Philadelphia-area librarians practicing assessment have a rich assessment resource here in our own backyard. The PLAD (Philadelphia Library Assessment Discussion) is a network of librarians who meet in person and virtually to connect with and learn from one another.
We met this month at Drexel’s Library Learning Terrace to share lightning (5 minute) presentations on a range of topics, from the using a rubric to assess learning spaces to conducting ethnographic research with students.
John Wiggins (Drexel) started us off with, Tuning our Ear to the Voice of the Customer. Drexel gathers data from students in a variety of ways, through a link on the library website to regular meetings with student leadership groups. A strong feedback loop lets the library know what students are happy, concerned or confused about – like why the hours of the library changed. And provides an opportunity for library staff to let students know why those decisions are made. (The hours change was based on transaction data).
Merrill Stein (Villanova) spoke about the regular surveys of faculty and students and the challenge of writing questions that are clearly understood. And while asking the same questions over time allows for trend analysis, sometimes we need to ditch the questions that just don’t work.
For a school with a small staff, Bryn Mawr librarians are very active with assessment. Melissa Cresswell spoke about using mixed methods (participatory design activities with students, photo diaries) to gather feedback on how library space is used. While they make changes to space incrementally, the rich qualitative data is used over and over and although the sample sizes are small, themes emerge. The overarching theme is that students want to be comfortable in the library.
Olivia Castello (Bryn Mawr) presented her research on the impact of the flipped classroom on library instruction. She wanted to know if this model, where students are provided with a tutorial as “homework” prior to their session at the library, had an impact on student success with an information literacy “quiz” after the session. While she’s found a correlation between the tutorial and student success, she’ll need a more controlled study to demonstrate real causation.
Danuta Nitecki (Drexel) introduced us to a rubric designed by the Learning Space Collaboratory for assessing learning spaces – We talked about what behaviors signify active learning and the kind of space and furniture best facilities this behavior
My own presentation was on cultivating a culture of assessment – how challenges can be turned into opportunities. I used this blog is an example of one opportunity – Assessment on the Ground serves as a vehicle for sharing best practices and generating a conversation about library assessment in all its forms.
Marc Meola (Community College of Philadelphia) introduced us to Opt Out, the national movement against standardize testing. He suggested that for instruction assessment, frequent low stakes testing may serve as a better method, where students and teachers see the results of tests and can learn from those.
ACRL’s Assessment in Action program has a growing presence in our community, as evidenced by two presentations related to that initiative. Caitlin Shanley (Temple Libraries’ own Instruction Librarian and Team Leader) spoke to the goals of the program as helping librarians to build relationships with external campus partners, and becoming part of a cohort of librarians practicing assessment. Elise Ferer’s (Drexel) proposes
to improve our understanding of how Drexel’s co-op experience relates to workplace information literacy. The proposal builds on the strong relationship between the Drexel’s Library and the career center.
The meeting also provided ample opportunity for small group conversations about the presentations. We discussed the iterative nature of assessment – from tweaking a survey from year-to-year to using mixed methods for a more robust picture of user experience. We are all challenged to design good surveys and have come to recognize the limitations, at times, of pre-packaged surveys for informing local questions. All of us struggle with the impact of increasing survey fatigue. Perhaps this is an opportunity to be more creative in how we do assessment. In generating and fostering that creativity, the PLAD group provides an excellent and fun way of supporting and learning from our colleagues.
Thanks to everyone who participated!