{"id":47,"date":"2014-08-25T20:51:50","date_gmt":"2014-08-26T00:51:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sites.temple.edu\/assessment\/?p=47"},"modified":"2016-04-19T11:23:41","modified_gmt":"2016-04-19T15:23:41","slug":"david-murrays-experience-as-an-embedded-librarian","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sites.temple.edu\/assessment\/2014\/08\/25\/david-murrays-experience-as-an-embedded-librarian\/","title":{"rendered":"David Murray’s Experience as an Embedded Librarian"},"content":{"rendered":"

David Murray (librarian for History, Latin America, Spanish & Portuguese) in the RIS department partnered with faculty member Ron Webb to teach The Legacy of Mesoamerica<\/em> this spring. In this conversation with Assessment Librarian Nancy Turner, he describes his work as an \u201cembedded librarian\u201d, the assessment he conducted as part of that work, and considers the value of embedded librarians in contributing to student research success.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

NT: Tell me about your project. <\/strong><\/p>\n

DM<\/strong>: I worked with Professor Webb for 9 to 12 months to put together a course and syllabus on The Legacy of Mesoamerica<\/em>. The goal was to move beyond the imparting of ACRL\u2019s standard for information literacy instruction, the so-called one-shot instruction session, and to instead embed information literacy into the curriculum. We went beyond the one-shot by having me, the librarian, convey or impart course content as well as those information literacy skills. We thought having the librarian deliver course content, in this case a series of lectures on Classic Maya art and architecture, would incline the students to take the information literacy component of the course more seriously.<\/p>\n

There were three information literacy assignments within this course, and one \u201cwarm up\u201d exercise that we can use as a \u201cpre-test\u201d of students\u2019 skills. The primary assignment was an annotated bibliography, which was graded using a rubric provided to the students.<\/p>\n

I had several questions.<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Are there indications of student learning, based on comparing the pre-test to the skills demonstrated in the annotated bibliography?<\/li>\n
  2. Did the students feel that having a librarian in the classroom improved their understanding and skills with the research process?<\/li>\n
  3. Did the improvements in student skills justify the time spent on the class and with the students?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    For the first question I could compare the IL skills manifested in the \u201cwarm-up\u201d assignment (pre-test) against those of the annotated bibliography. The two are not directly comparable, however, except in the sense that for both I asked students to describe the research process. In other words, the two assignments differ structurally. Yet I believe when properly compared can reflect changes in the students\u2019 approach to finding, using, and evaluating information sources for academic work.<\/p>\n

    I used a survey to get at the second question. The survey was intended to measure perceptions and attitudes, not knowledge.
    \n<\/strong><\/p>\n

    NT: Tell us about your results<\/strong><\/p>\n

    DM: 7 out of 9 students responded to the survey. 2 were not in class that day.<\/p>\n

    The top three skills the students felt they learned were:<\/p>\n