SUMMARY OF IL DISCUSSION AT
General
One group discussed the different options and recommendations presented regarding infusion of information literacy and technology literacy into the CAS curriculum. EDU and SPS faculty shared what their programs are doing in this direction. EDU has a system in place based on NCATE standards. SPS does not have one particular system in place but individual professors have infused the above two areas into their courses in various ways. The same was reported by CAS faculty. SPS is implementing a new IL course as part of its core in spring 2007
Some faculty believed it was a waste of time and effort—as will this initiative also become. Because there will be no follow up, future instruction, pedagogical theories, etc. that will ultimately measure how or what faculty are doing. Faculty that need to train students in IL will continue to do so, whether there is a mandate or not, no follow up on folks who don’t require it—so don’t mandate it, period.
Need to recognize that students come in with different levels of technology literacy. Information literacy requires continual reinforcement throughout the student’s tenure.
Should also consider visual literacy when discussing this topic.
Copyright and other information management issues are important and need to be taught
· Depends on majors, perhaps offer a one credit course as an introductory measure.
· A strong argument was offered for embedding information literacy instruction throughout various courses. The case was made that one single course would be forgotten and that information literacy needs to be reinforced and taught at all levels including higher levels.
· Upper level discipline specific courses could incorporate higher level information literacy instruction that built upon the basics students would learn during their first and second years of study.
· A spiral approach, perhaps including a specific information literacy course, would be the best approach, but the group could not think of many courses where embedding information literacy instruction would not be appropriate.
· No one in one group wanted a stand alone course for information literacy—infusion at best, only.
· No stand alone class for technology. (The bold characterizing the opinion of the group!) They preferred the idea of rubrics developed to assess IL in content classes and the development of surveys to poll the faculty on what they do regarding IL and how they assess outcomes. These could then be shared and a more common instrument developed.
· Creating several measuring points are best, e.g., first year seminar (tentative), seminar II courses, and senior capstone.
Question 2: Responses to four recommendations
· Workshops on specific information technology skills such as knowing how to use Word or PowerPoint would be the best way to handle those skills for those that don’t have them when they arrive.
· In-take assessment on information literacy skills is essential. If have a standalone course, should be able to test out.
· Recommendation 1 was found to be very difficult to implement because the first year CAS curriculum is already heavy. Instead, it was suggested (by the dean of CAS) that a one-credit academic success seminar is offered during the first year to provide foundational knowledge in the two desirable areas along with program orientation.
· One group saw significant benefit in having something specific in the first year experience and also embedding information literacy instruction in all first year courses.
· Recommendations 2, 3, and 4 were also found difficult to implement. It was suggested that attaching special assignments and rubrics to particular courses throughout the duration of the programs and collecting and recording the data may be something to consider more closely.
· Recommendation 2: They did not see the need for an outside evaluation. The group favored using assessments from the first year classes and comparing them to assessments in later semesters.
· Drop the FLC/Core requirements for CAS/SPS. No one in one group liked the idea that all core courses would have literacy & technology as the basis of the course—so it cannot and should not be mandated across the board.
· Recommendations 3-4: Most people felt that they already included assessments and these could be used to compare to those done by first year faculty. Of course, the issue was raised about who would actually collect and collate this data.
· Recommendation #4 – already doing that
· Specific goals and outcomes should be stated so they are easily measurable.
· A final product (capstone?) should demonstrate IL skills and abilities.
· Students need to know when the right tool fits the right situation.
· Everyone felt that the rubric was a good instrument for a first year assessment. Additional rubrics would obviously need to be developed for more advanced classes. However, a big issue was who would establish what constitutes “meets expectations,” exceeds expectations,” etc. Everyone agreed that we could use already established “best practices” to deal with this.
· Should have goals at different levels.
· Faculty believed that this process might be best accompanied by some sort of study inventorying what faculty are currently doing/already in our courses.
· Survey faculty to see what key IL skills are important as a discipline, and perhaps form a committee to make recommendations.
· Survey faculty comfort level with teaching IL skills and assess what faculty needs to learn in order to teach IL skills.
· Be sure not to forget the difference between technology skills and IL – just because students can use Word or PowerPoint does not mean they have higher order IL skills/understanding.
· Faculty was very interested in finding out what their colleagues were doing in this regard. They suggested a series of discussions on how we use technology in the classroom.
· The issue of faculty web pages: People were concerned by the lack of faculty web pages and access to sites such as Blackboard. In one group, Sue tried to explain how this function could be taken on my IQ Web, but everyone expressed concern that this system is not as good or as easy to use as Blackboard, for example.
· Need to share best practices, e.g., use of web assignments, among faculty. Perhaps set up an IM chat room or bulletin board for faculty.
· Need technical support for pedagogy, perhaps online modules, to enable the faculty to learn. Need to also consider classroom capability to support IL.