Here are my notes/debrief on the 2008 Oregon Information Literacy Summit (11/21/08)- including planning process and things to consider for next year.
As members of the Summit, it is our job to raise consciousness, generate language and buzzwords around information literacy that bring others in to the conversation, and distribute information to our colleagues who are not able to attend the Summit.
8:30 – 9:00 am Registration coffee and tea
- Registration was approximately 40. The smaller group size worked well for large discussions and reporting out from the small group breakout discussions. I would have liked to have a larger group because I know there are many who wanted but were unable to attend. To consider for next year: start planning earlier, send invitations and agenda with as much detail as possible, send invitations earlier, create a listserv of past participants then send invitation and updates to that list, choose date that does not conflict with other conference, have a Summit Planning committee member volunteer to coordinate registration. (note: small group assigned to look at technology options for a hybrid Summit, see below).
9:00 – 9:30 am Welcome & updates
On the evaluation forms someone noted that it would be good to “add a brief social gathering at the beginning or the evening before the Summit to become familiar with attendees.”
Also noted on the evaluation was that the planning committee needs to “realize that you have new attendees and do a better job of recapping last year’s meeting and work in between….I was wondering for the first half hour if I was at the right meeting.” So, as the planning committee, we need to prepare a stronger introduction to set the context for the Summit and bring everyone into the conversation.
9:30 – 10:30 am Panel discussion – collaborative IL models
Cooperative Library Instruction Project. Allen took the lead with a modified version of the presentation he gave at the ACRL OR/WA conference in October. Robert chimed in to help clarify the project vision. I added comments about the stage of the project (i.e., we at the beginning and want input, we have been talking to OWEAC colleages from the get go…)
Information Literacy Articulation Group of Greater Portland. Anna and I talked about our work articulating the Summit IL proficiencies. We talked about the creation and use of the proficiency poster “College students who are ready to begin upper-level coursework” (I posted updated pdf and word versions of the poster on this blog under Info Lit Links).
10:30 – 11:30 am Breakout session on institutional collaboration. Robert Monge from WOU facilitated the first breakout session. He asked each small group to consider: What can we share? What should we share? What kind of instruction and types of collaboration might we share?
- Although we had a good discussion, our small group veered off topic considerably.
- Wolfgang noted the need for different levels of information literacy…a continuum.
- Kate mentioned the recursive nature and that it is unrealistic to think we can set specific objectives that students will come out of class with.
- I noted a recommendation of the book Writing to Learn by William Zinsser (requested and received!)
- Starting place for each institution is to identify which classes require research
- Characteristics of Info Lit in sciences = APA, journal study, currency study, using .com as a springboard into current topic, Kate compared to writing across the curriculum…that just as you write differently in a science class so too would you write research differently.
11:30 – 12:00 noon Presentation: sharing materials and licensing (Rachel Bridgewater)
- I asked OSU to post Rachel’s handout on the OR IL Summit site and I will link to when possible
- I noted Bryan’s suggestion to allow students to comment on tutorials via multi-media u-tube type comments…how will we have students license their own materials? Apply copyright to student’s work!
12:00 – 1:00 pm Lunch (spent time catching up with Dan Bjerke from OSU)
1:00 – 2:00 pm Presentations on Information Literacy in the Classroom
- Teaching IL in the Writing Classroom (Julie Bacon, OSU)
- Teaching IL in the Disciplines (Shaun Huston, WOU). Shaun described the keyword assignment he uses in GEOG 107 to assess student reading comprehension and encourage students to think within the discipline vocabulary and framework.
- Screencasting: Getting Started (Anna Johnson, MHCC) Here is Anna’s screencasting presentation.
2:00 – 3:00 pm Breakout sessions…discussion tables
“Set expectations as high as we can, support from the bottom as much as we can.” Bryan Miyagishima.
- Our table broke in to groups of three and were tasked with reporting back about 2 things that work and 1 thing that works better. Here is a list of ideas we generated:
- break up material into segments so you don’t exceed students’ attention spans
- use small group work (have them report back, charge students with teaching their classmates)
- physically move around the classroom
- wow factor of technology such as smart boards sometimes works to keep students’ attention
- small groups come up with 5 tips around one study skill theme
- scholarly/popular activity
- model conversation with instructor (talk about why we are here…)
- model a search
- see student presentations and assignments (analyze for strong/weak areas)
- use call number feature to see shelf list (browse online)
- hand-held technology to help people work through info tech challenges because it is their tech of preference
- annotated bib (source relevancy, structure course around a final content, formatting) helps students move from collecting sources to reading and engaging with the content of the sources
- do the assignment yourself (!good idea!)
- have students write from their passion
- work to build community in a one hour session
Notes from the Assessment discussion table
- the challenge of the One-shot
- proficiencies from the last summit…make them in to measurable activities
- have a strategy you can communicate to people outside of the library
- IL can be scattered, messy, difficult to assess…so you are not crazy if you think this is hard work!
Notes from the Collaboration table
- How do librarians try to connect to faculty? Frequently attend meetings and participate on committees together
- Tutorials can help with the lack of time
- Class page for assignments
- non-research paper info-lit activities !assignments!
- challenge to work with discipline instructors who already feel proficient in research
3:00 – 4:00 pm Future of the IL Summit and next steps
- participants were in favor of keeping a face-to-face portion of the Summit
- participants were in favor of adding technological components for increasing access (hybrid model)
- participants agreed to have small groups discuss and make a recommendation for 1) structure of the Summit committee 2) Program of the Summit “conference” and 3) technological options for increased capture and access
- Anna suggested we start and end the day with work with our regional partners
- consider ‘unconference’ model where program is set the day of
- consider setting aside time for lightning talks (people sign up and give ten minute talks on current projects/research…etc)
- Bryan proposed we find institutions who are willing to host or fund (WOU, Linn-Benton, Chemeketa have volunteered)
- Sara suggested we consider an OWEAC like structure (set meetings, open membership, officers)
- Lynda suggested we add themes to the program that will attract other partners (e.g., IL in the sciences theme to attract science faculty)
- Dan to send out a survey asking for nominations of persons to sit on JBAC and/or the IL Subcommittee
- Consider: what is the name of our group
- Consider: piggy back on the Oregon Rhetoric Conference
Volunteers to work on Structure:
Doyne, Kate, Robin, Michele
Volunteers to work on Proposal for Face to Face:
Anna, Sara, Bryan, Uta
Volunteers to work on Tech Blend:
Robert, Ann-Marie, Candace