Re-tooling Information Instruction Delivery and Assessment for the Freshman Engineering Class:  the Good, the Bad and the Ugly

Mary L. Strife; Marian G. Armour-Gemmen; Robin A.M Hensel

Download Paper | Permalink

Conference: 2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Publication Date: June 23, 2013
Start Date: June 23, 2013
End Date: June 26, 2013
ISSN: 2153-5965
Conference Session: Fresh Perspectives on Information Literacy
Tagged Division: Engineering Libraries
Page Count: 13
Page Numbers: 23.1021.1 - 23.1021.13
DOI: 10.18260/1-2--22406
Permanent URL: https://peer.asee.org/22406
Download Count: 348

Request a correction

Paper Authors

biography

Mary L. Strife West Virginia University

visit author page

Mary is the Director of the Evansdale Library of West Virginia University since 2002. She has worked as an engineering and sciences librarian for over 30 years. Her B.A. in biology comes from SUNY College at Potsdam and her M.L.S. comes from the University of Buffalo. Her career includes positions at Cornell, Syracuse University, University of Rochester, and SUNY Utica/Rome. She is active in ASEE/ELD, ALA/ACRL, SLA Aerospace/Engineering.

visit author page

biography

Marian G. Armour-Gemmen West Virginia University

visit author page

Marian Armour-Gemmen has been the Patent & Trademark librarian at West Virginia University Libraries since 2003. In this capacity she assists inventors throughout the state of West Virginia. She is also the bibliographer for Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering as well as for Civil & Environmental Engineering. Previously she worked as the head of the Physical Sciences Library and as an associate in the Government Documents department.
She is the immediate past president of the Patent & Trademark Resource Center Association. She holds a M.L.I.S. from the University of South Carolina, a M.A. from the University of Michigan, and a B.A. from Calvin College.

visit author page

author page

Robin A.M Hensel West Virginia University

Download Paper | Permalink

Abstract

Re-tooling Information Instruction Delivery and Assessment for the Freshman Engineering Class: the Good, the Bad and the UglyThe engineering librarians at this institution taught the majority of the freshman engineerstudents in the fall and spring semesters of the 2011/12 academic year. Three in-classsessions were developed and delivered in a total of 22 sections and over 800 students.The instructors were generally positive about the experience and were happy with thepapers produces by the students. The one consistent complaint from the instructors wasthe fact that they had to give up 3 class sessions for our presentations. The librarianswere concerned that more students did not take the assessments connected with the classsessions thus limiting the data collected on their progress. When the first-year class wasrevamped over the summer, we worked with the instructors to come up with ways to havethe same amount of information delivered without using up three class sessions. Insteadof going into the classroom three time, the librarians went in for one session during weekthree, offered an out of class experience (OCE) in the library instruction room duringweeks five and six---session selection up to the student, and provided one online moduleon Intellectual Property to be completed in weeks ten to eleven. Assessments wereprovided in paper or online for each of the three sessions with overall pre- and post- teststo see what was known at the beginning and the end of the semester. Students wererequired to do a plagiarism tutorial and quiz with the grade recorded in the grade book.So far the assessment results have been much better and it is hoped that there will beadditional data from the spring 2013 semester.The challenges involved the actual creation of the course management shell since at fivepeople were involved in this endeavor. The summer was a study in collaboration andcompromise among instructors and librarians with strong wills and individual visions ofwhat needed to be included, when it needed to be done, and the outcomes. The processof allowing 630 students to select from 30 OCEs was developed using our research guidejust in time. It was also the first time that the librarian developed a complete onlinemodule for the course management system.This paper will focus on the changes in the information sessions and delivery, provideassessment data for each area, and chronicle the steps taken to set up this successfulcollaborative effort with the engineering instructors.

Citation
Format

Strife, M. L., & Armour-Gemmen, M. G., & Hensel, R. A. (2013, June), Re-tooling Information Instruction Delivery and Assessment for the Freshman Engineering Class: the Good, the Bad and the Ugly Paper presented at 2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Atlanta, Georgia. 10.18260/1-2--22406

TY  - CPAPER
AB  -   Re-tooling Information Instruction Delivery and Assessment for the    Freshman Engineering Class: the Good, the Bad and the UglyThe engineering librarians at this institution taught the majority of the freshman engineerstudents in the fall and spring semesters of the 2011/12 academic year. Three in-classsessions were developed and delivered in a total of 22 sections and over 800 students.The instructors were generally positive about the experience and were happy with thepapers produces by the students. The one consistent complaint from the instructors wasthe fact that they had to give up 3 class sessions for our presentations. The librarianswere concerned that more students did not take the assessments connected with the classsessions thus limiting the data collected on their progress. When the first-year class wasrevamped over the summer, we worked with the instructors to come up with ways to havethe same amount of information delivered without using up three class sessions. Insteadof going into the classroom three time, the librarians went in for one session during weekthree, offered an out of class experience (OCE) in the library instruction room duringweeks five and six---session selection up to the student, and provided one online moduleon Intellectual Property to be completed in weeks ten to eleven. Assessments wereprovided in paper or online for each of the three sessions with overall pre- and post- teststo see what was known at the beginning and the end of the semester. Students wererequired to do a plagiarism tutorial and quiz with the grade recorded in the grade book.So far the assessment results have been much better and it is hoped that there will beadditional data from the spring 2013 semester.The challenges involved the actual creation of the course management shell since at fivepeople were involved in this endeavor. The summer was a study in collaboration andcompromise among instructors and librarians with strong wills and individual visions ofwhat needed to be included, when it needed to be done, and the outcomes. The processof allowing 630 students to select from 30 OCEs was developed using our research guidejust in time. It was also the first time that the librarian developed a complete onlinemodule for the course management system.This paper will focus on the changes in the information sessions and delivery, provideassessment data for each area, and chronicle the steps taken to set up this successfulcollaborative effort with the engineering instructors.
AU  - Mary L. Strife
AU  - Marian G. Armour-Gemmen
AU  - Robin A.M Hensel
CY  - Atlanta, Georgia
DA  - 2013/06/23
PB  - ASEE Conferences
TI  - Re-tooling Information Instruction Delivery and Assessment for the Freshman Engineering Class:  the Good, the Bad and the Ugly
UR  - https://peer.asee.org/22406
DO  - 10.18260/1-2--22406
ER  -