A Comprehensive Three-year Cycle Student Learning Outcomes & Service
Unit Outcomes Report:
“I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been.” – Wayne Gretzky
“Information literacy is a set of abilities requiring individuals to “recognize when
information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate, and use effectively the
needed information.” - American Library Association
“Institutional assessment efforts should not be concerned about valuing what can be
measured, but instead about measuring what is valued” – A.W. Astin
“The quality of student learning is directly, although not exclusively related to the
quality of teaching. Therefore, one of the most promising ways to improve learning
it is to improve teaching.” – Thomas Angelo
“Assessment-as-learning is a multidimensional process, integral to learning, that
involves observing performances of an individual learner in action and judging them
on the basis of public development criteria, with resulting feedback to the learner.” “Assessment-As-Learning at Alverno College”
Information literacy is one of the primary institutional goals of Long Beach City
College and the LBCC Library. We value and aggressively promote its pivotal
role, especially in the context of our students’ need to compete and flourish in an
information-based global economy. Library courses are designed to meet the
information competency requirements of students, now a mandated graduation
requirement to matriculate with AA/AS degree. Librarians teach Library classes
in both the online and face-to-face format, and we have now instituted and
embedded a pre- and post-test within these courses to assess how well students
learn and to demonstrate student competency in information skills. By adding
this new dimension of assessment with the pre- and post-test that is embedded
within the Library courses, we gathered a rich amount of data through multiple
layers of assessment that truly reflect students’ information competency skills in
a reliable and scientific way. Continual analyses of the data gathered from
students’ performances will enable librarians to determine how effective they are
in achieving this goal. The gathering of the data is accomplished by using webbased technology, and/or i-Clickers, a classroom-response system that enables
the instantaneous capture of data.
The cornerstone of students’ success, both in their scholastic pursuit and in their
career goals in an information-based global economy, hinges on how well
2
students can demonstrate that they are indeed information competent. To that
end, the information- competency requirement for LBCC students is one of its
kind, and it is truly unique in the State of California, as we have taken the
leadership role in recognizing how information, as well as computer literacy, is
intimately intertwined; competency in both these areas assures a competitive
edge in the fiercely competitive global marketplace.
The assessment strategies applied in library courses principally shift the
paradigm from a traditional learning-objective model, which simply explains the
knowledge the students are expected to master in a given course, to a learning
outcomes and assessment model, which truly measures, in a student-centered
learning process, how that learning is actually taking place in class. Between
learning outcomes and assessment lies the third term—criteria or assessment
tools—that enable both instructors and students to grapple with the measuring
instruments used to assess students' learning. In this restructured and
reengineered model the criteria remain transparent and clear to all students
instead of being obscure or mystifying.
The movement and progress from what students need to learn to measure how
that learning has taken place is graphically presented below:
Instructional Design Process
Identify Problem
Evaluate
Solutions
Conduct Needs Analysis
Implement
Solution
Develop Solution
3
To answer the overarching question of how students will demonstrate their
learning outcomes in the area of information competency, the faculty in the
Library program continue to explore and engage in the following strategic
goals:
Strategies for Assessing Learning Outcomes
 Course level (embedded evaluation)
 Program/Department level
 Institutional level (calibrating institutional learning outcomes consistent
with program and course level learning outcomes)
In addition to the Library 1 course, which introduces students to library
resources in all formats and provides a venue to hone students' critical-thinking
and research skills, the Library offers other subject-specific courses that meet the
requirements for the Library Technician Program, such as Lib 2, Web Databases;
Lib 201, Introduction to Cataloging; Lib 202, Introduction to Access Services; Lib
203, Introduction to Acquisitions; Lib 204, Introduction to Reference Services;
Lib 210, Information Literacy in Allied Health; Lib 211, Information Literacy in
Business; Lib 212, Information Literacy in Law; Lib 213,
Information Literacy
in Government; and Lib 3, Information Competency. In short, the Library’s
instructional program aims to consolidate students' knowledge of and expertise
in high-demand vocational fields and it also seeks to help students transfer or
apply these skills to diverse fields, such as library and information science, allied
health, business and entrepreneurship, law, and government.
Although there are subtle differences in the application of the assessment tools
for the diverse library courses, the unifying thread that provides the cohesive
metrics and optics for the multi-layered measuring tools is predicated on these
five overarching questions common to all library courses:
1) What do you want the students to be able to do?
2) What do students need to know in order to do this well? (gap between
what is known and what is needed)
3) What learning activities will facilitate the learning process?
4) How will students demonstrate their learning (assessment)
5) How will students know they have done well? (criteria)
Scope of the Assessment
Although assessment is underway in all library courses, the Library faculty has
studied, and analyzed the students learning outcomes in two of its staple and
4
much valued courses: Lib 1 and Lib 3. What follows are some preliminary
findings of this analysis that provide a clear window into which learning
strategies and pedagogical tools have been most effective in class, both face-toface and online, as well as which areas may need a different strategy to yield
perhaps better results.
From Spring, 2010, to Fall, 2011, a total of 7 sections of Lib 1 were assessed for a
total of 263 students. In order to achieve assessment results that are truly
measurable, manageable, and meaningful, we identified two students’ learning
outcomes for Lib 1 and Lib 3 courses, as follows:
SLO #1:
Formulate effective research methodologies.
SLO#2:
Evaluate various information resources in accordance to identified research
needs
These two learning outcomes also respond to and answer the first question asked
by all librarians in their courses: What do you want students able to do?
However, the only way that librarians and students together can discover what
they need to know in order to do well in the course is first to explore the gap
between their prior knowledge base and what they need to learn. Closing the
gap between what they know and what they need to know is the second question
that all librarians address in their classes, and the learning gap is meaningfully
determined by administering a pre-test to gauge the students’ current skills level.
After analyzing the results of the pre-test, the library instructor redesigns the
content and structure of the learning activities to place more emphases in areas
where the students encountered the most difficulty in answering the problemsolving questions in the pre-test. While the post-test marks the culmination of
students’ learning efforts and their ability to successfully demonstrate their
learning, the intervention in their learning processes to correct and sharpen their
critical thinking skills is a continual process throughout the semester, and there is
no better way to guide the students’ learning than testing their skills set every
week with the use of i-clickers. As the attached document amply demonstrates,
the students’ difficulty in knowing adequately how to narrow a topic, or able to
read a citation and decipher its various elements, or distinguish between
magazines versus scholarly articles were all areas where students had various
5
degrees of learning difficulty in mastering. With timely interventions that
involved students taking repeated learning activities using i-clickers these areas
of concern were especially addressed from week to week, and the end result as
documented in the students’ responses show a remarkable improvement in their
critical thinking skills and problem-solving capacity after participating in these
exercises with rapid response system (i-clickers) recording their daily progress—
an instantaneous result technique that allows students to monitor their own
progress in class and thus take ownership and responsibility for their own
learning. The learning activities the librarians deployed to close the gap in the
students’ learning were multiple and varied. In particular, being cognizant of
and sensitive to students’ different learning styles and different skill level, the
librarians used multiple learning activities, including hands-on exercises, class
demonstration of skills acquired in class, and most importantly, the regular use
of i-clickers and other game-theory modalities to assess students’ problemsolving skills and critical thinking. The students demonstrated how well they are
learning by answering multiple-choice questions using i-clickers, and this
learning tool provided both the students and the librarians with a graphic and
instantaneous clue to students’ different learning styles and capacity to absorb
and individualize their knowledge base, which they can, in turn, later apply to
other problem-solving situations.
Our analyses of students’ response to various quizzes offered each week
provides another measuring tool besides the pre-and post-tests to measure
students’ learning outcomes. The daily results from how well students are
learning using the i-clickers provided us with a vantage point and refreshing
insight into students’ learning activities and how we can further improve their
cognitive skills. Furthermore, to ascertain whether the students could apply the
skill sets learned in class to other problem-solving situations, we asked the same
questions in a slightly different but related context a few weeks later, and the
results from this probe provided some fascinating results as well.
Finally, we tested the students’ abilities to demonstrate their learning through a
post-test, and the students were empowered to ascertain their own progress in
their learning curve by a set of clearly established criteria that the students then
6
applied to their own answers to ascertain if they have met the desired learning
goals and achievements. For example, in order to critically examine if an article is
worthy of serious consideration for their research assignment, students applied
evaluative criteria and asked questions such as who, what, when, how and
where the article was written in order to establish the worthiness and credentials
of the writer and its content.
By making the measuring criteria transparent to students, we empowered them
to be masters of their own destiny and take personal responsibility for their
learning and academic progress. What was clear from this learning exercise for
us as librarians, and for our students, was that any measurement of the learning
outcomes is always a cyclical process, and that the analyses of the data can lead
for us as instructors to further refining and fine-tuning our teaching strategies to
enable better learning and learning outcomes among students. By the same
token, for students the results of their assessment of their daily learning process
informs them where they need to improve in order to do better. We graphically
presented this cyclical process at the beginning of each class to students, so that
both we, as instructors, and they, as students, could enter into a solemn contract
to make the learning space in class always sacrosanct, meaningful, and
nurturing, and that we can learn from each other in a stimulating learning
environment.
7
Learning Outcomes in Instructional Design
Identify the Problem
#1 What do you want the students to be able to do?
Needs Analysis #2
Evaluate
Solution # 5
How will
students know
they have done
well? (criteria)
What do students need
to know in order to do
this well? (gap between
what is known
and what
is needed)
Implement Solution
#4 How will students
demonstrate their learning?
(assessment)
Develop Solution #3
What activity will facilitate
the learning?
We have, as a first step, analyzed Lib 1, our staple course, for assessment of
students’ learning outcomes and used the two overarching SLOs mentioned
above as our criteria for assessment. We discovered the following results about
students’ performance in the pre- and post-tests over the last three years:
Since Fall 2010 Long Beach City College has had in place a continuous and
systematic cycle of assessment at the course, program, and institutional levels. In
Spring 2013, we completed our first three-year cycle of assessment and closed the
loop. We responded rapidly to the recommendations of the ACCJC’s visiting
evaluation team which stated that “The college will be able to provide quality
assurance in a more complete way once it is able to establish and sustain a
continuous cycle of assessment of student learning, analysis of data,
communication of the results, and planning for improvements.” The LBCC
Library has instituted multiple layers of assessment tools with rubrics for library
courses, including the Library Technician Certificate program as well as subject
specific orientations. Library 1 and Library 3, which meet the mandatory
information competency requirements for AA/AS degrees, are assessed every
semester in order to make subtle changes to assessment tools and criteria if
necessary, and to adjust teaching techniques in response to results of continual
assessment of data semester by semester. We also take a holistic approach to
assessment at all levels by applying the analyses and assessment at the course
level to mutually inform and reinforce the assessment tools at the program level.
8
This is done for the Library Technician Certificate program, which is designed to
place prospective students in the paraprofessional career path. Both the library
courses and Library Technician Certificate Program are in sync with institutional
assessment goals, especially in meeting a high degree of excellence in
information, computer, and numeric competencies.
Since the library is a hybrid program, we track and analyze data using a dualtrack assessment method: first, Student Learning Outcomes; second, Service Unit
Outcomes. For the SLOs we have two well defined intended outcomes:
1) Formulate effective research methodologies
2) Evaluate various information resources in accordance to identified research
needs
The assessment tasks for the SLOs include a pre- and post- test; weekly
assessment of student progress in mastering the learning modules by the use of iclickers, a rapid response system that enables students to monitor their learning
progress as they answer multiple choice questions related to learning modules;
and finally group projects on selected research topics that require gathering,
assimilation, analysis and synthesis of information to deepen their
understanding of their research topic. The pre-test establishes what students
already know and the post-test determines if the students have closed the gap
between what they know and what they need to know in order to be information
competent. The success of the students also reveals how effective the instruction
had been for the course and what teaching adjustments need to be put in place in
order to achieve greater students’ success.
The established criteria require students to meet a high benchmark. The success
level is reached when 75% of the enrolled students achieve 70% or higher in the
post-test.
The information competencies that Long Beach City College purports to teach all
students covers meta-literacy in the following four domains:


Behavioral-what students should be able to do upon successful
completion of learning activities—skills, competencies
Cognitive-what students should know upon successful completion of
learning activities—comprehension, organization, application, evaluation
9


Affective-changes in learners’ emotions or attitudes through engagement
with learning activities
Metacognitive-what learners think about their own thinking—a reflective
understanding of how and why they learn, what they do and do not
know, their preconceptions, and how to continue to learn
(http://metaliteracy.org/learning-objectives/)
Keeping pace with the revised and expanded scope of information competency
standards as articulated by the Association of College & Research Libraries,
which now include “threshold concepts” and “metaliteracy”, Long Beach City
College Library has taken a proactive leadership role in making a concerted
effort to close the historically achievement gaps of under-represented students by
working in close concert with the Culinary Arts, Counseling, English,
History/Political Science, and Allied Health in developing video tutorials to
broaden and improve students’ awareness of multi-media, financial, health,
multi-cultural literacies. More importantly, the library is also expanding-- with
collaboration with related disciplines across the curriculum-- the scope and
depth of students’ emotional intelligence (EQ) by providing a nurturing learning
environment to expand students’ self-awareness, self-development, social
awareness and relationship management. The Library instruction program at
Long Beach City College includes a variety of methods of instruction such as
stand-alone library credit courses that meet information competency
requirements, workshops, orientations, and instruction at the reference desk.
In its endeavor to foster librarianship and to encourage a new generation of
librarians and library technicians, The Library Technician Program was launched
in Spring 2009; it is one of the few completely online programs at LBCC.
At the Reference desk, LBCC librarians consider each reference session as an
instructional or teachable moment session because librarians teach student
research skills in information competency as defined by the Academic Senate for
California Community Colleges and the Association of College and Research
Libraries: 1) Articulate a research need, 2) Use appropriate information
resources, 3) Evaluate and cite information resources, 4) Interpret and
communicate information. Service and instruction at the reference desk is
delivered via diverse formats: face-to-face, phone, email, text message, and chat.
Students may also request a personal research session with a librarian via an
online request form on the Library website. Periodically, students are asked to
fill an evaluation form of the competency and the quality of service offered by
10
librarians at the reference desk. Student evaluation is one of the major
components of faculty evaluation.
Librarians teach approximately 80 1-hour and 2-hour course-related instruction
sessions per academic year in the wired classroom in the Library, serving on
average 1100 students in approximately 17 disciplines. In order to prepare
customized subject-specific orientations, librarians work in close collaboration
with the instructor who often forwards the assignment to librarians. Librarians
often create a corresponding LibGuide for the class introducing the research
process and the appropriate resources. All library orientations teach students
basic information competency skills such as formulating a search statement,
locating and evaluating relevant information. The Library will continue the
close collaboration with faculty, especially newly hired faculty, in order to
encourage faculty to request library orientations and more 2-hour library
orientations enabling hands-on student participation.
In the Spring 2010 semester, the Library implemented a pre/post test
questionnaire for each orientation session. Of the 2289 responses from the posttest results, 77% students felt that the orientation session was extremely valuable
to them, 22% students felt that the orientation session was somewhat useful to
them, and 1% students felt that the orientation session was not useful to them.
Moreover, 91% students felt they can effectively search ProQuest database, 91%
students felt they can cite documents in MLA/APA style, 80% students felt they
can save full-text articles on their flash drive. The pre-test result showed that, in
general, low percentage of students ranging from 39% to 45% have heard or have
used most library resources such as online catalogs, periodicals, and reference
books. Based on these data, and in spite of the good post-test results, the Library
is aiming for a higher percentage of students feeling the benefits of library
orientation. Librarians will keep trying to engage students in this learning
process.
We are in the process of creating an online library orientation and tutorials that
can be included in the college's online learning portal, http://online.lbcc.edu.
Additionally, we offer several library courses fully online that DE students and
off-site students are encouraged to participate in.
The Library offers weekly drop-in morning and afternoon workshops on various
days and at various times in order to accommodate students’ busy schedule.
Workshop topics are changed periodically and may include such topics as
research paper basics, MLA citation, searching online catalog, searching
11
databases, public library academic resources. The workshops are advertised
campus-wide via email to all faculty, to department heads, in the community
newsletter “In the Loop”, and flyers and bookmarks at the reference and the
circulation desks in the Library. In spite of the flexible workshop schedule and
the advertising, attendance has been moderate. The Library will continue to
work closer with faculty to encourage students to attend these helpful
workshops.
All Library credit courses integrate information competency outcomes (as
defined by the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges and the
Association of College and Research Libraries) in their course outlines of record:
Lib 1, Lib 3, Lib 201, Lib 202, Lib 203, Lib 204. Due to budget constraint, all
library courses, except Lib 1, are offered once per academic year. To
accommodate students’ need for graduation, the Library offers 8 sections of Lib 1
per semester, 4 sections of face-to-face and 4 sections of online. To ensure that
students are able to develop skills in information competency, the 2-unit Lib1
Introduction to Library and Information Resources and the 3-unit Lib 3 Information
Competency are graduation requirement courses, both are transferable courses.
Due to budget constraint, the four courses Lib 210 Information Literacy in Allied
Health, Lib 211 Information Literacy in Business, Lib 212 Information Literacy in
Law, and Lib 213 Information Literacy in Government were not offered since
Spring 2009 semester and have been inactivated.
For academic years 2010-11 to 2011--12 there was an increase in annual
enrollment by 13.4%; from 663 to 752.
For academic years 2011--12 to 2012--13 there was a decrease in annual
enrollment by 8.7%; from 752 down to 686. The lower enrollment numbers could
be attributed to moving from a 18 week academic semester to a 16 week
semester.
There was a modest improvement in years 2012--13 as compared to years 2010-11, with an increase in annual enrollment by 3.4%; from 663 to 686.
The increase in enrollment during academic years 2010--11 to 2011--12 is in direct
correlation with the increase of section numbers; for academic years 2010--11 to
2011--12 there was a significant increase in section numbers by 21%, from 19 total
sections to 23 total sections.
12
For academic years 2011--12 to 2012-­­3 there was a slight decrease in the number
of section numbers by 13%, from 23 to 20 sections. This 13% decrease could be
due to moving from an 18 week academic semester to a 16 week semester.
There was a small improvement in years 2012--13 as compared to years 2010--11,
with an increase in the number of section numbers by 5%; from 19 to 20 total
sections.
For academic years 2010--11 to 2011--12 there was a small decrease in the average
retention rates by 5%, from 76% to a 72%.
For academic years 2011--12 to 2012--13 there was an increase in the average
retention rates by 4%, from 72% to 75%.
For academic years 2010--11 to 2011--12 there was no change in the average
success rate, with both years remaining constant at 60%.
For academic years 2011--12 to 2012--13 there was a very small decrease in the
Average Success Rate by 1.6%, from 60% to 59%.
The certificate and degree online program prepare students for employment with
entry and mid-level library technician positions in public, academic, school, and
special libraries. This program, designed according to guidelines from the
American Library Association, is intended to equip students with many of the
required competencies for a successful performance in all phases of library
services. It encompasses the library automation essentials such as acquisitions,
cataloging, circulation, public access catalogs, techniques of information
retrieval, and the Internet. It also emphasizes the skills of communication and the
spirit of public service essential in a diverse and multicultural society. Two
courses in the program, Lib 202 Introduction to Access Services and Lib 203
Introduction to Acquisitions, are recognized as approved courses by the Library
Support Staff Certification (LSSC) program. The information on its website
states that “the program is designed to recognize the value and accomplishments
of Library Support Staff. “ The LSSC Program is managed by the American
Library Association - Allied Professional Association (ALA-APA). The program
was launched in the Fall 2008 semester with the first two courses in the program,
LIB 3 Information Competency and LIB 204 Introduction to Reference Services
being offered. So far, the low number of 23 graduates from the program could be
partially due to the courses being offered only once per academic year.
The assessment tools encompassed in the pre- and post-test, i-clickers exercises,
13
and students’ group research projects were carefully crafted, designed, and
executed to measure not only students’ competencies in the nine learning
modules but also to measure the comfort-level of students to ultimately transfer
the learning and competency skills to different learning contexts and different
problem-solving situations. These competencies can then be used to enhance
life-long learning and critical thinking to solve problems in real life experience
and contexts.
From Fall 2008 semester through Spring 2012 semester, the Library has been
consulting with the SLO coordinator regularly and periodically for guidance
with implementing the SLO assessment for all Library courses and for the
Library Technician Program. In order to keep current, the Library also created
an internal management timeline for course SLO assessment. SLO assessment
was implemented via pre/post test for some courses, and via portfolios of
student works and rubric. The Library is current with its SLO assessment for the
Library Technician Program courses: LIB 3 Information Competency, LIB 201
Introduction to Cataloging, LIB 202 Introduction to Access Services, LIB 203
Introduction to Acquisitions, LIB 204 Introduction to Reference Services, and for
the two stand-alone courses Lib1 Introduction to Libraries and Information
Resources and Lib 2 Web databases. An SLO officer was assigned to the Library
with uploading all course SLO assessment reports to TracDat.
Here is a snapshot of the evidence we gathered in the last three years which
shows students’ demonstrated achievement of learning skills as well as measures
we intend to take during the next three year cycle to improve the overall quality
of students’ performance. For Library 1, our staple information competency
mandatory course, the percentage of students scoring 70% or higher on the posttest progressively improved from fall 2010, which was 73% for SLO #1 (intended
outcome) and 80% for SLO #2 (intended outcome) to 87% and 90% for Spring
2012 to a commanding 90% and 92% respectively for Spring 2013. For SLO # 1 the
increase in percentage from 2010 to 2012 was 14% and the jump from 2012 to
2013 was another 3%. For SLO #2 the increase in percentage from 2010 to 2012
was 10% and from 2012 to 2013 an increase of another 2%. What the graphs
reveal (see attached document) is a steady percentage increase from 2010 to 2013
in student performance in the post-test.
For the Library Technician Certificate program the results were less satisfactory,
which was in sharp contrast to the high rate of students finding gainful
paraprofessional positions after they graduated. Many of the students enrolled in
14
the Library Technician Program also moved on to enroll in a Master's program in
Library and Information Science. The analysis of the intriguing, albeit mediocre,
results in the post-test revealed that many students either did not take the posttest because they had accomplished their goals in the certificate program or did
not see the questions as relevant to their learning modules. The library faculty
therefore have decided to replace the not-so-relevant pre-and post-test with a
comprehensive assessment of the students' final portfolios using a different set of
rubrics.
The assessment and analyses of students’ learning outcomes in a variety of
library settings and courses provide a rich mine of information on how effective
our library faculty are in the classroom, and since the scope for learning new
teaching strategies and approaches to learning are limitless, the library faculty
through Faculty Development Program and Flex day activities acquire new
learning pedagogies by sharing and learning from faculty in diverse disciplines,
besides being actively engaged in their own regional and national associations
such as ACRL, ALA, CLA, and information competency listserv. Such learning
opportunities have expanded the librarians' repertoire of teaching deliveries and
engagement with students, which is now predominantly learner-centered and
student-centric that deploys the flipped classroom strategies to empower
students with their own active learning and stimulation.
In academic year 2012-2013, in order to enhance the functionality and
interactivity of the Library's Web site as a means of promoting student
success and supporting the growing community of distant learners, the
Library faculty and staff implemented the improvements and redesigned
the Library website utilizing HTML, CSS, XML, and ColdFusion
programming. Librarians and staff created and updated website content
including: LibGuides interactive tutorials, and overall maintenance of
consistent and accurate information. Library faculty, staff, and students
periodically conducted usability testing and provide input to ensure that
the website is functional and usable and meets the needs of all library
patrons. Librarians have been continuing to create new and customize
their LibGuides for a specific orientation to support the curriculum, to
update and manage their Library faculty subject guides within LibGuides.
The Library web site is constantly reviewed by the Library Technology
Taskforce for compliance and WMS integrated system for functionality
and accessibility. The Library Technology Taskforce has been making
15
recommendations to improve the functionality of the Voyager online
catalog and to run the Library's Web pages through online accessibility
checkers and validation services to ensure that the pages comply with
Section 508 requirements and that the code is well formed and valid. The
Library FAQ was expanded through the use of LibAnswers.
Our library uses EzProxy to allow access to our off-campus resources and
students validate their proof of library affiliation by logging in with their last
name and student id number. Faculty and staff can also access electronic
resources. We also offer virtual reference through live chat, email, text messaging
and phone. Comparable services to DE/CE students are provided extensively
through virtual reference -- via live chat with a librarian, email, text messaging
and phone calls. We currently have subscriptions to over 50 database collections,
comprised of collections from vendors including EBSCOhost (Premiere
Collection provided to all California Community Colleges), ProQuest, Gale, Facts
on File, and JSTOR.
In addition, we offer a collection of E-books through EbscoHost with a total of
16,928 titles with a publication date of up to 2010. We realize there is a need to
incorporate more recent titles to our EbscoHost e-book collection so it does not
seem out of date. We recently added Gale Virtual Reference to our electronic
holdings which contains 154 recent reference titles in the subjects: Arts, Business,
Environment, History, Law, Literature, Medicine, Multicultural Studies, Nation
and World, Science, Social Science and Technology. Electronic access is to library
material is available 24/7 through our EzProxy service.
Both campus libraries have complete accessibility for all patrons. Both libraries
provide equal student services and resources; the types of materials available at
each location might vary slightly due to the particular curriculum programs
offered at each campus. However, instructional materials may be transferred
between locations on request.
Since the library is a hybrid program, we track and analyze data using a dualtrack assessment method: first, Student Learning Outcomes; second, Service Unit
Outcomes. The Student Learning Outcomes and the Service Unit Outcomes,
including support services, are inextricably intertwined and complementary
components. The Service Unit Outcomes follow a similar rigor and have two
intended results:
16
1) The library will provide satisfactory service for each request throughout the
public services area
2) The library will provide a variety of up-to-date resources in multiple nonelectronic formats
The assessment task entails a Web-based survey to assess the library's efficiency
in meeting high standards of service at all access points including reference,
circulation, research centers, inter-library loan and study areas. The
criteria/expected level of achievement must reflect at least 70% of patrons
reporting satisfactory service in all areas of library services.
For the second outcome, the expected achievement must reflect at least 3% of
non-electronic titles from the library collection will be from the current century.
Finally, having completed our first comprehensive three-year assessment cycle,
we are now implementing the proposal by ACCJC to strengthen information
competency within instructional programs outside of the “Library Standards.”
This will include a broad range of General Education classes, especially those in
the science, engineering, and Career and Technical Education streams. This will
enable our students to have an edge in the fiercely competitive global market. To
that end, we also adhere to the Standards for libraries in Higher Education as
stipulated by the Association of College & Research Libraries. This ensures that
our students have a smooth transition regarding information and computer
literacy as they transfer to four-year colleges.
As the survey indicates, the input from students, staff and faculty was a large
and integral part of the survey conducted. Here is a summary of the Service Unit
Outcomes results from 2011 to 2013. Against a benchmark of 70% set as
satisfactory, the survey revealed the following data:
Circulation: 81%
Media Services 79%
Reference Service 81%
Research Center 84%
Overall Library Department 81%
The library also initiated a special survey to solicit a comprehensive evaluation
by the Allied Health faculty regarding the library’s collection pertaining to
Nursing and Allied Health programs. The purpose of this survey was to
ascertain if our collection meets industry standards. We are awaiting the results
17
of this survey in order to conduct further analysis and follow-up actions. In the
last three years we have updated the Nursing collection with generous grants
from the College.
By making the measuring criteria for SLOs and SUOs transparent to students, we
empowered them to be masters of their own destiny and take personal
responsibility for their own learning and academic progress. One of the positive
results of student self-assessment of their daily learning process, using i-clickers
for example, is that they know where they need to improve in order to do better.
We graphically present this cyclical process at the beginning of each class, so that
we, as instructors, and they, as students, can enter into a solemn contract to make
the learning space in class always sacrosanct, meaningful, and nurturing.
Having completed the three-year assessment cycle we are impressed with the
rapid progress we have made. We have been able to quantify student learning in
a manner that makes sense to both students and us while not shying away from
addressing areas where we need to improve. We look forward to the next threeyear assessment cycle which will include more hands-on student learning
exercises; more interaction with students beyond the class period; and better
monitoring of every individual student's progress through the course of the
semester. The Library will continue to integrate specific strategies in our
Department planning and will continue to use surveys and liaisons with faculty
to elicit feedback for improvements and changes.