Association of College & Research Libraries
50 E. Huron St. Chicago, IL 60611
800-545-2433, ext. 2523
[email protected], http://www.acrl.org
Advancing the Plan for Excellence
Goal Area Committee Annual Report & Work Plan
Goal Area: Student Learning
Goal: Advance innovative practices and environments that transform student learning.
Committee Name: Student Learning and Information Literacy Committee
Charge/Tasks: To oversee and implement ACRL’s Student Learning Initiative as described in
the strategic plan. Work with the ACRL Board and other ACRL units to create a comprehensive
approach to student learning and information literacy efforts including a) promote and facilitate
professional development, publications, research, and advocacy related to information literacy
and student learning; b) support the development of the ACRL student learning/information
literacy website; and c) monitor and assess the effectiveness of the ACRL Student Learning
Initiative.
Committee leadership







2016-17 Chair: Rhonda Kay Huisman
2016-17 Vice Chair: Elizabeth Berman
2015-16 Chair: Merinda Kaye Hensley
Board Liaison: Caroline Fuchs
Staff Liaison: Mary Jane Petrowski
Report submitted by: Merinda Kaye Hensley
Work plan submitted by: Rhonda Kay Huisman
2015–16 Year-end Committee Report
General overview of progress by ACRL toward goal.
SLILC continued the practice of forming project teams based on committee member interest to
complete its work around the four Student Learning Objectives. For the second year in a row,
SLILC was extremely productive with completing the tasks as outlined in the 2015-2016 work
plan. The Chair did make a few minor adjustments in spring 2016 to the work plan, which
amounted mostly to adding a few concrete items that had arisen as part of a project team’s work.
After the strategic planning brainstorming session at SPOS in fall 2015, the Objectives were
updated and revised and SLILC added one new objective:

Investigate and advocate for the inclusion of teaching and learning into library and
information science school curricula by collaborating with relevant ALA groups and
organizations.
Consequently, the Chair led discussions with committee members at the ALA Midwinter 2016
and ALA Annual 2016 to plan activities to address Objective 5 during 2016-2017.
The committee has five concrete and achievable objectives within which to work for 2016-2017.
The Chair and Vice Chair would like to thank the Board for their support in moving the
committee’s work forward.
Brief environmental scan for this goal area:
The official adoption of the Framework at Midwinter 2016 and the rescission of the Standards at
Annual 2016 means that there are implementation opportunities for SLILC and beyond. SLILC
initiated a collaborative relationship with the Framework Advisory Board (FAB) and the Visiting
Program Officer for Information Literacy during 2015-2016 and this relationship needs to be
strengthened in the coming year in order to engage ACRL members in discussion around the
pedagogy and theory of the Framework as well as continue to provide association members with
effective implementation materials.
Opportunities and challenges of critical importance for this goal area:
SLILC has the opportunity to provide strong leadership on the implementation for the
Framework and any future groups assigned to work on the Framework should work in
consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair of SLILC. For example, the sandbox and supporting
materials for librarians will need more attention than SLILC can provide alone. SLILC strongly
urges the Board to consider the future of implementation by providing a strong support system
and not to solely rely on SLILC for this type of work given the five objectives that are currently
being pursued by the committee.
Objectives (Plan for Excellence, Approved Midwinter 2015)
Objective 1: Identify innovative practices in learning environments and instruction that
enable academic librarians to transform learning.
Dashboard analysis:
o Green: Good progress is being made on this objective. Work should continue as
described in the multiyear grid
o Yellow: Not progressing as hoped.
o Red: Significant obstacles. Progress halted and Board advice sought.
o Blue: Objective needs serious reconsideration.
Description: High-impact educational practices (HIPs) - The ACRL Information Literacy
Framework defines information literacy as experiences, knowledge, and capacities that can be
developed in and beyond the classroom. Investigating and capitalizing on opportunities for
connecting information literacy to service learning, study abroad, undergraduate research, and
other co-curricular activities are important for ACRL membership.
Description: Global Perspectives on Information Literacy - Information literacy and the role of
the librarian supporting IL is interpreted around the world in many different ways. This project is
meant to bring together IL experts around the world to start a conversation on the commonalities
and differences between cultures and student/employer needs.

Accomplishments.
o High-impact educational practices:
 Chair and Vice Chair presented a poster on HIPs at the Assessment
Institute in Indianapolis (10/2015) which resulted in an invited column for
the AAHLE Newsletter (Huisman/Hensley, Jan 2016):
http://www.aalhe.org/wp-content/uploads/AALHE-Intersection-January2016.pdf.
 Constructed a bibliography on HIPs from the library & information
science and educational literature.
 Hosted a discussion event at ALA Midwinter 2016 conference with over
50 attendees: http://www.eventscribe.com/2016/ALAMidwinter/fsPopup.asp?Mode=presInfo&PresentationID=127383.

Collaborated with ACRL ULS to host a webinar to highlight current
examples with expert panel (inc. one member of SLILC).
o Global information literacy perspectives:
 Identified a working group for the new project (see description above)
which included a member of the IFLA Information Literacy Cmte, UK
organization CILIP, and the Chair of the Instruction Section.
 Identified and invited authors (15/18 total) to contribute to white paper to
be published early 2017. Currently in writing stage (July 2016).
 Secured funding from ACRL to supplement travel funds for authors to
attend ACRL and to provide a receptions at ACRL 2017.
 Constructed a template for authors to write their “section” of the white
paper including a citation style guide.



Planning several events for ACRL 2017 including a panel and round table
event to engage ACRL members at the conference on the white paper.
 Investigating an informal dinner for authors of the white paper at the
upcoming IFLA 2016 conference.
Challenges: There is much work to be done in this area and is only limited by committee
member time. These are two very large projects that will need attention during the
coming year.
Outlook:
o How likely is the committee/ACRL to make significant progress on this objective
in the next year? If not, why? Extremely likely for both areas. For the HIPs
project, since this area of programmatic work is new to information literacy
librarians, this is an area where SLILC can focus its time with significant impact
on the profession. The current Chair of the global IL project was added to the
committee as an ex-officio member (2016-2017) to oversee the entirety of the
project.
o Does the committee need additional support/resources? The committee will be in
touch with ACRL staff and the Board around planning for ACRL 2017.
o Does the objective need to be dropped or rewritten? No.
Objective 2: Articulate and advocate for the role of librarians in setting, achieving, and
measuring institutional learning outcomes.
 Dashboard analysis (select one that best characterizes outlook for this objective):
o Green: Good progress is being made on this objective. Work should continue as
described in the multiyear grid
o Yellow: Not progressing as hoped.
o Red: Significant obstacles. Progress halted and Board advice sought.
o Blue: Objective needs serious reconsideration.
Description: Librarians & Information Literacy as Part of Institutional Accreditation Continue to work on locating and providing access to self-studies of colleges and universities
as a means of creating a set of resources and examples for instruction librarians preparing to
document and report information literacy initiatives as part of an institutional accreditation
process.


Accomplishments:
o Moved the entirety of the resources to the new ACRL LibGuides platform.
o Proofread all current pages and made corrections as needed in order to meet the
Educational Role criteria.
o Found existing accreditation documentation/self-studies already online for
website.
o Contacted libraries asking for contact volunteers and listed them on the website.
o Wrote an ACRL Insider post about the resources on the SLILC website.
o The Chair and Vice Chair are planning outreach activities on accreditation and
information literacy including a webinar with a current accreditation agency to
host a webinar regarding how the Framework fits into accreditation practices.
Challenges:

o Keeping the documentation up-to-date is a constant exercise and will be a
commitment from SLILC for as long as the resources are relevant to the work of
IL librarians. While the project team made great progress, there are still some
accreditation agencies that are not fully represented and are only partially
complete
Outlook:
o How likely is the committee/ACRL to make significant progress on this objective
in the next year? If not, why? Extremely likely.
o Does the committee need additional support/resources? Not at this time.
o Does the objective need to be dropped or rewritten? No, this is an extremely
valuable project to librarians and should be aligned further with the Framework
activities.
Objective 3: Increase partnerships with other organizations to advance the impact of
Information Literacy on student learning.
Dashboard analysis:
o Green: Good progress is being made on this objective. Work should continue as
described in the multiyear grid
o Yellow: Not progressing as hoped.
o Red: Significant obstacles. Progress halted and Board advice sought.
o Blue: Objective needs serious reconsideration.

Accomplishments:
o SLILC continued to work with Elizabeth DuPuis, the ACRL/ELI Liaison through
2018. DuPuis presented a poster on the Framework at the February 2016 ELI
conference with the Visiting Program Office for Information Literacy. The Chair
assigned a SLILC committee member to assist the liaison but this did not result in
activity between the two – the liaison did not request further support. DuPuis has
many ideas for the future for working with ELI and has developed a strong
foundation for future activities.
o When the AASL/ACRL Interdivisional Committee on Information Literacy was
disbanded in 2015, SLILC agreed to permanently host the wiki, which was moved
during the SLILC website transition to LibGuides.
o An appointment recommendation for a member from CJCLS was implemented
July 1, 2015 – June 30, 2017. The CJCLS member was extremely active
throughout the year and SLILC is grateful to have benefitted from the perspective
of a community college librarian during discussions. The member also initiated a
discussion between the American Association of Community Colleges (AACC)
and ACRL to update the AACC Position Statement on Information Literacy (to be
completed 2016-2017):
http://www.aacc.nche.edu/About/Positions/Pages/ps05052008.aspx
o On 6/27/2015, the ACRL Board of Directors approved the proposal, “Proposal to
Design Professional Development Opportunities Regarding the Intersections of
Scholarly Communications and Information Literacy” as proposed by the
collaboration between SLILC and the Research and Scholarly Environment
Committee (ReSEC). Funding was allocated to pilot a new professional


development series (webinars and a roadshow similar to the Scholarly
Communications Roadshow) for librarians to build their expertise in the
intersections of SC and IL. The SLILC Chair and ReSEC worked together to hire
two original curriculum designers/presenters (Eight applicants total; John Watts,
UNLV and Maryam Fakouri, Columbia College). The curriculum was developed
under the supervision of an advisory committee including the SLILC Chair,
ReSEC Chair, two members of the Scholarly Communication Roadshow (Kevin
Smith and Stephanie Davis-Kahl) and one member of the Immersion faculty
(Karen Nicholson). A pilot webinar, “Teaching at the intersections: Aligning
scholarly communication and information literacy in the one-shot library
instruction session” was held with excellent attendance on 4/7/2016. SLILC,
ReSEC and ACRL staff agreed that SLILC would continue oversight for the
Intersections Roadshow with a document outlining responsibilities. The SLILC
Chair and ReSEC collaborated a second time in spring 2016 to hold another call
for presenters (10 applicants total; Emma Molls, Iowa State, Michelle Reed, U of
Kansas, and Joelle Pitts, Kansas State). The designers also held a pre-conference
on 6/24/2016 at ALA Annual in Orlando with 34 attendees and positive
evaluations.
o Co-hosted three spring 2016 webinars on learning analytics with the Value of
Academic Libraries Committee. http://www.ala.org/acrl/learninganalytics
o Collaborated with the Value of Academic Libraries Committee on a digital
badging project. Co-hosted ACRL Online Discussion Forum "National
Credentialing and Academic Libraries" on Wednesday, September 23, 2015 with
the VAL cmte. Reviewed a response to the Lumina Questionnaire with VAL cochair, Deb Malone.
o Collaborated with LLAMA/LOMS to propose and present ALA Annual program,
“Imagineering the Framework: Implementing and Assessing Information Literacy
Programs” on 6/25/2016. A committee member of SLILC participated in the
entire program planning process. http://www.eventscribe.com/2016/alaannual/fsPopup.asp?Mode=presInfo&PresentationID=137981
Challenges: SLILC explored two new collaborations with the Association of American
Colleges & Universities (AAC&U) and the National Council for Accreditation of
Teacher Education (NCATE). NCATE consolidated with TEAC into CAEP as the new
body for educator preparation. Establishing collaborations with outside organizations is
definitely seen as a worthwhile activity (see ELI liaison success) but it would help if the
ACRL board would provide guidance and expectations for what a positive relationship
might look like and how SLILC can facilitate in a manner so that both organizations feel
successful.
Outlook:
o How likely is the committee/ACRL to make significant progress on this objective
in the next year? If not, why? SLILC always has partners to work with throughout
the year (see the serendipitous work between VAL and SLILC). To make
progress, the Chair needs to make this a top priority.
o Does the committee need additional support/resources? No resources at this time
but guidance for success regarding partnerships would be helpful.
o Does the objective need to be dropped or rewritten? No.
Objective 4: Increase understanding of new models of information fluency as pedagogy
evolves.
Description: The ACRL Framework - Work with the ACRL Strategist to promote the ACRL
Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education.
Dashboard analysis:
o Green: Good progress is being made on this objective. Work should continue as
described in the multiyear grid
o Yellow: Not progressing as hoped.
o Red: Significant obstacles. Progress halted and Board advice sought.
o Blue: Objective needs serious reconsideration.

Accomplishments:
o Collaborated with ACRL Visiting Program Officer for Information Literacy
(Sharon Mader) and the Framework Advisory Board (FAB) to determine ways
SLILC can assist with promoting and supporting the ACRL Framework (FW).
Assisted FAB in an advisory role.
o Developed a calendar of professional development events on the FW.
http://acrl.libguides.com/FrameworkCalendar
o Planned and moderated two webinars
 “Big Picture Theory and the Practical Classroom: Threshold Concepts and
Information Literacy Instruction” with speakers Sylvia Lin Hanick (First
Year Experience Librarian and Assistant Professor, LaGuardia
Community College (CUNY)) and Lori Townsend (Learning Services
Coordinator, University of New Mexico). 234 attendees registered for the
event. Archive URL:
http://www.ilthresholdconcepts.com/presentations.html
 “A Shared Language: Threshold Concepts in Writing Studies” with
speakers Linda Adler-Kassner (Professor of Writing Studies, Associate
Dean of Undergraduate Education, University of California Santa
Barbara) and Elizabeth Wardle (Howe Professor of English, Director of
the Roger and Joyce Howe Center for Writing Excellence, Miami
University in Oxford, Ohio). Registration for the event filled to the 100
maximum capacity within hours. Archive URL:
http://ala.adobeconnect.com/p1g69i2uwuw/
o Review of threshold concepts bibliography with additional annotations to be
added by ALA Annual.
http://www.ala.org/acrl/issues/infolit/teaching/thresholdbib
o Initial project planning for a Framework in Action bibliography, including
identifying scope, process, and output, to be complete by ALA Annual.
o Proposed and accepted a new column for C&RL News, Perspectives on the
Framework. The inaugural column will be published in the September issues and
be published every other issue. There are four invited authors to start the column
(Emily Drabinski, Donna Witek, Troy Swanson, and Sharon Mader).


Challenges: SLILC was originally tasked with building the sandbox environment for
collections of curriculum materials but FAB took over this aspect of the Framework
implementation because their work more closely aligned with this type of activity. SLILC
has also been tasked with thinking about how to reach out to higher education
stakeholders and organizations to communicate about the Framework to explain the new
approach and highlight collaborations where possible. SLILC would benefit from a larger
conversation with the ACRL staff and Board of Directors about expectations for SLILC
related to the Framework in order to more clearly define the committee’s role in
implementation.
Outlook:
o How likely is the committee/ACRL to make significant progress on this objective
in the next year? If not, why? Extremely likely in collaboration with the VPO for
IL and FAB.
o Does the committee need additional support/resources? Not at this time.
o Does the objective need to be dropped or rewritten? No.
Ongoing activities:
 ACRL Information Literacy Web Site Development – The SLILC assigned web editor
sought extensive feedback from committee members to redesign the SLILC website in
preparation for the move to the ACRL account for LibGuides. The entire site was
reconstructed and moved successfully spring 2016. The web editor also updated the webeditor handbook, added new content for the Framework, updated all broken links,
updated the Zotero library of bibliographies, created a new Framework calendar, and
made slight revisions to the AASL/ACRL toolkit. The SLILC web presence is an
ongoing and extensive project that is divided between one prime web editor and one
support member.
Reflecting on the year
What worked well?
 Setting up a listserv for the committee, SLILC was the only group that didn’t have one
prior to this year and it made it much easier to make sure no one was left off
communication.
 Using Google Drive as a workspace for the project teams.
 Moving the website to LibGuides, the site is now much more user friendly and it is easier
to find content.
 Brainstorming sessions for strategic planning as a group at Midwinter and Annual
conference. Committee members expressed cohesion and connection to larger ACRL
goals.
 Holding online meetings for committee members (two in the fall and one in the spring).
The Chair sent out a report before the meeting via email so that the meeting time could be
spent on work-related activities. For example, the Chair invited guest speakers to the
meetings (Beth DuPuis, ELI liaison and Sharon Mader, VPO for IL) to promote
conversation and better understanding of the overall picture of SLILC’s place within
ACRL.




The Chair contacted individual committee members midway through the year via email
to check in on their perspectives for how the committee was working. This extra attention
helped to further engage committee members when it might be easy for a committee
member to feel neglected within such a large committee (22 members).
The SLILC Past Chair implemented a new committee member selection process which
was extremely successful in bringing new members to the committee that understand the
role and impact of SLILC. The Chair worked with the appointment liaison to pull names
from the ACRL volunteer form and the Chair also reached out to colleagues that might be
a good match for SLILC. An effort was made to combine new librarians as well as
experienced librarians in the field. Once names were determined, the Chair sent an
invitation to each prospective committee member to gauge interest and set up a 30minute phone call. Each phone call outlined the role of SLILC within ACRL as well as
the responsibilities of committee members including conference attendance, content of
current projects, and amount of expected time dedicated to committee work. Once the
members all agreed, the Chair contacted the appointment liaison to make the official
appointments. This worked extremely well and SLILC has seen committee member
productivity skyrocket from past years. SLILC has also seen a dramatic increase in inperson attendance at both the Midwinter and Annual conferences. The Chair strongly
encourages this practice to continue.
For those members that could not attend the ALA Midwinter or Annual conference inperson (only a handful of members), the Chair provided the option of calling in for the
reporting section of the meeting (worked okay for Midwinter with none at Annual) and
had the group work together virtually on the same strategic planning exercise that
happened at the in-person meeting. The feedback from the groups was positive and the
Chair recommends this as a positive mechanism for keeping members engaged
throughout the conference schedule.
The Chair implemented a plus/delta exercise at the end of each meeting (online and inperson) as well as an overall review of the committee year. The committee members took
this exercise seriously and the Chair implemented several suggestions throughout the
year in order to improve the workings of the committee. The Chair passed along final
suggestions to the incoming Chair and Vice Chair for 2016-2017.
What could have worked better?
 While the committee was much more productive than past years, the plus/delta feedback
at the end of the year did reveal that several members felt disconnected from the overall
work of the committee. This information had been communicated by email several times
and the Google Drive space was supposed to help keep track of activities. In reality, the
groups rarely updated their documents, so while the Chair was usually aware of activities,
it wasn’t easy for the committee members to see. It might be productive to ask each
project team to send a regular updated on a timely basis (rather than add to productive
meeting time for reporting).
 Expanding the online meetings to 90 minutes – it wasn’t east to cover all the content in
one hour.
 Finding ways to keep committee members engaged on the listserv throughout the year.
There are loads of activities related to information literacy that could be shared among
committee members.
What do you wish someone had told you before starting work on this committee?
 We have an opportunity to update our work plan mid-year and it would be more
productive to plan for this specifically as several situations did arise throughout the year.
 I wish there had been a year-long timeline of Chair activities to follow so that I could
plan better therefore I created one for the incoming Chair.
 It isn’t easy to keep track of the history of the committee’s activities outside the basic
annual reporting process which sometimes doesn’t capture why something may have
worked or not and how decisions were made.
 It is essential to explain to committee member how SLILC fits into the ACRL Plan for
Excellence so they can see the value of their work and feel commitment to their assigned
projects.
What made this work most rewarding (observations/comments/accolades)?
 The ACRL staff liaison was enormously helpful throughout the year. Mary Jane
Petrowski regularly attended meetings and was pro-active in sending items of interest to
the Chair and resolving issues as they arised. Thank you!
 SLILC was extremely productive and it is easy to see how much the committee members
accomplished – they are dedicated colleagues and as Chair, I appreciated their
commitment.
Any other comments, recommendations, or suggestions?
 There was lots of discussion about the state of the Competency Standards and the
Framework over the course of the year. This did create some angst among committee
members since it is part of their professional and service work. The Chair was integrally
involved in this process and was usually able to answer questions as they arised but it is
essential in the future to keep the current SLILC Chair up-to-date on activities so that
SLILC members can represent the association accurately.
 The next Chair and Vice Chair could consider alternative ways to keep track of project
team activities e.g. Trello.
 Since the committee is very large and has grown again for 2016-2017, the Chairs might
consider finding a way to incorporate a social aspect to the committee (e.g. informal
gathering after conference, team building exercise during meeting time or via email).
Revised Objectives approved spring 2016:



Challenge librarians and libraries to engage every student with information literacy
skills and in a way that is scalable and sustainable.
Increase the impact of information literacy by forming strategic partnerships with
relevant organizations.
Build capacity for librarians to collaborate with faculty and other campus partners in
instructional and curricular design and delivery that will integrate information literacy
into student learning.


Articulate and advocate for the role of librarians in setting, achieving, and measuring
institutional student learning outcomes.
Investigate and advocate for the inclusion of teaching and learning into library and
information science school curricula by collaborating with relevant ALA groups and
organizations.
2016–17 Committee Work Plan
Activity/Project Name and brief description:
Objective 1: Increase the ways ACRL is an advocate and model for open dissemination
and evaluation practices.
Select the single best connection to the ACRL Plan for Excellence and provide a brief
sentence connecting your project to the Plan.
Value of Academic Libraries
Objective: 1 2 3 4
Description of connection to specific objective: A sentence is suggested.
Student Learning
Objectives: 1 2 3 4 5
Description of connection to specific objective: A sentence is suggested.
Research and Scholarly Environment
Objectives: 1 2 3
Description of connection to specific objective: A sentence is suggested.
Supports the programs and services that target education, advocacy, publications, or
member engagement.
Description of connection to specific area: A sentence is suggested.
Timeline:
continuous project assigned in charge
short-term project that will be completed this membership year
multi-year project continuing past this membership year (expected completion date: __________)
Note: Multi-year strategic goal area projects are tracked in a multi-year planning grid. Expect your staff
liaison to follow-up with questions to add this project to ACRL’s multi-year planning grid which is reviewed by
the Board at its fall Strategic Planning Session and referenced for budget preparation.
Outline the steps and intermediate deadlines planned to complete the project. (add rows
as needed)
Specific
Action
Due Date
Party
Responsible
Resources Needed (e.g.,
financial*, technology, staff
support)