CAT Meeting Minutes 10.19.15

Owned by Michele Van Hoeck (Unlicensed)
Sept 19, 2016
5 min read

CAT Meeting
October 19, 2015
4:00-5:00 p.m.
Virtual meeting using Zoom
Members present: Jen Fabbi (San Marcos, Chair), Sarah Dahlen (Monterey Bay), Sue Thompson (San Marcos), Stephanie Alexander (East Bay), Felicia Kalker (Sonoma State), Laurie Borchard (Northridge), Diana Wu, (San Jose State), Michele Van Hoeck (California Maritime Academy, Vice-chair), and Laura Gil-Trejo (Fullerton, Consultant).
Members absent: Tiffini Travis (Long Beach), Monica Fusich (Fresno)
Recapping Meeting Minutes: The group reviewed minutes from previous meeting and agreed that they reflect what we talked about.

Toolbox Update: Toolbox is located at http://libguides.sjsu.edu/c.php?g=230377

  • Jen sent out the reminder email to CSU assessment contacts about a week ago and the October deadline has passed. She has received one piece of feedback about a typo, and Felicia's thoughtful responses. (To summarize, the "introduction" page of the website might have too much detail that might be perhaps better placed under section headers involving some re-organization of the site.)
  • Diana also received feedback: most were from committee members and were positive.
  • Sarah Dahlen says that she received feedback that all the examples are nice but it would be more helpful if we highlighted the BEST practices.
  • Launch date for end of October:
    • We agreed to launch the website as is with the intention to continue to improve and add upon what we already have. The link to the site will be sent locally to CAT members, COLD members, and those identified as being assessment leaders on their campus. Laura suggested we embed a counter on the site so we can measure traffic.
    • Plan for continued improvement of the site with the overall objective to take one of the "three most highly rated areas" by committee members and deans and create a section in the "CSU examples" section or its own section on that topic:
  1. Content focusing on digital learning objects: Searching for DLO projects that have assessment embedded in them. Laurie has a preliminary list of this type of activity. Collection of tutorials and resources with assessment built into them. Stephanie will help.
  2. Felicia volunteered to work on re-organization of the site, and Laura offered to help.
  3. Jen and Michelle will work on finding CSU examples of how librarians are developing assessment to address information literacy as a core competency for WASC accreditation.
  4. Sue volunteered to populate the site with more "tools" including surveys, statistical tools, and hopefully a link for contacts and local area experts.
  5. Sarah, Monica, and Diana will add new content to the site as site moderators.
  • There was some discussion about disseminating the site more broadly but most agreed it wasn't ready. Laurie noted being interested in looking at the toolkits that already existed.
  • There was some discussion about motivation for assessment. I think that Diana brought this to the group's attention to suggest that if there is no motivation to do assessment on a particular campus it doesn't matter how great the site is—it will not be used. She notes that WASC accreditation focusing on information literacy as a primary outcome is motivation to conduct assessment which will increase the probability that the site is used in a meaningful way.
  • Jen would like the site to be a place where we can document how libraries are contributing to the assessment of information literacy. She would like to see a CSU Libraries story on this.


Report on IL Assessment Pilot Project (Laura):

  • Data collection is completed.
  • Raffle winners as part of the incentive plan need to be selected.
  • Meeting to select rubrics and next steps is scheduled for October 28th. The administration of the post-test will also be discussed.


Report on GPLN Webcast (Stephanie and Laura):

  • Greater Western Library Alliance: 20-campus study correlating meaningful IL experiences and student outcomes.
  • The webinar centered on the challenges in obtaining IRB approval and discussed things like "Data sharing agreements." (This should be easier for us because we are all in the same system.)
  • They also discussed the challenges they have confronted in standardizing definitions (i.e., What is embedded course instruction?).
  • Laura is going to schedule a follow-up call with presenters Melissa and Zoltan to share notes.
  • Jen will ask Melissa (former colleague) to share initial research design.


Other

  • Jen will be working on a draft work plan that we can review at next meeting.
  • Jen will be attending COLD meeting this week: report to COLD about our recent activities and on the things we have done on the three most highly rated to topics (report attached).


Adjourned. Next meeting is November 23rd from 4-5 p.m.









COLD Assessment Team (CAT) Report
For October 22 COLD meeting
Jen Fabbi, Chair
The membership of CAT continues to meet monthly via "zoom" virtual meetings and has met twice since the last COLD meeting in September. At the September meeting, I asked all COLD deans to rank a number of areas for future CAT focus (see aggregate responses attached to this report). All 23 campuses responded. The clear priority areas are:

  1. WASC IL assessment, encompassing sharing and developing best practices, intersections between the core competencies of IL and critical thinking, and

signature IL assignments (IL assessment at campus level)

  1. Studies of how library use impacts student success (e.g., retention and GPA)
  2. Digital learning objects with built-in assessments, pre-/post- tests, shared

rubrics (IL assessment at Library level)
Numbers 1 and 3 also closely align with current CAT members' interest and expertise.

  • A list of assessment contacts for each campus has been compiled, and this group has been asked to review the CAT assessment toolkit before it is launched (http://libguides.sjsu.edu/c.php?g=230377).
  • In response to the priorities above, subgroups have been formed to develop additional content for the toolkit (post launch, including: 1) A collection of CSU library digital learning objects that include some type of assessment as well as free tools for building these objects; and 2) A collection of CSU campus WASC self-study report sections addressing information literacy as a core competency, IL assessment methods, and results.
  • IL assessment/impact pilot project is moving forward this fall. Participants are Northridge and Fresno. Pre-test data is currently being assessed. The sub-group is in the process of selecting a rubric to apply to student work. Volunteers who may want some experience with rubric norming and application will be recruited from the assessment contacts list to participate in that process. A post-test will be sent out to students as the semester draws to an end.
  • The team is inquiring about the research design for a 20-institution information literacy on student learning impact study that is currently being undertaken by the Greater Western Library Alliance (GWLA).





CAT Calibration: Step 1
9/4/15
RESULTS
My campus is:
Please rank the following potential CAT initiatives in order of interest to your campus. Those that are ranked as highly important and that match member expertise would be further developed into CAT work projects with the goal of creating infrastructure to benefit multiple campuses:
Please rank 1-8, one being highest ranking:
Numbers of 1, 2, and 3 rankings listed consecutively to the left of each item below. Items in red ranked highest by 23 deans/directors or their designees.
10, 3, 2 WASC IL assessment, encompassing sharing and developing best practices,
intersections between the core competencies of IL and critical thinking, and
signature IL assignments (IL assessment at campus level)
3, 4, 6 Digital learning objects with built-in assessments, pre-/post- tests, shared
rubrics (IL assessment at Library level)
0, 1, 3 System-wide pricing and administration of user surveys
3, 2, 4 New ULMS and best practices for interpreting data
0, 1, 5 How to communicate assessment data—dashboards, etc.
1, 2, 1 User experience assessment methods
1, 0, 1 Website usability testing
5, 10, 1 Studies of how library use impacts student success (e.g., retention and GPA)
Who do you consider to be your Library's key "assessment contact?"
More than one contact? Please specify: