I like some of these, but I’m not sure how many I’d feel comfortable using for a one shot. I’m going to try to facts based think-pair-share one today using facts from Project Information Literacy. Click here to download a .pdf file of a bunch of instruction ideas_ icebreakers
“This page is to share references to good articles on Assessment of One-Shot Instruction Sessions. There is also a link to my [Kathy Stroud's] presentation at the June 19, 2014 Subject Specialists meeting. The bulk of the references are to summative assessment – assessment that occurs after the instruction session and can be used to improve the outcomes of future sessions. However, I have included one resource that is entirely about formative assessment – assessment that occurs at aany point in the instruction and provides feedback to the instructor and learner.
Sobel, Karen and Kenneth Wolf. “Updating Your Tool Belt: Redesigning Assessments of Learning in the Library.” Reference & User Services Quarterly 50.3 (2011): 245-258. Library Literature & Information Science Full Text. Web. 19 June 2014.
Summary of Learning Assessment Tools applicable for one-shot instruction. It has example pre- and post-tests, and activities with scoring rubrics.
Whitlock, Brandy and Julie Nanavati. “A Systematic Approach to Performative and Authentic Assessment.” Reference Services Review 41.1 (2011): 32-48. Emerald Publishing Group. Web 19 June 19, 2014.
Good overview of assessment with a table comparing assessment tools. It also has example activities and scoring rubrics.
Grassian, Esther S and Joan R. Kaplowitz. Information Literacy Instruction: Theory and Practice. New York: Neal-Schuman Publishers, 2009. Print
Chapter 11 is “Assessment: Improving Learning; Improving Teaching. Good overview of assessment, discussion of levels of assessment, and choosing assessment tools. Knight Library’s copy is at ZA3075.G73 2009.
Choinski, Elizabeth and Michelle Emanuel. “The One-Minute Paper and the One-Hour Class: Outcomes Assessment for One-Shot Library Instruction.” Reference Services Review 34.1 (2006): 148-155. Emerald Publishing Group. Web 19 June 19, 2014.
Example questions, but scoring rubric not provided
Carter, Toni M. “Use What you Have: Authentic Assessment of In-Class Activities.” Reference Services Review. 41.1 (2013): 49-61. Emerald Publishing Group. Web 19 June 19, 2014.
Example of topic development activity and discussion of developing scoring rubrics
Buchanan, Heidi E. and Beth McDonough. The One-Shot Library Instruction Survival Guide. Chicago: ALA Editions, 2014. Print
The Library does not own a copy of this. Chapter 6 “How Will I Know What Worked?” is a reassuring guide to helping you assess your performance as a one-shot session instructor.
Veldof, Jerilyn R. Creating the One-shot Library Workshop: A Step-by-step Guide. Chicago: American Library Association, 2006. Print.
Also not owned by the UO Libraries. Step 9 “Build Evaluation Tools” and Step 19 “Evaluate Workshop” Discuss types of evaluations, evaluation design, and provide examples.
Broussard, Mary Snyder, Rachel Hickoff-Cresko, and Jessica Urick Oberlin. Snapshots of Reality: A Practical Guide to Formative Assessment in Library Instruction. Chicago: Association of College and Research Libraries, 2014. Print.
Also not owned by the UO Libraries. Contains many examples of formative assessment techniques and creative ideas for assessing what students know and have learned without cutting into teaching time.”
-Kathy Stroud from https://iris.uoregon.edu/cms/node/6258
This is basically the presentation that I saw yesterday at the UO:
He has a very cool piece about testing by group work, including using an IF AT form (scratch off multiple choice), starts around minute 40.
more on the concept:
more on the IF-AT system in the lower right of the page.
The web based version Mazur uses (because he dislikes multiple choice with a passion) is here:
It’s really reasonably priced, with some very cool features. It reminds me in may ways of what we were hoping to do with parts of ripple.
The Calibrated Peer Review system (the thing I understood as peer and self evaluation) part is around minute 54. And, I forgot that it’s based on a project at UCLA:
Where it looks like they have the whole system set up and ready to use/purchase.
Demonstrating Success through Assessment: Don’t Leave Outcomes to Chance – STS
With Dominique Turnbow, UCSD Librarian
1) Title: First write the learning outcomes, then plan the rest: assessment to make one shot sessions successful
2) Abstract (150-250 words):
Many librarians know that assessment should be a part of the planning process for instruction; however it is usually an afterthought. Well-written learning outcomes can lead to thoughtful, effective assessment and sound instruction. Learning outcomes that focus on goals that aren’t possible to measure during a one-shot workshop can lead to a feeling that assessment and instruction isn’t working. In these situations, outcomes likely focus on behaviors that should be assessed summatively and only after the learners have had practice (i.e. database searching techniques). Instead, most one-shot outcomes should focus on formative assessment, that is, behaviors that can be reasonably observed during the workshop.
This presentation will raise awareness about how to write formative learning outcomes for in-person instruction for large classes without computers and in computer labs, as well as for online instruction. The presenters will discuss concrete examples that have been used in science classes (primarily biomedical). This presentation will include best practices for:
using different assessment techniques such as the “one minute paper,” “muddiest points,” and survey tools, such as Google Forms;
employing clickers when you don’t have a computer lab; and
creating assessment for online learning.
Participants will leave with a solid understanding of formative and summative assessment, concrete examples of outcomes that can be used in one-shot library sessions or online and assessment strategies to address them.
still working on using more of this excellent post on teaching students “How to read and understand a scientific paper.”
I used parts of it to inform quiz questions that asked students to read parts of an 8 page article in preparation for a large lecture class where we’d be talking about researching concussions (see especially question 3). More context in the prep for lecture 1, HPHY 212 class.
as are having students fill out a grid and the whole CRAAP, etc thing just sort of embarrasses me. Also, I can never remember what everything stands for and what the differences are. These folks have a MUCH better way to go:
Benjes-Small, C., Archer, A., Tucker, K., Vassady, L., & Resor Whicker, J. (2013). Teaching Web Evaluation: A Cognitive Development Approach. Communications In Information Literacy, 7(1). Retrieved March 6, 2014, from http://www.comminfolit.org/index.php?journal=cil&page=article&op=view&path%5B%5D=v7i1p39
Especially Appendix A:
or Philly really isn’t so bad, even if it’s cold. Working the STS angle mostly so far, with Council meeting on Friday and the All Committee meeting this morning. I’ll head to the Hot Topics, where I’ll learn more about altmetrics. [Update: flying home early as my dear elderly MIL passed away, but you should check out these:] Tomorrow learning about packaging e-resources. I’m hopeful that I’ll know more about the different platforms for electronic books and journals if I go. I’m curious to see what comes of the 1pm STS unconference as well.
If you want to be an STS mentor sign up here. I’ve gotten so much from my mentor/mentee relationships over the years.
Also, the ALA published Guide to Reference is really wonderful. You should use it and buy the print sections when they start rolling out.
A list of the kinds of pedagogical techniques they covered this term. It’s a long list and I’ll try to add some annotations:
Clickers – Ready, Set, React: Getting the most out of peer instruction using clickers http://www.cwsei.ubc.ca/Files/ReadySetReact_3fold.pdf
The Clicker Resource Guide: (http://www.cwsei.ubc.ca/resources/files/Clicker_guide_CWSEI_CU-SEI.pdf)
CWSEI has some great resources on its Clicker page (http://www.cwsei.ubc.ca/resources/clickers.htm)
C.R.E.A.T.E.- Hoskins, SG. 2010. “But if it’s in the newspaper, doesn’t that mean it’s true?” Developing critical reading and analysis skills by evaluating newspaper science with CREATE. The American Biology Teacher 72(7): 415-420. Available from: http://www.bioone.org/doi/pdf/10.1525/abt.2010.72.7.5
Peer Led Team Learning
Think-Pair-Share – http://www.theteachertoolkit.com/index.php/tool/think-pair-share
POGIL – designed for Chemistry, now Biology and biochem – can it be adapted to other disciplines?
One-minute Papers – I usually do this just at the end of class, but wonder if more regular check ins would be helpful, like what’s shown here:
Strip Sequence – give students a list of answers and have them put them in the correct order. Large classes: use multiple choice questions to do this, with new clickers can vote on which one to put first, second, etc.
try for peer review process, life cycle of information, hierarchy of evidence
Whip Around – http://www.theteachertoolkit.com/index.php/tool/whip-around
Ask Open-Ended Questions
Learn Before Lecture Activities
Interactive Lecture Demonstrations
In Class Problem Solving
Reading lists are here (I was looking at this at the end of Fall 2013): http://scilit.uoregon.edu/recent_meetings.html
From the UNLV conference November 2013
Curriculum mapping from UNLVs impressive efforts – instruction framework
Kansas State University is using qualtrics for their instruction efforts. That’s right, QUALTRICS. See Melia Fritch‘s work and especially the qualtrics quiz.
Flipping is the new embedded. The word is being used a lot and being used to mean a lot of different things.
Other hot topics include : threshold concepts, cognitive something, concept based learning
Backwards design – start with what you want them to know, design instruction from there
Core ideas – conceptual ideas not just thresholds.
New ACRL IL standards will include:
Disposition (of the librarian) , skills, knowledge
Storify summary here.
Am I the only one who thinks these things should somehow map to each other more easily? It says that you can figure out which ones are higher order and which are lower order in the different outcomes. Wouldn’t it make sense to either list them hierarchically or be more explicit about which are which?
There’s this literal mapping of the Standards with notes about the taxonomy covered, but it’s mostly for a curriculum review and it’s specific to the university that created it.
I should check out the digital taxonomy: http://edorigami.wikispaces.com/#Bloom’s%20Taxonomy
and do a literature search, these look promising:
[maybe] Koufogiannakis, D., & Wiebe, N. (2006). Effective methods for teaching information literacy skills to undergraduate students: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 1(3), 3-43.
Callister, P. D. (2010). Time to Blossom: An Inquiry into Bloom’s Taxonomy as a Means to Ordered Legal Research Skills. Law Lib. Journal, 102(2), 191-218.
Keene, J., Colvin, J., & Sissons, J. (2010). Mapping student information literacy activity against Bloom’s Taxonomy of cognitive skills. Journal of information literacy, 4(1), 6-21.