one of the alamo...

Northwest Vista College – One of the Alamo Colleges 3535 N. Ellison Dr. San Antonio, TX 78251 (210) 486-4400 More information is available at: http://www.alamo.edu/nvc/qep

http://www.alamo.edu/nvc/qep

Northwest Vista College Improving Information Literacy through inFUSE ii

Table of Contents

Executive Summary: Northwest Vista College QEP ........................................................................... iv

Section 1: Overview ............................................................................................................................ 1 1a: Our Culture 1b: Mission and Strategic Plan

Section 2: QEP Topic Selection Process .............................................................................................. 4 2a: Timeline of Events 2b: Teams 2c: The Story – Topic Building 2d: Topic Exploration 2e: Data InFUSEd 2.1e: Analysis of Program Assessment 2.2e: CCSSE and CCFSSE Gap Analysis 2f: Methodologies: Topic Refinement

Section 3: Topic Refinement ............................................................................................................. 26 3a: Goal Setting 3b: Gaining Focus: Basic Strategies for Refining the QEP 3c: Gaining Focus: Faculty 3d: Gaining Focus: Students 3e: Building Momentum

Section 4: Student Learning Outcomes ............................................................................................ 33

Section 5: Literature Review and Best Practices ............................................................................... 35 5a: Overview 5b: ACRL Standards, the Framework, and Pedagogies 5c: Professional Development 5d: ePortfolios 5e: Rubrics 5f: Library Instruction

Section 6: Our Plan ........................................................................................................................... 41 6a: Strategies – In a nutshell 6b: Piloting 6c: Key Strategies to ensure a successful NVC QEP

Section 7: Timeline for the Pilot and Implementation of the NVC QEP ............................................ 48

Section 8: Organizational Structure .................................................................................................. 62

Section 9: Resources ......................................................................................................................... 64 9a: Budget

Northwest Vista College Improving Information Literacy through inFUSE iii

Section 10: Assessment ................................................................................................................... 66 10a: Description of assessment tools 10b: Baseline Assessment 10c: Rubrics

Section 11: References ..................................................................................................................... 73

Section 12: Appendices ..................................................................................................................... 77

List of Appendices: Appendix 1: Original Teams ........................................................................................................... 77 Appendix 2: Assessment in Action ................................................................................................. 78 Appendix 3: Library Workshop Data .............................................................................................. 82 Appendix 4: Additional Resources Informing the QEP .................................................................. 83 Appendix 5: Budget Narrative ........................................................................................................ 88 Appendix 6: General Assessment Rubric ....................................................................................... 91 Appendix 7: Assessment Feedback ................................................................................................ 92 Appendix 8: QEP Steering Team Minutes ...................................................................................... 93

List of Exhibits:

Exhibit 1: A Brief Implementation Matrix ....................................................................................... vi Exhibit 2: Executive Summary of Evidence for Each QEP Criterion .............................................. viii Exhibit 3: NVC Demographics .......................................................................................................... 1

Exhibit 4: NVC Core SLOs before 2012 ............................................................................................. 9 Exhibit 5: Questionnaire for Academic Areas ................................................................................ 27 Exhibit 6: QEP Wall ......................................................................................................................... 28 Exhibit 7: Schedule for Training Day .............................................................................................. 43

Northwest Vista College Improving Information Literacy through inFUSE iv

Executive Summary: Northwest Vista College QEP

“Students are poorly trained in college to effectively navigate the Internet’s

indiscriminate glut of information.” (Head and Wihbey).

orthwest Vista College (NVC) began the process of selecting and building a second Quality

Enhancement Plan (QEP) in 2013. The topic of the QEP, Information Literacy, originated

through broad-based input from College stakeholders, detailed reviews of institutional data,

including analysis of program learning outcome assessment results, a gap analysis of the data

from the Community College Survey of Student Engagement (CCSSE), the Community College

Faculty Survey of Student Engagement (CCFSSE), and research of national high-impact

practices.

The NVC QEP is titled Improving Information Literacy through inFUSE: Find, ethically Use,

Synthesize, and Evaluate. The Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) states

that “Students [today] have a greater role and responsibility in creating new knowledge, in

understanding the contours and the changing dynamics of the world of information, and in using

information, data, and scholarship ethically.” The focus of inFUSE is to improve the Information

Literacy skills of NVC students by providing strategic professional development, enhancing

teaching and learning strategies, and by developing relevant assessment measures.

NVC students will be introduced to Information Literacy at the foundational level of their

academic careers and receive scaffolded training throughout their time at NVC. Students will

learn Information Literacy strategies from across the disciplines and be able to critically apply

approaches to Information Literacy in their co-curricular experiences as well.

The primary focus of the College’s assessment process is to determine the gain in students’

Information Literacy skills from the foundational course (SDEV or EDUC 1300) to the point at

which they reach 30 hours or more of college credit hours. The College will assess the QEP

learning outcomes using both direct and indirect measures and formative and summative

evaluation methods. Targets will be more clearly defined to help determine the efficacy of the

QEP program following the establishment of an initial baseline from data gathered during the

2015-2016 pilot programs.

QEP Goal:

The goal of the NVC QEP is to equip students with Information Literacy skills that will show

them how to Find, ethically Use, Synthesize, and Evaluate information in their classes and in

their co-curricular programs.

The NVC QEP focuses on four student learning outcomes:

N

Northwest Vista College Improving Information Literacy through inFUSE v

Outcome 1: Students will be able to efficiently and effectively Find reliable and relevant

sources to meet their information needs by using library and various information sources

appropriately to explore a topic.

1a. Students will be able to find and use College and student services to meet

their academic and personal needs.

Outcome 2: Students will be able to Use information ethically and effectively by

applying appropriate citation/documentation systems to demonstrate understanding of

relevant economical, legal, and social issues.

Outcome 3: Students will be able to Synthesize credible resources to effectively

accomplish a specific purpose.

3a. Students will be able to Synthesize student and college services by

gathering and integrating resources into an ePortfolio.

Outcome 4: Students will be able to Evaluate information and sources through

identification of bias, authority, relevancy and credibility as it pertains to their information

needs.

Northwest Vista College Improving Information Literacy through inFUSE vi

Exhibit 1: A Brief Implementation Matrix

Target

Outcomes

Actions

Alignment to QEP Student Learning

Outcome and ACRL Standards and Framework

Pilot

Years 2014-2016

FTIC students in 15 sections of EDUC1300 and/or SDEV Foundational Courses

New Student Orientation attendees

Faculty and Staff

Introduce students to Information Literacy skills – focus on first two outcomes - Find and Use

Introduce employees and students to ePortfolios

Create campus-wide awareness of QEP and inFUSE

Collect assignments from faculty in various disciplines to gauge level of specific IL student expectations

Establish baseline numbers from assessments and skills based pre-test

Strategic professional development for EDUC/SDEV pilot instructors

Develop flipped classroom instructional methods for providing Information Literacy library instruction

Professional development for faculty and staff- focus on introduction to Information Literacy, enhanced pedagogical teaching strategies, and how each person can help students gain IL skills

Build Student Success Core Team

ePortfolio training for students in pilot EDUC/SDEV courses

IL Skills pre-test for students in pilot EDUC/SDEV courses

Marketing(by website, posters, banners, Trinity presentation, and giveaways) to assure that the vocabulary of information literacy is inFUSEd throughout the College

Develop general content IL rubric

NVC QEP SLOs 1) Find and 1a) Find College and Student Services; 2) ethically Use information;

ACRL Standards 1, 2 and 5

ACRL Learning Framework – concepts 1,3,4,6

Year 1 2016-2017

FTIC students in 15 sections of EDUC1300 and/or SDEV Foundational Courses

15 sections of ENGL 1301 courses


Faculty and Staff

Advance and reinforce information Literacy skills with enhanced library modules in 15 ENGL 1301 classes – focus on Synthesize and Evaluate

Intensify Professional Development – focus on development of assignments that communicate clear student expectations and deeper IL teaching methodologies.

Develop discipline specific IL needs via rubrics

Identify QEP Liaisons

Ensure strong assessment by developing core assessment team

Increase awareness of the ePortfolio

Faculty and staff will engage in “train the trainer” programs to ensure more discipline specific IL skills can be taught in more classrooms.

Hire Information Literacy Librarian to help coordinate QEP initiatives.

The ePortfolio will be featured

heavily in New Student

orientations and advising

sessions.

Information Literacy Academy opens for professional development

Develop Discipline Specific assessment materials through individual academic areas

Create Core assessment Team to norm and score together for 5 years

Use advising checkpoints for ePortfolio

Identify QEP liaisons

NVC QEP SLOs 3) Synthesize and 4) Evaluate

ACRL Standards 3 and 4

ACRL Learning Framework – concepts 2,3,4, and 6

Northwest Vista College Improving Information Literacy through inFUSE vii

Years

2-5

FTIC students in 25 sections of EDUC1300 and/or SDEV (add sections each year)

Students in 25 ENGL1301 sections, 15 ARTS1301, 15 STATS1442, 15 BIOL1308, and 15 HIST1301 courses (add sections each year)


Faculty and Staff

Advance and reinforce

information literacy in

subject specific research

strategies through high

enrollment classes –

combine elements of

FUSE

Professional development via the Information Literacy Academy

Trained trainers will help with discipline specific library modules

Assess advising touch points for ePortfolio checks

Check for students with 30 + credit hours for post-test

Assess using discipline specific rubrics – adjust as needed

Continue to build Train the Trainer program for new courses

Market and celebrate IL Academy graduates – begin to monitor students in those classes

Use Writing Across the Curriculum center/lab to help with on the spot training and to develop an assignment bank for IL courses

Refine assessment rubrics if needed

Target students at 30 + hours who took the IL Skills pre-test for post-test

Adjust feedback loop

NVC QEP SLOs FUSE – 1-5

ACRL Standards 1-5

ACRL Learning Framework – concepts 1-6

Northwest Vista College Improving Information Literacy through inFUSE viii

Exhibit 2: Executive Summary of Evidence for Each QEP Criterion

Requirement/

Standard

Criterion

Evidence

QEP Page

numbers

CR 2.12

Institutional Process for Identifying Key Issues:

Includes an institutional process identifying key issues emerging from institutional assessment

All members of the campus community participated in Town Hall meetings, focus groups, on-line forums and several topic votes. A large-scale survey of faculty, staff, students and college stakeholders was conducted. Presentations concerning the QEP topic were made to faculty and staff, outside constituents, and to the E-team (now the President’s Cabinet). Analysis of the findings, along with institutional data analysis, enabled the QEP Steering Team to triangulate findings and confidently select Information Literacy as the college’s QEP topic.

4-34

CR 2.12

Focus of the Plan: Focuses on learning outcomes and/or the environment supporting student learning and accomplishing the mission of the institution

The QEP is focused on giving students Information Literacy skills that will serve them both on our campus and in their capacity as lifelong learners. The QEP student learning outcomes are measureable and beneficial to students. The learning outcomes also reflect NVC’s culture, values, and expectations of excellence as outlined in our mission statement and called for in our Strategic Plan. The QEP is a collaborative venture with involvement from the entire College community.

2-3; 7-8; 33-34; 41-47

CS 3.3.2

Institutional Capability for the Initiation and Completion of the Plan: Demonstrates institutional capability for the initiation, implementation, and completion of the QEP

To ensure the success of the QEP, NVC is prepared to allocate the necessary staffing and the required financial resources of approximately 1.5 million dollars over five years. A detailed, five year plan accompanies this document. Information on the QEP pilot years is also included.

48-61; 64-65; 88-90

CS 3.3.2

Broad-Based Involvement in Development and Proposed Implementation: Includes broad-based involvement of institutional constituencies in the development and proposed implementation of the QEP

Broad-based involvement in the development of the QEP was achieved through the sustained efforts of the college’s QEP Steering Team, which represented a cross section of the college to include student participation. Regular presentations are made to the college’s E-team (now Cabinet) which generates discussion and garners new insights into shaping the plan. Stakeholders, such as the members of our NVC Business Council, have been surveyed and participated in face-to-face meetings concerning the scope of our QEP.

5-8; 26-32; 77-78

A matrix of our implementation plan includes “owners” of specific implementation arenas, key strategies, and goals with clear outcomes.

vi-viii; 26-32; 41-47

CS 3.3.2

Assessment of the Plan:

Identifies goals and a plan to assess their achievement

The primary goal of the NVC’s QEP is to develop a culture dedicated to the enhancement of information Literacy skills. The vehicle for accomplishing this goal will be the implementation of inFUSE. Four specific and measurable learning outcomes align with the goal of the QEP and act as springboards for assessments as to the effectiveness of the QEP in creating a campus culture of Information Literacy awareness.

33-34; 35-40; 66-72

Assessments will involve direct and indirect measures, include quantitative and qualitative approaches, and require action plans post assessment.

66-72; 79- 88; 91-92

In addition to course-based assessments, support activities associated with the QEP will be routinely assessed, and the Quality Enhancement Plan itself will be regularly evaluated.

67-68; 92

The culmination of these multiple assessment measures will be the institutionalization and integration of the QEP into the college’s routine strategic and operational planning and evaluation processes.

1-4; 33-34; 62-64

Northwest Vista College Improving Information Literacy through inFUSE 1

Section 1: Overview

1a: Our Culture his year, 2015, Northwest Vista College (NVC) celebrates 20 years of Creating

Opportunities for Success in the San Antonio, Texas community. Northwest Vista College is

located on 137 beautifully wooded-acres in a rapidly developing area of the city. NVC has grown

exponentially from the fall of 1995 when twelve students met in an off-campus site for classes, to the

present day where over 16,000 students are enrolled. NVC began offering classes at its current

campus in the fall of 1998, and received its initial SACS accreditation in 2001. Northwest Vista

College has always placed an emphasis on creating a student-centered learning environment with

support and resources devoted to cooperative and active learning strategies. Twenty years later,

this collaborative, student-centered culture continues to shape the mission, vision, and values of

the College and helps form a supportive, friendly, and helpful learning environment for its

students. The original NVC mission centered on student success and this same mission

provides affirmation for the selection of Information Literacy as the QEP topic with the most

potential for impacting student learning.

Student Characteristics: NVC students are vibrant individuals with diverse needs and unlimited abilities. In the fall of

2014, NVC had over 16,800 enrolled students. The demographic (non-dual credit) breakdown of

students is as follows:

Exhibit 3: NVC Demographics

59.45%26%

5.60%

2.68%

6.25%

NVC DEMOGRAPHICS FALL 2014

Hispanic White Black Afrcan-American Asian Other

T

http://www.alamo.edu/nvc/mission/

http://www.alamo.edu/nvc/mission/


The fall 2014 enrollment numbers reveal the following about NVC students:

25% are Full Time attendees, a decline from previous years

31% are between the ages of 18-19

The second highest age group are between the ages of 20-21 (23%)

46% are male

54% are female

15.76% are First Time In College Students (FTIC)

The percentage receiving Pell grants is trending upward (2012 numbers equal 30.2 % of the student

population)

Among NVC’s sister colleges within the Alamo College district, NVC has a much younger

population of students. Over 50% of NVC students are between the ages of 18 and 21.

Although these students are the most seemingly familiar with technology, there is a need to help

students manage the world of information that comes with technology. A QEP topic focusing on

Information Literacy will benefit a rather young student population and establish a continuum for

life-long learning. Alison J. Head, Director of Project Information Literacy, believes this of

todays’ students:

An unprecedented number of students were born digital – meaning that digital

technologies have been a constant feature in their lives. For them, information literacy

competencies are always being formed, practiced, and learned. Finding and using

information is exponentially more complex than it was a generation ago as the

information landscape has shifted from one of scarcity of resources to abundance and

overload.

Student learning, loosely defined by the American College of Research Librarians (ACRL), is

the ability to define a problem, investigate methods for exploration, make analogies between

research and opinion, and adapt basic ideas to more complex ideas. The NVC QEP builds on

this understanding of student learning by recognizing that students are living and learning in a

new knowledge economy where the world of information is denser than ever before.

1b: Mission and Strategic Plan orthwest Vista College’s mission is creating opportunities for success by offering quality

academic, technical and life-long learning experiences to its diverse communities in a

collaborative, student-centered, data-informed and shared leadership environment. This mission

statement guides the culture, the annual College strategic planning process, and institutional

assessments.

NVC’s mission statement is unique to the College and describes the distinctive approach to the

programs and services offered by supporting the needs of a diverse community in a

collaborative, student–centered, data-informed and shared leadership environment. This

mission addresses teaching and learning and focuses on life-long learning. The QEP topic of

Information Literacy supports the mission.

The QEP Steering Team began by discussing to what extent each initiative might advance

the College’s Mission and Strategic plan as well as enhance Student Learning. A commitment

N


was made to ensure each action taken merited the financial support and championing of NVC

and would serve as a catalyst for student learning.

Commitment to the Strategic Plan: NVC’s strategic planning process, including budgeting and

resource allocation, yields a living document that guides work groups in focusing their efforts on

that which is of greatest importance to the institution. The QEP provided the College with a

unique opportunity to design a thoughtful, cross-disciplinary plan to demonstrate the institution’s

commitment toward “effective and innovative curriculum and teaching and learning strategies”

(Objective 1 Strategy 1.A.). Most important was the desire to include the entire College

community in the development and design of the QEP plan thus ensuring “we provide college

wide support for completion” (Objective 1). The intentional design of the process reflects the

goal to “continuously improve the quality of our processes” (Objective IV) and “address and

improve student learning outcomes; improve faculty development and learning communities;

focus on degree planning and completion and integrate plans with faculty advising” (Objective

1 Strategy 1.B. OAP 1.B.3.2). Objective II is also met by the commitment for the QEP plan to

“enhance engagement, success, and learning for all.”

Broad Based Involvement: All members of the College community, including alumni, business partners, and community

members, participated in the planning process of the QEP and are invited to continually

participate in the QEP as it evolves. One of the many questions asked before finalizing the

topic of Information Literacy was what makes this QEP ideal for NVC’s conditions, population,

and challenges? The qualities, characteristics and values of the organization are clear from

the mission statement. The focus on collaboration, diversity, student-centeredness and

shared leadership all support the distinctiveness of NVC’s educational approach. This is

further supported by the NVC vision statement which states that NVC creates “exemplary

models for learning.”

The NVC culture is a perfect environmental fit for an Information Literacy initiative because of

the many benefits that will be received by faculty, staff, community members, and students both

today and in the future:

The QEP touches all students: On campus, extension campuses, and Distance Learning students;

The QEP establishes intentional learning – having the entire campus focus on the one goal of helping NVC

students become Information Literate;

The QEP develops transformative use of information – asking our faculty and staff to critically consider how

students will benefit from obtaining Information Literacy skills;

The QEP creates crucial social and personal skills in the digital age – NVC students are young. They are

developing an online identity. Helping manage this distinct social aspect of Information Literacy is a role the

entire community can participate in and help shape;

The QEP develops discerning scholars and autonomous, lifelong learners. A concerted effort to bridge the

gap between college and the workplace will ensure that NVC students leave the College with skills that

come from understanding how to manage and navigate information; and

NVC will share progress from the QEP with faculty, students, staff, and community partners. Giving the

entire community an opportunity to look over a summary of direct and indirect assessment measures will

ensure transparency in the process, develop a shared goal of working to improve student success, and raise

awareness of the concepts behind Information Literacy.


Section 2: QEP Topic Selection Process

2a: Timeline of Events Fall 2013/Spring 2014 SACSCOC Leadership Team holds six Town Hall Meetings to discuss possible new QEP topics

December 2013 SACSCOC Leadership Team selects QEP Director

January 2014 SACSCOC Leadership Team reviews feedback gathered from Town Hall Meetings

January 2014 SACSCOC Leadership Team and QEP Director build QEP Steering Team

January 2014 QEP Steering Team narrows Town Hall Topics and sends out Questionnaire inviting comments

on narrowed topic selections and asks faculty and staff for rankings

January/February 2014 QEP Steering Team performs gap analysis on CCSSE and CCFSSE responses

January/February 2014 QEP Steering Team performs gap analysis on NVC Outcome Assessments – Program and

Discipline

January/February 2014 QEP Steering Team reviews comments from Questionnaire

February 2014 QEP Steering Team selects Information Literacy as a potential QEP topic

February/March 2014 QEP Steering Team completes Literature Review on Information Literacy, with specific attention

to areas found lacking in gap analysis

March 2014 QEP Director and one Team member complete a site visit to Trinity University

March 2014 QEP Director presents Information Literacy as topic to E-team

March 2014 E-team asks QEP Steering Team to survey, employees, students, and stakeholders

March/April 2014 Survey developed by QEP Steering Team sent out to employees, students, and stakeholders

April 2014 QEP Steering Team analyzes survey results with help from College Institutional Research team

April 2014 QEP Director presents results of survey to the E-Team

May 15 2014 E-team approves Information Literacy as QEP topic

2b: Teams The NVC SACSCOC Leadership Team selected a QEP Director in December of 2013. The

QEP Steering Team was established in January 2014 with attention to building a team from

across all disciplines and all areas of campus to ensure a diverse, broad based Team of content

experts.

Team Responsibilities Reporting Line

SACSCOC Leadership Team Select Leadership for College Teams

Approve QEP topic

Identify key personnel for committees

Identify resource needs

Establish timelines

NVC President/Cabinet

QEP Steering Team Focus on QEP topic

Research topic and data

Update faculty and staff on progress

Develop budget

Create five year plan

Ensures that deadlines are met and coordinates with all relevant stakeholders

Directs pilots

Sets professional development schedules

Select Assessment Team

Review data

NVC President/Cabinet SACSCOC Leadership Team QEP Director

QEP Assessment Team Ensure appropriate Learning Outcomes are tied to appropriate assessment measure

QEP Director QEP Steering Team


Develop assessment plan

Research best practices and trends

Create IL general Assessment Rubric

Monitor development of Discipline specific rubrics QEP Student Success Core Team Develop processes for assessment of ePortfolio

Create plan for ePortfolio roll out

Facilitate professional development

Help with marketing measures

QEP Director

Appendix 1: QEP Team Lists

2c: The Story – Topic Building In the fall of 2013, NVC held six well attended faculty and staff Town Hall meetings where the

former QEP was discussed (positives/negatives) and new QEP topics were considered. The

Town Hall meetings were led by the College president and facilitated by the Vice Presidents.

The atmosphere at each meeting was collegial and stakeholders were engaged in the process.

For each topic suggested, five criteria were considered:

1. Does the topic focus on improving Student Learning?

2. Does the topic include the ability to assess and measure progress?

3. Does the topic carry forward the best features from our former QEP (focus on Communication, Active

Learning, and Critical Thinking)?

4. Will this topic have a broad impact on students and the institution?

5. Is this topic consistent with the College mission?

The “brainstorm” list from the initial set of meetings included:

Current QEP (re-envision) – writing, speaking, critical thinking, collaboration

Leadership

Social and personal responsibility

Adjunct Faculty Development

Technology in the classroom

Information literacy

Learning Communities

Evidence-based decision making

Writing (including common format, plagiarism)

Reading skills

Increasing academic survival

Improving & documenting academic assessment

Wellness

Balance

Current future trends in research

Learning to learn

Linking learning to workplace

Reinvent teaching to improve student learning (educational research)

Student intervention strategy

The QEP Steering Team first considered the lengthy “brainstorm” list from the six Town Hall

meetings in light of the criteria. The QEP Steering Team then looked for thematic definitions

from the list and narrowed the information by elimination of redundancies, topics not generating

strong interest from group to group, or topics not meeting the criteria. The Steering Team

developed an online questionnaire from the remaining topics and disseminated it to all faculty


and staff. The questionnaire asked for help in further narrowing the topic selections from the

Town Hall meetings. NVC faculty and staff voted and commented on topics considered

important for student success via an online forum.

The topics generated from the online forum and questionnaire were as follows (in order of most

votes): Writing and Critical Thinking

Reinventing teaching to improve student learning: research on teaching and learning

Information literacy

Evidence-based decision-making

Reinvision the current quality enhancement plan. Develop the next phase of writing, speaking, critical

thinking, and collaboration across the curriculum

Reading across the curriculum: Comprehension and analysis

Technology in the classroom: to enhance learning

Academic Survival Skills: skills for success in college, i.e. study skills, group communication, wellness, learning to learn

The QEP Steering Team identified Key Issues across the College by completing a gap analysis

of The Community College Survey of Student Engagement (CCSSE) and The Community

College Survey of Faculty Engagement (CCFSSE) data during the timeframe faculty and staff

were providing input via the questionnaire. Several institutional gaps were identified as a result

of this analysis (see data in section 2e). The Steering Team then scanned Discipline and

Program assessment numbers and found additional gaps in learning outcomes.

Identified gaps on the CCSSE centered on Information Literacy related skills such as the ability

to synthesize and evaluate information. An analysis of the assessments of Student Learning

Outcomes revealed issues with writing and critical thinking centering on areas of ethical use of

information and evaluation and synthesis skills. Information Literacy was viewed as an umbrella

that could extend the current QEP across all disciplines and programs and incorporate effective

use of technology into program and discipline areas while addressing writing, critical thinking,

and new teaching practices (the two top vote getters). Based on the key issues found in

examining internal data, a review of best practices, faculty and staff input, the demographics of

the NVC student population, and the opportunity to create an environment favorable to student

learning, the QEP Steering Team decided to research Information Literacy as the potential QEP

topic.

Topic Involvement: Format Group

Town Hall Focus Groups Open Online Forum Rankings Questionnaire

Administrators Faculty and staff

Research of Internal Data – gap analysis Research of Best Practices Review of High Impact Practices

QEP Steering Team

Survey Instrument, including text responses Faculty, staff, stakeholders, students Extended focus groups (convocation/professional development) Presentations of topic – internal and external to College

Faculty, staff, stakeholders, students Faculty, staff, stakeholders, students, district Presidents, Vice Presidents, Chancellor and Alamo Colleges Board of Trustees


2d: Topic Exploration Town Hall List

Narrowing of Topics

Faculty and Staff Questionnaire and Commentary

Gap Analysis of direct and indirect measures of student learning at NVC

Literature Review of Best Practices

Consideration of existing NVC Best practices (Information Literacy modules from Library)

Site visit to Trinity University

The NVC QEP Steering Team’s interest in Information Literacy was also fueled by the

successful Information Literacy workshops NVC librarians already provide for students and

faculty. The Library Information Literacy program includes course integrated face-to-face

information literacy sessions that faculty self-select for their needs. Student survey responses to

the sessions are consistently favorable. The QEP Steering Team then engaged in an extensive

research of the NVC internal and external data points to include a review of the strategic plan,

and conducted a literature review of national best practices in Information Literacy.

One of the common themes the Steering Team noted throughout the literature review

concerned students’ inability to effectively evaluate sources and synthesize information. Bloom’s

taxonomy places evaluation and synthesis skills in the highest order of cognitive thinking,

however in her article, “Enhancing Literacy and Illiteracy,” Alice Horning, author and Director of

the writing program at Oakland University, writes that “students [today] cannot [. . .] go beyond

summary to analysis, synthesis, and evaluation.” The Steering Team’s interest in incorporating

synthesis and evaluation as Learning Outcomes for the QEP was heightened because these

skills were also gaps noted in the institutional analysis of CCSSE scores and Outcomes.

The QEP Steering Team identified the specific characteristics

desired from an Information Literacy QEP. Information Literacy,

defined loosely by the ACRL as the ability to locate, gather,

evaluate, and use information analytically and effectively, was

the focus of another San Antonio institution of higher learning’s

QEP. Trinity University selected “Expanding Horizons” with an

emphasis on Information Literacy as the university’s Quality

Enhancement Plan.

The QEP Director and a QEP Steering Team member, Judy

McMillan, library chair, met with Benjamin Harris and Jeremy

McDonald, the QEP Leads from Trinity University, to exchange

ideas. The empirical data shared by the Trinity team solidified

NVC’s commitment to Information Literacy as a QEP topic that

would most impact student learning campus-wide.

The QEP Steering Team considered, through an in-depth review of the American College of

Research Libraries Standards (ACRL), what Outcomes or competencies would best serve NVC

students. The Steering Team had already formed an interest in evaluation and synthesis skills

and a review of the NVC assessment outcomes highlighted an additional issue of plagiarism

stemming from the failure of students to properly cite information. The highly regarded and

The driving factor for

the selection of

Information Literacy

as the QEP topic was

the determination by

the Team that this

topic had the

greatest potential for

impacting student

learning.

http://www.trinity.edu/departments/academic_affairs/qep/ExpandingHorizonsQEPpublic.pdf




commonly accepted ACRL Standards defines Information Literate students in the following

ways:

1. The information literate student determines the nature and extent of the information needed

2. The information literate student accesses needed information effectively and efficiently

3. The information literate student evaluates information and its sources critically and incorporates selected

information into his or her knowledge base and value system. (Includes as an outcome: The information

literate student synthesizes main ideas to construct new concepts.)

4. The information literate student, individually or as a member of a group, uses information effectively to

accomplish a specific purpose.

5. The information literate student understands many of the economic, legal, and social issues surrounding the

use of information and accesses and uses information ethically and legally.

Taking into consideration the greatest needs found through the gap analysis, as well as the best

practices from the ACRL Standards, the QEP Steering Team considered what information NVC

students should acquire after thirty hours of coursework at NVC. The following outcomes

surfaced:

Having students be able to locate information and recognize credible source material

Making sure students understand the ethical implications of documenting sources

Helping students synthesize information so they can construct their own ideas from information gathered

Making sure students can evaluate information critically

The FUSE acronym was borne out of a desire for students to Find information, ethically Use

information, Synthesize, and Evaluate information. Although the topic of Information Literacy is

huge, by focusing on the individual FUSE outcomes, the skills are both manageable and

practical for the College and NVC students and the ability to assess the change in students’

Information Literacy skills before and after the introduction to FUSE is clear.

Margit Misagyi Watts, author of College: We Make the Road by Walking, believes that “although

Information Literacy is not a widely discussed concept in advising, its objectives, as outlined by

the ACRL (2000), are very similar.” The NVC QEP expanded the definition of FUSE to include

Student and College services. Advisors and other Student Success specialists will help students

begin an ePortfolio where they might better learn to manage information and enhance

Information Literacy skills.

Direction and approval from the Executive team (E-team - currently called the President’s

Cabinet) involved the QEP Steering Team’s presentation of the proposed topic to the NVC

president’s Cabinet. The presentation included researched materials concerning Best Practice

models for Information Literacy acquisition and a three phase, one year QEP plan draft.

Feedback from the initial presentation was positive. The Cabinet wanted to ensure the topic was

related to Strategic Effort 2 of our Strategic Plan – Learning and Learning Outcomes. The

Cabinet then requested the Steering Team survey stakeholders regarding the topic. The QEP

Director completed the surveys and submitted the revised plan to the Cabinet in March of 2014.

Approval for the topic was granted in May of 2014.


2e: Data InFUSEd NVC has worked to create a culture of assessment. Disciplines design and assess discipline

specific student learning outcomes. NVC also conducts Program Outcome Assessment.

Material for the Program Outcome assessments is collected in fall and the analysis and

assessment of data is conducted in early spring. In order to assess learning outcomes, a

random sample of student work is collected from students who have completed 32 or more

credit hours. Program Outcome Assessments are scored based upon common rubrics at a

scheduled day in early spring called “Assessment Day.” Discipline outcomes are assessed

annually as scheduled by individual academic area.

NVC has assessed the core curriculum’s student

learning outcomes (SLOs) since 2005. The SLOs

included written communications, oral

communications, critical thinking, and collaborative

learning. During the 2011-2012 academic year, the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board

(THECB) prescribed a series of core curriculum objectives to be implemented by public colleges

and universities across the state of Texas. NVC adopted the additional core objectives as the

core student learning outcomes. The crosswalk from the former NVC student learning outcomes

to the new core student learning outcomes are shown in Exhibit 4.

To provide additional information on student learning, NVC participates in an annual attitudinal

assessment survey of our students through the Community College Survey of Student

Engagement (CCSSE). CCSSE data are direct measures of student perceptions rather than

direct measures of student outcomes. The Community College Survey of Faculty Engagement

(CCFSSE) elicits information from faculty about their perceptions regarding students'

educational experiences, their teaching practices, and the ways they spend their professional

time—both in and out of the classroom. CCFSSE surveys are completed every other year at

NVC.

CCSSE data, combined with data from SLO assessments, helped determine if there were gaps

between SLO achievement and student perceptions of their own learning.

Exhibit 4: NVC Core SLOs before 2012 NVC Core SLOs before 2012 NVC Core SLOs since 2012

Communication:

Writing

Speaking

Communication:

Writing

Speaking Visual

Critical Thinking Critical Thinking

Collaborative Learning Teamwork

Emperical and Quantitative Skills

Personal Responsibility

Social Responsibiilty

An internal scan of the assessment action plans and scorecards was conducted by the QEP

Steering Team to identify needs and gaps. Not all student learning outcomes included

identifiable Information Literacy outcomes nor did they all reveal problematic areas.

All courses participate in

assessment, whether online,

off campus, or on campus.


The QEP Steering Team aligned the NVC QEP Student Learning Outcomes to the CCSSE

question or Program Outcome after selecting the NVC QEP Student Learning Outcomes. To

further ensure the material consulted was applicable to the QEP topic, links to the ACRL

Standards were further identified. (QEP SLOs are abbreviated in this section)

Note: There are many references throughout this QEP document to the Association of College

and Research Libraries (ACRL) and their Information Literacy Competency Standards for

Higher Education. Since 2000, the Standards were used in most college and university

Information Literacy programs. The ACRL adopted a newer model called the ACRL Framework

for Information Literacy on February 2, 2015. While the more traditional Standards are

constructed with performance indicators and outcomes, the Framework is based on threshold

concepts. As the transition between the Framework and the Standards is still in flux and

debated among librarians, the NVC QEP Steering Team included ideas from both models and

has referenced both models.

2.1e: Analysis of Program Assessment Program Outcomes for Associate of Arts: Students will complete the general education core

requirements and receive a foundational exposure to a broad range of subjects in the liberal arts

appropriate to transfer to a baccalaureate program.

*Assessment numbers are from the 2013/2014 Academic Years as these were the years

that helped determine the scope of the QEP topic.

A 1. Student Learning Outcomes for Communication skills, including writing,

speaking and visual.

Writing:

Students will be able to produce clear, correct, and coherent prose adapted to

purpose, occasion, and audience using original and/or researched material;

Students will demonstrate an understanding of the writing process including how

to discover, develop, and organize a topic. Links to QEP SLO 1 effectively Find reliable and relevant sources; QEP SLO 2 ethically Use

information; QEP SLO 3 Synthesize credible resources; and QEP SLO 4 Evaluate information

and sources

Links to ACRL Information Literacy Standards 1-5

Links to ACRL Framework For Information Literacy Threshold Concepts 1-6

Key Issues:

o The English Departmental Assessment revealed a consistent pattern of

plagiarism in assessed papers. The incidents of plagiarism were not necessarily

a result of student dishonesty (cut and paste papers), but issues of improper

documentation of sources both in-text and on a works cited page. In reviewing

other program assessments of writing, this is a common concern across the

disciplines.

o Program Results (scale of 4):

Thesis Development – 2.70

Organization – 2.80


Supporting evidence – 2.68

Rhetorical effectiveness – 2.74

*All categories continue in a downward trend since 2012. Program Assessment definitions for each scoring category are as follows:

Thesis/Focus: The student writing sample shows a clear and well developed thesis statement

or a central idea.

Organization: The student writing sample is well organized with attention to the development of

an introduction, a conclusion, and the use of transitions.

Supporting Evidence: The student writing sample shows attention to the logical progression

and flow of ideas and includes the use of examples to clearly support and illustrate key ideas.

Rhetorical Effectiveness: The student writing sample shows a clearly evident purpose that

completely fulfills the stated requirements of the assignment.

Actions Planned:

The QEP topic will help mitigate the issues of plagiarism in several ways:

Year Action

Years 1-5

An intensive two part Information Literacy workshop is being developed by the librarians and will be scaffolded to include five high enrollment courses over the five years of the QEP (ENGL 1301, ARTS 1301, HIST 1301, BIOL 1308, STATS 1442) Faculty who have been trained by the Train the Trainer program will help librarians deliver this content.

Pilot-Year 5

Faculty development will include ACRL Framework 5: “Scholarship is a conversation,” and Standard 3: Seeing Information as value. Faculty are encouraged to have conversations about the ethical use of information in all classrooms.

Pilot-Year 5

A campaign series highlighting ways to understand specific aspects of FUSE will be visible across campus on posters, banners, and on the media site. Blitz marketing will include classroom messages detailing Information Literacy skills.

Pilot-Year 5

Faculty in all disciplines will be offered professional development in varying degrees. Sessions will include development of assignments that communicate expectations for IL skills, pedagogical enhancements to the curriculum, and developing activities that extend the lessons from the Library workshops throughout the semester.

The QEP topic will address concerns with issues such as thesis development, organization,

support of evidence, and rhetorical effectiveness, in several ways:

Year Action Pilot - Year 5

Ensure that during the assessment process, Information Literacy skills are correctly being assessed and that inter-rater reliability is not an issue. A core assessment team will remain in place for the duration of the QEP with a QEP Liaison representing each discipline and helping to develop discipline specific rubrics.

Pilot Year +

The QEP Assessment Team will develop a general assessment rubric that can be used as a guide for discipline specific rubric builds. Ensuring consistency during assessment will help maintain a reliable assessment process and the resulting measures will help the Team strategically design professional development sessions.

Pilot Year +

During assessment day, the assignment accompanying the student work will also be examined to help the Assessment Team identify ways in which faculty can better direct students toward Information Literacy skills.

Pilot Year +


Pilot Year +

Faculty and Student Services staff will help lead students to Find student support by way of emphasizing resources such as skills labs and tutoring centers.

Targets:

Area Percentage Plagiarized papers Year 1: Reduce plagiarized papers from 20% to 17%


Years 2-5: Reduce incidents of plagiarism 3% points per year until below 10%

Thesis Development Organization Support of Evidence Rhetorical Effectiveness

Year 1: Target mean scores in each category at 2.9 out of 4 Years 2-5: Target mean scores in each category at 3.2 and above out of 4

Speaking:

Students will demonstrate the ability to communicate verbally in language

appropriate to purpose and audience. Links to QEP SLO 3 Synthesize credible resources; and QEP SLO 4 Evaluate information and

sources

Links to ACRL Information Literacy Standards 1, 3,and 4,

Links to ACRL Framework For Information Literacy Threshold Concepts 2,3, 4, and 5

Key Issues:

o Both Discipline and Program Assessments show scores dropping in the organization

and clear sense of purpose categories.

o Program Results: (Scale of 4 through spring 2014. Scale now at 5)

Organization: 3.0

Clear Sense of Purpose: 3.12

*Although scores appear to have increased from fall 2013 to spring 2014, the shift in

scaling may have skewed the numbers

The assessment definitions for each scoring category are as follows:

Organization:1 The lack of organization, failure to introduce the topic, lack of transitions

between points, or awkward flow of information prevents the information from being

determined or understood.2 Problems with the introduction, body, conclusion, transitions, or

logical flow of information make the information somewhat confusing or unclear.3 An

introduction, body, conclusion, transitions, and logical flow of information make the information

clearly understandable.4 An attention-getting introduction, well-organized body, conclusion that

leaves a lasting impression, good transitions, and logical flow make the information interesting,

exciting, thought-provoking, or highly meaningful.

Clear Sense of Purpose: 1 The purpose of the presentation cannot be determined or

understood; the goal is unclear or unsupported.2 The purpose of the presentation and its

content is somewhat confusing; the message is ambiguous or vague.3 The presentation has a

clear, understandable message, and it is adequately supported.4 The goal and purpose of the

presentation are clear and well-supported; this helps make the presentation interesting,

exciting, thought-provoking, or highly meaningful.

Actions Planned:

Organization scores can be helped by training students to better understand how to

synthesize materials and evaluate them for meaning. Scores for a clear sense of

purpose can be raised by helping students Find relevant information, Synthesize and

Evaluate the materials. The QEP topic will help students with organization of thought

and in developing a clear sense of purpose in several ways:

Year Action Pilot Year and Year 1

Students taking the EDUC 1300 and/or SDEV courses (mandatory for FTIC students) will be introduced to Librarian instructed information literacy workshops and the ePortfolio. Most instructors teaching SDEV/EDUC will attend professional development sessions emphasizing the teaching of Information Literacy skills.


Pilot-Year 5


Pilot-Year 5


Targets:

Percentage

Organization Year 1: Target mean scores in each category at 3.2 out of 5

Clear Sense of Purpose Years 2-5: Target mean scores in each category at 3.5 and above out of 5

1. Visual:

Students will demonstrate the ability to effectively communicate information using

visual representation. Links to QEP SLO 3 Synthesize credible resources; and QEP SLO 4 Evaluate information and

sources

Links to ACRL Information Literacy Standards 3 and 4

Links to ACRL Framework For Information Literacy Threshold Concepts 1, 2, and 5

Key Issues:

o The findings for all Program Outcomes concerning visual scores fall below

the mean. Effective visual communication relies on the ability to Synthesize

and Evaluate information effectively.

o Program Results: All categories scored at 2.7- 2.73 The assessment definitions for each scoring category are as follows:

Student describes relevant elements and principles of visual composition found in the

example-4 Describes all or most of the relevant principles of visual composition with

accuracy 3 Describes some of the relevant principles of visual composition with accuracy 2

Describes at least one of the relevant principles of visual composition with some accuracy

1Some difficulty selecting and/or describing principles of visual composition with much

accuracy

Student demonstrates an understanding of how the elements of visual composition are used to

communicate within the example 4 Demonstrates a thorough understanding of how the

elements are used to communicate 3 Demonstrates a good understanding of how the

elements are used to communicate 2 Demonstrates a developing understanding of how the

elements are used to communicate 1 Demonstrates minimal understanding of how the

elements are used to communicate

Actions Planned:

The QEP topic will address these concerns in several ways:

Year Action Pilot Year +

Ensure that during the assessment process, Information Literacy skills are correctly being assessed and that inter-rater reliability is not an issue. A core assessment team will remain in place for the duration of the QEP with a QEP Liaison representing each discipline and helping to develop discipline specific rubrics.

Pilot Year +



Year 1+

During assessment day, the assignment accompanying the student work will also be examined to help the Assessment Team identify ways in which faculty can better direct students toward Information Literacy skills.

Pilot Year +


Pilot Year +


Year 3 An intensive two part Information Literacy workshop is being developed by the librarians and will be scaffolded to include five high enrollment courses over the five years of the QEP (ENGL 1301, ARTS 1301, HIST 1301, BIOL 1308, STSTS 1442) Faculty who have been trained by the Train the Trainer program will help librarians deliver this content.

Targets:

Numbers for visual assessment at the program level are below the mean or slightly at

the mean. This assessment is in a relatively new stage of development. Better

assessment training and assignment creation is expected to lead to a more stable

measurement process.

Area Percentage All areas Year 1: Target mean scores in each category at 2.75 out of 4

Years 2-5: Target mean scores in each category at 3.3 and above out of 4

2. Critical Thinking

Students will demonstrate the ability to employ critical thinking skills to

include analysis, evaluation, and synthesis of information to evaluate and

construct arguments, ideas, and alternative strategies Links to QEP SLO 2 ethically Use information; QEP SLO 3 Synthesize credible resources; and

QEP SLO 4 Evaluate information and sources



Key Issues:

o Discipline and Program Assessment: In the Critical Thinking Across the

Curriculum assessment, fairness and logic scores continue to trend downward

with clarity coming in below the median score as well.


Clarity – 2.9

Accuracy – 2.8

Relevance – 3.12

Logic – 2.83 The assessment definitions for some scoring categories are as follows:

Logic: 4 - essay makes sense; inferences/conclusions follow from the assumptions and supporting

information presented 3- essay more often than not makes sense; more often than not,

inferences/conclusions follow from the assumptions and supporting information presented 2- essay

generally does not make sense; inferences/conclusions rarely follow from the assumptions and

supporting information presented 1 –essay does not make sense; inferences/conclusions do not

follow from the assumptions and supporting information presented

Fairness: 4 – supporting information and assumptions are presented in a fair and evenhanded

manner 3 – more often than not, supporting information and assumptions are presented in a fair


and evenhanded manner 2 – for the most part, supporting information and assumptions are not

presented in a fair and evenhanded manner 1 – supporting information and assumptions are not

presented in a fair and evenhanded manner

Actions Planned:

Our QEP topic will help in several ways:

Year Action Pilot Year +


Pilot Year +


Pilot Year +


Pilot Year +


Targets:

Percentage

Logic Year 1: Target mean scores in each category at 3 out of 5

Fairness Years 2-5: Target mean scores in each category at 3.5 and above out of 5

3. Personal Responsibility:

Students will demonstrate the ability to connect choices and actions to

consequences; links to QEP SLO 2 ethically Use information

Students will understand the process of ethical decision making; links to QEP SLO 3

Synthesize credible resources; and QEP SLO 4 Evaluate information and sources

Students will demonstrate an understanding of the impact of their own actions on

the greater community links to QEP SLO 3 Synthesize credible resources; and QEP SLO 4

Evaluate information and sources



Key Issues:

o Program Assessment reveals scores at the low end of the target range, though

showing increases in 2014. Scores in the lower end of the range included Ethical

Decision Making and Connecting Choices.


Ethical Decision Making – 2.6

Connecting Choices – 2.96

Actions Planned:

Ethical Decision making is associated with the QEP learning outcome of ethical use of

information. Connecting choices can also be helped by giving students the tools to

become stronger evaluators of information. Our QEP topic will help in several ways:


Year Action Pilot -Year 1


Pilot Year

As Personal Responsibility is a relatively new Program Outcome for NVC, the assessment process might be in need of help. The QEP Assessment Team will develop a general assessment rubric that can be used as a guide for discipline specific rubric builds. Ensuring consistency during assessment will help maintain a reliable assessment process and the resulting measures will help the Team strategically design professional development sessions.

Pilot Year +


Pilot Year +


Years 3-5

An intensive two part Information Literacy workshop is being developed by the librarians and will be scaffolded to include five high enrollment courses over the five years of the QEP (ENGL 1301, ARTS 1301, HIST 1301, BIOL 1308, STSTS 1442) Faculty who have been trained by the Train the Trainer program will help librarians deliver this content.

Targets:

Percentage

Ethical Decision Making Year 1: Target mean scores in each category at 2.75 out of 5

Connecting Choices Years 2-5: Target mean scores in each category at 3.25 and above out of 5

Program Outcomes for Associate of Science: Students will complete the general education core

requirements and STEM related courses to prepare them for eventual transfer to a 4 year

institution in a STEM related major. (Instead of the ACRL Information Literacy Standards, in this

section information came from the ACRL Information Literacy Standards for Science and

Engineering/Technology)

A. Assessment of Core Student Learning Outcomes

1. Core Assessment Team Data and Summary:

2011 2012 2013 2014

Speaking 2.81 2.78 2.82 3.10

Writing 3.057 2.903 2.773 2.76 (scale of 4)

Visual NA NA NA 2.73 (scale of 4)

Critical Thinking 2.91 2.96 2.94 2.96 (scale of 5)

Teamwork NA NA NA 4.63 (scale of 5)

Personal Responsibility NA NA NA 2.63 (scale of 4)

Social Responsibility NA NA NA 1.78 (scale of 4)

Quantitative/Empirical NA NA NA 2.70 (scale of 4)


B.1 Student Learning Outcomes for Empirical & Quantitative Engineering, Statistical,

Graphical, Mathematical, and/or Numerical Analysis

Students will apply mathematical concepts, appropriate technology, and

quantitative tools to mathematics, science, computer science, and/or

engineering.

Students will demonstrate an ability to manipulate and analyze numerical data or

observe facts resulting in informed conclusions. links to QEP SLO 1 effectively Find reliable and relevant sources; QEP SLO 2 ethically

Use information; QEP SLO 3 Synthesize credible resources; and QEP SLO 4 Evaluate

information and sources

Links to ACRL STEM standards 1-4

Key Issues:

o Areas of Concern tend to focus on an imbedded problem within a course.

Because the assessment process for this outcome is still new, the QEP Steering

Team will review incoming assessment day assignments and monitor the results

to see if Information Literacy skills could help students in this area.

Actions Planned: To be determined

2. Communication: Technical Communication Skills

Students will apply written, oral and visual communication skills to projects in

mathematics, science computer science, and/or engineering. Links to QEP SLO 1 effectively Find reliable and relevant sources; QEP SLO 2 ethically



Links to ACRL STEM standards 1-5

Key Issues:

o This category did not reveal scores falling below the mean, however the

assessment process in this group has not been statistical meaningful as so few

courses have yet to assess this particular outcome.

Actions Planned: Since communication has been a problematic Outcome for the

Associate of Arts degree, the QEP Steering Team will monitor and plan accordingly in

this area.

3. Critical Thinking: Scientific and Analytical Problem Solving

Students will apply their knowledge to projects using mathematical principles, the

scientific method, computer science, and /or engineering analysis. links to QEP SLO 1 effectively Find reliable and relevant sources; QEP SLO 2 ethically



Students will demonstrate an understanding of the impact of their own actions

on the greater community links to QEP SLO 2 ethically Use information; QEP SLO 3 Synthesize credible resources;

and QEP SLO 4 Evaluate information and sources

Links to ACRL STEM standards 1,3,4

Key Issues:


o In general, scores seem to be below target for areas of scientific critical thinking.

Other areas trending downward were concerning application of technology and tools.

Not enough samples of the application of written, oral and visual communication

skills were available. This will definitely be a category to watch. Critical thinking is

often a major focus of science, computer science, and mathematics courses. From

2011 through 2013, the core assessment shows that critical thinking skills have

remained flat at approximately 2.9 out of 5. This level is lower than expected. In the

disciplines and departments that support the AS Program (chemistry, biology,

geology, physics, astronomy, computer science, engineering, and math), critical

thinking is and will continue to be a focus in the action plans.

Actions Planned:

Year Action Pilot- Year 5


Pilot- Year 5


Years 3-5

An intensive two part Information Literacy workshop is being developed by the librarians and will be scaffolded to include five high enrollment courses over the five years of the QEP (ENGL 1301, ARTS 1301, HIST 1301, BIOL 1308, STSTS 1442) Faculty who have been trained by the Train the Trainer program will help librarians deliver this content.

2.2e: CCSSE and CCFSSE Gap Analysis The Community College Survey of Student Engagement (CCSSE) and Faculty

Engagement (CCFSSE):

The College has participated in the CCSSE/CCFSSE since 2001. This data is particularly

relevant to the College’s QEP focus of Information Literacy because the survey asks questions

related to the four areas associated with the four student learning outcomes selected for the

Quality Enhancement Plan.

For items 4, 5, and 6, a gap analysis of responses from students and faculty was completed.

Gaps of 5% or more were considered as areas with key issues. Full time and part time faculty

numbers are combined unless otherwise noted.

(Highlighted areas indicate largest gaps) Student Faculty

Item 4. In your experience at this college during the current school year, about how often have

you done each of the following? Links to QEP SLO 1 effectively Find reliable and relevant sources; QEP SLO 2 ethically Use


and sources



CCSSE - 4d. Worked on a paper or project that required integrating ideas or information

from various sources?


2013 n=993 27.8% of students answered “very often”


CCFSSE - 4d. How often do students in your selected course section work on a paper

that requires integrating ideas or information from various sources?

2013 n=304 25.3% of faculty answered “very often”


CCSSE - 4j. Used the Internet or instant messaging to work on an assignment?



CCFSSE - 4j. How often do students in your selected course section use the Internet or

instant messaging to work on an assignment?


2014 n=142 35.9% of full time faculty answered “very often.”

Key Issues:

An interesting corollary can be made by looking at the results from the faculty survey

(the CCFSSE) compared to those of their students. There are two concerns about item

4d: 1) Students believe they develop projects requiring the integration of ideas or

information at a higher percentage than faculty do; 2) Less than one out of four faculty

and less than one-third of students believe that in most cases assignments call for the

integration of ideas or information from various sources.

In item 4j, students responded at a higher rate than faculty to saying that they use the

Internet “very often” for their assignments.

Actions Planned:


Faculty in all disciplines will be offered faculty development sessions. These sessions will focus on ways to improve assignments where the emphasis on Information Literacy skills is evident. It would also help for faculty to note on the assignment what expectations they have for students use of electronic devices, etc.

Years 1-5

Considering that vocabulary could be an issue with students, faculty and staff, poster and media campaigns will focus on the terminology of Information Literacy. This should help with a more common understanding of terms such as integration of ideas

Years 1-5


Targets:

Area Percentage

4d: Students and faculty responding “very often” to the number of assignments requiring students to integrate ideas and information

Year 1: Years 2-5:

5% increase in total scores By end of year 5, 50% of student and faculty respondents will answer “very often.”

4J: Via faculty development - Clearer

directions and more direct wording used

in assignment rubrics so that both

By 2021: The gap between faculty and student perception will

close.


students and faculty recognize the value

of the internet, or understand the

restriction of the internet, when competing

an assignment.

Item 5. During the current student year, how much has your coursework at this college

emphasized the following activities?

Links to QEP SLO 1 effectively Find reliable and relevant sources; QEP SLO 2 ethically Use


and sources

CCSSE 5b. Analyzing the basic elements of an idea, experience, or theory.



CCFSSE 5b. During the current student year, how much does your coursework in your

selected course emphasize analyzing the basic elements of an idea, experience, or

theory?



CCSSE 5c. Synthesizing and organizing ideas, information, or experiences in new

ways.



CCFSSE 5c. During the current student year, how much does your coursework in your

selected course emphasize synthesizing and organizing ideas, information, or

experiences in new ways?



CCSSE 5d. Making judgments about the value or soundness of information, arguments,

or methods.


2014 n=1046 24% of students answered “very often”

CCFSSE 5d. During the current student year, how much does your coursework in your

selected course emphasize making judgments about the value or soundness of

information, arguments, or methods?



CCSSE 5f. Using information you have read or heard to perform a new skill.




CCFSSE 5f. During the current student year, how much does your coursework in your

selected course emphasize using information you have read or heard to perform a new

skill?



Key Issues:

The number of students who believe they have used Information Literacy skills in their

classroom experience is vastly different from the faculty responses. Faculty responded in much

higher percentages that they are teaching evaluation, synthesis and ethical use of materials.

Actions Planned:



Years 1-5

Considering that vocabulary could be an issue with students, a campaign series highlighting ways to understand specific aspects of FUSE will be visible across campus on posters, banners, and on the media site. Blitz marketing will include classroom messages detailing Information Literacy skills. This should help with a more common understanding of terms such as evaluation and synthesis

Years 1-5


Targets:

Percentage

Analyze and Synthesize information scores

Year 1:

Years 2-5:

Target mean scores in each category at 2.75 out of 5

45% of student and faulty respondents answering “very often” by 2021

Judgements about value of

information By 2021: 40% of student and faculty respondents will answer “very often”

The following questions analyze student responses only.

Item 12. How much has your experience at this college contributed to your knowledge, skills,

and personal development in the following areas? Links to QEP SLO 1 effectively Find reliable and relevant sources; QEP SLO 2 ethically Use


and sources, and use of the ePortfolio



CCSSE 12b. Acquiring job or work-related knowledge and skills

2013 n=989 17.1% of students answered “very much”

2014 n=1037 20.1% of students answered “very much”

CCSSE 12e. Thinking critically and analytically




CCSSE 12g. Using computing and information technology

2013 n=988 38.7% of students answered “very little” or “some”


CCSSE 12i. Developing a personal code of values and ethics



Key Issues:

Members of the NVC Business Council report they have difficulty finding new college graduates

who can work on their own and work through a problem before calling for help. Student CCSSE

responses reveal that students do not connect their academic work with job skills. Skills learned

in the classroom are not translating to the students’ personal and/or work life.

Actions Planned:

Through professional development, instructors will be asked to help students consider aspects

of Information Literacy, such as the ethical use of information, as a form of value and ethics

building. Part of the new Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) Framework for

Information Literacy states:

New forms of scholarly and research conversations provide more avenues in which a

wide variety of individuals may have a voice in the conversation. Providing attribution to

relevant previous research is also an obligation of participation in the conversation. It

enables the conversation to move forward and strengthens one’s voice in the

conversation.

Another goal will be to increase the number of students who recognize they have acquired job

related skills.

Targets:

Students should recognize that the information they are obtaining in the classroom is applicable

to the work force. The ePortfolio is one place to train students how to use the information they

gained in the classroom to position themselves in the workplace. By 2021, the designated “end”

date for this QEP, the percentage for each of item in category 12 should be over 50%.

Item 13. This section has three parts. Please answer all three sections, indicating (1) How often

you use the following services, (2) how satisfied you are with the services, and (3) how

important the services are to you at this college. Links to QEP SLO 1 effectively Find reliable and relevant sources; QEP SLO 2 ethically Use


and sources



CCSSE 13.1a How often do you use academic advising/planning?

2013 n=978 48.2% of students answered “rarely/never”



CCSSE 13.1b How important is academic advising/planning to you?

2013 n=942 69.1% of students answered “very”


CCSSE 13.1c How often do you use career counseling?



CCSSE 13.1d How important is career counseling to you?



CCSSE 13.1e How often do you use the Skills labs (writing, math etc.)?



CCSSE 13.1f How important are the Skills labs (writing, math etc.) to you?



Key Issues:

There is a wide divide between what students report they want and the services they use. Part

of what Information Literacy is, is helping students find and use resources to help them in their

academic career as well as in the acquisition of workplace skills. The number of students who

report using the labs, for example, should match the number of students who say the labs are

very important to them.

Actions Planned:

The QEP is designed to help students Find the resources they need on campus. A poster and

media campaign will help as well as targeted faculty and staff development. Advisors at NVC

plan a soft roll out of inFUSE on the advising side of the house. Advisors meeting with students

will ask if they have logged the advising visit into their ePortfolio and then explain how the

ePortfolio is beneficial. Career Services will promote the ePortfolio when they hold job fairs on

campus as well. The additional CCSSE or Class Climate questions concerning use of the

ePortfolio will also ensure the language of the QEP is being transferred across campus.

Targets:

The goal will be to see the numbers of students reporting they want certain services to match

the number of students who use these services by the end of 2021.

Summary:

Scorecards have been developed that measure the changes in student perception. The College

is also adding special focus questions regarding the ePortfolio to the CCSSE survey. This will

help monitor the implementation of the QEP in the Student Services area. Some of the

questions added to the CCSSE include the following:

Have you set up your ePortfolio in Optimal Resume?

Have you completed the following activities?

1. Using the career survey tool?

2. Downloading a resume?


3. Including a letter of recommendation?

4. Adding an advising appointment?

5. Tracking skill lab visits?

2f: Methodologies: Topic Refinement To gain perspective from diverse groups, a survey instrument was developed and designed for

several categories of respondents. The QEP Steering Team asked groups of faculty, staff,

students and stakeholders (alumni, local employers, business, and university partners) to

respond to a survey concerning Information Literacy.

A mixed methods research design was implemented for all surveys. The purpose was to secure

both qualitative and quantitative data; therefore responses included both numerical and text

data. The distribution dates for the surveys were between 20-30 days. A validation trial was

conducted using University partners. The first set of surveys were distributed after vetting the

survey in QEP Steering Team meetings, in Cabinet meetings, and through the validation trial.

The first survey group was students. Multi-select multiple choice questions along with numerical

ranking questions were used.

A catchy survey icon was placed on all campus computers where students had access to

computers. This included all computer classrooms, student skill labs, open labs, and the library.

Along with the Student Survey, table toppers with QR codes were placed throughout the

campus to help notify students of the survey. Students were also offered the opportunity to enter

into a drawing when they completed the survey. The Steering Team received over 300

responses from students (n= 309).

Survey results show that a majority of NVC Students felt strongly that the following information

would be most useful to them as learners:

The ability to Find reliable websites and Synthesize electronic information

The knowledge to know how to Evaluate and cite sources

How to Use college resources

Only slightly over 50% of students (n=305 56%) reported they had written a bibliography in the

past academic year. Less than 50% of students (n=309 46%) used a library database in the

past academic year to search for information. Also telling was that a majority of students (n=303

83%) had never used an ePortfolio to help them manage information.

The next survey was directed toward full time faculty, staff, and adjuncts. The questions were a

combination of numerical rankings, scaled ratings, and open-ended questions. Once an

employee entered the survey, they were directed to disclose whether they were faculty or staff

and then a series of questions about Information Literacy was delivered. The respondents

replied to the open-ended questions with thoughtful, reflective responses. Close to 100% of full

time faculty responded to the survey. (full time faculty n= 139; part time faculty n= 159; staff

n=143 – total employee response n=441)

Faculty and Staff found the following skills important:

How important is it that students learn how to Find relevant information?


98% of respondents felt this was very important

How important is it that students learn how to Evaluate information they find?


How important is it that students learn to Use information accurately and ethically?


The third survey was directed at external College stakeholders. The questions were a

combination of numerical rankings, scaled ratings, and open-ended questions. This list included

alumni, business leaders, educational partners, and community leaders. 85 stakeholders

provided feedback via the survey. This survey required comments from respondents. We

received excellent written feedback from this group.

Our Stakeholders found the following skills important both in education and in their own

fields:

How important is it that students learn how to Find relevant information?


How often do employees in your profession need to Find relevant information?

89 % of respondents felt this was very important

How important is it that students learn how to Use information accurately and ethically?


How often do employees in your profession need to Use information accurately and

ethically?


The QEP Steering Team developed a summary of the survey results and posted those items,

along with a thank you, on our public web site. Comments from all groups indicated concern

with the ethical use of information and curiosity about an ePortfolio.


Section 3: Topic Refinement

3a: Goal Setting VC, in agreement with the American Library Association (ALA), believes that 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.” With this in

mind, the QEP Steering Team worked from May 2014-November 2014 on refining the topic of

Information Literacy so as to develop measurable and meaningful Student Learning Outcomes

that made sense for the NVC environment and for student needs.

The goal was threefold:

To narrow and focus the QEP topic into clear and meaningful Student Learning Outcomes;

To develop working definitions of each key term in inFUSE;

To investigate assessment measures for all aspects of the

QEP topic.

The QEP Steering Team believes that Information Literacy

skills are already being taught in classes across campus. The

Team also notes that there is no coordination of how these

skills and concepts are integrated into the curriculum nor is

there a formal check in place to see if students are gaining

enough Information Literacy skills to position themselves for

present and future needs.

3b: Gaining Focus: Basic Strategies for Refining the QEP

Initiative Target Group Compensation

Scaffolded Professional Development

August and January Training Days Most faculty and staff Contract days for most Part of promotion and/or tenure

Monthly training throughout the academic year Faculty and staff self-select Payment for 16 hours of training Payment for 8 hours of training

Information Literacy Academy

Train the Trainer program May be part of QEP liaison role

Payment for 16 hours of work and participation on Assessment Team

Discipline Specific Material Development: To assess assignments and student work to see if Information Literacy skills are being enhanced. A baseline will be established by a pretest in the SDEV/EDUC courses and subsequent use of an assessment rubric

Led by QEP Liaison (Departmental choice)

TBD dependent on leadership duties

ePortfolios: To help students manage and synthesize information about the use of college and student services

Student Success Liaisons

Amount TBD – monies budgeted for work on materials and training

Library Instruction: To infuse Information Literacy Skills into coursework, beginning with SDEV and EDUC courses through Information Literacy Modules (developed by our librarians)

Library Staff / Faculty – Train the Trainers

N

“Instructors who are familiar

with standards or definitions

of information literacy of any

type are much more likely to

incorporate information

literacy concepts into their

teaching, and to assess for

information literacy

competencies” (Saunders)


3c: Gaining Focus: Faculty Continuous refinement of the QEP topic required strategic input about what faculty considered

necessary Information Literacy skills for students. Since NVC has a history of successful August

faculty development days, in August 2014 all faculty were given questionnaires to help the QEP

Steering Team develop a more comprehensive focus for the QEP.

Exhibit 5: Questionnaire for Academic Areas Hello Wonderful Academic Chairperson:

Enclosed you will find questionnaires concerning our new NVC QEP. At some point during your discipline meeting,

please ask each of your faculty members to complete a questionnaire (2 questions). It shouldn’t take much time out

of your day. When you have gathered the completed forms, please place them back in this envelope and return them

to Denise Tolan in JH 111F.

Thank you so much for taking the time to help us as we continue to develop the QEP.

Our NVC QEP is designed to help infuse students with Information Literacy skills and to help them:

find credible and relevant information through ethical and effective navigation of internet resources

use critical thinking skills to discern and analyze information

synthesize information by effectively gathering and integrating academic and college resource material into

an ePortfolio

evaluate and manage acquired Information Literacy Skills through a self-evaluation process

With these ideas in mind, please answer the following questions:

What Information Literacy skills do students need to be successful in your discipline?

What Information Literacy skills do you believe students lack, and how does this impact their ability to succeed in your class?

Each discipline submitted responses. Faculty commonly noted the following:

Students lack the ability to evaluate information in regard to credibility and authenticity

Students lack the ability to ethically use materials

Information literacy could be implemented in virtually any course and would encourage

students to become more self-directed and active learners.

A review of the comments assured the QEP Steering Team that the FUSE categories tentatively

selected were of interest to faculty and would impact student learning.


3d: Gaining Focus: Students Gaining insight into what students understood about Information Literacy was critical. When

students arrived for the first day of class, they found a QEP Wall greeting them in the hallway

where their SDEV/EDUC courses were held. Students covered the paper left in the halls.

Exhibit 6: QEP Wall The QEP wall posed the questions:

What do you think Information Literacy

means? And If someone asked you

what Information Literacy was, what

would you say? The questions were

also asked on the NVC QEP Facebook

page. Many students felt that

Information Literacy was focused on

proper citation skills. Others saw

Information Literacy as a way to get

students to read more. While some

comments were frustratingly vague:

“The ability to learn something;” others

were stunningly perceptive: “To

effectively use information from all over our world.” The take away from the comment wall was

that Information Literacy was not a familiar term to students. The QEP Steering Team resolved

to heavily promote the concepts behind Information Literacy in and out of the classroom.

3e: Building Momentum

Graphic Design:

The QEP Steering Team wanted a QEP Logo that the NVC community would instantly

recognize. The graphic had to inspire, relate to learning, and showcase the elements of inFUSE.

The QEP Steering Team asked a group of student Work Studies to help design the graphic. The

Steering Team placed the finalists on the QEP website and asked for comments from the NVC

community. The top vote getter was that of a lightbulb, where the dominant image was the

FUSE inside the bulb. From the initial student image, one of

NVC’s graphic designers, Shawn Harward, refined the

graphic now used on posters and banners placed around

campus.

Community Involvement:

The external NVC community partners were crucial to the

refinement of our QEP topic. The QEP Director presented the QEP to the NVC Business

Council for feedback. The NVC Business Council has the following mission statement: “To help

create opportunities for success at Northwest Vista College through collaboration, partnerships,

mentorship, marketing and financial support.” At a focus group session following the QEP

presentation, Business Council members were asked how the QEP could help close gaps in the

business environment. Business Council members stated that there was an information gap in


what students learn in a classroom and what they bring to interviews. For example, students

report being strong critical thinkers, but often cannot define how. From this exchange came the

idea for a NVC Business Council Mentorship program. The NVC Business Council Mentorship

program is another avenue by which students can learn how to Find and Use information so as

to communicate Information Literacy skill acquisition once outside of the academic realm.

As early as 1998, the ACRL produced a presidential report on Information Literacy. One of the

recommendations was to “reach out to additional organizations representing government,

business, and education.” Engaging business and community leaders in a meaningful

relationship with the QEP is one way to help students manage information. In the spring of

2015, NVC piloted a group where five business leaders were partnered with five SDEV/EDUC

instructors. The business leaders and instructors felt that an emphasis on career planning

through the course of the semester might help focus the nature of the relationship.

The initiative has been renamed the Business Leader Career Coaching Program. For the

2015/16 Academic year, eight to ten partnerships between a Business Council member and an

EDUC class have been created. Patrick Currie, a professional mentorship trainer and executive

director for Boy with a Ball, will provide an orientation session on August 15th, 2015 for both

business coaches and faculty members. A 15 week framework has been developed to help with

planning for the partnerships. Suggestions from board members included setting realistic

expectations, leveraging outside speakers (i.e. bringing in someone to do a session on goal-

setting), having one on-site event to introduce the Business Council member to the instructor

and class, and at least two round-table discussions with each class to determine the needs of

the students. Business Council members will also be invited to attend Assessment Day so they

can see how the process works and participate in the continued shaping of the QEP.

Student Success:

NVC is fortunate to have a Student Success team committed to the success of the QEP and

willing to help build competencies for students. A QEP Student Success Core Team was

established to help define the QEP topic and allow for meaningful participation from the Student

Success team. Much of the current best practice information on information literacy links

advising with ePortfolio use. Bonnie Riedinger, Information Literacy and ePortfolio expert,

recognizes the benefits of tying advising to ePortfolios: Long-term benefits include:

• Development of reflective thinking. ePortfolios encourage students to think about their growth and become

active and self-reliant learners, assessors, and planners.

• Creation of a record of growth and accomplishment over time.

• Formation of student identity that is directed by the student with guidance from faculty and advisors. The Student Success staff will undertake a “Blitz Week,” or a soft launch, of the QEP on

September 4th 2015. This soft launch includes the roll out of a new graphic playing on the E in

QEP and E in ePortfolio. Posters will be designed to introduce students to the many ways

ePortfolios can give them agency in their growth as information literate students. Each member

of the Student Success team will set up their own ePortfolio so to better help students as they


work through the process. The enthusiasm offered by the Student Success team ensures our

campus will be inFUSEd by a college-wide QEP commitment to excellence!

NVC advisors are committed to introducing students to ePortfolios through New Student

Orientation sessions as well as during their “touch points,” or scheduled advising times. Far

from simply being a data warehouse, the ePortfolio, will be an

“evolving self-portrait, painted by the student and carried with

him/her from the first year experience through graduate

school and/or on to a career, [and] can be a lifelong, student-

centered learning tool” (Riedinger). Students will learn how to

evaluate the information they place in the ePortfolio as well as

synthesize and organize materials for current and future use.

The NVC Steering Team felt so strongly about the inclusion of

Student Success with the QEP that two of the QEP Student

Learning Outcomes are directly tied to the Student Success

team.

Employee Development Day:

NVC holds Employee Development day in October of every

year. This is a mandatory, contracted day for faculty and staff

and classes are not held. All faculty and staff attend

workshops that generally revolve around topics of interest for all employees. In 2014, the

College focused its Employee Development Day on Information Literacy. Proposals were

solicited from faculty and staff asking for workshops they could teach highlighting Information

Literacy. The idea was to introduce the vocabulary of Information Literacy to the campus. The

Information Literacy team from Trinity University, Jeremy McDonald and Benjamin Harris,

presented faculty and staff with an extended half-day workshop on Information Literacy. NVC

President, Dr. Ric Baser, introduced the speakers and talked about his commitment to

Information Literacy as the QEP topic. Time was given by the Trinity team for each employee to

consider how they might be able to help students gain Information Literacy skills. The afternoon

breakout sessions were focused on topics concerning Information Literacy. The goal was to

inFUSE the campus with Information Literacy awareness and begin as a community “of

scholars, researchers, or professionals [who] engage in sustained discourse with new insights

and discoveries occurring over time as a result of varied perspectives and interpretations”

(ACRL Framework Frame 5).

The entire day employees asked each other, “What did you say you could do to help with

information literacy?” The QEP Steering Team rolled out the event with water bottles, t-shirts,

bags and other assorted giveaways. Wipe on/wipe off boards in the shape of our QEP graphic

were used for employees to write down three ways they could help with the QEP. Banners and

posters with the QEP graphic were placed across campus.

Wipe on/wipe off

boards in the

shape of our

QEP graphic

were used for

employees to

write down three

ways they could

help with the

QEP.


Website and Marketing:

The QEP Steering Team was aware of the need to make the QEP visible on campus and in the

community. At the May 2014 graduation, one of the pilot group of Business Council mentors

was the Keynote Speaker. The QEP Steering Team also made sure faculty and staff

understood the SACSCOC QEP Guidelines. At the August 2014 Convocation, the QEP Steering

Team passed out copies of the SACSCOC Guidelines and the Vice President of academic

services detailed each point in the document. Everyone left convocation with an understanding

of how the NVC QEP complied with CS 2.12 and CR 3.3.2. The Steering Team also developed

a strong QEP Website which is updated and kept active with relevant information such as

articles on the new Information Literacy Framework. A special section relevant to students is

prominent on the website. At New Student Convocation in August 2015, students were given

promotional materials and a flyer with information on the QEP’s development and how

Information Literacy skills benefit student learning.

Visit to Gulf Coast State College:

The QEP Director visited Gulf Coast State College in Panama City, Florida in March of 2015.

Gulf Coast is in the 4th year of their Critical Academic Literacy QEP. They have a very active

and well organized Critical Academic Literacy Academy where faculty learn specific ways to

create assignments to help students develop deeper Critical Academic Literacy skills. Dr.

Sandra Etheridge, Executive Director, QEP and Dr. Cheryl Flax-Hyman, Vice President,

Institutional Effectiveness & Strategic Planning, answered questions, shared materials and

opened their classrooms for observation. The NVC QEP Director was able to share the concept

for the NVC QEP and received sage advice about how to construct a general rubric for

assessment while allowing disciplines to create discipline specific rubrics as well. The NVC QEP

Director spent two full days with the Gulf Coast QEP Director and members of the Gulf Coast

QEP Team and brought back helpful information and some well-developed tools to help refine

the NVC QEP topic and construct the framework for the Information Literacy Academy.

TeachTechFest 2014: Teachers, Learners & Technology:

TeachTechFest is an annual conference for the NVC community linking technology with

learning. The theme for TeachTechFest 2014 was also the focus of the QEP- Information

Literacy. The event featured numerous concurrent sessions on Information Literacy topics.

Stipends were available for part-time adjunct faculty. The Keynote speaker was Dr. Julie Beth

Todaro, an academic library manager for over 25 years and the Dean for Library Services at the

award-winning Austin Community College.

Sample Sessions:

What is this C.R.A.A.P.?

10:00 am — 10:35 am MLH 124

Linda Reeves and Judy McMillan, NVC Library

When students search for information on the web they’re going to find a lot of it. But is it credible? The 5-

step C.R.A.A.P. process will help you and your students separate the good resources from the . . . stuff.

Information Literacy in the Flipped Classroom

2:25 pm — 3:00 pm MLH 124

Cindy Magruder, NVC Geology Faculty and Linda Reeves, NVC Library

Flipping your classroom might seem weird and counterintuitive. But it is gaining in popularity as faculty and


students find ways to improve the traditional in-class/outside-of-class model. Let technology help you flip

your classroom to make the most of your time in class with your students.

TeachTechFest 2015 features sessions by Alan November, an international learning

technology expert. The conference has a heavy concentration on topics of Information

Literacy and critical thinking.

QEP Presentations: Nov-Dec 2013 Six town hall meetings

Focus groups within the meetings

Jan-March 2014 E-team presentations

March 2014 Website roll out

May 2014 All College Meeting – attended by faculty and staff

May 2014 All Faculty meetings – mandatory attendance for faculty

July 2014 TeachTechFest

August 2014 Convocation – campus wide attendance – mandatory

August 2014 Faculty Development Day – attended by full and part time

August-Sept 2014 Student QEP Wall

Sept 2014 NVC Business Council

October 2014 Employee Development Day

January 2015 Presidents/Vice Chancellors and Chancellor – District

January 2015 Alamo Colleges Board of Trustees

January 2015 Bragging Breakfast – NVC

February 2015 Poster roll out and banner placement on campus

March 2015 QEP sponsored Collaboration Conference.

Attendees from all five colleges across the district

April 2015 Individual visits to Academic departments

April 2015 First Meeting with Student Success Core Team

May 2015 Business Council Mentor speaks at Graduation

August 2015 Student Convocation – giveaways and informational material

Faculty Development Day

Convocation

September 2015 TeachTechFest World Tour with College president

Summary: All of the above activities were steps taken toward full implementation of the QEP.

Refinement of the topic was a long-term process that involved, faculty, staff, students and the

NVC community and business leaders. After a thorough review of internal data (Program and

discipline specific assessments, CCSSE and CCFSSE scores, and surveys of students, faculty,

staff and stakeholders) along with an external data review (Trinity visit, Gulf Coast visit, best

practices research) the NVC QEP Steering Team felt confident in presenting and infusing the

campus and community with inFUSE.


Section 4: Student Learning Outcomes

NVC QEP Outcome ACRL Standards and Framework

1. Find: Students will be able to efficiently and effectively Find reliable and relevant sources for their information needs by using library and various sources appropriately to explore a topic.

Standard 2: The information literate student accesses needed information effectively and efficiently. Frame 1: Learners who are developing their Information Literate abilities motivate themselves to find authoritative sources.

1a. Find: Students will be able to find and use college and student services to meet their academic and personal needs.

Standard 2: Outcome 5e: The information literate student uses various technologies to manage the information selected and organized. Frame 2: Learners who are developing their Information Literate abilities value the process of matching an information need with an appropriate product.

2. Use: Students will be able to Use information ethically and effectively by applying appropriate citation/documentation systems to demonstrate their understanding of relevant economical, legal, and social issues.

Standard 5: The information literate student understands many of the economic, legal, and social issues surrounding the use of information and uses and accesses information ethically and legally. Frame 3: Learners who are developing their Information Literate abilities respect the original ideas of others.

3. Synthesize: Students will be able to Synthesize credible resources to effectively accomplish a specific purpose. 3a. Students will be able to Synthesize student and college services by gathering and integrating resources into an ePortfolio

Standard 3 Indicator 3: The information literate student synthesizes main ideas to construct new concepts. Frame 4: Learners who are developing their Information Literate abilities Synthesize ideas gathered from multiple sources. Standard 4 Indicator 1a: The information literate student organizes the content in a manner that supports the purposes and format of the product or performance

4. Evaluate: Students will be able to Evaluate information and sources through identification of bias, authority, relevancy, and credibility as it pertains to their information needs.

Standard 3: The information literate student evaluates information and its sources critically and incorporates selected information into his or her knowledge base and value system. Frame 5: Learners who are developing their Information Literate abilities critically evaluate contributions made by others . . .

NVC QEP Goal:

The primary goal of NVC’s Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) is to equip students with

information literacy skills that will show them how to Find, ethically Use, Synthesize and

Evaluate information in their classes and reinforce those skills in their co-curricular programs.

The Learning Outcomes for the NVC inFUSE QEP were identified by the QEP Steering Team

and the QEP Assessment Team during March-May of 2015. These outcomes are based on the

Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education and the Framework for

Information Literacy as defined by the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL).

The Student Learning Outcomes are also based on NVC’s mission, culture, and student needs.

In his article “So What’s a Learning Outcome,” Mark Battersby writes of how “the outcome

approach focuses on integration and application of knowledge and what the students should be

able to do at the end of a course or program.” Keeping that in mind, the four outcomes from the


NVC QEP are outcomes the Steering Team would expect each student leaving NVC to have

mastered.

The Team also looked to Debra Gilchrist and Anne Zald and their Five Questions for help in

designing the Learning Outcomes. Gilchrist and Zald believe that when designing outcomes,

assessment must always be foremost in the equation. The five questions are as follows:

1. Outcome: What do you want the student to do?

2. Information Literacy Curriculum: What does the student need to know in order to do this well?

3. Pedagogy: What type of instruction will best enable the learning?

4. Assessment: How will the student demonstrate the learning?

5. Criteria for evaluation: How will I know the student has done this well?


Section 5: Literature Review and Best Practices

5a: Overview n their report College Learning for the New Global Century, the Association of American

Colleges and Universities (2007) listed Information Literacy as an Essential Learning Outcome

for higher education. Access to information has increased exponentially as the technology for

creating and disseminating information has become more efficient and more accessible.

Unfortunately, with this increase in information has also come a disproportionately large

increase in misinformation and manipulation of information intended to further specific agendas.

Long recognized as an important academic skill, the ability to understand and evaluate

information in context is now an increasingly necessary life skill. The Alexandria Proclamation

(2005) called information literacy “a basic human right in a digital world,” a right that empowers

the user and that is fundamental to lifelong learning (3). Information literacy is no longer a skill

that can be taught in isolation as something primarily relevant for research papers. The

information literacy skills necessary to participate in the world of the 21st century are different

from the skills required two decades ago. There is a need for information literacy to be taught

across the campus in ways that are meaningful for individual disciplines (Freeman & Lynd-Balta

2010). The increasing relevance of information literacy skills to students' educational,

professional, and personal lives makes teaching it a college-wide responsibility. The vision for

the NVC QEP includes a campus-wide awareness and understanding of the main concepts and

vocabulary of Information Literacy so that both College and community can be engaged in the

process of impacting student learning.

5b: ACRL Standards, the Framework, and Pedagogies Pedagogies relating to Information Literacy skills have been shifting and evolving for the past

thirty years. More learning styles, such as active learning and flipped classroom models, have

made teaching Information Literacy more inclusive of areas outside the library. Faculty are

becoming more aware of Information Literacy terminology and the importance of students

learning these skills and the assessment of their own teaching methods. It has been in the

college libraries where explicit Information Literacy instruction began to take hold and to flourish

and the librarians at NVC were at the forefront of this movement. NVC librarians have taught

Information Literacy skills in workshop settings for the past several years. In 2000, the

Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) declared a focused initiative on

Information Literacy for college libraries by adopting the “Information Literacy Competency

Standards for Higher Education.” In that seminal document, they defined information literacy as

“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’” (2000). The Standards

identified information literate individuals as ones who could effectively recognize the need for

information, find it, evaluate it, synthesize it into what they already know, and use it in a way that

is purposeful, ethical, and legal. In this way, the term “Information Literacy” encompassed a

wide variety of research and critical thinking skills and provided a structure for assessing those

skills. For fifteen years, these Standards guided Information Literacy instruction in college

I


libraries across the nation and, through the libraries, set the bar for college-wide Information

Literacy initiatives.

In 2012, an ACRL task force recommended the Standards be extensively revised in order to

move away from their implied focus on format and to incorporate the role of the student as

content creator (ACRL, 2012). As a result, in 2015 the ACRL introduced the “Framework for

Information Literacy for Higher Education.” Designed to be more flexible than the

Standards, the Framework incorporates the concept of metaliteracy into the definition of

information literacy, highlighting the ways in which students must engage fully with the

information and the environment in which it exists (“Framework” 2015). The Framework

introduced a significant pedagogical shift from seeing information literacy instruction as the

teaching of a specialized set of skills to seeing it as a knowledge-generating activity. In the

Framework, information literacy is defined as “the set of integrated abilities encompassing

the reflective discovery of information, the understanding of how information is produced

and valued, and the use of information in creating new knowledge and participating ethically

in communities of learning.” According to the Framework, information literate persons have

crossed several specific thresholds in their perception of information: they understand

information as something that itself has value, recognize the creation of information as a

process, know that authority is constructed and contextual, see research as a form of

inquiry, understand scholarship as an ongoing conversation, and approach searching for

information as a type of strategic exploration. This revised definition complements and

expands the definition of the Standards, and currently the ACRL are encouraging colleges

to incorporate the Framework into the work they are already doing with the Standards,

using it to expand their information literacy initiatives. Because the Standards and the

Framework are part of a learning continuum, NVC has decided to work with both models, as

they both naturally go hand in hand.

The ACRL developed a guideline called “Characteristics of Programs of Information

Literacy that Illustrate best Practices.” In this guide they advise that one of the goals of an

Information Literacy program should be to “Clearly present the integration of information

literacy across the curriculum for students’ academic growth and effective lifelong learning”

(Category 2). Another recommended goal is to “accommodate sequential growth of

students’ skills and understanding (Category 2). For these reasons, NVC is scaffolding

Information Literacy learning into five of the highest enrollment courses.

5c: Professional Development Explicit teaching of Information Literacy in higher education is crucial for preparing students for

Information Literacy tasks they will face in their professions. Once they are in the workforce,

students will not have the easy access to information specialists and resources they enjoy in

college, while at the same time, they will be required to perform increasingly specific and

complex Information Literacy tasks (Travis, 2011). Although these tasks will be different, they

will likely be performing these tasks with skills they acquired in college, since explicit training in

Information Literacy skills is uncommon in most professions (Weiner, 2011). It is important that


students are able to understand the transferability of Information Literacy tasks performed in

college and the ones they will perform in the workplace. A focus on critical thinking and

metacognition can help students make such connections. At NVC, professional development is

a cornerstone to the QEP process. The initial training is focused on having faculty develop

assignments with attention to specific and stated Information Literacy Outcomes. Faculty

development also features ways to engage students in conversations about Information

Literacy, development and use of the ePortfolio in classrooms and across campus, and how to

develop assignments and activities featuring the acquisition of Information Literacy skills within

a discipline specific area.

5d: ePortfolios Portfolios emerged as a pedagogical tool as early as the late 1980s. In the 1990s, increased

use of computers led to an electronic version eventually called the ePortfolio. Initially the

movement from hard copy portfolios to electronic versions was merely a difference in the

method of transmission, but advances in technology have made ePortfolios more versatile than

hard copy portfolios, changing the bar for what is possible. In today’s ePortfolios, students can

link to external websites, upload images and videos, and in some cases even have

conversations with the audience viewing the portfolio. Such versatility makes ePortfolios an

ideal medium for working with information literacy development. The adaptability of the

ePortfolio complements the widening definition of what content and activities count as

Information Literacy.

In the college setting, ePortfolios have been used as a formative pedagogical tool,

helping to increase students’ metacognitive aptitude, as well as their abilities to reflect on theory

and practice and to engage in self-assessment. But they are also used as an evaluative tool,

allowing students to exhibit exceptional work for assessment or to showcase work that

illustrates specific skills. The use of ePortfolios complements a student-centered pedagogy that

favors active learning and can help prepare students for focused lifelong learning (Kahn, 2014).

In reflecting on their learning, students can gain agency and become more active participants in

their own education.

There is also evidence that ePortfolios are helping students achieve greater learning

overall. Outcomes research on the initiatives of twenty-four leading ePortfolio campuses has

shown that well-planned use of ePortfolios increases student success, helps students achieve

deeper learning, and encourages positive, learning-focused institutional change (Eynon,

Gambino, & Torok, 2014). The benefits of a comprehensive, sustained ePortfolio program are

felt throughout the institution, with the possibility of effecting cultural and structural change.

Students benefit from the high-level cognitive task of reflecting on their learning across multiple

courses; faculty and staff benefit from the intense focus on student learning and the cross-

campus collaborations necessary for a robust ePortfolio program (Eynon, Gambino, & Torok,

2014). Use of ePortfolios can complement other campus-wide learning initiatives, serving as a

space where students can examine and articulate the overarching concepts their individual


assignments are teaching them and allowing them to make meaningful connections between

the different classes they are taking.

In addition to achieving greater learning, ePortfolios can help students learn how to do

the kind of planning that is necessary in order to successfully achieve their educational and

career goals. Advising ePortfolios have been used successfully to help first-year students

navigate the unfamiliar waters of higher education (Chen & Black, 2010; Ambrose, Martin, &

Page, 2011; Ambrose & Ambrose, 2013). If students use their ePortfolio to reflect on their goals

in advance, it can positively change the advising paradigm, resulting in a more engaged, and

thus more productive advising session (Ambrose & Ambrose, 2013). The ePortfolio can also

serve as a way to record student progress with benchmark advising outcomes (Ambrose &

Ambrose, 2013). Sustained use of the ePortfolio could help students stay focused on their larger

educational goals.

Creating ePortfolios while still in college can also help students with career planning.

Although at one time presenting a portfolio of work for a job interview was only necessary for

fields such as art or writing, it has become a much more common practice in other fields, such

business (Worley, 2011). While in college, students can begin to develop their professional

identity through their ePortfolios, making them aware of their strengths and weaknesses at a

time when they are still able to add to their skill set (Graves & Epstein, 2011). Upon graduation,

they can use their ePortfolios when applying for jobs in their chosen field. But more importantly,

they will be discuss their education in terms of the larger narrative of their career path and life

goals, allowing them to present themselves as emerging professionals in their job interviews.

ePortfolios encourage students to see their college courses, and their entire college experience,

as part of larger narrative. It is those kinds of higher-level thinking skills that will allow them to

make connections between their different classes and between college and their professional

life. Such connections will help them to see the transferability of skills they have already learned

and will help them continue to learn beyond college. The Student Success Team at NVC is

committed to helping students make these connections via advising and orientation sessions.

5e: Rubrics The ACRL’s criteria for best practices in assessment of student learning outcomes related to

Information Literacy advocates assessment of both the product a student creates and the

process by which they create it. Rather than focusing on a single outcome measure, they

recommend a range of assessment methods given both before and after Information Literacy

instruction. These methods include needs assessment, pre-tests and post-tests, portfolio

assessment, direct observation, and other methods (ACRL Information Literacy Best Practices

Committee).

Among librarians, testing had been the preferred method of assessment due to budgetary

constraints and low staffing ratios. As more faculty gained familiarity with Information Literacy,

rubric-based assessment has been adopted as an effective way to assess Information Literacy

skills (Oakleaf, 2009). A popular method of assessing student work in many other fields, rubrics

can be given to students in advance so the students understand the requirements they are


expected to meet. Rubrics can be used as a type of formative assessment, helping students

improve future learning by giving them direct feedback about their current work. Rubrics can

empower students, and frequent use of a rubric can encourage them to internalize the

evaluation criteria and apply it on their own in future situations (Oakleaf, 2008).

The drawbacks to using rubrics are the time they take to develop and the amount of training

needed to be able to use them reliably (Oakleaf, 2008), but given the time and resources for

development and training, rubrics can be a powerful assessment tool. NVC has dedicated funds

to maintain a core QEP Assessment Team. This Team, working under the direction of the QEP

Director, will undergo inter-rater reliability training and function as a team for the duration of the

QEP. Rubrics are being developed in each discipline to ensure both buy-in for the process and

that content measurement is applicable to the area being assessed.

5f: Library Instruction In her article, “Faculty Perspectives on Information Literacy as a Student Learning Outcome,”

Laura Saunders wrote of how: “students largely lack the competencies associated with

information literacy and that many colleges and universities are not moving beyond one-shot,

course level library instruction sessions to integrate information literacy into their curricula at the

program and institutional levels.” Factors involved in the lack of competency acquisition include

one-shot library sessions. Faculty should be trained to help move learning from those initial

sessions forward into the semester. The flipped classroom model of library instruction is also a

help. Students engage in the material prior to engaging with the librarian in person. This helps

keep material familiar and fresh. Faculty should also be trained to continue the material

delivered at the informational sessions and include it in their assignment directions. Familiarity

with Information Literacy terminology helps with continuity throughout the curriculum. Saunders

also claims that Information Literacy contains “knowledge and skills that are specific to each

field.” Having faculty take control of materials by using connective ideas and terminology

ensures continuity between classes. Faculty buy-in is also important as they must be the ones

who carry forward the concepts of Information Literacy first established by the library instruction.

Saunders notes that faculty must also be trained as to new library materials and emerging

pedagogies. This training is central to our pilot courses as the instructors at NVC are being

trained by the librarians on ways to extend the lessons started in the Information Literacy

workshops.

Appendix 3 – Data for Library Information Literacy Programs

5g: Assessment:

The University of Central Florida maintains that assessment “can build pedagogical theory by

analyzing which factors contribute to the learning gains.” Assessment, according to this theory,

is as useful to the QEP program for revealing the underlying pedagogies of a concept, as it is for

measuring student learning. Megan Oakleaf also feels that assessment in general should be a

way of discovering what students know rather than what they can mimic. Assessment that

builds on concepts introduced in the individual academic area should reveal expectations

valued by that discipline. For this reason, NVC is asking disciplines to develop discipline specific

Information Literacy rubrics.


Assessment in Action - Information Literacy and Student Success: Finding a

Relationship Between Information Literacy and Key Process Indicators: Kristin Johnson,

one of the NVC Librarians, leads a team working on a project focusing on the hypothesis

that “students who receive library instruction are more likely to succeed in higher

education institutions.” This study looks for the relationship between information literacy

instruction and NVC’s key process indicators (KPIs). The Assessment in Action project

aligns with NVC’s current Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) which is information literacy

and ePortfolios. This project is providing the QEP team baseline numbers from the pre-

test. The study will look for a relationship between the KPIs and information literacy in

order to create a better advocacy tool and contribute toward the college's assessment

endeavors.

Appendix 4 - Data for Assessment in Action

Appendix 5 - Additional Resources Informing the QEP


Section 6: Our Plan

NVC’s plan calls for a strategic engagement of Academic, College, and Student Services.

The five-year QEP process is designed to fully integrate participatory learning college-wide.

The NVC QEP offers a model for active campus engagement through 1) establishment of a

common definition and vocabulary of Information Literacy; 2) professional development; 3)

stipends for professional development; 4) stipends to help develop assessment tools; 5)

engagement in campus-wide Information Literacy assessment using rubrics; 6) expanding

the use of the ePortfolio, 7) Pre and post testing of Information Literacy skills.

6a: Strategies – In a nutshell Pre pilot years (2014-2016) Target Groups: Introduces Information literacy skills, including ePortfolio use, at the

foundational level in SDEV0270/EDUC1300 courses. The target group is First Time in College

(FTIC) students. Pilots consist of 10-15 sections of an EDUC/SDEV mix.

Professional development for general faculty and staff includes a broad

introduction to Information Literacy via presentations from experts in the field

(Trinity University), presentations on the QEP plan, faculty development within

the ongoing Faculty Development Friday sessions, and articles posted on the

QEP website.

Gathering of assignments from instructors throughout the college and monitoring of

the pilot SDEV/EDUC courses to help the QEP Assessment Team develop an

Information Literacy general content rubric (Appendix 6) to assess both assignment

rubric and student work for the spring 2016 assessment cycle. From this general

rubric, disciplines will be asked to develop content specific rubrics.

o Strategic training for instructors in the pilot courses included how to

develop assignments highlighting and specifically detailing elements of

FUSE; how to enhance the introductory information given to students in

the Information Literacy workshops given by librarians; and how to use

the ePortfolio to help students Evaluate and Synthesize College and

Students Services and Resources within the management system.

Pilot Testing of an Information Literacy Skills Pre-test.

Marketing with posters, banners, and giveaways to ensure that the vocabulary of

information literacy is inFUSEd across our campus.

Year One (2016): Advances and reinforces Information Literacy skills in the foundational

EDUC/SDEV courses as well as in English 1301 courses. The ePortfolio will be featured in New

Student orientations and advising sessions.

Professional development for faculty and staff includes faculty development

day trainings, Employee Development Day sessions, presentations on the

progress of the QEP, and articles posted on the QEP website.

o Faculty and staff will engage in “train the trainer” programs so that more

discipline specific skills can be taught in more classrooms;


o The Information Literacy Academy will open its first class;

o Faculty Development will be offered throughout the year both on line and

in face to face bi-monthly workshops. Training will include:

Ways to design assignments with clear skill expectations outlined

and reinforce Information Literacy skills introduced in library

workshops;

Enhancements to pedagogy including how to encourage

classroom dialogue about the ethics of citing sources;

Development of activities designed to reinforce Information

Literacy skill acquisition

o ePortfolio training will be offered on line and in face to face workshops.

Continuing Activities include library sessions in EDUC/SDEV courses, work on the content

specific rubrics, exposure to ePortfolios, expansion of the pre-test and Marketing with posters,

banners, and giveaways highlighting separate elements of inFUSE.

Years 2-5 (2017-2021): Advances and reinforces Information Literacy skills in subject specific

research strategies through high enrollment classes including History1301, STATS1442,

Biology1308 for non-majors, and ARTS1301 courses. Skills introduced in the foundational

courses and traditional first year courses will be built upon in these additional courses through

trained instructors. ePortfolio assessment will begin. Post-testing will also begin.

Professional development for faculty and staff includes faculty development

day trainings, Employee Development Day sessions, presentations on the

progress of the QEP, and articles posted on the QEP website.

o Faculty and staff will continue to enroll in “train the trainer” programs so

that more discipline specific skills can be taught in more classrooms;

o The Information Literacy Academy will graduate its first class and offer

additional sessions;

o Faculty Development will be offered throughout the year both on line and

in face to face bi-monthly workshops;

o ePortfolio training will be offered on line and in face to face workshops.

Continuing Activities include library sessions in EDUC/SDEV courses, work on the content

specific rubrics, exposure to ePortfolios, expansion of the pre-test and Marketing with posters,

banners, and giveaways highlighting separate elements of inFUSE.

6b: Piloting To maximize learning potential, students will be exposed to Information Literacy skills early

in their academic careers. The EDUC1300/SDEV group was targeted as they have received

an institutional commitment toward development of these courses for all entering students.

By introducing Information Literacy skills early on, students will be empowered by

Information Literacy skill acquisition and by the ePortfolio.


In January 2015, NVC held a full eight hour training day with our pilot group of instructors:

Exhibit 7: Schedule for Training Day Schedule for Training Day: January 17th 2015

MLH 101B

8:00-8:30 Coffee, light breakfast

8:30-10:30 Block 1 – Jo and Gary – ePortfolio training and ideas on how to use an ePortfolio in class.

Instructors will begin to design their own ePortfolio

10:30-10:45 Break

10:45-noon Block 2 - Librarians - Information Literacy training—“The Least you Need to Know about

Information Literacy.”

Noon-1:00 Lunch

1:00-2:30 Block 3 - Librarians- Literacy Skills—Useful Lesson Plans and assessments for Information literacy

2:30-2:45 Break

2:45- 3:30 Block 4 - Scoring Samples – spying Information Literacy Skills (samples from Economics, Biology,

Sociology and English).

3:30-5:00 Portfolio development

Training for the newest group of instructors was held August 15, 2015.

Time was allotted for instructors to set up their own ePortfolios using the same system

(Optimal Resume) that students use. The librarians trained instructors using sample

assignments (with names redacted) that were not considered successful in helping students

Find and ethically Use information. Time was allotted for instructors to create assignment

directions that communicated Information Literacy expectations clearly. The pilot group

reviewed assignment samples from various disciplines and “scored” assignment directions

for clarity. Would a student know where to go if an instructor’s only directions asked them to

“Complete a research paper using the library?”

Pilot instructors agreed to allow the QEP assessment team to review their own assignments

at an agreed upon point in the semester. The QEP Assessment Team could then begin

work on a general assessment rubric using existing content as a guide.

Students in pilot classes were asked to create an ePortfolio. After the semester was over, the pilot group of instructors were asked to respond to the following questions:

1. Do you feel students gained Information Literacy skills throughout the course of your class? 2. Did the ePortfolio work well in your classroom? If not, what changes would you make for the next

class you teach?

3. Do you have any suggestions for enhancements to the curriculum to help teach Information

Literacy to our students?

Other comments were as follows:

Best response from a faculty member: “I would say I gained some Information

Literacy skills!”

Best suggestion. “What I find lacking is the students’ ability to synthesize

and analyze academic writing. It is one thing to show students how to

access credible information, but it means nothing if the student does not understand

how to read it and truly understand the information.”

Notes: Several instructors felt they needed more guidance on integrating the

ePortfolio into the classroom. Instructor comments: “Next time, I will create a short


PowerPoint or Prezi explaining how the ePortfolio can be used to organize papers and

projects and career-oriented documents.”

To help build the pilot, The QEP Steering Team studied best practices, met with leaders in

the QEP process (Trinity University and Gulf Coast College), and surveyed key

stakeholders. Assessment and review of the results are in progress.

6c: Key Strategies to ensure a successful NVC QEP Strategy 1: Reaching all Students

The QEP is designed to help all students at NVC with the acquisition of Information

Literacy skills. While the initial focus is on FTIC students, Information Literacy skills will be

scaffolded and delivered to students in all courses. Some instructors might be Information

Literacy content experts, via the Information Literacy Academy or the Train-the-Trainer

program, but all students will be taught by instructors with at least some level of training in

Information Literacy. Advisors and other staff members will also be Information Literacy

trained. Students in high enrollment courses (most of them also core courses) will have

intensified Library Information Literacy sessions. These courses include ENGL1301,

HIST1301, ARTS1301, STATS1442, and BIOL1308.

Strategy 2: College-Wide Awareness

The NVC QEP process will involve each student and stakeholder. A college-wide

awareness about what the QEP and Information Literacy (inFUSE) is at NVC will ensure

that every person is involved. Along with professional development, a media campaign will

focus on an element of FUSE each month. Posters, banners, and the website will feature

ways to, for example, ethically Use information.

Progress to date:

Convocation 2014 – presentation on inFUSE and handouts from SACSCOC

Faculty Development Day 2014– presentation on inFUSE and surveys for faculty

Employee Development Day 2014 – speakers from Trinity University introducing concept

of Information Literacy and asking each faculty and staff member to consider ways they

can help

QEP Wall August 2014– for students to gain awareness of FUSE

Banners across campus with QEP graphic and QR code leading to more information -

ongoing

Active website - updates, new links for more information literacy information – ongoing

Include a syllabus statement on all eSyllabus forms – Fall 2016

Posters on campus with QEP graphic and QR code - ongoing

T-shirts, water bottle bags, giveaways with QEP graphic - ongoing

Train advisors to use ePortfolio and help students with functions – fall 2015

Introduce Information Literacy concepts at New Student orientations – spring 2016

Develop Student Success Core Team to create action plan for Student Success ePortfolio

– May 2015

Discuss FUSE with Academic Disciplines at chair meetings and at college meetings –

ongoing status updates

Develop workshops for professional development – fall 2015


Train discipline leaders to build discipline specific rubrics for assessment of Information

Literacy skills – fall 2015

Develop discipline specific Information Literacy modules and training programs for high

enrollment courses – fall 2015-2018

inFUSE Information Literacy Skills into coursework, beginning with SDEV and EDUC

courses through Information Literacy Modules (developed by our librarians) – spring 2014

Strategy 3: Provide Professional Development to help grow the skills necessary to support

student attainment of Information Literacy skills. To ensure that faculty and staff enthusiastically

incorporate the FUSE competencies into the classroom and College environment, Professional

Development will be offered with varying degrees of commitment. The QEP website will

provide training modules, webinars, and offer times and places where face-to-face training

sessions will take place.

Along with workshops, modules, and the Information Literacy Academy,

conferences for faculty and staff will be available (ACRL, ALA, LOEX,

SACSCOC Summer Institutes) through stipends and incentive grants. Faculty

who attend the Information Literacy Academy, or a conference, or participate

in Train-the-Trainer sessions will be asked to present at Faculty Development

Days and at a proposed NVC Information Literacy Conference (spring 2018).

Faculty and staff can participate in the Information Literacy Academy. This

16-hour course, will offer webinars, online workshops, and face-to-face

workshops taught by external speakers as well as the NVC librarians.

Employees who do not participate in either the IL Academy of Train-the-

Trainer courses will still be able to attend bi-monthly professional

development workshops.

Faculty and staff may enroll in Train-the-Trainer programs. In these

sessions, a small group of faculty will receive intensive Information Literacy

training and, in turn, train their colleagues and help deliver Information

Literacy library workshops. This approach contributes to the

interdepartmental cooperation and communication that is essential for the

success of this plan. This 8 hour training program will be taught by NVC

library faculty and staff and external content experts. Instructors and staff

completing this program will help assist in the flipped classroom teaching

approach to discipline specific Information Literacy sessions (high enrollment

courses – ENGL 1301 ARTS 1301, HIST 1301, STATS and BIOL1308).

Faculty and staff development will be offered twice a month throughout the

fall and spring. Online workshops, training sessions with the Student Success

Core team, webinars, the Library research guide, and a repository of Best

Practices will be available for all faculty and staff.

Intensive training for pilot instructors and targeted training for scaffolded

course modules (ENGL, HIST, STAT, BIOL, and ARTS) is available.

Faculty Development days will also feature Information Literacy Workshops


Strategy 4: Information Literacy Library Sessions will be scaffolded to help students as

they move through the curriculum. In the SDEV/EDUC courses, modules are already

focused on helping students Find and ethically Use information. As students move into

ENGL, HIST, BIOL, ARTS, and STATS courses, the modules will be more discipline

specific and focus on evaluation and synthesis skills as well. Modules will be developed

with input from content experts. Modules for the sessions will be aligned to our Student

Learning Outcomes and be interactive. This is a move away from the “one and done” model

of library instruction. This will allow for more student-to-content interaction. The modules for

each discipline are designed to help students gain Information Literacy skills through

multiple points of contact across the disciplines and are taught as a part of the flipped

classroom model.

Strategy 5: Student Success. Staff members, such as advisors, will help students with

Information Literacy skills by reminding them at advising sessions about the importance of

keeping an ePortfolio. Students will manage, evaluate, and synthesize information about

the use of college and student services through the development of an ePortfolio. The QEP

Director will ensure the following takes place:

a) Monthly meetings with Student Success Core team

b) Development of College Services Core Team

c) Staff specific training and workshops available

Strategy 6: Baselines established at several points during the start of the QEP:

Information Literacy skills pre-test for FTIC students

Assessment process designed to look for Information Literacy skills in

student work and on assignments

CCSSE/CCFSSE questions

ePortfolio checks

Tracking Library visits

Tracking Skill lab visits

To assess the effectiveness of the NVC QEP, students will take an Information Literacy skills

test within the first week or two in their foundational course (EDUC1300/SDEV). The majority of

these students are FTIC. The students who take the pre-test will be tracked and asked to

complete a post-test after having completed 30+ hours of course work. Students being asked to

take the post-test will be offered priority registration after completion of the test. Spring 2015,

the initial pilot semester, was a success in that over 300 students voluntarily took the pre-test.

This allowed for validation of the test, assessment of reliability, and time for needed

modifications. Beginning in fall 2015, scores from the pre-and post-test will be used to establish

baseline Information Literacy levels from which improvement may be measured. Students who

took the test after being in a course that included an Information Literacy librarian taught section

will be tracked to see how they compare with typical success and retention numbers from

students in classes without this course.

To assess assignments and student work to see if Information Literacy skills are being

enhanced:


a) A baseline will be established by use of a pretest in the SDEV/EDUC courses and

subsequent use of an assessment rubric. Both student work and corresponding

assignments will be assessed

b) A core team of assessment professionals will be trained to assess for a five year

period of time. This will allow the QEP assessment process to have more

consistency and produce more valid numbers

c) Scaffolded training and assessment training will build on foundational work

Strategy 7: Develop a grass-roots approach to the creation of in-house, discipline

specific materials that are targeted to the NVC population:

a) Ask faculty to lead the charge to develop rubrics that speak to their

disciplinary needs

b) Create modules that relate to the NVC student population

c) Develop a bank of assignments and teaching methodologies like the flipped

classroom

d) Commit to helping students with ePortfolios across the College

e) Create buy-in by honoring needs of specific areas and disciplines

f) Identify QEP Liaisons in all disciplines to work on Core Assessment Team

and lead discipline specific rubric design

Rubric Development:

Pilot year - Development of generic rubric by assessment team

Development of discipline specific rubrics

Year 1 – Continued refinement and development of rubric in disciplines (Assess for

practice spring 2016)

Years 2 – 5 – Full assessment – adjust as needed

Strategy 8: Community and Stakeholder support is a major priority for the QEP. The

NVC Business Leader Coaching program will grow and students who participate in these

classes may be tracked for success and retention data collection.

Include our constituents – the community, business leaders, etc. and introduce ePortfolios.

a) Keep the web site updated with information about our QEP successes and

challenges and actions plans

b) Recruit a community or business partner to take part in assessment day

c) Scale up the NVC Business Leader program to help students with job skills and

managing their Information Literacy needs.

Interventions are planned for the end of each assessment measure. All areas of the

College participate in annual planning and review to ensure continuous improvement. The

Academic areas engage in strategic review at the August Faculty Development Day

session. Broad based assessment and interventions to assure measures are successful are

a key strategy of the NVC QEP.


Section 7: Timeline for the Pilot and Implementation of the NVC QEP

7a: Phase 1 – Preparation Years

November-December 2013 Activity: Held a series of six well attended town hall meetings for faculty and staff Activity: Surveyed faculty to help narrow list of topics from town hall meetings

Action: Sent results to SharePoint and asked faculty and staff to offer additional input

Action: The results revealed five major topics of interest including Writing and Critical Thinking December 2013: Action: E-Team identified members of the QEP steering team. Members from across the college and

disciplines were selected. The initial team included representatives from Institutional Research (Eliza

Hernandez), Institutional technology (Tyrell Schwab), Art faculty (Tim Jones), English faculty (Denise Tolan),

SDEV/EDUC faculty (Gary Bowling), the NVC Vice President for Academics Jimmie Bruce), Librarian (Judy

McMillan), Public Relations (Renata Serafin), administrative staff (Janie Scott) and Dean for Interdisciplinary

Studies (Mary Dixson).

Spring 2014

January – March 2014: Activity: The QEP Steering team met several times (see meeting dates). These meetings allowed the team to research our institutional needs and examine student learning data. The team also found elements that, linked to our strategic plan and college mission, would be improved by a Quality Enhancement plan. Activity: The QEP Steering team reviewed strategic planning data, completed an internal and external scan of data, and researched best practices nationwide for trends in current QEP’s. Action: The five topics from the Town Hall meetings were narrowed to three areas of interest based on the data, research and stakeholder input. The three topics selected were Information Literacy, Writing and Critical Thinking, and Innovative teaching models. Activity: The QEP Steering team developed a plan to narrow the three topics into one and to gain broad based involvement in the final QEP selection process. This plan included soliciting input from faculty, administrators, students, staff and strategic partners. Action: The Team determined, based on the reading of data and research of other institutions, that Information Literacy was the topic that filled the most institutional gaps and captured the largest area of interest. Action: The Team then created multiple formats by which to gather and evaluate information and support for the topic of Information Literacy. These formats included surveys, focus groups and white papers. Action: The Team added a Facebook page to introduce the elements of a QEP Activity: Have the Team obtain E-Team input. Action: After presenting the potential topic for the QEP to the E-Team, the administrative body suggested obtaining further input from faculty, staff and students by broadening the survey base to include business leaders and community leaders. Action: The Team planned to survey students by providing links on all NVC student computers (including labs, library, and classrooms). QR codes were also placed on table toppers in the library, cafeteria area, and all the labs and tutoring centers. Action: The Team developed a draft of a budget for the QEP March 2014 Activity: Developed budget for the QEP Activity: Created Timelines for Phases II and III of QEP cycle Activity: Develop public website for the QEP Activity: Plan QEP Team meetings to go through summer sessions to help with roll out in August Action: Budget sent to administration for approval Action: QEP website active and QEP added to Quick Links on home page Action: Meetings scheduled through summer March – April 2014 Activity: Survey Summary on QEP website Activity: Developed three sets of survey questions for different groups


Action: Sent surveys to all faculty and staff, placed QR codes and survey links on student computers, sent survey to NVC business leaders, alumni, and community leaders. (Included a drawing for prizes if students completed survey and included email address) Action: Results were overwhelmingly good. High response rates from all stakeholders, especially business leaders and faculty/staff groups. April 2014 Activity: QEP Steering Team met to discuss Survey results and complete a QEP goal based on input from stakeholders and previous information. Activity: Met with consultant (Mark Smith) and discussed QEP goal with him. Mark Smith suggested our Team more clearly define QEP goals and be more specific on all terminology. Action: The QEP topic was narrowed and aligned with our college goals and mission statement.

QEP topic further developed with a tentative plan for assessment. Action: Survey results were posted on the QEP website for all stakeholders to review Activity: Broadened scope of QEP Team by adding members Action: Invited representatives from Workforce (Viviane Marioneaux), Advising (Jennifer Alvarez), Career Services (Jo Garcia), Student representation (Cassie Sluka now Ashley Price), Lab Support (Deb Rankin) and community service and fundraising (Lynne Dean). Activity: E-Team approved final selection of QEP topic. Activity: Began work on selection of QEP graphic and final naming of topic Action: Graphic was in design and the name FUSE was decided on as the QEP moniker May 2014 Activity: Presented QEP topic and plans to college faculty and staff at All College meeting Action: Developed Executive Summary of the QEP Action: Placed Executive Summary on public QEP website Action: Presentation from all college meeting available on SharePoint Action: Completed Literature Review for QEP topic based on research of the initial topic selection (On SharePoint)

May – June 2014 Activity: Site visits to Trinity University to speak with current and former QEP chair and director Action: Redesign and updating of QEP website based on input from Trinity visit

June 2014 Activity: Technology Fest was geared to feature topics concerning Information Literacy

July 2014 Action: SACSCOC Summer Institute June – August 2014 Activity: Team developed a draft of the QEP assessment model Activity: Team planned faculty development day and convocation presentations Activity: An activity for Faculty development Day was developed Activity: Developed marketing plan Activity: Revised QEP graphic Activity: Planned faculty development sessions to help faculty create assignments with attention to Information Literacy skills Activity: Attended meetings to help plan for ePortfolio Activity: Put together Assessment team Action: QEP graphic was completed and Team approved.

August 2014 Action: Roll out of QEP: infuse Action: Presentations at Faculty Development day and Faculty/Staff Convocation Action: Activity at Faculty Development. Questionnaire filled out by all faculty and returned by department chair. Responses synthesized and evaluated. Reponses helped Team see the QEP was responding to faculty needs.


Action: Flew airplanes with QEP information on them at Convocation. Dr. Bruce addressed the QEP and its importance Action: Put together QEP Wall in SDEV/EDUC wing of MLH. Allowed students to answer the questions, “What does Information Literacy mean to you?” Responses synthesized and evaluated. September 2014 Activity: Met with the NVC Business Council and introduced the QEP to that group

Fall 2014 Activity: Plan pilot for 15 EDUC classes beginning spring 2015 Activity: Librarians develop Modules for EDUC/SDEV classes covering Information Literacy topic Activity: Ask for faculty to participate. Plan training day on January 10, 2015 for faculty participating in pilot. Find trainers Action: Developed a draft of the QEP assessment model Action: Developed marketing plan Action: Revised QEP graphic Action: Put together Assessment team Action: Broadened scope of Steering Team by adding members from Workforce, advising, career

services, and fundraising

Spring 2015 Activity: Began pilot for 10 EDUC/SDEV classes Activity: Training day for pilot instructors Activity: Began NVC Business Leader Mentor Program Activity: Presentations to P/VC; Alamo Colleges Board of Trustees; All College Meeting Activity: Faculty Development presentation with librarians Activity: Visit to Gulf Coast State College Activity: QEP Director - Participation in Strategic Planning Activity: QEP District Director’s Meeting Activity: Student Success Core team meets Action: media banners on TV screens on campus and main website Action: Develop plan for ePortfolio roll out in Student Success

7b: Phase 2 – Pilot Year 2015-2016 (by process owner)

Process

Owner

Target group FTIC Students in pilot EDUC/SDEV courses; faculty,

staff

Outcome Enhance QEP: inFUSE for students, faculty, staff, and

stakeholders

Action: Pilot Deliver skills based pre-test to pilot classes

Assessment In

Action Team

Enhanced Information Literacy library workshop

for pilot classes

Librarians

Evaluate pilot instructor assignment to ensure

they communicate student expectations for

information Literacy Skills

QEP Steering

Have students log into ePortfolio in each pilot

course and complete one or two tasks (attach

letter of recommendation, or log advisor visits or

complete job skills tool – etc.

Team (includes

QEP director)


Complete Training Day in August 2015

QEP Director,

librarians, EDUC

Coordinator

Continue work on developing general

assessment rubric

QEP Assessment

Team

Action:

Professional

Development

Offer opportunities for staff development to create

awareness of ePortfolio use for students and engage

the community in Information Literacy awareness

QEP Steering

Team; Student

Success Core

Team

Offer opportunities for professional faculty

development focusing on assignment creation.

Take opportunities at faculty development days,

employee development day, and via our web site.

Offer monthly online and face to face workshops

to introduce elements of Information Literacy to

faculty and staff

QEP Steering

Team; Faculty

Development

Director

Build momentum for IL Academy and Train the

Trainer Programs

QEP Steering

Team; PR

Action:

Marketing

Grow understanding and awareness of

ePortfolios

QEP Steering

Team; Student

Success Core

Team

More deeply develop the Business Leader

Career Coaching Program (formerly named NVC

Business Leader Mentorship Program)

EDUC

Coordinator,

Business Council

Director

Create awareness campaign isolating terms,

such as Find

QEP Director; PR

Team

To Do – Prep

for QEP Full

Implementati

on

Plan Faculty Development day for August 2016 –

huge roll out of Information Literacy awareness –

perhaps create Implementation Team

QEP Steering

Team

Work on developing more in-depth module for

ENGL1301 roll out

Librarians

Outline Train the Trainer Program; Begin

program Spring 2016

Hire IL Librarian

QEP Steering

Team

Develop new CCSSE and Class Climate

Questions

IR Director; QEP

Steering Team

Work on an ePortfolio check for Student Success Student Success

Core team

QEP Director

Maintain website with updated information

Initiate development of Information Literacy

Academy

QEP Director


Offer Best Practices and current research trends

to faculty and staff via the website

Continue work on general rubric to assess EDUC

assignments and student work (Practice run end

of fall 2015)

QEP Assessment

Team

Involve Business Leader Career Coaching

Program in QEP via assessment day

QEP Director,

Business Council

Director

Identify discipline specific teams to begin rubric

development

Identify QEP Liaisons per discipline

Gather faculty and staff to review pre-test results

QEP Director;

Academic Chairs

Admin;

Assessment Assessments for faculty assignments and student

work using a general IL rubric (baseline

identification)

QEP Steering

Team; QEP

Assessment

Team, IR

Pre-test (skills based)

Review results of pre-test (baseline identification)

AIA Team; QEP

Director

CCSSE review

IR, IE, QEP

Steering Team,

QEP Assessment

Team, QEP

Student Success

Team

Library workshop review

Librarians, QEP

Assessment

Team

Reflection/

Review

Review assessment data from EDUC/SDEV

Develop necessary cycle of improvement from

results

QEP Steering

Team; QEP

Assessment

Team, IR

Review SACSCOC site visit information and

implement/change as necessary

Bring in student focus group and business

leaders to review data

Adjust plan as necessary

Admin; QEP

Steering Team;

QEP

Assessment

Team

Tag students for post-test at 30+ hours

Track (for baseline) Library and skill lab visits

IR; AIA Team

7c: Phase 3: Implementation Year 1 2016/17 Process

Owner

Target group Expand to FTIC Students in all EDUC courses; Add

15 ENGL1301 Courses targeted for specific library

instruction


Outcome Engage students, faculty, staff, and stakeholders in

inFUSE

Action:

Curricular/Co-

curricular

Deliver skills-based pre-test to EDUC classes

Assessment In

Action Team

Deliver Information Literacy library workshop to

all EDUC sections; 15 ENGL1301 Sections

Librarians; train

the trainers

Have students log into ePortfolio in each EDUC




Faculty; QEP

Director; EDUC

Coordinator

Action:

Professional

Development

Faculty Development day for August 2016 QEP Steering

Team; faculty

dev director

Begin advising touch points – checklist for

student ePortfolio use

QEP Steering

Team; Student

Success Team

Intensify IL training on Faculty development day

in January.

Keep web site current for updates and training

purposes.

Offer opportunities for staff development to

create awareness of ePortfolio use for students

and engage the community in Information

Literacy awareness

QEP Director

Offer monthly online and face to face workshops

to introduce elements of Information Literacy to

faculty and staff

Begin Information Literacy Academy


to faculty and staff via the website.

Increase Train the Trainer workshops to help with

addition of HIST courses in 2017

QEP Steering

Team; Fac Dev

Director; IL

Librarian

Increase training for advisors on ePortfolio checks Student Success

Team

Develop a plan for College Services QEP Director;

VP College

Services

Action:

Marketing

Enhance awareness campaign focusing on terms

and the ePortfolio

QEP Steering

Team

Intensify understanding and awareness of

ePortfolios

QEP Steering

Team; Student

Success team

Engage the Business Leader Career Coaching

Program (formerly named NVC Business Leader

Mentorship Program)

QEP Director,

Business

Council Director


Hold Student coffeehouses to discuss


QEP Steering

Team

Include additional CCSSE questions in the spring

questionnaire

IR; QEP

Director

To Do Work on assessing module for ENGL1301

courses

QEP

Assessment

Team, QEP

English liaison

Market Train the Trainer Program and IL

Academy

Develop new CCSSE and Class Climate

Questions

IR; QEP

Steering Team;

IE

Work on an ePortfolio check Student Success

Team

Maintain website with updated information QEP Director;

PR


Program in QEP via assessment day

Follow up with QEP Liaisons

QEP Director

Check pre-test to see if any questions need to be

added/adjusted

AIA Team

In early spring, develop norming session to

include discipline specific rubric creators

QEP Director;

QEP Liaisons;

QEP

Assessment

Team

Revisit rubric development after first assessment QEP

Assessment

Team

Flag students who took pre-test for post-test at

30+ hours

IR; QEP Director

Identify and train core assessment team QEP Director;

QEP

Assessment

Team

Assessment Solidify norming process for core IL assessment

team

QEP Director;

QEP

Assessment

Team; AIA

Pre-test (skills based) – look over results. See if

changes are needed.

CCSSE review


All teams

Librarians; QEP

Steering Team

Spring assessment – pull sample assignments and

student products and assess to norm rubric and to see

how assignments look before continued faculty

development

QEP

Assessment

Team


Review data, adjust rubrics, tailor faculty development

Develop assessment process for Student Success –

ePortfolios

Student Success

Team

Assess instructor assignments to ensure they

communicate student expectations for

Information Literacy Skills

Spring assessment – work with core group of

Discipline specific scorers on assessment day –

test out new discipline specific rubrics

QEP

Assessment

Team

Reflection/

Review

Report assessment data to Cabinet

QEP Director

Review indirect measures – CCSSE, Library

Visits, Noodle tools, Class climate survey, skill

lab visits

IR;AIA;

Steering

TEAM; IE


results

Steering

TEAM; Info Lit

Librarian

Bring in student focus group and business

leaders to review data

Adjust plan, including professional development

needs, as necessary

Review results of pre-test

QEP Director;

All Teams

Track (for baseline) Library and skill lab visits AIA; QEP

Director

IR

7d: Phase 4 –Year 2 2017-2018 (by process owner)

Process

Owners

Target group Expand differentiated courses to all EDUC courses, 25

ENGL1301 courses, and 10-15 HIST 1301 courses

Outcome Maintain engagement for students, faculty, staff, and

stakeholders for inFUSE

Action:

Curricular/co

-curricular

Deliver skills-based pre-test to SDEV/EDUC

classes

Assessment In

Action Team

Deliver differentiated Information Literacy library

workshop to all EDUC sections (discipline specific

for ENGL1301 and HIST 1301)

Librarians; train

the trainers

Use Trained Trainers to help discipline specific

content delivery in ENGL and HIST courses

Tighten general rubric on both assignments and

student work in EDUC

QEP

Assessment

Team; EDUC

Coordinator


Increase awareness of ePortfolios by highlighting

in ENGL and HIST courses

QEP Director;

Chairs

Celebrate Information Literacy Academy

graduates (track course success and retention)

Info Lit

Librarian; QEP

Director; IR

Have students log into ePortfolio in each pilot

course (ENGL and HIST) and complete one or two

tasks (attach letter of recommendation, or log

advisor visits or complete job skills tool – etc.

QEP Director;

EDUC

coordinator

Advising touch points – use checklist for student

ePortfolio use

Student

Success Core

Team

Action:

Professional

Development

Heavy concentration on IL training on Faculty

development days in August and January

QEP Director;

Info Lit Librarian


purposes.

Offer opportunities for monthly staff development

to create awareness of ePortfolio use for students

and engage the community in Information Literacy

awareness

QEP Director;

PR

Offer bi-monthly online and face to face

workshops to introduce elements of Information

Literacy to faculty and staff

Begin second group of Information Literacy

Academy students


to faculty and staff via the website.

Continue Train the Trainer workshops to help with

addition of HIST and BIOL courses in 2018

Continue training for advisors on ePortfolio checks

Continue Friday faculty development

QEP Director;

Info Lit

Librarian;

Faculty Dev

Director

Action:

Marketing


and the ePortfolio

Hold Student coffeehouses to discuss Information

Literacy

QEP Steering

Team; Info Lit

Librarian; PR

Expand the Business Leader Career Coaching


Mentorship Program)

QEP Director;

Business

Council Director


Roll out plan for College Services

QEP Director,

VPCS

Continue to update website QEP Director;

PR

Market ePortfolio and elements of inFUSE QEP Director;

Info Lit

Librarian; PR

To Do Plan Faculty Development day for August 2018 –

heavy concentration on Information Literacy

QEP Steering

Team; Info Lit

Librarian

Work on developing more in-depth modules for

ARTS courses

Refine Train the Trainer Program (if needed)

Librarians

QEP Steering

Team; Info Lit

Librarian

Tighten ePortfolio checks

QEP Student

Success team


Program in QEP via assessment day and

workshops for students

QEP Director;

Business

Council Director

Celebrate Information Literacy Academy

graduates (track course success and retention)

QEP Steering

Team; Info Lit

Librarian

Maintain discipline specific teams for discipline

specific rubric revision and to maintain core

assessment team

QEP Steering

Team; Info Lit

Librarian;

Academic

Chairs

Monitor pre-test to see if any questions need to be

added/adjusted

AIA Team

In early spring, complete norming session to

include discipline specific rubric creators

QEP

Assessment

Team; Info Lit

Librarian

Feedback

Loop/

Assessment

Solidify norming process for core IL assessment

team

Assess instructor assignments for HIST, ENGL

and EDUC courses to ensure they communicate

student expectations for Information Literacy Skills

Spring assessment – work with core group of QEP

Liaisons on assessment day – refine discipline

specific rubrics

QEP

Assessment

Team; Info Lit

Librarian


changes are needed.

QEP

Assessment

Team; Info Lit

Librarian

AIA Team

CCSSE review

IE, IR, QEP

Steering Team


Info Lit Librarian

and Team




how assignments look before continuous faculty

development

Review data, adjust rubrics, tailor faculty development

QEP

Assessment

Team; Info Lit

Librarian


ePortfolios

Student

Success team,

QEP Director

Reflection/

Review

Review assessment data from courses


Visits, Noodle tools, Class climate survey, skill lab

visits

QEP

Assessment

Team, Steering

Team, IR, IE,

Cabinet; AIA

Team

Review results of pre-test (baseline identification)

IR, AIA Team

Check for students who took pre-test for post-test

at 30+ hours

Track (for baseline) Library and skill lab visits

IR


results

QEP

Assessment

Team, Steering

Team

Bring in student focus group and business leaders

to review data

Adjust plan, including professional development

needs, as necessary

QEP Steering

Team

7e: Phase 5 –Years 3-5 2018-2021 (by process owner)

Process

Owners

Target group Year 3 - Expand differentiated courses to EDUC

courses, ENGL1301 courses, HIST1301, ARTS

courses, STATS courses, and BIOL1308 courses

(stagger over the years)

Year 4 - Expand differentiated courses to 50

EDUC/SDEV courses, 25 ENGL 1301 courses, 25 HIST

courses, 25 BIOL courses, and 15 ARTS courses

Year 5 - Expand differentiated courses to all EDUC

courses, 50 ENGL 1301 courses, 50 HIST courses, 50

BIOL courses, 50 ARTS courses, and 50 STATS

courses (numbers of courses dependent on staffing)

Outcome Maintain commitment to inFUSE for students,

faculty, staff, and stakeholders

Actions:

Curricular/co

-curricular

Deliver skills-based pre-test to EDUC classes

Deliver post-tests to students with 30+ hours of

course work

Monitor repository for test results

Assessment In

Action Team


Check on flagged students for 30 + hours for post-

test

AIA; IR

Deliver differentiated flipped classroom

Information Literacy library workshop to all

sections (discipline specific modules for ENGL

1301, HIST, BIOL, ARTS, and STATS)

Use Trained Trainers to help discipline specific

content delivery in targeted courses

Librarians; train

the trainers

Work with HIST, STATS, ARTS, and BIOL rubrics

before assessment day in spring – norming

sessions before spring semester

Assessment

Team

Increase awareness of ePortfolios by highlighting

in targeted courses

Student

Success Team

Grow the Information Literacy Academy

Ask students to use ePortfolio in ENGL, BIOL,

HIST, STATS, and ARTS classes (develop rubric)

QEP Director;

IL Librarian

Have students log into ePortfolio in each EDUC




Info Lit

Librarian; QEP

Director; EDUC

Coordinator

Actions:

Marketing

Engage the Business Leader Career Coaching


Mentorship Program)

QEP Director;

Business

Council Director


and the ePortfolio

Hold Student coffeehouses to discuss Information

Literacy

QEP Steering

Team; Info Lit

Librarian; PR

Actions:

Professional

Development

Grow the Information Literacy Academy

QEP Steering

Team; Info Lit

Librarian

Advising touch points – use checklist for student

ePortfolio use

QEP Director;

Student

Success team

Heavy concentration on IL training on Faculty

development days in August and January

QEP Director;

Faculty Dev

Director

QEP Steering

Team; Info Lit

Librarian;

Librarians


purposes.

Offer opportunities for monthly staff development

to create awareness of ePortfolio use for students

and engage the community in Information Literacy

awareness

Offer bi-monthly online and face to face

workshops to introduce elements of Information

Literacy to faculty and staff



to faculty and staff via the website

QEP Director

Continue Train the Trainer workshops to help with

addition of courses

Continue training for advisors on ePortfolio checks Student

Success team

Engage College Services QEP Director;

VPCS

Spring assessment – work with core group of

Discipline specific scorers on assessment day –

refine discipline specific rubrics

QEP

Assessment

Team

Flag IL Academy graduate instructors to check

assessment scores against non-trained instructors

IR; QEP

Director

Work on developing more in-depth modules for

high enrollment courses

IL Librarian;

Librarians

To Do Plan Faculty Development day for August and

January through 2021 – heavy concentration on


QEP Steering

Team; Fac Dev

Director; IL

Librarian

Track Library and skill lab visits

IR;IE; QEP

Director Monitor and adjust additional CCSSE questions in the

spring questionnaire

Refine Train the Trainer Program (if needed)

QEP Steering

Team; IL

Librarian

Tighten ePortfolio checks Student

Success team

Maintain website with updated information QEP Director


Program in QEP via assessment day and

workshops for students

QEP Director;

Business

Council Director

Maintain QEP Liaison relationship QEP Director;

IL Librarian

Maintain core assessment team

QEP

Assessment

Team In early spring, complete norming session to

include QEP Liaisons

Feedback

Loop/

Assessment

Solidify norming process for core IL assessment

team

.

IL Librarian;

QEP

Assessment

Team


changes are needed.

AIA Team

CCSSE review IE, IR, QEP

Steering Team


Info Lit Librarian

and Team

Assess instructor assignments for ENGL, HIST,

BIOL, ARTS, STATS, and EDUC courses to

ensure they communicate student expectations for

Information Literacy Skills

QEP

Assessment

Team

Ensure rubrics on both assignments and student

work are still effective measurement tools

Assessment

Team; Chairs

Library workshop review IL Librarian



how assignments look before developing new

professional sessions

QEP

Assessment

Team

Info Lit

Librarian;

Librarians Review data, adjust rubrics, tailor faculty development


ePortfolios

QEP

Assessment

Team;

QEP Student

Success team

Reflection/

Review


Visits, Noodle tools, Class climate survey, skill lab

visits

QEP

Assessment

Team; IE; IR,

Monitor pre-test to see if any questions need to be

added/adjusted

AIA Team


results

QEP Steering

Team; IL

Librarian

Report results to stakeholders; Cabinet QEP Director

Bring in student focus group and business leaders

to review data

QEP Director;

IL Librarian

Adjust professional development needs, as

necessary

QEP Director;

IL Librarian,

Steering Team

Review results of pre and post-test AIA team

Flag students who took pre-test for post-test at

30+ hours

Begin to measure results of IL Academy graduate

courses

AIA Team

QEP

Assessment

Team; IE; IR


Section 8: Organizational Structure


QEP Management: The management of the College’s QEP is designed to ensure operations, including assessment,

run smoothly and faculty, staff, students, and constituents remain engaged and informed about

the QEP process.

The QEP director assumed responsibility for her role in January 2014. The director was

appointed to this position by the President of the College. The director’s position is full-time and

reports directly to the Vice President for Academic Success. The director oversees the

implementation of the QEP in conjunction with the president’s Cabinet, the QEP Steering Team,

and the Institutional Effectiveness Team. The director has managerial experience from her

previous role as an academic chair as well as assessment experience stemming from her

coordination of the Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) initiative. The director also played a

key role in the formation of Faculty Development Day.

The QEP director’s office is housed on the second floor of the NVC administrative building

nearest the resources necessary to gather data, promote the QEP, and manage faculty and

staff groups. The QEP director assumes the following roles:

Oversight of budget

Management of assessment plan

Conduct presentations and updates

Oversee marketing

Coordination of faculty and staff development of materials (stipend and grants)

Establishment of professional development for the QEP

Analysis of data stemming from pre and post-tests, assessments, and indirect measures such as the

CCSSE.

Serve on Institutional Effectiveness team

Update QEP website and ensure publicity for the QEP

Organize and develop Information Literacy Academy

Coordinate QEP presentations

Prepare annual progress reports to Cabinet and stakeholders


Section 9: Resources

9a: Budget

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total

2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019 2019-2020 2020-2021

A. Personnel

QEP Coordinator 100% Release 24,000 24,000 24,000 24,000 24,000 120,000

Information Literacy Librarian

50% Salary share with library 29,000 29,000 29,000 29,000 29,000 145,000

QEP Pre and posttest design

37.37 per hour for development of assessment tool (Quiz). 48 hours@6 people 10762 10762 5381 26905

Assessment and rubric development

Work on assessment/rubric development. 30 Disciplines with 4 faculty reps. 37.37 per hour @ 16 hours 71,750 71,750 71,750 71,750 71,750 358,750

Statistical Research Specialist, Sr.

Data collection and implementation 17.26X19 hoursX35 weeks 11478 11478 11478 11478 11478 57,390

Info Lit Academy participants

30 disciplines X3 faculty per year 16 hours X 37.37 53000 53000 53000 53000 53000 265,000

Admin Support Specialist III $19 per hour X 40 30000 30000 30000 30000 30000 150,000

Stipends for adjunct ILA training

30 adjuncts per year @ 32.00 per hour @ 16 hours 15360 15360 15360 15360 15360 76,800

Train the trainer

16 faculty @ 16 hours @ 37.37 per hour 9472 9472 9472 9472 9472 47,360

Module Development 6 faculty @ 16 hours @ 37.37 per hour 3587 3587 3587 3587 3587 17,935

Totals 258,409 258,409 253,028 247,647 247,647 1,265,140

B. Fringe Benefits

C. Travel

AAEBL 2 participants @1500 3000 3000 3000 3000 3000 15000

SACS Annual Meeting 2 participants @ 1500 3000 3000 3000 3000 3000 15000

SACS Summer Institute 2 participants @ 1500 3000 3000 3000 3000 3000 15000

ACRL or LOEX 3 participants @1500 4500 4500 4500 4500 4500 22500

Educause 2 participants @1500 3000 3000 3000 3000 3000 15000

Totals 16500 16500 16500 16500 16500 82500

D. Equipment


iskills or SAILS $19 per test @ 500 students 9500 9500 19000

9a - Budget Software - for pre and post test 10000 10000 10000 30000

Totals 9500 9500 10000 10000 10000 49000 E. Supplies/Development

Office Supplies paper, general supplies 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 12500

Publications, printing ILA materials 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 12500

Faculty Development food, training materials, marketing 3000 3000 3000 3000 3000 15000

Faculty Development Speakers

2 speakers/trainers per year 5000 5000 5000 5000 5000 25000

Modules 3000 3000 3000 3000 3000 15000

Promotional materials 7500 7500 5000 5000 3500 28500

Totals 23500 23500 21000 21000 19500 108500

F. Contractual

Consulting Services 2500 2500 2500 7500

Totals 2500 2500 2500 7500

K. TOTAL COSTS 310409 310409 300528 295147 296147 1,512,640

l 5 year total 1,512,640

Appendix 6 – Budget Narrative


Section 10: Assessment

The central concern with the assessment process is to determine the gain in students’

information literacy skills from their entry onto our campus to the point where they reach 30 +

hours of college coursework. The College will measure the QEP Learning Outcomes using

both direct and indirect measures. Direct assessments will be purposefully designed as

internal measures. Providing faculty and staff with the opportunity to contribute to the

development of materials brings the College another layer of collaboration and investment in

the QEP. Discipline specific assessment rubrics will be knowledge based assessments and

also provide direct information on how students are performing with their acquisition of

Information Literacy skills.

Both Formative and Summative Evaluation methods will be utilized. Students’ assessed

work is formative in that it will serve as the basis for ongoing faculty development and

revision of the assessment tool in each academic area. The summative data will come

from the pre and post-test students take and will be measured by benchmarks. Formative

assessments will provide feedback for instructors to allow for adjustment of instructional

materials as needed.

Overall success will be measured by gains in posttest results and an increase in the stated

mean for assessment rubrics. The CCSSE and CCFSSE answers will also undergo gap

analysis. Following is a matrix for assessment implementation:


Assessment Type Description Date for Data

Collection Oversight Actions after Assessment

Direct/Indirect

QEP Student Learning Outcome Assessment by Rubric

Assess Student Work using discipline specific Information Literacy rubrics

February - annually

QEP Steering team, Assessment Coordinator

Take results back to Team for review. Create an Action Plan based on assessment data.

Direct

QEP Assignment Assessment by Rubric

Assess faculty assignments using discipline specific Information Literacy rubrics

February - annually

QEP Steering team, Assessment Coordinator

Take results back to Team for review. Create an Action Plan based on assessment data.

Direct

Pre-test – Information Literacy Skills test

Skills based test given to all students in SDEV/EDUC courses

Given in first week of classes

QEP Director, Institutional Research team, SDEV Coordinator

Target areas of concern and develop action plans

Direct

Post-Test - Information Literacy Skills test

Skills based test given to all students who took pre-test in in SDEV/EDUC courses

Given in final semester once student has reached 30+ class hours

QEP Director, Institutional Research team, SDEV Coordinator


Direct

Community College Survey of Student Engagement (CCSSE) including additional Information Literacy Questions

The CCSSE instrument provides information on student engagement, a key indicator of learning

Spring - annually

Director of Institutional Planning, Research and Effectiveness

Target areas of concern and develop action plans; measure against gaps in assessment scores

Indirect

Information Literacy Workshops

Library course instructors schedule for students. Often considered a “one-shot” workshop

End of each semester

Library team, QEP Steering team

Review areas where students are not hitting marks on Information Literacy Outcomes. Develop Action plan. Target faculty development

Indirect

Library and Lab Usage Reports

Indicators of how often students use College services.

End of each semester

Institutional Planning, Research and Effectiveness

Review data to see if student use of ePortfolios is increasing lab and library usage.

Indirect

ePortfolio Check Advising touch points Routinely – as students are advised

Student Success Core team, QEP Director


Indirect

Surveys, coffeehouses, forums

Informational Sources

Each semester – perhaps at mid-term

QEP Director and Steering Team


Indirect


Learning Outcomes and Assessment Process

Outcome Assessment Measure Direct/Indirect Frequency SLO 1: Students will be able to efficiently and effectively Find reliable and relevant sources for their information needs by using library and various sources appropriately to explore a topic.

Pre and post IL Skills test Rubric applied to assignment Library IL Modules CCSSE questions Skill lab usage Library usage

Direct Direct Indirect Indirect Indirect Indirect

Each semester February – annually Each semester Annually Each Semester Each Semester

SLO 1a: Students will be able to find and use college and student services to meet their academic and personal needs

ePortfolio checks Additional CCSSE Questions CCSSE Questions Surveys

Direct Indirect Indirect Direct

Throughout year at advising touch points Annually Annually Annually (student convocation)

SLO 2: Students will be able to Use information ethically and effectively by applying appropriate citation/documentation systems to demonstrate their understanding of relevant economical, legal, and social issues

Pre and post IL Skills test Rubric applied to assignment Library IL Modules CCSSE questions Skill lab usage Library usage

Direct Direct Indirect Indirect Indirect Indirect

Each semester February – annually Each semester Annually Each Semester Each Semester

SLO 3: Students will be able to Synthesize credible resources to effectively accomplish a specific purpose.

Pre and post IL Skills test Rubric applied to assignment Library IL Modules CCSSE questions

Direct Direct

Indirect Indirect

Each semester February – annually

Each Semester Annually

SLO 3a. Students will be able to Synthesize student and college services by gathering and integrating resources into an ePortfolio

ePortfolio checks Additional CCSSE Questions CCSSE Questions Surveys

Direct Indirect Indirect Direct

Throughout year at advising touch points Annually Annually Annually (student convocation)

SLO 4: Students will be able to Evaluate information and sources through identification of bias, authority, relevancy and credibility as it pertains to their information needs.

Pre and post IL Skills test Rubric applied to assignment Library IL Modules CCSSE questions

Direct Direct

Indirect Indirect

Each semester February – annually

Each Semester Annually

10a: Description of assessment tools: Pre and post-test (assesses all QEP SLO’s and Assessment in Action project) [Direct

Measure]:

The Information Literacy Skills test is administered to FTIC students within the first week of their

SDEV or EDUC1300 classes. This assessment tool allows progress to be tracked for students

who take the pretest and those same students who take the post-test after 30+ hours of college

credit (More information in Literature Review section).


Assessment with Discipline Specific Rubrics [Direct Measure]:

Assessment day at NVC is already established in each academic area where Student Learning

Outcomes are assessed. The QEP Assessment Team determined that since best practices

dictate that assessment should be faculty driven (Suskie 2009), the assessment tool should be

faculty driven as well. Based on the AAC&U value rubrics, the Assessment Team developed a

general Information Literacy rubric based on the ACRL Standards and the QEP Learning

Outcomes. This rubric guide serves as a springboard for each discipline to design rubrics that

address the specific Information Literacy goals of each discipline. Rubrics as an assessment

tool are already used effectively throughout the campus, however having each discipline focus

on Information Literacy competencies specific to their own discipline will strengthen the relevant

assessment process. Each discipline will select a QEP Liaison. The Liaison will be paid a

stipend to allow them time to work with the rest of their colleagues on developing a discipline

specific rubric and to serve as part of the assessment cohort.

All assessed student work gathered for assessment day comes with the original

assignment. The Assessment Team will match the appropriate discipline specific rubric to

the student work. The Information Literacy skills identified for courses ranging from

Economics to Kinesiology will be assessed. Each discipline will have a baseline score that

will help develop training plans and determine where students are having difficulty with

Information Literacy skills. The Assessment Team will assess the instructional assignment

as well as the student product to help identify ways in which faculty development can be

focused. The two part assessment measure will allow faculty to analyze learning gaps and

identify strategies to improve teaching and learning.

To ensure that inter-rater reliability is not an issue during assessment NVC will train a core

group of faculty to clearly identify Information Literacy skills via the rubric. Since rubrics will

be designed by content experts, these experts will work together for five years in an

Assessment Cohort. After one content expert has assessed a project, one assessor from

outside the area will assess the same project. If the scores vary within a certain percentage,

an arbiter will be assigned. Cross-training for assessment purposes will be completed in the

late fall and early spring. Discipline specific rubrics will encourage consistent application of

normative values as the work crosses various divisions. By keeping the assessment cohort

together for the five years of the QEP, scoring will be more stable and reliable.

During the evaluation process, mean scores are compared to results from previous years to

establish a trajectory for student skill levels. A wide variation in the overall scores will trigger a

reexamination of the sample and scoring. A variation in any specific category will denote an

area to explore for improvement. Scores are also evaluated against student self-reporting of

their involvement in Information Literacy content areas as found in the CCSSE survey given

each year. This is done to ensure that students’ estimation of their exposure corresponds with

faculty responses. If students report low levels of assignments requiring synthesis of work in the

classroom and the reports indicate poor scores, program review reports can be examined to find

gaps.


Student results and assessments are compared against the discipline reports of their QEP

efforts provided during Academic Program Review. The QEP Assessment team will look for

gaps in how the THECB Learning outcomes are being employed in the classrooms on campus.

Faculty Survey – Assessment in Action [Indirect Measure]:

The faculty survey is given to a random sample of faculty to ensure inclusion of both current

and non-users of our information literacy instruction. The survey questions ask questions

about Information Literacy, such as if they assign work requiring research during the

semester and how they approach citation instruction in their classes. Although one pilot

survey has been conducted thus far, the baseline will be monitored and survey questions

adjusted.

Student Survey - Assessment in Action [Indirect Measure]:

The survey will be administered to randomly selected classes. Questions include: “During your

time here at NVC, which classes offered instruction regarding the use of library resources or

evaluating information?” Students are offered the opportunity to have their name entered in a

drawing for a gift card. A baseline from the fall 2015 survey set will be established.

Community College Survey of Student Engagement (CCSSE) [Indirect Measure]:

NVC participates in the CCSSE survey annually in the spring. Several questions will be

monitored (see Data section 2.e) and five questions specific to the NVC QEP added to the

CCSSE. Those questions provide direction about how successful NVC is at encouraging

students to use an ePortfolio and allow the QEP Steering Team to gauge the level of

understanding students have regarding the QEP.

Community College Survey of Faculty Engagement (CCFSSE) [Indirect Measure]:

The data, now collected every two years, will be useful in that the questions relating to

Information Literacy skills showed a large gap between student perception and faculty

perception (See Data 2.3). Analysis of the gaps will allow focus on faculty development to better

strengthen student learning.

Library Instruction (flipped classroom model – 2 sessions) [Direct Measure]:

The NVC librarians taught 208 face-to-face Information Literacy sessions in AY 2012. Seven of

those classes were SDEV and zero were EDUC.

The NVC librarians taught 253 face-to-face Information Literacy sessions in AY 2013. Sixteen of

those were SDEV, and one was EDUC.

The focus on Information Literacy training in the foundational courses seems to have improved

the numbers as shown in the 2014 data.

The NVC librarians taught 295 face-to-face Information Literacy sessions in AY 2014.

Thirty of those were SDEV, and twenty-seven were EDUC. The goal in the pilot year and

for Year 1 of the QEP is to increase the number of EDUC/SDEV courses receiving

Information Literacy sessions to 50% of classes.


As the QEP Steering Team scaffolds the Information Literacy sessions into higher enrollment

courses over the five year period of time, Train-the-Trainer graduates will help the library team

deliver workshops. Academic areas without many requests for workshops will be contacted and

offered help.

The NVC SLO Assessment Cycle November Collect Fall data

February Assess.

Analyze data and create action plan

Create budget request.

March Area Review by VPAS

August Share action plan with adjuncts at Convocation meetings.

Fall Implement action plans.

September Program steering team reviews data results and action plans

(Academic and Workforce Program Review Steering Teams)

October Institutional Effectiveness team reviews data results and

action plan. (Institutional Effectiveness Review)

10b: Baseline Assessment Baseline assessment will be collected from our pilot courses and projects in spring 2015, fall

2015 and spring 2016. By spring of 2016, disciplines will have completed a discipline specific

rubric and a baseline will be established for specific disciplines as well.

10c: Rubrics The general Information Literacy rubric was created by the members of the QEP Assessment

Team and adapted, in part, from the AAC&U Value Rubrics. This rubric is not to be used for

grading, but to evaluate and discuss Information Literacy competencies. Each discipline will

elect a QEP Liaison who will work with the Writing Across the Curriculum Center or a librarian to

develop a discipline specific rubric appropriate to the Information Literacy needs of their

discipline. Although rubrics should include disciplinary content, they must also adhere to the

basic elements of inFUSE – for example, how does Finding information look in an economics

class, etc. Samples of discipline specific rubrics will be shared with each content area. QEP

liaisons report to the QEP Steering Team.

Instrument Target Population Method Outcome

IL Skills pre-test IL Skills post-test Assessment by rubric Assessment by discipline specific rubric CCSSE/CCFSSE Library Visits Skill Lab Visits Information Literacy Library Courses ePortfolio Checks

FTIC Former FTIC with 32+ college hours All students All students All students All students All students All students All students

Foundation courses Email Assessment Day Assessment Day Spring every year Collected data Collected data Collected Data Advisor Touch points

Establish baseline and collect longitudinal data Show growth from baseline Establish baseline and collect longitudinal data

Measure student perception Indicates Information Literacy management growth Effective use of ePortfolio


The general rubric shown in the appendix is a draft ready for testing on assessment day of

spring 2016 for pilot classes and areas where a discipline specific rubric might not be available.

Appendix 7 General Information Literacy Assessment Rubric


Section 11: References

ACRL Information Literacy Competency Standards Review Task Force. “Task Force

Recommendations.” ACRL AC12 Doc 13.1, June 2, 2012.

http://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/standards/ils_recomm.pdf

Alexandria Proclamation. (2005). URL: http:// http://eprints.rclis.org/3829/1/alexfinalreport.pdf

Ambrose, G. Alex, Holly E. Martin, and Hugh R. Page, Jr. (2014). Linking advising and

ePortfolios for Engagement: Design, evolution, assessment, and university-wide

implementation. Peer Review, 16.1 https://www.aacu.org/peerreview/2014/winter/linking-

advising-and-eportfolios-for-engagement

Ambrose, G. Alex, and Laura Williamson Ambrose. (2013). The blended advising model:

Transforming advising with ePortfolios. International Journal of ePortfolio, 3(1), 75-89.

Association of American Colleges and Universities & National Leadership Council. (2007).

College Learning for the New Global century: A report from the National Leadership

Council for Liberal Education & America’s Promise. Washington, D.C.: Association of

American Colleges and Universities.

http://www.aacu.org/sites/default/files/files/LEAP/GlobalCentury_final.pdf

Baron-Nixon, Leora. "Information Literacy: Imperatives for Faculty." Center for

Teaching 18.4 (2007): n. pag. Print.

Beile, P. (2006). “Assessing an Institution-wide Information Fluency Program: Commitment,

Plan, and Purpose.” University of Central Florida. Retrieved February 1, 2015.

Bent, Moira, and Ruth Stubbings, comps. The SCONUL Seven Pillars of Information

Literacy. N.p.: n.p., 2011. SCONUL. Web. 11 May 2015.

<http://www.sconul.ac.uk/sites/default/files/documents/coremodel.pdf>.

Chen, Helen L., & Black, Thomas C. (2010). Using e-portfolios to support an undergraduate

learning career: An experiment with academic advising. EDUCAUSE Quarterly


Magazine, 33(4). Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/using-eportfolios-

support-undergraduate-learning-careerexperiment-academic-advising

Kathryn, Crowe. "Assessment=Improved Teaching and Learning: Using Rubrics to Measure

Information Literacy Skills." ALA. 2010. Web. 2015.

Diller, Karen R., and Sue F. Phelps. "Learning Outcomes, Portfolios, and

Rubrics, Oh My! Authentic Assessment of an Information Literacy Program."

Libraries and the Academy 8.1 (2008): 75-88. Print.

Fister, Barbara. "Fostering Information Literacy Through Faculty Development."

Library Issues 29.4 (2009): n. pag. Print.

Fitzwater, Diana, ed. "Information Literacy Across the Curriculum Action Plan."

DuPage College. Ed. Jan Geesaman and Ken Gray. N.p., Aug. 2003. Web. 25

May 2015. <http://www.cod.edu/library/services/faculty/infolit/

actionplan.pdf>.

"Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education", American Library Association,

February 9, 2015. http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework

Freeman, Edward and Eileen Lynd-Balta. “Developing Information Literacy Skills Early in an

Undergraduate Curriculum.” College Teaching, 58, 109-115.

Graves, Nikki, and Molly Epstein. (2011). “ePortfolio: A tool for constructing a narrative

professional identity.” Business Communication Quarterly, 74(3), 342-346.

“Improving Student's Critical Academic Literacy through Enhancements in Classroom

Pedagogy.” (2010). Retrieved December 19, 2014.

Kahn, Susan. (2014). “E-Portfolios: A look at where we've been, where we are now, and where

we're (possibly) going.” Peer Review, 16.1, http://www.aacu.org/publications-

research/periodicals/e-portfolios-look-where-weve-been-where-we-are-now-and-where-

were

http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/using-eportfolios-support-undergraduate-learning-careerexperiment-academic-advising

http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/using-eportfolios-support-undergraduate-learning-careerexperiment-academic-advising

http://www.aacu.org/publications-research/periodicals/e-portfolios-look-where-weve-been-where-we-are-now-and-where-were




Harris, Benjamin R. "Subversive Infusions: Strategies For The Integration Of Information

Literacy Across The Curriculum." Journal Of Academic Librarianship 2 (2013): 175.

Academic OneFile. Web. 25 Sept. 2014.

Head, Alison. "How Freshman Conduct Course Research Once They Enter College."

Project Information Literacy. N.p., 5 Dec. 2013. Web. 25 May 2015.

<http://projectinfolit.org/images/pdfs/

pil_2013_freshmenstudy_fullreport.pdf>.

- - -. "Project Information Literacy: What Can Be Learned About the

Information-Seeking Behavior of Today's College Students?" ACRL.

Indianapolis, In. Apr. 2013. Print.

Head, Allison J, and John Wihbey. "At Sea in a Deluge of Data." The Chronicle of Higher

Education (2014). Web. 10 Apr. 2015.

Horning, Alice. "Defining Literacy and Illiteracy." The Reading Matrix 7.1 (2007): 69-84. Web. 1

Feb. 2015. <http://www.readingmatrix.com/articles/horning/article4.pdf>.

Iannuzzi, Patricia. "Faculty Development and Information Literacy." LOEX of the

West Conference. Bozeman, Montana. 1998. Print.

"Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education", American Library

Association, September 1, 2006.

http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/informationliteracycompetency

Lorenzo, George, and John Ittelson. "Demonstrating and Assessing Student

Learning with E-Portfolios." Ed. Diana Oblinger. Educause. 3rd ed. N.p.,

Oct. 2005. Web. 11 Feb. 2015.

Maughan, Patricia Davitt. "Assessing Information Literacy among Undergraduates."

College and Research Libraries (2001): 71-84. Print.

http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/informationliteracycompetency


Oakleaf, Megan. "The Information Literacy Instruction Assessment Cycle."

Emerald Insight (2008): 539-59. Print.

- - -. "A Roadmap for Assessing Student Learning Using the New Framework for Information

Literacy for Higher Education." Journal of Academic Librarianship. 40(5). 2014.

Popp, Mary Pagliero. "Assessment of Information Literacy: Lessons from the Higher Education

Assessment Movement." Association of Colleges and Research Libraries (2015). Web.

13 May 2015.

Saunders, L. (2012). Faculty Perspectives on Information Literacy as a Student Learning

Outcomes. The Journal of Academic Leadership, 38(4), 226-236. Retrieved January 11,

2015.

Schwartz, Barry. "What Learning How to Think Really Means." The Chronicle of

Higher Education (2015): n. pag. Print.

Travis, Tiffani. (2011). Education Libraries, 34(2), 19-31

Information Literacy: One Key to Education, (2008), Book by Margit Misangyi Watts (ed.).

Review by Nikola D. Strader. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 128 pp. $29.00

(paperback), ISBN # 978-470-39871-5 - See more at:

http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Resources/Journal/Current-Past-Book-

Reviews/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/399/Information-Literacy-One-Key-to-

Education.aspx#sthash.dFA7qsMO.dpuf

Weiner, Sharon. (2011). Education Libraries, 34(2), 7-14.

Worley, Rebecca B. (2011). “ePortfolios Examined: Tools for exhibit and evaluation.” Business

Communication Quarterly, 74(3), 330-332.

http://meganoakleaf.info/framework.pdf

http://meganoakleaf.info/framework.pdf


Section 12: Appendices

Appendix 1: Original Teams

SACSCOC Leadership Team

Jackie Claunch (Lead), President, Northwest Vista College

Jimmie Bruce, Vice President of Academic Success

Julie Pace, Vice President of College Services

Debi Gaitan, Vice President Student Services

Pat Fontenot, Dean Workforce

Jennifer Comedy-Holmes, Dean Student Services

Denise Tolan, English faculty, QEP Director

Virginia Leggett, Director of College Services

Janie Scott, Assistant to the Vice President of Academic Success

Eliza Hernandez, Director, Institutional Research/Plan/Effectiveness

QEP Steering Team

Team Leader - Denise Tolan, English faculty Recorder - Janie Scott, Assistant to the Vice President of Academic Success Administrative Liaison - Jimmie Bruce, Vice President of Academic Success Eliza Hernandez, Director, Institutional Research/Plan/Effectiveness Gary Bowling, Adjunct History faculty and Senior Coordinator of Student Development Judy McMillan, Faculty; Library chair Tim Jones, Faculty; Fine and Performing Arts and Kinesiology chair Renata Serafin, Director, Public Relations Tyrell Schwab, Coordinator of College Technology Jennifer Alvarez, Workforce Advising Sabrina Carey, English faculty and College Event Coordinator Lynne Dean, Director, Institutional Advancement Jo Garcia, Career and Transfer Services senior coordinator Viviane Marioneaux, Faculty, Workforce Cassie Sluka, Student Representative Ashley Price, Student Representative Deb Rankin, Writing Across the Curriculum lab Linda Reeves, Faculty Librarian

The Steering Team put together the QEP Assessment Team in May of 2014. The Assessment Team was made up of content experts in Academic Areas to help develop the General Rubric for Information Literacy.

QEP Assessment Team

Cindi Bluhm Faculty, Math Jimmie Bruce Vice President Academic Services Sabrina Carey, English faculty and College Event Coordinator Eliza Hernandez, Director, Institutional Research/Plan/Effectiveness Kristin Johnson, Librarian and AIA team lead Judy McMillan, Faculty; Library chair Heather McCreary Faculty, Workforce chair Deb Rankin Coordinator, Writing Across the Curriculum Linda Reeves Faculty, library Denise Tolan Faculty, English; QEP Director

The Student Success Core team was put together in April of 2015 in an effort to engage the energy and enthusiasm

for the ePortfolio.


Student Services QEP Core Team

Debi Gaitan Vice President Student Success

Denise Tolan Faculty, English; QEP Director

Christina Brown Director of Advising Services

Jennifer Comedy-Holmes Dean Student Services

Yolanda Guevara Reyes Recruitment, Senior Coordinator

Gary Bowling Senior Coordinator of Student Development

Jo Garcia Career and Transfer Services senior coordinator

Roque Heredia Degree Completion, Student Success/Advising Team Leader

Assessment in Action Team

Judy McMillan, Faculty, library; library chair

Dr. Eliza Hernandez, Director, Institutional Research/Plan/Effectiveness

Barbara Perez, Faculty, English

Kelly Blanco, Student Leadership / Activities, Student Success / Coordinator

Linda Reeves, Faculty, library

Kristin Johnson, Librarian, Team Lead

Assistance from: Cheri Burnside, Emily Smith, Karen Weiskittel, Nancy Kaida, Norma Velez-Vandrell, Renata

Gibson, and Amanda Gorrell

Appendix 2: Assessment in Action

Data Collected:

Number of information literacy interactions: information literacy session taught by a librarian, online module, survey data, and/or library introductions done by faculty instructor

I. IL skills test (also included in student survey but will be separate item in fall 2015) II. Student performance

o Student retention – course completion o Transfer rates – students continuing on in higher education o Graduation rates – students graduating with an associates

III. Student success – grade of C or better in class IV. Student persistence – semester to semester persistence of students and year to year persistence of

students V. Grade Point Average VI. Banner ID information will be collected. All reports and analyses generated will have all identifying

information removed before distribution. Banner ID information will be collected using StopWatch, which is on an Alamo-owned server or SurveyMonkey, which is a well-established third-party survey software. This will help minimize the risk of potential data breaches.

VII. Grades in class grouped by students who were present during the face-to-face information session and those who were not

The analysis consisted of the following: a. Look at skills test scores b. Look at number of times in F2F instruction c. Look for relationships between a and b above and success, retention, persistence, graduation, and

GPA d. Multivariate analysis of data – not completed to date

The initial demographic results are as follows:


Face-to-face Information Literacy Session Numbers: (Taught by a librarian)

Enrollment Success Rate Completion Rate

C1_FTIC_DC_DESC Times IL Sessions

33658 0.74 0.89 Continuing Student 0

1 2574 0.78 0.92

2 361 0.76 0.91

3 57 0.84 0.93

FTIC Student 0 1780 0.71 0.89

1 265 0.74 0.92

2 54 0.76 0.85

3 9 0.44 1

4 5 1 1

Transfer Student 0 1637 0.76 0.9

1 135 0.9 0.96

2 35 0.83 0.91

Total 40570 0.74 0.9


Multiple Choice Test:

Enrollment Success

Rate Completion Rate

Student Range Student Description

34 0.62 0.82 0-10 Continuing

Transfer 4 1 1

10-20 Continuing 38 0.89 1

New First Time 2 0.5 1

20-30 Continuing 65 0.77 0.91

New First Time 4 1 1

Transfer 4 0.75 1

30-40 Continuing 73 0.84 0.93

New First Time 6 0 0.83

40-50 0 . .

Continuing 121 0.88 0.96

New First Time 17 0.94 0.94

Returning, Former 6 1 1

Transfer 10 1 1

50-60 Continuing 120 0.86 0.94


Returning, Former 9 0.78 1

Transfer 14 1 1

60-70 Continuing 169 0.92 0.98

New First Time 14 0.79 0.93


Transfer 9 1 1

Transient 1 1 1

70-80 0 . .

Continuing 116 0.94 0.94



Transfer 8 1 1

80-90 Continuing 50 0.96 0.96



Transfer 2 1 1

90-100 Continuing 6 1 1

Total 924 0.88 0.95


Appendix 3: Library Information Literacy Program Data


Information Literacy Program Assessment

Semester Standard Total Number of Students Assessed

Spring 2014 ACRL 1 5




Fall 2014 ACRL 1 148






Appendix 4: Additional Resources Informing the QEP

D'Angelo, Barbara J., and Barry M. Maid. "Moving Beyond Definitions: Implementing Information

Literacy Across The Curriculum." Journal Of Academic Librarianship 30.3 (2004): 212-

216. Academic Search Complete. Web. 25 Sept. 2014. This article describes a natural

partnership between the library and Multimedia Writing and Technical Communication

(MWTC) Program at Arizona State University (ASU) East linking writing and information

literacy (IL) across the curriculum.

"Darton State College QEP Making Information Click." Darton State College. Ed. Darton State

College QEP Committee. Darton State College, n.d. Web. 23 Sept. 2014.

<http://www.darton.edu/QEP/>. QEP is information literacy--Making Information Click

(MIC). Introduced in three tiers: Tier One:Introduces information literacy skills at the

foundational level in Dart 1000. Tier Two:Advances and reinforces information literacy

skills in English 1101 and 1102 in the General Education program

Tier Three: Information literacy skills for courses in baccalaureate degree programs are

discipline and program specific to promote success in a chosen field.

Decarie, Christina. "Dead Or Alive: Information Literacy And Dead(?) Celebrities." Business

Communication Quarterly 75.2 (2012): 166-172. Business Source Complete. Web. 25

Sept. 2014. This article describes a business assignment that pushes students to be


creative in their research, to think critically about the information they find, and to provide

solutions and tools for improving their research and critical thinking skills.

Detlor, Brian, et al. "Student Perceptions Of Information Literacy Instruction: The Importance Of

Active Learning." Education For Information 29.2 (2012): 147-161. Academic Search

Complete. Web. 25 Sept. 2014. This study investigates the merits of employing active

learning strategies in the delivery of information literacy instruction

Forsyth Technical Community College QEP Committee. "Information Literacy: Because We

C.A.R.E." Forsyth Tech Education for Life. Forsyth Technical Community College, n.d.

Web. 23 Sept. 2014. The QEP is C.A.R.E - communicate, access, research, evaluate

and consists of mandatory student orientation, course modules, workshops and iskills for

assessment.

Freeman, Edward, and Eileen Lynd-Balta. "Developing Information Literacy Skills Early In An

Undergraduate Curriculum." College Teaching 58.3 (2010): 109-115. Academic Search

Complete. Web. 25 Sept. 2014 The collaborative activity described here, which could

easily be adapted for other disciplines, introduces first-semester freshmen to the

standards of professional scientific writing, the different forms of publication, search

strategies to effectively find information using a relevant database, and plagiarism.

Georgia Highlands College Information Competency Program. Rome: Georgia Highlands

College, n.d. Print. The mission of the Georgia Highlands College (GHC) Quality

Enhancement Plan (QEP) is to create a curriculum-wide culture of information

competency (IC) among students, which will be demonstrated through writing or other

modes of communication (such as oral communication). IC is defined by the college as

the ability to recognize what type of information is needed, locate that information,

evaluate it, and use it effectively.

Giguere, Marlene, and Others And. "Enhancing Information Literacy Skills Across The

Curriculum." (1995): ERIC. Web. 25 Sept. 2014. The model is comprised of two major

components: an inventory and analysis of identified categories of resources, and the

individual research paths designed for each category which outline the process which

one might follow in order to rapidly and efficiently utilize a resource. The process fosters

independent, cooperative, and resource-based learning.

Gunter, Kim, et al. Plan for Integrating Information Literacy into the General Education

Curriculum. Boone: Appalachia State, 2011. Print. Students must take 4 information

literacy modules before graduation and use e-portfolios for student artifacts.

Harris, Benjamin R. "Subversive Infusions: Strategies For The Integration Of Information

Literacy Across The Curriculum." Journal Of Academic Librarianship 2 (2013): 175.

Academic OneFile. Web. 25 Sept. 2014. An analysis of the topics and outcomes


proposed at 58 institutions offers librarians and information professionals an alternative

perspective on the integration of information literacy across the curriculum.

Hignite, Michael, Thomas M. Margavio, and Geanie W. Margavio. "Information Literacy

Assessment: Moving Beyond Computer Literacy." College Student Journal 43.3 (2009):

812-821. ERIC. Web. 25 Sept. 2014 In this study, the authors assess the information

literacy levels of some 600 college students.

"Information Literacy." University on Montevallo Quality Enhancement Plan. N.p., n.d. Web. 23

Sept. 2014. The QEP is Brick by Brick: Building Information Literacy. The initiative will

focus on five educational goals. The goals will be achieved through three-tiered

developmental model that introduces information literacy at the foundation level in

General Education program, advances the skills through designated courses in the

General Education program and in the majors, and focuses on mastery in upper-level

courses within the majors.

Information Literacy Committee. "Expanding Horizons: Using Information in the 21st Century."

Trinity University Information Literacy. Trinity University, n.d. Web. 23 Sept.

2014. “Expanding Horizons” is the QEP and will ensure that students are better

prepared to work conscientiously and ethically with information in their coursework, and

it will provide opportunities for students to apply similar critical thinking and research

skills in their co-curricular lives 4 outcomes – first year students – included faculty

workshops, course development and new positions

Jachens, Darryl, Dr., and Keith Iddings, Dr. Southern Wesleyan University Quality Enhancement

Plan Summary. Central: Southern Wesleyan University, n.d. Print. Students will receive

specific instruction regarding information literacy in three courses, two in the general

education curriculum and one in their academic major. Embedded within each of the

three courses is a writing project that students submit for assessment.

Julien, H., and K. Williamson. "Discourse And Practice In Information Literacy And Information

Seeking: Gaps And Opportunities." Information Research: An International Electronic

Journal 15.1 (2010): ERIC. Web. 25 Sept. 2014. This paper argues for increased

research consideration of the conceptual overlap between information seeking and

information literacy, and for scholarly attention to theory-based empirical research that

has potential value to practitioners.

Lincoln Memorial University Quality Enhancement Plan-Learning is Now Connected. Harrogate:

Lincoln Memorial University, 2009. Print. Course integrated information literacy and

developmental research skills program.

Maitaouthong, Therdsak, Kulthida Tuamsuk, and Yupin Techamanee. "Development Of The

Instructional Model By Integrating Information Literacy In The Class Learning And


Teaching Processes." Education For Information 28.2-4 (2010): 137-150. Academic

Search Complete. Web. 25 Sept. 2014. This study was aimed at developing an

instructional model by integrating information literacy in the instructional process of

general education courses at an undergraduate level

Mathews, Lisa Key, Dr., ed. "Building Success Through Discovery." Univeristy of North Alabama

QEP. U of North Alabama, n.d. Web. 23 Sept. 2014. Undergraduate research, reading,

data, information collection, analysis and presentation skills infused into all academic

programs

Mittermeyer, Diane. "Incoming First Year Undergraduate Students: How Information Literate Are

They?." Education For Information 23.4 (2005): 203-232. Academic Search Complete.

Web. 25 Sept. 2014. This paper presents a summary of a research which took place in

the province of Quebec (Canada). As stated in the title, in essence the research

question was: When entering the first year of undergraduate study, how information

literate are the students? Over 3,000 participants returned a mail questionnaire

representing a response rate of 56.9%. While 12 of the 15 universities participating to

the study were French speaking, 3 of them were English speaking, adding bilingualism

(French/English) to an already distinctive, highly cooperative, research design.

Oakleaf, Megan. "Using Rubrics To Assess Information Literacy: An Examination Of

Methodology And Interrater Reliability." Journal Of The American Society For

Information Science & Technology 60.5 (2009): 969-983. Business Source Complete.

Web. 25 Sept. 2014. This article describes the benefits of a rubric-based approach to

information literacy assessment, identifying a methodology for using rubrics to assess

information literacy skills, and analyzing the inter-rater reliability of information literacy

rubrics in the hands of university librarians, faculty, and students

Polkinghorne, Sarah, and Shauna Wilton. "Research Is A Verb: Exploring A New Information

Literacy--Embedded Undergraduate Research Methods Course." Canadian Journal Of

Information & Library Sciences 34.4 (2010): 457-473. Academic Search Complete. Web.

25 Sept. 2014. This paper introduces a potential solution to concerns about

undergraduates' research, writing, and critical thinking skills by introducing a new

activity-based, discipline-specific research methods course. This paper details the

course's design and explores its effectiveness by examining data collected within an

action research framework, including student-skills résumés and semi-structured post-

course interviews

QEP Committee. "Quality Enhancement Plan." River Parishes Community College. River

Parishes Community College, n.d. Web. 23 Sept. 2014. 5 learning outcomes-measure

using internal and external assessment tools-two groups, freshmen and 30+ hour

students.


Simons, Alexandra. "Librarians And Faculty Working Together At The University Of Houston."

Texas Library Journal 85.4 (2009): 126. Texas Reference Center. Web. 25 Sept. 2014.

The article offers information on the initiatives of the University of Houston (UH) Libraries

to connect with librarians in Texas. It states that the library participates in the Quality

Enhancement Plan (QEP) to help faculty incorporate information literacy skills into

assignments. Moreover, library resources and other information are embedded into

distance learning to allow students and faculty access to resources without going

through the library or university websites.

Smith, Jorden K., et al. "Information Literacy Proficiency: Assessing The Gap In High School

Students' Readiness For Undergraduate Academic Work." Library And Information

Science Research 2 (2013): 88. Academic OneFile. Web. 25 Sept. 2014. This study

examines how high school students' information literacy (IL) skills prepare them for

academic work in the digital age.

Somi, Ntombizodwa G., and Karin de Jager. "The Role Of Academic Libraries In The

Enhancement Of Information Literacy: A Study Of Fort Hare Library." South African

Journal Of Libraries & Information Science 71.3 (2005): 259-267. Academic Search

Complete. Web. 25 Sept. 2014. This paper reports on an investigation into the role of the

University of Fort Hare Library in the enhancement of students' information literacy. A

survey was conducted among both undergraduate and postgraduate students and

results of a total of 246 responses were analysed. Findings show that while there is

some evidence that the University of Fort Hare Library is engaging in information literacy

activities, students still have difficulty in finding, critically evaluating and using

information

Taylor, Arthur. "A Study Of The Information Search Behaviour Of The Millennial Generation."

Information Research: An International Electronic Journal 17.1 (2012): ERIC. Web. 25

Sept. 2014 The longitudinal study discussed here examined the information behavior of

undergraduate college students who were members of the millennial generation

Travis, Tiffini. "From The Classroom To The Boardroom: The Impact Of Information Literacy

Instruction On Workplace Research Skills." Education Libraries 34.2 (2011): 19-31.

ERIC. Web. 25 Sept. 2014. The purpose of this study is to examine various factors that

may contribute to continued and sustained use of information literacy skills beyond the

college experience, and specifically, what competencies students identify as essential

for their work.

Weiner, Sharon. "Information Literacy And The Workforce: A Review." Education Libraries 34.2

(2011): 7-14. ERIC. Web. 25 Sept. 2014. This paper is a review of reports on information

literacy and the workforce. There is a substantial body of literature on information literacy

in K-16 educational settings, but there is much less literature on implications for the

workplace and job-related lifelong learning. The topical categories of the reports are: the


importance of information literacy for the workforce; how information literacy differs in

work and educational settings; and barriers to information literacy in the workplace. The

paper concludes with recommendations for practice and for further research.

Appendix 5: Budget Narrative orthwest Vista College’s commitment to a successful QEP is illustrated in the committed

budget allocated for this venture. In 2014, well before the QEP’s official launch date of fall

2016, the College designated a specific QEP budget to allow for a meaningful awareness

campaign for the QEP and the implementation of a pilot. A dedicated budget was also

designated for the QEP in 2015.

NVC’s Cabinet identified the QEP as a college priority during strategic planning and, as such,

during the annual budget development process dedicated operating funds for the five years of

the QEP (FYs 2016-2021) as well as for the pilot years. The detailed budget narrative to follow

describes the College’s budget plan for the years 2016-2021.

Personnel: The cost for payrolled personnel is set at $472,390 for the 5 year cycle. Although personnel will

be needed to manage the scope of the QEP, a higher dollar amount will be spent on the College

team members who will help make the QEP a successful program for our students. Faculty and

staff, both full and part time, will be asked to participate in rubric development, pre and post-test

development, module creation, train the trainer programs and the Information Literacy Academy

and will be compensated for additional workloads.

Director

To successfully organize and implement the QEP, a full-time QEP director will be given 100%

release time from teaching duties for the full five years of the QEP to coordinate and manage

the project. The release time will allow the director to schedule, plan and facilitate meetings with

the QEP Steering Team and the QEP assessment team, keep faculty, staff and administrators

updated on QEP progress, oversee collection of data, ensure campus wide engagement in the

project, and coordinate efforts to successfully bring community partners into the QEP process.

The QEP director will work a 12 month schedule so all data can be reviewed in the summer and

faculty and staff action plans developed based on the review of the assessment cycle.

The cost to the College of the release time will be incurred as a cost of hiring an adjunct

instructor to cover the 5 classes the director will not teach. Total faculty release time is based on

an average adjunct pay range of $2522 per course for five courses per year for five years. The

cost of the QEP director could also be expressed by calculating the average salary of the faculty

member for the five years equaling approximately seventy-two thousand dollars ($72,000) for a

12-month period of time.

Information Literacy Librarian

In collaboration with the library and departmental faculty, this librarian will be responsible for

designing, teaching and promoting the information literacy curriculum within an outcomes

assessment and skills-based model. The librarian will work in a team with other librarians

N


implementing a multi-faceted instruction program. The cost of this position will be shared by the

library and absorbed as a permanent position by the library in 2021.

Specific responsibilities will also include:

Planning, implementing, marketing, and evaluating the College’s QEP in

coordination with the QEP director;

Serving as the contact person and faculty liaison for the QEP

Collaborating with others and working individually to produce a variety of

informational and instructional materials;

Developing new instructional applications of technology;

Working collegially with classroom faculty to integrate information literacy

competencies into the curriculum by integrating resource-based learning

experiences;

Reviewing curriculum and reaching out to teaching faculty to expand the

instruction program;

Incorporating active learning into both face-to-face and online tutorials;

Helping to identify appropriate learning outcomes and assessment tools;

Seeking opportunities to partner with faculty to integrate information literacy

across the College

Statistical Research Specialist

Job Description - Develops data extractions, reports and analyses supporting students, and/or

other internal College or District customers. This half-time position will help facilitate the

collection of data stemming from the assessment process as well as collect and compare pre

and post-test numbers.

Administrative Services Specialist

Job Description - Leads general administrative support for department leader(s), staff, students

and/or visitors. This full time position will assist the director with office duties and work with

maintaining the SharePoint site for faculty, staff, and administrators. The administrative services

specialist will also be responsible for managing the stipends for QEP liaisons and other QEP

team work.

Professional development A total of $130,000 has been allocated for professional development. The expenses support

faculty and staff attending the SACSCOC annual Summer Institute, the SACSCOC Annual

Meeting, and other conferences that will help make our QEP a dynamic and growing venture.

Other professional development expenses include possible use of consultants over the years,

books and materials for training purposes, and speakers to help keep our College current on

trends in Information Literacy topics.

Assessment Materials A total of $49,000 is allocated for either an external testing system (i.e. SAILS) or for the

development and monitoring of a College developed skills based test. Most external Information

Literacy skill services are geared toward university students. Kristin Johnson, one of our

librarians with a background in Institutional Research, has developed a test that can be used as


a pre and post-test. The test is targeted to our student base and management of the data

collection could be tailored to our needs. The budget items here are based on an equivocation

as to which direction our College will take.

Development Materials A total of $15,000 has been devoted to the creation of interactive Information Literacy modules

for the targeted courses featuring enhanced Information Literacy training (EDUC/SDEV,

ENGL1301, HIST1301, BIOL1308, STATS, and ARTS1301.

Marketing A total of $28,500 has been designated for ongoing marketing of the QEP. Expenses

include giveaways for students, faculty, staff and constituents to promote group cohesion

and an awareness of the QEP. Visual marketing will occur through informational posters

and banners placed across campus.

QEP Support A total of $12,500 is allocated for supplies and materials for the QEP office. The office

will function as a self-sustaining entity during the five-year QEP process.

Institutional Support not charged to the QEP The Vice Presidents of Academic Services, Student Services, and College Services will play an

integral role in helping facilitate this College-wide QEP initiative.

The Vice President of Academic Services (VPAS) is the College executive in charge of the

QEP. The former VPAA, Dr. Jimmie Bruce, attended all of the QEP Steering team meetings and

presents on the QEP with the Director whenever called to do so. The expectation is the new

VPAS will continue in this role.

The Vice President of Student Success (VPSS), Debi Gaitan, serves on the QEP Student

Success Core team along with the Director. Her interest in the QEP ensures that the ePortfolio

concept within the QEP will be successful.

The Vice President of College Success (VPCS), Erin Sherman is enthusiastic about the data

collection process of the QEP and providing budget development support. Her experience and

energy will be a guiding force.

The College Public Relations department has provided graphics for the QEP as well as helped

with design for promotional materials.

Other areas of the college are very invested with the success of the QEP, including the Dean of

Workforce and the Dean of Student Services. Although impossible to adequately analyze the

cost-benefit to the QEP from the services of our College executives, they are a necessary and

essential part of the equation.


Appendix 6 – General Assessment Rubric

Information Literacy General Outcomes. Information Literacy General Outcomes.

Students will be able to Find, ethically Use, Synthesize, and Evaluate information from various print and electronic sources. Rate each student for each outcome as N/A (0 points), Novice (1 point), Developing (2 points) or Proficient (3 points). Please make note of the Outcomes stated in the original assignment. You may write a number (3, 2, 1, 0) in the rated box for each outcome. For outcomes that don’t apply to a specific project, please select N/A.

Outcomes

Was this Outcome addressed in the

assignment instructions?

(1) Novice (2) Developing (3) Proficient

Finds reliable and relevant sources that are appropriate

to the topic.

Fully Partially Not Clear Not at all

Information sources are inappropriate, or poor quality, and/or lack relevance

Sources do not relate to concepts or topic Student identified few or no relevant

information sources

Sources accessed are marginal Source material appears unorganized and

unrelated to topic or thesis Student found a limited number or limited variety of

relevant sources

Student found a variety of information sources that directly fill the information need

Sources accessed are relevant and fairly comprehensive

Source material relates to thesis and topic

Uses information ethically by using appropriate

citation/documentation systems


Student does not attribute sources Student does not clearly distinguish between

common knowledge, source information, and/or own analysis

Student plagiarizes (intentionally or unintentionally)

Student uses source material as indirect quotes without adequate paraphrasing

Student provides course citation/acknowledgement but fails to follow style conventions

Student inconsistently distinguishes between common knowledge, source information, and/or own analysis

Student attempts to paraphrase or summarize cited material but poorly worded/rephrased

Student inconsistently attempts to quote, paraphrase or summarize

Student cites sources following style conventions with some minor errors

Student consistently distinguishes between common knowledge, source information, and/or own analysis

Student accurately quotes, paraphrases or summarizes

Shows ability to synthesize credible resources


Student does not organize content in a way that supports the purpose of the product

Outside sources of information are not used or are used incorrectly.

Overuse of direct quotes without explanations Student misrepresents other positions on the

topic, or fails to identify or acknowledge other views.

Student uses information from other sources, but the information is fragmented and not synthesized

Student attempts to organize content but does so inadequately

Student synthesizes information from other sources, but does not blend it well with own ideas

Limited, but correct use of outside information sources in interpretations

Limited, but appropriate use of direct quotes Inadequately represents other positions and /or

fails to acknowledge some major perspectives Engages with sources in a simple manner tending

toward summary

Content organization supports the purpose/format of the product

Outside information sources thoroughly integrated, including information that supports and refute interpretations

Correct explanations with appropriate use of direct quotes

Student integrates sources with each other and with one’s argument

Student appropriately represents major positions on the topic

Evaluates information by identifying bias, authority, relevancy and credibility


Student does not provide analysis of information of sources

Student does not acknowledge or contextualize assumptions related to information and sources

Labels all sources of information as equally relevant and credible or bases information selection solely on personal preference or convenience.

Provides superficial analysis of information or sources

Acknowledges and/or contextualizes some assumptions related to information and sources

Applies criteria used to evaluate a variety of information sources in order to compare quality and identify appropriate sources.

Appropriately analyzes information or sources by applying relevant criteria

Questions assumptions related to information and sources

Sources accessed are appropriate and relevant but not comprehensive

Critically evaluates information in order to judge quality, relevance, or perspective. Integrates evaluative criteria when using information.


Appendix 7 – Assessment Feedback

Departmental Assessment Feedback: (After viewing results of Information Literacy

Assessment)

Rubric Results

Information

Literacy

Student

Learning

Outcomes

Department

al Objective

(Did your

rubric assess

what you

wanted to

know?)

Assessment

Criteria &

Evaluation

Methods

(How, if at all,

will you

change the

rubric?)

Assessment

Results

(Which SLO

results

caused

concern?)

Use of

Results

(Modificatio

ns,

Improvemen

ts,

Accomplish

ments)

Action

(How are you

going to

implement

any needed

changes?)

SLO 1

SLO 2

SLO 3

SLO 4


Appendix 8 – QEP Steering Team Minutes

NVC QEP Steering Team: Minutes

April 3, 2014

In Attendance: Mary Dixson, Janie Scott, Renata Serafin, Lynne Dean, Deb Rankin, Jo Garcia,

Cassi Sluka, Gary Bowling, Judy McMillan, Eliza Hernandez, Denise Tolan

Absent: Tim Jones, Tyrell Schwab, Jimmie Bruce

1. Welcome new team members:

We did! Our new team members are Cassie Sluka (student intern), Jo Garcia

(College and Career services). Joining our team will also be Viviane M. and Jennifer

Alvarez.

Mary Dixson is leaving our fold and we said goodbye to her. Janie agreed to take

Mary’s place as recorder of the minutes.

2. Review new survey results from stakeholders:

We had incredible results from our survey! Over 85 Stakeholders responded.

Lynne suggested that we have our business partners and other stakeholders

participate in the assessment process. We thought that would be a great idea.

A suggestion was made to take quotes from the surveys and ask Renata to help

Denise put together an executive summary of the survey results. This could then be

placed on our QEP webpage and on FB.

We also need to send a thank you to all survey participants. Janie and Jimmie will

help Denise.

3. Look over comments from Faculty/Staff groups:

Eliza and Lynne were going to work on picking Student Survey winners for the

drawing.

Renata reminded us to take any survey promotions down if they are in our areas.

4. Tighten up QEP goal statement in light of survey results and our brilliant

conversations:

I am sending the latest copy of our goal out with these notes. Please make

comments and send back.

5. Discuss the Timeline and adjust as needed:

We looked over the timeline. Here are some roles that are needed and names, if

any, of volunteers. If you would like to be involved in a specific area, please let me

know. We can add categories as well (For example – career for Jo!):


1. Team Lead – Call meetings, facilitate process, set agendas, ensure task is accomplished in timeline Denise

2. Recorder – Ensure roll is taken, minutes are recorded, and agendas are available Janie 3. Researcher – Finds and analyzes information and best practices for team Judy McMillian 4. Communication – create a place for gathering student and other data, website preparation 5. Assessment – gathers data to justify choice and understands extent to which topic is

assessable Deb and Judy 6. Writer/Editor – drafts QEP submission document Denise 7. Content Experts – Will be knowledgeable and learn more about QEP topic 8. Administrative Liaison – communicates with the E-team and SACS Steering Team

6. See if Tyrell has any new information on ePortfolios:

Denise will talk to Tyrell about Symplicity

Denise will set up a meeting with Tom Cleary and Tyrell to discuss any district

ePortfolio visions

Denise will ask Tom Cleary for a district liaison for the ePortfolio project

7. Mary – look over faculty CCSSE questions:

Did not discuss

8. Plan for Phase II

Held until meeting after Mark Smith’s visit

Miscellaneous:

Add Information Literacy as an outcome to the ePortfolio content

Denise – look at Weatherford College to see if their QEP matches Tarleton

State’s

Find an exciting name we can use with FUSE

Question for Mark Smith – How do other colleges roll out QEP info in EDUC

courses?

Review budget needs with Jimmie and Eteam

Attachments:

QEP Goal

Survey Results

one of the alamo...

Documents