Presentation California Library Association annual conference on 11/4/12 in San Jose, CA. Panel speakers: Mary McMillan, Katherine Bevcar, Beth Wren-Estes, Lesley Farmer

1. Information Literacy in Zero Gravity:
Online Learning in Academic Libraries
Mary McMillan, Marymount College
Katherine Becvar, College of San Mateo
Beth Wrenn-Estes, San Jose State University, SLIS
Lesley Farmer, CSU Long Beach

2. WELCOME!

3. Creating Online Video Tutorials for
Community College Students
Katherine Becvar
Adjunct Reference Librarian
College of San Mateo

4. Some good ideas I encountered along
the way
• Recycle content to reduce the workload
• Present concepts, not interfaces
• Evaluate the needs of YOUR students /
users – what are the gaps?
• Sequence vs. Standalone

5. Recycle (content) = Reduce (work)
Working with existing content
versus
Creating your own tutorials from scratch
“Reinventing the Wheel” by flicker user conskeptical

6. Recycle (content) = Reduce (work)
CSM Worldcat Tutorials CSM CLIP Tutorials
(made from scratch) (recycled & rebranded)
>10-15 hours per tutorial (plus captions!) CLIP = Collaborative Library Instruction Project
<6 hours to edit and caption each one
Good content!
Not very interesting 

7. Present concepts, not interfaces
Murphy’s Law of Video Tutorials :
“As soon as you post your how-to tutorial,
they will change the interface.”
“Our Computers” by flickr user aranarth

8. Present concepts, not interfaces
How-to / interface tutorials should be quick-and-dirty
 (don’t spend too much time on them)
Conceptual tutorials teaching higher-order skills should be
where you spend your time

9. Evaluating the needs of YOUR
students / users
•Surveys (not so good) =
•they don’t know what they don’t know
•Observations and/or Reference Questions (better) =
•identifying the gaps
At CSM:
Lots of reference questions about in-text citations =
emphasized that topic in the tutorials

10. Sequence vs. Standalone
How to give a sense of sequence, while at the same
time allow each tutorial to stand alone?
“Jump sequence” by flickr user tricky “Hiking, Tromoso” by flickr user GuideGunnar

11. Sequence vs. Standalone
At CSM:
YouTube Playlist & a LibGuide

12. Taking Information Literacy Weightless:
Creating Engagement Through Active
Course Design
Mary McMillan
Marymount College, Rancho Palos Verdes, CA
Director of Library Services
Assistant Professor, Information Literacy
mmcmillan@marymountpv.edu

13. Online Course Design Case Study:
Marymount College – ID230 Information Literacy
Why ID230 Online?
College “dipping toes” into
distance education
Librarian experience with online
Capstone learning / technology
Other Courses
ID230: Info Literacy Belief that IL could be taught
effectively online
ENG112: English Composition
Compensation to develop &
ID117: Freshman Seminar teach online version of
required course

14. ADDIE
Instructional Design Model
Analyze
Implement Evaluate Design
Develop

15. Step 1: We Analyzed
What are the project parameters?
• Platform: Desire2Learn (campus LMS)
• 8-week, fully online course, 1-unit
• Stand-alone to be taught by multiple librarian instructors
Who are our learners?
• Undergraduates with little to no online learning experience
• Required for Liberal Arts degree
• Accustomed to easy access to personal support
What are our learning objectives?
• SLO1: Apply an understanding of how information is produced and disseminated in
order to select appropriate sources for information need
• SLO2: Construct and implement effectively-designed search strategies
• SLO3: Analyze information sources in order to determine credibility with regard to
• authority, objectivity and timeliness

16. Step 2: We Designed
A unifying architecture:
Ddd
A consistent “storyboard”:
 Identified standard structure of modules, arranged in a logical sequence
 Determined weekly content as specified by learning objectives
 Planned learning activities and a detailed assessment plan
 Drafted a course syllabus

17. Step 3: We Developed
Engagement through active learning
Prepared online Created learning objects
content and for skill practice.
assembled learning Integrated educational
materials resources from shared
repositories.
(e.g.MERLOT).
Paid attention to cognitive
load by chunking material Developed discussion
and exercises questions and detailed
assignment instructions
Incorporated multimedia,
info-graphics, and tutorials

18. Step 4: We Implemented

19. Continuously: We Evaluate
• Attainment of student learning outcomes as
demonstrated through assessment measures
• Feedback received from student evaluations
• Course structure, content, materials and activities
AND FROM THESE…
• Revise learning activities or content where needed
• Adjust instructional strategies
• Re-evaluate…

20. Lessons Learned
Try It Avoid It
Establishing and following course objectives and Designing it as you go
assessment measurements
Chunking content / Keeping text to a minimum Overusing text causing need for screen scrolling
Using smart graphics & visual media Using images that are purely decorative
Integrating active learning objects Overusing Powerpoints and online readings
Paying close attention to course navigation Over-depending on navigation in LMS
Writing clear directions and establishing patterns Assuming students will know what to do
of course activity
Responding to students promptly Neglecting to set clear expectations for response
timeframes
Grading discussions Expecting students to participate in optional
discussions
Developing a personal presence in the course Letting the class “teach itself”
Preparing for a significant time commitment Assuming teaching will be less work because its
online

21. Constant Attention -
Best Practices for Faculty in Online
Distance Learning Programs
Beth Wrenn-Estes, MLIS
San Jose State University
Instructor, School of Library and Information Science
bwestes@mac.com,
https://slisapps.sjsu.edu/facultypages/view.php?fac=wrenn_estesb

23. Sloan-C Quality Scorecard
The Sloan Consortium (Sloan-C) is a consortium of institutions and individuals committed to quality online learning.
The Sloan-C Quality Scorecard for the Administration of Online Education Programs is a tool for assessing and
measuring the quality of online programs. Administrators of online programs can use this scorecard to evaluate
program strengths and weaknesses.
The scorecard lists 70 specific indicators, which are grouped into the following nine areas of quality:
Institutional Support
Technology Support
Course Development and Instructional Design
Course Structure
Teaching and Learning
Social and Student Engagement
Faculty Support
Student Support
Evaluation and Assessment
The School of Library and Information Science uses this tool to evaluate and continuously improve the quality of
our program. In the summer of 2012, SLIS administrators completed the first overall review of the program using
the scorecard.
They wrote the rationale and provided evidence to support the scores for each of the 70 quality indicators.
The SLIS initial scorecard total was 196, a number that is categorized in the "exemplary" range by Sloan-C.

24. COURSE DEVELOPMENT AND INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN
 (11) Guidelines regarding minimum standards are used for course development, design, and delivery of online instruction
(such as course syllabus elements, course materials, assessment strategies, faculty feedback).
 (12) Technology is used as a tool to achieve learning outcomes in delivering course content.
 (13) Instructional materials, course syllabus, and learning outcomes are reviewed periodically to ensure they meet
program standards.
 (14) Courses are designed so that students develop the necessary knowledge and skills to meet learning objectives at
the course and program level. These may include engagement via analysis, synthesis and evaluation.
 (15) Learning objectives describe outcomes that are measurable.
 (16) Selected assessments measure the course learning objectives and are appropriate for an online learning
environment.
 (17) Student-centered instruction is considered during the course-development process.
 (18) There is consistency in course development for student retention and quality.
 (19) Course design promotes both faculty and student engagement.
 (20) Current and emerging technologies are evaluated and recommended for online teaching and learning.
 (21) Instructional design is provided for creation of effective pedagogy for both synchronous and asynchronous class
sessions.
 (22) Curriculum development is a core responsibility for faculty (i.e., faculty should be involved in either the development
or the decision making for the online curriculum choices).

25. PEER AND STUDENT
EVALUATION
 Peer Evaluation
Faculty evaluation performed by one
of the full-time faculty
 Student Evaluation
SOTES (Student Opinion of
Teaching Effectiveness)

27. BRINGING IT ALL TOGETHER
 Administrators review Sloan Scorecard on regular basis –
make recommendations – use for Strategic Planning
 Director looks for patterns in student comments and data
(SOTES). Looking at instructor strengths and weaknesses –
makes recommendations
 Administrators and faculty alike work on strategic plan and
review data from scorecard, SOTE trends and
faculty/student surveys to improve course design and best
practices in general
 Recommendations are transformed into needed training for
faculty and students

28. On-going training
 All new faculty take an course that introduces them to SLIS online
pedagogy, exemplary course design and technology and systems
 SLIS hosts a Faculty Institute each May where part time and full
time faculty come together for training and networking
 Constant training support through:
1) T3 Training Series (through our web conferencing
tool Collaborate)
2) YouTube Videos on various subjects (visit
YouTube.com/sjsu.slis)
3) Colloquia (visit http://slisweb.sjsu.edu/about-slis/
colloquia/Spring%202012)
4) Trained staff available to faculty and students

29. Online Professional Development:
Grounding eLearning For
Practitioners
Dr. Lesley Farmer
California State University, Long Beach
Librarianship Program Coordinator
Lesley.Farmer@csulb.edu

30. Online PD Aspects
 Self-pacing/locus of control
 Hands-on experimenting
 Practical transfer of learning
 Lesson sandbox
 Blogging reflection and commenting
 Cheerleaders

31. CSLA’s 23
Things
As a Web
tutorial set of
9 modules –
and structure
for member-
developed
added
tutorials

35. PD Aspects
 Self-pacing/locus of control
 Hands-on experimenting
 Practical transfer of learning
 Lesson sandbox
 Blogging reflection and commenting
 Cheerleaders

36. Strategies for Optimizing PD…
 Map tech competences among library staff
 Develop expertise directory
 Create a clearinghouse of free PD

37. Learn More
http://tinyurl.com/InfoLitZeroG