Assessment in Action

University of Wisconsin-Green Bay: Project Description

Page 1


Primary Outcome Examined (select one or more)

Student Learning: Assignment

Student Learning: Course

(No) Student Learning: Major

(No) Student Learning: Degree

(No) Student Engagement

(No) Student Success

(No) Academic Intimacy/Rapport

(No) Enrollment

(No) Retention

(No) Completion

(No) Graduation

(No) Articulation

(No) Graduates' Career Success

(No) Testing (e.g., GRE, MCAT, LSAT, CAAP, CLA, MAPP)

(No) Other (please describe)

Primary Library Factor Examined (select one or more)


(No) Instruction: Games

Instruction: One Shot

(No) Instruction: Course Embedded

(No) Instruction: Self-Paced Tutorials

(No) Reference

(No) Educational Role (other than reference or instruction)

(No) Space, Physical

(No) Discovery (library resources integrated in institutional web and other information portals)

(No) Discovery (library resource guides)

(No) Discovery (from preferred user starting points)

(No) Collections (quality, depth, diversity, format or currency)

(No) Personnel (number and quality)

(No) Other (please describe)

Student Population (select one or more)


(No) Graduate

(No) Incoming

(No) Graduating

(No) Pre-College/Developmental/Basic Skills

(No) Other (please describe)

Discipline (select one or more)



Social Sciences

(No) Natural Sciences (i.e., space, earth, life, chemistry or physics)

(No) Formal Sciences (i.e., computer science, logic, mathematics, statistics or systems science)

Professions/Applied Sciences

(No) English Composition

(No) General Education

(No) Information Literacy Credit Course

(No) Other (please describe)

AiA Team Members (select one or more)

Assessment Office

Institutional Research

Teaching Faculty

(No) Writing Center

(No) Information/Academic Technology

(No) Student Affairs

(No) Campus Administrator

Library Administrator

Other Librarian

(No) Other (please describe)

Page 2


Methods and Tools (select one or more)

(No) Survey

(No) Interviews

(No) Focus Group(s)

(No) Observation

Pre/Post Test


(No) Other (please describe)

Direct Data Type (select one or more)

(No) Student Portfolio

Research Paper/Project

(No) Class Assignment (other than research paper/project)

(No) Other (please describe)

Indirect Data Type (select one or more)

(No) Test Scores

(No) GPA

(No) Degree Completion Rate

(No) Retention Rate

(No) Other (please describe)

Page 3

Executive Summary (150 words open)

  • How does the project align with your institution’s priorities and needs?
  • Why did you choose the outcome and library factor as areas to examine?
  • Why was the team composition appropriate?

  1. Although information literacy has not been adopted by the institution as a priority and need, the First Year Seminar classes (FYS) assessed by this project have made it an emphasis. Assessing the courses that emphasize information literacy as a learned outcome strengthens the library's key role in teaching these important competencies and possibly could make the case for information literacy becoming an institutional priority. The outcome and library factor were chosen due to instruction and information literacy never having been formally assessed. This project was designed as a critical look into library instruction and tried to determine what effect information literacy instruction has on student learning and did the type of instructional session given have a greater or lesser effect? We also attempted to determine if the information literacy skills taught during instructional sessions demonstrated and manifested in student coursework. The AIA assessment team's composition was appropriate and included various departments but only asked for minimal participation from these outside players.

  • What are the significant contributions of your project?
  • What was learned about assessing the library’s impact on student learning and success?
  • What was learned about creating or contributing to a culture of assessment on campus?
  • What, if any, are the significant findings of your project?

  1. As our first attempt at "formal" information literacy assessment, this project proved invaluable as a learning experience and in providing baseline data about the strengths and/or short comings of library instruction. We learned that there are many key information literacy concepts that students come "preloaded" with and should only be addressed in information literacy sessions in order to refresh students' understanding. Conversely, it was also learned that there are many information literacy concepts that remain unlearned despite library instruction and that library instruction sessions should dedicate a greater amount of time to these concepts. While the library has carried out many internal assessment projects, it has never really conducted many public facing assessment projects. Since library instruction and information literacy is the "face" of the library on campus and is how faculty members and students encounter and learn of library services and engage with librarians, this project made library assessment visible to the campus and introduced our presence as a key contributor to student learning and student assessment.

  • What will you change as a result of what you learned (– e.g., institutional activities, library functions or practices, personal/professional practice, other)?
  • How does this project contribute to current, past, or future assessment activities on your campus?

  1. UW-GB has greatly benefited from our involvement in AIA and this project. Prior to this assessment, library instruction had largely been fixed and had never been improved upon with formal assessment. This project and the resulting data will be instrumental to UW-GB's new information literacy librarian and will be used in the development and design of library instructional sessions. UW-GB has been investigating the idea of a flipped classroom model of instruction and this assessment provide us with the data to show that a new instruction model might benefit student learning. Plus, implementing new flipped classroom activities and rebooting this assessment should provide UW-GB with an excellent comparison of library instructional design and the effect of the implemented changes. Aside from rebooting the project in 2014-15, information literacy assessment is now included within the instruction librarian duties and this position will be an active participate on the library assessment committee.

Please list any articles published, presentations given, URL of project website, and team leader contact details.

  1. Conference Presentation:

    Council of University of Wisconsin Libraries (CUWL) Summer Conference:

    Assessment in Action Initiative [AiA]: The Wisconsin Connection:
    Linda Kopecky – UW-Milwaukee, Robin Miller – UW-Eau Claire, Mitchell Scott – UW-Green Bay
    Part of ACRL's Value of Academic Libraries initiative, AiA is a three year program. Four institutional teams from Wisconsin, Alverno College and three UW campuses, Eau Claire, Green Bay and Milwaukee, were among the 75 chosen to be first year participants. Panelists will discuss how the AIA blended learning, peer-to-peer collegial relationships, and action learning projects will be implemented on their campuses.

Starting Somewhere: UW-Green Bay’s first information literacy assessment

As first time assessors, UW-Green Bay set out to investigate the effect that information literacy instruction has on student learning and does the type of instructional session have a greater or lesser effect on student learning. This study provided UWGB with useful and applicable data, but more importantly it provided the library with its first foray into formal information literacy assessment and taught us many lessons about the assessment process.