2002-2003 Curriculum Committee
and Library Liaisons Kate Clark, Irvine Valley College, Chair
Dan Crump, American River College
Rita Ramirez Dean-Land, College of the Desert
Yula Flournoy, Mt. San Jacinto College
Virginia McKee-Leone, Riverside College
Michelle Pilati, Rio Hondo College
Glenn Yoshida, Los Angeles Southwest College
Barbara Hollowell, Vice-President of Instruction,
Coastline Community College
2001-2002 Curriculum Committee
and Library Liaisons
Barbara Sawyer, Diablo Valley College, Chair
Dan Crump, American River College
Carmen Guerrero, Oxnard College
Elton Hall, Moorpark College
Andy Kivel, Diablo Valley College
Sue Shattuck, Diablo Valley College
Glenn Yoshida, Los Angeles Southwest College
In 1996, the California Community
College Board of Governors (BOG) issued a policy
statement identifying information competency as
a priority. Recognizing information competency
as an academic and professional matter, in May
1999 the Chancellor delegated the issue of information
competency as a graduation requirement to the
Academic Senate for its recommendations.
Meanwhile, in response to a Fall 1996 resolution,
the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges
issued a paper entitled Information Competency
in the California Community Colleges, which defined
information competency, identified its key components,
and suggested a variety of methods for implementation.
What follows is not a "best
practices" paper but rather a review of information
competency in various stages of implementation
within the curriculum of six colleges whose faculty
were generous in sharing their preliminary work
now in progress. Provided herein is a description
of the processes that these colleges have taken
to develop and implement information competency
requirements, as well as an overview of the challenges
that remain for future efforts--at these colleges
and for others across the state. The document
offers overarching concluding statements and makes
recommendations for local senates
INTRODUCTION
National Context
At no time in history has so much data from so
many diverse sources been available at the click
of a mouse or a turn of a page. Transfer institutions
and employers all expect individuals to be comfortable
with technology and to be able to use it to locate,
evaluate, and process information in a wide variety
of formats. Whether students complete a baccalaureate
degree, secure an occupational certificate, or
merely upgrade their skills or information base,
ultimately their employers will require them to
navigate and manage information successfully by
manipulating databases, spreadsheets, manuals,
or web pages that create the essential links to
information. In a recent survey, University of
Washington graduates after five and ten years
revealed that information use was the second most
important ability in their current primary activity.
The Commission on Higher Education
of the Middle States Association of Schools &
Colleges goes on to note that "Information
literacy … transcends specific disciplines
and professional careers" as a "subset
of critical thinking skills" citizens must
have to "know when they have an information
need and to access, evaluate (determine usefulness
of, summarize, synthesize, and draw conclusions
from), and effectively use information for both
content literacy in the curriculum and lifelong
learning." Ernest Boyer identifies information
as
our most precious resource.
In such a world, education should empower everyone,
not the few. But for information to become knowledge,
and ultimately, one hopes, wisdom, it must be
organized. And, in this new climate, the public
interest challenge, beyond access and equity
is, I believe the sorting and selection. The
challenge of educators is to help students make
sense of a world described by some as 'information
overload."
These abilities or competencies
to access and evaluate information are generally
referred to as "information competencies,"
which may presuppose a level of computer literacy
and comfort. Yet as seen in publications from
the Academic Senates for California Community
Colleges and of the California State Universities,
as well as material issued by the American Association
of Research Librarians, information competency
is clearly more complex than mere use of machinery
and should not be narrowly construed as computer
literacy or familiarity with software applications,
however integral those competencies may be to
locating and retrieving information in many fields.
As Jeremy Shapiro and Shelley K. Hughes note,
Information and computer
literacy, in the conventional sense, are functionally
valuable technical skills. But information literacy
should in fact be conceived more broadly as
a new liberal art that extends from knowing
how to use computers and access information
to critical reflection on the nature of information
itself, its technical infrastructure, and its
social, cultural and even philosophical context
and impact.
Local Implementation
Today, as faculty are locally defining and implementing
an information competency requirement, they are
aided by the 1998 paper adopted by the Academic
Senate for California Community Colleges, Information
Competency in the California Community Colleges.
That document defines information competency as
the ability to find, evaluate,
use, and communicate information in all its
various formats. It combines aspects of library
literacy, research methods and technological
literacy. Information competency includes consideration
of the ethical and legal implications of information
and requires the application of both critical
thinking and communication skills.
Similarly, the Academic Senate
of the California State Universities notes
that information competence
is the ability to find, evaluate, use, and
communicate information in all of its various
formats, including the plethora of electronic
communications. In other words, information
competence is the fusion or integration of
library literacy, ethics, critical thinking,
and communication skills.
Thus it is obviously incumbent
upon our colleges to prepare our students for
the information realities of the workplace and
the information challenges they will meet in upper
division work when they transfer.
Recognizing the importance of
these competencies, then, academic senates at
some of the CSU campuses have already added information
competency as a graduation requirement. Certainly
on-going development of curriculum and graduation
requirements are essential functions assigned
to the academic senates under Title 5 53200; we
view the continual upgrading and updating of our
curriculum and the periodic review of graduation
requirements as an on-going expression of our
commitment to our students' education. The Board
of Governors of the California Community Colleges
recently considered adopting an information requirement
for our community college students. While the
Department of Finance has intervened thus forestalling
the Board's intent, the Academic Senate for California
Community Colleges is fully committed to information
competency, as evidenced in adopted in resolutions
and the on-going efforts of colleges in addition
to the six highlighted here. Irrespective of delays
in Board of Governors' actions, local academic
senates and local governing boards should continue
to explore and to adopt local graduation requirements
in information competency that reflect what our
students should carry forth as they matriculate
to four-year universities or to the workplace.
(For a historical perspective on the development
of this competency requirement, please see Appendices
A and B.)
How to implement such an information
requirement now becomes our challenge. The earliest
discussions raised concerns among some faculty
and administrations about simply adding yet another
course--an onerous task for students enrolled
in some high-unit majors such as nursing or engineering.
As an alternative to simply adding a stand-alone
course, or even another course within a major
program, to meet the information competency requirement,
faculty have also proposed infusing the components
of an information competency requirement in many
courses throughout the curriculum; to do so, they
identify courses already engaged in the teaching
of these intellectual skills and contextualize
these elements throughout the curriculum, from
basic skills courses to vocational and transfer
courses. Thus, the requirement does not require
a new course or the hiring of new faculty, though
some campuses may elect to do so. It is also possible
to combine approaches, giving students choices
regarding how to meet this requirement. In all
instances, however, local campuses determine how
best this requirement can be matched to their
particular needs and curriculum.
Taking Inventory
In beginning to explore how to implement this
new requirement, local senates will therefore
want to inventory three elements: (1) what is
currently being done academically on their campuses
and how the teaching of these competencies may
already be embedded or implicit in existing courses;
(2) what skills and competencies students currently
possess; and (3) what correlative skills and interests
faculty currently have.
Faculty will want to consider
what instruction is already available on their
campuses. Community college library faculty throughout
the state have included library skills and research
instruction in their programs for many years,
and many composition faculty routinely teach and
reinforce these competencies in their classes.
Yet information competency is a matter to be explored
across the curriculum, and curricular decisions
and obligations as significant as these should
be shared by all faculty in all disciplines. What
such a graduation requirement does demand--and
what this document emphasizes--is the local decision-making
of faculty who seek local solutions responsive
to local curricular needs. In all instances, this
document also notes the link between technology's
significant contribution to intellectual sharing
and discussion and the essential critical reading,
writing, and thinking competencies inherent in
information competency.
Faculty will also want to determine
the skills their particular students may already
have. Because students enter the community college
with such a diverse range of information competency
and technology skill levels, it has been suggested
that a formal assessment instrument be developed
and then integrated into the matriculation process
at the college. Certainly faculty will also need
to consider how the digital divide might affect
particular students or groups of students. As
reported in the September 2002 online newsletter
of California Academic and Research Libraries
(CARL), a bay area group of community college
and CSU librarians is currently investigating
such a mechanism and has completed its report,
the Bay Area Regional Community College Information
Competency Standards Performance Indicators and
Outcomes.
It would then be important to
communicate to students through the college catalogue
the clear expectations of faculty teaching courses
or groups of courses. Their particular classes
would also be flagged or distinguished by some
symbol as requiring prior expertise in one or
more aspects of information competency--including
aspects of computer literacy or technology use.
Such designations would permit potential students
to better select courses or class sections in
which they are best prepared to be successful
or in which they can expand their competencies
and abilities.
Another issue must be considered as well: before
information competency of students can be ensured,
information competency of faculty must be ensured.
With the rapid pace of technological changes,
faculty's skills need continual updating and renewing.
The need for faculty development is paramount
and is a consideration for all information competency
program designers. Only now has the discussion
of a digital divide begun to incorporate the divide
between some technologically reticent faculty
and their often highly computer literate students
(who nonetheless often lack the critical acumen
essential for information competency). Faculty
development and support--for training and for
curricular revision--should be essential components
of a college's plan.
Six Strategies
Even prior to the anticipated institution of a
graduation requirement for information competency
in the California community colleges, a number
of colleges accepted this challenge to prepare
students for the Information Age by developing
a formal information competency requirement, and
in some cases, particular courses to meet their
new requirement. This paper features six pioneering
colleges who have taken steps to ensure that students
can access, evaluate, and use information: Diablo
Valley, Glendale, Cabrillo, Cuyamaca, Santa Rosa,
and Merced.
There is no single "way"
to institute information competency requirement,
nor any single model of implementation (stand
alone course, co-requisite, infusion, or integration),
and the processes of decision making and the instructional
strategies used by the six colleges in this paper
are not exhaustive; rather they suggest a variety
of possibilities for incorporating information
competency. In all of the instances, however,
collaborative effort has occurred. While library
faculty have certainly played a key role, they
have joined in collaboration with classroom faculty
across their campuses: the teaching of information
competency is everyone's job.
The General Education pattern,
the nature of a college's students, the state
of the college library's instruction program,
and the college's resources all play a role when
faculty determine the best way to introduce and
include information competency in the curriculum.
At these six colleges, those faculty charged with
developing their information competency element
considered how best to reach all students: basic
skills, transfer, vocational, recent high school
graduates, and returning students, all of whom
have varying levels of expertise and needs.
Each of the strategies presented
here includes a description of the process employed
for incorporating an information competency requirement
in the curriculum, an overview of the present
state of the design and implementation, and a
summation of current and future challenges. Each
college, as of this writing, finds itself at a
slightly different stage of the process as well.
The graphic
may help you navigate the colleges' summaries
to find the information of most use to your campus.
DEFINITION AND COMPONENTS
The 1998 Academic Senate paper identified
key components, expressed as skills, which comprise
information competency. Students with information
competency must be able to
state a research question, problem, or issue;
determine information requirements in various
disciplines for the research questions, problems,
or issues;
use information technology tools to locate
and retrieve relevant information
organize information;
analyze and evaluate information;
communicate using a variety of information
technologies;
understand the ethical and legal issues surrounding
information and information technology; and
apply the skills gained in information competency
to enable lifelong learning.
Additionally, this document
(and its appendices) presents definitions and
competencies as they have been determined locally
by Diablo Valley, Cabrillo, Cuyamaca, Santa Rosa
and Merced Colleges. (See Appendix E for an expanded
example of Santa Rosa's competencies.)
More broadly, a recent publication
by the Intersegmental Committee of Academic Senates
(ICAS) identified technological competencies expected
of entering freshmen. In writing that report,
Academic Literacy: A Statement of Competencies
Expected of Students Entering California's Public
Colleges and Universities, the authors surveyed
UC, CSU, and community college faculty who taught
lower division courses in all disciplines. These
faculty reported that they expect entering students
to be able to do the following:
type;
use word-processing software, to cut, paste,
and format text, spell-check, and save and move
files;
navigate e-mail, compose, send, and receive
e-mail, and post attachments;
employ e-mail etiquette;
navigate the Internet and the World Wide
Web, recognizing the significance of domains
(e.g., com, net, edu, org, gov);
use search engines effectively;
evaluate the authenticity of the Website,
the credibility of the author, and the validity
of material found on the Web;
know how to cite Internet sources; and
know what constitutes plagiarism and how
to avoid it when using the Internet.
The ICAS authors also note
that "other competencies, while not essential,
will enable a student to perform well in college."
They also report the following as desirable competencies:
contribute to discussions online;
use visual aids or applications-based visual
programs (such as PowerPoint) to present original
work or research or support the content of an
oral report; and
create and maintain a Website.
As suggested earlier, some of
these key components of information competency
may already be represented in curriculum and its
pedagogy designed to meet other requirements or
fulfill other needs, such as critical thinking,
applications of technology, or public speaking.
The 1998 Academic Senate paper advised "that
faculty review their curriculum to assure that
these components are covered," presumably
in one or more courses identified through curricular
review.
Expectations of entering students such as those
noted above propose challenges for community college
faculty who wish to ensure that their transferring
students are uniformly trained and can enter as
prepared as (if not more so) than their counterparts
already enrolled in four-year institutions. Yet
whether students choose to transfer or not, all
must be equally able to meet the challenges of
this Information Age.
INFORMATION COMPETENCY STRATEGIES:
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Strategy 1: Planning a Process
Prior to Selection of a Delivery Model
(DIABLO VALLEY COLLEGE)
START-UP PROCESS
Diablo Valley faculty initiated
a two-year, college-wide review of the college's
General Education requirements in 1998. The process
included a series of college open forums, examination
of existing requirements by each academic division,
and an opportunity for departments to propose
new areas of study for possible addition to the
general education curriculum.
The college's New Areas of Study
Task Force received four proposals for creating
new General Education graduation requirements.
One of the four proposals was an information competency
requirement proposed by the Library Department.
The General Education Review Plenary Committee,
comprised of faculty representatives from each
academic division, considered all the proposals
and voted to recommend only the one-unit information
competency proposal. The Plenary Committee collected
all the recommended changes to the General Education
pattern, including the new General Education Area
VII Information Competency catalogue statement
(see below), and presented the package to the
Faculty Senate.
GE Area VII. Information Competency
- Catalogue Statement
Information Competency is the
ability to both recognize when information is
needed, and to locate, evaluate, synthesize, use
and communicate information in various formats.
The faculty believes that DVC
graduates should be able to:
1. recognize when information is necessary;
2. develop effective research strategies;
3. locate, retrieve, and use information in a
variety of formats;
4. critically evaluate and synthesize information;
5. effectively create, present and communicate
information;
6. competently use computers and other information
technology tools;
7. understand the social, legal and ethical issues
relating to information and its use.
The entire revised General Education
pattern was distributed to faculty in Spring 2000
and adopted in May 2000. To date, all aspects
of the general education revisions have been included
in the current catalogue except for the new Information
Competency -- Area VII. Its inclusion awaits decisions
about the implementation strategy and is tentatively
slated for implementation Fall 2003.
APPLICATION
To coordinate and plan implementation
for the Fall 2003 information competency requirement,
the Faculty Senate established the Information
Competency Implementation Task Force. Convened
in Spring 2001, the Task Force currently meets
on a regular basis. To ensure a broad-based collaborative
effort, the Task Force's charge directed that
membership include two library faculty, the assistant
dean of instruction, the Instruction (Curriculum)
Committee chair, a second member of the Instruction
Committee, an English faculty member and four
additional classroom faculty.
The first year goal of the Task
Force was to develop and recommend a curriculum
approval process on information competency for
Faculty Senate approval and Instruction Committee
implementation. Their work details the learning
outcomes expected of the information competency
requirement, provides criteria to guide curriculum
development and assessment, and outlines a procedure
for the Instruction Committee to follow when approving
new or revised courses. The task force is not
responsible for selecting a particular implementation
model (stand- alone course, co-requisite, infusion,
integration, etc.), but it will develop a procedural
foundation and establish information competency
learning outcomes and standards for what is anticipated
to be a variety of instructional methods to meet
this graduation requirement.
The Task Force began its work
with general reading and discussion on information
competency before drafting a statement of learning
outcomes. To develop a statement of learning outcomes,
the Task Force used the Association of College
& Research Libraries, Information Literacy
Competency Standards for Higher Education, and
an abridged version of these learning outcomes
drafted by a group of San Francisco Bay Area community
college library faculty.
The Task Force's resultant statement,
"Area VII -- Information Competency Learning
Outcomes," amplifies the seven broad outcomes
in the catalogue statement on IC above. These
criteria will guide curriculum development and
approval for General Education Area VII. The Task
Force recommended and the Faculty Senate approved
these learning outcomes in May 2002.
The Task Force also presented
an outline of recommended guidelines and policies
for the Instruction Committee to use in reviewing
new or revised courses seeking approval to fulfill
the Area VII requirement. A challenge mechanism
for students who seek to get credit by examination
for the Area VII requirement is currently under
development.
At the conclusion of Spring 2002, the Faculty
Senate had approved these guidelines and the Instruction
Committee approved the first course to satisfy
the requirement, a one-unit library course LS121,
Information Competency and Research Skills. The
Information Competency Task Force will continue
meeting in Fall 2002 as additional curriculum
models are proposed.
CHALLENGES
The primary challenge to implementing
an information competency program is to initiate
and maintain the collaborative effort needed to
develop effective and workable models. It takes
a college-wide commitment to offer students a
multi-faceted program that is sustainable and
achieves the desired student outcomes. Diablo
Valley College has set forth the learning objectives
of the new requirement but must still consider
the various options to bring this curriculum to
the large and diverse student body that attend
the college.
Strategy 2: Using Research to
Determine Effective Models
(GLENDALE COLLEGE )
START-UP PROCESS
When a Fund for Student Success
(FSS) grant was awarded to Glendale Community
College in 1999/2000, the college's library was
offering a two-unit "Introduction to Library
Research" course and provided class orientations
on demand. The library had also developed and
taught an Internet search course which was eventually
turned over to the CS/IS department.
APPLICATION
Using the new FSS funds, librarians
developed a series of six workshops covering basic
library skills and a set of additional self-paced
research exercises for English 101. The library
faculty began a research study on the impact of
this information competency instruction on student
success and developed a one-unit credit course,
Introduction to Information Competency. These
results, and the work done through Research Across
the Curriculum are summarized below.
In addition, library faculty
developed and taught faculty workshops in 2000/2001;
generally, however, attendance was poor.
From Spring 2000 through Fall
2001, approximately 100 students took Library
101 or Library 191, the credit courses in information
competency. During the same period approximately
10,000 students attended a library workshop, and
3,500 students received library instruction as
part of a class orientation.
In 2001/2002, using Fund for
Instructional Improvement (FII) grant funds, the
research project was expanded to test additional
models of teaching information competency such
as course pairing and infusion.
Beginning in Winter 2002, a
series of specialized information competency components
were "infused" into the core Nursing
series, and into a history course on the causes
of war. In Spring 2002, one section of Library
191 was paired with English 101, College English.
By the end of this grant project, the college
will have evaluated how students who participate
in each of the for models of information competency
instruction perform on a proficiency test.
Currently, then, the modes of
information competency instruction include these
four options:
1. One-unit course - LIB191: Introduction to Information
Competency
Students meet 2 hours per week in a 27-computer
library instruction room.
Two sections of LIB 191 were offered (with
19 & 22 students each in Spring 2002), one
of which was paired with an English 101 course
(with instruction tailored to students' English
101 research paper assignments).
Course articulates with UC's and CSU's.
2. Infusion of information competency
components into existing courses
Nursing/Allied Health
Several 20-30 minute presentations are taught
each semester or intersession in the discipline
classroom.
Sessions are both general (how to find a
book) and specific (focused on an assignment
or related to a nursing topic under discussion
in the class).
In the future, handouts will be incorporated
into student handbooks and course packets (for
nursing students) and made available online
(for all students and their instructors).
Nursing faculty will also be trained so they
can provide basic information competency instruction
themselves.
History 136
During Spring 2002, the college offered 2
one-hour, specialized instruction sessions.
Resources specific to History 136: War --
History & Causes were covered.
In future semesters, this infusion model
will be tested with the general History 110
class and will be expanded to include online
resources.
3. Six workshops (10 one-hour
sessions offered each week for 14 weeks in a 16-week
semester):
Workshops cover such topics as:
Searching the Online Catalogue
Locating Journal & Newspaper Articles
Internet I: The Basics
Internet II: Searching & Evaluating
Research Strategies
Government Resources.
All workshops are one hour each. Each is
repeated at least once a week on a rotating
schedule. There are also special workshops combined
with self-paced research exercises as part of
the PACE English 101 course.
Workshops are rotated through the schedule
to ensure students can attend all.
During Fall Semester 2001 (16-week semester),
2077 students attended the 102 workshops.
In Spring 2002, the number of workshops were
increased to 140 with an increased number of
students completing the series.
4. On-request orientations
Requests come from faculty teaching such
courses as English 101 & 102, credit and
non-credit ESL, sociology, and student development.
Orientations address such topics as
using the library catalogue,
locating recommended reference sources,
using online databases to locate articles,
searching the World Wide Web,
evaluating websites.
Orientations are offered in a 27-computer
library instruction room.
Orientations usually are 1 or 1-1/2 hour
sessions.
The objective is to focus orientations on
discipline-related research and to complement
rather than repeat the material of the workshops.
During Fall Semester 2001, 35 orientations
reached 714 students.
Research Across the Curriculum
Task Force
In Fall 2001, the Glendale Community College Academic
Senate convened a Research Across the Curriculum
(RAC) Task Force. This Task Force was charged
with researching the need for an information competency
graduation requirement at Glendale Community College
and identifying possible methods of meeting such
a requirement. The Task Force recently presented
a final report to the Glendale Community College
Academic Senate recommending
that current information competency instruction
models already in place at Glendale Community
College continue to be funded, and
that library faculty and classroom resources
gradually be increased in preparation for a
mandated statewide information competency graduation
requirement.
The Task Force's recommendations
were based on
the already strong information competency
program in place at Glendale College,
the findings of the Research Project on Information
Competency at Glendale College, and
the Task Force's overall feeling that the
best way to meet an information competency graduation
requirement in the future would be through continuation
of the one-unit Introduction to Information
Competency course.
POSITIVE RESULTS
Research Project Results
In Spring 2000, Glendale College's Institutional
Research Unit began a long-term study of the impact
of the library's information competency classes
and workshops. The study now includes data from
Spring 2000, Fall 2000, Spring 2001, Fall 2001
and Spring 2002. What is significant is the on-going
desire of Glendale to base their educational planning
on comprehensible data and analysis. Their results,
as noted in Appendix C, suggest that there may
be a positive correlation between information
competency instruction and student outcomes in
terms of course grade for the workshops and GPA
for the credit courses. However, all research
remains limited, and any interpretations of their
results must be cautiously considered. Rather,
their research suggests questions and topics for
investigation as other colleges undertake their
own studies.
Glendale College's Institutional
Research, for example, conducted a variety of
comparisons: among all students in ESL 151, English
120 and English 101 on their completion of the
course and their course success, a comparison
of students who took Library 191 and a randomly
selected control group of non-Library 191 student,
matched by theoretically relevant measures (enrollment
status, prior GPA, primary language and units
attempted). Additional information about the status
of Glendale's information competency projects
can be found at http://www.glendale.edu/library/libins/icweb/icweb.html.
CHALLENGES
Currently Glendale Community
College has focused on equipping transferring
students with the information competencies they
will need in subsequent course work. In the future,
however, the discipline and library faculty plan
to
focus on those models which
are most effective in helping students succeed
and in preparing students for an information competency
proficiency test;
expand to include information competency
instruction within the vocational programs;
expand instruction to include noncredit/community
learners;
prepare for an information competency graduation
requirement;
prepare infusion models for more departments
on campus;
build a stronger online instruction presence;
resolve the disparity between class size
(e.g., 40 students in a history class) and availability
of simultaneous computer access (e.g., the 27-computer
library instruction room); and
compare the performance of students from
all the different instructional options on an
information competency proficiency test in 2003.
However, there are several
factors that may jeopardize the Research Across
the Curriculum Task Force's initial recommendations:
the current State of the California budget
seems to offer no money for additional resources;
some instructional faculty and administrators
do not understand or value information competency;
if degree students were required to complete
a one-unit information competency class rather
than using other infusion models, students would
be required to take more units to graduate.
This option poses a particular hardship for
some students in some majors (e.g., nursing);
and
current sentiment on campus does not support
the hiring of more library faculty perhaps necessary
to support some models, especially since these
hires might mean fewer hires in other faculty
groups on campus.
Strategy 3: Co-requisite Course
Model
(CABRILLO COLLEGE)
START-UP PROCESS
At Cabrillo College, the three-unit
transfer English course, English 1A (College Composition),
has a one-unit co-requisite, Library 10 (Information
Research). Library 10 was first introduced in
1988, and English 1A faculty participated on a
voluntary basis. It was so successful that it
soon went through the curriculum process to become
a co-requisite for all English 1A sections. However,
Library 10 is a self-paced class that may also
be taken without English 1A. Students may take
the class for credit/no credit and can receive
credit through credit by exam, though fewer than
1% of the students elect the credit/no credit
option available for this course. Library 10 is
taught primarily by adjunct librarians, but fulltime
librarians also participate. Additional information
can be found at the Library 10 Web page http://libwww.cabrillo.cc.ca.us/html/about/library-10/index.html.
APPLICATION
Library 10 is structured to
support the objectives of English 1A. The objectives
from Cabrillo's English 1A overlap with generally
held objectives of any information competency
course:
[English 1A] students will
1. use the library to find information in books,
magazines, and specialized journals; use electronic
databases and a variety of online sources to find
information;
2. plan an efficient search to discover those
sources that are most useful and reliable;
3. learn to incorporate sources in writing through
paraphrase, summary, and direct quotation and
to acknowledge the sources in formal documentation
to avoid plagiarism; and
4. begin to question texts for logical consistency
and adequacy of evidence.
Library 10's objectives include
the students' ability to
1. understand the differences between types of
information, e.g., popular, scholarly, current,
retrospective, statistical, critical, primary
and secondary;
2. develop appropriate search strategies, evaluating
the information accessed in relation to its content,
source, quality and relevance;
3. recognize the levels and appropriate uses of
diverse types and formats of information;
4. synthesize information from a variety of sources
to satisfy research and applied needs and be able
to transfer research process to future information
needs;
5. apply principles of scholarly and ethical research,
such as proper citation formats and respect for
intellectual property;
6. demonstrate effective use of the library in
conjunction with academic assignments as well
as applied learning needs.
Coordinating English 1 and Library
10 Activities
Early in the semester, the Library 10 and English
1A faculty meet their respective sections in the
library and together explain the Library 10 course
and the use of a workbook designed for the Library
10 course. Some librarians include a tour of the
library as part of this first session.
The workbook explains various
information resources with special emphasis on
research strategies and evaluation of resources;
the workbook also includes exercises, many of
which require students to use online sources.
Midway through the semester, library faculty require
students to submit their Library 10 workbook for
a midterm evaluation. Once the workbook is graded
by their library instructor and returned, students
continue to complete its exercises and submit
the completed workbook by a due date near the
final examination period. After submitting the
workbook for a final evaluation, the workbook
is returned to students who use it to prepare
for the final exam that is both "performance
based" and "written." During the
performance portion of their final exam, in addition
to multiple choice and short answer questions,
students are given the choice of three topics.
They must then use the skills learned in Library
10 to identify the question, locate sources (e.g.
one book, one magazine article, one journal article,
one website) and then cite them appropriately
in MLA format.
Selected sections of English
1A are offered online. The Library 10 component
for these online sections is introduced during
a mandatory three-hour orientation session, in
which the Library 10 instructor describes the
partnership and presents the Library 10 homepage
that is linked to the English 1A online homepage.
Students complete the same workbook, though their
final exam consists of a final project, which
is an annotated works-cited document that describes
each item identified through their workbook exercises
and the value of that source to their research.
In their end-of-term comments, students overwhelmingly
recommended that fellow students take Library
10 and stated that the course should be required
of all students.
POSITIVE RESULTS
Strong ties between English
1A and Library 10 faculty develop as the semester
unfolds, and participants note the development
of a "team spirit." Faculty follow through
with students having difficulty in both subjects
and often arrange for coaching and review sessions.
All librarians, including those working at the
Reference/Instruction Desk, take ownership of
Library 10. Students know that any available librarian
can assist them with the Library 10 workbook or
can answer questions related to course content.
CHALLENGES
Discussions about an online
Library 10 workbook have begun. Further development
of the workbook to more closely meet specific
needs of English 1A faculty is also taking place.
The course content for Library
10 will need to be modified and expanded to satisfy
the newly adopted Title 5 requirements for informational
competency, especially as it applies to the technology
skills students must demonstrate.
Discussions as to how Library 10 should be linked
to English courses below English 1A also need
to occur, especially as all AA degrees but only
14 of the college's 39 AS degrees require English
1A.
Strategy 4: Modified Infusion
Model
(CUYAMACA COLLEGE)
START-UP PROCESS
Cuyamaca College is using a
modified version of the infusion model as a means
of initiating this curricular change. Originally
conceived as a part of a "general education
reform" at the college, a number of vocational
courses have incorporated information competency
as well. As a result of the reform, six required
components have been identified for inclusion
in each course in the Cuyamaca College General
Education package . One of these components is
information competency. Effective 1999, the Curriculum
Committee must certify that each current (and
any newly proposed) course in the General Education
package provides for the six components, one of
which is information competency. Thus, each course
in the General Education package must contain
some element of the information competency package.
The college's curriculum guidelines defines the
information competency component as follows:
Courses shall motivate students
to develop information competency skills to improve
the quality of education and everyday life through
the selective use of information technology and
information resources. Students will be able to
identify information resources, apply appropriate
tools to acquire information, formulate a search
strategy, evaluate acquired information, and recognize
alternative information sources (note: these could
be considered as the primary elements of information
competency). This can be achieved through various
activities including but not limited to using
computers, periodical/journal research, Internet
research, Web home-page projects, and library
research orientations.
APPLICATION
Integrating some element of
the information competency into each course is
accomplished by providing a library research assignment
for the students - a joint effort between the
discipline faculty member and the library faculty
member. Examples include:
Students in geography learn
how to locate up-to-date cultural geography.
Students majoring in business
learn how to search for patents.
Students in English explore
literary criticism.
Students in the Environmental
Hazardous Materials Technology (EHMT) program
research San Diego Disposal waste methods.
Students in child psychology
learn the difference between secondary sources
and primary sources.
Advantages of an Infusion Model
1. The infusion model exposes students to elements
of information competency in each General Education
course taken.
2. The infusion model encourages discipline faculty
and library faculty to collaborate and develop
appropriate assignments to include in the course.
3. The infusion model can reach a greater number
of students than traditional unit course of 30
students.
4. The infusion model is easily implemented into
distance learning courses as the lessons in each
unit appear on the web.
5. The infusion model can be designed and implemented
more efficiently than the stand-alone or self-paced
courses taught by library faculty.
CHALLENGES
This library-based model uses
a dynamic website. Unlike some pages on the college
site, the library information competency infusion
model will always be undergoing structural change.
An instructor's syllabus might change from one
semester to the next, so the librarian-content
designer has to update all information competency
modules by continuing to add new points of access,
reformatting web layout, and redesigning appropriate
visuals. Though most students lack the critical
evaluative skills developed by this class, many
students are more computer savvy than many staff
and faculty. These students are used to viewing
professional web pages and the colleges must continue
to maintain a strong, professional web presence.
An expert web-designer is therefore critical to
the success of an infusion model.
Since not every course must
include all elements of information competency,
there is a chance that some students may not be
exposed to one or more of the elements during
pursuit of their general education courses; however,
given the broad range of courses in the General
Education package, full coverage is likely.
Some college faculty are concerned
that without subsequent institutional support
following the receipt of initial seed money to
develop an information competency component in
its curriculum, the college will be unable to
sustain its program. However a larger curricular
matter is to ensure that the local requirements
conform to any subsequent Title 5 language, particularly
the need in all instances for students to "use
and communicate information in all its various
formats" and the related responsibilities
to credit the sources of that information appropriately.
Strategy
5: Multiple Options in Partial Implementation
(Santa Rosa Junior College)
START-UP PROCESS
Santa Rosa Junior College (SRJC)
began exploring information competency in 1997
as the Library Information and Resources (LIR)
Department followed the discussions of information
competency at the state and national levels. About
that time, the college formed a special committee
to review the General Education pattern and recommend
changes. The LIR Department also reviewed the
Association of College and Research Libraries
(ACRL) and the American Library Association standards
on Information Competency, raising concerns about
the standards in a community college setting.
As most community colleges do not have the resources
of four-year institutions, the college decided
to modify the standards to reflect community college
levels. As part of the process regarding this
academic and professional matter, the Santa Rosa
Academic Senate approved these standards. (See
Appendix D.)
APPLICATION
The LIR Department began discussion
of how information competency could be implemented
at the local level. Several models of implementation
were discussed, each having merit. The LIR Department
reached consensus that the information competency
requirements would be best met with a new graduation
requirement. The overriding concern was the importance
of the students' needs in a changing environment
that requires critical skills far beyond what
was necessary in the past in the area of information
literacy.
The Department then began discussions
with the general education task force subcommittee
of the Curriculum Committee. The full Curriculum
Committee supported the concept of a requirement
for information competency and recommended it
to the local senate. Following discussions and
presentations with various constituent groups
and committees, the SRJC faculty reviewed the
options and decided that the most effective method
to ensure all components of the requirement were
met and implemented was a one-unit graduation
requirement. This strategy garnered college-wide
support, and in Spring 2000, the local senate
voted to support the requirement. The College
Council endorsed this proposal, and the Board
of Trustees approved the requirement in Spring
2002 for implementation in Fall 2002 and required
of students entering that semester. (See Appendix
E.)
The Curriculum Committee established
a course approval process and a subcommittee to
oversee that process for new or existing courses
submitted to meet this new requirement. The subcommittee
evaluated proposals in accord with the Standards
noted in Appendix D and approved the newly revised
library courses, LIR 10, 50 and 110 as meeting
these requirements. This approval process, approved
by the academic senate in Spring 2002, will continue
to be used for any additional courses submitted
in semesters to come.
Students may challenge the requirement
with an examination-for-credit process described
in Appendix
F.
Library Instructional Program
For at least six years, the Library Information
and Resources Department has been offering library
courses varying from one-half to three units.
The most recent offerings have been:
LIR 57 Internet Searching (series of half unit
courses)
LIR 60A/B Library Resources: Where and How (2
half units)
LIR 50 Research Skills for Papers, Reports and
Essays (1unit, CSU transferable)
LIR 22 Locating Knowledge (3 units)
During the formative years of
this requirement, the Department also created
courses that specifically met the information
competency requirement.
LIR 110 Finding and Using Information (1 unit)
LIR 10 Introduction to Information Competency
(1 unit, UC/CSU transferable)
These new courses, as well as
LIR 22 and LIR 50, were approved by the Curriculum
Committee to meet the information competency standards,
enabling the LIR Department to have several courses
that meet the requirement. The courses have been
offered in various formats including online, self-paced
workbooks, and in traditional classroom settings.
Courses have also been linked with other departments,
enabling both instructors to reinforce concepts
and make course work more relevant for students.
Students enrolled in LIR-linked courses are concurrently
enrolled in both courses. For example, even prior
to the adoption of this requirement, the LIR Department
and English Department had linked courses for
three years. The assignment of instructors is
an internal department procedure for both departments.
The curricula of the two courses are mutually
adapted to help students benefit from course work
in both. The extent of this cooperation is left
up to the individual instructors. The Library
courses are set up to reinforce the assignments
in the other courses especially in research process,
assigned topics and bibliographic citations.
CHALLENGES
The Library and Information
Resources Department sees a number of challenges
as it works with faculty to implement this requirement:
adding additional courses for developmental-level
students;
working with certificate course instructors
to provide focused instruction for their students;
identifying liaisons with other departments;
ensuring course content is relevant to students'
needs;
creating additional modes of presentation;
finding optimum scheduling to ensure student
success and access;
offering sufficient sections of the approved
Library courses at appropriate times to afford
students ample options;
assuring sufficient and trained staff to
teach and provide on-site assistance;
providing library faculty with pedagogical
training prior to their classroom experiences;
working with discipline faculty to create
focused, linked courses;
finding other faculty to augment their own
curriculum to meet this requirement; and
Strategy 6: From Planning to
Completed Implementation
(MERCED COLLEGE)
START-UP PROCESS
In 1998, Merced College adopted
a combined computer competency and information
literacy graduation requirement, effective for
students entering in Fall 2000.
Originally the Curriculum Committee formed a subcommittee
to investigate computer and information literacy
competencies. The chair of the Curriculum Committee
then appointed the committee members to serve
on this "Comlit Committee," representing
the Allied Health, Industrial Technology, Business,
Guidance, Science/Math and Learning Resources
divisions. Other committee members included a
dean from the Office of Instruction, the Learning
Resources Director, and a student services staff
person.
The Comlit Committee met for
one year and was charged to determine these matters:
1) whether or not to implement this requirement;
2) what the competencies would be;
3) how to determine what courses would meet the
competencies; and
4) what level of scrutiny would be in place for
new courses wishing to meet the competencies.
The Comlit Committee presented
its recommendations broadly across campus. Subsequently,
the Faculty Senate requested each division to
offer suggestions for the competencies. The Comlit
Committee reviewed these proposals and formulated
a final proposal for the competencies that it
forwarded to the Curriculum Committee, which in
turn established the competencies and recommended
them to the Faculty Senate.
In the Spring of 1998, after review by the Instructional
Council, the Faculty Senate determined the following
A-G components would comprise and define the computer
and information literacy requirements: Merced
students, upon graduation, should be able to
A. name and describe the typical digital computer
components and their functions;
B. describe common computer applications and related
social and ethical problems/impact;
C. learn fundamental operation and concepts of
word processing, spreadsheet, and/or database
software applications;
D. understand the difference between information
and knowledge;
E. understand the links among information centers
and the access points available through technology
and reference sources;
F. understand the basic structure of electronic
databases and the strategies used to access them;
and
G. recognize the different levels, types, and
formats of information including but not limited
to primary vs. secondary, and popular vs. scholarly.
[Note: These requirements were adopted these prior
to the proposed new Title 5 language. In Fall
2002, the Merced faculty will consider changes
to these requirements to align them with anticipated
Title 5 language.]
Furthermore, in the Fall of
1998, the Faculty Senate agreed upon these guidelines
and principles regarding the curriculum for these
competencies:
1. Courses [submitted to meet the A-G requirements]
may... meet any or all competencies.
2. Courses that were approved in the initial process
are now certified as meeting the competencies.
3. New courses [submitted to satisfy one or more
of] the competencies must include them on the
course content page and exit skills on the Course
Proposal Forms.
4. Existing courses may [be certified] to meet
the competencies [if] a Course Change Proposal
[is submitted], which includes the course content
page and exit skills.
5. The student services staff must certify the
completion of the competencies at the time [a
student submits an]... application for graduation.
6. The chart of which courses meet the competencies
is maintained in the Office of Instruction. Changes
in courses become effective for the fall semester
following the course change proposal or course
approval process of the Curriculum Committee.
Upon adoption of these competencies
and guidelines, the Instructional Council (Division
Chairs) worked with the faculty of each division
to suggest which existing courses should seek
certification as courses meeting one or more of
the competency requirements. These courses were
then submitted to the Curriculum Committee for
approval.
APPLICATION
The computer competency and
information literacy requirement has now been
embedded into the curriculum of various courses.
The faculty certify through the Curriculum Committee
which competencies they wish to teach and which
competency or competencies that course will address--all,
or several, or one. The counselors use a chart
to determine if students have completed all the
competencies. Effective Fall 2000, students must
receive a grade of "C" or better in
courses which meet the computer and information
literacy competency requirements A through G.
Presently, students may meet
the competency by one of these following mechanisms:
completion of the Registered
Nursing, Licensed Vocational Nursing or Radiologic
Technology program, or completion of CPSC 24 and
completion of the graduation requirement in English
(ENGL A or ENGL 1A),
or
completion of CPSC-40A&B
or ELCT 40A & B and
Learning Resources 30
or
completion of CPSC 1 or CPSC
2 and
completion of CPSC 30, 31, 32, or 33 and
completion of the graduation requirement in English
(ENGL A or 1A),
or
completion of a number of other
courses, each of which fulfills at
least one of the seven areas of computer and information
literacy as enumerated above.
POSITIVE RESULTS
Merced College librarians report
their pleasure with the collaboration efforts
of their discipline faculty colleagues. Active
discussions about information literacy continue
to take place as courses and assignments are developed.
Use of the library and participation of librarians
in class orientations and faculty training has
increased to levels previously undreamed of.
Additionally, this approach
has taken advantage of the natural affinity existing
between many courses and the information competency
and computer literacy essential to succeed in
those courses. The requirements permit faculty
to develop assignments that encourage a mastery
of those skills most suited to a given course
or area of study.
CHALLENGES
While this has been a successful
collaborative effort across campus, there are
still challenges. The faculty at Merced College
continue to support the computer and information
literacy competency requirements; however two
notable challenges face faculty as they write
curriculum.
First, as faculty develop new
curriculum or revise and update older curriculum,
they often fail to include in their course outlines
and student exit skills those information literacy
components that they already teach and that are
intrinsic to their classes: they do not recognize
that aspects of information competency may already
be present. Since the Learning Resource Center
(LRC) is represented on the Curriculum Committee,
and since the LRC director has a role in processing
the curriculum forms that go to the Committee,
librarians have the opportunity to encourage faculty
to imbed information competency components in
appropriate courses and explicitly note those
that are already there. Even with encouragement,
however, some faculty are not eager to include
activities designed to meet the information competency
requirement in their courses.
The second challenge is the
reverse of the first: some faculty have made efforts
to include all of the competencies, both information
literacy and computer competencies, in their new
or revised course outlines, regardless of their
discipline. Their main objective is to develop
a course that will serve as a one-stop class for
all graduating students in their field. This effort
is understandable, but a great deal of discussion
about appropriate disciplines and pedagogy has
occurred as the Curriculum Committee discusses
these omnibus classes.
Another challenge is suggested
by outside observers who contemplate the mechanics
of tracking multiple competencies for large numbers
of students. The guidance faculty have had concerns
because of difficulties helping students meet
the list of competencies.
A final problem is the lack
of resources. There is no computerized classroom
available for instruction. There are only two
full time librarians, both of whom are already
fully engaged in other activities such as staffing
the reference desk, cataloguing and providing
library orientations. Also, staff development
and training for the faculty who wish to incorporate
information literacy into their curriculum must
continue. Two faculty members have taken the LR
30 course in order to broaden their skills in
this area.
The college must now begin a
parallel examination of vocational and technical
courses in anticipation of the any proposed changes
in Title 5 to require these competencies for certificates
of 18 units or more and must review its list of
competencies to ensure a match with any new Title
5 changes.
CONCLUSIONS
The descriptions of the processes
and the models that arose from them at these six
colleges provide opportunities for other local
senates to debate, to ponder, perhaps even to
emulate. Additionally, local senates must consider
the potential implementation of information requirements
for certificate programs of 18 units or more.
The implementation of any such requirements is
accompanied by a host of other correlative matters:
assessment and placement, proficiency tests or
performance-based demonstrations of competency,
locally based or nationally devised instruments,
policies for exemption and certification, and
a host of other faculty-driven decisions associated
with the delegation of authority, including our
roles in establishing prerequisites and placing
courses within disciplines, degree and certificate
requirements, and standards or policies regarding
student preparation and success as well as our
own faculty development (Title 5, 53200 (d) (1,
2, 5, 8).
Recommendations
to Local Senates
The experiences of these six pioneering efforts,
and the cumulative experiences of local senates,
compels the Academic Senate for California Community
Colleges to propose that local senates, in crafting
a curricular response to Title 5, give full and
rich consideration to the following factors:
1) Faculty should foster wide
spread collaboration among faculty across the
curriculum, including academic and vocational
instructors, and their deans, librarians and counselors.
2) Local senates should encourage broad-based,
on-going faculty development to support faculty's
use of technologies and pedagogies as well as
to revise courses and curriculum to include these
new student competencies.
3) Local senates should ensure that adjunct faculty
are aware of changes made in existing courses
or requirements and prepared to incorporate such
changes into their teaching.
4) Faculty, through their local senates and curricular
procedures, should initiate a process to determine
how best to match the intent of the Title 5 requirement
with local curricular needs. To do so, faculty
will consider:
PLAN THE PROCESSES
Identify key participants, including students,
to engage in this college-wide discussion.
Create a campus culture supportive of information
competency as an educational goal and intellectual
behavior.
Familiarize themselves with any proposed
requirements of Title 5 relating to information
competency.
Determine a local definition of "information
competency" consistent with any new Title
5 Regulations and in response to the larger
global contexts of work and academics into which
our students will enter.
Initiate discussions about inclusion of information
competency within vocational programs and occupational
certificates, in anticipation of additional
related Title 5 changes currently in discussion.
IDENTIFY RESOURCES
Determine availability of librarians within
their geographical area, if additional librarians
will be needed.
Inventory available print, non-print, and
technology resources to meet the demand raised
by this new requirement.
Enumerate the costs and resources associated
with constant updating of online resources,
assignments, handbooks, and other instructional
modes.
Ensure the quality of library hardback and
software materials, databases, references, etc.,
particularly in times of economic hardship and
dwindling resources.
Determine whether staff and library faculty
have sufficient and current training and the
requisite pedagogical skills.
Assess level of administrative support for
staff development, staff resources, scheduling,
and institutional research.
SUPPORT FACULTY AND STAFF
Insist upon adequate, on-going faculty development
opportunities.
Consult with the faculty bargaining unit
on issues of load, working conditions, job performance
evaluations, and job responsibilities, especially
when collaborative efforts are initiated.
Ensure ongoing training for library faculty
and staff.
Provide on-going, inviting, faculty professional
development and training in
use of evolving technology
use of online data bases
resources available to minimize plagiarism
and offer citation instruction.
Undertake training necessary for faculty
who wish to revise or create curriculum in support
of this new mandate.
Provide orientations and training for new
and adjunct faculty to acquaint them with the
nature of information competency, its relationship
to the curriculum they teach, and the mechanisms
whereby they can measure their students' competencies.
FOCUS ON STUDENTS
Consider strategies to avoid undue pressures
on high unit programs (e.g., nursing, pre-engineering)
and students enrolled in them.
Determine a challenge process for students
to demonstrate existing competencies.
Ensure adequacy of computer facilities for
students and accessibility to all groups of
students throughout the day, evening, and weekends
(if applicable).
Consider whether students seeking multiple
certificates must demonstrate competencies in
each instance.
Consider the nature of proficiency exams,
"performance-based" demonstrations
of competencies, or assessment instruments,
collaborating intersegmentally where appropriate.
Work with counseling faculty to provide accurate
assessment and academic information about the
information competency requirement.
CREATE ON-GOING IMPLEMENTATION
AND DEVELOPMENT
Engage local curricular processes to ensure
that local requirements match the Title 5 Requirement
in spirit and in implied rigor.
Work with college staff, including web designers
and accessibility specialists to ensure academically
acceptable, useful, and universally accessible
websites.
ENGAGE IN CONTINUOUS EVALUATION
AND REVIEW
Provide clear direction to the institution
so that research supports teaching and learning
rather than instruction being driven by others'
research agendas.
Assess the impact of implementation of this
new requirement upon all constituents of the
campus community.
