Report and recommendations of the Instruction Group
May 2000

 

This report covers activities of the Instruction Group from January 1999 through May 2000.

Composition of the group

During the 1999-2000 academic year, the Instruction Group was composed of Barbara Rockenbach, Susan Brady, Martha Smalley (Chair as of 3/1999), Jan Glover, Suzanne Eggleston, Andy Shimp, Judy Carnes, Diane Kaplan, and Suzanne Lorimer - representing the Arts Library, Beinecke, Divinity Library, Medical Library, Music Library, Science libraries, Social Science libraries, SML Manuscripts and Archives, and SML Research Services and Collections, respectively. The Instruction Group has met regularly for two hours twice a month. A General Instruction Task Force (GITF) formed last summer was charged with designing and coordinating a new program of system-wide general instruction publicized from the Library Administration office. It consisted of Group members Susan Brady, Suzanne Eggleston, Suzanne Lorimer, Andy Shimp, and Martha Smalley, plus Jocelyn Tipton of the Social Sciences libraries. The GITF was primarily active during the late summer and early fall of 1999 as it worked to define and schedule a program of general instruction. After that period, activities of the GITF were integrated into Instruction Group activities, for the most part. (See Appendix A for GITF report.)

Background

To provide the context for this year's activities, we list briefly the Instruction Group's target goals for the 1998-1999 academic year:

  1. Create and distribute a PR package for instruction.
  2. Develop relationships with the Residential Colleges in order to provide more effective instruction service.
  3. Develop methods to improve links to the faculty.
  4. Continue our orientation work (e.g., Academic Fair participation).
  5. Continue to develop and evaluate the online research guide.
  6. Develop a User Education page.
  7. Continue assessing our program, including how we might test and assess our impact on students' information literacy, and developing a mechanism for assessing students' information literacy.
  8. Create a framework for the development of training materials for cross-disciplinary electronic materials.
  9. Offer a series of open opportunities to share new teaching methods with colleagues.
  10. Provide support for the creation of a permanent display about the library, its services and locations.

A number of these initiatives are ongoing, but the Instruction Group took as its primary task for the 1999-2000 academic year the development of a cohesive, well-publicized, ongoing program of general, cross-disciplinary instruction targeting both undergraduate and graduate students at Yale. This task represented the fruition of the goals specified in numbers 1, 4, 5, 6, and 8 above. The Instruction Group has continued to serve as an informal forum of information exchange and has sponsored training events for staff, but our focus this year was on defining and "packaging" the Library system's general instruction activities.

Goals for the 1999-2000 academic year

This year's goals for the Instruction Group and General Instruction Task Force were as follows:

  1. Offer instruction sessions on the following core topics:
    a. Orbis

    b. The Research Workstation

    c. WorldCat and the RLG Union Catalog

    d. News Resources

    e. EndNote

    f. How to Find Journal Articles (added for spring semester)

  2. Experiment with modes of publicity and times of offering these sessions in order to determine what methods might result in increased attendance. Inaugurate system of centralized publicity.

  3. Provide basic orientation to the Library system for incoming freshmen at the Computing @ Yale sessions and Academic Fair.

  4. Develop a program of instruction targeting graduate students, in cooperation with the McDougal Graduate Student Center.

  5. Develop web-based guides for all core sessions offered, in order to define the content considered appropriate for each, make future preparation for sessions more efficient, and provide an ongoing and easily accessible resource for independent learning.

  6. Develop a web site for the Yale University Library Research Education program that would:
    a. Provide orientation to the Library system and basic information about doing research at Yale.

    b. Draw together and publicize information about general instruction sessions, tutorials, and tours offered by the Library.

    c. Draw together and publicize information about course-related instruction sessions.

    d. Provide a gateway for individualized research assistance.

    e. Provide a gateway for information and links relevant for library staff involved in instruction activities.

  7. Create a basic online guide for doing research at Yale (i.e. "Researching a Topic in Four Easy Steps")

Activities of the Instruction Group

1. Instruction/orientation sessions offered:

Detailed summaries are provided in the appendices of this report, but, in brief, the following sessions were offered:

Targeting undergraduates or the general Yale community:

A total of 31 sessions on these six core areas were offered, taught by volunteer instructors from throughout the Library system. Average attendance at the core sessions was just over 6 people per session. In addition, as an experiment, two sessions during one week of the spring semester were particularly advertised as targeting term paper assignments of undergraduate students ("Strategies for Online Research" and a Term Paper Drop-in Clinic). These two sessions had sparse attendance.

Targeting graduate students:

Fall semester:

Spring semester:

A total of 12 Library sessions were offered at the McDougal Center, with an average attendance of 19 people per session.

2. Ongoing web sites established

The following web sites and their sub-sites were created, primarily by members of the Instruction Group. These sites are intended to publicize the Research Education program of the Yale libraries, define the content of sessions offered, make preparation for future sessions more efficient, and provide an opportunity for independent learning:

This is the basic page about the Research Education program at Yale. Its major sub-sites are:

Conclusions:

  1. The new scheme of increased and more varied publicity for Library instruction sessions targeting undergraduates and the general Yale community was an interesting experiment but did not prove to significantly increase the rate of attendance.
  2. The centralized coordination of publicity for general, system-wide Library instruction publicity targeting undergraduates and the general Yale community is a more equitable and efficient method, and it frees librarians for other tasks. We are very thankful to Jeong Min Park for her thorough and diligent coordination of publicity.
  3. The paper brochures listing library tours and general Research Education sessions were the most effective means of publicity.
  4. Based on evaluation sheet responses, nearly all attendees at sessions were grateful for the opportunity and felt it worth their time to attend. They found the content of sessions appropriate and relevant.
  5. The Library's new partnership with the McDougal Center was very successful and provided exciting new opportunities for reaching graduate students.
  6. Librarians in the system have expressed approval and gratitude for the consolidated information now available in online Research Education guides and tutorials.
  7. We don't know how much students or others use the new Research Education web sites but they clearly improve Yale's public profile and provide a web presence favorably comparable to other prominent research libraries.

Recommendations for the 2000-2001 academic year:

  1. Library participation in fall orientation activities such as the Computing @ Yale session, Academic Fair, and graduate student events should continue.
  2. It is worthwhile to utilize the following publicity methods for general, system-wide instruction offerings: a) paper brochure listing sessions and web site URLs - for distribution at fall orientation events & placement around the library system, b) notices to Yale Weekly Bulletin, and, possibly, c) notices in the Yale Daily Jolt.
  3. It is probably not worthwhile to utilize the following publicity methods: a) table tents, b) Yale Daily News ads, c) notices in Yale newspapers or e-bulletins (other than Yale Weekly Bulletin), d) posters on departments and other campus bulletin boards.
  4. It is most efficient to have publicity tasks done by the Library Administration office.
  5. Undergraduate students are not much inclined to attend non-required research education sessions, so we strongly recommend that the Library pursue the policy of having Library liaisons arrange with academic departments to have basic instruction sessions associated with specific courses. The primary opportunity for library instruction for undergraduates should be in sessions directly associated with popular undergraduate courses, e.g English 114, English 115, History 132, etc. These sessions should be designed and offered in cooperation with faculty.
  6. We should continue to offer a minimal number of general instruction sessions, in order to provide basic service to students and other Yale community members for whom course-related sessions are not available.
  7. General instruction sessions should include three sessions each on these core topics: a) Orbis, b) Introduction to the Research Workstation, c) Finding Journal Articles. (2 fall, 1 spring). In addition, the Research Education program should address the burgeoning field of knowledge management by offering sessions on EndNote and other tools that may emerge.
  8. The web sites for the core topics, as well as for News Resources, Primary Sources, and Catalogs Beyond Yale, should be maintained, improved, and widely publicized. Sessions on non-core topics should be offered if requested .
  9. We should try to assess the usefulness of the various web sites we have created by monitoring their use and introducing a feedback mechanism.
  10. We should find ways to make our web sites more dynamic and interactive.
  11. We should continue to coordinate instruction-related forums and sessions for library staff.

Submitted 7-19-00

APPENDIX A
Report of General Instruction Task Force (1999 Aug-2000 May)

The General Instruction Task Force was created in July 1999 and charged with developing and coordinating the library system's general instruction program for the academic year 1999-2000. "General instruction" was defined as covering four areas: a) Orbis; b) Introduction to the Research Workstation; c) News Resources (Nexis, etc.); d) Non-Yale catalogs, especially Eureka and WorldCat. Instruction in the use of EndNote bibliographic management software and on finding journal articles were added to this list when demand became apparent.

Administrative support was made available to facilitate the program. Jeong Min Park of the Library Administration office performed these duties:

a. Sending out publicity information by email and fax to various Yale publications, departments, etc., as recommended by Task Force plan;
b. Working with Task Force on design of publicity flyers; photocopying and delivery of flyers;
c. Monitoring of email and sign-up sheet registrations for sessions; sending confirmation messages to registrants; sending reminder notices to registrants;
d. Creating and distributing "table tent" announcements for the college dining halls once per semester.
e. Arranging for the photocopying and distribution of the following items for orientation programs: Library tours brochure, Research workshops brochure, Research Workstation handout, Orbis handout, map showing Yale libraries.

Prior to the establishment of the GITF, "general instruction" sessions at Yale were coordinated and taught primarily by the Research Services & Collections department at SML. RSC was dissatisfied with the low average attendance at such sessions, considering the amount of staff time put into the program. RSC also felt overburdened by the need to coordinate with no administrative assistance a program that had system-wide implications. The time seemed ripe to inaugurate a more effective and more equitable system of providing general library instruction at Yale. The GITF sought to test the following hypotheses:

a. Broader and more systematic publicity would increase the average attendance at library instruction sessions;
b. New venues and new schedules for sessions would increase the average attendance at library instruction sessions;
c. Publicity activities would be more efficiently managed from a central office;
d. Drawing on the broader YUL staff, rather than just RSC, would result in the creation of web sites that would enable both more efficient instructor preparation for sessions and independent, on-demand learning by patrons.

Conclusions about the truth of these hypotheses were drawn by analyzing the information derived from:

a. Attendance statistics gathered by Library Administrative Assistant. (see appendices)
b. Evaluation sheets filled out by session participants (see: http://www.library.yale.edu/instruction/evalform.htm for form; Jeong Min has compiled responses in an Access file);
c. Librarian feedback;
d. Concrete evidence of available resources.

Our conclusions, based on this information, were as follows:

Re. a.) Changes in publicity would increase attendance at instruction sessions:
This was found not to be true. The increased range and intensity of publicity did not affect attendance in a significant way. Information from evaluation sheets indicated that the majority of people found out about sessions from the photocopied brochures, which have been a standard method of publicity for many years. Publicity ventures as notices to the YCC Bulletin, Yale Daily News, posters on bulletin boards, and table tents in the dining halls did not bring results worthy of the effort expended.

Re. b.) New venues and new schedules would increase attendance at instruction sessions:
This was found to be true, to some extent. It was clearly true that the new venue of the McDougal Graduate Student Center was a successful innovation; average attendance per session at McDougal was 19 people, a very satisfactory group size. The Library also gained broad exposure by providing materials for the ITS-sponsored Computing @Yale sessions for incoming freshmen. For non-McDougal sessions and non-orientation sessions, statistics gathered re. the time of day of sessions showed that evening (7:00 p.m. or later) sessions had a higher average attendance than mid-day sessions. This would seem to indicate that further experimentation with offering late hour sessions is merited. However, it should be noted that the most heavily attended general instruction sessions were those for EndNote, and these sessions were offered at "non-innovative" times and venues; this is clearly a case where the content of the session, rather than its time and place, was the determining factor in the level of attendance.

Re. c.) Publicity activities would be more efficiently managed from a central office: We can rely on librarian feedback to verify the truth of this statement. Jeong Min Park proved to be a very efficient and reliable provider of services for the General Instruction program, and her efforts made it possible for the librarians to focus their attention on the actual teaching of sessions and on the creation of supporting web sites.

Re. d.) Drawing on the broader YUL staff, rather than just RSC, would result in the creation of web sites:
The truth of this statement is confirmed by the physical evidence. Approximately 30 web sites now exist that did not exist a year ago. These are all linked in some manner to the basic Research Education site: http://www.library.yale.edu/instruction.

Based on the experiences of this past year, the General Instruction Task Force concurs with these recommendations found in the Instruction Group report:

  1. Library participation in fall orientation activities such as the Computing @ Yale session, Academic Fair, and McDougal Center events should continue.
  2. It is worthwhile to utilize the following publicity methods for general, system-wide instruction offerings: a) paper brochure listing sessions and web site URLs - for distribution at fall orientation events & placement around the library system, b) notices to Yale Weekly Bulletin, and, possibly, c) notices in the Yale Daily Jolt. (The Yale Daily Jolt site was established midyear and it is too early to tell whether it will have significant impact on campus.)
  3. It is probably not worthwhile to utilize the following publicity methods: a) table tents, b) Yale Daily News ads, c) notices in Yale newspapers or e-bulletins (other than Yale Weekly Bulletin), d) posters on departments and other campus bulletin boards.
  4. These more limited publicity tasks for the general instruction program should done by the Library Administration office.
  5. We can build on our successful cooperation with the McDougal Center for reaching graduate students, but tactics should be changed for reaching undergraduates. We strongly recommend that the Library pursue the policy of having librarian liaisons arrange with academic departments to have basic instruction sessions associated with specific courses. The primary opportunity for library instruction for undergraduates should be in sessions directly associated with popular undergraduate courses, e.g English 114, English 115, History 132, etc. These sessions should be designed and offered in cooperation with faculty.
  6. We should continue to offer a minimal number of general instruction sessions, in order to provide basic service to students and other Yale community members for whom course-related sessions are not available.
  7. General instruction sessions should include three sessions each on these core topics: a) Orbis, b) Introduction to the Research Workstation, c) Finding Journal Articles. (2 fall, 1 spring). In addition, the Research Education program should address the burgeoning field of knowledge management by offering sessions on EndNote and other tools that may emerge.
  8. The web sites for the core topics, as well as for News Resources, Primary Sources, and Catalogs Beyond Yale, should be maintained, improved, and widely publicized. Sessions on non-core topics should be offered if requested.
  9. We should try to assess the usefulness of the various web sites we have created by monitoring their use and introducing a feedback mechanism.
  10. We should find ways to make our web sites more dynamic and interactive.

Last modified 20 July 2000
Send comments about this web site to the library web administrator at
Library Administrative Services
This file is located at http://www.library.yale.edu/Administration/SQIC/instructionannreport99_00.html