Framing a Strategy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5860/rusq.52n2.109Abstract
Higher education librarians and faculty members alike are faced with an ever-expanding palette of technologies available for instructional use. Efforts between these two groups to collaborate in information literacy programs can greatly benefit from the incorporation of some of these new technologies. This article presents the results of a survey of 118 faculty members at Western Michigan University; conducted in 2011, it had three aims: (1) to gauge current faculty perceptions about library research instruction; (2) to determine how faculty are using technology in instruction; and (3) to examine faculty insights regarding the integration of different technological formats into future library instruction. The three technologies most preferred were online videos, personal or WMU homepages, and discussion boards. Faculty in education and social sciences were the heaviest users of technology. Looking forward, faculty were most interested in shorter, more targeted face-to-face instructional sessions and in asynchronous online instruction, such as tutorials and class guides. The University Libraries has begun to reshape its information literacy program based on the survey results, and has started to incorporate more library research instruction into the new campus learning management system. This article concludes with a series of recommendations for librarians to determine the needs of their own campuses and to integrate technologies into their information literacy collaborations with faculty.
References
Kenneth C Green, Campus Computing 2010: The 21st National Survey of Computing and Information Technology in American Higher Education (2010): accessed November 15, 2011, http://download.1105media.com/EDU/ct11/CampusComputing2011.pdfnJ Edmund Maynard, '“A Case Study of Faculty Attitudes Toward Library Instruction: The Citadel Experience,”' Reference Services Review 18 no. 2 (1990): 73nJoy Thomas, '“Faculty Attitudes and Habits Concerning Library Instruction: How Much has Changed since 1982?”' Research Strategies 12 no. 4 (1994): 209-23nAnita Cannon, '“Faculty Survey on Library Research Instruction,”' RQ 33 no. 4 (1994): 524-41nGloria J. Leckie, Anne Fullerton, '“Information Literacy in Science and Engineering Undergraduate Education: Faculty Attitudes and Pedagogical Practices,”' College & Research Libraries 60 no. 1 (1999): 9-29nRhonda Gonzales, '“Opinions and Experiences of University Faculty regarding Library Research Instruction: Results of a Web-Based Survey at the University of Southern Colorado,”' Research Strategies 18 no. 3 (2001): 191-201nAnnmarie B. Singh, '“A Report on Faculty Perceptions of Students’ Information Literacy Competencies in Journalism and Mass Communication Programs: The ACEJMC Survey, ”' College & Research Libraries 66 no. 4 (2005): 294-310nKate Manuel, Susan E. Beck, Molly Molloy, '“An Ethnographic Study of Attitudes Influencing Faculty Collaboration in Library Instruction,”' Reference Librarian 43 no. 89–90 (2005): 139-61nPaul L. Hrycaj, Michael F. Russo, '“A Survey of LSU Faculty Attitudes toward Library Research Instruction,”' Louisiana Libraries 69 no. 4 (2007): 15-25nIbid., 15–25.n'“Is there an Information Literacy Skills Gap to be Bridged? An Examination of Faculty Perceptions and Activities Relating to Information Literacy in the United States and England,”' College & Research Libraries 71 no. 3 (2010): 203-22n(): Green,
Campus Computing 2010
.nJeffrey R. Young, '“Reaching the Last Technology Holdouts at the Front of the Classroom,”' Chronicle of Higher Education (): July 25, 2010, http://chronicle.texterity.com/chronicle/20100730a?pg=9#pg9nKevin R. Guidry, Allison BrckaLorenz, '“A Comparison of Student and Faculty Academic Technology use Across Disciplines,”' EDUCAUSE Quarterly 33 no. 3 (2010): 1-12 accessed October 12, 2011, www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Quarterly/EDUCAUSEQuarterlyMagazineVolum/AComparisonofStudentandFaculty/213682nPatricia McGee, Veronica Diaz, '“Wikis and Podcasts and Blogs! Oh, My! What is a Faculty Member Supposed to Do?”' EDUCAUSE Review 42 no. 5 (2007): 28-41 accessed November 10, 2011, www.educause.edu/ero/article/wikis-and-podcasts-and-blogs-oh-my-what-faculty-member-supposed-donSurveyMonkey, www.surveymonkey.comnCannon, “Faculty Survey, ” 524–41.nCannon, “Faculty Survey, ” 524–41; Leckie and Fullerton, “Information Literacy, ” 9–29; Gonzales, “Opinions and Experiences, ” 191–201; Hrycaj and Russo, “Survey of LSU Faculty, ” 15–25.nHrycaj and Russo, “Survey of LSU Faculty, ” 15–25; Manuel, Beck, and Molloy, “Ethnographic Study, ” 139–161.nHrycaj and Russo, “Survey of LSU Faculty, ” 15–25; Singh, “Report on Faculty, ” 294–310.nMaynard, “Case Study of Faculty, ” 67–76; Larry Hardesty, “Faculty Culture and Bibliographic Instruction: An Exploratory Analysis, ”
Library Trends
, no. 2 (1995): 339–67; Leckie and Fullerton, “Information Literacy, ” 9–29; Devin Feldman and Susan Sciammarella, “Both Sides of the Looking Glass: Librarian and Teaching Faculty Perceptions of Librarianship at Six Community Colleges, ”
College & Research Libraries
, no. 6(2000): 491–98.nPaul Hrycaj, Michael Russo, '“Reflections on Surveys of Faculty Attitudes Toward Collaboration with Librarians,”' Journal of Academic Librarianship 33 no. 6 (2007): 692-96 Thomas, “Faculty Attitudes, ” 209–23nConstance A. Mellon, '“Library Anxiety: A Grounded Theory and its Development,”' College & Research Libraries 47 no. 2 (1986): 163nEvan I. Farber, '“Working with Faculty: Some Reflections,”' College & Undergraduate Libraries 11 no. 2 (2004): 131nManuel, Beck, and Molloy, “Ethnographic Study, ” 139–61.nLeckie and Fullerton, “Information Literacy, ” 9–29.nWilliam B. Badke, '“Can’t Get no Respect: Helping Faculty to Understand the Educational Power of Information Literacy,”' Reference Librarian no. 89/90 (2005): 70nGreen,
Campus Computing 2010
.nYoung, “Reaching the Last Technology.”nAmanda Lenhart, memorandum, January 14, 2009, Pew Internet and American Life Project, accessed October 16, 2011, www.pewinternet.org/∼/media//Files/Reports/2009/PIP_Adult_social_networking_data_memo_FINAL.pdf.pdfnShannon D. Smith, Judith Borreson Caruso, Key Findings: The ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology, 2010 (): (EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research, October 2010), accessed October 25, 2011, http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/EKF/EKF1006.pdfnGreen,
Campus Computing 2010
.nYoung, “Reaching the Last Technology.”nSmith and Caruso,
Key Findings
.nGuidry and BrckaLorenz, “A Comparison of Student, ” 1–12.nResearchPath
, Western Michigan University online tutorial, http://libguides.wmich.edu/homenJing, TechSmith Corporation, http://www.techsmith.com/jing.htmlnWestern Michigan University adopted the Desire2Learn learning management system in the summer of 2011. Desire2Learn Incorporated, D2L Ltd., www.desire2learn.comnMatthew Pastula, '“Use of Information and Communication Technology to Enhance the Information Literacy Skills of Distance Students,”' Journal of Library & Information Services In Distance Learning 4 no. 3 (2010): 77-86nLili Luo, '“Web 2.0 Integration in Information Literacy Instruction: An Overview,”' Journal of Academic Librarianship 36 no. 1 (2010): 32-40nJaya Berk, '“Innovation in a Podshell: Bringing Information Literacy into the World of Podcasting,”' Electronic Library 25 no. 4 (2007): 409-19nGreen,
Campus Computing 2010
.nManuel, Beck, and Molloy, “Ethnographic Study, ” 139–61.nGuidry and BrckaLorenz, “A Comparison of Student, ” 1–12.n
