Quality assurance in Library and Information Schools in Europe: major trends and issues

. In Europe, the internationalisation process of higher education – driven by Bologna Process - have identified the objectives of improving quality assurance, transparency and recognition of qualifications. LIS guidelines for quality assurance and the recognition of professionals have been analised to discover a common definition of quality, of same purposes and of similar process. Could European LIS Schools collaborate toward a single accreditation system in Europe? The paper reports on the findings, limited to Europe, of an international survey, promoted and partly financed by IFLA Education and Training Section on quality assurance processes used in Library and Information Science (LIS) Schools. The survey has shown that, regardless of whether it concerns an institution or programme evaluation, assessment, audit or accreditation, there is a substantial convergence on: a common set of standards, a similar approach to evaluation process. It can be said also that quality assurance in LIS is more focused on resources and curriculum design than on learning outcomes and student evaluation. Conclusions will argue that further studies are required

Learning intentions and success criteria: learners' and teachers' views

It is generally accepted that Assessment for Learning (AfL) strategies are effective in teaching and learning. Approaches within this framework include the use of formative feedback, self and peer assessment and setting and discussion of learning intentions (LIs) and success criteria (SC). There has been a great deal of research into AfL strategies, but perhaps less into the way that the use of LIs and SC are actually perceived by teachers and their pupils. The purpose of the research described in this paper was to investigate teachers’ and pupils’ perceptions of AfL strategies, focusing specifically on LIs and SC within lessons. Findings showed that while both cohorts agreed on the usefulness of LIs and SC, in practice they were rarely discussed in class. Teachers displayed a variety of understandings regarding their purpose, and some learners, while appreciating their value for revision purposes, also expressed frustration at the tokenistic way in which they were implemented. The results of this study could be helpful in informing the wider education community about how LIs and SC are viewed by teachers and learners with a view to ensure understandings are consistent with research and policy through focused professional development courses

Teaching and learning in information retrieval

A literature review of pedagogical methods for teaching and learning information retrieval is presented. From the analysis of the literature a taxonomy was built and it is used to structure the paper. Information Retrieval (IR) is presented from different points of view: technical levels, educational goals, teaching and learning methods, assessment and curricula. The review is organized around two levels of abstraction which form a taxonomy that deals with the different aspects of pedagogy as applied to information retrieval. The first level looks at the technical level of delivering information retrieval concepts, and at the educational goals as articulated by the two main subject domains where IR is delivered: computer science (CS) and library and information science (LIS). The second level focuses on pedagogical issues, such as teaching and learning methods, delivery modes (classroom, online or e-learning), use of IR systems for teaching, assessment and feedback, and curricula design. The survey, and its bibliography, provides an overview of the pedagogical research carried out in the field of IR. It also provides a guide for educators on approaches that can be applied to improving the student learning experiences

Teaching about teaching and instruction on instruction: A challenge for health sciences library education

Objective: This is a review of the master's-level curricula of the fifty-eight America Library Association-accredited library and information science programs and iSchools for evidence of coursework and content related to library instruction. Special emphasis is placed on the schools and programs that also offer coursework in medical or health sciences librarianship. Methods: Fifty-eight school and program websites were reviewed. Course titles and course descriptions for seventy-three separate classes were analyzed. Twenty-three syllabi were examined. Results: All North American library education programs offer at least one course in the general area of library instruction; some programs offer multiple courses. No courses on instruction, however, are focused directly on the specialized area of health sciences librarianship. Conclusions: Master's degree students can take appropriate classes on library instruction, but the medical library profession needs to offer continuing education opportunities for practitioners who want to have specific instruction for the specialized world of the health sciences

Undergraduate Library Internships at Musselman Library, Gettysburg College

In 2015-2016, Musselman Library at Gettysburg College participated in Cohort 3 of the Association of College and Research Libraries’ Assessment in Action program. This report outlines an assessment completed of former undergraduate library interns in order to explore the impact their internship experience had on the development of career goals, acceptance to and preparation for graduate education, and their early career. Through an online survey (n= 45) and six semi-structured telephone interviews, respondents reported a positive impact on the above areas

Teaching the teachers: What's missing in LIS doctoral teacher education?

This panel presentation will discuss the results of a study that examines the status of teacher education in United States-based Library and Information Studies (LIS) doctoral degree programs. The study integrates analysis of program information, student perspectives, and institutional expectations to assess whether current approaches in developing discipline-specific educators are adequate for the immediate professional needs of doctoral students and the long-term academic viability of LIS programs. The analysis focuses on a subset of ALA-accredited LIS programs that hold membership in ALISE and/or the iSchool Organization. It assumes that the majority of the LIS degreed faculty personnel are drawn from these programs and thus are part of an overall network of doctoral teacher education and training that is ostensibly informed by shared policy frameworks. Yet, the notion of teaching doctoral students to be teachers is largely absent from professional discourse in LIS, where most discussions of education focus solely on training librarians, archivists, and other information professionals in information literacy instruction. In other words, there is not now, nor does there appear to have ever been, a clear consensus approach to training the people who ultimately become responsible for teaching LIS. Recent research and reporting demonstrate that across academe, PhD programs generally do not provide sufficient teacher training for doctoral students, mostly because academic faculty and department agendas are focused on research that attracts outside funding, facilitates industry partnerships, and adds notoriety and prestige for institutions in an increasingly competitive education marketplace. A 2018 study by the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) found that the scant training offered by the ‘professional apprenticeship’ system, defined mostly by teaching assistantships, may actually stunt doctoral students’ progress toward degree completion. The report indicates that “while teaching a few courses can be a valuable learning experience, many teaching assistants instead operate as a source of cheap labor for the academy,” producing a harmful “casualization” of academic labor that undermines traditional faculty roles and the tenure system. Further analysis by the AAUP shows that the proportion of teaching-intensive positions to research-intensive positions has risen sharply in recent years, representing a “seismic shift” with consequences for faculty and students due to the “lower levels of campus engagement across the board and a rising service burden for the shrinking core of tenurable faculty.” Discipline-specific studies of doctoral student teacher training in a variety of academic fields reveal an ambivalence among students toward their teaching responsibilities and opportunities, which often reflects a lack of confidence in and anxiety around their ability to teach effectively and leads to feelings of unpreparedness in assuming faculty positions. This is especially problematic for doctoral students in programs that promote the ideal of success as obtaining tenure-track positions in highly-ranked and research intensive academic institutions, while not adequately preparing doctoral students for alternative career paths. The trend of shrinking university budgets and diminishing opportunities for new PhDs to take on research-focused work has been accompanied by new expectations for education delivery by students, administrators, accreditors, employers, and other stakeholders, both of which contribute to the high attrition rate of doctoral students. Research shows that when combined with the firsthand experience gained through the apprentice systems, formal teacher training makes a positive difference in how new and aspiring faculty carry out their roles, manage their workloads, and build sustainable careers. Adequate teacher training also creates a ripple effect that benefits student learning outcomes and skills acquisition, which is especially important to LIS and other discipline areas built around a distinct but evolving set of practical professional pursuits. Very little scholarly research along these lines has been conducted in the LIS field and even a surface level scan of the status of doctoral student teacher training within LIS programs demonstrates that efforts are inconsistent, nonstandardized, and seemingly inadequate. This study attempts to dig deeper and address how teacher education and training is integrated into curricular offerings and requirements in American LIS doctoral programs. It incorporates perceptions from doctoral students about the teacher education and training they have received and it evaluates the education or training requirements included on faculty job position descriptions in these programs to see how they align with students’ experience and their own program expectations. The authors suggest that instruction needs to include and go beyond learning courseware, instructional design, educational theory, and ad hoc modelling of doctoral seminars to enable doctoral students to develop diverse but discipline-specific instructional approaches to LIS. In accord with the conference theme, this panel presentation is not limited to assessment and critique for its own sake, but rather seeks to propose possible solutions and recommendations for how teacher education and training might become more effective and more of a priority for LIS doctoral programs as they seek a more resilient future. The panel is composed of current doctoral students who will present on the various aspects of the research and discuss the findings in relation to their own experience with doctoral teacher training and education. Furthermore, the panelists intend to structure their delivery in a way that promotes interaction with faculty, students, administrators, and others in the audience and provides the basis for continuing conversations and research beyond the conference

Developing reflective practice in LIS education: The SEA-change model of reflection

This paper presents the SEAchange model of reflection. It was developed to support the growing interest in reflective practice within the library domain. The model was developed from experience gained teaching and training reflective writing to students and practitioners within librarianship. The model was tested using data gathered from the reflective journals of 22 MA Librarianship students, who submitted 116 reflective journal entries from October 2007 toMay 2008. The model has three core process elements: a consideration of the situation (S); consideration of the evidence used during the practice of reflection (E); and action (A) needed as a result of what has been learnt from the reflective process. An earlier study identified significant benefits that could be gained from engaging in reflective writing, particularly in relation to student learning outcomes, selfdevelopment and empowerment. These outcomes, identified as change or the need for change are integrated into the SEAchange model. Reflection is discussed in relation to teachers or mentors applying a progressive “descaffolding” approach to learning support in order to facilitate student autonomy. Further validation of the model is recommended in a range of different settings. The model provides a framework for the teaching, support and guidance of reflective practice

Engaging Patients to Improve Documentation of Oral Intake on a Cardiac Telemetry Unit: A Quality Improvement Initiative

Background InformationIt is important for patients with heart failure to have awareness of their intake & output to effectively manage their disease. There is evidence that tracking intake & output is a component of missed nursing care resulting in discrepancies between the actual patient intake and what is documented in the patient’s electronic health record (EHR). Aim The aim of this quality improvement project was to engage patients in monitoring their intake by using teach-back and patient engagement techniques to track their own oral fluid intake throughout the day. MethodsThe Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) model was used as the framework for this initiative. Patients meeting inclusion criteria were given a teach-back quiz to evaluate baseline knowledge. If patients were able to pass the teach-back quiz, they were given a tracking sheet with instructions on how to use it. After a period of eight hours, the sheet was collected and fluid intake volumes were compared with those documented in the EHR. ResultsUsing the Wilcox on non-parametric test, the mean difference between volume tracked by patient and volume documented by clinician was significant at pConclusion & Implications for CNL PracticeVariation between oral fluid intake volume documented in the EHR and patient stated volumes indicates that EHR documentation is less reliable than records kept by adequately educated and engaged patients. Implications for CNL practice include identification of opportunities to increase patient engagement and to utilize evidence-based techniques for this purpose. The CNL should explore barriers that contribute to inaccuracy of documentation. The CNL may explore more reliable methods for determining accurate patient fluid balance for at-risk populations

Undergraduate Library Internships and Professional Success

This poster reports on an assessment completed of former undergraduate library interns to explore the impact their internship had on the development of career goals, acceptance to and preparation for graduate education, and their early career. Through an online survey (n= 45) and six semi-structured telephone interviews, respondents reported a positive impact on the above areas