Professional Development

Sarah at the Metrolina Library Association Conference

Friday, June 19, 2015 1:50 pm

On June 11th, I drove to Charlotte to attend the 10th Annual Metrolina Library Association Conference. The keynote speaker was Dr. Jim Carmichael who is an active member of AAUP and an advocate for intellectual freedom. At the heart of teaching, he said, “[Professors] have the right to say what we feel is the truth in the classroom.”

I attended a session on productivity apps such as KanbanFlow and, which has a Pomodoro timer for those who use this time management method. Among,, and, I tested all three websites and the first two are my favorites. Check it out!

I also attended a session on instructional design, which provided some good reminders that learning outcomes should be observable, measurable, and demonstrated. Bloom’s taxonomy is helpful when constructing learning outcomes. When planning instruction, ask yourself: What do you want them to know? Need to know or nice to know?

The last two sessions that I attended were on designing staff development, and here are some points to consider:

Stakeholders: Departments, offices, student organizations, community groups could/should you include in the conversation?

Barriers: Identify any possible barriers that could arise through collaborating

Opportunities: What are some concrete and innovative collaborations that you could do around this topic?

In one session, the speaker recognized Roz Tedford who gave a presentation on developing an Information Literacy credit course for librarians at Winston-Salem State University. Go Roz!

The Living Library at Radford University is something new I learned where people can share their different perspectives, and apparently it is a growing trend in universities across the U.S. In addition, GLSEN is a recommended resource for designing inclusive programs.


Metrolina Library Association’s 9th Annual Conference

Monday, June 16, 2014 1:25 pm

Last week, Kaeley and I attended the Metrolina conference in Charlotte. It was different from prior Metrolina conferences in that it was held on the campus of Central Piedmont Community College rather than at Johnson & Wales Univ. in downtown Charlotte. The conference center served as our venue and did so very well. The conference began with a keynote speech followed by 4 concurrent sessions that wrapped around a lunch and poster session. Kaeley and I have agreed to split our write-ups rather than submitting duplicate entries on the sessions we attended together.

During session 2, we attended New Frontiers: Rethinking Library Instruction in Online Learning Spaces. The speaker began by outlining the short-comings of one-shot library instruction sessions: there’s insufficient time to help students refine their topics, to encourage them to read and analyze sources, or connect different information sources in a meaningful way. He asserts that digital learning objects can overcome these short-comings.

A Digital Learning Object is an electronic resource with clear learning objectives that often has assessment tied to it. It can take many formats: lecture, tutorial, online game, interactive online exercise, or a video tutorial embedded in a research guide. It’s short and focused and the most effective ones contain interactive elements. Our toolkit videos were an early version of Digital Learning Objects.

The presenter’s advice for creating effective DLOs includes these design suggestions: start with clear objectives; use a combination of AV and text; break it into discrete sections so none is too long; include interactive elements. His process for producing an 8-module DLO on information literacy consisted of the following steps: define the objectives; assess the intended audience; write the script; design the visuals; record the audio; import captions; review, edit, finalize; distribute.

He used Adobe Captivate to create the modules, but there are many options for making DLOs. They can be embedded in research guides or in course management programs. Finally, he stressed that interactivity is the key to successful online learning.

For session 3, I attended Change Your Approach to Faculty Collaboration, the description for which read “This presentation will provide guidance on how to change approaches to faculty collaboration by playing a more integral role in academic writing and publishing teams” and she did exactly that. Ms. Sorrell provided suggestions for how librarians can move from supporting faculty research and writing to becoming co-authors with the faculty. This is especially possible when a faculty member is working on literature review.

Melanie Sorrell of UNC-Charlotte suggested librarians can play a more integral role in researching and writing lit reviews beyond searching for articles. First, she suggests, publicize your desire or intention to your faculty – let them know what you’d like to do. Publicize your own articles to your faculty so they understand you’re a published author. Approach younger, tenure-seeking faculty; they may be more open to working with you since their need to publish is great. Once you start working with a faculty member(s) negotiate with the primary author and make it clear you can do more than search for articles, such as identifying target journals or writing a section of the review. Establish author order. Once these items have been agreed upon, send an e-mail to the primary author documenting the conversation that includes you as co-author.

Once you’re established as a member of the research team, she recommends doing the following: establish a draft timeline and be sure to hit your deadlines; manage the citation management software; do some background reading on the topic; ask the lead author for a draft of the abstract; and establish a list of keywords, and share them with the author(s) to verify.

Ms. Sorrell recommends documenting your search strategy and including it in the methodology section of the article. Include keywords or subject headings, date range limitations, and any filters you applied. As the search evolves, document how you altered it, document synonyms, truncation or other changes you made. I had never thought of this before and it was a real ‘light bulb’ moment for me.

In the later stages, edit the 2nd draft, using the knowledge gained from the background reading to insure that the lit review reflects the articles’ content. Finally, help your co-authors understand the difference between subscription and open access journals as you decide where to submit it for publication.

Ms. Sorrell’s co-presenter spent the second portion describing open access and copyright issues for authors, but since Molly has covered these topics with us so thoroughly, I don’t feel it’s necessary to repeat that content here.

For session 4, I attended Crossing the Threshold: Threshold Concepts & IL by Kathy Shields and Jenny Dale in which they shared ACRL’s evolution from IL standards towards a set of threshold concepts. Threshold concepts are basic or foundational concepts without an understanding of which, a student cannot move forward or cross the threshold. Once one grasps a TC, one cannot unlearn it. Often TCs are so basic that they go unrecognized by those who understand them.

To qualify as a TC, an idea must be: transformative, integrative, irreversible, bounded and troublesome. They are often concepts that define a discipline and the way of thinking for professionals in that discipline.

Why switch from standards to threshold concepts? TCs are easier to explain to faculty in other disciplines, they offer a greater potential for collaboration, they help explain the ‘why’ behind particular practices and they’re more comprehensive – more than a matter of checking of boxes.

The threshold concepts being proposed by ACRL include: scholarship is a conversation; research is inquiry; format as process; authority is constructed and contextual; and searching is strategic. During the session, we broke into small groups and mapped the new TCs to the current standards. This made it easier to see the shift as an evolution rather than a sharp break with past practices.

Sessions 3 and 4 were the most interesting to me as the concepts are so relevant to my practice of librarianship. I’m already thinking about how I might integrate threshold concepts into my LIB230 and LIB235/ESE305 classes.

Metrolina Conference 2010

Wednesday, June 23, 2010 2:37 pm

Metrolina 5th Annual Information Literacy Conference

17 June 2010, Charlotte, NC

This was the first Metrolina Information Literacy Conference I’ve attended, with a program that prompted some dithering over which sessions to choose-always a positive sign.

“Information Literacy Examined in Multicultural Context,” presented by keynote speaker Dr. Clara Chu of the Department of Library and Information Studies at UNCG, was the most thought-provoking of all the talks. Grounded at once in theory as well as in personal conviction and at times painful life experience, the lecture commenced by stressing the vast amount of information that inundates us every day, but adding that although we now have unprecedented access to diverse sources of information it is also difficult to distinguish information from noise and inaccuracy. Professor Chu defined a range of types of diversity: human diversity as broadly encompassing physical differences, life experiences, and personal preferences; cultural diversity as different beliefs, values, and personal characteristics; and systems diversity as variable organizational structure and management. She singled out the importance of critical literacy which fosters diverse ways of looking at information , questioning attitudes, values, and beliefs, and enabling one to uncover social inequality and injustice, as a means of being an agent of social change.

Multicultural literacy is the knowledge of culture and language. From feminist studies Chu singled out positionality, whereby one recognizes what one brings to the table in terms of social demographics, cultural characteristics, and language. She listed evaluation criteria for multicultural content or multimedia materials:

  1. Objectivity or bias such as racism, sexism, ethnocentrism, homophobia, or ageism; this is characterized by unrealistic representation, imbalance, omission, stereotyping, and fragmentation. For example, a library may have information about a community but not BY the community, inadvertently omitting their own voices. Counter-narratives tell the other story, affording perspectives that run counter to the presumed ones and alternatives to the dominant discourse.
  2. Language diversity, variance within languages, and language bias, once again bearing the potential for racism, sexism, homophobia, or ageism with loaded terminology, ridicule, exaggeration, mispronunciation, slander, or offensiveness. She raised the question of whether libraries are doing enough to provide multi-language access, and suggested using an approximate tool such as google translator.
  3. Subject, such as scope, authority, authenticity, and accuracy.
  4. Resources imbalance or selectivity, invisibility or omission, scope, diversity of format perspective and language.

Finally, she addressed cultural competency, which includes ethnic competence and an awareness of one’s own cultural limitations. By way of example, she listed characteristics of American culture: self-expression, equality, and informality, achievement, self control of destiny, individualism and authority in non-authoritarian relationships. By contrast, a Latino/a patron might be characterized by allocentrism (community orientation), simpatico, familialism, personal space issues, time orientation, gender roles, and respect for authority. Cultural competence also includes openness to cultural differences, utilizing cultural resources, and acknowledgement of cultural integrity. Multicultural literacy, she emphasized, is prominently one of the literacies of the twenty-first century.

“Classroom 2.0: Bringing Interactivity into Library Instruction,” presented by Jenny Dale, Amy Harris, and Lynda Kellam of UNCG, was an engaging and predictably interactive session. Prefacing the session with a nod to instructional design, which is intended to make the knowledge transfer happen in a deliberate, systematic, and appealing way, the group went on to advocate for interactivity as a means of engaging students and distributing power and responsibility. A few “Think-Pair-Share” sessions demonstrated the merit of interactivity as we variously pondered and proffered rationales for interactivity or the merits/demerits of our assorted libraries. Another exercise actually got us out of our seats as we wandered about the room in a modified reprise of the old “Sardines” childhood game, bearing slips of paper and searching for research statements and related keywords where we might all legitimately congregate together. It is always enormously helpful to get ideas for interactive strategies, so this was a particularly useful, pragmatic session.

“Teach Smarter Not Harder: Classroom Tips and Techniques,” with Sherry Bagwell, a retired educator from the Greenville County Schools, SC, was the one session that proved to be less than useful. The brief summary in the conference program had not indicated that the intended audience was in fact public school librarians and teachers, so although there were numerous tips and suggestions, they were not really germane to our higher education setting-and happily so, since many referred to problematic situations and behaviors, which we seem to be blissfully ignorant of and largely immune to, as far as I’m aware. She outlined core beliefs in the primacy of caring and the inevitability of conflict, and warned against attaching rewards to grades or to behavior. Behavior can be changed and good behavior must be taught, and good discipline is timely discipline. There was some discussion about different types of teachers: authoritative, permissive, and authoritarian, and the situations in which various approaches might tend to emerge.

Finally, I attended Mary Scanlon’s excellent session, “Increasing Intellectual Engagement in an Info-lit Class for Business Majors.” Her voice projecting valiantly through the ravages of persistent laryngitis, Mary described challenges in teaching an advanced business research course, as well as considerations in devising solutions. She cited numerous distractions for students: the numerous and diverse types of resources, databases and web sites, and the elusive critical thinking process that may or may not enable a student to connect a need with a germane resource. She sought approaches that would hold the students’ migratory attention spans and assignments that would reinforce knowledge and engage students with the research materials. She nonetheless had to bear in mind students’ frequently articulated expectations of the appropriate workload for a one-credit course(familiar, anyone?). Mary offered numerous tactics, including the following:

More graded, hands-on activities, including student presentations (e.g. students responsible in groups for teaching databases)

More of the course grade dependent on intellectual engagement with material (via the class blog and discussion), worksheets, and quizzes

In order to focus students’ attention, she consolidated the syllabus to four primary topics: company information, industry information, market research, and accounting information; and she covered fewer resources, two or three per topic with more time devoted to each and attention to drawing parallels among the resources.

She devised worksheets that were essentially guided note-taking, and were completed during class sessions. In these worksheets students were to describe contents and to list tools for refining a search and for managing results. Quizzes reinforced class content and applied tools learned in class, and written reports, 2-3 pages in length, required the use of certain resources, and were skill-based, involving critical thinking and integrating information from multiple sources.

Tactics to engage student attention included daily group presentations, weekly blog postings, and class discussion. Students had to teach databases, for which she provided initial orientation by way of jing videos.

In conclusion, course components that worked well included the worksheets, quizzes, written reports, database presentations, the final presentation, and the frequent feedback. Less successful were the information topics which did not seem to engage the students, who failed to think through all the issues. These topics were e-readers, Google Books, the decline of print newspapers, and Net neutrality, and the discussion that ensued offered suggestions for alternative topics or approaches. Outcomes for the course included higher grades, better coursework –especially the reports, and course evaluations.

This was a very useful, focused conference, and I hope to attend more in future years.

Metrolina Information Literacy Conference

Friday, June 18, 2010 1:35 pm

On Thursday, June 17, a group of ZSR librarians (Bobbie Collins, Carolyn McCallum, Molly Keener, Roz Tedford, Ellen Daugman, and Mary Scanlon) attended the 5th Annual Information Literacy Conference in Charlotte. This is the third year that I have attended the Metrolina Conference, and it gets better every year!

While enjoying a quick continental breakfast, I took time to review the conference schedule and made somenotes on which breakout programs to attend during the day. As usual, this conference was well organized and provided an opportunity for participants to select from a wide-variety of excellent programs on information literacy.

The first thing on the morning agenda was the opening keynote presentation. The speaker was Dr. Clara M. Chu, Department Chair and Professor, Department of Library and Information Studies at UNCG. Her presentation focused on “Information Literacy Examined in Multicultural Context.” In her opening remarks, Dr. Chu mentioned that in 2009 President Obama proclaimed October as National Information Literacy Awareness Month:

She noted that in the President’s proclamation he stated that “Americans have unprecedented access to the diverse and independent sources of information, as well as institutions such as libraries and universities, that can help separate truth from fiction and signal from noise.” Obama’s proclamation reinforces the importance of lifelong learning and the library’s involvement in promoting information literacy activities and programs.

In 2000, Dr. Chu published an article in Reference & User Services Quarterly entitled “See, hear, and speak no evil: A content approach to evaluating multicultural multimedia materials.” During her presentation, Dr. Chu made reference to her research and discussed four components to consider when evaluating materials: objectivity/bias, language use, subject mastery, and resources. According to Chu, we live in “multicultural societies and teach in multicultural settings.” Being aware of cultural values and traditions of learners, instructors can apply culturally responsive teaching principles to the classroom.

This year it was extremely difficult to decide which of the breakout sessions to attend. One of the breakout sessions focused on students as lifelong learners. The presenter was Joe Eshleman (Johnson & Wales University). His intriguing title (“Show me the value”) immediately caught my attention and so I decided to attend this session. To stimulate the discussion, Eshleman posed several questions. For example, one question was: “What does it mean to an individual to be information literate outside of the educational context?” There was a lively exchange of ideas and opinions among the participants with many sharing some great insights.

In the afternoon, I attend Roz and Molly’s presentation on using documentary film in IL instruction and Mary Scanlon’s presentation on info-lit for business majors. All of the ZSR presenters did an excellent job, and I came away with a lot of new ideas.

It was a beautiful day to attend a conference. The facilities at Johnson and Wales provided a relaxing setting to enjoy the presentations and reflect on the topic of information literacy. Also the conference provided an opportunity to connect with some IL colleagues and make some new friends in the process.

Metrolina Information Literacy Conference

Friday, June 18, 2010 11:37 am

Yesterday I attended the Metrolina Library Association 5th Annual Information Literacy Conference. As Roz noted, ZSR was well represented by both attendees and presenters (Carolyn, Bobbie, Ellen, Mary S., Roz, and I), and I enjoyed catching up with colleagues from both ZSR and my UNCG days, as well as make new acquaintances during breaks. Being a smaller conference enabled good connections and conversation throughout the day, but the small size did not mean that the presenters had small impact – quite the contrary, especially for me, still new to IL instruction!

Dr. Clara M. Chu, chair of the LIS department at UNCG, opened the conference with her keynote, “Information Literacy Examined in Multicultural Context.” She made the point that multicultural literacy embraces both information literacy and critical literacy in knowledge of cultures and languages, and pointed out that problems arise when we think that one difference is better than another. She also noted that we need to be aware of positionality: recognizing what we bring to the table (e.g., socio-demographics, cultural characteristics, language). We need to teach our students to look at information from critical, multicultural perspectives, and practice reflexive ethics. We also need to be aware of identifying counter-narratives or alternatives to the dominant discourse. As WFU’s student body continues to diversify, I believe that there will be increasing opportunities to discuss multicultural literacy in LIB100 courses.

The first breakout session I attended was a presentation by Joe Eshleman, Johnson & Wales University-Charlotte, focusing on strategies and content to use in IL instruction that helps emphasize the significance of IL to students’ futures. Students need to understand that whether they know it or not, they apply principles of IL whenever they look for information, be it on which cell phone to purchase to which resource will help with their paper. They’ve done it, they do it, and they’ll continue to do it! I have a lot of scribbled margin notes with ideas that the discussion from this session sparked for future LIB100 use that will hopefully help students see past IL as library/education-only to real-life applicability.

After a delicious lunch (thank you, culinary institute food services!), Roz and I gave our presentation on using documentary films in an IL class. Participants seemed genuinely interested in our approach, and we had great questions and suggestions that fueled conversation. And although it wasn’t technically part of our presentation, Roz discussed our faculty status and I shared insights on IL instruction as a new instructor, two tangential topics that were of interest to many in the room.

The final breakout session I attended was specifically for new instructors, which seemed like the perfect place to end my day. Donna Gunter and Stephanie Otis from UNCC created a survival guide of best practices for new instructors. Partnering with Roz to teach LIB100 this past spring, and tagging along on several BI sessions for FYS during the winter, gave me a good grounding in survival tactics for IL instruction, and this session confirmed much of what I already knew. However, I still came away with ideas for classroom management, and the reminder that we cannot teach all of them all things but we can provide a solid grounding (always good to hear!).

All in all, my first immersion into an IL conference was thought-provoking and fun, and I would definitely return to the Metrolina conference in the future!

Roz at Metrolina Conference

Friday, June 18, 2010 10:21 am

Yesterday, six of us (Mary S., Ellen, Carolyn, Molly, Bobbie and myself) attended the Metrolina Library Association’s 5th Annual Information Literacy Conference in Charlotte. This was my first time but others had been in the past and gave it high marks. I have to say it was a really great day, and not just because it was hosted by Johnson & Wales University. Those who know me know that I have this not-so-secret desire to go to culinary school, so the location was great and the food even better!

The opening keynote speaker was Dr. Clara Chu, from UNC-G’s Dept. of Library and Information Studies. She spoke on Information Literacy in a multicultural context. It was a thought provoking talk that covered issues ranging from being sure you use visual images that are diverse to recognizing diversity in a variety of different ways. One thing that I thought was interesting was how easy and important it can be to have the ability for student to translate library pages into their own language. If you don’t have fluent speakers on your staff to rewrite the content, then Google translator is a nice low-barrier way to provide multi-lingual content. Even if the translations are not perfect, they can be useful enough to make the patron feel more comfortable with you and your services and more likely to come in and ask for help. Lots to think about from Dr. Chu and she was around the rest of the day and attended sessions and brought up some great points in each about multiculturalism.

The firs session I attended was given by our friends Amy Harris, Jenny Dale and Lynda Kellam from UNC-G and it was about adding interactivity into one-shot library instruction sessions. Now, I have attended dozens of presentations over the years on this topic and I can say that this one was, by far, the most useful one I have attended. Many great ideas and examples were demonstrated that I fully plan on using in my instruction in the future. The one I liked the most I think was to hand out slips of paper to people in the class. On some of them have research questions, and on the rest have keywords. Then you have the students get up and try to match the keywords to the research question. Simple, but a really effective way to introduce or reinforce the ideas of keywords. Someone also suggested that for upper-level students or students who will be using books heavily you could also include some LC Subject Headings. Thus you could have “World War II” as a keyword and “World War, 1939-1945.” to begin the discussion of keyword searching vs. controlled vocabulary.

Molly and I were presenters during the second break-out session. Our presentation was about our use of documentary films in our LIB100 class this past Spring. It was well-attended and well received. I even came away with some ideas for other ways to use films. Dr. Chu was in our session and discussed how interesting it would be to find documentaries on the same subject created by people from different cultures, for example. We found, however, that there was a lot of interest in our faculty status process (we mentioned this in the presentation) so I think there is a presentation in there for some conference – perhaps NCLA where we can discuss the process we went through. I’d be happy to work on one with folks if there is interest.

The final presentation I went to was on library presence on mobile devices. It was given by Michael Winecoff from UNC-Charolotte and Beth Martin from Johnson C. Smith University. Both of these libraries have developed mobile web pages for their libraries that are exceptionally simple and would be easy to replicate. If you have a smart phone, use your web browser to go to to see what UNC-Charlotte has done. It has a very clean looking list of links. Two stood out to me: First is a ‘Call My Librarian’ list where you can pick your discipline and get a link to call the reference librarian for that department. They also have a simple floor guide and a way to see how many computers are free in the library. Johnson C. Smith has which is an icon based page where they have links to the catalog, hours, etc. What is interesting here is that they have enabled EbscoHost Mobile which provides a nice interface to Ebsco databases on the smart phone. They mentioned that it worked best on iPhones and Droids, but I think it would be worth looking into. Both libraries are making the code available to anyone who wants it – JCSU got their from NC State who has a mobile web site at - they in turn got their code from MIT…..

Mobile interfaces from libraries have a way to go, but these two showed some very easy ways to have a presence on the smart phone without having to write an iPhone app or anything complicated. I was thinking it would be nice to have a way for our students to see if there were study rooms available an book them on their phones…..sorry Kevin……did I say that out loud ;)

Anyway – it was a good conference and I will likely go back next year. Very worthwhile!

Professional Development
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007

Powered by, protected by Akismet. Blog with