CLUE Meeting Minutes - March 29, 2000
10:30am - noon
In attendance:
Trudi Hahn (Chair), Pat Herron, Zaida Diaz, Karen Fishman,
Maggie Cunningham.
Absent:
Paula Greenwell, Bob Kackley, Carleton Jackson.
Guest:
None.
1. Proposal to Collaborate with Campus Writing Center.
CLUE discussed the possibility of the Libraries collaborating with the campus Writing Center. Trudi had discussed this idea in the March 28, 2000 SMACC meeting, and wants CLUE's reactions as well. The Writing Center is staffed by retired faculty, seniors, undergraduate and graduate students. Trudi and Maggie visited the Writing Center and observed their work and have had some preliminary discussions with Leigh Ryan, Manager of the Writing Center. Trudi
offered this 4-stage proposal:
Stage 1:
Provide Writing Center with instructional materials from the Libraries.(Done-March 28, 2000)
Stage 2:
Offer training workshops to Writing Center staff to raise awareness of Library resources. (Done-Scheduled for August 28, 2000)
resources. (Done-Scheduled for August 28, 2000)
Stage 3:
Offer the Libraries' facilities to the Writing Center (McK 2109) during the last part of the semester when students need help the most (and few instruction classes are being held). The Writing Center would commit to staffing the room for these writing "workshops" on certain days from 5-7 p.m.
Stage 4:
In addition to Writing Center volunteers, a librarian would be available during the writing "workshops" for consultation about library research and database searching. Extensive advertising of the workshops would be conducted.
CLUE discussed the four facets of the proposal and raised some concerns and questions. It was decided that subject team members of CLUE would discuss this idea with their team members, and bring back their comments at next month's idea with their team members, and bring back their comments at next month's meeting.
Postscript: One question raised was the general caliber of students who use the Writing Center - were these marginal or at-risk students needing a great deal of basic assistance? In a follow-up discussion with Leigh Ryan, Trudi learned that the typical student who asks for assistance at the Writing Center is a good student striving to be excellent. Poor students who are in danger of failing because they cannot write well seldom seek help there.
2. Future of VICTORWeb Classes. (handout)
Maggie presented CLUE with the attendance statistics from fall 1995-spring 2000 for VICTORWeb classes. For the spring 2000 semester, 15 classes were offered with a total attendance of 41 people, averaging 3.6 participants per class; this is a considerable drop from last spring's average of 12 participants per class. The drop in VICTORWeb class attendance is largely due to the tremendous success of the Special Lecturers teaching the majority of the ENGL 101 sections and the Beyond the Basic classes. CLUE discussed the implications of the data and decided that walk-in VICTORWeb classes would not be offered again, but that a basic interactive tutorial (designed in modules) would replace this instruction. VICTORWeb classes would still be taught on a requested and/or ad hoc basis.
3. Future of Beyond the Basics Walk-in Classes. (handout)
Maggie distributed statistics for the spring Beyond the Basics walk-in and requested classes. 8 walk-in classes were offered, with a total attendance of 31 people, averaging 4 per class. The average attendance for requested classes was about 18. CLUE agreed that the Libraries should not any longer offer walk-in Beyond the Basics classes.
4. Future of EDCP 108/UNIV 101 Instruction.
Trudi described EDCP108/UNIV101 and the colleges that require it of their students. She proposed that the Libraries create a special class, taught only if a faculty member requests it by the first week of the semester, for EDCP 108/UNIV 101. The group discussed what should be taught. It was proposed that a working group be formed to design it. Karen volunteered to be on this working group, along with Maggie and Trudi. Trudi will identify a couple of others who
are interested in participating. The EDCP 108/UNIV 101 working group will bring their proposal to CLUE by May or June.
5. Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education.
CLUE discussed the article and will be looking at it again in the future.
6. Coordination of Basic, Introductory Instruction with Subject Specialized Classes.
How can we learn more about the content of advanced subject specific library instruction classes? What sort of mechanism can be developed to gather data about these classes? Are subject specialists teaching remedial library research steps, or is each class covering something new and fresh? What specialized material is covered? CLUE discussed these questions along with Trudi's proposal to do some kind of exploratory research to address these questions. The data gathered would hopefully raise new questions and insights. The
information gathered might be used to determine how resources are being allocated in relation to workload, to share ideas between colleagues on instructional methods, and to track how we have evolved over time in our instruction program. A survey form could be distributed to the subject specialists to gather data on the kinds of basic and advanced topics taught in advanced classes. CLUE subject team members agreed to discuss this idea with their teams, and bring back their comments to CLUE at the next meeting, or even earlier directly to Trudi. She would be willing to draft a survey form.
CLUE Tentative Meeting Agenda:
- CLUE will receive a de-briefing from subject team members on their
reactions/thoughts/ideas about the Library/Writing Center collaboration proposal.
- CLUE will receive a de-briefing from subject team members on their
reactions/thoughts/ideas about the subject-specific class content surveys.
Next CLUE Meeting:
Wednesday, April 26, 2000
|
|
|
© 2000 University of Maryland Libraries
Last Revised: March 29, 2000
|