









































1

PRE-CONFERENCE 
WORKSHOP

Building Collaboration with 
Faculty and Instructional 
Designers
Beth Larkee Kumar, Graduate Theological Union 
Dr. Kyle Schiefelbein-Guerrero, United Lutheran Seminary

ABSTR ACT Librarians are often working together within the library, 
but collaborating with faculty and instructional designers can benefit 
your students, faculty, and staff. Many large libraries have whole teams 
working collaboratively, but in a theological library you might be work-
ing at a much smaller scale, with a limited budget. This pre-conference 
focused on approaches that a small team (one librarian and one instruc-
tional designer/faculty member) has developed to collaborate across 
their departments to build a suite of services and collections to serve 
their patrons. The workshop allowed time to develop a plan of action 
to bring away three concrete items on which to collaborate with the 
faculty or instructional designers at your school.

BACKGROUND OF THE GRADUATE THEOLOGICAL UNION

Founded in 1962 as a consortium of Protestant seminaries, 
Graduate Theological Union soon became an ecumenical hub of 
Protestants, Catholics, and Unitarian Universalist traditions, now 
comprising eight schools. The Common Library was established 



2  ATL A 2019 PROCEEDINGS

in 1969, merging the schools’ individual library holdings into a 
single collection, a combined catalog, and eventually a single 
building. The GTU expanded its offerings to include the PhD and 
MA degrees, while the individual seminaries maintained degrees 
geared toward ministerial leadership (MDiv, etc.). The consortium’s 
location near the University of California, Berkeley has provided 
for important exchanges with the “secular” disciplines. The Center 
for Jewish Studies, the GTU’s first non-Christian center, opened in 
1968, and was later followed by centers for Islamic and Dharma 
studies. Recently, the Center for Arts & Religion and the Center for 
Theology and the Natural Sciences joined the GTU. In 2016 the MA 
and PhD programs were realigned to emphasize the interreligious 
and interdisciplinary nature of the GTU.

Even with such collaboration and excitement, the economic 
downturn and changes in mainline Protestantism in the late-2000s 
led to shifts in priorities. Many administrative services (financial aid, 
business office, human resources, information technology) became 
decentralized, and the total number of faculty members was slightly 
reduced. In the midst of all this, the library maintains its central 
role as the main hub of the consortium, even though numbers of the 
professional and paraprofessional staff had been lowered over the 
past decade. Because of the increased importance of online learning 
at the schools, the Digital Learning Department was created with Dr. 
Kyle Schiefelbein-Guerrero as its inaugural director.

The reduction in library staff required rethinking how public and 
user experience would be handled, as there were only 1.5 reference 
librarians, a reduction from three FTE. With less staff, the reference 
librarians had to be smarter about how they used the time on and off 
the desk. They cross-trained other librarians to fill in during instruc-
tion sessions or absences and taught theologians employed in other 
areas the basics of referral reference to cover the desk rather than 
close it. Beth Kumar, as department head, needed to do the major-
ity of the outreach, creation of content, and advertising while at the 
reference desk.

REASONS FOR COLLABORATION

With the Digital Learning Department and the GTU Library as the 



Pre-Conference Workshop  3

two remaining shared services for the entire consortium, it made 
sense to collaborate. At its most basic, it saves time, as there is a 
shorter time-to-completion on our projects when we do not have to 
repeat each process, such as reaching out to the schools to sched-
ule orientation sessions. Yet teamwork does not naturally happen; it 
requires intentionality and time for the team to coalesce. As a team 
of two, we can accomplish more together than each one separately. 
The biggest reason for collaboration is to draw on the breadth of 
experience and expertise in the different areas represented. Specifi-
cally, this expertise can be labeled by the three roles of Librarian, 
Faculty Member, and Instructional Designer/Technologist. In some 
cases, these roles are not necessarily three separate people, as a 
team member may fulfill two roles on campus. 

Librarian: the “insider” who is professionally trained in infor-
mation-seeking and literacy; knows the services offered; is most 
associated with the library; may or may not have a strong back-
ground in technology and/or educational theory.

Faculty Member: the “consumer” who tends to think about the 
library insofar as it connects with research and classroom assign-
ments; subject matter expert who knows the material the best 
and teaches it in the classroom, but may not be fully aware of the 
library’s offerings; may or may not have a background in educa-
tional theory.

Instructional Designer/Technologist: the “facilitator” who brings 
together various tools and techniques to assist the subject matter 
expert in course design; can recommend approaches to infor-
mation literacy and library usage as they connect specifically to 
courses.

Each person has had different histories with the classroom and 
the library, the combination of which is more than a single person. 
This breadth can help answer questions about what went well and 
what could be improved in the library and classroom experience.

A goal of collaboration is to become dialogue partners for new 
ideas. One option for dialoguing may be a verbal brainstorming 
session. The location of these dialogues is as important as who the 



4  ATL A 2019 PROCEEDINGS

partners are. When not requiring disclosure of private material, 
most of our dialogues took place between questions at the refer-
ence desk during slow shifts. This location was key, as it is a central 
service point in the building, in proximity to various places that 
intersect our individual and joint work. 

Observing the places allowed us to brainstorm how to resolve 
some issues we see daily, each from a particular perspective. It 
also allowed the non-expert to see the realm of the expert, provid-
ing suggestions that an “insider” may miss. When it came time to 
outline plans formally, we moved to a room with a touchscreen and 
whiteboard. 

A final reason for collaboration is to broaden the user base 
through referrals. Although some overlap exists, each person in the 
collaboration works primarily with a different group of constituents: 
the librarian with those engaged in research (faculty and students), 
the faculty member with students, and the instructional designer 
with faculty. Bringing all three together provides information from 
as many students, faculty, and staff members as possible, especially 
as some users are unsure who should know what when assuming 
older divisions of jobs.

Each role may know something that is of value to the other two, 
like a particular book that is popular among several courses that 
may be a good candidate for having multiple simultaneous ebook 
connections. This cross-information allows a faster initial response, 
which is not quite “cross-training,” as each person in the collabora-
tion team could not function alone.

APPROACHES TO COLLABORATION

At the GTU, Beth and Kyle have implemented these nine examples of 
collaboration, but there are many more that may work at your insti-
tution. 

1. Face-to-face Orientations
Previously, we were doing three separate parts of the orientation 
process at different times and in different buildings during orien-
tation week. The registrar was doing ID cards, the library was doing 
orientation, and Moodle support (Digital Learning Department) did 
a Moodle orientation. Moving the ID cards to the Digital Learning 



Pre-Conference Workshop  5

Department allowed us to change the process to create a block of time 
for “one-stop shopping” with the students divided by program and 
degree. When the students arrive at the library building, they have 
their photographs taken and IDs printed by Kyle or his student assis-
tant, which takes approximately one minute per student. The ID card 
printer computer is on a cart, so it can be moved into storage when it 
is not orientation week.

After receiving their card, the students move into the Collabora-
tive Learning Space (described below) to hear the hour-long library 
orientation to library resources, services, and other essential infor-
mation. Some residential students may have a brief tour as well. 
Finally, Kyle gives a fifteen-minute overview of Moodle. The three-
part session takes roughly ninety minutes and has motivated more 
students to attend the library orientation if they want an ID card, 
which has increased attendance to almost all incoming students. 

We offer make-up sessions during the first week of classes for 
those who cannot attend orientation week. 

2. Workshops (co-taught) and classes
Over the past few years, we have expanded the workshop offerings 
and targeted them toward specific audiences. For example, work-
shops for faculty and future faculty are geared towards teaching and 
course design. Other workshops are intended for a general graduate 
audience, such as the popular Zotero workshop. 

We evaluate each workshop and make changes every semester, 
based on feedback from participants or the lack of participants. Some-
times the material is relevant, but the title of the workshop, the time 
offered, or the mode (in person or online) needs to be changed. In 
addition to our co-teaching, we occasionally teach with other depart-
ments, such as the Professional Development Program (a support 
program for the PhD students) and CARe (Center for Arts and Religion). 

Examples of some of our co-taught workshops include: Fake News, 
Effective Presentations, Building Assignments with Information Liter-
acy, Zotero, and Technology for Teaching Religious Studies and Theol-
ogy.

3. Zoom and YouTube
We use both Zoom and YouTube for live events, the former for inter-
active events (in-class instruction sessions, meetings, and individual 



6  ATL A 2019 PROCEEDINGS

research help with students at a distance), and the latter for broadcast-
ing larger events and workshops that are open to all and designed to be 
watched at any time (the Zotero workshop). Kyle has set up our Zoom 
room (meeting code) numbers to match our telephone numbers, so 
the students use the same number to call reference as to meet with a 
librarian on Zoom. 

4. Moodle embedded roles
The increase in online and distance students also provided an oppor-
tunity for the reference librarian to be “present” in the courses in an 
asynchronous way. Kyle created a specific role in Moodle for the librar-
ian, which is a hybrid of the student and teacher roles. To maintain 
FERPA compliance, the librarian role can create certain digital arti-
facts in the system but cannot access any student data (except posts 
in the approved forums). The instructor requests that the librarian be 
added to the class so that the librarian can add materials and partici-
pate in discussions.

The librarian has a “sandbox” page on Moodle to create various 
modules that can be imported into classes. A popular module is the 
library overview video-quiz sequence, which contains four videos 
and four quizzes. The sequence utilizes conditional activities so that 
students must complete the videos and quizzes in order to finish the 
module. The instructor can see when students finish the module, 
and the librarian can assess any additional training needs through 
the quiz results.

5. Room Reservations/Room Remodeling
Since the library serves as the intellectual and cultural hub of GTU, it 
only made sense to place our collaborative tech-enabled classroom 
in there. The GTU had secured a grant from the Arthur Vining Davis 
Foundation, originally to replace the outdated library computer lab 
with another computer lab. When Kyle came on board, the project 
was expanded to transforming the room into a flexible learning space, 
with movable furniture, a large touchscreen, and video conferencing 
equipment. Kyle attended a half-day pre-workshop at Educause about 
learning spaces to solidify the plans. Kyle and Beth took field trips to 
other libraries (particularly the remodeled spaces at the University 
of California, Berkeley) to see how furniture and technology were 
being used, including mobile whiteboards which we implemented 



Pre-Conference Workshop  7

throughout the library.
As a way to promote the use of the upgraded classroom, which we 

call the Collaborative Learning Space (CLS), we requested from the 
dean and registrar that the required doctoral departmental seminars 
and the MA research methods course be scheduled there. In return, 
the library would schedule a reference librarian at the desk (which 
is directly outside the classroom door) during and for an hour after 
the class, so that research help can be directly connected with class-
room activities. This has also provided opportunities for the refer-
ence librarians to visit the classes themselves because of the visibility.

The popularity of the CLS had two consequences. First, we had to 
establish a policy on which classes and events could use the room. 
The space must still be open for library instruction sessions and 
workshops, so it cannot always be scheduled for regularly-scheduled 
classes. The policy dictates what has priority to use the room, which 
has worked with few glitches over the past two years. Second, faculty 
members wanted the other classrooms and study spaces upgraded 
with similar features. The GTU president was able to secure a larger 
grant that enabled us to transform a classroom, two study spaces, and 
a conference room, and provide additional technology for three addi-
tional rooms. The two study rooms and the Digital Learning Lab can 
be reserved online by students and faculty through the LibCal soft-
ware. The CLS and library conference room calendars are managed 
manually because of the priority policy.

6. Technical support (physical rooms and software)
As mentioned in the introduction, “cross-information” is an impor-
tant reason for collaboration. This is especially true when it comes to 
supporting the learning spaces, both the software and the physical 
furniture. With the CLS as the model, the rest of the learning spaces 
were designed similarly, meaning that it is necessary to be trained 
on one space to know how to use and support the others. The touch-
screens with onboard computers and the regular screens with NUCs 
all have the same software and passwords, and every system includes 
easy instructions for video conferencing. This consistency enables 
more people to support the systems, even at the basic level.

This support includes configuring the room’s layout to optimize 
learning. The tables are unlocked and unplugged so that they can 



8  ATL A 2019 PROCEEDINGS

be placed in different arrangements, and then they are locked and 
connected again. Patrons are asked about room layout when reserving 
the larger rooms. When orientations and library instruction occur in 
the CLS, extra tables and chairs are removed to lessen any distractions.

7. Chat/reference services
We have had librarian chat services on the library webpages for a 
while now but more recently integrated the chat into Moodle. The 
Ask-a-Librarian chat appears on the Moodle homepage, all course 
pages, and the help pages. Our statistics show that last year, nearly 
a quarter of all chat questions came via Moodle, along with an over-
all increase in chat questions each year. Sixty-three percent of chat 
questions still come directly via the library website, with the remain-
ing 13% coming from Summon (the discovery layer) and LibGuides. 

While clearly labeled with the words “Library Resources” and 
information about chatting with a librarian, we get a few students 
who are surprised that Beth or another librarian replies, as some 
expect a Moodle support person. For this reason, we have taught 
librarians to answer basic Moodle questions—such as “why can’t 
I see the syllabus?”—questions that can be answered without any 
access to student data. However, the majority of the questions are 
reference or research questions, related to the assignments the 
students are trying to complete. 

Conversely, Kyle has been cross-trained in basic reference skills. 
Although not a librarian, he can answer reference desk questions 
and knows when to refer students to a librarian when they need a 
more time-intensive research session. This is a tremendous asset 
because some questions begin as a standard technology question 
and then develop into a bigger information need. 

8. Advertising 
As with many of our activities before collaboration, we were 
completely siloed when it came to advertising our events. Moodle 
workshops, course design workshops, professional development 
workshops, and library workshops were advertised without a 
comprehensive marketing plan. Some workshops were listed on 
various websites, others sent to student email lists, others advertised 
with print signage, and some workshops only advertised by email-
ing faculty directly with a request to forward to their students. Our 



Pre-Conference Workshop  9

branch library had separate workshops and separate advertising, 
and we did not advertise on the GTU’s social media presence at all. 

We worked to combine all workshops into a single brochure for 
the semester, including workshops taught online and at the branch 
library. These were arranged by topic and date and given to all new 
students at orientation, and a LibGuide was created for most topics. 
We coordinated with campus marketing to advertise the ones with 
broad, general appeal on the campus social media platforms. We 
continued to advertise with print posters until recently when we 
replaced our bulletin board with a digital display. But most impor-
tantly, we added all the workshops to the campus-wide event calen-
dar on the GTU website, so people who are not necessarily looking 
at the library homepage will see each workshop. Our workshops are 
free and open to the public, so while we primarily have an audience 
of GTU students, we do draw people in from the UC Berkeley campus 
and members of the community.

A major benefit of having these open conversations with our 
colleagues about what workshops they are offering provides two 
incentives. First, we (individually) duplicate our teaching less, and 
offering a face-to-face and an online workshop on the same topic is 
less prep work. We record the online workshop and keep it posted 
for the future, so more people have access to the material and the 
associated LibGuide, without a lot of extra effort on our part. Second, 
the conversations around workshops have removed some of the silos 
between departments, and we find ourselves team-teaching work-
shops more. One example of this is the collaboration between the 
library and our Professional Development Program; we designed 
a workshop on Careers in Libraries, and specifically discuss using 
their degrees to become a theological librarian. The workshop 
has been well attended by students who are unsure if a traditional 
teaching job is something they want but are considering all areas 
in academia.

9. Collection Development
As needed, we suggest purchases for faculty and our professional 
development that normally would fall outside of the scope of our 
collection development policy, which is primarily in Religion, Theol-
ogy, and Philosophy. These could include design books, library 



10  ATL A 2019 PROCEEDINGS

architecture and space planning, Adobe software manuals, library 
instruction, and information literacy books, and they are purchased 
as ebooks when available. Additionally, as we get to know the courses 
and faculty, we will suggest books out of scope. These recommenda-
tions are based on courses where we have helped students/faculty, 
as in the case of biographies or fiction (areas where we do not collect 
much) or where we know there is higher-than-average demand, such 
as a book that is on the required list for three classes. 

CONCLUSION

As we continue our work, the goal has been to expand our network of 
collaboration to other members of the GTU. This is not only impor-
tant because we believe so strongly in collaboration, but it is also 
done out of necessity. When we presented our pre-conference work-
shop in Vancouver, we were in our positions as described through-
out this article. After returning from the conference, we have both 
changed in our positions at the GTU. Beth has shifted in her responsi-
bilities to become the lead librarian on user experience, the website, 
and online learning and shifted away from the management of the 
print collection and traditional reference desk duties. Kyle has left 
the GTU for a full-time faculty position elsewhere. The new Direc-
tor of Digital Learning, who trained with Kyle for an entire month 
before taking over, will be included in the collaboration network.

Another goal of our collaboration is to help others with what we 
have learned and done. The workshop slides with images of our 
spaces are included at: https://libguides.gtu.edu/collaborate. In 
addition, we provide some questions for you to start or revise your 
own institution’s collaborations.

QUESTIONS TO GET STARTED ON YOUR PLAN:

• Who at your library will be involved? 
• Who are your contact people outside of the library?
• Do you regularly meet up with these people, or would you arrange 

a separate time? 
• What resources and tools are needed, and what training is 

required? Examples: Zoom, Moodle, LibCal/LibGuides, Camta-
sia /Captivate, Adobe Premiere.

https://libguides.gtu.edu/collaborate


Pre-Conference Workshop  11

• Are you in a multicampus/multilibrary situation? If so, will you 
involve the other campus?

• How will you work across departments?
• Do you need permission to begin these conversations?
• How will you report the progress?
• Who needs to know? Your faculty, deans, president, or trustees?
• Should you report accomplishments for accreditation?
• Are there budget implications? Some considerations: headset 

with microphone, webcam, software, training/webinars, printing, 
outreach event with faculty, additional people for reference desk 
coverage? Who will install any hardware that is purchased?

• How often will you meet with your collaborators? Will you have 
formal meetings, or informal check-ins and email regularly?

• How will you coordinate workshops, orientations, or classes 
in advance to avoid conflicting times? 

• What do you want your outcomes to be?

Start small when you begin developing your plan: List three collabo-
rations you would like to implement at your campus and list three 
specific tasks to do first. 

BIOS

Beth Larkee Kumar was Head of Reference Services at the Gradu-
ate Theological Union Library in Berkeley, CA, managing the refer-
ence desk, the reference collection, instruction, and the library’s 
website. She recently changed duties to become the Learning and 
User Experience Librarian, shifting her priorities to online learn-
ing, the user experience, and managing the library’s website, guides, 
and marketing. Beth has been at the GTU for the past five years, 
but has previously been in academic libraries in Colorado, Illinois, 
and Virginia, ranging in size from giant flagship institutions to tiny 
private colleges. She holds both an MLIS and a Masters of Education 
(EdM) in Educational Organization and Leadership in Higher Educa-
tion from the University of Illinois.
Kyle Schiefelbein-Guerrero was Director of Digital Learning and 
Lecturer in Theology and Educational Technology at Graduate 
Theological Union. He was responsible for the consortium’s learn-
ing management system, course design workshops, faculty devel-



12  ATL A 2019 PROCEEDINGS

opment, and teaching a doctoral seminar on digital pedagogy. He 
earned his PhD in Liturgical Studies and Systematic Theology from 
GTU and has additional training from Educause and the Online 
Learning Consortium. He is currently Assistant Professor of Worship 
and Liturgy at United Lutheran Seminary in Pennsylvania. Starting 
in January 2020, he will be serving as co-editor of the journal Teach-
ing Theology & Religion.


