ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries 1 4 / C&RL News A m em ber of both the A C R L Publications in Librarianship Editorial Board and the LAMA LA& M Editorial Board, St. Clair’s professional activities include committee service in ALA’s LITA and ALCTS divisions and the Library Research Round Table. H er major editorial responsibilities have included the Texas Library Journal, the Geor­ gia- South Carolina College English Association Newsletter, and the Working Papers of the College of Business Administration at the University of Texas at San Antonio. A prolific writer, her work has appeared in College & Research Libraries, Technicalities, Wilson Library Rulletin, and Jour­ nal o f Library Administration. She has recently completed, along with Rose Mary Magrill, a study of undergraduate use of library collections funded by a grant from the Council on Library Resources (see pp. 25-28, this issue). ■ ■ Bibliographic instruction and accreditation in higher education By Marilyn Lutzker Deputy C hief Librarian John Jay College o f Criminal Justice I A new combination— accrediting libraries on the basis o f how well people are taught to use them. S ignificant changes are being made in the m anner in which libraries are viewed d u r­ ing the all-important higher education accredita­ tion process. The Middle States Commission on H igher Education now expects that each accred­ ited institution have a bibliographic instruction program, and that a library’s effectiveness within the teaching/leaming environm ent of the institu­ tion be clearly dem onstrated. Characteristics o f Excellence in Higher Educa­ tion: Standards f o r Accreditation states: “The centrality o f a library/leaming resources center in the educational mission of an institution deserves more than rhetoric and must be sup­ ported by more than lip service. An active and continuous program of bibliographic instruction is essential to realize this goal” (p. 35). Howard Simmons, executive director of the Middle States Commission on Higher Education, could not be more forthright in his support of bibliographic instruction. He has written, “As part of the accreditation process it is essential that all… institutions develop a strong program of biblio­ graphic instruction as one means of improving aca­ demic quality” [emphasis added] (Bibliographic Instruction, p .11). In support of this new emphasis, in Septem ber 1989, the Middle States Commission on Higher Education held a workshop to discuss methods of evaluating BI programs within the accreditation process. This article is based on the presentation made by the author at that workshop and on the discussions of the workshop participants. I have three objectives for sharing these ideas Fast, effective relief for your reference headaches. “I’d like a book by an author I saw on TV last night whose last name begins with ‘Sij’ and I think the title is Vietnam" “I’m looking for a book with a forward by Coretta Scott King about a slave re­ volt.” “I love old samplers. Are there any books about British samplers that are illustrated?” How many times have you had to help a patron with only snippets of information like the above? Now it’s easier than ever to do so - and reduce the time and effort it takes - with Books in Print Plus™. Unlike some CD-ROM products, which are nothing more than electronic vendors’ catalogs, Books in Print Plus is an important reference tool specifically designed to help you and your patrons find exactly what you’re looking for. Unique, work-saving software makes it simple. O n-screen prom pts, in ­ stant help screens, even a special patron mode all in­ sure that you won’t waste any tim e getting up and running with Books in Print P lu s . C u s to m s e a rc h through the database by combining any or all of up to 18 search criteria. For ex­ ample, search for all titles dealing with wine, published after 1987, and a list is displayed in seconds. If it is then decided that French wines should be exclud­ ed from the search, a simple change will immedi­ ately display all titles dealing with wine (with the exception of French wines) published after 1987. The results are so incredible that once you try Books in Print Plus, it will change the way you do reference work forever. Take two minutes and call us in the morning. To order Books in Print Plus for the IBM PC or A pple® M acintosh®, or for more information about how you can streamline reference procedures, call Bowker Electronic Publishing toll-free at 1-800-323-3288. In New York, Alaska, and Hawaii, please call us collect at 212-337-7190. You’ll be feeling better in no time. F o r e x tra re lie f, try Books in Print with Book Reviews Plus™ with full- text reviews fro m L ib ­ rary Journal, Publishers Weekly, School Library Journal, Booklist, Choice, Reference and Research Book N ew s, S c iT e c h Book News, and Univer­ sity Press Book News. B O W K E R E L E C T R O N I C P U B L I S H I N G Bowker Electronic Publishing. A division of R.R. Bowker. A Reed Publishing (USA) Company. 245 West 17th Street, New York, NY 10011. Telex: 12-7703; FAX: 212-645-0475. 1 6 / C&RL News with the broader academic library community: to alert all librarians to the changing emphasis so that they can help their own institutions prepare for ac­ creditation; to provide a tool for those who will be serving on accreditation teams; and not inciden­ tally, to possibly provide some leverage for those who are still trying to convince their library or school administration of the importance of biblio­ graphic instruction programs. Librarians in academic institutions are generally familiar with the accreditation process. An ex­ tended process. It starts with an institutional self- study and culminates about 18 months later when a team of experienced educators visits the institu­ tion for an on-site evaluation. Accreditation teams, as the link between the institution and the accrediting body, have a weighty responsibility. In composing these team s, the Middle States Commission tries for a mix of rep re­ sentative administrators and faculty; most teams include a librarian. Librarians as members o f accreditation teams Librarians who are selected to serve as members of an accreditation team are, first of all, full m em ­ bers of the team with the same overall charges as all other team members. In addition to these general responsibilities, they are expected—like business managers and systems experts—to serve as special resources in helping the team assess their special­ ized areas. There have, in the past, been complaints that some librarians tended to take a narrow view of their responsibilities and to limit their participation to matters concerning the library. With the new criteria, librarians on evaluation teams have an added obligation. Since the library is now to be judged in term s of its effectiveness within the total teaching/learning process of the institu­ tion, it is appropriate for librarians to assume re ­ sponsibility for reinforcing to the o th er team members the significance of bibliographic instruc­ tion programs in the accreditation process and to suggest ways in which all team members can help in judging the effectiveness of those programs. The self-study The purpose of the self-study is to help the institution clarify its own goals and objectives and assess its success in attaining them. Institutions are judged not by abstract criteria, but by the m anner in which they are meeting, or are trying to meet, their own goals within the standards adopted by the accrediting association. The self-study is the major source o f information about the institution; all parts of it must be studied with care by all members of the accreditation team. Evaluators looking for evidence that library in­ struction and educationally effective library use are integrated into the curriculum should find it in the sections that deal with academic programs as well as in the section on the library. We are looking for clear recognition on the part of all segments of the institution that the bibliographic instruction pro­ gram is indeed viewed, in Simmons’s words, “as one means of improving academic quality.” Syllabi It is individual course syllabi that, in a sense, keep the institutional self-study honest. As the teaching faculty’s working documents, they reflect the actual instructional modes and practices of the faculty. The value of looking at course assignments to help assess the educational role of the library is reflected in Simmons’s statem ent that “institutions which seem to have been most effective in getting students to take full advantage of the collections and in promoting the use of resources as a means of improving learning outcomes, have been those in which faculty have strong requirem ents for library research built into their instructional programs” (Simmons, A n Accreditors Perspective, p. 9). In assessing course syllabi the following ques­ tions might be addressed: • How many include library-based assign­ ments? • W hat is the nature of those assignments? • Are they appropriate for the school and its students? • Do they show evidence of thought and crea­ tivity? • Do they prom ote active learning? • Do they take advantage of primary' sources when appropriate? • Do they display a knowledge o f the range of resources available to students at the institution? • Is there a sense that, as students progress from first year to senior year, they are required to use increasingly complex library research skills? In addition to studying an institution’s syllabi, the Middle States Commission strongly urges evalu­ ators to look at student research papers and theses to see the extent to which library resources have actually been used. Discussions with faculty, students, administrators All members of the accreditation team take part in a variety of formal and informal discussions during the site visit. The object of these discussions is to find out how well the institution’s goals and objectives are realized in practice. In attem pting to assess the efficacy o f the bibliographic instruction January 1990 / 17 program, a combination of unobtrusive and direct approaches are recommended. In an institution where library use instruction has been integrated into the curriculum, one can reasonably expect that general discussions of the curriculum and of specific programs and courses will include reference to library use. The evaluators should listen carefully to these discussions and note what is— and what is not— said about student use of the library. As a result of both direct questions and indirect discussions, evaluators should be able to discover w hether there is a general awareness of the exis­ tence of the bibliographic instruction program and w hether there is an understanding of the relation­ ship between library use instruction and the wider educational process of the institution. Discussions with teaching faculty should help to discern the extent to which they are com mitted to library research for undergraduates, w hether they are aware o f the range of materials available in the library for student research projects, as well as the extent to which they view librarians as resource people who can not only offer students instruction in library use, but also help faculty in designing research projects. In discussions with administrators, we are look­ ing for a clear and com mitted recognition of the importance of a library instruction program to the overall educational goals of the institution and an acknowledgement of the institution’s responsibil­ ity to provide adequate funding to support it. Evaluators are urged to talk to as many students as possible. Such conversations should reveal the role which the use of the library plays in the educa­ tional process of the institution. Efforts should be made to determ ine not only how often students use the library, but in what ways they use it; w hether they have been effectively taught how to do inde­ pendent research; and, most important, w hether they themselves feel that they can comfortably and efficiently use library resources. “In the final analy­ sis, students must become self-directed learners who have mastered the research tools in the pursuit of knowledge and tru th ” (Simmons, Bibliographic Instruction, p. 12). Discussions at which librarians are present will almost always elicit some description of library use. However, if library use has really been integrated into the curriculum, such descriptions should come forth when librarians are not present. It is im por­ tant to rem ind the other team members to listen for them. The library Evaluators might want to look for evidence that the library is being proactive as well as reactive in making itself a vital part of the institution’s teach­ ing/leaming process. The Middle States Commis­ sion’s standards for accreditation state that “excel­ lence in the professional staff for the library is measurable in part by the extent to which they are active participants in the academic enterprise, not merely custodians” (Characteristics o f Excellence, p. 36). Evaluators will assess w hether librarians are moving in that direction. W hen talking to librarians and library admini­ stration, the following are among the specific issues that might be addressed: • W hat is the level of administrative commit­ m ent to the BI program? W hen funds or personnel are scarce, what gets cut first? Is there administra­ tive support for experimentation with new ap­ proaches and new formats? Does the administra­ tion actively prom ote the instruction program? • Are the librarians who are doing the instruc­ tion enthusiastic and well prepared? Are they knowl­ edgeable about learning theory and pedagogical methods as well as about the resources of the library? Are they sufficiently familiar with the curriculum, students, and faculty to be able to work with teaching faculty in designing research proj­ ects? • Is the entire library staff supportive of the BI program? If there are departm ental liaisons, do these people represent the instruction program as well as the collection development program? Are the librarians who participate in the instruction program treated as equals by their peers? Are they resented by their peers as having special privi­ leges? Are they given adequate preparation time? • Is the literature of the library instruction movement adequately represented in the library’s own collection? The bibliographic instruction program There are many ways of teaching students how to use the library. Adherents of credit courses, workbooks, course-related instruction, audio-vis­ ual presentations, or CAI can sometimes be rather vehem ent in support of their own ideas. The Middle States Commission, in bibliographic instruction as in other areas, is concerned with goals and out­ comes; it offers no prescriptions. Each institution is left to determ ine which mode or modes best serve its objectives and the needs of its own student body. Evaluators are cautioned not to look at BI pro­ grams with preconceived notions o f which mode is best, but to judge the program within the goals and objectives of the institution. W hen looking at the BI program, the following are some specific questions that might be ad­ dressed: • Is there a formal statem ent o f objectives for the program? To what extent are those objectives being met? 1 8 / C&RL News • How does the program fit with the teaching/ learning environment of the institution? Is the program teaching what students need to know? • Is the program a coherent, incremental one with instruction available for all levels of students, freshman through graduate? • Is there internal evidence of quality and car­ ing? Are instructional materials appropriate and produced attractively? • Is there recognition of different learning styles? • Are students taught the type of research strate­ gies necessary for them to become independent learners? Conclusion This brief paper, summarizing the presentation and discussion at the Middle States Commission’s workshop, was written to alert those who will be evaluated as well as those doing the evaluations to a changed perspective in the viewpoint of at least one of the major organizations charged with re ­ gional accreditation. The Commission on H igher Education is now alerting institutions to the increased emphasis on educational effectiveness in the accreditation proc­ ess. Administration, organization, facilities—too often the major focus of attention in the past—will now be examined in terms of their effect on teach­ ing and learning. We are being told that wonderful library collec­ tions are no longer sufficient: students must learn how to use them. We are being told that biblio­ graphic instruction programs are an essential in­ gredient in the educational process. Some of us have waited a long time to hear this! Bibliographic note The Commission on Higher Education is one of three divisions of the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools. The Commission on Higher Education frequently refers to itself as the Middle States Commission on H igher Education, the Middle States Association, or CHE/MSA. It is the official accrediting organization for the states of Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, and for the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Republic of Panama, and the Virgin Islands. Address: 3624 Market Street, Phila­ delphia, PA 19104. Commission on H igher Education. Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools. Char­ acteristics o f Excellence in Education: Standards fo r Accreditation. Rev. ed. Philadelphia, 1989. (This is the Commission’s primary statem ent of standards.) Commission on H igher Education. Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools. Hand­ book for Evaluation Team Members. Philadelphia, 1989. Simmons, Howard L., “An Accreditor’s P er­ spective: Bibliographic Instruction as a Tool for Learning.” Speech presented to the Library Asso­ ciation of the City of New York (LACUNY) at Borough of Manhattan Community College. New York City, May 19, 1989. Simmons, Howard L., “Bibliographic Instruc­ tion as a Tool for Learning: An A ccrediting Perspective.” CHE Letter, Sum m er 1989, pp. 11-12. Simmons, Howard L., “Transitions: Retrospect and Prospect; Annual Report of the Executive Director, 1988-89,” CHE Letter, Summer 1989. ■ ■ Bibliographic instruction or information literacy By H annelore Rader Director, University Library Cleveland State University Since the ALA Presidential Committee on In ­ formation Literacy issued its final report in January 1989, many librarians, including members of the ACRL Bibliographic Instruction Section (BIS), have been discussing, sometimes heatedly, how information literacy relates to bibliographic in­ struction. Before the 1989 ALA Annual Confer­ ence in Dallas, BIS sponsored a second Biblio­ graphic Instruction Think Tank (the first BI Think Tank was held before the 1981 ALA Annual Con­ ference in San Francisco), to explore the future direction of bibliographic instruction. Details of the second BI Think Tank are provided in “Educa­ tional Roles for Academic Libraries,” C&RL News,