C&RL News April 2015 206

Penn State-Fayette, The Eberly Campus is one of 19 commonwealth campuses of 
The Pennsylvania State University. It is a small 
and vibrant campus where the goal of student 
success drives many opportunities for col-
laboration. During the fall semester of 2013, 
the Learning and Technological Resources 
Committee at the Fayette campus discussed 
ways to promote learning and collaboration 
among campus learning partners. 

As active members of this committee, the 
library and the learning center brought forth 
the idea of collaboration between both units. 
Although the nature of this collaboration 
had yet to be defined, this was the first time 
the library and the learning center would 
collaborate to provide a blended service to 
students. The learning center coordinator 
and the reference and instruction librar-
ian decided to experiment with bringing 
research and writing skills under a single 
instruction session.

Penn State-Fayette, The Eberly 
Campus
The Eberly Campus is located between the 
cities of Uniontown and Connellsville in 
southwestern Pennsylvania. It is a commuter 
campus of approximately 800 students, with 
a mix of traditional, nontraditional, and 
international students. Penn State-Fayette 
offers five bachelor degree programs, eight 
associate degree programs, and the first two 
years of more than 160 Penn State degrees. 
The degree programs include nursing, ad-

ministration of justice, human development 
and family studies, psychology, electrical 
engineering technology, mining technol-
ogy, business, information sciences and 
technology, and a physical therapist assistant 
program.

   
Planning a team-teaching strategy
In developing their collaboration, both the 
library and the learning center identified 
that the process of research and writing is a 
seamless process in which well-conducted 
research leads to well-defined ideas, which 
leads to a well-written paper that includes 
proper source documentation. Prior to col-
laborating, each unit would independently 
visit classes for instruction and lessons about 
source documentation. Although this process 
is not ineffective, both units agreed that the 
expertise of each area could be combined 
and presented together rather than sepa-
rately. Both units predicted that presenting 
research and writing under one course might 
allow students to make a better connection 
between the two related processes. 

During the early planning stage, the 
library remarked that during library instruc-
tion sessions, students would ask questions 
regarding source documentation and how to 

Claudia C. Peterson and Mary Inks Budinsky

Successful collaboration between 
learning partners
The small campus experience

Claudia C. Peterson is reference and instruction librarian, 
email: ccp14@psu.edu, and Mary Inks Budinsky is 
learning center coordinator at PennState-Fayette, The 
Eberly Campus, email: mei112@psu.edu
© 2015 Claudia C. Peterson and Mary Inks Budinksy



April 2015 207 C&RL News

properly reflect their research in their writ-
ing. Also, when working with students on 
their papers, the learning center coordinator 
(also an adjunct instructor for the English 
department and a writing tutor) often re-
ceives research queries from students who 
often still need to locate further research to 
incorporate into their papers. While under-
standing that the expertise of the two can 
be an opportunity for some cross-training, 
these experiences further convinced both 
units of the strength their joint instruction 
would bring into the classroom.

Although this was the first time both 
units have worked together in this capac-
ity, other academic libraries and learning 
and writing centers have collaborated in a 
similar manner. For example, a review of the 
literature shows the intersections between 
both departments go as far back as 20 years. 
In Writing Across The Curriculum and the 
Academic Library, Jean Sheridan discusses 
an in depth overview of course design that 
includes research and writing skills in what 
looks like an embedded instruction format 
in the chapter “Making the Connection in 
the Classroom: A Model for a Library-Based 
Writing Course.”1 Most recently, in her 
article “Peering into the Writing Center,” 
Janelle Zauha discusses the importance for 
information literacy programs and writing 
centers to understand their common goals 
as stakeholders in student learning.2

With the need to blend research and 
writing skills in mind, our initial approach to 
team teaching was a very systematic process:

• The librarian and learning center coor-
dinator prepared necessary material for the 
instruction session. The material delivered 
included the use of databases and locating 
appropriate guides for source documenta-
tion.

• The librarian and the learning center 
coordinator met as needed before the class 
to review the instruction material. 

• On every occasion, the librarian in-
troduced the students to library services 
and covered course-related databases that 

included examples of searches. The learn-
ing center coordinator discussed learning 
center resources available to the students 
and answered questions about student con-
cerns, such as generating ideas, integrating 
source material into research papers, and 
documenting sources. 

• After the teaching portion, the students 
used the remaining time for their work. 
Total instruction time was approximately 
50 minutes. 

Our experience
During the fall 2013 term, the reference and 
instruction librarian and learning center co-
ordinator provided information literacy and 
writing instruction to four sections of CAS 
100 (Effective Speech) to show the students 
the various resources available to them 
within the library and the learning center. 
Each 50-minute instruction session included 
an overview of both areas. More specifically, 
the librarian covered adequate use of related 
databases for research, such as Gale Virtual 
Reference Library, CQ Researcher, and Ac-
cess World News (NewsBank)—all located 
under the library’s “Try These First” section 
on the website. The learning center coordi-
nator covered the various services available 
to students, focusing on what would be most 
helpful to the students for their particular 
assignment, including our Online Writing 
Lab, in the event that students would require 
help outside of regular learning center hours.

We decided to continue to offer joint 
instruction in the spring 2014 semester, 
although we had not begun to market our 
instruction as a joint effort during this time. 
During the spring 2014 term, the librar-
ian and learning center coordinator met 
with four different courses: Management 
321(Leadership and Motivation), Nursing 116 
(Clinical Immersion Introduction to Concepts 
of Illness), CAS 100 (Effective Speech), and 
CAS 250 (Small Group Communication).

With CAS and MGMT 321, we followed a 
similar format to the instruction we provided 
during the fall semester. We introduced the 
students to the many services provided 



C&RL News April 2015 208

through the library and the learning center.  
For MGMT 321, students had an assign-
ment in which they were asked to conduct 
research in order to generate a five-page pa-
per. Along with basic library resources, such 
as Gale Virtual Reference Library, students 
were taught to use the library’s discovery 
tool, LionSearch. Additionally, the learning 
center coordinator discussed the students’ 
writing concerns, ways the writing tutors 
can help throughout the assignment, how 
to request face-to-face and OWL tutoring, 
and APA and MLA formatting tips. Students 
were given the opportunity to ask ques-
tions and interact with us throughout the 
presentations.

For NURS 116, both the librarian and 
learning center coordinator had an oppor-
tunity to be more embedded in the course, 
and this course offered the opportunity to do 
some informal assessment on the efficacy of 
the instruction provided. The course instruc-
tor sought out the librarian late in the fall 
2013 semester to talk about library instruc-
tion needs. Students would have an assign-
ment to create a poster that detailed five 
aspects of a disease/condition. The grading 
rubric for this course required that students 
use at least two academic databases taught 
by the librarian, at least two evidence-based 
nursing resources also covered during the 
first instruction session, and proper use of 
APA citation. The course instructor, librarian, 
and learning center coordinator agreed on 
these criteria as fair for grading the students, 
since their assignment entailed both exten-
sive research and writing. 

The librarian first visited the class early 
in the semester and taught students how to 
use Nursing Reference Center, Dynamed, 
and Cochrane Library to get students started 
with their research topics. The librarian and 
learning center coordinator then hosted a 
follow-up instruction/workshop session with 
the students at the library to work in groups 
on their posters. Though the follow-up ses-
sion was more informal, the librarian helped 
the students find evidence-based research 
necessary for the assignment, while the 

learning center coordinator helped students 
understand and implement APA format. 
Later in the semester, students returned to 
the library for a third time in groups to fin-
ish their research, create their posters, and 
prepare for their presentations. During the 
third session, the learning center coordinator 
rotated among the groups and helped with 
poster design and APA format. 

On the day of the presentations, the li-
brarian and learning center coordinator were 
invited to visit the class to view the poster 
presentations. From viewing the student 
posters, it was clear that students had the 
ability to use the databases recommended 
by the librarian and had properly used APA 
citation to reference their work. 

Short-term outcomes and future 
goals
Because the joint instruction process was 
more organic during the first year that both 
units worked together, no specific criteria 
were identified in terms of choosing which 
courses to collaborate on for joint instruc-
tion. Rather, both units took the opportunity 
to team-teach for faculty with whom they 
already had a positive working relation-
ship. Moving forward, both units will work 
to develop an organized system of course 
criteria and marketing of services.

During the 2013-2014 school year, we 
team-taught a total of ten courses to ap-
proximately 194 students. We reached over 
20% of our student population in those 
courses alone. This experience shows the 
importance of continuing our efforts and 
demands the need for assessment of future 
team-taught courses. Building on this new 
collaboration between the library and the 
learning center, we aim to foster relation-
ships with additional faculty to engage in 
more hands-on work with students, similar 
to the NURS 116 course. 

Since this initial collaboration was suc-
cessful, we plan to implement the following 
ideas during our continued efforts:

• Market joint instruction services start-
ing fall 2014. 



April 2015 209 C&RL News

• Develop a general blueprint to follow 
for every course that will include appropri-
ate learning outcomes, hand-outs for later 
reference, and class activities for credit.

• Develop specifi c curriculum that inte-
grates the use of research tools and source 
documentation by implementing in-class 
activities where research and source docu-
mentation are practiced. We will focus our 
teaching on becoming more integrated with 
assignments and overall course objectives, 
in addition to providing general instruction 
on library research and source documenta-
tion.

• Help the students to achieve specifi c 
goals, to become collaborative learners who 
seek resources, and to acknowledge and 
practice research and writing as a process. 

• Identify specifi c courses where team-
teaching will be most effective.

• Develop plans to establish a more sta-
ble instruction classroom during the 2014-
2015 school year to improve the library’s 
instruction area for these sessions. More 
specifi cally, the campus head librarian has 
asked us to assess the workshop area and 
suggest improvements/changes, from furni-
ture to technology and other learning tools. 

• Develop an assessment tool to measure 
the effi cacy of our collaboration on student 
learning outcomes.

The opportunity to bring research and 
writing skills under a single course can have 
very positive effects. The goals outlined 
above will aid us in developing a successful 
service to undergraduates that will foster 
excellence in undergraduate research. For 
this, we will work closely with faculty as 
they develop their curriculum in order to 
properly align their research assignment 
with the writing and source development 
requirements, similar to our work with the 
faculty member teaching NURS 116. 

Conclusion
As academic libraries continue to express 
their value to their campuses, it is important 
to align library services to other student-
centered services that promote student 

success and excellence in student research. 
Small campus libraries can benefi t from 
their campus size because they can develop 
intimate working relationships with other 
student services units. Most libraries and 
learning centers have common goals of 
helping students become successful in their 
research and writing. 

We asked ourselves the following ques-
tion and encourage other small campus 
libraries to ponder the same one: How can 
we best work with other services and faculty 
on campus to fulfi ll that goal? This experi-
ence has worked for Penn State-Fayette’s 
library and learning center, and we are now 
in the process of revising and improving our 
strategy. We hope that sharing these efforts 
will help other libraries and learning centers 
consider their potential for collaboration in 
student learning services. 

Notes
1. Jean Sheridan, “Making Connections in 

the Classroom: A Model for a Library-Based 
Writing Course,” in Writing across the Curric-
ulum and the Academic Library: A Guide for 
Librarians, Instructors, and Writing Program 
Coordinators, ed. Jean Sheridan (Westport, 
CT: Greenwood Press, 1995), 95-102.

2. Janelle Zauha, “Peering into the Writing 
Center: Information Literacy as a Collaborative 
Conversation,” Communications in Informa-
tion Literacy 8, no.1 (2014), http://search.pro-
quest.com/docview/1552719868?accountid
=13158. 

C&RL News RSS

Cover art, article links, and other valuable 
information from C&RL News is available 
by subscribing to our RSS feed.

Point your Web browser to feeds.
feedburner.com/candrlnews, and add 
our feed to your favorite reader, such as 
Google Reader.