Alternative Library Instruction Models, or What Happens When You Want Back Out

I’ve been an instruction librarian since 2007, and over the years my perspective on library instruction has shifted from

How can I convince my liaison department faculty to schedule a class?
to
How can I make my classes more scaffolded within the curriculum?
to
How can I possibly do all of this teaching in one semester and get my other work done too?

The more experienced librarians reading this blog post might cry “BURNOUT!” but I am beginning to think that there’s a larger structural issue with library instruction programs like mine (and perhaps like yours as well).

The Set Up

I work at a small, public, liberal arts college that prides itself on its focus on teaching, undergraduate research, and close academic relationships between faculty and students. Librarians are 12 month tenure-track faculty, and although we don’t typically teach credit-bearing courses, we are heavily involved in the traditional “librarian-as-guest-lecturer” model of library instruction. I use the phrase “library instruction” because as much as I want to say we have an “information literacy education” program we aren’t quite there yet. My colleagues and I work with every section of incoming first year and transfer student liberal arts seminars (required for all new students) as well as multiple classes in multiple liaison departments. We’ve hit a point where our seminar involvement pretty much takes over our entire existence each fall semester, to the detriment of our other teaching, to say nothing of our other professional responsibilities, service, and scholarship. I’ve tried creating banks of activities based on our much-reduced information literacy learning outcomes so that my colleagues could plug-and-teach more easily, but the uniqueness of each seminar section makes it difficult to follow any kind of scripted lesson plan for all sections.

If the world is as wonderful a place as I hope it to be, I will likely be on sabbatical next academic year, leaving my colleagues–or, if we’re lucky, a visiting librarian–to absorb my teaching responsibilities (sorry, friends). As my library’s unofficial instruction coordinator, I realize that even with an extra teaching librarian we’d still be stretched far too thin to actually make a dent in the amount of work we put into these seminars. So…

What’s a Library Instruction Coordinator to Do?

I was professionally “raised” on the library instruction model that praised getting into as many research-based classes as you possibly can, because doing so would help students become better researchers and faculty better understand the importance of information literacy. I don’t buy this at all anymore. I feel like it puts librarians in an odd (perhaps even subservient) role and just isn’t pedagogically sound. What’s the point of teaching ALL THE THINGS ALL THE TIME? That just leads to repetition and, well, burnout.

That said, curriculum mapping is hard. Unless information literacy is built into the college’s curriculum from the top down (see Champlain College’s Core Curriculum sequence for scaffolding IL dreams), Major and Core Curricula are often unwieldy and not necessarily conducive to sequential information literacy integration. Plus doing so is not  a guarantee that teaching loads for librarians will be manageable and sustainable.

I know some libraries have pulled out of face-to-face instruction for first year courses like seminars and English Composition altogether, in favor of web-based tutorials or LMS embedded modules. Others hire one person to do all instruction for that particular course, and still others, like mine, split up the course load among all teaching librarians.

One way that our first year and transfer seminar is unique is that each section has a dedicated Peer Mentor–an upperclass student who takes the course and serves in this oddly defined role of part teaching assistant, part model student, part emotional support person. A visit to Swarthmore College last month, which has a wonderful peer research and information associates program, has me thinking about ways in which the Peer Mentors could take on many of the more mechanical teaching tasks that we as librarians are doing now. This would include things like introducing students to the discovery layer, databases, catalog, and interlibrary loan. We could then, as a library faculty, develop assignments, activities, and lesson plans to share with seminar instructors to integrate information literacy into their pedagogy.

I wonder if that’s going against one of librarianship’s sacred cows. Non-librarians teaching information literacy???? Gasp! Cringe! Ack! But I think it would free my colleagues and I up to work more thoughtfully with our liaison departments both in and outside of the classroom and develop a pedagogy of information literacy that best meets their needs.

My goal for the spring is to investigate pedagogy / library instruction models at other small colleges for ideas and inspiration, and create a plan for fall 2017. I’m curious to hear from readers who are perhaps in similar instruction predicaments. What’s worked for you?

The Rock and the Hard Place (Part 3): Being Open For Change

Two years ago the department in which I work was charged with developing a new organizational structure in response to changes in the scholarly publishing landscape.  Reflecting, presenting, and writing in various venues about this, it’s hard to avoid the ad nauseam reference to change – change is the new normal; embrace change; anticipate change; be the change you wish to see in the world.

In my previous post, the second in this three part series, I noted that the literature is growing in supporting the fact that flipping (changing) the subscription model to open access is an attainable reality, and that a will to do so is what’s needed.  My experience rethinking acquisitions and resource sharing workflows to support this changing landscape lead me to believe there is more than will at play.

One problem many libraries are aiming to solve with reorganizations, is the inadequate support of e-resource and open access workflows resulting from predominantly print based workflow and organizational structures.  This is interestingly parallel to an observation Van Noorden makes regarding the costs (that translate to high pricing) of traditional publishing and open access models. He writes:

“Whereas small [open access] starts ups can come up with fresh workflows using the latest electronic tools, some established publishers are still dealing with antiquated workflows for arranging peer review, typesetting, file-format conversation, and other chores.  Still older publishers are investing heavily in technology and should catch up eventually.”

Investing heavily is an interesting lens with which to consider the tensions at play in the subscription model and open access and is often the starting point for change. Investment connotes the shared driver of money at stake.  But investment of time, thought, and resources are also very much at play in exploring alternative workflow and organizational structures in these same spheres.   And because both involve people, solutions are not always a matter of simple arithmetic.

I had the opportunity to take notes for parts of the OA Symposium held at the University of Kansas recently, which was aimed specifically on open access funding alternatives to article and book processing charges (APC/BPC).  As I took notes for the symposium, I listened for specific connections to the subscription model that might lead to actionable solutions in my circle of influence. From almost every participant there was a common call for: concrete, actionable solutions (that do not reinvent the wheel), connections, and momentum.  Not surprisingly, these same outcomes are desired by those involved in reorganizational efforts to address and support such changes.

Breaking down any large problem — like institutional reorganizations or flipping subscription based or APC models of open access — requires both an ability to see the actors involved and the connections at play.  Both cases need a good dose of facilitation and process mapping.  In the OA Symposium participants did a fair amount of idea-generation, but also worked together in small groups to break down the processes involved in the APC model and its connections to many local and international players.  Proposing alternative models addressed the practicalities and anticipated challenges of implementation. Some of these proposals mentioned connections to subscription model in general terms; others offered more specifics.  I starting thinking more about the workflow and organizational implementation on a couple of these ideas.

Common funding models for open access initiatives, besides funding APC, are investing in open access memberships.  This is somewhat like subscription-based membership in consortia, which aim to reduce individual cost of participants and garner negotiating power in numbers. But a new (to me) twist on this model proposed that instead of modeling the price of participation on FTE or Carnegie classification (as the subscription models commonly do), perhaps differing levels of participation could be more voluntary, like endowments. Taking this a step further, I wonder if the options to invest as a silent donor would attract even more willing participation.  While contrary to the more public investment desired by open access advocacy, this recognizes a more guarded approach the subscription model workflow sometimes takes in managing messages about investment.  Take new e-resource trials, for example, which on the face of it represent no actual monetary commitment. However, a decision to even pursue trials may be carefully considered against messages that might appear to over promise the availability of resources that cannot be realistically afforded.  Such a decision might also  work at cross purposes with existing renewal workflows in negotiating better deals. To be clear, the need for budgetary accommodation in subscription renewals does not prevent libraries from considering new resources, but an awareness that the complexities of that messaging should be recognized.

Another, perhaps controversial twist on the membership models was tying participation with a commitment to reinvest subscription dollars along various timelines. (e.g. 1% – 100% over 10 years).  The incremental nature of this approach is also similar to subscription renewal workflows, which operate in annual incremental percentages increases (e.g. multi-year renewal deals often negotiate a pricing percentage cap on increases).  Again, its success with subscription workflows may come down to a question of transparency.  As with some licensing negotiation terms, a public, unified statement of commitment often helps get such clauses addressed in negotiation. Whether internal, or a transparent part of the negotiation process, finding a way to flip the negotiation of price cap percentage to a price reinvestment percentage is an interesting concept.

There are million other tiny ways to begin rethinking subscription and open access workflows in concrete ways. My next concrete step is to consider the steps recommended in the OA2020 Roadmap which is teeming with concrete practical solutions for subscription and open access budgeting and reporting, assessment, negotiation, and more. Being present at KU’s OA Symposium allowed me to pay attention and consider realities I hadn’t been aware of and take stock of how much more I can learn and potentially contribute.

 

References

Richard Van Noordern, “The True Cost of Science Publishing,” Nature 495 (2013), 426-429, doi:10.1038/495426a

Make it Work! Starting a Makerspace in an Academic Library, Phase 1

ACRLog welcomes a guest post from Hannah Pope, Emerging Technologies Librarian at Appalachian State University.

Makerspaces are cropping up in libraries everywhere, but the process for creating one of these areas in an academic library can often be layered and confusing. This is especially true for librarians and staff who have had very little prior makerspace experience. A factor that can make the process even more difficult is the lack of agreement over what exactly a makerspace is. My personal definition is: a makerspace is a place where patrons have access to tools where they can create and innovate while simultaneously inspiring one another as a community. Like with all things in libraries, that definition can be up for debate!

Over the course of the next several months, I am going to be sharing with you the process of creating and implementing a new makerspace. A little background first: I am the Emerging Technologies Librarian at a mid sized university located in the mountains of North Carolina. Our library has been progressively moving into a more innovative direction, and the makerspace has been a natural extension of that growth. Although there has been a lot of institutional support, we have encountered numerous issues leading up to the creation of the space…

Space Issues

Like many of you, our library suffers from a distinct lack of space. To remedy this, we began a massive library renewal project which heavily featured weeding old materials and the creating of new learning spaces. While our building is only a mere decade old, it quickly became apparent that the changing physical landscapes of libraries were not represented in the original building plans.

Many of you are working in a similar situation; either the library is in an older building, or the current space that you have just never quite seems to accommodate what you need it to. We’ve all been there. The important thing is find a space that will work for you and the makerspace that you are trying to build. There are many factors that should be taken into account that are too numerous to list here, but a few important ones include: Is there enough space for the equipment you want? Will you need access to an outside wall to ventilate your machines? What flavor should your makerspace be? Luckily, my library has finally gotten to the stage of the process where the area for our temporary makerspace has been cleared out. Whew! One hurdle down. That being said, it is a temporary space. Although we will be offering a variety of machines to work with, our space will not reach its full potential until we construct a better ventilated area in the near future. The important thing for right now is that the makerspace program will be able to start helping students and faculty in the early spring.

Creating a Makerspace Theme or Lack Thereof

I mentioned before that makerspaces can have a certain ‘flavor’ or theme. This is especially true in universities. Some can concentrate on arts-based programming and learning, while the most readily recognized types include STEM capabilities. The nature of your makerspace is ultimately up to you – and the patrons that you serve. Even though some makerspaces tend to focus on providing machines and tools that are related to certain areas, others contain a hodge-podge of anything and everything. The makerspace in my library will definitely fall into that category. The people at my library and within our community have a wide range of interests, and our makerspace will reflect that.

Equipment and Budget

Once you have the space and theme, it is time to decide what to purchase for your library’s makerspace. Rule of thumb: always overestimate the cost! When purchasing for a makerspace, there are going to be unforeseen costs to making it all run smoothly, including replacement parts, supplies, and required accessories. While there will always be new and exciting things to buy, it is important to remember that the needs of the patrons come first, so stick to the budget. It is also imperative that the physical space is taken into account. It wouldn’t be a good idea to purchase five 3D printers if you don’t have enough the space to house them. Ideally you would have someone who had the expertise to run each of the machines that you choose to buy. While it is expected that there will be at least a bit of a learning curve, it isn’t generally a good idea to buy a variety of machines if no one in the library has used them before. Getting more people involved is always a good idea, but if you or your staff don’t have any training, starting out slowly in regards to equipment may be the best approach. Academic libraries commonly start a 3D printing service before they move into full makerspace territory. This gives the library a sense of patron demand, and it also allows for staff to learn the equipment properly. My library has used this model and it has been very successful so far.

The lack of physical space didn’t keep us from implementing a 3D printing service, but now that there is a designated makerspace, we need more equipment to fill it. As I mentioned, our makerspace is going to be as eclectic as the student body that we serve. We will have a CNC machine, vinyl cutter and 3D printers, as well as a sewing machine for e-textiles and electronics in the main workspace. I am also creating an area that is specifically for instruction so that classes and workshops are surrounded by the ‘making’ environment as they learn. In addition, we are also tagging on a more nontraditional makerspace element – a virtual reality and gaming room. The room will have multiple gaming consoles as well as the HTC Vive and Microsoft Hololens available for students to explore. We also provide software so that patrons can create video games. The variety of equipment speaks to the varied interests of our students, faculty, and staff.

Developing Curriculum

One of the most vital parts of creating a successful makerspace is developing instruction and activities that highlight student potential. Even though my space was not open this semester, I still conducted workshops about 3D printing, 3D design, Arduino and e-textiles. By offering up these opportunities, I was able to introduce the campus to some of the technology that we currently have and build momentum for the makerspace opening in the Spring. I also partnered with a number of professors who incorporated the technology into their classes.

Next semester, I will be expanding the instruction by adding more courses and creating e-learning modules for patrons to use when learning about the new tools available. There will also be more outreach activities that will consist of directed projects that revolve around one or more machines within the makerspace. The opportunities for expansion are endless!

Are any of you creating makerspaces in your libraries? Stay tuned for the next piece of the makerspace journey.

Theory as a keel: Developing a critical framework for open education

Virginians involved in education were extremely fortunate to have the 13th Annual Open Education Conference held in Richmond, at the Great Richmond Convention Center November 2nd through 4th, 2016. The conference, billed as the “premiere venue for sharing research, development, advocacy, design, and other work relating the open education,” offers librarians a unique opportunity to interface with researchers, technologists, publishers, and educators in a collaborative environment. While some of these connections happened during sessions on topics like inclusive design, open education policy, and licensing, many occurred between sessions. On the final day, I had the chance to eat lunch with several William & Mary faculty and student researchers interested in open education, along with Kathleen DeLaurenti, the librarian at William & Mary leading our OER initiatives. The lunch conversation afforded me great perspective on the challenges educators face when trying to access and utilize appropriate open education resources as alternatives in their classes, especially for advanced topic courses. I am excited to join deLaurenti and our Scholarly Communications Committee’s efforts to expand open education resources here at William & Mary, where we will be running a pilot of the Open Textbook Network Program beginning early next year.

Open education is not just about textbooks and materials, however. Among the presenters at the Open Ed Conference this year was a William & Mary Ph.D. student in the School of Education, Jamison Miller, who joins a growing contingent of open education scholars calling for a theoretical grounding to support the practicum, resource-focused open education movement, a component he feels will be critical to its long term success and sustainability.

Continue reading Theory as a keel: Developing a critical framework for open education

Self-Care: Focusing on you

This fall semester has brought a full load of classes, projects, and committee work. Add on the election and the stress doubles. Since I began my job as an academic librarian, I have constantly heard “self care, self care.” However, being the stubborn person I am, I did not really understand the importance of setting time aside and knowing your limit of stress or frustration.

Usually, weekends are an escape, but when there is too much to do, it becomes a habit to take work home. Here are some tips of how I learned to make time for myself and my thoughts (both at work and at home)

-Get out of your cubicle/office. When I was drowning in work, it just seemed like I could not concentrate. I needed a change of scenery, just for a couple of hours. Get a space that’s just for yourself. Take your laptop, notebook, task list, and take that time to do what you need to get done.

-Coffee breaks are your best friend (in moderation). It gives you the opportunity to not only get caffeinated, but people watch while you’re in line.

-Walk around campus. Take a 10 minute walk to refresh your mind and get a little exercise

-It’s OK to take a day off when it comes to exercise. I usually go to the gym after work, but sometimes I’m so tired and cannot find the strength to change into gym clothes.

-Exercise! If you feel up for it, exercising can be a bit of time that is just for you and your thoughts. Download a podcast and hit the treadmill (or stair master, weights, pool)

-Chores around the house. I don’t know about you, but as I’ve gotten older, I have found cleaning quite therapeutic. It keeps me busy and I also like to talk to myself while I clean my room.

-Write! A lot of people find writing as a way to let out your thoughts, frustration, anger, etc. Take 10 or so minutes and just write about what you want. I will admit that a lot of times, my writings tend to be rants. I find that after a few minutes of furiously typing, I calm down.

Do not ignore your mental health! Your mental health is important above all else and when all is not well, it can start to impact your work and relationships. 

I know that for many people, myself included, it’s been a tough two weeks. Like many others, my mental health was affected by the results of the election, the rhetoric of the presidential campaigns, and the frustration with some acquaintances that did not understand why so many people were afraid. Take all of this and add in the workload and deadlines. Let’s remember that not everyone can take time off of work or call in sick, but some may have to find ways to work through this while at work. I hope that some of my suggestions can help. I don’t say this enough, but I am grateful for all the ACRLog readers, viewers, and writers! Take care of yourself and each other.