Melissa F Gonzalez

Librarians seek opportunities to improve outreach to faculty and promote shared interests in information literacy. A comprehensive review of syllabi for all undergraduate courses offered during one academic term examined course-level learning outcomes and graded assignments to see how well they aligned with the five Association of College and Research Libraries Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education. We observed discrepancies between descriptions of graded assignments and the articulation of student learning outcomes aligned with information literacy skills. The review generated an inventory of courses and instructors that will help subject specialists initiate conversations about collaborations related to information literacy.

Content analysis of course syllabi can answer a variety of questions about the structure of courses and the campus culture of teaching and learning. The authors report a review of the full population of undergraduate syllabi at one institution during one academic term (n = 1153), including rubric design and training procedures for reviewers. The authors discuss the rich data generated by a comprehensive analysis of syllabus content, including student learning outcomes, descriptions of assignments and projects, and descriptions of activities and strategies instructors use to promote student learning. The review generated inventories of courses that addressed learning outcomes and associated assignments. Librarians and the Centre for Teaching, Learning, and Assessment will use these inventories to approach departments and faculty with shared interests (e.g., information literacy, high impact pedagogical practices, 21st Century skills) and initiate collaborations to develop library workshops, resource materials, and new or improved assignments to promote these learning outcomes. The review findings document changes in the campus culture of teaching and learning and inform efforts for continuous improvement.

excerpt - Who knew a simple prefix could make such a difference? When I initially accepted a position at Clemson University to reprocess the James F. Byrnes papers, I thought, "process ... reprocess ... what's the difference, really?" The collection consists of about a hundred and thirty cubic feet of manuscript material, and I thought I would be doing the same old arranging I had been trained to do, just on a much larger scale. However, after a closer examination of the collection, apprehension and even dread slowly began to set in. This was much more than just a simple arrangement project.