The Educationally Effective LibrarySlides from a workshop at the annual conference of the American Theological Library Association,New Orleans, June 2014TD Lincoln

Our Time Together

• Is informed by your (20) responses to an online survey• I present current information•Will be interactive

What’s that guy doing up in front?

•Written self-study texts.•Served on ATS evaluation committees.• I want you to write a self-study that is more than an exercise in following orders.

DISCLAIMER

• THE VIEWPOINTS EXPRESSED HERE ARE NOT ENDORSED BY ATS, ATLA, THE CANADIAN LIBRARY ASSOCIATION, OR ANY OTHER OFFICIAL BODY.

PART 1: THE SELF-STUDY & REAFFIRMTION PROCESS

When we say “ATS” we might mean:Commission on Accrediting

of ATS

• Exists as a separate corporation from The Association.

• Purpose: to improve the quality of theological education through a peer-review process

The Association• Exists as a separate

entity from COA• “The Association

provides a host of programs, services, research, and other resources to support the work of administrators and faculty at member schools.”

WHAT IS A SELF-STUDY?

•NOT a set of trick questions• IS a report about how your school meets ATS expectations•COULD BE: a tedious requirement•OR: an opportunity to increase self-knowledge

REAFFIRMTION• For a period of 7 to 10 years (usually 10).

• LATE BREAKING NEWS: At the June 2014 meeting, the Commission proposed that member schools would create a NEW “midterm quality improvement report” halfway through accreditation period.

• The stated purpose is to document quality improvement and discuss “changes and challenges” experienced since last onsite visit.

• This proposal was NOT approved; it was referred back to the Commission.

ATS SAYS• “Reports should clearly identify the recommendations that the institution has developed as a result of the self-study. These recommendations should inform the institution’s strategic plan and reflect the serious intention of the school.” Handbook on Accreditation, section two, p. 9.

• Thus: a self-study results in the school making decisions about improvement even before the evaluation committee comes to call.

HOW DO EVALUATION COMMITTEE WORK?

• Your ATS staffer invites peer evaluators.• If your committee lacks a librarian, ATS staff consult with a librarian about Standard 4.• One practitioner from outside of theological education also serves.

FROM SELF-STUDY to COMMISSION ACTION

• PRELIMINARY: read documents & conference phone call• ON-SITE: interviews, checking documents, following up on concerns• DRAFT: a report with recommendations to the Commission• ACTION: by the Commission

NOTA BENE

• The evaluation committee is NOT there primarily to offer expert advice about your school or library. A committee may provide suggestions or hints for improvement.

WHAT USUALLY HAPPENS?

• A school is recommended for reaffirmation of accreditation for 10 years.• One or more reports are required to address weaknesses. Almost no schools come away free of follow-up reports.

STEALTH & GUILE

•A required report or a notation gets the attention of a school in the way that the library director’s earnest pleas do not.

PART 2: EXPLORING STANDARD 4

ABOUT STANDARD 4, SURVEY SAID:

• 45%: no parts are hard to understand• 30%: 4.2 and 4.3 are hard to understand

GROUP EXERCISE: READ 4.2 OR 4.3

•What is unclear to you?•What does your group think that the unclear bits mean?

4.1 LIBRARY COLLECTIONS

• 4.1.TEXTS• 4.1.2 COLLECTION

DEVELOPMENT POLICY

• 4.1.3 may have special collections

• 4.1.4 OTHER MEDIA & ELECTRONIC

• 4.1.5 COORDINATE

• MOST COMMON PROBLEMS:

• Policy seems out of step with mission or available resources

• Policy has not been reviewed recently.

4.2 CONTRIBUTION TO TEACHING, LEARNING, & RESEARCH

•You need to demonstrate that you DO these things.•Notice that 4.2 doesn’t say that you can tell that DOING these things impacts student learning.

4.3 PARTNERSHIP IN CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT

•4.3.2 “CONSULT,” “PARTICIPATE” & “ANTICIPATE”• TDL TRANSLATION: capture faculty attention even if faculty are thinking about just their own academic work.

4.4 ADMINISTRATION AND LEADERSHIP

• THE EXPECTATION DIFFERS IF YOU ARE EMBEDDED OR FREE-STANDING•4.4.3 SAYS IT IS THE DIRECTOR’S JOB TO CONDUCT ONGOING ASSESSEMENTS

4.5 RESOURCES

• “ADEQUATE” & “SUFFICIENT” MEETS THE ATS STANDARD, BASED ON YOUR MISSION• You should use benchmark comparisons 4.5.3

PART 3: REFLECTING ON EVIDENCE

SURVEY RESPONDENTS SAID

• 35% analyze circulation trends over time• 50% use data about usage of e-resources

to make decisions about subscription renewals• 42% routinely ask students and faculty

about the usefulness of collections• 45% used data about long-term trends to

inform decisions about improving library services

REFLECTION ON DATA IS THE WAY TO DEMONSTRATE ADEQUACY

• Contributions to teaching, learning, and research (4.2)• Partnership in curriculum development (4.3)

•DATA are good, BUT data by themselves are not analysis.

PART 3

• Part 3 consisted of exercises that participants worked on in small groups. A separate PDF contains directions used for the exercises.

TO SUMMARIZE

•Part 1: a look at the self-study and reaffirmation process•Part 2: standard 4•Part 3: exercises using data

FOR MORE HELP• TALK TO YOUR ATS/COA STAFF MEMBER• VISIT THE ATS WEBSITE• ASK LIBRARIANS WHOSE SCHOOLS RECENTLY

WERE VISITED

ABOUT THE PRESENTER

Timothy D. LincolnDirector, Stitt LibraryAustin Presbyterian Theological Seminarytlincoln@austinseminary.edu