Each group generated comments during the discussion period and recorded them on color-coded paper. Some groups focused on one or two topics while others explored a variety of topics.
Blue Group Learning is a messy process full of serendipity. Programs need to recognize this. Programs need people guided by individual initiative and willing to listen to one another. It would be beneficial to have some organization or initiation of new professors, especially for teachers of "first year experiences" courses. The Central Challenge is collaboration, initiating it and making it productive. Faculty sometimes rely too much on personal relationships and have to be prodded to make use of other experts. How do you get faculty-staff collaborations off the ground? Faculty are often unaware of staff expertise. Diverse approaches are needed. People are more comfortable when lines of responsibility are clearly defined. This is not to be confused with insecurity at the prospect of losing work to rivals in competing departments. What are the limits of librarians' roles as "generalists" or "specialists"? What might a "distributed model" of education look like? Disciplinary focus among librarians and writing tutors and academic computing specialists all geographically distributed on campus. Resources vary from institution to institution. This affects what can be done. The group was struck by the differences in institutional cultures on different campuses. Green Group We need a goal. What do we expect students to know coming in, and what do we expect students to know when they leave? What do we need to teach in the first year? One program used a mapping database for literacy sessions. They surveyed after the first year to see what students had learned and what they wished students had learned. Interaction between professors and librarians during sessions can help change student perceptions of both the librarian and the professor during the session. This can make for a more effective session. There could be a web site with competency expectations, or a mailing to first year students. Carleton, Grinnell, St. Olaf, and Macalester have a survey for all incoming students to measure competency in several areas. It is important to articulate our expectations and recognize discipline differences. There should be coherence. Isn't the fragmentation of learning part of the messy process of discovery and creativity? Do we need a common language to discuss writing? There is tension across disciplines, but that's part of the liveliness of the liberal arts. What is a primary source? The answer varies by discipline. How do we make this accessible to undergraduates? Do we need to make it accessible? What you cite and how you cite it varies by discipline because research strategies and needs vary by discipline. We are all writing to audiences. A common task is to instruct students on rhetoric and reading within a particular context. How do you introduce a student to a discipline and to the tools to find information in that discipline? Tools have changed, and there are more interdisciplinary studies. How do we talk to each other about how to teach in this environment? Pink Group If we think we're teaching to our major students, we must remember that we also have non-majors in our courses. Does that change writing instruction? Writing in the major/discipline is a different kind of skill development than that which goes on in first year courses. We can't say what is "good writing." It depends on the context. Similarly, "good" information is defined by its context. Keeping portfolios of majors in the discipline on file will allow sophomores and juniors in the major see what senior-level writing looks like. Having some sort of culminating experience (like a senior seminar) is very important. It functions as the next step beyond the first level of training. Faculty development is needed for teaching discipline-based writing courses. Have someone from the writing program come talk to the department so that it's not always dependent on individual faculty member's initiative First Year courses may teach the basics, but how do you continue the development over the next two to three years so that we don't end up with seniors who write like first-year students? How do we ensure institutional continuity? Getting an incentive (e.g. a grant) is very motivating! Otherwise efforts are often personally driven and short term. Collaboration has to start out small. Tentative steps and word of mouth can create momentum. The term "Scaffolding" came up over and over. What are our epistemologies and ontologies? Can we articulate them? There are multiple literacies, and they are connected. Purple Group There is a need for a variety of opportunities for connections. e.g. faculty committees, teaching and learning center work, etc. Research supports writing Informal collaboration in the classroom writing process is parallel with the research process. Currently, writing skills and library skills are taught separately. How can we integrate them within the classroom? Where does collaboration start? The commitment to student learning is shared by various groups, but each group approaches the problem using a different "language." What are some strategies for bridging gaps? Librarians enroll in classes. Librarians, faculty, and writing professionals each have different agendas. Are they conflicting? Should they be? Of course not. ASSESSMENT! Yellow Group Assignments should be constructed in a way that authorizes students to own their processes as critical researchers making writerly choices. This will help them feel able to enter the scholarly conversation. Standards for information literacy should inform pedagogy, being a foundation rather than an add-on. Choose the ACRL guidelines that best fit your goals. Assignments need to start with goals for student learning in order to be effective There is great danger in relegating writing and research to just a few courses. A distributed model integrates writing and research into more places, making it more relevant to students. Faculty development is needed for courses which incorporate but do not foreground writing and research. Departmental training should include the goals and strategies for teaching discipline-specific literacy outcomes. There are lots of ways to extend the collaboration repertoire. Sheri Breen of St. Olaf (breens@stolaf.edu) worked with a reference librarian to create a matrix for assessing annotations (ask her if you want to a copy). Have ongoing conversations, both formal and informal. Linked courses offer opportunities for collaboration. Projects in two courses complement each other. Collaboration is not just a matter of will, it is also a matter of time. Bridging gaps means that we need to know what students can do , and what we would like them to be able to do . "Assessment" is accounting for goals. Consider a conference about information literacy directed toward faculty (but including librarians, writing assistants, and technologists). Show how successful collaboration can look in the classroom. (posted by Christina McOmber or Cornell College, cmcomber@cornellcollege.edu)
