Difference between revisions of "Standard 5"

==Introduction==

Library and information resources at the Evergreen State College support students as they learn how to reason and communicate about freely chosen inquiries whose outcomes remain to be discovered or created (Smith, Standard 2)—in short, as they learn the skills of research, information literacy and media production. All areas of these services balance the open-ended demands of free inquiry against the need for stability, security and efficiency in systems and services.  This balance constitutes the focus of how we evaluate our role in undergraduate education. Unlike traditional libraries, this work encompasses media production in all forms, across the curriculum. All areas of Library and information resources are shaped by the primary mission of teaching and of providing state-of-the-art facilities for programs and individual students.  Historically, the Library has been well funded because of how deliberately it has integrated teaching, services, facilities, and collections across the curriculum in response to the demands of open-ended inquiry.  In fact, the high level of funding represents the strong collaboration among library and media staff, faculty, and administration, all of whom work in concert to develop the library as a center for teaching and learning.

Two broad roles define and distinguish Library and information resources at Evergreen. This chapter first describes and evaluates the teaching and instruction central to the mission of the Library and information resources in the context of Evergreen’s interdisciplinary, student-centered pedagogy.  Second, the chapter describes and assesses the collections, tools, and services developed in support of our educational roles.

==Teaching and Instruction==

===Description of Teaching and Instructional Programs: An Overview===

Library and information resources instructs and teaches in multiple modes, from basic skills instruction to more complex, content-driven teaching by faculty and professionals in the curriculum.  In fact, the teaching faculty contributes substantively and collaboratively to information services, collections and policies.  This dynamic collaboration between the faculty and Library and information resources has shaped our primary mission to support inquiry-based education. Each area of Library and information resources has developed structures to connect teaching and instruction closely to the faculty, the curriculum and the academic mission of the college.

====Faculty Librarians and the Library proper====

In the case of the Library, Evergreen requires rotation between the librarians and the teaching faculty [Exhibit: Pedersen, etc. for full description].  To describe this rotation briefly, faculty librarians rotate out of the library to teach full-time on a regular basis and, in exchange, teaching faculty rotate into the library to serve as librarians providing reference, instruction and collection development.  Faculty who rotate into the library leave with updated skills for developing information literacy within their programs and teams across the curriculum. Library faculty develop their subject specialties and enhance their ability to work across pedagogical and disciplinary realms. Perpetual faculty-wide interactions in faculty governance and team-teaching reinforce the strong connections between the library faculty and the teaching faculty. Librarians know the faculty as colleagues and teaching faculty know the librarians (probably the only basis for widespread and effective library instruction in a curriculum without requirements). Teaching teams also spread best practices in library instruction as older teaching faculty introduce their new faculty teammates to their library colleagues and the teaching they offer.

A loose liaison system links each librarian with a subset of the curriculum, based on subject expertise and personal alliances.  Faculty librarians provide a wide array of library and information technology related teaching. Teaching outside the library in the curriculum at large, library faculty develop teaching and subject expertise which increases their competence and creativity as they work to match library instruction with individual academic programs. One-time workshops designed to introduce sources particular to the research projects within an academic program represent the most common format. Librarians and teaching faculty design these workshops with the assumption that the skills imparted are embedded in the interests and needs of the program learning community. At a minimum, the faculty for the program usually 1) create a research assignment which informs and motivates the students’ work; 2) attend the workshop and take part, adding his or her expertise and/or questions; 3) provide the library liaison a syllabus and a copy of the assignment and a t of the topics students are considering and 4) ask the students to begin considering their topic before attending the workshop so that they are primed to begin actual research during the workshop. Librarians teach in staged series of workshops most frequently in the graduate programs, in the sciences, and in the off campus programs. Each year one or more library faculty affiliates deeply with a program, meeting weekly to create stepped learning conjoined with research assignments [Exhibit: Sara H. syllabi?]. For several years an information technology seminar linked library internship opportunities with a hands-on web technology workshop.  In that model, a small group of students explored contemporary questions in the world of rapid digitization and its social implications.  They paralleled that study with real library work and web production practice, including wikis and webpages designed to support library functions [Exhibits: IT wiki, Rare Books page; SAIL page?]. The seminar and workshop provided a venue for library faculty, staff and Academic Computing instructors to gather and consider both the past and future of information technologies [Exhibit: internship syllabi]. Each year one librarian also offers research methods through the evening and weekend curriculum. [Exhibit: Randy Stilson syllabi]

Library support for the two major off-campus offerings, the Tacoma and the Reservation-Based, Community-Determined programs, focuses heavily on instruction. Students of these programs have limited access to the physical library, and must be directed to the many high quality resources made available to them on-line. Most years, librarians work closely with the Research Methods class at Tacoma, providing instruction on site several weeks per quarter. In Winter 2008, a librarian will offer a 2-credit research module linked to the broader interdisciplinary curriculum of the Tacoma campus.  Library instruction at the Reservation sites of the Reservation-Based Community-Determined programs has varied widely. Recently the program has focused on building library methods into the lower division bridge curriculum, which has not involved the library directly.  Rebuilding this connection should be a high priority, and a planned faculty rotation from the Reservation-Based program will be an opportunity to do so. See the supplemental discussion of new services for discussion of the many ways direct access to collections has been facilitated through new services to off-campus programs. [this will need to be a link to the specific paragraphs]  [Exhibit: NAS and Tacoma resource pages]

Within the library, the Library Faculty see themselves primarily as teachers.  They tend to understand the services of the library in the context of teaching, rather than as service providers.  They take a proactive approach to the work, suggesting tools and strategies for designing library instruction, and finding the intellectual work in the world of research instruction.  They position themselves to work across administrative as well as curricular boundaries and sustain an important role in the crossroads of traditional research methods, contemporary information technology and the world of the curriculum and teaching faculty.

====Modes of Instruction in Media and Academic Computing====

At the level of academic programs, all major computer and media labs provide group instruction covering particular applications or the tools of the relevant discipline. Media and Computing Staff teach workshops in different spaces and in different modes, depending on discipline and the technology. There are no constraints upon what facility may be used. In one quarter, a science program with a media component might have workshops in the Computer Center focusing on blogs; a math program might meet in the Computer Applications Lab; a history program might learn about video production in the Multimedia lab; and a library research workshop could convene in one of the general-purpose labs in the Computer Center. In this way, academic programs leverage staff expertise and facilities.

Teaching faculty must be able to easily identify and contact the appropriate staff member to coordinate ITL instruction which may also require significant logistical support: lab scheduling, equipment check-out, server space, password access, personnel scheduling and other details. In Academic Computing, staff members work with faculty in order to coordinate how programs will teach technology. For instance, the staff member helps set up file shares, web spaces, and schedules and teaches workshops.  The Media Services staff also play a central role in how faculty design and integrate media into their programs.  Like Computing Staff, they schedule all requests for media instruction, whether from programs or from individual students.  Media faculty meet regularly with Media Services staff so that they can develop facilities, plan for access, and foster how academic programs integrate media into the curriculum.

Students who work independently on media or computing projects or who decide to tackle media projects within non-media oriented programs find many forms of instructional support outside of academic programs.  Academic Computing offers regularly scheduled technology workshops, which are open to all.  In addition, Evergreen students can access Lynda.com, which tutors students in software applications and programming languages.  The Library recently subscribed to Safari Books Online, which supports the computer science curriculum, but which also answers the technical inquires of students across the curriculum.  A Computing wiki began last year and hosts approximately 2,000 pages of instructions and tutorials.  Increasingly, students, faculty and staff rely on the wiki to stay abreast of technologies hosted on campus.  Students may access most media production facilities once they have completed a proficiency training session. Media instructors run hundreds of these quick, skills-focused instructional sessions annually, serving thousands of students, ensuring proper use of the equipment, and providing supportive technical background for systems. Finally, the Evening and Weekend Studies curriculum provides a coherent, regular pathway for instruction in use of the more complex production facilities, allowing students to gain the skills needed to apply media production resources to their work.

Like the library faculty, Media staff teach in a variety of ways—full-time, part-time, intensive, general, sustained, intermittent, specialized, individually, collaboratively. Many of the media staff are artists, professionals, and faculty in their own right, who have MFA’s in their fields. They teach photography, electronic music, web design, and digital imaging as adjuncts in Evening & Weekend Studies and in Extended Education. And their contributions to the curriculum are substantial and sustained, some of them having taught for over 20 years.  Not only does their work support the Expressive Arts, it also provides access and instruction to students who don’t consider themselves artists but who are nevertheless engaged in technologies that constitute the visual aesthetics of science, history, political science, psychology, and visual narrative.   Media staff who are adjuncts sometimes teach full time, as visiting artists. In general, Media staff are central to the success of media-based programs and are viewed as colleagues by the Expressive Arts faculty, whose programs they support, and as gurus by the faculty who are less media-literate. These working relationships form the backbone of Media Services.  Photo, Electronic Media and Media Loan staff supervise 4 to 8 student interns who are critical to the effective functioning of labs and services. These students typically not only gain high level skills in technical production, but also develop instructional, collaborative and administrative skills associated with working closely with students and technical staff.  Finally, all Media staff sponsor many individual contracts which provide opportunities for students who have identified intensive individual inquiries which are not supported in the curriculum at large.

Faculty institutes create valuable connections among faculty, library, media and academic computing instructors.   Every summer, the Dean of Faculty Development asks faculty to propose institutes that will familiarize participants in new technologies. The Dean funds the proposals that generate the most enrollment, which means that the faculty and staff drive this avenue for development.  Recent ITL institutes have focused on teaching statistics with Excel or on using online collaborative tools in foster learning communities.  Faculty are also paid for self-directed work that focuses on their programs.  In these instances, faculty evaluate technology, practice using it, and plan how to incorporate applications into their programs.

==Analysis & Assessment of Teaching & Instructional Programs==

The strong focus on teaching throughout Library and information resources suggests the following questions: 1) In a college without requirements, does information technology instruction reach enough students to assure that the vast majority of graduates develop their skills broadly in support of their inquiries? 2) Which students are taught?  Do students receive their information technology instruction in an array of disciplinary and developmentally varied situations or is it happening only in pockets of the curriculum?  3) Is it working?  Have students acquired information technology skills?

===How many students are taught?===

Within recent years about 75% of the total FTE attends program-based library instruction workshops. [Exhibit: workshop statistics]. In media services, from 2000 to 2007, a total of more than 1500 workshops were offered to approximately 156 programs. The number of workshops given and students reached in 2005 and 2006 were each more than double the numbers provided in 2000.  Workshops have increased along with new technologies, especially in Media Loan and in the new Multimedia and DIS labs.

Academic Computing instructors provide academic program-based training sessions and workshops throughout the academic year.

{| class="wikitable"

The number of teaching contacts across Library and information resources shows how many students are taught, but not which students. In end-of-program reviews from 2001-2006, The Office of Institutional Research asked faculty, “Did your students use technology to present work, conduct research (including library research), or solve problems?  If yes, How?”  Not surprisingly, faculty answered, “library/internet research skills were the most commonly used, followed by some form of presentation technology. .”  [Exhibit: http://www.evergreen.edu/institutionalresearch/pdf/assessment/epr/EPRsummary2006technology.pdf.]

==='''''Media/IT Literacy across the Curriculum: Where are we now?===

The Computer Applications Lab also shows a trend toward more broadly used applications.  Although the CAL has traditionally focused on the science curriculum in ES and SI, these users have begun to share their space with those who have less specialized demands.  Roughly 60%-70% of the classes in the CAL now work with statistical or numeric analysis, primarily Excel but also including Graphical Analysis, R, and SPSS. Ninety percent of CAL users prepare presentations, most often with Powerpoint, Word, Illustrator, and Excel. Approximately 60% of the programs meeting in the CAL still use analytical tools, including (in order of usage) ArcGIS, Mathematica, and Stella, which were once the focal point of all CAL applications.  Science faculty have shifted their emphasis to on-site analysis, using advanced applications in specialized scientific labs in ways that parallel the shift in Expressive Arts toward advanced applications.  Meanwhile, the CAL and the Computer Center remain a haven for students who seek more basic forms of support and instruction in media and computing.

Increasingly, Academic Computing has embraced its role in teaching workshops for entry-level programs. In fact, Academic Computing and the library  have worked to complement each other in the mission to teach students about college information resources and technologies. While Academic Computing has expanded its instructional support to teach students about entry level and basic media production, Media Services has continued to serve both specialized and entry-level students in labs designed and staffed accordingly.

===Critical Approaches to Media===

===Teaching Information Technology Literacy (ITL) Across the Curriculum===

During the first half of the self-study period, the Legislature mandated Information Technology Literacy (ITL) as a central focus for colleges and universities in the State. The  ITL movement  presented nothing surprising to the Evergreen Library, which has been engaged in these ideas and goals since the founding of the college. However, the legislative mandate created interest in evaluating our work. As used in this study, the term ITL encompasses every aspect of information technology, including digitized library research, but also includes concepts found in the literatures of media literacy, visual studies, and communications. In order to assure that students have the skills to communicate about their open inquiries, Library and information resources takes a broad role in the curriculum. Two of the “Six Expectations of an Evergreen Graduate” fall under this broad mission for students to achieve independence, creativity, and critical acumen. Expectation Two states that our graduates will communicate creatively and effectively;  Expectation Four, that our graduates apply qualitative, quantitative, and creative modes of inquiry appropriately to practical and theoretical problems across the disciplines. When students at Evergreen learn about media and information technologies, they also are immersed in disciplinary content that promotes their ability to "access, analyze, evaluate and create messages across a variety of contexts."  Not only should literate students read and write astutely, they also should access, view, critique and produce digital media and information that is clear, eloquent and complete.  In this way, digital scholarship merges seamlessly with individual and formal educational goals. [Footnote Sonia Livingstone article; Wyatt's definition; Caryn's position paper from the gen ed. process Nov. 27, 2000].

Library and information resources supports ITL, including media literacy, as an agenda for students across programs, disciplines and media.  Library and information resources collaborates with teaching teams as they instruct students in media and students who create films, multimedia or musical works for programs or for independent study.  These are the challenges of the "freely chosen inquiry," –challenges that cannot all be met at all times.  However, the location of Media Services administratively and physically within the library is meant to insure that media studies and media production are supported appropriately both within the programs that media faculty teach and elsewhere in the freely chosen inquiries of students.

Academic computing also provides access to—and instruction in-- information technologies through a balance of specialized and open computing facilities.. With the migration of many media applications to commonly available personal computer platforms, instruction and facilities to support media publishing have spread to academic computing and even to the library.

The Library, consistent with college-wide practices,  rejects requirements and embraces students who engage in open inquiry and independent judgment and who evince the ineffable quality of critical acumen.  In this context, we support a fluid curriculum and respond to changes that drive the needs and expectations of an innovative teaching faculty.  Because the Library shapes teaching according to individual students, a fluid curriculum, and highly diverse pedagogy,  standard or standardized assessment methods do  not  apply.  Instead, the Library commits to the intensive and never ending task of recreating learning goals, student-by-student, program-by-program. Context is everything, which obviates the role of abstract standards and measures.

On the other hand, the Library engages in qualitative assessment—a descriptive characterization of ITL teaching and learning .  Under the leadership of the Office of Institutional Research, the librarians designed a project that assessed students as they worked through real research inquiries.  The study documented the techniques and processes—and to some extent, the thinking—of students as they collaborated intensively on research questions. Although the group involved was statistically insignificant, it did produce an interesting snapshot.  For instance, the students were stronger in their grasp of content than they were in their command of library research tools for their specific inquiries.  In other words, a question about history might not lead them to Historical Abstracts. They were also strong in their ability to develop their research questions and to evaluate and synthesize the results. And they flourished in the task of collaborating about their work. What these results suggest is that “Faculty may want to assess their students’ abilities to obtain information and offer tutorials or refer students to the Library when deficiencies are detected.”

Beyond the immediate results, this qualitative assessment suggested that students benefit greatly when they collaborate.  Certainly, this observation is corroborated by the gains that students make when they work together in skill building instead of in canned computer workshops outside of programs.  Additionally,  peer groups are widely used across the curriculum as a way to encourage students to develop research topics and individual projects. Given the results of the qualitative assessment and given the widely practiced use of peer groups, library faculty should seek ways to implement collaborative research activities when they link their instruction to programs. This model of cooperation would build on the more isolated collaborations that take place, as a matter of course, between librarians and students at the reference desk. An enlarged vision of this basic transaction—discussion, exploration, and brainstorming—will enhance the relevance and effectiveness of library teaching and workshops. .  [Exhibit: [http://www.evergreen.edu/institutionalresearch/pdf/assessment/informationliteracy.pdf http://www.evergreen.edu/institutionalresearch/pdf/assessment/informationliteracy.pdf]]

==='''''Survey Evidence===

The 2006 Evergreen Student Experience Survey asked "To what extent have your Evergreen experiences contributed to your growth in ... the following computer-related fields...?"  For the category 'Studying or Doing Research via the Internet or other online sources":

* 47.5% reported quite a bit or a lot, for a total of 77.5%.

* More than 84% of Tacoma students reported at least some, of which 50% reported quite a bit.

* More than 93% of reservation-based students reported at least some contribution; 86.2% reporting quite a bit or a lot.

These statistics correlate well with the end-of-program review and instructional data cited earlier.  Considering just how many students express self-confidence in their research skills, and as the internet provides so many increasingly powerful tools for personal research, it is heartening to see that a good majority of students recognize that they developed greater (and one hopes more scholarly) research skills as part of their education at Evergreen.

* Just over 42% reported Evergreen contributed "Some", "Quite a Bit" or "A Lot".

* Fully 36.8% said "Not at All"

* and 20.9% said "Very Little."

''Evergreen students are more likely to learn about word processing than any other computer application. No single type of application is found in large numbers, but rather many types have small representation.

===''''ITL Instruction:  Conclusions===

''''Overall, Library and information resources and the teaching faculty assure that information technology infuses the curriculum.  On the other hand, the faculty has not embraced a single set of information technology skills.  Instead, they choose and adapt technologies according to the pedagogical and disciplinary requirements of their chosen inquiry. In the immediate future, Library and information resources should invite the teaching faculty into a discussion about whether the campus has any broad consensus about ITL. Long ago, the college committed to writing across the curriculum and allocated significant institutional resources to encourage that work—without proscriptive limits or standards. A wider discussion about ITL could produce a similar vision and a commensurate amount of institutional support. In the long run, such a vision will shape our understanding of digital scholarship in the liberal arts.

==Information Collections and Services==

As a long-time teaching library and with instruction at the center of the work of media and academic computing, LIRN staff as well and faculty and instructors focus on responsiveness to the needs of the curriculum and individual student inquiry. The fluidity and interdisciplinarity of the curriculum help define all services. The interconnectedness found in LIRN instructional program mean that LIRN does not just react to the expectations of patrons and the professional environment. Instead LIRN staff and faculty creatively design services and collections in interaction with rest of the teaching world of the college.

To support and facilitate these connections to the rest of Academics, the Library Dean meets once or twice weekly as one of the Academic Deans in the primary cross-curricular academic administrative structure of the college. He also meets weekly with the Provost, Associate Vice President for Academic Budget and Planning and the Academic Dean of Budget for budgetary discussions and decision making. The Director of Computing & Communications and the Manager of Academic Computing also join the Academic Deans meeting every other week.

=====Collection Development=====

Library faculty develop collections to support the changeable and interdisciplinary curriculum without benefit of departmental allocations.  They do so based on their own teaching, extensive service in governance structures of the faculty at large, and their role as members of the faculty who are, as a whole, responsible for designing the curriculum. [Ex: list of librarian and staff dtf assignments]. Because the faculty at large develops the curriculum, the work is done collectively through Planning Units and all-faculty retreats. No formal curricular review structure in the traditional sense exists. Thus, the librarians know, from the ground up, what is being planned and the curricular interests of their colleagues as they develop. Faculty who rotate into the library will often review, weed and strengthen areas of the collection related to their disciplinary expertise in order to complement the oversight offered by the library faculty selectors and the approval plan they have designed.  Because collection development is centralized in the hands of library faculty selectors, and because of the commitment to free inquiry, individual requests for acquisitions are almost always honored unless they are far out of collection development policy guidelines and represent a significant diversion of resources (budget or staff time).

The particular challenge of developing library collections and information services at Evergreen has been the impossibility of effectively satisfying all but the most beforehand requests of students and faculty working deeply on projects outside of the core curriculum and collections. Networked services and collections have basically solved this issue, even though the expectation for immediate access to all information in all formats continues to grow. For all but the very worst procrastinators, the SUMMIT system, which includes well over 30 academic libraries from Oregon and Washington, brings huge monograph collections to hand within two or three days. Additionally, periodicals collections have expanded 8 to 9 times over the self-study period; although parts of the aggregated databases are often less than appropriate for the academic context, specific titles and databases have been added thoughtfully, within the framework of the academic mission. Consortial purchases not only reduce costs dramatically, but are based upon the academic focus of the consortia. Finally, ILLiad, the on-line interlibrary loan system brings journal articles to the email accounts of students, again, within days (or even hours) of ordering. There are almost no discernable limits to accessing published information for any researcher except those who need to present within 24 hours. Nevertheless, Orbis-Cascade, the umbrella consortium which administers SUMMIT, is exploring collaborative collection development to ensure both the depth of the shared collections and the appropriate coverage of local collections. This process should result in even better assurance that students can effectively find the monographs needed to support their widest and deepest inquiries.

Freely-chosen independent media production by students creates significant strain for Media Services similar to that of library collections trying to cover every possible realm of inquiry.  Students working on independent media productions can create competition with the Expressive Arts media curriculum over scare resources (whether equipment, laboratories or staff teaching). In order to balance these demands, Media Sevices requires a Media Request Form of students (and programs) planning extensive use of Media Services. Individual contract forms include a checkmark for special equipment or facilities and the academic deans who review the forms use this as a safety net for screening intensive media use. The Media Services Manager and the Head of Instructional Media review demands for media support and assure that media resources are sufficient for the proposed work. The Expressive Arts planning unit instituted a Student Originated Studies (SOS) group contract in media in order to handle some of this demand for independent media production studies and to assure that students have the supervision and instructional and facilities support they need.

Evergreen's teaching models shape the design of traditional service points within the Library. Faculty librarians generally staff the reference desk whenever the library is open, with the presumption that individual assistance should be a teaching opportunity.  The work at reference should be process-focused rather than product focused, leading the patron to contextual understanding of research tools and methods appropriate to their needs. The reference desk serves as the end of the pipeline begun in workshops, the place where librarians can see what library instruction produces, whether inspiration or confusion. [ex: Pedersen e-mail on teaching at the desk]. Reference collections, tools and resources such as periodical databases, web pages or finding aids, demonstrate attention not just to convenience or uninformed expectations, but also and more substantially to learning opportunities. Thus, for example, very broad aggregate databases have been purchased because they are extremely cost-effective, but the librarians also emphasize and teach comparatively expensive digitized indexes which refer students more deeply into the discipline-based literature of their inquiries.  In web page design, signage, collection organization, and creation of virtual services, the planners ask what can be taught through the new design, service or collection.

As information technology has evolved over the past ten years and computers have become the networked platform for the majority of information access, research, communication and media production, LIRN has devoted significant energy to blending services.  With the generic library as a foundation and the interdisciplinary curriculum as the context, merged collections and services build upon an alternative past. The major remodel planned and implemented during the self-study period substantially strengthened opportunities for networking services, facilities and staff. One central, broad entrance provides access to the Library, the Computer Center, Media Loan and the stairs to Electronic Media, Photo Services and Computing and Communications.  A large staircase which hides this entrance from the view of individuals entering the building is being removed in the current, second phase of the library building remodel.

Instructional emphases and responsiveness to the character of the academic mission shaped the remodel. Collaborative study spaces predominate, whether open area study tables, grouped lounge furniture, pod-shaped arrangements in labs or small group study and media viewing rooms. Wireless access (almost ubiquitous on campus now) allows informal groupings around personal or library-owned laptops.  Additional laboratory spaces provide easier scheduling for program work and more computers for individuals when classes do not use the labs. Limited quiet study areas provide an alternative for the solitary scholar, but group work is the norm and encouraged.

New artwork welcomes patrons to lounge and study areas, emphasizing the library as a physical as well as virtual space. The new basement lounge near Rare Books and Archives, now affectionately dubbed the Library Underground, hosts frequent campus gatherings and public readings, although since the remodel flooding has occasionally disrupted the area. During the current crunch on college space due to more remodeling groups from across campus have used meeting and teaching spaces in the library, helping create interactions across campus organizations. A prominent location of the media collections assures visibility and close connection to the circulation and reference staff when Sound and Image Library (SAIL) staff are not present; further reduction of the physical reference collection will produce space for SAIL to expand toward reference and circulation. Student find lounge furniture  in what were formerly the barren hallways of media services and among the strictly utilitarian desks of the computer center. More room for the book collection, more study space and more flexibility for computers, laptops and media all serve to extend the ways in which students, faculty and the public use the wing.

The remodel also brought the Writing and the Quantitative and Symbolic Reasoning Centers into the main floor of the library, physically centralizing many academic teaching and learning support functions. This relationship has the potential to become an instructional and intellectual connection as well as a physical one.

Academic Computing and Media Services have blended facilities as specialized labs have evolved over the self-study period. Historically, Academic Computing focused on the physical computer center and on-site teaching and technology training for students and faculty, usually covering specific skills such as Word. The specialty labs (CAL, MML, DIS, ACC) focused on more specialized content-specific software and hardware. The specialized labs, with supporting instruction, facilitated student  work with more advanced media creation, collaborative critique, or discipline-oriented applications.

Specialized peripherals such as large format printers, collaborative production, and some applications requiring intensive computing power still require specialty labs. However, the primary distinction among labs is the level of expertise and specialized knowledge of the staff. Students benefit in many ways; they know where to find specialized support from the staff and faculty while they have the tools they need to do their work no matter which facility they are using.

=====Planning=====

Planning merged LIRN facilities and services creates challenges for administratively separated departments. The Information Technology Collaborative Hisve (ITCH) provides the most formal mechanism for collaboration around technology across the various parts of the college. Evergreen supports three ITCH groups: Academic, Administrative, and Core. The Academic ITCH meets at least once a month and includes professional staff from each of the primary technology labs, faculty, and interested students. The purpose of the Academic ITCH is to coordinate general academic IT initiatives, help develop general academic computing policy, and to guide strategic planning. Professional staff members in each of the primary technology areas have developed strong connections to discipline-specific slices of the curriculum, faculty and academic administration while they also need cross-disciplinary and cross-divisional exploration, planning and communication.  ITCH provides one of the necessary cross-curricular and cross-division contexts for developing information technology across these strong.

The work of ITCH focuses on facilities, budgets and services. No structure supports discussions or explorations about cross-curricular instruction across the areas or with faculty.  In the immediate future, LIRN should focus on fostering opportunities for these discussions.

===Analysis & Assessment of Information Services and Collections===

Once again, although it is clear that LIRN provides a wide array of information services, the question still remains whether the services are effective.  Institutional Research surveys alumni and students about campus resources routinely.  Over time, responses regarding the library and computing center have been strikingly positive. Students reported the library and computer center among the most highly used services or facilities with high user satisfaction levels as well. Library use rates were 99% in 1998; 97% in 2002; 97% for on campus users and 94.2% for off campus students in 2004.  User satisfaction rates were 75.5% somewhat or very satisfied in 1998 and 85% somewhat or very satisfied in 2002. The student experience survey of 2006 reports 95% users of the library.  Computer Center users were 94% of respondents in 1998, 96% in 2002 and 92% for on campus students and 93.4% for off campus students in 2004. In the 2006 student experience survey 88.5% of students reported using the computer center.

Thus, despite the radically changing information environment, the physical library has experienced only a slight reduction in use: 4% from 1998 to 2006. The computer center also has enjoyed heavy use over time, with some reduction in 2006 as more and more students use their own laptops on campus; the survey showed that 91% of students have their own computers. Satisfaction rates for the library and computer center remain the highest for any services on campus.

Starting in 2006, the ESES included questions about using library resources online and found that 85.2% of respondents use online library resources. Internal records also suggest phenomenal growth in online use of library resources. In 2000, when the library subscribed to three aggregate databases (Proquest, Ebscohost and JSTOR) users conducted 80,000 searches.  In 2006, with approximately 30 subscription databases, there were more than 262,677 searches. Careful review of variations of use from year to year reveals the direct impact a fluid curriculum has on database use.  For example, Modern Language Association International Bibliography statistics are quite erratic; one major project in a large academic program explains a five-fold increase of use in one year. As JSTOR has developed into a more deeply and broadly multi-interdisciplinary tool, use statistics show a shift away from heavy dependence on the less scholarly aggregates.  Extensive lobbying by faculty and librarians encourages this shift toward use of scholarly resources such as JSTOR.

Assessment of the popularity of Media Services may be approached through use data from Institutional Research and an additional user survey by Media Services staff member Lin Crowley, conducted as a project for her Masters in Public Administration studies. The goal of the survey was to understand what and how often the current college community, including students, staff and faculty, use Media Services. In addition, satisfaction levels were surveyed in order to identify areas of Media Services which may need additional attention and to elicit requests for additional services.

High use of general media facilities is verified in use statistics: for example, during the past year, Media Loan recorded about 14,000 patron contacts and handled over 132,000 transactions with individual pieces of media equipment, a level of use which has remained fairly constant throughout the study period.

=====Comparing Use Statistics With Other Libraries=====

In order to assess whether these use rates are cause for celebration, comparisons with other libraries provide some guidance.  In 2002, the Library implemented a major new service of sufficient complexity to allow some assessment of how efficiently the dissemination of new information technology occurs at Evergreen.  Does interconnectedness mean that news and skills spread quickly? The new service (then Cascade, now the much larger SUMMIT consortium of Washington and Oregon academic libraries) allowed students to search the shared collections of the 4-year public colleges and universities of the state, make on-line requests, and have items mailed very quickly to Evergreen.

[[Image:Summit copy.gif]]

Judging by the quick integration of SUMMIT into the culture of the college, it appears that communication methods and instructional relationships effectively support the spread of awareness of new services and the skills to use them. And it is important to remember that it was the circulation staff, with the willing support of staff of other areas, who made the service work effectively and efficiently from the outset. Lower early use rates at other institutions may be partially the result of staff deliberately implementing the service at a careful pace in order to avoid system collapse. Evergreen decided to implement at full force, with excellent results. Had turnaround time or inefficiency disappointed the users of Cascade, the take-off would have fizzled.

The peer groups Evergreen most commonly uses for comparisons consist of liberal arts colleges.  In general, the liberal arts college library (and thus, liberal arts college students!) is a very hard working institution. Nationally, a comparison of the average 2004 national liberal arts college library use statistics with those of the smaller masters level universities (Carnegie Class Masters I) reveals a dramatic difference. Looking at the first level of use, the walk into the library, Evergreen’s average gate count per FTE was 1.8, Masters universities were at 1.4 and Liberal arts colleges averaged 2.77.  At the next level of engagement or expertise, the patron checks out a book.  At the third level of library use, the patron identifies materials from libraries beyond his own and requests an interlibrary loan (ILL).  Unfortunately, in order to be comparable, ILL data must be conflated with the data for circulation, because SUMMIT statistics are counted as either circulations or interlibrary loans, depending upon the practice of the reporting library. Evergreen’s patrons borrow (via ILL and circulation) an average of 36 items per student, while the masters level institutions borrow only 1.55 and the liberal arts colleges nationally borrow an average of 34.

The same dramatic distinction between liberal arts colleges and comprehensive institutions appears in the SUMMIT consortium, which covers the full gamut of colleges and universities in Oregon and Washington. Following is a chart which ranks the top half of the 31 libraries in the region based upon their rates of use of SUMMIT, and shows Evergreen high on the list of the higher ranked liberal arts colleges, all well above usage rates at more comprehensive institutions.

{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="1"

| Library

| # Items borrowed

| FTE

| Items/FTE

| Reed

| G. Fox U.

| Marylhurst

| Lewis/Clark

| TESC

| 3.84

| Whitman

| Willamet

| UPS

| Seattle Pacific

| Western Ore.

| U Portland

| U Oregon

| E. Ore. U.

| Pacific U.

Looking at national data, the following table compares the averages of various commonly used Evergreen peer groups:

| '''1.81'''

| '''36'''

| 2.85

| 4.20

| 2.03

| 1.20

|-

| 1.74

Edutech, an information technology consultant, provided peer comparisons for Evergreen's information technology budgetary support.  The review determined that Evergreen devotes considerable resources to IT, and that Evergreen is consistent with many  peers in doing so. Edutech compared us to similar schools (in physical environment, enrollment numbers, educational goals and aspirations, residential nature, tuition, and governance structure) and found that such schools put a larger percentage of their budget into information technology than institutions with different kinds of aspirations.  Evergreen’s total actual expenditure for IT in 2005, expressed as a percentage of total institutional expenditures, was 6.7%.  This is in alignment with the figure reported by the Campus Computing 2006 survey for public four-year colleges, 6.7%. Campus Computing reported 6.5% as the average for all institutions.

=====Responsiveness to Rapid Change in the Information Environment=====

A final, important question to consider as LIRN assesses services and collections is whether LIRN responds rapidly, responsibly and appropriately to the opportunities presented by changing technology. Among the organizations included in LIRN, the library is the largest and most embedded in professional traditions. In the context of the rapid digitization of information challenges, the library may have the most investment in pre-existing structures and assumptions.

The Library rotation model and the particular form of library faculty status, while providing strong connection to the fluid curriculum and the motivated individual learner, also creates significant challenges to library administration and services. Consistency is a problem. Library faculty tend to be drawn away from much of the administration and day-to-day services of the library other than reference and bibliographic instruction, a tendency which has only been increased by the loss of one faculty library line due to budget cuts. Contractual requirements push Library faculty into college governance, full-time teaching, and the development of their own intellectual, creative and/or scholarly interests as teaching faculty.  Limited summer coverage and sabbaticals further attenuate consistent attention to ongoing library administration.

As an organization which makes decisions about services, staffing and resources through a flat, organically driven culture, does LIRN take appropriate advantage of the many new options and responsibilities which result from new digitized and networked information resources?  An appended list of major changes in services in library and media services, almost all driven by the opportunities created in the realm of digital resources and systems, testifies to a flexible and responsive organization (Appendix IV).

=====Conclusion: Assessing LIRN Collections and Services=====

The overall organizational habits of the college, habits of collaboration, egalitarian ideals, fluidity, face-to-face interactions, non-departmentalization, and interdisciplinary inquiry, deeply influence LIRN planning.  The result is a responsive, flexible, evolving set of services and resources. Working across the digital divide from traditional library services to computing to media has generated a commitment to providing information technology services without regard to where the services reside administratively. LIRN assesses technology within the context of Evergreen’s particular curriculum and needs and implements new applications incrementally in collaborative processes involving all three areas of service and the teaching faculty. As part of that work, LRN has had the distinct historical advantage of presuming that information comes in all formats and that it is not only possible but advisable to break down as many barriers as possible to access to information in all its forms in order to approach the ideal of the generic library, an idea whose time may have finally come.

==Future Plans, Goals & Challenges==

===Shared Technology Creates the Need for More Shared Work===

As described above, commonly used media applications, once physically limited to Media   Services, are now found throughout the facilities administered by Academic Computing and even, to a degree, in the library. Library resources, once physically limited to the library building, are found anywhere one can reach the web. Computers, once found only in the Computer Center, are everywhere. These shifts have accelerated over the past ten years and have changed the instructional roles of the areas and their relationship to the curriculum. Undoubtedly the focus of LIRN’s work over the next few years will be the continuing evolution of information technologies. Overlap and blending will continue and formal and informal connections among the library, media services and academic computing must also continue to develop so that effective shared work will continue to thrive in this network. It seems less than useful to expend large amounts of energy redesigning administrative structures in order to respond to what is happening organically as the result of the changing, networked information world. The library, media services and academic computing can assume working together, the question is how best to strengthen the shared work and how best to connect it even more fruitfully to the faculty outside of LIRN?

LIRN should facilitate information technology literacy conversations across the instructional staff and in connection with media and technology-literate faculty.  The goal should be thoughtful engagement of faculty across the curriculum in questions of appropriate use and critical analysis of broadly relevant media and computing applications. As one vehicle for this work, building on the success of technically-focused summer technology institutes, LIRN should develop faculty institutes and faculty/staff summer working groups to facilitate these explorations.  One goal for institutes and workgroups should be to identify further activities to continue the exploration of the digital liberal arts across the curriculum. Collecting ore presenting best or most interesting practices could be an example of such activities.

The LIRN IT infrastructure supports a surprisingly diverse array of technologies and media in the curriculum.  In order to fully leverage this infrastructure, LIRN should considered more coordination across boundaries to provide technology support. The experience a student has in moving between different specialty areas on campus (CAL, MML, Computer Center) could be more seamless and intuitive.  This seamlessness could be facilitated by evaluating the common services that areas currently provide separately (printing, building and maintaining image sets, server filespace, common software, etc..) and seeking unnecessary redundant efforts.  By taking better advantage of the network infrastructure, IT staff who directly support the curriculum could dedicate considerably more energy towards coordinating, developing and designing IT strategies with academic programs instead of maintaining redundant infrastructures.

To do so would require considering changes in both the focus of specialized facilities staff and in the coordination of instruction and support to the curriculum. It would also require additional curricular design support staff in academic computing in order to increase the flexibility for planning instruction with faculty. In support of these possibilities, LIRN should discuss models for integrating curricular support and instruction.

The possibilities and questions above relate to information technology and media instruction. From the perspective of the shared facilities, LIRN should continue to consider a central help desk for the information technology wing, especially as the central staircase which blocks the view to the shared entrance is removed.  It is time to look at the best design and flow of traffic in that entrance once again. The internal physical flow between the various floors of the information technology wing should be considered as well. Equipping potential teaching and performance space for large programs in the Library Underground and providing a safer environment for Archives and Rare Books should be part of this work.

Construction of the Center for New Media will begin soon. This project has distinct relevance to the changing roles of media services, the library and academic computing within the evolving digital liberal arts. The CNM will comprise a collection of media production studios and equipment to complement and complete existing Media Services and Academic Computing media resources and provide the primary bridge between the campus media infrastructure and networked digital resources.  For a discussion of the CNM and related curricula projects see Appendix V.

The thinning of the ranks of the library faculty has also lead to more rotations out of the library proportionate to librarians who remain to serve in the library.  The result is less consistency in library faculty attention to library administrative matters; lack of support for some areas of the curriculum; and inability to respond to proposed additional reference desk hours. Further, the lessening emphasis on traditional reference desk service caused by the availability of the internet creates a ripple effect on existing practices: 1) the role of student-centered reference desk instruction is weakened as the follow-up and safety net for formal library instruction; 2) the independent learner receives less attention; and 3) the function of faculty who rotate into the library changes as their service at the desk becomes less and less important. These questions should inform the reference group as they consider how to proceed with or without an increase in the number of library faculty.

The reference group should evaluate service to areas of the curriculum reporting or demonstrating less involvement in the various forms of information technology and consider whether more or different instruction support would be appropriate or desirable. Considering the retirement of one of two faculty librarians with expertise in science, the intensive library instructional model currently in use in the science curriculum, and the low rate of inclusion on library research in SI programs as reported in end of program reviews, the next library faculty hire should emphasize scientific expertise.

As discussed in the process-based ITL assessment project, library faculty should encourage and model small group peer work among student researchers as an important step toward developing research strategies.  Assessing student created bibliographies can be emphasized as a strategy for determining when intervention is a good step. In programs which require a preliminary thesis statement and annotated bibliography as part of a staged research process, library faculty might offer to review and assess those products and consult with students based upon the results.  This would, when manageable, help close the loop left open as library faculty start students on their research process, occasionally have the opportunity to follow up with individuals, but rarely have the opportunity to intervene as the process continues (or stalls). Broadly trained faculty, who rarely have the opportunity to teach in areas of their own deep expertise, might deeply appreciate this help with assessing resources identified by students.

Academic Computing and the Library Faculty should explore instructional connections with the Quantitative and Writing Centers to enhance overlapping roles as instructors providing broad skills development across the curriculum.

===Collections and Services===

The library will continue the already active work to implement a new library front page and database search pages. The college web designers may be willing to maintain the library front page without too much loss of library control over content. These discussions are underway.  The Orbis-Cascade consortium is also considering developing a shared catalog front-page which the library will consider as well. Current investigations into developments in federated searching options are also ongoing, the library having found the original Meta-Find search extremely disappointing.

The last self-study emphasized the library audio/visual collection.  Since then, one-time funds have frequently been infused and the collection has grown significantly. SAIL staff and selectors have emphasized both new titles and replacement of older formats and worn copies.  The library anticipates circulating the collection through SUMMIT, which will increase wear.

[[Image:SAILacq_copy.gif|384px]]

Based on this record of expenditures, a permanent allocation of more funds should be made to create a more predictable and stable budget. Selectors should still have the flexibility to purchase various formats from their funds for print monographs, but a stable and larger allocation for the SAIL budget would lessen the need to do so and reduce irregularities in expenditures, workload and processing. A review of all the materials budgets mid-year, with the intention of considering reallocations to meet the curricular demands for video and digitized reference resources is slated for winter quarter of 2008. Additionally, the staff necessary to research and order this significantly increased number of items should be funded.

 

Continuing to identify excellent web-based media collections will be important as well, to achieving the level of media collections desired to provide distributed access to those collections. Digitizing archival collections of images and video and creating high-quality photographic archives of faculty art work will be a priority, as discussed in the Center for New Media project description.

 

During the self-study period, the budget for purchasing monographs was cut.  $25,000 was transferred to Periodicals/Reference in 04/05.  $49,000 was cut in 02/03.  These cuts have been partially restored through a yearly allocation of $45,000 from Indirect Cost (soft money produced largely from grant activities involving research) and $10,000 from Library Fines, leaving a cut of $20,000. There have been no new allocations in response to inflation.

 

With the very efficient SUMMIT and ILLiad systems the collections do not need to be designed to support the student who engages in a freely-chosen in-depth inquiry which does not match the collection profile. The materials he needs are only a few clicks and a couple of days away. However, with SUMMIT the library also will have the data with which to examine, over time, whether there are particular subject area weaknesses, subject areas which generate particularly high borrowing from other institutions when compared to the strengths and expenditures in the library collection. This data should be analyzed in three years, and if it appears to be useful, a plan to continue routine use of the SUMMIT data to revise collection development should be developed.  Additionally, the library will engage in a shared collection development project within the SUMMIT organization to identify and agree upon areas of special attention by each library in order to develop the overall coverage of the consortium, while not abandoning core collections. The library should consider focusing on rebuilding the monographic budget in the context of the huge increase of titles in the periodicals collection but also the prospect of serials inflation, the recommended build-up of the audio-visual collections (which will relieve the monographic budgets expenditure on media) and the new tools for collection analysis SUMMIT will provide.  The library should not simply assume that cuts need to be restored across the board.

 

The library will continue to take advantage of the significantly increased purchasing power created by consortial agreements for periodical and other database purchases.  The library needs to keep an eye on the time and expertise necessary to keep up with the ever-increasing work of evaluating these agreements, purchases and contracts and the technical work to support electronic resources generally.  The library should consider whether a position devoted to electronic resource management is a high priority or whether other staffing is more appropriate to handle new formats in a distributed fashion.  A centralized specialist working on electronic resources would potentially help the selectors, who are generally library faculty whose responsibilities to teaching do not allow them to attend to collections as consistently as is desirable.  The work reduction afforded by systems such as Serials Solutions and Marchive should be considered in this larger picture of evolving collection development.

 

 

The Edutech consultant who evaluated information technology at Evergreen gave us good marks for the general level of budgetary support for information technology. The report also recommended that “to follow current best practices, the replacement cycle should be permanently funded and the operations budgets need to be raised regularly to reflect the increase in technology-equipped classrooms, the increased number of servers and desktop computers that must be supported, and other increases in the technology base.”  The college has begun to address this issue as permanent line item now addresses core server replacement and permanent funding for desktop replacements is under discussion for the next biennium.  This movement towards more permanent allocations for replacement and repair helps to ensure that the infrastructure can support the curriculum. ITCH has an important role in this process of establishing permanent allocations, setting priorities and sharing needs across the expectations and requirements of the various facilities within LIRN. While excellent discussions and planning occur through ITCH, the work of the ITCH is limited by its purely advisory status and lack of budgetary authority.

 

Many specific challenges remain. While broadly speaking information technology is well funded, aspirations for face-to-face instruction and support lead to the need for greater emphasis on IT curricular support positions (curricular designers). The additional instructor/curriculum designers would work directly with the faculty and students, mentoring them through a technological landscape that is far more dynamic than even Evergreen's curriculum.

 

Remodeling has significantly enhanced and increased teaching spaces and thus the amount of technology. Most teaching spaces now include computer, projection and LCD display systems if they are not actually labs with computers for each users.  The library plans to add even more specialized study lounges and rooms where small group collaborative learning activities are enhanced by ready access to information. The library should consider turning one of the library teaching spaces into a lab.  While LIRN is currently able to adequately support these facilities, the planned growth of the college to 5000 will require access to additional resources, ideally from a variety of sources.

 

Media Loan provides portable digital equipment while still struggling to keep older analog equipment running and available for programs using Super 8 and other analog formats.  This creates several problems including storage, maintenance (many parts are no longer available) and teaching the many different formats. Weighing faculty demand for out-dated equipment presents an on-going challenge.  Methods for resolving these competing demands are not sufficiently developed and should be addressed.

The Media Services area brought on-line a Web-based circulation system that greatly improves the efficiency of Media Loan.  Unfortunately the college hasn't been able to add a funding line for the annual maintenance contract and software updates.  Electronic Media authored an extensive Filemaker Pro-based system for space scheduling, equipment tracking, inventory control and work order controls.  Computing staff only minimally supported this effort.  These system are critical to the area operations, and need to be integrated into the broader campus programming support schema.

The Arts Annex does not enjoy media, a/v or networked technology.  Projecting art images is an important process for the arts curriculum and many of the image resources are migrating to web-based and digitized applications. Faculty must use Seminar II classrooms and cannot project or display in the annex where they often teach.

 

 

 

 

===Appendix I: Information Technology Literacy as reported in End of Program Reports===

 

The survey asks faculty to describe their inclusion of information technology in programs.  While the descriptions are idiosyncratic and display widely varying perspectives on what might be included in the idea of information technology, it is still possible to track patterns of technology use across planning units.  The table below portrays response rates for information technology sorted into five categories and organized by planning unit or interdisciplinary status (core and interarea programs). Other than library research, the categories distinguish between in-depth disciplinary tools used almost exclusively by one or two planning units (media production and specialized scientific applications) and more basic, cross-curricular entry-level tools which might reasonably be taught in a wide array of contexts (presentation media and basic computer applications such as Excel, social software or courseware, or simple webpage creation).  The two categories of cross-curricular tools, presentation media and basic computer applications, might be considered common components of basic information technology.  Extremely widely utilized applications such as word processing are not considered at all, having become almost completely ubiquitous, and thus, untaught at the college level.

 

{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0"

| valign="bottom" nowrap="undefined" colspan="3" | Spec. Comp.

| valign="bottom" nowrap="undefined" | 8

| valign="bottom" nowrap="undefined" | 11%

| valign="bottom" nowrap="undefined" | 6

| valign="bottom" nowrap="undefined" | 9%

| valign="bottom" nowrap="undefined" | 13

 

 

 

 

 

 

The most likely place for media production to appear outside of its disciplinary home is in interdivisional programs in Core and Interarea.  As faculty from EA move into interdivisional teaching, media production appears in 29% of core programs and 39% of interarea programs. Scientific computing appears in only 5% of core and 6% of interarea programs. EWS programs offer 16% media production and 10% scientific computing in their often more specialized classes.  Although team teaching is one of the college’s strongest faculty development tools, specialized applications do not appear to be spreading via team teaching. What little dissemination of expertise occurs is more likely to be media production rather than specialized scientific computing.

The table uses two columns to define basic information technology literacy. In the table, these are identified as presentation media and basic computing. In most cases, if a program reported use of a specialized medium or technology, then less specialized use was not included in the tabulation.

To summarize across the planning units, there are see strong preferences depending upon discipline.  SI focuses heavily on a combination of presentation media (often Illustrator posters) at 46% and specialized computing with less use or at least less mention of more basic computer applications.  ES and SPBC are the most balanced in use of basic information technology tools:  ES uses presentation media heavily (49%) and a fair amount of basic computer applications (39%).  SPBC also uses presentation media in a substantial number of programs (38%) with basic computing in 29%.  EA reports 26% of each basic technology, showing a commitment to using many types of information technologies as part of their context of media production.

Overall, considering both forms of basic information literacy, and factoring out the double counting of programs which work in both presentation media and basic computing, 42% of programs work with basic information literacy.  In general, this work happens more at planning unit and interarea levels than at Core.  It appears that core faculty are focusing more on basic reading and interpretation skills when not actively engaging non-print tools such as media production. The interarea curriculum on the other hand provides an environment where faculty tend to have more room to develop a wider range of skills, presumably because students are more widely prepared, and probably because of representation from the planning unit faculty with a variety of expertise.  Factoring in more specialized use, then, overall curricular coverage of media and computing information technology reaches a significant majority of programs.

While not represented in this table because the number of programs is small, off-campus programs generally show a high level of focus on information technology as an essential tool for accessing the resources for college level work and for communicating over the physical and temporal distances of their programs. When asked "To what extent have your Evergreen experienced contributed to your growth in each of the following?" tribal students answered "Quite a bit" 44.8% of the time to the category "Using computer technology to present work, find information or solve problems."  In stark contrast, all other categories of students ranked computer use as last or 20th of 24 categories [EX: http://www.evergreen.edu/institutionalresearch/studentexperiencesurvey2006responses.htm  question 19]as a skill developed at Evergreen. Presumably students in more conventional settings feel that they come to college with their use of computers well established, or they developed their use outside of the curriculum. In addition, a larger percentage of faculty teaching off-campus programs leverage the on-line collaboration tools such as Learning Management Systems (LMS) and eportfolios to facilitate communication within the planning unit outside of class time. This brings a technology focus to the forefront for off-campus students.  The Tacoma program, which reports out as a single program, but represents many tracks for hundreds of students, always includes a research and a media production component.

How does this spread of information technology instruction and use across the curriculum correlate to the teaching and support provided by LIRN?  Library workshops for 2003 through 2007 show that although Core program focus is not particularly frequent (55%) compared to much of the curriculum, yet library faculty work heavily with that part of the curriculum. Librarians gave workshops to 40 core programs over the time period, the highest commitment other than to EWS, with its very high number of individual programs and classes.  Thus while library research may not be as heavily covered in the Core curriculum as might be expected, faculty in core teams are reaching out for assistance in this aspect of the work very actively and the library is providing strong support.

Interarea and social science curricula are also well supported by library instruction with 26 and 22 programs served. Self-reported library research in programs (63% and 60%)correlates well to library-based instruction. Thus while one might expect that interarea programs are able to include more information technology in their programs, this is not simply because students are already prepared or assumed to be prepared in basic skills such as library research. There might also be a recognition that library research at the core level will be very different from what is expected in subsequent years.

The science and environmental studies curriculum show lower use of library instruction, with 12 and 15 programs requesting workshops.  CTL programs requested only 4 programs in the three year period, showing that even with low focus on library research, demands for instructional support are lower yet.

===Appendix II: Major Facilities===

Following is a description of the major information technology facilities supporting academic work.