designing an effective instruction program

Designing an Effec,ve Instruc,on Program

Instructor: Robin M. KatzRBMS Preconference WorkshopLas Vegas, NV -‐ June 24, 2014

Wednesday, June 25, 14

Welcome!9:00 – 10:00 Introduc8ons

BREAK

10:00 – 11:00 Thinking Programma8cally

11:00 – 12:00 Pedagogy: Teaching Philosophy in Prac8ce

LUNCH

1:00 – 2:00 Instruc8on Management

2:00 – 3:00 Planning Your Instruc8on Program

BREAK ?3:00 – 4:00 Wrap-‐Up

Students and Faculty in the Archives ● Brooklyn Historical Society


Introduc,ons

• Your vitals (name, (tle, ins(tu(on)

• Your experience teaching with primary sources

• Why are you here?

• What is your biggest ques8on at this point?



Introduc,ons

Robin M. Katz, MLISArchivist / SAFA Co-‐Director

@robinmkatz | [email protected]



http://twitter.com/robinmkatz


mailto:[email protected]


Introduc,ons

Robin M. Katz, MLISArchivist / SAFA Co-‐Director

I am here to:

• share what we’ve learned• encourage more (and be@er) teaching with collec(ons

• help you think strategically Students and Faculty in the Archives ● Brooklyn Historical Society


Introduc,ons

Julie Golia, PhDHistorian / SAFA Co-‐Director

@JulieThePH | [email protected]



http://twitter.com/julietheph

http://twitter.com/julietheph

mailto:[email protected]?subject=

mailto:[email protected]?subject=

Introduc,ons

Julie Golia, PhDHistorian / SAFA Co-‐Director

Julie’s absence reminds us to:

• be prepared, but flexible• have con(ngency plans• think about staff models (# of ppl needed)



Schedule9:00 – 10:00 Introduc8ons

BREAK

10:00 – 11:00 Thinking Programa8cally


LUNCH







BREAK



LUNCH






Thinking Programma,cally

•We do teach. A lot.




•We do teach. A lot.(fuzzy lines between teaching + outreach + public services...)




•We do teach. A lot.Surveys:

Allison, Anna Elise. Connec&ng Undergraduates with Primary Sources: A Study of Undergraduate Instruc&on in Archives, Manuscripts, and Special Collec&ons. MS Thesis. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 2005.

Krause. Magia G. “Learning in the Archives: A Report on Instruc(onal Prac(ces.” Journal of Archival Organiza&on 6.4 (2008): 233-‐268.

Malkmus, Doris. “‘Old Stuff’ for New Teaching Methods: Outreach to History Faculty Teaching with Primary Sources.” portal: Libraries and the Academy 10.4 (2010): 413-‐425.




•We do teach. A lot.Surveys:

Allison, Anna Elise. Connec&ng Undergraduates with Primary Sources: A Study of Undergraduate Instruc&on in Archives, Manuscripts, and Special Collec&ons. MS Thesis. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 2005.

Krause. Magia G. “Learning in the Archives: A Report on Instruc(onal Prac(ces.” Journal of Archival Organiza&on 6.4 (2008): 233-‐268.

Malkmus, Doris. “‘Old Stuff’ for New Teaching Methods: Outreach to History Faculty Teaching with Primary Sources.” portal: Libraries and the Academy 10.4 (2010): 413-‐425.

Recent edited volumes:

Mitchell, Eleanor, Peggy Seidan, and Suzy Taraba, eds. Past or Portal? Enhancing Undergraduate Learning through Special Collec&ons and Archives. Chicago: ACRL, 2012.

Bahde, Anne, Heather Smedberg, and Mafe Taormina, eds. Using Primary Sources: Hands-‐On Instruc&onal Exercises. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited, 2014.




•We do teach. A lot. BUT...




•We do teach. A lot. BUT...– we are not always inten8onal enough

• what are our goals? who are our audiences? why?






– we don’t always allocate resources systema8cally• do prioriPes determine Pme, space, etc? or is it ad hoc?






– we don’t always allocate resources systema8cally• do prioriPes determine Pme, space, etc? or is it ad hoc?

– we o]en lack the ability to improve pedagogy• for lack of training, Pme; because we are not asked to






– we don’t always allocate resources systema8cally• do prioriPes determine Pme, space, use? or is it ad hoc?

– we o]en lack the ability to improve pedagogy• for lack of training, Pme; because we are not asked to

– NONE of us evaluate well enough• do we demonstrate effecPveness, impact, value? how do we know if we meet our goals?



Our Program Experience: SAFA

Students and Faculty in the Archives was an innova(ve postsecondary educa(on program which used primary sources to teach document analysis, informa(on literacy, and cri(cal thinking skills in first-‐year undergraduates.



What was SAFA?

SAFA resulted in TeachArchives.org – Project documentaPon and findings– Sample exercises (with some digiPzed documents)– ArPcles on pedagogy by us and by faculty– Global audience of educators (middle -‐ grad school),

librarians, archivists, museum professionals, etc.



What was SAFA?

• Three year, $750,000 US Dept of Educa8on FIPSE grant – Jan 2011 unPl Dec 2013 (now in no-‐cost extension)

• Three schools within walking distance– St. Francis College– New York City College of Technology (CUNY)– Long Island University Brooklyn Campus

• Nineteen local partner faculty– All ranks, range of disciplines (not just history)– Variety of classes (seminars, surveys, etc.)– Intellectual and professional community

• Na8onal partners Students and Faculty in the Archives ● Brooklyn Historical Society


What was SAFA?

• Centered around class visits to the archives• Item-‐level document analysis – not independent student research

• Over four semesters (Fall 2011 -‐ Spring 2013)– 1,100 individual students– 65 courses– 100+ class visits to Brooklyn Historical Society– Allowed us to “tweak and refine”

• Professional development• Undergraduate research fellowships Students and Faculty in the Archives ● Brooklyn Historical Society


What was SAFA?


FALL 2011

SPRING 2012

FALL 2012

SPRING 2013 TOTALS

Courses16 14 18 17 65

Visits to BHS 35 20 21 24 100

Workshops1 2 0 0 3

Walking Tours 3 0 1 0 4

Pre-‐VisitsN/A N/A 5 3 8

Unique Students 287 201 371 276 1,135


What was SAFA?

Our student popula8on– Mostly first-‐year / early academic career– Very diverse: many minority, non-‐tradiPonal

students, and other under-‐represented groups– Mostly products of NYC public schools– Many internaPonal students, new Americans, or

non-‐naPve speakers of English



What was SAFA?

Sampling of SAFA classes– Robin Michals, Introduc&on to Digital Photography – Jen Wingate, Visual Culture of the Civil War – Sara Haviland, U.S., 1896-‐present – Geoff Zylstra, Early American History – Leah Dilworth, American Literature – Maihew Gold, English Composi&on: Fire, Disease, Disaster and the Shaping of Urban Public Space



SAFA Findings

Independent evaluators have found that SAFA students are more engaged, perform beder, and -‐ in some cases -‐ have higher reten8on rates than their peers.– Findings summarized on TeachArchives.org– Final Report due December 2014– Last EvaluaPon Report (2012) online



SAFA Findings: Observa,on Skills

Q: Why might this document be worth preserving in an archive?

(2012 Eval Report)


PRE POST

Students no(ng a single feature of giving a vague response

72% 49%

Students no(ng mul(ple physical features

28% 51%


Findings: Ar,cula,ng ‘a usable past’

Q: Why might this document be worth preserving in an archive?

(2012 Eval Report) Students and Faculty in the Archives ● Brooklyn Historical Society

Sample PRE responses Sample POST responses

This is a photo from the past To show how society valued entertainment

Because it showed what was going on at that moment.

[It] shows how technology was progressing in the US.

It gives insight... to what life was like during the 1960s.

It shows how people were sending postal cards through the

telegrams and how it was different... than... today.


SAFA Findings: Student Performance

Just one class at LIU Brooklyn

(2012 Eval Report)


SAFA NON-‐SAFAComple(on Rate 96.9% 76.7%

Passing Rate 91.9% 48%

Grade B or be@er 60.7% 30.3%


SAFA Findings: Student Performance

SAFA courses taught by faculty who used the program’s instruc(onal strategies succeeded in fostering posi(ve students outcomes – higher grades, and greater rates of course comple8on and course passing.

(2014 Eval Report)



SAFA Findings: Reten,on

Reten8on rates of SAFA students in well-‐matched are higher than comparison students at all three campuses.

(2014 Eval Report)



SAFA Findings: Faculty Learning

12 of 18 faculty members (66%) improved in two or more of our idenPfied best pracPces.

In the second year (2012-‐13), faculty designed and executed projects with: – fewer documents with more specific prompts– be@er defined learning objec(ves– more strategically-‐provided context

(2014 Eval Report)



Thinking Programma,callyGood pedagogical design needs to occur at both the program level and the individual project / course / visit level.



Thinking Programma,cally• SMART Goals

– specific, measurable, a@ainable, realis(c, (mely

• Audience• Staff/Time• Space• Funding• Collec8on Use• Do we value....

– depth vs. breadth? quality vs. quan(ty?– collabora(on vs. service?– how does this fit into organiza(onal priori(es? staff workloads?

• What models exist? Students and Faculty in the Archives ● Brooklyn Historical Society


Program Case Study: SAFA• Goals included: – Student engagement, performance, and retenPon– CriPcal thinking and informaPon literacy skills– To fulfill course learning objecPves (variable)

• Audience: First-‐year students; 3 local colleges• Staff/Time: Dedicated project staff• Space: Very limited• Funding: Grant-‐funded• Collec8on Use: Determined by course needs, condiPon• We valued...– demonstraPng a wide range of models– collaboraPon over service



Thinking Programma,callyTwo-‐minute “jot down”– Individually, quietly–Make quick notes about your workplace– If you think you have a “program,” describe your current pracPces

– If you want to be more programaPc, imagine hypothePcal / ideal / future scenarios

We will revisit these notes later in the day.



“Jot Down” (Individual)• SMART Goals

– specific, measurable, a@ainable, realis(c, (mely

• Audience• Staff/Time• Space• Funding• Collec8on Use• Do we value....

– depth vs. breadth? quality vs. quan(ty?– collabora(on vs. service?– how does this fit into organiza(onal priori(es? staff workloads?

• What models exist? Students and Faculty in the Archives ● Brooklyn Historical Society


Thinking Programma,callyGood pedagogical design needs to occur at both the program level and the individual project / course / visit level.




BREAK



LUNCH






Our Teaching Philosophy

Beginners need to be taught document analysis!

Our teaching philosophy:– Specific learning objecPves– Individual documents• The fewer the beier!

– Tailored small-‐group acPviPes– Directed, specific prompts• Ex: “Why did Henry Ward Beecher write this leier?”• Not “Who is the creator? What type of doc is this?”



To learn more, see teacharchives.org/ar(cles/our-‐teaching-‐philosophy





Adap8ng our approach for your program:– We think our model has been quite effecPve– Most of us work with beginners of some sort– But, there is a need to “build on” our approach– And you may not agree with our philosophy 100%– Please, demonstrate other approaches!

We are here to help you pose ques8ons and to determine the best answers for you.



Pedagogy: 8 Best Prac,ces

To Teach Effec8vely with Special Collec8ons:• Learning objecPves that align visit goals with course goals• Appropriate document selecPon (the fewer, the beier)• Tailored prompts• Reasoned assignment design• Carefully considered visit logisPcs• Thoughoul facilitaPon of archival visits, including wrap-‐ups • “Goldilocks” of context (not too much; not too liile)• Working collaboraPvely to tweak and refine



Pedagogy: Collabora,on

For beder or for worse, as librarians, archivists, and curators, we usually teach through collabora8on.




Why special collec8ons professionals should take the lead in crea8ng effec8ve in-‐archives learning experiences.




Why special collec8ons professionals should take the lead in crea8ng effec8ve in-‐archives learning experiences.– What needs to be clarified about who does what? Or about how things will work?




Why special collec8ons professionals should take the lead in crea8ng effec8ve in-‐archives learning experiences.– Content knowledge

– History and theory of archives/collecPons

– Teaching experience in archives seqng

– Extensive doc analysis skills

– Extensive logisPcal experience




Five-‐minute “lightning share”– In pairs, low conversaPon– TIMER!– One minute each:

• Do you usually collaborate to teach? How? With who?– One minute each:

• What is most challenging about collaboraPon?– One minute together:

• ReacPons



Research Support

• Researching as a teacher vs. as a scholar• Iden(fying documents to teach with is very different than iden(fying materials for scholarly research– Not looking for everything – just one effecPve item

– Is this a representaPve or outlier example?



Pedagogy: Objec,ves vs. Goals

Learning goals vs. learning objec8ves– Why we came to find the disPncPon so important



Learning Goals

• A statement that describes in broad terms what a student will learn from your course.– adapted from h@p://www.oucom.ohiou.edu/fd/wri(ngobjec(ves.pdf

• Knowledge, skills, or aftudes




http://www.oucom.ohiou.edu/fd/writingobjectives.pdf






Professors’ course goals were o]en the same as SAFA’s goals– For ex:

– Improve student engagement

– Build a sense of community

– Interact with neighborhoods




Learning Objec8ves

• Statement in specific and measurable terms that describes what the student will know or be able to do as a result of comple(ng course ac(vi(es.– adapted from http://www.oucom.ohiou.edu/fd/writingobjectives.pdf

• Provide criteria for acceptable performance; how students will demonstrate learning




http://www.lmu.edu/about/services/academicplanning/assessment/Assessment_Resources/Understanding_Mission__Goals_and_Learning_Outcomes.htm






Example: Sara Haviland’s goals vs. objec8ves• GOAL (broader)– Students will learn the unique history of the Civil

Rights movement in the North.

• OBJECTIVE (specific)– In their final research paper, students will idenPfy

and analyze the different issues, strategies, and consPtuencies of the Civil Rights movement in the North, as compared to the South.




To learn more, see teacharchives.org/ar(cles/learning-‐objec(ves




Assignment Design– We wanted to demonstrate a wide range of

assignment models

– Refined and tweaked over five semesters

– Defining roles played by instructors and archives staff


Pedagogy: Assignments


Types of Assignments and Visits– One-‐off in-‐archive acPvity

– Semester-‐long, mulP-‐visit structure

– Building a collaboraPve resource as a class

– Scaffolded document-‐to-‐folder model

– Scholarly research paper

– Other scholarly work (oral history, walking tour)

– Research for a creaPve project




Assignments: ques8ons to ask instructors– How much Pme do you have to spend in the archives over

the course of the semester?

– What knowledge or skills will your students gain in the archives? What kind of assignment will best manifest those?

– How important is student collaboraPon vs. independent work?

– Who are your students? (Majors vs. non-‐majors, first-‐years vs. advanced students, etc.)




Find successful assignments atteacharchives.org/exercises/




Pedagogy: Context

Talk to professors about how and when they will provide context for the archives visit– Our experience: not enough or too much context

– Finding the “Goldilocks” of context

– Define your role



Pedagogy: Context

Kinds of Context– Historical

– Technical / Format• Processes

• Paleography

– CollecPon Info • Provenance or donor

• How organized

– What is Special CollecPons?



Pedagogy: Context

Possible sources – Secondary sources

– Other primary sources

– Popular or experienPal readings

– Finding aids or other library descripPons

– Class lectures

– In-‐archive lectures

– Other ideas?



Pedagogy: Context

Context: ques8ons to ask (yourself or instructor)– What knowledge/skills/aqtudes might your

students need to acquire before encountering the archives?

– If more than one archives visit, what knowledge do you want them to acquire between visits?

– How can context readings help them answer quesPons raised (and unanswered) in archives?

– Will you preselect a reading, or will students find one themselves?



• To learn more, seeteacharchives.org/ar(cles/providing-‐context


Pedagogy: Context


Pedagogy: Document Selec,on

Document selec8on: how much?– For new students, item-‐level is best• Some experiences with providing folder from manuscript

collecPon

– Small number of items for students• Especially textual material

– Arc of visit relies on the document(s)• What is the journey students will take?

• AnPcipate pioalls and challenges

• Instructors do have a reading in mind Students and Faculty in the Archives ● Brooklyn Historical Society


Think about a student’s first encounter with the document. Consider:– physical size

– condiPon or handling needs

– length of text

– legibility (especially handwriPng)

– vocabulary

– visual literacy skills of students




Also remember:– How much more contextual knowledge you have

– The feeling of overwhelm in an archives• Manageable vs. unmanageable




To learn more, see

teacharchives.org/ar(cles/document-‐selec(on




Pedagogy: Handouts

Crea8ng specific prompts: why tailoring your student’s interac(on with the documents is important



Pedagogy: Handouts

Generic ques8ons can be confusing• Date created vs. date covered

• Author/creator

• Format

• “What is the source,” “why was this doc made,” “who is the audience” are actually difficult to answer!



Pedagogy: Handouts

Student prompts/handouts: why tailor?• Primary source docs are infinitely interpretable – but educators oten do have a reading in mind

• Handouts should reflect your specific visit objecPves

• Tailored handouts help anPcipate regularized experience for students• Rather than an educator providing context to students on a piecemeal basis (when floaPng or zoning)



Pedagogy: Handouts

Designing prompts/handouts: archives staff can take the lead• Don’t give students too long a handout

• ArPculate to students that they should closely observe and read the enPre document

• Consider including context or other sources in the handout

• Examples in your folder



To learn more, seeteacharchives.org/ar(cles/crea(ng-‐handouts


Pedagogy: Context


Pedagogy: Facilita,on

Facilita8ng an effec8ve visit – Thinking deeply about logisPcs makes for a beier pedagogical experience




Facilita8ng an effec8ve visit: plan ahead – Overbudget Pme in your agenda

• When to arrive and leave

• Don’t forget intros and wrap-‐ups

• It takes students a while to physically move

– Groups allow for discussion, collaboraPon, community building• But consider the room, the size of the docs, how long

– What tools are needed?

– Spell out roles of faculty and staff Students and Faculty in the Archives ● Brooklyn Historical Society


To learn more, seeteacharchives.org/ar(cles/logis(cs




Pedagogy: Wrap Ups

Work with instructor to plan an effec8ve wrap up– Planning oten overlooked by Brooklyn faculty

– Consider a way for the enPre class to reconvene and share

– Connect the “micro” (document) back to the “macro” (course content)

– See one great idea at teacharchives.org/exercises/impromptu-‐speeches



Pedagogy: Wrap Ups

Wrap ups: what to do– Think about logisPcs again

• Change it up, make sure they can see/hear each other

– Facilitate community interacPon – students speaking to each other, not you

– Ask hard quesPons! Demand a lot from your students

– Consider shaping wrap up around a “takeaway”• Course goal or objecPve, contemporary theme, personal reacPon, etc.



Pedagogy: Post-‐visit

A]er the visit– Push faculty to give clear instrucPons on follow up assignments • What do students do with in-‐archives handout?

• Consider assigning a visit reflecPon

• Relate the visit back to larger assignment?

– Clarify how/whether they should come back to archives independently• Our experiences: don’t make it opPonal



To learn more, seeteacharchives.org/ar(cles/wrap-‐up


Pedagogy: Wrap Ups


Teaching Philosophy in Prac,ce

Over Lunch -‐ Consider:Collabora8onObjec8ves and GoalsAssignmentsDocument Selec8onHandoutsContextFacilita8onWrap-‐upsPost-‐visit Students and Faculty in the Archives ● Brooklyn Historical Society



BREAK



LUNCH






Class Visits: Our Experience

SAFA in a nutshell– 1 – 3 visits is best (we had 1 -‐ 7)

– Anywhere from <10 – 40+ students in aiendance

– Faculty pre-‐select docs with staff help

– Requested items 3 weeks ahead of Pme

– Staff pull, prep, cite, assess copyright, set up docs

– Staff greet class; review care/handling; occasionally lecture; co-‐facilitate exercise & wrap-‐up




SAFA Management Workflow– see hip://www.teacharchives.org/wp-‐content/uploads/2014/02/SAFA-‐class-‐visit-‐procedures.pdf



http://www.teacharchives.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/SAFA-class-visit-procedures.pdf





Booking Class Visits– First-‐come, first-‐served

– Some negoPaPng• For example: ask one to leave early, next to come late for overlapping Pmes

– Google and Outlook calendars

– Class visit date determined deadlines• Reminder emails (using Google reminders for us)




Online Call Slips– Embedded Google Forms on website

• Used FormEmailer to email copies to instructors

– One per item• If it felt tedious to submit, it was tedious to pull and prep!

– Was hard to design a call slip to fit all collecPons, required extensive training to get quality call slips• And we eventually provided proper citaPons to faculty to avoid confusion. Time-‐consuming, but was easier for us.

– Requested three weeks to receive, allowed us to ask Qs or follow-‐up. Students and Faculty in the Archives ● Brooklyn Historical Society



Tracking Spreadsheet– Online call slips populated a Google spreadsheet which all project staff had access to

– Same spreadsheet used to track materials

– View spreadsheet




Pulling Procedures– Item-‐level pulling

• Required extra acid-‐free folders, out cards, plasPklips, and paper call slips (standard BHS procedure)

– Temporarily stored in separate document boxes marked with professor, class visit date and Pme

– Arranged internally by groups with citaPons




Cita8ons– Provided item-‐level citaPons for materials

– Printed on slips of paper that were clipped to or placed near collecPon items




Copyright and Photos– ConservaPvely assessed copyright ahead of Pme

– Informed students whether they:• Could take photos for research purposes only• Could post photos online with citaPon (was not always successful)

– View handouts in folders



Managing an Instruc,on Program

Special Collec8ons = A Special Challenge– We already straddle academic / professional worlds.

– Our workloads are oten complex, not well-‐defined.

– Not only do we need to learn to teach effecPvely with primary sources, but we also need to manage collec8ons, staff, budgets, and space.



Managing an Instruc,on Program

“Instruc8on Management” Includes:– CollecPon Management

– Space Management

– Time Management

– Staff Management

– RelaPonship Management

– Plus: We have to fit an instrucPon program in while tending to other prioriPes (like other researchers, back-‐end technical services work, or digiPzaPon).



Collec,on Management

Consider:– Who selects / requests materials for each class?

• What kind of lead Pme is needed to prepare?

– How will you track pulled materials used for classes?• Especially if pulling at the item-‐level. Who pulls? What extra supplies are needed? Where to store?

– What if other researchers want to use materials reserved for a class?



Collec,on Management

Consider:– Will reading room policies be the same for classes? Why / why not? Consider• Sign in/lockers, cameras, reproducPons, fees, noise, etc.

– Can students touch all collecPons?• Do you have self-‐serve, paging, or both?

– How to teach care and handling?

– How to teach returning to the reading room?



Class Visits: Care & Handling

How to teach care and handling– Not puniPve, stress universality

– Policies vary, but see our example guidelines• Have students read aloud

• Ask, “why?” or, “security or preservaPon?”

– In folders and online at teacharchives.org/arPcles/care-‐and-‐handling

• What is an archives/historical society?– Pre-‐visit experiment



Space Management

Consider:– Where do classes happen?

– Where can collecPons go?• Reading rooms, classrooms, other buildings?

• Will reproducPons or digital surrogates be used?

– Will classes share space with researchers or staff?

– What kind of booking / reservaPon system is needed?



Time Management

Before Class:– What kind of booking / reservaPon system is needed?• How will external partners request or reserve Pmes?

• Internally, always visibly schedule set up, teaching, and clean up Pme.

– Who is responsible for planning class visit agendas?

– Does class Pme need to include travel or set up Pme?



Time Management

During Class:– Who will keep track of Pme, and how?

• Use clocks, watches, Pmers.

• Always communicate Pme parameters to students.



Staff Management

– Who teaches? Who coordinates? Who fields requests? Who communicates with whom? • If mulPple staff teach, how are various relaPonships and styles managed across a department?

– What conPngency plans are needed (illness, etc.)?

– How is teaching supervised and evaluated?

– How will reference staff be trained to support assignments or student patrons?

– How will reference staff (and other patrons) be affected by class collecPon use?



Rela,onship Management

– What relaPonships do you need culPvate outside of your library to have a successful instrucPon program?• Administrators, educators, donors, students?

– How does teaching fit in with (or conflict with) communicaPons, publicity, or development efforts? • Consider student privacy and safety

• Use photo waivers

• Educate yourself about FERPA



Logis,cal Decisions– How will students get to the reading room?

• travel together or as a group? during class, or no?

– When will students receive an orientaPon to special collecPons?• Pre-‐visit experiment

– Will students work individually or in small groups?• Independent, interdependent, group?

– How will documents be arranged? • Will students look at all or some of the documents? Where and how should students sit / stand?



Logis,cal DecisionsTo learn more, see h@p://www.teacharchives.org/ar(cles/logis(cs



Class Visits: Facilita,on

Facilita8ng an effec8ve visit: in the archives– Make introducPons both clear and enthusiasPc

– Think about logisPcs• where to sit or stand, tables vs. clipboards, acousPcs

– How available will you be to students?• FloaPng vs. zoning

• Hang back or hands-‐on?

• What context provided as-‐needed?

• If you give one group a hint, tell the whole class




BREAK



LUNCH



BREAK 3:00 – 4:00 Wrap-‐Up



Planning Your Instruc,on Program

“Jot Down” (Individual)

– CollecPon Management

– Space Management

– Time Management

– Staff Management

– RelaPonship Management




In groups of 4, spend 20 mins discussing your “jot downs” about:

Collabora8on

Objec8ves and Goals

Document Selec8on

Assignments, Handouts, Context

Facilita8on (Wrap-‐ups, Post-‐visit)

Collec8on Management

Space Management

Time Management

Staff Management

Rela8onship Management Students and Faculty in the Archives ● Brooklyn Historical Society



Evalua8on and Assessment

– SaPsfacPon / Self-‐ReporPng

– Service EvaluaPon

– Learning Outcomes




Ques8ons to ask yourself– What are our goals?

– Who will help me evaluate?• IRB Board

• Campus Assessment Office

• Research Method Design / Data Analysis Support Services

• Independent Evaluators

• Self-‐Taught?

– What tools are available to me?

• SPSS, Survey Monkey, etc)




Ques8ons to ask yourself– What are we trying to prove / show?

• demonstrate

• value

• impact

– What are we trying to really learn?• improve

• “tweak and refine”

– Who will see the results?• internal only, administrators, users, publicaPons?




Ques8ons to ask yourself– How will you build in feedback?

• For you?

• To professors?

• To students? (“checks”)

– What is your role in providing / receiving feedback?




Pairs (15 minutes)

Define Goals: Choose to define one goal (together).

Write it down!

Discuss:

What resources are available to me?

What are you trying to show?

What are you trying to learn?

How will results be used

Feedback Students and Faculty in the Archives ● Brooklyn Historical Society



BREAK



LUNCH



BREAK 3:00 – 4:00 Wrap-‐Up



Wrap-‐Up

• Important themes:– Ini8a8ng change

– Recognizing partners

– Cul8va8ng allies

– Defining roles

– Making demands

– Scaling up

– Finding new audiences

– Moving away from “show and tell”

– Providing training / professional development Students and Faculty in the Archives ● Brooklyn Historical Society


Wrap-‐Up

• Do we have some concrete ideas we can take back home? Or do we know where to look?

• Do we feel more empowered to plan strategically?



Follow Ups

• I will – email slides and intro notes to everyone

– share my annotated bibliography when completed

• You will – look at TeachArchives.org

– keep in touch!

• Anything else?– @robinmkatz | [email protected]







designing an effective instruction program

Education