Designing training for circulation student workers
-
Upload
andrea-boehme -
Category
Documents
-
view
995 -
download
3
description
Transcript of Designing training for circulation student workers
DESIGNING TRAINING
FOR THE CUNNINGHAM
MEMORIAL LIBRARY’S
CIRCULATION
DEPARTMENT
Presented to the College of Education
Department of Curriculum,
Instruction, and Media Technology
Indiana State University
Terre Haute, Indiana
in Partial Fulfillment of the Course
Requirements for CIMT 620
Andrea Boehme
Indiana State University
4/30/2012
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library i
Contents
Contents _____________________________________________________________________ i
List of Figures ________________________________________________________________ iv
List of Tables ________________________________________________________________ v
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION ____________________________________________________ 1
Purpose ___________________________________________________________________ 1
Chapter 2 LEARNING CONTEXT _______________________________________________ 3
Instructional Environment ____________________________________________________ 3
Characteristics of the Organization ____________________________________________ 12
Characteristics of the Trainers ________________________________________________ 12
Curriculum Materials _______________________________________________________ 14
Comparison of Options _____________________________________________________ 14
Summation _______________________________________________________________ 15
Chapter 3 LEARNER ANALYSIS _______________________________________________ 16
Target Audience ___________________________________________________________ 16
Discussion _______________________________________________________________ 17
Implications for Design _____________________________________________________ 19
Chapter 4 FOCUS GROUP ____________________________________________________ 20
Introduction ______________________________________________________________ 20
Agenda for Transportation ___________________________________________________ 20
Questions Asked During the Interview _________________________________________ 20
Clothing for Interview ______________________________________________________ 21
Interviewees ______________________________________________________________ 21
Chapter 5 NEED ANALYSIS __________________________________________________ 22
Process __________________________________________________________________ 22
Phase I: Planning __________________________________________________________ 22
Phase II: Collecting Data ____________________________________________________ 24
Phase III: Analyzing the Data ________________________________________________ 24
Phase IV: Final Report ______________________________________________________ 28
Summation _______________________________________________________________ 29
Chapter 6 TASK ANALYSIS ___________________________________________________ 30
Introduction ______________________________________________________________ 30
Method __________________________________________________________________ 30
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library ii
Task Analysis _____________________________________________________________ 31
Discussion _______________________________________________________________ 31
Chapter 7 LEARNING OBJECTIVES ____________________________________________ 33
Learning Objectives ________________________________________________________ 33
Analysis of Learning Objectives ______________________________________________ 33
Objective Types ___________________________________________________________ 34
Learning Outcomes ________________________________________________________ 34
Chapter 8 INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGY: DECLARATIVE ________________________ 36
What is Declarative Knowledge? ______________________________________________ 36
Cognitive Process __________________________________________________________ 37
Linking with Existing Knowledge _____________________________________________ 37
Organization/Elaboration ____________________________________________________ 37
Conditions Supporting Learning ______________________________________________ 37
Practice __________________________________________________________________ 38
Evaluation ________________________________________________________________ 38
Chapter 9 INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGY: PROCEDURAL _________________________ 39
Introduction ______________________________________________________________ 39
Simplified Procedure _______________________________________________________ 39
Instructional Strategy/Procedural Considerations _________________________________ 40
Formative Analysis _________________________________________________________ 41
Chapter 10 INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGY: COGNITIVE __________________________ 43
Introduction ______________________________________________________________ 43
Strategy Selection __________________________________________________________ 43
Application _______________________________________________________________ 43
Formative Evaluation _______________________________________________________ 44
Application _______________________________________________________________ 44
Summative Evaluation ______________________________________________________ 45
Chapter 11 EVALUATION ____________________________________________________ 46
Introduction ______________________________________________________________ 46
Student Assessment ________________________________________________________ 46
Student Feedback __________________________________________________________ 48
Data Analysis _____________________________________________________________ 48
Recommended Changes _____________________________________________________ 51
Appendix 1 Pretest ___________________________________________________________ 52
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library iii
Assessment Tool for Applicants _______________________________________________ 54
Appendix 2 Learner Survey ____________________________________________________ 58
Appendix 3 Pretest Rubric _____________________________________________________ 59
Appendix 4 Surveys __________________________________________________________ 59
Subject Matter Expert _______________________________________________________ 59
Staff ____________________________________________________________________ 59
Appendix 5 Task Analysis Flow Chart ____________________________________________ 61
Appendix 6 Declarative Game __________________________________________________ 63
Shelve that material! For the timekeeper _______________________________________ 63
Creating the “shelves” ______________________________________________________ 63
Creating the shelving items __________________________________________________ 64
Creating the play area _______________________________________________________ 64
Shelve that Material! For the players ___________________________________________ 66
Score Card _______________________________________________________________ 68
Appendix 7 Creating a New Resident Card ________________________________________ 69
Appendix 8 Evaluation Pretest __________________________________________________ 71
Overview ________________________________________________________________ 71
Objectives ________________________________________________________________ 71
Instructions _______________________________________________________________ 71
Appendix 9 Evaluation PowerPoint ______________________________________________ 78
Appendix 10 Survey Backend with Results ________________________________________ 79
References __________________________________________________________________ 80
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library iv
List of Figures
Figure 2:1 Front of Room 028 _______________________________________________________________ 5
Figure 2:2 Back of Room 028 ________________________________________________________________ 5
Figure 2:3 Side View 028 ___________________________________________________________________ 5
Figure 2:4 Computer Setup 028 ______________________________________________________________ 5
Figure 2:5 Projector 028 ____________________________________________________________________ 6
Figure 2:6 028 Layout ______________________________________________________________________ 7
Figure 2:7 Instruction Lab __________________________________________________________________ 9
Figure 2:8 Instruction Lab Layout ___________________________________________________________ 9
Figure 2:9 Student Cube Layout ____________________________________________________________ 12
Figure 5:1 Phases of Analysis ______________________________________________________________ 22
Figure 5:2 Departmental Structure _________________________________________________________ 23
Figure 5:3 Task Performance Graph ________________________________________________________ 25
Figure 5:4 Perceived Ability Graph __________________________________________________________ 26
Figure 5:5 Desired Training Graph _________________________________________________________ 26
Figure 5:6 Method Graph __________________________________________________________________ 28
Figure 5:7 Training Needed Graph _________________________________________________________ 28
Figure 11:1 Motivation ____________________________________________________________________ 50
Figure 11:2 Appropriateness _______________________________________________________________ 50
Figure 11:3 Remember _____________________________________________________________________ 50
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library v
List of Tables
Table 2:1 Room 028 Features ________________________________________________________________ 3
Table 2:2 Instructional Lab Features _________________________________________________________ 8
Table 2:3 Individual Training Features _____________________________________________________ 10
Table 3:1 Learner Analysis _________________________________________________________________ 17
Table 9:1 Procedural Instruction ___________________________________________________________ 40
Table 10:1 Cognitive Instruction ____________________________________________________________ 44
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 1
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION
Interacting with almost all departments and patrons on a regular basis, the circulation
department at Cunningham Memorial Library (CML) is one of the most visible on campus.
From the time library opens until it closes, circulation is active in the library. It is vital,
therefore, that staff is well trained. CML’s circulation department employs twenty-nine persons.
Nineteen of these are students.
Students are consistently hired and trained to make up for the older students who
graduate, or leave the department. This year six new students were hired who all needed to learn
their job quickly. An orientation/training meeting informs students of their duties and outline
what is expected of them. This needs analysis is an evaluation specifically of the orientation, and
generally the whole training program in the circulation department of CML.
Purpose
The training was created to meet a felt need (Morrison, Ross, & Kemp 2001, p 29) of the
circulation staff (in this case and all following “staff” refers to those employees who work full
time in the circulation department. “Students” refer to those employees who are students of
Indiana State University and work part time in the department). The staff was unhappy with the
performance of the older students and knew the new students would need a firm foundation to
offset the inconsistent training they were currently receiving.
Concern with student performance is not new to CML. In 2003, the head of circulation
Alberta Comer (now the dean of the library) published a study on improving student job
performance. The study noted that a lack of student motivation and poor communication was the
cause of low performance. The study recommended the creation of a handbook, a recognition
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 2
system for outstanding students, formalizing peer training, utilizing email for communication,
and expanding training methods as methods to combat the problems. The majority of these have
been implemented to varying degrees of successfulness.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 3
Chapter 2 LEARNING CONTEXT
Instructional Environment
Paula, the student supervisor, and the instructional designer (ID) gave the instruction the
second week of the semester. The students were least busy academically at this time, and the
new students were hired. The instruction took place in a room on the Lower Level of the library,
room 028 (see figures 2:1-2:6). This room is commonly used for staff meetings, and
presentations. The room is large with seating for around 100 people. Chairs were lined up
across the width of the room, in five rows of fifteen chairs, with two tables, seating seven people,
behind that. The majority of students choose to sit in the rows of chairs towards the back of the
room.
Projection of the presentation was done from a ceiling mounted projector in the middle of
the room onto a standard screen. A computer terminal, located to the right of the screen, served
as the center of control and also as a podium. A laptop was used to run the presentation as the
available computer did not have access to Millennium (the integrated library system which is
used to check out books) which was needed for instruction.
The following chart describes the environmental factors in the instructional context, and
is taken from Morrison, Ross and Kemp (2011).
Table 2:1 Room 028 Features
Room 028 - original instruction environment.
Lighting Lighting controls are accessed by two separate switches. One in the
back controls the back lights. Another in the front controls the front. The
lights in the room were turned off, to better view the presentation.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 4
However light filtered in from the outside through opaque glass and
from the presentation.
Noise The Lower Level is a “loud” floor, meaning patrons are allowed to speak
normally. The doors of the meeting room were closed to muffle outside
sound. However, there were no major distractions from noise during the
presentation.
Temperature Temperature is controlled offsite and there are two settings: on and off.
That day was warm outside and it was hot in the room. The students did
not complain, but it was uncomfortable.
Seating There were enough seats that students could choose a vantage point that
worked well for them. However, as there were only two tables most
students would have had to take notes in their lap. We could have had
tables brought in but decided to forgo them as we didn’t foresee much
writing going on.
Accommodations The student supervisor, Paula, brought food and drink. The supervisor
was late, so students had to wait until the end of the presentation to eat.
Equipment Projector and screen, laptop, visual aids (resident card, ILL reserve place
card, ect.)
Transportation Students regularly provide transportation to and from work, so it was not
an issue. Unfortunately, some students had class. They were given a
copy of the presentation, handouts, and instructor notes with
encouragement to ask questions. Paula, however, was late as there was
thick fog and she had to pick up the refreshments.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 5
Figure 2:1 Front of Room 028
Figure 2:2 Back of Room 028
Figure 2:3 Side View 028
Figure 2:4 Computer Setup 028
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 6
Figure 2:5 Projector 028
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 7
Figure 2:6 028 Layout
Alternative option one
Another option for instruction is the Instruction Lab (see Figures 2:7 and 2:8). Located
on the second floor, this room is used by the Reference department to do their instruction. This
room has more technological options. It has the standard computer cart, to display instructional
material on two screens and a SMARTboard, from three ceiling mounted projectors. Fifty
computers are available for use and take up the majority of table space. This is a wide room with
seating arranged across the length of the room.
In the event that we added more technical aspects to the training we may need to use this
room. It does have the Millennium software on the computers already which is nice. We did not
choose this room because we were worried that students would get distracted by the computers.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 8
It felt a waste to have the instruction in a room with computers when we weren’t going to use
them. Food and drink are not allowed in this room, so it was less than ideal for instruction.
Table 2:2 Instructional Lab Features
Instructional Lab
Lighting Lighting is controllable using a bank of light switches. As the room is
sectioned off from the stacks by glass partitions, light comes in through
the glass. This room is still light when the lights are turned off for this
reason. If the computers and projectors are turned on that also adds to
the brightness.
Noise The second floor is also a “loud” floor that receives the same amount of
activity as the Lower Level. The doors can be closed and the students
have their backs to the glass aiding in concentration.
Temperature The Instruction Lab is subject to the same heating and cooling as the rest
of the library, and is not adjustable. The addition of computers would
increase the temperature in the room. However, there are fans available
to keep the discomfort minimal.
Seating Each computer terminal is a seating area for students which makes for a
roomier seating arrangement, but does not leave much space for
traditional note taking. To aid in viewing of material, it can be projected
onto three different screens so one does not have to crane their neck
across the room.
Accommodations There is no eating or drinking in the lab.
Equipment instructor computer, individual students computers, SMARTboard, 3
projectors, 2 projection screens, fans, Millennium, polling clickers
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 9
Transportation This site has the same transportation concerns as the original room on
the Lower Level.
Figure 2:7 Instruction Lab
Figure 2:8 Instruction Lab Layout
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 10
Alternative option two
Another option is giving instruction on a singular basis in the environment where workers
will do the job. This is the current method used in the library through peer training. An
experienced student is paired with a new one for approximately a week (this varies on the
student’s abilities and how urgently a replacement is needed). The more experienced student is
given their regular schedule, and the new one follows behind learning as they go. Along with
this the new student could use part of their time to review instructional materials alone in the
student cubicle located in circulation (see figure 2:9).
Table 2:3 Individual Training Features
Individual Training
Lighting Lighting throughout the library and in the student cubicle is controlled
by switches in the circulation area. The lights are always on when the
library is open.
Noise The basement and 3rd
floor of the library are “quiet” floors.
Patrons and staff are required to speak at a whisper, or locate to
another floor. Peer training in these areas will have to be at a
whisper.
The student cubicle is located in the middle of the circulation
area. During the day, there is quite a bit of noise from staff,
machinery, and patrons. At night it is quieter as there are less
staff and machines creating noise.
Temperature Temperature concerns are the same as listed in above sections.
Seating During peer training students sit two places: at the circulation
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 11
desk, or in the student cube during tasks. At the circulation desk
there are two chairs one for staff and another for students. If the
staff decides to stay at the desk one of the students will have to
stand for 1-2 hours. The student cube is cramped with room for
3-4 people maximum and two work stations.
For independent training the student would have to share the
student cube with other students on the job. This area is cramped
and during the day they may have to find a corner of the library
so work can get done. At night they should be able to have the
cube to themselves.
Accommodations In either situation, students are allowed to eat and drink but breaks are to
be taken away from the circulation department.
Equipment In both situations, students can be exposed to all the equipment they
would use on the job. Computer, laptop, scanners, sensitizers, carts, disk
cleaners, receipt printers, VCR, Millennium, walkie talkies,
Transportation The same transportation issues are present as in the other areas.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 12
Figure 2:9 Student Cube Layout
Characteristics of the Organization
As this curriculum was created using the suggestions of staff, the characteristics of the
organization are important. The general consensus was that students needed to cut down on
errors and learn to work independently so that staff could focus on doing their job.
Also the circulation department is a laidback, friendly group. Students feel free to
express their opinion on most subjects, and have no trouble joking around with staff. Serious
discussion is not hard to have, as long as you give time for jocularity.
Characteristics of the Trainers
Instruction was given by the ID and by Paula; the head of circulation, Susan was there as
well.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 13
Content experience
Susan - has worked in circulation for almost two years, before that she was in the
Reference department. She doesn’t know every minutia of what the students do but she can
answer questions about overall policy, and was able to clarify why we are/are not allowed to do
things certain ways. As a fellow Department of Education student, Susan has a positive view on
instruction, and values training. Focusing on running the administration side of the department,
Susan oversees the big picture.
Paula – has been working in circulation as the student supervisor for three years.
Students report directly to her in all of their activities. She knows everything that there is to
know about how students are supposed to do their job, what they know and don’t know, and who
to go to if she doesn’t have the answer. Paula has been responsible for the training of students.
Due to a busy schedule, the ID took over for this session. Her focus is on procedure. Are the
books shelved right, are students here when they are supposed to be, and so on. She works
mostly on the behind-the-scenes aspects of circulation
Andrea (ID)– has been working in circulation for nine months. As the night supervisor,
she can tell them how to do their tasks and can hold them responsible for not following policy
(privacy, professionalism). Andrea defers to Paula in all other situations.
Technology experience
The ID, is knowledgeable about all technology used in the creation of the instructional
materials. Paula is not very technically oriented. She is unfamiliar with PowerPoint and knows
the basics of how to use the computer. This lack of experience limits the technology available
for use in creating and administering instruction.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 14
Instructor training
If Paula is to take over training completely, she will have to know how to use PowerPoint
and how to operate the computer set up so she can display the presentation. Any new
technologies that are added will have to be learned by all instructors.
Curriculum Materials
There was no official curricula to fit the newly designed into. The instructional materials
addressed concerns felt in the circulation department. The previous approach, peer instruction,
was not altered. That is still the main way students learn the majority of tasks. Additional
instructions should be able to function within that system to define standards and to provide a
way for students to seek out answers themselves after training is done.
Comparison of Options
The room that is the most obvious for training is the Instruction Lab. It is the most high
tech, and is set up specifically to give instruction. It has the Millennium program for use in
demonstration, and has the best set up to view information as a group. They also have
technology that can be used to enhance learning. Polling clickers and the SMARTboard could be
used to advance the training and to make for a more dynamic session. The concern is the
computers. They take up a lot of desk space, and may lead to distraction if the students have
them on. Also as there is no food allowed, refreshments would have to be served in another
location in the library.
The second most obvious choice is what we actually used. It is less formal and can hold
the most people. It has good technology options that were suitable for the instructional needs at
the time. Extra technology had to be brought in to show how to use Millennium, but it was
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 15
easily obtainable. There was no room for writing but students didn’t seem to mind. Overall, this
room meets the needs of instruction. This also fits the informal culture of circulation.
The more unconventional option that would be used in a peer training situation is tricky
but offers the best access to the tools used on the job. Instruction would have to take place on an
individual basis which would form bonds between workers. However, seating would be a
problem especially during the day.
Summation
The environment used for training was perfect for our needs during the presentation: food
could be served; everyone could sit comfortably (in regards to space, not to temperature) and
participate. If changes were made in the curriculum the space needs may need to be
reconsidered. Changes in technology may also be a problem down the line as well as the student
supervisor is not familiar with most technology.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 16
Chapter 3 LEARNER ANALYSIS
Target Audience
The primary audience for instruction is the nineteen student workers in the circulation
department. Instruction was created to further their understanding of what is expected of them
when they work in circulation, as well as a clarification of tasks. The secondary audience is
future circulation students and part-time staff who might undergo the training.
In order to identify the learning characteristics of the primary audience, students were
given a pretest (Appendix 1) and a survey (Appendix 2). These methods were originally
intended to evaluate the student curriculum; however they have proven useful in identifying prior
learning. All other information was obtained through personal knowledge of the students
obtained by interacting with them on a daily basis.
Using Smith and Ragan’s (2005) four categories of learner characteristics students can be
described as follows (see Table 3.1). The focus in on the primary audience; traits of the
secondary group are mentioned only if they differ from the primary.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 17
Table 3:1 Learner Analysis
Similarities Differences
Sta
ble
Primary
Sensory Capacities: Students
possess no hindrances to sight or
sound comprehension
Information Processing: At least two
students have ADHD related
problems and as such have trouble
concentrating for extended periods
of time
Types and Conditions of learning:
peer training, independent learning
Secondary
Information Processing: no outliers
Primary
Aptitudes: Unknown
Cognitive Styles: Unknown
Psychosocial Traits:
Anxiety – no outliers
Locus of control – external and
internal are balanced in the group
academic self conduct - generally
positive
Demographics: Primarily Caucasian,
50/50 split on gender, 18-24 years
old, generally middle class
Secondary
Demographics: (part time staff)
Caucasian, Female, 26-50 years old
concentrated to over 35.
Ch
an
gin
g
Primary
Developmental process: no outliers
Intellectual development: no outliers
Language Development: no outliers
Psychosocial/Personality: students
are highly social
Secondary
Psychosocial: staff are from
different departments and have
various preferences to social
interaction
Primary
Developmental State: Students are a
mix of Erikson’s (1968) Identity vs.
Identity Confusion, and Intimacy vs.
Isolation
Prior Learning: Generally
(knowledge of the world) students
are at the same level of learning.
Specifically (knowledge of the job)
only 5 of the 20 students are
“experts” at the job.
Secondary
Developmental State: Staff are in
Erikson’s Generatively vs.
Stagnation
Prior: Staff are considered
intermediate at job skills
Discussion
The pretest was given to eleven of the nineteen students. Originally, it was supposed to
be taken by all of the students, but due to a communications error it was given late. The results
were separated by experience level. Six participants had over two years of experience, two had a
year or less experience, and three had only a few days of experience. The tests were graded and
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 18
each given a rating of expert, intermediate, or novice level. Expert level students made a few
errors generally related to not examining the questions carefully enough; they were explicit in
their explanations and descriptions. Intermediate students made a few errors related to
ignorance, they gave short answers that did not fully detail their process. Novice students made
considerable errors due to ignorance, and did not give enough detail in their explanations. Please
see the rubric (Appendix 3) for more detail. The students with over two years of experience
generally preformed at an expert level, with only one falling to intermediate. The second group
preformed at an intermediate level, with one bordering on novice. The third group, expectedly,
preformed at a novice level.
Originally, the majority of data on the students was to come from a focus group. After
two separate calls for participants, the suggested group size of five people could not be achieved.
At first, it was suspected this was because of scheduling problems. So a request was made for
willing participants to send times they were available and then a common opening would be used
to schedule the group. This method was also unsuccessful. Currently, data is being gathered
through an alternative method, a survey. The survey is still in the collection process, but is
proving interesting. It was distributed through SurveyMonkey a week ahead of time. It consists
of eight questions pertaining to training and takes about two minutes to complete. Six responses
have been collected so far, however, one was answered all “no reply” and as such has been
removed from the data. These responses are all from students with over 2 years of experience.
This pattern of non-responsiveness by the students is troubling. Only a select group of
students are willing to participate in evaluation activities. This group is mostly female, and from
the expert group of students. Data, obviously, will be skewed towards this group. It is unclear
why students do not want to participate. They weren’t getting paid for the focus group, but pizza
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 19
and drinks were to be provided. Possibly the timing was not convenient, as students were asked
to supply a time between 8am and 4pm. However, the response from a two minute online survey
only accounts for a fourth of the students, and they were from that same two years or more of
experience group.
Informal information of importance about the students was gathered through conversation
between Andrea, the night supervisor, and the students, staff, and student supervisor. Students
are a highly social. The majority of new hires are recommended by students already employed
by circulation and are often close friends or relatives. Students and staff also get along well.
The more experienced students have babysat staff children and are friends with staff on
Facebook. Newer students are introduced to staff through the students they know. There are a
few staff members who students gravitate towards, but all students have at least a professional
camaraderie with staff.
Implications for Design
A pattern is evident in the students: they are highly social, students with the most
experience are more willing to participate in evaluation than those who have been working here
less, and students are performing at a level appropriate for their experience.
In order to improve training an attitude learning approach (Smith and Ragan 2005, p 260-
268) could be useful. The focus on changing an attitude could rectify the student’s lethargy in
regards to willingness to participate in evaluation activities. If we can show them that their input
is valuable this could help. Also as a majority of tasks in circulation involve customer service,
attitude learning will be helpful in creating good customer service skills. The instructional
conditions for attitude objectives put a focus on role-playing. This works well with the student’s
social tendencies as it requires students to express themselves.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 20
Chapter 4 FOCUS GROUP
Introduction
In order to evaluate the circulation student training curriculum, the students, staff, and
subject matter expert (SME) of circulation were questioned. Originally, a focus group with
students was the main method of data collection. Due to low response, the focus group had to be
cancelled. Instead an online survey was distributed through email. This survey was based off
the format from the staff survey. The SME was given a list of interview questions through
email. This was arranged to fit both the interviewer and interviewee’s opposite schedules.
Agenda for Transportation
As the survey and interview were conducted over the Internet transportation was not a
factor. The agenda for the interview was informal as well. The email, sent on February 6th,
asked her to respond by Februrary10th.
Questions Asked During the Interview
Both types of questions, the survey and the interview, were structured. As neither
medium excels in allowing the participant to fully express their views, a structured format was
necessary. The interview was intended to be a dialog between the SME and the researcher;
however after the initial results no further questions were needed.
These methods were used to discover the felt needs of the circulation department. Felt
needs are “a desire or want that an individual has to improve either his or her performance or that
of the target audience” (Morrison, Ross, & Kemp 2001, p 29). Another goal was to quantify the
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 21
subjects felt needs, that before had only been expressed in complaints at staff meetings.
Surveying the student’s also served to get the other side of the story.
Clothing for Interview
In an experiment conducted in 1976 with eighty undergraduate students, it was shown
that dress had minimal effect on “perceived expertness” (Kerr & Dell). It was the conduct of the
interviewers that seemed to relay expertise. Hubble and Gelso (1978) also found that clients had
the best reaction to counselors with a dress style that was a bit more formal than what the client
usually wears. So a person who usually dresses casually (casual shirt and jeans) responds best to
a counselor who is business casual (nice slacks and a button down). These experiments show that
clothing does affect how interviewees perceive the interviewer. An important note is that
interviewer behavior, and the preferences of the interviewee have the most impact on perception.
More current discourse on attire is focused on a job interview. These articles recommend
“professional” attire. However, in these situations the person is being questioned, not doing the
questioning. They are the one being asked to prove their worth, whereas in an interview, aimed
at getting information, one wants to make the subject(s) feel at ease. The two types of interview
are not the same and should not be treated as such. Obviously, wearing pajamas to a focus group
is not appropriate, but the deciding factor on what to wear should come down to the audience.
Since the interviews were given without face-to-face interaction dress was not an issue.
However, any further interviews may be different. The majority of staff, students, and the SME
dress casually, therefore a business casual dress would be appropriate.
Interviewees
The only interview given was with the SME, Paula Huey.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 22
Chapter 5 NEED ANALYSIS
Process To conduct the needs analysis the following method from Morrison, Ross, and Kemp
(2001) was utilized.
Figure 5:1 Phases of Analysis
Phase I: Planning
The target audience for the assessment is the students and the SME in the department.
They will deal directly with the outcome of the assessment. The SME will have to implement
and enforce any changes, and the students will have to adapt and perform under any new
methods. The secondary audience is the staff at large. Susan, the head of the circulation
department, will have final say on what will and will not happen, and can direct the department
as a whole to take action in regards to training students. Other circulation staff will also have to
Phase I:Planning
Target audience
Strategy
Analysis
Particpants
Phase II: Collecting data
Sample Size
Scheduling
Phase III: Data Analysis
Analysis
Prioritization
Phase IV: Final Report
Purpose
Process
Results
Action
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 23
enforce changes and can report back the effectiveness. The following diagram shows the
structure of the department. One thing to note is Andrea has been separated and deemphasized
to show that, while a member of the regular staff, she conducted the study and was not a part of
the data. Paula has been emphasized to show her importance in the outcome.
Figure 5:2 Departmental Structure
In order to assess the training program at CML, the strategy was to conduct an
assessment using the discrepancy model (Smith & Ragan 2005). In this model there is a
curriculum in use and the model is used to find and address gaps in it. Gaps were found using a
pre/posttest over the meeting, and discussions with the staff and students. A survey of staff,
interview with the SME, and focus group of students was the original plan. Due to a lack of
participants the focus group was changed to a survey.
Analysis of the results happened as follows. The pre and posttest were compared using
the rubric in Appendix 3. The tests were divided by the experience level of the students to show
if any improvement occurred and at what levels. The surveys were compiled to compare
students and staff, and then that data was compared to the interview with the SME.
Susan
Staff Paula
Students
Andrea
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 24
Phase II: Collecting Data
The evaluation of the orientation/meeting was a pre/posttest (see Appendix 1) . This test
was given to eleven students before the meeting and fifteen after the test. The test consisted of
three short answer questions aimed at assessing customer service skills, fifty questions,
consisting of multiple choice, matching, and a map labeling exercise, to assess their knowledge
of the department, and lastly forty questions on Library of Congress classification that is also
used as an assessment during the hiring process.
The other data collection method consisted of an interview with the subject-matter expert
(SME) student supervisor, and a survey of staff and students. The interview with the SME was
conducted through email to accommodate both the interviewer’s, and interviewee’s opposite
schedules. The two surveys were also collected electronically using SurveyMonkey an online
survey creation and distribution website. The staff was sent an email inviting them to take the
survey; of the eight staff members, six responded. The students were sent a link to the website in
a mass email. Of the twenty potential respondents, six responded. One of these surveys was
answered all “No Response” and was excluded from the data, making five total. The five student
responses were all from those who had worked in the department for two or more years. This
skewed the results to the most experienced students in the department.
Phase III: Analyzing the Data
Pre/Post
Examination of the pre/post data showed the students with over two years of experience
generally preformed at an expert level, with only one falling to intermediate. The second group
performed at an intermediate level, with one bordering on novice. The third group, expectedly,
performed at a novice level. After the orientation the score generally improved. The
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 25
experienced students stayed the same, those students working between a year and half and five
months improved with two people advancing to expert. The novice students improved greatly as
well. They had all improved to intermediate, with one achieving expert status.
The rise in scores was a resulted from improved performance on the map labeling and
multiple choice questions. Students performed consistently on the short answer customer service
questions before and after the meeting.
Surveys
A comparison of staff and student surveys shows that there is little agreement on what the
students can do well and how to handle further training.
Figure 5:3 Task Performance Graph
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
0 10-20 30-40 50 60-70 80-90 100
Staff Students
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 26
Figure 5:4 Perceived Ability Graph
Figure 5:5 Desired Training Graph
The most telling of the data is the Correct/Confident task performance chart and the data
on customer service. When asked to rate the students on “what percentage of tasks do student
perform correctly” staff say task correctness tops out at 90% and goes down to as little as 50%.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Staff
Students
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Staff
Students
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 27
Whereas students have a more positive view of themselves: performing between 80 and 100%
confidence. Granted this data is from students who have worked in the library the longest and
does not reflect all student performances. Customer service is also a point of contention. The
students feel they have excellent customer service skills, and the SME agrees with them. When
asked what students do well, customer service was the first thing the SME wrote (P. Huey,
personal communication, February 10, 2012).
Current training method
When examining the effectiveness of current methods and what could be added staff was
split between the same amount and more training was needed, however, students were generally
fine with the current offerings. This was also reflected in the available training methods with
students tending towards what was currently in use (email, peer training, orientations). Students
and staff did see the value in diversifying the training curriculum by adding a handbook and
manual. Staff wanted to also add periodic testing, but the students showed no interest.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 28
Figure 5:6 Method Graph
Figure 5:7 Training Needed Graph
Phase IV: Final Report
The gaps in training can be seen in customer service. The survey shows that students and
staff disagree on what is proper customer service. A lack of change in the short answer on the
pre/posttest also speaks to the problem. Future training will need to focus on that aspect. An
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
handbook manual orientation peer emails testing lessons other
Staff Student
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
More Same Less
Re
sp
on
de
nts
Staff Students
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 29
examination of comments on both the student and staff survey also show that peer training is
inconsistent. Students are trained my multiple peers, and often do not get to experience tasks
that form the basis of tasks in the department. Another gap that was not actively studied but
became a factor was motivation. As seen in the survey, students are fine with their current
performance. There is also a lack of motivation in improving the department. Only a small
portion of students are willing to take time outside of work to discuss the problems. The need to
cancel the focus group and the small number of respondents to the survey shows this.
In order to fill these gaps the training process needs to be formalized in a series of low
tech solutions that happen as a part of the job. It was shown during an examination of the
learning environment that the SME, who will be ultimately responsible for implementing and
administering training, is not technologically adept and would need training on new methods.
Also the on-the-job aspect of training is critical. Students show more willingness to contribute
when they are in the environment. Giving them materials (such as a handbook, or video) they
can utilize when they are dealing with a problem may be more effective than a reminder outside
of the work environment.
This problem of motivation is an important, but was not the focus of this study. A deeper
look at this problem and possible solutions is needed to fully understand how it could be
improved. Another possible topic would be student/staff relations as a way to encourage
communication.
Summation
Comer’s study of the students in 2003 still rings true today. The same problems are
present. Hopefully, revisiting and revamping the solutions the study recommends will improve
student performance.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 30
Chapter 6 TASK ANALYSIS
Introduction
After conducting a Needs Assessment plan for the Cunningham Memorial Library’s
(CML) circulation department, it was found that students needed training methods that they were
able to during their work hours. In order to facilitate those needs an analysis of tasks is needed.
By examining what is involved an appropriate media, or method can be chosen. Students have a
myriad of tasks that need to be done and examining their job as a whole is impractical. To that
end, this task analysis will be on a job that forms the backbone of student tasks: sorting and
shelving materials.
Method
As Smith and Ragan (2005) report, the first part of analyzing a task is to create or
determine a learning goal. This is a “statement of purpose... [of] what learners should be able to
do at the conclusion of instruction” (Smith & Ragan 2005, p 77). It was discovered in the needs
assessment that shelving was an area in which students can improve, creating the goal: Learners
need to know the correct method for shelving the materials in the library.
The second step is to determine the type of learning that task entails. For sorting/shelving
material a declarative (Smith & Ragan 2005 pp 79-80) learning outcome is most appropriate.
The student needs to memorize the indicators of location that are available and where to find
that information on the item. Some application of knowledge they receive is present. For
example, a book that has “Ref” marked out, or incorrectly formatted call numbers can cause
confusion. However, there is nothing truly “intellectual” about recognizing that something is
wrong and asking for clarification, which is the course of action taught by the student supervisor.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 31
The last part of creating a task analysis is the analysis itself. Sorting/Shelving is a task
that begs for a procedural analysis. As explained by Morrison, Ross, and Kemp (2001, p 70) a
procedural analysis “is used to analyze tasks by identifying the steps required to complete [the
process]. The [analysis] breaks tasks into the size of steps needed for learning.” To do this the
task of sorting and shelving will be described by a Subject Matter Expert, in this case the
designer.
Task Analysis
Please see Appendix 5 for the flow chart for the task.
Discussion
In creating this chart a number of issues presented themselves. The first, that additional
subject material needs to be incorporated into the design. An understanding of Dewey and
Library of Congress classification models is required to shelve. Education on the systems need
not be very deep; however, a few key points need to be emphasized. For example, in both
systems the dot in a number is not a period, but a decimal point. This means that the number .423
comes before .43.
The second issue is that this process does not happen as one continuous task. Sorting
happens at the circulation desk and again in preshelving, while shelving is yet another task.
Workers have to know the whole process to understand why some parts of their job are
necessary. When they work at the desk, students are asked to put away materials in the same
order they are on the shelf to speed up work flow further down the line. Hopefully, seeing the
full process can show them why this task is required of them. Also because this does not happen
all at the same time it may make creating a lesson difficult. To that end, educators could share
this model with the students when addressing work flow or use it to give the student an overview
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 32
of the task; then the students should participate in the sorting and the shelving task for the main
mode of education.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 33
Chapter 7 LEARNING OBJECTIVES
Learning Objectives
Using Library of Congress classification, students will shelve stacks books correctly 90%
of the time with no errors from misreading the call number before the Cutter.
Using Dewey classification, students will shelve stacks books correctly 90% of the time
with no errors in identifying subgroups (easy reader, biography, ect)
Using alphabetical classification, students will make zero errors when shelving material.
Analysis of Learning Objectives
As stated in Morrison, Ross, and Kemp (2001), learning objectives fulfill three roles in
the learning process. They:
offer a means for instructors to focus their instruction
provide a method of evaluating student performance
guide the learner so they know what to expect from instruction
Having well stated learning objectives is essential in shaping both the student and teacher’s
expectations of their level of performance and the goal of the coursework.
The objectives listed above fulfill all of these roles. The objectives each have a specific
focus: teaching/learning about a specific classification system. Evaluation will occur in the
stacks with specific criteria to assess how the learner performed. They also guide the learner by
telling them which classification systems they will be learning about.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 34
Objective Types
Objectives are created with one of a few domains in mind. Each of these domains helps
the designer create objectives by identifying what type of learning will occur. Morrison, Ross,
and Kemp (2001) list three domains: cognitive, psychomotor, and affective. The cognitive
domain as defined by Morrison, Ross, and Kemp (2001) deals with “information or knowledge,
naming, solving, predicting and other intellectual aspects of learning” (p 86). An objective in
the cognitive domain addresses learning that challenges the learner to remember, comprehend,
apply, analyze, synthesize, or evaluate material. These tasks were created by Bloom in 1956 in
his taxonomy of cognitive objectives (Morrison, Ross, & Kemp 2001). Cognitive domain is the
focus of the objectives above. Students are asked to comprehend, apply, and analyze, each of the
shelving methods. For Smith and Ragan, the objectives are procedural ones.
Psychomotor is the next domain. This domain is focused on physically completing a
task. Tasks relating to using proper technique or manipulation of the body fall under this domain.
While no objectives were created for this domain for this exercise, an example for this course
could be how to properly lift heavy objects to reduce the risk of injury.
The last domain is the affective domain. Tasks with the goal of changing or creating
attitudes are included in this domain (Morrison, Ross, and Kemp 2001, p 89). An example of
this domain for a library student worker curriculum would be coursework on creating good
customer service skills. Instilling a willingness to be helpful and polite would require curriculum
that fosters that willingness.
Learning Outcomes
Smith and Ragan (2005) break down these domains into eight different types of
outcomes: declarative, concepts, principles, procedure, domain-specific problem solving,
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 35
cognitive strategies, attitudes, and psychomotor skills. Attitudes and psychomotor skills are
similar to their objective counterpoints. Declarative knowledge challenges the student to “know
that” something (Smith & Ragan 2005, p 79). In this lesson students have to recall where a book
goes in the library. Concept learning has students assess if an object is part of a particular
concept. In the library example student would be handed a material type and would have to
place it into one of the groups. Then in procedures the student would have to recall a procedure
and then go through the steps. This would be the act of shelving in the library. Principles
“describe the relationship between two or more concepts” (Smith & Ragan 2005, p 205). There
are few principles in the student workers jobs. An example outside the library would be
diminishing returns in economics. Domain-specific problem solving is exactly how it sounds.
Learners have to solve a problem using the tools of that domain. For instance, where do I place a
receiver dish on this tower to get the best signal? Lastly is cognitive strategies which teach
learners how to learn. A good example of this would be in teaching students to create
mnemonics to remember a series of steps or suggestions.
Knowledge of these domains and objectives types is important to creating objectives that
help both learner and educator proceed with instruction. Knowing the domain helps designer
create material that enhances learning. For instance, objectives focused on the psychomotor
domain of customer service will teach how to present one’s self. Does the staff member sit up
straight and make eye contact would be a way to evaluate. However, an affective objective
would evaluate how often the student displays a positive attitude. Objectives should focus both
parties on what to expect from instruction and how they will be evaluated on what is learned.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 36
Chapter 8 INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGY: DECLARATIVE
“A well-designed instructional strategy prompts or motivates the learner to
actively make [connections] between what the learners already knows and the
new information.”
Morrison, Ross, & Kemp 2001, p 124
The Cunningham Memorial Library at Indiana State University employs twenty students
in its circulation department. One of the keystone tasks is shelving. Students must be aware of
where books are in the library and how they are shelved for eight of eleven common tasks they
perform. The library has seven material types, two of which have multiple subtypes, and uses
three systems for shelving items. With such diversity in material and shelving systems, shelving
can get complicated. To aid in creating connections, a game was created. This game is based on
declarative learning strategies.
What is Declarative Knowledge?
Smith and Ragan (2005) define declarative knowledge as “[involving] ‘knowing that’
something is the case. In is often what we mean when we say we want the learners to
‘understand’ a content” (p 152). Within this knowledge type are three distinct subsections:
labels and names, facts and lists, and organized discourse. In the subtype labels and names
students create connections between information. Facts and lists have learners memorize data as
long sets of related information, or as knowledge sets. Lastly, students are challenged to
comprehend large sections of text in organized discourse.
The main goal of this game is to learn facts and lists. In this case the facts and lists are:
what kind of materials does the library have, where are those materials shelved, and how do we
shelve them.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 37
Cognitive Process
Declarative knowledge is learned through the cognitive process of “propositional
networks” (Smith & Ragan 2005, p 153). Prepositions are ideas and networks are the linked
ideas. Therefore, declarative knowledge is created by imparting ideas on students so that they
may link those ideas to create a greater understanding of them.
Linking with Existing Knowledge
The game utilizes a few methods to link old and new knowledge. The first of which is
metaphoric devices (Smith and Ragan 2005, p 159). The game has students run books to their
appropriate shelves and floor. The floors are represented by book carts placed in areas marked
out by floor (see game rules for a fuller description and map). The books the students are
shelving are dummies that use the same labeling that the library currently employs to further
connect the dummy to the real item. This method creates an associational technique where in a
green label means this area of browsing.
Organization/Elaboration
To help the students organize the information in their minds, they will be given a pretest
that asks them as groups to name all the different types of materials the library has. This will be
continued at the end of the day when students will organize the material types into floors as a
class. These tasks of organization and elaboration are important to linking information in
student’s minds
Conditions Supporting Learning
The organization of instruction follows the suggestions of Smith and Ragan (2005). At
the beginning of instruction session in order to gain attention and focus the students they will be
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 38
broken down into groups and asked to create a list of all the materials we have in the library.
This is also a way to preview instruction and communicate instructional purpose. By showing
student’s the many varieties of materials it will instill in them the complexity of their job. Then
the main instruction will take place.
Practice
The last part of the puzzle is practicing the information to evaluate the student’s learning
students. This will be done through participation in a game at the end of the session. This
game’s focuses on using declarative techniques and instructional organization to help circulation
students learn how to shelve properly. Metaphor, association, and practice are all employed to
help give the students mental tie-ins to the lesson.
Evaluation
Smith and Ragan (2005) recommend an evaluation based on recall to assess the
student’s learning. The game’s scorecard will provide the medium to test the recall by
asking students to put the book in the correct area. Points are subtracted when the player
places a book on the wrong “shelf”.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 39
Chapter 9 INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGY: PROCEDURAL
Introduction
Another area where students need assistance is in the creation of resident cards for
patrons. Smith and Ragan (2005) would classify this process as a simple procedure. The task is
a step-by-step process where there is little ambiguity on how to perform each step. Additionally,
this is a simple procedure, as there are no decision points where the procedure would branch into
separate trees. Each time you complete this task it will happen the same way.
In order to teach students how to create a resident card a tutorial will be created. Student
workers will have access to this material during their training, but it will also be available for
them at the desk. The tutorial will be created in Microsoft Word with screencaps and detailed
instructions following the suggestions of Smith and Ragan described in the following sections
(See Appendix 7 for tutorial)
Simplified Procedure
1. Patron needs a card
2. Prepare materials
a. Turn on laminator
b. Get card
c. Get Barcode
d. Get new patron form
3. Have patron fill out all parts of form
a. Confirm information against his/her driver’s license
4. Click “new patron” button
a. Fill out all applicable fields
b. Double check for correctness
5. Create card
a. Patron signs card
b. Date card with today’s date
c. Attach barcode
d. Laminate
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 40
6. Complete
a. Check out materials as normal
Instructional Strategy/Procedural Considerations
In their chapter on procedural strategies Smith and Ragan (2005) have many suggestions
for how to create this type of lesson. They start by describing how to write the procedure.
(Smith and Ragan describe strategies for both complex and simple procedures; this paper will
only focus on simple).
use clear sentences
each operation should represent and single...action
operation steps should be stated as imperative sentences (beginning with a verb)
With that written the next step is to present the material. For the sake of efficiency, Smith
and Ragan (2005) recommend that the procedure should be told to the students rather than
relying on a discovery method. Therefore, the instructor should first explain a step then let
students practice it before proceeding to the next. With these recommendations in mind, the
following lesson was created.
Table 9:1 Procedural Instruction
Introduction
Deploy attention
Establish
Instructional purpose
Today you will learn how to create a resident card. Doing this correctly
will save the patron, the billing clerk, and you the headache of having to
ask again for information.
Arouse interest and
Motivation
Most likely you will have to complete this task many times while you
work here.
Preview Lesson There are three major steps in this procedure: entering in the patron’s
information, creating the card, and putting the completed form away.
Body
Recall Relevant
Prior Knowledge
Students will have to access Millennium, and get the appropriate form
from the cart.
Process Information
and Examples
learning to determine if the procedure is required: Resident cards can be
created for any resident of the state of Indiana and the Illinois
Counties that surround Terre Haute. They must have a valid
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 41
Indiana/Illinois driver’s license and be willing to give us their
Social Security number. Members of Rose Hulman and Saint
Mary of the Woods can use their cards at ISU and should not be
issued a card. To avoid duplicate accounts ALWAYS perform a
patron search before issuing a card.
learning to complete the steps in the procedure: With computer screen
projected onto viewing screen, go through handout (appendix 7) showing
each step. For creating the card show students all the materials they need
to properly laminate a card
learning to check the appropriateness of a completed procedure: show
students the confirmation screen and have them compare the form
and the confirmation
learning to list the steps in the procedure: As a group, start a second
dummy account and have them walk instructor through steps.
Focus Attention During the lesson students will be focused with use of the mouse on the
screen to highlight areas that they need to focus on.
Employ Learning
Strategies
Students will be told where the handout can be found if they forget a step
Practice Each student will be asked to create a resident account according to a
completed sample form. They must turn in the form to the instructor
when they are complete.
Evaluate Feedback Depending on the size of the class, and time left in the session, 2-5
accounts will be picked at random and the class will review other
submissions for completeness.
Conclusion
Summarize and
Review
Based on feedback go over the problem areas and ask if there are any
additional questions.
Remotivate and
Close
Thank you all for participating. I know that we will all save a lot of time
now that you all understand so well
Assessment of Procedural Learning
Assess Learning To assess the students long term, the billing clerk will keep track of
information that is commonly entered incorrectly when connecting the
patron accounts to billing accounts. The clerk will relay this information
to the instructor so that specific areas can be remediated.
Formative Analysis
Morrison, Ross, and Kemp (2001) suggest performing analysis of materials early in the
creation process to avoid costly redesign later. To test the material, the procedure was given to
new members of circulation. They were asked to read the procedure (see Appendix 7) and create
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 42
a record from start to finish. The students were able to follow along with the sheet very well.
However, it was discovered that the student version of Millennium was not asking the students to
fill out certain required information. While not an issue for training, the problem needed to be
addressed in Millennium.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 43
Chapter 10 INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGY: COGNITIVE
Introduction
An important part of sorting books is being able to identify the markers of a particular
material type. A common problem is students giving patrons things they have no use for. They
will give patrons dummy cases, place markers, and informational markers. Students are literally
trying to check out pieces of wood. In order to correct this, students need to learn how to
examine the material for shelving clues.
To do this, cognitive strategies need to be employed. Smith and Ragan (2005 p 244)
define cognitive strategies as “techniques that learners use to control and monitor their own
cognitive processes”. They allow students to “organize, elaborate, manipulate, and retrieve
knowledge” or “discover, invent, or create” (Smith & Ragan 2005 p 244). In this task we focus
on retrieving knowledge.
Strategy Selection
The strategy used to teach this task is the cognitive domain strategy of organizing.
Students will be asked to graphically organize material. This strategy was selected because it
allows students to collate identifiers.
Application
Through guided instruction, students will be asked to create word webs to describe
material. They will be given an example material type, such as a DVD case, and will be asked to
describe what they know about it, and how they found out that information. The webs will
provide enough spaces for each identifier so that each space must be filled correctly to earn full
credit.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 44
Formative Evaluation
Formative evaluation begins during the construction of a instructional unit (Morrison,
Ross, & Kemp 2001). During the formative evaluation, Gooler suggests asking eight questions
to help instructional designers (ID) assess instruction (Morrison, Ross, & Kemp 2001 p 267).
Using a test subject who knew nothing about sorting, evaluation of the webs was done.
During the lesson the subject commented that the webs were repetitive as many material
types used similar identifiers, with only a few materials having any noticeable differences.
Resulting webs ended up clustered on one section with little “web-y-ness” in that there were only
one or two spokes. The subject suggested switching the focus from the material type to the
identifiers.
To accommodate the suggestions the ID created a list of common elements. The elements were
arranged in order from most obvious to least obvious.
Physical Item
Call number
Color
Stickers
These elements were used to form a mnemonic: Pretty Cool Circulation Students. This will help
students could use to remember the identifiers.
Application
Table 10:1 Cognitive Instruction
Introduction
Deploy Attention To begin, students will be asked to discuss how they
know where to shelve material.
Arouse Interest and
motivation
Tell learners how miss-shelving effects work flow
and cause additional frustrations.
Establish instructional
purpose
In order to correct this we will be looking at how to
look for clues on the material itself.
Preview lesson Explain the PCCS mnemonic, and have students
recite it.
Body
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 45
Recall prior knowledge Classification systems
Process Information Using PowerPoint and examples have students
describe how to
Focus Attention Each of the examples will only have the element
being discussed. Students won’t be distracted by
other elements.
Employ learning
strategies
Before switching slides I would ask the students for
the next part of the mnemonic and what element it
relates to.
Practice After going through the PowerPoint, students will
break into small groups and receive example and
asked to describe what they know about the material
using the PCCS model
Evaluate Feedback Have each group describe the material and how they
found that out in front of the large group.
Conclusion
Summarize and review Have students recite the mnemonic.
Transfer knowledge
Remotivate and close Thanks so much for your hard work. This will help
you all identify materials with greater accuracy.
Assessment
Assess performance Observation of the group’s examples for nonuse of
the mnemonic or incorrect application of an
identifier
Feedback and
remediation
Correct lesson for common errors found in the
student’s explanations
Summative Evaluation
To evaluate this strategy further, student worker errors will be analyzed. Each day
students record any errors they find while shelf reading. This information will be analyzed for
the average number of errors found in each section. Data from the semester before, and the
semester after the instruction will be compared. The average will be used to account for patrons
putting material back in the incorrect place. Another method will be of patron/staff reports of
students giving out incorrect materials. Lastly, during instruction, the instructor will look for
where students are struggling.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 46
Chapter 11 EVALUATION
Introduction
Shelving materials forms the backbone of student worker’s tasks. Knowing the basics of
shelving is a skill all student workers must master. To teach this skill, a lesson on the cognitive
task of identifying materials was created. In it, students were required to create word webs that
described individual material types. The following is an assessment of the lesson, and
suggestions for how to improve it.
Student Assessment
Instructional materials
The lesson consisted of a PowerPoint presentation (Appendix 9), and group work to teach
students a mnemonic that would teach them to look closely at material for shelving clues. With
the PowerPoint as the guide, students learned the mnemonic and how to apply it. After each
section students looked at real examples of the principle and were encouraged to discuss other
examples of that identifier. At the end of the presentation, students were divided into groups,
given a number of examples from a certain material type, and asked to assign them to the
appropriate area of the library. They were given ten minutes to work through the example and
then present their findings.
Formative assessment
Originally the concept was taught using word webs. The student was given an item type
and asked to describe it. In order to assess this instruction, it was administered to a test student.
The subject had no shelving experience in either the Cunningham Memorial Library or any
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 47
other libraries. It was found that this method did not fully utilize the word web’s potential.
Webs created did not have many branches and not all identifiers were equally represented on
each item. Additionally, there are so many item types that going through them individually took
too long. Instead, the focus was shifted off the item and onto the identifiers, and the above
lesson was created.
Summative assessments
In order to assess the students and the coursework a number of assessments were put into
place. The first was a pre and post test. Students were given a packet of examples (Appendix 8)
and asked to circle or otherwise marked identifiers. After instruction they were given the same
examples and asked to mark the identifiers again. This method had a twofold purpose.
Morrison, Ross, and Kemp (2001) note the following advantages. The first is “to assess the
learner’s preparation to study the course of topic” and “to determine which competencies for the
course or topic the learner may have already mastered” (Morrison, Ross, and Kemp 2001 p 220).
Secondly, pretests “measure the degree of improvement after instruction is completed”
(Morrison, Ross, and Kemp 2001 p 220). While these tests will not be “graded” the pretest (or
lack thereof) will be used to address where attention should be focused in the lesson. The post
will show where attention needs to be focused in subsequent classes.
In order to assess the students during the lesson a problem solving approach was used.
Smith and Ragan (2005) suggest that assessment of concept learning should involve explaining,
categorizing, or producing (non)examples of a group (p 180). This was combined with Morrison,
Ross, and Kemp’s (2001) suggestion that problem-solving questions are useful for “application,
analysis, and synthesis” of higher level cognitive skills (p 239). Together a group problem
solving activity was created. Each group was given a material type (Books, CDs, DVDs, and
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 48
Reserves) and asked to assign them to a floor and explain their method. They would present
their rationale to the rest of the class for feedback.
Student Feedback
Lastly, in order to get the students’ opinion of the lesson, a survey was created using
Google Forms. The survey was created using the suggestions in Morrison, Ross, and Kemp
(2001 p 258). Mainly that:
Rating scales should have no more than 5 points
Describe what the number means (1 = poor, 5 = excellent)
Use points that do not overlap
Use clear and concrete language
Express only one idea
The front end of the form can be found at the following website
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dFh5Q05hSGdrWDh4aDR0blJmY
lVQc0E6MQ#gid=0. Screenshots of the back end are included in appendix 10.
The survey gave the students an anonymous outlet to express their opinions of the lesson.
A pairing of open and closed questions allowed the students a chance to express their opinion
more completely, or on a topic that was not covered in the closed questions. Google Forms was
chosen over other online forms because of its unlimited responses, customizability, and plug-ins
(third party coding aimed at adding additional functions to the platform).
Data Analysis
Testing was conducted with five subjects. The subjects were between twenty and forty
years of age, with three females and two males. Two of the subjects were very experienced with
the materials and shelving; two were experienced with most of the materials and shelving; the
last had never worked with the materials before. All subjects were Caucasian, spoke English as a
first language, and had no impairments that would hinder their sight, hearing, comprehension, or
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 49
motor skills.
Each subject was given the pretest, then a paper copy of the PowerPoint presentation.
The instructor went through the presentation with each subject and answered any questions.
After the subject felt they understood the material they were given the post. Finally, the subjects
were given five books to analyze. Books were chosen for the test run, as they had the most
variation in identifiers. The analysis took place as a discussion between the instructor and the
subject. Subjects were then directed to the survey to express their opinion of the instruction.
Data from the pretests did show an improvement in the identification of clues on
material. In the pretest all subjects circled the call number as a whole, whereas in the post
subjects circled individual parts of the call number. As expected the two advanced students
identified the majority of the clues in the pretest, while the most inexperienced circled mainly the
call number. The inexperienced student did recognize that color was probably important during
the pretest, but didn’t know why. The test was printed on a black and white computer and the
color was added later with colored pencils. Most likely, the subject knew color was important as
it was deliberately added. Problems occurred with all students on the stickers portion of the
mnemonic as it was difficult to determine what was a sticker and what was a part of the material.
Data from the surveys found the following issues:
Reserve had regular call number instead of the teacher/class
Students thought the instruction was useful but wanted more examples
Students were not motivated to follow instruction. (figure 11.1)
Students felt the mnemonic was “silly” which most likely brought down the score on
“appropriateness” of instruction (figure 11.2)
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 50
Figure 11:1 Motivation
Figure 11:2 Appropriateness
Figure 11:3 Remember
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 51
Recommended Changes
Through the analysis of the data it was found that the following issues should be
addressed. The first is the addition of other material types should be included in the pretest.
Representations for thesis, microform/Government Documents, and periodicals are the most
important material to be added. Additionally the pretest needs to be reformatted from paper to
the physical object. The ability to draw on the material will be lost, but the switch will gain
realness which will hopefully add to comprehension.
The next focus should be on improving motivation and “silly”ness. Four of the subjects
work at the library and were not excited to get another lesson on shelving. The comment on
silliness was most likely directed towards this. The mnemonic is a bit childish, and results from
the survey (figure 3) suggest it may not stick. However, this test was conducted towards the end
of the semester, after the students had been required to undergo many requests to improve
training. Frustration, with the job may have lead to a disproportionate amount of resistance. If
further use of the strategy proves similar the focus will be shifted in another direction.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 52
Appendix 1 Pretest I have been working here for __________
Choose 2 of the following scenarios and write your response and/or the steps you
would use to complete the task. Feel free to write on the back of the page:
1. “Can I give you my 991 to check these books out?”
2. “I have a charge on my account for a book. What do I do?”
3. “Could I get a private room?”
4. *The gate beeps when they leave the building*
Match the staff member with their responsibilities. Lines can go to multiple
places.
Ali
Andrea
Carey
Holli
Josh
Katherine
Kelly
Paula
Susan
Sheila
Supervises all staff
Student Schedule Changes
Stacks Maintenance
Searches
Reserves
Remote Storage
Patron Accounts
ILL
Holds
Hold for Class
Graduate Carrels
Government Documents
Browsing Media Issues
Billing
Please mark your answer to the follow multiple choice questions.
1. I need to verify if an item’s status
(checked in, piece count) when
A. They are checked in
B. I am preshelving
C. I check out the item
D. All of the above
2. It is ok to ignore a system message when
A. They are over 2 years old
B. I am preshelving
C. Never
D. I am really busy
3. The Kurzweil room is
A. Designated for those who ask for it
directly
B. A group room reserved on the website
C. Located on the 3rd floor
D. All of the above
4. Questions about class reserves go to
A. Ali
B. Carey
C. Paula
D. Susan
5. Altering my task list is ok when
A. I switch tasks with another worker
B. I have an injury that would impede
my work
C. Paula/Staff on duty approves it
D. Never
6. To make a resident card the patron
should fill out the ___ form.
A. Change of Address
B. Processing
C. Social Security
D. Donation
Choose 1 scenario and describe how you would provide excellent customer
service. Feel free to present the information in the way that makes sense to you
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 53
(bulleted list, flow chart, paragraph, ect.). Responses should not exceed the space
provided.
You are reshelving books when you notice a patron roaming the stacks. They are
comparing the range markers against a piece of paper and look confused.
While checking out dvds to a patron, they mention they couldn’t find the second season
of their favorite series.
A faculty member wants to renew a book. Renewing it would cause them to exceed their
maximum of 3 renewals. You have served this professor before and know s/he is often
very demanding.
You are helping a patron, when another approaches you with a question.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 54
Assessment Tool for Applicants
Indiana State University Library uses the Library of Congress classification System for
re-shelving library material. Read the instructions for each section of the test carefully and study
the examples before beginning the problem. To put “books” in order, start at the top of each call
number and arrange them alphabetically and numerically. When you encounter a letter versus a
number, always put the letter first. Work as accurately and as rapidly as you can.
Section I: Same or Different
Examine each pair of call numbers. If both call numbers in the pair are the same, write “S” on
the line next to the pair. If they are different, write “D”.
Example: HM HM S HF HF D
132 132 54.5 54.5
.G37 .G37 .F63 .F36
1. KFN KFN 6. RC RC
971.5 977.5 280 208
.M4 .M4 .B8E8 .B8E8
2. HQ HQ 7. TR TR
71 71 898 898
.J35 .K35 .B8 .B8
3. L L 8. M ML
13 13 1 1
.E37 .E37 .M7D4 .M7B4
4. E F 9. QA BLIND
442 442 3612 QA
.B21 .B21 .H8 3612
.H8
5. QA QA 10. PN PN
76.6 76.6 1995 1995
.M352 .M352 .K2X426 .K2S426
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 55
Section II: Which Comes First? Decide which call number of each pair would come first if you were re-shelving these books, the call
number in column A or the call number in column B. Put the correct letter (A or B) on the line provided.
Example: (A) CB (B) CB
461 608 A
.F47 .B29
(A) F (B) E
82 94 B
.T379 .A65
A B
1. T T
61 61
.M28 .M28
V. 41 V. 39
2. CC AC
45 76
.C525 .B37
3. VA U
102 65
.I6 .N3A5
4. SB SB
482 472
.E223 .A485
5. GV G
53 53
.S7 .S46
6. TR TR
140 140
.B4A271 .B4A34
7. QA QA
76.5 76.5
.M192 .M1873
8. PS PS
3525 3525
.Z8S5 .Z8S5
1921 1961
9. AC AC
20 20
.B6 .B6
1981 V. 14
10. PS PS
3552 3525
.C7475W6 .C7475D6
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 56
Section III: The Shelving Order
Each row of call numbers is a separate problem. Arrange the numbers in each row in order from the
lowest to the highest. The lowest call number is 1. The next highest is 2, and so on until all five call
numbers have a number. Transfer your numbers to the line at the end of the row in the order you
have just arranged them. Example: (2) (1) (4) (3) (5) 21435
PN PN PN PN PS
12 1 58 14 203
.E3 .A8 .J6 .G17 .H2
1. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
A TR DS Z L
647 13 14 2015 50
.T17 .B334 .M55 .A1K3 .S417P5
2. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
QC QA QC QA QL
266 174.17 612.2 81 246
.M6 .R32B53 .K66 .H65 .K813
3. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
RC RC RC RC RA
199.7 197 199.7 197.5 199.4
.H63 .L5 .T374 .C5B55 .H53
4. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
GV GV GV GV GV
979 797 979 799 979
.P8S8 .P75R67 .P75G34 .P75K7 .P8G62
5. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
PS PS PS PS PS
2116 2116 2116 2116 2116
.A86L55 .A865F2 .A865F21 .A8L53 .A865L75
6. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
BL BL BL BL BL
310 310 310 310 310
.F7 .F7 .F7 .F7 .F7
1925 1907 1951 1907 1951
V. 3 V. 7 V. 4 V. 8 V. 7
7. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
L L L L L
411 411 411 411 411
.K5S42 .K5S41 .K5S44 .K5S412 .K5S422
8. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
JQ JQ JQ JQ JQ
1480 1480 1480 1480 1480
.Z2C578 .Z2B578 .Z2C598 .Z2B32 .Z2C68
9. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
PF PF PF PF PF
3099 3099 3099 3099 3099
.G5N63 .G55D6 .G5Z23 .G5N23 .G55N63
10. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
AS AS AS AS AS
210.3 210.3 210.3 210.3 210.3
.D3A23 .D3A32 .D35A2 .D3A25 .D3A22
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 57
Section IV: Where Does the Book Belong?
You are to “shelve” the book in the left column among the four books to the right. Enter
an A, B, C, D, or E on the blank line to indicate the correct place.
Example: A B C D E
C C C C C
73 73 73.5 82 97 A
.A21 .A6 .P17 .A2 .R47
A B C D E
1. PQ PQ PQ PQ PQ
2440 2436 2436 2440 2446
.A4V43 .A2V4 .A5 .T5 .A2
2. NK NE NK NK NK
3152 2540 807 2110 4645
.P713 .R4 .N4 .L38 .B46
3. UA UA UA UA UA
646.3 646.3 646.3 646.3 646.3
.J39 .A559 .G64 .M93 .S6
4. Z Z Z Z Z
699.3 699 699.22 699.22 699.5
.F4 .S3D36 .A1W49 .H54 .S66D4
5. QA QA QA QA QA
76.73 76.73 76.73 76.73 76.73
.B3C3513 .B3G78 .B3K63 .B3L49 .B3T7
6. S S S S S
452 419 491 524 542
.C2549 .C2565 .C256 .C2551 .C255
7. PS PS PS PS PS
3545 3545 3545 3545 3545
.O337Z55 .O337Z5 .O337Z54 .O337Z552 .O337Z6
8. HF HF HF HF HF
5415.15 5415.1 5415.1 5415.15 5415.2
.A3B17 .A21B2 .A3R4 .A3B2 .J7B2
9. RJ RJ RJ RJ RJ
506 506 506 506 506
.A9E93 .A9D45 .A9E38 .A9E4 .A9E94
10. E E E E E
184.7 184 184.7 184.7 184.7
.I577 .M5C45 .B57 .B66 .I57
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 58
Appendix 2 Learner Survey
1. I have been working in circulation for ____.
2. I feel confident performing __% of tasks.
0 10-20 30-40 50 60-70 80-90 100
3. Compared to my coworkers, I feel that I am __ knowledgeable about circulation tasks
and policies.
More Similarly Less
4. The current training method of 2 weeks working with an experienced student is ___ to
perform my job correctly.
5. A handbook that details policies such as wardrobe, time off, privacy concerns, ect.
A manual that describes how to do common jobs
An orientation to the library/circulation
Training from experienced students
Daily Emails
Periodic testing on circulation tasks
Lessons/Modules/Videos on important topics
Other (please specify)
6. I understand how to ____ and need no more training on it.
Use Millennium
Shelve
Interpret Library policy (as concerns patrons)
Interpret Library policy (as concerns student workers)
Perform good Customer service
Operate library equipment (printers, ect.)
Open/Close the library
Other (please specify)
7. I would like more training in:
Use Millennium
Shelve
Interpret Library policy (as concerns patrons)
Interpret Library policy (as concerns student workers)
Perform good Customer service
Operate library equipment (printers, ect.)
Open/Close the library
Other (please specify)
8. Do you have any other comments about students training?
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 59
Appendix 3 Pretest Rubric
Expert (3) Intermediate (2) Novice (1)
Multiple Choice 80-100% of questions are
answered correctly.
79-50% of questions
are answered correctly
49% or less of
answers are correct.
Short Answer Student describes the
correct actions needed to
perform the task.
Description is full and
takes account of all
aspects of the problem.
Student answers the
question correctly, but
does not provide a full
description of their
process, or account for
the majority of aspects
of the problem.
Student answers the
question incorrectly.
Library of
Congress (LoC)
Zero to minimal errors.
Errors are due to lack of
attention not a
fundamental confusion
about how LoC works.
Some errors, due to
misunderstanding the
LoC system.
The majority of
questions are
answered incorrectly,
due to a
misunderstanding of
the LoC system.
Expert 9 – 8
Intermediate 7 - 5
Novice 4-3
Appendix 4 Surveys
Subject Matter Expert
What do you expect from your students?
How do you currently train students?
How do well do you feel the students are trained?
What are some tasks students have trouble with?
What do students do well?
What changes would you like to see in how students are trained or learn about new policy?
Staff
1. Students are able to do __ % of common tasks correctly
0 10-20 30-40 50 60-70 80-90 100
2. Student tasks related to my section of circulation are preformed correctly ___% of the
time.
0 10-20 30-40 50 60-70 80-90 100
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 60
3. Students should have access to/ take part in ____ to help them learn about their job.
A handbook that details policies such as wardrobe, time off, privacy concerns, ect.
A manual that describes how to do common jobs
An orientation to the library/circulation
Training from experienced students
Daily Emails
Periodic testing on circulation tasks
Lessons/Modules/Videos on important topics
Other (please specify)
4. I feel that students need ___ training than what is currently offered to do their job
correctly.
More About the same Less
5. The experienced students understand how to ____ and need no more training on it.
Use Millennium
Shelve
Interpret Library policy (as concerns patrons)
Interpret Library policy (as concerns student workers)
Perform good Customer service
Operate library equipment (printers, ect.)
Open/Close the library
Other (please specify)
6. All students need more help in:
Use Millennium
Shelve
Interpret Library policy (as concerns patrons)
Interpret Library policy (as concerns student workers)
Perform good Customer service
Operate library equipment (printers, ect.)
Open/Close the library
Other (please specify)
7. Do you have any other comments about how the students are trained?
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 61
Appendix 5 Task Analysis Flow Chart
Determine location
using call # Check in Receive material
TMC Stacks Reserve Brow-
sing
ILL Gov
Doc
Referenc
e
Double
Check
in
Double
Check
in
Double
Check
in
Stacks
Cart
Stacks
Cart
Browsin
g Cart ILL
Cart
Gov Doc
Shelf
Referenc
e Shelf Reserve
Shelf
Alpha by
professor
/class
Alpha by
type
then
section
DONE!
Dewey
Call #
Take to
TMC
shelving
cart
Place on
reshelve
cart
Place on
reshelve
cart
By call
number Double
Check
in
DONE! DONE!
Place
on
Place
on
Place
on
Place
on
Place
on
Place
on
Place
on
Blue
Shelf in
Reference
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 62
DVD
CD
Videogam
e
Book Periodic
al
Graphic
Novel
Audioboo
k
Newspap
er
Take to
LL and
shelve
Dewey
DONE!
2nd
3rd
Lower
Level
Baseme
nt
Oversiz
e A-HE
B
Microfo
rms
Bound
Journal
s
Thesis
A-LB
L-Z Oversiz
e PR-Z
Oversiz
e K-Q
Oversiz
e HF-JZ Library
of
Congress
Shelve DONE!
DONE! Alpha Shelve
Take to
section
By floor
then LC
Take to
appropri
-ate
floor
Alpha by
type
then
section
Shelve
By
genre/
system
then
alpha
DONE! Library
of
Congress
DONE!
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 63
Appendix 6 Declarative Game
Shelve that material! For the timekeeper
This game was created for the Cunningham Memorial Library (CML) in Indiana State
University. This game aims to test the sorting and shelving knowledge of students after they
have received instruction on the topic. Rules and materials are based on the CML, but were
written to facilitate all libraries with only minor calibrations needed. Because each library has
their own idiosyncrasies in shelving system and location, the responsibility is on the instructor to
create the materials for this game. Feel free to alter the rules as meets the needs of your library.
Please keep in mind, the focus of this game is to create a link between the material being
shelved, and the location and system in which it is done.
Creating the “shelves”
In an ideal situation you would use the materials in the library to accurately simulate the
task of shelving. Most likely, that is not feasible. This is a fast paced game that will get your
students excited, and may result in damage to items in the collection. Therefore, dummies can
be used as a stand in. Old clam shell boxes, a list of call numbers on a chalk/white/smart board,
binders, anything that is easy for you to get a hold of will work. It should be noted, however,
that a large range should be created for each shelving section. It doesn’t have to span the
alphabet for LC, but should prove a challenge, forcing your players to shelve into the Cutter
number. You should create a range that can handle as many teams as you are likely to have for
the activity. 4 “books” to 1 team should be a sufficient ratio to give the teams a good challenge.
These dummies can be less detailed than the item dummies, but the call number should be easily
visible as the focus here is on shelving not sorting.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 64
Creating the shelving items
As all the teams are going to use one central area, each dummy item should be assigned
to a team. Color coding, numbers, letters, or team names should be used to prevent confusion
and aid in assigning penalties. As with creating the shelves anything you have on hand can be
used to create the dummies. Note cards, card stock, or laminated pages are suggested so students
can easily place the item on the shelf. Each dummy should have the same sorting identifiers as a
normal item. If the sticker on the biographies is green, it should be the same on the dummy. If
ILL’s have a band around the cover, so should the dummy. Each section should have one
representation that players must shelve. You could also choose to weight the number of items
for each section based on your circulation numbers, for example, having 4 DVD examples but
only one microfiche.
While the students will be using the same shelving areas, it is not recommended that each
team get the same set of material to shelve. They will be getting the items at different spots in
their stack and observant/crafty students could take advantage of previous team’s attempts and
put them in the same place. Each player should have to examine their item and make their own
decision of where they go.
Creating the play area
You may need a considerable amount of space to do this activity. The goal is to get the
students up and hustling. The most energetic may choose speed over accuracy, while others
might choose the opposite. Take into account the energy level of your students before creating
the game area. Another factor in planning should be accessibility. Teams will be crossing paths
during the activity, but no team should have better paths to the “shelves” than others.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 65
Each area where items are shelved should be clearly defined. The example map included
in this material divides the game area by floor then into specific sections. Have the clear signage
to denote areas or have players walk around the area to familiarize themselves before they start.
Bookcarts, tables, areas of chalkboard, ect. can be used to create shelving sections. To avoid
injury items should be able to be shelved from a standing position.
Figure A 1: Game area
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 66
Shelve that Material! For the players
Requires:
2+ teams of ~4
Time Keeper(s)
Stopwatch(s)
“Shelves”
“Items”
To play:
Each team starts at their “desk” with a stack of “items” to shelve next to them. Players are
not allowed to look at the cards before time starts. When time starts players should cross the line
and pick up an item. Once the player has decided where the item is shelved they should move to
the appropriate area and shelve the item. Players are allowed to consult with their teammates,
but only behind the starting line. Once the player has the item shelved, they should move back to
the starting area and tag the next member of their team. Once all the items have been shelved the
final member should rejoin their team and yell “Done” to stop their time.
Rules:
Safety first! Intentional physical interference (tripping, bumping, grabbing, blocking) of
other team’s members will result in a 20 second penalty. Verbal misdirection is allowed.
Each item between the correct shelving place and where the book was shelved will result
in a 2 second penalty per item.
Books shelved in the wrong section will results in a 5 second penalty.
Books placed on an incorrect floor will result in a 10 second penalty.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 67
All areas should be clearly displayed. There should be no errors from confusion of
layout. If this happens a credit based on severity can be given by the time keeper at
his/her discretion. This credit cannot exceed 30 seconds total.
Players who look at their “items” before the time starts will have to reshuffle their cards.
If the time keeper believes the player was deliberately seeking an advantage they can
place a penalty of up to 1 minute on the team.
Each member of the team must participate in taking an item from the “desk” to the
shelves.
Players are allowed to ask help from the team before attempting to shelve an item.
However, they must stand behind the start line to consult. 2 reminders will be given by
the time keeper. After the third the team will face a 10 second penalty for every offense.
Optional Rules:
A handicap of up to 1 minute (decided by the time keeper) may be added to any team that
has a disproportionate amount of new hires.
Obstacles in the form of “patrons” may be added at the discretion of the time keeper to
increase the level of difficulty. The player will have to answer the patron’s question
correctly before shelving the material. If the player doesn’t know the answer they can
choose to consult with team members back at the desk. If the player does not answer
correctly after 3 tries, they can choose to pass with a 15 second penalty.
If the need for multiple time keepers arises, the players may elect a head time keeper to
officiate all disputes on penalties.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 68
How to win:
When a team reaches the end of their items they must say “done” to receive their time.
The Time Keeper will yell the time and write it down. Penalties will be addressed after all teams
have completed shelving. The team with the fastest time wins. In the event of a tie the team
with the least number of errors wins.
Score Card
Base Time:
Penalties Seconds Modifier x Occurrences
Wrong Place +2
Wrong Section +5
Wrong Floor +10
Patron +15
Violations
Physical Interference +20
Cheating 1x only.
Max. 60 seconds
Line Violation +10 after 2nd offense
Credits
Area Confusion 1x only.
Max. 30 seconds
New Hire 1x only.
Max. 60 seconds
Total Time Number of penalties
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 69
Appendix 7 Creating a New Resident Card
1. Begin by requesting the patron’s driver’s license and having the patron fill out the
Change of Address/Social Security Form.
a. While they are filling out the form you should turn on the laminator and
retrieve a blank resident card and barcode from the box in the DVD drawer.
b. When the patron is done filling out the form have them sign and date their
card underneath the clear plastic cover. Then stick the barcode underneath
the cover in the box.
2. In Millennium, click the “New” button which is the first icon at the top.
3. Then select “iresident: ISU Resident”, and either hit “Select” or double click
your selection.
4. After that will be a series of fields to fill in. Click “Next” after you have fully filled
out the field or “Cancel New Record Creation” to end the creation process. (Only the
first field has been shown for brevity, a complete record is show below.)
5. a. Name: should be entered as LastName, FirstName Initial
b. Address: first line should be street, apartment number, second should be city,
state zipcode
c. Email: should be the current email
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 70
d. Telephone: enter the whole number with area code and no spaces. When you
have done this correctly the font will change to black.
e. Barcode: will be the entire number, without spaces, of the barcode you
attached to the resident card.
i. After you enter the number Millennium will say it is invalid and will
ask you to click to accept the number. This is natural just click “Yes”.
ii. Make sure you have recorded the barcode on the Change of
Address/Social Security Form
6. After you have fully filled out the information double check the record for accuracy.
Then save by clicking “Save/Close”, or “Cancel” to stop the process.
7. Now that the record has been created, laminate the card by placing it in the foil
carrier. Then run the carrier through the laminator.
a. You may have to push the card through at first, but eventually the machine
will autofeed the carrier.
b. It may take multiple runs to fully complete the lamination process.
8. Now that you have a completed card you can check out the patron’s materials or
turn them loose to put their new borrowing privileges to use.
9. Lastly, make sure you have signed the Change of Address/Social Security Form
before turning in the form to the billing clerk.
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 71
Appendix 8 Evaluation Pretest
Overview
In this lesson you will be taught how to look at library materials for clues that will help
you in shelving. To start the lesson we will use the following packet to see what you already
know. You will see these same examples again at the end of the lesson, so that you can see how
much you’ve improved.
Objectives
Students will learn how to use the PCCS mnemonic to examine library materials for
shelving information contained on the cover.
Instructions
The following packet contains examples of common items that need to be shelved.
Please circle/label/mark any part of the example that will help you. Feel free to use the “Notes”
section as you see fit.
Name: _________________________________________________________________
How long have you worked in circulation? ____________________________________
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 72
Notes:
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 73
Notes:
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 74
Notes:
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 75
Notes:
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 76
Notes:
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 77
Notes:
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 78
Appendix 9 Evaluation PowerPoint
Recognizing identifiers
Andrea Boehme
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 79
Appendix 10 Survey Backend with Results
Designing Instruction for the Cunningham Memorial Library 80
References
Comer, A. (2003). Searching for Solutions Supervising Student Employees. Journal of Access
Services, 1(4), 103-113.
Kerr, B. A., & Dell, D. M. (1976). Perceived interviewer expertness and attractiveness: Effects
of interviewer behavior and attire and interview setting. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 23(6), 553-556. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.23.6.553
Hubble, M. A., & Gelso, C. J. (1978). Effect of counselor attire in an initial interview. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 25(6), 581-584. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.25.6.581
Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., & Kemp, J. E. (2011). Designing effective instruction (6th
ed.).
Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Smith, P. L. & Ragan, T. J. (2005). Instructional design (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley &
Sons, Inc.
All images contained in this work were created by the author.
Credit for the original artwork that inspired the simulated covers is copyright of their artist. The
author of this work takes no credit for the work of Tim O’Brien (Hunger Games) or Larry
Rostant (Dance with Dragons).
Screenshots were taken using Snag-it and manipulated by the author of this work.
All instructional materials including PowerPoints and games were created by the author of this
work.