skip to main content
Indiana University

Bloomington Campus bridge
Indianapolis Canal

Standard II: Curriculum

Appendix 2.1: CSC Meeting Minutes

February 10, 2006

Draft Minutes of the SLIS Curriculum Steering Committee, February 10, 2006

Present: Danny Callison, Noriko Hara, Krystie Herndon, Sarah Horowitz, Susan Maguire, Anne Marie Mosher, Pnina Shachaf, Ralf Shaw, and Julie Zamostny.

Regrets: Heather Coates, Tim McIlvain

1. Committee members approved the minutes of the October 19 meeting.

2. L401 - waiver option: Committee members agreed with the recommendation to remove announcements of the L401 waiver. Incoming students who have technical background would be expected to contact the instructor if they believe they have the requisite knowledge (just as with any other course).

Student members of the committee expressed some concerns that the level or performance required to waive L401 is higher than what is learned in the course.

3. L401 as three 1-credit courses (402, 403, 404?): The suggestion to divide L401 into three separate, one-credit courses is a response to the problem of students who complete the first three or four modules well, but fail one at the end of the semester. Because they cannot withdraw from the course, they end up with three credits of “F.” Taking the L402-L404 series would recognize accomplishment of each aspect of the course. Mark Napier has been thinking of these modules:
1. Computing in a networked environment/Online searching
2. Unix and Database
3. HTML
The committee generally approved the idea and encouraged Mark to present proposals for the three courses and meet with the CSC. These would require campus remonstrance and review, so implementation would take some time.

Committee members expressed other concerns about L401:
low or variable quality of instruction
overlap with online searching instruction in L524
differing levels of student background/preparation (would it be possible to have an accelerated or online options for advanced students?)
UITS - STEPS class on database provides better coverage of this topic
update the Web design section: cover XHTML and CSS, drop static HTML tagging Some L401 content could be covered in the orientation to SLIS (before classes begin)

4. Course renumbering - discussion of the revised proposal: Committee members had several suggestion, which will be incorporated into the next version.

5. Career objectives for advising: Suggestions for this document will be incorporated and the revised version circulated for comment to the MIS and MLS program advisors.

March 28, 2006

Draft Minutes of the SLIS Curriculum Steering Committee, March 28, 2006

Present: Danny Callison, Heather Coates, Noriko Hara, Krystie Herndon, Sarah Horowitz, Susan Maguire , Tim McIlvain, Pnina Shachaf, Ralf Shaw.

Regrets: Anne Marie Mosher, Julie Zamostny

1. Committee members approved the minutes of the February 10 meeting.

2. Kenneth Crews’s proposal for a summer workshop on Copyright and Intellectual Property for Information Professionals was reviewed. The committee recommends that Dr. Crews consider scholarly communication and institutional repositories as one of the areas of application. We also suggest that he either reduce the percentage of the grade determined by class participation (to the more customary 10%) or provide examples of the criteria he will use/how this will be structured and evaluated. Given the uneven workloads of summer sessions, we encourage him to make the readings at least two weeks before the workshop, if possible. With these amendments, the committee approved the workshop proposal.

3.The IUB master’s students will conduct a student open meeting on SLIS curricula and courses. The Indianapolis students will need some more time to get organized; they may have a similar meeting in the fall.

4. The meeting adjourned at 4:30 to allow the student members time to plan for the open meeting.

January 31, 2007

SLIS Curriculum Steering Committee
Draft minutes of the January 31, 2007 meeting

Present: Rachel Applegate, Noriko Hara, Lokman Meho, Ralf Shaw

The faculty members of the committee agreed to recruit student five student members representing various constituencies:
IUB MLS (Julie Zamostny has agreed to continue to serve)
IUPUI MLS (Rachel will identify a student)
MIS (Heather Beery has agreed to serve)
Dual MIS/MLS (Emily Ford has agreed to serve)
Doctoral students (Jonathan Warren has agreed to continue to serve)

The proposed Digital Libraries Specialization was amended to 1) require the information architecture course as part of the MIS foundation (and remove it from the list of electives) and 2) remove the Human-Computer Interaction course as a foundations option and include it only in the list of electives.

The committee reviewed and approved (with minor changes) summer workshops related to digital libraries on:
Archival Practice and Encoded Archival Descriptions (EAD)
Metadata Object Description Schema (MODS)
Digitizing for Libraries

The committee approved the proposal for a dual MLS and MA in African Studies

April 5, 2007

SLIS Curriculum Steering Committee
Draft minutes of the April 5, 2007 meeting

Present: Heather Beery, Emily Ford, Noriko Hara, Lokman Meho, Ralf Shaw, Jonathan Warren, Julie Zamostny
Regrets: Rachel Applegate

The committee approved the following summer II workshops and topics course with suggestions to the instructors:
L595 Workshop on Text in the Digital Library - Tamara Lopez
L595 Workshop on Search Engine marketing - Pat East
L597 Topics: Libraries Bridging the Digital Divide - Wayne Buente

The committee approved a permanent course number, S585, for Records management, taught by Carol Choksy.

The IUB master’s students on the committee will coordinate a student open forum on the curriculum and prepare a report for the committee.

September 25, 2007

Curriculum Advisory Committee Meeting

I. Revision of Rare Books Specialization Proposal:
• This specialization would require students to take more credit hours from already existing classes
What is the course availability? Will students actually be able to take all the classes necessary for the specialization during their time here? -Yes.
• The proposal should say up front that the specialization will be 18 credits

• Make the following requirements for Rare Books Specialization:
S583 + S605 (internship) + 12 credits for Rare Books + 15 MLS foundation credits + 1 elective = 36 credits
-this will weed out the people only moderately interested in rare books
• S583 does not teach management principles—consider changing the MLS curriculum: S583 should count as an elective, and students still need to take another management class (S551?) to fulfill MLS requirements.
Another management class could teach students standard management principles while S583 teaches exceptions to the standard principles.
• Management is an ALA requirement—would just taking S583 meet that requirement?
-No
• Rare Book Cataloging Course is a possible offering in the future.

Committee recommendation: require students in a Rare Books concentration to take another management class in addition to S583.

Next action: Joel Silver will submit a revised copy, which will be distributed to faculty. The revision of Rare Books Specialization will be voted at the faculty meeting in October.

II. Committee Suggestion: MLS needs reviewing/revising
• Need to speak to Indianapolis faculty

• Open meetings should be held

• Assessment of student learning outcomes—we do not have a structure to do that If we consider revising the MLS curriculum, we should also come up with methods to assess student learning outcomes at the same time. We will need the results of the assessment next time ALA accreditation comes up.
Portfolio approach—take existing assignments from classes, and say, “this project shows that students have learned this topic.” Should there be a portfolio assessment for each student before they get their degree?

Or instructors (especially of core courses) could submit reports and/or students’ projects for assessment because it doesn’t matter about individual students learning so much—It is more about strengths and weaknesses of the program.

Also—we could possibly use student publications (although that highlights strengths and ignores weaknesses)

In addition, we could keep statistics: students participating in conferences, etc.
• Consider doing a similar assessment for MIS as well as MLS

III. Issue: Maximum number of credits a student can take in a semester
• There is a system-wide limit of 18 credits per semester (because of undergrads)
• Should we put it in the Bulletin saying students cannot take more than 15 credits without advisor approval, even though technically nothing stops students from taking 18?

There is no system to catch someone who takes too many credits, and we cannot change that.

• The rule for the summer sessions right now is 6 for the entire summer, which often gets overridden.

• Is it posted somewhere where students can see that 9 credits is considered full time for grad school? It should be, if it is not. Full-time status is important for financial aid and loans

• Should this be a case-by-case issue? -Yes.

Committee Recommendation: Emphasize it at orientation; Make sure that it is mentioned in the acceptance letter from the Indianapolis campus.
Students are not penalized financially if they drop in the first week of class

IV. Things to come
• Noriko to call an open meeting on behalf of this committee after speaking to Tom
Another meeting, based in Indianapolis, will probably be necessary too

• Future meeting times:
October 16, 4-5 p.m.
November 20, 4-5 p.m.
December 11, 4-5 p.m. (back-up)

Plan to finish all the work so that the December meeting does not need to happen; Lokman cannot be here at that time.

• Look for student representatives (Jonathan for PhD student representative?)
• Four (possible?) course proposals to consider: 3-credit summer course on PHP, special topics on Health Science, GIS, and Agent-Based Modeling.

October 16, 2007

Meeting Minutes of the SLIS Curriculum Steering Committee, October 16, 2007 Present: Noriko Hara, Ralf Shaw, Rachel Applegate, Lokman Meho, Jonathan Warren, Emily Mitchell, Andrew Tawfik, Haley Netherton

1. Committee members present introduced themselves and discussed posting the committee’s membership online so that anyone with curriculum-related concerns would know who to address those concerns to.

2. Recap/approval of September 25 meeting.

3. The committee discussed Hamid Ekbia’s proposal for S603: Modeling GIS. Committee members discussed the course description, grading, and course prerequisites. The proposed course was approved.

4. The committee discussed Hamid Ekbia’s proposal for an Agent-Based Modeling Techniques class. Concerns raised include: prerequisites, grading, whether a practical skills class like this should be taught before the course covering the theory involved, and whether the course should use Java instead of Python. The proposal was approved with recommendations to consider a course in programming (e.g., Kiduk Yang’s S517) or instructor permission as prerequisites, and to rewrite the proposal more definitely on matters including the course textbook.

5. Next meeting to be held November 20.

November 20, 2007

Meeting Minutes for the SLIS Curriculum Steering Committee, November 20, 2007

Present: Noriko Hara, Rachel Applegate, Jonathan Warren, Andrew Tawfik, Haley Netherton

1. Committee approved October 16 meeting minutes.

2. S604: The Philosophy and Critical Theory of Information

The committee discussed Ron Day’s S604 course proposal. Some commented that this course would be useful for students, but the committee made a number of recommendations:
1. Possibly have S510 be a prerequisite. For example, the topic for class 6, Social Informatics, is covered in S510. The syllabus needs to state course goals and objectives.
2. Provide some description as to why the issues selected for this course were chosen
3. Write a few lines about each topic, which will give students better ideas about this course (this could help recruit students)
a. III. European Documentation and Class 14 - possibly some clarification as to how the titles were tied together to elucidate the theme
4. Citations for readings should be completed.
5. p. 5. “Student Assignments” might be better titled “Student Assessment” or “Evaluation.”
a. Move the attendance requirement to this section (from Class 14); consider wording such as “consistent, constructive contributions to class discussion.”
6. Assignments: possibly include guidelines for ‘how to lead a class’ and guidelines for the paper, possibly introduce a midterm paper/test so students can receive feedback and understand expectations, and possibly include a presentation of an individual paper as a requirement at the end of the semester.
7. Grades: add detailed description of each assignment and how it will be evaluated, need to specify grade distribution by class activity or requirements.
8. Description for academic integrity was very brief, but the penalty for academic integrity seemed to be very harsh. Possibly provide some background and/or details.
9. Overall suggestions were to add a details and description of the course and assignments so students could have a better idea of the topics and course requirements.

The committee requested to review a revised proposal before approval.

3. S601/S604: CTELP Leadership Forum

The committee discussed Kathy Schilling’s S604 course proposal. The committee made a number of recommendations:

Suggestions:
1. Course number: S604 can be taken more than once so there is no need to say that it can be S601 or S604
2. It appears that the course syllabus includes both CTELP and S604. Need to separate what aspects are part of course and what aspects are part of the overall program
a/ Seems to be contradiction/confusion between assignments listed on page 5 or page 6 See #3 below
3. Coarse Goals and Objectives
a. P. 4. “Communicate (verbally and in writing) more effectively as a leader.”
i. Should be changed to “orally” as opposed to “verbally”
ii. Possibly need some clarification how they are communicating orally [perhaps in a residency program?]
b. Clarify how they are managing conflicts
i. It was noted that this may come up during the shadowing Suggestion was to separate course and residency
4. It is not clear why the leadership models presented here were the best models for this type of class. Possibly add justification for it.
5. Grades:
a. Some discussions regarding 30% participation (a little too much). It was noted during the meeting that the seminar setting would justify the 30%.
i. Possibly qualify the sub-assignments (e.g., online discussion forum participation, weekly team activity participation, etc.) to make it more substantive and measurable
ii. Change to a conference paper rather than a conference abstract
b. Job Hunting assignment may not be very challenging for master’s level. If it is an assignment, the percentage may be too high.
c. This differentiates from other management classes because other courses teach how they will be managed. S604 tries to groom others to be mentors
6. p. 8. first bullet point. “being pleasant in” seems redundant. It would be difficult to participate otherwise.

There was a question about the timing of eligibility. However, it was noted that the time commitment and logistics involved makes it almost a requirement that students quit their current jobs to join the program. In essence, it would be nearly impossible for students to take this prior to the end of their course.

A comment was made to possibly add some onsite residencies to cover materials. However, it was noted in the meeting that it was not possible because students may be scattered over the state.

The committee requested to review a revised proposal before approval. The next meeting is canceled, but the decisions/comments regarding the revised proposals will be made via e-mail.

February 28, 2008

Draft minutes of the SLIS Curriculum Steering Committee
February 28, 2008

Present: Rachel Applegate, Noriko Hara, Andrew Tawfik, Haley Netherton, Emily Mitchell

I. Committee approved November 20 meeting minutes.

II. The committee discussed Hamid Ekbia’s S603 course proposal: Modeling and Simulation of Social and Organizational Behavior. The committee made a number of recommendations:
A. Shorten the course rationale and the course description.
B. Make sure that all content mentioned in the course description is actually covered in the course (see F below)
C. Consider making Project 2 smaller pieces.
D. Change prerequisites to 510 instead of 501.
E. Mention the summer course in the course description and make clear how much (if any) overlap there will be between the two. Consider focusing entirely on modeling, instead of including Field Study, etc., as class topics. Students could be given data sets, instead of collect data from the field.
F. Assignment due dates should be specified.

The committee tentatively approved the proposal with suggested revisions.

III. The committee discussed Mike Casey’s course proposal: Audio Preservation Principles and Practices. The committee made some recommendations:
A. This course should have no prerequisites (as it is stated in the course proposal). The proposal should include information about a course textbook, since it looks like one will be required. The matter of getting the SLIS information commons to license the proper software should be looked into.
B. The time for the final exam should be listed in the course syllabus.

The committee approved the proposal with minor revisions.

IV. The committee discussed the student open meeting.
A. Haley should consider setting up a survey on OnCourse for IUPUI students, instead of holding an open meeting. The meeting in Bloomington needs to be held by Emily and Andrew after spring break. V. Future Meetings (tentative):
Friday, March 28, from 3:30-4:30
Thursday, April 17, from 3:30-4:30

March 28, 2008

Draft Minutes of the SLIS Curriculum Steering Committee

Present: Jonathan Warren, Rachel Applegate, Noriko Hara, Emily Mitchell, Andrew Tawfik, Howard Rosenbaum, Lokman Meho

I. Committee approved February 28 minutes.

II. The committee discussed the Student Open Forum on Curriculum, which was held on March 20.
A. Lokman and Noriko to distribute a more succinct version of Open Forum notes to other faculty.

III. The committee discussed S603 Podcasting Workshop for summer II, and made some suggestions:
A. 5% of students’ grade is missing from the syllabus and should be clarified.
B. A more cross-platform program than iMovies would be desirable.
The committee approved the course proposal with minor revisions.

IV. The committee discussed S603 Rare Book Cataloging for summer II, and made some suggestions:
A. The workload described on the syllabus is too great for a workshop, and should be reduced.
The committee approved the course proposal, with suggestion for reduced reading load.

V. The committee discussed S603 Teaching and Learning at a Distance, and made some recommendations:
A. Prerequisites for this workshop should be Information Architecture for the Web, or permission of the instructor.
B. Online references should be provided in the course syllabus.
The committee approved the course proposal with minor revisions.

VI. The next meeting of the CSC will be Thursday, April 17, from 3:30-4:30, conditional upon the committee’s receiving further course proposals to review.

September 19, 2008

Meeting Minutes for the SLIS Curriculum Steering Committee, September 19, 2008 at 3:45pm, room LI036
Present: Noriko Hara, Lokman Meho, Howard Rosenbaum, Rachel Applegate, Inna Kouper, Mateo Palos, Jessica Moad

The agenda for the meeting will be:

1. introduction of all the members
2. overview of the items that we need to discuss this academic year
3. plan for the rest of the semester
SLIS Long Range Planning Goals, 2008-2009

Goal #1: Develop a process for student outcome assessment
Tasks: Review options and instruments, evaluate the relative merits and associated costs of different approaches; take account of COA standards; make recommendations.
Responsibility: Curriculum Steering Committee (CSC)

Goal #2: Develop Digital Libraries specializations
Tasks: Review course content/sequencing; analyze market opportunities; develop promotional materials.
Responsibility: MIS & MLS directors; Director, DL Specializations; CSC; Director of Admissions.

Goal #3: Clarify commitment to continuing education
Tasks: Assess the demand for continuing education provision of different kinds; assess delivery capabilities and scale of commitment.
Responsibility: Associate deans; CSC; FPC

  • Develop Process for Student Outcome
    • Identify what options are available
    • Provides presentations
  • Develop Library Specializations
    • IMLS funding for Digital Libraries
    • Review the Digital Libraries specialization
    • Future meeting with John Walsh
    • Discuss Digital Library Specialization at student open meeting or through e-mail participation
  • Commitment to Continuing Education
    • Graduate certificate possibility
    • Joel Silver’s plans for new workshops
      • Past difficulties the process of in charging for seminars/workshops
      • Charge of $900-1200 to attend seminar/workshops
      • Joel discussing with Music school, because they have a similar program (Howard will meet with Joel next week to discuss his findings)
      • SLIS only deals with the course (Possibly 3 credit experience?)
      • A need to discuss the most cost effective model to deal with the workshops
  • Student Outcome Assessment
    • Evaluations of entire program
    • 3 basic ways to do program evaluation
      • Exam
      • Thesis or final paper
      • Draw evidence from stuff students are already doing
        • Student Learning Goals
        • Electronic Portfolio
          • Workshop about Electronic Portfolios at IUPUI soon- to be attended
          • Extra work for faculty
          • Each faculty member gets assigned to look at 10 portfolios and look at patterns to review for weaknesses
            • Best if 2 faculty members look at each portfolio
          • A graduation requirement but use things from classes
          • Useful for the next ALA accreditation
          • Portfolios graded by advisors?
          • Portfolios are good for internal proofing
          • Better to turn things in online with all professor’s notes or grade information on papers (for ALA)
          • Rachel distributed a summary of assessment tools and supported Portfolios
            • Study findings:
              • 13 schools required comprehensive exams
              • 13 exam or thesis
              • 7 required a thesis
              • 3 had portfolio or artifact
    • Question of Doctorate Students Participation in CSC Introduced by Meho
      • DSC handles doctorate curriculum
      • A doctorate student participates in CSC for experience, because she teaches, for her input
    • Future Scheduling
      • October 15, 2:30-3:30pm next meeting
      • Digital Libraries (with John Walsh)
        • Two Proposals
          • November 14, 4-5pm
          • December 12, 4-5pm
    • Action Items:
      • Members need to send questions to Rachel regarding the student outcome assessment.
      • Rachel will share her findings at the end of the semester

Minutes taken by Jessica Moad

October 15, 2008

Meeting Minutes for the SLIS Curriculum Steering Committee, October 15, 2008 at 2:30pm, room LI036
Present: Noriko Hara, Lokman Meho, Howard Rosenbaum, Rachel Applegate, Inna Kouper, Shelley Rich, Mateo Palos, Jessica Moad

Agenda:
1. Discussion of Digital Libraries specialization
2. “Introduction to Rare Books and Manuscripts” course proposal from Joel Silver
3. 621 Online Version course proposal from Monique Threatt
4. Ajax workshop proposal from Jonathan Tweedy

1. Digital Libraries Specialization discussion with John Walsh (in attendance):

  • A discussion of the possible revisions to features of the DL specialization introduced by John Walsh included:
    • Updating the SLIS website pertaining to the DL specialization
    • Adding course requirements
    • Possibly requiring an internship
    • Formal admission to the specialization
    • The question of how much flexibility or electives should remain
  • Committee members made several recommendations: Replacing S561 on the DL Specialization web page, which has not been offered recently
    • The possibility of offering different electives for different career paths
    • Requiring more technical courses for MLS students and more librarianship courses for MIS students
    • Research competing programs for examples of requirements and electives

2. Joel Silver’s “Introduction to Rare Books and Manuscripts” Proposal

  • Committee members requested this action:
    • Determine if the course is required for the Rare Books Specialization
  • Recommendations by the committee:
    • Change the course number to a topic number instead of a workshop number

Decision: The course is approved by all committee members

3. S621 Online Version Proposal

  • General information about the course discussed:
    • First online course at Bloomington; would be beneficial to evaluation of future online courses
  • Questions raised by committee members:
    • Is the syllabus too focused on film?
    • Can an updated version of the 2002 text be acquired?
  • Committee members requested this action:
    • Identify if Threatt has taught classroom based S621 previously
  • Recommendations by the committee:
    • Changes to wording regarding the use of Oncourse
    • Drop “publishable paper”
    • Clarify the Unit 5 Recommended and Supplemental Reading to determine if any reading is required
    • Change the prerequisite of 520, because it has not been offered recently, to 501
    • Discuss objectives in the syllabus
    • Possibly change the exclusive emphasis on writing assignments to include different types of assignments as well
    • Determine if the assignments overlap with the Collection Development course

Decision: Inform Threatt of questions and recommendations by the committee and require a new proposal

4. Workshop for Ajax S603

  • General information about the course discussed:
    • Counts toward programming requirement for MIS (1.5 credits)
  • Questions raised by committee members:
    • Is there any overlap with other courses?
    • Is the course specifically for LIS students? Is the course similar to S561?
  • Recommendations by the committee:
    • S532 (or a discussion with the professor) should be the only requirement

Decision: Approved with minor revisions
Future Scheduling:
Meeting with John Walsh
Continuing education discussion

Minutes taken by Jessica Moad

November 14, 2008

Meeting Minutes for the SLIS Curriculum Steering Committee, November 14, 2008 at 4:00pm, room LI036
Present: Noriko Hara, Lokman Meho, Howard Rosenbaum, Rachel Applegate, Inna Kouper, Shellie Rich, Mateo Palos, Jessica Moad

Agenda:
I. Continuing education discussion Summary of Continuing Education in ALA accredited education programs
II. Discussion of Rhonda Spencer’s Suggestions
III. Discussion of current opportunities for continuing education at IUB’s SLIS Goals:
Assess the demand for the various continuing education provisions
Assess delivery capabilities and scale of commitment

I. Continuing Education (CE) Discussed:
The Faculty Policy Council (FPC) is also discussing CE
Summary of CE research findings included:
General focus of target audience, courses required, numbers of online and face-to-face programs

II. Committee members discussed Rhonda Spencer’s suggestions

  • Questions raised by the committee members:
    • Can one or two workshops be implemented?
    • Should workshops be bundled?
    • Should the workshops be one credit hour or remain 1.5 credit hours?
      • Previously discontinued one credit hour courses due to difficulty for students to complete credit hour requirements
    • How would this affect non-credit and credit seeking students? Instructor’s credentials and charges?
  • Recommendations by the committee:
    • If a plan is developed, possible implementation in Summer 2008
    • 1.5 credit hours per workshop
  • Discussion of offering Courses Online Development can be difficult
    • Development funds from campus are available Lacking demand from residents on Bloomington campus
    • Could offer GCIA online for non-residential students Questions raised by the committee members:
    • Is there a sufficient market? IUPUI currently has online courses – Advertise these?
    • Hybrid courses an option?
  • Recommendations by the committee:
    • Development of an online course could provide doctoral students with academic credits and experience

III. Committee members discussed current opportunities for CE at SLIS

• Possible Content: Rare Books or Archives Previously consulted with Joel Silver Issues are attendance numbers and payment options

  • Questions raised by the committee members:
    • Interest in non-credit options?
    • 15 credits or more required for financial aid, other sources of aid available?
    • Application fees for non-degree seeking students? (Yes)
  • Recommendations by the committee:
    • Summer institutes
  • Public Library Certification
    • Marilyn Irwin consulted CE credits are currently required
      • The number of credits depend on certificate level Record keeping the responsibility of the participants
    • Credits much be achieved every five years
  • Questions raised by the committee members:
    • How should SLIS compete and advertise?
  • Recommendations by the committee:
    • Advertise with the State Library & ILF
      • Create a webpage for continuing education Begin with courses IU SLIS currently offers

Future Scheduling:
1. Meeting with John Walsh to discuss Digital Libraries
2. Discuss student outcome assessment
Action Items:
1.Discuss CE with FPC
a. Determine if CSC needs to review CE again
b. Ask about scale of commitment
2. Send questions to Rachel regarding student outcome assessment at least one week before the next meeting

Minutes taken by Jessica Moad

February 11, 2009

Meeting Minutes for the SLIS Curriculum Steering Committee, February 11th, 2009 at 2:00pm, room LI001
Present: Noriko Hara, Howard Rosenbaum, Lokman Meho, Rachel Applegate, Inna Kouper, Shellie Rich, Mateo Palos, Jessica Moad

Agenda:
1. Approve minutes of Nov 14 meeting
Course proposals
2. S621: by Monique Threatt
3. S603: Emerging technologies in library by Patrick Patterson
4. S604: Branch Librarianship by Stephanie Gaston
5. Student open meeting planning
6. Student outcome assessment
7. Schedule meetings for the spring semester

1. Meeting Minutes from November 14th Approved by committee members

Course Proposals:

2. S621: by Monique Threatt
· Postponed for future review due to need for further revision

3. S603: Emerging technologies in library by Patrick Patterson

  • General information about the course discussed
  • Questions raised by committee members:
    • Elaboration needed on assignments?
    • Are the Blog assignments too light?
    • #5 on objectives, p. 1 – Is this implied in previous bullets?
    • Why an emphasis on Google maps for librarians? Could instead compare and contrast mapping technologies or focus on other technologies such as LibraryThing?
    • Who is the target audience for this course?
  • Recommendations by the committee:
    • More detail about the assignments Added complexity for the technology assignments
    • Remove 5th bullet on objectives
    • Demonstrate how Google maps is significant for the course
    • Add readings to those without
  • Decision: Review proposal again after revisions are made

4. S604: Branch Librarianship by Stephanie Gaston

  • General information about the course discussed
  • Questions raised by committee members:
    • Information on academic and special libraries applicable?
  • Recommendations by the committee:
    • A more descriptive course description
    • Remove information on academic and special libraries
  • Decision: Approved with minor revisions

5. Student open meeting planning

  • Invite SLIS masters students to talk about curriculum issues
  • Action Items:
    • Make fliers and invitations, set up room with Mary Kennedy, obtain refreshments, etc.
    • Create an option for students to comment through e-mail
    • Conduct before Spring Break
  • Recommendations by the committee:
    • Comments about instructors should be suggested as placed in course evaluations
    • Make a list of open-ended questions

6. Student outcome assessment

  • General information about assessment plan discussed
  • Matrix provided through Oncourse
  • Matrix edited by individual students to include uploaded projects Program reflections also submitted
  • Must be a graduation requirement
  • Further information regarding requirements are included in document
  • Comments by the committee:
    • Criteria and examples of requirements must be provided

7. Future Scheduling

  • Thursday, March 5, 9:30am John Walsh to discuss Digital Libraries Specialization Rachel Applegate to continue discussion of Student Outcome Assessment
  • Thursday, April 2, 9:30am

Action Items:

  • Noriko will send a copy of previous student open meeting information to current student representatives
  • Student representatives will plan and implement the student open meeting

Minutes taken by Jessica Moad

March 5, 2009

Meeting Minutes for the SLIS Curriculum Steering Committee, March 5, 2009 at 9:30am, room LI036
Present: Noriko Hara, Howard Rosenbaum, Lokman Meho, Rachel Applegate, Inna Kouper, Mateo Palos, Jessica Moad
Not in attendance: Shellie Rich

Agenda:
1. Approve minutes of February 11th meeting
2. Digital Library Specialization Revision Proposal (by John Walsh, present)
3. Update on student open meeting
4. Course proposal: S604 Semantic Application of Metadata by Ying Ding
5. Additional comments on student outcome assessment

1. February 11th meeting minutes approved

2. Digital Library Specialization Revision Proposal (by John Walsh, present)

  • General information about the proposal discussed by John Walsh
  • Questions and concerns raised by committee members:
    • Should Cataloging or Collection Development be course options?
    • Can other workshops be considered for course options?
    • Confusion regarding total credits required
    • Color on proposal meaningful?
    • Internship availability – raised by Dr. Walsh
      • MCPL an additional non-IU option
      • Required internships means assuring availability
      • Will work with Howard Rosenbaum
  • Recommendations by the committee:
    • Delete Issues section
    • Remove old course numbers
    • Add information about using other workshops to complete course requirements

3. Update on student open meeting

  • Scheduled for Wednesday, March 11th, 2009 from 2-3:15pm
  • Room LI030
  • Food arrangements have been made
  • Fliers up
  • Invitations out
  • Will report back in April
  • IUPUI student curriculum feedback
    • Using SurveyMonkey Will report back in April

4. Course proposal: S604 Semantic Application of Metadata by Ying Ding

  • General information about the course discussed Questions and concerns raised by committee members:
    • Use of the term “survey”
    • Long reading list
    • Does rationale need to be given?
    • Overlap with other courses?
  • Recommendations by the committee:
    • Establish length of articles and identify which are required
    • Look at courses students have taken prior to enrollment Clarify group project
    • Clarify presentation
    • Awkwardness in some wording, such as “survey” instead of “overview”
  • Decision: Approved with minor revisions

Update provided on course proposals S603: by Patrick Patterson and S621: by Monique Threatt

5. Additional comments on student outcome assessment

  • Questions and concerns raised by committee members:
    • What if assignments from a relevant course did not apply?
      • Students could write an essay or use assignments from other courses
      • Faculty advertises that course(s) fulfill requirements
        • Applicable course numbers could be placed next to the appropriate categories
    • Assessment is intended to determine if holes are in the program
    • How can students utilize the portfolio after graduation?
      • Although student cannot access Oncourse after graduation, professors can
      • External viewer can obtain a guest pass
      • Other programs may be available but none recommended Noriko discussed issue with Dean Blaise Cronin Recommended open discussion of assessment to faculty meeting
  • Action Item: Rachel will need to prepare overview
    • Which schools are doing which type of assessment?
    • What data is available?
  • Decision: Student outcome assessment should be considered
    • Student Portfolio is one option to consider with the possibility of others
  • Action Items:
    • Approve revised course proposals before registration

Minutes taken by Jessica Moad

April 2, 2009

Meeting Minutes for the SLIS Curriculum Steering Committee, April 2, 2009 at 9:30am, room LI036
Present: Noriko Hara, Lokman Meho, Rachel Applegate, Shellie Rich, Inna Kouper, Mateo Palos, Jessica Moad
Not in attendance: Howard Rosenbaum

Agenda:
1. Approve minutes of March 5 meeting
2. Report on student open meeting at Bloomington and Indianapolis
3. ADA statement
4. Workshop credit hours for MLS/MIS dual students
5. Deadlines for course proposal submission
6. Future Planning

1. March 5 meeting minutes approved

2. Report on student open meeting at Bloomington and Indianapolis

  • Discussed responses and actions needed Bloomington Campus: Takes time for students to see results from responses to their concerns Can provide comments for each campus, IUPUI and IUB
    • In classes, try to establish convergence between IS and LS
      • Separation and confusion are an issue
    • Jobs and Careers
      • Student chapters could provide contact information and directory of jobs on campus
      • Career fairs have not been continued because of cost and small size of department IALA good place to inquire about jobs
    • Students can join the alumni association to have contact with alumni
      • Networking events – It is believed that current students are invited
    • Cannot allow open Computer Lab 24 hours due to lack of time, staffing, and funds
      • Can discuss opening earlier on Saturdays
    • Specializations on transcripts is currently in process Cannot address Art Librarianship course 2 credit hours because this is a Fine Arts course and is offset by a 4 hour internship
  • Action Items:
    • Distribute report to faculty
    • Student representatives should write to address SLIS student concerns while considering sensitive issues
    • Determine if any changes can be made to S517 or S532 course titles
    • Evaluate report with older reports to determine which comments do and do not recur
    • When redesigning SLIS Web site, can add more information about who students should contact for jobs and details about which courses to take for certain career paths
      • IUPUI currently has a detailed list of recommended courses for different career paths
    • Discuss opening the SLIS lab at 10am on Saturdays with Mark Napier
    • Future Planning:
      • Begin planning for next CSC student open forum in December Hold a forum twice a year?
        • Could implement an online survey in Fall and face-to-face forum in Spring
  • Indianapolis Campus:
    • 40 responses total
    • 17 pages of responses to analyze, some responses include:
      • Specific course requests
      • 401 complaints
      • Many enjoy Friday course options, weekend and evening classes
    • Not as many responses to program requirement question
  • Action Items:
    • Provide Bloomington members with details about how the questions were created and best methods of sorting data

3. ADA statement

  • Discussed general information
    • Including the statement benefits both students and professors
    • Indianapolis campus currently uses the statement
  • Decision: Add statement to each course syllabus

4. Workshop credit hours for MLS/MIS dual students

  • Discussed general information
    • Students pursuing the dual degree can currently take only 6 credit hours of workshops
    • Changing the limit to 9 credit hours instead of 7.5 makes more mathematical sense
  • Action Item: Determine when this can be official
  • Decision: Change allowed workshop credit hours for those pursing dual degree to 9 credit hours

5. Deadlines for course proposal submission

  • Discussed general information
  • Decision:
    • Create deadline For Fall and Summer courses – Proposal must be submitted by the end of January
      • For Spring courses – Proposals submitted by the end of September
    • Set date deadline for both IUPUI and IUB
  • Action Items:
    • Make the announcement to faculty and PhD students
    • Make deadline information available on the Web site

6. Future Planning for next Fall:

  • Discuss student outcome assessment including E-Portfolio updates, Elin Jacob will visit during the discussion
  • Discuss changing the passing grade (C+) for required courses (Rachel Appelgate)

Minutes taken by Jessica Moad

September 30, 2009

Meeting Minutes for the SLIS Curriculum Steering Committee, Wednesday, September 30, 2009 at 11:00am, room LI036
Present: Howard Rosenbaum, Noriko Hara, Ron Day, Rachel Applegate, Katherine Schilling, Inna Kouper, Elizabeth Essink, China Williams, Jessica Moad Not in attendance:

Agenda:
1. Member introductions
2. Schedule for the rest of the semester & items to be discussed this semester
3. Dual degree with Central Eurasian Studies
4. Total number of internship credit hours for MIS/MLS dual degree (6 or 9?)
5. Children’s and Young Adult Services Specialization
6. Course evaluation
7. Student outcome assessment — Dr. Elin Jacob will join us at 11:30am

1. Member introductions

2. Schedule for the rest of the semester & items to be discussed this semester

  • Future Meeting Dates
    • October 21, Wed, 11:15-12:15pm
    • November 18, Wed, 11:15-12:15pm
    • December 9, Wed, 11:15-12:15pm*
      § *The December meeting is a backup.
  • Bloomington members will meet at RTV-175 in the Telecommunication building, and IUPUI members will meet at UL 3100F, the SLIS conference room

3. Dual degree with Central Eurasian Studies (CES)

  • Discussed general information
    • Students in CES have expressed interest in the degree
    • Credits Required
      • MLS – foundation plus 15 hours of electives
      • MIS – 21 plus 15 hours of electives
    • Possibility of small number of students enrolled CES faculty has already approved the proposed dual degree
  • Questions and concerns raised by committee members:
    • Who is the point of contact for the dual degree?
      • There doesn’t have to be a specific point of contact, but Dr. Howard Rosenbaum can be a contact
    • Does a student need to apply to both departments at once?
  • Recommendations by the committee:
    • Clarify the language about when to enroll Action item: Dr. Rosenbaum will check and report back to the committee.
  • Decision: Approved with minor revisions

4. Children’s and Young Adult Services Specialization

  • Discussed general information
    • There is growing interest among SLIS students
    • Would need adjuncts to teach some of the courses
    • Specialization advisor has selected relevant courses; she teaches several Public Library Programming and Storytelling workshops may also count toward specialization course credits
  • Questions and concerns raised by committee members:
    • Do the specializations appear on transcript for IUPUI?
    • This is an area of focus for IUPUI
  • Recommendations by the committee:
    • IUPUI will review the proposal to determine if they want to provide some inputs for the list of courses
    • The committee will hear from IUPUI at next meeting regarding this specialization

5. Total number of internship credit hours for MIS/MLS dual degree (6 or 9?)

  • Discussed general information
    • Currently, MLS can take 3 credit hours and MIS can take 6
    • Most students completing dual degrees generally focus on one direction or the other
    • Many students are currently completing 2-3 credits
    • Decision about the internship placement is left up to the student
    • On Committee Vote:
      • 2 votes for 6 credit hours
      • 5 votes for 9 credit hours
  • Decision:
    • 9 credit hours for the total number of internship credit hours allowed for MIS/MLS dual degree students
  • Action Item:
    • The committee’s recommendation will be presented at the fall faculty meeting for vote

7. Student outcome assessment, Dr. Elin Jacob, Guest Speaker

  • Discussed general information
    • Dr. Jacob used portfolio, in teaching, for 8 yrs
    • Dr. Jacob’s Findings:
      • Stopped using the portfolio Wanted to encourage students to think
      • Found it problematic and time consuming to grade
      • Students thought of it in terms of quantity not quality
      • Didn’t demonstrate whether students understood the materials
      • Was busy work for the students
      • Often seemed nothing more than making something creative
    • Dr. Jacob read from her course requirements
  • Questions and concerns raised by committee members:
    • Is Dr. Jacob’s experience related to committee goals? Both pull from coursework already completed
    • Who is going to evaluate the portfolios? Confusion about how the portfolios will be evaluated
      • Must consider level of students coming into the program, or data may be skewed, which can make progress seem better than it is
    • Concerns about Oncourse availability and student rights and privacy issues
      • They may be on Oncourse in the future and be available to those that ask for them
    • Discussion about the need and desire to evaluate
      • Must demonstrate evaluation methods to ALA
        • Can evaluation meet the minimum standards?
    • Several other universities have stopped using portfolios after implementing them
  • Suggestions by Dr. Jacob:
    • To really evaluate the program, the faculty could be responsible for collecting their own portfolios from classes
    • Each individual is different – we must consider where each student started and what they brought to the program
    • Increase in intellect in students does not show an increase in the quality of education
  • Action Item:
    • Dr. Jacob will send electronic version of requirements for the portfolios used in her classes
  • Decision:
    • Discussion will be continued

6. Course evaluation

  • Postponed until next meeting

Minutes taken by Jessica Moad

October 21, 2009

Meeting Minutes for the SLIS Curriculum Steering Committee, Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 11:15am, IU room RTV-175 and IUPUI room UL 3100F
Present: Howard Rosenbaum, Noriko Hara, Ron Day, Rachel Applegate, Katherine Schilling, Inna Kouper, Elizabeth Essink, China Williams, Jessica Moad

Agenda:
1. Review of minutes of September 30 meeting
2. Specialization in Children's literature (a list of courses to be added from SLIS Indianapolis)
3. New program requirement: that all students arrange reliable access to the Internet. This would pre-empt having to put it in individual syllabi and establish an expected norm.
4. Change in program regulation: to not allow courses with C+ grades to count towards the core requirements. Currently, a C does not count but a C+ does.
5. ALA standards on Student Outcome Assessment
6. Status report on electronic portfolios
7. Course evaluation
8. How to go about S401 revisions

1. Review of minutes of September 30 meeting

  • Decision: Approved

2. Specialization in Children's literature (a list of courses to be added from SLIS Indianapolis)

  • Discussed general information
    • Previously there had been career guides, but not a track or transcript specializations for this area at IUPUI
    • A few courses added for student options
    • Specialization title: Youth Services Specialization
  • Questions and concerns raised by committee members:
    • S622 not taught in Bloomington
  • Recommendations by committee members:
    • Remove S514 Computerization in Society from course list Add language about the possibility of courses being added or removed from list of those offered
    • Add internship

3. New program requirement: that all students arrange reliable access to the Internet. This would pre-empt having to put it in individual syllabi and establish an expected norm.

  • Discussed general information
    • UITS may have similar standards
    • Language intentionally left vague
    • Previously, similar language placed in individual course syllabi
    • Change policy in getting into program
    • Placed in orientation or application, etc
  • Rural areas an issue
    • Decision: Discuss at next faculty meeting with a possibility of being voted on next spring

4. Change in program regulation: to not allow courses with C+ grades to count towards the core requirements. Currently, a C does not count but a C+ does.

  • Discussed general information
    • Applicable for the foundation courses only
  • Decision: Discuss at next faculty meeting for a future vote

5. ALA standards on Student Outcome Assessment

  • Discussed general information
    • Syracuse published a study in 2008 Dean Cronin requested that there be some forms of an outcome assessment by 2012
  • Questions and concerns raised by committee members:
    • What will be evaluated from portfolios?
      • Possibility of focus on class or topic, which can change throughout time
    • Results from portfolios will improve the program?
    • Two goals – evaluate the students and the program?
      • Portfolios only intended for program evaluation but intended to involve the student in the evaluation process and allow students to reflect on program
        • Discussion about the intellectual value of reflection
  • Concern about workload for faculty and students
  • Whether students or professors select the work, the evaluation will have a selective bias
  • Costs and benefits must meet the needs of each party

6. Status report on electronic portfolios

  • Discussed general information
    • During the summer and fall semesters, IUPUI solicited students to try out the portfolios – getting feedback from students
    • Students may contact advisor for any feedback
    • Many students report being able to think of program in new way and find the portfolios valuable

7. Course evaluation

  • Discussed general information
    • IUPUI uses the same form as IUB
  • Action: IUPUI will send form to IUB

8. How to go about S401 revisions

  • Decision: Postpone

Minutes taken by Jessica Moad

November 18, 2009

Meeting Minutes for the SLIS Curriculum Steering Committee, Wednesday, November 18, 2009 at 11:15am, IU room RTV-175 and IUPUI room UL 3100F
Present: Howard Rosenbaum, Noriko Hara, Rachel Applegate, Katherine Schilling, Inna Kouper, Elizabeth Essink, China Williams, Jessica Moad

Agenda:
1. Review of minutes of October 21 meeting
2. Course proposal for S604 from John Paolillo
3. New program requirement: that all students arrange reliable access to the internet
4. Change in program regulation: to not allow courses with C+ grades to count towards the core
5. Specialization in Children's literature
6. Status report on electronic portfolios
7. S401 revision suggestion

Review of minutes of October 21 meeting

  • Decision: Approved

1. Course proposal for S604 from John Paolillo

  • Recommendations by the committee:
    • Course name changed to “Social Network Analysis” Course description changed to match course content Expand assignment descriptions Howard will work with John to make these revisions Decision: Approved with minor changes

2. New program requirement: that all students arrange reliable access to the Internet. This would pre-empt having to put it in individual syllabi and establish an expected norm.

  • Discussed general information
    • Placement of the policy change
      • Suggestion to include the requirement in the school bulletin as well as in admissions materials
  • Decision: Discuss at the next spring faculty meeting

3. Change in program regulation: to not allow courses with C+ grades to count towards the core

  • Discussed general information Language used in the second paragraph of the document is phrased correctly: “Proposal for core course grade requirement change”
  • Recommendations by the committee:
    • Consensus that any required course with a grade lower than a B- would need to be repeated Decision: Discuss item at the next spring faculty meeting

4. Specialization in Children's literature

  • Multiple versions of the proposal for this specialization were provided Decision: Dana Backs will be contacted and the committee will revisit this item on December 9, 2009.

5. Status report on electronic portfolios

  • Discussed general information
    • Rachel has received positive feedback from the students who have created electronic portfolios in OnCourse
    • Students have also reported that the tool is easy to use
  • Questions and concerns raised by committee members:
    • Difficulty accessing portfolios by those outside community Working on availability to export and download portfolio Students would need to export upon graduation, before student access ends
      • Media, links and videos can be added to portfolios
    • Additional criteria needs to be created for evaluation
  • Recommendations by the committee:
    • Item needs to be analyzed and discussed further
      • Discussion will continue at faculty policy council meeting on December 2, 2009

6. 401 revision suggestion

  • Decision: Postpone discussion until December 9, 2009

Minutes taken by China Williams and Jessica Moad

December 9, 2009

Meeting Minutes for the SLIS Curriculum Steering Committee, Wednesday, December 9, 2009 at 11:15am, IU room RTV-175 and IUPUI room UL 3100F
Present: Howard Rosenbaum, Noriko Hara, Ron Day, Rachel Applegate, Katherine Schilling, Inna Kouper, Elizabeth Essink, China Williams, Jessica Moad

Agenda:
1. Review of minutes of November 9 meeting
2. Specialization in Children's literature
3. S603 workshop on Python from Muhammad Abdul-Mageed
4. Course proposal for S644 from Noriko Hara
5. S401 revisions
6. Report on student outcome assessment from the FPC meeting

1. Review of minutes of November 9 meeting

  • Decision: Approved

2. Specialization in Children's literature

  • Discussed general information
  • Decision: Approved – Will be discussed at the next spring faculty meeting

3. S603 workshop on Python from Muhammad Abdul-Mageed

  • Discussed general information
  • Recommendations by the committee:
    • Revision in Section 2, under Potential Audiences
      • S571 materials for youth – Incorrect course listed
    • Section 7.1 Needs clarification
      • 7 lab exercises each day or one set each day?
    • Section 7.2 Needs clarification
      • Two lowest assignments dropped or skipped?
    • Two Section 9s listed
      • Section 9 Change “deduced” to “deducted”
  • Decision: Approved with minor revisions

4. Course proposal for S644 from Noriko Hara

  • Discussed general information
    • Structured from two different courses
  • Questions and concerns raised by committee members:
    • Large number of assignments for doctoral students on p. 11?
      • Assignments lead to possible publication and greater understanding of the subject and source
  • Recommendations by committee members: Needs consistent use of IT or ITC
  • Decision: Approved with minor revisions – Course will begin in fall 2010 as S604 and then will obtain course number S644

5. S401 revisions

  • Discussed general information
    • 401 is a prerequisite for other classes and only required for MLS students
    • Changed in past for improvement Option to waive out was previously clearer, but the test was too difficult Currently, no specific information provided about waiving the course
    • Can change to two options: Increase skills, or take one of technology courses
      • Increasing to 39 credit hours, will not make us less competitive
      • Students without 401 skills would complete 401 and a technology course
        • Would need a system to determine students with or without skills IUPUI has different options and approach
      • Students may opt out and take STEPS courses or demonstrate skills
        • Can learn one or more skill on own
      • No longer teach Unix
      • Revise course every year to keep current
      • Provides skills needed to get through the program
      • Taught Online
        • Issues with students needing face-to-face help
        • Students must be independent learners
    • Each class capped at 20, with one adjunct per class
    • Very few student complaints
    • Generally about 10 students of 100 elect to waive the course
      • Of the 10, usually 6 are approved
      • Professor in charge of course decides on approval
  • Recommendations by committee members: Consider incorporating technology into required courses
    • View IUPUI syllabus
  • Questions and concerns raised by committee members:
    • Raising credit hours and improving 401 are separate issues Possibility of offering different classes with varying levels of technological instruction?
  • Action Items: Look at IUPUI’s structure and syllabus, and investigate other options

6. Report on student outcome assessment from the FPC meeting

  • Discussed general information
    • IUPUI pilot program
    • E-port programming issues from student feedback being addressed
      • Waiting to hear from faculty regarding desired options Further discussions on the subject will be discussed by the faculty policy council, and not the CSC

Minutes taken by Jessica Moad

February 17, 2010

Meeting Minutes for the SLIS Curriculum Steering Committee, Wednesday, February 17, 2010 from 10am-11:30am, IU room 036
Present: Howard Rosenbaum, Ron Day, Inna Kouper, China Williams, Jessica Moad
Absent: Rachel Applegate, Katherine Schilling, Elizabeth Essink

Agenda:
1. Review of minutes of Dec. 9th meeting
2. Revised summer workshop proposal: S603 Introduction to Programming/Python workshop (Mohammed Mageed, SLIS PhD)
3. Summer workshop proposal: S603: Sustainable Development and American Lifestyle: Foundations, Information Resources, and Spin (Robert Noel, Head, Swain Hall Library)
4. Summer workshop proposal: S603: PHP/PostgreSQL Workshop (Timothy Bowman, SLIS PhD)
5. Summer workshop proposal: S603: Crisp Communications: Producing clear, concise policies, procedures, and public relations materials (Ed Rossman, Adult Services, Shaker Heights Public Library)
6. Status report on program assessment
7. New business

1. Review of minutes of Dec. 9th meeting

  • Decision: Approved

2. Revised summer workshop proposal: S603 Introduction to Programming/Python workshop (Mohammed Mageed, SLIS PhD)

  • Discussed general information Questions and concerns raised by committee members:
    • He may mean S532 Information Architecture not S571, on the part about ‘potential audiences.’
    • He may mean “with Python, a simple, clean, …” unless Python is really THE only simple, clean and intuitive programming language.
    • It is presumed that the Unix skills needed beforehand are taught in S401; if not, if he could point prospective students to where they could pick up those skills before class that would be good.
  • Recommendations by committee members: Move required books, as they may be missed if located at the bottom of the syllabus
  • Decision: Approved with minor revisions

3. Summer workshop proposal: S603: Sustainable Development and American Lifestyle: Foundations, Information Resources, and Spin (Robert Noel, Head, Swain Hall Library)

  • Discussed general information
    • Set up to be a 3 credit, but first time will be 1.5 credits
  • Questions and concerns raised by committee members:
    • Talks about the issues and less about the information side
    • Emphasis on Wikipedia is bothersome
    • Texts are confusing – more broken out by topics – where readings are relevant in specific classes
    • Proposal doesn’t make clear the number of credits
    • Appears to have more theoretical background, vs. being just skills-based
    • Should it have S604 rather than S603 (in agenda, there’s nothing in the syllabus)?
    • Are the six topics daily sessions? (no calendar)
    • What part of the class sessions is taken up with viewing films?
    • There’s more opportunity to explore information communication channels, vs. just being able to be critical of the information itself
      • This seems to be key in the description of the “Final” but I don’t see it listed in the class sessions before that, which seem topic-oriented
    • Recommendations by committee members: Needs more information specific content, quality, and sources
      • Inna will send a document with suggestions
        • Content is directed at undergraduates, needs to be aimed at master’s students
        • Have papers written by students instead of quizzes and tests
  • Decision: Revise and resubmit

4. Summer workshop proposal: S603: PHP/PostgreSQL Workshop (Timothy Bowman, SLIS PhD)

  • Discussed general information
    • Adds to MIS programming options
    • Description of the course requirements is nice; might be useful for the Python workshop too
  • Questions and concerns raised by committee members:
    • If he wants people to read things before the first class session he should make that required, not optional (and keep alerting people)
  • Decision: Approved

5. Summer workshop proposal: S603: Crisp Communications: Producing clear, concise policies, procedures, and public relations materials (Ed Rossman, Adult Services, Shaker Heights Public Library)

  • Discussed general information
    • 1.5 credits – workshop
    • Assignments turned in after class sessions
  • Questions and concerns raised by committee members:
    • Is there enough time to learn and retain?
    • No pre-requisite
    • Only 14 contact hours, and only 2 hours worth of homework
      • The rough standard really isn’t two hours of homework for 1 CREDIT, but two hours per CONTACT hour
    • For a hands-on workshop, does not seem to be enough for 1.5 hours of graduate level work
    • The materials seem suitable for STEPS workshops or undergraduate work
  • Recommendations by committee members:
    • Needs more contact hours
    • Needs to be cleaned up
      • Needs more explanation of assignments
      • Needs to consider timing Raise to master’s level workshop
      • State up-front what exact programs will be used
      • Needs far more extensive homework: applying the skills, reflecting on various forms of communication, perhaps more extensive critique of existing materials
  • Decision: Revise and resubmit

6. Status report on program assessment

  • Drs. Shaw and Jacob have developed an alternative that does not involve E-Portfolios
  • Involves a series of surveys and interviews done by doctoral students
  • Different assessments on each campus

7. New business

  • None

Minutes taken by Jessica Moad

September 22, 2010

Wednesday, September 22, 2010
12-1:30
001

Applegate, Bouley, Kalb, Rosenbaum, Schilling, Shachaf

Agenda:

1. The minutes of the February 2010 meeting were approved

2. As per the Dean's request, the committee discussed Provost Hansen's Elearning Task Force report, which was distributed in advance. One observation was that the report seemed to emphasis blended learning throughout the report (more so than other types of elearning); the suggestion was made that this may reflect IUB's interest in remaining a residential campus. The consensus was that the recommendations in the report seemed to be very reasonable.

Applegate and Schilling provided background comments about DE on our two campuses. They explained that IUB can offer a wide variety of online courses because it received blanket approval to do so from the Higher Education commission. IUPUI has to receive permission from the Commission for each program offered. Applegate said that IUPUI will try to obtain the same level of approval for DE programs in 2012. The SLIS online offerings are extensive but do not cover all of the core courses or many of the electives so they do not offer a full online MLS. She sad that the it would be up to he new EAD, Tomas Lipinski, to restart the initiative to offer a full degree online. They said that the division of labor has meant that IUPUI has had more of an emphasis on delivering DE. In addition, there is pressure at IUPUI to get involved with DE because of the lack of classroom space.

3. The committee discussed a new course proposal from Theresa Heidenreich: Human Resource Management for Libraries. The proposal is interesting and would be a good addition to the MLS electives. The committee had 4 suggestions

-The topics are certainly worthy of a three credit course but the assignments seem to be only worth 1.5 credits. They also seem too simple for a graduate course. Can they be reworked to be more appropriate for graduate credit?

[If she will not change the assignments, it’ll be a 1.5 credit workshop and reduce the sessions]

-There seem to be some gaps in the course content. Can she include more about legal issues involved in HR work? Could there be more about supervisory experience (performance evaluations, searching, hiring and firing)?

-The prerequisites make it more difficult to take the class - more people might take it if these were changed. Perhaps the prerequisite could be having taken 6 credits and permission of the instructor?

-Are the readings for Weeks 3 and 7 redundant? Can the redundant ones be removed?

The committee's decision is that the proposal should be revised and resubmitted

4. The committee discussed a revised new course proposal from Noriko Hara: S644 Social Aspects of Information Technology for submission to the Campus Curriculum Committee.

Since this course was proposed, however, there have been changes in the doctoral proposal that open a new possibility. What has changed is that the faculty voted to cross list courses that are available to doctoral courses so this one can be the first to be cross listed. The committee suggested taking one of the 514/8 numbers, changing the title, and submitting it to the doctoral Steering Committee for cross listing as a doctoral course.

There were three suggestions

-Describe the issue paper for the doctoral students in greater detail

-Consider adding a "hot topic" day in the syllabus where new developments could be discussed

- Consider adding content on internet retailing and product reviewing

Suggestion: E-approval if Hara wants to follow the 518 plan and considers these minor changes

5. New business

Summer courses
Rosenbaum will follow up with Noel, Mundy and Rossman to fond out if they are interested in teaching in summer 2011

There are several new courses that may be submitted for approval this fall.
Cassidy Sugomito may propose a course on Scholarly Communication
Doug Sanders may propose a a workshop on the description and selection of storage materials for paper-based collections
Barbara Truesdell, Assistant Director Center for the Study of History and Memory may propose a course on Oral History

Campus Curriculum Committee
Rosenbaum will Submit Walsh's S604 Digital Humanities to CCC fso that it can receive a new number (657)

There are two upcoming initiatives in the works.
Dual degree with CLACS (MIS)
Specialization for MIS: CMC

Topics for the next meeting
Survey results next meeting
A review prerequisites for some courses
Discuss the issue of 604 classes that are run several times. What should be done with them?
Standards for online courses - how can that be determined? Is it a CSC issue (class size, quality?)

Meeting adjourned at 1:40.

Uploaded

SLIS

cscMin_Feb2010.doc
iub_forum-summary.docx
iupui_forum-summary.pdf

October 13, 2010

Wednesday, October 13, 2010
12-1:30
UL1331

Rosenbaum, Shachaf, Applegate, Washington, Ma, Kalb, Bouley
Regrets: Schilling

Agenda

1. The minutes from the 9/22 meeting were approved

2. Two course proposals, Digital Curation and Scholarly Communication, were discussed beginning with general comments.

Applegate suggested that the committee look over the suite of courses that focus on digital libraries. As 604 courses, these can be taught, but if they are going to get new numbers, the committee should have a discussion about how they fit into the growing DL specialization. She said that Xia might be included in these discussions since he has an interest in the area.

In response to a question about the possible overlap between the two proposals, Shachaf said that the two courses approach their topics from different angles – practical and theoretical – so overlap is not a significant problem. She said that there is demand among the students for these topics.

Rosenbaum suggested that once these courses are offered, the committee might want to have a conversation with Walsh and Bantin (specialization directors) about the place of these courses in the DL and Archives specializations.

2a: A new course proposal from Stacy Kowalczyk 604: Digital Curation

Bouley asked if there could there be page ranges provided for the readings so that students will know how much reading they will have to do for each session. She pointed to some ambiguity between the use of the terms “honor” and “dishonesty” and asked that the differences be clarified. In the Participation section she would like to see the “class policies for acceptable notification of absences” specified more clearly.

Applegate pointed out that the percentages for the assignments don’t add up (on p.3-4 they total 150%). This should be fixed.

Shachaf asked whether the appropriate number of scholars would be available for the final project if the class were to be large? She wondered whether the students would be working in groups for the final project or if there would be a scholar for each person? She asked whether Kowalczyk was prepared for a large class? She also asked whether it would be appropriate to ask Bantin to look over the syllabus.

Washington noticed that there were no prerequisites and wondered whether people without an appropriate background would be able to handle the assignment requiring the development of a digital curation plan. She suggested that the Metadata course might be a prerequisite. The committee should ask her if there are prerequisites that make sense and how she will approach the curation plan – will she guide them through the process?

The committee decided that the proposal would be approved pending changes.

2b. A new course proposal from Cassidy Sugimoto: 604: Scholarly Communication

Applegate noticed that on p5, in the section on participation, that students seem to be given too much leeway – they are penalized only 9% for missing half the semester. Could there be a more stringent attendance policy? She suggested that the factors involved in participation could be described without specifying the penalties. Bouley asked whether the emphasis on these factors was reasonable stating that the penalty for a lack of respect seems excessive compared to that missing class. Shachaf said that this section could be greatly simplified by eliminating the table.

There is a typo on p4: Therefore, in order to familiarize yourself with this type of system and the resources contained within it, you will choose an institutional repository and [evaluation] it.

Bouley said that the goals and objectives section should be clarified. For example, the fourth objective seems to be something that it done in the class (examine the role). She said that the final review of the repository is due at the end of the course but the topic is covered in the last two weeks in the class. Will this provide enough time for students to contact people, gather information and write the assignment? She suggested shifting the class to a session earlier in the semester or moving the presentations to later in the semester.

Shachaf pointed out that the percentages don’t add up on p.4 (the final project percentage is wrong). She also said that the readings in section 3 readings should not overlap with those offered in 502 and 505. She also commented that there are librarians who deal with IP issues in scholarly communication – they created their own positions. Could she invite them into her class?

Ma noticed that there is overlap in assignments between 502 and 505 on bibliometrics. Could these reading be changed?

The committee decided that the proposal would be approved pending changes.

3. The committee began a discussion about the results of the spring 2010 SLIS student forum/survey that was held on both campuses; there was a meeting in Bloomington and an online survey conducted at IUPUI. The documents are available at:

https://ella.slis.indiana.edu/g/csc/

iub_forum-summary.docx
iupui_forum-summary.pdf

Two main issues were how widely and in what forms to disseminate the responses and deciding what the action items will be from these reports for the CSC, the Associate Deans and other relevant committees. These will be discussed at upcoming CSC meetings. The suggestion was made to use the survey in Bloomington because the response rate at IUPUI had been high and the turnout for the meeting is typically low. One action item, then, is to redesign the survey for use on both campuses.

The committee then discussed comments from the survey about S401. Bouley agreed with some of the comments about 401, particularly the requests for the inclusion of more innovative technologies in the course. She did not see how the time spent on HTML mattered in her career and had only seen it applied in one course.

Shachaf said that it was possible to test out of 401 but that the process was not easily discovered. Bouley asked whether the wavier option could be made more public. Rosenbaum raised a practical concern about the time and effort involved in evaluating the waivers or tests. He asked whether a good instrument could be designed for people to test out of the course. Washington wondered about the value of creating a placement exam to assess technology skills and asked whether there could be multiple 401s reflecting different skill levels. Kalb said that a lot of the 401 material can be learned in UITS STEP classes. Washington responded that the STEP classes may be too low level. Applegate said that Chen is reviewing S401 and can talk with us about it. She asked whether we can alert incoming students to exactly what they need before coming to class so that they can address their deficits before coming to SLIS.

Shachaf said that we could find out which classes require 401 skills and once we know which skills matter and then engage in a more informed redesign of the class. We can find out what the people teaching the courses want people to have going in.

Several options were suggested for S401:

  • Not to have it as a requirement
  • To have a clear way to test out if the class (if we can standardize the test)
  • To redesign the content to be more useful to the students;
  • To turn it into a graduate course.

Decision: The CSC decided to use the surveys across the campuses to gather data.

4. New business

Topics for the next meeting:

Student forum report: which points to address
Evaluate Applegate’s book for use in her class
Review prerequisites for some courses
Discuss the issue of 604 classes that are run several times. What should be done with them?
Discuss standards for online courses - Is it a CSC issue (class size, quality?):
Decision: Hara’s course can be added to the spring schedule.
The meeting adjourned at 1:40.
Uploaded

sugimoto_rationale.docx
sugimoto_scholarly-comm.docx
kowalczyk_digital_curation.docx
cscMin_sept10.docx

December 8, 2010

Wednesday, December 8, 2010
12-1:30 PM
SLIS 030

Bouley, Hara, Kalb, Ma Rosenbaum, Shachaf, Schilling, Washington
Regrets: Applegate (who sent email comments to Rosenbaum)

Agenda

1. The minutes from the 10/13 meeting were approved unanimously

2. Discussion of Applegate's request to use her book in her class

Applegate, who was not present for the discussion, had asked the CSC to respond to her request to use her book “Managing the Small College Library,” in her course, S552, next fall. She argued that no other book has in one place a concise presentation of important issues for academic library managers particularly focusing on smaller libraries. She offered to donate to the SLIS IU Foundation account an amount equivalent to the royalties generated by her students’ purchase of the book.

The committee discussed her request, raising the general issue of how the CSC should respond to conflict of interest situations. The general tone of the discussion was that members of the committee did not have any objections to a faculty member using his or her book in class so long as it was not the only reading on the syllabus. However, the consensus was that the CSC should not become involved in making these decisions.

Decision: The committee recommends that Applegate discuss the situation with her Associate Dean. Committee members emphasized that this recommendation has nothing to do with the use of the book in her class, in fact, it seems entirely appropriate.

3. Discussion a proposal to revise the Archives and Records Management specialization

Bantin, Director of the specialization, and Rosenbaum submitted a proposal to revise the specialization, primarily be adding another cluster of courses, taken from IS electives, from which students can draw to complete their electives.

The committee, in principle, supports this revision. Applegate suggested adding the Digital Libraries course and a Topics course to the list. Shachaf asked that the proposal be reformatted and Bouley pointed out several errors in course numbering that should be corrected.

Decision: The committee recommends that Rosenbaum meet with Bantin to discuss the revision in light of these recommendations.

4. Discussion of a new course proposal from Andrea Copeland and Stephanie Holman: Public Library Programming

The committee was favorably disposed toward this proposal. Applegate suggested that Copeland ensure that there would be minimal overlap between this and related courses such as the Public Library Management course. Since students will choose real library branches/sites, she asked for clarification about site selection, guidelines for collaboration and a plan for dealing with small libraries that have less than specific or useful mission statements and lack strategic plans. She also suggested listing the assignments were listed at the beginning rather than after the extensive reading list and timetable. She asked if the programming observation is required to be done at their chosen branch, or can any library do?

Shachaf asked that the syllabus be reformatted to include some basic information including the number of credits, the rationale for the course and the extent to which it overlaps with existing courses. Hara asked for clarification about course prerequisites.

This is a confusing section head:

III. Public Programming Plan For Program, 2 each (40%)

It could be done as,
III. Public Program Plan, x 2
Program 1 due...
Program 2 due

Decision: The committee recommends that Copeland and Holman revise and resubmit the syllabus, responding to these comments. They should make sure to explain the extent to which the course overlaps with other courses

5. Continued discussion of the results of the 2010 student survey/forum

Shachaf said that the committee should try to address one issue that the students raised, for example, 401 or the addition of a capstone course. Kalb suggested focusing on the creation of a capstone course for both degrees, stating that students would be interested in taking it because they would be able use what they had learned in the program to write a paper of create a project that they would be able to use when job hunting. He suggested a capstone night with presentation. Expressing a consensus opinion, Washington suggested that the capstone be optional capstone class

Decision: The committee agreed to spend time next semester developing a proposal for an optional capstone class.

6. New business

Rosenbaum informed that committee that he was meeting with the Director of the Center for Latin American Studies to discuss the creation of a new MIS/CLACS dual degree.

Three files have been uploaded to

https://info.slis.indiana.edu/g/csc/

cscMin_Oct10.docx
archives_draft10.csc.docx

Meeting adjourned at 1:30 PM.

February 1, 2011

Wednesday, February 1, 2011
4:15-5:30 PM
SLIS 001

All the files are available via:

Here is the agenda for the meeting.

Hara, Shachaf, Rosenbaum, Washington, Ma, Kalb, Applegate, Bouley

1. The minutes from the December 8 meeting were approved unanimously

Applegate had an update about the conflict of interest issue in relation to the textbook use that will be added to the agenda of the next meeting

2. Meetings were scheduled for the rest of the semester

March 2 4 PM
April 13 4 PM
April 27 4 PM

3. There were two announcements:
Rosenbaum said a request will be submitted to the Campus Curriculum Committee to obtain a permanent number for the Digital Humanities course, currently taught as a 604 topics course; the proposed number will be in the S650 range. He also reported that a request had been submitted to the CCC for a title change for S514 "Computerization in Society" to "Social Aspects of Information Technology"

Decision: Rosenbaum will consult with Walsh and Shaw to settle on a number for the course

4. Discussion of a proposal for a dual MIS/MA degree between SLIS and the Center for Latin American and Caribbean Studies

Rosenbaum described a proposal for a dual MIS/MA degree between SLIS and the Center for Latin American and Caribbean Studies. He said that he and Dr. Van Hoose, Director of the Center, had developed a dual degree based on the existing MLS/MA dual degree and asked for comment. He said that Van Hoose will be submitting the proposal to CLACS faculty or approval this spring. Shachaf said that the proposal should be proofread for consistency, making sure the acronym (CLACS) is correct throughout. She also asked that CLACS update their web site to include the most current information about the MLS/MA dual degree. Rosenbaum said that he would convey this request to Van Hoose.

Decision: The committee supported the proposal pending the changes. The next sep is to submit the proposal to the faculty for approval.

5. Discussion of a suggestion to replace the open student forum with an online survey

Hara explained the background of the suggestion that the Student Open Forum, held in IUB in the spring be replaced as an online survey similar to that used at IUPUI.

Decision: Hara asked Washington and Kalb to look at the IUPUI survey and develop a version to be used at IUB. They will report back to the committee in March.

6. There were four new course proposals submitted to the committee

Andrea Copeland resubmitted a proposal for S604: Public Library Services

Shachaf asked that the names of the instructors be included in the course syllabus. Bouley noted that the multiculturalism articles in the syllabus were somewhat dated and asked if they could be updated to reflect recent developments. She also asked if the timing of the assignments could be clarified: the evaluation assignment seems to be due in the same class it is discussed. Can it be moved around? Applegate wondered whether the two assignments were due at different times and suggested that this be clarified in the syllabus.

Decision: The committee approved the proposal pending the completion of minor revisions

Craig Simpson submitted a proposal fow a workshop: S603: Processing Manuscript Collections

Bouley asked for more description of the in-class exercises explaining that from a student’s point of view, it is not clear what they will be doing. She also wondered whether some of the exercises be done outside of class, freeing up more class time for content. Kalb questioned the grading distribution asking whether 50% of the course grade should be allocated for the in class exercises - can it be less? He suggested that the final paper be worth 50% and in class exercises30%. Shachaf asked whether start of the workshop could be moved from 2:00 back to 1:00 to conform to the regular class schedule. Washington asked about the degree of overlap between this and the manuscripts class and suggested that this be explained more clearly in the proposal.

Decision: The committee suggested that Simpson respond to the comments and suggestions above and changes and resubmit the proposal with revisions.

- Libraries as 3rd Place

Madeline asks for a grade breakdown for the assignments
Rachel says that it should be a 604 Topics
Not that enthusiastic about it as a permanent course
Bouley says that the title of the course is not clear and it should be more descriptive to entice people to take the class
Rachel reminds us that there will be an announcement on the list that will provide more detail
But the course title can;t be expanded that much
Perhaps allow students to get their books from other providers
Kris should not be so negative in the section about the use of technology in the class - they are graduate students, after all

- Social Networking Technologies

7. S401

The following files were uploaded to https://info.slis.indiana.edu/g/csc/

cscMin-Dec08.docx
MA-MIS_CLACS_draft2.docx
copeland_course-prop_lib-svc.docx
copeland_pub-library-scv.docx
simpson_proc-man-wkshop.docx
simpson_prop-proc-man-wkshop.docx
eskew_3rd_place_prop.docx
eskew_3rd_place.docx
bishop_social-net-tech.pdf