Indicator 1- Outcome: Students work effectively in groups.

Number and percent of librarians who observe students working in groups in the InfoPod area. Clicking on the statement presents the following text: No: An indicator should describe a change in participants. While students may appear to be working productively, a librarian really can’t observe just what they are doing and how effective it is. Starting your indicator with the participant will help you avoid this error.

Number and percent of students in Infopod groups who score 3 or higher (scale 1-5) on the group participation assessment rubric. Clicking on the statement presents the following text: Yes, An existing measure such as a teacher’s grade of group effectiveness can target an outcome precisely

Indicator 2 – Outcome: Students create information-rich products

Number and percent of Infopod students whose group projects include high-quality information resources as demonstrated by bibliographies from Infopod-using student projects achieving 3 or higher on information-quality rubric. Clicking on the statement presents the following text: Yes, this indicator gauges mastery by using the instructor’s assessment. Notice that for this informal check of effectiveness, a comparison to non-Infopod users is not necessary. What constitutes success is that Infopods help students master a skill. What do you think a reasonable target would be for this indicator?

Number of footnotes & percent of pages with footnotes in papers of Infopod users compared to the same in papers of non-Infopod users. Clicking on the statement presents the following text: Not really. It’s true this indicator includes a comparison of Infopod users and non-users which is nice but not mandatory. But the indicator is a count, not an assessment of whether the students have mastered a skill.

This page only contains the longdescriptions from the "indicators" examples on the "Check your understanding: Whitney Library" example page.