PSU+Summer+2014

LM5010 - Learning Resources Centers and Services - Final Grade "B"

          - Professor feedback: While you did an excellent job on "strengths" and "weaknesses" your "opportunities" and "threats" are incomplete. You also did not submit the "summary" portion of this assignment.

 - Professor feedback: Profile 1, Description 2, Program Assessment 3, Mission and Vision 4, Goals & Objections 3, Three-Year Action Plan 3, Budget 3, Cover Letter 2, Total = 21 - Your Program Assessment Summary came across as much too negative. Although no points were deducted for your Mission and Vision, you should think in terms of the library vs. yourself. The mission and vision are for the program so the words, "me" and "I" should be avoided. We recognize that you are entering into a new position, but your Goals & Objectives and Action Plan should not have come across with so much emphasis on your individual professional growth but more towards the growth of the program. There were minor grammatical/formatting errors in your project such as with an occasional mis-choice of words and the double spacing in your cover letter. We wish you the best in your new position and recognize that it will be both challenging and rewarding. Even though you have been hired for the library…remember that librarians are tech integration leaders in schools!



LM5030 - #|Reference and Research - Final Grade "C+"

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14pt;"> - <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor feedback: Thank you for your contribut ions to our Unit 2 readings/videos. You chose well, and provided summaries with evident relevance to the unit. The article you chose was a thoughtful selection connecting to Unit 2’s learning objectives and will be useful in your library #|practice.#|Your video choice is an excellent addition to the discussion of “reference collections” in the 21st century library. You had a couple of errors in citation - capitalization errors (no points deducted). Rubric breakdown: Mechanics - 5; Summary]] for article-4.5; Summary for video-4.5; Relevance-5; Timeliness-5.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14pt;"> - <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor feedback: This is a stronger analysis with your additions. You included more information on the currency of the collection and the publishers. Bias was touched upon in your review of collective biographies, but you did not #|address the questions we posed about bias in your original feedback. We would have also liked to see more around how this reference collection supports the school’s #|curriculum, or the NH curriculum for K-8 schools. Per the rubric, your scores are 3,3,4,4,5,4,4,2,5, N/A. Good luck with your #|plans for this reference collection next year!

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14pt;"> - <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor feedback: You provided thorough and informative #|reviews of PebbleGo, Big Universe, and Marshall Cavendish Digital. Your inclusion of features that you liked and disliked was well done. While Big Universe is a great resource for schools, it is considered nonfiction instead of reference (and this course focuses only on reference). Therefore, while you may include it in your “real” library’s collection, for the purposes of this course and the reference collection for the fictional “Anytown” school library, it would not be included in your reference collection final #|assignment. Also, it is important to note that the primary content of PebbleGo is encyclopedia articles, [|maps], videos, and [|pictures]. There are four separate databases and the price of the subscription is dependent on the bundle of databases you choose for your school. We hope this feedback is helpful

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14pt;">- <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor feedback: This is a #|good start to #|a website evaluation #|checklist, but if you use it in your school setting, you will need to get permission from the Newton Schools since it is so similar. We graded your evaluation a 3 for development and design for the following reasons: you did not identify the age level, there was no purpose of the tool clearly stated, there were no #|clear #| directions for the students, and there were several typos that significantly impact the design of your evaluation. Also, the rubric states that citations should be included in #|APA format. Your rubric scores are 3,3,4,1.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14pt;"> - <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor feedback: As our rubric grading indicates, there are some significant gaps in your collaborative research unit. Our primary concern is that you did not provide a design with inquiry-based learning in mind, with student outcomes in mind. The Moodle logs indicate that you did not access the UBD and inquiry articles, which would have been helpful for this assignment. In the Curriculum Objectives section, you need to answer one/all of the questions provided, including the question “what do we want the students to know or be able to do at the end of this unit? Your stated lesson objective is an enduring understanding, but should also show evidence of inquiry - a question that students need to answer to demonstrate understanding and transfer of learning. In order to motivate students for the unit, the student tasks need to be performance-based, and might include a scenario or a prompt for students to understand what they need to do and to help them get excited about the learning. We had difficulty determining what the students were going to do, what they were to learn, and how they would be assessed. You might want to revisit “Loertscher’s taxonomy of involvement” on pages 120- 124 in Donham. With adjustments, your unit promises to be an exciting collaborative unit. You have broken out the roles of teacher and Library Media Specialist nicely, and the opportunities for collaboration are excellent. From what we can see, the opportunities for integration of technology are substantial. Your rubric scores are: 2,2,2,4,4,4,2,4,4,4.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14pt;"> and - <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor feedback: You did a very good job on your pathfinder. With a few edits, you will have a excellent pathfinder that provides astarting point for your students’ research. Your unit summary was well done, identifying how the unit is based on #|student interest and learning needs, is linked to student achievement, and supports the learning needs of all students. You clearly outlined the collaborative roles of the Library Media Specialist and #|teacher, and you identified the strategies you will employ to integrate information literacy, content, and technology curricula. You included several quality resources, but the [|assignment] guidelines specified delineating a basic source, and then key resources with annotations for 3-5 of those, which was not included in your pathfinder. Your Reference Resource collection (part I) has some excellent general reference resources, too, and you should consider including those in this unit (for example, World Book Encyclopedia either [|print] or [|online] and/or Britannica would have been good choices to list as basic sources). Also, listing the titles of all web sources in your Internet resources box would improve clarity (and consider[|adding] descriptions for all, like you did for Infoplease--very helpful). You created a box for books, which will be important to add because at present, all your sources are online. Make sure that your text follows rules of grammar for capitalization and that you use consistent formatting. It is age appropriate, although adding some more graphics or boxes/sections and cues (such as “start here”) may make it easier for your students to distinguish between types of sources. According to the rubric, your scores are: 5,5,5,5,3,4,3,2,5,4. Nicely done.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14pt;"> - <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor feedback: You have a good start to a core reference collection. A K-8 collection can be difficult due to the wide age range and diversity required. You included titles to meet the needs of your learners, representing several areas of the curriculum. Some areas of the curriculum for the middle school/upper grades could benefit from additional support (such as life sciences - biomes, health - drug education, and the arts). While many of your titles included selection tools and rationale, some titles were missing this information in all three parts of your collection. In terms of budget, your reported total of $17996.91 did not include the pricing for ProQuest and Ebsco databases in part I of your collection ($2086), causing your collection to be over budget. Gale Virtual Reference also did not list a price. You included a nice selection of free websites in each part of your collection. Your rubric scores are: 4,5,4,5,3,3. One point was deducted for late submission.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14pt;"> - <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor feedback: In your reflection you recognized the value of pathfinders, collaboration, and teaching students to locate and evaluate sources. More importantly, you identified that it is essential that the “LMS be well-versed in curriculum standards across grades/subjects and be able to envision connections and opportunities for collaboration that will benefit the students and maximize use of resources.” These are all good connections. While we appreciate your discussion of what you learned, we would liked to have seen more discussion of how these concepts will impact you as a school librarian, and whether or not your goals for the course were fulfilled. As you begin your practice as a Library Media Specialist, we hope you have an opportunity to revisit the course readings to build a foundation to your library practice of collaboration, leadership, and collection development. Your rubric scores are 5,4,5,5,5,5,5, and N/A. One point was also deducted for late submission.