Search results

A common way for academic libraries to support student success is through partnership with writing centers. Practices such as applying service design thinking to develop and inform integrated library and writing center services can lead to a student-focused space. This chapter outlines how service design, studio pedagogy, and peer learning informed the setup and ongoing services in The Undergrad Research and Writing Studio (URWS or, the Studio), a shared space in the Oregon State University Libraries. The URWS model is grounded in studio pedagogy, which employs a “propose-critique-iterate” approach to student writing development (Brocato, 2009). Research and writing consultants assist student writers when they have a question, mirroring libraries’ point of need service approach. Librarians and studio faculty collaborated on the training curriculum, which emphasizes how research and writing are intertwined processes. Peer consultant reflection and assessment inform the ongoing development of the overarching program, service, space, and training, ensuring alignment with the ethos of centering students and their learning.

The study aims to explore collaborations between writing centers and libraries which create opportunities for providing information literacy intervention for students doing researched writing. This case study gathered data from writing center logs to uncover if and how information literacy activity was occurring during consultations.

A representative sample of writing center logs recorded between September of 2013 and May 2014 was mined for frequencies of library and information literacy terms. Transaction logs were coded and analyzed according to the frames in the Association of College and Research Libraries Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education.

Information literacy is discussed in only 13 per cent of consultations. Referrals to librarians accounted for less than 1 per cent of all transactions. Students most commonly asked for assistance in formatting citations, but deeper information literacy conversations did occur that provide opportunities for engagement with the Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education.

Transactions were examined from one university. Although findings cannot be generalized, the results were applicable to local services, and this study provides a model useful for libraries and writing centers.

This study provides ample direction for future collaborations that will take advantage of the intersections of information literacy and writing instruction to improve student research skills.

Although much has been written about partnerships between libraries and writing centers, this study uniquely demonstrates a model for data sharing across institutional boundaries and how one library mined existing data from a writing center.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how library reference departments and writing centers have extended their services to reach audiences beyond their respective locations, and to analyze the experiences of one university in collaboration between the two entities. The aim is to provide insight into the advantages and disadvantages of two approaches toward collaboration: that of a reference librarian holding office hours in a writing center, and writing center consultants providing service hours within the library.

Reference/consultation logs and input from participating consultants and librarians are utilized to explore the usage and effectiveness of the two collaborative approaches.

Analyzing student participation in the library and writing center services indicate that, while students are not likely to seek library reference services in the writing center, they appreciate having writing consultation services available within the library at times when the writing center is not open. Observation also suggests that students use services differently at the two locations, preferring extended interactions at the writing center where hour‐long consultations are customary.

This work conveys first hand experiences and makes suggestions regarding scheduling, staffing, equipment, and publicity.

Little has been written about the feasibility and practical implications of writing center consultants working within libraries.

Research and writing can be challenging tasks for undergraduate students, and evaluating online sources for use in papers can be especially difficult to do well. This chapter discusses a partnership between a library and a writing center to teach writing consultants the basics of the Information Literacy Framework and online source evaluation. This included providing additional education for peer writing consultants. Consultants became more fluent in the aspects of evaluation and provided perspective on how and why undergraduate students struggle with this in the research and writing process, establishing the value of assembling networked pedagogical models for teaching information literacy.

This paper seeks to report on the successful collaboration in an academic learning commons environment, established collaboratively between the University of Guelph and Humber College, where library reference and writing center support services are integrated and therefore model student behaviour when writing academic papers.

After examining previous collaborative efforts between libraries and writing centres, this paper focuses on the relationship between thinking and the writing process itself as the theoretical framework on which a successful collaboration between the University of Guelph‐Humber Library Reference Services and Humber College's Writing Center exists. Statistical data relating to the increased usage levels of reference services, when made available in a writing centre environment, as well as library services satisfaction data are reported.

Researching and writing anxiety is diminished when students are able to access both reference (researching) services and writing support services in the same location. The increased exchange and interface between reference service providers and writing tutors, while assisting students to write better academic papers, reflects the fact that thinking, researching and writing are interwoven and recursive processes that are further enhanced when supported by their physical collocation. Academic institutions should model and further facilitate the collocation and integration of the research and writing processes by reorganizing services and service delivery units to better reflect student behaviour.

When this paper was written, service level usage data that had been gathered fully supported the continued collaboration of the reference and writing centre services. However, further research needs to be conducted regarding the impact of this cross‐functional, student support service on student success.

This paper is of interest to academic leaders and service providers who are interested in furthering collaborations between students' service providers, primarily library reference staff and writing centre tutors, whose partnership naturally reflects the integrated and recursive research and writing processes.

This paper aims to report on the University of Denver Penrose Library's Research Center, a new reference service model created to respond to the changing needs of students and to strengthen the connection between research and writing.

An increase in reference questions requiring more time, a financial gift to the university which provided an opportunity to propose a new vision of integrating research and writing, and the opening of a new Writing Center in the library prompted the reference librarians to implement a consultation model in fall quarter 2008. A highly visible, dedicated space for one‐on‐one, in‐depth consultations, the Research Center reinforces skills learned in library instruction sessions and effectively promotes reference services.

A successful new Research Center reaches a larger segment of the university community, better serves student research needs, and enhances library instructional services. During the course of the academic year, 856 consultations were provided to students and faculty, attesting to the popularity of the service.

More robust assessment data are needed to establish the impact of the Research Center on student learning.

The paper outlines a successful method of delivering research services that leverages existing staff resources, increases the visibility of library services, and provides more personalized, in‐depth research consultations to the university community.

Adapted from the Writing Center consultation model, the Research Center's prominent location and configuration encourage active learning interactions, complement the library instruction program, and actively promote consultations with subject‐specialist librarians.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the design, implementation, and pilot of a Mobile Makerspace at a private, southeastern liberal arts institution that did not have a campus-wide makerspace. In an effort to give students in a residential hall access to maker tools and technologies and also meet the needs of a campus-wide writing initiative, a team of administrators and staff worked to build and design programing for the “MobileMaker,” a pop-up Mobile Makerspace.

The authors explain how the equipment was chosen based on a variety of user skill levels. The technical specifications of the MobileMaker are also detailed, which includes 3D printing and crafting tools, and a variety of electronics. In addition, they explain how a mobile cart was modified to house and secure the equipment so it could be stored in an unsecured area. The team experienced several challenges with the MobileMaker project, including the overall durability of the mobile cart and the lack of a dedicated staff to manage the equipment.

The authors conclude that mobility and security were mutually exclusive with the mobile design that was chosen. Greater mobility was sacrificed to achieve greater security via locked doors and compartments that added weight to the cart. While the goal of increased student access to maker tools and technologies was met, the level of access was often limited due to staffing limitations.

An unanticipated outcome of the project was the conversations that were generated about the need and demand for a dedicated makerspace open to the entire campus community.

The purpose of this article is to survey the means through which libraries and writing centers are collaborating to determine best practices and applications.

Examples of collaboration between libraries and writing centers were examined and grouped into similar examples to highlight themes within the literature.

Many librarians are training writing center staff and tutors in library services and information literacy skills. Reference librarians are sharing space or holding joint office hours with writing centers to help create a one‐stop shop for students. Joint classes and workshops are helping to reinforce the connected nature of research and writing. It is important to survey the environment; some types of collaboration work better at some institutions than others.

This is a review of the literature concerning collaboration and cannot contain every example of library and writing center collaboration.

Using this article, librarians can compile a list of possible ways to collaborate with their writing center.

This article is of value to librarians and writing center staff looking for ways to foster collaboration and ways that they can begin to collaborate.

The Bureau of Economics in the Federal Trade Commission has a three-part role in the Agency and the strength of its functions changed over time depending on the preferences and ideology of the FTC’s leaders, developments in the field of economics, and the tenor of the times. The over-riding current role is to provide well considered, unbiased economic advice regarding antitrust and consumer protection law enforcement cases to the legal staff and the Commission. The second role, which long ago was primary, is to provide reports on investigations of various industries to the public and public officials. This role was more recently called research or “policy R&D”. A third role is to advocate for competition and markets both domestically and internationally. As a practical matter, the provision of economic advice to the FTC and to the legal staff has required that the economists wear “two hats,” helping the legal staff investigate cases and provide evidence to support law enforcement cases while also providing advice to the legal bureaus and to the Commission on which cases to pursue (thus providing “a second set of eyes” to evaluate cases). There is sometimes a tension in those functions because building a case is not the same as evaluating a case. Economists and the Bureau of Economics have provided such services to the FTC for over 100 years proving that a sub-organization can survive while playing roles that sometimes conflict. Such a life is not, however, always easy or fun.