American Library Association (ALA) standards for the accreditation of library schools emphasize the of student learning outcomes; this is part of a broader accountability movement in higher education. This study reviews accreditors' statements on assessment, past methods of evaluating library schools, and general definitions of measures of student learning. It then examines fifteen publicly-available program presentations, self-study documents prepared for ALA-Committee on Accreditation visits and review, for descriptions of or indirect measures of student learning outcomes and their use for program-level and improvement. Only seven of the Fifteen presentations describe the use of direct measures of student learning. Further research on program-level use of outcomes measurement would strengthen the profession and address external pressures for concrete accountability. Introduction As educational programs housed in institutions of higher education, library science programs are subject to a growing culture of assessment that has gained strength in recent years. There are increasing demands from state and national legislators for documentation of student learning1, and accrediting agencies, both regional (general institutional) and professional, have responded. The 1992 American Library Association Committee on Accreditation (COA) Standards for Accreditation of Master's programs in Library and Information Studies2 incorporate specific references to the importance of at several levels. The standard for faculty (HI) requires that faculty demonstrate skill in academic planning and Two other standards are even more and explicit: II. Curriculum The curriculum is continually reviewed and receptive to innovation; ils evaluation is used for ongoing appraisal, to make improvements, and to plan for the future. Evaluation of the curriculum includes of students' achievements and their subsequent accomplishments. IV: Students The school applies the results of evaluation of student achievement to development. Procedures are established for systematic evaluation of the degree to which a program's academic and administrative policies and activities regarding students are achieving its objectives.3 Because the standards specify the importance of evaluation and evaluative data, this article examines presentations prepared for ALA accreditation - the primary documentation of how the standards are met- to review in what way library and information science (LIS) masters programs report that student learning outcomes are assessed and their evaluation utilized in planning. Background Professional accreditation is part of overall academic evaluation. The public's view of institutional evaluation has largely revolved around input and process variables. For the 2006 U.S. News and World Report college rankings, the largest single factor (25%) was a reputational survey. Input data (quality of students, faculty characteristics, and spending per student) made up approximately 35%; process variables such as class size approximately 10%; and a type of indirect outcomes data - graduation and retention rates - the remainder.4 The National Survey of Student Engagement, something of a competitor in terms of institutional assessment, is primarily process-oriented, asking students what kinds of educational experiences they have engaged in at their institution.5 There have been relatively few attempts to rate or rank library schools. The U.S. News graduate school rankings for library science and the White studies use only reputational surveys.6 Other researchers have studied faculty (e.g. publications7 and general qualifications8); student or alumni feedback9 and employer feedback.10 Some review administrative inputs such as faculty-student ratio or budgets. To a large degree dissatisfaction with these reputational, input and process oriented approaches contributed to the growing development of an outcomes-based approach, strengthening in the 1980s and 1990s. …
Read full abstract
Sep 1, 2021
David Bockino 
Open Access