Staff Development Fitness Project Team

1
Staff Development Fitness Project Team

• May 16, 2000

2
Accomplishments

• Completed first of three assessments on
  technology fitness
• Nearing completion of the second assessment
  instrument on instructional fitness.
• Beginning design of third assessment instrument
  on library and team fitness.
• Received support from subject experts reading and
  improving instruments.

3
How the Scores were Figured

• Results of the technology fitness assessment
• Scoring of responses times the number value of
  each of the five points on the scale ? the
  maximum score possible.
• ExampleLikert Scale 5 4 3 2 1
• N9 responding x4 x2 x 2
  x1 x0
  20 8 6 2
  0 36
• 9 x 5 (maximum possible of 100 if everyone gave
  a response of 5) 45
• 36 ? 45 .80 or 80 of the maximum possible
  score.
• 9 x 1 (minimum possible of 20 if everyone gave a
  response of 1) 9
• 9 ? 45 .20 or 20 of the maximum possible
  score.
• Since the lowest score possible is 20, the range
  of possible scores is actually only 80, from 20
  to 100. Therefore the true midpoint of the
  scoring range is 60, not 50.

4
Key to Total Average Fitness Score

• 80 100 High levels of expertise throughout
  team. Every category is strong.
• 70 79 Most members report strengths in all
  but one category.
• 60 69 Several categories show gaps among high
  and low fitness members.
• 50 59 Many categories show gaps among high
  and low fitness members.
• 40 49 Significantly low fitness scores among
  a majority of members.

5
TECHNOLOGY FITNESS CATEGORIES

• USE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY HARDWARE AND
  SOFTWARE
• ACCESSING INFORMATION RESOURCES
• ELECTRONIC PUBLISHING
• LEARNING NEW TECHNOLOGY
• UNDERSTANDING TECHNOLOGY USE AS IT RELATES TO THE
  LIBRARYAND SOCIAL VALUES
• EVALUATING THE USEFULLNESS OF TECHNOLOGY

6
Results

• Importance of Categories
• Average importance score of all teams responses
  to all six categories 82
• Highest average importance score by a team was 93
  (FA/H) and lowest average importance score was 68
  (FAST).
• Highest importance score given a category out of
  six categories was Category 4 Learning New
  Technology with a combined teams average of 88.
  Team averages for this category ranged from 68
  (RAMSC) to 100 (LIST).
• Lowest importance score given a category was
  Category 6 Evaluating the Usefulness of
  Technology with a combined teams average of 71.
  Team averages for this category ranged from 54
  (FAST) to 93 (FA/H).

7
Fitness Self-Assessment

• Average fitness score of all teams responses to
  all six categories 66
• Average fitness score 79 (LIST)
• 77 (FA/H)
• 70 (RAMSC)
• 69 (SET)
• 65 (UST)
• 63 (SST)
• 60 (FAST)
• 58 (MAT)
• 53 (TST)

8
CAUTION! Winding Road Ahead!

• The variation among teams may reflect decisions
  made by a team about how to staff to technology
  needs.
• This assessment is focused on capabilities judged
  necessary for a broad range of teams and
  positions, and is not always relevant to a
  specific team or position.
• This assessment does not assess for highly
  specialized capabilities, nor should the scores
  infer anything about performance. In some cases
  (setting up a personal computer and peripheral
  hardware) we are actively discouraged by LIST
  from performing such acts. In others (access and
  retrieve information through SABIO or associated
  data base) some of us are engaged in this
  activity as a central part of our work, and
  others are not.

9
CURVAS PELIGROSAS!

• We are returning the individual surveys to team
  members so that they can interpret the overall
  team scores in terms of their own responses.
• We are asking each team to set aside some time at
  a team meeting to review the overall team scores
  and come to some agreement about how to best
  interpret the scores.
• We ask that each team report back to the Fitness
  Project about the next steps or responses coming
  out of discussions, and suggest to Fitness what
  training programs or services we might recommend
  be supported.

10
ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS

• There are few agreed upon standards or
  performance measures related to these categories
  of knowledge and skill. Can I use a word
  processor to create a text document? Is it a
  strength of mine? The answers these questions
  raise other questions about what it means to be
  skilled or proficient. This assessment doesnt
  tell what Preserving Intellectual Freedom looks
  like, or how to judge if you were able to
  develop a perspective on socio-political
  issues. There are a wide variety of
  interpretations about what fitness means.
  Resist the urge to use these scores as if they
  were finely honed. They are very rough
  indicators.

11
Additional Thoughts

• Individuals and Teams may not know what they
  dont know. I may think that I am fit when it
  comes to file management, because I can open a
  new folder and put a file in it. At the same
  time, I may be creating names for files that will
  become easily lost, and not aware that I could do
  better. The self-assessments behind the scores
  are useful, but not perfect indicators of what we
  need.
• While these categories are fairly well understood
  to be important (as affirmed by the generally
  high importance scores), they are not static.
  Some will become more important in the future,
  and some less.

12
Yet Another Additional Thought

• Remember, what you know today can always become
  useless tomorrow. Recent example moving from
  Pine to Outlook.

13
Next Steps

• .The Instructional Fitness Assessment will be
  ready to administer soon. Fitness team members
  need to get scheduled to administer this
  assessment at each Teams regular meeting no
  later than May 26.
• .Teams provide the Fitness Project with feedback
  on their interpretation of the technology results
  as soon as possible.
• .The results of the Instructional Fitness
  assessment will be returned to teams at the same
  time that the third and last assessment is
  administered the week of June12-16.
• .Teams provide the Fitness Project with feedback
  on their interpretation of the instructional
  results along with the third assessment no later
  than Friday, June 23.

14
Next Steps

• .The results of the Library and Team fitness
  assessment will be returned within two weeks of
  the receipt of the last assessment.
• .The team will work on a final report based on
  findings of all three assessments and the
  feedback received. We will seek an empty slot in
  a team reports session in July.
• .The Fitness Project team will hand-off the
  implementation phase of this work, involving
  development of programs, services, and informal
  learning approaches to S.O.S. and all teams by
  late July (10 months after teamstart).