ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries 238 / C&RL News ■ A p ril 2003 C o l l e g e & R e s e a r c h L i b r a r i e s wsne Eight steps for developing a first-year English composition award A look at a successful program at East Carolina University by A li D. Abdulla and Janice Steed Lewis During th e 2000– 2001 acad em ic y ear, li­brarians at East Carolina University’s (ECU) Joyner Library developed and im plem ented search com petition for students in first-year En­ glish composition classes. The award competition is a relatively inexpensive way to prom ote library instruction and research skills and to rew ard stu­ dents for excellence. Lessons w e learned during the process of establishing the award may be use­ ful to other libraries considering similar projects. Recognizing both the newly established higher education vision that provides for lifelong learn­ ing opportunities and trains students to becom e independent learners and the critical role infor­ m ation technology will play in the lives o f our students and faculty, academic librarians have un­ dertaken tremendous innovations to raise the pro­ file o f inform ation literacy an d bring together content learning and information literacy devel­ opment. The first-year composition aw ard reflects our librarians’ efforts in w orking closely w ith teach­ ing faculty and moving library support tow ard a broader role in fostering student learning. It repre­ sents a partnership betw een teaching faculty and librarians at ECU that is helping build a univer sity-wide aw areness o f information literacy as a key to student learning and to the university’s life­ long learning agenda. B ecause the first-year English com position course provides the basic concepts and skills of a information literacy to undergraduate students, w e lo o k ed to these classes as o n e o f the m ost rea­ppropriate venues for developing a collaborative partnership w ith teaching faculty. Creating an aw ard program focused o n this segm ent o f our user group strengthens the library’s natural link to the writing curriculum o f the university. Prom o tin g research and w ritin g The First-Year Writing Program at ECU consists of tw o three-credit-hour classes that are general education requirements for all baccalaureate de­ gree programs. English 1100 focuses on principles o f expository writing, w hile English 1200 p ro ­ vides instruction in critical reading, library research, and research writing, including analytical and ar­ gumentative writing. T he typical class size is 25 students. Classes are taught by a combination of tenured and tenure-track faculty, adjunct faculty, and teaching assistants w ho are graduate students in the Master’s o f Arts in English program . The majority o f English 1200 instructors schedule one or tw o library instruction sessions for their classes. Traditionally, the coordinator o f instructional services has enjoyed a close relationship w ith the director o f the First-Year Writing Program. She is invited to m eet w ith new English teaching assis­ tants at the start of each sem ester to explain the learning objectives for basic instruction sessions and to discuss the instruction options available to the instructors and their students. About the authors A li D. Abdulla is head o f reference and Janice Steed Lewis is coordinator o f instructional services at East Carolina University, e-mail: abdullaa@mail.ecu.edu and lewisja@mail.ecu.edu mailto:abdullaa@mail.ecu.edu mailto:lewisja@mail.ecu.edu C&RL News ■ A p ril 2003 / 239 With the relationship between the library and the First-Year Writing Pro­ gram in mind, the head of the refer­ ence department developed the idea of a research competition. He believed that the competition would promote research and writing skills and show­ case the library’s role in teaching the research process. He hoped that the program would provide helpful in­ sights into the types of subjects being researched by our first-year students and the teaching methods of the course, which would lead to a higher level of collaboration with teaching Standing (left to right): W. Keats Sparrow (dean of the College of Arts and Sciences), Carroll Varner (director of Academic Library Services), English 1100 instructors Mary C arroll-H acke tt and Je n n ife r Hughes. Seated: Contest particip an t G in ge r Raynor, first-p lace w in n e r M eagan A t t a n a s i, a n d s e c o n d -p la c e w in n e r R eb ecca Lynn G oo dm uth. faculty in the English department. Within one academic year, we es­ tablished, named, funded, and pro­ moted the program, held the first competition, and awarded cash prizes to three students who wrote the top papers. The award winners were recognized at a reception attended by top university administra­ tors, students, faculty, library staff, and members of the Friends of the Library. The effort reflects a successful collaboration among all these groups. E ig h t step s to success The following steps outline the process the ECU library followed in setting up the competition and some lessons we learned along the way. 1. O btain th e su p p o r t o f lib ra ry ad­ m inistration. Our first step was to meet with the library director to obtain his support for the program. Since we planned to award cash prizes to the winners of the competition ($100 for first place, $75 for second, and $50 for third), w e needed a funding source. The direc­ tor enthusiastically endorsed the competition and offered to ask the Friends of the Library to sponsor the program, i.e., pay for a recep­ tion honoring the w inners and for the cash awards. The director also suggested that we name the award in honor of a respected long­ time professor in the English Department, a gentleman who also serves as the dean of the College of Arts and Sciences. Doing so gave us credibility w ithin the university community, h elped us attract an audience for the award reception, and recognized a worthy m ember of the faculty. The Friends of the Library’s spon­ sorship also improved our credibility and stability. 2. A ctiv ely in v o lv e th e E n g lish D e­ p a rtm en t. The director o f the First-Year Writing Program was a natural liaison within the English Department. He enthusiastically su p p o rted the com petition and its potential for fostering closer instructional ties between Joyner Library an d the English Department. The director p resen ted the proposal for the competition to the department’s composition committee and obtained its support. He readily ag reed to b e o n e o f the judges an d reco m ­ mended that the associate director of the pro­ gram also be a judge. An instruction librarian at Joyner Library agreed to be the third judge. 3. D ev e lo p w o rk a b le g u id e lin e s . We used the Web to find several similar programs at other academic libraries and reviewed their rules. The director o f the First-Year Writing Program suggested that the guidelines be flex­ ible enough to include the variety of approaches to research writing being taught (for example, multidisciplinary and multi-genre approaches). We felt, too, that the guidelines needed to be general, since the papers were originally writ­ ten for a class assignment and w ould have to meet any requirements imposed by the instruc­ tor, such as number or type of sources used or length. The draft guidelines stated that the papers had to include a research component and that they w o u ld b e judged on the quality o f the research as well as the quality of the writing. We also required that the paper have received a grade o f “A” in an English 1200 class. The associate director of the First-Year Writing 240 /C&RL News ■ April 2003 Program suggested that w e eliminate this re­ quirement, to remove any possible unfairness caused by inconsistencies in grading practices by instructors. We rem oved this requirement, and the number and quality of papers submitted for the competition proved that students would not be motivated to submit mediocre papers. 4. P rom ote th e co m p etitio n . We pro­ moted the award competition during English 1200 library instruction sessions. Handouts listing the award guidelines were available for pick up dur­ ing these classes and in the reference area of the library. We posted signs in the library and outside o f the English D epartm ent’s classrooms. The guidelines w ere also posted on the Library In­ struction and First-Year Writing Program Web sites. The First-Year Writing Program’s director re­ minded instructors of the award at their weekly meetings. Only teaching assistants regularly attend these meetings, however, so faculty w ho taught English 1200 classes may not have been as aware of the award program. During the second year of the competition, we sent e-mail reminders near the end of the semester to all English 1200 fac­ ulty and teaching assistants, asking them to an­ nounce the competition to their students and en­ courage students to submit papers. 5. D evelop a p ro cess fo r h a n d lin g sub­ mitted papers. We decided that papers could be mailed or personally delivered to the First-Year Writing Program director (one of the judges) or to the coordinator of instmctional services (who was not a judge). Without examining them, the director placed entries in an envelope and sent them to the coordinator. It was important to have someone handle the entries who was not a judge. Even though the guidelines specified that identi­ fying information should only be on a cover page, many students’ names were in headers on each page of the paper (probably a requirement from the instructor). The coordinator blacked out all identifying information, numbered the papers, made a key identifying numbers/names, made cop­ ies of the papers, and distributed them to each judge. 6. Judging. Judging went smoothly, with com­ promises being made where necessary. It probably is wise to have an odd number of judges in case a tiebreaker is needed. We also learned to allow sufficient time between judging and the awards ceremony to follow institutional procedures for having checks prepared for the winners. (A staff member had to advance the money for the awards at our first ceremony). 7. R ecognize t h e w in n e r s w ith ap pro­ priate fanfare. We chose the day before classes began in the fall for the awards ceremony. We planned a simple reception with cake and punch. Invitations were created using Blue Mountain e- cards. A nice feature of these e-cards is the RSVP button. Even though many people selected the “Not Sure” response, w e at least had some idea of how many people to expect. We invited all of the students who submitted entries, all teaching assis­ tants and faculty in the English Department, the dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, mem­ bers of the Board o f the Friends of the Library, members of the library’s reference department, the library director, and the library’s liaison with the Friends group. We contacted the winners via e-mail; if they did not reply within a few days, we telephoned them. We prepared special certificates for the first-, second- and third-place winners, as well as certificates of participation for all entrants. The library director served as the master of cer­ emonies at the reception and awarded the prizes and certificates. 8. Publicize th e w in n e rs and th e c o n ­ test. We sent press releases and photographs to the student and faculty campus newspapers. Had it been later in the school year, w e would have tried to have a reporter and photographer from the student newspaper attend the reception. We were pleasantly surprised that a reporter later in­ terviewed the head of the reference department and one of the winners. We also posted fliers announcing the winners in the library and on the Library Instruction Web site. M ovin g fo rw a rd This year, w e will obtain the w inners’ written permission to post their papers on our Web site. Also, w e ’ll ask the w inners to read excerpts from their papers during the reception. Establishing the award program required a substantial time commitment from library staff. With the groundwork in place, though, much less time has been required to coordinate the program during its second year. The benefits have b ee n well w orth the time spent. We in­ creased th e visibility o f the Library Instruc­ tion and the First-Year Writing Programs, we dev elo p ed closer w orking relationships b e­ tween these groups, w e positioned the library as an active player in the u n d ergraduate re­ search activities of the university, and w e en­ couraged and rewarded excellence among our students. ■ C&RL News m April 2003 / 241