266 266 College & Research Libraries May 1998 Development of Critical Thinking Skills: An Analysis of Academic Library Experiences and Other Measures Ethelene Whitmire The purpose of this study is to determine the influences that affect the development of critical thinking skills in undergraduate students. This study examines data from the College Student Experiences Question­ naire (CSEQ), a national, cross-sectional survey completed by students during the 1992–1993 academic year. Using Astin’s I-E-O model and Pace’s quality of effort theory as the conceptual framework, the study examined students’ background characteristics, library experiences, experiences with faculty, course learning, and experiences with writing to determine the greatest influences on gains in critical thinking devel­ opment. Results of the factor analyses and the hierarchical multiple re­ gression indicated that grades, class year, focused academic library activities, informal faculty interaction, active course learning, and con­ scientious writing all resulted in gains in critical thinking. Implications of these findings suggest that academic librarians should design library research skills courses to increase students’ focused use of the aca­ demic library and its resources in order to increase their critical thinking skills. ne of the primary objectives of American higher education is to assist undergraduates in acquiring critical thinking skills.1 Higher education studies have ex­ amined numerous college experiences to explain undergraduates’ development of critical thinking. Based on their review of empirical studies, researchers Ernest T. Pascarella and Patrick T. Terenzini con­ cluded that college attendance has a posi­ tive influence on this development.2 Critical thinking has been defined as the ability to identify central issues or assumptions in an argument, evaluate conflicting claims, eliminate useless infor­ mation, evaluate the credibility of an in­ formation source, evaluate evidence of authority, provide support for a conclu­ sion, interpret whether conclusions are warranted on the basis of the data given, incorporate anomalous data into a coher­ ent framework, and read with a high level of comprehension.3 If it is true, as Pascarella and Terenzini conclude, that college attendance does make a difference in the development of critical thinking skills, we need to determine Ethelene Whitmire is Librarian-in-Residence in the Sterling Memorial Library at Yale University; e- mail: ethelene.whitmire@yale.edu. 266 mailto:ethelene.whitmire@yale.edu Development of Critical Thinking Skills 267 what aspects of the college expe­ rience influence this develop­ ment. Recent higher education studies have identified factors such as student precollege traits, course work and curricu­ lar patterns, classroom experi­ ences, out-of-class experiences, student activities, institutional characteristics, and involve­ ment.4 These studies also have identified academic library ex­ periences as a factor related to critical thinking development. According to Barbara MacAdam, critical thinking de­ velopment “has been the focus of considerable discussion and program development within academic libraries in recent years, primarily as a teaching strategy and as a desired out­ come for bibliographic instruction.”5 The combination of a new generation of com­ puter-literate undergraduates and the vast amount of information available by way of computers and electronic re­ sources has increased the necessity for the development of critical thinking skills. According to Lizabeth A. Wilson, “stu­ dents tend to think that everything acces­ sible via computers is useful and accu­ rate.”6 However, undergraduates need to Empirical research on academic library experiences and the develop- ment of critical thinking have provided mixed results. understand and “be continually re­ minded that online sources are merely access tools, uncritical purveyors of infor­ mation.”7 One of the greatest problems facing librarians today is assisting users in critically evaluating the vast amount of information available to them.8 Some librarians have designed pro­ grams and services aimed at fostering un­ dergraduates’ critical thinking develop­ ment. Joan Ormondroyd describes four FIGURE 1 The I-E-O Model Inputs Environment Outcome Student Academic Development background library of critical characteristics experiences thinking skills Experiences with faculty Course learning Experience in writing programs at Cornell University in which librarians and faculty work together to develop courses that promote the concept of critical thinking.9 Sonia Bodi describes collaborating with faculty to design bib­ liographic instruction presentations for their courses that will encourage students to develop their critical thinking skills.10 In another article, Bodi discusses linking bibliographic instruction with critical thinking by using a scheme of intellec­ tual development as a guide for the goals of the course. 11 Finally, Eugene A. Engeldinger suggests criteria students should use to evaluate sources when con­ structing an annotated bibliography.12 The criteria are designed to develop critical thinking skills. Review of the Literature Empirical research on academic library experiences and the development of criti­ cal thinking have provided mixed results. John C. Ory and Larry A. Braskamp stud­ ied the relationship between the quality of effort students put into their involve­ ment in activities and the subsequent impact on student growth and develop­ ment.13 They defined intellectual growth and development with terms represent­ ing critical thinking (e.g., ability to think analytically and logically, ability to put http:bibliography.12 http:course.11 http:skills.10 268 College & Research Libraries May 1998 ideas together, and so on). There were moderate posi­ tive correlations between academic activities (library experiences, experiences with faculty, course learning, writing) and gains in critical thinking for students in the honors (n = 74) and transi­ tional program (n = 74) and low positive correlations be­ tween the two factors and with the regular students (n = 77). There were low posi­ tive correlations between in­ terpersonal activities (e.g., personal experiences, expe­ riences with peers, etc.) and gains in critical thinking skills for all three groups. The authors used the College Student Experiences Ques­ tionnaire (CSEQ), which measures the quality of effort that students engage in de­ veloped by C. Robert Pace.14 Ory and Braskamp found a strong relationship between library experiences and gains in critical thinking.15 Patrick T. Terenzini and others studied the effect of three dimensions of stu­ dents’ college experiences: curricular exposure; formal classroom and instructional experiences; and out-of-class experiences on critical think­ ing.16 They found that formal classroom and instructional experiences and out-of-class experiences on critical think­ ing contributed to gains in TABLE 1 Descriptive Statistics for the Variables in the Analysis Standard Mean* Deviation Block 1: Background Characteristics Age 1.31† .64 Gender .60‡ .49 Race .24§ .43 Class 2.40|| 1.23 Grades 3.17# 1.14 Majors .50** .50 Block 2: Academic Library Experiences Used indexes to journal articles 2.01 .84 Developed bibliography 2.30 .91 Used card catalogue or computer 2.49 .89 Asked librarian for help 2.00 .79 Read in reserve or reference section 1.94 .81 Checked citations in things read 1.73 .81 Read basic references or documents 1.48 .69 Found material by browsing 1.78 .85 in stacks Checked out books 1.82 .87 Block 3: Experiences with Faculty Talked with faculty member 2.81 .84 Asked for info related to a course 2.62 .83 Visited informally after class 2.32 .86 Made office appointment with faculty 2.12 .81 Discussed term paper/project 2.08 .81 with faculty Discussed career plans with faculty 1.92 .84 Asked for comments/criticism 1.96 .84 about work Had coffee, cokes, snacks with faculty 1.32 .63 Worked with faculty on research 1.21 .56 project Discussed personal problems with 1.40 .67 faculty critical thinking. This was a one-year lon- critical thinking developed by American gitudinal, panel study design in which College Testing in the fall of 1991. Dur­ six hundred students were studied at a ing the spring 1992 term, students com­ large, urban research university in the pleted the follow-up Form 88A of CAAP Midwest. The students completed Form and items from the CSEQ measuring stu­ 88B of the Collegiate Assessment of Aca- dents’ in-class and out-of-class experi­ demic Proficiency (CAAP) measuring ences in college. The results of the regres­ http:thinking.15 Development of Critical Thinking Skills 269 TABLE 1 (cont.) Descriptive Statistics for the Variables in the Analysis Standard Mean* Deviation Block 4: Course Learning Took detailed notes in class 3.48 .69 Participated in class discussions 2.86 .83 Underlined major points in readings 2.95 .93 Saw how facts and ideas fit together 2.90 .82 Thought about practical applications 2.84 .82 Integrated ideas from various sources 2.81 .88 Summarized major points 2.77 .87 and information Explained material to another student 2.77 .80 Made outlines from notes or readings 2.27 .99 Did additional readings 1.87 .82 Block 5: Experiences with Writing Used dictionary or thesaurus 3.02 .85 Thought about grammar etc, 3.12 .84 while writing Wrote rough draft and revised it 3.16 .89 Spent 5 or more hours writing a paper 2.86 1.01 Asked others to read something 2.72 .97 you wrote Referred to style book or grammar 2.49 .97 manual Revised paper two or more times 2.51 1.01 Asked instructor for advice on writing 2.12 .97 Made appointment to talk about 1.79 .93 criticism Submitted writing for publication 1.27 .68 Dependent Variable: Critical Thinking Gain in ability to put ideas together 2.78 .79 Gain in ability to think analytically 2.71 .82 Gain in ability to learn on own 2.92 .81 Gain in quantitative thinking 2.37 .89 * Means are on a scale of 1 to 4 with 1 = never and 4 = very often except in Block 1 as noted. † 1 = 22 or younger to 3 = 28 or older ‡ 1 = female; 0 = male § 1 = minority; 0 = white || 1 = freshman to 4 = senior # 1 = C or lower to 5 = A ** 0 = professional; 1 = liberal arts sion analysis indicated that variables predicting gains in critical thinking included precollege characteristics (par­ ents’ education, initial critical thinking ability); out-of-class ex­ periences (relationships with stu­ dents, number of nonassigned books read); and class-related ex­ periences (hours per week spent studying). No variables describing the types of courses taken (e.g., math, science, or arts and hu­ manities) proved to be signifi­ cant. However, this study found that library experiences were significantly and nega­ tively related to the develop­ ment of critical thinking. This negative relationship between academic library experiences and critical thinking develop­ ment also was found in a simi­ lar study by the same authors.17 Statement of the Problem Considering the mixed results of the previous empirical re­ search examining the relation­ ship between academic library experiences and the develop­ ment of critical thinking skills, this study uses a different con­ ceptual framework. The re­ search questions for this study are: 1. What factors influence the development of critical thinking skills? 2. What is the role of the academic library experiences of undergraduates in their devel­ opment of critical thinking? The conceptual framework for this study is the I-E-O model developed by Alexander W. Astin and the quality of effort theory developed by C. Robert Pace.18,19 The I-E-O model rep­ resents inputs, environment, http:authors.17 270 College & Research Libraries May 1998 and outcome. The inputs and the en­ vironment represent the indepen­ dent variables. The inputs in this study are the students’ background characteristics. The environment consists of the college experiences (with the academic library, the fac­ ulty, writing, and course learning). Finally, the outcome is the depen­ dent variable—the development of critical thinking skills. The quality of effort theory postulates that stu­ dent outcomes are related to the amount of time and energy students expend on their college experiences (see figure 1). The Method Section Data Source This study utilized data obtained from the 1992–1993 CSEQ. The CSEQ was designed to assess the levels of time and effort students in­ vest in their college activities, among other items. The study examined data from six sections of the CSEQ: (1) background information, (2) li­ brary experiences, (3) experiences with faculty, (4) course learning, (5) experiences with writing, and (6) es­ timate of gains in critical thinking (see table 1). Subjects The data set contained 18,157 stu­ dents attending all institutional types (research universities, doctoral universities, comprehensive col­ leges and universities, liberal arts colleges, and community colleges). The majority of the students in the sample were traditional-aged col­ lege students, female, and white. The average grade for the sample was a B. Finally, the students in the sample were split evenly between professional and liberal arts majors. Although most students in the sample had talked with a faculty member, most had not worked with TABLE 2 Factor Loadings and Internal Consistencies for Exploratory Factor Model of Library Experiences, Experiences with Faculty, Course Learning, Experiences with Writing, and Critical Thinking Variables Factors and Survey Items Factor Loading Academic Library Reference Activities (internal consisitency = .77) Used indexes to journal articles .68 Developed bibliography .67 Used card catalogue or computer .65 Asked librarian for help .49 Read in reserve or reference section .44 Academic Library Probing Activities (internal consisitency = .75) Checked citations in things read .66 Read basic references or documents .65 Found material by browsing in stacks .64 Checked out books .52 Experiences with Faculty—Informal Contacts (internal consisitency = .89) Asked for info related to a course .78 Visited informally after class .73 Talked with faculty member .73 Made office appointment with faculty .64 Discussed term paper/project with faculty .62 Asked for comments/criticism about work .58 Discussed career plans with faculty .55 Experiences with Faculty—Personal, Social, Work Contacts (internal consisitency = .68) Had coffee, cokes, snacks with faculty .67 Discussed personal problems with faculty .62 Worked with faculty on research project .50 Course Learning—Participation and Application (internal consisitency = .75) Saw how facts and ideas fit together .76 Thought about practical applications .74 Participated in class discussions .46 Integrated ideas from various sources .45 Development of Critical Thinking Skills 271 TABLE 2 (cont.) Factor Loadings and Internal Consistencies for Exploratory Factor Model of Library Experiences, Experiences with Faculty, Course Learning, Experiences with Writing, and Critical Thinking Variables Factors and Survey Items Factor Loading Course Learning—Integrative Activities (internal consisitency = .75) Made outlines from notes or readings .72 Summarized major points and information .65 Did additional readings .47 Explained material to another student .44 Underlined major points in readings .42 Experiences with Writing—Basic Mechanisms and Conscientious Revisions (internal consisitency = .86) Wrote rough draft and revised it .76 Thought about grammar, etc., while writing .70 Spent five or more hours writing a paper .65 Used dictionary or thesaurus .63 Revised paper two or more times .61 Referred to stylebook or grammar manual .57 Asked others to read something you wrote .57 Experiences with Writing—Critical Advice and Quality (internal consisitency = .70) Asked instructor for advice on writing .78 Made appointment to talk about criticism .77 Submitted writing for publication .36 Critical Thinking (internal consisitency = .82) Gain in ability to put ideas together .83 Gain in ability to think analytically .79 Gain in ability to learn on own .67 Gain in quantitative thinking .65 demic library experiences, the stu­ dents in the sample selected the variable “used card catalogue or computer” as the library experi­ ence they engaged in most often and “read basic references or docu­ ments” as the activity they engaged in less frequently (see table 1). Analyses Exploratory factor analyses were conducted utilizing orthogonal, principal-axis factor rotation methods to reduce the number of measured variables for analyses and to eliminate highly correlated variables. Oblique factor analyses were used in this study based on the assumption that these factors were correlated. Items that had a factor score of at least .35 or over were retained in the development of subsequent scales. Blocked hierarchical multiple regression was used to determine the amount of influence of each variable and factor on under­ graduate development of critical thinking skills. Using Astin’s I-E­ O model, the variables represent­ ing the inputs were entered first, followed by the factors represent­ ing the environment. Results The factor analyses resulted in two academic library experiences factors. One factor represented li­ brary reference activities de­ scribed by C. Robert Pace as “rou­ tine, moderately exploratory use” and library probing activities which refer to “increased amounts faculty on a research project. Nearly all of independent exploration and focused the students stated that they took detailed activity.”20 The experiences with faculty notes in class, but few did any additional members broke into two factors repre­ readings for their courses. The majority senting informal and formal contact. The of the students wrote rough drafts and two resulting factors describing course revised their papers, but few submitted learning represent class participation and them for publication. Regarding aca- integrative activities. Experiences with 272 College & Research Libraries May 1998 TABLE 3 Summary of Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Development of Critical Thinking Skills Significance Variable B Level Inputs Race .11 Gender - .43 *** Age - .34 *** Class .29 *** Grades .07 *** Major - .07 Environment Academic library .01 reference activities Academic library .03 *** probing activities Experiences with .04 *** faculty—informal contacts Experiences with .03 faculty—personal, social, work contacts Course learning— .26 *** participation and application Course learning— .09 *** integrative activities Experiences with .05 *** writing—basic mechanisms Experiences with - .00 writing—critical advice and quality Final R2 = .21 ***p = ˜ .001 writing also broke into two factors repre­ senting using basic mechanisms and con­ scientious revisions and seeking critical ad­ vice. Finally, four variables represent the critical thinking factor. These results are shown in table 2 along with the alpha reliabilities of the factors, which ranged from .68 to .89. The results of the blocked hierarchical regression reported in table 3 revealed that women and older students were less likely to report gains in critical thinking. Upperclassmen and students with higher grades were more likely to report gains. Routine use of the academic library did not influence critical thinking develop­ ment. However, students engaged in more focused library activities reported a significant impact on their critical think­ ing development. Likewise, students re­ porting more effort in engaging in infor­ mal contact with faculty (including dis­ cussing a term paper with faculty), ac­ tively participating in course learning, and making conscientious revisions in their writing reported greater gains in their critical thinking. Conclusions Considering the results of the analyses in this study, several factors can increase undergraduate development of critical thinking skills. Faculty and librarians can work together to help students achieve this desirable learning outcome. The re­ sults of the regression analysis indicate that students need to meet with their fac­ ulty members more often to discuss their term papers among other concerns, be­ come active class participants, work on their writing skills, and use the academic library for more focused activities. Notes 1. Alexander W. Astin, Assessment for Excellence: The Philosophy and Practice of Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education (Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Pr., 1993); Sonia Bodi, “Critical Thinking and Bibliographic Instruction: The Relationship,” Journal of Academic Librarianship 14 (1988): 150–53; Diane F. Halpern, “Assessing the Effectiveness of Critical Thinking Instruction,” Journal of Gen­ eral Education 42 (1993): 238–54; Ernest T. Pascarella et al, “Is Differential Exposure to College Linked to the Development of Critical Thinking?” Research in Higher Education 37 (1996): 159–74. Development of Critical Thinking Skills 273 2. Ernest T. Pascarella and Patrick T. Terenzini, How College Affects Students: Findings and Insights from Twenty Years of Research (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1991). 3. C. Furedy and J. Furedy, “Critical Thinking: Toward Research and Dialogue,” Using Re­ search to Improve Teaching (New Directions for Teaching and Learning No. 23), eds. J. Donald and A. Sullivan (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1985); Halpern, “Assessing the Effectiveness of Critical Thinking Instruction,” 238–54. 4. John C. Ory and Larry A. Braskamp, “Involvement and Growth of Students in Three Academic Programs,” Research in Higher Education 28 (1988): 116–29; Patrick T. Terenzini et al, “First-Generation College Students: Characteristics, Experiences, and Cognitive Development,” Research in Higher Education 37 (1996): 1–22; ———, “Academic and Out-of-Class Influences on Student’ Intellectual Orientations,” Review of Higher Education 19 (1995): 23–44; ———, “Influ­ ences Affecting the Development of Students’ Critical Thinking Skills,” Research in Higher Educa­ tion 36 (1995): 23–39. 5. Barbara MacAdam, “Sustaining the Culture of the Book: The Role of Enrichment Reading and Critical Thinking in the Undergraduate Curriculum,” in Library Trends, vol. 44, eds. T. G. McFadden and T. J. Hostetler (Champaign, Ill.: Univ. of Illinois Graduate School of Library and Information Science, 1995), 237–63. 6. Lizabeth A. Wilson, “Changing Users: Bibliographic Instruction for Whom?” in The Evolv­ ing Educational Mission of the Library, eds. Betsy Baker and Mary Ellen Litzinger (Chicago: ACRL, 1992), 30–31. 7. Sonia Bodi, “Collaborating with Faculty in Teaching Critical Thinking: The Role of Li­ brarians,” Research Strategies 10 (1992): 69–76. 8. Keith Morgan, “Information-Seeking Behavior: Challenges for Reference Services,” LIBRES: Library and Information Science Research Electronic Journal 3 (1993). 9. Joan Ormondroyd, “The Role of the Library in Promoting Critical Thinking in the Class­ room and Beyond,” in Russian–American Seminar on Critical Thinking and the Library, vols. 200/ 201 eds. Cerise Oberman and Dennis Kimmage (Champaign, Ill.: Univ. of Illinois Graduate School of Library and Information Science, 1995), 119–25. 10. Bodi, “Collaborating with Faculty in Teaching Critical Thinking,” 69–76. 11. ———, “Critical Thinking and Bibliographic Instruction: The Relationship,” 150–53. 12. Eugene A. Engeldinger, “Bibliographic Instruction and Critical Thinking: The Contribu­ tion of the Annotated Bibliography,” RQ 28 (1988): 195–202. 13. Ory and Braskamp, “Involvement and Growth of Students in Three Academic Programs,” 116–29. 14. C. Robert Pace, Measuring the Quality of College Student Experiences (Los Angeles: Univ. of California Higher Education Research Institute, 1984). 15. Ory and Braskamp, “Involvement and Growth of Students in Three Academic Programs,” 116–29. 16. Terenzini et al, “Influences Affecting the Development of Students’ Critical Thinking Skills,” 23–39. 17. ———, “Academic and Out-of-Class Influences on Student’ Intellectual Orientations,” 23–44. 18. Astin, Assessment for Excellence. 19. Pace, Measuring the Quality of College Student Experiences. 20. Ibid. << /ASCII85EncodePages false /AllowTransparency false /AutoPositionEPSFiles true /AutoRotatePages /All /Binding /Left /CalGrayProfile (Dot Gain 20%) /CalRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1) /CalCMYKProfile (U.S. Web Coated \050SWOP\051 v2) /sRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1) /CannotEmbedFontPolicy /Warning /CompatibilityLevel 1.3 /CompressObjects /Tags /CompressPages true /ConvertImagesToIndexed true /PassThroughJPEGImages true /CreateJobTicket false /DefaultRenderingIntent /Default /DetectBlends true /DetectCurves 0.0000 /ColorConversionStrategy /CMYK /DoThumbnails false /EmbedAllFonts true /EmbedOpenType false /ParseICCProfilesInComments true /EmbedJobOptions true /DSCReportingLevel 0 /EmitDSCWarnings false /EndPage -1 /ImageMemory 1048576 /LockDistillerParams false /MaxSubsetPct 1 /Optimize true /OPM 1 /ParseDSCComments true /ParseDSCCommentsForDocInfo true /PreserveCopyPage true /PreserveDICMYKValues true /PreserveEPSInfo true /PreserveFlatness false /PreserveHalftoneInfo true /PreserveOPIComments false /PreserveOverprintSettings true /StartPage 1 /SubsetFonts false /TransferFunctionInfo /Apply /UCRandBGInfo /Preserve /UsePrologue false /ColorSettingsFile () /AlwaysEmbed [ true ] /NeverEmbed [ true ] /AntiAliasColorImages false /CropColorImages false /ColorImageMinResolution 151 /ColorImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleColorImages true /ColorImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /ColorImageResolution 300 /ColorImageDepth -1 /ColorImageMinDownsampleDepth 1 /ColorImageDownsampleThreshold 1.10000 /EncodeColorImages true /ColorImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterColorImages true /ColorImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /ColorACSImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /ColorImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /JPEG2000ColorACSImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /JPEG2000ColorImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /AntiAliasGrayImages false /CropGrayImages false /GrayImageMinResolution 151 /GrayImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleGrayImages true /GrayImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /GrayImageResolution 300 /GrayImageDepth -1 /GrayImageMinDownsampleDepth 2 /GrayImageDownsampleThreshold 1.10000 /EncodeGrayImages true /GrayImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterGrayImages true /GrayImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /GrayACSImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /GrayImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /JPEG2000GrayACSImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /JPEG2000GrayImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /AntiAliasMonoImages false /CropMonoImages false /MonoImageMinResolution 600 /MonoImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleMonoImages true /MonoImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /MonoImageResolution 1200 /MonoImageDepth -1 /MonoImageDownsampleThreshold 1.16667 /EncodeMonoImages true /MonoImageFilter /CCITTFaxEncode /MonoImageDict << /K -1 >> /AllowPSXObjects false /CheckCompliance [ /None ] /PDFX1aCheck false /PDFX3Check false /PDFXCompliantPDFOnly false /PDFXNoTrimBoxError true /PDFXTrimBoxToMediaBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXSetBleedBoxToMediaBox true /PDFXBleedBoxToTrimBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfile () /PDFXOutputConditionIdentifier () /PDFXOutputCondition () /PDFXRegistryName () /PDFXTrapped /False /CreateJDFFile false /Description << /ENU (IPC Print Services, Inc. Please use these settings with InDesign CS4 \(6.x\). These settings should work well for every type of job; B/W, Color or Spot Color. Contact Pre-press Helpdesk at prepress_helpdesk@ipcprintservices.com if you have questions or need customized settings.) >> /Namespace [ (Adobe) (Common) (1.0) ] /OtherNamespaces [ << /AsReaderSpreads false /CropImagesToFrames true /ErrorControl /WarnAndContinue /FlattenerIgnoreSpreadOverrides false /IncludeGuidesGrids false /IncludeNonPrinting false /IncludeSlug false /Namespace [ (Adobe) (InDesign) (4.0) ] /OmitPlacedBitmaps false /OmitPlacedEPS false /OmitPlacedPDF false /SimulateOverprint /Legacy >> << /AddBleedMarks true /AddColorBars false /AddCropMarks true /AddPageInfo true /AddRegMarks false /BleedOffset [ 9 9 9 9 ] /ConvertColors /ConvertToCMYK /DestinationProfileName (U.S. Web Coated \(SWOP\) v2) /DestinationProfileSelector /DocumentCMYK /Downsample16BitImages true /FlattenerPreset << /ClipComplexRegions true /ConvertStrokesToOutlines true /ConvertTextToOutlines true /GradientResolution 300 /LineArtTextResolution 1200 /PresetName ([High Resolution]) /PresetSelector /HighResolution /RasterVectorBalance 1 >> /FormElements false /GenerateStructure false /IncludeBookmarks false /IncludeHyperlinks false /IncludeInteractive false /IncludeLayers false /IncludeProfiles true /MarksOffset 9 /MarksWeight 0.250000 /MultimediaHandling /UseObjectSettings /Namespace [ (Adobe) (CreativeSuite) (3.0) ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfileSelector /NA /PageMarksFile /RomanDefault /PreserveEditing true /UntaggedCMYKHandling /LeaveUntagged /UntaggedRGBHandling /UseDocumentProfile /UseDocumentBleed false >> << /AllowImageBreaks true /AllowTableBreaks true /ExpandPage false /HonorBaseURL true /HonorRolloverEffect false /IgnoreHTMLPageBreaks false /IncludeHeaderFooter false /MarginOffset [ 0 0 0 0 ] /MetadataAuthor () /MetadataKeywords () /MetadataSubject () /MetadataTitle () /MetricPageSize [ 0 0 ] /MetricUnit /inch /MobileCompatible 0 /Namespace [ (Adobe) (GoLive) (8.0) ] /OpenZoomToHTMLFontSize false /PageOrientation /Portrait /RemoveBackground false /ShrinkContent true /TreatColorsAs /MainMonitorColors /UseEmbeddedProfiles false /UseHTMLTitleAsMetadata true >> ] >> setdistillerparams << /HWResolution [2400 2400] /PageSize [612.000 792.000] >> setpagedevice