Background
Librarians in Learning Programs and Initiatives (LPI) teach many library research sessions for introductory writing courses (e.g. English 125 and English 124) throughout the academic year. The library sessions for English 125 have a model lesson plan that we share with course instructors who request a library session with us. Doreen Bradley, head of LPI, asked us if a similar model lesson plan for English 124 would be helpful for librarians and course instructors. My colleague, Angie Oehrli and I wanted to examine the question of how instruction for English 124 is different from or similar to the instruction for English 125 before committing to designing a lesson plan. Perhaps English 125 and English 124 could utilize the same lesson plan!
During December 2025, we interviewed five English 124 course instructors about the course and its goals, as well as their experiences with library instruction. We took notes during each interview session. We decided to reflect on the interviews in an informal setting by designing a transcript-reading data analysis meeting with our colleagues so that we could explore the fruits of those conversations together. We called this meeting a “workshop” with the hopes that it indicated active learning, conversation, and assessment as a group. In this blog post, we will be referring to “workshop” as the event hosted for group data analysis of English 124 interview transcripts. When we mention “library sessions,” we are referring to the research instruction sessions LPI provides at the library for English 124 and 125 classes.
The Data Analysis Workshop
Because we were concerned with information overload and our busy schedules, we set out to design an activity involving minimal preparation by both the facilitators and the participants. We arranged this group data-analysis workshop during a regularly scheduled unit meeting, thereby eliminating the need to find another day and time on our already busy calendars.
We collected the interview transcripts into packets, and anonymized the names and other identifying information of the interviewees. We emailed the packet to our LPI colleagues ahead of time; however, participants were not required to complete the reading ahead of time.
For the workshop event, we had packets printed and available for participants to highlight, jot down notes, underline, etc. We designed the workshop to consist of 3 rotations of reading, with a color assigned to a specific task in a rotation.
- The first rotation (highlighted pink) involved reading to find similarities and overlap: what was common across all the interview transcripts? Why was that interesting or significant?
- The second reading rotation (highlighted in yellow) was for identifying differences and contradictions: how are English 124 instructors talking differently about their class goals and methods?
- The third rotation asked participants for written general notes, getting thoughts together, and thinking about what was missing from the data.
Between each reading, we had a facilitated conversation about what we gleaned from that particular reading lens. This bloomed into helpful notes about our insights, experience, and observed fluctuations of the English writing curriculum, research literacy, teaching practices, etc.
We collected the highlighted packets (Angie and I took notes during the conversation to cross reference with the packets later). We used both resources to discuss next steps and to design a deliverable that would be distributed to our unit and our other teaching librarian partners.
What we learned together
When our reading rotations were complete, we asked, “So what?” What do we do with this information, and how does it affect (or not affect) our current teaching practices for English 124 (and subsequently, English 125) library sessions? The more significant throughline in this conversation was a reminder of how crucial communication between the course instructor and the librarian is before a library session. Potential adjustments in teaching preparation seemed to be the most distinct recommendation, re-affirming our commitment to building relationships with course instructors through robust communication.
We learned from doing this type of data analysis work in a communal workshop style that our colleagues found it impactful to read these anonymized interview transcripts from instructors. Being able to talk about the interviews directly with colleagues and exchange teaching tips, examples, and anecdotes was both helpful and important to our growth as teachers and librarians. Angie and I also reflected that being able to interact with our colleagues about the data removed any assumptions we might have acquired because of our familiarity with the interviews. Hearing from our colleagues with fresh eyes opened the conversation, whereas a report with filtered information from just the two of us might not have offered the opportunity for inspiration and engagement.
Conclusions and reflections
Angie and I are working on a set of recommended “conversation starters” – questions librarians can use while communicating with course instructors – as our deliverable for this project. This is a shift from what we previously thought might happen at the end of this assessment: we thought we might develop a model lesson plan for English 124, similar to our model for English 125. We hope this set of conversation starters will benefit our preparation practices for all library instruction sessions, especially English 124.
This group analysis workshop, again, was an informal event, built around the context of internal use, communal learning and engagement, and improving our unit’s service to instructors and students in English 124 classes. As an early-career librarian, I found the process of this assessment project and workshop event to be incredibly helpful in the development of my own teaching practices. In fact, this semester I began setting up Zoom meetings with my English 125 and 124 class instructors a week prior to our library sessions, so that I could establish a rapport, discern how students are engaging with one another, and how I could uniquely tailor parts of the lesson plan to the needs of the students and the goals of the instructor. I also appreciated the feedback, comments, and institutional knowledge offered by my colleagues during our conversations, which has allowed me to communicate with course instructors more effectively.
We have chatted about the idea of having a more regular workshop-like experience in LPI as a result of this activity, for example, perhaps a lunch hour where we talk about strategies that have been working for us in the past few weeks, a place to vent frustrations, or to solicit advice or ask specific questions about teaching topics, demo searches, and databases that might be useful for a particular class. Regardless of what additional ideas might bubble up as a result of our group data analysis workshop, it is evident that setting aside the time to check in, source feedback, and reframe our approach was helpful for all of us.