This article presents the results of a faculty survey conducted at the University of Vermont during academic year 2014-2015. The survey asked faculty about: familiarity with scholarly metrics, metric-seeking habits, help-seeking habits, and the role of metrics in their department's tenure and promotion process. The survey also gathered faculty opinions on how well scholarly metrics reflect the importance of scholarly work and how faculty feel about administrators gathering institutional scholarly metric information. Results point to the necessity of understanding the campus landscape of faculty knowledge, opinion, importance, and use of scholarly metrics before engaging faculty in further discussions about quantifying the impact of their scholarly work. aculty at our institution possess a range of attitudes, knowledge, and opinions about the metrics that purport to measure the impact and influence of their scholarship. While many faculty work in departments that require and emphasize traditional scholarly metrics in the reappointment, tenure, and promotion process (RPT), other departments use nontraditional measures that better fit their discipline, and still other departments rely almost exclusively on professional judgment. We sought to capture at the University of Vermont, a midsized research institution, a scan of our campus' faculty, not only to assess disciplinary differences, but also to put together a campuswide picture of how our faculty use, perceive, and understand scholarly metrics. Five guiding questions shaped our survey work: • How familiar are faculty with scholarly metrics? • How/why/when do they seek them out? • Where do faculty turn for help? • What role do scholarly metrics play in the tenure and promotion process? • What opinions and thoughts do faculty members have about how well these metrics reflect the impact of a scholar's work? These guiding questions served as the framework for our survey and also serve as the outline for this article's results section.

This article presents the results of a faculty survey conducted at the University of Vermont during academic year 2014-2015. The survey asked faculty about: familiarity with scholarly metrics, metric-seeking habits, help-seeking habits, and the role of metrics in their department's tenure and promotion process. The survey also gathered faculty opinions on how well scholarly metrics reflect the importance of scholarly work and how faculty feel about administrators gathering institutional scholarly metric information. Results point to the necessity of understanding the campus landscape of faculty knowledge, opinion, importance, and use of scholarly metrics before engaging faculty in further discussions about quantifying the impact of their scholarly work. aculty at our institution possess a range of attitudes, knowledge, and opinions about the metrics that purport to measure the impact and influence of their scholarship. While many faculty work in departments that require and emphasize traditional scholarly metrics in the reappointment, tenure, and promotion process (RPT), other departments use nontraditional measures that better fit their discipline, and still other departments rely almost exclusively on professional judgment. We sought to capture at the University of Vermont, a midsized research institution, a scan of our campus' faculty, not only to assess disciplinary differences, but also to put together a campuswide picture of how our faculty use, perceive, and understand scholarly metrics.Five guiding questions shaped our survey work:• How familiar are faculty with scholarly metrics?• How/why/when do they seek them out?• Where do faculty turn for help?• What role do scholarly metrics play in the tenure and promotion process?• What opinions and thoughts do faculty members have about how well these metrics reflect the impact of a scholar's work? These guiding questions served as the framework for our survey and also serve as the outline for this article's results section.

Campus portals are one of the most visible and frequently used online spaces for students, offering one-stop access to key services for learning and academic self-management. This case study reports how instruction librarians at the University of Vermont collaborated with portal developers in the registrar’s office to develop high-impact, point-of-need content for a dedicated “Library” page. This content was then created in LibGuides and published using the Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) for LibGuides boxes. Initial usage data and analytics show that traffic to the libraries’ portal page has been substantially and consistently higher than expected. The next phase for the project will be the creation of customized library content that is responsive to the student’s user profile.

448I n a model that has developed over the past few years, instruction librarians at the University of Vermont sought to create better opportunities to talk with one another about teaching, observe each other's classes, provide constructive feedback, and engage in reflective practice. In order to achieve these goals, a small group of us began to work as a team to learn from each other and our students.Our group recognized that by working in a small community of practice, we could break down instructional barriers and could create a valuable learning experience for ourselves, as well as a replicable model for our colleagues. The model that grew out of this experience is grounded in examining our teaching and work in the classroom from multiple directions: peer observation, self-reflection, and student evaluations.The specific goals of the project were to improve teaching among cohort members by providing a venue for discussing teaching among colleagues, creating a safe space for using unfamiliar teaching techniques in the classroom, developing a method for engaging in reciprocal peer-observation, and engaging in post-classroom self-reflection of our teaching practices. An underlying goal of the project was to demystify teaching observations as they had previously existed at our institution. In the past, observations had been closely associated with evaluation and with the reappointment and promotion process, rather than being a normal and valuable part of our teaching experience. Setting context with a common lesson planWe implemented the 360° Feedback Model while teaching a series of integrated oneshot class sessions to support students enrolled in an introductory writing and information literacy course. The class, ENGS 001: Written Expression, shares common readings and a common assignment sequence across all sections of the course. The three participating librarians taught, in total, 17 sections of ENGS 001 over two-and-a-half weeks, and each section was also observed by a peer from our cohort. We were aware that teaching and observing this many sessions would demand most of our time over the two-week period, but we felt that this intensive environment would provide us with more opportunities for observation and to make adjustments to our teaching in a truly iterative manner.After developing learning outcomes for the class, we collectively decided upon

Author-level bibliometrics are one way to measure scholarly contributions. Such metrics are often calculated from journals indexed in the Web of ScienceTM. Google Scholar more comprehensively reflects the contributions of special education scholars by including many more social science and education journals. The current study analyzed 348 publicly available Google Scholar profiles of special education faculty at 213 U.S. universities to explore currently available measures (i.e., citation counts, h-index, i10-index). Using descriptive statistics, quartile distributions, and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), we identified several significant differences across variables based on academic rank and Carnegie classification with medium to large effect sizes. Currently reported metrics (i.e., citation counts, h-index, i10-index) advantaged scholars with higher academic rank and those working at universities with higher research activity. Suggestions are offered to support career development.