Final Week Reflections

In class two weeks ago we talked a little bit about our Twitter experiences. I was extremely surprised by how many people had negative opinions. I did too but for some reason I assumed that everyone absolutely loved it. Finding out that other people felt the same way as me made me feel a little better. I am still waiting to judge Twitter. I have not deleted my account and I have gone on a couple of times in the past few weeks. We’ll see what ends up happening. After talking about Twitter we were given a quick Elluminate walk-through, which was very helpful for doing the webinar, and time to work with it in class.

Last week my group did our webinar on Creative Commons. Overall it went very well. We had a few minor issues with audio and slides but we stayed calm and worked through it with no problem. After being on both the presenter and participant ends of webinars I have a lot more appreciation for them. They are a great interactive way to learn more information on something, without the hassle of traveling. Also, even though they aren't all that difficult, I do think I will be less picky and critical when I watch them in the future. There are so many things to keep track of and so many tiny things that can go wrong. I have to say, I can't decide if I personally like doing them. I definitely did not panic as much as for in-person presentations. It's really nice to be able to go through your notes when you lose your train of thought, instead of just standing there panicking. On the other hand, it throws me off  to have no idea if anyone is really listening. The complete silence on the other end is very strange. Pausing, especially for polls, is extremely difficult, and not something I did well in our webinar. I just wanted to fill up the silence. Overall, though, I think I have a new appreciation for webinars.

The readings for this week were about professional development. I really enjoyed the mix of school and public library articles, as well having both technological and face-to-face methods discussed. Semadini's article was about professional development in a rural school. It described the Fusion program, where teachers are in control of choosing what area of teaching they want to improve in based on both their students' needs and their own. Collaboration with other teachers is promoted and required. I think this is an interesting idea. Giving teachers' the chance to evaluate themselves and decide what area need improvement makes much more sense than assuming that everyone needs the same development in the same areas. I also think its great how excited the teachers are about it. I don't know very much about other ways teachers continue their education, so I have nothing to compare this to. Overall it seems like a good idea, though.

The other two articles described the same basic method of professional development. The Blowers and Reed article focused on teaching computer competency and Web 2.0 skills to librarians and staff at a public library, while the Fontichiaro article adapted the same basic ideas into a development program for teachers in an elementary school. I really loved the ideas and methods they described. Allowing the participants to work at their own pace and at their own comfort level is great. I hope that all libraries implement programs like this. At one library I went to there were definitely some older librarians and staff who were not at all comfortable using the computers. I cannot even imagine them using some of the more advanced technological tools. I think any library could really benefit from this. Also, I know that technology will always be changing and improving and that most of the tools I have learned in this class will someday be outdated. It makes me really excited to know that libraries plan programs like these for their librarians to help them stay current and that one day I could be participating in them. It sounds like fun!

Week 11 Reflections

Class was really interesting. I enjoyed Paul Courant talking about the Digital Public Library and Google Books a lot. I also appreciated his opinion that the court was right to overturn the legislation, even though he was unhappy that they had. He seemed passionate about digital liraries but not so passionate that he was blind to other sides of it. Discussing embedded librarianship with our cohorts was interesting too. I actually like getting into the cohorts. We spend so much time reading each others' blog posts and commenting on them with no real interaction. It's nice to actually talk. Anyways, other than that, we also talked about what makes a good webinar. Once again I am very nervous but I'm sure it won't be so bad when we actually do it.

So Twitter... I am going to try not to judge it too soon. I have not been enjoying it so far but  I have a feeling that I could get addicted to it if I let myself. I'm a little bit nosy and I love to know what is going on in people's lives... Particularly famous people's lives. There sure are a lot of famous people tweeting. I also love all the links that lead to interesting articles and fun stuff (both library related and not). I could, and probably will, waste tons of time just reading tweets, but I know that is not what this assignment is about. I know it is supposed to be about using Twitter as a professional tool and I'm not sure if I like it from that side. Certain people tweet a little too much and say things that I don't care about at all. But it is my choice to follow them so I can't really blame them. Just because they're librarians doesn't mean they have to say librarian-y things all the time. Still, having to sort through the meaningless (for me) tweets is time consuming and overwhelming.

As far as libraries having their own Twitter accounts, I'm not sure I see the point. With so many people tweeting multiple times in an hour, it seems like it is difficult for a library to keep up. For example, I am following the Howell Library and they tweet once a day, if that. Usually it is more like once a week. To me, it seems like they are just wasting time with that account. Their tweets just get lost unless I deliberately try to find them. I don't think most people would even think to try to find them, if they even started following them to start with.

Really though, my least favorite part is actually tweeting and retweeting. While other students in the class are fully embracing Twitter and just tweeting away, I am struggling to make it through just five tweets and retweets. I know that sounds ridiculous but I don't really have anything I personally want to tweet and I haven't come across too many things interesting or relevant enough to retweet. I guess I assume that the original tweeter probably reached way more people than I would so their tweet is doing just fine without my retweet. Plus I don't know them. I feel like it is creepy for me to be retweeting from people I don't know. I think all of this Twitter anxiety is just me though. I have never had a status on facebook, and I see that as very similar to tweets. It just feels like a lot of pressure, especially when people you don't really know are following you. I think the only real way to use Twitter as a networking tool is if you actively participate. As someone who would rather passively read others' tweets, it just isn't all that great.

Week 10 Reflections

Last week we split into groups to do our one shot workshops. Overall they were very interesting. Everyone chose great topics. I particularly appreciated the one on copyright in libraries because this is important for librarians and I know nothing about it. Also, Andrea and Eden had cupcakes so that helped too. I think my workshop went ok, but not as well as the book club. When we were planning it didn't seem like an uneven balance between straight lecturing and discussion. However, when we actually did the workshop it felt like we talked forever and that the discussion was short and a little unenthusiastic. I'm not sure if this was just because the other groups were much more interactive so we seemed off in comparison or if it was actually a problem. Regardless, I think it went fairly well and definitely was not worth getting super nervous about.

The chapter from How People Learn discussed specific examples of great history, math, and science teachers. Some of the examples were really cool. The teachers that were described gave me a warm fuzzy feeling about schools and teaching. They all were clearly very passionate about what they were teaching and were also very creative. The main point was that good teachers need more than just expertise on the subject matter itself. They also need to have pedagogical content knowledge (knowledge about how the subject is structured, what about it is important, what parts confuse students...). The chapter stressed that there is no one method for teaching that can be transferred to all subject areas. Each one requires different knowledge and strategies. What this seems to say to me is that a good history teacher would necessarily make a good math teacher or science teacher. This then makes me wonder about elementary school where one teacher teaches all subjects for a particular grade. This makes sense to me, but based on the readings I wonder if it is a good idea. The teacher could be wonderful at teaching certain things and not others and where would that leave the kids? I don't know. Changing that would probably throw elementary school into chaos.

I really enjoyed the Matos, Matsuoka-Motley and Mayer article about embedded librarians. I'm not interested in being an academic librarian but if I was I would totally want to be an embedded librarian, specifically the traditional kind. I loved the description of the music librarian who initially had trouble getting faculty and students to accept her but then changed her location and became very involved, included, accepted, and helpful. I know SI has a specific librarian who we are supposed to go to for help and everything. She seems very nice, but I have never felt like contacting her. I might if she actually had an office in North Quad. Or maybe it wouldn't make a difference. I'm not sure. I know the situation is different then with the music librarian in the article because the music library itself was separate from the rest of the library. I suppose the hybrid embedded librarian would be more practical for SI.

The virtual embedded librarian was also an interesting idea (from the Montgomery article) and I understand the need for them. I just don't think I would enjoy that type of librarian-patron interaction very much. Also, I like the idea of webinars for certain things, like learning about library issues (or as a way to learn about new ideas in any profession). It is relatively easy and cost effective. I have not yet watched a sample webinar for class tomorrow (I will before class starts - promise!) but I did watch one about comic books and graphic novels last semester. It was really interesting and informative. However, I'm not sure how I feel about it as an actual teaching tool in colleges and other schools. I know webinars are interactive, but I just can't picture the college kids actually taking advantage of the features. I think they would just go through the motions and not get anything out of it at all. I'm pretty sure that's what I would have done. I guess I might be a little pessimistic about it. It is an interesting idea and it could work.

Week 9 Reflections

I had my book club last week and I think it went extremely well. I always get very nervous before that kind of thing but after it started it almost just ran itself, although part of that might have just been that we had a group of chatty opinionated people. If nobody wanted to talk I bet the whole thing would have been really nerve-racking and painful. Surprisingly, our biggest problem was that the time went so quickly. I thought twenty minutes a piece sounded really long but it wasn't at all. We had a list of about twenty-five questions and I think we only asked five. There were a few I really wanted to ask too, but we ran out of time. I think there were multiple times where we should have cut people off and moved on, especially during the opening introduction. I was really just expecting people to say their favorite fairy tale and move on, not talk about it in detail. Both Natalie and I are fairly quiet people and it was a little hard to assert ourselves in a group of much more talkative people. I think if the book club had been with actual teenagers it would have been a little easier because I would have felt a little more like an authority figure. It's much harder to direct your peers. Other than that, though, it went really well and I appreciated all of the ideas the other book club members brought in.

The other book clubs went well too. I enjoyed them a lot and I felt completely comfortable sharing my thoughts, which doesn't usually happen for me. Everybody brought up points that I hadn't thought of (like Cinnamon... How did I not catch that reference?!?!?!) and made me think much more about the stories. I think for all of them we were supposed to act like teens and that was really difficult. For most of them we eventually gave up. I don't feel old at all, but I realized that I don't think at all the same as I did in high school. So hurray! I'm growing up!

In class we learned about how to do workshops. It was really interesting and helpful to hear all the different techniques and strategies for designing a workshop. In particular, it was good to see how it should be broken up. This makes it a little less intimidating. You can just look at a specific part that has a certain time allotment and plan that, instead of trying to figure out how to fill up a larger amount of time. Obviously all the parts have to fit together and flow, but still. I am very nervous to do the workshops tomorrow, but hopefully it will be like the book clubs and end up being not nearly as scary as I originally thought.

We also had a video webinar with Bobbi Newman. It was a little strange not being able to see her, but I totally understand why she would feel more comfortable that way. Overall I enjoyed it a lot. The views she expressed were much less intense than some of the blog opinions I read, which I thought was good. I wonder if some of that has to do with the way people write blogs. I think it is easy to go on rants and not actually be as hardcore for or against something as it seems. Like I wonder if the Librarian in Black would have come across as more toned down if we had talked to her too. I think blogs can be kind of strange. Anyways, I really appreciated hearing her views on everything.

Week 8 Reflections

My book club is meeting tomorrow, so more on that next week.

I am saving the HarperCollins issue for last. I have to say, the other readings were sort of blown from my mind after that. Anyways, the ALA Code of Ethics initially seemed very short. Then I read the sentence that “The principles of this Code are expressed in broad statements to guide ethical decision making. These statements provide a framework; they cannot and do not dictate conduct to cover particular situations.” I’m guessing if they were any longer, it would turn into rules rather than guidelines. They all seem pretty straightforward. The third one about patron privacy made me think of my recent visit to the Chelsea District Library for another class. The computers there have shields over them that only allows you to see what is on the screen if you are looking at it straight on. I think this is a great example of a library protecting their patrons’ right to privacy.  The seventh principle about separating personal beliefs from professional duty makes a lot of sense, but I think it will also be the hardest to uphold. Most librarians are very passionate about the library and their work. When you become personally invested in something, I think it is also hard to keep your personal beliefs from interfering.

Pixey Anne Mosley’s “Creating a Library Assignment Workshop for University Faculty” was pretty interesting. I really liked how proactive and involved the librarians were in working with the faculty. I have never had a terrible assignment like the ones mentioned, but I can see how it would be frustrating for both the librarians and the students. I found it amusing how many times the importance of watching our for faculty egos was mentioned. Anyways, I thought the workshop was great and I liked the detailed description of how they created it, how they adjusted it, and the feedback they received.

The HarperCollins debate is really interesting and kind of addictive. I would read one thing, then read the comments, then follow the links, and then repeat. With all the many opinions I read, I am still having trouble forming my own. I do think it is an unfortunate decision for HarperCollins to make. At the same time, they are just trying to find ways to make money from digital reading. Many people mentioned how greedy they are. This may or may not be true, but regardless, their main goal is to make money. As a business this has to be their main priority. In my opinion they are just trying something out. Maybe it was a bad choice, but I think they are being unfairly attacked. Libraries don’t really know how to handle ebooks either. Everyone involved is just trying to find their way. Their statement in Library Love Fest basically says that. I don’t know. This is not me taking HarperCollins’ side. I just think they don’t completely deserve a full out attack. Although after saying that, I think it is really something that HarperCollins’ own authors aren’t taking their side in this. I personally think that says a lot. Marilyn Johnson is a really good example of someone who is looking at things rationally and is, for the most part, unbiased.

On a somewhat similar note, I feel bad for OverDrive in all this. Not that they are getting nearly as much negativity, but they still are getting some. I really liked the CEO’s comments on the issue. I thought it was properly apologetic while also not taking the blame for things outside of their control. I agree with him that the better solution was to continue to provide access to HarperCollins, than to just stop. Overall, based on his post I feel like they are the only side involved that are keeping a level head. Unlike the librarians and HarperCollins.

The library side is definitely the most interesting. In particular I love that librarians' reactions range from outraged, sad, level-headed, resigned, unsurprised... It's amazing. Some were all in favor of boycotting, others were strongly opposed. The eBook User’s Bill of Rights was very popular with many, but not all. Basically, there is not full out agreement on anything.

A librarian who was mentioned often by other bloggers is Sarah Houghton-Jan. She is absolutely furious, which doesn't really surprise me. She was really angry about the Library of Congress and Wikileaks thing too. I'm not sure how well placed or productive her fury is. In particular, I was not a fan of the San Rafael Library's letter to Harper Collins. To me, it just came across as angry and a little unprofessional. There was some good information in there, however, so I don't know why it rubbed me the wrong way. If it rubbed someone who is mostly on the library side, then I can't imagine how Harper Collins felt about it.

I also don't agree with a boycott. My opinion on this is pretty much aligned with the BluePixie blogger, who says that by boycotting "we limit patron access because of an "internal" (to the world of books) dispute. While some patrons may understand why, the vast majority won't care beyond the fact that they can't get the latest title when they want it. Along with the fact that I am philosophically opposed to limiting reader access for any reason, as should any professional librarian be, we will damage our own standing with our patrons by voluntarily limiting access. Alienating the people who pay our wages and provide the money to build our collections? It's both hypocritical and bad business." I think she is completely right. Many patrons won’t understand, and patron support is incredibly important. In Emily’s blog last week she brought up how the library in Troy is closing. Although when I looked into that a little it seems like there were many factors involved, the failure to pass the millage certainly didn’t help at all. Losing community support will kill libraries a whole lot faster than the publishing companies.

In addition to this, Sarah Glassmeyer (a law librarian) looked at the numbers involved between libraries and publishing companies. She basically said that if publishers wanted to, they could cut libraries out altogether. She doesn’t think a boycott of HarperCollins would do that much, and that is if all the libraries joined together. If only some boycott, the effect will be even less.

One of the librarians I was following for the blogger assignment is Meredith Farkas from Information Wants To Be Free. I like her a lot so I was really interested to read her opinion. She brought up some great points. She is more concerned with all the e-content issues, than this one in particular. This makes so much more sense to me. I almost get the feeling that librarians are angry about e-content in general and are taking it out on this particular situation. My favorite thing she said is “I find it amusing that some vendors and librarians want to apply the print model to e-books, until that model becomes inconvenient for them.” Print and e-books aren’t the same but both sides of the issue seem to want to treat it them that way when they are making their arguments. Librarians are saying they can get more than twenty-six uses out of a book so HarperCollins is wrong. HarperCollins is saying that books don’t last forever and ever so librarians are wrong. Really, both are moot points. I don’t think they can be compared.

So that is somewhat a summary of some of the views I read. I hope all of it made sense. It’s hard to write your opinion on something when you don’t know what your opinion is.

Week 7 Reflections

I don't have a lot to say about the last class because I missed it due to snow. I went through the slides and I am very sad to have missed Vicki Browne quest speak about book clubs. I love book clubs and public librarians! It looks like she had a lot of great stuff to say. Luckily the notes Kristin took on her presentation were very detailed so I still got a lot of the information. I looked up AADL's Book Clubs To Go and there are some really great books there! A lot of them I have read or have been meaning to read (I still haven't switched back to adult books after 624). The rest of the class seemed to be tips about book clubs and Socratic Seminars. I am interested to hear more about how the practice Socratic Seminar went. The Darnton article brought up great points and I wish I had heard other people's opinions.

This weeks readings were for our book clubs. For my group I had to read The Lady or the Tiger? by Frank Stockton, Cinnamon by Neil Gaiman, The Gift of the Magi by O. Henry, and The Last Question by Isaac Asimov. Oh and also my group's which is The Goose Girl by the Brothers Grimm. I did a quick read of all the stories but I am not meeting with my group until next week so I will go more in depth on them later. I think it is interesting how different everyone's stories are. They took place in everything from the past to the future and covered fantasy, science fiction, and realistic fiction. I am really looking forward to the book clubs next week.

Sorry for such a short post! Hopefully the next few weeks will make up for it.

Week 6 Reflections

In class last week we discussed the survey for the gaming talk in terms of whether we would hire McGonigal back and what we would change if we were McGonigal. I originally would have said that a library should for sure hire her back. I thought she was a good speaker, interesting, and very enthusiastic. However, after talking with my group, I'm no longer completely certain. She did not really explain her ideas clearly and, based on the survey, did not make huge impacts in people's personal or professional lives. It's kind of sad how easily impressed I am and how easily I am persuaded to completely change my opinion. We also got into our cohort groups to discuss the bloggers we have been following. It was interesting to hear about some of the issues that came up in other blogs and to hear different interpretations of the blogs I did read. The best part for me was discussing the Librarian in Black with some of my cohorts. I knew there was something about her I didn't quite like but I couldn't put my finger on it. I guess a lot of people got a bad vibe from her because she is self-promoting and comes across as slightly full of herself. That made me feel better about not liking her. The rest of the time was mainly spent on transfer, which is interesting but not my favorite topic.

I loved this weeks readings about book clubs and Socratic Seminars. Barbara Hoffert's article ("The Book Club Exploded") had great ideas for book clubs. From author participation to having participants read different books, the suggestions all seemed like good ways to add excitement to book clubs, especially for patrons who don't normally like book clubs. They were also very doable for a public library. I love reading about new ideas that will attract more people to the library. The only thing that I didn't agree with was the implication that the "old" book clubs are no longer a good choice. Personally, "chitchat about beloved beloved classics or recent best sellers" sounds like fun to me, and not just because I am a library student. I think a lot of patrons would still like this type of book club and getting rid of it just to attract new patrons seems a little unfair to them. I think trying new types of book clubs is a great idea, but not at the expense of the traditional book club.

The other two readings focused specifically on Socratic Seminars. Lynda Tredway explained the idea behind Socratic Seminars, while Margaret Metzger showed how it could be put into practice. I had no idea what a Socratic seminar was before this, but the idea is actually not that complicated. It's basically a discussion where students respectfully question themselves and each other to get at the meaning of a passage (or whatever the discussion is about). I was very impressed by the success of Margaret Metzger's seminars with her freshman students. I would have loved having an experience like that in my high school English classes. Well, probably at the time I would not have liked it, but based on the improvements the students experienced in thoroughly analyzing texts, expressing themselves, and accepting constructive criticism, I think I really could have benefitted from it. I am kind of looking forward to our demo Socratic Seminar in class and kind of dreading it.

Week 5 Reflections

Class this week was interesting. I really enjoyed Dr. Jane McGonigal's talk on how gaming can make the world better. I personally have little interest in gaming, but her enthusiasm was catching. I thought her discussion of why gaming appeals to people (because they feel like they are better or more accomplished in the game than in real life) and her explanation of the positive aspects of gaming (advanced problem solving skills, perseverance, sense of accomplishment...) made a lot of sense. I just have to wonder if if is a good idea to encourage gaming when it already had such a strong hold on so many people. I have a younger brother in high school who spends a lot of time playing World of Warcraft. Last year it got to the point where he was failing multiple classes because he was spending so much time playing WoW and my parents made him stop playing altogether. They let him play again this year and he is managing his time slightly better but it is still all he really wants to do. It just seems like he is withdrawing more and more from the world and that is scary. Even though it would be cool if games started solving real problems, I just don't think I like the thought of people having such much online interactions and so few "real" interactions. Regardless, Dr. McGonigal did give me a new perspective on gaming. A little less helpful was all the time spent classifying the survey questions. Most people (other than the tree people) had very similar ways of classifying the questions. Differences were more due to interpretations of the question, rather than actual classification. Still, it was good to see how to write, format, and distribute a good survey.

Wiggins and McTighe's "Put Understanding First" explains that the goal of school should be teaching for meaning and transfer. It also describes the different teaching methods (direct instruction, facilitation, and coaching) that are necessary for reaching this goal. I loved their suggestion for teaching mean, median, and mode. It seems like students would have a very thorough understanding of all the concepts involved. I remember learning mean, median, and mode, and we definitely only learned how to compute them. It was really boring because the math involved is really easy. We never learned how to use them, so I always thought (and still do a little) that the mode was pointless and that the the median was the only thing worth knowing about. Clearly my education on this was lacking something. However, their method seems like it would take a ton of time on a concept that isn't all that difficult. If teachers covered every concept in every subject like that, they would not get far. I guess that is kind of the point of teaching for understanding and what Wiggins and McTighe point out as the point of school, however. Instead of students having a shallow understanding of everything, they have a complete understanding of a few things and they learn how to learn in general. That idea seems good, but I think it could only work if ALL schools in the country worked that way. Otherwise it would be very difficult for kids who move and would probably be a mess at college where students from different schools come together.

Chapter 3 from How People Learn was all about transfer and what influences students' ability to transfer.  Most of it was pretty straight forward and unsurprising. The most interesting part for me was about the effect context has on transfer. It seemed like a big problem with some of my past classes is that they were so abstract. No context was given and so they seemed impractical. I thought this section was going to explain the need to provide students with context. However, the section actually stated that providing just one context can actually hurt students' ability to transfer. By over contextualizing, students can't see how to apply what they learned to anything but that specific context. The chapter suggests encouraging more flexible thinking by providing multiple contexts, explaining one context and then generalizing, or using problem solving to decide how a problem would be affected by changes. Even though I had never thought of it this way before it makes a lot of sense.

Week 4 Reflections

In class last week we discussed the concept of "information literacy." Even after reading the articles I was still unclear on what it was, and I guess for a good reason. Definitions tend to be very general and abstract, with words that don't really mean anything (like "use"). It was very helpful for me when we got into groups to create our own definitions. One of my group members had a teaching background and her view of "information literacy" was much more general than mine. She saw the "information" part as literally ALL types of information, while I was focusing on just information about researching (like finding and evaluating sources, connecting facts...) which doesn't take into account most of what students learn in school. Our final definition was "the ability to take information learned in a theoretical environment, evaluate its relevance and usefulness, use critical thinking skills to decide whether to employ or disregard it, and then implement it into practical situations." By looking at it from this point of view, "information literacy" really fits a lot more with our past classes about teaching so that students can make connections and gain more of an "expert" type of knowledge. 

I found the readings for this week pretty interesting. The Sadler article dealt with various forms of feedback and formative assessment. I mostly agreed with what was said. I think feedback is much more useful for students when it comes regularly and is in the form of comments, rather than just grades. I also liked that Sadler discouraged feedback and grades that are based on curves and giving a certain percentage of students high grades or low grades. Although I felt this extreme pride whenever I knew that I got the highest grade in a class, I still think that competition in school should be discouraged and more emphasis should be placed on improvement and learning. The only thing I really disagreed with in the article was how much importance was placed on students' being able to do self-assessment. Sadler makes it seem like the ability to accurately evaluate your own work will then improve it. I do not agree with this. I know when I have done a good job on an assignment, and I am usually (painfully) aware of just how bad certain other assignments are. Now, I know it seems silly that I  would knowingly turn in a bad assignment, but sometimes I really just don't know how to make it better. I know what needs to be fixed but I can't seem to get it. In cases like this, the ability to evaluate my own work accurately is of no help to me.

Chapter 6 of How People Learn discussed the different types of learning environments (learner, knowledge, assessment, and community centered) and how they all must be included and work together to create a successful learning environment. I had never thought of the different types, but they all seem extremely important, and it seems almost obvious that you would need a balance of the different environments. The way I see it, learner and knowledge centered environments are about the actual teaching. Learner centered takes into account the students' backgrounds, while knowledge centered focuses on the methods and activities that help students understand what is being taught. Assessment centered (very similar to the Sadler article) is about the feedback the teachers give. It is sometimes separate from the teaching (like in summative assessment), or very much a part of it (like in formative assessment). Community centered environments seem to have less to do with teaching and more to do with the feel of the class. This environment seems to be less of its own type, and more of a combination of the other three interacting (which is maybe why the diagram shows it as surrounding/including the other environments). The form of assessment will greatly affect the community, as will the degree to which the environment is learner and knowledge centered. I thought it was interesting that outside communities (and television) were included in the community centered environment, since there is little teachers can do to affect it. I guess teachers really just need to acknowledge it is there, it has an affect on students, and it can potentially be used to help students.

I'm not completely sure how the readings will relate to public libraries, where learning situations tend to be short, and on a one-time bases. The learning environments seemed pretty similar to the readings for our first class (chapters one and two) and probably relate in a similar way. It will be important as a teaching librarian for me to take into account my students'/patrons' past knowledge and find ways to teach to all learning types. I don't know how I will bring assessment into it, however. Hopefully class will relate it to libraries a bit.

Week 3 Reflections

For class we had to look for three articles about information literacy and I focused on information literacy in the public library. The articles I found each deal with a different age group (children, teens, and adults).

Article 1
Harding, Jane. "Information Literacy and the Public Library." Australasian Public Libraries and Information Services 21, no. 4 (December 2008): 157-167.

In her article, Jane Harding discusses the role of information literacy in public libraries. She talks about the library's strengths (recognized place of learning, broad clientele, access to materials, information literacy experts...), constraints (lack of framework and resources, poor attitude toward teaching), and services (reference interviews, tech training, partnership with various organizations). This article gives a good overview of information literacy in public libraries. She points out that although there is not a lot written about this topic, public libraries are actually doing a good job providing information literacy services. However, I got the impression from the article that a lot more could be done. With many libraries making information literacy a part of their mission statements and strategic plan it seems like more should be done than just continuing to provide reference interviews and giving tech classes.

Article 2
Gilton, Donna G. "Information Literacy as a Department Store: Applications for Public Teen Librarians." Young Adult Library Services 6, no. 2 (Winter 2008): 39-42, 44.

I did not completely understand the significance of Donna Gilton's description of the department store way of looking at information literacy. The basement is the library orientation and basic instruction. It should be seen as the foundation of information literacy. The next few floors is the formal and advanced instruction such as classes. The last few floors are the company's offices and is where programs and services are planned, coordinated and evaluated. While I do think all of this is significant to information literacy, it seemed like it could be kind of assumed. The rest of the article, however, was about different ways teen librarians can collaborate with local schools to provide information literacy to their patrons. One way was by providing workshops for teachers on new literature (both popular and academic). Another was to find out about assignments ahead of time and put books on hold or offer workshops to the students on the specific topic. I do agree that libraries should work with the schools, I just don't think that is the only way for them to provide information literacy support.

Article 3
Collen, Lauren. "Teaching Information Literacy in the Public Library." Knowledge Quest 37, no. 1 (September/October 2008): 12-16.

This article was my favorite. Lauren Collen describes the concept of her Computer Camp program and explains the benefits. She recognized that many children using her public library did not understand how to do keyword searches, either because of a lack of information literacy education or an ability to put lessons into practice.  She realized that they needed the hands on practice necessary to develop lasting information literacy skills. She created the Computer Camp which gave 4th-7th graders the chance to research and write a short report with the guidance and support of a librarian. The camp took place in three 1.5 hour days, with children working in pairs. The first day was spend talking about keyword searches, the necessity of refining searches, and playing games using tools such as the Visual Thesaurus. The second day was spent researching a broad topic, narrowing it based on interest, and using skills from the first day to find information. On the third day the kids learned to use Microsoft Publisher and WordArt to create a short report. The kids loved the program and the parents noticed improvement in the children's ability to research for school. I loved reading about a children's librarian who saw a real patron need and then worked to fulfill it. Although I am sure a lot of work went into Computer Camp, it also seemed like an extremely doable program for most public libraries.  While the other articles acknowledged that public libraries need to get involved in information literacy, this one gave a clear example of what that would look like. I thought the whole thing just sounded really great. I would love to be involved in a program like that.

Before reading these articles I did not have a very clear idea of what information literacy was. Jane Harding's article did a good job clarifying it for me. From what I could tell, information literacy is being able to recognize when information is needed, and having the ability to locate, evaluate, and use it effectively. There are many parts to this definition and, the importance of the parts depends on the user. For example, adults are less likely to need help using information and more likely to need help locating it. Children may need help with all parts because they are just learning, and teens may need slightly less instruction. Obviously it is much more complicated than just separating needs by age, but it does show that public librarians will have a different idea of what services to provide based on what age they serve. I found it interesting that each article had a different idea of what library's need to do.  Article One made it seem like librarian's should basically keep doing what they are doing. Article Two focused on collaboration between school and public librarians, with public librarians doing somewhat little on their own. Article Three demonstrated a way that librarians can take an active role in information literacy education by creating programs. I think by combining all of these ideas, librarians can provide great information literacy services.

Week 2 Reflections

I found this week's readings to be much more applicable to teaching in a library setting because the focus was more on one-time workshops and instruction. Although it was interesting to learn about good teaching techniques from week 1, it seemed a little difficult to apply to one-time workshops where you know little about the students. Even though in class we discussed possible ways to apply the information to libraries, I still thought that many of them would not work. Tiered courses and taking a skills inventory at the beginning of the class rely too much on the students' knowledge (and honesty) about their level. Also, as someone who was frequently paired with someone of a lower level, I would feel terribly guilty using the technique of pairing more skilled and less skilled people together. I would worry that the more skilled person was not getting anything out of it if they had to spend their time helping someone else.

I appreciated the honesty in the Introduction of Creating the One-Shot Library Workshop regarding the feasibility of going through every stage of instructional systems design (ISD). Many times I learn the time-consuming step-by-step process that is the "best" way to analyze or implement a program and wonder just how practical  it is to do that in real life (501 comes to mind...). Here, Veldof and other librarians she quotes stress that the full process may not always be beneficial or necessary. That being said, I could see the benefits in the ADDIE (analysis, design, development, implementation, evaluation) stages and how they could save time in the long run, especially after reading the Yelinek et. al. article that put the steps into practice. It seemed like their online tutorial was much more successful than the one that had been in place because they took the time to analyze the users and interview the instructors. Also, after they put the tutorial in place, they spent time surveying and testing the users to determine what changes needed to be made.  Without this article, the ADDIE stages would have been hard to picture.

Nicole Johnston's article was the most difficult for me to follow. She studied an online learning module for developing information literacy skills, and mainly focused on the evaluation process. Based on a survey of the module's users, as well as on a focus group, she found that the online learning module was beneficial and a success. I thought the questions she asked almost forced that conclusion. To me, ease of navigation has little to do with whether a format is actually beneficial. Similarly, the students thought they had an improved understanding of information literacy, but "improved" could mean anything from full understanding to just a slight improvement. It is possible that using other methods could have made a larger improvement. I may be slightly biased because I just did an online module for another class and although I learned from it, I think I would have benefitted more from a face-to-face lesson.

In SI647 I learned about the growing importance of virtual reference in libraries, especially for better serving children and teens who are more accustomed to using technology. However, it was also stressed that librarians have not received the proper training for providing good virtual reference. An important part of reference is to explain to patrons how to search for sources and find them on their own. Simply giving them a source is not nearly as beneficial. Virtual reference makes it even more difficult to provide instruction because librarians cannot demonstrate a search or show what they are doing. The many free screencast tools discussed in the Griffis article seemed perfect for this. It allows librarians to explain things visually, even in a virtual setting and that is so important.  I look forward to learning how to use some of these tools.

Week 1 Reflections (1/10/11)

While I know for sure that I want to work in a public library, I am undecided on whether I want to work with children, young adults, or maybe even adults. However, for a long time I had planned on being a children's librarian, so I chose to read the competencies posted by ALSC on the requirements for librarians serving children. Though at times brief, repetitive, or unspecific, the requirements overall seem very up to date and important for children's librarianship in today's society. I like that in multiple sections the subject of diversity came up. The competencies state that it is necessary to have diverse collection materials, and that children's librarians should know how to interact effectively and respectfully with patrons of other cultures. I do think that a little more needs to be said about these topics, but overall it is good.

A section that seems extremely important is the Technology section. It stresses having strong computer skills and a strong knowledge about current and future technology. I am by no means a fan of all the technological advancements that are occurring. However, I do not think that they are going to stop, and to just ignore them and hope they go away is both useless and ignorant. This is true in all forms of librarianship, not just for children's librarianship. Keeping up with and utilizing current technology is also a great way to reach and relate to children who were raised using these resources (although in some cases this might apply more to YA than to children). This section also strikes me as one of the more difficult to achieve. We are living in a time of almost constant technological  advancements. Just to have basic knowledge about all of them seems overwhelming, but to constantly be developing the skills necessary to use them effectively seems almost impossible. However, as I said above, I think it is very important and definitely deserves the time and attention of children's librarians.

In reading How People Learn I found out many interesting and surprising things about learning and teaching. I especially thought it was interesting to read how sixth graders who were taught using Thinker Tools Curriculum were better at solving (conceptual) physics problems than eleventh and twelfth graders who were in traditional physics classes. I would not have guessed that this teaching style would make that much difference. I have had many classes, from elementary school all the way up to grad school, that have required me to  reflect on what I know, what I have learned, what my hypotheses are... And I always hated it. It has always felt forced and not at all beneficial. Maybe I was not properly taught how to evaluate myself when I was little. I'm not sure.

At the same time, I do agree that too much emphasis in high school and college on memorizing facts, without regard for understanding. This was especially true in my math classes in college. I have always been good at memorizing facts but I did not always fully understand the concepts behind them. My fiance, on the other hand, does not memorize, but instead spends time truly understanding the concepts. I would do significantly better on tests but I am sure  that if we were both asked to take the tests now, a few years later, that I would not be able to do any of the problems and he would do decently well.

I found the Experts and Novices chapter more difficult to relate to and understand. What I did get out of it made me a little worried about myself and about teaching systems in general. As I said in the last paragraph, I am pretty good at memorization. Because of this I have always done quite well in school. However, I tend to forget things immediately following the test. Even if I do remember it, it does not do a lot of good. As this chapter stated, "Experts' knowledge cannot be reduced to sets of isolated facts or propositions " (page 31). I'm pretty sure that my knowledge puts me in the novice category for everything. I have a feeling that many people who have wanted to do well in school also have this problem, and I don't think it is fully out fault (although a little bit for somewhat taking the easy way out).

I am a little worried that even at SI where there are no tests that require memorization, I am not always getting the hands on experience necessary to move past being a novice in any category. Classes such as 501 give step by step detailed instructions that do not allow for students to figure things out on their own, and develop their own methods. I do think that expertise often comes with time. The book mentioned in the example of chess players that expertise came from playing thousands of games. I have a feeling that becoming an expert (or accomplished novice) librarian will come after working as one for a while. It just makes me wonder a little about the point, then, of being in grad school.