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.
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Sunday, January 23, 2011
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.
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.
Monday, January 10, 2011
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)