250: teaching about information

What are the key understanding in teaching about information? Think about how information is conceptualized, both within popular consciousness, and academia. Using Bruce's informed learning, as well as standards what do we think is important in understanding information? This is a continuation of the IL discussion (and maybe this part should have come first) - does this change the way you conceive IL standards?

So many questions- I'm starting with the last one first, I think.

I actually love that this question came second, because now I have a chance to stop and reflect a little on my position up until now-- that teaching "information" itself isn't as important as teaching about how to interact with information in a personal, purposeful way. That's why I love the AASL standards- to me, they're as much about presenting perspectives as teaching skills.

But this week I think to myself, okay self, wait a second here. Without grounding all of these lovely ideas about information seeking and reflection in a meaningful context of information, they lose some meaning. I appreciate that Bruce's perspective encompasses both the importance of information literacy behaviors and skills, as well as their context and purpose.

When it comes to questions of "what is information?" and "how is information literacy best taught?" I still think that there's a divide between academics like Bruce and the people who wrote the AASL standards, and popular ideas. As a teacher, I see all sorts of ways that students (and especially their parents) expect teaching and learning to look in school, and a lot of it has to do with an outdated, hierarchical model of information transmission. They expect a sort of top down, teacher has the information and gives it to the students who take it in- model. In such a model, the information itself remains unchanged, even as different individuals work with it for different purposes. For me, the biggest piece of education that needs to happen for popularly held ideas about information and information literacy, is that learning is not just about having the right answer. It's about grappling with information, about selecting which information is most needed for a given situation, and finding it efficiently.

250: information literacy

What are the big ideas and unspoken assumptions of information literacy? Look beyond the skills - how are we conceptualizing information literacy (you may want to break it down). What are the unstated biases guiding the way we discuss information literacy - in terms of standards. If you were teaching a course that focused on information literacy what are the overarching understandings you would want students to have at the end of the course?

With the advent of the Internet, the explosion of digital media, and the increased accessibility to and reliance on these outlets of information, the nature of literacy has changed. When I think about literacy, or information literacy, I see a broadening of these ideas to include a whole host of new skills and strategies that didn't need to be taught before, because they simply didn't exist. As a K-12 person, I focused my thinking on the AASL standards (which I think Sir Ken would love, don't you?). I appreciate these standards because when we start talking about this big, expanded ideas about information literacy, it feels hard to me to distill those big ideas down into meaningful, applicable standards that can guide our practice as librarians.

I think it's notable that skills are only one of the learning goals outlined by the AASL standards. Not only do we want students to understand concepts at a basic level, or be able to repeat back information (perhaps this is the "knowledge" level we discussed in our last round of posts), but learners need to be able to think abstractly and critically about information, to be metacognitive and self-reflective, and to apply what they've learned to new situations (that's the "understanding" piece).

Information literacy is about connecting with information. Information literate people can locate information they need using a variety of tools, can critically evaluate that information for accuracy, bias, and relevance to their learning needs. They can "read" a variety of information, in a variety of formats (by "read" here, I mean not only reading in a traditional, decoding sense, but decode, take it in, understand it, ask thoughtful questions, and think abstractly). There are so many new technologies to learn to read (I still can't read twitter. What's up with all of those #s?).

This week I thought a lot about how we teach students to navigate different sources of information. I think there's much less of a divide in young people's minds between "good" or legitimate information (textbooks, peer reviewed articles, reference sources in a library) and "bad" or less legitimate information (websites, their friends' Facebook page, etc.). Our job, I believe, is not to adhere to a rigid hierarchy about "good" and "bad" sources, but to help students learn to choose and evaluate sources appropriately, given the learning task at hand. To me, that is true information literacy.

A short example: last night, I was reading my daughter the book The House That Jack Built. There's that line, "This is the malt that lay in the house that Jack built." My husband and I started wondering what malt is, exactly. After activating our prior knowledge ("Malt is in Whoppers, right? Those are tasty), I googled "What is malt?" and landed on a definition-- at everyone's favorite questionable source, Wikipedia. My husband said, "But is Wikipedia real information? Can't, like, anyone just get on there and write whatever?"

My feeling is, yes, it's real information (I'm hoping Bruce would back me up here), and it's a reasonable source for our information needs. If I wanted to write a dissertation, or any sort of academic paper about malt, I wouldn't use Wikipedia- I'd find a more reliable source. But in the moment, for a quick answer, it worked fine.

That's a long, rambling story, to illustrate the point that I think one of the biggest ideas in the world of teaching information literacy is that the information is out there, and students need to learn how to match the appropriate information with the task at hand.

250: what does it mean to learn?

What does it mean to learn? Include thoughts on the definitions and conceptualizations of knowing and understanding.

As I began to reflect on what it means to learn, I decided to try and asses my own prior knowledge about the learning process before I read and listened to what the experts had to say in this week’s readings. Here’s what I started with:

1. Learners start by bringing their own perspective (culture, previous experience, prior knowledge, learning style, etc.) to new learning tasks. The personal nature of learning means everyone’s process is different. There is a social context to learning; it doesn’t happen in a vacuum.

2. As new information is presented, learners seek to understand it though their unique lens. Often there is a period of uncertainty or grappling with the information (what Piaget would call “disequilibrium”), as a learner tries to assimilate new knowledge with what s/he already knows.

3. Knowledge leads to understanding. That is, a grasp of the facts can lead a learner to hook those facts onto what s/he already knows, and make meaning out of the new information.

4. It is only when a learner has made new information (or knowledge) meaningful to herself by interacting with it in a meaningful way, that true understanding can occur.

Post-reading, my initial thoughts are mostly the same, but a bit more clear.

(Also, I want to marry Sir Ken. Don’t tell my husband. Brilliant.)

I agree with Wiggins and McTighe (2006) that “knowledge” constitutes the facts, and that knowledge leads to “understanding,” or the deeper meaning of the facts. I would add that knowledge might also include what a learner already knows or assumes as they encounter new information. Wiggins and McTighe and Bloom all put a higher priority on understanding over just knowledge, as does one of my favorite educational thinkers, Eleanor Duckworth. In her fabulous book, The Having of Wonderful Ideas, she states: “Knowing the right answer requires no decisions, carries no risks, and makes no demands. It is automatic. It is thoughtless” (Duckworth, 2006). I believe what Duckworth is saying (and I think Bloom, etc. would agree) is that providing learners the opportunity to interact with information—to experiment, to predict, to explore assumptions and test out theories—is a key link in the chain of understanding. Without the chance to construct meaning out of knowledge, the knowledge is sort of useless. I appreciate also Wiggins and McTighe’s point about incorrect knowledge or a misunderstanding of the facts as useful tools in helping learners gain a deeper and truer understanding of new material.

If you believe Sir Ken (and I do), it seems that this critical process of using knowledge to give rise to understanding in a personalized way is not happening in our schools, in general. With an emphasis on standardization (of curriculum and assessment) and un-differentiated learning, it’s no wonder students are turned off. As a school librarian, I am excited about the opportunities I have to interact with students a bit outside of that standard paradigm, and help support them as they learn about what they’re interested in.

reflective journal

Reflect on the semester's readings, discussions, assignments, etc. Has your vision changed? What are you looking forward to implementing in your school library program? What worries you about the profession? What are the challenges?

It has been so interesting to take this course at the same time as I began work as a school librarian. Already I can see both ways that topics raised in our course apply to the real world of librarianship, as well as obstacles that come up when theory starts to get put into practice.

A theme that I've considered often over the course of this semester is the dynamic nature of librarianship. This seems like a profession that is continuously changing and evolving, or at least has the potential to. I know from my years as a classroom teacher that routines are necessary in schools, but that it's easy for a routine to become a rut. I'm wondering about how I will stay on top of developments and new ideas in the field, once I'm out of library school. I also wonder about collaboration. It's been great to have classes full of colleagues and professors who are all interested in school librarianship, who are available for brainstorming with and bouncing questions around. How will the nature of collegiality change if I'm the only librarian at a school? What are some other avenues for collaboration and professional affinity?

My worries:
-finding a (full-time) job at all
-budget woes
-getting to know a collection well enough to be able to match books with all sorts of readers (how do librarians do this? it seems like magic to me)
-getting to know hundreds of students instead of one class at a time, and wondering if relationships with so many kids at once will be as fulfilling as those were with my first grade students

Budget and job searching issues notwithstanding, I think that my other worries will be resolved just by having more time and experience actually working as a librarian, and bridging that theory-practice divide. I appreciate that many of our assignments have focused on practical tools that could be used in a real life library setting (particularly the tech tools).

Overall, I feel hopeful about the potential for school libraries and excited (if sometimes intimidated) about getting further into the profession. I think it's important work. I hope I'm up to the task.

school libraries and advocacy

What is the role of advocacy in the school library? To whom should you apply advocacy efforts, why? In investigating advocacy efforts what do you see that you like? What concerns do you have? What challenges are facing school libraries?

There always seems to come a point in classes where I hit the theory-vs.-practice wall. That is to say, I read or hear or learn things in my courses that sound good in theory, but I’m not quite sure how I will implement them in my practice as a school librarian. Advocacy is somewhat like that for me. I think advocating for the importance of school libraries (and library funding, programming, resources, etc.) is tremendously important, and an undeniable necessity in this profession right now. But it’s hard to know what it looks like in practice—or how to find the time to do it.

Given all of that, I really appreciate the depth of the resources at the AASL website— to know that there are ready-made, readily available sources of information and advocacy ideas is so helpful. All of the advocacy toolkits are resources I can definitely imagine using and revisiting over and over again. They really help distill a big concept like advocacy into manageable, easy to understand ideas and suggestions for action.

While I’m not totally sure how advocacy efforts fit into the day to day workings of a school library, I do feel like those efforts should be an integrated piece of any school library program, as opposed to an afterthought added in only occasionally. I work in a school library right now which is exceptional in several ways—it is well-funded, with three library staff members (for a 500 student school); there is money for new books and author visits and professional development, and a good deal of collaboration with classroom teachers. At first glance, an outside observer might argue that there’s relatively little need for library advocacy. But I see the ways it is a part of the head librarian’s thinking all the time. Whether it’s creating a parent volunteer program, holding community events in the library, or thinking of ways to partner with other local schools with fewer library resrouces, there is a consistent, subtle way that she is promoting the library all the time. The goal is for the library to feel like (and be) an essential part of the school community, and for the community members to feel connected to the library. This work is ongoing.

Certainly contemporary libraries are challenged by budget constraints, first and foremost, and advocacy is necessary on all levels. From library promotion efforts in individual schools, to events like the ALA’s annual Library Advocacy Day, getting the message out that libraries are essential to learning is critical. We need to be able to explain why our efforts and programs are important to all kinds of stakeholders—students, parents, administrators, school boards, etc. Fortunately, there seem to be lots of resources out there to help librarians navigate the terrain of advocacy, and put theory into practice.

shhh... don't tell the ala

Discuss the issues surrounding intellectual freedom, censorship, selection, and in loo parentis in school libraries. Do not restrict your comments to print format only, and consider how long standing programs (such as AR, or highly restrictive filtering) may play a role in intellectual freedom issues. How will you deal with these issues?

I love the ALA. I love that they’re fighting the good fight on important issues, and I am proud to be a card-carrying member of what I think is an important organization. I think that, theoretically, the ALA’s position statements on intellectual freedom are reasonable and aspirational and certainly well thought out. But to me, these statements deal too much in the realm of theory and don’t provide a lot of guidance to librarians in practice (which is fine-- this is just to say that they feel incomplete to me). It also seems, though I don’t know, that the ALA’s position statements apply more easily to public libraries, and that school libraries might face issues of intellectual freedom and censorship in different ways.

The ALA’s statement on Access for Children and Young Adults to Nonprint Materials states: “Recognizing that librarians cannot act in loco parentis, ALA acknowledges and supports the exercise by parents of their responsibility to guide their own children's reading and viewing” (www.ala.org, 2010). I understand that public librarians don’t (and needn’t) act in loco parentis, but I think that statement gets a lot blurrier in a school setting. Teachers do act in loco parentis in all sorts of ways.

Here is my question about nonprint materials: would the ALA condone unrestricted internet access in school libraries? I agree with the ALA’s statement that students should have unfettered access to “a diversity of content and format.” Surely, though, there is information that is so obscene or age-inappropriate that exposing children to it could be harmful to them. School libraries have collection development policies-- books that are appropriate for students are chosen by librarians. Not every book that is published is one that students have access to in school. I believe it should be the same for nonprint resources like the internet. I don’t think children should have unsupervised, unfettered access to the internet. I don’t know much about how filtering software works, but I feel that some level of guidance toward appropriate resources is necessary in school libraries.

As for labeling and rating systems, this is another area where the gap between theory and practice leaves something to be desired. I understand the ALA’s position that adding ratings or other labels to materials that aren’t part of the published product (ratings on movies or video games, for example) is a form of censorship, as it can either implicitly or explicitly limit a student’s access to library materials. However. I believe there are times where some guidance is appropriate and necessary. I think it’s important to consider the intent of the ratings, and the impact that they have. Are ratings there to provide guidance or to deliberately restrict access? It reminds me of the early 1990’s debate over warning labels on music, and the sale of certain music requiring parental consent. Here’s how I feel: warning label= okay; requiring parental consent= not okay. That’s essentially how I feel here.

The other question that comes up for me is, who is doing the labeling? When big bad Accelerated Reader adds ratings for its books, that makes me suspicious (though again, I don’t have a huge problem with it unless books rated MG+ aren’t made available to students who want to read them). If librarians create systems that work for their libraries and their communities, I have less of a problem with that. I realize that puts a lot of power in the hands of librarians, but I think we’re a pretty trustworthy bunch.

An example from the real world. I work in a K-8 private school library. The head librarian is a big proponent of YA literature, and has worked hard to create a teen section that will appeal to middle school readers. Books in the teen section that have particularly mature content or language have a red dot on the barcode-- 7th and 8th graders may check these books out freely, though K-6th grade students need parental permission to do so. I think the ALA would be super cranky about this. To me, it makes practical sense. A book for an 8th grader might really not be appropriate for a 2nd grader. Are the 2nd graders prohibited from browsing through the teen books? No. If a second grader wanted to borrow Twilight (or Breaking Dawn, for that matter), do I think a parent might want to weigh in? Yes. Could I find that second grader a really exciting book about love and vampires that was more age appropriate in the meantime? Sure. If the parent gave their consent, would I have a problem with a 2nd grader checking the book out? Nope.

Could guidelines such as the red dot system be misused and infringe on students’ intellectual freedom? Absolutely, but not necessarily. The head librarian at my school explained to me that this system has freed her up to develop a really rich and varied teen collection, without fretting too much about potentially mature themes or language. So it’s complicated.

No matter what a school library’s policies are regarding intellectual freedom and access to information, they should be clearly communicated to families, through collection development policies, letters home, or other means of family education. And we should of course continually be teaching students how to evaluate books and nonprint materials for themselves.

reflective journal: what's in a name?

What is in a name? Over the last 25 years (probably longer) the title of school librarian has morphed from school librarian to media specialist to teacher librarian. In Canada and California, and maybe other places we are officially teacher librarians. According to AASL we are school librarians. You would be amazed (or at least I am) at the debate and passion this issue incurs. A recent webinar explored the issue, right after AASL's announcement - yes, we are school librarians. What is your take? Does the name matter? Why? Which would you choose? Why?

I have a lot of thoughts about this seemingly innocuous question. Or two questions, really: What do we call ourselves? And, does it matter? I had to go with bullet points here, because my thoughts on this are flying in many different directions.

• It strikes me that this conversation, both the tone of the AASL discussion and the topic itself, reflects a profession that is somewhat in crisis, or at least in flux. If everything is hunky dory and things are going well, then you need to don’t devote a year of time to decide what to call yourself. The thrust of the AASL conversation was about branding and identity to the larger community, but I also feel that part of this question stems from the evolving self-identity of librarians, as well as the pressure of needing to continuously justify the importance of our work. So my first question is, who are we trying to define ourselves for? The public? Ourselves? Both?
  

• There was a lot of talk in the AASL webinar about the shift from an emphasis on information to an emphasis on knowledge. I like this. It reflects the shift in the research from a focus on “information literacy” to “guided inquiry." I think we’ve talked about this in class, too—the idea that information is the means, not the end. In some ways, I think this shift is about an acclimation to an information-saturated world. Perhaps 20 years ago the conversation was about, “Hey wow, look at all of this information!” And now it’s a given that the information is there, and the focus is on what we do with it.

• The move toward (or back to) school librarian as the “official” title for our profession is a way of re-encompassing what librarians do and are responsible for. I don’t know the whole history, but I can imagine that job titles like Library Media Teacher/Specialist and Information Technology High Priestess emerged due to changes in the profession and in school libraries. If librarians weren’t only reading books and helping with print reference anymore, but were doing more media and technology-related work, then perhaps some felt that a new title was needed to reflect these changes. Now I feel like there’s a move to bring it back and say, yes, libraries are changing and librarians are in charge of all of this— books and tech and computers and kindles and reference and databases and all of it— to sort of bring it all back in under the umbrella of librarianship. I appreciate that—it strikes me as a more integrative step than fracturing the job title. It’s post-postmodern!

• That said, I kind of think people should get to call themselves what they want, as a general rule, though I suppose professional associations get to be a little bit fascist about it, if they want to be. It was interesting for me to read some of the comments on the ALA and AASL websites about this issue—some school librarians clearly felt strongly about their professional identity and job title. So yes, names do matter. And I think there’s room for variation, too. I think what’s ultimately most important is that our role is clear to our students, teachers and families that we serve. “School librarian” is simple, direct, and to the point. I must say, I also like teacher-librarian. But maybe the “teacher” should be implied? Like all librarians are teachers?

• I identify myself a school librarian, so I am happy to accept this AASL guideline. I think it’s an appropriate name. It’s easily understood, and it’s broad enough to encompass the many facets of contemporary librarianship.