“IF YOU LOVE SOMETHING, LET IT GO”
A Bold Case for Shared
Responsibility for Information
Literacy through Collaboration
wi...
Donna Witek, information literacy librarian
@donnarosemary
Teresa Grettano, rhetoric/composition professor
@tgrett
Slides:...
What does collaborative information
literacy instruction between librarians
and teaching faculty look like?
#futureofIL
PART I: THEORY
META + PEDAGOGY
 meta-
 meta-awareness
 meta-literacy
 metaliteracy
• ACRL Framework for IL
 pedagogy
...
BUT FIRST: WHY?
 strengthening relationship-based partnerships
 sharing expertise between disciplines
 sustainable IL p...
META-
 Defining meta-
• μετά = ancient Greek for “after”
• evolved into “beyond, about”
 metacognition = thinking about ...
META-AWARENESS
 Defining “meta-awareness”
• Develop in students a “meta-awareness of why they do what they do with
inform...
META-LITERACY
Early conception of “meta-literacy” on Facebook
by Teresa Grettano and Donna Witek, presented at the
Georgia...
METALITERACY
 the “metaliteracy core” as a “revision of the original
information literacy construct”
 metacognition as a...
ACRL FRAMEWORK FOR IL
 A framework for teaching and learning information literacy
• Heavily influenced by metaliteracy
• ...
PEDAGOGY
 Defining pedagogy
• παιδαγωγός = ancient Greek for “to lead a child”
• guiding or attending
• the art/science/p...
CRITICAL PEDAGOGY
 Defining critical pedagogy
• studies power: functions, distribution, the construction of
• united in o...
CRITICAL INFORMATION LITERACY
 Defining critical information literacy (Elmborg)
• IL is “more than a set of acquired skil...
PART II: PRAXIS
RHETORIC & SOCIAL MEDIA
 200-level WRTG course
 first offered as Special Topics course in Spring 2011
 ...
What does collaborative information
literacy instruction between librarians
and teaching faculty look like?
Opening questi...
FACE-TO-FACE INSTRUCTION BY THE LIBRARIAN
 Opportunities for the librarian to have direct encounters with students in
the...
REFERENCE INTERACTIONS &
ONE-ON-ONE RESEARCH APPOINTMENTS
 Opportunities for the librarian to have direct encounters with...
ONLINE LEARNING OBJECTS & ENVIRONMENTS
 The pedagogical use of online objects or platforms to deliver course
content or t...
ASSIGNMENT DESIGN
 The deliberate choices made by the instructor in relation to the
assignments given to students in the ...
ASSIGNMENT DESIGN
 Questions librarians should ask about the assignment as given (cont.):
• How realistic is the due date...
COURSE GOALS/OBJECTIVES/OUTCOMES
 The stated goals for the course; most often found on the course syllabus,
and sometimes...
COURSE GOALS/OBJECTIVES/OUTCOMES
 Questions librarians should ask about the course
goals/objectives/outcomes (cont.):
• D...
DISCIPLINARY FRAMEWORKS
 A framework for teaching and learning within a field or discipline
 Examples:
• For list see sl...
DISPOSITIONS TOWARD TEACHING &
LITERACY (IN OURSELVES)
 We can work on our own dispositions and attitudes toward
collabor...
TEACHING THE TEACHER
 We, information literacy librarians, can teach faculty within the
disciplines how to teach informat...
WHAT TO LOOK FOR IN A FACULTY
COLLABORATOR
 meta-aware of disciplinary history in relation to information,
literacy, and ...
QUESTIONS & DISCUSSION
Donna Witek @donnarosemary
donna.witek@scranton.edu
Teresa Grettano @tgrett
teresa.grettano@scranto...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

"If you love something, let it go": A Bold Case for Shared Responsibility for Information Literacy through Collaboration with Teaching Faculty

873 views
667 views

Published on

Update: VIDEO OF LIVE PRESENTATION ADDED AFTER LAST SLIDE.
Presenters: Donna Witek and Teresa Grettano
Connecticut Information Literacy Conference, June 13, 2014, Manchester, CT
Abstract: The greatest challenge for information literacy (IL) programs today is the question of how to teach and assess higher-level IL concepts, dispositions, and behaviors, within the wider context of disciplinary course content and the undergraduate educational experience. A bold solution to this problem takes the form of in-depth collaboration between IL librarians and teaching faculty, the former recognizing the latter as potential partners and co-teachers of IL. The draft Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education emphasizes “the vital role of collaboration and its potential for increasing student understanding of the processes of knowledge creation and scholarship” (ACRL, 2014). The presenters—an IL librarian and a rhetoric & composition professor—offer as a collaborative model their own experience co-designing and co-teaching a course called Rhetoric & Social Media into which both IL and metaliteracy were explicitly integrated. Collaboration is no longer optional—it is essential to the #futureofIL.

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
873
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
49
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

"If you love something, let it go": A Bold Case for Shared Responsibility for Information Literacy through Collaboration with Teaching Faculty

  1. 1. “IF YOU LOVE SOMETHING, LET IT GO” A Bold Case for Shared Responsibility for Information Literacy through Collaboration with Teaching FacultyDonna Witek and Teresa Grettano The University of Scranton Connecticut Information Literacy Conference, June 13, 2014
  2. 2. Donna Witek, information literacy librarian @donnarosemary Teresa Grettano, rhetoric/composition professor @tgrett Slides: http://tinyurl.com/CTILC2014 #futureofIL
  3. 3. What does collaborative information literacy instruction between librarians and teaching faculty look like? #futureofIL
  4. 4. PART I: THEORY META + PEDAGOGY  meta-  meta-awareness  meta-literacy  metaliteracy • ACRL Framework for IL  pedagogy  critical pedagogy  critical information literacy #futureofIL
  5. 5. BUT FIRST: WHY?  strengthening relationship-based partnerships  sharing expertise between disciplines  sustainable IL programs & practices  shared assessment across programs & curriculum  student learning is deeper & transferable between contexts #futureofIL
  6. 6. META-  Defining meta- • μετά = ancient Greek for “after” • evolved into “beyond, about”  metacognition = thinking about thinking  metaphysical = reality beyond the physical  metaliteracy = “literacy about literacy” (Mackey and Jacobson, Metaliteracy: Reinventing Information Literacy to Empower Learners, 2014, p. 27)  Deeper level of abstraction about an object of study • “metaland” • “that’s so ‘meta’” #futureofIL
  7. 7. META-AWARENESS  Defining “meta-awareness” • Develop in students a “meta-awareness of why they do what they do with information” that we labeled “meta-literacy”  Course goals for Rhetoric & Social Media (syllabus) • Become aware of your online behavior, its reasoning and effects • Develop more purposeful and effective practices in social network environments  Meta-awareness goes beyond literacy • metacognition • emotional intelligence • lifelong learning #futureofIL
  8. 8. META-LITERACY Early conception of “meta-literacy” on Facebook by Teresa Grettano and Donna Witek, presented at the Georgia Conference on Information Literacy, October 1, 2010 See http://tinyurl.com/GAIL10 “…information literacy in the age of social media requires a kind of ‘meta-literacy’ that previous understandings of information literacy did not: educators must teach themselves and their students to be critically aware of why they do what they do with information, otherwise the tools will make the decisions for them” (p. 255). (Witek and Grettano, “Information literacy on Facebook: an analysis”, Reference Services Review 40.2, 2012) #futureofIL
  9. 9. METALITERACY  the “metaliteracy core” as a “revision of the original information literacy construct”  metacognition as a “permeable layer”  the “essential aspects of the original ACRL (2000) standard definition” make up the next sphere  “mediation sphere” referencing “significant trends in open and online learning”  “incorporate and use” expanded to include “produce and share” and further to “collaborate and participate”  “a nonlinear, circular, and transparent framework” that is flexible, open, and decentered #futureofIL Metaliteracy Model developed by Tom Mackey, Trudi Jacobson, and Roger Lipera Metaliteracy: Reinventing Information Literacy to Empower Learners (Mackey and Jacobson, 2014, pp. 23-25)
  10. 10. ACRL FRAMEWORK FOR IL  A framework for teaching and learning information literacy • Heavily influenced by metaliteracy • Emphasizes the “vital role of collaboration and its potential for increasing student understanding of the processes of knowledge creation and scholarship.”  between students and their peers  between students and their instructors  between librarians and teaching faculty • Threshold concepts as collaborative contact points  Troy Swanson, IL Framework Task Force Member: “. . . these concepts open a point of conversation between faculty members and librarians. Since the new framework does not outline skills to teach, but, instead, thresholds of understanding and dispositions for action, librarians and faculty can explore how students develop as information literate learners within the curriculum. This is a move past the one-shot session toward more meaningful pedagogical exchange” (emphases added). #futureofIL ACRL Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education, Draft 1, Part 1, 2014, http://acrl.ala.org/ilstandards/ Swanson, “THE NEW INFORMATION LITERACY FRAMEWORK AND JAMES MADISON”, 2014, http://tinyurl.com/ILswanson
  11. 11. PEDAGOGY  Defining pedagogy • παιδαγωγός = ancient Greek for “to lead a child” • guiding or attending • the art/science/profession/method/practice/function/work of teaching  Simply put, pedagogy is • what content you teach and why (knowledge) • how you teach this content and why this way and not others (methods) • the goals of your instruction and why • the purpose of education as a whole and why #futureofIL
  12. 12. CRITICAL PEDAGOGY  Defining critical pedagogy • studies power: functions, distribution, the construction of • united in objectives—the interrogation and disruption of power—not in theory or approaches • empowering, problem-posing, liberatory, radical, progressive • key people: Paulo Freire, Ira Shor, Henry Giroux , Peter McLaren • theoretical background: Marxist, Frankfurt School, poststructuralist, postmodernist  Key concepts for teaching and collaboration: • co-inquisitors, disrupts hierarchy in instruction • praxis, both reflection and action, both critique and intervention • conscientizacao or critical consciousness #futureofIL
  13. 13. CRITICAL INFORMATION LITERACY  Defining critical information literacy (Elmborg) • IL is “more than a set of acquired skills” but “the comprehension of entire system of thought and the ways that information flows in that system” as well as “the capacity to critically evaluate the system itself” (p. 196) • Argues for librarians to “develop a critical practice of librarianship—a theoretically informed praxis” (p. 198)  Connected to metaliteracy (Mackey and Jacobson) • Metaliterate learners can “fill gaps in learning and develop strategies for understanding” so “the learner is also a teacher and each individual is a collaborative partner in the learning experience” (p. 13) • “Metaliteracy is a critical perspective that raises questions about our pedagogical assumptions and the linear ways we have been teaching information literacy” (p. 8) #futureofIL #critlib http://tinyurl.com/critlibx Elmborg, “Critical Information Literacy: Implications for Instructional Practice”, Journal of Academic Librarianship 32.2, 2006 Mackey and Jacobson, Metaliteracy: Reinventing Information Literacy to Empower Learners, 2014
  14. 14. PART II: PRAXIS RHETORIC & SOCIAL MEDIA  200-level WRTG course  first offered as Special Topics course in Spring 2011  co-designed and co-taught by presenters  “situates traditional instruction in rhetorical theory/practice and information literacy within social networks—specifically on Facebook” (syllabus)  course goals include rhetorical theory/practice, traditional information literacy, and metaliteracy #futureofIL Witek and Grettano, “Teaching metaliteracy: a new paradigm in action”, Reference Services Review 42.2, 2014
  15. 15. What does collaborative information literacy instruction between librarians and teaching faculty look like? Opening question revisited… #futureofIL
  16. 16. FACE-TO-FACE INSTRUCTION BY THE LIBRARIAN  Opportunities for the librarian to have direct encounters with students in the classroom.  Examples: one-shot, two-shot, embedded, co-teaching, teaching  Rhetoric & Social Media: co-teaching #futureofIL
  17. 17. REFERENCE INTERACTIONS & ONE-ON-ONE RESEARCH APPOINTMENTS  Opportunities for the librarian to have direct encounters with students outside of the classroom.  Examples: referred by instructor, self-directed by student, librarian plugs self during face-to-face instruction  Rhetoric & Social Media: later iterations of the course #futureofIL
  18. 18. ONLINE LEARNING OBJECTS & ENVIRONMENTS  The pedagogical use of online objects or platforms to deliver course content or to facilitate learning.  Examples: tutorials, research guides, LMSs, social media platforms  Rhetoric & Social Media: • Facebook (as object and secret group), then Twitter, Instagram, and Pinterest • LMS: ANGEL (document management and formal communications w/ students; Donna added to course in ANGEL) #futureofIL
  19. 19. ASSIGNMENT DESIGN  The deliberate choices made by the instructor in relation to the assignments given to students in the course; ideally, these choices are tied directly and measurably to student learning outcomes.  Questions librarians should ask about the assignment as given: • Is there an assignment prompt? Do you have it in your possession in advance of your instruction to the students? • What tasks (verbs) is the instructor asking students to do? • How are the library’s resources, or information sources in general, named or described by the instructor? Does it mention the library and/or the librarian at all? #futureofIL
  20. 20. ASSIGNMENT DESIGN  Questions librarians should ask about the assignment as given (cont.): • How realistic is the due date for the assignment? • Is the assignment and/or librarian-led instruction occurring at the optimal time in relation to the due date as well as to the introduction of the assignment? • In what ways can these assignment elements be tweaked to further integrate and develop information literacy in students through the activity of the assignment? • What other questions can we ask about assignments?  Rhetoric & Social Media: co-designed every assignment #futureofIL
  21. 21. COURSE GOALS/OBJECTIVES/OUTCOMES  The stated goals for the course; most often found on the course syllabus, and sometimes referred to as “course objectives” or “student learning outcomes for the course.”  Questions librarians should ask about the course goals/objectives/outcomes: • Do you have the syllabus? Are they listed on the syllabus? • What word choice does the instructor make for describing them? Are they goals? Objectives? Outcomes? • Are they measurable? What kinds of verbs are used? #futureofIL
  22. 22. COURSE GOALS/OBJECTIVES/OUTCOMES  Questions librarians should ask about the course goals/objectives/outcomes (cont.): • Do any goals call on skills, competencies, behaviors, knowledge, or dispositions that are shared with information literacy? • Can any be tweaked to better make the connection between the course and information literacy?  Rhetoric & Social Media: • six goals: two rhetorical theory/practice, two traditional information literacy, and two metaliteracy #futureofIL
  23. 23. DISCIPLINARY FRAMEWORKS  A framework for teaching and learning within a field or discipline  Examples: • For list see slides 10 and 11 of Witek, “You Have Standards?”: Disciplinary Frameworks as a Bridge to Collaboration, PA Forward Information Literacy Summit, State College, 2013, http://tinyurl.com/PAFILS13  Rhetoric & Social Media: used the ACRL Standards (2000) and the WPA Outcomes Statement (2000), and later the Framework for Success in Postsecondary Writing (2011) #futureofIL Mazziotti and Grettano, “‘Hanging Together’: Collaboration Between Information Literacy and Writing Programs Based on the ACRL Standards and the WPA Outcomes.”, ACRL 2011 Proceedings, http://tinyurl.com/ACRL2011paper
  24. 24. DISPOSITIONS TOWARD TEACHING & LITERACY (IN OURSELVES)  We can work on our own dispositions and attitudes toward collaborating with teaching faculty, toward our own instruction, and toward our own discipline.  Collaborative dispositions to cultivate: • selves as experts • another’s ideas can always refine and make mine better • being open to learning from and with students • risk/vulnerability within collaborative partnership • any others?  Rhetoric & Social Media: a critical pedagogy disposition #futureofIL
  25. 25. TEACHING THE TEACHER  We, information literacy librarians, can teach faculty within the disciplines how to teach information literacy, so we no longer need to do it ourselves.  Opportunities to do this: • discourse on campus • curriculum committees and reform • shared governance structures • incentives, institutes, and faculty development programs  Rhetoric & Social Media: IL Stipend Program • http://tinyurl.com/ILstipends #futureofIL
  26. 26. WHAT TO LOOK FOR IN A FACULTY COLLABORATOR  meta-aware of disciplinary history in relation to information, literacy, and research methods  meta-aware of pedagogy  meta-aware of course goals/objectives/outcomes  meta-aware of student behaviors and abilities #futureofIL
  27. 27. QUESTIONS & DISCUSSION Donna Witek @donnarosemary donna.witek@scranton.edu Teresa Grettano @tgrett teresa.grettano@scranton.edu Slides: http://tinyurl.com/CTILC2014 #futureofIL

×