1. Teaching strategies for librarians
Enhancing the quality and impact of your library workshops
CILIP: London and South-East Region of SLG
Nov 2015
2. Welcome
09.30-10.00 Registration and refreshments
10:00-10:45 What makes a bad workshop?
10:45-11:00 Break
11:00-13:00 The Winner takes it all
13:00-14:00 Lunch
14:00-15:30 Create a game
15:30-15:45 Tea/Coffee
15:45-16:15 Presentations
16:15: 16:30 Questions and reflections
16:30 Close
http://people-equation.com/wp-content/uploads/Welcome-mat.jpg
3. What makes a bad workshop?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/webtreatsetc/4869256777/
10. Is teaching our Waterloo?
• Relevance
• Too much
• Didactic
• Uninspiring
• Subject
• Teaching skills
http://www.flickr.com/photos/vicchi/4079403111/
11. Björn Again
• Less is more
• Cloning
• Discussion
• Learning by doing
• Learners, not the taught
• Games
http://advedupsyfall09.wikispaces.com/Sara+Woodard
12. The name of the game
• Fun
• Quick
• Simple
• Easy
• Need or objective
Adapted from Susan Boyle, Lilac 2011
13. I have a dream
Move from
“ …lifting and transporting textual
substance from one location, the library, to
another, their teacher’s briefcases.”
To
“…searching, analyzing, evaluating,
synthesizing, selecting, rejecting…”
Kleine 1987
https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2462/3767003528_3137344451_o.jpg
16. Example of coursework marking criteria
10% Introduction
15% Overview
30% Critical analysis
15% Discussion
10% Conclusion
10% Referencing
10% Quality etc
Maximum marks for a well
referenced and accurate
description of [subject]
using suitable references
Maximum of 10 marks for a list of
references which is both relevant,
and correctly given in Harvard
style
Maximum of 10 marks for quality,
style of writing and presentation
18. Books
What are they:
A written or printed work of fiction or fact.
May be electronic.
Good for:
Clear overview.
Not so good for:
Up to date information.
19. Journal
What are they:
A regular publication containing articles on a particular
academic subject.
Presents new research.
Good for:
Latest research, critically reviewed by experts.
Not so good for:
Broad overview of a subject.
20. Web page
What are they:
An information resource which can be easily created by
anyone on any topic.
Electronic.
Good for:
Very up to date information.
Not so good for:
Accurate and reliable information.
21. Newspaper
What are they:
A regular publication containing current events,
informative articles, diverse features and advertising.
May be electronic.
Good for:
Daily information.
Not so good for:
Balanced and well researched information.
22. Popular (trade) journal
What are they:
A regular publication containing new products plus
information for a business sector.
Good for:
Latest product news.
Not so good for:
Detailed and objective reports.
23. Find out more
MyUniHub > MyStudy > MyLibrary > MySubject > Science & Technology
http://libguides.mdx.ac.uk/computing
26. Finding resources
myUniHub > My Study > My Library > Summon
Select Summon and
search for information for
your project
27. Google vs Summon
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ennuiislife/3450743002/
Google
• Familiar and easy to use
• Finds too much information
• Fast results
• Access from any computer
• Access to some books and journals
• Designed to sell you things
• Search results sponsored
• Searches for info from any source
• Pay for academic information
Summon
• Easy to use
• Finds lots of academic info
• Fast results
• Access from any computer
• Access to lots of books and journals
• Designed to find you information
• Search results by relevance
• Searches quality resources
• Free access to full text
29. Evaluating information
Imagine you are writing an essay on ‘Network Security’.
Have a look at the 4 items that you have been given and
consider the following:
• Which items are the most relevant to your essay?
• Which items would be no use?
• Which item has the most academic authority?
• Which items might have bias?
• Which item is the most current?
31. Take a chance on me
Marks Attendees Non-attendees
Commonest mark 65% 50%
Highest mark 90% 75%
Lowest mark 40% 40%
Bibliography
commonest mark
7/10 5/10
•Survey of CCM2426 students
•66 attendees, 22 non-attendees
32. “If you put me to the test, if
you let me try………”
Search tools used Attendees Non-attendees
Google 68% 63%
Wikipedia 38% 27%
Summon 68% 40%
Library catalogue 30% 59%
Evaluation criteria Attendees Non-attendees
Current 89% 59%
Relevant 76% 59%
Academic authority 67% 41%
Easy to read 24% 45%
33. “Does it mean anything to
you......”
• Engaged
• Discussion
• Learning
• Safe
• Respond
• Breathing space
• Observe
https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnragai/
34. Arrival (what we now know)
• Not all students want a well rounded education
• Digital Natives are not different
• Digital Literacy is not Information Literacy
35. The winner takes it all
• Changes have worked
• Teaching is more fun
• Impact…
...Library training gets you better marks!
38. Create a game
• Reflect on our games
• Think about games you know
• Brainstorm ideas
• Create game
• Complete form
• Prepare 5 min presentation
Adapted from Susan Boyle, Lilac 2011 http://www.flickr.com/photos/ajourneyroundmyskull/4788590225/
41. Adam Edwards a.edwards@mdx.ac.uk
Vanessa Hill v.hill@mdx.ac.uk
http://bit.ly/GamesMDX
ght Fotolia under Microsoft licence http://office.microsoft.com/en-gb/images/results.aspx?qu=blank+sign&ex=1#ai:MP900442493|
42. References
• Badke, W. (2010). Why information literacy is invisible. Communications in Information
Literacy, 4 (2), pp.129-141.
• Bennett, S., Maton, K., and Kervin, L. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: a critical review of
the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39 (5), pp.775-786.
• Boyle, S. (2011) Using games to enhance information literacy sessions, Presented at LILAC
2011. http://www.slideshare.net/infolit_group/boyle-using-games-to-enchance-information-
literacy
• Chen, K., and Lin,P.. (2011). Information literacy in university library user education. Aslib
Proceedings: new information perspectives, 63 (4), pp.399-418.
• CIBER. (2008).Information behaviour of the researchers of the future. UCL, London.
http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/reppres/gg_final_keynote_11012008.pdf
• Fieldhouse, M. and Nicholas, D. (2008). Digital literacy as information savvy: the road to
information literacy. In: Lankshear, C. and Knobel, M. (eds). Digital literacy: concepts, policies
and practices. New York, Peter Lang Publishing Group, pp. 47-72.
• Helsper, E. J., and Eynon, R. (2010). Digital natives: where is the evidence? British
Educational Research Journal, 36 (3), pp. 503-520.
43. • Holton, D. (2010). The Digital Natives/Digital Immigrants distinction is dead or at least dying.
EdTechDev. Available at https://edtechdev.wordpress.com/2010/03/19/the-digital-natives-digital-
immigrants-distinction-is-dead-or-at-least-dying/ [Accessed 9th June 2015]
• Jones, C., Ramanau, R., Cross, S. and Healing, G. (2010). Net generation or Digital Natives: is there a
distinct new generation entering university? Computers and Education, 54, pp.722-732.
• Kennedy, G., Judd, T., Dalgarnot, B. and Waycott, J. (2010). Beyond natives and immigrants: exploring
types of net generation students. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26, pp.332-343.
• Kleine, M. (1987). What is it we do when we write articles like this one-or how can we get students to
join us? Writing Instructor, 6. pp.151-161.
• Margaryan, A., Littlejohn, A., and Vojt, G. (2011). Are digital natives a myth or reality? University
students’ use of digital technologies. Computers and Education, 56, pp.429-440.
• Norgaard, R. (2003). Writing information literacy in the classroom: pedagogical enactments and
implications, Reference and User Services Quarterly, 43 (3), pp. 220-226
• Norgaard, R. (2004). Writing information literacy in the classroom: pedagogical enactments and
implications, Reference and User Services Quarterly, 43 (3), pp.220-226.
• Palfrey, J., and Gasser, U. (2008). Born digital: understanding the first generation of digital natives.
Basic Books, New York.
• Prensky, M. (2001a). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9 (5), pp.1-6.
• Prensky, M. (2009). H.Sapiens Digital: From Digital Immigrants and Digital Natives to Digital Wisdom.
The Wisdom Page. Available from http://www.wisdompage.com/Prensky01.html [Accessed 9th June
2015]
44. • Webber, S and Johnston, B. (2013).Transforming information literacy for higher education in the 21st
century: a lifelong learning approach. In: Developing people’s information capabilities: fostering
information literacy in educational, workplace and community contexts (Library and Information
Science volume 8), Emerald Group Publishing, pp.15-30. In: Lankshear, C. and Knobel, M. (eds).
Digital literacy: concepts, policies and practices. New York, Peter Lang Publishing Group, pp. 47-
72.
• Webber, S., Ford, N., Crowder, M. and Madden, A. (2013). Collaborating for deep critical
information behaviour. Presented at: LILAC 2013, University of Manchester, UK. 25-27th March
2013. Available at http://www.slideshare.net/infolit_group/webber-ford-2013-18177230 [Accessed
11th September 2014]
• White, D. and Le Cornu, A. (2011). Visitors and residents: a new typology for online engagement.
First Monday: peer reviewed journal on the Internet, 16 (9). Available from
http://firstmonday.org/article/view/3171/3049 [Accessed 9th June 2015]
• Wright, F., White, D., Hirst, T. and cann, A. (2014). Visitors and residents: mapping student attitudes
to academic use of social networks. Learning, Media and Technology, 39 (1), pp.126-141.
• __________________________________________________
Editor's Notes
AE
Welcome and intros.
This is where we work.
Ask delegates to introduce themselves and what they hope to get out of the session etc
AE
Plan for the day:
09.30-10.00 Registration and refreshments
10:00-10:45 What makes a bad workshop?
10:45-11:00 Break
11:00-13:00 The Winner takes it all
13:00-14:00 Lunch
14:00-15:30 Create a game
15:30-15:45 Tea/Coffee
15:45-16:15 Presentations
16:15: 16:30 Questions and reflections
16:30 Close
VH
Divide into groups
10:00-10:10 10 mins to discuss and note down ‘5 things guaranteed to make a library workshop a disaster’
10:10-10:25 Pass on to next team and spend 15 mins coming up with solutions
VH and AE
10:25-10:45 Feedback
15 min break 10:45-11:00
VH
Abba theme.
VH
Higher Education focus, but relevant to school libraries.
Looking at the broader issues surrounding provision of information literacy training in HE
How we have been inspired to change the way we teach and address the problems
What we have done and how we have developed our provision
What impact have we had
Plus we will look at some of the myths that we have explored as part of our Doctorate
AE
AE and VH (back in 2011) identified a number of issues regarding provision of user education:
Not embedded
No central coordination of skills within the School
Workshops usually provided at request of academic staff on ad hoc basis
Inconsistent provision:
Which led to inconsistent provision and duplication Eg. rarely see all first year students, but sometimes more than once.
Impossible to develop progressive programme of information literacy training
Made worse by complex module structure
New programme structure is simpler but still no central co-ord.
Bad timing:
Insufficient time
Wrong time, so not relevant to students
Also workshops often at wrong time, so not relevant to students e.g. sometimes we are offered a time slot because the lecturer will be at a conference and needs their classes covered!!
Repercussions for student behaviour as library workshops perceived as unimportant.
Information skills:
Assumption by academics and students that IT skills = IL skills (find, eval and use info found)
Not the case…something we have explored in our research
AE
There are also issues surrounding students….
Student research is often strategic, the students have an end goal which is to make the grade.
Book or journal with the answers
Right amount of facts
Right number of references
Reporting back to teacher
Easy option: use Google and Wikipedia as easy
Also fear of plagiarising and criticising information, also students who have never written more than 500 words
Librarians reinforce this with our Behaviourist approach to teaching. (More about teaching on next slide).
AE
Is teaching a Librarian’s Waterloo?
Relevance: Library workshops often perceived as not relevant to students’ academic work
Too much: We want to tell them everything we know
Didactic: Obsessed with showing them how to use databases step-by-step….very linear
Uninspiring: Bore students/death by Powerpoint
Subject: We need to remember that we are teaching information skills and not the subject
Teaching skills: librarians not taught to teach……however things are changing (more later)
However Middlesex librarians are starting to get teaching qualifications. Benefits:
Equivalent qualifications to academic staff = equal footing
Learning together: academics and support staff studying PGCert together = gain understanding of each others role, contribution etc
Language: use same language
Respect: mutual
Understanding of the theory behind teaching
VH
Inspired by ‘Teaching information literacy in HE workshop’. Attended at CILIP. Dec 2010.
We teach 3-5 times too much
When planning sessions we need to consider what will make the biggest difference given time limit/use online guides
We try to clone our expertise
We can’t distil our own experience into a one hour session.
We don’t need to show students how to search databases, but we do need to show them how to appreciate the value of academic resources, search effectively, evaluate the information found and how to use it ethically
Discussion is powerful:
Find out how the students already find info, what they already know, what they want
Learn/discover together (peer learning): don’t plan searches/demos in advance
We can learn a lot about student’s understanding from the questions they ask
Learning by doing is empowering:
Encourage active participation through a variety of activities eg. trying things out, getting feedback, solving problems, peer discussion, reflecting on mistakes etc
No demos: Interaction and exploration
Uninvolved students are less likely to learn
Students should be learners, not the taught (working together to learn):
Our role to support and facilitate
Disciplinary context is a key influence on student learning ie. one method does not fit all….devised different sessions for PDE students
Games:
Inspiration from LILAC 2011- Susan Boyle (UCD) Using games in HE.
VH
Games should be:
Fun-enjoyable
Quick -10 mins
Simple - easy to prepare and cheap
Easy to grasp and play- no complicated rules
Meet a specific need or objective
VH
VH
What we did:
Back to basics-we considered what we need to teach
Identified key elements Resources, keywords, searching and evaluation
Created a game/activity for each element
Mix and match elements
Coordinate content with LDU to avoid duplication
Created a menu of workshops i.e. what we would cover in each year
Have developed alternatives for 2nd and 3rd years and PGs
The framework for every workshop:
Thinking about resources game in an academic context ( 3 x versions TAR, Sources and Scenario)
Keywords: using image to get students thinking about keywords (specific, alternative, related) and then using real example
The real thing: relate learning to a project
Searching (hands on) mainly use Summon = frees up time to concentrate on info skills
Evaluation using sample search results (website, newspaper article, trade journal, academic journal) and Criteria game for 3rd years.
PDE students: have taken interactivity much further eg. taking items from special collections into their studio (think about how they can use them), letting them discover art and design collections themselves at HE (mini project) etc.
AE
This is what we do….a typical 1st year workshop for computing students.
‘Better than Google’ is a direct challenge to the students’ love of ‘Googling it’
AE
Following a teaching observation, we acted on feedback and now add marking criteria.
Shows how use of the library can enhance their marks.
Gets attention of those students who are not engaged.
E.g.
Worth considering this:
Max points awarded to work which is based on good research and well referenced
Max marks awarded if refs used are relevant and correctly written ie. Harvard style
LDU can help with style of writing and presentation
AE
Hand out exercise Thinking about resources.
Groups
10 mins
AE
Good for:
broad/general overview of subject
Edited for quality and accuracy
Not so good for:
May not be specific enough
Can be out of date
AE
Good for:
Up-to-date
Specialist/focussed
Present latest research
Edited for accuracy/quality (peer reviewed)
Lots of references
Not so good for:
Can be hard to locate/access
Expensive
May be too specific
May be at wrong level
AE
Good for:
Easy to use/search
All subjects covered
Can be very up-to-date
Mobile
Not so good for:
No editorial control
Unreliable sources
Can be created by anyone
Material can lack provenance
Can be out-of-date
Not everyone has access
AE
Good for:
Up-to-date
Edited
Readily available (latest copies especially)
Not so good for:
Can be bias
Can be unbalanced
Can be sensationalist
Hard to get hold of/access (back issues)
AE
Good for:
Latest information
Current events
Concise info
Product news
Often available online with RSS/Twitter etc
Not so good for:
Detail
Objective information ie. can be bias, adverts, preferential products etc
Often hard to find old issues
Back issues/archive
AE
More information about the range of resources available on the Library Subject Guide plus lots of useful online guides eg. how to search for information for your project.
VH
VH
Example of a real student project and how we get students to think about their keywords.
What are the keywords? Cornish, villages, 4G, trial
What are the alternative keywords?
Cornish: Cornwall, West Country, West of England
Villages: Village, rural communities, countryside
4G: Fourth generation technology, cellular wireless standards, networking technology,
Trial: test, evaluation
What terms can you use to make your search more specific?
Internet access
Fixed and mobile subscribers
Frequency and bandwidth
Infrastructure
BT and Everything Everywhere
Routers, antennas, and dongles
Radio spectrum
IP based mobile broadband
Services eg. ultra-broadband internet access, IP telephony, gaming services, streamed multimedia
LTE (Long term evolution)
IMT (International mobile telecommunications) advanced compliance
What are the related subjects?
Rural internet access
UK digital agenda, Digital Britain
Digital inclusion
Telecommunications
3G and 2G
Laptop computer wireless modems, smart phones, mobile devices
00:50
AE
AE
Searching is followed by a discussion about the advantages of using Summon to find info rather than Google.
Google
Familiar and easy to use
Finds too much information
Fast results
Access from any computer
Access to some books and journals
Designed to sell you things eg. shoes
Search results sponsored…no accident that Wikipedia, Amazon etc at top of search results
Searches for info from any source
Pay for academic information
Summon
Easy to use
Finds lots of academic info
Fast results
Access from any computer
Access to lots of books and journals
Designed to find you information: up-to-date, focussed/specific
Search results by relevance
Searches quality resources eg. Peer reviewed journal articles, conference proceedings , research etc
Free access to full text ie. Information not freely available elsewhere
VH
Introduce the importance of evaluating information for quality
What do you think about this quote by Abraham Lincoln?
VH
Divide class into group
Hand out worksheet and 4x items.
Discuss. No right or wrong answers. All items found by doing a search on Network Security.
Which items are most relevant:
Academic journal and Wiki most relevant.
Newspaper article is sensationalist and trade journal is a review of software.
Which items would be no use:
Newspaper article useless, and trade journal probably not unless needed to know about software packages.
Which item has the most academic authority:
Academic journal. It has biography of authors, references, in-text citations and uses academic language. Article has been peer reviewed.
Wikipedia has refs, but don’t know who has added information.
Are any of the items bias:
Newspaper
Trade journal is reviewing software and may be swayed by advertisers.
Which item is the most current:
Wikipedia
Academic journal is very out-of-date 2004
Would not use any of them and would continue search. Discuss the importance of evaluating the information that you find.
VH
Authority : Who is the author? What is their knowledge base/qualifications? How have they carried out their research?
Relevance : Is this what I need? Will it answer my question? Is it at the right level?
Intent : What is the purpose of information e.g. financial gain, propaganda, academic etc?
Objectivity : Balanced view? Opposing views represented? Links to supporting information?
Currency: How old is this information? When was it last updated and by whom?
AE
Those who attended average 65%, rather than 50 % for non attendees ie. 15% higher
Attendees 7/10 for bibliography, rather than 5/10 ie. 20% difference
AE
Resources used shows better choice of resource by attendees….in the case of this project, very little current info, so Library catalogue not a good choice
Evaluation criteria shows better understanding by attendees ie. Academic authority and currency seen as impo rather than easy to read.
VH
As students take part in one of our activities
They are engaged and there is increased interest, motivation and retention. Also games make learning fun.
Lots of discussion……collective and peer learning………working together to solve problem/win/loose……learning is social, communal, and collaborative
Students appear to be learning……Burgun believes that games teach us how to learn, activating prior knowledge and building on existing skills. This is the constructivist approach to learning which is the foundation of our changed pedagogical practice.
Students seem willing to ask questions, voice opinions etc: games can alleviate some of the fear that students experience when using a library i.e. they can experiment in a safe environment
We can respond as necessary….challenging misconceptions and filling gaps in their knowledge
Use of games alleviates the burden of running back-to-back workshops …..providing us with breathing space. Every workshop different for us.
Starting a workshop with this game also gives us time to observe and reflect……what we hear the students discuss is indicative of what they know and what they don’t know. This harks back to Markless’s idea that discussion is powerful.
Therefore use of games in our workshops empower students to make decisions based on prior knowledge, plan a course of action, solve problems, learn and consolidate new information.
VH
These are some things we have learnt from our research which we though might be useful to you.
Not all students want a well rounded education
Secondary schools are judged by exam results, teach to test, 14 years of being told what to do, giving the correct answer in the right way to pass exams
This influences student attitudes at Uni
More concerned with making the grade/achieving employability, rather than getting an education
Just want to find the right book or journal with the answers, right number of references, using the easy option which is usually Google.
Behaviour reinforced by librarians through demos, linear approach to teaching etc
Recent research by Uni of Sheffield found discrepancy between expectations of aca staff and UG info skills.
Believing that skills have been learnt at school.
In reality 45% students felt unprepared for this aspect of Uni and over half wanted support and guidance (Webber et al, 2013).
Similar findings in USA
But economic decline means not enough jobs, therefore need to reassess the value of a Uni education = lifeskills
And we wonder can enhanced information literacy can help move students on from purely strategic learning to something more creative not least because this would prepare them better for the rest of their lives?
Digital Natives are not different to previous generations
Digital natives = multitaskers, access to tech, proficient in their use, Internet is primary info source etc
As compared with Digital Immigrants= less reliant on Internet, more likely to use physical library , prefer to read from paper etc
Some people suggest a 2nd generation of Digital Natives born after 1990 who have grown up with social media
Prensky back in 2001 made distinction between technical and cognitive skills believing DN brains has been fundamentally changed by the use of technology
Others (Fieldhouse and Nicholas) assume that their language is diff and that there are implications for education process and we need to teach them differently
However others question this (Bennett et al)….Digital Immigrants also known as Generation X (born between 1961-1981) used to multi-task (TV/homework), DNs don’t expect to be taught differently….quite traditional in their expectations
MORI suggest students don’t utilise technology as much as we think
Lots of research suggest extent of Internet use, not just to do with age, other factors=socio-ec, ethnicity, gender, home environment etc
Therefore Digital Natives are not homogenous group
Concept of DN and DI increasingly questioned……age alone cannot explain use of technology.
White and Le Cornu advocate the idea of ‘Visitors and residents’ who use Internet respectively as a ‘Tool’ to find info when appropriate and a ‘place/space’ where they can develop a digital identity and network within a community.
Prensky has also reconsidered and now talks of ‘Digital wisdom’ to distinguish between those who accept the judicous and timely use of technology to access info for decision-making and those who don’t.
Digital Literacy is not Information Literacy
Google Generation/Digital Natives have matured in a world dominated by the Internet, they know how to use technology, so assumption is they are information literate.
Chen and Lin believe that students comfortable in a digital world are also liable to think they have the necessary skills.
However Norgaard believes that we should not treat IL as a neutral set of skills….it is not just about process.
The influential CIBER 2008 (Information behaviour of future researchers) report showed that 89% of students use search engines at start of their research and 93% are satisfied with this experience.
CIBER also showed that virtual library users spent as much time ‘finding their bearings’ as they did viewing actual search results suggesting less proficiency as previously thought.
In reality they don’t know how to use all the info judiciously any more than we did and lack the critical skills.
AE
Changes to methods have worked: survey shows that we have made an impact, plus many colleagues have used and adapted our workshops for their students
Teaching is more fun for students and for us
But we can now say...
...Library training gets you better marks
AE
Any questions
AE
Lunch 1-2
AE
1 hour 30 mins to do the following
Reflect on our games
Think about games you know
Brainstorm ideas
Create game
Complete form
Prepare 5 min presentation
14:00-15:30 Create a game
15:30-15:45 Tea/Coffee
15:45-16:15 Presentations
16:15: 16:30 Questions and reflections
VH
If time play Dewey game as used with Foundation students.
