Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Fostering Metadiscourse
on Metaliteracy
Teresa Grettano
Assistant Professor
Director of FYW
Dept. of English & Theatre
The...
“old” paradigm
à normal science
à anomalies
à crisis
--SHIFT--
à articulation
à acceptance
à application
“new” parad...
•  Adopted in 2000
•  “Information literacy is a set of
abilities requiring individuals to
‘recognize when information is
...
“Metaliteracy Model” [in Wonderland] from
Mackey & Jacobson Metaliteracy, Ch. 1, Figure 1
Paradigm Shift
Mackey &
Jacobson...
•  5 Standards, each with Performance
Indicators and Outcomes
•  Standards focus on determining
an information need, and
a...
#acrlilrevisions Task Force Website chronicling IL Standards Revision Process
http://acrl.ala.org/ilstandards/
Paradigm Sh...
February!
2015!
WPA OS & ACRL Standards
Collaboration
Mazziotti & Grettano “Hanging Together” (2011)
#4C15 #H20 #ILmetadisc
FYW Review & Revision
Collaboration
Conventions	
  of	
  Format	
  
Voice	
  
Integrate	
  
Flexible	
  Strategies	
  
Foc...
ACRL Framework for IL Rhetoric & Composition
Collaboration
•  Authority is constructed &
contextual
•  Information creatio...
•  The rabbit hole is uncanny and
uncomfortable
•  Critical pedagogy & vulnerability
•  “The Facebook course” mocked
as tr...
Classroom
Rewards
Risks & Rewards
•  Model Metaliteracy
•  Student engagement because of
our enthusiasm
•  Critical engage...
Campus Culture & Curriculum
Risks
Risks & Rewards
•  Resistance or rejection
•  Untenured faculty &
underrepresented disci...
Campus Culture & Curriculum
Rewards
Risks & Rewards
•  Tenure!
•  Respect as “fighters”
•  Committee invitations for legit...
Professional & Disciplinar y
Risks
Risks & Rewards
•  Enacting metaliteracy in the IL revision
process: Twitter & blogging...
Professional & Disciplinar y
Rewards
Risks & Rewards
•  Achievement Unlocked: Framework for IL
“accepted by the ACRL Board...
•  How can you foster collaboration in
teaching and research between IL &
Rhet/Comp on your campus using
shared language &...
References
Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education. Association of College
and Research Libraries, 2015.
F...
References
---. “Reframing Information Literacy as a Metaliteracy.” College & Research Libraries
72.1 (2011): 62-78.
Mazzi...
"We're all mad here": Fostering Metadiscourse on Metaliteracy
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

"We're all mad here": Fostering Metadiscourse on Metaliteracy

704 views

Published on

Presenters: Teresa Grettano and Donna Witek
Conference on College Composition and Communication, March 18-21, 2015, Tampa, FL
Abstract (excerpts):

This presentation will introduce attendees to the paradigm shift underway in the field of information literacy and serve as a model for collaboration between rhetoric & composition instructors and information literacy librarians. The presentation will be a “talk about the talk” instructors in these two disciplines can have in order to collaborate to design and deliver literacy instruction in and for the participatory information environments of the 21st century.
. . .

We co-presenters—an information literacy librarian and a rhetoric & composition professor—offer as a model for collaboration and metaliteracy instruction the conversations and processes through which our own collaboration developed and thrived. We co-design and co-teach a course called Rhetoric & Social Media into which information literacy, rhetorical theory, writing instruction, and metaliteracy are explicitly integrated. Our collaboration—both in its content and its form—has situated us on the front lines of literacy education and (inter)disciplinary identity on our campus, in and across our respective disciplines, and in higher education as a whole. We are engaged in teaching and research that focuses on analyzing students’ literacy practices, behaviors, dispositions, & abilities in the realm of social media and the effects of engagement in these participatory information environments on literacy and instruction; we are collaborating on first-year writing program development & assessment and sharing student learning outcomes across programs; and we are participating in curricular revision & assessment across campus and positioning literacy instruction in the center of our general education program. In short, it’s been an invigorating five years for us, though at times we have felt a little “mad” in introducing this metadiscourse into these crucible-like contexts.

The presentation title, “We’re all mad here,” playfully hints at some of the risks involved in entering this type of collaboration, in engaging in metadiscourse, and in studying and teaching metaliteracy. The “risk” theme of the conference will be addressed on three levels—the disciplinary, the institutional, and the classroom—by engaging the following questions: What does it look like to model this metadiscourse for students, in a course design and in co-teaching? What are the consequences? What does it look like to have this metadiscourse on campus, in program and curricular design, especially with colleagues who resist interdisciplinarity? What are the consequences? What does it look like to have this metadiscourse in our disciplines, with our colleagues, in our research, in defining ourselves for public and educational audiences? What are the consequences?

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

"We're all mad here": Fostering Metadiscourse on Metaliteracy

  1. 1. Fostering Metadiscourse on Metaliteracy Teresa Grettano Assistant Professor Director of FYW Dept. of English & Theatre The University of Scranton @tgrett teresa.grettano@scranton.edu Donna Witek Associate Professor IL Instruction Librarian Weinberg Memorial Library The University of Scranton @donnarosemary donna.witek@scranton.edu
  2. 2. “old” paradigm à normal science à anomalies à crisis --SHIFT-- à articulation à acceptance à application “new” paradigm Paradigm Shift Kuhn Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962) Hairston “The Winds of Change” (1982) #4C15 #H20 #ILmetadisc
  3. 3. •  Adopted in 2000 •  “Information literacy is a set of abilities requiring individuals to ‘recognize when information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate, and use effectively the needed information.’” •  Competency-based education •  Finalized and accepted in 2015 •  “Information literacy is the set of integrated abilities encompassing the reflective discovery of information, the understanding of how information is produced and valued, and the use of information in creating new knowledge and participating ethically in communities of learning.” •  Threshold Concepts/ Understanding By Design and Metaliteracy… ACRL IL Standards ACRL Framework for IL Paradigm Shift #4C15 #H20 #ILmetadisc
  4. 4. “Metaliteracy Model” [in Wonderland] from Mackey & Jacobson Metaliteracy, Ch. 1, Figure 1 Paradigm Shift Mackey & Jacobson (2011) Witek & Grettano (2012) Mackey & Jacobson (2014) Witek & Grettano (2014) #4C15 #H20 #ILmetadisc
  5. 5. •  5 Standards, each with Performance Indicators and Outcomes •  Standards focus on determining an information need, and accessing, evaluating, and using information ethically to meet that need. •  IL learning outcomes are standardized and universal. •  6 Frames, each with a proposed Threshold Concept for IL, Knowledge Practices, and Dispositions •  Frames focus on the constructed and contextual nature of authority, information creation as a process, the differing types of value placed on information, research as inquiry, scholarship as conversation, and searching as strategic exploration. •  IL learning outcomes are locally developed, situated, and contextualized. ACRL IL Standards ACRL Framework for IL Paradigm Shift #4C15 #H20 #ILmetadisc
  6. 6. #acrlilrevisions Task Force Website chronicling IL Standards Revision Process http://acrl.ala.org/ilstandards/ Paradigm Shift #4C15 #H20 #ILmetadisc
  7. 7. February! 2015!
  8. 8. WPA OS & ACRL Standards Collaboration Mazziotti & Grettano “Hanging Together” (2011) #4C15 #H20 #ILmetadisc
  9. 9. FYW Review & Revision Collaboration Conventions  of  Format   Voice   Integrate   Flexible  Strategies   Focus  on  a  purpose   Documenting   Multiple  Drafts   Digital  Information  Literacy   Writing  for  Inquiry   Information  Literacy   Mean  rating  for  importance     of  outcome  (Top  10)   •  2013: 3-yr review & revision plan •  WPA OS instructor survey: 5/10 outcomes ranked highest in importance refer to shared research outcomes •  Invite librarians to join FYW Committee •  Invite librarians to score assessment of final papers #4C15 #H20 #ILmetadisc
  10. 10. ACRL Framework for IL Rhetoric & Composition Collaboration •  Authority is constructed & contextual •  Information creation as a process •  Information has value •  Research as inquiry •  Scholarship as conversation •  Searching as strategic exploration #4C15 #H20 #ILmetadisc •  Ethos & the politics of power •  Process = format, medium is message •  Intellectual property and access issues but also value = power •  Intellectual curiosity & exploration, also Habits of Mind •  Burke’s Parlor •  Generative process
  11. 11. •  The rabbit hole is uncanny and uncomfortable •  Critical pedagogy & vulnerability •  “The Facebook course” mocked as trivial and a distraction •  Labor practices & compensation Classroom Risks Risks & Rewards #4C15 #H20 #ILmetadisc
  12. 12. Classroom Rewards Risks & Rewards •  Model Metaliteracy •  Student engagement because of our enthusiasm •  Critical engagement with media, information, language, and communication •  Shared outcomes met in authentic ways •  Job-readiness #4C15 #H20 #ILmetadisc
  13. 13. Campus Culture & Curriculum Risks Risks & Rewards •  Resistance or rejection •  Untenured faculty & underrepresented disciplines •  Curriculum review & revision •  “Skills” vs “content” courses •  Eloquentia Perfecta •  Professional education vs the liberal arts “Queen of Hearts” by Dominic Murphy via Alice in Wonderland Art #4C15 #H20 #ILmetadisc
  14. 14. Campus Culture & Curriculum Rewards Risks & Rewards •  Tenure! •  Respect as “fighters” •  Committee invitations for legitimacy •  Model for collaboration •  Model for SoTL •  Leadership roles #4C15 #H20 #ILmetadisc
  15. 15. Professional & Disciplinar y Risks Risks & Rewards •  Enacting metaliteracy in the IL revision process: Twitter & blogging •  February 2014: “Metaliteracy and the New Draft ACRL IL Framework” •  April 2014, July 2014, December 2014: public & transparent participation in revision process •  January 2015 (on ACRLog): “‘Sunrise, Sunset’: A Reflection on Assessment and the Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education” •  February 2015: “Making the Framework Accessible” Image by Nicoletta Ceccoli via Marica on MyModernMet.com #4C15 #H20 #ILmetadisc
  16. 16. Professional & Disciplinar y Rewards Risks & Rewards •  Achievement Unlocked: Framework for IL “accepted by the ACRL Board” = supported with resources! •  Work Still Ahead: Framework for IL co- existing with IL Standards, eventual sunset of latter? •  What’s Next: transformed IL pedagogy •  Worth the Risk? Yes: authentic student learning at stake. •  BONUS: collaboration with Rhet/Comp and other disciplinary faculty …this matters. Image via Alicismo on Tumblr #4C15 #H20 #ILmetadisc
  17. 17. •  How can you foster collaboration in teaching and research between IL & Rhet/Comp on your campus using shared language & outcomes? •  What fights are worth fighting on your campus and how can you build alliances? •  How can we advocate for and support each other professionally on campus, in our disciplines, and in public discourse? Action Items #4C15 #H20 #ILmetadisc
  18. 18. References Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education. Association of College and Research Libraries, 2015. Framework for Success in Postsecondary Writing. Council of Writing Program Administrators, the National Council of Teachers of English, and the National Writing Project, 2011. Hairston, Maxine. “The Winds of Change: Thomas Kuhn and the Revolution in the Teaching of Writing.” CCC 33.1 (1982): 76-88. Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education. Association of College & Research Libraries, 2000. Kuhn, Thomas. Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1962, 2012. Mackey, Thomas P., and Trudi E. Jacobson. Metaliteracy: Reinventing Information Literacy to Empower Learners. Chicago: ALA Neal-Schuman, 2014. Slide 1/2
  19. 19. References ---. “Reframing Information Literacy as a Metaliteracy.” College & Research Libraries 72.1 (2011): 62-78. Mazziotti, Donna, and Teresa Grettano. “‘Hanging Together’: Collaboration between Information Literacy and Writing Programs Based on the ACRL Standards and the WPA Outcomes.” ACRL 2011. Witek, Donna, and Teresa Grettano. “Information literacy on Facebook: an analysis.” Reference Services Review 40.2 (2012): 242-57. ---. “Teaching metaliteracy: a new paradigm in action.” Reference Services Review 42.2 (2014): 188-208. WPA Outcomes Statement for First-Year Composition. Council of Writing Program Administrators. 2000, 2008, 2014. Slide 2/2

×