When we created A New Curriculum for Information Literacy in 2011, one of our aims was to inform future information literacy teaching. By creating a framework which is both practical and research informed we wanted not only to exemplify what we found forward-looking teachers were already doing but also to offer an accessible model for others.
“Less training, more teaching” – expert consultation
Pursuing this thinking led us to see (in classic constructivist fashion) that this complex issue of ‘how to teach’ depends on the agency and approach of the practitioner – not on what they’re told to do : ) It’s about your worldview and how you see your identity [Wheeler]
Note this is a phenomenographic outcome space – not discrete categories, but a fluid set of identities that we move between. So what is our teaching identity?
Suggests there remain serious issues around our own perception of our identity, our value, and our position in teaching & learning. Lack of confidence, lack of pedagogic expertise (perceived or unconscious).
There’s also how we’re permitted to see ourselves. There are significant institutional factors in how we’re allowed to see and portray ourselves, and what we’re allowed to do in our practice. A lot of this has to do with the strategic positioning of the library within the institution. (Mwesigwa – “information material custodianship” p.74)
McCluskey’s study: “it is apparent that one academic saw the role as predominantly reactive-supportive, one entirely supportive, two mostly supportive, with some tendencies to partnership and one leaning towards partnership more strongly.” (p.69)
So institutional perceptions and positioning of the library are yet more factors that can prevent librarians from fulfilling their potential as partners in teaching and learning, rather than providers and custodians of material.
Think about – for instance – where you fit in the curriculum design and course validation process. Are you involved right from the start, in designing the content and learning opportunities? Do you only come in at the course validation level, e.g. reading list fulfilment? Do you even come in at course validation level?
We would love to hear from anyone who thinks they are involved in curriculum design? Course approval process still an after thought. Pair discussion about where you are in your institution and feedback.
Aiming for a quick & dirty, ‘big picture’ approach here just to get an overview of your own practice and context.
May be useful to bear in mind that the 10 strands aim to cover the learner’s journey, not just what libraries usually teach.
HANDOUT: audit mapping worksheet (JS to bring)
Because of the underlying principles of ANCIL - we looked to develop a pedagogy for empowerment, not transmission of knowledge.
So, pick one of the strands where you feel you do ‘teaching’ (however you define it) and where you are a partner in designing learning (not a resource provider). Now let’s think about these questions …
Again, this is likely to be on a spectrum that varies according to context. (Remember that institutional pressure – might be the difference between genuine evaluation of info sources [e.g. Scholar] and the “value add” message of ‘our databases contain everything you need’ …)
Link this to teacher identity and confidence. The expert identity / do you spend time telling students what to do / what to think rather than asking questions, letting them find things out.
If it’s useful to your thinking, use parts of the lesson plan template to bring out the higher-order information understanding and/or constructivist approaches in your approach.
HANDOUT: lesson plan (EMC to bring)
A couple of tools for reflection and reflexivity.
“all components in the teaching system – the curriculum and its intended outcomes, the teaching methods used, the assessment tasks – are aligned to each other …. The learner finds it difficult to escape without learning appropriately” (!)
Also Biggs & Tang 11: “Driving in the thick fog is unpleasant. So is learning in one.”
NB FIND EXAMPLE OF MIS-ALIGNED ASSESSMENT
“an adult educator claims to use a student-centred approach to learning (Espoused Theory) but his/her actual theory-in-use, the one that drives the design and implementation of his/ her action, is the conventional didactic, teacher-content led approach. The adult educator in this example believes his/her espoused theory and remains blissfully unaware of the actual theory being used, and as such cannot surface or reflect upon the real goals and objectives that he/she is attempting to achieve.” - http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/00002884.htm
Being in the moment – noticing when you are uncomfortable – mindfulness and IL and reflexive practice – reflection in action as Schon calls it
ANCIL and the reflexive practitioner - Secker & Coonan
ANCIL AND THE REFLEXIVE
City, University of
Anglia Ruskin University
ORIGINS OF ANCIL
Develop a revolutionary
curriculum for IL in a digital
Map the current landscape of
Expert consultation: not just
what should be taught, but
Temple to Apollo, Zoe52
flickr.com CC BY-NC-SA 2.0
THEORIES ESPOUSED VS.
Argyris & Schon,
I’m a huge
fan of active
MINDFULNESS AND MOMENTS OF
Reflexivity is not to be confused
with reflection. We often reflect
on our teaching, and we ask
students to reflect on their
learning. Reflection is a wonderful
tool. It is, though, a tool for “after
the fact.” We reflect at the end of
an assignment or at the end of a
course. We identify what we
learned and how we can possibly
do differently next time.
Reflexivity, on the other hand, is
to engage in the moment, to
understand the thoughts and
feelings of an experience while
experiencing that experience.
Hara, Billie (2010) Reflexive Pedagogy. The
Chronicle of Higher Education.
ACRL Student Learning and Information Committee (2017) Global Perspectives on
Information Literacy: Fostering A Dialogue for International Understanding.
Argyris, C. & Schon, D. (1974) Theory In Practice: Increasing Professional
Effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Biggs, J. & Tang, C. (2011) Teaching For Quality Learning in Higher Education: What
the Student Does. Maidenhead: Open University Press
McCluskey, C. (2011) Creating information literacy partnerships in higher education.
Library and Information Research 35(111), 59-72
Wheeler, E. & McKinney, P. (2015) Are librarians teachers? Investigating academic
librarians' perceptions of their own teaching roles. Journal of Information
LIteracy 9(2), 111-128
Tulip stair at the Queens House Greenwich by mcginnley, flickr.com (CC BY-SA 2.0)
Boud, D., Keogh, R. & Walker, D. (1985) Reflection: Turning
Experience into Learning. London: Kogan Page
Brookfield, S. (1995) Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher. San
Francisco: Jossey- Bass
Gibb, G. (1988) Learning by Doing: A guide to teaching and learning
methods. London: Further Education Unit
Moon, J. (2005) Guide for Busy Academics No.4. Learning Through
Reflection. York: Higher Education Academy
Schon, D. (1987) Educating The Reflective Practitioner. San Francisco:
email@example.com | @jsecker
firstname.lastname@example.org | @LibGoddess
All ANCIL resources are CC-licensed and free to
download at newcurriculum.wordpress.com