Presented at LILAC 2010

1. Professionalising the educational role of the
IL practitioner:
Reaching out to students and academic staff
Maria-Carme Torras
Senior academic librarian, University of Bergen Library
maria-carme.torras@ub.uib.no
Niels Jørgen Blaabjerg
Development consultant and Functional Manager
Aalborg University Library
njb@aub.aau.dk
LILAC 2010 Limerick, Ireland 30 March 2010

2. Bergen & Aalborg
Present
Starring
Niels J. Blaabjerg as the academic librarian
Maria-Carme Torras as the lecturer

3. Slide with picture of the office
http://www.flickr.com/photos/splorp/135375378

4. Information Searching Course
Evaluation
Course in information searching- for first year
students
Library course in information searching was not
relevant or useful – 75% .
Attendance – 90%
Student motivation and engagement 

5. The didactic relation model
Learning goals
Introduction of Library
catalogue
Searching techniques –
boolean, truncation
Demonstrations
search exercises
To become familiar with
library services
To be able to search the library
catalogue
1 hour
Compulsory course
30 students
library IT-classroom
Settings
Assessment
Scores
(exercises)
Questionnaires
(Hiim & Hippe, 1998)
Learning process
Learning conditions
1st year students
1st semester
Student motivation
Content

6. The Pentagon tool
(Rienecker & Jørgensen, 2005)

7. THE END

8. Workshop goals
To reflect on the IL practioner’s empowerment
to tackle challenges in reaching out to
faculty
students
More specifically, to discuss how the IL
practitioner’s role can be professionalised
through the use of theories and/or research in
order to:
achieve real collaboration with faculty
create better learning situations
and processes for students

9. Workshop plan
The role play
Group work
Group presentations and plenary
discussion
Summing up

10. What has helped us?
Faculty: communicate better in planning/marketing
courses, use ”their” jargon
didactic relation model (Hiim & Hippe, 1998; Bjørndal &
Lieberg, 1978)
didactic triangle of practice (Løvlie, 1972 )
Students: understand searching and writing in
learning process
Information searching process (Kuhlthau, 2004)
Searching styles (Heinström, 2002)
Academic writing process (Rienecker & Jørgensen, 2005;
Dysthe et al. 2000)
Solid theoretical background
To facilitate a paradigm shift in our IL education
To develop face-to-face teaching and online learning objects to
support the student where she is in the learning process
To adopt a multiplicity of roles depending on student situation
and needs: locator, identifier, counsellor (Kuhlthau, 1994)

11. Questions for group discussion
Introduction round
In 30 seconds, tell the rest of the group: What is your experience with the use of
theories and/or research findings in your IL practice?
Group discussion
1. What theories (educational, management, etc.) and/or research findings have
helped you or can help you improve your work as an IL practitioner in order to
a. achieve real collaboration with faculty ?
b. create better learning situations and processes for the students?
2. How can you apply theories and/or research in IL education practices at your
institution?
3. What are the potential pitfalls you should anticipate when applying theories and/or
research in your practice?
4. What are the benefits that can be gained from applying theories and/or research?
Sum up the main ideas of your discussion in order to present them to the rest of the
participants in 3 minutes.

12. Workshop goals
To reflect on the IL practioner’s empowerment
to tackle challenges in reaching out to
faculty
students
More specifically, to discuss how the IL
practitioner’s role can be professionalised
through the use of theories and/or research in
order to:
achieve real collaboration with faculty
create better learning situations
and processes for students

13. Summing up

14. References
Bjørndal, B. and Lieberg, S. (1978) Nye veier i didaktikken? En innføring i didaktiske emner og begreper. Oslo: Aschehoug and Co.
Blaabjerg, N.J. et al (2008) Flexible Learning Objects Web - FLOW . Aalborg : Aalborg University Library. http://flow.aau.dk .
Blaabjerg, N.J. et al (2006) Streaming Webbased Information Modules – SWIM. http://web.aub.aau.dk/swim2/1024/start.html .
Dysthe, O. et al (2000) Skrive for å lære. Skriving i høyere utdanning. Oslo: Abstrakt.
Heinström, J. (2002) Fast surfers, broad scanners and deep divers. personality and information-seeking behaviour. Åbo: Åbo Akademis
Förlag.
Himm, H. and Hippe, E. (1998). Læring gjennom opplevelse, forståelse og handling: en studiebok i didaktik (2 ed.) Oslo:
Universitetsforlaget.
Kuhlthau, C.C. (2004) Seeking meaning. A process approach to library and information services. 2nd edition. Westport: Libraries
Unlimited.
Løvlie, L. (1972). Universitetspedagogikk – eller debaten som ble vekk. In: Mediaas, N. et al. eds. Etablert pedagogikk – makt eller
avmakt? Oslo: Gyldendal, pp. 29–35.
Rienecker, L. and Stray Jørgensen, P. (2005) Den gode opgave - håndbog i opgaveskrivning på videregående uddannelser.
Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur.
Søk og Skriv. Søk og Skriv [Search and Write]. http://www.sokogskriv.no/.
Torras, M.C. and Saetre, T.P. (2009) Information Literacy Education: A process approach. Professionalising the pedagogical role of
academic libraries. Oxford: Chandos Publishing.