Digital Literacy

ETL512 Assessment 2: Post 1 – Services and Resources to Meet User Needs

Leave a comment

Using examples from at least two information agencies you attended, discuss the range of services and resources they provide and how these services and resources are tailored to meet the needs of their users. (500 words)

My virtual visits to Lake Tuggeranong College (LTC), West Moreton Anglican College (WMAC) and Bundaberg Regional Libraries (BRL) provided me with an interesting opportunity to compare the ways school and public libraries are similar and different in the provision of services and resources to meet their users’ needs.

School libraries serve specific school learning communities which consist of students, staff, and parents (Kimmel, 2014, p.31), and aim to meet the educational, cultural, recreational, and professional needs of these users (NSW Department of Education, 2017, p.8). Conversely, public libraries provide free access to information for all community members to enable their participation in society and to contribute to the economic wellbeing of their families and the nation (Australian Library and Information Association [ALIA], 2018, p.1). While both aim to provide free access to a range of services and resources to their users, two key differences exist: firstly, attendance in schools is mandatory, whereas engagement with a public library is optional; and secondly, education is controlled by the state, whereas public libraries facilitate non-coercive, self-directed learning (Foundation for Economic Education & FEEGA, 2019, p.1-2).

Both school libraries visited placed a heavy emphasis on providing services and resources designed to improve their users’ reading, digital, and information literacies, a core expectation of teacher-librarians supporting young people (ALIA, Australian School Libraries Association, & Australian Education Union, 2020, p.1). LTC supported pleasure reading through genrefication and emphasised the need to build strong relationships with students to understand their needs and make them feel supported. LTC also discussed the creation of their library website to support student learning and staff teaching, and the provision of accessible, detailed PowerPoints which develop students’ research, evaluation, and referencing skills. Key to these resources’ success is staff collaboration and consultation, embedding them into classroom activities, and ongoing promotion. 

The need for advocacy and promotion were also discussed during both school visits, highlighting the importance of claiming our space (Bonanno, 2011). LTC noted their practices supporting reading and information literacy were crucial advocacy opportunities, and they frequently promoted their services to parents as well as staff and students. WMAC noted that they raised their library profile by supporting non-traditional tasks (e.g. uniforms), showcasing the library’s value by harnessing the needs of key decision makers and meeting patrons not normally involved with the library. 

BRL also emphasised the importance of customer service, proving that strong relationships are crucial to leadership in both public and educational libraries (Branch-Mueller & Rodger, 2022, p.46-47). Harris discussed the difference between traditional card holders and hidden patrons (e.g. homeless users). Climate-controlled safe spaces and harm reduction work in public libraries supports their role as ‘second responders’ who step in when other services are unavailable or inaccessible (Aykanian et al., 2020, p.S72), reflecting the wellbeing work I encounter in my school library. Harris also emphasised the importance of advocacy and promotions, especially regarding funding. BRL’s provision of technology and IT support (including senior digital literacy programs, digital collections, broadband access, robotics, and 3D printing) reflects the ways modern libraries must stay current with the changing infosphere (Floridi, 2007, p.59). All points discussed supported research regarding the wide variety of services valued by public library users (Hider et al., 2023, p.20-34) and highlighted the similarities with school libraries, despite our different clientele. 

Word count: 543

 

REFERENCES:

Australian Library and Information Association [ALIA]. (2018). Statement on public library services. https://read.alia.org.au/statement-public-library-services

ALIA, Australian School Libraries Association [ASLA], & Australian Education Union [AEU] (2020). Joint statement on school libraries. https://read.alia.org.au/joint-statement-school-libraries

Aykanian, A., Morton, P., Trawver, K., Victorson, L., Preskitt, S., & Street, K. (2020). Library-Based Field Placements: Meeting the Diverse Needs of Patrons, Including Those Experiencing Homelessness. Journal of Social Work Education, 56(1), S72–S80. https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2020.1723757

Bonanno, K. (2011). ASLA Keynote Speaker: A profession at the tipping point: time to change the game plan. [Video]. Vimeo. https://vimeo.com/31003940 

Branch-Mueller, J., & Rodger, J. (2022). Single Threads Woven Together in a Tapestry: Dispositions of Teacher-Librarian Leaders. School Libraries Worldwide, 39–49. https://doi.org/10.29173/slw8454

Foundation For Economic Education, & FEEGA. (2019). The Difference Between Public Libraries and Public Schools. ContentEngine LLC, a Florida limited liability company.

Floridi, L. (2007). A Look into the Future Impact of ICT on Our Lives. The Information Society 23(1), 59-64. https://doi.org/10.1080/019722406010599094

Hider, P., Garner, J., Wakeling, S., & Jamali Mahmuei, H. R. (2023). “Part of My Daily Life”: The importance of public libraries as physical spaces. Public Library Quarterly, 42(2), 190-219. https://doi.org/10.1080/01616846.2022.2092347

Kimmel, S. C. (2014). Developing collections to empower learners. ALA/AASL

NSW Department of Education (2017). Handbook for School Libraries.

ETL533 2.2: Digital Learning Frameworks

Leave a comment

For my own future purposes, I thought it would be a good idea to create a summary of various frameworks designed to help educators incorporate technology into their practice.

Bloom’s Digital Taxonomy is familiar to many teachers, and has been updated for digital environments:

Kelly (2016).

 

Another way of looking at Bloom’s Taxonomy in the digital world is provided by Schrock, who adjusts the conceptual stages so that they all feed into the higher-order tasks surrounding the creation of new content:

 

Schrock (n.d.).

 

Schrock also compares their view of the updated Bloom’s Taxonomy to the SAMR model:

Schrock (n.d.).

The T3 Framework identifies three stages of digital learning:

  1. Translational = focus on automation, consumption of digital knowledge
  2. Transformational = focus on production and contribution of digital knowledge
  3. Transcendent = focus on inquiry design and social entrepreneurship

 

 

Finally, there is the TPACK model, which “attempts to identify the nature of knowledge required by teachers for technology integration in their teaching, while addressing the complex, multifaceted and situated nature of teacher knowledge”:

http://tpack.org

 

 

 

Kelly (2016 March 1). The evolution of Bloom’s Taxonomy. https://instructionaldesignbykelly.wordpress.com/2016/03/01/the-evolution-of-blooms-taxonomy-and-how-it-applies-to-teachers-today/

Schrock, K. (n.d.). Bloomin’ apps. Retrieved from http://www.schrockguide.net/bloomin-apps.html

tpack.org

ETL533 2.1: Literature in the classroom

Leave a comment

Think about your own journey as an educator – what has changed in your teaching practice over the course of your career with regards to technology use and literature? Is that change embedded at a core level, or is it a matter of changing tools?

As I completed the readings for this topic, I was struck by how many of the websites, tools or apps discussed by the authors are now superseded or simply unavailable. Adobe Flash, for instance, was an interesting tool with potential that is no longer supported, causing many of my early teaching resources to be redundant. 

We’ve also moved from the 1:1 device arrangement made possible by the Digital Education Revolution funding to banks of devices which consist of outdated and slow technology to be shared among classes. At the start of my career in 2011 we were excited by the possibility of these 1:1 devices which, although not without their own challenges (such as student distraction and technical difficulties), allowed teachers to broaden their lessons beyond the traditional written page. We spent a lot of time reconfiguring our teaching and learning programs, only for the device roll-out to be discontinued. Due to the simultaneous release of the new Australian Curriculum (and several successive new syllabi) we never had the time to revisit our programs in the depth required to do these new circumstances and changing technological landscape justice. 

While we are constantly encouraged to utilise technology to engage our students, in my experience there is still little training, time, and support for staff to do so. I feel like we’re constantly playing catch-up, and as a result I feel that we often neglect fundamental aspects of digital literacy. One of our Deputies recently purchased two class sets of iPads that can be booked via the library and shared amongst students. He has also organised for one of our Year 7 classes to be a ‘Tech Elect’ class which focuses on the use of technology (especially student-owned 1:1 iPads) as a tool for learning across all subjects. This is definitely an exciting development which has the potential to be beneficial for our students and teaching staff. However, the incorporation of these devices has not been without significant logistical and pedagogical challenges, and excludes students without the financial ability and technological understanding required to participate. Our students often lack the fundamentals of traditional literacy needed as a foundation for exploring digital texts (Leu et. al., 2011; Combes, 2016), and despite their status as ‘digital natives’ often don’t have the ability or knowledge to navigate these rapidly evolving digital spaces effectively; sadly, as teachers, we often lack these skills too.

 

Combes, B. (2016). Digital literacy: A new flavour of literacy or something different?Synergy, 14(1). Retrieved from https://www.slav.vic.edu.au/index.php/Synergy/article/view/v14120163

Leu, D. J. et al (2011). The new literacies of online reading comprehension: Expanding the literacy and learning curriculum. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 55(1), 5-14. Doi: 10.1598/JAAL.55.1.1