Browsed by
Tag: information literacy

Teaching Information Literacy

Teaching Information Literacy

This blog post is a reflection on my experience with teaching information literacy. I identify the changes needed in my own teaching practice and the challenges I see facing the profession as a whole.

 

How is information literacy currently taught to students in your context?

Reflecting on my six years teaching Year 1 and Year 2, information literacy was barely touched upon. The only thing I can recall is teaching our students how to paraphrase information they had read on topics of interest when writing their own informative texts, but this was as far as we went on this topic. For these tasks I always sought out quality information sources myself and provided these to the students. Upon reflection, doing this was taking away the chance to model, guide, and support my students in how to select quality information sources.

 

What is needed to build upon current teaching approaches?

A clear continuum of what information literacy may look like at each stage. An example of this is Hossain’s (2020, p. 14) K-12 Academic Integrity Literacy (citation and referencing) continuum. The expectations listed in the ‘K-Grade 2’ column emphasise a need for teachers to explicitly model information literacy practices, such as verbally acknowledging the ownership of work. Linking back to the teaching of paraphrasing that I mentioned previously, I could further build upon this by clearly explaining why we paraphrase the information we have gained to develop an awareness of ownership within my students.

 

What do you see as the challenges for teaching information literacy in our complex and changing information ecosystem?

I see smartphones as a huge challenge when it comes to teaching information literacy. While the younger generation are often labelled as “digital natives”, evidence suggests that the digital literacy skills of this cohort vary considerably, and the technologies they choose to engage with are limited (Merga, 2018, p. 78). In 2023, it was estimated around 91 percent of 14- to 17-year-olds in Australia owned a smartphone (Maclean, 2024, para. 1). While smartphones appear to be the technology of choice for the current teenage cohort of students, the technology has drawbacks that impact the application of digital literacy skills. A smartphones screen size and capabilities do not facilitate the ability to critically assess content using strategies such as exploring multiple sources (Yarmey, 2023, p. 108). This limitation impacts a young persons ability to critically assess information sources that they may encounter when using their smartphones.

 

What might you consider to be potential ways to respond to these challenges?

Embedding instruction on how to select the right tools for information searching within our information literacy lessons. Also ensuring that the information literacy skills that are taught, particularly at the high school level, are transferable to mobile phone devices, as it is inevitable that this cohort of students will engaging with information sources using smartphones.

 

References:

Hossain, Z. (2020). Connecting policy to practice: How do literature, standards and guidelines inform our understanding of the role of school library professionals in cultivating an academic integrity culture? Synergy, 18(1). https://slav.vic.edu.au/index.php/Synergy/article/view/373

Maclean, J. (2024, September 9). 91 per cent of Australian teens have a phone – but many are not secure. CSU News. https://news.csu.edu.au/opinion/91-per-cent-of-australian-teens-have-a-phone-but-many-are-not-secure#:~:text=Most%20Australian%20teenagers%20have%20their,the%20interactions%20they%20might%20have.

Merga, M. K. (2018). Reading Engagement for Tweens and Teens: What Would Make Them Read More?. Bloomsbury Publishing

Yarmey, K. (2023). Changing the conversation: introducing information literacy to a generation of smartphone users. In Godwin, P. & Parker, J. (Eds.), Information Literacy beyond Library 2.0 (1st ed., pp. 103-110). Facet.

ETL401: A Reflection On Learning

ETL401: A Reflection On Learning

When I reflect upon how far my learning has come since the beginning of this subject, I have come to realise that the preconceived ideas that I had were from a different era of teacher librarianship (Wilson, 2021, March 8). In recent times the profession has undergone a renaissance, reinventing itself to meet the need for students to be information literate in the 21st century. Through regular blogging and online discussions, I can see just how far my understanding of information literacy, inquiry learning models and the teacher librarian’s role in inquiry learning has come.

 

My initial understanding of information literacy was simply the action of selecting, locating and evaluating resources. My new understanding acknowledges that information literacy is complex, broad and context dependent. With the information landscape continuing to evolve at a rapid rate, the definition of information literacy will evolve with it and in turn, change the skills and knowledge required of me as a teacher librarian (Wilson, 2021, May 5). To begin constructing my own understanding, I applied Annemaree Lloyd’s (2007, p. 5) sociocultural definition of information literacy to the context of student learning and identified that the development of transliteracy skills, student collaboration, engaging students using all their senses, and incorporating ICT were crucial in the teaching of information literacy (Wilson, 2021, April 26).

 

With my increased understanding of information literacy comes a greater understanding of the Australian Curriculum’s (Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority, n.d.) general capabilities and their place within teaching and learning. In module 4.1a and 4.1b, I reflected upon my personal experience as a classroom teacher trying to reconcile best practice with other competing demands (Wilson, 2021, April 16; Wilson, 2021, April 17). I resonated with what Lee FitzGerald (2018, p. 53) cited as an inhibitor for collaboration: “embarrassment”. I was embarrassed for not understanding how to incorporate the general capabilities within my teaching. Having now had practice in embedding the general capabilities within an inquiry unit and identifying how to assess these skills, I now feel more capable in incorporating these skills and processes into future guided inquiry units.

 

Through my learning of information literacy models I came to the conclusion that any challenges or disadvantages bought about by the implementation of a guided inquiry approach were outweighed by the advantages; the most notable being that “a guided inquiry approach to learning allows our students to construct their own meaning and subsequently create lifelong learning skills” (Wilson, 2021, May 1). Of the many information literacy models I analysed, the one that piqued my interests was Guided Inquiry Design (Kuhlthau et al, 2015, p. 53). As a lower primary teacher, I always believed that research tasks were reserved for older students. However, Guided Inquiry Design has shown me that by scaffolding their emerging research skills and harnessing their natural curiosity (Maniotes, 2018, p. 19), even the youngest of students can develop inquiry skills. Utilising digital tools allows teachers to collect qualitative data on the inquiry process (Wilson, 2021, April 14) and support younger students to record reflections on their learning orally, mitigating the need for well-developed writing skills.

 

I have come to learn that the role of a teacher librarian is teacher first, librarian second. This concept was reinforced when I examined the standards within the Evidence Guide for Teacher Librarians in The Proficient Career Stage (Australian School Library Association, 2014) (Wilson, 2021, April 19). I previously held the misconception that teacher librarians simply connected classroom teachers to relevant resources when planning units of inquiry. I now recognise that collaboration is the key to embedding information literacy and sits at the core of a teacher librarian’s role. However, creating a culture where collaboration is valued amongst classroom teachers is no easy feat, requiring a teacher librarian to think long-term and begin with “one interested teacher at a time” (Garrison & FitzGerald, 2019) (Wilson, 2021, April 23).

 

In module 4.3, I examined research that provided evidence of the impact a teacher librarian has on student reading results (Hughes, 2013, para. 1) and expressed the opinion:

If the mere presence of a teacher librarian (sometimes not even qualified with dual qualifications) in a school has the impact to improve reading results, then I imagine the active involvement from a dually-qualified teacher librarian in curriculum development would have an even greater impact on student learning and achievement across many other learning areas (Wilson, 2021, April 24).

Therefore, by expanding my own understanding of information literacy and inquiry learning through ETL401 and putting this new learning into action, I should be able to make a significant pedagogical impact on the teaching and learning within my school.

 

References

Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. (n.d.). General capabilities. https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/general-capabilities/

 

Australian School Library Association. (2014). Evidence Guide for Teacher Librarians in The Proficient Career Stage. ASLA. https://asla.org.au/evidence-guides-tls

 

FitzGerald, L. (2018). Guided inquiry goes global : Evidence-based practice in action. ABC-CLIO, LLC

 

Garrison, K. L. & FitzGerald, L. (2019, October 21-25). “One interested teacher at a time”: Australian Teacher Librarian Perspectives on Collaboration and Inquiry [conference paper]. 48th Annual Conference of the International Association of School Librarianship and the 23rd International Forum on Research in School Librarianship, Dubrovnik, Croatia.

 

Hughes, H. (2013).  School libraries and teacher-librarians: evidence of their contribution to student literacy and learning. Curriculum and Leadership Journal, 11(12). http://www.curriculum.edu.au/leader/school_libraries_and_tls,36453.html?issueID=12777

 

Kuhlthau, C. C., Maniotes, L. K., & Caspari, A. K. (2015). Guided Inquiry: Learning in the 21st Century (2nd ed.). Libraries Unlimited.

 

Lloyd, A. (2007). Learning to put out the red stuff: Becoming information literate through discursive practice. Library Quarterly77(2), 181-198.

 

Maniotes, L. K. (2018). Guided Inquiry Design in Action: Elementary School. Libraries Unlimited.

A Work in Progress: My Initial Understanding of Information Literacy

A Work in Progress: My Initial Understanding of Information Literacy

I am currently at the very beginning in regard to forming my understanding of information literacy, so the views that I write below are my preliminary understanding of things to consider when embedding information literacy as a teacher librarian. No doubt these views and understandings will evolve and change the more I learn, so it will be interesting to revisit this post in the future to see how far my understanding has developed.

 

Annemaree Lloyd’s (2007b) article, entitled Recasting information literacy as sociocultural practice: Implications for library and information science researchers, resonated with me the most. I was able to apply her observations around how NSW ambulance officers and firefighters became information literate within their professions to my own experience of becoming a primary school teacher; moving from the educational theory learned in university lecture theatres (epistemic information), to undertaking teaching practicums (corporeal information), then to my first job as a teacher (social information). Lloyd’s definition of information literacy is embedded in a sociocultural theory of learning. She describes information literacy as:

“a catalyst for learning and at the same time inextricably enmeshed with learning. Information literate people have a deep awareness, connection and fluency with the information environment. Information literate people are engaged, enabled, enriched and embodied by social, procedural and physical information that constitute an information environment. Information literacy is constituted through the connections that exist between people, artefacts, texts and bodily experiences, which enable individuals to develop both subjective and intersubjective positions. Information literacy is a way of knowing the many environments that constitute an individual being in the world” (Lloyd, 2007a, p. 5).

To structure my current understanding of information literacy and how it applies to the role of a teacher librarian, I am going reflect upon each sentence in Lloyd’s definition of information literacy above within the context of student learning in a school environment.

 

“Information literate people have a deep awareness, connection and fluency with the information environment” (Lloyd, 2007a, p. 5).

For a teacher librarian, this sentence highlights the need to develop the transliteracy skills of students. Transliteracy is the ability to fluidly move between technologies, media and contexts in order to search, collaborate and communicate effectively (Sukovic, 2016, para. 2). For example, the skills needed to select, locate, and evaluate information within a book are different to the skills needed to select, locate, and evaluate information within a website, and users need to know both in order to gain exposure to a richer information environment. A library that is comprised of a diverse range of information in different modalities is required so students can proficiently develop and use transliteracy skills. Some of the transliteracy skill set is reflected in the Australian Curriculum’s General Capabilities through the elements below:

 

“Information literate people are engaged, enabled, enriched and embodied by social, procedural and physical information that constitute an information environment” (Lloyd, 2007a, p. 5).

This point touches on Lloyd’s (2007b, para. 26) “knowing locations”: epistemic (print and electronic texts that contain theory and are representational of a concept), corporeal (formed through observation or a “tactile and kinaesthetic activity associated with actual practice” (Lloyd, 2007b, para. 29)) and social (knowledge gained from first-hand practice and experience). In a school context, I draw parallels with this idea to the Gradual Release of Responsibility model that is commonly used within teaching and learning. This model sees teachers scaffold learning by moving through a sequence of modelled (student observes a task or skill), shared (student performs this task or skill with a peer or teacher), and independent learning (student performs the task independently). This model is commonly implemented with the teacher-student relationship at the centre and ignores the beneficial impact that collaboration with peers can have during the modelled and shared stages (Fisher & Frey, 2008, p. 3). Proving students with opportunities to collaborate and learn from each other is reflected in the following elements from the Australian Curriculum’s General Capabilities:

 

“Information literacy is constituted through the connections that exist between people, artefacts, texts and bodily experiences, which enable individuals to develop both subjective and intersubjective positions” (Lloyd, 2007a, p. 5).

Lloyd (2007b, para. 11) highlights how we need to use our whole body, not just our minds, when becoming information literate. Providing opportunities for students to engage with content through the utilisation of different senses via various modalities will strengthen their learning and development of information literacy. Again, it highlights the important role collaboration and social interaction play in learning. As I reflect on this element of Lloyd’s definition, I recall the Visual, Auditory and Kinasthetic learning style theory that was popular around the time that I was studying my degree. As a theory, its impact on learning has been challenged, but at the crux of it exists an idea that most competent teachers understand already: “that children learn through their senses, that environment and motivation are important, and that the human brain is pretty well adapted to processing the information from everything that they see, hear and do” (Sharp et al., 2008, p. 294). Understanding that learning is complex and thus planning learning experiences that engage all three can provide a richer learning experience to create information literate students.

 

“Information literacy is a way of knowing the many environments that constitute an individual being in the world” (Lloyd, 2007a, p. 5).

The ‘environments’ are the different contexts that exist within a student’s life which requires them to learn a related information literacy. Some environments that students may be developing their information literacy include part-time jobs, sporting groups, and hobbies. Groups, such as hobby and interest groups, can exist face-to-face on through online communities. In the school environment, teacher librarians can harness the use of technology, such as wikis, skype and the Google suite of tools, to foster collaboration, “break down the knowledge silos”, and expand the learning environment (Gibson-Langford, 2009).

 

The considerations that I have identified through the analysis of Lloyd’s (2007a) definition of information literacy are: the development of transliteracy skills, collaboration between students, providing learning experiences that utilise the students whole body and senses, and utilising ICT as a means of collaboration and expansion of the learning environment. As I mentioned previously, I am still in the preliminary stages of developing my own understanding of information literacy. Lloyd’s (2007a) definition combined with practical examples of how this applies within the workplace provided a context for me to develop my understanding. From this I was able to make connections to how it would apply in a school context and the considerations a teacher librarian would need to make when planning to teach information literacy.

 

References:

Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2008). Better learning through structured teaching : A framework for the gradual release of responsibility. Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development

 

Langford, L (2009). Collaboration or Co-blab-oration. Synergy, 7(2).

 

Lloyd, A. (2007a). Learning to put out the red stuff: Becoming information literate through discursive practice. Library Quarterly77(2), 181-198.

 

Lloyd, A. (2007b).  Recasting information literacy as sociocultural practice: Implications for library and information science researchers. Information Research, 12(4). http://informationr.net/ir/12-4/colis/colis34.html#Lloyd_2007

 

Sharp, J. G., Bowker, R., & Byrne, J. (2008) VAK or VAK‐uous? Towards the trivialisation of learning and the death of scholarship. Research Papers in Education, 23(3), 293-314.

 

Sukovic, S. (2016). What Exactly Is Transliteracy?. Elsevier SciTech Connect. http://scitechconnect.elsevier.com/what-exactly-is-transliteracy/

Step 1 of 2
Please sign in first
You are on your way to create a site.
Skip to toolbar