Connect the dots

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:

• Critical and creative thinking: Inquiring – identifying, exploring and organising information and ideas
• Information and Communication Technology (ICT): Investigating with ICT
• Literacy: Comprehending texts through listening, reading and viewing

 

“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 and Communication Technology (ICT): Communicating with ICT
• Personal and Social Capability: Social Management
• Personal and Social Capability: Social Awareness

 

“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 Quarterly, 77(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/