Assessment 3: Part C_Reflective Practice

Bradley, P. (2012).  Library warning poster. [Photograph]. Flicker. https://www.flickr.com/photos/52965040@N00/8073524689

I have been on a journey into the role of the teacher librarian (TL), information literacy and inquiry learning models. Even the ‘basics’ prove challenging, such as the ever growing definitions and types of literacies to be aware of!  (Seewald, 2021, Jan 9).

Recently I read Lutpon’s Adding value: Principals’ perceptions of the role of the teacher-librarian (2016), and was pleased to read the positive attributes of the TL as described by the principals. Categories such as curriculum leader, manager, superperson, and connector were assigned (Lupton, 2016, pp.59-61) and it was encouraging to read about the recognition given to great TLs. The TLs were regarded so much more than what Harzell (cited in Farmer, 2007) has described as merely “responsive helpmates” (p. 60). I witnessed the above stated categories (particularly ‘superperson’) in my current school, with a former TL, Judith. I wrote about the teaching of “wisdom” (Sternberg as cited in the Oregon Technology in Education Council, 2007) in my blog (Seewald, 2020, Nov 26). Judith took on this ‘wisdom’ role too.  As stated in my very first blog post, working with Judith “had a profound impact on my understanding of the role of a TL” (Seewald, 2020, Nov 22). However, I now realise that this was just the beginning in my exploration of the roles and responsibilities of a TL.

A couple of points from Lupton’s research hit home. The majority of the principals valued the “T” in the TL much more than the “L” (Lupton, 2016, p. 58). Skilled teaching, (particularly in the area of inquiry and ICT) as well as resourcing the curriculum with understanding and insight were highlighted. So much so, that Lupton (2016) has warned that some TLs may “find themselves redundant” (p. 58) if they are focused more on library management rather than on teaching and integrating themselves within the curriculum. As Herring (2007, p.32) states, information literacy is the key role of a TL, and it is educational, as opposed to administrative! This is such an important point to note. It links really well with what Bonanno (2011) has been saying; TLs need to get out there and (not so quietly) show what they can do!

I am still musing over the role of the TL in inquiry teaching.  I’ve not seen this done at all, in any of the international schools I have worked at, beyond the occasional stand alone lesson about ‘how to reference’ (Seewald, 2021, Jan 7). I’m struggling to reconcile the expectations of a TL in this area and what I have witnessed in over 20 years of teaching. Most of our readings point to an expectation that the TL is hands-on with inquiry/information literacy teaching. Not an “it’s the icing on the cake if they do this” approach, but more a ‘this is a huge part of the role’. 

Why haven’t I seen more of this in practice then? Have I just missed the opportunities? I have always been pretty self sufficient in teaching research skills because they are embedded in my subject criteria of MYP Individuals & Societies, so I have always taken on that responsibility, as outlined in a recent blog post (Seewald, 2021, Jan 9).  Have I not seen a TL/subject teacher partnership because of the IB framework I have always worked in – one which expects subject teachers to teach inquiry-based lessons as the ‘norm’ not the ‘exception’? Or is it because we as teachers have really pigeon-holed the role of the TL, with more of the emphasis put on the “L” in “TL”? I suspect it is more of the latter. And that is what I have found so challenging in the past few weeks – confronting what I thought a TL was and recognizing that, in part, my own beliefs have hampered the TL / teacher relationship, of what we could do together in a collaborative partnership. 

Another light-bulb moment for me was learning about the information literacy models that I had never heard of before (Seewald, 2021, Jan 9). I would really value working with a TL to implement an agreed upon framework to provide a consistent approach (Seewald, 2021, Jan 10). I can only take students so far with my little ‘Research Booklet”!  In addition, the realisation that TLs can be involved in their own research, such as using the SLIM Toolkit (Todd et al., 2005) really brought home to me the wide ranging skills a TL can offer and the importance of evidence-based practice. 

References

Data, information, knowledge, and wisdom. (2007, February 27). Oregon Technology in Education Council. Retrieved January 16, 2021, from https://otec.uoregon.edu/data-wisdom.htm

Farmer, L. (2007). Principals: Catalysts for collaboration. School Libraries Worldwide, 13(1), 56-65.

Herring, J. (2007). Teacher librarians and the school library. In S. Ferguson (Ed.), Libraries in the twenty-first century: Charting new directions in information. (pp. 27-42). Chandos Publishing.

Lupton, M. (2016). Adding value: Principals’ perceptions of the role of the teacher-librarian. School Libraries Worldwide, 22(1), 49-61.

Todd, R. J., Kuhlthau, C. C., & Heinström, J. E. (2005). SLIM: A toolkit and handbook for tracking and assessing student learning outcomes of Guided Inquiry through the school library. Centre for International Scholarship in School Libraries at Rutgers University. Retrieved January 16, 2021, from http://eclipse.rutgers.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2014/03/slimtoolkit.pdf

Guided Inquiry Design: An initial perspective

Ramberg, M. (2006). Questions? [Photograph]. Flickr. https://www.flickr.com/photos/40021607@N00/185508448

 

 

Disclaimer:

Oh no! I wrote out this rather lengthy post in response to a prompt in Module 5. However, it’s only now that I realise I was supposed to use my TL hat in doing so. But my hat is only in the design stage at the moment, as I’m such a newbie and always seem to revert to my classroom teacher space. I’m sorry Liz, I don’t want to delete it so here it is:

The subjects closest to my heart are MYP Individuals & Societies (I&S) and DP History. Both have heavy research components. As I have taught vertically through the MYP and DP, I notice that those students who have not grasped effective research skills really struggle in DP History, particularly in their Internal Assessment papers and their Extended Essays. MYP I&S’s Criterion B (Thinking Critically) provides the rubric we use for assessment. By the end of Year 10, students should be able to:

  • Formulate a clear and focused research question and justify its relevance
  • Formulate and follow and action plan to investigate a research question
  • Use research methods to collect and record appropriate, varied and relevant information
  • Evaluate the process and results of the investigation (Individuals & Societies Guide, p. 38)

Criterion B was pretty daunting to teach towards when I first started in the MYP. It seemed like a mountain to climb – how to provide the steps? I was in an IB MYP workshop when a fellow delegate shared a document with processes he had put together in order to reach the above listed goals. I took this document, thanked him profusely and after many modifications, still use it. It’s called the Research Booklet (yes, I know, scintillating title).  I’m pretty attached to it by now! The best thing is that it keeps all of the student processes (including the evaluation) in ONE document. It’s then easy to check up on where kids are at, without having to sort through many papers (physical and digital) per student. 

After reading through Module 5 about Information LIteracy Models (ILM),  I had a bit of a revelation. I was trying to scaffold kids into better research skills with my humble booklet. Great, but without any framework or base to guide me.  

I have just started reading about the Information Search Process / Guided Inquiry Design Process (ISP/GID). I absolutely love the fact that the GID is embedded in the research of the ISP, giving it a very strong evidence based practice leaning. The stages of Kuhlthau’s ISP make total sense to me – I have seen it over and over again in students (and myself!) without ever putting a name to it. It was so refreshing to read about the ISP – because it acknowledges the affective component of researching – which if the frustration becomes overwhelming – stops the research process altogether. To see student’s thoughts, feelings and actions captured in one model and how they “interplay across time within the context of a traditional research assignment” (Kuhlthau & Maniotes, 2014, p. 10) was very powerful. Finally, someone was listening to the kids and trying to see and understand the process through their eyes!

I obviously need to read deeper about GID. My initial thoughts in regards to it include an appreciation that the GID stages are thoughtful and don’t skip straight to formulating questions. Too often I have seen this with students as they rush to ‘nail’ their research question – often having to revise it later (and not due to further deeper research, but due to the rush at the start!)

I could definitely adapt my booklet to reflect the steps provided by GID. I feel then that I would have a solid research base behind me for the sorts of questions others ask – why are you doing it like that? For me, I can see an easy switch. The challenge would be to convince others. This wouldn’t be too hard in my own subject area (especially if I did all the work to prep a unit based on GID as an example!) BUT introducing this across the whole middle school or high school would be much more difficult. I’m not sure how I would even start to do that. Maybe here is where the role of the TL could come in? Would a presentation/information/invitations to Heads of Departments and the Principals be effective? It would definitely have to involve the MYP and DP coordinators, although I think they would be very much on board. We are a very inquiry orientated school, but we lack consistency in our approaches. So why hasn’t this already been done? For years we have struggled with some subjects teaching research skills, and others not, and the ones that do – all do it differently. I’d love to see a consistent approach, with the TL driving this supported by a well researched ILM. 

References

FitzGerald, L. (2001). The twin purposes of guided inquiry: Guiding students inquiry and evidence based practice. Scan, 30(1), 26-41. 

International Baccalaureate. (2013). Individuals and Societies Guide. International Baccalaureate Organization. https://resources.ibo.org/myp/subject-group/Individuals-and-societies/resource/11162-32902/?lang=en

Maniotes, L.K., Kuhlthau, C.C. (2014). Making the shift. Knowledge Quest. 43(2), 8-17.

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