Shannon Badcock – Page 3

Author: Shannon Badcock (Page 3 of 4)

Thinking about: The limits of digital resources

On March 10, 2022

Pros and cons of bundled sets (e.g. database or Standing Orders service)

The school library context plays a necessary role in determining whether the Teacher Librarian should choose to invest in bundled sets. Often the TL will trial something for a year to collect data so as to decide whether it’s viable to continue the investment.

The chief pro of the bundled set is convenience. This can be broken down into

time-saving
discounted cost
ease of access (possibly. Possibly not)

A Standing Orders service, such as Scholastic Books, provides pre-selected print fiction titles to school libraries. These may be quite popular, current titles and authors, which could be useful in a primary school.

But surely part of being a TL is having a broad, deep knowledge of and interest in literature and literacy? It strikes me as unwise to leave such an important area of development and learning in the hands of a commercial company. You would need to have multiple Standing Orders, with different companies, and it’s doubtful you would save much in the end.

Journal and other online databases – such as EBSCO and Britannica – are more useful, but require active teaching for students to be able to access and use them successfully. Without active teaching, students won’t even know they’re there and will simply use Google (which, as we know, offers quick but rarely great resources; and for primary students, not age-appropriate).

————–

Pros and cons of online content not owned by the library

The question here was what kind of ebook access to pay for for the school library; I’d like to say: be careful of investing too much in it at all.

Everyone thought e-books were going to ‘kill’ the print book. Hasn’t happened; print books are even more popular now than before. Technology changes rapidly, meaning that the Kindles my school library has stashed in the tech store room are collecting dust because they’re redundant. But the way our brains prefer to process and access information doesn’t change nearly so quickly.

My school library has a subscription to Wheelers Books, which provides access to a wide range of fiction titles, mostly older ones, definitely the classics. According to our data, hardly anyone ever uses it so we’re considering not renewing the subscription next year.

Both our fiction and our non-fiction sections get quite a lot of use. Yes, students – and staff – will also do a quick Google search, but when you need something more substantial, more in-depth – better quality, for sure – nothing beats a paid-for resource written by someone who knows their stuff.

When the wifi network crashes, you can still read the book. And gosh it pains me to see students hunched over the little screens of their smart phones, trying to read text.

I have maybe one student in every class who chooses to use the ebook edition of the text we are studying, but it’s useless for actual studying purposes. You can’t flip to find the page with the quote you need, for a start, and the distractions that come with having phones out… We have a statewide mobile phone ban in the classroom and it’s an important one.

Several of the articles were out-of-date already, in saying that ebooks are popular. McEwan, publishing in 2018, is more accurate in pointing out the limitations of online resources.

When it comes to non-fiction, an online version is impractical. Our art students browse the books till they find what they’re looking for (and art books don’t go out-of-date as they’re not ‘factual’ in that sense) and then make colour copies so they can create their journals. It’s harder to browse, to find artists whose style you admire and are inspired by, with ebooks.

Students and staff at my school request books, and we buy them. We promote them, visually and physically, incorporating them into displays. They are searchable on our OPAC. And there’s nothing wrong with simply heading to a particular Dewey section and seeing what else is on the shelf.

The problem is, of course, budget. I work at a large public senior secondary college and our library budget is generous compared to most schools. I would still argue, though, that it’s better to slowly build up a good selection of quality titles, and use inter-library loans, than to pay for access to ebooks in ownership or subscription form. But if you do, you’ll need to find inventive ways of drawing attention to them. As with the success of Google, humans do tend to go for the easy grab right in front of them: the print book, with the eye-catching cover.

There’s a lot of expectation on Teacher Librarians to keep the school library ‘current’, and accessible to all. While worthy, there’s also the danger of investing too much in what turns out to be a passing trend – like those Kindles. But perhaps, considering how much we weed from the print collection, that, too is simply the nature of the library?

References

McEwan, I. (2018). Trending now. Teacher Librarian, 45(3), 50-52.

Organising Information: Defining terms

By Shannon Badcock

On July 17, 2021

In ETL505, Study Notes

Information resource — something that contains information, in many forms (Rowe, 2021). Recorded information should be one of the object’s (digital or physical) primary functions. Something may not be intended to contain or convey information, but in a new context (such as a museum display) becomes an information resource (Hider, 2018, p.1). These resources contain any and all of data, information, knowledge and wisdom (Hider, 2018, p.2). Likewise, a ‘document’ is any kind of text, in any mode.

Resource description — descriptions enable us to understand things but also so that things can be used (Hider, 2018, p.3). The descriptions are practical, supportive and applied (rather than theoretical or abstract). The intention is key: resource descriptions should enable connection; people should be able to use them to find, identify, select, obtain and explore useful, relevant information (Hider, 2018, p.3). Descriptions cover different aspects of the resource, and “can be broken down into different elements that each pertain to these different aspects.” (Hider, 2018, p.4). Different types of resource will require different types of descriptions (Hider, 2018, p.13). May also be called ‘cataloguing’ or ‘indexing’ (Hider, 2018, p.13).

Describers — those actively engaged in creating resource descriptions. These may be people or computers or organisations such as publishers. They may be directly connected to the resource (such as the author) and their motives may vary, but their intent is always to help people searching for information (Hider, 2018, p.3-4).

Recipients — those searching for information of particular kinds. Recipients may be individuals, groups, other computers or the general population. Recipients are the intended audience and understanding them and their information seeking behaviours will influence the nature of the resource description.

Metadata — literally, ‘data about data’. The term ‘information’ can be used interchangeably with ‘data’, and ‘metadata’ can be used in place of ‘information resource description’ (Hider, 2018, p.4). Metadata is commonly associated with digital information resources, and refers to information (or data) that can be processed by a computer. Metadata is used to identify and describe information for retrieval, which is also described as ‘discovery metadata’ (Hider, 2018, p.5). Other terms include ‘cataloguing’, ‘bibliographic data’, ‘indexing’, ‘tagging’, ‘archival description’ and ‘museum documentation’ (Hider, 2018, p.6). Metadata includes the author’s name, the title, the year produced/published etc.

Metadata evolves with technological and resource changes over time but it needs to be conventional and standardised, not arbitrary (Hider, 2018, p.11). The title page of a book, film credits, record labels are all forms of metadata formats that have evolved over time, based on the type of resource. Likewise, the conventions of library catalogues – the formats and systems and style – have “become increasingly standardised” (Hider, 2018, p.11), enabling people from different countries to understand and locate the resource through metadata.

Elements — these can be the information or content itself or how it is ‘carried’ – the mode (book, computer file, roll of film etc), or both. Content elements include subject and language while carrier elements include size and physical location (Hider, 2018, p.4). There is no set number of elements a description needs – they can be infinite – but some may be more useful than others. Elements may also be called ‘categories’ or ‘data fields’ (Hider, 2018, p.7).

Values — within elements, values are the words used to record the information, such as the form the author’s name takes (full, or abbreviated?) or how broad or narrow the words used are. The element might be ‘subject’ but what words will you use to capture a book about animals? Just ‘animals’ or ‘fauna’ or ‘farm animals’ or ‘mammals’? These words are the values. The words chosen can effect the quality of the metadata; accuracy is important but so is logic, usefulness, and intelligibility (Hider, 2019, p.6-7).

Format — the format for recording the values needs to be appropriate and compatible with the intended information retrieval system (Hider, 2018, p.7). How it will be transmitted is also a factor.

Information organisation (or ‘knowledge organisation’) — the intellectual as well as physical organisation of resources, using descriptions (Hider, 2018, p.13) that support access to information through tools like indexes (Hider, 2018, p.15). Information organisation involves manually creating resource descriptions.

Indexes — a database of representations of the actual resource in the form of metadata taken from titles, authors and/or content. Indexes are tools that provide access to the collection, such as library catalogues, archival finding aids, museum registers and search engines (Hider, 2018, p.14).

OPAC — online public access catalogue (Hider, 2018, p.16).

Information retrieval — the separate yet parallel field to information organisation “which developed the mathematical algorithms that have made today’s web search engines so successful” (Hider, 2018, p.16). While the main difference is method, it is a significant difference. Information retrieval systems such as search engines are based mostly on the indexing of content rather than indexing metadata and cannot offer much help with “the formulation of search queries” or with “the selection and identification of resources.” (Hider, 2018, p.18) Still, search engines like Google and sites like YouTube rely on text-based descriptions – the metadata provided by users and contributors (Hider, 2018, p.18).

FRBR — Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (1998) – “a conceptual model of the bibliographic universe involving four different ‘levels’ of information resource” (Hider, 2018, p.25).

LRM — Library Reference Model (2017) – a new version of the FRBR model where “information resources are divided hierarchically into four ‘entities’, labelled works, expressions, manifestations and items (WEMI) (Hider, 2018, p.25). The hierarchy is based on “increasing levels of abstraction”.

WORK: known by a title; a package of content, such as a novel, picture, law or news report. Works can exist within larger works. (Andrea Lorenz’s example: Emily Bronte coming up with the story for Wuthering Heights)

EXPRESSION: how the work is expressed, such as in what language, by a translator, or what version. (Andrea Lorenz’s example: Emily Bronte writing Wuthering Heights)

MANIFESTATION: how the particular version or expression is ‘carried’ or conveyed – a particular printing of an edition, the pressing of a CD. (Andrea Lorenz’s example: the publisher publishes Wuthering Heights, assigns an ISBN)

ITEM: an individual information resource that has a physical form; an object (Andrea Lorenz’s example: the specific print copy of Wuthering Heights, to hold in your hands)

Semantic Web — a vision that builds on Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 using linked data. “This, in theory, will allow computers not only to find web documents but to make sense of them, through the data linked to them” – but only if the data is of high quality and reliable (Hider, 2018, p.19).

References

Hider, P. (2018). Information resource description: Creating and managing metadata (2nd ed.). Facet.

Lorenz, Andrea. (2012). FRBR Simplified. YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPBpP0wbWTg

Rowe, H. (2021). Introduction. In The need for information resource description [ETL505 Modules, Module 1). Retrieved from Charles Sturt University website: https://interact2.csu.edu.au/webapps/blackboard/execute/displayLearningUnit?course_id=_57507_1&content_id=_4494340_1

Inquiry Skills in the Australian Curriculum

By Shannon Badcock

On May 9, 2021

In Discussion forum, ETL401

dennies025 / Pixabay

Module 5.3a: discuss Lupton’s article “Inquiry skills in the Australian Curriculum” and the potential impact of her analysis on the need for an inquiry learning model in your school.

Mandy Lupton (2012) offers an analysis of the 2011 Australian Curriculum in Science, History and Geography – with History and Geography being in the draft stage at the time. Her analysis compares and contrasts the learning objectives, skills and abilities expected of students across different year levels, finding inconsistencies and limitations especially in the Science curriculum.

Inquiry skills in the Australian Curriculum for Science are limited to predicting, planning, conducting, processing, evaluating and communicating data – what’s missing is ‘interpretation’ (Lupton, 2012, p.14). The focus is on gathering data which can better reflect the inquiry process (as opposed to history which emphasises the need to gather information, which implies ‘facts’) (p.15) Science also restricts independent student questioning to a Year 7 start (p.15). Overall, the “role of information literacy is weak” with the emphasis on gathering empirical data through experiments (p.15).

I am especially interested in this as I have selected Year 5 Science for my inquiry learning assignment (Assessment Task 3). Lupton notes that the US National Research Council identified a need for information literacy but that this has not been reflected in the Australian Curriculum: Science. As such, school science inquiry is not ‘authentic’.

Lupton sees this as an opportunity for the teacher librarian to “unite the strands” of Science Understanding, Science as a Human Endeavour and Science Inquiry Skills (p.15). I am interested at where the crossovers are between the science inquiry skills and the General Capabilities, especially Critical and Creative Thinking (CCT). This could further support Lupton’s view that “a lost opportunity for ACARA” is a new one for teacher librarians (p.18), as the CCT strand fills in the gaps in the Science curriculum’s Inquiry Skills strand.

References

Lupton, M.(2014) Inquiry skills in the Australian Curriculum v6, Access, November. pages 12-18. https://search-informit-org.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/doi/10.3316/INFORMIT.584040093322031

Thoughts on Literacy

By Shannon Badcock

On May 8, 2021

In Discussion forum, ETL401, Reflection post

KELLEPICS / Pixabay

I never knew ‘literacy’ was such a complex term but, as with ‘information’, it is not as simple as it sounds. I definitely consider the term to be more of a concept (a sophisticated and complex idea) but one that was grounded in something tangible: knowing how to read and write. Of course, listening, speaking and viewing are also literacy skills; all five work together.

Literacy starts with the alphabet and phonics but is not just a recognition and understanding of visual symbols and the sounds they make; the semiotic system includes 5 key modes of communication: visual, linguistic, aural, gestural and spatial. We use all of these in order to construct meaning in our interactions, when we watch a game of footy, listen to music, ask someone for a favour.

Maryanne Wolf (2009) explains that we are not born to read but must create a ‘reading circuit’ from scratch; in turn, literacy reshapes our brains. It is a fascinating concept and a timely reminder to read Proust and the Squid, which I’ve had sitting on my shelf for over 10 years!

But the part of Wolf’s article that really resonated with me, and which makes clear the connection between literacy and inquiry learning, is where she explains the “sophisticated set of comprehension processes” that allow us not only to be literate at the most basic level, but to think beyond the text. This is ‘critical thinking’ and I share Wolf’s concern that new technologies (especially mobile devices) might be reshaping children’s brains in ways that impede their ability to think, if for no other reason than the fact that it does so much for us, quickly and efficiently, so that we do not need to develop that process in our own brains.

Wow. And, wow.

In that context, the integration of critical thinking and inquiry learning in schools can be seen to be even more important – it’s not just about what future employers want. Implied in all this is the risk that we could actually make ourselves, as a species, well, dumber. But the research isn’t there yet, it’s too soon to see the consequences and already people are conscious of a desire to ‘get back to basics’ for themselves and their families. Literacy is a complex term that encompasses a broad scope of contexts and modes, and while ‘Siri’ and other ‘helpful’ devices might have a longitudinal impact on the development of ‘comprehension processes’, it is also true that our world is more complex than ever and new demands are being made on our brains. Context shapes us just as we shape context. Our ability to make meaning from the world around us just got more interesting.

References

Wolf, Maryanne. (2009). Beyond decoding words in Does the brain like ebooks? New York Times [blog] https://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/14/does-the-brain-like-e-books/?_r=0

Mindset challenges for collaboration in a school environment

By Shannon Badcock

On May 2, 2021

In Discussion forum, ETL401

Discussion forum 4.2.

I asked my husband, who teaches in a small, low-SES primary school, about collaboration and he expressed a view that is wide-spread: I don’t share because I don’t get any credit for my work (paraphrased).

To review what the barriers to successful collaboration really are, the top of the pile is this:

We don’t really understand what it means to collaborate or how it could benefit us or our students.

We think it’s just about sharing resources. We confuse it with the other, closely-related terms identified by Montiel-Overall (2005, p.25): networking, coordination, cooperation and partnership. Each is valuable and necessary but they probably don’t involve the shared thinking that she identifies as an important first step in the collaboration process.

The second key barrier is this lack of acknowledgement and recognition felt by most educators. That no one sees what we do, our successes both big and small, or appreciates the time, effort and personal expertise that we put into our work. The paradox is that, we are so caught up in the idea that no one recognises our expertise (Gibson-Langford, 2008, pp.32-3) – our ‘personal mastery’, as Senge (2007) calls it – that we can become blind to other people’s areas of expertise.

When we are time-poor and beset on all sides by more and more demands, both administrative and curriculum-based, and there’s no structural support for yet another professional development ‘requirement’ that feels and sounds like just another fad (teachers are skilled at looking and sounding compliant with the latest top-down initiative while knowing that in a couple of years it will be forgotten and the school will move on, so what’s the point in expending energy you don’t have?), we feel that ‘collaboration’ is the enemy. This perspective is based on the lack of conceptual understanding mentioned above, and a very clear understanding of the realities of teaching, at any level. At some schools, especially primary schools, teachers in a grade level are told what to teach and how in their ‘professional learning communities’ (PLCs); the school culture is a cohesive one with rigorous standards for teachers and students alike, but there’s arguably little to no creativity.

They say that real change (or revolution!) comes from below. The people have to want it, and drive it. In a school setting, senior staff need to be in touch to see what’s going on and support it, but as soon as it becomes a directive, it will be sure to fail.

Others have already mentioned it of course, but I agree that it needs to start with one receptive teacher. And because of the misunderstandings of what collaboration actually entails – the misinformed belief that it is simply sharing resources from which others can benefit while you receive no credit – it would be important that the TL does not call it ‘collaborate’ at first. Maybe after, when reflecting and assessing how it went with the colleague teacher, but not when initiating it. It needs to be disguised so that the jaded classroom teacher doesn’t shift into cynical, resistant mode. It can’t be forced, it needs to be organic, growing from an informal conversation (as described in some of the readings).

As a classroom teacher (I work one day a week in the school library, as support for the two TLs and the students, and to learn the job), I can honestly say I didn’t understand what ‘collaboration’ meant, and I know from my experiences and conversations with others, that no one really does. Spenge (2007) describes structural change, a shared vision and rethinking ‘mental models’ (p.8) as a means for empowering employees at all levels and driving up corporate successes. I can’t help but feel that the school environment is a bit different, that the types of people attracted to teaching are already the ‘lone ranger’ types. And, ironically, teachers themselves tend to have fixed mindsets and be resistant to learning new things. We’ve all observed it, even in ourselves.

So I would argue that it is really important for the Teacher Librarian to understand these mindsets (and I think they already understand it, better than anyone!), and keep this in mind when approaching teachers. As Karen Bonanno said in her speech at the 2011 ASLA conference, “A profession at the tipping point”, the idea is to find the one teacher in the school who wants to work with you and build on the success from that collaborative partnership. As a TL I plan to invite myself (via the Learning Area manager) to LA meetings in each department, not only to find out what’s going on but also to get a sense of who might be receptive to collaboration.

Because there’s no doubt that great things can happen when we want it.

References

Bonanno, K. (2011). A profession at the tipping point: Time to change the game plan. https://vimeo.com/31003940.

Gibson-Langford, L. (2008). Collaboration: Force or forced, Part 2. Scan, 27(1), 31-37

Montiel-Overall, P. (2005). A theoretical understanding of teacher and librarian collaboration, School Libraries Worldwide, 11(2), 24-48.

Senge, P. (2007). Chapter 1: Give me a lever long enough … and single-handed I can move the world. In The Jossey-Bass reader on educational leadership, 2nd ed. (pp.3-15)

Inquiry Learning

By Shannon Badcock

On April 29, 2021

In Discussion forum, ETL401

Discussion forum 4.1b

Photo by JJ Jordan on Unsplash

Are the acquisition of 21st century skills and the focus on accountability mutually exclusive?
(You may wish to consider what problems and barriers teachers and TLs may face in schools which adopt inquiry learning.)
What issues might stand in the way of inquiry learning in the school?
What issues might stand in the way of collaboration between teachers and teacher librarians to carry out inquiry learning?

Note: I’ve included some background info and rambled a fair bit as it helps me develop my thinking.

The Australian Curriculum and ’21st century skills’ aren’t particularly compatible. 21st century skills have been incorporated into the national curriculum as the ‘General Capabilities’, which are currently under review. These are:

Digital literacy
Critical and creative thinking
Personal and social capability
Ethical understanding
Intercultural understanding

The Australian Curriculum website explains that “The general capabilities are not stand-alone subjects but are taught through the learning area content in the Australian Curriculum. Not all general capabilities will be developed in every learning area. They are only included in learning area content where they can be developed in authentic and meaningful ways.” (Australian Curriculum Review: General Capabilities, 2021)

The key point here is that each General Capability (GC) is not meant to be the focus of a unit of study, but are elements that should be incorporated into the teaching and studying of a topic, as in, you should be doing it anyway. But no doubt, many teachers don’t, hence the need to spell it out.

An example of the Critical and Creative Thinking capability, current and revised:

ACARA Consultation Curriculum, page 4

The point that you don’t need to use it in teaching everything, all year (an impossibility anyway, for all 5 GCs), makes it a bit more flexible and relevant. Therefore, it shouldn’t be at odds with the other focus of the curriculum: accountability.

Looking at the elements of this GC (above), it is clear that it is a Guided Inquiry (GI) model. A Guided Inquiry is a framework of self-motivated learning where the teacher provides a question and the students research it, after figuring out how to go about this process. On its own, it would be a disaster: it requires students to have certain abilities (not least of which is getting along with others, knowing how to research topics and disseminate and evaluate information, and how to write and explain things) and these must be taught.

‘Accountability’ is the requirement of assessment, as in, how do we know how well the student is doing? Are they progressing and improving? What have they learned? Outcomes are a necessary feature of teaching and learning, though standardised testing like NAPLAN doesn’t sit well with me. I’m not even that keen on exams, having had many students who have made great strides during the year, mastered complex concepts, improved their written expression and grown as a person and a member of a community, do poorly in an exam because the medium is just not equitable. And the issue with tests like NAPLAN is the need to use computers to assess students’ work (because of the vast volume of work to assess); even if it were still people doing it, there’s issues with that too (as anyone who teaches a creative writing course and comes out of a moderation meeting absolutely purple after arguing over whether a student’s work deserves an A or a C knows!). It’s not a perfect system.

But there are so many issues, on all fronts, for all styles of pedagogy. This is what makes the jobs of teachers and TLs so complex and difficult: the whole student must be taken into consideration, and it gets messy.

[para. 6] On paper and in high SES schools, GI sounds amazing and rich and invigorating. But you can’t do it all year long, in every subject; it can’t be the only thing you do; and not every class or student would benefit from it. It works nicely with middle class and upper class children who do not have learning difficulties (such as Global Delay or Foetal Alcohol Syndrome); who are not disruptive or aggressive because they have super difficult home lives or extreme trauma; who attend school consistently with rarely a sick day or truancy problems – in short, with kids like my son whose school has implemented a school-wide GI model: Kath Murdoch‘s Inquiry Learning pedagogy (interesting that no one’s mentioned Kath Murdoch yet!).

To illustrate: a teacher I know went to a Kath Murdoch Professional Learning (PL) session and asked her, How would you make this work in a low SES school? Kath had no reply, because she knows: it doesn’t work. There are too many issues in the primary school classroom: students with attention spans a minute long, students with low IQs, students with severe trauma, students who barely attend, students who have no interests, elective mutes, students who let the drama in the community affect their ability to work with others, students who simply can’t read or write. Because bottom line, “true inquiry is internally motivated” (Lutheran Education Queensland, n.d.), and that’s the sticking point. So many of our students just do not have this ability to self-motivate. Left to research a topic, many will simply go on social media, watch unrelated videos on YouTube, chat, lose interest, squabble, or have absolutely no idea what it is they are meant to be doing or how to do it.

I would be very interested in hearing about the experiences of someone who had got it to work in a really low SES school. I’m not saying it’s impossible, but there’s just no support in place – i.e. funding – to enable success with a GI model in such a school. To expect a teacher to do this would be ridiculous when they must focus on the basics of literacy and numeracy (also General Capabilities, but not topics for a GI), classroom rules, managing behaviour etc. And these are also schools with no Teacher Librarian, which only compounds things.

The issues facing teachers and teacher librarians who want to use a GI model for a unit from the Australian Curriculum are ones facing the whole of Australia, urban and regional: the devaluing of education and generational problems in the community. If you could make it work, it would be amazing: think of what could change for these students from communities where rates of domestic violence, child neglect, drug and alcohol abuse, high unemployment, crime and teen pregnancies.

But these are kids whose development is already waaaaay behind because of issues in the early years – the late Dr Fraser Mustard (who I had the pleasure of hearing speak at a meeting in the Ontario Ministry of Education years ago: his passion for starting maternal and baby care before pregnancy up until 5-years-old was palpable, and his research should widely embraced by our governments if they really want to lift standards in Australia) articulated it well when he stressed the need to integrate health and education, rather than think of them as separate (Fraser Mustard Centre, n.d.).

In short, the key issues that make it difficult to use a GI model for teachers and teacher librarians are these:

students must have the skills, or be able to learn them through explicit teaching, in order to participate in a Guided Inquiry model, and many just don’t or cannot. They lack self-motivation and this is a tricky thing to teach.
within the scope of the subjects I teach, only the level 2 English Foundations course potentially has space and flexibility for it – the level 3 (pre-tertiary) courses do not. All of our English courses have an independent or negotiated study, but there is no time to incorporate a GI into these modules. That said, we still incorporate the GC, including critical and creative thinking, just in other ways.
implementing inquiry learning in the school requires students to be present as it’s an on-going thing over several weeks. It’s also often a group task, and you end up with one or two students having to pick up the slack for the others.
the school must have a Teacher Librarian (TL), which many don’t, in order for the classroom teacher to have the support they need, as to do this well, it must be planned out. (It looks like the teacher is abdicating their responsibilities to teach, but that shouldn’t be the case!)
the school must have a collaborative model in place, supporting teachers and TLs to work together through shared release time to plan and be in the classroom together.
Teachers are often time- and resources-poor.

References

Australian Curriculum Review: General Capabilities. (2021). https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/consultation/general-capabilities/

Fraser Mustard Centre. (n.d.). Department of Education South Australia. https://www.education.sa.gov.au/department/research-and-statistics/conducting-research/fraser-mustard-centre/fraser-mustard-centre-driving-high-quality-research-improve-childrens-lives

Kath Murdoch. (n.d.). https://www.kathmurdoch.com.au/

Lutheran Education Queensland. (n.d.). Approaches to learning: Inquiry based learning. https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/media/1360/lutheran-education-queensland-inquiry-based-learning.pdf

The role of the Principal and the TL

By Shannon Badcock

On April 25, 2021

In Discussion forum, ETL401, Reflection post

Photo by Aleks Dahlberg on Unsplash

Module 3.3.

In most areas of employment, a need is identified, management agree that staffing for that gap is important, and someone qualified (hopefully) is employed to meet that need. Their job description is clear, they fit into an established staffing structure, they have a clear product to produce, and they understand the markers against which their job performance is evaluated. That is to say, ideally everyone in the business or department knows what that person does, the work they produce, who they answer to and the value they add.

Not so the teacher librarian (TL). The role is an old one that has carried through to the present and people are struggling to remember why it was created in the first place when the present looks so very different. It’s not even that teacher librarians have failed to make themselves relevant; rather, assumptions about librarians as “the stereotypical school marm librarian, shushing students and checking out books, oblivious to what’s happening in education and the politics that drive major educational priorities and funding” (Kachel, 2017, para.2) persist. This stereotype popped up in more than one article in Module 3 (Kachel, 2017; Kuon, 2012; Lupton, 2016), and it completely resonated. It felt familiar, because I have absorbed it too: A stern older woman wearing glasses and a “twin-set” (Lupton, 2016), who spends all her time amongst dusty books, glaring at students who start whispering to each other, and is completely unapproachable. When you think about the typical age of school principals, this may well have been the librarian they remember from their childhood: the dragon. Our biases (ingrained assumptions which influence our decisions and opinions) are often invisible to us but may result in teacher librarians being marginalised, overlooked and considered irrelevant. The good news is that TLs can do something about it.

A 2011 Australian Government inquiry found that the TL “was seen as a poor performing teacher who had been placed in the Library to remove them from the classroom” and that they were stereotyped as the “dragon in pearls who guards books” (Lupton, 2016, p.49). In a 2016 study of principals’ perceptions of teacher librarians in Queensland, it becomes clear that even principals aren’t always sure what the role of the TL is (Lupton, 2016, p.52), or their value to the school, especially in improving student achievement (Lupton, 2016, p.53).

A 2013 survey of teacher librarians’ contribution to student literacy development in Gold Coast schools reported a mostly positive perception of principals on the role of the TL (Hughes, 2013, p.41). Principals could see that ‘literacy’ had evolved into something multi-faceted and that TLs can work not only with students but other teachers as well (Hughes, 2013, p. 45). 93% of principals in the survey considered the school library to be “necessary” and a positive influence on student literacy development (Hughes, 2013, p.48) – the results were higher for non-government schools, which typically invest more in their libraries and TLs. Hughes notes that six of the government schools in the survey did not have a TL (Hughes, 2013, p.48). The principals recognised a need for more funding, in particular for support staff and technological resources.

So it seems that, while the myth of the librarian-as-dragon persists, many principals do see value in their teacher librarians – though “the contextualised nature of the role points to one of the problems with the profession, that it is that the value of the teacher-librarian as an individual seemed to outweigh the value of the role per se.” (Lupton, 2016, p.57) While this is a bit concerning it’s hardly surprising: teaching is a personalised, stylistic profession and there are no definitive ‘answers’ or ways of doing things (it’s an established understanding at my school that you can’t teach someone else’s lesson: we each have our own style of teaching and the thought-processes behind it are very individual).

Ultimately, principals value five ‘themes’ in their teacher librarians, according to Lupton’s survey:

TLs provide value-for-money, as they are teachers first, librarians second;
TLs provide a broad perspective because of their management, whole-school/holistic position;
TLs can give valuable advice and provide ideas to other staff;
TLs provide leadership in ICT; and
the qualities of teacher-librarians – their skill set and professional disposition – are valued (Lupton, 2016, p.52)

Earlier, Hughes’ (2013) survey of Gold Coast principals found that TLs were perceived as effective contributors to student literacy development (pp.43-4); managers and leaders in literacy (p.45); and flexible and collaborative (p.46).

But perception is key to the survival of the teacher librarian because so much of their work is done in the ‘wings’, rather than centre stage. Haycock (2007) believes that collaboration with other staff is vital, and this is echoed across other articles. Todd (2012) notes that for the school library to be recognised and appreciated as “a pedagogical centre” (p.30) , TLs need to see themselves as co-teachers (p.31) – echoing Lupton (2016) who found that principals valued TLs as teachers first. Because they are managers of school libraries, TLs must therefore collaborate with other teaching staff. The difficulty with this is less about time (Haycock, 2007, p.31) and more about other “teachers’ attitudes prevent[ing] instructional collaboration” (Haycock, 2007, p.31). To overcome any issues with finding the time to collaborate, the best results were found when there was flexible scheduling (Haycock, 2007, p.31). More importantly, issues with normalising collaboration – as an expected part of the profession – comes down to the support of the principal.

It feels like a cycle: to be valued by the principal, TLs need to collaborate with other staff. In order to collaborate with other staff, principal support is probably needed. However, becoming valuable to the principal starts even earlier, and because it’s just one person (as opposed to many teachers), it’s a much less daunting prospect.

Mark Ray (2013) identifies several key things that TLs can do to ensure a strong, mutually-beneficial relationship with the school principal:

Seek out win-win opportunities (use the library to help the school meet its ‘vision’).
Give before you receive (find out what your principal needs, then help them).
Bridge the gap (collaborate).
Identify successes (share the positive things you see in the classroom that teachers and other staff are doing)

This is a clear strategy involving the occasional conversation with a busy principal who may feel that the TL is unnecessary window-dressing at the start, but who will come to see you as indispensable. I’m tempted to use a Holmes-and-Watson analogy but it doesn’t quite fit.

Likewise, Debra Kachel (2017) has a similar strategy for increasing your influence with the principal, which boils down to two, very doable points:

Research what your principal cares about (this is similar to Ray’s first point), whether it’s a ‘hidden agenda’ or clearly stated on the school website. Kachel also suggests getting to know the principal’s interests and background, as a way to make a connection
Change the conversation: “instead of telling the principal what’s happening, ask the principal what he or she wants to happen” (p.51) – this is akin to Ray’s second point (above). The point of this is to make the school library an integral part of the school mission at all levels. Which makes a great deal of sense.

In 2011 Karen Bonanno presented a ‘five fingered plan’ for ensuring that Teacher Librarians are recognised and valued by the whole school community. The ‘five fingers’ consist of:

Thumb: strength of character (establish pre-eminence, an online presence, bring expertise)
Pointer finger: F.O.C.U.S. (follow one course until sucsessful: have a goal, assess outcomes – don’t take on too many goals all at once)
Middle finger: brand (what you, the TL, stand for; involves all ‘fingers’)
Ring finger: relationships (circle of influence. Focus on working with those people who want to work with you)
Little finger: the little things that count (your ‘elevator pitch’: what you do that others don’t but make it about them, not you – this makes you indispensable to other educators and the principal, rather than sounding like you only care about your own interests which may not align with the school’s).

Overall, it comes down to the teacher librarian as a professional educator with a broad set of skills whose role encompasses the school as a whole: all staff, students, community stakeholders; and multiple facets: information literacy, information management, leader, collaborator, resourceful. Ultimately, the role must fit the school: you the TL must fit the school environment, but also bring about positive change. You can help shape it in beautiful ways, precisely because you’re across the whole environment.

References

Bonanno, K. (2011). A profession at the tipping point: Time to change the game plan. Australian School Library Association conference, Vimeo, https://vimeo.com/31003940.

Haycock, K. (2007). Collaboration: Critical success factors for student learning. School Libraries Worldwide, 13(1), 25-35.

Hughes, H. (2013). Findings about Gold Coast Principal’s views of school libraries and teacher librarians. Chapter 8, School libraries, teacher librarians and their contribution to student literacy development in Gold Coast schools. Research report.

Kachel, D. (2017). The principal and the librarian: positioning the school library program. Teacher Librarian 45(1). Pages 50-52.

Kuon, T., Weimar, H. (2012, September). How does your boss see you? School Library Journal, 58(9), 36.

Lupton, M. (2016, January). Adding value: principal’s perceptions of the role of the teacher-librarian. School Libraries Worldwide, 22(1). Pages 49-61. https://doi-org.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/10.14265.22.1.005

Ray, M. (2013, January 31). Making the principal connection. School Library Journal. https://www.slj.com/?detailStory=the-same-difference-mark-ray-asserts-that-principals-and-librarians-have-a-lot-more-in-common-than-you-might-think-and-he-should-know

Todd, R. J. (2012). School libraries as pedagogical centers. SCAN, 3(3), 27-36.

Are school librarians an endangered species?

By Shannon Badcock

On April 19, 2021

In ETL401, Reflection post

They shouldn’t be, but I can’t escape the feeling that they are.

Still, hearing that the public and even the government considers TLs to be an “invisible profession”, and that even the publisher Scholastic referred to TLs as an endangered species, provokes an instant flare of indignation, rage even.

Context is everything: most government schools in Tasmania do not have a full- or even part-time teacher librarian on staff. They’re simply not funded, and are therefore low in priority when principals allocate school budgets.

Despite the fact that successive state governments claim Tasmania’s low literacy and numeracy levels are a high priority.

The ACER review of 11-12 education in Tasmania includes a submission from ALIA/ASLA Tasmania which reported that

increasing numbers of students enrolled in pre-tertiary and vocational subjects […] are not reaching adequate standards
for requirements with study and research upon entry to those subjects, such as:

• many students entering Year 11 are not confident in using traditional ICT productivity
software [eg Office 365/email/word-processing/presentation styles, image manipulation or
spread-sheeting data]; and
• many students do not have the knowledge and skills in using online libraries and their
gateways to networked database subscription services that are critical requirements for
research at this level.

Increasingly, students report that they did not have exposure to formal library programs or pathways planning in Years 9-10 to provide that scope or sequencing or transitioning of the teaching
of information skills and the acquisition of digital literacy.

It also notes that only 8 government high school libraries are staffed with a teacher librarian, and most of those have other teaching loads. The majority are staffed by library technicians or library aides, including district and remote schools connected to LINC (Libraries Tasmania) as a community hub.

This is in direct contrast to independent and Catholic sector schools, which take pride in their school libraries as “a symbol of the institution’s commitment to managing information for knowledge and learning” and are “sources of achievement of the social capital to the school community, a tangible indicator of the parent-giving, levies and they contribute to competitive edge with like-schools or colleges.” (ACER Review, 2016) The school library, and qualified teacher librarians, become focal points for class-based education and the controversial funding model employed in Australia.

In addition, research has found that school NAPLAN scores were significantly below the median in schools without a qualified teacher librarian. And yet still, there are no moves to permanently staff school libraries with TLs in Tasmania.

So it sounds like the onus in on TLs, where they do exist, to work even harder to prove a connection between student outcomes and libraries (because the research already out there doesn’t count, apparently). Karen Bonanno’s 2011 speech at the ASLA conference, as well as her 2015 article “A profession at the tipping point (revisited)” provide some encouragement. And TLs are nothing if not resourceful and up for a challenge. They may be considered invisible or endangered, and it may be hard to prove learning outcomes when low-achieving schools have no capacity for a TL (who therefore can’t help turn things around and provide this data), but they are still there, working diligently.

My take on Bonanno’s ‘Five finger plan to success‘ (adapted from Donald Trump, infamous for business failure, but the logic is valid) is the requirement of TLs to engage actively in their own PR. To promote themselves, certainly, but also the role – and the school library itself. This seems a bit intimidating, since libraries attract introverts by nature, but a quiet, firm, thoughtful response is a strong one and focussing on one goal at a time, as per Bonanno’s advice, is the key message for me. I hope by the end of this degree (which I’ve only just started) that I’ll have the confidence to take this on and represent my state. Because unlike the poor thylacine, teacher librarians are certainly not extinct.

References
ACER Review of the Years 9-12 education sector in Tasmania Submission by ALIA/ASLA Tasmania members. 30 September 2016. https://www.acer.org/files/ALIAASLAandSLACsubmissionfortheACER9-12Review.pdf

The Teacher Librarian in the Information Landscape

By Shannon Badcock

On March 18, 2021

In ETL401, Reflection post

Discussion Forum 2.5 (task: write a blog post)

Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash

Had you asked me what ‘information’ meant, as a concept or a word, I would probably have said, “Um, facts and figures?” I doubt I’m alone in having no idea just how complex and multifaceted it is. It has been defined as “knowledge”, facts” or “data” (Merriam-Webster) but it is also how we communicate knowledge, and receive it.

And then there are the different types of information: from information serving as an accusation to data that has no meaning until interpreted or supplied with context.

The semantic understanding of ‘information’ is the most useful and relevant: that it is meaningful, a message, and requires context in order to be meaningful. According to the ‘data-knowledge continuum’, information is a step beyond raw data because it has meaning and purpose; it leads to knowledge and, hopefully, wisdom. Knowledge itself comes in different forms, from the individual to the collective, and on a great many different topics.

Amongst so much information, humans rely on a shared understanding of semiotics – the signs and symbols we use to communicate meaning and understand each other – in order to organise data into information, leading to knowledge and, hopefully, wisdom. Otherwise there is nothing but chaos.

In the current ‘Information Age’, when a great wealth of information on every topic conceivable is widely accessible, we seem to be walking a fine line between coherent semiotics and pure chaos. The weight of information available on the World Wide Web (WWW) is overwhelming. It’s not surprising how much we depend on search engines like Google or Bing to help us manage it all.

Photo by Jaromír Kavan on Unsplash

The ‘information landscape’ has the weight of a dam full of water, and a search engine is the concrete wall, letting a small trickle out at any one time. Contemplating just how much information is out there is like trying to comprehend the fact that the universe doesn’t end: it’s crushing, and your mind just stutters to a stop.

Teacher librarians are real-life, human search engines: organising, selecting and communicating information that would otherwise be inaccessible or overwhelming to students. I don’t mean that they replace search engines, but they function as another conduit – even for the search engines themselves. Without an understanding of the broader information landscape in all its complexities, both online and in hard copy, teacher librarians would be unable to help students. I’ll confess, this intimidates me: it seems, three weeks into this Masters degree, to be an unbelievably difficult task. So much knowledge and, yes, wisdom in a teacher librarian’s head!

The introduction of the WWW has dramatically changed the information landscape, from one that was primarily print-based and expert-driven (with knowledge being held and controlled by those who have been granted access, usually along class, wealth and gender lines) to one that is everywhere, anywhere and also nowhere. The WWW has democratised information – or rather, access to it – but this comes with its own problems.

I belong to that generation (the very start of Gen Y) which grew up without computers (and there was certainly no public internet!). There were no computers throughout my primary school years – they existed, but they were rare in my corner of the world. In grade 7, we had a class called ‘word processing’ where, using computers that even then looked hideously ancient, with their squat, toad-like shape and green text on a black screen, we were taught to touch-type and some basic coding. In grade 8 I had a class called ‘keyboarding’ where I was taught how to use Word and format documents, and improve my typing skills. All year long we laboriously typed out letters copied from spiral-bound books. Tedious but effective. In grade 9 I took a class called ‘information technology’ where we learned about the history of computing and corresponding technologies – I’m not sure I fully understood it but I enjoyed the class. When my older sister attended this same high school about 6 years earlier, there were two rooms full of typewriters for the (mostly female) students to learn basic typing skills on. No computers. By the time I was in grade 7, the school had a room of black-and-white monitors and 4 – yes, four! – colour computers. Playing Solitaire was as fun as it got.

So I grew up alongside the technology, watching it evolve and improve. When I was at university studying my undergrad in English and History, the internet was a barely functioning, mostly useless thing that we still didn’t really understand. Not only were Google’s search algorithms a pain to figure out, there wasn’t very much on the WWW to search through. Not to mention that the modem connection continues to be the butt of many jokes. Meanwhile there were news articles talking about how we were all going to let our fridges order our groceries for us, and shopping would all be ‘online’. I laughed. This iteration of the ‘information landscape’ could barely walk. Meanwhile, I was holed up in the university library, hunting down old journal articles in library binding and photocopying them so I could find what I needed. It was not just that the information in books was perceived as reliable, it was that it was there: tangible, with a physical presence and therefore trustworthy.

The current information landscape – or the ‘infosphere’ as Luciano Floridi (2007) calls it – is an ever-changing, fascinating yet potentially treacherous beast in comparison. ‘Infosphere’ isn’t exactly synonymous with ‘cyberspace’ but a term Floridi coined to capture “the whole information environment” and all its “entities” (59) as “the very distinction between online and offline […] become[s] blurred and then disappear[s].” (61) According to Floridi, it is changing the very nature of being, of what it means to be human. The separation of ‘offline’ and ‘online’ is blurring, disappearing even, so that our ‘ordinary environment’ is being ‘reontologized’ [sic] – it is “becoming our ecosystem” and “progressively absorbing any other space”. (Floridi, 2007, p.61)

The problem with this is an observable one: we are unprepared for all that these changes mean for us. We have been caught off-guard. While there are positive ramifications to being able to access information whenever and wherever we like, such as convenience and the simplification of daily tasks such as paying bills or booking hotels; and enabling those from less privileged backgrounds have access to the same information as the privileged, there are also negatives that our societies are struggling to comprehend, let alone deal with. We don’t read deeply anymore, or even finish what we start (Manjoo, 2013 and Baron, 2016). Because of this, ‘information’ is losing meaning, and can become ‘misinformation’. There’s an ongoing abuse of this ready access, with bullying, threatening behaviour, misogyny and racism proliferating behind the protective safety of anonymity – an anonymity that also protects freedom of speech for marginalised peoples. It’s all happening so fast, while humans, by nature, evolve slowly and need time to adjust to change.

Photo by Gabriel Sollmann on Unsplash

The role of the teacher librarian (TL) in this information landscape has become a vitally important one, more so than ever before. People aren’t going to stop using social media, the WWW isn’t going to go away. Nor would I want that. But humans – of all ages – need a whole new set of skills not just in how to use a computer and type up a document, but also in how to navigate the infosphere; protect themselves; and evaluate and organise information. I see this need first-hand in my own father, who lacks this kind of education and so has no ability to judge the veracity of online articles, or that he should be wary of getting his knowledge from Facebook memes.

Without a doubt, the evolving information landscape makes the TL role a challenging one, but not an impossible one. Keeping abreast of changes to copyright laws and referencing styles; constantly updating your knowledge and understanding of online sources and databases; finding ways to help students learn how to navigate the complex infosphere; and respecting others’ right to information and respectful expression – these things are all interconnected and woven through the very fabric of a school library. The scope feels intimidating but can be broken down into smaller, more manageable parts. I am learning so much about what it means to be a teacher librarian; I had no idea how complex a role it is, but it’s also a fascinating challenge. Without an understanding of the ever-changing nature of the information landscape, TLs would not only struggle to help students navigate it but also struggle to adapt, themselves.

References

Baron, Naomi S (2016). Do students lose depth in digital reading? The Conversation.

Floridi, Luciano (2007). A look into the future impact of ICT on our lives. The Information Society, 23(1), 59-64.

Manjoo, Farhad (2013). You won’t finish this article. Slate.

Thinking About Information

By Shannon Badcock

On March 14, 2021

In ETL401, Reflection post

[Discussion Forum 2.1 – Activity 1: Post an original discussion]

Like many others here, I too found the ‘attributes of information’, as an important part of world economies, very interesting.

It reminded me of how Israel’s booming economy is due to information technology – not only the collection and trading of information but the means for capturing it in the first place.

But for educators especially, the Digital Information Age brings with it many issues. Not only do we see the effects of the spreading of hurtful ‘information’ amongst children and teenagers, causing stress, anxiety and bullying, but we must endlessly go into battle on the side of ‘quality’ versus ‘ease of access’, with skirmishes against ‘distraction’ and ‘click bait’.

Wikipedia has vastly improved over the years and is no longer a joke, but most reputable online sources just don’t cater to children working on research projects. I remember in my primary school library, back in the 80s, was stocked full of non-fiction titles which the librarians had carefully selected for their accessibility as much as their quality. The downside is how quickly they would become out-of-date, but it was a curated collection and an excellent resource for the lessons the librarian would give us on how to find information. We never had to worry about the reliability of it. We trusted these books.

Has anyone seen The Capture? A British crime-mystery-thriller drama that was on the ABC a couple of years ago. In it, a group sought to challenge the use and veracity of London’s thousands of CCTV cameras, used to convict people of crimes, by manipulating what people see.

My students – 16-18 year olds – automatically think that what they see is the truth. Visual texts become more powerful than what’s written – not just because it’s more memorable but because they ‘see it with their own eyes’. People on the internet use this, consciously or otherwise, to gain a higher audience for their information, and it helps explain why social media platforms have become places where people go to get information. The more reputable the information, the more ‘boring’ it looks. I’ve noticed that on Instagram, the CSIRO uses amazing photos and also humour to attract an audience. (Anyone else a follower? They’re so funny! See, it works.)

I think where I’m going with this is the problematic connection between information as ‘entertainment’, as assumed verified fact (“Oh, people can come up with statistics to prove anything, Kent. Forty percent of all people know that.” – Homer Simpson), and how accessible it is.

It seems that, more than ever, the role of teacher librarian will be finding the ‘right’ sources of information for students, sources that will hold their interest AND be reliable, if we ever want students to gain ‘wisdom’.

Portable Magic

"Books make people quiet, yet they are so loud.” – Nnedi Okorafor

Author: Shannon Badcock (Page 3 of 4)

Thinking about: The limits of digital resources

Organising Information: Defining terms

Inquiry Skills in the Australian Curriculum

Thoughts on Literacy

Mindset challenges for collaboration in a school environment

Inquiry Learning

The role of the Principal and the TL

Are school librarians an endangered species?

The Teacher Librarian in the Information Landscape

Thinking About Information

Categories

Currently Reading

Currently Reading

Recently Posted

Recent Comments

Tags

Book News & Reviews

MEd (TL) blogs

Professional Associations

Professional TL Sites

Goodreads Library: Read in 2021

Shannon 's bookshelf: 2021

Meta

"Books make people quiet, yet they are so loud.” – Nnedi Okorafor

Author: Shannon Badcock (Page 3 of 4)

Categories

Currently Reading

Currently Reading

Recently Posted

Recent Comments

Tags

Book News & Reviews

MEd (TL) blogs

Professional Associations

Professional TL Sites

Subscribe by Email

Goodreads Library: Read in 2021

Meta