Reflective Practice – What have I learned, what does the future look like?
When initially confronted with deliberating the nature of information (Parker, 2020a) my long held (semantic) view was challenged with an alternative and far more interesting approach. Examining ‘The information Hierarchy’ (AEW, 2008) I could see information as a process, existing on a continuum. This allowed me to reflect on my role as a Teacher Librarian (TL), teaching students how to manage information as a process. Whilst simple, my original thoughts exposed positive connections between information, process, teaching and the TL.
Recognising the impact of an “ever evolving technologically driven world” (Parker, 2020b), it is important to acknowledge the TLs role in ‘guiding’ students, supporting and providing them with the correct tools to manage this information successfully, in essence creating inquiry learning opportunities despite the obstacles presented in a such a constantly changing and fluid landscape. It is clear to me that TLs must understand this landscape in order to “contribute to the development of lifelong learners” (The Australian School Library Association, 2014). Originally reviewing Webster’s (2002, p. 8) description of the information society as a “global phenomenon” (Parker, 2020, March 13, Forum 2.1) I later connected this to current readings of Kutner and Armstrong (2012) who argue that we should rethink information literacy and recognise the “greater societal and global contexts of information” (p. 27). By placing information in a global landscape, we need to embrace a holistic view of information literacy (IL). O’Connell (2012) gives this a digital context recognising that the information environment is a networked resource (p. 6). Accordingly, beyond guiding students to identify, locate, evaluate and use information, TLs must consider that “deep information literacy” (Kutner & Armstrong, 2012, p. 28) encompasses a broader social justice setting whereby IL is educational, social, political and cultural. O’Connell (2012, p. 8) surmises that the information environment is a digital environment and in inquiry learning it is TLs who are providing the extensive knowledge of the wide-ranging resources in both the physical and virtual library. It appears then that digital literacy, viewed as having a set of skills required to navigate a digital environment, is perhaps a focus that TLs must consider including when facilitating inquiry instruction. Coombes (2009) argues that whilst students confidently use technology they demonstrate poor information-seeking behaviour and ultimately poor technology use. It goes without saying that in an information landscape that is heavily inhabited with ever evolving technologies it is clear the TLs role as digital expert must step beyond teaching students how to be ethically minded digital citizens and include digital information searching into inquiry learning.
Reading about and utilising the ISP/GID inquiry model (Kuhlthau et al., 2012) to plan a unit of inquiry has exposed me to the variety of models that can be used as a vehicle to deliver inquiry learning in a school environment. Understanding that there is not a “one-solution-fits-all” (Levitov, 2016, p. 34) when designing a unit of inquiry opens up a choice of models to consider. Whether it be the I-Learn model which aligns itself closely with the concept of information fluency recognising information-age learning (Neuman, 2011, introduction) or perhaps a simpler framework such as Herring’s PLUS model (Herring, 2004) which has four steps, it means that a tailored approach with the correctly matched model will created an environment of inquiry creating not only lifelong learners but learners who love learning. Collecting data, preparation, then careful selection whilst working collaboratively with staff members allows TLs to play an instrumental role in cultivating a culture of inquiry across the school (Parker, 2020 May 1, Forum 5.4a).
In trying to reconcile my thoughts regarding the role of the TL whilst navigating the concept of inquiry learning, I connected to the discussions around the nature of collaboration within the school between TL and teachers (Mesh, 2020, April, 30 Forum 5.3). Reflecting on my own experiences (Parker, 2020, May 1, Forum 5.4b) I realised that to facilitate successful inquiry learning within the school, collaborative practice is key. Inquiry learning needs to be present in all teaching and learning programs, not just the library program and it is the TLs responsibility, working with a community of practitioners, to facilitate this curriculum change. Here is a need then to direct the collaborative focus toward inquiry which sits at the centre of the learning environment (Lamb, 2011, p. 35). Understanding my role is one thing but seeing myself as a key piece of the school jigsaw puzzle through teamwork, shared knowledge and building and leading inquiry-based learning, leads me to conclude that the TL not endangered (Bonnano, 2011), not misunderstood (Parker, 2020c), the TL is “an innovator”.
References
AEW. (2008). Community of practice: Part B. The Information Hierarchy. www.maxwideman.com/issacons/iac1013d/sld004.htm
Bonanno, K (2011, October 23). A profession at the tipping point: Time to change the game plan. [Video]. Vimeo. https://vimeo.com/31003940.
Australian School Library Association (2014) What is a teacher librarian? https://asla.org.au/what-is-a-teacher-librarian.
Coombes, B. (2009). Generation Y: Are they really digital natives or more like digital refugees? Synergy, 7(1), 31-40.
Herring, J. E. (2004). The internet and information skills: A guide for teachers and librarians. Facet Publishing.
Kuhlthau, C.C., Maniotes, L.K., & Caspari, A.K. (2012). Guided inquiry design: A framework for inquiry in your school. ABC-CLIO, LLC.
Kutner, L., & Armstrong, A. (2012). Rethinking information literacy in a globalised world. Communications in information literacy, 6(1), 24-33.
Lamb, A. (2011). Bursting with potential: Mixing a media specialist’s palette; TechTrends, 55(4), 27-36.
Levitov, D. (2016). School libraries, librarians, and inquiry learning. Teacher Librarian, 43(4), 28- 31, 34-35.
Mesh, V. (2020, April 30). Forum 5.3 [Online discussion comment]. Interact 2. https://interact2.csu.edu.au.
Neuman, D. (2011). Learning in information rich environment: I-LEARN and the construction of knowledge in the 21st century. Springer.
O’Connell, J. (2012). So you think they can learn? Scan, 31(2), 5-12
Parker, R. (2020a, March 15). ETL401 Module 2.1 Reflections on information. Ruth’s Journal. https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/ruth2020/2020/03/15/module-2-1-reflections/.
Parker, R. (2020b, March 15) TL401 Module 2.3 Information society. Ruth’s Journal. https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/ruth2020/2020/03/15/module-2-3-reflections/.
Parker, R. (2020c, May 15). ETL401 Module 3 The role of the teacher librarian (1). Ruth’s Journal. https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/ruth2020/2020/05/15/etl401-module-3-the-role-of-the-teacher-librariani/.
Parker, R. (2020, March 13). Forum 2.1 [Online discussion comment]. Interact 2. https://interact2.csu.edu.au
Parker, R. (2020, May 1). Forum 5.4a [Online discussion comment]. Interact 2. https://interact2.csu.edu.au.
Parker, R. (2020, May 1). Forum 5.4b [Online discussion comment]. Interact 2. https://interact2.csu.edu.au.
Webster, F. (2014). Theories of the information society. Routledge https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csuau/detail.action?docID=1656811