Provide a critical reflection of how your understanding of information literacy (IL), IL models and the teacher librarian’s (TL’s) role in inquiry learning has expanded through this subject. Refer to previous blog posts and other commentary from the subject forums to support your emerging understanding in the reflection.
Developing an understanding of IL was challenging for me throughout ETL401. My early post in ‘2.1 Thinking About Information’ (Coddington, 2020a) revealed a deepening, yet shallow, understanding of IL, informed, I believe, by my English teaching background. However, engagement with course content (Module 5, Interact2) revealed that IL and multi-literacies as literacy to understand (Coddington, 2020b), are far more complex than I had imagined, consisting of processes, skills and literacies that should inform TL pedagogical (Kalantiz & Cope, 2015). However, I lacked knowledge on how to effectively teach it. As the collaborative teaching of IL in inquiry learning (I.L) units may be considered to be integral to the TL’s role (the potential compulsory nature of which I see both sides of (Coddington, 2020d)), this has implications for my role. A deeper understanding is required on how to fulfil it.
Fitzgerald & Garrison’s research (2017) on the Guided Inquiry Process Design (GID) as an IL model prompted me to question the long-term benefits of GID as students move into the workforce and how a TL might promote and implement models on a school-wide basis. I subsequently reflected on associated issues such as concerns about accountability, content coverage and workload, and how these might impact the implementation of a common IL model (Coddington, 2020c), showcasing the development and significance of such understandings. However, unlike others, I hadn’t considered the impact of executive staff (who might insist – or not – on collaboration) and reluctance to collaborate with new staff on implementation (Coddington, 2020d; Garrison & FitzGerald, 2019). As a new TL at a new school, this certainly has significance. Garrison & FitzGerald’s research-based guidance on how to overcome such issues to integrate IL through I.L across the curriculum (work with executive staff to plan, collaborate on an individual basis and host professional learning) are steps that I endeavour to take so that students are not disadvantaged.
However, more research on IL models is required before this can occur as I had previously not encountered IL models, and as a result of my brief readings of I.L, I didn’t think it was compatible with my subjects, and had not considered how it manifested across the curriculum. Bonanno’s work deepened my understanding of the latter and the necessity of an integrated approach to IL (Coddington, 2020e). Whilst I, like many others in the discussion thread 5.4a: Information Literacy, wondered where it fit in the English curriculum, it is clear I had a gap in knowledge that other’s (Moon, 2020) did not. Sluiter (2017) provided insights into potential application through inquiry literature circles, however my background did not facilitate consideration of inquiry mapping and IL models from other perspectives, such as Art and PDHPE. As a TL, I will need to have a broader understanding of the various curricula’s if I am to engage in the worthwhile task of mapping IL and I.L in all subjects for a wholistic approach. Bonanno and Lupton’s work provide models for how this can be achieved, and will need to be used as scaffolds for further research and I.L mapping and planning.
To supplement this, research into IL models was required, and broadened my understanding of the challenges TLs face in collaboration and IL models. Module 5: Information Literacy content (CSU, 2020; Kuhlthau et al., 2020; The Big6 etc.) gave me a shallow understanding, but in light of the discussions around the potential requirement of collaboration between TLs and teachers, and the inherent challenges (Coddington, 2020f), I found myself preferencing GID for its facilitation of collaboration between students and the popularity of it in Australia (Coddington, 2020g; Garrison & FitzGerald, 2020; Kuhlthau et al., 2012; Maniotes, 2017). However, if Principals expect TLs to create inquiry units collaboratively (Coddington, 2020d), then PLUS offers simplicity (CSU, 2020). However, GID and I-LEARN offer transferability (Garrison & FitzGerald, 2019; Greenwell, 2016), and Big6 ICT skill development (Eisenberg, 2003). Is the focus on an ease of full-scale implementation, which I consider difficult (Coddington, 2020e), or progressive implementation for long-term skill development and transfer? How does a central school TL decide?
Following Bonanno and Lupton’s models to track I.L across all subjects would be helpful to determine what skills are required, which would assist me in making a final decision on which model to implement in my role as collaborator in I.L. for K-12. Following this model would allow me to have deeper understandings of IL models and curriculum subjects, and would therefore assist me in facing the issues associated with this role (potential expectations of collaboration (Coddington, 2020d), barriers to collaboration (Coddington, 2020f), etc.) – a more complex role than I originally thought (Coddington, 2020h; Coddington, 2020i).
Word count: 770
Reference List
Bonanno, K. (2014). F-10 inquiry skills scope and sequence, and F-10 core skills and tools. Eduwebinar. https://eduwebinar.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/curriculum_mapping_scope_sequence_skills_tools.pdf
Charles Sturt University (CSU). (2020). Outline of the PLUS Model. James Herring’s PLUS Model: Purpose Location Use Self-Evaluation. https://farrer.csu.edu.au/PLUS/
Coddington, M. (2020a, March 11). 2.1 Thinking About Information. Discussion forum post [ETL401 Interact2].
Coddington, M. [monica.coddington1] (2020b, May 18). Dissecting Literacy. The Learning of a Teacher Librarian in Training. https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/teacherlibrarianintraining/2020/05/18/dissecting-literacy/
Coddington, M. (2020c, May 4). 4.1b: Inquiry Learning. Discussion forum post [ETL401 Interact2].
Coddington, M. (2020d, May 18). 4.3: The TL and Curriculum. Discussion forum post [ETL401 Interact2].
Coddington, M. (2020e, May 7). 5.3a: Information Literacy Model. Discussion forum post [ETL401 Interact 2].
Coddington, M. [monica.coddington1] (2020f, May 21). Challenges in the TL’s Role. The Learning of a Teacher Librarian in Training. https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/teacherlibrarianintraining/2020/05/21/challenges-in-the-tls-role/
Coddington, M. [monica.coddington1] (2020g, May 21). Information Literacy and Inquiry Learning. The Learning of a Teacher Librarian in Training. https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/teacherlibrarianintraining/2020/05/21/information-literacy-and-inquiry-learning/
Coddington, M. (2020h, March 15). ETL401 AT1 Part B – Experience-Informed Reflections on the TL Role. The Learning of a Teacher Librarian in Training. https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/teacherlibrarianintraining/2020/03/15/etl401-at1-part-b-experience-informed-reflections-on-the-tl-role/
Coddington, M. [monica.coddington1] (2020i, May 1). Who comes first – the teacher or the librarian? The Learning of a Teacher Librarian in Training. https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/teacherlibrarianintraining/2020/05/01/who-comes-first-the-teacher-or-the-librarian/
Eisenberg, M. (2003). Implementing Information Skills: Lessons Learned from the Big6 Approach to Information Problem-Solving. School Libraries in Canada, 22(4), 20-23. URL.
Fitzgerald, L. & Garrison, K. (2017). ‘It Trains Your Brain’: Student Reflections on Using the Guided Inquiry Design Process. Synergy, 15(2). https://search-informit-com-au.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/fullText;dn=217217;res=AEIPT
Garrison, K., & FitzGerald, L. (2019). “One interested teacher at a time”: Australian Teacher Librarian Perspectives on Collaboration and Inquiry. International Association of School Librarianship. 1-10. https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/docview/2343152998?fbclid=IwAR01RLBXOmJJDjO7XLEM2fGguCT4_gnHeKDpo8DNPGIDaTpuYVk6nEZkwdE&rfr_id=info%3Axri%2Fsid%3Aprimo
Greenwell, S. (2016). Using the I-LEARN model for information literacy instruction. Journal of Information Literacy, 10(1), 67-85. https://ojs.lboro.ac.uk/JIL/article/view/PRA-V10-I1-4/2328
Kalantzis, M. & Cope, B. (2015). Multiliteracies: Expanding the scope of literacy pedagogy. New Learning Online. https://newlearningonline.com/multiliteracies
Kuhlthau, C. C., Maniotes, L. K. & Caspari, A. K. (2020). Guided Inquiry Design. http://wp.comminfo.rutgers.edu/ckuhlthau/guided-inquiry-design/
Kuhlthau, C. C., Maniotes, L. K. & Caspari, A. K. (2012). Guided Inquiry Design: A Framework for Inquiry in Your School. ABC-CLIO, LLC.
Lupton, M. (2012). Inquiry Skills in the Australian Curriculum. Access, 26(2), 12-18. URL
Maniotes, L. K. (2017). Guided Inquiry Design Framework. In L. Maniotes (Ed.), Guided Inquiry Design in Action: High School (1st Ed., 5-12). Libraries Unlimited.
Moon, K. (2020, May 7). 5.4a: Information Literacy. Discussion forum post [ETL401 Interact2].
Sluiter, K. (2017). From Literature Circles to Inquiry Circles. The Educators Room. https://theeducatorsroom.com/lit-circles-inquiry-circles/
The Big6 (2018). The BIG6: Information and Technology Skills for Student Success. The Big6. https://thebig6.org/
