teaching the next generation of information literacy educators: pedagogy and learning

Teaching the next generation ofIL educators: pedagogy and learning

Pamela McKinneyPamela [email protected]@ischoolpam

Sheila [email protected]@sheilayoshikawahttp://information-literacy.blogspot.co.uk

Information School, University of SheffieldCreating Knowledge 8, Reykjavík, June 2016

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Contents

• The module context

• Entwistle’s et al. (2004) Teaching-learning Environments model

• The institutional environment & teachers’ characteristics

• The learning design

• Characteristics of the learners

• Conclusions

Pamela McKinney and Sheila Webber, 2016

The “Information Literacy” modules

• Face-to-Face (F2F) and Distance Learning (DL course new in 2015) running in tandem

• Learning aims:

• understand from both theoretical and practical perspectives the concepts of information literacy and information behaviour;

• develop their own information literacy and understanding of its application to their future lives;

• compare different approaches to teaching and demonstrate awareness of implications for adopting different approaches to teaching and learning;

• understand how the information environment is evolving, including both traditional and new media, and the implications for citizens’ information literacy; and

• develop practical skills in searching, evaluating and presenting information.


The development of the TLE model

• ETL project “Enhancing teaching-learning environments in Undergraduate Courses”

• 5 case studies in different disciplinary areas

• Gathered multi-institutional data and used multiple data collection methods – from students and from staff

• Research project also created the “Threshold Concepts” (Meyer & Land 2003)


The Teaching-Learning Environment

Entwistle et al. (2004: 3)


Subject knowledge & pedagogical beliefs

• Pam -Background as a learning developer working specifically to extend and develop Inquiry-based learning (IBL) at the university. Research intersection between IBL and IL

• Sheila – expertise in TEL and IBL – 2nd Life, MOOCs; research experience in phenomenography; Institutional teaching award

• Our joint understanding of IL and what it means from a theoretical and practical perspective in different communities and landscapes

What students are expected to learn and understand

• Desire to bring about conceptual change in students and not just “develop skills”.

• Develop a strong theoretical basis for their teaching


Departmental and institutional influences

• Drive to extend the market and create a DL alternative to f-2-f programme (financial)

• “Brand new” programme – freedom to design and develop

• Institutional procedures & policies e.g. new programme & module creation procedures, assignment word counts

7


Validating bodies and academic community

• CILIP accreditation and Professional Knowledge & Skills Base (PKSB)

• QAA subject benchmarks

• Professional views – e.g. from employers and alumni

• Research –Corrall & Bewick (2009) /Wheeler & McKinney (2015) / Hornung (2013)


Overall course design (linked with constructive alignment)

• Both modules share subject, sequence and assessment but the tools used to deliver and mediate the teaching are different in the F2F and DL versions of the module.

• 2 overarching strands – what is Information Literacy, what is Teaching & Learning

• Practical activities (e.g. use TEL tools, Dialog searching) that are linked to expected progress on assessment tasks

• Theoretical material dealt with towards end of module to ensure students have had teaching that directly relates to the assessment

• Front loading to cover more material at start to leave time for students to complete assessment at end of semester

• F2F class – focus on activity happening in the 3 hour class

• Distance Learners – focus on providing content and facilitating interaction that students can manage in their own time – synchronous activities


01/06

10Principal tools we use


Principle tools we use

01/06

11


• Assignment 1: create an annotated bibliography on a topic negotiated with a tutor and reflect on how personal IL has been developed through this activity.

• Assignment 2: Work in a group to design an IL learning intervention (not assessed). Critically reflect on the experience of designing and delivering IL teaching and their personal development as teachers.

• Interaction: Groups of DL and F2F students were paired up and asked to provide each other with an IL learning need.

• Low stakes teaching: only the reflection is assessed, not the teaching

• Assess both theoretical understanding and practical application


Model activity: Reflect on an experience of finding information and identify the sources used

Face-2-Face

• Pre-session students asked to post to a Blackboard discussion forum.

• In the session students were given a short lecture and then asked to discuss their post with a partner or small group in the light of material covered on “Information Horizons”. (Savolainen and Kari, 2004)

• Plenary discussion led by the tutor where individual’s experiences were discussed and points of interest or comparison were surfaced.

Distance Learning• Pre-session (week) students

asked to post to Google+ group.• A lecture was recorded with

audio & video components and made available on the VLE

• Students were encouraged to reflect on their original post in the light of material covered on “InformationHorizons”and post again.

• A short feedback video was created that discussed the student posts and this was also madeavailable on

the VLE


Entry characteristics

• DL students mostly working while studying (only part time students)

• F2F more “just” students (but all had previous work experience in an information context)

• F2F students ¼ International; DL students 1/10 international

• Range of Undergraduate degree subjects (but we can’t see what they are on the student management system)

• Ethnic diversity? BME? Age? Disability?


Conceptions of learning & approaches to studying

• Encouraged a reflective approach to their own learning through use of learning styles instruments e.g. VARK learning styles questionnaire (Fleming and Baume, 2006)

• All encouraged to take the “approaches to study” inventory (Entwistle & Tait, 1994) Some really thoughtful responses and discussion about these on VLE discussion boards (but much more for DL students)

• Being reflective about learning currently and in previous educational experiences was an explicit aspect of the module. (class time planned for this but found to be unworkable)

• Perceptions of T&L environment: evaluations show that different students had radically different perceptions of the same T&L environment


Quality of learning achieved

• Problem: How do we as tutors identify this? How do learners identify this?

• Information School procedure: Module evaluation questionnaire with a mix of quantitative and qualitative data

• Our reflection: what does a mark really mean?

• Do students feel validated by getting a good mark?

• Failure rate is very low

• Reflective assessments allow us to understand more about how and what students feel they have learned (but strategic learners could simply write what they think the lecturer wants to read)

• Further research ongoing with learners


Conclusion• Multi-modal method in the DL environment perhaps engages

students more and gives wider opportunities for different types of engagement. Some activities could be extended into the F2F module.

• Creative use of different platforms for learning worked well for both cohorts

• Being in-work allows students to more immediately contextualisetheir learning through discussion and observation

• We both enjoyed planning and delivering the DL module, and found the contrast between the 2 sets of students interesting

• The reflections prompted by this presentation will be taken forward as part of a larger research project looking more closely at the DL experience.

• Being in class seemed to promote a more passive and judgmental view of learning – we need to work on creating the online learning ethos in the classroom.


References

• CILIP (2016) My professional Knowledge and Skills basehttp://www.cilip.org.uk/jobs-careers/professional-knowledge-skills-base [ Accessed 10.05.16]

• Corral, S. & Bewick, L (2009) Developing Librarians as Teachers:A Study of Their Pedagogical Knowledge. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 42 (2)

• Entwistle, N. J. & Tait, H. (1994). The Revised Approaches to Studying Inventory. Edinburgh: Centre for Research into Learning and Instruction, University of Edinburgh.

• Entwistle, N., Nisbet, J. and Bromage, A. (2004). Teaching-learning environments and student learning in electronic engineering: paper presented at Third Workshop of the European Network on Powerful Learning Environments, in Brugge, September 30 – October 2, 2004. http://www.ed.ac.uk/etl/docs/Brugge2004.pdf

• Fleming, N., and Baume, D. (2006). Learning styles again: VARKing up the right tree! Educational Developments, (7.4), 4-7. Retrieved 28 September 2015 from http://vark-learn.com/wp- content/uploads/2014/08/Educational-Developments.pdf

• Hornung, E. (2013) On your own but not alone: One person librarians in Ireland and their perceptions of continuing professional development. Library Trends 61 (3) 675-702


http://www.cilip.org.uk/jobs-careers/professional-knowledge-skills-base

http://www.ed.ac.uk/etl/docs/Brugge2004.pdf

http://vark-learn.com/wp- content/uploads/2014/08/Educational-Developments.pdf

References (contd)• Meyer, J & Land, R (2003) Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge:

Linkages to ways of thinking and practising within disciplines. http://www.etl.tla.ed.ac.uk//docs/ETLreport4.pdf

• Prosser, M. and Trigwell, K. (1999). Understanding teaching and learning.Buckingham, England: Open University Press.

• Quality Assurance Agency (2015) Subject benchmark statement: Librarianship, Information, Knowledge, Records and Archives Management. http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/Publications/Documents/SBS-librarianship-15.pdf

• Savolainen, R. and Kari, J. (2004). Placing the internet in information source horizons: a study of information seeking by internet users in the context of self-development. Library and Information Science Research, 26, 415-433.

• Wheeler, E. (2014). Investigating academic librarians’ perceptions of their own teaching skills. MA dissertation. Sheffield, England: Information School University of Sheffield. Retrieved 4 October 2015 from http://dagda.shef.ac.uk/dispub/dissertations/2013-14/External/Wheeler_130117630.pdf

• Wheeler, E. & McKinney P. (2015) Are librarians teachers? Investigating academic librarians’ perceptions of their own teaching skills. Journal of Information Literacy 9(2) 111-128

19


http://www.etl.tla.ed.ac.uk/docs/ETLreport4.pdf

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/Publications/Documents/SBS-librarianship-15.pdf