Protected: ETL401 Assessment 3 Reflective Practice

Information Literacy and Inquiry Based Teaching

I enjoyed the CRAAP test video , CRAAP rubric and Get REAL rubric, and I was searching for information seeking processes and look what I found! A BS-O-Meter! I can’t remember what forum discussion I was in that mentioned we needed one of these, but voila! Here it is! (I will put it into the forum discussions later):

https://libguides.furman.edu/medialiteracy/framework — BS-O-Meter Image by Libby Young (2019) of Furman University, James B. Duke Library. Used with (email) permission. CC Licence 4.0

These devices help us teach the digital literacy aspect of information literacy. What is information literacy? I have grown to understand it better and better and particularly found this quote to be important:

“Understanding information literacy as a catalyst for learning necessitates a move away from exploring textual practices towards incorporating an understanding of the sociocultural and corporeal practices that are involved in coming to know an information environment” (Loyd 2007, pp. Abstract).

Information Literacy is but one form of the the vast aspects of literacy, sometimes referred to as multi-literacies, multi-modal pedagogy or trans-literacy. And basically what it boils down to is that, because of the multiplicity of literacy, educators (including TLs!) need a “pedagogical repertoire” in order to teach all aspects and forms of literacy (Kalantzis & Cope 2015).

I am heartened by the American Library Association (2016): “Information literacy forms the basis for lifelong learning. It is common to all disciplines, to all learning environments, and to all levels of education. It enables learners to master content and extend their investigations, become more self-directed, and assume greater control over their own learning. … …Information literacy, while showing significant overlap with information technology (digital literacy) skills, is a distinct and broader area of competence.”

According to the ALA, (2016) we must help our students become information literate individuals who can:

- “determine the extent of information needed;
- access the needed information effectively and efficiently;
- evaluate information and its sources critically;
- incorporate selected information into one’s knowledge base;
- use information effectively to accomplish a specific purpose; and
- understand the economic, legal, and social issues surrounding the use of information, and access and use information ethically and legally” (ALA 2016).

In the Teacher Librarian field, inquiry teaching models have been identified as the best means for enabling information literacy in students.

Maniotes and Kahlthau (2014) explain that inquiry teaching models support the information literacy (and research) for all ages because it is learning centred and focuses on emotionally stimulating questioning and deep understanding rather than product-driven answering and fact finding.

The inquiry teaching model is not presently taught very often or with rigour in most educational settings and this is where, according to Maniotes and Kahlthau (2014), the TL is vital!

In the upper years (age 9 and above) the use of Guided Inquiry Design (GID) is one of the models that is popular. Maniotes and Kahlthau describe it as a framework of inquiry learning design, as represented in 8 sequential phases “Open, Immerse, Explore, Identify, Gather, Create, Share, and Evaluate” (Maniotes & Kahlthau 2014, pp.Abstract).

As I teach the younger years predominantly, I have chosen to work with the Super3 and Big6 Inquiry teaching models and I am hopeful that I can do the pedagogy justice. I am certainly going to give it my best shot!

References

ALA (2016). Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher education. Retrieved from: https://alair.ala.org/handle/11213/7668

Lloyd, A. (2007). Recasting information literacy as sociocultural practice: Implications for library and information science researchers. Information Research, 12(4).

Kalantzis, M. & Cope, B. (2015). Multiliteracies: Expanding the scope of literacy pedagogy. New Learning.

Lloyd, A. (2007). Recasting information literacy as sociocultural practice: Implications for library and information science researchers. Information Research, 12(4).

Maniotes, L. K., & Kuhlthau, C. C. (2014). MAKING THE SHIFT. Knowledge Quest, 43(2), 8-17. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/docview/1620878836?accountid=10344

Young, L. (2019). BS-O-Meter. [Image]. Retrieved from: https://libguides.furman.edu/medialiteracy/framework

Comparing and Contrasting: Herring (2007), Lamb (2011), Purcell (2010) & Valenza (2010)

The role of the teacher librarian thinking prompts from the ETL401 Module 3.2 discussion forum:

“Prioritising the TL roles:.. TL roles that might ‘fly under the radar’… Lamb vs Herring vs Purcell vs Valenza… What to give up, according to Lamb and Valenza, in order to be a proactive TL… Purcell’s ideas of the prioritisation of the TL roles vs my ideas…” These things I found difficult to grasp in the form of these questions but I found Karen Balmer’s forum post on ‘Module 3.2 The role of the teacher librarian’ posted on the 21st March 2019, provoked the most thought.

I particularly liked Karen’s statement that “the role has evolved significantly… 21^st century skills that TLs should be helping to develop in their students. There also seems to be general agreement with what Herring’s (2007) asse(r)tion that ‘school libraries do not exist in a vacuum…'”

I was concerned by Herring’s statement that unnecessary emphasis is placed on reading for pleasure – as I think Herring has missed the mark, in a pursuit to support teaching information literacy when the aspects of literacy (learning to read, and reading to learn – or reading for pleasure) should in fact be taught together (one purpose, not outweighing the others) and should not be seen as in any way separate. (More on that in this blog post.)

Like Karen Balmer, I agree with Purcell that our role should be that of a team or school (curriculum) leader, (curriculum) partner, information (literacy) specialist, teacher and administrator (of the library and strong teaching and learning) programs.

Finally, Karen and I prefer how Lamb puts being at media specialist of 21st century teaching and learning in the fore-front of the list of roles, including information technologist, administrator and (last but not least) a teacher, with the additional roles of ‘curriculum consultant, community collaborator and digital detective’ as varying in priority on any particular day, depending on the needs of the stakeholders. In this, Lamb identifies how the social aspects of the role, or collaborating with educators as colleagues is vital.

References:

Balmer, K. (2019, March 21) Module 3.2 The Role of the Teacher Librarian [Online Forum comment]. Message posted to: https://interact2.csu.edu.au/webapps/discussionboard/do/message?action=list_messages&course_id=_42380_1&nav=discussion_board_entry&conf_id=_78883_1&forum_id=_147404_1&message_id=_2093678_1

Herring, J. (2007). Teacher librarians and the school library. Retrieved from https://www-sciencedirect-com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/science/article/pii/B9781876938437500028

Lamb, A. (2011). Bursting with potential: Mixing a media specialist’s palette. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=60840783&site=ehost-live

Purcell, M. (2010). All librarians do is check out books, right? A look at the roles of a school library media specialist. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ907292&site=ehost-live

Valenza, J. (2010). A revised manifesto. Retrieved from http://blogs.slj.com/neverendingsearch/2010/12/03/a-revised-manifesto/

Information Literacy, Learning to Read and Reading to Learn

[Reflection of ETL401 Module 5]

Hold your horses cowboy! I’ve just been triggered!

Let’s begin with learning to read and reading to learn. The (ETL401) 5th module jumps straight to reading to learn and doesn’t really mention learning to read, but it is my belief that the two are intrinsically combined and that the education system currently fails students in separating the two (Robb 2011).

Learning to read: This separation of ‘learning to read’ (for some purposes, abbreviated to ‘decoding’-although it is sometimes not referred to as this, the focus has shifted to phonics and decoding) and ‘reading to learn’ (for some purposes, abbreviated to ‘critical thought'(CILIP 2016)) has been directly witnessed and practised by me and my colleagues for at least 5 years (I started in 2014), as part of the Early Action for Success (EAfS) funding program.

This program, in phase 1, poured money into (and continues to do so to some degree) several things like ‘Instructional Leader’ Deputy Principal level positions and ‘mentoring’ time off class, and a large portion of the money has gone towards training teachers in Targeted Early Numeracy (TEN) the ‘Language Learning & Literacy in the Early Years‘ (L3) narrow pedagogies for teaching kindergarten to year 2 students foundational literacy and numeracy skills.

[Sidebar 1: Originally, the TEN program was, in my opinion, almost completely a spin off of the Count Me in Too (CMIT) program (in which I am trained) and Developing Efficient Numeracy Strategies (DENS), using the Schedule for Early Numeracy Assessment (SENA) 1 or 2. Once trained in TEN, teachers, including myself, utilised CMIT, DENS and SENA to effectively teach the TEN math group games and lessons. Similarly, the L3 program is a spin off of Reading Recovery, linked to Best Start and focussed on kindergarten children (Howell & Neilson 2015).
Later, L3 teacher training was revised to suite ‘stage 1’ or year 1 & 2 students (which is where I joined the training). Currently, the EAfS program is in ‘Phase 2’ and has embraced micro-level data collection and the new National Learning Progressions …I am being critical here about L3 but not without foundation (Howell & Neilson 2015 p.8).
And don’t even get me started on the fact that the (now defunct) NSW Literacy Continuum provided for EAfS schools meant that we didn’t even crack open the NSW English Syllabus all year-much less the National Curriculum–we simply taught to and reported on the NSW Literacy and Numeracy continuums! Roar! Outrage! Sirens! Remind anyone of the teaching to the test arguments against NAPLAN? Well hello new Learning Progressions, which have replaced the previous continuums…but I digress…]

What all of this means to me at the moment, in terms of teaching Information Literacy / ‘Reading to learn’, is that, in my current context, half of any given school is focussed on ‘Learning to read’/decoding using L3 guided reading groups, using decodable/phonics/guided readers, teaching students ‘how to read’/decoding without any thought into teaching students ‘reading to learn’/critical thought.

In fact, until a student reaches a particular level of knowing ‘how to read’ (measured in our schools as reading a PM Reader level of 15, based on a 95% success benchmark or ‘running record’ of their reading of a PM Reader that they’ve read at least once before) they may then begin learning skills of ‘reading to learn’/critical thought. For some students, particularly in schools in low Socio Economic Status areas (who, coincidentally, have low NAPLAN results that qualify them for EAfS funding) they don’t reach the PM Reader level of 15 until they are 8 or 9 years old (year 3 or 4) and thus, by that point, reading (so purely focussed on ‘how’ rather ‘why’) has lost all value.

Teach Information Literacy From the Start: What I propose is to teach students, regardless of their age or decoding ability to think critically about texts, using quality texts. It is very difficult to think critically about a (commonly fiction) text that is lacking depth like the little decoding readers that are all the rage at the moment (Adoniou, Cambourne & Ewing 2018). And there is an aspect of L3 that I thought did this particularly well, called ‘Initial, Modelled and Shared readings (IMS),’ However, I was the only teacher at one school who was making time for it amongst the time-heavy requirements of ‘guided reading groups’/how to read lessons. Let’s let that sink in for a moment: nobody had time for information literacy because teaching students how to decode boring levelled readers was taking up all of their time.

Information Literacy is teaching how to think critically and this is a key part of comprehension and reading for enjoyment. In L3 IMS for stage 1 students (the kindergarten version do something similar but not to the same degree and they call it ‘Reading to’ or similar), is not exclusively the rights of L3 (see this link for further reading) and so I will go into how to run the IMS lessons and how they relate to Information Literacy and a year one (age 6-7) classroom:

Quality texts: First, the teacher first picks a quality book like The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr Morris Lessmore (2012) by W.E. Joyce. (This was also adapted as an award winning short film (Joyce 2011)- which I just watched for the 20th time and was reduced to tears AGAIN, because I just realised the importance of Information literacy and Teacher Librarians! If you watch it, try to think of the grey people are ‘learning to read’ and the colourful ones are ‘reading to learn’).
In the world of the story: The teacher reads the book and nobody (including the teacher is allowed to comment).
Quality Talk Question Prompts: The teacher critically analyses the book and creates a list of possible ‘critical thought’ questions that will be expected from the students in the third reading of the book and has those ready as a reference for the second reading of the text to the students. (For an example of this, see one of my teacher prompt sheets.)
Modelled reading(s):The teacher reads the book aloud again, possibly even a third time to the students (who are not allowed to comment) but this time the teacher can either explain the meta-language or ‘difficult’ words in the text and then model thinking critically about the book with thoughts based on the prepared list of questions (without actually saying those questions out loud).
Shared reading: The teacher reads the book a final time and then releases the students to comment freely about the text in a round table / dinner scenario. For younger students, I use a behaviour management / talking technique of a smiley ball that gets passed to those who want to speak and if you have a turn speaking you put a popsicle stick in front of you. If you don’t have a turn speaking about the text, I can see clearly and offer prompts based on my prepared question sheet to help reluctant students.
Writing: I like to link this to writing lessons, sometimes filming the students
My AL Sentence Board for the Fantastic Flying Books of Mr Morris Lessmore

and typing their discussions (or using my Accelerated Literacy sentence board to work on writing conventions), so that they can use what they said about the text in their writing but this is just something that I do and not really related to IMS reading/L3.

So what this all means for me in practice as a TL, is that I need to continue to read to my students and continue to utilise information literacy / critical thought strategies (CILIP 2016) that are proven to improve literacy outcomes for students (regardless of their reading ‘levels’), including aspects of L3 and aspects of Accelerated Literacy because student access to quality (fiction and non-fiction) texts and the ability to practice Information Literacy skills is a key component to learning how to read AND reading to learn.

Next post: Information Literacy for reading to learn and inquiry teaching models…I promise…

References

Adoniou, M, Cambourne, B. & Ewing R. (2018). What are decodable readers and do they work? Retrieved from: https://theconversation.com/what-are-decodable-readers-and-do-they-work-106067

CILIP Information Literacy Group. (2016). Information literacy definitions.

Howell & Neilson (2015). A critique of the L3 early years literacy program. Learning Difficulties Australia, Volume 47(2). pp.7-pp.12. Retrieved from https://www.ldaustralia.org/client/documents/Bulletin%20Winter%202015.pdf

Joyce, W. E. (2012). The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr Morris Lessmore. London: Simon & Schuster.

Joyce, W. E. [Screen name] (2011, January 30). The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr Morris Lessmore. [Video File]. Retrieved from: https://youtu.be/Ad3CMri3hOs

Robb, L. (2011). The myth of learn to read/read to learn. Scholastic Instructor. Retrieved from http://www.scholastic.com/teachers/article/myth-learn-readread-learn

The New Paradigm Part 2 of 2

[ETL401 Module 4]

The New Paradigm: Let’s do both inquiry based learning and outcomes

In the previous post, I discussed collaboration and the steps that I think might be needed to get to a point where I can collaborate with the majority of teachers.

I’ve looked at the research and looked at the *information literacy inquiry models (particularly those more suited to primary and infants classes, such as Big6 and Super3) and okay, I’m in. Where do I sign?

*References in support of Inquiry based teaching and learning:

Bonanno, K. (2015). F-10 Inquiry skills scope and sequence and F-10 core skills and tools. Eduwebinar Pty Ltd, Zillmere, Queensland. Retrieved from: https://s2.amazonaws.com/scope-sequence/Bonanno-curriculum_mapping_v1.pdf

FitzGerald, L (2015) Guided Inquiry in practice, Scan 34/4,16-27

Kuhlthau, C., Maniotes, L. & Caspari, A. (2015) GI: Learning in the 21st century, 2nd edition. Santa Barbara, California: Libraries Unlimited.

Global Education Leadership Programme (GELP, 2011). We wanted to talk about 21st Century education. Retrieved from:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nA1Aqp0sPQo

O’Connell, J. (2012). So you think they can learn? Scan, 31, May, 5-11

The New Paradigm Part 1 of 2

(Reflection ETL401 Module 4 – The Teacher Librarian and the Curriculum)

(RSA Animate 2008) This is a very powerful video that offers a dichotomous view of an ‘education paradigm’.

Throwing the baby out with the bath water: While I agree that there has been (or in some cases, needs to be) a shift in the Australian education system, I am hesitant to throw out the baby with the bath water and dispose of outcomes. I have had great success with my students by utilising the NSW syllabus document outcomes and indicators. These have been regularly updated and rearranged over the years and each update, in my opinion, has improved the approach.

Similarly, so have approaches such as ‘play based learning’ or the ‘Reggio Emilia Approach’ / the environment as the ‘third teacher’ (Wein 2015), integrated units such as COGS and inquiry based learning (IBL) such as The Big6 or the Super3 / project based learning (PBL) models evolved over time and have been accepted and used by teachers to varying degrees and with varying degrees of success.

A Breath of Fresh Air: Anyone in the education system for more than 5 years will have seen enough new ideas blow in to the educational sphere to know that they generally blow straight back out to make room for the next big breeze, and leave very little in their wake in terms of real change.

I don’t think this ‘New Paradigm’ is a situation of ‘outcomes based learning’ vs ‘inquiry based learning.’ I don’t think the two need to be pitted against each other in an argument reminiscent of the recent arguments about how to teach literacy as seen in media and other outlets, for example as per this 2017 blog post by Eleanor Heaton about phonics versus the whole language approach.

I see no reason why we can’t have both and simply be more flexible in the application of outcomes to meet real individual student needs.

The real issues with outcome based teaching are based in 1. a lack of authentic growth mindset (Dweck 2006) in adults and students – an inability to see mistakes as part of learning, 2. the social debate regarding reporting to parents and telling the students themselves or their parents that their child has or has not met stage outcomes based on a ‘letter’ mark or tick in a box. Far better, according to Hattie & Peddie (2003), for the system to simply say, ‘this is what sorts of things you/your child can do well, these are things that they are still learning or here are the learning goals for the future.’ It isn’t the outcomes at fault, it is how we’ve applied them to our practice as educators.

[Sidebar 1: To this end, I am extremely interested in the Quality Teaching Framework to improve the structure of lesson delivery (if this is done through inquiry based teaching then so be it) and reading more about ability/interest/friendship grouping of students as opposed to age/year/stage grouping of students.]

[Sidebar 2: If you think Outcome based teaching is holding students back, don’t even get me started on the ‘Learning Progressions,’ ‘NAPLAN’ and the ‘Our Schools’ Website / league tables which have resulted in ‘teaching to the test’ and ‘school shopping.’ Gah.]

[Sidebar 3: If outcome models are so flawed and inquiry models are so perfect, why aren’t universities scrapping outcome based marking criteria and using inquiry models?]

Making assumptions about students: How students find information and their level of ability, particularly when it comes to electronic resources varies widely – much more so than adults realise and according to Coombes, “The basic premise of the Net Generation theory, that familiarity with technology equates with efficient and effective use and these achievements are only applicable to a specific group because they have grown up with technology, is flawed” (Coombes 2009, pp.32).

Technology is a tool, rather than a solution (Coombes 2009). Society has a new ‘digital age’ environment in which we live and we are expecting students to learn how to navigate it simply by being born amongst it. We have a new set of digital expectations in our society but have neglected to update our education system of our students to enable them to meet those expectations.

Information Search Process (ISP) skills / information literacy: Being able to recognise functions of a digital device does not automatically mean that students are able to access, process and absorb information on that they come across on said device (Coombes 2009). Students are overly reliant on the internet, have limited ability to search effectively, and are rarely able to critically evaluate information that they find (Coombes 2009).

The Role of Teacher Librarians (et al.): Educators have responsibility to lift their game when it comes to teaching students information literacy / searching skills such as collecting, managing and evaluating information (particularly when they believe the first thing that appears in their search is the most relevant or most accurate when in fact the first thing that comes up is based on their prior searches and the search engine’s popularity algorithms), finding the information again at a later date, and storing information for future use (Combes, 2007b in Coombes 2009).

Evidence and Assessment within the library: I like the list of ideas in ETL401 Module 3 (based on Valenza 2015) for evidence that the library program is of benefit to the school teaching and learning programs and curriculum. However, I am wary of introducing something that is trivial or that will not stand the test of time or that might sit in a filing cabinet – lost and forgotten.

For that reason, I will use the Quality Teaching Framework and the subsequent evaluation sheet (that I modified on GoogleDocs) to evaluate my lessons or units of work professionally, and will also use the (yet to be created) school library website or more private/access restricted photo/video-based programs (where accepted by the school) for evidence of student engagement or achievement such as ClassDojo, Seesaw or ClassCraft. The benefit of these applications is that they are also able to be used by students themselves, with any device (at home or at school).

I’m looking at you, teachers who profess to be techno-phobes! As Coombes’ 2009 work was written 10 years ago, and research within her article is based on the 10 to ‘teen’ age range, most of the students in her focus are now adults and quite possibly, teachers themselves. Those who are from current and previous generations, as educators, need to be aware of our own gaps in information literacy so that we can stop the cycle of poor information seeking skills!

The Blame Game: What I’ve also seen in education, in varying degrees based on context, is a lack of personal and professional reflection. A lack of ‘mindfulness’ and being in the moment. A wish for the utopian environment and an unrealistic desire for perfect students who fit into a mould and live up to unrealistic expectations and students who are compliant rather than collaborative (Goss & Sonnemann 2017).

This results in a filtering down of ‘blame’ for the poor foundational (primarily literacy and numeracy) skills that students have when they arrive into high school. The high school teachers blame the stage 3 teachers. The stage 3 teachers blame the stage 2 teachers. The stage 2 teachers blame the stage 1 teachers. The stage 1 teachers blame the kindergarten/prep teachers. The kindy/prep teachers blame the preschools. (And everybody blames the RFF teachers and the parents and finally, the students themselves).

What I’d like to see is every person involved in education taking a look in the mirror and reflecting daily on their pedagogical practice. What I’d like to see is everyone practising mindfulness–thoughtfully doing what they can with the students and contexts that they have in the moment in time in which they are living, and authentic growth mindset–appreciating that mistakes are part of learning.

References:

Combes, B. (2009). Generation Y: Are they really digital natives or more like digital refugees? Synergy, 7(1), 31-40

Dweck, C. (2016). What having a “growth mindset” actually means. Harvard Business Review, 13, 213-226.

Goss, P. & Sonnemann, J. (2017). Engaging Students – Creating classrooms that improve learning. Retrieved from: https://grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Engaging-students-creating-classrooms-that-improve-learning.pdf

Hattie, J., & Peddie, R. (2003). School reports: “Praising with faint damns.” Journal issue, 3.

RSA Animate – Robinson, K. (2008). Changing educational paradigms. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U#aid=P8wNMEma2ng

Valenza, J. (2015). Evolving with evidence: Leveraging new tools for EBP. Knowledge Quest. 43/3, 36-43

Wien, C. A. (2015). Emergent curriculum in the primary classroom: Interpreting the Reggio Emilia approach in schools. Teachers College Press.

Creating a Collaborative Climate – The Triple C’s

[Reflection of ETL401 & ETL503 (The TL Role in Collaboration)] (*addendum 16 September 2019 for ETL504)

I think I’ve been pretty clear in my stance on the impact of temporary and casual work environments to the collaborative climate. If not, then I suppose I should mention here how much it wears away at collaboration to have individuals fighting for the renewals of their contracts: completely and utterly.

The casualisation of the teaching workforce, particularly in my personal working context, is not something I am able to change as an individual. Helping create a collaborative climate (despite the political climate) however, I can try to change.

Before we jump head first into collaborating with classroom teachers on an inquiry unit of work, let’s take a step back. I mean, yes we want to design and implement inquiry learning and literature programs and we certainly want to help embed digital formats. But we need to confront the elephant in the room in stead of simply shrugging our shoulders and saying ‘some teachers just don’t want to collaborate.’

I would argue that some teachers haven’t had positive collaborative experiences in the past (experiencing – much like a lot of students must experience – forced compliance rather than collaboration) or some teachers expect judgement in disguise rather than collaboration.

We ran into this in a school where we were trying to roll out Quality Teaching Rounds (QTR). We surveyed the staff to identify their concerns and these were the results:

Q. Why do we have to? (Comfort Zones: Not comfortable being watched / observed / critiqued; Doubt ‘teamwork’ capabilities; Criteria for involvement unclear; Feel pressured to do it).

A. (summarised) Be the change you wish to see in the world. Also, the NSW DET require a colleague observe you once a year so it might as well have a clear structure and limits and offer real improvement to your teaching.

Q. What’s the benefit? (Is there follow up; What do ‘we’ get out of it; Evidence of benefits; How does it improve the school; How valuable is it versus mentoring which we do already).

A. (shown QTR training slides proving benefits based on research)

Q. How could we possibly do it? (Logistics / Resources: What types of lessons have to be observed, eg 1:1, whole class, small group; Time off class; Casuals; Time required for prep work outside school hours).

A. (Thankfully, the principal had budgeted for the resources and did not have a set idea of what sort of lessons were required for observation).

The QTR team did our best with the resources and research provided by the QT Framework training to answer these concerns in a specially allocated staff meeting. We then surveyed the staff to determine their level of interest, which was about 70% in favour, and a few other teachers joined the second ‘Quality Teaching Round.’

Furthermore, in this process and in the readings for ETL401 Module 4, it occurred to me that an aspect of (primary) teaching that impacts collaboration is an ingrained and embedded culture of isolation. A teacher, predominantly alone in a room of students (or a Teacher Librarian on their own in the library) cannot effectively collaborate with other teachers as well as someone working in an office filled with cubicles or a group of engineers on a building site.

Another aspect of collaboration are the social norms of either Australian culture, or the culture of a town or city, or the culture of a school context. An immigrant and possible ASD person myself, I struggle with social norms on a daily basis.

I am also struck by the massive gap in the expectations of our TL role as collaborators, where we are expected to just jump in there and collaborate with teaching and learning programs with people who don’t know anything about us and of whom we also know very little…it is a bit ‘chicken before the egg’!

The OECD-UNICEF (2016) Education Working paper’s ‘dimensions of learning’ for organisation transformation touches on this (developing and sharing a student centred vision, having a culture of support for staff learning opportunities, promoting team collaborative professional development and embedding systems that support it, establishing daily expectations or ‘culture’ of inquiry, innovation and exploration–including staff in leadership roles, and learning with and from larger learning systems outside of the school context or direct governing body).

Logistically though, what does this look like? I love the idea of the ATSI community’s ‘yarning circle’. But how do I help create a ‘yarning circle’ or gathering spot where we can get to know each other and our contexts and socialise professionally? How do I help draw people out of their shells and into the safe environment of a collaborative climate?

Creating a Collaborative Climate (The triple C’s):

I can’t do it alone. There are things the executive must do to help improve the collaborative climate and things that they will need from me as well. However, once I’ve developed a rapport with the principal by helping them achieve their ideas, I will liaise with the principal to allow for time and budget amounts to be determined and allocated to enable some or all of the following of MY (8) ideas for creating a collaborative environment each year as follows:

In an allocated staff meeting or staff development day, we sit in a ‘yarning circle’ and discuss ourselves, our school and any concerns openly and freely, using the ideas from this link as a guide: ATSI community’s ‘yarning circle’.
Everyone completes the School Context Survey (draft version also in links on the right side of this blog) either collaboratively or on their own in time provided.
Everyone takes the VIA Character Survey and shares their top 5 / 10 character traits for the year (they can change slightly each year).
Everyone completes the Philosophy of Teaching Survey (draft version in links also on the right side of this blog). My own philosophy of Teaching has been updated for 2019 using the survey questions and can be used as a guide.
A photo of the teacher is either created or supplied with their permission (see #7 below for format ideas) using the Photo Permission Form Template created by the American Library Association (or similar).
The results of the school context, VIA, and philosophy surveys can then be sent electronically to the TL to be added to a electronic photo of the teacher(s) (with their permission), &/or collated and presented on an intranet or school website (which, unfortunately I do not have at present as I am not attached to a particular school).
I even have ideas (I have a marketing background, don’t forget!) on what the end result would look like and have pinned these ideas onto my Teacher Spotlight Pinterest board. (This board could also, theoretically, be made available for all of the school staff to edit).
And finally, (and this is where it gets a bit heavy), introduce Quality Teaching Rounds (in which I am an advocate and trained to deliver) to the school at least once a year if not twice, depending on budget and time allowances.

From here, collaborating on programming and teaching collaborative inquiry units are a walk in the park.

*16 September 2019 ETL504 addendum: See the template link on the left of the blog for initiating a collaborative inquiry unit with a classroom teacher Created by Christy Roe, based on suggestions from Carr, J. (Ed.), (2008) p.13-14; 28; 39; and Bishop, (2011) p.7.

WHEW! Its a big task. I hope I’m up to the challenge!

References:

Bishop, K. (2011). Connecting libraries with classrooms. Retrieved from ProQuest Ebook Central.

Carr, J. (Ed.). (2008). Leadership for excellence: Insights of the national school library media program of the year award winners. Retrieved from iG Library.

OECD-UNICEF. (2016). What makes a school a learning organisation? A guide for policy makers, school leaders and teachers. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/education/school/school-learning-organisation.pdf

Censorship creates hackers, curation creates thinkers?

(Reflection on ETL503 Module 2.6)

When I first started this course, my thoughts on information was that it was important to me that everyone have access to all information (Moody 2005), individual limitations such as disability, geography, financial capability/internet access not-withstanding, (as this is a more complex social justice set of issues). I believed information was not something that any person or corporation should own.

In that sense, I suppose I have the heart of a hacker. Not the sort of hacker who wants to steal a person’s private information in order to rob them, I’m not talking about being a person who commits cyber crime. I am more thinking along the lines of civil liberties and protesting the rise of stringent ‘intellectual property law.’ (Coleman 2012).

Thoughts: in fact, can anyone really own information? … Similarly to the indigenous community beliefs: Does anyone really ‘own’ land: Aren’t people simply custodians of information in varying degrees?

However, as I am studying the Teacher Librarian as information specialist role, I am fine-tuning my beliefs and perceptions. I can now see how curating and resource selection can benefit students (and society) by narrowing down the playing field to a more manageable and relevant space. I am understanding my own motivations better!

Censorship, a historically relevant concept, is motivated by either overt, covert (Moody 2005, pp.145) control, social engineering and seeking proof of weaknesses in information of a whole text – negating any strengths that the information might contain (Ashiem 1953, pp. 63).

Curation (aka resource or information ‘selection’) is motivated by democratically believing in an information seeker’s ability to think, providing others with the freedom to think and read, the freedom to value information within the context in which it was written despite any perceived ‘flaws’ within the minutia of the information (Ashiem 1953, pp. 63, & Lukenbill 2007 pp.28).

When pursuing the path of ‘selection’ of resources or ‘curation’ of resources, TL’s or school resource selectors must then demonstrate ongoing and diligent and consciousness of their (possibly overt or covert) bias and motivations as well as the (possibly overt or covert) bias and motivations of other stakeholders (including ‘community standards’ arguments which seek to take content out of context or limit the range of information available to information seekers, for the purpose of censorship) for selecting or de-selecting resources in order to ensure that they do not cross the line from curation into censorship (Jenkinson 2002 pp. 23, & Moody 2005, pp. 142).

Moreover, rather than be motivated to select or deselect resources based on ‘community standards’, TLs need to focus on providing a range of information and views (Moody 2005, pp. 143) as per Australian ‘industry standards’ such as those provided by ACARA, NESA or AITSL and appropriately curating the library collection to suit the curriculum and the point of need in our individual contexts (Moody 2005, pp. 146, & Lukenbill 2007 pp 26).

Furthermore, if the school library has a formal Collection Development Plan and / or procedure for resource selection/curation/censorship policy section or survey questionnaire for challenges or complaints, then it will offer some protection from external or internal bias and censorship (Jacobson 2016, & ALA 2016).

References

ALA (2016), “Challenge Support” Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/tools/challengesupport

Asheim, L. (1953). Not censorship but selection. Wilson Library Bulletin, 28, 63-67. Retrieved from: http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/censorshipfirstamendmentissues/notcensorship

Coleman, E. G. (2012). Coding freedom: The ethics and aesthetics of hacking. Princeton University Press.

Jacobson, L. (2016). Unnatural selection. School Library Journal, 62(10), 20. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/docview/1825615756?accountid=10344

Jenkinson, D. (2002). Selection and censorship: It’s simple arithmetic. School libraries in Canada, 2(4), 22. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lih&AN=7277053&site=ehost-live

Lukenbill, W.B. (2007). Censorship: What do school library specialists really know? School Library Media Research, 10. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/aasl/sites/ala.org.aasl/files/content/aaslpubsandjournals/slr/vol10/SLMR_Censorship_V10.pdf

Moody, K. (2005) Covert censorship in libraries: a discussion paper, The Australian Library Journal, 54:2, 138-147, DOI: 10.1080/00049670.2005.10721741

Musings of an Apprentice Information Specialist

Following my ‘pass’ on my Discussion Essay (Assessment 2) for Introduction to Teacher Librarianship (ETL401) I had another look through the forum posts for Module 2 from my colleagues this week and I wrote notes of my thoughts as I went along:

INFORMATION: A school context must come to an agreed understanding to a definition of, opinions of, and methods for seeking and absorbing information. Thus, we will have a better understanding of what is an ‘information specialist’ or ‘information literacy’ or ‘information (insert word here)’.

MULTI-LITERACIES: Back in my UWS studies in 2003-2006, we didn’t learn much about how to implement Guided Reading groups using PM Readers (ugh, I despise this method of teaching anyway) but we did a fair amount of study around ‘multi-literacies’ (Lilly & Green 2004 p.99 & 118, Worthington & Carruthers 2003 p.12, Arthur 2001, & Barratt-Pugh & Rohl 2000 p. 198-201).

[Sidebar: In fact, in my NSW Department of Education (DET) job interview in 2006, I was asked how I would implement my English program and when I answered academically, with my knowledge of ‘multi-literacies,’ I failed the interview and was told to do another practicum in a primary school (although that was not officially a requirement of the DET) in order to ‘pass’ my interview and be granted a teacher number. The head of the panel, a high-school principal, was worried that I wouldn’t implement the traditional Australian primary school English content and would create a generation of illiterate students, I suppose. Thankfully, I did as she asked and got the job easily the second time around…interesting how ‘multi-literacies’ has come full circle in the form of ‘information literacy’ as well…but I digress.]

GOING GLOBAL: Information has become more global, as has our society, with the introduction of digital technologies and the ‘world wide web.’ This means that we, as Teachers and Teacher librarians must be more flexible with our students as global citizens, acknowledging and integrating: multiple languages, multiple cultural norms, multiple methods of information seeking, multiple methods of information absorption (aka ‘learning’), multiple learning styles (that change depending on an individual person’s context in any given moment in their lives) and multiple ability levels.

Is information that is globally available, much like the fancy car that a rich family buy their inexperienced teenager, less valued? If it comes too easily will it get taken for granted and generally end in a car crash?

SOCIAL MEDIA: The global network has also seen the creation of ‘social media’ and ‘wiki’ spaces. This impacts on people’s learning because, while social media is an excellent tool for engagement and delivery of information (linked to the research and marketing analytics done by corporations on how to reach target audiences–particularly children as per Veltri, et al 2016), social media is a weak platform in which to apply knowledge to every day reality. It is a sub-reality. A false replication of actual society with real, living and breathing humans and human interactions.

This is evident in any situation where someone makes an educated statement on a social media platform and is then hit with a barrage of abusive comments. People on social media platforms go on to social media platforms in order to be ‘social’–they aren’t there to be educated and aren’t open to absorb information, particularly if they have to work for it or if said information puts them out of their comfort zones and into a learning pit.

NAVEL GAZING: I wonder if the prevalence or demand for self expression on social media has been born from the American talk show and self-help movement? Much like these movements who focus ‘in rather than out,’ (Murray 2015) could social media confuse the lines of what is a therapy tool, versus valuable information or accurately tested and researched knowledge?

ACADEMIC SOCIAL MEDIA: When we blend academia with social media, do we then, in turn, blur lines of authenticity for students? Why are some blogs academic and some mere musings? Is the blurring of academic information being part of the deep web versus readily available on the internet a clever way of engaging students in academia, embracing the method of delivery preferred by 21st century learners?

EASY TO FIND OVERLOAD VS RESTRICTED ACCESS DEEP WEB: Both are problematic. Historically, libraries have suffered the weight of hoarding and politicalisation of information. Encyclopaedia Britannica have a great topic page on their website (El-Abbadi 2019) about the Library of Alexandria which details how the Royal library and its ‘daughter’ library the Serapeum were destroyed by fire and war.

Great swaths of information have been destroyed in the past, and in today’s global information network, we are drowning in misinformation, irrelevant information, and less connection to information.

We are slightly more organised on the deep web, which is less susceptible to misinformation, but more likely to segregate and discriminate against users, particularly to society’s lower classes.

THE TL ROLE: In order to be valued as TL who are information specialists, we are the navigators and we need tools like telescopes, compasses and maps to help the ship navigate the ‘infosphere’ (Floridi 2007). We must safely navigate towards islands of internet information and cruise ships of social media. We must safely navigate below the water, helping the ship find and understand the underwater volcanoes and creatures of information.

TL’s need to:

remember how to use digital technologies
but to still keep in mind that using social media for work purposes is like working while on holiday, particularly for some teachers and teacher librarians who are suffering from stress or burnout, or who are trying to stabilise their work/life balance and
we must strive to enable students to go through the stages of the Learning Cycle,
use evidence-based practice,
be aware of theories and pedagogies that we have been using as teachers, such as Multiple Intelligences and/or the Berry Street Educational Model (BSEM) for trauma informed practice or Quality Teaching Rounds, and
work collaboratively with all stakeholders, much like the crew of a submarine!

This is a drawing by my son Toby Roe that illustrates how we view the TL role in the current ‘information society’ or ‘infosphere’ (Image use with permission from the artist)

Teacher Librarians need to be the navigators of the (school) submarine. The principal and executives are the captain and first mates. The teachers are the crew and the kids, the families are the passengers. The submarine needs everyone to work together in order to be able to navigate the information sea above the water, including the political breezes and cultural water currents, the social media cruise ships and the various modes of information islands. It also needs to be able to safely navigate below the sea in the deep web with all of the volcanic deep web databases, applications and sea creatures that lurk about in the darkness.

References:

Arthur, L. Young children as critical consumers. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy. Oct 2001. v24. i3. p.182(14).

Barratt-Pugh, C. & Rohl, M. (2000). Literacy learning in the early years. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.

El-Abbadi, M. (2019). Encyclopaedia Brittanica. Retrieved from www.brittanica.com/topic/library-of-alexandria

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

Lilly, E. & Green, C. (2004). Linking Home and School Literacies. Developing partnerships with families through children’s literature. NJ: Pealson.

Murray, D. C. (2015) Notes to self: the visual culture of selfies in the age of social media. Consumption Markets & Culture, 18:6, 490-516, DOI: 10.1080/10253866.2015.1052967

Worthington, M. & Carruthers, E. (2003). Children’s Mathematics: Making Marks, Making Meaning. London: Paul Chapman Publishing.

Veltri, G. & Lupiáñez-Villanueva, F. & Gaskell, G. & Theben, A. & Folkvord, F. & Bonatti, L. & Bogliacino, F. & Fernández, L. & Codagnone, C. (2016). (Radboud University) Study on the impact of marketing through social media, online games and mobile applications on children’s behaviour. Published by Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2576.7280.

What is my why?

I’ve always been someone who has to know. My mother used to mock me by saying ‘the nose knows’, implying that I was nosey and in everyone’s business. She wasn’t half wrong. I do love to know what is going on. I want to ‘know.’

Perhaps this is some part of being on the autism spectrum (both my kids are and through them I can see how I may be too), I was very introverted and observant as a child, sucking my thumb until age 11 (possibly to self sooth and to hide and not have to talk if I didn’t want to). I studied people and the world and did my best to learn all the rules so that I could stick to them.

I masked myself. I did what I thought my father or teachers wanted. I studied psychology. I never felt like I fit. Moving to Australia to marry my husband was the best thing I’ve ever done in my life. Here I fit better. With him I fit.

I tried several jobs and was successful at them. While studying to become a psychologist and working in retail, I heard: ‘You’re a natural salesperson. Could you train others?’ While working in a call centre but aiming to work in marketing, I heard: ‘You’re great on the phone, can we use your voice on the company auto answering service?.’ While working my way up in the marketing department, I heard: ‘You’re so organised, you should be an executive secretary.’ When I set up in a new school as a teacher, having taught for 6 or so years, I heard: ‘You have an eye for design in your classroom, you should be an interior designer.’

I can’t be cross at these comments. It must have been subconsciously evident that these jobs were not my why…although that last one still rankles…(I don’t want to be an effing interior designer, I’m a teacher and a damn good one thanks!) Obviously that school was not the right fit.

It is hard for me to find myself. It is hard for me to identify my why. But over all of these years I have been getting closer and closer to it.

I can measure my level of ‘finding my why’ success by my joy and sense of accomplishment inside myself. I can measure this also by how challenging I find it…truth be told, I am a good salesperson, I can (with practice) have a nice voice, I am very organised and I appreciate that spaces ‘speak.’ I am good at things but that doesn’t mean they are my ‘why’ or that they are the right fit.

I am all of these things and more: an artist, a mother, a wife, a sister, a daughter, a niece, an aunt, a gardener, a cousin, a friend, a beagle carer, a laugher, a reader, a writer, a learner and, possibly most of all, a teacher.

A lot of things are my ‘why,’ depending on who I’m with and the situation. But what stands true and challenges me–let’s not forget that being in our comfort zones is not being true to our ‘why– and what gives me the greatest sense of accomplishment is enabling the accomplishments of others. (AKA: teaching).

Teaching is my why.

Teaching is my why I didn’t quit when I had two children with additional needs. Teaching is my why I didn’t quit when I was told I didn’t have a contract two years in a row. Teaching is my why I am no longer working in sales, or marketing or at schools where I’m not valued.

I just have to change how my teaching job looks for me in this current climate of data collection and standardised testing…in this climate of casualisation and over abundance of principal power…in this climate of funding cuts and library closures.

I might not get a job as a teacher librarian. But I’ll be damned if anyone will stop me from becoming trained to be one. I love to know. I have to know what’s going on. I want to be a teacher librarian.

Trust me on this, the nose knows.

Are School Librarians an Endangered Species?

(Reflection of ETL401 Module 3.1-3.2)

100 words (actually, I’ve highlighted 65) that summarise the amazing and encouraging ‘Profession at the tipping point (2015) and the keynote speech from the ASLA 2011 Conference, by Karen Bonanno Keynote Speaker ‘A Profession at the Tipping point: Time to Change the Game Plan’:

Due to a Federated Educational Structure, new push for ICT qualifications and other ‘tipping points‘, we are fighting for our jobs and have to prove why we are relevant. (Otherwise we run the risk of becoming endangered).

To do so we must:

Look at our situations as ‘glass half full’.

‘Let our rhetoric resonate with our audience.’

‘Begin with the end in mind’

Use the ‘5 Finger Plan to Success (Pre-imminence, Focus, Brand, Circle of influence; and surmise the little things we do that count)

We need to use slow seduction rather than expect a seismic shift, aiming for 1% improvement over time, building relationships as we go along every day in our schools, communities and professional networks. And we should be striving for the AITSL Highly Accomplished or Lead Teacher Qualifications.

References:

Bonanno , K. (2015). A profession at the tipping point (revisited). Access, March, 14-21

Beautiful Doesn’t Mean New

Beautiful doesn’t always mean new. (Photo by Christy Roe)

(Reflection on ETL503 Resourcing the Curriculum Module 2)

When ‘resourcing the curriculum,’ as a teacher librarian I will need to remember lots of information as mentioned in the module. I will also need to remember two things:

Beautiful doesn’t always mean new, (see image) and
Sometimes patron/student needs outweigh their wants. (*See below)

1. New things aren’t always the best things. My grandmother’s recipe for chicken and dumplings far outweighs any new dishes that my mother or my aunts dreamt up for our yearly Thanksgiving or Christmas feasts. Old buildings using engineers, fine brickwork, stone masonry or intricate carpentry far outweigh cardboard or plastic construction-particularly in times of natural disasters like earthquakes.

Should digital resources replace physical resources? If new is perceived as better, then will Artificial Intelligence replace teachers? Guilherme (2019) goes into this with a powerful depth. We are facilitators, but we are also teachers. We are providers of information but we also teach the skills to interpret the information and utilise it in life.

2. A key factor in ‘resourcing the curriculum’ is that it reinforces the concept of ‘information as a commodity.’ As much as we’d like libraries and information to be free, the fact is that neither are without cost. (Whether that cost is paid by taxes or individuals is a political debate for another day.)

In terms of ‘information as a commodity,’ this has some powerful landmines. The idea that information can have ownership has led to a strong community of hackers whose primary function is to provide information that someone or a corporation has deemed ‘a commodity’ and opportunity for profit.

For librarians, ‘information as a commodity’ is also full of landmines. We are adults, we are educated, we have a job to facilitate the education of students. We are also, gendered, cultural, geographical, and loaded with our own personal string of internal bias.

*Does the student voice of their needs or wants, outweigh what society (and the teacher librarian) view as student needs or wants or vice versa?

I would like to review my personal bias and society’s bias towards the voices and contexts of students as discussed in Shirley Steinberg’s most recently edited book: Kinderculture (2018)

I am having a lot of colliding thoughts about ‘engaging learners’ and fulfilling ‘needs’ of the learners &/or the school community and ‘who has the final say’ in resourcing the curriculum.

I say colliding because I have taught at so many different schools (South West Sydney, Far West, casually and through temporary engagement, RFF, classroom teaching, job share, etc) and can see a common lack of consideration for sociocultural context of students for programming and planning. If programming and planning were a building, the foundation is the sociocultural context. Without a sound knowledge of the school’s foundation, the building / educational program will crumble and resourcing the curriculum becomes moot. The library starts to fail or becomes irrelevant. The funding decreases. The principal sees no point in allocating a qualified TL. People start throwing around the idea of getting rid of a library altogether. In the distance: sirens.

Yesterday I worked at a geographically isolated and drought affected primary school with a large number of students from very low SES, high evidence of trauma (large ATSI population, witnesses of or suffers of domestic violence, neglect, alcohol / drug / physical / mental / emotional abuse / deaths in the family), higher than state average numbers of students with diagnosed and undiagnosed disabilities (including lead affected disabilities due to historical mining practises) and the students in this area are, overall, not meeting state expectations based on NAPLAN results. In my area, there are a statistically higher numbers of these things in all of the schools but in this particular school, the statistics are more visible.

As a result, most of the students are coming to school to feel or express love. (See Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs as explained by McCloud, 2018 in the reference list below). They have some basic human needs that are not being met at home and they come to school to have these needs met.

However, the main push from the teacher of the class I was on yesterday, was to teach content that was not adjusted to meet the needs of the students as individuals. It was straight from the stage based syllabus and so difficult that the students were not just disengaged but were actively protesting and having meltdowns before my eyes. When I suggested deviating from the plan, everyone agreed and calm was restored.

Too often in today’s educational realm, the needs of students are filled with a top-down mentality. Schools start at what the administration identify as a need-based on Australian or state benchmarks and societal goals (eg. NAPLAN, national curriculum or state syllabus documents). They then look to the local administrators to identify needs, such as recent literacy or numeracy training or strategies (eg. L3 or TEN). Then the teachers weigh in (eg. Sport or Creative art or Social-Emotional-Learning – which may or may not be sourced from evidence based practises). Parents and families sometimes get to have a say – and it is interesting to note the capability of the families to engage with the form of communication method chosen by the school as often low SES families cannot get to meetings and cannot access digital forms of communication or are too illiterate themselves to fill in a form – (eg. ‘I want my child to learn how to do public speaking so they can become a prefect or school captain’). Then, almost as an addendum, a little box is put out in the library to gather the student’s identified needs or wants (a system designed to preference students with high enough literacy skills and levels of engagement already to participate).

I prefer to value the student’s needs first – identified by them, identified through a authentic TL relationship with the students, and identified by a thorough a collaborative study of the socio-cultural context (Farmer, et al 2018) of the school. The library and classrooms in the example of the school where I worked yesterday, need to focus on being places for students to have voice and to feel loved and express love. The school needs to be a safe shelter and offer warmth and basic physical comfort. It needs to have a teacher librarian who is acutely aware of the ‘kinder culture’ (Steinberg, 2018) of students in the school and resources the library to embrace the ‘kinder culture’-which is the main key to engagement, particularly with students from low SES, high disability or who’ve been traumatised.

Once these areas have become the main priority for resourcing the curriculum and are working well, and the students are engaged, then the questions can be asked of parents and carers and the community of what they identify as ‘needs.’ Teachers can also weigh in, followed by the local teaching community and administrations. Finally, a little box can be put out for the state and federal needs so that they can have their say.

References:

Farmer, S., Dockett, S., & Arthur, L. (2014). Programming and planning in early childhood settings. Chapter 6. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com

Guilherme, A. AI and education: the importance of teacher and student relations. AI & Soc. (2019) 34: 47. Retrieved from: https://doi-org.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/10.1007/s00146-017-0693-8

McCloud, S. (2018). Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. Retrieved from: https://www.simplypsychology.org/maslow.html

Steinberg, R.S. (2018). Kinderculture : The corporate construction of childhood. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com

Being Part of an Information Society

(Reflections of Introduction to Teacher Librarianship Module 2.3)

Knowledge is power. While I most definitely believe that I will become a librarian at some point I will always be a teacher and this amalgamation of ‘teacher librarian’ means that I am a facilitator of education. This is a key component of my teaching philosophy.

I am most disturbed by the concept of inequality and injustice and as such, I am uncomfortable with the idea that information is, as discussed by WebFinance, 2016, in Module 2.3:

“the (1) pervasive influence of IT on home, work, and recreational aspects of the individuals daily routine, (2) stratification into new classes those who are information-rich and those who are information-poor, (3) loosening of the nation state’s hold on the lives of individuals and the rise of highly sophisticated criminals who can steal identities and vast sums of money through information related (cyber) crime (WebFinance, 2016).”

The growth of technology in our lives has created, in some ways, more questions than answers:

Why is technology so pervasive? (How do I get my husband to put the phone down and look at me when I am speaking to him???)
What can we do to stop it from creating a new class system or intensifying the status quo? (Particularly given the first question which makes me want to go live in the Amazon and leave technology behind. And if I didn’t have technology who is to say that I would be disadvantaged? Would my life have greater quality rather than quantity?)
Does it really ‘loosen the nation’s hold’ on our lives? (Is it a bad thing that ‘the nation’ hasn’t got a ‘hold’ on ‘us?’ Who is it exactly that has a hold on ‘us’? Governments? Special Interest Groups? Corporations? Computers?)
Why does it increase the occurrence of identity and other theft? (Why are people so horrible to each other on the digital sphere?)

Proposed questions (and my answers) from Module 2.3:

“Who or what is driving technological change–Is it the inhabitants of the landscape or the technology?”

I believe the drive for change and continued growth of technological advances has to do with the people and the pursuit of democracy (Coccia 2010) as well as the economy (mainly capitalism as noted by Schiller in Webster 2014, p. 149) and competition between countries-most notably in the ‘space race’ and the Cold War (Godwin, 2006).

I also think the need of all humans is to improve the world in which we live, even if it is a small way, is an important factor towards careers that drive change, be they careers that drive technological change or societal injustice change or both.

This need to be of value to the world is a key factor of a Japanese concept called Ikigai (Garcia & Miralles, 2017) which is a principle of life that can exist without being consciously aware that it exists.

Does technology itself drives the agenda (and rate of change) or is society in control?

I hope we are still in control but I honestly could not say for certain and perhaps that, in itself, should be cause for alarm.

Should teacher librarians be considered part of the ‘Information Society’?

As I said at the start of this post, I am (or will be soon) a teacher librarian. My skills as a teacher–as a Quality Teaching Framework trained, NESA Proficient (and maintained) Teacher is not negated by the need to ensure that information is made available to the students and school in which I teach.

My teaching philosophy may grow and change and I may be part of an information society–but one thing will always remain: Teachers are facilitators of education (more than an transmitters) of information.

References:

Coccia, Mario. (2010). Democratization is the driving force for technological and economic change. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/248497849_Democratization_is_the_driving_force_for_technological_and_economic_change

Garcia, H. & Miralles, F. (2017) Ikigai: The Japanese Secret to a Long and Happy Life. London: UK. Hutchinson.

Godwin, M. (2006) The Cold War and the Early Space Race. Retrieved from: https://www.history.ac.uk/ihr/Focus/cold/articles/godwin.html

Web Finance Inc. (2016). Information Society. Retrieved from Introduction to Teacher Librarianship Module 2.3: https://interact2.csu.edu.au/webapps/blackboard/content/listContent.jsp?course_id=_42380_1&content_id=_2633951_1&mode=view

Information and the digital age – Positives and Negatives

(Reflection of Module 2.2 Introduction to Teacher Librarianship)

Western society has easy access to information. It might not always be up to date or relevant to our individual contexts but it is available.

5 positives of the digital age:

It is faster than doing research using a library or non-fiction text that has been purchased.
Levels the playing field to some degree for economically disadvantaged communities.
Levels the playing field to some degree for geographically disadvantaged communities.
More people have a venue for having a ‘voice.’
Creates an avenue for collaboration that was not there previously.

4 negatives of the digital age:

Relies on the assumption that the entire world are having equal input when that is not true.
Opens the gate to misinformation (eg. propaganda) to reach a larger audience for the sake of another’s personal gain.
It takes a lot of time to weed out the stuff we don’t want or need to see (this having previously been done by editors and publishers or researchers in their fields). [Search engines try to help with this by programs where ‘the tool directs the user’. These algorithms try to guess what you-the user-want to see. However, this places inhuman limitations on the information that we seek and can often miss the mark. The intelligence is artificial and cannot offer clarification the way that a human can].
People (eg. teachers) will most often see only the good things that others (in their profession) put on the internet and not the reality.

References:

Case, D. (2006). The concept of information. In Looking for information: A survey of research on information seeking, needs and behaviour, pp. 40-65 (Chapter 3). 2nd ed. Burlingham: Emerald Group Publishing Ltd. ebook, CSU Library.

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

What is Information?

Following the readings for Introduction to Teacher Librarianship Module 2.1 (2019) regarding the ‘Information hierarchy’ it occurs to me that the information sequence suggested could be described or represented as a 2D spiral as occurs in mathematics and a 3D helix, as occurs naturally in nature.

[Sidebar: For more information on the Fibonacci Sequence, and how to teach the idea to students here: https://www.mathsisfun.com/numbers/fibonacci-sequence.html]

When discussing powerful words such as, ‘data, knowledge, wisdom, intelligence, instructions, and messages’, I agree with Module 2.1, that information is a complex idea that is often subjective and correlational.

I think of information in ‘classical’ terms, and related to physical entities such as energy and matter, and agree with the idea that there is a ‘data-information-knowledge-wisdom continuum’ (AEW, 2008). While we live in modern times, there is still value in ‘classical’ information, knowledge and wisdom.

My idea of an information ‘continuum’ is that, instead of a linear model, if you picture the shell image above as a person’s mind, each line represents a continuing time sequence of learning: data (D), information (I), knowledge (K) and wisdom (W) regarding a topic or train of thought. Some lines (building, much like DNA in their repeating DIKW sequence) are weak and so light (‘misinformation’) that they cannot replicate the sequence and fade away. Every shell is unique, although there are commonalities, as is found in humans.

[Sidebar: The four inherent junctions or properties of DNA can be further researched here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4537162/]

I like the idea from Module 2.1 that states: “information creates more information” as this supports my helix view of information.

However I believe that the “self-multiplication” of information as mentioned in Module 2.1 generally only causes an overload when one cannot release an old idea or old information in favour of the new or when a person’s capability to research information highways is limited.

Further thoughts about information:

Can the DIKW sequence be varied in itself, just as DNA is varied, eg, WDKI?
Is the Information hierarchy or continuum more of a triple helix representing the individual, group and societal knowledge, rather than a helix as represented in the shell image above?

References:

AEW. (2008). Community of practice: Part B. The Information Hierarchy.[slideshare] Retrieved from: Introduction to Teacher Librarianship Module 2.1 (2019) https://interact2.csu.edu.au/webapps/blackboard/content/listContent.jsp?course_id=_42380_1&content_id=_2633951_1&mode=view

Introduction to Teacher Librarianship Module 2.1 (2019) https://interact2.csu.edu.au/webapps/blackboard/content/listContent.jsp?course_id=_42380_1&content_id=_2633951_1&mode=view

Math is Fun (2016). Fibonacci Sequence. Retrieved from: https://www.mathsisfun.com/numbers/fibonacci-sequence.html

National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine (2015). The Inherent Properties of DNA Four-way Junctions. Retrieved from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4537162/

My 2019 Understanding of the Role of the Teacher Librarian in Schools

When I reflect back to when I was a child, the local library was a place of peace and organisation, a place of welcoming and quiet during what was a lonely and poverty-stricken time in my life.
When I was a young adult the local library was a place that I went to be free of expectations and demands and could read and research relevant and up to date young adult novels and magazines to learn more about how to exist in the world.
When I grew to be an adult, the high school and college librarians were the most efficient and helpful people that I knew, and I trusted them to have the most quality and noteworthy resources to support my education.

Perhaps, for some people the Internet offers peace, organisation, welcome, quiet, freedom, research, trust, direction, and quality resources, so long as they have the Internet skills to find what they need (USC Marshall, 2019).

It does not, however, always offer these things for the majority of students with any consistency and requires a human to help them navigate.

Does the world still need school libraries or libraries in general?

I myself have worked at a school that debated this issue and very nearly voted in favour of changing the library to a book-less computer lab. There have also been articles regarding the topic, such as (Preiss, 2014; The Conversation, 2015 and Dring, 2014).

After experiences that I’ve had, and following articles such as those listed above, the lack of support for the library possibly stems from some systematic employment decisions, which have resulted in the library becoming out of date with modern times.

Let’s create a hypothetical 2019 NSW Primary school library:

What had previously been a full time position may have been dropped to part time because of a decrease in student enrolments, funding cuts or the needs of the librarian. The previous librarian, who had possibly been at the school for many years and who possibly had specific Librarian qualifications, may have moved on or retired. A teacher who wanted to work part time because of health or family reasons perhaps then filled the role. Thus, that teacher my have then remained as the librarian for the next few years, unaware and under-skilled—changing very little, despite the world changing all around them.

It is understandable then that the hypothetical library would be seen as out-dated and irrelevant: it had failed to change with the times.

What is the role of a 2019 Teacher Librarian in reality?

According to the NSW Department of Education (2018), the school library is central to teaching and learning and the role includes: “Collaborative teaching support, Information services, Personnel and Materials and equipment systems.”

Food for thought: Conspicuously missing from the NSW DET Role information is the requirement for Teacher Librarians to have or be attempting their Masters of Education degrees. (Pop over to the forum topic in Interact2 and lets discuss it!)

What about the 2019 digital environment in which we all live?

Teacher Librarians have a workplace that is within a changing information and digital landscape and must therefore be flexible to change. Just as classroom teachers have had numerous changes and growth, so should teacher librarians.

This means that librarians need to actively manage the collection resources including and beyond paper texts and pro-actively research and implement online resources across schools to support teachers and engage students.

This need for a 21st century approach is supported by research from Softlink (2017), which concludes:

“Continued investment in school libraries is vital for the development of literacy and improved educational outcomes. Librarians and library staff play an important role in student academic development. It is clear there is a growing requirement for digital and online resources and that school-wide access and integration is important for engaging students in learning.”

References:

NSW Department of Education. (2018). Your Library. Retrieved from https://education.nsw.gov.au/teaching-and-learning/curriculum/learning-across-the-curriculum/school-libraries/your-library#Schools0

Preiss, B. (2014). Teacher Librarians On Borrowed Time As Pages Turn On Reading Sources. Retrieved from https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/teacher-librarians-on-borrowed-time-as-pages-turn-on-reading-sources-20140919-10j3ly.html

The Conversation. (2019). The Calamity of the Disappearing School Libraries. Retrieved from The Conversation, 2015 http://theconversation.com/the-calamity-of-the-disappearing-school-libraries-44498

Dring, S. (2014). Don’t Overlook Your School Librarian They’re the Unsung Heroes of Literacy. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/teacher-network/teacher-blog/2014/sep/18/school-librarian-literacy-support-teacher-students?fbclid=IwAR3J0c-NzDLhxVY47ecmxYmfS1fb7rEgYd4NnRxMRjgDM_VMcdK0N_QI8yU

Softlink. (2017). The 2017 Softlink Australian and New Zealand School Library Survey Report. Retrieved from https://www.softlinkint.com/downloads/2017_Softlink_Australian_and_New_Zealand_School_Library_Survey_Report.pdf

Welcome to the Teachers Who Know Me Blog

Hi, I’m Christy Roe and this is my first blog post. I chose this name for the blog because I’ve operated a closed Facebook Group with the same name since 2013 for teachers or lecturers who’ve worked with me all the way back to when I started Primary teaching in 2007.

The Teacher’s Who Know Me blog is a reflective device for my thoughts and learning relating to education. It was created as part of my Masters of Education in Teacher Librarianship to keep track of the things I learn, reflect on them and to share them with teachers or lecturers who know me or who have worked with me over the years.

All images and opinions are my own or used with permission, and will be referenced and supported by research or evidence wherever possible.

Thank you for interacting with me, now and into the future,

Christy