Are you literate?

The topic of this week's readings was information literacy, but unlike previous readings, the articles were self-assigned. I actually ended up reading quite a few, all of which had some useful insights, and here is a list for your reference:

• Hignite, Michael, Ph.D. et al. "Information Literacy Assessment: Moving Beyond Computer Literacy". College Student Journal Vol. 43, Issue 3. Date: 09/01/2009 Start Page: 81
• Shenton, Andrew K. and Megan Fitzgibbons. "Making information literacy relevant". Library Review Vol. 59, Issue 3. Date: 03/01/2010 Start Page: 165. 
• Lloyd, Annemaree. "Information Literacy : The Meta-Competency of the Knowledge Economy? An Exploratory Paper". Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 2003 35: 87, http://lis.sagepub.com 
• Lloyd, Annemaree. "Information literacy : Different contexts, different concepts, different truths?"Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 2005 37: 82
• Anderson, Byron(2008) 'Information “Literacies”', Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian, 26: 2, 63 — 65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J103v26n02_05

My first question, before even reading anything, was, "What on earth is information literacy?" I mean, the real official description. I could definitely have fumbled together a definition. I don't know about you, lovely readers, but this is a new term in my repertoire. Well, I worked a bit of google magic and hit upon this website: http://www.webs.uidaho.edu/info_literacy/   I only read the first page, but it was very useful to establish a starting point.Basically, information literacy is the skills and abilities to access, analyze, evaluate, and use information.

With that question out of the way, I proceeded on to my research (long live online magazine articles at the U of M library), and found some very interesting ideas.

First, there was a common theme in multiple articles about the definition of information literacy. In Anderson's article, he refers to "literacies" and argues that there are other literacies, such as visual literacy and media literacy. This raises an interesting question. Are these part of information literacy, are they separate types of literacy, or are they synonyms for information literacy? At present, my verdict is that they are subcategories of information literacy, but I'm open to discussion. At any rate, it does give one pause to consider the full scope of information literacy. Hignite's article, which delves into the result of an information literacy assessment (and has some really intriguing statistics, it was a great read), concludes that information literacy has to go beyond mere software/hardware manipulation, which provides another thing to take into account when teaching. Another dimension to information literacy is discussed in by Lloyd. In her article "Information Literacy: Different contexts, different concepts, different truths?" she introduces the idea of information literacy in the workplace, vs. information literacy in education, and points out that in the workplace, information is based on social relationships  and experience, sources of information not accumulated into the the standard definition of information literacy, but I think Lloyd has a valid point. There are more sources of information than just books and computers.

The meta-competency article by Lloyd then questions whether the information literacy learned in the academic realm is transferable to other arenas. For example, if I can write a research report for a class, does that also mean I can solve a technical problem in my employment? I like to think I am informational literate--this is an unverified claim, I've never taken a test or anything, and I do have moments when I wonder about my informational skills. But, I think overall, I am information literate. And I think that there are foundational skills that do transfer from field to field. Sure, there are others that don't carry over, but I think that they probably build on some of these foundational skills, which makes it possible to acquire new skills. I can't prove it, but it's as good a theory as any.

The Shenton and Fitzgibbon article is good food for thought, particularly for school librarians. I quite enjoyed the opening section: how do you convince kids that information literacy has value beyond school assignments? It seems like the eternal question of education, how on earth do we convince these kids that this matters. Good luck to all of you seeking an answer. Let me know if you find it. I won't give you a spoiler, but they do have some good suggestions to help.

They article also raise another interesting point. Can information literacy be taught independent of other subjects? That is to say, can we just go in and teach Information Literacy 101? Or does it have to be in the context of other subjects? I'm interested in opinions and thoughts. I think some skills could be taught or enhanced independently. But some things you learn best by doing, and may be taught best in conjunction with other subjects. I really don't know. Anyone else have any thoughts?

As you can see, there is a lot to explore in information literacy. I figured I would check out a few articles and pick the three that were most interesting--clearly that didn't work. I do hope that there has been something interesting for you to consider in my lengthy recap, and feel free to contribute your insights as well!

My first, but not last, attempt at screencasting

So, here is a link to my first ever (and hopefully worst!) screencast:
643 Screencast


I must say, I will probably never have a career as a narrator. And probably not as a director-maybe assistant director, or maybe I just need to direct someone other than myself. I will say, I have gained a new empathy for all the really lousy YouTube videos we watched in class. This is not to say I didn't like the assignment. I did, and I think it is a terrific assignment. It was just kind of stressful for me. Why, you ask? (Or maybe you don't ask, and are hoping not to find out. Sorry) Well, for just a few reasons.

For example, topic selection. This probably should have been very easy, but everything I thought of seemed so redundant or self-explanatory. I didn't actually look, but I imagine there are about a thousand tutorials on photo editing, or blogging, or wiki-ing (I know, not a word). I really wanted to do something that wasn't adding to the already abundant collection. And then, everything I thought of seemed so obvious, including the topic I finally chose, which was checking out audio and digital books online. Who is actually going to be doing that? Most likely people who already know how to navigate a computer. I ended up banking on the fact that somewhere out there is someone whose children bought them a kindle or mp3 player for their birthday and they have no idea what to do with it. I also convinced myself not to worry about what tutorials already existed. I did discover that there are a lot of cool tools out there though (including one called crocodoc, which has been a lifesaver this weekend! Yay for unforeseen perks of homework).

I also discovered some screencasting problems that we didn't mention in class. For example, I found I have a tendency to play around with the mouse, which doesn't go over well in a screencast. And I had to remind myself to balance professional and natural, and to hit my key points (it's hard to read a script when you have to watch a screen, after all). I also realized that not all topics lend themselves to all teaching strategies - for example, it was hard to draw connections and demonstrate transferability with my topic, and the limited timing didn't help. The big lesson here was that a five-minute screencast takes much longer than 5 minutes to prepare. (Although you may not believe it from watching my screencast...but I really did spend more than 5 minutes on it).

But, on the bright side, we learn from mistakes as much as we do from success, and I definitely learned a lot. I have a great new tool at my disposal, and a nice long list of what-not-to-do's. As far as learning and getting experience goes, this is a definite winner.

One Shot, IDS, and Online Tutorials

Not the most creative of titles, but an accurate account of this week's material. I have been thinking a lot about the online tutorials and my own experience. Some of the points of Johnston's work have stuck with me, most notably the pros and cons of online tutorials. It's great to be able to cover material at your own pace and your own convenience, but there is that drawback of not having a live resource to explain and clarify what you aren't sure on. It made me think of my experiences learning Excel. The first time I set out to learn Excel (more than the very basic stuff), I took a course at the public library. This course was pretty basic, and we didn't have much of an opportunity to do anything hands on, there was no application element. The second time, I actually did Microsoft's online training. This was much more beneficial and I actually learned quite a bit. It also included practice exercises, and had printable reference sheets that made it easy to compile a reference manual of sorts. In that scenario, I definitely liked the online training, but there are many things I would prefer in class instruction. My courses here at the University, for example. There is so much I would miss out on if all I did was download a copy of the PowerPoint slides and give myself the lecture! I definitely agree  that online tutorials can be valuable tools for learning, though.

I have also been thinking about ADDIE, that good old instructional design process. The book was specifically referring to live teaching, but I think the same process would be invaluable in designing an online tutorial. Many of the benefits of using the instructional design process would be particularly beneficial for an online tutorial. For example, being able to design a course that could be used over and over for years is a desirable quality in online tutorials. Getting consistent results is also critical. And the idea of having one shot applies as well. So, even though the case study and examples from Veldof's book are classroom experiences, the same ideas are applicable in other areas, as well.

I am pretty excited about the screencasting tools--I love free programs, especially when I actually learn how to use them! More on that in the future, I imagine.

I know this barely touches the surface of the material for this week, but I just wanted to share my thoughts. Till next time.

Expert Learners, Competencies, and other thoughts

I confess, I find expertise alluring. At least, I do after reading chapter 2. Being an expert in something really gives you a powerful set of tools to use, not just in your field, but in acquiring new knowledge, and in all aspects of life. Maybe that is why education has traditionally been so valued and why it opens doors--it's not so much about the facts you learn, but about becoming someone who can think a certain way about one thing and then apply that to other areas. When I think about my own education--both in a formal setting, and in less formal settings, such as in my home for example--I feel like the most valuable thing I took from my years of study is my ability to think about things the way I do. The ability to learn and think is empowering.

But what does this have to do with libraries, competencies, an MSI? Well, the most obvious answer is that the goal of a master's degree is to become an expert, or at least more of an expert, in an area. And in looking at the competencies, one of the words that comes up a lot is understanding. A competent library science professional has to understand and have a way of thinking about information to be successful.

Now, ideally, we graduate as experts, but in case you didn't notice, those competencies are pretty detailed. I don't think there is any way to become an expert in all aspects of librarianship--how on earth would one learn everything about legal, administrative, outreach, collecting, etc.? There's just too much. So how do we become expert without being expert? How do we learn everything we need to know? It's kind of overwhelming. Fortunately, an expert learner knows what they don't know.Thank goodness for metacognition!

Learning: From Speculation to Science

So far, I have only read chapter one. There are some very interesting ideas, though, that ring true to me, at least. First is the idea that what we consider knowing has changed. I remember when I was in high school (waaaaay back when), everyone thought I was super smart because I could memorize well, but I never felt that my memory indicated my intellect. What is the use of being able to spew forth trivial information? The value of knowledge comes in being able to connect, to apply what you know to a given situation or idea. I think that is where the understanding comes in. And, as the text indicated, being able to take what you know, and bring that into play with what you are being taught really enhances the learning process.

Back to the idea of "what is knowing." The text also mentioned that knowing has shifted to being able to find and use knowledge. Reflecting on the leadership experiences I have had, that is really a crucial element. I was a leader not because I knew the answers, but because I knew how to find them, and took the initiative to find them. People turned to me because they knew that I would find an answer. I have always considered the ability to learn one of my greatest strengths, and I think we assume that it's one of those inalienable qualities we all have--we are people, therefore we can all learn. That is true, but as the reading points out, some of us are better at it than others, and there are ways to become better learners.

So, those are just a few things I've been thinking about as I read, but I'm sure there is more to come with Chapter 2: How Experts Differ from Novices