Class Reflection 02/21/2011 - Facilitating Book Clubs and Seminars...

 ... a.k.a. "The week I am completely out-of-sync with my classmates."

First, I'd like to say it was really wonderful to have Ms. Browne from the AADL speak to us on the various ins-and-outs of book clubs.  I always appreciate hearing from experienced professionals and I gained some valuable insight into what a book club is beyond my preconceived notions.

Now where the fun begins.  I was completely caught off guard by the extremely negative reaction most of my fellow classmates had to the Metzger article.  I'm honestly a little surprised no one called me out on my previous blog post in which I rave about how great I thought it was and how I thought we needed more teachers like Metzger.

My feeling is these different reactions happened for main two reasons:

First - I was subconsciously reading the article from the perspective of myself as a student, not from the perspective of an educator (and certainly not from the perspective of a K-12 educator).  I'm still making the switch from student to instructor, so this is not that surprising to me.  I also think it is a good example of prior knowledge and experience influencing my interpretation.  My favorite high school English class was, in part, very much about students discussing a text without extensive input from the instructor.  We did not do this every class period and we did have to work up to it throughout the beginning of the school year.  But at some point we began having really interesting discussions on our own, and the teacher would step only as an equal participant or when we were struggling and needed help.  It was not a formal "Socratic seminar," nor did we have inner and outer circles, but the end goal was still the same - students critically assessing a selected reading and constructing meaning together.  I guess I got wrapped up in my own personal experience and did not fully step away to assess the larger situation.  It will take some more time to fully pull out of "student-mode" and get into "instructor-mode." 

Second - I think I was focusing more on the concepts in the article than I was the author's tone or bias.  However, during discussion I could easily see the issues many of my classmates mentioned.  I do remember being a bit turned off by the author's casual mention of students with learning disabilities, and agree that a better reaction to these students' experience should have been "How can my model be adapted for these students as well?" rather than just ignoring the issue.  I also agree that Metzger's writing style is much more stylized and editorial than I would expect of an academic article, but I guess it just did not bother me that much.  Aside from these issues, I still think the foundational concepts of the article are sound - that critical reading is an invisible skill and teachers need to find methods to both assess students in this area, as well as techniques for modeling these skills for struggling students.  

In the end, maybe I did not read it closely enough and perhaps I need to read it again with a new awareness of these issues.  But what really bothered me was the idea of tossing out the article all together.  I think it's dangerous to completely discount the article or its method because it did not work for all students.  I think it can still be a good demonstration of the importance of thinking about one's audience, understanding students' progress, and making adjustments accordingly.  Whether or not Metzger did this well or genuinely, I'm not sure, but she did at least address the issue.  I really don't think it's fair to say this was a completely terrible article for us to read.  Rather it should be read and critically analyzed for its strengths and weaknesses (which is what we should be doing anyway)

Week 6 - Book Clubs and Socratic Seminars

Working through the readings and looking at the syllabus leads me to believe we're in store for not only learning to facilitate Book Clubs and Socratic seminars, but also participating in a seminar during next week's class. Oh what fun!

Reading for the week:

"Socratic Seminars: Engaging Students in Intellectual Discourse" - L. Tredway (Educational Leadership, September 1995)

I am very thankful the reading started with an overview of the Socratic Seminar. Mostly because my prior knowledge of the method was a little off and needed correcting; reading a more complete description of the method gave me a better idea of what to expect for the coming weeks. What struck me most about the rest of the reading is how very related it is to our discussion of transfer last week (by design, perhaps?), as well as information literacy and assessment material from previous weeks. The premise of using the seminar method is for students to develop deeper levels of analytical and critical thinking skills.  Additionally, students develop literacy skills that can easily be incorporated into facets of information literacy, as well as interpersonal skills (such as respect when giving and receiving feedback).  These are important skills not only in academia, but also in everyday life, and I think they can easily be transferred out of the classroom and into "real-world" settings, though perhaps not in the same overt ways we discussed last week.

One of my favorite points the author makes is use of Socratic seminars in building self-esteem. More precisely I think it is more important to consider building students' feeling of self-efficacy, in that when people feel they are "good" at something they are more likely to enjoy it and feel good about themselves. So much of what makes learning successful requires internal motivation from students.  Therefore, if students like learning and we can help them be "good" learners, they are more likely to internalize their own educational goals.

"The Book Club Exploded" - B. Hoffert (Library Journal, 07/15/2006)

Having never participated in a formal book club myself, this article was insightful into the even the simplest wants and needs of book club members and the libraries which serve them. For instance, I never considered that if a library hosts a book club they will need multiple copies of the book to lend out (an admittedly obvious "duh" moment, but a necessary realization for someone who tends to write in books while doing close reading and therefore does typically use library books for this purpose).

Mostly while reading, I was considering the idea of mixed-media "book" clubs and the concept of information literacy (transliteracy or whatever other type of literacy I cannot remember right now). Though the article mentions that teens are an increasing demographic for book clubs, I thought the idea of using book clubs and different types of media is a good way to address continuing literacy development in "older" demographics.  By "older" I really just mean those people who are no longer in school and are therefore out of the scope of school or academic librarians. Information literacy does not seem like a skill anyone can completely master, yet once we leave school there is not the same level of concern for its development. Public libraries seem like a good place to facilitate continuing IL development, and including mixed media in book clubs will also promote learning about new types of information technology.

"Teaching reading: beyond the plot" - M. Metzger (Phi Delta Kappan, Nov 1998)

I want to start by saying that I think we really need more insightful teachers like Ms. Metzger in our schools. Period.

This article is a really great example of so many things we've covered in class during the past few weeks, and there's really no way I can do it complete justice.  I think it's a fabulous demonstration of how the Socratic seminar method can be adapted and introduced to encourage literacy, analytical, and critical thinking development in students. I also appreciated how honest the author was with regards to her own shortcomings and what she learned during the development of her class curriculum.  One thing that struck me about both her narration to us (the reader) as well as to the students in her class is a teacher's ability to model and demonstrate behaviors which would otherwise remain internal. In our reading and discussion several weeks ago about teaching for understanding and developing metacognition, one of the important skills teachers must learn is how to externalize thinking processes.  By demonstrating to students how she would complete their tasks (such as note taking or giving feedback) the author gives students a more concrete understanding of the task. Additionally, by explaining to the reader her own thought process during the class development, she is demonstrating the way an "expert" teacher thinks.

Veering away from the Socratic seminar a bit, another concept which really stuck out to me was the idea that "because reading is invisible" student's reading processes cannot be measured and assessed the same way other skills are.  Also, "most students do not understand how their more articulate, insightful classmates reach conclusions about literature." I think both of these statements apply equally well to the academic research process because out of class research is largely invisible to instructors. Sure, they see the paper and bibliography which are the result of the research, but they likely do not see the research process itself.  Students also may not understand how more experienced peers can complete the task because they probably do not do research together (either out of fear of cheating or simply because they are not researching the same topics). In library instruction, it is important to make the research process visible to students. Also, librarians are more likely than professors to see the research process as it is taking place. This means we have a more strategic  position in which to assist students as they navigate the research processes. Yet another reason for us to become well versed in theories and methods of instruction.

Those are my two-cents for the week!  Off to more "closely" read Darton's "The Library: Three Jeremaids" for our in-class Socratic session!

Class Reflections 02/14/2011 - Transfer

Honestly, I've been struggling through the transfer material. And I think class this week helped me to both understand how it can be applicable to libraries, as well as why I've been struggling with engaging the material this week.

Until recently, I was never the student to ask why I should learn something or how it would be applicable to my "real" life.  As a K-12 student, I assumed the teachers just knew what they were talking about when they said it was important (so trusting and naive, I know). I also inherently liked school and was good at it, "transfer" never really crossed my mind.  Then, as an undergrad at a liberal arts college, I never really assumed that what I was learning was supposed to have direct applicability - in some respect, I was learning a way of thinking and learning, not just actual the material itself (which is transfer, but it was not really presented as such on a day-to-day basis).  I also think this made me a lazy learner.  Not that I didn't study hard, but that I really hated when teachers or professors tried tactics like the "hook question."  I just wanted them to get on with teaching us whatever material would be covered for the day, and I'd make my own meaning later... if and when I felt like it. Basically, for the majority of my education I have not consciously thought of "transfer" as a particularly important part of my education.

It is only now that I am in a professional program, working towards a more distinct career goal, that I feel the need to ask "when and how will I use this?" This shift is coming slowly, which means it has been difficult for me to really internalize the importance of transfer. In some of my classes now, particularly the ones that are not overtly focused on libraries, the importance of transfer is becoming increasingly important to me. It's not that I no longer find knowledge for knowledge's sake to be important, but that on a very real level it's not what I need from education at this time. I need to be doing more transfer, and I need my professors to be helping. Ironically, I feel I've been getting less of it now than previously when I didn't find it to be all that important.

As a future professional, I can see the importance of transfer, even in a library setting.  For instance, do we want the same patron coming back to the reference desk every time they need to find an article in a different database?  Or, do we want to teach them skills that will transfer across platforms? Do we want to teach them "yes, you can check the database box that says 'limit to scholarly articles'?" Or do we want to teach them the different values and features of scholarly vs. popular articles so they can evaluate future sources themselves?

I also really liked the idea of the "hook question" from a practitioner's standpoint.  I've been struggling with practical examples of how to capture student's prior knowledge.  Tonight I thought the in class example of surveying how people would go about doing research on cars was a really valuable in understanding a method to tap into that knowledge base in a concrete fashion.

So, not a particularly exhaustive review of class, but rather this is what I am contemplating as we move into the next week.

Week 5 - Learning and Transfer...

... or answering the classic question, "What does dissecting a frog have to with my real life?"  While I will not be attempting answer that particular question today, I do have a few other thoughts from our reading this week.

How People Learn  - Chapter 3 "Learning and Transfer"

Once again, our text does not disappoint with a smorgasbord of learning research and theories, this time to help us better understand "transfer" - that is "the ability to extend what has been learned in once context to new contexts" (p. 51).  The basic set-up is:

• Initial learning is necessary for transfer
• Knowledge that is overly contextualized can reduce transfer
• Transfer is best viewed as an active, dynamic process
• All learning involves transfer based on previous learning

Many of the themes we have discussed previously are once again important points in this chapter - including the importance of addressing student's prior knowledge when learning new tasks, the importance of learning for understanding (rather than memorization), and the role of context in learning and transfer (a big one in this chapter!).  

There was also another discussion of the importance of metacognition in learning, this time with respect to transfer.  The "reciprocal teaching" model (p.67) particularly caught my eye due to its application in reading comprehension.  During our Week 3 class, we discussed the similarities between reading comprehension skills and information literacy.  Though as I mention in my previous reflective post I had not previously considered this comparison, it really makes a lot of sense to me.  Therefore, the reciprocal teaching model may be something librarians can consider when designing basic information literacy workshops.  Particularly in K-12 and academic libraries, I think there are some creative ways we can integrate this model into our standard curriculum, either in one-shot situations or through repeated exposure.  I think the most difficult-to-implement aspect of the reciprocal teaching model would be "establishing a social setting that enables joint negotiation for understanding."  What does this look like?  To me it implies some level of trust and common ground.  Can this be accomplished in a one-shot situation?

"Put Understanding First" - Wiggins and McTighe

The premise of this article is to suggest better ways that education in high schools may promote learning for understanding, with the end goal that this will produce learners who are not just good at "doing school," but instead are prepared for "the world beyond school."  Wiggins and McTighe suggest curriculum must help students to acquire and make meaning of information in the classroom, as well help them learn to transfer new knowledge to new situations.

It's difficult to disagree with the authors on this, as I feel many of my own K-12 (and even some college) experiences mirrored their observations - that schools stress acquiring large amounts of information before students are asked to apply or making meaning out of that information.  By the time an "appropriate" amount of information is a acquired, many students have lost interest or there simply is not time to include the "make meaning and transfer" tasks before moving onto the next unit (perhaps an example of education being "a mile wide and an inch deep?").  Additionally, I really liked the idea that "the textbook should serve as a resource, not as the syllabus."  Teachers (and librarians) spend a significant amount of time and effort to learn their trade; why then do we end up letting the textbook determine course of study?

Perhaps the idea I appreciated most in this article is the emphasis that traditional teaching and instruction methods are not inherently bad, but rather they are limited in the scope of their usefulness and have a tendency to be over used.  They do not advocate for lectures, quizzes, and standardized tests to be thrown out the window.  Rather, they suggest the use of these tools needs to be thought of as only a few of the very important methods by which students should learn and be assessed.  It's not so much about finding the *one* right instructional method, but rather learning how to use a variety of methods depending on the purpose of the teaching/learning activity.  Also, moving through teaching and learning should be considered an iterative process - students can cycle through acquisition, meaning, and transfer in a non-linear fashion.  

We should also consider how we can use these tools in library instruction.  How can we use a variety of activities to help learners move through acquisition, meaning, and transfer during information literacy development?  I think this goes beyond "If I show you how to access ProQuest through SearchTools, then you should also be able to find PsycInfo," to something more abstract about the context in which a database is appropriate to use (this is also related to HPL Ch 3, which helping students understand problems at a higher level of abstraction promotes transfer).  Once again, it is becoming clear to me how difficult it must be to integrate all of the necessary components of "learning for understanding" into a coherent curriculum or single instructional period, and even more difficult without foresight and planning.

"Failure" or "Iterative Design?"

For our blogger assignment I have been following K.G. Schneider over at Free Range Librarian, and her post today titled "In Praise of Succeeding" is very timely considering our recent discussions of assessment.  And, I happen to really love some of the things she says, so I thought I'd pass it along.  Schneider's article re-frames the discussion of being comfortable with "failure" and instead suggests we should be more concerned learning to accept and build on negative reviews, rather than quitting too early (or at least I hope I am interpreting this correctly).  I think some of these same issues are important to consider when we are issuing feedback - whether it is to students or colleagues.  Is there a way we can frame feedback to be truly "constructive criticism?"  How can we prepare ourselves and students to become better at receiving such feedback?
And for those of you who do not want to read the entire thing, my favorite paragraph from the original article:

"Patience, grasshopper. “Not now” is not the same as “no.”  Sometimes a great idea needs to wait its turn; sometimes it is simply precocious, and in a year will be timely. Other times, a great idea has lost its prime moment and needs to be left behind on the altar of things that could have happened in an alternate universe. You’re all the better for having had a great idea; there will be many more."

Class Reflections 02/07/2011 - Assessment

Here are a few of the my highlights from tonight's discussion about assessment:

• I am glad we were specifically asked to make the leap from the role of students to that of educators.  This is a struggle for me personally because I am so well trained to take on the role of a student.  But then I realized - every time I fill out a feedback form, I'm assessing.  Every time I have an interaction with a patron at the reference desk (even now as a student), I am providing assessment.  A new spin on how we traditionally think of roles.
• The McGonigal presentation on gaming was interesting and informative.  Even though I have no interest in gaming, I like the idea of taking something that people already spent a lot of time doing and making it serve a different purpose.  Also, I felt the exercise we completed after class, grouping different types of feedback questions, was an interesting way to segue into how we design surveys as feedback and assessment tools.  Coming from a social science research background, I can really appreciate the power of a good survey and how easy it is to make a bad one.
• I also appreciated that we talked about when it is appropriate to use summative assessment vs. formative assessment.  I think it's really important to understand the value of all tools and when to use them.
• My favorite idea from class tonight was the thought about summative assessment used as formative assessment.  Though this is particularly true when considering summative assessment as data for the "A" part of an ADDIE cycle, what really struck me was the example of some law school students considering their class grades as formative assessment for eventually taking the bar exam.  What if more education worked this way?  Looking at individual assignment grades as feedback with regards to your long-term standing in a course could be an interesting model to consider.  This would also take some restructuring of how classes are taught - not only resulting in more assignments worth smaller percentages of the final grade, but also how students are taught or socialized to think about the purpose of assignments.  Is the purpose of an assignment to play the numbers and figure out exactly what you have to do to get ___ grade?  Or is it to learn something that fits into the larger picture of the course?  My feeling is we'd all like to say assignments serve the latter purpose, but are they really presented that way and do students approach them that way?
• Additionally, I was thinking about the notion of fixed vs. malleable views of intelligence and how it could also be important to consider in the conversation about assessments.  Do learners with different mindsets respond better to one type of assessment over the others?  Or do they differ in their response to how these types of assessments are presented?

Not an exhaustive review of class, but a few things that are rattling around in my brain!

Week 4: Information Literacy Wrap-up and Assessment

Reflections on Week 3 Class - "Information Literacy"

Here are some of the interesting things I took away from the class period:

• Defining "information literacy" is hard, though I did enjoy finding new ways to conceptualize the term "use."  Our group felt "application" is a good substitute, but still lacks some of the connotation of "use."  I actually like the ACRL's definition of information literacy because, although it contains the word "use", it also casts a wider net of the skills we expect an "information literate" person to possess.  In class, my group also added an additional component to the definition - integrating new knowledge and modifying existing existing understandings and beliefs about information.
• Comparing IL with reading comprehension was not something I have considered previously.  I can see how reading for comprehension is very much analogous to deeper levels of information literacy (ie. looking for deeper meaning, making connections, analysis, etc).
• This was my third course in which we have discussed Kuhlthau's Information Search Process, and each time I find new facets that make me think a little deeper.  This time I considered the concept of "zone of intervention" occurring around the exploration phase, and also what this means for library students and the master's education curriculum.  Are we being taught that we should be engaging users a little later in the search process?  Are we gaining the skills for this?  I think my answer for UMich SI is mostly "yes we are," but some days I waiver, and I don't really know what the trend is overall for the education of future librarians.
• Also, a further extension of our discussion on whether our familiarity of a subject affects our movement through Kuhlthau's model - I suggest that perhaps instead of skipping steps altogether for topics with which we are familiar, we instead move through the first few steps much more quickly.  I have no data for this, just an idea.
• Striplings "Model of Inquiry" was also very interesting, but at this point in class I was becoming more cynical (read: low blood sugar) and couldn't help but wonder about the practical use of some of these models (not just Striplings, but others as well).  In a perfect world - yes, all of these steps would be present in information consumers at least part of the time.  But honestly, I cannot remember when I last had time to "reflect."  This blog is really the best example, yet I struggle with the blog because typically the emphasis in school is put on producing something (or "expression") and once that product is one, immediately moving on to the next product.  I almost feel guilty spending a significant amount of time on refection, even though the blog-as-reflection is also a "product."  What can we realistically do to incorporate more reflection into day-to-day tasks?  Okay, rant over.  I'm going to go eat a candy bar and hopefully come back in a better mood!

Design of Learning Environments and Formative Assessment
This week's readings built well on what we've been discussing in class.  How can we integrate what we know about how people learn and what we need to be teaching them (eg. information literacy) to promote learning and understanding.  This week's answer - through the thoughtful design of learning environments, including considerations about assessment techniques.

Chapter 6 - "The Design of Learning Environments" from How People Learn 
 The bulk of this chapter is discussing four important considerations for designing learning environments:

• Learner-centered environments - teachers are aware of the prior knowledge, skills, and beliefs that students bring with them to a classroom.  Teachers also attempt to use student's prior knowledge to enhance learning or can engage them in "cognitive conflict" and then help students understand such conflicts (p. 134).
• Knowledge-centered environments - address the areas in which students need to gain knowledge in order to be successful learners.  This goes beyond rote memorization, to encouraging learning as understanding and helping students develop an "integrated understanding of a discipline" (p. 138).
• Assessment-centered environments - students are provided with feedback with regards to how well they are achieving their learning goals.  Assessment may be "formative" or "summative"  Formative assessment is preferred for improved teaching and learning because it helps students develop an understanding of their performance while they still have a chance to modify it.
• Community-centered environments - teachers and students are recognized as part of a classroom and school community, as well as the larger local, regional, national, or global communities.  If the community environment is ignored, certain teaching and learning methods may not promote student growth in knowledge and understanding.  Additionally, the culture of each community has important implications in the classroom.  I loved the example on page 146 of the Inuit who view quiet children as a marker of high intelligence and self control, while the non-Inuit administrators assumed children who do not talk in class must have a speech delay.  Such misunderstandings can take negatively affect the ability of teachers and students to create a productive learning environment.

The last part of the chapter discusses the importance of alignment between the four types of learning environments.  Specifically, that understanding who students are, what is being taught, how it's being taught, where it's being taught, and how it's being assessed are all important for thoroughly understanding how much students are actually learning.

"Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems" - D. R. Sadler (1989)
This article describes in more depth what "formative assessment" is and why it is important in learning.  

• More specifically, formative assessment is "concerned with how judgments about the quality of student responses can be used to shape and improve the student's competence by short-circuiting the randomness and inefficiency of trial-and-error learning" (p. 120).  Teachers providing "feedback" to learners about the success and progress of their work is a key feature to formative assessment.  Additionally, the process of providing feedback to students also helps the teacher monitor student progress and adjust appropriately. 
• The purpose of formative assessment and feedback in learning is to help students continually improve their learning and performance by understanding: 1) the standard or goal to which they are to perform, 2) their current performance and how it compares to that standard, and 3) how to take action to fill in "gaps" between their performance and the standard (p. 121).
• Additionally, the article describes in some depth the "qualitative judgments" which are necessary in assessment.  That is, rarely can helpful assessment be based on hard-and-fast rules or a scale; rather, teachers must make many of their judgments based on tacit knowledge of what is "high quality" and what is not using a variety of criterias.  The qualitative nature of these judgments makes it difficult for teachers to accurately express performance standards to students.  The challenge then becomes for teachers to learn how to "download" these judgments and standards to students, so that students my learn how to monitor their own performance more effectively.

 Take-Away Points?
One of the biggest connections I made this week between these two readings and what we have discussed previously is the importance of metacognition and monitoring one's own performance as a key component of learning.  We have discussed previously that metacognition is a central feature of active learning and learning for understanding.  To me, two important features of formative assessment are: 1) it aims to promote students' awareness (self-monitoring) of their own functioning with regards to standards or goals for performance, and 2) the purpose of feedback is to help students develop an internal gauge for assessing their own performance, rather than continually relying on an outside authority to do so.  This is important when we consider that the aim of education should be to help students build a knowledge-base they can use outside of a classroom environment.  Additionally, formative assessment is effective at promoting this type of understanding because it allows students to incorporate feedback into their current product or performance, unlike summative assessment which does not.

Although I think assessment is an important feature of learning, I could not help but consider how much responsibility this puts on the teacher.  Particularly since many judgments of student work are qualitative and based on "fuzzy" criteria, teachers have a huge weight to bear with regards to communicating these standards effectively to allow students' development of learning, understanding, and metacognitive skills (as discussed above).  But I also do not think teachers can do this alone.  Therefore, Sadler's statement that "only when a learner assumes ownership of a goal can it play a significant part in the voluntary regulation of performance" speaks volumes to the fact that teachers can only do so much.  To some extent, students have to want to learn and they have to want to perform better.  Without this type of internalization, assessment seems nearly useless to the learner.  I think this is partially where other aspects of the learning environment, particularly the concepts of learner and culturally-centered environments, can support assessment because they allow teachers to understand their students and ways in which they can be encouraged to learn.

Of course, in the end this comes back to: how does this apply to librarians?  Or, how can librarians apply these concepts?  This week, I'm a little stumped because I do not understand well when librarians are given opportunities to provide formative assessment.  I suppose this will likely be discussed in class as well, and I look forward to hearing others' views.