What a fantastic four days!

What did I learn? Hmmm…

What a difference funding makes! Compare National Library, and particularly the Parliamentary library with the Lu Rees Archives. Passion is similar in all, though.

Accessibility is the driving for of the NLA. Diversity of their collections is amazing. Makes sense that an accountant is in charge of the stacks! Reader/reference services and info lit training of the public important; like most libraries now, I suppose, it’s about helping people find the right info, rather than finding it for them. Training for reference staff ongoing. Dewey inefficient location system for monographs – browsing doesn’t occur. Document supply fascinating – assembly line in operation, but staff are rostered so not stuck with same task all day (take that, Henry Ford!) We were also taken to the Maps, newspaper collection, Australian, retrospective collection, pictures and manuscripts, preservation and Asian collections.

Was surprised to see that much work is carried out by APS staff, rather than trained librarians. Collaboration between institutions (eg. Geoscience Australia) – can’t store everything. Copyright affects type of media stored (eg. microfilm not electronic storage of newspapers).

Parliamentary library – not my favourite, I’m afraid. Clear branches – research and collection management (called ‘Information Access”, I think). Broad and deep expertise required of research staff; stressful, high pressure work. Huge responsibility; impartiality and confidentiality issues interesting. Staff are very proud of their databases and IT – most of the explanation of that went straight over my head (still had my teacher’s hat on).

Lu Rees – what a lovely collection. After visiting the Parl.Lib, I think that I would have to have a passion for, or at least strong interest, in the collection I work with, in order to enjoy my job. LRA survives on passion (v little funding). Lack of documentation concerning in regards to handover from current staff, as is lack of digitisation of collection – how will they survive?

UC library do much to support their students. Obviously very proud of what they do.

AIATSIS (Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies) – I always wondered what this building was! Funding shortages obvious here. So important for preservation of disappearing languages, etc. Seems to need some streamlining – multiple databases, etc, was confusing, would discourage users, I think. Develop their own subject headings. No weeding done – but nothing was said about space/storage problem. Issue about access and cultural sensitivity interesting – may pose dilemmas in academic and PC contexts.

Australian War Memorial – commemoration through understanding. Use of software really improves service delivery. Research services not provided to public – advice only given. Explanation of Private vs Official records was great; future of collection (as commands, records, emails to family at home, etc, now electronic and not kept) fascinating, and scary. Classified documents take the quagmire of copyright another step further.

ANU Library was interesting, with its different branches – what an Oxbridge hangover! They’re only 3 minutes walk away from each other! Loss of staff jobs obviously difficult, and more than unfortunate. Huge staff; ‘Division of Information’ complex and complicated. Coordination and collaboration between precincts important. Online support for users with disabilities. ArticleReach looks terrific – about time, too (subscription fee paid the external company, but saves staffing costs and time). Data is gathered on every single job on desk enquiries – part of the culture (I wonder how tedious it gets, or if it simply becomes habit?) Pathfinders for each subject/school look useful. Run IL training. Aquisitions are handled by acquisition or library staff, rather than specialised catalougers. technical services support. Share bibliographic data with other institutions.

Overall, I was surprised at how evident trends were in each library, especially the current fashion for family history research. Policies and procedures must be adapted to suit the context and needs of users.IT can bring about significant changes, but only when it is funded appropriately. Time restraints apply everywhere. Passion allows adaptability and survival.


Having just finished my final assignment for the semester, I should write this up so I have it for my portfolio next year.

RE: Cataloguing and bibliographic standards

Doing cataloguing work in the library helped me make much more sense of this subject. Goodness knows how I would have got my head around the material if I hadn’t had the experience.

SCIS makes the world a much easier place, but their subject headings, which come with their catalogue entries, are rubbish – and they have the nerve to charge extra money for that part of the subscription!  If the purpose of centralised/outsourced cataloguing is to save time and money (on salaries), then it needs to be done properly, or we might as well create records from scratch.

The new centralised OPAC for all schools will change things, I’m sure. Let’s hope they get it right this time!

After completing the units about subject headings, I realised I have many mistakes, particularly by including more than 10 headings. I need to make sure I check more carefully next time I add.

Dewey – Uuuuggghhhh! How god-awfully BORING! How no one with a responsibility for rewriting it has never been able to step back and say, ‘This is ridiculous!’, is ridiculous.

Now that WebDewey exists, you still have to jump through 20 hoops to find the subdivisions and annotations you want, even though they could include the link right there! It makes no sense! And then SCIS says not to include everything anyway. MAKE UP YOUR MINDS!

+WebDewey is so hard to use. I would never have been able to complete those tasks without the hard copy (of a previous edition, which meant extra checking) in front of me.

(yes, I hated that assignment. I see its relevance and importance, but I hated it: the lack of consistency and contradictions, mainly).

What else will I need to write down for my portfolio next year?

Before this subject, I had a limited understanding of the role of the teacher librarian (TL). From subjects studied last semester, I knew that teaching information literacy (including use of electronic resources) was important, as well as leadership in curriculum and cultural change towards a learning-how-to-learn environment. Being a learner who likes classifications and pigeon holes, I had difficulty in comprehending the full extent and interdependence of the aspects of a TL’s role. My understanding has broadened dramatically, and what I am looking forward to now is learning more about how we can carry out our professional ‘practice’ and ‘commitment’ (ASLA/ALIA, 2004).

I have had mixed experiences with TLs. I have never seen or worked with a TL who collaborated on integrated instruction or curriculum (Montiel-Overall, 2005); the most I have witnessed were isolated acts of cooperation and coordination. As a classroom teacher, I have rarely received support from TLs in resourcing curriculum delivery outside of student research projects; this is another aspect of the role which has come to my attention, but through study of another subject.

At the conclusion of this subject I am still feeling uneasy about resource-based learning (RBL). The readings have helped convince me of its importance, but I have always been doubtful about its place in schools in forthcoming years (Squires, March 8, 2010). I have never seen RBL implemented successfully, and under (time) pressures during the past months I have found it difficult to remain ‘solution-orientated’ (Todd, 2008) and think I need some distance from my job to gain perspective. Haycock (1991, p. 17) described the fears of teachers, which I share, in regards to RBL, about how much of the set curriculum (content) the students will actually learn and about whether I have the knowledge and skills to successfully facilitate such learning opportunities. Implementation of the very content-heavy National History Curriculum adds pressure to this, as does working with students who are reluct to learn, even with choice and ownership over their learning. As a classroom teacher and TL I will need to demonstrate the commitment of which Page (1999) writes and a willingness to sacrifice aspects of the curriculum for prioritised learning skills. But what are the ‘practical steps’ (Smith, 2010), beyond obtaining principal support, for making RBL ‘happen’? Baby steps, trial and error and making use of professional networks (such as OZ_TLNET, which I have joined) may be the answer, as well as effective use of CSU subject forums by all users. I had not considered, however, that classroom teachers need us (Mulazzani, 2010) and that they may drive RBL in schools just as well as TLs. This is one place where the marketing role of TLs, which I had never considered before and was brought to my attention by Schmidmaier (2007), is pertinent; I myself have under-utilised the library and my school’s TLs.

I had never considered the TL’s role in contributing to research (modelling and promoting lifelong learning, ASLA/ALIA, 2004) for the benefit of the wider learning community. I have always found the idea of ‘action-research’ confronting, but Lamb & Johnston’s work (2004-2007) made it less so. Todd (2008) also makes participation in research sound challenging but very do-able, but I would like to hear from TLs who collaborate on large projects and conduct research at the same time. I am still also concerned about school libraries and their research becoming tools of the state (or of others with agendas; Squires, March 8, 2010). The Teachers’ Code of Professional Practice (ACT, 2004) implies that we must do as we are instructed by our employer, but what power do we have to decide that serving the public and serving our employer may no longer equate? This is, perhaps, another reason for us to contribute to research.

This subject has extended my understanding, after completing ‘Teacher Librarian as Leader’ last year, of the role of the TL in leading cultural change towards an information literate school community, particularly in regards to what they can/should do in this role. School-wide, collaborative design of an information skills continuum, for use in teaching and assessing learning, sounds exciting (Squires, May 23, 2010). Investigation into other learning skills, such as Habits of Mind, should be a part of this process if we are to drive towards a focus on learning-how-to-learn, and share the driving with teachers across different curriculum areas. I would like to learn more about the impacts that RBL (or the extent to which it is implemented) might have upon the teaching of information literacy skills, including the consistent use of one model throughout a school (Squires, May 23, 2010).

Considering the world in which information is becoming increasingly easy to access and the fact that the TL’s role is becoming more focused on helping others learn how to use information, perhaps a change of title is called for: ‘strategy guys’ (Warlick, 2006) seems appropriate (Squires, May 23, 2010).

Word Count: 780 words.


(ASLA/ALIA) Australian School Library Association/Australian Library and Information Association (2004). Standards of professional excellence for teacher librarians. Retrieved from http://www.asla.org.au/policy/standards.htm

(ACT) Australian Capital Territory (2006). Teachers’ code of professional practice. Canberra: Publishing Services for the Department of Education and Training.

Haycock, C. (1991). Resource-based learning: A shift in the roles of teacher, learner. NASSP bulletin, 75(535), 15-22.

Lamb, A & Johnson, L. (2004-2007). The school library media specialist: Evidence-based decision-making. In The school library media specialist. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from http://eduscapes.com/sms/program/evidence.html

Montiel-Overall, P. (2005). A theoretical understanding of teacher and librarian collaboration, School Libraries Worldwide, 11(2), 24-48.

Mulazzani, D. (2010, March 14). The juggling act of RBL. Message posted to ETL401 Module 3 sub-forum.

Page, C.A. (1999). Developing the school resource centre program: A developmental approach. In K. Hancock (Ed.), Foundations for effective school library media programs (pp. 207-214).

Schmidmaier, D. (Presenter) (2007, February 6). Education for the library profession in the digital age. Podcast retrieved from http://www.slv.vic.gov.au/programs/ltf/forums/digital_forums/dagmar.html

Smith, K. (2010, April 16). How do we get to “collaboration”. Message posted to ETL401 Module 3 sub-forum.

Todd, R. J. (2008). The dynamics of classroom teacher and teacher librarian instructional collaborations. Scan, 27(2), 19-28.

Warlick, D. (Presenter). (2006, November 12). Episode 74 — A conversation about the future of libraries. Connect learning, with David Warlick. Podcast retrieved from http://davidwarlick.com/connectlearning/?p=86


Watkins and Marsick, Sculpting the learning organisation

This is similar to ideas covered in ‘TL as leader’ course last year.

I still have a big problem with  the idea that an individual’s learning should be tied to the future needs of the organisation, because so often the members have no say over what that future will be. The principal doesn’t listen to us, let alone the education minister! Why is their decision so much more important than mine? They don’t even work in schools!

All this stuff about organisational structure and change…I see the point of it, but how far away are we getting from our core business, ie. helping the kids learn? When can the TL go home? Are they going to pay us more for managing others when we’re not School leaders?

J Cibulka, S Coursey, M Nakayama, J Price and S Stewart; Schools as learning organisations

Organisation must move from learning how to learning why, and look at how they learn and develop – bring on the TL and IL!

Rejection of the ‘machine bureaucracy’? So it’s not just me! But to what extent is the bureaucracy willing to reject itself?

The long-term professional development the authors write about have been tried at my school, with dismal results because of the delivery of it. We need choice and ownership over what we do.

The list of what is needed to develop and sustain schools as professional learning communities make a lot of sense. Should the TL be in charge of PD in schools? Collaborate with teachers about what they want? Buidl teams for action research, say?

I really like: ‘enable learners to share responsibility for and control of their learning’. But how do we do this? How do we nuture a value inside them that does not exist at home, and for which there are no real consequences?

There is a tension between educating students and merely controlling and processing them, with confusing signals sent to schools and teachers about how they will be judged and held accountable. – YES. It chops and changes with governments and fashions. I’m all for progress, but we may need to sit down and think about some old fashioned values and what it is we really want kids to learn. Do we want to give them skills to survive and thrive, if that means they’re not very nice people, that they don’t know what it means to make sacrifices and go without? This is deciding our ‘moral purpose’, I suppose.

Transformational leadership – links in with ideas from last year, that leadership must permeate all levels of an organisation, with all members leading for real change to be enacted. I guess we try to teach students how to lead, too.

Is all of this about transferring what we try to do with our students, to what we do with ourselves?

Todd, R. J. (2008). The dynamics of classroom teacher and teacher librarian instructional collaborations. Scan, 27(2), 19-28.

What an effort this article was to read!

Todd’s reports on the extent of collaboration in schools was no surprise.

The planning for collaboration helps build the relationship too – interesting.

Time the prominent difficulty – how surprising!

‘Being solution-orientated’ – does that mean ‘thinking positively’?

Change in work routine refreshing – I think it’s time we were reinvigorated a little! Good angle to approach staff from?

Issue of status of TL is interesting. How much is it about student outcomes and use of TL skills, and how much is about personal feelings of worth amongst the staff (like in any gathering of people, if we don’t feel like we fit in, then we get upset and want to leave)? Todd writes that there were some ‘concerns [raised] about what is the public voice of school librarians in a school’. Are TLs actually interested in student outcomes, or do they just want to keep their jobs?

Team teaching helped cover more content in a shorter period of time: is this because of more individual attention for students? Better behaviour management? Or just better instruction?

Enjoyment in the process transferred over to the students – I don’t actually remember the last time I ‘enjoyed’ preparing something with other staff; maybe in the musical? SNEAK was tough, but I actually enjoyed that. I think I am becoming a little bored teaching the same kind of stuff all the time.

Author of another reading (can’t remember which one) mentioned relationships being the basis for what we do; reiterated here

8 points of advice v useful.

Plan and be flexible!

Page, Developing the school resource centre program (in Foundations for effective school library media programs)

Shouldnt function as a reactor or start ‘where the teachers are at’ – must be your own trail blazer.

‘Fate of most programs is decided at the informal level’: corridor conversations play such a big role in teachers’ jobs.

Need support of teachers and administration.

  1. Assess the current situation
  2. Define the role and the program, responsibilities – for yourself and every one else.
  3. Establish guidelines – for flexible scheduling, cooperative planning and resources sharing.
  4. Communicate often and well
  5. Start small, think big
  6. Establish a school-based skills continuum. (Useful tips here about how to go about collaborative writing of this continuum with staff).
  7. Be accountable.
  8. Be high-profile. ‘Maintain visibility with report card inserts’ – great idea!
  9. Change the approach, not the tune; persist but be flexible

10. Take bigger steps: grade level planning. Making this a second step might be hard if teachers are already working in ‘unison’ across all classes in a grade.

11. Total school programming (for a theme day, week or month)

5 stages in the change process:

  1. Awareness – of role of TL and other staff. Someone needs to take responsibility.
  2. Understanding – make others understand, communicate well and often.
  3. Acceptance – get other ppl to accept you through demonstration and actually DOING your job
  4. Commitment – don’t give up, shows it must be valuable.
  5. Renewal – implementation is a process, no quick results, lifelong learning, etc. But sometimes you have to realise when you’ve been beaten, cut your losses and start again.

Montiel-Overall, A theoretical understanding of teacher and librarian collaboration

Collaboration invites creativity and innovation

If knowledge is constructed through interaction among members of society (Vygotsky), should ALL learning be collaborative? How do we get teenagers to stay on task?

World views and collab – need enough difference to generate innovation, but too much as to split the relationship. Some conflict necessary; backed up by Fullan.

Zone of proximal development – one of the few things I actually remember from my teaching degree (just about the extent of the educational psychology we covered), the ‘i+1’.

What is my world view? I agree with Vygotsky, but succumb to the pressure of having to cover outcomes. How do I do both?

Successful collaboration is marked by jointly creating something that is greater than what either could have created alone – that was in Fullan, too.

Are ‘mental model’ like envisaging, what gymnasts do to help them master new jumps, etc?

Networking – urk! Makes me think of slimy ladder-climbers who have plenty of acquaintances but no real friends. I understand what it’s for, but I don’t like it: used to ‘make informal social connections that may lead to joint efforts’. I don’t want to make friends with someone so I can use them! Making ‘professional connections’ would be a better way of putting it.

Coordination plays a part – how do you separate it from collaboration? Isnt collaboration just coordination of efforts and ideas, with a bit of useful conflict and evaluation thrown in?

‘Divide and conquer’ mode of attacking large projects is often used for time efficiency, but I can that it wasn’t successful when we moderated the Yr 9 document studies – looking at everything togterh helped us better achieve our aims.

‘Collaboration is shared thinking, shared planning and shared creation of innovative integrated instruction’ – I like it! Total agreement not implied. Free sharing of ideas.

Librarians are to have a supportive, rather than equal role with classroom teachers.

Models of TL and teacher collaboration:

  1. Coordination – low involvement
  2. Cooperation – medium involvement
  3. Integrated instruction – high involvement
  4. Integrated curriculum – highest involvement, planning from the very beginning/core

Quality of relationships (in trust, communication, etc) improve as move up the scale.

Collaboration involves interest, improved learning (effect of collaboration on student outcomes), intensity (commitment and participation), innovation and integration (combining it all together, cros curricula) – higher degrees, better collaboration.

‘TLs and teachers will be prepared to determine if RESOURCES are available for them to engage in high-end collaborative efforts…’ we ‘need to be able to make informed decisions about how and where their resources should be spent’ – is she saying that collaboration is not always justifiable? That the emphasis that’s coming from all the other writings is impractical, unfair, and not considerate of us as professionals or as people with lives outside of work?

Knowledge is a process, not a product.

Info Lit Assessment – Brown, Building rubrics

Not much new here.

Criteria for processes is the tricky thing – other than observing the students, can be very difficult to assess some processes.

Convergence of literacies – Warlick – literacy in the new info landscape

The origins and motives of information are increasingly ambiguous – it is more important than ever to be a responsible reader.

We are overwhelmed with info, so its about how we use it. “Info must now compete for our attention”.

“We can no longer be the gatekeepers. We must…teach children how to be their own gatekeepers.”

Senge – Jossey Bass reader on educational leadership

Learning organisations, 5 disciplines:

  • Systems thinking, trying to see, understand and work with the “invisible fabrics of interrelated actions”, our intuitive, underlying world view.
  • Personal mastery – always learning to do the best you can
  • Mental models – deeply ingrained assumptions that influence how we understand the world and how we take action. Be critical of these understandings we hold.
  • Building shared vision – real goals
  • Team learning

Systems thinking ties it all together, but can’t happen without the other 4.

Humans instinctively learn, and love it. So what happens when teenagers get to high school? That terrible self-promotion ad on ABC TV, where the science teacher says, “They never stop asking questions.” What a load of bollocks! That man has never worked with teenagers in his life! So, what happens to that instinct during adolescence? Why are they only curious about such a narrow window of life?

Stripling, B. (2007). Assessing information fluency: gathering evidence of student learning. School library media activities monthly, 23(8), 25-29

“info fluency” now replaces “info literacy”? For goodness sake! Surely if skills are skills (and not stored knowledge) they can be applied suitably.

Start of Stripling Model is like “KW” in KWL. à Hey, he writes it later!

Assess with diagnostic, formative and summative tools. Real life assessment, not isolated.

Diagnostic: Bringing ‘misconceptions to the surface’ is important, + recognising they are misconceptions. Design a scavenger hunt to assess students’ knowledge of how to use the library.

Formative: during middle processes. ‘Exit cards’ (must answer q about your learning before you can leave today) are a great idea – would they work with my yr 9s, though? Checklist of observable behaviours I like; they measure completion, not quality of work. + Students can do formative assessment themselves, ask questions before moving to the next stage.

Summative assessments of IL need to be integrated with assessment of content to have power and leverage for the library.

By designing creative assessment products, can challenge students more in IL skills. About intellectual quality.

Need to:

  • establish IL goals for each task/unit
  • define clear criteria for the successful application of these skills – this is the tricky part!
  • ‘Align goals and criteria with assignment’ – isn’t this the wrong way around? Shouldn’t you design the task (backwards) to suit your outcomes?
  • Move to student self-assessment
  • Make assessment a natural part of the learning process

Are we supposed to do all of this and teach the content set by ACARA?

Lorenzo, Catalysts for change

Info fluency includes:

  • Basic IT skills
  • Info literacy skills
  • Critical thinking skills
  • But IL skills encompass 1 and 3! You’ve got to be able to LOCATE the information, and evaluate what you read/see, etc, make judgments, draw conclusions and evaluate.

Students do not typically ask for help – that’s true!

Net-Geners are:

  • Articulate and smarter
  • Mutli-taskers, cope with changing contexts
  • Learn by trial and error, rather than careful research
  • Process info quickly and make broad, hypertext webbed connections, not linear
  • Solve problems by connecting w others
  • Are constantly connected to info, do not read instructions, demand immediacy
  • Are social, but not necessarily face2face
  • Visual based learners, not text based
  • Demand to be engaged or will shut out teachers – too right!

Libraries are still necessary because even thought the info is easy to find, there is too much of it. TL’s job is to teach them to surf it.

Those ‘contained spaces’ sound fab – like VLEs?

Not all kids are net-geners, though, and have different skills.

[Lots of definitions and explanations about the web2.0 world] – not passive consumers of info, but active participants

People are identifying themselves not by geography, but by their interests.

Leaving the info age and entering the recommendation age. “Information gathering is no longer the issue – making smart decisions based on the information is now the trick. Recommendations serve as shortcuts through the thicket of information.” SO important for IL and role of TL.

Librarians are now expected to:

  • Develop more sophisticated info fluency initiatives
  • Have a better understanding of copyright and licensing laws
  • Construct web portals for students
  • Improve understanding of the technologies.
  • Backgrounds of students
  • Pedagogies

IL needs to be integrated across the curriculum to reflect the 2.0 world of knowledge construction.

Technologies change, but what we do (or can do) with information inside our heads doesn’t

Warlick, A conversation of the future of libraries

Library 2.0 – user-driven tools, experiential, collaborative knowledge building. Lib is a workplace.

What is the place? Virtual and real. Provide access to information, help make connections with info to make something new. Consume and produce/create knowledge. Get context for everything – TL can help with this. Teaching to standards gets in the way of this

TL has to get out of the library and to where the users are – online, into classrooms.

It’s always changing – definition must allow for new technologies and uses of them.

What do we want to do? How do we use the tools to improve our core business?

2.0 is about conversation, engage everyone. Library is a conversation that goes beyond the physical walls.

TL has the expertise to help use knowledge and technology. TL is the ‘strategy guy’.

Users also includes other members of the community


Fullan, Changes forces

Schools are different from businesses because they have a deeper moral purpose, but are bogged down with bureaucracy.

Prof, collaborative communities are better because:

  • Have clear purpose for all learning
  • Work together to achieve that purpose, assess and evaluate together
  • Collaborative responsibility
  • Authentic pedagogy
  • Have social support for student learning

Urgencyàagencyàenergy needed for success

Staff need to be prepared for conflict and being uncomfortable for real change

3 keys concepts for school reform:

  • Increased participation and democracy
  • Focus on systematic restructuring through improvement plan
  • Innovative instruction

Connectedness between members the most important – fragmentation, overload and incoherence are big problems. Divided, and we’re conquered! Develop team-building and communication. But diversity important for new ideas, experimentation.

Complex change is not linear

Conflict and emotions are necessary to make wise decisions and work with people – we are not robots!

Quality ideas the important thing, and sharing them, developing them, with members

Be selectively innovative – do a few things, but do them well.

There is leadership, but initiative and self-organisation amongst the plebs, too.

“To become complacent is to become vulnerable”

3 powerful change forces: moral purpose, power, ideas/best practices. Collaborative cultures help these 3 things to happen.

‘As work becomes more complex and collaborative, companies where people work together best have a competitive edge.’ Does this mean that IL should be collaborative?

Advanced apologies for the weird fonts! Won’t let me change them, no matter what I do!

Langford, L. (1998). Information literacy: a clarification http://www.fno.org/sept98/clarify.html

Ppl keep saying that defining IL  is difficult –we need to do it if we are to map and assess it properly, + argue the case for TLs and libraries

IL, like all literacy, should be taught be all teachers, not matter their subject area.

Attitude is important in IL – about your own construction of knowledge, meaning and ‘self-interest’

“The concept of literacy really depends on the information needs of the society of the time… literacy is an act of semiosis. Therefore, if literacy is merely an act of semiosis, then every act that records symbols of human communication outside of the human body is a type of literacy”. Interesting - where does it stop?

“Australian definition of literacy may, in fact, be the best: to be able to function well in society, which entails the ability to read, use numbers and to find information and use it appropriately.” This is not really a constructivist approach to learning – who creates and changes the ‘information’?

How do we define IL? In skills, behaviours, attitudes? Thinking, researching? Process or content orientated? The attributes of a person:
"ability to access, evaluate, and use information from a variety of resources, to recognise when information is needed, and to know how to learn."

IL can be different depending on the curriculum area. Is about the attainment of skills, which rely on processes.

IL is something we keep learning forever – not a box we can can tick off at the end of yr 10.

Is about CRITICAL thinking behaviours.

Should be “key competence for individual and societal development in Australia” – that makes sense to me! Should TLs lead the charge in promoting/developing this idea? Or by doing that are they shooting themselves in the foot and making it look like their baby, like something that is not for everyone?

In ‘Every Chance to Learn’, all these IL skills/attributes come under ELAs:

1. The student uses a range of strategies to think and learn.

2. The student understands and applies the inquiry process.

3. The student makes considered decisions.

5. The student contributes to group effectiveness.
6. The student uses Information and Communication Technologies effectively.

And all of us are meant to teach these!

IL, and teaching of it, was certainly not taught at my uni. Focus is always on teaching content, not on skills. Need articulated maps of steps learners (may) go through as they learn, to help us understand how skills are obtained – this can better help us teach skills.

Abilock, D. (2004). Information literacy: an overview of design, process and outcomes. http://www.noodletools.com/debbie/literacies/information/2engage/infolit2.html

EDILERCE building blocks model of IL. Very detailed. Uses aspects of ILPO model, with expansion.

Would be great to PD, not so good to give kids a frame to hang their meta-learning on.

Herring & Tarter, Progress in developing information literacy in a secondary school using the PLUS model

Did I read this last yr in the ‘Info Environment’ unit? (I think ths studied is referred to in Herring’s book)

Some students in the study articukated how they used the acronym

“Review the meaning of an information literate student in the school via discussion between staff members” – need to do this before can move forward – need to articulate what it looks like.

Teach info and strategies when needed – like James Gee

Different info lit models http://ictnz.com/infolitmodels.htm

I really like the Alberta Model :


Information Retrieval

Information Processing – BUT WOULD ADD ‘RECORDING’

Information Sharing


Would making links to other areas come under ‘evaluation’?

There are a number of differences, but I think the most appropriate, particularly where they’re specific, would depend on the type of task you give students: discursive or argumentative; answer a specific question or develop your own. Obviously RBL has implications here.

Herring, A Critical Investigation of Students’ and Teachers’ Views of the Use of Information Literacy Skills in School Assignments, http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/aasl/aaslpubsandjournals/slmrb/slmrcontents/volume9/informationliteracy.cfm

Have I read about this in Herring’s book? Yes, I think I have.
More about the indefinable nature of IL
Remember to check out this more IL evidence: Kuhlthau, C. 2004. Seeking meaning: A process approach to library and information services. 2nd edition, Westport Conn.: Libraries Unlimited.

Why would ‘digital literacy’ ever be different from ‘info literacy’? Digital is just a format/medium, not a special kind of information in this context. “It is argued here that information literacy encapsulates all sources of information and ideas and supports critical learning.”

Interesting definitions about ‘qualitative research’.

Is there much different in here to the previous Herring article?

Issue of students not doing preliminary planning and rushing their work hits home – no suggestions given, though.

Important to remember – the same IL model may not suit all students, so maybe school should use different ones? How confused would this make students?

[Use this text for reference about children preferring digital over hard-copy resources]

This is interesting and useful: ‘Teachers and SLMSS can, by taking a collaborative approach, benefit from this study by doing the following:

  • Seeking and analyzing feedback from students on the extent to which students benefit from information literacy skills teaching in schools
  • Examining the extent to which students transfer information literacy skills across subjects and school levels
  • Exploring students’ use of print and electronic resources in order to maximize student use of quality learning resources
  • Reviewing information literacy skills programs in the light of Limberg’s (2005, 47) focus on developing “ a repertoire of understandings” for students’.

I think that perhaps the complexity and variables in the IL processes are testament to the fact that behaviourist theories of learning are not really true, and constructionist theories are the way to go (and not just fashionable ideas)?

Wolf, S. (2003). The Big Six information skills as a metacognitive scaffold: A case study.


Emphasises importance of metacognition in the process/es

“Costa (1984) and Brown et al. (1984) advocated for the infusion of strategy instruction throughout the curriculum. Palincsar (1986) recommended that strategy instruction be gradually transferred from teacher to student in order for the strategy to be fully integrated. This transfer or gradual fading of support for the student is a central element of scaffolding.”

“One common assumption associated with the design, development, and implementation of student-centered learning environments (particularly environments that are technology-enhanced) is that “learners must take more responsibility for monitoring, and reflecting upon, the learning process” (Hill and Hannafin 1997, 170). Further, student effectiveness within student-centered environments is attributed to an ability to monitor thoughts and actions; locating, selecting, organizing, integrating, and using relevant information to generate products; and evaluating the efficiency and effectiveness of personal approaches during open-ended learning (Hill and Land 1997; Land and Greene 2000).”

“Recommendations for scaffolding metacognitive development in students have been identified. Students can be taught to:

  • generate questions,
  • make conscious choices regarding information for problem solutions,
  • evaluate information in relation to multiple criteria,
  • summarize information,
  • and keep a thinking log or journal (Bondy 1984; Costa 1984).

Teachers can provide specific support and scaffolding for desired metacognitive skills by:

  • labeling student behaviors as metacognitive behaviors,
  • modeling specific metacognitive activities (e.g. self-questioning, reflection, strategy revision),
  • providing opportunities for feedback to the students,
  • and by adopting a specific learning or studying model for use within the classroom (Bondy 1984; Costa 1984).”

Metacognition is necessary for effective problem solving. A model also provides language for metalanguage.

Bondy (1984): “Preparing children to meet the demands of an uncertain future, however, may require a shift in educational focus from the content to the process of learning.”