Instruction Adventures

Ah, the famous ACRL Standards.  I have heard so much about them, and there is a great deal packed into a fairly compact document.  Floating on the shifting tides of accreditation committee standards, ACRL has gone a great way in simplifying and explaining what we have to do to meet accreditation standards, and in (fairly) plain language, provided guidance to get there (at least in our documentation).  Outcomes assessment is necessary these days, whether you are in medicine or bicycle repair, so….

Outcomes for libraries being measured by “…the ways in which library users are changed as a result of their contact with the library’s resources and programs” is a challenging task.  We have to set up tasks and objectives that have measurable outcomes, then we have to measure the outcomes, and this may mean tracking outcomes (including graduation rates and employment history for academia) for years.  How many things can go wrong here?  Is simple better, or is it the only way?  Sticking to ratio data (number of library holdings per student enrolled) may be simple, but is it a metric that is meaningful?  Number of electronic holdings per student?  In the UA annual report (http://www.lib.ua.edu/sites/default/files/admin/AnnualReport2011-2012.pdf), I found metrics that made sense, including numbers of actual downloads per year—but outcomes…in search of outcomes.

Using the first year experience and EN 102 as an example, I see great potential in the collaborative process and cooperation with EN faculty.  To knit classroom objectives and facile use of library resources together is a win-win, clearly.  This is not outsourcing of faculty responsibility to library personnel, rather it is an opportunity to reach students who have not yet been reached in their earlier academic careers.  We can get to young scholars who have been satisfied up until now with the canned mushrooms of google and wikipedia, and bring them into the world of fresh mushrooms (if you can stand a kitchen analogy).  Next thing you know, these same young folks will be doing their own balsamic vinegar reductions, deglazing with apple juice, or making their own pizza sauce in the academic world, thoughtfully searching for opposing views in order to sort their own feelings, forming their own philosophies, and contributing effectively to their own education (and their classmates’).  Yay interdisciplinary work!  Yay librarian educators!  Yay thoughtful, skilled scholars who won’t take just anything for an answer!

Excited?  You betcha.  Challenged?  Even more than excited.  Time to dig.  Gotta go.

This reading was quite interesting. It reflected on research suggesting that active learning exercises are more effective than lecture-based, demonstrative sessions. This may seem intuitive to most of us, but I feel that we often forget these facts and instead do what is familiar and safe. For many of us, that means talking about what we know. However, as this article suggests, we must give up a bit of the control we hold over the classroom to the students in order for them to grow as researchers. We must allow them to actively participate in the process; otherwise the progress we seek for those students will be stunted. While this process can be scary and unnerving (change often is), it is also beneficial, not just for the students but also for us as instructors. As I mentioned in my last post, I have been finding it difficult to shift my focus from my own performance as an instructor to the experience my students are having. Perhaps, through an enhanced focus on active learning exercises, I can better deliver a successful instruction session.

What I really need to do is sit at the keyboard, read, and write as I am reading.  Things get assimilated so quickly, i forget what i knew before i read an article, and then it (new info) is inside my head, and i cannot unknow it for the purposes of writing a reflection.  How unanalytical is that, i wanna know?

Anyway, Ms. Manuel begins with an amusing litany of the supposed flaws of undergraduates’ intellectual, ethical, and scientific capabilities, and bearing in mind that it is every generation’s duty to drive older generations nuts, I say “so?”  In my limited time with GIS and riding the reference desk at Bruno, I have seen the breaking light in undergraduate faces when they see a search being constructed for the first time or they make a connection between a resource and the fact that it is at their fingertips.  Put me down as one who says that gaining “information literacy” is what undergraduates need, and if they have not caught on by the time they reach us, then they need that floatation device.  It is what feeding or gaining an inquiring mind is all about, and THAT is the beginning of any intellectual career.

One of the first things I learned via GIS is how important it is to begin at the beginning, and Manuel’s paper illustrates the many gaps that may exist among students.  Exploring exactly what a “source” is.  Giving students a good 360 tour of the Scout interface or the library homepage.  All good stuff.  Our boy, George Boole, and his scion, Professor Venn.  More good stuff than can be covered in an hour, but getting students interested and involved means that they can return to us with the next-level questions in their journeys.  Yay librarians.

Sobering thoughts: things like the Production Paradox and the Principle of Least Effort are always peeking over our shoulders, but each person’s education is that person’s responsibility.  If someone is determined to “C” their way through school and life, I cannot do much about that, even if they do wind up pushing my wheelchair (or hovercraft or whatever).  Education is a selective and a selection process—we can help pique interest, we can help construct searches, we can teach those who want to fish well how to fish well.

I like being involved with the EN 102 crew, and have found that the instructor participation and assistance really makes a difference, and now I understand Sara Whitver’s willingness to modify lesson plans at the last minute because an EN instructor has done so.  Being the most effective and flexible instructor that I can be is where it is at.  Find a way to get the “C” people interested in doing at least “B” work, and you may have just helped create a solid B student who aspires to be an A student.  One never knows.  I have teachers I remember.  I can’t stop and wonder right now if anyone will ever remember me.   Too much to do.  Too many young folks out there who have not yet seen the information literacy sun come up.  Just heard the alarm clock.  Later.

First, if anyone ever sees me clinging too tightly to my “assumptive clusters”, I want you to tell me…immediately.  And then, you can tell me what assumptive clusters are.  All snarkiness aside, Brookfield has made a good effort to condense a cloud of feelings and knowledge about being a good teacher into several pages of text, for which I thank him.

Using our own self-knowledge (and histories or autobiographies) to inform our teaching philosophies makes sense, as does trying to gain insight into our styles and function via our students’ eyes and opinions.  These are the tools we have.  Our colleagues can inform us about the assumptive clusters that we exhibit, among other not-so-great characteristics that may affect our teaching abilities, and the theoretical literature can enlighten us, but only if we can clearly understand it and put theory into practice.

I am 100% behind Brookfield’s estimation of classroom teachers’ estimations of academic literature as being written to impress tenure committees rather than to assist teachers in their work and professional growth.  Even when topics or concepts are hard to pin down, simple is better, and Einstein seemed to think that the heart of genius is simplicity.  Me, not arguing with ole Albert, no way.

Dismissing personal teaching experience as “merely anecdotal” is not only demeaning (Brookfield), but mad.  We are, each of us, our own experimental universe, and this includes students.  Our personal experience is all we have, as we do not have interchangeable chips that can be inserted while we do this task or that.  We ride around with and within ourselves, 24/7/365, and I think being truly reflective (on the road to being effective) must acknowledge and use that experience, as well as invite criticism from those around us.  What we do well in one’s eyes may be a fault in another’s.  Finding the balance—where is it; does it exist?  Of course it does, but the balance point is different every day, in every class, and for every student.

Thus, the challenge of teaching.  We enter classrooms inhabited by universes of unknown experience and capacity, unknown wounds, unknown accomplishments (also, unknown lack of sleep).  No one can tread every line in this environment without flaw.  No one.  For those who enjoy the unattainable challenge, this is it.

Btw, calling brownie points deviance credits?  Please.  Bottom line, no institutional brownie points, no voice.  No service, no voice.  Be heard, and if you need a life preserver, count upon your colleagues to throw you one, as carrying one with you all the time impedes progress and ensures mediocrity.  Just sayin.  Bouncing ideas.

After reading this article on reflection, I started to think about my experiences in the classroom last week. Honestly, it is a little hard to think critically about my teaching methods–after all, I just (co)taught my first week of classes, and be the end I was just happy I was able to get through a class without sweating through my shirt! For the first couple of classes I was sort of focused on performing well. Looking back, I realize my best classes were those in which I was relaxed, and not concerned about delivering a great performance.

I would have to say my second class with Mark Robison and my second class with Josh Sahib were the classes I feel best about. In those classes, I was completely relaxed, delivered my material well, and I actually felt like I helped some people. I wasn’t concerned with ‘not messing up’; I was more concerned with connecting with the students and hoping they were picking up on some of what I was talking about. I believe that once my nerves were out of the way, I was able to do what I was there to do.

Teaching is really an interesting experience, when new. I was so nervous last week, and I just wanted to do well in the classroom for my own sake. But as teachers, we are really there for the students–it should be that I am nervous for their experience, not mine. So there is a very interesting intersection that happens here, an intersection where we as teachers are trying to deliver for others and for ourselves. I am not sure how to resolve this, but I think if I was more concerned with what my students were learning or not learning I would be less concerned about my own success or failure as a presenter of material.

On the whole, I am mostly pleased with how my week of teaching went. After reading this article, I realize that professors I have had that were particularly great at both lecturing and classroom interaction are those that I have been trying to emulate. Though I want to branch out and try new things, it will be hard for me because I personally do not feel passionately about games in the classroom. I personally feel that whatever I am doing in the classroom needs to be geared toward the students’ assignments, coursework or life in an academic setting. I want to make it matter for them; I want to make them understand why it is important. I am not sure if I could pull off a teaching session built around games that ‘trick’ them into learning the material. That said, I think it is very important for me to realize that I favor lecture-style settings, and I need to realize that so I will always remember to interact with my classes and not go off the deep-end of lecturing students to sleep.

Forgot to mention that i had also sat in on part of a session that Melissa Fortson Green conducted.  She tackled the new Facebook tool, Graph Chart, just one day after it had made news in that all sorts of unintended consequences were possible.  That is, privacy settings or no privacy settings, Graph Chart can apparently pull up some “interesting” results, and Ms. Green dove right in and got the class going and interested by using the newest and greatest buzz.  My bravery is not equal, I am just sayin.

Just thought I would mention that i was in a meeting the other day for which the other attendees were prepared, and the subject was teaching philosophies.  Up until that time, i did not think i had a teaching philosophy, but when a “six word philosophical statement” was shared with the group, i almost immediately came up with mine.  “Bouncing ideas from student to student.”  All we need to do is keep what is bouncing more or less in bounds, and show students the tools and how to use them.  I really admire what i see happening with the professional staff here.  Certainly a worthy aim, this library instruction, and i am happy to think of all the competent information consumers being spawned on this campus.

I also sat in on a portion of a class taught by Michael Pearce, who took the students (and me) on a 360 degree tour of the basic Scout page.  Picked up some valuable tips, and now all i need to do is find them again, my constant problem.  Practice, practice, practice.

Sara Franks’ article on interdisciplinary study and critical thinking regarding sources of information was quite thought-provoking, given it’s focus on how to impart the latter on students during library instruction sessions. The author cites postmodern ideas, driven by Lyotard, that the grand narratives traditionally taught in academia are insufficient in representing the course of human history. I agree with this notion–think about how we think of periods of time within countries. We think of “Nazis” as every single German who lived in Germany during the 1930s and 1940s. We think of North Koreans as crazy, as brainwashed sociopaths. Imagine the people of those countries, talking about Americans as a homogeneous people. My point is, we generalize to move quickly through material, but to me this seems insufficient and incorrect.

As for library instruction, I agree that we should teach students to question or sources, their motives, and their funding and organizations. We should not teach them that popular sources are all bad and academic sources are all good. Ideally, students should question all sources, should question motives, should question the process through which academic articles are produced.

The reality is, we have limited time, and too many lessons to impart. A theoretical discussion about academic sources and how many are produced through a formula and not through genius could be better suited for an advanced library instruction class, but maybe not for an introductory one. In short, these sorts of lessons are important, but I am skeptical about how well one might move through this sort of material in a short session.

This inspirational article called “The Courage to Teach” was quite moving and made me believe I might actually be able to teach. The author, I thought, was very convincing in arguing that a teacher cannot merely ‘go through the motions’–instead, a teacher must commit his or herself completely to the task, leaving them open to success or failure, acceptance or rejection, achievement or heartbreak. I myself have struggled with this dilemma. On the one hand, I want to inspire my students, to teach them useful tools that will better serve them in their academic careers. On the other, I have received the same advice from quite a few peers–‘don’t stress out so much, in the long run, they’ll never remember your class.’ This is, certainly, terrible advice. No teacher should venture into the classroom ensuring themselves that at the end of the day what they do won’t matter. It is self-defeating with the intention of being self-preserving. The sliver of truth here is that ‘it is not the end of the world if I fail.’ I cannot live and die by my sessions. I should put my best effort into them, but they should not paralyze me.

In the end, I really liked this article. Not only was it inspiring, it put me in the correct frame of mind for teaching. That is to say, I should not go into this half-hearted, acting like I don’t care, just to make sure my ego is not damaged. This is something I am really looking forward to, and so I should go into it with a committed mind.