information literacy
If we strive to teach students the best way to critically evaluate the information that they find in relation to the purpose at hand, we will produce a generation of digitally literate adults who are equipped to learn through their lifetimes. In the end, is this not the greatest lesson we can teach today’s students?
(Schrock, 2002)
What did I learn?
It is well accepted in educational academia that students need to have sound information literacy (IL) skills in order for them to operate at a functional level in the 21st Century (Herring, 2011; Kuhlthau, 2010). Research indicates that a Guided Inquiry (GI) approach to teaching, which is founded upon a constructivist concept of learning, is the most effective means of impacting on student learning now, and into the future (Purcell, 2010). ETL401 taught me the significance of the TL in being a key leader to initiating and supporting a whole-school collaborative teaching and learning structure based on GI.
ETL501 was invaluable to my learning in demonstrating the importance of the expertise a TL requires to effectively and efficiently evaluate the quality, validity and reliability of information sourced from any Website. This resulted in the creation of a Website Evaluation Checklist for Teachers. The creation and publication of my Gold pathfinder was a gratifying moment because I had experimented with a variety of new Web 2.0 tools, sourced different search engines, educational databases, directories and selected quality information using a set criteria and begun to value copyright issues. ETL503 reinforced the need for a TL to be astute in the selection and acquisition of print and digital resources in effectively supporting the classroom teacher to teach a particular unit of work.
What did I do with that learning?
The Gold pathfinder was utilised straight away by Stage 3, whose learning culminated in a Gold Day where students simulated living quarters and produced a short play reflecting on what life would have been like. One task for ETL401, required a critical comparison between two IL models. At the time, I wasn’t working as a TL and assessed the better model to implement would be the New South Wales Department of Education and Training (NSWDET) Information Skills Model (2007) over Kuhlthau’s (2010) Information Search Process Model because I surmised there would be more teaching support available when I was eventually employed in a NSW public school.
It is well accepted in educational academia that students need to have sound information literacy (IL) skills in order for them to operate at a functional level in the 21st Century (Herring, 2011; Kuhlthau, 2010). Research indicates that a Guided Inquiry (GI) approach to teaching, which is founded upon a constructivist concept of learning, is the most effective means of impacting on student learning now, and into the future (Purcell, 2010). ETL401 taught me the significance of the TL in being a key leader to initiating and supporting a whole-school collaborative teaching and learning structure based on GI.
ETL501 was invaluable to my learning in demonstrating the importance of the expertise a TL requires to effectively and efficiently evaluate the quality, validity and reliability of information sourced from any Website. This resulted in the creation of a Website Evaluation Checklist for Teachers. The creation and publication of my Gold pathfinder was a gratifying moment because I had experimented with a variety of new Web 2.0 tools, sourced different search engines, educational databases, directories and selected quality information using a set criteria and begun to value copyright issues. ETL503 reinforced the need for a TL to be astute in the selection and acquisition of print and digital resources in effectively supporting the classroom teacher to teach a particular unit of work.
What did I do with that learning?
The Gold pathfinder was utilised straight away by Stage 3, whose learning culminated in a Gold Day where students simulated living quarters and produced a short play reflecting on what life would have been like. One task for ETL401, required a critical comparison between two IL models. At the time, I wasn’t working as a TL and assessed the better model to implement would be the New South Wales Department of Education and Training (NSWDET) Information Skills Model (2007) over Kuhlthau’s (2010) Information Search Process Model because I surmised there would be more teaching support available when I was eventually employed in a NSW public school.
Since then, I have worked in a local public school where the updated Guided Inquiry Design Process (see below) was being trialled by the TL (Kuhlthau, Maniotes & Caspari, 2012). All models have similar characteristics and having already been exposed to the benefits of GI, I was more easily able to write collaborative units of work such as: Seasons (Year 1). I have a laminated copy of my Website Evaluation Checklist to which I continually refer, when writing units of work for students.
Before I commenced my current 3-day a week TL role in 2015, I approached the Principal with the idea of using a collaborative GI teaching model. While budgeting constraints have not enabled the implementation of a truly collaborative teaching model, the Principal did create a timetable, which at times, had two classes from the same grade accessing the LC at the same time so I could showcase the process of GI. This has involved modelling and team-teaching with a variety of classroom teachers, in which I scaffolded the learning process of GI and enabled students to develop skills that they can use back in the classroom.
What will I do next?
I am continuing to program and teach units of work using the GI framework and modelling this teaching and learning practice to numerous classroom teachers who have told me how much they have learned about technology and integrating IL skills into their classroom. Classroom teachers are consulting me about my use of Google Apps and how I integrate this into my teaching. My next step is to experiment further with using the different functions of Google Apps.
Currently, our school is trialling a scope and sequence that incorporates the new Board of Studies Teaching and Educational Standards NSW Syllabuses for Science, History and Geography (https://syllabus.bostes.nsw.edu.au/). While classroom teachers and myself are keen to create pathfinders specific to units of work, this has been temporarily placed on hold until the scope and sequence is finalised. Once my study is complete, I intend to work on this and include the following aspects into a school pathfinder as it would be relevant to any unit of work:
What will I do next?
I am continuing to program and teach units of work using the GI framework and modelling this teaching and learning practice to numerous classroom teachers who have told me how much they have learned about technology and integrating IL skills into their classroom. Classroom teachers are consulting me about my use of Google Apps and how I integrate this into my teaching. My next step is to experiment further with using the different functions of Google Apps.
Currently, our school is trialling a scope and sequence that incorporates the new Board of Studies Teaching and Educational Standards NSW Syllabuses for Science, History and Geography (https://syllabus.bostes.nsw.edu.au/). While classroom teachers and myself are keen to create pathfinders specific to units of work, this has been temporarily placed on hold until the scope and sequence is finalised. Once my study is complete, I intend to work on this and include the following aspects into a school pathfinder as it would be relevant to any unit of work:
- the steps involved in the GI process;
- a student website evaluation template;
- a research sheet to guide learning in the GI process;
- a generic student assessment rubric;
- a reference/bibliography outline.