Those who subscribers to the OZTL_NET will already be aware of this site that links to podcasts about teaching Information Literacy in libraries. It might be of interest to ETL 401 students.
This is a great idea! Adventures in library instruction is a monthly hour long podcast (available in mp3) ”about teaching information literacy in libraries.”
http://adlibinstruction.blogspot.com/
and this one for both ETL 401 and ETL 501
http://www.rusq.org/2010/06/23/instructional-strategies-for-digital-reference-methods-to-facilitate-student-learning/
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Friday, July 23, 2010
Reference, The Net and the Nature of Truth
In ETL 501 we have been considering the future of reference material. Of first interest is the multi-faceted nature of reference material. On one hand, it is the books that are not available for loan and can only be used in the library itself. The State Library of NSW is a reference library in keeping with this definition. In school and public libraries, the reference books tend to be the most expensive books or books of which there may be only one copy. Print encyclopaedias, some dictionaries, year books and so on are classified as reference books because they are unavailable for borrowing and can only be used within the library.
Somehow, this means that the term "reference" has also come to mean those books, such as encyclopaedias, that have been designed for easy reference to information, facts and images. It has also come to mean academic or authoritative texts to which one refers for reliable, verifiable facts and information.
However, post-modernism does not sit comfortably with the notion that there is such as thing as reliable, verifiable facts and information. According to post-modern thinking, the authority or reliability no longer lies necessarily with an academic researcher, expert author or even scientific paper. It lies with the individual reader and their experience and understanding. If it's true for them, then it's true.
There is a positive and negative aspect to this. One the positive side we have come to recognise and respect the authority and reliability of other traditions, such as the oral tradition of indigenous cultures as having equal standing with Western academic knowledge. We also acknowledge that not all knowledge and wisdom lies in the realm of academia or rational modernism.
On the negative side, there is no longer a consensus of what constitutes an objective, testable truth. The growing awareness that observations and records can consciously or unconsciously influenced by the observer or author themselves has led to mistrust of much that would have been taken for granted as fact in years gone by.Scientific measurement may suggest an objectivity but the purpose and design of the experiment or empirical observation or the use, projection and interpretation of the measured observations have left contemporary citizens less inclined to view the results as infallible.
While this situation perplexes neo-Darwinists such as Dawkins and Hitchin, science has itself to blame. Ordinary citizens see the result of the arrogant assurance of science in the arms race, the space race and the dehumanising effect of technology. They see the champions of scientific progress choosing between a sterile, anti-spiritualism and a fanatical and fervent religious belief in the ability of science as the saviour of humankind.
This post-modern view of knowledge is evident in a resource such as Wikipedia. Obviously, there is also a financial saving to having willing contributor share their knowledge for free but the key element is the democratic approach that honours the knowledge of each individual and the ability of the collected readership to approve or correct the knowledge being provided.
At one level it serves the original purpose of the world wide web, to allow researchers around the world to share their knowledge but the pool of knowledge and expertise has been expanded or democratised. Somehow the arbiter of truth or fact is now the collective mind of the world.
Where does that leave the internet and Wikipedia as a reference source? It is a product of the desire to make information instantly available to whoever wants it. It is also a victim of the scepticism that underscores post-modern society. If it taken with these characteristics in tension, then Wikipedia and similar online references deliver exactly what they were created to provide.If we can educate our students to use them with this understanding AND to seek information and verification from a number of sources then we are contributing to their development as successful users of online information.
If we can reinstate trust both through our relationships with them and through the quality and usefulness of information and resources to which we direct them, we will do them an even greater service.
Somehow, this means that the term "reference" has also come to mean those books, such as encyclopaedias, that have been designed for easy reference to information, facts and images. It has also come to mean academic or authoritative texts to which one refers for reliable, verifiable facts and information.
However, post-modernism does not sit comfortably with the notion that there is such as thing as reliable, verifiable facts and information. According to post-modern thinking, the authority or reliability no longer lies necessarily with an academic researcher, expert author or even scientific paper. It lies with the individual reader and their experience and understanding. If it's true for them, then it's true.
There is a positive and negative aspect to this. One the positive side we have come to recognise and respect the authority and reliability of other traditions, such as the oral tradition of indigenous cultures as having equal standing with Western academic knowledge. We also acknowledge that not all knowledge and wisdom lies in the realm of academia or rational modernism.
On the negative side, there is no longer a consensus of what constitutes an objective, testable truth. The growing awareness that observations and records can consciously or unconsciously influenced by the observer or author themselves has led to mistrust of much that would have been taken for granted as fact in years gone by.Scientific measurement may suggest an objectivity but the purpose and design of the experiment or empirical observation or the use, projection and interpretation of the measured observations have left contemporary citizens less inclined to view the results as infallible.
While this situation perplexes neo-Darwinists such as Dawkins and Hitchin, science has itself to blame. Ordinary citizens see the result of the arrogant assurance of science in the arms race, the space race and the dehumanising effect of technology. They see the champions of scientific progress choosing between a sterile, anti-spiritualism and a fanatical and fervent religious belief in the ability of science as the saviour of humankind.
This post-modern view of knowledge is evident in a resource such as Wikipedia. Obviously, there is also a financial saving to having willing contributor share their knowledge for free but the key element is the democratic approach that honours the knowledge of each individual and the ability of the collected readership to approve or correct the knowledge being provided.
At one level it serves the original purpose of the world wide web, to allow researchers around the world to share their knowledge but the pool of knowledge and expertise has been expanded or democratised. Somehow the arbiter of truth or fact is now the collective mind of the world.
Where does that leave the internet and Wikipedia as a reference source? It is a product of the desire to make information instantly available to whoever wants it. It is also a victim of the scepticism that underscores post-modern society. If it taken with these characteristics in tension, then Wikipedia and similar online references deliver exactly what they were created to provide.If we can educate our students to use them with this understanding AND to seek information and verification from a number of sources then we are contributing to their development as successful users of online information.
If we can reinstate trust both through our relationships with them and through the quality and usefulness of information and resources to which we direct them, we will do them an even greater service.
Saturday, July 17, 2010
Bloom, Gardner and Pirozzo
In ETL 501, we're looking at the educational foundation for research. Bloom's Taxonomy has been suggested as a common starting point for learning, thinking and research. One of the forum posts referred to the combined Gardner/Blooms Matrix and the work of Ralph Pirozzo. I have attended two workshops with Ralph and I find his approach and his published material very useful. However, I always take the time to make the observation that combining Bloom and Gardner was originally set out in a book by Helen McGrath and Toni Noble, entitled Seven Ways at Once. The first of which was published in 1997. No doubt they will update these at some stage to include the eighth, Naturalist, intelligence. The McGrath and Noble books contain matrices of General Classroom Tasks and Starting Points. You can also find Blooms units and these Multiple Intelligence for a range of school stages and subjects (including Maths) in the TalentEd publication from the University of New England (UNE).
The point of these expanded grid is to remind us that, as James has said in the notes, that different students learn in different ways and that reference material is more than printed text. So the 42-grid reminds us that an image or an animation or even a site with sound is an important alternative for some learning styles.
By way of interest or maybe clarification here are three variations of the Blooms Taxonomy levels. I've used rows as there is no formatting available to make columns. The terms in the second row may help clarify the meaning of each level.
Bloom: Knowledge, Comprehension, Application, Analysis, Synthesis, Evaluation
Mean: Remembering, Understanding, Using, Breaking Down, Creating, Judging
Pohl: Remembering, Understanding, Applying, Analysing, Evaluating, Creating
You will note that the third row, by Australian author Michael Pohl (who has written lots of useful Thinking Skills books), has the "top" two levels swapped around. An interesting variation that is worth pondering if and when you have time.
In some ways Bloom would have expected that students moved beyond an external reference for synthesis and evaluation to their own thinking and creative skills. However, as we have found, finding a reputable scholar or researcher who has published findings to support your thinking. So Google Scholar, or the Research Assistance section of AskScott or Newscan for the older students OR Study Search Australia for both Primary and Secondary Students would be useful for the higher levels of Bloom's Taxonomy.
Here's a link to Study Search
http://www.studysearch.com.au/Home/tabid/36/Default.aspx
The Six Thinking Hats and the Thinking Caps (which I think are Pohl's variation but I could be wrong) overlap with Bloom in that they separate facts (White) from Evaluation (Positive and Negative, Yellow and Black) and Action (Green. Creativity). They also include the affective or emotional aspects (Feelings, Red) and metacognition (thinking about thinking, Blue).
The point of these expanded grid is to remind us that, as James has said in the notes, that different students learn in different ways and that reference material is more than printed text. So the 42-grid reminds us that an image or an animation or even a site with sound is an important alternative for some learning styles.
By way of interest or maybe clarification here are three variations of the Blooms Taxonomy levels. I've used rows as there is no formatting available to make columns. The terms in the second row may help clarify the meaning of each level.
Bloom: Knowledge, Comprehension, Application, Analysis, Synthesis, Evaluation
Mean: Remembering, Understanding, Using, Breaking Down, Creating, Judging
Pohl: Remembering, Understanding, Applying, Analysing, Evaluating, Creating
You will note that the third row, by Australian author Michael Pohl (who has written lots of useful Thinking Skills books), has the "top" two levels swapped around. An interesting variation that is worth pondering if and when you have time.
In some ways Bloom would have expected that students moved beyond an external reference for synthesis and evaluation to their own thinking and creative skills. However, as we have found, finding a reputable scholar or researcher who has published findings to support your thinking. So Google Scholar, or the Research Assistance section of AskScott or Newscan for the older students OR Study Search Australia for both Primary and Secondary Students would be useful for the higher levels of Bloom's Taxonomy.
Here's a link to Study Search
http://www.studysearch.com.au/Home/tabid/36/Default.aspx
The Six Thinking Hats and the Thinking Caps (which I think are Pohl's variation but I could be wrong) overlap with Bloom in that they separate facts (White) from Evaluation (Positive and Negative, Yellow and Black) and Action (Green. Creativity). They also include the affective or emotional aspects (Feelings, Red) and metacognition (thinking about thinking, Blue).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)