Reading, February 27

This week, I'm lucky enough to be reading several short stories and essays:

• "The Duration of Life" by the Brothers Grimm
• "Parrot Land" from The Brazilian Fairy Book
• "The Fisherman and His Wife" by the Brothers Grimm
• excerpt from "Darkness Too Visible" by Megan Cox Gurdon and "Why the Best Children's Books are Written in Blood" by Sherman Alexie

These are mostly children's stories or are about children's stories, so the differences between them are very interesting. 

The first, "The Duration of Life," is a folk tale about the stages of human life. It is simplistic, but with the ring of truth that folk tales usually have. Being by the Brothers Grimm, it is, of course, dark. The themes seem to revolve around punishment for human greed and knowing when to be happy with what you have. Good lessons for children, I suppose. I expect the discussion about this one to be either very minimal or pretty intense. 

"Parrot Land" felt familiar in the same way that "The Duration of Life" did. It is a frame narrative in which a princess who is apparently friends with a parrot that tells stories is being courted (?) by her evil cousin. The cousin sets up a failed parrot sale outside the princess's home to get her attention, but she asks for the storytelling parrot to distract her. It tells her about a prince who runs a bunch of errands to get his father his sight back and ends up with a shiny sword and a nice horse. I don't have a lot to say about it. Maybe discussion will prove the story to have more depth than what I see now. 

"The Fisherman and His Wife" is about how women are greedy and wrathful and don't know what they want. What else would it be about?

And finally, three cheers for Sherman Alexie. I'm sure this is the popular opinion, but I'm no hipster. The juxtaposition of these two excerpts highlights a lot of issues surrounding writing and librarianship, chief among them that literature is highly personal, and a lot of people feel that their way of thinking about it is the one true way. I can never condone censorship or book-banning (clutching my petticoat as we speak), but I can sympathize with a parent who sees the dark world of contemporary (or any?) teenagers and worries. Thanks to Mollie and Krista, though, for giving us the Alexie piece to calm our nerves. I think I know the direction this discussion will take. 

- K

Reflection on Class, February 20

We discussed book clubs in class on Thursday, and it was one of my favorite discussions so far. That might be because it was one of the few discussions we've had that relates directly to my intended career as a public librarian, or maybe it's because it made me feel like an English major again. In any case, it was nice to talk about something other than teaching.
I especially enjoyed the Socratic seminar in the second half of the class. Actually acting out a book group scenario was helpful for putting our readings into context. The index cards that we used to record our questions, for example, was a good exercise. In this case, only a few people actually read their questions to the group before the conversation hit its stride. In another group or class, though, all of the questions might have been needed.
I also noticed that the discussion felt very much like many of my undergraduate classes, where we sat in a circle around the room with the professor at the front, but we spoke to each other, not just to the professor. In this class, though, even though Kristin was a facilitator and not the leader of the discussion, it still felt like she was the leader. Maybe it would have been different if it had been a student facilitating, or maybe it wouldn't have mattered. I would be interested in how this dynamic would play out in different circumstances.
I am looking forward to seeing how our book groups this week will compare. We covered a lot of guidelines in our discussion last week, but I suspect that it is more or less intuitive in practice. I suppose we'll find out.

Reading, February 20

Our readings for this week were: 

• "The Evolving Book Group" by Beth Dempsey
• "The Book Club Exploded" by Barbara Hoffert
• "Teaching reading: beyond the plot" by Margaret Metzger
• "Socratic Seminars: Engaging Students in Intellectual Discourse" by Lynda Tredway

These readings ran the gamut of comfort for me. The first, which discussed mostly traditional but updated book groups was familiar and made me want to run over to the YDL and join a book club. The second was still about book clubs, but in a more large-scale, technologically savvy way. A little less Jane Austen and a little more Mary Roach, but okay. The last two readings concerned Socratic Seminars, and that's where I disengaged a bit. 

The accounts of various seminars, especially Metzger's first-hand account of seminars in her own classroom, are interesting (and I wish my teachers had had them) but what is the application in a library setting? I can't imagine a group of adults dutifully arranging their chairs in concentric circles to discuss (but only during their turn!) the Game of Thrones series. It's the sort of thing that a free-thinking, progressive teacher does, but that people are just too cool for out in the real world. The Metzger article did have a helpful discussion, though, about the pitfalls of leading a book group - derailing the conversation by accident, influencing the way people are talking in unhelpful ways, and distracting people from talking to one another by forcing them to talk to you. 

I much preferred the "Not Your Ordinary Book Group" discussed in the Dempsey article (no surprise there). That model - monthly meetings supplemented or substituted by online discussion - involved much less stress than the seminar model and even the examples given in the Hoffert article. All of that to-do, the arranging for authors or videoconferences, the ritual of the Socratic seminar seem antithetic to what my idea of a book group has always been: a place to talk intelligently but not pretentiously about a shared experience, which happens to be a book. A place to explore your own mind and get to know your neighbors a little better. Do we really need chair-circles and publisher-sponsored pre-packaged programs for that?

- K

Reflection on reading, February 13

This week's readings were (links require U of M log in):

• "Put Understanding First" by Wiggins and McTighe
• Chapter 3 of How People Learn

The readings for today concerned learning transfer and what teachers can do to assure that students understand material deeply enough to allow for it. Again, I think this is a discussion that fits more neatly into areas of librarianship with a captive audience, such as school and academic libraries. In these environments, students are (in theory) entirely oriented toward learning, so in-depth instruction is expected. In a public library, even if you take the long view of helping patrons to educate themselves, those patrons would need an exceptional level of interest and motivation to engage in learning the way our readings specified.

How much learning is required in order to facilitate transfer? As much as can happen at a one-shot workshop? A screencast? A workshop series? And how much time would patrons have to take out of their lives to engage in that much learning time? I also wonder what level of immersion is necessary. School children and college students are constantly involved with their class work; would a working mother taking one class a week on digital literacy be able to accomplish the same level of understanding, given all the other demands on her attention?

I guess my question really is: how do you teach deep intellectual understanding to someone who only wants a skill or working knowledge?

"Bonus" blogger blog

As an assignment, we were asked to read four bloggers for the past few weeks. Here is the write-up for the assignment.

The Bloggers

Libraries are for Use

• Karen R. Harker, MLS, MPH
• Collection Assessment Librarian, University of North Texas Libraries
• Harker's blog is based on the teachings of S.R. Ranganathan and his book, The 5 Laws of Library Science. Though posts are no longer explicitly about the chapters of the book, Harker includes elements of Ranganathan's teaching in her discussions.
  The main topic of the blog is academic libraries. Posts largely concern developments in the field (published studies, news, etc) with some of Harker's personal experiences mixed in. The tone is friendly and informal, but professional, and the posts tend to be medium-to-long and thorough. This would be a helpful blog for a smart person who isn't very familiar with academic libraries, since it covers a range of issues that concern a university library. 

Swiss Army Librarian

• Brian Herzog, MLIS
• Reference librarian, Chelmsford Public Library
• Herzog's blog revolves around the daily experiences of a reference librarian at a public library, combined with updates on the information field at large. The topic coverage is very broad, but Herzog shows a special interest in digital concerns such as surveillance and copyright. His voice is very personal, so that even posts about national trends or movements are based on a strong point of view and often a strong opinion. Herzog also posts particularly interesting reference transactions. The story of the patron who believed that her computer timing out was the work of the government trying to block her access to certain information was one of the better ones.
  Herzog is an active writer and speaker in the field of public librarianship, and the tone of the blog reflects the mix of his academic background and pursuits with his daily work with the public. 

David Lee King

• Digital Services Director, Topeka & Shawnee County Public Library
• King's blog is similar to Swiss Army Librarian in that it is focused on technology in a public library setting. The blog's tone and voice are also similar, though King takes a strong stance on issues like copyright less often than Herzog. King often discusses content creation and focuses more often on the use of digital hardware (cameras, sound equipment) than does Herzog. He also writes occasionally about makerspaces. The blog is very community-focused, and King is clearly interested in social media and its role in librarianship.
  He is an international speaker with a background in service. 

Tame the Web

• Dr. Michael Stephens
• Assistant Professor, School of Library and Information Science at San Jose State University
• Stephens, like the other bloggers mentioned here, largely writes about technology as it applies to librarianship (in his case, mostly academic librarianship). The technology about which he writes, though, is geared toward higher education. He writes often about MOOCs. Like Libraries are for Use, many of the posts on this blog are announcements and brief discussions of recent reports and other news.
  Stephens's tone is much less personal than Herzog's or King's. While he does discuss his own work, he does not delve much into his personal life or views. 

Analysis

• All of these bloggers were very interested in (surprise!) technology. It was interesting to see, though, how they all discussed technology in different ways. Libraries are for Use was the least tech-oriented, but Harker did cover reports and news that concerned technology and discussed it some in the context of academic libraries. Swiss Army Librarian wrote about technology as it concerns the general public, especially those who visit public libraries. Those posts were on big issues like DMCA and surveillance, which are not only related to libraries. David Lee King was also concerned with technology in public libraries, but he focused much more on content creation, such as videos and podcasts, as well as makerspaces. Tame the Web took a much more academic approach to talking about technology, focusing on its potential as a teaching tool for higher education. 
• I noticed a strong service ethic in all of these blogs. While only Swiss Army Librarian discussed interactions with patrons in the form of reference service, all of the bloggers wrote about their work in terms of making their library (or class) the best it can be for their patrons. They all also expressed a concern with bettering the world at large through information or libraries. 
• My Big Takeaways (TM) from this were:
• There is endless variety in libraries and librarianship, but you pretty much always know when a librarian is speaking. 
• As much as we may complain, our patrons and communities are still the most important things to us (professionally, at least). 
• You can't be a Luddite and a librarian at the same time. 

- K

Reflection on Class, February 6

This class cleared up a lot of my uncertainties from the reading. I hadn't thought of the possibilities for doing long-term teaching in a public library environment, but it does make sense. I still don't like the idea of treating a community of people of various ages the same way in which you'd treat a group of children, but I can see engaging in learner-centered teaching through reference services or a series of workshops or book clubs.

Something from our discussion today that stuck with me was the difference between summative and formative assessment. Kristin mentioned that graduate students tend to see individual grades as reflective of their worth as people (which is absolutely true for me) and, later, that whether assessment is summative or formative is to a degree in the eye of the beholder. That reminded me of the growth/fixed mindset discussion that we had a couple of weeks ago. If a person tends toward a fixed mindset, is all assessment summative to them? Is that something that teachers and other educators should take into account? We've talked about being aware of learners' prior knowledge or cultural context, but I wonder if having an understanding of how hard they are on themselves is on par with those considerations.

- K

P.S. I feel somewhat sheepish for saying this after Kristin made a point of saying that we're all responsible for asking our own questions, but I had no idea what a poster for a conference was supposed to be, either. So thanks, Emily.

Reading, Week 5

This week, we were asked to read:

• chapter 6 of How People Learn
• "The Fundamentals of Formative Assessment" from What Teachers Really Need to Know About Formative Assessment by Greenstein

These readings covered the basics of what formative assessment is - basically, checking in with students' learning in order to tailor lessons to their needs and development - and why it's important. Because it's where I'm headed, I read the chapters through the lens of public librarianship. I have to say, I'm not sure how to two go together. 

Certainly, when doing library-based instruction, it's important to understand patrons' prior knowledge and/or cultural context, something that was covered in the reading. But for the most part, the concepts of formative assessment and learner- and knowledge-centered environments that were discussed seem best suited to the long-term teaching of children. I don't know how well these theories would play out when conducting short-term teaching of adults. 

If a workshop in, say, how to use an e-reader lasts an hour, it would be possible to pause at the half-hour mark to ask the patrons to do a quick exercise to assess their understanding. But how then can the lesson be tailored to help those who need it? Getting to know your students also seems to be a vital component of creating a learner-centered environment, and it would be difficult in the context of teaching a single lesson to a group of busy adults. Or busy college students, for that matter, if you force me to think about academic librarianship. 

I can also see adults not responding well to teaching methods developed for children. Even I bristle a little at the thought of someone conducting something called "formative assessment" on me (even though I'm a student and it happens all the time). 

I'll be interested to see how these concepts play out in class discussion this week. I'm sure Kristin will say something I hadn't thought of, as usual. 

Class Reflection, January 30

We spent a lot of time this week revisiting material that we covered last week, which turned out to be a good thing, since most of us didn't actually know what we were talking about when it came to information literacy and (especially) transliteracy. I'm afraid I still don't know what I'm talking about regarding transliteracy, but I think I'm in good company there.

The most interesting part of class was when Kristen asked us to think about and write down the steps we took to complete our most recent research papers and the emotions we felt at each step. Maybe it's because I just can't stop talking about myself, but I found it illuminating to write down the actual process of what I had done. In case you're curious - as I'm sure you are - here is the unedited list:

stress out
pick topic (relief, uncertainty)
explore topic in general (curiosity)
stress out
search databases (stress)
ask for help (accomplished)
refine database search (confident)
start writing (stressed, a little confident)
search more, scrap some sources (looking for specific info) (increasingly confident)
finish writing (2 days before due) (relieved)

Without thinking much about it, I wrote "stress out" twice as distinct steps in my research and writing process. That's probably due in part to the fact that I could see where the lesson was going (Kulthau's findings about the emotional phases of information seeking), but also because as academics, many of us come to understand not just the intellectual processes of writing, but the emotional ones as well. We know when to allow ourselves to feel overwhelmed and when it's time to overcome those feelings and get to work. We know not to really relax until our projects are finished. 

I think that becoming a librarian, someone who helps others with these processes, requires formalizing that innate knowledge. It's a recognition and codification of what has become familiar over time. 

Writing this, I think about teaching my fiance how to cook. I have to remember what used to be new to me, the mistakes I made, and recognize the little things (where the oven rack goes, how to tell if you've set a burner too high) that I can now do without thinking. And this teaching happens as I'm still learning. It seems like teaching another person to learn or to seek information might be a similar balance of recognizing what you don't know and passing on what you do.