“Learner-Centered Pedagogy” Now Available for Pre-order from ALA

Dani and I have been relatively quiet about this, but we have a book coming out from ALA Editions, and it’s now available for pre-order from ALA.

screen-shot-2017-02-08-at-1-11-34-pm

Here is a short synopsis of the book’s first chapter from the introduction, which gives a sense of the core thesis of the book in broad outline:

The overall thesis of this book is that learner-centered pedagogy involves taking seriously the idea that who we are as people matters in the context of learning. We’ve organized the book into six main chapters; each chapter builds on this core idea. In the first chapter, we introduce a working definition of learner-centered pedagogy drawn from the education literature, counseling psychology, and previous work on learner- centered teaching. We follow the pioneering “person-centered” vision of humanistic psychologist and educator Carl Rogers in placing empathy as central to humanistic education and therapies, by placing the concept of empathy at the heart of learner-centered librarianship. We therefore pose, “What is it like to be a person learning something?” as the central question of the book, which we partially answer in each of the following chapters. Finally, we reframe information literacy to be an explicitly learner-centered concept that involves learners using information to think well about what matters to them. This definition of information literacy will inform the practical strategies suggested in the rest of the book.

So there it is: essentially we aim for a “person-centered” approach to teaching research grounded in empathy, by which we mean that the central question for learner centered librarians to consider is, “What is it like to be a person learning something?” or example, the first chapter considers the educational and psychological research on “What is it like to be a person learning something from a motivational perspective?” It turns out that there’s a ton of empirical evidence on questions like this. So we consider:  What does the empirical research say about what makes people want to learn something, and, given this research, what concrete strategies can we use as information literacy educators to  tailor our instruction to learner’s motivational needs?

Subsequent chapters consider different elements of what it’s like to be a learner, e.g., from a cognitive standpoint. As we fill out our picture, we’ve tried to present an entire learner-centered approach to teaching info lit that’s not only grounded in the empirical evidence about learning, but also fundamentally grounded in the nature of what it means to be a human being.

Let us know if you have any questions: book is available for pre-order via ALA’s website.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Bibliographic Instruction is Dead, Education, Library Instruction, Posts by Kevin Michael Klipfel

Librarian in a Strange Land

It’s a Tuesday afternoon, and I’m teaching an introductory STEM class using a lesson plan that I’ve used approximately one billion times before, asking students to located a scientific study based on reporting in the popular media (shoutout to my awesome colleague Cynthia Cohen for first introducing me to this idea). Each quarter, I switch up the article so that it’s current; this time, I choose one about how consuming chili peppers can potentially help you live longer. In this class, we looked at two reported pieces: one from The New York Times that was a bit light on details, and one from The Olive Oil Times that included a surprising amount of evidence from the study. I’m hoping to complicate the idea that source type is a foolproof heuristic for quality, expecting that the students will claim that the NYT is a better source because…it’s the freaking New York Times.

We begin our discussion by looking at the NYT piece. “What do we know about this publication?” I ask.

“It’s not reliable,” one student says. “You have to be careful because it can be biased.”

This catches me by surprise. I ask the rest of the class, “Do you think the New York Times is a reliable source?” The majority shake their heads. I’m taken by surprise (not only because we’re specifically talking about peppers here): In every instruction session that I’ve ever led, sources like the New York Times are held up as gold-standard sources, basically the next-best thing you could get to a peer-reviewed scientific study. And, today, suddenly, it’s not.

In the days leading up to the inauguration, with “fake news” becoming an everyday part of our cultural lexicon, Danah Boyd publishes a piece called “Did Media Literacy Backfire?“, where she posits that, as a culture, we have done too good a job of encouraging people to question information, especially information that does not jive with their personal experiences and networks. Boyd writes, “Media literacy asks people to raise questions and be wary of information that they’re receiving. People are. Unfortunately, that’s exactly why we’re talking past one another.”

I read this piece, and it feels right: My social networks are echo chambers, and when I see postings from the other end of the political spectrum, I doubt them more and more quickly than those that implicitly align with my worldview, ultimately true or not. I hear and participate in conversations about how social media is so distressing these days, and my corner of the Internet gets more and more homogeneous as those people who don’t agree either fall silent or unfriend. The echoes amplify, but I barely notice, and I have trouble imagining that there could be an inverse version of my world, but of course there is.

I appreciate the irony that I am validating the conclusions of this post on my own experiences.

One way to understand information (and media) literacy’s goal is to create wary consumers of information. In some ways, this project seems to have been a resounding success; in others, not, as this skepticism tends to come out more in certain contexts, and not at all in others. The project of information literacy feels like success in small ways (e.g., “My students can find peer-reviewed articles!”), but feels like failure once writ large. What happened?

My hypothesis is that we all took the concept of “evidence” (and, consequently, “good” information being rooted in evidence) for granted. And now, thanks to world events, we discover that a concept that we implicitly thought everyone understood the same way… well, we didn’t. And now we have to face that.

So what do we do now? In an analogy that seems more and more apt by the day, librarians and educators must be Vergils, leading learners through an informational hellscape. And to do that, we can’t rely on our old tricks, like CRAAP, because they presume an agreement about meanings of terms like “reliability.” We’ll have to break down these concepts, and build them up together toward a shared meaning. This is going to require empathy, and collaboration with our educator colleagues because this can’t be done in a 50-minute one-shot–it’ll have to happen over years, with consistent reinforcement, and librarians can’t own it alone. It’s going to need us to advocate for spending our efforts on more challenging material, like why someone might want to find a peer-reviewed study in the first place. If we live in a world where people question everything (or everything that doesn’t align with their worldview),then let’s help them think about the questions they’ll need to ask to interpret those sources.

Every morning, I wake up and am not sure how I will find the world. I question things I thought I knew (Sure, CNN is sensationalist, but is it really “fake news”?). I wonder if the work I’m doing will have any impact. I don’t presume to know how learners will respond to questions now. This new world requires humility.

7 Comments

Filed under Bibliographic Instruction is Dead, Library Instruction, Posts by Dani Brecher

Important Articles in Library Science #1: Don Fallis’s “On Verifying the Accuracy of Information: Philosophical Perspectives”

A common complaint about the literature in library science is that, well, it basically sucks. This is, in my anecdotal experience, more often than not, claimed by people who don’t actually write such literature themselves, and seem to have a relatively dismal view of theorizing and reflecting on the nature of what they do. Those claims need not be taken very seriously.

But a lot of the library science literature out there really does, in my never humble opinion, kind of suck. The reasons I’ve usually heard cited to support this tend to be something like small sample sizes; lack of rigor; lack of transferrability from one library context to another; and so forth. I mean, this seems true enough, I guess, though I’ve never personally taken these reasons to be especially compelling evidence for the lack of usefulness of our professional literature: even if a study is pretty small it can still, for example, give you useful ideas to try at your institution, inform you of stuff other people are trying that you may be able to adapt for your own purposes, or whatever.

I’ve been thinking a lot about this and I guess, for me, the main reason I think a lot of library literature sucks is that it’s superficial: it’s not really grounded in any deep sense of what it means to be a human being.

Continue reading

6 Comments

Filed under Education

An Opportunity to Directly Support Public Library Education

My friend from library school Laina Stapleton is now a school librarian in North Carolina and is in need of a little funding support to better the lives of her students. Before I say more about that, let me say something real quick about Laina. When I was in library school I, quite literally, thought I was going to fail out every semester. During my first year we were required to take a computer skills course, which included things like basic programming where we had to built a website. I was absolutely lost in this class, was struggling to build a website, and was hopeless at coding. Laina sat near me, and though she barely knew me, took absolute mercy on my soul and helped me through the whole process even though she barely knew me. She just did it because I was struggling. She is, you see, a good person.

Laina’s school is now looking for a little help to turn their library into a dynamic, 21st Century learner-centered environment. Here’s a little bit of info about Laina’s students:

We serve a large, diverse group of students in a mixed urban-rural setting. Many of them come from low socio-economic families; this area of our school system is the poorest. They are historically underserved and are a high immigrant population; we have students from Ukraine, Russia, Moldova, Mexico, El Salvador, Honduras, Samoa and other Pacific Islands, Romania, Albania, and the highest population of Micronesians in our county. They bring their cultures, backgrounds, and experiences to school, creating a fairly unique learning environment that the library is truly the center of.

They visit the library of their own accord to 3D print, check out board games, socialize, access technology, talk books and reading, and as a safe space in an environment that can be volatile at times. They want to learn, to meet our high expectations, and are smart enough to recognize when we aren’t doing all that we can to help and encourage them and notice when things aren’t up to par.

Donations will directly support student learning in the library:

Our library has been undergoing a change beginning two years ago when both librarians arrived new to the school. Last year, we wrote a Five Year Collection Development and Library Management Plan. One of the goals is to update the physical appearance of the library to bring it into the 21st century and support our 1:1 program. We see an average of 120 students during our open tutorial period, 3 classes, and 17 individual students per day. Our furniture is approximately 30 years old and no longer viable for our programming.

It’s a wonderful proposal for a great person, so please donate to a cause that will really benefit the educational experience of North Carolina’s children. In this difficult political climate where many of us are not sure what we can do or how we can facilitate change, donations such as these, however small, can make a huge and direct impact onchildren’s education.

You can read more about Laina’s proposal (including a detailed breakdown of how donations will be spent) here.

UPDATE: The funding goal on this project has been reached; thanks to those of you who donated. You the real MVP’s.

Leave a comment

Filed under Education, Posts by Kevin Michael Klipfel, Reading & Literacy

Libraries and Critical Thinking: No Better Time Than Now

It is a depressing time to be both an American and a person who thinks that facts matter. We have a President who denies the reality of climate change; claims that performing a study into whether voter fraud occurred is in and of itself grounds for concluding that voter fraud occurred; and, of course, prefers “alternative facts” [sic] when the way the world actually is turns out not to be in his liking. Donald Trump’s world is a zero sum game where if you’re not a winner you’re a loser, and there’s no grey area between terrific and disaster. And this is, like, the first week.

But though Trump is as pernicious an enemy to critical thinking as we’ve seen in quite some time, this current state of affairs provides librarians with an opportunity to (re)establish ourselves as educators whose primary business is helping learners distinguish fact from fiction. Carl Rogers once said that when doing research “the facts are friendly.” I can think of no better credo for the information literacy enterprise, and no better message that we could hope to deliver to our students.

Librarians, I’ve always believed, are in the very business of evidence: we teach learners how to use reliable information so they can construct their beliefs based on the best evidence available to them. Whether helping a student find an article in a database; learn how to cite something in MLA; or write an annotated bibliography, all our efforts boil down to helping learners base their beliefs on the evidence.

The present situation affords us a unique opportunity to use our creative powers to make this expertise explicit, and help both students and other campus faculty see our value in the realm of critical thinking. There are any number of ways to do this that fall squarely within the realm of librarianship. And the best ways, in my opinion, will be lessons that maintain our neutrality in the face of politics and and our allegiance to the facts, whatever they may happen to be. Facts are not political, no matter what this, or any other government administration may prefer you to believe.

 

4 Comments

Filed under Bibliographic Instruction is Dead, Education, Library Instruction, On Being Human, Posts by Kevin Michael Klipfel, Uncategorized

Everything is Fucked … The Class

Interesting:

In a much-discussed article at Slate, social psychologist Michael Inzlicht told a reporter, “Meta-analyses are fucked” (Engber, 2016). What does it mean, in science, for something to be fucked? Fucked needs to mean more than that something is complicated or must be undertaken with thought and care, as that would be trivially true of everything in science. In this class we will go a step further and say that something is fucked if it presents hard conceptual challenges to which implementable, real-world solutions for working scientists are either not available or routinely ignored in practice.

The format of this seminar is as follows: Each week we will read and discuss 1-2 papers that raise the question of whether something is fucked. Our focus will be on things that may be fucked in research methods, scientific practice, and philosophy of science. The potential fuckedness of specific theories, research topics, etc. will not be the focus of this class per se, but rather will be used to illustrate these important topics. To that end, each week a different student will be assigned to find a paper that illustrates the fuckedness (or lack thereof) of that week’s topic, and give a 15-minute presentation about whether it is indeed fucked.

I took a few classes in library school that could have been titled this, but I don’t think it was intentional.

Leave a comment

Filed under Education, On Being Human, Posts by Kevin Michael Klipfel, Uncategorized

LC vs. Dewey?

Question for academic librarians: As a reference and instruction librarian, do you prefer the LC or Dewey classification systems? I mean this specifically from the student perspective: do you find that one or the other is easier for students to understand?

For most of my time working in libraries, I worked in libraries that used LC, but I’m now working for the first time in an academic library that uses Dewey. And my entirely unscientific, anecdotal sense is that students find Dewey easier to understand. It just seems to me to make more sense to them (I wonder if the explanation for this is that the fact that most letters don’t correspond to the actual letters of the subjects in LC (e.g., P isn’t Philosophy is kind of weird to students and Dewey doesn’t have to overcome that).

Thoughts based on your experience?

 

4 Comments

Filed under Library Instruction, Posts by Kevin Michael Klipfel, The Library Game