Herring & Bush: Info Literacy & Transfer

Key research questions in the paper:

• How did teachers define information literacy and transfer?
• What was the teachers' experience of using the New South Wales information literacy skills model with their students?
• What evidence did teachers find of the transfer of ils amongst their students?
• What factors may be identified that contribute to establishing a school wide culture of transfer of ils across time and subjects?
• What impact might the school executive have on establishing a culture of transfer of ils?

So, based on those, this article is one I should include in my abstract assignment.  I need to know more about the New South Wales information literacy skills model.   This is an issue I often have with academic journal articles.  There is usually an assumption that those reading know the context of the "discussion."  Apart from beginning with scrolls, everyone has to come into the discussion at some point.

But anyway.

1.  The article admits there is no agreed definition of "information literacy."  Hallelujah, it's not just me.  NSW is "the information process."  Stages:  defining, locating, selecting, organizing, presenting, and assessing.  Each stage represents a number of skills.  In the U.S. we tend to use "The Big 6."  I think I just deleted a pdf of an article about The Big 6 b/c it didn't look scholarly but maybe I should search for some and read them.

2.  Some criticize the use of any model b/c information seeking is an individual process.  The response, in general, is that we should teach a model and show students how to adapt it to fit their own style of information seeking.  This seems reasonable to me because what is the alternative--teach them nothing?  Have everyone re-invent the wheel for every student?

3.  Past research has focused on improvement of models:  students' identification of purpose, question formulation, concept mapping, information seeking, information evaluation, and the use of information and ideas in assignment presentation.  This paper focuses on transfer (more below).

4.  Educators do not agree upon one definition or on students' ability to transfer knowledge or skills from one setting to the next.  In this article, the authors feel they can show evidence of transfer in students.  Past research (Haskell) indicates that transfer is likely to be limited unless it is specifically addressed by staff and unless staff believe that encouraging students to transfer knowledge is valuable.  (why would an educator not want students to apply what they learn to other areas of learning??)

5.  Method used:  constructivist grounded analysis approach.  Did not set out to prove a hypotheses, used coding to identify what is happening in the data (as opposed to iding repeated themes), interprets the data (vs. merely reporting, allows for establishing categories), categories tested by researcher, coded data re-examined, can lead to theory development.

Data collection/study itself:

Teachers for grades 3-6 agreed to incorporate specific information literacy terminology into their science and (from what I can tell) social studies lessons.  Participating teachers were given a diary with sections for each of the 6 IL steps.  They recorded their own observations of "what they perceived their studetns' understanding and degree of completion of individual il steps to be."  Posters of the 6 steps were displayed in the classroom.  Teachers were also interviewed at the end of the term.  Before the next term, teachers were asked not to explicitly teach IL skills.  They were given comment sheets in lieu of diaries an asked to record observations at weekly intervals, recording observations of transfer.  Principals were interviewed about definitions and beliefs about il and transfer.

Data analysis:  data coded, final categories established after coding.  B/c of small size of study, no theory was set forth.  Conclusions are based on coded/categorized data.

Conclusions:

• diary observations:  there was extensive scaffolding for students, including providing defining questions (who am I looking for, what type of info do I need, why do I need the info?), guidance on how to select info or organize it, or how to format their final products.  Students did well with defining, locating, and presenting, but many had trouble with selecting.  This may have been b/c of low reading comprehension skills. Some reported that students seemed overwhelmed by information available.  Teachers did not comment on student search skills. (interesting).  Assessing stage was largely neglected by the teachers (or misunderstood to mean teacher reflection rather than student metacognitian).  The use of the diary/participation in the study resulted in teachers paying much more attention to students' use of ils than in the past.
• teacher interviews:  
• definitions of info literacy varied.  "There was no agreement amongst the teachers about what might constitute information literacy in the school context."  (this is why we need a dedicated TL)
• Most agreed the NSW model was helpful and that having a common terminology was important for students across grade levels.  They found the model easy to incorporate into their own teaching styles and found it forced them to focus on addressing gaps in student understanding.  Problems with the model included having too many steps (some could be combined), presenting too great a challenge for less able students (requiring more direct teacher help), and not helping with root issues like poor reading skills.  (students with poor reading comprehension were overwhelmed by information, particularly on websites, and the ils model did not help them with that problem).  Teachers all identified a need for differentiation.
• Teachers agreed that student ability to transfer ils over time/subjects would vary.  Most thought students could transfer the defining and locating steps, but doubted student ability to transfer all stages.  Most felt transfer would only really happen if teachers consistently taught the same model from year to year (in other words, one term's instruction was not enough for transfer to occur).  
• Teacher comments:  Teachers insisted scaffolding was needed for lower ability students.  Teachers in years 4-6 indicated evidence of transfer.  Year 3 teachers didn't see the transfer, perhaps because of their own narrow interpretations of the skills (related only to a formal assessment task).  Students showed the most improvement in defining and locating.  "most students showed an improved awareness of identifying a clear purpose for their information gathering, and most students appeared to have improved their web searching."  "Less able students still found some of the concepts in the model difficult to understand, whereas the most able students had incorporated the model as a whole."  Year 6 teachers noted improvement in how students assessed and organized information.  "less cutting and pasting. . .paragraphs better sequenced."  
• teacher interviews end of term 3:  
• information literacy:  teachers increased their understanding of info literacy and, in general, viewed it in a wider context, though some still viewed it as a process rather than a way of thinking.   Year 6 teachers referred to students taking a more critical approach to ils.  All teachers felt that having one model for staff and students was beneficial.  Shared terminology was also viewed as beneficial, and teachers felt that using the nsw model would become "second nature" to students.  High ability students demonstrated the most benefit, but all students benefited.  Less able students still needed "considerable support."  Teachers identified the need for teacher training, making sure everyone understood the NSW model and embedded it in their lessons, using the shared terminology.  Need for consistent reminders at staff meetings was mentioned.
• transfer:  teacher understanding of transfer had increased, attributed by teachers to discussions among themselves and with the tl.  Teachers saw a need for the whole school to focus more on transfer.  Teachers saw evidence of transfer among most students, more with high ability and less with lower ability students.  Teachers saw value in transfer but did not all agree that schools could "be seen to have culture of transfer."  One teacher who she wasn't sure (transfer happened) b/c she hadn't seen what others were doing.  To me, this means teachers need to talk to each other over grade levels/subject areas more often.
• Principal interviews:  (2 b/c one left in middle of study)  both agreed that developing information literacy was a high priority for the school.  1 said there had been considerable work in ils (b/c of teacher librarian), 2 said it had been done but that ils needed to be embedded in assessment.  Both saw culture of transfer as desirable but difficult to achieve.  1 said there should be a whole school approach with leadership from admin and tl.  2 said all staff must be involved.  Both agreed culture of transfer could only be attained with a combo of top down and bottom up approaches--staff need to feel they are involved in developing the culture of transfer.  Both felt it would be a gradual process, not something that could be imposed.

Discussion:

3 categories identified by researchers:  1.  teachers' adoption of the NSW model, 2. teachers' critical views on transfer, and 3. teachers' adn principals critical views on establishing a cutlure of transfer in the school.  Collaboration between teachers and TL is an underlying theme in all 3 categories.

1.  Teachers saw value in NSW model, noted improvement in students, particularly in planning for learning tasks and information seeking/use.  Evident that teachers had paid little attention to ex;licity leacthing ils in the past.

2.  At beginning, teachers knowledge of transfer was limited.  While they saw it of great value in principle, little attention was paid to transfer in the school.  Involved teachers took a "more critical view" of transfer, demonstrated by differentiation between groups (identifying those who could transfer skills easily vs. those who needed more scaffolding).

3.  Teachers and principals view establishing a culture of transfer as important, but difficult to achieve.  Factors which might influence developing a culture of transfer:  common terminology, formal and informal discussion of transfer within the school, and leadership on part of principal.

"Underpinning the above categories is the need for collaboration between the school staff and the school librarian."

Conclusions:  "To be influential in establishing a culture of transfer in the school, teacher librarians should consider playing an active role in:

• in-service training for all staff to establish clear understanding of meaning of transfer and information literacy
• gaining support from administrators
• establishing a close liason between teachers and tl and tl and principal
• embedding ils, including higher order thinking skills, in school curriculum
• ensuring a consistent approach to ils in the school via use of shared terminology across the school
• providing visual reminders of il in every classroom (posters)
• developing strategies for improving students' use of information literacy skills and practices in a virtual environment.

My response:  There are a lot of studies showing that student achievement is higher in schools where trained tls are involved in curriculum planning.  This study, though small, shows WHY that is true--because the TL can ensure that teachers all understand ILS themselves and are using common terminology to explain them to students, because TLs can consistently remind and assist teachers in embedding ils in their lessons, and because TLs can help teach and reinforce those skills across curriculum areas and grade levels.   While educators like to think they do this type of thing on their own, the truth is that teachers often teach in an isolated bubble, and the more budgets shrink, the more teachers are asked to do in their already limited time.  Having a TL to coordinate this type of collaboration and consistency across a school is invaluable.  CAN it be done without a TL?  Maybe, if dept/grade level heads take up that role.  But it will be done less consistently, and teachers will eventually get tired and go back to doing what they have always done in the past.

Frustrating given the current state of things in CA, but maybe I can help correct this issue in my own children's school at least.

I am feeling a bit better about my "focus area" and choosing articles for abstracts.  This one will be among them.  I'm kind of focusing on teaching and learning and the role of the teacher librarian, I guess.