4+Information+Literacy+and+ICTs

=** Information Literacy and ICTs **= = =

Excellent Teacher Librarians...
learning// ||
 * 1.1 |||| //understand the principles of lifelong learning// ||
 * 1.1.1 || // are well-informed about information literacy theory and practice // ||
 * 1.1.4 || //comprehensively understand the role of information and communication technologies (ICTs) in lifelong
 * 1.2 || //know about learning and teaching across curriculum areas and developmental levels// ||
 * 1.2.1 || //have a detailed knowledge of current educational pedagogy// ||
 * 1.2.2 || //are thoroughly familiar with the information literacy and information needs, skills and interests of learners// ||
 * 2.2 || //collaboratively plan and resource curriculum programs which incorporate transferable information literacy and literature outcomes// ||

Despite extensive access to technology, an appropriate level of human resources and policy and vision that extols admirable ambitions, site 1 has exhibited limited success in attaining the stated goals of the school library. This failure is the result of: an incomplete policy-implementation chain; a lack of collaboration between the TL and classroom teacher in the design of the curriculum; traditional, teacher-led and classroom-based pedagogy that is not aligned with an appreciation of the features and capabilities of contemporary ICTs; minimal explicit focus on contextually based development of information literacy skills for the students; teacher controlled learning experiences that give little autonomy to the student. Thus, to achieve improved outcomes for students and meet best practice standards, there needs to be both an appreciation and integration of the constituent elements of the entire informational learning and use process. These elements include: incorporation of the effective use of ICTs within the curriculum; a collaborative approach to the development of the curriculum; knowledge and consideration of current pedagogies in the development of the curriculum; and an understanding and implementation of information literacy skills for students.

Despite statements acknowledging the importance of ICT use within the curriculum, ineffective policy implementation strategies at Site 1 have lead to little change in the way learning occurs. Although attention has been given to the development of library policies that reflect the ICT priorities of the school (Kearns, 2002 ) as evidenced in the “Smart Goals” and ICT policy, there is little evidence of effective planning and implementation using ICTs and an attempt to “incorporate new technologies into conventional frameworks” (Lankshear, 2000 ) has resulted in this school failing to take full advantage of the ICTs that are available through the library.

For the effective use of ICTs to improve learner outcomes, there must be explicit consideration of ICT in the planning and implementation of the curriculum. At Site 1 there was little evidence of ICTs being used effectively despite the students and teachers excellent access to computers and digital information. The junior school comprises 325 students and in the library there are 6 research stations with networked computers and at least six networked computers in every classroom. The library also has a class set of laptop computers available. The library subscribes to 11 online databases and an informative, user-friendly library web site is available for students to search for resources, access information for assignment tasks and other library news. However, during the weekly “library lessons” that each class attends, ICTs are not used or discussed. Instead, students “fill out” a booklet that may be either their wide reading journal or a library skills book. In addition, it is expected and assumed that teachers bring their classes to the library for the research elements of the curriculum units. However, a lack of collaboration between the class teachers and the TL in the planning of the units have resulted in the absence of guidelines, ensuring that the ICTs available through the library are utilised effectively and incorporated extensively within the curriculum.

The TL and class teachers need to consider the use of ICT as an integral part of the curriculum. Bracey B (2005) asks “after the wires [hardware] are provided, what happens then?” She suggests that “technology and pedagogy should meet. The use of the tool [ICT] for teachers…requires their ability to personalize it to their teaching for many different uses”. To attain standards of best practice, there is need for collaboration in the planning and implementation of the units so that the expertise of the TL and the ICTs available through the library are utilised to their full extent.

The extensive access to ICT’s including hardware, software and web 2.0 in this library, has the potential for transforming the traditional instructivist approach to learning and teaching to one of a social constructivist approach. The resulting curriculum should emphasise “integrated resource-based and technology-based inquiry learning and collaborative project-based learning” enabling students to collaborate and work in teams, communicate their ideas and be creative and productive in the use of technology including web 2.0 (Ministerial Council for education, employment, training and youth affairs 2008 ). However, during my observations of student research in the library, it became evident that traditional teaching methods continue. The pedagogical approach was very structured, with teacher-led inquiry for knowledge-based, traditional forms of assessment. Although the layout of the library at site 1 encourages group work, with group desks and networked research stations, both the TL and class teacher discouraged face-to-face dialogue between students regarding the research process. The tasks were individual, submitted to the teacher directly with no opportunity for student collaboration or peer feedback.

To take full advantage of the opportunities afforded through the advances in technology, and equip students with the skills needed to become effective members of this digital society, there is a need for TLs to adopt 21st century pedagogies that reflect a “bold and creative commitment to relevant and quality learning and teaching” (Whitby, 2007 ). The Strategic Plan (2010) at Site 1 states “emerging technologies (web 2.0) can be effectively used in teaching and learning.” However, I observed no evidence of pedagogical approaches that incorporate the effective use of ICTs, to develop 21st century skills and improve student outcomes. The curriculum should support the principles of lifelong learning, preparing students for a future of “ongoing engagement in solving real problems, dealing with real events and competently coping with the dynamics of real life (Whitby, 2007 ).

Due to a lack of collaboration in the design of the curriculum, the information literacy (IL) program at site 1 is isolated from the broader curriculum and the result is inconsistent distribution of information skills within the school. Combes (2010) suggests “… information literacy outcomes should be embedded into curriculum programs not taught as separate library skills.” She continues to explain “TLs are specialist support teachers for teachers - to help them design programs that are resource based, develop independent learning skills and embed literacy and information literacy learning outcomes - we should be working collaboratively with teachers to design the programs and to assess and evaluate those outcomes that relate to our area of expertise.” Collaborative planning of the curriculum, utilizing the expertise of the TL is essential if IL is to be consistently incorporated within the main thrust of the curriculum rather than considered a fringe academic skill that is addressed to variable degrees depending on the preferences of the class teacher to use the library for research.

During the research process, the TL at site 1 utilises a scaffolded “Research Matrix” that guides the students in the development and use of IL skills and allows them some control over their own learning. Hay (2006) acknowledges that scaffolding and guiding supports those students who require assistance to be “more efficient in research planning, locating and evaluating resources, selecting appropriate information, synthesising and ethically using appropriate information, and writing their assignments.” The matrix allows the students to work at their own pace and demonstrate the extent of their success in completing each stage of the process. It also enables the TL to identify those students who require assistance. Loveless (2001) explains that effective teaching is allowing the student to have some control over the learning activity, identifying those students that need more assistance and guidance, and those that need to have the opportunity to solve problems for themselves. However, excessive intervention, such as selecting and displaying the reference books to use, listing web sites to use about the topic, detract from the opportunity for the students’ independent use of their IL skills. Therefore, it is necessary to develop strategies that guide students throughout the research process while allowing them to maintain some control over their learning. The strategy should allow students to work independently to solve problems and incorporate feedback mechanisms that identify zones of intervention that are specific to the learner.

For the goals to be realised and standards of best practice to be met, there requires a unified pedagogical approach that addresses the learning needs of 21st century students and promotes a greater collaborative effort in curriculum planning. It is imperative that a policy implementation process is developed, that assures the translation of lofty ambition to practical efforts in fostering collaborative learning, independent learning, problem solving and a more consistent development of IL skills.