Skip to content

Category: Teaching and Learning

The Research/Writing Connection and Why There Shouldn’t be Turf

Head on over to See Also, where Steve Lawson writes thoughtfully (as usual) about the connection between research and writing, information literacy, and the differences and similarities between librarians and disciplinary faculty.

To what extent should librarians help students see multiple sides of the scholarly conversation, develop their own arguments, or give other advice about constructing effective presentations? The only answer I have is “it depends.” It depends on a lot of things, but one of the most important is the librarian’s relationship with the professor. I know one professor, for example, who encourages her students to meet with me as they’re deciding on a topic, as they’re writing their papers, or at any other time in the iterative writing process. She and I in effect double team the students, pushing them to think not only about the answers to their research questions, but also about what makes a good research question in the first place. On the other hand, I know professors who bristle if I do anything more than teach the difference between keyword and subject searching. One professor would prefer me not to talk about evaluation of sources because that’s something properly done during office hours and by “struggling through” drafts.

While I would never suggest that librarians should usurp the professor’s role, I think that there are three specific ways in which we are uniquely placed to help students as they learn to engage with sources. First and most obviously, we are trained to think in terms of sources. We can make educated guesses about whether the information sought would be collected in a compilation, submitted to academic journals, explored in depth in a monograph, reported on in the news, or entered into an encyclopedia. We are adept at jumping straight to the questions “who would publish about this and where would they publish it?” Over the last few weeks, I’ve become acutely aware that most students cannot make educated guesses about these sorts of things. They just guess.

Second, we do not grade students. I’ve had students express confusion to me when they wouldn’t have jeopardized their standing in class to ask a “stupid” question. And I’ve had a couple of good responses from professors who, when I alerted them to a pattern of confusion in their classes, took steps to alleviate that confusion.

Third and most important, librarians are not usually as deeply immersed in the particular subject matter at hand as are the faculty. This often seems like a liability since we can’t simply pull related facts and theories out of our memories and construct searches from this base of knowledge. But far from being a liability, this is actually our greatest advantage. Because we don’t simply “know” the topic at hand, we get to model learning about the topic with the student. The hardest part about this is remembering to narrate our thought processes to students as we work together. I was reminded of this earlier this week when a student asked me how I knew which record in a result list to open. I explained that I didn’t and then consciously narrated through scanning the result list, picking up on clues from publication types and titles, looking at years of publication, and so on. Then I’d click on the record and narrate what I was seeing: title, author, publication name, subject headings, abstract. All this is new to students (especially first year students, though some seniors are almost here), but after a few minutes of this type of modeling most students will begin to take ownership of the search, suggesting new directions, pointing out records to open, and eventually running off to continue on their own. When we model learning, taking notes, going back and modifying old searches, picking up on clues, and getting excited when we find a juicy article, we’re not only helping students locate the information they need, but we’re also helping them learn the art of research.

On a related note, I would add that in addition to negotiating where librarians’ skills overlap with and complement disciplinary faculty’s skills, we should also consider how our skills overlap with those of the writing professionals on our campuses. Last spring I was invited to attend a meeting of writing professionals in our region, and it was eye-opening for all of us to realize that we both think about our jobs in similar ways, and that we both work with students on the same projects. And yet, students are trained not to expect too much help with mechanics and “proof reading” at the writing center. Writing professionals and faculty both expect students to learn about constructing effective arguments when they work with writing tutors. Why should it be so different for librarians? Just as writing tutors work with writers more than with papers, so also academic librarians are in the business of working with researchers, not simply of providing research.

Comments closed

Here’s Hoping

Yesterday was rather a trying day.

It all started during the night. You see, I was up half of it worrying about the apartment building burning down because one of my neighbors decided to throw one of her all-night parties, complete with banshee-like screaming (which is really her trademark). Anyway, this time she terrified me by setting fire to her kids’ art work which had been hanging on her apartment door. I could imagine her and her drunken friends using lighters on all sorts of other things, many of which could smolder for hours before bursting into flames. So I couldn’t sleep. (And yes, police were involved.)

Then I dragged myself to work to finish preparing for the classes I was supposed to teach. They were particularly challenging for two reasons: almost all of my preparation time during the week had been eaten up by impossible questions (which ate up hours of time and generally turned out to be unanswerable), and they were both for groups rather than classes, so there was no assignment to help motivate them to pay attention. I was also competing with their natural sense that paying attention to a library session on a Saturday was optional at best. So I had to come up with brilliantly exciting classes without the benefit of much preparation. Great.

To make matters worse, the organizer of the harder of the two classes (for the 20 new TRIO students) insisted that they be introduced to EndNote (along with getting a “general library introduction” and a tour of the library). Did I mention that all this was to take place in the space of an hour?

Well, I sat down and started listing all the things you need to know before you can use EndNote. You need the know the difference between a journal, an article, a book, and an essay in a book. You need know now that citation is important. You need to know which fields in the EndNote records are necessary and which are optional. And the list went on and on. So I decided to structure the whole class around citation as a way to introduce all this stuff, make them familiar with articles and books, and use the catalog and a database (since we could capture citations from those places into EndNote). By the end of the class, they’d be able to understand what EndNote does, but more importantly, they’d know what’s available to them at the library and some of the major distinctions between types of sources.

So here’s what I did. I took them on a whirlwind tour (which started 8 minutes late because they didn’t show up on time), then we got to work. We discussed Scholarly Communication and I highlighted citation as the key to following and joining in the conversation of scholars. Then we collectively came up with the goals of citation (which they figured was “to point readers to the words and ideas you respond to in your piece of the scholarly conversation”). I then handed out 3 books and 3 journals and charged each group of students with coming up with their own citation style and with justifying why they included the information they used in their citation and why they excluded the information they left out. Then we compared each of their citations with MLA, APA, and Chicago Manual of Style citations.

All of this took a lot longer than I’d figured (which I should have expected, but I’m only a baby instructor), and we were running late to begin with, so we were left with only 15 minutes for EndNote introductions (including the database and catalog searches so that we could capture citations). But all in all, I’m thrilled with the discussions I overheard while the students were creating their citation styles. They were arguing for and against including ISSN and ISBN numbers, discussing whether or not including the publisher’s name and the place of publication had anything to do with following the words and ideas of the authors, and generally teaching themselves a lot about the books and articles I’d handed out. What fun!

So maybe we didn’t cover very much in the grand scope of library research skills, but I kept remembering back to Randy telling me that students remember the experience first and the skills second. These students had a good experience. They were questioning me and each other, they were joking with me (about my status as the murderer in the Murder Mystery the library puts on for freshmen), and a few of them thanked me more sincerely than I’m used to at the end of a class.

So for next time, I’ll plan less. But I think I’ll include database searching as part of the process of looking at citations to figure out what you’re actually seeing in a result list. MLA International Bibliography would be good for this because it included book chapters as well as articles. I will also remember that this whole exercise (from discussing scholarly communication to discussing and comparing citations) takes 25 minutes if you’ve got 20 kids and 6 items to be cited.

Comments closed

Experiencing Competence Theory

Most of you probably weren’t reading this blog back when I talked about an article I read about Competence Theory. Well, now I’ve experienced it. I know it’s not the first time I’ve experienced it, and there’s absolutely no way it’ll be the last time unless I decide to give up being a thinking, breathing, learning being. (For those of you who didn’t follow the link I provided above, shame on you, and here’s the deal: those who are incompetent are incapable of telling when they do things poorly, are incapable of seeing the differences between their poor work and the work of experts, and are generally overconfident.)

Anyway, I’ve been happily building up my first web site and learning CSS and generally having a grand ol’ time mucking about with code. And in my defense, it’s not too shabby for a first try. (It’s also fun to have a space where I can experiment with cool new things like Meebo Me.) But I’ve learned two very important lessons: I don’t know what I’m doing (yet), and stealing borrowing code and learning from it is dangerous when you don’t know what good code looks like. You may very well “learn” to do some things that aren’t kosher.

Since I’m sure I’m not the only one out there who doesn’t know the rules of the HTML road, here’s one for you. You can only use standard tags. This is true even if the tags you make up seem to work just fine, and even if you see other people making up tags right and left. I still haven’t wrapped my head around why made-up tags are taboo even if they work, but I also remember wondering what the big deal was with Boolean searching when Google seemed to understand me just fine… so I won’t argue. I assume it has to do with the fact that some unenlightened people don’t use Firefox (yet).

I’ve looked through my code again, and I can’t see any more “non-standard” tags (non-standards sounds so much better than “fake”). I’ve come to terms with using the <'span'> tag with a defined class, even thought that’s so much uglier. And I’ve learned that whenever I learn a new, cool trick from someone, I need to run it past a known and identified expert in the field because I obviously can’t tell what’s what.

This is what I love about blogging. How would I ever have learned this stuff otherwise? I should be getting continuing education credits for this.

And thanks, Steve, for your help. You’re the best.

2 Comments

I’m Not Blogging

I promised myself that I wouldn’t blog tonight. I need more sleep than I’ve been getting. So this is just to say that I’m not blogging tonight. I’m really not.

While I’m not blogging, here are some random bits of nothingness that are running around in my head:

  • Don’t keep telling me there’s no one right answer. I’m tired of it, and usually that’s obvious anyway. It’s sort of like “um” while waiting for students to respond.
  • At IDEO they say “fail frequently so you can succeed more often.” I likey…
  • I’m apparently not a “feeling” learner (according to the learning styles assessment we did today). I’m a converger/assimilator. Don’t make me role-play or expect me to learn too much from the emotion-centric experiences of others. (But somehow I’ve got to figure out how to integrate this type of thing into my instruction or I’ll alienate all the Divergers out there who don’t care a wit for my thinking/doing/thinking method of learning.)
  • Randy Rocks! Can we get him to come to Carleton and talk to us? Please? Pretty please? Though it’d be a pretty penny to fly him in from Hawaii, I imagine… (I’m so excited that I get to be in two sessions led by him tomorrow…. I get all school-girlish-happy to be in his classes and be allowed to have fun while learning.)

Tomorrow morning we present our 5-minute chunks of a class and get critiqued by the group. Wish me luck!

Okay, no more blogging. Must do homework and then SLEEP.

2 Comments