Invitation to Collaboration:

Teaching Information Literacy to University Teachers

Johanna Tevaniemi, Anne Lehto and Mirja Iivonen

Creating Knowledge V, August, 20-22 2008, Turku

Challenges in teaching IL to university teachers

Challenges in teaching IL to university teachers

Assessment of learningAssessment of learning

Feedback & Reflection

Feedback & Reflection

Core content analysisCore content analysisDevelopment

work of the courseDevelopment

work of the course

Tampere University Library- strategy & plan of action

Tampere University Library- strategy & plan of action

Invitation to Collaboration:

Teaching Information Literacy to University

Teachers

Organizing an update course to the

teachers and researchers

Organizing an update course to the

teachers and researchers

University of Tampere

6 faculties: 15 700 students, 2100 staff IL is included in the curricula in all faculties,

still not compulsory in all of them 2007: >800 library teaching hours,>5500

participants, >2000 credits (ECTS)

Challengesin teaching IL to university teachers 1

How to motivate university teachers to achieve better information literacy skills?

Requires collaborative methods, e.g. collaboration between librarians, administrators, experts in pedagogy as well as information and learning technology

Academic librarians have to demonstrate commitment to university teachers and understanding about the pedagogical approaches beyond the teaching of the disciplines

Challengesin teaching IL to university teachers 2

Resource allocation The high-quality teaching of information literacy

skills requires time and effort from the librarians and information specialists.

The library’s investments in learning environments, including computers and IT facilities.

A variety of needs, e.g. from librarians’ pedagogical competence to providing technical solutions and up to date teaching materials.

Challengesin teaching IL to university teachers 3

How to convince university teachers about the role of the library in integrating information literacy into curriculum

Seeing university teachers as gate-keepers

e.g. by introducing the electronic resources and services of the library to university teachers and updating their own knowledge of these issues

Empowering teachers

The objective is to make the university teachers commit to utilize electronic resources in their own teaching and research and in this way also assures the level of their professional know-how.

The importance of the teachers’ know-how can be seen clearly, when they direct their students to use available collections of information resources widely, to deepen their students’ learning in the subject area.

They also have to require of their students that they use electronic services and scientific electronic resources in the works which belong to students’ studies The expert use of electronic services and resources requires that the

students have developed their academic thinking and contextual analysis on their own discipline.

In this way, the teachers direct their students in their discipline teaching towards the deep approach learning.

Teaching the electronic resources and services of the library to university

teachers

One focus in Tampere university library plan of action 2008, is teaching information skills and electronic resources for university teachers

special updating courses of information literacy and information resources

many positive results

The Electronic resources and services of the library – an update to the teachers and researchers –

education

in the middle of January 2008

2 courses of the same content, in the sequence days.

duration was 4 hours

in collaboration with university’s Learning Technology Centre

the collaboration with other actors of the university gives status and visibility to education that library offers

altogether 21 teachers and researchers participated during 2 days

of the participants 12 gave us feedback

the education was planned on aligned teaching stages

Educational method / Implementation of teaching

general training in short information packages format the short and focused information clarifies their own prevailing knowledge of the subject to deepen their knowhow in the same teaching context they are told the most important sources for additional information and contact persons participants were encouraged to take part in to discussion and to make questions

the education took place in one of the teaching labs in library

participants could both familiarize themselves with electronic services and training, simultaneously in the matter being taught

the schedule and the purpose of teaching session were presented as well as information specialists with their specialty disciplines

The core content for the education,”Must know”

The core content covers the essential information and skills which are elementary for the learner to be able to adopt new

information. According to core content analysis, all the participants should master the core content after the

education. (Nevgi and Lindblom-Ylänne, 2002).

In this education: To make main electronic services in the

library familiar, in order to inforce their independent use

To learn where to get additional guidance for deepening the teachers’ individual learning

Assessment of learning

Method 1: participants self-assessment to find out how they themselves experienced their own learning process

About a week after the education Method 2: During the teaching session

information specialists observed participants and plotted posed questions and discussions.

Feedback collation (a)

The participants’ own assessment of their

learning during the education: In all the answers it was clearly brought out,

that they had received new information and deepened their practical knowledge. They all assumed that the course and its content was useful in relation to their own working tasks and that they could recommend the course to their colleagues

Feedback collation (b)

In open questions, the participants were also asked development proposals. These turned out to be various.

They expressed that they would have needed already earlier those skills and knowledge learnt during this course.

Mainly, they gave thanks for the education and its friendly atmosphere.

Feedback collation (c)Development work of the course

Those sections or parts of the teaching that emerged additional questions, can be brought out and emphasized in the following teaching sessions

In information specialists’ point of view: All information specialists, who were teaching in this

education reflected their experiences that they received during the course, together with other colleagues as well as alone. Self reflection is a very important tool for professional development.

Results

Cognitive results Knowledge about various information

resources increased Affective results

Teachers’ motivation and confidence in electronic resources strengthened and their uncertainty reduced

Behavioural results ??

In Conclusion

Librarians are experts who know information resources and search strategies, university teachers manage their subject fields and the evaluation of the relevance and authenticity of information resources.

The expertise of both partners is needed Therefore the library should take the initiative

and invite university teachers to collaborate with librarians in teaching information literacy to students.

Thank you for your attention!

http://www.uta.fi/laitokset/kirjasto/english

References• Bennett, S. (2007). Designing for uncertainty: three approaches. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 33 (2), 165-179.• Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32 (3), 347-364. • Brophy, P. (2007). Communicating the library: librarians and faculty in dialogue. Library Management, 28 (8/9), 515-523.• Catts, R. (2007). Evaluating information literacy initiatives in higher education. In A. Nevgi (ed.), Informaatiolukutaito

yliopisto-opetuksessa [Information literacy in university education] (pp. 33-52). Helsinki: Palmenia-kustannus.• Juntunen, A., Lehto, A., Saarti, J. & Tevaniemi, J. (in press). Supporting information literacy learning in Finnish universities

– standards, projects, educating online. Paper presented at Creating Knowledge IV, 16-18 August 2006. Copenhagen, Denmark. In J. Lau (ed.), Information Literacy: International Perspectives. Munich: Saur.

• (IFLA Publications 131), available at: http://www.ck-iv.dk/papers/JuntunenLehtoSaartiTevaniemi%20Supporting%20information%20literacy%20learning%20.pdf

• Langley, A., Grass E.G. and Vaughan, K.T.L. (2006). Building Bridges: Collaboration Within and Beyond the Academic Library. Oxford, Chandos.

• Levander, L. (2002). Reflektio yliopisto-opettajan työssä [Reflection in work of the university teacher]. In S. Lindblom-Ylänne & A. Nevgi (eds.), Yliopisto- ja korkeakouluopettajan käsikirja [Handbook for teachers in higher education] (pp. 452-467). Helsinki: WSOY.

• Löfström, E., Kanerva, K., Tuuttila, L., Lehtinen, A. & Nevgi, A. (2006). Quality Teaching in Web-Based Environments: Handbook for University Teachers. (University of Helsinki, Administrative Publications, Reports 34). Helsinki: University of Helsinki, Academic Affairs, available at: http://www.helsinki.fi/julkaisut/aineisto/hallinnon_julkaisuja_34_2006.pdf

• Nevgi, A. & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (2002). Opetuksen suunnittelun työkalut [Tools for planning teaching]. In S. Lindblom-Ylänne & A. Nevgi (eds.), Yliopisto- ja korkeakouluopettajan käsikirja [Handbook for teachers in higher education] (pp. 236-252). Helsinki: WSOY.

• Rader, H.B. (2004). Building faculty-librarian partnerships to prepare students for information fluency. The time for sharing information expertise is now. College and Research Libraries News, 65 (2), 74-80

• Rockman, I.F. (2002). Strengthening connections between information literacy, general education, and assessments efforts. Library Trends, 51 (2), 185-198.

• Smith, K.R. (2001). New roles and responsibilities for the university library: advancing student learning through outcomes assessment. Journal of Library Administration, 35 (4), 29-36.

• Sonnenwald, D. (1995). Contested collaboration. A descriptive model of intergroup communication in information system design. Information Processing & Management, 31 (6), 859-877.

• Tynjälä, P. (1999). Oppiminen tiedon rakentamisena. Konstruktivistisen oppimiskäsityksen perusteita [Learning as knowledge buildning. Foundations of a constructivist approach to learning]. Helsinki: Kirjayhtymä.

• Virkus, S. (2003). Information literacy in Europe: a literature review. Information Research, 8 (4). Available at: http://informationr.net/ir/8-4/paper159.html