lit review: Defining Relevancy

You might think that I picked up Defining Relevancy: Managing the New Academic Library, edited by Janet McNeil Hurlbert and published by Libraries Unlimited in 2008, just to read the chapter "Opportunities for Small and Medium-Sized College Archives in the Digital Age" by Carole P. Johnson. OK, well I did; but, the chapter was not insightful for this research project. [Sorry, if you want to find out about that chapter, I encourage you to seek out the book.] I did find a few other chapters to be more fitting to my cause and so will discuss them here.

Christopher Cox, "Changing Demographics: Meet the Students and Faculty of the Future" explains Millennials as 'diverse' (p.3). To my surprise, this group was born between 1982 and 2002 (really, I had no idea the scope was that wide). Qualities that Cox explores of this diverse group, with which we are all speaking for the considerable future in academia, are:

• 'they are ethnically diverse and celebrate diversity',
• 'they are nontraditional',
• 'they expect choices and instant gratification' [yeah, I'll say],
• 'they are digital natives',
• 'they enjoy gaming and media', and
• 'they learn best experientially and collaboratively' (p.4-12).

Naturally, I focused on the description of learning experimentally and collaboratively as my sessions have built in more and more of these elements. Cox encourages problem-based and active learning over lecture-based classes. He also encourages using online and offline collaborative spaces.

Section III groups together three information literacy articles worth noting by Sterngold, Lombard and LeVan, and Steffen. Let me start with the case study by Lombard and LeVan.

Emmett Lombard and Sally LeVan's, "Faculty and Information Literacy Case Study" provides insights on two need of faculty--scholarship and teaching support. The cumulative data, harvested comments, results, and appended questions are all included in this case study. If you are looking for the faculty's voice on these issues, this article may provide insights. Perhaps what I took most from this study was the methodology and the questions themselves. In my own survey of faculty, I might have benefited from this short, multiple-choice format, at least to begin the conversation. I will keep that in mind for next time I do a survey.

Arthur H. Sterngold provides some interesting insight with "Rhetoric Versus Reality: A Faculty Perspective on Information Literacy Instruction". I must admit; this fellow had me intrigued from the first sentence. Sterngold proposes that "librarians serve more as consultants to faculty than as direct providers of IL instruction" (p.85). Yes I know, this argument is not popular with my colleagues; but, he does provide a faculty's perspective and it should be heard in order to understand that perspective at the very least. It is only a 10-paged article; get a copy and see what Sterngold says in his own words.

Susan Swords Steffen's article, "Through the Information Literacy Lens: Managing the College Library in the Twenty-First Century", discusses the pressures of reduced resources  to scale-back or eliminate information literacy. She argues that despite this, successful information literacy can be provided and incorporated into other aspects such as serving users, reorganizing library spaces, using technology, and emphasizing the importance of information literacy for students.

Once again, I have turned to library literature for inspiration with my endeavours on information literacy. Although the library does provide a close relationship and some good insights, the archives must find their own path for literacy instruction. In this way, I believe that archives will define their own relevancy within the academic sector and beyond.

Discover Deeper Meanings: Just Add Archives

or, the session at WILU. 

[Much to my shock and dismay, WILU does not stand for Wendy’s Information Literacy Universe!?!]

On 8 May, Amber Klatt and I were fortunate to make a presentation to ten, enthusiastic participants at the Workshop for Instruction in Library Use (WILU) on the campus of the University of New Brunswick in Fredericton. We had 45, carefully-planned, jam-packed minutes to unfold our research. Here’s the nutshell version.

Everyone introduced themselves and told us briefly about their favourite teacher; why was that person your favourite? This provided some good insights for us all. After a quick review of the agenda, it was “get to work” time. We divided the participants into smaller groups. Our handout had two sets of questions and the participants were given reproduced archival material that matched one of those sets. This allowed us to reproduce an activity that would normally happen when students come to the Archives. [Curious? Here is the history activity; here is the biology activity.] The activity ended with a larger discussion on the question, “Why would a third year student seek out these resources?” Conscious of the clock, Amber launched into a short lecture on the benefits of our research to students, faculty, us and the Archives. [I picked up at that point, bragging that since 2007, 1400 students have had an Archives class! But, I digress.] I briefly explained the six methods that we used to deliver our classes to students and the factors that unconsciously structured our choices. Finally, it was the participants turn to think about ideas for their own classes. Amber explained an activity whereby everyone would write down a class delivery idea, then share it with someone, and then share both of those ideas with someone else. In this way, participants would come out of the session with four, new ideas to bring home with them.

Amber and I structured the session to provide an experience for the participants—not a lecture. We wanted them to step into the shoes of a student for the activity, then step back into the educator role to examine that activity, and finally leave with some new ideas. Our evaluation slips reflected that we were successful in doing just that. Thanks to everyone who participated for making it such a great session.

Here are some of my parting thoughts that I shared with the group, and will now share with you:

·         Archives are not passive places.

·         Archives are relevant to curriculum at the university level. Our research has proven that!

·         Archives can contribute to literacy instruction in meaningful ways.

·         With the right tools and partnerships, an Archivist can be an active educator. Amber Klatt (now a graduate of the B.Ed. program) added a depth to the classes and questions that I could not have done alone.

I just HAVE to tell folks about this project. Really, I do. It’s a requirement.

As part of my grant application, I indicated that I would share my findings with colleagues. Keeping up this blog, and its companion, is only one way to share my research. Bringing a number of stakeholders to the same room and talking about the research is my usual way of sharing. Last week, I held a meeting with those stakeholders. I invited 25 faculty and administrators to participate in an activity using primary documents (about 30 minutes) and a presentation of the research findings (15 minutes). Only eight people came, but they were so engaged and enthusiastic that the group remained long after the session was over.

Many of the research findings have already been shared on this blog; but, some data was compiled only for the purpose of the meeting. I want to share it as you may be surprised by the findings.

Let’s start with numbers.

Below is a chart, showing the number of students, by discipline, taking an archives session between 2007 and 2011 (before my research began). “Other” refers to students in Theology and Interdisciplinary courses, which did not come every year. 

 

Here is a chart showing the numbers of students, by discipline, receiving an archives session between 2011 and 2013 (during the time of this research). “Other” refers to Psychology and English course.

 

Before this research started, the numbers of students having archives sessions were already very strong. During this research, the numbers became stronger. This increase came with no publicity on my part; the faculty heard about my sessions and asked for a session without my prompting. 

You can see from the charts above that History continues to grow. Education dropped off in 2012/13 because of a leave, but I already have a class booked for the summer term and expect their numbers to rise again. Kinesiology and Nutrition are expected to continue booking sessions in the Fall.

Now for the sessions themselves...

With respect to the “learning packages” we hoped to develop, there were great results. Our grant application stated that we would develop packages for eight courses; instead, we developed twelve packages and delivered ten. These packages fit into six categories and future sessions will be developed to fit within them. They are:

1.       Information: to provide an overview or introduction.

2.       Speed dating: to quickly assess many, course-relevant sources.

3.       Discovery: to slowly explore a source or group of sources for a common theme.

4.       Questioning: to explore a source in order to answer a specific question(s).

5.       Research Workshop: to practice course-specific research.

6.       Combination: some or all of the above sessions in various combinations.

I cannot state strongly enough the important of my research assistant, Amber Klatt. Her experience and education was vital to the success of this research. She has helped me understand how to create meaningful archives sessions that give the students the right tools to actively teach themselves about primary sources. I have said time and time again, the success of this grant was not what we were doing, it was how we were doing it. 

Snapshot impressions #10 – fifth class of the Winter 2013 term

Last class of the term for me did not go even a little bit according to plan. And, it was a good plan!

This was a small group of students, so the session could be focused on their assignment needs. They wanted a tour and time to ask questions (check). The prof wanted time to discuss sources at other archives (check). I wanted the students to have time to look at sources relevant to their assignment (check). We had over two hours to do all of that, so this is what I had planned…

Everyone in the class had been to the Archives and Special Collections for a session. This was a chance to take them behind the scenes and show them the closed stacks, answering their questions about the collections and preservation issues. Then, we would reconvene and discuss sources that would help the students with their research papers. While the prof was lecturing on sources at other archives in the country, I would pull material from the Archives. When the prof finished his lecture, the students would have time to review the pulled material. After they had seen the material, we would all have an open discussion about sources and evidence.

In reality, the tour took almost half of the class time instead of 20 minutes (or so). It was done in a completely relaxed manner and the students asked many questions while expressing a deep interest in the collections. They didn’t really want to take the class as time to work on their assignment, they wanted to learn more about behind the scenes. Although I had planned the session with the professor in advance, I had completely misunderstood the expectations of the students.

What did they miss? I had planned a 20-30 minute segment for open discussion about questioning sources. The purpose was to encourage students to think about the kind of questions they are asking and, therefore, the kind of answers they are getting (e.g., presence of bias, skewing your research, etc.). The discussion was going to open with the professor talk about how studying the past has changed dramatically over the recent 100 years and how it will change in the next 100 years. Then we all would have discussed the following:

1.  What is your perspective on how history is being told today?
2. Where do you fit in the process of historical research?
3. If you write about history, are you creating history? What role do you have in creating history?
4. What history do you want to tell? How does that influence your research?

No matter. This was a great class to end the sessions offered during the term. As for the questions, I will find a way to recycle them into another session next year – guaranteed.

Snapshot impressions #9 – fourth class of the Winter 2013 term

This course was introductory, so you know what that means—too many students for one session. Fortunately, two sessions did the trick. [I find that offering the same session more than twice on the same day is too tiring and does cause me some confusion. I can’t recall if I mentioned certain details to one class or another, etc.] Two sessions works well and the students got the best of both worlds by taking the opposite session with a librarian.

The prof came to my second session and participated in discussions about the documents. Personally, I love when that happens. (I may have said this before.) I feel that it is important for the students to see the prof and the archivist together in the session and providing two perspectives on the content.

Because the prof and I had discussed the course content and assignment well in advance, my research assistant and I were prepared for this class. The assignment involved the students choosing a research topic, five of which were well represented by primary documents in the Archives. Oddly enough, that worked out perfectly—the research room has five tables. As the students entered the room, they randomly chose to sit at one of the five tables. Each table featured a single, archival document and a set of questions. All of the students had the same set of questions, aimed to help them probe the evidence on the table. The groups were given lots of time to look at the material and share their ideas before they were asked to speak about the records and discuss the questions with everyone. (Here’s how it was done: http://archivallessons.blogspot.ca/2013/04/extra-extra-come-learn-all-about-it.html) 

As luck would have it, some students sat at a table with the document that was relevant to their assignment. My research assistant and I have discussed if we should label the table’s topics to reduce some of the randomness of selecting a table. We have decided against it. The luck of the draw (or serendipity) is part of the experience of visiting an archives. Yes, some students will not be engaged as a result, but others will enjoy the element of discovery. We did build in a few minutes near the end of the session for the students to roam around and look at the documents on the other tables. I hope to incorporate more “roaming” in my future sessions.

Snapshot impressions #8 – third class of the Winter 2013 term

Once a term, it seems, I have a session that allows me to really bring out my creative side. This session provided a chance to do just that. You may remember my blogging about some of those books I read during the summer that seemed to have little relevance to my research but that had spawned a few ideas for the back burner. Aha—what sources of inspiration they proved to be!

The students in this class had been tasked with a challenging assignment. To help them, Amber and I set out to create a workshop-type session for the students to practice/brainstorm for their assignment. (To see how it was done, check out http://archivallessons.blogspot.ca/2013/03/more-than-just-pretty-face.html). Briefly, we had pre-selected five groups of records that could potentially be made into five, individual displays. The students were asked to review the materials, think about how to use the materials in a display, and prepare to defend their display idea to the class.

I enjoyed observing each group of students exploring their pre-selected materials with the aim to “pitch” their display idea to the class. Every group had only two minutes to convince the other groups to vote for their display idea. After a secret ballot was taken, the votes were tallied immediately and the winner was declared before the session continued with further discussion about important record-keeping issues.

All that said, there were drawbacks with the session too that may or may not be overcome. For example, we divided the room into five groups, each with a different set of pre-selected records. Students sat randomly at tables as they entered the reading room. We did not provide any indication of the topic at each table. This meant that some students were not interested in the records at their table while others found their records fascinating. Amber and I have discussed this “luck of the draw” method and see it as both an opportunity and a challenge for the students. I am not sure if I will change my approach in the future. Another example of a drawback was that only one student was the spokesperson for each group’s pitch. We have limited the timing of each pitch to two minutes. Perhaps there is a way to allow more students in each group to speak or pitch the idea so that we can hear more voices. We want the students to have the opportunity to be heard if they want to speak.

Overall, this session was successful. It was fun to develop and fun to deliver. Perhaps I will make few changes if I have the chance to use it with another class. Generally though, I felt that this was such a successful workshop that I plan to use it as an example when I give a presentation this Spring.

Snapshot impressions #7 – second class of the Winter 2013 term

Nope, I'm not having déjà vu. Almost exactly one year later, this class returned for another session. And, it was just as exciting! This time, I re-used some of the ideas that went well last year and brought in some new and modified ideas. 

As with last year, I used a set of physical exercises to get the class moving. [This exercise is described at: http://archivallessons.blogspot.ca/2012/07/anyone-here-busy.html]. To my delight, the students enjoyed it just as much this year. I also included audio chants, cheers, and music in the session. These audio clips are part of a sports-related web site that is prominently featured during the class. Using audio is certainly worth it and brings in an added dimension to the class.

New this year was a handout, one that acted as a reference sheet for the students and generated a lot of work for me. Let me explain. This is an introductory-level class. The professor wanted the students to understand the difference between primary and secondary sources as well as receive guidance with citation style. I wanted to make this an interactive exercise. So, one side of the handout gave ten examples of sources and provided a properly formatted citation example for each source (i.e., book, home movie, photograph, article, web site, etc.). I had each example in a box and randomly pulled them out while asking the students what type of source I was holding. As the students identified each one, they circled the word “primary” or “secondary” on their sheet, next to the citation. I spoke then briefly about the specific item (i.e., an interesting or funny detail) as it circulated through the class. The other side of the handout asked a few, specific questions about the presentation – key things to remember as we continued along. The handout seemed to give the students a reason to listen to the presentation.

Here’s where I took a risk. The handout also provided a space for each student to write down a question for me. I guaranteed them that I would respond. Am I a little crazy? Perhaps. Why did I do this? It was a large class and I wanted the students to feel that they could ask a question and not feel like it was “dumb”. I wanted every student to have a chance to be heard. I can tell you that there was not a single dumb question in the entire lot. Everyone asked a relevant question, some asked a detailed question, and some asked a reference question. All of the answers required thought, a bit of research, and a little tact. Did I mention that it was a large class? It took me four days to answer them all, but every student received an answer. Will I do this type of activity again? YES. In fact, the revised form is already drafted and ready to print for future classes. When I will use it requires a bit more of my discretion.

This class has returned two years in a row. Improvements and adaptations are being planned for next year. I hope that the professor comes back so that I can implement these new plans.