PD Series: How Do Our Students Learn?: A Cognitive Psychological Model for Info Lit Instruction

Just another WordPress site

PD Series: How Do Our Students Learn?: A Cognitive Psychological Model for Info Lit Instruction

and we are so happy to have Danny Brecher and Kevin Michael clipsal join us again for a PD session they did one with us earlier this year and we had a really great turnout danny is an instructional design and technology librarian at the claremont colleges and kevin is the coordinator of information literacy instruction at CSU chico and together they run the super awesome blog rule number one rule number one blog com they’re writing about all sorts of interesting topics in library land and they actually presented this session at low x earlier this year so we’re really appreciative that they’re willing to share this presentation with our audience for those who weren’t able to go see them at low x so damning Kevin the floor is yours and Jeff and I are here if you need anything from us okay thank you Emily Thank You Emily okay so thank you everybody for being here to listen to us talk about how our students learn our cognitive psychological model for information literacy instruction which is quite a mouthful but what we’re going to be focusing on today basically is how we can take a few things that we can learn from the cognitive psychology of how students learn what’s going on in students brains what’s interesting to them and so forth and apply that to our information literacy instruction so one of the central premise ease of our talk is that when we think about ourselves as information literacy educators the word educator is actually extremely important and brings with it certain commitments increasingly we are hold on as teacher librarians to have a really substantial teaching role with information literacy whether it’s in our case like in an academic library or in case with 12 situations so we are edgy and since we’re educators we actually have certain responsibilities and one of those responsibilities we think is to have a knowledge of what’s going on in this field of education so we can best serve our students so we can best serve our libraries and really be with it as it were with what’s going on with student learning so we can be we can be really contributing to Student Success the best to the best of our abilities so the idea of librarians as educators and with that coming on certain responsibilities is is maybe I think the central premise from which are interesting cognitive psychology stems from we want to know how we can be the best contributors to student learning that we can be so toward that end Jen and I are quite interested in what does it mean to be a student-centered educator what does student-centered learning mean I think we all have vaguely heard or know that it’s really important to approach educational experience from a student’s perspective we don’t want to be saved on this stage it’s sometimes called kind of administering knowledge from up top we really want to be epistatic and understand where our students are coming from and then tailor our instruction accordingly so our understanding of student centered teaching is that involves understanding students from the students perspective how they learn what motivates them and then we want to tailor our instruction so when we think about our instruction for information literacy in this way it helps us figure out exactly what we’re aiming for as educators we know we want to be student-centered and we know that means coming at it from the students point of view and we also know that means that we want to figure out what learning is what does it mean for a student to learn something so one of the things that we’ve drawn from the cognitive psychology literature the study of student learning is that the primary goal of education is to promote a change in the learners knowledge now we want to bring about a certain transformation in actually the brains of our students we want to change the way they think about our domain information

and even more specific than that just wanted to bring about this change the positive psychology literature gives us a few ways to actually measure whether our instruction is hitting the marks because it gives us ways to measure whether students are learning so there is two central measures of learning that we have drawn from this literature and we think that these measures of learning can really help us guide our instructions so what does it mean to say that a student has learned something one thing that this means is that the student can retain the information that we have taught them in other words can the student later once the instruction is over actually recall what’s being said so we can ask ourselves as educators thinking from this framework okay I want to be a good information literacy educator how can I then teach the material to students so that it back facilitates the retention the remembering of the information that aren’t actually presenting to the students this again gives us something specifically to aim at as an educator we know that from the literature that retention information is one of the things that means for a student to learn so what we can then do is figure out well what strategies actually proven in the scientific literature that we can do in the classroom to help students retain information what is the cognitive science about learning say about that so that’s we found we have found that to be one very helpful way to think about how we can really engage in best practice in the classroom we want students to retain the stuff that we’re saying what is the literature say about that a second measure of student learning is that we want it’s not just a regurgitate information we don’t want them just to be able to remember the specific things that we happen to say we also want them to think critically about it right we want them in other words will transfer the information that we have taught them in one context to another context so a second question we can ask ourselves after how can I organize my instruction to help students retain information is that we can figure out how can we teach as Matilda students what strategies are proven to be effective for helping students transfer information across domains we can try to help students think critically through information literacy education about the world around them but this is going to involve looking at actual teaching strategies that facilitates facilitate transfer and although this actually helps us assess we can figure out concrete assessments is this helping students retain information is this strategy helping students transfer information so the cognitive science of learning has helped us frame what it means to be a student-centered educator in this way and what we have found useful to actually turn to cognitive science we’re trying to answer these questions to figure out what teaching strategies will be effective in the information literacy education I’ll pass it off the damn in here thanks Kevin so I’m going to talk a little bit about why cognitive science and what can cognitive science tell and not tell us so basically cognitive science is the study of the brain so learning is of course one piece of that the cognitive scientists study all kinds of different things but in many ways what they’re studying is sort of the mechanics of how it works so not so much the art but the science of learning and teaching so what we’re really interested in as educators is how does information get in the brain stick in the brain so that question about retention but then how does it get back out again and how do we know that students are able to use it in new context so the retention piece and then getting the information into the brain piece is definitely something that cognitive science tells us it also gives us some tips on how we can promote this transfer to new context which is what we’ll be talking about today so one thing that I think was a very of an aha moment for both Kevin and myself when we took some educational psychology course work was that cognitive science tells us but students are more alike than

different in terms of how they think and learn so what cognitive science is basically saying is that we’re all human we all have brains of course we’re all different people but in many ways the way the information gets in and out of the brain is similar which is not to say that people don’t have different learning preferences does not to say that there aren’t learning disabilities or people are better at remembering certain types of information like visual information or music auditory information it just means that in general people tend their brains tend to work in similar ways and I think we both thought that this was very helpful as beginning educators to think about okay well here are some ways that we can really target our teaching but we have a better chance of students having these measures of success of transferring retention so oh okay I see that there’s a question about cultures so in many cases I think the answer is yes but this is something that’s basically human so they test this on other symbian animals as well and it turned out that they think a lot like Gossage is very interesting so one of our goals today or our primary goal today is to combine some of the findings from cognitive science with this idea that we are Student Center teachers and that we want our pedagogy to reflect this student-centered learning and then applying it to the information literacy context so to promote that we’ve come up with five principles for information literacy instruction drawn from the cognitive psychology literature and the first thing I’m going to talk about is creating a problem context so sometimes I like to call this setting mistakes so one thing that cognitive psychology tells us is that people are more likely to pay attention if they’re interested in something so if they see that something is relevant to them so in many cases when we conduct our information literacy instruction we want seems to come into our classrooms when they have an assignment at hand I think this is something very common in just the reason why we want this is because when they have some some stake in the matter than they’re more likely to pay attention if they’re more likely to pay attention it’s more likely to be retained in their consciousness the other thing that we can do is provide conditional knowledge to help promote transfer so conditional knowledge is knowing when and why to use different concepts and different procedural knowledge in new ways so like I am going to unlock my door this way i turn my key to the right and then I know that this is generally how you unlock doors but now I had this process explained to me and I can apply it to new context so by creating these steaks and by telling students why it matters we’re promoting this idea of retention so we take an assignment and the assignment we might consider the problem to be solved so you need to find five scholarly articles because you need the right up that has some evidence from different sources that have a high burden of proof let’s say then we think about the stage in the research process so have they already picked their topic if not then maybe that’s where we need to start because that’s where they’re paying attention right now if they’ve already got their topic are they looking for their sources if so then maybe that’s where we need to start right now and that’s the problem to be solved the other interesting piece of this is that as as humans were sort of hardwired to life to solve problems and in fact this is an evolutionary thing so as far back as 1949 there were studies done at the University of Wisconsin by a faculty member named Kerry Harlow where he looked at rhesus monkeys and he gave them a puzzle and he thought that he was going to have to bribe them with food or water different ways of reinforcing the behavior and what he found was as soon as he gave them monkeys the puzzle they started to solve it because they enjoyed solving it so just by having a problem or a puzzle people tend to pay more attention because our brains like that kind of stimulation so it’s very interesting okay so principle number two is limit learning outcomes so I think we’ve probably all been in situations where we talked to a faculty member and they say I’m going to come in and bring my students and I want you to teach everything there is to know about the library in one session which is not possible and the reason why it’s not

good pedagogy either is because actually the brain can’t take in that much information at once by providing so much information it’s unlikely that students will be able to retain any of it so that’s of course a problem which I think we talk about a lot in information science of information overload where people just have too much information and they can’t deal with it so they just tune out or only remember like a small portion of it so what’s interesting about this is that actually our brains have a certain amount of information that they can take in at once so again this is a pretty old study but I thought piece was published in 50 by George Miller called the magic number seven in which he proposed that the working part of the memory so what we’re engaging with when we think about things at the moment so when you’re learning something it starts in the working part of your memory that can hold about seven pieces chunks of information at once plus or minus 2 and this has been this has been something that people have examined in the years since fun and in some cases they have proposed that that number might actually be lower as low as to which I actually think is I’m not sure how that could be possible but two is a number that’s been out there so when the information is in the working memory then by practicing it it actually goes in to your long-term memory where students can bring that information back out at the point of need but if you keep putting more information into your working memory if you overload the working memory then either people will stop taking in that information or some of the information that’s already in there has to go out in order for the new information to come in so what this means is that by minimizing our content we can maximize retention and so a good rule of thumb is maybe to have two or three learning outcomes for a session and I think that once you explain two faculty members but this is the case but you know just like they don’t try to teach too much in their courses you don’t want to teach too much in your courses because what you’re teaching is valuable material so again if they have a list of 10 things that they would like you to cover in the session and say I can do two or three of these really well which are the most important at this time in the assignment going back to when what part of the process are the students in and then if you want me to cover more of this material maybe that’s an opportunity to have a second library session okay Kevin over to you Thank You Danny okay so principal three so we have tried thus far when thinking about preparing our session to to create a problem context we’ve worked with the instructor the faculty member say we are working with to create a problem for the student to solve we figure out where are the students at in the research process right now because they’re not going to be so interested in stuff that they aren’t presently thinking about so we figure out where are they at in the research process so they choosing a topic or are they needing to evaluate sources for the credibility of their evidence and then we focus on that major learning outcome we maybe offer the faculty member or the person we’re teaching for some possible examples of exercises we could do toward that done there is this question sort of like okay when we need to do the instruction with our actual students how do we deliver that instructional content and one major thing that the cognitive science literature teaches us is there’s an awful lot of evidence that the humanistic idea of just telling your students a story helps them retain information so what we can do is build a narrative in our classes with students the reason for this is that it really facilitates remembering there’s something about what it means to be a human being that we are interested in stories so one of our favorite people to read about education stuff is a professor named Daniel Willingham who wrote a really wonderful book called vitamin students like school and he had this really great quote and he says that the human mind seems exquisitely tuned to understand they remember stories

to such an extent that he calls stories psychologically privileged meaning we remember information and stuff that’s presented to us way more when it’s presented in the storage format then if it’s presented in other ways just as sort of wrote lecture so I like that quote a lot and it’s something that I think about when I think about how to present material I think well how could I turn this into a story format because again this is one of the ways that we’re all very similar as learners so Joan Didion one of our favorite writer says we tell ourselves stories in order to live meaning this thing about being human that interests us about the narrative format it’s just part of what it means to be a person to be interested in narrative so with that in mind we can think of very particular narrative modeling strategies in the classroom and I think we have been able to extract two different kinds of ways that we can tell stories to students in the classroom and sometimes one way of telling a story it was ending our content in that way it’s helpful and sometimes a different way so there’s two ways we have been able to figure out one is what I call narrative modeling and the other is what we’ve come to call storytelling so to illustrate narrative modeling that’s a picture of my favorite rapper Drake and one example of a narrative kind of modeling is you just sort of tell the students the story of how you performed the research task for them you model that behavior for them so then they can use that kind of divergent thinking that you are modeling for them in their in their own research process so the example of Drake is a good one I think because that’s a personal interest of mine so I remember I had an assignment once that was about music and culture that I was teaching for a faculty member for and the assignment was to write a pitchfork style music review this writer review of an album or write something about an artist you like so my narrative modeling when something was very casual and it goes something like this you say to the students something like okay so what we’re going to do in this session is I’m just going to give you some research skills they’ll be useful to you for your music and culture assignment you specifically tie it to that assignment and I say something like okay so when I got your assignment I was like man what the heck should I even write about and then I remember well one day I was one day I would say over my breakfast and the new drake album had just come out and i read this thing that the author said what was interesting about great is that unlike a lot of hip hop artists like jay-z or other people Drake isn’t about being like a sucky isn’t about being all top he’s just about being authentically himself so he has changed the nature of like what it means to be real or authentic in hip-hop to just being being authentically yourself rather than being like authentically wheel from the streets so then I modeled for them okay I took this one little line in black ink with a vulture article or very kind of not good popular source and show them how from there I turned that into an actual research assignment using the library and so forth but modeling that process just threw a narrative like how I actually went through what they are going through giving them a way to think about it is actually according to the cognitive science much more interesting than if I would have just had started a little later if that ok so I chose this is a topic and let’s start searching the library catalog you tell them story of how they could actually go about doing it through a kind of narrative modeling process of your own research process okay so that’s one kind of way to deliver content by telling a story which we’ve called a narrative modeling another way to tell a story and here’s our here is Galileo is just old-school straight up storytelling so this is from an article in the educational psychology literature in it gives us a really nice example of the

subtle tea of what’s on the left is a straight-up exposition of the Galilean telescope and on the right is putting that same piece of instructional content in a more traditional story format and what we learn of course is that putting in in its making subtle changes and putting in the form of a story is more interesting so instead of on the Left giving a straightforward exposition which seems boring to students we actually can give rephrase in a story about what Galileo did rather than some kind of objective facts about some scientific discovery you put it within a human context to put it within a narrative context and given what we’re like as people it becomes more interesting to the learner so I really think that it’s kind of cool that there’s a lot of evidence in science for what’s a real real kind of humanistic view of life that what people like to do is tell stories and what people are interested in is stories so that’s one way we found a really helpful for presenting information so on to principal for we’ve chosen a problem context we have limited our learning out and we’ve tried to embed the stuff we’re going to say about the research process in our own teaching in a narrative but then we have this question of like well what aspects of the actual material might we focus on is there anything that causes of science can actually tell us about about what part of the instructional material to focus on so what we have figured out is what helpful is to focus on what the cottage of literature calls deep structure so what is deep structure well deep structure is the inherent meaning of something what that means is that it’s the stuff that’s central really the important stuff about what we might want students to learn from a particular topic rather than a piece of super superficial knowledge about the content and the difference between kind of superficial knowledge and a kind of deep structural knowledge of material is that superficial knowledge only applies in one context whereas the deep structural knowledge in fact transfers so when we focus on deep structure of material we can help students transfer so here’s an example of what I mean by say a kind of superficial kind of knowledge versus a deep structural knowledge so if you take a very simple example of a polo shirt so you might ask me well what is a polo shirt and I could tell you it’s the black it’s the black piece of cotton you know that Kevin is wearing with a crocodile on it might tell you an example of what a polo shirt in fact is but it gives you a superficial understanding of what a polo shirt is right it only tells you in one case what a polo shirt is some polo shirts are not black alas not all polo shirts were made by the cost so it’s a superficial kind of understanding unfortunately a lot of instructional content in our libraries there’s a kind of superficial knowledge in that way and we’ll talk about this later with more examples from libraries but what we want to do is give us to the deep structural knowledge that applies in this particular case but also transfers to other contexts so for example if I say a polo shirt and this is from Wikipedia is a form of a shirt with a collar a placket and maybe two or three buttons that really actually defines what a polo shirt is in all cases so that allows that kind of knowledge allows students to actually think critically we can present it in our in one case in one problem context within library research

instruction but then what we can do giving soon as that kind of knowledge does is helps them transfer to other contexts so in other words teaching on to the deep structure of our information that we’re presenting facilitates transfer it facilitates students critical thinking which is one of the two main goals of Education want students remember stuff that they can transfer to other contexts and think critically about so figuring out what’s the deep structure of what I’m talking about whether it’s topic selection whether it is evaluating information what’s the deep stuff about this that on transfers to other contexts so I’m going to pass it off here to Danny sure so now that we talked about what type of content you might want to be covering in your classroom the next question is how go about teaching it and how to go about having students engage with it so principle number five is that active learning is in fact practice of deep structure so I think we talk about active learning a lot it’s definitely the way that pedagogical trends have gone and now we’ll talk a little bit about why this might be really good for teaching deep structure the first thing to note is that according again to our friend Dan Willingham is that as far as anybody knows the only way to get really good at something is to do it over and over and over and over again so this is again of something that’s become very popular concept in the past few years after Malcolm Gladwell talked about the 10,000 hour rule so the idea that you have to do something for 10,000 hours plus or minus a lot of hours in order to become an expert in something and it’s not just that you do it over and over again or without thinking you engaged with it in this very deliberate way so birtley practicing meaning that you focus on what you’re doing you’re putting forth effort it’s not too hard it’s not too easy it’s within that zone of proximity to what you already can do and that you’re getting feedback as you go that’s both critical and from an expert themselves so practice then facilitates the retention piece but it’s going to stick in your brain the deep structure piece facilitates moving into new context so if we put that together that’s when we would want to have active learning happening so I’m going to give you an example first and then talk a little bit more about it so here’s a whole bunch of different polo shirts so if I was in a classroom and we had just talked about what a polo shirt is according to the Wikipedia definition I might put up a whole bunch of pictures of different polo shirts or just bring sure it’s in general and the question then will be caned students take some of that sort of core knowledge of what a polo shirt essentially is and then apply it to these new shirts that they see so the one in the middle even though it’s not the same color and it doesn’t have a crocodile on it and it may be has a different number of buttons still polo shirt the one on the right even though it has stripes oh my goodness totally different and how the crocodile on it but it’s still a polo shirt because ultimately it’s the same thing if I put a picture of a t-shirt up there it would fail the test of what a polo shirt is it would have no collar you wouldn’t have any plackets all these various things that make a polo shirt a polo shirt but that’s not coming from me we’re asking students to do that task so that’s the active learning piece so yeah and Kevin is in fact he has deep knowledge of polo shirts i will say so the active learning is engaging with higher cognitive activities such as selecting organizing and integrating knowledge in new wave so one way that we might do this in a classroom is seeing is explaining something telling a story and then taking time to let students do it themselves because the more times that they do it the more likely they will be able to do it in the future and if they can apply it in different abstract ways so if we say okay is this what kind of article is this is it scholarly are popular and why what are the key features that identified as such is it because it’s reliable is it because it was published in a journal all these different things if they see multiple examples of that they’re applying it into new context and that’s very

important for being able to do it again in the future okay so now we’re going to turn to an example of how you might structure a whole class following these principles so the first thing we would do is start with the assignment prompt and again this is creating that problem context so instead of just having a general library session where you come in and say here’s the printers and here’s the databases and you might this in the future they have a very specific problem in mind and the assignment that i’m going to show you now I bet is we’re familiar to everybody so it’s very long let’s cut to the important part which is that the student will need to create an annotated bibliography of five scholarly secondary sources that they plan on using in support of their argument so that’s the piece that they’re coming to the library for really and so if you talk to your faculty member and ask them that are coming in to the library like what part of the process are they in they might say they’re picking what their topic is which is maybe a different learning at will definitely a different learning outcomes but maybe even a different class or are they at the point where they’re finding and evaluating their sources so let’s imagine that they’re finding and evaluating their sources so the first thing you might do then is come up with a couple learning outcomes so for example students will be able to find scholarly sources through the library website and maybe your second one would be students will be able articulate what makes a scholarly article a scholarly article so not only what are some of the like surface-level trappings or the publications that it’s in and how it’s weighed out but some of the deeper things like reliability and those again you could break that down into two separate outcome then you could start your class by talking about it in this narrative way and so my my preference is I often talk about it in the Drake context right so I lay out a roadmap of what I would you in this situation so I might too this is my topic and then I would think about different keywords and this is why I would take those different keywords and demonstrate my thought process as I go Kevin on the other hand I think sort of tends more towards the storytelling sides i’ll let him serve explain yeah thanks i mean yeah i mean it really does depend on the context about modeling topic selection i might do the road map kind of thing sometimes when like in this this is an example right how to put this into practice so if we were to play i might do based on all this positive science stuff is if we were doing this assignment example about evaluating information i was trying to figure out what’s the deep structure so right often professors talk about this in terms of you want student to be able to pick out scholarly sources and differentiate those from popular sources right and it’s not just this superficial sense that we want students to be able to pick out a scholarly source from a lineup you want to we don’t want to just give them a bunch of a bunch of superficial indicators of why this is a good source we want to tell them at bottom why do your professors prefer that you use peer-reviewed sources rather than non peer-reviewed sources and the idea that deep structure that transfers is that you want to check the evidence you want to make sure that the sources are reliable and the best kind of evidence we tend to have the story goes is that um peer-reviewed scholarly articles or the most reliable because they go through a very rigorous kind of fact checking process right so that the effect checking the idea of evidence is what the deep structure is not scholarly vs. popular but you can use that scholars popular distinction to frame it in a deep structural way so here’s one story I often tell I’m really a big fan of this Jay McInerney novel called Bright Lights Big City which is a very popular novel in 1980s and I got the idea of use this story this when I was reading this novel for fun but in the story Jay McInerney his character is a New Yorker magazine fact checker and so what’s his job to go through a potential a piece of the new personal pocket publish and check every single factual statement for whether it’s accurate and what he does is verifies it with a

reliable source right so one thing that I talked about is like there’s this young kid in New York whose job depends on whether or not um all the stuff in this magazine is accurate so I tell them that story and I give them this I thought experiment like imagine if your stakes were that high right that you would get fired for people get fired for believing something false how what kinds of sources would you want well you’d want the sources that have the best most reliable kind of evidence and then I tell another story right after that to give through this deep structural knowledge of reliability of what makes something reliable what makes something good evidence and I use this little continuum so I use a continuum of reliability because reliability is not all or nothing it takes place on a continuum and in order to illustrate a continuum I talked about this idea of tastiness being on a continuum so here comes more stories so there’s got the McInerney story here that’s another story right so if I were to illustrate the idea of a continuum right that things aren’t all or nothing that things are better or worse I’d be like all right something can be tasty or not tasty right and they can range from the two lousy to the absolutely delicious so for example where I was a college student you know you move out of the dorms after your first year you’re poor you’re broke so I was like the worst the worst the lowest level of tastiness is like eating ramen every day for four years and they identify with this they start laughing with this story of me the sad librarian who is that the ramen and then I talk about okay I just move to California the absolute other end of the spectrum the utterly delicious in and out burger right that’s like most of my waking thoughts now revolve around whether I can do it in and out burger for lunch so I love in and out burger now and they like that when I was at University North Carolina I would talk about the continuum of fun and beating dupe was at the top of the continuum and they like that so you have the idea of like yeah that’s a possible learning object right in and out versus the security of that five guys so the idea is that ok I’m one in the discussions in and out at one end of the spectrum that’s not very good is in ramen and then in the middle it’s like okay a PBA PB&J sandwich that okay that’s that I would be willing to eat that frequently so we get introduced this idea the continuum through like maybe like three or four stories right then we talk about reliability so okay we’ve got articles not based on research at all those are the least reliable those are these sort of any ramen every day for four years sources they don’t give you the right kind of intellectual nourishment but not based on evidence you don’t know if they’re true you don’t want to consume them right on the other hand you have peer reviewed articles those are the most reliable that’s like the in and out kind of sources because they have the best evidence and then somewhere in between you have your PB&J kinds of sources popular articles based in a lot of research so often there’s like a new of times article that mentions the scholarly study so you can say okay yeah I’d kind of be comfortable building my beliefs on that and what I’ve done now is get up a deep structure of the scholarly vs. popular distinction that they can then transfer so then I have an active learning piece that shows them various articles and ask them where would you place them on this continuum tryna get them to see the idea of a good articles one presents the best possible evidence and so practice or the active learning piece of that session is having students place different sources on this continuum so our practice is of the deep structure in that way by having them do specific examples of articles and figuring out based on the deep structure not on what it looks like not on who wrote it not on anything it other than the deep idea that reliability depends on the quality of evidence so this would be so you cannot say a lot of different things like Melissa in the chat says you might talk about how to read a sell the

article you might have various things but the central part of your teaching would be this focus on deep structure so I would hope that takes like 20 minutes on that focus just on that and then how students practice and then talk about talk about why certain articles fell where they did on the continuum and when I show this to faculty it’s always been very successful so that’s just like one example that you can use in a classroom that’s based on all of this stuff having a problem contacts the assignment limiting learning outcomes just talking about like what is a scholarly article and why is the professor’s prefer it and then getting them to practice to deep structure so yeah and I love this too I would say and I think I’ve used it in a slightly different way where we talked about how different articles work towards a specific argument and putting that across a continuum so there’s lots of different ways that you could even use this particular piece so the question then is what challenges and opportunities does this model present so the challenge is of course like you have to come up with all these different things that that will fit within the model which is very expansive and can be used very creatively but coming up with an active piece 4d structure is not always easy but i think that the opportunities definitely outweigh the challenge is for one thing this really professional eise’s us and so when we meet with faculty to collaborate on a course we can say this is how we learn you think about how people learn to hopefully and how can we help your students achieve what they need to achieve how can we help them be a success in your course how can we help them become good researchers and I think it was John in the chat earlier who said something about asking faculty what is something that your students struggle with and faculty always will come up with something and it may be something like citing their sources or maybe something like choosing good articles or reliable articles then we’re sort of a team right we can say we can spend a whole session or we could spend most of a session talking about these things I am as an information professional an expert on this I know how to teach this and I know how to explain it to your students so this I think gives us a lot of credibility so to me that’s the biggest opportunity Kevin do you want to add anything well you know thinking about it that way I mean when you try to figure out the fact problems the fact they are having with students research do you have like good solutions to them they really are receptive to it and treat you as an equal the experience look you know you see I think when people don’t when librarians don’t get invited back it’s when the faculty thinks they can do it themselves or doesn’t really resonate with their problems so if you go in there and talk about superficial characteristics of the information for you know like look to see what was written by and they’re like I can do that right or if you just show them basic database searching like here’s where the peer reviewed button is in Eric that’s not getting a deep structure and I find the more you get at each structure in ways of the faculty it’s even ways if that faculty member hasn’t thought about and that may mean builds up a lot of goodwill I think that you and your creative you’re giving them creative solutions to their problems but again they may not have thought of their like I could have shown them the button but they might not have thought of a way for students to practice what that actually means tell them what applause what are the costs polo is but it’s harder to get at that idea of like but what makes anything polo right it’s yeah so that’s the end of this particular presentation from us we would definitely love to hear from you we would love to talk about this more with you and obviously we’ll have a moment for a Q&A in just a second but here is our contact information and we’re on twitter as well and then the URL for our blog rule number one blog com where we talk about similar content to this frequently so now I think we’ll take some time for questions cool Thank You Danny and Kevin so much as you’ve seen the chat has been super active there’s been lots of feedback and questions coming in so we do have about five to eight minutes or so for questions so if you guys have any questions or feedback for Danny and Kevin feel free to drop it in the chat now there’s one of those I think go ahead I was gonna say maybe one thing to put up here at this point is here a couple

articles and books that we would definitely recommend for starting to think about these things which I think will maybe start to get at the answer to the question about where do you go for examples of practice exercises I think in some cases like they might not dig this for your particular context you may have to think of something but having a deeper understanding of some of these concepts I think would be super helpful so here are some starting places yeah I love this question by Sarah how do we change the culture of superficial teachings play fixed that’s something I think that what a superficial teaching to be to be honest and it’s really hard to try to change that and I think what you do is you are a model for the profession you try to do these interesting things you try to be a deeper educator and I think one thing that I’ve been successful what is like you know if faculty like if you’re doing your job well then other people see that this is maybe a good way to do it that there’s other ways to do it and you can push the profession forward in that way Danny what do you think about them so I think the other piece of that is that you could have assessment data that reflects that certain pedagogies work better towards whatever the outcome is and in fact that’s been part of our I would say our assessment an action project this year at Claremont which was led by library and Sarah low where we look at like does teaching certain information literacy outcomes make a difference in students final papers and does having a librarian in the classroom do so and what we found was yes it does so you could even make that more granular and say okay here’s something where you superficially sort of teach things and then you teach it in a way that focuses on deep structure and doesn’t make a difference and does it have a tangible outcome something like in the research paper at the end of the class right evidence talks right yeah exactly people like data and it’s kind of hard to argue with at that point right there was another question and I think that’s something I think about a lot tically on the blog is like okay where are all the great teaching examples like where are all the great where do you find so I think the way the person phrase it like where do you find these good teaching exercises and I think a lot of times it’s up to us to create them it is sort of what I think in one of the things that I’m constantly doing in my job i think is getting out okay what is the literature say about how students learn and how can i create a learning exercise based on that right and that continuum is just an example of that so I think understanding the literature is enormously important for creating practical things we want to create practical instructional exercises for information literacy that are based on good educational research and pedagogy and I think that it’s like the Wild West in a lot of ways information literacy in terms of those things existing it’s maybe that oh go ahead go ahead are they just say I think that this might be one thing that a la is thinking about in the new information literacy framework is creating these sort of sandbox spaces where people can share these exercises and I think that’s hopefully going to be a great resource and if people start thinking about it in this way and that is certainly one place but those might be available yeah and that’s what it seems to me the framework trying to get at like look here’s a framework we want to think about research conceptually right and it’s also getting a deep structure I think so want to get a thief structure but it doesn’t tell you what to do right I and I think that’s an important thing for librarians realize it there’s let me know one you know if you don’t if you just did the continuum without understanding say the deeper reasons I think it’s not that effective I think it’s about creating these exercises based on this deep idea of us as educators so that’s sort of my proselytizing about that okay guys i just wanted to chime in quickly i did see some people were asking about like the slides in the bibliography Danny thank you for bringing it up on the screen right now but just as a reminder for everyone we are going to be sending out the presentation slides and a recording and we’ve also started to send out the chat log as well and I think just seeing all of the resources and comments that people have been sharing in the chat I will include the an anonymous version of the chat log as well so that people can kind of come back through and see what else was being shared during the session and I would look again please feel free to contact us we’d love to talk about this stuff more absolutely and if you have a great exercise that you would

like to share we’d love to host that on our blog as well that might be something really great to add we’ve been inviting a lot of guest posts from really interesting librarians and so definitely get at us if you want to share something okay guys I was just going to say it seems like a lot of people are saying thank you so we want to say thank you to thank you so much for taking time out of your day and if you’re in Guam or Ukraine thanks for getting up earlier staying up late well we had a great time as always yeah thank you guys so much danny and kevin has always been really fascinating stuff as always and lots and lots of appreciation so to everyone who joined us make sure to connect with Danny and Kevin either on Twitter or if anything just check out their their blog there’s always like kevin was saying they’ve been having a lot of really interesting guest posts but there’s lots of great stuff on there for you guys to continue learning beyond just this webinar so thank you again to everyone who took the time to join us thanks to you Danny and Kevin and keep an eye out for the follow-up email in your inbox and we have two sessions in August coming up as well so we’ll send you some more information about that and thanks again everyone and enjoy the rest of your week