As if "the dreaded one-shot workshop" wasn't enough, we're now moving on to the webinar. As far as I can tell, the webinar is a one-shot workshop, but distributed across locations and technologies, though it seems that more interaction is encouraged. I guess the webinar is meant to be more of a class than a presentation, but the teaching element was, I felt, just as appropriate in our fact-to-face sessions.
We read two articles from Public Service Quarterly about embedded librarians, who are assigned to exclusively to specific departments within academic institutions. According to Matos, Motley, and Mayer, the traditional model is placed (physically) into a department and meant to support the faculty and students in a variety of library-related ways, whereas the second model is a sort of distance-liaison, that department's sole point of library contact via a collection of communication modes (2010). The case study for the traditionally embedded librarian felt that her physical proximity to students and faculty allowed her to connect with and enrich her department (music) in ways that would have never been possible otherwise. The connected liaison case study librarian accounted the ways in which technology and different lines of communication had helped him to field questions, maintain a collection, and provide distance education for his business and economics department. It seems that face-to-face interaction with one's user base affords more complex relationships within one's department, but it is undeniable that technologies such as those developed for webinars allow librarians to reach today's users that may not be willing or able to visit a physical library or office.
We also read a chapter from How People Learn on effective teaching. The main points were that an effective teacher possesses knowledge both of the subjet area and the ways in which her students learn. Examples in history, math, and science emphasized the differences in effective teaching strategies between subjects, but what stayed consistent between all were the importance of subject principles and context within a student's own concept model, the greater concept map of the subject field, and life outside the classroom. Effective teachers understand how to engage students by eliciting and building on questions and held concepts from the beginning of the course. The takeaway for a librarian, who doesn't have a semester or year to build a lesson plan, might be the importance of gaining an understanding of a patron's current knowledge of a subject, and of communication in determining how to provide the best help in response to a question or in a workshop (or webinar).
Sunday, March 31, 2013
Week 9: One-shot workshops
Our one-shot workshops this week were quite varied in form. Each of the four teams in my group prepared a different combination of presentation and reflection to teach us about something interesting.
My group decided to spend a bit more time on the Pew Study brought up in class a few weeks ago about people's aspirations and expectations for public libraries. We spent a brief intro period going over some significant points (vocally), and then we handed out a copy of the study's executive summary for each team to review in more detail. After 5 minutes, we asked the teams to discuss how they felt the findings might apply to their chosen career path, followed by a group-wide discussion facilitated by us. Participants were able to pull out some points they found surprising, though we had some difficulty eliciting responses with connections to future careers outside of public libraries. Much of our survey responses pointed out that the review and discussion times were too short, or that even the executive summary was too much information to digest in so little time. Overall, I think we tried to fit too many components into such a short amount of time; we could have easily approached this study the same way we did with the book club, with much more reflection/discussion time, and time for each participant to peruse the study itself before we met.
We received a library-centered introduction to paper preservation in the form of a Presi presentation. This workshop was very well structured, and the handout was a simple note-taking sheet with 3 section headings and plenty of lines for writing. It was very evenly-paced and informative; my only recommendation was that the various web resources shown in the Prezi visual be provided on the handout, so that audience members wouldn't have to worry about frantically copying things down.
We learned the procedure for ordering printed work from the University's Espresso Book Machine via a PowerPoint presentation. Our handout was a printout of the slides, six to a page. While I learned of capabilities I had not considered for this service I have never used, the annotated screen-shot step-through was a bit hard to follow. Rather than explain options available on the screen for each step, it might have been more coherent for us to have received an overview of the possibilities for each step, followed by a live demonstration with a narration that referred to the information we had previously reviewed.
Finally, we were introduced to CIPA, the Child Internet Protection Act. The presenters handed out and reviewed (vocally) a well-laid out report that combined the act itself, the ALA Code of Ethics, and some relevant developments from recent years regarding the act's application in certain libraries. We then turned the handout sheet over, and were invited to consider the two case scenarios we read and to discuss how well we thought they followed CIPA and/or the Code of Ethics. It was a very interesting discussion, and the timing was great.
Overall, one-shot workshops are a lot trickier than book clubs. There are a lot more possibilities for structure, and the amount of time you have to work with matters a great deal in achieving an appropriate pace. It is important to put yourself in the participant's place and consider how you might fare as an audience member: What would you want provided? How well could you keep up? Is this the best medium or method for explanation or demonstration?
My group decided to spend a bit more time on the Pew Study brought up in class a few weeks ago about people's aspirations and expectations for public libraries. We spent a brief intro period going over some significant points (vocally), and then we handed out a copy of the study's executive summary for each team to review in more detail. After 5 minutes, we asked the teams to discuss how they felt the findings might apply to their chosen career path, followed by a group-wide discussion facilitated by us. Participants were able to pull out some points they found surprising, though we had some difficulty eliciting responses with connections to future careers outside of public libraries. Much of our survey responses pointed out that the review and discussion times were too short, or that even the executive summary was too much information to digest in so little time. Overall, I think we tried to fit too many components into such a short amount of time; we could have easily approached this study the same way we did with the book club, with much more reflection/discussion time, and time for each participant to peruse the study itself before we met.
We received a library-centered introduction to paper preservation in the form of a Presi presentation. This workshop was very well structured, and the handout was a simple note-taking sheet with 3 section headings and plenty of lines for writing. It was very evenly-paced and informative; my only recommendation was that the various web resources shown in the Prezi visual be provided on the handout, so that audience members wouldn't have to worry about frantically copying things down.
We learned the procedure for ordering printed work from the University's Espresso Book Machine via a PowerPoint presentation. Our handout was a printout of the slides, six to a page. While I learned of capabilities I had not considered for this service I have never used, the annotated screen-shot step-through was a bit hard to follow. Rather than explain options available on the screen for each step, it might have been more coherent for us to have received an overview of the possibilities for each step, followed by a live demonstration with a narration that referred to the information we had previously reviewed.
Finally, we were introduced to CIPA, the Child Internet Protection Act. The presenters handed out and reviewed (vocally) a well-laid out report that combined the act itself, the ALA Code of Ethics, and some relevant developments from recent years regarding the act's application in certain libraries. We then turned the handout sheet over, and were invited to consider the two case scenarios we read and to discuss how well we thought they followed CIPA and/or the Code of Ethics. It was a very interesting discussion, and the timing was great.
Overall, one-shot workshops are a lot trickier than book clubs. There are a lot more possibilities for structure, and the amount of time you have to work with matters a great deal in achieving an appropriate pace. It is important to put yourself in the participant's place and consider how you might fare as an audience member: What would you want provided? How well could you keep up? Is this the best medium or method for explanation or demonstration?
Sunday, March 24, 2013
Week 8 Class: Workshops and Ethics
We spent the first part of class discussing how to run a good workshop, starting out with brainstorming what makes a bad workshop. Most of the answers were typical (boring presentation, inappropriate length), but the topic of icebreakers ended up receiving quite a lot of attention. Turns out it can be tricky business asking groups of strangers to reveal even small bits of personal information, and those activities that elicit no real information from participants merely serve to try the patience. The best bet is to find an activity or tidbit to be shared that is relevant to the workshop topic at hand. Another potentially underthought section of the workshop is the orientation; you need to bring your participants around to roughly the same page on the situation/material, and make sure that you plant means of group management (e.g. cards for forming pairs and groups) at the beginning of the session. Be conscious, as when helping a patron one-on-one, of your participants' capabilities and potential comfort zones and accomodate them accordingly to minimize confusion and derailment.
Once we got through an outline/overview of workshop structure, we participated in a library ethics workshop by addressing two stories about recent developments for the Toronto Public Library. After assessing the ALA code of ethics in class, we read both stories in small groups and voiced how we felt the code could be applied to each in turn in a class discussion. First was the story about the library placing ads on the backs of due date slips; the ads will be managed by an agency, but the library has laid down some stipulations about ads aimed at children, and will receive income from the ads. The second, about linking the catalogue with an online retailer, seemed at first to be simply a convenience. Both instances seemed to be questionable on the sixth principle of the code, but feelings were quite diverse about the degree to which either situation offended or violated the code. Even when prompted to prefer one over the other, different answers were voiced, with varying reasoning for both sides. I felt that many would have been perhaps a bit closer to an agreement if we had known more details about each situation, including the unknowable: how would each play out on a case-by-case basis? Even in hypothetical form, calling ethically charged decisions remains difficult and time-consuming.
Once we got through an outline/overview of workshop structure, we participated in a library ethics workshop by addressing two stories about recent developments for the Toronto Public Library. After assessing the ALA code of ethics in class, we read both stories in small groups and voiced how we felt the code could be applied to each in turn in a class discussion. First was the story about the library placing ads on the backs of due date slips; the ads will be managed by an agency, but the library has laid down some stipulations about ads aimed at children, and will receive income from the ads. The second, about linking the catalogue with an online retailer, seemed at first to be simply a convenience. Both instances seemed to be questionable on the sixth principle of the code, but feelings were quite diverse about the degree to which either situation offended or violated the code. Even when prompted to prefer one over the other, different answers were voiced, with varying reasoning for both sides. I felt that many would have been perhaps a bit closer to an agreement if we had known more details about each situation, including the unknowable: how would each play out on a case-by-case basis? Even in hypothetical form, calling ethically charged decisions remains difficult and time-consuming.
Sunday, March 17, 2013
Week 8 Readings: Ethics in Helping
This week's readings tackle the difficult area of ethics at the reference desk. Perhaps the small number of pieces (only the ALA Code of Ethics and an 8-page piece by Mark Lenker) could be taken as an indicator of the difficulty and lack of authority about the topic. There are a few journals and plenty of articles dedicated to the subject of librarian and information ethics, but many are address situations and events much larger than the case-by-case struggles of assisting individuals at the reference desk or on the floor.
Libraries are particularly ripe for ethical dilemmas because of the potential power of information and the stance many libraries take towards its freedom and the privacy of their patrons. Librarians, in assisting others, have personal convictions to pit against professional duties that are more explicit and, sometimes, radical than other institutions. In his article, Lenker uses the example of a "more or less clean-cut young man of high school age" asking for information on marijuana cultivation as a question that sets the reference librarian asked to a lot of internal consideration. Should he attempt to learn more about the use to which this information would be put? If he does this, how will this effect his actions? His personal convictions stand, here, at odds with his library's approach to information freedom and patron help, but should he give in to the needs of the patron and his professional obligations or hold some integrity, thereby forcing his own standards onto another? What of the consequences of his actions?
Lenker stresses, toward the end of his article, that we should not resort to oversimplification (e.g. "the REAL question is" this one facet of the larger problem). Easier said than done; as I read through his case study, I found myself thinking "how long is the patron willing to stand there while you debate these difficult points in your head?" Ethics are subjective, complicated and difficult, and only extensive experience can possibly make the decisions easier for each of us individually.
Libraries are particularly ripe for ethical dilemmas because of the potential power of information and the stance many libraries take towards its freedom and the privacy of their patrons. Librarians, in assisting others, have personal convictions to pit against professional duties that are more explicit and, sometimes, radical than other institutions. In his article, Lenker uses the example of a "more or less clean-cut young man of high school age" asking for information on marijuana cultivation as a question that sets the reference librarian asked to a lot of internal consideration. Should he attempt to learn more about the use to which this information would be put? If he does this, how will this effect his actions? His personal convictions stand, here, at odds with his library's approach to information freedom and patron help, but should he give in to the needs of the patron and his professional obligations or hold some integrity, thereby forcing his own standards onto another? What of the consequences of his actions?
Lenker stresses, toward the end of his article, that we should not resort to oversimplification (e.g. "the REAL question is" this one facet of the larger problem). Easier said than done; as I read through his case study, I found myself thinking "how long is the patron willing to stand there while you debate these difficult points in your head?" Ethics are subjective, complicated and difficult, and only extensive experience can possibly make the decisions easier for each of us individually.
Week 7 Class: Book Club
Our book club session was a predictably pleasant time. It was nice to get others' thoughts about the pieces, to see the different opinions and interpretations everyone brought to the discussion. My group went first, and it did seem to take everyone a bit of time to warm up to both asking and responding to questions. We had a difficult time keeping the discussion in the order we had attempted to arrange in our questions; from our feedback surveys, we determined that not everyone was on the same page of background information, and we were perhaps a bit too worried about overtaking the discussion. Still, we did get some good cerebral activity going.
It was easier being a participant, of course. It turns out that my interpretation of the Virginia Woolf piece was maybe too influenced by my preconception of her work; the other participants found it to be a pleasantly un-depressing surprise. Of the mislaid street piece, we were asked if we would do as the main character did and move onto the street (and keep the secret) that his job would demand he report. To my surprise, most replies showed a lot of caution, wary of eventual repercussions. Our discussion of the Queen's Tarts was fun indeed. I wasn't aware of the actual Alice in Wonderland connection, and, while we did talk a bit about the content, the discussion ended up addressing the place of classics like this in children's literature, and the trend of telling parts of the story and side stories through illustration with no explicit text narration.
Last thought: this was very much a librarian book club. Not all book clubs will be so full of well-read, enthusiastic members on the up-and-up about the nuances of literature's place and connections in society. Not to say that book clubs aren't formed of interested individuals with plenty of knowledge, just that the discussion would have been a bit different if the members had been more diverse in occupation, age, or experience.
It was easier being a participant, of course. It turns out that my interpretation of the Virginia Woolf piece was maybe too influenced by my preconception of her work; the other participants found it to be a pleasantly un-depressing surprise. Of the mislaid street piece, we were asked if we would do as the main character did and move onto the street (and keep the secret) that his job would demand he report. To my surprise, most replies showed a lot of caution, wary of eventual repercussions. Our discussion of the Queen's Tarts was fun indeed. I wasn't aware of the actual Alice in Wonderland connection, and, while we did talk a bit about the content, the discussion ended up addressing the place of classics like this in children's literature, and the trend of telling parts of the story and side stories through illustration with no explicit text narration.
Last thought: this was very much a librarian book club. Not all book clubs will be so full of well-read, enthusiastic members on the up-and-up about the nuances of literature's place and connections in society. Not to say that book clubs aren't formed of interested individuals with plenty of knowledge, just that the discussion would have been a bit different if the members had been more diverse in occupation, age, or experience.
Sunday, March 10, 2013
Week 7 Readings: 4 Pieces for our Book Club Assignment
This week we will be holding quick book club sessions in smaller groups. Below are my initial responses to the four pieces for my group (the Clubs Group).
The Crime
Victor Hugo
"How could you burn the library! Such a noble institution! Knowledge is what raises you up, empowers you, the true measure of a society's progress!" Hugo invokes the names of several literary and philosophical greats, and lays out the path books and knowledge can inspire from ignorance and prejudice to enlightenment and liberty. As the culprit has no access to such benefits ("I cannot read"), the poem can be seen as a reminder of the importance of information literacy (and literacy in general), and a sort of grounding for those who might get too caught up in a particular cause or pursuit.A Haunted House
Virginia Woolf
This reading is a lot harder to grasp than the others. The author describes a ghostly couple searching for an unnamed Treasure, but at the same time she forgets what she herself goes looking for within the house. Knowing what I do about the author, my interpretation is of an attempt to describe the difficulty of finding that certain something in life, especially for those with depression. The ghostly couple has come back to find it; they know what's important now that they've passed, and even they have a tough time nailing it down.The Street That Got Mislaid
Patrick Waddington
Marc Girondin is a lowly clerk whose specialty is the streets of Montreal. He seems to be perfectly happy at work amid the officious workings of bureaucracy, especially with the contrast of the inhospitability he faces from his landlady and neighbors. Until one day, when he finds a lost card detailing a street he's never heard of. He sets out to inspect, and ends up hearing the story of the street forgotten by the city from one of the longtime residents. Without taxes, inspections, or unwanted visitors, it's turned into a haven from the rest of the city, lost in time. As he hears of the content little community, Marc realizes that perhaps the authority of bureaucracy isn't a uniformly benign factor. Perhaps I'm too cynical; I found this piece a bit like an adult fairy tale. Plenty of people would be happy to find a tax-free little close-knit neighborhood in the middle of a city. And the turn Marc makes from celebrating the power of bureaucracy to advocating slipping under its radar is quick and painless; then again, not every decision need be difficult.The Queen of Hearts
Randolph Caldecott
Very short poem about the titular Queen and her tarts; she makes them, the Knave (Jack) steals them, the King finds out and beats him, and the Knave brings them back, seemingly having learned his lesson. I've seen this poem before, but the illustrations for this particular publication are what lend the little story a more robust feel. The simplest interpretation of the poem is as a moral against petty theft, but the illustrations lend an interesting glimpse of the life of royalty/aristocracy (in the garden, archery practice, dancing), and a little extra of the cat who tattles on the Knave to the fat kitchen servant.Week 6 Class: Running a good book club/discussion
The consensus seems to be that a good book club discussion should not aim for a verdict or consensus. The discussion facilitators should read deeply, annotating the piece, developing and asking questions to which they do not have definitive answers. Conversation should not stray too far from the reading assignment, but participants are encouraged to tie in related experiences and examples that promote relation and understanding. Facilitators have several types of inquiry from which to develop questions, but if the discussion seems to be perpetuating in the proper direction, there is no reason to cut it short in order to reach an imagines question/topic quota.
We had our own discussion of the assigned piece, "In the 21-st Century, Let's Ban (Paper) Books" by Marc Prensky; the class contributed discussion questions and Prof. Fonticharo guided the conversation. The piece is very provocative for those in our field, which made for many points of questioning. After just a little bit of discussion from our submitted questions, though, our mediator did a bit of "bird walking" (leading the discussion instead of taking more of a supportive role) in order to introduce the nature of the author into the group's consideration. While discussion leaders should refrain from lending too firm a hand to the helm, the work of the author outside of the piece on which we were focusing was of relevant consideration, and allowed for further discussion on the topic in a slightly larger scope. I will remember to learn about the author as another point of context in future readings.
We had our own discussion of the assigned piece, "In the 21-st Century, Let's Ban (Paper) Books" by Marc Prensky; the class contributed discussion questions and Prof. Fonticharo guided the conversation. The piece is very provocative for those in our field, which made for many points of questioning. After just a little bit of discussion from our submitted questions, though, our mediator did a bit of "bird walking" (leading the discussion instead of taking more of a supportive role) in order to introduce the nature of the author into the group's consideration. While discussion leaders should refrain from lending too firm a hand to the helm, the work of the author outside of the piece on which we were focusing was of relevant consideration, and allowed for further discussion on the topic in a slightly larger scope. I will remember to learn about the author as another point of context in future readings.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)