Week 2: Reflection
In class, we talked about formative assessment, professional development, the difference between novice and expert skills, ADDIE, and screencasts as well as the larger question of the efficacy of online learning modules. The questions that stuck with me most were those about online learning. I feel that there are specific needs that online instruction fills, the need for answers right now and for enrichment in addition to face to face instruction, and specific situations where it is the best of a limited variety of solutions. Personally, however, given the choice between an online-only program and a primarily face-to-face instructional setting, I pick the face-to-face, because the opportunity to actually get to know classmates and teachers and being a part of that educational community makes the experience that much more valuable and meaningful.
I think I got a little off-topic there, maybe. Anyway. Are online modules effective enough to replace face-to-face instruction? They can, in certain situations. For procedural skills, like learning how to use a tech tool or an introduction to searching a certain database, an online module completed outside of class can conserve valuable class time so the instructor can spend more time on more complex skills. Does it matter whether online instruction is effective, or does it just matter what the students want? Of course the effectiveness of the instruction matters. If it doesn't work, that student won't have the necessary skills/knowledge to achieve his goals or to do his job well.. Which is bad news.
Week 3: Information Literacy or Information Fluency or Transliteracy Articles
Both Trimm and Farkas focus heavily on the changing landscape of technologies, platforms, and information available to the average information consumer today. Farkas stresses the fact that evaluation of information available on the open web has become much more "nuanced" today than it was, say, six or eight years ago. Trimm addresses the need for librarians to keep up with changing technologies, to take time to explore and play with new tools so that they can incorporate those skills into library instruction and encourage their communities to explore new platforms "for communicating and producing information."
Birdsong discusses the Information Literacy Initiative at the University of Washington iSchool. This organization focuses on "outliers," or people who have not received information literacy instruction, of any age or social status. She explains two programs the organization has implemented: one for teens and one for older adults; she also enumerates the reasons information literacy instruction is so important for these "outliers."
Trimm, N. (2011). Not Just Literate, but Transliterate: Encouraging Transliteracy Adoption in Library Services. Colorado Libraries, 36(1).
Farkas, M. (2011). Information Literacy 2.0: Critical inquiry in the age of social media. American Libraries, 42(11/12), 32.
Birdsong, L. (2009). Information literacy training for all? the outliers. Searcher, 17(8), 18-23, 54.
Your question of effectiveness vs. what the students want is a really good one. I suspect that a lot of students, if they _actually_ want to learn something, would prefer face-to-face instruction, just like you. But if they're just "required" to learn something, like in a lot of library workshop situations, they'd probably just as well watch something online at the own convenience. But then, of course, the learning's probably not going to be as effective. So is a education by screencast a timesaver, like you suggest? If students care, it definitely is. But if they care, would they be going to an actual workshop instead? Maybe, maybe not. It's a lot to ponder.
ReplyDeleteMaybe the answer is that screencasts are going to work best when you have motivated learners, which I think people who've been involved in online education could tell you pretty easily. But working out the balance in typical situations in a library setting is tricky.