New year - New adventures!

In addition to a full scale overhaul of the traditional library with major weeding and re-cataloging to improve student accessibility, we are introducing one-to-one Chromebooks at 6th and 7th grade, and I was asked at the last minute to teach a series of ten week courses to 7th graders.

Library stuff and one-to-one later. Course curriculum request was to include some keyboarding and whatever good stuff I'd like to teach them. WOW! It didn't take much research to learn that today's seventh graders are not excited about keyboarding class and that with few exceptions, without opportunity to use keyboarding on task students' find personally appealing, it tends to be ineffective. (Sorry I didn't save links to all articles but they are fairly easy to find if you are looking.)

So what to teach?

I've spent too much time learning about and promoting non-traditional lessons and projects to fall into a traditional research project to teach library skills and practice keyboarding. Our ELA teachers and even some of our SS and science teachers help me with that. Now Genius Hour is something that I could get excited about, but not sure I want ten weeks of seventh grade Genius Hour . . .

CODING! We have no business or digital technology teachers in the district. Seventh graders are the perfect age for an exploratory class in computer programming! The goal would be to teach some computational thinking and ability to break a problem down to develop simple algorithm solutions. I know absolutely nothing about computer science or coding! This should be a cinch!

Three days of research into keyboarding and intro to coding programs and I am practically a pro (at research, not keyboarding or coding.) I have decided that my first major goal is to have students animate their names to include on cover page of the Google Sites websites I also plan to have them create. Problem is, the name animation exercise I found on Scratch seems way too difficult. Next week . . .

Day one: Shortened schedule to make time for afternoon assembly. Seventeen of twenty students on roster came to class. We got all but one logged in to computers and into Google Chrome. Logging in to Code.org is simple with a Google account. They had to be convinced it was okay to tell the truth about their ages. Sad that their first instinct is to pretend (lie) that they are at least 13.

They followed instructions to join my class but their instincts again to skip tutorial video at beginning of the Classic Maze, Hour of Code project that I chose as a starting point for them. The roar of confusion was almost deafening - and yet amusing. We turned our monitors off to watch the intro video together as a class. They couldn't get monitors back on fast enough and away they went!

Day one of school, with shortened classes, and the class of 2022 has already started to build code! I can't wait until tomorrow!

Libraries and Transliteracy blog: Gone, but not forgotten!

I am very sad that to read that Bobbi Newman and the crew at the Libraries and Transliteracy blog are closing shop.  In most parts of the country we are just opening the door to Information Literacy and have so many more battles to win before we offer true support to Transliteracy.  We will dearly miss the guidance and support they offered through this blog and can only hope that the void this departure leaves will be filled with motivational visionaries dedicated to this cause as a beacon for librarians into the future.

Below are some favorite presentations posted recently to the Libraries and Transliteracy blog and below them, excerpts from a February 2011 post by Bobbi introducing the concept of transliteracy to beginners.

Framing Transliterate Learning Through Inquiry and Participatory Culture from Buffy Hamilton

Transliteracy, customer service and the future of from Anthony Molaro

Exploring transliteracy from Bobbi Newman

ALA 2011 - Why Transliteracy from Lane Wilkinson

Beginner’s Guide to Transliteracy

February 27, 2011 — Bobbi Newman

Where did the term transliteracy come from?

 . . . . . . . . . . . .

Thomas, et al, posit a very specific origin to the term transliteracy:

The word ‘transliteracy’ is derived from the verb ‘to transliterate’, meaning to write or print a letter or word using the closest corresponding letters of a different alphabet or language. This of course is nothing new, but transliteracy extends the act of transliteration and applies it to the increasingly wide range of communication platforms and tools at our disposal. From early signing and orality through handwriting, print, TV and film to networked digital media, the concept of transliteracy calls for a change of perspective away from the battles over print versus digital, and a move instead towards a unifying ecology not just of media, but of all literacies relevant to reading, writing, interaction and culture, both past and present.

What is transliteracy?

Sue Thomas and her group use this working definition:

Transliteracy is the ability to read, write and interact across a range of platforms, tools and media from signing and orality through handwriting, print, TV, radio and film, to digital social networks.

The definition of transliteracy continues to be expanded and refined, but, as Ipri points out:

Basically, transliteracy is concerned with what it means to be literate in the 21st century. It analyzes the relationship between people and technology, most specifically social networking, but is fluid enough to not be tied to any particular technology. It focuses more on the social uses of technology, whatever that technology may be.

How is transliteracy different than media literacy, digital literacy or technology literacy?

Transliteracy is an over-arching concept that is not meant to replace any of the other more specific studies of format-specific literacies. It sits on top of these other literacies in an attempt to understand the relationship among them. As Thomas, et al write, transliteracy

offers a wider analysis of reading, writing and interacting across a range of platforms, tools, media and cultures, transliteracy does not replace, but rather contains, “media literacy” and also “digital literacy.”

They go on to posit that

transliteracy calls for a change of perspective away from the battles over print versus digital, and a move instead towards a unifying ecology not just of media, but of all literacies relevant to reading, writing, interaction and culture, both past and present. It is, we hope, an opportunity to cross some very obstructive divides.

Unlike many literacies that have a particular focus, transliteracy attempts to be all-inclusive. According to Thomas

transliteracy is not just about computer-based materials, but about all communication types across time and culture. It does not privilege one above the other but treats all as of equal value and moves between and across them.

. . . . . . . . . . . .

Check out the archived Libraries and Transliteracy blog for the rest of this post and many other even more compelling ones.  Thanks Bobbi, Tom, Anthony, Lane and Gretchen for your leadership.

Explicit instruction limits learning . . .

I often teach technology to students quickly. I often start with the comment, "I know many of you already know how to do this but if you'll give me a few minutes I might remind you of something you've forgotten." Once started, I try to keep things interesting and fast paced and will say as I skim rapidly over very important tips or techniques, "If you need help figuring out how to [get here / do this / take the next step] let me know and I will be glad to help you."

I have found that this method causes students to try harder to figure out how to do things they may have struggled with if I taught in greater detail. I think we (all) tend to rely on as much assistance or guidance as we can get and only when pushed to extend ourselves does our creativity and motivation to learn by doing engage. This seems to me like the basis of constructivist learning and the model we should all pursue as educators.

I watch teachers repeat basic instructions again and again until, "everyone in the class gets it," but notice that it sometimes takes forever and in following lessons students need the explanations again and again. With my method, after the first time, when I tell the students, "This is easy and I know nobody will have a problem with it," if I have to revisit later it is done individually or very quickly to the group with a preface like the one above.

A recent MIT study seems to confirm my rationale and support my opinion that sometimes to promote learning, when it comes to teaching, explicit instruction, less is more.

Suppose someone showed you a novel gadget and told you, “Here’s how it works,” while demonstrating a single function, such as pushing a button. What would you do when they handed it to you?

You’d probably push the button. But what if the gadget had other functions? Would it occur to you to search for them, if your teacher hadn’t alluded to their existence?

Maybe, maybe not. It turns out that there is a “double-edged sword” to pedagogy: Explicit instruction makes children less likely to engage in spontaneous exploration and discovery. A study by MIT researchers and colleagues compared the behavior of children given a novel toy under four different conditions, finding that children expressly taught one of its functions played with the toy for less time and discovered fewer things to do with it than children in the other three scenarios.

According to Laura Schulz, . . . Associate Professor of Cognitive Science at MIT, this is rational behavior, as teaching is meant to impart skills quickly and efficiently. The danger is leading children to believe that they’ve learned all there is to know, thereby discouraging independent discovery.

The rest of the article is available at MIT News.

Tech toys or tools (?) and their uses

Wordle.com is described on its home page as a "toy". Using it to create a tag cloud of this blog, though, it is a tool to summarize and discover the primary informational focus or keywords being discussed. Is this cheating? Is using a calculator to do math cheating? The answer is a resounding "no". The answer is that we need to embrace technology and the new tools and methods available to us as a society and as teachers and learners.

A school librarian I met recently boasted how much fun she had doing her job - playing with kids and technology every day. Past generations maintained a strict division between technology toys and technology tools but the more I learn about the technology available and the pedagogy of learning, the more difficult it becomes to label tech toys as valueless. Tool or toy, matching the application to the curriculum, the need, and particular learning style is far more important than the preconceived perception of the application's value.

Presenters at the K-12 Online Conference (live this month and archived for perpetuity) with the theme “Amplifying Possibilities” are using many different communication technologies to share and teach us some of the Web 2.0 possibilities and challenge us to reach for the next level. In their presentation "How Can I Become Part of this ReadWriteWeb Revolution?" Alice Barr, Bob Sprankle, and Cheryl Oakes remind us that once we immerse ourselves and accept our roles as learners along with our students, they will develop and show us ways to use technology that we cannot even imagine.
Keynote speaker Stephen Heppell (designer of physical and virtual learning environments of the future) started the conference (link to his presentation moved. will add when I find.) by describing the crossroads in our educational environment today from the old "factory style" classrooms to the new community classrooms defined by "us-ness". He spoke of teachers provoking learning instead of providing learning and pushing students to take ownership of their learning. While I don't see the majority of our students accepting that role, I think he hit the nail on the head regarding the social nature of learning today and the value of "audience" as a tool in the equation. Perhaps the failure of students to take more ownership or at least be more interested and engaged may be a result of our failure to trust them with the tools of their generation.

Instead of prohibiting headphones, for instance, we should be providing them to all students along with books on tape, podcasts, vodcasts, and text message reminders of class assignments. Instead of disjointed and meaningless deliverable assignments during the course of a semester, perhaps each assignment should add toward a greater, high quality, publishable whole to be displayed on the web. Examples could include articles, tables, photos and even video or podcasts blended into a student created website, or perhaps a professionally designed magazine, well maintained blog, or carefully edited video news program. The key factor may not be the format, but the freedom to choose the format and the reality that, upon completion, it will be available for the full world to see (including important peers and family members).

Blogging & other 2.0 apps in the classroom

I'm hooked! Serendipitous research this week has led me into the websites and blogs of school libraries, librarians, and teachers who are actively using Web 2.0 tools in the classroom. These teachers are not using technology just for the sake of technology, but as an integral tool in curriculum development.

I've heard podcasts of poetry, political ads, personal experiences, book talks and more. I have seen student created websites about history, health, and science. Blogs have been adopted by teachers in virtually every subject area and, amazingly, in almost every grade level.

Included below are a couple videos borrowed from TeacherTube. The first describes blogs, bloggers, and our relationship to the world around us.




The second gives ten reasons students should be blogging.




I apologize for not including links of all the Web 2.0 applications referenced above. Will begin to share these details in future posts . . . )

Better Pedagogy

Did I mention that I am taking three classes this semester? Met my family a few days ago and needed introductions. Talked to my Dad on the phone and commented on the amount of content output we had to create in this program as compared to the graduate programs he used to take. Not sure if it is the fact that our focus is information literacy or if this is how graduate school is taught today.

Focus this week in another class was how to teach an information literacy lesson that connects with the students, fostering “creative, reflective, and critical habits.” After reading Heidi Jacobs article, “Information and Reflective Pedagogical Praxis” (2008), it is apparent that many of us revert to a forced or “banking model” of education instead of striving for a more constructionist or conversational method.

To interest students in information literacy, we must first forget the theoretical. Many students tend to be disinterested outside of preferred topics (e.g. sports) or ones they see as threats against their personal interests or liberties (e.g. dress code). To implement an effective lesson, we must first engage students. Perhaps a conversation about past searches for information would work as an icebreaker for a lesson on search strategies. This conversation would also act as an assessment tool regarding current levels of expertise and a starting point for the lesson.

Instead of preaching the benefits of database research, perhaps the lesson should begin with discussion about acceptable and unacceptable sources for various types of information from an assortment of print sources displayed in the class – various magazines, journals, newspapers, phone books, encyclopedias, non-fiction and fiction books, student term papers, yearbooks, etc. As the group analyzes these sources in the real world, they may develop a greater understanding of sources in the virtual world.

The lesson could continue with group development of search strategies to find information students had struggled with in the past. By involving the group, discovery of alternate keywords might grow almost like a game instead of an individual drudgery. Discussing and having students demonstrate databases that they use regularly may eliminate some of the confusion and frustration regarding leased databases. Students seem to be well aware of TVGuide, imdb, Amazon, imeem, NFL.com, ESPN.com, WhitePages, and others.

So many librarians focus on the mechanics – how to use a database. The majority of students will figure the mechanics out very quickly if we can convince them that the answers to the question can be found more easily here than on the web. This lesson needs to be the focus of our “instruction”.

Concluding with a game of stump-the-librarian may be helpful in reinforcing successful strategies. Rules could allow group or individual work by students, students and librarian choosing topics alternately, and winners based upon group evaluation of source quality.

Jacobs, H.L.M. (2008, May). Information and Reflective Pedagogical Praxis. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 34, 256-262.