Critical Evaluation of the ILA against Information Literacy and Inquiry Models

In this post I evaluate the ILA against frameworks that deal with information literacy, internet searching and questioning.

The Six Frames for Information Literacy Education

This framework was designed by Bruce, Edwards and Lupton in 2006 to be used as a tool to analyse, interpret and understand challenges presented by different educators’ views on instruction and curriculum design.

The means of facilitating learning that was used in the ILA was contained within the “Learning to learn” frame. This frame uses the constructivist orientation and helps learners to build their knowledge and develop ways of learning that enable them to grow sophisticated thinking patterns (Bruce, Edwards & Lupton, 2006). As the students worked on their topic within this ILA they continuously developed and honed their new information literacy (IL) skills. Proof of the development of IL skills for the ILA was presented during the production of the AVD and subsequent presentation evening when they discussed their findings with relatives and friends. Reflection played a large part throughout the ILA and although the task was completed individually, students were encouraged to participate in group discussions with peers and instructors during class. I believe that this assisted significantly with the quality of research and their AVD.

Action Research Model for Reflective Internet Searching

This model describes a conceptual framework to use for effective internet searching (Edwards & Bruce, 2002). The authors developed it in order to assist students with the “challenges of working with an environment that is subject to continuous change”. The power to retrieve, assess and use information is vital for success in learning and the basis for the development of lifelong learners. (Edwards & Bruce, 2002).

The Action Research Model shown below consists of four steps that are intended to be performed repetitively rather than consecutively.  This circular or repetitive nature of the framework helps students develop their information literacy skills. Reflection on their successes and failures equips them with the tenacity required to develop the skills needed in inquiry learning. (Edwards & Bruce, 2002).

The Action Research Model for Reflective Internet Searching

Questioning frameworks

Questioning is arguably the most vital part of all inquiry tasks.  As mentioned in the post entitled “The type of inquiry method that was used”, all inquiry methods are fairly similar; having questioning, seeking and concluding components. But teaching students how to ask good questions helps them to take ownership of their learning. It is an essential lifelong learning skill. There are a number of questioning frameworks that can be used to ‘train’ students in the important art of questioning.

The Inquiry Process (Brunner, 2002) is an inquiry model that uses 4 cyclical phases to explore posing real questions, finding resources, interpreting information and reporting findings.This is an excellent questioning framework to use for most inquiry based tasks and is very relevant to “my” ILA. As the ILA is a guided inquiry task levelled at Year 9 students who are still developing their information literacy skills, the questions suggested in the framework help with more highly scaffolded inquiry projects (such as mine). The Inquiry Model can also lead the students carefully through what could become quite a frustrating experience for less experienced IBL students if they did not have a framework to  guide them.

Brunner's Inquiry Process

GeST windows

Bruce & Lupton envisage Information literacy as a set of three “windows” that are nested within each other. 

GeST windows

The inner and most basic “Generic” window is described by Lupton as “a set of discrete, neutral generic skills related to reading writing and the use of technology” (Bruce & Lupton 2010). “My” ILA remains largely within this window as classes included topic analysis, search terms (synonyms and related terms, Boolean operators, computer skills, constructing search strings and rules for citing and referencing.

Many aspects of the ILA can be said to regard IL within the “situated” window. Here IL is seen as “Social Practices involving personal, work, family and community problems” (Lupton & Bruce 2010). The primary data obtained by the students, in the forms of photographs, interviews, surveys and the collecting and analysis of statistics are all forms of socially based “encountering information” (Lupton  & Bruce 2010).

The all encompassing “transformative window” is where social change is effected through an “emancipatory process”( Lupton & Bruce 2010). The skills and processes of the Generic perspective as well as the social practices and personal meaning of the Situational perspective are both contained within the Transformative window. Here IL is seen as a “range of information practices used to transform oneself and society”. IL is taught by empowering learners to critique information in order to challenge the status quo. This was a requirement of the ILA as students were encouraged to “identify a strategy that could be implemented(either by you or your family or more widely in the community) to reduce that‘footprint factor’. In other words students were being encouraged to transform themselves and society with their research discoveries. This transformative information literacy was rigorously tested when the students were required to defend their position and research when speaking to family and friends as part of their culminating activities.

Bloom’s revised taxonomy

The original Bloom’s taxonomy was developed by Benjamin Bloom, a cognitive psychologist, in the 1950’s. His purpose was to categorise and order thinking skills. The thinking skills start from the lower order thinking skills LOTS of knowledge, comprehension and application to the higher order thinking skills HOTS of analysis, synthesis and evaluation. Each word used was in the form of a noun. 

The Original Bloom's taxonomy

Bloom’s taxonomy was then revised by a former student of his, Lorin Anderson, in the 1990’s to fit in with 21st century learning. This is called Bloom’s revised taxonomy. She saw the need to reflect the modern technological and digital processes required of the 21^st century student. The revision entailed changing the words used to describe each category into verbs rather than nouns and the highest categories were swapped and changed into “Evaluating” and “Creating”. Each category is associated with various verbs describing the skills associated with that category.

Comparison of Bloom's taxonomy with the Digital taxonomy

The taxonomy represents the way we learn. Students have to remember concepts before they can understand them. When a concept is understood it can be applied. The ability to apply knowledge implies that it can be analysed and if we can analyse it then we can evaluate its impact. Creating a new concept requires that we are able to remember, understand, apply, analyse and evaluate it.

When I analysed and compared the ILA to Bloom’s revised taxonomy many skills were showcased. Some needed more representations and these will be discussed under recommendations.

Bloom's Digital Taxonomy

Students were well-versed in the application of skills such as note-taking, bullet-pointing, highlighting, locating, retrieving, naming, searching and "Googling". They were encouraged to keep a journal or “Record of Research” documenting their research findings and for taking rough bullet point notes of information they expected to use when presenting their topic. This all assisted them to remember the new concepts encountered in the ILA.

Their understanding of the Ecological Footprint concept was developed by directing them to the Ecological footprint site – getting then to complete the quiz on the site and then answer further questions for homework once they had perused the site. Class discussions also enhanced this understanding. Lessons in advanced Boolean search techniques also assisted the understanding process. Completing organisers during Step 4 of their task sheet would also have required an understanding of the topic.

Application of knowledge was evident when they started to use their knowledge and understanding of the topic to construct and conduct the questions in their surveys and interviews. It also helped with knowing which photographs to take and which information to keep or discard when they compiled their AVD.

The students’ analysing skills were tested/ given a work out when they analysed their research findings from their surveys and statistical data and tabled or graphed them. Analysis of statistical data gathered from other sources eg books and the internet also contributed to their “analysis toolkit”. It was recommended that ideas were presented in mind maps and other graphic organisers – this too would have required analysis. It would also have required creativity.

Once all of the above tasks had been completed the students were ready to compile and assemble their AVDs. This required the evaluating skills of checking, critiquing, detecting, monitoring to get everything as it should be.

Creativity was required to create interesting open-ended questions for friends and family to ask them during the presentation. Creativity was also required for the tokens and other exhibition extras required for their final presentation.

References

Bruce, C. Edwards, S. & Lupton, M. (2006) Six Frames for information literacy education: exploring the challenges of applying theory to practice. Special issue. Information Literacy - the challenges of implementation.

Brunner, C. (2012). The Inquiry Process. Retrieved from http://www.youthlearn.org/learning/planning/lesson-planning/how-inquiry/how-inquiry

Edwards, S & Bruce, C. (2002) Reflective Internet Searching: and action research model. The Learning Organisation: An International Journal. 9 (3/4): 180-188

Lupton, M., & Bruce, C. (2010). Chapter 1: Windows on Information Literacy Worlds: Generic, Situated and Transformative Perspectives in Lloyd, Annemaree and Talja, Sanna. Practising information literacy: bringing theories of learning, practice and information literacy together. Wagga wagga: Centre for Information Studies, p. 3-27.