Module+2

=** Module 2 Reflections ** =

** February 13th, 2011 **


This week's module was about Inquiry and Web 2.0 tools that support the different stages of the Inquiry process. Again I was humbled by the dozens of novel tools out there that I have simply never heard of. Especially within the Berger/Trexler chapter on Social Bookmarking, I am amazed by the possibilities for collaboration, communication, connection, reflection, etc provided by Diigo.com alone. Why didn't this exist when I was in high school? When I was in college?!

The biggest take-away from this chapter, for me, was the discussion of "folksonomy" versus taxonomy. We have been going in this direction ever since Web 1.0 disappeared - the users are creating the content on the web, not professionals, so why not also have the users classify the content? Surely, I see the place for hierarchies, leveled organization, and authority in physical libraries, even search engines and online encyclopedias. But there is so much user-created content on the web. Why even give ourselves the headache of trying to classify it, when users have discovered a better and more USEFUL way to do it? --> Tagging.

After all, as stressed in the text, social bookmarking isn't about authority and accuracy, it is about remembering -- what information was useful on this site? How will I use it? Who should I share it with?

And, with Diigo, the possibilities seem endless. I remember learning how to label index cards for note taking during research projects in elementary school. The Author's last name went in the top left corner, the subject in the middle, and the page number in the top right. Organizing those cards took about as much time as the research and note-taking itself. Let's be honest--when, outside of school, have I organized index cards in this way, or even taken notes on them? I see the point...but it appears to be useless in the "real world." Now, with a couple of clicks, you can do all that an index card can do and more. Plus, you don't have to fear losing the card, your teacher can check your process without taking your cards (the only copy!), and you can share you findings with your teammates, reducing the necessity for duplicate cards. What a world!

Moving on...

A major theme that was present in several of the articles from this module was that of the diminishing necessity for rote memorization of content. I have never really thought of it in this way before...that it now seems obvious and almost frustrating. What is the point of learning content and memorizing minutia, when virtually anyone with Internet access can retrieve those facts instantaneously? As written by Harada and Yoshina in "Moving From Rote to Inquiry," this focus in school on memorizing facts is in "direct contrast to the world outside the classroom," where you flourish not by knowing everything, but by being able to efficiently locate the information you need.

It is similar to the complaint that has been heard in math classrooms for decades - "why do I need to learn math when we have calculators?" Well...why? Here's why: If you can't conceptualize the formula that will calculate the figure you are looking for, how will you know what to type into the calculator? So yes, math to a certain degree is important (see Doug Johnson's entry on a similar subject: If they let me design the math curriculum). But memorizing formulas is not. In algebra, teach kids what a variable is so that they know X can be whatever they need it to be...their credit card interest, their tax refund, their shopping budget, etc. Then give them a calculator and show them how to use it.

Similarly, will students ever really need to know the name of all the generals in the Civil War? The battle sites? The exact dates? No...not unless they want to go up against Watson on Jeopardy. Do they need to understand WHY there was a civil war? HOW it started? HOW it has changed our country? YES!! Is there one way to learn this? NO! So why are //standardized// tests the assessment of choice? ...?????

Anyone can go on the Internet and find the answers to the questions about factoids that our teachers asked us to memorize. But knowing the answers to those questions doesn't better prepare us for a life and a career in the 21st century market.

With such a focus on (ineffective) standardized testing which, in my opinion, unfairly tests students on mostly rote learning, the library media program can be the central place for inquiry learning (real learning...). Giving students identical learning experiences is not going to teach the majority of our students. Research and inquiry, in the context of 21st century tools, can allow our students to actually learn and discover the answers to //their// __How and Why__ questions, not just the test's __What__ questions. Along the way, they'll also learn what they are capable of, where their interests lie, and how they are different from one another, rather than the same. Before you know it, we have a whole class or self-aware, 21st century scholars graduating into the real world - and guess what kids - it doesn't look that different from the K-12 world.

Then...this truly moves us from "All students can learn, to all students will learn."

Educators have been trying to stress the need for Inquiry learning for a long time. Bloom's taxonomy was novel - a breath of fresh air - it classified learning in a meaningful way, from LOTS to HOTS. Later it was determined that it wasn't learning/student-centered, because it wasn't rooted in evidence-based learning. Simply reworking the taxonomy to be structured based on verbs (what will students be able to do?) rather than nouns gave educators a whole new platform for teaching. Better objectives lead to better practices and better outcomes.

And now, it has been revised once again to include our evolving digital vernacular - terms that all students and teachers should know - because they are TODAY!



As educators find ways to expand and push forward the learning experiences that are possible because of today's technology, the Inquiry process becomes more and more relevant for all students.

The "School Libraries Worldwide" article was a very tough, technical read, but it made excellent points. "The [Kuhlthau's Information Search Process (ISP)] and Guided Inquiry call for an evidence-based teaching approach where instructors gather evidence from the work of user-learners who may be trapped in the [Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD)]." Here, the ZPD is where learners find they are unable to move forward without assistance. The ISP helps educators to identify the "Zones of Intervention." The intervention process is guided inquiry. Perhaps this could play out as follows...

First, take into consideration one version of the Inquiry Process: Connect, Wonder, Investigate, Construct, Express, Reflect. ((CWICER, pronounced Quicker, has proven to be a fun little mnemonic device for me)).

Perhaps a student has accomplished the Connect and Wonder stages, but is stuck on the Investigating process. The Teacher-Librarian aids the student in a self-questioning process aligned with their results from the "wonder stage," to better focus on what information needs to be explored and discovered during the investigate phase. The Teacher-Librarian then pulls out Michael Fisher's version of Bloom's Digital Taxonomy, and suggests tools that may aid the student in searching for and finding the information they seek. Perhaps the student can be paired up with a peer who is ahead of the game, and interested in teaching a classmate.



A quote says it well: "A culture of Inquiry emerges as teachers become learners, learners are self- and peer-taught, and everyone becomes a researcher."

With this process, does anyone really need to memorize?



The cartoon really says a lot. Sometimes I still feel this way. There is so much to remember...if you learn things so you can pass a test, you won't remember them after the test. Lesson learned time and time again. But this cartoon applies to this module and the field in general, in at least 2 different ways.

1. Once you learn the inquiry process, can you really forget it? I don't think so - I think it's like riding a bike. You might not remember the names of the steps (try CWICER!), but guess what? It doesn't matter! You learn the process because you live it. You know what step is next because it's logical and necessary. It becomes a part of who you are and how you function. No back-up copy necessary.

2. With all the fabulous new Web 2.0 tools, you don't need to remember as much as you used to. You don't even need to remember where you put your index cards--because they are virtual! Diigo will remember it all for you, and help you to organize your thoughts in a meaningful way. Meaningful for YOU, and not for your teacher. There is your back-up copy.

To put it all together (Inquiry, Web 2.0, folksonomy, etc...) We live in a world where your success is dependent upon your being able to sell yourself as an individual with experience and wisdom, and the ability to adapt quickly to new situations. So why not allow students to begin gaining that experience as early as kindergarten? To be able to feel confident and individual long before they will ever really need to, so that when that day comes, they are confident and ready, rather than inexperienced and scared?

Just some thoughts :).