TL life – Page 4 – Learning through the Library

Literary Learning – Shifting from ‘Learning to Read’ to ‘Reading to learn’.

Language and literature has always been part of educational practices.

This is because language is central to cognition and therefore needs to be implemented in all areas of thinking and learning. Literary learning is the use of literature across the curriculum. It is based upon genre theory as language is learned in context and a variety of genres and formats should be made available for all students to (Derewianka, 2015). Whilst the emotive and behavioural benefits of literature are well documented, some teachers may believe that a variety of genres in teaching and learning are unnecessary. Cornett (2014) points out the many cognitive values of literary arts in the curriculum such as promoting literacy, supporting active meaning construction and provoking inquiry, lifelong learning, problem solving and increasing critical thinking skills. The role of the teacher librarian and educator is to increase the implementation of the various forms of literature, such as narratives, expositions, discussions and recounts, in order to increase student exposure to the heterogeneity of discourses available in their subject area.

GDJ / Pixabay – Code breaker to text analyser.

Literacy for learning is when a student moves from simply being codebreakers and text participants, to using text for learning and analysing. The basis of literary learning is genre theory and programs such as ‘reading to learn’ places an emphasis on students using a variety of literature formats in schooling (Derewianka, 2015). Genre theory has had a great influence on education practices in Australia. It is an extension of Vygotsky’s and Halliday’s theory of language development occurring in social contexts (Derewianka, 2015). The extension is based upon the view that students need access to a variety of genres within their subject matter in order to be able to engage in discourse (Derewianka, 2015). Since each genre has its own identifiable format, it is important that educators offer a variety of genres to maintain equity (Derewianka, 2015). Derewianka (2015) also elucidates the pertinent fact that each key learning area has a particular vocabulary, and that students need to understand and develop experience with this specific language and various formats in order to achieve academic success.

ACARA places great emphasis on literacy, language and literature in the curriculum. It requires students to use language as a method of participating in the learning process (Derewianka, 2015). I have previously elucidated on the importance of literacy, so I will not go into any more detail about that now. But within the General capabilities curriculum, there is a requirement for students to be able to make meaning and critically analyse. Therefore, the use of a variety of genres within teaching and learning practices ensures students are able to meet the learning outcomes set by the standards within the curriculum.

From a pedagogical perspective, literary learning is a child centred approach to teaching and learning. Derewianka (2015) points out that the shift from teacher to child centric pedagogy requires student’s engagement in order for them to participate in the learning. Literature can be used as a method to learn about subject matter as it provides a increased engagement for students and also has a higher recall compared to expository texts (Cornett, 2014, p. 151). Besides being a mode of conveying information, the use of good quality literature has been proven to support construction of meaning, deepen understanding of complex social issues and meet the aesthetic needs of students (Cornett, 2014, p. 151). The latter is very important as motivation is a commitment to extend the reader’s aesthetic experience (Cornett, 2014).

There are some educators that are skeptical of the need to implement literature across the curriculum, even though the implementation of language, literature and literacy across key learning areas has been part of teaching practice for the last few decades. One of the arguments against the implementation of literature, is that some students would struggle against having to negotiate meaning from the text. Students with low literacy and those who speak a second language could find some genres more problematic than others. But Cornett (2014) refuted this argument by determining that literature based learning is beneficial to students combating aliteracy or illiteracy. This is because students that have literature at the core of their learning improve their overall reading levels in comparison to those that do not (Cornett, 2014). Ironically, the use of standarised tests have been proven to have no benefit in improving literacy outcomes but they still happen at regular intervals (Cornett, 2014). But whilst literature have been proven to address cognitive, emotional and developmental needs, not all students (and teachers) like all aspects such as narrative literature. Since choice is an essential aspect of engagement and motivation, it is important to implement a variety of genres and resources in educational practices when planning a unit of work. Astute educators will know that it makes sense to balance pragmatism with literature.

Literary learning is the implementation of literature across the curriculum. By using literature as a method of conveying subject specific information, teachers are improving the learning outcomes of the students. From an evidence based perspective, literature based learning is the better option for students as it allows students to construct their own bank of knowledge from information which is more easily read, understood and comprehended. It allows students to put into context the subject specific vocabulary they have learned and use correctly the variety of formats and genres that are applicable to their discipline. Students no longer just learn to read… they read so that they can learn.

References:

Cornett, C. E. (2014). Integrating the literary arts throughout the curriculum. In Creating meaning through literature and the arts: arts integration for Classroom teachers (5th ed,) (pp144-193) USA

Derewianka, B. (2015). The contribution of genre theory to literacy education in Australia. In J. Turbill, G. Barton & C. Brock (Eds.), Teaching Writing in Today’s Classrooms: Looking back to looking forward (pp. 69-86). Norwood, Australia: Australian Literary Educators’ Association. Retrieved from https://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2620&context=sspapers

Academic integrity – more than just plagiarism.

Academic integrity is often espoused and bandied about across educational institutions, especially in the first few weeks of every scholastic year.

La Trobe university describes it as shared values and behaviour that includes but is not exclusive to honesty, fairness and responsible practices. This concept of honesty in academia is a two way street. Educational institutions such as schools and universities are obliged to award credit and acknowledge honestly conducted work. Students are responsible for ensuring that their work meets the required standards mandated (LaTrobe, 2019). The onus of practices that promote academic honesty need to be equally addressed by students, staff, executive and organisations. It is not simply the role of a student to avoid plagiarism, but also the role of education to provide them with the skills and knowledge to do so. Additionally, society needs to realise that academic integrity does not start and finish with plagiarism. Plagiarism is just an aspect of authentic academia. Other practices include the creation of assessment tasks that limit the risk of dishonest practices and organisations to adequately address infringements in their policies with appropriate levels of censure that are age and stage appropriate. The role of teacher librarian is multifaceted when it comes to academic integrity. Due to their dynamic position, a TL is able to address academic honesty from a student and classroom teacher (CT) lens and from a department and school perspective.

Academic honesty starts with the classroom teacher. If teachers continuously utilise reputable sources in their teaching and learning, as well as consistently reference them correctly; then they are modeling good practice. Students (and teachers) need to be aware that academic honesty is not just for assessment tasks. Its for all tasks. Like all skills, good research behavioural practices such as using databases, encyclopaedias and journal articles are essential in formulating evidence based assertions. Using disreputable sources does not bode well for your postulations. W. Edwards Deming was quoted in Forbes (2016) that “without data you’re just a person with an opinion”. My experience as a scientist holds me in good authority in championing this point. In the fields of science and mathematics, opinions hold little value. It is the data from rigorously run experiments that define our thinking process. Poorly run experiments with inconclusive data have no value; as do opinions with no justification and evidence. Opinions are fine when limited to coffee preferences but not in academics.

The other aspect of academic integrity within the TL’s and or CT’s realms, is the explicit teaching of information literacy. Information literacy is defined by the ability to find, seek, use and create information and traditionally the domain of TL area of expertise (Kuhthau et al, 2012). IL needs to be taught and then subsequently assessed in order for students to reach proficiency (Jacobson et al. 2018; Qayyum & Smith, 2018, p257; McGrew et al. 2018). It is not passively acquired by the act of completing a research task – but rather, these skills need to be integrated into daily practice to boost competency (Kong, 2014). Part of these practices include the direct instruction of correct referencing techniques. As mentioned before, plagiarism is AN aspect of academic honesty, it is not the entirety.

Whilst it teaching information literacy and the finer points of referencing is essential, it is important to note that the assessment task itself can be a liability to honest practice. Introducing mandatory evidence of progress, drafts and log books are other useful methods in ensuring authenticity of work. Assessment tasks that are repeated at yearly intervals for indefinite periods of time are also very problematic. This is due to the fact that its simplistic to assume that students do not try to seek aid from older siblings and or cousins. Having a maximum time frame of 2 years allowed for a particular task reduces the likelihood of younger relatives plagiarising from older siblings. Another point to note is that nuances of language in assessment task construction can reduce the likelihood of plagiarism. Requesting students to analyse, justify and relate to their community requires higher order thinking skills and is harder to successfully pass off as own work due to the nature of the questions. TL can be of great assistance to teachers in the construction of assessment tasks. Ezard (2019) pointed out that co-creation and collective capacity is the fundamental basis of true collaborative practice (cited in Templeton, 2019). Collaboration between departments and the library can result in a positive sharing of expertise and knowledge resulting in tasks that elicit deep understanding and truly engage the student.

Departmental heads and school administrators have the last word on academic honesty in a school situation. The school policies are the framework in which the academic integrity of the staff and students is based upon. Therefore it is up to the executives to ensure the policies are current with contemporary practices which includes the rapid evolution of technology and the challenges that it brings. They are also responsible to clearly define what constitutes minor, moderate and major infringements and their appropriate consequences. Staff need to realise that a major infringement in middle school is not the same as a major infringement in senior school. A suggestion would be construct a hierarchy of violations that is clearly distributed to students and teachers. This transparency reduces the likelihood of students citing ignorance in their defence. An example of such a hierarchy from ANU, Canberra and Andrews University in Michigan are available for your perusal.

Much has been said so far about how teaching staff can do to promote academic honesty. But in all honesty, students need to also be aware of their role in this dual relationship. Students need to follow the referencing guidelines set by their institution. Whether it be APA, Harvard or MLA citation styles, students need to conform. They also need to refrain from reusing earlier work and badging it as new work. Many students feel that this cannot be plagiarism as its their own material. But what they are unaware of is that they can reference previous works. The most common ways in which students are academically dishonest is collusion and unequal group work. Collusion as Monash University (2019) points out is the “unauthorised collaboration on assessable work with other people”. Frequently unauthorised partners include parents, older siblings, tutors and friends. It is dishonest to present the collaborative efforts of multiple people off as individual work. Group work is a minefield where academic honesty is concerned. It is very common for one or two people in a group to carry the team. This unequal distribution of work is often due to a participant’s absenteeism and or disinterest. Unfortunately, there is no suggestion I can offer as I have been guilty of doing too much in past group assessments in order to pass/complete a task. In my opinion, (no facts), I believe that group tasks should not be used for summative assessments tasks due the inequitable nature of collaborative groups.

Academic honesty is not just for students to follow when submitting their assignments. Rather it is a mindset, a code of conduct, developed during schooling years and manifested in adulthood. As a code of conduct, infringements of this nature need to be treated similarly to infringements of other conduct related behaviour. Simply assigning punitive measures is not conducive to learning and reducing future occurrences. Instead, it is more productive to create a situation in which academic integrity is the norm and best practice for both students and teachers. Academic honesty is more than just plagiarism. Its is the authenticity of your work and the extension of self.

References

Ezard, T., (2019) Leading the Buzz in your school. ASLA 50th Conference. Canberra

Jacobsen, R., Halvorsen, A., Frasier, A., Schmitt, A., Crocco, M., and Segall, A. (2018). Thinking deeply, thinking emotionally; how high school students make sense of evidence. Theory & Research in Social Education. 46, 232-276. DOI 10.1080/00933104.2018.1425170

Jones, M. & Silberzahn, P. (2016) Without an opinion, you’re just another person with data. Forbes – Media and Entertainment. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/awsmediaandentertainment/2019/09/12/how-to-thrive-in-todays-disrupted-media-markets/#7862807770ed

Kuhlthau, C., Maniotes, L. & Caspari, A. (2012). Guided inquiry design: A framework for inquiry in your school. Libraries Unlimited. USA.

Kong, S. (2014). Developing information literacy and critical thinking skills through domain knowledge learning in digital classrooms: An experience of practicing flipped classroom strategy. Computers & Education. 78, pp.160-173, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.05.009

Latrobe University (2019). Academic Integrity. Student Administration. Retrieved from https://www.latrobe.edu.au/students/admin/academic-integrity

Monash University (2019). Academic integrity, plagiarism and collusion. Student Administration. Retrieved from https://www.latrobe.edu.au/students/admin/academic-integrity

McGrew, S., Breakstone, J., Ortega, T., Smith, M., and Wineburg, S. (2018). Can students evaluate online sources? Learning from assessments of civic online reasoning. Theory & Research in Social Education. 46, 165-193, DOI 10.1080/00933104.2017.1416320

Qayyum, M., & Smith, David. (2018). Changing research behaviours of university students with progression through a course. Journal of the Australian Library and Information Association. 67: 3 pp256-277 DOI: 10.1080/24750158.2018.1502243

Templeton, T. (2019). Co-existing or co-operating. Trish’s trek into bookspace [blog]. Retrieved from https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/trish/2019/04/18/co-existing-or-co-operating/

Breaking down the barriers

Break out boxes are a fabulous activity that engage and excite students of all ages. These boxes mirror how an escape room works in that students puzzle their way through to find the code that will unlock the box and obtain their prize!

These boxes were amazing all throughout book week!! My fabulous colleague Jordan is a whiz at creating activities that stimulate the brain, evoke critical thinking, creativity, collaboration and communication. Using the Critical and creative thinking continuum from the General capabilities, the puzzles were selected to address the various strands at the appropriate stage for each class. Our students were thoroughly engaged in the pursuit of a grand prize. TBH, the grand prizes were lollies as that was what the budget permitted.

The boxes were such a hit that we have been clamoured with requests to repeat them with other classes. The 2IC of RE has asked the boxes be available for Year 8 RE to sum up their World Religions unit at the end of next term as well as 7 RE for their unit on ‘Gospels, Parables and Miracles’. 9 History wants it for exam preparation in two weeks. 10 English want it next week to reinvigorate the flagging interest in ‘Lord of the flies’ that I have previously grumbled about. We even managed to get an elusive science class requesting it – 11 Biology is going to trial one to introduce the next unit of work.

So what does this mean for us as a TL?

Besides embedding the Gen Caps into the teaching and learning, breakout boxes draw in the skeptical teachers by breaking down barriers. We all know there are teachers in every school that have strong aversions to libraries and teacher librarians. There are ones that are not sure of what a TL can contribute to the classroom, and others that avoid the library like its a contagious disease. Some are not even sure why we are there at all!

We have found that breakout boxes are so captivating that its plainly obvious how it can work in the classroom teacher’s favour. But this indulgence comes at a cost… They need to book a TL to do this activity either in the library or their classroom. And maybe then they will see, we aren’t all that scary. And then… maybe then, they will come back, to borrow books, request teaching spaces and most importantly, collaborate together in planning units of work.

Maybe then they will understand what we do, and who we are.

Now who is feeling smug?

(my HOD… this whole concept wasnt my idea, but as my HOD and colleagues are not going to blog about it. I might as well)

Where was that green sheep (cake)?

Getting the word about Book week out. We have asked the kids to bring in food that has a book theme. They will be judged and then prizes awarded before selling them to raise money for the Pajama Foundation. We had a lovely student bring in some a few days early to drum up support. So far we have had 40 students agree to bring in something delectable for next week.

stay tuned …