I am able to design training programs based on appropriate learning principles and theories
Introduction
Librarians are committed to providing the best possible services to patrons. In order to do this, librarians’ skills and knowledge must keep pace with organizational change and advancing technologies. Librarians attend training programs to learn the skills they need to best serve the library and its patrons. Librarians, however, are not only participants in training programs. They create and deliver training programs themselves so that staff and colleagues gain the specialized skills and knowledge they need to perform their jobs most effectively.
Librarians are also committed to helping patrons find the information they need. This mission includes helping patrons learn skills to find information on their own. Teaching those skills naturally involves instruction.
Given the important role training and instruction play in libraries, librarians need to know how to design effective training programs. More specifically, the librarian must understand relevant learning principles and theories that are the basis for designing and delivering effective instruction. The librarian must appreciate that individuals have different learning styles and that material must be presented in multiple modalities to support learning. The librarian must understand strategies that keep participants motivated and engaged during instruction. My work in the SLIS program has focused on information literacy instruction, but through that work I have learned key pedagogical principles applicable to both training staff and information literacy instruction. My knowledge of these principles gives me the ability to design training programs based on appropriate learning principles and theories.
Commentary
One of the primary ways I have come to understand instructional development and design is through my experience as an information literacy instructor. During my internship at the King Library I taught an information literacy session on the distinction between scholarly and popular sources. I also co-taught two additional sessions. In one of these sessions I presented an introduction to Academic Search Premier. The other covered the distinction between primary and secondary sources.
In preparation for teaching these sessions I read Jacobson and Gatti’s (2001) Teaching Information Literacy Concepts. The book is a collection of information literacy lesson plans, not a discussion of pedagogical theory. Nevertheless, the book’s content implicitly conveys a key pedagogical principle: many people learn best through hands-on experience rather than passively listening to a lecture. The lesson plans collected in the work almost all include some type of active-learning exercise. This principle guided me as I planned my own information literacy sessions which combined brief lecture with individual and group exercises.
As I planned the sessions I kept in mind several key principles of effective instruction. Planning began with an informal needs assessment, i.e., a discussion with colleagues concerning the skills most important for students to learn given the assignments in a particular course. When planning lectures and activities, I was careful to stay focused on the topic of the session in an effort to avoid overwhelming students by covering too much information. I was careful to coordinate exercises to assignments in the students’ courses. This gave the sessions practical value for the students and helped motivate them to participate in (and learn from) the activities. Planning the sessions also involved developing clear learning objectives and preparing handouts and worksheets. At the beginning of a session, I communicated those learning objectives to students. I also emphasized the practical benefits of the information covered in the session as a means of promoting student interest in the material.
Many of the concepts and steps discussed above are applicable to staff training programs. For example, developing a training session or program often begins with a needs (or deficiency) assessment. Arthur, et al. (2003) describe a needs assessment as a “three-step process”:
organizational analysis (e.g., Which organizational goals can be attained through personnel training? Where is training needed in the organization?), task analysis (e.g., What must the trainee learn in order to perform the job effectively? What will training cover?), and person analysis (e.g., Which individuals need training and for what?). (p. 235)
Training programs must also be actively promoted in order to motivate employee participation. Just as students need to see the practical benefits of information literacy skills, employees need to see that a training session or program has “tangible benefits” (Roberts, n.d.; see also Harmon, 1989). Information literacy instruction and training are comparable in other ways. Planning and delivering a training program involve:
developing performance-based learning objectives and communicating those objectives during the session (Roberts, n.d.; Blanchard & Thacker, 2007);
tailoring information to participants’ level of knowledge (Blanchard & Thacker, 2007);
selecting instructional strategies best suited to training objectives (Arthur, et al., 2003);
using multiple instructional strategies to address the different learning styles of participants (e.g., lecture, demonstration, discussion, drills, group problem-solving activities, etc.) (Harmon, 1989);
providing participants with handouts and other learning aids (Harmon, 1989);
limiting the information covered during a session to a few major concepts (Harmon, 1989);
giving participants the chance to learn new concepts and skills through hands-on experience (Blanchard & Thacker, 2007, p. 200; Tucker, 2004).
Planning a training session or program is not limited to the content covered during the session itself. It also involves assessment (Roberts, n.d.; Blanchard & Thacker, 2007, pp. 200-201; Tucker, 2004). Were program objectives met? If not, why not? Whether data is gathered through questionnaires, surveys, or performance evaluations, assessment helps guide the development of future training programs.
Evidence
I am submitting three assignments as evidence of my competency in this area. The first is a worksheet I created during my internship at SJSU’s King Library. The worksheet is intended to be used during an information literacy instructional session. The worksheet guides students through the search process in a step-by-step fashion. Questions and instructions are designed to introduce students to basic search strategies (e.g., how to narrow or broaden a search) as well important features of article databases (e.g., thesauri, limiters, saving citations, e-mailing citations). By completing the worksheet, students also gain an appreciation for the differences and relative advantages of keyword searching vs. subject searching.
I designed the activity with several pedagogical principles in mind. Students get to choose their own search topics (ideally, the topic they have chosen for a course research paper). Students are motivated to participate in the activity because of its practical value – it helps them make progress on a course assignment. Problem-based learning serves as another way to motivate students during the session. At the beginning of the activity, students are given a minimum of direction or instruction to complete the worksheet. This is expected to create some difficulty and frustration for the students. Fifteen to twenty minutes into the activity the instructor provides some direct instruction related to the worksheet (using an example provided by a student). Students who have been struggling with the activity will be motivated to pay attention and learn the information. Finally, concepts are taught through an active learning exercise. Rather than passively listening to a lecture, students learn by doing. Giving students’ first-hand experience of instructional content is an effective means of teaching concepts and skills. The worksheet demonstrates an understanding of important pedagogical principles.
The second assignment is an article review. The article concerned one academic library’s attempt to improve its own information literacy instruction. The authors – librarians at Pepperdine University – describe the inadequacy of their library’s previous approach to information literacy instruction, their research into effective instructional techniques, and the ways they changed information literacy instruction to make it more effective. The authors found that an exclusive reliance on lecture was an inadequate method of information literacy instruction. Consequently, they investigated practices at other libraries to find ways to improve instruction. Among numerous findings, the authors discovered that students have different learning styles. While some students may learn by passively listening to a lecture, others require more active, hands-on experience to learn new information. Based on practices at other institutions, they concluded that information literacy instruction is best guided by clearly articulated information literacy competencies. They also found that web-based instruction can be an effective way to present some material.
Based on their research, the authors implemented the following reforms: (1) information literacy competencies would be used to guide the design of instructional content, (2) web-based applications would be used to teach some material formerly covered during the instructional session, and (3) some hands-on experience would be incorporated into the instructional session. Diverting some instructional content to the web meant that less material needed to be covered during the instructional session. It was hoped that students would then feel less overwhelmed and more likely to learn the information covered during the session. General principles of effective information literacy instruction are a theme that runs throughout the article. My review of the article demonstrates a familiarity with important concepts related to effective information literacy instruction.
The third assignment I am submitting is a screencast I created for LIBR 246. In the screencast I demonstrate some of the features of the social bookmarking site Brainify. Screencasts in general are an important instructional tool because they address multiple sensory modalities. As Farkas (2007) observes, “Video content offers patrons both visual and audio channels, increasing the likelihood of lasting learning” (p. 197). Screencasts have additional advantages as instructional tools. For those with a high-speed internet connection, screencasts can be viewed at point of need. They also let the learner pace the delivery of instructional content and review information as needed. My screencast on Brainify demonstrates the ability to apply learning theory and technical knowledge to create a valuable instructional resource.
Conclusion
The librarian’s commitment to meeting the information needs of patrons has implications beyond building a collection or answering reference questions. Helping patrons meet their information needs includes helping them learn how to find information themselves. Teaching information literacy skills is a natural extension of the fundamental commitment of librarians. In addition, librarians often work with in complex institutional environments saturated with technology. In order to provide services, they must themselves stay up-to-date on technology. This will often require training. Librarians, then, are educators, whether that involves educating colleagues, library staff, or patrons. As educators, librarian must understand effective pedagogy. Without an understanding of effective pedagogical strategies, librarians run the risk of wasting considerable time and expense developing a training program or class that fails to meet learning objectives. Through my SLIS coursework I have become familiar with pedagogical strategies essential to the planning and delivery of training programs and information literacy instruction. I know how to design training programs based on appropriate learning principles and theories.
References
Arthur, W., Bennett, W., Edens, P. S., & Bell, S. T. (2003). Effectiveness of training in organizations: A meta-analysis of design and evaluation features. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(2), 234–245. Retrieved November 11, 2009 from http://www.psychologie.uni-mannheim.de/cip/Tut/seminare_wittmann/meta_fribourg/Arthur_etal_2003_MA_Trainings_in_organisations.pdf
Blanchard, P. N. & Thacker, J. W. (2007). Effective training: Systems, strategies and practices. Third edition. [S.l.]: Pearson Educ.
Farkas, M. G. (2007). Social software in libraries: Building collaboration, communication, and community online. Medford, N.J.: Information Today.
Harmon, G. D. (1989). How to create an effective training program. Supervision. Retrieved November 12, 2009 from http://www.allbusiness.com/human-resources/careers-career-development/111636-1.html
Jacobson, T., & Gatti, T. H. (2001). Teaching information literacy concepts: Activities and frameworks from the field. Active learning series, no. 6. Pittsburgh, PA: Library Instruction Publications.
Roberts, M. (n.d.). How to plan effective training sessions. Retrieved November 12, 2009 from http://www.notrain-nogain.org/Man/TtT/mich.asp
Tucker, J. C. (2004). Getting down to business: Library staff training. Reference Services Review, 32(3), 293-301. Retrieved November 11, 2009, from Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Screencast Tutorial - Screencast demonstration of the features of Brainify (an academic, social bookmarking tool)