Currency: Is It Important?

In the TL course that I am actually not finished yet it seems to me that too much was made of currency; that is, how current or "up-to-date" a source is.  On the website evaluation assignment I even lost marks because one of the websites I chose to be used when teaching and learning about film techniques did not make the magical cut-off of 2004.  Interestingly, this was a website by Yale University that I think any English teacher would use in a heartbeat.  So, how important is currency really? 

When reading for the website evaluation assignment I came across some articles that argued that too much is made of currency.  In history, for example, it is more important to use an authoritative source rather than one that is just recent or up-to-date.  Indeed, in most disciplines this would have to be the case.  This would include teacher librarianship and, indeed, many articles were used in the lecture notes that date from the 1980s and 90s, especially the stuff on organisational change. 

Moreover, as I noticed when completing the assignment on definitions of information literacy, a definition that is recent may be exactly or almost the same as one that is not.  This is because there seems to be a consensus on what information literacy is and should do, even though the wording of a definition may be slightly different and everyone seems to want to have a go at defining information literacy because this is fun.  So, "recent" may actually not mean "up-to-date".  In a sense, something that is not recent or current can be up-to-date.

This may explain why many websites that I have seen recently, including government education ones, are not putting copyright or updated dates at the bottom.  Moreover, I can safely say that any English teacher would probably say, a date on a website about film techniques is not necessary.  Information about film techniques does not change ever.  A long-shot will always be a long-shot.  A canted angle will always be a canted angle.  The information does not change. 

It must be said that in some cases currency may be important.  Actually, it would be truer to say, perhaps, that for some currency may be important.  If a doctor, for example, is trying to discover causes of cancer currency of opinion would be expected.  If engineers are trying to work out how to build better dam walls, new information would be very useful.  If you are a teacher librarian writing a submission for a government inquiry, latest information would be a must.  In these cases, timeliness really matters.

To conclude this discussion (I probably should put this task keyword in so that I can show this post to the students) and there is plenty more to say, I would argue that too much is made of currency.  For most people, (especially teachers desperate to find anything on a particular topic on the Internet or in the library) currency will not matter and will not necessarily mean that the information user is not using up-to-date information.  Indeed, for academics currency will also often not matter.  A quick glance through most recent journal articles will reveal articles that were written whenever.

Ideas for scholarly publications

This blog post will definitely evolve and I really don't have much time today.  One idea that I would like to publish on is partnerships (dare I say collaboration) between public libraries and school libraries.  last year I advocated this in an assignment and the response it received was, shall we say, not very productive, especially because after Skyping the lecturer I got the impression that the lecturer had confused collaboration between libraries and librarians with joint libraries.  As I later found out when researching joint libraries for the placement report you either love them or you hate them passionately.

Nevertheless, the issue of joint libraries aside, the impression I have received from public libraries, such as the Parramatta City Library, is that main-branch or large public libraries are already supporting the teaching and learning of many schools, through technology learning centres, a blizzard of HSC resources and so on.  Accordingly, public libraries would love to collaborate with school libraries in order to better serve the needs of school students, including through information literacy.  They really have to want this because unlike schools, students are not a captive audience, they will go where-ever it is best for them to go. On the other hand, school libraries tend to be insular.  Yes, to save money they will tell students to use databases freely available at the public library but other than this I have not seen much reaching out to public libraries.  In the literature I found an article in Scan about the cooperation between a public school and the Fairfield City Library.  I also found an article about the cooperation between a public school in Mackay and the Mackay City Library (ahh, my home town!).  This is not much.  Consequently, it would be good to explore this when I have time.

Another idea I would like to pursue through, initially I think, a Slideshare PowerPoint, then a conference paper (this does not to be referreed) is the school library as a shopping mall.  It is an interesting idea and having done much research on shopping malls I have research.  I know I will get bizzarre reactions and alot of obstruction but this is par for the course when talking about shopping malls.  But, maybe by doing this more as a public than an academic work I will be able to reach out to a non-academic and a younger, more open-minded audience.  I may actually see practical thinking and constructive feedback rather than prejudice and theoretical abstraction used to mask a personal prejudice. 

Revolution in the Classroom

On 6 February, 2012 a 4 Corners documentary aired about problems to do with secondary education.  The journalists were  Matthew Carney and Janine Cohen.  Updated February 6, 2012 20:30:00.  http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2012/02/02/3421391.htm.  As stated on the 4 Corners website:

For some time now there's been a bruising debate about the balance of funding handed out to public and private schools. No one doubts it's an important debate, but many educators believe it has helped obscure an even more fundamental question about where the money is spent. Over the past decade, the Federal Government has spent billions of dollars trying to lower class sizes, increase the use of computers and boost investment in school buildings. At the same time, Australia's educational performance relative to key neighbouring countries has been falling. The question is why?

For some the answer is simple. Money is being spent in the wrong places. Experts point to a growing body of research that says good teachers are the major determining factor in how a child performs at school. They claim that too little money is being spent on improving teacher performance. To make matters worse, state school principals are not empowered to make decisions about how their schools are staffed and run. As a result, some good teachers go unrewarded and bad teachers cannot be sacked.

To be fair to 4 Corners and the journalists there is a strength of this story.  For those that know nothing about secondary education the story provides a minuscule of highly simplified information that is typically available on Teachers TV or The American news and current affairs show The News Hour.  So, for instance, there is a scene of a principal shown out and about in the school mixing with the students.  An "expert" refers to class sizes (just in case you had forgotten about that).  There is a scene of what appears to be a beginning teacher being assessed on classroom technique and saying how wonderful this is.  Also, there is a scene of a derelict school being replaced by a wonderful new school.  So, if you knew nothing about secondary education (and let's face it most know very little other than what they see or read in the media), now you know a minuscule more.


Predictably, the story has a number of weaknesses and I'll try to be brief.  Firstly, as stated above "For some the answer is simple".  This does not mean that the answer is simple.  On the contrary, the overall impression that the story gives is that the answer is simple.  To do so, the narrator and the "experts" seem to dismiss everything but the simple answer that they are pushing.  So, for example, the question of class sizes (which the narrator and "experts" do not seem to see as simple) is just dismissed as a distraction.  Important stake holders such as the Teachers' Federation and the Department of Education are just mentioned as seeming bad guys that are part of the problem.  

Secondly, it is interesting that Kerry O'Brien introduces the story by saying that contrary to standard practice the material will be allowed to speak for itself.  So, the journalist is going to be value-neutral and the story is going to be something like reality TV.  On the contrary, the impression that I got as I was watching is that the journalist was not value-neutral and the material was not allowed to speak for itself.  In fact, it seems to be a highly manufactured story that is steered where the journalist and indeed 4 Corners with its politics raison d'etre want it to go. With the report of the Gonski review into funding  due out soon the the narrator and "experts" keep arguing that real issue is not funding and that it is unrealistic for public schools to want more funding.  Contrary voices are just not heard.  Moreover, this issue of principals hiring and firing which is not a simple question seems to be of very recent origin so it is difficult to see why the journalists pick this as their simple answer.  A cynical person might suggest that this is a distraction from the real issue.


Thirdly, as stated: "Experts point to a growing body of research that says good teachers are the major determining factor in how a child performs at school. They claim that too little money is being spent on improving teacher performance". This sure is simplistic.  Experts also point to a growing body of research that a number of other factors are a major determining factor in how a child performs at school, including parents, ICT, full-time permanent positions, teacher librarians, good community literacy standards, expenditure on school buildings (and yes, I have been in classrooms with broken desks, broken chairs, wood panelling that is so old that it smells real bad, schools that like prisons - replete with balconies and prison court-yards), funding, class sizes, more support for the classroom teacher by the school administration, and so on.  It is rather simplistic to just focus on "good teachers" and teacher performance.  Interestingly, given this focus on teacher performance it is unbelievable that the journalists do not even mention the Institute of Teachers; the government body that ensures that teachers meet standards of excellence and are accredited.

Fourthly, what is a good and what is a bad teacher (that is so bad that this person needs to be fired)?  With respect to the first, the narrator points to good classroom technique and mouthing a positive view of students.  Is this really all there is to being a good teacher?  I suppose in journalism fairly-land it is.  With respect to the second, the story gives no example of what a bad teacher is.  Maybe if one concludes that the journalists are confused then the example of a good teacher is actually an example of a bad teacher because she apparently does not yet know the names of the students.  Bad teacher, bad teacher. If a bad teacher is someone who tries to molest students no-one would have a problem with this teacher being fired.  But, what has this got to do with this story.  A child-molester can still achieve good results in relation to the curriculum.

Fifthly, what is apparent from this story is that to suggest that all blame for the failure of the education system lies with teachers the journalists seem to side with students against teachers and to construct students as passive, unknowing and unresponsible.  So, for example, we see the seeming beginning teacher being bad by not using the students' names but we do not see students screaming, yelling, eating, using their mobile phones inappropriately and so on.  Actually, the class seems to be either a very good class that I would love to teach or they are just mindful of the video-camera.  Moreover, as I was reminded the other day students tend to behave differently for male teachers than they do for female teachers, especially if that teacher is young and attractive.  It is important to note while it is often possible to find some male teachers teaching subjects such as Maths or Science, it is often rare to find a male English teacher.  Accordingly, students often misbehave (in my experience) for male teachers in English simply because they are not used to them.  Good or bad here has nothing to do with classroom technique, or indeed the teacher, and does not depend on simplistic things like putting up hands.

I could keep going all day, but I've got to go.  I have to say that the 4 Corners story is very un-original and not an example of 4 Corners journalism at its best.  It might have been better if they had stuck to the typical format.  I can't finish without referring to my favourite metaphor - Clayton's.  The "answer" provided in this story to the ills of the education system is a Clayton's answer.  The answer you have when you are seeminly too lazy or ignorant to have an answer.

Collaboration?

In defining collaboration and what it is not, a good article is:Gibson-Langford, L (2007) Collaboration: Force or Forced, Scan, 26(4): 19-30.  There is a lot to think about here but the following will serve.  Gibson-Langford is here talking about a history of problems with teacher librarian attempts at collaboration with others in schools. 

In our zeal to engage more actively in teaching partnerships, did we really fully grasp this practice called collaboration?  Did we understand the complexities of human relationships that underpin collaboration?  Did we realistically establish its possibilities?  Did we invest time preparing the social environment in which to begin a collaborative process with our classroom teachers before we set out on such a significant professional agenda?  Did we ever weigh up the notion that collaboration may be something not possible in human relationships due to the complexity of human behaviour? Is it possible that collaboration is a concept that is misused, misunderstood and misguided, under the belief that teachers working in close proximity are enabled to be collaborative in their approach to learning and teaching?

These are not the only problems, there is a plethora of others, but one thing that I would highlight here is that teaching experience shows that group teaching and learning strategies, such as team teaching and group work, often do not work with all teachers and students.  Hence, it is unlikely that collaboration would work with all teacher librarians, teachers and students.

It is important to note that, in my opinion, the above does not mean that collaboration is impossible or not something that educators and learners should use to more effectively educate and learn.  On the contrary, it suggests that as with other group strategies this strategy (and it is just one teaching and learning strategy) needs to be taken more seriously. 

Vision? Mission? Goals?

The best guide to creating a statement of vision for a school library that I have seen is New York City School Library System Handbook – Section 1 10/10/08


http://schools.nycenet.edu/offices/teachlearn/sls/Handbook_Section1_VisionMissionGoalsExpectations.pdf

With this guide there is also useful resources such as a proforma for rating the school library.

The ASLA standards of professional Experience?

Effective searching?

A really good and practical article on effective searching is: Wall, J. (2009) Teaching Power Searching. Scan, 28(1), 12-16.  Available at: http://www.curriculumsupport.education.nsw.gov.au/schoollibraries/assets/pdf/wallpowsearch.pdf

I particularly like the stages that Wall uses for teaching search strategies.

 1. Use Wikipedia to understand the basics of the topic – question the accuracy or authority of the information.  2. Check resources for more in-depth information – books, online databases, etc. 3. Use the advanced search function in  Google or in other preferred search engines.

I also like the list of useful functions such as * and ~

Finally, I like the arguement about having a knowledge of search engines and ones that are more applicable to specific needs.