ERIC EJ1089286: "Mind-Blowing:" Fostering Self-Regulated Learning in Information Literacy Instruction

2015·0.38 MB·English

by  ERIC

Volume 9, Issue 1, 2015 [PERSPECTIVES]
“M -B ”
IND LOWING
Fostering self-regulated learning in information literacy
instruction
Eveline Houtman The new ACRL Framework for Information
University of Toronto Literacy for Higher Education brings a new
emphasis into our instruction on student
metacognition and dispositions. In this article I
introduce self-regulated learning, a related
concept from the field of education; it
encompasses metacognition, emotions,
motivations and behaviors. I discuss how this
concept could be important and helpful in
implementing the related elements in the
ACRL Framework and draw on the concept to
devise strategies and activities that promote
students’ self-awareness and learning skills.
This focus promotes a more learner-centered
approach to teaching. The article also adds to
the conversation on developing a self-
reflective pedagogical praxis in information
literacy instruction.
[PERSPECTIVES EDITED BY KIM LEEDER REED & SARAH E. NORTH]
6
Houtman, “Mind-Blowing” Communications in Information Literacy 9(1), 2015
INTRODUCTION being mindful, intentional, reflective,
introspective, self-aware, self-
“One of the best gifts teachers can controlled, and self-disciplined
give students are the experiences that about learning, and it leads to
open their eyes to themselves as becoming self-directed. (Nilson,
learners.” (Weimer, 2014) 2014)

The new ACRL Framework for Information Such an approach to learning demands of us
Literacy for Higher Education (2015) brings a reflective, self-aware, and intentional
a new emphasis into our instruction on approach to teaching (Booth, 2011) — and
metacognition, the monitoring of one’s demands also a reflective approach in
thinking and learning processes. It also writing this article. This is not intended as a
introduces dispositions, ways of thinking prescriptive “how I did it good” article
and acting related to information literacy (Wilson, 2013), but more a reflective “this
is what I tried to do (and why), this is what
that “address the affective, attitudinal, or
valuing dimension of learning” (ACRL, worked (or not), this is what I’ll try next”
2015, p. 2). The Framework does not article. The article adds to the conversation
address implementation, which is now the on developing a self-reflexive pedagogical
task of teaching librarians going forward. In praxis in information literacy instruction
this article, I introduce self-regulated (Jacobs, 2008).
learning, a related concept from the field of
education, and discuss why this concept THE “WHY?” AND “SO WHAT?” OF
could be important and helpful in SELF-REGULATED LEARNING
implementing these elements of the
Framework. I draw on this concept to devise Self-regulated learning is a well-established
strategies and activities that promote
concept in education, with an extensive
students’ self-awareness and learning skills. research base (to get a sense of the research,
see Zimmerman & Schunk, 2011). Decades
Self-regulated learning encompasses of studies have shown its strong positive
metacognition, but is also the broader term, effect on student learning. Hattie (2009) has
encompassing “awareness and control over synthesized hundreds of meta-analyses of
one’s emotions, motivations, behavior, and educational research in order to compare the
environment as related to learning” (Nilson, statistical effect size of different factors
2013, p. 5) — in other words, it related to student achievement. He has
encompasses metacognition and found that elements of self-regulated
dispositions. Self-regulated learning is learning, such as metacognitive strategies,
self-questioning, and study skills, show a
the voice in your head that asks you large effect on learning. To put this in
questions about your learning… [It perspective, time on task has a medium
is] the conscious planning, effect; homework has a small-medium
monitoring, evaluation, and effect; problem-based learning and
ultimately control of one’s learning mentoring both have a small effect on
in order to maximize it… It means student achievement.
[PERSPECTIVES]
7
Houtman, “Mind-Blowing” Communications in Information Literacy 9(1), 2015
If self-regulated learning is so important, are or are not learning, what they
why has the LIS literature previously paid are deeming important, how they are
no attention to the concept? It may be that, tackling and proceeding with an
like faculty, we have been more focused on assignment… how much confidence
delivering content in our instruction. The they may have in their knowledge
importance of the concept was first brought and skills, how much they may be
to my attention at a conference of the overestimating their knowledge and
Society for Teaching and Learning in skills… Wrappers not only enhance
Higher Education; the idea seemed equally students’ performance on their
new to the faculty in the room. It may be regular course components but also
that we consider self-regulated learning to teach them how their mind works
be the province of our academic success and how to make it learn and
centers with their classes on topics such as perform better. In doing so,
study skills and procrastination. Yet self- wrappers multiply the learning value
regulated learning can be general — study of every standard class activity and
skills — or domain specific (Boekaerts, assignment. (p. 13)
1997) — how to study for a test in a
particular subject. In fact, the point of the This, then, was what initially hooked me on
conference session I attended (Knaack, the idea of self-regulated learning: what, I
2014) was to give faculty tips for helping wondered, would self-regulated learning
students learn how to learn in the context of wrappers look like in the domain of
the faculty members’ own domain-specific information literacy instruction?
classes.
It should be noted that the LIS literature has
Nilson (2013), referenced at the conference focused, to some extent, on various
session, advocates for embedding learning elements of self-regulated learning, such as
objectives and activities related to self- metacognition (Mackey & Jacobson, 2014),
regulated learning in all courses. She affect (Kuhlthau, 2004), self-efficacy beliefs
suggests the use of wrappers (Lovett, 2008), (Kurbanoglu, 2003), and more. What the
which she describes as concept of self-regulated learning allows us
to do is pull together all the different
activities and assignments that direct elements that put students at the center of
students’ attention to self-regulation their own learning. This in turn allows us to
before, during, or after regular look at student learning differently. The LIS
course components. As the word literature tends to emphasize the importance
suggests, they wrap around assigned of learning theory, such as constructivism,
readings, videos, podcasts, lectures, for instructional literacy (Booth, 2011). The
regular course assignments, quizzes, self-regulated learning literature instead
and exams. Their purpose if to tends to emphasize how learning is
heighten students’ conscious understood and experienced by the students
awareness of their learning process: themselves. For example:
what they are and are not
understanding or retaining, how they  students may think of themselves
[PERSPECTIVES]
8
Houtman, “Mind-Blowing” Communications in Information Literacy 9(1), 2015
as students rather than learners point out, “without such explicit and
(Weimer, 2012); transparent priorities, many students find
 most students don’t think about day-to-day work confusing and
how they learn; they may struggle frustrating” (p. 16). Clarity around these
to produce any insights into their questions also helps us in designing our
own learning (Weimer, 2014); teaching. The Framework doesn’t directly
 they may harbor misconceptions address these questions; rather it assumes
about learning: the importance of metacognition and
 they may think their ability to dispositions (and in fact the importance of
learn is fixed (e.g. “I suck at information literacy) without explicitly
math”), rather than something making a case for any of these (Houtman,
that is mutable (Dweck, 2006) 2015).
 they may think learning should
be easy rather than something Self-regulated learning may help us
hard and effortful (Nilson, formulate one answer to the “why?” and “so
2013) what?” questions. Consider this statement:
 they may attribute their “The goal of learner-centered teaching is the
learning, or lack of learning, to development of students as autonomous,
sources outside themselves (the self-directed, and self-regulating
teacher, the curriculum) rather learners” (Weimer, 2013, p. 10). If we
than to their own effort accept the need to become more learner-
(Nilson, 2013); centered, and if we accept self-regulated
 the less they know, the more learning as a central goal, we might then
confident they are likely to be add, “Our goal is to introduce strategies and
in their knowledge and skills activities into our instruction to make
(Nilson, 2013). students more reflective, intentional, and
self-aware of their learning in the domain of
We have all encountered students with these information literacy, in order to help our
beliefs and attitudes. Luckily, teaching them students develop as self-regulating
strategies for metacognition and self- learners.”
regulated learning makes a difference to
how students see their learning and This has been one of my goals for the last
therefore how they approach learning year, as I discuss in the next sections.
(Lovett, 2008; Nilson, 2013). In addition to
the research literature, there is a body of MY CONTEXT
practice-focused but research-based
literature that can provide us with teaching My examples in this article come from a
ideas in this area (for example, Nilson, workshop series that I have coordinated for
2013). several years called Essential Research
Skills. It consists of four 80-minute
“Why?’ and “so what?” are important sessions, each offered several times over the
questions for student understanding and year:
learning; as Wiggins and McTighe (2005)
[PERSPECTIVES]
9
Houtman, “Mind-Blowing” Communications in Information Literacy 9(1), 2015
 Getting Started order at any time) and complete a written
 Finding Scholarly Sources reflective exercise, they can get credit in the
 Choosing the Best Sources for institution’s Co-Curricular Record. This is
Your Topic the approach the institution has taken to
 Citing and Organizing Your recognize extra-curricular activities, rather
Sources than badging.

The series has been developed The workshops were designed with early
collaboratively with other librarians over undergraduates in mind. However I
several years1, with a genealogy that goes purposely did not put that information in
back to simpler how-to-search-the-database any descriptions of the workshops since in
classes. In the previous two years, the my experience students come to writing and
collaboration also included two writing research — and the recognition that they
instructors. Although this year there is no need help with these — at different stages in
formal collaboration with the writing their academic careers. Surprisingly, this
centers, their influence can still be seen in year a fair number of graduate students also
some of the elements of the workshops. took the classes (possibly because the
From year to year we have reassessed the series’ name attracts them more strongly
entire series, adding, removing, rearranging, than the previous year’s “Core Library
and refining the various elements as Skills”), in some classes outnumbering the
necessary. For example, this is the first year undergraduates. This did affect the dynamic
with a whole session devoted to evaluating of the classes and going forward to next
sources. This is also the first year where self year we need to consider whether to
-regulated learning has been an explicit establish separate workshop series for
focus, although elements such as reflective undergraduate and graduate students.
exercises were already present.
Several librarians teach these classes from a
The workshops are open registration: that is, common outline; I can speak only to my
generic classes rather than classes integrated own teaching experiences in this article.
into students’ coursework. The broader Each workshop consists of student
context is a very large research-intensive reflections, exercises, small and large group
institution with no common first year discussion, and lecturettes, a term adopted
composition class where students might get from our Centre for Teaching Support and
information literacy instruction and with Innovation to remind us to keep lectures
uneven integration of librarians into short. Because each workshop is driven by
academic departments. For some students, the participation, questions and interests of
then, the open registration classes are their the students in the class that particular day
only opportunity to experience formal — and students are not a homogenous group
library instruction. The series also allows us — the same workshop can be quite different
to provide more extensive instruction than each time. This means giving up some
in the too-typical one-shots that faculty control. It can also set up a tension between
request. Students sign up for individual wanting to follow the students’ lead and
classes. If they take all four classes (in any wanting to cover what was promised. And
[PERSPECTIVES]
10
Houtman, “Mind-Blowing” Communications in Information Literacy 9(1), 2015
although the format typically promotes  they break the ice — students
student engagement, some students resist who talk to each other first are
engagement and make it clear they would more likely to speak to the class
prefer to sit passively while the instructor and the instructor too;
does the work.  they set the tone and let students
know what to expect (i.e. they
We value this workshop series for the lively will be asked to think and talk in
learning that generally occurs there, but also the class);
as a space to try out innovations in our  they create a buffer at the
teaching. The myth about innovation is that beginning of class, something
things immediately improve. The reality, as students can start to work on
education reform expert Michael Fullan while other students inevitably
(2001) points out, is that there is inevitably trickle in late;
an implementation dip where performance  they focus the students on
and confidence goes down — something we themselves and their own
may all want to keep in mind as we learning (The knock against
implement the new Framework. These generic instruction is that
workshops allow us to try something new, students will not engage because
reflect on what happened, and try again until they don’t understand how it is
we feel we’re getting it right. relevant to them. This makes the
session immediately personal and
In the next sections I describe some of the therefore relevant to them.);
self-regulated learning activities we’ve tried  they allow the instructor to learn
in these workshops. something about the students in
the room;
REFLECTIVE ACTIVITIES  they allow the students to hear
from other students, to learn
EMBEDDED IN THE CLASS
from their peers’ perspectives

and knowledge and questions.
Student reflection is at the heart of self-

regulated learning and it is threaded through
The prompt for the reflection at the
these workshops. Each workshop starts
beginning of the Getting Started class is
with a reflective exercise in the form of a
drawn from Project Information Literacy
think-pair-share exercise, where students
(Head & Eisenberg, 2010): “84% of
first think to themselves about a given
students find getting started is the hardest
prompt, then discuss their ideas with their
part of the research process. Do you agree?
neighbor(s), and then share what they
Disagree? Why?” We verbally prompt the
choose with the class as a whole. These
students to either think of a specific
reflections may focus on the students’
assignment or to think more generally. The
experience, or on how they go about a
students, by the way, are tickled to think
particular process, or on “why?” or purpose
that someone is researching them.
questions. These opening reflections serve

several functions:

[PERSPECTIVES]
11
Houtman, “Mind-Blowing” Communications in Information Literacy 9(1), 2015
This exercise generally brings up the ask more pointed questions. The first four
expected issues – not knowing anything stages of the ISP – initiation, topic selection,
about the assigned topic, how to navigate exploration, and topic focus – also serve as
too much information, how to narrow a the outline for the rest of the class, thus
topic, how to know what is a “good” topic – extending even further students’ chances to
but it allows students to articulate them for reflect on the model and to test its
themselves. Sometimes a more general issue usefulness against their own experience.
comes up, such as procrastination or writing
with English as a second language, and we The opening reflection for the Finding
refer the student to other classes and Scholarly Sources class instead focuses on
resources on campus. process. The students are asked to pick one
of three possible topics. They are then given
We follow this exercise with a lecturette a scenario: it’s 11:30 pm, their assignment
that introduces Kuhlthau’s (2004) model of outline is due the next day, and the
the information search process (ISP). Our assignment requirements include identifying
initial purpose with this is to address the three to five scholarly sources they plan to
common student misconception that the use. They are asked to keep track of the
search process is a linear, “efficient” process they use to find the scholarly
process that simply involves picking a topic, sources. Again, the discussion allows the
searching and finding the required number students to compare their own processes
of sources, and then writing up the with their peers.
assignment. It is also a way to begin to
introduce the perspectives in the The students continue to work on their
Framework’s “Research as inquiry” frame chosen question for the rest of the workshop
(ACRL, 2015, p. 9-10), although we don’t in small groups with others who chose the
reference it in class or use its language. same question. At the very end they are
Drawing on the frame more explicitly is asked to go back to the opening scenario
possibly something to consider going and reflect on what they would now do
forward. differently. This exercise falls completely
flat. Yes, they’ll do things differently, the
We illustrate our representation of the ISP students assure me as they pack up to leave.
with emoticons and we talk about the I think this is a case of too much reflection,
emotions, such as uncertainty or confusion, particularly since we also ask them to
that Kuhlthau’s (2004) research has found complete a one-minute paper at the end of
associated with the different stages of the each workshop. I continue to use the prompt
process. In the class discussion that follows, in the hope that when the students are
I find that somewhat unexpectedly the ISP actually faced with a similar scenario, it will
model serves also as a scaffold to extend the remind the voice in their head to ask
reflective discussion that began with the questions about the process.
initial exercise. Students are now more
likely to bring up their own feelings, or to In the Choosing the Best Sources for Your
highlight a specific part of the process as Topic workshop, we start off by looking at
being particularly difficult for them, or to web sources. We ask the students to do a
[PERSPECTIVES]
12
Houtman, “Mind-Blowing” Communications in Information Literacy 9(1), 2015
Google search on “tar sands” and then to be trouble decoding the professors’ language in
conscious of the types of sources they find, order to understand the purpose of the
which ones they would choose to use in an assignment. To help them, we provide a
assignment, and what criteria they use to handout from the Writing Centres that
make that decision. This is the initial decodes terms such as “evaluate,”
reflective exercise that students struggle “compare” or “analyze,” and urge them to
with the most; it seems to completely ask questions in class when they don’t
flummox many of them. In return, I struggle understand, which they’re usually reluctant
with what to do with the exercise. Part of to do. Students also often struggle with
me wonders how I can scaffold this activity questions of broader purpose, such as “why
to make it more effective. Part of me says write? (besides because it’s required).”
it’s more effective to let the students Some students seem to be unaware of such
struggle, so they will better appreciate the overarching goals for higher education as
tools we introduce in the class. critical thinking.

Our current purpose in this workshop is to REFLECTIVE ACTIVITIES AS
give the students various tools and criteria
ASSESSMENT
from which they can develop their own list

of the criteria that matter to them – it’s not
We also use reflective activities for written
self-regulated learning if we just tell them
formative and summative assessment. At the
what should matter. This goal cries out for a
end of each workshop we ask students to
final reflective exercise, currently lacking,
complete an anonymous one-minute paper
where the students are asked to identify
with two questions:
their own personal top three (or so) criteria.

I think this would work best anonymously,
1. What did you find useful about
so they can be honest; I’ve thought of
today’s session?
setting up an electronic poll. This again
2. What would you still like to
would let the students test their ideas against
know more about?
the ideas of their peers.

We also leave room for comments. These
The opening reflective exercise in the Citing
questions are generic, and as noted above, it
and Organizing Your Sources session
might be more interesting and useful to ask
focuses on a “why?” or purpose question:
questions specific to the individual
“Why is it important to cite your sources
workshops.
besides because it’s required?” In this case

the students can test their answers against
Once the students have completed all four
the expert ideas of 20 faculty members who
workshops, they need to complete a longer
were asked the same question. The students
reflective exercise to get credit in the Co-
do quite well on this particular purpose
Curricular Record. The first year we became
question, but this isn’t true of all such
part of this program, I scrambled to find a
questions. In the Getting Started class, we
model to adapt. I settled on a modified
provide two sample assignments for
version of Dietz-Uhler and Lanter’s (2009)
discussion and the students often have
four-questions technique:
[PERSPECTIVES]
13
Houtman, “Mind-Blowing” Communications in Information Literacy 9(1), 2015
1. Identify one important concept, heard about BEAM in a Tweet about a
idea or skill that you learned conference session that has now been turned
while completing the Essential into an article; Rubick, 2015); and citation
Research Skills workshops. counts in Google Scholar, also new to most
2. Why do you believe that this students. The goal with these tools is to give
concept, idea or skill is students structures and ways of thinking that
important? can be helpful to their learning. We use
3. Apply what you have learned concept maps in the workshops to help
from these workshops to some students begin to map out an unfamiliar
aspect of your life. topic, and then narrow in on one aspect of it.
4. What question(s) has the BEAM provides a way of evaluating
workshops raised for you? What possible sources by keeping in mind their
are you still wondering about? function in the writing: B is for background;
(You can’t say “nothing”!) E is for exhibit or evidence; A is for
argument; and M is for method, including
The underlying logic to these questions is methodological theory. Gauging academic
What? - So what? - Now what? (Kolb, importance by citation counts lets students,
1984) — questions that can be helpful in who may initially know little about a
generating many other prompts. particular subject, still distinguish who are
the Big Names they should pay attention to.
This final exercise allows the students to
reflect after the fact on what they have One tool that is less successful in these
learned. Some students write long, workshops is the well-known CRAAP test
thoughtful responses, others do the for systematically evaluating web sources.
minimum. I have thought about instituting a The way it does not work provides insight
minimum word count — Dietz-Uhler and into how students are thinking about the
Lanter (2009) specify 100 words — but this issue. CRAAP of course stands for
would then require me to police it, Currency – Relevance – Accuracy –
something I’m not eager to do. This final Authority – Purpose, which serves as a
exercise also allows us to learn more about checklist for evaluation. We introduce
our students and what they learn in our CRAAP as part of our focus on various
workshops, though I actually usually find evaluation criteria. After we introduce the
students’ in-class questions and discussions tool, we ask students to evaluate one of two
more revealing. assigned tar sands-related websites and
determine whether they would use it in an
assignment. Despite using CRAAP, students
TOOLS FOR THINKING AND
have trouble in making that determination;
LEARNING
CRAAP doesn’t seem to help them in any

meaningful way. For example, despite my
We introduce a number of different tools in
strong hints, students typically don’t think
these workshops. These include concept
to Google the organization that creates the
maps, which surprisingly few students have
site when thinking about authority, although
used before; Bizup’s (2008) BEAM, which
this would give them useful information
no one, including myself, has used before (I
[PERSPECTIVES]
14
Houtman, “Mind-Blowing” Communications in Information Literacy 9(1), 2015
(e.g. affiliations, funding) that could inform CONCLUSION
their evaluation. Once I open the discussion
up to questions they quickly lose interest in Reflecting on these self-regulated learning
CRAAP. activities through the writing of this article
has given me a space to think closely not
What students ask about instead are specific just about the activities — about what is
websites or types of sites and whether they working, what is not, and what I could
can use them in their assignments. They improve — but also about what I am trying
appear to want a simple, clear-cut, yes-or-no to accomplish in my teaching. A recurrent
answer from me as the expert. I see this theme has been the need to be as clear as
desire for a clear-cut answer also when we possible about this in my own thinking, and
do the BEAM exercise, in which we look at then to be more explicit about the “so
the function of different citations in a what?” of each concept and activity I
scholarly article. The students seem introduce so students can better understand
disproportionately distressed when my the connection to their learning. This leads
reading of a citation – my “answer” -- is to questions of how to more broadly frame
different than theirs. the “so what?” of self-regulated learning.
Nilson (2013) recommends that academic
Instead of giving yes-or-no answers I open courses include self-regulating learning
up a discussion of how the use of sources is objectives as well as disciplinary objectives,
dependent on context. The idea of context and that faculty explain from the beginning
engages and challenges the students in a how learning how to learn will benefit the
way that CRAAP does not; for example, students. Should we be open with the
student questions about context become students about our self-regulated learning
threaded through the rest of the session. objectives for the workshops? Should we
This tells me that the Choosing Sources explicitly discuss the benefits of learning
workshop may need a deeper rethink. how to learn in all our information literacy
Context might be the starting point, I think instruction? I wonder how students would
now, rather than a range of criteria. It’s also respond. Is this a way to frame information
clear that students struggle with evaluating literacy instruction to faculty? I wonder how
authority and purpose and need more they would respond.
support, structure, and, in fact, direction in
these key areas. These issues of course Weimer (2013) describes her transformation
connect directly to the Framework’s to learner-centered teacher: “I began to see
“Information Creation as a Process” and course content in a different light. It moved
“Authority is Constructed and from being the end to being the means. It
Contextual” (ACRL, 2015); I would like to went from being something I covered to
draw more explicitly on these frames going something I used to develop learning skills
forward. It seems that the Framework is a and an awareness of learning processes (p.
more useful “tool” for thinking and learning 8).” As a teacher I still find myself caught
– and creating self-regulated learners -- than somewhere between content-centered and
CRAAP. learner-centered, but my thinking is shifting.
I started by seeing self-regulated learning
[PERSPECTIVES]
15