IOPN Journals (Illinois Open Publishing Network)
Not a member yet
1384 research outputs found
Sort by
STEM Outreach Activities in Academic Libraries: Planning Strategies, COVID’s Impact, and Future Considerations
Get PDFOutreach in academic libraries is an important aspect of their mission to support campus communities, but the nature of these activities, and the steps taken to plan them, is not fully understood at the profession-wide level. This study aimed to start the process of gathering data on outreach, especially among those who serve STEM-related constituents, and to begin recording the effects of COVID on library programming and events. Surveys sent to representative librarians from Association of Academic Universities (AAU) members asked about their current outreach offerings and whether they utilized a formal outreach document to help plan and evaluate their efforts. Though all reported engaging in some sort of outreach, most shared that they had an informal approach to outreach planning. A majority reported that COVID required a shift in outreach, with staffing continuing to be a concern. Full results from the survey are offered, along with a discussion of the findings, and thoughts on the next steps towards a clearer understanding of the effects outreach has, and its role in, academic libraries post COVID
Multiple Means of Engagement: Connecting with Students Across Modalities through Choice, Flexibility and Authentic Assessment
Get PDFUniversal Design for Learning (UDL) offers instructors a framework “to improve and optimize teaching and learning for all people based on scientific insights into how humans learn” (CAST, 2018). The framework consists of three principles: Multiple Means of Engagement, Multiple Means of Representation, and Multiple Means of Action and Expression. This session will take a deep dive into the principle of Multiple Means of Engagement and help attendees think deeply about how to implement that principle in their courses in concrete ways. However, rather than functioning as a traditional panel of experts providing knowledge to an audience, this session will model the practices of Multiple Means of Engagement by emphasizing interactive discussions and activities throughout the session.
The principle of Multiple Means of Engagement is concerned with learner motivation, and centers mainly on the “why” or the reasons behind the instructional choices we make that can help to engage and motivate learners. This principle recognizes that different learners have different motivations for learning as well as different barriers that can impede that learning (CAST, 2018). Indeed, the same factors that might excite and motivate one learner could be off-putting for another. In order to engage the largest number of learners, the principle of Multiple Means of Engagement encourages instructors to provide learners with autonomy and choices, highlight the relevance of the instruction, vary demands and challenges, foster collaboration and community, and promote self-regulation including self-assessment.
The panelists, who both have a strong grounding in pedagogy and instructional design, including the principles of UDL, will provide a framing introduction to UDL and Multiple Means of Engagement, as described in more detail below.
This session will begin with a brief introduction to UDL and the three principles that make up the framework. From there, the panelists will offer a more thorough examination of the principle of Multiple Means of Engagement. They will review each of the guidelines and checkpoints involved in the principle as well as the theories that underpin them. Further, while the UDL framework is modality agnostic, teaching modalities such as face-to-face and online synchronous and asynchronous each present unique opportunities and challenges with regard to learner engagement and motivation. The panelists will draw on the research and their own experience teaching across modalities to discuss these specific issues. Throughout the framing portion of the session, they will provide concrete examples of the principle of Multiple Means of Engagement in action.
Following this framing presentation, the panelists will model the principles of Multiple Means of Engagement by involving attendees in interactive discussions and activities. Attendees will have an opportunity to share ideas and in collaboration with others, develop strategies for building Multiple Means of Engagement in their own courses
Not Just for Viral Dance Trends: Exploring Gen Z\u27s Motivations and Methods for Enacting Social Change Using TikTok
Get PDFAlthough some research has already been completed on Gen Z’s attitudes and approaches toward social justice issues, additional study is needed to explore the ways in which they engage with activism. The rise of TikTok as a social media giant provides a unique opportunity for researchers; while the platform was intended as a space for lighthearted content and viral dance trends, the app is increasingly being leveraged for news, political content, and activism. In addition, the Pew Research Center reports that the majority of users on the app are teens and young adults; approximately two-thirds of American teens have and use TikTok. The explosive growth of the platform over the last few years means that little formal study has been done on TikTok in general. All these factors combined make TikTok an ideal focus for examining the reasons members of Gen Z have for engaging in activism both on and offline, as well as the ways they utilize TikTok’s unique affordances to achieve their goals. This study will collect quantitative data using a survey of self-reported Gen Z activists. This survey will provide data on respondents’ motivations and attitudes towards activism, users’ engagement in activism on the platform, how users utilize TikTok’s affordances to engage with activist content, Gen Z’s engagement in activist behaviors both on- and offline, and how effective they believe their efforts are
Discussing Health and LIS Research & Education
Get PDFInterest in the intersection of health research and education and LIS research and education has perhaps never been higher. 2023 opened with a special issue of Library Quarterly on the topic of “Libraries Confronting Pandemic Disinformation,” and on February 2, 2023, Reference Services Review published “Libraries advancing health equity: a literature review,” authored by staff of the National Library of Medicine’s Office of Engagement and Training.
It is our goal to accelerate these conversations by facilitating an engaging and collaborative panel in which both the panelists and audience participate in a dialog that highlights our research and our engagement with our students on health and LIS.
This non-traditional panel focuses on health research/education and its impacts. The session aims to provide an opportunity for both the organizers and the audience to share their research/teaching and/or research/teaching agendas and engage in conversations and feedback that can contribute to a cohesive understanding as to what we are doing in the domain of health.
Panelists will discuss the following in 5–10-minute lightning talks:
Beth Bloch. Librarians working with biomedical researchers often help them find literature that is interdisciplinary in design. The findings from a content analysis of articles found in these databases suggest such indexing presents epistemological implications. Most notably, that the terms used by PubMed, when compared to Scopus, better identifies the scientific discipline (e.g., biology, chemistry), as well as experimental methodology used by article authors.
Abigail L. Phillips. Empathy and Compassion for Our Students: The Well-Being and Mental Health Needs of Information Studies PhD Students. In this lightening talk, we want to discussion and present upon the ways in which information studies doctoral students take care of their mental health and what supports are needed to improve their well-being.
Christine D’Arpa, Deborah Charbonneau, and Sandra Belz. Health Programming in Public Libraries: A Survey of Public Library Directors in Michigan. This brief talk discusses the scope of health programming in public libraries in the state of Michigan. This study has the potential to build a better understanding of the challenges reported by library directors related to efforts to support the health of their communities.
Jenny Bossaller, Emily Vardell, and Bobbie Long. Most librarians are aware of vulnerable people who frequent their libraries, including individuals with addictions and mental health issues. Not all people struggling with addictions are visible, though. There is a growing Alcohol Free (AF) movement which encourages people to rethink their relationship with alcohol. Libraries can play a key role in this movement by expanding on their traditional roles as meeting places, information hubs, and literacy circles.
After these presentations, the audience will be invited to share their own perspectives, work, and thoughts. Throughout this process, participants will be invited to offer constructive feedback on each contributor’s ideas. Through this process, we hope to create an exciting, interactive session in which both current SIG members and all interested members of the ALISE community will have the opportunity to share research and teaching strategies and potentially find new collaborators
You Know It When You See It: A Conversation About Rigor in Teaching
Get PDFThis panel will explore the concept of academic rigor and LIS educators’ ideas and practices related to academic rigor. Debates about academic rigor and its purpose have shown that many instructors consider rigor to be a process of upholding standards and setting boundaries, while others see it as a gatekeeping mechanism to “weed out” students who would be successful under more flexible circumstances (Jack & Sathy, 2021). As the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted students’ modes of learning, not to mention their mental and physical health, conversations about rigor have been brought to the forefront as instructors balance pre-pandemic course structures, student (and administration’s) calls for flexibility, and the need to implement instructional standards and quality of learning. These conversations are certainly relevant for LIS educators who are trying to prepare students for the demands and expectations of professionals working in libraries, archives, museums, and other settings, and therefore may feel that rigor is more than simply ensuring academic prowess, but future professional success as well.
Questions arise, though, as to what rigor actually is. Rigor is a nebulous concept, meaning that applications of rigor or “rigorous” courses can be inequitable and help to maintain white supremacy (Campbell, Dortch, & Burt, 2018). Faculty may think of rigor as setting high academic expectations or grading harshly; however, as Posselt (2018) points out, rigor, especially in graduate school, goes beyond creating an academically difficult experience that leads to learning. Rigor is also an experience of acculturation and adjusting to academic practices, which can create inequity for minoritized students without sufficient support. Additionally, some instructors conceive of rigor as the opposite of being flexible, having strict expectations about how and when students will engage in particular activities, which can adversely impact student mental health (Savini, 2016) or make a class less accessible to students with disabilities (Guest Pryal, 2022). On the other hand, students describe rigor in terms of workload such as the amount of reading assigned, the level of complexity and thought required, and grading standards (Draeger et al., 2015). Further, one’s perception of rigor may be influenced by their personal circumstances, such as in the lives of adult students who are juggling school, work, and family responsibilities.
While the nuances of rigor differ across disciplines, best practices of instructional design (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005) encourage instructors of graduate-level courses to take into account not only the specific nature of the discipline but also where learners are “expected to engage with increasing independence in tasks requiring analysis and synthesis, on the edge of their current abilities and their field’s current scope of knowledge” (Posslet, 2018, p. 64). On the other end of the spectrum, Riley (2017) points to the rigor “gatekeepers” who are the “enemy of design” within engineering domains, which also contributes to constructing disciplinary boundaries that keep in (as well as push out) specific methods and ways of knowing. Schnee (2008) argues that rising to rigorous expectations is a social justice issue for academically under-prepared students, a situation that presents challenges requiring substantial resources and creative thinking. Accreditation can be seen as a tool to provide consistency for identifying a rigorous curriculum (Wergin, 2005); however, aligning courses to program outcomes in this manner is necessarily difficult, in part due to the freedom faculty have to design and assess their own courses (Dill et al., 1996). Given the occasionally unclear expectations around rigor and the lack of discussion about rigor in the LIS literature, this panel will provide an opportunity for collective clarification around understandings of rigor in the discipline.
PANEL STRUCTURE
This is an interactive session beginning with a review of how rigor has been discussed in the literature and other disciplines. Attendees will work individually and in small groups to create a common definition of rigor. After sharing the definitions, presenters will lead a discussion on academic rigor, exploring such questions as:
What are the concepts, phrases, or words common to all the definitions?
What are the major differences in the definitions presented?
Are there concepts or phrases in one definition that you wish had been in your group’s definition?
Based on these definitions, would you describe your pedagogy as rigorous?
Based on these definitions, how is rigor reflected in your courses?
What types of assignments are considered rigorous (essays, research papers, tests, etc.)?
How is rigor reflected in your grading practice?
How, if at all, do you think rigor differs between in-person and online courses?
Has COVID-19 influenced your course planning as it relates to rigor?
Attendees will leave the panel with a better understanding of how they conceptualize rigor, how this compares to other understandings of rigor, and how rigor is enacted in their pedagogical practices
Developing Library Leadership Competencies through Experiential Learning: The Use of Instructional Scaffolding in Asynchronous Environments
Get PDFSince the goal of many graduate library and information science (LIS) programs is to educate students as 21st century library leaders, leadership education is one of the core areas LIS curricula have focused on. Despite an abundance of approaches to cultivating leadership skills in traditional educational settings, achieving this goal becomes considerably more problematic in asynchronous online environments. This study explores the effectiveness of instructional scaffolding as a pedagogical tool implemented across five sections of a master’s level Management in Information Organizations course. The content of this asynchronous course revolves around the foundational competencies and skillsets put forth by the Library Leadership & Management Association (LLAMA). The course’s scenario-based common assignment facilitates mastery of several key LLAMA leadership competencies: change management, adaptive leadership practiced through evidence-based decision making, emotional intelligence and conflict resolution, critical thinking, advocacy, and professional ethics. This research highlights the benefits of a multi-modal pedagogical approach, including instructor-led facilitation, eLearning scenarios, and experiential learning, to complement the scenario of the common assignment and thus bridge the gap between theory and practice of teaching various leadership concepts. The author also delineates ways to integrate discussion circles, field experience, and cohort peer support as scaffolding mechanisms to enhance students’ intrinsic motivation and engagement with the material, factors commonly recognized as challenges in asynchronous learning. Based on the results of qualitative thematic analysis of student assignments, recommendations are made for better aligning extant LIS curricula with established learning outcomes pertaining to leadership education and training in library and information professions
Accessibility and Ability in LIS Curricula and Pedagogy: Sharing Lessons Learned
Get PDFIn recent years, library and information science (LIS) academic programs have been working to address systemic bias within the field and to improve their coverage of issues related to diversity, equity, inclusion, accessibility, and justice (DEIAJ). While accessibility is a core part of DEIAJ considerations and the American Library Association values (ALA, 2019), it is rarely considered central to curriculum and accessibility and disability are seldom covered in graduate LIS courses (Alajmi & Alshammari, 2020; Ren et al., 2022).
The lack of LIS curricular content addressing accessibility and serving disabled patrons mirrors the struggles of LIS practitioners to address those issues (Dow & Bushman, 2020; Potnis & Mallary, 2021). For example, previous research argues that librarians should understand Web accessibility to provide equitable access to digital resources (e.g., digital libraries, LibGuides, and websites) for disabled patrons (Mulliken & Djenmo, 2017). However, LIS graduates and practicing librarians report feeling uncomfortable with creating accessible Web pages and LibGuides (Pionke, 2021). Similarly, while previous research indicates that graduates must learn to engage with disabled patrons to elicit their accessibility needs (Copeland, 2012; Copeland, 2023; Gibson et al., 2021) and that empathy training helps practicing librarians better engage disabled patrons (Pionke, 2021), few LIS programs integrate such training into their curricula.
Unfortunately, LIS faculty may feel under-supported or unprepared to address this content in program curricula or their individual courses. Research in related fields indicates that faculty have concerns about unfamiliarity with the content (Guedes & Landoni, 2020), insufficient time or institutional support (Kawas et al., 2019), and a lack of program- and field-level learning objectives (Shinohara et al., 2018). While little research specifically explores LIS educators’ experiences teaching accessibility principles and practices, previous work indicates that faculty may feel unprepared to teach topics such as accessible Web design (Mulliken & Djenmo, 2017).
Despite the lack of research on LIS faculty experiences with teaching accessibility-related content, some best practices and impacts of including this content have been shared. Examples include teaching LIS students how adopting Universal Design for Learning can create accessible and inclusive training (Lewitzky & Weaver, 2022) and how evaluating and designing accessible digital resources can improve disabled patrons’ experiences using library services (Mulliken, 2016). Integrating accessibility content within a service-learning framework can help students become even more attuned to disabled patrons’ accessibility needs and show students how to co-create inclusive library and information spaces (Copeland, 2019).
LIS faculty must better equip graduates to serve disabled patrons while modeling accessible pedagogy. Additionally, collaboration between LIS faculty and students in addressing these topics is necessary to achieve equity in the field. Given that this topic deserves more time beyond this session, the panel aims to facilitate a timely, worthwhile conversation with LIS educators and students about information behaviors and practices in accessible LIS learning experiences, as well as building and facilitating an ongoing accessibility community of practice.
This panel will comprise two 45-minute sections, with the first section addressing accessibility concerns and the second section modeling instructional design strategies. Each section will begin with the moderator asking panelists questions to prompt discussion. Questions will include topics on how LIS curricula can prepare students to address disability and accessibility issues and tools, as well as on how faculty can ensure accessible learning environments. Panelists will ensure that both faculty and student perspectives are represented (10 minutes).
Next, each panelist will lead a breakout group in discussing questions raised (20 minutes). Panelists will reconvene and report back, with the moderator synthesizing connections made (10 minutes). Five minutes will be allotted for introductions, and another five minutes for an intermission between sections.
During each breakout discussion, panelists will gather contact details from participants interested in building a community of practice dedicated to integrating accessibility in LIS education. As a first step toward developing this community, panelists will establish a ListServ using interested participants’ email addresses. Next steps will be shared with ListServ recipients
Art as Information: Re-reading Quicksand
Get PDF“Art as Information: Re-reading Quicksand” is a micro-study of an African American cultural narrative through artmaking. My subject is the autobiographical and fictional novel, Quicksand by Nella Larsen (1928). Larsen’s life and creative storytelling provide paths for how we may attend to cultural heritage knowledge gaps about Black womanhood by engaging with the informing processes of art. This especially highlights artwork concerning self-definition and self-determination while navigating life within a racialized, classed, and gendered body. I re-present Quicksand as an autobiographical artifact and living artwork to explore how we may produce an ever-emerging archives on Black womanhood from rereading cultural auto/bio/fiction. This critical and cyclical exploration involves making artworks that reiterate and interpret knowledges that emerge from reading Larsen’s narrative—modeling a framework of how Art as Information (AAI) may be engaged to reexamine personal narratives.
This dissertation also reintroduces AAI as a subfield of Information Sciences that engages artmaking as an information technology. It involves the study of arts’ roles within knowledge production: how we craft, document, process, and circulate information through making art. I intertwine Information Sciences with art pedagogy and auto/bio/fiction studies. I also lean on cultural-attentive lenses, such as Black Feminist Material Culture and Culturally Situated Reader Response Theory, to examine how we may tend to cultural knowledges that are historically silenced and disfigured—exploring the liberatory aspects of artmaking to intercept and dismantle exploitative depictions (i.e., visual violences) historically committed against marginalized groups under the guise of neutral documentation and curiosity
Encouraging Cultural Competence Among LIS Professionals via the Critical Incident Technique and Reflective Journaling
Get PDFIn a political climate in which intellectual freedom, particularly regarding Critical Race Theory (CRT) and other diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) concepts are under attack, courses with DEI content are especially relevant. Examining Library and Information Studies (LIS) curriculum within the United States, scholars have repeatedly found DEI content, despite being foundational to the LIS profession, is insufficient in preparing future LIS professionals. Scholars, throughout decades of research within LIS education, have explored various lines of inquiry, including multicultural LIS education (Carter, 1978), recruitment challenges that contribute to a lack of diversity (Childers and Adams, 1972), trainings, and professional development opportunities to better serve diverse populations (Simsova, 1980), and LIS curricula at institutions across the United States (Cohen, 1980). More recent scholarship has provided innovative efforts and approaches regarding recruitment, curriculum, and pedagogy, while also presenting the necessity to expand conceptions of diversity within LIS education (Adkins, Virden, & Yier, 2015; Jaeger et al., 2015; Roy, 2015). Despite extant literature and professional attention to DEI issues, the LIS education, and the profession at large, remains largely White (Bajjaly & Drulia, 2021) and can improve (Chancellor, 2019; DuMont, 1986; Jaeger et al., 2011; Mestre, 2010; Ndumu & Chancellor, 2021). The focus on these issues within LIS education is significant for the training of future LIS professionals as, once employed, opportunities for additional training are limited given the one-shot nature of many professional development opportunities.
This presentation describes one attempt to effectively incorporate DEI content, specifically cultural competence, into a 4-week continuing education course in which participants can incorporate material into their professional activities via the critical incident technique and reflective journaling. After discussing existing scholarship regarding LIS education to establish the need for concerted efforts to implement useful and actionable approaches to DEI concepts, the presentation describes a continuing education course in which the critical incident technique and reflective journaling are offered as tools to effectively translate coursework into professional practice. A common, although not universal, approach to DEI and cultural competence training within LIS is one-off workshops, with many professional development opportunities limited by nature of their delivery. The present course’s emphasis on continual reflection via journaling and the critical incident technique addresses the limitations of many professional development opportunities.
The presentation discusses a variety of topics pertinent to LIS curriculum. Instructional modality offers both opportunities and challenges, both of which this presentation addresses. As an online course, striking a balance between asynchronous content with synchronous meetings presents possibilities to check understanding and promote student engagement. As a continuing education course – a form of professional development – necessitates an understanding of educators that students’ schedules are full and, as working professionals, they have demands on their time that affect engagement. includes suggestions for professionals and educators to keep up to date with emerging research (e.g., the move from cultural competence to cultural humility within recent scholarship), incorporating course content into required LIS curriculum, and outlines avenues for future research
Faculty/Student Research Collaboration: Enhancing LIS Student Learning and Creating Opportunities
Get PDFThis poster discusses the collaboration between LIS faculty and a second generation of research assistants on an IMLS-funded multi-year research project on health and wellness programming and partnerships by small and rural public libraries. Student research assistants enrolled in an asynchronous master’s program in LIS contributed to the project in myriad ways including serving as junior partners in the collection, coding, and analysis of qualitative data. The collaborative team environment encouraged their full participation and valued the experience, knowledge, and, especially questions they brought to the table. The research was significantly enriched by student participation and they, in turn, found it complemented classroom learning while also deepening their understanding of key aspects of public library work. The poster identifies and discusses student learning, professional and pedagogical opportunities, and lessons learned from this type of collaboration from three points of view: first, each of the two master’s students (Wilhelme and Miranda) who joined the research team in the final year of the project and second, LIS faculty (D’Arpa)