Transforming theory into practice: Creating student-centered instructional activities rooted in the Framework

Abstract

During summer 2019, the four reference librarians at the University of the District of Columbia (UDC), an HBCU in the nation’s capital, met weekly to review and discuss each part of the ACRL Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education. With our student population in mind, we had two goals: establishing a team-wide shared analysis of each frame and developing a collection of student-centered active learning activities, rooted in the Framework’s concepts, that could be mixed and matched during one-shot and embedded library instruction. Prior to this project, the librarians were using a limited group of library instruction activities that were not necessarily related to the Framework. During the project, the librarians found the Framework to be highly theoretical, making it challenging to identify concrete learning activities. However, by deeply engaging with the Framework, it was possible to create student-centered instructional activities that were rooted in the theory, and we were able to expand our repertoire of activities used in library instruction. We were also able to provide faculty with firm examples of how library instruction engages their students in information literacy and lifelong learning.

Word (and/or/not) play

“…The Framework was designed with pedagogical flexibility in mind, allowing librarians local control in how they implement the core ideas of information literacy. Implementation of the frames has resulted in more active, interactive, conversational, collaborative and hands-on instruction compared to the Standards' skill-based approach (Kowalski et al, 2021;Latham et al, 2019), and more concept and problem-based instruction compared to the Standards' focus on resource-based bibliography (Scott, 2017). Much of the attempted instruction of the Framework centers around student-centered pedagogy, such as scaffolding and social constructivism (Mattson & Oberlies, 2018).…”

“…Anxiety in users can hamper their playfulness (Bateson & Martin, 2013). However, play provides social benefits (Barnett, 2011;Gordon, 2014) and providing a space welcoming play may be able to reduce this anxiety (James, 2021;Kowalski et al, 2021). Kurtz (2011) describes the change in affect among teenage students: active engagement in goal-directed communicative activity, situated and meaningful language use, playfulness, creativity, and improvisation play an important role in improving learners' willingness to speak, and that they (largely positively) affect learners' readiness to engage in more autonomous and more extended interaction.…”

“…Active and interactive learning has long been recommended as powerful methods of teaching information literacy (Mattson & Oberlies, 2018;Swanson & Jagman, 2015), and play and playfulness are methods of achieving active learning (Francis, 2017;Walsh, 2018). Kowalski et al (2021) found that by 'employing fun activities, we were able to alleviate some student anxiety around research and the library' (p. 116). A common challenge among instruction librarians is the lack of the time available to teach information literacy skills, especially when they are limited to a one-shot session of perhaps 30 minutes.…”