One of our first discussions was about the concept of "authority" and how that relates to us in the library. My discussion board contribution was...
"I fight authority, authority always wins"
Sorry, I'm an 80's girl and couldn't resist the John Mellencamp reference but this is how many people view authority, it has a very negative connotation. People most often associate "power" with "authority" but why? Can we be authoritative without power? Or is this just called a "know-it-all"?
Even in our lesson reading, "William A. Katz is one of the best known authorities on reference materials in public and university libraries." We trust authorities, we seek authorities, yet when we are young, like our students, we fight authority. I think one of the challenges for the TL is to be an authority on resources and information that the students can trust. It reminds me of teaching young children that the police are their friends, the librarian is their friend too.
Following our discussion that week, and thinking about our readings and other discussions, I have realized that I am now thinking more about "authority." I have struggled quite a bit over the past few years with helping students to understand the concept of "authority" in relation to their on-line research. Our discussions have really clarified for me, the idea of a Google search as a popularity contest but that students see Google as an authority. They figure that if Google says it's good, it must be good. I have tried specific criteria in my assignments, discussed the plagiarism issues involved in "cutting and pasting", and have required multiple sources for all research. I am starting to wonder if they are just trying to wear me down or if they really don't "get it."
I wonder if it really just doesn't matter to my students, mostly grade 11 and 12, if their information is accurate or authoritative. Even when I point out glaring errors in their information, they seem unfazed. Even getting zero for plagiarizing complete essays from the internet does not seem to be a deterrent. Sure, they think it's interesting when I point out ways to confirm information, or how Wikipedia is information provided, for the most part, by "regular" people like you and me, but they do not seem to take that information and put it into practice.
I want my library and the services I offer to have some authority. I want to be viewed as a reliable source. The question becomes am I just providing information, resources, tools, or am I teaching students how to do this for themselves? In the career paths they choose, will they need the skills I want them to have? Will they need to know how to tell if information on the internet is accurate? I believe they do need to know this so that they can be informed citizens and contributing members of society, but do they, and sometimes even their parents, believe this as well?
This leads to another discussion question we shared in relation to the terms in the glossary of our text. I said...
Since many of the thoughts I had about the glossary terms have already been shared, I decided to mention a phrase that was in the lesson reading that is posing some difficulty for me lately. The phrase is "technically literate". In the reading it is part of one of the "bad news" items about the present state of reference support in school libraries:
"It is still questionable whether students are "technically literate" and other skills such as problem solving/thinking skills may have been neglected."
As I work to prepare my students for real world applications of the skills I am teaching them in English it has become very obvious that they are not as "technically literate" as we think they are - or perhaps their definition and my definition of this phrase are different. Many assume, including the students, that because they can text, use Facebook and play video games that they are more apt at using technology than those of us who went through university without the internet (or even a computer for that matter - yep, TYPED my papers on an electric typewriter!) These same students can type a word in Google and "research" a topic but are they really using this technology to the best of its ability? I have grade 12 students who don't know how to format a document, not even centre a title on a page. I have grade 11 students who claim they know how to use their computer yet they can't download a worksheet that I have provided in pdf form on our class blog.
They are also impatient with the technology and do not understand the difference between their one computer at home and its single connection to the internet, and our school with 3 labs, 12 routers and a server that is trying to keep computers of various ages working. They all blame the Macs, or the schools, but they just really don't understand how it works. Shouldn't "technically literate" include some basic understanding of the function and workings of the technology?
Perhaps part of my problem with the phrase is the word "literate". We use the term "functionally literate" for people who can "fake" their way through the world with limited reading skills. Perhaps our students are "functionally technically literate"?
Because I work with teenagers, I am very familiar with the rolled eyes, "I know everything" look. Many of my students thing that we are "old fashioned" and not "up on what's 'in'". How wrong they are. Convincing students of our authority is part of the issue. I am concerned with my students who appear to be technically literate but who really just know how to use some simple applications or game systems. I am concerned that the rapid pace of technological growth is creating a generation that just likes and wants all of the gadgets, but who doesn't really understand how to use them. I also am concerned that my students don't seem to appreciate the value of resources and tools that are older than 5 to 10 years.
Even though we can get our research materials on-line, we still need to be able to use them as a print resource. Even though we live in a digital age, we still have to be able to communicate effectively and competently. I use my experience as an on-line student with my own students quite regularly. I explain to them that I work in a virtual class room and that it is often difficult to have a "discussion" with people without seeing their expressions or understanding who they are. I find I also have to be an even better researcher and strong student because each of my courses has been set up differently. I have had to learn where to look for assignment criteria and due dates, on-line etiquette for discussions and chats, and acronyms, whew, there are a lot of acronyms! I share with them how fortunate they are to have face to face interactions with their peers and instructors but I think it will take actually experiencing a faceless, on-line world before they will truly acknowledge what I am saying, or my authority.
"I fight authority, authority always wins"
Sorry, I'm an 80's girl and couldn't resist the John Mellencamp reference but this is how many people view authority, it has a very negative connotation. People most often associate "power" with "authority" but why? Can we be authoritative without power? Or is this just called a "know-it-all"?
Even in our lesson reading, "William A. Katz is one of the best known authorities on reference materials in public and university libraries." We trust authorities, we seek authorities, yet when we are young, like our students, we fight authority. I think one of the challenges for the TL is to be an authority on resources and information that the students can trust. It reminds me of teaching young children that the police are their friends, the librarian is their friend too.
Following our discussion that week, and thinking about our readings and other discussions, I have realized that I am now thinking more about "authority." I have struggled quite a bit over the past few years with helping students to understand the concept of "authority" in relation to their on-line research. Our discussions have really clarified for me, the idea of a Google search as a popularity contest but that students see Google as an authority. They figure that if Google says it's good, it must be good. I have tried specific criteria in my assignments, discussed the plagiarism issues involved in "cutting and pasting", and have required multiple sources for all research. I am starting to wonder if they are just trying to wear me down or if they really don't "get it."
I wonder if it really just doesn't matter to my students, mostly grade 11 and 12, if their information is accurate or authoritative. Even when I point out glaring errors in their information, they seem unfazed. Even getting zero for plagiarizing complete essays from the internet does not seem to be a deterrent. Sure, they think it's interesting when I point out ways to confirm information, or how Wikipedia is information provided, for the most part, by "regular" people like you and me, but they do not seem to take that information and put it into practice.
I want my library and the services I offer to have some authority. I want to be viewed as a reliable source. The question becomes am I just providing information, resources, tools, or am I teaching students how to do this for themselves? In the career paths they choose, will they need the skills I want them to have? Will they need to know how to tell if information on the internet is accurate? I believe they do need to know this so that they can be informed citizens and contributing members of society, but do they, and sometimes even their parents, believe this as well?
This leads to another discussion question we shared in relation to the terms in the glossary of our text. I said...
Since many of the thoughts I had about the glossary terms have already been shared, I decided to mention a phrase that was in the lesson reading that is posing some difficulty for me lately. The phrase is "technically literate". In the reading it is part of one of the "bad news" items about the present state of reference support in school libraries:
"It is still questionable whether students are "technically literate" and other skills such as problem solving/thinking skills may have been neglected."
As I work to prepare my students for real world applications of the skills I am teaching them in English it has become very obvious that they are not as "technically literate" as we think they are - or perhaps their definition and my definition of this phrase are different. Many assume, including the students, that because they can text, use Facebook and play video games that they are more apt at using technology than those of us who went through university without the internet (or even a computer for that matter - yep, TYPED my papers on an electric typewriter!) These same students can type a word in Google and "research" a topic but are they really using this technology to the best of its ability? I have grade 12 students who don't know how to format a document, not even centre a title on a page. I have grade 11 students who claim they know how to use their computer yet they can't download a worksheet that I have provided in pdf form on our class blog.
They are also impatient with the technology and do not understand the difference between their one computer at home and its single connection to the internet, and our school with 3 labs, 12 routers and a server that is trying to keep computers of various ages working. They all blame the Macs, or the schools, but they just really don't understand how it works. Shouldn't "technically literate" include some basic understanding of the function and workings of the technology?
Perhaps part of my problem with the phrase is the word "literate". We use the term "functionally literate" for people who can "fake" their way through the world with limited reading skills. Perhaps our students are "functionally technically literate"?
Because I work with teenagers, I am very familiar with the rolled eyes, "I know everything" look. Many of my students thing that we are "old fashioned" and not "up on what's 'in'". How wrong they are. Convincing students of our authority is part of the issue. I am concerned with my students who appear to be technically literate but who really just know how to use some simple applications or game systems. I am concerned that the rapid pace of technological growth is creating a generation that just likes and wants all of the gadgets, but who doesn't really understand how to use them. I also am concerned that my students don't seem to appreciate the value of resources and tools that are older than 5 to 10 years.
Even though we can get our research materials on-line, we still need to be able to use them as a print resource. Even though we live in a digital age, we still have to be able to communicate effectively and competently. I use my experience as an on-line student with my own students quite regularly. I explain to them that I work in a virtual class room and that it is often difficult to have a "discussion" with people without seeing their expressions or understanding who they are. I find I also have to be an even better researcher and strong student because each of my courses has been set up differently. I have had to learn where to look for assignment criteria and due dates, on-line etiquette for discussions and chats, and acronyms, whew, there are a lot of acronyms! I share with them how fortunate they are to have face to face interactions with their peers and instructors but I think it will take actually experiencing a faceless, on-line world before they will truly acknowledge what I am saying, or my authority.
I don't know about you but I am becoming wearier and wearier with all the opinion on the Web that masks as "authoritative". And, I never thought I'd tire of opinion!
ReplyDelete