Information Fluency in NY State
May 23rd, 2007 by Christopher HarrisI am at the spring meeting for the School Library Systems Association of New York State – a group for the directors of the School Library Systems. Today we are engaging in a panel discussion about information fluency in New York. As a state, we lack a statewide curriculum document or set of standards. Many regions across the state have been developing benchmarks, scopes and sequences, and other curriculum documentation for information fluency skills. On the panel are
- Linda Fox, SLS Director for Capital Region BOCES
- Fran Roscello, Associate for School Library Media Programs for New York State Education Department
- Barbara Stripling, SLS Director for New York City
- James Viola, Regional Coordinator for School Improvement for New York State Education Department
Barbara Stripling began by talking about the work that has been going on in New York City. They developed an excellent continuum for information literacy. At the heart of this document are three standards. 1) using inquiry to build understanding, 2) reading – personal enjoyment and aesthetic enjoyment, and 3) demonstrating social responsibility. These will sound very familiar to anyone who has been reading their Information Power. In the end, they built this document to serve as a base for future growth.
Linda Fox told us how librarians in the Albany region (like so many other regions) were frustrated by the lack of a statewide curriculum to guide their instruction. In viewing lessons, Linda saw that librarians were teaching content and not information skills. To address this, Linda set up four days last summer for librarians to design a curriculum from scratch! Instead of building from other curricula documents, they read books like The World is Flat and talked about curriculum design theories. Then they started writing. They created performance indicators and a K-12 scope and sequence. They identified a need to embed technology and force collaboration and are continuing to work towards full adoption.
Fran Roscello provided a very nice overview of the history of school library curriculum in New York. Her goal, she told us, has been to keep students in the forefront of information fluency discussions. If we don’t start teaching information skills in elementary school, then students are not prepared for going to college. This is why we need to develop curriculum, standards, and other instruction models. The key piece, however, is to have documents that will be used and developed further to meet local needs. The New York State Learning Standards provide a framework…we need to work to develop them into quality instructional practices to meet student needs.
Jim Viola spoke more from the State Education perspective with a focus on school improvement [this is a New York state wording for a BOCES service that supports curriculum and instructional development]. Jim works with all of the schools outside of New York City – you have to understand here that NYC has 1/3 of the students in NY state!!! – to support networks for development. The new push from the state is to develop “synergy” across different centers. In NY, there is something called USNY – the University of the State of New York – that pulls together all of the schools, colleges/universities, museums, libraries, certified professions (like doctors) and more. He spent a bit of time talking about an article we all read before the panel – Mel Levine’s “The Essential Cognitive Backpack.” Where do we fit in this as School Library Systems and school libraries? As Jim Viola noted, libraries are not mentioned in the Mel Levine article. The first step is we must make sure libraries are seen as full partners.
Let me break this out here and focus on that – we were told from a leader from the NY State Education Department that we must work more diligently to ensure that school libraries are seen as resources for learning in our schools and the conversation about development of learning.
As the new Governor of New York, Elliot Spitzer, moves forward with his new vision for schools – funding, but with more accountability – libraries will need to help with more schools that will be identified as being in need of improvement. Many of the newly identified schools will probably be based on graduation rates. In this state, we are having a bit of a graduation crisis right now. Graduation rates can be closely tied to attendance rates. While Jim Viola didn’t make this connection, I believe very strongly that school libraries can be a focal point that can encourage attendance by providing a safe place (physical, intellectual, etc.) for students.
More to follow, but wanted to get this live-blogged bit up during a quick break…
May 27th, 2007 at 1:58 am
I think there is a great deal of confusion about the role of the library media specialist not only among principals and teachers but among media specialists themselves. Information Power is so open ended that it makes it hard for us to define ourselves. If we as a group struggle to define ourselves, how can we create a cohesive message that others can understand?
Also, I am confused by the comment that media specialists are teaching content rather than information literacy skills. I teach both and I can’t see how one can have an effective and motivating information literacy skill lesson without including content.
May 27th, 2007 at 1:22 pm
I completely agree about the Information Power standards being too open ended. AASL’s new draft standards are also very open ended. In some ways this is good – it gives states and districts the flexibiliy to implement the standards in their own way. If AASL published a national scope and sequence that included a day-by-day insructional planning guide we probably wouldn’t be happy with that either. I do like what ISTE did with their educational technology standards in that they prsented grade level performace indicators to help guide the development of instruction.
As far as the content vs skils, Linda Fox told of visiting libraries in her region and seeing librarians teaching lessons on whales. She was uncomfortable, she told the group, with librarians presenting that content instead of information literacy skills. I feel that in the end, content is the instructional goal for many of our lessons. If the skills are the only goal, then we are teaching the skills in isolation. When the information skills are taught as an embeded part of a content lesson, students are probably more likely to retain the process.
May 27th, 2007 at 6:38 pm
Okay, so now I am thinking that its not so much that library media specialists are teaching content. It is the absence of information literacy skills tied to that content that is bothering Linda. That is certainly troubling. Perhaps we need a state scope and sequence to help media specialists address those skills by grade level. To be honest, I don’t think that’s the total solution to the lack of understanding about what we do. I DO appreciate that the library directors have gotten together to try to figure it all out!
As you all said, one big obstacle is a lack of understanding about what we are teaching. Helen Thompson in Fostering Information Literacy, says that information literacy skills are really all the critical thinking skills we need to use information. So, here’s a question: Why do we call those skills information literacy skills when most educators call them critical thinking/higher order thinking skills? One message we could bring to administrators is that we teach critical thinking skills. We are the critical thinking skills specialists in the building. If administrators realized what we are teaching, I think it would make it easier for them to support us. I think we need to speak the language of educators when discussing our profession.
By the way, I agree with you. We need to have flexibility in the standards. They need to be somewhat open ended in order for us to serve our patrons.
( Also, I think a scope and sequence would be helpful in guiding us to develop quality lesson plans.)