Ok, now that that's out of the way, YAHOO! I had an absolute blast presenting with Becky during our session "Bringing Reality TV to Library Instruction: Non-traditional Activities for Teaching Traditional Library Concepts." Our presentation began with a brief overview of both of our institutions (small, liberal arts but with many professional programs, similar average ACT scores--Grand View's is 21, etc.). Then we jumped into explaining the activities and how they were applied in two very different ways.
The foundation for the activity:
- Simply put, it's a series of tasks (which I enthusiastically declared many times throughout the session, partly because it's applicable, and partly because it makes me think of Ted Stevens' declaration that the Internet is a series of tubes...series of tasks...series of tubes. That's where my brain went anyway!)
- A group activity
- The group must complete each task before advancing to the next round, after having the librarian or instructor sign off on the task
University of Dubuque's version--The Great Poetry Race:
- This originated from a brainstorming session on a Friday afternoon (when all great, kooky ideas are generated, of course) when library faculty & staff were trying to come up with a creative and entertaining approach to students needing to find secondary resources on a poem. The goal was to be sure students were comfortable and capable searching within the library catalog, CREDO, JSTOR, & Academic Search Premier, and they would be introduced to Literature Resource Center. The activity was done over two class sessions. Librarians reviewed using the databases listed above & introduced Lit Resource Center and then gave the students a chance to ask questions or review something again. After that, students were grouped and had to complete (you guessed it!) a series of tasks. They were given packets of cards, each with a different task that needed to be completed by the group. Here's the catch: the groups had to do this without asking for help. They had one "life raft" card they could use to get help, but other than that, they were on their own. For each task, the groups had to select a different member of the group to be their leader. The first group to complete their tasks & have them signed off on by a librarian was declared the leader (hooray)!
Grand View University's version--The Great Citation Race:
- We are fortunate to have a strong embedded program with several departments on campus, including the English department. I worked with Engl 101 (Intro to Composition, a first-year composition course) for this activity. Many of the students we get may not have even written a research paper before, let alone mastered the science (art?...whatever.) of citations. So, long story made longer, we developed a series of activities to be delivered over five class sessions. Each activity took the first 20 or so minutes of class; the rest of the session was spent searching the library catalog or databases for the types of materials they learned to cite earlier.
- For the citation activity, groups were formed based on the students' majors (the instructor liked students to learn that, rather than have 1 set citation style for the entire class...Which meant I got to teach 4 citation styles. At once.), leaving the class with seven groups. The groups that completed the activities first received the highest number of points (7), with the next group receiving one less (6), and so on. The whole group needed to complete the activity and have it written on their sheets in order for anyone in the group to receive their points. At the end of all of the rounds, those individual with the highest point totals received prizes (of course, the prizes were awesome Pez dispensers & a big package of Peeps). For each round the students completed a worksheet (I know, worksheets are gross, but I felt the students would better interact with the citations they were creating by writing them out). Each citation style had a different worksheet, but they all worked to cite the same sources (I just had to prepare answer keys in 4 different styles for each activity). Here's a brief overview of each of the rounds:
- Round 1: Explained the game & learned how to cite books with one author (no editors)--This included in-text (or end note) citations, paraphrasing source material, and incorporating direct quotes
- Round 2: Citing books with multiple authors &/or editors (followed by finding books in the library catalog)
- Round 3: Citing journal articles from databases & in print (followed by finding journal articles in the library's collection)
- Round 4: Citing websites (followed by searching for & evaluating websites)
- Round 5: Recap of previous rounds, showing points progress chart, and celebrating winners (followed by independent work time for additional research)
- It was a bit chaotic at times, but the students really made the connection between citations and responsible use of materials. Having to prepare multiple citation styles was...a challenge and a bit time consuming, but since the instructor wanted them to learn the citation styles they would use later in their majors, we made it work. (Let me know if this doesn't make sense--I sometimes forget to explain a step or two...)
Then it was time for the IULILColloq attendees to get in on the fun and complete a series of tasks in their own groups!
- Round 1: Chose a course from a list we provided (see the Prezi, linked above)
- Round 2: They identified an IL skill to target in the course they selected in Round 1
- Round 3: They linked their IL skill from Round 2 to at least 1 ACRL IL standard (& explained why they chose it)--We provided them with a printout of the ACRL IL Standards, for easy reference
- Round 4: They wrote 2 learning outcomes for the session/IL skills they selected (i.e. The students will...)
- Round 5: After completing the above steps as a group (and having gotten them signed off by either Becky or myself), the attendees worked individually to write down one IL skill, course, or way in which they could use this strategy at their own institution. They then shared their responses with the group and we recorded them on the prezi (so all could access them later)
Ok, so that's the nitty-gritty stuff of how we implemented this activity at our institutions and in our presentation. I mentioned at the beginning of this (now ridiculously long) post that we received some great feedback and comments about our presentation. Here are a few (I'm not trying to brag--I'm just super-excited that our presentation was so well-received!):
- "Another great one! These ladies were not only knowledgeable, but very entertaining. I loved their storytelling approach to how they made these techniques work with their students. Great, GREAT presentation."
- "I thought it was smart to have the audience try out the approach."
- "I think a little more time would have helped this session. The presenters discussed what they did in the instruction sessions at their universities and then demonstrated how their process worked by having session members participate in a real-life example. But, I was still left a little confused by exactly how they planned and executed their instruction. It would have been nice to have some time to talk to them about that." Agreed--we packed a lot into a short amount of time--it would have been great to have had more time to visit at the end of the session!
- "Hilarious and so fun. The hour went by before we knew it. Good ideas. Look forward to implementing my own 'series of tasks'!"
- "I loved the energy of the presenters and also the information! They mentioned empowering students to answer each other's questions, and I LOVE this idea."
- "This was one of the best sessions I attended and I think it was because instead of telling us how they did it, they had us experience it as a participant and described the behind-the-scenes parts at the beginning and end. The session leaders demonstrated their enthusiasm and genuine desire to teach. It was great fun!"
No comments:
Post a Comment