Statement of Competency K
Design training programs based on appropriate learning principles and theories.
Librarians are charged with providing equity of access to the service population. Offering information literacy courses to the community is one way this duty is fulfilled. Also, teaching patrons how to conduct their own searches gives them a sense of independence and confidence. A diverse community, however, means varied teaching methods are necessary. Not only must a librarian consider education, socio-economic, and literacy factors, but also the method of learning to which each individual works best. Furthermore, a librarian should attune themselves as to when it is appropriate to try and teach a patron. At the most basic level, some learn better from visual, verbal or through hands-on practice. The theories behind the learning principles that go into pedagogy seek to incorporate these most simplistic of methods along with more sophisticated techniques.
The ALA division, Library Instruction Round Table (LIRT), is a roundtable that provides librarians with tools for training. This ample resource provides tutorials, pamphlets and other documentation to guide librarians in their efforts to provide effective learning techniques and promote information literacy. LIRT gathers the best in instructional articles to guide library professionals to the newest theories in the topic.
Several other websites are available to guide librarians in their quest for effective training. The University of Texas Libraries promotes the Felder-Silverman Learning Style Model. The model categorizes styles as active vs. reflective, sensing vs. intuitive, visual vs. verbal and sequential vs. global (University of Texas Libraries, 2005, para. 2). Using several tactics to speak to each approach provides well-rounded training, as many learners possess a combination of these styles. Throughout my coursework, I found the active learning popular method. During a LIBR 256 (Archives and Manuscripts) session, I was able to participate in hands-on active learning at the Sherman Library by processing a new acquisition. The theories and approaches to processing a collection were clarified by this manual exercise.
Two other popular learning models in the library profession are Dunn and Dunn’s Learning Style Inventory (LSI) and Kolb’s Experiential Learning Model. Dunn and Dunn’s model outlines various stimulus and other factors that affect ones ability to learn. These groups of environmental, emotional, sociological, physiological and psychological are further broken down into 21 elements (DeBello, 1990, p. 204). Realistically, librarians do not have the time to administer the LSI, or Productivity Environmental Preference Survey for adults, to assess individual learning styles. In an effort to develop training programs to meet these diverse styles, librarians may want to experiment with individual and group work, sporadic breaks in lessons, time of day factors and informal vs. formal program design.
Kolb’s Experiential Learning Model posits that people translate experience into concepts which are used to guide new experiences. The learning styles are classified as converger, diverger, assimilator and accommodator (DeBello, p. 211). Dalyrmple (2002) notes that the “converger” and “assimilator” are the most common types among academic librarians (p. 263). Convergers like to understand how things work. Programs developed around the converger should contain hands-on application of ideas and how they will work in real world situations. The assimilator needs to know what information is needed or missing to form a new concept. Training that deals with theoretical models may work best with this type of learner.
While I have not yet had the opportunity to conduct training sessions in a library environment, I have had extensive experience as a Business Analyst (BA) in the IT department. The BA often works as a liaison between the programmers and external and internal customers, making the ability translate effectively between the two a necessity. When preparing training manuals and sessions I must set aside the technical jargon that is used with programmers. The submitted evidence, Diary Procedure, illustrates a training manual that I created at my job. In addition to the manual I conducted an in-person training session.
Prior to preparing the claims training manual I had several meetings with employees in the claims department. These meetings allowed me to get a firm grasp of my user model, their understanding of the system and what they expect from a manual. I assimilated a training method which would be most likely to hit all types of learners. The manual is written step by step with a visual representation of the screens discussed. Each section was verbally explained in the training session and I guided the employees in setting up their own claim diaries in a test environment. Participants were given a chance to ask questions and repeat steps they were not comfortable with. I believe this training session was successful in focusing on several types of learning styles possible within the group.
The second evidentiary item, Learning Styles, is a class discussion taken from my LIBR 210 (Reference and Information Services) course on Blackboard. The first discussion analyzes Eisenberg’s Big6 learning model. The Big6 theory was the first I learned in the MLIS program. Once I gathered more information to other learning methods like Kahlthau’s six-stage model, I noticed gaps in this popular theory. The second post is a response to a student’s post which discusses visual approaches in teaching information literacy. Additional posts discuss Elmborg’s schemata theory and the cognitive interview, the use of interpersonal skills in teaching and Dervin’s neutral questioning techniques.
Learning style theories are something I plan on assimilating into my experience training employees and writing manuals. The key is being able to combine a variety of styles into programs as librarians do not often have the time or resources to tailor programs to specific styles. Librarians can several resources discussed above that show successful ways a multitude of styles can be integrated into training sessions.
References
Dalrymple, C. (2002). Perceptions and practices of learning styles in library instruction. College & Research Libraries, 63(3), 261-73. Retrieved April 7, 2009, from Library Lit & Inf Full Text database.
DeBello, T. C. (1990). Comparison of eleven major learning style models: Variables, appropriate populations, validity of instrumentation and the research behind them. Journal of Reading, Writing, and Learning Disabilities, 6, 203-222. Retrieved April 7, 2009 from http://www.ldrc.ca/projects/atutor/content/7/debello.htm
University of Texas Libraries. (2005, March 7). Learning styles. Retrieved April 7, 2009 from http://www.lib.utexas.edu/services/instruction/tips/tf/tf_lstyles.html