Not So Distant Future

In his inimitable style, Doug Johnson posed a research question that I’m pondering this evening–

“Is requiring print resources a sacred cow that needs to be put out to pasture?”

My initial response(from his site) was that:

“I have very mixed feelings about this. It feels somewhat artificial sometimes to say “one print source” but on the other hand, I have seen students go from one print source to using ten, and being engrossed in their subject and it really enticing them in. And we also say “1 peer-reviewed journal” here, for example, or “1 periodical online or offline” so I’m not sure where we draw the line.

It’s not that I think everything on the internet is wrong, or that it’s not out there–but sometimes, I just wonder if the key is–how do we show students how to pick the right resource for the right job?

I think our guidelines have to be flexible. I think we have to consider topics like your son’s and what would work best for him.

Maybe to make this formula less simple, what we should ideally do is conference with every student about their paper(using a discussion board, chat, physical conferences) and suggest the very best resources for THEIR topic. Point their boat in the right direction and then let them steer but also have them self-evaluate their route and how successful it was for them?

I know sometimes we boil things down to formulas to make it simpler–”Don’t end a sentence with a preposition”, for example, or “Every essay has five paragraphs,” but then again I think these formulas ultimately hem in our students. . . .

I’m not going to defend books just because I’m a librarian–I’m going to just say that there is so much serendipity, comfort and wisdom in writing–no matter what the form it takes, that we should honor it in how we approach it with students.”

In considering this dilemma more, I really think it boils down to how we approach the research process in general. If any of us are doing “real” and deep research, of course we would consult all sorts of sources–we’d want to know who the experts are, whether we find them on the web, which leads us to their books, or vice versa?

Many many articles and blog posts relate ideas back to books, where an idea can be far more fully developed than in an article in a journal or on a website or blog. But are we asking students to use books because they “should?” or are we asking them to examine books because they would inform their research and expand their thinking about it? So many assignments we ask students to do in terms of research are more like reports than like research–in which case, any brief and concise and accurate source will do. But when we are asking more something more, something which engages them more deeply, then I warrant all sorts of sources are important and significant.

I also think that how we teach research has gotten pretty sloppy, to put it bluntly, in the internet age. I’m not one for notecards, or prescriptive methods, but we just sort of toss students out online too often with some sort of minimal scaffolding and minimal expectations of quality or evaluation on students’ part. (Of course sometimes quick research has its purposes, and I’m not talking about those sorts of straightforward fact gathering purposes).

In his post, Doug suggested that what is more key than the type of source is having student defend each of their sources in their bibliography, justifying the quality and purpose of it. This seems like such a pragmatic way to bring in that much needed element of evaluative thought into their research process, and models for them how we as adults examine and consider a source.

And when we ask students to construct meaning through the process of research, then it’s likely that books will very often be a significant part of the equation–not because we “made them” use them, but because the students found that they added meaning to what they were learning.

Isn’t that why we all read books? and websites? and articles?

So, Doug, I’m not sure I really answered your question, but perhaps reframed it–I just want students to be able to find the juicy wild daisies in that pasture

Image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/joesflickr/666951546/

I failed some teachers the other day.   I failed to recognize a potential problem ahead of time and didn’t dedicate my best practices towards resolving it.

After the fact, I realized it was a difficulty I see with research assignments fairly often.  (Even when I do recognize the difficulty ahead of time, it’s not always something I am able to resolve because it depends on collaborative planning sometimes.)

I’m always pleased when teachers ask students to investigate topics instead of teaching the topic themselves directly because I think it puts students in a more active role in the learning process.  

But my issue lies in approaching students with pre-defined topics.   I think there’s some important scaffolding we need to do to make assignments like that more effective.   And I think I fail when I don’t approach teachers with ideas for how to do that.

On frequent occassions, I find myself helping students who are attempting to research a topic that they fundamentally have no clue about, to be blunt about it.  It is like the time a student came up to me in the library years ago, and said to me in a somewhat exasperated tone of voice, “There is just nothing in the library on my ‘guy.’”  Having heard that comment many a time before, I asked who she was researching, thinking we might have to do some deep investigating.   Her answer was  “Frude.”  

After puzzling over it for a minute, I found out that this gentleman was actually “Freud,” so naturally we did have plenty of information about him.   But the fact that she was assigned a topic about which she knew absolutely nothing and that didn’t grow out of her natural curiosity in the course, meant that the name had no context for her, and so she had nothing to go on except a misspelled name.  I don’t tell this story to ridicule this student at all, by the way.

I just think too often this happens to students.  Sure, some of them are proficient in Google or Yahoo or using a library catalog online.  But if they don’t understand what they are looking up, when they hit a roadblock, they have little in the way of alternatives.  (Of course, they do have their own networks who can sometimes help them unmuddle the question.)

To me, this is the fundamental problem with assigning one or two word “topics” to students or having them draw them from a hat, or whatever the methodology, rather than having students select topics from the unit of study themselves.   And by select I don’t just mean pick from a list, but perhaps by skimming ahead through the next chapter of their history textbook and picking out something that picques their interest, or  brainstorming questions with their class that they might be interested in, or clipping articles out of the newspaper that catch their interest and then building up a file of things they are interested (or do this on del.icio.us or Google reader or Diigo or whatever online tool they choose).

On the other hand, I do think there is value to letting students start out with a question or topic of their choice (within parameters) and not defining the steps too specifically at first.   I think there is a balance to challenging them to investigate and inspiring them to be detectives and scaffolding them.   Are we modeling for them what we do when we are stuck?   Do we show them how we ask our network for help, our librarian, our friend down the hall–do we model for them what sites we start with when we are puzzled?

We want to model good sources and strategies for them to an extent, but we also want them to learn to follow leads and be independent learners, and I think that balance is tricky.  I don’t think just tossing them out on Google with a vague topic is the answer, but I think we can also squelch their investigative curiosity by making a research process too “step by step.”  

Wes Fryer and Scott Weidig have been having an interesting exchange about this idea of “procedural” learning versus “navigational” learning in regards to teachers, but I think it applies to students as well.   (To summarize and oversimplify, Wes defines procedural learners being those that want to have a series of steps to follow, and navigational learners as being those who figure it out by “doing” it and experimenting.)

In their conversation, Scott asks:

“I guess that I am thinking that if we look at how young children, who very much want to learn and I feel are a great model of what an investigative thinker/learner is/should be, learn (navigationally) is there a point in the education cycle where we teach that out of them and create a procedural learner in its place? Are we creating this cycle by in essence teaching goal setting and breaking of topics/ideas down into more manageable ‘goals.’”

I think an area often neglected in teacher training (and in staff development) is about the whole nature of research and how we teach it and use it in the classroom.    Even if the assignment is fairly straightforward–I want students to investigate “x” and share it with the class–How do we strike that balance between covering the content we need to, and helping students be investigative and curious?  How do we tap into their curiosity?  Can we engage students better by giving them some choices?  Can we arouse their curiosity by our own passion for the subject?   Can we connect it in to what they already know, or ask them to make those connections before beginning?  

And as they move through their research,  do we model how to problem solve?  And have we created a situation where they are invested enough in it to even WANT to problem solve?

As guides,  how do we know when to intervene in their process and provide them some context during their investigative process so that they are more successful–what Carol Kuhlthau calls the “zone of intervention?”   Can we make assignments defined enough for our curricular needs, but open-ended enough that students can follow what I think of as the serendipitious paths of information that might arise along the way during their search?   

And how can we use tools that allow us to see what students are thinking as they move through a research process, so we can even understand the barriers they are encountering–journaling on sites like Tumblr?  using blogs as reflective tools during their research process?  Twitter for micro-reflections?  Skype or IM in the library so students can just instant message a clarification question? 

The simplest things can trip any of us up.   The notion of “have to” versus “want to” can slow any of us down in our work.  The questions of invitation, of context, and of exploration seem significant ones if we are to inspire student investigation and curiosity, (or teacher investigation, for that matter.)   If we want to create curious and investigative adults as Scott writes about, how do we support those traits in our own assignments and interactions with students?

How are libraries changing?  Well, since my library is in boxes, it’s a question I think about a lot.

Today a teacher across the street emailed me (and then Skyped) a reference question, which I knew was in a book that we had packed.  So, like an intrepid journalist, I followed up online, checked many of our databases, used Google, tried different search terms, still to no avail.

Next I thought to dig deeper into the web, and check major statistical sites that I knew of, like University of Michigan’s, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and Statistical Abstracts, but still no dice.

I recalled that the New York Times now has free archives, back to the 1800’s, that are keyword searchable, so tried there, and found some inkling of what I was looking for.  (That would depend on if the teacher wanted students to gather the information themselves, or just wanted a chart which showed it already collected.)

After an hour of searching, I reaffirmed that the book source I knew was probably one of the best for finding the information.   But it was in a box.

All of which is a good demonstration that not everything is online still, and sometimes we need the BEST tool, not just any tool. (And that tasks we assign students that we think should be easy are sometimes very challenging!)

And then I thought of my Twitter network, which contains many librarians.   I sent out the book title, and within a minute found a librarian(thanks Jill!) who had access to the book and was able to look up the question for me, and got some great recommendations from others as well(thanks techchicks!)

So even though I didn’t have the book in hand, or hardly any books for that matter, I still have library services because I have a network.  

Doug Johnson wrote recently about the decline of print encyclopedias, and wondered if students have the same fondness for World Book online that he did poring over the pages of a set at his home as a child.  I doubt that they do.   And while I believe that online resources are incredible tools, it is simply that we need to use the “best” tool–whether it’s a book, a network, or a database–and part of being information literate is knowing what the best tool might be, and where to try next if that tool doesn’t work(or is in the physically limiting state of being in a box!)

Our profession has long revolved around knowing how to find things as much as “safeguarding” the things.    And networking is just another powerful tool–in fact one of the most powerful since we can collectively work on solving a problem together.

Libraries are an important mix of all of the new technologies and the traditional, and we have to be willing to maximize the use of that mix to serve our customers.   And we have to, both teachers and librarians, work to help students maximize that mix. 

If students rely on just one type of tool or one skill, (which sometimes they tend to do), they won’t have the confidence of knowing they CAN find what they need.   We need to encourage them and scaffold them in using the full range of information tools out there–from the innovative and cutting edge to the traditional and tried. 

We all have to “roll with” the changes in our current information environment, but being informed searchers is an increasingly important part of that, that I fear gets neglected too often.

  Professor Tara Brabazon of the University of Brighton is concerned about student uses of Google and Wikipedia.  She is giving an upcoming lecture in Brighton which piqued my interest, entitled “Google is White Bread for the Mind.”

While I am always amazed by Google, and  by no means go so far as she does(banning students from using Wikipedia and Google), I do think she’s onto something as far as our work with students and gives us a good metaphor to hang our hats on.

Google, like white bread, is easy, quick, and readily available (and liked by many/most students).   But white bread’s nutritional value is lacking, so of course as parents, most of us recommend and buy wheat bread for our own children, whether or not they like white bread better.

As educators, shouldn’t we be providing more “nutritional value” for our students?   When we assign any research project or paper, shouldn’t we, as content area specialists, be providing some guidance as to whom the experts in the field are and where the best sources are(be they databases or websites?), rather than turning the students loose to wander?  

Or if we send them wandering, wouldn’t it be helpful to give them clues as to what to look for(important organizations in our fields, ways to evaluate a website for authority, etc.?)   And in the results they bring us, shouldn’t we be helping students cull out the best resources for that field?  (and embracing resources they find when they discover great ones we aren’t aware of?)

I’m very much an advocate for discovery and sometimes use a Google search myself to establish who the experts in the field are.  But…if I am not familiar with the field, I still try to find a “guide” online–whether a friend I can consult or a teacher in the field or a website where someone expert has provided links.

As the professor points out, students will find their way to Google, so isn’t our job to make sure they know other avenues for finding information as well?

And even when we give our students white bread, can’t we  homebake it and put it some oatmeal or wheat germ?

image credit:  http://www.flickr.com/photos/doublereed/1985361614/

A chance plea from a parent and colleague Brian Smith on Twitter today led to a long discussion online about the research process and how it could be so much more meaningful for students than it is.

Smith was struggling to work with his 14 year old to generate a research topic.  The assignment the student was given was to pick “something of interest.”

While it seems very open-ended to allow a student to research whatever they want, as very often happens, the student was given the assignment with no advance preparation, brainstorming, etc., and expected to “come up with” a topic.

(I also wonder where the librarian was in this process.  As a number of us commented on twitter, teachers often don’t seem to perceive us as partners in the research process or even as helpful advisors sometimes, even though research is what we “do” for our campuses; but that is another post altogether).

Smith reflected his frustration in his tweet:

How do we tap into student passions when we ask them to really research something?  How do we stoke those fires, draw them in, ask for their voices and make it personal for them?     And are we(both teachers and librarians) providing enough inspiration and scaffolding throughout the research process?   What can all of us do differently to make this more meaningful for students–a rich, engaged and authentic experience where real learning and understanding occurs?

Carol Kuhlthau has done a tremendous amount of work on the research process, and her model is one I find very valuable because it speaks to the process, not the product.   She observed the behaviors of students while doing research and her model describes both the steps they experienced but also the emotions associated with each stage.   

 For example during the initiation phase, students feel anxiety and uncertainty as they seek to define the assignment and their topic.  That’s a normal way for students to feel, and it helps for both students, teachers, and parents to know that.   Her model does an excellent job of portraying those connections, and in her books, she elucidates many ways to scaffold research assignments for students so that they are supported during the more stressful parts of the process.

Kuhlthau also identifies a “zone of intervention” based on Vygotsky’s work on zones of proximal development, which is the zone during which help and scaffolding helps move students through the process and eases their anxiety.

So part of the issue I frequently see is that we aren’t sufficiently supporting students through the stress that characterizes the beginning stages of the research process.  

But another issue is something that Brian identified in his tweet–where is the passion?  His child was told they couldn’t do their first topic because another student had selected it–on a practical classroom level, this is understandable, but in terms of the student’s passion for the topic it isn’t.  If a student is interested in something, that is what they are interested in. 

Basically we are asking them to set aside their own passion because another student “claimed it” first.   And if we go back to Kuhlthau’s model, at the most stressful and difficult stage of the research process, we are adding to the stress by denying the student his own self-selected interest.   

One way to have balanced that in the first place would be to begin a research assignment by weeks of having students write about their interests, or clip newspaper articles, or to bookmark websites on delicious–then the student would have had already identified several of his/her interests and wouldn’t be left in a scene that is all too familiar to many of us who are parents or librarians–sitting with the child going, “Do you like this?  No…do you like this?   No? …aren’t you interested in this?”   

Another model which seeks to address the area of student passions is Ken Macrorie’s I-search model, which encourages students to be active participants in the research process and encourages use of primary sources as well.

So again, aside from scaffolding the process much more effectively, how can we tap into student passions?   How can we make the research process more real–more like the real research that researchers do?  Here’s a few ideas, but I would love to hear more.

1.  Give students time to consider their interests.  How many of us could “generate” a topic when approaching it completely cold.  The bells rings–okay, pick your topic.

2.  Consider having students, as I mentioned above, write about things that interest them or collect information for weeks or months prior to the assignment.

3.  As you move through your curriculum, have students keep a “research idea” log as things in the curriculum pique their interest. 

4.  Consider conducting research across an entire semester or year.   Two of our teachers are trying this this year–having students gradually collect articles of interest, compare Wikipedia with other sources, use delicious or furl to bookmark items, keep their eyes out for news stories on their topics and so on.  (Interestingly, this was partially driven by the fact that our main library will be closed in the spring when they will be writing their paper, but it’s been very very effective educationally.)

5.  Consider completely rethinking the “research project.”  Tell students they will write a research paper sometime during the year when it feels right to them.   Scaffold everyone at the beginning with assistance on logistics, but let students “strike when the iron is hot.”    (I know we are dealing with high school students, but….they might enjoy having this flexibility and spontaneity).

6.  Have students establish a blog or use a class bulletin board online as a way to explore topics, ask others for help and work collaboratively.  (What would have happened for the student above if the teacher had said–well, if you want to do this topic, and if you and the other student agree, how about the two of you working collaboratively on your research and your paper?  And then supported that with sharing web 2.0 tools that would have assisted them?)

7.  Consider how writing a blog entry or several blog entries is like writing a research paper–where you explore, document and share your investigations and passions.   Could a “blog” be a research paper and be even more meaningful because it’s published?

8.  Consider making the process more open-ended for students.  Every researcher does not end up with the same product in “real life.”  Why can’t the product grow organically out of the topic and student’s process?    Some students may want to create a video to inform others, while others may want to write a blog, and yet others may want to create a slide show and present their information to their peers.     Empower students to make those choices.

9.  If you are a classroom teacher, then realize that your librarian is and wants to be a real partner with you in research(and your tech coordinator may as well!)   Most school librarians have teaching degrees(in some states, this is required) and most have taught.  (and many were English teachers!)    Your librarian sees research in action every day, sees the problems students are having, sees where help is needed and wants to collaborate with you and plan with you.   Seek them out and don’t feel like you are bothering them or inconveniencing them.   (And librarians, don’t ever make teachers feel like they are inconveniencing you!)

But whatever you do–think about how to engage your students passionately in their research.  Think about how to make it authentic for students.  Rethink how you were taught the “research paper” and rethink how you teach it.   Throw out the old “box” and see what happens, because your students will benefit tremendously in the end.    And imagine “grading” research papers where every student was so engaged and passionate about their writing and their topic that they transcended the form.   Wouldn’t that make the process worth it for everyone?   It could even become the spark that leads a student on a life-changing path as they learn to shape their own learning.

How do students choose their sources?   After finishing the video I created about ”authority of sources” I have come to the conclusion one thing I’d like to know more about is how students make those choices, so I can include their thoughts in the video as well.

So I’ve been talking to students when they’ve been in the library and asking them about how they choose sources on our student blog, so I can eventually include that.

I struggle sometimes when a class comes in with ”convincing” even the teachers not to  have students just ”google” every topic, much less convincing the students.   We all know Google can be very effective as can Wikipedia, obviously, for a first crack at a project.  

(Many of our teachers do ask students to include book sources, or allow Wikipedia as background but not as a source, or only allow one online encyclopedia, etc., so they are trying to get students to explore a variety of sources.)

Digging Deeper  

However, at our campus, since most of our students are college bound, I also feel that it’s important that they are aware of databases and the deeper web.  They may rarely “walk into” a college library because they’ll be using the online databases from their dorm rooms, most likely, if they discover them.  I feel it’s important as librarians that we make sure students discover them, despite all the downsides, like the more difficult entry way, the fact that selection of sources may be required, etc.  

I do understand that we need to, as Doug Johnson says, work with the students we have, so I  think it’s important to understand how they approach this and how we can scaffold what they are doing.

For example, can’t we work with them on how to use Wikipedia more effectively(checking the background discussions on their topic?) or how to use Google’s more advanced searching when needed?

I’ve put together a beginning collection of tips on a wiki I created for a summer district workshop “Google versus the databases” to try to get at that scaffolding.

And on her blog, The WebFooted Book Lady ponders what is good enough for our students? 

“In my job as a teacher librarian I ask myself the “Is this information good enough?” question all the time. Is the activity, or skill the student is practicing more important than the validity of the actual data they are using?”

She goes on:

“The real question should be ‘Are we giving our students the skills to become discerning, ethical users of information?’ Is what we are teaching them good enough?”

Joyce Valenza asked this question at NECC as well.

Do we want our students to be getting what is “good enough”? Or do we want them to push past the obvious, dig deep, think, question and choose what is best in their fields?   After all, they will be our presidents, legislators, and CEO’s. 

Question is–Do we want leaders who settle for “good enough”?

Image credit:  http://www.flickr.com/photos/crystalflickr/906569032/

Since participating in dy/dan’s “Four Slide Contest” earlier this summer, I’ve been thinking alot about design.

This little movie about authority of sources is one I’ve been tinkering with for a couple of weeks, hoping to jazz up the concept a little.   I am hoping to add student interviews into the movie later in the year.

Thanks to Ewan Mcintosh for the great quote that started me thinking about this.   And to my son for reminding me to pick interesting music

Sidenote:  After experiencing a lot of technical difficulties with my own laptop as I was finishing the project, I was reminded of the frustrations our students may experience when they are assigned multimedia projects.   I think one of the values of “producing” media ourselves is that we can put ourselves in their shoes, understand better what we are asking of them, and the time, effort, and logistical constraints involved!

Here’s version one, until I get version two completed ;)  There’s also a version with more “tame” music on Teachertube.

Download Video: Posted by technolibrary at TeacherTube.com.

When I first saw the iPhone, I was so excited, because I started thinking that this will be the device(or one close to it) that will be the portable device for our students for classroom use.

Today’s release of some new Apple products, including the iPod Touch (basically an iPhone without the phone part, or an iPod with internet) makes me think that day is one day closer.

 I recently watched a fascinating interview that Robert Scoble did with computer science professor Eliot Soloway, which Dean Shareski had featured on his blog.  Soloway ran away with the idea that the cell phone is the device of the future. 

My husband told me today that people at work were talking about the new, free Google phone.    I look it up, and voila–it’s about to be released in 2008, according to this.

Now why would all of this be exciting to a librarian?  Because the notion that people can inexpensively and readily have access to information, resources, online books, wikis, blogs, from wherever they are, is fascinating to me.   Will libraries and what we do continue to change because of this?  Sure we will.   Do we need to be planning ahead for these changes?  Sure we do.  

But part of being a librarian is all about access and helping people have access to information.   Libraries began as a way to help people have access to information.  So the concept that people will have more and more choices for doing that is a huge positive.

Will classrooms also change because of this?  Sure they will.

For example, we’ve been struggling a bit on campus with lacking enough  classroom computers for student use.  Imagine if we handed five of the  iPod Touch to each teacher for their class–less expensive, wireless devices that are portable and can go outside for a science experiment or on a field trip?

We have an increasingly important job helping students be savvy users of information, savvy with email, savvy at protecting their privacy, and savvy about their networks.  We can’t really know what the device is going to be, but when information is available on demand, all the time, to everyone (across the digital divide), then we need them to be prepared and wise users of that information.

The other good news in today’s announcement?–now that the price of the iPhone has gone down, I can get one!

Image credit:  Sullivan, Justin.  Getty Images

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20607455/displaymode/1176/rstry/20606900/

As I have been doing some reading all summer, my whole notion of research is shifting somewhat.  Maybe it is reflecting the shift that many of our students are living, as well.

I’m coming to realize more and more that although in schools we treat research as a somewhat solitary activity, in its true form, research is a very networked activity.

As George Siemens writes, in describing Connectivism, “learning is no longer an internal, individualistic activity.”  He goes on to point out that learners “remain current in their field through the connections they have formed.”   I often think of how scientists or historians conduct research, not in an isolated bubble, but in a network of colleagues, acquaintances, librarians and in the company of information from the past. 

Siemens goes on to cite Karen Stephenson, who writes:

“Experience has long been considered the best teacher of knowledge. Since we cannot experience everything, other people’s experiences, and hence other people, become the surrogate for knowledge.”

Our students already practice the power of knowledge sharing because they use their social networks not only socially, but in order to help one another….in the olden days, via long phone calls about homework, and now via Facebook or MySpace or IM.  But do we ask them to employ those skills DURING the school day, officially, particularly when they are engaged in a research project?

As I read more and think about research projects, and then think about how my own approach to learning has changed the last few years with the increasing ability to network both within and outside of my campus, I am realizing that we need to be addressing those changes in library research programs as well.

What ways can we  support students in drawing on the knowledge of both experts and of one another?

Some practical ideas I am considering that would allow students to network more:

• Using message boards or forums during research projects so that students can give one another research tips is a way to engage students more actively.  We tried this last year during our Vietnam Wall project and it worked well.  Students enjoyed giving tips to one another.
• Creating collaborative wikis for projects is another way.  Again, we tried this on a government policy project, where students collaborated across class periods on a wiki.

• Asking a student to explain to the class how they would approach a research problem establishes that students have expertise as well (a fact they already realize, since students often ask other students for help.)
• Asking students to “play” librarian for a class and explain how to use the appropriate databases.
• Enabling some sort of “chat” during a research period that could be used for research help from one another.

• Making sure that students spent time conferencing face to face with one another every couple of days to share good resources with each other (ala the Cha-cha website model).
• Employing a “team” of researchers–assign a research project to a team, much as a team of scientists would work on a research dilemma.  Allow the teams to conference with other “teams” from other class periods, via blogs, wikis, Skype chats, chatrooms, or face-to-face meetings.
• Posting white butcher paper on the wall where students can write requests for help on a topic and others can volunteer to assist them or write suggestions.  (It doesn’t always have to be “high tech.”)

• Helping students set up a Pageflakes site with feeds from helpful blogs and links to helpful websites to “display” their learning network.
• Having students use web-mapping software like Inspiration or Bubbl.us to map out who their information “lifelines” are.
• Teaching them how to use the del.icio.us bookmarks of other experts or their friends as a way to broaden their network and find good information.
• Asking them to show you how they use social networking to help them with research–What are the sites they use to share information and help one another?

By redefining research in a more “real world” and connected way, I think we can help it become more integral to our campuses and more integral to the way our students learn.  

I’d like to hear of other ideas you may have for helping students “network” during a research process.  Thanks to Dean Shareski for the links.

A few days ago, I wrote about reflective learning, and really identified with Will Richardson’s and David Warlick’s comments about focusing on the learning and community, and how the process sometimes gets lost in the production of the product.  

Ironically, as I was reading Harry Potter: Order of the Phoenix last night, I noticed that Harry has difficulty in Snape’s Potions class.  Frequently his “product” doesn’t meet Snape’s expectations.   After some discussion with Hermione and reflection, Harry realizes that he needs to slow down and focus on the process more.

Now that may be a simple analogy that doesn’t entirely fit, but the point is, that many research models that we use support this focus on process and self-evaluation, (such as the Big 6, or Carol Kuhlthau’s Information Search Process, and many others).

Carol Kuhlthau  work particularly focuses on the process, students’ emotional stages as they move through it, and how we can support them during the process, by identifying when the most opportune times for intervention are, and what those types of interventions could look like.

As teachers and librarians, how can we provide more time for reflection and focus on the process and the learning?  But particularly, how can we do that in a way that builds a supportive community of learners that Will Richardson writes about?

Where I see the breakdown occurring is in several areas:

1.  Do we have expectations?  –The students may not be required to spend time on the research/reflection part of the assignment prior to the production part.   Kids are in a hurry(and so are we sometimes).  I’ve seen students starting their powerpoint on the same day they are doing the research assignment.  Where is the time for them to absorb what they are learning? Is the assignment so fact-based that all they are doing is regurgitating information?

2.  Do they have enough time for reflection during the process and afterwards?  In our haste to cover so much content, are we neglecting the time to reflect?   Can the research be spread out over several weeks or over the semester to create time for more deep inquiry?   (This would model authentic research–which isn’t completed in a couple of days or a week.)

3.  Do we ask students to evaluate the process?  The product gets evaluated in many different ways.   How can we help them be more reflective as they are doing research and share that reflection with other learners who are having similar experiences as a means of extending their reflection and gaining support?

4.  Do we help them build a network for discussing the process and extending their learning?   Or are they working in isolation?    Do real scientists and researchers work in isolation?  Do we?  How does helping students build a network help create a more authentic experience?

4.  Is our goal even to teach that reflection?  Should we?  What is our goal?  Product, process, learning?  Is the focus of the assignment actually reflective of what the goal is?

Some concrete ideas for focusing on process–

1.  a research process log or questionaire (And some other examples I’ve linked to).  These could be used at the end of a research period, weekly, or throughout the stages of the process.   One question I am pondering is how to make these types of questionaires more networked–post on a wiki? or blog?  Other ideas?

2.  a research blog –A place where students can write reflectively about their process, and dialogue with others in their class.

•  If it seems too overwhelming to have each student create a blog, use a group blog and have a scribe for the week or day. 
• Or  threaded forum may work better, where students can toss out topics they need help with and get feedback.
• What about podblogs?–Group the students in the class into pods or groups.   Each group collaboratively writes a blog as they move through a learning process.  That way, the teacher is only checking in with four or five blogs per class instead of 30, and the group can interact and form community and share tips and help during the research process.    The 6 or 7 members of each pod can alternately post to the blog.

3.  Wikis–use wikis for students so they can collaborate as they collect information.   We have done this and it worked well.    Students across class periods working on the same topic were able to help each other gather the research.  (This would work best when there are a set of topics that all the classes are working on.)   As Will Richardson points out, Wikis have a much neglected but interactive discussion feature.  Pbwiki even incorporates chat features and yackpack, which allows recorded conversations to be sent back and forth.  How could those types of discussion tools be used along with a research wiki to stimulate discussion of the learning that was occurring?

4.  Google Docs–encourage students to use Google docs as they take notes or begin writing, and have them invite a few of their fellow students to join in as collaborators or just as readers.

5.  Sharing bookmarks–another route other than wikis is to have students set up accounts on del.icio.us or Furl or Google Notebook, because these tools not only allow students to bookmark their findings, but to share their bookmarks with other students.  Diigo not only allows students to bookmark their sites, but annotate them, clip them, and share them on a blog, email, or album.   Bookmarking a collection of sites that they can use later conveys the idea that the learning is ongoing, that they can “add to” what they have found later, in a way that a set of notecards or a bibliography doesn’t, because they seem more “final” and product oriented.   And these sites allow them to network and learn collaboratively from one another.

6.  Evaluation–As librarian extraordinaire Doug Johnson reminded me in an previous post,

“One of the things I’ve noticed is that when we ask students to follow an information problem solving model like the Big6, we tend to ignore the 1st step of defining the task and the last step of evaluating the product and the process. “It’s the final step where we need to ask students to reflect on both how good their product was AND how effective they were in doing their work. I’d ask students to always answer the question ‘What will I do differently next time to improve my work and skills?’”

Even if we ask students to reflect on the process along the way, asking them to reflect at the “end of the journey” or to try to pull their thoughts together after the process is important.   And having them do that in a way that is networked(like a blog or wiki discussion or a chat on Skype, or a classroom discussion, etc.) allows them to learn from one another, and build on one another’s evaluation and learning. 

That is where we are really having them extend their learning, deepen their reflection, and internalize their own learning process.

Other ideas, thoughts?  This potion I’m working on is not fully baked yet