Information literacy is dehumanising if it is not dialogic. In the same way that a fluency in a language is gauged through dialogue, information literacy has meaning when it is participatory, connected, responsive and dynamic. Fluency with information is demonstrated through participation in civic dialogue where individuals connect and knowledge is shared, refined and remoulded into new meaning for each participant. This is not merely an expansion of the term information literacy by definition but it is an expansion through action.
A core belief in my approach to the role of the library in learning is that it involves empowering student and teacher agency. In many respects, libraries still retain the traditional pillars of library service, expertise and resources (see the IFLA School Library Guidelines) and continue to stand strongly behind ideals such as freedom of information and freedom of human expression. The required paradigm shift in the role of the library comes when we consider how the learning community is empowered to engage with the library. The basis for this paradigm shift embodies the very meaning of learning. That is, simply learning the content and ideas that the library hosts is not enough but learning how to access these ideas is critical. Many traditional approaches to learning in the library do aim to support this process of learning however in reality, many patrons feel that the library is a closely controlled and a fiercely protected space that is
dominated by librarian-mediated access. Often, as a revered space, there can be a heavy sense that the administration of an ordered library is the most important feature of the library experience. These traditional features of the library remain important but we need to ask which of these features dominate the culture within the library itself and the culture surrounding the library. I wrote a post a while ago about the perfect library and posed the idea that it is about focus and getting the balance right to ensure the library is achieving the key outcomes it is striving for. Student agency is one of those critical outcomes that must define how we go about running our libraries.
Student agency refers to a sense of ownership, independence and self determination that leads a student to feel empowered to take action. In the learning context this looks like a student who feels supported and secure enough to take risks, to ask questions, to fail, to apply critical analysis and take action based on their understandings and beliefs. Choice is crucial to a sense of agency. In contrast, narrow, authoritarian and predefining contexts curtail this sense of independence and limit student influence over the process of learning. Building a sense of agency in our students is integral to developing an inquiry learning context based on questioning, critical analysis, meta-cognition, reasoning, problem solving and creativity.
Coming back to the role of the library in learning, student agency clearly becomes a necessary focus that defines how we run a library. Where job descriptions for librarians can look more like a manifesto of the modern cosmopolitan superhuman the key to unlocking these documents is to discern which of this list of positive attributes, skills and tasks will have the most profound impact on student agency and therefore learning.
Each element of the role of the library is important and should define the role of the librarian however not in equal proportions.
Trying to achieve all of these guidelines and expectations in equal measure is neither realistic nor desirable. An example may help to illustrate what I mean. These may be controversial for some readers so if you feel I am being unbalanced here, please respond and enter the discussion.
I am going to begin with a sceptical note. Complex systems theory has experienced an increasingly rapid rise in popularity in the social sciences and by extension is also gaining significant traction in education. In the milieu of fads and trends in education there are a plethora of claims made for the effectiveness of a particular approach that can yield the learning outcomes we are all in education to achieve. I am always cautious of a new programme packaged by the large learning corporations or promoted by individuals whose income depends on the adoption of a particular approach so in presenting complex systems in education I ask that you employ the greatest level of critical analysis and sceptical inquiry. This presentation is designed to challenge assumptions, open our minds and give us a more holistic view of our classroom and library practices. The value I see in a complex systems approach is that implicit within the theoretical framework is an open and holistic view of students and the educational context we are part of creating for them. Any theoretical framework that seems to lead to an unbalanced focus on single elements or purports to be a panacea is highly suspect because education is not simple. There is an undeniable complexity to the task we have as educators. When you consider the diversity of students within a single class, the thought that a single approach will meet all their individual needs instantly appears ridiculous. Herein lies the strength of a complex systems approach because at it’s very core is the embracing of the complex, the dynamic, the unpredictable, the intangibles and the challenges of working with children who bring a vast array of prior experiences, expertise and characteristics that come together to make them a collection of unique individuals.