Global Action for School Libraries: Models of Inquiry 9783110772586, 9783110772579

Citation preview

IFLA Publications

Edited by Janine Schmidt and International Federation of Library Associations International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions Fédération Internationale des Associations de Bibliothécaires et des Bibliothèques Internationaler Verband der bibliothekarischen Vereine und Institutionen Международная Федерация Библиотечных Ассоциаций и Учреждений Federación Internacional de Asociaciones de Bibliotecarios y Bibliotecas

Volume 182

Global Action for School Libraries Models of Inquiry Edited by Barbara A. Schultz-Jones and Dianne Oberg

DE GRUYTER SAUR

ISBN 9 978-3-11-077257-9 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-077258-6 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-077261-6 ISSN 0344-6891 DOI https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110772586 Library of Congress Control Number: 2022938835 Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data is available on the internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston. This book is published with open access at www.degruyter.com. Cover Image: Brooke Auchincloss / ONOKY / Getty Images Typesetting: Dr Rainer Ostermann, München Printing and binding: CPI books GmbH, Leck www.degruyter.com

This book is dedicated to Ross J. Todd, July 12, 1951 – March 30, 2022. The news of the untimely death of one of the authors featured in this book, Dr. Ross J. Todd, an Associate Professor of Library and Information Science at the School of Communication and Information at Rutgers University, was received as this book was being finalised. He was a world-renowned expert on adolescent information seeking and use, inquiry learning in digital information environments, and the transformative role of school libraries in the 21st century. Ross was a friend and colleague to many and all are deeply saddened to lose his zealous support for school libraries, belief in the life-changing instructional role of school librarians, strong evidence-based research, dedicated mentorship and wonderful friendship. It is an honour that he contributed a chapter to this book.

Contents About IFLA

Contents

XI

Valérie Glass and Katy Manck Messages from the Sponsoring Organisations

1

Barbara A. Schultz-Jones and Dianne Oberg Preface 3

Part I: Developing Models of Inquiry for Teaching and Learning Louise Limberg 1 Researching Information and Learning Activities in School Libraries: A Swedish Perspective 9 Ross J. Todd 2 Research Supporting Inquiry: The Center for International Scholarship in School Libraries (CISSL) at Rutgers University 22 Jean Donham 3 The Importance of an Inquiry Model in Teaching and Learning Barbara Stripling 4 The Stripling Model of Inquiry

48

Darryl Toerien 5 FOSIL: Developing and Extending the Stripling Model of Inquiry Buffy Edwards 6 Guided Inquiry Design

35

62

77

Jennifer L. Branch-Mueller and Dianne Oberg 7 Focus on Inquiry: An Information Search Process Model Adapted for Alberta 89 Clarence Maybee and Anne Whisken 8 Informed Learning: Engaging with Information Enables Learning

102

VIII 

 Contents

Part II: Implementing Models of Inquiry Joseph Sanders and Jennifer Toerien 9 Deep Collaboration by Teacher and Librarian to Develop an Inquiry Mindset 117 Violet H. Harada 10 Fostering Civic Engagement and Quality Learning through Community-Centered Capstone Projects 136 Liz Hoggatt and Martha Pangburn 11 Exploring Social Justice Using Guided Inquiry Design

148

Carol Jones and Cherity Pennington 12 Using the Guided Inquiry Design Model at Shawnee Middle School

162

Jenna Nemec-Loise 13 Curiosity, Conversation, and Connection Through Guided Inquiry Design 173 Kasey L. Garrison, Lee FitzGerald, and Alinda Sheerman 14 Not the Normal Way: Using Guided Inquiry Design in Australia

188

Anne Whisken 15 Informed Learning and Action Research for Professional Development 201 Deborah Lang Froggatt 16 Making It Real: Growing Inquiry Learning Instructors

215

Yumiko Kasai, Yoko Noborimoto, and Shiori Ito 17 Inquiry Learning Initiatives in Japan 226 Rei Iwasaki and Mutsumi Ohira 18 Public School Libraries in Inquiry-Based Learning in Japan

241

Marie Guillet and Valérie Glass 19 Using the Document de Collecte/Collection Document with French Secondary Students 253



Contents 

 IX

Sarah Pavey 20 Supporting Inquiry-based Learning in a Behaviourist Educational System in England 266

Contributors

280

About IFLA www.ifla.org IFLA (The International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions) is the leading international body representing the interests of library and information services and their users. It is the global voice of the library and information profession. IFLA provides information specialists throughout the world with a forum for exchanging ideas and promoting international cooperation, research, and development in all fields of library activity and information service. IFLA is one of the means through which libraries, information centres, and information professionals worldwide can formulate their goals, exert their influence as a group, protect their interests, and find solutions to global problems. IFLA’s mission to inspire, engage, enable and connect the global library field can only be fulfilled with the co-operation and active involvement of its members and affiliates. Currently, approximately 1,600 associations, institutions and individuals, from widely divergent cultural backgrounds are working together to further this mission Through its formal membership, IFLA directly or indirectly represents some 500,000 library and information professionals worldwide. IFLA pursues its vision of a strong and united library field powering literate, informed and participatory societies through a variety of channels, including the publication of a major journal, as well as guidelines, reports and monographs on a wide range of topics. IFLA organizes webinars and workshops around the world to enhance professional practice and increase awareness of the growing importance of libraries in the digital age. All this is done in collaboration with a number of other non-governmental organizations, funding bodies and international agencies such as UNESCO and WIPO. The Federation’s website is the key source of information about IFLA, its policies and activities: www.ifla.org. Library and information professionals gather annually at the IFLA World Library and Information Congress, held in August each year in cities around the world. IFLA was founded in Edinburgh, Scotland, in 1927 at an international conference of national library directors. IFLA was registered in the Netherlands in 1971. The National Library of the Netherlands (Koninklijke Bibliotheek) in The Hague, generously provides the facilities for our headquarters. Regional offices are located in Argentina, South Africa and Singapore.

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110772586-202

Valérie Glass and Katy Manck

Messages from the Sponsoring Organisations As Chair of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) School Libraries Section, I am very pleased and honoured to present this fourth publication resulting from collaboration between the IFLA School Libraries Section and the International Association of School Librarianship (IASL). This book focuses on inquiry-based learning, one of the six vital aspects of the instructional work of school and teacher librarians identified in the second edition of the IFLA School Library Guidelines (2015): –– Literacy and reading promotion –– Media and information literacy (e.g. information literacy, information skills, information competences, information fluency, media literacy, transliteracy) –– Inquiry-based learning (e.g. problem-based learning, critical thinking) –– Technology integration –– Professional development for teachers, and –– Appreciation of literature and culture (IFLA 2015, 8). Inquiry-based learning demonstrates the importance of the instructional role of school librarians worldwide in supporting and advancing student learning and in taking a leadership role in their schools in the implementation of inquiry-based teaching and learning. By addressing the subject from multiple perspectives including the research foundations of inquiry, research-based models of inquiry, examples of implementation and links to other instructional activities, the book will be of interest to the school librarian community worldwide, to practitioners, educators, and researchers. Finally, I would like to acknowledge the work and commitment of the authors and the co-editors.

Valérie Glass Chair, IFLA School Libraries Section

https://doi.org/10.1515/ 9783110772586-001

2 

 Valérie Glass and Katy Manck

As school librarians, our practice must be grounded in research; as researchers, our findings must be validated in the real world. This volume applies these key truths to models of inquiry. School librarians striving to integrate models of inquiry into the entire school’s learning plan will find in this volume the research foundations of inquiry-based teaching and learning, as well as specifics on several pedagogical models for inquiry. Complementing the theoretical chapters are practice-based reports from around the world that demonstrate: –– Successful implementation of models of inquiry through the school library –– The resources needed for inquiry –– How to evaluate student learning, and –– How to become a leader of change in your school. IASL congratulates the contributors and editors for expanding the scholarship and practical knowledge on models of inquiry needed by our profession as we support all learners in our schools.

Katy Manck President, International Association of School Librarianship

Reference International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA). 2015. IFLA School Library Guidelines. 2nd ed. Written by the School Libraries Section Standing Committee. Edited by Barbara A. Schultz-Jones and Dianne Oberg, with contributions from the International Association of School Librarianship Executive Board. https://www.ifla.org/ files/assets/school-libraries-resource-centers/publications/ifla-school-library-guidelines. pdf.

Preface

Preface

The concept of “inquiry” speaks to our curiosity and pursuit of knowledge. The focus on inquiry-based teaching and learning in this book illuminates a key core instructional activity of a school librarian (IFLA 2015). Inquiry learning is a vital part of a student’s information-to-knowledge journey, alongside personal, social, and cultural growth. The book concentrates on the instructional role of the school librarian, specifically on the ways in which members of the school library community worldwide have developed, revised, promoted, and implemented models of inquiry. School librarians recognise the importance of a systematic framework of instruction for guiding and encouraging learners. Effective implementation of inquiry-based teaching and learning requires a consistent instructional approach, based on a model of inquiry that is built on foundations of research and best practice. The chapters in the book: –– Explain the importance and significance of inquiry as a learning process –– Outline the research underpinning notions of inquiry –– Describe ways in which models of inquiry have been developed –– Present details of the various models of inquiry in play and their development globally –– Provide recommendations for implementing the use of such models, and –– Demonstrate how other core instructional activities of school librarians, such as literacy and reading promotion, technology integration and professional development of teachers, can be integrated into inquiry (IFLA 2015, 38). Approaches to teaching and learning change over time and across the globe with various philosophical approaches following a varying extent of focus on the teacher or the learner. As with many areas of librarianship, the terminology used to describe the programmes and activities of a school library varies around the world. We are characterising “inquiry-based learning” as learning to be a learner, and a lifelong and lifewide pursuit involving critical thinking, problem-based learning, questioning mindfulness, and finding, using and evaluating information. Inquiry develops the skills and understandings learners need in new information environments: as students in post-secondary institutions; as producers and creators in workplaces; or as citizens in communities. Through inquiry-based teaching, school librarians help students build the essential skills and understandings needed for dealing with complex learning challenges. “Models of inquiry” are process-based models that are theory-based and grounded in research primarily from the fields of education and library and inforhttps://doi.org/10.1515/9783110772586-002

4 

 Preface

mation science. The models reflect various learning theories and library and information seeking behaviours. Instructional models provide the basis for structured approaches to teaching and learning, methods of delivery for lessons, and sequences of lessons that build competencies. For example, Kuhlthau’s Information Search Process is a theoretical model and the basis of the Guided Inquiry Design instructional model. Many activities addressed under the umbrella of inquiry-based learning are referred to by various terms. Expressions such as “bibliographic instruction” once used primarily in North America to describe instruction on how to use the library’s collections and systems and “user or reader education” which applied to any means used to help users understand the library and its services, are in an age of digital transformation now referred to by alternative terms. Learners build competency and become information literate, able to “recognize when information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate, and use effectively the needed information” (ALA 1989; ALA n.d.). The meaning of information literacy varies globally and terms like data literacy, digital capability, digital literacy, information competence, information competencies, information fluencies, information literacy, information skills, inquiry, media literacy, transliteracy, or visual literacy (IFLA 2015, 38–39; IFLA 2017) are found. The changing terminology signals the increasing importance of being differently and widely skilled in a world of accelerated technological change and varied information resources. Instruction in the use of information has shifted from direction on the location of sources and how to find them to a process approach that emphasises thinking about information and using information within a problem-solving perspective. The knowledge of tools, sources, and search strategies is still needed but the knowledge and skills are best developed through inquiry-based teaching of thinking and problem solving. Building information literacy using inquiry-based teaching requires methods that adjust and adapt to student needs. One teaching method that has gained popularity is the concept of “scaffolding” where the teacher transitions from providing a high level of assistance to the student to full independence by the student as understanding increases. The teacher works with students to become aware of individual “dispositions” as the ways in which individuals orient towards or develop mindsets to explore the wider world. Students are encouraged to reflect on their learning. A key aspect of inquiry learning is metacognition or “thinking about thinking”, the process of becoming aware of how one learns. It can be applied to thinking about individual personal responses and feelings during the learning process, the affective side of learning. In an age of disinformation and misinformation, the importance of equipping young people with the tools and skills to operate in a changing world must



Preface  

 5

be amplified. The COVID-19 pandemic era has dramatically impacted the use of technology as a source of information, a means of communication, and a way of delivering instruction. This book explores the instructional role of the school/ teacher librarian and offers a global perspective on how models of inquiry can position and transform learning environments. The school library can be a centre of inquiry, discovery, creativity, critical engagement, and innovative pedagogy within a physical and digital learning space where students develop thinking-based capabilities, knowledge-based capabilities, personal and interpersonal capabilities and learning management capabilities. An inquiry-based teaching and learning approach facilitates school-wide continuity and cohesiveness through cross-curriculum inquiry projects and interdisciplinary learning. Part 1 of the book, Developing Models of Inquiry for Teaching and Learning, extends understanding of models of inquiry by examining how the models have been developed through incorporating insights from research and from practice. Chapters 1–8 deal with the process of adapting theoretical models to create instructional models that guide and support inquiry-based teaching and learning. Part 2, Implementing Models of Inquiry, provides practical examples from across the world on how various inquiry models or approaches to inquiry-based teaching and learning have been or are being implemented in practice. Chapters 9–20 illustrate the use of the models and provide practical examples for consideration and potential application, including the lessons learned from successes and challenges. Barbara A. Schultz-Jones and Dianne Oberg Editors

References American Library Association (ALA). n.d. “What is Information Literacy?” https://literacy.ala. org/information-literacy/. American Library Association (ALA). 1989. Presidential Committee on Information Literacy. Final Report. Chicago: American Library Association. https://www.ala.org/acrl/publications/ whitepapers/presidential. International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA). 2015. IFLA School Library Guidelines, 2nd rev. ed. Written by the IFLA School Libraries Section Standing Committee. Edited by Barbara. A. Schultz-Jones, and Dianne Oberg, with contributions from the International Association of School Librarianship Executive Board. https:// repository.ifla.org/bitstream/123456789/58/1/ifla-school-library-guidelines.pdf;

6 

 Preface

https://www.ifla.org/files/assets/school-libraries-resource-centers/publications/ ifla-school-library-guidelines.pdf. International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA). 2017. “IFLA Statement on Digital Literacy.” August 18, 2017. https://repository.ifla.org/ bitstream/123456789/1283/1/ifla_digital_literacy_statement.pdf.

Part I: Developing Models of Inquiry for Teaching and Learning

Part 1 examines how models of inquiry have been developed through incorporating insights from research and from practice and by adapting theoretical models to create instructional models that guide and support inquiry-based teaching and learning.

Louise Limberg

1 R  esearching Information and Learning Activities in School Libraries: A Swedish Perspective Abstract: Since the 1980s educational methods in Swedish schools gradually moved from teacher-directed instruction to student-centred learning. Students work with problem-based tasks on topics related to school subjects. This type of work, based on constructivist views of learning, involves students’ independent information seeking and use. The strengthened roles for school libraries linked to the changing teaching practices provided rich empirical settings for research on information seeking and learning. This chapter presents an overview of Swedish research on information activities in school library contexts. Findings emphasize particular dimensions of information literacy, including critical searching for information, determining credibility and trust, and meaning-making about information infrastructures that partly reshape more traditional views. Research findings contributed to raising political interest, as evidenced in government proposals in Sweden to strengthen school libraries. Implications of library science involvement in an interdisciplinary centre of excellence are discussed. Keywords: School libraries – Research; Information literacy; Sociocultural theory; School libraries – Sweden; Interdisciplinary research

Introduction “What and how do students learn via ways of seeking and using information for their inquiry-based school tasks?” This question was pivotal for Swedish school library research for ten years from the mid-1990s. The “what” included information seeking as well as the content of assignment topics. Studies were directed at the interaction between information seeking and use, and learning (Alexandersson and Limberg 2012; Gärdén 2016; Limberg 1999; Limberg et al. 2008; Lundh 2011). Since then, there has been a shift in focus from information seeking and learning toward information literacy with interest directed at the concept itself, what it means and how it is enacted in various situations. The increasing interest in information literacy was partly shaped by findings from previous studies on information seeking and learning, and partly by technological and societal changes, such as digitisation and globalisation with access to infinite amounts of information, including disinformation and misinformation enabled particularly https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110772586-003

10 

 Louise Limberg

via social media (Gärdén 2016; Johansson and Limberg 2017; Limberg and Sundin 2006; Sundin 2020). Much of the research highlighted was conducted within the Linnaeus Centre for Research on Learning, Interaction and Mediated Communication in Contemporary Society (LinCS) during its existence from 2006 to 2018. The interdisciplinary organisation of the Centre, supporting different perspectives on studies of learning in digital environments proved fruitful with regard to the research topics chosen and the approaches taken in various studies. The studies presented can be characterised as basic research, with a view to reaching in-depth understandings of information activities in school library practices. The research findings are presented in the form of reasoning, discussion and conclusions, including suggestions about their relevance for professional practice. Implications of being part of a large interdisciplinary research programme are considered. While a substantial part of the research presented was conducted within the LinCS programme, the overview is not limited to LinCS research.

The Context – The LinCS Centre of Excellence LinCS was a centre of excellence which operated at the University of Gothenburg (GU) and the University of Borås (UB) from 2006 to 2018. Its creation was the successful outcome of a call from the Swedish Research Council/Vetenskapsrådet in 2005 for a long-term 10-year research programme. Of the 97 applications submitted, ten were funded. One of LinCS’ three overall themes was “Literacies, media and infrastructures for learning”, which focussed on how learners accommodate to learning in digital environments and how they develop literacy and media skills required by, and relevant for, the new media ecology. The theme reflects an interest in the role and use of infrastructures for learning and information, including libraries and electronic tools ranging from search engines, electronic journals, smartphones and apps to social media and learning platforms, and in analysing the ways in which information is organised, retrieved and used in digital environments. Exploring how digital tools re-create conditions for learning and information use was a core interest. Within the LinCS framework, about 55 senior and junior scholars and PhD students collaborated in a range of projects related to issues concerning learning, literacies, and mediated communication in a digitised society. The participating institutions included the Department of Education, Communication and Learning and the IT Faculty at GU as well as the Swedish School of Library and Information Science (SSLIS) at UB. Over the life of the Centre, twelve of the active LinCS



1 Researching Information and Learning Activities in School Libraries 

 11

researchers came from the SSLIS. LinCS participated in international networks and regularly hosted significant visiting researchers including LIS scholars.

LinCS Research on Information Activities and Learning LinCS research covered an extensive range of empirical studies on information activities and learning situated in educational as well as business, health care, everyday life, and other practices. This chapter focuses on school library settings. An overall theoretical approach based on a sociocultural perspective of learning held this broad research programme together.

A Sociocultural Perspective of Learning The sociocultural perspective of learning is based on Vygotskyan theory. According to the Russian psychologist and philosopher Lev Vygotsky (1896–1934), human abilities include physical, intellectual, cultural and social aspects. For understanding learning, these various aspects must be considered. This view challenges theories of learning focussing on cognitive aspects only. Vygotsky’s core idea was that learning is primarily a social activity always involving the use of physical and intellectual tools that mediate learning activities. Physical tools may be books, pens, computers, telescopes or rulers. Language is the most important intellectual tool used for thinking and communication. A notebook or a smartphone, like many tools, combines physical and intellectual resources. A central aspect of a sociocultural view of human learning is that it includes not only facts, skills and concepts but also how to use tools like keyboards or computer software, how to store information on paper or in digital format, and how to use websites or databases. It further assumes that learning is situated in various practices, like school, sports, gardening or healthcare, and that these different practices shape activities, for instance information seeking. Sociocultural research on information literacy focuses on how information activities are shaped in school or in other practices to find out how information literacy is understood and what qualifies as information literacy in different practices (Hicks 2018). The view of learning as socially shaped shifts the research focus from individual thinking and understanding toward meaning-making via social interaction between people, and between people and mediating tools (Lave and Wenger 1991; Säljö 2009, 2021). It is worth pointing out that the notion of information activities has theoretical implications tied to the sociocultural perspective and refers to all sorts

12 

 Louise Limberg

of interaction with information, including seeking, finding, assessing, using, producing, sharing, encountering, managing, and designing. The sociocultural approach is directed at the ways in which information activities and school practices mutually shape each other, and how conditions for meaning-making and learning are formed related to students’ inquiry-based tasks (Limberg, Sundin, and Talja 2012).

Empirical Studies Empirical investigations adopting a sociocultural approach are inspired by ethnographical methodology, including observations, field notes, video recordings, interviews, questionnaires and documents produced in the practices studied. Essential to the LinCS agenda was the exploration of the role of media, in particular digital media, for the transformation of learning practices. This chapter is centred on school library contexts with specific interest in aspects of information activities, such as the evaluation of sources, including determining credibility and trust, use of social media, and changes in teaching practices.

From Information Seeking and Learning to Information Literacy During some thirty years, Swedish research on information activities in school contexts gradually shifted from a focus on the interaction between information seeking and learning toward an interest in empirical and conceptual aspects of information literacy. The following section presents and discusses findings from three decades on Swedish school library research on these topics.

Interaction between Information Seeking and Learning – 1990s to 2000s Studies on information seeking and learning outcomes explored questions about how the ways in which students search for and use information interact with what they learn about the subject content of their assignments. Studies guided by investigating such interaction were conducted between the mid-1990s and early 2000s. The dual focus on information seeking and use and on learning outcomes facilitated analysis of empirical material generated via observations of class-



1 Researching Information and Learning Activities in School Libraries 

 13

room and library activities, interviews with students, teachers and librarians, and documents such as students’ reports and teachers’ instructions and written feedback. Findings indicated that the quality of learning outcomes closely correlated with the quality of information seeking, evaluating and using information (Alexandersson and Limberg 2012; Limberg 1999; Limberg, Alexandersson, Lantz-Andersson, and Folkesson 2008). In the studies cited and in similar studies, quality is measured against achievement of learning goals formulated in curricula and syllabi. Limberg (1999) found that the most important aspects affecting the quality of learning outcomes were linked to students’ previous knowledge of subject content, assessment of relevance criteria, cognitive authority and bias as well as ways of analysing information content in sources used. Moreover, the quality of learning outcomes was strongly related to patterns of collaboration within student groups. Close collaboration and trustful sharing of information and ideas led to improved results (Limberg 1997). The studies identified a recurring feature in students’ approaches to information seeking as fact-finding: students expected to find ready-made answers to their research questions. Their expectations tended to obstruct analyses of sources used and limited potential for in-depth understandings of the content found (Gärdén, Francke, Lundh, and Limberg 2014; Todd 2008). Findings in the studies highlighted difficulties for students in their attempts to evaluate information as well as in composing their own content built on texts from other sources (Alexandersson and Limberg 2012; Gärdén 2016; Limberg, Alexandersson, Lantz-Andersson, and Folkesson 2008). The findings suggest a conflict between traditional school practices based on learning as memorizing facts mediated through teachers and textbooks, and self-directed learning tasks emphasising analysis and meaning-making (Alexandersson and Limberg 2012; Limberg, Alexandersson, Lantz-Andersson, and Folkesson 2008). The tensions identified between traditional practices of schooling and problem-based or inquiry-based learning raise awareness about the complexity of students’ self-directed learning, and indicate a need to reshape methods of teaching, including instruction, guidance and interaction between pedagogues, both teachers and librarians, and students (Gärdén 2016; Limberg, Alexandersson, Lantz-Andersson, and Folkesson 2008). A changed pedagogical approach entails broadened responsibilities for librarians, going beyond traditional teaching about tools and strategies for information seeking. In close collaboration with teachers, librarians’ widened duties include helping students formulate research questions, assisting them in evaluating sources to solve specific problems for particular situations, interacting with students on the art of using sources to compose meaningful texts, and providing relevant feedback to students during the process. Both teachers and librarians play a critical role as mediators, giving

14 

 Louise Limberg

students feedback and support related to the process and content of the students’ meaning-making tasks (Alexandersson and Limberg 2012; Limberg, Alexandersson, Lantz-Andersson, and Folkesson 2008). Gärdén (2016) emphasises the importance of explicit communication about information seeking and use as one of seven critical elements of information literacy education in school practice. Findings from the studies on the interaction between information activities and learning led researchers to examine information literacy further.

Information Literacy as a Topic of Research – 2010 Onward No sharp line can be drawn between information literacy and information seeking and use. One involves the other. Information seeking is an ongoing activity, and information literacy can be seen as the outcome of learning purposeful ways of seeking and using information for a particular task or situation. The focus on information literacy involved studies of more or less purposeful information activities mediated via various tools with a view to reaching more in-depth understandings of the concept of information literacy. Limberg and Sundin (2006) argue for strong links between information seeking and information literacy; findings from information seeking research have the potential to provide information literacy education with a theoretical grounding for activities undertaken and approaches adopted; and the field of information literacy education offers information behaviour research a context for empirical studies of information seeking. During the last decade Swedish information literacy research has focussed particularly on how today’s digitised information universe has pervaded changes in information literacy practices such as the critical evaluation of sources or ways of assessing trust in information and identifying disinformation and misinformation. Findings from the research suggest strengthening, questioning or adding new dimensions to established information literacy practices and models. Referring again to results about information seeking as fact-finding, it seems obvious that students undertaking learning tasks use search engines and find them helpful. At the same time, search outcomes are difficult to evaluate. Studies indicate that students rarely consider the ranking of results generated from search engines, with Google the most commonly used. Students tend to choose the most easily accessible items listed, often the first which appear on the list. Researchers suggest that the notion of critical evaluation of the search process should supplement the evaluation of information found as an object of teaching. Evaluation of the search and the sources located involves considering the context and origin of the sources, understanding the infrastructure of the information landscape,



1 Researching Information and Learning Activities in School Libraries 

 15

and comprehending the algorithms directing what information resources are retrieved from the search (Carlsson and Sundin 2018; Haider and Sundin 2019b; Sundin and Haider 2016). Haider and Sundin (2019c), in evaluating the search process, describe it as a form of infrastructural meaning-making; that is, the understanding not only of the search results but how they came about. The emphasis on critical evaluation of information in teaching is identified as problematic. Various studies indicate that students end up not trusting anything, since they learn to be hypercritical in evaluating information (Carlsson and Sundin 2018; Haider and Sundin 2019c). Researchers identify an obvious risk that the rejection of trust in all information will lead to a stance that differences between various knowledge claims will be reduced to personal taste. Trust is a basis for the ability to evaluate information and there is a need to combine teaching about critical evaluation with the means to assess what and why some information is more trustworthy than other. An understanding of the context of information creation and its origins and how institutions such as universities, schools, libraries and public media operate is essential to determining the veracity of information, as well as an awareness of the foundations of any knowledge claims (Haider and Sundin 2019c). Generally, information searching and seeking are considered as a means to an end, that is, finding information is undertaken to learn something or to solve a problem. Research findings indicate that with the ascendancy of Google and other search engines in the search process, how to search for information effectively is rarely taken up as part of the teaching process (Carlsson and Sundin 2018; Sundin 2015). Searching for information is regarded as equal to googling for information, and more often than not, the search is conducted to locate facts, and is considered a straightforward and simple activity (Alexandersson and Limberg 2012; Carlsson and Sundin 2018; Gärdén, Francke, Lundh, and Limberg 2014). Several studies have identified difficulties among teachers related to teaching about the complexities of information searching, assessing trust and critically evaluating information in today’s networked world (Limberg and Folkesson 2006; Carlsson and Sundin 2017). Haider and Sundin suggest: the need for a view of information literacy that accounts for infrastructural meaning-making at the same time as it enables the political dimensions of the way in which facts and factual information are created and valued in contemporary society to be taken seriously (Haider and Sundin 2019a, Abstract).

Such a view of information literacy would imply far-reaching consequences for teaching and learning, with a view to acknowledging information literacy as an object of learning in its own right and not merely as a means to an end.

16 

 Louise Limberg

Political Interest in School Libraries During the last few years, school libraries have appeared on the Swedish political agenda. There are concerns about young people’s decreasing reading of books as well as worries about the consequences of proliferating social media use with seemingly limitless access to information, misinformation, disinformation, and fake news. The concept of Media and Information Literacy (MIL), launched by UNESCO in 2011, has evoked an interest among academics and professionals in education and media studies, as well as among politicians in Sweden. Some of the research presented in this chapter has been noted outside academia and researchers have been invited to carry out investigations for the Swedish National Agency for Education/Skolverket and other government institutions (Haider and Sundin 2016, 2017; Sundin and Haider 2019). A government commission 2015–2019 at the Kungliga biblioteket/Swedish National Library tasked with developing plans for long-term national goals and strategies for the entire publicly funded library community constituted another driving force. The commission published several reports on school libraries, including a study on the value of school libraries (Schultz Nybacka 2019). Final suggestions from the work undertaken highlighted the importance of strengthening school libraries. Studies and writings by professional school librarians further contributed to raising political interest (Ahlstedt et al. 2015; Schultz-Jones et al. 2019), as well as activities carried out by the national school library group within the Svensk Biblioteksförening/Swedish Library Association, along with other interest groups, such as the Sveriges Författarförbund/Swedish Writers’ Union. In 2019 a government committee was assigned to examine issues related to teaching materials, including school libraries. Its report, presented in early 2021, attributed important roles to school libraries and acknowledged the expertise of school librarians in promoting reading and for teaching MIL. Particular emphasis was put on staffing school libraries with professional librarians. To date, no government bill based on the committee proposals has been presented, but if some of the ideas and recommendations are implemented, important progress for the position of school libraries in Sweden may follow. The outcome can be seen as the result of successful interaction between researchers, professionals and people working in the political sphere.



1 Researching Information and Learning Activities in School Libraries 

 17

The Power of the LinCS Collaboration LinCS had great significance for the successful research outcomes presented in this chapter. The combination of two academic fields and their collaboration, strong theoretical framing, and the operational effectiveness of the research community, all led to novel insights and rich opportunities for communicating research results.

Focus on Learning The strong research focus on learning proved particularly fruitful for studies on information seeking and information literacy. The sociocultural perspective with an interest in how physical and intellectual tools shape activities is markedly appropriate for studying information practices, where mediating tools have major significance. Further, the view that learning comes about via social interaction directs research beyond individuals’ activities, to develop novel understandings of information concepts and practices. The interdisciplinary collaboration between LIS and educational researchers enabled dual perspectives on the research problems themselves, the identification of topical issues, and multifaceted analyses for establishing the relevance of findings. Such collaboration also opened opportunities for co-authorship and numerous publications in a variety of journals and books.

Structural Organisation The large number of researchers within the community, along with the infrastructure and organisation of LinCS, was a major strength. Regular seminars where senior and junior scholars, including PhD students, shared ongoing work for critique from fellow members contributed to the quality of research output. Recurring meetings with visiting international scholars provided valuable learning and networking opportunities. Researchers advanced in their careers; many PhD students graduated; new doctoral students were recruited; and assistant professors were promoted to associate professors, several of whom became full professors. Inevitably during the operating life of the Centre, researchers moved to other institutions, and new members were admitted, contributing to new influences, innovative approaches and widening networks.

18 

 Louise Limberg

Conclusion and Final Remarks The research studies presented constitute a substantial body of knowledge on information activities in school library contexts. They demonstrate considerable development with later studies building on previous studies; jointly they form a strong corpus of research outcomes; they contribute in-depth and novel insights into the interaction between information activities and learning. Findings emphasize particular dimensions of the concept of information literacy and new perspectives on information literacy education with improved understandings of critical information searching including infrastructural meaning-making, ways of determining credibility and trust through comprehending the grounding for various knowledge claims, and insightful evaluation means that add to more traditional views of seek and find. One conclusion from the sociocultural research is that information literacy, as shaped in different practices, is multifaceted and therefore cannot be conclusively captured in general lists or models. However, findings also indicate that the competences forming information literacy are essential today. They emphasize that information literacy is not static; conceptual and empirical understandings interact with societal change, digitisation and globalisation.

Relevance for Professional Practice The question immediately arises about the relevance of the research for school library work. Sociocultural studies are often designed as basic research and rarely present results in models immediately applicable in professional practices. However, this research has high relevance for school librarianship as it invites questioning, analysing and revising existing purposeful information literacy practices. Likewise, in-depth exploration of concepts may contribute to developing the language for communication about information literacy in teaching practices. It is worth mentioning that during the whole period there have been frequent contacts between academics and professional school librarians. Many practitioners have followed on-going research and researchers have been invited to take part in professional conferences, workshops and other venues and to share and discuss their findings. Universities have designed and offered further education courses, sometimes targeted to librarians and teachers together. The political interest in school libraries is an important outcome of the various activities.



1 Researching Information and Learning Activities in School Libraries 

 19

Final Remarks Experiences from the scholarly work presented here are that the interaction between researchers in LIS and education provided fruitful conditions for exploring information seeking and information literacy. The shared interests of the researchers in how digital tools reshape conditions for learning and information use constituted a favourable foundation for a range of investigations in school library settings. Varied empirical studies were connected through the joint theoretical framing of the sociocultural perspective, combined with conceptual understandings of information activities. Interdisciplinary collaboration added to multifaceted research design and outcomes. The LinCS community decisively contributed to the quantity and quality of research on information seeking and use, and on information literacy, intellectually as well as materially.

References Ahlstedt, K., I. Andersson, S. Hög, J. Lindmark, and B. Westas. 2015. “School Libraries for All.” In Global Action on School Library Guidelines, edited by B.A. Schultz-Jones and D. Oberg, 111–121. Berlin, München, Boston: De Gruyter Saur. https://doi. org/10.1515/9783110362664-012. Alexandersson, Mikael, and Louise Limberg. 2012. “Changing Conditions for Information Use and Learning in Swedish Schools.” HUMAN IT 11, no. 2: 131–154. https://humanit.hb.se/ article/view/70/52. Carlsson, Hanna, and Olof Sundin. 2017. “Searching for Delegated Knowledge in Elementary Schools.” Information Research 22, no. 1: paper isic1618. http://InformationR.net/ir/22-1/ isic/isic1618.html. Carlsson, Hanna, and Olof Sundin. 2018. Sök- och källkritik i grundskolan. En forskningsrapport. [Search and Source Criticism in Compulsory School; A Research Report.] Lund: Lund University. Swedish https://portal.research.lu.se/sv/publications/ s%C3%B6k-och-k%C3%A4llkritik-i-grundskolan-en-forskningsrapport; English https:// portal.research.lu.se/sv/publications/s%C3%B6k-och-k%C3%A4llkritik-i-grundskolanen-forskningsrapport. Gärdén, Cecilia. 2016. “Information Literacy in the Tension Between School’s Discursive Practice and Students’ Self-directed Learning.” Information Research 21, no. 4: paper 734. http://informationr.net/ir/21-4/paper734.html. Gärdén, Cecilia, Helena Francke, Anna H. Lundh, and Louise Limberg. 2014. “A Matter of Facts? Linguistic Tools in the Context of Information Seeking and Use in Schools.” Information Research 19, no. 4: (paper isic07). http://InformationR.net/ir/19-4/isic/isic07.html. Haider, Jutta, and Olof Sundin. 2016. Algoritmer i samhället. [Algorithms in Society.] Kansliet för strategi- och samtidsfrågor, Regeringskansliet. [Office of Strategic and Contemporary Affairs, Government offices.] Swedish: https://portal.research.lu.se/sv/publications/

20 

 Louise Limberg

algoritmer-i-samh%C3%A4llet; English: https://portal.research.lu.se/sv/publications/ algoritmer-i-samh%C3%A4llet. Haider, Jutta, and Olof Sundin. 2017. Algoritmer: IIS internetguide. [Algorithms: IIS Internetguide) Internetguide Nr. 46. Stockholm: Internetstiftelsen [The Internet Foundation]. Swedish https://portal.research.lu.se/sv/publications/algoritmeriis-internetguide; English https://portal.research.lu.se/sv/publications/ algoritmer-iis-internetguide. Haider, Jutta, and Olof Sundin. 2019a. “The Fragmentation of Facts and Infrastructural Meaning-making: New Demands on Information Literacy.” Information Research 24, no. 4: colis1923. http://InformationR.net/ir/24-4/colis/colis1923.html. Haider, Jutta and Olof Sundin. 2019b. “How Do you Trust? On Infrastructural Meaning-making and the Need for Self-reflection.” In Understanding Media and Information Literacy (MIL) in the Digital Age: A question of Democracy, edited by U. Carlsson, 107–112. Gothenburg: University of Gothenburg and UNESCO. Available at https://lup.lub.lu.se/search/ws/ files/69810710/107_112_Haider_o_Sundin_9_september.pdf. Haider, Jutta, and Olof Sundin. 2019c. Invisible Search and Online Search Engines: The Ubiquity of Search in Everyday Life. London: Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9780429448546. Available at https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/oa-mono/10.4324/9780429448546/invisiblesearch-online-search-engines-jutta-haider-olof-sundin; https://www.researchgate.net/ profile/Olof-Sundin-2/publication/331865863_Invisible_Search_and_Online_Search_ Engines_The_Ubiquity_of_Search_in_Everyday_Life/links/618adc9261f098772076cb30/ Invisible-Search-and-Online-Search-Engines-The-Ubiquity-of-Search-in-Everyday-Life. pdf?origin=publication_detail. Hicks, Alison. 2018. “Making the case for a sociocultural perspective on information literacy.” In The Politics of Theory and the Practice of Critical Librarianship, edited by K. Nicholson and M. Seale, 69–85. Sacramento, CA: Library Juice Press. Johansson, Veronica, and Louise Limberg. 2017. “Seeking Critical Literacies in Information Practices: Reconceptualising Critical Literacy as Situated and Tool-mediated Enactments of Meaning.” Information Research 22, no. 1: CoLIS paper 1611. Lave, Jean, and Wenger, Etienne. 1991. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Limberg, Louise. 1997. “Information Use for Learning Purposes.” In Information Seeking in Context. Proceedings of an International Conference on Research in Information Needs, Seeking and Use in Different Contexts 14–16 August, 1996, edited by P. Vakkari, R. Savolainen, & B. Dervin, 275–289. London: Taylor Graham. Limberg, Louise. 1999. “Three Conceptions of Information Seeking and Use.” In Exploring the Contexts of Information Behaviour. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Research in Information Needs, Seeking and Use in Different Contexts, 13–15 August 1998, Sheffield, edited by Thomas D. Wilson and David K. Allen, 116–132. London: Taylor Graham. Available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228715275_Three_conceptions_ of_information_seeking_and_use/link/00b495238a5cc16403000000/download. Limberg, Louise, Mikael Alexandersson, Annika Lantz-Andersson, and Lena Folkesson. 2008. “What Matters? Shaping Meaningful Learning through Teaching Information Literacy.” Libri 58, no. 2: 82–91. Available at https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/ download?doi=10.1.1.579.1904&rep=rep1&type=pdf. Limberg, Louise, and Lena Folkesson. 2006. Undervisning i informationssökning: Slutrapport från projektet Informationssökning, didaktik och lärande (IDOL). [Teaching Information



1 Researching Information and Learning Activities in School Libraries 

 21

Seeking. Final Report on the Project Information Seeking, Didactics, and Learning.] University of Borås Sweden. Available at https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/ diva2:883677/FULLTEXT01.pdf. Limberg, Louise, and Olof Sundin. 2006. “Teaching Information Seeking: Relating Information Literacy Education to Theories of Information Behaviour.” Information Research 2, no. 1: paper 280. Available at https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1104682. Limberg, Louise, Olof Sundin, and Sanna Talja. 2012. “Three Theoretical Perspectives on Information Literacy.” HUMAN IT 11, no. 2: 93–130. https://humanit.hb.se/article/ view/69/51. Lundh, Anna H. 2011. Doing Research in Primary School: Information Activities in Project-Based Learning. PhD diss., University of Gothenburg and University of Borås. http://urn.kb.se/ resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-3593. Säljö, Roger. 2009. “Learning, Theories of Learning, and Units of Analysis in Research.” Educational Psychologist 44, no. 3: 202–208. DOI: 10.1080/00461520903029030. Säljö, Roger. 2021. “The Conceptualization of Learning in Learning Research.” In Learning as Social Practice. Beyond Education as an Individual Enterprise, edited by G. Kress, S. Selander, S. Säljö & C. Wulf, 146–168. London: Routledge. Schultz-Jones, Barbara, Lisa Åström, and John Marino. 2019. “From Ohio to Uppsala.” In Proceedings of the 48th Annual Conference of the International Association of School Librarianship and the 23rd International Forum on Research in School Librarianship, edited by J. L. Branch-Mueller. Edmonton, Canada: University of Alberta. DOI: https://doi. org/10.29173/iasl7400. Schultz Nybacka, Pamela. 2019. Värdet av skolbibliotek: en verksamhet för hållbar utbildning och bildning. [The Value of School Libraries.] Stockholm: Kungliga biblioteket, Nationell biblioteksstrategi. https://weburn.kb.se/tumnaglar/publ/nsk/nznrzmzml0cbdnsk.jpg Sundin, Olof. 2015. “Invisible Search: Information Literacy in the Swedish Curriculum for Compulsory Schools.” Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy 10, no. 4: 193–209. https:// doi.org/10.18261/ISSN1891-943X-2015-04-01 Available at https://www.idunn.no/doi/ full/10.18261/ISSN1891-943X-2015-04-01. Sundin, Olof. 2020. “Where is Search in Information Literacy?” In Sustainable Digital Communities: 15th International Conference, iConference 2020, edited by A. Sundqvist, G. Berget, J. Nolin, and K.I. Skjerdingstad. Boras, Sweden, March 23–26, 2020, Proceedings. 373–379. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43687-2 . Preprint available at https://lucris.lub.lu.se/ws/portalfiles/portal/77578026/Sundin_iconference_preprint. pdf. Sundin, Olof, and Jutta Haider. 2019. Sökkritik och algoritmers synlighet. [Search Criticism and the Visibility of Algorithms.] Stockholm: Skolverket [The Swedish National Agency for Education]. https://www.skolverket.se/download/18.2f324c251782590 9a16f9e/1621432180237/D3_1-gy_02A_02_sokkritik.pdf. Todd, Ross J. 2008. “From Information to Knowledge: Charting and Measuring Changes in Students’ Knowledge of a Curriculum Topic.” Information Research 11, no. 4: paper 264.

Ross J. Todd

2 R  esearch Supporting Inquiry: The Center for International Scholarship in School Libraries (CISSL) at Rutgers University Abstract: This chapter focuses on the role of university research centers in supporting and enabling inquiry-centered learning and highlights the work of the Center for International Scholarship in School Libraries (CISSL) at Rutgers University in the United States. CISSL positions its profile and work on a core foundation of empirical research and enabling the adoption, adaption and transformation of research results into evidence-based professional practice for school librarians and classroom teachers. The Center emphasizes the instructional role of school librarians and concentrates on engagement with evidence to shape resource-centered inquiry learning and to demonstrate the impact and value of school libraries as centers of learning. Keywords: Inquiry-based learning; Evidence-based library science; School libraries – Evaluation

Background The Center for International Scholarship in School Libraries (CISSL) in the School of Communication and Information at Rutgers University was established in April 2003 by Distinguished Professor Emerita Carol Collier Kuhlthau who became its first Director. Dr. Ross J. Todd became CISSL’s first Director of Research. It was a memorable day in April 2003. International and national visitors had gathered in New Brunswick, New Jersey for the opening ceremony and reception, only to have the whole university closed and the event cancelled due to an April snowstorm that rapidly dumped seven inches of snow on the city. CISSL was born in a powerful storm that transformed the urban landscape into a winter wonderland. Almost twenty years later, CISSL continues its vision of transforming education through inquiry learning, and particularly through the Guided Inquiry Design framework developed by Professor Carol Kuhlthau through her decades of empirical research that established the Information Search Process (ISP). The ISP provides the evidence-based foundation for Guided Inquiry Design as the pedagogical framework for resource-based inquiry learning.

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110772586-004



Research Supporting Inquiry 

 23

The Center’s Mission and Focus Deep commitment to a clear vision has guided CISSL as a university-based center and its initiatives and practices over the years: “All young people and educators have access to information and technology-rich learning communities that prepare them through Guided Inquiry reading and literacy development in all its forms to live and work in a globally networked world” (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2012, 2015). The vision statement underpins the focus on empirical research and its transformative role in the development of instructional practices and evidence tools; an active approach to dissemination through publications and research forums; and enactment through evidence-based professional empowerment programs. The evidence-based foundation has been the key building block for the focus, direction and leadership of CISSL in enacting inquiry-centered learning in schools. The direction for action is made explicit in the long-standing Mission Statement of CISSL: ––

Through its research and development program… CISSL seeks to transform education through inquiry learning. CISSL aims to provide the arena that will: ––

Inspire learning and creativity of students

––

Enhance effective teaching through inquiry learning

––

Focus on Guided Inquiry, reading and literacy in diverse information environments

––

Support school libraries as instructional centers for the development of 21st

––

Provide professional development that brings CISSL’s research and findings to

century skills the educational community ––

Transform schools into 21st century information and technology rich learning centers (Rutgers University CISSL, n.d.)

The goals are challenging, but are derived from a set of core beliefs that have informed the decision making, research directions, and professional development initiatives of CISSL. The goals respect the complexity and challenges of 21st century learning in schools, build information and inquiry practices that are founded on sustained and diverse empirical evidence, and position school libraries not merely as collections and distribution centers of curated resources, but as dynamic instructional centers that develop deep engagement with diverse information sources, reflective and critical thinking, problem solving, and building deep understanding and knowledge. There is a fundamental belief in a societal role of building effective professional practice through research and dissemination. CISSL’s activities are based on several decades of research, experience, insights and systematic measures that support the transformative role of school

24 

 Ross J. Todd

libraries in the development of the student’s personal, social and cultural growth. There is a powerful belief that the school library is the school’s physical and virtual learning commons where reading, literacy, inquiry, thinking, imagination, discovery, and creativity are central to the student’s information-to-knowledge/learning journey and personal life journey. Now, more than ever, school libraries are crucial to the development of students as intellectual, social and cultural agents. In essence, driving CISSL’s agenda is fostering interactions between scholars, students, professionals, and community to nurture research, problem solving, and evidence-based knowledge creation and dissemination through inquiry.

The Center’s Research Contributions At the center of CISSL’s research and dissemination initiatives is the focus on enacting inquiry-based learning. The model of the Information Search Process, developed by Carol Kuhlthau over a thirty-year research program, and its professional integration through Guided Inquiry Design developed by Kuhlthau, Maniotes and Caspari (2015) form the centerpiece of professional enactment and transformation. The model of the process includes: –– Initiation, when a person first becomes aware of a lack of knowledge or understanding and feelings of uncertainty and apprehension are common –– Selection, when a general area, topic, or problem is identified and initial uncertainty often gives way to a brief sense of optimism and a readiness to begin the search –– Exploration, when inconsistent, incompatible information is encountered and uncertainty, confusion, and doubt frequently increase and people find themselves “in the dip” of confidence –– Formulation, when a focused perspective is formed and uncertainty diminishes as confidence begins to increase –– Collection, when information pertinent to the focused perspective is gathered and uncertainty subsides as interest and involvement deepens, and –– Presentation, when the search is completed with a new understanding enabling the person to explain his or her learning to others or in some way put the learning to use. Later work added a seventh stage: –– Assessing — reflecting on the learning.



Research Supporting Inquiry 

 25

CISSL has played an important role in contributing to the national agenda of research on the impact of the professional role of school librarians, particularly their instructional initiatives, and libraries. From 2002–2007, CISSL undertook two large-scale studies: Student Learning through Ohio School Libraries (Todd and Kuhlthau 2005a, 2005b), and Student Learning through Delaware School Libraries (Todd and Heinstrom 2006). Summaries of the studies, together with studies of school libraries in other US states, are presented in Scholastic’s compendium of research supporting the effectiveness of school libraries (Scholastic 2016). The studies of Ohio and Delaware represented a significant departure from the mainstream correlation-centered state studies previously undertaken in that they sought to understand directly how students benefited from school libraries through elaborating conceptions of help and providing some measure of the extent of the help as perceived by students and faculty. The Ohio study (Todd and Kuhlthau 2005a, 2005b) examined 39 effective school libraries across Ohio and collected information from 13,123 students in Grades 3 to 12 and from 879 teaching faculty through two web-based surveys with 48 questions and one open-ended critical incident question. The Delaware study (Todd 2008) took a similar approach. It sought to identify exemplary school libraries in Delaware and undertook in-depth analyses to elucidate how quality school libraries contribute to learning in the school and to student outcomes and achievements. As in the Ohio study, quantitative and qualitative data were collected from 5733 students and 468 faculty from 13 selected schools in Delaware that met a range of quality school library criteria. The data collection instruments used were made available to the professional community, so that school libraries could conduct small-scale studies of a classroom of students, or a grade level, to gather local data to understand how their libraries help students with learning and achievement outcomes. International replications of the studies have been undertaken, notably in Australia and Sweden. An empirical model that positions the school library as a dynamic agent of learning has been derived and refined from the studies. The evidence collated has demonstrated the centrality of the instructional role of the school librarian, and has empowered school librarians and collaborative partners to engage in iterative informational-formational-transformational processes through instruction and technology, reading and literacy development. The model of the library as a dynamic agent of learning (Figure 2.1) has directly and indirectly guided the inquiry-centered professional development initiatives undertaken by CISSL.

26 

 Ross J. Todd

Figure 2.1: Model of the School Library as a Dynamic Agent of Learning (Todd and Kuhlthau 2005, 85)

From 2009–2012, CISSL undertook a statewide study in New Jersey, titled One Common Goal: Student Learning. The research, on behalf of the New Jersey Association of School Librarians (NJASL), sought first to construct a picture of the status of New Jersey’s school libraries in terms of their informational-transformational-formational dimensions; secondly to understand the contribution of quality school libraries to education in New Jersey; thirdly to understand some of the contextual and professional dynamics that enable and inhibit school libraries to contribute significantly to education in New Jersey; and fourthly to make recommendations to New Jersey stakeholders to develop a sustained and long-term program of capacity building and evidence-based continuous improvement of school libraries in New Jersey. The first phase of the study gathered data from 765 school librarians through a voluntary online survey to establish essential benchmarks about school libraries in New Jersey. Data were collected on the extent and levels of staffing, both professional and paraprofessional; the nature and extent of information resources; the nature and extent of technology infrastructure and its use and levels of technical support;



Research Supporting Inquiry 

 27

reading and literacy initiatives; instructional and curriculum activities centering on inquiry learning and information literacy; engagement in instructional collaboration, coordination and cooperation; perceptions of the impact of the school library on student learning outcomes and achievement; and the challenges, barriers and enablers related to professional school library work (Todd, Gordon, and Lu 2010). Phase 2 of the New Jersey study examined 12 schools whose librarians reported high levels of collaboration with teachers in Phase 1. Focus groups, comprised of one hundred school personnel including the principal, curriculum leaders, school librarian, classroom teachers, and specialists such as special needs and literacy teachers, addressed the following four themes: Theme 1: In what ways does the school support learning through the school library? Theme 2: In what ways, if any, does the school library contribute to learning? Theme 3: What do students learn through their interaction and engagement with the school library? Theme 4: How do you envision the future of school libraries? Two core findings emerged in this stage of the study (Todd, Gordon, and Lu 2011). First, the primary function of the school library was as a learning and instruction center engaging with diverse information resources for quality learning outcomes: –– For students, the primary focus of school library was on building capacity for critical engagement with information and producing knowledge, not finding “stuff” –– For teaching faculty, the school library was a center of learning innovation, experimenting with technology and information, and enhancing teaching skills using information and technology to empower deep learning of students: in essence, it was an ecosystem for inquiry-centered learning –– The role of the school librarian as co-teacher was the most powerful dynamic in the sustainability of school libraries, and –– Teachers recognized the instructional expertise of school librarians and actively sought out this expertise, and consistently highlighted the sustained, active use of the school library by them and their students. Second, the pedagogy of the school library that was valued by the school leaders and classroom teachers in this phase of the study was an inquiry-centered pedagogy: –– Inquiry-based instruction implemented through instructional teams: collaborative pedagogy –– Mutuality of working towards one common goal: enabling core curriculum content standards

28 

 Ross J. Todd

–– Emphasis given to intellectual agency for developing deep knowledge and understanding targeted to curriculum outcomes and life-centered outcomes –– Built excitement, interest and motivation for learning –– Engaged students as content providers who work on- and off-line to produce creative products –– Staged process of inquiry-based learning: students were not left to their own devices to undertake substantial research projects –– School library portrayed as a common ground across the school for meeting individual and special needs, and –– Literacies included visual literacy, print literacy, media literacy, digital literacy, and technological literacies. The findings provided strong evidence of the core role of CISSL: the engagement in inquiry-centered research, and the translation and application of the research through strategies that focus on informational-transformational-formational dimensions of student engagement with information.

The Focus on Evidence-Based Practice A key contribution of CISSL has been the sustained focus on the development of a framework of Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) for school libraries. The working model of EBP emerged from traditions in education focusing on data-driven decision making and evidenced-based librarianship (Table 2.1):

Table 2.1: Evidence-based Practice for School Libraries – Conceptual Framework (Todd 2009, 89)



Research Supporting Inquiry 

 29

The framework posits evidence-based school librarianship as an approach to professional practice in school libraries that systematically engages research-derived evidence found in the corpus of scholarship of the field and its allied disciplines, observed evidence, and local user-reported evidence. The holistic approach to evidence in the context of school libraries welds three dimensions of evidence namely: Evidence for Practice, Evidence in Practice, and Evidence of Practice: –– Evidence For Practice focuses on examining and using best available formal empirical research and methods to inform practices and actions and to identify best practices that have been tested and validated through empirical research. Evidence for Practice is the informational dimension of school library practice –– Evidence In Practice focuses on reflective practitioners integrating available research evidence with deep knowledge and understanding derived from professional experience. It implements measures to engage with local evidence to identify learning dilemmas, learning needs, and achievement gaps to make decisions about the continuous improvement of the school library practices to bring optimal outcomes and actively contribute to school mission and goals. Evidence in Practice is the transformational dimension of school library practice, and –– Evidence Of Practice is concerned with the measured outcomes and impacts of practice, and is derived from systematically measured, primarily userbased data. It focuses on the real results of what school librarians do, rather than on what school librarians do. It focuses on the development of local measures to identify outcomes and impacts, going beyond process and activities as outputs. It establishes what has changed for learners as a result of inputs, interventions, activities, processes, and charting the nature and extent and quality of effect. Evidence of Practice constitutes the formational dimension of school library practice (Todd 2009). The EBP framework has become a central dynamic in CISSL’s professional empowerment of school librarians and classroom teachers. EBP is considered to be an approach to best practice. School librarians are challenged in their local contexts to take action in establishing and documenting evidence of impacts of school library programs. EBP asks school librarians to engage in local initiatives that go beyond mere evidence-informed practice and information-based evidence, to a central focus on knowledge-based evidence, to establish a range of evidence collection strategies, and to disseminate such evidence to key decision makers including school leaders, school boards, regional and state educational authorities, and political decision makers. Evidence-based advocacy is an important mantra for CISSL.

30 

 Ross J. Todd

Over the years, CISSL has provided extensive EBP training to professional groups, school library associations, and school teams across the US, the UK, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica, China, Portugal, Croatia, Sweden, Denmark, Qatar, Kazakhstan, Turkey, and South Africa. The development programs provide emphasis on engaging with tools and strategies to document school library impacts, as well as developing EBP plans and dissemination initiatives that are responsive to local needs. CISSL provides access to some inquiry-centered EBP tools. They include the School Library Impact Measure (SLIM) which is a toolkit that enables school librarians and classroom teachers to assess student learning through guided inquiry in the school library. The toolkit includes a Handbook, Reflection Instruments, Scoring Guidelines, and Scoring Sheet.

Dissemination of Research Outcomes The core dynamics of CISSL’s research and professional work integrate Kuhlthau’s Information Search Process, Guided Inquiry Design, the transformational instructional role of the school librarian as an information learning specialist, and fostering approaches to EBP. An important element of the Center’s responsibility is to disseminate research findings in a variety of forums and contexts, including publications, presentations and workshops at international and national professional and scholarly conferences, research symposia, the website, and professional training programs through CISSL’s Summer Institute program. Key initiatives have been: –– Three-day residential Summer Institutes, titled Guided Inquiry for Student Learning. The 5th Institute, scheduled for July 2020 on the Rutgers campus, was cancelled due to the Covid-19 pandemic. The Summer Institutes are led by the co-developers of Guided Inquiry Design®, Carol Kuhlthau, Leslie Maniotes and Ann Caspari, and are built on the published works centering on Guided Inquiry (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2012, 2015; Maniotes 2016, 2018; Maniotes, Harrington, and Lambusta 2015). The residential institutes bring together school-based teams which typically include the school librarian, classroom teachers, specialist teachers and school leaders including deputy principals and/or curriculum leaders. The intensive program, built on the foundation of Kuhlthau’s Information Search Process, addresses: –– Instructional design for rigorous, interdisciplinary, standards-based learning, and effective teaching strategies in the inquiry context –– Supporting students with their social/emotional response to learning from a variety of resources



––

––

––

––

Research Supporting Inquiry 

 31

–– Harnessing the digital environment such as the Smithsonian Institution resources to enhance learning –– Developing instructional collaborative partnerships among teachers, librarians, administrators, parents, and the community that have a greater impact on student learning, and –– Assessing inquiry learning through evidence-based practice strategies, documenting and disseminating outcomes to appropriate audiences. Substantive and sustained input into the curriculum of the School Librarianship concentration in the LIS department’s Master of Information (MI) program. The flagship course, Learning Theory, Inquiry and Instructional Design, based on Guided Inquiry Design, is the cornerstone of a suite of courses that form the New Jersey Department of Education’s state certification for school librarians. Over two decades, the course has played a formative and transformative role in pre-service education and certification of school librarians across New Jersey. Through ongoing engagement with the New Jersey Department of Education, the Center provides a significant voice in the education of school librarians. Support for doctoral students working as research assistants, teaching assistants and administrative assistants using funding received through strong donor support. Recent topics examined include: young people’s information practices and informal learning in makerspaces; gendered literacy through social media; information use behaviors of students in an online learning community; book censorship and the perspectives of challengers; multiplatform books for young readers; conceptions and practices of information literacy in academic libraries; information seeking and use of English language learners in a high school setting; everyday life science and health information seeking; science fiction and Guided Inquiry Design. Outcomes are typically disseminated through scholarly publications and presentations at school library and general librarianship conferences. Annual scholarships for Masters’ students who engage with a range of school library projects. A current project is the development of a research base to support school librarians in progressing themes on inclusion, diversity and equity, especially in relation to underserved and marginalized groups in schools. The Center engages actively with the university’s philanthropic arm and the school’s development personnel to procure funds. Small grants are made to Masters’ students to attend state and national conferences. International collaborative research and scholarship, particularly playing a role in mentoring newer researchers and providing research expertise, methods training and publishing expertise. The Center plays a role as a human resource for school librarians and school library researchers, often

32 

 Ross J. Todd

through participation in international school library conferences, such as the International Association of School Librarianship (IASL). Scholars have engaged in the formal external assessment of PhD candidates around the world, including Finland, Germany, and Australia. –– Methodological and assessment tools to enable researchers and practitioners to continue research agendas and to demonstrate the impact of inquiry-centered learning on curriculum, everyday life, and information competency development, and –– Scholar-in-residence programs, through collaborative research projects, and joint professional development initiatives including scholars on sabbatical programs, international training programs for teams of school librarians, scholars-in-residence at outside institutions to promote the work of the Center and build scholarly and strategic alliances globally, and stakeholder participation in CISSL’s advisory structure.

Conclusion For over twenty years, CISSL scholars and colleagues have pursued diverse approaches to empirical research on how schools, libraries and information agencies can prepare young people to seek and use information through resourcebased inquiry. Activities have included sponsored research funded by various professional agencies, for example, the Ohio, Delaware and New Jersey Studies, and engaging with international research teams in Australia and Sweden replicating the studies, and competitive grant-based research from agencies such as the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) along with individual research studies funded by CISSL. The ongoing challenge is to balance fundamental and applied research and create synergies between them to impact growth and change through school libraries. The research agenda has firmly centered on Guided Inquiry, reading and literacy engagement, information seeking behaviors of youth, dynamics of knowledge construction, safety practices in online environments, and evidence-based practice. At the heart of the Center is understanding the nature, practices and dynamics of how students learn in diverse resource-based environments, and how instructional practices can be continuously improved. The Center is committed to an evidence-based approach to empowering learners in an information-intense society. Research findings have been disseminated in international research symposia, publishing initiatives, research reports, invited presentations, workshops, media releases and professional and scholarly programs. CISSL has become a



Research Supporting Inquiry 

 33

highly regarded national and international platform addressing significant matters connected to school libraries. CISSL was born in a powerful storm which transformed the urban landscape. Its commitment, focus, successful research, and engagement with the school library community continue to play a role in transforming the learning landscape of school libraries.

References Kuhlthau, Carol Collier, Leslie K. Maniotes, and Ann K. Caspari. 2015. Guided Inquiry: Learning in the 21st Century, 2nd ed. Santa Barbara, Calif.: Libraries Unlimited. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier, Leslie K. Maniotes, and Ann K. Caspari. 2012. Guided Inquiry Design: A Framework for Inquiry in Your School. Santa Barbara, Calif.: Libraries Unlimited. Maniotes, Leslie K. 2018. Guided Inquiry Design® in Action: Elementary School. Santa Barbara, Calif.: Libraries Unlimited. Maniotes, Leslie K. 2016. Guided Inquiry Design® in Action: High School. Libraries Unlimited. Maniotes, Leslie K., LaDawna Harrington, and Patrice Lambusta. 2015. Guided Inquiry Design® in Action: Middle School Libraries. Libraries Unlimited. Rutgers University. School of Communication and Information. Center for International Scholarship in School Libraries (CISSL). n.d. “Mission and Vision.” https://cissl.rutgers. edu/mission-and-vision/. Scholastic. 2016. School Libraries Work: A Compendium of Research Supporting the Effectiveness of School Libraries. Jefferson City, MO.: Scholastic Library Publishing. Available at https://www.scholastic.com/SLW2016/resources/documents/SLW_Booklet_ Final_Lo.pdf. Todd, Ross J. 2008. “Building Capacity and Continuous Improvement of School Libraries: The Delaware Experience.” International Association of School Librarianship (IASL) Conference Proceedings, Berkeley, USA: World Class Learning and LIteracy through School Libraries. https://journals.library.ualberta.ca/slw/index.php/iasl/article/view/7987/4845; https:// iasl-online.org/resources/Documents/PD%20Library/iasl2008_toddrf.pdf. Todd, Ross J. 2009. “School Librarianship and Evidence-Based Practice: Perspectives, Progress, and Problems.” Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 4, no. 2–3: 78–96. https://journals.library.ualberta.ca/eblip/index.php/EBLIP/article/view/4637/5318 Todd, Ross J., Carol Gordon, and Ya-Ling Lu. 2010. One Common Goal: Student Learning: Report of Findings and Recommendations of the New Jersey School Library Survey, Phase 1. On behalf of the New Jersey Association of School Libraries. New Brunswick, NJ: CISSL Rutgers University. ISBN: 978-0-982-9590-0-8. CISS. Powerpoint presentation on the findings available at https://sites.comminfo.rutgers.edu/cissl/wp-content/uploads/ sites/8/2020/01/cissl_njasl_2010.pdf. Todd, Ross J., Carol Gordon, and Ya-Ling Lu. 2011. One Common Goal: Student Learning: Report of Findings and Recommendations of the New Jersey School Library Survey, Phase 2. On behalf of the New Jersey Association of School Libraries. CISSL, Rutgers University. New Brunswick NJ: Center for International Scholarship in School Libraries (CISSL). https:// sites.comminfo.rutgers.edu/cissl/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2020/01/njasl_phase-_2_ final_0.pdf.

34 

 Ross J. Todd

Todd, Ross J., and Jannica Heinstrom. 2006. Report of Phase Two of Delaware School Library Survey: “Student Learning Through Delaware School Libraries” Part 2 Summary of Findings & Recommendations On behalf of the Governor’s Task Force on School Libraries Delaware USA. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for International Scholarship in School Libraries (CISSL). https://libraries.delaware.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/123/2016/09/ TFSLRecomFinalDel2.pdf. Todd, Ross J., and Carol Collier Kuhlthau. 2005a. “Student Learning Through Ohio School Libraries, Part 1: How Effective School Libraries Help Students.” School Libraries Worldwide 11, no. 1:63–88. Available at https://www.researchgate.net/ publication/265043672_Student_Learning_Through_Ohio_School_Libraries_Part_1_How_ Effective_School_Libraries_Help_Students. Todd, Ross J., and Carol Collier. Kuhlthau. 2005b. “Student Learning Through Ohio School Libraries, Part 2 Faculty Perceptions of Effective School Libraries.” School Libraries Worldwide 11, no.1: 89-110. https://journals.library.ualberta.ca/slw/index.php/slw/ article/download/6959/3957/2580.

Jean Donham

3 T  he Importance of an Inquiry Model in Teaching and Learning Abstract: Although inquiry-based learning is an active process focused on problems or scenarios, many students enter into the experience with flawed mental models of what is understood by inquiry. They tend to envision it as a more traditional transfer of collected information from sources to achieve a final product of knowledge. A consistent approach to instruction across grades and disciplines can help students develop their understanding of inquiry and lead to the feeling of accomplishment inherent in discovery learning. Adopting an inquiry process model helps learners distinguish between inquiry and reportage, offers a lexicon for communication, and defines a framework for curriculum development and assessment. Embracing a learner profile that incorporates the dispositions of inquiry strengthens the connection between the inquiry model and the learner. Keywords: Inquiry-based learning; Cognitive maps (Psychology); Student-centred learning

Introduction Models serve many purposes. Hobbyists build models replicating cars or airplanes as a way of appreciating specific design elements. Architects bring models to clients to communicate their visions for new structures. Models are used in science and technology to track processes such as flow of blood or demonstrate the earth’s rotation. Scientists use models to represent systems or concepts such as the galaxy or a cell to increase understanding of objects or structures that may be difficult to observe. In education, models serve similar functions, and a model of the inquiry process provides a scaffold for envisioning the process, identifying its elements and designing curriculum and instruction. More specifically, in considering the inquiry process, mental models become particularly relevant. Callison (2003) posits that the term “mental model” defines how one visualizes a process. Since their introduction as a construct, “mental models have long been considered an important enabler of cognitive performance” (Moon, Johnston, and Moon 2018).

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110772586-005

36 

 Jean Donham

Flawed Mental Models Too often, the mental model of inquiry held by students, and sometimes teachers, is flawed. Pitts’ (1995) ground-breaking work on students’ mental models of the research process underscored the importance of students having support, direct instruction and guidance focused on the inquiry process to counter their flawed mental models. Similarly, in a study of ninth graders’ perceptions of research, Gordon expressed this concern when she stated: Reporting has masqueraded as researching for so long that the terms are used interchangeably. In a study that interviewed ninth graders as they worked through a research assignment, one student revealed that ‘Students’ perception of doing research was writing a grammatically correct report that was well-presented and provided other peoples’ answers to someone else’s question’ (Gordon 1996, 32).

“[C]reativity and inquiry were not perceived as part of the process, and grades were perceived as the most important measure of success” (Gordon 1999, 3). Gordon describes as typical an assignment that requires students to report on information found, but lacks the essential principles of inquiry, which include crafting an authentic researchable question, proceeding to gather and analyze valid and reliable data, and integrating findings with prior knowledge to discover new ideas, insights or information. Indeed, inquiry can be perceived inaccurately as an assembly process where information is collected from a variety of sources and assembled into a report. This view is distinctly different from the discovery that authentic inquiry generates. Hinchliffe, Rand and Collier (2018) used surveys and focus groups to determine the mental models of inquiry held by first-year college students. Three particularly relevant findings reveal the flawed mental models of students: First-year students believe that every question has a singular answer First-year students believe that research is a linear, uni-directional process First-year students believe they are supposed to do their research without assistance (11).

Students who hold on to a mental model of inquiry defined by these assumptions are unlikely to engage in authentic inquiry. Acknowledging such flawed mental models underscores the importance of designing instruction to counteract such inaccurate perceptions of the inquiry process with a clear and consistent exposition of the components of the model of inquiry being used.



3 The Importance of an Inquiry Model in Teaching and Learning 

 37

Use of an Inquiry Model in Teaching A model of the inquiry process provides an underpinning structure of components for the development of curriculum and design of lessons. Adoption of a specific model provides a lexicon for communication among educators and with students to identify and analyze the stages of the process. While the professional literature offers various inquiry process models, the framework emerging from the research of Carol Collier Kuhlthau is foundational. Kuhlthau (2004) defined the crucial tasks in the process: Initiation: Posing questions Selection: Discussing or considering possible topics for investigation Exploration: Reading to become informed about the broad topic Formulation: Forming a focus for the investigation Collection: Seeking information to support the investigation Presentation: Synthesizing the findings into a cohesive whole Assessment: Identifying the problems and successes of the process.

Kuhlthau and other theorists generally agree that the inquiry process is not linear; one proceeds along a path that may include returning more than once to an earlier stage to redirect or refine one’s inquiry. The process generally moves from posing questions to assessing the results of the inquiry process and often generates new questions for the next inquiry cycle. Teaching the inquiry process requires that the teacher analyze the tasks that comprise the process and determine how to teach students to perform each task. In short, studying the component parts of the model helps answer the question, “What must I teach in order for my students to engage in authentic inquiry?” Responses to the question depend on development of a model-based inquiry process curriculum and design of specific lessons grounded in the model. The Empire State Information Fluency Curriculum serves as an example of a curriculum designed around an inquiry model. The curriculum follows the Stripling Inquiry Model (Stripling 2003) that describes the inquiry process as a recursive process with the following stages: –– Connect: Connect to prior experience and background knowledge –– Wonder: Develop questions; make predictions or generate hypotheses –– Investigate: Find and evaluate information to answer questions or illuminate new questions –– Construct: Construct new understandings and draw conclusions –– Express: Apply understandings to a new context and express new ideas to share learning with others, and –– Reflect: Reflect on learning and ask new questions (Small et al. 2011).

38 

 Jean Donham

The Empire State Information Fluency Curriculum (New York City School Library System 2014) frames learning outcomes and lessons to align with the Stripling model so that learners experience the inquiry model across grades and disciplines. The structured vocabulary of the model allows teachers and students to label behaviors and share meaning. Such consistent and continuous experience with an inquiry model through grades and across disciplines, regardless of the model chosen, creates a likelihood that learners will over time internalize the same understanding of inquiry, and be less likely to hold the flawed model that confuses reportage with inquiry. A qualitative study of eighth-grade students examined the efficacy of teaching students an inquiry process model to provide language and structure for metacognition (Wolf, Brush and Saye 2003). To think metacognitively is to reflect on one’s own processes, analyze where one is in the process, and assess what work comes next. In the study, students were introduced to the Big Six information skills model of the inquiry process, and subsequently the language and stages of the model were referenced in a project focused on researching and writing about events surrounding the African-American Civil Rights movement. The Big Six information skills are: task definition, information seeking strategies, location and access, use of information, synthesis, and evaluation (Eisenberg and Berkowitz 1992; Wolf, Brush and Saye 2003). Researchers, through analyzing student logs and journals, recorded teacher-student interactions, student work, and post-activity interviews, asserted that the model provided the elements necessary for mental modeling so that students could construct their own processes to succeed with their investigations. A case study set in an elementary school library exemplifies using a model to design curriculum and lessons (Donham 2001). A school librarian collaborated with all teachers to construct and maintain a matrix, integrating the stages of inquiry defined by Kuhlthau and outlined above. The matrix mapped content area units with lessons about the inquiry process. Meeting with teachers individually at each grade level, the librarian was able to ask, “What aspect of inquiry are we teaching during this unit?” Important benefits emerged from the cooperative development of the matrix: it provided assurance that all aspects of the inquiry process appeared in the curriculum, along with articulation across grade levels and disciplines. The model provided not only a framework, but also a common language to facilitate teacher-librarian communication and collaboration.



3 The Importance of an Inquiry Model in Teaching and Learning 

 39

Use of an Inquiry Model in Learning It is useful to consider the value of an inquiry model from the learner perspective. In the previously mentioned case study undertaken at an elementary school, an inquiry process model provided a pathway for students to come to own the model of inquiry adopted (Donham 2001). Units of study typically began with background building. The general topic would be introduced. Students would share what they already knew about the subject or the teacher would provide background, using experiences like field trips or common readings. One example was instruction focused on the Kuhlthau Exploration stage of the inquiry process. The teacher and the librarian team taught a lesson on posing questions for exploration of a topic, a stage in the inquiry process that leads students toward framing a focus for their inquiries. In a grade 2 lesson for 7-8-year-olds, students were led through a process of generating questions for background exploration. The teacher and librarian began with modeling questioning for the topic of the Praying Mantis. Together they generated questions with the class and began by posing their own questions: Librarian: “One thing that intrigued me was “How did the Praying Mantis get its name?” Teacher: “I was wondering what it eats.” Librarian: “I wonder if it eats in a special way.”

Soon students were raising hands to offer additions to the list of questions: Where does it live? Does it live alone or with other Praying Mantises? Does it use camouflage? Is it dangerous or harmful? To whom?

Next, they demonstrated how exploration of the topic might add research questions: Librarian: Let me read to you about the Praying Mantis: “Insects that live by killing other insects: One of the best-known hunters is the Praying Mantis.” What question does that make you think of? I am wondering if it has anything special that makes it a really good hunter? I had not thought of that question until I started reading. Teacher: When we go to the library tomorrow, as you come across information, you may then have questions that you never even thought of (Donham 2001, 18).

Importantly, the teacher and librarian were explicit about the stage of the inquiry process so that students were cognizant of process. The inquiry process is itself a topic of instruction. It is not an assumption, but an intended learning outcome.

40 

 Jean Donham

Understanding the inquiry process helps students be self-aware and to engage in metacognition. Having a model that frames the process effectively provides the learner with a roadmap for the reflection inherent in metacognition. The importance of developing a mental model of the inquiry process is supported in research in science education. For example, the implementation of the TSI model (Teaching Science as Inquiry) is examined in a study by Seraphin and others (2012). In that study, investigators found that using a conceptual model of the inquiry process in science provided language for students and teachers to reflect on their inquiry processes, and discuss and assess them. The value of common language and a common mental model applies to inquiry in the library as well as it does to the science classroom. In the case study on the Praying Mantis already discussed, young students were being guided in the Exploration phase as a process of becoming informed about the topic to develop a focus for investigation: Teacher: What is our goal today? Student: To choose three insects we would like to research. We are exploring today. Teacher: What is our next step after exploring? Student: Asking questions. Library media specialist: On the tables are books about lots of insects. What you do today is browse these books and find some insects that you would like to research. (Donham 2001, 18).

At the school, posters of a child-friendly version of the model hung in classrooms throughout the school. They were not mere decoration; teachers referenced the posters in discussion of inquiry projects. With teacher and librarian using common language, students were getting a consistent picture of inquiry work. Adoption of an inquiry process model made the consistency feasible. The library was firmly linked into the activity undertaken. Rugg (2013) describes a specialized schema in what he calls script theory. He suggests that scripts or mental templates describe the key features of an activity. He asserts, for example, that the script for a pre-arranged dinner at a restaurant includes the actions of booking a table, arriving at the agreed time, being greeted by a member of staff, being shown to the table, and so on. Once the script is learned, diners feel confident in eating out. Similarly, Dalli (1991) uses the example of a child learning to show concern for others; the child must have a script for altruistic behavior that specifies how to respond to a particular set of events. Script theory can further cement perception of the process. A disposition might be likened to an attitude or, as Arthur Costa would say, “habit of mind.” A goal of inquiry-based learning is to develop a mindset, a “habit of mind” or disposition of inquiry in learners. Script theory can serve as a method to help develop inquiry as a “habit of mind.” Librarians can consciously apply



3 The Importance of an Inquiry Model in Teaching and Learning 

 41

scripts repeatedly in group instruction and in individual work (Donham 2016). For example, applying the Stripling Inquiry Model language when reading a text to children, the elementary school librarian would be heard saying at pauses in reading, “This makes me wonder...” or “After reading this, I wonder…” Likewise encouraging students to engage, the librarian might pause to ask “What does this make you wonder?” Using “I wonder…” as part of a stem sentence for student responses after reading, listening or viewing experiences can help students internalize a specific stage of inquiry. If students have age-appropriate language to label the stages of the inquiry process, they can become aware of their learning pathways. For young children the process might be expressed as follows: Child-friendly Language

Stripling Model

What do I already know? What do I want to learn? Let’s read and find out more. Let’s write it down. What does it mean? Does it make sense? Let’s put it all together. Let’s share what we have learned How did we learn? What do we still wonder? What will we do differently next time?

Connect Wonder Investigate Construct Express Reflect

Using a model to envision the inquiry process can be helpful for college undergraduate students as well. In an undergraduate seminar class, students were assigned a major research paper (Donham, Heinrich, and Bostwick 2010). Upon receiving the assignment, the librarian, team-teaching with the professor, asked students whether they were feeling anxious or uncertain about the task before them. She then shared the Kuhlthau model revealing the trend line for feelings of uncertainty (Figure 3.1). She explained to students that a high level of uncertainty at the beginning of the inquiry process is normal, and suggested that, if they were not feeling anxious, perhaps they might reflect on whether they were anticipating true inquiry. Revealing the model to students normalized and affirmed their feelings. By looking at the next stages of the process, students could see a path toward less uncertainty. The librarian pointed out the zone of intervention to assure students that there would be support to take them through the process, whether the “intervener was the professor, the librarian, a peer, or other trusted person.”

42 

 Jean Donham

Figure 3.1: Kuhlthau Process Model: Level of Uncertainty

Explicitly teaching the model helped students arrive at an understanding of the cyclical nature of research. At the end of the experience, one student wrote in her reflection, “Although it was hard to end with a lot of questions, it makes me want to look into a lot of other things.” Guidance in the development of a focus for inquiry fits into undergraduate education. In the seminar class already described, students were introduced to a schema for questioning based on the work of Dahlgren and Öberg (2001). Four categories of questions were described to provide models for students to develop queries that would lead them to the discovery inherent in inquiry rather than mere reportage. The categories were: –– Meaning-oriented: Constructing the meaning of a concept or phenomenon. Example: What is the meaning of feminism in the context of “family values”? –– Relational: Examining the relationship between one phenomenon or concept and another. Example: What effect does homogeneity in a high school’s demographics have on students’ development of racial understanding? –– Value-oriented: Interpreting events or phenomena in the context of a value system that may be political, religious, social, gender-related, etc. Example: What has been the impact of the women’s movement on men’s family roles?



3 The Importance of an Inquiry Model in Teaching and Learning 

 43

–– Solution-oriented questions: Examining a problem and seeking a solution. Example: What lessons from the successful re-emergence of bald eagles can be applied to other endangered species? The instruction came at the zone of intervention point on the model, as the teacher, peers, and the librarian worked together in the seminar. The students expressed their findings from Exploration, and together the class and instructors helped each student hone a focused question to fit and guide the inquiry. For example, one student was interested in investigating her observation of a young child who was drawing detailed graphic pictures of war themes including weapons, dying soldiers, tanks and military aircraft. The child had become increasingly withdrawn from social interactions in the classroom and was frequently distracted. The student learned that the child’s older brother was serving in the Iraq War, and she was curious to understand the possible effects of an obsession with military weapons and operations on the child’s emotional well-being. Through a process of exploring observations of the drawings and the child’s behavior and sharing them with the class to seek classmates’ input and affirmation, the student proceeded to a relational question that focused her line of inquiry on the impact of personal experiences in war on young children. Students accomplished the transition from Exploration to Formulation with guidance, input and support from peers and instructors, fully aware of the model and anticipating a less anxious feeling as they progressed.

Assessment of Student Performance Attention to process raises awareness of the importance of assessment of the learner’s process understandings as well as content output. Both formative and summative assessment can be aligned with the inquiry process model. As an example, following the Stripling Model, at the Investigate stage, at the end of a work session, the librarian and/or teacher might ask students to write a brief response to a question like “Do I have enough information yet?” or “How do I know that these are trusted sources of information?” Reviewing students’ responses to such questions before the next work session may indicate a need for intervention by the librarian or the teacher. In summative evaluation, at the conclusion of a project, learners may be asked to self-assess with an open-ended question focusing on the Investigate stage: “How could you tell when you were finished gathering information?” In short, assessing student performance based on the inquiry process model and the aspect that was emphasized in instruction

44 

 Jean Donham

at the end of a specific project keeps students focused on inquiry as process. Responses to such queries inform the librarian and teacher about what needs to be taught in the future.

The Learner Profile While a model of the inquiry process is essential to embracing the process, adopting a learner profile can be equally important. The International Baccalaureate Learner Profile is an example of a learner profile. Hill (2012) lists the attributes that compose the profile of a learner in the International Baccalaureate (IB) program as: –– Inquirers acquire skills to conduct inquiry and research and show independence in learning. They actively enjoy learning. –– Knowledgeable learners explore concepts, ideas and issues that have local and global significance; they acquire in-depth knowledge and develop understanding across a broad and balanced range of disciplines. –– Thinkers exercise initiative in applying critical and creative thinking to recognize and approach complex problems and make reasoned, ethical decisions. –– Communicators understand and express ideas and information confidently and creatively in more than one language and in a variety of modes of communication. They work effectively in collaboration with others. –– Principled learners act with integrity and honesty, with a strong sense of fairness, justice and respect for the dignity of the individual, groups and communities. They take responsibility for their own actions and the consequences that accompany them. –– Open-minded learners understand and appreciate their own cultures and personal histories and are open to the perspectives, values and traditions of others. –– Caring learners show empathy, compassion and respect towards the needs and feelings of others. –– Risk-takers approach unfamiliar situations and uncertainty with courage and forethought. They are brave and articulate in defending their beliefs. –– Balanced learners understand the importance of intellectual, physical and emotional balance, to achieve personal well-being for themselves and others. –– Reflective learners are able to assess and understand their strengths and limitations to support their learning and personal development.



3 The Importance of an Inquiry Model in Teaching and Learning 

 45

The IB learner profile accords well with an inquiry-based model for learning. For example, by sharing the Kuhlthau model of the affective domain, learners can come to appreciate that their feelings of uncertainty are normal, which can reduce the anxiety of taking a risk on a challenging question. Curiosity is key to the Wonder stage of the Stripling Inquiry Model. Open-mindedness supports the need to investigate in-depth a range of viewpoints and sources. Like teaching for inquiry, the elements of the IB learner profile aim to develop the dispositions or attitudes of lifelong learning. Jones (2015) describes asking students to use the learner profile to reflect on their development as learners. He asked the students at the end of a term to use a learner profile attribute as a lens for reflecting on how they had developed or how they could further develop. Like explicit instruction on inquiry process models, explicit consideration of a learner profile urges students to be aware of their own learning behaviors.

Conclusion The notion of intentionality is an important disposition or quality for teachers and learners to embrace. Adopting a model is a first step toward intentionally teaching students the inquiry process. A model provides a framework for designing curriculum and instruction. It affords teachers and librarians a common lexicon for discussing the inquiry process. It offers a guide for assessment of student learning. Most importantly, it shifts learners away from flawed mental models of inquiry as a process of collecting information from various sources and assembling it into a product to meet the requirements of an assignment. Instead, students learn the importance of drawing on background knowledge to generate authentic and complex questions; they gain insight into the recursive nature of inquiry; they recognize that inquiry often leads them to seek assistance from teachers, librarians, peers, or others; learners envision themselves as inquirers, thinkers and risk-takers; and perhaps most importantly, students have the opportunity to enjoy the rewards of discovery.

References Callison, Daniel. 2003. Key Words, Concepts and Methods for Information Age Instruction: A Guide for Teaching Information Inquiry. Baltimore, MD: LMS Associates. Dahlgren, Madeleine Abrandt, and Gunilla Öberg. 2001. “Questioning to Learn and Learning to Question: Structure and Function of Problem-based Learning Scenarios in Environmental

46 

 Jean Donham

Science Education.” Higher Education 41, no. 3: 263–282. Available at https://www. researchgate.net/publication/226320774_Questioning_to_learn_and_learning_ to_question_Structure_and_function_of_problem-based_learning_scenarios_in_ environmental_science_education/link/09e41507f17ffd1ba9000000/download. Dalli, Carmen. 1991. Scripts for Children’s Lives: What Do Parents and Early Childhood Teachers Contribute to Children’s Understanding of Events in Their Lives? Paper presented at 5th Early Childhood Convention 8–12 September, 1991, Dunedin, New Zealand. (ED 344664). Available at https://www.researchgate.net/ publication/265907681_Scripts_for_children’s_lives_What_do_parents_and_early_ childhood_teachers_contribute_to_children’s_understanding_of_events_in_their_lives/ link/5420b9830cf241a65a1e4618/download. Donham, Jean. 2001. “The Importance of a Model.” In. Inquiry-based Learning: Lessons from Library Power by Donham, Jean, Carol Collier Kuhlthau, Dianne Oberg, and Kay Bishop, 13–30. Worthington, OH: Linworth Publishing. Donham, Jean. 2016. “Mental Scripts for Nurturing Student Dispositions of Inquiry.” Teacher Librarian 43, no. 4: 24–27. Available at https://www.academia.edu/30542542/Mental_ Scripts_for_Nurturing_Dispositions_of_Inquiry. Donham, Jean, Jill A. Heinrich, and Kerry A. Bostwick. 2010. “Mental Models of Research: Generating Authentic Questions.” College Teaching 58, no. 1: 8–14. Available at https:// www.jstor.org/stable/25763407. Eisenberg, Michael B., and Joseph E. Berkowitz. 1992. “Information Problem-Solving: The Big Six Skills Approach” School Library Media Activities Monthly, 8, no. 5: 27–29,37. Available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234713449_Information_Problem-Solving_ The_Big_Six_Skills_Approach. Gordon, Carol. 1996. “Is Fish a Vegetable? A Qualitative Study of a Ninth Grade Research Project.” School Library Media Quarterly 25, no. 1: 27–33. Gordon, Carol. 1999. “Students as Authentic Researchers: A New Prescription for the High School Research Assignment.” School Library Media Research 2: 1–21. Available at https://www.ala.org/aasl/sites/ala.org.aasl/files/content/aaslpubsandjournals/slr/vol2/ SLMR_AuthenticResearchers_V2.pdf. Hill, Ian. 2012. “An International Model of World-Class Education: The International Baccalaureate.” Prospects 42, no. 3: 341–359. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11125-012-9243-9. Available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257641223_ An_international_model_of_world-class_education_The_International_Baccalaureate. Hinchliffe, Lisa Janicke, Allison Rand, and Jillian Collier. 2018. “Predictable Information Literacy Misconceptions of First-Year College Students.” Communications in Information Literacy 12, no. 1: 4–18. https://doi.org/10.15760/comminfolit.2018.12.1.2. Available at https:// pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1244&context=comminfolit. Jones, Gareth. 2015. “Making the IB Learner Profile Visible.” IS: International School 18, no. 1: 27–28. Available at https://www.researchgate.net/profile/ Victoria-Wasner/publication/282653225_International_School_Magazine/ links/5616159a08ae983c1b424c98/International-School-Magazine.pdf. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier. 2004. Seeking Meaning: A Practical Approach to Library and Information Services, 2nd ed. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited. Moon, Brian, Charles Johnston, and Skyler Moon. 2018. “A Case for the Superiority of Concept Mapping-Based Assessments for Assessing Mental Models.” In Concept Mapping: Renewing Learning and Thinking. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on



3 The Importance of an Inquiry Model in Teaching and Learning 

 47

Concept Mapping, Medellín, Colombia, 2018, 1–11. Medellin, Columbia Universidad EAFIT and IHMC. Available at http://cmc.ihmc.us/cmc2018Papers/cmc2018-p93.pdf. New York City. School Library System. 2014. Empire State Information Fluency Continuum Benchmark Skills for Grades K-12: Assessments/ Common Core Alignment: Developed by the New York City School Library System. New York: NYC Department of Education. https:// www.engageny.org/resource/empire-state-information-fluency-continuum/file/132186. Pitts, Judy M., Joy H. McGregor, and Barbara K. Stripling. 1995. “Mental Models of Information: The 1993–94 AASL/Highsmith Research Award Study.” School Library Media Quarterly 23: 177–184.Available at https://www.ala.org/aasl/sites/ala.org.aasl/files/content/ aaslpubsandjournals/slr/edchoice/SLMQ_MentalModelsofInformation_InfoPower.pdf. Rugg, Gordon. 2013. “Schema Theory, Scripts, and Mental Templates: An Introduction.” Hyde and Rugg: Neat Ideas from Unusual Places [blog]. August 13, 2013. https://hydeandrugg. wordpress.com/2013/08/30/schema-theory-scripts-and-mental-templates-anintroduction. Seraphin, Kanesa D., Joanna Philippoff, Lauren Kaupp, and Lisa M. Vallin. 2012. “Metacognition as Means to Increase the Effectiveness of Inquiry-Based Science Education.” Science Education International 23 no. 4: 366–82. Available at https://www.researchgate.net/ publication/282863514_Metacognition_As_Means_to_Increase_the_Effectiveness_of_ Inquiry-based_Science_Education/link/562031e808aed8dd19404657/download. Small, Ruth V., Marilyn P. Arnone, Barbara K. Stripling and Pam Berger. 2011. Teaching for Inquiry: Engaging the Learner Within. New York: Neal-Schuman. Stripling, Barbara K. 2003. “Inquiry-Based Learning.” In Curriculum Connections Through the Library, edited by Barbara K. Stripling and Sandra Hughes-Hassell, 3–39. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited. Wolf, Sara, Thomas Brush, and John Saye. 2003. “The Big Six Information Skills as a Metacognitive Scaffold: A Case Study.” School Library Research 6: 1–24. https://www. ala.org/aasl/sites/ala.org.aasl/files/content/aaslpubsandjournals/slr/vol6/SLMR_ BigSixInfoSkills_V6.pdf.

Barbara K. Stripling

4 The Stripling Model of Inquiry Abstract: The Stripling Model of Inquiry encourages students’ active participation in their own learning and encompasses a six-phase reflective and recursive inquiry process: connect, wonder, investigate, construct, express and reflect; together with a pre-kindergarten to grade 12 (PK-12) continuum of literacy, inquiry, technology, and personal growth skills. The Model leads to the development of an inquiry stance that prepares and motivates students to pursue lifelong learning. The Model is founded on educational theories of John Dewey, authentic learning and assessment, constructivism, digital inquiry, deep reading, and social-emotional growth. The Stripling Model of Inquiry places learners at the core of the library program and situates librarians as instructional leaders, collaborators, and teachers of essential skills in the school. This chapter tracks the author’s personal journey into the development of new ways of thinking about learning and tells the story of the development of the Model of Inquiry. Keywords: Inquiry-based learning; School libraries; Learning process; School librarians; Student-centered learning

Overview Inquiry is both a process and a stance of learning in which learners are empowered to pursue their sense of wonder and develop new understandings and even new questions about the way the world works. Ideally, learners start from an inquiry stance, a frame of mind characterized by curiosity, questioning, openness to new ideas, and a willingness to engage in seeking answers to their questions. When students develop an inquiry stance, they become motivated to take charge of their own learning, both within and outside of school. An inquiry stance is only one aspect of developing successful inquirers. Learners must translate their motivation to learn into actual learning through an inquiry process that guides them through the phases of questioning, thinking, and reflecting necessary for the construction of new understandings. The Stripling Model of Inquiry, first published in 2003, provides just such an inquiry-process frame (Stripling 2003). Through the six phases of the Stripling Model, learners are encouraged to participate actively in their own learning: Connect, Wonder, Investigate, Construct, Express and Reflect. Learners first connect to what they already know or feel about a topic of interest; then wonder and ask questions that they want to pursue; inveshttps://doi.org/10.1515/9783110772586-006



4 The Stripling Model of Inquiry 

 49

tigate to discover valid answers; draw evidence-based conclusions or opinions to construct new understandings; express and communicate insights to others; and reflect on their own learning process and product. This chapter tells the story of the development of the Stripling Model of Inquiry, traces its roots, and explores the continuing evolution of the model and its implementation in school libraries.

Setting the Scene: The Changing Context Inquiry-based teaching and learning in school libraries in the US has evolved over the last forty years.

1980s: Educational Reform and Shifts in School Libraries During the 1980s, major shifts were occurring in education and school libraries in the US. In 1983, a National Commission of Excellence in Education published A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform, calling for a major overhaul of the educational system (US National Commission 1983). At roughly the same time, the American Association of School Librarians (AASL), in collaboration with the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT), issued new national guidelines, Information Power: Guidelines for School Library Media Programs that focused on the school librarian’s three roles: information specialist, teacher, and instructional consultant (AASL and AECT 1988). The author of this chapter and fellow librarian, Judy M. Pitts, two young librarians at the Fayetteville Public Schools high school library, fully engaged in rethinking education and school libraries by developing a research process and emphasizing the teaching of thinking skills. They shared the new ideas with the field in Brainstorms and Blueprints: Teaching Library Research as a Thinking Process (Stripling and Pitts 1988). The book focused on the two essential elements of library research: brainstorms, conceptual, right-brain activities that encourage creative research, and blueprints, carefully delineated, left-brain processes that bring order to the new ideas.

1990s: School Library Reform and Focus on Student Learning By the 1990s, the school library profession in the United States was responding to the school reform movement with library reform initiatives. One such initiative,

50 

 Barbara K. Stripling

the National Library Power Program funded by DeWitt Wallace–Reader’s Digest Fund, was launched in 40 communities throughout the US to foster a national vision for school libraries and support the development of exemplary models (Zweizig et al. 1999). In 1998, new national school library guidelines, Information Power: Building Partnerships for Learning, were published in the US and, for the first time, included information literacy standards for student learning (AASL and AECT 1998). The new focus on student learning was reflected internationally in the publication of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA)/UNESCO School Library Manifesto 1999: The School Library in Teaching and Learning for All. As described in the Manifesto, the school library “equips students with lifelong learning skills and develops the imagination, enabling them to live as responsible citizens” (IFLA 1999).

2000s: School Reform, Impact on Libraries, and Focus on Inquiry In the 2000s, the passing of the No Child Left Behind legislation in the US led to school reform efforts that marginalized school libraries and increased accountability, site-based management, and an emphasis on national testing. To counter the testing frenzy and the decline in educational support for school libraries and authentic learning, the author turned to inquiry and developed and published the Stripling Model of Inquiry in 2003 (Stripling 2003), followed by the development of a kindergarten grade to 12 (K-12) Information Fluency Continuum (IFC) with a team of outstanding New York City (NYC) school librarians in 2005. The IFC was published in a giant print notebook and distributed to all NYC school librarians and made available on a flash drive. It included the standards, indicators, and skills for K-12 students that would enable them to pursue inquiry-based learning using the Stripling Model of Inquiry as a process frame. During the latter half of the 2000s, burgeoning support for an emphasis on learning and inquiry by the school library profession was seen in three AASL publications: new national standards for student learning, Standards for the 21st-Century Learner (2007) since updated as AASL Standards Framework for Learners; new national guidelines for library programs, Empowering Learners: Guidelines for School Library Media Programs (2009a); and a K-12 continuum of specific indicators and skills, Standards for the 21stCentury Learner in Action (2009b).



4 The Stripling Model of Inquiry 

 51

2010s: A New Focus on Thinking Skills and Inquiry In 2010 in the United States, the publication of the Common Core State Standards, including national standards in English Language Arts and Mathematics, as well as Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects, placed a new focus on development of critical thinking skills as an essential component of content learning (Common Core State Standards 2010, since updated). School librarians championed the new focus on skills because it aligned closely to the library profession’s commitment to teach process and thinking skills as a part of content-area learning. Several publications in the school library world during the 2010s fortified school library connections to the Common Core and strengthened inquiry-based instruction in libraries. The earlier version of the K-12 IFC in New York City was aligned with the Common Core, adopted by the New York State School Library System Association, renamed the Empire State Information Fluency Continuum (ESIFC), and shared online in 2012 as a statewide framework for the information and inquiry skills to be taught through the library (Stripling 2012). Since 2015, emphasis on inquiry-based learning and teaching in the school library can be seen both nationally and internationally. IFLA published the second edition of the School Library Guidelines which highlighted a learner focus and inquiry-based learning models (IFLA 2015). AASL published new national standards, National School Library Standards, with six foundations to guide learners, librarians, and libraries: Inquire, Include, Collaborate, Curate, Explore, and Engage (AASL 2018). An increasing diversity of students in the US, changes in the global information and technology environments, and new societal and cultural trends began to make their mark. Characteristics of the digital environment with huge growth in the use of social media and the ubiquity of mobile devices make the teaching of new digital literacy and inquiry skills imperative. New essential skills include: –– Sourcing involving evaluating the authority and credibility of sources –– Lateral reading and corroboration to ensure validation of information by comparing it to other sources –– Visual literacy to enable appropriate selection and interpretation of visual data while avoiding graphic seduction –– Media literacy for effective evaluation and interpretation of media messages based on their accuracy, purpose and bias, and –– Social media expertise to counter inherent challenges of virality, misinformation, cyberbullying, and intentional disinformation and take advantage of opportunities to produce and publish information and opinions for authentic audiences.

52 

 Barbara K. Stripling

At the same time, librarians increasingly began to recognize the library’s vital role in attending to the social, emotional, and cultural growth of their students, not just their cognitive growth. In response to the changing context, the ESIFC was reconceptualized in 2019. It incorporated additional skills and attitudes integrated into the inquiry experiences, leading to important outcomes of student agency and voice. The ESIFC was published online using LibGuides software with a Creative Commons license making it available for all (Stripling 2019).

In the Beginning: The Genesis of Inquiry The path to inquiry began with the realization that students needed to be taught how to learn and how to build their own knowledge, not just find information or parrot knowledge created by someone else. How do people learn?

Authentic Learning and Assessment The early thinking about learning was heavily influenced by A Guide to Authentic Instruction and Assessment: Vision, Standards and Scoring (Newmann, Secada, and Wehlage 1995) which proposed three standards for authentic academic achievement: construction of knowledge, disciplined inquiry, and value beyond school. These ideas were translated into actions a librarian could take: –– Construction of Knowledge: Collaborate with classroom teachers to design experiences that require students to use skills like evaluation, analysis, and synthesis to make sense of the information they encounter –– Disciplined Inquiry: Frame research assignments with a well-structured research process, and –– Value Beyond School: Envisage student assessment products that are authentic ways in which people communicate in the real world. The model of research as a thinking process developed in the early days at Fayetteville featured an approach to authentic learning in the library. The process was linear, replete with examples of library instruction in thinking skills, and focused on empowering students to do the thinking (Stripling and Pitts 1988). A taxonomy of reactions to research was developed: Recalling, Explaining, Analyzing, Challenging, Transforming, and Synthesizing (REACTS), along with authentic assessment products and subsequently included in the ESIFC to lift students’ learning from repetition of approved knowledge to formation of their own under-



4 The Stripling Model of Inquiry 

 53

standing and application of it in a new and creative way (Stripling and Pitts 2019, updated by Stripling from earlier work).

Moving from the Research Process to the Inquiry Model As the journey continued with further investigation into learning, authentic assessment, and information skills, came the dawning realization that a research-process model no longer matched the new approach to the philosophy of teaching and learning. A new model was needed to position students at the center of learning and empower them to determine for themselves the focus, path, and outcome of their investigations. That realization was the genesis for developing the Stripling Model of Inquiry with six recursive phases of thought and action already outlined: Connect, Wonder, Investigate, Construct, Express, and Reflect (Stripling 2003).

The Rising Action: Developing the Approach In taking the next steps in developing the Model, the work of John Dewey, deeper understandings of critical thinking, exploration of instructional design, and an investigation of constructivism became important.

Educational Philosophy: John Dewey The foundation of the approach to inquiry and learning can be traced to John Dewey and the educational philosophy presented in Experience & Education (Dewey 1938). Dewey focused on education as experience. Experiences must include both “acquisition of the organized bodies of information” and “prepared forms of skill which comprehend the material of instruction” (18). Dewey’s recognition of the need for both content and skills provided solid justification for the role of a school librarian as a teacher of sense-making skills that enable students to learn content. Dewey’s emphasis on the continuity of experience led to envisioning the model of inquiry as a recursive cycle that begins with connecting to prior knowledge and results in reflecting and asking further questions to propel the next inquiry.

54 

 Barbara K. Stripling

Critical Thinking From the foundation in Dewey, the next step in the development of the inquiry model was the investigation of critical thinking and the discovery of numerous authors and thinkers who offered rationales for teaching students to think and embedding a thinking curriculum into schools. A key influence was Arthur Costa’s compendium of short articles written by leading experts that defined the concepts of critical and creative thinking and offered guidance for teaching thinking effectively (Costa 1991). One of the more valuable aspects of Costa’s compendium was the mention of graphic organizers. Graphic organizers can be used to teach the underlying, stepby-step process required for mastering a new thinking skill. The development of graphic organizers continued over the years, culminating in over 200 created for the latest edition of the ESIFC (Stripling 2019 Section 6). Graphic organizers enable students to work through performance of a skill and to show their thinking processes explicitly. Both the student and the librarian can see what the student understands and is able to do.

Instructional Design Moving forward from some degree of confidence in the application of critical thinking skills and authentic learning and assessment involved a consideration of the larger concept of instructional design that prioritized the integration of critical thinking skills into the content goals of teachers. The backwards design process proposed in 1998 by Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe in Understanding by Design (1998, 2nd ed 2005) transformed collaborative planning with teachers to focus first on the desired outcomes and understandings and second to design the activities to get there. Focusing on the goal of understanding made it easier to choose authentic summative assessment products, integrate the teaching of critical information skills, and design instructional units that gave students time to think through new ideas. The concepts of backward design and teaching for understanding were important building blocks in the transition from a teacher-driven, linear research process to a student-driven, cyclical inquiry-process model.

Constructivism The next step in the development of the model was the investigation of constructivism as an educational philosophy. Constructivism defines learning as an active



4 The Stripling Model of Inquiry 

 55

process in which learners build knowledge from experiences. Social constructivism expands the individualistic aspects of constructivist learning to recognize the collaborative and social dimensions of learning with and from others. The most influential book personally on constructivism was The Case for Constructivist Classrooms by Jacqueline G. Brooks and Martin G. Brooks (1993) which offered guiding principles of constructivist teaching. The principles, all of which made intellectual sense, included: posing problems that are relevant to students; focusing on essential concepts; and valuing students’ points of view. The Construct phase of the inquiry model was later developed as a direct result of recognizing the importance of students’ constructing their own understandings.

The Climax: The Model of Inquiry The six-phase Model of Inquiry (Figure 4.1) was first published in 2003, in Curriculum Connections Through the Library, a volume co-edited with Sandra Hughes-Hassell. In the first chapter, inquiry-based learning was framed as both a recursive and reflective process and identified skills and strategies most appropriate for each phase (Stripling 2003).

Figure 4.1: The Model of Inquiry (Stripling and Hughes-Hassell 2003, 7, updated in later documents)

56 

 Barbara K. Stripling

The six-phase process of the Stripling Model of Inquiry is a natural process of learning that is propelled by the learner, rather than an artificial frame imposed by a teacher or librarian, with steps that are rigidly defined and linear. Several aspects of the process are important to highlight to get a full picture: –– The process is cyclical and recursive, and the learner is in charge of deciding when to move to the next phase or when to backtrack and ask new questions or identify new resources. Reflection is embedded in every phase. –– The Connect Phase transforms the experience to a personalized quest rather than an academic exercise by focusing on both personal connections of what learners already know, feel, or assume and prior knowledge connections. –– The Construct Phase empowers students to take charge of their own learning by enabling them to follow a thoughtful, sense-making pattern of investigation leading to development of evidence-based conclusions and a final product.

Inquiry Stance The ultimate goal of the Stripling Model of Inquiry is to empower students to develop an inquiry stance and the motivation to satisfy curiosity, ask questions, and seek answers about both academic and personal ideas. Several key features of the model foster the development of an inquiry stance. The model is based on a personal approach to learning and inquiry. As students develop the skills and attitudes of inquiry, they gain confidence in their ability to form their own opinions and conclusions and begin to recognize that they can have an impact on the world. The whole-child approach nourishes growth in cognitive, emotional, social, and cultural competencies. Developing empathy for others, for example, becomes a natural part of inquiry experiences in the library, not a disconnected cultural skill referred to occasionally, but never taught.

The Falling Action: Implementation Articulated Continuum of Inquiry Skills The Stripling Model of Inquiry includes not only a six-phase process, but also a clear articulation of the inquiry, literacy, critical thinking, technology, and personal skills that underlie the process and must be developed over time. The



4 The Stripling Model of Inquiry 

 57

ESIFC, with its continuum of skills and graphic organizers, is an essential application of the Stripling model and key to its implementation in PK-12 (Stripling 2019). The skills and attitudes identified are essential for independent inquiry (Stripling 2019, Sections 1, 2 and 3). Middle school students, for example, will learn to recognize and resist the persuasive techniques used in television ads designed to influence them to buy a trending product. The framework for learning is comprehensive and engages the whole child including cognitive, social, emotional, and cultural aspects in pursuing authentic answers to real questions. The ESIFC provides a means for implementing the model. The four anchor standards of the ESIFC encompass a broad and comprehensive approach to preK-12 learning that is framed by an inquiry stance and student empowerment (Stripling 2019, Section 1): –– Standard 1: Inquiry and design thinking: use inquiry and design thinking to build understanding and create new knowledge –– Standard 2: Multiple literacies: use multiple literacies to explore, learn, and express ideas –– Standard 3: Social and civic responsibility: demonstrate civic responsibility, respect for diverse perspectives, collaboration, and digital citizenship, and –– Standard 4: Personal growth and agency: engage in personal exploration, social and emotional growth, independent reading and learning, and personal agency. The whole-child perspective of the Stripling inquiry model opens opportunities for the implementation beyond co-planned and co-taught inquiry-based units. The librarian can develop the entire instructional program with an inquiry stance in mind and can, for example, ask second graders to predict what will happen in a book based on an analysis of the cover; create a library Wonder Wall for middle schoolers to post questions and answers; or foster student conversations about teen issues through young adult literature book clubs.

The REACTS Taxonomy The REACTS taxonomy already mentioned, Recalling, Explaining, Analyzing, Challenging, Transforming, and Synthesizing, and example products were built into the ESIFC to add authenticity and creativity to students’ inquiry experiences. When students can see a connection to the real world in the way they share their new understandings with others, they recognize the authentic value of inquiry and its usefulness in navigating and thriving in the world beyond school. They start to develop an inquiry stance (Stripling and Pitts 2019).

58 

 Barbara K. Stripling

Deep Reading Full implementation of the Stripling inquiry model includes teaching students to read deeply, to move beyond comprehension of what someone else has said to make their own interpretations and form evidence-based ideas and opinions. Deep reading skills that could be taught during each phase of inquiry include: –– Connect. Identify feelings, assumptions, and personal biases –– Wonder. Extend the ideas in text by asking questions like: What else is important? What has been left out? What is the deeper meaning? –– Investigate. Read interactively –– Construct. Extend understanding by taking multiple perspectives to interpret information –– Express. Employ creative thinking to envision original ways to present ideas and conclusions, and –– Reflect. Reflect on the process and product at the end of an inquiry experience.

Closure A career-long quest to achieve the vision of empowering young people to become independent, lifelong learners has resulted in many lessons learned in relation to the inquiry process itself and the role of the librarian.

The Inquiry Process The Construct phase of inquiry is the most difficult to teach and the most often omitted by librarians, teachers, and students. The construction of understanding is, however, the great differentiator between traditional research and the inquiry process. It is important to be explicit about the phases of the inquiry process, so that students recognize the flow of learning and personal responsibility for determining when they are ready to move forward or need to move backward to fill in gaps or redirect inquiry. Transparency about the process is essential and enables students to regulate their own learning progress. Inquiry is learner-centered, not teacher-centered or knowledge-centered. If an inquiry-based approach is to be implemented successfully, librarians must have a clear and shared portrait of the learner: independent, thoughtful, self-con-



4 The Stripling Model of Inquiry 

 59

fident, and motivated to continue learning beyond school; and able to act with agency and voice.

The Role of the Librarian Implementing a comprehensive model of inquiry calls for librarians to function as learners, teachers, and leaders. First, librarians must engage in continuous learning to adapt to changes in the environment and the student population and take action to implement appropriate responses. Second, the teaching role of librarians has been dramatically enhanced under inquiry. Librarians must develop a curriculum of inquiry skills specifically tailored to the needs and goals of the educators and students in the school, teach the skills of inquiry in a planned and strategic manner, collaborate with classroom teachers to design and co-teach inquiry assignments, and gather evidence of students’ performance of inquiry skills through formative assessment. The librarian’s role as leader has shifted substantially with the implementation of inquiry across the school. Librarians must ensure that the vision of a student empowered by inquiry is shared by the entire school community. Librarians must establish themselves as instructional leaders within the school by aligning library priorities with those of the teachers and administrators and advocating effectively with the whole school community for inquiry-based teaching and learning. Through professional development and modeling, librarians must enable classroom teachers to share the responsibility for inquiry and integrate the teaching of inquiry skills and inquiry-based experiences into classroom instruction. Above all, librarians must be flexible and responsive to the culture and environment of the school without losing the vision of schoolwide inquiry.

Final Words There is closure to the initial journey of inquiry and the telling of its story, but the journey continues, and the domain of inquiry will continue to grow and expand as the environment and students change. Sustainability issues, digital developments with huge growth in the use of social media, artificial intelligence, user-generated content, gaming, platform development, cybersecurity concerns and enhanced speed of communication, along with a new fabric of life unfolding around the pandemic with people of all ages working and learning from home all present new challenges. New concepts must be identified and explored. How

60 

 Barbara K. Stripling

can understanding and implementation of inquiry be extended to equip students now and in the future? The Stripling Model of Inquiry encompasses more than an inquiry process and even more than a continuum of skills necessary to engage in inquiry. Implementing the Stripling model means cultivating an inquiry stance in every student and educator by fostering a schoolwide mindset that values curiosity, questioning, and the pursuit of new learning, both within and outside of the school environment. When librarians design their library programs around an inquiry stance, they can successfully integrate inquiry into the full library program including the space, collection, instruction, collaboration, reading experiences, makerspaces, special activities, and climate. More importantly, librarians can prepare their learners for life.

References American Association of School Librarians (AASL) and Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT). 1988. Information Power: Guidelines for School Library Media Programs. Chicago: American Library Association. https://files.eric.ed.gov/ fulltext/ED315028.pdf. American Association of School Librarians (AASL) and Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT). 1998. Information Power: Building Partnerships for Learning. Chicago: American Library Association. American Association of School Librarians (AASL). 2007. Standards for the 21st-Century Learner. Chicago: AASL. American Association of School Librarians (AASL). 2009a. Empowering Learners: Guidelines for School Library Media Programs. Chicago: AASL. American Association of School Librarians (AASL). 2009b. Standards for the 21st-Century Learner in Action. Chicago: AASL. Available at https://www.epsnj.org/site/handlers/ filedownload.ashx?moduleinstanceid=7770&dataid=32216&FileName=AASL%20 21ST%20C%20learner.pdf. American Association of School Librarians (AASL). 2018. National School Library Standards. Chicago: AASL. https://standards.aasl.org/. Brooks, Jacqueline G., and Martin G. Brooks. 1993. The Case for Constructivist Classrooms. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Costa, Arthur L., ed. 1991. Developing Minds: A Resource Book for Teaching Thinking, Revised Edition, Vol. 1. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Available at https://archive.org/stream/ ERIC_ED332166/ERIC_ED332166_djvu.txt; https://openlibrary.org/books/OL24939379M/ Developing_minds. Dewey, John. 1938. Experience and Education. NY: Simon & Schuster. Available at https:// openlibrary.org/works/OL111355W/Experience_and_education. International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA). 2015. IFLA School Library Guidelines, 2nd ed., Written by the IFLA School Libraries Section Standing



4 The Stripling Model of Inquiry 

 61

Committee. Edited by Barbara. A. Schultz-Jones, and Dianne Oberg, with contributions from the International Association of School Librarianship Executive Board. https:// repository.ifla.org/bitstream/123456789/58/1/ifla-school-library-guidelines.pdf https:// www.ifla.org/files/assets/school-libraries-resource-centers/publications/ifla-schoollibrary-guidelines.pdf. International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA). School Libraries and Resource Centers Section. 1999. “The School Library in Learning and Teaching for All: IFLA/ UNESCO School Library Manifesto.” Available at https://archive.ifla.org/VII/s11/pubs/ schoolmanif.htm. Newmann, Fred M., Walter G. Secada, and Gary G. Wehlage. 1995. A Guide to Authentic Instruction and Assessment: Vision, Standards and Scoring. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Center for Education Research. Stripling, Barbara K. 2003. “Inquiry-Based Learning.” In Curriculum Connections Through the Library, edited by Barbara K. Stripling and Sandra Hughes-Hassell, 3–39. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited. Stripling, Barbara K. 2012. Empire State Information Fluency Continuum. n.d. https://www. engageny.org/resource/empire-state-information-fluency-continuum; https://www. engageny.org/file/132186/download/empire-state-ifc.pdf?token=E2nLLOW7. Stripling, Barbara K. 2019 Empire State Information Fluency Continuum. School Library Systems Association. LibGuide. https://slsa-nys.libguides.com/ifc. Stripling, Barbara K., and Sandra Hughes-Hassell, eds. 2003. Curriculum Connections Through the Library. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited. Stripling, Barbara K., and Judy M. Pitts. 1988. Brainstorms and Blueprints: Teaching Library Research as a Thinking Process. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited. Stripling, Barbara K., and Judy M. Pitts. 2019. “REACTS: A Taxonomy of Reactions to Research.” In Empire State Information Fluency Continuum, by Barbara K. Stripling. Section 7. https:// slsa-nys.libguides.com/ifc/reacts. Reproduced from Barbara K. Stripling and Judy M. Pitts. Brainstorms and Blueprints: Teaching Library Research as a Thinking Process . Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited, 1988. US National Commission on Excellence in Education. 1983. A Nation at Risk. Available at https://edreform.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/A_Nation_At_Risk_1983.pdf. Wiggins, Grant, and Jay McTighe. 1998. Understanding by Design. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Available at https://archive.org/details/understandingbyd00wigg. Expanded 2nd ed. 2005. The Understanding By Design Framework by Jay McTighe, and Grant Wiggins is available at https://files.ascd.org/staticfiles/ascd/pdf/siteASCD/publications/UbD_ WhitePaper0312.pdf. Zweizig, Douglas, Dianne McAfee Hopkins with Norman Webb and Gary Wehlage. Summary Prepared by Anne Wheelock. 1999. Executive Summary: Findings from the Evaluation of the National Library Power Program: An Initiative of the DeWitt Wallace Reader’s Digest Fund. Conducted by the University of Wisconsin at Madison School of Library and Information Studies and School of Education. New York: DeWitt Wallace-Reader’s Digest Fund. https:// www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/Documents/Findings-From-the-NationalLibrary-Power-Program.pdf.

Darryl Toerien

5 F OSIL: Developing and Extending the Stripling Model of Inquiry Abstract: FOSIL (Framework Of Skills for Inquiry Learning) is a model of the inquiry learning process developed in the UK that is based on the work of Barbara Stripling as reflected in the Empire State Information Fluency Continuum (ESIFC). Because the ESIFC emerged from a stance and is underpinned by skills, FOSIL is likewise a mind set, a skill set and a tool set for use with a framework and a model. FOSIL is also a pre-kindergarten through year 12 (PK-12) programme for students 4–18 years-old, and it comprises skills that need to be developed systematically and progressively. FOSIL is a collaborative endeavour into the nature and practice of inquiry learning, and it has a growing international community of users. Keywords: Constructivism (Education); Education – Philosophy; Inquiry-based learning; School libraries; Learning process; School librarians; Student-centred learning

Introduction The writing of this chapter is made easier by the inclusion of the previous chapter on the Stripling Model of Inquiry. It is the foundation on which FOSIL (Framework Of Skills for Inquiry Learning) is built and provides a detailed background to this chapter. Changing the starting point of this chapter fortuitously changes its focus. The origin of the story of FOSIL is a cautionary tale. While there is a discussion of FOSIL as an adaption of the Stripling Model, which is used under a Creative Commons licence, for the cautionary part of this tale to be instructive, it is necessary to discuss the circumstances that led to adaption, rather than adoption, of the Stripling Model.

A Tale of Two Paradigms Harold Howe II, a US Commissioner of Education during the Johnson administration and Senior Lecturer Emeritus at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, incisively observed that “what a school thinks of its library is a measure of how it feels about education” (Howe 1967, 28). The perception of the library varies according to the school’s driving educational paradigm: from an educahttps://doi.org/10.1515/9783110772586-007



5 FOSIL: Developing and Extending the Stripling Model of Inquiry 

 63

tional process that is instruction-based and teacher- and teaching-centred, to an educational process that is inquiry-based and learner- and learning-centred. School librarians in the UK are unlikely to have been teachers before becoming school librarians, and librarians who are professionally qualified will not have specialisations in school librarianship. As a result, school librarians in the UK are largely ill-equipped to change, where necessary, how they and their colleagues think and feel about education and about the library. The consequences of the lack of specialised qualifications in school librarianship are likely to be dire, for as Kachel and Lance postulate in an interview with Pun, “the losses of school librarians are not solely based on school finances – common reason for eliminating librarians ... [and] we believe a major contributor to those losses has been a ‘disconnect’ between school librarianship and the larger education community” (Pun 2021; Kachel and Lance 2021). The disconnect noted in the US is greater still in the UK.

The Impact of School Library Guidelines For school librarians, therefore, the second edition of the IFLA School Library Guidelines (2015) [hereinafter the 2015 Guidelines] offers a vital frame of reference, reflecting an evolutionary trajectory over the last 60 years towards a school library that is integral to the educational process. Except when it is not. This aphorism brings to mind the Yogi Berra saying “In theory there is no difference between theory and practice, while in practice there is”. To reconcile the theory and practice of school librarianship, or at least to position school librarians so that they may begin to do so, two things are necessary. Firstly, the library needs to be the type of library that is, in practice, integral to the educational process. School library practice must match the theory clearly outlined in the 2015 Guidelines. Drawing on more than 50 years of international research, the 2015 Guidelines identify the distinguishing features of a vital school library as: –– Having “a qualified school librarian with formal education in school librarianship and classroom teaching that enables the professional expertise required for the complex roles of instruction, reading and literacy development, school library management, collaboration with teaching staff, and engagement with the educational community” (13) –– More broadly, “in order to meet the teaching and learning needs of a school community, it is essential to have a well-trained and highly motivated staff, in sufficient numbers according to the size of the school and its unique needs [with] the operational aspects of a school library best handled by trained clerical and technical support staff in order to ensure

64 

 Darryl Toerien

that a school librarian has the time needed for the professional roles of instruction, management, collaboration, and leadership” (25) –– Providing “targeted high-quality diverse collections (print, multimedia, digital) that support the school’s formal and informal curriculum, including individual projects and personal development” (17), and –– Having “an explicit policy and plan for ongoing growth and development” (17) The 2015 Guidelines elaborate on the details of programmes and activities to be provided by the school library at some length, identifying the core instructional activities that constitute the school library’s pedagogical programme as: –– literacy and reading promotion (39–40) –– media and information literacy instruction (40–41) –– inquiry-based learning models (41–44) –– technology integration (44), and –– professional development for teachers (44). While it would be helpful to gain knowledge and skills specifically about school libraries as part of a specialised professional qualification, the 2015 Guidelines provide for librarians with an inclination towards school libraries an idea of the direction to take and the ground that will need to be covered. The situation is not ideal, but as Shera pointed out in his monumental Foundations of Education for Librarianship (1972): even the most nearly ideal curriculum can be only the beginning of the educational process, and the student’s years of formal education can accomplish little more than create an awareness of the knowledge they must master and the ways in which such mastery may be achieved over their entire professional life (223).

This message, which is borne of deep insight into the true nature of education, would prove to be formative and immeasurably valuable in the development of the FOSIL model of inquiry. It led to FOSIL’s tagline: “Learning by finding out for yourself”. The phrase included is not “by yourself”, which suggests minimal or no guidance and/or interventions, but “for yourself”, which expresses an inquiry stance that gives rise to the inquiry process. Secondly, the school library is integral to an educational process, namely an inquiry-based and learner- and learning-centred educational process, which is not the prevailing educational process, at least in the UK, which tends to be instruction-based and teacher- and teaching-centred. To make sense of fitting in with the educational process, the preparation of the FOSIL model looked back to



5 FOSIL: Developing and Extending the Stripling Model of Inquiry 

 65

the first edition of the IFLA/UNESCO School Library Guidelines (IFLA 2002) [hereinafter 2002 Guidelines]. In discussing the library’s pedagogical programme and the instructional activities of the professional librarian, the 2002 Guidelines make the point that “teachers’ educational philosophy constitutes the ideological basis for their choice of teaching methods” (16). The 2002 Guidelines do not elaborate, but contrast teachers whose pedagogical approach is based on a traditional view of the centrality of the role of the teacher, the textbook and the classroom in the educational process with those whose pedagogical approach is based on a more progressive view of the educational process (16). Unsurprisingly, the latter are more likely to be open to collaboration with the school librarian and to view the school library as defined in the 2015 Guidelines as a “school’s physical and digital learning space where reading, inquiry, research, thinking, imagination, and creativity are central to students’ information-to-knowledge journey and to their personal, social, and cultural growth” (IFLA 2015, 16). And while it is tempting and understandable for librarians to seek to collaborate only with teachers with progressive views, the 2015 Guidelines, as already noted, emphasise communication, collaboration and engagement with all. While Howe’s observation about the perception of the library’s role holds, with progressive teachers likely to be easily persuaded to think differently about the library because of how they already feel about education, teachers with traditional views will likely need greater persuasion to feel differently about education, which will predispose them to think differently about the library. Focusing on the role and responsibilities of the school librarian in dealing with teachers with two different views of education, traditional and progressive, moves a step closer to FOSIL, and also forms the backdrop for its development.

Information Literacy to Information Inquiry The shift in pedagogical emphasis from information literacy in the 2002 Guidelines to inquiry in the 2015 Guidelines has changed the paradigm and is vitally important, because it not only reflects a broader evolution towards inquiry that had been underway in school libraries since the 1960s (Callison 2015, vii), but recognizes that the school library exists as a learning centre because of inquiry (Callison and Preddy 2006, 601). Inquiry was the missing piece of the puzzle that had been there all along. The school library is integral to an inquiry-based educational process which is learner- and learning-centred, but is peripheral, at best, to an instruction-based educational process which is teacher- and teaching-centred. What complicates matters is that the two paradigms and educational processes

66 

 Darryl Toerien

inevitably co-exist, although the political and structural educational systems in which they co-exist tend to be arranged to support an instruction-based educational process. The reasons for this are beyond the scope of this chapter, but understanding the background helps with finding the solution.

FOSIL: Framework of Skills on Inquiry Learning The Philosophical Basis The educational philosophy most closely aligned with the development of FOSIL (FOSIL; Hutchinson 2020) is constructionism (Harel and Papert 1991). Constructivist educational philosophies deny the obvious truth that the way to improve learning is through improving instruction, or instructionism. “Learning is always a reconstruction, not a transmission of knowledge” (Psenka et al. 2017, 9), and it is fundamentally an epistemological concern. Constructionism does not call into question the value of instruction as such, nor is it dismissive of teaching because it is minimalist; rather the goal is to teach in such a way as to produce the most learning for the least teaching (Papert 1993, 139). However, the outcome cannot be achieved by simply reducing the quantity of teaching and leaving everything else unchanged. A paradigm shift in the full sense of Thomas Kuhn’s use of the term is required (1996, 75). The FOSIL belief is that the constructivist educational philosophy is best served by an inquiry-based pedagogical approach, which is at odds with the transmission-based pedagogical approach that persists in most schools in the UK. There is a twofold problem. Firstly, on a theoretical level, inquiry is grossly misunderstood, a situation aggravated by opposition to inquiry that is often ideological. Secondly, on a practical level, creating and sustaining the conditions for effective inquiry requires, amongst other things, effective collaboration between professionals in an environment that is often hostile to collaboration, especially between teachers and librarians.

The Response The twofold problem requires a complex response, at the heart of which lies a reimagined model of professional collaboration that is authentically child-centred in focus and empowering in intent. The response is urgently needed if children are to be equipped effectively for their future, a future that society has made more challenging and less certain. FOSIL (Figure 5.1) constitutes such an evolving response.



5 FOSIL: Developing and Extending the Stripling Model of Inquiry 

Figure 5.1: FOSIL Inquiry Cycle

 67

68 

 Darryl Toerien

FOSIL emerged in 2011 as the result of trying to solve two specific problems at Oakham School, a co-educational school for 10–18 year-olds in the heart of rural England. The problems related to the International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme and in particular to the Extended Essay (EE), which is a mandatory independent, self-directed piece of research, finishing with a 4,000-word paper. Firstly, how can students be effectively prepared for the demands of the EE? Specifically how can students learn to accurately cite and reference according to a standard style, when, for the majority of them, their education at school up to that point would not have required work of this nature. The initial expectation for the solution was a framework of information literacy skills, but, serendipitously, it turned out to be a PK-12 framework of inquiry learning skills with an accompanying model of the inquiry learning process, the Empire State Information Fluency Continuum (ESIFC). The ESIFC was developed by the School Library Systems Association of New York State under the leadership of Barbara Stripling (2019), which led directly to FOSIL, and is the basis of FOSIL (Toerien, n.d.). According to the ESIFC, which was then in use in schools throughout New York City, citing and referencing was a priority skill in Grade 5: “Cites all sources used according to model provided by teacher”; Grade 7: “Cites all sources used according to local style formats”, which was understood to mean a house style; and Grade 10: “Cites all sources used according to standard style formats”. The immediate consequence of accepting the ESIFC approach was deciding on APA (American Psychological Association) style as the standard style format as well as house style, which was taught from Grade 5 through to Grade 12. Secondly, how can students be more effectively supported from a deeper understanding of the inquiry process throughout the EE? The focus on this question was motivated by a sense that the EE timetable, which in many respects was exemplary, worked against the inquiry process at certain key points because it was driven primarily by administrative concerns. The clearest example was the requirement for the process to begin with a research question rather than allowing the research question to emerge from the process at an appropriate point. Considering the stages in the process led to Carol Kuhlthau’s Information Search Process (ISP) (Kuhlthau, n.d.), which, in adding a more explicit affective, cognitive and physical dimension to the emerging understanding of the inquiry process, not only allowed a realignment of the EE timetable to reinforce the inquiry process, but also helped identify points of optimal intervention to support the EE process (Figure 5.2). The diagram reflects alignment of the EE timetable with a growing understanding of Kuhlthau’s ISP and the ESIFC for use in FOSIL.



5 FOSIL: Developing and Extending the Stripling Model of Inquiry 

Figure 5.2: Combining Insights from the ISP with FOSIL

 69

70 

 Darryl Toerien

Integrating the Elements into FOSIL It must be noted that the elements of ESIFC and FOSIL are not being combined with Kuhlthau’s ISP. FOSIL is seeking to gratefully and respectfully combine insights gained into the inquiry process from two highly regarded bodies of work. Having set out to find a framework of information literacy skills, and having serendipitously stumbled into a model of the inquiry process along with a PK-12 framework of inquiry skills, the author found himself increasingly turning attention to the inquiry process as an approach to learning and to teaching for learning. Barbara Stripling (2017) accurately describes the challenges. Providing a framework of the inquiry process is only the first step in empowering students to pursue inquiry on their own. The next step is to structure teaching around a framework of the literacy, inquiry, critical thinking, and technology skills that students must develop at each phase of inquiry over their years of school and in the context of content area learning (52).

A distinguishing feature of the ESIFC, and by extension FOSIL, is the combination of a sound instructional model of the inquiry process and a highly detailed PK-12 framework of literacy, inquiry, critical thinking, and technology skills, initially developed in 2009 and re-imagined in 2019, “to adapt to the changing information, education, and technology environments, as well as the increasing diversity in our student populations” (Stripling 2019). The ESIFC encompasses more than the inquiry process: Inquiry and Design Thinking, Multiple Literacies, Social and Civic Responsibility, Personal Growth and Agency. Included here are only the skill sets that enable the inquiry process (Figure 5.3). Because the skills comprising the skill sets need to be developed systematically and progressively, priority skills in the ESIFC are accompanied by graphic organisers, which serve both instructional and formative assessment purposes, and which are a further distinguishing feature of the ESIFC, and by extension FOSIL. Graphic organisers for priority skills are available from the ESIFC LibGuide by Grade or by Standard, and were the starting point for FOSIL-based graphic organisers, which employ colour for instructional purposes, and is a distinguishing feature of FOSIL (for examples, see the chapter in part 2 of this book, titled “Deep Collaboration by Teacher and Librarian to Develop an Inquiry Mindset”). While serendipity may have had a hand in leading FOSIL to the ESIFC, adopting and adapting it was a deeply considered choice. The three main reasons for choosing the Stripling Model and ESIFC were:



5 FOSIL: Developing and Extending the Stripling Model of Inquiry 

Figure 5.3: FOSIL Inquiry Cycle Skill Sets

 71

72 

 Darryl Toerien

–– The stages of Stripling Model: Connect, Wonder, Investigate, Construct, Express, and Reflect, are thoughtfully named, make obvious logical sense, and are easy to remember, even for young children –– The highly detailed and clearly thought out framework of the “literacy, inquiry, critical thinking, and technology skills that students must develop at each phase of inquiry over their years of school and in the context of content area learning” (Stripling 2017, 52) that enables the inquiry process, which is available from the FOSIL Group website, and –– Both the Stripling Model and the underlying framework of skills as expressed in the ESIFC are available under a Creative Commons licence, without which it would not have been possible to develop and share FOSIL. There is a remarkably pleasing ongoing effort to respectfully transplant the ESIFC in foreign, and increasingly international, soil. FOSIL has been reciprocally endorsed by the School Library Systems Association of New York State and Barbara Stripling has commended the FOSIL Group website, established in April 2019 to support ongoing development and increasingly widespread use of FOSIL, and noted its “clear and elegant presentation of inquiry” (email correspondence with the author). Barbara Stripling has since joined the FOSIL Group, and there is close collaboration on its ongoing development. Having found in Kuhlthau’s ISP a powerful tool for solving a different set of problems, it would have made no sense to completely abandon the ISP, which is where work on combining the insights of the ISP with FOSIL began. However, growing understanding of the Stripling Model in relation to the full ESIFC, combined with close collaboration with Barbara Stripling, is revealing the extent to which aspects of the inquiry learning process that are more explicit in the ISP are present in the ESIFC and deepending the understanding of potential applications in FOSIL No model of a complex and dynamic process is perfect in its explanatory power. All models have relative strengths and weaknesses, which is why the 2015 Guidelines, which frame learning through inquiry, contain a cautionary note Creating models for inquiry-based learning involves years of research, development, and practical experimentation. Schools without a model recommended by their education authority should select a model that aligns most closely with the goals and learning outcomes of their curricula, rather than attempting to develop their own models. … Where there is no locally or nationally developed model for inquiry-based teaching and learning, a school librarian should work with the classroom teachers and school leaders to select a model. As the teachers and students apply the model they may wish to adapt the model to serve school goals and local needs. However, caution should be exercised in adapting any



5 FOSIL: Developing and Extending the Stripling Model of Inquiry 

 73

model. Without a deep understanding of the theoretical foundations of the model, adaptations may eliminate the power of the model (2015, 41–43).

FOSIL is a case in point, now 11 years in the making.

Final Touches to FOSIL As highlighted previously, school librarians in the UK are unlikely to have been teachers before becoming school librarians, and professionally qualified school librarians undertaking training in the UK will not have a specialisation in school librarianship. Against this backdrop, FOSIL began as a relatively modest undertaking for one school, Oakham, and was named FOSIL, the Framework for Oakham School Information Literacy. It soon became clear that a growing number of colleagues at other schools including librarians, teachers, and administrators were on a similar journey. Interest in FOSIL was far more widespread than Oakhaml, and even than the UK. The wide interest, combined with the fact that the framework being developed involved both the inquiry process and associated skills rather than merely a framework of information literacy skills, afforded the opportunity for FOSIL to become the Framework Of Skills for Inquiry Learning. Use of the ESIFC and and development of FOSIL under Creative Commons licences facilitated sharing of content. The adoption of an inquiry stance supported by the appropriate means to achieve this end along with a resolute committment to making sense of where the inquiry process would lead guaranteed success. Without such an approach, the way between a framework of information literacy skills and a sound instructional model of the inquiry process undergirded by a highly detailed framework of inquiry learning skills might not have been found. The power of the Stripling Model and the ESIFC might have been lost. An added benefit is that colleagues elsewhere can adopt or adapt FOSIL without needing to rename it. The history of FOSIL in Guernsey is a case in point. It was successfully transplanted in 2013 as CWICER: Connect, Wonder, Investigate, Construct, Express, and Reflect. The revised approach speedily clarified the need for the construction of a shared vocabulary around inquiry, because, as Levitov (2016) warns, standardisation of inquiry language is an important step if all educators are to share a common understanding, and without which effective collaboration between librarians and teachers is simply not possible (30). The far-sighted decision to rename FOSIL, which saw CWICER revert to FOSIL, as well as the subsequent and inevitable formation of the FOSIL Group: Advancing

74 

 Darryl Toerien

Inquiry Learning, led to the rapid expansion of FOSIL beyond Oakham School, as reflected in the growing membership of the FOSIL Group.

Final Words It has been said, possibly by Leonard Sweet, that a community is the stories that it tells and the songs that it sings. In concluding a tale of two paradigms, a final distinguishing feature of FOSIL is the community of educators who, in the Forums of the FOSIL Group, are humbly telling stories and singing songs that counter Ivan Illich’s charge that the principal lesson that school teaches is the need to be taught (1971). In doing so, all involved add stories and songs to the broader community of educators labouring toward an educational reality in which “it is not the library that ‘supports’ the classroom” but rather in which “the classroom leads … inevitably and essentially to the library” (Beswick 1967, 201). This educational reality does not value the library over the classroom but acknowledges that students cannot be taught everything they need to know, and so the best that can be done is to position them where they can find what they need to know, when they need to know it (widely attributed to Seymour Papert). And achieving this outcome requires reimagined professional collaboration between classroom and library that is truly empowering for students, librarians and teachers. And it would be a far, far better thing than we have ever done.

Acknowledgements I am grateful to Lee FitzGerald, Editor of Access, the professional journal of the Australian School Library Association, and my co-author Elizabeth Hutchinson, for permission to base the second part of this chapter on: Hutchinson, Elizabeth, and Darryl Toerien. 2021. “FOSIL: Inquiry as Mind Set, Skill Set, Tool Set and Community. Access 35, no. 2: 31–38. https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.837868836728270.

References Beswick, Norman W. 1967. “The Library College – the True University.” The Library Association Record 69, no. 6: 198–202.



5 FOSIL: Developing and Extending the Stripling Model of Inquiry 

 75

Callison, Daniel. 2015. The Evolution of Inquiry: Controlled, Guided, Modeled, and Free. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited. Callison, Daniel, and Leslie Preddy. 2006. The Blue Book on Information Age Inquiry, Instruction and Literacy. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited. Harel, Idit and Seymour Papert. 1991. Constructionism: Research Reports and Essays. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Howe, Harold. 1967. “On Libraries and Learning.” School Library Journal 13 (February), 28. Hutchinson, Elizabeth. 2020. “An Extraordinary Journey: FOSIL (Framework of Skills for Inquiry Learning).”[ElizabethHutchinson blog]. August 11, 2020. https://www. elizabethahutchinson.com/post/fosil-framework-of-skills-for-inquiry-learning-anextraordinary-journey. Hutchinson, Elizabeth, and Darryl Toerien. 2021. “FOSIL: Inquiry as Mind Set, Skill Set, Tool Set and Community.” Access 35, no. 2: 31–38. https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/ informit.837868836728270. Illich, Ivan. 1971. Deschooling Society. New York, NY: Harper & Row. International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA). 2002. IFLA/UNESCO School Library Guidelines. The Hague: IFLA. https://archive.ifla.org/VII/s11/pubs/ sguide02.pdf. International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA). 2015. IFLA School Library Guidelines. 2nd ed., Written by the IFLA School Libraries Section Standing Committee. Edited by Barbara A. Schultz-Jones, and Dianne Oberg, with contributions from the International Association of School Librarianship Executive Board. The Hague: IFLA. https://www.ifla.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/assets/school-libraries-resourcecenters/publications/ifla-school-library-guidelines.pdf ;https://repository.ifla.org/ bitstream/123456789/58/1/ifla-school-library-guidelines.pdf. Kachel, Debra E., and Keith Curry Lance. 2021. “The Status of State Support of School Library Programs.” Teacher Librarian 48, no. 5: 8–13. https://libslide.org/pubs/KachelLance-State%20Support-TL-June%202021.pdf. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier. n.d. “Information Search Process” http://wp.comminfo.rutgers.edu/ ckuhlthau/wp-content/uploads/sites/185/2016/01/ELIS-3E.pdf. Kuhn, Thomas S. 1996. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 3rd ed. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. Levitov, Deborah. 2016. “School Libraries, Librarians, and Inquiry Learning.” Teacher Librarian 43, no. 4: 28–35. Available at https://buxreadsbooks.files.wordpress.com/2019/04/1levitov_2016_schoollibsinquirylearning-1.pdf. Papert, Seymour. 1993. The Children’s Machine: Rethinking School in the Age of the Computer. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Psenka, Carolyn E., Kyoung-Yuna Kim, Gül E. Okudan Kremer, Karl R. Haapala, and Kathy L. Jackson. 2017. “Translating Constructionist Learning to Engineering Design Education.” Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science 21, no. 2: 3–20. Pun, Ray. 2021. “An Interview with Debra E. Kachel and Keith Curry Lance on the IMLS project, ‘SLIDE: School Librarian Investigation: Decline or Evolution?’” IFLA CPDWL Blog , June 7, 2021. https://blogs.ifla.org/cpdwl/2021/06/07/ an-interview-with-debra-e-kachel-and-keith-curry-lance-on-the-imls-project-related-toslide-school-librarian-investigation-decline-or-evolution/. Shera, Jesse H. 1972. The Foundations of Education for Librarianship. New York, NY: Becker and Hayes.

76 

 Darryl Toerien

Stripling, Barbara K. 2017. “Empowering Students to Inquire in a Digital Environment”. In School Librarianship: Past, Present, and Future edited by S. W. Alman, Chapter 4, 51–63. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Available at https://schoollibraryconnection.com/ assets/mediaserver/SLC/2254/2254698.pdf. Stripling, Barbara K. 2019. “Empire State Information Fluency Continuum.” School Library Systems Association. [Libguide]. https://slsa-nys.libguides.com/ifc/home. Toerien, Darryl. n.d. “History.” The FOSIL Group: Advancing Inquiry Learning. https://fosil.org. uk/history/.

Buffy Edwards

6 Guided Inquiry Design Abstract: Guided Inquiry Design® (GId) is a research-based pedagogical framework and way of thinking, learning, and teaching that transforms a school into a collaborative inquiry community. It provides a roadmap to successful inquiry based learning. It was built from what is known about how students learn within an information rich context. Implemented in schools from rural settings to urban cities across the US, GId supports the academic growth of students in pre-kindergarten to 12th grade (PK-12) through seamless integration of the inquiry process with curricula standards. This chapter discusses the Information Search Process, the research foundation of GId, its development, essential details of the model, authentic strategies, implementation, and reasons why the model is effective. The author was involved in a regional implementation of GId and the chapter focuses on her learnings from the experience. Keywords: Inquiry-based learning; Critical thinking Information behavior

What is Guided Inquiry Design? Guided Inquiry Design® (GId) is a roadmap to successful inquiry based learning. It bears a trademark registration and cannot be used without permission. Guided Inquiry Design was built from what is known about how students learn within an information rich context. GId is a fluid and flexible model and an approach to teaching and learning that shifts the focus from teacher-centered instruction to student-centered learning (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2012). The model is grounded in constructivist learning theory and principles and provides a framework for designing, guiding, and assessing inquiry learning that is tailored to the specific, unique needs of students (Maniotes 2017). GId evolved from Carol Kuhlthau’s research on the Information Search Process (ISP). Kuhlthau’s research explained the thoughts, actions, and feelings of students during the research process and provided new thinking on how to support and guide student learning during inquiry/research projects (Figure 6.1).

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110772586-008

78 

 Buffy Edwards

Figure 6.1: Model of the Information Search Process (Kuhlthau 2004). Reproduced with the permission of the authors

The GId Framework helps teachers and librarians focus on inquiry from the students’ perspective. The design framework designates time for students to be curious, build background knowledge and develop higher level questions of personal relevance. There are eight phases: Open, Immerse, Explore, Identify, Gather, Create, Share and Evaluate. Student interest is first piqued or opened; background knowledge is built through immersion; exploration of information sources follows with freedom to follow personal interests related to the content; identifying a focus or the direction of the research in the form of questions for further investigation comes next; information is gathered; new knowledge is created; and sharing information and ideas continues the process. Throughout each phase, students reflect on the process and the content with a final student reflection and evaluation by the collaborative team once the process is complete. The thoughts, feelings, and actions of students change as they move from Immerse to Explore. They feel confusion, anxiety, frustration, and a dip in confidence, but confidence increases as the students develop inquiry questions based on personal interest. The shape of the design, shown in Figure 6.2, follows the related flow of confidence and maps students’ emotions in the inquiry process, as described in Kuhlthau’s ISP. In the Identify phase, conversations with students support the development of a heightened quality of questions, and their confidence and belief in their own learning begin to strengthen (Maniotes 2017, 51; Maniotes 2018). The Create phase provides the opportunity for construction of new knowledge through Inquiry Charts and through creation of culminating projects and products. The products of GId include both low-tech academic papers and high-tech makerspace activities that further illustrate the flexible use of the model and strong grounding in constructivist learning theory. Throughout the GId process,



6 Guided Inquiry Design 

 79

construction of knowledge and collaboration is supported, and reflection and assessment of learning are woven into each step. Reflection helps students recognize how much they have learned and understand how they best learn. Students become metacognitively aware of themselves as learners. Reflection provides a chance for celebration of accomplishment while helping learners develop higher-level thinking skills.

Figure 6.2: Guided Inquiry Design Process (Maniotes Kuhlthau, and Caspari 2012, 31). Reproduced with the permission of the authors

How Did Guided Inquiry Design Begin? The GId team represents a collaborative approach from three diverse fields of education, information science, museum education, and curriculum and instruction and comprises Leslie Maniotes, Carol Collier Kuhlthau, and Ann Caspari. GId synthesizes thirty years of research about student learning occurring in school libraries (Kuhlthau, Caspari, and Maniotes 2015, 46–47). As noted above, it draws from the corpus of research findings conducted by Kuhlthau on the Information Search Process (ISP) (Kuhlthau 2004). Kuhlthau’s early studies about students’ research looked at the thoughts, feelings, and actions of students as they completed research projects. Beginning in the early 1980s, Kuhlthau wanted to help

80 

 Buffy Edwards

students use the library resources while engaged in research assignments. She observed that without time to process information, explore information and form a focus before attempting to gather information, students became frustrated and often procrastinated. The more students worked, saw the ISP model, and reflected on the phases, the more they began to recognize their individualized process for learning. Kuhlthau’s body of research found that learners wanted and needed to be active in the process of research, and it resulted in tools that scaffold learning. The spark that initiated the development of GId was the sweeping need to disseminate the important research findings of the ISP in a manner that teachers could use. Few educators, outside of librarians, knew about the ISP research. The goal was to create something that reflected the findings in an understandable language and to create a bridge between the teacher and librarian fields (Leslie Maniotes, personal discussion, September 2021.) Within the GId team, Kuhlthau brought the school librarianship background, while Maniotes brought experience and understanding as a teacher from the field of reading education and Caspari infused the model with the perspective of the informal learning environment of the museum educator. The model, Guided Inquiry Design, would provide a clear pathway for teachers and librarians to use together in collaboration when designing and implementing inquiry and research learning experiences. The GId team created a full program that addressed the findings about the process, student engagement, and educator support. The program’s inclusions came from evidence collected from student interactions in the process. The end product was intended to support teachers and librarians to teach at point of need, embed information literacy into content area units of study and facilitate or guide the process for all students. The goal was that through use of the model all students would come to own the process and understand strategies to help them dig more deeply into their inquiries and achieve lifelong learning (Leslie Maniotes, personal discussion, September 2021).

Continuing Development Kuhlthau’s work on the ISP identified the Six Cs for constructing understanding: Collaborate, Converse, Compose, Choose, Chart, and Continue (Kuhlthau 2004; Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2015). They provided opportunities for learners to work through feelings of disequilibrium and create conditions for successful inquiring across the entire process. The GId team developed the Six Cs into Inquiry Tools embedded into the GId framework, pairing students’ work to match the phases of inquiry. GId provides the structure and guidance, time, scaffolds,



6 Guided Inquiry Design 

 81

and opportunity to build background knowledge which supports students in developing their own inquiry questions. Developmental work on GId refined the inquiry and research process and outcomes were verified in large-scale studies; in addition, success factors, reading strategies, and the role of the librarian as counselor or guide for the process were defined and illustrated in detail. GId has incorporated the ISP research findings into a model where student learning is guided and supported at key points of need. GId fosters curiosity and the love of learning and provides natural support for differentiated instruction because of the individual freedom and independence for students in the process. Now more than ever, it is important for students to have the ability to discern good information from misinformation. Kids need the freedom to wonder. GId expands their world and invites students to create their own experiences and meaning that will last beyond the school building and school days. GId allows students to identify questions that they have and find the answers with guided help from experts who include teachers, librarians, and field professionals. GId enables students to go independently when they have questions about things they see in the world.

What are the Key Features of Guided Inquiry Design? GId has key features that make it a powerful tool for educators. The process originates from the student perspective; it enables students to research their own interests; it recognizes and validates the emotional aspect of learning; it assumes collaboration between the librarian and teacher with information literacy lessons embedded into the process; and it incorporates the tools carefully designed to enhance the student experience and learning at each phase. GId allows students the opportunity to have voice and choice in their inquiry work in their own learning. GId helps build a culture of respect with students. The students need to feel that the collaborative learning team trusts them and respects their interests. This is particularly important for students with risk factors impeding success in the traditional school environment, who can be challenging to engage. The GId framework enables the support team to predict trouble spots and proactively provide assistance through conversation and other structures embedded in the GId model. The validation of student emotion tied to thoughts

82 

 Buffy Edwards

and action is paramount. By giving students control over their own learning, GId allows for increased engagement, more autonomy, and deeper learning overall. Throughout the process, there is intentional, deliberate embedded information literacy learning. For example, in Explore students are taught to browse and have an open mind thinking of their interests. In Gather they need specific search strategies and can be taught in small groups or individuals. A practitioner illustrates: For the first time, students’ learning goes beyond what the teacher knows, and while it can be uncomfortable for teachers to relinquish control, the engagement and autonomy students show is proof of its worth. Elementary teacher, Norman Public Schools. (Maniotes 2016, 8).

Intentional structures and strategies or Inquiry Tools are used to engage the learner. The GId framework explicates when to use the inquiry tools at each phase of the process. For example, using the Inquiry Chart in Create helps students to visualize, organize and synthesize ideas. An Inquiry Log used from Explore through Gather helps students keep track of the resources chosen. The GId model indicates when the Inquiry Community and Inquiry Circles are best used for collaboration, resource and idea sharing (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2012). Guided Inquiry is clearly described so that together teachers and librarians can more effectively design and guide student learning in the inquiry process. Teachers who have implemented the model note students developing higher level questions and better-quality products, connecting locally and globally, and expanding their own learning because of a vested interest in themselves. Other key features of GId are the expanded role of the teacher librarian as perceived in the learning community. Practitioners share that the implementation of GId has made their roles as librarians more visible, more clearly understood, and more in demand. The practitioners’ understanding of GId improves their ability to collaborate. The GId units provide the context for the librarians to teach information literacy from their expertise.

How and Where has Guided Inquiry Design Been Implemented? The model has been implemented in many schools and regions. Implementation varies depending on the local school and district needs. Some practitioners adopt the model in one school while elsewhere entire districts have implemented GId, such as the Norman Public Schools, Baltimore Public Schools, Chesterfield



6 Guided Inquiry Design 

 83

County in Virginia, Jefferson County in Kentucky, and Boston Public Schools, to name a few. Each district has determined a need for GId that maps onto their strategic plans and has implemented a unique approach by tying the initiative to technology, library, or curricular goals. Because the model is fluid and flexible, practitioners can adapt it to fit the unique needs of their schools and learning community. The first district-wide adoption of Guided Inquiry Design (GId) in the US was Norman Public Schools (NPS), Norman, Oklahoma. Norman, with a population of 124,000, is an academic community that includes the University of Oklahoma. NPS is home to more than 14,000 students and 2,000 educators: seventeen elementary schools, four middle schools, two high schools, and one alternative education school. In 2015 when the author of this chapter was doubling as a practitioner in a K-12 alternative school and working at the district level in the library services department, GId was identified by district leaders as the pedagogical framework to back the 1:1 laptop program. 1:1 laptop programs were implemented globally to integrate information and communications technology into the school environment through the provision of laptops loaded with software and connected to the internet to students for use in academic activities. In Norman, learning teams of librarians and teachers in all grade levels K-12 were trained using the Guided Inquiry Design® Institute Professional Development over a five-year period. Workshops helped educational leaders, teachers, coaches, librarians, tech integrators, curriculum coordinators and teaching teams become facilitators of learning and feel confident in their ability to apply the concepts learned to their own classroom or school. The author was involved in the GId implementation. In the GId training at NPS teachers and librarians learned to design subject units from concepts rather than topics (Donham 2014) with an “invitation to open” students’ curiosity (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2012). Students asked questions to expand the content while later digging deep to find their own answers to build meaning. For example, one fifth grade class looked at the American Revolutionary War through the lens of unification and asked how groups come together for a cause. In a science class, they considered the concept of disruption and asked questions about how to make ecosystems more stable. In one school in Norman, the real change came when teachers were able to see authentic questions being answered that met state curriculum standards. It (GId) is research based and when I implemented it with fidelity it simply worked. In my coaching experience outside of my school building I have seen teams want to make changes because “their kids can’t do that” – that is teachers putting limitations on kids, not the model. If PK students can work through the process, any grade can. You do have to use

84 

 Buffy Edwards

what you know about teaching – shared writing, small group work, inquiry circles helping to answer one another’s questions, but it can be done (Edwards 2021).

In the school where GId was embraced fully, learners in every grade level were “thinking big thoughts, taking ownership, and truly internalizing the process” (Edwards 2021). Everyone in the school embraced it. The principal used it for teachers’ professional development. By recognizing and using the process, she led teachers in developing their annual goals for professional growth and, in doing so, showed her commitment to GId. All teachers placed a poster of the GId phases in their rooms. The library Makerspace was integrated in the Create phase, and GId units were developed around major concepts that students would explore and understand to a deeper level. GId allowed students to dig into the content and find themselves in the work. It married their interests and the content. A librarian practitioner in the school shared “every year as an educator I would learn something new from my students as they approached the same concept with new questions and then shared that knowledge with our entire community of learners, myself included” (Edwards 2021). Of course, not all schools fully embrace GId to this degree. When it does happen, students are engaged; student information literacy learning builds across the grades; teachers learn from the practice and from each other and the school becomes a true Inquiry Community with the library as the hub of the learning. For GId implementation to be successful, initial and continual professional development is important. Professional development worked from the top to bottom of the NPS school system with an initial a half-day leader workshop for all district leaders to set the context for the work to come. The process continued as teacher librarians read the text Guided Inquiry Design: A Framework for Inquiry in Your School (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2012) in their professional development sessions. Librarians and teachers were then trained in teams together. NPS leaders chose learning teams from each school, including teacher librarians and teachers, to attend a three-day GId Institute, a dedicated program initially designed for the Rutgers’ Center for International Scholarship in School Libraries (CISSL). The district set out to train every librarian and all teachers using the official GId Institute. The process proved ideal. Teams developed their own units for implementation with coaching and support. The participants found the learning transformative. A middle school teacher shared: Guided Inquiry has inspired me to advocate for student choice. I never would have believed that student-led questioning would lead to the deep, authentic learning I’ve seen in my class over the last two years, but even when I’m not teaching a Guided Inquiry unit, I’m thinking of ways to increase student agency in the classroom (Lewis, Simmons, and Maniotes 2018, 25).



6 Guided Inquiry Design 

 85

Each team implemented the unit designed in the training. Throughout the implementation, district personnel observed, coached, and provided additional feedback as needed. The teacher librarians continued their professional development by sharing implementation strategies and experiences with district principals. The professional development initiatives supported the district goal of high-quality implementation of GId as the instructional frame bolster for the 1:1 computer innovation. Ongoing training in the district continues, including a train-thetrainer model to build GId leadership on the ground.

What is Different about Guided Inquiry Design? The difference that GId makes is the impact on student learning, thinking and development of self-efficacy. The beginning phases of Open, Immerse and Explore provide time for students to learn about the topic and to make personal connections without trying to find information. In GId, students are introduced to the topic by generating curiosity, allowing for the opportunity to make personal connections through Third Space (Maniotes 2005). Third Space is the connection between the student’s world and the curriculum, where students engage personally and individually in their own learning (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2012). Research is a natural result of inquiry. The intersection where learning happens is within the context of student interest, curriculum content and the formation of new knowledge. Library practitioners and teachers agree that student voice and choice in learning create a deeper connection with the content. Lewis, Simmons and Maniotes (2018) share their view about the program in Norman, “Voice and choice play a central role in GId, as inquiry is driven by the students’ own interests” (25). With the GId approach, student engagement is palpable. Students ask to work on their own projects. Collaboration of all kinds – student to student, student to teacher, and teacher to teacher – establishes a lower student-to-teacher ratio where it is possible for one-on-one conversations. Teachers share new energy and sense of purpose in their work. Collaborations and conversations are strategies that support inquiry and research (Kuhlthau 2004).

86 

 Buffy Edwards

Lessons Learned The implementation of GId at NPS was a profound step that could significantly impact student learning. From the first district implementation, GId has seen continued growth and implementation. Large urban districts to small country schools are embracing the model because they recognize the need for a common process for inquiry and for the level of information literacy necessary for living in the information age. Through GId, students learn the process, acquire strategies that can be replicated in any deeper searching task, and discover themselves as learners. Inquiry learning is not only in the library but is happening in the classroom. When all educators embrace inquiry methods, students can be guided to know how to dig deep, to answer their questions and learn from a variety of sources of information in complex and unique ways. Many educators are seeing the value of GId and embracing the needed changes. Even though school libraries can transform learning, recent studies suggest there are still equity issues. Lance (2020) found an increased loss of school librarians in school districts across the US, with or most vulnerable students most impacted by the loss. There is still work to be done. Reflecting on the implementation of the model, several lessons have been learned. Students will accept challenges and if open to learning, anything is possible. Teachers and librarians must be willing to let students be in control. For example, in Norman, an Alternative School providing an educational option for students with risk factors impeding success in the traditional school environment, initially was hesitant about doing a GId unit. Staff lacked an understanding of GId, and they were protective of teaching and learning time. However, observing their students thrive when given freedom of choice for topics, projects, and their learning was a powerful turning point. Teachers allowed themselves to trust the process, and many commented “where has this been all my life?” Teachers and librarians must trust that kids will ask great questions and help them internalize the process so they can learn independently. Practitioners share that following the GId process helped them stay organized and focused on the purpose of each phase. Establishing roles and responsibilities for the collaborative team supports success. It helps keep everyone on track and each team member can see how the school librarian supports the entire process. Practitioners in the NPS learned that the shared research model across the school district allowed for common expectations and the creation of even more meaningful learning opportunities. The next generation of librarians must have high expectations for collaboration and for their own role in inquiry-based learning in the school. From a personal perspective, the author’s involvement in teaching and working with



6 Guided Inquiry Design 

 87

pre-service teacher librarians is a distinct privilege and sharing GId with university classes in the library program is vitally important and enormously significant. To share a student quote: “This process of learning has been an experience. It makes you more responsible for your work, rather than having people telling you what they expect. You learn how to organize and situate yourself” (Maniotes 2017, 321). Guided Inquiry Design is more than an inquiry model; it is learning how to learn.

Acknowledgement Gratitude to Leslie Maniotes for inspiration, Cherity Pennington for proofing, and Norman Public School librarian contributors, Molly Dettmann, Stacy Ford, Jamie Johnson, and Teresa Lansford.

References ​Donham, Jean. 2014. “Deep Learning through Concepts-Based Inquiry.” School Library Monthly 27, no. 1: 8–11. https://files.nwesd.org/jlongchamps/CD_Meetings/3.20.15/School_ Library_Monthly-DeepLearning_through_Concept-based_Inquiry.pdf. Edwards, Buffy. 2021. “Norman Public Schools Practitioner Survey.” Unpublished manuscript. Kachel, Debra E., and Keith Curry Lance. 2021. “The Status of State Support of School Library Programs.” Teacher Librarian 48, no. 5: 8–13. Available at https://libslide.org/pubs/ Kachel-Lance-State%20Support-TL-June%202021.pdf. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier. 2004. Seeking Meaning: A Process Approach to Library and Information Services 2nd ed. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited/Greenwood Press. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier, Leslie K. Maniotes, and Ann K. Caspari. 2012. Guided Inquiry Design: A Framework for Inquiry in Your School. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier, Leslie K. Maniotes, and Ann K. Caspari. 2015. Guided Inquiry: Learning in the 21st Century 2nd ed. Santa Barbara. CA: Libraries Unlimited. Lance, Keith Curry, and Leslie K. Maniotes. 2020. “Linking Librarians, Inquiry Learning, and Information Literacy?” Phi Delta Kappan 101, no. 7: 47–51. https://kappanonline.org/ linking-librarians-inquiry-learning-information-literacy-lance-maniotes/. Lewis, Kathryn Roots, Shirley Simmons, and Leslie Maniotes. 2018. “Building a Culture for Learner Voice and Choice through Inquiry.” Teacher Librarian 45, no. 4 (April): 24–27. Available at https://guidedinquirydesign.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/ TLBuildingCultureforLearnerVoice.Apr18-.pdf. Maniotes, Leslie K. 2005. “The Transformative Power of the Literary Third Space.” PhD Diss., University of Colorado, Boulder. Available at https://sites.google.com/site/ lesliekmaniotes/home/about/research.

88 

 Buffy Edwards

Maniotes, Leslie K. 2016. “Intentional Inquiry: Vision, Persistence, and Relationships.” Teacher Librarian 43, no. 5: 8–11. Available at https://guidedinquirydesign.com/wp-content/ uploads/2020/06/TLIntentional.Inquiry.Jun16.pdf. Maniotes, Leslie K., ed. 2017. Guided Inquiry in Action, High School. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO. Maniotes, Leslie K., ed. 2018. Guided Inquiry in Action, Elementary School. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO. Maniotes, Leslie K., and Carol C. Kuhlthau. 2014. “Making the Shift: From Traditional Research Assignments to Guiding Inquiry Learning.” Knowledge Quest 43, no. 2 (January): 8–17. Available at https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1045936.pdf.

Jennifer L. Branch-Mueller and Dianne Oberg

7 F ocus on Inquiry: An Information Search Process Model Adapted for Alberta Abstract: Focus on Inquiry: A Teacher’s Guide to Implementing Inquiry-Based Learning was developed by educators and researchers in Alberta, Canada to support kindergarten to twelfth grade (K-12) educators in engaging students in inquiry-based learning. Focus on Inquiry is an instructional model, based on research from education on the learning process and from library and information science on the information search process, and strongly influenced by Kuhlthau’s Information Search Process (ISP). The experience of classroom teachers and teacher-librarians was valuable in developing a model that was researchbased but very practical in its pedagogical approach. The development of Focus on Inquiry is a story of collaboration between school-based educators, university-based researchers, professional association leaders, and government administrators. Keywords: Inquiry-based learning; Information Search Process (ISP); Instructional systems; Metacognition; Library collaboration; Information literacy

Background Canada is the second largest country in the world by geographic area and has ten provinces and three territories. There are many regional differences in terms of languages, cultures, and histories. Alberta has a population of about 4.5 million and is located in the western part of Canada but east of the Rocky Mountains. It has prairie landscapes, boreal forests, foothills, and mountains. The area known as Alberta is the traditional territory of many First Nations and Métis people. The city of Edmonton, Amiskwaciwâskahikan, meaning Beaver Hills House, is in Treaty 6 territory, and is the capital of Alberta. There is no federal or national department of education in Canada; all educational policy and curriculum decisions for kindergarten (children aged 5–6 years) to grade 12 (17–18 year-olds) (K-12) are made at the provincial or territorial level. In Alberta, school administrators determine staffing configurations and discretionary budgets with decision making and implementation locally site-based. Teachers complete a four-year Bachelor of Education degree at minimum, and some complete a two-year post-degree Bachelor of Education program. Teacher-librarians, with qualifications in education and librarianship, are not common https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110772586-009

90 

 Jennifer L. Branch-Mueller and Dianne Oberg

in schools in Alberta. There are school libraries in almost all schools but staffing varies. Some schools have full-time or part-time qualified library technicians; some have teachers in the library; and some have unqualified staff, including educational assistants doing basic clerical work, or volunteers. Alberta students consistently score well on PISA tests, OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment. Alberta is a rich province with a strong public library system, including regional libraries supporting rural areas through interlibrary loans, programming, and support for very small villages and hamlets, and large public library systems with multiple branch locations in the major cities of Edmonton and Calgary. Both cities have populations of about one million people.

Genesis of Focus on Inquiry The story of Focus on Inquiry began in the 1980s. Focus on Learning (Alberta Education 1985) presented Alberta’s first school library policy and an integrated program model for school libraries. Cooperative planning and implementation were essential. The model had three components: instruction, management, and development. Instruction was placed at the focal point of the model and consisted of four elements: information retrieval, information processing, information sharing, and appreciation of knowledge and culture. Although the four elements were described in terms of skills to be taught and student outcomes to be achieved, there was little guidance as to how teachers and teacher-librarians might implement instruction, which was defined as “A series of teaching/ learning strategies designed to develop a full range of information skills that are correlated to meet both the needs of the student and the goals and objectives of the classroom curriculum” (6). When educators in the K-12 sector began to implement the policies and practices outlined in the 1985 document, the lack of guidance related to instructional matters became apparent. In response to the concern, Focus on Research (Alberta Education 1990) was developed to support teachers, and teacher-librarians, in teaching students a model of the information search process. The team of researchers and practitioners involved in the development of Focus on Research had the advantage of new research on the information search process and the opportunity to work directly with Carol Collier Kuhlthau. She was the keynote speaker and leader for a week-long immersion workshop in Alberta in the summer of 1990. From the beginning, her research and that of others in the US including Barbara Stripling and Jean Donham made important contributions to Alberta’s school library community’s commitment to a research-based inquiry process model.



7 Focus on Inquiry: An Information Search Process Model Adapted for Alberta 

 91

A decade after the publication of Focus on Research, findings from continuing research on the information search process and models of library instruction, as well as suggestions from teachers and teacher-librarians, indicated that it was time to enhance and rethink the 1990 research process model. The essential elements of the Focus on Research model were strong, but changes in curriculum, students, technology, professional development, research findings, and the world of work all pointed to the need for an update. Additionally, research and practice pointed to a need for a deeper consideration of the implications of technology and the implications of the affective nature of inquiry-based learning. At the end of 2003, two serendipitous events occurred, First, there was an unanticipated budget surplus in the Ministry of Education that had to be spent by the end of March 2004, and second, the person with responsibility for school libraries in her portfolio, who had been seconded to the Ministry from her position as a school and district leader in school libraries, had a list of priority projects ready when the budget surplus announcement came. The number one priority was the revision of Focus on Research and support for the implementation of the revised document.

The Developing Story of Focus on Inquiry The authors of this chapter, both faculty members at the University of Alberta, were contracted to write the draft document and to manage the first stage reviews. The first stage reviewers of the draft document were experts in the content area of the document: other school library educators, executive members of the provincial school library association, the Learning Resources Council of the Alberta Teachers’ Association which later became the Alberta School Learning Commons Council, and outstanding teacher-librarians. The second stage reviewers were classroom teachers, principals, and school district administrators as well as Ministry of Education officials, many of whom were educators seconded for short terms to the Ministry. The authors of this chapter knew they could provide the theory and research related to inquiry-based learning, but also understood that the document updating Focus on Inquiry would not meet its goals if it was, in the end, unsuitable for practical use by teachers and teacher-librarians. An initial draft was written to share with the first stage reviewers. Because the final document had to be suitable for the needs of school-level practitioners and because the authors’ customary audience was academic, it was acknowledged from the beginning that there would be many versions before a draft document would be ready for submission to the Ministry of Education.

92 

 Jennifer L. Branch-Mueller and Dianne Oberg

There is a wide range of activities that could be library-based and involve instruction by a teacher and/or teacher-librarian (for example IFLA 2015, 39–44). To carry out the work, great clarity was required about the understandings of library-based instruction and the conceptions of inquiry-based learning. What is regarded as exemplary library instruction has changed over the years: from a source approach, during the 1960s and 1970s to a pathfinder approach, through the 1980s and a process approach, beginning in the 1990s (Kuhlthau 1993; 2nd ed. 2004; Thomas et al. 2020). It has been argued over the years (for example Branch 2003; Donham, Kuhlthau and Oberg 2001; Oberg 1999, 2002, 2004), a process approach to inquiry calls for an awareness of the complexity of learning from information; learning from information is not a routine or standardized task, and it involves affective as well as cognitive domains. For work on Focus on Inquiry, inquiry-based learning was defined as: a process where students formulate questions, investigate widely and then build new understandings, meanings and knowledge. That knowledge is new to the students and may be used to answer a question, to develop a solution, or to support a position or point of view. The knowledge is usually presented to others and may result in some sort of action. (Alberta Learning 2004, 1)

The story of Focus on Inquiry sits within the broader framework of curriculum change in the province of Alberta. The first curriculum document to impact inquiry in Alberta was the English Language Arts curriculum. The third of the five general student outcomes in this curriculum reads: “Students will listen, speak, read, write, view and represent to manage ideas and information” (Alberta Learning 2000, 4). Teachers were expected to teach students to engage in research as part of the required curriculum. Next came the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) curriculum. The outcomes involved “communicating, inquiring, decision making, and problem solving” (Alberta Learning 2000–2003, 2) and were intended to be integrated into the core courses within the program. These two curriculum documents were shaped by teacher-librarians who volunteered to work on curriculum development teams as well as by teacher-librarians working within the Ministry of Education. With the two curriculum documents in hand, work began on Focus on Inquiry. Focus group sessions were held. First stage reviewers were asked to respond in general to the initial draft and to consider a number of questions related to the content of the document: –– What definitions of inquiry and of inquiry-based learning should be used? –– How much of the earlier Focus on Research model should be incorporated into the new document? –– Should we use or recommend a model at all?



7 Focus on Inquiry: An Information Search Process Model Adapted for Alberta 

 93

–– How could we best address concerns arising from the implementation of Focus on Research and other inquiry models? The first-stage reviewers were a tough audience. They said that the tone of the document was too dense and too academic and that it was not helpful enough for classroom teachers and needed to be more practical.

Implementing the Model After some soul searching and much revising and editing, the Focus on Inquiry model was completed in 2004 and the provincial teacher-librarian association, the Learning Resources Council of the Alberta Teachers Association, took an active role in providing professional development for teacher-librarians and other school library staff. The Council also distributed 2000 colour posters of the model to every school in Alberta along with information about the new document. The document itself was sold at a reasonable price from the government book depository. In the first year, more than 6000 copies of Focus on Inquiry were sold. Today an online version of the document is freely available. As work on the document was being concluded and final edits completed, the Ministry of Education started the process of developing the new K-12 Social Studies curriculum. The Ministry staff member who initiated the development of Focus on Inquiry was also involved in the new curriculum work and brought the inquiry model to the attention of those charged with leading the development of the new social studies program. The social studies curriculum developers saw value in the Focus on Inquiry model and included inquiry as a central part of the learning outcomes. In the front matter of the K-6 Program of Studies, three components of the curriculum are set forth: Social studies develops the key values and attitudes, knowledge and understanding, and skills and processes necessary for students to become active and responsible citizens, engaged in the democratic process and aware of their capacity to effect change in their communities, society and world (Alberta Education 2005, 1).

Within the skills and processes component, inquiry is front and centre. Social studies provides learning opportunities for students to engage in active inquiry ... conduct research ethically using a variety of methods and sources; organize, interpret and present their findings; and defend their opinions ... apply skills of metacognition, reflecting upon what they have learned and what they need to learn ... communicate ideas and information in an informed, organized and persuasive manner (Alberta Education 2005, 2).

94 

 Jennifer L. Branch-Mueller and Dianne Oberg

Experience with the ICT curriculum suggested that outcomes needed to be embedded in the core curriculum areas rather than expecting teachers to integrate across subject areas or programs. As a result, inquiry and ICT were both embedded in the specific outcomes related to skills and processes and included “research for deliberative inquiry” and the infusion of technology (Alberta Education 2005, 8–10). Unlike other new curriculum initiatives, there was a huge investment in the new social studies program of studies. Textbooks and other support resources including posters, big books, non-fiction books for young children, and teaching guides were created to match the new learning outcomes, and all schools in the province were provided with them. Various professional development sessions were offered, and school boards were given funding to hire substitute teachers so that all teachers could attend the sessions. Members of the Learning Resources Council were asked to facilitate some of these workshops, and as a result, Focus on Inquiry as well as the Information and Communication Technology curriculum, were presented to teachers as part of the core curriculum for all students in Alberta. Other organizations also took up the inquiry challenge. One such organization was the Galileo Educational Network.

Key Components of the Model There are common themes related to how learners experience the inquiry process and how library instruction can best support learners as they work through the inquiry process. Five themes, described briefly below, were front of mind as the new approach was developed (Kuhlthau 1993, 2004). –– Developing emotional literacy: the Information Search Process (ISP) approach to inquiry emphasizes the affective as well as cognitive aspects of the process. Students need to be helped to recognize as natural the waves of optimism and frustration that accompany complex learning. They also need to be aware of, and have coping strategies to address, such common phenomena as library anxiety and information overload. Students who understand that their feelings are not unique but shared by others are less likely to be overwhelmed by them –– Investing time in exploration: the problem-solving emphasis of the ISP means a shift in the way time is thought about and used. More time is needed in early stages of the process for exploration, for building content knowledge, for developing a personal interpretation or focus. The time spent is well-invested in developing students’ interest in, and commitment to, the topic being researched



7 Focus on Inquiry: An Information Search Process Model Adapted for Alberta 

 95

–– Supporting students during their work: students experience different feelings, thoughts, and actions at each phase of the inquiry process, which calls for different kinds of teacher and teacher-librarian involvement or mediation at the various stages in the process. When teachers and librarians talk with students about their learning, they can help students to move forward, see things from a new perspective, make connections between previous and new knowledge, and see the patterns of their learning (Todd 1995) –– Teaching role of the librarian: librarians need to take an active teaching role in working with teaching colleagues in schools, because an inquiry model is difficult to implement fully even when there is a knowledgeable teacher-librarian. Teachers who have worked collaboratively with librarians are impressed by the creative and imaginative learning experiences that resulted from cooperative planning with teacher-librarians, and –– Understanding the process approach: even teachers and librarians who are aware of process models sometimes believe they are implementing their model but actually are leaving out the aspects that are critical to the success of the model. Implementing process approaches is difficult in schools where the teaching practices and curriculum do not support a process or constructivist approach. The Focus on Inquiry model has several essential features. The first is that it is an instructional model that can be used in several ways: as a scaffold for instruction; a gauge for feelings; a common language for teachers and students; a guide for students; and a guide for monitoring and assessment (Alberta Learning 2004; Donham, Bishop, Kuhlthau, and Oberg 2001). Second, the core component of the model, Reflecting on the Process (called Review the Process in the 1990 document) includes both the affective and cognitive domains of metacognition. If the skills learned through inquiry are going to be able to be transferred across subject areas and into lifelong and lifewide information seeking activities, then reflecting on the process is essential. The model (Figure 7.1) has a powerful visual component with the connected puzzle pieces, and many have found the Inquiry Model poster to be a helpful aid for teaching and learning.

96 

 Jennifer L. Branch-Mueller and Dianne Oberg

Figure 7.1: Focus on Inquiry: A Teacher’s Guide to Implementing Inquiry-based Learning (Alberta Learning 2004, 10)

Third, the model includes student learning outcomes (See Figure 7.2) that can be assessed by teachers throughout the inquiry process.

Planning

–– –– –– –– ––

Establishing a topic area for inquiry Identifying possible information sources Identifying audience and presentation format Establishing evaluation criteria Outlining a plan for inquiry

Reflecting on the process

Retrieving

–– –– –– –– ––

Developing an information retrieval plan Locating and collecting resources Selecting relevant information Evaluating information Reviewing and revising plan for inquiry

Reflecting on the process



7 Focus on Inquiry: An Information Search Process Model Adapted for Alberta 

 97

–– –– Processing –– –– ––

Identifying a focus for inquiry Choosing pertinent information Recording information Making connections and inferences Reviewing and revising plan for inquiry

Creating

–– –– –– –– ––

Organizing information Creating a product Thinking about the audience Revising and editing Reviewing and revising plan for inquiry

Reflecting on the process

Sharing

–– –– ––

Communicating with the audience Presenting new understandings Demonstrating appropriate audience behaviour

Reflecting on the process

Evaluating

–– –– ––

Evaluating product Evaluating inquiry process and inquiry plan Reviewing and revising personal inquiry model

Reflecting on the process

Reflecting on the process

Figure 7.2: Student Outcomes from Focus on Inquiry: A Teacher’s Guide to Implementing Inquiry-based Learning (Alberta Learning 2004, 20).

In Focus on Inquiry, each phase of the model is explained in the same way and aligned with other Alberta curriculum documents: key learnings; building student skills; teaching; assessing; thinking about; and reflecting on the process. It includes connections to other curriculum documents to help teachers see the cross-curricular connections that can happen when students engage in inquiry. The document is written in accessible language and includes checklists and planning cycle templates. Theory is integrated into the document, but the overall tone and approach of the document are practical.

Advantages and Disadvantages The power of inquiry-based learning quickly becomes evident to teachers and teacher-librarians who implement the approach. Inquiry-based learning provides opportunities for students to develop skills they will need and use throughout their lives to cope with problems that may not have a clear solution, to deal with changes and challenges to understandings, and to shape their searches for solutions, now and in the future. A systematic approach ensures that students have the opportunity to engage in inquiry, to learn an overall process, and to understand that the general inquiry process can be transferred to other inquiry situations. When students have the

98 

 Jennifer L. Branch-Mueller and Dianne Oberg

benefit of a systematic approach, from primary grades through high school, they become familiar with the inquiry process; they internalize a variety of inquiry skills and strategies for independent and group use; and they are able to adapt procedures to various inquiry situations. The challenges of implementing inquiry-based learning quickly become evident to teachers and teacher-librarians who are new to implementing the approach. There are many ways in which inquiry-based learning challenges more traditional approaches to learning: it takes time; it is messy; and it works against much of the current testing movements. Inquiry-based learning must be embedded in the curriculum. Currently, curriculum changes in Alberta are threatening the important steps made towards inquiry in schools. A culture of inquiry may require a change in school culture, and some schools, individually or as part of a district-wide initiative, have made inquiry-based learning their instructional priority. Studies investigating the implementation of inquiry-based science education, of inquiry-based information literacy programs, and of other inquiry-based educational innovations, have resulted in guidelines for building a culture of inquiry. The following are some of the indicators of a culture of inquiry: –– Administrators in the school or district have a clearly articulated vision for inquiry –– The vision for inquiry is carried forward despite competing pressures –– Two or more champions promote the vision for inquiry –– Resources and space for inquiry are readily accessible –– Teachers collaborate and support each other –– Teachers, students, and parents trust each other –– Small, interdisciplinary teams of teachers work together, and –– Problem-solving and investigative skills are valued throughout the school and the school system (Falk and Drayton 2001; Kuhlthau 2003).

Going Forward Teaching the inquiry process in ways that respect the interests and needs of young people is a complex and fascinating educational task, one that demands the very best of the knowledge and skills of teachers and librarians. An enormous amount of research has been conducted over the past three decades that can contribute to this work with young people. Teachers and librarians need to keep abreast of the growing body of research, and use it to reflect upon and improve practice on an ongoing basis. Without a deep understanding of the process approach to inqui-



7 Focus on Inquiry: An Information Search Process Model Adapted for Alberta 

 99

ry-based learning, traditional practices are likely to continue and limit students’ learning opportunities; some practices push learners to get to work too early and prevent them from developing a personal perspective and motivation for learning through investigation. Classrooms and schools must be closely examined to see to what extent they embody a culture of inquiry. The concept of a culture of inquiry must be embedded to implement inquiry-based teaching and learning effectively in K-12 schools but will, however, be new to many K-12 educators. Two questions underpinned the development of Focus on Inquiry: –– How can K-12 students be expected to engage in inquiry without the support of teachers and librarians? –– How can teachers and librarians, and also administrators and education officials, give students the support they need without having had the experience of being engaged in inquiry themselves? Now, almost 20 years since the publication of Focus on Inquiry and 15 years since inquiry and ICT were embedded in the social studies curriculum, some Alberta students in graduate and undergraduate teacher education classes seem not to have experienced, or cannot remember experiencing, inquiry as part of their K-12 learning journeys. There is still much work to be done to provide opportunities for teachers and teacher-librarians to engage in their own inquiry journeys so that they can better understand inquiry and contribute to building a culture of inquiry in their schools and classrooms.

Acknowledgements In this chapter, we have drawn extensively from papers presented at two World Library and Information Conferences/Congresses of IFLA, in Bangkok, Thailand and in Buenos Aires, Argentina (Oberg 1999, 2004). We acknowledge, with thanks, the many researchers and educators who have contributed to our work, including our graduate students and research assistants.

References Alberta Education. 1984. Focus on Learning: An Integrated Program Model for Alberta School Libraries. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Education. Abstract available at https://eric. ed.gov/?id=ED262822.

100 

 Jennifer L. Branch-Mueller and Dianne Oberg

Alberta Education. 1990. Focus on Research: A Guide to Developing Student Research Skills. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Education. Abstract available at ERIC - ED325135 - Focus on Research. A Guide to Developing Students’ Research Skills., 1990. Alberta Learning. 2000. English Language Arts (K-9). Edmonton, AB. https://education.alberta. ca/media/160360/ela-pos-k-9.pdf. Alberta Learning. 2000–2003. Information and Communication Technology (K-12). Edmonton, AB: https://archive.org/details/infocommtechkto1200albe. Alberta Learning. 2004. Focus on Inquiry: A Teacher’s Guide to Implementing Inquiry-Based Learning. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Learning. https://open.alberta.ca/ publications/0778526666. Alberta Education. 2005. Social Studies (K-6). Edmonton, AB. https://education.alberta.ca/ media/3273004/social-studies-k-6-pos.pdf. Branch, Jennifer L. 2003. “Instructional Intervention is the Key: Supporting Adolescent Information Seeking.” School Libraries Worldwide 9, no. 2: 47–61. Available at https:// journals.library.ualberta.ca/slw/index.php/slw/article/view/7124. Donham, Jean, Kay Bishop, Carol Collier Kuhlthau, and Dianne Oberg. 2001. Inquiry-based Learning: Lessons from Library Power. Worthington, OH: Linworth Press. Available at https://openlibrary.org/works/OL19600110W/Inquiry-based_learning. Falk, Joni K, and Brian Drayton. 2001. “Cultivating a Culture of Inquiry”. Hands On! 23, no. 2: 1 https://www.terc.edu/?s=cultivating+a+culture+of+inquiry. International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA). 2015. IFLA School Library Guidelines. 2nd ed., Written by the IFLA School Libraries Section Standing Committee. Edited by Barbara A. Schultz-Jones, and Dianne Oberg, with contributions from the International Association of School Librarianship Executive Board. The Hague: IFLA. https://www.ifla.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/assets/school-libraries-resourcecenters/publications/ifla-school-library-guidelines.pdf; https://repository.ifla.org/ bitstream/123456789/58/1/ifla-school-library-guidelines.pdf. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier. 1993. Seeking Meaning: A Process Approach to Library and Information Services. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier. 2003. “Rethinking Libraries for the Information Age School: Vital Roles in Inquiry Learning.” Keynote Address, International Association of School Librarianship Conference & International Research, Forum on Research in School Librarianship, July 9, 2001 Auckland, New Zealand Keynote. School Libraries in Canada 22, no. 4: 1–3 https://www.proquest.com/openview/c0e9cc624aa45d122d754aac9462d65f/1?pqorigsite=gscholar&cbl=32982. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier. 2004. Seeking Meaning: A Process Approach to Library and Information Services. 2nd ed. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited. Oberg, Dianne. 1999. “Teaching the Research Process – For Discovery and Personal Growth.” 65th IFLA Conference and General Council, Bangkok, Thailand, August 20 – August 28, 1999. Conference Proceedings. http://www.ifla.org/IV/ifla65/papers/078-119e.htm. Oberg, Dianne. 2002. “The Affective Dimension of Information Literacy.” In Problems Are the Solution: Keys to Lifelong Learning, edited by Steph Capra and Jenny Ryan, 37–56. Brisbane: Capra Ryan & Associates. Oberg, Dianne. 2004. “Promoting Information Literacies: A Focus on Inquiry.” World Library and Information Congress: 70th IFLA General Conference and Council 22–27 August 2004 Buenos Aires, Argentina. http://archive.ifla.org/IV/ifla70/papers/088e-Oberg.pdf.



7 Focus on Inquiry: An Information Search Process Model Adapted for Alberta 

 101

Thomas, Nancy Pickering, Sherry R. Crow, Judy A. Henning, and Jean Donham. 2020. Information Literacy and Information Skills Instruction: New Directions for School Libraries. 4th ed. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited. Todd, Ross J. 1995.” Information Literacy: Philosophy, Principles, and Practice.” School Libraries Worldwide 1, no. 1: 54–68. https://journals.library.ualberta.ca/slw/index.php/ slw/article/view/6943/3941.

Clarence Maybee and Anne Whisken

8 I nformed Learning: Engaging with Information Enables Learning Abstract: Informed Learning aims to contextualize information literacy education within subject learning. The Informed Learning model is guided by three principles that focus on: building on learners’ previous experiences of using information to learn, emphasizing learning to use information and subject content simultaneously, and fostering new awareness of both using information and subject content. Demonstrating its adaptability for reflective and collaborative inquiry, Informed Learning has been used to create new tools and approaches to enable educators to develop learning experiences in which learners come to see new ways of using information. Keywords: Learning; Information literacy; Action research

Introduction The history of information literacy education in Australia mirrors developments across the world. Despite continuing investigations into its nature, a gap exists between information literacy theory and its practice in tertiary and school classrooms. While focusing on the information skills and processes students are expected to demonstrate, less attention is given to the pedagogies and practices involved. Informed Learning (Bruce 2008) aims to address the gap between skills and pedagogies through the transformation of teacher practice by moving from a library-centric view to contextualizing information literacy within subject learning. The model problematizes information literacy education, asking: What might students learn about using information while they learn subject content? This chapter outlines the development of the Informed Learning model and examines its implementation in various contexts.

Genesis and Development Christine Bruce’s research on information literacy began in the 1990s at a time when the library community was in the early days of conceptualizing information literacy. An initial study that aimed to define information literacy used the Delphi Technique to develop a list of attributes of an information literate person based https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110772586-010



8 Informed Learning: Engaging with Information Enables Learning 

 103

on the views of experts primarily from the field of education (Doyle 1992). The resulting list of attributes aligned with the American Library Association’s (1989, para. 3) description of an information literate person as someone able to “recognize when information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate, and use effectively the needed information.” The definitions of information literacy presented in the field sparked Bruce’s interest in exploring how information literacy was experienced first-hand by teachers and researchers. To develop a more holistic and nuanced understanding of information literacy, Bruce employed an approach called phenomenography to study the varied ways that people working in higher education experienced information literacy. Her analysis of interviews with various instructors, librarians, administrators, and others uncovered seven interconnected ways of experiencing information literacy. Each experience was categorized with a name that emphasized its focus. The resulting categories were: –– Information technology –– Information sources –– Information process –– Information control –– Knowledge construction –– Knowledge extension, and –– Wisdom (Bruce 1997). While Bruce was conducting her research on academics’ experiences of information literacy, Louise Limberg (2000) was using a phenomenographic approach to study experiences of information seeking by Swedish high school students as they researched an essay. Taking place just prior to Sweden becoming a member of the European Union (EU) in 1993/94, the essay assignment focused on an evaluation by the students of the consequences of Sweden joining the EU. The analysis revealed that students’ experiences of information seeking were closely related to their experiences of the topic they were studying. Students who focused on information seeking as fact-finding experienced the consequences of EU membership as something that could not be determined due to lack of facts. Those who emphasized balancing information to make correct choices focused on various sub-topics related to EU development and experienced it mainly as economic cooperation. Students who focused on scrutinizing and analyzing information experienced EU membership as a matter of ethical or political decision or commitment. The most significant implication of Limberg’s study was its suggestion that the students’ understandings of the subject content influenced how they searched for information.

104 

 Clarence Maybee and Anne Whisken

Following Bruce’s (1997) and Limberg’s (2000) seminal studies, other researchers began to use phenomenography to explore experiences of information literacy (Gunton, Bruce, and Davis 2014). One such study explored the experiences of information literacy of academics in different disciplines in higher education (Webber, Boon, and Johnston 2005). Others focused on educators in schools (Alexandersson and Limberg 2005; Williams and Wavell 2007). While there was some variation in the findings across the various contexts investigated, the experiences identified in these studies all tended to range from focusing on accessing information to focusing on applying information to be an independent learner or practitioner. For example, Williams and Wavell (2007) found that teachers experience information literacy as: –– Finding information –– Comprehending texts –– Drawing meaning from information –– Performing information skills –– Showing critical awareness, and –– Engaging in independent learning. Studies were also conducted to explore higher education students’ experiences of information literacy (Lupton 2008; Maybee 2006), which are in many ways comparable to teachers’ experiences. For example, Lupton’s (2008) study of music and tax students revealed that the relationship between information literacy and learning is experienced in one of three ways: linearly, using information and then learning; cyclically, using information and then learning iteratively; or simultaneously, using information and learning at the same time. The findings from this body of phenomenographic research led to the central idea behind Informed Learning: that engaging with information enables learning (Bruce 2008). This differentiates it from other models which emphasize development of information skills.

Key Features of Informed Learning Grounded in the findings from the phenomenographic studies outlined above, Informed Learning is centred on the idea that information literacy may be experienced in various ways within the same context. Informed Learning is guided by three principles: –– Builds on learners’ current Informed Learning experiences –– Promotes simultaneous learning about subject content and the information using process, and



8 Informed Learning: Engaging with Information Enables Learning 

 105

–– Enables learners to experience using information and subject content in new ways (Bruce and Hughes 2010). Drawing from earlier research, three frameworks are central to Informed Learning, each of which examines information literacy from a different perspective: –– Seven Faces (Bruce 1997) –– Six Frames (Bruce, Edwards, and Lupton 2006), and –– Generic, Situated and Transformative (GeST) Windows (Lupton and Bruce 2010). Revised slightly from her earlier work (Bruce 1997), Bruce (2008) used the Seven Faces of Informed Learning to describe varying experiences of using information within a learning context (Table 8.1). Face

Description

1

Information Awareness

2 3 4 5 6 7

Information Sources Information Process Information Control Knowledge Construction Knowledge Extension Wisdom

Using technology and networks to communicate and keep abreast of developments in the field Sourcing information to meet a learning need Engaging in information processes to learn Making connections between information and learning needs Building a knowledge base in new areas of interest Extending an existing knowledge base Making wise use of information for the benefit of others

Table 8.1: Seven Faces of Informed Learning (Bruce 2008)

Outlined in Table 8.2, the Six Frames of Informed Learning is a pedagogic model that draws from major approaches taken in teaching and delineates how information literacy is typically represented in those approaches. Frame Content Competency

Learning is…

Change in what is known Build competency by following pre-determined path Learning to Learn Develop ways of thinking and reasoning Personal Relevance Find personal relevance and meaning Social Impact Adopt perspectives that encourage social change Relational Discern more powerful ways of seeing

Information Literacy is… Knowledge about information Set of competency skills Way of learning Different for different people Social critique and reform Complex of different ways of using information

Table 8.2: Six Frames of Informed Learning (Adapted from Bruce, Edwards, and Lupton 2006)

106 

 Clarence Maybee and Anne Whisken

The GeST windows model (Lupton and Bruce 2010) theorizes different approaches to information literacy: generic, situated, and transformative. Generic approaches emphasize skills and process models, while situated approaches refer to perspectives that focus on authentic disciplinary and professional ways of using information, and the transformative approach aligns with a critical perspective. Each of the three frameworks describes information literacy from a different perspective. Table 8.3 outlines the relationship between the three by showing how the categories from each correlate with the categories in the other frameworks. For example, if a teacher emphasized learning to learn, the teacher may also experience, or desire their students to experience, information literacy as information process, information control, or knowledge construction, which aligns with a situated view. In contrast, if the students adopted a transformative viewpoint, the teacher would likely focus on social relevance or relational perspectives in teaching, so that students might experience information literacy as extending knowledge or wisdom, in which they would use information for social good. GeST Windows

Six Frames

Seven Faces

Generic

Content Competency

Information technology Information sources

Learning to Learn

Information process Information control

Personal Relevance

Knowledge-base

Social Impact Relational

Knowledge extension Wisdom

Situated

Transformative

Table 8.3: Alignment of Informed Learning Frameworks (Maybee 2015 adapted from Bruce 2008; Bruce, Edwards, and Lupton 2006; Lupton and Bruce 2010)

As outlined in Table 8.4, there are several characteristics associated with Informed Learning. While information is considered anything that is informing (Bruce 2008), there is a focus on engagement with disciplinary or professional information. Informed Learning emphasizes an active learning environment informed by various experts including librarians and technologists. Informed Learning aims to create learning environments in which learners undergo transformation in which they change their understandings of themselves, their disciplines, or their professional practices.



8 Informed Learning: Engaging with Information Enables Learning 

Areas of Focus

Characteristics

Engaging with information

Awareness of different ways of using information Information practices drawn from disciplinary or professional practices

 107

Ethical uses of information Subject content

Focuses on knowledge creation

Information

Disciplinary information Diverse forms of information, e.g. textual, visual, auditory, embodied, etc.

Pedagogy

Active learning techniques, such as collaborative and independent learning, problem-solving, evidence-based practice, and independent research Learners’ previous experiences are drawn on Holistic approach to using information to learn Shared responsibility amongst educators in particular disciplines, information technologists and librarians, etc. Diverse student populations share perspectives

Transformative change

Learners may change their understandings of themselves, their discipline, and their professional practice

Table 8.4: Characteristics of Informed Learning (Maybee 2015 adapted from Bruce and Hughes 2010)

Application of Informed Learning Informed Learning has been applied in several educational settings since its articulation by Bruce in 2008. Academic librarians in the US have used Informed Learning in their work with instructors in higher education to create information literacy coursework within disciplinary courses (Maybee 2018; Ranger 2019). Informed Learning has also been used in university courses. Hughes and Bruce (2012) describe the application of Informed Learning in hybrid online masters-level courses in Australia. In New Zealand, Feekery (2013) combined Informed Learning with participatory action research (PAR) to change educators’ approaches to information literacy education so that beginning students in a four-year university course might develop more sophisticated information strategies for improved

108 

 Clarence Maybee and Anne Whisken

disciplinary learning outcomes. Whisken (2019a) used Informed Learning PAR for professional development in an Australian secondary school, demonstrating the success of combining two intentionally transformative processes to bridge the gap between information literacy education theory and practice. In addition to developing curricula, researchers have applied Informed Learning to create new tools and approaches to enable educators to develop learning experiences in which students come to see new ways of using information. Hughes and Whisken have applied Informed Learning thinking to design of learning spaces. Hughes (2015) introduced the use of participatory design and Whisken (2016, 2017; Whisken et al. 2017) combined the model’s problematized approach with participatory design for ongoing design and review of library learning spaces. These ever-broader applications demonstrate the adaptability of Informed Learning for reflective and collaborative inquiry by educators, librarians and students who seek to develop more powerful ways of using information to learn.

Informed Learning Design While Informed Learning outlines key elements that relate information literacy to learning (Bruce 2008), instructors may need additional guidance to design coursework. Informed Learning Design (Maybee et al. 2019) was created as an instructional design model to develop learning environments in which students use information to learn within the disciplinary classroom. To construct Informed Learning Design, the research team drew from a review of curriculum design models, as well as a learning theory called variation theory (Marton 2014) that grew out of the same research tradition as Informed Learning. Variation theory suggests that for learning to occur, students must encounter critical variations that enable them to see aspects, for example, colour, or features, which are specific instances of an aspect, for example, blue, that are essential to experiencing what they are studying in the way intended by the teacher (Marton 2014). There are two overarching types of variations: separation and fusion. Separation occurs when aspects or features are contrasted with each other or generalized in that different instances are experienced all at once. For example, a critical aspect of Twitter may be the genre of social media. Students might be asked to compare social media to other separate genres, such as blogs, news, or peer-reviewed journals, or asked to think about previous generalized encounters with different kinds of social media, such as Instagram and Facebook. Once aspects or features have been separated, the type of variation called fusion allows them to be focused on simultaneously, enabling a student to see what they are learning about in a new



8 Informed Learning: Engaging with Information Enables Learning 

 109

way. The sequence of variations necessary for students to see what they are studying in a new way is called a pattern of variation. Informed Learning Design aligns with the three principles of Informed Learning, namely building on learners’ previous experiences of using information to learn, emphasizing learning to use information and subject content simultaneously, and fostering new awareness of both using information and subject content (Hughes and Bruce 2012). Informed Learning Design draws from variation theory (Marton 2014). However, the critical aspects and features that are separated and fused must be related to both information use and the subject content being studied. Reflective of the three components common in curriculum design models, Informed Learning Design involves three stages: –– Defining expectations for Informed Learning –– Determining Informed Learning activities, and –– Developing Informed Learning assessment (Maybee et al. 2019). Defining expectations for Informed Learning involves the instructor identifying which of the aspects or features related to subject content and information use are critical for students to become aware of to learn as intended by the instructor (Maybee et al. 2019). Informed Learning activities must be designed to create a pattern of variation that separates and then fuses critical aspects and features related to both using information and content. In the final stage of the design process, an assessment plan is developed. Formative assessment may provide additional opportunity for varying critical aspects and features when feedback is given before a summative assessment is implemented that determines students’ awareness of the aspects and features related specifically to using information and subject content at the conclusion of the student project or course. Applicable for designing learning environments at all educational levels, Informed Learning Design (Maybee et al. 2019) has primarily been used to guide curriculum development projects in higher education. Made possible in part by funding from the Institute of Museum and Library Services (RE-13-19-0021-19), a project is currently underway in the US in which teams of librarians and instructors at the University of Arizona, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, and Purdue University are applying Informed Learning Design to design student projects for undergraduates to learn to use information in disciplinary learning contexts.

Informed Learning Participatory Action Research The Informed Learning model (Bruce 2008) has been used in combination with various forms of participatory action research (PAR) in Australia and New

110 

 Clarence Maybee and Anne Whisken

Zealand. Both Informed Learning and PAR bring focus to establishing common understandings in communities of inquiry to bring about change or to find solutions to problems. Each has transformation of views and practice as an essential focus. PAR arises from the social research methodology of action research, which had its genesis in the work of social psychologist Kurt Lewin and the Tavistock Institute in the early to mid-20th century (Carr and Kemmis 1986). It was later adapted to provide participating practitioners with a means of researching their own practice problems. The group research process of planning, acting, observing and reflecting has been developed further for educational contexts by Kemmis and his colleagues (Kemmis 2009). In their PhD projects, both Feekery (2013) and Whisken (2019a) used PAR for staff professional development to explore the use of Informed Learning to change educator practice so that students might learn expert information use within the context of disciplinary learning. Feekery’s (2013) research at Massey University in Palmerston North, New Zealand proposed that Informed Learning’s more holistic view might assist educators to move from previous approaches of information search and retrieval and product-based assessment to creating learner-centred, process experiences that stress reflective approaches to information use as part of disciplinary learning. Her findings showed that Informed Learning relocated the focus of information literacy education from library to classroom, with the PAR process allowing “a dual focus on both action (to support staff to change pedagogy) and research (to understand the process of change)” (Feekery 2013, 11). She nominated collaborative and collegial conversations as key implications for future research about integrating information strategies into curriculum design. Whisken’s (2019a) research at a secondary school in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia investigated whether Informed Learning might overcome the historical gap between theory and practice in information literacy education. She used PAR as a professional development process for teachers to examine the application of Informed Learning ideas within the context of their subject teaching. Over a year, three case groups of teachers at different year levels used PAR cycles of reflective action to explore ways that Informed Learning might enhance subject learning by bringing explicit attention to expert information strategies. Key findings showed teacher appreciation for the collaborative processes of PAR which created safe spaces for reflective exploration of new ideas in subject practice and curriculum design. Teachers found that the material in the Informed Learning book (Bruce 2008) provided clear steps for appreciative inquiry of their own subject information strategies. They identified the need for students to develop expert skills to operate successfully in the rapidly changing information environment and the



8 Informed Learning: Engaging with Information Enables Learning 

 111

need for teachers themselves to learn new pedagogies to help their students develop such repertoires of information strategies. Implications arising from the research include the need for a whole school approach to ensure students experience consistent information use understandings and practices. Another is that teachers need time and support to develop the capabilities required to teach such expert information strategies. Whisken (2019b) developed a framework for whole school information practice to guide the structures and processes for teachers and students to develop and integrate information practices and strategies into subject learning. Further application of the findings led to a proposed framework for whole school wide reading practice (Whisken 2021), with an accompanying professional development model: Informed Learning PAR for wide reading practice. In a broader application of the Informed Learning model, Whisken used insights from her Informed Learning PAR research to work with architects on an award-nominated school library building (Whisken 2016, 2017; Whisken et al. 2017). She found that Informed Learning’s collegial and problematized approach brought focused inquiry to ways that physical and digital spaces, and arrangements of furniture, resources, and collections might best support learning about both subject content and expert information use.

Conclusion Informed Learning was introduced into the field by Bruce fourteen years ago (2008) and its promise has taken some time to come to fruition. Inclusive of three principles, several characteristics, and three frameworks, including the Seven Faces (Bruce 1997), GeST Windows (Lupton and Bruce 2010), and Six Frames (Bruce, Edwards, and Lupton 2006), Informed Learning represents a complex assemblage of information-focused concepts and ideas. However, the three frameworks can work together to illuminate different aspects of the same phenomenon. GeST Windows outlines a theoretical approach; Six Frames brings a pedagogic focus; and the Seven Faces provides an experiential perspective. Each contributes to using information effectively to learn subject content. Collectively, the various elements of Informed Learning provide a multifaceted description of an approach to inquiry learning. Informed Learning has been applied in practice and research as well as the development of new tools and approaches, demonstrating its ongoing utility. Applications include Informed Learning Design (Maybee et al. 2019) and Informed Learning PAR (Whisken 2019a). Inviting increased engagement by

112 

 Clarence Maybee and Anne Whisken

stakeholders, including librarians, teachers, and administrators, the model can be used to foster transformative professional development. It does so by supporting the exploration of ways that expert information use can enhance the experience of disciplinary learning and improve academic outcomes (Whisken 2019a). Informed Learning may be considered a type of inquiry learning model for educators. By changing conceptions of the role that information use plays in disciplinary learning contexts, educators may then alter how they approach teaching their students. Finally, the complexity of Informed Learning outlined in this chapter suggests that it can serve a wider purpose than many inquiry learning models, which often focus on a discrete instructional process. In contrast, Informed Learning provides a big picture perspective to shape the development of classroom activities as well as overarching pedagogic and curricular reform.

References Alexandersson, Mikael, and Louise Limberg. 2005. “In the Shade of the Knowledge Society and the Importance of Information Literacy.” Paper presented at the 11th Biennial European Association for Research for Learning and Instruction (Earli) Conference, Nicosia, Cyprus, August 23–27, 2005. Available at http://InformationR.net/ir/12-1/in_the_shade.html. American Library Association. 1989. Presidential Committee on Information Literacy. Final Report. Report released January 10, 1989, Washington DC. Chicago: American Library Association. https://www.ala.org/acrl/publications/whitepapers/presidential. Bruce, Christine S. 1997. The Seven Faces of Information Literacy. Blackwood, South Australia: Auslib Press. Bruce, Christine S. 2008. Informed Learning. Chicago: American Library Association. Draft manuscript available at https://eprints.qut.edu.au/17988/34/17988.pdf. Bruce, Christine S., Sylvia L. Edwards, and Mandy Lupton. 2006. “Six Frames for Information Literacy Education: A Conceptual Framework for Interpreting the Relationships Between Theory and Practice.” ITALICS (Innovations in Teaching and Learning Information and Computer Science) 51, no. 1: 1–18. Available at https://www.researchgate.net/ publication/26467429_Six_Frames_for_Information_literacy_Education_a_conceptual_ framework_for_interpreting_the_relationships_between_theory_and_practice. Bruce, Christine S., and Hilary Hughes. 2010. “Informed Learning: A Pedagogical Construct Attending Simultaneously to Information Use and Learning.” Library and Information Science Research 32, no. 4: A2–A8. Available at https://eprints.qut.edu.au/38705/1/ COVERSHEET_C38705.pdf. Carr, Wilfred, and Stephen Kemmis. 1986. Becoming Critical: Education, Knowledge and Action Research Rev. ed.. Waurn Ponds, Vic., Aust.: Deakin University Press. Available at https:// www.academia.edu/31301744/Becoming_critical. Doyle, Christina S. 1992. Outcome Measures for Information Literacy Within the National Education Goals of 1990: Final Report to National Forum on Information Literacy June



8 Informed Learning: Engaging with Information Enables Learning 

 113

24 1992: Summary of Findings. Washington, DC: US Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement. Available at https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ ED351033.pdf. Feekery, Angela. 2013. Conversation and Change: Integrating Information Literacy to Support Learning in the New Zealand Tertiary Context. Doctoral dissertation, Massey University, Manuwatu, New Zealand. Available at https://ako.ac.nz/knowledge-centre/ conversation-and-change-integrating-information-literacy-to-support-learning-in-the-newzealand-tertiary-context/. Gunton, Lyndelle, Christine Susan Bruce, and Kate Davis. 2014. “Information Literacy Research: The Evolution of the Relational Approach.” In Library and Information Science Research in Asia-Oceania: Theory and Practice edited by Jia Tina Du, Qinghua Zhu, and Andy Koronios, 82–101. Hershey, Pennsylvania: IGI Global. Hughes, Hilary. 2015. “Participatory Library Designing.” FYI: the Journal for the School Information Professional 19, no. 2: 4–6, 13. Hughes, Hilary, and Christine S. Bruce. 2012. “Snapshots of Informed Learning: LIS and Beyond.” Education for Information 29: 253–269. Available at https://eprints.qut.edu. au/63169/1/InfoEducation-2012-FINAL.pdf. Limberg, Louise. 2000. “Is There a Relationship Between Information Seeking and Learning Outcomes?” In Information Literacy Around the World: Advances in Programs and Research, edited by Christine S. Bruce, Philip C. Candy, and Helmut Klaus. Wagga Wagga, NSW: Charles Sturt University. Lupton, Mandy. 2008. Information Literacy and Learning. Blackwood, South Australia: Auslib Press. Available as PhD thesis Faculty of Information Technology QUT 2008 https://eprints. qut.edu.au/16665/1/Mandy_Lupton_Thesis.pdf Lupton, Mandy, and Christine S. Bruce. 2010. “Windows on Information Literacy Worlds: Generic, Situated and Transformative Perspectives.” In Practicing Information Literacy: Bringing Theories of Learning, Practice and Information Literacy Together edited by Annemaree Lloyd and Sanna Talja, 4–27. Wagga Wagga, N.S.W: Charles Sturt University. Available at https://inquirylearingbestpractice.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/luptonand-bruce.pdf. Marton, Ference. 2014. Necessary Conditions of Learning. New York: Routledge. Maybee, Clarence. 2006. “Undergraduate Perceptions of Information Use: The Basis for Creating User-centered Student Information Literacy Instruction.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 32, no. 1: 79–85. Available at https://www.academia.edu/2151912/ Undergraduate_perceptions_of_information_use_the_basis_for_creating_user_centered_ student_information_literacy_instruction?auto=citations&from=cover_page . Maybee, Clarence. 2015. Informed Learning in the Undergraduate Classroom: The Role of Information Experiences in Shaping Outcomes. Doctoral Dissertation, Queensland University of Technology. Brisbane, QLD, Australia. https://eprints.qut.edu.au/89685/. Maybee, Clarence. 2018. IMPACT Learning: Librarians at the Forefront of Change in Higher Education. Chandos. Maybee, Clarence, Christine S. Bruce, Mandy Lupton, and Ming Fai Pang. 2019. “Informed Learning Design: Teaching and Learning Through Engagement with Information.” Higher Education Research & Development 38, no. 3: 579–593. Available at https://eprints.qut. edu.au/120713/16/Maybee_Informed_learning_design_HERD%2520preprint.pdf.

114 

 Clarence Maybee and Anne Whisken

Ranger, Kim. 2019. “Relational Liaising to Integrate Informed Learning into the Disciplinary Classroom.” In Informed Learning Applications: Insights from Research and Practice edited by Kim Ranger, 67–80. Emerald. Available at https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/cgi/ viewcontent.cgi?article=1015&context=library_books. Webber, Sheila, Stuart Boon, and Bill Johnston. 2005. “A Comparison of UK Academics’ Conceptions of Information Literacy in Two Disciplines: English and Marketing.” Library and Information Research 29, no. 93: 4–15. Available at https://eprints.whiterose. ac.uk/77964/1/A%20. Whisken, Anne. 2016. “Library Learning Intentions and Descriptors for Ongoing Action Research.” Synergy 14, no. 2. http://slav.vic.edu.au/index.php/Synergy/article/view/ v142201612. Whisken, Anne. 2017. “Re-imagining the Library Landscape: An Approach to School Library Design.” Connections. Schools Catalogue Information Service SCIS. Issue 103 Term 2 2017. https://www.scisdata.com/media/1656/connections103.pdf. Whisken, Anne. 2019a. Informed Learning Practice in a Secondary School: A Participatory Action Research Case Study. Doctoral Dissertation, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, NSW, Australia. Available at https://researchoutput.csu.edu.au/en/publications/ informed-learning-practice-in-a-secondary-school-a-participatory-. Whisken, Anne. 2019b. “Ten School Benchmarks to Build Student Information Strategies.” Synergy 17, no. 2. Available at http://slav.vic.edu.au/index.php/Synergy/article/view/ V1721910/120. Whisken, Anne. 2021. “Framework for Whole School Wide Reading Practice.” Synergy 19, no. 1. https://slav.vic.edu.au/index.php/Synergy/article/view/488/481. Whisken, Anne, Sia Yannopoulos, Liz Campbell and Linden Carroll. 2017. “Design Thinking for Ongoing Library Transformation.” Synergy 15, no. 1. http://slav.vic.edu.au/index.php/ Synergy/article/view/v151201710. Williams, Dorothy A., and Caroline Wavell. 2007. “Secondary School Teachers’ Conceptions of Student Information Literacy.” Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 39, no. 4: 199–212. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000607083211.

Part II: Implementing Models of Inquiry

Part 2 provides practical examples from across the world, focusing on how a specific inquiry model or approach to inquiry-based teaching and learning has been or is being implemented in practice and what lessons have been learned from successes and challenges.

Joseph Sanders and Jennifer Toerien

9 D  eep Collaboration by Teacher and Librarian to Develop an Inquiry Mindset Abstract: This case-study of a four-year collaboration between a school librarian and an A-level Politics teacher focuses on the development of a three-week Pressure Groups inquiry unit in the context of broader shifts towards inquiry-based learning within the Politics course at Oakham School in the UK. The collaboration was based on the Framework of Skills for Inquiry Learning (FOSIL) instructional model. It not only achieved its target of improving both student knowledge retention, and analysis and evaluation skills for the unit itself and within the Politics course more broadly, but also had a wider impact on teaching and learning in a range of subjects across the school. Keywords: Politics – Study and teaching; Inquiry-based learning; Library cooperation; School librarian participation in curriculum planning; School libraries – United Kingdom

Introduction Inquiry can easily be mischaracterized as learning through stand-alone project work, potentially creating a damaging false dichotomy between inquiry and direct instruction, and devaluing the benefits of the constructivist approach to teaching and learning that nurtures critical skills required to future-proof students. The authors have come to identify with the Galileo Education Network’s description of inquiry as “a stance that pervades all aspects of life and is essential to the way in which knowledge is created” (Galileo Education Network, n.d.). Viewing inquiry as a stance rather than an instructional choice makes it almost impossible to consider the goal of teaching and learning to be stand-alone inquiry projects sitting alongside other more traditional units and expands the understanding of what constitutes inquiry. This collaboration between a politics teacher and a school librarian at Oakham School sought to improve subject knowledge retention and application of higher-level analysis and evaluation skills; it also provided a case-study of inquiry as a central tool for curriculum design. The case-study is presented through the lens of the Framework of Skills for Inquiry Learning (FOSIL) instructional model, the FOSIL Inquiry Cycle (Figure 9.1), which provides a scaffolding as vital for education

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110772586-011

118 

 Joseph Sanders and Jennifer Toerien

Figure 9.1: FOSIL Inquiry Cycle (The FOSIL Group, n.d.)



9 Deep Collaboration by Teacher and Librarian to Develop an Inquiry Mindset 

 119

professionals during inquiry design as it is for students during the inquiry process (The FOSIL Group, n.d.).

The Context Oakham School is a co-educational, secondary, independent day and boarding school in England, which since 2001 has offered students the choice of educational pathways in the final two years of school of either the Advanced Level General Certificate of Education (A-level), qualifications such as Business and Technology Education Council ( BTEC) and Cambridge Pre-U or the International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme (IBDP) (Figure 9.2).

Figure 9.2: The main educational pathways at Oakham School

The School had been on an inquiry journey since 2011 when Darryl Toerien, the Head of Library, first developed FOSIL. Although Darryl’s work with FOSIL began with the Extended Essay, a compulsory component of the IBDP, the library team also made considerable progress in collaborating with subject colleagues on embedding inquiry into the curriculum in Years 6–9 (US Grades 5–8) with students aged 10–14 years. However, in a system with a strong focus on external standardised testing, teachers and librarians often struggled to make time and space for inquiry investigations. The challenge was particularly true at GCSE and A-level, where there was a perception that there was no time for inquiry.

Building Inquiry into Politics In June 2018 Joseph Sanders (Joe), Lead Practitioner and Politics teacher, identified the need for a more structured and explicit approach to the examined skills of analysis and evaluation in A-level Politics. He approached Jennifer Toerien (Jenny), Curriculum Librarian for Upper School, following an in-service training

120 

 Joseph Sanders and Jennifer Toerien

session that she led on inquiry, to discuss how FOSIL could help; this led to a four-year collaboration on building inquiry within A-level Politics. Joe had noticed that the jump required in analysis and evaluation skills from GCSE to A-level was pronounced. A content-heavy syllabus meant there was pressure to get through content earlier in the course, leading to front-loading courses with knowledge at the expense of skills. The Pressure Groups unit (Pearson Edexcel 2019, 9) taught towards the end of the first year of the two-year course, was often the first occasion for students to bring knowledge and skills together. The unit required students to recall evidence from case studies on a variety of pressure groups and use it to critique the groups’ methods and effectiveness. The implementation in the politics collaboration of the six components of the Inquiry Cycle: Connect, Wonder, Investigate, Construct, Express and Reflect, is outlined in the following section.

Embedding Inquiry Connect: Drawing on What is Known to Better Understand What is Not Known During Connect, it is vital to develop an understanding of the ground in which the inquiry is rooted. The context has been outlined. Joe had noted that, in previous years teaching Politics, following a mix of classroom teaching and independent research homework, students’ essays were light both on factual knowledge and on analysis and evaluation. He hoped that with more structured support and thoughtful inquiry design, students would become more engaged and invested in the case studies, improving recall, analysis and evaluation. Joe and Jenny were both excited by the prospect that inquiry might be the most effective way of delivering an entire unit of content in a high-stakes, externally examined course. The project also sought to challenge the perception that there was no time for inquiry.

Wonder: Identifying Questions to Best Guide Investigation “Inquiry is a dynamic process of being open to wonder and puzzlement and coming to know and understand the world” (Galileo Education Network, n.d.), and all inquiries are driven by questions. Educators and students have differing perspectives on inquiry. The educators’ meta-inquiry, or underlying inquiry into inquiry design, was driven by the question, “How can inquiry-based learning be



9 Deep Collaboration by Teacher and Librarian to Develop an Inquiry Mindset 

 121

used to improve student outcomes and experiences in A-level Politics?” The aims were: –– Build the unit around a single scaffolded inquiry rather than separate homework tasks as it had been previously –– Explicitly teach and scaffold the skills of analysis and evaluation, and –– Explore the benefits of embedded inquiry-based learning more widely, within and beyond the Politics course. Joe’s initial goals were to use the FOSIL framework and resources to develop a single three-week inquiry unit on Pressure Groups for three classes of mixed ability Year 12 (US Grade 11) students aged 16–17 years (Figure 9.3) using the Mondrian Wall, a dynamic curriculum mapping and planning tool. Two key questions were used: What does it mean for a pressure group to be successful? Are pressure groups good for democracy? Separate stand-alone graphic organisers would be developed to support essay planning throughout the course. It was vital that students’ knowledge and understanding following the inquiry unit were as good or better than might have been achieved through alternative methods.

Figure 9.3: Overview of Pressure Groups unit from Mondrian Wall (dynamic curriculum map)

122 

 Joseph Sanders and Jennifer Toerien

Key factors in the success of the collaboration were a shared sense of purpose, with the focus on the students’ outcomes and experiences, and a strong respect for and desire to learn from each other. There can sometimes be a transactional sense in teacher/librarian collaborations where the librarian feels required to use expertise in accessing resources to buy classroom time to pursue an information literacy agenda, somehow separate from the curriculum agenda of the teacher. The development of shared goals, both in terms of subject-based skills and knowledge and inquiry skills, was essential to the process.

Investigate: Locating and Using Appropriate Scholarly Resources Effectively The inquiry design process was ongoing and began one year prior to first delivery of the unit. Alongside the external resources used in the planning, each person involved recognised the other as an expert resource. Regular meetings were held, weekly for a couple of months at the beginning and end of each year, with longer gaps for resource design in the middle. Joe shared his knowledge of the exam specification and assessment objectives, whilst Jenny contributed her understanding of resource design, the inquiry process and skills development. Wiggins and McTighe’s (2005) principle of backward design is vital to successful inquiry, and the extended development period allowed learning intentions for the topic to crystallise. The initial focus of the unit on the successes and limitations of specific pressure groups led to the broader question of whether pressure groups are good for democracy, which was not only an important part of the Politics course, but also encouraged and promoted social and civic responsibility, in line with Standard 3, “Demonstrating civic responsibility”, of the Empire State Information Fluency Continuum on which FOSIL is based (Stripling 2019). Although students would spend significant time on independent inquiry, the unit would also include some integrated elements of direct instruction. The taught elements would importantly also be delivered using the language and strategies of inquiry-based learning. Although ideally students should generate their own questions and decide on an appropriate form of expression, with exam classes working towards a very clearly defined set of learning objectives within a tight timeframe, it is sometimes necessary to focus on particular inquiry stages. In this case, the overarching inquiry questions were provided and the form of expression mandated, while students were supported in taking personal ownership of the inquiry through subsidiary questions during Investigate and Construct.



9 Deep Collaboration by Teacher and Librarian to Develop an Inquiry Mindset 

 123

Investigation and exploration led to further questions for the teacher and librarian, such as: –– How might direct instruction and inquiry be effectively blended within the unit? –– How should the teacher and librarian support the students to find and work with resources? –– What sort of scaffolding would best support students to develop higher-order analysis and evaluation skills? –– How could the format of the Express stage most effectively support our aims? –– How could effective notetaking during Express be facilitated so that students could gain maximum benefit from each other’s work? These questions shaped the inquiry and drove the design of the graphic organisers (Figure 9.5).

Construct: Building Accurate Understanding Based on Factual Evidence An early realisation that every student essay could be viewed as a mini-inquiry led to the design of several essay planning wraps (Figure 9.4). Printed double sided on A3 paper, a page was folded in the centre to wrap around student essays. The clear FOSIL colour coding helped students locate themselves in each inquiry stage. The example provided focuses on Construct which is the link often missing between information, knowledge and understanding. The wraps are now used extensively throughout the course, supporting analytical, structured essays, embedding the FOSIL cycle and promoting the idea of essays as inquiries and students as inquirers. The impact of the wrap cannot be overstated. It has become the centrepiece of assessment across the entire department, and it has close cousins in a variety of subjects, such as Geography, Drama, and Physical Education. Since students wrote essays throughout the course, the aim in the Pressure Groups inquiry unit was to give students the opportunity to Express their understandings differently. The Oxford-style debate format was used with two sides arguing for or against a predetermined statement known as a motion. The debate was carefully staged through a series of graphic organisers (Figure 9.5) and required students to present reasoned arguments to challenge each other’s evidence, promoting analysis and evaluation skills. The motion, “This house believes that X is a successful pressure group”, led to a vital Connect stage exploring the meaning of pressure group success and the factors influencing success. Another key feature of successful inquiry design is advance planning to ensure the availability

124 

 Joseph Sanders and Jennifer Toerien

Figure 9.4: Essay planning wrap



9 Deep Collaboration by Teacher and Librarian to Develop an Inquiry Mindset 

 125

Figure 9.5. Graphic organisers to support the 2019 and 2020 inquiry (https://fosil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Pressure-Groups-Inquiry-Journal-2020. pd ; https://fosil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/6FA-Politics-Pressure-Groups-InquiryJournal.pdf)

126 

 Joseph Sanders and Jennifer Toerien

of plenty of accessible investigative material. A good knowledge of the students and an exploration of available resources enabled the selection of suitable UK pressure groups for each student. Pairs of students were assigned to each pressure group. The paired research groups matched students of similar verbal ability to make the debates more balanced, with each person providing support for the other in gathering information. Students who would benefit from extra demands were assigned pressure groups that were known to present significant challenges in locating and interpreting suitable resources at the Investigate stage. Students were told which side of the debate they would be on just before it started, encouraging them to investigate both sides and consider how evidence might be challenged and defended. They were then encouraged to focus on rebuttal skills, with balanced arguments required in A-level essays. Students became more discerning about the sources they used, for fear of being unmasked by their peers as uncritical researchers, and the blue Construct graphic organiser became a vital “crib sheet” during their debates. For their exams, students would need to discuss different pressure groups, and it was important that they learnt from each other’s debates. The fact that each pair was debating a different pressure group, and that all needed to gather evidence from every debate, was designed to prevent students in the audience from becoming passengers and uninvolved. A separate note-taking graphic organiser was prepared for the audience to gather evidence for their own essays. Following the debates, students would be asked to design their own pressure groups to showcase what they had learnt about successful pressure groups, and also to write an exam-style essay. After a year of preparation, it was time to move on to Express to deliver the unit.

Express: Making the Compelling Case Given the Evidence and the Audience Students went through the inquiry cycle twice over the course of ten lessons, with a different focus each time. Cycle 1 took place during lessons 1–7 and Cycle 2 was undertaken during lessons 8–10. Cycle 1 focused on finding, evaluating and using sources to support a particular point of view and Cycle 2 focused on evaluating different perspectives and forming and presenting an evidence-based conclusion.



9 Deep Collaboration by Teacher and Librarian to Develop an Inquiry Mindset 

 127

Cycle 1: Focus. Finding, Evaluating and Using Sources to Support a Point of View Joe began the unit by introducing the basic ideas in a gamified, concept-based lesson, following up with two reputable pre-selected articles about pressure group success and failure to read for homework, using a Connect and Wonder graphic organiser to elicit links to prior knowledge and additional questions. In 2019, the first year of the programme, Jenny introduced the Investigate stage with a lesson on internet search strategies and source evaluation, using CRAAP (Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy and Purpose) testing (Blakeslee 2004). Students tended to default to the pressure groups’ own websites and needed strategies to engage critically with the websites as well as encouragement to seek different perspectives. Students recorded their investigations in Investigative Journal graphic organisers, which encouraged them to evaluate their sources and reflect on their findings. In subsequent years Joe delivered this lesson. An important part of the library strategy is empowering individual teachers to deliver specific inquiry skills themselves, freeing librarians for wider collaboration. Students were allotted at least a full week of independent research homework during the Investigate stage to enable exploration of a wide range of sources at their own pace. In the meantime, the teacher spent two lessons introducing different types of pressure groups including trade unions, think tanks, cyberactivists, and lobbyists which would be essential for the second cycle of the inquiry, where students would be required to explore a wider range of group types. Lobbyists and cyberactivists, for example, are frequently differentiated with the former being considered undemocratic and the latter a grassroots activity. Students were supported to Construct their understanding independently during lesson time because they had gathered plenty of information but needed help to organize it to prepare for the demanding debate task. The lesson allowed plenty of discussion with the subject teacher in structuring arguments, pre-empting rebuttals, and forming convincing evaluation, all key exam skills. It is not surprising that this stage yielded a resource now used in various forms in every unit of work in the A-level Politics curriculum (Figure 9.6). During the debates the audience took notes to gather evidence for their essays. The graphic organiser originally designed for use was similar to the Figure 9.6 Construct sheet used to prepare for the debates (Figure 9.7). It turned out to be too structured for aural notetaking and the cognitive load was too great. For 2020 the note-taking sheet was redesigned around a Cornell note approach, which is more flexible and easier for students to use at speed. It was also recoloured from Express pink to Investigate red and Construct blue to acknowledge the fact that although the debaters were in the Express stage, the audience was in an information gathering Investigate stage of a new cycle. The organiser proved much more

128 

 Joseph Sanders and Jennifer Toerien

Figure 9.6: Construct sheet for debates (https://fosil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/ 08/6FA-Politics-Pressure-Groups-Inquiry-Journal.pdf)



9 Deep Collaboration by Teacher and Librarian to Develop an Inquiry Mindset 

Figure 9.7: Student audience note-taking graphic organisers for debates (https://fosil.org.uk/resources/?fosil_title=pressure%20groups)

 129

130 

 Joseph Sanders and Jennifer Toerien

effective and also introduced students to the useful skill of Cornell note-taking (Figure 9.7). The Reflect stage of the student inquiry contained opportunities for peer- and self-assessment. Jenny created reflection slips and a summary reflection document to help students pause and consider their product and process (Figure 9.5), which tailored feedback to the aims of the inquiry and brought structure to the subsequent feedforward to the second cycle. Feedforwarding focuses on development in the future rather than feeding back on past performance.

Cycle 2: Focus – Evaluating Different Perspectives and Forming and Presenting an Evidence-based Conclusion In the first year, 2019, students were asked to design their own fictional pressure group in Cycle 2. While they enjoyed this, the activity did not meet its original aims. For subsequent years a more purposeful second stage was created (Figure 9.8 and Figure 9.9) focusing on different types of pressure group and their role in a democratic society.

Figure 9.8: How the Express stage of the inquiry changed after the first year

From 2020 onwards in the second cycle of the inquiry students wrote an article for The Orwell Youth Prize, an external competition that gave students a more realistic purpose. They were given a curated set of online resources to save time and allow them to focus on evaluating the evidence. Students needed exposure



9 Deep Collaboration by Teacher and Librarian to Develop an Inquiry Mindset 

 131

to subtopics in preparation for their exams and were required to read, make notes on, and evaluate each other’s articles at the Reflect stage.

Outcomes of Express The result was a carefully structured and scaffolded guided inquiry (Figure 9.9), with students working on different subtopics towards the same goal, expected to learn from and critically review each other’s work (Callison 2015, 18). Adopting a questioning attitude throughout built a level of implicit reflection into student habits. The FOSIL-based scaffolds for students meant that teacher exposition remained minimal, often a feature of well-planned inquiry. The resources take significant time to create and refine, but once generated, lead students through the process. Nevertheless, practices which remain central to inquiry are formative assessment and adaptive teaching. Pairing students off for competitive debates takes some thought, as poorly balanced pairs can lead to one-sided debates and limited evidence, analysis and evaluation. Formative assessment is necessary as students transition from one stage of the cycle to the next, with the teacher planning collaborative activities and providing tailored feedback to inquiry homework. Some corrections are inevitably required, even with a clear framework. The other major change that occurred in 2020 was the development of a LibGuide to support the inquiry. It became a central pillar of support for students, providing guidance and easy access to graphic organisers and a sophisticated suite of curated resources for the second inquiry cycle; fortuitously it was in place before the COVID-19 school closures and the inquiry was able to run successfully online through Microsoft Teams in 2020.

Reflect: Evaluating Process and Product The Pressure Group inquiry unit continues to be a success, meeting its original aims of improving both skills and knowledge retention, and the level of debate has improved each year. Though assessment of oracy remains largely absent from most A-level exams, with the exception of languages, increasing emphasis is being placed on the importance of oracy in UK schools, for example, through the Oracy All-Party Parliamentary Group report (UK Parliament 2021). The impact on student oracy of our Pressure Groups unit was striking, with previously shy or reticent students beginning to forward astute, undergraduate-level arguments. Remote learning during the 2020 Covid-19 UK school shutdown increased the emerging impact on reticent students, with

132 

 Joseph Sanders and Jennifer Toerien

Figure 9.9: The structure of the inquiry in 2020 and 2021

much of the anxiety of physically standing up in front of peers removed, leaving the mental space for verbal jousting craved by many of the students who sign up to study Politics.



9 Deep Collaboration by Teacher and Librarian to Develop an Inquiry Mindset 

 133

The Orwell prize essay at the second Express stage nudged students towards the techniques required for exam success in Politics essays. In addition, the pooling of findings led to genuine, natural collaborative learning with all students contributing to a rich database of evidence for their peers. The final essays were based on very well-researched evidence and a familiar structure. The outcome of the two inquiry cycles was that essays were overwhelmingly improved, both in terms of knowledge and skills. Longer term, the use of Construct sheets in the Pressure Group inquiry unit, combined with the creation of the essay-planning wrap, meant that, by the end of Year 12, Politics students were far more adept at structuring their essays. It was gratifying to observe the UK government assessment objectives and the AO2 and AO3 skills (Pearson Edexcel 2019, 55) of analysis, forensically unpicking arguments, and evaluation, forming and justifying conclusions, become part of the student vernacular. There is a growing trend for A-level Politics students to select Pressure Groups as their chosen Paper 1 essay option topic in practice exams and assessments, demonstrating increased engagement with the unit. The quantitative success of the inquiry as measured by grades is harder to ascertain as there was no intention initially to undertake an impact study, and consequently there was no suitable pre-intervention evidence for comparison. Intriguingly, a comparison of the 2020 and 2021 iterations of the inquiry, the 2021 group made a very small 1% improvement in average marks for the inquiry unit, and a 2.3% improvement in the period three months after the inquiry. Although not statistically significant, the data may hint that the inquiry may have an increasingly positive effect on student attainment each year, but it is impossible to control for the effects of the 2020 Covid 19 UK school shutdown, which meant that the inquiry unit was run remotely in 2020. Observation suggests that student outcomes have improved each year since 2018 not because of the Pressure Group inquiry but because of the increased immersion of students into inquiry-based learning which is gradually being embedded into other areas, consolidating knowledge and skills in a more structured way. Since the inception of explicit inquiry-based learning into Politics in late 2018, its use has spread to every unit in the course, and to other related A-level optional subjects such as Economics. Through recyclable graphic organisers such as the Investigative Journal, Cornell notetaking sheet, Construct sheets and the essay-planning wrap, students have become more familiar with the inquiry structure. Although the inquiry took time and energy to set up, very little further refinement was needed after the second year. The initial goal was not a short-term fix. It was always hoped that collaborative inquiry design in one unit would light a fire across entire subjects and faculties. Ongoing reflection and evaluation were vital. Frequent meetings were held to plan future collaboration, hone resource

134 

 Joseph Sanders and Jennifer Toerien

design and monitor impact on students. The continuous deep collaboration was a transformative experience for both teacher and librarian, and the progress made would have been impossible without it. Alongside weekly meetings was an ongoing reflective thread on the FOSIL Group forum. Just as students were encouraged to evaluate their own and each other’s work and to adopt a questioning attitude throughout, so too were teacher and librarian who reflected honestly and publicly on progress. The forum discussion also provided an important record of the development of the inquiry which will help others in planning future collaborations. It is important to emphasize that the approach to the Politics unit was not a complete change of teaching style but of stance; inquiry-based learning involves some direct instruction. Many of the concepts and theories were first carefully discussed and embedded through a homework reading task and an introductory lesson. For the first year it was as much work, if not more, than usual when it came to curriculum design and resourcing. Teachers and librarians still contribute just as much expertise. There is no sense of students just being left to work it all out by themselves. FOSIL is about learning by finding out for, not by, yourself. FOSIL gave teacher, librarian and the students a framework to organize thinking and processes, and students became less passive, realizing that every stage was vital to their long-term outcomes. As one student cynically put it when discussing the FOSIL essay-planning wrap, “I don’t like it but it works…”, described by Joe and Jenny as the broccoli phenomenon. “Broccoli is good for you whether you like the taste or not”.

Where To Next? The collaboration described in this case study has already led to fundamental changes in the structure and delivery of the A-level Politics course at Oakham, introducing inquiry and embedding FOSIL resources throughout. On a wider school level, it resulted in significant sharing of practice in several departments, spanning all age groups, approaching curriculum design with teacher/librarian collaboration at the fore. By providing evidence that inquiry-based learning can work successfully beyond the archetypal project, myths were debunked within the School and opportunities opened up for collaboration across subjects. The benefits of genuine deep and sustained long-term collaboration between teacher and librarian were not felt only by students and colleagues. Teacher and librarian grew significantly as educators through the experience, learning from each other and from the students, and developing something very special in the process that



9 Deep Collaboration by Teacher and Librarian to Develop an Inquiry Mindset 

 135

would have been beyond either individually. The whole definitely was greater than the sum of the parts.

References Blakeslee, Sarah. 2004. “The CRAAP Test.” LOEX Quarterly 31, no. 3: 6–7. https://commons. emich.edu/loexquarterly/vol31/iss3/4. Callison, Daniel. 2015. The Evolution of Inquiry: Controlled, Guided, Modelled and Free. Santa Barbara: Libraries Unlimited. The FOSIL Group. 2019. “The FOSIL Inquiry Cycle.” https://fosil.org.uk/fosil-cycle/. Galileo Education Network. n.d. “What is Inquiry?” https://galileo.org/articles/what-isinquiry/. Pearson Edexcel. 2019. “A Level Politics Specification.” https://qualifications.pearson.com/ content/dam/pdf/A%20Level/Politics/2017/Specification%20and%20sample%20 assessments/A-level-Politics-Specification.pdf. Stripling, Barbara. 2019. “Empire State Information Fluency Continuum.” https://slsa-nys. libguides.com/ifc. UK Parliament. Oracy All-Party Parliamentary Group. 2021. Speak for Change: Final report and Recommendations from theOracy All-Party Parliamentary Group Inquiry. https:// oracy.inparliament.uk/sites/oracy.inparliament.uk/files/2021-04/Oracy_APPG_ FinalReport_28_04%20%284%29.pdf. Wiggins, Grant, and Jay McTighe. 2005. Understanding by Design. Expanded 2nd edition. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Available at https://www.sweeneydesignphoto.com/ uploads/1/1/9/6/119696250/understanding-by-design-expanded-2nd-edition.pdf.

Violet H. Harada

10 F ostering Civic Engagement and Quality Learning through Community-Centered Capstone Projects Abstract: This account describes a state-wide project in Hawaii involving librarian and teacher teams guiding high school students through their final academic culminating capstone projects. The chapter identifies key components of a community-centered approach to inquiry-based learning, namely, identifying community issues that mattered to the students, engaging community experts as mentors, and developing projects that had a broader societal focus. Along with a description of the training program for the instructional teams, the chapter focuses on the outcomes and insights gained by the students and by the teams working with them. Keywords: Civic engagement (Education); Constructivism (Education); Information literacy – Study and teaching; Lifelong learning

Introduction Meaningful learning happens when students use information to develop critical analytical skills and practice reflective engagement. It requires the meshing of disciplinary content with a process that fosters curiosity and inquiry. Compared to teacher-led assignments, community-focused learning provides students with a sense of agency. It goes beyond content mastery to applications that assume local and global dimensions of exploration. David Perkins calls such learning “lifeworthy learning” that erases the silos separating traditional approaches to disciplinary study and focuses on students’ personal choice, commitment, and passion (2016, 16). Pathways to Excellence and Achievement in Research and Learning (PEARL), was a government grant-funded initiative, in which teams of teachers and librarians in Hawaii promoted inquiry that extended beyond the parameters of the school and brought students into the public arena. The project capitalized on local and physical landscapes to introduce the interplay of disciplines and emphasized a hands-on approach to wrestling with real-world issues surrounding the students. This chapter provides background information on the PEARL training program and the context for the expectations and outcomes intended for both https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110772586-012



10 Fostering Civic Engagement and Quality Learning 

 137

the instructional teams and the students. A major portion of the chapter provides snapshots and anecdotes of specific student and team experiences immediately following the training and continuing beyond the three years of the grant.

Project PEARL The PEARL initiative received funding from the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) for three years and commenced in 2010. As a collaborative effort between the Hawaii State Department of Education and the University of Hawaii (UH), the project’s major objective was to train teams of teachers and librarians from high schools in the State to use an inquiry-based approach to assisting students ages 15 to 18 in completing capstone projects. These projects served as culminating academic experiences for students, who received special honors distinction at graduation. Students were asked to select a topic, profession, or social problem that interested them, conduct research on the subject, create a paper and a final product demonstrating their learning acquisition or conclusions, and give an oral presentation on the project to a panel of teachers, experts, and community members who collectively evaluated its quality (Harada 2016, 2).

Teams applying for participation in the training program were required to include a librarian. Over the grant period, there were two cohorts with a total of twenty-four teams from schools in urban sites on the island of Oahu and various rural communities on the Big Island of Hawaii, Maui, and Molokai. A few schools required projects of all graduating senior students aged 17 to 18. Most of the secondary campuses implemented capstone work as a voluntary activity for special recognition (ibid., 1–3). The PEARL design team that implemented the training consisted of a project director, a faculty specialist, and two high school librarians. The director (and author of this chapter) was a professor who coordinated the school library specialization in the UH Library and Information Science Graduate Program. A faculty specialist from the UH Information and Computer Sciences Department, who held a doctorate in curriculum studies, served as the project evaluator. In addition, the team included two school librarians from an award-winning high school who served as PEARL trainers. The IMLS grant was used to defray costs for participants’ travel to training sites on Oahu, university course credits, and hiring of the high school librarians who served as trainers. Each of the two cohorts participated in a year-long professional experience that incorporated research-based pedagogical practices to assist students in

138 

 Violet H. Harada

planning investigations, collecting and interpreting data, and presenting results to authentic audiences comprising appropriate individuals with expertise in the subject of the student’s product (Stripling 2020, 19). The constructivist approach to capstone work was influenced by Carol Kuhlthau’s Information Search Process (ISP) (Kuhlthau 2004, 41–52) and by aspects of the Guided Inquiry Design (GID) framework (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2007, 53–59). The training focused on several key elements of the GID framework: –– Open, Immerse, and Explore, that captured the open exploration of themes and issues about which students were curious, and –– Identify, Gather, and Create, that dealt with the gathering and critical analysis of information from diverse sources. The importance of a collaborative approach to working with students was a crucial aspect of Project PEARL. Collaboration involved students working with each other, with the teacher, the librarian and most importantly with the community. Community mentors were key in helping young researchers gain a range of skills and acquire in-depth knowledge. Along with Kuhlthau’s approach to inquiry-based learning, Project PEARL also introduced valuable facets of Barbara Stripling’s recursive inquiry model that underscored connecting to interests, asking provocative questions, using a range of relevant resources, and constructing and expressing findings in compelling narratives and authentic products (Stripling 2010, 17–19). The training targeted strategies that promoted critical decision making and the generation of questions that explored the unknown rather than restating answers easily found (Stripling 2014, 94–97). To assess the effectiveness of the training, the PEARL design team employed questionnaires before commencing training and after the year-long implementation. School teams also posted monthly reports online throughout the execution phase. Post-implementation site visits and interviews were conducted by the project evaluator. In addition, participants created electronic portfolios with examples of student projects. In assessing student work, the school teams devised rubrics and checklists based on general criteria that had been collaboratively developed in the training. The criteria included understanding of content, interaction with community experts, rigor of questions addressed, selection and use of relevant resources, and synthesis of information from research and experience. At the end of the funding period, the design team produced a training guide in electronic and printed formats to enable replicating the project as a model for future professional development and made the document available to public and private schools in the State. An account of the training model developed by



10 Fostering Civic Engagement and Quality Learning 

 139

Project PEARL was also published in School Library Research to strengthen communication (Harada 2016). The following section describes some of the projects undertaken by the students.

The Capstone Projects Students selected a range of issues that merged local and global community concerns with their personal interests and strengths. The following examples capture the diverse nature of the students’ pursuits.

Working with Foster Care Youth on Financial Literacy Maya integrated her concerns about the needs of underserved young people at risk with her research in financial literacy. Recognizing that basic financial education should be available to everyone, she focused on children in foster care. She explained, “They have a high statistic of failing and dropping out of school and becoming homeless. I really wanted to give these kids a chance to succeed.” To create her lessons, Maya conducted research along two critical prongs: finances and financial literacy and information about foster care and the support systems in place. Maya worked with a group of fifteen young people ranging from middle to high school aged 11 to 18 at Susannah Wesley Community Center located in a low-income neighborhood on Oahu. She taught a total of six lessons over three days with each session lasting from one and a half to two hours and covered topics such as the basics of counting change, money management, and different types of expenses to consider. The staff at the community center were invaluable mentors: “They helped me through every step of my project and with my lessons. They were also present at every lesson I hosted.” She journaled: “Financial education should NOT be a privilege; it should be provided to everyone. I also learned that foster care children are just normal kids. Working with them was fun, and I learned so much.”

140 

 Violet H. Harada

Designing an Art Classroom When Ronald’s high school announced that it would be redesigning the art classroom, he decided to combine his passion for artistic pursuits with his emerging interest in architectural design by sketching a possible new classroom. Ronald seized the opportunity to research a range of designs. As he studied different options, he realized the impact of the environment on behavior and learning. His mentors included experts from Group 70, an architectural firm in Honolulu, and from faculty at the UH School of Architecture as well as a retired UH art professor. Ronald surveyed students to determine what would make an appealing learning space for his peers. His ideas included adjustable lighting, flexible creation spaces, expanded display areas, color recommendations, and adequate storage areas and electrical outlets. Ronald presented his design recommendations to the faculty and many of his concepts were ultimately incorporated in the remodeled classroom. His faculty advisors noted, “Ronald’s personal growth represented the kind of learning that happens when a student is set free to pursue his own quest for knowledge. His achievement exemplifies what happens when we go beyond our four walls and our students work alongside the community.”

Developing Personal Care Products Lani had always been interested in the effects of personal care products on people’s health and the environment. She decided to investigate the chemicals in such products, including potential carcinogens and irritants that might be absorbed by the skin in significant amounts. The school librarian asked a faculty member in the biological sciences department at a local community college to assist Lani in her research. Lani ultimately created a soap that she described as “an entirely natural, cruelty-free and environmentally friendly hollow ball of glycerin filled with a liquid Castile soap.” She elaborated, “Consumers can crack the orb over their heads to use the liquid soap as shampoo. They can also use the outer shells to wash themselves for a one-time use, which is great for showering at the beach or while camping.” Lani admitted that tackling the project was “immensely challenging” and, at points, she felt like giving up. Coming from an extended Filipino family of seventeen adults and children, Lani was the only family member born in the US and the first to identify English as her first language. Her persistence in completing the project was borne of her determination “to serve as a model for my cousins here and in the Philippines, to set the bar high, and show them that through hard work, anything is possible.”



10 Fostering Civic Engagement and Quality Learning 

 141

Supporting Local Food Businesses Cara wanted a project with genuine community impact. She realized that more than 90% of Hawaii’s food was imported, and she was concerned about the vulnerability of the State’s citizens during union strikes and natural disasters. Her extensive fieldwork included studying sustainable food production from the perspectives of both consumers and entrepreneurs. She reviewed government documents to determine the economic benefits of local food production and worked with personnel at Honolulu Gourmet Foods to understand the pros and cons of production and marketing. As part of her research, Cara volunteered to help the food company at its booth during a farmers’ market held at Kapiolani Community College. Cara ultimately concocted her own soup recipe made from local produce and sold it through a fresh food truck at the UH Sustainability Courtyard. She concluded: We have a long way to go when it comes to supporting local businesses, but this situation is improving. When there’s more of a demand, people’s health and Hawaii’s economy will get better. We must strive for self-sustainability if we are thinking about our future generations.

Creating an Alternative to Fossil Fuels The desire for a cleaner environment drove Carol and Linda to search for an alternative to harmful fossil fuels. In their exploratory research, the partners identified algae biofuels as a promising source of renewable energy because algae are environmentally sustainable, easy to cultivate, and growable in salt water and wastewater locales. They designed a photo-bioreactor system that provided algae with carbon dioxide, oxygen, and aquarium lights for an optimal growth environment. Their biology teachers in advanced placement courses served as project collaborators. For additional consultation, the school librarian also connected the students with a doctoral candidate in the UH Chemistry Department. According to Linda, the algae analysis process was “extremely arduous.” They had to decide which nutrients could be used, what concentrations would work, and what type of algae might be used. Carol elaborated: We had thirty-nine different bottles to perform the analysis on. We had to prepare it by putting the algae in test tubes, put them through the centrifuge, then we had to put in a phosphate buffer and centrifuge it again about three times. It took us about two months in the school lab. Next, we decided to do hexane extraction to remove the lipids from the algae

142 

 Violet H. Harada

and get the pure biomass content. Handling the hexane was difficult since it is not safe for the human body, and it evaporates very quickly.

Carol and Linda garnered top honors at the 2017 Oahu district science fair, and presented their research at the Regeneron International Science and Engineering Fair administered by the Society for Science in Los Angeles.

Other Projects Instructional teams applied the same inquiry process with groups of students completing community-focused projects in general courses. In one of the high schools in Honolulu, students in the hospitality academy learned that the remains of the largest World War II prisoner-of-war and internment site in Hawaii, Honouliuli, was located just miles from their school. Concerned about why the US government would imprison their own citizens, the students conducted individual research on different aspects of the incarceration of Japanese Americans in internment camps during the war. To assist the students, the school librarian invited volunteers from the Japanese Cultural Center of Hawaii (JCCH) to introduce primary resources from the center’s archival collection. When students discovered that the JCCH was petitioning for Honouliuli to be designated as a national monument, they volunteered to canvas the community for signatures and write supporting letters to members of Congress. In 2015, President Barack Obama signed the historic proclamation (Harada 2020, 83–84). The students’ research and petitioning efforts profoundly impacted on them. Ken, one of the seniors in the academy, commented: “This project has shown me why hidden parts of history must be taught to our generation. We need to pass on these stories to let everyone remember this is what our government did! And that this can happen again.” Two graduates of the program were panelists in the 2016 Regional Youth Summit on the Japanese American incarceration that was held in Honolulu. One graduate became the first student serving on the Day of Remembrance planning committee at Creighton University in Nebraska. The Day of Remembrance is an annual observance of the Japanese American Confinement which is held on or near February 19, the day in 1942 when President Franklin Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066 that authorized the mass evacuation of Japanese American families from states on the West Coast and their imprisonment at various sites in the US.



10 Fostering Civic Engagement and Quality Learning 

 143

Insights Gained and Lessons Learned In a pre-training survey administered by the PEARL designers, many of the teachers admitted that their understanding of the inquiry process was restricted to helping students identify acceptable topics and use a limited number of print and online resources. Through post-training logs and reports, team members shared the following insights gained about effectively building a culture of inquiry.

Importance of the Initiation Phase School teams repeatedly mentioned the importance of the exploratory phase of inquiry in establishing trusting relationships, investigating issues in the community that were both local and global, and having students articulate how personal interests and prior experiences might be connected. As one teacher noted, “The questions pursued were no longer simply what and when, but what if, how come, and why did it matter.”

Student Agency At the beginning of the training, teachers acknowledged that they often took the lead in generating questions for students to research. Several of them admitted that they felt “it saved time to give students the questions.” As a result of the training, the teams realized that student engagement in the questioning phase was crucial for students to assume ownership of their work. The training introduced different protocols and strategies that teams could adopt to help students create researchable and purposeful questions. The strategies included conversation starters, interest grids and checklists, overview maps, and journal postings to actively involve students in formulating questions that stimulated their curiosity and challenged them to consider deeper investigations.

Self-reflection Early in the training, teams expressed past disappointment with the quality of students’ reflections. One teacher said, “Students write one or two sentences to produce superficial reflections.” Another confessed, “We often run out of time for assessment and reflection.” In the training, the design team relied heavily on modeling the reflective process and involved everyone in regular postings of

144 

 Violet H. Harada

individual and group reflections. As teams provided both the time for reflection and for responses to students’ reflection logs, they discovered that the students had substantive reflections to share. One teacher observed, “I was surprised that students were able to articulate their feelings, understand their learning targets, and provide wonderful feedback on their learning process.”

Iterative Process Both teachers and librarians understood that inquiry learning was a nonlinear process. A fresh insight for them, however, was applying that same approach to their planning. One team reported: The students took a step back at one point because they realized their questions weren’t that good. We had continued on but then we realized that we should get them to think a little more about their questions, so we also took a step back to the question generation phase. We wanted to get them thinking about what they had done and how improvements could be made. The big a-ha was giving ourselves permission to make changes without feeling like we had failed. We were involved in a spiral of trying things, observing the results with students, getting student feedback, and returning to the design table again.

Critical Involvement of the Community The teams found community mentors to be invaluable guides in students’ quests for answers and their pursuit of deeper questions. While the teachers and librarians were key in identifying potential contacts for the students, the students also took the initiative to search for experts through family networks and online searches. The list of mentors ranged from engineers to poets, state government personnel to volunteers in nonprofits, and scientists to small business owners.

Outcomes for Librarians The team approach to working with students was critical in capitalizing on the strengths and skills of both teachers and librarians. Librarians assumed valued roles as partners, who advised both faculty colleagues and students and provided links to specialized community resources. One teacher wrote: Hands down, the BEST part of this project has been the collaboration with our librarian. She was always willing to check out another source or pursue another angle or clarify a difficult



10 Fostering Civic Engagement and Quality Learning 

 145

idea. Working with her bumped up the quality of the thesis statement tremendously. The academic and personal support that I received from my librarian created a vehicle for my own growth as a writer and as a teacher.

Student Learnings In their learning logs, students described specific disciplinary knowledge gained and technical and communication skills acquired. The students’ reflections on growth and change in their learning dispositions were of special interest to the instructional and PEARL design teams. Insights from three students were:

Building Resilience Kevin created a shape identification program for object recognition and classification that used a USB camera attached to a handheld Beaglebone Black processor, a software tool with wide uses in various industries. He wrote: I was constantly plagued with technical issues each step of the way. This occasionally took a toll on my motivation to complete my program. Enduring the challenges taught me about perseverance. I also realized that delaying the need for instant gratification reaped a greater reward at the end.

Admitting Vulnerability Jennifer sketched designs for a 21st century classroom. She reflected: It was okay to be vulnerable and naive. I was exposed to so many new fields and experiences. I truly felt like I was five years old again in a foreign world. At times, I was scared and uncertain, but my school advisors assured me that this was a natural part of making new discoveries. Little by little, I witnessed my personal growth.

Self-empowerment Heather developed a lesson on identity theft that could be taught at her school and designed a smartphone app to reach a wider audience. She concluded:

146 

 Violet H. Harada

The project gave me the unique opportunity to take charge of my own education. That freedom made it fun to explore. At the same time, the freedom was the most challenging part of the process. At first, I was almost paralyzed with indecision because I wanted to pick the ‘right path’ for my project. Once I realized that there was no ‘right’ way, I was able to enjoy trying different things and learning from both successes and failures. In short, the most rewarding part was the freedom to learn in a real-world setting.

Progress Beyond the Grant While the official grant period began in 2010 and ended in 2013, the school teams continued their work on a voluntary and less formal basis until 2020 when the pandemic shut down in-person attendance in schools and capstone activities were placed on hold. During the intervening years, the PEARL director and evaluator maintained annual contact with the librarians via email, phone, and in-person visits and documented the information shared. Up to 2020, eighteen of the twenty-four librarians continued to work with partners although the team compositions changed with retirements, transfers, and movement in teaching assignments. The PEARL director and evaluator also captured samples of student projects by receiving permission from parents to establish direct email contact with students recommended by the school teams.

Conclusion Community-based projects in Project PEARL allowed students to make vital personal connections with their sense of place, their history, and their future. They became navigators on dynamic journeys where they were citizens contributing to the health and sustainability of their local communities and the world at large. As guides and mentors, the instructional teams realized that they were teaching students to be lifelong learners who would always ask the questions, “What should we do?” and “Why should we do it?” As a learning community, both adults and students embraced a sense of public spirit that resulted in their personal investment in the well-being of their communities (Levine 2016, 31–32). Importantly, knowledge building extended beyond the classrooms and the schools. It required the creation of an environment where “knowledge flows multi-directionally inside, outside, and beyond the classroom” (Stefl-Mabry 2006, xi). In Project PEARL, the overarching insight gained was that lifelong learning is built on making intelligent and responsible decisions which are inextricably linked to establishing communities where learning occurs for everyone.



10 Fostering Civic Engagement and Quality Learning 

 147

Acknowledgement Special thanks to Dr. Michael-Brian Ogawa, who served as the evaluator for Project PEARL during and beyond the grant-funded period.

References Harada, Violet H. 2016. “A Practice Centered Approach to Professional Development: TeacherLibrarian Collaboration in Capstone Projects.” School Library Research 19. https://www. ala.org/aasl/sites/ala.org.aasl/files/content/aaslpubsandjournals/slr/vol19/SLR_ PracticeCenteredApproach_V19.pdf. Harada, Violet H. 2020. “Inspiring Civic Action: Collaborating with the Japanese Cultural Center of Hawaii.” In Radical Collaborations for Learning: School Librarians as Change Agents, edited by Violet H. Harada and Sharon Coatney, 77–88. Santa Barbara: Libraries Unlimited. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier. 2004. Seeking Meaning: A Process Approach to Library and Information Services. 2nd ed. Westport: Libraries Unlimited. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier, Leslie K. Maniotes, and Ann K. Caspari. 2007. Guided Inquiry: Learning in the 21st Century. Westport: Libraries Unlimited. Levine, Peter. 2016. “The Question Each Citizen Must Ask.” Educational Leadership 73, no. 6: 30–34. Available at https://www.academia.edu/22295702/The_Question_Each_Citizen_ Must_Ask Perkins, David N. 2016. “Lifeworthy Learning.” Educational Leadership 73, no. 6: 12–17. Available at https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/lifeworthy-learning Stefl-Mabry, Joette, and Barbara L. Lynch. 2006. Knowledge Communities: Bringing the Village into the Classroom. Landham: Scarecrow Press. Stripling, Barbara K. 2010. “Teaching Students to Think in the Digital Environment: Digital Literacy and Digital Inquiry.” School Library Monthly 26, no. 8: 16–19. Stripling, Barbara K. 2014. “Inquiry in the Digital Age.” In Inquiry and the Common Core: Librarians and Teachers Designing Teaching for Learning, edited by Violet H. Harada and Sharon Coatney, 93–105. Santa Barbara: Libraries Unlimited. Stripling, Barbara K. 2020. “Advocating for the ‘Why’ of School Libraries: Empowering Students through Inquiry.” Knowledge Quest 48, no. 4: 14–20. Available at https://files.eric.ed.gov/ fulltext/EJ1250013.pdf.

Liz Hoggatt and Martha Pangburn

11 E  xploring Social Justice Using Guided Inquiry Design Abstract: Sophomore (second year) students in an English Language Arts (ELA) classroom at Norman High School in Oklahoma in the US researched social justice issues during a Guided Inquiry Design® unit. During the research process, learners constructed an inquiry question, completed academic research, and created an annotated bibliography. Learners synthesized their research to create products using makerspace tools that illustrated the problem, posed a possible solution, and crafted a written rationale connecting the research to the creative product. This chapter explores the most transformative aspects of the teaching and highlights student engagement. Keywords: Inquiry-based learning; Social justice; Language arts (Secondary); Makerspaces in libraries

Background Norman Public Schools (NPS) serves over 14,000 students in seventeen elementary schools, four middle schools, and two high schools, all staffed by full-time, certified school librarians, in the state of Oklahoma in the US. In 2015, NPS was preparing to go one-to-one with technology at the secondary level so that all students would have their own mobile computer devices. In response, “the director of libraries and instructional technology began investigating research-based instructional models that would transform learning in the classroom” (Lewis, Simmons, and Maniotes 2018, 24). During the investigation, the director of libraries came across Carol Kuhlthau, Leslie Maniotes, and Ann Caspari’s book, Guided Inquiry Design: A Framework for Inquiry in Your School (2012). After sharing the book with other district leaders, the director led a book study with the district curriculum team and building level school librarians. At a later stage, Leslie Maniotes presented Guided Inquiry Design® (GId) in a three-day institute format to a contingent of teachers and school librarians at NPS. GId is a linear looking process consisting of overlapping phases in a flow of connected learning experiences. It helps teachers design inquiry based learning as it occurs. The Guided Inquiry Design® Framework contains eight phases:

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110772586-013



11 Exploring Social Justice Using Guided Inquiry Design 

 149

Open, Immerse, Explore, Identify, Gather, Create, Share, and Evaluate (Guided Inquiry Design, n.d.). GId has become an integral part of the NPS strategic plan and has been implemented at every level of the district, from pre-kindergarten through twelfth grade (PK-12). NPS was the first district in the US to incorporate the GId process district-wide. In addition, it was the first school district to have its own in-house GId trainers, selected and trained by Maniotes. The unit outlined in this chapter was taught at Norman High School (NHS), located in Norman, OK, US, population 122,000. The learning team included the co-authors, one of whom is an English teacher and department chair and the other is one of two school librarians at NHS. NHS serves 2,100 students in grades nine through twelve, aged fourteen to eighteen, with approximately 50% economically disadvantaged. In 2017, NHS opened a College and Career Center, including a new school library facility, housing a print collection of 25,000 books, flexible seating, a coffee bar, makerspace, two classrooms, and three small group study rooms. The library operates on a flexible schedule and is staffed by two certified school librarians, a library secretary, and a technology support specialist. Virtual resources including ebooks, audiobooks, and databases are available on demand via the library’s website. The makerspace supports creativity and hands-on learning through the provision of 3D printing, audiovisual tools, an electronic cutting machine, wood cutting and burning, a sewing machine, virtual reality, clay, paint, art supplies, and more. There is a long history of a collaborative culture at NHS, and GId has been an ongoing process since 2015. At the site level, an extended learning team consisting of the classroom teacher, school librarians, and the innovative learning coach works with students. The district’s commitment to one-to-one provision of a computer for each student allows for the effective use of digital technology, which is central to teaching and learning. The relationship between classroom teacher and school librarian is integral to the success of GId. Teacher and librarian together integrate technology with inquiry-based learning methods to foster learner motivation, engagement, and empowerment by encouraging students to ask their own questions and create knowledge around specific curricular content and process standards.

150 

 Liz Hoggatt and Martha Pangburn

Planning and Designing the Unit The featured unit was in the English Language Arts (ELA) course designed and implemented in a sophomore (tenth grade or second year) of high school with students aged fifteen. It was taught over a period of seven weeks. The class had been exploring justice throughout the school year, thematically through fiction texts, through an informative essay focused on various court cases, and through exploration of their ideals and values tied to the concept of justice within society. The extended learning team comprised several classroom teachers and two school librarians. They attended a three-day training institute where they collaboratively planned the unit. In the training institute, the team generated ideas and received coaching. The feedback inherent in the process was integral to the team’s preparation and success. The unit was taught in various iterations including a more traditional approach in which the unit culminated in a research paper. The iteration discussed in this chapter is the one involving the most engagement from students. It focused on making which in this context is defined as an iterative process through which students design and create products demonstrating acquired knowledge. The learning team found that students enjoyed showcasing their skills in the final learning products. These skills would not normally be assessed in an ELA course. To ensure successful delivery of the unit, the learning team relied heavily on the Inquiry Tools provided with GId including Community, Circles, Journals, Logs, and Charts to be used throughout each phase. “These tools are designed so that students are practicing strategies for inquiry across the entire inquiry process. They are learning ways to manage their inquiry, develop their thinking, and learn from a variety of information sources” (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2012, 39). The inquiry tools were largely completed digitally which allowed the learning team to assess student learning and progress instantly, and target learners who needed a conference or intervention. Inquiry Circles were used to assess the inherent emotional lows and highs of the research process. A true Inquiry Community was formed in the class through the use of the various tools. Within the framework of GId, the subject matter being taught must be rooted in an overarching concept. The classroom teacher chooses an umbrella concept pulled from the curriculum standards or one that will be a starting point for student engagement (Donham 2010, 9). Due to the nature of ELA standards and curriculum, the concept becomes secondary to the skills developed and assessed over the course of the unit. While social justice was the concept in this unit, the team’s ELA learning outcomes were focused on critical thinking, refining a viable



11 Exploring Social Justice Using Guided Inquiry Design 

 151

research question, assessing credibility and validity of information, and presenting researched and synthesized information in a creative, unique way. The school librarians determined that the unit touched on all six of the shared foundations from the AASL Standards for Learners: Inquire, Include, Collaborate, Curate, Explore, and Engage (American Association of School Librarians 2018, 17). With the planning completed, implementation began following the eight phases of the GId framework of Open, Immerse, Explore, Identify, Gather, Create, Share, and Evaluate.

Implementation of Guided Inquiry Design The Open Phase The Open phase is the catalyst to inquiry and is intended to unlock students’ minds and stimulate their curiosity (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2012, 2). Due to the brief nature of the Open phase, the team wanted to create a powerful opener that would introduce students to the idea of themselves as agents of change. The Inquiry Community completed two quick activities. Students first generated a definition of social justice individually, written in their Inquiry Journals, and followed up by working with a partner to expand the ideas. The Inquiry Community then created a definition, and students were shown some scholarly definitions as well. One definition used was: Social justice encompasses economic justice. Social justice is the virtue which guides us in creating those organized human interactions we call institutions. In turn, social institutions, when justly organized, provide us with access to what is good for the person, both individually and in our associations with others. Social justice also imposes on each of us a personal responsibility to work with others to design and continually perfect our institutions as tools for personal and social development (Center for Economic and Social Justice, n.d.)

Finally, to encourage students to think about their own worlds, they were asked to consider an issue in today’s world, globally or locally, that they would like to change. The activities and conversations stimulated students to open their minds to think about the world around them.

152 

 Liz Hoggatt and Martha Pangburn

The Immerse Phase In Immerse, the focus is on building background knowledge, connecting to content, and helping students discover interesting ideas (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2012, 3). During the brainstorming session in Open, students discussed issues about which they were passionate. In the Immerse phase, it is the teacher’s job to expose them to unfamiliar social justice issues. To present different issues, the team created a slideshow to shed light on specific social justice issues. The slideshow included multimedia snapshots, short video clips, images, political cartoons, and graphs with statistics. Students were asked to identify the issues presented in the slides and to reflect on each in their Inquiry Journals. The result of the activity was a thorough and wide-ranging list of social justice topics designed to spur the students’ curiosity and interest and to help them choose a relevant topic. In Immerse, the team felt students should be exposed to various maker tools so that the final product would be a creative endeavor with full student choice. The school librarians curated an activity during which students visited stations exposing them to the various tools available in the makerspace. Students were asked to reflect in their Inquiry Journals on the tools they found most inspiring.

The Explore Phase Once students had been fully immersed in the concept of social justice, the Inquiry Community moved into the Explore phase to investigate ideas, look around, and dip in (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2012, 3). The focus was on exploring new ideas, not on finding facts. Learners were tasked with finding two to three social justice issues not yet discussed during the unit, locating an article, graphic, or video about each issue, and adding it to their Inquiry Logs. Learners also responded to Inquiry Journal prompts throughout the Explore phase, such as: –– Why research social justice topics? Does it matter? Why or why not? –– Why is it important to discuss controversial issues? How do we discuss these things in a civil manner? After learners identified two to three issues of interest, they met in Inquiry Circles to share the details and their impressions. Learners were asked to outline their chosen topics, along with the reasons for selection and why the issues identified were considered social justice issues. The credibility of sources used was also



11 Exploring Social Justice Using Guided Inquiry Design 

 153

discussed. Listeners were asked to identify one question about the issue, share it with the group, and add it to their Inquiry Journal. Through the use of the Inquiry Tools, learners compiled a list of all topics discussed, as well as any other topics of interest that had not been examined. Learners were also asked to consider the definition of social justice previously outlined. At the conclusion of the Explore phase, learners reflected on their work and identified their top three social justice issues, as well as their top two making tools, and explained the rationale (Figure 11.1). Ultimately the team’s goal was for each student to make a Third Space connection: The basic tenet of Guided Inquiry is Third Space, a dynamic learning space that connects school learning to the student’s world. It is the ‘watermark’ of Guided Inquiry, a pervasive underlying impression that influences all aspects of the design and guidance throughout the inquiry process (Maniotes 2017, 5).

It is through Open, Immerse, and finally Explore that learners form their Third Space connections.

Figure 11.1: Topic Choice

154 

 Liz Hoggatt and Martha Pangburn

The Identify Phase In the Identify phase, learners are asked to pause, ponder, identify the inquiry question, and decide the direction of research (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2012, 4). The classroom teacher and school librarians collaborated to present a lesson on generating and improving questioning, using the Question Formulation Technique (QFT) from the Right Question Institute. Learners were shown three images related to the social justice concept to stimulate thinking and to provide the opportunity to practice asking questions. After learners brainstormed questions related to one of the images, the school librarians facilitated a class discussion around the images. This lesson helped students adopt the appropriate mindset for questioning, which is crucial in the Identify phase. Leveled questions are another tool used to give structure to the question formulation process and explain the expected complexity. Leveled questions involve a scaffolding approach with three types of questions: gathering, processing and applying. After the lesson, learners returned to their various Inquiry tools, including Journals and Logs, to complete an Identify Chart (Figure 11.2) to clarify their thinking and prepare the first draft of the research question. Once learners had a research question, they were ready to conference.

Figure 11.2: Identify Chart: Research Question



11 Exploring Social Justice Using Guided Inquiry Design 

 155

Conferencing is an all-hands-on-deck situation where the whole learning team is available to meet with students. Learners are required to conference with two peers, a school librarian, and the classroom teacher. When conferencing during question formulation, educators help guide learners as they identify research questions and devise plans to fill knowledge gaps. Educators pose the following questions: –– Is your question open-ended? –– Is it researchable? –– What do you think the answer to your question will look like? –– How will you begin researching your question? Learners were encouraged to write down all iterations of their questions throughout the Identify phase. Conferencing helped ensure that learners wrote a complex, researchable inquiry question connecting to the Third Space. It is important to recognize that the complexity of a question may not be understood until a learner’s thinking is explained. Interest is more important than depth or complexity. The individualized nature of the conferences is important. What may be a simplistic question for one student, may be complex and nuanced for another due to the degree of interest. Some examples of student questions were: –– How has mass incarceration affected communities of color? –– How can the government protect its citizens while maintaining their civil liberty of privacy? –– Why are rights limited for women in Saudi Arabia, and what can we recognize and help with to give women more gender equality?

The Gather Phase In the Gather phase, learners collect important information, go broad, and go deep (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2012, 4). It is a key phase for the school librarian’s involvement as librarians introduce information resources to learners. The learning team used Inquiry Journals and informal check-ins to formatively assess learners’ progress and understanding of the inquiry process. School librarians and classroom teachers collaborated to conduct mini lessons on appropriate citation practices, formatting, and in-text references, as well as effective searching techniques and evaluating the credibility of sources. Educators reflected that the Gather phase is often when students experience frustration and begin to feel overwhelmed. It is vital to check in on their feelings

156 

 Liz Hoggatt and Martha Pangburn

toward both the process and the information they are finding. Examples of Inquiry Journal prompts included: –– Why do you think academic databases (a collection of information that includes access to academic journals) tend to be more credible for research than a standard Google search? –– Scale your feelings about the research process so far: –– 4 – I’m feeling good. No complaints! I am confident in my topic and the resources I am finding. –– 3 – I’m okay. I understand the assignment, I am just nervous about it all coming together. –– 2 – I’m overwhelmed and I’m not sure I am moving in the right direction. I need to conference with you. –– 1 – I’m really stressing out. Where do I even begin? Help me! Help me! Through student reflection from previous GId units, the learning team knew that Gather was one of the most challenging phases. Conferencing was therefore added to this phase to support learners as they located and evaluated information, made connections, and gained understanding. By sitting down with students, the team was able to discuss progress, and any problems including what searches were working, what sources had been found, and what was still needed to answer their questions.

The Create Phase During the Create phase, students communicate, reflect on learning, and go beyond facts to interpret and extend their knowledge (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2012, 4). Students craft their learning products. Typically, a larger portion of class time is devoted to this phase. A day in Create is busy and can look different for each individual project. Some students monitored their 3D prints, some slathered paint on canvas, some used sound equipment to create podcasts, and some typed short stories. Create is an important phase for active involvement of classroom educators and school librarians in monitoring student work. Before students began creating, they were asked to submit Create proposals describing their projects, the supplies needed, tools to be used, plans for working at school or home, timelines, and how their products would answer their inquiry questions. Students were encouraged to move beyond the literal in their creations, focusing more on the abstract or artistic interpretations of their research. A member of the learning team had visited the Modern Art Museum in Fort



11 Exploring Social Justice Using Guided Inquiry Design 

 157

Worth, Texas and viewed an exhibit titled Ladder for Booker T. Washington, 1996 by Martin Puryear. The sculpture features a crooked multi-story wooden ladder with rungs of various lengths climbing to the ceiling. Booker T. Washington was a 19th century activist educator and leader in the African American community. The sculpture was meant to represent the challenges in Washington’s life (Zucker 2019). In Puryear’s own words, the sculpture connects to “the whole notion that [Washington’s] idea of progress for the [African American] race was a long slow progression” (Puryear 2011). A photograph of the exhibit was shared with students as an example of an abstract way to evoke a social justice issue and to serve as inspiration. To ensure students were progressing, the learning team created a checkpoint for students to show the first iteration of their learning products, known as the prototype. For the prototype checkpoint, students took pictures or screenshots to demonstrate their progress and were asked to reflect on the challenges thus far, their next steps, and how the product connected to the inquiry question. The checkpoint became vital for alerting the learning team to the need for intervention with students who were struggling. Students crafted a short written rationale for their learning products as the final component of Create. The piece was intended to succinctly answer the inquiry question through embedding evidence from properly cited sources into the students’ writing, and it included a clear explanation of how the learning product demonstrated acquired knowledge and answered the inquiry question. This written component assessed multiple research and writing standards and also functioned as a museum-type explanation of exhibits in the Gallery Walk presented in the Share phase.

The Share Phase “Share is the culminating phase in the inquiry process when students share the product they have created to showcase what they have learned with the other students in their Inquiry Community” (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2012, 5). During the Share phase, learners presented their final products over a two-day period in a Gallery Walk format, with classmates and stakeholders rotating through each presentation. Audience members asked questions of each presenter and answered reflection questions after visiting each station. During Share, the learning team conducted formative assessments by way of observing both students’ interactions with their audience and how they communicated their findings through their product.

158 

 Liz Hoggatt and Martha Pangburn

The Evaluate Phase In the Evaluate phase, both the learning team and the students evaluate achievement of learning goals, and reflect on content and process (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2012, 5). Often at the completion of a long research project, the teacher completes the evaluation, the student passively receives the grade, and the class moves on to the next unit. A unique aspect of GId is the student’s role in self-evaluating completed work and the learning process. Both classroom teacher and school librarian evaluated learner process and product through a 4-point rubric assessment: iteration, initiative, design/layout, and written rationale. This rubric was intended to assess students’ proficiency of aforementioned ELA standards in the written rationale as well as their ability to be reflective of their own process. Additionally, students were asked to self-evaluate and reflect on their new understandings as part of the student’s written rationale, and through a Google survey with reflection questions included. Students’ feedback is always interesting. They often shared frustrations with aspects of the research process but felt great pride in their final products.

What Worked Well One of the goals of the unit was to foster an environment where students could take creative risks to display their learning. The development of the school library makerspace helped empower students to shift from passive consumers of information to active creators and innovators. The makerspace allowed for greater differentiation of teaching and learning to accommodate multiple intelligences, and to make connections via interdisciplinary studies. Students who participated in learning experiences involving technology and innovation proved themselves to be inquisitive, imaginative, and motivated. Makerspaces are fueling innovation, allowing for voice and choice and further enriching experiences. Conferencing with learners is an integral component of GId. It helps build rapport, provides differentiated instruction, supports learners when they need it most, and fosters inquiry and curation. When conferencing during the Identify phase, teachers and school librarians helped guide learners as they identified research questions and devised plans to fill knowledge gaps. In Gather, conferencing helped learners curate as they used information literacy skills to gather, evaluate, and synthesize information from a variety of sources. During Create,



11 Exploring Social Justice Using Guided Inquiry Design 

 159

conferences assisted learners as they synthesized information, processed through iterations of their product, and used information ethically. Student reflection and formative assessment are deeply embedded in the process through the use of Inquiry Tools in each phase. Student reflections were recorded in an Inquiry Journal making note of interesting information, posing questions about content, and addressing the inherent emotional highs and lows of research. The Inquiry Journals in Google Docs became a vehicle for two-way communication between learners and teachers and allowed teachers to know where and when learners needed extra support.

Implications for Future Implementation of Inquiry Students flourished in the creative environment driven by choice and student interest. Several students were chosen to participate in the NHS Creativity and Learning Showcase, a schoolwide event displaying student work in a variety of disciplines. The publicity about the successful use of GId ultimately resulted in other disciplines engaging in GId and in using making experiences. Inherent in the GId process is placing the responsibility for learning on students which can be difficult for teachers. Letting go of teacher control allowed for a transformative experience for teacher and student. Initially, there was a misconception that the teacher and school librarian needed to be adept with every maker and technological tool in the arsenal. In fact, students taught the adults about these tools throughout the process. Because GId focuses on the process rather than the product itself, classroom educators and school librarians are afforded the freedom to discard misconceptions. It is imperative to participate fully in the collaboration necessary for GId and to use the power of the team. Each member brings strengths and expertise to the work with student learning. Through making, the team was able to see the richness of student engagement in learning driven by their interests in relation to content and product.

Concluding Thoughts Students who were apathetic or disengaged on a normal school day flourished in the inquiry-based, choice-driven environment. The products created demonstrated considerable innovation and imagination. One student chose the broad social justice topic of racism and produced one of the most creative final products,

160 

 Liz Hoggatt and Martha Pangburn

a pair of Vans tennis shoes, one white, one black, with text about figures from the American Civil Rights Movement. He wore the shoes to school and posted his work on Instagram. Another student studied the effects of child abuse and produced a speed-paint time-lapse video featuring original artwork as well as voice-over narration with statistics about child abuse. Another young man, who was critical of his work all year, took great pride in his final product. He posed a question about the effects of domestic violence on male victims as opposed to females. He ingeniously used a lamp and a white lamp shade to shed light on the issue, presented domestic violence statistics for men on one side of the lampshade in black marker and for women on the other, and covered the underside of the half with women’s statistics with black fabric. The creative treatment allowed the men’s statistics to be illuminated when the lamp was turned on, which became an eye-opening and powerful visual display of his findings. The examples of student work highlight the empowerment of student voice and innovation. Through the GId process, students engaged in deep learning, crafted nuanced products that featured their research, and showcased individual creativity and ingenuity. It is through the GId framework that the learning team was afforded the freedom to craft a unit that allowed for student autonomy and voice to be central to the teaching and learning processes. Students, teachers, and school librarians found the experience transformative.

References American Association of School Librarians (AASL). 2018. National School Library Standards for Learners, School Librarians, and School Libraries. Chicago: American Library Association. Overview available at https://libguides.ala.org/school-library-expert/ aasl-natl-standards; Framework available at https://standards.aasl.org/wp-content/ uploads/2018/08/180206-AASL-framework-for-learners-2.pdf. Center for Economic and Social Justice. n.d.. “Defining Economic Justice and Social Justice.” https://www.cesj.org/learn/definitions/defining-economic-justice-and-social-justice/. Donham, Jean. 2010. “Deep Learning through Concept-Based Inquiry.” School Library Monthly 27, no. 1 (January): 8–11. Available at https://www.academia.edu/333398/Deep_ Learning_Through_Concept_Based_Inquiry. Guided Inquiry Design. n.d. “Guided Inquiry Design® Framework.” https:// guidedinquirydesign.com/gid-process/. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier, Leslie K. Maniotes, and Ann K. Caspari. 2012. Guided Inquiry Design: A Framework for Inquiry in Your School. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited. Lewis, Kathryn Roots, Shirley Simmons, and Leslie Maniotes. 2018. “Building a Culture for Learner Voice and Choice through Inquiry.” Teacher Librarian 45, no. 4 (April): 24–27. Available at https://guidedinquirydesign.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/ TLBuildingCultureforLearnerVoice.Apr18-.pdf.



11 Exploring Social Justice Using Guided Inquiry Design 

 161

Maniotes, Leslie K., ed. 2017. Guided Inquiry Design in Action: High School. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited. Puryear, Martin. 2011. “Abstraction and ‘Ladder for Booker T. Washington’: Interview” Art21. This interview was originally published on PBS.org in September 2003 and was republished on Art21.org in November 2011. https://art21.org/read/martin-puryearabstraction-and-ladder-for-booker-t-washington/. PBS. Last modified September 9, 2003. https://www.pbs.org/video/art21-time/. Zucker, Adam. 2019.”Still Climbing Booker T. Washington’s Ladder.” Artfully Learning. November 11, 2019. https://theartsandeducation.wordpress.com/2019/11/11/ still-climbing-booker-t-washingtons-ladder/.

Carol Jones and Cherity Pennington

12 U  sing the Guided Inquiry Design Model at Shawnee Middle School Abstract: The authors describe the steps a group of eighth grade English language arts teachers and their school librarian took in planning, developing, and implementing an award-winning Guided Inquiry Design® unit at Shawnee Middle School on the topic of the Tulsa Oklahoma Race Massacre of 1921 (Oklahoma 2001). The professional development undertaken for the teaching team is described. The resources identified for use and software support tools are outlined. The actions taken throughout each phase of the inquiry unit are delineated. The authors discuss challenges the teaching team faced during the process as well as future plans. Keywords: Tulsa Race Massacre, Tulsa, Okla., 1921; Inquiry-based learning; Instructional teams

Introduction In 2019, English language arts (ELA) classroom teachers and a school librarian from Shawnee Middle School (SMS) designed and implemented for eighth grade students, aged thirteen to fourteen years, a learning unit using Guided Inquiry Design® (GId) as its inquiry framework. The unit focused on the Tulsa Race Massacre, a century-old event in which a White mob attacked people, homes and businesses in an area of Tulsa, Oklahoma, known as the Greenwood District or Black Wall Street, because of its thriving Black-owned businesses and affluent residents. The event is one of the worst instances of racial violence in US history and was largely unknown to most Oklahomans until the last couple of decades following the establishment of an official Race Riot Commission (Oklahoma 2001). The Commission’s report recorded the destruction of property, the social and economic dislocation and devastation of the Black community, the extensive casualties, and the total destruction of the business district of Greenwood. The Oklahoma State Department of Education has since taken steps to recognize the importance and impact of historical events and requires that all public school students learn about the Tulsa Race Massacre (Oklahoma State Department of Education, n.d., 45).

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110772586-014



12 Using the Guided Inquiry Design Model at Shawnee Middle School 

 163

The Context Oklahoma became the 46th state of the US in 1907 and is a relatively young state at 114 years old, compared to the rest of the US (Oklahoma Digital Prairie, n.d.). Located in the South Central region of the US, Oklahoma is known for its residents’ diversity and rich cultural history. It is the home of 39 federally recognized Native American tribal nations (University of Oklahoma, n.d.). Sadly, Oklahoma’s diversity is rooted in the state’s and nation’s history of racism emanating from its leaders. The federal Indian Removal Act of 1830 led to forced migration of many Native American nations to what is now the State of Oklahoma (Oklahoma Digital Prairie, n.d.). Traveling with the Native Americans were many of their former slaves who were freed following the American Civil War. They became known as Freedmen, settled near the tribal land allotments, and formed their own towns composed entirely of African-American residents. A few of the towns survive until today (O’Dell, n.d.). Greenwood, an all-Black neighborhood of Tulsa, grew in wealth because of its proximity to Tulsa where many people had jobs in oil production, and because one of its founders, O. W. Gurley, bought land and sold it to Black professionals in hopes of building a self-sufficient town with all the necessary utilities and services within its own boundaries. Today, Oklahoma is a state that benefits from its racial diversity. The city of Shawnee, Oklahoma, reflects much of the state’s diversity. Located in central Oklahoma, Shawnee has approximately 31,300 residents (US Census Bureau 2020). As the city’s largest public school district, Shawnee Public Schools reflects the city’s and state’s diversity. Shawnee Middle School serves all 760 sixth, seventh, and eighth graders, students aged eleven to fourteen, within the district’s geographic boundaries. Close to 47% of students are White, 6% are Black, 13% are Hispanic, 14% are Native American, and 20% have two or more racial origins. The majority of the latter group include Native American as one of their races. According to the district’s American Indian Education office, approximately one-third of students are citizens of a Tribal Nation. The students’ racial diversity and their desire to understand more about the state’s history led the SMS school librarian and eighth grade ELA teachers to develop a GId unit for their students related to the history of the Tulsa Race Massacre.

164 

 Carol Jones and Cherity Pennington

Professional Development of the Teaching Team In the fall of 2017, with administrative approval, the SMS school librarian at that time began a book study of Guided Inquiry: Learning in the 21st Century (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2015), with ELA classroom teachers who were also interested in using GId in their classrooms. The eighth grade ELA teachers made learning about and using GId part of their written goals for the 2017–18 school year. The first year attempting to use the GId framework was rocky for several reasons including a lack of professional development for the educators beyond the book study. The school librarian and classroom teachers understood that in order to use GId effectively with students, they needed expert-driven professional development. By 2019, the SMS librarian who had begun exploring GId with classroom teachers had left to take a position as the library services coordinator for the school district. Within the new position, she advocated for and secured funding for Leslie Maniotes, author of many of the GId publications and leader of GId professional development institutes, to lead in-person training for the new SMS school librarian and a select group of classroom teachers serving sixth, seventh, and eighth grade students. Following Maniotes’ in-person professional development sessions, which included her critiques and guidance as the educators designed their GId units, the teachers’ use of GId as a teaching and learning model improved tremendously. Maniotes later provided professional coaching for team members on the GId framework with follow-up professional training via video conferencing. As professional reading for educators, the book Guided Inquiry Design: A Framework for Inquiry in Your School (Kuhlthau, Caspari, and Maniotes 2012), proved to be the most useful print resource for the educators throughout the planning and teaching processes.

Design Phases Planning and Preparation The entire unit, including the teaching team’s planning time, lasted approximately eight weeks. Part of the planning process included determining an overarching concept for the learners to explore during the GId unit. The concept identified was that assumptions people make often cause conflict. The team developed this concept while wrestling with how to connect the Tulsa Race Massacre to prejudices and assumptions learners see around them. The team



12 Using the Guided Inquiry Design Model at Shawnee Middle School 

 165

determined the student learning goals which included information literacy skill development prior to designing the unit’s content along with the formative and summative assessments to be used throughout. The educators developed a timeline and assigned responsibilities for each step of the GId process to each teacher and other staff members within the school or district as needed. The teaching team chose the learning resources to be used and the instructional strategies to be adopted. Multiple information sources in a variety of print and digital formats were chosen for learner access. The teaching team provided learners with a variety of fiction and nonfiction print titles as well as several research databases. An annual funding allocation to the school library was used to purchase instructional materials, and an anonymous donor from the local community provided classroom sets of the novel, Dreamland Burning (Latham 2017). The instructional strategy, Jigsaw, developed by the University of Oklahoma K20 Center, Authentic Lessons for 21st Century Learners, breaks up complex readings into equal parts to be shared between multiple students, and it was chosen for use. Various web-based instructional applications, including the Google Workspace for Education, the curation tool Wakelet, a platform for controlling, creating and curating engaging visual collections, and the video discussion tool FlipGrid from Microsoft were also selected. These preparation steps are not technically parts of the GId process but were necessary components of the foundation for the students’ successful GId experience. Co-planning time was vital to the process and the SMS schedule allowed for eighth-grade classroom teachers to have shared planning time. The school librarian’s flexible schedule combined with a full-time assistant allowed the school librarian to co-plan and co-teach. Following the planning and preparation for the unit, it was launched and delivered through the various phases of the GId framework: Open, Immerse, Explore, Identify, Gather, Create, Share and Evaluate.

Phase 1: Open The first phase of the GId framework is the Open phase, which serves to stimulate the learners’ curiosity. Given the unit’s focus on the theme of assumptions which might lead to conflict, the open phase involved use of resources which had been identified as addressing the theme in way which would engender discussion and open inquiry. Learners were asked to read the picture book Smoky Night (Bunting 1994) which had been inspired by the Los Angeles riots of 1992. Learners also examined a photograph of the 1932 painting The First Thanksgiving 1621 by Jean Leon Gerome Ferris. The teaching team used the lesson plans of the Stanford Historical Education Group related to this painting. Examining both resources

166 

 Carol Jones and Cherity Pennington

contributed to a discussion about the term assumption. The Open phase ended with each student completing an individual journal entry about a time in their lives when someone had made decisions based on an assumption about them. The purpose of the quick write was to help learners form a personal connection to the topic.

Phase 2: Immerse The goals of the Immerse phase are for learners to build background knowledge, connect to the unit’s content and discover interesting ideas. The teaching team used a variety of resources within the phase to fully immerse learners in the history of the Tulsa Race Massacre. Students engaged with videos and podcasts of survivors’ stories, newspaper reports, arrest records, interviews, and photographs. The resources used included the video segment Greenwood and the Tulsa Race Riots (PBS 2019), which is a clip from the Public Broadcasting Service’s documentary BOSS: The Black Experience in Business, and the audio recording Meet the Last Surviving Witness to the Tulsa Race Riot of 1921 (Gilles 2018). A set of display panels from a Tulsa Race Massacre traveling exhibit were borrowed by SMS from the Tulsa Historical Society and Museum and were used in the learning process. The K20 Center at the University of Oklahoma, a research and development center that promotes innovations in education, later purchased a copy of the display panels for the SMS library’s permanent use. In their literature classes, students read Dreamland Burning (Latham 2017), a novel written by a Tulsa author that combines historical and contemporary settings to recount the Tulsa Race Massacre and its aftermath. As they read the novel, students discussed how the fictional account aligned, or did not align, with the primary source documents they were examining, including arrest records, newspaper articles and podcasts of survivors telling their accounts. The students viewed or heard online many of the resources through the Oklahoma Department of Libraries digital collections, Digital Prairie. The culmination of the Immerse phase was a powerful visit from the author of Dreamland Burning.

Phase 3: Explore Within the next phase, Explore, learners were invited to explore interesting ideas, look around, and dip into content related to the topic of assumptions potentially leading to conflict. Students accessed the collection of curated resources assembled using the Wakelet software and viewed the TED Talk video Looks Aren’t



12 Using the Guided Inquiry Design Model at Shawnee Middle School 

 167

Everything: Believe Me, I’m a Model (Russell 2012) so they could explore other aspects related to assumptions. In the Explore phase, both students and teachers reported feeling overwhelmed. Feelings of bewilderment can be especially true for students who have not yet identified their inquiry topics precisely or formed clear ideas about them. The first year conducting the GId unit was the most strenuous and overpowering for the teaching team due to the different roles that teachers serve within GId. Laying the groundwork, planning for the process, and doing background research to support the process were the steps where teachers spent the most time. Reflecting, evaluating, and making changes for subsequent years, and often within the same year, also took time for teachers. However, teachers spent their in-class time serving as guides for the learners, not presenting content that students would passively receive. Some teachers stated they felt oddly lazy and inactive during times they were guiding the learners. One teacher specifically remarked that she did not feel she was teaching. Later, during a conversation between the teaching team and Maniotes, this same teacher reflected the following: You cannot follow a strict plan and say these are the things I am going to get done on this day. It is really important that people are fluid and flexible with this unit because you may need to spend a few days on something that the kids need — and whatever [that something] is going to be different with each group of kids that comes through. So, the flexibility and working with the kids, and working through the issues, and being patient with them, and scaffolding them through this research is really important.

Phase 4: Identify Following the first three phases of GId which were time-intensive but necessary, students were ready for the Identify phase where they would develop the questions that would guide their inquiries further. As students began developing their own research questions, they were guided to continue using content in the Wakelet; Gale in Context: Opposing Viewpoints, a database investigating divergent perspectives on important social issues; the research choices in the Oklahoma Digital Prairie archives; and other sources that would support their ideas and journeys of discovery (Hill and Mathews 2021; Hylton, Lansana, and Hill 2021; Weatherford and Cooper 2021). Some students found they needed to return to the Explore phase before they could adequately resolve issues and identify their questions.

168 

 Carol Jones and Cherity Pennington

Phase 5: Gather In the Gather phase, students explored and engaged with the general concept of the unit. They were told that they would continue with inquiry of their own selection that related to an area where they thought that assumptions held by individuals affected society as a whole. Students were not limited in their choices for further research and investigation. Some investigated historical eras where issues had arisen as a result of untested assumptions about people from different backgrounds, events, topics, or social issues. Research areas examined included the treatment of US citizens of Japanese descent during the WWII era; the potential impact of medical marijuana prior to its legalization in Oklahoma; topics relevant to teens such as video gaming, owning pit bulls, and vaping; larger social issues such as homelessness, poverty, and significantly differential payments to male sports figures versus female sports figures; issues related to world-wide audiences like COVID infection rates; and topics more closely linked to the US or Oklahoma, for example, infant/maternal mortality in certain racial groups. Students were guided to continue their research and information gathering through the previously used Wakelet and databases, such as Gale in Context: Opposing Viewpoints. Students used a variety of tools to obtain data and track their research. In the Gather phase especially, the goal is to collate the information found and link it to the sources used. An Inquiry Chart was used by the students to list their research questions along with each source as well as the source’s claim, evidence and reasoning data that related back to the question.

Phase 6: Create In the Create phase, students collaborated in a think-pair-share activity to discuss with their peers what they had learned about their questions. The activity allowed students to formulate their learning and to lead them to make decisions about what they wanted to create to demonstrate the learning. The students completed a proposal explaining what they wanted to create to outline their achievements and the understandings of their chosen topic. Students were given a choice of products they could create: a traditional research paper, a podcast, a video, a website or blog, or a slideshow. Some students chose safer, familiar products, while others chose products based on the content they found and the product that would best demonstrate their learning. For each product choice, the teaching team provided an assessment rubric and sample so learners knew in advance how the teaching team would assess their projects.



12 Using the Guided Inquiry Design Model at Shawnee Middle School 

 169

Phase 7: Share Once students created a product that demonstrated their learning, it was time to Share it with others. The teaching team asked each student to create a written teaser, a short introductory advertisement, about their project and to display the teaser with a QR code linked to the digital product. The QR codes and teasers were displayed on the walls outside classrooms. Students, school staff members and parents were given opportunities to scan the QR codes to view each project. The students recorded written responses explaining what they learned from each other’s creations. In the Covid environment when students could not wander or cluster, students could not use the scavenger hunt style of viewing other students’ work. Instead, the team posted the flyers into a shared Google folder where students could view classmates’ work. The change facilitated a higher level of engagement than the previous presentation format which surprised the teaching team. Students indicated they spent more time reading and viewing others’ projects, and they enjoyed the online approach because it facilitated access to the projects outside the classroom.

Phase 8: Evaluate The Evaluate phase gave the learners an opportunity to reflect on achievement of their personal learning goals as well as on the process they followed throughout the GId unit. Students each created a FlipGrid video answering the questions: –– What worked during the GId process? –– What surprised you? –– What did you learn about the topic, about the inquiry process, and about yourself as a learner/researcher? –– What would you change next time?

Challenges Encountered Despite the successes the teaching team and students had with GId, there have been challenges with the implementation. While many classroom teachers and the school librarian have embraced using GId and are seeing the positive impact of giving learners ownership of their inquiries, not all teachers at SMS share the same enthusiasm. Teachers who are not comfortable with research themselves

170 

 Carol Jones and Cherity Pennington

have balked at learning about GId and have avoided collaborating with other teachers and the school librarian within the framework. Another challenge is the time required to plan and conduct a GId unit. After the initial year introducing GId, subsequent years have faced obstacles created by the Covid-19 pandemic. The pandemic frequently interrupted students’ in-person learning in the 2019–20 and 2020–21 academic years. Learners experienced difficulty in accessing online learning platforms, even when technology and Internet access were available, which hindered effective guidance during the GId phases. Thankfully, in the 2019–2020 school year, the eighth-grade team had conducted their GId unit prior to the impact of the pandemic, and teachers felt students were armed with some tools to be independent learners while quarantined at home. When students returned to in-person learning in the 2020–21 academic year, the teaching teams wanted to conduct a GId unit with their students early in the teaching year but chose to focus more time on relationship building and social and emotional learning to establish trust with students rather than rush the inquiry process. The teachers’ choice to use scaffolding techniques of learning to enhance students’ experiences and to support student learning paid off for learners who had not been in school for several months. Students were subsequently successful in the GId process in the spring semester of that school year.

Future Plans Future plans for using GId at Shawnee Middle School include giving learners more choice during the Immerse phase; rather than all students reading the same novel, they will have guided choices. In the 2021–22 school year, the unit was modified to allow more student choice with literature circles. Students choose from the books Almost American Girl (Ha 2020), Angel of Greenwood (Pink 2021), Dear Martin (Stone 2017), Dreamland Burning (Latham 2017), Long Way Down: The Graphic Novel (Reynolds and Novgorodoff 2017), and This is My America (Johnson 2020). At the district level, future plans include expanding GId professional training to all school sites and grade levels. Administrators have expressed admiration for SMS’s success with the GId process, and the Tulsa Race Massacre GId unit has received both state and national awards, including the 2021 Sara Jaffarian School Library Program Award from the American Library Association (ALA 2021). However, because district leaders want to ensure teachers are not overwhelmed by the immediate trauma caused by the Covid-19 pandemic and are fully able to embrace the GId process, plans for expanding the training will be delayed.



12 Using the Guided Inquiry Design Model at Shawnee Middle School 

 171

References American Library Association (ALA). 2021. “Shawnee (Okla.) Middle School Wins ALA’s 2021 Jaffarian Award for Tulsa Race Massacre Program.” ALA Member News, June 3, 2021. https://www.ala.org/news/member-news/2021/06/shawnee-okla-middle-school-winsala-s-2021-jaffarian-award-tulsa-race-massacre. Bunting, Eve. 1994. Smoky Night. Illustrated by David Diaz. San Diego, CA: Harcourt. Gilles, Nellie. 2018. “Meet the Last Surviving Witness to the Tulsa Race Riot of 1921.” NPR. Code Sw!tch. Radio Diaries, Audio, 6-minute listen. May 31, 2018. https://www.npr.org/ sections/codeswitch/2018/05/31/615546965/meet-the-last-surviving-witness-to-thetulsa-race-riot-of-1921. Ha, Robin. 2020. Almost American Girl: An Illustrated Memoir. New York, NY: HarperCollins. Johnson, Kim. 2020. This Is My America. New York, NY: Random House. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier, Leslie K. Maniotes, and Ann K. Caspari. 2012. Guided Inquiry Design: A Framework for Inquiry in Your School. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier, Leslie K. Maniotes, and Ann K. Caspari. 2015. Guided Inquiry: Learning in the 21st Century. 2nd ed. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited. Latham, Jennifer. 2017. Dreamland Burning. New York: Little, Brown. O’Dell, Larry. n.d. “All-Black Towns.” The Encyclopedia of Oklahoma History and Culture. Oklahoma Historical Society. https://www.okhistory.org/publications/enc/entry. php?entry=AL009. OK.Gov. n.d. “Timeline of Oklahoma History: Events in Oklahoma Through the Years.” [Created by Digital Prairie Oklahoma Department of Libraries]. https://digitalprairieok.net/ ok-history/. Oklahoma. Commission to Study the Tulsa Race Riot of 1921. 2001. Tulsa Race Riot: A Report by the Oklahoma Commission to Study the Tulsa Race Riot of 1921, Compiled by Danney Goble February 28, 2001. Available at https://www.okhistory.org/research/forms/freport.pdf. Oklahoma State Department of Education. N.d. “Oklahoma Academic Standards: Social Studies.” https://sde.ok.gov/sites/default/files/documents/files/Oklahoma%20 Academic%20Standards%20for%20Social%20Studies%208.26.19.pdf. PBS. “Greenwood and the Tulsa Race Riots: BOSS: The Black Experience in Business.” YouTube Video. Clip 03:24. Posted by Thirteen, April 18, 2019. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yceK9LHFSA. Pink, Randi 2021. Angel of Greenwood. New York, NY: Feiwel & Friends. Reynolds, Jason, and Danica Novgorodoff. 2020. Long Way Down: The Graphic Novel. New York, NY: Atheneum. Russell, Cameron. 2012. “Looks Aren’t Everything: Believe Me, I’m a Model.” TED: TedXMidAtlantic. Video, October 2012. https://www.ted.com/talks/ cameron_russell_looks_aren_t_everything_believe_me_i_m_a_model?utm_ campaign=tedspread&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=tedcomshare. Stone, Nic. 2017. Dear Martin. New York, NY: Crown, 2017. Tulsa Historical Society and Museum. 2022. “1921 Tulsa Race Massacre.” https://www. tulsahistory.org/exhibit/1921-tulsa-race-massacre/#flexible-content. US Census Bureau. 2020. Shawnee city, Oklahoma; United States. QuickFacts. https://www. census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/shawneecityoklahoma,US/PST045219.

172 

 Carol Jones and Cherity Pennington

University of Oklahoma. Dodge Family College of Arts and Sciences. Native American Studies. n.d. “Oklahoma’s Native Nations.” https://www.ou.edu/cas/nas/resources/tribalinformation. University of Oklahoma. K20 Learning Center. 2020. “Jigsaw.” Authentic Lessons for 21st Century Learners. September 16, 2020. https://learn.k20center.ou.edu/strategy/179.

Jenna Nemec-Loise

13 C  uriosity, Conversation, and Connection Through Guided Inquiry Design Abstract: Presented as a replicable best practice, this chapter traces the evolution of a research and writing project from a fact-based report into an inquiry-rich experience for ten- and eleven-year-old students at a junior kindergarten through twelfth grade (JK-12) independent school, North Shore Country Day, in Winnetka in the midwestern United States. In addition to curricular and pedagogical pivots toward Guided Inquiry Design, discussion includes the impact of a relationship-based information-seeking behavior model on students’ curiosity about topics that interest them; conversation with peers about their research and writing processes; and connection with their school librarian, who becomes a learning partner, research mentor, and writing coach. Keywords: Information literacy; Information behaviour; Collaboration; School librarians – Professional relationships

Introduction The onset of the global COVID-19 pandemic posed unprecedented challenges for primary and secondary educators worldwide. For many, rapid pivots away from traditional classroom learning towards remote or hybrid modalities were unfamiliar at best and harrowing at worst. How would educators teach, and how would students learn? Amidst the uncertainty, school librarians shone. According to an American Association of School Librarians (2021) snapshot survey, “Whether in virtual, hybrid, or in-person settings, school librarians were essential in helping and often leading the efforts of their educator colleagues to transition to remote teaching and learning.” The International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) addressed pandemic collaboration between school librarians and teachers: As the world looks to imagine a future post-COVID, we can hope that a key part of this will be enhanced cooperation with libraries. As we have seen, when cooperation succeeds, students stand to benefit, reducing the risk of long-term negative impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic (IFLA 2020).

This chapter tells the story of how three colleagues and the lower school librarian seized opportunity and fostered innovation for fifth grade students attending https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110772586-015

174 

 Jenna Nemec-Loise

the US independent school of North Shore Country Day (NSCD) in Winnetka, Illinois, at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. Through Guided Inquiry Design, the collaborative team successfully reimagined a product-based deliverable as a process-oriented learning journey to inspire and sustain students’ curiosity, conversation, and connection.

Winnetka and North Shore Country Day In 2019, the village of Winnetka, sixteen miles from Chicago in the state of Illinois in the US, had a population of 12,316 and a median household income greater than $250,000 USD. North Shore Country Day (NSCD) is a junior kindergarten through twelfth grade (JK-12) independent school in Winnetka. While NSCD is located in Winnetka, student enrollment draws 540 students from diverse backgrounds in twenty-seven suburban communities and the city of Chicago (NSCD, n.d. d); and student demographics and realities do not necessarily mirror those of Winnetka residents. NSCD has a distinguished history and distinctive characteristics.

What Makes North Shore Country Day Different? Hallmarks of the progressive education movement, “Country Day schools originated in the US in the late 19th century. By building schools in the country, near city limits, students could be immersed in education during the day and return to home at night” (NSCD, n.d. a). NSCD is an independent school whose identity infuses the NSCD approach to education. According to the National Association of Independent Schools (NAIS), independent schools are close-knit communities that provide students with individualized attention. They challenge students to stretch their minds and go beyond academics to develop responsible, independent, and community-oriented students (NAIS, n.d.). Unlike public and other private schools, independent schools are unique in their philosophies, governance, and financing. Each is mission-driven; overseen by a board of trustees; funded largely through tuition dollars and charitable donations; and accredited by state-level bodies NSCD is governed by a 29-member Board of Trustees (NSCD, n.d. c) and financed through an $18 million USD operating budget, a $35 million USD endowment, and $1.4 million USD in annual giving (NSCD, n.d. a). Accredited by the Independent School Association of the Central States (ISACS), NSCD is a member of the Lake Michigan Association of Indepen-



13 Curiosity, Conversation, and Connection Through Guided Inquiry Design 

 175

dent Schools (LMAIS), a non-profit regional network of 39 educational institutions, and the NAIS (NAIS, n.d.). The school’s context and origins have led to the development of a clearly defined and targeted purpose: We prepare students with a challenging education that requires them to think critically, communicate effectively and engage fully in their intellectual growth and personal development. In doing so, they become self-confident, ethical citizens of the world who embody our motto, “Live and Serve” (NSCD, n.d. e).

The North Shore Country Day Library The Hall Library is the student-centered, faculty-focused heart of North Shore Country Day’s learning community. More than a space and a collection, the library is an inclusive celebration of people, relationships and diversity. A full-time lower school librarian and a full-time middle and upper school librarian curate library resources and deliver high-quality information literacy instruction that prepares students for success both in school and in life.

The Journey Begins The story begins with Fifth Grade Reports (FGR), a traditional product-based deliverable overseen by a fifth grade assistant teacher. The reports consisted of written and oral components designed to help students practice their emerging presentation skills. Working in groups of two to six, students gathered facts on their choices of topics within twelve pre-selected categories: historical events, music, inventions, geography/places, art, current events, environment, historical people, cultures, math/science, authors, and other, which could be negotiated with a teacher. Topics chosen included panda conservation, the Sydney Opera House, Jane Goodall, Jamaican culture, the history of ball sports, and living with a learning disability. After writing five-paragraph essays based on facts they learned during research, students presented their findings at weekly gatherings of the NSCD lower school community with single Google slides serving as visual aids. The slides contained images representing students’ topics as well as bulleted talking points drawn from their essays. Given time constraints, the primary FGR focus was on rapid completion of written reports rather than on authentic explorations of topics. In Fall 2020, it was decided that the lower school librarian

176 

 Jenna Nemec-Loise

would partner with the fifth grade learning team to discuss the evolution of FGR into a capstone lower school information literacy project which would be a concluding investigative piece of work for the students.

The Planning and Preparation Planning the new approach and preparing for it began with an examination of the school’s purpose, the role of the library, and finding an appropriate learning framework. Initial work by the learning team on to the new project focused on the NSCD purpose, which exemplifies the school’s identity and shapes the essential skills that drive JK-12 curricula and pedagogy (Figure 13.1).

Figure 13.1: North Shore Country Day Essential Skills

It was agreed that the NSCD purpose and essential skills resonated with the efforts to reimagine and rejuvenate FGR. But what would the elements look like in the new reconceived project? How would the local approach at NSCD be framed within a worldwide learning landscape?



13 Curiosity, Conversation, and Connection Through Guided Inquiry Design 

 177

Rethinking the Role of the Library The new project was a school library initiative. The learning team turned to the IFLA/UNESCO School Library Manifesto (IFLA 1999) and the IFLA School Library Guidelines, 2nd Edition (IFLA School Libraries Section Standing Committee 2015) for guidance. Almost immediately, the NSCD purpose was connected to the Manifesto, which promotes lifelong learning skills and imagination development as discernible pathways to lives of responsible citizenry. Similarly, the Guidelines “envision a world of inclusion, equity of opportunity, and social justice” (IFLA School Libraries Section Standing Committee 2015, 13), encouraging educational institutions to think globally while acting locally. The team accepted the ideas as natural fits with the school’s positioning: At North Shore Country Day, we believe that equity, diversity and inclusion are essential to the fulfillment of our mission, to the achievement of educational excellence and to the creation of a better world (NSCD, n.d. b)

Confident in the role the library could play in the projected new approach, the next question was formulated: How can an intentional school library project be designed and delivered to champion youth agency, yield authentic learning, and inspire students to become critical global thinkers who serve one another?

Finding the Appropriate Framework Having determined the overarching goals of the project and the role the library might play, a review of curriculum design options and pedagogical approaches was undertaken. This review led to Guided Inquiry Design (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2012, 2015). The Guided Inquiry Design framework places the learner at the center, and embedding habits of mind and social emotional learning within a flexible framework of eight phases: Open, Immerse, Explore, Identify, Gather, Create, Share and Evaluate. It emphasizes the educator’s role of guide and supporter. The team developing the new project found the overall framework to be: –– Innovative in its emphasis on research and information-seeking processes rather than products –– Holistic in its five kinds of learning, particularly information literacy, learning how to learn, and social skills (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2012, 8–9) –– Applicable to the NSCD purpose and IFLA/UNESCO school library foundations –– Customizable to NSCD teaching and learning goals and objectives

178 

 Jenna Nemec-Loise

–– Sustainable in its implementation as a capstone information literacy program for fifth grade, and –– Transferable to students’ academic and personal pursuits during their NSCD experiences and beyond them.

Shaping the New Project In formulating the new project, it was important to define its scope, name it appropriately, and ensure appropriate design to match the needs of learners.

Defining and Naming the Project Having selected Guided Inquiry Design, the team began reimagining the project through nomenclature that would capture the joy and enthusiasm to be felt by learners. Instead of creating product-oriented reports, students would engage in process-driven explorations. Rather than identifying themselves traditionally as students, 38 fifth graders would call themselves explorers. Rebadged as Fifth Grade Explorations (5GE), the new approach empowers fifth graders to tell the story of who they are as researchers, writers, and critical thinkers while emphasizing their: –– Curiosity about topics that interest them –– Conversation with peers about their learning and knowledge creation, and –– Connection to their school librarian, who serves as a guide during exploration. Through small group inquiry sessions, customized assignments, and one-to-one coaching, explorers answer research questions and create artifacts and at the same time learn more about their school library, their topics, and themselves.

Curriculum and Course Design The Guided Inquiry Design model was regarded as a roadmap with flexible options rather than a blueprint with fixed elements. The eight phases of Guided Inquiry Design (i.e., Open, Immerse, Explore, Identify, Gather, Create, Share, and Evaluate) provided the basic scope and sequence for the 5GE course. In a dual role as Director of Library and Information Literacy and Lower School Librarian, the author became the learning team lead who guided explorers’ research,



13 Curiosity, Conversation, and Connection Through Guided Inquiry Design 

 179

writing, and reflective processes; fifth grade teachers served as a support network for both the explorers and the librarian as all embarked upon their respective learning journeys. With the scope and sequence and learning team established, the course vision was: –– Cohort-based, with explorers participating in small group settings –– Explorer-driven, with explorers serving as the chief researchers, writers, and decision makers about the shapes and directions of their 5GE projects –– Peer-focused, with explorers seeking ideas and feedback from one another –– Process-oriented, with a final product comprising only a small portion of explorers’ work, and –– Formative rather than summative in assessment.

The Continuing Story: Content and Delivery Launched in November 2020, the 5GE program began as a series of two-week intensive minicourses, which explorers attended in rotating cohorts of five to six. During the 2020–21 school year, seven cohorts participated in 5GE minicourses between November and May. Each minicourse consisted of ten 30-minute inquiry sessions paired with daily homework assignments framed around six Guided Inquiry Design phases: Open, Immerse, Explore, Identify, Gather, and Create.

Inquiry Session 1: Connecting with Your Topic/ Open Inquiry Session 1 invited explorers to unpack their curiosities with and for one another. Asking questions facilitated conversation and guided explorers toward their passions and personal interests, which included topics such as endangered species, climate change, the LGBTQ+ community, world languages, military history, Olympic sports, and global music. Lively exchanges connected explorers in organic ways that built camaraderie and enthusiasm for the work ahead. At the end of Inquiry Session 1, explorers responded knowledgeably to the following questions both orally and in writing: –– What topic are you genuinely curious about? –– Why does this topic resonate with you so deeply? –– What do you already know about your topic?

180 

 Jenna Nemec-Loise

Inquiry Session 2: Preparing for Your Research/Immerse During Inquiry Session 2, explorers reflected honestly on their information-seeking behaviors outside an academic setting. Thought-provoking discussion starters included: What’s your first inclination when you’re curious about something? Do you pick up a device? Reach for a book? Chat with a friend? As explorers shared responses with one another, they built awareness of their own information-seeking behaviors, which they had rarely considered before their 5GE experiences. At the end of Inquiry Session 2, explorers articulated their preliminary research plans by journaling responses to these questions: –– Where is the first place you plan to look for information on your topic? –– What kinds of resources are likely to have good information on your topic? –– Who are the people you can ask for help as you research your topic?

Inquiry Session 3: Exploring Your Interest/Explore Inquiry Session 3 helped explorers activate their preliminary research plans using three starting points: one self-identified resource, one print or digital library resource, and one resource suggested to them based on their respective topics. As explorers discovered the depth and breadth of their interests, they documented three sets of responses to the following prompts: –– What is the name of this resource? –– How would you describe this resource to someone else? –– Why did you choose this resource as a starting point for your research? At the end of Inquiry Session 3, explorers compiled nine Fascinating Facts with potential to prompt their further investigations.

Inquiry Session 4: Developing Your Research Question/Identify For Inquiry Session 4, explorers used the Fascinating Facts they discovered to draft possible research questions. With guidance, they discussed the qualities of good research questions and workshopped possibilities with and for one another. Explorers were eager to connect the personal interests they expressed during Inquiry Session 1 and the exploratory research they conducted during Inquiry Session 3 to the development of questions that were specific, open-ended, and answerable with multiple facts.



13 Curiosity, Conversation, and Connection Through Guided Inquiry Design 

 181

At the end of Inquiry Session 4, each explorer identified one research question to sustain curiosity and drive ongoing inquiry, as shown in Table 13.1. Topic

Research Question

Climate change Dreams Mount Everest Swimming

How does climate change affect animals in the Rocky Mountains? What are the connections between the human brain and dreaming? What are some safety hazards for climbers of Mount Everest? How is Olympic swimming different from non-competitive swimming?

Table 13.1: Sample 5GE Topics and Research Questions

Inquiry Session 5: Answering Your Research Question/Gather Inquiry Session 5 challenged explorers to apply their cumulative 5GE learning to focused information-seeking efforts. They analyzed their research questions and used them to create keywords for browsing the school library’s print and digital collections, consulting with their peers and the librarian as needed. The activity helped explorers differentiate between the exploratory research they conducted during Inquiry Session 3 and subsequent information gathering to answer their specific research questions. At the end of Inquiry Session 5, explorers selected at least three additional resources to answer their research questions in multiple ways.

Inquiry Sessions 6-10: Creating Your Knowledge/Create During Week 2 of their 5GE minicourses, explorers created shareable knowledge about their topics by drafting narrative essays to tell their inquiry stories. Each essay included: –– An introduction featuring a narrative hook, topic statement, personal interest statement, and research question –– A resources paragraph describing at least three resources consulted and selection rationale for each –– A Big 3 paragraph detailing three possible answers to their research question drawn from resources consulted –– A reflective paragraph noting changes in attitudes, knowledge, behaviors, and/or skills during their exploration, and –– A conclusion summarizing the research process and outlining future inquiry steps.

182 

 Jenna Nemec-Loise

To help explorers feel successful during their drafting stages, five graphic organizers were created with examples from a project on the Day of the Dead/Día de los Muertos holiday, which is traditionally celebrated on November 1st or 2nd to celebrate and remember the lives of friends and family who have died (Table 13.2). Explorers found the tools very useful, often commenting on ways they could be applied to projects across other academic disciplines. Your Research Question Example: What are some of the biggest Day of the Dead traditions? Your narrative hook to draw your audience in: Example: Did you know that Halloween isn’t the only holiday celebrated at the end of October and in early November?

A statement of your topic: Example: Many people in Mexico honor loved ones every year during Día de los Muertos, or Day of the Dead.

Space for student idea Space for student statement

Your interest in and connection to your topic: Example: I first became interested in Day of the Dead after visiting the National Museum of the American Indian in Washington, D.C., where I saw people lighting candles and leaving offerings on an altar. Space for student notes

A statement of your research question: Example: The research question I’ve chosen for my Fifth Grade Exploration (5GE) is, “What are some of the biggest Day of the Dead traditions?”

Space for student question

Table 13.2: Sample Graphic Organizer for Narrative Essay Introduction

After the Minicourse: Sharing Your Knowledge/Share After the minicourses, explorers spent an additional week working individually with members of the learning team to revise and edit the written projects. To complete the Share phase of Guided Inquiry Design, all 38 explorers partnered with the librarian as a large group on creation and customization of a 5GE Google Site to showcase projects for the entire JK-12 learning community. Since COVID-19 safety protocols prohibited explorers from presenting their projects in person, the digital option allowed them to demonstrate their emerging information literacy skill sets. In addition to the final essays, all explorers wrote brief biographical



13 Curiosity, Conversation, and Connection Through Guided Inquiry Design 

 183

statements and produced short videos introducing their explorations, which they published on dedicated project pages.

Resources Used Key resources utilized during the 5GE program were people, iPads, G-Suite (renamed Google Workspace) applications, the school library’s print and digital collections, and high-quality broadband internet connections. To cultivate a relationship-based approach to information-seeking behavior, the 5GE program positioned people as primary starting points for research. Explorers forged learning partnerships with their peers and members of the learning team to hone their emerging information and media literacy skill sets while deepening their engagement with the school library and technology resources. 5GE promoted collaboration between members of the learning team, leveraging the relationships to create reflective pedagogy and meaningful learning experiences. Since NSCD provides all students with devices through a 1:1 technology program providing a tablet for every student, explorers used iPads preloaded with G-Suite applications to complete each phase of their exploration. Beyond inquiry sessions, explorers communicated regularly with the learning team via Gmail and Google Classroom, which served as the 5GE learning management system. They used Google Jamboard sticky notes to document research findings and Google Docs for journaling and drafting. While explorers were welcome to consult trustworthy websites during their research with guidance, they were asked to search the school library’s print and digital collections before using internet search engines. Subscription databases popular with explorers included Britannica School, ProQuest SIRS Discoverer, and ProQuest CultureGrams. High quality broadband internet connections were vital to explorers’ use of the school library’s digital collections both on campus and remotely.

Monitoring and Assessment/Evaluate 5GE was designed for flexibility, nimbleness, and responsiveness, making the Evaluate phase of Guided Inquiry Design an ongoing process. The learning team evaluated teaching approaches at the end of each minicourse and adjusted components based on input from explorers and one another. Since explorations were

184 

 Jenna Nemec-Loise

not graded and learning was highly individualized, overall program assessment included qualitative data collection methods such as personal interviews, observations, and anecdotal evidence.

Project Outcomes The learning team connected key 5GE outcomes with the five kinds of learning through Guided Inquiry Design: curriculum content, information literacy, learning how to learn, literacy competency, and social skills (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2012, 8–9). Based on qualitative data collection methods, the program yielded: –– Authenticity in students’ identity development as researchers, writers, critical thinkers, and ethical citizens of the world –– Agency among students to direct their own learning, explore topics of significance to them, and create substantive knowledge, and –– Advocacy for the JK-12 school library program and the purpose and value of strong and meaningful school librarianship among students, faculty, staff, administrators, and families. Anecdotal evidence and feedback from explorers suggested that the core 5GE goals of curiosity, conversation, and connection were achieved: –– When asked how she felt about her 5GE research question, one explorer said: “I feel great about [my question] because it feels like me” –– During a robust inquiry session, an explorer commented: “Everyone here is like a team. We’re always helping each other and giving each other ideas” –– At the end of her minicourse, an explorer said how much she loved her 5GE experience. When asked what she loved the most, she replied to the librarian: “That you’re the teacher.”

Challenges Encountered Three significant challenges were encountered during the 5GE inaugural year. Due to lack of prior knowledge and information literacy instruction, explorers had limited research skill sets in accessing databases, generating keywords, and narrowing searches; consequently, the learning team devoted additional time to teaching these skills, which reduced work time during inquiry sessions. Since 5GE was a late addition to 2020–21 course offerings, academic scheduling con-



13 Curiosity, Conversation, and Connection Through Guided Inquiry Design 

 185

flicts frequently resulted in floating minicourse dates and times, which disrupted explorers’ engagement with 5GE content and daily homework assignments. Lastly, the two-week intensive model of course delivery proved challenging for the learning team as they sought to balance 5GE work with other professional responsibilities.

Lessons Learned Lessons learned during the 2020–21 school year included validation of the 5GE course design and opportunities for its improvement. The strong belief that the social aspect of 5GE is paramount was affirmed. Particularly during pandemic learning, explorers thrived during conversation and connection with one another. Reflection became an important component of each inquiry session and fundamental to the success of explorers’ narrative essays, which told the stories of becoming critical thinkers and ethical citizens of the world. Perhaps most importantly, it was confirmed that 5GE constituted a replicable best practice for other school librarians to incorporate the Guided Inquiry Design model into their own work with students. To make explorers’ 5GE experiences richer and more rewarding for the 2021–22 school year, minicourse timelines were altered, inquiry sessions lengthened, and meeting times adjusted. Rather than two-week intensive minicourses, trimester scheduling was chosen for three concurrent cohorts of four to five students each. The extended model honors the process-oriented philosophy of 5GE, affording both explorers and the learning team more time to enjoy their work and one another. Inquiry sessions have increased from 30 to 40 minutes and take place during explorers’ midday common work periods, eliminating the academic scheduling conflicts that arose during the previous morning meeting time slot. At the time of writing, all changes have been implemented, and the second iteration of 5GE has launched successfully.

Going Forward With its emphases on curiosity, conversation, and connection, 5GE supports a reconceptualization of school library impact beyond academic achievement. Scholars are encouraged to reframe their central research questions for future impact study research. “How do school libraries help students become better students?” might become “How do school libraries and school librarians help

186 

 Jenna Nemec-Loise

students become the people they are in the process of becoming?” This conceptual shift embraces the United Nations human development approach, which emphasizes people, opportunities, and choices (United Nations Development Programme, n.d.) as well as Nussbaum’s ten Central Capabilities, which focus on what individuals are able to do, and to be, when just societies champion human dignity as the goal of development (Nussbaum 2011, 32–33). The capabilities include: a natural human lifespan; bodily health and integrity; senses, imagination, and thought; emotions; practical reason; affiliation with both human and nonhuman species; play; and control over one’s environment (Nussbaum 2011, 33–34). Both the United Nations human development approach and Nussbaum’s Central Capabilities merit deeper consideration by scholars and practitioners as innovation continues within and beyond school libraries worldwide.

Acknowledgement The author thanks the NSCD 2020-2021 fifth grade class and colleagues Libby Ester, Ellen Rasmussen, and Chrissie Timbers for their partnership and collaboration during the inaugural 5GE year.

References American Association of School Librarians. 2021. “Final School Library Snapshot Survey Results.” Knowledge Quest [blog]. May 3, 2021. https://knowledgequest.aasl.org/ final-school-library-snapshot-survey-results. International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA). 1999. “IFLA/UNESCO School Library Manifesto 1999: The School Library in Learning and Teaching for All.” https://www.ifla.org/publications/iflaunesco-school-library-manifesto-1999. International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA). 2020. “A Vital Job at a Difficult Time: Libraries Supporting Teachers During COVID-19.” Library Policy and Advocacy Blog, October 6, 2020. https://blogs.ifla.org/lpa/2020/10/06/a-vital-job-at-adifficult-time-libraries-supporting-teachers-during-covid-19. International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA). School Libraries Section Standing Committee. 2015. IFLA School Library Guidelines. 2nd ed., Edited by Barbara Schultz-Jones and Dianne Oberg. https://www.ifla.org/files/assets/school-librariesresource-centers/publications/ifla-school-library-guidelines.pdf. Kuhlthau, Carol C., Leslie K. Maniotes, and Ann K. Caspari. 2012. Guided Inquiry Design: A Framework for Inquiry in Your School. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO. Kuhlthau, Carol C., Leslie K. Maniotes, and Ann K. Caspari. 2015. Guided Inquiry: Learning in the 21st Century. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO.



13 Curiosity, Conversation, and Connection Through Guided Inquiry Design 

 187

National Association of Independent Schools (NAIS). n.d. “What Are Independent Private Schools?” https://parents.nais.org/learn/what-are-independent-private-schools. North Shore Country Day (NSCD). n.d. a. “By the Numbers.” About Us. https://www.nscds.org/ about/by-the-numbers. North Shore Country Day (NSCD). n.d. b. “Equity, Diversity, Inclusion.” About Us. https://www. nscds.org/about/equity-diversity-inclusion. North Shore Country Day (NSCD). n.d. c. “Leadership: Board of Trustees.” About Us.. https:// www.nscds.org/about/leadership. North Shore Country Day (NSCD). n.d. d. “Welcome.” Admission. https://www.nscds.org/ admission. North Shore Country Day (NSCD). n.d. e. “Why NSCD?” About Us. https://www.nscds.org/ about/why-nscd. Nussbaum, Martha C. 2011. Creating Capabilities: The Human Development Approach. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. United Nations Development Programme, n.d. “Human Development Reports.: About Human Development.” http://hdr.undp.org/en/humandev.

Kasey L. Garrison, Lee FitzGerald, and Alinda Sheerman

14 N  ot the Normal Way: Using Guided Inquiry Design in Australia

Abstract: Not “the normal way” is how student participant Susie described the use of Guided Inquiry Design (GID), which has been embedded into the teaching practice of her Australian secondary school on the outskirts of Sydney for a decade. This chapter details research with Year Nine students of history, aged fourteen to fifteen years, who undertook an inquiry task on the Industrial Revolution. The study investigated the experiences of students in all stages of inquiry and considered how inquiry and explicit teaching might complement each other. An increased focus on content instead of skills on explicit teaching, and on teacher accountability within the school have led to a potential diminished demand for GID at the school but developments elsewhere might herald a new emphasis on inquiry learning. Keywords: Inquiry-based learning; High schools – Australia; School libraries – Australia; Focus groups

Introduction This chapter details the experience of delivering a unit of study in history to Australian secondary school students aged fourteen to fifteen years using Guided Inquiry (GI) and the Guided Inquiry Design process (GID) as developed by Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari (2007, 2012, 2015). Four history teachers and one teacher librarian (TL) collaborated on the unit and worked together to deliver the content, support students, and evaluate outcomes. Two researchers were involved in the research evaluation. The Stage Five, Year Nine history unit studied the Industrial Revolution as part of the New South Wales Education Standards Authority (NESA) syllabus (NESA 2012) with the main inquiry question: Did the Industrial Revolution make a better world? A sample unit is available (NESA, n.d.).

Background The setting for this study is a private, independent, coeducational, Christian school in the outer suburbs of Sydney, in the state of New South Wales in Australia. The school includes approximately 1300 students from Prep/Kindergarten through https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110772586-016



14 Not the Normal Way: Using Guided Inquiry Design in Australia 

 189

Year Twelve (K-12). There is one library that serves the whole school staffed by two full-time TLs and two full-time library technicians or assistants. One of the teacher librarians has been there for seventeen years and has established the library as a collaborative learning space with facilities for comfortable reading and relaxation. Year Eleven and Twelve students attend the library for supervised study periods. The school has a strong culture of inquiry learning, and the TL often collaborates with teachers on inquiry units, mostly using GID. The TL has been working to implement GI at the school since 2008. Her favoured methods are to foster Fullan’s “positive contagion” (Fullan and Langworthy 2014) through continuous cycles of action research, and to encourage teachers and students to demonstrate what they have learnt through individual inquiry units. The ongoing aim is to inspire teachers to change their pedagogies to the use of an inquiry student-centred framework rather than the traditional teacher-centred pedagogies that pervade their practice. Since the project was carried out in 2017, the school has moved towards explicit teaching at the expense of the inquiry learning culture. TLs at the school are working with teachers to help them understand that the two approaches are not mutually exclusive. The move towards diminution of content in syllabuses and less onerous accountability for teachers will perhaps help reinstate inquiry into its well-established place in the school.

The Australian Curriculum The Australian Curriculum is a national curriculum across geographical and school-sector boundaries. It was introduced in 2012 and aims to provide a worldclass education for all young Australians and to improve the quality, equity and transparency of Australia’s education system. A recent review of the national curriculum seeks to refine, realign and declutter the curriculum to focus on core content and authentic ways to treat general capabilities and cross curriculum priorities when teaching learning areas. The updated Australian Curriculum is due for release in April 2022. A New South Wales Education Standards Authority (NESA) curriculum review, Nurturing Wonder and Igniting Passion, has also been recently conducted at the state level. It called for a curriculum “that supports teachers to nurture wonder, ignite passion and provide every young person with knowledge, skills and attributes that will help prepare them for a lifetime of learning, meaningful adult employment and effective future citizenship” (2020, xi). It might be said that both the Australian Curriculum Review (2021) and the NESA Curriculum Review (2020) have as prime motives the rationalising of content in syllabi, and the diminishing of accountability requirements demanded

190 

 Kasey L. Garrison, Lee FitzGerald, and Alinda Sheerman

of teachers. In recent years, both factors have inhibited the time that teachers have had to give to inquiry learning. Another factor impinging on the take-up of inquiry learning is the general debate about the future of education between standardizing and future-focused pedagogies presented in Professor Alan Reid’s report to the Australian Secondary Principals’ Association and summarised as: From the many voices contributing to debates about policy and practice in Australian education, it is possible to identify two major competing discourses. One is standardising, and favours certainty, uniformity, competition and regulation in education policy. Its policy features include school choice, competition between schools in an education market, high-stakes standardised testing and narrowing the curriculum. The other discourse is futures-focused and prizes flexibility, adaptability, collaboration and agility. Its policy features include student-centred teaching approaches, integrated and project-based learning, inquiry, formative assessment and teacher autonomy. It is clear that the standardisation discourse is holding the upper hand, and has become instantiated in the framing of education policy in many countries, including Australia. This is despite the fact that in many countries, teachers and educational researchers have demonstrated its negative consequences. They argue that such approaches actually diminish the quality of education, fail to address the challenges of the future, and make it harder for educators to implement a futures-focused agenda (Reid 2018, 3).

Reid notes two major competing discourses about policy and practice in Australian education. On the one hand, there is a standardizing approach which highlights curriculum reduction in a certain and contained education policy environment while, on the other hand, there is the alternative approach which values flexibility, collaboration, and a student focus with tasked learning. Reid believes that the standardizing discourse holds the upper hand at present. Explicit teaching is typical of a standardized trend in education, and inquiry learning is typical of a futures-focused trend (Reid 2018). There is no need to conclude that one excludes the other as there is a place for both pedagogies and approaches, even within one inquiry unit of work. The Australian Education Research Organisation (2021) defines explicit teaching as “fully explaining and effectively demonstrating what students need to learn … Learning happens most efficiently when teaching is clear, systematic and does not leave students to construct or discover information without any guidance” (as explicit teaching advocates tend to think about inquiry learning). Media coverage of inquiry learning as laissez-faire and given without guidelines and direction, where students are left to fend for themselves in a sea of information is false. It is certain that there is a place for explicit teaching in inquiry learning, and a place for inquiry in explicit teaching. It is unclear whether the pandemic in the last two years has changed the rhetoric of the debate on the future of education. Certainly



14 Not the Normal Way: Using Guided Inquiry Design in Australia 

 191

much change has occurred with many programmes and classes going online in some states in Australia for many months.

Information Literacy in the Australian Curriculum The Australian Library and Information Association (ALIA) and the Australian School Library Association (ASLA) have a joint statement on information literacy which includes reference to inquiry methods: The ability to locate, manage and use information to create information products using a variety of inquiry methods is an essential component of any information literacy program. A framework is required to ensure all targeted skills are identified and taught strategically and sequentially within the context of the school’s curriculum. The aim of this framework is the development of highly competent, confident information users and creators. Essential skills for contemporary learners are the ability to: critically analyse their information need, identify appropriate sources and synthesise, curate and re-imagine the information to construct personal knowledge (ALIA and ASLA 2016).

Information literacy is present in the Australian Curriculum in syllabus outcomes in every subject, as well as being an important part of the structure for the 21st century skills in the General Capabilities dimension which refers to an integrated and interconnected set of knowledge, skills, behaviours and dispositions that can be developed and applied across the curriculum to help students become successful learners, confident and creative individuals and active and informed citizens. General Capabilities include literacy, numeracy, ICT, critical and creative thinking, personal and social capability, ethical understanding, and intercultural understanding. However, the skills of information literacy are presented unevenly from subject to subject, and there is a need for an underlying framework like GID to underpin the teaching of these 21st century skills.

The Research Project – Inquiring Into the Industrial Revolution The Participants The project involved the TL, four Year Nine history teachers, two university researchers, and approximately 100 students. The TL worked with the teachers to plan the inquiry unit; however, due to time constraints for the teachers, the TL

192 

 Kasey L. Garrison, Lee FitzGerald, and Alinda Sheerman

wrote the unit and prepared the programme for the students including process journals guiding the unit and reading logs recording notes from the research. The two university researchers and TL collaborated on the research to evaluate the unit, which involved analysing students’ work and survey questionnaires and conducting focus groups. All students in Year Nine completed the unit but only the twenty two students who signed and returned consent forms participated in the research component of the project by sharing their work and questionnaires with researchers and participating in the focus groups. As GID is used widely in the school, most of the students had already experienced using the process. Only one of the twenty-two students participating in the research had not used GID. The new student, Susie, provided the title for this chapter and insight into the differences between learning about the Industrial Revolution “the normal way” through direct explicit instruction at her previous school and through GID at this school. The students involved in the unit came from four classes based on academic ability levels including one high level, two middle levels, and one low level. While the TL and teachers made accommodations for the needs of students across levels during the research process, the units followed the same programme and students completed the same tasks and assessments.

Project Features Open, Immerse, Explore, Identify, Gather, Create, Share and Evaluate. As already noted, the unit was delivered following the GID stages of Open, Immerse, Explore, Identify, Gather, Create/Share, and Evaluate. At three stages in the unit, Open, Explore/Identify and Evaluate, the students completed surveys based on the School Library Impact Measure, the SLIM Toolkit developed by Todd, Kuhlthau, and Heinström (2005). The surveys gathered data on the students’ prior, developing, and culminating knowledge of the topic. as well as their understanding and practice of GID. The information in Table 14.1 shows key tasks and planning across the GID stages for students, teachers, and the TL. Stage

Purpose

Students

Teachers and TL

Open

Create an engaging introduction to the main topic.

Take the initial survey. Take notes on budding areas of interest in process journals.

Develop engaging introduction to get students excited to learn.



Stage

14 Not the Normal Way: Using Guided Inquiry Design in Australia 

Purpose

 193

Students

Teachers and TL

Immerse Build background knowledge across the topic and narrow down sub-topic area for group assessment.

Immerse in information on the main topic, researching broadly, making note of particular interest areas.

Develop inquiry circles based on three sub-topics.

Explore

Begin to explore the sub-topic, investigating broadly with inquiry circle.

Explore with inquiry circles and construct sub-questions.

Scaffold students in taking notes. Prepare resources for research.

Identify

Develop an inquiry question based on the sub-topic to pursue for the rest of the unit.

Take middle survey. Identify individual inquiry questions and share with inquiry circle.

Support students in creating strong questions. Give feedback in process journals.

Gather

Collect detailed, deeper information related to the inquiry question.

Organize work for the group assessment, a newspaper with each student writing an article based on their inquiry question.

Facilitate groups in designing their assessment structure.

Create & Create the final product Share and share with the class.

Complete the group assessment and share it with the entire class.

Supervise presentation of group assessments. Lead a discussion of the overarching inquiry question.

Evaluate Reflect on the overall unit, including the content and the GID process.

Take final survey. Culminating conversation with inquiry circles to evaluate process and reflect on the topic. Focus groups with university researchers.

Evaluate group assessments. Culminating conversation with teaching team reflecting on experience, discussing challenges and future improvements.

Table 14.1: Key Tasks and Planning Across the GID Stages

Duration of the Project In Australia, schools generally operate through the calendar year, starting a new school year at the end of January and ending around the middle of December. The school year consists of two semesters, divided into four terms lasting nine

194 

 Kasey L. Garrison, Lee FitzGerald, and Alinda Sheerman

to eleven weeks with approximately two weeks of holidays in between each term and six weeks of summer holidays between each school year. The students in this study completed the GID unit across nine weeks during the third school term in 2017. The history unit included twenty-seven lessons with the classes meeting in the library or classroom for fifty minutes three times per week.

Evaluation and Outcomes The research component of the unit was carried out by the university researchers with the TL offering useful perspectives from students on their experiences whilst engaged in GID. Data sources related to the student experience included the group assessment process journals documenting the students’ research and notes throughout the unit, survey questionnaires based on the SLIM Toolkit before, during, and after the unit, and focus groups at the end of the unit. A complete analysis of the research portion of the study, is available (Garrison, FitzGerald, and Sheerman 2018, 2019; Garrison 2021). The survey questionnaires used Likert-scale and open-ended questions from the SLIM Toolkit to determine students’ knowledge and interest in the topic as well as their confidence using GID. The results from the Likert-scale questions showed an increase in all three areas across the three surveys, except that interest in the topic fell slightly from the second to third survey. This dip is predicted in the GID model (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2012, 3) as happening at the Explore phase. The students took the second survey late in the Explore phase when there is pressure to move to the Identify phase to focus on an area of interest and begin to identify an inquiry question. Despite that dip, from the first to the third survey, there were gains in the students’ self-reported knowledge of the topic and their confidence in using GID. Further, in the open-ended questions, students showed growth across the stages. The SLIM Toolkit analyses the questions by determining if a student’s response is a fact, explanation or conclusion, with each label growing in complexity and understanding. By the last survey, students offered statements which were more complex than in the earlier stages. In addition to the quantitative findings from the research, students shared personal perspectives on their learning and the value of using GID in focus groups. Students identified important tenets of GID as impacting their learning in positive and negative ways. For example, they liked being able to choose their own topics to pursue for their individual inquiry questions; however, some students found it hard to pick one and go with it. Others felt their topics did not have enough information, like Kinsley who noted, “there’s not like anything on chimney sweeps!” Another difficult element of GID was the independent nature



14 Not the Normal Way: Using Guided Inquiry Design in Australia 

 195

of the process. This independence was particularly challenging for the students in the highest ability class like Amy who prefers more “teacher-oriented learning” similar to explicit instruction. It is clear from the findings that whilst the students made gains in their knowledge on the Industrial Revolution topic and felt more confident using the GID process, they still needed support and feedback from the teaching team throughout all stages.

Challenges in Using Guided Inquiry Design One of the biggest challenges in implementing strong, high quality inquiry units is time. For the TL, in practice, the time included keeping up with the four classes simultaneously whilst managing the rest of the TL position responsibilities including the library itself and other classes. To help the teachers, the TL wrote the unit and put it all together adding to her workload. The TL was part of the formative assessment process, making comments to students in their process journals while they were engaged in their research. While the task was time-consuming, the students in the focus groups noted the support as being particularly useful and encouraging for them. Further, experience in previous inquiry units (Garrison, FitzGerald, and Sheerman 2018) shows that the availability of time is very important, especially at the early stages of GID where students get to know the overall topic in order to choose what sub-topic most interests them. Another challenge was assessment as the classroom teachers wanted a more formal, content-driven assessment, but the TL preferred a less structured assessment, enabling more choice and creativity. Finding a unit that does not require a formal assessment would be a useful way to combat the problem. Experiences in the school show GID works better with primary school teachers and children aged up to twelve years. There is less stress with a crowded curriculum than with secondary school teachers and older students aged thirteen to seventeen or eighteen. Primary school teachers are used to working in grade teams, and collaborating with the TL is normal practice for them, with one GID unit of work facilitated in most primary grades every year. The secondary school teachers tend to stand alone within faculties, teaching a common programme of work but independently. Sharing work and pooling resources has not been the culture in most faculties. Because time was not available to prepare and train teachers in the use of GID prior to unit delivery, participants found it difficult to manage sharing the teaching and assessment aspects.

196 

 Kasey L. Garrison, Lee FitzGerald, and Alinda Sheerman

Lessons Learned and the Way Ahead Students found the structure of the GID process useful. As Bob said in one of the focus groups: “It just like, helps you to get where you’re going.” The students liked the ability to choose. While advocating for the choice approach, students in the lower ability group found it hard to choose their topics and, in the focus groups and survey responses, they noted needing more structure and support. The need to support students should not be a deterrent to using GID, but educators must be mindful of, and responsive to, students’ individual needs One collaborating teacher noted the support that might be required. One group of four students had trouble agreeing and communicating with each other on their project ideas. They split into two pairs and stopped speaking to the other pair so the teacher initiated a mediation with the four students, helping each to recognise the conflict in the group and how it might be resolved through changing behavior to unite and complete the project. The teacher reflected “this was such a great process to go through, in learning to work together cooperatively, understand different work styles and ways of dealing with conflict, and then conflict resolution and compromise.” She also recognised the value of the GID process in helping develop skills herself outside of teaching, noting that “mediation can be a very effective tool for dealing with student conflict, and gave [her] confidence to detect and act on issues in the future.” While group work and the inquiry circle format often used in GID can be challenging, they also hold rewards and the potential for building life skills. Another key lesson relates to the culture of the school and importance of relationships and administrative support. Changing pedagogies in the school where the study was undertaken are moving from inquiry to more explicit teaching despite the focus of inquiry in national and international curricula. Changing dynamics in a school can have a profound effect on long established practice. Significant leadership changes and new faculty heads can change curriculum and move the teaching focus from inquiry learning towards explicit teaching with more formal assessments and removal of GID from use. With the pending statewide introduction within New South Wales of a mandatory inquiry unit in Year Eleven and, with continued proposals to move back to an inquiry approach from the TL, the pendulum is slowly swinging back. This year, a teacher who worked with the TL in the past has asked to use GID in a unit of work later in the year, and planning is underway. The use of FOSIL is also under consideration, and when the Australian Curriculum version 9 is in place in 2022, there is the possibility of a new inquiry model integrating the various approaches.



14 Not the Normal Way: Using Guided Inquiry Design in Australia 

 197

A unique aspect of the history unit was the collaboration between the TL and university researchers to investigate the students’ experiences in using GID. Given the limited time of teachers and TLs for reflection, the focus groups and questionnaires enabled the team to collect important data on the unit overall and to consider how students’ experiences could be enhanced and better supported in future units. Practising educators and university researchers can and should work together to develop relationships and research opportunities that straddle practice and academia and potentially lead to advances in both research and practice.

Alternative Information Literacy and Information Inquiry Models There are many inquiry models available to practitioners, and other developments in information literacy models that relate to challenges faced in using GID.

The Framework of Skills for Inquiry Learning (FOSIL) The development of FOSIL, Framework Of Skills for Inquiry Learning (FOSIL Group n.d.), began in the UK in 2011 with the work of Darryl Toerien and is based on an inquiry mindset and the Empire State Information Fluency Continuum (Stripling 2019) which originated with the work of Barbara Stripling when she was at the New York City School Library System. FOSIL also draws on the work of Carol Kuhlthau. It constitutes a model of the inquiry process with a cycle consisting of Connect, Wonder, Investigate, Construct, Express, and Reflect. The FOSIL Group makes available a growing collection of freely available learning resources for support. The FOSIL cycle is underpinned with a framework of skills and resources/scaffolding for every part of the FOSIL process. The advantage lies in the explicit linking of the cycle with the local curriculum which allows TLs to demonstrate clearly how they are contributing to student learning outcomes.

The Information Fluency Framework (IFF) The NSW Department of Education is involved in a project called the Information Fluency Framework (Cook 2021; Wall 2019). The focus is to expand on information literacy as information fluency, and how it may be explicitly developed

198 

 Kasey L. Garrison, Lee FitzGerald, and Alinda Sheerman

across the stages of schooling. The IFF will be embedded into the NSW curricula of Science, English, Geography and History, creating exciting opportunities for TLs who have long sought a way to demonstrate the impact of their teaching on student learning. Information fluency is defined as: the ability to critically think while engaging with, creating and utilising information and technology, regardless of the information platform or medium (NSW Department of Education n.d.). The framework provides for five elements: Social, Literate, Innovative, Critical and Creative, and Ethical,

Conclusion The research with the history unit focused on the GID model, which is an inquiry model based on extensive research with particular work done by Kuhlthau on the Information Search Process (Kuhlthau 1985, 1989, 2004). Despite the researched value of GID, it appears that focus on explicit instruction and content-heavy syllabuses are having an impact on time available for any brand of inquiry learning in Australia (Garrison and FitzGerald in press). However, reform of the NSW Curriculum and the Australian Curriculum is focusing, amongst other things, on rationalising the amount of content to be covered and reducing the accountability demands on exhausted teachers. This development is encouraging for inquiry learning and for Australian TLs who find it difficult to prove the impact they are making on student learning through their involvement in inquiry learning. As Susie and Bob note, it is not “the normal way”, but it still “helps you to get where you’re going.”

References Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). 2021. “Review of the Australian Curriculum Version 8.4.” https://www.acara.edu.au/curriculum/ curriculum-review. Australian Education Research Organisation. 2021. “Tried and Tested: Explicit Instruction.” https://edresearch.edu.au/tried-and-tested-explicit-instruction. Australian Library and Information Association (ALIA) and Australian School Library Association (ASLA). 2016. “Statement on Information Literacy.” https://asla.org.au/resources/ Documents/Website%20Documents/Policies/policy_Information_Literacy.pdf. Cook, Aaron. 2021. “Shaping a Framework for Information Fluency.” Scan 40, no. 1: 4–10. https://www.education.nsw.gov.au/content/dam/main-education/teaching-and-learning/



14 Not the Normal Way: Using Guided Inquiry Design in Australia 

 199

professional-learning/scan/media/documents/vol-40/Scan_40-1_Feb2021_Accessible. pdf. Fullan, Michael, and Maria Langworthy. 2014. A Rich Seam: How New Pedagogies Find Deep Learning. London: Pearson. https://michaelfullan.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/3897. Rich_Seam_web.pdf Garrison, Kasey L., Lee FitzGerald, and Alinda Sheerman. 2018. “‘Just Let Me Go At It’: Exploring Students’ Use and Perceptions of Guided Inquiry.” School Library Research, 21. http:// www.ala.org/aasl/sites/ala.org.aasl/files/content/aaslpubsandjournals/slr/vol21/ SLR_JustLetMeGoAtIt_V21.pdf. Garrison, Kasey L., Lee FitzGerald, and Alinda Sheerman. 2019. “‘They Should Be Called Guiders’: Teachers and Teacher Librarians Developing Inquiry Learners.” School Libraries Worldwide 25, no. 2: 34–47. Available at https://researchoutput.csu.edu.au/ws/ portalfiles/portal/43802268/29481684_published_article.pdf. Garrison, Kasey L., and Lee FitzGerald. 2022. “‘On the Fly’: Collaboration between Teachers and Teacher Librarians in Inquiry Learning.” Information Literacy in a Post-Truth Era: Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Information Literacy ECIL, September 20–23, Bamberg Germany, 2021, 411–426. https://link.springer.com/ chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-99885-1_35. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier. 1985. A Process Approach to Library Skills Instruction. School Library Media Quarterly 13, no. 1: 35–40. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier. 1989. The Information Search Process of High-, Middle-, and Low-achieving High School Seniors. School Library Media Quarterly 17, no. 4: 224–26. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier. 2004. Seeking Meaning: A Process Approach to Library and Information Services. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier, Leslie L. Maniotes, and Anne Caspari. 2007. Guided Inquiry: Learning in the 21st Century. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier, Leslie L. Maniotes, and Anne Caspari. 2012. Guided Inquiry Design: A Framework for Inquiry in Your School. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier, Leslie L Maniotes,., and Anne Caspari. 2015. Guided Inquiry: Learning in the 21st Century. 2nd ed. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited. New South Wales Department of Education. n.d. “Information Fluency Framework.” https:// education.nsw.gov.au/content/dam/main-education/teaching-and-learning/curriculum/ media/documents/Information_fluency_framework.pdf. New South Wales Education Standards Authority (NESA). n.d. “History sample unit: The Industrial Revolution (Depth Study 1: Making a Better World?).” https://syllabus.nesa.nsw. edu.au/assets/global/files/history_s5_sampleu1.pdf. New South Wales Education Standards Authority (NESA) 2012. “NSW Syllabus for the Australian Curriculum: History K-10 Syllabus.” Sydney, NSW: Board of Studies.https:// educationstandards.nsw.edu.au/wps/wcm/connect/55f81fec-7312-45ff-b7a70a92a868c675/history-k10-syllabus.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CVID=. New South Wales Education Standards Authority (NESA). 2020. “Nurturing Wonder and Igniting Passion: Designs for a New School Curriculum: NSW Curriculum Review” Sydney, NSW: NSW Education Standards Authority. Independent lead Geoff Masters. https://research. acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1005&context=nswcurriculumreview. Reid, Alan. 2018. “Beyond Certainty: A Process for Thinking about Futures for Australian Education.” Brisbane, Qld: Australian Secondary Principals’ Association. https://www. saspa.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/aspa0001_Monograph_digital.pdf.

200 

 Kasey L. Garrison, Lee FitzGerald, and Alinda Sheerman

Stripling, Barbara. 2019. “Empire State Information Fluency Continuum.” https://slsa-nys. libguides.com/ifc. The FOSIL Group. n.d. “The FOSIL Group: Advancing Inquiry Learning.” https://fosil.org.uk/. Todd, Ross J., Carol Collier Kuhlthau, and Janica Heinström. 2005. School Library Impact Measure (SLIM): A Toolkit and Handbook for Tracking and Assessing Student Learning Outcomes of Guided Inquiry Through the School Library. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for International Scholarship in School Libraries, Rutgers University. Funded by the Institute for Museum and Library Services. https://www.researchgate.net/ publication/278674274_School_Library_Impact_Measure_SLIM_A_Toolkit_and_ Handbook_For_Tracking_and_Assessing_Student_Learning_Outcomes_Of_Guided_ Inquiry_Through_The_School_Library; http://eclipse.rutgers.edu/wp-content/uploads/ sites/20/2014/03/slimtoolkit.pdf. Wall, June. 2019. “Information Fluency: A Path to Explore and Innovate?” Scan 38, no. 9. https://education.nsw.gov.au/teaching-and-learning/professional-learning/scan/ past-issues/vol-38--2019/information-fluency-a-path-to-explore-and-innovate.

Anne Whisken

15 I nformed Learning and Action Research for Professional Development Abstract: This chapter reports the successful use of Informed Learning Participatory Action Research (PAR) for transformative professional development to overcome a historic gap between information literacy education theory and practice. Secondary school teachers and teacher librarians participated in a PhD qualitative research project undertaken in Australia to explore new ways of teaching expert information use as part of subject learning. An overview of the transformative models used is provided as well as a framework for whole school information practice by which students might develop their own repertoires of expert information strategies. The model presents a collaborative approach to changing teacher practice for information literacy education. Keywords: Participatory research; Action research; Information literacy – Study and teaching; Inquiry-based learning

Introduction Teacher librarians have long sought ways to overcome the gap between information literacy education theory and its practice. The author of this chapter, Head of Library at a large private secondary school in Melbourne, capital of Victoria, a southern Australian state, found the ideas of Informed Learning (IL) articulated by Bruce (2008), presented a new approach to the problem. A qualitative multiple case study PhD research project was designed which combined IL with Participatory Action Research (PAR). Three groups of secondary teachers and teacher librarians undertook four action cycles across a year to explore ways that IL ideas might help teach expert information strategies as part of subject learning. The findings showed that IL PAR can bridge the gap between information literacy education theory and practice and present a model for successful teacher professional development. The model can be used for inquiry learning planning and to support a whole school approach to expert information practice.

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110772586-017

202 

 Anne Whisken

The Context The author, with extensive experience as head of secondary school libraries in large Australian schools, found that despite advances in information literacy education theory and frameworks for its curriculum integration (ALIA and ASLA 2016a, 2016b, 2016c), the teaching of information literacy as part of daily classroom practice continued to be sporadic and difficult to track. She deemed three factors responsible for the difficulties. The first was the continuous iteration of frameworks, models and lists of skills to be taught without attention to teacher classroom practices. Secondly, this was compounded by an increasing focus on Information and Communication Technology (ICT) skills required for the digital education environment rather than understanding them as subsets of an ever-evolving repertoire of information literacy strategies. The third factor was the absorption of information literacy into generic cross-curriculum global competencies to be integrated into subject teaching without clear and comprehensive information literacy pedagogies practised by all teachers across the curriculum. The definition of information literacy in the Final Report from the ALA Presidential Committee on Information Literacy in the late 1980s continues to guide the author’s understandings, with its emphasis on integration of information literacy into classroom practice, on using information to learn how to learn, and on championing the role of information literacy in society by school leaders: To be information literate, a person must be able to recognize when information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate, and effectively use the needed information. Producing such a citizenry will require that schools and colleges appreciate and integrate the concept of information literacy into their learning programs and that they play a leadership role in equipping individuals and institutions to take advantage of the opportunities inherent within the information society. Ultimately, information literate people are those who have learned how to learn. They know how to learn because they know how knowledge is organized, how to find information, and how to use information in such a way that others can learn from them. They are people prepared for lifelong learning, because they can always find the information needed for any task or decision at hand (ALA 1989).

As information storage, access and use have become increasingly digitised, a focus on digital skills has tended to replace the broader understanding of information literacy which is independent of the information format or means of access. Digital skills are included in specifications of media and information literacy/information and media literacy (MIL), digital literacy, and strategies to distinguish misinformation, disinformation and fake news (Carlsson 2019; Cordell 2013; Jones-Jang, Mortensen and Liu 2019). In international and national standards, digital skills frequently come under the heading of cross-curricular global



15 Informed Learning and Action Research for Professional Development 

 203

competencies which are expected to be part of discipline teaching and learning. Information literacy as a distinct area of learning in Australia has largely been subsumed into subject and core competency strands of national and state standards without clarity about where and how it is taught by teachers in a consistent and tracked developmental continuum (ALIA and ASLA 2016a; ACARA, n.d.; Lupton 2014; Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority, n.d.). While teacher librarians may be seen as the staff within the school who will guide a comprehensive programme of cross-curriculum information literacy education, decreased school library funding has diminished the expertise and resources available to undertake the task (ASLA 2010). Teacher librarians have sought to deliver information literacy education by collaboration with teachers in inquiry or problem-based learning (PBL) models (FitzGerald 2015). The models offer orientation to the explicit use of creative and reflective thinking skills which are regarded highly in most theoretical and philosophical approaches to information literacy across the globe. The approaches range from student-centred to teacher-led, with increasing emphasis on the way information is being used in relation to lifelong learning and learning how to learn (Lupton 2015; Murdoch 2019). However, the teaching of information literacy as an explicit practice within the inquiry models seems variable (Buchanan et al. 2016), nor do the models necessarily address the need for broader teacher demonstration of expert information use. New information literacy and information fluency frameworks are being proposed by teacher librarians (Stripling 2019; Wall 2021) to support teaching information strategies within evolving pedagogies. Newer frameworks or approaches seldom address the whole school professional development required for teachers themselves to take on responsibility for teaching information literacy or implementing it as part of daily classroom practice. In 2009, the author speculated about how teaching practices might change to incorporate consistent information literacy education as part of subject teaching. What professional development process might provide for greater collaboration between teacher librarians and teachers to support such practice (Gibson-Langford 2009; Langford 1998)? What might bridge the gap between information literacy education theory and practice?

Moving from Speculation to Conceptualisation Bruce (2008) provided a new perspective on information literacy education which offered the potential for educators to appreciate the value of information literacy within their subject teaching. The IL model and perspective on informa-

204 

 Anne Whisken

tion literacy developed by Bruce emphasised ways information is used to learn. It brought a problematised ever-inquiring approach to teaching in which the educator asks: What learning about information use takes place as information is used for subject learning? How might information use enhance subject learning? The model also addressed the increasingly digital educational environment. The author realised that the IL model might provide a way to bridge the gap in information literacy theory and practice. She designed a research project (Whisken 2019a) in which teachers and teacher librarians used Participatory Action Research (PAR) cycles to explore use of IL ideas in their practices.

Concept Development The IL PAR qualitative PhD research project took place at a single site: the 1,300student secondary campus of a large private secondary school in Melbourne. The project used multiple case study methodology with a PAR approach (Figure 15.1) to explore application of IL ideas to teacher practice and was facilitated by the teacher librarian researcher. Both IL and PAR have a transformative intent. The IL model (Bruce 2008) was based on phenomenography, an educational research approach which addresses the qualitative differences in people’s experiences. Combined with learning theory, it gave a pedagogical structure for the researcher to invite participants to identify and build on their own experiences of information use in their subject areas. Following the constructivist learning design of the model, emphasising constructing new knowledge through experience, Bruce introduced ideas for reflection and transformation of views and for transfer of the new learning into action. PAR’s basis in the social research methodology of action research, as developed in the educational field (Carr and Kemmis 1986; Kemmis 2009), gave the researcher a professional development structure in which practitioners learned to undertake reflective action in their own areas of expertise to transform their practices. Twenty-five teachers took part in the study, in three mixed-subject case groups. The mixed-subject case groups ranged in size from seven to ten participants, each undertaking four action research cycles across a year in 2010 (Whisken 2019a, 2019b). The subjects included languages, mathematics, science, religious education and humanities. Figure 15.1, Multiple Case Study PAR, represents one cycle of the four in the study.



15 Informed Learning and Action Research for Professional Development 

 205

Figure 15.1: Multiple Case Study PAR (Whisken 2019a)

Implementation of the Action Participants in each case collaboratively undertook the pre-step of reading about IL ideas, framing their investigative actions, and determining context and purpose. Each participant then followed a process of four cycles, each of which involved: –– Reading IL material and discussing responses –– Planning an action for their own practices –– Carrying out the action –– Observing and reflecting on the action and its impact, and –– Reporting the outcome to the group. Figure 15.2, the Informed Learning Praxis Model, describes the process in which teachers are constantly engaged in querying how use of information might enhance learning. Participants in each case group used the structure of the Informed Learning book (Bruce 2008) to examine the new ideas within the context of their current practices. They identified where expert information use was already in place, even if was not explicit, and continued by exploring areas where good information strategies might be used to improve student engagement and operation in the subject area. Early in the research cycles, teachers identified a common understanding that changes in the information environment were such that they as teachers could no longer be the mediators of material students would access for their subject learning. They were concerned that students did not have the skills to safely and competently navigate the new environment and that as teachers they did not have the

206 

 Anne Whisken

Figure 15.2: Informed Learning Praxis Model (Whisken 2019a)

pedagogies to help students acquire such strategies. There was high interest in exploring how Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) and information literacy education ideas might help develop new pedagogies. Bruce identified seven faces or experiences of IL (Figure 15.1): information technology, information sources, information process, information control, knowledge construction, knowledge extension, and wisdom. Teachers used the seven faces as a guide and explored ways to bring attention to the information strategies and associated ICTs involved in the learning experiences they would design for their students. IL acknowledges that ICTs are an always-present factor in most school learning experiences, either as a focus of the activity, or on the margins or periphery. The seven faces provide a scaffold to help teachers identify which elements of subject and ICT learning are involved in each learning-with-information experience. The approach provides a research-based specific terminology for teachers to use in developing common understandings about using information to learn. Seven Faces of Informed Learning

The Teacher Asks Questions

Brings focus to the type of information Establishes the focus of attention in the experience experience intended and what will be on the margins or periphery First Face: Information Awareness Experience

––

Second Face: Sourcing Information Experience

––

––

––

Focus: How to use ICTs collaboratively with others to gain awareness of relevant information Marginal and peripheral: How to successfully share, scan and select information in social forms Focus: The nature and location of the information sources themselves Marginal and peripheral: Using ICTs to find information sources



15 Informed Learning and Action Research for Professional Development 

 207

Seven Faces of Informed Learning

The Teacher Asks Questions

Third Face: Information Process Experience

––

Fourth Face: Information Control Experience

–– ––

Focus: How to manage the information found Marginal and peripheral: How to use ICTs to assist management of information

Fifth Face: Knowledge Construction Experience

––

Focus: The critical analysis strategies used to engage and come to know the information in the context of the discipline Marginal and peripheral: How to incorporate new understanding into a discipline knowledge base, and how ICTs can be used to do so

––

––

Sixth Face: Knowledge Extension Experience

––

–– Seventh Face: The Wisdom Experience

––

––

Focus: The processes used to apply and interpret the information found in different disciplines Marginal and peripheral: How to use ICTs in the processes

Focus: Explicit awareness of the intuitive capacity to make links between new information, a knowledge base and creation of new knowledge Marginal and peripheral: The developing knowledge base and use of ICTs in the processes Focus: Explicit awareness of the values brought to the use of information and creation of new knowledge, Marginal and peripheral: The developing knowledge base and use of ICTs

Table 15.1: Seven Faces of Informed Learning (Bruce 2008)

Participants in the project were excited to discover that many of the seven faces were already familiar to them as subject specialists, affirming Bruce’s research (1997) but they realised that they tended not to refer to them specifically in classroom teaching. The practices remained back-of-mind as part of their subject expertise. The teachers realised that there would be advantages in making the faces of information use visible to students as part of subject information mastery. The teachers understood the need to model the information use practices they wanted students to learn. Teachers in each case group examined ways to transfer understandings about information use experiences to curriculum design which incorporated explicit information use practices. IL proposes that the integration of explicit information use enhances subject learning and enables students to develop their own repertoires of information use strategies. The teachers used the “Six Frames for Informed Learning” (Table 15.2). The Six Frames of Informed Learning is based

208 

 Anne Whisken

on the Six Frames for Information Literacy Education by Bruce, Edwards, and Lupton (2006}, but was published by Bruce as the Six Frames of Informed Learning in 2008 (Bruce 2008) to explore the question: What information strategies do I want students to learn in this subject learning activity? The frames refer to the views taken by educators when designing curricula to ensure that students learn the strategies for information literacy mastery as they use information for subject learning. Like the seven faces construct, six frames provide a terminology for common understandings about using information to learn. Six Frames for Informed Learning pay attention to the type of learning about subject information use that will take place

The Teacher Asks Questions to establish clarity with colleagues and students about the learning intentions involved in the way information is to be used in subject learning activities

First Frame: Content

What should students know about their subject and about the world of information? What do we want students to be able to do with information in the subject learning task and at what level of competence? What should students know about how experts in their subject area construct knowledge? How do we enable students to find the personal relevance of this information use activity? How will students explore the social impact of information use practices? How do students gain an overall view of use of information: how do they bring critical awareness and reflection to different ways of seeing and experiencing?

Second Frame: Competency

Third Frame: Learning to Learn Fourth Frame: Personal Relevance Fifth Frame: Social Impact Sixth Frame: Relational

Table 15.2: Six Frames of Informed Learning (Bruce 2008)

Across the case groups, teachers used IL’s six frames design constructs and seven faces information experience perspectives to develop new curricula. They trialled ways to enhance subject learning by improving students’ information use strategies. The outcomes of actions in each PAR cycle were reported to case group colleagues, with reflective sharing about successes and the difficulties encountered.

Participants’ Perspectives Each case group represented a different year level in the school: Year 8, Year 10 and the combined IB Diploma Years 11 and 12. The teachers came from a variety of



15 Informed Learning and Action Research for Professional Development 

 209

subject backgrounds, and they found the diversity fruitful in their collaboration, enabling discussion from the different perspectives represented. Teachers were able to focus on learning about information use across a particular year level and discuss how each subject area might contribute to the development by students of their own individual repertoires of information strategies. Importantly, from the researcher’s perspective, the project demonstrated that teachers readily saw the importance of daily modelling the subject information strategies they wanted adopted by students. The teachers identified the need to change their styles to become reflective colleagues with their students, together exploring ways to navigate the evolving information environment. The teachers recommended a whole of school approach so that students might experience consistent terminology and strategies. The project demonstrated a successful professional development process to bridge the gap between information literacy theory and practice. The research showed that teachers found PAR to be a supportive and effective professional development process. They appreciated the school’s support for the project. The collegiality developed within each case group was particularly important. It gave participants confidence to discuss successes and failures as they explored IL’s ideas and capacity to enhance subject learning. As teachers, they found familiarity in the formal structures of PAR cycles which gave them processes, timelines, and formats for engaging in and reporting their professional development. Some teachers found IL’s ideas difficult at first, for two reasons. The first was a lack of familiarity with the concepts of information literacy education. The second was the process of moving to view the teaching and learning in their subject areas through different perspectives, as provided by the seven faces and six frames of IL. Once that step was achieved, the findings showed that teachers could readily see the advantages in designing curricula which enabled information mastery in subject areas as well as following consistent and explicit information pedagogies across the curriculum. The teachers realised that students might, by variety of experience and application, develop their own repertoires of information strategies for use in future learning and gain global competencies for an evolving information environment. An important finding of the project was the way it changed teachers’ perceptions of the role of the teacher librarian. It demonstrated that teacher librarians can be leaders in professional development for information literacy education across the curriculum. In this project, the Head of Library was facilitator and case group member which ensured that expertise in PAR, ICTs and IL was brought to each case group. Busy teachers appreciated having leadership and support for a year-long project. Other teacher librarians were members of case groups and in some cases

210 

 Anne Whisken

collaborated with teachers in their actions. Teachers gained a greater understanding of the expertise teacher librarians brought to teaching and learning in the school.

Project Outcomes The findings of the research project affirmed the strength of the two transformative professional development frameworks. By using them in combination the project achieved its goal of bridging the gap between information literacy education theory and practice. The holistic nature of IL builds the understanding that expert information practice applies in all areas of teaching and learning across the curriculum, rather than existing as a set of skills to be applied within research projects. It can be used successfully in both secondary and tertiary situations (Maybee et al. 2019). It places the responsibility for teaching information literacy on the shoulders of all staff across the school, rather than as the sole preserve of teacher librarians. Teacher librarians are viewed as expert colleagues who collaborate and provide support in using information to learn in daily curriculum practice. The hook of IL is vital: expert information use can enhance subject learning. The use of PAR cycles as a means for teachers to explore, reflect and discuss ways to incorporate IL ideas into their teaching practices was especially mentioned by participants in the research project. They appreciated its collegial structure and found it to be a positive way of undertaking professional development.

A New Framework One of the outcomes of the project was a new framework to assist others in transforming teacher practice. A Framework for Whole School Information Practice (Figure 15.3) was designed (Whisken 2019b). The framework includes ten benchmarks to guide and evaluate school structures, policies, programmes and resources so that students might experience and develop their own repertoires of expert information strategies.



15 Informed Learning and Action Research for Professional Development 

 211

A Framework for Whole School Information Practice: Benchmarks for Repertoires of Information Strategies Information Literacy Education in a school should satisfy these criteria: 1. Repertoires of Information Strategies. The goal of development by students of individual repertoires of information strategies for future learning is seen as a whole school problem, articulated in an information practice statement which sits as part of the school’s curriculum framework. 2. Holistic Information Literacy Education Model. The school has selected a holistic model which develops and guides teacher practice to ensure a cohesive approach across the school (such as IL). 3. School Leadership for Whole School Information Practice. Development of repertoires of information strategies and associated practices stipulated in the information practice statement are mandated, championed, and modelled by school leadership. 4. PAR for Information Literacy Education Professional Development. The information practice statement is interpreted and integrated into discipline practice by collaborative school teams engaged in ongoing professional development (such as IL PAR). 5. Explicit Integration of Information Strategies. Information strategies and ICTs are selected for explicit integration into discipline learning intentions, activities, outcomes, feedback and reporting processes. 6. Explicit Modelling of Discipline Information Mastery. Teachers are explicit with colleagues and students about information practices which select and use information strategies and ICTs for discipline information mastery. 7. Reflective Information Use. Teachers engage with colleagues and students to bring reflective attention to variation of aspects of information use, discipline content, and ICTs used in learning experiences. 8. Teacher Librarians in Curriculum Design. Teacher librarians bring their information and ICT use expertise to collaborative teaching teams for curriculum design and teaching. 9. Library and Information Architecture, Resources and Spaces for Information Literacy Education. Sophisticated library and information architectures, resources and learning spaces provide for both the physical and digital experiences of developing and using expert information strategies for learning. 10. Documenting and Reporting Information Literacy Education Research. The programme’s progress is documented as part of ongoing PAR at the school and its results are reported into the field to provide reflective, peer reviewed data for evidence-based practice Table 15.3: A Framework for Whole School Information Practice (Whisken 2019a)

An emergent professional development model, the Informed Learning Praxis Model (Figure 15.2) can be used to structure information literacy education within existing programmes. Another development from the project’s findings is a Framework for Whole School Wide Reading Practice (Whisken 2021) to guide

212 

 Anne Whisken

development within schools of a culture wherein students might experience and develop wide reading strategies.

Conclusion The teachers involved in the action research project found it a powerful form of professional development about information literacy education. They came to see that explicit teaching of expert information strategies can enhance student subject learning and enable students to develop independent repertoires of information strategies. The teachers recognised that the strategies learned by the students would help them safely and ethically navigate the increasingly complex information environment. The teachers appreciated the value of working with teacher librarians to incorporate information literacy education into their practices. As a successful process for professional development about information literacy education, IL PAR can be used across the school, or for the more focused work of developing pedagogies associated with integrating various information skills or processes into research or inquiry learning units.

References American Library Association (ALA). 1989. Presidential Committee on Information Literacy: Final report. Chicago, IL: ALA. http://www.ala.org/acrl/publications/whitepapers/presidential. Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). n.d. “Australian Curriculum: F-10 Curriculum (Version 8.4).” Sydney: ACARA. https://www. australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/. Australian Library and Information Association (ALIA) and Australian School Library Association (ASLA). 2016a. “Statement on Information Literacy.” https://asla.org.au/resources/ Documents/Website%20Documents/Policies/policy_Information_Literacy.pdf. Australian Library and Information Association (ALIA) and Australian School Library Association (ASLA). 2016b. “Statement on Library and Information Services in Schools.” https:// asla.org.au/resources/Documents/Website%20Documents/Policies/policy_Library_ Information_Services.pdf. Australian Library and Information Association (ALIA) and Australian School Library Association (ASLA). 2016c. “Statement on School Libraries and Information and Communication Technologies.” https://asla.org.au/resources/Documents/Website%20Documents/ Policies/policy_School%20Libraries_ict.pdf. Australian School Library Association (ASLA). 2010. “Submission from the Australian School Library Association Inc. to the House of Representatives Inquiry into School Libraries and Teacher Librarians in Australian Schools.” https://www.asla.org.au/resources/ Documents/Website%20Documents/Submissions/ASLAsubmissionApril2010.pdf.



15 Informed Learning and Action Research for Professional Development 

 213

Bruce, Christine, Sylvia Edwards, and Mandy Lupton. 2006. “Six Frames for Information Literacy Education: A Conceptual Framework for Interpreting the Relationships Between Theory and Practice.” Innovation in Teaching and Learning in Information and Computer Sciences 5, no. 1: 1–18. https://doi.org/10.11120/ital.2006.05010002. Available at https://eprints.qut. edu.au/225059/1/5011.pdf. Bruce, Christine S. 2008. Informed Learning. Chicago, IL: Association of College and Research Libraries. Available at https://eprints.qut.edu.au/17988/34/17988.pdf. Buchanan, Shelly Marie Crist, Mary Ann Harlan, Christine S. Bruce, and Sylvia Edwards. 2016. “Inquiry Based Learning Models, Information Literacy, and Student Engagement: A Literature Review. School Libraries Worldwide 22, no. 2: 23–39. Available at https:// eprints.qut.edu.au/222587/3/102823.pdf. Carlsson, Ulla. 2019. “Media and Information Literacy: Field of Knowledge, Concepts and History.” In Understanding Media and Information Literacy (MIL) in the Digital Age. A Question of Democracy edited by Ulla Carlsson, 37–55. Göteborg, Sweden: UNESCO Chair on Freedom of Expression, Media Development and Global Policy at University of Gothenburg in collaboration with Region Västra Götaland and the Swedish National Commission for UNESCO. https://webarchive.unesco.org/20201009042827/https:// en.unesco.org/sites/default/files/gmw2019_understanding_mil_ulla_carlsson.pdf. Carr, Wilfred, and Stephen Kemmis. 1986. Becoming Critical: Education, Knowledge and Action Research. rev. ed. Waurn Ponds, Vic.: Deakin University. Cordell, Roseanne Marie. 2013. “Information Literacy and Digital Literacy: Competing or Complementary?” Communications in Information Literacy 7, no. 2: 177–183. https://doi. org/10.15760/comminfolit.2013.7.2.150. FitzGerald, Lee. 2015. “Guided Inquiry in Practice.” Scan 34, no. 4: 16–27. Available at https:// guidedinquiryoz.edublogs.org/files/2015/12/ACCESS-June-2015-FitzGerald-1t7e8hb2a5q60e.pdf. Gibson-Langford, Linda. 2009. “Action Research – Creative Partnerships in Learning and Teaching.” Paper presented at the International Association of School Librarianship (IASL) 38th Annual Conference Incorporating the 13th International Forum on Research in School Librarianship, 2 – 4 September 2009 Abano Terme, Padova, Italy. “Preparing Pupils and Students for the Future – School Libraries in the Picture.” https://iasl-online.org/ resources/Documents/IASL2009_RFP_GIBSON-LANGFORD.pdf. Jones-Jang, S. Mo, Tara Mortensen, and Jingjing Liu. 2019. “Does Media Literacy Help Identification of Fake News? Information Literacy Helps, but Other Literacies Don’t.” American Behavioral Scientist 65, no. 2: 371–388. https://doi. org/10.1177/0002764219869406. Available at https://www.researchgate.net/ profile/Mo-Jones-Jang/publication/335352499_Does_Media_Literacy_Help_ Identification_of_Fake_News_Information_Literacy_Helps_but_Other_Literacies_Don’t/ links/5d5fe26ea6fdccc32cca0da3/Does-Media-Literacy-Help-Identification-of-Fake-NewsInformation-Literacy-Helps-but-Other-Literacies-Dont.pdf. Kemmis, Stephen. 2009. “Action Research as a Practice-based Practice.” Educational Action Research 17, no. 3: 463–474. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650790903093284. Available at https://researchoutput.csu.edu.au/ws/portalfiles/ portal/8742038/999008282manuscript.pdf. Langford, Linda. 1998. “Of Special Interest: Information Literacy: A Clarification.” School Libraries Worldwide 4, no. 1: 59–72. https://journals.library.ualberta.ca/slw/index.php/ slw/article/view/7036.

214 

 Anne Whisken

Lupton, Mandy. 2014. “Inquiry skills in the Australian Curriculum v6: A Bird’s-Eye View.” Access 28, no. 4: 8–29. Available at https://www.eprints.qut.edu.au/78451/1/Lupton_ACCESS_ Nov_2014_2pg.pdf. Lupton, Mandy. 2015. “Teacher Librarians’ Understanding of Inquiry Learning.” Access 29, no. 4: 18–29. Available at https://eprints.qut.edu.au/87481/. Maybee, Clarence, Christine S. Bruce, Mandy Lupton, and Ming Fai Pang. 2019. “Informed Learning Design: Teaching and Learning Through Engagement with Information.” Higher Education Research & Development 38, no. 3: 579–593. Available at https:// researchonline.jcu.edu.au/55910/. Murdoch, Kath. 2019. “A Model for Designing a Journey of Inquiry.” [Kath Murdoch Education Consulting. Updated Diagram: Designing a Journey of Inquiry]. https:// static1.squarespace.com/static/55c7efeae4b0f5d2463be2d1/t/5dcb82551bdcf03f3 65b0a6f/1573618265386/A+MODEL+FOR+DESIGNING+A+JOURNEY+OF+INQUIRY.pdf. Stripling, Barbara. 2019. Empire State Information Fluency Continuum. School Library Systems Association. https://slsa-nys.libguides.com/ifc/home. Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority. n.d. “Victorian Curriculum Foundation-10: Curriculum Design: Learning Areas and Capabilities.” https://victoriancurriculum.vcaa.vic. edu.au/overview/curriculum-design/learning-areas-and-capabilities. Wall, June. 2021. “Information Fluency: A NSW Journey.” SCAN: The Journal for Educators 40, no. 9: 4–9. Available at https://education.nsw.gov.au/content/dam/main-education/ teaching-and-learning/professional-learning/scan/media/documents/vol-40/Scan_40-9_ Oct2021_AEM.pdf. Whisken, Anne. 2019a. “Informed Learning Practice in a Secondary School: A Participatory Action Research Case Study.” PhD thesis, Charles Sturt University. Available at https:// researchoutput.csu.edu.au/en/publications/informed-learning-practice-in-a-secondaryschool-a-participatory-. Whisken, Anne. 2019b. “Ten School Benchmarks to Build Student Information Strategies.” Synergy 17, no. 2. https://slav.vic.edu.au/index.php/Synergy/article/view/V1721910/120. Whisken, Anne. 2021. “Framework for Whole School Wide Reading Practice.” Synergy 19, no. 1. https://slav.vic.edu.au/index.php/Synergy/article/view/488.

Deborah Lang Froggatt

16 M  aking It Real: Growing Inquiry Learning Instructors Abstract: Certified school librarians (CSLs) in the United States are entrusted with facilitating inquiry-based learning through creating learning environments that provide students with time, resources, and support to ensure success. Implementing inquiry learning teaching practices that impact academic achievement is enhanced by professional development for CSLs and for those who supervise and evaluate CSL performance. Professional development facilitators need to provide pedagogical and experiential opportunities for examining inquiry learning in action. Strategies to improve CSL skills and knowledge should include opportunities to experience inquiry learning personally so that CSLs and their performance evaluators become familiar with the inquiry learning process and understand how inquiry learning influences student success. This chapter describes how action research conducted by CSLs and collaborations between evaluators and the school district human resources department in a large city in Massachusetts led to policy change as well as to deeper understanding of the inquiry learning process. School librarian specific rubrics, the AASL National School Library Standards (AASL 2018a, 2018b) and inquiry learning strategies were crosswalked with student learning goals to demonstrate alignment and to develop a performance evaluation rubric appropriate to the work of CSLs in Massachusetts. Keywords: Inquiry-based learning; Professional development; Performance evaluation

Introduction Certified school librarians (CSLs) in the US are specifically trained to work with students and have extensive librarian-related experience on top of their teaching experience. The educational requirements to become a CSL vary from state to state. CSLs are guided and entrusted to “create learning environments that provide enough time, resources ... to facilitate inquiry” (Callison 2015, 28) by their professional colleagues, school district library leadership, or administrative performance evaluators who play a role in validating training and education requirements for CSLs. Acquiring skills and knowledge for inquiry learning success requires school librarian professional learning developers to provide pedagogical and experiential opportunities for aspiring teacher librarians where https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110772586-018

216 

 Deborah Lang Froggatt

inquiry learning teaching practices are examined for their impact on student academic success. The work described in this chapter was undertaken in a large urban school district in Massachusetts. Requirements for CSLs in the state include a baccalaureate degree in teaching and a school library media program certificate or a master’s degree in library and information science. The author, director of the school district’s library services program, noticed that many of the district’s CSLs were unfamiliar with, or had not engaged in, the inquiry learning process themselves. Research confirms that a lack of preparation in inquiry-based methods is a barrier to implementing it effectively in practice (Levy et al. 2013; Barton and Levstik 2004 as cited in Martell 2020). Some school principals, who are often CSL performance evaluators, seemed not to be aware of how inquiry learning intersected with student achievement. CSLs, if evaluated at all, were being observed using a rubric designed for a classroom teacher which might not be assessing the characteristics required for a school librarian. To address the issues, CSLs must themselves experience inquiry learning to implement it effectively, and the evaluators must be familiar with inquiry learning in action. This chapter addresses the following question: How can school librarian leadership support CSLs’ experiential growth as inquiry learning instructors?

Background Massachusetts is one of the smallest states in the US and located in the northeastern region bordering the Atlantic Ocean. The state has a population of just over seven million. The Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (MDESE) provides a set of targeted rubrics, scoring tools designed to help educators and evaluators develop a consistent, shared understanding of proficient performance in practice (MDESE 2021). MDESE has worked with the Massachusetts School Library Association (MSLA) to develop a non-compulsory school librarian performance evaluation rubric (MDESE, n.d.). The rubric aligns with state sanctioned teacher evaluation indicators and includes inquiry learning elements. In the school district, up until 2019, CSLs were evaluated as teachers. Performance evaluations were applied inconsistently. CSL evaluators were not always aware of the MDESE rubric for school librarians. Examples of CSL evaluation feedback included non-pedagogical library tasks such as “manages the bookroom well” or “maintains the library catalog”. While one section states: “IVE-1. The proficient school librarian maintains a website that is regularly updated



16 Making It Real: Growing Inquiry Learning Instructors 

 217

with new content that reflects instructional work with students, as well as up-todate resources for reading, inquiry activities, and responsible digital citizenship” (MDESE, n.d.,7), inquiry learning pedagogy is not addressed in any depth. Some school librarians were not provided with the formative support required for improving their inquiry teaching and student learning practices, and evaluators were not aware of the skills or knowledge required. In addition, schools in the urban district determine an annual instructional focus on which all certified faculty are to base their goals. Performance evaluations of staff are measured against the goals. Teaching and learning artifacts must support the goals and include lesson plans, student work, and demonstrations of collaboration. This chapter chronicles the process of the growth of inquiry learning instruction across the school district. It describes the development and implementation of a school librarian specific performance evaluation rubric (AASL 2018a) which informed school librarian evaluators and, in turn, was adopted for use within the school district. For CSLs, inquiry learning is an essential element of professional learning that could be incorporated into state sanctioned performance evaluations. For CSLs, principals and evaluators, knowledge of strategies for supporting CSL’s integration of inquiry learning across the curriculum enlarges the scope of collaborative leadership (Elkins 2014; Froggatt 2020; Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2015; Pon 2005). Improvements in inquiry learning across the curriculum can strengthen equitable student access to effective school library programs and advance academic achievement (Francis and Lance 2011; Lance 2010; Lance, Rodney and Schwarz 2010). Inquiry learning action research can showcase the unique teaching and learning that school librarians bring to their school communities.

The Path to Improvement Begins In 2016, the author began a collaboration with the local school district’s Human Resources Department (HRD). HRD was not aware of optional use of the school librarian performance evaluation rubric. Departmental discourse ensued and included discussion of school library specific indicators that linked the rubric and examples of inquiry learning pedagogical interventions, in particular Guided Inquiry Design (GID) (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2015). As part of the discussion to improve rubrics and their use, the existing rubrics in Massachusetts were explained along with standards emanating from the American Association of School Librarians (AASL). The AASL Standards (2007) were

218 

 Deborah Lang Froggatt

introduced and featured as elements of the school librarian evaluation rubric. For instance, the Massachusetts “Rubric: I-A-I. Subject Matter Knowledge” includes inquiry learning language: students “collaborate ... develop, publish and/or present” (MDESE, n.d., 2). The student actions align with the AASL Learning Standards (2007): “2.1.5. Collaborate with others to exchange ideas, develop new understandings, make decisions and solve problems” (AASL 2009, 29). The standards remain similar to the later version which is used currently: AASL Student Learning Framework: “III.A.2: Scaffolding enactment of learning group roles to enable the development of new understandings within a group” (AASL 2018a, 49). The revised rubric reflected the GID phases identified by Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari (2015): Open, Immerse, Explore, Identify, Gather, Create, Share and Evaluate.

The Professional Development Solution On learning the depth and breadth of the impact of inquiry learning pedagogy, the human resources team proposed that the school library director facilitate professional development with CSLs, performing action research to show how data from students’ inquiry learning showed demonstrable impact on academic achievement. Five CSLs in 2017 and three CSLs in 2018 collaborated with the human resources department and their evaluators to pilot implementing the revised MDESE rubric (n.d.). Because the CSLs were observed using various versions of the rubrics, the CSLs’ and the evaluators’ knowledge varied widely regarding the inquiry learning competencies in the school library rubric and the content of the AASL standards (2007). To meet the requirements of an annual instructional focus and to add an inquiry learning lens, each CSL developed an observable and measurable learning intervention, to be constructed around one of the GID phases already mentioned. The CSL research approaches included developing essential questions, topic selection and using T-charts. The learning activity would either be an element of an inquiry learning lesson or a scaffolded lesson that was part of a collaboratively facilitated inquiry learning unit. Student engagement, language arts and visual literacy integration, makerspace literature, and knowledge of  STEAM (Science Technology, Engineering, Arts, Mathematics) careers were topics addressed. With input from HRD, the director and an experienced CSL developed a year-long professional development course and served as the course facilitators. Action research and evidence-based, inquiry learning student outcomes (Gordon 2009) were at the core of the professional learning. The course facili-



16 Making It Real: Growing Inquiry Learning Instructors 

 219

tators chose inquiry learning interventions with measurable impacts. GID was embedded throughout. The action research element of the professional development allowed the CSLs to experience inquiry learning. To do this, CSLs performed their own research on their inquiry learning student interventions, which showcased learning models. The interventions were integrated with a GID phase. By integrating the process into their performance evaluations, the school librarians, their evaluators and the action research course facilitators engaged in a metacognitive learning experience with the goal of improving student academic performance. The evaluators garnered a better understanding of the unique instructional role of CSLs and acquired school librarian specific observation strategies for determining exemplary inquiry learning practices such as collaborative discourse on a specific element in the MDESE CSL rubric or observing students engaged in a GID phase. The 2017 and 2018 professional development pilots required that the CSLs use the existing MDESE teacher rubric for state certification, but it included elements from the associated school librarian rubric indicator. Initial professional development discourse centered around brainstorming student interventions based on the school’s instructional focus and practice. Action research theory and inquiry learning models were explored, and lessons and unit plans were developed which integrated AASL standards and academic content standards. Sharing of student work and data from observed lessons were included in preand post-observation meetings with evaluators and the course facilitators. The artifacts and observations were uploaded into the approved teacher assessment platform as artifacts. All of the CSLs received proficient or exemplary ratings in their performance evaluations. At the same time, the student interventions prompted the CSLs to develop what the school district deems “student look-fors” or observable student learning behaviors (BPS 2021). The “look-fors” or observable priority outcomes were identified in inquiry learning and shared by CSLs along with the action research projects at an end-of-school-year library services department meeting. The two case studies of the action research projects presented later in this chapter provide examples of the look-fors. One session of the Professional Development Day consisted of reviewing the school librarian performance evaluation rubric and the emerging inquiry learning look-fors constructed by the action research team. The inquiry learning look-fors continue to be used as a guide for CSL lesson and unit construction and to support evaluator observations. However, due to the pandemic, codifying the inquiry learning look-fors for inclusion in the district’s school librarian performance evaluation rubric was put on hold. The library services director is collaborating with the district’s human resources department to

220 

 Deborah Lang Froggatt

vet the language so that the full school librarian rubric with the inquiry learning look-fors can be used for the state approved school librarian performance evaluations. The inquiry learning professional development and the development of inquiry learning in content units informed the creation of formative assessments that foster empowerment, collaboration, and knowledge building opportunities to showcase new practices. The outcomes bolstered CSLs “to strengthen ... practice and to engage in evaluator dialog about [their] work [and] its value” (AASL 2018a, 161–162). The CSLs presented the results of their action research at the MSLA 2018 annual conference. Updating the state’s school librarian performance evaluation rubric resource document is a future goal of the state’s school librarian professional association, the MSLA.

Action Research Examples and Crosswalk Analysis Two action research examples from the elementary and secondary school levels undertaken as part of the professional development program are outlined in this section, the first involving engagement and comprehension in an elementary school and the second examining use of the Explore phase of GID in a secondary school. Both demonstrate how information inquiry was integrated into the professional development of the CSLs. Crosswalk analysis is a bridging technique used to identify similarities and differences between different systems to help planning and application, particularly where interoperability is the goal. AASL has demonstrated the technique and used it to examine the AASL standards in relation to other standards in use. Crosswalks of how school library standards related to inquiry learning were implemented in the professional development program are provided.

Engagement and Comprehension in an Elementary School The CSL of an elementary school took as her inquiry learning essential question: “Does reading selection influence student story comprehension?” She wanted to examine whether students, when given a choice to develop their own authentic learning experiences, would be more encouraged to explain their thinking through visual, verbal or written expression to support comprehension (Keohane 2021). The target group was a diverse group of young boys aged eight and nine who were not engaged in reading and struggled with reading comprehension.



16 Making It Real: Growing Inquiry Learning Instructors 

 221

The CSL facilitated an inquiry learning research project where the students chose a topic as part of the Explore phase in GID. Comprehension strategies including understanding the context, seeking meaning and visualizing were integrated into the inquiry learning project. The CSL’s hypothesis was that students would improve their comprehension when given the opportunity to choose what they wanted to read, including reading texts beyond their designated reading levels. The CSL wondered if this form of student agency would prompt students to challenge themselves and strive to understand complex text. Three classes with a total of 68 students participated in personalized inquiry learning research. The purpose was for them to be more encouraged to explain their thinking through visual, verbal and written expression in order to support comprehension. Students were provided with a range of leveled, non-fiction books and given independent reading time with the selected books. During three library visits, the students compared and contrasted ideas and concepts taken from the books’ indices, charts and diagrams to curate information for their T-chart graphic organizer visual representations. The CSL compared the first T-chart with the last to consider whether or not the students could describe main ideas and use details from the text with increased vocabulary. The students’ completed work showed how students approached the text and how they comprehended what they had read, as well as any differences across the three sessions. From this inquiry learning experience, the students grew as engaged readers and learners as well as performing well on standardized test questions related to visual elements located in non-fiction texts. The inquiry learning look-for that the CSL developed in relationship to the state’s school librarian rubric indicator was: Students demonstrate that they know how to use the organization of the library and elements of a book (inside flap, back cover, table of contents) to identify and choose material that interests them (MDESE, n.d.). The associated teacher element, from Massachusetts target performance evaluation indicators for child and adolescent development, is “providing differentiated learning experiences that enable all students to progress toward meeting intended outcomes” (MDESE 2018, 2), and the associated school librarian element is “selects materials to support learners at various developmental levels and abilities” (MDESE, n.d., 1A-2). Crosswalking to the AASL standards (2018a) established that the following were integrated into the work: –– V.A.1. Reading widely and deeply in multiple formats and write and create for a variety of purposes. –– V.C.1. Expressing curiosity about a topic of personal interest or curricular relevance. (AASL 2018a, 38)

222 

 Deborah Lang Froggatt

–– VI. D. 1. Personalizing their use of information and information technologies. (AASL 2018a, 39).

Exploring Research Questions in a Secondary School The CSL of a secondary school took as her inquiry learning essential question: “Does giving time and space in the library to explore topics of interest result in better research questions?” (McBride 2021). The target group comprised high school seniors aged seventeen in a humanities course combining language arts and social studies. The students had previously been assigned research topics and immediately begun to engage in the Gather information source phase of GID, omitting the second phase of GID, Explore (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2015, 56–57). The CSL collaborated with the humanities teacher to create a project proposal for students that included a research question. Three classes involving 78 students participated. In previous years, around 10% of students ended up altering their research focus area while Gathering information. After students delved into their own curiosities in a wider Explore phase during time for a pre-search, the CSL and the teacher noted a higher level of student engagement with the research topics. Only two changed their topics. The inquiry learning intervention of enlarging the capacity for students to answer their own questions authentically showed that the rate of change went from 10% down to 2.6%, demonstrating the significance of student agency within inquiry learning pedagogical outcomes. “Students were much more engaged in the whole research process because they had choice over their topics” (McBride 2021). Two inquiry learning look-fors emerged from the intervention and the associated school librarian performance evaluation elements generated by the CSL and her school librarian colleagues: first that students choose from a number of options to show proficiency and second that students feel comfortable going to the librarian to ask for help in reader’s advisory or during research. The relevant state’s teacher performance evaluation indicator is “II-B-3. Student Motivation” and the associated teacher element is “Consistently creates learning experiences that guide students to identify their strengths, interests, and needs; ask for support when appropriate; take academic risks; and challenge themselves to learn” (MDESE 2018, 7). The associated school librarian element is “The proficient school librarian ... Stays apprised of student projects and individual interests to provide feedback and expose students to additional resources” (MDESE, n.d., 3).



16 Making It Real: Growing Inquiry Learning Instructors 

 223

Crosswalking to the AASL standards (2018a) established that the following were integrated into the work: –– V.A.1. Reading widely and deeply in multiple formats and write and create for a variety of purposes –– V.A.2. Reflecting and questioning assumptions about possible misconceptions –– V.A.3. Engaging inquiry-based processes for personal growth –– V.C.1. Expressing curiosity about a topic of personal interest or curricular relevance –– V.C.2. Co-constructing innovative means of investigation (AASL 2018a, 38).

Conclusion Integrating inquiry-based learning into professional development for CSLs proved to be extremely effective. Persistent and collaborative dialog between the library services director and the human resources department about the CSL evidence-based practices in the action research pilot coupled with performance evaluation observations brought about significant policy changes. The 2019 MDESE/MSLA rubric for school librarians was adopted, and the rubric became an option for formative and summative CSL evaluations. Funding was procured for the library services department to offer formal Guided Inquiry Design® (GId) professional development for CSLs and teacher teams facilitated by Dr. Leslie Maniotes, one of the three GID researchers (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2015). The “scaled-up” (Maass and Engeln 2018, 13) school-based inquiry learning professional development program has provided CSLs with opportunities to become collaborative leaders (Kimmel, Dickinson, and Doll 2012) in facilitating the implementation of elements of GID across units of study as the curriculum and faculty change. The two action research projects highlighted in the chapter demonstrate how CSLs can integrate student learning goals with personal performance evaluations. The crosswalks showed how performance evaluation can be linked to school library specific evaluation rubric components, inquiry learning elements, and the AASL standards (2018a, 2018b). The action research and the associated inquiry learning student interventions deepened the understanding of inquiry learning pedagogy for CSLs, school administrators and evaluators. Enhanced knowledge of the inquiry learning process supports school librarian performance which directly impacts student achievement.

224 

 Deborah Lang Froggatt

The annual professional development course for CSLs continues. CSL participants develop inquiry-based performance evaluation crosswalks, similar to the ones described above. The course includes targeting a problem of practice for action research, applying AASL standards (2018a) and associating work undertaken with a GID phase (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2015). When CSLs engage in inquiry learning for improving their own practice, while at the same time demonstrating student academic growth, they “make it real” (AASL 2018a, 163). A truly successful outcome is that by making inquiry learning real for CSLs and school communities, the school library services director is currently overseeing the district’s investment in the addition of 80 CSLs by 2026, with 30 by 2023. Inquiry-based learning has resulted in real achievements.

References American Association of School Librarians (AASL). 2007. Standards for the 21st Century Learner. Chicago: American Library Association. American Association of School Librarians (AASL). 2009. Standards for the 21st Century Learner in Action. Chicago: American Library Association. Available at https://www.epsnj.org/site/handlers/filedownload. ashx?moduleinstanceid=7770&dataid=32216&FileName=AASL%2021ST%20C%20 learner.pdf. American Association of School Librarians (AASL). 2018a. National School Library Standards. Chicago: ALA Editions. Available in part at https://standards.aasl.org/. American Association of School Librarians (AASL). 2018b. “AASL Standards Framework for Learners.” https://standards.aasl.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/AASL-StandardsFramework-for-Learners-pamphlet.pdf. Boston Public Schools (BPS) Office of Human Capital (OHC). n.d. “Interactive Rubric Overview.” https://www.bostonpublicschools.org/page/416. Callison, Daniel. 2015. The Evolution of Inquiry. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited. Elkins, Aaron J. 2014. “What’s Expected, What’s Required, and What’s Measured: A Comparative Qualitative Content Analysis of the National Professional Standards for School Librarians, and Their Job Descriptions and Performance Evaluations in Florida.” Ph.D. diss. Florida State University. https://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/islandora/object/fsu%3A185384/ datastream/PDF/view. Francis, Briana Hovendick, and Keith Curry Lance. 2011. “Administrators and Teachers: Findings from the Latest Studies in Colorado and Idaho.” Tech Trends 55, no. 4: 63–69. https://doi. org/10.1007/s11528-011-0513-9. Froggatt, Deborah Lang. 2020. “A Social Justice Advocacy Model: The Informationally Underserved and Equitable Access to School Libraries.” In Social Justice and Cultural Competency: Essential Readings for School Librarians, edited by Marcia A. Mardis and Dianne Oberg, 14–26. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited.



16 Making It Real: Growing Inquiry Learning Instructors 

 225

Gordon, Carol A. 2009. “An Emerging Theory for Evidence Based Information Literacy Instruction in School Libraries, Part 1: Building a Foundation.” Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 4, no. 2: 56–77. https://journals.library.ualberta.ca/eblip/index.php/ EBLIP/article/view/5614/5320. Keohane, Morgan. 2021. “Does Reading Selection Influence Story Comprehension?” P.A. Shaw Library. Research. https://pashawlibrary.weebly.com/research.html. Kimmel, Sue C., Gail K. Dickenson, and Carol A. Doll. 2012. “Dispositions in the Twenty First Century School Library Profession.” School Libraries Worldwide 18, no. 2: 106–120. Available at https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/stemps_fac_pubs/75/. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier, Leslie K. Maniotes, and Ann K. Caspari. 2015. Guided Inquiry: Learning in the 21st Century. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited. Lance, Keith Curry. 2010. “The Mind of a Researcher: Keith Curry Lance.” Interview by Teacher Librarian 37, no. 4: 81–82. Available at https://edition.pagesuite-professional.co.uk/ html5/reader/production/default.aspx?pubname=&edid=33691b3e-c0eb-46bc-9d83affea95c4633&pnum=81. Lance, Keith Curry, Marcia J. Rodney, and Bill Schwarz. 2010. “The Impact of School Libraries on Academic Achievement: A Research Study Based on Responses from Administrators in Idaho.” School Library Monthly 26, no. 9: 14–17. Levy, Brett. L. M., Ebony E. Thomas, Kathryn Drago, and Leslie A. Rex. 2013. Examining Studies of Inquiry-based Learning in Three Fields of Education Sparking Generative Conversation. Journal of Teacher Education 64, no. 5: 387–408. https://doi. org/10.1177/0022487113496430. Available at https://scholarsarchive.library.albany.edu/ etap_fac_scholar/23/. Maass, Katja, and Katrin Engeln. 2018. “Effects of Scaled-up Professional Development Courses About Inquiry Based Learning on Teachers.” Journal of Education and Training Studies 6, no. 4 (April): 1–16. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/228083276.pdf. Martell, Christopher C. 2020. “Barriers to Inquiry-based Instruction: A Longitudinal Study of History Teachers.” Journal of Teacher Education 7, no. 3: 279–291. doi.org/10.1177/0022487119841880. Available at https://www.scribd.com/. document/488203483/Martell-2020-Barriers-to-inquiry-based-instructi Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (MDESE). n.d. “DESE Rubric for Evaluating School Librarians: MSLA Implementation Support for School Librarians: Resource to Support DESE Model Rubric System.” https://www.maschoolibraries.org/ dese-rubric-school-librarians.html. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (MDESE). 2018. “Massachusetts Model System for Educator Evaluation Classroom Teacher Rubric.” https://www.doe.mass.edu/edeval/model/PartIII_AppxC.pdf. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (MDESE). 2021. “Rubrics.” https://www.doe.mass.edu/edeval/rubrics/. McBride, Bonnie. 2021. Action Research Plan. https://tinyurl.com/5cpucfud. Part of Presentations, Research and Other Work. https://library.fenwayhs.org/about-ms-mcbride Pon, Terrance. 2005. “Evaluation of the Teacher Librarian: Review of the Models.” School Libraries in Canada 24, no. 3: 37–43. http://journal.canadianschoollibraries.ca/ wp-content/uploads/2017/04/SLiCv24n3.pdf.

Yumiko Kasai, Yoko Noborimoto, and Shiori Ito

17 Inquiry Learning Initiatives in Japan Abstract: In the history of Japanese education, a subject-oriented and teachercentred teaching and learning method has been commonplace. However, the recently revised national curriculum is focusing on active learning, and the key terms associated with the new approach are independent, collaborative, and deep learning. The high school subject called the Period for Integrated Study has been updated as part of the revision process to Period for Inquiry-Based Cross-Disciplinary Study. The shifts in today’s Japanese educational context are described using case studies of inquiry-based learning initiatives in a Kindergarten – to Year Twelve (K – 12) academy and a high school. Keywords: School libraries – Japan; Inquiry-based learning

School Libraries in the Japanese Educational System School libraries in Japan are based on the School Education Laws and Regulations and the School Library Law, enacted in 1947 and 1953 respectively (Japan Library Association 1994). As a result of the laws and regulations, nearly 100% of Japanese schools have school libraries. However, being referred to in legislation does not guarantee the execution of ideal library management or practices (Kasai 2006). For example, the issue of employment of professionals in the school library in Japan has been a concern for over fifty years. Although shisho-kyoyu/ librarian-teacher, a teacher with librarianship qualifications, has been identified by the School Library Law since 1953, the actual post of shisho-kyoyu was frequently vacant and not active in schools for many years. In 1997, the School Library Laws were partially revised, and it was stated that certain sized schools must appoint a shisho-kyoyu to comply with, and to implement, the national curriculum that was revised in the late 1990s.

The School Library and the National Curriculum Another component having an impact on the Japanese school library is the national curriculum. Since 1947, the national curriculum has been revised every ten years. However, for over fifty years, the description of the school library in https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110772586-019



17 Inquiry Learning Initiatives in Japan 

 227

the national curriculum has not changed to any degree, and the teaching and learning methods closely related to the functions of school library have not been referenced in the documents. In the late 1990s, a new subject called Sogo-teki na gakushu no Jikan/ Period for Integrated Study was added to the national curriculum (Japan. MEXT 2009) by Japan’s Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (Japan. MEXT, n.d.; Japan. MEXT 2007). The new subject represented a transition in Japanese education from traditional lecture-oriented teaching styles to a learner-centred focus. It is discussed further in the next section on Inquiry Learning as the new unit made a significant impact on the growth of inquiry learning. Some drastic changes appeared in two other areas with the revision of the national curriculum, published in 1998–1999 and implemented in 2002–2003, and the introduction of computers and network systems in schools. In the following twenty years, the national curriculum of Japan was revised twice, with the latest revision implemented from 2018, initially in elementary schools with students aged six to twelve. One focus of the more recent revision is the emphasis on inquiry learning. In high schools, the subject named Period for Integrated Study was changed to Period for Inquiry-Based Cross-Disciplinary Study (Japan. MEXT 2019).

Inquiry Learning in Japanese Education Few challenged the Asian tradition and orthodoxy of lecture-oriented teaching and learning styles in Japan in the years prior to World War II. The School Library Law introduced in 1953 was influenced by John Dewey’s ideas of teaching and learning. However, after several years of being enthusiastically adopted, due to the increasing number of children nationwide, the Japanese government was forced to change the policy to adapt to large-sized classrooms of approximately fifty or more students per class. As a result, the resource-based learning which had been occurring in school libraries fell by the wayside. However, towards the end of the 20th century, Japanese educational policy began to change again, little by little, in favour of more flexible teaching and learning styles. Nonetheless, throughout the 20th century, a few schools persisted with a problem-solving and project-based learning (OECD 2012; Umene 1977). Almost 100 years ago in Wakasa High School, a prefectural school in Fukui prefecture, located in a fishermen’s village along the Sea of Japan, the students learned in the project-based learning style and produced a canned mackerel product, which was presented to the public at an industrial exhibition. In 2020, students from

228 

 Yumiko Kasai, Yoko Noborimoto, and Shiori Ito

the same school completed their Year Twelve project, with a canned mackerel product. It was carried into and consumed in space by Japanese astronaut Soichi Noguchi. The story was widely reported on the internet (Kyodo News 2018), and it will also be featured in a new English language textbook, MY WAY English Expression to be published by Sanseido in 2022. In the 1960s, following on from the trend to expand science education, discovery learning (Bruner 1960, 1961, 1966) was introduced into Japan. Toshiyuki Mizukoshi (1975, 2001), a Japanese scholar of media studies, examined discovery learning and suggested that guided discovery was extremely practical in Japanese classrooms. Later, Mizukoshi integrated “learning by discovery method” and “learning by inquiry” into “heuristic learning” (Mizukoshi 1987, 50–51). The concept of inquiry learning (Suchman 1961) was introduced in Japan at the same time as discovery learning. Though the concept of inquiry learning was not accepted as widely as discovery learning, inquiry learning emphasised both process and attitude to learning. Both discovery learning and inquiry learning were introduced mainly into science education. In the 21st century, inquiry-based learning is increasingly gaining importance in Japan as a means of developing students’ ability to evaluate information independently and to solve problems. Inquiry is an approach to learning whereby students find and use a variety of information sources and ideas to increase their understanding of problems, topics, or issues. Inquiry learning requires more from students than simply answering questions or getting the right answer. It espouses investigation, exploration, search, quest, research, pursuit, and study (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2012). The Period for Integrated Studies as already noted was introduced into the Japanese national curriculum at the end of the 2010s and its successor, Period for Inquiry-Based Cross-Disciplinary Study, continues curriculum developments. The curriculum requires all students to engage in inquiry-based learning. It seeks to enable students to think independently about their lives through cross-disciplinary and inquiry studies. It also fosters in them the qualities and abilities required to identify tasks, learn and think independently, make proactive decisions, and solve problems efficiently (Japan. MEXT 2009). Period for Integrated Study encouraged every school to develop its own curriculum according to each school’s characteristics and context. Each school would choose the objectives and content for the new unit. For example, the new approach enabled schools surrounded by rice paddies in rural areas to choose rice and culture as an annual research topic. The Ministry highlighted examples of topics to be included such as environmental studies, social welfare, global education, and local interests:



17 Inquiry Learning Initiatives in Japan 

 229

Learning activities should be conducted in the light of the conditions of each school: for example, learning activities about cross-synthetic tasks, including international understanding, information, environment, welfare/health, learning activities about tasks based on pupils’ interests and concerns, and learning activities about tasks depending on characteristics of the local community and the school such as people’s lives, traditions and culture of the local community (Japan. MEXT, n.d.).

The learning sequence, including setting a problem, collecting information, arranging and analysing it, and reporting it intelligibly to others, is appropriate for developing students’ information literacy. In advancing the Period for Integrated Study, Kurokami (1999) outlines three important factors. First, children must be able to partake in independent activity. Second, the activity must be converted into learning through the curriculum or the learning methods used in class. Third, it is necessary to find ways to improve the students’ learning environment. In a curriculum’s design phase, the composition of the learning environment determines the success or failure of integrated learning. In Japan, a small number of schools, including both private schools and municipal schools, have been reintroducing inquiry-based learning in their respective curricula. The two case studies of private schools in the Tokyo metropolitan area that complete this chapter showcase the good practices observed in one K-12 academy and one secondary school.

Inquiry Learning at Tamagawa Academy, Tokyo Tamagawa Academy (K-12) was founded in 1929 as a private elementary education organization by Kuniyoshi Obara, a charismatic educator and philosopher. Later a secondary education division was added and, in 1947, Tamagawa University received approval for establishment as a pre-war old system university. As a gakuen/academy which encompasses all school grades, it currently provides education from kindergarten to graduate school level within a single campus. The Tamagawa Academy intranet, called Children Homes and Teachers’ Network (CHaT Net), was built in 1998, and information technology education has been included in the curriculum from grades three through twelve. In September 2006, the Multimedia Resource Center (MMRC) was opened. In the lead-up to its design and construction, various teachers’ ideas were incorporated into the Center’s zoning and furniture design. Some photos were introduced in a publication of the School Library Association of Victoria, Australia (La Marca 2007, 12, 158) (Figures 17.1 and 17.2).

230 

 Yumiko Kasai, Yoko Noborimoto, and Shiori Ito

Figure 17.1: Browsing Area

Figure 17.2: Table Designed for Communication

Kasai (2012) was involved with the design process and proposed three key concepts for the new learning space: –– Transition from storage to learning space –– Transition from information pool to information gym, and –– Cooperative and collaborative learning community with a variety of styles and methods of learning. Kasai suggested that the MMRC should be the space to improve and embed learning skills across the curriculum of Tamagawa’s K-12 education. The concept of



17 Inquiry Learning Initiatives in Japan 

 231

learning skills that Kasai introduced from English-speaking countries inspired the teachers in Tamagawa Academy when they planned a new program called Manabi no waza/Waza for Learning.

Waza for Learning Waza for Learning is a translation from the English phrase for learning skill. However, the Japanese word waza means not only skills in general, but also a great expert’s artistic skills. Waza is a sequence of actions, steps, procedures, and methods for doing something skilfully. Japan has an abundance of traditional waza that have been passed on by previous generations and are revered in the culture. Japanese people continue to develop and master various traditional waza, such as in the ceramic arts, martial arts, and culinary arts. With advances in computer technology, children’s environments are changing drastically. Although children’s cultural experiences have changed dramatically in the past fifty years, schools do not always reflect or respond to the changes (Buckingham and Sefton-Green 1994). New methods of teaching and learning media are imperative to ensure that young people can manage the challenges in their environments. Waza for Learning is taught in the Multimedia Resources Center, which is an expansion of the traditional school library. The MMRC is designed to accommodate various activities including literature research, seminars, and discussions. Waza for Learning effectively integrates information and communications technology (ICT) and inquiry learning. It was born from the user-oriented program which was based on information literacy and library skills education. Tamagawa Academy gradually adopted a small cycle of inquiry learning in an annual programme and encouraged students to learn use of library functions by inquiry and library facilities at the same time. In 2021, the MMRC with a small branch library called Annex in another building is managed by two certified shisho-kyoyu/librarian-teachers, two certified librarians, and four clerical staff members in charge of the checking service at the library reception. All except for three clerical staff are full-time workers. The purpose of Waza for Learning is to cultivate information literacy and logical thinking skills in the style of inquiry learning. Two of the authors of this chapter, Noborimoto and Ito, together with other team members implemented the program for the ninth grade students who are fifteen years old. The program seeks to ensure that students acquire the skills to: –– Decide on research questions or themes based on personal interests –– Collect, sort, and record information –– Classify and summarise information

232 

 Yumiko Kasai, Yoko Noborimoto, and Shiori Ito

–– Provide supporting evidence for answers to research questions –– Compose a paper writing it to maintain logical consistency between the research question, the evidence and the conclusion –– Present other research details effectively orally, and –– Ask effective questions. Waza for Learning was initially based on the inquiry model from Alberta’s Focus on Inquiry (Alberta 2004). The model developed for Waza for Learning is shown in Figure 17.3.

Figure 17.3: Model of Inquiry Learning Inspired by Alberta (Tamagawa 2015)

Subsequently, the Tamagawa team based Waza for Learning on Guided Inquiry Design (Figure 17.4) from the research of Carol Kuhlthau who developed the Information Search Process (Kuhlthau 2004). Kuhlthau’s approach addresses students’ feelings, the affective domain, as well as their thinking or cognitive skills, along with their actions. In each step of the Information Search Process (Kuhlthau 2004), the students’ feelings change. Students may initially have



17 Inquiry Learning Initiatives in Japan 

 233

feelings of certainty and optimism only to experience apprehension, uncertainty, confusion and frustration when they experience difficulties in seeking and exploring relevant information. Success in formulating a focus and collecting information may lead to clarity, a sense of direction, confidence and satisfaction although disappointment may arise with a failure to resolve difficulties ,and finally with a sense of accomplishment when the task is complete.

Figure 17.4: Guided Inquiry Design Process (Khulthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2012)

The various models enable teachers to anticipate the changes in feelings that students may experience at each step of inquiry learning and to guide the students in coping with difficulties during the program of Waza for Learning. The annual program of Waza for Learning is set out in Table 17.1, including the allocation by time. The Japanese school year is from April to the following March.

234 

 Yumiko Kasai, Yoko Noborimoto, and Shiori Ito

Apr. to May

How to listen to the talk – coaching skills (1) Orientation of the MMRC facilities and the program (6) How to draw a MindMap (2)

June to Aug.

How to find a research question (1) How to find books, online public access catalog, browsing books (2) Knowing about copyright, quotation, bibliography (1) How to use online databases, encyclopedia (1) How to decide on a research question (2) How to choose and adapt Information, grouping (1) How to draw Inquiry Map (2) Logical thinking, change of viewpoint (1) Choosing and adapting information, creating a MindMap (4) How to use the public library (1)

Sept. to Oct.

Demonstration of MindMap (5) How to make the slides for presentation (1) Make slides (5) How to make a presentation (1) Skills in Asking Questions (2) Practice giving presentation (5)

Nov. to Dec.

Poster sessions (4) Reflection on the presentation, examining a counter argument (2) Creating an Inquiry Map for paper (2) How to write a paper and quote (1) Writing paper (4)

Jan. to Feb.

Revision of a paper and slides (4) How to write a summary (1) Exercises for speech (2) Final presentation (3) Continuity to the next year (1) Reflection, evaluation (1)

Table 17.1: Annual Program of Waza for Learning (hour/time assigned)

Necessary learning skills, including some important ICT skills, are fostered through Waza for Learning (Noborimoto 2018; Noborimoto and Kasai 2013; Noborimoto et al. 2016, 2017a, 2017b). Noborimoto developed a bibliographic management system called MyRef to support students’ information retrieval and note-taking from various types of media, incorporating students’ logs in the system (Figure 17.5).



17 Inquiry Learning Initiatives in Japan 

 235

Figure 17.5: MyRef interface (Noborimoto et al. 2017b)

One result of using the MyRef system was that students increased their use of materials from 9.8 items prior to use to 13.4 items per student in 2016. The use continued to increase with an average of 17.6 items in 2018 for ninth grade students. An Achievement of Information Literacy Skills survey has been undertaken every year since Waza for Learning started, and the results indicate positive student responses about levels of understanding of learned components, including ICT skills, which increased from a Pre-Test level of 59.9% to a Post-Test level of 73.5% in 2016 (n=157). In 2021, Waza for Learning is a 60-hour subject across the whole school year and is affiliated with a national science education project called Super Science High School. Since 2021, Tamagawa Academy has implemented a Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) policy, and all ninth grade students use their own information devices at school and at home. Mastering ICT skills for learning in all subjects is increasingly important in Waza for Learning.

Inquiry Learning at Toin Gakuen High School, Yokohama, Kanagawa Prefecture Toin Gakuen High School was established as a private school in 1964 in the northern area of the city of Yokohama. The aim of the school is to educate excellent

236 

 Yumiko Kasai, Yoko Noborimoto, and Shiori Ito

talent for the future. The school’s philosophy is based on intellectual, moral, and physical education. Toin Gakuen is a large-scale educational institution from kindergarten to university, and there are libraries in each school building. Each library is run by one certified shisho-kyoyu/librarian-teacher and one certified librarian. Other school staff members support the clerical work of the library. Since 2018, ahead of the official start of the new national curriculum, Toin Gakuen High School has implemented its own curriculum for the Period for Inquiry-based Cross-disciplinary Study. Table 17.2 provides a broad outline of the curriculum content for 2019. There were seminars held for the tenth grade in 2019 on topics including cross-cultural understanding, new technology, mathematics in society, social issues, science in our life, gender studies, media, traditional arts, subculture criticism and Japanese literature and folklore. Grade

10th grade

11th grade

Semester

1st

2nd

Contents

Common skills

Individual or Group Research

Style

Homeroom

Seminar by subject

3rd

1st

2nd

3rd

Presentation

Paper

Table 17.2: Design of a two-year Period for Inquiry-based Cross-disciplinary Study in Toin Gakuen High School

In 2020, as occurred in many schools elsewhere in the world, Toin Gakuen was forced to operate online classrooms to prevent the spread of the COVID-19 virus. The school made great efforts to keep students engaged with inquiry-based learning at home and to maintain student motivation for inquiry through the use of digital information tools including the school website where they posted presentations and other applications.

Conclusion Kuhlthau’s Information Search Process model, the Guided Inquiry Design model, and other inquiry models emphasise that inquiry is an essential component of effective learning. Learners must take a long and winding road to develop answers for their own inquiries. There are many obstacles along the way but the guided inquiry model outlines the points where educators can intervene to help learners progress, overcome difficulties, and ease feelings of anxiety.



17 Inquiry Learning Initiatives in Japan 

 237

In her research, Kasai (2014) focused on the two stages of Explore and Gather from Kuhlthau’s Guided Inquiry model because during these two stages, learners Collect information for different purposes. Learners Explore information resources to identify their research questions. Once the research question and the focus of the inquiry are set, the Gathering of information is expected to be a different process, compared to the Explore stage. However, Kasai found that most students used the same resources during both stages. Kasai’s hypothesis that learners’ perspectives on collecting information would be different according to the inquiry process was disproved. The result was from one ninth grade class, with an extremely limited number of subjects. However, it indicates how difficult it is for learners to identify their research questions during limited times of study and with immature reading literacy. Even for adult learners, it is difficult to develop good research questions. For young learners, more careful and tactful intervention is needed. Through the experience of the Guided Inquiry model, all teachers, librarians, and learners can learn more about the mystical art of waza to help build their learning. Tamagawa K-12 Academy continues to share the harvest from Waza for Learning undertaken for the ninth grade with younger learners. In the first and second grade curricula, five hours of lessons of modified Waza for Learning are provided each year on the use of mind maps and other thinking tools. In the third to fifth grades, seventy hours of lessons per year are given based on a modified version of Waza for Learning, and the students experience inquiry-based learning and training for logical thinking along with programming education. Throughout Asia, difficulties remain in introducing inquiry learning into school library programs within each region’s traditionally oriented teacher-centred approach to education. The attempts and challenges by Japanese school libraries may be of some assistance in helping other regions’ school library programs to flourish.

Acknowledgement All three authors joined Rutgers University’s Center for International Scholarship in School Libraries (CISSL) summer workshop in 2012 to learn more about Guided Inquiry Design from Professor Emeritus Carol Kuhlthau. Special thanks to Dr Kuhlthau for her guidance, support, and friendship for her international friends.

238 

 Yumiko Kasai, Yoko Noborimoto, and Shiori Ito

References Alberta. Alberta Learning. Learning and Teaching Resources Branch. 2004. Focus on Inquiry: A Teacher’s Guide to Implementing Inquiry-Based Learning. https://open.alberta.ca/ publications/0778526666. Bruner, Jerome. 1960. The Process of Education. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press. Available at https://mde.biologia.gr/amigi/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2016/03/ The-Process-of-Education-Bruner.pdf. Bruner, Jerome S. 1961. “The Act of Discovery.” Harvard Educational Review 31: 21–32. Available at https://digitalauthorshipuri.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/the-act-of-discovery-bruner. pdf. Bruner, Jerome. 1966. Toward a Theory of Instruction. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press. Available at https://openlibrary.org/works/OL13356727W/Toward_a_theory_of_ instruction. Buckingham, David, and Julian Sefton-Green. 1994. Cultural Studies Goes to School: Reading and Teaching Popular Media (Critical Perspectives on Literacy and Education). Abingdon, Oxon: Taylor & Francis. Available at https://books.google. com.au/books?id=MZZthjgHriwC&newbks=0&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_ summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false. Japan. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Sciences and Technology (MEXT). n.d. “Chapter 4 the Period for Integrated Studies.” https://www.mext.go.jp/component/a_menu/ education/micro_detail/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2011/04/11/1298356_12_1.pdf. Japan. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT). 2007. “MEXT: Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology.” .https://www.mext.go.jp/ list_001/list_016/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2009/03/19/mext_2007_e.pdf. Japan. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) 2009. Explanation of the High School Course of Study: The Volume on the Period for Integrated Studies. Tokyo: Japan Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. Text in Japanese. Japan. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT). 2019. “The National Curriculum Standard for Upper Secondary Department of Special Needs Education School.” https://www.mext.go.jp/content/20210414-mxt_tokubetu01-100002985.pdf. Japan Library Association. International Relations Committee. 1994. Librarianship in Japan. Rev. ed. Tokyo: Japan Library Association. https://iss.ndl.go.jp/books/R100000002I000002408798-00. Text in Japanese. Kasai, Yumiko. 2006. “School Library Challenge in Japan-LIPER-SL: Library and Information Professions and Education Renewal: School Library Research Group Report.” In Proceedings of the Asia-Pacific Conference on Library & Information Education & Practice (ALIEP), Singapore, April 3–6, 2006, edited by C. Khoo, D. Singh and A.S. Chaudhry, 436–444. Singapore: School of Communication & Information, Nanyang Technological University. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228508961_School_library_ challenge_in_Japan-LIPER-SL_Library_and_information_professions_and_education_ renewal_School_Library_Research_Group_report/link/0912f511d0da006b0a000000/ download.



17 Inquiry Learning Initiatives in Japan 

 239

Kasai, Yumiko. 2012. “School Library Design Encouraging Learning: The Case of the Multi-Media Resources Center of Tamagawa K-12 Academy.” Learning Resources and Information 224: 60–63. https://iss.ndl.go.jp/books/R100000002-I000007426113-00. Text in Japanese. Kasai, Yumiko. 2014. “Research on Inquiry Learning for 9th grade with Kuhlthau’s Guided Inquiry Framework.” Annual Conference Proceedings of Japan Society of Library and Information Science 62: 65–68. https://iss.ndl.go.jp/books/R100000002-I024695887-00. Text in Japanese. Kasai, Yumiko, Shiori Ito, Yoshifumi Goto, K. Shioya, and Tatsuya Horita. 2009. Evaluation Research of the Information Literacy Educational Program for 9th Grade. Annual convention collected papers of Japan Society for Educational Technology 25: 675–676. Text in Japanese. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier. 2004. Seeking Meaning: A Process Approach to Library and Information Services. 2nd ed. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier, Leslie K. Maniotes, and Ann K. Caspari. 2015. Guided Inquiry: Learning in the 21st Century. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier, Leslie K. Maniotes, and Ann K. Caspari. 2012. Guided Inquiry Design: A Framework for Inquiry in Your School. Westport, CT : Libraries Unlimited. Kurokami, Haruo. 1999. Development of Period for Integrated Studies. Tokyo: Nihon Bunkyou Shuppan. https://iss.ndl.go.jp/books/R100000096-I001740222-00. Text in Japanese. Kyodo News. 2018. “Japanese Teens Go Above and Beyond with Space-bound Canned Fish.” Kyodo News, November 14, 2018. https://english.kyodonews.net/ news/2018/11/635f7e957770-japanese-teens-go-above-and-beyond-with-space-boundcanned-fish.html. La Marca, Susan, ed. 2007. Rethink! Ideas for Inspiring School Library Design, edited by Susan La Marca, featured section by Kevin Hennah. Carlton, Vic: School Library Association of Victoria. Mizukoshi, Toshiyuki. 1975. Research on Discovery Learning. Tokyo: Meiji Tosho Shuppan Corporation. https://iss.ndl.go.jp/books/R100000002-I000001181242-00. Text in Japanese. Mizukoshi, Toshiyuki. 1987. Methodology of Lesson Study. Tokyo: Meiji Tosho Shuppan Corporation. https://iss.ndl.go.jp/books/R100000002-I000001847261-00. Text in Japanese. Mizukoshi, Toshiyuki. 2001. “Educational Reform in Japan: Retrospect and Prospect.” http:// citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download;jsessionid=FF314327B491EC7FE396ABDBC85B86EF?doi=10.1.1.111.2171&rep=rep1&type=pdf. Noborimoto, Yoko. 2018. “Fostering Information Literacy through Inquiry-Based Learning in Japan.” Synergy 16, no. 1. https://www.slav.vic.edu.au/index.php/Synergy/article/view/ v16120186/53. Noborimoto, Yoko, and Yumiko Kasai. 2013. “Waza for Learning: Practice of Guided Inquiry Learning for a Student.” Poster presented at the International Association of School Librarianship (IASL) 42nd Annual Conference, Bali, Indonesia: Enhancing Students’ Life Skills through the School Library. https://iasl-online.org/resources/Documents/ p1noborimoto.pdf. Noborimoto, Yoko, Yoshifumi Goto, Shiori Ito, Yumiko Kasai, and Tatsuya Horita. 2016. “Implementation and Evaluation of the Inquiry Learning Program, Waza for Learning, at the Age of 15.” In Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education

240 

 Yumiko Kasai, Yoko Noborimoto, and Shiori Ito

International Conference, edited by G. Chamblee and L. Langub, 1708–1715. Savannah, GA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). https://www. learntechlib.org/primary/p/171919/. Noborimoto, Yoko, Shiroi Ito, Yoshifumi Goto and Tatsuya Horita. 2017a. “Development and Evaluation of Worksheets for Junior High School Students to Understand the Structure of Argument in Exploratory Learning.” Journal of the Japanese Society of Educational Engineering 40, Suppl.: 121–124. https://doi.org/10.15077/jjet.S40067. Text in Japanese. Noborimoto, Yoko, Syota Itagaki, Shiori Ito, and Tatsuya Horita. 2017b. “Development of a Bibliography Managerial System for Students Who are Forward Information Gathering Based on the Characteristics of Media.” Japanese Society for Information and Systems in Education 34 no. 3: 261–273. https://doi.org/10.14926/jsise.34.261. Text in Japanese. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). 2012. “Strong Performers and Successful Reformers in Education: Lessons from PISA for Japan.” Paris: OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264118539-en. Suchman, J. Richard. 1961. “Inquiry Training: Building Skills for Autonomous Discovery.” Merrill-Palmer Quarterly of Behavior and Development 7, no. 3: 147–169. Available at https://www.jstor.org/stable/23082723. Tamagawa Academy, Manabi no Waza/ Teaching Staff. 2015. Manabi No Waza Text Book for the 9th Grade Students in Affiliation with Sogo-Teki Na Gakushu No Jikan / Period for Integrated Study. Tokyo: Tamagawa Academy, Upper Division. Text in Japanese. Umene, S. 1977. Problem Solving Learning, Vol 7 in the series of Umene Satoru educational articles Meiji Tosho Shuppan Corporation. https://iss.ndl.go.jp/books/R100000001I023384230-00. Text in Japanese.

Rei Iwasaki and Mutsumi Ohira

18 P  ublic School Libraries in Inquiry-Based Learning in Japan Abstract: This chapter focuses on the role of school libraries in facilitating inquiry-based learning in Japan. The topic is related to the revision of the national curriculum/Courses of Study in Japan which requires schools to offer a wide range of subjects, two of which are called the Period for Integrated Studies and the Period for Inquiry-Based Cross-Disciplinary Study. Each has inquiry-based learning as the main goal. In Japan, inquiry-based learning began in 1998, but most of the schools which have implemented inquiry-based learning are private schools; public schools that have implemented inquiry-based learning are rare. This chapter introduces two case studies of public schools where school libraries are implementing inquiry-based learning. The case studies contribute to setting standards for school library services involved in students’ inquiry-based learning in Japan and share details for potential application elsewhere. Keywords: School libraries – Japan; Information literacy; Inquiry-based learning

Introduction This chapter focuses on the role of school libraries in facilitating inquiry-based learning in Japanese schools. In Japan, there are two types of school library professionals, shisho-kyoyu/teacher librarians and gakko-shisho/school librarians. Teacher librarians are teachers who are qualified by completing a teacher-training course and taking five subjects about school libraries. In Japanese public schools, it is unusual for teacher librarians to work exclusively in that role; most of them additionally hold the post of classroom teacher. School librarians can be qualified in two ways: by completing the course for librarians as a national qualification, or by completing a course for school librarians which is not a national qualification. At most public elementary and junior high schools, school librarians work part-time, but at most public senior high schools in Kyoto Prefecture, school librarians are full-time workers. This chapter’s topic is related to the revision of the national curriculum/ Courses of Study in Japan. The curriculum is determined by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) which sets national curriculum standards for the whole of Japan, with revisions approximately every ten years (Japan MEXT, n.d. a). The Courses of Study require elementary, junior high, https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110772586-020

242 

 Rei Iwasaki and Mutsumi Ohira

and high schools to offer a subject called the Period for Integrated Studies (Japan MEXT, n.d. b) with inquiry-based learning as the main goal. The Courses of Study state that the intent behind offering the subject is to enable students to think independently about life through cross-disciplinary and inquiry studies, while fostering the qualities and abilities needed for students to recognise their own tasks, learn and think independently, take proactive decisions, and solve problems. The subject enables students to acquire the habits of studying and thinking and cultivates their commitment to problem-solving and inquiry activities in a proactive, creative, and cooperative manner (Translated from Japan MEXT 2018a). The Period for Integrated Studies subject was introduced in 1998 in elementary and junior high schools and in 1999 in senior high schools. Following its introduction, MEXT made several efforts to further improve the subject; for instance, for high schools, the subject Period for Integrated Studies was changed to Period for Inquiry-Based Cross-Disciplinary Study. As stated in the IFLA School Library Guidelines (IFLA 2015), the school library plays an effective role in cultivating inquiry-based learning. However, only a small number of schools in Japan are implementing inquiry-based learning using their school libraries. Only private schools are making advanced use of their school libraries for inquiry-based learning. Most public school libraries have not yet made such services available. It is essential to develop public school libraries, as most children in Japan who are from financially weaker backgrounds go to public schools. Public school libraries need to provide good educational services to all children, following the IFLA/ UNESCO School Library Manifesto that says, “school library services must be provided equally to all members of the school community” (IFLA 1999). The case studies in this chapter targeted progressive public schools that were expected to be doing well in terms of using their school libraries in the implementation of inquiry-based learning. The selected schools and their activities are described, with a focus on their usage of the school library for inquiry-based learning as well as their approaches to library-supported learning.

Inquiry-based Learning in Japanese High Schools The new subject for high schools, Period for Inquiry-Based Cross-Disciplinary Study, was announced in 2018 and will be implemented in 2022 (Japan MEXT 2018b, 475–477). The subject aims to improve students’ ability to think about their own lives and to encourage them to solve any challenges or problems through inquisitive and integrated learning. The subject has three goals:



18 Public School Libraries in Inquiry-Based Learning in Japan 

 243

–– In the process of the research, students acquire knowledge and skills necessary for the discovery of a problem and its solution and come to understand the significance and value of the inquiry –– Students find a question from the real world and real life and in relation to themselves; they identify and select the topic themselves, investigate and collect information, arrange and analyse information, and formulate and present the results, and –– Students do inquiry-based learning independently and cooperatively and learn to contribute to realising a better society. The instructional plan of the Courses of Study requires the use of school libraries, along with other aspects of the wider information network. The commentary for the subject says, “in brief, inquiry involves a series of intellectual tasks (Figure 18.1) that students investigate in relation to the self and are going to ascertain of things”. It is necessary to repeat the inquiry process to develop students’ abilities and, as a result, the process will be useful in other subjects and in the real world.

Figure 18.1: Chart illustrating the cycle of inquiry-based learning for students (Japan MEXT 2018b)

244 

 Rei Iwasaki and Mutsumi Ohira

The Case Study of Horikawa Senior High School Kyoto Municipal Horikawa Senior High School accommodates students aged fifteen to eighteen years old. Located in the historic city of Kyoto, it is a public school that has been implementing inquiry-based learning since 1999, maximizing the use of the school library. There is one teacher librarian and one full-time school librarian. The teacher librarian is also a full-time worker, but not working exclusively for the school library. The school is considered a model school for inquiry-based learning in Japan. It offers a course titled Inquiry Division which employs an inquiry process model that corresponds to the Information Search Process model proposed by Carol Kuhlthau (2004; 2018). The school developed a textbook dedicated to the model in 2018. The textbook, Inquiry into the Unknown World: Pathfinder for Inquiry-based Learning, is a compilation of methods of inquiry-based learning (Kyoto Municipal Horikawa Senior High School 2018; Nemoto and Saito 2020). The case study examines the textbook and its use in classes to reveal the roles played by both teachers and school librarians and the nature of their collaboration. The approach of Horikawa Senior High School is an interesting topic because it is believed that it had a substantial influence on the national curriculum/Courses of Study. Analysing the methodology of Horikawa can guide other schools as they begin to implement inquiry-based learning and develop their own unique approaches. The textbook has been edited for tenth-grade and eleventh-grade students to learn about the basis of inquiry-based learning; eleventh-grade students are required to write an article in the course, Inquiry Division. The textbook has two special features, first a description of the model of inquiry-based learning, and second an emphasis on the inquiry process. Students belong to a particular subject seminar, for example, language and literature, social science or physics, and write their articles with the guidance of the textbook. Students can choose their themes freely and the topics for their articles vary widely, ranging from topics about everyday life such as “Method to chop disposable chopsticks neatly” to academic ones such as “Relations of collision energy and the incidence angle of the meteorite”. When students write their articles, a school librarian provides support by selecting various resources and providing suitable ones to the students. The teachers also support students doing inquiry-based learning and writing articles not only in classrooms but also in the school library. In the textbook, the model of inquiry-based learning is explained by two types of models, the model of problem-solving, and the model of reasoning which is reflecting on information found. The first type of model requires students to formulate a question and an hypothesis, and to demonstrate the design of their



18 Public School Libraries in Inquiry-Based Learning in Japan 

 245

own inquiries. The textbook stresses the importance of the requirements and expresses the process found in Figure 18.2. The textbook uses three keywords, metacognition, critical thinking, and mindfulness, to explain the basics of the way of thinking when students are finding their own questions and possible answers.

Figure 18.2: Problem-solving Process in Inquiry-based Learning (Kyoto Municipal Horikawa Senior High School, 2018, 22)

The second type of model stresses being logical and indicates that there are three conditions for being logical: –– The process of proof is not unreasonable –– Conclusions are based on evidence and factual data, and –– Premises and arguments must be openly expressed to avoid misunderstanding. Three ways of reasoning, deduction, induction, and abduction, are introduced. The two types of models are presented in the first half of the textbook, along with exercises for each stage. In the latter half of the textbook, there are instruc-

246 

 Rei Iwasaki and Mutsumi Ohira

tions related to library use and information seeking and to safe, responsible, ethical and legal information behaviours.

The Information Search Process, Guided Inquiry Design and the Japanese Inquiry Process The inquiry process used in the Horikawa Senior High School’ s textbook is shown in Figure 18.2 and resembles the model of the Information Search Process (ISP) which Carol Kuhlthau developed (Kuhlthau 2004; 2010). The ISP model is a theoretical model; the instructional model for the ISP is Guided Inquiry Design (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2015). The instructional models in Japan’s Course of Study and in the Horikawa High School textbook have been influenced by the ISP. Courses of Study

1. Identification and selection of topics

The Model of ISP

Process Model of Horikawa Senior High School

1. Initiation

Discovery of the topic 1. Identification and Selection of topics

2. Selection

2. Setting of the hypothesis 3. Design of problem-solving

2. Exploration

3. Exploration 4. Formulation

3. Formulation and Analysis

4. Exploration and Inspection of the hypothesis

5. Collection

5. Consideration of the result and Assessment of the hypothesis

4. Conclusion and Presentation

6. Presentation

 

 

 

6. Future tasks

Table 18.1: A Comparison of Inquiry Process Models

As is shown in Table 18.1, the inquiry process models are similar, but the two Japanese models are different from the model of the Information Search Process (ISP), particularly in relation to the realms of experience. The ISP model has six stages and incorporates three realms of experience: the affective or feelings realm, the cognitive or thoughts realm and the physical or actions realm, all of which are common to each stage. In contrast, Japanese models do not have these



18 Public School Libraries in Inquiry-Based Learning in Japan 

 247

realms. The ISP model puts the focus on the learners themselves, and it describes not only the learners’ actions but also their feelings and thoughts. In contrast, Japanese models emphasise instruction and outline the steps to be taken and the methods to be used by the students. The Japanese model is more teacher-centred than the ISP which analyses the learners’ actions. While there are some differences between the models, the education method, which shows the way of inquiry-based learning to students along with an ISP model proposed based on an academic study, can give results. The establishment of the methodology enables it to be used in many other schools, and it may lead to standardising the approach to inquiry-based learning in school education nationwide throughout Japan in its turn.

Inquiry-based Learning in Japanese Elementary and Junior High Schools The Period for Integrated Studies in elementary and junior high schools was created in 1998, as part of the revision of the national curriculum/Courses of Study. The Period for Integrated Studies unit was designed for cross-disciplinary and comprehensive learning that transcends the boundaries of subjects, and relates to local circumstances within the region, school, and actual conditions of children, as well as incorporating exploratory learning and collaboration. The Period for Integrated Studies was designed to be basic to learning (Japan MEXT, n.d. b). In particular, to realise exploratory learning, it was emphasised that the process of exploration in learning related to task setting, information collection, organisation and analysis, and summary and expression and should be repeated in a developmental manner. The approach is similar to the shared foundation and key commitment of the learning process outlined in the American Association of School Librarians (AASL) Standards Framework for Learners: Inquire, Include, Collaborate, Curate, Explore and Engage along with Think, Create, Share and Grow. In the Period for Integrated Studies, the process of exploratory learning has become even more important and received greater emphasis, correlating inquiry with the qualities and abilities to be nurtured in each subject, and focusing on exploration in the real world, in real life, and in each subject. However, since each school in Japan sets learning goals and learning content based on the total learning time available, the learning achievements of students differ because the learning themes and search conditions differ depending on the school. Therefore, only a few public schools position the focus of learning on the

248 

 Rei Iwasaki and Mutsumi Ohira

Period for Integrated Studies, and few public schools support the school library and its activities.

The Case Study of Takayama City’s Elementary and Junior High Schools Takayama City is a small traditional city situated between mountains. In this case study, the implementation status of inquiry-based learning was monitored in nineteen municipal elementary schools attended by students aged seven to twelve years and twelve municipal junior high schools with students aged twelve to fifteen years in Takayama City. In 2010, Takayama City positioned the school library as a base for exploratory learning for students and decided to promote the maintenance and enhancement of school libraries. Behind the policy was the cycle of critical thinking that the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) emphasises (OECD, n.d., 2018), along with the purpose of the Period for Integrated Studies in the national curriculum/Courses of Study. The purpose of the Period for Integrated Studies is stated as “In the process of solving problems and inquiry activities, teachers should give pupils learning opportunities to solve problems in cooperation with others and to analyze, organize and express by means of words”. Students are expected to question their own questions, actively participate in their elucidation, conduct a wide range of research, and gain new understandings. By forming meaning and knowledge and communicating it to others, new questions and actions arise (Japan MEXT, n.d. b, 2). The cycles of learning involve using critical thinking and analysing all kinds of information and emphasise that learning is not just a one-time activity, but a continuous process. Takayama City considers that it is important not only to acquire knowledge but also to acquire learning methods together with knowledge, and they regard the Period for Integrated Studies as an inquiry-type learning. The school library was firmly positioned as the centre of inquiry learning and the base for its development. To implement the ideas in school education, Takayama City has created an environment that enables effective use of the school library. In 2018, the City launched an education support project for the Takayama City Library to promote exploratory learning consistently from elementary school to junior high school, so that it will be school libraries where school education and the real world cooperate to develop students, based on research support models in schools. The city is promoting traditions and culture of the local community in the Period for Integrated Studies and utilizing the school library.



18 Public School Libraries in Inquiry-Based Learning in Japan 

 249

Takayama City School Library Development Plan In the Takayama City School Library system, librarians belonging to the Takayama City Library are assigned to each school as school librarians. In Japanese public elementary and junior high schools, there are many cases where part-time or volunteers run a school library, but in Takayama City, school librarians who are qualified librarians are assigned to each school, and it is said that they are in a privileged learning environment. However, the librarian training courses in Japan prioritise the training of librarians in public libraries, and there are few opportunities to learn about school education and learning courses. Therefore, the Takayama City Library has a specialist leader who is an experienced school librarian with assigned responsibility for supporting the librarians assigned to the schools. Until recently, in Takayama City, the school library had been used as a place primarily for reading, and the collection of books was biased toward history and literature. There were few books that could be used for subject learning during the Period for Integrated Studies, and the public librarians and school librarians did not have much experience in subject learning and information education. Therefore, to support subject learning and information education, the training system for the school library staff including shisho-kyoyu/teacher-librarians and gakko-shisho/school librarians was reorganised and enhanced. The aim of the training was to spread inquiry-based learning throughout the school by collaborating with all school staff, teacher-librarians, and school librarians. In addition, the school library environments have been improved so that they can be used as places for fostering students’ information abilities. Outmoded and outof-date materials have been discarded, personal computers have been deployed in the school libraries, and cooperative activities with public libraries have been put in place. By promoting the traditions and culture of the local community, as required in the Period for Integrated Studies at elementary and junior high schools, the school and local residents work together through the Period for Integrated Studies, and the school becomes the core of the region. The school is involved with the community through the school library which can contribute to lifelong learning and to community activities and promotion.

School Libraries and Regional Cooperation Ensuring an effective relationship between the school library and the community is not simply achieved by opening the school library to residents to lend and

250 

 Rei Iwasaki and Mutsumi Ohira

borrow books. By positioning the school as a central public facility in the community, the school library has become a place of interaction with residents of a wide range of generations, from the elderly to young children, through the Period for Integrated Studies. As Vygotsky states, “the actual development level (the everyday concepts acquired by the child’s action [behavior] toward the exterior) and the adults’ scientific concepts are blended through social interaction (communication) between them, thereby reshaping these everyday concepts to attain a higher level (proximal development level)” (1978, 102; see also Takatori 1994). Schools, public libraries, and local communities are connected through research and learning using the school library, and learning is raised to a higher level through interaction between students and teachers, librarians, and residents. Under the Takayama City Basic Law for Education Promotion, the school library plays a role as a medium that connects schools and communities, and residents and schools collaborate to promote learning activities with the school open to the entire local community. The school library is helping to raise school education to higher standards.

Conclusion The public schools that are implementing cycles of learning through inquiry and that are consistently repeating the inquiry process are enabling students to develop as inquiry learners and to be lifelong learners. Although inquiry-based learning has been required by the Courses of Study by the government of Japan for many years, and enforcement is demanded, it has been a hard fight for many schools, especially those that lack clear understandings of the nature of inquiry learning and the methodology needed to carry it out. In addition, securing enough human resources and physical and digital resources remains a problem for school libraries in Japan. This chapter has highlighted some success stories of the implementation of inquiry learning in Japan and provided insights into the status of the role of school libraries in inquiry-based learning in public schools in Japan. It is hoped that the achievements noted will inspire others both in Japan and elsewhere and contribute to the improvement of school library services for students involved in inquiry-based learning in Japan and throughout the world.



18 Public School Libraries in Inquiry-Based Learning in Japan 

 251

References American Association of School Librarians (AASL). 2018. “AASL Standards Framework for Learners.” https://standards.aasl.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/AASL-StandardsFramework-for-Learners-pamphlet.pdf. International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA). 1999. “IFLA/UNESCO School Library Manifesto 1999: The School Library in Teaching and Learning for All.” https://www.ifla.org/publications/ifla-unesco-school-library-manifesto-1999/. International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA). 2015. IFLA School Library Guidelines .2nd ed. Written by the School Libraries Section Standing Committee. Edited by Barbara A. Schultz-Jones and Dianne Oberg, with contributions from the International Association of School Librarianship Executive Board. https://www.ifla.org/ files/assets/school-libraries-resource-centers/publications/ifla-school-library-guidelines. pdf. Japan Ministry of Education Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT), n.d. a “Improvement of Academic Ability (Courses of Study).” https://www.mext.go.jp/en/ policy/education/elsec/title02/detail02/1373859.htm. Japan Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT). n.d. b “Chapter 5 the Period for Integrated Studies.” https://www.mext.go.jp/component/english/__ icsFiles/afieldfile/2011/03/17/1303755_012.pdf. Japan Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT). 2018a. The Courses of Study for Elementary School.　https://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/shotou/new-cs/ youryou/syo/;　https://www.mext.go.jp/content/1413522_001.pdf. General Provisions in English. https://www.mext.go.jp/content/20201008-mxt_kyoiku02-000005241_1.pdf. Japan Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT). 2018b. The Courses of Study for Senior High School.　https://www.mext.go.jp/content/1384661_6_1_3. pdf. [English overview] available at https://www.mext.go.jp/content/20201117-mxt_ kyoiku02-100014466-01.pdf. Nemoto, Akira, and Yasunori Saito, eds. 2020. New Perspectives in the Evolution of Reference Services. Japan Library Association. [Text in Japanese. Title translated into English]. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier. 2004. Seeking Meaning: A Process Approach to Library and Information Services. 2nd ed. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier. 2010. “Information Search Process Model” In Encyclopedia of Library and Information Sciences, 3rd ed. Edited by Marcia J. Bates and Mary Niles Maack, Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. Available at http://wp.comminfo.rutgers.edu/ckuhlthau/ wp-content/uploads/sites/185/2016/01/ELIS-3E.pdf Kyoto Municipal Horikawa Senior High School. 2018. Inquiry into the Unknown World: Pathfinder for Inquiry-based Learning. [Textbook in Japanese used in the school]. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. n.d. “Critical Thinking: Process and Product” OECD Assessment Rubric. https://www.oecd.org/education/class-friendlyassessment-rubric-critical-thinking.pdf. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). 2018. “The Future of Education and Skills Education 2030.” Paris: OECD. https://www.oecd.org/ education/2030/E2030%20Position%20Paper%20(05.04.2018).pdf.

252 

 Rei Iwasaki and Mutsumi Ohira

Takatori, Kenichiro. 1994. Vygotski, Piaget, and the Development of Activity Theory. Kyoto Hosei Publishing. Translation of L.S. Vygotsky. Mind in Society: Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Vygotsky, L. S. 1978. Mind in Society: Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press. Available at https://home.fau.edu/musgrove/web/ vygotsky1978.pdf. Japanese translation available by Kenichiro Takatori. Vygotski, Piaget, and the Development of Activity Theory.

Marie Guillet and Valérie Glass

19 U  sing the Document de Collecte/ Collection Document with French Secondary Students Abstract: This chapter describes experiences related to an instructional approach for information research used in schools in France. The approach relies on what has become known as the document de collecte/collection document. The collection document concept emerged within France based on students’ observed practices in online information research, particularly the practice of copying and pasting content from online searches. The chapter describes the development of the document, identifies its characteristics, and outlines experiences in its use. The various uses of the collection document have reshaped its content, and the document has evolved through pedagogical practice and experience working with students. Keywords: Teacher librarians; School libraries – France; Evidence-based library science; Inquiry-based learning

Introduction The document de collecte/collection document is a concept developed in 2008 by Nicole Boubée, a researcher in information and communication science. The concept was rapidly adopted by many French teacher librarians in the context of the information research situations experienced by their students. The concept may be seen as an adaptation related to the evolution of the information society. The adoption of the collection document by the profession shows an awareness of the parallel evolution of young people’s practices in searching for and using information. The collection document also allows learners to develop real learning in information literacy. The concept of the collection document and its use within the pedagogical frame of information literacy has evolved throughout the years, driven by teacher librarians who were inspired by it, questioned it, experienced it and experimented with it. Various sharings on blogs, on the independent and collaborative Doc pour docs, on school websites, particularly on the section dedicated to school libraries and to information literacy resources, demonstrate the engagement of the profession around an emerging concept based on Nicole Boubée’s academic works. Training days both institutionally and externally based, conferences, and roundhttps://doi.org/10.1515/9783110772586-021

254 

 Marie Guillet and Valérie Glass

tables or workshops during professional association conferences came together to challenge, discuss and gradually legitimise the emerging concept. Because of the evolving nature of the collection document concept, the sources examining it are primarily found on websites, blogs and other online sources.

Origins of the Document de Collecte/Collection Document In 2008, Nicole Boubée published an article entitled “The role of copied-pasted in the activity of information research of secondary students.” Boubée used the expression document de collecte/collection document to describe the extraction of portions of documents copied, pasted, stacked and processed into a Word document (Boubée 2008). Boubée goes beyond the perception of the copying and pasting action as a single phenomenon of note-taking or plagiarism to conceive its role as a dynamic in the information process. The copying and pasting action is defined as a type of information extraction whose production is a new form of content which constitutes a document de collecte/collection document. Boubée’s doctoral dissertation focused on juvenile information research activity. She conducted an empirical study which involved the observation of student pairs in secondary school classes from the sixth to the twelfth grade over a period of two weeks. She observed that half of the pairs elaborated a collection document in parallel to other types of information extraction such as handwriting notes or printing documents. The collection documents, mostly created early within the information research process, showed common features: stack of copied and pasted extracts, simplified layout to be finalised at a later stage, and modest length. The collection document was regularly consulted throughout the subsequent research activity: students scrolled down it and commented on it, to help them develop new research avenues and to reformulate their inquiries. In her 2008 article, Boubée discusses the varying student perceptions of the functions of the collection document. For example, it provided a way to check if a subject or topic had been addressed fully and completely, and it provided a way to assess the quality of the research. The collection document also performed the function of storing information, to enable continuing the research activity outside the Web environment and to manage time effectively. Multiple aspects of the research process emerged from the perceptions: the approach taken to the topic, an analysis of information need, and the use and assessment of information (Boubée 2014).



19 Using the Document de Collecte 

 255

Nicole Boubée’s academic work supports awareness of the information behaviours of students in the instructional approach to information research. Teacher librarians quickly seized on her academic works and initiated wide adoption of the collection document concept.

Teacher Librarian Awareness of the Document de Collecte/Collection Document Teacher librarians quickly examined the collection document and probed and tested it in relation to the teaching model of information research stages. In particular, Marion Carbillet (2010) and Noel Uguen (2016) introduced the collection document in their pedagogical practices and incorporated an awareness of young people’s practices in information literacy instruction. Uguen proposed considering the collection document in relation to digital and hypertextual reading, which differs from the linear reading of printed documents. Subsequently numerous experiences and pedagogical adaptations were led by teacher librarians. Some included the collection document as a stage in the inquiry process, while others conceived of it as a record of the interactions across various stages of the inquiry process. Various blog posts, online articles and other pedagogical experiments have been published on the Web since the end of the first decade of the 21st century (Educavox 2017; Mes docs de doc 2010, 2011; Mourtada 2012; L’Odyssée d’Ln 2013a). The practice of using the collection document with students in inquiry situations, in a school context, continued, without being adopted formally by the profession. The practice seemed to be in the possession of the profession.

Teacher Attitudes to Use of the Document de Collecte/ Collection Document Use by the teacher librarian, or by a subject teacher aware of the collection document, raises questions about the validity of teachers’ attitudes when they seemingly sanction practices and behaviours like copying and pasting, which are ordinarily criticised. Simple note-taking may paraphrase documents but also lead to plagiarism. Since the world has become digital, Internet access has developed and grown strongly within schools. The practice of copying and pasting has been seen as plagiarism, and has been pointed out and denounced by teachers. How,

256 

 Marie Guillet and Valérie Glass

then, can teachers in using the collection document seemingly legitimise such a questionable practice? The collection document and its practical use within inquiry situations in a school context clearly changes the simple copying and pasting routine which leads to plagiarism. The collection document involves transformation to a copying, pasting and creation approach, which distinguishes the final production as an original creation, a true information product, far from a simple plagiarism. Seizing the collection document and using it with students means that the information practices of young people have been understood and an appropriate response has been made. Using the document brings to light the importance of questioning student behaviours and practices to ensure genuine inclusion of realistic approaches and good practices in the learning processes.

Use of the Document de Collecte/Collection Document with Students The collection document is used in various student situations. It is not always presented to students in a research situation, because in general it is a practice already used, depending on its adoption within the school library and across the school. The presentation of the collection document, or a reminder of it as a prerequisite, occurs at the beginning of the instructional session and can take various forms. Generally, if the classroom facilities allow it, a live demonstration, usually video-projected, is done. Tutorials, made available to students under various conditions and in various formats, are proposed to students and to teachers eager to use the collection document. The sharing of training modules and practices, often under free of charge licences, and collaboration are strengths of the teacher librarian profession in France. The important and progressive adoption of the collection document by teacher librarians is likened to a theatre of various uses, where different instructional adaptations arise. Sometimes it will be a stage of information research, or a means of developing common interactions between different stages of information research. It can also become a tool to observe reflection by students on their research paths, with such reflection having a strong impact on learning. The use of the collection document can be extended to annotation and editing, sometimes with the assistance of digital curation tools, for example Padlet, Diigo, and Scoop.IT!.



19 Using the Document de Collecte 

 257

Students as Consumers and Creators The student in an inquiry approach to learning carries out two roles, as reader and consumer of information, and as author, producer or creator of information. To adapt to the two roles played by students, it is necessary to develop knowledge and skills around several notions that come into play: defining information need; accessing information and evaluating the credibility of sources used, their authority, and relevance; and becoming an author through creating secondary documents, editing them, and rebadging or redocumenting content. In using the collection document with students, student behaviours must always be borne in mind.

Characteristics of the Document de Collecte/ Collection Document The document de collecte/collection document often begins as a compilation of copied and pasted extracts from various internet files created using Word software. It is usually titled “collection document + subject.” Each extract is referenced, usually with the URL address of the extract. The recording of the web address enables both quotations from the source documents of the subject being investigated, and referencing of resources used, facilitating later return to the resource if needed. A collection document may be printed, reworked, and annotated; the information it contains can be organised, ranked, and assessed. The collection document is thus a working document and necessarily incomplete. It allows the student to keep track of work undertaken. The document acts as a trail, an aide-mémoire or a kind of memory device of the research process. The collection document is frequently proposed to students and implemented from the first information research training session, and its length is often limited by the teacher, generally to one to three pages. Its use with students can be taken up from different pedagogical variables. For example, the choice of the subject is either imposed through a prescribed or semi-prescribed task or chosen by the student as a self-generated task; the teacher can propose a selection of online resources, or encourage the students to carry out their own research directly on the Web. Despite the collection document having a strong digital context, it is not about neglecting and/or abandoning printed supports. However, the selection of printed information is not as straightforward to implement as it is with digital, where a simple technical movement, copying and pasting, remains easy. But alternatives can be offered, thanks in particular to online collaborative tools, allowing students to transcribe data from printed documents, with the help of digital tools.

258 

 Marie Guillet and Valérie Glass

In the context of feedback proposed by Sandrine Geoffroy, multimedia resources in different formats including websites, periodicals, and non-fiction books can be distinguished at the end of the collecting document (Geoffroy 2013). Even if the collection document does not represent in itself an information literacy notion, a proposal for teaching the concept is available on the website called Wikinotions under the entry collecte de données/data collecting. The website was created by the Association des Professeurs Documentalistes de l’Education Nationale (APDEN), the national association of teacher librarians in France (APDEN 2016). The collection document has two major formulations at beginner and advanced levels. The beginner level document –– Contains several sources –– Proposes an extract in copied and pasted for each source along with the reference for the source, and –– Leads to a compilation of these sources without necessarily a layout. The advanced level document –– Presents a specific organisational layout and structure with a stack of referenced copied and pasted extracts –– Can be created with various tools –– Can be subjected to a template layout or editing, and –– Can be shared with an online community.

Information Literacy Skills and the Document de Collecte/Collection Document The use of the collection document in an information learning situation within the school setting allows teacher librarians to work in a convenient way not only with a formatted information product to structure information access, use and creation, but also in a theoretical way to embrace different information literacy notions.

Instructional Notions at Stake Numerous information literacy notions can be addressed with students during an inquiry process by implementing use of the collection document. Addressing the



19 Using the Document de Collecte 

 259

various notions necessarily entails a stage of instructional design. According to an interview with Pascal Duplessis, a teacher-librarian instructor, instructional design is an exercise requiring a necessary scientific rigour (Doc pour Docs 2014b). Instructional issues related to information literacy include determining learning outcomes and the knowledge content to be transmitted as well as pedagogical issues. Learners, students and teachers must all be considered and knowledge is at stake. Pascal Duplessis commenced the online IDBase project in October 2013 to observe teaching practices and to understand and create awareness of instructional knowledge at all levels. The APDEN’s Wikinotions project makes available the instructional work of information literacy notions which are explored in more detail below. Different notions are at stake. The notions are defined, and the level of formulation and performance expected from learners discussed. The instructional work of information literacy involves a real didactic transposition, that is, the process by which knowledge content is modified to adapt it to its teaching for various types of learners; in other words, the theoretical knowledge of information literacy is transformed into taught knowledge which is appropriate to the student’s level.

Defining Information Need The collection document can rely on questions concerning a subject before implementing the document. But information needs evolve all along the information process progressively at different stages of the research process through selection, organisation, ranking, and assessment. The collection document remains incomplete. At the beginner level, the information need –– Comes from the observation of a lack of knowledge –– Is related to an individual –– Results in asking questions –– Allows the formulation of key words –– Represents a stage of research process, and –– Is linked to a problem-solving situation. At the advanced level, the information need –– Arises from a cognitive impulsion –– Allows the formulation of a problem –– Implies an interaction with the information system –– Implies processes of planning, control and regulation, and –– Involves metacognitive knowledge.

260 

 Marie Guillet and Valérie Glass

Assessing Information The student performs two roles of reader and author and should adopt different questioning skills to support each. Initially, the student is information assessor and defines the source, identifies authorship and origins, determines its authority, and also the relevance of information. As an information producer, the student must be able to be critical towards information found. With this in mind the sources mapping practice, proposed by Hélène Mulot, teacher librarian, on her blog L’Odyssée d’Ln is developing (L’Odyssée d’Ln 2013b; 2014). The mapping of sources aims at listing a typography of information authorities online and is presented as a means of enabling questioning of students’ information literacy notions and to examine them in a logical sequence in the implementation of an information literacy progression. Source evaluation at the beginner level –– Produces an information type –– Is at the origin of information, and –– Is based on the validity of information. Source evaluation at the advanced level –– Produces information –– Produces a discourse –– Proceeds from an intention –– Spreads information, and –– Can be credited with reputation. Evaluation of the author at the beginner level creates an intellectual work. Evaluation of the author at the advanced level creates, or has the ownership of, an intellectual work, and can be singular, involving one individual, or plural, involving several individuals. Determining authority at the beginner level consists of the assignment of a value to information, and implies judgement criteria. At the advanced level, determining authority implies criteria linked to content including concepts like truth, value, and thematic relevance, criteria linked to the source involving the author and authority and can require a verification or a corroboration which relies on the consultation of several sources. At the beginner level, determining relevance –– Is from information research –– Is a criterion of information assessment –– Is relative to the information need



19 Using the Document de Collecte 

 261

–– Brings an answer to the information need, and –– Brings a knowledge element. At the advanced level, determining relevance –– Establishes links between the research subject/topic and the information found –– Gives a value to data –– Is from the information value process, and –– Implies a subjective judgement.

Becoming an Author, Producer or Creator of Information Becoming an author requires that the student builds on the collection document which is not an end in itself. It is a working document and therefore incomplete. It becomes a secondary document which builds on primary sources and has a meaning in an information research process when retrieved information is ranked, organised, edited, reworked and repurposed. The secondary document at the beginner level is related to a primary document and stems from treatment of the primary document in some way. At the advanced level, the secondary document contains information of a descriptive or analytical type, presents a specific organisational structure, and might contribute to a database. Editing the secondary document at the beginner level is a writing process, uses a technological device and organises a selection of content. At the advanced level, editing the secondary document involves information design and consists of a continuing and open process. Redocumenting or repurposing the content at the beginner level designates a new document treatment, by adding, fragmenting, extracting, integrating and/ or rearranging content with other documents or fragments of documents. At the advanced level, a completely new documentary treatment may emerge, with potentially digitisation of printed documents, the addition of metadata or the reuse of one document within another document.

Open Access and the Document de Collecte/ Collection Document Teaching students how to do information research should not lead, for information professionals working with them, to omitting from any learning pro-

262 

 Marie Guillet and Valérie Glass

gramme issues concerning the information society. Information programmes should enable students to grasp the nature of the information society in which they live and to develop critical thinking. The collection document practice relies on copying and pasting from existing documents and is linked to societal questions and concerns about copyright and more broadly to the notion of an information commons, creative commons licences, and open access to information (SavoirsCom1 n.d.). The Copy Party project, which was first led in the context of libraries by Lionel Maurel, Silvère Mercier and Olivier Ertzscheid (2012) at the academic library of La Roche sur Yon, focused on reflections about intellectual property rights. The initiative moved to school libraries in secondary schools with a first experience led by Gildas Dimier and Anne Sophie Domenc (Dimier 2012). The teacher librarians used an instructional device to design an instructional programme of nine sessions for twelfth grade students in their Literature and Society course. The programme concentrated on intellectual property rights and copyright in printed material and digital literature. Such initiatives draw attention to the issues associated with information access in a digital society.

Conclusion The concept of the document de collecte/collection document was formalised by Nicole Boubée in 2008. Nicole Boubée’s academic works presented her observation of the copying and pasting phenomena adopted by young people in a digital information context which shaped their information processing. The observation shaped the creation of the collection document which responded positively to information behaviour. Previous approaches to teaching information research methods were questioned by teacher librarians. The collection document became widely admired and accepted (Doc pour docs 2014a, 2017). To understand more precisely the way young people access and use information, it has been suggested that the way students use the collection document should be observed and an analysis undertaken of the students’ point of view (Mulot 2016). A verbal session on the use of the collection document, asking students about its benefits enables students to grasp the purpose, function, and use of the collection document. The activity also allows students to measure the work they have accomplished from new success criteria. Student reflection provides a form of self-assessment, and the discussion engages the student and attributes meaning to the activities undertaken.



19 Using the Document de Collecte 

 263

The collection document not only builds on student copying and pasting practices but also focuses on the information process, which, in addition to knowledge acquisition in a school subject, develops the knowledge and information skills required for ongoing learning. The collection document provides the entry to a real information culture in schools. Since 2016, the collection document has been implemented within the media and information literacy (MIL) programme in cycle four, which corresponds to the seventh, eighth and ninth grades in the French system in the context of middle school reform. At this time, there are no academic works about the use of the collection document by teacher librarians in France or in the French school network abroad or, even in a broader way, in other French speaking countries. The collection document questioned and is questioning. It constitutes true inquiry learning. Pascal Duplessis suggested that the collection document was a trend overtaking the foundations of information literacy and questioning pre-conceived notions of information discovery and digital documentation (Doc pour docs 2014b). The collective adoption of the collection document by the teacher librarianship profession in France and its inclusion in a modest way in media and information literacy programmes in the middle school are in early developmental stages. Other developments, other reflections, and the evolution of young people’s information practices along with new approaches to teaching and learning in an uncertain world will impact on reshaping the collection document to ensure that it contributes to improvements to learning.

References Association des Professeurs Documentalistes de l’Education Nationale (APDEN). 2016. “A.P.D.E.N.: National Federation of French professeurs documentalistes: Strong Ambition: Teaching Information and Media Makes Students Stronger.” http://www.apden.org/IMG/ pdf/flyer_2016_eng.pdf. Boubée, Nicole. 2008. “Le Rôle des Copiés-collés dans l’Activité de Recherche d’Information des Elèves du Secondaire.” in L’ Education à la Culture Informationnelle, edited by Françoise Chapron and Éric Delamotte, 208–220. Villeurbanne: Presses de l’Enssib, 2010. Available at HAL Open Science http://archivesic.ccsd.cnrs.fr/docs/00/34/41/61/PDF/ NBoubee-Erte-CopieColle.pdf. Boubée, Nicole. 2014. “The Cross Self-Confrontation Method and Challenges in Researching the Active Information-Seeking of Young People.“ In Assessing Libraries and Library Users and Use: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference Libraries in the Digital Age (LIDA), Zadar, 16–20 June 2014, edited by Sanjica Faletar Tanacković

264 

 Marie Guillet and Valérie Glass

and Boris Bosančić, 3–12. Zadar: University of Zadar and Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Osijek. https://www.academia.edu/62323500/ Assessing_libraries_and_library_users_and_use_proceedings_of_the_13th_ international_conference_Libraries_in_the_Digital_Age_LIDA_Zadar_16_20_June_2014. Carbillet, Marion. 2010. “Travailler Différemment la Prise de Notes en 4ème: Introduction de la Notion de ‘Document de Collecte’.” Overblog. Mes docs de doc,[blog], October 22, 2010. http://mesdocsdedoc.over-blog.com/article-travailler-differemment-la-prise-de-note-en4eme-introduction-de-la-notion-de-document-de-collecte-59406314.html. Dimier, Gildas. 2012. “Transposer le Concept de Copy Party à l’École.” Cactus Acide, June 26, 2012. http://www.culturedel.info/cactusacide/?p=5907. Doc pour docs. 2014a. “Le Document de Collecte: Quand la Recherche Documentaire Devient Ecriture, Mémoire et Partage.” April 8, 2014. http://www.docpourdocs.fr/spip. php?article539. Doc pour docs. 2014b. “Entretien avec Pascal Duplessis, Créateur d’ID Base.” January 28, 2014. http://www.docpourdocs.fr/spip.php?article531. Doc pour docs. 2017. “Le Document de Collecte.” May 2, 2017. http://www.docpourdocs.fr/spip. php?rubrique348. Educavox: Le Média des Acteurs de l’Ecole. 2017. “Document de Collecte: Savoir Copier pour Construire, Structurer et Partager son Environnement Informationnel.” October 26, 2017; https://www.educavox.fr/innovation/didactique/document-de-collecte-savoir-copierpour-construire-structurer-et-partager-son-environnement-informationnel. Geoffroy, Sandrine. 2013. “Le Document de Collecte Multi-supports.” Overblog: L’odyssée d’Ln : je tisse m@ toile; Le blog d’une prof doc qui partage ses découvertes, ses doutes et ses espoirs (en particulier dans les Communs) February 14, 2013. http://odysseedln.overblog. com/le-document-de-collecte-multi-supports. Maurel, Lionel, Silvère Mercier and Olivier Ertzscheid. 2012. “A ‘Copy Party’ in the Library.” Médium 32–33, no. 3–4: 397–411. https://www.cairn-int.info/article-E_MEDIU_032_0397-a-copy-party-in-the-library.htm. Mes docs de doc. 2010. “Travailler Différemment la Prise de Notes en 4ème: Introduction de la Notion de Document de Collecte.” Blog pédagogique d’une prof-doc. October 22, 2010. http://mesdocsdedoc.over-blog.com/article-travailler-differemment-la-prise-de-note-en4eme-introduction-de-la-notion-de-document-de-collecte-59406314.html. Mes docs de doc. 2011. “Pourquoi (et Comment) Utiliser le Document de Collecte m’a Permis d’Abandonner la Méthode de Recherche par Étapes.” Blog pédagogique d’une prof-doc. December 8, 2011. http://mesdocsdedoc.over-blog.com/article-pourquoi-et-comment-jutilise-le-docuement-de-collecte-dans-de-nombreuses-situations-de-recherche-91780637. html. Mulot, Hélène. 2016. “Document de Collecte: Savoir Copier pour Construire, Structurer et Partager son Environnement Informationnel.” Slideshare, November 9, 2016. https:// fr.slideshare.net/HlneMULOT/document-de-collecte-savoir-copier-pour-construirestructurer-et-partager-son-environnement-informationnel. L’Odyssée d’Ln: Je Tisse m@ Toile. 2013a. “Le Document de Collecte Vu par les Élèves.” Overblog: Le blog d’une prof doc qui partage ses découvertes, ses doutes et ses espoirs (en particulier dans les Communs), March 12, 2013. http://odysseedln.overblog.com/ le-document-de-collecte-%C3%A9l%C3%A8ves.



19 Using the Document de Collecte 

 265

L’Odyssée d’Ln: Je Tisse m@ Toile. 2013b. “De la Typologie des Sources à la Typologie des Autorités: Situer un Discours dans un Contexte pour l’Evaluer.” Overblog: Le blog d’une prof doc qui partage ses découvertes, ses doutes et ses espoirs (en particulier dans les Communs) February 4, 2013. http://odysseedln.overblog.com/typologie-autorit%C3%A9s. L’Odyssée d’Ln: Je Tisse m@ Toile. 2014. “Elaborer une Sitographie et un Document de Collecte et les Editorialiser (SVT 3e).” Overblog: Le blog d’une prof doc qui partage ses découvertes, ses doutes et ses espoirs (en particulier dans les Communs) October 5, 2014. http://odysseedln.overblog.com/editorialiser-svt3e.html. Mourtada, A. 2012. “La RD en Utilisant la Présentation du Document de Collecte – Carte Mentale.” Tic Tac Doc August 24, 2012. http://aristide.12.free.fr/spip.php?article318. SavoirsCom1. n.d. “Le Manifeste de SavoirsCom1.” http://www.savoirscom1.info/manifestesavoirscom1/. Uguen, Noel. 2016. “Le Document de Collecte et la Culture Numérique.” Académie de Nantes. Portail pédagogique. Documentation, January 22, 2016. https://www.pedagogie. ac-nantes.fr/documentation/enseignement/didactique/le-document-de-collecte-et-laculture-numerique-946768.kjsp.

Sarah Pavey

20 S  upporting Inquiry-based Learning in a Behaviourist Educational System in England Abstract: This chapter addresses the challenges of embedding inquiry-related information literacy skills when working with a curriculum rooted in behaviourist pedagogy. The challenges facing school libraries in England are outlined. Specifically, the focus is on England’s National Curriculum and national examination system and how inquiry learning might be integrated into teaching and learning. Various opportunities for embedding inquiry learning are identified. By analysing the National Curriculum in depth, it is possible to identify areas where some elements of inquiry models might be applied with effect, supporting not just the required learning outcomes but also wider lifelong learning skills demanded by employers and higher education. Keywords: Curriculum planning – England; Behaviourism (Psychology); Examinations; Pedagogy; Information Literacy; Inquiry-based learning

The National Curriculum in England Education is a devolved policy area in the United Kingdom, and schools in England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales follow different curricula. The National Curriculum in England includes mathematics, sciences, English, physical education and computing at all stages. Maintained schools in England must teach the National Curriculum to students aged five to sixteen years. Since 2012 the National Curriculum and examination syllabuses followed by students in most secondary schools in England have undergone significant change (Roberts 2021). The curriculum changes have had a marked impact on the school library profession and on the delivery of information literacy concepts. In 2008, the Association of Teachers and Lecturers (ATL), now part of the National Education Union (NEU), conducted a survey highlighting educators’ concerns that much prescribed coursework undertaken by students was plagiarised or completed by parents (Lipsett 2008). The survey was followed by the production of a guide for teachers by Ofqual, the regulator of qualifications, examinations and assessments in England and vocational qualifications in Northern Ireland (Flood, Murray, and Rowell 2009). The reaction by the UK Department for Education (DfE) was first https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110772586-022



20 Supporting Inquiry-based Learning in a Behaviourist Educational System 

 267

to replace coursework with controlled assessment or inquiry completed under examination conditions and then in 2014 to revert to a rote learning approach with examinations and an emphasis on Shakespeare and British history (Adams 2013; UK DfE 2014). Simultaneously, although schools in England are not legally required to have a school library or to employ a librarian, mention was made of the library and librarians in the official documentation for the National Curriculum implementation with statements like “with teachers making use of any library services and expertise to support this” (UK DfE 2014, 11, 38, 46). Unfortunately, the document places school library use solely within the remit of the English subject department. Many schools abandoned a cross-curricular role for their library staff, leading to a significant de-professionalisation of the school librarian role (BMG Research 2019). With the absence of a required inquiry-based approach to teaching and learning, it takes an innovative approach to implement the information literacy skills students need to cope with the demands of higher education and to become global citizens.

Challenges Faced by School Librarians The National Curriculum and formal examination system in England place great demands on subject teachers’ time and require that students be well-versed in the answers marked by the algorithmic digitalised process that is in place. It is difficult for teaching staff to consider an alternative approach without taking a huge risk. Many new teachers in England have qualified without experience of engaging in inquiry-based or project-based learning themselves and prefer the security of what they know and feels familiar. To an extent, the lack of knowledge of problem-based learning is underpinned by teacher training programmes which emphasise: …curriculum progression starts with … ensuring that trainees can ‘cope and manage to know what they are teaching … and getting children to pay attention’ before moving them on to thinking about better questioning and assessment practice (Spielman 2019).

In addition, following the COVID-19 pandemic, the focus is very much on the catch-up curriculum. Catching up on missed learning is an initiative funded by the UK Government and involves a concentration on core subjects of mathematics, English and the sciences, to ensure students pass their national qualifications at sixteen and eighteen years (UK DfE 2021).

268 

 Sarah Pavey

The issue for school librarians in England is that historically most do not hold teaching qualifications and are employed as support staff in the school rather than as part of an academic team. With the changes in the National Curriculum, many people employed as librarians in English schools may not have had experience with higher education. A member of support staff suggesting an inquiry-based model approach is unlikely to be successful or popular with teachers. Additionally, many school librarians in England are employed primarily to run reading for pleasure programmes for the English Department. Many do not have formal training librarianship and might not understand the concepts of information literacy or inquiry-based learning, let alone be able to teach them. Meanwhile, those schools who do have a designated member of library staff were asked whether they had any training or qualifications relevant to librarianship. Just more than half (51%) report that their designated staff have had training in this area. Academic and professional qualifications in the field are, in contrast, less common (34% and 30% respectively). In all, 72% of schools report that their designated member of library staff has had training or has qualification(s) relevant to librarianship (BMG Research 2019, 32).

The survey report goes on to say “English/Literacy is the most common subject the main member of library staff works with (70%; 64% primary and 95% secondary)” (BMG Research 2019, 47). School librarians in England who survived the COVID-19 pandemic without being furloughed or redeployed to tasks outside the library, have focussed on supporting cross-curricular subjects through the provision of online resources including databases, websites, and ebooks and guidance in their use. As a result, some teaching staff have come to appreciate the wider remit that a school librarian might offer, as reported in a survey conducted in 2020 by Softlink in partnership with the School Library Association: On the plus, my technology skills have grown, I’ve become more imaginative, and daring in what I try to offer. I am also delving more deeply into what the LMS can offer to provide a better remote service to our community (Softlink 2021).

Information Literacy Interventions While ideally the ultimate goal would be for the government to change its directions and amend the structure of England’s National Curriculum and formal examination system, personal experience from meetings with departmental officials has demonstrated that change is unlikely to occur. To be blunt, inquiry-based learning and constructivist pedagogy are not routes the Department



20 Supporting Inquiry-based Learning in a Behaviourist Educational System 

 269

wishes to take. The Department says no change will occur until there is a change of government. However, the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted some issues such as the lack of intermediate assessments or observations on the process and progress of learning, and many educationalists are calling for the issues to be addressed because of pressure on subject teachers. In consultation about proposals to modify the assessment requirements, the rationale provided for the changes was “To reduce pressures on teaching time and to accommodate potential on-going public health restrictions” (UK Ofqual 2020). The Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport (DCMS) has recently asked CILIP, the UK professional library organisation, to help set up a task force comprising various stakeholder organisations to expand their original target of preventing online harm and to respond to an online harms white paper. The Media and Information Literacy Alliance (MILA) was launched in July 2021, co-ordinated by CILIP and the Information Literacy Group of (ILG), to influence media and information literacy debates, policy and practice in the UK. The MILA initiative is unlikely to impact on lesson delivery within English schools because it considers lifelong learning skills for adults as well as children. Furthermore, when provision of products designed for use in schools is considered by MILA stakeholders and mapped against the National Curriculum and examination board assessment criteria, there is a mismatch Pavey 2022; UK DCMS 2021). Members of MILA are producing high quality material for media and information literacy, but the material rarely supports what teachers are expected to deliver to students. It is important for school librarians to consider how media and information literacy skills can be embedded into directed learning programmes or the initiatives will fail to make impact and run the risk of being sidelined or dropped when time pressures arise. Three approaches for information literacy interventions are possible: first through the National Curriculum and exam board syllabus analysis; second through situational motivation; and third through investigating the structure of information. Each will be examined in turn.

National Curriculum Initiatives The author, as one of the school representatives for CILIP ILG and a founder of the movement calling for a reform of the current National Curriculum to include information literacy, InformAll, has completed a detailed analysis to determine where there are opportunities to deliver elements of an information literacy programme within the National Curriculum (InformAll 2020). It is important that

270 

 Sarah Pavey

librarians are familiar with the learning content of courses delivered in schools so that timely and informed support can be offered to both staff and students. Within the primary curriculum of England (UK DFE 2014), there is scope for introducing the beginning elements of: –– Open from Guided Inquiry Design (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2012) –– Wonder from Stripling’s Model of Inquiry (Stripling 2004) –– Planning from the FOSIL group’s Focus on Inquiry (Fosil Group, n.d.), and –– Content and Information Awareness from Bruce’s Informed Learning (Bruce 2008). Children from the age of four years learn to ask questions, make predictions, and be curious. Introducing young children to the elements of inquiry highlighted in the various models is key to children’s continuing development. Older students aged eight through eleven years can expand on any initial knowledge base gained by young children through subsequent project work in different subjects. However, it is only within the English subject strand of the National Curriculum that students are asked to “retrieve and record information from non-fiction books, evaluate viewpoints, justify opinions, formal presentations and debate, support inferences with evidence” (UK DFE 2014, 37, 45). The statement maps well on to the inquiry models considered in this book. However, such models might be too complex for younger students and a simplified model that can expand alongside students’ growing competencies such as Begin, Action, Tell (BAT) (Nesset 2015) may be more appropriate and appealing. In England students are being taught within the limits of a behaviourist curriculum. Behaviourism focuses on learning through reinforcement, repetition and reward, commonly known as rote learning (McLeod 2021; Skinner 1961). The teacher is the dominant person, and the learner has little opportunity for reflection. Emotions are not involved. The approach reinforces the Search and Find elements in the inquiry model which become more important than the reflective elements. It is the end product rather than the process that attracts marks in cross-curricular project work. What also needs to be considered is how terminology in guidance notes is used within the National Curriculum. Mostly “research” relates to “finding something” rather than how the activity was achieved. “Evaluate” generally translates to “how well do you think you achieved the learning outcomes” rather than any evaluation of the resources. The functional approach to research is underpinned by the computing curriculum strand which states students should know how to “apply logical reasoning, use the internet safely, collect and present data” (UK DfE 2014) but fails to address the values emphasised by Informed Learning and other inquiry models.



20 Supporting Inquiry-based Learning in a Behaviourist Educational System 

 271

In the secondary National Curriculum for students aged eleven to sixteen years, the division between subjects becomes more exact and there is little scope for crossover or interdisciplinary work. Any advisory notes for teachers apply to delivery within specific disciplines. Librarians need to be aware of the various differentials to apply elements of inquiry models effectively or well-intentioned offers of support may be rejected. For example, in science, the strand of Learning to Learn from the Informed Learning model (Bruce 2008) might be applied to meet the National Curriculum demand “understand that scientific methods and theories develop as earlier explanations are codified to take account of new evidence and ideas, together with the importance of publishing results and peer review” (UK DfE 2014, 201). One needs to be conscious that “interpreting data” might concern self-reflection on the student’s own experimental data rather than that constructed by others. Opportunities for teachers to adopt project-based or inquiry-based learning approaches exist for students aged eleven to thirteen years before they embark on formal examination syllabuses, but many teachers are reluctant to take a risk. A full inquiry model could be applied successfully. It is a question of persuading teachers on an individual basis, and providing pedagogical evidence is key. Models such as the FOSIL Inquiry Cycle emphasising metacognition and Informed Learning with its Six Frames: Content, Competency, Learning to Learn, Personal Relevance, Social Impact, and Relational, may have more success. The National Curriculum in England does not have an equivalent of the International Baccalaureate Organisation’s Diploma Program Theory of Knowledge paper. However, the General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) qualification which is taken in Years Ten or Eleven has a Citizenship component. It contains elements of information literacy providing chinks in the behaviourist curriculum armour. Beyond the age of thirteen, learning is focussed on passing examinations. Time-pressured teachers work to ensure as many students as possible attain the skills needed to gain good grades or at least a pass level. Teachers will be judged for their own career prospects on student results. It is a big ask to challenge teachers to step outside safe boundaries without proven benefit. Any interventions need to be firmly underpinned by National Curriculum and exam syllabus content. It is imperative expected learning outcomes are rigorously examined and clearly determined. Even where elements of coursework appear to exist in subject schedules, librarians must tread carefully. The final exam will be taken under test conditions and the purpose of class work relates to exam preparation. The documents that students analyse in the exam will be given to them and elements of information literacy models such as Explore, Investigate, Retrieve and Sources for Gathering evidence will not be relevant, although skills in identifying what is important and

272 

 Sarah Pavey

can be used within a specific article will. Librarians must be prepared to adapt and tweak models according to desired learning outcomes. Although the National Curriculum in England does not have the statutory element of an extended essay to demonstrate research skills, as in the International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme qualification, there are opportunities for students to undertake an independent research project through the Higher Project Qualification (HPQ) at sixteen years and Extended Project Qualification (EPQ) at eighteen years (AQA 2021). The qualifications are optional and not necessarily offered by all schools. Each student is encouraged to undertake personal research on a topic of interest and present it as an essay, artefact, or a performance. The syllabus includes a taught element which encompasses learning to cite sources of information in academic style. Disappointingly, assessment marks are primarily awarded for the outcome of the project rather than the process, and information literacy models are of limited use. While librarians could explain and use an information inquiry model as part of the taught element hours at the beginning of the student research, there would be no compulsion to follow the advice. If an artefact or performance is of a good standard, it would be difficult to determine the impact of any research process method on the grade attained. It may be deemed more appropriate to focus on students who are planning essays, which might have more long-term value. Librarians understand the importance of being able to use technology effectively in research, not simply the ability to select keywords and master bespoke search engines within subscription databases to find information but also the importance of applying critical information literacy skills in evaluation and selection. The various search skills are emphasised by many inquiry models and especially within Informed Learning’s Seven Faces: Information Technology, Information Sources, Information Process, Information Control, Knowledge Construction, Knowledge Extension, and Wisdom (Bruce 1998). However, at secondary level education in England use of computers is focussed on safety and avoiding online harms with strict filtering. Continuing work on online harm has already been referred to. There have been some suggestions that all mobile devices should be banned in state schools (Criddle 2021). Evaluation of data frequently refers to how well data is presented using online tools rather than considering the authenticity and relevance of content. There is a dichotomy between what information professionals understand and would like to deliver and the learning outcomes dictated by government advice and guidelines to teachers. There is a challenge, but it is not insurmountable.



20 Supporting Inquiry-based Learning in a Behaviourist Educational System 

 273

Seizing the Momentum of Situational Motivation When there is no opportunity to practise research skills because of curriculum constraints, it is important to identify potential opportunities in local situations. Defined learning outcomes can be identified and understood and the place and purpose of information inquiry in meeting information needs explained at a personal, local community and global level. Motivation to learn can be “situational” (Guay, Vallerand, and Blanchard 2000). Librarians can suggest to teachers the use of information literacy elements as part of the rationale for topic coverage and begin to engage with a behaviourist curriculum. Parts of an inquiry-based learning model can be selected, even if not the whole approach. One such product developed by the author is a lesson centred on the CILIP ILG information literacy definition: Information literacy is the ability to think critically and make balanced judgements about any information we find and use. It empowers us as citizens to reach and express informed views and to engage fully with society (CILIP 2018).

The lesson (Minta 2021) linked the learning outcomes to the UN seventeen sustainable development goals (SDGs) (UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, n.d.). The approach was different and avoided the need for practical inquiry work while underpinning the importance of information literacy skills. CILIP defines information literacy through five elements or strands: education, citizenship, workplace, health and everyday life. By associating the competencies with global issues, for example UN Goal 13 Climate Action, situational motivation can be created for both teachers and students to consider embedding information literacy skills within the existing National Curriculum. How would it work in practice? An example is presented from a geography course, which is a GCSE subject. For the examination, students complete an issue evaluation paper. Twelve weeks before the exam, students are given a resource booklet to work through as a series of exercises. A clean copy is provided in the exam with questions on it. The paper advice states: Assessment will consist of a series of questions related to a contemporary geographical issue(s), leading to a more extended piece of writing which will involve an evaluative judgement. Students will apply knowledge and understanding to interpret, analyse and evaluate the information and issue(s) in the pre-release resources booklet and the question paper. They will also use geographical skills to set the issue(s) in context and to examine conflicting viewpoints about the issue(s) Students will develop a critical perspective on the issue(s) studied, consider the points of view of the stakeholders involved, make an appraisal of the

274 

 Sarah Pavey

advantages and disadvantages, and evaluate the alternatives. The exam will also require students to consider physical and human interrelationships and to make reasoned justifications for proposed solutions in terms of their likely impact on both people and the physical environment (Section A: Issue Evaluation).

Engagement with the topic is enhanced through using the strands of the CILIP information literacy definition. First, students divide into five groups, and each group is assigned a strand. The groups debate the impact on society if information literacy skills were not possessed in the context. The process is repeated, reforming the groups to include at least one person from each strand, to obtain an overall picture of the importance of information literacy. The groups are next given the topic for the exam paper plus one of the UN Goals, allowing students to understand the global significance. The students are asked what changes could be made within the school community to help achieve the goal and also at a personal level. The process helps to create the situational motivation needed to retain knowledge for the exam but also allows the dissemination of important information literacy skills despite the content being given rather than obtained through independent research. Information literacy models underpin the pedagogy. The Create and Investigate strands of Guided Inquiry (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, and Caspari 2012), Stripling’s 2003 Model of Inquiry and the FOSIL Inquiry Cycle (The FOSIL Group, n.d.) can be applied as well as understanding the metacognitive holistic element in Focus on Inquiry (Alberta Learning 2004). The most pertinent model might be Informed Learning (Bruce 2008) using Learning to Learn, Personal Relevance and Social Impact frames, and its approach might have greater appeal in collaboration with teaching staff.

Information Structure Considerations Often reportage is confused with research. For example, when research starts with an encyclopaedic question, learners expect to find an “unambiguous and not too complex answer” (Dahlgren and Öberg 2001, 270). Encyclopaedic questions, in contrast to questions that are meaning-oriented, relational, value-oriented, or solution-oriented, call for a surface approach to learning. A superficial approach can lead to an emphasis on reportage, on answering questions of an interrogative nature like who, what, which, or where. Within a behaviourist curriculum, the concept of quality control of information is taken to the extreme with content largely supplied to students by experts rather than an inquiry-based approach where exploration is encouraged.



20 Supporting Inquiry-based Learning in a Behaviourist Educational System 

 275

The dichotomy between research or inquiry and reportage is reflected in the work of Pawley (2003) who illustrated the effect of language division between information consumers and information producers and the fears of librarians that quality control might be compromised if others make decisions. Students are both consumers and creators when they undertake inquiry-based learning but how can they develop the holistic approach to information handling without the opportunity to practise? How can one ensure that as global citizens students take responsibility for what they create as well as what they consume? How do students become alert to conspiracy theories and online scams? An understanding of how and where information is created and built upon by others is an essential competency for life, and it can be argued is inextricably intertwined with information consumption. How can competencies be achieved within a behaviourist predominantly rote learning curriculum or exam schedule? Perhaps identifying areas of the curriculum encouraging true research rather than mere reportage is the key. The Informed Learning model with its seven frames (Bruce 1998) provides the closest alignment in terms of learning outcomes. The Learning to Learn, Personal Relevance, Social Impact and Relational frames all feed into the concept of understanding the structure of information. But as already noted the National Curriculum in England does not have the equivalent of a Theory of Knowledge paper of the International Baccalaureate and, for most subjects, information is simply given to students to learn for a test. Nonetheless there are examples within science, humanities, literature and citizenship where students are expected to ponder the source of information and its origins albeit mostly with prescribed boundaries rather than free expression. Librarians can point out to teaching staff that teaching information skills has situational benefits as well as supporting the competencies called for by higher education and employers. The answer may lie in collaborating closely with staff who are open to the approach. Simple changes in introducing a new textbook or syllabus could include a closer look at who has been commissioned to write it and why. Teachers could be encouraged to ask students to examine a list of references at the end of an article for class discussion to discuss their impact on the text. Librarians need to think outside the box and cannot expect teachers to suddenly adopt inquiry-based learning approaches to the detriment of the skills they need to impart to students to pass their examinations. Other opportunities to consider the nature of information may arise through informal lessons. General class periods where debate is encouraged such as citizenship lessons, personal, social, health and economic (PHSE) lessons or relationships and sex education (RSE) lessons provide opportunities for inquiry learning. The nature of information can be examined through assembly, a display

276 

 Sarah Pavey

in the library, a competition, or special theme weeks such as World Book Day. Information competencies can be promoted to the whole school community.

Conclusion In many schools, the pedagogy followed fulfils the requirements of gaining qualifications for the workplace. Higher education must conform to rigid rote learning assessment criteria. It is therefore a challenge for school librarians who generally lean towards a social constructivist approach to learning. However, there are opportunities which must be seized wherever and whenever possible. Librarians can choose to analyse elements of the curriculum to identify opportunities for embedding information inquiry, build appropriate relationships with teachers and select those members of academic staff willing to collaborate. Experimentation with the approach will gain the best fit with teacher requirements to achieve the desired learning outcomes. Solutions must be matched with teacher perspectives and the pressures teachers face from senior leaders of the school community must be understood. In England, most school librarians are not employed as teaching staff and care must be taken not to undermine teachers when librarians show students how to practise research using information literacy skills and strategies. Many information literacy skills and strategies are designed with inquiry-based learning in mind, and appropriate elements of the model must be selected with sensitivity to support the task in hand for both staff and students when the National Curriculum dictates rote learning. The terminology used by the National Curriculum must be checked and the teachers’ and students understanding of intended learning outcomes verified before delivering elements of information literacy programmes or inquiry models. Another trap is assuming that where the National Curriculum suggests that an inquiry-based approach is needed, that an inquiry model can automatically be used. Within a behaviourist curriculum, inquiry work might not necessarily mean independent and exploratory learning. The nature of the inquiry might be prescribed and curtailed to fit with the assessment mark scheme. Overall, if a school does not operate an inquiry-based approach to learning, inquiry models should not be dismissed, nor should the teaching of information literacy competencies be omitted from the school librarian remit. Instead, the knowledge of inquiry models and of information literacy skills should be used to demonstrate innovative creativity and adaptability in helping teaching and other staff and students achieve the best learning outcomes.



20 Supporting Inquiry-based Learning in a Behaviourist Educational System 

 277

References Adams, Richard. 2013. “Michael Gove Unveils GCSE Reforms.” The Guardian, June 12, 2013. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2013/jun/11/michael-gove-gcse-reforms. Alberta Learning. Learning and Teaching Resources Branch. 2004. Focus on Inquiry: A Teacher’s Guide to Implementing Inquiry-Based Learning. Edmonton, Alberta: Alberta Learning. https://open.alberta.ca/publications/0778526666. AQA. n.d. “Level 3 Extended Project Qualification.” https://www.aqa.org.uk/subjects/projects/ project-qualifications/EPQ-7993. AQA. 2018. “GCSE Geography.” https://www.aqa.org.uk/subjects/geography/gcse/ geography-8035/subject-content/geographical-applications. BMG Research. 2019. “National Survey to Scope School Library Provision in England, Northern Ireland, and Wales: Research Report.” Prepared for Great School Libraries. https://d824397c-0ce2-4fc6-b5c4-8d2e4de5b242.filesusr.com/ ugd/8d6dfb_8b81a7c94c2c4c4a970265496f42307a.pdf. Bruce, Christine Susan. 1998. The Seven Faces of Information Literacy. Adelaide, SA: Auslib Press. Bruce, Christine Susan. 2008. Informed Learning. Chicago: American Library Association. CILIP. 2018. “Definition of Information Literacy.” Prepared by the Information Literacy Group. https://infolit.org.uk/ILdefinitionCILIP2018.pdf. Criddle, Cristina. 2021. “Mobile Phones Should be Banned in Schools – Gavin Williamson.” BBC News, April 7, 2021. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-56663010. Dahlgren, Madeleine Abrandt, and Gunilla Öberg. 2001. “Questioning to Learn and Learning to Question: Structure and Function of Problem-based Learning Scenarios in Environmental Science Education.” Higher Education 41, no. 3: 263–282. Available at https://www. researchgate.net/publication/226320774_Questioning_to_learn_and_learning_ to_question_Structure_and_function_of_problem-based_learning_scenarios_in_ environmental_science_education. Flood, Anne, Will Murray and Gill Rowell. 2009. Authenticity: A Guide for Teachers. Commissioned by Ofqual, written by PlagiarismAdvice.org. Coventry: Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation. https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/10772/7/2009-12-24plagiarism-teachers_Redacted.pdf. The FOSIL Group. n.d. The FOSIL Inquiry Cycle. https://fosil.org.uk/fosil-cycle/. Guay, Frederic, Robert J. Vallerand, and Celine Blanchard. 2000. “On the Assessment of Situational Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation: The Situational Motivation Scale (SIMS).” Motivation and Emotion 24, no. 3: 275–213. Available at https://corpus.ulaval.ca/jspui/ bitstream/20.500.11794/14012/4/PrePubl%20-%20On%20the%20Assessment.pdf. InformAll. 2020. “Information Literacy for School Education.” https://www.informall.org.uk/ news/il-school-education/. Kuhlthau, Carol Collier, Leslie K. Maniotes, and Ann K. Caspari. 2012. Guided Inquiry Design: A Framework for Inquiry in Your School. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited. Lipsett, Anthea. 2008. “Internet Plagiarism Among Sixth-formers is ‘Rife’.” The Guardian, January 18, 2008. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2008/jan/18/schools.uk1. McLeod, Saul. 2021. “Pavlov’s Dogs Study and Pavlovian Conditioning Explained.” Simply Psychology, 2018 updated 2021. https://www.simplypsychology.org/pavlov.html.

278 

 Sarah Pavey

Minta, Louise. 2021. “Four Days at the World Education Summit…And I Survived!” World Education Summit, Tuesday 23rd March 2021: Sarah Pavey: Information Literacy for Global Citizenship. CILIP. Information Literacy Group. Event Reviews 2021. https://infolit.org.uk/ four-days-at-the-world-education-summitand-i-survived/. Nesset, Valerie. 2015. “Using Empirical Data to Refine a Model for Information Literacy Instruction for Elementary School Students.” Information Research 20, no. 1: Proceedings of ISIC, the Information Behaviour Conference, Leeds, 2–5 September 2014: Part 2, (paper isicsp14). http://informationr.net/ir/20-1/isic2/isicsp14.html#.Yjo9eE1BxX4. Pavey, Sarah. 2022. “Mind the Gap.” Information Professional Jan/Feb 2022, 46–7. https://content.yudu.com/web/43mce/0A43mcf/InfoPro34JanFeb2022/html/index. html?refUrl=https%253A%252F%252Fwww.cilip.org.uk%252Fpage%252FInfoPro2022 InfoPro34 Jan-Feb 2022 (yudu.com). Pawley, Christine. 2003. “Information Literacy: A Contradictory Coupling.” The Library Quarterly 73, no. 4: 422–452. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4309685. Roberts, Nerys. 2021. “The School Curriculum in England.” https://researchbriefings.files. parliament.uk/documents/SN06798/SN06798.pdf. Skinner, B.F. 1961. “Teaching Machines.” Scientific American 205, no. 5, 90–106. Available at https://www.jstor.org/ stable/24937132?refreqid=excelsior%3A8e4c46a02029f07e19d3b08941e9bcd6. Softlink. 2021. “Impact of COVID-19 on School Libraries in the UK.”[Blog], March 1, 2021. https://www.softlinkint.com/blog/impact-of-covid-school-libraries-uk/. Spielman, Amanda. 2019. “HMCI Commentary: The Initial Teacher Education Curriculum.” From Ofsted [Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills] and Spielman [Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector], October 16, 2019. https://www.gov.uk/government/ speeches/hmci-commentary-the-initial-teacher-education-curriculum. Stripling, Barbara K. 2003. “Inquiry-Based Learning.” In Curriculum Connections Through the Library, edited by Barbara K. Stripling and Sandra Hughes-Hassell, 3–39. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited. UK Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport (DCMS). 2021. “Online Media Literacy Strategy.” https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/online-media-literacystrategy. “Online Media Literacy Strategy.” https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/ government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1004233/DCMS_Media_ Literacy_Report_Roll_Out_Accessible_PDF.pdf. “Online Safety – Media Literacy Strategy. Mapping Exercise and Literature Review, Phase 1 Report.” Study carried out for DCMS by RSM UK Consulting LLP, with support from the Centre for Excellence in Media Practice at Bournemouth University (CEMP). https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/ uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1010025/2021-02-25_Phase_1_final_ report__2__-_ACCESSIBLE.pdf. UK Department for Education (DfE). 2014. “The National Curriculum in England: Framework for Key Stages 1–4.” https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-inengland-framework-for-key-stages-1-to-4. “The National Curriculum in England: Framework Document.” https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/ uploads/attachment_data/file/381344/Master_final_national_curriculum_28_Nov.pdf. UK Department for Education (DfE). 2021. “What Catch-Up Funding is For.” Guidance: Catch-up Premium, April 27, 2021. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/catch-uppremium-coronavirus-covid-19/catch-up-premium.



20 Supporting Inquiry-based Learning in a Behaviourist Educational System 

 279

UK Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation (Ofqual). 2020. “Consultation on Proposed Changes to the Assessment of GCSEs, AS and A Levels in 2021.” https://assets. publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/ file/897137/Consultation_on_proposed_changes_to_the_assessment_of_GCSEs__AS_ and_A_levels_in_2021_020620.pdf. United Nations (UN). Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Sustainable Development. n.d. “Do You Know All 17 Goals?” https://sdgs.un.org/goals.

Contributors

Contributors

Jennifer L. Branch-Mueller, PhD, is a Professor in the Faculty of Education at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada. She worked as a junior high teacher and teacher-librarian in Inuvik, Northwest Territories for six years, as a teacher in Northern Ontario, and did research in Aberdeen, Scotland. Jennifer’s areas of research are information seeking processes, information literacy education, school library research, online learning and teaching, and teacher-librarian education. She teaches courses at the graduate and undergraduate level. Jean Donham, PhD, retired as Professor of Library Studies at the University of Northern Iowa. Previously, she was Library Director at Cornell College in Mount Vernon, Iowa, Associate Professor in the School of Library and Information Science at the University of Iowa, and Coordinator of the Library Program in the Iowa City Community Schools. She holds an MLS from the University of Maryland and a PhD in Educational Leadership from the University of Iowa. She is author of Enhancing Teaching and Learning; A Leadership Guide for School Librarians, published by ALA Editions, along with numerous other scholarly publications.. Buffy Edwards, MLIS, PhD, worked in K-12 school libraries for three decades as a practitioner and as the District Library Information Specialist, Norman Public Schools (NPS), Norman, Oklahoma. Changing career lanes in 2016, Buffy travels and visits school libraries across the US and continues to guide preservice librarians in the role of an online professor at the School of Library and Information Studies, University of Oklahoma. Buffy is author of several articles and contributed a chapter to Guided Inquiry Design®: High School, edited by Leslie K. Maniotes..

Lee FitzGerald is an Adjunct Lecturer in Teacher Librarianship at Charles Sturt University in Australia, and editor of ACCESS, the journal of the Australian School Library Association. She was a teacher librarian in Sydney schools, spanning 30 years. She has a long-term interest in Guided Inquiry, as a practitioner and research partner with her chapter’s co-authors. Her book, Guided Inquiry Goes Global: Evidence-based Practice in Action, was released in 2019 by ABC Clio. Lee was awarded the John Hirst Award 2020 by the School Library Association of New South Wales which recognises excellence in professional leadership, support, and services in school libraries. Deborah Lang Froggatt is the Boston Public Schools Director of Library Services. A fifteen-year veteran of Boston Public Schools, she directed Boston Arts/Academy Fenway High School Library for the first nine years. Her school library career spans twenty-five years at elementary, middle and high school. Deborah earned a BA in history from Miami University, an MA in Education from Princeton Theological Seminary, an MLS from Southern Connecticut State University and a PhD from the Graduate School of Library Science at Simmons College. Research foci include the informationally underserved and school librarian assessment. Kasey Garrison, PhD, is a Senior Lecturer in the School of Information and Communication Studies at Charles Sturt University in Wagga Wagga, Australia. Kasey teaches in the Master of Education-Teacher Librarianship and coordinates the Children’s Librarianship Specialisation for the Bachelor and Master of Information Studies. Kasey’s research interests focus on social justice and diversity issues within youth literature and the availability of such literature to youth as well



as inquiry learning and the role of the teacher librarian. Valérie Glass has been a certified teacher librarian since 2011. She has been working at the Lycée international in Lyon, France since 2016. She is a member of the national board of the Association des Professeurs Documentalistes de l’Éducation Nationale (APDEN) and in charge of international relationships. She is chair of the Standing Committee of the IFLA Section Standing Committee on School Libraries. Marie Guillet has been a certified teacher librarian since 2010. She is currently working as a teacher librarian at the Collège Albert Camus in Gaillac, France. She is a member of the Association des Professeurs Documentalistes de l’Éducation Nationale (APDEN) Toulouse’s board and has served as a member of the APDEN national board. Violet H. Harada, EdD, is Professor Emerita of Library and Information Science Program in ICS at the University of Hawaii in Honolulu, Hawaii, where she coordinated the school library specialization for more than twenty years. Vi has authored and edited numerous books and articles on the instructional role of teacher librarians and presented her work at various state, national, and international conferences. In 2011, she received the Distinguished Service Award from the American Association of School Librarians for her contributions to school librarianship. Liz Hoggatt is an English teacher at Norman High School, Norman Public Schools, in Norman, OK, US. She holds a Master’s Degree in Instructional Leadership and Academic Curriculum and a BA in English Literary and Cultural Studies, both from The University of Oklahoma. She is a member of the National Council of Teachers of English, a district trainer of GId, and a local conference presenter about writing across the curriculum

Contributors 

 281

and the use of Google for Education. Liz was recognized as the 2019 Norman Public Schools Teacher of the Year and was a finalist for 2020 Oklahoma State Teacher of the Year. Shiori Ito has been Shisho-kyoyu/teacher librarian in the Multimedia Resource Center (MMRC) of the Tamagawa Academy in Tokyo, Japan since the MMRC’s opening in 2006. She was involved in the launch of the ninth grade inquiry-based subject called Manabi no waza/Waza for Learning in 2008. She is active as a key member of the management of this subject, and also in running the MMRC as a learning space. She is a co-author of the book entitled Waza for Learning: Inquiry learning, Report Writing, and Presentations from 14-Year Olds published in 2014. Rei Iwasaki has been a Professor at Kyoto Notre Dame University in Kyoto, Japan since 2012. She completed her EdM at the University of Tokyo. Her main research/professional topic is school library services for children’s reading and learning in Japan. She is Chairperson of Kyoto City’s Library Council and a member of the Board of Directors at Kyoto Lifelong Learning Foundation. Previous experiences include chairing a of the meeting of experts of children’s reading in the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. She was awarded the Kyoto Prize for her distinguished services in education. Carol Jones, MSLIS, is the school librarian at Shawnee Middle School, Shawnee, OK, US. She enjoys helping students and teachers become successful researchers and learning guides. She received the University of Oklahoma’s K20 Center 2020 Southeast Region SKIE Award and the American Library Association’s Sara Jaffarian School Library Program Award for her work on the GId project. Yumiko Kasai, PhD, is a scholar in the areas of children’s information behaviour and learning

282 

 Contributors

environment, including the school library and learning spaces. She is currently a Professor in the Department of Library, Archival and Information Studies, School of Literature, Tsurumi University, Yokohama, Japan. Yumiko started her academic research in 2000 after working as an information specialist in a Japanese company, a non-profit organisation affiliated with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, and the Embassy of Japan in Singapore. As an academic advisor, she has been involved with design of several school library media centres in Japan. Louise Limberg is Professor Emerita at the University of Borås, Sweden, Swedish School of Library and Information Science. Her research interests concern the interaction between information seeking and use, and learning, linked to issues of information literacy. A series of studies has been conducted, directed to students’ ways of engaging with information systems and sources. Exploring how digital tools recreate conditions for learning and information use has been a core interest. From 2006–2010 Louise was a member of the board of LinCS, an interdisciplinary centre of excellence at the University of Gothenburg and the University of Borås. Clarence Maybee is a Professor and the W. Wayne Booker Chair in Information Literacy at Purdue University’s Libraries and School of Information Studies. He was awarded his PhD from Queensland University of Technology in 2015 and received the Outstanding Doctoral Thesis Award for his dissertation, Informed Learning in the Undergraduate Classroom: The Role of Information Experiences in Shaping Outcomes. In 2019, he received the Librarian Recognition Award from the American Library Association’s Library Instruction Round Table. Clarence authored the book, IMPACT Learning: Librarians at the Forefront of Change in Higher Education, published in 2018 by Chandos Publishing.

Jenna Nemec-Loise, MLIS, is Director of Library and Information Literacy and Lower School Librarian at North Shore Country Day, a junior kindergarten through twelfth grade independent school in Winnetka, Illinois, US. Her primary research interests include human development approaches to school library impact studies and the information seeking behaviour of pre-readers. A doctoral student in Dominican University’s School of Information Studies program, Jenna will complete her dissertation, “Deconstructing Definition: A Qualitative Content Analysis of School Library Impact as Human Capability in Empirical Research Studies from Brazil, New Zealand Aotearoa, Nigeria, Northern Ireland, and the Philippines” in 2022. Yoko Noborimoto, PhD, is currently Associate Professor of the Graduate School of Teacher Education, Tokyo Gakugei University. Her special field is information literacy, information technology education, and inquiry learning. She also belongs to the Tokyo Gakugei University Research Organization for Next-Generation Education and is involved with the Project for Inquirybased Learning in high schools funded by the Mitsubishi Memorial Foundation for Educational Excellence. This project supports high school teachers who are in charge of the Period for Inquiry-Based Cross-Disciplinary Study and other subjects, helping them to create a learning community and develop teaching and learning materials. Dianne Oberg, PhD, is Professor Emerita in the Faculty of Education at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada. Before coming to the University, Dianne worked as a classroom teacher and teacher-librarian in the public school system. Her research focuses on teacher-librarianship education and on the implementation and evaluation of school library programs. Dianne was the editor of the international journal School Libraries Worldwide, has published widely



and continues to be an active member of school library associations at local, national, and international levels. Mutsumi Ohira has worked as Professor at Kyoto Sangyo University in Kyoto, Japan since 2012. She completed her PhD at Osaka University. Her main research/professional topics are educational technology, school library education programs for children’s learning and distance learning. She is Chairperson of Osaka Prefecture’s and Izumi City’s Council on Promotion of Children’s Reading. Previous professional experiences include teaching at a private junior high school, and participation in the Sakai City Board of Education School Library Promotion Project. She is the Vice President of NPO Sakai International Interchange Association. Martha Pangburn is a school librarian at Norman High School, Norman Public Schools, in Norman, OK, US, where she is a district GId trainer. She holds a Master’s Degree in Library and Information Studies from the University of Oklahoma and a Bachelor of Science in Education from Oklahoma Baptist University. Martha has presented at local, state, and national conferences on a variety of topics, most frequently on inquiry and making in the curriculum. Martha is active in state and national library organisations and was recognized as the 2020 Polly Clarke award winner by the Oklahoma School Librarians Association. Sarah Pavey holds degrees in biochemistry, information studies and a post-16 teaching qualification. She is a Fellow of CILIP and the Royal Society of Arts. Having been a school librarian for twenty years, she now works as an education consultant, through SP4IL, in the UK and internationally on a range of information literacy topics for primary and secondary schools. Sarah is a national committee member of the UK Information Literacy Group and School Librarian Group

Contributors 

 283

of CILIP. She has written several books including Playing Games in the School Library (Facet, 2021) and co-authored The Innovative School Librarian (Facet, 2018). Sarah speaks regularly at education conferences. Cherity Pennington, MLIS, is the communications and library services coordinator for Shawnee Public Schools, Shawnee, OK, US. She is the current president of the Oklahoma Library Association. Her professional interests include improving professional development opportunities for school librarians. Joseph Sanders is Teacher, Politics and International Relations and Lead Practitioner at Oakham School, Rutland, UK. He trained at the Institute of Education, London, before taking his first post at a comprehensive school in Dagenham, East London. Over the course of more than ten years of teaching experience, he has specialised in teaching and learning and providing mentoring for fellow teachers. His expertise spans the academic and pastoral sides of the independent sector, combining the affective priorities of schooling with pedagogical school-based research into the practice of taxonomies, teacher collaboration in lesson studies, and higher-order thinking skills frameworks. Barbara A. Schultz-Jones, PhD, is Professor, Associate Chair, Director of the School Library Certification and Youth Librarianship programs, and serves as Director of the Master of Science in Library Science or Information Science programs at the University of North Texas. She is a past-Chair of the Standing Committee of IFLA School Libraries Section, a current member of IFLA’s Education and Training Section and an active member of the International Association of School Librarianship. She and Dianne Oberg co-edited the 2015 IFLA School Library Guidelines (2015), Global Action on School Library Guidelines (2015), and Global Action

284 

 Contributors

on School Library Education and Training (2018). Barbara‘s research centres on the school library learning environment. Alinda Sheerman is Head of Information Services at Broughton Anglican College in Menangle, NSW, Australia, where Guided Inquiry has been used by both primary and secondary classes across a number of subjects for more than ten years. Alinda carries out action research on the impact of Guided Inquiry on student learning and, with co-author Lee Fitzgerald, manages the Australian Guided Inquiry Community: http:// guidedinquiryoz.edublogs.org. In 2012, Alinda was awarded both the Australian Teacher Librarian of the Year and the School Library Association of New South Wales Teacher Librarian of the Year. Barbara Stripling, DPS, is Professor Emerita at the School of Information Studies, Syracuse University. She has had an extensive career in the library profession, including positions as Director of Library Services for the New York City Schools, school librarian and school district Director of Libraries in Arkansas, library grant program director in Tennessee, and Associate Professor at Syracuse University. Barbara has written or edited numerous books and articles and is the creator of the Stripling Model of Inquiry. She has served the profession as President of the American Association of School Librarians (1986–1987), the New York Library Association (2016–2017), the American Library Association (2013–2014), and the Freedom to Read Foundation (2020–). Ross J. Todd, PhD, was Associate Professor in the Department of Library and Information Science, School of Communication and Information at Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, and Director of the Center for International Scholarship in School Libraries (CISSL).  His teaching and research interests

focused on adolescent information seeking and use. His research was multi-faceted and included: understanding how children learn and build new knowledge from information; how school librarians and classroom teachers can more effectively empower student learning; and how the development of information and critical literacies through guided inquiry and constructivist learning approaches lead to deep knowledge and deep understanding. Ross sadly passed away before the publication of this book. It is fitting that one of his last professional acts was the preparation of a chapter reflecting on much of his work. Darryl Toerien is Head of Inquiry-Based Learning at Blanchelande College in Guernsey. He is an elected member of the Standing Committee for the School Libraries Section of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) and a co-opted member of the Board of the School Library Association (UK). He developed FOSIL in 2011 and founded the FOSIL Group in 2019 to better support the growing international community of librarians and teachers who are using FOSIL to frame learning. Since 2020 he has been collaborating closely with Barbara Stripling on the ongoing development of FOSIL and the FOSIL Group. Jennifer Toerien was the Upper School Curriculum Librarian at Oakham School, Rutland, UK until August 2021. She is now Senior Librarian and Extended Project Coordinator (EPQ) at Blanchelande College, Guernsey. She studied mathematics at Cambridge University and then trained as a physics teacher at the Institute of Education, London. She taught physics for eight years, including four at Oakham School. Following her Master’s in Information and Library Studies at Robert Gordon University, she became a teacher librarian and, with her husband Darryl, is a founding member of the FOSIL Group, a global community of inquiry.



Her main focus is collaborative inquiry planning and resource design. Anne Whisken, MApplSci, PhD, has worked and studied in the library field for four decades, chiefly as a teacher librarian and Head of Library at secondary schools in Australia. Her 2019 PhD from Charles Sturt University, Australia, Informed Learning Practice in a Secondary School: A

Contributors 

 285

Participatory Action Research Case Study, investigated ways that teachers might use informed learning ideas to close the gap between information literacy education theory and practice. Anne and her library team received the 2016 School Library Association of Victoria’s (SLAV) Innovators Award, the 2017 SLAV Leadership Award and participated in designing an awardnominated school library.