Analyzing the ‘Bridge Encyclopedia’ through McLuhan’s Tetrad and Latour’s Actor Network Theory
I can’t be the only person who was obsessed with Microsoft Encarta’s Mindmaze game. I had always yearned for a set of Encyclopedias… but when that free disc comes with your computer, I shortly stopped asking for them.
it’s media all the way down
Media ecology is the study of how media and technology function as environments that shape human perception, communication, and understanding. It looks not just at content, but at the structures and systems we build and are surrounded by, from language to smartphones, and how they shape what we can think, say, and do. Like an ecosystem, these media interact with one another and with us, constantly reshaping our cultural and intellectual “habitat.” Media ecology asks the right questions because it recognizes that anything that impacts our communication or interaction provides limits and biases to what is possible. Without recognizing the impact of these impositions we risk mistaking the shape of our media environment for the shape of reality itself.
This definition aligns with Strate’s (2000, as cited in Strate and Lum, 2020) argument that media ecology is a perspective; “a way of seeing”—that treats media as environments rather than just channels. Neil Postman (as cited in Lum, 2000) similarly calls media ecology “the study of the cultural consequences of media change that affects our social organization, cognitive habits, and political ideas” (p. 4). In other words, it is not enough to examine what media say; we must examine what they make possible and what they make difficult to imagine.
Strate and Lum (2000) situate media ecology within a tradition that is ecological, interdisciplinary, and activist, drawing on Patrick Geddes’ view that intellectuals must act as shapers of environments, not just observers (p. 60). This implies that media ecology cannot belong neatly to one discipline. It is necessarily intersectional, combining insights from communication studies, history, sociology, semiotics, and philosophy. Thinking ecologically means remembering that, as Miller (1989) puts it, “no living organism can be understood except in terms of the total environment in which it functioned” (as cited in Strate & Lum, 2000, p. 68).
Mumford’s historical schema illustrates how environments structure society over time. His three phases—eotechnic, paleotechnic, and neotechnic—mark shifts from renewable energy to industrial extraction to machine-human symbiosis, with each stage reorganizing labor, power, and social classes (Strate & Lum, 2000, pp. 63–65). These phases demonstrate that technological environments are not neutral: they define the “rules of the game” for entire cultures.
Lum (2000) further explains that media have both physical and symbolic dimensions, each with distinct biases. These biases can be temporal, spatial, sensory, political, social, metaphysical, or epistemological (p. 2). To do media ecology is to surface these biases and ask what forms of knowledge, attention, and relationship they enable—and which they foreclose. This is why media ecology “asks the right questions.” It does not merely catalog media; it interrogates how each medium privileges some possibilities and silences others.
Model of Educational Media Ecology
References
Lum, C. M. K. (2000). Introduction: The intellectual roots of media ecology. New Jersey Journal of Communication, 8(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/15456870009367375
Strate, L., & Lum, C. M. K. (2000). Lewis Mumford and the ecology of technics. New Jersey Journal of Communication, 8(1), 56–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/15456870009367379
Video tour and final course reflection
Okay, so my video is a bit longer than 5 minutes, but I swear there’s a reason! My video tour is presented as a mock news segment with Artie Smarts, an animated robot newscaster. I went with this format to keep things conversational and fun while still walking through the project in detail, drawing on Mayer’s (2009) personalization principle to show that professional learning can be engaging as well as practical. The playful opening, a few jokes, and the closing segment were all part of setting that tone and holding attention — though they do push the video slightly past the suggested runtime. I was having a lot of fun making it (using a combination of Adobe Express, Apple Clips, and CapCut), and I hope that comes through when you watch.
Sometimes you plan something and follow your itinerary to the letter; other times, despite your best intentions, another path calls to you and you end up going in a completely different direction. Such was the case with my learning throughout ETEC 524. In hindsight, it’s probably not surprising that my main work ended up focusing on AI and educators; it is a topic I’ve been almost obsessively engaged with for the past two years. But this was not where I initially set out to go in May.
My original goal was to outline and begin developing a hybrid online/classroom course for Grade 11/12 students, centred on skill development and mastery in an area of their choice. I’ve long wanted to create space for students who are not drawn to more traditional academic programming to pursue a deep dive into something meaningful to them. However, as the course unfolded, I shifted toward building a professional development module for educators in my school division. This shift came partly from recognizing the immediate usefulness of such a resource, and partly from seeing an opportunity to help teachers design more accessible, less cluttered Edsby environments for their students.
When I compared my initial and final projects, I noticed that both aimed at the same underlying challenge: addressing crucial shortcomings in current pedagogical models. The difference was that the PD module would allow me to act on these ideas sooner and in a context where I could model thoughtful technology use for colleagues as well as students. That reframing not only changed the direction of my final assignment, but also reframed how I now think about my role as a teacher-librarian — not just supporting student learning directly, but shaping the digital spaces and professional practices that make deeper learning possible.
I suppose we always live in ‘interesting times’, but the phrase seems particularly apropos of our current moment. Large Language Model tools, economic models that incentivize the capture of our attention and data, and political dialogue are currently shaking the foundation of what it means to learn, and therefore what it means to teach. I leave this course with many great resources to strengthen my toolbox, but also quite a few existential questions about where we move on from here.
In terms of resources, several were especially important in shaping my thinking throughout the course. I’m always one for an acronym, and Bates’ (2015) SECTIONS model and its clear breakdown of considerations for technology selection was a very helpful frame. I still struggle with it in some ways, but only because I see that it may lead organizations to prioritize immediate cost over sustainability. Of course, this is a systemic issue. Planned obsolescence, increasing energy demands, and security and privacy issues create a scenario where tech requires frequent updating and replacement, while the majority of companies that have significant interest in developing hardware and software run on a model of infinite profit and growth. This results in devices where parts can’t be swapped out, or where our data is traded like a commodity. Fighting against this means using open source or older technologies that require more in-house tech support, and often significantly less ease of use. I can’t help but worry that we’re paying out of our future for ease of use today.
Outcome development and assessment was another area of growth for me. Given my role in the public school system, I am much more familiar with assessing by outcomes that have been provided to me, rather than creating those outcomes myself. My part one of my second assignment showed my weakness in that area. Assessing for PD learning rather than an academic course was something that I hadn’t really thought about. In most of my school-based PD learning experience, assessment seems to boil down to your name being on the attendance sheet, or (for online modules), a series of automatically graded multiple choice and true/false questions that staff often did as a group. But we know that simply being in the room isn’t learning something, and that tests generally only measure lower-order skills (Mazur, 2013). As such, Mazur’s suggestions to improve assessment by mimicking real life, focusing on feedback not ranking, and assessing skills rather than content were especially useful, and I tried to mindfully incorporate them into the activities I planned in my unit. His fourth point about resolving the coach/judge conflict is tricky for online learning especially, as instructors are often spread more thinly. For older users, peer and self-assessment can be a useful workaround.
Media literacy (particularly around images, and also video)has also emerged for me as an essential skill for both students and educators. Yousman’s (2016) discussion of speed versus depth, appearances versus analysis, and the emotional pull of images resonates strongly with my concerns about online-only learning. In a digital environment where learners are often inundated with visuals, the skill to pause, question, and analyze becomes a prerequisite for critical engagement.
Ultimately, this course has left me feeling more positive about the state of in-person teaching, and with significant question marks about the long-term sustainability of online-only-asynchronous education — especially given generative AI’s rise. Many edtech tools, whether devices, applications, or Learning Management Systems, allow for holistic application of UDL principles into a blended learning environment; a fully inclusive environment that allows for multiple means of engagement, representation, and action & expression (Bourlova, 2025). But assessing learning without a real connection to the learner in an online-only environment becomes increasingly challenging in a world where almost anything can be made for you in seconds. When we are digitally siloed, it becomes far too easy to “other” the entire world. Bringing learning back to community, even in a hybrid format, becomes a moral as well as a pedagogical imperative.
This is why I leave this course particularly invigorated to see how learning technologies can be applied to hybrid environments, especially in the realm of professional development. When I plan professional development in schools, I often hear how great it is to have bespoke learning that is relevant, personalized, and even a bit fun when topics are difficult. I know, though, that these sessions are limited in their universal design, as some individuals need more time to process, different modalities, or repeated exposure to key ideas. What if this kind of work can be done at my divisional level to plan PD that reaches more of us, on locally relevant topics, and what if that trickles into our classrooms? One next step I see is reaching out to upper administration to share my vision of hybrid-learning PD using our Edsby system. I don’t know of anyone within my division with this specific background and training, and I wonder if I might be able to shape a role for myself in this space. McErlean’s (2018) work on interactive narratives also strikes me as especially relevant here — using immersion to engage participants while still controlling the delivery of key content. I think hybrid learning could benefit greatly from this balance.
I’m also especially interested in making Open Educational Resources that align with UDL standards. In creating accessible and Creative Commons-licensed resources, I can work toward reducing the paywall creep that has marked the shift from the open optimism of the Web 2.0 era to today’s increasingly commercialized edtech landscape. This work would not only address accessibility and equity concerns but also provide sustainable, adaptable materials that could serve both students and educators long after their initial creation. In my job as a teacher-librarian, I can promote the heck out of these resources to teachers; we don’t have to be in the pocket of big textbook anymore.
This course has reinforced for me that educational technology is at its best when it strengthens human connection, promotes equity, and cultivates critical engagement; not when it simply delivers content faster or more efficiently. The challenge, especially in “interesting times,” is to hold on to those values in the face of rapid change, commercialization, and the seductive ease of automation. My next steps (from advocating for hybrid, UDL-informed professional development to creating accessible OERs) are grounded in a belief that technology should expand possibilities for both teachers and learners, without locking us into closed systems or shallow engagement. The tools will keep changing, but the responsibility to use them thoughtfully remains the same.
References
Bates, T. (2014). Choosing and using media in education: The SECTIONS model. In Teaching in digital age. Retrieved from https://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/part/9-pedagogical-differences-between-media
Bourlova, T. (2025). Week 8: Creating Content. [Lecture Notes] UBC Canvas. https://canvas.ubc.ca
Issa, T., & Isaias, P. (2022). Sustainable design : HCI, usability and environmental concerns. Springer.
Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
McErlean, K. (2018). Interactive narrative. In Interactive narratives and transmedia storytelling: Creating immersive stories across new media platforms (pp. 120-151). New York: Routledge.
The New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60–93.
Yousman, B. (2016). The text and the image: Media literacy, pedagogy, and generational divides. In J. Frechette & R. Williams (Eds.), Media education for a digital generation (pp. 157-170).
The Learning Environment evaluation rubric was an interesting assignment for me, as I joined a group focused on post-secondary education, despite all of my teaching experience being at the middle and high school levels. Specifically choosing Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College (CMCC) as our organization provided an excellent opportunity to explore how technology could be leveraged in a program that relies heavily on in-person and hands-on practicum. As I joked in one of our meetings this week—I don’t think I would be willing to go to a chiropractor who was trained only virtually! As such, it became clear that the platform we recommended needed to complement, not replace, face-to-face and practical training.
I had a lot of fun collaborating to develop the rubric for this assignment and weaving together elements from both the SECTIONS and CITE models to create a more holistic overview – what we have entitled the LEARNERS Institutional Needs Assessment Scale and the LEARNERS Learning Tool Assessment Calculator. While the SECTIONS model offers a clear lens for classroom integration, the CITE framework (aimed at global development) brings in valuable perspectives around equity and community benefit—something I believe should be considered in a Canadian context as well. That said, the CITE model can be difficult to navigate, which led us to focus on identifying overlaps and building something new that worked for our scenario. You can see the Needs Assessment Scale here, and the Assessment Calculator here.
One key realization for me during this process was the difference between equity and accessibility in evaluating a technology’s appropriateness. Coming from a public school background, I often prioritize equitable access across diverse devices and connectivity levels. However, in the context of CMCC, with a smaller and more homogenous student body, these concerns were not as high on the institutional priority list. This highlighted how institutional context truly shapes which values are seen as essential—and which are optional.
This project also gave me the opportunity to explore two LMS platforms I hadn’t previously encountered: Docebo and Google Classroom. Docebo, which is used largely in corporate settings, did not sit well with me. Its marketing—“There is no reason we can’t quadruple revenue in the next two years… Docebo has allowed us to create an education engine that’s very plug-and-play and very scalable” (Docebo, 2025)—left me wondering whether education was being reduced to a one-size-fits-all revenue model. That’s obviously beyond the scope of our rubric, but it left a lasting impression (and not a good one). That being said, it offered almost all of the bells and whistles you could be looking for 🙂
Google Classroom is a more familiar and affordable option, but I worry that its low cost is being subsidized through user data collection. The recent bankruptcy of 23andMe (Allyn, 2024), and the concerns about what might happen to user data post-collapse, made me reflect on the fragility of digital trust. While Google Classroom receives a passing grade from Common Sense Media, even their evaluation notes several red flags around data use.
The following two images (Common Sense Media, 2022) show concerns re: data in the Google Classroom ecosystem.
By the end of this assignment, I found myself increasingly skeptical that a truly ethical, learner-centered LMS exists. This exercise sharpened my ability to evaluate tools critically—but it also reinforced my concerns about the broader systems behind them.
Allyn, B. (2024, October 3). 23andMe is on the brink. What happens to all its DNA data? NPR. https://www.npr.org/2024/10/03/g-s1-25795/23andme-data-genetic-dna-privacy
Bates, A. W. (2015). Teaching in a digital age. In opentextbc.ca. Tony Bates Associates Ltd. https://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage
Common Sense Media. (2022, December 19). Common Sense Privacy Evaluation for Google Classroom. Privacy.commonsense.org. https://privacy.commonsense.org/evaluation/Google-Classroom
Docebo. (2025, April 21). The LMS for education. https://www.docebo.com/solutions/education/
Osterweil, S., Shaw, P., Allen, S., Groff, J., Kodidala, S. P., & Schoenfeld, I. (2015). A framework for evaluating appropriateness of education technology use in global development programs. https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/115340/Summary%20Report_A%20Framework%20for%20Evaluating%20Appropriateness%20of%20Educational%20Technology%20Use%20in%20Global%20Development%20Programs.pdf
A vision for what may come out of ETEC 524
Guten tag meine Leser!
(Or to those of you not currently obsessed with working your way through the Duolingo German course—good day my readers.)
For those of you new to my blog, willkommen! I’m Morgan, a secondary school teacher-librarian and current student in the Masters of Educational Technology program through the University of British Columbia. I’m just starting ETEC 524, Learning Technologies: Selection, Design and Application, and this seems like the perfect excuse to dust off my poor, neglected blog. If you scroll through past posts, you’ll get a sense of my background—but here’s the Coles notes version.
This is my fifteenth-year teaching in the public school system in Manitoba, mostly at the middle and high school levels. On paper, I think I was supposed to be a history teacher, but I’ve done a little bit of everything—core classrooms and upper-middle humanities. Seven years ago, I was asked to move into a teacher-librarian role, and I haven’t looked back since. As this blog shows, this is my second program at UBC; my first was the LIBE Diploma, which gave me excellent training in running a well-rounded library program. Librarianing is the best. I get to buy books, collaborate with teachers, curate across multimodalities, nag people about copyright (not gonna lie, my least favourite part), and help guide future-focused pedagogy. I considered a Masters in Library Studies but felt that this program better fit my interests, the needs of our space, and where I see the future of libraries heading.
For this course, I’m interested in bridging the gap between healthy communities and the overwhelming amount of digital content at our fingertips. How do I help students not just find information, but apply it to their own lives? Moving between in-person and virtual spaces is part of daily life, but how do we make that shift feel practical for learners? Maybe it’s the creep of middle age making me critical, but many students seem increasingly disillusioned with school. How do we build learning environments where students critically engage with tech beyond academic checkboxes? And how do I ensure I’m using technology for true redefinition (Puentedura, 2009) rather than using resource-heavy tools for tasks that could just as easily be done on paper? As a librarian, I see the aftermath of a lot of poorly planned tech investments, and I don’t want what I design to add to the mess.
What I hope to develop is a course where students choose a demonstrable skill—something they truly want to learn—and build it over a semester. They would set goals, manage their time, reflect on their progress, tackle challenges, and share their learning with others. For example, I might choose to learn how to make the perfect pancake (a worthy pursuit, in my opinion). I’d network with cooks, test recipes, reflect on my process, and document what I learn so I could share it with others. The course would wrap up with a community celebration where students showcase their skills. It’s still just the glimmer of an idea, but I’m hopeful this class will help me turn it into something practical and worth running.
The challenge, of course, is designing something meaningful and manageable when students will pick skills I know nothing about—and that’s kind of the point. I won’t be the expert, but I can build structures to help them find reliable sources, network and connect with experts, and reflect on their learning. That’s where I hope this course will help me grow—giving me the tools to better select and apply technologies that support diverse, self-directed learning without turning the course into a chaotic free-for-all.
This course feels like the right fit to help me move that idea forward. The frameworks we’ll explore—like SAMR and SECTIONS (Bates, 2014)—can help me evaluate whether my design choices are meaningful or just adding extra steps. The focus on learning environments, interaction, and engagement will help me balance student independence with community-building. The work on assessment will push me to clarify what success looks like when every student is learning something different. Later modules on content creation, multimodal presentation, and communication will give me practical tools to support students in sharing their learning in ways that go beyond the traditional slideshow or essay. The final assignments are perfectly timed to help me produce both a structured unit and a tech integration proposal—directly aligned with my course concept.
In short, I hope this course will help me move from intention to implementation—grounding my ideas in research-backed frameworks and best practices, and giving me peer and instructor feedback on my course design. Specifically, I hope to strengthen my ability to design learning environments that foster student agency, apply digital tools purposefully, develop process-based assessment strategies, and support students in sharing their learning in meaningful ways.
To do this, I’ll need access to examples of blended learning structures, readings on assessment for self-directed learning, and opportunities to experiment with digital tools for documenting learning. I also hope to learn from my peers—many of whom bring different teaching contexts and insights that could help me refine my thinking.
By the end of our time together, I know this course will help me take a meaningful step forward in becoming a digital-age teaching professional—someone who not only navigates the evolving world of educational technology but helps students do the same, critically, creatively, and ethically.
Bates, A. W. (2015). Teaching in a digital age. In opentextbc.ca. Tony Bates Associates Ltd. https://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage
PowerSchool. (2021, April 13). SAMR Model: A Practical Guide for K-12 Classroom Technology Integration. https://www.powerschool.com/blog/samr-model-a-practical-guide-for-k-12-classroom-technology-integration
This week I chose to focus my attention on Media Convergence, and you can view my MindMap on the topic here! Below, you can watch as Bovine Morgan takes you on a journey through his many thoughts about the topic.
Alternative Title
“Algorithms; Math Gone Wild”
Here’s a link to my assignment this week. I wanted to embed it directly into my blog, but some features weren’t working that way, and you deserve the full experience. You’ll find my references embedded in my presentation.
It’s been awhile! Since finishing up my T-L post-bacc through UBC I’ve started up on my Master’s Degree, also through UBC in their Educational Technology (MET) Program. And I spent so much time putting this Learning Theory Concept Map together that it should get to see someone else’s eyes other than my instructor’s.
; guiding our peers towards growth in their reference collection use
Teacher-Librarians are not just student educators – they also help lead their peers to growth and development in their own practice. But just like student learning, this can be a sensitive task. Our students come to us with a wide range of background knowledge, experiences, interests, and skillsets, and so do all teachers. We know that there is no such thing as a one size fits all approach to student learning, and thus it should be no shock that we cannot develop a OSFA approach to teacher learning either.
But often, with the blinders of our daily lives and the heavy demands of education, we want to describe how to do something before thinking about whether teachers are ready and comfortable to push their practice (Loucks-Horsley, 1996 as cited in “The Concerns-Based Adoption Model”). Change is a slow process, and what one teacher is ready for, another will find inconceivable. Barriers can exist regarding teaching experience, content area knowledge, technological proficiency, on top of each person’s own learning experiences or what is going on in their lives outside of school. Pushing people to try and do things that they are not ready for is an invitation for stalling growth in practice.
So, how do we apply this knowledge to encourage teacher growth in the use of our library reference collections? Fortunately, we have the Concerns-Based Adoption Model to guide us in building effective coaching and growth opportunities for teachers across a wide range of readiness for innovation.
Also worth considering when planning teacher learning is Dr. Ruben Puentedura’s SAMR model.
These two models have been considered when designing personalized learning opportunities for the two fictional staff below.
Teacher A has been teaching Grade 7-9 students at Imaginary School for close to 40 years. Almost all that time has been spent as a math and science teacher. Generations of community families have had A as a math/science teacher and for the most part, students have all done the same assignments across that time. Their teaching style matches a more traditional lecture method, and many of the learning resources that they use for their courses have not changed dramatically over the decades – their motto being “if it’s not broke, don’t fix it.” Their walls are lined with out-of-date textbooks, from which they will still occasionally pull a page or two – last week we chatted in the office while they were photocopying from a textbook with a copyright date of 1984. All students in their classroom receive the same learning materials. Teacher A has strong classroom management skills and an engaging personality that helps them connect with students despite the sometimes-dry nature of their materials. While not an adept user of technology, A has shown significant growth over the pandemic, and it has made them more likely to incorporate what they know into their teaching. They have five laptops in their classroom that students use for basic research and typing up documents and making posters. When materials, resources and information are shared by e-mail, Teacher A does not respond.
Because of the sharing of project ideas between members of the Grade 7 and 9 Teams, small projects have been incorporated into most of the year’s science units, and students are expected to use digital resources to complete their research. Previously Teacher A reports using physical copies of encyclopedias that were in our collection, but since these materials have been weeded, they have not moved to their digital counterparts, and they are not using print resources in our general collection either. When asked, they were unable to identify any virtual resources. However, students are often left to ‘Google’ on their own, with little guidance on how to effectively find reliable information online or how to navigate various websites.
CBAM
In terms of ‘Stage of Concern’, Teacher A sits at the Awareness stage of development, as outside of the things that they know and are aware of, they have little interest in learning more about a resource.
Regarding their ‘Levels of Use of Innovation,’ they sit at the Non-Use level, showing no interest and action towards expanding their use of our reference collection.
SAMR
While Teacher A does have his students use technology in his classes it is usually done at the Substitution level, where students are simply typing up written work or collating materials for posters that will be printed out and displayed in the classroom.
Because presentations introducing materials or new technologies at staff meetings and occasional email updates have not pulled Teacher A towards freshening their practice, a more direct approach will be necessary. Based on my observations, our online encyclopedia subscriptions would be most useful, but pathfinders (Centeno, 2021) or other collections of materials may prove to be just as practical. Making a point to pop in and see the teacher during their prep time and discover what units and projects their students have upcoming is a first step to determining what parts of our reference collection will be useful to support them and their classes. Once this has been determined, I can provide them with a brief overview of what is in the collection that will be of best use to their students and offer to provide support for them and their students when it comes time to research by booking the library as a research space for their class. These small workshops using pre-existing assignments will provide an opportunity to tweak Teacher A’s practice without having them completely redesign their practice. These actions should help move Teacher A from the Non-Use level to the orientation level of CBAM’s eight Levels of Use.
While this assignment is regarding the Reference Collection, I think a similar model can be used to move Teacher A’s use of technology to a level of Augmentation. Because the teacher is not comfortable with technology themself, pulling a small group of students and providing instruction on a graphic design platform like Canva, which allows for embedding videos and other multimedia, could be a useful way to nudge them towards transforming their use of technology. Students can then present and share their projects and lead their peers in utilizing the technology on other assignments. I would also suggest the work of Fontichiaro to nudge A’s worksheets towards inquiry, without requiring a complete overhaul of their practice.
Teacher B has been teaching Grade 5/6 students at Imaginary School for the last 4 years, with several years of experience in other schools on term contracts previously. As a core teacher, they are responsible for teaching ELA, Social Studies, Science, Math, and Art. Teacher B is adventurous and willing to try new things without necessarily having proficiency in the skill themselves, and student learning is often guided by students’ own interests. While there are textbooks available to use in the classroom for Social Studies class, B does not use them often, as they find that they are often much too advanced for many students in the class to understand. Their class actively uses their small set of laptops and iPads, and frequently borrows from others as they need them over the course of each day. Teacher B reaches out to the Teacher-Librarian for collaboration and unit planning, often inviting them in for small group instruction or other lessons. Materials shared in staff meetings, PD, or emails are often seen incorporated into this teacher’s practice.
While aware of our digital encyclopedia collections, Teacher B had less awareness of other reference materials in our collection like CBC Curio, NFB Campus and teachingbooks.net
CBAM
In relation to the parts of reference collection they use and the CBAM ‘Stages of Concern’ Teacher B is at the Collaboration stage, where they are mostly comfortable with the resources but are considering how others are using these resources to improve their own practice.
In terms of ‘Levels of Use of Innovation’ they would be at the Routine level, where they are using the reference materials, they are aware of regularly but are making few changes to that use.
SAMR
I would assess Teacher B’s technology integration at the Redefinition level, where they are using technology to create transformative learning experiences like podcasts or multimedia presentations that would have been impossible (or much more difficult) 20 years ago.
Because Teacher B tries new things and collaborates frequently with their team, they will need less guided support to evolve their practice. One suggestion I have is to book a weekly collaboration time where B and I can discuss their current and upcoming needs and to co-assess student learning using our reference resources. What is working and what is not? What kinds of materials are we missing? Another suggestion is providing coverages, or requesting release time from administration, for Teacher Bs so that they can go and observe other teachers and their use of reference materials and technology. To raise awareness of the other reference materials in our collection, lunch and learn sessions can be provided to provide brief overviews of what these materials are and some short examples of ready-to-use activities utilizing them.
Centeno, K. (2021, October 8). LibGuides: Library and Information Studies: Pathfinders and content curation. Guides.lib.odu.edu. https://guides.lib.odu.edu/c.php?g=743626&p=6849679
Fontichiaro, K. (2009). Nudging toward Inquiry: Re-envisioning Existing Research Projects. School Library Monthly, 26(1), 17–19. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=shib&db=eue&AN=502986054&site=ehost-live&scope=site&custid=s5672194
Huang, P.-S. (n.d.). Levels of use – Concerns-Based Adoption Model. Sites.google.com. Retrieved March 6, 2022, from https://sites.google.com/site/ch7cbam/home/levels-of-use
Olson, K., Lannan, K., Cumming, J., Macgillivary, H., & Richards, K. (2020). The concerns-based adoption model and strategic plan evaluation: Multiple methodologies to understand complex change. Theory and Practice, 31(3), 49–58. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1274351.pdf
The Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM): A model for change in individuals. (n.d.). https://s3.wp.wsu.edu/uploads/sites/731/2015/07/CBAM-explanation.pdf
And every resource, its learner
Lesson 5, which focused on the reference interview, really stood out for me in Theme 2 and left me with lots to ponder. A reference interview is a conversation between a student and a librarian that helps determine what a student’s information needs are, and how to help students find resources that will meet their needs (Riedling & Harlow, 2019, p. 88).
Despite the fact that I do reference interviews every day with students, I hadn’t really ever sat down and thought about the process that I go through when completing them. If I had had to put together a list of my steps for helping students find information, I would have said the following:
01
Ask students how I can help them, and what it is they are looking for. Look over any documentation that they have for an assignment together.
02
Determine what the student already knows about the topic, and what basic understanding is necessary for them to know what they are searching for.
03
Inquire about a preference for format (book or digital) and guide them towards the one that will meet their needs the best; I find students often come in looking for a print resource when a digital one would be better suited for their needs.
04
Assist student to navigate to the required resource, if available.
I see my role as scaffolding towards having students find the correct information for their purposes, so that in the future they can move towards independence. I found that the example steps provided in the Riedling & Harlow text seemed more like how to find the right information for the students, whereas my approach has generally been to teach students how to find that information; more teacher-librarian, than teacher-librarian, if that makes any sense.
One of the parts that I was glad to see mentioned, but that I didn’t put on my list specifically, was reading verbal (encouragements, rephrasing, open questions, etc.) and nonverbal (gestures, tones, posture etc.) cues to guide the reference interview (Riedling & Harlow, 2019, p. 92). It was a good reminder to be more patient in my responses to students and to make sure that I am focusing on what students need, rather than what I think they need. Being a clear and empathetic communicator is key.
As an aside, I think it’s important for us to be aware of the fact that non-verbal communication can vary in between cultures. While eye contact might be read as a sign that a student is comfortable and engaged in a conversation and is something that we would want to reflect back to the student, in others this is not the case, and it could make a student uncomfortable. For example, in many Indigenous cultures sustained eye contact is not seen as an expected part of communication; often residential school survivors were punished for not maintaining it (Indigenous Corporate Training Inc., 2012).
Lesson 5 also contained this standout quote from the readings which is worth repeating and recording for posterity:
“When not guided in the use of a process, students tend to approach research as if there is only one answer and fail to use information to construct their own meaning.”
(Kuhlthau in Russell, 2001)
We must help students realize that research is a process and not simply a checklist of answers to be found. The TL’s role in creating Information, Digital, and Media Literate Critical Thinkers cannot be underestimated.
While I’ve spent most of my time discussing the first of the three lessons of this Theme, I will briefly touch on Managing and Evaluation. I feel like I am more aware of these topics because they have been covered in other courses that I have taken towards my diploma. Managing and Developing the Reference collection is done with a process that is parallel to the regular collection development process, although in my case I might be able to piggyback on different budgetary funds, and I would use the collection development stages set forth by Doiron (2002) to grow our collection (as cited in University of British Columbia, 2022).
In terms of Evaluation, I was struck by this quote from the BC ERAC document, that we
“must ensure that resources are easily accessible by staff and students. The format, cost, and number of learning resources, as well as the personnel and facilities available, will be factors in these decisions.”
(2008, p. 87)
Inspired by this, I will endeavor to survey staff and students on use of our existing digital collection, what materials they would like readily available for students in the library, and frequent topics of research. I think that this information will serve me well in planning for the development of our collection and ensuring that when students come to the library for resources I can point them towards the correct resources more regularly during the reference interview process.
How do we balance the need for efficiencies and financial savings with the importance of supporting local businesses and the local economy?
BC Educational Resources Acquisition Consortium. (2008). Evaluating, selecting and acquiring learning resources: A guide. https://bctla.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/erac_wb.pdf
Indigenous Corporate Training Inc. (2012). Eye contact and Aboriginal Peoples. Ictinc.ca. https://www.ictinc.ca/blog/eye-contact-and-aboriginal-peoples
Riedling, A. M., & Houston, C. (2019). Reference skills for the school librarian : tools and tips. Libraries Unlimited.
University of British Columbia. (2022) “Lesson 6: Managing the Reference Collection”. UBC Canvas.
