Workshop for Instruction in Library Use (WILU) (45th : 2016)

Frames within Frames : An Exploration of the Assumptions Implicit in the ACRL Framework for Information… Svendsen, Melissa 2016-05-30

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
58233-Svendsen_Melissa_Frames_frames_2016_slides.pdf [ 576.26kB ]
58233-Svendsen_Melissa_Frames_frames_2016_handout.pdf [ 42.7kB ]
Metadata
JSON: 58233-1.0305738.json
JSON-LD: 58233-1.0305738-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 58233-1.0305738-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 58233-1.0305738-rdf.json
Turtle: 58233-1.0305738-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 58233-1.0305738-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 58233-1.0305738-source.json
Full Text
58233-1.0305738-fulltext.txt
Citation
58233-1.0305738.ris

Full Text

Frames within Frames1. The frames discussed here are adapted from the Association of  College and Research Libraries’ Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education (ACRL MW15 4.1). Retrieved from http://acrl.ala.org/ilstandards/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Framework-MW15-Board-Docs.pdfFramework for Information Literacy for Higher Education1An Exploration of  theAssumptions Implicit in the ACRL’sThe Framework• reflects an education system that is designed for students who share a sociocultural background with their professors.  • assumes a particular kind of  student, with a particular set of  pre-existing dispositions.• is very ambitious, with a focus on higher order skills. If  we are to serve all of  our students, and in particular our international students, it is critical that we:• uncover the implicit assumptions that underlie the Framework.• be prepared to teach these assumptions directly.In this talk, I will:• discuss each frame in turn, attempting  to uncover the implicit assumptions that underlie it. • argue that, to the extent that we are able to make these implicit assumptions explicit, we will better serve our international students.Frame 1Authority is constructed and contextual. • Authority is constructedin that different communities recognize different types of  authority.• Authority is contextual in that different information needs require different levels of  authority.Assumption: Authority is contested. • Authority is contested in that reasonable people candisagree on the assignment of  authority, both within and among communities. • Asserting that an authority figure is mistaken is not necessarily a sign of  disrespect.Frame 2 Information creation  is a process.• Information creation is a process that occurs within a particular context. • The iterative process of  researching, creating, revising, and disseminating information varies, and the results reflect these variations.Assumption: Information creation is contingent.• Information creation is contingent upon social, cultural and economic factors.• If  these factors were different, then the information created would be different.Frame 3 Information has value.Information has value: • as a means of  education. • as a means of  understanding the world.  • as a means of  influence. • as a  commodity. Assumption Information varies in quality.• Information sources vary incurrency, completeness and reliability. • Information sources of  various degrees of  quality serve various purposes. Frame 4Research is inquiry.Research is an iterativeprocess that involves asking new and/or increasingly complex questions that develop additional lines of  inquiry.Assumption: Asking questions and findinganswers are important partsof  acquiring knowledge.• Knowledge must be actively constructed by individuals using many sources.  • Individuals’ opinions matter and may even influence the answers that they find.• It is unlikely that all of  the answers to a question will be found in one place. Frame 5Scholarship is a conversation.Communities of  scholars engage in sustained discourse that results in new insights and discoveries emerging over time.  Assumption:Reasonable people can disagree.• Asserting that someone is mistakenis not a sign of  disrespect.  • Honest mistakes are an inevitable part of  the process of  creating knowledge, so being wrong does not necessary involve loss of  face. Frame  6 Searching is strategic exploration. Searching for information is an iterative process that requires the evaluation of  information sources and the ongoing pursuit of  new sources. Assumption: Understanding the world requires a skeptical attitude and an open mind.• It is not enough to master a set of  facts about the world as presented by an authority figure. • All human knowledge is incomplete and therefore subject to ongoing re-analysis. The following assumptions underlie the Framework:• Understanding the world requires openness and skepticism.• Asking and answering questions is important.• Reasonable people can disagree.Summary• Information varies in quality.• Information creation is contingent.• Authority is contested. International students often introduce a fact or concept with:Citation and Plagiarism“Everyone knows that…”or“There is no disputing that …”Because authority is contested, it is important that scholars be clear about exactly whose authority they are invoking. Because information varies in quality, it is important for scholars to show that they have selected high quality sources.  Because scholarship is a conversation in which reasonable people can disagree, it is important to keep track of  the individual voices.The reader needs to know which ideasare the author’s own and which have been borrowed from other people.  Learning ActivityDo video games contribute to violence?Research is a conversation in which reasonable people can disagree.McGrath, T. (2014). When Killing is a Game. Men's Health, 29 (5), 120-171.1. Who is the author and where does he work? 3. What does the author believe about the connection between video games and violence?2. Where was the article published and what type of  publication is it? 4. The author quotes three different scholars who conduct research on video games and violence. What are their names?Brad BushmanChristopher FergusonDoug GentileFerguson, C. (2015). Do angry birds make for angry children? A meta-analysis of  video game influences on children’s and adolescents' aggression, mental health, prosocial behavior, and academic performance. Perspectives On Psychological Science, 10 (5), 646-666. Ferguson, C. (2014). Is video game violence bad? Psychologist, 27 (5), 324-327.Swing, E. L., Gentile, D.A., and Anderson, C. A. (2009). Learning processes and violent video games. In R. E. Ferdig (Ed). Handbook of  Research on Effective Electronic Gaming in Education (pp. 876-892). New York, NY: Hersey.Gabbiadini, A., Riva, P., Andrighetto, L., Volpato, C., & Bushman, B. (2014). Interactive Effect of  Moral Disengagement and Violent Video Games on Self-Control, Cheating, and Aggression. Social Psychological And Personality Science, 5 (4), 451-458. • Students who come from high schools where rote memorization is emphasized over inquiry.• Aboriginal students dealing with the legacy of  residential schools.• First generation university students unfamiliar with the norms of  academic discourse.• Students raised in families with authoritarian parenting styles. Beyond International Students…Questions? Image Credits: Stills taken from Visualize Sources: A Doug Downs Film, illustrated by David Flaherty.   Retrieved from: https://youtu.be/rqR4XC6wKQUsed with permission of  the artist. Frames within Frames1. The frames discussed here are adapted from the Association of  College and Research Libraries’ Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education (ACRL MW15 4.1). Retrieved from http://acrl.ala.org/ilstandards/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Framework-MW15-Board-Docs.pdfFramework for Information Literacy for Higher Education1An Exploration of  theAssumptions Implicit in the ACRL’sThe Framework• reflects an education system that is designed for students who share a sociocultural background with their professors.  • assumes a particular kind of  student, with a particular set of  pre-existing dispositions.• is very ambitious, with a focus on higher order skills. If  we are to serve all of  our students, and in particular our international students, it is critical that we:• uncover the implicit assumptions that underlie the Framework.• be prepared to teach these assumptions directly.In this talk, I will:• discuss each frame in turn, attempting  to uncover the implicit assumptions that underlie it. • argue that, to the extent that we are able to make these implicit assumptions explicit, we will better serve our international students.Frame 1Authority is constructed and contextual. • Authority is constructedin that different communities recognize different types of  authority.• Authority is contextual in that different information needs require different levels of  authority.Assumption: Authority is contested. • Authority is contested in that reasonable people candisagree on the assignment of  authority, both within and among communities. • Asserting that an authority figure is mistaken is not necessarily a sign of  disrespect.Frame 2 Information creation  is a process.• Information creation is a process that occurs within a particular context. • The iterative process of  researching, creating, revising, and disseminating information varies, and the results reflect these variations.Assumption: Information creation is contingent.• Information creation is contingent upon social, cultural and economic factors.• If  these factors were different, then the information created would be different.Frame 3 Information has value.Information has value: • as a means of  education. • as a means of  understanding the world.  • as a means of  influence. • as a  commodity. Assumption Information varies in quality.• Information sources vary incurrency, completeness and reliability. • Information sources of  various degrees of  quality serve various purposes. Frame 4Research is inquiry.Research is an iterativeprocess that involves asking new and/or increasingly complex questions that develop additional lines of  inquiry.Assumption: Asking questions and findinganswers are important partsof  acquiring knowledge.• Knowledge must be actively constructed by individuals using many sources.  • Individuals’ opinions matter and may even influence the answers that they find.• It is unlikely that all of  the answers to a question will be found in one place. Frame 5Scholarship is a conversation.Communities of  scholars engage in sustained discourse that results in new insights and discoveries emerging over time.  Assumption:Reasonable people can disagree.• Asserting that someone is mistakenis not a sign of  disrespect.  • Honest mistakes are an inevitable part of  the process of  creating knowledge, so being wrong does not necessary involve loss of  face. Frame  6 Searching is strategic exploration. Searching for information is an iterative process that requires the evaluation of  information sources and the ongoing pursuit of  new sources. Assumption: Understanding the world requires a skeptical attitude and an open mind.• It is not enough to master a set of  facts about the world as presented by an authority figure. • All human knowledge is incomplete and therefore subject to ongoing re-analysis. The following assumptions underlie the Framework:• Understanding the world requires openness and skepticism.• Asking and answering questions is important.• Reasonable people can disagree.Summary• Information varies in quality.• Information creation is contingent.• Authority is contested. International students often introduce a fact or concept with:Citation and Plagiarism“Everyone knows that…”or“There is no disputing that …”Because authority is contested, it is important that scholars be clear about exactly whose authority they are invoking. Because information varies in quality, it is important for scholars to show that they have selected high quality sources.  Because scholarship is a conversation in which reasonable people can disagree, it is important to keep track of  the individual voices.The reader needs to know which ideasare the author’s own and which have been borrowed from other people.  Learning ActivityDo video games contribute to violence?Research is a conversation in which reasonable people can disagree.McGrath, T. (2014). When Killing is a Game. Men's Health, 29 (5), 120-171.1. Who is the author and where does he work? 3. What does the author believe about the connection between video games and violence?2. Where was the article published and what type of  publication is it? 4. The author quotes three different scholars who conduct research on video games and violence. What are their names?Brad BushmanChristopher FergusonDoug GentileFerguson, C. (2015). Do angry birds make for angry children? A meta-analysis of  video game influences on children’s and adolescents' aggression, mental health, prosocial behavior, and academic performance. Perspectives On Psychological Science, 10 (5), 646-666. Ferguson, C. (2014). Is video game violence bad? Psychologist, 27 (5), 324-327.Swing, E. L., Gentile, D.A., and Anderson, C. A. (2009). Learning processes and violent video games. In R. E. Ferdig (Ed). Handbook of  Research on Effective Electronic Gaming in Education (pp. 876-892). New York, NY: Hersey.Gabbiadini, A., Riva, P., Andrighetto, L., Volpato, C., & Bushman, B. (2014). Interactive Effect of  Moral Disengagement and Violent Video Games on Self-Control, Cheating, and Aggression. Social Psychological And Personality Science, 5 (4), 451-458. • Students who come from high schools where rote memorization is emphasized over inquiry.• Aboriginal students dealing with the legacy of  residential schools.• First generation university students unfamiliar with the norms of  academic discourse.• Students raised in families with authoritarian parenting styles. Beyond International Students…Questions? Image Credits: Stills taken from Visualize Sources: A Doug Downs Film, illustrated by David Flaherty.   Retrieved from: https://youtu.be/rqR4XC6wKQUsed with permission of  the artist. Melissa Svendsen                                 melissasvendsen.com                               May 30, 2016  Frames within Frames An Exploration of the Assumptions Implicit in the ACRL  Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education  The ACRL’s Framework1 assumes a particular kind of student, with a particular set of pre-existing dispositions.  In order to serve all of our students, and in particular our international students, we must uncover the assumptions that underlie the Framework and be prepared to teach them directly.  Frame 1 Authority is constructed and contextual.  Authority is constructed in that different communities recognize different types of authority.  Authority is contextual in that different information needs require different levels of authority. Assumption: Authority is contested.  Authority is contested in that reasonable people disagree on the assignment of authority, both within and among communities.  Asserting that an authority figure is mistaken is not necessarily a sign of disrespect. Frame 2 Information creation is a process.  Information creation is a process that occurs within a particular context. The iterative process of researching, creating, revising, and disseminating information varies, and the results reflects these variations.  Assumption: Information creation is contingent. The creation of information is contingent upon social, cultural and economic factors.  If these factors were different, then the information created would be different.   Frame 3 Information has value.  Information has value as a commodity, as a means of influence, as a means of education, and as means of understanding the world.   Assumption: Information varies in quality.  Information sources vary in currency, completeness and reliability.  Information sources of various degrees of quality serve various purposes.                                               1 The frames discussed here are adapted from the Association of College and Research Libraries’ Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education (ACRL MW15 4.1). Retrieved from http://acrl.ala.org/ilstandards/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Framework-MW15-Board-Docs.pdf Melissa Svendsen                                 melissasvendsen.com                               May 30, 2016  Frame 4 Research is Inquiry.  Research is an iterative process that involves asking new and/or increasingly complex questions that develop additional lines of inquiry. Assumption: Asking questions and finding answers are important parts of acquiring knowledge.  Knowledge is not just a set of facts and concepts handed down by a single source of authority, such a teacher or government official.  Instead, knowledge must be actively constructed by individuals using elements taken from many sources.   Frame 5 Scholarship is a Conversation.  Communities of scholars with a variety of perspectives engage in sustained discourse that results in new insights and discoveries emerging over time. Assumption: Reasonable people can disagree.  Asserting that someone is mistaken is not a sign of disrespect.  Honest mistakes are an inevitable part of the process of creating knowledge, so being wrong does not necessary involve loss of face.   Frame 6 Searching is Strategic Exploration.  Searching for information is an iterative process that requires the evaluation of information sources and the ongoing pursuit of new sources.  Assumption: Understanding the world requires a skeptical attitude and an open mind.  It is not enough to master a prescribed set of facts about the word as presented by an authority figure.  All human knowledge is necessarily incomplete and therefore subject to ongoing reanalysis.          

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.58233.1-0305738/manifest

Comment

Related Items