Pen’s TL Blog

Journey to the Centre of Teacher Librarianship

Receipt of Unexpectedly Poor Marks Process (RUPMaP) May 22, 2009

Filed under: ISPs,Ramblings — penszen @ 9:39 pm

I think Kuhlthau needs to extend her information search process to include the dreadful aftermath when a learner gets an unexpectedly dud mark. This is how Kuhlthau starts it off:

A learner moves through uncertainty, optimism and confusion towards clarity as she seeks relevant information and formulates her focus. After collecting the information she needs with growing confidence, and writing and rewriting her paper until she reaches a level of satisfaction with it, she awaits her results. The assessment phase should bring with it a sense of accomplishment, but this assumes a successful outcome.

When her mark arrives, and it’s pathetic, those weeks of hard work loom large in the learner’s mind and the disappointment and shame merge with anger and resentment. That’s when she moves through the RUPMaP.

There’s globalising, feeling that her very identity is under attack: “I am a damn good [insert profession here], what do they know about me.”

There’s rebellion: “I’m gonna hand in the next assignment and I don’t care if it’s any good. I’ll show them.”

There’s the fight response: “This marker isn’t fair. I did an okay job. I want a re-mark.”

And the flight response: “It’s no good. I obviously can’t do it. There’s no point going on with it. I quit.”

There may even be acceptance: “Well, there are obviously extremely high standards, and I didn’t quite do it right.”

The learner may move through some or all of these stages, and revisit them throughout the process of coming to terms with the dud mark and making decisions about the future.

The process resolves in one of three ways:

  • Pursuit of a re-mark, which leads either to satisfaction or further frustration and disappointment.
  • Acceptance, after which the learner carries on with the course of study.
  • Abandonment of the course, leading to both relief and disappointment.

An understanding of the RUPMaP can provide comfort and clarity to a learner in distress. Allowing the learner to move through stages of the RUPMaP is essential. Blocking the emotional responses that emerge after the shock of an unexpectedly poor mark can be detrimental to the learner’s health. A few drinks can also help, as well as watching some mindless TV.

Good luck to anyone coping with the receipt of unexpectedly poor marks.

Advertisements
 

Is it already May 14th? May 14, 2009

Filed under: ISPs,Ramblings,Reading for pleasure — penszen @ 10:43 am

How can so much time have passed since my last blog entry?? Lucky I have some other TL student bloggers out there to inspire me (see my blogroll). I was commenting away till I realised I should be putting some of those ideas on my own blog.

So what have I been up to? Aside from nursing sick children and taking little trips to the countryside, I have knocked over the critical analysis of three information search processes. I know I’ll fall down on the wide reading bit, but I certainly have opinions so there’s no problem with the ‘critical’ bit. I hope. We’ll see. Moving right along. I have a sense of impending freedom and I’m trying not to rush through the work, just to be finished. But ooh, that freedom…

The other thing I have achieved is actually finishing a fiction book, my first in literally months. “The Time Traveler’s Wife” by Audrey Niffenegger (Vintage, 2005) is a great read, so cleverly crafted and skillfully written. I imagine Niffenegger had huge sheets of paper with timelines all around her workspace. I’d love to read about the process of writing that very temporally complex book. (If that’s the right use of that word.) Plus, can I add that saying Niffenegger’s name is a pleasure in itself.

Yes yes I should be writing something about the course, but I just feel a bit rebellious this morning. So I’m off to play lexulous online. Ha.

 

Kuhlthau the guru April 12, 2009

Filed under: Information literacy,ISPs,Teaching and learning strategies — penszen @ 2:19 am

I finally got around to reading Carol Kuhlthau and yes, she is a guru. Having looked at a few of the other information search processes (ISPs) like the Big 6, the NSW DET process and Herring’s PLUS model, I really appreciate the more holistic approach Kuhlthau takes which incorporates the feeling side of the learning process as well as the thinking and acting aspects.

Her chapter titled Learning as a Process, in Seeking Meaning: A Process Approach to Library and Information Services (2004) is a fascinatng read. Revisiting some learning theory after nearly twenty years was invigorating. Is it because I’m older now, with more life experience, more insight into teaching and learning, that Dewey seems so brilliant? I don’t remember appreciating him as an undergraduate. But to say in 1944 that a democratic society “must see that its members are educated for personal initiative and adaptability” (in Kuhlthau, 2004, p.15) is so progressive. For decades after he wrote, schools were still places where children had to sit quietly and rote learn facts without questioning the teacher. In some classes I fear that’s still the case.

George Kelly is a new name to me, though I have heard of personal constructs and subscribe wholeheartedly to the concept. I am a great believer in the “endless opportunity for change” (p.17) that Kuhlthau describes, though sadly many people seem to find threats to their personal constructs too overwhelming and simply reject the possibility of change. Attitudes about homosexuality seem deeply ingrained, as well as beliefs about gender roles. From an educational perspective, I have seen young learners firmly holding on to personal constructs of themselves as ‘stupid’ or ‘slow’, not to mention the ‘naughty’ kids who find it hard to reimagine themselves as anything different. It takes a patient and persistant teacher or carer, who can repeatedly find opportunities for that ‘naughty’ child to do the right thing and feel the positive consequences that come from it, for that construct to change.

Jerome Bruner builds on the work of earlier constructivists. He describes construction of knowledge as a complex, confusing process. He stresses that thought, feeling and action do not each stand alone, but “constitute a unified whole” (in Kuhlthau, 2004, p.23). Too much new information arouses anxiety but too much redundant information induces boredom. As educators providing a learning experience, we must find a balance that will stimulate the learner without provoking so much anxiety that the learner will switch off.

Kuhlthau summarizes thus: “The process of construction incorporates a cycle of acting and reflecting, feeling and formulating, predicting and choosing, and interpreting and creating” (p.26).

In our second Kuhlthau reading, The Process of Learning from Information (1995), these theories are put into practice. Kuhlthau explains how important a process is to cope with the information overload we are faced with in modern society (p.2). Without a process to follow, we are aimlessly grabbing at bits and pieces of information, with no coherent strategy, easily becoming overwhelmed.

Kuhlthau’s model works through the steps of initiation, selection, exploration, formulation, collection and presentation, but it also describes the feelings that a learner may experience throughout the process. When a learner knows what to expect, they are better able to cope with the feelings of confusion and anxiety that arise during the challenging phases of the process. The emotions are normalised and when equipped with strategies to move forward, the learner need not remain paralysed by confusion and indecision.

I particularly liked the discussion about what is ‘enough’ (p.10), as I am currently flailing a little in my own assignment, still reading and seeking and wondering if I should include this, or that, perhaps the other. I suspect I haven’t quite formulated my own perspective, which Kuhlthau explains is necessary to determine what is enough. Her ISP “treats the concept of enough as what is enough to make sense for oneself” (p.10). I recognise that I am still cycling through stages two to five… selecting, exploring, formulating and collecting, wondering if I’ve selected an appropriate obstacle, exploring some more, reformulating, collecting some more…

Which reminds me, I have an assignment to write.