nz information literacy archive

Click to go to

Please contact the editor,
to lodge material in the Information Literacy Archive

©The articles on this website are copyrighted by Metacog Ltd. Permission to reproduce any article in any form must be sought from Metacog Ltd.

2000 Robyn Boswell: Future Problem Solving - NZ kids foot it

2000 Alan Cooper: Thinking to learn

2000 Gwen Gawith: Information literacy in action at SCONZ

2000 Gwen Gawith: Blooming questions

1999 Art Costa: An interview with Art Costa

1999 Robyn Boswell: International Future Problem Solving success

1999 Gwen Gawith: The survival of the book: Co-existing with Gog and Magog

1999 Gwen Gawith: Lost the plot: Reading for what?

1999 Gwen Gawith: Rushkoff and visual literacy

1999 Gwen Gawith: KFL: Knowledge Free learning?

1998 Gwen Gawith: Ban projects: Teach information literacy

1998 Gwen Gawith: The cry for deep learning…

1998 Gwen Gawith: The Mercury model of information literacy

1998 David Hyerle: Thinking literacy in an age of ICT

1998 Pauline Donaldson: A virtual classroom with 3500 students

1997 Jeff Bruce and Gwen Gawith: information literacy and Infolink

1997 Gwen Gawith: How to ? or not to?: That is the ?

1997 Gwen Gawith: Unlocking learning: Key words

1996 Gwen Gawith: Epistemic fluency or the cognitive trots!

1995 Gwen Gawith: A serious look at self-efficacy: waking beeping Slooty!

1993 Gwen Gawith: The National Curriculum and the information process

information literacy:
learning & thinking

How to ? or not to ? that is the ?

This article was published in Good Teacher, Term 2 1997

Gwen Gawith

One of the perennial information/ research/ study skill conundrums goes like this:

If you don't know what you know, how do you know what there is to know?

It should be self-evident that new knowledge anchors itself in prior knowledge and that learning has a lot to do with finding out what you don't know, based on what you know already, by asking questions.

Students MUST learn to ask their own questions. How will they learn if teachers, even secondary teachers, give them questions? Who owns the questioning process then?

Questioning is, arguably, THE fundamental information skill. It is a skill so fundamental to learning - from books, from people, from Encarta, from the Internet - that I hope it features prominently in the National Education Monitoring Project (NEMP) information skills tasks.

I've had years of observing new Zealand students (primary through to tertiary) floundering around doing projects with nothing more than a vague, very vague, idea that there are things called open and closed questions, and, somehow, open questions are automatically 'better'. Are they?

In questioning any information source - person, print, electronic - the rules are really simple (even if the application of the rules is not!):

1. Work out what you know;

2. Group/ cluster/ map your knowledge into topic categories;

3. Work out questions related to your topic and sub-topic categories using the 'W' prompts: who, what, where, when, why (and how).

4. Sort your questions; short FACTUAL questions come first;

5. Large, thinking, inferential questions come later; they inevitably involve opinion - and opinion must be grounded in fact, evidence.

Students often see these broad, inferential questions , for example, "What is Kiwi ingenuity?" as better. Of course this would be a useful question if you were doing a qualitative research study involving interviewing X subjects. But if you want information from print sources, Encarta, or the Internet, you'd be better asking a few FACTUAL questions first, such as:

• Can I find examples of Kiwi ingenuity? Rural sector? Urban sector? Industrial/ business sector/ Domestic sector?

• Are there any interesting/ significant Kiwi inventions?

• Have they been patented? how could I find out?

• How many people list their occupation as 'inventor'? More/ same/ fewer as other countries, eg Australia, UK, USA?

Questioning information sources also involves knowing where to look and how to look.

Most students are woefully shortsighted in their conviction that all the information they need 'lives' in Encarta, on the Net, or whatever is the flavour of the month!

OK, where would you go to get information relating to the above questions, and what would you look up - 'kiwi ingenuity'? This is exactly what most students would look up without support and guidance from you! And then they'd say that the information source 'sucked' because there wasn't anything on their topic!

Teaching students that key words are 'important' words is fine, but not for questioning information. 'Kiwi' and 'ingenuity' are clearly important words in this topic, but are they key SEARCH terms?

What information sources and search terms would you advise them to use?

Back to questioning: Another common problem is that students often see questions as inviolate, immutable, set in concrete. They have developed their questions, and that is IT! They want AN answer to precisely the the question they've asked. It doesn't work that way! Questions need to be seen as infinitely flexible and malleable. They grow, shrink, change shape and clone themselves!

It's a lot easier if you look for information related to these shape-changing questions rather than for AN answer to A question.

There are three key remedies here for teachers:

1. Give students the idea that they are interviewing information rather than looking for an answer to a question;

2. You need to model ways of shrinking a question, making it grow, asking it differently;

3. You need to model how to recognise when information (from people, from printed or electronic text) matches their information need, even if it isn't a perfect fit with their questions.

Age is no barrier to modelling, demonstrating, discussing, checking questions. Even with New Entrants you can play "how else can I ask that question?" You can read simple information and ask children to put their hands up when they think that it says something about what they need to know.

Having a 'need to know' mindset is a lot healthier as a base for developing effective questioning than being wedded to the notion of finding a pre-processed shrinkwrapped answer to a question.

Why is simple seldom easy?

Good question!