“A Framework Tasting: Trying Out a New Vintage in Info Lit”
Conversation Starter
TILC (The Innovative Library Classroom) 2015

Discussion Summary - Engaging with the Framework

Questions considered:
What does this frame mean to you?
How do your current instructional practices support:
What else would you like to try to engage with and support:

Authority Is Constructed and Contextual
An example provided by the Frame 1 group to engage with the frame: A faculty from a Social Psychology course approached a librarian in the group about frame 1 as it related directly to what they were teaching in their course - examining construction of authority. As an activity, the instructor and librarian divided the class into groups. Each group (was given, or found?) a journal article about a topic in Social Psychology. They were asked to read the article. Then, they were asked to research the article’s author/s and prepare an introduction of the author/s as though they would be introducing the author/s as a speaker. They were asked to address the author’s / authors’ work, qualifications, and to use the following question to frame their intro: Why would this author be worth listening to?

Information Creation as a Process
The group saw this frame as promoting opportunities to investigate the process behind information one uses, and the processes one uses oneself. One example provided: ask students, “Where does information come from?”, then discuss responses. When encountering information sources, ask, “Where does this information come from?” - for example, whether looking at a Twitter, Facebook, or Instagram post, an article from an academic journal, a post on an organization’s website, etc. Follow up with a discussion on how else such information might be published/distributed.

Information Has Value
The group saw this theme as tying into the theme Scholarship as Conversation. Their discussion considered options such as a year long or semester long class that would engage with both of these frames and address topics such as citation, information privilege, and a balance between flexibility and precision in methods for valuing information. They also noted that they would add discussions of consequence when addressing this frame - consequences of valuing information using standardized practices, and of not taking time/effort to do so (lack of attribution).

Research as Inquiry
The group saw this frame’s importance as emphasizing ways to support students in the full process of inquiry, and in facilitating activities, time, and spaces in which they are supported in inquiry as a true exploration, idea generation, and question formulation → both prior to, and mixed in with frame 6, which focuses on Searching as Strategic Exploration. One example from this group is a course where the librarian and instructor support students in exploring and acquiring many sources of information, so closer to 10 minimum, rather than a more standard 2-5 for intro research courses. The idea being to really explore the topic and then develop their questions and target their subsequent searches based on what they learn and think about after reading and evaluating the first large group of sources.

Scholarship as Conversation
The group saw this frame as a way to encourage students to think of their role as a participant in the scholarly conversation. Some methods the group suggested were to encourage students to: build on others’ ideas, be open to new and different ideas, provide evidence from other works as part of their work to show that they are part of the larger conversation on a topic, and experience the conversation as ongoing without an endpoint. The group emphasized discussing different outputs for scholarship and the role they play in shaping the scholarly conversation. They also suggested assigning useful outputs, such as grant proposals rather than research papers to build similar skills and work with a useful experience for later scholarly work.

Searching as Strategic Exploration
This group saw this frame as a common role for librarians in supporting faculty teaching and student research. They suggested the following ways to engage with this frame: discussing uses of discovery tools versus/in addition to distinct resources; discussing ways to approach searching - as tactical, as question driven; work with students to break down the process of searching; and encourage students to consider first what they already know, and what methods they already use to gather information - encourage them to think through when, how, and why they use different methods to find different information. The group also promoted training for faculty on information literacy and forming partnerships to integrate this frame with course assignments, such as students receiving points for creating research logs.