ACRL框架是一种教学工具吗?大学生对其语言和概念的解读

IF 1.3 4区 管理学 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Reference Services Review Pub Date : 2021-12-10 DOI:10.1108/rsr-10-2021-0054
Jennifer Jarson, Rachel Hamelers
{"title":"ACRL框架是一种教学工具吗?大学生对其语言和概念的解读","authors":"Jennifer Jarson, Rachel Hamelers","doi":"10.1108/rsr-10-2021-0054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose While many librarians have celebrated the pedagogical inspiration offered by the ACRL Framework, some have raised concerns about the comprehensibility and accessibility of its language, particularly for students. The authors sought to understand if introducing the language of the frames explicitly – in addition to using them as the implicit foundation of our teaching – resonated with these undergraduates. This case study investigates how undergraduates at a liberal arts institution interpreted the Framework’s language and concepts in relation to their independent research.Design/methodology/approach In this case study, the authors analyzed 25 undergraduates’ reflections on their information literacy learning guided by recommendations for thematic analysis of qualitative data from Braun and Clarke (2006) and Castleberry and Nolen (2018). These steps included closely reading the reflections, disassembling and reassembling by frame, coding for themes, and finding trends and patterns.Findings The authors’ analysis of students’ reflections offers insight into how these students interpreted the Framework’s language and related it to their own experience. By noting language that seemed to resonate in this instance, the authors suggest ways in which educators could effectively use the Framework’s language with undergraduates.Originality/value Other studies in this area have generally been conducted with semester-long general education courses. This case study explores if explicit use of the Framework’s language outside of the classroom setting can resonate with undergraduates. Expanding research into different academic contexts enhances our understanding of how librarians may use the Framework as an explicit pedagogical tool.","PeriodicalId":46478,"journal":{"name":"Reference Services Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is the ACRL Framework a teaching tool? Undergraduates’ interpretations of its language and concepts\",\"authors\":\"Jennifer Jarson, Rachel Hamelers\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/rsr-10-2021-0054\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose While many librarians have celebrated the pedagogical inspiration offered by the ACRL Framework, some have raised concerns about the comprehensibility and accessibility of its language, particularly for students. The authors sought to understand if introducing the language of the frames explicitly – in addition to using them as the implicit foundation of our teaching – resonated with these undergraduates. This case study investigates how undergraduates at a liberal arts institution interpreted the Framework’s language and concepts in relation to their independent research.Design/methodology/approach In this case study, the authors analyzed 25 undergraduates’ reflections on their information literacy learning guided by recommendations for thematic analysis of qualitative data from Braun and Clarke (2006) and Castleberry and Nolen (2018). These steps included closely reading the reflections, disassembling and reassembling by frame, coding for themes, and finding trends and patterns.Findings The authors’ analysis of students’ reflections offers insight into how these students interpreted the Framework’s language and related it to their own experience. By noting language that seemed to resonate in this instance, the authors suggest ways in which educators could effectively use the Framework’s language with undergraduates.Originality/value Other studies in this area have generally been conducted with semester-long general education courses. This case study explores if explicit use of the Framework’s language outside of the classroom setting can resonate with undergraduates. Expanding research into different academic contexts enhances our understanding of how librarians may use the Framework as an explicit pedagogical tool.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46478,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Reference Services Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Reference Services Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/rsr-10-2021-0054\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reference Services Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/rsr-10-2021-0054","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的尽管许多图书馆员庆祝ACRL框架提供的教学灵感,但也有人对其语言的可理解性和可访问性表示担忧,尤其是对学生而言。作者试图了解,除了将框架的语言作为教学的隐含基础外,明确地引入框架的语言是否会引起这些本科生的共鸣。本案例研究调查了文科院校的本科生如何在独立研究中解读框架的语言和概念。设计/方法论/方法在本案例研究中,作者根据Braun和Clarke(2006)以及Castleberry和Nolen(2018)的定性数据主题分析建议,分析了25名本科生对其信息素养学习的反思。这些步骤包括仔细阅读反思,按框架分解和重组,对主题进行编码,并找到趋势和模式。研究结果作者对学生反思的分析让我们深入了解了这些学生是如何理解框架的语言并将其与自己的经历联系起来的。通过指出在这种情况下似乎引起共鸣的语言,作者提出了教育工作者可以有效地在本科生中使用框架语言的方法。原创性/价值这一领域的其他研究通常是通过为期一学期的普通教育课程进行的。本案例研究探讨了在课堂之外明确使用框架语言是否能引起本科生的共鸣。将研究扩展到不同的学术背景中,可以增强我们对图书馆员如何使用该框架作为明确的教学工具的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Is the ACRL Framework a teaching tool? Undergraduates’ interpretations of its language and concepts
Purpose While many librarians have celebrated the pedagogical inspiration offered by the ACRL Framework, some have raised concerns about the comprehensibility and accessibility of its language, particularly for students. The authors sought to understand if introducing the language of the frames explicitly – in addition to using them as the implicit foundation of our teaching – resonated with these undergraduates. This case study investigates how undergraduates at a liberal arts institution interpreted the Framework’s language and concepts in relation to their independent research.Design/methodology/approach In this case study, the authors analyzed 25 undergraduates’ reflections on their information literacy learning guided by recommendations for thematic analysis of qualitative data from Braun and Clarke (2006) and Castleberry and Nolen (2018). These steps included closely reading the reflections, disassembling and reassembling by frame, coding for themes, and finding trends and patterns.Findings The authors’ analysis of students’ reflections offers insight into how these students interpreted the Framework’s language and related it to their own experience. By noting language that seemed to resonate in this instance, the authors suggest ways in which educators could effectively use the Framework’s language with undergraduates.Originality/value Other studies in this area have generally been conducted with semester-long general education courses. This case study explores if explicit use of the Framework’s language outside of the classroom setting can resonate with undergraduates. Expanding research into different academic contexts enhances our understanding of how librarians may use the Framework as an explicit pedagogical tool.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Reference Services Review
Reference Services Review INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
10.00%
发文量
16
期刊介绍: Reference Services Review (RSR ) is a quarterly, refereed journal dedicated to the enrichment of reference knowledge and the advancement of reference services. RSR covers all aspects of reference functions, including automation of reference services, evaluation and assessment of reference functions and sources, models for delivering quality reference services in all types and sizes of libraries, development and management of teaching/learning activities, promotion of information literacy programs, and partnerships with other entities to achieve reference goals and objectives. RSR prepares its readers to understand and embrace current and emerging technologies affecting reference functions, instructional services and information needs of library users.
期刊最新文献
Fostering UDL-informed library instruction practices developed from the COVID-19 pandemic Toward the development of a framework for literacy support and promotion by public libraries in financially and infrastructurally low-resourced territories Editorial: Start the conversation: impactful reading on reference and instruction Non-familial White Sponge Nevus, an Innocuous yet Clinically Significant Entity: Report of a Case with Review of the Literature. Implementing universal design for learning in the library and across campus to promote more inclusive pedagogy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1