Reflection about feedback given

Image by Sea-turtle

The unexpected lessons from this step in the process!

Kuhlthau's Guided Inquiry (2007) supports the notion of a community of learners where the instructional team and students learn together AND learn from one another. Allowing for others to view and provide responses about your work is a valuable part of the Guided Inquiry process.

My first response (I will bravely admit!) to the thought of receiving feedback from my peers AND then having to make changes to what I thought I had worked enough on was not worth repeating! However, as I took those first steps and started to read their essays I discovered that there were other ways to approach the essay. I found that I had used things or had learnt things that may be useful to share with them. I couldn't wait to see what they would think of my "attempt" (I had acknowledged now that it was a draft and not the final version). For the first time I was looking critically at the content and structure of my peer's essays and it was triggering the same reflections about my own work.

Once my feedback was received, I was able to see my essay from the perspective of someone else's eyes.  Suggestions such as, "Could the sentence be reworded to put the emphasis on the negotiated nature of the assessment item?" and "Is there a need here to talk about evaluation and reflection?" forced me to read my work through the eyes of my audience. Without the prompt, I would not have realised that the meaning could be enhanced by these changes. Questions by my colleagues enabled me to change the order of my paragraphs as they queried the importance of some points ahead of others and the logical flow of ideas. 

When reflecting upon this process I can now see that I benefitted not only from receiving the feedback but also in giving the feedback too. This was a very valuable part of the process for me and one that would be often overlooked at the end of an inquiry. The effect of feedback from and to the learning community is very powerful and some of the advantages that I can identify from it are:

1. Increased understandings
2. Knowledge base increased
3. New knowledge constructed
4. Own work is viewed from a different perspective
5. Collaborative skills enhanced
6. Sharing of knowledge and skills with others
7. Fostered critical thinking
8. Developed deep learning
9. Helped identify further questions and problems to solve

This process would also be valuable with children and would need to be modelled to students and gradually built upon from year to year. We need to teach our children to think critically and collaborate with one another. To collaborate and learn from one another is a life long learning skill. 

Models of Information Literacy

Square Peg, Round Hole?

There are an abundance of models that attempt to outline the process of information learning for teachers and students to follow that can support inquiry based learning. They can be broadly classified into two groups, those that reflect a linear process of inquiry and those that are non-linear and are more cyclical in nature. The linear models are usually characterised by a set of steps or stages that are undertaken in a certain order, one after the other. The cyclical type models are a series of stages or phases that the inquirer works through but it is often characterised by 'a returning to' previous stages throughout the process as required. 

Earlier in the blog I have explained that I could relate well to the early stages of Kuhlthau's model of the Information Search Process (ISP), notably the stages of Initiation, Selection, Exploration and Formulation. The feelings experienced at each of these phases resonated well with me. Alberta Inquiry Model (2004), illustrated below, is another model that I feel closely aligns with the inquiry process that I have undertaken. It allows for the revisiting of the various stages over and over again in the process of inquiry. I was continually looping backwards and forwards as I found new information, re-organised information, changed focus and attempted to make sense of the information. To do this constant "revisiting of the stages, I was reflecting upon the process every step of the way. Reflection and evaluation is not something that you can tag on at the end, these are processes that are happening all the time as you are synthesising new information with existing information. I believe that reflection is an integral part of each and every phase of the cycle. The flexibility that encompasses this model enables me to feel that it is OK to have some individuality in the way that I undertake the information learning process.

The Alberta Inquiry Model

from http://sites.google.com/site/emints4me/inquiry-models

I also believe that you'll never fully get it right and that at the end of the "completed" product there needs to be a process of evaluation, not only of the finished product but of the process itself and what I have learned about myself as an inquirer. For me, one of the biggest lessons that I will take from the process is to find a way to be more systematic with the collection of information. Throughout the process of searching I found valuable information and then couldn't relocate it again or if I could there was a lengthy search for it. This obviously caused much frustration and contributed to a lot of time wastage. Kuhlthau identifies several concepts for the use of information once it has been collected. One of these is 'Managing Inquiry: Keeping track along the way' (2007, p89). These can include strategies for note-taking either in a written journal or via tools on the computer to record sources of information. In subsequent searches I will seek help to further refine these skills so that the process does not become so overwhelming.

Evaluating information

What to use and what not to use - that is the question!

As I stated in my second Slim Toolkit Questionnaire, I was collecting articles in abundance and I was struggling to find the time to read them thoroughly and keep searching! It quickly became apparent that I needed to start sorting through those that would be useful to my context essay and come up with a system by which I could select articles more accurately. A tutorial at around this time had included a discussion about the things to look for when evaluating the worth of an article for inclusion in your research. Kuhlthau (2007) identifies five characteristics of information that can be utilised in determining whether the article is beneficial to your inquiry or not. These five characteristics are:

1. Expertise - Who the author is, their qualifications and credentials
2. Accuracy - the factual correctness of the source
3. Currency - the date of publication of the material
4. Perspective and - the author's point of view, purpose in writing the article and any bias
5. Quality - How well written and articulate the piece of writing is

So in order to consider each of these characteristics in the light of my inquiry this is how I applied them when evaluating whether or not information was to be used.

1. The author of the source in this case, needed to be connected to educational research from a university. The list of references to other experts in the area of historical inquiry was an indication of the amount of research that had been drawn upon in writing the article. The journal that it appeared in also helped give the article credibility. For example the journal, "Social Studies Research and Practice" featured articles by credible authors on the specific area of my inquiry.

2. The accuracy of the information was not as clear. I have already referred to my ability to see trends in ideas and concepts across the literature. This was one element that I utilised in determining the accuracy of the information. I felt that the literature was not always as accurate in terms of its relevance to specifically Year 3 students as it tended to encompass all the elementary years. However in the end I generalised the findings to suit the younger years.

3. Part of my search process was to only use sources that were dated from 2001 to the present day. Theories and models of inquiry had changed over the years so I felt that it was important to have recent, up to date information.

4. The point of view of the author wasn't always evident in the title but became more obvious in the first couple of paragraphs.The following article sounded as though it would be worthwhile. However upon further reading it was discarded because it was more about the National Inquiry into School History rather than the inquiry approach used in school history, as suggested in the title.

Title: 'It ain't what you do, it's the way that you do it' : the national history inquiry, SOSE and the enacted curriculum.

Personal Author: Taylor, A.

Source: Ethos 7-12; v.9 n.1 p.9-19; Term 1 2001

Abstract: In November 1999 the Commonwealth announced the establishment of a National Inquiry into School History. This article briefly outlines the process of the inquiry and its outcomes and then goes on to focus on one particular aspect of the inquiry research findings which has interesting implications for the teaching of Studies of Society and the Environment.

5. When assessing the worth of an article it was important that it was well written and well structured. Many articles that were included, cited from other works which further added to the quality and validity of the article. 


The following articles were included. Both authors were assistant or associate professors and were published in academic journals that were included in an educational database. The abstracts included many of the themes and ideas that were continually surfacing in other articles as well. The information was current and relevant to the teaching of history today for younger students. Whilst the second article was presented from research based around pre-service teachers and their approach to teaching inquiry-based history the findings were still relevant. 


Teaching Elementary Students How to Interpret the Past. By: Fertig, Gary. Social Studies, v96 n1 p2 Jan-Feb 2005. (EJ712159)
Elementary students can learn how to take an interpretive approach to learning history so that they can construct knowledge about collective past experience in ways that provide a meaningful context for understanding present experience. Like historians, children communicate their interpretations to others by telling or writing stories in which they "do not discover the past so much as they create it; they choose the events and people that they think constitute the past, and they decide what about them is important to know." The stories or historical narrative accounts are selective for practical and personal reasons. They are practical because it is impossible for anyone to know or gain access to all of the facts surrounding an event, and personal because an individual's life experiences, beliefs, and values influence the choice of phenomena and ways in which that person assigns causality and significance to events. Historical narratives and the sources of evidence relied on to create them require interpretation because they are inherently selective, incomplete, and value based. This article discusses why it is important to teach children to interpret the past and challenges to interpreting the past with children. Suggested activities for teaching elementary students how to interpret the past are appended.

Subjects: Historians; Concept Formation; Elementary School Students; Historical Interpretation; History Instruction; Teaching Methods; Class Activities

Historical Inquiry in a Methods Classroom: Examining Our Beliefs and Shedding Our Old Ways. By: Fragnoli, Kristi. Social Studies, v96 n6 p247-251 Nov-Dec 2005. (EJ744196)
Historical inquiry is a multifaceted phenomenon. S. G. Grant describes it as "the passion for pulling ideas apart and putting them back together" (2000, 196). Historical inquiry as an instructional strategy benefits students and the classroom dynamic. It promotes students' appreciation of their personal histories while they are exploring others' histories. Students are more engaged in the subject than they would be in a class in which the teacher requires only rote memorization of minute facts. According to Levstik and Barton (1997), the memorization of isolated facts rarely advances students' conceptual understanding. The study that is reported in this article concerns the way in which preservice teachers negotiate historical inquiry-based teaching and learning in relation to their preexisting conceptions of social studies as a discipline. Another concern was finding whether having an understanding of historical inquiry influences pedagogy.

Subjects: Teaching Methods; Preservice Teachers; Student Attitudes; Social Studies; History; Inquiry; Preservice Teacher Education; Methods Courses; Case Studies; Student Surveys

Finally, the mind map that I had developed (See blog entry for Thursday August 11) proved to be a valuable tool as I began to sort the information that I collected. The articles that supported the theories and concepts that I had identified as recurring and supportive of the ILA were put aside for further reading. As my case was strengthening with support information I was able to begin making connections between pieces of information that started out as separate points. For example, the use of artifacts, object-based inquiry and the use of concrete objects in historical inquiry evolved into one point concerning the importance of basing the ILA around the use of primary sources. 

Focus! Focus! Focus!

Since my last post I have had a few more sessions of database searching. I have used A+ and Eric. Some of these search results will be elaborated on in future blogs. However, over the past couple of days since I have started to search the databases I have found that the following things have occurred:

1. I have become more confident in using search terms and Boolean operators. I have been more likely to deviate away from the step by step instructions of the demonstration videos to see if another way works or what it may bring up. In the process I have probably been taken off onto many tangents, spent way too much time there for only a few possible results and collected information that is not entirely useful. This can be over whelming at times.
2. Some common themes and ideas have started to occur more frequently in some of the information that I have found. For example, the idea of historical inquiry as a disciplined inquiry; the use of artifacts and object-based inquiry when undertaking historical inquiry; and the use of narratives and personal stories as a natural way into historical inquiry for elementary students. This has helped me to distinguish between articles in terms of their usefulness if there were common themes coming through in the key points or the titles.
3. I have started to form a focus for the context essay or a direction that I think it will take. I have moved on from the mere collection of information that I hope will be useful to a more purposeful collection with a vision to how it might shape my essay. This was not a straight forward process. I seemed to go backwards and forwards over the information drawing together the common themes and then returning to the outline for the essay and the elements that I thought it should contain contain. There were times when I thought it was starting to come together in my mind and then I'd come across other information that would throw my focus off course. This seemed to happen over and over again! All of this is a step forward as I try to make sense of the information and try to assimilate it with my existing knowledge and the demands of the task.  

Reflections..
Upon reflection I can see that at this point in the process, my search is mirroring the third and fourth phases of Kuhlthau's Model of the Information Search Process (2007). These stages are "exploration" and "formulation."I expected that once I started searching the databases that I would find the information and then everything would start to fall into place. However instead of it being easy, I found that the information challenged my previous thinking and presented me with new theories and ideas that I struggled to make sense of, in terms of my ILA with my Year 3 group. I was confused and overwhelmed with the amount of information and how it would fit neatly into an inquiry learning model for me to follow or adapt. It wasn't going to be that easy! My struggle was with the way that I was going to utilise the various sources of information in a new cohesive way to inform my learning activity. Kuhlthau asserts that this is the stage where the real learning begins because these uncertainties drive you to find meaning. I was really struggling as a result of my uncertainty as to how I was going to connect all my new found information. 
Once I identified that my focus would be to answer the question, "What are the theories, models and curriculum documents that have informed my Information Learning Activity?" I began to search more purposefully and I started to feel like I had regained some control over where I was heading.
I have also been able to identify with the early stages of Callison's model, "The Five Elements of Information Inquiry (2006). My information searching lead me to new information which in turn triggered questions and further exploration. As the trends in the information surfaced (as mentioned above) I was able to gather information that confirmed my initial ideas. This was starting to feel like the way forward and it felt safe. However when I came upon new information that identified the importance of narratives and stories as a way into historical inquiry I needed to construct new understandings for my ILA (Colby, 2008). Callison calls this element, "assimilation" where new knowledge is merged with previous understandings to form a new view or perspective. This involves reflective questioning and analysis each time new information is encountered and is thus a cyclical process encountered many times in the information search process. I feel that at this stage Callison's approach is a more accurate match for my experiences than the Kuhlthau ISP because I identify more strongly with that continuous cycle of questioning, exploring, assimilating, inferring and reflecting each time new information is encountered.  

I've started! So where do I actually start?

bk1bennett

So as you can see, I have started! That means that I have selected a topic for the Inquiry Learning Activity (ILA) and I have undertaken the first questionnaire! For a while there, there was a great sense of achievement as I felt that I had a focus and something to work towards. The euphoria was short-lived! The road ahead seems long, windy, "destinationless" and shrouded in thick, soupy fog!

All is not lost though: I have background knowledge, thanks to the supplied readings; I have support, thanks to the weekly tutorials, discussion forums and the peers in my learning cohort; and I have the motivation to continue, thanks to the assessment that looms in 4 weeks' time! AND I have found comfort in the research presented by Carol Kuhlthau, (2007) that claims that once the research topic has been selected there is a brief sense of elation only to be followed shortly afterwards by nervousness and uncertainty at the enormity of the task that awaits. Hooray! I'm not alone! I'm normal!

In fact Kuhlthau identifies 7 stages in her model of the Information Search Process (2007). These are outlined in the following diagram:

Image from http://comminfo.rutgers.edu/~kuhlthau/information_search_process.htm (2004)

The model is more than just a series of steps in the research process, it also acknowledges that the learner experiences a variety of emotions, thoughts and actions as part of the research process. These are important to recognise as they provide opportunities for the teacher to provide the appropriate intervention to match each stage of the process.

In relation to this model, I am currently working in the first two stages of Initiation and Selection, experiencing a great deal of uncertainty concerning the task that lies ahead. This certainly has implications for my teaching as I need to be aware of students embarking on a research task, who would also identify the task to be insurmountable and be unclear about how they will take that first step. As a Masters of Education student the task has been initiated by the lecturer and the topic selection has been guided by her during tutorial sessions and written outlines to meet the requirements of the course. Whilst there has been freedom to select your own topic of inquiry, pertaining to your individual work circumstances, there have been parameters to guide the selection. It would be easy to give up at this stage, fearing that you don't have the ability to identify the sort of information required and where to locate it, all before writing the context essay! This would be no different for the students that we teach. Hopefully, as I continue with my research I will find the solution on how to move forward and clear some of this fog ...........