Musings on Teaching Critical Thinking & Literacy

     When thinking about critical thinking and critical literacy, I like how Dennis Hayes and Heather Davis have broken them down. Dennis Hayes highlights the importance of collecting information first, then analyzing a question using the best information found. In a nut-shell, “information literacy and critical thinking […] cannot exist without the other” (Davis). One cannot do a proper job of critically analyzing a question if they are ill-informed. The information literate person must be able to recognize when they need to gather more information (Davis). To properly gather information, Heather Davis highlights these steps (taken from ACRL):

• “Determine the extent of information needed

• Access the needed information effectively and efficiently

• Evaluate information and its sources critically

• Incorporate selected information into one’s own knowledge base

• Use information effectively to accomplish a specific purpose

• Understand the economic, legal, and social issues surrounding the use of information, and access and use information ethically and legally”

The critical thinker can then (as Davis notes):

1) Generate purposes	4) Utilize concepts	7) Generate implications
2) Raise questions	5) Make inferences	8) Embody a point of view
3) Use information	6) Make assumptions

     When a teacher, or teacher-librarian (TL), is showing, or providing, information, Hayes highlights the importance of not being a source of indoctrination, telling, or insinuating, what students should think or how they should conform. Teachers need to insure “debate and discussion based on considerable knowledge” by a critical thinking moderator (such as a teacher) occurs. Hayes doesn’t like the notion of classifying critical thinking as a skill (conceiving of it using “tick box techniques”), preferring to think of it like “having ‘a critical spirit.’”

     I feel that Davis’s and Hayes’s views of critical thinking and literacy fit together, as I have presented them. Heather Coffey offers a different perspective. She writes, “critical literacy is the ability to read texts in an active, reflective manner in order to better understand power, inequality, and injustice in human relationships.” I've found this to be a common perspective in the teaching community, but the problem I see with this definition is its limited scope. Is it not a movie or book critic’s job to use their critical abilities to dissect even more than just “power, inequality, and injustice”? That, and critically literate readers may not read a text “in order to” gain something specific from it, but the more critically literate thinker will have a greater ability to catch meanings (intended and unintended) from texts. It is part of a teacher’s job to teach societal norms, ethical practices, kindness, respect, and other valued practices, but a teacher should also be careful not to think of these things as being critical literacy or critical thinking, but rather as a form of knowledge that can be applied through their analyses and ensuing discussions of texts. I found much of what she wrote conformed to her defined perspective (a narrow focus with a well-intentioned agenda, which she is not alone in having), but she also wrote something I agreed with: “the teacher acts as conversation facilitator rather than receptacle of knowledge,” but then she finishes the sentence with, “to examine issues of power, and the ‘biases and hidden agendas within texts.’” A critically literate thinker will have these lenses on – they’ll see issues of power, biases and hidden agendas in texts, but they’ll also see more than that, they’ll see when their view point is challenged or complicated, and they’ll see other elements and themes that aren’t only related to “power, inequality, and injustice.” To me, pictures and paintings (composition, lighting, colour), architecture (aesthetics, purpose), word-less documentaries (which may have "no" attached bias), acting techniques: all of these things can be “read” and critiqued, and through more than just the focus of “power, inequality, and injustice.” I wonder if this well-intentioned narrowing of the definition and presentation of critical literacy might affect student apathy. Aspects of “power, inequality, and injustice”, in my opinion, should be analyzed within texts, but to put such an exclusive emphasis on only this form of analysis as being part of critical thinking can probably alienate students who are struggling to understand such things (such as from inexperience) and who could use positive encouragement on elements and themes of critical thinking and literacy that they understand or which they are currently more interested in. They may become social activists later in life, but other interests they have shouldn’t be over-looked. A teacher, as discussion moderator, should include social justice questions in critical analyses, but also throw in a few others, and they should not discourage students to discuss other questions, from a text, that interest them. Also, I imagine that involving students in open discussions helps engage them in learning and shows that their thoughts and opinions are valued.

As a TL, to promote critical literacy and critical thinking, I intend to teach information gathering techniques (listed in the bullet points above), help students to understand what they’re looking for and find texts to help their studies, and discuss texts with them (individually and/or part of a class or group). Dr. Ginette D. Roberge offers further ideas I like, such as:

a)     “Use student questions as a starting point for meaningful, whole-class discussions on issues of social justice,” (exploratory talk, inquiry, reflection).

b)     “Provide students with opportunities to participate in peer-led bullying prevention and intervention campaigns” (if this action followed information analysis and discussion, it can qualify as being the next step after critical literacy and thinking has occurred).

c)      “Create opportunities for safe and frank communication,” (p2).

Questions Roberge proposes to ask related to potentially uncovering “power, inequality, and injustice” are good questions I would also consider posing:

-         “Is the author trying to send a deeper message? Who might agree/disagree with this message?

-         Are other viewpoints missing?

-         What technique(s) has the author used in this story to influence the reader? How might the text differ if it had been written by someone else?

-         Who is marginalized in this text? Who is empowered?” (2)

Any additional questions would be text specific, and once these questions have been explored to the best of their abilities, students should be encouraged to pose their own questions to discuss.

References

Coffey, H. (n.d.) Critical Literacy. Retrieved from http://www.learnnc.org/lp/pages/4437

Hayes, D. (2014, August 9). Let’s stop trying to teach students critical thinking.
Retrieved from http://theconversation.com/lets-stop-trying-to-teach-students-critical-thinking-30321

Roberge, G (2013, June). Promoting critical literacy across the curriculum and fostering safer learning environments.  What works? Research into Practice, Ontario Ministry of Education. Retrieved from:  http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/inspire/research/WW_PromotingCriticalLiteracy.pdf

Davis, H. (2010, February 3). Critical Literacy? Information! [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://www.inthelibrarywiththeleadpipe.org/2010/critical-literacy-information/

Encouraging Reading Above All Else

Elementary Scenario A grade two student comes into the library, on his own, to choose books. He is usually an enthusiastic science book fan (insects, tigers, sharks). He looks sad and defeated and says: “My Mom says that from now on I have to have take out chapter books to help my reading and they have to be a 2.4”. What do you do/say? How do you help this student? How do you turn this dilemma into an opportunity?

     Asking (or implying) a student to stop reading what they enjoy reading and read something else instead doesn’t help them want to read. According to Krashen’s YouTube video, “The Power of Reading”, reading for pleasure helps advance reading skills more than force-fed reading, which can also deter a student from enjoying to read. A motto I intend on telling parents and teachers when I start a teacher-librarian (TL) position is that I won’t prevent a student from reading what they want to read and will actually do the reverse: I’ll encourage it. I will also help them to expand their horizons, but I will not tell them what to read. I don’t want to “erode [a] student’s interest in reading [, as] children must receive constant encouragement for reading” (Kelley, p90).

     I would imagine the student’s mother in the scenario worries that her child is not developing their reading skills and is looking at the pictures in the science book and, maybe, skimming some of the written details. As a TL, I would be interested in discovering how much the student is reading from these books. This can be done with a friendly question denoting interest. In relation to a book they are returning, the question could be: “Oh, this book looks interesting. Was it interesting?” If this doesn’t prompt details beyond yes or no, a TL could follow with, “What sort of interesting things were in it?” or “Why wasn’t it interesting?”, then proceed by opening the book to encourage the student to flip through it and tell the TL their findings and analyses. This form of questioning feeds into what Kelley points out: that “the only thing readers enjoy almost as much as reading is talking about books with other readers” (p98). Perhaps the student was reading more than the mother realized or perhaps the TL has now encouraged the student to read more from science books so that they can share this information with the TL.

     As a TL, I might not want to completely disregard what a student’s parents or teachers wish that they read; I wouldn’t ask or encourage them to replace what they want to read with what others wish them to read, but I would likely want to help the student foster the skills it is that their teacher or parent wish them to acquire. In this scenario, I would encourage (but not insist) the student find a chapter book to accompany their choice of science book. A natural in would be to find a book related to the avenue of science the student is interested in: if it’s biomes, they can decide to pick a science book on a biome they’re interested in and pair it with a chapter book set in that biome – the student could even have both books side-by-side to better envision what they’re reading from the chapter book. I would also encourage them to read with their parents. But, I wouldn’t steer them to a specific reading level (such as 2.4). Parrot quotes the Library Bill of Rights, “a library should not use such labels as a classification system, or to promote any restrictive or prejudicial practice.’” I am reminded of something I personally noticed some years ago: I am bilingual (English and French), but in my academic studies I read predominantly French academic books and papers, which are technically a “high reading level”, but when it came to reading chapter books, even those at a “middle school” level, I encountered a fair amount of words I hadn’t seen before. Reading level does not necessarily match up with one’s specific vocabulary. I’m quite adept at reading Shakespeare, but I wouldn’t be as adept at reading a topic I wasn’t as familiar with. Parrot supports my discovery when he notes that “[kids] are capable of learning to match themselves to ‘just right’ books—without the teacher directing them to a labeled bin.” And, if a book is over their “reading level” and they’re motivated to read it because it interests them, they may well succeed in at least adequately reading it. Parrot continues, “When [students] come into the library the next time, talk about their choices: what worked; what didn’t. They have to learn their own processes for selecting books, and if we keep narrowing the choices by artificial constraints, we aren’t giving them that chance.”

References

Kelley, S., & Miller, D. (2013) Reading in the wild: The book whisper’s keys to cultivating lifelong reading habits. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. p.88-128   (Book Excerpt)

Krashen, S. (2012, April 5). “The power of reading. The COE lecture series. University of Georgia.” Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSW7gmvDLag

Parrott, Kiera.  (August 28, 2017).  Thinking outside the bin: why labeling books by reading level disempowers young readers. Retrieved from: http://www.slj.com/2017/08/feature-articles/thinking-outside-the-bin-why-labeling-books-by-reading-level-disempowers-young-readers/#_

Teaching Students about Online Reference Resources

     Researching a topic can be a challenge. For those with little guidance, Google is a popular go-to for information. Unfortunately, there are some issues with using Google, such as: a) it only indexes around 4% of internet content (Cuthrell), b) the quality of retrieved information isn't consistently good or reliable, c) there's barely any qualifiers to place on inquiries, and d) it retrieves links based on “PageRank”, which includes frequency of requested keyword, age of the page (the older the better), and how many sites link to it (Strickland) rather than the more useful methodology of retrieving queries based on "titles, subject headings, class numbers, and qualification metadata to ensure the precision of ranked output" (Markey, 8); therefore, Google isn’t the best resource to use for research. No resource is, actually, the be-all-end-all for all forms of inquiries, which highlights the importance and need of reference resource professionals to help students with their inquiries. Professionals such as teacher-librarians.

     One place these professionals could start when teaching about these resources (to aid students in their research/inquiries) is telling them about the scope of the internet itself and informing them of the three terms used to explain this scope: surface web, deep web, and dark web.

https://darkwebnews.com/deep-web/

     The surface web is all the indexed, and the search-engine-accessible, content that don’t require logins to view (Google, Amazon, Landmark Cinemas, Imdb, Wikipedia, etc.). The deep web is the opposite: unindexed, unsearchable, and content that includes sites which require logging in to view (emails, World Book, EBSCO). Many surface web pages started out as deep web pages before their “rank” pushed them to the “surface”. The dark web is a sub-section of the deep web that can only be accessed with a specific browser and is used by those who don’t want their messages or internet activities observed; it’s a part of the web that only the most experienced of internet users should visit as illegal and, quite frankly, terrifying/disturbing things can go on there (or be rumored to) (Cuthrell). The important take-away is that a lot of useful inquiries and research information can be found on the safe part of the deep web – information those who only look at the surface web would never see. It’s also important to note that when most people do browse the surface web with search-engines they typically stop after the first page or two, which means they barely see much of surface web content as well!

     What a teacher-librarian should be able to do is to help students find the wealth of great resources found on the deep web and nearly un-accessed part of the surface web. In my previous blog post, I wrote about a reference resource website I created (IDCC Online Library) for students, parents, teachers, and teacher-librarians to gain access to such great, often hidden, resources, but certain schools and school districts also have sections on their pages that link to useful resources and some to locked resources that they’ve paid for (World Book, EBSCO, Gale). Teacher-librarians should find out what great resources their school or school district has paid for, familiarize themselves with the content, and show/teach students and teachers how to use them, including how to login to them.

     The other important piece to teach is which type of resource (online and print) one should use for their specific inquiry, including the benefits, purposes, and drawbacks of each resource. Such types include: yearbooks (Guinness), atlases, biographies, bibliographies, almanacs, handbooks, directories, dictionaries, thesauruses, encyclopedias, maps, gazetters, indexes, periodicals, and sites with limited, specific, scope (NASA, Three Sixty Cameras). Teacher-librarians should also be able to evaluate which of these resources are good, based on such qualifiers as: accuracy, authority, cost, currency, ease of use, comprehensiveness, content, format, indexing, objectivity, scope, scale, and vendor (Riedling).

     And, finally, there’s research methods which should be taught based on grade level, such as Points of Inquiry for upper elementary, Super 3 for middle school, and Big 6 for Secondary School, or methods like these as there are many kinds and the topic can also influence which one should be used/taught.

References

Cuthrell, Shannon. “Deep Web.” Dark Web News, https://darkwebnews.com/deep-web/.

Markey, K. (2007). The online library catalog: Paradise lost and paradise regained? D-Lib Magazine, 13(1), 8.

Riedling, Ann Marlow, et al. Reference Skills for the School Librarian Tools and Tips. Linworth, 2013.

Savoie, JP. "About." IDCC Online Library, https://idcconlinelibrary.wixsite.com/idcc.

Strickland, Jonathan. "How Google Works." How Stuff Works, https://computer.howstuffworks.com/internet/basics/google1.htm.

“The Points of Inquiry.” British Columbia Teacher-Librarians’ Association, https://bctla.ca/resources/point-of-inquiry/.

“TheBig6.Org.” TheBig6, thebig6.org/.