Re: Why computer labs suck.

[Jeff Hastings <hastings@hps.k12.mi.us>]

Mr. Doyle,

I divide the computers in my library by function somewhat (currently only 3
divisions, OPAC, electronic encyclopedias and WEB/Periodicals/Misc.
reference) and dedicate them to their respective purposes on the library
floor near their print brethren because it works as a teaching tool.  If it
didn't, I wouldn't do it.  In fact, I do it because I realized that,
paradoxically, our students were getting less literate and info savvy as
access to info was increasing.  Because : Access to information wasn't the
problem!  Understanding was. Synthesizing was. Discriminating was! This
methodology facilitates the teaching of resource types, so that kids
recognize them, learn their strengths and weaknesses. In these days when
everyone is a library expert by virtue of the fact that they have net
dial-in at home, it is really essential to say, in effect, "slow down, let's
consider this stuff carefully; What type of info do we need?  Where might we
best look? What do we stand to find?  Who wrote this? How do we credit their
work?"  et cetera, et cetera.

Working with both electronic and print information tools on the library
floor facilitates the teaching of these basic skills without creating any
access barriers, in fact-- unlike labs in our school which are accessed only
through class scheduling-- my stuff is always open to individuals and
groups. Presenting arrays of materials this way lets kids experience
tangible synergies and dichotomies between and among a spectrum of resources
as they work. How can you beat that? I'll tell you: When you get sixty kids
running around using a well-chosen variety of tools to accomplish a variety
of tasks, it's as good as it gets.

I can say this with confidence: My faculty appreciates me taking a lead in
addressing bibliography, authority, plagiarism and all of the peripheral
issues that get neglected easily when kids use computers to gather
information, especially if they're gathering info in a computer lab, under
the supervision of a tech teacher or para-pro.  I host workshops on
developing research projects and understanding the role of electronic tools
as a complement to traditional resources. They appreciate me sorting this
stuff out for them:  They tell me how they were gradually beginning to
realize that, for instance, many kids were getting their source material for
their reports from reports posted on the web by other kids, or that they
feared their kids were becoming "cut-and-paste scholars," using technology
as a shortcut past understanding, rather than as an expedient towards it.
The staff in our computer labs also approached me with the same concerns.
Recognizing authority, discouraging plagiarism, crediting authors: they were
confused about this stuff, and it was palpable. In a sense, I've just
stepped up and said "I CAN HELP YOU WITH THESE PROBLEMS! THEY'RE NOT NEW,
AND THEY'RE NOT INSURMOUNTABLE! C'MON IN: WE DO THIS STUFF IN THE LIBRARY"
Many older faculty were relieved to find at my workshops that the mission of
the library hasn't really changed at all, some of the methods have.  I find
that in teaching information literacy, the approach is education, to staff
and students, bit by bit by bit.


Establishing functional divisions in our info tools, in any media, which
students can learn to recognize and investigate with every library visit,
makes conceptual sense to me. It provides many more opportunities for quick
teaching. (I have data projectors at every cluster of computers) It has
increased my traffic, helped me establish new and renewed relations with
faculty, enhanced our reputation as a robust and thoughtful practitioner of
the au courant, rather than a quaint nod to the desiccated and dusty
didactic past, (popular perceptions, not mine) and kept our kids safe from
all of the crud on the net by virtue of the fact that kids know we are hip
and monitoring their on-line work.  Our PTO likes what I am doing so much
that they have paid for the facilitation of much of it.  The only drawback
is that it is lots of work. You have to be there, vigilant and ready to
teach at the drop of a hat, often in the form of hushed little individual
work sessions.

Let's consider those all-in-one type resources, you alluded to.  True:
They're more common than ever, and I don't like them so much.  When our
version of infotrac added a non-periodical resource, I was disappointed.
Now they're still basically a periodical index/text resource, but with a
couple crummy reference works thrown in. What's the point in that?  All
they've done there is muddy the waters for teaching.  I've told them so. I
don't fight the inevitable though, the difficulty with sources which tend to
blend together disparate resources is that, inevitably they have to be
dissected before they can be analyzed.  Again-- ACCESSING information has
never been the problem in my library, TEACHING how to choose it, understand
it, and use it in a prescribed fashion has.

And what of the CIRCULATION and CATALOG vendors who tie web references
directly into their catalogs so that students can hop on the web directly?
A neat idea in theory perhaps, but a ludicrous one, in practice, at least in
my k-12 situation!  No one here will touch it with a ten-foot pole. Because,
of course, it would promote lazy scholarship and kids would be surfing on it
all day long--who the hell is kidding who!  I would do the same thing if I
was twelve!  In fact, I could see myself playing with a catalog as an adult!
Days of thoughtless reverie...an ADHD cornucopia!  Why look at a catalog
record when you can look at pictures of people having sex?

Clifford Stoll in his great book subtitled "Second thoughts on the
information highway" warned us to be aware of the fantasy of the "Universal
Workstation."  This Internet pioneer wrote that the dream of sitting at a
computer and having everything--absolutely everything--available at the
punch of a button is an alluring, but illusory, fantasy.  "Primarily, " he
adds, "a male fantasy."

Believing this to be true, I want only to present all of the best resources
in concert, on the library floor, because I believe people will always need
to make similar educated choices among media and content types.

Tony:  It's all about what works.  Your methodology might be a better
approach for you, or your patron population.  I like my approach. It keeps
students in the facility where I can best attempt to teach them and
discourage a lazy approach to scholarship which leans on technology as a
plaything, shortcut or distraction. Here, in this specific school building,
it keeps teachers who  want their kids to "look up something on the
Internet" from doing so in a computer lab wherein the height of their
instruction will be learning how to place the cursor and enter a keyword
into a search engine.

How does this approach pay off?  It's evidenced in this way:  Kids and
teachers used to always say this to me: "Do ya think I could look this up on
the computer?" Increasingly, they say things like "Do you think I could get
a newsweekly article on this from INFOTRAC?" or "Would Current Biography
have an article on this lady?"

Yeah-- I want my tools IN the library, on the floor.  I do, of course, make
them accessible from without when possible, I just take pains to try to
insure that they know that those tools don't constitute every information
option under the sun. Witness
HTTP://hps.k12.mi.us/~hwms/content/library.html

Thanks for reading!

Jeff Hastings
School Library Media Specialist
Highlander Way Middle School
Howell, Michigan 48843

hastings@hps.k12.mi.us

-----Original Message-----
From: Doyle_Tony [mailto:tdoyle@MUHSD.K12.CA.US]
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2000 4:59 PM
Subject: Re: Why computer labs suck.


We have a computer lab in our library and it works great.  It is not a
remote location but it is a distinct section of the library.

Books in libraries are divided into sections (by Dewey or LOC) to speed
access.  These arrangements work pretty well but they are artificial and not
perfect (e.g. why do I have to go to 3 or 4 different sections to see all of
the books by Asimov?).

With electronic sources this division is unnecessary. We don't have separate
encyclopedia computers and magazine database computers and Internet
computers.  They are all the same computers.  We can have 30 kids looking at
the same encyclopedia article or they can all be doing different things.
Some electronic resources defy this artificial division into categories such
as reference, periodical, Internet, etc.  The kids can use Encarta to jump
directly to useful Web sites without having to search.  Electric Library
combines periodicals, reference books, images and other types of information
into one easily searchable product.  Products from vendors such as Follett
are even blurring the line between the catalog and the Web.  Our students
can access the catalog from any computer then walk across the room and get
the book or click on Web links embedded in the bibliographic records.  They
can also search the catalog at one of our sister schools and request an ILL
and receive the book 2 days later.  The "other" computer functions are also
not distinct from the research process.  Students build links to Web pages
and programs into Power Point presentations.  They also copy sections of Web
pages or long articles into Word documents for more efficient printing and
can even e-mail articles from Electric Library and other applications to
their home accounts.

The physical location of computers does not send the message that books are
inferior.  It is poor instructional design that does that.  The teacher who
sends kids to the library and tells them they must get their information
from the Web when a book would be ten times faster reduces the value of the
print collection.  It is also the instructor who doesn't make kids evaluate
Web sites critically that contributes to this.  Many of the teachers at our
school do an outstanding job designing research projects that combine print
and electronic resources and the students learn the value of both types.

Computer based resources are different from their print counterparts.
Sometimes better (e.g. magazine databases) sometimes inferior (online
novels).  They are changing the way information is accessed and blurring the
lines between sources.  I don't think we should try to separate the various
functions of computers into discreet units when in actuality they are
becoming more integrated.  As long as the kids have physical access to the
books and computers and to the librarian, attaching a lab to the library
makes sense.  I look at it as an expansion of the library's space (always a
good thing).  In fact networking has allowed us to expand the library into
every classroom.  All of our electronic tools, including the catalog, are
available all over campus.



--
Tony Doyle, Librarian (and book lover)
Livingston HS, Livingston, CA
tdoyle@muhsd.k12.ca.us


-----Original Message-----
... I mentioned that I thought attaching a COMPUTER LAB to a school
library was a tired, old paradigm, done by default, for lack of a more
creative way to deliver electronic resources... something like that.  A
few
of you objected, thinking perhaps that I don't wish to use electronic
tools
in my library. No sir. I use electronic tools IN my library. Exclusively
IN
the library.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=
All postings to LM_NET are protected under copyright law.
To quit LM_NET (or set-reset NOMAIL or DIGEST), send email to:
listserv@listserv.syr.edu   In the message write EITHER:
1) SIGNOFF LM_NET 2) SET LM_NET NOMAIL or 3) SET LM_NET DIGEST
4) SET LM_NET MAIL  * Please allow for confirmation from Listserv.
For LM_NET Help see: http://ericir.syr.edu/lm_net/
Archives: http://askeric.org/Virtual/Listserv_Archives/LM_NET.html
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=