1 of 25

“You Talkin’to me?”�Composing a New �Information Literacy

Jaena Alabi, Auburn University

Amanda Roberts, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis

Frank Smith, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis

2 of 25

Agenda

Introduction
Composition Theory
Practical Strategies
Conclusion

3 of 25

Converging Paths

“Common Ground” and Intersections

4 of 25

Fister’s “Common Ground,” 1992

Find out what is happening in the composition classroom.
Understand the language and values of composition
Make sure agendas mesh by negotiating with faculty.

5 of 25

Writing as a Process

Introduced to Comp by Janet Emig in 1970s
“Stages” of Composing (Williams)

Invention

Planning

Drafting

Pausing

Reading

Revising

Editing

Publishing

6 of 25

Writing as a Process

Phase Model (Williams; Elmborg)

Invention

Drafting

Revising

Editing

7 of 25

Research as a Process

Kuhlthau’s Information Search Process (ISP)

Initiation
Selection
Exploration
Formulation
Collection
Presentation

ACRL IL Competency Standards as Process (Elmborg)

Overlap, merge, evolve in a spiral process

8 of 25

Linking Research and Writing

Literature

Isbell & Broaddus: the “continuum”
Elmborg: one-on-one practice
Bordonaro: processes shape each other

Similar techniques

Reference Interview
Writing Tutorial

9 of 25

Learning to Talk the Talk

Composition Studies:

Theory & Language

10 of 25

Which statement resonates with you?

The library is

an ordered place that organizes information into standardized, neutral categories, in the tradition of science
a physical and figurative meeting-place where “cultures meet, clash, and grapple with each other”

Contact zone (Pratt)

11 of 25

Which of these statements do you think is true?

A good researcher uses books and scholarly journals.
A good researcher can find resources and information pertinent to something that interests him/her.
Sources should be selected with the intended audience in mind. What would they consider credible?
A source is a social action.

A. Current-Traditional/Formalism

B. Expressivist

C. Rhetorical

D. Social construction

12 of 25

Social Construction

Discourse community (Bartholomae)
Genre theory
Post-process pedagogy

13 of 25

Comp in Conversation

Research process

“entering the conversation” (Burkean parlor)
“critical inquiry”

Information literacy

critical thinking about “outside” sources
“critical literacy”
technology

Priority: synthesis

Burke's "Unending Conversation" Metaphor

Imagine that you enter a parlor. You come late. When you arrive, others have long preceded you, and they are engaged in a heated discussion, a discussion too heated for them to pause and tell you exactly what it is about. In fact, the discussion had already begun long before any of them got there, so that no one present is qualified to retrace for you all the steps that had gone before. You listen for a while, until you decide that you have caught the tenor of the argument; then you put in your oar. Someone answers; you answer him; another comes to your defense; another aligns himself against you, to either the embarrassment or gratification of your opponent, depending upon the quality of your ally's assistance. However, the discussion is interminable. The hour grows late, you must depart. And you do depart, with the discussion still vigorously in progress.

--The Philosophy of Literary Form

14 of 25

EAP Classroom

Differences

Linguistic issues
Rhetorical, cultural, and experiential

Approach varies widely

trend to closely mirror native speaker comp classroom & tasks

EAP composition classes necessarily tend to differ in instruction due to both linguistic issues and rhetorical, cultural, and experiential differences.

Like native speaker comp classrooms, the approach varies widely, but the trend is to more closely mirror the native speaker comp classroom & tasks.

In most universities, there is little correlation between what occurs in the EAP composition classes and the “native speaker” composition classes.
EAP composition classes differ from “native speaker” sections as they include explicit grammar instruction.
To achieve curricular consistency, EAP composition classes are nearly identical to “native speaker” composition classes.
EAP composition classes necessarily tend to differ in instruction due to both linguistic issues and rhetorical, cultural, and experiential differences.

If librarian is more aware of what the EAP classroom is like, you will be more prepared for the classroom

Can’t have the same expectations of this classroom as you would in the NNS classroom

In European countries, it is entirely possible for students to get graduate degrees but never write a paper or only write one

Professor provides info – student may not have experience researching on their own – closed research

“Native speakers” vs. TESOL/ESOL/ESL/EAP/ESP

Contrastive Rhetoric/Intercultural Rhetoric

Cross-cultural teaching/learning differences; need for “academic literacy”

“Research” experience

Obviously – language/vocabulary/reading

Frequent result? Less exploration; more focus on form; often “closed” research projects

One difference in the EAP classroom is that greater attention is drawn to the idea of academic literacy and acculturation – teaching EAP students “how to survive & succeed” in the US university environment, and this impacts the writing classroom with a great emphasis on form, organization, and modeling, especially at the undergraduate level.

Contrastive Rhetoric [Kaplan (1966); Leki (1992); Connor (1996); Matsuda (1997); Bazerman & Prior (2004)], first proposed by Robert Kaplan in the mid-60s, put forth the idea that there are different cultural patterns to the organization of writing and that these intercultural differences in organization, expectations, and construction of meaning in writing significantly impact both how students approach writing and how “well” they do in the process. Although the original concept is now viewed as too reductionist and as a sort of dinosaur, the core of the idea has been the object of significant study and has heavily influenced ESL/EAP writing instruction, the original model has been modified umpteen times, and it’s led to greater emphasis on context, discourse community, and shared dynamic interaction of writer/reader backgrounds. And it’s often now referred to intercultural rhetoric, a more positive term first suggested by Connor.

There are many studies that also indicate that EAP/ESL students also come to any classroom with significantly different learning approaches and expectations of what writing is. Ballard & Clanchy (and, strangely, many Australian applied linguists) suggest "cultural and intellectual traditions differentially shape and inform education“ and that particularly students from Asia approach learning in a reproductive manner/conserving knowledge [Ballard & Clanchy (1988); Cope & Kalantzis (1993)] rather than an “analytical/speculative” manner. Further, there are other influential differences in perspectives of writing that become the focus of much attention, including plagiarism, student-teacher role, handwriting, complications in understanding feedback [Tere example], and yes, just for extra emphasis, plagiarism.

To effectively produce a piece of writing, students need knowledge of culture, circumstances, purposes, and motives that prevail in particular academic settings (Johns 1997) in addition to language-related issues.

Perspective of research – Paltridge, et al. (2009) note that, in some countries, the teacher provides the student with all the information that they need to write a paper; Hayward (2004) observes that it’s not unusual for European students to have advanced degrees without ever having written an academically-based research paper. Still other countries, like many Arabic countries, have a much stronger oral tradition than writing tradition.

Frequent result? Less exploration; more focus on form; often “closed” research projects;

15 of 25

ESL/EAP concerns

Contrastive Rhetoric/Intercultural Rhetoric
Cross-cultural teaching/learning differences; need for “academic literacy”
“Research” experience
Language/vocabulary/reading
Less exploration; more focus on form; often “closed” research projects

16 of 25

Language or Lack of Knowledge?

“Quite honestly, I’m positive a librarian could do a lot more but perhaps this is part of the problem. As a comp instructor, I don’t know how to utilize a librarian other than to have her show my students how to search for relevant source material. But clearly there is much more a librarian could help comp students with. So I see less issue with the language a librarian uses and perhaps more with my lack of knowledge about how a librarian can interact with my students.”

17 of 25

Confessions from a Panelist

What would it take for Frank to invite a librarian to his class (other than guilt)?

A presentation that doesn’t emulate lecture.

Interactive, problem-based instruction; emphasize critical thinking
Workshop-style library sessions
Conversation to empower students
Importance of the follow-up

18 of 25

Instructor role

Pre-presentation/workshop/etc. preparation
Active participation & question modeling
Classroom management
Clear communication/articulation of needs

19 of 25

Librarian role

Situate yourself & use the lingo
Tailor instruction to phases
Borrow comp tools

prewriting activities
synthesis grid
“moves” templates
journals

“Conversation” modeling in the classroom

Know your comp program – read textbooks, look at assignments, perhaps what or where comp faculty are publishing and what language they are using the classroom.

Know where students are in the classroom. For example, if you know that students are learning classical appeals, you can use rhetorical terminology such as ethos, logos, and pathos to discuss credibility or scholarly and popular sources. You can also suggest that students ask rhetorical questions about the author, audience, and the text’s basic values, beliefs and assumptions.

Use comp tools such as free-writing (Jaena) ---synthesis grid (“grid of common points”) to help students organize the literature review, academic moves templates that help students write literature reviews (Amanda)

Conversation modeling in the classroom includes modeling a conversation with instructor in front of students (Jaena example)

Introducing research with the Burkean parlor metaphor (in handout) (Amanda)

Set up research session by having students act out a conversation and then be interrupted by another student (Jaena)

Tailor your instruction to phases and select tools and use time accordingly:

--in beginning, use free-writing …

20 of 25

Works Cited

Please see “Selected Bibliography” on ACRL 2011 Conference Website.

Refer to http://www.iupui.edu/~uwc/handouts.html for literature review synthesis grid, logos/pathos/ethos explanation, academic conversation “moves” template, and more

21 of 25

Contact Information

Jaena Alabi, English & Psychology Reference Librarian

Auburn University

jaena.alabi@auburn.edu

Amanda Roberts, Associate Faculty, Writing Program

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis

amanrobe@iupui.edu

Frank Smith, Lecturer, English for Academic Purposes and IU School of Law

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis

fms@iupui.edu

22 of 25

Audience Activity

Redefining information literacy

Think about the following:

How do you define information literacy?

How would you revise your IL definition or the ACRL IL standards to be more accessible to composition faculty?

Write on index cards
Pair up with a neighbor
Share your thoughts with each other (and the whole audience, if desired)

23 of 25

Share/Questions

24 of 25

Synthesis grid

25 of 25

Academic Moves Template