21
This article was downloaded by: [Florida Atlantic University] On: 14 November 2014, At: 16:31 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK College & Undergraduate Libraries Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wcul20 Designing Collaborative Learning Experiences for Library Computer Classrooms Stefan A. Smith MLIS, MA a b c a University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee , USA b George Washington University , USA c Murphy Library, University of Wisconsin-La Crosse , La Crosse, WI, 54601, USA Published online: 23 Sep 2008. To cite this article: Stefan A. Smith MLIS, MA (2004) Designing Collaborative Learning Experiences for Library Computer Classrooms, College & Undergraduate Libraries, 11:2, 65-83, DOI: 10.1300/J106v11n02_06 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J106v11n02_06 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or

Designing Collaborative Learning Experiences for Library Computer Classrooms

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Designing Collaborative Learning Experiences for Library Computer Classrooms

This article was downloaded by: [Florida Atlantic University]On: 14 November 2014, At: 16:31Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

College & UndergraduateLibrariesPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wcul20

Designing CollaborativeLearning Experiences forLibrary Computer ClassroomsStefan A. Smith MLIS, MA a b ca University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee , USAb George Washington University , USAc Murphy Library, University of Wisconsin-La Crosse ,La Crosse, WI, 54601, USAPublished online: 23 Sep 2008.

To cite this article: Stefan A. Smith MLIS, MA (2004) Designing Collaborative LearningExperiences for Library Computer Classrooms, College & Undergraduate Libraries,11:2, 65-83, DOI: 10.1300/J106v11n02_06

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J106v11n02_06

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or

Page 2: Designing Collaborative Learning Experiences for Library Computer Classrooms

indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

6:31

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Page 3: Designing Collaborative Learning Experiences for Library Computer Classrooms

Designing CollaborativeLearning Experiences

for Library Computer ClassroomsStefan A. Smith

ABSTRACT. Collaborative learning, a form of active learning, can beused in computer classrooms to provide effective library instruction. Li-brarians have used collaborative learning in traditional classrooms and arebeginning to incorporate it into hands-on computer classrooms. As librari-ans develop computer-based collaborative environments, they will likelyface issues that lead them to reconsider how they approach facility design,curricular strategies, student expectations, teaching styles, and classroomtime management. This article makes a case for using collaborative learn-ing within library computer classrooms and describes how librarians at amedium-sized university made the transition from hands-on individual-ized learning to hands-on collaborative learning. [Article copies availablefor a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service: 1-800-HAWORTH.E-mail address: <[email protected]> Website: <http://www.HaworthPress.com> © 2004 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.]

Stefan A. Smith (MLIS, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee; MA, George Wash-ington University) is Outreach Librarian, Murphy Library, University of Wiscon-sin-La Crosse, La Crosse, WI 54601 (address e-mail to: [email protected]).

College & Undergraduate Libraries, Vol. 11(2) 2004http://www.haworthpress.com/web/CUL

2004 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.Digital Object Identifier: 10.1300/J106v11n02_06 65

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

6:31

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Page 4: Designing Collaborative Learning Experiences for Library Computer Classrooms

KEYWORDS. Collaborative learning, group learning, active learning,library instruction, information literacy, teaching techniques, classroommanagement, classroom furniture, computer classroom design

INTRODUCTION

A look inside a typical academic library computer classroom revealstwenty to thirty students sitting quietly, each bent into a monitor, eachindividually involved with the computer before them. The lights aredim, and a librarian is somewhere near the front of the room pointing toa screen and talking. Students are involved in a variety of activities:some are on-task and following the instructor, some are trying to catchup, some have completed the current task and are waiting, and some areengaged in unrelated computing activities. This is the computer class-room setting that most librarians and students experience and for whichmost curricula and facilities are designed. It reflects and supportslong-standing, traditional educational theories and practices.

A glance inside a collaborative computer classroom reveals a differ-ent experience. Several groups of students are clustered around comput-ers, three to five students per group. The room is alive with discussionand debate. The lights are bright, and the librarian is busy movingamong groups, strategizing and brainstorming. Students are active, theirhands, heads, and faces in motion. Within each group, all members areon the same task. Students feel comfortable talking and asking ques-tions of each other and the instructor. This classroom reflects more cur-rent educational theories, which direct students to construct their ownpaths to knowledge through socially-relevant, peer-based learning ex-periences.

In collaborative learning, small groups of learners work together to-ward common objectives, practicing open and dynamic methods of in-quiry while building knowledge grounded in socially-relevant contexts.While distinctions can be made among collaborative, cooperative, andgroup learning, in this article, they are seen as roughly synonymous.They collectively represent methods of active learning in which smallgroups of students share the accountability for discovery and learning.Collaborative learning is a logical derivative of constructivist learningtheory, the foremost philosophy of current educational studies and prac-tices. Constructivist learning theory asserts that knowledge is self-cre-ated and built on the structural underpinnings of previously acquiredunderstandings (Howe and Berv 2000). Cognition takes hold when

66 COLLEGE & UNDERGRADUATE LIBRARIES

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

6:31

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Page 5: Designing Collaborative Learning Experiences for Library Computer Classrooms

ideas are processed and made relevant within the cultural context of thelearner (McLoughlin and Oliver 1998). Constructivist learning theoryforms the philosophical backdrop for many current methods, strategies,and techniques of learning, including active, experiential, collaborative,problem-based, and case-based learning, to name a few.

In the early 1900s, John Dewey introduced active learning, a con-cept now familiar to most librarians. At the same time, he discussedcollaborative learning, suggesting that group negotiations and ideasgenerated by discussion and explanation were instrumental in discoveryand learning (Hung 2002). Since then, collaborative learning has beenfrequently studied and its effectiveness verified (Will 1997). In the fieldof librarianship, studies have found that undergraduates preferred col-laborative learning over individual learning (Dabbour 1997) and thatwhen traditional bibliographic lectures were redesigned to includesmall-group, hands-on components, they were seen as more positive andeffective (Drueke 1992). Collaborative learning has also been frequentlystudied in hands-on computer classrooms. In a meta-analysis of 122 stud-ies involving 11,317 learners, Yiping, Abrami, and d’Apollonia con-cluded that “when working with computer technology in small groups,students in general produced substantially better group products thanindividual products and they also gained more individual knowledgethan those learning with computer technology individually” (2001,476).

Many instruction programs still use a form of teaching in which thelibrarian demonstrates an activity and students try to replicate it(Hollister and Coe 2003). This is especially common in computer class-rooms, most of which have been designed specifically to support thismimetic style of learning. Hollister and Coe (2003) assert that whilemost librarians favor active learning methods in theory, in practice theymay avoid it because it seems to take more time. Collaborative learningis further deterred because most hands-on facilities have been de-signed to support individualized learning activities at the expense ofgroup interaction. Given these hindering factors, it is little wonder thatcollaborative learning has not been more deeply integrated into librarycomputer classrooms.

Librarians and students at the University of Wisconsin-La Crossehave had positive experiences using collaborative methods in hands-onclasses that had previously used more traditional methods of instruc-tion. The University of Wisconsin at La Crosse is home to approximately8,000 students, mostly undergraduates. Murphy Library, the university’ssingle, centralized library, has an active information literacy instruction

Stefan A. Smith 67

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

6:31

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Page 6: Designing Collaborative Learning Experiences for Library Computer Classrooms

program reaching approximately 5,000 participants each year. The di-rector of this program encourages librarians to experiment with diverseteaching styles and techniques, and the program has a history of using avariety of active learning methods. In 2002, the author of this article be-gan using collaborative learning methods in hands-on classes in com-puter classrooms. The first sessions were with returning adult learnerswho had a wide variety of information literacy skills and who hadunique individual needs. Collaborative learning was seen as a way toblend the inconsistencies in skill levels. Through natural group interac-tion, the skills and experience of advanced students were expected tomove individual groups, and eventually entire classes, forward. Thisinitial implementation of collaborative learning within the computerclassroom was judged a success by instructors and learners alike, lead-ing to the use of hands-on collaborative learning in a variety of otherclasses ranging from freshman-level English to graduate-level Busi-ness.

THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

Collaborative work is most effective in environments that havebeen purposefully designed to meet the unique needs of group learnersand teachers. The design and layout of computer classrooms maygreatly affect pedagogical approaches and how they are implementedwithin the rooms (Huang and Lee 2001). A well-planned design usesfurniture built for group work, technology that facilitates collabora-tion, and space that allows for flexibility in pedagogical approach. AtMurphy Library, the existing hands-on instruction room was modifiedto be effective with both individual and group instruction, similar toFigure 1.

Room layout should allow learners to form ad hoc groups with easewhile encouraging interaction within and among groups, and betweenteachers and groups. Clear lines of sight should exist between groupmembers, instructors, and projection screens. In some cases, this maymean having all group tables face the same direction. In others, it maymean having redundant projection screens on more than one wall. Al-though the choices and decisions that accompany room layout are notoverly complex, significant changes may be necessary when adapting aroom previously built for individualized learning. For example, atMurphy Library, a substantial effort that included carpet removal andtrenching went into bringing power outlets to the center of a room where

68 COLLEGE & UNDERGRADUATE LIBRARIES

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

6:31

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Page 7: Designing Collaborative Learning Experiences for Library Computer Classrooms

outlets had previously existed only along outside walls. Room design-ers will want to take into account issues of accessibility as well, ensur-ing that access lanes are free of cables or other obstructions. Huang andLee (2001) in their Chinese-language article, and Lowery (1998) item-ize a number of logical and physical arrangements that allow learnersand teachers to interact flexibly.

Librarians have long recognized the value of tables that either ac-commodate or have been built specifically for group discussion andgroup study. However, while such tables can be found throughout mostlibrary facilities, they are rarely included in computer learning facilities.Tables designed for collaborative computer-learning allow several peo-ple to sit and interact comfortably and effectively. The most simple andinexpensive table designed for group work, as shown in Figure 2, holdsone computer with a monitor that is visible to all group members. Vari-ant designs include the use of two or more low-profile monitors forbetter visibility among group members, or two or more keyboards foreasy sharing of input activities. Another option is to have tables opti-mized for group work in which every member of the group has a dedi-cated computer, as shown in Figure 3. These are ideal for conducting

Stefan A. Smith 69

FIGURE 1. Classroom layout that seats up to 28 individual learners or 8 groupsof up to 4-5 people in the center stations. Students face the screen on the leftduring demonstrations. This room is designed to support group work, individ-ual work, and instructor demonstrations.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

6:31

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Page 8: Designing Collaborative Learning Experiences for Library Computer Classrooms

both group and individual activities, but pose some challenges for linesof sight and are more costly. For one-shot library instruction sessions,the single-computer-per-group model may be most effective. For lon-ger-term sessions, or for conducting exercises in which students workindividually on activities that are later integrated as a whole group proj-

70 COLLEGE & UNDERGRADUATE LIBRARIES

FIGURE 2. Table with one computer that is shared among several learners.

FIGURE 3. Table with several computers and low-profile monitors for groupand individual work.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

6:31

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Page 9: Designing Collaborative Learning Experiences for Library Computer Classrooms

ect, it may be advantageous to have tables at which each student has adedicated computer.

When selecting computer hardware for collaborative classrooms, un-obtrusive designs are usually preferable. Low-profile monitors or thosethat can be partially recessed into modified tables can substantially im-prove line of sight. While notebook computers allow for flexible seatingconfigurations, they generally provide poor visibility from side anglesand, unless configured with a separate keyboard, sit too close to thekeyboardist to provide good visibility to the rest of the group. The typ-ical workstation for people with visual impairments will be of littlebenefit as a shared computer; instead, a separate ADA-compliantworkstation integrated within a group-work table may be preferable.

When a collaborative-learning computer classroom is not available,almost any situation can be adapted, at least temporarily, for collabora-tive learning. Students are usually most willing to arrange themselvesinto makeshift group configurations for strategizing sessions and forgroup computing activities. During the first year that collaborative com-puter learning was used at Murphy Library, the library had no dedicatedcomputer classroom of its own, and approximately fifteen group com-puter-learning sessions were conducted in traditional computer class-rooms in various locations across campus. Students were instructed toform groups and to rearrange their seating configurations. One room,typical of those available, consisted of five rows of six computers each;in this room, students were usually arranged into five groups, one perrow. Students were asked to put their jackets and backpacks along theperiphery of the room so that they could more easily assemble arounda single computer. Occasionally librarians encouraged students to re-arrange their groups if some members had a blocked line of sight orwhen groups or individuals were marginalized due to awkward seatingarrangements. The less-than-ideal facilities never hampered the effec-tiveness of the collaborative experience. In fact, some experiences wereenhanced by the camaraderie of students and teachers as they roseabove the physical limitations of their environment to embark on fulfill-ing learning experiences.

At Murphy Library, a room was eventually redesigned to accommo-date both group and individual instruction methods. The floor plan isnow configured so that eight computer workstations stand alone in thecenter of the room and an additional 20 computers are arranged alongthe periphery of the room, facing the side walls (see Figure 1). The eightstations in the center of the room are spaced so that four to five studentscan cluster around each workstation in comfort. With this arrangement,

Stefan A. Smith 71

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

6:31

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Page 10: Designing Collaborative Learning Experiences for Library Computer Classrooms

the room can accommodate 28 individual learners or up to 40 grouplearners. In group-learning situations, students move chairs away fromwall-oriented workstations and place them around the tables in the cen-ter of the room. For individual computing, chairs are moved away fromthe center tables to the computers along the sides so that everyone hasan individual workstation.

STUDENT EXPECTATIONS

When librarians at Murphy Library began using collaborative com-puter learning, they encountered a broad range of student expecta-tions. While returning adult learners were more often willing andeager to participate, students in freshman English classes tended to re-act more hesitantly. They typically did not expect to encounter a col-laborative learning situation, and some were reluctant to form groupsand work with others. College students, although they desire challeng-ing and meaningful learning environments, also rank a non-threateningenvironment as a priority (Dupuis 1999). Younger students, especially,are not always willing to take risks in peer situations, and the prospect ofa social learning experience can compound any discomfort already feltat entering a new and unfamiliar classroom.

At Murphy Library, the problems associated with exposing studentsto this unexpected experience, although infrequent, usually occur at twointervals. The first is when students enter the room and discover thatthey are not going to be sitting and working alone. The second is afterthey have formed into groups and are asked for the first time to enterinto discussions with fellow group members. These problems are usu-ally temporary, and once students adjust, they participate willingly.

Initial Resistance

Classroom experiences that get off to a positive, well-managed startare likely to continue to be successful. Librarians at Murphy Libraryused a variety of techniques to manage the entrance and seating of stu-dents and to establish a positive initial tone, including:

• Asking course instructors to prepare students prior to the day of thelibrary session, perhaps even dividing the class into groups for thesession;

72 COLLEGE & UNDERGRADUATE LIBRARIES

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

6:31

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Page 11: Designing Collaborative Learning Experiences for Library Computer Classrooms

• Greeting students at the door and directing them to group work ta-bles;

• Announcing as students enter the room that groups will be formed,and repeating as more students enter;

• Displaying a large-font message on the projected instructor screendirecting students to form groups at the group work tables;

• Taping a message on the monitors of individual-work (or extra)computers with a message similar to, “This computer not avail-able. Please use one of the 8 computers in the center of the room.Form groups of 3-4 people per computer;”

• Using a random selection process or a previously determinedmethod to form groups if the class seems unusually reluctant or ifstudents have already become comfortable at individual comput-ers.

In addition, librarians have found that students are more enthusiasticabout collaborative learning when the pragmatic benefits are outlined.For example, students are likely to understand and welcome the practi-cal advantages of group work when it is explained that members in theirgroup may have special talents or experiences such as keyboard skills,computer skills, or library research experience.

Subsequent Resistance

The second point at which resistance may occur is when students areasked to begin their first group activity. This is usually not an issue foradult learners and upper-level classes, but younger students who are notused to working in groups or who are less secure in social settings maybenefit from techniques designed to facilitate group conversations. Afew techniques used by librarians at Murphy Library include:

• Explaining the rules and concepts of collaborative work before re-vealing the first exercise. This forces students to hold back theirnatural tendency to start the exercise and gives them the opportu-nity to concentrate on and comprehend the process;

• Promoting a lively and active environment by encouraging stu-dents to speak as freely and loudly as they wish in their group;

• Instructing groups to assign key responsibilities to members be-fore they begin exercises. Examples include keyboarder, recorder,and speaker. This also helps break the conversational ice with afairly safe, focused topic;

Stefan A. Smith 73

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

6:31

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Page 12: Designing Collaborative Learning Experiences for Library Computer Classrooms

• Asking group members to introduce themselves to each other,even if they already know each other’s names. They may be askedto add one personal fact to the introduction, such as where theirhome town is, or what their favorite sport is, etc. This activityhelps reduce formality and sometimes forms a small, initial groupbond, even if only to agree that the exercise seemed silly.

One librarian uses a space exploration metaphor to encourage partici-pation, having groups imagine that they are on a quest to far-off “infor-mation galaxies.” Students take on roles such as “pilot” (keyboarder),recorder of the “captain’s log” (note taker), “communications officer”(speaker for the group), and polite back-seat drivers.

Occasionally a group will gradually develop an unproductive dy-namic resulting in poor internal communications. If a group seems to betoo quiet, dominated by one individual, or otherwise dysfunctional, twooptions can result in significant change: either switch roles within thegroup; or announce a group personnel change, in which a member ortwo from each group must leave and join another group.

Students often enter library classrooms expecting to accomplish indi-vidual objectives such as finding materials for course assignments. Inrooms that are configured to accommodate both group and individualcomputer instruction, this expectation can be met by dividing the classinto two periods, one for collaborative work and the other for individualresearch. Or groups may work together on members’ individual re-search needs, one person at a time. Regardless of how this expectation ismanaged, it is important to address students’ need to do individual re-search, when this need exists. A thoughtful explanation of how thegroup experience will lead to greater efficiency in individual endeavorscan be effective.

THE COLLABORATIVE TEACHING PERSONALITY

Collaborative classrooms look and feel quite different from their tra-ditional counterparts. They tend to be noisier and more spontaneous andmay appear to be disorganized. Many librarians have been teaching foryears in a culture where quietness and strict attention are equated witheffective learning. Current learning theories, however, propose that stu-dents who are quietly and attentively focused on the teacher may not belearning as well as they could (Jensen, 2000). Given this rather substan-tial change in classroom dynamic, librarians may be concerned that

74 COLLEGE & UNDERGRADUATE LIBRARIES

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

6:31

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Page 13: Designing Collaborative Learning Experiences for Library Computer Classrooms

their tried-and-true approaches to teaching may not be as effective in thecollaborative computer classroom.

Collaborative classrooms do not require ostentatious, extrovertedteaching techniques, nor do teachers need to be experts at improvisa-tional strategizing. Librarians who are less comfortable managing con-versations and activities extemporaneously can prepare a catalog offocus questions and activities in advance. They can allow the class to setits own direction within the framework of the curriculum and choosefrom their selection of questions and activities when appropriate. Otherlibrarians may choose to provide only a structural framework and im-provise the activities that take place therein. While some librarians willprefer a more conservative framework–for example, a consistent pat-tern of demonstration, followed by group work, followed by discus-sion–others will wish to use more adventurous activities such as gameplaying. Just as with other methods of library instruction, the collabora-tive environment allows librarians to match their own comfort level inthe teaching techniques they choose to use.

Collaborative teaching methods employ both proactive and reactiveteaching techniques. While librarians need not change their teachingpersonalities to be effective in collaborative environments, some partsof the teaching process will be handled differently. On the one hand, li-brarians will be actively involved with students, communicating di-rectly about objectives, expectations, and paths to achievement. Withinthe more spontaneous structure of the collaborative classroom, librari-ans may need to be more involved with this part of the process than inindividualized-learning environments. On the other hand, librarianswill spend a great deal of time “fading out,” playing the role of a watch-ful facilitator whose direction may not always be necessary. This mayfeel quite different to librarians who are used to closely managing allclassroom activities. Some librarians find themselves well suited to onerole or the other, and it may take some time, practice, or professional de-velopment to feel comfortable in both roles.

Collaborative computer learning also uses a very different and oftenunpredictable timeline than the more structured curricula of lecture-styleteaching. The questions that arise from discussion following group activ-ities often bring up topics planned for discussion later in the class pe-riod. Some librarians may feel comfortable changing their teachingplan, jumping forward and backward in their presentation slides ornotes, while others may want to defer specific questions until later in thepresentation.

Stefan A. Smith 75

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

6:31

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Page 14: Designing Collaborative Learning Experiences for Library Computer Classrooms

Although collaborative classrooms may appear to be somewhat dis-organized, behind the noise and apparent disorder are well-constructedplans that move individuals and groups toward specific objectives. Thetime-management techniques and curricular strategies described in thefollowing sections allow librarians to divide classes into clearly-de-fined, easy-to-control segments with clear learning objectives. Librari-ans who use these techniques and strategies will find that regardless oftheir personality, teaching style, or individual approach, they can pro-vide a sound framework that allows students the freedom of collabora-tive exploration while providing an unambiguous and manageablestructure.

TIME MANAGEMENT

Many library instruction sessions are still one-hour/one-shot classes(Hollister and Coe 2003). Even in this format, collaborative learningcan be done effectively. Librarians must first plan how to schedule ac-tivities during the time allotted for the session. Some choices include:

• The class can alternate several times between librarian-led activi-ties (such as demonstration or whole-class discussion) and collab-orative work;

• A single period of time can be reserved for librarian-led activitiesfollowed by an extended collaborative work time;

• The entire class period can be collaborative work with occasionalwhole-class discussions;

• A single period of time can be reserved for collaborative learningactivities followed by a period reserved for completing individualresearch.

Most of the sessions at Murphy Library consist of three activities:first lecture/demonstration, then group work time, then whole-class dis-cussion. This is repeated as often as time allows. This structure of short,repeated activities provides many opportunities for the librarian to in-teract with groups, allows a customizable class schedule, brings upopenings to fine tune groups and their activities, and helps keep the ses-sions lively and varied.

When discussing collaborative learning strategies, librarians oftenexpress concerns about trying to fit an already full agenda into a lessstructured environment. At first glance, it would appear that collabora-

76 COLLEGE & UNDERGRADUATE LIBRARIES

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

6:31

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Page 15: Designing Collaborative Learning Experiences for Library Computer Classrooms

tive, student-led activities take more time than those led and controlledby the instructor. However, studies have shown that in computer class-rooms where ground rules are well defined and the instructor is consis-tent with methods and techniques, collaborative learning is seen as timeefficient and effective (Bevilacqua 2000). Librarians can maintain aschedule through use of specific, itemized agendas, in which activitiesare scheduled for specific lengths of time. While this might seem to ex-ert a counterproductive control, well-designed curricula lead learners toanticipated, critical learning moments. These moments can be built intothe agenda, which can then be rearranged on the fly to address questionsand needs as they arise.

Librarians at Murphy Library use the following techniques to keepscheduled activities within specific time limits:

• Clearly state how long each activity will take. Measure in minutes;• During group time, frequently announce how much time remains;• If more than one activity is to be completed, make groups aware of

where they may wish to be in relation to how much time remains;• Apply time limits to post-activity processing as well as to lec-

ture/demonstration periods;• Have all time limits clearly posted on slides, whiteboards, hand-

outs, etc.

Librarians found that although some activities did take more timethan in individualized learning environments, they tended to spawn ad-ditional reinforcing activities that led to efficiencies in learning and re-tention of previous and subsequent activities. Librarians who taught thesame class repeatedly were able to find a balance that allowed enoughtime to cover the same agendas as in individualized-learning sessions.In addition, librarians reported that the number of extraneous questionsfrom individual participants and problems related to computer or navi-gation issues were substantially reduced, resulting in more efficient useof time.

Librarians also questioned whether collaborative learning was time-effective when teaching simple facts or process-oriented details. Afterexperimentation, librarians at Murphy Library discovered that manydetails and specific instructions, which would normally be discussedas individual agenda items in non-collaborative settings, could be leftunspoken in the collaborative classroom. These items were readily as-similated by learners while on the path to larger group goals, oftenthrough in-group dialog or through whole-class post-activity process-

Stefan A. Smith 77

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

6:31

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Page 16: Designing Collaborative Learning Experiences for Library Computer Classrooms

ing. For example, instead of spending class time lecturing and demon-strating the difference between a specific database’s “document types”and “publication types” limiters, groups completed larger-scale exer-cises in limiting, where they discovered first-hand the meaning of thoseand other limiters. Students who completed only a handful of group ac-tivities, each requiring substantial exploration of new territory, hadbeen exposed to and required to use numerous specific resources fea-tures and process-oriented mechanisms. While students felt that theymay have experienced four or five topics, librarians felt that studentshad learned dozens of specific skills along the way.

CURRICULAR STRATEGIES

One librarian at Murphy Library remarked that it was a “liberatingexperience” to allow students to build their own understanding of theconcepts and details he previously had tried to teach as a “sage on thestage.” Instead of leading 26 individuals to point and click their wayinto an information database, he simply told groups they had two min-utes to find the database at the library’s web site. Two minutes was usu-ally far more than sufficient, and along the way students learned fromtheir misplaced clicks, observed peripheral things together, and were re-sponsible themselves for a very basic task that could seem condescend-ing to be led through.

Simple, single-objective activities such as the two-minutes-to-a-data-base assignment are effective in collaborative environments, especiallyin short, one-shot sessions. Exercises need not be weighty or substan-tial to be successful. At Murphy Library, librarians purposefully buildin quick, focused exercises among more in-depth activities to keepgroups active and engaged. In one-hour/one-shot sessions, a rapidsuccession of short collaborative projects followed by focused whole-class discussions creates a crisp tempo that allows the class to cover alarger number of topics.

During hands-on group-work segments, the librarian circulates amonggroups, answering questions and providing guidance when needed.This is an excellent opportunity for the librarian to make note of ques-tions coming from groups to share with the class as a whole after theactivity. To keep groups focused on what is expected during eachgroup-work activity, librarians sometimes display the objectives andthe time allocation of the current activity on the instructor screen or dis-tribute them in paper form. For activities that are complex or require

78 COLLEGE & UNDERGRADUATE LIBRARIES

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

6:31

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Page 17: Designing Collaborative Learning Experiences for Library Computer Classrooms

in-depth investigation, examples or specific steps that facilitate thegreater learning objective may be displayed or printed. However, forthe collaborative experience to be most effective, instructions are notstep-by-step, recipe-type directions.

Regardless of the length or nature of the group activity, the entireclass benefits from whole-class discussions that take place after groupactivities. These post-activity exercises are known as “processing” inthe field of experiential education, and are considered one of the essen-tial elements of knowledge building among groups (Simpson 2003). Ina typical form of processing used at Murphy Library, groups are askedto record and share with the whole class at least one comment or ques-tion as a result of each collaborative activity. For example, an activity inwhich students apply Boolean operators within a specific databasemight also include the assignment to identify the most successful searchstatement used within each group and to share it with the entire classduring the discussion period. The combined group activity and subse-quent whole-class discussion effectively leads learners through the pro-cess of discovery, practice, and reinforcement that seems necessary tofully understand concepts such as Boolean searching. Each group mayalso be asked to record and share one question that arises internally dur-ing a group exercise. An important factor in this assignment is that eachgroup should agree upon a significant question even if it had found theanswer along the way.

While the above examples of post-activity processing may seem ba-sic and not new to library instruction, when implemented within a col-laborative environment, they take on different characteristics andbecome more efficient and focused. The questions and comments thatarise during processing are usually the result of internal group discus-sions, and they tend to be concentrated, focused, and relevant to all classmembers. The entire class moves forward through grass-roots experi-ences rather than instructor-contrived scenarios. In addition, when com-ments come from groups instead of individuals, one of the typicaltime-traps of the individual computer-learning classroom, in which en-tire classes may be held hostage by remedial or irrelevant questionsfrom any number of the many participants, is effectively neutralized.Because each group is seen as a single participant, the management ofextraneous input is limited to a few participants instead of to dozens.

Collaborative exercises that are designed to meet specific learningobjectives and that allow learners to come to their own understanding ofthose objectives are most effective. Many individual hands-on exercisescan be modified for collaborative learning. Keyser (2000, 36) notes the

Stefan A. Smith 79

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

6:31

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Page 18: Designing Collaborative Learning Experiences for Library Computer Classrooms

importance of careful planning, suggesting that this “is not just any‘group work’” but that each exercise “should be chosen for the aca-demic task and the students who must accomplish it.” In her article,Keyser (2000) also provides a number of examples of collaborativetechniques for achieving specific leaning objectives. Several exercisesin use at Murphy Library have also been included in the appendix of thisarticle.

CONCLUSION

The experiences at Murphy Library reveal that collaborative learningcan be integrated into computer classrooms in both ad hoc and plannedways with effective results. The most successful experiences occurwhen librarians carefully address facility design, curricular strategies,student expectations, teaching styles, and classroom time management.While facilities designed to support collaborative learning clearly en-hance the experience, classroom management and teaching strategiesare of greater importance, and rewarding experiences can be created inalmost any computer classroom. With a little practice, librarians can de-velop a store of techniques that facilitate group formation, interaction,and discussion, and that help create lively, active learning environ-ments. Librarians can match their own teaching styles and personali-ties to the group-learning environment as they use techniques gearedtoward the facilitation of learning rather than the transmittal of infor-mation. Carefully planned agendas with firm time limits allow librari-ans to cover nearly the same amount of material as with individualizedlearning while respecting students’ ability to solve both conceptualand process-oriented challenges. Librarians will find that most of thechallenges that accompany the transition to collaborative learning aremanageable and can be solved through the use of straightforward teach-ing strategies.

Librarians at Murphy Library who used the techniques described inthis article found that most collaborative learning sessions were effec-tive, positive experiences in which students learned well together andmet classroom objectives. As other librarians implement collaborativelearning within the computer classroom, developing their own ap-proaches, they are likely to find themselves leading stimulating learningexperiences in which students use their own initiative and capabilities tobuild solid understanding of the principles and specifics of informationliteracy.

80 COLLEGE & UNDERGRADUATE LIBRARIES

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

6:31

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Page 19: Designing Collaborative Learning Experiences for Library Computer Classrooms

QUICK BIB

Bevilacqua, Mary. 2000. “Collaborative Learning in the Secondary EnglishClass.” The Clearing House 73 (3): 132-133.

Keyser, Marcia W. 1999. “Active Learning and Cooperative Learning: Under-standing the Difference and Using Both Styles Effectively.” Research Strate-gies 17 (1): 35-44.

Will, Anne M. 1997. “Group Learning in Workshops.” New Directions for Adult& Continuing Education (76), 33-41.

REFERENCES

Bevilacqua, Mary. 2000. “Collaborative Learning in the Secondary English Class.”The Clearing House 73 (3): 132-133.

Dabbour, Katherine Strober. 1997. “Applying Active Learning Methods to the Designof Library Instruction for a Freshman Seminar.” College & Research Libraries 58(4): 299-309.

Drueke, Jeanetta. 1992. “Active Learning in the University Library Instruction Class-room.” Research Strategies 10 (2): 77-83.

Dupuis, Elizabeth A. 1999. “The Creative Evolution of Library Instruction.” ReferenceServices Review 27 (3): 287-291.

Hollister, Christopher V. and Jonathan Coe. 2003. “Current Trends vs. TraditionalModels: Librarians’ Views on the Methods of Library Instruction.” College & Un-dergraduate Libraries 10 (2): 49-63.

Howe, Kenneth R. & J. Berv. 2000. “Constructing Constructivism, Epistemologicaland Pedagogical.” In D.C. Phillips ed. Constructivism in Education: Opinions andsecond opinions on controversial issues. (Ninety-Ninth Yearbook of the NationalSociety for the Study of Education). Chicago, IL. The National Society for theStudy of Education.

Huang, Hsin-jong and Shih-chung Lee. 2001. “Designing a Group Teaching ComputerClassroom” [Chinese]. Journal of Educational Media & Library Sciences 39 (1):70-84.

Hung, David. W.L. 2002. “Metaphorical Ideas as Mediating Artifacts for the Social Con-struction of Knowledge: Implications from the Writings of Dewey and Vygotsky.”International Journal of Instructional Media 29 (2): 197-215.

Jensen, Eric. 2000. Brain-based Learning. San Diego, CA: The Brain Store.Keyser, Marcia W. 1999. “Active Learning and Cooperative Learning: Understanding

the Difference and Using Both Styles Effectively.” Research Strategies 17 (1): 35-44.Lowery, Lawrence. 1998. “Strategies for Instruction.” Foss 11 (Spring): 6-9.McLoughlin, Catherine, and Ron Oliver. 1998. “Maximising the Language and Learn-

ing Link in Computer Learning Environments.” British Journal of EducationalTechnology 29 (2): 125-36.

Stefan A. Smith 81

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

6:31

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Page 20: Designing Collaborative Learning Experiences for Library Computer Classrooms

Simpson, Steven V. 2003. The Leader Who is Hardly Known: Self-less Teaching fromthe Chinese Tradition. Oklahoma City, OK: Wood and Barnes Press.

Will, Anne M. 1997. “Group Learning in Workshops.” New Directions for Adult &Continuing Education 76 (Winter): 33-41.

Yiping, Lou, Philip C. Abrami, and Sylvia d’Apollonia, S. 2001. “Small Group and In-dividual Learning with Technology: A Meta-Analysis.” Review of Educational Re-search 71 (3): 449-522.

Received: 05/22/04Revised/Reviewed: 05/28/04

Accepted: 06/01/04

APPENDIX. Sample Exercises

Collaborative Learning Exercise: Find Subject Descriptor

Objective: Understand the value of the thesaurus in the PsycINFO database.

Steps:

1. Groups are given 4 minutes to search for articles related to “body image.”

2. Some groups are given printed instructions leading them to the thesaurus. Others areinstructed to use free-text searching.

3. Groups are to record one question or comment about anything that happened duringthis exercise.

4. Whole class discussion takes place during which thesaurus searching is comparedwith free-text searching, and questions and comments are addressed.

Outcomes: Students understand controlled vocabulary; students understand ways to dis-cover subject descriptors; other related questions are answered.

82 COLLEGE & UNDERGRADUATE LIBRARIES

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

6:31

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Page 21: Designing Collaborative Learning Experiences for Library Computer Classrooms

Collaborative Learning Exercise: Introduction to Library Web Site

Objective: Become aware of the library home page and the category of “most popular” data-bases.

Steps:

1. Groups are given 3 minutes to find the library home page and the section that lists the“most popular” databases.

2. Groups are to record one question or comment about anything that happened duringthis exercise.

3. Groups share with the rest of the class their one question or comment.

Outcomes: Students know how to find the library web site and this rather obvious categoryof resources, and have discussed peripheral items of interest.

Collaborative Learning Exercise: Understand Journal Citations

Objective: Understand the various elements of journal citations; get experience with libraryresources.

Steps:

1. Groups are instructed to find the “Communication Studies” area of the library web siteand select any database listed there.

2. Groups conduct a search on the topic of their choice and select one citation.

3. Groups record at least 4 critical parts of the citation that would be necessary to find thearticle elsewhere.

4. Groups record at least one question or comment about anything related to this ac-tivity.

5. Librarian displays a citation on the screen and points to parallels as groups share theirresults.

Outcomes: Students understand citations; they understand why they may need a citation;they understand terms such as “volume” and “issue”; other related questions are answered.

Stefan A. Smith 83

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

6:31

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14