I have found that my information searching and use has definitely reflected Callison's Five Elements of Information Inquiry.
 |
| Callison's Five Elements of Information Inquiry |
Throughout the research process I moved from preliminary browsing (by exploring broad information related to general inquiry) to more focused search and use (critical thinking and information literacy in the visual arts).
Through assimilation and inference (and continual questioning and reflection), I built on my understanding of the topic by critically considering a range of information and viewpoints. This promoted higher order thinking and deep knowledge and understanding. As I made deeper connections, I was also able to narrow and refine my argument. This focus enabled me to engage with and target the more specific research/resources that I needed to round off my literature review.
Callison's model acknowledges that the five elements continually interact throughout the learning experience.
McKenzie's Research Cycle
I think my researching experience is also reflected well through McKenzie’s Research Cycle (below), where questioning, exploring, gathering, understanding, sorting, synthesising and evaluating occurs as a repetitive and continuous cycle, culminating in the reporting phase.
McKenzie’s Research Cycle and Callison’s 5 Elements of Information Inquiry, capture the dynamic process of inquiry. The models point out that inquiry is not just a static and linear process, but that deep knowledge and understanding occurs through a sustained and continual cycle of information discovery and use.
Kuhlthau's ISP Model
 |
| McKenzie, J. Research Cycle. http://www.fno.org/dec99/rcycle.html |
McKenzie’s Research Cycle and Callison’s 5 Elements of Information Inquiry, capture the dynamic process of inquiry. The models point out that inquiry is not just a static and linear process, but that deep knowledge and understanding occurs through a sustained and continual cycle of information discovery and use.
Kuhlthau's ISP Model
This has made me more critical of Khulthau’s ISP model, as it does not really capture the rich, continuous, interconnected nature of inquiry. The model is represented to be more static and linear and does not adequately account for the complex, evolving and metacognitive processes that should (I think) be characteristic of inquiry learning.
While I certainly related to the feelings, thoughts and actions documented in the initiation, selection and exploration stages of Khulthau’s ISP (see Blog Entry 1 and Blog Entry 2), I do not think my experiences in this inquiry project have been accurately reflected throughout the last stages of the model. I acknowledge that my thoughts and actions did become more focused as I progressed, however, I still felt mixed emotions throughout the collection and (working towards) the presentation phase as I was continually analysing, synthesising and re-working concepts and ideas in an effort to further refine and improve my literature review. In this way, I did not experience complete clarity, as the ISP model appears to suggest.
As previously mentioned, I find Callison’s interconnected elements of questioning, exploration, assimilation, inference and reflection much more valuable. I think the assimilation and inference elements, in particular, account for the lack of clarity I sometimes felt during the collection and presentation stages as I tried to create more complex links between information and ideas. Callison’s 5 elements acknowledge the progressive acceptance, rejection or altering of knowledge in the learning process.
This experience has, however, made me realise the importance of acknowledging the emotions that students experience in learning and it has reinforced the value that guidance and what Khulthau (2007) refers to as the ‘zone of intervention’ (p.26-27) plays in effective inquiry. As I have been identifying and working through my own frustrations and doubts, I have come to more deeply consider the need to intervene at those ‘critical’ moments in the classroom and to guide students through those points in the learning process where they need assistance and advice. The consideration given to learners’ feelings and emotions is one of the strengths of the ISP model.
References:
Callison, D. (2006). Chapter 1: Information Inquiry: Concepts and Elements. In Callison, D. and Preddy, L. The blue book on information age inquiry, instruction and literacy. Westport, Conn: Libraries Unlimited, pp.3-16.
Kuhlthau et al. (2007). Guided Inquiry: Learning in the 21st Century. CT: Libraries Unlimited.
McKenzie, J. (1999). The Research Cycle. In From Now On: The Educational Technology Journal; 9 (4). Available at: http://www.fno.org/dec99/rcycle.html.
 |
| Kuhlthau, C. Model of the Information Search Process |
While I certainly related to the feelings, thoughts and actions documented in the initiation, selection and exploration stages of Khulthau’s ISP (see Blog Entry 1 and Blog Entry 2), I do not think my experiences in this inquiry project have been accurately reflected throughout the last stages of the model. I acknowledge that my thoughts and actions did become more focused as I progressed, however, I still felt mixed emotions throughout the collection and (working towards) the presentation phase as I was continually analysing, synthesising and re-working concepts and ideas in an effort to further refine and improve my literature review. In this way, I did not experience complete clarity, as the ISP model appears to suggest.
As previously mentioned, I find Callison’s interconnected elements of questioning, exploration, assimilation, inference and reflection much more valuable. I think the assimilation and inference elements, in particular, account for the lack of clarity I sometimes felt during the collection and presentation stages as I tried to create more complex links between information and ideas. Callison’s 5 elements acknowledge the progressive acceptance, rejection or altering of knowledge in the learning process.
This experience has, however, made me realise the importance of acknowledging the emotions that students experience in learning and it has reinforced the value that guidance and what Khulthau (2007) refers to as the ‘zone of intervention’ (p.26-27) plays in effective inquiry. As I have been identifying and working through my own frustrations and doubts, I have come to more deeply consider the need to intervene at those ‘critical’ moments in the classroom and to guide students through those points in the learning process where they need assistance and advice. The consideration given to learners’ feelings and emotions is one of the strengths of the ISP model.
References:
Callison, D. (2006). Chapter 1: Information Inquiry: Concepts and Elements. In Callison, D. and Preddy, L. The blue book on information age inquiry, instruction and literacy. Westport, Conn: Libraries Unlimited, pp.3-16.
Kuhlthau et al. (2007). Guided Inquiry: Learning in the 21st Century. CT: Libraries Unlimited.
McKenzie, J. (1999). The Research Cycle. In From Now On: The Educational Technology Journal; 9 (4). Available at: http://www.fno.org/dec99/rcycle.html.
No comments:
Post a Comment