Too much or too little?

I've been thinking about my teaching pedagogy again, and trying to decide what makes sense.  When you teach a one-shot, fifty minute class you're up against a lot of obstacles from the get-go.  The students don't know you, so you haven't developed a rapport.  They don't think "the librarian" can teach them anything.  They'd rather goof off on facebook - hey, it's the first class they've had in the computer lab so why not take advantage of it?

I started off by trying to hit everything, at least briefly.  Searching for books, searching for articles, search strategies in general, different databases, lots and lots of content.  But you know what?  I don't know that more than a tiny handful of students took anything away from that, other than "yeah, I think I might recognize the librarian" and "databases are complicated, so I'll stick with Google".

So I've modified my pedagogy.  I've decided that there are three main things I want the students to take away from my time class.  1) There are folks who can help you.  2) There's lots of great stuff out there.  3) Databases are not scary. 

So I spend the first part of class talking about the library, and how they can get help.  I tell them how to contact me, and how to contact other librarians though a whole host of social media, chat, text, and tweets.  I started including lots of suggested database links on my guides.  I don't go into detail, but I point them out as great starting places.  And then reiterate - over and over and over - that I am there to help them, whenever they need it.

Finally, I compare database searching to Google searching.  I try to show them that - just like Google - they can jump in feet-first and still get good results.  I show them helps; tell them that ... just like Google ... they can play around with searches and use the links on the left to narrow results.

And you know what?  I think it's working!  I've had more students this semester request books, ask for research help, and actually use library services.  And I'd like to think that in the classes I'm getting at least a few nods of appreciation (instead of blank stares).

Breakthrough!

LSI and MBTI and Pedagogy

Sounds daunting, right?  Well it is, in a way.  I mentioned in my last post (which was ::shudder:: almost two months ago... abject apologies!) that I did some seminar work on Kolb's Learning Style Inventory (LSI).  I've also done a good bit of work with the MBTI - the Meyers-Briggs Type Indicator, in the abbreviated form of the Keirsey Temperament Sorter.  I was thinking this week about the correlation between the two and how it could make for an interesting workshop at the right conference.

The MBTI looks at your personality type in several directions: Introverted-Extroverted, Sensing-Intuition, Thinking-Feeling, Judgment-Perception.  (There are several online versions of the survey... here's one if you're interested.)  It's interesting to see how your personality "scores", and makes you think about how you react to different situations... and how you teach!  I generally score as an INTJ, but I'm right on the line between Thinking and Feeling so depending on my mood when I take the survey, I will sometimes come out as an INFJ.  Heh.  If you're not familiar with the MBTI, here's a good place to visit for an excellent description!

So that's all about personality preferences.   (Note I say *preferences* - the survey doesn't give you hard-and-fast results that means That's What You Are Forever.  It's a moment in time, and indicates your personal preferences.)

The LSI looks at learning styles, specifically the one developed by David Kolb.  I talked about that a little in my previous post, so I won't bore you with the details again.

So why do I bring this up?  I'm working on a workshop proposal for a library conference next June!  It will look at these two instruments and then relate them to pedagogical styles in the classroom.   Thoughts?  Comments?  Am I certifiable, or just slightly nuts?