 |
 |
Sweeping and simplistic. He has a new hammer, so every problem looks like a nail. I don't teach reference, but I find his example uninformed and insulting to both those who do teach reference and those who practice it. Perhaps he should spend a bit more time speaking with, rather than to, LIS educators, so that he knows what we do before he attempts to tell us how to do it better. Have any of these vague ideas actually been empirically tested? It all sounds very much like the motivational speakers one is barraged with during PBS pledge drives. They may very well be useful, sound principles, but I would like some empirical data demonstrating that before I expose my students to them. I prefer not to treat my students as lab rats. It's interesting that the positive comments all revolve around human-computer interaction/interface design when his article clearly is advocating applying these ideas to human-human interaction. Suzanne M. Stauffer, Ph.D. Assistant Professor School of Library and Information Science Louisiana State University 275 Coates Hall Baton Rouge, LA 70803 (225)578-1461 Fax: (225)578-4581 [log in to unmask] Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information? --T.S. Eliot, "Choruses from The Rock" ________________________________ From: Open Lib/Info Sci Education Forum on behalf of Wallace, Danny Sent: Tue 4/6/2010 7:03 PM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: How Design Thinking Could Improve LIS Education Thanks, Bernie, for pointing us to a provocative essay. Mr. Bell is unfortunately making a sweeping, untested assumption that the principles he espouses are not at work in LIS education. His proposed example in which students are taught "to first think about the user and what he or she is trying to accomplish and the factors driving them to ask the question" rather than teaching them "to ask reference interview questions aimed at narrowing the possibilities so that the librarian can impose a solution on the user" is going to sound amazingly familiar to any competent faculty member engaged in teaching reference and information services in an LIS program. The essay also leads one to wonder if it is important to a design thinking approach to correctly name fundamental concepts: there is no ALA sanctioned process known as "re-accreditation." Danny On 4/6/10 3:47 PM, "B.G. Sloan" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: I recently read an interesting blog posting by Steven Bell, Associate University Librarian for Research & Instructional Services at Temple University's Paley Library. He is also an Adjunct Associate Professor at the Drexel University College of Information Science & Technology. http://dbl.lishost.org/blog/2010/03/31/how-design-thinking-could-improve-lis-education/ The author recently attended the 15th anniversary celebration for the Internet Public Library, as well as a meeting of the re-accreditation advisory board for Drexel University's LIS school (the author is a member of that advisory board). His blog posting is an outgrowth of discussions he had while attending these meetings. An excerpt: "LIS students...need to gain proficiency with important skills, such as the organization of material, reference work, subject specialization and digital development. No one argues that. But where the need seems more acute, and where there is less certainty about how to teach, is with the less tangible skills sets such as listening and observing, problem analysis or critical thinking. That's where much of the conversation focused; what could practitioners share to help educators design a better curriculum for LIS students. That's when it occurred to me. We should be talking about integrating design thinking into the LIS curriculum...I believe that the first LIS program that declares itself the 'design thinking iSchool' is going to set the standard for the future of library education. Is there a forward thinking LIS program that is ready to give this a try?" Bernie Sloan