Building capacity: sharing INASP’s approach to information literacy training - Emma Farrow
•Transferir como PPTX, PDF•
1 gostou•815 visualizações
Presented at LILAC 2015
Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Mais procurados
Mais procurados (17)
Destaque
Destaque (20)
Semelhante a Building capacity: sharing INASP’s approach to information literacy training - Emma Farrow
Semelhante a Building capacity: sharing INASP’s approach to information literacy training - Emma Farrow (20)
Mais de IL Group (CILIP Information Literacy Group)
Mais de IL Group (CILIP Information Literacy Group) (20)
Último
Último (20)
Building capacity: sharing INASP’s approach to information literacy training - Emma Farrow
- 1. Building capacity… sharing INASP’s approach to information literacy training 13/04/2015 1 Emma Farrow LILAC 2015, 8 - 10 April 2015
- 2. Mission: putting research knowledge at the heart of development Aim: work with partners in Africa, Asia and Latin America to improve – access – production and – use of research information & knowledge so that countries are equipped to solve their development challenges 03/12/2013 2 Principles: capacity development, sharing of learning, sustainability
- 3. IL training as part of strategic plan • New 5 year programme of work: Strengthening Research and Knowledge Systems • 10 new or revised workshops including: - Information Literacy Strategy - Information Literacy into Curriculum - Pedagogical Skills • Working with and through library consortia - strategic planning, leading to 3 year plans 13/04/2015 3
- 4. IL workshops delivery IL into Curriculum Nicaragua (Feb 2014) Ghana (May 2014) Uganda (July 2014) Kenya (Nov 2014) IL Strategy Zimbabwe (May 2014) Honduras (Nov 2014) Next El Salvador Bolivia 13/04/2015 4
- 5. Improving quality of our training through: 1. Better participatory materials 2. Building capacity of facilitators 3. Improved participant selection 4. Pre- and post-workshop assessments 5. Integrated post-workshop tasks … and six month follow up 13/04/2015 5
- 6. 1. Participatory materials • Standard materials developed by consultant • Local adaptation encouraged • Learning included: - longer lead in time for pilots and review - balancing standard materials and local context 13/04/2015 6 Adaptation of content to the local context enables clear understanding of the topic. [Facilitator report]
- 7. 2. Build capacity of facilitators We do this through a ‘cascading workshop approach’ 13/04/2015 7 Pilot: experienced lead / consortium nominated assistant Workshop 1: observe & report Workshop 2: assist.facilitator, home country Workshop 3: potential lead facilitator
- 8. Cascading workshop in action Introducing…Faith Akiteng College Librarian, Makerere University Uganda - experienced IL trainer 13/04/2015 8 Ghana workshop: Observer Uganda workshop: Assistant Facilitator Kenya workshop: Lead Facilitator
- 9. 3. Improved participant selection • Clear criteria for participation • Pre-workshop assessment – including institutional readiness / support • Final decision with consortium 13/04/2015 9 The selection process was some how “diluted” in the sense that some participants without prior IL training experience attended even after INASP and facilitators gave their views on their eligibility. [Facilitator report]
- 10. 4. Pre/post-workshop assessment • Informs facilitators e.g. training experience / expectations • Informs INASP (and our funders) - improved understanding of core concepts? • Challenge: asking the right questions! 13/04/2015 10 The assessment process was excellent…helped in aligning the workshop activities to the kind of participants expected. [Facilitator report]
- 11. 5. Post-workshop tasks… • Integrated post-workshop tasks - stated expectation from start - to be completed within 6 months of workshop > action plan / collective agreement 13/04/2015 11
- 12. Post-workshop tasks example • Develop an information literacy curriculum outline, or review an existing one (you may wish to develop either the mind-map or curriculum template) • Develop a detailed lesson plan for your IL training (e.g. using format introduced in Planning training using a lesson plan) • Develop an advocacy action plan, with steps to raise awareness of your IL programme (e.g. using template introduced in Communication & Advocacy) • Another appropriate, equivalent task which meets the needs of the consortium and member institutions 13/04/2015 12
- 13. 5. Post-workshop tasks… • Integrated post-workshop tasks - stated expectation from start - to be completed within 6 months of workshop > action plan / collective agreement …and 6 month follow up - facilitators: how their training put into practice - consortium: impact of their workshop - participants: feedback on their work - INASP/funders: impact of our support 13/04/2015 13
- 14. Improving quality of our training through: 1. Better participatory materials 2. Building capacity of facilitators 3. Improved participant selection 4. Pre- and post-workshop assessments 5. Integrated post-workshop tasks … and six month follow up … how successful? 13/04/2015 14
- 15. Looking ahead • “6 month” follow up • IL online forum: ‘Chat Literacy' • Toolkit approach for new materials • Network of trainers - consortia-nominated trainers equipped with learner-centred knowledge, skills, attitudes 13/04/2015 15
- 16. Next Steps: Faith Ghana workshop: Observer Uganda workshop: Assistant Facilitator Kenya workshop: Lead Facilitator NEXT STEP : Participant in Network of Trainers programme 13/04/2015 16 Having recently attended a pedagogical skills workshop …on how best to deliver IL training, I am a converted believer that a learner- centred approach is best for delivering any training.
- 17. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. 13/04/2015 17 For further information on our work on Access to Research, subscribe to our blog at http://blog.inasp.info, follow us on twitter @INASPinfo and facebook inasp.info , or visit our website www.inasp.info For workshop materials, in English and Spanish, visit: http://www.inasp.info/en/training-resources/courses/ Thank you for listening Emma Farrow efarrow@inasp.info
Notas do Editor
- [20 mins max, under Outreach and Collaboration] This presentation draws upon INASP’s two new Information Literacy workshops - which have been commissioned and run (in English and Spanish) in 5 partner countries over the last year - to illustrate our strategy and approach to capacity development as we work alongside local partners
- Central to INASP’s approach are local partnerships. INASP has created a strong network of collaborators in over 20 partner countries who determine local needs and are committed to long term continuous improvement in generating, communicating and using research. Funded by DFID and Sida for >10 years
- New 5 year programme of work, recognise we won’t always be in the picture. SRKS: Strengthening Research and Knowledge Systems Identified 10 activities for library staff – including information literacy training and pedagogical skills Reflecting role of librarians in improve use of e-resources "IL Strategy“ 3-day: participants develop a strategic approach to developing an IL programme. Identifying key stakeholders and their institution's readiness. Outcome is a draft strategic plan for introducing (or revising) an IL curriculum. - "IL into Curriculum“ 4-day: prepares participants to design an appropriate and relevant IL curriculum for their institution. Includes underlying theory, considering institutional readiness and developing advocacy messages. Then moves on to actual components of an IL curriculum - with the outcome being a draft curriculum outline. Both draw on existing models, standards and frameworks e.g. SCONUL Seven Pillars Model, Arcadia ANCIL [a new curriculum for IL], ACRL standards With most countries we work in, move from annual workshop selection to a 2-3 plan, outcome mapping process with local library consortium or equivalent Reflecting on where wish to be in 5 years time - Identify their current and future needs - Recognise skills and expertise of members
- Now at end of year 2, this slow shows workshops delivered to date and two planned
- To ensure that the training we deliver is effective, and that it builds genuine and enduring capacity within library consortia/equivalent national agencies, we have increased our emphasis on quality. - progressively improving our training materials - delivered in country by local or regional facilitators cascaded to expand the reach of this training focusing on appropriate pedagogical approaches as well as subject expertise - tightening participant selection processes (to ensure that the right people are trained) - assessing what participants have learnt as a result of each workshop - Ensuring they are able to put this into practise Iterative process, learning as we go alongside our partners = consider each heading in turn…
- Standard approach for our training materials Designed so anyone able to pick them up and use – facilitator notes, guidance on exercises etc Freely available under creative commons license on INASP website IL materials developed by Siobhan Duvigneau, Inst. Development Studies – experienced IL trainer and familiarity with local context for some of our partners Learning: Pilots = need for additional day for both workshops Translation of some resources e.g. Arcadia curriculum – balance with need for local / regional examples e.g. Jesus Lau introduced Mexican IL standards “the course seem to have been designed in Europe or some other place. Could we tailor the course to the Kenyan situation? Some survey has to be done.” participant feedback
- Our approach is not to fly in international trainers but work with local facilitators wherever possible, building their capacity Due to new 3 year plans, we knew which partner countries having particular workshops and were able to plan more cascading or travelling workshops then was previously possible There is reporting at each stage: reflections, feedback and any personal training needs
- Actual example: Faith joined first African workshop as an observer, then assistant facilitator for the training in her home country and finally lead for the Kenyan workshop
- Strengthening selection process to ensure that the right people are trained Earlier challenge of not always most appropriate people at our workshops – so not in a position to put learning into practice e.g. too senior, in wrong role or home institution not ready for the changes required Workshop invite clear about expectations and responsibilities, both from potential participant and their home institution Pre-assessment included questions on readiness (more on assessments next) In some cases pre-assessment used as a selection tool – mostly institutions invited to submit names against the criteria INASP and facilitators reviewed applicants, but final decision with partners For local consortium, balance between offering training to member institutions and ensuring most appropriate people attend
- Pre and post-assessments were relatively new for INASP IL assessments developed by INASP and content expert/developer, and reviewed by another experienced facilitator e.g. criteria for IL training that some previous experience and IL training as part of current remit Accessible / replicable by partners as opposed to sophisticated tool developed by our M&E team After early workshops, an explicit question about line manager consent added Some benefit from inviting feedback from our partners e.g. question on level of role and qualifications The right question versus open to misinterpretation or a memory test rather than checking understanding Time to complete pre-assessment versus post-assessment at end of long workshop For IL into Curriculum, participating institutions were also asked to submit existing materials in advance – e.g. lesson plan or existing curriculum – so inform facilitators of existing practices
- Clear outcomes within 6 months of the training developed at time workshops developed / commissioned So clear expectations strengthened by introduction of action plan and collective agreement After 6 months, participants asked to report back – for the IL workshops, including their IL strategy or curriculum/lesson plan - Facilitators keen to be involved in a review of these = feedback on how learning put into practice - Consortium able to see impact e.g. 87% of participants went on to develop IL strategies - Participants benefit from (generic) feedback - INASP receives copy of report sent from facilitator to consortium, so also able to see impact of training and report back to funders
- Shift in approach as recognised, with feedback from facilitators, that a stronger process to agree next steps was required Alongside, opportunity for local consortium to feed into approach, on what they we would like the training to achieve Learning included that expected outcomes had to meet both institutional and consortium need
- So clear expectations strengthened by introduction of action plan and collective agreement After 6 months, participants asked to report back – for the IL workshops, including their IL strategy or curriculum/lesson plan - Facilitators keen to be involved in a review of these = feedback on how learning put into practice - Consortium able to see impact e.g. 87% of participants went on to develop IL strategies - Participants benefit from (generic) feedback - INASP receives copy of report sent from facilitator to consortium, so also able to see impact of training and report back to funders
- To return to this slide… 2 years into the programme, how successful have we been? We certainly didn’t have all the answers from the start, and hadn’t appreciated the complexity of what we were seeking to achieve – so plenty of learning along the way Iterative process, able to respond to feedback from partner consortia, facilitators and participants e.g. extending length of workshops, improving Spanish translation of materials, strengthening agreement of post-workshop tasks and involving facilitators in 6 month review More learning as move forward…
- In relation to the IL training: - Some delays but now reviewing post-workshop tasks - Community of Practice / online forum to provide ongoing peer support Promoting Chat Literacy, well-established under IDS More widely: - New materials being designing using a toolkit approach, to give increased flexibility for facilitators and so learner centred approach - Network of trainers – further strengthening existing facilitators identified by local consortium to design and deliver learner centred training Pilot with Ghana and Uganda
- Our approach is very much about working with our partners so fitting to end with next steps for Faith
- You are free: to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work to Remix — to adapt the work to make commercial use of the work Under the following conditions: Attribution — You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). Share Alike — If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar license to this one. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/