one: In defense of closed-captioning.
In response to discussion in class and posts in a couple of blogs, I just want to encourage people not to make assumptions about the people who would use closed captions. Closed captions aren't just for the deaf, the way that many people in class seem to be assuming. They're also for people who are hard of hearing, people who have trouble processing spoken language (especially spoken language that's not from a person who's physically present), English language learners whose reading comprehension may be better than their spoken language comprehension, and people who don't have or don't want to use sound on their computers. Also, closed captioning in another language is a way to extend support to speakers of that language without having to produce another resource entirely from scratch. I agree that captions are not always necessary for all people at all times, but I strongly think that they should be an option whenever possible.
@Kristin (or any other readers who may have an answer): do you know if any of the screencasting tools we went over allows for optional captions that a viewer could switch on or off?
two: Weiner, Sharon A. "On Information Literacy in the Library Workforce." Serials Review 36.4 (2010): 204-204.
I thought that this was an interesting article for the Professional Practice in Library and Information Centers class. It's basically asking whether libraries are expecting the same kind of information literacy that outside companies are demanding of their employees. I have to say that before coming across this article, this is something that never would have occurred to me to worry about. I guess I assumed that since we're in the information literacy business (or, at least, information literacy is a major part of our job description), we'd all be pretty information literate, but according to Weiner, that's not necessarily the case.
three: Stern, Caroline and Trishanjit Kaur. "Developing Theory-Based, Practical Information Literacy Training for Adults." The International Information & Library Review. 42.2 (2010): 69-74.
This article suggests that libraries can learn from businesses when it comes to designing educational experiences for adult learners. The authors advocate moving away from traditional educational models, which they describe as being "systematic, cumulative, sustained, and periodically graded for achievement," and towards a training model borrowed from the corporate world, which "focuses on an immediate need or opportunity and builds on the existing expertise, education, or interest of the targeted learner." The article references the ADDIE system of design we looked at last week, which reassures me that the model is widely used and not just a figment of Veldof's imagination.
Feminist/classics geek moment: why is the teaching of adults labled "andragogy" (ἀνήρ = man)? Is there some reason why men are privileged in this process? Is there an equivalent practice of "gynegogy" (γυνή = woman) if only women are involved? Why can't the term be "anthropogogy" (ἄνθρωπος = person), so it includes everyone?
four: Hall, Rachel. "Public Praxis: A Vision for Critical Information Literacy in Public Libraries." Public Library Quarterly 29.2 (2010): 162-175.
This article critiques the place that information literacy holds in public libraries. It observes that teaching information literacy is a big concern in school and academic libraries, but it often gets overlooked in public libraries, or confused with the concepts of life-long learning and user education. The author advocates for centering information literacy as a non-value neutral skill and for librarians to become more assertive while still not positioning themselves as authoritative. I really like the focus on outreach and active programming in this article. I also appreciate the recognition that information literacy isn't a neutral skill -- that people start out from different places and simply knowing how to use a job board isn't necessarily going to get someone a job, for instance. I think that as a profession that seeks to serve everyone, it is important for librarians to be aware of privilege and how access to information plays into it.
I would like to think that no one was attempting to argue "against" closed-captioning, or at least I know that was not my personal intent (rather, my intent was to demonstrate that it is hard to please all users, all the time). I agree with you that the best solution is to have closed-captions be an option which can be turned on or off, depending on user preference. Or even making two separate tutorials - one with, one without - which users can chose from. I am not a person who "needs" closed-captioning in any of the ways you mentioned above, but I do sometimes find myself using the feature if the area I'm in is noisy, or I'm trying to keep the volume down on whatever I'm watching. I also think it demonstrates the need for doing as much "assessment" of a target population as possible, because many of the groups you mentioned in your post may easily be overlooked or forgotten.
ReplyDeleteBased on the Hall article you read, you mention that teaching information literacy often gets overlooked in public libraries. I read in another blog that sometimes people believe that literacy skills should be primarily taught in the school. I would disagree. The public library is a place for patrons to learn whatever information they can and want to glean. Also, what about those patrons who are not in the school systems? For example, people who have immigrated to a different country are certainly going to need to learn how to navigate online information in a new country. Even people who have long since earned their degrees may have rusty skills and have no desire to return to school - the public library can provide a great service in teaching them current information literacy skills. I also believe that the school and public library should act cooperatively in teaching whatever information literacy skills can be learned - and thus can teach more people.
ReplyDelete