1

Diagnostic Interview: Preparing Lesson Plans Valerie E. Bogert Emporia State University SLIM Overland Park, KS

Introduction The person I chose to interview, instructs 65 home school students in a mixed class of 7th to 12th graders, on Ancient history. Each week she prepares a one hour lesson in a college lecture format, on a select time period. Her focus for the week of the interview was on South, Central, and North American indigenous people. Her goal was to present the new information and somehow tie it into the previous lessons that she has taught. For the privacy of the individual I have chosen I will refer to her as Ann throughout this paper. Ann has been teaching basic history to home school elementary children for 15 years. This is her second year instructing older students on Ancient history. She has basic experience in putting together Ancient history lectures for the older age groups. She devotes approximately twenty five hours a week to research and development of each lesson. The rest of her time is devoted to her full time job as a Licensed Mid-wife and birthing instructor for a small section of Southwest Missouri. She is in her early 50s. The purpose of this paper is to examine and discuss the information seeking behavior of a teacher preparing lesson plans for a mixed age group of students. It also highlights the participants cognitive learning styles and how they played a role in the research process. The researchers methods are compared with Kuhlthaus six step model of the search process and Kellys hypothesis theory on indicative verses invitational. All findings are based on personal observation and an open question interview. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and Gardners Multiple Intelligence Theory are also used to determine her learning and personality styles.

Information need To begin our session, I asked Ann what prompted her need to acquire new information. She replied that upon completion of her last lesson on medieval history in Japan and China, the students had requested a lesson on the early history of indigenous peoples of the Americas. She has taught a similar lesson to younger children on North American tribes but did not have the knowledge needed to translate that into a lesson for her advanced older students. While she had some previous knowledge on North American tribes, she had little to no knowledge on the tribes of the South and Central Americas other than what she had studied personally many years ago as a student. She expressed that she was very apprehensive to begin this search and worried that she would have trouble tying this lesson in with the previous lessons she had taught earlier this year. Before we started the interview I asked Ann to show me what resources she typically turns to when working on a new lesson plan. She has four books that she always has on hand when beginning a new topic. These books are: Steams of Civilization, Stanton & Hyma (1992); The time tables of History, Grun (1991); Usborne Illustrated Atlas of World History, Miles (1995); and Usborne Internet linked encyclopedia of World History, Bingham (2001). She also uses popular internet search engines when looking for pictures, maps and further information. As Ann begins her initial search I observe that she follows Kuhlthaus initial model of the information search process that is outlined on page 45, of Seeking Meaning, Kuhlthau (2004). This model can best be described as incorporating three realms: affective (feelings), the cognitive (thoughts), and the physical (actions) common to each of the six stages. (Kuhlthau, 2004, Model of the information, para.1)

Research Process The first stage in Kuhlthaus model is task initiation. Ann expressed that she feels urgency and an apprehension when she begins looking for new information. She considers her time that she has to complete her lesson plans and what roadblocks or barriers she will face during the preparation. She also selects which areas and the time period she wants to focus on, then does a bit of brainstorming to get a feel for which direction she will take. This is very much like what table 3.2 shows us on task initiation. (Kuhlthau, First stage, table 3.2, page 45) Next Ann moves into stage two, which is topic selection. Her behavior is very similar to what is shown in table 3.3, located on page 46. (Kuhlthau, 2004) She becomes more excited about her topic as she begins to narrow down her starting point. She still harbors a bit of anxiety as to the relevance of the topic and if it will tie into her previous lessons. Her excitement stems from the thought of finding new and exciting material for her students. Her anxiety comes from blending the new lesson about the tribes in the Americas, with the last lesson on Japan and China. She is also anxious about the amount of time she may or may not have to prepare. She selects a starting point and decides to focus on the earliest known city in the Americas. When I ask her why she chose that particular topic she states that it seems to be a topic that has the most information to go on from the books she has brought with her. Ann moves through stage two quickly and proceeds to stage three (pre-focus exploration). She then plans out her strategy for the information she needs to find by creating a timeline on paper. She moves on to consult her book entitled The time tables of History, Grun, (1991). In the book she finds that the oldest city in America was established in 100 B.C. around the same time Chinese explorers were discovering India (Grun, 1991). She then grabs a sheet of

paper and creates her own basic timeline using that fact as a start date. She flips through the book further and determines an estimated stopping point of around 900 B.C. When I ask her why she does this particular step, she states the following: I have learned to do this through trial and error and previous experience when I research. I have found that if I do not give myself a timeline with a clear stopping point, I get disorganized quickly, and keep expanding my research beyond what I can reasonably teach in an hour or get accurate information on. (Ann, personal communication, Feb, 17th, 2011) Ann continues her search and creates a strong outline for herself, which is a perfect example of stage four (focus formulation) that is shown in table 3.5 (Kuhlthau, 2004). She consults the rest of her texts and begins several online searches. While doing the searches she opens a blank PowerPoint presentation. When she finds relevant maps or pictures she copies them into the PowerPoint for later reference and copies down the resource in her notes. At this point, I ask Ann what she considers to be a good reliable online site. Her answer surprises me as she states that she uses Wikipedia often. I ask her how she knows that it is a good site and she says she looks at the footnotes and links at the bottom of the page. She visits those sources to make sure that the information is accurate and the person giving it has the right credentials. I ask what she means by credentials and she replies that she usually uses professors or archeologists that are well known in that field. She is open to using others as long as she can look them up and verify who they are and why they are qualified to present that information. If it is not up to her standards she rejects the information and moves on to someone else.

She shows me another site that she uses often (Britannica Online), but expresses great annoyance, because to get most of the information she needs would require a paid subscription. She gets lucky when she types in Quetzalcoatl (who is a Central American deity), and the website gives her several pages of information. She quickly adds it to her favorites and decides to come back later. I feel that Ann moves from stage four (Focus formulation) and into stage five (Information collection) almost seamlessly. In stage four she has narrowed down her focus to select topics that she wants to pursue. In stage five she narrows down her focus a bit more as she consults her books and online text. She determines what further information she needs by looking at her notes and her excitement level for the project is at its all time high. However, based on my observations Ann has a tendency to move backwards at this point. She closes off some of her searching when she determines she has found enough, but if something in a text or online site catches her eye, she will get off task quickly and chase that thought to the detriment of her current research. Several times I observed her almost going back to the beginning when she would find something new. This I will discuss further when I evaluate her learning and personality styles. In stage five according to the text, we should observe the following: At this point, the task is to gather information pertaining to the focused topic. Thoughts center on defining and supporting the focus. Actions involve selecting information pertinent to the students focus and taking detailed notes on that which pertains specifically to the focus, as general information on the topic is no longer relevant after formulation. (Kuhlthau, 2004, p. 49)

In some ways Ann has achieved this. She chooses to focus on the cities and peoples from a short time frame in the early history of South, Central and North America. However, she gets off track when she finds information about early sports at that time. She then tries to somehow squeeze it into what she is currently working on. This causes her to go back to the early search process stages and practically start over. In stage six (search closure) Ann should be completing her research and preparing the findings for her presentation. I feel that during the interview Ann only obtains partial closure in her research. Several of her ideas and topics are well planned and ready to be presented. But, she still continued to seek further information. I asked her when she determines that she has enough information and is finished with that lesson. She explains that she never really feels finished with her research. She further explains that she often continues adding things to her PowerPoint presentations up to an hour before class starts. Even as she is teaching she often feels dissatisfaction that she may have not done enough for that lesson. After comparing Anns research process with Kuhlthaus model of the information search process, I can further expand into Kellys Personal Construct theory, which talks about invitational verses indicative moods and how they play a role in her search. Both moods can be described as the following: Invitational mood would foster an open search, one ready to take in new information. An indicative mood would foster an approach seeking closure. The invitational mood leaves the person open to new ideas and receptive to change and adjustment according to what is encountered. In the indicative mood a person depends on the construct that he or she presently holds and rejects new information and ideas. (Kuhlthau, 2004, p. 42)

Ann exhibits a very invitational view when searching. She is constantly adjusting her searches based on new information she finds. Also, if a beloved scholar or book has questionable material, she is able to move on to find a better source. However, she keeps this mood throughout the process, never really achieving closure fostered by an indicative mood exhibited in later stages of the search process. I asked her what she does when she encounters new information at the end of her search when she feels that she has completed everything. She responded that if it is relevant or new she considers it and whether or not it would enhance the lesson. If she feels she has enough or has run out of time to add it, she rejects it and moves on. However, she will jot down where she found the information in case she needs it in the future. Based on this answer, I can determine that she is very invitational regarding information even at the later stages. While this is helpful in some cases it does create an issue for her when she is trying to complete the lesson plans. An indicative mood at the last stages would help her wrap things up and would reject the new information. I checked in with Ann at a later date to see if she had come to a stopping point and found that she had started the process over based on new information she had uncovered after our interview. Level of Assistance During the interview Ann did not seek the help of a librarian, even though the interview took place in the caf next to the library. When I asked her how she felt the library could help her with her research, she expressed that she rarely consults a librarian but does use the library. She will check out books from the library but she will not ask for help with specific titles. She prefers to do the search herself and often does it on the library website. She explained that she does not

have time to drive to the building since she lives outside of town. She will type in a keyword or topic and look at the descriptions of the books that they have. She then selects about a dozen books and picks them up in the drive through when she happens to be in town. Barriers Throughout the interview Ann said that time was her biggest barrier. Since she has a full time job beyond her responsibilities as a home school teacher, several older children at home, and many volunteer positions, she feels she simply runs out of time. She also sets very high, almost unachievable, standards to present a perfect lesson every time. She says that if all students except one are engaged and enjoying the presentation, she will focus on that one student and strive harder the next time to make sure all are learning at the level she thinks they should be. She also makes sure that she completes at least 16 pages of notes before each lesson so that all her bases are covered. Learning and personality styles Ann is a very outgoing individual. Her goal when teaching is to make things fun and accessible to others. She has a good memory when it comes to facts and recalls her past lessons with considerable ease. She is very excited during the research process even when she comes across things she may not understand. She frequently states: I cant wait till my students see this! (Ann, personal communication, Feb, 17th, 2011) In Barbara Webbs article, Typecasting with Myers Briggs, she provides a chart that describes each of the sixteen different personality types. (Webb 1990) Each of the sixteen types has a small description of that personality. If I apply Anns behaviors to the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator chart, Ann would clearly be an ESFP. She is extroverted, sensory lead, feeling, and

10

perceiving. Her type can be described as outgoing, friendly, someone who likes to make things fun for others (her students), and is good at remembering facts. (Webb, 1990) As Ann prepares her lesson plans she uses lots of pictures and maps. She will pause during her search and stare off into space until she remembers a detail. She explains that she often uses audio/visual resources when finding new information. Clearly this shows that she is a Visual/Spatial learner as presented by Howard Gardners Multiple Intelligence Theory. Analysis and conclusion Throughout the research process Ann maintains an indicative mood and allows the flow of new information to interrupt the completion of her lesson plans. I feel that she needs to set limits on what resources she uses and the number of them. By the time she is close to being finished she will have used around 10-12 books and an equal amount of online resources. If she limits herself to a few books and internet sources that support her ideas, she will have more time to complete her research and not be working right up until class time. I also feel that an informational service provider could help her narrow down the amount of books she checks out. She will check out over a dozen at a time off the internet and hope that they have what she wants. Most of them she discards when she goes through them at home. An information specialist (librarian) could help her select the most useful books and prevent the extra time she spends at home deciding if they are relevant or not. Her internet searches are very broad and she will type one or two words into the search engine to see what comes up. She is often very overwhelmed with all the things that the search engines bring up and frequently gets information overload. If she were to use features such as Advanced Google Scholar, she could narrow her searches down to specific subjects, journals and

11

even dates. Since her preference is to find articles by educators this would be a helpful way to only get information from those sources. While Ann reflects Kuhlthaus model very well, she does go back and forth between steps instead of proceeding in order. I feel that based on my observations, her personality, learning styles, and time constraints play a large factor in this process. Some are helpful to her and others create barriers preventing the full completion of her lesson plans. After our interview was complete, I recommended several strategies to Ann that I felt would help benefit her research, such as Google Scholar. Ann was very excited about using that site and felt it would help her shave off some time when doing web based searching. Based on my observations, I feel that Ann has a good grasp of how to seek new information. Her skills do need to be refined in some areas so she can get the most out of her time. All in all, I felt this was a good learning experience for us both and I look forward to seeing her develop her new skills.

12

References Grun, B. (1991). Timetables of history, new third rev ed: Horizontal linkage of people & events. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster. Kuhlthau, C.C. (2004). Seeking meaning: a process approach to library and information services . Westport, CT: Libraries Unltd Inc . Webb, B. (1990). Typecasting life with myers-briggs. Library Journal, 115 (11), 32-37.