Teachers are being challenged as never before to tailor instruction to meet the educational needs of an increasingly diverse population of young learners and to make sense of the differences in cognitive development and ability, cognitive style, social and cultural experiences and traditions, as well as language variations.¹ Diagnosing instructional needs and customizing instructional approaches for information literacy education assumes the presence of "reflective prac­ti­tion­ers" (Schön 1983) who are able to apply educational theory to practice. As has been noted in previous chapters, school librarians have proven themselves to be both reflective and resourceful in reframing resource-­based "library skills" to focus on information seeking, process learning, critical thinking, prob­lem solving (Bodi 1992 Kuhlthau 1993b), and guided inquiry (Kuhlthau et al. 2007).

There are, of course, many ways to differentiate instruction. In the research lit­er­a­ture of library and information science, individual differences have frequently been viewed in terms of "user needs" and information-­seeking be­hav­iors. Within the educational literature, differences are seen to relate to cognitive and personal development and learning styles. Research in sociology, communication, and other disciplines suggest worldview, culture, socioeconomic status, and gender as foundations of difference. Understanding each of these dimensions can help school librarians design effective learning sessions.

Grover's Diagnostic Model

In the 1990s, Robert Grover (1993, 1994) proposed a useful approach to instructional customization that takes account of differences in thinking and learning. In essence, Grover's model reframes the standard reference interview as a "cycle of ser­vice" that shifts the focus of attention from the characteristics of the library's resources to a concern for the information seeker and his or her par­tic­u­lar information needs. Originally aimed at recreating reference interactions as user-­centered activities in public and academic libraries, the model can be used by school librarians in lesson planning ­because, as Grover (1994) suggests, "information skills instruction is an educational ser­vice" (176).²

In creating his model, Grover (1993, 1994) invoked a clinical approach developed by doctors to diagnose, prescribe for, and treat their patients. In Grover's adaptation, the ser­vice cycle begins when a librarian and an information seeker first encounter each other and ends with the librarian's evaluation of the services provided. Two ele­ments in the model specifically address accountability issues and deserve special notice. The first is that, from the outset, the librarian assumes responsibility for the successful outcome of the ser­vice interaction or information search pro­cess. The second is that it is the library user, not the librarian, who determines what constitutes "success" in terms of ser­vice or search outcomes.

The four steps in Grover's (1993, 1994) model are diagnosis, prescription, treatment, and evaluation (see Figure 5.1). At diagnosis, the information provider must inquire into the what, where, and when of the user's information topic or need. However, the central question to be answered is "who?" According to Grover, ­factors to consider include the individual's literacy level, developmental level, cognitive style, worldview, format preference, culture, and technological skills. Age, gender, communication style, and English-­language proficiency may also be germane at the diagnosis phase. This information is then used in the second, or prescription, stage of the model in determining the relevance and appropriateness of specific resources (available in the collection, online, or in another library) that ­will meet the user's need.

The information seeker and the resources identified by the librarian are brought together at the treatment stage of the cycle at evaluation, the librarian assesses the ser­vice pro­cess in light of the user's satisfaction with the resources provided. The questions to be addressed at evaluation include: Has the user's need been met? Has the user's prob­lem been resolved? If the answer to ­these questions is "no," the diagnostic pro­cess begins over again and is repeated ­until the user is satisfied.

When applied in a school context, diagnosis of a student's needs must additionally involve initial assessments of his or her reading level, prior knowledge of the topic or subject, and preferred learning style (Grover 1994) so that lessons that address specific curricular objectives and standards and that meet the instructional needs and preferences of individual students can be created. The implementation of the lesson corresponds with the treatment stage of Grover's model. Evaluating the outcomes of instruction concludes the cycle at this stage, the school librarian and teacher can assess student learning in relation to the objectives established ­earlier. This assessment can then serve as a basis on which to plan further activities or make necessary modifications to instructional strategies.

Student pro­gress and learning may be assessed through observation, interviewing, student journals or learning diaries, portfolios, student proj­ects, paper-­and-­pencil tests, and teacher-­, peer-­, and self-­evaluations. In the event that assessment mea­sures show that objectives have not been met or that skills have not been learned, a new round or rounds of planning, instruction, and assessment can be carried out ­until such time as students achieve mastery. In sum, Grover (1994) proposes diagnose, design, teach, assess, reteach, and reassess as steps in an instructional adaptation of his ser­vice cycle.

Dimensions of Difference

Successful implementation of Grover's (1994) model calls for a theoretical grounding in library and information studies (LIS) and related disciplines as a way to advance student learning and individualize instruction. In the LIS research lit­erature, individual differences have frequently been viewed in terms of user needs and information-­seeking be­hav­iors as conceptualized by Taylor, Belkin, and Dervin. Within the educational lit­era­ture, differences have been related to psy­chol­ogy (Maslow), cognitive development (Piaget, Bloom, & ­identified others), cognitive pro­cessing and activity (e.g., laterality) (Buzan), an environmental­systematic approach (Tomlinson), multiple intelligences (Gardner), learning modes and approaches (e.g., Kolb & Pask), worldview (Anderson), and gender (Gilligan). Understanding each of ­these dimensions can help school librarians design effective learning sessions. In a very real sense, they also reveal the layers of complexity embedded within activities that may appear, on the surface, to be straightforward and unproblematic.

Notes

¹ The con­temporary term for individualizing instruction is "curriculum differentiation," a strategy that calls on teachers to alter course content and pro­cesses, instructional environment, learning products, and assessment mea­sures in response to the interests and abilities of individual students. Interdisciplinary approaches to content, in­de­pen­dent activities, critical thinking, active exploration, and challenging assignments are current priorities in curriculum differentiation.

²When employed in this context, the model assumes that lessons proceed within the context of ongoing classroom activity and draws attention to the necessity of proj­ect coordination and cooperative planning with the classroom teacher.

References

Bernier, A. (2007). Introduction: "Not Broke by Someone Else's Schedule": On Joy and Young Adult Information Seeking. In M. K. Chelton and C. Cool (Eds.), Youth Information-­Seeking Be­hav­ior II: Context, Theories, Models, and Issues (pp. xiii–­xxviii). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.

Bodi, S. (1992). Collaborating with Faculty in Teaching Critical Thinking: The Role of Librarians. Research Strategies, 10, no. 2, 69–76.

Grover, R. (1993). A Proposed Model for Diagnosing Information Needs. School Library Media Quarterly, 21, no. 2, 95–100.

Grover, R. (1994). Assessing Information Skills Instruction. The Reference Librarian, 20, no. 44, 173–189.

Kuhlthau, C. C. (1993b). Seeking Meaning. Norwood, NJ: Ablex

Kuhlthau, C. C., Maniotes, L. K., & Caspari, A. K. (2007). Guided Inquiry: Learning in the 21^st ­Century. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.

Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York: Basic Books.

Small, R. V., & Stewart, J. (2013). Meeting Needs: Effective Programs for Students with Disabilities. School Library Monthly, 29, no. 8, 11–13.