Kicking off the afternoon which was promised to be more active in order to keep us awake after lunch was Geoff Walton from Staffordshire University. He started by telling us that we could learn lessons about information literacy by reading Ben Goldacre's Bad Science. I've not read it but we've got a copy so I think I'll take a look. Next we were asked to think about what we considered to be the essential ingredients of teaching. Here is the list the group came up with:

• Passion
• Assessment
• Communication
• Charisma
• Understanding the level of the learner
• Motivation of teacher and learner
• Enthusiasm
• Subject knowledge
• Learning outcomes
• Confidence
• Flexibility

One that we didn't hit on but that was top of Geoff's list was risk taking. Of all the sessions from the event I felt that Geoff's provided me with the most practical advice for teaching. One idea that I'm not sure I'm brave enough to try yet is to let the students dictate the content of an induction session simply by asking what they need or want to know. Another, which came from a group work exercise on the library and information masters course at Loughborough was the idea of information literacy snakes and ladders.

One soundbite that I will take from Geoff's presentation and try to remember when I am planning any session is this:

"Students don’t like generic information literacy sessions; they want them specific and relevant to their subject."

The penultimate session of the day was led by Emma King from the Learning and Development Centre at Warwick. This was a practical session focused on teaching spaces and how they affect the design of teaching sessions. For this the Teaching Grid had been split into 5 areas each set up as a different type of teaching space. There was

• a formal/lecture style room
• an empty space
• informal seating
• a board room
• cabaret/cafe style seating
• a computer lab (external from the Teaching Grid)

We were split into groups and were given the chance to evaluate two of the spaces. The group I was in got the informal seating and board room. We found the informal seating was a good, relaxed space for group work. We thought it would be useful for any type of teaching where each member of the group was asked to give feedback as there was a sense that the relaxed nature of the space gave a feeling that everyone in the group was equal. In contrast the board room was much more of a formal, rigid space and we felt as a group that we were looking for someone to lead us. Again we thought that the space would be useful for group work and the addition of a table meant that it could be something where lots of materials were used. We discussed where as a teacher you might position yourself in this space - at the head of the table, on a corner, or even on the outside moving around the room.

What I took from this session was a deeper understanding of how the space you have can either restrict or provide opportunities for the development of learning. When I have planned sessions in the past I have known that the room I'm using has a fixed layout, usually either a lecture theatre or a computer lab. This really limits the kind of thing you can do with the group. The benefit of somewhere like the Teaching Grid is that you can decide what methods you want to use in the session and then design the space around that instead of the other way round.

The final session of the day was a panel discussion chaired by one of the event organisers, Ross Connell. The panel included all of the speakers plus Jo Alcock in her capacity as a member of the CILIP West Midlands branch committee. All of the questions posed generated real discussion and to round off this post here is a brief summary of them all.

Q. On whose standards do we judge librarians as teachers?
A. There were many different views on the panel ranging from an institution specific peer assessment to the HEA professional standards. Debbi Boden suggested that qualifications like the P.G Cert. are not subject specific so completion of a learning programme like SirLearnaLot might be more useful for librarians.

Q. Why aren't there any teaching modules on LIS courses?
A. The panel knew of some courses which had teaching elements to them - Loughborough, Sheffield and London MET. Jo Webb thought that the reason teaching wasn't a core element was because it wasn't relevant to all sectors but Debbi Boden disagreed saying that information literacy was important for everyone in the profession giving the example of public librarians teaching digital citizenship.

Q. Can you give any practical tips for how to find enough teaching hours for the P.G. Cert.?
A. Geoff Walton suggested that keeping a reflective teaching diary could help with this. Sally Patalong encouraged us to think beyond what we would call teaching; hours can be built up through one to one sessions, assessment or peer observation.

Q. Where does the responsibility lie for defining the librarians teaching role?
A. Debbi Boden says that initially it should come from the individual but that as the two are bound CILIP should play a part. The feeling in the room was that librarians are in a unique position to experiment with teaching styles as we do not have the constraints of traditional teaching techniques.

Having put all my notes from the event into these posts I've realised that I have got a lot to think about and explore. I feel really encouraged me to be more confident and experimental with the sessions I design.

Update: Slides and handouts from all of the day's presentations are now available on the Librarians as Teachers page of the University of Warwick Library website.

The day started with Antony Brewerton of the University of Warwick giving us a walking tour of the library's Teaching Grid which, given the topic of the day, was a perfect location for the event. It is a highly dynamic space with no fixed partitions or furniture. Back in our seats Antony introduced us to the ladder of loyalty where each rung is a stage on a continuum defining customer engagement; from potential customers at the bottom to partners at the top. He tied this back to the library's use of the Teaching Grid as a way of engaging and developing relationships with both academics and students.

Following this, Debbi Boden from Glasgow Caledonian University gave the keynote on the evolution of the librarian's teaching role. She started with a couple of videos to highlight that the profession is still struggling to overcome the librarian stereotype. I can't resist sharing this one with you:

Debbi then went on to identify what skills librarians need to be effective teachers. At the very least this should be a knowledge of educational theory and the vocabulary that accompanies that. It was interesting to hear that at Glasgow Cal all liaison librarians are expected to have a teaching qualification and if they don't have one when they are appointed they must complete the P.G. Cert. within 2 years. One slide in this presentation outlined an ideal CV, amongst other things this included being a Fellow of the Higher Education Academy (HEA) and a chartered member of CILIP. Debbi pointed out that if a candidate had one or the other she would prefer them to be an HEA Fellow but that she would not appoint a teacher over a librarian. As someone who has been debating for months over whether to Charter a teaching qualification and HEA membership feels like a more practical and viable alternative.

The next presentation, from Jo Webb, followed on well from here as it focused on the HEA and gaining recognition for teaching. Talking to other delegates during the breaks I think many felt that the topic of this session was all new to them, and this was shown at the start when Jo asked how many of the group were HEA members - of 45 only 5 raised their hands. As well as looking at the criteria of membership the HEA's professional standards were also discussed. Unfortunately from this I didn't feel that librarians were really valued as members of the HEA; the criteria for the different levels of membership have been redefined and now librarians may only join as associates where before they could become fellows [Update: I misunderstood this - see clarification from Jo in the comments]. Having said that though I am definitely going to do some further reading about what is involved.

The last presentation of the morning, given by Sally Patalong from Coventry University, was about the P.G. Cert. qualification. Sally has a unique perspective on this having been a student on the course, a practitioner, and now a facilitator. I really found hearing her personal experience of the process and how it has helped her develop as a teacher useful. She rounded off the morning perfectly with three recommendations:

1. Keep evidence of everything you do
2. Observe other teachers, focusing on their style not the content
3. Ask for feedback, reflect on it and act where appropriate

Okay let's pause there. I have decided to split this post of the event in two because it would have just been too long otherwise. Stay tuned for the second half which I will post tomorrow.

First up was Katie Hill talking about the consumer generation. The consumer generation knows what it wants and how to get it as well as what standards and services it expects. It is important to note that both library users and library staff are part of the consumer generation and this has a great impact on the service. We have to adapt to meet the new demands of our users. Katie gave an example from the University of York where the Lending Services team has been renamed Customer Services. This reflects a change in focus from the stock or resources to the users/customers. To sum this all up Katie used this great phrase:

"Librarians are no longer gatekeepers of information but gateways to information."

Ned Potter followed on from Katie with a presentation on librarian stereotypes. First he looked at the different types of stereotype presented in Maura Seale's article Old Maids, Policeman and Social Rejects. I've not really been confronted by the stereotypes but I often find that when I tell someone I'm a librarian they have nothing to say after that because they have no idea what being a librarian means these days. Ned's talk was entertaining but I don't think it really got us anywhere except that we all know that the stereotypical librarian is a myth.

Ned's best contribution to the conference for me was his discussion of the idea that we're only as good as our last customer interaction. Based on the old addage that a sportsman is only as good as his last game. He suggested that every time we engage with a user we should imagine that the whole service will be judged on our standard of service. This is something I am trying to employ when staffing the information desk - are you?

After lunch we got on to the topic of marketing. I'm not sure how Kath Aitken's talk on the skills a professional librarian can bring to public libraries fitted in here but it was thought provoking none the less. She began by looking at the value of a professional qualification in a public library from the perspective of someone who had started out as a library assistant then returned to work for the same employer post qualification. I found it intriguing to hear someone else's perspective on this as someone who has also held both a non-professional and a professional post in the same library. The talk of the value of the library qualification has been brought up again this week at Umbrella. I've seen lots of tweets suggesting that library qualifications are only desirable, not essential in most sectors. This is something that clearly needs more discussion.

The last presentation I want to mention was given by Jo Alcock on marketing yourself using online tools. She focused on three areas, social networking, blogging and microblogging and rounded her presentation off with ten top tips for marketing yourself online. As someone who already uses tools like Twitter and also maintains a blog it's always great to hear them being promoted. I find having an active professional presence online makes me feel so much more connected to the profession and other librarians and really inspires me to continue to develop my skills and interests.

Credits: image by bookgrl

My initial intention had been to just monitor the event just to keep up with what was happening. The experience however drew me in and at one point this morning (before the event started) I was up in the top 10 list of tweeters. If this event does nothing else it will have brought together a group of librarians professionally and geographically diverse.

I have high hopes however that something more will come out of it. I am not a member of CILIP and haven't been since I graduated from library school. My personal feeling is that CILIP doesn't engage me enough to warrant my membership fee. Depending on the outcome of today I may change my mind.

Anyway, what I really wanted to write about in this post were some thoughts I had on my cycle ride home as I was digesting the comments from the event. It's one thing to ask how CILIP are using web 2.0 tools and what their role is in leading the profession in their use but I also wonder how these tools are being used in teaching future professionals and whether they are being taught how these tools can be used in libraries and by librarians.

I graduated from library school nearly 3 years ago. We did a module called Hypermedia in which we had to create a website but there was no mention of the new technologies that were creeping on to the scene. My cohort were just beginning to use Facebook socially but there was no thought that it might have a place professionally. We used or perhaps it's better to say were forced to use Blackboard to communicate with the group and participate in group assignments. I wonder if today this is still the case or are people using tools like Ning to create social networks specific to their course?

Are future professionals being encouraged to experiment with new technologies and think of new ways to use them in libraries? Are they being asked to think about the potential drawbacks or legal issues? Are they being taught best practice? Are they debating where to draw the line between personal and professional or, if indeed there needs to be a line? Or are they teaching themselves?