Considering Comfort Zones
In class on Monday, we discussed the portion of the ADDIE instructional design method during which the instructor develops checks for understanding. In other words, and in library terms, the librarian planning the workshop should create and add methods by which she can test the learners’ comprehension of the material being presented. While this does seem like a good idea, I think the circumstances under which these checks will be effective are limited, so it’s very important to pay attention to how you’re designing them.
For example, to better explain what I mean, imagine that a librarian is giving a workshop to a class of undergrads and, to check understanding, asks people to raise their hands or somehow indicate when they are confused. Many students may feel embarrassed to admit that they are not keeping up, or generally uncomfortable singling themselves out. Others may be willing to speak up but could be unsure what to ask or how to express their confusion. I think that, when designing these understanding checks, librarians must ensure they are creating situations in which students feel comfortable being honest about their comprehension issues, rather than feeling the need to misrepresent how they are feeling.
Another discussion topic that stood out to me from class was the idea of transferability and the way that it seems to play back into the discussion of a conceptual framework. People just learn better when they can develop a context for what they are learning, and both of these concepts speak to that. Not only is it helpful to have a conceptual framework–to understand the “why” of what you’re doing–but it can also be useful to understand how and where you would apply the skills–in other words, the “why” of using what you’re learning. Conveying context seems to be one of the most useful and important things an instructor can do.
I'm a librarian-in-training at the University of Michigan, and this blog is where I'll be responding to classwork and readings for the course Professional Practice in Libraries and Information Centers.
linguomancer.wordpress.com 
I agree that “checks for understanding” often lose authenticity because of social pressures. It is hard for a librarian to establish the rapport with students in a single, fifty minute session for them to build enough trust to admit when they don’t understand. I know there are a lot of computer-based technologies that can provide anonymous (or private) polls that gauge understanding. I’ve only seen these used in traditional classrooms and am interested to see if libraries are also using them for instruction.
I agree with both of you and I think we even as grad students see it in our classes. How often was there a question probably the entire class had but only one or two people raised their hand. I also like Naomi’s idea about using a computer based poll to address issues of anonymity. I don’t know if this could work time wise but would a doodle poll setup to be anonymous be a way for librarians to test for understand. The other way to test for understanding of course is to have questions during the lesson that so understand through demonstration of skills.