Competency M :  Communication

demonstrate oral and written communication skills necessary for group work, collaborations and professional level presentations;

 

Introduction

While the stereotype of librarians, archivists and records managers is one of a lone individual contentedly surrounded by books and papers with nary a soul in sight, the truth is that these fields do require strong communication skills.  Librarians must do informal reference interviews to determine precisely what their users need, in order to direct them successfully.  Archivists communicate with both donors and users to explain the details of contributing a collection, or finding the information needed within collections.  Records managers communicate with both management and staff, designing systems that will achieve the RM goals but still be familiar and unintimating enough that users will willingly (as least a bit) add the metadata necessary for successful storage and later retrieval.

Furthermore, each of these fields needs professionals who are capable of explaining procedures, techniques, new systems or materials, or working with new users/patrons, using both the spoken and written word.  They must be able to explain their perspectives and information adequately in group situations, in ways that are understood, without being antagonizing or condescending.  The ability to communicate in groups, to work collaboratively, is a skill high in demand in this as well as other fields.  The information professional who can work collaboratively when needed, and be a successful independent speaker when requested, is a strong asset to his or her organization.

In working collaboratively, one must be both willing to contribute his or her ideas, yet must also be willing to allow others to contribute.  “Neither a lurker not a board-hog be.”  Ideas should be presented “no ego attached,” with objections and counter-opinions presented with careful explanation or evidence of “why.” A successful collaboration is a balance of contributions from all involved, with an impartial discussion of the merits or disadvantages of each suggestion, ultimately resulting in a product which is better than any individual would have created on his or her own.
When composing an oral presentation, lecture, or speech, one must first be able to organize the information in a coherent and logical manner, with a flow from beginning to end.  It must contain all the factual information the topic requires, in a format that each specific audience will be able to accept and learn from.  The presentation should be practiced and comfortable, whether the presenter is or not.  The speaker should also appear polished and comfortable with both the situation and the material.
The abilities to communicate effectively  with both the spoken and written word, in groups and in presentations, makes information professionals more valued members of their institutions, helping departments to function better, and learn procedures and concepts more successfully.

 

Evidence

For my evidence, I’ve included a D2L student workshop I co-presented, a group project creating a database of LIS articles, a GoogleDocs discussion for my Cataloging Final Project, and a presentation presented at an international genealogy conference.

Note: all links will open in new tabs/windows.

 

Evidence #1 - D2L Student Workshop:  Tips on Working in D2L

My first evidence is a SLIS workshop I co-presented, to instruct students on how to use D2L, particularly focusing on those tools beyond the absolute basics.  The workshop was presented live a total of four times, with one session saved as an always-available recording in the D2L Support database.  The length of the workshop itself is approximately one hour, with a question/answer segment following.

My co-presenter and I first discussed which topics we wanted to include, then who would best present which topic.  We wrote our own segments individually, using a combination of screenshots and live “application sharing” to communicate the information.

For purposes of flow, we decided that he would open the workshop and welcome the students.  I would then present several topics, then he would present additional topics and open the question/answer segment.  While each of us was speaking, the other monitored the “chat window” and in real-time answered questions submitted there.  For example, we learned that some students had not been added to the “classlist” for a Student Practice D2L site.  Once that announcement was made by my co-presenter, and students typed in that they weren’t included, I “enrolled” each student immediately, and they were able to view the site while he was still describing it.

For the collaborative process, although we didn’t try to divide the allotted hour in half, ultimately the presentation was evenly divided between us.  We found that we each had areas of expertise and knowledge that complemented the other’s areas.  The feedback we received was that the workshop was very worthwhile and useful, and each successive presentation had more students than the one before.

This evidence demonstrates my strong ability to present educational information, to work with others collaboratively, and to work simultaneously with speaking, demonstrating techniques and methods, and describe new concepts in terms the audience can easily grasp.

Note: the above link is to the Elluminate recording. The password is "slisd2l."

 

Evidence #2 - 202 Group Project - Database of LIS Articles

My second evidence is a group project for 202: Information Retrieval, in which we designed, populated, then evaluated a database for a collection of journal articles. I and two others formed this group after working together for a prior project in the same class.  While we were not required to maintain the same groups, all three of us felt we were a successful team, and wanted to continue the collaboration.  We had worked with another team for the first project, and in evaluating their results, were able to see that not all groups were as compatible as ours was.

For this project, we were expected to select the articles for the database, build preco and postco lists and index the articles, then do a critical evaluation of our database’s ability to search by subject.

As a group, we each contributed substantially to each of the components, yet also accepted the input of the others easily.  Our collaboration was entirely via email, which caused us to develop an informal system of renaming new versions to avoid confusion; because there were three in our group, at times we had 2-3 different files circulating simultaneously.

To further demonstrate our collaborative process, at the beginning of this evidence, I have added a sample email, in which we were discussing which articles to include.  The middle section (Parts A and B) are the database and evaluation.  In the third part of the assignment (Part C) we were to analyze our ability to work as a group.  We were to include a group assessment of the strengths and weakness of working together, then to include individual assessments of our own contributions.  This analysis of our ability to work together is on page 13 (the last page).  The assignment itself, as well as the sample email included, demonstrate that I have indeed mastered the ability to work collaboratively with others, to create useful and professional projects and documents.

 

Evidence #3 - Cataloging Final Project:  GoogleDocs editing session

For my third evidence, I chose one of the later editing sessions for the final Cataloging Project for 248: Beginning Cataloging.  While this professor did not require that we work in teams, we were permitted to do so, with the understanding that we would turn in a single file between us, and would all receive the exact same grade.  This project was to catalog a set of 8 items (books), determining all the information on a standard blank MARC form (provided).  We began by working independently to determine the LCC and DCC call numbers, LCSH codes, and MARC codes.  We then collaborated in GoogleDocs with the live text-chat feature enabled, to discuss those areas where we had different answers or were confused.  Once we agreed, one of the group members downloaded the final version, “cleaned it up,” and submitted all eight forms as a single file.  We also collaborated on an essay section at the end of the report, describing some of the decisions we made.

I chose to include this collaboration as a GoogleDocs session because each of our individual contributions to the collaborative effort are visible, via different chat colors. (My color was blue.) Our willingness to contribute and speak up, balanced by our cooperative listening, are strong features of successful collaboration, and the communication skills necessary to achieve successful group work.

My contributions, and the balanced contributions of each of us, created a well-functioning collaborative team.  We received an “A” for this work, also indicating that we were able to collaborate and arrive at the best possible answers for each item.  This evidence demonstrates that I work well with others, by both contributing worthwhile content, as well as accepting the input of others, to achieve a successful result.

 

Evidence #4 - Genealogy Lecture – PowerPoint lecture with accompanying Storyboard and script.

My fourth evidence is the PowerPoint component of a lecture I presented to an international genealogy conference, “Canada Unspooled:  Genealogical research of Canadian records.”  I designed the concept, wrote the script, selected all the research and images to include, designed the slide style, and selected/edited the screenshots, then edited the whole to fit within the specified 45-minute time slot. I also wrote the syllabus and a handout with referenced URLs.

Following the presentation, I uploaded it to SlideShare, where it is currently hosted.  The Notes accompanying the SlideShare page include links to additional URLs, as well as to a storyboard with the entire script linked to the PowerPoint slides, so later users could receive the entire information.  This additional information is hosted on a section of my personal genealogy website, and will be available as long as I choose.

This audience was an adult, educated, mixed-age audience.  I was equally comfortable presenting to this audience as I was conducting the D2L workshop to our grad students, and the responses were equally favorable.  This evidence, particularly when included with the D2L workshop, demonstrates my ability to communicate effectively with a wide range of professional and avocational groups, yet to conduct professional-level presentations.  I am confident that I have mastered the oral and written communication skills expected by this competency, and look forward to continued confidence in front of various audience groups in my future career.

 

Conclusion

Although I did begin this program having had prior experience in public speaking, and creating lectures and presentations, my skills have very much been advanced by this program.  The ability to communicate effectively, in any media, to any audience, is important in this field as much as in any.  Information professionals are in better positions to succeed, if they have the ability to get their ideas across to others, whether those ideas are ideas for a new collection or digital project, suggestions for records retention, thoughts on how to set up a display or exhibit, recommendations on how to allocate a budget, or to collaboratively work with others toward any of these goals.  I also have learned the importance of collaborative efforts, particularly when such efforts bring together otherwise-disparate groups toward a common goal.

 

Evidence for Competency M

(All links will open in inew tabs/windows.)

1. Student Workshop:  Tips on Working in D2L
Note: this link is to the Elluminate recording. The password is "slisd2l."

2. 202 Group Project - Database of LIS Articles

3. Cataloging Final Project:  GoogleDocs editing session

4. Genealogy Lecture – PowerPoint lecture with accompanying Storyboard and script