Last summer I was observing a session of ACRL’s Immersion program. My purpose there was to observe the teaching as a future teacher, but as usual in the face of smart people with interesting things to say – my brain went to town on the content.
That idea of secret outcomes just grabbed my imagination and I had to share. It captured Dani’s imagination too and #stealthgoals was born.
To be honest, we think it’s partly because “stealth” is more fun to say than “secret.” And “goals” is definitely broader (and maybe therefore more interesting) than “outcomes.” Both of us came from the teaching and learning world, but we have also both recently taken on administrative and management responsibilities and let’s face it, #stealthgoals are just as interesting in that context. And things re much more likely to be “goals” than “outcomes” outside of teaching.
But a conversation earlier today, we also discussed whether one of the reasons that the concept resonated so immediately is tied to our experiences in that teaching role. In library instruction — and really in teaching and learning more broadly in higher ed — we are routinely pushed to think about our goals, our outcomes, our assessment from the students’ perspective, and to communicate that perspective directly to learners. And as librarians we have to spend a lot of time thinking about what that means for informal learning, for tutorials or point of need services, for learning spaces, and all of the other parts of our teaching lives that go beyond the traditional for-credit course.
And a whole lot of that is fine! When thoughtfully constructed and intentionally used, things like learning outcomes and rubrics are really great teaching tools, and really great communication tools. Some of our favorite conversations with colleagues and students alike have been sparked by the desire to really come to a shared understanding of why what we are doing matters.
But a little bit of it isn’t fine. Obviously, when it turns into a hoop-jumping exercise — when posting the outcomes becomes the goal, instead of a means to the goal — that can get disheartening. Maybe less obviously, though, we wonder if maybe sometimes we use that focus on the learner to avoid having the real conversations we need to have about our own agendas, priorities and values? Does it allow us to ignore questions and issues of power and our place in our organizations? And this is a question that’s come up in many contexts, throughout the library — it goes way beyond the classroom and the teaching and learning context. If we limit our vision to the things that we think our users (or learners or clients or investors or stakeholders) value — what do we miss? What falls outside of that frame?
And, as you can see, this is where our subsequent conversations about #stealthgoals have gone way beyond the description in the tweets linked above.
So we are thinking this might be an excellent topic for a panel of librarians, doing different work, and bringing different frames to discuss. Maybe in public? At some place like ACRL? If this sounds like a conversation you might want to have, let one of us know.
Anne-Marie (email) (@amlibrarian)
Dani (email) (@danibcook)