Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

First, second, and third-order barriers to information literacy and inquiry-based learning for teachers in poverty contexts

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Educational technology research and development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study sought to understand challenges that teachers (N = 15) in poverty settings encountered during information literacy instruction (ILI) and inquiry-based learning. First order barriers focused on insufficient support for instruction (training to align ILI in poverty settings; integrate diverse information resources/technology tools), administrative support (differing administrative priorities toward ILI); and access to technology (lack of broadband internet; paywalled information/learning resources). Second-order barriers consisted of the following: teachers’ pedagogical beliefs (empowering student IL through question-generation); teachers’ beliefs about computers/technology (challenge of misinformation and knowledge gaps); and teachers’ beliefs about students’ roles (strategies for structuring and limiting resources; addressing affective deficits due to poverty through ILI). Lastly, third-order barriers explored teachers’ design-thinking in ways that employed multiple visualizations. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Dr. Craig Shepherd, Dr. Helen Perkins, and Dr. Erin Shaw for their helpful comments.

Funding

No relevant information related to funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrew A. Tawfik.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed consent

The methodology was approved by the university’s Institutional Review Board (IRB). All participants were informed that the study had been approved by the IRB and made aware of their rights prior to agreeing to participate in the study.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix A: First, Second and Third Order Barriers Coding Scheme Definitions

Appendix A: First, Second and Third Order Barriers Coding Scheme Definitions

Barrier

Operational Definition

Examples

1st Order Barriers

  

Lack of Training

K-12 teachers lack sufficient training to conduct inquiry-based learning and information literacy instruction, and thus struggle to effectively integrate these instructional strategies as part of their curriculum (Francom, 2020; Li et al., 2019; Shannon et al., 2019).

Teachers receive only general training in their school district on ILI such as a group of weblinks to resources they could use.

Teachers are not trained on poverty specific ILI pedagogy.

Lack of Time to Plan Instruction

Teachers need more time to learn and incorporate technology tools into inquiry-based instruction such as ILI. This barrier grows as teachers training increases and they learn more tools (Kopcha, 2012).

Teachers must take additional time to update lesson plans with new technology tools

Teachers need extra time to make sure the tools are accessible for their students.

Lack of Administrative Support

Administrators may view test scores and other academic issues as priorities over ILI (Claro, et al., 2017)

Administrators do not see the value of ILI in the overall curriculum

They are unaware of ILI best practices.

Lack of Technology Access

Students living in poverty have limited internet access at home that hampers their ability to complete inquiry-based assignments using technology (Warschaeur, 2011)

Students may have to share a device with several siblings at home.

Students may lack high-speed wifi at home.

Second Order Barriers

  

Teachers’ Beliefs About Pedagogy

Teachers either tend to favor a teacher-centered, or a student-centered approach to pedagogy.

Teacher-centered approaches tend to limit inquiry-based learning options.

Allowing students to select the questions they will seek the answers is a more student-centered approach.

Teachers’ Beliefs About the Role of Computers/Technology

How comfortable teachers are with technology is directly related to how they will employ it in their instructional practice (Ertmer, et al., 2012).

Teachers who are more willing to integrate technology are also more willing to use it in student-centered ways for ILI.

Teachers’ Beliefs About the Instructional Roles of Teachers and Students

This construct relates to teacher perceptions of students capabilities to engage in inquiry-based learning such as ILI (Brandmiller, et al., 2020).

Teachers may limit their ILI based on their perceptions of students’ capabilities.

Teachers may have to take an additional roles such as motivating learners and helping them to understand the significance of developing IL skills in their future success.

Third Order Barriers

  

Design thinking

Incorporating design thinking is an iterative process of the following constructs: understand, observe, point of view, ideate, prototype, and test ((Brown, 2008; Razzouk & Shute, 2012).

Teachers plan multiple approaches to inquiry-based instruction to reach all of their learners.

Teachers create and iterate materials throughout instruction to address shifts in their learners’ needs.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Johnson, B.T., Tawfik, A.A. First, second, and third-order barriers to information literacy and inquiry-based learning for teachers in poverty contexts. Education Tech Research Dev 70, 1221–1246 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-022-10124-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-022-10124-w

Navigation