peer review

Teacher librarians
understandings of
inquiry learning
By Mandy Lupton
Biography
Dr Mandy Lupton is a Senior Lecturer in the Faculty of Education, School of Cultural and
Professional Learning, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland. She
teaches a range of units in the Master of Education (teacher-librarianship). She has written
and spoken extensively on inquiry learning. Her current research includes investigating
the use of social media for teaching and learning.
Email: mandy.lupton@qut.edu.au

Abstract
This paper presents a study investigating
teacher librarians understandings of
inquiry learning. Teacher librarians have
traditionally been involved in information
literacy education. For some teacher
librarians, this has involved collaborating
with the classroom teacher on inquiry
learning units of work. For others, it
has involved offering a parallel library
curriculum. The findings of this study are
based on semi-structured interviews with
nine teacher librarians in Queensland
schools. The study revealed that teacher
librarians saw inquiry learning in two ways
as: (a) student-centred investigation; and (b)
teaching a process.

Introduction
In many schools, the teacher librarian
works with teachers and students on tasks
that involve searching, finding, evaluating,

18

November 2015 ACCESS

organising and presenting information.

These tasks and processes have variously
been described as information seeking,
information literacy and inquiry learning.
As such, the teacher librarian is cast as
the information literacy expert, who, due
to his or her expertise of search tools
and strategies and knowledge of relevant
resources, is a valuable member of the
teaching team (Kuhlthau, Maniotes &
Caspari 2007). Typically, the teacher
librarian teaches students to search, find
and evaluate print and online sources
using the Internet, databases and library
catalogue (Harada & Yoshina 2004;
Chu 2008). They also teach academic
skills such as referencing and citing,
and technical skills such as the use of
software and Internet applications. There
is a strong relationship between this
information literacy development and the
inquiry learning approaches it supports.

peer review

The use of the inquiry process

models and the emphasis on
questioning indicates that teacher
librarians have evolved their
practice from an information literacy
or information-seeking focus to a
more holistic inquiry focus.
Many models of inquiry learning exist,
some generic and some disciplinary;
however, those that are promoted in the
teacher librarianship literature tend to
be generic information-seeking models.
Table 1 juxtaposes the prominent models
used in Australian teacher librarianship.
They are the Big6 (Eisenberg & Berkowitz
1990), the Information Process (NSW
Department of Education and Training
2007), the Information Search Process
(Kuhlthau 1991) and Guided Inquiry
(Kuhlthau, Maniotes & Caspari 2007).
Guided
Inquiry
incorporates
the
Information Search Process (ISP), an

information-seeking model based on

Kuhlthaus ground-breaking empirical
research that investigates students
undertaking information-seeking tasks.
Guided Inquiry as a pedagogical approach
promotes the use of a team of teachers
including the teacher librarian to guide
students by providing particular levels of
support (called zones of intervention) at
critical points in the information-seeking
process. The Australian Library and
Information Association and the Australian
School Library Association (2009) support
Guided Inquiry. As can be seen in Table 1,
the models have similar steps and stages.

Table 1: Information-seeking and process models

Big6
(Eisenberg &
Berkowitz 1990)

Information Search
Process
(Kuhlthau 1991)

Guided Inquiry
Design
(Kuhlthau et al. 2007)

The Information
Process
(NSW DET 2007)

Define task

Initiate
Select

Open
Immerse

Defining

Search

Explore
Formulate

Explore
Identify

Locating
Selecting
Organising

Locate

Collect

Gather

Use
Synthesise
Evaluate

Create
Present
Assess

Share

Presenting

Evaluate

Assessing
November 2015 ACCESS

19

peer review

Inquiry skills are embedded in the Australian

Curriculum (ACARA 2014) in Science, History,
Geography, Economics and Business, Civics
and Citizenship and the general capabilities
of Critical and Creative Thinking and
Information and Communication Technology.
The general inquiry stages have been
summarised as questioning, planning and
conducting investigations, collecting and
evaluating data and information, using data
and information, evaluating and reflecting
on the inquiry process and communicating
(Lupton 2014). As such, they are elaborated
versions of the information-seeking and
process models as presented in Table 1.

of work (see, for example, McLean 2011;

Scheffers & Bryant 2013; Torrington 2013),
there has been no empirical research into
teacher librarians understandings of
inquiry learning.

Teachers understandings of inquiry

learning
There is a small body of existing research
investigating
classroom
teachers
understandings of inquiry and information
literacy. However, most of the existing
research has primarily used pre-existing
frameworks to direct the participants
answers rather than open-ended questions.

when a whole-school approach was used, the teacher

librarians felt that there was a shared language and
understanding about inquiry learning."

Inquiry learning, as a concept, is also a

feature of the International Baccalaureate
(IB) curriculum (IBO 2014).
Just as there has been a long tradition of
teacher librarians working with students
on developing information literacy, teacher
librarians now regard their role as working
with students and classroom teachers
supporting them in undertaking inquiry
within the Australian Curriculum (Lupton
2012). This role marks a transition from
the 1990s practice of information literacy
development to a more contemporary
approach
(Callison
2006;
Kuhlthau
2010). However, while there is a range of
professional literature showcasing the
role of the teacher librarian in inquiry units

20

November 2015 ACCESS

For instance, Mertes (2014) elicited

secondary school teachers understandings
of an information-literate student using
the frame of locating, evaluating and using
information. She found that teachers
highlighted evaluating information, analysing
information, using technology to locate
information and finding web-based sources.
Smith (2013) used the ACRL Information
Literacy Competency Standards for Higher
Education as a basis to explore secondary
teachers perceptions of information literacy.
Smith found that teachers were unfamiliar
with the term information literacy and
associated it with literacy and research.
Behrenbruch (2012) used statements about
inquiry as a stimulus to explore middle
years teachers perspectives. She found

peer review

Table 2: Description of categories

Dimensions:

Category 1:
Student-centred investigation

Role of the teacher

librarian

Guide
Scaffold
Provide resources/choose
texts
Provide room, allow
independence
Teach skills
Use questioning strategies

Role of the student

Role of questioning

Provide students with

agency over their learning
Provide personal relevance

Critical thinking
Narrow the topic

Role of process

Research
Search for and find
information
Organise information

Keep students on track

Help with time
management

Focus

Student-directed

Teacher-directed

Pose questions
Choose topic/follow interest
Apply information
Draw conclusions

three interrelated themes: planning for

inquiry; developing students inquiries; and
working with other teachers. Ramnarain
(2014) used a quantitative questionnaire
with statements about inquiry learning.
She found that the dominant perception of
inquiry was that it helped learners develop
experimental process skills.
Two qualitative studies are of closer
relevance to the current study. Williams and
Wavell (2007) mapped secondary school
teachers understandings of information
literacy into six categories: finding

Category 2:
Teaching a process
Teach the steps
Scaffold
Keep students on track
Provide structure and
direction
Teach information literacy
skills
Use a whole-school
approach
Pose questions
Follow steps
Search for information
Be independent learners

information;
linguistic
understanding;
making meaning; skills; critical awareness of
sources; and independent learning. Ireland,
Watters, Brownlee and Lupton (2012) found
that primary teachers understood inquiry
science teaching as:
a. providing stimulating experiences to
students;
b. providing challenging problems to
students; and
c. assisting students to ask and answer
their own questions.
November 2015 ACCESS

21

peer review

Inquiring into inquiry

The research question underpinning this
study was How do teacher librarians
understand and experience inquiry
learning? This was explored through
investigating teacher librarians general
understandings of inquiry learning as well
as concrete examples of their practice.

Inquiry methodology
The participants of the study were nine
teacher librarians employed in state (n=5)
and private (n=4) schools in Queensland,
Australia. The schools ranged in size from
approximately 500 to 1800 students, with
a diversity of year groups represented (for
example, primary, secondary, K12).
Semi-structured interviews ranging from
20 to 60 minutes were undertaken with the
participants. Participants were asked about
their understanding of inquiry learning and
of the relationship between inquiry learning
and information literacy. They were also
asked to provide examples of when an
inquiry unit of work went well, and when
it went badly. The interviews were audiorecorded and transcribed verbatim. Two
of the participants had little experience
with inquiry learning due to the role they
played at their school (library management
rather than hands-on teaching). This lack
of experience was evident in a shorter
interview and a lack of concrete examples
of practice.
The research was underpinned by
phenomenography; a qualitative,interpretive
research approach (Marton 1992; Bowden
& Green 2005). A phenomenographic
study is designed to expose variation in
the ways that people experience specific
phenomena (Marton & Booth 1997; Marton

22

November 2015 ACCESS

2000). Phenomenographic data analysis

involves numerous iterations of searching
for similarities and differences in the data.
These similarities and differences are
teased out through identifying dimensions
that run through the categories. Identifying
these elements is part of creating a structure
for each category, which delimits it from
other categories. The range of similarities
and differences are mapped into a related
set of categories. The set of categories
represents the range of ways a phenomenon
might be experienced. The categories do
not represent individuals as each category
can be aggregated and abstracted from a
number of individuals.

Teacher librarians understandings of

inquiry learning
Teacher librarians understood inquiry
learning to be both a student-centred
investigation and teaching a process.
Student-centred investigation was based
around the role of the students, while
teaching a process was based around
the role of the teacher librarian. The two
categories are thus two sides of the same
coin. Table 2 illustrates the characteristics
of each category.

Category 1: Inquiry learning is

student-centred investigation
Student-centred investigation concerns
students learning a topic through posing
questions while developing information
literacy skills. Student-centred investigation
consisted of the students choosing a topic,
asking questions and using information to
solve real-life problems.
Inquiry learning is when the student is
given a real-life task, has to go and nd
information, research the task and the

peer review

information that they need, and then apply

it to a problem that they have been given
and come up with some kind of solution
or conclusion on what theyve researched.
Its not just about regurgitating information
that they found (TL4).
Inquiry learning from this perspective was
regarded as active learning.
Inquiry learning is about kids doing and being
engaged; not about teachers presenting or
lecturing. For me, inquiry learning is that
process where kids are actually engaged
in nding out, researching, organising
information, that sort of thing (TL2).
Students were able to choose inquiry
questions that related to their own interests.
Thus, inquiry learning was seen as allowing
the students to have agency over their
learning. In being able to create their own
questions, inquiry process was seen as
having greater relevance to students as it
gave them more control.
The powers given over to them in that they
choose the specics about what they want
to research or learn about and create their
own questions that answer their questions,
rather than answering the questions that
we think they should be asking (TL3).
For instance, TL3 described two inquiry
units of work that she felt were successful.
In the first unit of work, Year 4 students
investigated a war that involved Australia.
They created a museum display based on
their research. In the second unit of work,
Year 6 students investigated immigration to
Australia. They chose a family from another
country to research, asking questions about
why they came and what their influence
was on their local area. TL3 said that both

units were successful because students

were able to choose to focus on a topic
that held relevance to them. In the case of
the war history unit, students chose a war
that one of their family members had been
involved in, or, one in which their country of
origin was involved in a war with Australia.
In the immigration unit, students were able
choose a family group that related to their
own family.
The students were in control of their
learning. They were the ones who were
directing what information they wanted,
what information they needed and what
source, I suppose to a degree They were
in control of whether they used photos or
newspapers and books. They had access
to such a variety of things that they could
get the answers to the questions they were
setting; they were posing, rather than us
doing it That held some relevance to their
life, rather than, We think you need to know
this. Inquiring lets you follow your interest
and things that are relevant to you (TL3).
The role of the teacher librarian in studentcentred investigation was seen as providing
an environment in which students are guided
and scaffolded to become independent in
their inquiries. Teacher librarians used
terms such as giving and providing when
they described their role. They provided
services, tools, skills and resources.
You help shape the inquiry by providing
services and things providing some
resources [that] give direction, but enough
room to move that they continue to push past
and get it and do their own inquiry (TL1).
Giving a child the problem and giving them
the tools to be able to solve the problem
and come up with the solution they need. So
November 2015 ACCESS

23

peer review

enabling them to identify what they already

know, giving them the tools to be able to
nd out what they dont know, and then the
tools to be able to take what they dont know
and turn it into questions that will guide
them through their knowledge gathering to
produce new knowledge and you stand
on the sidelines and you just give them the
tools so that they do it themselves, that they
are lifelong learners. Thats inquiry to me
(TL5).
Its giving them essential learnings;
essential skills to go ahead and do their
own learning (TL8).
The role of questioning in student-centred
investigation was seen as a way of students
directing their own learning through
choosing questions that had relevance for
them.
The powers given over to them in that they
choose the specics about what they want
to research or learn about and create their
own questions that answer their questions,
rather than answering the questions that
we think they should be asking. It allows
the students to still be able to follow
their interests and develop their skills for
questioning. Thats the power I guess for
me knowing how to ask a question to nd
out what you want to nd out, rather than
someone just telling you (TL3).

Several teacher librarians mentioned a

staged information-seeking process with
clear steps (called a formula by TL7).
They used inquiry and information literacy
models such as Kuhlthaus ISP (Kuhlthau
1991) and the Big6 (Eisenberg & Berkowitz
1990), or a variation thereof.
The rst thing that comes to mind is
information literacy skills. Straight up.
Those six steps that Ive always stuck by
(TL9).
Weve just come up with a simple set of
terms for us, which is really, basically:
dene, locate, select, organise, present,
evaluate (TL2).
So starting off with an idea and then
developing that idea and researching that
idea and unpacking it and investigating it,
and then getting the new knowledge that
you develop by doing Kuhlthaus step-bystep process into producing whatever you
do at the end. In this school, thats how I see
inquiry (TL5).

Teaching a process involved the teacher

librarian teaching the steps and scaffolding
students through the inquiry process.

For some, the process model was used as a

school-wide framework, while for others it
was used for individual units of work. Some
teacher librarians displayed the stages as
posters on the walls of the library for easy
reference. At one school, students from
Year 7 received a workbook with templates
to use for each inquiry. In another school,
the teacher librarian designed research
guides for particular assignments that led
students through a modified process model.
TL5 adopted Kuhlthaus ISP as a schoolwide framework for the IB.

Its clear steps. If you teach them in clear

steps and all the steps that are involved
with each step, then thats what it is (TL6).

I use Kuhlthaus information search process

as the framework for that whole process
right through the school. Her information

Category 2: Inquiry learning is

teaching a process

24

November 2015 ACCESS

peer review

search process starts in Year 10 and is

used by just about every subject area in the
school now as a framework because you
can hang everything off it (TL5).
She described an inquiry unit where senior
secondary students were split into groups,
with each group investigating a famous
psychologist.
We did lots of brainstorming on ideas
they had to work through the process of
the information search process [Kuhlthau]
from the beginning to the end so that
they understood the importance of prior
knowledge from their background reading
and work out their focus questions and then
go in and do their in-depth reading, and
keep a list of references and an annotated
bibliography, so that in the end theyre fully
referenced (TL5).
TL5 commented that before she taught in an
IB program she used a simple information
skills model of define, locate, select.
However, when she started teaching the IB
she realised that Kuhlthaus information
search process (ISP) was a broader
inquiry model that develops students as
independent learners.

We build in all the dates into the process. So

by step four on the 20th of January, this is
what you should be doing. And it just gives
them an idea of where they should be up to.
The students who dont use the information
search process as a framework are the ones
who get into the most trouble ... Some kids
wont do it like this because thats not the sort
of thinker they are and thats ne because
thats one of the best things about this school.
We cater for all different thinking but it just
gives them a bit of a framework (TL5).
TL4 also discussed the importance of
students staying on track with each stage.
She mentioned that inquiry units of work
needed to be chunked down. For instance,
she felt that a typical unit of six weeks
duration was too long for lower ability
secondary students.
I know from my previous school that if you
give them a big chunk of time, they nd it
hard to manage the thing. Oh, I dont need
to do anything today, Ive got next week,
Ive got the week after. So you really need
to chunk it down. This is what were doing
now. And make sure they do it. And have
deadlines as you go along so that they dont
waste their time (TL4).

Before I used Kuhlthaus, I used to use the

information skills continuum dene,
locate, select. And Id always looked at
Kuhlthaus model and thought I wonder
what youd use that for. Of course, when we
walked in here [IB school] and the students
had to be independent learners, thats when
Kuhlthaus little framework for inquiry
came into its own, because thats exactly
what they have to do (TL5).

Scaffolding the process for students by

providing structure was also important for
TL6.

The ISP is used to scaffold the inquiry

process to keep students on track.

The teacher librarians used a range of

strategies to encourage students to develop

I dont know whether its the early childhood

teacher in me, where kids love structure.
Kids like to know, This is what I have to
do. This is the way I need to do it, and I
know where Im heading, I know thats my
direction (TL6).

November 2015 ACCESS

25

peer review

questions and a questioning attitude. The

role of questions included critical thinking,
including evaluating information and a
way of narrowing the topic. Questioning as
a critical thinking process was described
by TL1 in an example of a senior history
inquiry where she initially choose texts
that would be outside their ability to
find. She then guided students through a
critical approach to the texts where she
helped them question the information in
the texts.
They had at least started to question what
was in front of them trying to give them
signposts about where they might stop and
nd something to validate it rather than
accept it in the discussion theyd stopped
saying, He did this, and started to say, He
may have done that. Its likely hes done
that (TL1).
Questioning was also seen as a way to
narrow a topic. This involved defining
aspects of the topic.
Let them narrow it down so they could nally
frame a question that they could answer
its very hard to question if you dont have
parameters To start a question, like in
debating, you have to dene it I would
structure so that they had linkages moving
on, and Id also rewrite the kinds of questions
so that they were also framed the same way,
so that ensured they had to dig (TL1).
TL6 described an environmental studies
unit of work that she undertook with a
number of year groups. She showed the
students a short video on sustainability
and asked them to choose an issue they
were interested in. Students had to create a
superhero, who would solve the particular
environmental problem they had identified.

26

November 2015 ACCESS

She explained the way she used questions

to narrow the topic:
The rst [step] is dening your topic. The
teachers might say, Go and learn about
sustainability. Well, sustainability is a
massive subject so you really need to bring
it down, what is it specically that were
going to be learning about? Instead of
saying, Were learning about panda bears
What about them? What is the question
youre going to ask about panda bears thats
going to focus your research? So it might be
something like, Why are they endangered?
or What part of their habitat is causing
them to be endangered? Instead of saying,
Go and learn about sustainability, or even
panda bears, it gives them a really specic
focus, and theyre not going off on tangents.
Questioning gives them a specic focus to
follow when theyre researching (TL6).
The questioning strategies that the teacher
librarians used to help students take
ownership included brainstorming and
questioning frameworks such as KWL (What
do you know? What do you want to know?
What have you learned?) and the 5Ws and
H (Who? What? When? Where? Why? How?).
For example, TL9 described a unit of work
with Year 4 on Indigenous culture and
history. She used the picture book You and me
and Murrawee as a stimulus for generating
questions about Indigenous people. First,
she brainstormed ideas with the students;
then she underwent a rigorous process of
narrowing the topic:
And then they all had to write down one
question that they would like to know about
Aboriginal people in the past. And they all
came up with them, and we collated them
all, and then I got the collation and then
started putting them into subjects. So we

peer review

started putting them into housing, into

family life, into this, into that, and then
we had miscellaneous. They looked at the
questions and the miscellaneous [sic], and
so theyd actually say, We might need more
categories for that. Some of those questions
are the same, so we could actually put them
together or just take one out. So that was in
the really early stages, and what we found
by doing that process with them that the
ownership of that topic became so strong.
And that was fantastic. Then they had to go
away and have at least four good questions
on their topic developed to work on. To me,
once wed set that with them, it made the
research easy (TL9).

Discussion
The findings of the study revealed success
factors and barriers to conducting inquiry
units of work. Success factors included
teacher librarian and classroom teacher
as collaborative partners, students
maintaining their engagement and students
choosing questions relevant to their lives.
The barriers to inquiry learning were
identified as risk to teachers and students
and lack of time. For instance, TL3 said that,
for teachers, inquiry learning was risky as
more control was handed to students. The
risk is that students would not learn the
required content. For students, the risk
is in the choices that they make and their
understanding that there is not necessarily
a right answer that they are seeking.
Its risky for the students because they
dont know what the proper, correct only
answer is. They have to take risks in
what information theyre gathering, and
how theyre putting it together, and what
theyre presenting coming back because
theres not one question; one answer.
Theyre taking risks in the pathway that

they take, with their information gathering

and presentation still a certain risk in
that theyre not trying to guess the answer
thats in the teachers head, because theres
not just one answer. For teachers, the risk
is that its that empowering thing again.
In that, youre handing over control of the
learning to the students. The risk is that
they wont retain or learn any knowledge,
understanding, skills, practice, process ...
Its a risk about the unknown, for teachers
that arent familiar with the process (TL3).
TL3 described an inquiry unit that was
unsuccessful due to the teachers returning
to their traditional methods of giving
students the information accompanied by a
comprehension worksheet.
We did the planning then, within three
weeks, it all fell apart because the teachers
werent prepared to take risks, they just
fell back into their old ways and started
photocopying sheets and comprehension
stuff, like Here is a bit of information about
the Ballarat gold elds and here are your
nine questions. They [the teachers] just fell
back into their comfort zone there was
a big gap about nding out what they [the
students] wanted to nd out, because they
were being fed the information (TL3).
The teacher librarians reported that one
way of managing risk was by using the
process models. In particular, when a
whole-school approach was used, the
teacher librarians felt that there was a
shared language and understanding about
inquiry learning. However, in some cases
the teacher librarian was forced to conduct
a separate library inquiry curriculum where
stand-alone inquiry tasks were undertaken
without collaboration or involvement with
the class teacher. The teacher librarians
November 2015 ACCESS

27

peer review

did not perceive these inquiries as less

successful in terms of student learning
outcomes; however, it is possible that having
a separate library inquiry curriculum may
work against a whole-school approach.

Conclusion
The findings of this study indicate that
teacher librarians are strong advocates of
inquiry learning based on inquiry process
models. The use of these inquiry process
models and the emphasis on questioning
indicates that teacher librarians have
evolved their practice from an information
literacy or information-seeking focus to a
more holistic inquiry focus.
It is worth noting that there were suggestions
in the data of a third category: inquiry learning
as a way of learning. This is seen in TL9s
comment that inquiry is an approach to life
I see it as a way of learning. Unfortunately,
this category could not be fleshed out from
the limited data available.
The incorporation of inquiry skills as a
strand in a range of subject areas in the
Australian Curriculum is an opportunity
for teacher librarians to leverage their
information literacy and inquiry expertise
to support the curriculum. As evidenced
by the examples from practice, this should
include supporting students in developing
questions as well as scaffolding them
through the inquiry process. Another
opportunity for teacher librarians to have
an impact on the curriculum is the proposed
revisions to the Australian Curriculum
to create an integrated primary school
Humanities and Social Sciences subject
(ACARA 2015). These revisions may allow
teacher librarians to initiate collaborations
with class teachers and to advocate for a
whole-school approach to inquiry.

28

November 2015 ACCESS

References
ACARA 2014, The Australian Curriculum.
Viewed 5 January 2014, from http://www.
australiancurriculum.edu.au/
ACARA 2015, Improving the Australian
Curriculum. Viewed from http://www.acara.
edu.au/verve/_resources/20150508_
IMPROVING_AUST_CUR_v_2_2.pdf
Australian Library and Information Association
and Australian School Library Association
2009, Statement on guided inquiry and the
curriculum. Viewed 20 October 2014, from
http://www.asla.org.au/policy/Guidedinquiry-and-the-curriculum.aspx
Behrenbruch, M 2012, Whats essential?
Teachers perspectives on inquiry, Dancing in
the light, M Behrenbruch, Sense Publishers,
vol. 83, pp. 81109.
Bowden, JA & Green, P, Eds 2005, Doing
developmental phenomenography, RMIT
University Press, Melbourne.
Callison, D 2006, The blue book on information
age inquiry, instruction and literacy, Libraries
Unlimited, Westport, Conn.
Chu, S 2008, Grade 4 students development
of research skills through inquirybased learning projects, School Libraries
Worldwide, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 1037.
Eisenberg, M & Berkowitz, R 1990,
Information problem-solving: The Big Six
approach to library & information skills
instruction, Ablex Publishing Corporation,
Norwood, New Jersey.
Harada, V & Yoshina, J 2004, Inquiry learning
through librarian-teacher partnerships,
Linworth Publishing, Worthington, OH.
IBO 2014, Three programmes, International
Baccalaureate Organization. Viewed 1
June 2014, from http://www.ibo.org/
programmes/index.cfm.

peer review

Ireland, J, Watters, J, Brownlee, J et al.

2012, Elementary teachers conceptions
of inquiry teaching: Messages for teacher
development, Journal of Science Teacher
Education, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 159175.
Kuhlthau, C 2010, Guided inquiry: School
libraries in the 21st century, School Libraries
Worldwide, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 112.
Kuhlthau, C, Maniotes, L & Caspari, A 2007,
Guided Inquiry: Learning in the 21st century,
Libraries Unlimited, Westport, Conn.
Kuhlthau, CC 1991, Inside the search
process: Information seeking from the
users perspective, Journal of the American
Society for Information Science, vol. 42, no.5,
pp. 361371.
Lupton, M 2012, Inquiry skills in the
Australian Curriculum, ACCESS, vol. 26, no.
2, pp. 1218.
Lupton, M 2014, Inquiry skills in the
Australian Curriculum v6: A birds-eye view,
ACCESS, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 829.
Marton, F 1992, The phenomenography
of learning: A qualitative approach to
educational research and some of its
implications for didactics, Learning and
Instruction, vol. 2, no.1, pp. 601616.
Marton, F 2000, The structure of awareness,
Phenomenography, JA Bowden & E Walsh,
Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology,
Melbourne, pp. 102116.
Marton, F & Booth, S 1997, Learning and
awareness, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Mahwah.
McLean, I 2011, Taking the plunge: guided
inquiry, persuasion and the research river
at Penrith Public School, Scan, vol. 30, no. 4,
pp. 2635.

Mertes, N 2014, Teachers conceptions

of student information literacy learning
and teachers practices of information
literacy teaching and collaboration with the
school library: A grounded case study, PhD,
Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin.
NSW Department of Education and Training
2007, Information skills in the school:
Engaging learners in constructing knowledge,
School Libraries and Information Literacy
Unit Curriculum K12 Directorate, NSW
Department of Education and Training.
Viewed 12 August 2012, from http://www.
curriculumsupport.education.nsw.gov.au/
schoollibraries/teachingideas/isp/docs/
infoskills.pdf.
Ramnarain, U 2014, Teachers perceptions
of inquiry-based learning in urban,
suburban, township and rural high schools:
The context-specificity of science curriculum
implementation in South Africa, Teaching
and Teacher Education, vol. 38, pp. 6575.
Scheffers, J & Bryant, K 2013, Perfect
match: Guided Inquiry and iPad technology,
Scan, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 913.
Smith, J 2013, Secondary teachers
and information literacy (IL): Teacher
understanding and perceptions of IL in the
classroom, Library & Information Science
Research, vol. 35, pp. 216222.
Torrington, J 2013, Using guided inquiry in
a Year 3 classroom, ACCESS, vol. 27, no. 4,
pp. 2224.
Williams, D & Wavell, C 2007, Secondary
school teachers conceptions of student
information literacy, Journal of Librarianship
and Information Science, vol. 39, no. 4. pp.
199212.

November 2015 ACCESS

29

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without
permission.