In 2004, Steven J. Bell and John Shank introduced the term blended librarian to describe academic librarians who had begun to take on new instructional design roles in addition to the roles that they had been trained for in library school. Several years later, the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) officially recognized instructional design skills as a core proficiency for instructional librarians. What exactly is instructional design? And what instructional design skills do librarians need to know? 

For instructional librarianship to have a positive and high impact on information literacy learning in today’s society as described throughout this book, it is important to continuously emphasize how librarians understand and use information, media, and technology in all their roles and responsibilities. With this purpose in mind, Chapter 4 focuses on teaching librarians in the instructional designer role. It introduces you to the competencies of instructional design and technology and outlines the specific areas of content and pedagogical knowledge that teaching librarians in the instructional design role will find most relevant. Much can be learned about instructional design in libraries from the academic library context because instructional librarianship is applicable to all library types!

To get started , here are three essential questions (Wiggins & McTighe, 2013) we ask you to consider while reading this chapter:

The sections that follow were adapted from Hovious, A., & Smith, A. (2023). Blended librarianship—20 years later. Kansas Library Association College and University Libraries Section Proceedings, 13(1), licensed under the CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 license. https://doi.org/10.4148/2160-942X.1088

4.1 A Brief History of Blended Librarianship 

The idea of blended librarianship was proposed by Bell and Shank (2004) as a way of redefining academic librarianship which they perceived to be increasingly disassociated from the actual learning process. They noted that this was a time of considerable upheaval within academia, that the role of the academic librarian was increasingly ambiguous within the rapidly changing technologies within and outside the library, and that there needed to be a new paradigm for academic librarianship to refocus the profession to meet the newly emerging needs and wants of information users.   

They saw academic librarianship as increasingly marginalized by the development of large courseware systems and resulting information silos removed from the library, such as changes in textbook publishing that included accompanying websites to create complete resource solutions that usurp traditional library databases, the rise of ubiquitous search engines, a total reimagining of scholarly publishing with more emphasis on direct communication and the decline of the traditional journal-based collections within academic libraries, the development of individualized information subscription services, book searching through Amazon and Google and the resulting “Googleization” effect of libraries trying to emulate commercial systems, and the integration of database content directly into commercial software.  

The idea of blended librarianship was therefore defined by Bell and Shank as “as an academic librarian who combines the traditional skill set of librarianship with the information technologist’s hardware/software skills, and the instructional or educational designer’s ability to apply technology appropriately in the teaching-learning process” (2004, p. 374). They further suggested six principles of blended librarianship that would result in moving academic librarians to the center of the teaching and learning process, rather than their current peripheral role. These six principles were that academic librarians 1) exert leadership on campus as innovators and change agents, 2) develop campus-wide information literacy programs to foster involvement in the teaching and learning process, 3) design instructional and educational programs in the use of library services and the development of information literacy as necessary skills and knowledge for future achievement; 4) collaborate with instructional technologists and instructional designers to ensure appropriate development of programs and services to further the academic library mission; 5) enhance adaptive, creative, proactive and interactive change through communication with instructional design/ technology librarians or instructional designers; and 6) transform relationship to faculty by means of assisting them with the integration of technology and library resources into hybrid or blended courses.  

In 2011, Shank and Bell further noted that academic librarians must have a clear understanding and vision of why both the library and academic librarians should exist at all, as the actual methods of accomplishing whatever this vision may be are likely to continue to change frequently and rapidly. This then creates an opportunity for academic librarians to participate in “disruptive innovation” that will redefine how librarians perform their teaching role, and it is for this opportunity that blended librarianship provides the blueprint. 

4.2 Teaching Librarians and the Instructional Designer Role 

Though the term “blended librarianship” never quite took off, the principles of blended librarianship can be seen in the development of competencies for instructional librarians. In 2008, the American Library Association (ALA) published the Standards for Proficiencies for Instruction Librarians and Coordinators. Within that guide, there was a category for instructional design skills: 

The effective instruction librarian: 

6.1. Collaborates with classroom faculty by defining expectations and desired learning outcomes in order to determine appropriate information literacy proficiencies and resources to be introduced in library instruction. 

6.2. Sequences information in a lesson plan to guide the instruction session, course, workshop, or other instructional material. 

6.3. Creates learner-centered course content and incorporates activities directly tied to learning outcomes. 

6.4. Assists learners to assess their own information needs, differentiate among sources of information, and help them to develop skills to effectively identify, locate, and evaluate sources. 

4.3.2 AECT Standard 2: Content Pedagogy 

A deep understanding of pedagogical content knowledge is essential for the successful implementation of the ADDIE process. Unfortunately, the professional development opportunities for instructional design within the library profession tend to focus largely on introducing the ADDIE model rather than the knowledge needed to implement each phase of it. Pedagogical knowledge informs the methods that instructional designers use to effectively support learning across different educational contexts. It requires more than a high-level understanding of learning theories. Rather, pedagogical content knowledge is the combined knowledge of learning theories, instructional theories, and teaching methods. The dropdown boxes below list core areas of pedagogical knowledge that are valuable for all teaching librarians and especially for those acting in the instructional designer role. 

🖱 Click on the magnifying glass to explore each core area of pedagogical knowledge for instructional designers.

A distinguishing characteristic between learning theories and instructional theories is that instructional theories are useful for directly guiding the instructional design process. For example, Bloom’s Taxonomy of Learning is an essential guide for the activities of task analysis and writing learning objectives and outcomes (Newton, Da Silva, & Peters, 2020), while Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction effectively guides the instructional planning process (McNeill & Fitch, 2023). On the other hand, learning theories serve to provide an understanding of how people learn. Knowledge of learning theories is key to making decisions about teaching methods based on learners’ needs and characteristics. However, it should be noted that not everyone distinguishes between the two and may instead treat all as learning theories. Learning and instructional theories shape the learning environments that are selected or created during the instructional design process, while teaching methods reflect those learning environments. 

4.3.3 AECT Standard 3: Learning Environments 

What is an effective learning environment? By drawing on the content knowledge and content pedagogy of AECT Standards 1 and 2, instructional designers can identify and select instructional strategies, tools, and technologies that create the optimal conditions for different types of learning. However, understanding the optimal conditions of learning also requires understanding that learning environments are more than just physical or virtual spaces. Learning takes place in social and cultural contexts and may also be influenced by institutional practices. Individuals also experience learning through their own social and cultural lenses (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2018). For teaching librarians in the instructional designer role, the concept of learning environments is multi-systemic. It extends beyond the tutorial and the classroom to the library and even to the lifeworld because information literacy is a lifelong learning skill. This makes AECT Standard 3 significant to teaching librarians—and perhaps more challenging. To address this, two methods are recommended for developing a deeper understanding of learning environments: (1) systems thinking (Somerville et al., 2006) and (2) activity theory (Jonassen & Rohrer-Murphy, 1999). These are more advanced approaches in instructional design but are especially relevant to instructional design librarianship. 

4.4 Conclusion 

Though blended librarianship is a term that never quite took off in academic librarianship, the principles of blended librarianship (Bell & Shank, 2004; Shank & Bell, 2011) are readily apparent in the ALA’s (2017) Roles and Strengths of Teaching Librarians. Considering the holistic approach taken by the ACRL’s (2015) Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education and the challenges that it presents for information literacy teaching and learning, the knowledge and skills of instructional design are as essential as ever for teaching librarians. However, the full development of instructional design skills in the setting of an MLS degree program is not feasible since each profession follows its own set of competencies. Instead, teaching librarians in the instructional designer role may wish to pursue a post-graduate certificate or second master’s degree in instructional design and technology. 

4.5 Featured Exercises in Instructional Librarianship

4.5.1 Instructional Designer Self-Reflection

After reviewing and exploring the competencies of instructional design in this chapter, take a few minutes to reflect on your own existing knowledge and skills about learning theories, instructional design models, pedagogies and technical knowledge.

4.6 References and Recommended Reading

American Library Association. (2000). Information literacy competency standards for higher education. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/11213/7668 

American Library Association. (2008). Standards for proficiencies for instruction librarians and coordinators: A practical guide. Retrieved from https://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/standards/profstandards.pdf 

American Library Association. (2015, February 9). Framework for information literacy for higher education. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework 

American Library Association. (2017, May 15). Roles and strengths of teaching librarians. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/teachinglibrarians 

Association of College and Research Libraries. (2015). Framework for information literacy for higher education. Retrieved from https://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework 

Association of Educational Communications and Technology. (2012, July 16). AECT Standards, 2012 version. Retrieved from https://www.aect.org/docs/AECTstandards2012.pdf 

Bell, S. J., & Shank, J. (2004). The blended librarian: A blueprint for redefining the teaching and learning role of academic librarians. College & Research Libraries News, 65(7), 372-375. https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.65.7.7297 

Birgili, B. (2019). Comparative reflection on best known instructional design models: Notes from the field. Current Issues in Emerging eLearning, 6(1), Article 5. https://scholarworks.umb.edu/ciee/vol6/iss1/5 

Jonassen, D. H., & Rohrer-Murphy, L. (1999). Activity theory as a framework for designing constructivist learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(1), 61-79. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299477 

McNeill, L., & Fitch, D. (2023). Microlearning through the lens of Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction: A qualitative study. TechTrends, 67, 521-533. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00805-x 

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2018). How people learn ii: Learners, contexts, and cultures. National Academies Press. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/24783  

Newton, P. M., Da Silva, A., & Peters, L. G. (2020). A pragmatic master list of action verbs for Bloom's Taxonomy. Frontiers in Education, 5, Article 107. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.00107 

Shank, J., & Bell, S. J. (2011). Blended librarianship: [Re]envisioning the role of librarian as educator in the digital information Age. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 51(2), 105–110. https://doi.org/10.5860/rusq.51n2.105 

Somerville, M. M., Mirijamdotter, A., & Collins, L. (2006, January). Systems thinking and information literacy: Elements of a knowledge enabling workplace environment. In Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'06) (Vol. 7, pp. 150-150). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2006.449