ILTS Library Information Specialist (220) study materials
ILTS Library Information Specialist (220) study resources

ILTS Library Information Specialist (220): Instructional Role of the Library Information Specialist

ILTS Library Information Specialist (220) · Work through your exam, one topic at a time.

All guide sections

Instructional Role of the Library Information Specialist

Domain 1: Instructional Role of the Library Information Specialist

This domain tests how the library information specialist works as an instructional partner: collaborating with teachers, integrating inquiry and information literacy into curriculum, co-teaching, assessing learning, promoting reading, and leading professional development. The exam favors a librarian who begins with student outcomes and content standards rather than isolated library skills.

Core rules and concepts

  • Collaboration is cyclical: identify a curricular need, co-plan with standards, co-teach, co-assess, and revise.
  • Anchor instruction in the AASL Shared Foundations (Inquire, Include, Collaborate, Curate, Explore, Engage) and relevant Illinois learning standards.
  • Use backward design: set learning targets and acceptable evidence before choosing activities.
  • Differentiate for English learners, students with IEPs or 504 plans, and struggling readers through accessible formats and scaffolds.
  • Reading promotion is instructional when it builds choice, relevance, and reader identity.

Worked example

A seventh-grade science teacher plans a disease research project. The librarian asks for the science standard and the desired product, then co-writes a question-framing mini-lesson and a source-evaluation rubric. They co-teach two sessions and score student work together. The reasoning is that the librarian did not substitute a generic orientation; the work began with the teacher's content objective, added AASL inquiry skills, and produced shared assessment evidence.

Traps

  • Scheduling a class visit and calling it collaboration.
  • Teaching database mechanics without a curricular purpose.
  • Planning only library standards and ignoring the teacher's content standards.
  • Skipping co-assessment, leaving no evidence of impact.