- Hignite, Michael, Ph.D. et al. "Information Literacy Assessment: Moving Beyond Computer Literacy". College Student Journal Vol. 43, Issue 3. Date: 09/01/2009 Start Page: 81
- Shenton, Andrew K. and Megan Fitzgibbons. "Making information literacy relevant". Library Review Vol. 59, Issue 3. Date: 03/01/2010 Start Page: 165.
- Lloyd, Annemaree. "Information Literacy : The Meta-Competency of the Knowledge Economy? An Exploratory Paper". Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 2003 35: 87, http://lis.sagepub.com
- Lloyd, Annemaree. "Information literacy : Different contexts, different concepts, different truths?"Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 2005 37: 82
- Anderson, Byron(2008) 'Information “Literacies”', Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian, 26: 2, 63 — 65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J103v26n02_05
With that question out of the way, I proceeded on to my research (long live online magazine articles at the U of M library), and found some very interesting ideas.
First, there was a common theme in multiple articles about the definition of information literacy. In Anderson's article, he refers to "literacies" and argues that there are other literacies, such as visual literacy and media literacy. This raises an interesting question. Are these part of information literacy, are they separate types of literacy, or are they synonyms for information literacy? At present, my verdict is that they are subcategories of information literacy, but I'm open to discussion. At any rate, it does give one pause to consider the full scope of information literacy. Hignite's article, which delves into the result of an information literacy assessment (and has some really intriguing statistics, it was a great read), concludes that information literacy has to go beyond mere software/hardware manipulation, which provides another thing to take into account when teaching. Another dimension to information literacy is discussed in by Lloyd. In her article "Information Literacy: Different contexts, different concepts, different truths?" she introduces the idea of information literacy in the workplace, vs. information literacy in education, and points out that in the workplace, information is based on social relationships and experience, sources of information not accumulated into the the standard definition of information literacy, but I think Lloyd has a valid point. There are more sources of information than just books and computers.
The meta-competency article by Lloyd then questions whether the information literacy learned in the academic realm is transferable to other arenas. For example, if I can write a research report for a class, does that also mean I can solve a technical problem in my employment? I like to think I am informational literate--this is an unverified claim, I've never taken a test or anything, and I do have moments when I wonder about my informational skills. But, I think overall, I am information literate. And I think that there are foundational skills that do transfer from field to field. Sure, there are others that don't carry over, but I think that they probably build on some of these foundational skills, which makes it possible to acquire new skills. I can't prove it, but it's as good a theory as any.
The Shenton and Fitzgibbon article is good food for thought, particularly for school librarians. I quite enjoyed the opening section: how do you convince kids that information literacy has value beyond school assignments? It seems like the eternal question of education, how on earth do we convince these kids that this matters. Good luck to all of you seeking an answer. Let me know if you find it. I won't give you a spoiler, but they do have some good suggestions to help.
They article also raise another interesting point. Can information literacy be taught independent of other subjects? That is to say, can we just go in and teach Information Literacy 101? Or does it have to be in the context of other subjects? I'm interested in opinions and thoughts. I think some skills could be taught or enhanced independently. But some things you learn best by doing, and may be taught best in conjunction with other subjects. I really don't know. Anyone else have any thoughts?
As you can see, there is a lot to explore in information literacy. I figured I would check out a few articles and pick the three that were most interesting--clearly that didn't work. I do hope that there has been something interesting for you to consider in my lengthy recap, and feel free to contribute your insights as well!
Your question about whether information literacy can be taught independently of other subjects or in the context of other subjects seems particularly relevant RIGHT NOW. Schools are mostly not addressing this at all, which leaves this question to librarians, both school and public. Plus, this is extremely subjective as to whom is being taught, that is, are these kids who have grown up with computers and the internet and parents who monitor their use, or are these students who go to the public library to use facebook and youtube? How much do they know already? What do they need to know for life, and their specific assignments? The UM library teaches both cold-info lit classes and also info-lit as it relates to a subject (i.e. how to search for articles in psycinfo for a psych303 class). It seems much more research is needed on this topic.
ReplyDeleteFirst, there was a common theme in multiple articles about the definition of information literacy. In Anderson's article, he refers to "literacies" and argues that there are other literacies, such as visual literacy and media literacy. This raises an interesting question. Are these part of information literacy, are they separate types of literacy, or are they synonyms for information literacy?
ReplyDeleteI think too many people spend time wondering about this, and too few people spend time clearing obstacles between patrons and information literacy. The fact is there are some ideas that encompass meaning which cannot be articulated. For example, we define plain old literacy as the ability to read and write, but that is not what literacy really is-- it actually has to do with the ability to get and produce meaning with the written word, but exactly how that process happens...making information turn into or produce meaning...that's hard to articulate, that's also what information literacy is...time to move onto the next step and start figuring out what things we can articulate(and knock out) that get that in between us and meaning. We don't have the language right now to say this is what the brain does when it makes meaning, for surely if we did, teaching information literacy would be quite a bit simpler. The revelation of that neurological or cognitive process has to be the end goal, not the starting point.
I agree with Alissa, more research is needed as to the best way to teach information literacy. However, I think that student interest needs to be taken into consideration. That being said, simply teaching information literacy for information literacy's sake, could be incredibly dull. Kids usually learn more when they're having fun, and although school assignments are not always fun, at least there is a goal that is being worked toward. Then again, I suppose there would be a way to come up with fun information literacy coursework. A major problem as far as schools go is time. Teachers are already stretched for time to cover everything they need to with their students. Adding another subject area that needs to be addressed throughout a K-12 education might be difficult. Some restructuring would have to happen.
ReplyDelete