Changing Models, Changing Emphases: The Evolution of Information Literacy


Published on

Collaborative keynote presentation by Trudi Jacobson and Tom Mackey for the IL Summit 2014.

Published in: Education, Technology
1 Comment
No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Changing Models, Changing Emphases: The Evolution of Information Literacy

  1. 1. Changing Models, Changing Emphases: The Evolution of Information Literacy 1 Trudi Jacobson & Tom Mackey #metaliteracy Into the Next Generation: The Future of Information Literacy DePaul University Library and Moraine Valley Community College Library Friday, April 25, 2014 8:30am-3:30pm
  2. 2. Today’s Topics 2 Metaliteracy and Badging Threshold Concepts IL in the Disciplines
  4. 4. Key Elements of Metaliteracy Produce Collaborate Participate Share Metacognition 4
  5. 5. 5 Figure developed by Mackey, Jacobson, & Roger Lipera Mackey and Jacobson (2014) Metaliteracy: Reinventing Information Literacy to Empower Learners
  6. 6. • “promotes critical thinking and collaboration in a digital age (p. 62).” • “comprehensive framework to effectively participate in social media and online communities (p. 62)” • “unified construct that supports the acquisition, production, and sharing of knowledge in collaborative online communities (p. 62).” 6 Thomas P. Mackey and Trudi E. Jacobson “Reframing Information Literacy as a Metaliteracy” College & Research Libraries. January 2011 72:62-78.
  7. 7. “Metaliteracy empowers learners to participate in interactive information environments, equipped with the ability to continuously reflect, change, and contribute as critical thinkers (p. 86).” (Jacobson and Mackey, Proposing a Metaliteracy Model to Redefine Information Literacy, 2013)
  8. 8. “Metaliteracy is not about introducing yet another literacy format, but rather reinventing an existing one, information literacy, the critical foundation literacy that informs many others while being flexible and adaptive enough to evolve and change over time (p. 1- 2).” Metaliteracy: Reinventing Information Literacy to Empower Learners (Mackey and Jacobson, 2014).
  9. 9. Metaliteracy: Advancing Learning After Literacy (Jacobson and Mackey, 2014):$!2c1).pdf “Metaliteracy promotes a very different teaching and learning dynamic that needs to be present in the teaching of both groups. (p. 3).”
  10. 10. Metaliteracy: Advancing Learning After Literacy (Jacobson and Mackey, 2014):$!2c1).pdf “Students rarely see themselves as producers of information, only as consumers, even though they may be very creative with emerging technologies outside of school. (p. 3).”
  11. 11. Metaliteracy: Advancing Learning After Literacy (Jacobson and Mackey, 2014):$!2c1).pdf “In many cases, they have only produced papers meant solely for the eyes of their instructors. Writing for a broader audience, and working in collaboration with others, requires a new set of abilities. (p. 3).”
  12. 12. Metacognition 12 _Thinker,_Auguste_Rodin.jpg “cognition about cognition or thinking about one’s own thinking…” Metacognition in Learning and Instruction: Theory, Research and Practice, Hope J. Hartman (2002)
  13. 13. 13 Figure developed by Mackey, Jacobson and Roger Lipera Mackey and Jacobson (2014) Metaliteracy: Reinventing Information Literacy to Empower Learners
  14. 14. Metaliteracy is Metacognitive “This metacognitive approach challenges a reliance on skills-based information literacy instruction only and shifts the focus to knowledge acquisition in collaboration with others.” Mackey and Jacobson (2014) Metaliteracy: Reinventing Information Literacy to Empower Learners 14 Judith Leyster Self-portrait, 1630
  15. 15. Massive Open Online Courses cMOOC: “cMOOCs are discursive communities creating knowledge together.” • “Connectivism and Connectivist Knowledge (George Siemens and Stephen Downes) • Creativity & Multicultural Communication • Metaliteracy MOOC xMOOC “Whilst they include discussion forums…the centre of the course is the instructor-guided lesson. Each student’s journey/trajectory through the course is linear and based on the absorption and understanding of fixed competencies.” • EdX • Coursera • Canvas 15 what-is-a-mooc-what-are-the-different-types-of-mooc-xmoocs-and-cmoocs/
  16. 16.
  17. 17. Blackboard Collaborate Session
  18. 18. Conundrum Intent • MOOC designed for student engagement and connectivity with the thoughts of others as a critical mechanism for learning Reality • Students unused to this model, which emphasizes self-directed choices that do not follow a set path; they severely flounder 18
  20. 20. Badging • Same idea as Scout badges • Competency-based learning • Elements of gaming (quests, challenges) • Designated badges are shareable (LinkedIn, online portfolios or resumes) • Associated metadata indicates issuing organization, describes knowledge or skills gained 20
  21. 21. Metaliteracy Learning Objectives Goal 1: Evaluate content critically, including dynamic, online content that changes and evolves, such as article preprints, blogs, and wikis. 21
  22. 22. Goal 2: Understand personal privacy, information ethics, and intellectual property issues in changing technology environments 22 Metaliteracy Learning Objectives
  23. 23. Goal 3: Share information and collaborate in a variety of participatory environments 23 Metaliteracy Learning Objectives
  24. 24. Goal 4: Demonstrate ability to connect learning and research strategies with lifelong learning processes and personal, academic, and professional goals 24 Metaliteracy Learning Objectives
  25. 25. 25 Master Evaluator Content Analysis Search Queries Info. Sources Database Searching Evaluation Points Currency Relevance Authority Accuracy Purpose Packaging & Sharing Format Mode Perpectives & Responses Author's Voice Degrees of Separation Giving Credit Collab- orative Creation Speaking Out Informed Consumer Individual Creation Peer Review User Response Master Evaluator Badge Feedback Mechanisms
  26. 26. 26
  27. 27. 27
  28. 28. Preliminary Observations Students • Student engagement • Quality of submitted work • Interest in earning badge – “something unusual to discuss with interviewers” Faculty • Evident interest • Willingness to take the time to review 28
  30. 30. Threshold Concepts Hofer, Townsend, and Brunetti describe threshold concepts and their criteria, as based on the work of Jan Meyer and Ray Land: …Threshold concepts are the core ideas and processes in any discipline that define the discipline, but that are so ingrained that they often go unspoken or unrecognized by practitioner. They are the central concepts that we want our students to understand and put into practice, that encourage them to think and act like practitioners themselves. (Hofer, Townsend, and Brunetti, 2012, 387- 88) 30
  31. 31. 31 Threshold Concepts Transformative Integrative Irreversible Bounded Troublesome (Hofer, Townsend, and Brunetti, 2012, 387-88), quoting Meyer and Land
  32. 32. 32
  33. 33. Draft ACRL Framework: Threshold Concept Units 33 Threshold Concepts Knowledge Practices Dispositions Self-Assessments Assignments & Assessments •Integration into Curriculum •Abilities •Affective •Habits of Mind •Assists with metacognition •Formative and summative
  34. 34. Sample Threshold Concepts • Scholarship is a Conversation • Research is a Process of Inquiry • Authority Is Contextual And Constructed (based on Delphi study conducted by Townsend, Hofer, Lu, and Brunetti) 34
  35. 35. AUTHORITY IS CONTEXTUAL AND CONSTRUCTED Authority of information resources depends upon their origins, the information need, and the context in which those information resources were created and will be used.
  36. 36. Dispositions Are motivated to find authoritative sources, recognizing that authority may be manifested in unexpected ways Knowledge Practices (Abilities) Recognize that authoritative content may be packaged formally or informally, and may include dynamic user- generated information. Self-Assessments Challenge themselves to find sources whose authority may be conferred in different ways.
  37. 37. Possible Assessments or Assignments: • Provide students with two different information types (with two different goals) on the same topic by the same unnamed authoritative creator/author (for example, scholarly article and blog post). Use this as a discussion starter with students about context in relationship to authority. Reveal authorship later in discussion (might lead to lesson on information need and locating sources). (Lower level; one shot friendly) [Overlaps with threshold concept: Format as Process]
  39. 39. Opportunities/Challenges in the Disciplines • Librarians can’t do it all • Faculty conceptions of information literacy • Incorporating goal of metaliterate students • Interest aroused by threshold concepts • Potential role for badging 39
  40. 40. Lower level IL requirement for all incoming students Upper level IL requirement in the major Department responsibility New learning objectives New conversations 40 General Education Competency Requirements
  41. 41. Metaliteracy joins Info Literacy at UAlbany New major-based general education learning objectives 2. “Demonstrate the ability to evaluate content, including dynamic, online content if appropriate” 4. “Produce, share, and evaluate information in a variety of participatory environments” 5. “Integrate learning and research strategies with lifelong learning processes and personal, academic, and professional goals” 41
  42. 42. General Education Lower level Upper level IL requirement in the major Badging More extensive use of badging Threshold concept badging within disciplines? 42
  43. 43. QUESTIONS? 43
  44. 44. Metaliteracy means that YOU can be a Rock Star! 44
  45. 45. 45 Trudi E. Jacobson, M.L.S., M.A. Distinguished Librarian Head, Information Literacy Department University Libraries University at Albany, SUNY Tom Mackey, Ph.D. Dean Center for Distance Learning Empire State College, SUNY