Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Relating Research and Practice in Information Literacy 
Sheila Webber (University of Sheffield), Ola Pilerot (University o...
Structure 
•Introduction 
•Sheila Webber 
•Ola Pilerot 
•Louise Limberg 
•Bill Johnston 
•Continuing the conversation with...
Introduction 
•IL research is a developing field: issue of how is it developing, where does it fit 
•Critical mass of prac...
What we talk about when we talk about the IL research agenda 
Sheila Webber (Information School, University of Sheffield)
Scope of my contribution 
•Examined selected articles and conference papers explicitly talking about the IL research agend...
•Examined selected articles and conference papers explicitly talking about the IL research agenda/priorities 
•Researchers...
Researchers 
•Talk about the meaning of IL itself; their own stance on what IL is about, and the meaning of IL as a subjec...
Researchers 
•Position themselves and proposed agenda/priorities in relation to: 
–researchers in IL, in other LIS fields,...
Librarians/ library organisations 
•These 3 articles are all focused on teaching IL in higher education 
•They position th...
Librarians/ library organisations 
•Do not propose IL itself as object of study: in ACRL (understandably) and in Starr (20...
•Researchers establishing the field: positioning, laying foundations, testing and expanding boundaries, “here we are still...
Connections between research and practice in the IL narrative 
a mapping of the literature 
Ola Pilerot, PhD, Swedish Scho...
The IL narrative 
•Opinions, best practice, debate, policies and guidlines, research findings etc 
•Articles, reports, blo...
“Information Literacy” on three levels 
•A “label” describing a field of research or a narrative on IL 
•An empirical conc...
Three strands in the IL narrative 
1.“[T]he information literacy movement” (e.g., Garner, 2006) is manifested in the broad...
Different goals 
Professional practice 
Policy-making 
Research 
”The information literacy movement” 
IL as a goal for edu...
Conceptualizations and understandings of IL 
Professional practice/Policy-making 
Research 
•Normatively prescribed 
•A ra...
Interconnections between strands 
•For example, manifest intertextual elements (Fairclough, 1992, p. 84) such as reference...
Web of Science (WoS) literature referred to by IL researchers (n=1000) 
The total of 389 references from two recent volume...
0 
200 
400 
600 
800 
1000 
1200 
Sample of IL records in 
WoS (n=1000) 
2 recent volumes from 
UNESCO (2013) 
(n=389) 
N...
# Journal Records Percent 
1 JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC LIBRARIANSHIP 146 13,5 
2 PORTAL-LIBRARIES AND THE ACADEMY 72 6,7 
3 COLL...
www.lincs.gu.se 
CHALLENGING THE DISCOURSE OF THE RESEARCH ‒ PRACTICE GAP 
RELATING RESEARCH AND PRACTICE IN IL Louise Lim...
www.lincs.gu.se 
PREVIOUS RESEARCH 
Limberg, ECIL panel, Oct. 2014 
•Nature of and reasons for the gap 
–lack of relevance...
www.lincs.gu.se 
PROPOSED REMEDIES TO THE GAP 
Limberg, ECIL panel, Oct. 2014 
•increase practitioners’ involvement in res...
www.lincs.gu.se 
IN SUPPORT OF SCHOOL LIBRARY DEVELOPMENT – STRUCTURE AND DESIGN 
Limberg, ECIL panel, Oct. 2014 
•SSLIS p...
www.lincs.gu.se 
AIM AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS 
Limberg, ECIL panel, Oct. 2014 
To present and discuss findings from professi...
www.lincs.gu.se 
FINDINGS: WAYS OF USING RESEARCH 
Limberg, ECIL panel, Oct. 2014 
1)to design and carry out a project 
2)...
www.lincs.gu.se 
FEATURES OF FINDINGS 
Limberg, ECIL panel, Oct. 2014 
•concrete, hands-on view of using research 
•strong...
www.lincs.gu.se 
IN THE LIGHT OF PREVIOUS RESEARCH 
Σ strong and varied interest in putting research into professional pr...
www.lincs.gu.se 
CONCLUDING REMARKS 
Limberg, ECIL panel, Oct. 2014 
•The relationship between research and practice needs...
Building Capacity 
Bill Johnston 
(University of Strathclyde)
Capacity Building by …. 
1.Research on teaching & learning. 
2.Practical Educational Development: staff support & organiza...
Research: teaching & learning 
Research traditions 
•Phenomenography 
•Social Constructivism 
•Transformational learning 
...
Educational Development in Practice: 
Staff support 
•Research infused Post Graduate Certificates. 
•Course re-design team...
International & European Collaborations 
•Identify a big, fundable topic 
•Adopt a research-based design 
•Break it down a...
Continuing the conversation with you! 
•Can we leverage the ECIL network? 
•Would a project on relating research and pract...
Sheila Webber Information School University of Sheffield, UK s.webber@shef.ac.uk Twitter & SL: Sheila Yoshikawa http://inf...
References 1 
•Association of College and Research Libraries IS Research and Scholarship Committee. (2011). Research agend...
•Hall, H., Irving, C. & Cruickshank (2012). Improving access to Library and Information Science research: maximising its r...
•McNicol, S. & Dalton, P. (2004). Striking a balance: priorities for research in LIS. Library Review, 53(3), 167-176. 
•Pa...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Relating Research and Practice in Information Literacy

2,780 views

Published on

Panel by Sheila Webber (University of Sheffield), Ola Pilerot (University of Borås), Louise Limberg (University of Borås), Bill Johnston (Strathclyde University) presented at the European Conference on Information Literacy, Dubrovnik, October 2014.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

Relating Research and Practice in Information Literacy

  1. 1. Relating Research and Practice in Information Literacy Sheila Webber (University of Sheffield), Ola Pilerot (University of Borås), Louise Limberg (University of Borås), Bill Johnston (Strathclyde University) ECIL Dubrovnik October 2014
  2. 2. Structure •Introduction •Sheila Webber •Ola Pilerot •Louise Limberg •Bill Johnston •Continuing the conversation with you!
  3. 3. Introduction •IL research is a developing field: issue of how is it developing, where does it fit •Critical mass of practitioners seem to agree research is necessary •Perceived “gap” between library practitioners & LIS researchers predates IL research i.e. background of LIS research not being seen (by librarians) as sufficient to needs of librarians •Ambiguous relationship between librarians and LIS academics in some countries
  4. 4. What we talk about when we talk about the IL research agenda Sheila Webber (Information School, University of Sheffield)
  5. 5. Scope of my contribution •Examined selected articles and conference papers explicitly talking about the IL research agenda/priorities •Identifying the context in which the authors are placing their discussion of research agenda/ priorities; how they position it, introduce it etc. •May help to explain differences in the actual priorities / agenda proposed (the latter will only be dealt with briefly here) •Contributes to the scene setting of subsequent panel presentations •Is connected to question of “Why do research in IL”
  6. 6. •Examined selected articles and conference papers explicitly talking about the IL research agenda/priorities •Researchers: Lloyd and Bruce (2011); Lloyd and Williamson (2008); Partridge et al. (2008); Sundin (2011) •Librarians/ professional organisations; ACRL (2011); Gibson and Jacobson (2014); Starr (2012) •Contrasting 2 perspectives •Exclusions and limitations of the study
  7. 7. Researchers •Talk about the meaning of IL itself; their own stance on what IL is about, and the meaning of IL as a subject of research •IL as not just the territory of librarians •Positioning themselves –theoretically or philosophically –methodologically –in terms of what populations investigated –in terms of what research questions pursued
  8. 8. Researchers •Position themselves and proposed agenda/priorities in relation to: –researchers in IL, in other LIS fields, or in “LIS” generally –researchers in other disciplines –the timeline/development of IL as a field •Talk about discussion/collaboration in context of specifying, conducting, disseminating research •Conditions for research (e.g. funding, how you develop a research agenda)
  9. 9. Librarians/ library organisations •These 3 articles are all focused on teaching IL in higher education •They position the proposed agenda/priorities as a reaction to changes in learners’ behaviour and in the environment (e.g. “instruction environment” (ACRL, 2011); technology changes) i.e. IL and its research agenda need to change because the learners & their environment has changed •Methodologies not discussed in depth
  10. 10. Librarians/ library organisations •Do not propose IL itself as object of study: in ACRL (understandably) and in Starr (2012) nature of IL also not discussed. •Related to previous research mainly by identifying deficiencies of previous research e.g. lack of generalisable evidence (exception PIL) •“Context” as limitation or problem rather than a focus for research •Discussion and collaboration focused on faculty & other institutional groups, mainly to improve practice
  11. 11. •Researchers establishing the field: positioning, laying foundations, testing and expanding boundaries, “here we are still working at exploring/ investigating / uncovering the phenomenon” (Partridge et al, 2008) •Main emphases in librarians’ agendas: improving practice, testing and developing IL frameworks, getting quantified evidence that what they do is valuable and works - working towards a robust scalable framework for teaching IL
  12. 12. Connections between research and practice in the IL narrative a mapping of the literature Ola Pilerot, PhD, Swedish School of Library and Information Science, University of Borås
  13. 13. The IL narrative •Opinions, best practice, debate, policies and guidlines, research findings etc •Articles, reports, blogs, conference presentations, book chapters and books etc
  14. 14. “Information Literacy” on three levels •A “label” describing a field of research or a narrative on IL •An empirical concept used for capturing information seeking and use activities •An analytical/theoretical concept used as a tool for analyzing or theorizing a phenomenon (e.g. information seeking and use activities)
  15. 15. Three strands in the IL narrative 1.“[T]he information literacy movement” (e.g., Garner, 2006) is manifested in the broadest of these strands: texts written by practitioners, predominantly librarians at universities and other educational institutions, who (often) give evidence of best practice 2.Policy-making texts that explicitly stress the importance of all people becoming information literate, e.g. documents published or supported by organizations such as IFLA and UNESCO 3.A growing body of empirically and theoretically grounded research texts produced at university departments within the fields of educational science and library and information science Pilerot & Lindberg, 2011
  16. 16. Different goals Professional practice Policy-making Research ”The information literacy movement” IL as a goal for educational activities IL as goal and means for politics IL as a study object e.g. ACRL e.g. UNESCO, IFLA e.g. The International Information Literacies Research Network Pilerot & Lindberg, 2011
  17. 17. Conceptualizations and understandings of IL Professional practice/Policy-making Research •Normatively prescribed •A rather fixed set of generic skills •Predominantly cognitive, emphasizing critical thinking •Primarily related to digital and textual sources •An individual and measurable competence •Transferable across practices •Analytically described •Situated, related to contexts •Social, discursive, corporeal (and cognitive) •Related to a manifold of sources •A social, collective competence embedded in practices •Variational according to situations, activities, and practices Pilerot & Lindberg, 2011
  18. 18. Interconnections between strands •For example, manifest intertextual elements (Fairclough, 1992, p. 84) such as references linking together documents •Example
  19. 19. Web of Science (WoS) literature referred to by IL researchers (n=1000) The total of 389 references from two recent volumes published by UNESCO The total of 452 references from two recent books authored by librarians Database: Social Sciences Citation Index + Arts & Humanities Citation Index Time span: all years Subject area: Information Science & Library Science Search term: “information literacy” as Topic = 1081 records (in 69 journals) All the references (n=21233) cited in the 1081 records The 1000 most cited out of the above Conceptual relationship of information literacy and media literacy in knowledge societies: Series of research papers (2013) UNESCO. Retrieved from: http://tinyurl.com/nks6bku + Media and information literacy: Policy and strategy (2013) UNESCO. Retrieved from: http://fr.unesco.org/node/ 183761 Noe, N.W. (2013). Creating and maintaining an information literacy instruction program in the Twenty-First century: an ever-changing landscape. Oxford: Chandos. + Mackey & Jacobson (2014). Metaliteracy: Reinventing information literacy to empower learners. London: Facet Publishing Are they interconnected?
  20. 20. 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Sample of IL records in WoS (n=1000) 2 recent volumes from UNESCO (2013) (n=389) Noe (2013) and Mackey & Jacobson (2013) (n=452) UNESCO in WoS (n=37) Noe and Mackey & Jacobson in WoS (n=48) Noe and Mackey & Jacobson in UNESCO (n=29)
  21. 21. # Journal Records Percent 1 JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC LIBRARIANSHIP 146 13,5 2 PORTAL-LIBRARIES AND THE ACADEMY 72 6,7 3 COLLEGE & RESEARCH LIBRARIES 71 6,6 4 INFORMATION RESEARCH 51 4,7 5 JOURNAL OF LIBRARIANSHIP AND INFORMATION SCIENCE 47 4,3 6 ELECTRONIC LIBRARY 46 4,3 7 LIBRARY TRENDS 44 4,1 8 LIBRI 43 4,0 9 REFERENCE & USER SERVICES QUARTERLY 42 3,9 10 JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION 39 3,6 11 HEALTH INFORMATION AND LIBRARIES JOURNAL 36 3,3 12 LIBRARY & INFORMATION SCIENCE RESEARCH 35 3,2 13 PROGRAM-ELECTRONIC LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS 32 3,0 14 AUSTRALIAN LIBRARY JOURNAL 31 2,9 15 CANADIAN JOURNAL OF INFORMATION AND LIBRARY SCIENCE 26 2,4 16 ASLIB PROCEEDINGS 24 2,2 17 AUSTRALIAN ACADEMIC & RESEARCH LIBRARIES 22 2,0 18 LIBRARY HI TECH 21 1,9 19 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 20 1,9 20 LIBRARY JOURNAL 17 1,9 # Journal Records Percent 1 JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC LIBRARIANSHIP 12 6,9 2 COLLEGE & RESEARCH LIBRARIES 11 6,3 3 REFERENCE SERVICES REVIEW 9 5,2 4 COLLEGE & RESEARCH LIBRARIES NEWS 7 4,0 5 JOURNAL OF INFORMATION LITERACY 6 3,4 COMMUNICATIONS IN INFORMATION LITERACY 6 3,4 6 COLLEGE & UNDERGRADUATE LIBRARIES 5 2,8 7 PUBLIC SERVICES QUARTERLY 4 2,3 JOURNAL OF LIBRARY ADMINISTRATION 4 2,3 PORTAL-LIBRARIES AND THE ACADEMY 4 2,3 JOURNAL OF LIBRARIANSHIP AND INFORMATION SCIENCE 4 2,3 8 COMMUNITY & JUNIOR COLLEGE LIBRARIES 3 1,7 CHANGE: THE MAGAZINE OF HIGHER LEARNING 3 1,7 9 COMPUTERS & EDUCATION 2 1,1 REFERENCE & USER SERVICES QUARTERLY 2 1,1 RESEARCH STRATEGIES 2 1,1 COMPUTERS IN LIBRARIES 2 1,1 LIBRARY JOURNAL 2 1,1 REFERENCE LIBRARIAN 2 1,1 LIBRARY REVIEW 2 1,1 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFORMATION MANAGEMENT 2 1,1 COLORADO LIBRARIES 2 1,1 EDUCAUSE REVIEW 2 1,1 # Journal Records Percent 1 JOURNAL OF COMMUNICATION 4 4,4 2 JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION 3 3,3 JOURNAL OF LIBRARIANSHIP AND INFORMATION SCIENCE 3 3,3 COMUNICAR 3 3,3 3 FIRST MONDAY 2 2,2 INFORMATION RESEARCH 2 2,2 COLLEGE & RESEARCH LIBRARIES 2 2,2 COLLEGE & RESEARCH LIBRARIES NEWS 2 2,2 INTERNATIONAL INFORMATION & LIBRARY REVIEW 2 2,2 MEDIA, CULTURE & SOCIETY 2 2,2 NTI 2 2,2 ANNUAL REVIEW OF SOCIOLOGY 2 2,2 HARVARD EDUCATIONAL REVIEW 2 2,2 Journals in the UNESCO volumes referred to two or more times Journals in Noe and Mackey and Jacobson referred to two or more times The 20 most frequently used journals in the IL research literature
  22. 22. www.lincs.gu.se CHALLENGING THE DISCOURSE OF THE RESEARCH ‒ PRACTICE GAP RELATING RESEARCH AND PRACTICE IN IL Louise Limberg SSLIS Limberg, ECIL panel, Oct. 2014
  23. 23. www.lincs.gu.se PREVIOUS RESEARCH Limberg, ECIL panel, Oct. 2014 •Nature of and reasons for the gap –lack of relevance –lack of interest –lack of mediational means (e.g. journals) –too theoretical BUT •common interests •school librarianship different from other LIS areas, more active in using research in and for practice
  24. 24. www.lincs.gu.se PROPOSED REMEDIES TO THE GAP Limberg, ECIL panel, Oct. 2014 •increase practitioners’ involvement in research •improve the dissemination of research to practice •add in-depth discussions in research papers on implications for practice •evidence based librarianship (EBLIP) •apply research approaches relevant for practice Need for further empirical research on relationship between research and practice (e.g. DReaM; Roberts et al. 2013)
  25. 25. www.lincs.gu.se IN SUPPORT OF SCHOOL LIBRARY DEVELOPMENT – STRUCTURE AND DESIGN Limberg, ECIL panel, Oct. 2014 •SSLIS programme designed to support local school (library) development projects •Schools’ local development projects aimed at improving teaching and learning of language and literacies •Participating schools had chosen school libraries as important tools for reaching this aim (cf. above) •Programme participants in teams of 4-5 people
  26. 26. www.lincs.gu.se AIM AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS Limberg, ECIL panel, Oct. 2014 To present and discuss findings from professional development programme targeted at putting research into practice in school librarianship 1)What activities of putting research into practice happened? 2)How can the findings be interpreted in relation to previous research on the research-practice gap in LIS? 3)What meanings were constructed with regard to putting research into professional practice?
  27. 27. www.lincs.gu.se FINDINGS: WAYS OF USING RESEARCH Limberg, ECIL panel, Oct. 2014 1)to design and carry out a project 2)to develop teaching methods 3)to create a common understanding within the team or school 4)to inspire further activities aimed at school library development 5)for professional development 6)to conduct research
  28. 28. www.lincs.gu.se FEATURES OF FINDINGS Limberg, ECIL panel, Oct. 2014 •concrete, hands-on view of using research •strong focus on the mediation of research via using and producing texts •interaction between different communities of professional practice for reshaping common school practice •putting research into practice emerged as the appropriation of purposeful tools for acting in a community of practice
  29. 29. www.lincs.gu.se IN THE LIGHT OF PREVIOUS RESEARCH Σ strong and varied interest in putting research into professional practice. Interest shared by practitioners and researchers/SSLIS team Practioners expressed demand for –knowing about research, –analysing potential relevance of certain research, –in-depth discussions about implications for practice, – suggestions about how to use findings Limberg, ECIL panel, Oct. 2014
  30. 30. www.lincs.gu.se CONCLUDING REMARKS Limberg, ECIL panel, Oct. 2014 •The relationship between research and practice needs to be revisited for a more solid and nuanced knowledge base •Professional development programme = purposeful tool for mediating ways of putting research into practice •Future programmes should be directed at the object of learning as ”knowing how to use research in professional practice for library development”
  31. 31. Building Capacity Bill Johnston (University of Strathclyde)
  32. 32. Capacity Building by …. 1.Research on teaching & learning. 2.Practical Educational Development: staff support & organizational change. 3.International and European Collaborations. Asking Big Questions: what are universities for?
  33. 33. Research: teaching & learning Research traditions •Phenomenography •Social Constructivism •Transformational learning •Threshold Concepts Applications •Active,collaborative, inquiry-based methods •Blended learning landscapes •Whole year & whole course re-design •ACRL revision
  34. 34. Educational Development in Practice: Staff support •Research infused Post Graduate Certificates. •Course re-design teams. •Role expansion - lecturer/tutor as designer •Research collaborations Organizational change •Structures/leaders •External quality assessment •Bologna process •Planning/funding •Decisions/evaluation •Career trajectories •Research/teaching dynamics
  35. 35. International & European Collaborations •Identify a big, fundable topic •Adopt a research-based design •Break it down and divide the labour •Create thematic working groups •Keep it simple and efficient •Where are the funding sources? •Who is currently research active? •Where are the centres / units? •How would findings be disseminated? •Can we leverage the ECIL network?
  36. 36. Continuing the conversation with you! •Can we leverage the ECIL network? •Would a project on relating research and practice be a suitable topic? •Discuss with your neighbours
  37. 37. Sheila Webber Information School University of Sheffield, UK s.webber@shef.ac.uk Twitter & SL: Sheila Yoshikawa http://information-literacy.blogspot.com/ http://www.slideshare.net/sheilawebber/ Orcid ID 0000-0002-2280-9519 Dr Ola Pilerot Swedish School of Library and Information Science, University of Borås, Sweden ola.pilerot@hb.se Bill Johnston Honorary Research Fellow University of Strathclyde Glasgow, Scotland b.johnston@strath.ac.uk Professor Louise Limberg Swedish School of Library and Information Science, University of Borås, Sweden louise.limberg@hb.se
  38. 38. References 1 •Association of College and Research Libraries IS Research and Scholarship Committee. (2011). Research agenda for library instruction and information literacy. (Rev. ed.) Chicago, Il: ACRL. http://www.ala.org/acrl/aboutacrl/directoryofleadership/sections/is/iswebsite/projpubs/researchagendalibrary •Booth, A. (2003). Bridging the Research-Practice Gap? The Role of Evidence Based Librarianship. New review of information and library research, 9(1), 3-23. •Collini, S. (2012). What are universities for? Penguin. •Entwistle, N. and Tomlinson, P. (Eds.), Student learning and university teaching. Leicester, England: British Psychological Society. •Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Cambridge: Polity Press. •Garner, S. D. (Ed.). (2006). High-level colloquium on information literacy and lifelong learning. Report of the meeting in Bibliotheca Alexandrina, November 6-9, 2005. http://archive.ifla.org/III/wsis/High-Level-Colloquium.pdf •Gibson, C. and Jacobson, T. (2014) Informing and extending the draft ACRL Information Literacy Framework for Higher Education: an overview and avenues for research. College and research libraries, 75 (3), 250-254. •Haddow, G. & Klobas, J.E. (2004). Communication of research to practice in library and information science: Closing the gap. Library & Information Science Research, 26(1), 29-43.
  39. 39. •Hall, H., Irving, C. & Cruickshank (2012). Improving access to Library and Information Science research: maximising its relevance and impact to practitioners. Business Information Review, 29 (4), 224-230. •Julien, H. & Williamson, K. (2010). Discourse and practice in information literacy and information seeking: gaps and opportunities. Information Research, 16(1), paper 458. http://www.informationr.net/ir/16-1/paper458.html •Klobas, J. E. & Clyde, L. A. (2010). Beliefs, attitudes and perceptions about research and practice in a professional field. Library & Information Science Research, 32, 237-245. •Limberg, L. (2010). Information Literacies at the intersection between information seeking and learning: contexts and values. In Information Literacies Research Network Seminar: COLIS 2010 Conference: London. Boras: University of Boras. Retrieved March 5, 2014 from http://bada.hb.se/bitstream/2320/6536/1/ILRS_2010_Louise_Limberg_introductory_paper.pdf •Limberg, L. & Sundin, O. (2006). Teaching information seeking: relating information literacy education to theories of information behaviour. Information Research, 12(1), paper 280. http://www.informationr.net/ir/12-1/paper280.html •Lloyd, A. & Bruce, C.S. (2011). State of the art and future challenges for information literacy research. In Social Media and Information Practices Workshop, 10-11 November 2011, University of Borås, Sweden. http://eprints.qut.edu.au/47207/2/47207.pdf •Lloyd, A. and Williamson, K. (2008). Towards and understanding of information literacy in context. Journal of librarianship and information science, 40(1), 3-12. •McKechnie, L., Julien, H., & Oliphant, T. (2008). Communicating research findings to library and information science practitioners: A study of ISIC papers from 1996 to 2000. Information Research. 13(4). http://www.informationr.net/ir/13-4/paper375.html
  40. 40. •McNicol, S. & Dalton, P. (2004). Striking a balance: priorities for research in LIS. Library Review, 53(3), 167-176. •Partridge, H., Bruce, C. and Tilley, C. (2008) Community information literacy: developing an Australian research agenda. Libri, 58, 110-122. •Pilerot (in press). Connections between research and practice in the information literacy narrative: a mapping of the literature and some propositions. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science. •Pilerot, O. & Lindberg, J. (2011). The concept of information literacy in policy-making texts: an imperialistic project? Library Trends, 60(2), 338-360. •Powell, R. R., Baker, L. M. & Mika, J. J. (2002). Library and information science practitioners and research. Library & Information Science Research, 24, 49-72. •Roberts, A., Madden, A.D. & Corrall, S. (2013). Putting Research into Practice. Library Trends, 61 (3), 479-512. •Starr, S. (2012). Editorial: Improving instruction in medical libraries: the research agenda. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 100(4), 236-238 •Sundin, O. (2011) From the periphery to the centre: some aspects regarding the future of information literacy research. In Social Media and Information Practices Workshop, 10-11 November 2011, University of Borås, Sweden. •Webber, S. (2007). Information literacy research map. http://www.slideshare.net/sheilawebber/map-of-information-literacy-research

×