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.

Our Work Here is Done

Presentation by Adam Edwards and Vanessa Hill, Middlesex University London from the Summon and Information Literacy event at Queen Mary University, London.

Related Books

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Our Work Here is Done

  1. 1. Our work here is done.... UK Summon Information Literacy Nov 2015 QMUL
  2. 2. ….or is it?
  3. 3. But…..
  4. 4. “……nobody except librarians want to search, everyone else just wants to find”
  5. 5. • Digital Natives • IT skills = IL skills • Evaluating information • New student skills
  6. 6. Digital Natives are different
  7. 7. IT skills = IL skills
  8. 8. The Internet is like a……. “Giant sweetshop, in which we behave like children, grabbing all we can get with less regards for quality than quantity” Fieldhouse and Nicholas, 2008 Students do not evaluate information
  9. 9. New students are information literate
  10. 10. Academic perspective • Information overload • Information skills • Graduate of the future • Potential of librarians • Info literacy/academic literacy • Limited view
  11. 11. “I didn’t quite realise how little the students knew about the Internet until we started doing stuff together and it’s become more and more terrifying every single year that it’s not getting better what they are coming in with” 1st year Lecturer
  12. 12. Our solutions
  13. 13. Final thoughts
  14. 14. Adam Edwards Vanessa Hill
  15. 15. References • Asher, C. (2003). Separate but equal: Librarians, academics and information literacy. Australian Academic and Research Libraries, 34 (1), pp.52-55. • Badke, W. (2010). Why information literacy is invisible. Communications in Information Literacy, 4 (2), pp.129-141. • Bennett, S., Maton, K., and Kervin, L. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: a critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39 (5), pp.775-786. • Chen, K. and Lin, P. (2011). Information literacy in university library user education. Aslib Proceedings: new information perspectives, 63 (4), pp.399-418. • CIBER. (2008). Information behaviour of the researchers of the future. UCL, London. Available at [Accessed 8th September 2014] • Coonan, E. (2011). A new curriculum for information literacy curriculum: transitional, transferable, transformational – Theoretical background, Teaching learning: perceptions of information literacy. Cambridge University Library. Available at [Accessed 23rd November 2014] • Dutton, W.H. and Helsper, E.J. (2007). The Internet in Britain: 2007. Oxford, Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford. Available at [Accessed: 29th December 2014] • Fieldhouse, M. and Nicholas, D. (2008). Digital literacy as information savvy: the road to information literacy. In: Lankshear, C. and Knobel, M. (eds). Digital literacy: concepts, policies and practices. New York, Peter Lang Publishing Group, pp. 47-72. • Head, A. (2012). Learning curve: How college graduates solve information problems once they join the workplace (Project Information Literacy Research Report). Available from [Accessed 11th June 2015] • Head, A. (2013). Learning the ropes: How Freshmen conduct course research once they enter college (Project Information Literacy Research Report). Available from [Accessed 9th June 2015]
  16. 16. • Head, A. and Eisenberg, M. (2010). Truth be told: How college students evaluate and use information in the digital age (Project Information Literacy Progress report). Available from [Accessed 11th June 2015] • Helsper, E. J., and Eynon, R. (2010). Digital natives: where is the evidence? British Educational Research Journal, 36 (3), pp. 503-520. • Holton, D. (2010). The Digital Natives/Digital Immigrants distinction is dead or at least dying. EdTechDev. Available at [Accessed 9th June 2015] • Jackson, M.G. (1999). Image and status: academic librarians and the new professionalism. Advances in Librarianship, 23 (1), pp.93-115. • Jones, C., Ramanau, R., Cross, S. and Healing, G. (2010). Net generation or Digital Natives: is there a distinct new generation entering university? Computers and Education, 54, pp.722-732. • Kennedy, G., Judd, T., Dalgarnot, B. and Waycott, J. (2010). Beyond natives and immigrants: exploring types of net generation students. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26, pp.332-343. • Margaryan, A., Littlejohn, A., and Vojt, G. (2011). Are digital natives a myth or reality? University students’ use of digital technologies. Computers and Education, 56, pp.429-440. • Markess, S. (2009). A new conception of information literacy for the digital learning environment in higher education. Nordic Journal of Information Literacy in Higher Education, 1 (1). pp.25-40. • McGuinness, C. (2006). What faculty think: Exploring the barriers to information literacy development in undergraduate education. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 32 (6), pp.573-582. • Norgaard, R. (2003). Writing information literacy: contributions to a concept. Reference and User Services Quarterly, 43 (2). pp.124-130. • Orr, D., Appleton, M. and Wallin, M. (2001). Information literacy and flexible delivery: creating a conceptual framework and model. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 27 (6), pp.457-463.
  17. 17. • Palfrey, J., and Gasser, U. (2008). Born digital: understanding the first generation of digital natives. Basic Books, New York. • Prensky, M. (2001a). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9 (5), pp.1-6. • Prensky, M. (2001b). Digital natives, digital immigrants: do they really think differently? On the Horizon, 9 (6), pp.1-6. • Prensky, M. (2009). H.Sapiens Digital: From Digital Immigrants and Digital Natives to Digital Wisdom. The Wisdom Page. Available from [Accessed 9th June 2015] • Silipigni Connaway, L. and Dickey, T. (2010). The digital information seeker: report of findings from selected OCLC, RIN and JISC user behaviour projects. JISC. Available at ports/2010/digitalinformationseekerreport.pdf [Accessed 27th February 2015] • Webber, S., Ford, N., Crowder, M. and Madden, A. (2013). Collaborating for deep critical information behaviour. Presented at: LILAC 2013, University of Manchester, UK. 25-27th March 2013. Available at [Accessed 11th September 2014] • Weetman, J. (2005). Osmosis- does it work for the development of information literacy? The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 31 (5), pp.456-460. • Weetman DaCosta, J. (2010). Is there an information literacy skills gap to be bridged? An examination of faculty perceptions and activities relating to information literacy in the United States and England. College and Research Libraries, 71 (3), pp.203-222. Available at [Accessed 4th January 2015] • White, D. and Le Cornu, A. (2011). Visitors and residents: a new typology for online engagement. First Monday: peer reviewed journal on the Internet, 16 (9). Available from [Accessed 9th June 2015] • Wright, F., White, D., Hirst, T. and cann, A. (2014). Visitors and residents: mapping student attitudes to academic use of social networks. Learning, Media and Technology, 39 (1), pp.126-141.
  18. 18. Photo credits: • Slide 1 • Slide 2 • Slide 3 (clockwise from top left) • Slide 4 • Slide 5 • Slide 6 • Slide 7 • Slide 8 • Slide 9 • Slide 10 • Slide 11 • Slide 12 • Slide 13 • Slide 14 • Slide 15 • Slide 16 • Slide 17 Copyright Fotolia under Microsoft licence • Slide 18,_Australia.jpg