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.

Advancing Information Literacy in Higher Education: four questions for debate

786 views

Published on

Panel session chaired by Sheila Corrall, with Ethan Pullman, Alexis Macklin, Charlie Inskip and Sheila Webber, on 6th April 2018 at the LILAC conference in Liverpool, UK

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Advancing Information Literacy in Higher Education: four questions for debate

  1. 1. Advancing Information Literacy In Higher Education Four Questions For Debate Sheila Corrall, Ethan Pullman, Charlie Inskip, Sheila Webber & Alexis Macklin Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  2. 2. Four Questions For Debate 1. Which model(s) should we use? – How should we define/frame educational interventions, in terms of a theoretical lens and/or orientation, conceptual framework, process model, professional standards or guidelines? 2. What should our purpose be? – Improve academic performance, prepare graduates for employment, or help people interact with information for lifewide and lifelong learning as informed citizens? Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  3. 3. Four Questions For Debate 3. How should we position information literacy? – As a transferable, measurable skillset; a higher-order, knowledge-based meta-competence; or a soft applied discipline, with its own distinct identity? 4. How should we assess information literacy? – What types of measures should we use, e.g., affective, behavioral, cognitive? How should we collect evidence, e.g., exercises, tests, course products, narratives, observation, interviews? When should we do it? Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  4. 4. Presenters Sheila Corrall, University of Pittsburgh School of Computing and Information (Moderator/Timekeeper) Ethan Pullman, Carnegie Mellon University Libraries (Q. 1) Charlie Inskip, University College London Department of Information Studies (Q. 2) Sheila Webber, University of Sheffield Information School (Q. 3) Alexis Macklin, Purdue University Fort Wayne Library (Q. 4) Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  5. 5. Which Model(s) Should We Use To Frame Our Interventions? Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  6. 6. An ‘IL Model by any other name’, would it be as sweet? Visual representation based on Models & Frameworks, ILG Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  7. 7. Then came IL types And all in 50 minutes or less! Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  8. 8. IL at IATUL Members of International Association of University Libraries 2015 IATUL Special Interest Group Information Literacy Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  9. 9. How are U.S. librarians using the standards? (Julien, Gross, Latham, Survey of IL Practices in US, CRL 2018) And all in 50 minutes or less! 87% 87% 81% 60% 53% 52% 51% Hands-on instruction in computer lab Individualized instruction (one-on-one) Lectures/demonstrations in subject classes Group instruction courses/subjects in the library Video recordings (such as YouTube videos) Web tutorials Library guides/handouts web format Method of Instruction Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  10. 10. How are U.S. librarians using the standards? (ibid) 5.99 5.03 4.38 4.36 4.1 2.64 2.48 2.36 Awareness of Tech Innovations How to Manage Information How databases work Other Locating find info in various sources general strategies critical thinking Ranking of Objectives Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  11. 11. How are U.S. librarians using the standards? (ibid) Assessment Method 58% 41% 40% Faculty formative self-assessments Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  12. 12. Back to Our Question (i.e. your turn) “How should we define and/or frame our educational interventions? In terms of a theoretical lens or orientation, conceptual framework, process model, professional standards, or guidelines? Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  13. 13. A Librarian’s Perspective • Standards help you develop learning outcomes • Frameworks help guide teaching & learning philosophies • Keep your eyes on the ball: Literacy not Expertise • Learning is contextual: some context need a process approach, some need theory, the challenge is knowing the difference • If assessment is easy, we’d all be doing it • Learning doesn’t stop, nor does teaching Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  14. 14. What Should Our Purpose Be As Information Literacy Educators? Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  15. 15. What should our purpose be as information literacy educators? Improve academic performance? Prepare graduates for employment? Help people interact with information for life-wide and lifelong learning as informed citizens? All of the above? Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  16. 16. Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  17. 17. What should our purpose be as information literacy educators? “In HE the primary purpose of information literacy interventions is to enable students to independently seek information and use it appropriately and conform to academic information norms. One could call this ‘academic information literacy’.” (Information Literacy Group, n.d.) Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  18. 18. What should our purpose be as information literacy educators? https://lydiaarnold.wordpress.com/2016/10/03/the-process-of-defining-graduate-attributes/ Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  19. 19. Russia, Office, Men, Women, Working, Workers, Complex – tpsdave - http://pixabay.com/en/russia-office-men-women-working-95311/ CC0 1.0 Teaching Chemistry – starmanseries - https://flic.kr/p/ciLwbon CC BY 2.0 Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  20. 20. Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  21. 21. What Should Our Purpose Be As Information Literacy Educators? Or should we be asking, • what is the role of our institution? • should we contribute to the development of graduate attributes? How? • are we / should we be preparing students for the wider world? • should we concentrate on ‘academic information literacy’ and leave employability to careers consultants? • what is the role of faculty? Over to you… Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  22. 22. How Should We Position Information Literacy? Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  23. 23. Information literacy • A complex, dynamic concept • A discipline (Johnston & Webber, 2006; Webber & Johnston, 2017) or at least a subject domain • Like many social science disciplines: development comes about through both practice and research Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  24. 24. How to position IL? • Depends on your motivation e.g. – Signalling allegiance – Carving out an academic reputation – Aligning with organisational goals and strategy – Fitting in with an existing initative – Developing an information literate curriculum – Helping a specific group of people to engage with the information that will enable them to life their life • IL is rich enough to accommodate all this! Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  25. 25. Observations • Needs to be contextually interpreted, culturally relevant • “Literacies” “Meta” “Critical” don’t replace IL • Digital Literacy – in short/medium term will be old fashioned (Floridi’s (2015) idea of offline and online blending to onlife) – don’t get trapped there • Positioning with UNESCO concept of Media & Information Literacy may have more mileage, but need to be assertive about Information component Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  26. 26. How Should We Assess Our Information Literacy Activities ? Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  27. 27. What are we doing? • Information literacy assessment in higher education (ILAHE) – theoretical framework (Pinto, 2015) – 5 consolidated lines of research (clusters) o Evaluation-Education o Assessment o Students-Efficacy o Learning/research o Library Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  28. 28. Why are we doing this? • Three primary functions of information literacy instruction assessment (Erlinger, in press) – Providing feedback to learners – Providing feedback to instructors – Demonstrating value of programs to stakeholders and administrators Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  29. 29. Does it matter? • Are students more information literate as a result of IL instruction (one-shots or embedded)? Do they retain IL skills? • Are more faculty collaborating with librarians and/or embedding IL into their curriculum? • Have IL assessment measures demonstrated impact (student retention; improved graduation rates)? Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  30. 30. References Bates, M. J. (2015). The information professions: Knowledge, memory, heritage. Information Research, 20(1). Retrieved from http://InformationR.net/ir/20- 1/paper655.html Erlinger, A. (2017). Outcomes assessment in undergraduate information literacy instruction: A systematic review. College & Research Libraries. Advance online publication. Retrieved from https://crl.acrl.org/index.php/crl/article/view/16600 Floridi, L. (ed.). (2015). The onlife manifesto. Heidelberg: Springer. Johnston, B., & Webber, S. (2006). As we may think: Information literacy as a discipline for the information age. Research Strategies, 20(3), 108-121. Julien, H., Gross, M., & Latham, D. (2018). Survey of information literacy instructional practices in US academic libraries. College & Research Libraries, 79(2), 179-199. Pinto, M. (2015). Viewing and exploring the subject area of information literacy assessment in higher education (2000–2011). Scientometrics, 102(1), 227-245. Webber, S., & Johnston, B. (2017). Information literacy: Conceptions, context and the formation of a discipline. Journal of Information Literacy, 11(1), 156-183. UNESCO MIL initiatives: https://en.unesco.org/themes/media-and-information-literacy; http://www.unesco.org/new/en/gapmil/ Corrall, Pullman, Inskip, Webber & Macklin, 2018
  31. 31. Advancing Information Literacy in Higher Education Four Questions For Debate 1. Which model(s) should we use? 2. What should our purpose be as IL educators? 3. How should we position information literacy? 4. How should we assess information literacy? Your Turn – Reactions and Discussion
  32. 32. Contacts Sheila Corrall scorrall@pitt.edu Charlie Inskip c.inskip@ucl.ac.uk Alexis Macklin macklina@ipfw.edu Ethan Pullman ethanp@cmu.edu Sheila Webber s.webber@sheffield.ac.uk @sheilayoshikawa http://information-literacy.blogspot.com
  33. 33. Please continue the debate at https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/IL4Qs

×