Presenters: Donna Witek and Ellysa Stern Cahoy Keynote presentation PA Forward Information Literacy Summit, July 23, 2014, State College, PA

1. ACRL’s Framework for Information
Literacy for Higher Education
Implications for Practice
Donna Witek / Ellysa Stern Cahoy
PA Forward Information Literacy Summit ~ July 23, 2014
Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA
@donnarosemary ~ @ellysa ~ #PAFILS14

2. Introduction
Review / revision process
Overview of Framework
Implications for practice
Strategies for implementation

3. Revision Process: Where We Were
Information literacy is a set of abilities requiring
individuals to "recognize when information is
needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate,
and use effectively the needed information."
http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/informationliteracycompetency

4. Revision Process: Where We Are
“Information literacy is a repertoire of understandings,
practices, and dispositions focused on flexible engagement
with the information ecosystem, underpinned by critical
self-reflection. The repertoire involves finding, evaluating,
interpreting, managing, and using information to answer
questions and develop new ones; and creating new
knowledge through ethical participation in communities of
learning, scholarship, and practice.”
http://acrl.ala.org/ilstandards/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Framework-for-IL-for-HE-Draft-2.pdf

5. Threshold concepts
A threshold concept framework includes “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 practitioners.” (Hofer, Townsend, Brunetti,
2011, p. 184)
Townsend, L. & Brunetti, K. & Hofer, A. R.(2011). Threshold Concepts and Information Literacy. portal:
Libraries and the Academy 11(3), 853-869. The Johns Hopkins University Press. Retrieved March 19, 2014, from
Project MUSE database.

6. Threshold concepts
Definitional criteria
■ Transformative—Learner has a shift in perspective
■ Integrative– Unifying separate concepts into a whole
■ Irreversible– Once learned, cannot be unlearned
■ Bounded– Unique to a discipline
■ Troublesome– Difficult ideas that may place a
roadblock in the learning process
Townsend, L. & Brunetti, K. & Hofer, A. R.(2011). Threshold Concepts and Information Literacy. portal:
Libraries and the Academy 11(3), 853-869. The Johns Hopkins University Press. Retrieved March 19, 2014, from
Project MUSE database.

7. Revision Process: Where We Are
Threshold Concepts for IL:
Scholarship is a conversation
Research as inquiry
Authority is contextual and constructed
Format as a process
Searching as exploration
Information has value
http://acrl.ala.org/ilstandards/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Framework-for-IL-for-HE-Draft-2.pdf

8. Implications for Practice
From Standards to a Framework
Collaboration with faculty across disciplines
Teaching towards multiple learning domains
Information literacy as a metaliteracy

9. Implications for Practice
From Standards to a Framework
Exploring threshold concepts within instruction
Developing learning outcomes
locally / regionally / nationally
How do the “whys” of IL give meaning to the “whats”?

10. Implications for Practice
Scholarship is a conversation
Transformative
Integrative
Irreversible
Bounded
Troublesome

11. Implications for Practice
Knowledge Practices:
Identify the contribution that particular articles,
books, and other scholarly pieces make to disciplinary
knowledge.
Summarize the changes in scholarly perspective over
time on a particular topic within a specific discipline.
Contribute to scholarly conversation at an appropriate
level.

12. Implications for Practice
Collaboration with faculty across disciplines
Conversations with faculty around threshold
concepts
Integration of IL throughout the curriculum
In what ways can we share responsibility for IL
instruction with our colleagues?

13. Implications for Practice
Teaching towards multiple learning domains
Cognitive (Knowledge Practices)
Affective (Dispositions)
Behavioral (Knowledge Practices / Dispositions)
Can we embed multiple domains within our teaching?

14. Implications for Practice
Information literacy as a metaliteracy
IL in participatory digital environments
Students as knowledge creators
Metacognitive reflection as learning
activity
What are the pedagogical opportunities
that arise?
Metaliteracy Model developed by Tom
Mackey, Trudi Jacobson, and Roger
Lipera in Metaliteracy: Reinventing
Information Literacy to Empower
Learners (Mackey and Jacobson, 2014,
pp. 23)

15. Strategies for Implementation
The Framework for IL as:
a new way to understand things you’re already doing
providing new language and concepts to communicate
what you do and how you do it
a process through which to transform the goals you set
for your IL instruction & programs

16. Questions & Discussion
Donna Witek
The University of Scranton
donna.witek@scranton.edu ~ @donnarosemary
Ellysa Stern Cahoy
Penn State University, University Park
ellysa@psu.edu ~ @ellysa