Information Literacy in the Knowledge Society

Information Literacy in the Knowledge Society

Wolfgang G. StockHeinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Germany, Department of Information Science

Conference on Information Literacy, Düsseldorf, Germany, Febr. 7, 2013

2HEINRICH-HEINE-UNIVERSITY DÜSSELDORF

Agenda

AGENDA


Information Literacy: Retrieval Literacy and Knowledge Representation Literacy

Information Literacy in the Everyday Life, in the Workplace and in School and University

Measuring Information Literacy

How Information Literate are People Today? Some Examples

Information Literacy Instruction: How to Teach Information Literacy?




Subjects of Information Literacy


How information literate are people today? Some examples

Information Literacy Instruction: Ho to Teach Information Literacy?


INFORMATION LITERACY: RETRIEVAL LITERACY AND KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION LITERACY


What means „Information Literacy“?

Information Literacy comprises those contents of Information Science that are needed by everyone

in everyday life,

on the job and

in school (or university)



What means „Knowledge Society“?

A Knowledge Society is based on information and communication technology, on (scientific and other) knowledge, and on creativity. Essential parts of the workforce are knowledge workers and other creative people

Knowledge changes. In the knowledge society, lifelong learning becomes important

In knowledge societies, digital natives form the majority of people

Knowledge-based and creative companies are in need of corporate (and city-wide) knowledge management.



What means „Information Literacy in the Knowledge Society“?

Knowledge workers and other creative people: without Information Literacy they have no chance on job markets

Lifelong learning: without Information Literacy people are not able to perform information acquisition and learning

Digital natives: their basic characteristic is being Information Literate

Knowledge management: employees must be Information Literate.

Conclusion: The importance of Information Literacy will increase in knowledge societies



Information Literacy is one of the basic skills of the 21st century

(Illustrations by M. Stock)



„Alexandria Proclamation on Information Literacy and Lifelong Learning“: „Information Literacy ... empowers people in all walks of life to seek, evaluate, use and create information effectively to achieve their personal, social, occupational and educational goals“.

Information Literacy minimizes social inequality in the knowledge society

Information Literacy minimizes the digital divide

Information Literacy strengthens the individual‘s participation in the knowledge society (e-inclusion)

Perhaps Information Literacy becomes a human right in the knowledge society



Access to ICT and to information services

Motivation

Competencies:--- General education

--- ICT and media literacy--- Information literacy

Participation in the knowledge society



Information Literacy: Two competencies

1. Information retrieval literacy

Searching, finding and use of information

Special knowledge in the topical area

Historical background:

Library instruction

ALA standards

„Six Big Skills“



Information Literacy: Two competencies

2. Knowledge representation literacy

Creation and publication of information

Indexing

Historical background:

Web 2.0

„Produser“ / „Produsage“



Layer model of literacies

Basic literacies

ICT literacy / media literacy

Information Literacy



Information literacy

Recognition of

information needs

Searching for and

retrieval of information

Evaluation of the

quality of information

Making use of

information Provision

for information

law and ethics

Creation of information

Provision for privacy

Representation and storage

of information

ICT and smartphone skills – Media literacy

Basic computer

skills

Smart-

phone skills

Office

software

Internet

skills

Media literacy

Literacy

Reading

Writing

Numeracy



INFORMATION LITERACY IN THE EVERYDAY LIFE, IN THE WORKPLACE AND IN SCHOOL AND UNIVERSITY


Information Literacy in the everyday life

Digital divide: information rich vs information poor

Standing on the right side of the divide

„Knowledge Gap Hypothesis“ (Tichenor, Donohue, & Olien, 1970)

Increase of mass media information leads to

1. population with higher socioeconomic status and higher education will benefit from the richer information environment

2. population with lower socioeconomic status and only minimal education will loose orientation in the information environment



„Knowledge Gap Hypothesis“

The gap between these two segments tends to increase

„Internet Gap Hypothesis“ (today)

Same results concerning internet use

Matthew effect:

„For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath” (Matthew 13:12). The context is: knowledge

Empirical results (Bonfadelli, 2002): education is the crucial factor of the internet gap (followed by income)



Empirical results (Bonfadelli, 2002):

„Internet access alone does not guarantee an informed public“

„People with higher education use the Internet for informational and service-oriented purposes“

„People with lower education use the Internet significantly more for entertainment reasons“

Information Literacy is a key for e-inclusion in the everyday life of the knowledge society



Information Literacy in the workplace

In institutions, knowledge management and information literacy are strongly connected

Bruce (1999): organizational processes and information literacy

Many organizational process require information literate employees

Task for the corporate knowledge management or the company library



Information Literacy in schools / universities

Schools

Human Resource: Teacher librarians

Infrastructure: School libraries

Universities

Human Resource: Teaching librarians

Infrastructure: Academic libraries



Instruction of Information Literacy

Kindergarten

Primary school

Secondary school

University

Off-the-job training

On-the-job training

Instruction of special user groups (e.g., teachers, scientists, librarians, but also silver surfers or expats)



MEASURING INFORMATION LITERACY


Methods to study information literacy:

1st Using rubrics

2nd Using questionnaires

Presupposition:

Existence of standards



Standards of retrieval literacy: American Library Association (ALA) / Association for College and Research Libraries (ACRL) (ACRL, 2000)

Determination of the nature and extent of the information needed

Effective and efficient access to needed information

Critical evaluation of retrieved information and its sources / incorporation of information in his/her knowledge base

Effective use of information to accomplish a specific purpose

Understanding of economic, legal and social issues



Standards of retrieval literacy

Recognition of information needs

Searching for and retrieval of information

Evaluation of the quality of

information

Making use of information

Provision for information economics, information

law and information ethics



Standards of knowledge representation literacy („Düsseldorf model“) (Gust von Loh & Stock, 2013)

Know-how to create information (take a picture, write a blog post, make a video etc.) which can be published

Ability to store information in an information service (upload the video to a sharing service, upload/edit/delete information in a social network etc.)

Deploying methods of knowledge representation (tagging the information in sharing services, finding meaningful titles etc.)

Provision for privacy (own privacy and privacy of others)

Understanding of economic, legal and social issues



Standards of knowledge representation literacy

Creation of information

Storage of information

Representation of information

Provision of privacy

Provision for information economics, information

law and information ethics



Using rubrics

Defining „rubrics“ (study dimensions)

Studying „products“ from test persons (e.g., academic works from students)

Alternative: analysis of students‘ portfolios

Assessing the materials (by more than one assessor)



Using rubrics. Example: Rubrics from van Helvoort (2010)



Advantages of rubrics

Authentic products as a test base

It is possible to evaluation learning progress across time

Disadvantages of rubrics

Only few dimensions of information literacy (mostly references)

Problems to find the „right“ evaluation (from „very good“ to „very bad“)

Low inter-assessor consistency



Instant Questionnaires

ILTInformation Literacy Test

ILAS-ED Information

Literacy Assessment

Scale for Education



Instant questionnaires

Typical example: (from TRAILS)



Self-designed questionnaire. Example 1: Chang et al. (2012): Assessing information literacy in secondary schools in Singapore



Self-designed questionnaire. Example 2: Erkmen & Shanmugarajah (2013): Assessing retrieval literacy in secondary schools in Germany



Example 3: Erkmen & Shanmugarajah (2013): Assessing knowledge representation literacy in secondary schools in Germany



Advantages of questionnaires

Quantative data

Easy to evaluate

Own questionnaire: freedom to choose research-specific questions (and: free of fees)

Disadvantages of questionnaires

Problematic to find test persons

Artificial situation

Predefined questions (and – sometimes – answers)


How information literate are people today? Some examples

HOW INFORMATION LITERATE ARE PEOPLE TODAY? SOME EXAMPLES


Three recent empirical studies on Information Literacy

Study by Erkmen & Shanmugarajah (2013): Information Literacy of German secondary school students (Method: own questionnaire)

Study by Given, Julien, Quellete and Smith (2010): Information Literacy of Canadian high school graduates (Method: ILT questionnaire)

Study by Chang et al. (2012): Information Literacy of Singaporean secondary school students (Method: own questionnaire)



Study by Erkmen & Shanmugarajah (2013)

Retrieval Literacy of German secondary school students: 54.9% (35.14 out of 64 points)

Information needs 71.7% (4.3 out of 6 points)

Searching 59.4% (19 out of 32 points)

Evaluation 48.1% (6.97 out of 14.5 points)

Use 42.3% (4.87 out of 11.5 points)




Knowledge Representation Literacy of German secondary school students: 37.2% (9.67 out of 26 points)

Creation 32.2% (4.02 out of 12.5 points)

Storing 48.0% (0.96 out of 2 points)

Indexing 40.1% (4.69 out of 11.5 points)




Information Law and Ethics Literacy of German secondary school students: 62.5% (6.25 out of 10 points)

Information ethics 58.3% (2.33 out of 4 points)

Information law 65.3% (3.92 out of 6 points)



Study by Given, Julien, Quellette and Smith (2010)

Information Literacy (Retrieval Literacy) of Canadian high school graduates: 50.7%

Method: ILT



Study by Chang et al. (2012): Information Literacy of Singaporean secondary school students



The studies from three continents present (more or less) the same result:

The grade of Information Literacy of high school students is about 50%

Unscientific remark: that‘s frustrating!

Or (more optimistic): There is an awful lot of work for us.


Information Literacy Instruction: How to Teach Information Literacy?

INFORMATION LITERACY INSTRUCTION: HOW TO TEACH INFORMATION LITERACY?


Didactics of Information Literacy (Ader, Orszullok, & Stock, 2013)

Subject of its own right?

Resource-based learning (Document-based learning)

Inquiry-base learning

Teacher-centered learning

Team-based learning

Game-based learning



Information Literacy: Subject of its own right?

Embedded in other subjects‘ instruction

In primary schools: e.g., in language instruction or in general studies (in Germany, Heimat- und Sachkunde)

In secondary schools: e.g., in history instruction

In universities: in combination with subjects studied (e.g. „Information Literacy for chemicists“, „Information Literacy for physicians“)



Information Literacy: Subject of its own right?

Subject on its own right

In primary schools: probably not

In secondary schools: Düsseldorf model: 2 hours in grade 6; 2 hours in grade 10 or 11

In universities: „Information Literacy“ (independent of specific subjects)



Resource-based learning (Document-based learning) (Hannafin & Hill, 2008)

Resource: media, people, places, ideas „that have the potential to support learning“

Resource-based learning: „The use and application of available assets to support varied learning needs across contexts“




Scaffolding: „Process through which individuals are supported in identifying, interpreting, or otherwise using resources“

Procedural scaffolds (focusing cognitive resources)

Conceptual scaffolds (identification of knowledge, making connections between resources)

Metacognitive scaffolds (reflection, comparison, revision)

Strategic scaffolds (identifying ways to analyze, plan, and respond)




Tools: „Devices that aid individuals to engage and manipulate resources and ideas“

Processing tools (applied technology)

Searching tools (Web search engines, professional information services)

Manipulation tools (e.g., testing different scenarios)

Communication tools (synchronous tools: instant messaging, videoconferencing; asynchronous tools: blogs, podcasts, microblogs, e-mail, wikis)



Resource-based learning in Information Literacy instruction

Information Literacy instruction is always resource-based

Retrieval literacy: ability to find and use resources

Knowledge representation literacy: ability to create and represent resources



Inquiry-base learning (Edelson, Gordin, & Pea, 1999)

Inquiry: pursuit of open questions (projects; „project-based learning“)

Authentic activities

Motivation for activity

Opportunities for learning

Developing general inquiry abilities (posing and refining research questions, planning and managing an investigation, analyzing and communicating results)

Acquiring specific investigation skills (e.g., controlled experimentation, modeling, synthesis of primary sources, exploration of quantitative data)



Opportunities for learning (cont‘d)

Developing an improved understanding of science concepts

Problematize (realizing boundaries of knowledge)

Demand (placing a demand for knowledge to complete the investigation)

Discover and refine (uncovering scientific principles, refining the principles in the investigation; „discovery learning“)

Apply (application of scientific understanding in the pursuit of the research question)



Inquiry-based learning

Technological support:

ICT

Providing investigation tools

Providing knowledge resources

Providing record-keeping tools



Inquiry-based learning in Information Literacy instruction

(Nearly) all approaches of Information Literacy instruction apply inquiry-based learning

Example: Chu (2009)

Inquiry project-based learning in a primary school (grade 4)

Teachers: language teacher, general studies teacher, IT teacher, school librarian

Two projects in six months (Phase 1: The Earth; Phase 2: The History of Hong Kong and China)

Results: Evaluation of students, teachers and parents: improvement of Information Literacy and of enjoyment



Teacher-centered learning

Inquiry-based learning does not mean to led the students alone

Inquiry-based learning alone: only minimal learning success (Kirschner, Sweeler, & Clark, 2006)

In combination with inquiry-based learning: teacher-based learning

Implementation of project management (e.g., milestones)

And (very important!): learning to learn



Teacher-centered learning in information literacy instruction

In combination of inquiry-based learning

Phases with project-work (learner-based learning) and phases with teacher-centered learning (Mokhtar, Majid, & Foo, 2008)

Example (retrieval literacy instruction): Demonstration of the functionality of Web of Science by the teacher

Example (knowledge representation literacy instruction): Lecture on the thesaurus of Medline (MeSH)



Team-based learning (in the sense of Michaelsen) (Michaelsen, Watson, Cragin, & Fink, 1982)

Team-formation and management (teams are permanent, formed by the instructor, and have the opportunity to develop into learning teams)

Accountability (team members are accountable to the rest of the team, every team member contributes to team discussions and problem solving, team members engage in peer assessment; the team performs as a whole)

Feedback (learning from other team members, necessary for group development)

Assignment design: the tRATs (team readiness assessment tests), additionally: iRATs (individual RATs)



Team-based learning in Information Literacy instruction

Information Literacy course at the University at Albany, State University of New York (Jacobson, 2011)

Strategy: building students‘ engagement and making the course interactive

Tasks to fulfill by the teams



Team-based learning in Information Literacy instruction (Jacobson, 2011)



Game-based learning

„Homo ludens“ (Johan Huizinga)

Digital natives like to play (digital games) (Knautz, 2013)

Gamification: Use of game mechanics in non-game environments

Gamification fosters fun and intrinsic learning motivation



Game-based learning

Game mechanics in learning environments

Points

Levels

Badges (status symbols)

Achievements

Quests

Virtual goods

Leaderboards



Game-based learning in Information Literacy instruction

Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf: Tutorial of the lecture „Knowledge Representation“ applies game mechanics



Information Literacy teachers

Education of Information Literacy teachers

What subject? Educational science and information science?

Advanced education

How to organize? (In schools? Teachers colleges? Universities?)

Establishment of Information Literacy research in universities

CONCLUSION: INFORMATION LITERACY IN THE KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY


The importance of Information Literacy increases in a knowledge society.

In a knowledge society, Information Literacy is necessary in the everyday life (to stand on the right side of the digital divide), in the workplace and at school.

There are two methods to study Information Literacy: using rubrics or using questionnaires. There are lots of instant questionnaires (ILS, SAILS, NAILS, etc.).

Empirical studies on Information Literacy of students find (more or less) poor results: Today‘s students are rarely information literate.

Therefore instruction of Information Literacy becomes necessary. Didactic elements are document-based, inquiry-based, teacher-centered, team-based and game-based learning.

QUESTIONS?CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE DISCUSSION?


Thank you! [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

LITERATURE


Ader, S., Orszullok, L., Stock, W. G. (2013). Informationskompetenz als Schulfach: Wer sollte was wann und wie unterrichten? In S. Gust von Loh & W. G. Stock (Eds.), Informationskompetenz in der Schule (pp. 259-271). Berlin, Boston, MA: De Gruyter Saur.

ACRL (2000). Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education. Chicago, IL: ALA.

Bonfadelli, H. (2002). The internet and knowledge gaps. European Journal of Communication, 17(1), 65-84.

Bruce, C. (1999). Workplace experiences of information literacy. International Journal of Information Management, 19, 33-47.

Chang, Y. K, Zhang, X., Mokhtar, I. A., Foo, S., Majid, S., Luyt, B., & Theng, Y. L. (2012). Assessing students’ information literacy skills in two secondary schools in Singapore. Journal of Information Literacy, 6(2), 19-34.

Chu, K. W. S. (2009). Inquiry project-based learning with a partnership of three types of teachers and the school librarian. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(8), 1671-1686.

Edelson, D. C., Gordin, D. N., & Pea, R. D. (1999). Adressing the challenges of inquiry-based learning through technology and curriculum design. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8(3/4), 391-450.

Erkmen, M., & Shanmugarajah, P. (2013). Stand der Informationskompetenz bei Schülern in Deutschland. Bachelor‘s Thesis. Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf.

Given, L. M., Julien, H., Quellette, D., & Smith, J. (2010). Evidence-based information literacy instruction. In Proceedings of the 73rd ASIS&T Annual Meeting (2 pages).

Gust von Loh, S., & Stock, W. G. (2013). Informationskompetenz als Schulfach? In S. Gust von Loh & W. G. Stock (Eds.), Informationskompetenz in der Schule (pp. 1-20). Berlin, Boston, MA: De Gruyter Saur.

LITERATURE (CONT’D)


Hannafin, M. J., & Hill, J. R. (2008). Resource-based learning. In J.M. Spector, M.D. Merrill, J. van Merriënboer, & M.P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 525-536). 3rd Ed. New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Ass.

Helvoort, J. van (2010). A scoring rubric for performance assessment of information literacy in Dutch Higher Education. Journal of Information Literacy, 4(1), 22-39.

Jacobson, T. E. (2011). Team-based learning in an information literacy course, Communications in Information Literacy, 5(2), 82-101.

Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work. An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiental, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75-86.

Michaelsen, L. K., Watson, W. E., Cragin, J. P., & Fink, L. D. (1982). Team-based learning: A potential solution to the problems of large classes. Exchange. The Organizational Behavior Teaching Journal, 7(4), 18-33.

Mokhtar, I. A., Majid, S., & Foo, S. (2008). Teaching information literacy through learning styles. The application of Gardner‘s multiple intelligences. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 40(2), 93-109.

Knautz, K. (2013). Gamification im Kontext der Vermittlung von Informationskompetenz. In S. Gust von Loh & W. G. Stock (Eds.), Informationskompetenz in der Schule (pp. 223-257). Berlin, Boston, MA: De Gruyter Saur.

Tichenor, P. J., Donohue, G. A., & Olien, C. N. (1970). Mass media flow and differential growth in knowledge. Public Opinion Quarterly, 34, 159-170.