Teaching information literacyEnhancing the quality and impact of library workshops

LISSEE, Highgate School 2016

• Issues

• Inspiration

• Solutions

• Impact

• Myths

Looking back

Librarians and teaching• Ad hoc and add-on

• Not relevant

• Procedures and process

• Didactic and uninspiring

• And so it continues

Student perspective•Answers•Facts•References•Reporting back•Easy option•Fear

Librarians reinforce this!http://www.flickr.com/photos/nottsexminer/6270679714/

Inspiration• Less is more

• Cloning

• Discussion

• Learning by doing

• Learners, not the taughthttp://advedupsyfall09.wikispaces.com/Sara+Woodard

Back to basics

• Resources

• Keywords

• Searching

• Evaluation

The name of the game• Fun

• Quick

• Simple

• Easy

• Need or objective

Adapted from Susan Boyle, Lilac 2011

https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnragai/

Our visionMove students from

“ …lifting and transporting textual substance from one location, the library, to another, their teacher’s briefcases.”

To“…searching, analyzing, evaluating, synthesizing, selecting, rejecting…”

Kleine 1987

http://unihub.mdx.ac.uk/your-study/library-and-it-support

CMT1300 Oct 2015

Better than Google

Thinking about resources

BooksWhat are they:

A written or printed work of fiction or fact.

May be electronic.

Good for:

Clear overview.

Not so good for:

Up to date information.

Thinking about keywords

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rossjamesparker/89414788/

The real thing

http://www.flickr.com/photos/sidelong/300188454/

Your first piece of coursework for CCM2426 will be based on the Cornish Villages 4G trial.

• Keywords

• Alternative keywords

• More specific keywords

• Related subjects

Finding resourcesmyUniHub > My Study > My Library > Summon

Select Summon and search for information for your project

Google vs Summon

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ennuiislife/3450743002/

Google • Familiar and easy to use

• Finds too much information

• Fast results

• Access from any computer

• Access to some books and journals

• Designed to sell you things

• Search results sponsored

• Searches for info from any source

• Pay for academic information

Summon• Easy to use

• Finds lots of academic info

• Fast results

• Access from any computer

• Access to lots of books and journals

• Designed to find you information

• Search results by relevance

• Searches quality resources

• Free access to full text

Evaluating information

http://f.tqn.com/y/urbanlegends/1/W/E/D/1/lincoln-quote.jpg

• Authority• Relevance• Intent• Objectivity• Currency

Evaluating information

How are books arranged in the library?

004.19 PRE

Books are arranged…..

Com

putin

g

Des

ign

Des

ign

Des

ign

Ani

mal

s

Ani

mal

s

Ani

mal

s

Com

putin

g

Com

putin

g

His

tory

His

tory

History

004.19 ABE 004.19 CR0 004.19 PRE

Impact

Marks Attendees Non-attendees

Commonest mark 65% 50%

Highest mark 90% 75%

Lowest mark 40% 40%

Bibliography commonest mark

7/10 5/10

• Survey of CCM2426 students

• 66 attendees, 22 non-attendees

Search tools used Attendees Non-attendeesGoogle 68% 63%

Wikipedia 38% 27%

Summon 68% 40%

Library catalogue 30% 59%

Evaluation criteria Attendees Non-attendeesCurrent 89% 59%

Relevant 76% 59%

Academic authority 67% 41%

Easy to read 24% 45%

http://eprints.mdx.ac.uk/id/eprint/18944

Digital Natives are different

IT skills = IL skills

Final thoughts

http://www.flickr.com/photos/naturalturn/3264726560/

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/93/Question_mark_road_sign,_Australia.jpg

Dr Vanessa Hill v.hill@mdx.ac.uk

Dr Adam Edwards a.edwards@mdx.ac.uk

http://bit.ly/GamesMDXLibrary

http://eprints.mdx.ac.uk/id/eprint/18944

Copyright Fotolia under Microsoft licence http://office.microsoft.com/en-gb/images/results.aspx?qu=blank+sign&ex=1#ai:MP900442493|

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 http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/reppres/gg_final_keynote_11012008.pdf [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 http://ccfil.pbworks.com/f/emma_report_final.pdf [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 http://oxis.oii.ox.ac.uk/reports/ [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 http://projectinfolit.org/images/pdfs/pil_fall2012_workplacestudy_fullreport_revised.pdf [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 http://projectinfolit.org/images/pdfs/pil_2013_freshmenstudy_fullreport.pdf [Accessed 9th June 2015]

• 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 http://projectinfolit.org/images/pdfs/pil_fall2010_survey_fullreport1.pdf [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 https://edtechdev.wordpress.com/2010/03/19/the-digital-natives-digital-immigrants-distinction-is-dead-or-at-least-dying/ [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.

• 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 http://www.wisdompage.com/Prensky01.html [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 http://www.webarchive.org.uk/wayback/archive/20140615023510/http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/publications/reports/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 http://www.slideshare.net/infolit_group/webber-ford-2013-18177230 [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 http://derby.openrepository.com/derby/bitstream/10545/254393/1/C%26RL_May2010.pdf [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 http://firstmonday.org/article/view/3171/3049 [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.