Call for Papers Information Literacy Section Satellite Meeting Limerick Ireland August 14-15th 2014 Facing the Future: Librarians and Information Literacy in a Changing LandscapeSatellite meeting website: http://www.iflasatellitelimerick.com
Carol C. Kuhlthau, professor emerita in the School of Communication and Information at Rutgers University, is the 2013 recipient of the ASIS&T Award of Merit, the highest honor presented by ASIS&T. The award goes to an individual who has made a noteworthy contribution to the field of information science, including the expression of new ideas, the creation of new devices, the development of better techniques and outstanding service to the profession. Professor Kuhlthau is internationally recognized for her contributions to the study of information behavior. Her best-known work is her book Seeking Meaning: A Process Approach to Library and Information Services. In her rigorous research she observed student information seeking, developed a model of the information search process, then tested the model in several ways over several studies to validate and refine the model. This model has motivated widespread current research interest in the affective components of the information search process. In addition information professionals' practice has been significantly influenced by her publications. Her life and work are models in several senses. Personally highly intelligent, judicious, and modest, she has earned the highest respect from scholars and students in the field of information behavior as well as practitioners. Through example, Carol Kuhlthau has taught many in the field how to do rigorous research, how to mentor, and how to teach.
Project SAILS (Standardized Assessment of Information Literacy Skills) is launching the beta test of an international version of the SAILS cohort assessment.
We are very excited to reach this stage. Working with librarians from various countries, we have made extensive revisions to the assessment so as to meet the needs of an international audience. In order to determine if the new test is valid, we are seeking testing institutions in countries outside the United States. If you or someone you know is interested, please go to this web page for details:
The purpose of this set of learning resources is to help students:
- Explore the educational uses of Web 2.0 tools and services; - Familiarise themselves with a range of useful applications for study-related purposes; - Highlight good practice in the use of social software and the internet, in general
-----Original Message----- From: Jim Moses [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] Sent: 24 July 2013 15:52 To: email@example.com Subject: [INFOLIT] Primary Research Group has published The Survey of Best Practicesin Developing Online Information Literacy Tutorials, ISBN 978-157440-247-6
Primary Research Group has published The Survey of Best Practices in Developing Online Information Literacy Tutorials, ISBN 978-157440-247-6. The study looks closely at how academic libraries are developing and deploying online information literacy tutorials exploring issues such as spending, budgets, staffing, range and qualifications of staff used for tutorial development, software use, time frame for tutorial development, conceptions of what constitutes a quality tutorial, assessment of library efforts, marketing to students and faculty, cooperation with other institutions, frequency of tutorial revision, measurement of student outcomes and other issues in the development and use of online information literacy tutorials.
The study was devised with the assistance of Jennifer Holland and Yvonne Mery of the University of Arizona Libraries, and Erica DeFrain of the University of Vermont Library, and the summary of main findings was written by Holland and DeFrain.
Just a few of the main findings from this exhaustive 285 page study are that:
• The mean number of information literacy tutorials per library in the sample was 27.92, and the median was 10.50. • The library homepage was listed as the most popular access point for online information literacy tutorials, followed by subject guides, course guides, and YouTube. • Nearly 69% of tutorials used by the libraries in the sample were created in-house. • A third of the libraries sampled reported using the tutorials of other libraries. • The following institutions were cited by survey participants for excellence in tutorial development and a source of imitation or inspiration: Cardiff University, Clark College, Coastal Carolina University, Cooperative Library Instruction Project, Glasgow Caledonian (UK), Kent State, Manor College, Michigan State University, North Carolina State University, Open University (UK), Penn State, Rutgers, South African Universities, TILT, University of Arizona, University of California-Irvine, University of Illinois-Chicago, University of Pittsburgh, University of Sydney, University of Texas-Austin, University of Texas-Houston, Vanderbilt, Wayne State University, West Chester University, and Western Oregon University. • About a quarter of the libraries sampled assigned only one person to the task of developing information literacy tutorials for the library. • Only a third of librarians sampled felt that their institutions provided adequate support for tutorial development. • 43.75% of respondents from community colleges indicating that it took less than 10 hours to develop an information literacy tutorial. • 2.56% of the libraries sampled used their own in-house developed software to create tutorials.
Data is broken out by size and type of library, for US and foreign libraries, and for public and private colleges. For further information view our website at www.PrimaryResearch.com.
The Research Information and Digital Literacies Coalition (RIDLs) has formulated a set of criteria to help training practitioners in higher education describe, review and evaluate their training and development interventions and resources intended for researchers, but also for students and teaching staff - see http://www.researchinfonet.org/infolit/ridls/strand2/ for details. These criteria relate to all interventions aimed at developing information-handling knowledge, skills and competencies, whether in the form of face-to-face sessions/courses or digital/online resources. They serve three broad purposes:
(i) Helping institutional staff who design and deliver such courses and resources to describe and review them; the aim being to provide a structured and recognized way of presenting such interventions in online resources and demonstrating their value. (ii) Providing a simple means of assessing courses and resources, for use within or outside the institutions in which the interventions have been compiled; the aim being to evaluate their suitability and usefulness as transferable resources. (iii) Serving as a prompt for a dialogue between training practitioners and learners, and providing a structure for such a dialogue. However, the criteria are not intended as a prescriptive or rigid tool, nor as a means of assessing the performance of training practitioners: they are very much about providing the latter with a logical and common-sense self-help framework that will assist them with the formulation and delivery of their resources. If any readers of this list you would like to try out the criteria within their own institutions, please do not hesitate to do so. And if you would like further information, feel free to contact Stéphane Goldstein, at firstname.lastname@example.org
ACRL’s Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education (“the Standards”) were first adopted in 2000. Since then the Standards have become one of, if not the most essential document, related to the emergence of information literacy as a recognized learning outcome at many institutions of higher education. In the vast collection of research and writings about information literacy, the Standards are cited thousands of times. Put simply, ACRL’s Standards are the de facto definition of information literacy. Though they have served the academic library profession well over the past thirteen years, the current standards are showing their age. It is time for our association to engage in a process to rethink and reimagine them for the next generation of academic librarians, college students and the faculty.
This process was initiated in July 2011 with the creation of a Task Force to review the Standards in order to determine if ACRL should retain the existing standards for an additional five-year cycle, revise the standards, or rescind the standards if they were regarded as no longer useful. That Task Force recommended to the ACRL Board of Directors that the Standards should be extensively revised. Citing emerging models of information literacy, recognizing the development of multiple new literacies and the need to provide a stronger continuum of literacy from K-16, the recommendations from the Review Task Force were approved by the Board at the 2012 ALA Annual Conference.
The Board’s next step was the creation of the ACRL Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education Task Force with the following charge:
Update the Information literacy competency standards for higher education so that they reflect the current thinking on such things as the creation and dissemination of knowledge, the changing global higher education and learning environment, the shift from information literacy to information fluency, and the expanding definition of information literacy to include multiple literacies, e.g., transliteracy, media literacy, digital literacy, etc.
With the charge in place, I set about recruiting the individuals who would take on the challenging task of revising the Standards. I believe the roster reflects some of the best minds our profession has currently working in the area of information literacy. At the nucleus of the team are two highly accomplished information literacy experts, Trudi Jacobson and Craig Gibson, who will serve as the Task Force co-chairs. According to Jacobson, Head of Information Literacy Department in the University Libraries of University at Albany, SUNY and a member of the initial Standards Review team, “the Task Force was strategically constituted in order to include members with expertise in the field of information literacy and higher education more generally. The librarian members represent a range of institution types as well as aspects of information literacy.”
Jacobson, who is also noted for co-developing a metaliteracy framework for information literacy, added that “We also wanted to include those with specialized knowledge and affiliations within higher education that will facilitate a broad, multiple-constituency examination of the issues.” The membership of task force includes non-librarians from university departments, higher education organizations, and an accreditor. The full roster for the Task Force is available on the ACRL website.
In a recent prospectus provided to the ACRL Board of Director’s Executive Committee, Jacobson and Gibson outlined their thinking about how they would guide the Task Force in approaching a revision of the Standards (see “additional resources” at the end of this post for links to the prospectus and Board response). According to Gibson, the 2000 Standards have served us well. However, owing to changes in user behavior, higher education, technologies, and the information environment itself, Gibson said “We now need an expanded set of literacies—those that take us beyond textual information, that emphasize student participation in creating new content, that encourage students to develop metacognitive abilities and different parts of the brain, and that create more and deeper opportunities for collaboration among librarians, faculty, instructional designers, technologists, and students themselves.” He added that “The Standards need to reflect that information may be textual, visual, audiotory, or data. This is a new learning environment where students lead curriculum projects as often as faculty or other experts.”
In rewriting the Standards, Gibson and Jacobson hope to lead the Task Force in providing good examples of how the blending of competencies across multiple literacies will better serve us in creating more discussion, collaboration, and student and faculty involvement alike. Their shared vision is that the new Standards are likely to be digests and examples of good practices of collaborative program development around these blended competencies.
If you would like to learn more about the work of the Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education, I encourage you to attend an open forum being held at the 2013 ALA Annual Conference on Saturday, June 29, 2013, from 1:00 to 2:30 p.m.
I got this message from Woody Horton, active as ever. Thank you. Colleagues, a great many short IL videos, of various lengths, aimed at different education levels, with a variety of themes, and so on, have been published in recent years and I find them very useful for the classroom, in workshops, at conferences and business meetings, and so forth. They can be very useful for getting across basic ideas, and adding an entertaining element to what might otherwise be a "heavy" topic. I urge you to become familiar with some of them so that you can enrich your teaching and professional IL tools portfolios. Here is a selected sample, and you can certainly find many more if you go to the main YouTube website. There are some MIL videos among them.
UNESCO supports the Media and Information Literacy (MIL) and Intercultural Dialogue University Network in the launch of an online course in MIL and intercultural dialogue. The course is designed for teachers, policy makers and professionals. It is led by the Queensland University of Technology (QUT) and will be offered over 13 weeks, from 25 February to 31 May 2013.