This  project  has  been  funded  with  support  from  the  European  Commission  

 

       

           

     

Strategic  Models  for  Information  Literacy  Authors:  Sabina  Cisek,  Maria  Próchnicka    

 

Empower Autonomous Learning through Information Competencies

 

Stategic  Models    for  Information  Literacy    Authors:  Sabina  Cisek,  Maria  Próchnicka    Date: January 2011    

                               This  project  has  been  funded  with  support  from  the  European  Commission    

   

   

 

Page 2 of 15

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................. 2

INTRODUCTORY REMARKS ......................................................................................... 3

SCOPE AND PURPOSE ................................................................................................. 4

METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................... 5

THE STRATEGY FOR INFORMATION LITERACY DEVELOPMENT – A POSSIBLE FRAMEWORK WITH SOME TENTATIVE CONTENT ........................................................ 7

CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................................... 13

Page 3 of 15

INTRODUCTORY REMARKS

The present text constitutes Deliverable 4.1 of the Work Package 4 of the EMPATIC project. As this report is one part of the larger work, it should be read together with the previous EMPATIC’s products, in particular – the Deliverable 1.1, entitled Report on current state and best practices in Information Literacy, where the concept of Information Literacy (IL) itself has been discussed and defined. Also, in Deliverable 1.1, various aspects, dimensions and levels of IL have been meticulously characterized on the basis of an extensive literature research. In addition, this paper is directly related to the Deliverable 4.2 of the Work Package 4, Illustrative Case Studies, where the selected examples of the IL “good practices” in Europe have been described and analyzed. The EMPATIC project is funded under the EU Lifelong Learning Programme (LLP) and has a transversal nature. Consequently, the present document exposes the educational side1 of Information Literacy development and takes into account four learning sectors encompassed by LLP, related to the four ongoing sectoral programmes, that is school (Comenius), higher education (Erasmus), vocational (Leonardo da Vinci) and adult (Grundtvig).

1 This has to be underlined, because there are other aspects of Information Literacy development, such as information content, resources or ICT connectivity building.

Page 4 of 15

SCOPE AND PURPOSE

The aim of this paper is to create a conceptual, generic and tentative framework for the strategy/strategic model of Information Literacy development, so that subsequent, more specific IL models could be “deduced”. It is intended to set the ground and provide a starting point for further discussion on the “sectoral” sub-strategies of Information Literacy development. The two fundamental features of the proposed framework are as follows:

─ the model of IL development takes a strategic approach. It is based on the assumption that Information Literacy is critically important for well-being and success of today’s individuals, societies and nations, so has to be a matter of an organized, planned and rational action on the European and national levels;

─ this is not a model of Information Literacy itself, but a strategy for Information Literacy

development, mainly, but not only, by teaching/learning, in different contexts and on various levels.

Building a strategy for Information Literacy development is an effortful enterprise, for a number of reasons:

─ first of all, the notion AND practice of Information Literacy themselves – as the desk research has shown (see Deliverable 1.1) – are multi-dimensional, have various aspects and contexts;

─ secondly, there is no established or commonly agreed-on methodology for working out the

Information Literacy strategies. Sheila Corrall, a well-known researcher in the field, states: “Further research is needed to review existing strategy models, tools and techniques and assess their suitability for IL strategy development (…)” and continues “Other areas suggested for future research include the investigation of relationships between IL strategies and other organizational strategies (…); and comparative studies of IL strategy development in different sectors (…)” (Corrall 2008, p. 35);

─ thirdly, although there are some formal strategic documents related to Information Literacy

development in existence they are of narrow scope and constrained to one organization, in particular – a university. Moreover, those strategies are usually not “proper” ones, that is – do not encompass all required elements and issues (Corrall 2008) (for an example see IFLA Information Literacy Section Strategic Plans at http://www.ifla.org/en/publications/information-literacy-section-strategic-plan).

Page 5 of 15

METHODOLOGY

When creating a strategic model for Information Literacy development one has to take into account the two following aspects:

─ the formal structure of a strategy – what should any strategic document include – e.g. components, frame, length, appendices, etc.;

─ the subject content – related to a particular area of Information Literacy,

learning sector, etc.. At the moment, as has been mentioned earlier, there are no ready tools or techniques for creating Information Literacy development strategies. The appropriate knowledge and methods coming from the Management Sciences achievements may be used here. Protzko, reviewing already cited Corral (2008) paper, notices: “One or more strategic management models or tools available could improve IL strategy development, consistency, and coherency. (…) Conforming to strategic planning norms could strengthen IL strategy. Elements of models from the public or private sectors might be tailored to meet the specific needs of IL strategies. Further research could identify suitable strategy models for IL development. The process of implementing IL strategy should also be considered in future research” (Protzko 2008). Valuable guidelines for the content and structure of Information Literacy development strategies – in the teaching/learning environments – are given in the Characteristics of Programs of Information Literacy that Illustrate Best Practices: A Guideline by the American Library Association / Association of College and Research Libraries (ALA/ACRL 2003). Although the terms “strategy” or “strategic model” are not used in that document, the elements proposed there are relevant to strategic thinking, and include:

─ Mission ─ Goals and Objectives ─ Planning ─ Administrative and Institutional Support ─ Articulation with the Curriculum ─ Collaboration ─ Pedagogy ─ Staffing ─ Outreach ─ Assessment/Evaluation

Page 6 of 15

To conclude, any strategy should embrace at least the following parts: ─ Context – accepted values, assumptions, background, definitions, environment,

situation analysis ─ Mission/vision statement ─ Aims/Goals/Objectives ─ Actions – action plans, responsibilities, targets, timescales ─ Standards ─ Stakeholders ─ Outcomes, performance measures ─ References ─ Appendices, e.g. illustrative best practice cases

In the next section of this document the above listed structural elements are used to build the framework for the proposed Information Literacy development strategy.

Page 7 of 15

THE STRATEGY FOR INFORMATION LITERACY DEVELOPMENT – A POSSIBLE FRAMEWORK WITH SOME TENTATIVE CONTENT

1. Context with elements of situational analysis

1.1. What is Information Literacy? As already noted, the meanings of the term “Information Literacy” are described in detail in the Deliverable 1.1 of the EMPATIC project. So, here we cite only one, but very influential definition of “Information Literacy” by American Library Association / Association of College and Research Libraries: “People – as individuals and as a nation – must be information literate. To be information literate, a person must be able to recognize when information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate, and use effectively the needed information” (ALA/ACRL 1989). and “Information literacy forms the basis for lifelong learning. It is common to all disciplines, to all learning environments, and to all levels of education. It enables learners to master content and extend their investigations, become more self-directed, and assume greater control over their own learning. An information literate individual is able to: ─ determine the extent of information needed; ─ access the needed information effectively and efficiently; ─ evaluate information and its sources critically; ─ incorporate selected information into one’s knowledge base; ─ use information effectively to accomplish a specific purpose; ─ understand the economic, legal, and social issues surrounding the use of information,

and access and use information ethically and legally” (ALA/ACRL 2011).

1.2. Information Literacy is important Information literacy is widely recognized as an essential competence for participation in general and higher education, the workplace and society. In UNESCO’s Alexandria Proclamation on Information Literacy and Lifelong Learning we read: “Information Literacy (…) is crucial to the competitive advantage of individuals, enterprises (especially small and medium enterprises), regions and nations; provides the key to effective access, use and creation of content to support economic development, education, health and human services, and all other aspects of contemporary societies (…)”. And also: “Information Literacy lies at the core of lifelong learning. It empowers people in all walks of life to seek, evaluate, use and create information effectively to achieve their personal, social, occupational and educational goals. It is a basic human right in a digital world and promotes social inclusion of all nations” (Alexandria Proclamation, 2005).

In Europe Information Literacy is unappreciated, its role is undervalued, and it has been frequently equated with the Digital Literacy (Basili 2008a). For example – in the official EU document Key Competences for Lifelong Learning – A European Framework – there is a separate part on Digital Competence, defined as “the confident and critical use of Information Society Technology (IST) for work, leisure and communication”, but not on Information Literacy.

Page 8 of 15

Information Literacy development ought to be a matter of strategic thinking, not left to library and information community only, and ad hoc actions. The strategy should be prepared by the key stakeholders in the process, working collaboratively.

1.3. Information Literacy “environment” The Information Literacy contexts, making a background for the IL development strategy are presented by Figures 1 and 2. Figure 1. Contexts and dimensions of Information Literacy

Page 9 of 15

Figure 2. IL-related competencies

2. Mission ─ Mainstreaming of Information Literacy at the national and European Union

levels

3. Vision ─ Information literate – at least at the basic level (see Deliverable 1.1, p. 66) –

citizens, business, government, societies in Europe

4. Goals ─ Raising society-wide Information Literacy awareness ─ “Institutionalization” of Information Literacy ─ Integrating Information Literacy in curricula in all levels and sectors of the

educational systems in Europe

Page 10 of 15

5. Actions (examples) ─ Within the goal “Raising society-wide Information Literacy awareness”

o To organize IL-oriented “events” (conferences, meetings, happenings, etc.) addressed to different professional and social groups

o To provide targeted marketing to the IL stakeholders and potential “support groups”

o To utilize the Internet power and influence, e.g. to create IL-oriented websites, to promote IL concept in the social media

─ Within the goal “Institutionalization of Information Literacy” o To establish official bodies responsible for Information Literacy o To produce formal documents, establishing the legal ground for the IL

development at national and European levels

─ Within the goal “Integrating Information Literacy in curricula in all levels and sectors of the educational systems in Europe”

o To embed IL content into existing curricula of different kind o To advance knowledge and understanding of Information Literacy among

school teachers and universities’ faculty, e.g. by “training of trainers”

6. Stakeholders Information Literacy (potential) stakeholders are both organizations (formal or informal) and individuals, listed here in the alphabetical order:

─ Business organizations ─ Citizens (“everybody”) themselves ─ European Union agencies, in particular those connected with the education,

lifelong learning and information society areas, e.g. EACEA (the Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency)

─ Interested researchers, scientists ─ Libraries and the library and information science (LIS) communities and

associations ─ Local authorities ─ National governments, including appropriate ministries (of education,

information society, regional development etc.) ─ NGO – nongovernmental organizations ─ Other interested individuals, e.g. Information Literacy bloggers, activists ─ School authorities, schools of different level and type, headmasters and

teachers ─ Universities and other higher education bodies

The division of IL development responsibilities and areas of action amongst potential stakeholders should be a matter of further diagnosis and decisions.

Page 11 of 15

7. Information Literacy standards and performance indicators One can find in the literature a number of Information Literacy standards, or standard-like statements, fully or partly related to the four learning sectors, i.e. school, higher education, vocational and adult ones. But, it has to be emphasised that the most-known, elaborated and recognized standards, frequently embracing also the IL performance measures, are connected predominantly with the higher education sector. In particular, there do not exist “ready-to-use”, fully developed Information Literacy standards for the adult/lifelong learning sector. The examples of IL standards or proto-standards that may be of use at least as “starting points” for further discussion, are collected in Table 1. Table 1: Selected Information Literacy standards and “proto-standards”

Learning sector

Related LLP programme Information Literacy standards

Adult sector

Grundtvig – Adult learning

A fragment on Information Literacy in Partnership for 21st Century Skills (2009). Framework for 21st Century Learning. http://www.p21.org/documents/P21_Framework_Definitions.pdf by the Partnership for 21st Century Skills

HE – Higher Education sector

Erasmus – Higher education

SCONUL Advisory Committee on Information Literacy (1999). Information skills in higher education. http://www.sconul.ac.uk/groups/information_literacy/papers/Seven_pillars2.pdf by the Society of College, National and University Libraries SCONUL or ALA/ACRL (2000). Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education. http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/acrl/standards/informationliteracycompetency.cfm by the Association of College and Research Libraries ACRL, a division of the American Library Association ALA

Page 12 of 15

School sector

Comenius – Action for school

ALA/AASL (2007). Standards for the 21st-Century Learner. http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/aasl/guidelinesandstandards/learningstandards/AASL_LearningStandards.pdf by the American Association of School Librarians AASL (a division of the American Library Association ALA) or – as an example of “detailed” approach – Nevada Department of Education (2003). Nevada Information literacy Standards. Information Literacy Content Standards for K-12 grades. http://www.doe.nv.gov/Standards/IL/infolit.pdf

VET Vocational Education and Training sector

Leonardo da Vinci – Vocational training

U.S. Department of Labor (1991). What Work Requires of Schools. A SCANS Report for America 2000. http://wdr.doleta.gov/SCANS/whatwork/whatwork.pdf or Bruce, Christine Susan (1999). Workplace experiences of information literacy. International Journal of Information Management Volume 19, p. 33-47. (“Seven Faces” of Information Literacy in the workplace)

In addition, it is reasonable to connect the IL standards and performance measures – seen in the context of creating the Europe-wide Information Literacy development strategy – with the other EU actions and conceptual frames, particularly those pertaining to lifelong learning and education. At the moment, the most important enterprise in this regard seems to be EQF – the European Qualification Framework for Lifelong Learning. In the European Commission document we read: “As an instrument for the promotion of lifelong learning, the EQF encompasses all levels of qualifications acquired in general, vocational as well as academic education and training. Additionally, the framework addresses qualifications acquired in initial and continuing education and training. The eight reference levels are described in terms of learning outcomes. (…) In the EQF a learning outcome is defined as a statement of what a learner knows, understands and is able to do on completion of a learning process. The EQF therefore emphasizes the results of learning rather than focusing on inputs such as length of study. Learning outcomes are specified in three categories – as knowledge, skills and competence” (European Commission 2008, p. 3).

Page 13 of 15

CONCLUSIONS

To create functional, detailed, and – what is most important – practically implementable strategic models for Information Literacy development in Europe further work is needed, particularly in two directions:

─ working out the proper formal structure of strategic documents, adequate for the Information Literacy area

─ working out the specific, learning sector oriented IL strategies content. This further work can only be achieved by the team-work of co-operating IL stakeholders of various backgrounds.

Page 14 of 15

REFERENCES AND SELECTED LITERATURE • ALA/AASL (2007). Standards for the 21st-Century Learner.

http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/aasl/guidelinesandstandards/learningstandards/AASL_LearningStandards.pdf

• ALA/ACRL (2000). Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education. http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/acrl/standards/informationliteracycompetency.cfm

• ALA/ACRL (2003). Characteristics of Programs of Information Literacy that Illustrate Best Practices: A Guideline. http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/acrl/standards/characteristics.cfm

• Basili, Carla (2008a). Information and education policies in Europe: key factors influencing Information Literacy academic policies in Europe. In: Information Literacy at the crossroads of Education and Information Policies in Europe. Ed. Carla Basili. Roma: Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, p. 18-32.

• Basili, Carla (2008b). Theorems of Information Literacy. A mathematical-like approach to the discourse of Information Literacy. In: Seria III: ePublikacje Instytutu INiB UJ. Red. Maria Kocójowa. Nr 5. Biblioteka: klucz do sukcesu użytkowników. Kraków: Instytut Informacji Naukowej i Bibliotekoznawstwa UJ. http://www-old.inib.uj.edu.pl/wyd_iinb/s3_z5/basili-n.pdf

• Bruce, Christine Susan (1999). Workplace experiences of information literacy. International Journal of Information Management Volume 19, p. 33-47.

• Catts, Ralph; Lau, Jesus (2008). Towards Information Literacy Indicators. Paris: UNESCO. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001587/158723e.pdf

• Corrall, Sheila (2008). Information literacy strategy development in higher education: an exploratory study. International Journal of Information Management Volume 28, p. 26-37.

• European Communities (2007). Key Competences for Lifelong Learning – A European Framework. http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/education_culture/publ/pdf/ll-learning/keycomp_en.pdf

• European Communities (2008). The European Qualification Framework for Lifelong Learning (EQF). http://ec.europa.eu/education/pub/pdf/general/eqf/broch_en.pdf

• IFLA (2011a). InfoLit Global. http://www.infolitglobal.info/en/ • IFLA (2011b). Information Literacy Section Strategic Plan.

http://www.ifla.org/en/publications/information-literacy-section-strategic-plan • Information Literacy Website. http://www.informationliteracy.org.uk/ • Library of the University of the Sunshine Coast, Queensland, Australia (2011).

Information Literacy Strategy. http://www.usc.edu.au/University/Library/About/InformationLiteracy/

• Partnership for 21st Century Skills (2009). Framework for 21st Century Learning. http://www.p21.org/documents/P21_Framework_Definitions.pdf

• Protzko, Shandra (2008). Information Literacy Strategy Development: Study Prescribes Strategic Management Framework for Academic Institutions. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice Volume 3 Number 4. http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/EBLIP/article/view/4149

Page 15 of 15

• SCONUL Advisory Committee on Information Literacy (1999). Information skills in higher education. http://www.sconul.ac.uk/groups/information_literacy/papers/Seven_pillars2.pdf

• U.S. Department of Labor (1991). What Work Requires of Schools. A SCANS Report for America 2000. http://wdr.doleta.gov/SCANS/whatwork/whatwork.pdf

• UNESCO (2005). Beacons of the Information Society. The Alexandria Proclamation on Information Literacy and Lifelong Learning. http://archive.ifla.org/III/wsis/BeaconInfSoc.html

• UNESCO (2011). Information Literacy. UNESCO’s action to provide people with the skills and abilities for critical reception, assessment and use of information and media in their professional and personal lives. http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/ev.php-URL_ID=15886&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html

• Webber, Sheila; Johnson, Bill (2006). Information Literacy: Standards and statements. http://dis.shef.ac.uk/literacy/standards.htm

1

http://empat-ic.eu/eng/

Project funded by the European Commission

under the Lifelong Learning Programme

This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be

held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.