the new framework for information literacy : directions for the future sharon mader, acrl il program...
TRANSCRIPT
The New Framework for Information Literacy : Directions for the Future
Sharon Mader, ACRL IL Program Officer
Ann Campion Riley, ACRL Vice-president/President-elect
Fargo, North Dakota
April 27, 2015
From Standards to Framework Began with regular five year ACRL standards review Standards for IL had been in place since 1999 This time the committee recommended substantial change ACRL Board charged a task force Task force held meetings, forums, webinars etc. over several
years; made revisions based on feedback Framework presented to ACRL at ALA Midwinter Meeting in
Chicago, January 2015 ACRL Board “filed” it; parliamentary action to allow
additions and changes Previous standards still on ACRL website
Forces for Change: The Environmental Context
Higher education & the information ecosystem
Collaboration
Students as creators and participants in research & scholarship
The Personal & Professional Context
What has led us to this point?The evolution of information literacy
Defining ourselves as educators and collaborators
“Under conditions of complex, nonlinear evolution, we need more slow knowing.”
Contrasts
“We fear both ambiguity and complexity … because we still focus on the parts, rather than the whole system.
Where are we now?The frames
Authority is Contextual and ConstructedInformation Creation as a ProcessInformation has ValueResearch as InquiryScholarship as ConversationSearching as Strategic Exploration
What is new & compelling here?
Takes librarians to the heart of teaching and learning
Creates a common conversation Includes affective dimensions and habits of
mindDefines students as creators not just consumersReflects the way research is really doneEncourages self-reflection & self-knowledgeLives in the local contextBrings students into the dialogueShines light on the ‘stuck places’Leads to instructional design for understanding
Creates a common conversation
Topics that take us beyond technique and into the fundamental issues of teaching…
Includes affective dimensions
“The bibliographic paradigm is based on certainty and order, whereas the user’s constructive process is characterized by uncertainty and confusion.”
From the perspective of the student
1. The information technology conception
2. The information sources conception
3. The information process conception
4. The information control conception
5. The knowledge construction conception
6. The knowledge extension conception
7. The wisdom conception
Information Literacy as it is experienced...
“Within this framework, teaching and learning information literacy would stress not skills acquisition but the growth of learners in coming to understand and experience information literacy in these different ways.”
How research is really done
Nancy Fried FosterIthaka S+R Issue Brief, November 13, 2014
The Convergence
IL SC
Backwards design to uncover enduring understandings
Step 1: Identify desired results.
Step 2: Determine acceptable evidence to demonstrate results.
Step 3: Plan learning experiences and instruction.
In learning, questions come before answers…
Framework for information literacy for higher education
Metaliteracy
Threshold Concepts
“…an overarching set of abilities in which students are both consumers and creators of information in multiple formats.”
BehavioralAffectiveCognitiveMetacognitive
But what are threshold concepts?
Threshold Concepts and Troublesome Knowledge:Linkages to Ways of thinking and practicing
within the disciplines
Jan Meyer and Ray LandEnhancing teaching-learning environments in
undergraduate courses (the ETL Project, University of Edinburgh)
Occasional Report 4, May 2003
Threshold Concept Characteristics
TransformativeIrreversibleIntegrativeBoundedTroublesome
What are the stumbling blocks for students on the scholarly
path?
Threshold concept research:Transactional curriculum inquiry research questions
1. What do academics consider to be fundamental to a grasp of their subject?
2. What do students find difficult to grasp?
3. What curriculum design interventions can support mastery of these difficulties?
Cousin, G. (2009). Researching Learning in Higher Education. New York: Routledge.
Threshold concept research findings: Transactional curriculum inquiryThe dialogue amongst faculty, librarians, and students is essential in the process of developing the threshold concept framework.
The purpose of the threshold concepts is to improve the learning experience of students.
Threshold concept research provides curriculum design guidelines
1. Jewels in the curriculum2. Listening for understanding3. A holding environment for the toleration of
confusion and uncertainty4. Recursiveness and excursiveness5. The importance of engagement6. Take account of variation in where students
start out
Cousin, G. (2006). An introduction to threshold concepts, Planet , 17, 4-5.
Unpacking the Framework
IL Threshold Concepts
Knowledge practices (abilities)
Dispositions
The Framework Threshold Concepts
Scholarship is a ConversationResearch as InquiryAuthority is Contextual and ConstructedFormat as a ProcessSearching as Exploration Information has Value
Applying a frame STEM – Undergraduate research
Frame: Scholarship as a conversation
Knowledge practice: Contribute to scholarly conversation at an appropriate level
Disposition: See themselves as contributors to scholarship rather than only consumers of it
Questions on learning lead to outcomes
Frame: Scholarship as ConversationCommunities of scholars, researchers, or professionals engage in sustained discourse with new insights and discoveries occurring over time as a result of varied perspectives and interpretations.
Example questions: Can learners contribute to scholarly conversation at an appropriate level? Do learners see themselves a contributors to scholarship rather than only
consumers?
Frame: Searching as Strategic ExplorationSearching for information is often nonlinear and iterative, requiring the evaluation of a range of information sources and the mental flexibility to pursue alternate avenues as new understanding develops.
Example questions: Can learners utilize divergent and convergent thinking appropriately when searching? Do learners understand that first attempts at searching do not always produce
adequate results?
From the Framework FAQ’s(July 2014)
Threshold concepts present an avenue to broaden our practice from focusing on skills and indicators to focusing on the development and exchange of knowledge within scholarship, professional discourse, and the larger society.
A new companion
Standards worldACRL Standards for Libraries in Higher Education
ACRL Standards for Information Literacy in Higher Education
ACRL Framework for Information Literacy in Higher Education
AASL Standards for the 21st Century Learner
Learning Standards and Common Core State Standards Crosswalk (ala.org/aasl)
A Dear John Letter to the Standards [for IL]
I know things won’t be perfect with the Framework, either. I know things won’t change overnight. But I also know that things will be a lot better, because the Framework inspires me. It’s been a really long time since I was inspired by you, Standards. Most of all, the Framework gives me language to express the potential for information literacy instruction to subject faculty, administrators, and my fellow librarians–language I hope will help me make a positive, large-scale impact on student learning throughout my career.Lauren Wallishttps://laurenwallis.wordpress.com/2015/02/05/a-dear-john-letter-to-the-standards/auren Wallis, posted Feb. 5, 2015
Librarians-true academic partners
The Framework“The intent of the framework is to encourage conversations among a broad group of stakeholders who will craft an IL program that meets the needs of their institution.
The Standards for Libraries in HEDesigned to guide academic libraries in advancing and sustaining their role as partners in educating students, achieving their institutions’ missions, & positioning libraries as leaders in assessment and continuous improvement on their campuses.
Structure of the Standards for Libraries
9 Principles, including:The Educational Role of the Library
Library-centered Performance Indicators for each Principle – expectations of what all libraries do.
Locally developed user-centered outcomes that provide evidence of the impact of the library
The Framework opens the way for librarians, faculty, and other institutional partners
to redesign instruction sessions, assignments, courses, and even curricula;
to connect information literacy with student success initiatives;
to collaborate on pedagogical research and involve students themselves in that research;
and to create wider conversations about student learning, the scholarship of teaching and learning, and the assessment of learning on local campuses and beyond.
One example:
From Moriana Garcia, Natural Sciences Liaison Librarian, Denison University, Ohio Created a 90 minute-long faculty workshop in
September/2014, “A Roadmap to Better Class Assignments: Helping Students Understand the New Information Ecosystem”.
Participants brought an assignment based on research or IL that they wanted to improve. Worked in small groups to incorporate the new threshold concepts and to create new learning objectives.
One result: a shift in professors’ perceptions: “Information literacy was not the library’s sole responsibility anymore. For them, it became a common project”
Another example from Nicole Pagowsky, Arizona State University
Developed “big questions” for the frames:
Frame 1: Scholarship is a ConversationWhat barriers exist when entering into the “conversation” of scholarship?How can we gain greater understanding of topics by examining the connections and ongoing narratives between different scholarly pieces?How do our responsibilities shift when moving from just consumers of information to critics and/or creators of it?
Then learning outcomes were developed…..
Students should be able to:Recognize the metaphor of “conversation” to describe
the purpose of research Identify the contribution of specific scholarly pieces
and varying perspectives to a disciplinary knowledge “conversation”
Contribute to the scholarly conversation at an appropriate level, through the lens of becoming a creator/critic
A VisionThe Framework will be actively and creatively used in research and practice in order to transform the role of librarians as educators and of the library as an integral partner in the teaching and learning mission of higher education.
Much more work for ushttp://www.ala.org/
acrl/standards/ilframework
Virtual sandboxBank of examplesMapping of outcomesCrosswalk from
standardsMany blogs and articlesCommunity of usersOpen educational
resources of all kinds
SourcesBruce, Christine. The
Seven Faces of Information Literacy. AUSLIB Press, 1997.
Common Ground at the Nexus of Information Literacy and Scholarly Communication. Edited by Stephanie Davis Kahl. ACRL, 2013
Foster, Nancy Fried. Information Literacy and Research Practice. Ithaka, 2014.
Fullan, Michael. Leading in a Culture of Change. Jossey-Bass, 2001.
Kuhlthau, Carol C. Seeking Meaning. Libraries Unlimited, 2003
Sources continuedMackey, Thomas and
Trudi Jacobson. Metaliteracy. Neal-Schuman, 2014.
Palmer, Parker. The Courage to Teach. Jossey-Bass, 1997
Wheatley, Margaret. Leadership and the New Science. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 1992.
Wiggins, Grant, Jay McTighe and Allison Zmuda. Understanding By Design. ASCD, 1998.