1 10 Trends on Information Literacy and LILAC 2011| Loreena Sandalwood, RL Eleni Zazani

10 Trends on Information Literacy and LILAC 2011

LILAC 2011 was the second LILAC in a row I attended so unavoidably I make

comparisons in my mind. Today, I thought to address some of the IL trends I

noticed, along with the audiences’ reactions.

What I call trends are things repeatedly mentioned throughout a 3-day programme

by different speakers from around the globe and in some cases in different context.

This year focus was given to themes, already mentioned, underpinned by recent

research, reports, polices, delivered both by national and international work across

various sectors. I suppose that each year themes are selected in a similar manner.

The themes covered last year were also characterised by variety but the conclusion

of a great number of the presentations was about measuring impact or justifying

value, something which was expected due to the introduction of new working

patterns and financial constraints. New structures are already in place or in some

cases are about to be. This year I feel we took a step forward and a stronger focus

was placed on practices that allow us to move forward.

1. Namely, the digital divide, technological advances and our digital

transformation in an information-rich world was the driver in this year’s

LILAC. Mobile technologies and web 2.0 applications are going to definitely

impact the IL agenda.

Andrew Walsh, in his presentation about “Martini information literacy: How

does “anytime, anyplace, anywhere” access to information change what

Information Literacy means?”

http://lilacconference.com/WP/programme/abstracts-mon/#009 pointed out

that people usually don’t search on the open web but prefer apps instead for

quick and fast information. Stats also show that we may have nothing but

smartPhones in the market after 2015. The traditional IL model doesn’t fit. Of

course new technologies affect us all as well. “We are all Google Generation”

as Dave Nicholas said in his keynote speech and I would say that we have

started behaving as such in some occasions.

Dave said that Google generation is a multitasking generation because

this attitude stimulates a continuous skittering and flicking through

pages on the web.

2 10 Trends on Information Literacy and LILAC 2011| Loreena Sandalwood, RL Eleni Zazani

I was amazed to see a significant increase in the tweets produced this year in

comparison to the LILAC 2010. For instance this year twapperKeeper

archived 2787 tweets to date (03.05.2011) whereas last year we had 1416

tweets during an equally lively LILAC. Looking more closely to see whether

fellow librarians have been more multitasking this year than before, it was

noted that,two of the top 10 twitterers significantly increased their tweeting in

comparison to last year.

2. Employability skills and graduate attributes is another driver of IL

provision librarians will look at. Many speakers stressed that IL is a key

attribute for the 21st century citizen and a key competency to lifelong learning.

It was acknowledged that employability skills are at the top of the agenda.

[Horizon report New Media Consortium (2011). The Horizon Report:

2011 Edition. http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/HR2011.pdf],

declares that the game-based learning in massively multiplayer online

games, as a key trend to watch out for in the next 2-3 years, is going to

be an influential part of the educational technologies (Andy Jackson).

Dave Nicholas with the CIBER report on the Google Generation Project

outlined that people like immersive environments, those which create a

sense of being there. The report itself predicts the 3-D virtual

environment as a key player in the years to come (CIBER report, p.27)

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/infostudies/research/ciber/downloads/ggexecutive.

pdf

3. Terminology. Academics don’t understand and don’t like the jargon of IL.

Terminology is one of the issues often discussed although this year another

angle was revealed. Up to now emphasis was given on using educator’s

language and it was thought that the IL term was the most appropriate for

approaching academics. Surprisingly, many fellow librarians especially from

other countries mentioned that the term doesn’t help, as it has negative

connotations in their language. Similar comments were expressed from

English speaking librarians as well. Two keynote speakers openly stated that

they were not in favour of the term, namely Jesus Lau and Dave Nicholas.

The latter advised that the literacy part is dropped.

4. I don’t know whether there was a stronger presence of school librarians this

year or not. What I am certain of is that a more robust and constructive

dialogue took place between Academic and School librarians, addressing

IL gaps across sectors. School Librarians, on the one hand, stressed the

need for a focus on IL coverage in the PGCE curriculum for people prepared

to teach in Primary and Secondary levels, and Academic Librarians on the

3 10 Trends on Information Literacy and LILAC 2011| Loreena Sandalwood, RL Eleni Zazani

other hand outline the need for a basic preparation of students before entering

HE.

5. To model or not to model? Are models constructive and useful tools or

not? This year’s LILAC provided a fertile ground for discussions whether

models are useful or not. I think people were mostly lost in terminology

(between models and frameworks) rather than questioning the value of

models. I think the majority like models as they provide a common language

and this is evident by the fact that during this year’s LILAC the revised model

of SCONUL’s Seven Pillars was launched, and at least 2 international

presenters showed their models for embedding IL in an academic context

(New Zealand and Thailand). [Part of the LILAC 2011 debate :Challenging

the linear models of IL http://prezi.com/3lybv3jdc67b/challenging-the-

linear-models-of-il/]

6. IL and other “literacies”. Digital literacy (and other literacies e.g.

transliteracy) are part of the overwhelming information landscape.

Librarians definitely feel that other “literacies” create niche areas we need to

address and that they become integral part of IL. I am very glad that the

revised model functions as an umbrella for all the literacies.

7. IL and globalisation or Educating for the global citizenship. I think that

what will be discussed more in the future is how IL is impacted in an

interconnected world and how librarians approach the IL and globalisation

intersection in practice, especially in institutions whose motto is “Education for

the global citizenship”.

8. IL and research. A lot of research still needs to be done. Last year

Research methods proved to be one of our weaknesses. Many Innovative

projects were presented but only few have been assessed through reliable

research. I do recall that Ralph Catts mentioned in his closing remarks that

the Quality of the research was fairly poor. Judging by the presentations I

attended, the quality of the research presented was exemplar and less based

on empirical assumptions.

9. Literacy that appeals to Lifelong learners. Happy to see it at the top of the

agenda along with the employability skills and graduate attributes.

10. Rethinking IL... Rethinking... It’s probably time for revising practices

however I feel that we were inviting each other to get involved in deep lateral

thinking rather than be stormed away by the horizontal thinking our times are

defined by!