1

Consultation on the Development of an Information Literacy Framework for Hong Kong Students

Education and Manpower Bureau

HKSAR

2

Principal Investigators (in alphabetical order of institutes)

Dr. LI Siu Cheung, Sandy (BU)

Prof. LEE Fong Lok (CUHK)

Dr. KONG Siu Cheung (HKIEd)

Mr. James HENRI (HKU)

3

Outline

Part 1: The IL Framework1. The scope of the study, IL worldwide and in the HK context2. The proposed IL standards, indicators and learning outcomes3. Exemplars on IL education

Part 2: The implementation of the IL Framework1. Research on IL implementation2. The IL implementation and options3. Suggested staff development programme 4. IL implementation schedule

Part 3: Open discussion

4

Part 1: The IL framework

1.1 The scope of the study, IL worldwide and in the HK

context

1.2 Proposed IL standards, indicators and learning outcomes

1.3 Exemplars

5

1.1: The scope of the study, IL worldwide & in the HK context

1.1.1 Background of the Study

1.1.2 IL Worldwide

1.1.3 Information Literacy

6

1.1.1 Background of the Study

“A broad framework of IL for students will be developed to help teachers and students have a clearer picture on the learning targets of using IT in education” (EMB, 2004 SECTION 3, 24 a)1.

A Task Group to realize the proposal for the development of an IL Framework for Hong Kong students

1 http://www.emb.gov.hk/elt

7

Information literacy framework

Implementation policies and strategies

Professional development and

teacher assessment

Students assessment and support

1. Objectives, standards and learning outcomes

2. Essential learning content in IL3. Relationships with IT and other curriculum

8. Policies and strategies9. School leadership, models, class

practices and quality assurance

4. Professional development and culture

5. Roles and responsibilities of stakeholders

6. Assessment rubrics, tools, reporting7. Funding, support and tool kits

Scope of the research study

8

1.1.2 IL worldwide

USA Information Literacy Standards for Student Learning American

Association of School Librarians (AASL)

United Kingdom Standing Conference of National and University Libraries from

United Kingdom (SCONUL)

Australia and New Zealand Australian and New Zealand Institute of Information Literacy

(ANZIIL)

9

United Nations - Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

Building the Information Society: a global challenge in the new Millennium (2003)2

Declaration of Principles

Plan of Action

2 http://www.itu.int/wsis/documents/doc_multi.asp?lang=en&id=1161|1160

10

Declaration of Principles

C4. Capacity building

“Each person should have the opportunity to acquire the necessary skills and knowledge in order to understand, participate actively in, and benefit fully from, the Information Society and the knowledge economy”2

11

Plan of Action

C4. Capacity building

“Everyone should have the necessary skills to benefit fully from the Information Society. Therefore capacity building and ICT literacy are essential”2

“ICTs can contribute to achieving universal education worldwide, through delivery of education and training of teachers, and offering improved conditions for lifelong learning….”2

12

Capacity Building in this Study

Capacity building an iterative process to build up the knowledge

of a learner with individual effort and/or as a member of a community

participate in, benefit from and contribute to the Information Society

for the well-being of the knowledge world

13

Relationship between IT and IL in this Study

InformationTechnology

Information Literacy

14

1.1.3 Information Literacy According to American Library Association

Presidential Committee on IL (1989), the information literate person is,

"able to recognize when information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate, and use it effectively"

15

Information Literacy (con’t )

The Nine IL Standards for Student Learning (From: Information Power: Building Partnerships for Learning by the American Association of School Librarians and the Association for Educational Communications Technology)

3 standards on Information Literacy 3 standards on Independent Learning 3 standards on Social Responsibility

16

IL Education for Hong Kong Students in the 21st Century

The IL framework has 3 main social development trends that shapes it

The Emerging Knowledge Society Capability for Information Processing

Digital culture Know “how” and know “why”

Globalization Capacity Building with global perspectives

17

IL as a means to realize the four key learning tasks

Moral & Civic Education

Information literacy

Reading to Learn

IT for Interactive Learning

Project learning

18

Information Literacy in this Study

Information literacy is the capacity to realize the need for information turn information into meaning generate new ideas

IL requires learners to understand the rationale behind using information to know information searching behaviour know how and know why

19

1.2: Proposed IL standards, indicators and learning outcomes

1.2.1 Content analysis

1.2.2 Objectives of the IL framework

1.2.3 The IL framework for HK students

20

1.2.1 Content analysis of IL frameworks

State University of New York (SUNY) Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL) American Association of School Librarians & Associatio

n for Educational Communications and Technology (AASL & ACET)

Standing Conference of National and University Libraries from United Kingdom (SCONUL)

Alaska Association of School Librarians (AkASL) Washington Library Media Association (WLMA) Australian and New Zealand Institute of Information Lite

racy (ANZIIL)

21

Meta-AnalysisMeta-Analysis

Coding SchemeCoding Scheme

cognitive dimension

meta-cognitive dimension

affective dimension

socio-cultural dimension

find

comprehend

apply

analyse

synthesize

evaluate

attitude

motivation &value

communal

social

awareness

planning &monitoring

reflection

present

integrate

22

1.2.2 Objectives of the IL framework for HK Students

The primary objectives of the IL framework are four fold

To enable students to master the necessary skills to comprehend, locate, analyse, critically evaluate and synthesize information and apply their knowledge to inform decisions and problem solving;

23

Objectives (con’t)

To develop students as reflective learners who are able to plan, reflect upon and regulate their process of inquiry in a rapidly changing, information-based environment;

To enable students to appreciate that being an independent learner will contribute to personal growth, enjoyment and lifelong learning;

To empower students with greater autonomy and social responsibility over the use of information in their individual as well as collaborative learning.

1.2.3 The IL Framework for HK Students

A Conceptual Framework for Information Literacy 24

25

Standards- Cognitive

C1 An information literate person is able to determine the extent of and locate the information needed. C1.1 Comprehend C1.2 Find

C2 An information literate person is able to apply information to problem-solving and decision making. C2.1 Apply

26

Standards- Cognitive (con’t) C3 An information literate person is able to analyse the c

ollected information and construct new concepts or understandings C3.1 Analyse C3.2 Synthesize C3.3 Present

C4 An information literate person is able to critically evaluate information and integrate new concepts with prior knowledge. C4.1 Evaluate C4.2 Integrate

27

Standards- Meta-cognitive

M1 An information literate person is able to be aware that information processing is iterative, time-consuming and demands effort. M1.1 Awareness

M2 An information literate person is able to plan and monitor the process of enquiry. M2.1 Planning and monitoring

M3 An information literate person is able to reflect upon and regulate the process of enquiry. M3.1 Reflecting

28

Standards- Affective

A1 An information literate person is able to recognise that being an independent reader will contribute to personal enjoyment and lifelong learning. A1.1 Attitude

A2 An information literate person is able to recognise that information processing skills and freedom of information access are pivotal to sustaining the development of a knowledge society A2.1 Motivation and value

29

Standards- Socio-cultural

S1 An information literate person is able to contribute positively to the learning community in knowledge building. S1.1 Communal

S2 An information literate person is able to understand and respect the moral, legal, political and cultural contexts in which information is being used. S2.1 Social

30

Learning Outcomes

Proposed 4 levels of attainment

Level I (~Junior Primary)

Level II (~Senior Primary)

Level III (~Junior Secondary)

Level IV (~Senior Secondary)

31

Examples of Learning outcomes- Cognitive (PBL)

Indicators C1.1.1: able to frame appropriate questions based on information needs

Level I: articulate the focus of the given research topic

Level II: identify and clarify research inquiry

Level III: formulate questions for research inquiry

Level IV: formulate and criticize own questions as essential and non-essential for research inquiry

32

Examples- Cognitive (PBL & IT) Indicators C1.1.2: able to determine the nature and

scope of the information needed Level I: use simple mind-maps for brainstorming ideas and

thoughts

Level II: construct simple mind-maps to articulate ideas & thoughts

Level III: construct mind-maps to frame research questions

Level IV: construct mind-maps to build research framework

33

Examples- Cognitive (IT) Indicators C1.2.2: able to develop strategies for

locating information Level I: use simple keywords to search for information with

search engines

Level II: use logical operators to search

Level III: use logical operators to search; sort and rank the information in search engines

Level IV: use logical operators to search; sort and rank the information; search Internet using a range of strategies available in a variety of meta-search engines

34

Examples- Cognitive (Reading & IT) Indicators C1.2.2: able to develop strategies for

locating information Level I: browse library shelves to locate information

Level II: use keywords with logical operators to search library catalogues

Level III: access on-line library catalogues and electronic resources  

Level IV: expand the search beyond the school library, such as, use public libraries, electronic resources, etc.

35

Examples- Meta-Cognitive (Independent Learning (IDL))

Indicators M3.1.3: able to review the information seeking process and revise search strategies as necessary

Level I: be aware of the importance of self-reflection for improving learning

Level II: compare information selected and interpreted with information needs

Level III: compare information selected and interpreted and adjust research strategies if necessary

Level IV: suggest areas for further research

36

Examples- Meta-Cognitive (PBL & IDL)

Indicators M2.1.1: able to decompose a complex task/ problem into manageable components

Level I: － Level II: use simple statements to describe the purpose of th

e given task

Level III: identify the key components

Level IV: identify the key components; arrange the components into sequences and rankings for effectively completing the task

37

Examples- Affective Indicators A2.1.3: able to recognise the importance of free

dom of information access to a knowledge society

Recognise that freedom of information access

Level I: helps people make right judgment

Level II: informs decision making

Level III: informs decision making and contribute to community-wide knowledge building

Level IV: is pivotal to intellectual, economical, political and social development of a society

38

Examples- Socio-cultural(Moral & Civic Education)

Indicators S2.1.4: able to observe laws, regulations, institutional policies, and social etiquette related to the access and use of information resources.

Level I: describe the information sources

Level II: respect and acknowledge the ownership; be aware of the laws governing intellectual property rights

Level III: respect and acknowledge the ownership; be aware of the laws governing intellectual property rights and privacy

Level IV: respect the ownership and use one of the standards of citations e.g. APA and MLA, etc.; be aware of the laws governing intellectual property rights and privacy;respect institutional policies for proper use of and access to information

39

Examples- Socio-cultural (PBL) Indicators S1.1.2: able to collaborate effectively in

groups to pursue and construct knowledge Level I: take turns speaking in a group, sharing ideas

Level II: listen to, acknowledge and consider different opinions for group work

Level III: respect and accept divergent ideas and opinions expressed by classmates and others and able to resolve conflicts

Level IV: respect and accept divergent ideas and opinions expressed by classmates and others and able to manage conflicts

40

1.3: Exemplars

Purpose

To illustrate the learner-centered approach of IL education

41

Exemplars

Design rationale The IL framework is designed for capacity building

of learners for independent learning and assuming social responsibilities

Designed with the humanistic rationale of guiding learners to develop from basic information processing skill, complex level thinking skills to meta-cognitive abilities in the information society

42

Exemplars

Hong Kong, My Home Knowing about E-Certificate Colour World: Proper use & Identify Sou

rce of Information Drug Abuse and Youth

http://www3.fed.cuhk.edu.hk/ited/IL/drugabuse/

Bit Torrent: Angel or Devil?

43

Part 2: The implementation of the IL Framework

2.1 Research on IL implementation

2.2 The IL implementation and options

2.3 Suggested staff development programme

2.4 IL implementation schedule

44

2.1 Research on IL implementation

2.1.1 Focus group discussions

2.1.2 In-depth interviews

2.1.3 Questionnaire survey

45

2.1.1 Focus group discussions

15 Focus Group, each lasted for 90 minutes

Brief introduction and discussed with a set of questions

Audio record, written feedbacks and survey

46

2.1.2 In-depth interviews

11 Groups: Education Legislative Council Industry

Lasted for 90 minutes Interviewed with guidelines

educational general

Audio record

47

2.1.3 Questionnaire Survey

786 primary and 522 secondary schools

Targets Principals/Curriculum coordinators IT coordinators Teacher librarians

3924 Questionnaires send out 2608 Questionnaires returned Response Rate: 66.46%

48

2.2: IL Implementation & Options

2.2.1 Results on the IL framework

2.2.2 Implementation models & options

2.2.3 Assessment of teachers

2.2.4 Assessment of students

49

The following recommendations are views

Gathered from School Heads and Teachers

During the Focus Group Discussion, Interview and Questionnaire Survey

2.2.1 Questionnaire: Is IL education needed for students ?

50

No4.97%

Yes95.03%

Questionnaire on IL Framework: CognitiveWhen students graduate, they are expected to be able to: Average (1-4) S.D.

a. Identify a variety of potential sources of information 3.48 0.52

b. Develop strategies for locating information 3.46 0.54

c. Frame appropriate questions based on information needs 3.42 0.52

d. Determine the nature and scope of the information needed 3.38 0.52

e. Apply information to inform decisions 3.45 0.53

f. Apply information in critical thinking 3.42 0.57

g. Apply information in problem solving 3.51 0.53

h. Record, categorise and manage the information and its sources 3.36 0.55

i. Critically analyse information collected 3.41 0.55

j. Derive new concepts or understandings from the information collected 3.30 0.57

k. Make inferences, connections and draw conclusions 3.34 0.55

l. Determine accuracy, relevance and comprehensiveness of information 3.41 0.56

m. Assimilate new concepts into their knowledge bases and value systems 3.37 0.55

Table 2.2 Average rating on cognition from questionnaire- all participants

Questionnaire on IL Framework: Meta-cognitive

When students graduate, they are expected to be able to:Average

(1-4)S.D.

a. Recognise the information seeking process is evolutionary and changes during the course of investigation

3.45 0.52

b. Understand the information processing requires time, diligence and practice 3.50 0.51

c. Define a manageable focus and timeline 3.42 0.53

d. Apply new and prior information to planning and creation of a particular product/performance

3.30 0.57

e. Reflect upon the development process for the product/performance and identify areas of improvement

3.45 0.55

f. Devise strategies for revising, improving and updating self-generated knowledge

3.31 0.57

g. Review the information seeking process and revise search strategies as necessary

3.37 0.56

Table 2.3 Average rating on meta-cognition from questionnaire- all participants

Questionnaire on IL Framework: Affective

When students graduate, they are expected to be able to:Average

(1-4)S.D.

a. Read for information and pleasure 3.47 0.54

b. Recognise and select materials appropriate to personal abilities and interests

3.51 0.51

c. Recognise that accurate and comprehensive information is the basis for intelligent decision-making

3.49 0.53

d. Recognise that being an independent learner will contribute to lifelong learning

3.54 0.53

e. Recognise the importance of freedom of information access to a knowledge society

3.47 0.53

Table 2.4 Average rating on affection from questionnaire- all participants

Questionnaire on IL Framework: Socio-Cultural

When students graduate, they are expected to be able to:Average

(1-4)S.D.

a. Share knowledge and information with others 3.45 0.52

b. Collaborate effectively in groups to pursue and construct knowledge 3.48 0.54

c.  Recognise that information is underpinned by values and beliefs 3.44 0.54

d. Understand and respect the principles of equitable access to information

3.48 0.53

e. Understand and respect for the principle of intellectual freedom 3.51 0.53

f. Observe laws, institutional policies and social etiquette related to access and use information

3.44 0.53

Table 2.5 Average rating on social culture from questionnaire- all participants

Top ratings by primary school practitioners

　 When students graduate, they are expected to be able to:Average (1-

4)S.D.

A a. Read for information and pleasure 3.36 0.52

Mb. Understand the information processing requires time, diligence and practice

3.33 0.50

Ab. Recognise and select materials appropriate to personal abilities and interests

3.32 0.52

S a. Share knowledge and information with others 3.27 0.48

S e. Understand and respect for the principle of intellectual freedom 3.27 0.55

S b. Collaborate effectively in groups to pursue and construct knowledge 3.25 0.54

Sd. Understand and respect the principles of equitable access to information

3.24 0.54

Ma. Recognise the information seeking process is evolutionary and changes during the course of investigation

3.22 0.50

C g. Apply information in problem-solving 3.22 0.54

Ad. Recognise that being an independent learner will contribute to lifelong learning

3.19 0.64

Table 2.6 Top ratings by primary school practitioners from questionnaire

Top ratings by secondary school practitioners　 When students graduate, they are expected to be able to:

Average (1-4)

S.D.

Ad. Recognise that being an independent learner will contribute to lifelong learning

3.49 0.53

Ab. Recognise and select materials appropriate to personal abilities and interests

3.45 0.51

C g. Apply information in problem solving 3.45 0.53

S e. Understand and respect for the principle of intellectual freedom 3.45 0.53

Ac. Recognise that accurate and comprehensive information is the basis for intelligent decision-making 3.44 0.54

Mb. Understand the information processing requires time, diligence and practice

3.44 0.51

Sd. Understand and respect the principles of equitable access to information

3.41 0.54

A a. Read for information and pleasure 3.40 0.54

Sf. Observe laws, institutional policies and social etiquette related to access and use information

3.40 0.53

S b. Collaborate effectively in groups to pursue and construct knowledge 3.40 0.55

Table 2.7 Top ratings by secondary school practitioners from questionnaire

57

2.2.2 Concerns on IL implementation

IL should not be implemented as new initiative

IL should be infused into the existing curriculum

Judgment from parents would affect the attitude of schools towards IL

IL standards should be a framework highlighting the existing educational standards accepted by educators in general.

58

Policy recommendations on IL implementation

IL standards VS existing educational standards information technology assumes a role for learners to

attain these goals. the IL framework should not be perceived as a new

educational initiative.

Conducting pilot studies and disseminating experiences of existing IL-leading schools to the teaching practitioners are ways to obtain consensus of teachers with the initiative.

59

Policy recommendations on IL implementation (con’t)

Requires efforts to induce teachers to implement the IL framework and to inspire parents to realize the importance of the initiative

The EMB should consider organizing seminars and advertising to educate parents about the importance of IL.

The coordinator of implementing the IL framework in schools should be a higher rank staff member for essential professional leadership

a.IT/Library

lessoncoordinating

model+

c. Use PBL tofoster IL

30.71%

a.IT/Library

lessoncoordinating

model+

b. Curriculuminfusion

34.85%

b. Curriculuminfusion

+c. Use PBL to

foster IL

34.44%

60Figure 4.2: Proportion of choosing the IL implementation models (Teacher librarians)

Proportion of choosing the IL implementation models (Teacher librarians)

b. Curriculuminfusion

+c. Use PBL to

foster IL

32.16%

a. IT/Librarylesson

coordinatingmodel

+ c. Use PBL tofoster IL

30.72%

a. IT/Librarylesson

coordinatingmodel

+ b. Curriculum

infusion

37.11%

61Figure 4.3: Proportion of choosing the IL implementation models (IT coordinators)

Proportion of choosing the IL implementation models (IT coordinators)

a. IT/Librarylesson

coordinatingmodel

+c. Use PBL to

foster IL

31.75%

a. IT/Librarylesson

coordinatingmodel

+b. Curriculum

infusion

36.28%

b. Curriculuminfusion

+c. Use PBL to

foster IL

31.97%

62

Figure 4.4: Proportion of choosing the IL implementation models (Principals/ curriculum coordinators)

Proportion of choosing the IL implementation models (Principals/ Curriculum coordinators)

63

IL should be infused in existing curricular in basic education such as

IT/Library lesson and curriculum infusion (a + b)

Curriculum infusion and PBL model (b + c)

IT/Library lesson and PBL model (a + c)

Policy recommendations on IL implementation

64

2.2.3 Concerns from practitioners on teachers’ assessment

Aim of assessment: ensure teachers to transfer IL skills to students push teachers to move forward in IL

implementation

Well-defined assessment will ensure the willingness of teachers to teach IL

Should not focus on memorizing information

65

Recommendations to the concern

A comprehensive Staff development programme for teachers should be designed

Staff development should be incorporated in the existing CPD

Details of staff development will be covered later on 2.3

66

2.2.4 Students’ assessment and support

Table 2.9 Count of opinions from written feedbacks on difficulties in the assessment of students

Difficulties in students’ assessment Count %

Difficult to assess students' information literacy 13 31.71%

Difficult to assess students' attitude/ morals/ values 10 24.39%

Difficult to have concrete standards for assessment 7 17.07%

No assessment for information literacy is needed 3 7.32%

No detailed assessment method is needed 1 2.44%

Other difficulties in students’ assessment 7 17.07%

Total 41 100.00%

67

Concerns from practitioners on students’ assessment

Not be paper and pencil examination

Should not discourage students’ interest

Increase number of assessments may come up with a more objective assessment result

Nature and methods of assessment:

Widely accepted, simple and easy to define

Concise, descriptive, developmental

68

Concerns from practitioners on students’ assessment (con’t)

Focus on individual improvement rather than comparison between students

A combination of self-assessment, peer assessment and teachers’ assessment

Completing projects or presentations in an open resources environment, such as the internet and library access

Conducting interviews

69

Recommendations on assessing students

Nature of assessment Generalized, widely accepted, simple and easy to define, formative

and developmental

Adopting descriptive statements will be inevitable as assessment tends to measure the quality of a person

More objective by adopting measures, such as continual assessing multiple assessors

Outcome of assessment should be concise

Summative assessment at the end of a key learning stage is necessary for smooth progression

70

Recommendations on assessing students (con’t)

Methods of assessment Assess in an open assessment environment, such as

the internet library access

Conduct interviews in assessing IL

Construct continue assessment and multiple assessors using assessment rubrics A number of teachers participate assessments Teachers assess students’ attainment by rubrics marks on the extremes are truncated

At an early stage, school-based assessment.

Further studies and investigations on high-stake assessment

71

Assessment rubrics, tools and reporting

For the design of assessment toolkits

assessment platform to support school-based assessment

wireless network for real time IL assessment

mobile devices for teachers to input data into assessment rubrics developed for report generation

72

2.3: Staff Development Programme

2.3.1 Concerns

2.3.2 Guidelines

2.3.3 Contents of in-service teacher training

2.3.4 Contents of pre-service teacher training

73

Concerns about staff development Count %

Suggestions on training method 22 36.67%

IL should be recognized by teachers before the start of any training

13 21.67%

Trainings will increase teachers' workload and pressure 11 18.33%

Staff development is difficult 7 11.67%

Resources of training 2 3.33%

Disagree on any staff training 1 1.67%

Other difficulties in staff development 4 6.67%

Total 60 100.00%Table 2.10: Count of opinions from written feedbacks on difficulties in staff development

2.3.1 Concerns about staff development

74

2.3.2 Guidelines for implementing staff development

1. Obtain consensus of school teachers before initiation

2. Start as soon as possible to prepare for implementation in schools

3. Provide sufficient resources for supporting, such as offering substitute teachers

4. Organize the programme in an extended period to minimize pressure of teachers

75

5. Flexible training scheme for teachers to organize their own development

6. Consider web-based training materials fora) minimizing effort for attending courses and

b) maximizing outcomes of face-to-face lecturing

Guidelines on training methods

76

7. Most school teachers attend school-based courses and/or web-based courses

Few teachers attend full training- serve as trainers (seed teachers)

8. Support and guidelines for trainers for implementing school-based IL initiatives

Guidelines on training methods (con’t)

77

Guidelines on training methods (con’t)

9. Organize activities in staff development day for gaining practical experiences on the process of learning IL

10. Authentic knowledge for teachers, such asa) visiting schools with experience on IL implementation

and

b) sharing experience with those experienced teachers in IL education

78

11. Teachers with a) no formal IL education background and b) rare experiences in teaching IL

should have chances to attend elective courses on building knowledge of IL and the pedagogy of teaching IL

12. Incorporate training for developing competence of pre-service teachers on implementing the IL initiatives.

Guidelines on training methods (con’t)

79

2.4: IL Implementation Schedule

2.4.1 Suitable time for the IL implementation

2.4.2 Pilot study & implementation

schedule

1-2 years39%

2-3 years30%

3-4 years16%

4-5 years5%

5-6 years7%

Others

3%

80

2.4.1 When should be the suitable time for implementing staff development in schools?

Figure 2.4: The suitable time for implementing staff development in schools from questionnaire

81

Conduct a 2-year pilot study

Primary and secondary schools

May include showcases of experienced IL schools

Implementation schedule

Time for launch is kept open

2.4.2 Pilot study & implementation schedule

82

Seminar on implementing an information literacy framework for Hong Kong students

Thank You for your attention!

http://www.emb.gov.hk/IL/enghttp://www.emb.gov.hk/IL/chiiterc@emb.gov.hk

83

Part 3: Open Discussion

The Development of an Information Literacy Framework for Hong Kong Students