information literacy standards development irene doskatsch executive director, anziil...
TRANSCRIPT
Information Literacy Information Literacy Standards DevelopmentStandards Development
Irene DoskatschIrene DoskatschExecutive Director, ANZIILExecutive Director, ANZIIL
[email protected]@unisa.edu.au
PRESENTATION OUTLINEPRESENTATION OUTLINE
Development chronologyDevelopment chronology• Identification of significant milestonesIdentification of significant milestones• US processUS process• Australian processAustralian process
Revision processRevision process
Reflections – a critical perspectiveReflections – a critical perspective
BEFORE NATIONAL IL BEFORE NATIONAL IL STANDARDSSTANDARDS
No common framework for No common framework for integrating IL into curriculaintegrating IL into curricula
No common basis for assessmentNo common basis for assessment
No common starting point for No common starting point for benchmarkingbenchmarking
US MILESTONESUS MILESTONES
1989 1989 ALA Presidential Committee ALA Presidential Committee on Information Literacy Final on Information Literacy Final report defined 4 aspects of report defined 4 aspects of Information LiteracyInformation Literacy
19901990 National Forum for National Forum for Information Literacy Information Literacy establishedestablished
Climate of reformClimate of reform
1990s general education reforms1990s general education reforms
• fundamental academic skills across the fundamental academic skills across the curriculumcurriculum
• internationalising the curriculuminternationalising the curriculum
• using technology to enhance teachingusing technology to enhance teaching
• learning communities to promote cooperationlearning communities to promote cooperation
• assessing student learningassessing student learning
STAKEHOLDERS in the STAKEHOLDERS in the EDUCATION REFORM AGENDAEDUCATION REFORM AGENDA
American Association for Higher EducationAmerican Association for Higher Education
Teaching and Learning with Technology Teaching and Learning with Technology GroupGroup
Regional Accreditation GroupsRegional Accreditation Groups
Discipline-Based AccreditationDiscipline-Based Accreditation
Association of Educational Association of Educational Communications and TechnologyCommunications and Technology
WHAT WERE THE DRIVERS FOR WHAT WERE THE DRIVERS FOR THE GENESIS OF IL STANDARDS?THE GENESIS OF IL STANDARDS?
Various stakeholders expecting greater Various stakeholders expecting greater accountable for demonstrable student accountable for demonstrable student learning outcomes from higher education learning outcomes from higher education institutionsinstitutions
Need for assessment methodologies based Need for assessment methodologies based upon abilities and performance upon abilities and performance
Pressure on academic libraries to Pressure on academic libraries to demonstrate effectiveness in terms of demonstrate effectiveness in terms of student learning student learning
US MILESTONESUS MILESTONES
1998 1998 Boyer Commission Report Boyer Commission Report Reinventing Undergraduate Reinventing Undergraduate EducationEducation
1998 1998 American Association of American Association of School Libraries & Association School Libraries & Association of Educational Communicationof Educational Communication& Technology & Technology Information Information Literacy Standards for Student Literacy Standards for Student Learning competencies for Learning competencies for students K-12students K-12
AUSTRALIAN MILESTONESAUSTRALIAN MILESTONES
Early 1970 IL advocacy in schoolsEarly 1970 IL advocacy in schools
1990+ Various government reports 1990+ Various government reports which implicitly or explicitly which implicitly or explicitly highlighted the need for information highlighted the need for information literacyliteracy
AUSTRALIAN MILESTONESAUSTRALIAN MILESTONES
1992+1992+ National information National information literacy literacy conferencesconferences
1994 1994 Developing lifelong Developing lifelong learners through learners through undergraduate educationundergraduate education
19971997 Christine Bruce Seven faces Christine Bruce Seven faces of information literacy of information literacy doctoral researchdoctoral research
Task Force on Information Literacy Task Force on Information Literacy Competency StandardsCompetency Standards
Multi-association Task Force established Multi-association Task Force established 1998 1998
One year to complete the StandardsOne year to complete the Standards
Budget of $10,000 for travel, to hire an Budget of $10,000 for travel, to hire an assessment consultant, and to cover assessment consultant, and to cover expenses of the non-librarians on the Task expenses of the non-librarians on the Task Force. Force.
US Task Force on Information Literacy US Task Force on Information Literacy Competency StandardsCompetency Standards
The draft was presented at several The draft was presented at several higher education conferences (one higher education conferences (one on assessment, one in Australia, one on assessment, one in Australia, one at AAHE). at AAHE).
Strategies for securing endorsement Strategies for securing endorsement from other higher education from other higher education associations and accreditation bodies associations and accreditation bodies as well as discipline-based groups.as well as discipline-based groups.
DEVELOPMENT CHRONOLOGYDEVELOPMENT CHRONOLOGY
2000 Jan2000 Jan Information Literacy Competency Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education Standards for Higher Education approved by ACRL & endorsement approved by ACRL & endorsement by American Association for Higher by American Association for Higher EducationEducation
2000 March2000 March Alan Bundy lobbies CAUL to develop Alan Bundy lobbies CAUL to develop Australian Information Literacy Australian Information Literacy StandardsStandards
2000 Sept 2000 Sept Birth of the Australian Information Birth of the Australian Information Literacy standards at a national Literacy standards at a national workshop hosted by UniSA Libraryworkshop hosted by UniSA Library
Information literacy competency Information literacy competency standards for higher educationstandards for higher education
The information literate studentThe information literate student
determines the extent of the information determines the extent of the information neededneeded
accesses needed information effectively accesses needed information effectively and efficientand efficient
evaluates information and its sources evaluates information and its sources critically and incorporates selected critically and incorporates selected information into his or her knowledge base information into his or her knowledge base and value systemand value system
Information literacy competency Information literacy competency standards for higher educationstandards for higher education
The information literate studentThe information literate student
uses information effectively to accomplish uses information effectively to accomplish a specific purposea specific purpose
understands many of the economic, legal, understands many of the economic, legal, and social issues surrounding the use of and social issues surrounding the use of information and accesses and uses information and accesses and uses information ethically and legallyinformation ethically and legally
BIRTH OF AUSTRALIAN BIRTH OF AUSTRALIAN I L STANDARDSI L STANDARDS
Facilitator Mary Jane Petrowski, Associate Facilitator Mary Jane Petrowski, Associate Professor Head, Information Literacy, Professor Head, Information Literacy, Member ACRL Task Force on Information Member ACRL Task Force on Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Literacy Competency Standards for Higher EducationEducation
662 participants were representative from 2 participants were representative from Australian and New Zealand universities, Australian and New Zealand universities, the school sector, TAFE sector, the Council the school sector, TAFE sector, the Council of Australian State Libraries & ALIAof Australian State Libraries & ALIA
BASIS OF THE WORKSHOPBASIS OF THE WORKSHOP Changes in pedagogyChanges in pedagogy
Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational ObjectivesObjectives
Critical thinkingCritical thinking
Australian research in particular the Bruce Australian research in particular the Bruce relational model of Information Literacy relational model of Information Literacy
Information Literacy Competency Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education - Standards for Higher Education - Who? Who? What? How? When?What? How? When?
Thinking Skills
Thinking Skills
Higher level cognitive
skills - more complex and
abstract
Higher level cognitive
skills - more complex and
abstract
Lower leveltasks
Recognizes that knowledge can be organized into disciplines that influence the way
information is accessed
Recognizes that knowledge can be organized into disciplines that influence the way
information is accessed
Explores general information sources to increase familiarity with the topic
Explores general information sources to increase familiarity with the topic
Information Literacy as Critical ThinkingInformation Literacy as Critical Thinking
Purpose of Thinking: Standards 1 & 4
Purpose of Thinking: Standards 1 & 4
Question at Issue:Standards 1 and 2
Question at Issue:Standards 1 and 2
Information:Standards 1 and 2
Information:Standards 1 and 2
Interpretation & Inference:Standards 3
Interpretation & Inference:Standards 3
Concepts:Standards 1, 2
Concepts:Standards 1, 2
Assumptions:Standard 3
Assumptions:Standard 3
Implications & Consequences:Standards 1, 2, 5
Implications & Consequences:Standards 1, 2, 5
Points of View:Standards 1, 3, 4, 5
Points of View:Standards 1, 3, 4, 5
A critical thinker considers
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE US DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE US AND AUSTRALIAN VERSIONSAND AUSTRALIAN VERSIONS
USUS Five standardsFive standards Emphasis on Emphasis on
competenciescompetencies Higher education in Higher education in
the titlethe title
AustralianAustralian Seven standardsSeven standards Omission of the Omission of the
term competency term competency from title -from title -emphasis ways of emphasis ways of using information using information
Higher education Higher education deliberately deliberately omitted from titleomitted from title
DEVELOPMENT CHRONOLOGYDEVELOPMENT CHRONOLOGY
2000 Oct 2000 Oct CAUL approved the revision of CAUL approved the revision of the US standards as the US standards as Information Information Literacy StandardsLiteracy Standards
2003 Jan2003 Jan Workshop to review the first Workshop to review the first editionedition
2003 Nov2003 Nov The second edition should be The second edition should be finalised finalised
Critique of first edition Critique of first edition
The standards should reflect the The standards should reflect the language of quality and quality language of quality and quality audits. This would leave the way audits. This would leave the way open for individual professions, open for individual professions, industries, etc to rework the industries, etc to rework the standards into a "competency standards into a "competency standard" specific to that profession standard" specific to that profession or industry. or industry.
Critique of first editionCritique of first edition
Terminology and concepts used in Terminology and concepts used in the current standards have made it a the current standards have made it a difficult task to sell the idea of difficult task to sell the idea of information literacy to the academic information literacy to the academic community. It is felt that using community. It is felt that using language more relevant to the language more relevant to the academic and professional academic and professional community would facilitate wider community would facilitate wider adoption of the standardsadoption of the standards
Critique of first editionCritique of first edition
The role of the examples is The role of the examples is confusing. ‘Examples’ is not a confusing. ‘Examples’ is not a familiar term associated with familiar term associated with Standards. Standards.
What is their function? What is their function? Are they intended to be suggested Are they intended to be suggested
performance/assessment criteria?performance/assessment criteria? Should they be clearly measurable? Should they be clearly measurable?
Critique of first editionCritique of first edition
more attention should be given to the more attention should be given to the wording of the standards and outcomeswording of the standards and outcomes
examples need to be carefully examined examples need to be carefully examined to ensure that they actually flow from the to ensure that they actually flow from the outcome to which they are attachedoutcome to which they are attached
standards are at present too complex to standards are at present too complex to be user-friendlybe user-friendly
REVIEW OF THE FIRST EDITIONREVIEW OF THE FIRST EDITIONOF IL STANDARDSOF IL STANDARDS
Facilitator Dr Ralph Catts, an Facilitator Dr Ralph Catts, an academic from University of New academic from University of New EnglandEngland
Review process considered:Review process considered:• scope and meaning of each scope and meaning of each
StandardStandard• how it is written how it is written • for whom it is intendedfor whom it is intended
Suggestions for the second Suggestions for the second editionedition
New titleNew title - - The Australian/NZ Information The Australian/NZ Information Literacy Framework: Principles, Standards Literacy Framework: Principles, Standards & Practice.& Practice.
Case studies of how higher education Case studies of how higher education institutions using the Standardsinstitutions using the Standards
Methods of Assessment: curriculum Methods of Assessment: curriculum alignmentalignment
Information literacy and staff developmentInformation literacy and staff development
REFLECTIONSREFLECTIONS
First edition a pilotFirst edition a pilot Review process rushed; greater Review process rushed; greater
consultation requiredconsultation required Endorsement by a great number of Endorsement by a great number of
educational and related associationseducational and related associations Lack of involvement of non Library Lack of involvement of non Library
stakeholders stakeholders No budgetNo budget