If you had asked me last year what Information Literacy (IL) was, I would have responded with something pithy, like “The ability to find and understand information?” (Yes, the question mark is intentional.) Now I see the complexity that comes with this term and the need for me to develop a working understanding of it that I can bring to my role as a Teacher Librarian (TL).
On consideration, the behaviourist approach to IL looks like it would fit easily into the curriculum of a school by providing a set of measurable skills that students can develop. The examples provided in the Australian and New Zealand Information Literacy Framework (Bundy, 2004) could certainly be copied into a curriculum map, learning sequence or rubric with little fuss while being easily accessible to the discipline teacher. Using this approach, the TL could support the development of a specific skill in the classroom as required.
But there is concern that this will not support the deep levels of thinking that students need to strive towards in order to be ready for today’s global workforce (Kutner, L. & Armstrong, A. 2012) The sociocultural approach looks to address this by viewing the student as experiencer rather than sponge (Ackermann, E. 2001). Both Lloyd (2007) and Farrell and Badke (2015) present a case for networks or communities of people being necessary for optimal learning.
As well as this, there is research to suggest that we make meaning in different ways depending on context; this is looked at in detail in the six frames for information literacy (Bruce, Edwards, and Lupton, 2006). They (Bruce et al., 2006) ask librarians to consider the different perspectives that each teacher may have of teaching and learning and how this may impact the ways that IL is covered in the classroom.
The big takeaway for me is the need to articulate what IL is, audit it against what is currently done in domains and then offer to work in collaboration with teachers to ensure that our students have the opportunity to become lifelong learners.
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.
(The Alexandria Proclamation on Information Literacy and Lifelong Learning, UNESCO, 2005)
References:
Ackerman, E. (2001). Piaget’s Constructivism, Papert’s Constructionism: What’s the difference? Retrieved from https://learning.media.mit.edu/content/publications/EA.Piaget%20_%20Papert.pdf
Bundy, A. (Ed.) (2004). Australian and New Zealand information literacy framework: Principles, standards and practice. 2nd ed. Australian and New Zealand Institute for Information Literacy. Retrieved from https://www.utas.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/79068/anz-info-lit-policy.pdf
Farrell, R. & Badke, W. (2015). Situating information literacy in the disciplines: A practical and systematic approach for academic librarians. Reference Services Review, 43(2), 319-340. Retrieved from https://www-emerald-com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/insight/content/doi/10.1108/RSR-11-2014-0052/full/html#loginreload
Kutner, L. & Armstrong, A. (2012). Rethinking information literacy in a globalised world. Communications in Information Literacy, 6(1), 24-33. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/docview/1312440468?accountid=10344
Lloyd, A. (2007). Recasting information literacy as sociocultural practice: Implications for library and information science researchers. Information Research, 12(4). Retrieved from http://informationr.net/ir/12-4/colis/colis34.html
United Nations Education Scientific and Cultural Organisation. (2005). High level colloquium on information literacy and lifelong learning report of a meeting. Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000144820