The role of teacher librarians (TLs) has for a long time been recognised as a promotor of literacy (Lance, 2023). Meanwhile, the internet was predicted by many to lead to the demise of the library as an academic source (Odlyzko, 1995) or a supplier of paper books (Kinney, 2010) but it seems instead that it has just differentiated the TL’s role. After reading through the modules, I asked Chat GPT if the role of the TL would end up being susceptible to automation. The bot suggested that AI is unlikely to replace TLs as it acknowledged that AI cannot offer the personalized service that librarians provide (Chat GPT, personal communication, 2023).  

Online texts have expanded the TL’s responsibilities in working with different formats as school libraries often house more digital than physical resources (as could be argued of many households) leading to an evolved meaning of the concept of ‘literacy’ in the digital age. This shift has given ‘literacy’ a whole new meaning in the digital era. According to reports, academic librarians are expected to dive deeper into digital services and online resources by 2030 (Merga, 2020. Scholars have been talking a lot about the new roles TLs are taking on, from being advocates to managing all sorts of things like content, knowledge, and even web design (Halder, 2009; cited in Momoh and Lanre, 2019). It’s like the job got more complex, demanding extra skills to keep up.   

Effective search strategies now extend beyond the Google search bar to include advanced techniques, while resource-based learning encourages students to gather and compare information critically. Anderson’s analysis (2006) emphasizes the importance of these key concepts in upskilling learners for success in a knowledge-driven society, highlighting the need not only for knowledge acquisition but also an understanding of how knowledge is socially organized. I was struck by Floridi’s (2007) point that now the idea of common knowledge has arguably grown in size because so much information is available. I would argue that this evolution of information literacy concepts, paralleling advancements in information technologies, will continue to be affected by chat GPT, which is depending on online content for its output (Saravanan, 2023).  

The obvious link between chat GPT and plagiarism has been the most recent point of the discussion (Perkins, 2023; Halaweh, 2023; Cotton, Cotton and Shipway, 2023; Azouley, Hirst and Reches, 2023).  However, I would argue that the advancement of study aid tools could very quickly introduce another new role for the TL as not only do TLs need to address the use of AI chatbots in assessments and research, moving away from mere plagiarism detection toward fostering constructive relationships with technology but also to foster an appreciation for creativity and originality.   

My current work on a university preparatory course has highlighted for me students’ dependence on technology. The students initially were shocked to be asked to write their assessments without their suite of translation tools, chat GPT, predictive text and other extensions and plug-ins. The general consensus was that this type of writing was common practice at education institutes in Asia (my students are Chinese international students.) Therefore, TLs also need to promote the creation of honest, original and creative texts.  

Word count: 530  

References  

Andersen, J. (2006). The public sphere and discursive activities: information literacy as sociopolitical skills. Journal of Documentation, 62(2), 213–228. https://doi.org/10.1108/00220410610653307  

Azoulay, R., Hirst, T. and Reches, S. (2023). Let’s Do It Ourselves: Ensuring Academic Integrity in the Age of ChatGPT and Beyond. [online] www.techrxiv.org. doi:https://doi.org/10.36227/techrxiv.24194874.v1.  

Chat GPT, personal communication, 2023.  

Cotton, D.R.E., Cotton, P.A. and Shipway, J.R. (2023). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, pp.1–12. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148.  

Floridi, L. (2007). A look into the future impact of ICT on our lives. The Information Society, 23(1), 59-64. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240601059094  

Halaweh, M. (2023). ChatGPT in education: Strategies for responsible implementation. Aau.ac.ae. [online] doi:https://doi.org/1309517X.  

Lance, K. C. (2023, March 15). Why school librarians matter: What years of research tell us – kappanonline.org. kappanonline.org. https://kappanonline.org/lance-kachel-school-librarians-matter-years-research/  

Kinney, B. (2010). The internet, public libraries, and the digital divide. Public Library Quarterly, 29(2), 104–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/01616841003779718  

Merga, M. K. (2020). What is the literacy supportive role of the school librarian in the United Kingdom? Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 53(4), 601–614. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000620964569  

Momoh, E. O., & Lanre, F. A. (2019). The evolving roles of libraries and librarians in the 21st century. Library Philosophy and Practice. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/2867/?utm_source=digitalcommons.unl.edu%2Flibphilprac%2F2867&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages  

Perkins, M. (2023). Academic integrity considerations of AI Large Language Models in the post-pandemic era: ChatGPT and beyond. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 20(2). doi:https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.02.07.  

Odlyzko, A. (1995). Tragic loss or good riddance? The impending demise of traditional scholarly journals. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 42(1), 71–122. https://doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.1995.1004  

Saravanan, A. S. (2023). The Limitations of Chat GPT. Medium.  https://medium.com/@asarav/the-limitations-of-chat-gpt-8b73f5859bb4