Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [University of New Hampshire]On: 16 June 2014, At: 13:31Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK
Science & Technology LibrariesPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wstl20
Using the ACRL InformationLiteracy Competency Standardsfor Science and Engineering/Technology to Develop aModular Critical-Thinking-Based Information LiteracyTutorialKathrine Aydelott PhD aa Shapiro Library , Southern New HampshireUniversity , 2500 North River Road, Manchester, NH,03106-1045, USAPublished online: 23 Sep 2008.
To cite this article: Kathrine Aydelott PhD (2007) Using the ACRL Information LiteracyCompetency Standards for Science and Engineering/Technology to Develop a ModularCritical-Thinking-Based Information Literacy Tutorial, Science & Technology Libraries,27:4, 19-42, DOI: 10.1300/J122v27n04_03
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J122v27n04_03
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with
primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ew H
amps
hire
] at
13:
31 1
6 Ju
ne 2
014
Using the ACRL InformationLiteracy Competency Standards
for Science and Engineering/Technologyto Develop a Modular
Critical-Thinking-Based InformationLiteracy Tutorial
Kathrine Aydelott
ABSTRACT. This paper presents an overview of the process Yale’sKline Science Library used to build an interactive Web-based informa-tion literacy tutorial based on the ACRL Information Literacy Compe-tency Standards for Science and Engineering/Technology. Self-pacedcritical-thinking-based content and embedded quizzes allow the Websiteto be used as both a course-integrated assignment and a stand-alone teach-ing and learning tool. doi:10.1300/J122v27n04_03 [Article copies availablefor a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service: 1-800-HAWORTH.E-mail address: <[email protected]> Website: <http://www.HaworthPress.com> © 2007 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.]
KEYWORDS. Information literacy, information competencies, libraryinstruction, critical thinking
Kathrine Aydelott, PhD, is Reference Coordinator/Instruction Librarian, ShapiroLibrary, Southern New Hampshire University, 2500 North River Road, Manchester,NH 03106-1045 (E-mail: [email protected]).
Science & Technology Libraries, Vol. 27(4) 2007Available online at http://stl.haworthpress.com
© 2007 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.doi:10.1300/J122v27n04_03 19
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ew H
amps
hire
] at
13:
31 1
6 Ju
ne 2
014
INTRODUCTION
Librarians typically have at best “one shot” per class per semester toprovide students with the skills necessary to complete their courseassignments. As a result, bibliographic instruction, restricted by the lim-itations of time, remains largely focused on HOW to use a particulartool rather than WHY to use it: How to search the online library catalogor how to find a journal article in a database, rather than why variousinformation resources would be valuable to a student in the course ofhis research. Such approaches presume that students–undergraduatesand graduate students alike–know what information they need.
Library Websites often mirror these tool-based research strategies, asdo many online information literacy tutorials, where the focus remainson the “information,” rather than on the “literacy” behind finding andusing it. The inclusion of critical-thinking components can significantlyenrich information literacy instruction, and often form the pedagogi-cal foundation of required courses in library and research skills, introduc-tory methodologies courses, and course-integrated assignments designedcollaboratively between faculty and librarians. However, in the absenceof such face-to-face instruction, Web-based information literacy tutori-als can be made substantial enough so that both the HOW and the WHYcan be emphasized: How are primary sources used in my discipline?Why should I search an article-database rather than the library catalog?How do I incorporate such information into my research?
AN IDEA FOR A MODULARDISCIPLINE-NEUTRAL INFORMATION
LITERACY TUTORIAL
In summer 2006, the recommendation by the American PhysicalSociety to require physics departments to include information literacyin their graduate programs1 prompted Yale’s Kline Science Libraryto build an online information literacy tutorial. Although the libraryhad been successful in providing research skills education to incom-ing graduate students in the sciences, the librarians recognized thatthe 75-minute “one shot” workshops were inadequate to sufficientlyintroduce information literacy skills. Some online, user-centric, critical-thinking-based guides for finding information had already been created,but these were not based on any stated information literacy competency
20 SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY LIBRARIES
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ew H
amps
hire
] at
13:
31 1
6 Ju
ne 2
014
standards. Thinking more broadly, we recognized that few opportuni-ties existed to provide critical-thinking-based information literacy edu-cation to campus undergraduates, and bibliographic instruction to thispopulation also remained largely tool-based in nature.
Our goal at Kline, therefore, was to build a Web-based, self-paced,discipline-neutral, modular tutorial that could serve as a foundationfor information literacy instruction to both undergraduate and graduatestudents of any discipline. Building the majority of the tutorial for un-dergraduate users would make the information valuable to a muchlarger population, both at Yale and elsewhere; building it for the Webwould allow for links to be added in ClassesV2, Yale’s Sakai-based open-source course management system, as well as to other department andlibrary Websites, making it widely and easily accessible; making thetutorial self-paced would allow for its inclusion as an assignment in course-integrated instruction but also allow it to be used as a stand-alone toolfor students campus-wide; building the tutorial to be discipline-neutralwould emphasize the universal applicability of information literacy; andthe tutorial’s modular nature would allow for the addition of discipline-specific information for the sciences, as well as for other disciplinesas other libraries and academic departments desired to participate. Amodular approach would further allow for the inclusion of advancedlearning goals that would be appropriate for graduate-level instruction,which would also emphasize the life-long-learning nature of informa-tion literacy.
Another goal was to include embedded quizzes that could test com-prehension at various points throughout the tutorial. The quiz ques-tions would be based on a critical-thinking approach that would ask thestudents to consider information in context rather than just test theability to select and use the appropriate tool. The quizzes would allowfor immediate student feedback, and discipline-specific quizzes couldtest comprehension of unique features of disciplinary, cross-disciplin-ary, or interdisciplinary research. Further, the quizzes would be iterativein nature, such that a failing grade would necessitate a return to the tuto-rial and the successful completion of a different quiz in order to passthe module. In this way the intention would be to learn, not just to pass.The availability of such quizzes in course-integrated instruction wouldallow instructors to assign the tutorial without being concerned aboutadditional grading, and independent users would still be able to gain thepedagogical advantage of quiz-based interaction.
Although the science library was the main impetus behind the proj-ect, collaborating with other librarians and faculty members to create,
Kathrine Aydelott 21
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ew H
amps
hire
] at
13:
31 1
6 Ju
ne 2
014
build, and maintain the content of the tutorial over time was another sig-nificant goal.
The danger, of course, of such an ambitious plan was building a Web-site so complex that the information itself became unwieldy. How bestto corral our best intentions?
MANAGING INFORMATION LITERACYUSING THE ACRL INFORMATION LITERACYCOMPETENCY STANDARDS FOR SCIENCE
AND ENGINEERING/TECHNOLOGY
ACRL’s Information Literacy Competency Standards provide a meansto negotiate the universe of information by presenting broad standardsand performance outcomes by which to manage our desire to presentall we know to our audiences. The Information Literacy CompetencyStandards for Higher Education (2000; hereafter abbreviated HE) iden-tifies five standards for information literacy:
1. Determine the extent of information needed.2. Access the needed information effectively and efficiently.3. Evaluate information and its sources critically.4. Use information effectively to accomplish a specific purpose.5. Understand the legal, economic, and social issues surrounding the
use of information, and access and use information ethically andlegally.2
Significantly, the HE report recognizes that various constituenciesare responsible for students acquiring these information literacy skills:The faculty, who are responsible for course content, assignment cre-ation, and grounding in academic disciplines; The librarians, who areresponsible for course support and library skills instruction; The admin-istrators, who encourage collaborations between faculty and librariansto teach comprehensive information literacy skills; and The studentsthemselves who must learn the skills and put them into practice to com-plete course assignments and manage life-long information needs. Fac-ulty and librarians typically share responsibility for HE Standards Oneto Three and Five, whereas the students’ responsibility falls signifi-cantly on Standard Four, where “specific purpose” typically meansincorporating information appropriately into a course assignment orexperiment. The 22 performance indicators that show proficiency in the
22 SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY LIBRARIES
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ew H
amps
hire
] at
13:
31 1
6 Ju
ne 2
014
HE Standards can similarly be identified as the primary responsibilityof the faculty, the librarians, or the students to initiate.
Since the publication of HE in 2000, individual disciplines have ap-proved variants of the Standards for their own populations that identifydiscipline-specific information, tools, and strategies in the performanceoutcomes. For example, the Information Literacy Competency Standardsfor Science and Engineering/Technology (June 2006; hereafter abbrevi-ated Sci-Tech) vary notably from those for Higher Education:
1. The information literate student determines the nature and extentof the information needed.
2. The information literate student acquires needed information ef-fectively and efficiently.
3. The information literate student critically evaluates the procuredinformation and its sources, and as a result, decides whether ornot to modify the initial query and/or seek additional sources andwhether to develop a new research process.
4. The information literate student understands the economic, ethi-cal, legal, and social issues surrounding the use of informationand its technologies and either as an individual or as a member ofa group, uses information effectively, ethically and legally to ac-complish a specific purpose.
5. The information literate student understands that information lit-eracy is an ongoing process and an important component to life-long learning and recognizes the need to keep current regardingnew developments in his or her field.3
Whereas accomplishing HE’s Standard Four, to use information toaccomplish a specific purpose, was largely the student’s responsibility,Sci-Tech’s Standard Four, which merges HE’s Standards Four to Five,adds librarian responsibility (often shared with faculty) to teach stu-dents how to use information ethically and legally to accomplish a spe-cific purpose. Similarly Sci-Tech’s Standard Five to keep current inthe field emphasizes the librarian role (often shared with faculty) tounderstand and teach what can be called knowledge management skills,such as the use of bibliographic management software, RSS feeds, andarticle-database auto-alerts. Reference to these skills is noticeably ab-sent in the HE Standards.
These changes between the HE and Sci-Tech Standards, publishedsix years apart, seem more to reflect a growing recognition of the im-portance of knowledge management techniques and legal and ethical
Kathrine Aydelott 23
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ew H
amps
hire
] at
13:
31 1
6 Ju
ne 2
014
issues associated with information than a belief that the science and tech-nology fields have a disciplinary monopoly on such issues. The Sci-Tech Standards are more current than HE, and this currency results in alist that is much easier for librarians to work with because librarian re-sponsibility for teaching the performance outcomes is more consistentthroughout the list.
Aside from these changes, and other relatively slight variations inwording, the Standards remain largely the same from HE to Sci-Tech.Similarly, by further comparing individual HE and Sci-Tech perfor-mance outcomes within the Standards, few incorporate such science-specific language as to make them unusable in a broader context. Forexample, performance outcomes may qualify general “information” toreflect “scientific, technical, and related information” or identify pat-ents as a science-specific information resource. Most of the outcomes,however, remain the same as those in discipline-neutral HE in spite ofSci-Tech’s disciplinary perspective, or can easily be made neutral withminor changes.
Therefore, few are likely to argue that the Sci-Tech Standards areapplicable only to students in the science and technology fields. Human-ities students also must manage citations, keep current in their scholarlyand professional lives, and otherwise master the same informationliteracy skills as the science and technology disciplines. The Sci-TechStandards are therefore an excellent basis for an information literacy tu-torial created for a variety of disciplines, and for these reasons–and notjust because we are the science library–we chose to build our informa-tion literacy tutorial around the Sci-Tech Standards.
DEFINING RESPONSIBILITIESAND IDENTIFYING CONTENT
In using the Sci-Tech Standards to plan our information literacy tuto-rial, our first step was to identify the performance outcomes for whichthe librarian was typically responsible. We didn’t want to overstep ourboundaries and assume responsibility for teaching a skill that tradition-ally belonged to faculty, nor would we address skills normally per-formed by students or students in conjunction with faculty. Examples ofoutcomes that we decided were outside of our purview as librarians in-cluded 1.4.c: “Formulates a realistic overall plan and timeline to acquirethe needed information” and 3.5.b: “Works effectively in small groupsor teams”; whereas those we recognized as being initiated by librari-
24 SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY LIBRARIES
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ew H
amps
hire
] at
13:
31 1
6 Ju
ne 2
014
ans included 2.1.b: “Investigates the scope, content, and organization ofinformation retrieval systems” and 3.2.a: “Distinguishes between primary,secondary, and tertiary sources and recognizes how location of the in-formation source in the cycle of scientific information relates to thecredibility of the information.” For the latter, removing “scientific”from the wording made the outcome discipline-neutral for our purposes.See the Appendix to this article for the list of Sci-Tech performance out-comes we focused on in our tutorial.
Having highlighted those performance outcomes typically associatedwith a librarian’s role, we summarized these and outlined a series ofLessons for each of the Sci-Tech Standards, the titles of which wouldserve as our main modules.
BUILDING THE TUTORIAL:FROM THEORY TO PRACTICE
The opening page of our tutorial Website, http://www.library.yale.edu/science/instruction/IL_Intro.html, the layout of which was inspiredby the former WebPALS information literacy tutorial from the Min-nesota State Colleges and Universities,4 provides a general introductionand sets out the structure of our tutorial. A pre-test is available to assessinitial understanding of information literacy concepts. This is followedby an outline of our Lesson modules, each of which is named for one ofthe five Sci-Tech Standards:
• Standard One: Defining Information Needs• Standard Two: Acquiring Information Efficiently and Effectively• Standard Three: Critically Evaluating Information and Its Sources• Standard Four: Using Information Ethically• Standard Five: Keeping Current Regarding New Information in
the Field
Links to the discipline-specific lessons and to the general and sub-ject-specific quizzes are also provided on the home page, and headingsalso point to lists of “Tools and Techniques” and “Instructional LibrarianResources,” which help to establish the tutorial as not only a stand-alone teaching tool but also as a self-help center for accessing docu-mentation resources. A general introduction provides an overview ofthe tutorial’s content and mission.
Kathrine Aydelott 25
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ew H
amps
hire
] at
13:
31 1
6 Ju
ne 2
014
Below is the outline of our Standard One lesson module, built aroundthe first Sci-Tech Standard to define information needs:
Standard One: Defining Information Needs
Lesson 1: What is Information and How Is It Organized?Lesson 2: Defining Information NeedsLesson 3: Recognizing Primary, Secondary and Tertiary SourcesLesson 4: Recognizing Popular, Scholarly, Peer-Reviewed, and
Trade JournalsLesson 5: Recognizing the Value of Non-Peer-Reviewed and
Other Information SourcesLesson 6: Logistics: Access, Barriers, Time versus Effort, and
Data ManagementLesson 7: Discipline-Specific Resources (science, history, English)General Standard One QuizDiscipline-specific Quizzes
By including topics such as “What is Information and How is it Orga-nized” in Standard One, we ground our tutorial in information literacyat its base level rather than jumping to the tool-specific Lessons wheremany information literacy tutorials begin (and sometimes end). The firstStandard is therefore much more introductory and theoretical in nature,and does more to introduce students of all levels to the building blocksof information, the media involved, and the challenges of acquiring,managing, and working with information.
The content in the main Lessons is presented in discipline-neutrallanguage, and a separate Lesson module of linked Webpages and quiz-zes presents discipline-specific content to a target audience of sciencestudents. In this way, we can present general science or Physics-specificinformation, such as science-specific classification schemes and infor-mation on pre-print servers, to a population for whom the content is mostrelevant; users from other disciplines can remain focused on the contentwritten from a general perspective. By presenting discipline-specific in-formation in separate modules, we also allow for the inclusion of materialdeveloped in consultation and collaboration with other disciplines, such asEnglish and History, for which Yale already requires research skills ed-ucation either as part of first-year or upper-level experiences.
Quizzes for both general Standard One information and science-specific information have been created to test comprehension of bothsets of ideas. Many library pre- and post-tests for bibliographic instruc-
26 SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY LIBRARIES
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ew H
amps
hire
] at
13:
31 1
6 Ju
ne 2
014
tion ask leading or jargon-filled questions geared toward identifyingteaching points, such as asking students whether they have ever used an“OPAC.” It was important for us to develop quiz questions that identi-fied whether the student learned the material presented not just whetherthe student was able to bridge library language. The quizzes presentcritical-thinking questions or research scenarios that must be solved, forexample (correct answer in bold):
Which of the following could be considered primary source material:
1. Newspaper report of Pluto being demoted to a dwarf planet2. PBS show about astronomy news3. A play about astronomers and their discoveries4. Data evaluation results reported in a professional journal5. All of the above6. None of the above
Such formulations allow students to discover as they learn, and assess-ment testing of the quizzes will be able to identify the quality of thequestions, which we can continue to improve to ensure that the pedagogyis effective. Further, quizzes that test both a general and a discipline-specific understanding address multiple intelligences and different learn-ing styles. Whether someone learns more effectively by using eithergeneral terminology or discipline-specific examples, they have two av-enues by which to learn and succeed.
In both the HE and the Sci-Tech Standards, Standard Two involvesaccessing information efficiently and effectively. Performance outcomesin this Standard include formulating effective search strategies, identi-fying keywords and synonyms, using various classification schemes,and following citations and references to identify additional resources.Very often, this Standard presents the HOW we as librarians are so usedto teaching: How to search the library catalog, how to search an article-database. This is the librarian’s home turf, the place we’re most com-fortable when it comes to working with the Standards. Here, again, wehad to be cautious not to let our zeal to present information overwhelmour potential students by making our tutorial too complex.
Our Standard Two module is divided into the following Lessons:
Standard Two: Access Information Efficiently and Effectively
Lesson 1: Introduction to Searching for InformationLesson 2: Developing Search Strategies
Kathrine Aydelott 27
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ew H
amps
hire
] at
13:
31 1
6 Ju
ne 2
014
Lesson 3: Types of Information ToolsLesson 4: Retrieving InformationLesson 5: Analyzing Information RetrievedLesson 6: Knowledge Management: Store, Retrieve, and Format
InformationLesson 7: Discipline-Specific Resources (science, history, English)General Standard Two QuizDiscipline-specific Quizzes
Lesson 1 on “Introduction to Searching for Information” incorporatedsome of the Kline Library’s already existing research help guides thatdirected the student to basic reference tools, books, journal articles, andWWW information. Lesson 2 on “Developing Search Strategies” is fur-ther divided into multiple short pages that present among other strate-gies the basics of using Boolean and wildcard characters, controlledvocabulary, keyword searching on the Web, search limits, and citationtracking. Lesson 3 on “Types of Information Tools” presents informa-tion on reading citations and library records, database interfaces andsearch options, and Web-based information tools, such as directoriesand search engines.
Significantly, this more tool-based Standard, and Lessons 2 and 3 inparticular, allowed us to incorporate Camtasia screen-capture video tu-torials, which combine video, audio, and text-bubble “call-outs,” thatallow us to demonstrate in the next best way to working with a studentin person how a tool is used. We have already made Camtasia tutorialsfor using tools such as our online library catalog and commonly useddatabases, as well as for services ranging from interlibrary loan and da-tabase auto-alerts, and others can be made as appropriate. We can thenembed these and other new technologies as links into our informationliteracy tutorial as they develop. Using Camtasia also gave us anothermeans to address multiple intelligences and learning styles.
Other Lessons within this Standard follow the Sci-Tech Standard Twoperformance outcomes to teach strategies for retrieving informationdiscovered, including the use of Yale Links, Yale’s SFX link- resolver;analyzing information, including a discussion of assessing the quantity,quality, accuracy, currency, and relevance of information retrieved;and, in Lesson 6, an introduction to knowledge management, includingtips on how to extract and organize the information retrieved using toolssuch as RefWorks, which has another Camtasia video tutorial associ-ated with it.
28 SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY LIBRARIES
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ew H
amps
hire
] at
13:
31 1
6 Ju
ne 2
014
General tools introduced in this Standard include the Yale library cat-alog as well as an overview of how to search general databases such asAcademic Search Premier. Tools introduced in the discipline-specificscience module include Chemical Abstracts, Sci-Finder Scholar, andWeb of Science.
Sci-Tech’s Standard Three, “Evaluate Information Critically,” has fewperformance outcomes we identified as being primarily driven by the li-brarian. One that does, “Distinguishes between primary, secondary, andtertiary sources, and recognizes how location of the information sourcein the cycle of [scientific] information relates to the credibility of the in-formation,” is so similar to Standard One’s “Recognizes that primary,secondary, and tertiary sources vary in importance and use with eachdiscipline,” that we felt our Standard One Lesson 3: “Recognizing Pri-mary, Secondary, and Tertiary Resources” had adequately addressedthe information. This short module therefore addresses two performanceoutcomes that help students evaluate information for “reliability, valid-ity, accuracy, authority, timeliness, and point of view or bias,” as well asfor “prejudice, deception, or manipulation in the information or its use.”Our lesson centers around a discussion of information presented in twohoax Websites in order to demonstrate good critical-thinking-based eval-uation practices in finding information about authorship, authority, ac-curacy, and bias in online sources, strategies which can then be adaptedwhen using non-Web resources.
Standard Four will include topics on intellectual property, copyright,and fair use; plagiarism, censorship and free speech; issues involvingfee-based versus free information; privacy, security, and passwords;and abiding by institutional policies, including those governing humanand animal use. While some of this information can be presented solelyfrom a librarian’s perspective, other aspects of these lessons will necessi-tate collaboration with other authorities, such as faculty, administrators,university counselors, and others to ensure the information’s accuracyand currency.
Standard Five lessons concern with how to keep current in a field,present information on scholarly publishing and distribution methods,how to manage information and citations over time, preservation con-cerns, and other strategies, including auto-alerts, RSS feeds, blogs, andaffiliated tools and services. Here again, collaborating with faculty to pre-sent a real-world view of the research process is essential.
Shaped with significant collaboration between librarians, faculty,and administrators, and available in one easily accessible Web-basedlocation, this self-paced information literacy tutorial will become not only
Kathrine Aydelott 29
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ew H
amps
hire
] at
13:
31 1
6 Ju
ne 2
014
a significant tool for teaching and learning, but an important site for ac-cessing a variety of important information relevant to audiences acrossthe university that currently resides on Websites scattered across Yale’svirtual Web space.
COMPLEXITIES OF IMPLEMENTATIONAND FUTURE PLANS
The tutorial Website remains complex, but navigation is carefullymanaged to prevent getting lost while remaining flexible enough to allowfor jumps from one Lesson or module to the next. As information in thevarious Lesson modules refers back to information we discussed moresuperficially or more thoroughly earlier in the tutorial, Lessons are cross-referenced, and links to outside sources of information are also providedin order to create as robust an information tool as is practical. We arecontinually experimenting with ways to make our information pertinentand accessible.
Embedding the quizzes has also required experimentation. Our de-sire that these require little faculty handling led us to explore a varietyof possible test and survey tools ranging from SurveyMonkey.com, tothe Tests and Quizzes feature of ClassesV2 server, to the similar butcurrently more robust feature in the Blackboard course managementsystem, which we are currently using through our affiliation with theYale Medical School Library until ClassesV2 can support more ques-tion options.
Future plans call for the assessment of this tutorial, a process thatshould address the entire construct and not just those elements that focuson student skills. While we certainly want to assess the usability of theWebsite and the effectiveness of the quiz questions, we also want to as-sess this tool as both a stand-alone tutorial and a course-integratedassignment. We further want to evaluate whether using the Standards toorganize the information in the Lessons is an effective means to presentinformation literacy content, and we want to evaluate the content itselffrom the students’ the faculty’s and the librarian’s perspective. Finally,we want to assess whether this tool is effective as a one-stop portal forinformation literacy resources. We strongly anticipate faculty feedbackas we will market the tutorial for inclusion in science courses either as acourse-integrated assignment or as a recommendation for independentstudent use.
30 SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY LIBRARIES
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ew H
amps
hire
] at
13:
31 1
6 Ju
ne 2
014
CONCLUSION
On campus, in the field of librarianship, and in the culture at large,debate continues over the use of the term “information literacy.” Manyfind the term belittling, just as some take the Dummies series of booksas personal insults. Others find the term abstract, corporate, or vaguelyreminiscent of Orwellian doublespeak. Some find the phrase distasteful,perhaps, as an unwelcome reminder that “literacy” in whatever mediumis not something that is achieved once but achieved and then continuallyadvanced. However, terms that are sometimes more acceptable, such as“Research Skills,” do little to evoke the immense universe of information,the breadth of sources, range of formats, scope of applicability, or life-long journey of avoiding traps and pitfalls, adapting to new methods,and incorporating new routines that “information literacy” can suggest.
At the Kline Science Library, we have entered the fray by calling ourproject an “information literacy tutorial” rather than a “research skillstutorial” or an “information management tool.” As librarians, we use theterm “information literacy” boldly to assert our affiliation with standardsset by our profession and our alignment with the literature of the field.But we also recognize the false implication that learning stops once “lit-eracy” is achieved. We don’t want to stop at literacy; we want to aim fordevelopment of skills over time. No one tutorial can capture the essenceof what is required so as to use information in wise and literate ways, buta modular tutorial with room for development, improvement, and growthcan form a baseline for focusing attention on the range of skills requiredby today’s users of information, no matter their age. We don’t want tostop at literacy; we aim for fluency, which can only be achieved withpractice, savvy, and growth over time.
Received: December 15, 2006Accepted: December 19, 2006
NOTES
1. “Report of the Joint AAPT-APS Task Force: Graduate Education in Physics.”American Association of Physics Teachers. 2005, Rev. June 2006. http://www.aapt.org/Resources/upload/2006%20Grad_Ed_Report_Revised_Final.pdf (Accessed 09 Dec,2006).
2. “Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education.” AmericanLibrary Association. 2006. http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlstandards/informationliteracycompetency.htm (Accessed 09 Dec, 2006).
Kathrine Aydelott 31
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ew H
amps
hire
] at
13:
31 1
6 Ju
ne 2
014
3. “Information Literacy Standards for Science and Technology.” American Li-brary Association. 2006. http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlstandards/infolitscitech.htm(Accessed 09 Dec, 2006).
4. The WebPALS Information Literacy Tutorial from the Minnesota StateColleges and Universities had been found at: http://www.pals.msus.edu/tutorial/tablesversion/home.htm. It has not been accessible since fall 2006, and is now avail-able only from the Way Back Machine Internet Archive: http://www.archive.org/index.php.
doi:10.1300/J122v27n04_03
32 SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY LIBRARIES
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ew H
amps
hire
] at
13:
31 1
6 Ju
ne 2
014
APPENDIX
The following is the list of ACRL Information Literacy Competency Standardsfor Science and Engineering/Technology. The Kline Science Library identifiedthe performance outcomes in bold as being the responsibility of librarians toteach (sometimes in collaboration with faculty). It should be noted that this listis subjective, and others might find more or fewer performance outcomes to fallwithin the librarian’s purview in their own assessment of the list.
Words in brackets are those we identified as science-specific and ignored inorder to make our information literacy tutorial discipline-neutral.
Standard One
The information literate student determines the nature and extent of the in-formation needed.
Performance Indicators
The information literate student:
1. Defines and articulates the need for information. Outcomes include thatthe student:
a. Identifies and/or paraphrases a research topic, or other information needsuch as that resulting from an assigned lab exercise or project.
b. Consults with instructor/advisor for appropriateness of topic, researchproject, or laboratory exercise question.
c. Develops a hypothesis or thesis statement and formulates questionsbased on the information need.
d. Explores general information sources to increase familiaritywith current knowledge of the topic.
e. Defines or modifies the information need to achieve a manageablefocus.
f. Identifies key concepts and terms that describe the informationneed.
2. Identifies a variety of types and formats of potential sources for infor-mation. Outcomes include that the student:
a. Identifies the purpose and audience of potential resources (e.g.,popular vs. scholarly, current vs. historical, external vs. internal,primary vs. secondary vs. tertiary).
b. Considers experts or other researchers as potential informationresources.
Kathrine Aydelott 33
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ew H
amps
hire
] at
13:
31 1
6 Ju
ne 2
014
APPENDIX (continued)
c. Identifies the value and differences of potential resources in avariety of formats (e.g., multimedia, database, Website, data set,patent, Geographic Information Systems, 3-D technology, openfile report, audio/visual, book, graph, map).
d. Realizes that information may need to be constructed with rawdata from primary sources or by experimentation.
e. Recognizes that potentially useful information or data in a vari-ety of formats may be proprietary, have limited access, or may befreely available online.
f. Recognizes that potentially useful information may require spe-cific data management expertise and that an understanding ofthe structure of organizations involved in producing the informa-tion aids in the identification of that information.
3. Has a working knowledge of the literature of the field and how it is pro-duced. Outcomes include that the student:
a. Knows how [scientific, technical, and related] information is for-mally and informally produced, organized, and disseminated.
b. Recognizes that primary, secondary, and tertiary sources vary inimportance and use with each discipline.
c. Is aware of the professional associations of the field and their literature.d. Is knowledgeable of sources that are specific to the field, e.g., man-
uals, handbooks, patents, standards, material/equipment specificat-ions, current rules and regulations, reference material routinelyused in industry, manuals of industrial processes and practices,and product literature.
e. Recognizes that knowledge can be organized into disciplines andcombinations of disciplines (multidisciplinary) that influence the wayinformation is accessed and considers the possibility that the literatureof other disciplines may be relevant to the information need.
f. Recognizes the value of archival information, recognizes how its useand importance may vary with each discipline, and recognizes theimportance of preservation of information.
4. Considers the costs and benefits of acquiring the needed information.Outcomes include that the student:
a. Determines the availability of needed information and makesdecisions on broadening the information seeking process beyond
34 SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY LIBRARIES
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ew H
amps
hire
] at
13:
31 1
6 Ju
ne 2
014
locally held resources. Some examples would be consulting with col-leagues, independent information brokers, experts, and consultantsin the field in addition to using interlibrary loan, nearby libraries,and information centers.
b. Recognizes that there may be a tradeoff between the value of theinformation and the time and cost to obtain it.
c. Formulates a realistic overall plan and timeline to acquire the neededinformation.
d. Recognizes the importance of a variety of information research areasthat can be used to gain competitive advantage, track new products,improve processes, and monitor competitors and their marketing strat-egies. Some examples would be consulting with experts and consul-tants in a field, research into licensing opportunities, and patent andintellectual property research.
e. Recognizes that information needed may be in a foreign languageand that translation may be necessary.
Standard Two
The information literate student acquires needed information effectivelyand efficiently.
Performance Indicators
The information literate student:
1. Selects the most appropriate investigative methods or information retrievalsystems for accessing the needed information. Outcomes include that thestudent:
a. Identifies appropriate investigative methods (e.g., literature search,laboratory experiment, simulation, fieldwork).
b. Investigates the scope, content, and organization of informationretrieval systems.
c. Selects efficient and effective approaches for accessing the infor-mation needed from the investigative method or information re-trieval system.
2. Constructs and implements effectively designed search strategies. Out-comes include that the student:
a. Develops a research plan appropriate to the investigative method.
Kathrine Aydelott 35
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ew H
amps
hire
] at
13:
31 1
6 Ju
ne 2
014
APPENDIX (continued)
b. Identifies keywords, synonyms and related terms for the infor-mation needed and selects an appropriate controlled vocabularyspecific to the discipline or information retrieval system.
c. Uses other methods of search term input such as structure search-ing and image searching, specific to the discipline or informationretrieval system.
d. Constructs a search strategy using appropriate commands for theinformation retrieval system selected (e.g., Boolean operators,truncation, and proximity for search engines; internal organiz-ers such as indexes for books).
e. Implements the search strategy in various information retrievalsystems using different user interfaces and search engines, withdifferent command languages, protocols, and search parame-ters, while recognizing similar search features across the systems(such as: e-mail alerts and save search options, search fields, andcontrolled vocabulary).
f. Follows citations and cited references to identify additional, perti-nent articles.
3. Retrieves information using a variety of methods. Outcomes include thatthe student:
a. Uses various relevant search systems to retrieve information in a vari-ety of formats.
b. Uses various classification schemes and other systems (e.g., callnumber systems or indexes) to locate information resources withinthe library or to identify specific sites for physical exploration.
c. Uses specialized online or in person services as needed to retrieveinformation and whenever unable to identify or locate appropri-ate materials (e.g., interlibrary loan/document delivery, librari-ans, library staff, professional associations, institutional researchoffices, community resources, subject experts, and practitioners).
d. Uses surveys, letters, interviews, experiments, and other forms of in-quiry to retrieve information or data, as appropriate for the researcharea or discipline.
4. Refines the search strategy if necessary. Outcomes include that thestudent:
a. Assesses the quantity, quality, accuracy, currency, and relevanceof the search results and the limitations of the information re-
36 SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY LIBRARIES
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ew H
amps
hire
] at
13:
31 1
6 Ju
ne 2
014
trieval systems or investigative methods to determine whetheralternatives should be sought and used.
b. Identifies gaps in the information retrieved and determines if the searchstrategy should be revised.
c. Repeats the search using the revised strategy or new systems or meth-ods as necessary.
5. Extracts, records, transfers, and manages the information and its sources.Outcomes include that the student:
a. Selects the most appropriate technology for the task of extracting theneeded information (e.g., copy/paste software functions, photocopier,scanner, audio/visual equipment, exploratory instruments, export ofthe information or record, or note taking). Examples of technologies toexport information would be bibliographic management software, textconversion software, and spreadsheet software.
b. Creates a system for organizing the information including track-ing results of laboratory experiments, fieldwork, etc.
c. Differentiates between the types of sources cited and understandsthe elements and correct syntax of a citation for a wide range ofresources.
d. Records all pertinent citation information for future referenceby ownloading, printing, emailing, or manual notation. Uses var-ious technologies to manage the information selected and orga-nized, e.g., bibliographic management software.
Standard Three
The information literate student critically evaluates the procured informa-tion and its sources, and as a result, decides whether or not to modify the initialquery and/or seek additional sources and whether to develop a new researchprocess.
Performance Indicators
The information literate student:
1. Summarizes the main ideas to be extracted from the information gath-ered. Outcomes include that the student:
a. Applies an understanding of the structure of a scientific paper and usessections, such as the abstract or conclusion, to summarize the main ideas.
Kathrine Aydelott 37
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ew H
amps
hire
] at
13:
31 1
6 Ju
ne 2
014
APPENDIX (continued)
b. Selects main ideas from the text.c. Identifies verbatim material that can then be appropriately quoted.
2. Selects information by articulating and applying criteria for evaluatingboth the information and its sources. Outcomes include that the student:
a. Distinguishes between primary, secondary, and tertiary sources,and recognizes how location of the information source in thecycle of [scientific] information relates to the credibility of theinformation.
b. Distinguishes among facts, points of view, and opinion.c. Examines and compares information from various sources in
order to evaluate reliability, validity, accuracy, authority, time-liness, and point of view or bias.
d. Analyzes the structure and logic of supporting arguments or methods.e. Understands and uses statistical treatment of data as evaluative criteria.f. Recognizes prejudice, deception, or manipulation in the informa-
tion or its use.g. Recognizes the cultural, physical, or other context within which the
information was created, and understands the impact of context on in-terpreting the information.
3. Synthesizes main ideas to construct new concepts. Outcomes include thatthe student:
a. Recognizes interrelationships among concepts and combines theminto potentially useful primary statements and/or summary of find-ings with supporting evidence.
b. Extends initial synthesis, when possible, at a higher level of abstrac-tion to construct new hypotheses that may require additional infor-mation.
c. Utilizes computer and other technologies (e.g., spreadsheets, data-bases, multimedia, and audio or visual equipment) for studying theinteraction of ideas and other phenomena.
4. Compares new knowledge with prior knowledge to determine the valueadded, contradictions, or other unique characteristics of the information.Outcomes include that the student:
a. Determines whether information satisfies the research or other infor-mation need.
38 SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY LIBRARIES
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ew H
amps
hire
] at
13:
31 1
6 Ju
ne 2
014
b. Uses consciously selected criteria to determine whether the infor-mation contradicts or verifies information used from other sources.
c. Draws conclusions based upon information gathered.d. Tests theories with discipline-appropriate techniques (e.g., simula-
tors, experiments).e. Determines probable accuracy by questioning the source of the infor-
mation, limitations of the information gathering tools or strategies,and the reasonableness of the conclusions.
f. Integrates new information with previous information or knowledge.g. Determines whether information provides evidence relevant to the
information need or research question.h. Includes information that is pertinent even when it contradicts the
individual’s value system, and includes it without skewing it.
5. Validates understanding and interpretation of the information throughdiscourse with other individuals, small groups or teams, subject-areaexperts, and/or practitioners. Outcomes include that the student:
a. Participates in classroom and virtual/electronic discussions (e.g.,e-mail, bulletin boards, chat rooms) and uses discussions for validat-ing understanding and interpretation of the information.
b. Works effectively in small groups or teams.c. Seeks expert opinion through a variety of mechanisms (e.g., inter-
views, e-mail, listservs).
6. Determines whether the initial query should be revised. Outcomesinclude that the student:
a. Determines if original information need has been satisfied or ifadditional information is needed.
b. Reviews search strategy and incorporates additional concepts asnecessary.
c. Reviews information retrieval sources used and expands to includeothers as needed.
7. Evaluates the procured information and the entire process. Outcomesinclude that the student:
a. Reviews and assesses the procured information and determines pos-sible improvements in the information seeking process.
b. Applies the improvements to subsequent projects.
Kathrine Aydelott 39
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ew H
amps
hire
] at
13:
31 1
6 Ju
ne 2
014
APPENDIX (continued)
Standard Four
The information literate student understands the economic, ethical, legal,and social issues surrounding the use of information and its technologies andeither as an individual or as a member of a group, uses information effectively,ethically, and legally to accomplish a specific purpose.
Performance Indicators
The information literate student:
1. Understands many of the ethical, legal and socio-economic issuessurrounding information and information technology. Outcomesinclude that the student:
a. Identifies and discusses issues related to privacy and security inboth the print and electronic environments.
b. Identifies and discusses issues related to free vs. fee-based accessto information.
c. Identifies and discusses issues related to censorship and freedomof speech.
d. Demonstrates an understanding of intellectual property, copy-right, and fair use of copyrighted material and research data.
2. Follows laws, regulations, institutional policies, and etiquette related to theaccess and use of information resources. Outcomes include that the student:
a. Participates in electronic discussions following accepted practices(e.g., “Netiquette”).
b. Uses approved passwords and other forms of ID for access toinformation resources ethically.
c. Complies with institutional policies on access to and distributionof information resources.
d. Preserves the integrity of information resources, equipment, systemsand facilities.
e. Legally obtains, stores, and disseminates text, data, images, or sounds.f. Demonstrates an understanding of what constitutes plagiarism and
does not represent work attributable to others as his/her own. This in-cludes the work of other members of research teams.
g. Demonstrates an understanding of federal, state, and institutionalpolicies related to the use of human and animal subjects in research.
40 SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY LIBRARIES
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ew H
amps
hire
] at
13:
31 1
6 Ju
ne 2
014
3. Acknowledges the use of information sources in communicating theproduct or performance. Outcomes include that the student:
a. Selects an appropriate documentation style for each researchproject and uses it consistently to cite sources.
b. Posts permission granted notices, as needed, for copyrighted material.c. Acknowledges all contributors, funding sources, grants, etc. Complies
with reporting and other requirements related to grants.
4. Applies creativity in use of the information for a particular product orperformance. Outcomes include that the student:
a. Selects, analyzes, organizes, summarizes, and/or synthesizes infor-mation from a variety of resources.
b. Explores the use of advanced information technologies, such as datamining and visualization to move beyond retrieval and identify trendsand patterns within large sets of complex research data.
5. Evaluates the final product or performance and revises the developmentprocess used as necessary. Outcomes include that the student:
a. Maintains a journal or log of activities related to the information seeking,evaluating, and communicating process.
b. Reflects on past successes, failures, and alternative strategies.c. Applies devised improvements to subsequent projects.
6. Communicates the product or performance effectively to others. Out-comes include that the student:
a. Chooses a communication medium and format that best supports thepurposes of the product or performance and the intended audience.
b. Uses a range of information technology applications in creatingthe product or performance.
c. Incorporates principles of design in the product or performance.d. Communicates clearly and succinctly, if appropriate, with a style that
supports the purposes of the intended audience.
Standard Five
The information literate student understands that information literacy is anongoing process and an important component of life-long learning and recog-nizes the need to keep current regarding new developments in his or her field.
Kathrine Aydelott 41
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ew H
amps
hire
] at
13:
31 1
6 Ju
ne 2
014
APPENDIX (continued)
Performance Indicators
The information literate student:
1. Recognizes the value of ongoing assimilation and preservation of knowl-edge in the field. Outcomes include that the student:
a. Recognizes that, for a professional, it is necessary to keep up withnew developments that are published in the literature of the field.
b. Recognizes that learning about information gathering is an on-going process as the source, format, software requirements, anddelivery method of needed information changes and evolves withtime.
c. Is able to apply information access skills learned in one subjectarea to another.
d. Understands the importance of archiving information so thatit will survive company mergers, outdated access technologies,personnel departures, etc.
2. Uses a variety of methods and emerging technologies for keeping currentin the field. Outcomes include that the student:
a. Establishes current awareness services and follows citation andcited references for pertinent articles.
b. Uses online table of contents scanning, review journals, and otherforms of rapid communication literature.
c. Manages files of citations of articles read or accessed (such asthrough use of bibliographic management software).
d. Uses bibliometric analysis tools to update knowledge of changingtechnology and product life cycles (such as by analyzing a com-pany’s published papers and/or patent portfolio).
e. Recognizes emerging forms and methods of scholarly publishingin the field. Recent examples are: the use of blogs, RSS feeds,open access journals, and freely available online research data.
42 SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY LIBRARIES
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ew H
amps
hire
] at
13:
31 1
6 Ju
ne 2
014
