Information Literacy in the Knowledge Society

Information Literacy in the
Knowledge Society

Wolfgang G. Stock
Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Germany, Department of Information Science
Conference on Information Literacy, Düsseldorf, Germany, Febr. 7, 2013

Agenda

HEINRICH-HEINE-UNIVERSITY DÜSSELDORF 2

AGENDA

 Information Literacy: Retrieval Literacy and Knowledge
Representation Literacy
 Information Literacy in the Everyday Life, in the Workplace
and in School and University
 Measuring Information Literacy
 How Information Literate are People Today? Some Examples
 Information Literacy Instruction: How to Teach Information
Literacy?


Information Literacy:
Retrieval Literacy and
Knowledge Representation
 Information Literacy: Retrieval Literacy and Knowledge
Representation LiteracyLiteracy
 Information Literacy in the Everyday Life, in the Workplace
and in School and University
 Subjects of Information Literacy
 Measuring Information Literacy
 How information literate are people today? Some examples
 Information Literacy Instruction: Ho to Teach Information
Literacy?


INFORMATION LITERACY: RETRIEVAL LITERACY AND
KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION LITERACY

 What means „Information Literacy“?
 Information Literacy comprises those contents of Information
Science that are needed by everyone
 in everyday life,
 on the job and
 in school (or university)



 What means „Knowledge Society“?
 A Knowledge Society is based on information and
communication technology, on (scientific and other)
knowledge, and on creativity. Essential parts of the workforce
are knowledge workers and other creative people
 Knowledge changes. In the knowledge society, lifelong
learning becomes important
 In knowledge societies, digital natives form the majority of
people
 Knowledge-based and creative companies are in need of
corporate (and city-wide) knowledge management.



 What means „Information Literacy in the Knowledge Society“?
 Knowledge workers and other creative people: without
Information Literacy they have no chance on job markets
 Lifelong learning: without Information Literacy people are not
able to perform information acquisition and learning
 Digital natives: their basic characteristic is being Information
Literate
 Knowledge management: employees must be Information
Literate.
 Conclusion: The importance of Information Literacy will
increase in knowledge societies



 Information Literacy is one of the
basic skills of the 21st century

(Illustrations by M. Stock)



 „Alexandria Proclamation on Information Literacy and Lifelong
Learning“: „Information Literacy ... empowers people in all
walks of life to seek, evaluate, use and create information
effectively to achieve their personal, social, occupational and
educational goals“.
 Information Literacy minimizes social inequality in the
knowledge society
 Information Literacy minimizes the digital divide
 Information Literacy strengthens the individual„s participation
in the knowledge society (e-inclusion)
 Perhaps Information Literacy becomes a human right in the
knowledge society



Access to ICT and to information
services

Participation in the knowledge
Motivation
society

Competencies:
--- General education
--- ICT and media literacy
--- Information literacy



 Information Literacy:
Two competencies

 1. Information retrieval literacy
 Searching, finding and use
of information
 Special knowledge in the
topical area
 Historical background:
 Library instruction
 ALA standards
 „Six Big Skills“



 Information Literacy:
Two competencies

 2. Knowledge representation
literacy
 Creation and publication of
information
 Indexing
 Historical background:
 Web 2.0
 „Produser“ / „Produsage“



 Layer model of literacies

 Basic literacies
 ICT literacy / media literacy
 Information Literacy



Recognition Searching Evaluation Making
of for and of the use
information retrieval of quality of of Provision
needs information information information for
information
Representation law and
Creation of and storage Provision ethics
information of for privacy
information

Information literacy

Basic
computer Smart- Office Internet Media
skills phone skills software skills literacy

ICT and smartphone skills – Media literacy

Reading Writing Numeracy

Literacy


Information Literacy in the
Everyday Life, in the Workplace and
HEINRICH-HEINE-UNIVERSITY DÜSSELDORF in School and University 15

INFORMATION LITERACY IN THE EVERYDAY LIFE, IN THE WORKPLACE
AND IN SCHOOL AND UNIVERSITY

 Information Literacy in the everyday life
 Digital divide: information rich vs information poor
 Standing on the right side of the divide
 „Knowledge Gap Hypothesis“ (Tichenor, Donohue, &
Olien, 1970)
 Increase of mass media information leads to
 1. population with higher socioeconomic status and
higher education will benefit from the richer
information environment
 2. population with lower socioeconomic status and
only minimal education will loose orientation in the
information environment



 „Knowledge Gap Hypothesis“
 The gap between these two segments tends to increase
 „Internet Gap Hypothesis“ (today)
 Same results concerning internet use
 Matthew effect:
 „For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have
more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be
taken away even that he hath” (Matthew 13:12). The context
is: knowledge
 Empirical results (Bonfadelli, 2002): education is the crucial
factor of the internet gap (followed by income)



 Empirical results (Bonfadelli, 2002):
 „Internet access alone does not guarantee an informed
public“
 „People with higher education use the Internet for
informational and service-oriented purposes“
 „People with lower education use the Internet significantly
more for entertainment reasons“

 Information Literacy is a key for e-inclusion in the everyday life
of the knowledge society



 Information Literacy in the workplace
 In institutions, knowledge management and information
literacy are strongly connected
 Bruce (1999): organizational processes and information
literacy
 Many organizational process require information literate
employees
 Task for the corporate knowledge management or the
company library



 Information Literacy in schools / universities

 Schools
 Human Resource: Teacher librarians
 Infrastructure: School libraries
 Universities
 Human Resource: Teaching librarians
 Infrastructure: Academic libraries



 Instruction of Information Literacy
 Kindergarten
 Primary school
 Secondary school
 University
 Off-the-job training
 On-the-job training
 Instruction of special user groups (e.g., teachers,
scientists, librarians, but also silver surfers or expats)


Measuring Information Literacy


MEASURING INFORMATION LITERACY

 Methods to study information literacy:
 1st Using rubrics
 2nd Using questionnaires

 Presupposition:
 Existence of standards



 Standards of retrieval literacy: American Library Association
(ALA) / Association for College and Research Libraries
(ACRL) (ACRL, 2000)
 Determination of the nature and extent of the information
needed
 Effective and efficient access to needed information
 Critical evaluation of retrieved information and its sources
/ incorporation of information in his/her knowledge base
 Effective use of information to accomplish a specific
purpose
 Understanding of economic, legal and social issues



 Standards of retrieval literacy

Searching for and Evaluation of the
Recognition of Making use of
retrieval of quality of
information needs information
information information

Provision for information
economics, information
law and information ethics



 Standards of knowledge representation literacy („Düsseldorf
model“) (Gust von Loh & Stock, 2013)
 Know-how to create information (take a picture, write a
blog post, make a video etc.) which can be published
 Ability to store information in an information service
(upload the video to a sharing service, upload/edit/delete
information in a social network etc.)
 Deploying methods of knowledge representation (tagging
the information in sharing services, finding meaningful
titles etc.)
 Provision for privacy (own privacy and privacy of others)
 Understanding of economic, legal and social issues



 Standards of knowledge representation literacy

Creation of Storage of Representation of
information information information

Provision for information
Provision of
economics, information
privacy
law and information ethics



 Using rubrics
 Defining „rubrics“ (study dimensions)
 Studying „products“ from test persons (e.g., academic
works from students)
 Alternative: analysis of students„ portfolios
 Assessing the materials (by more than one assessor)



 Using rubrics. Example: Rubrics from van Helvoort (2010)



 Advantages of rubrics
 Authentic products as a test base
 It is possible to evaluation learning progress across time
 Disadvantages of rubrics
 Only few dimensions of information literacy (mostly
references)
 Problems to find the „right“ evaluation (from „very good“ to
„very bad“)
 Low inter-assessor consistency



ILAS-ED
 Instant Questionnaires
Information
Literacy
ILT Assessment
Information Literacy Test Scale for
Education



 Instant questionnaires
 Typical example: (from TRAILS)



 Self-designed questionnaire. Example 1: Chang et al. (2012):
Assessing information literacy in secondary schools in
Singapore



 Self-designed questionnaire. Example 2: Erkmen &
Shanmugarajah (2013): Assessing retrieval literacy in
secondary schools in Germany



 Example 3: Erkmen & Shanmugarajah (2013): Assessing
knowledge representation literacy in secondary schools in
Germany



 Advantages of questionnaires
 Quantative data
 Easy to evaluate
 Own questionnaire: freedom to choose research-specific
questions (and: free of fees)
 Disadvantages of questionnaires
 Problematic to find test persons
 Artificial situation
 Predefined questions (and – sometimes – answers)


How information literate are people
today? Some examples


HOW INFORMATION LITERATE ARE PEOPLE TODAY? SOME EXAMPLES

 Three recent empirical studies on Information Literacy
 Study by Erkmen & Shanmugarajah (2013): Information
Literacy of German secondary school students (Method:
own questionnaire)
 Study by Given, Julien, Quellete and Smith (2010):
Information Literacy of Canadian high school graduates
(Method: ILT questionnaire)
 Study by Chang et al. (2012): Information Literacy of
Singaporean secondary school students (Method: own
questionnaire)



 Study by Erkmen & Shanmugarajah (2013)

 Retrieval Literacy of German secondary school
students: 54.9% (35.14 out of 64 points)

 Information needs 71.7% (4.3 out of 6 points)
 Searching 59.4% (19 out of 32 points)
 Evaluation 48.1% (6.97 out of 14.5 points)
 Use 42.3% (4.87 out of 11.5 points)




 Knowledge Representation Literacy of German secondary
school students: 37.2% (9.67 out of 26 points)

 Creation 32.2% (4.02 out of 12.5 points)
 Storing 48.0% (0.96 out of 2 points)
 Indexing 40.1% (4.69 out of 11.5 points)




 Information Law and Ethics Literacy of German secondary
school students: 62.5% (6.25 out of 10 points)

 Information ethics 58.3% (2.33 out of 4 points)
 Information law 65.3% (3.92 out of 6 points)



 Study by Given, Julien, Quellette and Smith (2010)

 Information Literacy (Retrieval Literacy) of Canadian high
school graduates: 50.7%
 Method: ILT



 Study by Chang et al. (2012): Information Literacy of
Singaporean secondary school students



 The studies from three continents present (more or less) the
same result:

 The grade of Information Literacy of high school students is
about 50%

 Unscientific remark: that„s frustrating!
 Or (more optimistic): There is an awful lot of work for us.


Information Literacy Instruction:
How to Teach Information Literacy?


INFORMATION LITERACY INSTRUCTION:
HOW TO TEACH INFORMATION LITERACY?

 Didactics of Information Literacy (Ader, Orszullok, & Stock,
2013)
 Subject of its own right?
 Resource-based learning (Document-based learning)
 Inquiry-base learning
 Teacher-centered learning
 Team-based learning
 Game-based learning



 Information Literacy: Subject of its own right?
 Embedded in other subjects„ instruction
 In primary schools: e.g., in language instruction or in
general studies (in Germany, Heimat- und
Sachkunde)
 In secondary schools: e.g., in history instruction
 In universities: in combination with subjects studied
(e.g. „Information Literacy for chemicists“,
„Information Literacy for physicians“)



 Information Literacy: Subject of its own right?
 Subject on its own right
 In primary schools: probably not
 In secondary schools: Düsseldorf model: 2 hours in
grade 6; 2 hours in grade 10 or 11
 In universities: „Information Literacy“ (independent of
specific subjects)



(Hannafin & Hill, 2008)

 Resource: media, people, places, ideas „that have the
potential to support learning“
 Resource-based learning: „The use and application of
available assets to support varied learning needs across
contexts“



 Scaffolding: „Process through which individuals are
supported in identifying, interpreting, or otherwise using
resources“
 Procedural scaffolds (focusing cognitive resources)
 Conceptual scaffolds (identification of knowledge,
making connections between resources)
 Metacognitive scaffolds (reflection, comparison,
revision)
 Strategic scaffolds (identifying ways to analyze, plan,
and respond)



 Tools: „Devices that aid individuals to engage and
manipulate resources and ideas“
 Processing tools (applied technology)
 Searching tools (Web search engines, professional
information services)
 Manipulation tools (e.g., testing different scenarios)
 Communication tools (synchronous tools: instant
messaging, videoconferencing; asynchronous tools:
blogs, podcasts, microblogs, e-mail, wikis)



 Resource-based learning in Information Literacy instruction

 Information Literacy instruction is always resource-based
 Retrieval literacy: ability to find and use resources
 Knowledge representation literacy: ability to create
and represent resources


 Inquiry-base learning (Edelson, Gordin, & Pea, 1999)
 Inquiry: pursuit of open questions (projects; „project-
based learning“)
 Authentic activities
 Motivation for activity
 Opportunities for learning
 Developing general inquiry abilities (posing and
refining research questions, planning and managing
an investigation, analyzing and communicating
results)
 Acquiring specific investigation skills (e.g., controlled
experimentation, modeling, synthesis of primary
sources, exploration of quantitative data)



 Opportunities for learning (cont„d)
 Developing an improved understanding of science
concepts
 Problematize (realizing boundaries of knowledge)
 Demand (placing a demand for knowledge to
complete the investigation)
 Discover and refine (uncovering scientific
principles, refining the principles in the
investigation; „discovery learning“)
 Apply (application of scientific understanding in
the pursuit of the research question)



 Inquiry-based learning
 Technological support:
 ICT
 Providing investigation tools
 Providing knowledge resources
 Providing record-keeping tools



 Inquiry-based learning in Information Literacy instruction
 (Nearly) all approaches of Information Literacy instruction
apply inquiry-based learning
 Example: Chu (2009)
 Inquiry project-based learning in a primary school
(grade 4)
 Teachers: language teacher, general studies teacher,
IT teacher, school librarian
 Two projects in six months (Phase 1: The Earth;
Phase 2: The History of Hong Kong and China)
 Results: Evaluation of students, teachers and parents:
improvement of Information Literacy and of enjoyment



 Teacher-centered learning
 Inquiry-based learning does not mean to led the
students alone
 Inquiry-based learning alone: only minimal learning
success (Kirschner, Sweeler, & Clark, 2006)
 In combination with inquiry-based learning: teacher-
based learning
 Implementation of project management (e.g.,
milestones)
 And (very important!): learning to learn



 Teacher-centered learning in information literacy instruction
 In combination of inquiry-based learning
 Phases with project-work (learner-based learning)
and phases with teacher-centered learning (Mokhtar,
Majid, & Foo, 2008)
 Example (retrieval literacy instruction): Demonstration
of the functionality of Web of Science by the teacher
 Example (knowledge representation literacy
instruction): Lecture on the thesaurus of Medline
(MeSH)



 Team-based learning (in the sense of Michaelsen)
(Michaelsen, Watson, Cragin, & Fink, 1982)
 Team-formation and management (teams are permanent,
formed by the instructor, and have the opportunity to
develop into learning teams)
 Accountability (team members are accountable to the rest
of the team, every team member contributes to team
discussions and problem solving, team members engage
in peer assessment; the team performs as a whole)
 Feedback (learning from other team members, necessary
for group development)
 Assignment design: the tRATs (team readiness
assessment tests), additionally: iRATs (individual RATs)



 Team-based learning in Information Literacy instruction
 Information Literacy course at the University at Albany,
State University of New York (Jacobson, 2011)
 Strategy: building students„ engagement and making the
course interactive
 Tasks to fulfill by the teams



 Team-based learning in Information Literacy instruction
(Jacobson, 2011)



 „Homo ludens“ (Johan Huizinga)
 Digital natives like to play (digital games) (Knautz, 2013)
 Gamification: Use of game mechanics in non-game
environments
 Gamification fosters fun and intrinsic learning motivation



 Game mechanics in learning environments
 Points
 Levels
 Badges (status symbols)
 Achievements
 Quests
 Virtual goods
 Leaderboards



 Game-based learning in Information Literacy instruction
 Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf: Tutorial of the
lecture „Knowledge Representation“ applies game
mechanics



 Information Literacy teachers
 Education of Information Literacy teachers
 What subject? Educational science and information
science?
 Advanced education
 How to organize? (In schools? Teachers colleges?
Universities?)
 Establishment of Information Literacy research in
universities


CONCLUSION: INFORMATION LITERACY IN THE KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY

 The importance of Information Literacy increases in a
knowledge society.
 In a knowledge society, Information Literacy is necessary in
the everyday life (to stand on the right side of the digital
divide), in the workplace and at school.
 There are two methods to study Information Literacy: using
rubrics or using questionnaires. There are lots of instant
questionnaires (ILS, SAILS, NAILS, etc.).
 Empirical studies on Information Literacy of students find
(more or less) poor results: Today„s students are rarely
information literate.
 Therefore instruction of Information Literacy becomes
necessary. Didactic elements are document-based, inquiry-
based, teacher-centered, team-based and game-based
learning.


QUESTIONS?
CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE DISCUSSION?

Thank you!
Stock@phil.hhu.de


LITERATURE

Ader, S., Orszullok, L., Stock, W. G. (2013). Informationskompetenz als Schulfach: Wer sollte was wann und wie
unterrichten? In S. Gust von Loh & W. G. Stock (Eds.), Informationskompetenz in der Schule (pp. 259-271). Berlin,
Boston, MA: De Gruyter Saur.
ACRL (2000). Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education. Chicago, IL: ALA.
Bonfadelli, H. (2002). The internet and knowledge gaps. European Journal of Communication, 17(1), 65-84.
Bruce, C. (1999). Workplace experiences of information literacy. International Journal of Information Management,
19, 33-47.
Chang, Y. K, Zhang, X., Mokhtar, I. A., Foo, S., Majid, S., Luyt, B., & Theng, Y. L. (2012). Assessing students‟
information literacy skills in two secondary schools in Singapore. Journal of Information Literacy, 6(2), 19-34.
Chu, K. W. S. (2009). Inquiry project-based learning with a partnership of three types of teachers and the school
librarian. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(8), 1671-1686.
Edelson, D. C., Gordin, D. N., & Pea, R. D. (1999). Adressing the challenges of inquiry-based learning through
technology and curriculum design. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8(3/4), 391-450.
Erkmen, M., & Shanmugarajah, P. (2013). Stand der Informationskompetenz bei Schülern in Deutschland.
Bachelor„s Thesis. Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf.
Given, L. M., Julien, H., Quellette, D., & Smith, J. (2010). Evidence-based information literacy instruction. In
Proceedings of the 73rd ASIS&T Annual Meeting (2 pages).
Gust von Loh, S., & Stock, W. G. (2013). Informationskompetenz als Schulfach? In S. Gust von Loh & W. G. Stock
(Eds.), Informationskompetenz in der Schule (pp. 1-20). Berlin, Boston, MA: De Gruyter Saur.


LITERATURE (CONT’D)

Hannafin, M. J., & Hill, J. R. (2008). Resource-based learning. In J.M. Spector, M.D. Merrill, J. van Merriënboer, &
M.P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 525-536). 3rd
Ed. New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Ass.
Helvoort, J. van (2010). A scoring rubric for performance assessment of information literacy in Dutch Higher
Education. Journal of Information Literacy, 4(1), 22-39.
Jacobson, T. E. (2011). Team-based learning in an information literacy course, Communications in Information
Literacy, 5(2), 82-101.
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work. An
analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiental, and inquiry-based teaching.
Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75-86.
Michaelsen, L. K., Watson, W. E., Cragin, J. P., & Fink, L. D. (1982). Team-based learning: A potential solution to
the problems of large classes. Exchange. The Organizational Behavior Teaching Journal, 7(4), 18-33.
Mokhtar, I. A., Majid, S., & Foo, S. (2008). Teaching information literacy through learning styles. The application of
Gardner„s multiple intelligences. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 40(2), 93-109.
Knautz, K. (2013). Gamification im Kontext der Vermittlung von Informationskompetenz. In S. Gust von Loh & W.
G. Stock (Eds.), Informationskompetenz in der Schule (pp. 223-257). Berlin, Boston, MA: De Gruyter Saur.
Tichenor, P. J., Donohue, G. A., & Olien, C. N. (1970). Mass media flow and differential growth in knowledge.
Public Opinion Quarterly, 34, 159-170.


Information Literacy in the Knowledge Society

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (10)

Similar to Information Literacy in the Knowledge Society

Similar to Information Literacy in the Knowledge Society (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Information Literacy in the Knowledge Society