I can see how the concept of "Information Literacy" can be an interesting one from a theoretical point of view, or a useful one for advocacy, PR or marketing. However, because of its abstract nature it is not easy to measure or delimit.
In practice, what I do is teach information skills, relevant ones I hope, which will possibly contribute to augment the worldly-wiseness of my students in the information environment, i.e. their information literacy.
Any of my students may be more skilled than I am in a particular area, yet benefit from my expertise in the particular aspects associated to their course of study. An absolute measure of anybody's information literacy is not plausible - at least not according to my own concept of information literacy.
A.C.
PS: I have noticed sometimes the term "Information Literacy" seems to be replaced by "Information Fluency", as a more polically correct one to apply to those who are thought to be highly literate because of their level of education, e.g. academics.
_________________________________________________________________
Alejandro Chiner A., Resources Librarian (Health Studies and Community Nursing)
(2nd Floor) Harrison Learning Centre, University of Wolverhampton, St. Peter's Square, Wolverhampton WV1 1RH, UK
tel: +44 (0)1902 32 2385 fax: +44 (0)1902 32 2194 email: [log in to unmask] http://www.wlv.ac.uk/LIB
_________________________________________________________________
-----Original Message-----
From: Information literacy and information skills teaching discussion
list [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Vincent
Matthews
Sent: 26 July 2006 10:52
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [LIS-INFOLITERACY] IL: over-egging the pudding?
An article by Peter Williams entitled 'Against information literacy'
-
<http://www.cilip.org.uk/publications/updatemagazine/archive/archive2006/july/williams.htm>http://www.cilip.org.uk/publications/updatemagazine/archive/archive2006/july/williams.htm
-
is designed to give the information literacy movement pause for thought.
Williams attacks a tendency within the movement to overstate the
importance of IL and to talk in abstract ways rather than to grapple
pragmatically with the real needs of library users. My own gloss on
his argument is that the library and information community has
over-reacted in the face of the massive expansion in sources of
available information.
For those of us in institutions where the 'modest and flexible'
approaches to information literacy he calls for are the best we can
hope to offer, the article is a breath of fresh air. But I suspect
that Williams will be attacked both by those who, he says, greatly
over-state the case for IL and by others who will say that he
shouldn't label all IL practitioners as extremists, nor write off the
IL movement as having failed.
Where do you stand?
Vincent Matthews
UCL
|