Dear All,
Here is a summary of response to my recent posting about information
literacy (IL) and public libraries. For reference this was in connection
with the work of the CILIP Information Literacy group (a sub-group of
CILIP's Community Services Group). The main issues raised were:
* Terminology - possible lack of awareness of information literacy in
public libraries as a term, and/or what it means
* Some limited evidence of IL activity or related activity but not
necessarily calling it by the same name.
* Point was made that IL should be central to the Digital Citizenship
strand within Framework for The Future.
* Concern that IL may mean or be taken to mean technical skill in ICT
* Concern that there may be people doing things in parallel without
knowing it, and sharing this would be useful
Fuller version below edited to remove contributor names and non-connected
comments.
Andrew Lewis
e-Services Officer
Library and Information Services
Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead
01628 796 592
[log in to unmask]
www.rbwm.gov.uk/libraries
This sounds really interesting. Am I right in thinking that you'll be
addressing issues concerning *information* literacy and not *information
technology* literacy? One of the problems in the public sector (sensu lato,
not just libraries) is that the latter is mistaken for the former and even
elementary, but important, quality assurance factors like currency, sourcing
and cross-checking aren't considered. Too often, "information literacy" is
taken to mean "how to use a computer" and not "how to use whatever tools and
resources are available and how to make sure they're reliable." I think
public libraries have a useful rôle in making sure that the common "if you
need to find out something just Google it" mindset doesn't degenerate into
"it must be true, I saw it on Jerry Springer" and that this is something
they can bring to the wider local government world.The terminology's
definitely an issue, especially as half the librarians would decide that
"information literacy" isn't anything to do with them because it's to do
with computers. Mind you, I do have to wonder just how information literate
some of our librarians are, but that's another story.
There are a couple of links below from JISC which might also be worth
exploring around the notion of I-Skills for staff development - for I-skills
read information literacy, as well as asking similar questions around
terminology, clarification between simple ICT use & appraising a range of
information tools to support work/life needs etc, developing an I-Skills
framework
http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/JISC-SISS-Investing-v1-09.pdf
<http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/JISC-SISS-Investing-v1-09.pdf>
Improving staff i-skills
http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/JISC-SISS-Improving-v1-08.pdf
<http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/JISC-SISS-Improving-v1-08.pdf>
Gives another sectoral perspective which I think could be of interest in the
context of your broader aims
Is also some work undertaken via MLA West Midlands called the West Midlands
Libraries Challenge which produced some interesting content aimed at
developing basic IT & information skills of local people, including in a
number of Asian languages
I agree the terminology is very important. Having worked in the school and
further/higher education sectors I am aware that the language (and sometimes
focus) is really quite different in public libraries. I find myself having
to re-interpret language and contexts for staff so they can see the
relevance to them. So if the website is to be effective it is vital that you
get this right.
In fact I had an e-mail conversation with Chris Powis recently about just
this topic. Chris Powis is joint author of Facet Publishing's "Teaching
information skills".
He has a grant through a National Teaching Fellowship Project to set up a
web site to support the educational needs of librarians' who teach (in most
cases - teaching information skills). He wants his website to reach all
sectors too. If you are not aware of Chris's work then I think it would be
useful to have some discussions. Some of the problems and opportunities will
be similar and it would save the work being done twice!
If I can be of any other assistance do let me know.
Having read the notes below I would agree that there could be problems with
terminology - information literacy is not a term we use here. To me, the
term suggests information skills which I would see as a person who needs
information for some purpose or other and the skills they require to seek
out and use that information whatever the format .
I think it would include things like using a catalogue, how an index works,
currency of information, bias, online sources etc and also things like
including references/citations etc at the end of a piece of work. this is
the sort of thing we try to explain to students on class visits etc
We are, of course, doing a lot of what we call reader development work which
I feel is something rather different and can take in things like readers
groups and other activities.
I do sometimes worry that we keep inventing new terminology when the old may
be just as good and actually describes the subject more accurately than the
new-fangled term does (perhaps I've just been in Libraryland too long!)
Not sure if you are receiving lots of replies off-list but I thought I'd
step forward here, and try to tease out some of the issues you outline. The
first point I'd like to make is that within public libraries Information
Literacy, in a practical sense, is ubiquitous. But, as you rightly suspect,
IL is not well known formally in a theoretical sense. An interesting way to
look at this is to understand IL within a learning environment where the
literacy is driven specifically to support more effective learning e.g. in a
higher education setting. Within a public library environment IL can also
be used to support learning but it is more crucially driven by other agenda
such as social inclusion, democratic empowerment and digital citizenship.
There is then a 'common ground' or an overlap that exists where the use of
IL supports learning (it's a kind of Boolean thing!). Of course confusion
then arises because the notion of a literacy implies that a set of
'competencies' (I'm avoiding the word skills) needs to be acquired or
learned; so we are learning to learn. In public libraries there has been a
significant effort placed on developing a technological infrastructure - the
rolling out of the Peoples Network, this has tended to focus attention on
keyboards and monitors - the tools rather than the job - but I think this is
okay as it is now evolving to a mature model that will call into play
information literacies.
On a policy level within public libraries the key document that determines
direction is the MLA's Framework for the Future this clearly alludes to an
Information Literacy and perhaps tucks it neatly under the Digital
Citizenship heading. There is however a tension here with the actual
methodology used to assess performance within public libraries which is
essentially quantitative and output based whereas the types of activities
undertaken within pls that chime in well with IL are qualitative and outcome
based. Strategically the pls are 'facing the wrong way'. There is a lot of
debate now on the extension of 'Impact Measures' the introduction of these
would more accurately portray current public library provision. (see recent
postings on the public library list)
Anyway, Andrew, apologies for going on - I'm happy to support your efforts
in whatever way I can. I would suggest that some type of applied research
into the whole area might be a good starting point.
It's a worthy cause which I believe is at the core of our profession.
Ofcom media literacy stuff is
available at http://www.ofcom.org.uk/advice/media_literacy/
<http://www.ofcom.org.uk/advice/media_literacy/> and the
e-GIF stuff is at http://www.govtalk.gov.uk/schemasstandards/egif.asp
<http://www.govtalk.gov.uk/schemasstandards/egif.asp>
**********************************************************************
You should be aware that all emails received and sent by this Council are subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and therefore may be disclosed to a third party.
This e-mail is confidential and is intended only for the person(s)
named above. If you are not the intended addressee it is requested
that you do not copy, distribute or rely on the information contained
within the e-mail, as such action may be unlawful.
If it has reached you by mistake then please call 01628 798888 to
let us know or notify us by e-mail and then delete the message.
Thank you for your help
http://www.rbwm.gov.uk
**********************************************************************
|
