Thoughts on information literacy

I have a lot of assignments based on the concept of information literacy at school this semester. My first such assignment was due the first day of class (yes, we get homework before school even starts!) We had to find two articles on Information Literacy and write about them. In my mind, I confused information literacy and information literacy instruction. After reading more, I realize that isn’t true, but the definition is still a little fuzzy in my mind.

Adding to the confusion is the fact that a lot of people seem to use the term “information literacy instruction” as a synonym for bibliographic or library use instruction. In my mind, these are all very distinct concepts. I define the terms like this:

Information Literacy Instruction – The instruction on not only finding information, but distinguishing good information from bad.

Bibliographic Instruction – I’m a little unclear on this concept, but I see this as a more straightforward “this is how you cite your sources” instruction. It might include instruction on a specific citation style. I think this type of instruction would be well suited to a discussion on citing in general and how the citation engine (so to speak) works.

Library Use instruction – This is the straightforward “how to use the library” class. This would include how to access databases, the intricacies of searches in the various databases, the kinds of print resources to be found, how to use ILL, etc.

A few thoughts on instruction:

Information literacy instruction seems to take place mostly in academic library settings. I think information literacy would be useful in a public library setting and in school libraries, too. This seems like the most likely candidate to be taught as a general class- that is, not at the point of need.

On the other hand, I think library use instruction and bibliographic instruction are best taught at the point of need. I know that often they are not taught at the point of need, though- the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, for instance, has library 110 class that students take early on. To be perfectly honest, as a student, I didn’t find that class that useful. It may be partially due to my unusually prolonged experience (it was 7 years from the time I started to the time I graduated), but by the time I really needed the information from the class, it had been long enough that I forgot nearly everything learned.

Now that I am in the library, I see why the class is taught the way it is- requiring students to take it is one of the few ways to make sure they hear about library resources early on.

There is overlap between the three type of instruction to be sure- being able to read and follow citations is certainly needed for a university student’s information literacy.

Back to information literacy

So what is information literacy? I’m still having a hard time with a definition, but it includes such abilities as being able to tell paid content from other content, being able to verify a source and find backup sources if needed, knowing where to look (or who to ask) for desired information. It includes basic competencies with a computer and being able to express oneself adequately both in talking and writing (you can’t ask for information if you can’t express your need.)

Information literacy also includes the ability to cite sources- either formally through citation, or informally, as on the web, though links.

Information literacy and library 2.0

There’s been a lot written about library and education 2.0 lately- I’m not really going to chime in in except to say that I think that some of the focus on the library 2.0 movement is tied up in the desire for information literacy. In order to find certain kinds of information, one has know about new tools and technologies. There’s plenty of information that can also be found in books (and some that can only be found in books) but there’s also some things you can only get online.

I personally don’t think it’s important that librarians jump on the bandwagon and become 100% proficient in every “next big thing,” but it’s also not a good idea to ignore these new modes of communication entirely. (As is the case with librarians who “don’t do email.”)

The Annoyed Librarian posted recently about the profession’s reticence in distinguishing between bad and good information. I think there’s a difference in determining between bad and good at the reference desk and in collection development. It’s clear that there is a value judgment involved in information literacy.

What’s your definition?

I’d like to hear other’s take on information literacy. What does it mean to you?

---

Picture credits: Too much information by Violator3. information by untitledprojects.