Library instruction dates back as far as the late 1800’s, though a conceptual understanding of it did not appear until the 1950’s and 1960’s (Hardesty, 1995). An event that signaled the emergence of formal bibliographic instruction was the Monteith Library Project at Wayne State University in 1960, an experimental university-wide program that sought to improve students’ competence in using the library (Knapp, 1961). Lack of acceptance of librarians as faculty peers led to the failure of that program. The modern bibliographic instruction movement began a decade later and gained further traction in 1977 when the Bibliographic Instruction Section of the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) was officially formed (Hardesty, 1995). However, it was the introduction of information literacy and its recognition as an important skill for college and career readiness that led to the prominence of information literacy instruction as a central job duty for academic and librarians (Saunders, 2012). Information literacy instruction is also foundational to the work of K-12 school librarians, who are expected to "model, promote, and teach critical-thinking and the inquiry process by using multiple literacies" (ALA/AASL/CAEP, 2019, p. 11). Both academic and school librarians are guided by standards, guidelines, and frameworks for information literacy set forth by their respective divisions of the American Library Association.
2.5.1 AASL Standards Framework for Learners
Garrison et al. (2018) describe the Standards Framework for Learners (AASL, 2017) as a tool intended to "transform teaching and learning and provide a comprehensive support guide for school librarians to create, implement and assess meaningful, structured learning tasks focused on important information literacy skills for students" (p. 2). The standards are arranged across six integrated frameworks, also referred to as shared foundations, that describe the knowledge and competencies that students should be able to demonstrate as they develop into multi-literate lifelong learners.
🖱 Click on the magnifying glass for each shared foundation below to explore its role in library instruction.
🔎I. Inquire
Inquiry-based information activities give learners the opportunity to explore their personal interests through problem solving and experiential learning. They build new knowledge while drawing on prior knowledge, and make real-world connections to concepts that foster a love for lifelong learning.
🔎II. Include
Interacting with a range of learners and engaging in debate with exposure to multiple perspectives helps students develop empathy, tolerance, and a commitment to inclusivity.
🔎III. Collaborate
When learners work collaboratively in a group toward a shared goal, they deepen their understanding of diverse perspectives and learn from each other through peer feedback. A variety of tools can be used to extend collaborative learning into digital spaces.
🔎IV. Curate
When learners are empowered to collect, organize, and share personally relevant resources with a variety of audiences, they have the opportunity to critically reflect on the quality and accuracy of the sources that they curate.
The exploratory nature of inquiry processes fosters curiosity and helps learners develop a growth mindset.
🔎VI. Engage
When learners are able to follow legal and ethical practices for using, creating, and sharing information, then they are able to inspire others to do the same.
2.5.2 The ACRL Framework
The Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) first published Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education in 2000, with the goal of providing a tool for academic librarians to assess the information and research literacy skills of their students. The publication tied information literacy squarely to lifelong learning, and recognized the integral role of information technology skills that coexist alongside information literacy (i.e., to locate information in a database). Five standards, broken down into 22 performance indicators, described the skill sets integral to information literacy. The success of the 2000 standards are reflected in their wide acceptance by the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U, 2007), as well as in the development of standardized tests, such as Projects SAILS: The Project for the Standardized Assessment of Information Literacy Skills (Radcliff et al., 2007), to formally assess the skills.
More recently, those standards were rescinded in favor of a Framework for Information Literacy in Higher Education. The new framework expanded the definition of information literacy, describing it as a “set of integrated abilities encompassing the reflective discovery of information, the understanding of how information is produced and valued, and the use of information in creating new knowledge and participating ethically in communities of learning” (ACRL, 2015, p. 3). The structure of the ACRL framework is based on the constructivist learning philosophy of threshold concepts, which are defined as concepts that require a transformational way of thinking to progress in learning (Meyer & Land, 2005). This has proven to be an instructional challenge for academic librarians, apparent in literature questioning the usefulness of threshold concepts for developing information literacy instruction, especially at the undergraduate level (Morgan, 2015; Reed, 2015; Townsend et al., 2016). The six threshold concepts of the Framework for Information Literacy in Higher Education are described below. Each concept is supported by a set of knowledge practices and dispositions.
🖱 Click on the magnifying glass for each threshold concept below to explore its role in library instruction.
🔎Authority is Constructed and Contextual
Information resources reflect their creators’ expertise and credibility and are evaluated based on the information need and the context in which the information will be used. Authority is constructed in that various communities may recognize different types of authority. It is contextual in that the information need may help to determine the level of authority required (ACRL, 2015, p. 12).
Information literate students understand that authority differs by context and discipline and look to appropriate indicators of authority (e.g., subject expertise, experience, reputation) when evaluating the credibility and reliability of a source.
🔎Information Creation as a Process
Information in any format is produced to convey a message and is shared via a selected delivery method. The iterative processes of researching, creating, revising, and disseminating information vary, and the resulting product reflects these differences (ACRL, 2015, p. 14).
Information literate students understand that authors and creators intentially select a specific mode of delivery to convey a specific message to a specific audience. The norms of message delivery (i.e., accepted modes) depend upon discipline and context.
🔎Information Has Value
Information possesses several dimensions of value, including as a commodity, as a means of education, as a means to influence, and as a means of negotiating and understanding the world. Legal and socio economic interests influence information production and dissemination (ACRL, 2015, p. 16).
Information literate students recognize that information is a commodity. They understand the social and legal constructs of intellectual property and give credit to others' original ideas and creative works through attribution and citation.
🔎Research as Inquiry
Research is iterative and depends upon asking increasingly complex or new questions whose answers in turn develop additional questions or lines of inquiry in any field (ACRL, 2015, p. 18).
Information literate students are able to identify information gaps in research, formulate research questions that match information needs, and synthesize information from multiple sources.
🔎Scholarship as Conversation
Communities of scholars, researchers, or professionals engage in sustained discourse with new insights and discoveries occurring over time as a result of varied perspectives and interpretations (ACRL, p. 20).
Information literate students successfully participate in scholarly communities of practice. They are aware of the evolving changes in scholarly perspectives within their specific disciplines. They participate in scholarly discussions, contribute to student research journals, and/or present at conferences and other venues.
🔎Searching as Strategic Exploration
Searching for information is often nonlinear and iterative, requiring the evaluation of a range of information sources and the mental flexibility to pursue alternate avenues as new understanding develops (ACRL, p. 22).
Information literate students use appropriate search strategies that align with their information needs.
2.5.2 Information Literacy as an Essential Learning Outcome
In 2005, the Liberal Education and America’s Promise (LEAP) initiative was launched by the Association of American Colleges and Universities to promote the importance of a liberal arts education to achieve an informed body of college graduates in the 21st century (Schneider, 2021). The research-based initiative outlines four Essential Learning Outcomes that are integral to the undergraduate curriculum. Of the four outcomes, information literacy falls under Intellectual and Practical Skills. The LEAP initiative motivated numerous institutions of higher education to develop programs to integrate the Essential Learning Outcomes into their core undergraduate curricula. As a result, information literacy is widely recognized today as fundamental to undergraduate education (Saunders, 2012). The LEAP initiative has even inspired some academic librarians to experiment with information literacy learning within student-centered collaborative programming (Schendel et al., 2013).
2.6 Featured Exercises in Instructional Librarianship
Featured items are opportunities for pre- and in-service instructional librarians to engage in intellectual exercises extending chapter content that may challenge your thinking and encourage additional practices in instructional librarian.
2.6.1 Featured Exercise: Promoting Information Literacy Learning
After reading this chapter, reflect on the presented information literacy definitions and descriptions; benefits, theories, and models of information literacy; and standards for information literacy. Once you have collected and organized your thoughts, draft a 500 word statement from the library telling listeners what information literacy is and why information literacy skills are important in today’s society. Once you have your statement just right, using your written statement, record a video (audio and video) that can be shared on the library’s website answering the question: What is information literacy? Why is information literacy important?
Think of your video as a library promotional statement.
2.6.2 Featured Exercise: Overcoming Hurdles
Reflecting on the contents of this chapter, talk to two instructional librarians (any library type). Ask these three questions:
- Please tell me about your commitment to information literacy learning?
- What hurdles to library instruction do you experience?
- If you could improve your situation toward increased involve in information literacy skills instruction, what would you change be?
Immediately following the conversation, make some notes about what you learned. Discuss your conversation with class members. Based on your conversation with class members, what proactive steps will you take?
2.7 References and Recommended Readings
Behrens, S. J. (1994). A conceptual analysis and historical overview of information literacy. College & Research Libraries, 55(4), 309-322.
Breivik, P. S. (1985). A vision in the making: Putting libraries back in the information society. American Libraries, 16(10), 723.
Burchinal, L. G. (1976, Sept. 24). The communications revolution: America’s third century challenge. In The future of organizing knowledge: Papers presented at the Texas A & M University Library’s Centennial Academic Assembly. College Station, TX: Texas A & M University Library.
Callison, D., & Baker, K. (2014). Elements of information inquiry, evolution of models, & measure reflection. Knowledge Quest, 43(2), 18-24.
Cooper, J. C. (2014). Guided inquiry by design: The story of student learning. School Library Monthly, 30(4), 18-20.
Eisenberg, M. B., & Berkowitz, R. E. (1990). Information problem solving: The Big Six skills approach to library & information skills instruction. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Eisenberg, M. B. (2008). Information literacy: Essential skills for the information age. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 28(2), 39-47.
Ivanitskaya, L., O’Boyle, I., & Casey, A. M. (2006). Health information literacy and competencies of information age students: Results from the interactive online Research Readiness Self-Assessment (RRSA). Journal of Medical Internet Research, 8(2), e6. doi:10.2196/jmir.8.2.e6
Johnston, B., & Webber, S. (2003). Information literacy in higher education: A review and case study. Studies in Higher Education, 28(3), 335-352. doi:10.1080/03075070310000113441
Kitchener, K. S., & King, P. M. (1981). Reflective judgment: Concepts of justification and their relationship to age and education. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 2(2), 89-116.
Kuhlthau, C. C. (1985). Teaching the library research process. New York, NY: Centre for Applied Research in Education.
Kuhlthau, C. C. (1987). Information skills for an information society: A review of research. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University. (ERIC No. ED297740)
Kuhlthau, C. C. (1989). Information search process: A summary of research and implications for school library media programs. School Library Media Quarterly, 18(1). http://www.ala.org/aasl/slr
Kuhlthau, C. C. (2010). Guided inquiry: School libraries in the 21st century. School Libraries Worldwide, 16(1), 1-12.
Kuhlthau, C. C., Turock, B. J., George, M. W., & Belvin, R. J. (1990). Validating a Model of the Search Process: A Comparison of Academic, Public, and School Library Users. Library and Information Science Research, 12(1), 5-31.
Kuiper, E., Volman, M., & Terwel, J. (2005). The Web as an information resource in K-12 education: Strategies for supporting students in searching and processing information. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 285-328. doi:10.3102/00346543075003285
Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2006). Changing literacies. Bristol, PA: Open University Press.
Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J. L., Castek, J., & Henry, L. A. (2013). New literacies; A dual-level theory of the changing nature of literacy, instruction, and assessment. In Alverman, D., Ruddell, R. B., & Unrau, N. (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (pp. 1150-1181). Newark, NJ: International Reading Association.
Liberal Education & America’s Promise. (2011). The LEAP vision for learning. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities. https://www.aacu.org
Lowe, C. A., & Eisenberg, M. B. (2006). Big6 skills for information literacy. In Fisher, K. E., Erdelez, S., & McKechnie, L. E. F. (Eds.), Theories of information behavior (pp. 63-68). Medford, NJ: Information Today, Inc.
Mackey, T. P., & Jacobson, T. E. (2010). Reframing information literacy as a metaliteracy. College & Research Libraries, 76(1), 62-78. http://crl.acrl.org
Metzger, M. J. (2007). Making sense of credibility on the web: Models for evaluating online information and recommendations for future research. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(13), 2078-2091. doi:10.1002/asi.20672
Meyer, J. H., & Land, R. (2005). Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge (2): Epistemological considerations and a conceptual framework for teaching and learning. Higher Education, 49(3), 373-388.
Morgan, P. K. (2015). Pausing at the threshold. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 15(1), 183-195.
Reed, K. L. (2015). Square peg in a round hole? The framework for information literacy in the community college environment. Journal of Library Administration, 55(3), 235-248.
Schendel, E., Garrison, J., Johnson, P., & Van Orsdel, L. (2013). Making noise in the library: Designing a student learning environment to support a liberal education. In Cases on higher education spaces: Innovation, collaboration, and technology (pp. 290-312). IGI Global.
Schneider, C. G. (2021). Making liberal education inclusive: The roots and reach of the LEAP framework for college learning. Association of American Colleges and Universities.
Stripling, B. K. (2003). Inquiry-based learning. In Stripling, B. K., & Hassell, S. H. (Eds.), Curriculum connections through the library (pp. 3–39). Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
Stripling, B. (2009). Teaching inquiry with primary sources. Teaching with Primary Sources Quarterly, 2(3), 2-4. Retrieved from http://www.loc.gov/teachers/tps/journal/
Stripling, B. K., & Pitts, J. M. (1988). Brainstorms and blueprints: Teaching library research as a thinking process. Englewood, Colo: Libraries Unlimited.
Townsend, L., Hofer, A. R., Lin Hanick, S., & Brunetti, K. (2016). Identifying threshold concepts for information literacy: A Delphi study. Communications in Information Literacy, 10(1). http://archives.pdx.edu/ds/psu/22354
Weiner, S. A., & Jackman, L. W. (2010). Information literacy beyond the library: The National Forum on Information Literacy. Libraries Faculty and Staff Scholarship and Research. Paper 73.
Wolf, S. (2003). The Big Six Information Skills as a metacognitive scaffold: A case study. School Library Media Research, 6. http://www.ala.org/aasl/slr
Young, T. E. (1999). The big three information literacy models. Knowledge Quest, 27(3), 32-35.
Zurkowski, P. (1974). The information service environment relationships and priorities. Related paper no. 5. Washington, DC: National Commission on Libraries and Information Science. (ERIC No. ED100391)