Introduction:
Information literacy is the 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 [1]
The above definition of information literacy is by ACRL which
works as a division of the association we call ALA.
This as well as several other definitions are given by several
other experts of the field define information literacy in many different ways,
but the main focus is always on harvesting the needed information at the right
time and utilize the same to solve the problem. [2]
But when it comes to evaluating someone in terms of his
information literacy skills, some standards, or we can say that some indicators
must be there which test the level of information literacy in the test
individual.
To facilitate this need of evaluation The Association of
College and Research Libraries (ACRL, 2000) an association working as a
division of the American Library Association (ALA) released the ‘Information
Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education
Information Literacy Standards:[3]
For the purpose of evaluation and to act as the standards and
performance indicators for the information literacy programs of higher
education institutions, ACRL division of ALA has formulated 5 standards, which
are directly linked to the performance indicators embedded in them accordingly.
[4]
The final version of these competency standards was approved
in January 2000 which was prepared by the ACRL Task Force on Information
Literacy Competency Standards.
ACRL has also provided information literacy standards for
other fields such as for journalism students and professionals, for nursing,
for anthropology and sociology students, for science and technology, for
teacher education etc.[5]
Information Literacy Competency Standards and Performance Indicators for
Higher Education:[6]
ACRL task force on Information Literacy Competency Standard’s
final version which got approved in 2000 defined 5 Information Literacy
Standards with performance indicators that are to be considered as the best
practices which the higher education institutions can adopt to assess the
information literacy programs.
These standards are:[7]
Standard One:
The Information
literate student determines the nature and extent of information needed.
Performance indicators:
1.
A student possessing information literacy can identify, understand and
express the information-related needs.
2.
A student possessing information literacy can recognize and find various
potential information sources available in whatsoever format.
3.
A student possessing information literacy takes into consideration the
costs involved in the acquisition of the desired information with a comparison
to the benefits of acquiring that particular piece of information.
4.
A student possessing information literacy is capable of reevaluating the
nature as well as the extent of the needed information.
Standard two:
The information
literate student accesses needed information effectively and efficiently.
Performance indicators:
1. A student possessing information literacy chooses the best available
method for the investigation of information and also relies on the best
information retrieval system for gaining the access to the information.
2. A student possessing information literacy formulates better search strategies
for the implementation purpose.
3. A student possessing information literacy uses both the online or in-person options for the retrieval of the best information in there.
4. A student possessing information literacy can redefine the search
strategy in accordance with the need of the time.
5. A student possessing information literacy extracts, records and manage
the retrieved information along with their sources efficiently.
Standard three:
The information
literate student evaluates information and its sources critically and
incorporates selected information into his or her knowledge base and value
system.
Performance indicators:
1.
A student possessing information literacy extracts and summarizes the
main theme idea from the gathered information.
2.
A student possessing information literacy understands and implicates the
initial evaluation criteria for both the information as well as the information
sources.
3.
A student possessing information literacy constructs the main idea
embedded in the information gathered and use it to formulate new concepts
4.
A student possessing information literacy does a comparative analysis
between the knowledge gained and the prior available knowledge to determine the
added values, contradictions, or any other uniqueness in the information.
5.
A student possessing information literacy checks whether the newly gained
knowledge makes any impact on the acquirer’s value system and if so then takes
necessary steps to reconcile the differences.
6.
A student possessing information literacy validates the understanding and
interpretations of the information by making some quality discussions with
other individuals, subject experts or the researchers working in the same
field.
7.
A student possessing information literacy analyses the need if the
initial query is to be revised or not.
Standard four:
The information
literate student, individually or as a member of a group, uses information
effectively to accomplish a specific purpose.
Performance indicators:
1. A student possessing information literacy uses newly acquired as well as
prior knowledge to plan and create the required product or performance.
2.A student possessing information literacy makes revisions to the
development process timely and in accordance with the needs.
3.A student possessing information literacy makes effective communication
of the products to the audience.
Standard five:
The information
literate student understands many of the economic, legal, and social issues
surrounding the use of information and access and uses information ethically
and legally.
Performance indicators:
1.
A student possessing information literacy is well aware of the legal,
ethical, and socioeconomic issues which affect information and information
technology.
2.
A student possessing information literacy works in accordance with the
laws, rules, regulations, policies of the institutions involved, etiquettes and
netiquettes related to the access as well as the use of the information
resources.
3.
A student possessing information literacy gives proper acknowledgment to
the source of the information while communicating the product or performance to
its audience.[8]
The Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) has
replaced the Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education
(ACRL, 2000) with the Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education
(ACRL, 2015)[9]
Arrangement pattern of the Standards:
These standards are arranged in a hierarchy in accordance
with the Blooms’ (1956) which is used two define and differentiate between
different levels of human cognition i.e. thinking, learning, and understanding.
That’s why, as we move from standard 1 towards standard 5, we observe an
increase in the complexity and cognition level required to achieve that
standard too.[10]
These are arranged in increasing order of mental requirement
or simply we can say the cognition level as the former standards focus on
access to information while the later ones focus on the critical evaluation of
the extracted information.[11]
Conclusion:
By making the analysis and review of various information
literacy standards formulated by ACRL or any other organization as UNESCO,
SCONUL or any other, we can conclude the following points:
§ In all the information literacy
standards the arrangement follows a pattern that is indistinctively from lower
order (gathering) towards the higher order (evaluation, analysis and creating
new information from the prior information).
§ The arrangement pattern is somewhat
similar to that of the Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956)
§ All the standards put forward by the different association follows a basic hierarchy as shown in the given figure 1.
§ These standards along with their
performance indicators can prove to good evaluation criteria for the checking
effectiveness of the various information literacy programs being run by any of
the institution
Figure 1 The basic hierarchy of the Information Literacy Standards
§ All the standards were primarily
formulated by special emphasis on the explicit type of knowledge may it be
gathering of the information from relevant sources or disseminating the same
being bound by the IPR and other legal and ethical issues, and the tacit
knowledge is somewhere left behind which preparing these drafts.[12]
§ Various information literacy standards
are prepared by ACRL alone for students as well as professionals working in
different fields may it be teaching, journalism, nursing, anthropology, science
and technology, but what remains the same is the basic pattern and idea behind
these standards. All the standards follow the same hierarchy and guide the
implementer towards the same goals through the nearly same path as shown in
figure 1.
§ Information literacy is getting live
status in various higher educational institutes but there is need for special
skills development, training the library professionals to act as instructors
and instructional designers giving weight to the value of information literacy.
§ Rather than being limited to the
library science field, a more multidisciplinary approach to information
literacy research and instructions should be there in the curriculum.[13]
§ Offering formal information literacy
programs is getting pace in various educational institutes such as University
of Texas, The California State University, and The University of Washington
etc.
References:
·
LISBDNETWORK. (2019, February 19). Information Literacy. Library &
Information Science Network. https://www.lisbdnetwork.com/information-literacy/
·
Lau,
Jesus. (2006). Guidelines on Information Literacy for Lifelong Learning.
·
"Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education",
American Library Association, February 9, 2015.
http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework (Accessed June 11, 2021)
Document ID:
b910a6c4-6c8a-0d44-7dbc-a5dcbd509e3f
·
"Objectives for Information Literacy Instruction: A
Model Statement for Academic Librarians", American Library Association,
September 1, 2006.
http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/objectivesinformation
(Accessed June 11, 2021)
Document ID:
bbb3383f-1eba-dcd4-e94e-90a036e3a76d
·
"Standards, Guidelines, and Frameworks - Alphabetical
List", American Library Association, April 16, 2018.
http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/alphabetical (Accessed June 11, 2021)
Document
ID: c0aa687a-5bb1-428c-8425-a16a520c7913
·
Library Association, A. (2000). ACRL STANDARDS:
Information Literacy Compentency Standards for Higher Education. College &
Research Libraries News, 61(3), 207-215.
Doi: https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.61.3.207
·
"Information Literacy Standards for
Anthropology and Sociology Students", American Library Association,
February 6, 2008.
http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/anthro_soc_standards
(Accessed June 11, 2021)
Document ID:
4abee5ef-a4ee-5c84-b1d2-9ee5a4e11b5e
·
"Information Literacy Standards for Science and
Engineering/Technology", American Library Association, July 24, 2006.
http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/infolitscitech
(Accessed June 11, 2021)
Document ID:
b65e0fb0-5ded-a6d4-2d06-d3cb068960af
·
Adams, N. E. (2015). Bloom’s taxonomy of
cognitive learning objectives. Journal of the Medical Library Association:
JMLA, 103(3), 152–153. https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.103.3.010
·
Uribe Tirado, A., & Castaño Muñoz, W.
(2012). Information literacy competency standards for higher education and
their correlation with the cycle of knowledge generation. LIBER Quarterly,
22(3), 213. https://doi.org/10.18352/lq.8167
·
Kasowitz-Scheer, Abby and Pasqualoni, Michael,
"Information Literacy Instruction in Higher Education: Trends and
Issues" (2002). Libraries' and Librarians' Publications. 34.
https://surface.syr.edu/sul/34
·
D’Angelo, B. J., Jamieson, S., Maid, B. M.,
& Walker, J. R. (2017). Information Literacy. WAC Clearinghouse.
[1]
"Framework
for Information Literacy for Higher Education", American Library
Association, February 9, 2015.
http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework (Accessed June 11, 2021)
Document ID:
b910a6c4-6c8a-0d44-7dbc-a5dcbd509e3f
[3] LISBDNETWORK.
(2019, February 19). Information Literacy. Library & Information Science
Network. https://www.lisbdnetwork.com/information-literacy/
[4] "Objectives
for Information Literacy Instruction: A Model Statement for Academic
Librarians", American Library Association, September 1, 2006.
http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/objectivesinformation
(Accessed June 11, 2021)
Document ID: bbb3383f-1eba-dcd4-e94e-90a036e3a76d
[5] "Standards,
Guidelines, and Frameworks - Alphabetical List", American Library
Association, April 16, 2018.
http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/alphabetical (Accessed June 11, 2021)
Document ID:
c0aa687a-5bb1-428c-8425-a16a520c7913
[6] Library
Association, A. (2000). ACRL STANDARDS: Information Literacy Compentency
Standards for Higher Education. College & Research Libraries News, 61(3),
207-215.
doi:https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.61.3.207
[7] "Information
Literacy Standards for Anthropology and Sociology Students", American
Library Association, February 6, 2008.
http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/anthro_soc_standards
(Accessed June 11, 2021)
Document ID: 4abee5ef-a4ee-5c84-b1d2-9ee5a4e11b5e
[8]
"Information
Literacy Standards for Science and Engineering/Technology", American
Library Association, July 24, 2006.
http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/infolitscitech (Accessed June 11, 2021)
Document ID: b65e0fb0-5ded-a6d4-2d06-d3cb068960af
[9]
D’Angelo, B. J., Jamieson, S., Maid, B. M.,
& Walker, J. R. (2017). Information Literacy. WAC Clearinghouse.
[10]
Adams, N. E. (2015). Bloom’s taxonomy of
cognitive learning objectives. Journal of the Medical Library Association:
JMLA, 103(3), 152–153. https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.103.3.010
[11]
LISBDNETWORK. (2019, February
19). Information Literacy. Library & Information Science Network. https://www.lisbdnetwork.com/information-literacy/
[12] Uribe
Tirado, A., & Castaño Muñoz, W. (2012). Information literacy competency
standards for higher education and their correlation with the cycle of
knowledge generation. LIBER Quarterly, 22(3), 213.
[13] Kasowitz-Scheer,
Abby and Pasqualoni, Michael, "Information Literacy Instruction in Higher
Education: Trends and Issues" (2002). Libraries' and Librarians'
Publications. 34.
https://surface.syr.edu/sul/34
No comments:
Post a Comment