EDUCAUSE James W. Marcum, Ph.D.

College of Staten IslandCity University of New York

© Educause, Indianapolis, October 2001

RethinkingInformation Literacy

Information Literacy (“Library” definition)

Knowing when information is needed Identifying the information needed Accessing the needed information Evaluating the information Organizing the information Using the information effectively to solve the

problem• American Library Association, Final Report... Information Literacy.

(1989).

Information Literacy (IL) Initiative

1989: IL as essential to Lifelong Learning• Breivik & Gee, Information Literacy (ACE, 1989)

1998: IL incorporates current trends– Service Learning– Resource-based Learning– Undergraduate Research– Problem-based Learning

• Breivik, Student Learning in the Information Age (ACE, 1998)

IL: Other Contributions Nurturing self-reliant learners Studies of student learning practices Assumptions of IL:

– Grounded in Information Technology (IT)

– Based on knowledge of information sources

– Use of tools to manage information to create new knowledge

• Marcum, “Rethinking Information Literacy,” Library Quarterly (January 2002, forthcoming)

Information Literacy: Now Well Established

Demanded by Accrediting Agencies. Integrated into the curriculum Studied and evaluated “Information Literacy Librarians”

Encompassing Public libraries and School

libraries as well

So … it’s time to “review”This paper will:

Critique the premises of the “information- processing paradigm” at the core of IL

Briefly review IL’s “learning” assumptions Consider the adequacy of the “literacy”

proposed amidst – a visual culture and – clear workplace competency shortcomings

Suggest an appropriate stance for the future

Is Information Processing the Appropriate Paradigm?

Start: math theory of communication (bits, signals, measures, entropy) - Shannon & Weaver

Representation (symbols used by computers & human mind) - H. Simon; J. Fodor

Content analysis (statistical, linguistic, and communication models) - Krippendorff

Flow of information -Dretske

Noise => Data => Information => Knowledge

INFORMATION PROCESSING AND TRANSFER PARADIGM COGNITION: Human mind like a computer

COMMUNICATION as signal

INSTRUCTION as method

CONTENT TRANSFER as purpose

INFORMATION ACCUMULATION as goal; more is better (i.e. more intelligence)

INFORMATION PROCESSING INFORMATION PROCESSING AND TRANSFER PARADIGMAND TRANSFER PARADIGM

INSTRUCTOR

STUDENT

RESOURCES

SUBJECT TEACHING

Communication

Prevalence of the Information Processing Model

Ubiquitous computing

Telecommunications-based interactivity

Internet and World-Wide-Web

Assumptions of the cognitive sciences

Classroom teaching practices

Anomalies in the IP Paradigm

Information Knowledge (-Salomon)

Inappropriate identification of mental & computer logic (-Brier)

Language: not signal, but the thought itself (-Carruthers)

New cognitive neurosciences encompass emotion and “knowledge management”

(-Gazzamiga)

Gibson’s “ecological model” of perception, information and knowledge

Information = human communication (2nd-hand information only)

Environment does NOT “signal” observer

In short: IP Paradigm is too simplistic

Is “Learning” the Appropriate Methodology?

Student @ center of process Information Literacy theorists and practitioners

are “constructivists”– Learning as dynamic, emergent, interactive,

IL could be more “contextual,” situated Assessment: a major challenge

– In sum: IL “passes” this test, at least as well as the education “establishment”

-Iannuzzi; Bruce

Is “Information” theAppropriate Literacy?

Level I Literacy: ability to read and write Level II: Fluency in a second language,

code, or technology – a social pattern of skills, with material support

to achieve a valued intellectual purpose - A. diSessa, Changing Minds (MIT,

2000)

Level III Literacy: Many-faceted

Visual Literacy: – cope with mass media, morphing, etc.– multi-indexical (codified and tacit knowledge)

- K. Henderson, On Line and On Paper (MIT, 1999)

Technological Literacy: computer literacy Advanced Literacies:

– networked, interactive, social– knowledge media (dynamic, public, transient) -

Daniel, Mega-Universities & Knowledge Media (London, 1998)

What is the Appropriate Literacy?

Multiple Literacies– Tool Literacies– Representation Literacies (print, media, etc.)

– K. Tyner, Literacy in a Digital World (Erlbaum, 1998)

Workplace Literacies

Workplace Literacies:Competency? Fluency? Expertise?

Ultimate goal: assure that graduates are prepared to function in the Information Age– Requires Lifelong Learning (since skills are dated)

Workplace Literacy – Both personal and social skills– Technological, functional in specific work– Social engagement, context– Experience in practice (not just theory)

– Hull, Changing Work, Changing Workers (SUNY, 1997).

Current Proposals:Are they compatible?

“General” competence IT Competence:

– Skills, personality traits, and knowledge, both • tacit: experience and cognition, and• explicit: applications, systems, management

– Investment in learning = profitability– Required of effective top managers as well

Additional Proposal

Specific proposed competence IT Fluency:

– The FIT individual is articulate, can synthesize information, and reformulate knowledge effectively

– In order to successfully apply IT to complex situations

– National Research Council, Being Fluent with Information Technology (Washington, 1999).

Alternative Approach: Expertise

Expertise: (cognitively) = more and better knowledge, better-organized knowledge, problem-solving capabilities, and superior creative and practical abilities

Additionally: tacit knowledge, social understanding within domain, expert agents and systems, and situated - contextual knowledge.

– Feltovich, et al., Expertise in Context (AAAI/MIT, 1999).

Implications Ultimately, it is functional competency that

is required, not just literacy. Such competency / fluency can only be

developed fully on the job Educators can accomplish this goal only in

partnership with the workplace … relieving us of explicit responsibility, yet

demanding new alliances and tactics.

In ConclusionIs IL Reaching too Far? Tools + resources + research process +

practical abilities Service learning + inquiry learning +

problem based learning + collaboration IL reaches too far if

– 1. it requires every information seeker to become a librarian

– 2. IL becomes synonymous with “learning”

IL: Too Narrow a View?

And yet not far enough; IL still too oriented

– toward print (when more visual and technological and interactive

skills are required)

– … and toward the individual (must heed the social determinants of learning effectiveness and workplace expertise)

To accomplish its goals IL must

refocus on the challenges of

socio-technical fluency for the

workplace

Information Literacy: Now Well Established

Demanded by Accrediting Agencies. Integrated into the curriculum Studied and evaluated “Information Literacy Librarians”

Encompassing Public libraries and School

libraries as well

Proposals