Many (but not by any means all - I teach community college) of my younger students are computer literate, but not information literate. They can use Google or Wikipedia; but how well are they using them? Let me put it this way - whenever I catch anyone plagiarizing, it's usually from a web page in the first page or two of the Google search results.
That is so not information literacy.
According to the ACRL, "Information literacy is a set of abilities requiring individuals to 'recognize when information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate, and use effectively the needed information.'" The ACRL has defined 5 standards that indicate information literacy, and they pretty closely align with my understanding as someone who is unofficially paid to teach information literacy under the guise of a college composition course: know when you need information, know how to go about seeking it (e.g., Google versus the library, how to do effective searches), be able to recognize "good" information (i.e., critical reading), use the information in an effective way once it's found, and use other people's ideas ethically (i.e., don't plagiarize).
Let me interject here that this is harder than it seems.
The final project for my freshman composition classes, an argument or analysis paper that is informed by outside sources have outcomes (which are given to me) that look a bit like the above standards. This usually requires hitting the easy button by telling them they need X amount of sources, half of which must be "library" sources (and we discuss the whys and hows of that, which includes what even I must admit is a terribly boring orientation - and I like this stuff! - at the library to the catalog, databases, and internet with tips that the students seem to mostly forget. I've tried requesting a short, database only version for this Monday, so let's see how that goes.) I require these "library" sources (argh, I can't call them non-internet because practically the whole library collection is digital and accessible online) or else from some students I will get a bunch of stuff no doubt found in the first 2 pages of Google. However, I do let them use internet sources - but they have to be "credible." This is a concept we (try to) explore at length (the critical reading component), and admit that I am pretty happy if they can at least halfway look critically at a source.
This would be a noble goal alone in a semester, but I am also supposed to get them to know when they need outside information (again, by force of assignment combined with models in our readings, usually a discussion focused on argument - but since I think many are happy sticking with their already-formed ideas, I'm not so sure this "sticks"), how to not plagiarize (integration and citation practice with some explanation of why and a dash of turnitin.com), and how to use that information effectively. This last one is tough. Humans are good at the quick categorization into the "I agree" and "I disagree" files.
Oh, and I'm also supposed to be teaching them how to write an effective college essay.
All in all it is hard for me to say I am doing any of this well. I can measure types of sources and how well sources are integrated and cited easily, but the rest?
The ACRL standards lean heavily towards primary resources and academic scholarship as the information to be sought out. I think that at the freshman level, this can be instructive but is not as helpful as at a more advanced level. Scholars in the field need primary sources and peer-reviewed journal articles. But, really, do my freshmen, beyond a first-hand experience in how primary sources can be interpreted?
The standards also emphasize, somewhat implicitly, database search engines (through the use of advanced search features as an outcome), thus downplaying the role of the internet search engine and its plethera of secondary sources. Considering I, an MLIS student and holder of an MA in English, with 24-hour access to a few college library catalogs and many databases, still go to Google most of the when I need to know something (sometimes even "expert" stuff - thank you internet forums when my computer did _____), this focus is a bit unrealistic. I wish the librarians would spend more time showing my students how to use the internet better.
Intellectual property rights get another spotlight in the standards, which makes sense given the Western, scholarly perspective. Finally, there is much emphasis on technology in general, which is a separate skill (as the ACRL freely admits) but one that has gotten so wrapped up in information retrieval and has really confounded information literacy with the sheer volume of information now available.
Amber, you have a tough job. I've heard from other English composition instructors who practically go insane teaching this course year after year. But, I don't want to be too negative. You are doing a great service even if you have the occasional bouts of "am I doing this well?"
ReplyDeleteI couldn't agree with you more about teaching better internet skills. This seems like the most intuitive way to search for everyone across the board these days. I was glad to have a chapter and discussion devoted to internet searching in the reference class I took over the summer. I think the more education surrounding it, the better. And here's where I get on my soapbox - whether we like it or not, the internet is here to stay. It does have it's limits, like everything else, but I think it's part of our jobs as librarians to make the best of it and figure out how to sharpen our understanding of it so it can be seen by all as a valid research tool.
I also agree that the internet is here to stay and that we should teach users how to use it and how to identify a good source. I've come to find out that undergrad students are not as invested in their research as grad students and professors are, therefore they care to spend the time it takes to search databases.
ReplyDelete