From small step to giant leap in research ability.

Abstract

Undergraduate students have access to enormous amounts of information yet often fail to understand how to locate and use information effectively and ethically. This article describes a unique collaboration that embeds the five information competencies in a specific course and delivers instruction in information literacy from both the content faculty and the librarian. Embedding the information competencies into the curriculum transforms a complex process into a series of small achievable steps and delivers instruction at the student's point of need, resulting in improved information literacy.

Introduction and Justification

Today more information than ever before is literally at our fingertips. Undergraduate students often rely solely on the widely available and easily accessible information on the Web for their research needs. A student researching obesity can go to a search engine such as Google and within 0.17 seconds link to 9,240,000 websites that discuss or mention the word obesity. While easy access to infinite sources of information is seemingly the stuff of dreams, the reality of the information age may be something more of a nightmare. Patricia Senn Breivik (2005), Chair of the National Forum on Information Literacy observes: "As far back as 1982, futurist John Naisbitt presciently wrote, 'We are drowning in information but starved for knowledge" (p. 22). Undergraduate students often fail to understand the basics of information retrieval and use. "Many students think that Google indexes the entire Web ... Most know nothing about the 'invisible Web' that includes research tools ... that index scholarly journals" (Grassian, 2004, p. 24). Both faculty and librarians report that undergraduate students "often use the Web indiscriminately. They copy and paste from all kinds of Web sites" (Grassian, 2004, p. 25). "The digital age makes it easy for students to plagiarize" (Sterngold, 2004, p. 16). Undergraduates often do not know the differences between popular and scholarly publishing, and are unfamiliar with the peer review process. In addition, in the face of the worldwide Web explosion, librarians are finding it increasingly difficult to promote the value of authoritative library resources.

The information age is rapidly transforming into an information crisis because students lack the understanding and tools with which to sift through the staggering amounts of information available on the Web. To begin to address this significant problem the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) have developed Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education of(ACRL, 2004). These standards identify and describe what an information literate individual needs to know and be able to do to function effectively in the information age. "Information literacy is a set of abilities requiring individuals to recognize when information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate and effectively use the information" (ACRL, 2004, p. 2). The five Information Literacy Standards for Higher Education developed by the ACRL specifically address these abilities. The Information Literate student is able to determine the nature and extent of the information needed (Standard One); access that information effectively (Standard Two); evaluate information and its sources critically (Standard Three); use information effectively to accomplish a specific purpose (Standard Four); and use information ethically and legally (Standard Five). Our understanding of information literacy continues to evolve. "Information literacy is best envisioned as a broader concept ... In this broader perspective, information literacy is a kind of critical thinking ability ... a person who is information literate specifically uses critical thinking to negotiate our information-overloaded existence" (Breivik, 2005, p. 23).

Currently, most information competency instruction is provided by librarians in the form of single library instruction sessions or invitations to classes. These one time only sessions have little lasting effect (Lowe, 1995). Nunberg (2005) observes that "leaving information literacy to librarians alone suggests a failure to understand the scope of the problem" (p. 4.4). Breivik (2005) notes "when it comes to helping students master information-literacy skills, the work has to center in the classroom" (p. 26). What is needed is collaborative instruction that involves both faculty and librarians in teaching information competency to undergraduate students. The evidence from successful faculty librarian collaborations (Chiste, Glover, & Westwood, 2000; D'Angelo & Maid, 2004; Dickson, 2004; Ducas & Michaud-Ostryk, 2004; Fiegen, Cherry, & Watson, 2002; Rockman, 2003) suggests that assimilating library instruction with a course curriculum can improve students' information literacy skills. "The current classes faculty teach can become starting points for creating a more structured information literacy initiative" (Breivik, 2005, p. 26). This article describes an on-going faculty-librarian collaboration.

Background

The library's instruction statistics, compiled and analyzed each semester by the library's Instruction Coordinator, demonstrate that the Communication Studies faculty at CSU-Stanislans requests library instruction for its students more often than nearly every other department in the university (A. Andres, personal communication, January 9, 2005). The Communication Studies faculty has long recognized the importance of the library's resources and has taken initiative through the library's instructional program to ensure their students are exposed to the library, its services, and the basic skills of information retrieval. The library's instructional statistics also indicate that the majority of library instruction provided to the Communication Studies students takes place through single sessions conducted by a librarian (A. Andres, personal communication, January 9, 2005). Despite these efforts, the Communication Studies department determined that students continue to lack the skills outlined by the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education (ACRL, 2004).

The single instruction session approach currently in place has several weaknesses. Library instruction is often delivered with little connection to specific assignments or research projects. When instruction is provided too early and without a context, the content is too abstract for students to link to their own information needs (Malenfant & Demers, 2004). The single session approach also allows for very limited instructional time, with the result that the five competencies can not be adequately addressed. A third weakness is a lack of coordination between courses in the curriculum and among faculty in the department that leaves students with varying degrees of skill. Some students participate in several single instructional sessions that provide almost identical content, and other students receive little or no library instruction. In an effort to address these issues, the Communication Studies department began in early 2004 to develop a comprehensive and systematic plan to integrate the five information literacy competencies into their curriculum. With the support of a grant from the California State University Office of the Chancellor, the Communication Studies faculty, in collaboration with a librarian, began to address specific goals for integrating the competencies. One of the goals established by the department was to revise targeted course syllabi and assignments to include intensive, graduated information literacy components. A Communication Studies instructor and a librarian began to outline a strategy for a lower division critical thinking course, COMM 2300: Argumentation and Critical Thinking. COMM 2300 is a lower division general education course composed of thirty students. There are 19 female and 11 male students in the class. The group is composed of 11 freshmen, 13 sophomores, 2 juniors, and 4 seniors. COMM 2300 is ideal for an information literacy component because this critical thinking course requires students to effectively determine their information needs, access appropriate and reliable information, and then use this information to formulate arguments based on reasoning, evidence, and analysis.

Nature of the Collaboration

This collaboration is unique because it fully embeds the five information competencies into a specific course and curriculum and delivers instruction in information literacy from both the content faculty and the librarian. The collaboration is in process, but it is our belief that this approach will result in improved information literacy. The strengths of this approach are twofold: first, it transforms a complex process into a series of small achievable steps; and second it delivers instruction at the student's point of need.

This collaboration pairs a Communication Studies instructor and an Instructional Librarian. Both partners in this collaboration are fully invested in the course, and both are active in planning and implementing this new and innovative instructional design. The instructor and librarian work together to create assignments and instruction that will fully integrate the five information competencies into the Argumentation and Critical Thinking curriculum. Assessment of this approach is on-going, as part of a pre-test/post-test research design. Developed by the librarian, the pre-test consists of 16 multiple choice questions that are organized into sections based on each of the information competency standards. The pre-test incorporates existing information competency assessment instruments (Landrum & Muench, 1994), and extends them by extracting additional quantitative data and assessing student knowledge of basic library research skills. Data from the pre-test, administered in February, suggests that students are not skilled at accessing and evaluating information (Standards Two and Three). Data reveals that approximately 90% of the students believe that the library's local catalog is the best place to search for journal articles, while closer to 92% of the respondents do not know how to physically locate the library's print journal collection. These results may have more to do with the status of the students as undergraduates, who have had limited occasion to work with and exposure to journals. The pre-test also indicates that approximately 85% of the respondents are unable to define 'paraphrasing.' At a time when plagiarism and cheating are making headlines, it is surprising to learn that none of the students recall being exposed to the university's policy on cheating and plagiarism (Standard Five). The preliminary data from the pre-test measured student's information-seeking skills, and is enhancing on-going evaluation of this pedagogical approach.

The faculty member devised the large writing assignments to fulfill the specific objectives of the argumentation and critical thinking course. In the Argument paper students are to construct an argument about a significant social issue, which requires them to effectively determine their information needs, access appropriate and reliable information, and then use this information to formulate arguments based on reasoning, evidence, and analysis. The Rebuttal Paper and Speech ask students to refute the argument they made in the Argument paper, which again requires them to effectively determine their information needs, access appropriate and reliable information, and then use this information to formulate refutation arguments based on reasoning, evidence, and analysis. The specific learning objectives of the Argumentation and Critical Thinking course dovetail nicely with the information literacy standards, as both focus on enabling students to find, retrieve, ethically use and critically evaluate information, arguments and evidence.

The librarian was a co-creator of the course and curriculum, a co-instructor in teaching the information literacy standards, and functioned as an invaluable resource to students. The librarian offered a unique perspective on student research and could report to the faculty on what actually occurs when students use the library. Our faculty are generally unaware with how students use the library. The librarian offered specific and concrete ideas to guide students through the research process and assist students in formulating a question and devising a research plan. The librarian had detailed knowledge about finding information. A benefit to students was that they formed a personal connection to the librarian and had access to the librarian via email 24/7.

Specific Assignments

The major assignments in the Argumentation and Critical Thinking course are two papers. The Argument paper asks students to select a local issue, explore the literature surrounding that issue, and develop an argument about that issue. The Refutation paper asks students to respond to their own argument and engage in the process of rebuttal and refutation. To fully integrate the five information competencies into the Argumentation and Critical Thinking course, the major assignments needed to be broken down into their requisite parts. The instructor and librarian collaboratively created a series of smaller assignments, five assignments per paper (ten in all), that fully integrate the five information competencies into the course curriculum.

The first assignment focuses on topic selection and topic development (Standard One), and assists students in narrowing their topic. The second assignment asks students to identify the sources of information they will use, and to explain why they will use these sources of information (Standard Two). Prior to receiving library and class instruction, students identified free web based search engines as their primary reference tool. The assignment confirmed that students know very little about scholarly sources, peer reviewed articles or academic data bases (Grassian, 2004). A library instruction session on the date this assignment was due acquainted students with academic databases in the library and distinguished between scholarly and popular sources. This instruction was delivered at the student's point of need. Following this instruction, students had time for hands-on searches with feedback from the librarian. The faculty then spent several class sessions dealing with content specific topics of source and message credibility and types and sources of evidence (Standards Two and Three). The third assignment asks students to organize their information and to outline the paper (Standard Four).

Standard Five seeks to make students more aware of the issues of plagiarism and to help them understand the economic, legal and social issues surrounding the use of information. To achieve this goal, both the librarian and the faculty will explicit instruct students in citing sources and using information ethically and legally will be provided. Repeating this instruction will make the message stronger. Additionally, the fifth assignment asks students to turn in copies of all their sources and to physically highlight the information or evidence they think they will use in the paper. This evidence can then easily be incorporated into the outline.

Outcomes and Discussion

We believe this collaboration will produce several positive outcomes. First, this approach fulfills all of the information competencies. Students will be able to determine the extent of information needed, access the needed information effectively and efficiently, evaluate information and its sources critically, incorporate selected information into their knowledge base, understand the economic, legal and social issues surrounding the use of information, and access and use information ethically and legally. Second, this approach gets students back in the library, for the period of instruction, and teaches them the value of the resources of an academic library. Undergraduates are able to interact one-on-one with the instructional librarian and learn, at the point of need, what resources the library can make available to them. Students have already learned that searching for information on academic databases not only leads them more quickly to scholarly sources but also helps them more successfully narrow their topics. Third, by breaking the information down into its requisite parts, students will acquire functional knowledge they can take with them throughout their academic career and beyond. The goal of this collaboration is to transform a complex and often overwhelming process into a series of small and achievable steps.

This collaboration connects the expertise of both the faculty and the librarian. Faculty possesses subject matter expertise and the librarian is able to connect to students' informational needs. Since information competence is designed for life-long learning, it is vital that collaboration be continued and developed with new technologies. With the widespread use of classroom management software, many librarians are now approaching faculty and asking to participate in an online discussion forum or to post electronic library guides via online course management software programs. Living in the information age does not have to be a nightmare. Recalling the words of astronaut Neil Armstrong, "one small step" can be transformed into a "giant leap." The millions of pieces of information literally at our fingertips can be managed effectively by employing an approach to library instruction that merges the educational objectives of the specific course and the information competency standards. In an age of information overload, this collaboration turns a complex process into a series of small and achievable steps.

Note

Readers can contact the authors for copies of the specific assignments and/or the post-test results.

References

Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL). (2004). Information literacy competency standards for higher education. Retrieved November 19, 2004, from http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlstandards/informationliteracycompetency.htm# ildef

Breivik, P.S. (2005, March/April). 21st century learning and information literacy. Change, 20-27.

Chiste, K.B., Glover, A., & Westwood, G. (2000). Infiltration and enrichment: Capturing and securing information literacy territory in academe. Journal of Academic Librarianship 26, 202-208.

D'Angelo, B.J., & Maid, B.M. (2004). Moving beyond definitions: Implementing information literacy across the curriculum. Journal of Academic Librarianship 30 (3), 212-217.

Dickson, V. (2004). Collaboration plus! The development of an information literacy and communication program. Australian Library Journal 53 (2), 153-160. Retrieved June 28, 2004, from Expanded Academic ASAP database.

Ducas, A.M., & Michaud-Ostryk, N. (2004). Toward a new venture: Building partnerships with faculty. College and Research Libraries 65 (4), 334-348.

Fiegen, A.M., Cherry, B., & Watson, K. (2002). Reflections on collaboration: Learning outcomes and information literacy assessment in the business curriculum. Reference Services Review 30 (4), 307-318.

Grassian, E. (2004, May/June). Do they really do that? Librarians teaching outside the classroom. Change, 22-27.

Landrum, R.E., & Muench, D.M. (1994). Assessing students' library skills and knowledge: The library research strategies questionnaire [Special issue]. Psychological Reports 75, 1619-1628.

Lowe, S. (1995). Collaboration with Faculty: Integrating Information Literacy into the Curriculum. The Seventh Off-campus Library Services Conference Proceedings. Mount Pleasant, MI: Central Michigan University.

Malenfant, C., & Demers, N.E. (2004). Collaboration for point of need library instruction. Reference Services Review 32 (3), 264-273.

Nunberg, G. (2005, February 13). Teaching students to swim in the online sea. New York Times, p. 4.4.

Rockman, I. (2003). Integrating information literacy into the learning outcomes of academic disciplines: A critical 21st century issue. College and Research Libraries News 64, 612-615.

Sterngold, A. (2004, May/June). Confronting plagiarism: How conventional teaching invites cyber-cheating. Change, 16-21.