Information Literacy Misinterpreted Again

This article from The Washington Post came in through a library list serv. The author, an independent school librarian, laments over his students' lack of interest in reading. His attempts at piquing their interest with eye-catching posters and displays seems only to get the students halfway: watching the film version of the classic tale as opposed to reading the novel.

I agree with the author's assertion that students aren't interested in reading, and I have some very good reasons to agree. Other than personal observations from the reference desk and the Reading at Risk study, the National Freshman Attitudes report suggests that this trend continues from secondary school to college. I also communicate with some local school librarians who are very passionate about what they do and how they help their students become independent, lifelong learners. It's by talking with these librarians and my efforts to create a dialog between school and academic librarians that I've found a fundamental misunderstanding stagnating information literacy progress.

"Information Literacy " is currently a buzzword in the field of library science. But some librarians equate it, as this author does, to "mastering computer skills, not promoting a love of reading and books." While not completely inaccurate, this is a a gross paraphrase which leaves out the most important piece of information literacy.

Information literate people have mastered computer skills because those skills are crucial to retrieving even books (via the online card catalog). From observations and research we know that students can use computers effectively. These students have been exposed to computers from childhood and are masters of the mouse, keyboard and Internet. They may struggle with database searching at the start, but most "get it" with some practical experience. The fundamental skill information literacy instructors are trying to teach is, “Why/when should one use a database or a book or the Internet or consult with an information professional (librarian or otherwise).” We are not discouraging the use of ANY resource, rather we're trying to teach the students to consider their research options and evaluate ALL resources before using them to satisfy an information need. The root of information literacy is a new form of critical thinking that gets students to consider the research process. It is less hands on, and more theoretical than some librarians' definitions. We're not just re-naming bibliographic instruction or "library" instruction here...information literacy as a whole is a core competency that is getting more and more attention by organizations that can make a difference in its implementation in education in both primary and secondary schools and colleges.

I hear my librarians and faculty complain that students aren't using good sources (books, journals, magazines, newspapers), and they're saying the same things as school librarians and teachers. AASL and ACRL standards are eerily similar but the differences can create vast misunderstandings. So let's get on the same page with defining information literacy. I started a “Sister Libraries” project to do just that. Any support, criticism, or feedback about this project is welcome.

Library Website Hall of Fame

While there's no methodology for the acceptance into the Library Website Hall of Fame (it is a wiki), there are some very attractive designs here with some very innovative uses of technology. I'll be brining this to the attention of my colleagues who are working on redesigning my library's web presence.