Journal of Educational Computing, Design & Telecommunications

Volume 6, Fall, 2005

Teaching Information Literacy in Higher Education:
What can we learn from faculty?

Elaine Chen and Bo Yang

Elaine Chen and Bo Yang are both doctoral candidates in the College of Education at Kansas State University. They have collaborated on several research projects and presented a version of this paper at the Society of Information Technology and Teacher Education (SITE), in the spring of 2005 in Phoenix, Arizona.

Abstract

More and more educators realize that there is no guarantee that computer literate students have adequate information literacy skills to find authoritative information and evaluate it for use in their research. What does information literacy mean? How can faculty help students with effective research methods? This short paper suggests some effective patterns to help students conduct high quality research, especially making use of the Internet.

Introduction

People talk about research in a variety of educational settings: University faculty deal with research on a daily basis; graduate students employ research for theses or dissertations; and even K-12 students engage in research to produce projects for technology assisted project-based learning. Meanwhile, educators are facing a big challenge of keeping up with information environments that have changed dramatically in appearance, location, accessibility, application and communication in the past ten years. What do our students really need to know? How can we help them keep up with rapid change? Is there any difference between today’s research patterns that integrate technologies, especially the computer and the Internet, and traditional research methods? Questions like these have increasingly become a concern for educators (Walton & Archer, 2004). Furthermore, we have seen more and more concerns from faculty about the quality of student research. “Plain and simple, the Internet is ruining the quality of students’ research paper.” (Thompson, 2003, p. 260) Why has this happened? Do our students have the knowledge they need to conduct good research? How do faculty, immersed in a more traditional library experience, learn to do good online research? Do the experiences in “brick and mortar” libraries help students use virtual library’s online searching systems effectively?

Purpose Statement

Although in modern society, with the dramatic usage of computer and Internet, students can access to a mass of information by using tools like Google, AskJeeves and other search engines, there are more concerns about the quality of student research. These concerns may not simply result from student laziness, but rather a result of unfamiliarity with “Information Literacy” skills. Such knowledge is crucial for high quality research in education.

The goal of the paper is to share with the readers what the two researchers have learned through a study of university faculty who conduct online research with the ultimate goal of drawing attention to the need for information literacy skills in higher education. We highlight the methods used by faculty that are most useful for other educators as they try to address difficulties that many novice student researchers encounter. These methods can provide valuable research skills for students to learn and emulate. We will provide guidelines outlining when students should learn the skills; what information literacy skills need special instruction; and suggest whose responsibility it is to teach students to succeed in an information age.

Literature Review: Information Literacy

People use computers everyday for different proposes including entertainment devices similar to television, radio, or video games; office tools including word processing, data storage, calculators; communication tools such as electronic mail or telephone; and of course as learning media for transmitting and transforming information. The effective use of the technology tools previously listed is called “computer literacy”. There is no guarantee, however, that a computer literate student has the effective research skills that most educators would like them to have. Indeed, recent concerns about the ability of students to efficiently search and use information have been raised (Jenson 2004; Riedling 2004, D’Angelo & Maid, 2004). Students may be online, but access has not necessarily taught them anything about the quality of information they have accessed or how to use it. Moreover, the issue of student plagiarism is a common complaint of teachers, but should students take all the blame if they are not taught how to conduct effective ethical online research? Accordingly, the term “information literacy” arose when educators recognized that computer literacy skills did not ensure the ability to conduct research. A widely accepted definition from the National Forum on Information Literacy for information literacy (IL) states that IL is “the ability to know when there is a need for information, to be able to identify, locate, evaluate, and effectively use that information for the issue or problem at hand.” (ALA, n.d.)

A report titled “Information Literacy Standards for Student Learning” prepared by American Association of School Librarians and Association for Educational Communications and Technology suggests three essential standards related to IL:

1. The student is able to access information efficiently and effectively. That is, the student knows when to seek information beyond his or her personal knowledge, how to frame questions that will lead to the appropriate information, and where to seek that information. (ALA et al., 1998 p.3)
2. The student is able to evaluate information critically and competently. That is, the student weighs information carefully and wisely to determine its quality. (ALA et al., 1998 p.4)
3. The student is able to use information accurately and creatively. That is, the student organizes and integrates new information to their own knowledge, and produces information in appropriate formats. (ALA et al., 1998 p.5)

These standards illustrate the reality that computers and Internet make it possible for students to access information at anytime from anywhere, and beg the question, “What can institutions and faculty do to prepare students for effective use of this information?” Answers to the questions “who is responsible for IL?” and “who are the experts in IL?” were presented by D’Angelo and Maid’s study of Partnership Between the Library and a Multimedia Writing and Technical Communication. These authors state that “Faculty across the campus must understand they all have a shared responsibility in injecting IL into their curriculum. However, they can only do so meaningfully in close collaboration with the experts in the library.” (2004, p. 216)

A library located in one Midwest university studied by the authors of this paper, has an online catalog through which students and faculty can find books, journals, e-journals, newspapers, sound and video recordings, printed music, maps, government documents and manuscripts. Besides that, the university offers a resource called CATnet: a new kind of information discovery web site. CATnet brings together an expanding array of electronic resources and specialized information access tools such as, Databases E-Journals, and a growing number of university-created digital collections. CATnet users can choose from a variety of search and discovery tools according to their access requirements. The search box on the CATnet home page is a new “semi-search” tool that enables users to search many information resources at once. The university’s “Digital Library” actively participates in developing technologies that promise the best access options for students and researchers. People with a university electronic ID can set up a personal workspace on CATnet by using a feature called “My CATnet”

Research Questions:

The following questions guided this research:

How does education faculty conduct online research?

What are their strategies in searching, organizing, retrieving, and sharing information with colleagues?What are their difficulties in searching, organizing, and/or retrieving information?What are the methods used (including technology tools) by these faculty? What is the role of technology?

2. What are the primary concerns of education faculty in regard of students’ information literacy skills?

How can faculty and library staff help to improve students’ information literacy skills?Whose responsibility it is to teach IL skills in higher education?

Method

The researchers conducted semi-structured interviews with seven faculty members from the College of Education at a Midwest university. The initial interview instrument was revised after it was pilot tested with an experienced researcher. Faculty included in the study were comprised of two male and five females teaching in the areas in Science Education, Educational Technology, Education Leadership, Counseling Psychology, and Multicultural Education. Their teaching experiences ranged from two years to seventeen years. The researchers also interviewed the education librarian to acquire a different perspective on issues related to IL. All the interviews were tape-recorded, transcribed and independently coded by the two researchers to develop tentative categories, which were then compared, resorted and organized into broader themes. The next step of data analysis focused on identifying connections among different categories and themes to provide a coherent account of research results.

Findings

Faculty’s information literacy skills

There is no doubt that education faculty have “the ability to know when there is a need for information, to be able to identify, locate, evaluate, and effectively use that information for the issue or problem at hand.” (ALA, n.d.) However, in order to explore how faculty conduct online research, and how these strategies can help novice researchers, we focused on how faculty use computers for searching, organizing, retrieving, and sharing information with colleagues. The findings are listed below:

Online searching skills-
We expected that faculty would favor the university’s online library system rather than commercial search website; but the findings indicate that Google was the most used search engine for all the participants. There is, however, a tendency for faculty to use Google mainly for general information seeking to identify terms and phrases, and then conduct deeper research using the library’s online database. The typical format for this method was:

Use Google for initial search. Some participants also used Google to find out what have been done in related fields.
Participants identify terms and phases using Google, which then sent the search back to the university’s online library.
Consult with the education librarian. One faulty mentioned that if she couldn’t find a satisfactory result from her initial search, she would call library staff to ask for guidance.
Google Advanced and Google Scholar were mentioned for more detailed and specific hits as well as for academic searches.

Organizing skills-
Although participants tended to keep printed articles in binders, folders, and drawers, the computer organization skills varied:

No one was satisfied with their organizational systems.
Some effective strategies included organization by authors, title, and subject.
One participant used FileMaker Pro to create a database for his bibliography of books. He is working on a second database for journal articles.
Most of the participants used a Microsoft Word document to collect a list of bibliography. In addition to simple bibliographies the participants also:
Added lines to distinguish what has been used, what has not, and what can be used in the future
Citations indicating where the paper is and in which folder for easy retrieval
References listed in APA format
RefWorks has been introduced as an effective way to organize the references.

RefWorks is a web-based database which allows users to create personal databases and generate bibliographies. Instead of typing every word, the user can simply import references from some online databases by using built-in filters. In addition to importing, RefWorks automatically creates author, descriptor and periodical indices for quick search and retrieval. Most of the participants, however reported that time was a significant issue for learning this application. All participants agreed that a simple and powerful organizational tool is desperately needed.

Retrieving skills-
Based on the participants’ poorly organized systems, retrieving resources using their personal methods of organization has never been easy, but people have their own methods of retrieving files:

Participants agreed that hardcopy folders are still preferred. For them, it is easier to find resources from drawers, folders, and three-ring binders.
Retrieving resources from computers is not that easy. It relies on how well they name the electronic files, the electronic folders, and remembering where the folders have been stored. One participant had seventeen research projects at hand reported that she had to go through all the folders and documents to find what she wanted

Sharing resources with others-
Collaboration was mentioned as a valued skill for conducting research. One new faculty member described the importance of learning from a mentor, but raised the question of how best to share information with each other? Strategies reported by participants included, sending emails, attachments, zipped files, links, or PDF files. Although RefWorks has a feature that allows sharing references with others, none of the participants mentioned it. The authors assumed that the severity of learning curve caused no one to take full advantage of the features available through RefWorks.

The role of technology-
Even if technology is indispensable, and online searching is “what everyone does nowadays”, teaching individuals how to use technology effectively for purposes of research is a different issue. Difficulties related to this issue that participants identified include:

The cross-platform obstacle between Macintosh and PC systems.
Young faculty reported that use technology more, but there is no strong evidence between age and use of technology. This disparity may simply be due to the small sample size.
Participants identified the time required to learn new technology as a critical issue. Whether faculty shifted to a new application depended on how long it took to learn and use, and the simplicity of the application.
Participants reported that it takes time to create references in, or transfer accumulated references into an online database application.

Concerns about students’ information literacy skills
Some faculty assumed students had information literacy skills because they had computer skills, but this is not true in many cases. Students might possess computer skills and information-seeking skills, and still not have enough background knowledge to evaluate the credibility of resources. Faculty reported that their students also used Google searches for research papers and class assignments, but students tended to use what they found from the website which might not be “full-text”. Unlike their instructors, students neglected to use the university’s online database for a deeper search. Additional themes identified in the faculty interviews were:

Faculty were concerned about students’ IL skills. Students should learn IL skills as early as possible. (at least in the high school).
Plagiarism is still a problem. Faculty should not assume that students understand what plagiarism is.
Graduate students are motivated to learn and accumulate IL skills, but most of the undergraduate students are not.
Students tend to use main-stream search engines for one-stop searching. Students should develop the ability to determine whether or not the article they have located is credible.
Students lack the ability to effectively use keywords, terms, norms, and phrases from their disciplines when searching.
Students are not aware of what journals, online database, or online resources are available for their research.
Faculty should take some responsibilities to integrate information literacy skills into curriculum.
Collaboration between faculty and library staff to teach information literacy skills should be promoted in higher education settings.

Recommendations

To improve IL skills in this age of information, we make the following recommendations:

There is a need to integrate IL into curricula and teach IL skills when students first conduct online research in high school and before.
Students need a knowledge base for the keywords, terms, norms, and phases used in their fields. Teachers and the library staff can work together to provide workshops and/or training programs for students to learn keywords and terms in their respective disciplines.
Students need to recognize scholars in their field. They also need to learn what journals and online databases are available in their field.
Google search is so popular because it is simple and powerful. Special instructions for using “.COM” search engines for academic search are needed.
Some other search engines and protocols should be introduced for specific online searches including Google Scholar, Vivisimo, Clusty, Grokker, and LexisNexis.
Technology is the tool to get things done. People do not have the patience to learn new software due to the time issues and cognitive load limitations. A simple and powerful tool for effective organization and easy retrieval could solve some of these problems.

Conclusions

Our research shows that although more and more students believe that the Internet is now sufficiently simple, and powerful enough for them to find whatever they want; even graduate without ever using the library, our faculty is still concerned about student research skills. Despite all of its strengths, the Internet cannot provide students with the high-quality scholarly information that is available only through subscription, license, or purchase. How to teach students information-seeking, organizational and use skills should be of primary concern in higher education. Based on the perspectives of faculty members we interviewed, we identified basic research techniques that all students should learn. Education faculty conducted online search in a similar way: they used Google to search general ideas, they used those terms identified in the initial search with the university library’s online system to find credible full-text articles. Some students are assumed to have better computer and/or Internet skills than their instructors, which might be true, but what they lack is the ability to identify authorized articles; moreover, they do not have enough background knowledge in their field to deepen their searches. What we can learn from faculty is twofold: students need adequate training for IL skills and students need solid knowledge in their field to shape their IL skills.

Notes

The authors presented a version of this paper in a poster session at the Society of Information Technology and Teacher Education (SITE). The SITE conference took place March 1st to March 5th, , 2005 in Phoenix, Arizona. This version of this paper is also available online at: http://www-personal.ksu.edu/~chang/IL/index.htm

References

American Library Association (n.d.) Standards for Libraries in Higher Education: Retrieved: September 27, 2004, from
http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlstandards/standardslibraries.htm

American Library Association (ALA) and Association for Educational Communications and
Technology (AECT). (1998). Information Literary Standards for Student Learning: Standards and Indicators. Retrieved September 28, 2004, from American Association of School Librarians: http://www.ala.org/ala/aasl/aaslproftools/informationpower/informationpower.htm

Asselin, M. (2004, April). Guiding the inclusion of information literacy. Teacher Librarian,
31 (4), 63-64.

Asselin, M. (2004, June). New literacies: Towards a renewed role of school libraries. Teacher Librarian, 31(5), 52-53.

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

Davis, E. (2004, September/October). Leveraging our cutting-edge library tools and
resources—An information literacy success story. MultiMedia & Internet @ Schools, 11 (5), 25-27.
Google. (n. d.) http://www.google.com/
Jenson, J.D. (2004, Summer). It's the information age, so where's the information? Why our students can't find it and what we can do to help. College Teaching, 52 (3), 107-12.

Thompson, C. (2003). Information illiterate or lazy: How college students use the web for research. Libraries and the Academy, 3, 259-268.

RefWorks. (n.d.). RefWorks Web Based Bibliographic Management Software. Retrieved:
January 11, 2005 from: http://www.RefWorkss.com/productinfo.shtml

Smalley, T.N. (2004, May). College success: High school librarians make the difference. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 30(3), 193-8

Walton, M., & Archer, A. (2004). The Web and information literacy: Scaffolding the use of
web sources in a project-based curriculum. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(2), 173-186.