Notes from the 2009 Georgia Conference on Information Literacy

Georgia Conference on Information Literacy
September 25-26, 2009
Coastal Georgia Center
Savannah, GA

Many of the sessions at GA CoIL seemed to agree that we need to do a better job teaching information literacy skills to students (and faculty). Of course, we’re doing plenty (we think) now, but students keep going back to Google, no matter how much instruction we give.
Following are some of my very, very rough notes from sessions I attended at the conference. Luckily, many of our presenters have agreed to make their presentations available on the Georgia Conference on Information Literacy EagleSpace site. Visit it at http://eaglespace.georgiasouthern.edu/jspui/handle/10518/1893 for far better details on these and other presentations at this year’s conference. (You may enter keywords in the search box or you may browse for the desired presentation by subject, title, or author).

Friday, September 25
Panel 6
“Teaching of Intellectual Property as Part of Information Literacy: Still a Challenge,” Jeannette Cox. “Catching ‘cheaters’ is not the approach to teaching students life-long learning skills.”
“Tips for Writing Information Literacy Best Practices for Publication in a Publish or Perish World!” Betty J. Morris. Meet editors at conferences; volunteer to serve on advisory boards, as peer reviewer. Good advice!

“Rearranging the Horse and the Cart: Using Citation Analysis for Pedagogical and Curricular Reform of Writing Programs,” Sandra Jamieson. The Citation Project: http://citationproject.net Plagiarism: deliberate; patchwriting: poor paraphrasing/summarizing. Students confused about secondary information in publications. Failure to adequately/accurately cite information and ideas (as well as quotations). Confusion about how to paraphrase and about WHAT to cite.

Panel 11
“Why Digital Does not Equal Daunting: The Role of Information Management Tools in Supporting Faculty Research through Topic-Specific Library Workshops,” Liya Deng and Stan Trembach. Citation management, Refworks, google forms for assessment.
“You’ve Been Poked: Using Facebook as a Way to Engage Students while Teaching Basic Research Skills,” Alicia Howe. Facebook assignment: working in pairs, write a bio of each other a) based on FB profile, b) use that to ask questions. Could also use Ning instead of FB if you prefer (or if your school has decided to block FB—shades of MOO?)

“The Effect of Library Instruction on the Information Seeking Behavior of Undergraduate Education Majors,” Jason Martin. (My question: How do you reach ALL of our students? Library instruction, embedded librarians, tutorials, etc. – limited reach?) http://library.ucf.edu/Presentations/2009/GCIL Where do students look for information for a class? 72% Internet; 28% library. Found no significant difference between students who were taught “academic research instruction” and those who weren’t in what type of sources they choose to use.

[me: are we asking students to do too much too soon? I just (finally) trashed my senior-level undergraduate papers (and I was an English major), and I LIKED my papers as I re-read them. So did my professors—well, mostly. They garnered mostly A grades with “very well written” type comments. But I had never heard of “peer review” and I had no idea what a scholarly journal was or how to go about finding one until the first semester of grad school. Instead, I culled information from such sources as newspapers and magazines—I simply LOVED the old print Reader’s Guide to Periodical Literature as an undergrad in the pre-digital era! Now, of course, the Internet has made garbage, as well as valuable sources, easily available to our students and, since online databases make scholarly sources easily available, too, we suddenly seem to think that first-year students should be using them. Unfortunately, even when students DO try use these sources, they are usually written at a level that students can’t understand. In other words, we have access without accessibility.]

Panel 18
“Using iSkills and SAILS to Assess Information Literacy: What Do We Know and What Do We Do Now?” Shawn Tonner, Marina Slemmons, and Jennifer Campbell Meier. My Question: Even though students in ENGL 1102 did really very well in SAILS (http://www.projectsails.org) testing, what happens to these students when they progress in school? Answer: iSkills (http://iskills.org) – test in research methods courses in majors. Of course, a distinct problem with iSkills is that it seems to confuse/conflate technological literacy with information literacy skills. IL as QEP goal (SACS accreditation) at NGSCU.

Workshop 4 Assessing Student Learning
“Assessing Student Learning,” Julie Housknecht, Adrienne Button, and Pete Bursi
Learning Outcomes ENGL 1101 (Information Literacy) – Student learning objectives: SurveyMonkey (assessment). See also polleverywhere.com (without clickers—free for less than 100). NGCSU Outcome Measures (Menu – type of instruction, time, ACRL standard). Scaffolded learning (the menu can be an aid to this). Assign narrated “movie” documenting, w/annotated bibliography, rubric, etc. (ME: Try a “mockumentary”?) . Four class sessions for project.

Saturday, September 26
Kathleen Blake Yancey, Keynote Speaker
In her keynote speech, “Creating and Exploring New Worlds: Web 2.0, Information Literacy, and the Uses of Knowledge,” Yancey makes the argument that we have been teaching writing as process, but, if we do not teach content, we may have no processes to teach. Assumptions: Sources = materials, materials = verbal, visual, multimedia; use of the materials of others; creation of materials. Information literacy, to Yancey, think of the use of the material of others and plagiarism. Also, how do you create your own materials? Knowledge is constructed very differently than the way we have seen it in the past. Traditional library as “cathedral of knowledge.” A la Thomas Hardy class structure. This model still exists all too often. But it is no longer the only version. The Web has made “the library” available 24/7. We can go to the library, we can have materials “delivered” to us, we can access full text—and even download materials (within certain guidelines/restrictions). JStor allows for “export citations” – after login. Are we teaching these kinds of skills? No. Students want a physical and intellectual map of the physical library; they also want a “map” of the online library. Scavenger hunts don’t have a lot of “sticking” power; that is not the way we remember. BUT, our information ecologies are incomplete: 1) library 2) popular(?) and 3) “alternative” (blogs, National Enquirer, etc.)
Alternative sources may be valuable, but they are not usually included in our information ecologies (we generally focus on “canonical” sources to the exclusion of much valuable and credible material). Assignment: why something is credible and why it is not. (First question: Is it plausible? THEN is it credible!) “Filter and then publish vs. publish and then filter.” AAC&U Value Project (Association of American Colleges and Universities): Set of scoring guides for 11 categories of inquiry (including information literacy) to evaluate student work inside electronic portfolios.
· Determine the extent of information needed
· Access the needed information
· Evaluate information and its sources critically
· Use information effectively to accomplish a specific purpose
· Access and use information ethically and legally
www.aacu.org/value/rubrics/pdef/InformationLiteracy.pdf
Omits content—and not necessarily attuned to 21st century information ecology. Technology and composition, as well as Information Literacy, are areas often assumed to have no content. But that is about to change with regard to technology. New framework for 2011 high school – writing is composed on computer! Duh! New framework for technology – areas where students have to practice tech, but with content included (“how technology has interfaced with culture over time”)!! What we know about transfer of learning – what you learn in one setting you can carry forward into another setting and use appropriately. “How People Learn” book by John Bradsford (?) et al. – CONTENT MATTERS. “Without content, students operate on a GPS device.” Sam Wineberg – the making of knowledge in history: 1) corroboration (fidelity) 2) sourcing (authority) and 3) contextualization. Student assumption that textbooks are the most authoritative sources. Students do not understand primary and secondary (or even tertiary!) sources.

Tasks:
Case Study: How Do They Compare?
Analysis of an Encyclopedia Entry and Wikipedia Entry= an opportunity to consider how a given term is defined in two spaces purporting to provide information of the same quality; intended to help us understand how they are alike and different and what one might do in creating a Wikipedia entry. (Yancey)

Case Study: A Blogging Map of a Community
Raise a question you really care about; look at 15 blogs (and NO other sources). Community created through breadcrumbing the blogs—consider the credibility of the information . Modified – blogs may lead to more “traditional” sources.

Question in Google: Do Parents Influence Children Behavior? Results: range of sources, not necessarily with the same answers! Consider credibility/authority (sourcing/filtering).

Case Study: What are the Sources
Backsourcing a NY Times editorial: what are the sources the editor/writer must have consulted in order to produce this opinion piece?
What’s the role of content? 2 modest proposals
1. Include the logic of research practices (For example, 5 principles governing citations (Walker & Taylor) From slots to logic:
a. Access
b. Intellectual property
c. Economy
d. Standardization
e. Transparency
2. Identify key terms that together are information literacy: for example “Circulation”
a. For example, citation index--Citation maps (who has cited who? Any article is in the context of other articles.
b. Circulation—old/new “The Story behind the Story” – for example, how propaganda becomes information
Prior knowledge/post knowledge: iterative process. Threshold concepts: credible; corroboration; circulation (AND plausibility). Critical incident theory—case studies as staged critical incidents (e.g., investigation when an airplane crashes). Missing components

Panel 33 Saturday 9/26, p. 14
“Rhetorical Information Literacy in Professional Writing & Rhetoric: How Current Scholarship Can Shape University Infrastructure to Enhance Curriculum,” Michael Strickland and Paula Rosinski

Professional writing and Rhetoric (PWR) major (Digital media minor – check this) at Elon U. More robust version of rhetorical worldview in PWR – getting things DONE. Shapiro & Huges: IL is “a new liberal art that extends from knowing how to use computers and access information to critical reflection on the nature of information itself.” Functional, critical, and rhetorical computer literacy – Stuart Selber’s Multiliteracies. Such courses as 271 writing technologies; 282 CUPID studio (Center for Undergraduate Publication in? Design); 312 visual rhetorics, beginning with integration/introduction of digital I.L. initiative in first-year writing. Logic of citation (e.g., Walker & Taylor).

In 1101 – Digital Literacy initiative:
1. How search engines/databases search differently
2. Metadata as knowledge management
3. Naming files/folders/etc. as facilitating knowledge management & collaboration
4. Google docs, google scholar, books
5. RSS feeds, etc.

“Knowledge mgmt. is truly a growth industry and exploding as an outgrowth of information literacy connection/sinternet connections” (Strickland). Even helping students to organize data on hard drives/USB drives etc. – “computer sanitation” – ways of organizing information in the same ways as databases, in essence!

ENGL 212 Multimedia Rhetorics
Computer science students learn that rhetoric can inform their practice; writing students learn supposed distinction b/w science and humanities blurs in digital texts.
“With traditional & digital information/texts:
· Understanding audience is crucial
· Visual components carry persuasive power
· Organization & textual conventions affect access, meaning

“Tell a story” project: tell 1 store in 4 different mediums & reflection (clay, pencil & paper, word, multimedia) .

“Blog Postings: Reputable or Risky?” Patrice A. Williams and Ronda Zents.
Using online postings or blogs as sources of information. Short story by Larry Fondation, “Deportation at Breakfast,” using “Points to Ponder,” assigned students to write an analytical response (1 page). One student found the work of a former student who had posted her work to her professional blog. The student then used it rather effectively! Rhonda Zents using expert author blogs. Greg Mortenson’s Three Cups of Tea. Response to—after writing a rough draft of their response, students then incorporate what they find on the author’s blog.

Panel 38
“A Web –based Bulletin Board as Edward Soja’s ‘Thirdspace’: ESL and LGBTQ Students Claim Home Turf,” Patricia T. Price and Reuben HayslettPowerful slide show from Clothesline Project behind the speakers helps contextualize the discussion. (Note to self: the color coding of t-shirts as visual rhetoric.) “Loss of corporeality in cyberspace” (Price). {Me: Is there such as loss?). “Establishing a sense of home” – What material objects do students bring to campus from home? Explore relationships—body image and feelings of displacement. Price connected 2 classes in Georgia View, one in Women and Gender Studies and another an ESL class. Students read and responded to each other’s work without any f2f contact. Hayslett’s very powerful story of same-sex domestic violence and the campus’s response to his plight were powerfully presented (and published in a campus publication). Analysis of ESL student responses without f2f contact (e.g., sans “body”). Combining Pratt’s contact zone with Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development=”Contact zone of proximal development” (suggested by Mark McBeth, an audience member