Author:
Boon Stuart,Johnston Bill,Webber Sheila
Abstract
PurposeThe purpose of this research is to identify UK English academics' conceptions of information literacy and compare those conceptions with current information literacy standards and frameworks.Design/methodology/approachThree year AHRB‐funded study involving 80 academics interviewed throughout the UK and using the phenomenographic research method to discover variation in experience leading towards identification of qualitatively different conceptions of information literacy. Conceptions are then reviewed in light of previous research and current librarian‐generated frameworks and standards.FindingsThe findings identify UK English academics' conceptions of information literacy and show them to be both similar to and significantly different from conceptions described in previous research and librarian‐generated frameworks and standards.Research limitations/implicationsThe research focuses on creating a conceptual snapshot‐in‐time for the 20 English academics taking part. The research implies that disciplinary differences in conception of information literacy are significant and suggests further research to assess disciplinary conceptual differences.Practical implicationsLibrarians working with English faculty on information literacy need to be aware of differences in conception between themselves and academics to work effectively. The paper also highlights the significance of information literacy in English faculty's teaching and research practices and this relevance suggests that information literacy should be integrated into course and curriculum design.Originality/valueThe paper fills a major gap in literature on information literacy by focussing on conceptions of lecturers, thereby counterbalancing the abundance of work produced by librarians. The paper illustrates the complexity of English academics' conceptions of information literacy and informs academics' use and understanding of information literacy.
Subject
Library and Information Sciences,Information Systems
Reference53 articles.
1. Association of College and Research Libraries (2000), Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education, American Library Association, Chicago, IL, available at: www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlstandards/informationliteracycompetency.htm.
2. Association of College and Research Libraries IS Research and Scholarship Committee (2003), “Association of College and Research Libraries IS Research and Scholarship Committee ACRL Research agenda: research agenda for library instruction and information literacy”, Library and Information Science Research, Vol. 25, pp. 479‐87.
3. Ashworth, P. and Lucas, U. (2000), “Achieving empathy and engagement: a practical approach to the design, conduct and reporting of phenomenographic research”, Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 295‐308.
4. Bates, M. (1989), “The design of browsing and berrypicking techniques for the online search interface”, Online Review, Vol. 13 No. 5, pp. 407‐24.
5. Bawden, D. (2001), “Information and digital literacies: a review of concepts”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 57 No. 2, pp. 218‐59.
Cited by
115 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献