Information Literacy is hard to define. While there is certainly agreement about the importance of teaching students how to access, evaluate and ethically incorporate the work of others, an overabundance of frameworks can leave instruction programs wondering what to focus on. Should we teach about a website/tool that can help students evaluate a potential source, or should we teach them how to produce their own sources? Or is it in fact more important for students to understand how their own experiences and socialization might affect their evaluation of said sources? The emergence of interactive media platforms only complicates these questions: Is discourse on social media an academic resource, emerging technologies, examples of digital media or insidious examples of capitalism's negative effects on the information landscape? What exactly is the intersection between information, data, media, technologies, psychology and learning theory....
Way back in 2011, Mackey and Jacobson highlighted this tension when they noted that "several competing concepts of literacy have emerged including digital literacy, media literacy, visual literacy, and information technology fluency, but there is a need for a comprehensive framework based on essential information proficiencies and knowledge" (Mackey, 62). Part of Mackey and Jacobson's response to this disciplinary disorganization was to propose metaliteracy (search our catalog) as a solution. While the name might cause cynics to roll their eyes, metaliteracy is defined as an "overarching and self-referential framework that integrates emerging technologies and unifies multiple literacy types" (Mackey, 62). This unified definition is exactly why the ACRL Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education "draws significantly upon the concept of metaliteracy, which offers a renewed vision of information literacy as an overarching set of abilities in which students are consumers and creators of information who can participate successfully in collaborative spaces" (ACRL). While this concept has been around for over a decade at this point, I think that this definition suffers from "too-much-ism" and can be difficult to apply with fidelity - especially for new instruction librarians. In the coming months, I want to offer concrete suggestions of how instruction librarians can incorporate metaliteracy into their instruction practices, and their assessment of information literacy learning outcomes.
Super Practical Metaliteracy Tip you can start using tomorrow:
You can very easily incorporate metacognition and self-reflection into your exit ticket or post-session survey. Many instruction programs have a standardized tool that is administered after one-shot instruction sessions. One way to incorporate metalitearcy into your assessment is to require students to reflect on their own learning process or how they relate to information. A sample prompt might read: What strategy worked well? What have I learned that I can use for future tasks? How can I memorize this strategy?
Works Cited:
Association of College and Research Libraries, Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education. Chicago: ALA, 2015. American Library Association. Web. 12 Feb. 2015.
Mackey, Thomas P, and Trudi E Jacobson. “Reframing Information Literacy as a Metaliteracy.” College & research libraries 72.1 (2011): 62–78. Web.
Further Reading:
 Metaliteracy in a Connected World by
ISBN: 9780838949443
|
|
|
|
|
This is part 2 of a series on Practical Metaliteracy Tips for Library Instruction Programs. Please see my previous post where I introduced the metaliteracy model and began discussing practical ways that instruction programs can begin incorporating the principles of metaliteracy into their programs.
Metaliteracy and Source Evaluation
Evaluating online information is an essential skill for anyone who uses a cell phone to interact with the world. Librarians - and teachers of all ages - assume that because the majority of college students are digital natives, they have the skills and dispositions to be savvy internet users. As Kirschner and De Bruyckere (2017) remind us, teachers must "avoid the pitfall of assuming that their students possess talents and abilities that they do not actually have" (p.137). Add to this assumption the fact that many library instruction programs rely on dated information evaluation techniques and frameworks (Ziv & Bene, 2022). This has created a situation where students are given analog tools for a digital world. Caulfield and Wineburg (2023, p.8) note that "print-based conceptions of critical thinking don't cut it. Skillfully navigating the internet requires conceptions of critical thinking tailored to a digital environment." The key here is metacognition and the context of the self.
Metacognition is an essential part of what separates metaliteracy from information literacy or technology literacy. "While metacognitive reflection is included in the ACRL Framework, it is not as pronounced or integral to that model as it is in metaliteracy" (Mackey & Jacobson, 2022, p. 36). A more nuanced understanding of the information environment requires students to not only consider their thoughts and feelings as they interact with information but also see themselves as active producers of knowledge. Caulfield & Wineburg (2023) emphasize this in their S.I.F.T. Model for online verification - they acknowledge this metacognitive self-awareness to be an essential first step in evaluating online information (p.12). This brings us to our Practical Metaliteracy Tip for Library Instruction Programs....
Super Practical Metaliteracy Tip you can start using tomorrow:
Encourage students to consider the three contexts of online information: the context of self, the context of the source, and the context of the claim. As students are required to think about the limits of their own expertise, as well as acknowledge their own emotional/physiological reactions to new/unknow information, they will begin developing metacognitive skills that are essential for navigating the digital world. Mackey (2022) reiterates that this "self-directed approach to the synthesis, evaluation and assessment of learning is integral to the metaliteracy model," and an essential component of creating metaliterate learners and citizens. Giving students time to reflect on their own reactions/feelings to sources, while also teaching them to note these reactions is an important part of modern source evaluation can be very useful. Students need to understand that they are an integral part of the information environment - and need to be able to think metacognitively about the research/evaluation process.
Works Cited:
Caulfield, M., & Wineburg, S. S. (2023). Verified: How to think straight, get duped less, and make better decisions about what to believe online. The University of Chicago Press.
Kirschner, P. A., & De Bruyckere, P. (2017). The myths of the digital native and the multitasker. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 135–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.06.001
Mackey, T. P. (2022). Metaliteracy in a connected world: Developing learners as producers. ALA Neal-Schuman.
SIFT (The Four Moves). (2019, June 19). Hapgood. https://hapgood.us/2019/06/19/sift-the-four-moves/
Ziv, N., & Bene, E. (2022). Preparing College Students for a Digital Age: A Survey of Instructional Approaches to Spotting Misinformation | Ziv | College & Research Libraries. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.83.6.905
Commenting on blog posts requires an account.
Login is required to interact with this comment. Please and try again.
If you do not have an account, Register Now.