Teaching, Learning and Information Literacy

  • Published on
    27-Mar-2017

  • View
    217

  • Download
    4

Transcript

  • This article was downloaded by: [University of California Santa Cruz]On: 25 November 2014, At: 13:09Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

    Behavioral & Social SciencesLibrarianPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wbss20

    Teaching, Learning andInformation LiteracyJennifer L. Branch a ba Teacher-Librarianship by Distance LearningProgramb Department of Education and the School of Libraryand Information Studies, Faculty of Education ,University of Alberta , Edmonton, AB, CanadaPublished online: 25 Sep 2008.

    To cite this article: Jennifer L. Branch (2003) Teaching, Learning and InformationLiteracy, Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian, 22:1, 33-46, DOI: 10.1300/J103v22n01_04

    To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J103v22n01_04

    PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

    Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the Content) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

    http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wbss20http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1300/J103v22n01_04http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1300/J103v22n01_04http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J103v22n01_04

  • This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

    Dow

    nloa

    ded

    by [

    Uni

    vers

    ity o

    f C

    alif

    orni

    a Sa

    nta

    Cru

    z] a

    t 13:

    09 2

    5 N

    ovem

    ber

    2014

    http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

  • Teaching, Learningand Information Literacy:

    Developing an Understandingof Pre-Service Teachers Knowledge

    Jennifer L. Branch

    SUMMARY. This study explored pre-service teachers understandingsof information literacy and Information and Communication Technology(ICT) outcomes before and after being involved in a class that promotedand explored issues of information literacy and resource-based learning.One surprising result of a pre-class questionnaire was that, when askedabout the role of information literacy in their lives as teachers, only four ofthe ten participants mentioned the students in their classroom and only oneparticipant clearly stated that information literacy skills would need to betaught to students. This result suggests that teacher educators need tomove from helping pre-service teachers become more information literateto helping pre-service teachers integrate information literacy skills intotheir own teaching. The post-class questionnaire found that immersingpre-service teachers in a research process, information literacy, and re-

    Jennifer L. Branch is Coordinator, Teacher-Librarianship by Distance LearningProgram and Assistant Professor with a joint appointment in the Department of Educa-tion and the School of Library and Information Studies, Faculty of Education,University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada (E-mail: jbranch@ualberta.ca).

    [Haworth co-indexing entry note]: Teaching, Learning and Information Literacy: Developing an Under-standing of Pre-Service Teachers Knowledge. Branch, Jennifer L. Co-published simultaneously in Behav-ioral & Social Sciences Librarian (The Haworth Information Press, an imprint of The Haworth Press, Inc.)Vol. 22, No. 1, 2003, pp. 33-46; and: Information Literacy Instruction for Educators: Professional Knowledgefor an Information Age (ed: Dawn M. Shinew, and Scott Walter) The Haworth Information Press, an imprintof The Haworth Press, Inc., 2003, pp. 33-46. Single or multiple copies of this article are available for a feefrom The Haworth Document Delivery Service [1-800-HAWORTH, 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. (EST). E-mail ad-dress: docdelivery@haworthpress.com].

    http://www.haworthpress.com/store/product.asp?sku=J103 2003 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.

    Digital Object Identifier: 10.1300/J103v22n01_04 33

    Dow

    nloa

    ded

    by [

    Uni

    vers

    ity o

    f C

    alif

    orni

    a Sa

    nta

    Cru

    z] a

    t 13:

    09 2

    5 N

    ovem

    ber

    2014

  • source-based learning environment allowed their definitions of informa-tion literacy to expand, and they were better able to imagine how theycould integrate the ICT outcomes into their teaching. [Article copies avail-able for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service: 1-800-HAWORTH.E-mail address: Website: 2003 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.]

    KEYWORDS. Information literacy, teacher education, resource-basedlearning, information and communication technology, research process

    Information literacy is one of the educational buzzwords for this newmillennium. As educators, we want our students to be able to locate,evaluate, synthesize, and use information from a variety of sources toanswer all types of questions. As teacher educators, our challenge is toprepare teachers to teach the skills, strategies and attitudes that are partof information literacy. Education librarians can have an important rolein the information literacy education of pre-service teachers as well.

    The research in this paper was conducted in the Faculty of Educationat the University of Alberta. Readers outside of Canada should be awareof the Canadian educational context. By legislation, education, includ-ing post-secondary education, is primarily a provincial and territorialmatter. There have recently been a number of regional initiativesdeigned to create common curriculum frameworks in the areas of math,language arts, science and social studies. As yet, there is neither a na-tional office of education, nor national governmental policies in the ar-eas of information literacy and technology integration for pre-serviceteachers or for K-12 students. Some regional, provincial and territorialpolicy initiatives in these areas have been developed, however, or are inthe development stage, including Albertas Information and Communi-cation Technology Curriculum.

    It is also important to know that there are two national school libraryassociations, neither having the impact on educational policy and prac-tice of the kind evidenced in the U.S. by organizations such as theAmerican Association of School Librarians (AASL) and the Interna-tional Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). Nor are teacher ed-ucation institutions in Canada accredited by a body equivalent to theNational Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). Asis consistent with the Canadian approach to many aspects of public pol-icy, assurance of high-quality programs and services does not comeabout through federal regulations but through more local and collabora-

    34 INFORMATION LITERACY INSTRUCTION FOR EDUCATORS

    Dow

    nloa

    ded

    by [

    Uni

    vers

    ity o

    f C

    alif

    orni

    a Sa

    nta

    Cru

    z] a

    t 13:

    09 2

    5 N

    ovem

    ber

    2014

  • tive processes of negotiation underpinned by expectations of goodwill,effort and integrity.

    It was in this educational climate that the province of Alberta and itseducation department (Alberta Learning) created the Information andCommunication Technology (ICT) outcomes. Information literacy ispart of this new document that provides students with a broad perspec-tive on the nature of technology, how to use and apply a variety of tech-nologies, and the impact of information and communication technologieson themselves and on society (Alberta Learning 2002). The ICT curricu-lum is meant to be integrated with other K-12 curriculum areas.

    The ICT curriculum focuses on new ways to communicate, inquire,make decisions and solve problems. It is the processes, tools and tech-niques for:

    Gathering and identifying information Classifying and organizing Summarizing and synthesizing Analyzing and evaluating Speculating and predicting (Alberta Learning, 2002).

    These concepts are presented in three categories. The first, commu-nicating, inquiring, decision making and problem solving are about theability to use a variety of processes to critically assess information,manage inquiry, solve problems, do research and communicate with avariety of audiences. Students are expected to apply their knowledgeand skills in real-life situations. The second category, foundational op-erations, knowledge and concepts, is about understanding the natureand effect of technology, the moral and ethical use of technology, massmedia in a digitized context, ergonomic and safety issues, and basiccomputer, telecommunication and multimedia technology operations.Processes for productivity, the third category, is about the knowledgeand skills required to use a variety of basic productivity tools and tech-niquesfor example, text composition; data organization; graphical, au-dio and multimedia composition and manipulation; media and processintegration; and electronic communication, navigation and collabora-tion through electronic means (Alberta Learning 2002).

    These outcomes are not that different from expectations across NorthAmerica that teachers integrate technology and information literacyskills into teaching. In Alberta, as in other jurisdictions, school districtshave implemented professional development and in-service sessionsfor their classroom teachers in order to facilitate this work. In Faculties

    Jennifer L. Branch 35

    Dow

    nloa

    ded

    by [

    Uni

    vers

    ity o

    f C

    alif

    orni

    a Sa

    nta

    Cru

    z] a

    t 13:

    09 2

    5 N

    ovem

    ber

    2014

  • of Education, some methods courses now include reference to, and as-signments based on, the ICT outcomes. Also, students have been re-quired to take a computer fundamentals class that focuses on thetechnology outcomes from ICT. At the University of Alberta, informa-tion literacy is not specifically addressed.

    We know very little about what understandings pre-service teachershave about information literacy and how a course that promotes infor-mation literacy influences these understandings. This study exploredpre-service teachers understandings of information literacy and ICToutcomes. Pre-service teachers were involved in a class on resource-based teaching that promoted and explored issues of information liter-acy and resource-based learning. Early in the class, participants wereasked about their understandings of information literacy. At the end ofthe class, they were again asked about their understandings of informa-tion literacy and also about ICT outcomes to compare and contrast withthe initial responses.

    REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

    As early as 1989, the American Library Association recommendedthat information literacy be included in pre-service teacher education.In 1998, when the Association of College and Research Libraries(ACRL) prepared A Progress Report on Information Literacy: An Up-date on the American Library Association Presidential Committee onInformation Literacy: Final Report, they were able to outline the as-tounding progress that has been made toward the reaching of these rec-ommendations in such a relatively short period of time, with littlefinancial support, and largely through volunteer and grassroots efforts.However, one glaring area where nothing had been accomplished wasRecommendation 5teacher education and information literacy. ACRL(1998) suggested that there must be a plan for working with teacher ed-ucation programs and the National Council for Accreditation ofTeacher Education to infuse information literacy requirements into un-dergraduate and graduate programs of teacher education. The call forinformation literacy to be included in pre-service teacher education wasmade again in Blueprint for Collaboration (ACRL 2000) with the state-ment that faculties of education need to include academic librarians asmembers of the instructional team in graduate and undergraduateteacher education programs and in continuing professional teacher de-velopment programs.

    36 INFORMATION LITERACY INSTRUCTION FOR EDUCATORS

    Dow

    nloa

    ded

    by [

    Uni

    vers

    ity o

    f C

    alif

    orni

    a Sa

    nta

    Cru

    z] a

    t 13:

    09 2

    5 N

    ovem

    ber

    2014

  • Elsewhere in this collection, Asselin and Doiron (2003) report on astudy of the role of school libraries and information literacy in Facultiesof Education at universities across Canada. They discovered that activi-ties that foster information literacy skills were included in the coursecontent of methods courses in pre-service education. However, theseinformation literacy outcomes were aimed at facilitating the pre-serviceteachers own school success rather than toward helping pre-serviceteachers think about how they would teach information literacy skills intheir own classrooms. According to the authors, The skills associatedwith information literacy such as working with the research process arevery much a part of revitalized methods courses, but little is done toshow pre-service teachers how to develop these skills with their futurestudents. In fact, it appears that transfer of learned skills in the libraryto classroom instruction is not scaffolded enough for new teachers to besuccessful. In speaking with librarians at libraries and resource centersthat serve the Faculties of Education, the authors found that librarianswere also helping pre-service teachers develop information literacyskillseven if the librarians did not always recognize that they were do-ing so. Disheartening to hear was that librarians reported that they werenot aware of leadership in the area of information literacy by any of thecourse instructors.

    Asselin and Lee (2002) reported the results of a study where they in-fused information literacy into a language arts methods course forpre-service teachers. The authors used pre- and post-reflective writingsand concept maps or webs as a way to track the new understandings of in-formation literacy. They found that students information literacy knowl-edge was enhanced by participating in the project. For Asselin and Lee(2002), the most significant development in our students understandingof information literacy was the shift from thinking of it as readingmasses of print information to a process-based view of interpreting andgenerating multiple types of information (13). Participants were veryexcited about how their information literacy skills improved during thecourse. They felt, for example, that they were better able to use and toteach students how to use electronic resources and to search the Internet.

    RESEARCH METHODS

    This study focused on information literacy understandings and theeffects of an information-literacy class on a group of pre-service teachereducation students. The University of Alberta offers two Bachelor of

    Jennifer L. Branch 37

    Dow

    nloa

    ded

    by [

    Uni

    vers

    ity o

    f C

    alif

    orni

    a Sa

    nta

    Cru

    z] a

    t 13:

    09 2

    5 N

    ovem

    ber

    2014

  • Education programsa four-year program and two-year program forthose students who already have a degree. The participants in the studywere enrolled in Resource-Based Teaching (EDES 346), a course of-fered to students in both the elementary and secondary streams. Theclass had 20 students (17 women and 3 men) ranging in age from about20 to 45.

    The course involved exploring a variety of resources (e.g., encyclo-pedias and other reference tools, the ERIC database, Web sites, books,online and print newspapers and magazines, scholarly journal articles,games, videos, and posters) and creating an annotated bibliography on atopic from the curriculum of the students choice. Students were also re-quired to prepare a critical evaluation of a Web site, to create a posterpresentation on a community resource to support teaching and learning,and to plan an integrated resource-based teaching unit that incorporatedone or more content areas plus ICT outcomes. These assignments weredesigned to allow pre-service teachers to learn about research whilecompleting a research process leading up to the production of the inte-grated, resource-based teaching unit. Pre-service teachers chose a topicof interest from a preferred curriculum area (usually the students majoror minor) and created an annotated bibliography of resources useful tosupport teaching and learning for their topic. Next, pre-service teachersevaluated a Web site that would be useful for their topic and, finally,identified community resources that would support their topic. Usingall of these resources, pre-service teachers then developed their unit.The course focused on helping pre-service teachers understand how tolocate, evaluate, and use appropriate teaching and learning resources ina variety of formats to develop an integrated resource-based learningunit. It also highlighted research process models, learning styles, au-thentic assessment, school library programs (including visits to schoollibraries at the elementary, junior and senior high level), inquiry-basedlearning, planning a resource-based learning project, and how to pro-mote reading in schools.

    An education librarian assisted with the class by doing two workshops.The first workshop was an orientation to the library and to the resourcesthat would be especially important for the students including referencematerials and the reference librarians information desk, current journals,newspapers and magazines, curriculum documents, and the curriculumlibrary. The curriculum library is located within the education library andcollects all of the selected and approved resources for Alberta schools.The second workshop was an ERIC database-searching workshop. Edu-

    38 INFORMATION LITERACY INSTRUCTION FOR EDUCATORS

    Dow

    nloa

    ded

    by [

    Uni

    vers

    ity o

    f C

    alif

    orni

    a Sa

    nta

    Cru

    z] a

    t 13:

    09 2

    5 N

    ovem

    ber

    2014

  • cation librarians have a long history collaborating with instructors andfaculty members in developing and teaching this class.

    Research ethics approval was given by the Faculty of Education tocarry out the study. Participants gave informed consent and were not co-erced in any way. The researcher was also the instructor so it was im-portant for the students to understand that the decision to participate ornot had no influence on grades. All students in the class were asked toparticipate and ten volunteered. The ten participants represent studentsof varying ages and home life situations.

    The pre-service teachers came with a variety of backgrounds andmore than half of the participants had already completed a degree in an-other subject area such as biology, mathematics, accounting, chemistry,or English. Six of the ten participants had taken a course in computerfundamentals that highlighted some of the ICT outcomes (those relatingto specific technologies, e.g., spreadsheets, databases, word-processingprograms, Web design, presentation software, and digital imaging soft-ware). Additional opportunities exist for pre-service teachers to attendworkshops in the Education Library but these are all on a voluntary ba-sis. Students may be exposed to information literacy discussions as partof other courses but not in any structured way. A newly-designed re-quired course in educational technology now involves information liter-acy instruction by education librarians, but these participants were notinvolved in that course.

    Each of the participants completed two open-ended questionnairesthat were distributed on the course Web site and returned by e-mail. Thefirst questionnaire asked about the participants family life, work lifeand school life, about the participants understanding of the term infor-mation literacy, and about the participants understanding of how infor-mation literacy will be a part of his or her professional life as a teacher.The second questionnaire asked questions about the impact of thecourse including changes to the participants understanding of the terminformation literacy, how information literacy will be a part of his or herown teaching, and if the participant felt more information literate as aresult of the class. Questions also were asked about the participants un-derstandings of the ICT outcomes mandated for all schools in Alberta.The first questionnaire was distributed early in the term (September2002), and the second at the end of the term (December 2002).

    Each of the questionnaires arrived by e-mail so no transcription of re-sponses was necessary. Each set of responses was read thoroughly. Asthe research progressed, e-mail responses and observation notes were

    Jennifer L. Branch 39

    Dow

    nloa

    ded

    by [

    Uni

    vers

    ity o

    f C

    alif

    orni

    a Sa

    nta

    Cru

    z] a

    t 13:

    09 2

    5 N

    ovem

    ber

    2014

  • analyzed to generate ideas, thoughts and new questions. Patterns andcommon experiences emerged from the data and were recorded.

    Participants also gave the researcher permission to analyze the finalexamination that asked them to describe the purpose of the Informa-tion and Communication Technology Outcomes and how you would in-tegrate those outcomes into your own teaching. This data alsoprovided insight into the students understanding of information liter-acy and how to integrate these skills into the curriculum.

    FINDINGS

    Several themes emerged from the data analysis. These include Defi-nitions of Information Literacy, Information Literacy in Teaching andLearning, Becoming Information Literate, and the Impact of the Courseon Understanding and Being Able to Integrate ICT Outcomes. Each ofthese themes is presented below.

    Definitions of Information Literacy

    Participants were all able to define information literacy. Informationliteracy for the majority of the participants had to do with finding, lo-cating, and acquiring information in various forms. For four partici-pants, it also meant being able to use the information. One participantstated, I think it means many thingsbeing able to understand a questionbeing posed to you, being able to communicate with others, knowingwhere to look for pertinent information, being able to sort through all ofthe gobbledygook to find what it is you were looking for, knowing thedifference between different sources. The idea of being able to tell thedifference between credible and less credible sources came up only oneother time. Three participants also talked about the need to understand in-formation that comes from different kinds of sources.

    There were some similarities and differences from the first question-naire, when participants were asked about their information literacy un-derstandings, and their responses to the same question at the end of theterm. Participants still strongly indicated that finding, locating, andaccessing information were very important in information literacy.New terms, however, entered the definitions, including process,brainstorm, organize, calculate, and solve. Several of the par-ticipants, when asked if their definition of information literacy hadchanged answered in the negative, and then proceeded to give a com-pletely different definition from the one offered earlier. One of the par-

    40 INFORMATION LITERACY INSTRUCTION FOR EDUCATORS

    Dow

    nloa

    ded

    by [

    Uni

    vers

    ity o

    f C

    alif

    orni

    a Sa

    nta

    Cru

    z] a

    t 13:

    09 2

    5 N

    ovem

    ber

    2014

  • ticipants noted that she felt that being information literate was moreimportant than she had before the course: I think that it [informationliteracy] has, however, grown in importance for me. I think it is becom-ing even more important for people to be able to understand and evalu-ate the validity of the information that they receive in every day life,especially with the growing influence of the media. Another studentnoted that Now I include the ability to calculate and solve mathemati-cal problems as a function of information literacy.

    Information Literacy in Teaching and Learning

    Participants also had many ideas about the ways information literacywill be a part of their lives as teachers. One noted that she will need tobe able to find information to supplement information given in the text-book. Along the same lines, another stated that she will always belooking for updated information as well as focusing on the best methodto teach a particular subject. A third added: Teachers get sent all sortsof stuff, and have to balance all sorts of outside interests in their class-room so being able to sort through all the information thats available(from all sorts of sources, and whether I want the info or not!), and pickout the stuff/resources that I need and that will be useful to me would behelpful. There was certainly a strong message that participants felt thatthey needed to be information literate to help themselves as teachers.

    Only four of the ten participants gave some indication that it was im-portant to help their students become information literate. Only one gotto the heart of the issue of teaching information literacy. She stated, Iwould also like to think that Ill be passing skills other than the primarysubject to my students as wellthings such as how to organize, how towade through information to find whats really important, etc. Oneparticipant wanted her students to be information literate and anotherwanted students to be independent learners. A third participant notedthat it was important to be able to teach students how to find informa-tion, especially now when there is so much information out there. I can-not possibly teach them everything so they need to know how to find outinformation on their own.

    Becoming Information Literate

    When asked if participants felt more information literate as a result ofthis class, all felt that they were. Some of the things participants felt theyhad learned included:

    Jennifer L. Branch 41

    Dow

    nloa

    ded

    by [

    Uni

    vers

    ity o

    f C

    alif

    orni

    a Sa

    nta

    Cru

    z] a

    t 13:

    09 2

    5 N

    ovem

    ber

    2014

  • the ability to identify an information need and to think criticallyabout the best resources available to meet that need;

    the ability to access community resources to locate information; the ability to critically evaluate information found on the Internet;

    and, the ability to present students with different styles of projects.

    One student stated, I think that I am more information literate. I ambetter able to access computer-based information, am aware of ways toevaluate information and feel that I am able to take the information Ihave learned and use it in my classroom. Participants did suggest areaswhere they still felt unsure about information literacy. These includedthe more practical things such as searching the Internet and understand-ing the different search engines, searching online databases includingERIC, and learning how to use the library.

    Impact of Course on Understandingand Being Able to Integrate ICT Outcomes

    The ICT outcomes are the closest thing to an information literacycurriculum that one could hope to havenearly 20 percent of the com-mittee developing the curriculum was made up of teacher-librarians.When asked about understandings about ICT outcomes, seven of the tenparticipants felt they were better able to address ICT outcomes as a re-sult of this class. One stated, I never realized they werent all aboutcomputersall of my curriculum classes emphasized the use of comput-ers, but not the thinking and learning that comes with the technologyand piles of information. Another commented, I know where to findthem now! Now that I know where they are, then I can better addressthem through different activities. A third added, Yes, I do feel betterable to address ICT outcomes, if only because I was forced to look atthem and see how they would apply to my classroom and I hadnt beenasked to do that before. Other students felt that previous courses hadalso prepared them in this regard. One noted that the required computercourse and her minor course did a good job of addressing ICT out-comes. Another felt that the required computer course was more usefulto her for addressing ICT outcomes. As she wrote: I feel better know-ing about ICT outcomes but not to fully address all the issues.

    Participants had many ideas for integrating ICT outcomes into thecurriculum and these included having students:

    42 INFORMATION LITERACY INSTRUCTION FOR EDUCATORS

    Dow

    nloa

    ded

    by [

    Uni

    vers

    ity o

    f C

    alif

    orni

    a Sa

    nta

    Cru

    z] a

    t 13:

    09 2

    5 N

    ovem

    ber

    2014

  • Retrieve, access, and critically evaluate information from a varietyof sources;

    Use and learn more advanced skills on available software such asInspiration, PowerPoint, FrontPage, Excel, and Word;

    Learn to use, manipulate, and incorporate digital images, digitalvideos, graphics, clip art and drawings to enhance presentations;

    Learn to properly cite sources; Research a variety of authentic topics with real world applications

    and using real world data to learn different points of view; and, Incorporate graphics, clip art, and drawings.

    DISCUSSION

    Early in the resource-based teaching course, the ten participants wereable to give a very limited definition of information literacy. Their defi-nitions included finding/locating/accessing information, and some in-cluded using/evaluating/selecting information. Although the definitionswere not complete and did not include the idea of process, this was notunexpected. What was surprising, however, was that when asked aboutthe role of information literacy in their life as a teacher only four of theten participants mentioned the students in their classroom and only oneclearly stated that information literacy skills would need to be taught tostudents. When examining the results of research done by Asselin andDoiron (in press), however, it became clear why this was happening.Pre-service teachers are indeed being taught information literacy skillsas part of their methods courses, but these methods courses are not help-ing pre-service teachers prepare to integrate and teach information liter-acy skills to the students in their own classrooms.

    The failure to connect information literacy skills to teachers futurestudents is the fatal flaw in our current pre-service education programs.Either as teacher educators or as education librarians, we need to movefrom simply helping pre-service teachers become more information lit-erate themselves to preparing pre-service teachers to integrate informa-tion literacy skills into their own teaching (which should also helppre-service teachers become more information literate). Asselin andLee (2002) found success with integrating information literacy instruc-tion into a language arts methods course for pre-service teachers. Theyfound the project made a difference to new teachers understanding ofand abilities to teach information literacy (16).

    Jennifer L. Branch 43

    Dow

    nloa

    ded

    by [

    Uni

    vers

    ity o

    f C

    alif

    orni

    a Sa

    nta

    Cru

    z] a

    t 13:

    09 2

    5 N

    ovem

    ber

    2014

  • This study confirmed the findings of Asselin and Lee (2002) andfound that by immersing pre-service teachers in a research process, in-formation literacy, and resource-based learning environment, their defi-nitions of information literacy expanded and they were better able toimagine how they could integrate the ICT outcomes into their teaching.Moreover, they felt more comfortable with integrating the ICT out-comes into their lessons and the variety of ways they envisioned doingso is proof of this.

    IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

    We all wish for our children to grow up to be independent, life-longlearners. Consequently, our children will need the information literacyskills of being able to identify, locate, and effectively use information tosolve all kinds of problems. For Carr (1998), this ability to learn how tolearn is a key characteristic of those who are information literate.These skills need to be taught to our children, beginning at an early age,and need to be reinforced and expanded as they move through elemen-tary, junior and senior high school. A few parents may be able to helptheir children learn these skills but classroom teachers and teacher-li-brarians will have the most responsibility for developing these skills.

    For that to happen we must ensure that our pre-service teachers learnin their teacher education programs the skills not only to be informationliterate teachers, but also to be information literacy instructors. Thisprocess may actually involve two steps. The first is to develop the infor-mation literacy skills in our pre-service teachers. We look to educationlibrarians, teacher educators, and other instructors in undergraduateprograms to work with post-secondary students to require them to find,evaluate, use, synthesize, and present information in interesting waysusing a variety of technologies. The second step is that Faculties of Edu-cation must recognize that having information literate teachers does notnecessarily mean that they will produce information literate students.We do not expect that people who are good in science and math will in-herently understand the strategies and methods appropriate for teachingothers to be good in science and math. Likewise, we cannot assume thatthe fact that one has mastered the research process means that one isprepared to effectively integrate information skills instruction as part ofthe coursework in a content area. In teacher education programs we helppre-service teachers understand both the content and the strategies nec-essary to teach a particular subject such as language arts, social studies,

    44 INFORMATION LITERACY INSTRUCTION FOR EDUCATORS

    Dow

    nloa

    ded

    by [

    Uni

    vers

    ity o

    f C

    alif

    orni

    a Sa

    nta

    Cru

    z] a

    t 13:

    09 2

    5 N

    ovem

    ber

    2014

  • math and science. Effective teachers need to have the content and un-derstandings of information literacy and also the discussion of strate-gies, methods, and approaches that best suit the teaching of informationliteracy, including the importance of integrating information literacyskills instruction into all subject areas.

    Teacher educators must rethink and redesign methods courses.Along with helping pre-service teachers develop their own informationliteracy skills, we also need to make it a priority for them to understandhow to teach information literacy to their students. In this way, we canhelp pre-service teachers to become lifelong learners who can then pro-mote lifelong learning skills in their own classrooms. For that to hap-pen, pre-service teachers need to be given opportunities to see howinformation literacy skills can be integrated into the core subject areasand how important new technologies can be when finding, organizing,synthesizing and presenting information.

    Perhaps we can do this easily within existing methods courses by re-thinking assignments (Asselin and Lee 2002), or maybe we must createa new course, required for all pre-service teachers, that provides oppor-tunities to learn how to integrate information literacy instruction intotheir lessons while exploring issues of process learning, informationtechnology and resource-based learning. Either way, we need to findnew ways to help pre-service teachers gain these skills.

    To effect change, we need reports of other projects designed to helppre-service teachers become more information literate. Examples suchas these, including those provided in this collection, can provide teachereducation program planning committees with models of possibilitiesand options for course revisions and additions. We also need more re-search to help us to better understand how to support and guide pre-ser-vice teachers when they are learning to be information literacy teachers.These pre-service teachers can be the ones who can help our childrenmeet the challenges of living in the Information Age.

    REFERENCES

    Alberta Learning. 2002. Information communication and technology [online]. [cited11 September 2002]. Available from World Wide Web: .

    American Library Association. 1989. Final Report of the Presidential Committee onInformation Literacy [online]. Chicago: The Author [cited 10 March 2003]. Avail-able from World Wide Web: .

    Jennifer L. Branch 45

    Dow

    nloa

    ded

    by [

    Uni

    vers

    ity o

    f C

    alif

    orni

    a Sa

    nta

    Cru

    z] a

    t 13:

    09 2

    5 N

    ovem

    ber

    2014

  • Asselin, Marlene, and Elizabeth A. Lee. 2002. I wish someone had taught me: Infor-mation literacy in a teacher education program. Teacher Librarian 30 (2): 10-17.

    Asselin, Marlene, and Ray Doiron. 2003. Whither they go: An analysis of the inclusionof school library programs and services in the preparation of pre-service teachers inCanadian universities. Behavioral and Social Sciences Librarian, 22(1): 19-32.

    Association of College and Research Libraries. 1998. A progress report on informa-tion literacy: An update on the American Library Association Presidential Commit-tee on Information Literacy: Final Report. [cited 18 December 2002]. Availablefrom World Wide Web: .

    Association of College and Research Libraries and American Association of SchoolLibrarians. 2000. Blueprint for Collaboration: AASL/ACRL Task Force on the Edu-cational Role of Libraries. [cited 88 January 20032]. Available from World WideWeb: .

    Carr, Jo Ann. 1998. Information literacy and teacher education [online]. Washington,DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Teaching and Teacher Education. (ERIC DocumentReproduction Service No. ED 424231) [cited 5 March 2003]. Available WorldWide Web: .

    46 INFORMATION LITERACY INSTRUCTION FOR EDUCATORS

    Dow

    nloa

    ded

    by [

    Uni

    vers

    ity o

    f C

    alif

    orni

    a Sa

    nta

    Cru

    z] a

    t 13:

    09 2

    5 N

    ovem

    ber

    2014