Relating Research and Practice in Information Literacy

Relating Research and Practice in
Information Literacy
Sheila Webber (University of Sheffield), Ola Pilerot
(University of Borås), Louise Limberg (University of
Borås), Bill Johnston (Strathclyde University)
ECIL
Dubrovnik
October
2014

Structure
• Introduction
• Sheila Webber
• Ola Pilerot
• Louise Limberg
• Bill Johnston
• Continuing the conversation with you!

Introduction
• IL research is a developing field: issue of how is it
developing, where does it fit
• Critical mass of practitioners seem to agree
research is necessary
• Perceived “gap” between library practitioners & LIS
researchers predates IL research i.e. background of
LIS research not being seen (by librarians) as
sufficient to needs of librarians
• Ambiguous relationship between librarians and LIS
academics in some countries

What we talk about when we talk
about the IL research agenda
Sheila Webber
(Information
School,
University of
Sheffield)

Scope of my contribution
• Examined selected articles and conference papers
explicitly talking about the IL research agenda/priorities
• Identifying the context in which the authors are placing
their discussion of research agenda/ priorities; how
they position it, introduce it etc.
• May help to explain differences in the actual priorities /
agenda proposed (the latter will only be dealt with
briefly here)
• Contributes to the scene setting of subsequent panel
presentations
• Is connected to question of “Why do research in IL”

• Examined selected articles and conference papers
explicitly talking about the IL research
agenda/priorities
• Researchers: Lloyd and Bruce (2011); Lloyd and
Williamson (2008); Partridge et al. (2008); Sundin
(2011)
• Librarians/ professional organisations; ACRL (2011);
Gibson and Jacobson (2014); Starr (2012)
• Contrasting 2 perspectives
• Exclusions and limitations of the study

Researchers
• Talk about the meaning of IL itself; their own stance
on what IL is about, and the meaning of IL as a
subject of research
• IL as not just the territory of librarians
• Positioning themselves
– theoretically or philosophically
– methodologically
– in terms of what populations investigated
– in terms of what research questions pursued

Researchers
• Position themselves and proposed agenda/priorities
in relation to:
– researchers in IL, in other LIS fields, or in “LIS” generally
– researchers in other disciplines
– the timeline/development of IL as a field
• Talk about discussion/collaboration in context of
specifying, conducting, disseminating research
• Conditions for research (e.g. funding, how you
develop a research agenda)

Librarians/ library organisations
• These 3 articles are all focused on teaching IL in
higher education
• They position the proposed agenda/priorities as a
reaction to changes in learners’ behaviour and in
the environment (e.g. “instruction environment”
(ACRL, 2011); technology changes) i.e. IL and its
research agenda need to change because the
learners & their environment has changed
• Methodologies not discussed in depth

Librarians/ library organisations
• Do not propose IL itself as object of study: in ACRL
(understandably) and in Starr (2012) nature of IL
also not discussed.
• Related to previous research mainly by identifying
deficiencies of previous research e.g. lack of
generalisable evidence (exception PIL)
• “Context” as limitation or problem rather than a focus
for research
• Discussion and collaboration focused on faculty &
other institutional groups, mainly to improve practice

• Researchers establishing the field: positioning,
laying foundations, testing and expanding
boundaries,
“here we are still working at exploring/ investigating
/ uncovering the phenomenon” (Partridge et al,
2008)
• Main emphases in librarians’ agendas: improving
practice, testing and developing IL frameworks,
getting quantified evidence that what they do is
valuable and works - working towards a robust
scalable framework for teaching IL

Connections between research
and practice in the IL narrative
a mapping of the literature
Ola Pilerot, PhD, Swedish School of Library and Information Science, University of Borås

The IL narrative
• Opinions, best practice, debate, policies and
guidlines, research findings etc
• Articles, reports, blogs, conference presentations,
book chapters and books etc

“Information Literacy” on three levels
• A “label” describing a field of research or a
narrative on IL
• An empirical concept used for capturing
information seeking and use activities
• An analytical/theoretical concept used as a tool
for analyzing or theorizing a phenomenon (e.g.
information seeking and use activities)

Three strands in the IL narrative
1. “[T]he information literacy movement” (e.g., Garner, 2006) is
manifested in the broadest of these strands: texts written by
practitioners, predominantly librarians at universities and other
educational institutions, who (often) give evidence of best practice
2. Policy-making texts that explicitly stress the importance of all
people becoming information literate, e.g. documents published or
supported by organizations such as IFLA and UNESCO
3. A growing body of empirically and theoretically grounded research
texts produced at university departments within the fields of
educational science and library and information science
Pilerot & Lindberg, 2011

Different goals
Professional practice Policy-making Research
”The information literacy movement”
IL as a goal for educational
activities
IL as goal and means for
politics
IL as a study object
e.g. ACRL e.g. UNESCO, IFLA e.g. The International
Information Literacies
Research Network

Conceptualizations and understandings
of IL
Professional practice/Policy-making Research
• Normatively prescribed
• A rather fixed set of generic skills
• Predominantly cognitive, emphasizing
critical thinking
• Primarily related to digital and textual
sources
• An individual and measurable
competence
• Transferable across practices
• Analytically described
• Situated, related to contexts
• Social, discursive, corporeal (and
cognitive)
• Related to a manifold of sources
• A social, collective competence
embedded in practices
• Variational according to situations,
activities, and practices

Interconnections between strands
• For example, manifest intertextual elements
(Fairclough, 1992, p. 84) such as references linking
together documents
• Example

Web of Science (WoS)
literature referred to by IL
researchers (n=1000)
The total of 389 references
from two recent volumes
published by UNESCO
The total of 452 references
from two recent books
authored by librarians
Database: Social Sciences
Citation Index + Arts &
Humanities Citation Index
Time span: all years
Subject area: Information
Science & Library Science
Search term: “information
literacy” as Topic
= 1081 records (in 69
journals)
All the references
(n=21233) cited in the
1081 records
The 1000 most cited out of
the above
Conceptual relationship of
information literacy and
media literacy in
knowledge societies: Series
of research papers (2013)
UNESCO. Retrieved from:
http://tinyurl.com/nks6bku
+
Media and information
literacy: Policy and strategy
(2013) UNESCO. Retrieved
from:
http://fr.unesco.org/node/
183761
Noe, N.W. (2013). Creating
and maintaining an
information literacy
instruction program in the
Twenty-First century: an
ever-changing landscape.
Oxford: Chandos.
+
Mackey & Jacobson (2014).
Metaliteracy: Reinventing
information literacy to
empower learners. London:
Facet Publishing
Are they interconnected?

0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Sample of IL records in
WoS (n=1000)
2 recent volumes from
UNESCO (2013)
(n=389)
Noe (2013) and
Mackey & Jacobson
(2013) (n=452)
UNESCO in WoS (n=37) Noe and Mackey &
Jacobson in WoS
(n=48)
Noe and Mackey &
Jacobson in UNESCO
(n=29)

# Journal Records Percent
1 JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC LIBRARIANSHIP 146 13,5
2 PORTAL-LIBRARIES AND THE ACADEMY 72 6,7
3 COLLEGE & RESEARCH LIBRARIES 71 6,6
4 INFORMATION RESEARCH 51 4,7
5 JOURNAL OF LIBRARIANSHIP AND INFORMATION SCIENCE 47 4,3
6 ELECTRONIC LIBRARY 46 4,3
7 LIBRARY TRENDS 44 4,1
8 LIBRI 43 4,0
9 REFERENCE & USER SERVICES QUARTERLY 42 3,9
10 JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION 39 3,6
11 HEALTH INFORMATION AND LIBRARIES JOURNAL 36 3,3
12 LIBRARY & INFORMATION SCIENCE RESEARCH 35 3,2
13 PROGRAM-ELECTRONIC LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS 32 3,0
14 AUSTRALIAN LIBRARY JOURNAL 31 2,9
15 CANADIAN JOURNAL OF INFORMATION AND LIBRARY SCIENCE 26 2,4
16 ASLIB PROCEEDINGS 24 2,2
17 AUSTRALIAN ACADEMIC & RESEARCH LIBRARIES 22 2,0
18 LIBRARY HI TECH 21 1,9
19 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE
AND TECHNOLOGY
20 1,9
20 LIBRARY JOURNAL 17 1,9
1 JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC LIBRARIANSHIP 12 6,9
2 COLLEGE & RESEARCH LIBRARIES 11 6,3
3 REFERENCE SERVICES REVIEW 9 5,2
4 COLLEGE & RESEARCH LIBRARIES NEWS 7 4,0
5 JOURNAL OF INFORMATION LITERACY 6 3,4
COMMUNICATIONS IN INFORMATION LITERACY 6 3,4
6 COLLEGE & UNDERGRADUATE LIBRARIES 5 2,8
7 PUBLIC SERVICES QUARTERLY 4 2,3
JOURNAL OF LIBRARY ADMINISTRATION 4 2,3
PORTAL-LIBRARIES AND THE ACADEMY 4 2,3
JOURNAL OF LIBRARIANSHIP AND INFORMATION SCIENCE 4 2,3
8 COMMUNITY & JUNIOR COLLEGE LIBRARIES 3 1,7
CHANGE: THE MAGAZINE OF HIGHER LEARNING 3 1,7
9 COMPUTERS & EDUCATION 2 1,1
REFERENCE & USER SERVICES QUARTERLY 2 1,1
RESEARCH STRATEGIES 2 1,1
COMPUTERS IN LIBRARIES 2 1,1
LIBRARY JOURNAL 2 1,1
REFERENCE LIBRARIAN 2 1,1
LIBRARY REVIEW 2 1,1
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFORMATION MANAGEMENT 2 1,1
COLORADO LIBRARIES 2 1,1
EDUCAUSE REVIEW 2 1,1
1 JOURNAL OF COMMUNICATION 4 4,4
2 JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION 3 3,3
JOURNAL OF LIBRARIANSHIP AND INFORMATION SCIENCE 3 3,3
COMUNICAR 3 3,3
3 FIRST MONDAY 2 2,2
INFORMATION RESEARCH 2 2,2
COLLEGE & RESEARCH LIBRARIES 2 2,2
COLLEGE & RESEARCH LIBRARIES NEWS 2 2,2
INTERNATIONAL INFORMATION & LIBRARY REVIEW 2 2,2
MEDIA, CULTURE & SOCIETY 2 2,2
NTI 2 2,2
ANNUAL REVIEW OF SOCIOLOGY 2 2,2
HARVARD EDUCATIONAL REVIEW 2 2,2
Journals in the UNESCO volumes
referred to two or more times
Journals in Noe and Mackey and Jacobson
referred to two or more times
The 20 most frequently used journals
in the IL research literature

www.lincs.gu.se
CHALLENGING THE DISCOURSE OF THE
RESEARCH ‒ PRACTICE GAP
RELATING RESEARCH AND PRACTICE IN IL
Louise Limberg
SSLIS
Limberg, ECIL panel, Oct. 2014

www.lincs.gu.se
PREVIOUS RESEARCH
• Nature of and reasons for the gap
–lack of relevance
–lack of interest
–lack of mediational means (e.g. journals)
–too theoretical
BUT
• common interests
• school librarianship different from other LIS areas,
more active in using research in and for practice

www.lincs.gu.se
PROPOSED REMEDIES TO THE GAP
• increase practitioners’ involvement in research
• improve the dissemination of research to practice
• add in-depth discussions in research papers on
implications for practice
• evidence based librarianship (EBLIP)
• apply research approaches relevant for practice
Need for further empirical research on
relationship between research and practice (e.g.
DReaM; Roberts et al. 2013)

www.lincs.gu.se
IN SUPPORT OF SCHOOL LIBRARY
DEVELOPMENT – STRUCTURE AND DESIGN
• SSLIS programme designed to support local school
(library) development projects
• Schools’ local development projects aimed at
improving teaching and learning of language and
literacies
• Participating schools had chosen school libraries as
important tools for reaching this aim (cf. above)
• Programme participants in teams of 4-5 people

www.lincs.gu.se
AIM AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS
To present and discuss findings from professional
development programme targeted at putting
research into practice in school librarianship
1) What activities of putting research into practice
happened?
2) How can the findings be interpreted in relation to
previous research on the research-practice gap in
LIS?
3) What meanings were constructed with regard to
putting research into professional practice?

www.lincs.gu.se
FINDINGS: WAYS OF USING RESEARCH
1) to design and carry out a project
2) to develop teaching methods
3) to create a common understanding within the
team or school
4) to inspire further activities aimed at school
library development
5) for professional development
6) to conduct research

www.lincs.gu.se
FEATURES OF FINDINGS
• concrete, hands-on view of using research
• strong focus on the mediation of research via using
and producing texts
• interaction between different communities of
professional practice for reshaping common school
practice
• putting research into practice emerged as the
appropriation of purposeful tools for acting in a
community of practice

www.lincs.gu.se
IN THE LIGHT OF PREVIOUS RESEARCH
 ∑ strong and varied interest in putting research
into professional practice. Interest shared by
practitioners and researchers/SSLIS team
 Practioners expressed demand for
–knowing about research,
–analysing potential relevance of certain research,
–in-depth discussions about implications for practice,
– suggestions about how to use findings

www.lincs.gu.se
CONCLUDING REMARKS
• The relationship between research and practice
needs to be revisited for a more solid and nuanced
knowledge base
• Professional development programme =
purposeful tool for mediating ways of putting
research into practice
• Future programmes should be directed at the
object of learning as ”knowing how to use research
in professional practice for library development”

Building Capacity
Bill Johnston
(University of Strathclyde)

Capacity Building by ….
1. Research on teaching & learning.
2. Practical Educational Development: staff support &
organizational change.
3. International and European Collaborations.
Asking Big Questions:
what are universities for?

Research:
teaching & learning
Research traditions
• Phenomenography
• Social Constructivism
• Transformational
learning
• Threshold Concepts
Applications
• Active,collaborative,
inquiry-based methods
• Blended learning
landscapes
• Whole year & whole
course re-design
• ACRL revision

Educational Development in
Practice:
Staff support
• Research infused Post
Graduate Certificates.
• Course re-design teams.
• Role expansion -
lecturer/tutor as designer
• Research collaborations
Organizational change
• Structures/leaders
• External quality assessment
• Bologna process
• Planning/funding
• Decisions/evaluation
• Career trajectories
• Research/teaching
dynamics

International & European
Collaborations
• Identify a big, fundable
topic
• Adopt a research-based
design
• Break it down and divide
the labour
• Create thematic working
groups
• Keep it simple and
efficient
• Where are the funding
sources?
• Who is currently
research active?
• Where are the centres /
units?
• How would findings be
disseminated?
• Can we leverage the
ECIL network?

Continuing the conversation with
you!
• Can we leverage the ECIL network?
• Would a project on relating research and
practice be a suitable topic?
• Discuss with your neighbours

Sheila Webber
Information School
University of Sheffield, UK
s.webber@shef.ac.uk
Twitter & SL: Sheila Yoshikawa
http://information-literacy.blogspot.com/
http://www.slideshare.net/sheilawebber/
Orcid ID 0000-0002-2280-9519
Dr Ola Pilerot
Swedish School of Library
and Information Science,
University of Borås,
Sweden
ola.pilerot@hb.se
Bill Johnston
Honorary Research Fellow
University of Strathclyde
Glasgow, Scotland
b.johnston@strath.ac.uk
Professor Louise Limberg
Swedish School of Library
and Information Science,
University of Borås, Sweden
louise.limberg@hb.se

References 1
• Association of College and Research Libraries IS Research and Scholarship Committee.
(2011). Research agenda for library instruction and information literacy. (Rev. ed.) Chicago, Il:
ACRL.
http://www.ala.org/acrl/aboutacrl/directoryofleadership/sections/is/iswebsite/projpubs/research
agendalibrary
• Booth, A. (2003). Bridging the Research-Practice Gap? The Role of Evidence Based
Librarianship. New review of information and library research, 9(1), 3-23.
• Collini, S. (2012). What are universities for? Penguin.
• Entwistle, N. and Tomlinson, P. (Eds.), Student learning and university teaching. Leicester,
England: British Psychological Society.
• Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Cambridge: Polity Press.
• Garner, S. D. (Ed.). (2006). High-level colloquium on information literacy and lifelong learning.
Report of the meeting in Bibliotheca Alexandrina, November 6-9, 2005.
http://archive.ifla.org/III/wsis/High-Level-Colloquium.pdf
• Gibson, C. and Jacobson, T. (2014) Informing and extending the draft ACRL Information
Literacy Framework for Higher Education: an overview and avenues for research. College and
research libraries, 75 (3), 250-254.
• Haddow, G. & Klobas, J.E. (2004). Communication of research to practice in library and
information science: Closing the gap. Library & Information Science Research, 26(1), 29-43.

• Hall, H., Irving, C. & Cruickshank (2012). Improving access to Library and Information Science
research: maximising its relevance and impact to practitioners. Business Information Review,
29 (4), 224-230.
• Julien, H. & Williamson, K. (2010). Discourse and practice in information literacy and
information seeking: gaps and opportunities. Information Research, 16(1), paper 458.
http://www.informationr.net/ir/16-1/paper458.html
• Klobas, J. E. & Clyde, L. A. (2010). Beliefs, attitudes and perceptions about research and
practice in a professional field. Library & Information Science Research, 32, 237-245.
• Limberg, L. (2010). Information Literacies at the intersection between information seeking and
learning: contexts and values. In Information Literacies Research Network Seminar: COLIS
2010 Conference: London. Boras: University of Boras. Retrieved March 5, 2014 from
http://bada.hb.se/bitstream/2320/6536/1/ILRS_2010_Louise_Limberg_introductory_paper.pdf
• Limberg, L. & Sundin, O. (2006). Teaching information seeking: relating information literacy
education to theories of information behaviour. Information Research, 12(1), paper 280.
http://www.informationr.net/ir/12-1/paper280.html
• Lloyd, A. & Bruce, C.S. (2011). State of the art and future challenges for information literacy
research. In Social Media and Information Practices Workshop, 10-11 November 2011,
University of Borås, Sweden. http://eprints.qut.edu.au/47207/2/47207.pdf
• Lloyd, A. and Williamson, K. (2008). Towards and understanding of information literacy in
context. Journal of librarianship and information science, 40(1), 3-12.
• McKechnie, L., Julien, H., & Oliphant, T. (2008). Communicating research findings to library
and information science practitioners: A study of ISIC papers from 1996 to 2000. Information
Research. 13(4). http://www.informationr.net/ir/13-4/paper375.html

• McNicol, S. & Dalton, P. (2004). Striking a balance: priorities for research in LIS. Library
Review, 53(3), 167-176.
• Partridge, H., Bruce, C. and Tilley, C. (2008) Community information literacy: developing an
Australian research agenda. Libri, 58, 110-122.
• Pilerot (in press). Connections between research and practice in the information literacy
narrative: a mapping of the literature and some propositions. Journal of Librarianship and
Information Science.
• Pilerot, O. & Lindberg, J. (2011). The concept of information literacy in policy-making texts: an
imperialistic project? Library Trends, 60(2), 338-360.
• Powell, R. R., Baker, L. M. & Mika, J. J. (2002). Library and information science practitioners
and research. Library & Information Science Research, 24, 49-72.
• Roberts, A., Madden, A.D. & Corrall, S. (2013). Putting Research into Practice. Library Trends,
61 (3), 479-512.
• Starr, S. (2012). Editorial: Improving instruction in medical libraries: the research agenda.
Journal of the Medical Library Association, 100(4), 236-238
• Sundin, O. (2011) From the periphery to the centre: some aspects regarding the future of
information literacy research. In Social Media and Information Practices Workshop, 10-11
November 2011, University of Borås, Sweden.
• Webber, S. (2007). Information literacy research map.
http://www.slideshare.net/sheilawebber/map-of-information-literacy-research

Relating Research and Practice in Information Literacy

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Relating Research and Practice in Information Literacy

Similar to Relating Research and Practice in Information Literacy (20)

More from Sheila Webber

More from Sheila Webber (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Relating Research and Practice in Information Literacy