Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Publications
  3. Publishing partners
  4. Facet Publishing
  5. Content Listing

Refine listing

Refine listing

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

5856 results in Facet Publishing

Page 185 of 293

  • 4 - Putting the impact into planning

  • from Part 2 - Evaluating Impact
  • David Streatfield, Sharon Markless
  • Book:
    Evaluating the Impact of Your Library
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    23 December 2012, pp 61-68

  • Summary

    This chapter introduces the model for evaluating impact and makes some points about how to use it. You are then invited to start using the model by thinking about the answers to some general questions. Answering these questions is an important step to take in moving into the impact evaluation model.

    Why do we need a new evaluation model?

    The balance between service delivery, detailed consideration of processes and impact evaluation is critical when assessing the success of a service. However, our experience suggests that the balance is usually heavily weighted away from impact evaluation. Ever since we first began to work systematically with library and information service managers on impact, two points have been apparent:

  • The concepts and terminology get in the way. People easily become confused about such ideas as efficiency and effectiveness when they try to apply them in practice. Not only that but the terms used, such as inputs, processes, outputs and outcomes (and higher order outcomes) are applied inconsistently, both by managers in practice and in some of the published literature on performance evaluation.

  • When people identify an area for attention or improvement they can usually come up with a list of things to do to put it right. Generally speaking, however, people find it much harder to think about the aims and objectives underlying what they are trying to do (that is, what they are trying to achieve by providing services). Unfortunately, this focus on aims is necessary: we need to be very clear about what we are trying to achieve if we want to be able to tell whether we have succeeded. Since people are usually more comfortable with organizing and running activities, their focus on impact often gets fuzzy – when this happens we slide off into identifying process performance indicators (or ‘tick off when done’ indicators). These tell us whether things on the list have been done, but they don't tell us whether they were worth doing, or indeed whether they have had any effect.

    • Our response to these two challenges is to offer a process for people to work through to help to get to grips with impact. We have used this general approach with more than a thousand library and information service managers and have adapted it for all kinds of settings – from school libraries to universities and from public libraries to business and industry.

  • Strand Seven - The ethical dimension of information

    • By Lyn Parker, Lyn Parker is Head of Learning and Teaching Enhancement and Copyright Compliance Officer at the University of Sheffield Library.
  • Edited by Jane Secker, Emma Coonan
  • Book:
    Rethinking Information Literacy
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    23 December 2012, pp 79-94

  • Summary

    Where Strand Three aims to articulate, explore and develop the academic literacies of reading and writing within the student's disciplinary context, Strand Seven builds upon these competences to explore ethical values around information use. This includes ‘need-to-know’ issues such as referencing and attribution, plagiarism, copyright and intellectual property guidelines; however, it also opens the way for rich discussion around where the borderline between bad scholarship and unethical or illegal behaviour lies. This approach creates opportunities for students to move beyond black-and-white usage guidelines and towards an informed and nuanced appreciation of the ethics of information.

    Lyn is Secretary of the CILIP Information Literacy group and a member of the Universities UK (UUK) Copyright Working Group. She took part in the ANCIL expert consultation which helped inform and shape the final curriculum. Specializing in copyright, intellectual property and learning and teaching developments at Sheffield University, Lyn's expertise in the ethical aspects of information literacy made her the natural choice for a Strand Seven case study.

    Institutional context

    The University of Sheffield is in the Top Ten of the Russell Group of leading research-intensive universities and was named ‘University of the Year’ 2011 in the Times Higher Education awards. The priority themes of the university's Learning and Teaching Strategy 2011–16 include internationalization, employability, research-led learning and developing communities of learning. The University Library has aligned its Strategic Plan and Objectives with those of the university. Within Learning and Teaching, the aim is to work in close partnership with departments to embed information literacy into the curriculum while engaging students in an understanding of their transferable skills. The university has the aspiration that all Sheffield students should be information literate when they graduate. Faculty librarians liaise with course leaders to design appropriate activities and assessment to ensure this is achieved.

    This case study reflects on various projects at the university which come under the heading of ethical use of information. It starts with the development of an online plagiarism tutorial and quiz, which supports the university's Unfair Means policy and guidance; shows the need for increased copyright awareness among both staff and students, and how this has been achieved through the development of a Copyright Hub, bringing together guidance from various departments within the University;

  • Conclusion

  • Edited by Jane Secker, Emma Coonan
  • Book:
    Rethinking Information Literacy
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    23 December 2012, pp 141-146

  • Summary

    [O]ur society and all of its institutions are in continuing processes of transformation…. We must learn to understand, guide, influence and manage these transformations. We must make the capacity for undertaking them integral to ourselves and to our institutions. We must, in other words, become adept at learning.

    Schon (1973, 28)

    One of the greatest challenges for education has always been to help students to develop a questioning mind – an outlook which necessitates a critical approach to dealing with information and the capacity to evaluate and synthesize multiple perspectives on an issue. It also involves an understanding of how information is transformed into knowledge, and a recognition that learning is sometimes a challenging process, as it may involve assimilating new knowledge that challenges our world view.

    In earlier times, information, knowledge and learning were privileged and scarce commodities accessible only to an elite, and controlled and mediated by teachers, librarians and other ‘gatekeepers’. In the digital age, however, there is an abundance of information: knowledge and learning are more widely accessible than ever before, often in an unmediated form. The role of the librarian may be slowly evolving from the gatekeeper of knowledge, to a facilitator of learning, helping develop autonomy in students and impart a capacity for lifelong learning. Conversely, however, teachers and faculty observe that students, rather than becoming more independent in their approach to learning and more critical of the information they find, seem to be becoming less questioning and more dependent on teachers.

    The central role that information and knowledge plays in learning means that in any discipline there needs to be an explicit approach to dealing with them. In the library world we call that capability ‘information literacy’. Librarians are the natural partners to work with teachers to develop this learning framework in students, and to embed its development into the curriculum. This task is too big for one group in education to tackle alone and only by working together can we create a truly learner-focused environment. Yet perhaps the greatest challenge in the coming few years for those in the information and library profession is one of status and perceptions about their role.

  • 9 - Gathering and interpreting evidence

  • from Part 2 - Evaluating Impact
  • David Streatfield, Sharon Markless
  • Book:
    Evaluating the Impact of Your Library
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    23 December 2012, pp 127-170

  • Summary

    This chapter suggests which evidence-gathering methods will tell you what you need to know, how to gather that evidence, and what that evidence is telling you. We then offer a warning about confusing evidence with advocacy.

    Since it is probably better to adapt a research tool (such as a questionnaire, checklist or observation schedule) for your own purposes rather than start from scratch, we have prepared or selected a range of research tools for use in different types of libraries. These tools can be found at www.facetpublishing.co.uk/evaluatingimpact.

    Let us start with a precept: all evidence-gathering methods have inherent weaknesses, so it is important to employ a range of methods if you want to build up a good picture – this is known in the research jargon as triangulation. Even if you are adapting an existing research tool there are a number of things that you should bear in mind when using them to gather evidence. These are considered below.

    Observation

    At first sight, it is surprising that library and information research borrows heavily on two of the social science research approaches (asking questions and making inferences) but largely neglects systematic observation as a research method. It is easy to understand this under-use in large-scale research, since systematic observation is time-consuming and can generate huge amounts of data. However, even when people take on small-scale evaluation they usually gravitate towards the questionnaire and the focus group, almost regardless of whether these will provide the sorts of information required.

    This is a pity, because in the immortal words of the American baseball player and coach Lawrence ‘Yogi’ Berra, ‘You can observe a lot by watching.’ We know from our own experience that observation is a great way to develop ideas about how people use information, how library systems and services can be improved or how people can improve their teaching, training or interaction with service users. It is also one of the best ways of finding out whether your services are really making an impact.

    There are several types of observation that may prove useful in evaluating the impact of your services.

    Small-scale systematic observation

    If you are interested in specific aspects of service use, such as how users find things in your library, or what they actually use your computers or wireless links for, a time-series study may be the answer.

  • Strand Six - Managing information

    • By Elizabeth Tilley, Elizabeth Tilley has worked in small, specialist academic libraries since 1997; her previous career as a trained teacher has helped to inform much of her work in libraries.
  • Edited by Jane Secker, Emma Coonan
  • Book:
    Rethinking Information Literacy
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    23 December 2012, pp 67-78

  • Summary

    Strand Six includes a range of key functional skills such as time management and planning, effective information storage and retrieval, reference management and staying up to date. Without these skills students will struggle to manage and process academic information efficiently. While the practical element of these skills is taught widely, it is important to emphasize that there is a cognitive aspect inherent in each which links the daily practices of study and research directly to the learner's developing identity. It is therefore vital to give students the opportunity to reflect on how they will integrate these skills into their own practices and workflow, and to review their practices from time to time.

    Many digital tools are available to support and simplify these aspects of information management, and trainers are free to select and teach the tools they feel are most appropriate for a particular cohort at a given time. We have not stipulated particular tools to teach, firstly since technology is moving at too fast a pace, and secondly in order to emphasize that understanding the underlying study and research needs is of greater importance than learning to use specific tools or programs to aid these processes.

    As the Librarian at the Faculty of English at the University of Cambridge, Elizabeth has been teaching information literacy in a way that underpins many of the ANCIL principles. She was part of the expert consultation carried out as part of the ANCIL research and her thinking helped shape ideas about how the curriculum should be taught. Her approach to teaching students how to manage information, by using Zotero to engage them and provide the ‘wow’ factor, is a useful example of good practice in one of the key strands in any information literacy teaching.

    Institutional context

    The Faculty of English at the University of Cambridge is one of many faculties and departments which are organized loosely into schools; English is within the Arts and Humanities School. The majority of the faculties within this school have large, currently independently run, faculty libraries. Our priority at the English Faculty Library (EFL) in terms of collection development is with the undergraduate body, which comprises approximately 700 students. The largely taught MPhil programme at the faculty is active and increasingly an important aspect of provision, and as a result the library finds itself in the position of supporting this group as well.

  • 10 - Taking stock, setting targets and development planning

  • from Part 2 - Evaluating Impact
  • David Streatfield, Sharon Markless
  • Book:
    Evaluating the Impact of Your Library
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    23 December 2012, pp 171-180

  • Summary

    This chapter starts by looking at how to review the impact indicators generated through the process in order to keep the whole thing manageable! We then focus on setting realistic impact targets and conclude by considering where and how development planning fits into the process of evaluating impact.

    Taking stock: reviewing your impact and process indicators

    Before you move on to select your targets, it will be useful to stop and review all your impact indicators. There are four main dimensions:

  • Range. Do your indicators reflect the full range of what you are trying to change and give you enough of a picture of whether your services are working efficiently?

  • Number. Have you generated too many indicators? Publications on managing performance usually recommend 15–20 ‘key’ indicators (including both process and impact indicators), with any others considered as secondary. If you go much beyond that scale it becomes difficult to gain and retain an overall picture of what is going on. Too many indicators can also lead to diverting over-much energy into collecting evidence rather than running your service.

  • Relevance. Do all the indicators really tell you something useful and contribute to the overall picture? Are you still collecting ‘traditional’ performance data because you have always done so? Are any of your indicators only used as the basis for making management reports?

  • User focus/service focus. Do you have a balance between ‘outward-looking’ user-focused indicators and ‘inward-looking’ system enhancement indicators?

    • No matter how much care you take in writing and reviewing your indicators, they may not all work. All indicators ought to be regarded as provisional at the outset. They should be monitored to see if they are leading you to really useful information. If not, change them or ditch them.

    Setting targets for impact

    Impact targets aim at improving the effectiveness of the service; they focus on discernible differences in impact on people in significant areas of use of the service. They are different from process targets, which record what people have done. Impact targets can be concerned with the whole community served or parts of it. See also the definitions offered in ‘Impact and all that: use of some key terms in this book’ on page xv.

  • 7 - Making things happen: activities and process indicators

  • from Part 2 - Evaluating Impact
  • David Streatfield, Sharon Markless
  • Book:
    Evaluating the Impact of Your Library
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    23 December 2012, pp 105-112

  • Summary

    Here we look at translating objectives into action. It is the most straightforward and least demanding stage of the process for most libraries. We know from our workshops that once people have a clear idea of what they are trying to achieve it is usually fairly easy to think of a variety of ways to get there. Then, when you have decided on what to do, finding ways of telling whether you have done them (process indicators) is not usually very challenging.

    Why activities? Why now?

    We have taken up a lot of space in the last few chapters warning you of the dangers of getting sidetracked when you are trying to evaluate your impact by looking at what you do (activities and processes), rather than concentrating on what difference you make. Why are we moving the goalposts now? Activities do matter: you need to think about them and keep them under review. That is why we have written this chapter. However, if you want this stage in the process to support the evaluation of your impact, you need to get the timing and the focus right.

    Timing

    You should leave any consideration of activities and processes until after you have completed your initial work on objectives and impact indicators. We have seen what happens to impact evaluation when library managers get caught up with questions about service delivery, allocation of resources, allocating staff time and prioritizing among a wide range of activities. Attention slips away from impact with the result that planning once again focuses around provision. For example, the UK public library annual library plans are still replete with specific processes and actions aimed at keeping the services going, enhancing the library infrastructure and activity building. These processes very much reflect the hands-on, operationally focused approach of many library managers. We are not saying that such concerns are not important, just that they need to wait until now, after you clarify what you want to achieve and how you will know you are being successful.

    Focus

    The danger when considering activities and processes is that you might record everything that you are doing in the general area covered by your objectives. We recommend that you tie activities into the objectives, specifically linking a set of actions to each impact objective.

  • 1 - The demand for evidence

  • from Part 1 - The Context
  • David Streatfield, Sharon Markless
  • Book:
    Evaluating the Impact of Your Library
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    23 December 2012, pp 3-22

  • Summary

    If you are interested in the impact of your library services, or of library services in general, you may like to start by reflecting on where the impetus towards impact evaluation is coming from and how that impetus can itself distort the picture. These issues are explored below. However, if your concerns are purely practical please go on to Chapter 4.

    Why is evidence of impact an issue for libraries (and information services)?

    Picture a group of scholars working in the Library of Alexandria in about 50 BC. Now assume that they have been ferried forward in time and deposited in your library today. Will they identify their surroundings as a library? More specifically, will the scholars recognize the printed publications at the heart of your library as equivalent in some way to their scrolls? If so, it seems likely that they will know their surroundings as a library. But what happens if we ship them forward another 30 years and touch them down again? Will your library still be there? Will it be recognizable as a library? Will information technology and the demand for different kinds of interaction between library staff, users and the service have transformed the library beyond recognition?

    Even the most sensitive crystal ball is unlikely to offer a clear picture of libraries 30 years hence because of the accelerating rate of change. However, if we can start to gauge the changes in the impact of various services, this will give us an indication of where things are going and help in managing the changes needed to get there.

    We don't have to look 30 years ahead to make a case for looking at impact. One common feature of all types of libraries is that there is too much to do and too little time. ‘Traditional’ performance indicators are important for enabling you to tell whether aspects of a service are working efficiently. However, when a new initiative or project is undertaken, this is usually achieved by prising precious time away from other operational activities. If this is the case, it is doubly important to know whether the innovation is working and how. More specifically, are you using this precious time well? How can your innovation be made to work better?

  • Strand One - Transition from school to higher education

    • By Sarah Pavey, Sarah Pavey is Senior Librarian at Box Hill School, and holds a degree in Biochemistry and a Masters in Information Science.
  • Edited by Jane Secker, Emma Coonan
  • Book:
    Rethinking Information Literacy
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    23 December 2012, pp 1-12

  • Summary

    Strand One, unusually, links an aspect of information literacy learning to a specific point in the undergraduate career. The content of this strand focuses on the transition from school to higher education – a perfect time to engage students in their own learning process by giving them a vocabulary and analytic structure through which to address the significant changes in expectations, teaching styles and attitudes to learning that occur at this point. This deeply reflective opportunity is mirrored by the content of Strand Ten, which supports the transition to the workplace and everyday life. Book-ending the curriculum, these strands deal with the transference of information literacy skills, behaviours and attitudes to new cultures, and with ongoing exploration and development of the learner's identity in relation to information contexts.

    Sarah took part in the expert consultation carried out as part of the ANCIL research and was chosen because she is a qualified librarian working in the independent school sector. In many ways her experience is atypical, as the demands of the International Baccalaureate, which are very different from those of A-levels, explicitly help students make the transition into higher education. Sarah's approach to information literacy, and the learning culture at Box Hill School, form a sound basis for helping students make the transition to the higher education environment. In particular, her teaching makes explicit the transitional issues that need to be addressed when students move through school and into higher education.

    Institutional context

    Box Hill School is an independent co-educational, part-boarding school for students aged 11–19 years, and also has an International Study Centre. Twenty-five countries are represented among its 425 students, and many staff have experience of teaching abroad.

    The school follows the philosophy of Kurt Hahn, experimental educationalist and founder of Gordonstoun. It helped to initiate Round Square (www.roundsquare.org), a worldwide association of more than 80 schools. Students are committed to participating in the six pillars, or IDEALS: International understanding; Democracy; Environment; Adventure; Leader - ship; and Service.

    In 2008 the decision was taken to abandon the traditional English syllabus in favour of the International Baccalaureate Diploma (IB). The International Baccalaureate Organisation (IBO) requires any school it endorses for the Diploma to have a library, and recommends that this library be managed by a qualified teacher-librarian (IBO, 2004).

  • Strand Three - Developing academic literacies

    • By Moira Bent, Moira Bent is Faculty Liaison Librarian at Newcastle University, and a National Teaching Fellow.
  • Edited by Jane Secker, Emma Coonan
  • Book:
    Rethinking Information Literacy
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    23 December 2012, pp 27-40

  • Summary

    Strand Three aims to articulate, explore and develop the academic literacies of reading and writing in line with ANCIL's view of information literacy as a continuum ranging from functional skills through to high-level intellectual operations. The content of this strand therefore embraces not only key skills and strategies in academic reading and writing, such as skimming and scanning strategies and recognizing and using appropriate academic idiom, but also higher-order contextual activities such as textual interrogation and critiquing, argument construction, and understanding of a discipline's epistemological structure and values.

    Moira has made a significant contribution to information literacy not only in the UK but internationally. She is a member of the SCONUL working group for information literacy, which recently launched an updated version of the ‘Seven Pillars’ model, is an experienced practitioner and has written and presented widely on information literacy. She is also a National Teaching Fellow and took part in the ANCIL expert consultation. Here she describes a staff training and support initiative which illustrates how closely academic literacies and information literacy are interrelated.

    Institutional context

    This case study describes a project designed to provide opportunities for teaching staff to embed information literacy concepts into the curriculum in Newcastle University, UK, and in Newcastle University in Singapore (NUIS). Developed from an existing methodology to appreciate information literacy within the context of academic literacies, the work builds on and extends several previous and concurrent initiatives.

    Newcastle University, a Russell Group University located in the north-east of England, has 21,000 students, of whom 6000 are postgraduates, 4000 are international and a growing number are learning at a distance from the main campus. In common with many other universities, examples of best practice in developing academic literacies can be found alongside much less developed practice (Bent and Stockdale, 2009). Information literacy is recognized at a strategic level in the university: as digital literacy in the strategic plan, within the Graduate Skills framework and more explicitly in the e-portfolio system which will be deployed across the institution in 2012. The e-portfolio will enable students to reflect on their learning and identify areas, including information literacy, in which they need to develop. However, while information literacy is included in the portfolio, the interpretation does focus mainly on skills aspects, as is to be expected.

  • Introduction

  • David Streatfield, Sharon Markless
  • Book:
    Evaluating the Impact of Your Library
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    23 December 2012, pp xi-xii

  • Summary

    This book explores a major issue for library and information service managers of all kinds – evaluating the impact of services. When we introduced the first edition of this book we noted that all types of libraries and information services traditionally collect a range of performance information that can tell you as managers something about the efficiency of your services but that a sustained focus on impact was rare, despite the fact that impact evaluation (or as it is sometimes called, outcomes-based evaluation) had recently taken on new importance. What is interesting now is how many library managers are ready to move on to focus on effectiveness of services, or the impact of services on users, including remote users.

    Why do we need a second edition of the book? The world of library impact evaluation has changed substantially in the past six years. There are more international and national efforts to engage with the impact of library services on users and, as a result, we now know more about the areas in which libraries of all kinds can make a difference to the lives of their users, as we show in a fully revised and updated Chapter 3.

    One thing that hasn't changed much is that library and information service managers still find it hard to get a grip on the slippery concept of service impact and many still struggle when trying to address impact questions in their planning. We are continuing to help here and are increasingly getting involved with evaluation efforts in a variety of countries, with active support from professional bodies in the field. This work has given us the chance to develop, further test and refine our approach to evaluating impact as presented in the first edition of this book. Our analysis of the issues and our approach to evaluating service impact that has helped managers in public, education, health and ‘special’ libraries and information services are still at the core of this book. The approach is designed to help you to understand, construct and deploy impact indicators that relate closely to what you are trying to achieve. The core chapters take you through our rigorously tested process model for impact evaluation, with tools and examples to equip you with all that you need in order to address your own service impact questions.

  • Strand Two - Becoming an independent learner

    • By Geoff Walton, Dr Geoff Walton is a Senior Researcher and Academic Skills Tutor: Librarian at Staffordshire University., Jamie Cleland, Dr Jamie Cleland joined Staffordshire University in September 2005 and is Senior Lecturer in Sport Sociology.
  • Edited by Jane Secker, Emma Coonan
  • Book:
    Rethinking Information Literacy
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    23 December 2012, pp 13-26

  • Summary

    Strand Two is informed by the belief that change occurs throughout the learning process as a natural, inevitable and sometimes challenging aspect of learning. Building on the transitional issues identified in Strand One, Strand Two positions the concept of ‘learning to learn’ as a lifelong framework for encountering, evaluating and assimilating new information, including evidence that conflicts with or challenges the learner's beliefs and world view.

    The concept of the autonomous learner is fundamental to this vision. Rather than endeavouring to teach students how to deal with every kind of information, this strand aims to facilitate their emergence as individuals capable of generating strategies for dealing with new information contexts as required, at every stage in their lives.

    Geoff is a well known researcher and practitioner in the information literacy field, and a member of the RIN Working Group on Information Literacy. He has written and published widely in the field as well as conducting doctoral research, and took part in the ANCIL expert consultation.

    We are delighted that Geoff 's colleague Jamie Cleland, a senior lecturer in Sport Sociology at Staffordshire University, has co-authored this chapter, making it an outstanding example of interprofessional collaboration.

    Institutional context and module development (Geoff)

    This chapter will draw upon six years’ work carried out in collaboration with academic colleagues in Sport and Exercise Science at Staffordshire University, especially Dr Jamie Cleland, who also contributes to this chapter. The specific focus is a core first-year module called Research and Professional Development (between 120 and 160 per cohort). Before the module leader and I became involved in this particular module it was notoriously unpopular amongst students, who found it boring, unnecessary and full of material they ‘knew already’ because they had ‘done it all at college’. Yet these students, who, according to their own informal self-assessment, seemed to have arrived at university with a complete set of study skills and with claims that suggested they were at the highest levels of information literacy, produced essays and other assignments that told a very different story.

    It is perhaps unsurprising that the narrative from the module leader and his team was one of frustration: students produced essays with poor sentence structure, could not argue effectively, and used inadequate, often internet-based resources found via the first page of a two-keyword Google search.

  • Strand Nine - Synthesizing information and creating new knowledge

    • By Emma Coonan, Dr Emma Coonan directs and teaches on Cambridge University's Research Skills Programme (www.lib.cam.ac.uk/courses), which supports the information skills and academic development of students and researchers across the university.
  • Edited by Jane Secker, Emma Coonan
  • Book:
    Rethinking Information Literacy
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    23 December 2012, pp 107-118

  • Summary

    Strand Nine covers the higher-order intellectual operations around information, and again falls outside more traditional models of information literacy. The strand includes formulating research questions and learning to frame problems. This will include using chosen information sources to articulate and analyse problems in your discipline. It also incorporates assimilating information within the disciplinary framework, weighing the value of new information, and developing new insights and knowledge.

    In many disciplines demonstrating these abilities may not be required or assessed until third-year or even postgraduate level, when students conduct an extended piece of work such as a dissertation. In these contexts the transition to conducting independent research may entail a significant step up in expectations and performance, and should be supported accordingly. In other disciplines (particularly arts or humanities subjects), evaluation, synthesis, voice and register are foregrounded almost from the beginning. In all cases, the development of these complex information-handling operations must be scaffolded as an integral part of academic learning.

    Emma was the obvious choice to write the ninth case study in this book, given her role in developing ANCIL, but also her experience at Cambridge in leading and delivering the Research Skills Programme. While this case study focuses on Strand Nine, there are several other themes woven into the session that Emma teaches, which develops students’ academic writing and reading and helps them learn about the academic practices of their discipline and how to synthesize and create new knowledge. The element of reflection is particularly strong in this case study.

    Institutional context

    The Research Skills Programme at Cambridge University Library offers specialist provision in various aspects of information literacy, including information and data management, finding and evaluating literature, academic writing and critical thinking. Its Information Skills strand provides eight sessions, which are aligned with either key academic practices such as literature searching and referencing, or specific phases in the study and research processes, including dissertation research at both undergraduate and Masters level. While each session is free-standing, the programme is designed to fit together in a modular, scaffolded fashion, so that participants can build their information-handling abilities and insight over the course of their subject career.

  • Strand Five - Resource discovery in your discipline

    • By Isla Kuhn, Never having imagined working in the health and medical library world, Isla Kuhn surprised herself when she got a job in the Cairns Library, University of Oxford's medical library based at the John Radcliffe Hospital.
  • Edited by Jane Secker, Emma Coonan
  • Book:
    Rethinking Information Literacy
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    23 December 2012, pp 55-66

  • Summary

    Where Strand Four deals with the various publication formats in which scholarly information is made available, Strand Five focuses on the gateways, platforms and collection-level resources which endeavour to aggregate these formats. Libraries are key players in making these resources available, including not only library and archival catalogues but also abstract and indexing databases, subject-specific gateways, e-journal collections and datasets. In addition, library websites also act as informal aggregators, linking to other academic resources.

    Therefore, in addition to being aware of the different types of information available in the academic landscape, students need to learn to locate, use and, above all, evaluate the containers or gateways through which they access them. Because of their size, it is not always evident that these key ‘finding aids’ themselves have limitations of scope, coverage or chronology, and that critical evaluation must be applied not only to individual scholarly works, but also to whole resources.

    Isla has helped pioneer several teaching initiatives in the University of Cambridge library community, including the TeachMeet format and events, a ‘23 Things’ course tailored for medical library staff, and mutual peer observation of teaching. She was the natural choice for Strand Five, as she teaches students where to look for and how to evaluate complex specialist information, not in a programmatic way but using a discursive and reflective approach that develops a deep understanding of the advantages and limitations of the resources and databases themselves as information tools. Isla was also an Arcadia Fellow in 2011, organizing a high-profile symposium and ‘hackday’ on ‘The Internet- Informed Patient’ (www.iip-symposium.info/).

    Institutional context

    As Reader Services Librarian in the University of Cambridge Medical Library, my role is all about supporting readers in their research, education or clinical care. Readers come from a range of backgrounds and are at various stages in their academic and professional careers. Clinical students naturally form a major group. These students have completed up to three years of pre-clinical studies either in Cambridge or at other universities, but this does not necessarily help them gain awareness of the sources of clinical – as opposed to academic – information that will be valuable for them. Students arriving from other universities face challenges in terms of adapting to a new information environment and, in particular, discovering a different range of subscription resources.

Page 185 of 293