BOOK   REVIEW:

What Exactly is Information Literacy Anyway?
By Shawn Thomas, sthomas@chipublib.org

Breivik, Patricia Senn.  Student Learning in the Information Age.  Phoenix, AZ: The Oryx Press, 1998.  ISBN 1-57356-000-6.
Information literacy is more than the incorporation of technology and computers in the classroom.  And it is more than showing students how to use information resources in the library.  According to the author, information literacy is a resource-based learning process that fosters student’s abilities to identify, locate, evaluate, and use information from a myriad of sources both technological and print.  Information literacy fosters active learning by teaching students to critically analyze and synthesize information.

The author, Patricia Senn Breivik, is currently the Dean of the University Libraries at Wayne State University. She has written and/or edited five other books with subjects focusing on higher education and the empowerment of the academic library’s role in instruction.  Her works include:

  • Planning the Library Instruction Program, 1982
  • Information Literacy: Revolution in the Library, 1989
  • Libraries and the Search for Academic Excellence, 1988
  • Funding Alternatives for Libraries, 1979
  • Open Admissions and the Academic Library, 1977 
The first chapter of Student Learning in the Information Age introduces information literacy and higher education’s response to it in the U.S., Australia, South Africa and China.  Breivik defines an information-literate student and sets lofty standards of independent student learning and social responsibility.  In the second chapter she explains that resource-based learning emphasizes collaboration and teamwork as well as the diversity of comprehension levels and learning styles of the individuals in each class.  Resource-based courses mandate the use of several mediums that include books, magazines, television, radio, computer databases, the Internet, government agencies and community experts.  End products in these classes are not the typical term papers or exams but instead involve the creation of a TV program, publication or a web site.  Students thus acquire experience for their resumes as well as preparation for the same information resources that will bombard them beyond the classroom. 

Breivik then delves into a critical-thinking course at North Park College in Chicago to give what she considers an excellent example of this type of class.  This class assists students to distinguish scholarship from propaganda.  In addition, she also provides models of information literacy programs within the curriculums at Northwest Missouri State University, California State University at San Marcos, Towson University in Maryland, Purdue University, North Dakota State University and the University of Washington. 
In an expansion on Chapter Three, Breivik gives model examples of specific discipline programs (Agriculture, Business, Engineering, English, Law, Medicine, and the Sciences) on campuses across the nation.  The ERIC Clearinghouse on Information Resources established a web site that showcases these models at <http://ericir.syr.edu/nfil>.  The Selected Resources section at the end of the book also gives the top eleven international information literacy sites on the WWW according to the ERIC Clearinghouse.  (Note: When I tried each site address, seven of the eleven were not found.)

For academic leaders trying to decide whether to pursue information-literacy through resource-based learning on their campuses, Chapter Five is helpful.  Challenges and obstacles are listed for students, faculty, librarians and the academic leaders themselves.  The following chapter addresses institutional challenges for resource-based learning.  These include planning an overall campus strategy (the author suggests using librarians to facilitate this process), and financial resources to implement the strategy.

The final chapter gives five practical steps to follow in order to get your campus on board for an information literacy 
program:

  • Make a commitment to move away from the lecture-   textbook-reserves style of teaching and think about how information literacy relates to your college’s mission statement and goals.
  • Develop a plan to integrate information resources and technology into the curriculum so students will have the opportunity to become efficient lifelong learners.
  • Share and sell the vision you have come up with thus far and present opportunities to see resource-based learning in action.
  • Conduct a campus audit of incentives for information literacy through examination of promotion and tenure criteria, faculty and staff development activities and curricular requirements.
  • Create measurements for short and long-term success results. You can use student/faculty evaluations and alumni Surveys.  Then use the student newspaper, annual report and public occasions to broadcast your successes.
Appendix C is interesting, although a bit dated, as it provides a snapshot of college campuses and their “information literacy” programs in existence four to five years ago.  A national survey endorsed by the American Association of Higher Education of 3,236 accredited colleges and universities in 1994-95 showed that information literacy was still in its infancy nationwide. 

The results did show a promising start and illustrated success for those institutions that had incorporated these programs into their curricula thus far.  The survey did, however,  indicate that many institutions confuse the term “information literacy” with computer literacy and/or bibliographic instruction which is still an issue today.

Two of the author’s other appendixes are useful in that one gives a sample writing syllabus for a psychology class and another lists a particular college’s competency growth plan (freshman through senior year) in library and information literacy for students with a marketing major.

A nice complement to Student Learning is the 1998 publication titled As If Learning Mattered: Reforming Higher Education by Richard E. Miller.  His book takes a look at past efforts to reform educational practice and what changes are possible by bureaucracies as social instruments.

For older publications in this same vein, you might want to consult the following:

Farmer, D. W., and Terrence F. Mech. Information Literacy: Developing Students as Independent Learners. (New Directions for Higher Education series, no. 78). San Francisco:  Jossey-Bass, 1992.

Noble, Pat.  Resource-Based Learning in Post Compulsory Education. NY:  Nichols, 1980.

Shawn Thomas, a member of the LIRT Newsletter Committee, works at the Chicago Public Library Information Center. 
LIRT News, June 1999. Volume 21, number 4.
To report problems, please contact the LIRT News Production editor at edwards@ufl.edu

   WELCOME      BACK ISSUES