Conference Agenda

In the 1960s, four scientific organizations from around the globe set up a charitable organization--a publisher--charged with serving that community’s discipline-specific information needs. This was primarily done through the creation of an A&I database, but serving those information needs also extended to enhancing the community’s understanding of information and the information ecosystem.

To do so, the publisher created a literacy and outreach manager role. Efforts to enhance information literacy amongst students and professionals in the field have included creating guidance about: good practice for literature searching; the publication process; predatory publishers; and, discipline-specific systematic review methodology.

The latest effort has been to design and build a lengthy SpringShare LibWizard quiz. This quiz is a training tutorial for the database (with one version per vendor platform), but it is also a vehicle for instilling principles of information literacy. Thanks to the publisher’s robust global networks with academic and industry-based librarians and researchers, this quiz can potentially have substantial reach and influence in the field. This PechaKucha presentation will capture the project’s challenges and solutions.

First, the motivation for building the quiz—to teach students to use the database, to understand that and how it differs from a search engine, and to have a basic understanding of controlled vocabulary. This, hopefully, can help solve the problem of poor student research skills and weak bibliographies.

Second, logistical issues. Why use LibWizard as the vehicle for the training tutorial? Why use the quiz function rather than the tutorial function? What are the challenges in building a thirty-page tutorial in a tool mostly designed for shorter objects?

Third, pedagogical issues. Where does the balance lie between showing where to click on the interface and dwelling on the quality of information and interpreting the results that a search returns? What might a person taking the quiz know already? How long can a quiz be that must be completed in one sitting? What are the most important points to emphasize and reinforce with the quiz questions? How can questions be structured so that learning is active?

Third, reception and roll out. Although the tutorial will be freely available for anyone to use who wants to—anyone who finds it online can take it—the vision of its success is for it to be integrated into library sessions and course modules at universities that subscribe to the database. One librarian at a US university has said that they will use it for a flipped learning exercise before students attend face-to-face library sessions. Another academic lecturer has asked to have a version branded with their course number and library webpage and they’ll embed it into a mandatory introductory course. Will the quiz be adopted more broadly? If so, how and where?

As this project of creating a web-based quiz to support database searching and information literacy skills is just being rolled out, a PechaKucha presentation has the potential to capture the most important lessons and challenges encountered in the earliest stages of its release.

As the world of media continues to rapidly evolve, it is crucial for librarian instructors to equip students with the necessary skills to effectively evaluate online information. However, traditional methods of information evaluation, such as the CRAAP test with a focus on close reading, may no longer be sufficient in today’s digital age.

To address this challenge an exercise teaching updated information evaluation skills has been incorporated into a one-shot librarian instructor workshop taught in a large undergraduate compulsory course at the American University of Sharjah. The exercise is based on a new method designed for evaluating web-based media called SIFT (The Four Moves), developed in 2017 by digital information specialist Mike Caulfield (Caulfield, 2019).

The SIFT method consists of four moves that are performed when encountering online information;

• Stop

• Investigate the source

• Find better coverage

• Trace quotes to original source

The new exercise is designed to teach students to determine the legitimacy of information in a fast and effective manner by reframing information evaluation skills as ‘learning to think like fact-checkers’, as suggested in Caulfield’s SIFT video series instruction of the method (CTRL-F, 2020). The exercise, taught within the one-shot workshop, has been repeated over multiple semesters to all sections of the course, taught by either one of two librarian instructors or a graduate teaching assistant. The exercise continues to be refined and updated based on feedback and new findings, ensuring that skills are delivered using the most effective approach.

By encouraging students to explore the wider context of a source, they can self-teach and build practice in using evaluative habits that are highly valuable both in an academic sense and also for their own personal media and social media literacy skills. Ultimately, this exercise aims to provide students with the necessary skills to critically evaluate online information, making them better equipped to navigate the rapidly shifting landscape of media in today’s digital age. This presentation will share strategies and learnings from delivering this SIFT-based exercise within the structure of the one-shot librarian instructor workshop.

References

Caulfield, M. (2019). SIFT (The four moves). Hapgood. Retrieved from https://hapgood.us/2019/06/19/sift-the-four-moves/

CTRL-F. (2020). Online verification skills with Mike Caulfield [Video playlist]. YouTube. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsSbsdukQ8VYy88IiSJhz4NyBxxtLzsNr

Since 2021, the TLIT4U project has been implemented by ULSIT (Bulgaria), UNIPR (Italy), ULAPLAND (Finland) and FPM (Italy). The project highlights the need to improve students’ multiple literacy skills and develop a curriculum integrating a STE(A)M approach and using serious games. The numerous definitions of Digital Fluency - DF (Demir, 2015; Ross, 2015) often overlap with definitions of IL, digital competencies and even multimodality. Sparrow (2018) defines 5 skills essential for students with regard to fluency. The paper presents the results of the survey on DF carried out in the first phase of TLT4U and the focus group with students using Design thinking (DT) method realized in the second phase of the project.

Methodology

The research questions of the survey during the first phase were: How do students rate their digital fluency and what do teachers think about the difficulty of integrating digital fluency skills into their curricula? In order to investigate students’ perceptions and skills, the project team organized a workshop and presented the concepts of transliteracy, STEM and DF to trainees from the partner universities in IT, BG and FI. After an analysis of the students’ needs, in the second phase the partners involved students in the design of a curriculum to obtain DF skills applying the DT method.

Findings

The perceptions of students and teachers on DF and Digital literacy skills were analyzed and further activities with students were planned towards the design of a DF curriculum. The learning objectives set by students, the proposed learning activities and assessment methods were matched with the criteria of interdisciplinarity and employability. The outcomes of a relevant curriculum were specified and a syllabus was developed by the students using the DT method and the peer assessment approach. The project will use these results to prepare a model curriculum and promote an active learning based on Inquiry based and STEAM education.

References

Demir, K., Aydin, B., Ersoy, N. S., Kelek, A., Tatar, I., Kuzu, A., & Odebasi, H. F. (2015). Visiting digital fluency for preservice teachers in Turkey. World Journal on Educational Technology, 7(1).

Ross, P. (2015). Digital fluency, social enterprise and why they are important for HR. Huffpost Business.

Sparrow, J. (2018). Digital fluency: Preparing students to create big, bold problems. Educause review.

Educational institutions are politically the “slowest tanker” regarding their willingness to change. That is as true for schools and their curricula as it is for pedagogical adaptations and paradigms of public libraries. Given ChatGPT, Luminar Neo, and similar AI-supported image and text programs and the demands of a diversified society, these institutions face even more severe challenges and changes than those brought about by digitization and networking in Web 2.0. Schools and universities are considering how examinations can be made even safer and how undercutting can become impossible. Initial considerations are expectedly to move in the direction of restrictions and controls. They are relying on appropriate security software, which is the equivalent of using AI, to put AI on trial?. Teachers fear losing control over knowledge acquisition if artificial bits of intelligence with access to the digitally available literature create texts at a speed and complexity at which this is impossible for humans.

What is the function of libraries in this process? How do they respond to the “competition of AI”? Solutions must not be sought by taking a step backward, ignoring the existence of such systems, and relying on memorized book knowledge in oral exams as proof of performance. To borrow Henry Jenkins’ description of schools’ misadoption of innovation: we need to avoid learning for an “outdated world” (Jenkins & Kelly, 2013, p. 9). Disruptive technological developments require just such societal adjustments. Riel Miller’s (2011), theory of futures literacy, now a UN initiative, considers inculcating more effective preparation, analysis, and empowerment for what challenges and developments lie ahead for humanity.

The collective examination of different levels of future problems and possible developments and solutions should make short-, medium- and longer-term scenarios conceivable and creatively workable. In our new continuing education program, “XPRTN for futures literacies,” we wanted to create training reflective of beliefs held by public library employees while supporting their searchfor a future library pedagogy through knowledge of theory, structure, and categories as well as through collaborative development We were concerned with meeting the challenges in a diverse post- or transhumanistic mediatized society of inclusion, gender justice, democratization, linguistic and social diversity, (Ernst & Schröter, 2020). Our team at TU Dortmund and TH Cologne University of Applied Sciences addressed these concerns in our training –. The format thus replaces the “XPRTN for Reading,” which has qualified about 15 employees of public libraries annually since 2011. The reference to educational partners’ expectations and framework conditions will remain in the new offering. However, the orientation moves from reading as a cultural technique to a more action-oriented approach of participatory adaptation to continuously changing framework conditions and the social challenges of the library as a “third place (Oldenburg, 1989).” We plan to outline and reflect on the concept in a collegial circle in our conference presentation.

References

Jenkins, H., & Kelly, W. (Eds.) (2013). Reading in a participatory culture. Remixing Moby-Dick in the English classroom. New York; London: Teachers College Press.

Ernst, C., & Schröter, J. (2020). Zukünftige Medien. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

Miller, R. (2011). Opinion: Futures literacy: Embracing complexity and using the future. Ethos, 10, 81–86. Retrieved from https://www.csc.gov.sg/docs/default-source/ethos/ethos10.pdf

Oldenburg, R. (1989). The great good place. St Paul, Minnesota: Paragon House .

Intellectual property plays a key role in the development of the knowledge-based economy in that it affects competitiveness and innovation. The aim of this research was to draw attention, through ananalysis and criticism of literature, to the importance of knowledge of intellectual property protection.Industrial property and copyright is important to understand in the context of new, dynamically developing information and communication technologies and the digital economy. In this context, higher education librarians, in particular scientific librarians in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) areas, can play an important role. The inclusion of training in the use of intellectual property skills in academic information literacy programs will contribute to strengthening students’ knowledge of intellectual property protection. This will assist librarians in developing practical skills and developing and improving professional competences related to functioning in a modern, innovative economy. In my paper I will define the concepts related to the ability to use intellectual property and the ability to use information in the area of intellectual property. I will present activities drawn from scientific librarians shaping the ability to use intellectual property with selected faculties of the Jagiellonian University including the Faculty of Medicine, Faculty of Pharmacy, Faculty of Management and Social Communication, and Faculty of Biophysics, Biochemistry and Biotechnology). I will collect the data as part of a survey conducted among librarians of individual faculties.

Purpose

This report highlights the extending role of libraries and other memory institutions due to the progress of Open Science and particularly Citizen Science. Citizen Science is a developing practice with various stakeholders, combining strengths and resources, engaging in research by addressing societal needs and global problems, and developing a knowledge society. Libraries play a relevant role here by promoting collaboration among various stakeholders and increasing information and scientific literacy.

Methodology

The international project LibOCS (Project Number: 2021-1-EE01-KA220-HED-000031125) was the framework for the chosen methodology and study. Two surveys were run in the Baltic States: Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. The first survey was held from April to July 2022. The second survey was built based on the data obtained in the first survey, and it was held from June to September 2022. The feedback received from both semi-structured questionnaires was 127 filled and valid for analysis responses of the first survey and 60 of the second one.

Gathered data helped to list the opinions and experiences of researchers, librarians, and specialists of other memory institutions, citizen scientists, or volunteers engaged in Citizen Science projects. The research of available information highlighted only a few Citizen Science projects aired in the Baltics with the engagement of library specialists (Kaseorg, 2022; Dobreva, 2015; Bite, 2020), therefore, it was decided to widen the range of respondents, and to run the surveys also among other memory institutions.

The QuestionPro tool was exploited to design surveys and collect data, and content analysis was used as the method of data aanalysis.

Findings

Respondents in the Baltic States expressed the willingness to collaborate with memory institution specialists in Citizen Science projects. The answers of the respondents witness the expanding role of the memory institutions specialists in research with the ability to perform the tasks related to organizing training on information, digital, data, and scientific literacy, as well as to giving support for Citizen Science projects through community conventions and promotion of knowledge sharing culture.

References

Bite, K., Daugavietis, J., Kampars, J., Kreicbergs, J., Kuchma, I., Locmele, E., Ostrovska, D., Vecpuise, E., Veisa, K., Zelve, M., & Latvijas Republikas Izglitibas un zinatnes ministrija. (2020). “Pētījuma par atvērto zinātni un rīcībpolitikas ceļa kartes izstrādi” noslēguma ziņojums 2020. gada 4 jūnijs. Retrieved September 9, 2022 from https://www.izm.gov.lv/sites/izm/files/petijums-atverta_zinatne_21_2.pdf

Dobreva, M., & Devreni-Kutsuki, A. (2015). Citizen science and memory institutions: Opportunities and challenges. [Conference paper]. Im INFORUM 2015: 21st Annual Conference on Professional Information Resources 2015, Prague, Czech Republic. Retrieved September 27, 2022 from https://www.inforum.cz/pdf/2015/dobreva-milena.pdf

Kaseorg, S., Neerut, L., Lembinen, L., & Arust, E. (2022). Drivers and barriers of citizen engagement in open science and the role of university libraries in the Baltics. Zenodo. Retrieved August 26, 2022 from https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6997820