Search (1411 results, page 1 of 71)

0.113060236 = product of:
  0.22612047 = sum of:
    0.22612047 = sum of:
      0.19191255 = weight(_text_:literacy in 4902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.19191255 = score(doc=4902,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.29616246 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05049654 = queryNorm
          0.64799756 = fieldWeight in 4902, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4902)
      0.03420792 = weight(_text_:22 in 4902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03420792 = score(doc=4902,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17683028 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05049654 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4902, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4902)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In this article a social constructionist approach to information technology (IT) literacy is introduced. This approach contributes to the literature an IT literacy by introducing the concept of IT self as a description of the momentary, context-dependent, and multilayered nature of interpretations of IT competencies. In the research litersture, IT literacy is offen defined as sets of basic skills to be learned, and competencies to be demonstrated. In line with this approach, research an IT competencies conventionally develops models for explaining user acceptance, and for measuring computer-related attitudes and skills. The assumption is that computerrelated attitudes and seif-efficacy impact IT adoption and success in computer use. Computer seif-efficacy measures are, however, often based an seif-assessments that measure interpretations of skills rather than performance in practice. An analysis of empirical interview data in which academic researchers discuss their relationships with computers and IT competence shows how a seif-assessment such as "computer anxiety" presented in one discussion context can in another discussion context be consigned to the past in favor of a different and more positive version. Here it is argued that descriptions of IT competencies and computer-related attitudes are dialogic social constructs and closely tied with more general implicit understandings of the nature of technical artifacts and technical knowledge. These implicit theories and assumptions are rarely taken under scrutiny in discussions of IT literacy yet they have profound implications for the aims and methods in teaching computer skills.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.1, S.13-22

0.113060236 = product of:
  0.22612047 = sum of:
    0.22612047 = sum of:
      0.19191255 = weight(_text_:literacy in 1897) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.19191255 = score(doc=1897,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.29616246 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05049654 = queryNorm
          0.64799756 = fieldWeight in 1897, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1897)
      0.03420792 = weight(_text_:22 in 1897) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03420792 = score(doc=1897,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17683028 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05049654 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1897, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1897)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - Since every community of practice generates, seeks, retrieves and uses information resources and sources related to the cognitive structure being researched or studied and the tasks being performed, the need arises to undertake studies focused on real user communities, which in the case of this paper is the group of translators. This paper aims to investigate this issue. Design/methodology/approach - In this arena of application, it is important to remember that translators are not only information users, but also information processors and producers. Thus, their documentary competence has to evolve in three dimensions: the informational, the methodological and the strategic. The conceptual model proposed in the paper is based on information literacy (INFOLIT) standards and also the authors' knowledge of translation practice and the competencies it demands, where INFOLIT plays a starring role. This paper is part of a broader research currently in progress, whose main goal is to provide translators and interpreters with a solid instruction in information literacy. Findings - The paper introduces a model for information literacy specifically intended to develop the information competence of this community of users, it reveals that the model is a gathering of skills, competences, knowledge and values, and it is based on the cooperation between the authors' expert knowledge of information science and professional translation practice. Originality/value - This paper puts forward the first proposal for information literacy applied to translation training.

Date

7. 6.2008 16:18:22

0.11138784 = product of:
  0.22277568 = sum of:
    0.22277568 = product of:
      0.44555137 = sum of:
        0.44555137 = weight(_text_:literacy in 4479) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.44555137 = score(doc=4479,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.29616246 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05049654 = queryNorm
            1.5044154 = fieldWeight in 4479, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4479)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The concepts of 'information literacy' and 'digital literacy' are described, and reviewed, by way of a literature survey and analysis. Related concepts, including computer literacy, library literacy, network literacy, Internet literacy and hyper-literacy are also discussed, and their relationships elucidated. After a general introduction, the paper begins with the basic concept of 'literacy', which is then expanded to include newer forms of literacy, more suitable for complex information environments. Some of these, for example library, media and computer literacies, are based largely on specific skills, but have some extension beyond them. They lead togeneral concepts, such as information literacy and digital literacy which are based on knowledge, perceptions and attitudes, though reliant on the simpler skills-based literacies

0.101946354 = product of:
  0.20389271 = sum of:
    0.20389271 = sum of:
      0.1628432 = weight(_text_:literacy in 1658) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.1628432 = score(doc=1658,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.29616246 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05049654 = queryNorm
          0.54984415 = fieldWeight in 1658, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1658)
      0.041049503 = weight(_text_:22 in 1658) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041049503 = score(doc=1658,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17683028 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05049654 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1658, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1658)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article presents the consequences to librarians and teachers for the flattening of expertise, or the Google Effect. As blogs continue to fill the Web with the bizarre daily rituals and opinions of people who we would never bother speaking to at a party, let alone invite into our homes, there has never been a greater need to stress the importance of intelligence, education, credentials and credibility. The problem is not only accuracy, but also the mediocrity initiated through the Google Effect. The concern is not with the banality of information - there has always been a plurality of sources in the analogue environment. The concern is the lack of literacy skills and strategies to sort the trash from the relevant. This paper addresses not only the social choices about computer use and information literacy, but the intellectual choices we make in our professional lives as teachers and librarians. In such a time, the Google Effect raises stark questions about the value of reading, research, writing and scholarship.

Date

16. 3.2019 16:22:08

0.10072665 = sum of:
  0.080201894 = product of:
    0.24060568 = sum of:
      0.24060568 = weight(_text_:3a in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.24060568 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.42811024 = queryWeight, product of:
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05049654 = queryNorm
          0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
    0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.020524751 = product of:
    0.041049503 = sum of:
      0.041049503 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041049503 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17683028 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05049654 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl.: http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CEAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fciteseerx.ist.psu.edu%2Fviewdoc%2Fdownload%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.91.4940%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3Dpdf&ei=dOXrUMeIDYHDtQahsIGACg&usg=AFQjCNHFWVh6gNPvnOrOS9R3rkrXCNVD-A&sig2=5I2F5evRfMnsttSgFF9g7Q&bvm=bv.1357316858,d.Yms.

Date

8. 1.2013 10:22:32

0.09499186 = product of:
  0.18998373 = sum of:
    0.18998373 = product of:
      0.37996745 = sum of:
        0.37996745 = weight(_text_:literacy in 6479) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.37996745 = score(doc=6479,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.29616246 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05049654 = queryNorm
            1.2829697 = fieldWeight in 6479, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6479)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.09103212 = product of:
  0.18206424 = sum of:
    0.18206424 = product of:
      0.36412847 = sum of:
        0.36412847 = weight(_text_:literacy in 606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.36412847 = score(doc=606,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.29616246 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05049654 = queryNorm
            1.229489 = fieldWeight in 606, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=606)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - To describe the various landscapes in which information literacy has been explored and to propose new ways of thinking about information literacy. Design/methodology/approach - Draws on constructivist-influenced grounded theory method employed during doctoral research into information literacy practices of firefighters. Findings - Information-literate people are more usefully described as being engaged, enabled, enriched and embodied. Information literacy is conceptualized through this research as a way of knowing. The revised and extended definition is a more appropriate one to underpin an emerging ontological perspective on information literacy and to foster an understanding of information literacy as a meta-competency. Research limitations/implications - The research was limited to an in-depth exploration of one professional group in one geographic location over 18 months. Practical implications - The provision of a broader definition of the information literacy and the illustration of how information is perceived in a variety of concepts broadens librarians' and educators' understanding of information literacy. It offers librarians and educators a different way of thinking about information literacy. Originality/value - This paper reports and expands upon original doctoral research of significance to information professionals and educators.

0.0849553 = product of:
  0.1699106 = sum of:
    0.1699106 = sum of:
      0.13570267 = weight(_text_:literacy in 2603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.13570267 = score(doc=2603,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.29616246 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05049654 = queryNorm
          0.4582035 = fieldWeight in 2603, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2603)
      0.03420792 = weight(_text_:22 in 2603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03420792 = score(doc=2603,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17683028 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05049654 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2603, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2603)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - This paper aims to report the result of follow-up research on end-users' conceptions of information visibility on the web and their conceptualizations of success and failure in web searching. Design/methodology/approach - The data were collected by a questionnaire followed by a brief interview with the participants. The questionnaire was developed based on the information visibility model suggested by the author in the original study. Fifty-two library and information sciences students from Tarbiat Mollem University (TMU) and Iran University of Medical Sciences (IUMS) in Tehran took part in the study. Findings - The model of information visibility can enable web users to gain a better understanding of their information seeking (IS) outcomes and it can assist them to improve their information literacy skills. The model can provide a theoretical framework to investigate web users' IS behavior and can be used as a diagnostic tool to explore the contextual and conceptual elements affecting the visibility of information for end-users. Research limitations/implications - The paper suggests a visibility learning diary (VLD), which might be useful to measure the efficiency of information literacy training courses. Originality/value - The contextual and conceptual approach of the paper provides a deeper insight into the issue of information visibility, which has received little attention by IS and information retrieval researchers until now.

Date

1. 1.2009 10:22:40

0.08310058 = product of:
  0.16620116 = sum of:
    0.16620116 = product of:
      0.33240232 = sum of:
        0.33240232 = weight(_text_:literacy in 3462) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.33240232 = score(doc=3462,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.29616246 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05049654 = queryNorm
            1.1223648 = fieldWeight in 3462, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3462)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In this new edition the author updates and expands an her reviews of the literature conceming learning styles, information skills, literacy skills, technological literacy, and bibliographic instruction.

0.08310058 = product of:
  0.16620116 = sum of:
    0.16620116 = product of:
      0.33240232 = sum of:
        0.33240232 = weight(_text_:literacy in 829) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.33240232 = score(doc=829,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.29616246 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05049654 = queryNorm
            1.1223648 = fieldWeight in 829, product of:
              4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                24.0 = termFreq=24.0
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=829)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this research is to identify UK English academics' conceptions of information literacy and compare those conceptions with current information literacy standards and frameworks. Design/methodology/approach - Three year AHRB-funded study involving 80 academics interviewed throughout the UK and using the phenomenographic research method to discover variation in experience leading towards identification of qualitatively different conceptions of information literacy. Conceptions are then reviewed in light of previous research and current librarian-generated frameworks and standards. Findings - The findings identify UK English academics' conceptions of information literacy and show them to be both similar to and significantly different from conceptions described in previous research and librarian-generated frameworks and standards. Research limitations/implications - The research focuses on creating a conceptual snapshot-in-time for the 20 English academics taking part. The research implies that disciplinary differences in conception of information literacy are significant and suggests further research to assess disciplinary conceptual differences. Practical implications - Librarians working with English faculty on information literacy need to be aware of differences in conception between themselves and academics to work effectively. The paper also highlights the significance of information literacy in English faculty's teaching and research practices and this relevance suggests that information literacy should be integrated into course and curriculum design. Originality/value - The paper fills a major gap in literature on information literacy by focussing on conceptions of lecturers, thereby counterbalancing the abundance of work produced by librarians. The paper illustrates the complexity of English academics' conceptions of information literacy and informs academics' use and understanding of information literacy.

0.08310058 = product of:
  0.16620116 = sum of:
    0.16620116 = product of:
      0.33240232 = sum of:
        0.33240232 = weight(_text_:literacy in 3799) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.33240232 = score(doc=3799,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.29616246 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05049654 = queryNorm
            1.1223648 = fieldWeight in 3799, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3799)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The following entry offers definitions and discusses the development of the concept of information literacy. It then presents some examples of information literacy programs worldwide, emphasizing the role of international organizations such as UNESCO and IFLA.

0.08223039 = product of:
  0.16446078 = sum of:
    0.16446078 = product of:
      0.32892156 = sum of:
        0.32892156 = weight(_text_:literacy in 3686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.32892156 = score(doc=3686,freq=94.0), product of:
            0.29616246 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05049654 = queryNorm
            1.1106119 = fieldWeight in 3686, product of:
              9.69536 = tf(freq=94.0), with freq of:
                94.0 = termFreq=94.0
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3686)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 56(2005) no.9, S.1008-1009 (D.E. Agosto): "This second edition of Information Literacy: Essential Skills for the Information Age remains true to the first edition (published in 1998). The main changes involved the updating of educational standards discussed in the text, as well as the updating of the term history. Overall, this book serves as a detailed definition of the concept of information literacy and focuses heavily an presenting and discussing related state and national educational standards and policies. It is divided into 10 chapters, many of which contain examples of U.S. and international information literacy programs in a variety of educational settings. Chapter one offers a detailed definition of information literacy, as well as tracing the deviation of the term. The term was first introduced in 1974 by Paul Zurkowski in a proposal to the national Commission an Libraries and Information Science. Fifteen years later a special ALA committee derived the now generally accepted definition: "To be information literate requires a new set of skills. These include how to locate and use information needed for problem-solving and decision-making efficiently and effectively" (American Library Association, 1989, p. 11). Definitions for a number of related concepts are also offered, including definitions for visual literacy, media literacy, computer literacy, digital literacy, and network literacy. Although the authors do define these different subtypes of information literacy, they sidestep the argument over the definition of the more general term literacy, consequently avoiding the controversy over national and world illiteracy rates. Regardless of the actual rate of U.S. literacy (which varies radically with each different definition of "literacy"), basic literacy, i.e., basic reading and writing skills, still presents a formidable educational goal in the U.S. In fact, More than 5 million high-schoolers do not read well enough to understand their textbooks or other material written for their grade level. According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress, 26% of these students cannot read material many of us world deem essential for daily living, such as road signs, newspapers, and bus schedules. (Hock & Deshler, 2003, p. 27)
Chapter two delves more deeply into the historical evolution of the concept of information literacy, and chapter three summarizes selected information literacy research. Researchers generally agree that information literacy is a process, rather than a set of skills to be learned (despite the unfortunate use of the word "skills" in the ALA definition). Researchers also generally agree that information literacy should be taught across the curriculum, as opposed to limiting it to the library or any other single educational context or discipline. Chapter four discusses economic ties to information literacy, suggesting that countries with information literate populations will better succeed economically in the current and future information-based world economy. A recent report issued by the Basic Education Coalition, an umbrella group of 19 private and nongovernmental development and relief organizations, supports this claim based an meta-analysis of large bodies of data collected by the World Bank, the United Nations, and other international organizations. Teach a Child, Transform a Nation (Basic Education Coalition, 2004) concluded that no modern nation has achieved sustained economic growth without providing near universal basic education for its citizens. It also concluded that countries that improve their literacy rates by 20 to 30% sec subsequent GDP increases of 8 to 16%. In light of the Coalition's finding that one fourth of adults in the world's developing countries are unable to read or write, the goal of worldwide information literacy seems sadly unattainable for the present, a present in which even universal basic literacy is still a pipedream. Chapter live discusses information literacy across the curriculum as an interpretation of national standards. The many examples of school and university information literacy programs, standards, and policies detailed throughout the volume world be very useful to educators and administrators engaging in program planning and review. For example, the authors explain that economics standards included in the Goals 2000: Educate America Act are comprised of 20 benchmark content standards. They quote a two-pronged grade 12 benchmark that first entails students being able to discuss how a high school senior's working 20 hours a week while attending school might result in a reduced overall lifetime income, and second requires students to be able to describe how increasing the federal minimum wage might result in reduced income for some workers. The authors tie this benchmark to information literacy as follows: "Economic decision making requires complex thinking skills because the variables involved are interdependent.
Students need to use the whole range of information literacy skills to identify needed information, evaluate and analyze information, and use information for critical thinking and problem solving" (p. 81). Chapters six and seven address K-12 education and information literacy. The authors outline the restructuring necessary to make information literacy a basic part of the curriculum and emphasize resourcebased learning as crucial in teaching information literacy. The authors also discuss the implications of the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act to the teaching of information literacy in primary and secondary schools. Again they avoid controversy, this time by omitting analysis of the success or failure of the Act in promoting the teaching and learning of information literacy. Instead, these chapters provide a number of examples of information literacy programs in K-12 educational settings within the US. Examples range from information literacy guidelines developed by the California Technology Assistance Project to a discussion of home schoolers and information literacy. Throughout the 1990s, the information literacy movement began to filter up to higher education. Chapter eight discusses related standards and presents a number of examples of college-level information literacy programs, including programs at the University of Massachusetts, Kent State University, and Washington State University. Chapter nine deals with technology and information literacy. It tocuses an the teaching of technology use as process teaching and an the importance of context in technology education.
Lastly, chapter 10 considers possible future directions of the information literacy movement. The authors conclude "Our ability to be information literate depends an our willingness to be lifelong learners as we are challenged to master new, and as yet unknown, technologies that will surely alter the landscape of information in the future" (p. 177). Following the book's 10 chapters are a number of appendices that present information literacy standards and definitions, a timeline of the evolution of the information literacy movement, and a number of related bibliographies. Lead author Eisenberg is perhaps best known as the co-creator, with Bob Berkowitz, of the Big 6, an information literacy model. The model includes six components: Task Definition, Information Seeking Strategies, Location and Access, Use of Information, Synthesis, and Evaluation (Eisenberg, 2003). Throughout the book, Eisenberg and his co-authors show how the Big 6 model can be used to teach information literacy. For example, in chapter nine, "Technology and Information Literacy," they lay out each of the six model components, providing specific technological skills benchmarks for each, such as "Know the roles and computer expertise of the people working in the school library media center and elsewhere who might provide information or assistance" under step 3, "Location and Access" (p. 160). The many detailed descriptions of information literacy policies and programs that appear throughout the book make it most useful for educators, administrators, and policy makers involved in the teaching, planning, and development of information literacy programs, standards, and policies. Overall, this newly revised volume stands as one of the most comprehensive single available sources from which to begin a detailed investigation of the concept of information literacy."

0.0814216 = product of:
  0.1628432 = sum of:
    0.1628432 = product of:
      0.3256864 = sum of:
        0.3256864 = weight(_text_:literacy in 1390) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.3256864 = score(doc=1390,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.29616246 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05049654 = queryNorm
            1.0996883 = fieldWeight in 1390, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1390)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.080163635 = product of:
  0.16032727 = sum of:
    0.16032727 = sum of:
      0.13296093 = weight(_text_:literacy in 1427) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.13296093 = score(doc=1427,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.29616246 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05049654 = queryNorm
          0.4489459 = fieldWeight in 1427, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1427)
      0.027366336 = weight(_text_:22 in 1427) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.027366336 = score(doc=1427,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17683028 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05049654 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1427, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1427)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

"Teaching Library" - dies ist nicht nur der Titel dieses Buches, sondern vor allem auch eine selbstbewusste Behauptung in einem Land, in dem die Politik die Bibliotheken als Partner des Lernens noch nicht entdeckt hat, in dem die kommunalen Gremien in Zeiten des Sparens die Ausgaben für Bibliotheken als angeblich freiwillige Leistungen in dem Feld der Kultur neben Museen und Theatern munter kürzen. Dabei belegen die internationalen Studien (PISA, TIMSS etc.) zur Leistungsfähigkeit von Bildungssystemen bereits jetzt schon erhebliche Defizite des deutschen Bildungswesens, insbesondere hinsichtlich der Schlüsselqualifikationen, die unter "Literacy" gefasst werden. Als notwendige Antwort auf dieses Defizit empfehlen die Autoren dieses Buches die viel pointiertere Einbindung der gesamten Bibliotheken in Deutschland in unser Bildungssystem, um sowohl die Unentbehrlichkeit zu unterstreichen, als auch Synergien mit anderen Bildungsträgern zu nutzen. Das vorliegende Buch zeigt eindrucksvoll die erstaunliche Vielfalt der Initiativen und den Einfallsreichtum der Bibliothekare in dieser Hinsicht.

Date

22. 2.2008 14:17:00

LCSH

Information literacy / Study and teaching / Germany

Subject

Information literacy / Study and teaching / Germany

0.079562746 = product of:
  0.15912549 = sum of:
    0.15912549 = product of:
      0.31825098 = sum of:
        0.31825098 = weight(_text_:literacy in 4740) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.31825098 = score(doc=4740,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.29616246 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05049654 = queryNorm
            1.0745825 = fieldWeight in 4740, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4740)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - To demonstrate existing definitional consensus on information literacy, and outline the main and unique areas of concern resulting from that consensus for libraries desiring to contribute to information literacy education. Design/methodology/approach - Leading attempts at defining information literacy are examined to demonstrate their lack of substantive definitional differences, and to establish parameters for the library's participation in information literacy education. Findings - Examines the leading definitional contributions since the American Library Association's 1989 seminal work on information literacy. Demonstrates the lack of substantive definitional differences between those and the ALA definition. Suggests librarians concentrate on the expectations deriving from such unanimity, and outlines those expectations. Practical implications - Clarity of definitions provides more stable atmosphere for practical initiatives, while controversies over definitions distract from action. By pointing out the fundamental agreements between seemingly competing definitions of information literacy, this article underscores the need for librarians to fully concentrate on ways to achieve information literacy. By specifying the library's unique place in that process and outlining the concrete things it can do, the article also provides practical guidance for more focused activity on the part of the library in information literacy education. Originality/value - This article demonstrates a consistently overlooked definitional consensus on information literacy, and shows how the purported differences in definition actually represent delineations of steps and approaches that facilitate practical implementation. It also outlines the specific areas and activities that are legitimate responsibilities of the library in information literacy education, and notes areas outside the library's reach.

0.07509767 = product of:
  0.15019535 = sum of:
    0.15019535 = product of:
      0.3003907 = sum of:
        0.3003907 = weight(_text_:literacy in 1899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.3003907 = score(doc=1899,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.29616246 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05049654 = queryNorm
            1.0142767 = fieldWeight in 1899, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1899)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Two liberal arts colleges in Minnesota are building an their longstanding commitment to bibliographic instruction to develop innovative information literacy programs. This article explores assumptions shared by the Earlham model of bibliographic instruction and the information literacy movement, outlines important differences, examines conditions that inhibit change, and profiles two approaches to developing information literacy programs with strong cross-campus collaboration.

Source

Information literacy programs: successes and challenges. Ed.: Patricia Durisin

0.07509767 = product of:
  0.15019535 = sum of:
    0.15019535 = product of:
      0.3003907 = sum of:
        0.3003907 = weight(_text_:literacy in 4443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.3003907 = score(doc=4443,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.29616246 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05049654 = queryNorm
            1.0142767 = fieldWeight in 4443, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4443)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper is primarily concerned with self-efficacy in the context of information literacy. The focus is first on the concept of self-efficacy, followed by attainment of self-efficacy beliefs. Finally, findings of the research, the aim of which was to explore students' (who enrolled in the Department of Information Management, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey) perceived self-efficacy for information and computer literacy, are scrutinized. Results of the research indicate no significant year-to-year changes, although the students have a positive perceived self-efficacy for information literacy. Students' self-efficacy beliefs regarding information literacy and computers are correlated.

0.07509767 = product of:
  0.15019535 = sum of:
    0.15019535 = product of:
      0.3003907 = sum of:
        0.3003907 = weight(_text_:literacy in 610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.3003907 = score(doc=610,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.29616246 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05049654 = queryNorm
            1.0142767 = fieldWeight in 610, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=610)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - The main aim of this paper is to describe the development of a scale designed to measure self-efficacy for information literacy. Design/methodology/approach - Cronbach's alpha, item analysis and item discrimination indices, principal component analysis, varimax rotation, and discriminant validity were used to measure reliability and validity of the scale. A 28-item refined version of the scale was found highly reliable and of reasonable length. Findings - Further refinement based on principal component analysis indicated three major components, which allow approaching information literacy skills regarding to their complexity levels. Originality/value - The information literacy self-efficacy scale is recommended to identify individuals with low self-efficacy beliefs, which may be a significantly limiting factor for them to explore their information literacy skills.

0.07509767 = product of:
  0.15019535 = sum of:
    0.15019535 = product of:
      0.3003907 = sum of:
        0.3003907 = weight(_text_:literacy in 31) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.3003907 = score(doc=31,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.29616246 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05049654 = queryNorm
            1.0142767 = fieldWeight in 31, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=31)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper presents an overview of the development of current practice in information literacy education in tertiary institutions in South Africa. The policy framework affecting information literacy is examined from multiple perspectives. An examination of the literature identifies key concerns that are used in the compilation of a small survey instrument to establish current practice. The impact of institutional policies, finding educational strategies that meet the identified objectives of information literacy, diversity in students' backgrounds and abilities, and ultimately the assessment of performance all emerged as significant. The concept of multiliteracies is suggested as a useful approach to conceptualizing information literacy as central to student learning. Future directions are suggested.

0.07509767 = product of:
  0.15019535 = sum of:
    0.15019535 = product of:
      0.3003907 = sum of:
        0.3003907 = weight(_text_:literacy in 3610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.3003907 = score(doc=3610,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.29616246 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05049654 = queryNorm
            1.0142767 = fieldWeight in 3610, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3610)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - This paper aims to argue for a conception of information literacy (IL) that goes beyond the abilities of finding information as it includes communication skills. An important issue in this is that abstractors exercise IL on a professional level. Design/methodology/approach - By stressing the importance of the fact that information literacy extends towards verbal communication the paper takes an interdisciplinary approach, the main component of which is linguistics. Findings - It is found that verbal communication and especially analytic-synthetic writing activities play an important role in information literacy at the level of everyday language use, semi-professional and professional summarising of information. The latter level characterises abstracting. Originality/value - The paper adds to the body of knowledge about information literacy in general and in connection with communication and abstracting.