This study proposed an Environment-Based Design (EBDEA) to develop a draft of information literacy assessment criteria (ILAC), to improve the efficiency of developing ILAC. The approach is validated using two methods. Firstly, a case study is conducted to create ILAC for K-12 students by the EBDEA, resulting in four first-tier and 21 s-tier criteria. These were compared with the ILAC from the International Association for Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). The comparison revealed a high degree of consistency between the two sets of ILAC, with the EBDEA-generated ILAC including several additional items that are integral to the criteria but absent in IEA's version. Subsequently, expert evaluation was employed to affirm the effectiveness of the EBDEA, with the majority of experts expressing satisfaction with the ILAC developed via this method. The findings indicate that EBDEA is an efficient approach for developing ILAC, requiring less time and fewer human resources.
ACRL. (2000). Information literacy competency standards for higher education. Teacher Librarian, 9(4), 63–67. http://doi.org/10.1300/J107v09n04_09
2.
AhmadiA.SoltaniF.GheitasiM. (2007). An ICT technical reference model for Iran Universities. International Conference on Information Technology. IEEE. Las Vegas, NV. http://doi.org/10.1109/ITNG.2007.33
3.
AldahdouhA. (2021). Information search behavior in fragile and conflict-affected learning contexts. The Internet and Higher Education, 50 (100808), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2021.100808
4.
AliyyahR. R.RasmitadilaR.HumairaM. A.MujahidinE.RachmadtullahR. (2020). Are the assessment criteria and the role of educational stakeholders able to make outstanding teacher?International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation, 24(6), 8946–8957. https://doi.org/10.37200/IJPR/V2416/PR260902
5.
ArnborgS.BrynielssonJ.ArtmanH.WalleniusK. (2000). Information awareness in command and control: Precision, quality, utility. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Information Fusion, 2, 25–32. https://doi.org/10.1109/ific.2000.859871
6.
BachelorJ. (2010, May). Hypertext in the classroom: Changing definitions of literature and literacy [Master’s thesis]. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/122911/
7.
BachenC.BranchN.DoyleL.ServissT.VossJ. (2018). Teaching teachers to teach writing, critical thinking, and information literacy: A case study of a faculty learning community as a campus-wide pedagogical intervention strategy. Staff Publications, Research, and Presentations, 203, 1–56. https://scholarcommons.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1202&context=library.
8.
BernardR. (2007). Information lifecycle security risk assessment: A tool for closing security gaps. Computers & Security, 26(1), 26–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2006.12.005
9.
CheligeerC.YangJ.BayatpourA.MiklinA.DufresneS.LinL.BhuiyanN.ZengY. (2023). A hybrid semantic networks construction framework for engineering design. Journal of Mechanical Design, 145(4), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4056076
10.
ChenT.YangJ.DuW.YaoJ.YanJ.GeH.BhuiyanN.ZhouF.LiuX.ZengY. (2022). Data quality criteria for urban waste management policy-making using environment-based design. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 55(10), 1435–1440.
11.
CoelliT. J.RaoD. S. P.O'DonnellC. J.BatteseG. E. (2005). An introduction to efficiency and productivity analysis (2nd ed.). Springer.
12.
CookeA. (2002). A guide to finding quality information on the internet. Program Electronic Library & Information Systems, 33(4), 386–386. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006922
13.
DeLucaC.LaPointe-McEwanD.LuhangaU. (2016). Teacher assessment literacy: A review of international standards and measures. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 28(3), 251–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-015-9233-6
14.
DourishP.BellottiV. (1992). Awareness and coordination in shared workspaces. In Proceedings of the 1992 ACM conference on computer-supported cooperative work(pp. 107–114). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/143457.143468
15.
DoyleG. J.FurlongK. E.SeccoL. (2016). Information literacy in a digital era: Understanding the impact of mobile information for undergraduate nursing students. In Studies in Health Technology and Informatics (Vol. 225, pp. 297–301). https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-658-3-297
16.
DuW.YangJ.ChenT.YaoJ.YanJ.GeH.NadiaB.ZhouF.LiuX.ZengY. (2023). Sustainable policy design—how policy impacts household waste management: A case-study from Shanghai. In WangL. L.GeH.ZhaiZ. J.QiD.OufM.SunC.WangD. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th international conference on building energy and environment (pp. 1529–1539). Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9822-5_158
17.
FraillonJ.SchulzW.AinleyJ. (2013). International computer and information literacy study: Assessment framework. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement, 33(4), 95–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2012.09.012
HenkelM.GrafmüllerS.GrosD. (2018). Comparing information literacy levels of Canadian and German university students. In G. Chowdhury, J. McLeod, V. Gillet, P. Willett (Eds.), Transforming Digital Worlds (pp. 464–475). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78105-1_51
JacxsensL.PenningsG.LentackerL.StoopD.ProvoostV. (2024). Identifying essential information for a valid informed consent (ic) of egg donors: An international delphi study. Human Reproduction, 39(Supplement_1), deae108.143. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deae108.143
22.
JosephS.JohnD.KurianS. S.TomT. (2018). An assessment of information literacy competence of postgraduate students. International Journal of Library & Information Science, 7(2), 45–54. https://doi.org/10.34218/IJLIS.7.2.2018.006
23.
JunS.HanS.KimH.LeeW. (2014). Assessing the computational literacy of elementary students on a national level in Korea. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 26(4), 319–332. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-013-9185-7
24.
KhodyakovD.GrantS.KrogerJ.Gadwah-MeadenC.MotalaA.LarkinJ. (2023). Disciplinary trends in the use of the Delphi method: A bibliometric analysis. PLOS ONE, 18(8), e0289009. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0289009
25.
LeiH. (2015). A review of the research and practice on the domestic information literacy education in the last two decades. Library Journal, 34(3), 16–22. https://doi.org/10.13663/j.cnki.lj.2015.03.003
26.
LewisT. (2000). Comments - response to Steve Petrina’s book review and John Ritz’s comment. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 37(2), 1–9.
LucianoF. (2010). The Cambridge handbook of information and computer ethics. Cambridge University Press.
29.
MarkauskaiteL. (2007). Exploring the structure of trainee teachers’ ICT literacy: The main components of, and relationships between, general cognitive and technical capabilities. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55, 547–572. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-007-9043-8
30.
MbandjeD. C.LoureiroM. J.LucasM. (2023). Digital competence and information literacy: Clarifying concepts based on a literature review. Educational Media International, 60(3–4), 306–316. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2023.2324584
31.
MohammadiA.YangJ.BorgianniY.ZengY. (2024). Barriers and enablers of TRIZ: A literature analysis using the TASKS framework. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 22(4), 1206–1230. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEDT-01-2022-0066
NaitoM. (2019). An information literacy curriculum: A proposal. College & Research Libraries News, 52(5), 293–296. https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.52.5.293
34.
PanM. (2013, September). Developing key performance indicators (KPIs) for a department utilizing environment-based design (EBD) methodology [Master's thesis]. https://spectrum.library.concordia.ca/977812
35.
RaderH. (1990). Bibliographic instruction or information literacy. College & Research Libraries News, 51(1), 18–20. https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.51.1.18
36.
RaderH. (2019). Conference circuit: Information literacy: The professional issue: Subjects addressed at the Third National Australian Conference. College & Research Libraries News, 59(3), 171–173. https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.59.3.171
37.
RaeisA. R.BahramiS.YousefiM. (2013). Relationship between information literacy and creativity: A study of students at the Isfahan University of medical sciences. Materia Socio Medica, 25(1), 28–31. https://doi.org/10.5455/msm.2013.25.28-31
38.
RahmaningrumS. A.OktavianaP. P. (2020). Sentiment classification of hotel service review on traveloka sites using nave bayes classifier (NBC) and binary logistic regression. Journal of Physics Conference Series, 1490(1), 012065. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1490/1/012065.
39.
RazaviS. R.YangJ.YangY.AkgunduzA.BhuiyanN.ZengY. (2024). Environment-driven evolution analysis of a product: A case study of braking system evolution. Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science, 27(2), 135–150. https://doi.org/10.3233/JID-230070
40.
ShiY. H.PengC. L.WuD.YangH. (2018). Research on the evaluating indicators system of information literacy for K-12 students. China Educational Technology, 45(8), 73–77. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/11.3792.g4.20180730.1339.020
41.
SkedsmoG.HuberS. G. (2021). Data, indicators, and feedback in education. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 33, 251–254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-021-09362-y
42.
SunX.ZengY.ZhouF. (2011). Environment-based design (EBD) approach to developing quality management systems: A case study. Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science, 15(2), 53–70. https://doi.org/10.3233/JID-2011-15204
43.
Tachie-DonkorG.EzemaI. J. (2023). Effect of information literacy skills on university students’ information seeking behaviour and lifelong learning. Heliyon, 9(8), e18427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e18427
44.
TamburinoL.BravoG. (2024). Ecological efficiency: The ability to achieve human well-being while limiting environmental impact. Environmental and Sustainability Indicators, 21(100322). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indic.2023.100322
45.
TangH.WangS.LiH.LundH.KaiserM. J. (2021). Flexibility categorization, sources, capabilities and technologies for energy-flexible and grid-responsive buildings: State-of-the-art and future perspective. Energy, 219(15), 1–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.119598
WangX.CaoH.YangJ.ZengY. (2024). Effective KPI development using environment-based design (EBD) methodology: A case study of airline KPI system. Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science, 28(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/10920617241289750
48.
WangM.ZengY. (2009). Asking the right questions to elicit product requirements. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 22(4), 283–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/09511920802232902
49.
XuH.ZhangL.LiQ. (2021). A novel inverse procedure for load identification based on improved artificial tree algorithm. Engineering with Computers, 37(1), 663–674. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-019-00848-4
50.
YangJ.DouY.ZengY. (2023). Environment-based design (EBD): Using only necessary knowledge for designer creativity. Proceedings of the Design Society, 3, 1675–1684. https://doi.org/10.1017/pds.2023.168
51.
YangJ.ZengY.Ekwaro-OsireS.NispelA.GeH. (2022). Environment-Based life cycle decomposition (eLCD): Adaptation of EBD to sustainable design. Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science, 24(2), 5–28. https://doi.org/10.3233/JID200018
52.
ZahayD. L.HandfieldR. B. (2004). The role of learning and technical capabilities in predicting adoption of b2b technologies. Industrial Marketing Management, 33(7), 627–641. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2003.10.004
53.
ZengY. (2004). Environment-based formulation of design problem. Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science, 8(4), 45–63. https://doi.org/10.3233/JID-2004-8404
54.
ZengY. (2008). Recursive object model (ROM)-modelling of linguistic information in engineering design. Computers in Industry, 59(6), 612–625. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2008.03.002
55.
ZengY. (2011). Environment-based design (EBD). Proceedings of ASME 2011 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, 237–250. https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2011-48263
56.
ZengY. (2015). Environment-based design (EBD): A methodology for transdisciplinary design+. Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science, 19(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.3233/jid-2015-0004
57.
ZengY. (2020). Environment: The first thing to look at in conceptual design. Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science, 24(1), 45–66. https://doi.org/10.3233/JID200005
ZengY.GuP. (1999). A science-based approach to product design theory part I: Formulation and formalization of design process. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 15(6), 331–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0736-5845(99)00028-9
60.
ZurkowskiP. (1974). The information service environment relationships and priorities. US National Commission on Libraries and Information Science.
