Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The response to the countless forms of information delivery and creation has been the catalyst for the development of the new literacies that are being researched and implemented into teaching by educators around the world. This article will examine information literacy courses being taught at colleges and universities and how the courses implemented 21st century literacies into the curriculum, specifically transliteracy and metaliteracy. The article will discuss how a 3-credit information literacy course was redesigned to include the concepts behind transliteracy and metaliteracy. Furthermore, the article will discuss why the Constructivist approach in the classroom seems the best approach for information literacy instruction and how Connectivism could be a possible approach to teaching information literacy going forward. Finally, the article will question whether the current information literacy standards endorsed by the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) are appropriate for today's world or if a reconceptualization of literacy is needed.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL). (2000). Information literacy competency standards for higher education. Chicago: American Library Association. Retrieved from http://www.acrl.org/ala/mgrps/divs/acrl/standards/standards.pdf

Bealle

(2010). Using constructivism to engage students in an online IL course. In Hollister

C. V.

(Ed.), Best practices for credit-bearing information literacy courses (p. 242). Chicago: Association of College and Research Libraries.

Bobish

(2011). 205tuesdayfall2011 [licensed for non-commercial use only] / UNL 205 fall 2011 Tuesday Retrieved 11/28/2011, 2011, from http://205tuesdayfall2011.pbworks.com/w/page/44658840/UNL%20205%20Fall%202011%20Tuesday

Bobish

(2011). Participation and pedagogy: Connecting the social web to ACRL learning outcomes. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 37(1), 54–63.

Brown

T. H.

(2006). Beyond constructivism: Navigationism in the knowledge era. On the Horizon, 14(3), 108–120.

Colborn

N. W.

(2010). The motivation triangle: Affecting change in student learning in credit IL courses by examining the student, the course content, and the teacher. In Hollister

C. V.

(Ed.), Best practices for credit-bearing information literacy courses (p. 227). Chicago: Association of College and Research Libraries.

Dunaway

M. K.

(2011). Connectivism: Learning theory and pedagogical practice for networked information landscapes. Reference Services Review, 39(4), 675–685.

Fox

(2001). Constructivism examined. Oxford Review of Education, 27(1), 23–35.

Holden

(2011). Information literacy in the sciences: UNL 206X syllabus quarter 1 spring 2011 Retrieved from http://library.albany.edu/usered/unl205/Instructor_Directory.htm#holden

10.

Imler

(2010). Using collaborative learning in a credit IL course. In Hollister

C. V.

(Ed.), Best practices for credit-bearing information literacy courses (p. 217). Chicago: Association of College and Research Libraries.

11.

Ipri

(2010). Introducing transliteracy what does it mean to academic libraries? College & Research Libraries News, 71(10), 532.

12.

Jenkins

(2006). Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide. New York: New York University Press.

13.

Jones-Kavalier

B. R.

Flannigan

S. L.

(2006). Connecting the digital dots: Literacy of the 21st century. EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 29(2), 8–10.

14.

Luo

(2010). Web 2.0 integration in information literacy instruction: An overview. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 36(1), 32–40.

15.

Mackey

T. P.

Jacobson

T. E.

(2011). Reframing information literacy as a metaliteracy. College Research Library College and Research Libraries, 72(1), 62–78.

16.

Macklin

A. S.

(2001). Integrating information literacy using problem-based learning. Reference Services Review, 29(4), 306–314.

17.

Pence

H. E.

(2007). Preparing for the real web generation. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 35(3), 347–356.

18.

Shenton

A. K.

Fitzgibbons

(2010). Making information literacy relevant. Library Review, 59(3), 165–174.

19.

Siemens

(2005). Elearnspace. Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Retrieved November 27, 2011, from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm

20.

Spiranec

Zorica

M. B.

(2010). Information literacy 2.0: Hype or discourse refinement? Journal of Documentation, 66(1), 140–153.

21.

Thomas

(2008). Transliteracy and new media. In Adams

Gibson

Arisong

S. M.

(Eds.), Transdisciplinary digital art. Sound, vision and the new screen (pp. 101–109). Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Reconsidering Information Literacy in the 21st Century: The Redesign of an Information Literacy Class

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References