Librarian Use of the Knowledge Practices and Dispositions in the ACRL Framework
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29173/cais1918Keywords:
Information Literacy, information practices, quantitative content analysisAbstract
This poster details the findings of an investigation of US academic instruction librarians’ use of the knowledge practices and dispositions in the Framework for Information Literacy in Higher Education from the Association of College and Research Libraries (2016). The Framework is a departure from the previous set of standards, but is often critiqued for being too theoretical and therefore not relevant to practice. In order to investigate the extent to which academic librarians use this theoretically-grounded document in practice, a questionnaire and interview study was conducted. This questionnaire explored librarian preparation in library science and education; familiarity with the frames, knowledge practices, and dispositions; examples of how, if at all, the knowledge practices and dispositions are implemented in information literacy instruction; and barriers with implementing the Framework. Follow up interviews investigated more deeply how various parts of the Framework were implemented in librarians’ daily work.
L'usage par les bibliothécaires des pratiques de connaissances et dispositions dans le référentiel de l’ACRL
Résumé
Cette affiche détaille les résultats d’une enquête sur les bibliothécaires universitaires aux États-Unis quant à leur utilisation des pratiques de connaissances et des dispositions dans le Référentiel de l’Association of College and Research Libraries (2016). Le Référentiel s’éloigne de l’ensemble des normes antérieures, mais est souvent critiqué pour être trop théorique et par conséquent, n’étant pas pertinent dans la pratique. Dans le but de déterminer dans quelle mesure les bibliothécaires universitaires utilisent ce document fondé sur la théorie dans la pratique, un questionnaire et une entrevue ont été mis en place. Ce questionnaire explore la formation des bibliothécaires dans le domaine de la bibliothéconomie et de l’éducation; leur familiarité avec ces cadres de référence, leurs mises en pratiques de connaissances, ainsi que les dispositions; des exemples de la façon dont, le cas échéant, les pratiques de connaissances et les dispositions sont implantées dans l’enseignement de la maîtrise de l’information; et les obstacles dans l’implantation de ce cadre de référence. Les entrevues de suivi ont permis d’analyser en profondeur la façon dont les divers éléments du cadre sont mis en œuvre dans le travail quotidien des bibliothécaires.
Mots-clés
Maîtrise de l’information; pratiques de l’information; analyse de contenus quantitatif
References
Association of College and Research Libraries. (2016). Framework for information literacy for higher education. http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework
Beatty, J. (2014, September 14). Locating information literacy within institutional oppression. In the Library with the Lead Pipe. http://www.inthelibrarywiththeleadpipe.org/2014/locating-information-literacy-within-institutional-oppression/
Bombaro, C. (2016). The Framework is elitist. Reference Services Review, 44(4), 552–563. https://doi.org/10.1108/RSR-08-2016-0052
Foasberg, N. M. (2015). From standards to frameworks for IL: How the ACRL framework addresses critiques of the standards. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 15(4), 699–717. https://doi.org/10.1353/pla.2015.0045
Gross, M., Latham, D., & Julien, H. (2018). What the framework means to me: Attitudes of academic librarians toward the ACRL framework for information literacy for higher education. Library & Information Science Research, 40(3), 262–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2018.09.008
Hjørland, B., & Albrechtsen, H. (1995). Toward a new horizon in information science: Domain-analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 46(6), 400–425. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199507)46:6<400::AID-ASI2>3.0.CO;2-Y
Hsieh, M. L., Dawson, P. H., & Yang, S. Q. (2021). The ACRL Framework successes and challenges since 2016: A survey. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 47(2), 102306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2020.102306
Julien, H. (2008). Content analysis. In L. M. Given (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (2nd. ed., pp. 120–122). SAGE.
Limberg, L., Sundin, O., & Talja, S. (2012). Three theoretical perspectives on information literacy. Human IT: Journal for Information Technology Studies as a Human Science, 11(2), Article 2. https://humanit.hb.se/article/view/69
Lloyd, A. (2017). Information literacy and literacies of information: A mid-range theory and model. Journal of Information Literacy, 11(1), 91–105. https://doi.org/10.11645/11.1.2185
Meyer, J. H. F., & Land, R. (2006). Overcoming Barriers to Student Understanding: Threshold Concepts and Troublesome Knowledge. Routledge.
Pilerot, O. (2016). Connections between research and practice in the information literacy narrative: A mapping of the literature and some propositions. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 48(4), 313–321.
Rath, L. (2022). Information literacy is a social practice: A threshold concept for academic instruction librarians. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, e20210067. https://doi.org/10.3138/jelis-2021-0067
Saldaña, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Tuominen, K., Savolainen, R., & Talja, S. (2005). Information literacy as a sociotechnical practice. The Library Quarterly, 75(3), 329–345. https://doi.org/10.1086/497311
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Logan Rath, Heidi Julien

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.


