Information literacy advocacy and the public library landscape
Introduction
The importance of information literacy, in relation to lifelong learning; enabling a more informed and empowered citizenry; and, addressing the inequalities produced by the information society, has been strongly advocated at an international level. Endorsement by UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) through the Prague Declaration (2003) and the Alexandria Proclamation (Garner 2006) has seen the concept of information literacy become widely disseminated among the library community. As a result, a discourse has been created that establishes the values of information literacy and situates the practice as a critical literacy in the twenty-first century (Garner, 2006).
However, despite the importance of the declarations and the widespread dissemination to the broader community, there has been minimal research conducted in public library and community landscapes. A number of reasons may contribute to this lacuna. First, while it is possible to clearly articulate what information literacy should do for an individual and how it contributes to their practice, it is often difficult to articulate what information literacy is without resorting to abstraction and generalization or simply falling back to the skills and information and communication technology literacy paradigm. This is because information literacy, as we have seen in the other landscapes, will manifest itself differently according to the situation in which it is practised. While we continue to focus on the individual, it is the setting and the collaborative practices that shape the setting that should be the object of our attention. As community settings are so broad, there appears to be a difficulty in reconciling the aspirational statements of information literacy, which are generalized and abstract, with the realities of actual practice. Secondly, while these statements do not explicitly connect information literacy with the digital age, there are implicit assumptions that technology is the primary mode and model for communication and to be without it is to be part of the information literate poor. This view produces a deficit model of information literacy—one where the focus is on the tools of learning and communication, rather than the holistic nature of information and learning. Finally, evidence from the literature in this sector appears to suggest that public and community librarians feel that the ‘championing’ of information literacy has been imposed upon them, with little professional or financial support. While it is clear that they accept this responsibility, the complex and unbounded nature of information literacy in this sector makes it difficult for this particular group to conceptualize the unique characteristics of information literacy for the many groups within this sector. This leads to difficulty in developing cohesive and effective information literacy programmes. Consequently, information literacy education for this sector tends to draw on some elements from the educational sector, and is usually reduced to technology training and information searching.
Where research has been conducted it appears to be aimed at understanding and highlighting the need and implications of information literacy practice for lifelong learning or the lack of librarians’ skills or training. However, the most interesting feature of this landscape is the reflexive understanding whereby public librarians are examining their own skills and expertise (or lack of these) in relation to their ability to develop information literacy skills in others.
Advocacy of information literacy
Advocacy for information literacy has been located in the majority of international peak bodies that represent the library, cultural and education sectors. Prominent among these are the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Information for All Programme (IFAP). Two significant documents have been produced by UNESCO, these are the Prague Declaration (NCLIS, 2003) and the Alexandria Proclamation (Garner, 2006). These documents make explicit the discourse of information literacy as an enabling information practice, which contributes to the empowerment of citizens, and they illustrate a range of views about what should constitute information literacy practice. The work of the international committees has contributed to the development of curriculum documents employed in the education sector, e.g. US Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL), the UK Society of College, National and University Libraries (SCONUL) and the Australian and New Zealand Institute for Information Literacy (ANZIIL). Peak bodies representing the sector have also adopted the principles and objectives, e.g. American Library Association (ALA), and the Australian Library and Information Association (ALIA). There is some doubt as to the effectiveness of these groups in raising the profile of information literacy outside of the education sector, in particular, in the workplace or within the areas of government policy, which appears to still consider information literacy to only be an information and communication technology-related skill.
The key value underpinning the development of the Alexandria Proclamation is the force of information literacy and lifelong learning as powerful agents to promote social inclusion, empowerment and democratization for the world’s people in today’s information society. Embedded in the Alexandria Proclamation is the intention to raise the ‘global awareness of information literacy as part of the human right to lifelong learning’ (Garner, 2006, p. 5). Patricia Breivik, the Chair Emeritus of The National Forum on Information Literacy, summarized the relationship and importance of these two key events in Prague and Alexandria by indicating that: ‘The outcomes of the Prague event laid the theoretical foundation for international collaboration in promoting Information Literacy as an essential set of abilities in the 21st century … The Alexandria colloquium took those outputs and began the process of developing practical agendas for raising awareness and promoting Information Literacy and lifelong learning skills.’ (Garner, 2006, p. 5).
Prior to the Alexandria colloquium an expert panel of sector experts and regional team leaders met to establish a set of ‘givens’. These are useful to consider as key conceptual drivers that underpinned the meeting’s set of information literacy values and established a contemporary information literacy discourse. They are stated as the following (Garner, 2006, p. 30).
Information literacy is too important to be left to any one institution, agency or profession; collaboration is essential.
Information literacy needs to be approached within the context of people’s cultural values, societal groupings and personal information needs.
Information literacy is more than use of technology.
Information literacy is concerned with empowering people regardless of modes of information access and delivery.
Achievement of information literacy goals requires flexible strategies to meet the needs of diverse communities and individuals.
Information literacy is a prerequisite for participating effectively in the information society and is part of the basic human right of lifelong learning education.
For the Alexandria Proclamation on information literacy to be advanced at a global level Philip Candy argued that it needs to gain the status of an issue of vital world importance. This would require advocates to become more outward looking and to critically reflect on the successful features of worldwide movements. He suggests that: ‘We should learn from mass education movements, whether about environment, health, smoking or appropriate sexual practices. We need to examine what has been highly successful worldwide and determine the essence of those successful interventions that we can use to promote Information Literacy’ (Garner, 2006, p. 49).
An example of advocacy at this level is found in Australia where the Australian Library and Information Association (ALIA) has produced the Statement on Information Literacy for all Australians. Drawing from the Alexandria Proclamation (Garner, 2006), ALIA articulates the principle of information literacy as:
A thriving national and global culture, economy and democracy will best be advanced by people who are empowered in all walks of life to seek, evaluate, use and create information effectively to achieve their personal, social, occupational and educational goals. It is a basic human right in a digital world and promotes social inclusion within a range of cultural contexts.
This statement exemplifies the discourse of information literacy for all peak organizations. Information literacy is articulated in these statements as a practice that is inclusive of all people; facilitates learning for life; enables the creation of new knowledge; is underpinned by the acquisition of skills; enables innovation and enterprise; and produces participatory citizenry, social and economic development as an outcome (NCLIS et al., 2003; ALIA, 2006; Garner, 2006).
In these peak bodies’ reports, information literacy is commonly defined as the ability to locate, evaluate, manage and use information. There is a strong connection between information literacy and technology, in particular the use of information and communication technology to access information and information literacy is conceptualized from a library-centric perspective. This particular view is largely organized around print-based or digitized materials and a decentralized view of information literacy as a transferable generic skill.
However, attempts to have information literacy placed on the political agendas of government bodies has proved difficult and at the time of the Alexandria Proclamation (Garner, 2006), Finland was the only country to have achieved this objective. Tovote (in Garner, 2006, p. 45) highlighted work that had been undertaken in that country, indicating that information literacy issues had reached the political level, resulting in the inclusion of information literacy programmes for all ages. In general, Nordic countries have been proactive in collaborating on information literacy projects that focus around the public library sector. An example provided by Hansen (2004) is a Nordbok funded project involving Norway, Finland, Sweden, Iceland and Denmark that explored a number of themes related to national policies and information literacy. These included public libraries as learning centres, librarians as teachers, and library strategies in relation to advocacy at all levels. A second phase of the collaborative project has resulted in the widespread dissemination of information literacy practices.
Advocacy was viewed by Bruce and Lampson (2002) as an important factor in order for information literacy to be successfully accepted. Librarians also understood the need to advocate for information literacy at the policy level by gaining support from their library’s boards and administrators. The authors (p. 102) suggested that: ‘… librarians who are most knowledgeable and motivated regarding information literacy need to educate and motivate their administrators and co-workers and create partnerships to promote the allocation of information literacy resources in the form of staffing, and the prioritization of time and budget.’
The advocacy role of library associations and the profession
The need for the information profession to build the impetus for change by raising public awareness of information literacy has become an established theme in the literature. In particular, professional associations and their members are identified as being key players in lobbying government to establish information literacy policy, for resources and funding to enable libraries and other bodies to undertake the work of developing the infrastructure, and for staff training in order to implement programmes for the community (see, for example, the information literacy train the trainer programmes supported by UNESCO). Bundy (2002, p. 125) argues that because librarians recognize the importance of information literacy as prerequisite for ‘personal and democratic empowerment’, they should actively advocate to governments and educators that the critical issue of the information age is the ‘information literacy divide, not the digital divide’.
Bundy couples this discourse about the empowerment of others with the characterization of information literate people, which draws from the educational perspective of information literacy. ‘People who recognise their own need for good information, and who have the skills to identify, access, evaluate, synthesise and apply the needed information are thus information literate’ (p. 125).
The ALA developed their paper on information literacy Building information literate communities (2001) along with establishing a subcommittee with the aim of ‘building public awareness of what it takes to be information literate in the 21st century’ (Brey-Casiano, 2006, pp. 181–190). Furthering this aim, the association produced a package for librarians to develop their information literacy advocacy skills. The package was entitled A library advocate’s guide to building information literate communities and is available on the ALA website along with their other information literacy tools. During her term as ALA President Brey-Casiano believed that opportunities should be developed to create worldwide partnerships within the library profession to advocate for information literacy and share resources. She suggested that:
… we should create a worldwide network of library advocates who can share ideas, resources and much more. With the many resources available to us here in the United States, provided by ALA and other organizations, we can build information literate communities in every corner of the world, which provide a better quality of life for the people who live there (p. 190).
Given the lack of public money available for information literacy initiatives within the community sector, this sentiment is admirable. However, while it still appears that many attempts are being made by the various information literacy associations (e.g. ANZIIL, SCONUL, NFIL) to provide online resources, the lack of funding for information literacy training and support for the development of programmes appears to be a major hindrance for librarians within the public sector.
Information literacy in the public library sector
In comparison with the literature on information literacy in the higher education landscape there are few research studies and little written on how information literacy is conceptualized in the public library sector, in instructional programmes, or about the practitioner experience of information literacy in the public landscape (Virkus, 2003; Hart, 2006; Harding, 2008). In a recent article, Harding (2008) identified that less than 2% of the literature on information literacy has any focus on public libraries and suggests that ‘little guidance has been given … as to how they should go about this’, i.e. information literacy programme development (p. 289). This useful literature review by Harding focused on the value of public libraries in relation to community information literacy developments and the progress made by public libraries in their information literacy endeavours.
Compared with the higher education sector and to a lesser extent the workplace, in public libraries, research into information literacy appears to be in the early stages of development. This is evidenced by studies examining: staff and user attitudes to information literacy (Koning, 2001; Bruce and Lampson, 2002; Julien and Hoffman, 2008); identification of the national status of information literacy development (Julien and Breu, 2005; Hart, 2006); raising concerns about the inadequacy of staff training, resources and infrastructure (Harding, 2008); levels of planning and documentation for information literacy (Harding, 2008); and advocacy and promotion (Brey-Casiano, 2006; Harding, 2008). An earlier study by Ryynanen (2002), points to the vital role of public libraries in providing equitable access to information for people with socio-economic disadvantage (i.e. those without the capacity to own the technology) for participation in the twenty-first century information society.
The notion that public libraries are well placed within the community to foster information literacy and promote the importance of an information literate society prevails in many of the peak body statements and from key writers in this area (e.g. see Breivik and Gee, 1989; Bundy, 2002). This contrasts with the idea that information literacy practice is being imposed on the public sector, and is reported by Harding (2008), who echoes the earlier statements of Julien and Hoffman (2008). Harding (2008, p. 274) states that ‘despite the myriad challenges, public libraries world wide are embracing this imposed responsibility and have implemented a wide array of information literacy programs’. However, these programmes tend to mirror the library-centric view of information literacy, of combining bibliographic skills with the promotion of a skill set that reflects searching for online information using readily available search engines and databases and the use of computers.
In her analysis of the literature, Harding (2008) argues that the public library is in a strong position to facilitate information literacy skill development in the community. She identifies the strengths within the public library system (p. 279), including:
the traditional and recognized role of the public library as a place of learning;
that from a community perspective librarians are considered to be information experts;
the broad client base of public libraries is a strength when it comes to fostering the information literacy message;
the public library often represents a child’s first learning experience with formal information access, and from this perspective librarians are able to instil the importance and value of information and of the library as an information space;
that the public library has the ability to facilitate lifelong learning through their contact with members of the community who are interested in self-directed study or informal learning;
the one-to-one relationship between public librarians and clients provides teachable moments (one-to-one reference training encounters);
public librarians have been effective in forming partnerships with other stakeholders (e.g. schools, government). This places them in a prime position to advocate the information literacy message; and
as key access points for general public to information and information and communication technology resources, the public library is in a strong position to provide training.
However, while public libraries appear to have accepted this imposed responsibility for information literacy instruction, Harding (2008) notes that there is a lack of information literacy guidelines and few manuals that have been developed specifically for this sector that take into account the realities of the practice or client need. This author also points to the issues of inadequate funding for information literacy within this sector. She is of the view that public libraries have been forced to develop their own responses to the proclamations about information literacy, balancing between the responsibility for providing information literacy instruction programmes with their limited resources and the demands of the community (p. 280). Limited funding has resulted in public libraries’ need to focus on certain aspects of information literacy rather than on the whole process. Examples provided by Harding (2008, p. 284) include:
the investment of public libraries into information and communication technology and computer access and training, which aims at meeting the demands of clients for training in online searching;
ad hoc ‘teachable moments’ where individual instruction moves from the teaching of basic access skills to more complex evaluation skills, and developing partnerships with:
– schools and academic institutions, where public librarians are actively engaged with the provision of curriculum assistance and tailoring collections to suit students after school hour needs; and
– securing funding to enable effective information literacy training of library staff and funding to provide community information literacy training.
Addressing information literacy from a Danish perspective, Skov (2004) suggests that part of the problem with information literacy provision in the public library sector, is the lack of a common language that describes information literacy. The term more commonly used in Denmark is ‘informationskompetence’, which describes ‘user education and library instruction encompassing student learning and the pedagogical role of the librarian’ (para 2). This lack of common language for information literacy (or ‘informationskompetence’), results in many public libraries interpreting the term to include all traditional library activities such as library orientation, user education, user-librarian negotiation (reference) digital services as all inclusive of the information literacy concept. In this context teaching information literacy also becomes synonymous with information searching skills. Thus the power of the concept is reduced to a library-centric view (Skov, 2004). The author suggests public librarians are ill equipped to teach information literacy as a broad concept. This illustrates one of the tensions between educators and librarians in relation to information literacy education and highlights the public library’s role as a supporting one. Skov (2004) suggests that:
teaching students to become information literate is not done solely by teaching information searching, it requires a painstaking effort to teach critical thinking, formulation of research questions, analysis and evaluation of information. It is formal education’s business to impart these competencies to students and the responsibility lies with teachers being the main stakeholders in the learning process (para 13).
However, a reality of public libraries not often mentioned is that they are open to school children long after teachers have left their classrooms. Consequently, information literacy education and supporting the school curriculum is an issue for these institutions, who must juggle the needs of a specific group in addition to the competing needs of many diverse interest groups within the community. Therefore, public libraries face a difficult task when it comes to the effective provision of information literacy within the community. The diverse nature, skills and needs of their constituent base; the limited recognition of the critical role that public libraries play supporting the community; a failure of governments to provide adequate financial support for information literacy programmes; and, the failure of peak library and education bodies to support public libraries in the development of information literacy programmes have resulted in an ad hoc approach to information literacy development for this sector. A number of other factors that affect the development of information literacy programmes in public libraries are listed by Harding (2008, pp. 274–294) as:
lack of agreed standards, frameworks or guidelines that would provide a blueprint for public libraries;
resources, such as staff, funding, space and facilities, which place limitations on what can be done within this sector;
perceptions, attitudes and beliefs from staff about what information literacy is, including:
– a lack of understanding and knowledge by public librarians as to what constitutes information literacy for this sector and what practices are the most important;
– valuing information (librarians need to accommodate the ways clients value information);
– public awareness of the public library as a provider of information literacy;
– support and acknowledgement of the public library’s information literacy role by government, industry bodies; and
Importantly, Harding (2008) also points out that public librarians are not perceived as having a teaching role, even though there is a general perception within the community and among peak organizations that public libraries are learning institutions. This is reflected and often reinforced in library and information science teaching programmes, where teaching skills are not routinely taught to librarians as part of their own professional education. Consequently, for this sector there is often an ad hoc approach to information literacy education and minimal promotion of the practice to the wider community.
Empirical research
As mentioned earlier, there are few studies of information literacy in public libraries. However, of these studies reported, some share a common range of issues. In particular, a lack of support for public libraries from other sectors, funding and, the librarian’s perception about their role in supporting the information literacy education of their clients.
Research in Canada by Julien and Breu (2005) documented current information literacy instructional practices and also investigated public librarians’ attitudes towards the delivery of information literacy programmes. The information and communication technology focus of this quantitative study was aligned with the Canadian government’s imperative to ensure maximum connectivity for its citizens. Reporting on the first phase of the study, which examined the gap between government policy intent and the provision of information literacy services, the researchers observed:
that information literacy was not a high priority within this sector, even though it is deemed by librarians to be important for all the community;
that a small number of libraries are taking a large role in the development of information literacy skill development in the community;
that there is perception that information literacy training is being imposed on this sector with little funded support to ensure success; and
a strong injection of resources to support information literacy services is needed (e.g. dedicated funding, trained staff and training space).
Julien and Breu (2005, pp. 297–298)
The role of Canadian public libraries in developing information literacy skills (web-based) of community users was the basis of the second study by Julien and Hoffman (2008). Employing the ACRL definition, the authors understand information literacy to be a ‘set of skills needed to find, retrieve, analyse and use information’ (p. 24). The study explored the public use of the Internet, current training practices, users’ opinions of their information literacy skills in using the Internet and the experiences of the staff. While the Canadian government has provided the information and communication technology infrastructure to roll out the Internet to public libraries across the nation, limited resources to provide information literacy training to the community have meant that policy objectives could not be fully met, i.e. the intention is to ‘… provide Canadians greater opportunities to develop the skills necessary to access online information’ (p. 20).
The information literacy environment identified by Julien and Hoffman’s (2008, pp. 33–39) study of Canadian public libraries highlights that:
training remained a comparatively minor priority with little formal training given;
clients are learning themselves and developing information literacy skills through experience and consulting with other people for advice and help rather than using formal training when offered by libraries;
funding dedicated to the task of information literacy was lacking; and
there was a lack of dedicated trained staff and space for training.
The authors found that there is a ‘second level digital divide’ emanating from a ‘misplaced confidence many Canadians have in their ability to find, assess and appropriately use information’ (p. 21). It is possible that time (alone) spent on the Internet might or might not develop information literacy skills ‘more likely this experience develops confidence rather than actual skills’ (p. 39). However, the authors observed the importance that information and communication technology training opportunities gave: ‘… some people the increased sense of community and of self-efficacy that accompanies Internet use might be strong starting point for the development of more sophisticated online skills (development training).’ (Julien and Hoffman, 2008, p. 39).
The issue of transfer was also noted within this study. Reflecting on the lack of transfer of skills from formal information literacy education, the authors noted that: ‘One interesting yet unsettling theme was the informal training provided to students at all levels, from grade school through to postsecondary, who apparently receive insufficient training in their educational contexts. This issue was noticeable at all the libraries visited’ (Julien and Hoffman, 2008, p. 35). Similarly, the authors noted that: ‘… people are mostly training themselves, developing their information literacy skills through personal experience and seeking help from informal personal sources, such as friends and family, rather than through formal library training’ (Julien and Hoffman, 2008, p. 39).
In this research, public librarians in Canada note that they are required to provide informal training to students who are not receiving it in a school setting. Again this point highlights the mismatch between the education and public sector about the adequacy of information literacy education for school children. The lack of collaboration between the education sector and the public library is of concern. In most cases it will be public librarians who are called in to pick up the deficit in information literacy training, primarily because of their greater accessibility. It also points to a greater need for library and information science courses to include some form of small group training in their curriculum.
Education for librarians is not a new issue. The information literacy perspectives of all types of librarians in Washington State were sought in the Bruce and Lampson (2002) study. It was intended that the implications gleaned from the views collected would then help determine the information literacy education needs for librarians. In this study the largest cohort were public librarians who: ‘… expressed the greatest need for support and training. Additionally, public librarians felt the most ill at ease in the teaching environment’ (Bruce and Lampson, 2002, p. 101).
The type of information literacy support provided by public librarians tended to be ‘one-on-one support for people with information needs … connecting information literacy service and instruction with the reference services of the library’ (Bruce and Lampson, 2002, p. 92). However, librarians wanted to see more information literacy classes offered in the library supported by active promotion of current information literacy activities. They were aware that: ‘Until and unless time, staffing and resources are allocated to support the development of a proactive program of information literacy within the institution, librarians indicated that reference staff will continue to respond to the need for information literacy in an ad-hoc, reactive fashion on an individual-by-individual basis.’ (Bruce and Lampson, 2002, p. 102).
Hart (2006) has explored the relationship between the public library, and its readiness to undertake an instructional role in information literacy. The aim of this research was to investigate how ready public libraries in South Africa were to deliver expanded information literacy programmes. In particular, the study was interested in the delivery of information literacy to school students who used the public library, in a rural province, where only 18% of schools have libraries and as a consequence, support falls to the public library. In terms of ‘readiness’ the study aimed to identify the:
levels of facilities and infrastructure needed for information literacy programme delivery, and
willingness by librarians to take on an enhanced role in information literacy education.
The author envisaged that these two key elements were intertwined and central to the current information literacy environment in South African public libraries.
The library staff interviewed for this study had a narrow view of the public library’s information literacy role and the staff’s ability to describe information literacy and the search process suggested an incomplete understanding of information literacy. However, the author was optimistic that there was a ‘dawning recognition that the public library has no choice but to intervene in pupils’ information literacy education’ (Hart, 2006, p. 60).
The second element that was found to be vital for the expansion of information literacy programmes was the existing facilities and infrastructure. Hart indicates that in South Africa there is a lack of physical facilities. In addition, the lasting effects of the apartheid system still impact on quality of service (Hart, 2006).
Given the intertwined nature of the two issues and the need for strategic change to take place, the study’s ‘fundamental’ conclusion was that in order for cultural change to take place ‘sustainable information literacy education in public libraries will depend on dynamic leadership and on a vision of a new model of the public library’. (Hart 2006, p. 60).
In 2001 the Information Literacy subgroup of the Library and Information Association of New Zealand Aotearoa (LIANZA) surveyed public libraries to identify the nature and extent of information literacy practices. The survey aimed to identify:
the extent and range of formal and informal programmes provided by public libraries;
the extent to which information literacy education programmes are formalized in planning and policy; and
what public libraries consider they need to develop information literacy education.
Koning (2001, p. 170)
The areas to progress the information literacy agenda were identified as:
increasing staff awareness of the importance of information literacy in their roles as librarians;
developing and sharing planning documents;
training (high level of need for skills in reference and e-resources, IT, information literacy and teaching);
government recognition of the role of libraries in information literacy development as being crucial to the knowledge/information society to progress information literacy education; and
Partnerships with other institutions
Public libraries are uniquely placed to partner with other institutions for information literacy development, given the librarian’s broad mandate of service offerings (Skov, 2004). Commenting on the Danish public library situation Skov (2004) notes that public libraries have a strong role as a support institution in information literacy partnerships with schools, not only for information literacy skill development but in developing critical thinking, question formulation and information evaluation in the children of the community. Skov (2004, para 14) wrote, ‘If the concept of information literacy is taken to its fullest extent, the challenge of the public library is to get involved in the knowledge construction process of school children in collaboration with schoolteachers and school librarians’.
In describing an example from Denmark, Skov also highlights the outcomes of this partnership in terms of the development of shared values related to learning and student project work and a more collaborative approach between teachers and librarians where teachers are offered information searching courses. In return, librarians have been able to develop knowledge about new teaching methods. Citing the joint projects between public libraries and formal education in Arhus, Denmark, Skov (2004, para 14) suggests that the collaboration and knowledge sharing by both groups has also produced a range of intangible results, such as ‘an increased knowledge of how the library can support new teaching methods and assist students in their learning process, and a shared understanding of the concept of information literacy’.
In a national survey in New Zealand, Koning (2001) reports that partnerships were most often formed with schools (56% of public libraries). The example of schools is mirrored in the several examples given in Skov (2004). Other institutions where partnerships were identified were training institutions (30%) and community organizations (26%). Interestingly though, there is little mention of efforts to form partnerships with local businesses, although Koning (2001) notes that larger libraries were more likely to partner with these groups.
Need for national information policies and initiatives
In the same way that the agenda for information literacy in higher education needs to be supported and/or driven by university management and policy, it is also true of information literacy in the broader community. However, in the community context information literacy needs to be propelled by policy initiatives driven at the national level (Bundy, 2002; Candy, 2002; Correia, 2002). Such policies provide the support and impetus for the development of information literacy in various contexts, including libraries, community centres and museums, and to the professions. Candy (2002, p. 12) notes that:
Despite Zurkowski’s call as long ago as 1974 for national strategic approaches to the development of information literate students and citizens, most governments have until recently been less than wholehearted in their commitment to this goal. In recent years, there has been a flurry of aspirational policies and national agendas about becoming information economies and learning societies, and even some tentative advocacy for information literacy.
Information literacy and lifelong learning are inextricably entwined and this strong connection is evident in the Prague Declaration and further developed in the Alexandria Proclamation. Candy’s white paper for the Prague meeting of information literacy experts (2002) sets the agenda on this issue. He argues that:
The first … requirement (is) that people must have access to needed information; and the second is that they must be able to judge the quality of the information to which they are exposed. As a result, discourses about lifelong learning have become inextricably interwoven with, on the one hand, concerns about equitable access to information (much of which is in digital form) and, on the other hand, policies and practices designed to enhance the capacity to deal with large—often overwhelming—amounts of information (p. 13).
Aspirational information literacy: governance and civil society
Information literacy for an ‘active, effective and responsible citizenship’ is an area where there are a multitude of aspirational statements, but very little attention from researchers (Correia, 2002, p. 24). Citizens without good information literacy skills have limited access to information and as such strike barriers that prevent participation in their community. Ferrerio (in Garner, 2006, p. 45) wrote, ‘Information Literacy is more than a sum of attributes, it is a process that facilitates social inclusion, through pedagogical mobilisation of interrelated content including knowledge, skills, attitudes and values of citizens.’
The importance of this issue is highlighted in the Alexandria Proclamation, where one particular group was dedicated to exploring the implications of information literacy for governance and citizenship. The aim of the group was to: ‘… empower people to actively participate in governance and citizenry and to control their own lives, respecting cultural diversity in both oral and digital societies as a public good.’ (Garner, 2006, p. 18).
The target audience for the recommendations that emerged from the meeting was: ‘political and civic leaders, NGOs, community groups, government agencies (national and international), international foundations, libraries, labour unions, educational institutions, business and industry, media.’ (UNESCO, NFIL and IFLA, 2006, p. 18).
In a White Paper developed for the Prague meeting, Correia (2002) explores the dimensions and importance of information literacy for all members of the community. Correia (p. 4) states:
In short, if citizenship is about making informed choices and decisions, about taking action, individually and as part of collective processes, to play a full part as active citizens and to be civically engaged through the exercise of moral responsibility, community involvement and exercise of their rights and responsibilities, then people need to acquire participatory skills. In parallel, they need to be information literate, at least at a basic level. They need the skills to enable them to locate, access, retrieve, evaluate, interpret and act on information, in order to identify, monitor and anticipate problems and communicate needs. They need to be able to exercise political, civil and social rights and responsibilities for self and others. Communication skills are also an essential element for an active and responsible citizenship, as people need to communicate to be able to express ideas and opinions with the confidence that they will be heard and taken into account.
Correia (2002) further suggests that effective citizenry requires that people are able to make practical use of information, not when engaged in formal educational settings but also in their work and everyday environments. In particular, information literacy provides the tools necessary for effective and informed decision making, enabling citizens to critically assess political environments, and to recognize ‘misinformation, deception or disinformation’ (pp. 15–16). In this regard Correia recognizes the power of information literacy and the ability of the phenomenon to improve an individual’s body of knowledge (Correia, 2002).
Seeking the key concepts that underpin policy initiatives and competencies that will ‘promote an information literate citizenry’, Correia (2002, p. 13) researched the topic ‘what are the information literacy competencies for an active, effective and responsible citizenship’ (p. 12). Correia (p. 13) identified three broad conceptual categories.
(i) Education for citizenship (as a continuous process, both in the formal education system and in the informal adult education system for lifelong learning).
(ii) Creation of an information environment through the implementation of information policies with the emphasis on access and provision of quality information for citizenship.
(iii) Public and Civil Society Institutions as Information Intermediaries.
The Alexandria Proclamation (Garner, 2006, pp. 18–19) makes a number of recommendations relating to government and citizenship and urges national governments to create councils to promote an information culture. Other recommendations include the need to:
develop lead agencies to consult with other stakeholders (e.g. education and information and communication technology);
create programmes that will produce information literate people;
develop information literacy standards in the workplace and business sectors; and
address unemployment through information literacy education and to address the need for civics and citizenship education through information literacy programmes.
It is assumed that much of this work will fall to the public library sector but without the will and funding of governments then it is highly unlikely that these institutions will be able to convert information literacy ideals into reality.
Health information literacy
Health information literacy is a tangible and powerful concept for providing examples of information literacy in action, thus making it easier to communicate to the general public its value, whereas the abstract concept of information literacy is more difficult to promote (Wedgeworth, in Garner, 2006, p. 63). For example, Wedgeworth noted that ‘people are motivated to know more about their health and the health of their families’ (pp. 63–64). Developing good health information literacy programmes and strategies are vital for the empowerment of all individuals in all countries. A strong focus on information literacy in education sector programmes is vital if people are to become empowered in relation to health care and better able to make informed decisions not only about their own situations but contribute to improving the situations of others. There are a number reasons why health information literacy is vital. According to Candy (in Garner, 2006, p. 55) these are that:
it is vital that all actors understand any documents, charts, records, dosages, treatments, etc., to ensure proper care and accurate diagnosis, treatment and instructions;
everyone needs to understand the information needed about their own health;
governments have a large responsibility—for both ideological and financial reasons;
health is increasingly international in scope, with migration and refugees and air travel diseases that spread as fast as or faster than the information about the diseases;
health and human services are a large and growing part of the economy with more and more potential for inter-sectoral collaboration such as between education, care providers, insurance companies, libraries, publishers and pharmaceutical companies;
within health there is a long tradition of people helping each other (these traditions of self-help on the one hand and mutual support have become even more pronounced since the advent of the internet);
information and communication technologies have a particular impact on the provision of health and human services ranging from e-health and telemedicine and integrated patient care records to patient networks;
health information comes in a variety of forms and formats (photos, text, graphs, CDs, websites, etc.) and, thus, illustrates the multifaceted nature of information literacy—it is, therefore, a good test site for information literacy;
There is a strong relationship ‘between the lack of Health Information Literacy and poverty’ (Wedgeworth, in Garner, 2006, p. 61). Much information is available on the Web; consequently, those lacking the technology and those with poor information literacy and information technology skills encounter deep barriers for access to quality health information. This in turn affects their ability to make informed decisions. The preamble in the Alexandria Proclamation provides the context to the Health and Human Services recommendations:
In the context of a universal commitment to enhanced quality of life, all citizens have a right to good health and to healthcare based on informed consent, which is reaffirmed and supported by this declaration. In support of this right, we reaffirm the entitlement of all citizens to access information that is relevant to their health and the health of their families and communities. In particular we refer to the necessary protection of the mother and the child as embodied in the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, to the rights of children to have access to information about health as enshrined in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Article 26), and to the rights of all people to have sufficient information and understanding to give informed consent to treatment.
Garner (2006, p. 14)
In order to promote information literacy in this sector, Candy has argued that there needs to be greater clarity and precision about what information literacy means. I have (2005) argued that information literacy will mean different things according to the context in which it is practised. Candy makes the same point, and also suggests that information literacy is a contextual practice, consequently, what constitutes information literacy will be influenced by the discourse that shapes the setting. Therefore, in each domain, information literacy practises may exhibit some characteristics that are unique to the setting (e.g. a focus on information and communication technology, or on oral communication practices). In order to account for the variability in health information literacy, Candy suggests more co-ordination between national, regional and local approaches, which attempts to disseminate best practice, needs to be developed and supported. He points out that information literacy development in this area must recognize cultural difference. He also suggests that special attention should be paid to training healthcare professionals in information literacy education in order for these practices to be passed on and thus benefit and empower communities in respect to decision making related to their health (Candy, 2002, p. 57).
Putting a figure on the costs of poor health information literacy Wedgeworth (in Garner, 2006, p. 61) suggests that: ‘… there are estimates that in North America more than 75 billion dollars is wasted because people don’t understand their physician’s instructions and end up going to the emergency room. This has driven the American Medical Association to be actively involved in Health Information Literacy and the training of health care professionals’.
In the field of health it is easy to be misled into believing that the only issue is dissemination and access to information; evaluation and the use of information are critical aspects that are sometimes overlooked. Byrne, an Australian participant at the Alexandria meeting discussed the human costs of poor health information literacy that involve: ‘… misleading information, incorrect information and dangerous information—all of which makes Information Literacy more important in the field of health. The higher-level message we should be striving for is if you seek out information, and don’t have the skills to evaluate it, you place your loved ones in jeopardy’ (Byrne, in Garner, 2006, p. 65).
Apart from a number of aspirational statements alluding to the importance of information literacy practice in this sector, a number of recommendations were made in relation to health information literacy. These included:
the development of integrated curriculum for all years of schooling and focused towards responsibility for health;
the strengthening of partnerships with existing health organizations (e.g. World Health Organization (WHO), NGOs) and other public health organizations;
the empowering of carers and patients through information literacy education, enabling them to ask questions and make informed decisions;
advocacy for information literacy within the health profession;
training of health professionals to improve their information literacy skills; and
development of a best practice database to demonstrate quality information literacy programmes and initiatives.
Garner (2006, pp. 14–15)
Characteristics of information literacy in the public sector landscape
While the public sector is diverse and complex, the current perception of information literacy within this landscape is understood in specific ways— as a library-centric practice that focuses around information searching and the effective use of information and communication technology and library skills. This view also underpins a number of tensions and issues that exist in the debate within this sector, creating ambiguity about what information literacy is, what constitutes information literacy education and how the community should be supported (and by whom). In particular there is a need to reconcile the aspirational statements made by peak bodies relating to the importance of information literacy to all people. This relates to the need to provide education for librarians that will allow them to move away from the library-centric idea of information literacy and move towards a broader focus that includes training delivery. This requires not only advocacy by peak bodies to governments to obtain sustained funding, but also a commitment by library and information science educators to providing librarians with training specific to information literacy. This moves beyond the research process to include aspects of information literacy that are not based on print or information communication and technology literacy. Based on the current literature the landscape appears to exhibit the following characteristics:
perceptions of information literacy and information literacy practice tend to follow library-centric models blending bibliographic instruction with a user education model—in this respect the concept of information literacy for this sector is more closely aligned with ‘informationskompetence’ found in Nordic countries;
the lack of clear focus results in an inability to effectively advocate the importance of information literacy to funding bodies;
the tendency to apply ad hoc approaches to information literacy education as a result of poor funding to the sector;
focus towards a narrow skills education (e.g. information searching and information and communication technology orientation) rather than more complex features of information literacy, which would facilitate the lifelong learning agenda, as it is advocated by peak bodies;
a high level of reflexivity about librarian ability (or lack of abilities) in information literacy training;
it is driven by a tension that is created by aspirational statements attesting to the importance of information literacy to empowering citizens and lifelong learning—this tension results in public librarians feeling that the discourse of information literacy is being ‘imposed’ upon them with little understanding of the realities of practice within this sector.
Conclusions
Currently, there is a research lacuna into information literacy in the public sector. Of the research that has been conducted, themes centre on advocacy for information literacy as a prerequisite for lifelong learning. They also consider the tensions and difficulties faced by librarians in public libraries to support the learning of students who use the library outside school time, in addition to the diverse interests of the community. Conceptions of information literacy education appear to focus on the library-centric instructional models with a strong emphasis on searching for information and computer literacy.
References
ALIA, Statement on information literacy for all Australians Retrieved 13 October 2008 from. Australian Library and Information Association., 2006. http://www.alia.org.au/policies/information.literacy.html/
Breivik, P.S., Gee, E. Information literacy; revolution in the library. New York: Macmillan; 1989.
Brey-Casiano, C.A. From literate to information literate communities. Public Library Quarterly. 2006; 25(1/2):181–190.
Bruce, H., Lampson, M. Information professionals as agents for information literacy. Education for Information. 2002; 20:81–106.
Bundy, A. Growing the community of the informed: information literacy: a global issue. Australian Academic and Research Libraries. 2002; 33(3):125–134.
Candy, P. Information literacy and lifelong learning, White paper prepared for UNESCO, the US National Commission on Libraries and Information Science, and the National Forum on Information Literacy, for use at the Information Literacy Meeting of Experts, Prague, The Czech Republic Retrieved on 25 September 2008 from, 2002. http://74.11.214.110/libinter/infolitconf&meet/papers/candy-fullpaper.pdf/
Correia, A.M.R., Information literacy for an active and effective citizenship. White paper prepared for UNESCO, the US National Commission on Libraries and Information Science, and the National Forum on Information Literacy, for use at the Information Literacy Meeting of Experts, July 2002, Prague, Czech Republic, retrieved 25 September 2008, 2002. http://74.11.214.110/libinter/infolitconf&meet/papers/correia-fullpaper.pdf/
Garner, S., High-level colloquium on information literacy and lifelong learning Bibliotheca Alexandrina, Alexandria, Egypt, November 6–9, 2005. Report of a Meeting Sponsored by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), National Forum on Information Literacy (NFIL) and the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA), 2006, Retrieved 13 January 2009,. http://archive.ifla.org/III/wsis/High-Level-Colloquium.pdf/
Hansen, J.N., The public libraries and information literacy in a Nordic perspective Retrieved 8 January 2009,. Scandinavian Public Library Quarterly, 3, 31., 2004. http://www.splq.info/issues/vol37_3/11.htm/
Harding, J.N. Information literacy and the public library: We’ve talked the talk, but are we walking the walk? Australian Library Journal. 2008; 56:48–62.
Hart, G. The information education readiness of public libraries in Mpumalanga Province (South Africa). Libri. 2006; 56:48–62.
Julien, H., Breu, R.D. Instructional practices in Canadian public libraries. Library and Information Science Research. 2005; 27(3):281–301.
Julien, H., Hoffman, C. Information literacy training in Canada’s public libraries. Library Quarterly. 2008; 78(1):19–41.
Koning, A. Information literacy in New Zealand. APLIS. 2001; 14(3):159–164.
NCLIS, NFIL, and UNESCO, The Prague Declaration. Report on the Information literacy meeting of experts. ‘Towards an information literate society’., 2003. http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/files/19636/11228863531PragueDeclaration.pdf/PragueDeclaration.pdf/
Ryynanen, M., Information literacy, libraries and policy makers. White paper prepared for UNESCO, the US National Commission on Libraries and Information Science, and the National Forum on Information Literacy, for use at the Information Literacy Meeting of Experts, Prague, The Czech Republic, retrieved 26 September 2008 from, 2002. http://www.splq.info/issues/vol37_3/11.htm/
Skov, A., Information literacy and the role of public libraries retrieved January 2009 from. Scandinavian Public Library Quarterly. 2004;3(4–7). http://www.splq.info/issues/vol37_3/02.htm/
Virkus, S. Information literacy in Europe: a literature review. Information Research. 2003; 8(4):1–102.