Kuhlthau’s Information Search Process model

The research undertaken by Carol Kuhlthau (1987, 1989, 1993, 2004) over several decades has been very influential in this field. Kuhlthau’s (1989) pioneering research used a grounded theory approach to develop the Information Search Process (ISP) model. One of the innovative aspects of her research was that it not only studied what students did when researching for a school assignment but how students perceived the information process and how their feelings changed at different stages of the process. Despite its name, the ISP model is not merely focused on searching for information but, according to Kuhlthau (2004, p. 44) focuses on ‘the affective (feelings), the cognitive (thoughts) and the physical (actions) common to each stage’. Kuhlthau’s (2004) subsequent studies showed that, despite extensive claims from within the field of bibliographic instruction research, the quantity of resources found by students was not necessarily instrumental in extending students’ learning or improving the quality of written work done by students.

Kuhlthau (2004) summarizes a number of research projects related to information literacy in schools. One of the areas studied by Kuhlthau, but paid little attention by other researchers, was the level of student confidence at different stages of completing an assignment. Kuhlthau (2004) states that, in all her research, students tended to have low levels of confidence at the start of an assignment and that their confidence increased as they were able to define the parameters of their topic and find more relevant information. Kuhlthau (1993, 2004) does not focus closely on the issue of the transfer of information literacy skills from one context to another but implies that some of the students she studied, both at school and at university, were able to transfer aspects of skills they had learned. In particular, Kuhlthau (2004, p. 76) states that students’ abilities in ‘formulating a focus’ and their ability to deal with changes to ‘their preconceived notions of a topic’ developed over time.

Concept mapping

Students’ use of concept maps has been featured in a number of information literacy research studies in schools. Carol Gordon (2000) studied students’ use of concept maps when completing a school assignment and found that concept mapping was beneficial to students when they were searching for information. The focus of Gordon’s (2000) study was on students who were likely to go on to university. Her study indicated that the students who used concept maps effectively were more likely to think more clearly about the purpose of their assignment, more likely to relate prior knowledge to new knowledge and more likely to use concepts when searching for information. Kinchin and Hay (2003) examined the use of concept maps by students studying science; they argue that concept maps can improve students’ metacognitive abilities and encourage students to relate prior knowledge to new information and ideas. Maureen Cain (2004) examined the use of concept maps by primary-school students and found that most students’ performance was improved in areas such as concentration, keeping to task, formulating questions around a chosen topic and effective use of information resources. Herring, Tarter and Naylor (2000) found that Year 8 students saw the use of a concept map as beneficial in relation to the organization of their thoughts and research findings and viewed a concept map as a tool that could be used at different stages of an assignment.

In the studies summarized above, students were encouraged to draw up physical concept maps on paper, using a variety of formats and names, for example, spider diagrams. In a study of final-year primary-school students, Herring and Hurst (2006) found that many students preferred to have a mental map of their assignment plan rather than a physical concept map. However, when students were asked what advice they would give to future students doing the same assignment, most students stated that future students should have a written concept map.

Information seeking by students

There has been a focus by some researchers investigating information literacy in schools on the strategies used by students seeking information both from print and from digital information resources. Jennifer Branch (2001) found that students using CD-ROM encyclopedias encountered difficulties in defining keywords for searching and were often daunted by extensive articles. She noted some of the affective aspects of Kuhlthau’s ISP model, in that students expressed feelings of uncertainty in initial searching but became more confident when searching was successful. Dania Bilal (2004) examined students’ use of the Yahooligans search engine and found that students were likely to be more successful in searching for topics they had chosen rather than those imposed by a teacher. She also reports that the students in her study clearly needed guidance on relating searching for information to the wider aspects of information literacy, such as identifying purpose and taking a more metacognitive view of their information seeking in relation to learning. Meyers, Nathan and Saxton (2006) identified barriers to information seeking and Chung and Neuman (2007) examined how students formed search strategies.

Researchers in information literacy in schools have also examined: the use of information skills models such the Big Six model (Eisenberg & Berkowitz 1990; Wolf 2003) and the PLUS model (Herring, Tarter & Naylor 2000, 2002); the development of an information literacy program (Ryan & Hudson 2003); and affective aspects of information literacy (Farmer 2005). Loertscher and Woolls’ (2002) review of information literacy research in schools also focuses on assessment.

Context

The school in this study is a United Kingdom secondary county coeducational grammar school with 750 students. The students in Year 12 were final-year students who were completing an independent study project as part of their A-level (equivalent to the New South Wales Higher School Certificate) physics course. The students in this physics class were almost all high-achieving students who were expected to go on to university after leaving school. The structure of the curriculum and assessment system in England and Wales means that students, particularly those who choose science-related subjects, are mainly assessed by examinations, with course work being a small part of their overall assessment. Students in this study were required to complete a research report, worth 7.5% of their final A-level physics grade. Students were allowed to choose their own topic and were given guidance by teachers on topic selection. Students were encouraged to meet with physics staff in the time allowed for the independent study. A report specification was given to students and this outlined the aims, format and assessment of the report. The specification identified that students would be assessed on their ability to find, analyze and compare information from a range of sources, to discuss the selected topic and draw conclusions from this discussion, and to relate the topic to other aspects of the physics course that they had been studying.

Grounded analysis

This study takes an interpretivist perspective. Within this perspective, the study takes a constructivist view of knowledge and of the conduct of research. The key elements of a constructivist view are that knowledge is constructed by individuals, in this context in schools, and is not something that exists separately, to be discovered by students. In reviewing constructivism, Phillips (1995, p. 5) argues that the basis of constructivism is that ‘by and large human knowledge, and the criteria and methods we use in our inquiries, are all constructed [Phillips’ italics]’. For this author, constructivism implies that, when people of any age learn, they take part in a process of construction and that this process is affected by experiences of the learner as well as by features of the learner’s social environment.

Grounded analysis, which is part of the overall grounded theory methodology, seeks to analyze research data with a view to examining what is happening in the studied setting, what actions are taken by participants in the study, how the participants interact with others and what the data tells the researcher about the feelings and attitudes of the participants. Grounded analysis was initially developed by Glaser and Strauss (1967), who argued that theory could be developed by examining what theory might emerge from research data. There have been a number of developments in grounded theory since Glaser and Strauss’s seminal work (1967), particularly in work by Strauss and Corbin (1998) and, more recently, by Charmaz (2006).

Charmaz (2006) argues that while Strauss and Corbin’s (1998) work advanced grounded theory as a method, it remained within the positive perspective and that a more interpretivist perspective should be adopted. Charmaz (2006, p. 9) states that grounded theory is not discovered, as Glaser and Strauss suggest, and that

This constructivist view of grounded theory—and therefore grounded analysis— does not assume that the researcher is a completely objective observer, with no preconceptions or influences. Pidgeon and Henwood (2004, p. 628) argue that it is important that ‘researchers remain aware that knowing always involves seeing or hearing from within particular, individually, institutionally and other socio-culturally embedded perspectives and locations’.

Grounded analysis is a technique in which the researcher studies collected data and begins by using what Charmaz (2006, p. 43) refers to as ‘qualitative coding, the process of finding what the data are all about’. This type of coding in constructivist grounded analysis does not merely seek to describe what is happening from the participants’ point of view but seeks to attach meaningful labels to sections of data. These labels are a form of the researcher’s interpretation of the data. The codes identified by the researcher in grounded analysis, according to Charmaz (2006), should reflect the participants’ actions rather than preconceived topics identified by the researcher and this is an area where grounded analysis differs from other data analysis techniques.

Once initial coding is completed, the researcher can enter what Charmaz (2006, p. 46) refers to as ‘a focused, selective phase that uses the most significant or frequent initial codes, to sort, synthesise, integrate and organise large amounts of data’. This in turn leads to a process of forming categories that can be the basis of theory development. In the present study, the coding and category formulation from student diaries was followed by interviews with students, which led to further category formulation. In this study, the focus is on grounded analysis and not on the formation of a grounded theory, as a limited amount of data was collected from part of a single population. Grounded analysis can, however, highlight key features of the participants’ actions and views and inform practice.

Data collection

The selection of the group of students was done through convenience sampling (Patton 2002), as ongoing collaboration between the physics department and the school librarian resulted in the cooperation of teachers and students. Twelve students completed a diary while they did their assignment and were then interviewed by the researcher after the assignment was completed. The data from the diaries and interviews was analyzed using constructivist grounded analysis. Data was collected from students in the form of a structured diary which asked students to comment on a range of aspects of their use of information literacy skills during their assignment process. The diary also asked students to comment on their levels of confidence at different stages of the process and asked them to evaluate the quality of their assignment and how they might have improved it. The use of student diaries as a means of collecting data from students has been used in school library research by Kuhlthau (2004), Tallman (1998), Harada (2002) and Barranoik (2001). The diaries cannot be taken as verbatim accounts of reality but should be viewed as constructions by the students of what they view as reality in completing the physics assignment.

The second stage of data collection took the form of semi-structured interviews of the students who were completing the physics assignment. Interviews are recommended as a source of rich data by Burns (2000) and Patton (2002). Charmaz (2006, p. 26) recommends that ‘intensive interviews’ should be used in grounded theory studies to provide depth. In interpreting interviews, constructivist researchers recognize that, as with the diaries mentioned above, interviews are the participants’ construction of what they view as reality; it is the researcher’s task to interpret what participants say (and sometimes what they do not say) in order to construct the researcher’s view of the studied world.

Data analysis

A key aspect of grounded analysis is constant comparison (Glaser & Strauss 1967; Dey 2004), which involves the researcher in returning to earlier data in order to re-examine established categories or seek new codes and categories from existing data. Thus in this study, the author re-examined data from both the diaries and the interviews until no new codes or categories emerged. This is referred to as ‘saturation’ (Pidgeon & Henwood 2004; Charmaz 2006), but one of the criticisms of this approach is that ‘saturation’ is a rather ill-defined term with few clear guidelines for researchers as to when this point might be reached, as implied by Dey (2004).

• What students thought and did about purpose and organization

• What students thought and did about searching for information

• What students thought and did about writing

• What students thought about their levels of confidence

• What students thought about transfer

What students thought and did about purpose and organization

The students who participated in this study were in Year 12, their final year of school, with some experience of doing independent projects (although this experience varied amongst students). Nevertheless, many students found initial difficulties in identifying a clear purpose for their assignment and faced these difficulties in a number of ways. In their diaries, all of the students noted the importance of establishing the parameters of their work and, although some guidance was provided in the assignment specification given to students, students had to impose their own parameters. Various strategies were adopted in defining purpose and parameters and some students referred to using prior knowledge as a basis for doing this. Student comments in the diaries included:

Other students approached this by posing questions (for example, ‘Having decided on a broad topic, I then decided on a specific question that my project should answer’) and students noted in their diaries that identifying questions to ask was not a difficult task. Some students used techniques such as listing bullet points (‘I wrote down some bullet points which tells me what I need to do the research on and break the report down into different parts’) and written concept maps (‘My spider diagram highlighted areas I needed for more information’).

What was clear from this analysis of the student diaries was that some students clearly stated that they wrote down lists of points, questions or concept maps, while other students clearly used strategies to define purpose and establish the parameters of their topic, but did not mention writing down ideas (‘I thought about what things should be included in the answer’). This suggested that some students may have had mental maps to help them define their assignment and this aspect was explored in the interviews.

In the interviews, students were asked about mental maps. All students agreed that they had some form of a mental map, but their images of their mental maps varied and they also use their mental maps in varying ways. For some students, use of a mental map to plan their assignment was the predominant tool they used; comments from these students included:

Most students stated that they used a mixture of written questions, bullet points or concept maps as well as a mental map. Some students had a clear preference for writing down, as one student commented:

In the interviews, students explained that their mental maps took a variety of forms with some students describing their mental maps as being similar to concept maps (for example, ‘It’s probably a bit like a written concept map as you’ve got the main idea and you’ve got stuff floating about so it’s kind of similar in a way’). Other students had a more linear view of their mental maps (‘I suppose I sort of think about things laterally. I think about the plan in sequence as opposed to branches coming out in all directions’).

All students had a clear awareness of the need to identify a clear purpose for their assignment and to reflect on how the assignment might be structured. Students referred to this as ‘planning’. In their diaries, most students saw planning as an aid to their future strategy in completing the assignment; their comments included:

Not all students found planning straightforward, as one student noted:

The students’ comments on how they viewed planning and how they established the parameters of their assignment were followed up in the interviews. For most students in this study, identifying a clear purpose or planning was the key skill which they identified when completing an assignment and comments included:

The student who cast doubt on the value of planning in the diary had, by the time he was interviewed, revised his opinion and commented:

The above findings show that there was a variety of individual approaches to identifying a clear purpose for the assignment and thinking about the structure of the assignment.

What students thought and did about searching for information

In their diaries, students stated that they used information resources such as books and the web for a range of purposes—to help them decide on their topic, to seek general information which would lead them to more specific information on a topic, to compare sources of information, to verify information and to seek specialist sources of information. Most students found it fairly easy to identify general information on a topic but harder to find specialist information (for example, ‘It was reasonably easy to find general information needed but much harder to find specifically relevant information’).

These students also showed an awareness of the importance of evaluating the websites which they used and they had a keen sense of reliability. In the diaries, students noted using criteria such as:

Students also had a strong awareness of the need to verify information from different sources (for example, ‘See who wrote it and if it said the same things as other websites’).

In the interviews, students could be more expansive in their comments on searching for information and students highlighted verification of information as a key focus. Comments included:

It became clear in the interviews that students’ use of information resources varied from being limited (‘Mainly the Internet as I couldn’t really find any textbooks which had the information I needed, so I used Internet sites’) to being extensive (‘We have subscriptions to New Scientist and Scientific American and InfoWeb, I think, and we can access these from home with the school’s logon, so that was obviously very useful’). Most of the students alluded to using Google for searching but only one student referred to another search engine (answers.com). Students were generally aware of the need to use combinations of keywords when searching (for example, ‘I would search using a number of keywords like carbon nanofibres and elevators’) and some students referred to using questions as search phrases. Some students were clearly proficient in using the information and ideas in sources effectively and comments included:

These students mostly searched in a structured manner and both the diaries and the interviews showed that most were aware of the range of information sources available to them, although not all students used the full range of sources.

What students did and thought about writing their assignment

The student diaries implied that students took different approaches to the writing of their assignment. Some students took a direct approach to writing (for example, ‘I collected the information for each chapter then wrote it up immediately’), whereas others took a similar, but less direct, approach (for example, ‘Write up sections as I research, then redraft to get more flow of ideas between sections’). For other students, note-taking and writing up the whole assignment is more important (for example, ‘As they [notes] are all on one document, I can delete everything I don’t need and leave just the bits I need’). These approaches to writing were followed up in the interviews and students explained some of their thinking behind their individual approach. Comments included:

Some students indicated that they revised sections of the assignment as they progressed and one student commented:

The students who preferred to take notes on all the sections of their assignment before writing up were in a minority but clearly explained their approach. For example, one student commented:

A number of students had clearly thought about their approach to writing and viewed their approach as individual, rather than reflecting any collective approach to writing; comments included:

The writing strategies and styles of students show not only the individual stances taken by students but also the reflective attitudes of students with regards to their approaches to writing.

What students thought about their levels of confidence

In the diaries, students were asked about how confident they felt at two stages in the assignment process—after their initial definition of their assignment, and before starting to write up their assignment. Almost all of the students showed a fairly high level of confidence at both stages, but students also showed aspects which affected their levels of confidence.

Some students were very confident after the initial definition of their assignment (for example, ‘I feel confident as I know exactly what I need to do to find out and what questions to ask’). Other students expressed some doubts (for example, ‘I feel like I could have planned my work better—diagrams, notes etc., but I hope to become more confident in researching’) and only one student lacked confidence (‘I’m not very confident in the work I’ve done, as I’m not good at keeping to deadlines’).

When students were about to write up their assignment, most were still confident, although more students expressed concerns at this stage. Some students were still very confident (for example, ‘Should go quite well as I have found all the information I need and all I have to do is collate it’). The concerns of other students were about what to include in the report (for example, ‘I find it is hard to do the selection as there is too much information I need to include in my report’), the lack of information in some areas (for example, ‘There are a number of areas where the resources are insufficient to cover all the details’), and meeting deadlines (for example, ‘Still feel I need to work faster’). It was also clear that some students had gained confidence as the assignment progressed (for example, ‘I am more confident now that I can see the backbone of my project taking shape’).

In the interviews, only two of the students said that they had been confident throughout the assignment process and their comments included:

For all the other students in this study, confidence varied at different stages when completing the assignment. Some students revealed a lack of confidence at the start of the assignment, although they had not stated this in their diaries, and this related to their uncertainty about the difficulty of the assignment. A student commented:

Other students started confidently but experienced dips in confidence at certain parts of the assignment process. One student commented:

Students’ levels of confidence were seen from the evidence of the diaries and the interviews to vary and a number of factors affecting confidence were revealed.

What students thought about transfer

In the diaries, students were asked to comment about the value of doing research assignments and whether such assignments should be part of the A-level syllabus. All of the students referred, either in relation to value or the A-level syllabus, to the future use of skills gained or reinforced when completing the physics assignment. Some students referred to what they would be doing at university and comments in the diaries included:

Students also identified the workplace as a site for the application of research related skills, with comments such as:

In the interviews, students were asked to comment further on points made in the diaries. The use of information literacy skills at university was referred to by most students; their comments included:

Some students referred to using skills not just at university; one student commented:

It is interesting to note here that students were not asked directly about the issue of the transfer of skills but spontaneously expressed views about transfer.

Abilock, D., Information literacy. Building blocks of research. overview of design, process and outcomes, 2007. viewed 26 October 2009. http://www.noodletools.com/debbie/literacies/information/lover/infolitl.html

Barranoik, L. Meaningful research projects for high school students. SCAN. 2001; vol. 20(4):23–29.

Bilal, D. Research on children’s information seeking on the web. In: Chelton M., Cool C., eds. Youth information-seeking behavior: Theories, models and issues. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press; 2004:271–292.

Branch, J. Information-seeking processes of junior high school students: A case study of CD-ROM encyclopedia use. School Libraries Worldwide. 2001; vol. 7(1):11–27.

Burns, R. Introduction to research methods, 4th ed. Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson Education; 2000.

Cain, M. Using mind-maps to raise standards in literacy, improve confidence and encourage positive attitudes towards learning. National Teacher Research Panel, London, 2004. viewed 26 October 2009. http://www.standards.dcsf.gov.uk/ntrp/lib/pdf/Cain.pdf

Charmaz, K. Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage; 2006.

Chung, S., Neuman, D. High school students’ information seeking and use for class projects. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2007; vol. 58(10):1503–1517.

Detterman, D. ‘The case for the prosecution: Transfer as an epiphenomenon’ in Transfer on trial: Intelligence, cognition and instruction. D Detterman and R Stemberg: Ablex Publishing, Norwood, NJ; 1993.

Dey, I. Grounded theory. In: Seale C., Gobo G., Gubrium J., Silverman D., eds. Qualitative research practice. London: Sage, 2004.

Doyle, C. Information literacy in an information society: A concept for the information age. Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearing House on Information & Technology; 1994.

Eisenberg, M., Berkowitz, B. Information problem solving: The Big Six skills approach to library & information skills instruction. Norwood, NJ: Ablex; 1990.

Ellis, J., Salisbury, F., Information literacy milestones. Building on the prior knowledge of first-year students. Australian Library Journa; vol. 53, 2004. no. 4, viewed 26 October 2009. http://alia.org.au/publishing/alj/53.4/full.text/ellis.salisbury.html

Farmer, L. Social-emotional behavior and information literacy. In: Lee S., ed. IASL Reports 2005: Information leadership in a culture of change. Erie, PA: International Association of School Librarianship, 2005.

Glaser, B., Strauss, A. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine; 1967.

Gordon, C., The effects of concept mapping on the searching behavior of tenth-grade students. School Library Media Research 2000; vol. 2 article 5, viewed 26 October 2009. http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/aasl/aaslpubsandjournals/slmrb/slmrcontents/volume32000/mapping.cfm

Greeno, J., Moore, J., Smith, D. ‘Transfer of situated learning’ in Transfer on trial: Intelligence, cognition and instruction. D Detterman and R Sternberg: Ablex Publishing, Norwood, NJ; 1993.

Harada, V., Personalizing the information research process. School Library Media Research. A case study of journal writing with elementary-age student. 2002; vol. 5 article 1, viewed 26 October 2009. http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/aasl/aaslpubsandjournals/slmrb/slmrcontents/volume52002/harada.cfm

Haskell, R. Transfer of learning: Cognition, instruction and reasoning. San Diego, CA: Academic Press; 2001.

Herring, J. Teaching information skills in schools. London: Library Association Publishing; 1996.

Herring, J., Tarter, A. Progress in developing information literacy in a secondary school using the PLUS model. School Libraries in View. 2007; vol. 23:3–7.

Herring, J.E., Hurst, J., An investigation into the extent to which Year 6 students transfer information literacy across subjects. MacGregor, J., Hay, L., ed. Research in Teacher Librarianship: Proceedings of the Centre for Studies in Teacher Librarianship Research Conference. Australian National University, Canberra, 2006:9–10 April 2005, viewed 25 October 2009. http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/educat/sis/CIS/epubs/CSTL/An_investigation_into_the_extent_to_which_Year_6_students.pdf

Herring, J.E., Tarter, A., Naylor, S. Theory into practice: Using the PLUS model to teach information skills and support the curriculum in a secondary school. In: Howe E., ed. Developing information literacy. Seattle, WA: International Association of School Librarianship, 2000.

Herring, J.E., Tarter, A., Naylor, S. An evaluation of the use of the PLUS model to develop pupils’ information skills in a secondary school. School Libraries Worldwide. 2002; vol. 8(1):1–24.

Kinchin, I., Hay, D. How a qualitative approach to concept map analysis can be used to aid learning by illustrating patterns of conceptual development. Educational Research. 2000; vol. 42(1):43–57.

Kuhlthau, C. Information skills for an information society: A review of research, ERIC Clearing House on Information Resources. NJ: Syracuse; 1987.

Kuhlthau, C. Information search process: A summary of research and implications for school library media programs. School Library Media Quarterly. 1989; vol. 22(1):19–25.

Kuhlthau, C. Seeking meaning: A process approach to library and information services. Norwood, NJ: Ablex; 1993.

Kuhlthau, C. Seeking meaning: A process approach to library and information services, 2nd ed. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited; 2004.

Langford, L. Information literacy: A clarification. School Libraries Worldwide. 1998; vol. 4(1):59–72.

Limberg, L. ‘Informing information literacy education through empirical research’ in The information literate school community 2: Issues of leadership, J Henri & M Asselin (eds). Centre for Information Studies: Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, NSW; 2005.

Lobato, J. How design experiments can inform a rethinking of transfer and vice versa. Educational Researcher. 2003; vol. 32(1):17–20.

Loertscher, D.V., Woolls, B. Information literacy: A review of the research: A guide for practitioners and researchers, 2nd ed. San Jose, CA: Hi Willow Research and Publishing; 2002.

McKenzie, J., Reading (and questioning) fine print. The Question Mark 2008; vol. 5 no. 2, viewed 26 October 2009. http://questioning.org/dec08/covdec.html

Meyers, E.M., Nathan, L.P., Saxton, M.L., Barriers to information seeking in high school libraries. Conflicts between perception and practice. Information Research; vol. 12, 2006. no. 2, viewed 25 October 2009,. http://informationr.net/ir/12-2/paper295.html

Patton, M. Qualitative research and evaluation methods, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2002.

Phillips, D. The good, the bad and the ugly: The many faces of constructivism. Educational Researcher. 1995; vol. 24(7):5–12.

Pidgeon, N., Henwood, K. Grounded theory. In: Hardy M., et al, eds. Handbook of Data Analysis. London: Sage; 2004:625–648.

Royer, J., Mestre, J., Dufresne, R. Introduction: Framing the transfer problem. In: Mestre J., ed. Transfer of learning from a modern multidisciplinary perspective. Greenwich, CT: Information Age, 2005.

Ryan, S., Hudson, V. ‘Evidence-based practice, transformational leadership and information literacy at Santa Maria College’, Synergy, vol. I, no. 2003; vol. 1:29–41.

Strauss, A., Corbin, J. Basics of qualitative research, 2nd ed. London: Sage; 1998.

Tallman, J. I-Search: An inquiry based, student centred, research and writing process’. Knowledge Quest. 1998; vol. 27(1):20–27.

Volet, S. Learning across cultures: Appropriateness of knowledge transfer. International Journal of Educational Research. 1999; vol. 31(7):625–643.

Wolf, S., The Big Six information skills as a metacognitive scaffold: a case study. School Library Media Research 2003; vol. 6 article 3, viewed 26 October 2009. http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/aasl/aaslpubsandjournals/slmrb/slmrcontents/volume62003/bigsixinformation.cfm