Sie sind auf Seite 1von 11

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0033-0337.

htm

PROG 43,3

Information literacy and Web 2.0: is it just hype?


Peter Godwin
University of Bedfordshire, Luton, UK
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate that Web 2.0 provides an exciting set of tools for librarians to help their students become more information-literate. Design/methodology/approach Recently, information overload and Web 2.0 have led librarians to adopt practices labelled as Library 2.0. Information literacy can be the key to affecting the learning attitudes and characteristics adopted by the users, caricatured as the Web generation. Web 2.0 tools provide new, interactive ways to engage them. The literature is reviewed to provide examples of librarians using Web 2.0 tools to improve the information literacy of their users. Findings Librarians are embracing Web 2.0 as it becomes more mainstream and experimenting with the tools to supplement their information literacy interventions. Many of these are being well received but their quantity and measures of their impact on learning have yet to be assessed. Originality/value The link between information literacy and Web 2.0 is novel, encourages constructive learning and enables respected educational methods (e.g. reection) to be used in different ways. Keywords Information literacy, Worldwide web, Higher education Paper type Case study

264
Received 10 February 2009 Revised 7 April 2009 Accepted 25 April 2009

1. Introduction The prophets of doom are predicting the end of librarianship as it has been known. Printed journals are being dumped, the punters are just Googling, and the e-book is threatening to burst through at any moment. Will there be a role for librarians in ve years time? In my opinion, I think it will be a different one with information literacy (IL) at its core. The so-called Google generations technical ability is easily overstated and they are no more able to search and evaluate effectively than their forebears. Librarians cannot simply use their tried and trusted methods from the days of user education, and will need to employ more engaging and active methods to reach their patrons. Web 2.0, by its emphasis on the user and participatory character, fosters innovatory approaches which should be more fun. Recently there has been some evangelising and examples of good practice. As we shall see this is going beyond hype, but these are early days and it is impossible to quantify the activity. It is clear that the Web 2.0 mantra has arrived, is irreversible, and that experimentation is happening and will spread unpredictably. That is the nature of Web 2.0. 2. From Web 2.0 to Library 2.0 The experimental user-focussed participatory approach, enabled by the web as a platform has become known as Web 2.0. This has been seen as important in many
This paper is an updated version of a presentation made at the Bridging Worlds Conference organised by the National Library Board of Singapore in October 2008.

Program: electronic library and information systems Vol. 43 No. 3, 2009 pp. 264-274 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0033-0337 DOI 10.1108/00330330910978563

elds and has spawned a whole group of 2.0s (e.g. Business 2.0, Education 2.0) including Library 2.0. Since 2006 we can detect keen interest from all sectors of librarians, judging by the number of conferences, (e.g. the Australian Computers in Education Conference, Canberra 29 September-2 October 2008 included a track on e-learning including information literacy, Web 2.0 and school libraries (www.acce.edu. au/)), workshops, and articles (such as the literature review of social software and libraries (Secker, 2008)). In particular the ground-breaking Learning 2.0 programme, devised by Helene Blowers of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, with its 23 things (or small exercises) encouraging all her public library to become familiar with Web 2.0 tools, has been made available freely on the web. Abram (2008a) said of this programme in his blog: I believe that this has been one of the most transformational and viral activities to happen globally to libraries in decades. Her efforts have really made a difference. He then cites a long list of articles and libraries which have adapted the methodology. Meredith Farkas Five weeks to a social library programme is also available under creative commons licence on the web and been heavily used (www. sociallibraries.com/course/). With the growing interest and controversy around Web 2.0 the tide has come in and few librarians are seeking to emulate King Canute. However, real change takes time and we should not mistake enthusiasm and paying lip service for real commitment. Librarians should regard really simple syndication (RSS), blogs, YouTube, social networks, tagging and wikis as mainstream. They have, according to Stephen Abram, to pass the chasm of the early adopters and into the space of the early majority (McLean, 2008). If Web 2.0 is about participation, how many librarians are doing this? It would be illuminating to know how many are putting presentations on Slideshare. As Charles Arthur said in 2006 Its an emerging rule of thumb that suggests that if you get a group of 100 people online then one will create content, ten will interact with it (commenting or offering improvements) and the other 89 will just view it (Arthur, 2006). Wikipedia is often accused of being dominated by geeks or eccentrics. The potential for participation is vast but evidence shows that with students, the popularity and exposure of services like Facebook and YouTube contrast sharply with Flickr and del.icio.us (Horwath and Williamson, 2008). However, as we shall see, the latter are both useful to most students and also for promoting and encouraging them to be more information literate. Facebook has gained most attention and the dangers of exposing personal details and movements on Facebook continue to be well documented (Solove, 2008). At present, the take-up of Facebook has spread well beyond the originally intended young academic community in the US to all ages everywhere. Latest trends show a huge growth in the over 35 age group (Smith, 2009). 3. Enter the web generation Much has been written about the so-called web generation and its expectations. Over the past two years there have been more surveys and serious investigation into the habits and attributes of web generation users. Importantly, the Centre for Information Behaviour and the Evaluation of Research (CIBER) at University College London carried out research based on deep log analysis of user behaviour, demonstrating the way such users search by age and status (CIBER, 2008). The results do not make encouraging reading for academic librarians. Many myths are exposed, for example users:

Information literacy and Web 2.0 265

PROG 43,3

. . .

266

nd their peers more credible than authority gures; prefer quick information in chunks, as do all age groups; are impatient, but again so are all age groups, depending on their previous experience; and search swiftly, with poor grasp of their information requirement, leading to inadequate search strategies and keyword formulation, and leaving no time for evaluating relevance, accuracy or authority.

Clearly the importance of the web generation as different has been overstated and increasingly we are all exhibiting some of the characteristics of this generation. Perhaps the most important nding is the prevalence of bouncing when users power browse, and are content with just glancing at abstracts. This may be due to poor search engine skills, but we can expect that many routes and choices for users to information (lots of clicking) will continue (e.g. via social network sites) as the web continues to join together (Nicholas et al., 2008). We can also expect users to have less knowledge of scholarly publishing and the nature of what they nd on the web (Nicholas et al., 2008). This is a serious matter as the importance of understanding the context of material found is becoming paramount. Despite the advances made in ICT abilities, the IL skills of these younger users are no better than those of the so-called Baby boomers. With the growth of self-directed learning, both on campus and distance learning, these deciencies have become more serious. Horwath and Williamson (2008) describe the survey undertaken at Mohawk College, Canada which again concluded that the web generation was not the wonder generation, with superior intelligence and technical uency. Also, all the web generation was not spending its time using Web 2.0 tools. Other age groups may be spending more time creating content and sharing. Web generation students are more concerned with Facebook, YouTube and iTunes than blogs, wikis, podcasts, or RSS feeds. Williams et al. (2008) refer to research by Gross and Latham (2007) which analyses the level of information literacy of groups of students about to go to university, and during their courses at Florida State University. Most signicant are the lower scorers in the test analysis: their self-estimate of ability is higher than their actual scores as they do not recognise they have a problem. This may resonate with some of the students we meet in UK universities and elsewhere with the growth of mass higher education, but there is no empirical research here to prove it yet. This has led Williams et al. to conclude that our interventions in Higher Education (HE) are too late as the damage has already been done. Users have developed poor Google-related searching habits which are too deeply inculcated. The prevalence of plagiarism has been suggested as conrmation of this trend. However, the suggested development of better IL skills in formative years, via school teachers, school librarians and parents, while laudable would be very hard to achieve in the UK environment. I still believe we have a duty to work with students in HE to improve their information literacy. Gross and Latham (2007) also refer to research which says that the common skills-based didactic cure for low-skilled individuals may not always be successful. This implies a search for new ways to intervene, helping students to recognise and overcome their IL deciencies. Could Web 2.0 offer ways of reaching these students? I believe that many web generation students are disadvantaged because they think they know how to nd information, but they dont know what they dont know. Librarians lecturing to them is

not the answer. Making them aware of what is available is only a part of the equation. Carefully crafted assignments which force them to use a variety of resources, and methods using active learning to engage them, give librarians the opportunity to employ Web 2.0 tools. 4. Information literacy is the key How can students meet the challenges posed by their courses and lifelong learning? This has led some to require a plethora of literacies of which IL is only one (Martin and Madigan, 2006).This has been the librarians major problem: how to dene what it is that we are concerned with and what to call it. I do not propose to go into a long debate over labels, because IL still seems to be the best widely used term to describe the kind of literacy which the twenty-rst-century citizen requires: recognising appropriate information, collaborating, synthesising and adapting it wisely and ethically. David Warlick, of the Landmark Project (http://landmark-project.com/) and coming from a school educational perspective, is also proposing a twenty-rst-century literacy to answer questions like what students need to know, when most of recorded knowledge is a mouse-click away; how they distinguish good and bad knowledge; deciding what it does to the value of information when everyone is a producer and how we promote the new tools and assist their ethical use (Warlick, 2008). If IL is a key to success in lifelong learning and coping in the future, this does not equate with librarians still telling their users about library buildings and databases. Our twenty-rst-century students will not be best served by these approaches. Modern IL requires that students be acquainted with the whole range of sources available from Google, Google Scholar, Intute, ofcial web sites (e.g. UK Statistics Authority), full-text journal databases, subject databases to books, encyclopaedias etc. However, librarians will still need to adjust their methods of delivery to accommodate their future clientele. 5. Connecting using Web 2.0 Growth of interest in the connection between IL and Web 2.0 began to be topical in 2006. At that time it was less clear whether the connection would be to wider literacies. Also how exactly it would affect the IL agenda needed to be explored. Questions raised at the time included: (1) Was it about librarians own knowledge and abilities? (2) Was it about simply connecting with the new type of user? (3) Was it about content which we could use as teachers? (4) Was it about content for users to employ in their study? (5) Was it about providing new ways for us to employ to reach our users and how would academic staff t into this equation? (6) Was it simply to reach the so-called Web generation or all users ? In fact it proved to be all of these things and only subsequently can we begin to see exactly where the emphasis should lie. We have already seen that there is plenty of evidence for librarians taking the 2.0 mantra on board, but the initiatives which follow may have more to do with promotion than pedagogy. A key consideration in using the tools will prove to be relationships and partnerships with academic staff, learning and teaching or curriculum planners and IT trainers. Sarah Faye Cohen (2008) has written

Information literacy and Web 2.0 267

PROG 43,3

268

persuasively, saying Librarians must use their skills as instructors and act as partners in the academic environment. 2.0 offers many opportunities for sharing, learning, and communicating. The exploration of this was taken up in the edited book Information Literacy meets Library 2.0 (Godwin and Parker, 2008). By now many librarians have shown interest in Web 2.0 tools and what this could mean for services in their library, but to what extent have they used these new skills in connection with IL? Information from some of the trendsetters are contained in the book, but how far is this general? Librarians need to experiment: there is no one size which ts all subject areas or institutions. Evidence of this comes in a recent post from Kim Ranger (Grand Valley State University, Michigan) (Ranger, 2008) reecting on how she had followed up a Workshop for Instruction in Library Use (WILU) Conference presentation by Cameron Hoffman (one of the books contributors). She had tried out a wiki, Flickr (which had been less successful) and blogs. Similarly, an e-mail survey undertaken in 2008 by a colleague at the University of Bedfordshire in the UK found that of the 22 responses, all but one were from HE: half had used Web 2.0 in their programmes and ten were contemplating doing so, with RSS feeds, blogs and wikis the most commonly used. We can also deduce from conference papers that activity is taking place. Ewing and Prescott (2008) of St Cloud State University, Minnesota, surveyed their students and found high use of YouTube and Facebook, but low use of podcasts and Flickr and none of RSS. Therefore they set out to introduce the tools to students within their curricula. From these sources I have chosen to draw a picture of how Web 2.0 assists our IL interventions based on useful and important facets of our pedagogy rather than via the tools themselves. This will help to emphasise that the 2.0s are more about helping to change behaviour than about technology. 6. Active learning and collaboration Web 2.0 can help us to engage our users by employing more active techniques. Let us begin with Wikipedia, it is both a powerful information source and an instrument to deliver all kinds if IL messages (Godwin, 2008, p.168). For example it can be used to show how data is built up, by checking the history facility in Wikipedia. Anne-Marie Deitering describes exactly this in her experiences with a rst year composition course at Oregon State University (Deitering, 2008), basing an assignment on how information is created. The promotion of Sarah Palin to US Vice-Presidential candidacy in 2008 is a good example for tracking this. Wikipedia can help students understand how information is created and to value it. Students will use Wikipedia as a starting point for nding basic information and it is neither possible nor desirable to stop this. Can we get unbiased information about John McCain? Perhaps the Wikipedia article, in its attempt at neutrality, is a good example of where to start, but it certainly is not the only source. It is in informing students about the different types of sources that Wikipedia can be so useful. Library Instruction Wiki includes an example of a librarian who asks students to put information about herself on Wikipedia and edit it. Brockhouse and Groom (2007) from the University of Washington Bothell tell of how a student class put their assignments onto Wikipedia helping them to do better work and deal with issues of voice, knowledge, and community. Wikipedia still contains an entry with dozens of university and college projects. It would be interesting to know how many are currently using it!

Facebook is useful to help students understand privacy and ethical issues as they create their own proles, utilise other persons material and run the risk of exposing their personality on the open web. (Educause Learning Initiative, 2006). Keywords are one of the hardest concepts for students to understand. Hoffman and Polkinghorn (2008) discuss the use of tags in Flickr to help students understand keywords, subject searching, and make comparisons between tags and controlled vocabulary as used in Library of Congress subject headings. Del.icio.us can be used for bookmarking web sites and then sharing with a group by using agreed course tags. In addition to Wikipedia, wikis in general can be employed to assist IL. Beestrum and Orenic (2008) tell of how these were employed in English teaching at the Dominican University in Illinois in the USA. Using PBwiki students were given some initial acclimatising exercises to get used to a wiki, and then worked in groups to concentrate on specic questions using a database, brainstorming topics and search terms and writing annotations of items found as a group activity. Games have been developed and trialled for IL delivery, particularly in some American universities. Markey et al. (2008) have recently written about Defense of Hidgeon; the plague years, a web-based game for teaching incoming students IL skills and concepts at the University of Michigan. Experience showed that despite monetary prizes offered initially, voluntary participation only increased to 65 per cent when participation was linked to nal grading; also game play must be targeted with specic, limited objectives. Much was learned from the experiment and I believe any new game produced there has a much higher chance of student engagement and success (Markey et al., 2008). Is Second Life (SL) Web 2.0? Strangely I would class it as a help in active learning. This is because the user has an avatar and can then y and be anonymous and free in ways that are impossible in First Life. Lyn Parker (2008) provides an introduction to SL and her experiences using it at the University of Shefeld in the UK. The jury is still out over how useful the reference facilities in SL will be, but some of the work undertaken here must impinge on IL and be attractive to some users. Reference interviews have been included in this paper because the passing on of IL skills is still a key part of the reference interview. Brockhouse and Groom (2007) describe their recent experiences of using SL for reference at McMaster University in Canada; take-up was not large, but was appreciated. The future addition of a voice facility may make the service more personal as at the Enquiry Desk. Jo Parker describes the new IL unit from the Open University (UK) TU120 Beyond Google course (Parker, J., 2008). This introduces students to the main Web 2.0 tools and encourages or requires them to use them. Finally Sheila Webber describes her experience of using SL to develop inquiry skills with rst year students at the University of Shefeld in the UK. Students undertook critical incident interviews with SL residents, and this formed a successful blend with other parts of the course (Webber, 2008). 7. Convenience RSS is about convenience and is at the heart of Web 2.0. It is the tool that allows the regular update of chosen information to the user. Fryer and Secker (2008) show the benets of how RSS feeds have been used at the London School of Economics and the ramications for user training so that students understand how to make best use of them. Our users expect us to be where they are, and Web 2.0 tools can help us to reactivate our services at a distance, especially for information literacy. We have to

Information literacy and Web 2.0 269

PROG 43,3

270

start thinking of all non-face-to-face usages as distant users. As more and more of the curriculum is delivered electronically this gives opportunities for embedding material. This can be done at module or even lesson level via virtual learning environments (VLEs). Blackboard has wiki and blog facilities, albeit they are clunky, and the Coursefeed facility from Blackboard into Facebook enables users to access their courses and this may be extremely useful for students. The attraction of Facebook is that it enables the librarian to be where the users are. There are debates about whether they want us there, but with adequate promotion users may choose to access our services from Facebook. We must remember that one of the prime reasons students ignore our facilities is that they cannot nd them easily enough. We have set up a Facebook site at the University of Bedfordshire Library and promote it at induction sessions so that those interested can become fans. It enables access to our subject pages, thereby creating an easy way for students to reach the subject advice and resources that we offer. Facebook offers the chance for people to indicate what they are currently doing. This has broadened into microblogging services like Twitter, with some libraries taking out an account and using it to connect with their clientele. Instant messaging for accessing reference services has been trialled at some libraries. Hvass and Myer (2008) tell of their experience of using Meebo at the University of Teesside in the UK. The importance of heavy marketing was stressed, for the service was only available for four hours between Monday and Friday. Take-up was small, but highly appreciated by those who used it. Services, like del.icio.us and the Furl social bookmarking sites, enable easier and more convenient bookmarking that can be done from any PC with results shared among all users. The del.icio.us collection of tags has even been preferred to Google as a search engine, because all results have been selected by at least one person and popularity is indicated by the number who tagged them. Services like CiteULike enable easy tagging and sharing of bibliographic information. The convenience of podcasting has made it popular as a means of getting across limited amounts of instructional information which the user can access on subscription anywhere anytime. Zimmer and Ziph (2007) explain how the podcast series at Kresge Business Administration Library of the University of Michigan in the US was developed. User feedback was very positive but, interestingly, video podcast or vodcasts were preferred. 8. Visual learning Our users, and I believe particularly the web generation, are characteristically visual. If we are to make an impact now and in the future we have to make our services and interventions more graphic. For example, Croydon College in the UK found that the AquaBrowser search platform and enriched catalogues increased online usage dramatically. Other library systems are following similar paths, as we all try to get nearer to an Amazon-type interface. Boolify is a tool which helps to explain Boolean searching, and allows a search to be built up visually. It may be more successful for teaching about Boolean than Venn diagrams, because it is interactive. YouTube already contains many instructional videos which we can use in our teaching. Susan Ariew describes her experiences creating YouTube IL instructional videos at the University of South Florida (Ariew, 2008); her video on databases was used with groups in 2006 as an icebreaker for IL instruction, and the later Chronicles of Libraria, although less instructional, received a lot of attention from librarians elsewhere. There

are also clips and some historical material in many subject areas which can be used in teaching. Patal (2008) referred to the 50 greatest arts videos on YouTube. The use of Flickr for class activities at St. Cloud State University, Minnesota (Ewing and Prescott, 2008) shows how Flickr can be used for groups of students taking pictures of the library and tagging the images. 9. Reective learning Reection is currently very important in higher education courses, especially through emphasis on reective practice in health courses. The concept of reection does not come easily to many students, and therefore Web 2.0 tools that can help will be valued. The use of blogs is well established in schools (Richardson, 2006) and many of his ideas can apply equally to HE. Librarians are beginning to use blogs, usually in collaboration with academic staff, to reect on materials found or more generally on the progress of projects. I suggest that blogs can provide another means for establishing a continuous link between a student group and the librarian reecting on information collection for assignments. Too often the librarian sees a group and then loses contact. Payne (2008) describes her experiences of using a blog in a rst year Information Skills module with business academics and students at the University of Northampton in the UK. Interestingly, although most were aged 18-21, many had difculty using blogger software and many still saved their posting until the end of the module. 10. The future What does the future hold for use of the Web 2.0 tools in IL? Will they be replaced by something like Web 3.0? I think the future lies with the use of smaller gadgets. McIntosh (2008) suggests that teachers should be taking note of the potential of mobiles in the classroom as a bridge across the digital divide. Already there are two and a half times more people in the world using mobiles than are using the internet. As Stephen Abram (2008b) says this depends on understanding the potential in personal devices laptops, smartphones, PDA to dominate as the device. When this happens users will have what they need in their pocket. Library 2.0 librarians seek to be where their users are, whether that is Facebook or a VLE. As everything gets smaller we can expect that we shall follow into these devices, which are ideal for presenting the small amounts of information which they prefer anyway. This implies that we shall be making more podcasts and vodcasts as we seek to meet our users anywhere anytime mentality. Despite the limitations of the small screen, mobiles are natural to the web generation. Walton (2008) describes the use of iPods for library guides at Illinois State University. At present the costs of surng the web via mobile devices are problematic for everyone, but we can predict that this will change. A glimpse of what is to come can be seen with Wikipanion, the iPhone version of Wikipedia. 11. Conclusions We must go beyond telling students about the library and simply trying to x their skill gaps. Part of our problem comes from a wrong approach within HE where librarians still concentrate on their databases rather than working together with academics to produce understanding of trusted sources, critical thinking and how information is built up and transmitted ethically. Certainly there is a worrying trend across all age groups which depend entirely on Google or other search engines and are

Information literacy and Web 2.0 271

PROG 43,3

unable to search effectively or sort the wheat from the chaff. The web could be disabling rather than transforming them. I believe the solution can only be found in continually seeking to change their habits, and in future all librarians should be playing a part in this. In practice, this is most likely to be in HE, accomplished by active learning as part of the curriculum. Library 2.0 librarians have powerful Web 2.0 weapons to help accomplish this.
References Abram, S. (2008a), The 23 things Learning 2.0, Stephens Lighthouse (blog), available at: http://stephenslighthouse.sirsidynix.com/archives/2008/02/the_23_things_l.html (accessed 8 March 2009). Abram, S. (2008b), Evolution to revolution to chaos? Reference in transition. Search the way you want to search, Searcher, Vol. 16 No. 8, available at: www.infotoday.com/searcher/sep08/ Abram.shtml (accessed 8 March 2009). Ariew, S. (2008), Joining the YouTube conversation to teach information literacy, in Godwin, P. and Parker, J. (Eds), Information Literacy Meets Library 2.0, Facet Publishing, London. Arthur, C. (2006), Newly asked questions: What is the 1% rule?, The Guardian: Technology, 20 July, available at: www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2006/jul/20/guardianweekly technologysection2 (accessed 8 March 2009). Beestrum, M. and Orenic, K. (2008), Wiki-ing into Collaborative Learning Library Orientation Exchange (LOEX) Conference, available at: http://loex2008collaborate.pbwiki.com/f/ Final_Wiki_Uses_In_Library_Instruction.ppt (accessed 8 March 2009). Brockhouse, A. and Groom, M. (2007), Using Wikipedia to re-envision the term paper, EDUCAUSE Annual Conference, 23 October, available at: http://connect.educause.edu/ Library/Abstract/UsingWikipediatoReenvisio/45402?time 1221658967 (accessed 8 March 2009). CIBER (2008), The information behaviour of the researcher of the future, report prepared for the British Library and JISC, available at: www.bl.uk/news/pdf/googlegen.pdf (accessed 8 March 2009). Cohen, S.F. (2008), Taking 2.0 to the faculty: why, who and how, C&RL News, Vol. 69 No. 9, pp. 472-5, available at: www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/acrl/publications/crlnews/2008/sep/ ALA_print_layout_1_514875_514875.cfm (accessed 8 March 2009). Deitering, A.M. (2008), Using Wikipedia to eavesdrop on the scholarly conversation, in Godwin, P. and Parker, J. (Eds), Information Literacy meets Library 2.0, Facet Publishing, London. Educause Learning Initiative (2006), Seven Things You Should Know about Facebook, Educause Learning Initiative, available at: www.educause.edu/ELI/7ThingsYou ShouldKnow AboutFaceb/156820 (accessed 8 March 2009). Ewing, R.L. and Prescott, M.K. (2008), Teaching Web 2.0 to Student 1.5: effective methods for introducing new information, Library Orientation Exchange (LOEX) Conference, 2 May, available at: www.loexconference.org/2008/presentations/EwingPrescottLoexHandout.pdf (accessed 8 March 2009). Fryer, C. and Secker, J. (2008), Information literacy and RSS feeds at LSE, in Godwin, P. and Parker, J. (Eds), Information Literacy Meets Library 2.0, Facet Publishing, London. Godwin, P. (2008), Conclusion, in Godwin, P. and Parker, J. (Eds), Information Literacy Meets Library 2.0, Facet Publishing, London.

272

Godwin, P. and Parker, J. (Eds) (2008), Information Literacy Meets Library 2.0, Facet Publishing, London. Gross, M. and Latham, D. (2007), Attaining information literacy: an investigation of the relationship between skill level, self-estimates of skill, and library anxiety, Library & Information Science Research, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 332-53. Hoffman, C. and Polkinghorn, S. (2008), Sparking Flickrs of insight into controlled vocabularies and subject searching, in Godwin, P. and Parker, J. (Eds), Information Literacy meets Library 2.0, Facet Publishing, London. Horwath, J. and Williamson, C. (2008), The kids are all right or are they?, 37th Workshop on Instruction in Library Use, UBC Okanagan, Kelowna, British Columbia (Canada), May 14-16, available at: http://eprints.rclis.org/archive/00013639/ (accessed 8 March 2009). Hvass, A. and Myer, S. (2008), Can I help you? Implementing an IM service, The Electronic Library, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 530-44. McIntosh, E. (2008), Please, turn your mobile phones on, BBC Scotland Learning (blog), available at: www.bbc.co.uk/scotland/learning/diary/mobile.shtml (accessed 8 March 2009). McLean, M. (2008), ALIA dreaming 08: big stuff library challenges, Connecting Librarian (blog), available at: http://connectinglibrarian.com/2008/09/04/alia-dreaming-08-fri-amplenary-stephen-abram/ (accessed 8 March 2009). Markey, K., Swanson, F., Jenkins, A., Jennings, B.J., St Jean, B., Rosenberg, V., Yao, X. and Frost, R.L. (2008), The effectiveness of a web-based board game for teaching undergraduate students information literacy concepts and skills, D-Lib Magazine, Vol. 14 No. 9/10, available at: www. dlib.org/dlib/september08/markey/09markey.html (accessed 8 March 2009). Martin, A. and Madigan, D. (Eds) (2006), Digital Literacies for Learning, Facet Publishing, London. Nicholas, D., Huntington, P., Jamali, H.R. and Dobrowolski, T. (2008), The information-seeking behaviour of the digital consumer: case study the virtual scholar, in Nicholas, D. and Rowlands, I. (Eds), Digital Consumers Reshaping the Information Profession, Facet Publishing, London. Parker, J. (2008), Going beyond Google at the Open University, in Godwin, P. and Parker, J. (Eds), Information Literacy Meets Library 2.0, Facet Publishing, London. Parker, L. (2008), Second Life: the seventh face of the library?, Program: electronic library and information systems, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 232-42. Patal, A. (2008), The 50 greatest arts videos on YouTube, The Observer: Review: Arts, 31 August, available at: www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/aug/31/youtube.jazz (accessed 8 March 2009). Payne, G. (2008), The blog as an assessment tool, in Godwin, P. and Parker, J. (Eds), Information Literacy Meets Library 2.0, Facet Publishing, London. Ranger, K. (2008), Teaching and learning, Reections of a Quaker Librarian (blog), available at: http://quakerlibn.blogspot.com/2008/09/teaching-learning.html (accessed 8 March 2009). Richardson, W. (2006), Blogs,Wikis, Podcasts, and Other Powerful Web Tools for Classrooms, Corwin, Thousand Oaks, CA/Sage, London. Secker, J. (2008), Social software and libraries: a literature review from the LASSIE project, Program: electronic library and information systems, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 219-31. Smith, J. (2009), Number of US Facebook users over 35 nearly doubles in last 60 days, Inside Facebook (blog), available at: www.insidefacebook.com/2009/03/25/number-of-usfacebook-users-over-35-nearly-doubles-in-last-60-days/ (accessed 8 March 2009).

Information literacy and Web 2.0 273

PROG 43,3

274

Solove, D.J. (2008), Do social networks bring the end of privacy?, Scientic American Magazine, 18 August, available at: www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id do-social-networksbring&print true (accessed 8 March 2009). Walton, S. (2008), How we t six oors of Milner Library into the palm of your hand, available at: http://eprints.rclis.org/archive/00013519/01/How_We_Fit_Presentation_Sean_Walton. pdf (accessed 8 March 2009). Warlick, D. (2008), Contemporary literacy, online handouts for redening literacy and literacy and learning presentations (wiki), available at: http://davidwarlick.com/wiki/pmwiki. php?n Main.RedeningLiteracyForThe21stCentury Webber, S. (2008), Using rst and second life to develop inquiry skills in the freshmen year at a UK university: a happy blend?, SLED Conference, available at: www.slideshare.net/ sheilawebber/using-rst-and-second-life-to-develop-inquiry-skills-in-the-freshman-yearat-a-uk-university-a-happy-blend-presentation/ (accessed 8 March 2009). Williams, P., Rowlands, I. and Fieldhouse, M. (2008), The Google generation myths and realities about young peoples digital behaviour, in Nicholas, D. and Rowlands, I. (Eds), Digital Consumers Reshaping the Information Profession, Facet Publishing, London. Zimmer, J.L. and Ziph, S.W. (2007), Library instruction on the go: podcasting at the Kresge Library, available at: http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/50689/1/LOEX2007. ppt (accessed 8 March 2009). Further reading Buckland, A. and Godfrey, K. (2008), Gimmick or groundbreaking? Canadian academic libraries using chat reference in multi-user virtual environments, IFLA Conference, Quebec, Canada, 10-14 August, available at: www.ia.org/IV/ia74/papers/158-Buckland_Godfrey-en.pdf (accessed 8 March 2009). Daniels, K. and Huxor, E. (2008), Information literacy and Web 2.0: developing a modern media curriculum using social bookmarking and social networking tools, University of Bedfordshire Centre for Teaching and Learning project, Luton. Corresponding author Peter Godwin can be contacted at: peter.godwin@beds.ac.uk

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen