Steve Wright, Kirsty Williamson, Jen Sullivan
ITNR, Caulfield School of Information Technology
Vivienne Bernath
Monash University Library
Research students’
understanding of information
literacy
www.monash.edu.au
Overview
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Introduction
Literature review
Philosophy and method
Findings
Conclusion
Discussion
www.monash.edu.au
2
1. Introduction: Information literacy
Here is one common definition:
‘the ability to access, evaluate, and apply
information effectively to situations requiring
decision making, problem solving, or the
acquisition of knowledge’
(Young & Harmony, 1999, p.1)
www.monash.edu.au
3
1. Introduction: Themes
Our project addressed research students’
–
information needs
–
understanding of the scope and appropriateness of a
variety of information sources
–
selection of search strategies and tools
–
views of the convenience and currency of access
provided by electronic media
–
evaluation of information sources: reliability and
authority
–
personal information management tools and strategies.
www.monash.edu.au
4
2. Literature review
‘PhD students have specific needs which need
to be fulfilled to enable them to manage their
personal research information satisfactorily’
Pilerot (2004: 92)
Macauley (2000, 2001) suggests reintermediation
of librarians in supportive roles for postgraduate
students’ information literacy needs.
www.monash.edu.au
5
3. Philosophical framework
Interpretivist / constructivist framework,
including grounded theory concepts
Opportunity to explore and generate ideas serendipitous findings
Elicits rich-picture, in-depth perspectives
Represents multiple voices of participants.
www.monash.edu.au
6
3. Method
Purposive, theoretical sampling
Represents main variables
Sample:
- 15 research students from Faculty of IT.
- participants obtained through lecturers.
www.monash.edu.au
7
3. Data collection
Ethnographic technique - interviews
Piloted semi structured interview schedule
Revised questions and re-piloted
Individual interviews May to December, 2003.
www.monash.edu.au
8
3. Data analysis
Influenced by Charmaz’s (2003) ‘constructivist
grounded theory’.
Recognises that
- ‘the viewer creates the data and ensuing
analysis through interaction with the viewed’.
- researchers’ backgrounds influence
interpretations.
Team all involved in developing themes and
categories of analysis.
www.monash.edu.au
9
3. Assessing the methodological approach
Disadvantages
- discursive answers do not fit into easily
managed categories
- sample size is small, costly in time and money.
Advantages
- personal meanings can be studied in depth
- conveys nuances
- explores ‘why’ questions.
www.monash.edu.au
10
3. The sample: participant profile
15 research students
SIMS
SBS
SCSSE
PhD
Masters
Honours
9
5
1
9 Female
6 Male
Information Management & Systems
Business Systems
Computer Science & Software Engineering
10
3
2
www.monash.edu.au
11
3. The sample: participant profile
Age range
20-29 (6)
30-39 (3)
40-49 (3)
50-59 (1)
60+ (2)
Monash undergraduates
4
Non-Monash undergraduates
11
Other than Australian undergraduate experience
6
www.monash.edu.au
12
4. Findings: Information need
Reasons for selection of research topics:
– Set by supervisors (Honours)
– Often evolved from departmental research
projects (Masters)
– Chosen for fit with past experience or present
interests (PhD)
Several students mentioned changing direction
with their topics and in one case the topic had been
totally changed.
Information need, particularly in these cases,
involved continual re-evaluation.
www.monash.edu.au
13
Use of sources – our study
Different needs for different kinds of
research projects:
‘Mainly journals because of currency’
(H)
‘It’s great having the Internet because
you can find almost anything’ (J)
www.monash.edu.au
14
Personal information sources – our study
Important on one front above all:
‘Yes, I had a lot of support from my
supervisor’ (K)
‘[My two supervisors] never agreed on
anything … I found the disagreement good
most of the time. But sometimes it could
be confusing’ (H)
www.monash.edu.au
15
Search tools – our study
Google sets the standard?
‘Journals online … Google would probably
be my second choice’ (A)
‘I do like Google. Even when I search
Monash stuff I use Google. Google is
fast’ (M)
www.monash.edu.au
16
Search strategies: the Internet – our study
At one extreme, there was the following:
‘The more you use [the Internet], the more
it will be helpful for you. It is a cumulative
effect and it accelerates your searching
capabilities. It tells you the searching
techniques automatically’ (O)
www.monash.edu.au
17
Other search strategies – our study
A range of approaches here as well:
‘I tend to start in a database and I'll search on
keywords. Each one has their own set of
keywords’ (A)
‘I look at the volumes searching literally through
each volume seeing if any of the articles will
interest me’ (B)
www.monash.edu.au
18
Convenience of access – our study
Time, distance, responsibilities:
‘the online library databases are probably
the most important thing because they give
me access to resources that I couldn’t
physically get to otherwise’ (E)
‘It is just easier to go through a general
Google search first’ (G)
www.monash.edu.au
19
Currency of information – our study
Again, subject matter can make a difference:
‘things that were published five years before
or one month before is available online so I
can be in touch with the current research in a
short period of time’ (O)
‘Some of the information is not available in
printed form because it is too new to come
into print’ (K)
www.monash.edu.au
20
Knowing when to stop seeking
A genuine challenge that evokes uncertainty
in many cases:
‘I wish I knew’ (E)
[If a given question is answered] ‘I just move
on’ (N)
‘that’s something you use your supervisor for’
(G)
www.monash.edu.au
21
Evaluating authority of sources and information
Once again, a wide spectrum of responses:
‘I know how easy it is to put stuff on the Web …
If it doesn’t have that ostensible credibility, then
I’m not going to use it’ (D)
‘I always think that what I get online is valid’ (L)
www.monash.edu.au
22
Personal information management
From the tightly orchestrated to full-blown
improvisation:
‘I print out or photocopy all the articles. I index them. I
have a little Access database which I key in the titles
and keywords and all the authors and then I can do
cross-referencing’ (E)
‘It depends on what kind of mental mood I’m in … The
easiest I find is just keep it all in my head and most of
the time I will remember, “Oh I read that somewhere,
and it’s over there”’ (A)
www.monash.edu.au
23
5. Conclusion
• Research students
– Information literacy needs
– Awareness of needs
– Awareness of avenues to address needs
• Librarians
– Bridge building
– Targeted marketing
• Information professionals
– Research and publication
www.monash.edu.au
24
6. References
Bruce, C. (1990). ‘Information skills coursework for postgraduate students: investigation and
response at the Queensland University of Technology’, Australian Academic and
Research Libraries, 21 (4): 224 – 232.
Bruce, C. (1997). The seven faces of information literacy. Blackwood: Auslib Press.
Charmaz, K. (2003). ‘Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods’, in N. K. Denzin
& Y. S. Lincoln (eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
EPIC (2003. ‘The Electronic Publishing Initiative at Columbia (EPIC) Online Survey of College
Students: Executive Summary’, www.epic.columbia.edu/eval/find09/find09.html, accessed
1 May 2005.
Genoni, P. & Partridge, J. (2000). ‘Personal research information management: Information
literacy and the research student’,in C. Bruce & P. Candy (Eds.) Information literacy
around the world: Advances in programs and research (pp.223-235). Wagga Wagga:
Centre for Information Studies, Charles Sturt University.
Hazard, H., Hegarty, F., & J. Baird (1994). Information Needs of Research Staff and
Postgraduate Students at Swinburne University of Technology. Hawthorn, Victoria:
Swinburne University of Technology.
Heinstrom, J. (2002). Fast Surfers, Broad Scanners and Deep Divers: Personality and
Information-Seeking Behaviour. Abo : Abo Akademi Förlag.
www.monash.edu.au
25
6. References
Kuhlthau, C. (1991). ‘Inside the search process: information seeking from the user’s
perspective’, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42 (5), 361-371.
Macauley, P. (2001) Doctoral Research and Scholarly Communication: Candidates,
Supervisors and Information Literacy. PhD Thesis, Faculty of Education, Deakin
University, Geelong.
Macauley, P. (2000). ‘Pedagogic continuity in doctoral supervision: passing on, or passing by,
of information skills?’, in M. Kiley and G. Mullins (eds.) Quality in postgraduate research:
Making ends meet. Adelaide: Advisory Centre for University Education.
OCLC (2002) White Paper on the Information Habits of College Students, June, Dublin, OH:
OCLC, http://www5.oclc.org/downloads/community/informationhabits.pdf, accessed 17
August 2005.
Pilerot, O. (2004). ‘Information Literacy Education for PhD Students – a Case Study’, paper
presented to the 12th Nordic Conference on Information and Documentation,
www2.db.dk/NIOD/pilerot.pdf, accessed 17 August 2005.
Tenopir, C., with the assistance of B. Hitchcock and A. Pillow (2003). Use and Users of
Electronic Library Resources: An Overview and Analysis of Recent Research Studies.
Washington, D.C.: Council on Library and Information Resources. Accessed January 10,
2004. Available www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub120/pub120.pdf
Young, R. & Harmony, S. (1999). Working with Faculty to Design Undergraduate Information
Literacy Programs. New York: Neal-Schuman.
www.monash.edu.au
26