ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries C&RL News ■ October 1999 I 751 Information literacy and the technological transformation of higher education ACRL/IS Think Tank III discussion to continue with an online forum in October by Allison Level and M. Kathleen Kern C o n tin u in g its tradition o f bringing to ­ gether experts to predict an d plan future developm ents, the Instruction Section or nized and held Think Tank III, a lively discus­ sion regarding future directions for informa­ tion literacy initiatives in higher education. H eld during th e ALA A nnual Conference in N ew O rle a n s, T h in k T ank III brought together six librarians and six e d u c a t io n a l t e c h n o l o g is ts fro m around the country to develop and present papers on critical information literacy issues at a day-long w orking session. Support for the working ses­ sion w as provided by both the ACRL Initiative F und an d netLibrary, an In tern et-b ased distributor o f elec­ tronic books m arketed specifically to libraries. Think Tank papers an d discus­ sions incorporated them es regarding trends in technology, information literacy, col­ laboration, an d scholarly communication: • D efining Moments: The Role o f In fo rm a ­ tion Literacy in the 21st C entury Construct o f E ducation. Mark D onovan an d A nne Zald (University o f Washington) discussed how the g challenges p o se d by an inform ation-driven society dem and a rethinking of higher educa­ a­tion, as well as h o w instruction librarians and teaching faculty will b e affected by institutional efforts to prepare active, critical, and informa­ tion-literate students. • O u r F u tu re Revisited: R ed efin in g the Teaching Role o f L ibrarians o n the Wired Campus. Elizabeth Dupuis (Uni­ versity of Texas at Austin) and Margit Misangyi Watts (University o f Hawaii at M anoa) revisited William Miller’s Think Tank II pap er (The F uture o f Bibliographic Instruction a n d Infor­ m ation Literacy f o r the A cadem ic Li­ brarian) in o rder to reexam ine the teaching role of academ ic librarians in light o f the major information literacy initiatives w itnessed in higher educa­ tion in the past ten years and the w ide­ spread integration o f technology into the daily lives o f students. • Deep Impact: C hanging Technologies a n d the (R)evolution o f Inform ation Literacy. Judith Swanson (California Polytechnic State Univer­ sity) and D ane Ward (Wayne State University) exam ined the im pact o f technological changes About the authors A llis o n Level is h e a d o f re fe ren ce a t S o u th w e st M issou ri State University, e-m ail: allisonlevel@ m ail.sm su.edu; M. K a th lee n K ern is p ro je c t lea d e r/re fe ren ce lib ra ria n a t Io w a State U niversity; e-m ail: kke rn @ g w ga te .lib .iastate .e du CONFERENCE CIRCUIT mailto:allisonlevel@mail.smsu.edu mailto:kkern@gwgate.lib.iastate.edu 752 / C&RL News ■ October 1999 T h in k Tank III p a rtic ip a n ts in N ew O rleans d u rin g th e A L A A n n u a l C o n fe re n c e . F ro n t r o w (I t o r): Ree D eD onato, E lizabeth Dupuis, M. K athleen Kern, A n n e Scrivener Agee. M id d le ro w (I to r): Dane W ard, J u d ith Swanson, M a rg it M isangyi W atts, Karen W illiam s, Patricia lannuzzi, Craig Gibson. Back ro w (I to r): A n n e Zald, M ark D onovan. N o t p ictu re d : James A u stin . a n d a n increasingly “technologized” student pop u latio n o n the design a n d delivery o f cam ­ pus-w ide inform ation literacy program s. • Lessons Learned: C om puter Technologies as Teaching Tools a n d Their Applications to Library Instruction. K aren Williams a n d Jam es Austin (University o f Arizona) review ed cur­ rent research regarding th e successful use o f co m p u ter technology as a teaching tool and ex p lo red h o w this k n ow ledge can b est b e a p ­ plied to th e teaching o f inform ation literacy in academ ic libraries. • Justify O ur Love: Inform ation Literacy, Stu­ d e n t Learning, a n d the Role o f A ssessm ent in H igher E ducation. A nne Scrivener Agee an d Craig G ibson (G eorge M ason University) ex­ plored h o w inform ation literacy efforts affect student learning an d exam ined relevant issues regarding the m easurem ent a n d assessm ent o f inform ation literacy outcom es in light o f the dem ands being placed u p o n higher education for increased accountability. • In Search o f C om m on Ground: the In fo r­ m ation Literacy/Computer Literacy Connection. Patricia lannuzzi (Florida International Univer­ sity) exam ined w hy th e teaching o f inform a­ tion literacy in higher education seem s n o t to have received w idespread acceptance a n d en ­ thusiasm to th e sam e degree as th e teaching o f com puter o r technology literacy. She also explored w h at opportunities m ay exist for col­ laborative partnerships b etw een proponents of these tw o skill areas. Ree D eD onato (Colum bia University) par­ ticipated as Think Tank m oderator an d led par­ tic ip a n ts th r o u g h th e g r o u p d is c u ssio n s. K athleen Kern (Iow a State Univer­ sity) served as recorder o f the event a n d w o r k e d th r o u g h o u t th e d ay keep in g detailed notes o n th e p re ­ sentations an d discussions. W hile initial Think Tank III par­ ticipation w as limited by necessity to a relatively small nu m b er o f individu­ als, b o th th e participant p ap ers an d th e ideas that em erged during the w orking session d e m a n d discussion b y a m u ch b ro a d e r audience. T here­ fore, th e T hink T ank III Task Force has a n n o u n c e d plans for a m o n th ­ long online discussion forum set to b eg in o n O ctober 18 (see sidebar on next page). IS T h in k Tan ks: H isto rica l o v e rv ie w It has b e e n 18 years since the tradition o f fo­ cu sed deliberations o n the direction o f library instruction b eg an w ith th e first T hink Tank, sp o n so red by th e ACRL B ibliographic Instruc­ tion Section (n o w the Instruction Section). In 1981, six library leaders w ere convened for a day-long discussion to identify key issues shaping the future o f library instruction; rec­ o m m en d a program o f research a n d action to en ab le the profession to overcom e obstacles an d seize opportunities related to library in­ struction; an d stimulate professional discourse.1 In 1989, a seco n d Think T ank focused o n th e educational roles o f academ ic librarians. Ten distinguished academ ic librarians w ere se­ lected to consider a n u m b e r o f issues, includ­ ing: 1) th e state o f inform ation literacy; 2) the evolution o f n e w service roles to effectively m eet th e n eed s o f the academ ic comm unity; an d 3) areas for co n certed future effort. Teams p resen ted w orking papers o n such topics as inform ation literacy, higher education curricu­ lum reform , the challenge o f changing u ser groups, a n d educating a seco n d generation of instruction librarians.2 T h in k T a n k III: C o n tin u in g a tra d itio n In 1998, R andy Hensley, Instruction Section chair, subm itted an ACRL Initiative F und p ro ­ posal to bring together leaders in the fields of inform ation literacy an d educational technol­ ogy to exam ine current trends in higher e d u ­ cation affecting academ ic libraries an d to iden­ tify critical issues a n d concerns o f inform ation literacy relating to technological change. C&RL News ■ October 1999 / 753 Think Tank III was intended to develop an agenda for information literacy that reflects the transformative impact of technology on the field and establishes goals for innovative develop­ m ent to m eet that transformation. Shortly after ACRL approved funding, the Think Tank III Task Force w as appointed to plan and define the event.3 The Task Force solicited team applications from educational technologists, librarians, and individuals. Participants w ere selected on the basis of: 1) research publications o r presenta­ tions relating to the im pact o r use o f technol­ ogy o n teaching and learning in a higher e d u ­ cation environment; 2) innovation or creativity involving the incorporation of information tech­ nology into instructional design and develop­ ment; and 3) dem onstrated cam pus involve­ m ent in collaborative projects incorporating in­ formation technology and teaching an d learn­ ing. An effort w as m ade to include individuals from geographically diverse locations. O nce participant team s w ere in place, each team w as assigned a topic and asked to d e­ velop a relevant w orking paper. Working p a­ pers w ere posted on the Think Tank III intranet so that participants and task force mem bers could read and com m ent o n the papers b e­ fore meeting in N ew Orleans. S e ttin g the sta g e fo r th e New O rleans even t Think Tank participants and invited guests at­ ten d ed an evening reception in N ew Orleans on Thursday, Ju n e 24 to get acquainted. For som e team mem bers, this w as the first face-to- face meeting, since all prior contact w as via telephone o r com puter. Reception highlights included short oral histories by previous Think Tank participants Paula Walker, Shelley Phipps, Betsy Baker, and Betsy Wilson. Randy H ensley reflected o n the visioning efforts o f the previous Think Tanks by observ­ ing that Think Tank I determ ined that instruc­ tion is im portant to libraries; Think Tank II determ ined that instruction in libraries is im­ portant to the educational process; and Think Tank III w ould hopefully determ ine how li­ brarians w ho teach can move into the realm o f partnership w ith faculty to transform higher education. M ajor th e m e s o f T h in k Tank III Discussion in the morning sessions centered a ro u n d the appropriateness o f technology, collaboration, scholarly comm unication and a discipline-based research process, interpersonal com m unication beyond the barriers of organi­ zational structure, an d the nature o f change in everything from institutional environm ents to instructional options. Participants felt that comm unication comes naturally, but that collaboration is m ore diffi­ cult to establish, especially w hen organizational environm ents may not support collaboration across departm ents. Librarians n eed to com ­ municate with faculty about information literacy in the context o f teaching and learning to get beyond the boundaries o f information literacy as a library-only issue. Participants had differ­ ent opinions about just how transforming the im pact of technology is o n education. A fternoon sessions focused o n issues of assessm ent a n d the role o f inform ation lit­ eracy w ithin the academ y. A ssessment w as considered w ith respect to m easurem ent of student learning an d assessm ent of inform a­ tion literacy programs. A recurring them e that em erged w as that inform ation literacy needs to b e integrated across the curriculum. Patricia Iannuzzi led participants through a series o f activities that exam ined the relation­ A fte r T h in k T a n k III: C o n tin u in g th e co n v e rsa tio n Librarians, educational technologists, stu­ dents, an d o th er interested professionals are invited to take part in the next phase o f Think T ank III by joining the dialogue d u rin g th e u p c o m in g T h in k T an k III O nline Forum o n O ctober 18. This “virtual” think tank experience will m ake use o f a variety o f W eb-based com ­ m u n i c a ti o n te c h n o l o g ie s , in c lu d in g th read ed discussion forum s an d real-time electronic discussion room s. Draft copies o f the Think Tank participant papers will b e available for public review and com ­ ment, and sum m aries o f public com m ents obtained during the online forum will be included with participant papers in the of­ ficial record o f Think Tank III, to be p u b ­ lished next year. More infor nation about the Think Tank III Online Forum is on the ACRL Instruction Section Web site at http://w w w .libraries. mtgers.edu/is/projects/thinktank/. http://www.libraries mtgers.edu/is/projects/thinktank/ 754 / C&RL News ■ October 1999 ship betw een com puter literacy an d informa­ tion literacy an d th e roles of various stake­ h o ld ers (librarians, faculty, stu d en ts, te a c h ­ ing centers, a n d c o m p u te r c en te rs) in th e te a c h in g o f inform ation literacy. M uch dis­ cu ssio n fo c u se d o n th e p artn ersh ip s n e e d e d to m ak e inform ation literacy a p art o f th e curriculum . P articipants also d iscu ssed the n e e d for librarians to continue m arketing the issue o f inform ation literacy outside o f librari­ an sh ip th ro u g h a tte n d a n c e at h ig h e r e d u c a ­ tio n conferences. W hen asked to identify key conclusions at the en d o f the day, participants m entioned that: • librarians an d educators n e e d to develop tools o f collaboration in o rder to transform higher education; • the T hink Tank process should b e repli­ cated w ithin universities as a w ay to continue the conversation about information literacy and collaboration and bring it before a w ider audi­ ence; • librarians are still struggling for valida­ tion in o u r roles as educators, b o th within and outside o f ou r profession; and • technologies are secondary to the educa­ tion process; p eo p le drive transform ation not technology. Librarians a n d educational technologists n eed to m ove far b ey o n d their o w n jobs and think about w hat it is to educate an d to b e an educated person. Inform ation literacy needs to be a pervasive part of the learning environ­ ment. The evolution o f higher education d e ­ m ands the reconsideration o f all o f their roles. N otes 1. American Library Association, Association o f College and Research Libraries, Bibliographic Instruction Section, “Think Tank Recommenda­ tions for Bibliographic Instruction, ” College & Re­ search Libraries News 42 (1981): 394-98. 2. T he w orking papers for Think Tank II w ere subsequently revised an d published as The Evolving E ducational Mission o f the Library (Chicago: ACRL, 1992). 3. T ask force m em b ers w e re C harlotte Crockett, Keith Gresham (chair), Rebecca Jack- son, Allison Level, C indy P ierard, Laverne Sim oneaux, a n d Beth W oodard. ■ (Immersion (99 continued fro m page 726) A b re a k fro m o u r w o rk In addition to our strenuous academics, several terrific social activities w ere held. We had a lovely reception on Friday evening to kick off the pro­ gram and m eet our Immersion colleagues in an informal setting, and w e all enjoyed a wonderful “indoor” picnic at the Valcour Educational Con­ ference Center o n the shore of breathtaking Lake Champlain. To celebrate our last evening, many of us treated ourselves to a fabulous dinner cruise w ith delicious food, live music, dancing, an d a splendid sunset and brilliant full moon. In c o n clu sio n I ho p e that this w as the first o f m any similar In­ formation Literacy Immersion Programs. Being the first Immersion Program, there were of course some suggested changes. Beth Evans from CUNY, Brooklyn College, noted that she and her colleagues felt that a Track 1.5 w ould b e quite useful, and that more sessions mixing the two tracks could be very beneficial. Several Track II participants men­ tioned that because of the am ount of information given, discussed, and debated, another day would have b een valuable to give us more time for ab­ sorption and reflection. Immersion ’99 w as grueling, intense, and re­ m inded m e that I’m grateful not to b e a full-time student again living in the dorms and eating dorm food; it was also an absolutely wonderful experi­ ence. I agree w ith M artha Perry w h e n sh e com ­ m ented, “I w ould heartily encourage all instruc­ tion librarians to apply for adm ission to future IILs—you w on’t regret it!”— Madeline Cop p (Note: Many thanks to th e follow ing p eo p le for their c o m m e n ts : L in d a F ritz ( U n iv e r s it y o f S askatchew an), Jerilyn Veldof (U niversity of Minnesota), Martin Raish (Brigham Young Uni­ versity), Martha R. Perry (Bellarm ine College), Beth Evans (CUNY, Brooklyn College), an d all the other Track II participants I m et at Immersion 99. Note 1. Many thanks to the following people for their c o m m e n ts : L in d a F ritz ( U n iv e r s it y o f Saskatchewan), Jerilyn Veldof (University of Min­ nesota), Martin Raish (Brigham Young University), Martha R. Perry (Bellarmine College), Beth Evans (CUNY, Brooklyn College), and all the other Track II participants I m et at Immersion ’9 9 .■