nov10b.indd C&RL News November 2010 532 Transliteracy is recent terminology gain-ing currency in the library world. It is a broad term encompassing and transcending many existing concepts. Because transliteracy is not a library-centric concept, many in the profession are unsure what the term means and how it relates to libraries’ instructional mission and to other existing ideas about various literacies. Transliteracy is such a new concept that its working definition is still evolving and many of its tenets can easily be misinterpreted. Although this term is in flux, academic librarians should watch develop- ments in this new field to continually assess and understand what impact it may have on the ways they assist and interact with their patrons and each other. Transliteracy originated with the cross- disciplinary Transliteracies Project group, headed by Alan Liu from the Department of English at the University of California-Santa Barbara. The main focus of that group is the study of online reading. Sue Thomas, profes- sor of new media at De Montfort University, attended the Transliteracies conference held by this group in 2005 and has since built upon their research to develop the key concepts and working definition of transliteracy. The term has its basis in the word transliterate, which means “to write or print a letter or word using the closest corresponding letters of a different alphabet or language.” The essential idea here is that transliteracy is concerned with mapping meaning across different media and not with developing particular literacies about various media. It is not about learning text literacy and visual literacy and digital literacy in isolation from one another but about the interaction among all these literacies. The working definition of transliteracy, as put forth by Thomas, states that it is “the abil- ity to read, write and interact across a range of platforms, tools and media from signing and orality through handwriting, print, TV, radio and films, to digital social networks.” Basically, transliteracy is concerned with what it means to be literate in the 21st cen- tury. It analyzes the relationship between people and technology, most specifically social networking, but is fluid enough to not be tied to any particular technology. It focuses more on the social uses of technol- ogy, whatever that technology may be. This terminology is new and the study of translit- eracy is in the early stages, so this definition is likely to evolve. Transliteracy is new enough to be un- known to many in the library profession. In 2009, Susie Andretta, senior lecturer at Lon- don Metropolitan University, interviewed four librarians about transliteracy, three of whom were not familiar with the term. She discov- ered, however, this does not mean librarians are not familiar with the underlying concepts. One librarian, initially unfamiliar with the term, notes that this working definition is “an accurate description of this phenomenon,” emphasizing the fact that the issues are out in the library world being addressed already but not necessarily under the umbrella of transliteracy. Andretta says that “the lack of Tom Ipri is head of media and computer services at the University of Nevada-Las Vegas, e-mail: tom.ipri@ unlv.edu © 2010 Tom Ipri Tom Ipri Introducing transliteracy What does it mean to academic libraries? November 2010 533 C&RL News familiarity with the terminology does not mean that transliteracy is not integrated in the practice of these information professionals.” Because of its broad scope and recent gen- esis, transliteracy can be misinterpreted easily. Not much work exists in the scholarly record, especially within library scholarship, although there has been lively debate and discussion via informal channels as interested parties begin to hash out what this term means to libraries. Oversimplifying the concept is tempting but that risks turning transliteracy into just another buzzword. An important issue that needs to be addressed is whether transliteracy concepts manifest as skills and to what degree these skills are teachable. On one level, transliteracy is a descriptive concept, being a “new analytical perspective.” In its original iteration, transliteracy is more about understanding the ways various means of communication interact and understand- ing, not necessarily teaching, the skills neces- sary to move effortlessly from one medium to another. It is about the convergence of these media and acknowledges the multi-modal experience of engaging with the modern world. As Thomas notes, transliteracy is a move toward “a unifying ecology of not just media, but of all literacies relevant to reading, writing, interaction and culture.” That’s not to say that teachable and trans- ferable skills have not become a key concern of transliteracy, only that transliteracy in its initial form lacked a pedagogical imperative. Because of the newness and holistic nature of transliteracy, defining what specific skills are necessary is a bit of a challenge. No group has yet proffered any suggestion as to what a definitive list of transliteracy skills would look like. Some librarians have stepped up to promote transliteracy concepts, but more work needs to be done to formalize what rela- tionship libraries will have with transliteracy. Information literacy standards are in place, but are these enough to support the growing research with how people currently communicate across various media, how they produce information in myriad forms and formats, and how they establish rapidly expanding social networks? The answer could very well be yes, but, if not, should these standards be expanded to encompass these issues, or should transliteracy proponents adopt clear standards and define specific skills to supplement information literacy? Transliteracy is very concerned with the social meaning of literacy. It explores the participatory nature of new means of com- municating, which breaks down barriers between academia and the wider community and calls into question standard notions of what constitutes authority by emphasizing the benefits of knowledge sharing via social networks. Thomas points to “an increasing need for organizations and individuals to develop wider, more open networks, partner- ships and trusted communities to share ideas and to innovate.” In 2007, the Institute of the Future, Califor- nia, issued a report, “The Future of Learning Agents,” which states that “transliterating social and creative life implies new social and political understandings as new relations of creative production emerge. Collective authorship and collective intelligence are modes of active learning and discovery that present new dynamics between individuals and groups with respect to knowledge.” In the transliterate world, creating a social network of experts is held in high regard. What is important is not just transferring information but creating an information nar- rative that evolves over time and adds value. Libraries can help add value for patrons by allowing patrons to contribute to the con- struction of knowledge bases. This social construction of knowledge can take many forms from allowing tagging in catalogs to commenting on special collection photo- graphs. The assumption that authority only comes from an established expert changes in a transliterate world. Personal experience can add value to rare photographs, for example, by supplementing academic research. Not only does transliteracy question pre- vious assumptions of authority, it also calls (continued on page 567) November 2010 567 C&RL News Ed. note: Send your news to: Grants & Acquisitions, C&RL News, 50 E. Huron St., Chicago, IL 60611-2795; e-mail: agalloway@ala.org. Acquisitions A rare medieval bible has been ac - quired by the University of South Carolina (USC). The book is English and was made in Oxford around 1240, and is in pristine condition. It was purchased at auction in London with support from New York’s B. H. Breslauer Foundation. Most complete medieval Bibles in the United States, fewer than 100 in number, are from France or Italy, and USC’s Bible likely remained in its country of origin from its creation until this year. The Bible acquired by USC is the only English pocket Bible in the Southeast. A collection of Jan Morris has been gifted to the University Libraries at George Mason University. It comprises a comprehensive collection of nearly all of her travel narra- tives in not only the first editions, but also most of the subsequent editions, including galleys, proof versions, and editions with composition errors. The Jan Morris Col- lection consists of 136 titles and one rare poster (a chromolithographic enlargement of the dust jacket of Manhattan ’45, a pro- motional piece, signed by Morris). The col- lection includes Morris’s Coronation Everest, signed by Sir Edmund Hillary. Born James Morris in 1926 in Somerset, England, Morris began medically transitioning from male-to- female in 1964, and underwent gender re- assignment surgery in 1972. She published under her former name, James Morris, until the 1970s. She is widely acclaimed for her travel writing, which includes famous pro- files of Oxford, Venice, Wales, Hong Kong, and New York City, among other places. Morris’ most recent book, Contact! A Book of Encounters, was published in 2010. A Welsh nationalist, and also an essayist and historian of note, her most famous nontra- vel work is the Pax Britannica trilogy, a history of the British Empire. G r a n t s a n d A c q u i s i t i o n sAnn-Christe Galloway into question the often assumed privilege of printed text. Transliteracy works against the “entrenched bias towards the written me- dium.” ALA Committee on Literacy’s definition of literacy demonstrates this bias. It defines literacy as the ability to use “printed and written information to function in society, to achieve one’s goals, and to develop one’s knowledge and potential.” Transliteracy is not unique in questioning this bias—media literacy efforts have certainly tried to raise the profile of nonprint materi- als. But transliteracy is unique in combining democratizing communication formats, ex- pressing no preference of one over the other, with emphasizing the social construction of meaning via diverse media. Because of the ways in which transliteracy questions authority and devalues hierarchi- cal structures for disseminating information, proponents tend to advocate for issues that help level the information playing field, such as ensuring neutrality and bridging the digital divide. Despite the fact that transliteracy originat- ed outside the library realm, librarians should follow the development of this concept because so much of transliteracy overlaps concerns much at the heart of librarianship. As more research is created in the field, librar- ians can incorporate these new ideas into the ways they assist patrons with accessing, un- derstanding, and producing information. The social aspects of transliteracy can enhance the workplace by creating robust systems of knowledge sharing and can enhance user experience by granting them a role in the construction of information. (“Introducing transliteracy,” cont. from page 533)