june12b.indd June 2012 355 C&RL News The “Characteristics of Programs of In-formation Literacy that Illustrate Best Practices: A Guideline” attempts to articulate elements of exemplary information literacy programs for undergraduate students at four- and two-year institutions.1 The characteristics identify and describe features notable in information literacy programs of excellence. The characteristics are not, however, descriptive of any one program, but rather represent a metaset of elements identified through examination of many programs and philosophies of undergraduate information literacy. In addition, though guided by the defi- nitions found in the “Final Report of the ALA Presidential Committee on Informa- tion Literacy” (1989), “A Progress Report on Information Literacy: An Update on the American Library Association Presidential Committee on Information Literacy: Final Report” (1998), and the “Information Lit- eracy Competency Standards for Higher Education” (2000), the characteristics them- selves do not attempt to define information literacy per se. Instead, the focus is on defining the elements of best practices in information literacy programming. Although an attempt was made to cat- egorize and organize the characteristics for ease of use and logical presentation, the order does not reflect any judgment of priority. Purpose and use The characteristics are primarily intended to help those who are interested in develop- ing, assessing, and improving information literacy programs. This audience includes faculty, librarians, administrators, and tech- nology professionals, as well as others in- volved in information literacy programming at a particular institution. Individuals involved with information literacy programming are encouraged to use the characteristics in a variety of ways. These characteristics both present and represent a set of ideas that can be used when establishing, developing, advancing, revitalizing, or assessing an information literacy program. The character- istics also provide a framework within which to categorize the details of a given program and to analyze how different program elements contribute to attaining excellence in information literacy. Because the characteristics are descrip- tive in nature and the result of a meta-analysis of many programs, they may also be useful for benchmarking program status, improvement, and long-term development. It is important to note, however, that no program is expected to be exemplary with respect to all characteristics; this list is not Characteristics of programs of information literacy that illustrate best practices: A guideline by the ACRL Information Literacy Best Practices Committee Approved by the ACRL Board of Directors, June 2003, revised January 2012 ACRL standards and guidelines C&RL News June 2012 356 prescriptive. Rather, individuals are encour- aged to consider their library and institu- tional contexts in establishing information literacy program goals and strategies while incorporating these characteristics. Librarians are also encouraged to make use of the “Guidelines for Instruction Pro- grams in Academic Libraries” for specific guidance on academic library involvement with information literacy programs. Characteristics of programs of information literacy that illustrate best practices Category 1: Mission A mission statement for an information lit- eracy program: • includes a definition of information literacy; • is consistent with the “ACRL Informa- tion Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education”; • aligns with the library’s mission state- ment to correspond with the larger mission statement of the institution; • adheres to the format of campus stra- tegic documents; • incorporates the institutional stakehold- ers, clearly reflecting their contributions and the expected benefits; • appears in appropriate institutional documents; and • promotes relevant lifelong learning and professional development. Category 2: Goals and objectives Goals and objectives for an information literacy program: • are consistent with the mission, goals, and objectives of the library and the insti- tution; • establish measurable outcomes for evaluation of the program; • accommodate input from institutional stakeholders; • clearly present the integration of in- formation literacy across the curriculum for students’ academic pursuits and effective lifelong learning, see Category 5: Articula- tion; • accommodate sequential growth of stu- dents’ skills and understanding throughout their education, see Category 5: Articula- tion; and • take into account all learners served by or connected to the institution, regardless of delivery systems or location. Category 3: Planning Planning for an information literacy pro- gram: •articulates and develops mechanisms to implement and/or adapt components of the best practices listed in this document (as needed): - mission - goals and objectives - administration and institutional support - articulation (program sequence) with the curriculum - collaboration - pedagogy - staffing - outreach - assessment/evaluation • addresses current opportunities and challenges; • is tied to library, institutional, and information technology planning and bud- geting cycles; • incorporates findings from environ- mental scans; • accommodates the level of the pro- gram, department, and institution; • addresses and prioritizes human, technological, and financial resources (both current and projected), taking into account administrative and institutional support; • encourages librarian, faculty, and ad- ministrator collaboration at the outset; • enables librarians to take on leadership roles that will extend beyond the planning stages; • includes a program for training and development, see Category 8: Staffing; and June 2012 357 C&RL News • provides a timeline for systematic revision. Category 4: Administrative and institutional support Administration within an institution: • assigns information literacy leadership and responsibilities to appropriate librarians, faculty, and staff; • incorporates information literacy in the institution’s mission, strategic plan, policies, and procedures; • provides funding to establish and en- sure ongoing support for: - teaching facilities - current and appropriate technologies - appropriate staffing levels - professional development opportuni- ties • recognizes and encourages collabora- tion, see Category 6: Collaboration; • communicates support for the pro- gram; and • rewards individual and institutional achievement and participation in the infor- mation literacy program. Category 5: Articulation (program sequence) within the curriculum Articulation with the curriculum for an in- formation literacy program: • identifies the scope (i.e., depth and complexity) of competencies to be acquired on a disciplinary level as well as at the course level; • sequences and integrates competen- cies throughout a student’s academic career, progressing in sophistication; • emphasizes learner-centered learning, see Category 7: Pedagogy; • is formalized and widely disseminated; • uses local governance structures to advocate for and ensure institution-wide integration into academic or vocational programs; and • specifies programs and courses charged with implementing competencies. Category 6: Collaboration Collaboration in an information literacy pro- gram among disciplinary faculty, librarians, other instructors (e.g., teaching assistants), administrators, and other program staff: • fosters communication among disci- plinary faculty, librarians, other instructors (e.g., teaching assistants), administrators, and other staff within the institution; • focuses on enhancing student learning and skill development for lifelong learning; • communicates effectively with faculty, librarians, other instructors, administrators, and additional staff members to gain sup- port for the program within the academic community; • aligns information literacy with disci- plinary content; • works within the context of the course content, and other learning experiences, to achieve information literacy outcomes; and • takes place at different stages: planning, delivery, assessment of student learning, and evaluation and refinement of the program. Category 7: Pedagogy Pedagogy for an information literacy program: • supports diverse approaches to teach- ing and learning; • is suitable to the type of instruction (e.g., one-shot, dedicated course); • takes into account diverse teaching and learning styles; • incorporates and uses relevant and ap- propriate information technology and other media resources to support pedagogy; • advances learning through collabora- tive and experiential-learning activities; • promotes critical thinking, reflection, and recursive learning; • builds on learners’ existing knowledge, course assignments, and career goals; • contextualizes information literacy within ongoing coursework appropriate to the academic program and course level; and • prepares students for independent lifelong learning. C&RL News June 2012 358 Category 8: Staffing Staff for an information literacy program: • includes librarians, library staff, admin- istrators, program coordinators, instructional technologists, as well as disciplinary faculty, graphic designers, teaching/learning special- ists, and other program staff as needed; • endeavors to work collaboratively with others and support each other’s learning development; • are knowledgeable in instruction/ teaching, curriculum development, and assessment of student learning; • garner expertise in developing, co- ordinating, implementing, evaluating, and revising information literacy programs; • exemplify and advocate for informa- tion literacy and lifelong learning; • engage in professional development and training; • are adequate in number to support the program’s mission and workload; and • receive regular evaluations about the quality of their contributions to the pro- gram and areas for improvement. Category 9: Outreach Outreach activities for an information lit- eracy program: • clearly define and describe the program and its value to targeted audiences, includ- ing those within and beyond the specific institution; • market the program through the cre- ation and distribution of publicity materials; • identify and reach out to relevant stakeholders and support groups both within and outside of the institution; • use a variety of communication methods, including formal and informal networks and media channels; • provide, in collaboration with other campus professional development staff, workshops and programs that relate to information literacy; and • contribute to information literacy’s advancement by sharing information, meth- ods, and plans with peers and stakeholders both within and outside of the institution. Category 10: Assessment/evaluation Assessment/evaluation of information lit- eracy includes program performance and student outcomes. Program evaluation: • develops a process for program plan- ning, evaluation, and revision; • measures the progress of meeting the program’s goals and objectives, see Category 2: Goals and Objectives; • integrates with course and curriculum assessment, institutional evaluations and regional/professional accreditation initia- tives; and • uses appropriate assessment/evalu- ation method for relevant purposes, for example, formative and summative and/ or short-term and longitudinal. Student outcomes: • acknowledge differences in learning and teaching styles in the outcome measures; • employ a variety of pre- and post-in- struction outcome measures; for example: needs assessment, pre-tests, post-tests, portfolio assessment, oral defense, quizzes, essays, direct observation, anecdotal, peer and self review, and experience; • focus on learner performance, knowl- edge acquisition, and attitude appraisal; • assess the learners’ process and product; and • include learner-, peer-, and self- evaluation. Document and revision history The characteristics were developed through a multiphase process, which involved pro- fessionals from multiple sectors of higher education, including librarians, faculty, administrators, and professional organiza- tions. Beginning in April 2000, suggestions for an original draft of the characteristics were gathered through a Web-based Delphi polling technique. Members of the Best June 2012 359 C&RL News Practices Project Team and Best Practices Advisory Panel then wrote a document based upon these suggestions and revised it several times. A working draft was dis- tributed widely for comment and went through a further revision. A penultimate draft was completed in March 2001 and was used as the basis for selecting ten institu- tions for a national invitational conference on best practices in information literacy programming, which was held in Atlanta in June 2002. As part of that meeting, the characteristics were further refined. The revisions culminated in a final edition. In 2008 members of the ACRL Informa- tion Literacy Best Practices Committee (ILBP) undertook a revision of the charac- teristics. Committee members agreed that certain language needed to be changed in order to better represent the current state of information literacy at academic institu- tions. Members of ILBP began the process by offering suggestions for revisions; these suggestions were then collected, keyed to the original text, and then disseminated for comments from the ACRL membership by sending the links to the original document and the proposed revisions to the ILI-L, COLLIB, and CJC electronic lists. After col- lecting the comments provided by ACRL members, the document was re-examined, and a new draft was created using the track changes feature, which allowed readers to look at proposed changes and the differ- ences in meaning that would result from making those changes. The changes were then integrated into the original document and submitted to ACRL Executive Commit- tee for approval. Note 1. View the guideline online at www. ala.org/acrl/standards/characteristics for interactive annotations. Have you visited the new Project MUSE? Project MUSE now offers both books and journals on a single new, fully-integrated platform. We provide: • Over 15,000 digital scholarly books, side-by-side with more than 500 essential current journals in the humanities and social sciences • New book titles released simultaneously with print • A rich archive of past journal volumes and backlist books • Affordable, flexible collections • Unlimited usage, downloading, and printing; no DRM • Easy-to-use tools for research and teaching Visit us at ALA Booth #1345 http://muse.jhu.edu For more information: muse@press.jhu.edu PRO3227_2012_5x4_Layout 1 5/9/12 1:55 PM Page 1