Steve Wright, Kirsty Williamson, Jen SullivanVivienne Bernath ITNR, Caulfield School of Information TechnologyMonash University Library

1
Steve Wright, Kirsty Williamson, Jen
Sullivan Vivienne BernathITNR, Caulfield School
of Information Technology Monash University
Library

• Research students understanding of information
  literacy

2
Overview

1. Introduction
2. Literature review
3. Philosophy and method
4. Findings
5. Conclusion
6. Discussion

3
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)

4
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.

5
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.

6
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.

7
3. Method

• Purposive, theoretical sampling
• Represents main variables
• Sample
• - 15 research students from Faculty of IT.
• - participants obtained through lecturers.

8
3. Data collection

• Ethnographic technique - interviews
• Piloted semi structured interview schedule
• Revised questions and re-piloted
• Individual interviews May to December, 2003.

9
3. Data analysis

• Influenced by Charmazs (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.

10
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.

11
3. The sample participant profile
15 research students 9 Female 6
Male SIMS 9 Information Management
Systems SBS 5 Business Systems SCSSE 1
Computer Science Software Engineering PhD
10 Masters 3 Honours 2
12
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
13
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.

14
Use of sources our study

• Different needs for different kinds of research
  projects
• Mainly journals because of currency (H)
• Its great having the Internet because you can
  find almost anything (J)

15
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)

16
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)

17
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)

18
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)

19
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 couldnt physically get to
  otherwise (E)
• It is just easier to go through a general
  Google search first (G)

20
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)

21
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)
• thats something you use your supervisor for
  (G)

22
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 doesnt have that ostensible credibility,
  then Im not going to use it (D)
• I always think that what I get online is valid
  (L)

23
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 Im 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 its over there (A)

24
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

25
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.ed
  u/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.

26
6. References

• Kuhlthau, C. (1991). Inside the search process
  information seeking from the users 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/informati
  onhabits.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/pil
  erot.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.