Kathy Yancey @ Georgia Conference on Information Literacy
Kathleen Blake Yancey delivered the keynote at the 2009 Georgia Conference on Information Literacy, a talk entitled “Creating and Exploring New Worlds: Web 2.0, Information Literacy, and the Uses of Knowledge.”
Yancey worked to open our conception of sources a bit, to broaden it from alphabetic or written to include multiple media, and consider that one’s sources both come from others and are created by us. Is this new? The multiple media component is certainly a relatively new phenomenon, at least the ubiquity of it is. And most students in colleges generally experience research or engagement with source materials as the manipulation of other people’s material. But much of the material we think of as “source” material has been created by someone.
Yancey argues that, as teachers, we should push students into the “stew” of information, scholarly material found in libraries and academic subscription databases, material in blogs, in more popular press publications, and more. We should then encourage students to evaluate the information found in these sources as a way for them to take charge of the information they encounter.
Information literacy practices must have content in them if students are to make meaningful use of them. Yancey claims that one key to the transference of skills from one context to another is content. In the absence of content, skills become something we may practice without really understanding the why, the reasons the skills are valuable.
Sam Wineberg and Information Ecology
Yancey notes that, for Wineberg, we establish credibility through corroboration (or fidelity), sourcing, and contextualization. When students don’t engage in these practices in writing about history, they run into trouble. When confronted with a variety of texts that describe/explain a historical event, students struggle to determine which source(s) are most authoritative.
Note the role of “content” in each of the following assignments
- Analyze an entry in an encyclopedia and one in wikipedia. How do the entries compare? How are the pieces written? How does one evaluate the entries? Shifting the order of filtering and publishing. Encyclopedias begin with filtering, then publish. Wikipedia publishes first, then filters.
- Build a blogging map on a topic. Find blog-based material on a specific topic. What do we learn about evaluating sources by engaging with these blogs. Are .coms better than .edus? Yancey argues that when we dig into a source we can’t simply “source” by looking at the URL.
- Sourcing backwards. Start with an editorial in the NY Times. Then work backwards and locate the kinds of sources the editors draw from in moving to the editorial.
What is the Role of Content?
Logic of Research Practices – transform our thinking from filling in slots to citation, to thinking about the logic in citation or documentation
- intellectual property
Identify key terms that together are Information Literacy.
- Circulation – Who cites whom in an article. We can see that scholars are in conversation with each other. In the new circulation, on the web and in television news, we can see propaganda served up as information. Yancey claims that this development is possible because of changes in the position of filtering in the new information ecology.
- Credibility -
- Corroboration -
- Plausibility -
Yancey argues that we should also use “critical incident theory” practices in the classroom. Build assignments that put students in positions to take a critical incidents approach in locating and working with sources.
I very much like the suggestion that we have students confront specific critical incidents by juxtaposing information sources as part of evaluation. What I’m not so sure about is Yancey’s conception of “content” in this framework. Obviously, content matters, and I’m supportive of her point. (Absent content, information retrieval or research is merely an empty exercise with little relevance to us, or to our students.)
At the same time, I suspect that this kind of work will have the greatest impact in the context of actual courses, places were it may be least likely to find an audience. Students in a history, biology, or literature class, when asked to conduct research as part of the course, would likely be most receptive to this kind of approach. But faculty teaching these courses are more likely to be focused on the content knowledge itself. Embedding the kinds of information literacy assignments into the curriculum will be a challenge that may even be more daunting than the efforts to infuse process writing pedagogies into such courses.