Lessons Learned from
Project Information Literacy

How College Students
Seek Information in theDigital Age
Mike Eisenberg© Eisenberg 2010

Agenda1. Setting the SceneThe information societyStudents in 2010…and beyondProject Information Literacy

2. Implications & Practical Recommendations
Raise the critical thinking bar

Library

3. Questions & Discussion© Eisenberg 2010

Setting the Scene© Eisenberg 2010

The Question

How can we best help
our students to learn –in order to be fulfilled
and successful in the21st century?
© Eisenberg 2010

Technology – is not the answer.
But…


the world has changed

our students have changed

we must change.

© Eisenberg 2010

Has education changed?

• No.
• Not much.
• Not really.

© Eisenberg 2010

© Eisenberg 2010

A Vision of Students Today• Michael Wesch, Kansas StateUniversity• Cultural Anthropologist• www.youtube.com/user/mwesch#p/u/7/dGCJ46vyR9o© Eisenberg 2010

Has the world changed?

• Yes!
• Much!
• Really!
Global Internet traffic
http://internet-politics.andrewchadwick.com/media/T465098Computer_graphic_of_global_internet_traffic-SPL.jpg© Eisenberg 2010

especially due toinformation & technology© Eisenberg 2010

Computers today are one
million times more powerfulthan those 20 years ago.

© Eisenberg 2010

Looking back 30 years…
• 1981 – the personal computer• 1985 – the Internet• 1995 – the Web• 1999 – Wireless• 1999 – Google• 2001 – iPod
• 2005 – YouTube• 2006 – Twitter• 2010 – iPad
© Eisenberg 2010

In 20 years computers will be
one million times morepowerful than today!

© Eisenberg 2010

looking ahead…

Increasingly, we will livein the physical world&in a parallel, INFORMATION universe.
© Eisenberg 2010

Students 2010

© Eisenberg 2010

The Googl Generation

The Google Generation• Those born 20 years ago have neverknown a world without the World WideWeb!
• 1989 – Tim Berners-Lee invents the Web• 1993 – CERN puts Web in the public domain• 1992 – Mosaic browser• 1995 – Netscape browser• 1999 – Google

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7375703.stm

From Digital Immigrants to Digital Natives

The Google Generation• Experiences• Expectations• Pace© Eisenberg 2010

Experiences

Wifi

playlists

Computer

Xbox, Wii, Playstation
WWWGoogle© Eisenberg 2010

On demandExpectations

Anywhere

Now!

24/7

Practical© Eisenberg 2010

Speed of light

Pace

Multiprocessing
Last minute© Eisenberg 2010

What is it like to be a student in the digital age?

© Eisenberg 2010

How Today’s College Students
Find & Use Information

Project Information Literacy

Alison J. Head, Ph.D., Research Scientist
Mike Eisenberg, Dean Emeritus and Professor
The Information School
University of Washington© Eisenberg 2010

Project Information Literacy
How college students
define and operationalize research tasks• Focus groups(7 campuses, n =86)

2008

• Pilot survey (6 campuses, n= 2318)• Follow-up interviews• Content analysis (28 campuses, n=191)

2009• Large-scale survey (25 campuses, n=8335)• Follow-up interviews

2010• Ongoing, cross-campus study in US; Course Related + Everyday Life Research• Social science methods (quantitative + qualitative)• Based in UW’s iSchool• Funding: MacArthur Foundation; ProQuest

How do students find information?
How do they evaluate and use it?
What difficulties do they encounter?

PIL 2010 Research Study―The Movie‖

What keeps us talking at PIL …

New milestone• Based on collective sample—over 10,000 respondents• This year’s findings validate previous PIL findings• For example:

 Information-seeking driven byfamiliarity and habit - use same set ofsources, similar order of preference

96%

Course readings

97%

92%

Search engines

96%

88%

Scholarly databases

94%

83%

Instructors

88%

73%

Wikipedia

85%
0%

25%

2010 Survey, n=8353
2009 Survey, n=2318

Course research

50%

75%

100%

95%

Search engines

99%
84%

Wikipedia

91%
87%

Friends85%
75%

Personal
collection

82%
63%

Government sites

77%
0%2010, n=8353
2009 Survey, n=2318

25%

50%

75% 100%

Everyday life researchand from the 2009 study…

Wikipedia• Wikipedia - www.youtube.com/user/ProjInfoLit#p/u/2/9nOe26xY1zM

Wikipedia• To obtain a summary (82%)• To help to get started (76%)• Interface is easy to use (69%)• To find meaning of terms (67%)• Comprehensible explanations (64%)

85% of students
uses Wikipedia
for backgroundmaterial

15%- 2009 Survey85%© Eisenberg 2010

Use of Time
• Procrastination?
• http://www.youtube.com/user/ProjInfoLit#p/u/3/OBMVU
qnPank© Eisenberg 2010

Meet Jessica© Eisenberg 2010

Behavior• Curious and engaged, wants to learnsomething new—at least in the beginning.
• Deals with constraints (grade, time,expectations).
• Heads off staggering amounts ofinformation.

• Traverses information landscape with smallcompass.
• Risk-averse and plays it safe (coursereadings).

• Self-taught and independent—does leverage
strategies from high school years.
• Takes a consistent, thoughtful—albeitnarrow—approach.

• Waits until the last minute.

Expectations• Perfect source exists
somewhere - just have tofind it.
• Best approach?
Just Google it.
• On first page of results?
Awesome.
• Up-to-date and current?
Essential.

• But please make it brief.

“Want it just in time,find it just in the right place.”© Eisenberg 2010

© Eisenberg 2010

© Eisenberg 2010

Surprise (to the PIL team):

Evaluates information with a wary eye© Eisenberg 2010

Currency
1. Big Picture

2. Language

Authority

Web evaluation• Take little at face value
Design• Use a blend of formal + selftaught criteria• Apply more than 7 criteria whenevaluating for course work (54%)

Familiarity• Don’t accept Web content on its
own 3. Situational

Asks for help
For course work:• Instructors (49%)• Classmates (32%)• Librarians (11%)

For personal use:•

Friends/family (61%)•Classmates (43%)•Librarians (5%)

What is difficult about research —from start to finish?

―The longest part of researchis getting to the question to ask.‖

Course research difficulties
1. Getting started (84%)
2. Defining a topic (66%)

3. Narrowing down a topic (62%)
4. Sorting through irrelevant results (61%)
2010, n =8,353 | 25 campuses

Everyday life research difficulties
1. Sorting through irrelevant results (41%)
2. Not being able to find the ―answer‖ (33%)
3. Determining credibility ( 26%)

4. Evaluating sources (24%)
2010, n =8.353 | 25 campuses

Defining the task and assessing the process:harder than finding!

Difficulties: Stages
69%

Everyday life
difficulties
Taskresearch
Definition
14%

1.

Sorting through irrelevant results (41%)
41%2.

Self Assessment
Not being
able to find the ―answer‖ (33%)

3.

Determining credibility ( 24%)

19%

30%
Search

4. Evaluating sources (24%)15%
2010, n =8.353 | 25 campuses

25%
Using Information
22%
Course work
Personal use

0%25%50%

75%100%

Why is course research difficult?

Students are

more practiced atwriting techniques
thanresearch strategies

Research routines• Techniques for writing papers—thesis statement (58%), own
perspective (55%)• Fewer routines for research—organizational system (43%),
search terms (36%)• Carried over approach from high school to college,(according to most interviewed)• One in 10 interviewees learned from campus librarians

Most don’t fully understand theresearch process and what is expectedSituation with inherent risk
• Trouble with nature and scope of assignments Narrowing a topic (62%) – what if a topic fails me?
 Desire for comprehensive investigation (78%)• Unsure about performance Little basis for self-assessing, i.e., good job? (48%)
 Finding answers to prove research completed (76%)

Web 2.0

Slow coming to the classroom?

Web 2.0 for course work
• Google Docs (48%)• Online forums (26%)• Wikis (18%)• Social bookmarking (10%)

For everyday life research• Facebook (70%)

one additional piece of the puzzle© Eisenberg 2010

PIL Handout Study (July 2010)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEsyQnM5P4o© Eisenberg 2010

Implications & Recommendations© Eisenberg 2010

1. Raise the critical thinking bar.
2. Re-think and energize library as a active
and engaged in student learning.

© Eisenberg 2010

1. Raise the critical thinking bar

by integrating information & technology
skills into course expectations,assignments, instruction, and learning.
© Eisenberg 2010

1. Raise the critical thinking bar• Ensure that students have essential information
literacy skills.
• Integrate information literacy skills into course
expectations, assignments, instruction, andlearning.
• Go ―beyond reading‖ – students should be able toprocess information in all its forms.
• Go ―beyond writing‖ – students should be able toproduce of information and knowledge in all forms.

© Eisenberg 2010

Goals• Students who think.
• Students who are effective (and efficient)at using, processing, evaluating, andproducing information and ideas.

© Eisenberg 2010

Students who continually move up the―information spectrum‖

ACTIONKNOWLEDGE
INFORMATION

DATA© Eisenberg 2010

1. Raise the critical thinking bar• Ensure that students have essential information
literacy skills.
• Integrate information literacy skills into course
expectations, assignments, instruction, andlearning.
• Go ―beyond reading‖ – students should be able toprocess information in all its forms.
• Go ―beyond writing‖ – students should be able toproduce of information and knowledge in all forms.

• Address plagiarism and new challenges in termsof credibility, authority, trust, intellectual property.

© Eisenberg 2010

Plagiarism• Address plagiarism in terms of credibility,authority, trust, intellectual property.
• Create a ―culture of citing.‖© Eisenberg 2010

Fighting Plagiarism: Creating a Culture of Citing• Model citing in teaching and presenting.

• Show ―bad‖ examples – exaggerate plagiarism.
• Have students cite sources all the time.
• Expect citing in class discussions as well.
• Do not accept work without citing.
• Focus on citations in context more than bibliographies.
• Require ―annotated‖ bibliographies – with annotationsof ―why‖ students selected a particular source as wellas their ―credibility‖ analysis of the source.
© Eisenberg 2010

1. Raise the critical thinking bar.
2. Re-think and energize library as a activeand engaged in student learning.

© Eisenberg 2010

2. Re-think Library• Library = the physical and virtual information
infrastructure of the college• Key Resources eReserves Articles and Article Search Engines• Services
 24/7, virtual and physical Digital reference• Librarians
 Information consultants
 Tech in instruction & learning consultants
 Information literacy teaching partners© Eisenberg 2010

2. Re-think Library
Approaches and Priorities• Change focus of instruction – from resourcessearch to defining the task, using information andself-assessment.
• Embrace the Wikipedia!
• Be sensitive to ―last minute syndrome.‖• Offer consultation-coaching services—on demand.
• Work with faculty (and students) to improveo Assignmentso Use of Web 2.0 capabilities.

© Eisenberg 2010

2. Re-think Library
Information Literacy Program
From partial, hit-or-miss to comprehensive: Defined Predictable Measured Reported© Eisenberg 2010

in conclusion© Eisenberg 2010

implications

findings
opportunities© Eisenberg 2010

opportunities© Eisenberg 2010

Change© Eisenberg 2010

© Eisenberg 2010