Consultation on the Development of an Information Literacy Framework for Hong Kong Students

1. Consultation on the Development of an Information Literacy Framework for Hong Kong Students Education and Manpower Bureau HKSAR

2. Principal Investigators(in alphabetical order of institutes) • Dr. LI Siu Cheung, Sandy (BU) • Prof. LEE Fong Lok (CUHK) • Dr. KONG Siu Cheung (HKIEd) • Mr. James HENRI (HKU)

3. Outline Part 1: The IL Framework • The scope of the study, IL worldwide and in the HK context • The proposed IL standards, indicators and learning outcomes • Exemplars on IL education Part 2: The implementation of the IL Framework • Research on IL implementation • The IL implementation and options • Suggested staff development programme • IL implementation schedule Part 3: Open discussion

4. Part 1: The IL framework 1.1 The scope of the study, IL worldwide and in the HK context 1.2 Proposed IL standards, indicators and learning outcomes 1.3 Exemplars

5. 1.1: The scope of the study, IL worldwide & in the HK context 1.1.1 Background of the Study 1.1.2 IL Worldwide 1.1.3 Information Literacy

6. 1.1.1 Background of the Study • “A broad framework of IL for students will be developed to help teachers and students have a clearer picture on the learning targets of using IT in education” (EMB, 2004 SECTION 3, 24 a)1. • A Task Group to realize the proposal for the development of an IL Framework for Hong Kong students 1 http://www.emb.gov.hk/elt

7. 1. Objectives, standards and learning outcomes 2. Essential learning content in IL 3. Relationships with IT and other curriculum Information literacy framework Implementation policies and strategies 8. Policies and strategies 9. School leadership, models, class practices and quality assurance Professional development and teacher assessment Students assessment and support 6. Assessment rubrics, tools, reporting 7. Funding, support and tool kits 4. Professional development and culture 5. Roles and responsibilities of stakeholders Scope of the research study

8. 1.1.2 IL worldwide USA • Information Literacy Standards for Student Learning American Association of School Librarians (AASL) United Kingdom • Standing Conference of National and University Libraries from United Kingdom (SCONUL) Australia and New Zealand • Australian and New Zealand Institute of Information Literacy (ANZIIL)

9. United Nations - Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization • Building the Information Society: a global challenge in the new Millennium (2003)2 • Declaration of Principles • Plan of Action 2http://www.itu.int/wsis/documents/doc_multi.asp?lang=en&id=1161|1160

10. Declaration of Principles C4. Capacity building “Each person should have the opportunity to acquire the necessary skills and knowledge in order to understand, participate actively in, and benefit fully from, the Information Society and the knowledge economy”2

11. Plan of Action C4. Capacity building “Everyone should have the necessary skills to benefit fully from the Information Society. Therefore capacity building and ICT literacy are essential”2 “ICTs can contribute to achieving universal education worldwide, through delivery of education and training of teachers, and offering improved conditions for lifelong learning….”2

12. Capacity Building in this Study • Capacity building • an iterative process to build up the knowledge of a learner • with individual effort and/or • as a member of a community • participate in, benefit from and contribute to the Information Society • for the well-being of the knowledge world

13. Information Literacy Information Technology Relationship between IT and IL in this Study

14. 1.1.3 Information Literacy • According to American Library Association Presidential Committee on IL (1989), the information literate person is, • "able to recognize when information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate, and use it effectively"

15. Information Literacy (con’t ) • The Nine IL Standards for Student Learning(From: Information Power: Building Partnerships for Learning by the American Association of School Librarians and the Association for Educational Communications Technology) • 3 standards on Information Literacy • 3 standards on Independent Learning • 3 standards on Social Responsibility

16. IL Education for Hong Kong Students in the 21st Century • The IL framework has 3 main social development trends that shapes it • The Emerging Knowledge Society • Capability for Information Processing • Digital culture • Know “how” and know “why” • Globalization • Capacity Building with global perspectives

17. Moral & Civic Education IT for Interactive Learning Information literacy Reading to Learn Project learning IL as a means to realize the four key learning tasks

18. Information Literacy in this Study • Information literacy is the capacity to • realize the need for information • turn information into meaning • generate new ideas • IL requires learners • to understand the rationale behind using information • to know information searching behaviour • know how and know why

19. 1.2: Proposed IL standards, indicators and learning outcomes 1.2.1 Content analysis 1.2.2 Objectives of the IL framework 1.2.3 The IL framework for HK students

20. 1.2.1 Content analysis of IL frameworks • State University of New York (SUNY) • Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL) • American Association of School Librarians & Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AASL & ACET) • Standing Conference of National and University Libraries from United Kingdom (SCONUL) • Alaska Association of School Librarians (AkASL) • Washington Library Media Association (WLMA) • Australian and New Zealand Institute of Information Literacy (ANZIIL)

21. Meta-Analysis Coding Scheme cognitive dimension meta-cognitive dimension affective dimension socio-cultural dimension comprehend attitude awareness communal find social planning & motivation & apply monitoring value reflection analyse synthesize present evaluate integrate

22. 1.2.2 Objectives of the IL framework for HK Students • The primary objectives of the IL framework are four fold • To enable students to master the necessary skills to comprehend, locate, analyse, critically evaluate and synthesize information and apply their knowledge to inform decisions and problem solving;

23. Objectives (con’t) • To develop students as reflective learners who are able to plan, reflect upon and regulate their process of inquiry in a rapidly changing, information-based environment; • To enable students to appreciate that being an independent learner will contribute to personal growth, enjoyment and lifelong learning; • To empower students with greater autonomy and social responsibility over the use of information in their individual as well as collaborative learning.

24. 1.2.3 The IL Framework for HK Students A Conceptual Framework for Information Literacy 24

25. Standards- Cognitive • C1 An information literate person is able to determine the extent of and locate the information needed. • C1.1 Comprehend • C1.2 Find • C2 An information literate person is able to apply information to problem-solving and decision making. • C2.1 Apply

26. Standards- Cognitive (con’t) • C3 An information literate person is able to analyse the collected information and construct new concepts or understandings • C3.1 Analyse • C3.2 Synthesize • C3.3 Present • C4 An information literate person is able to critically evaluate information and integrate new concepts with prior knowledge. • C4.1 Evaluate • C4.2 Integrate

27. Standards- Meta-cognitive • M1 An information literate person is able to be aware that information processing is iterative, time-consuming and demands effort. • M1.1 Awareness • M2 An information literate person is able to plan and monitor the process of enquiry. • M2.1 Planning and monitoring • M3 An information literate person is able to reflect upon and regulate the process of enquiry. • M3.1 Reflecting

28. Standards- Affective • A1 An information literate person is able to recognise that being an independent reader will contribute to personal enjoyment and lifelong learning. • A1.1 Attitude • A2 An information literate person is able to recognise that information processing skills and freedom of information access are pivotal to sustaining the development of a knowledge society • A2.1 Motivation and value

29. Standards- Socio-cultural • S1 An information literate person is able to contribute positively to the learning community in knowledge building. • S1.1 Communal • S2 An information literate person is able to understand and respect the moral, legal, political and culturalcontexts in which information is being used. • S2.1 Social

30. Learning Outcomes • Proposed 4 levels of attainment • Level I (~Junior Primary) • Level II (~Senior Primary) • Level III (~Junior Secondary) • Level IV (~Senior Secondary)

31. Examples of Learning outcomes- Cognitive (PBL) • Indicators C1.1.1: able to frame appropriate questions based on information needs • Level I: articulate the focus of the given research topic • Level II: identify and clarify research inquiry • Level III: formulate questions for research inquiry • Level IV: formulate and criticize own questions as essential and non-essential for research inquiry

32. Examples- Cognitive (PBL & IT) • Indicators C1.1.2: able to determine the nature and scope of the information needed • Level I: use simple mind-maps for brainstorming ideas and thoughts • Level II: construct simple mind-maps to articulate ideas & thoughts • Level III: construct mind-maps to frame research questions • Level IV: construct mind-maps to build research framework

33. Examples- Cognitive (IT) • Indicators C1.2.2: able to develop strategies for locating information • Level I: use simple keywords to search for information with search engines • Level II: use logical operators to search • Level III: use logical operators to search; sort and rank the information in search engines • Level IV: use logical operators to search; sort and rank the information; search Internet using a range of strategies available in a variety of meta-search engines

34. Examples- Cognitive (Reading & IT) • Indicators C1.2.2: able to develop strategies for locating information • Level I: browse library shelves to locate information • Level II: use keywords with logical operators to search library catalogues • Level III: access on-line library catalogues and electronic resources   • Level IV: expand the search beyond the school library, such as, use public libraries, electronic resources, etc.

35. Examples- Meta-Cognitive (Independent Learning (IDL)) • Indicators M3.1.3: able to review the information seeking process and revise search strategies as necessary • Level I: be aware of the importance of self-reflection for improving learning • Level II: compare information selected and interpreted with information needs • Level III: compare information selected and interpreted and adjust research strategies if necessary • Level IV: suggest areas for further research

36. Examples- Meta-Cognitive (PBL & IDL) • Indicators M2.1.1: able to decompose a complex task/ problem into manageable components • Level I: － • Level II: use simple statements to describe the purpose of the given task • Level III: identify the key components • Level IV: identify the key components; arrange the components into sequences and rankings for effectively completing the task

37. Examples- Affective • Indicators A2.1.3:able to recognise the importance of freedom of informationaccess to a knowledge society Recognise that freedom of information access • Level I: helps people make right judgment • Level II: informs decision making • Level III: informs decision making and contribute to community-wide knowledge building • Level IV: is pivotal to intellectual, economical, political and social development of a society

38. Examples- Socio-cultural(Moral & Civic Education) • Indicators S2.1.4: able to observe laws, regulations, institutional policies, and social etiquette related to the access and use of information resources. • Level I: describe the information sources • Level II: respect and acknowledge the ownership; be aware of the laws governing intellectual property rights • Level III: respect and acknowledge the ownership; be aware of the laws governing intellectual property rights and privacy • Level IV: respect the ownership and use one of the standards of citations e.g. APA and MLA, etc.; be aware of the laws governing intellectual property rights and privacy;respect institutional policies for proper use of and access to information

39. Examples- Socio-cultural (PBL) • Indicators S1.1.2:able to collaborate effectively in groups to pursue and construct knowledge • Level I: take turns speaking in a group, sharing ideas • Level II: listen to, acknowledge and consider different opinions for group work • Level III: respect and accept divergent ideas and opinions expressed by classmates and others and able to resolve conflicts • Level IV: respect and accept divergent ideas and opinions expressed by classmates and others and able to manage conflicts

40. 1.3: Exemplars Purpose To illustrate the learner-centered approach of IL education

41. Exemplars • Design rationale • The IL framework is designed for capacity building of learners for independent learning and assuming social responsibilities • Designed with the humanistic rationale of guiding learners to develop from basic information processing skill, complex level thinking skills to meta-cognitive abilities in the information society

42. Exemplars • Hong Kong, My Home • Knowing about E-Certificate • Colour World: Proper use & Identify Source of Information • Drug Abuse and Youth • http://www3.fed.cuhk.edu.hk/ited/IL/drugabuse/ • Bit Torrent: Angel or Devil?

43. Part 2: The implementation of the IL Framework 2.1 Research on IL implementation 2.2 The IL implementation and options 2.3 Suggested staff development programme 2.4 IL implementation schedule

44. 2.1 Research on IL implementation • 2.1.1 Focus group discussions • 2.1.2 In-depth interviews • 2.1.3 Questionnaire survey

45. 2.1.1 Focus group discussions • 15 Focus Group, each lasted for 90 minutes • Brief introduction and discussed with a set of questions • Audio record, written feedbacks and survey

46. 2.1.2 In-depth interviews • 11 Groups: • Education • Legislative Council • Industry • Lasted for 90 minutes • Interviewed with guidelines • educational • general • Audio record

47. 2.1.3 Questionnaire Survey • 786 primary and 522 secondary schools • Targets • Principals/Curriculum coordinators • IT coordinators • Teacher librarians • 3924 Questionnaires send out • 2608 Questionnaires returned • Response Rate: 66.46%

48. 2.2: IL Implementation & Options 2.2.1 Results on the IL framework 2.2.2 Implementation models & options 2.2.3 Assessment of teachers 2.2.4 Assessment of students

49. The following recommendations are views Gathered from School Heads and Teachers During the Focus Group Discussion, Interview and Questionnaire Survey

50. 2.2.1 Questionnaire: Is IL education needed for students ? 50