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
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

2 http//www.itu.int/wsis/documents/doc_multi.asp?
langenid11611160
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 economy2

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
  essential2
• 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
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 (cont )

• 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
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
communal
awareness
find
social
motivation
planning
apply
value
monitoring
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 (cont)

• 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 (cont)

• 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 cultural contexts 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 information access 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 privacyrespect
  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
51
Questionnaire on IL Framework Cognitive
Table 2.2 Average rating on cognition from
questionnaire- all participants
52
Questionnaire on IL Framework Meta-cognitive
Table 2.3 Average rating on meta-cognition from
questionnaire- all participants
53
Questionnaire on IL Framework Affective
Table 2.4 Average rating on affection from
questionnaire- all participants
54
Questionnaire on IL Framework Socio-Cultural
Table 2.5 Average rating on social culture from
questionnaire- all participants
55
Top ratings by primary school practitioners
Table 2.6 Top ratings by primary school
practitioners from questionnaire
56
Top ratings by secondary school practitioners
Table 2.7 Top ratings by secondary school
practitioners from questionnaire
57
2.2.2 Concerns on IL implementation

• IL should not be implemented as new initiative
• IL should be infused into the existing curriculum
• Judgment from parents would affect the attitude
  of schools towards IL
• IL standards should be a framework highlighting
  the existing educational standards accepted by
  educators in general.

58
Policy recommendations on IL implementation

• IL standards VS existing educational standards
• information technology assumes a role for
  learners to attain these goals.
• the IL framework should not be perceived as a new
  educational initiative.
• Conducting pilot studies and disseminating
  experiences of existing IL-leading schools to the
  teaching practitioners are ways to obtain
  consensus of teachers with the initiative.

59
Policy recommendations on IL implementation
(cont)

• Requires efforts to induce teachers to implement
  the IL framework and to inspire parents to
  realize the importance of the initiative
• The EMB should consider organizing seminars and
  advertising to educate parents about the
  importance of IL.
• The coordinator of implementing the IL framework
  in schools should be a higher rank staff member
  for essential professional leadership

60
Proportion of choosing the IL implementation
models (Teacher librarians)
Figure 4.2 Proportion of choosing the IL
implementation models (Teacher librarians)
60
61
Proportion of choosing the IL implementation
models (IT coordinators)
Figure 4.3 Proportion of choosing the IL
implementation models (IT coordinators)
61
62
Proportion of choosing the IL implementation
models (Principals/ Curriculum coordinators)
Figure 4.4 Proportion of choosing the IL
implementation models (Principals/ curriculum
coordinators)
62
63
Policy recommendations on IL implementation

• IL should be infused in existing curricular in
  basic education such as
• IT/Library lesson and curriculum infusion (a b)
• Curriculum infusion and PBL model (b c)
• IT/Library lesson and PBL model (a c)

64
2.2.3 Concerns from practitioners on teachers
assessment

• Aim of assessment
• ensure teachers to transfer IL skills to students
  
• push teachers to move forward in IL
  implementation
• Well-defined assessment will ensure the
  willingness of teachers to teach IL
• Should not focus on memorizing information

65
Recommendations to the concern

• A comprehensive Staff development programme for
  teachers should be designed
• Staff development should be incorporated in the
  existing CPD
• Details of staff development will be covered
  later on 2.3

66
2.2.4 Students assessment and support
Table 2.9 Count of opinions from written
feedbacks on difficulties in the assessment of
students
67
Concerns from practitioners on students
assessment

• Not be paper and pencil examination
• Should not discourage students interest
• Increase number of assessments may come up with a
  more objective assessment result
• Nature and methods of assessment
• Widely accepted, simple and easy to define
• Concise, descriptive, developmental

68
Concerns from practitioners on students
assessment (cont)

• Focus on individual improvement rather than
  comparison between students
• A combination of self-assessment, peer assessment
  and teachers assessment
• Completing projects or presentations in an open
  resources environment, such as the internet and
  library access
• Conducting interviews

69
Recommendations on assessing students

• Nature of assessment
• Generalized, widely accepted, simple and easy to
  define, formative and developmental
• Adopting descriptive statements will be
  inevitable as assessment tends to measure the
  quality of a person
• More objective by adopting measures, such as
• continual assessing
• multiple assessors
• Outcome of assessment should be concise
• Summative assessment at the end of a key learning
  stage is necessary for smooth progression

70
Recommendations on assessing students (cont)

• Methods of assessment
• Assess in an open assessment environment, such as
  
• the internet
• library access
• Conduct interviews in assessing IL
• Construct continue assessment and multiple
  assessors using assessment rubrics
• A number of teachers participate assessments
• Teachers assess students attainment by rubrics
• marks on the extremes are truncated
• At an early stage, school-based assessment.
• Further studies and investigations on high-stake
  assessment

71
Assessment rubrics, tools and reporting

• For the design of assessment toolkits
• assessment platform to support school-based
  assessment
• wireless network for real time IL assessment
• mobile devices for teachers to input data into
  assessment rubrics developed for report generation

72
2.3 Staff Development Programme

• 2.3.1 Concerns
• 2.3.2 Guidelines
• 2.3.3 Contents of in-service teacher training
• 2.3.4 Contents of pre-service teacher training

73
2.3.1 Concerns about staff development
Table 2.10 Count of opinions from written
feedbacks on difficulties in staff development
74
2.3.2 Guidelines for implementing staff
development

• Obtain consensus of school teachers before
  initiation
• Start as soon as possible to prepare for
  implementation in schools
• Provide sufficient resources for supporting, such
  as offering substitute teachers
• Organize the programme in an extended period to
  minimize pressure of teachers

75
Guidelines on training methods

• Flexible training scheme for teachers to organize
  their own development
• Consider web-based training materials for
• minimizing effort for attending courses and
• maximizing outcomes of face-to-face lecturing

76
Guidelines on training methods (cont)

• Most school teachers attend
• school-based courses and/or web-based courses
• Few teachers attend
• full training- serve as trainers (seed teachers)
• Support and guidelines for trainers for
  implementing school-based IL initiatives

77
Guidelines on training methods (cont)

• Organize activities in staff development day for
  gaining practical experiences on the process of
  learning IL
• Authentic knowledge for teachers, such as
• visiting schools with experience on IL
  implementation and
• sharing experience with those experienced
  teachers in IL education

78
Guidelines on training methods (cont)

• Teachers with
• no formal IL education background and
• rare experiences in teaching IL
• should have chances to attend elective courses
  on building knowledge of IL and the pedagogy of
  teaching IL
• Incorporate training for developing competence of
  pre-service teachers on implementing the IL
  initiatives.

79
2.4 IL Implementation Schedule

• 2.4.1 Suitable time for the IL implementation
• 2.4.2 Pilot study implementation
  schedule

80
2.4.1 When should be the suitable time for
implementing staff development in schools?
Figure 2.4 The suitable time for implementing
staff development in schools from questionnaire
80
81
2.4.2 Pilot study implementation schedule

• Conduct a 2-year pilot study
• Primary and secondary schools
• May include showcases of experienced IL schools
• Implementation schedule
• Time for launch is kept open

82
Seminar on implementing an information literacy
framework for Hong Kong students

• Thank You for your attention!
• http//www.emb.gov.hk/IL/eng
• http//www.emb.gov.hk/IL/chi
• iterc_at_emb.gov.hk

83
Part 3 Open Discussion

• The Development of an Information Literacy
  Framework for Hong Kong Students