Information Literacy for Researchers

There is a leaflet available here entitled "Information Literacy framework on the Vitae Researcher Development Framework using the SCONUL Seven Pillars of Information Literacy".
This is a valuable document which uses the new SCONUL Seven Pillars framework and should be a useful aid for demystifying the information maze for researchers.

Research Supervisors and Information Literacy

Just in case you haven't come across the recent RIN report "The role of research supervisors in information literacy" - here is the link. It looks at the role of PhD supervisors in ensuring research students have the appropriate level of IL ability to manage their work and later career. Two online surveys were done (one for supervisors and one for research students)plus 5 case studies. A complex and variable picture emerges (doesnt surprise me..) Supervisors are an influence, even if they dont real;ly recognise the IL concept.A minority do not engage their students in IL. There is emphasis on academic writing and importance of critical thinking which I finbd encouraging. Supervisors are not always aware of the training and help available (surprise surprise). Many admit to being out of date or not fully up to date.
We have an opening here and the recommendations will help this. See here

SCONUL Seven Pillars Model revised!

At the LILAC Conference in London recently Moira Bent and Ruth Stubbings unveiled the new version of the SCONUL Seven Pillars Information Literacy framework. This is a major development and I should have shouted about it before! I quote :

"In order for the model to be relevant to different user communities and ages, the new model is presented as a generic “core” model for Higher Education, to which a series of “lenses”, representing the different groups of learners, can be applied. The Research Lens is the first of the lenses to be developed."

Here is the generic model for HE
Here is the research lens

If you build it will they come? Researchers and Web 2.0

If you build it, will they come? is a Research Information Network (RIN) report about researchers and Web 2.0.

They conclude "Our study indicates that a majority of researchers are making at least occasional use of one or more web 2.0 tools or services for purposes related to their research: for communicating their work; for developing and sustaining networks and collaborations; or for finding out about what others are doing. But frequent or intensive use is rare, and some researchers regard blogs, wikis and other novel forms of communication as a waste of time or even
dangerous."
Uptake of Web 2.0 varies according to discipline. There is a lack of trust and a good deal of conservatism around. It is a useful document for all librarians who have to support researchers to have a look at.
The message is :
"Information professionals should not seek to re-establish centralised provision, which might
inhibit the dispersed processes of innovation and experimentation. Instead they may need
to rethink their current roles and organisation, and to broaden their agendas to include
effective support for web 2.0.
Their roles might usefully include:
• raising awareness of the range of tools and services and their relevance for different
kinds of activities;
• publicising examples of successful use and good practice by research groups and
networks across a range of disciplines;
• providing guidelines and training to help researchers make informed choices;
• helping to set standards and providing advice on curation and preservation."

Researchers of Tomorrow (who use Google)

Here is the summary report about the interim findings of the first year of the Researchers of Tomorrow (British Library/JISC) study. A survey went out earlier this year and over 6500 doctoral students replied. Here is are some findings:

• Time pressures are a significant constraint for most respondents, both full-time and part‐time.

• More Generation Y than older scholars are likely to be working from officespace, laboratory or studio in their own institution, rather than working from their own home.
  

• • About half of the respondents have been usefully trained in, for instance, finding and using subject‐based bibliographical and journal resources, andfinding research resources beyond their own institution.
  

• Far fewer respondents, however, have received any training in using more advanced technology‐based research resources and tools such as research methods, finding and using online datasets or working in virtualresearch environments.
  

• Only a small proportion of respondents in any age group say they use ‘emergent technology’ (e.g. Web 2.0 applications) in their research, although those that do generally find it valuable.

• In a snapshot of information‐seeking and research activity, the majority of doctoral students were looking for text‐based and secondary, published research resources, rather than primary research resources (e.g. data to analyse or original manuscript sources).
  

• Google and Google Scholar are dominant as the main source used by doctoral students of all ages to find the information they require.

It's an important report and well worth following up. I was disappointed to see the low use of Web 2.0. Here is an opening for librarians to assist - showing that Web 2.0 can assist with result retrieval and saving time.

Mind the skills gap : Information-handling for Researchers : the RIN report

This report by Research Information Network looks at how researchers in HE acquire the appropriate skills to discover and handle information resources and services, the training opportunities offered for them and the take-up. Unsurprisingly they uncovered patchy, uncoordinated provision with insufficient evidence of potential audience size or take-up. Library involvement was significant but often uncoordinated with other University training. There was a mismatch between the terms and content librarians and researchers thought appropriate. Librarians were often unclear of the paramenters of their role, and there were few examples of strategic application to researchers' training at institutional or faculty level. Attempts to bring researchers up to date with Web 2.0 services had met with "at best mixed success." More worrying, library input tended to focus on information seeking, citation of sources and library services, with much less emphasis on evaluation, organising, managing, transforming or communicating information , or copyright and open access. The latter are key areas in 2008 - the Web 2.0 world : librarians have a duty and opportunity here.
RIN will be consulting with Research Council UK , Vitae, RLUK , SCONUL and other relevant bodies. I hope that librarians will make a forceful contribution by widening their commitment, and increasing the scope of their contribution to ensure researchers have the information skills appropriate in the 21st century.