Researcher infoliteracy - beyond the "how to do it" training

Just in case you have missed it. There has been an interesting discussion going on in LIS-INFOLITERACY on Researcher Infoliteracy - beyond the "how to do it" training. I particualry liked Emma Coonan's contribution. Whilst Emma works with university students I think what she says is relevant to all IL training regardless of the sector. See what you think.

She also highlights a jigsaw graphic that she has come across that is related to information literacy landscape which I liked. I'm a fan of information literacy landscape having working in different landscapes / environments e.g. different professions, in different posts and at diferent career stages, different employers and using different levels of IL skills and competencies related to the landscape / environment and my own competencies at that time. Moira Bent talks about information literacy landscapes. The jigsaw also reminds me of a reference to information literacy being multifaceted like a Rubric cube where Susie Andretta was talking about a wide range of IL articles in an edition of JIL (Journal of Information Literacy) from different sectors with different view points.

"I've been aiming for some years now to realign my research skills sessions from the procedural "how to" towards the reflective "why", and the most useful insight I've gained is: think process, not product (or if you prefer: research, not resource). Rather than offering sessions on individual resources, my courses are called "How to do a literature search", "How to decode your reading list", "Referencing without tears" and similar. They are designed to support various aspects and phases of doing study and research, and as such they naturally introduce useful sources and tools for each process. However, they also aim to spark discussion of choices and values. Why might this particular resource be a useful one for you? Concomitantly, what are its limitations for what you're working on?

This approach means that I always offer options - a range of resources to support a particular phase in the process, never just one. As a result, it's up to the individual student or researcher to identify what each resource has to offer and make an informed choice according to their own needs, which are determined by the context in which they're working at the time. This hands the agency and the responsibility back to the student. It recognises that every information context is different, and that the person who is the 'expert' in that context is the individual student/researcher - not the librarian. It means that I can
suggest tools and resources, but not mandate their use. It means I don't frame Google (/Scholar) as some kind of competition, but as an information source which like all information sources has drawbacks and limitations. It's grounded in a belief that I'm not here to give people answers, but to support them in framing questions.
 
I think relinquishing our status as 'experts' who have the answers and tell students 'how to' is vital if we want to move towards becoming partners in the research process, and instead invite them to consider 'why'. That relinquishment of expert status is a difficult move to make as it seems to undermine our most cherished identity as librarians, but I do believe that for a host of reasons - most important of which is supporting research excellence - it's an attitudinal change we must make.

To come back to practicalities : ) I use this jigsaw graphic (https://librariangoddess.wordpress.com/2012/07/20/research-jigsaw/) with postgraduate students as a way of showing where information-handling behaviours and values fit withing learning journey. It's handy because it illustrates recognisable aspects of the research process alongside some less familiar ones, which may be threshold concepts in themselves, and it helps me situate what I talk about in a way that makes it more relevant to what they're doing as researchers." Emma Coonan