Information Literacy

Information literacy is the ability to recognize when information is needed, find it efficiently, evaluate it critically, and use it effectively and ethically. In a world where anyone can publish anything instantly, the bottleneck has shifted from information scarcity to information evaluation. The functionally literate reader of the 21st century must not only read well but search well, judge well, and synthesize well.

Agent affinity: achebe (source perspective, whose voice is represented), rosenblatt (reader as active constructor of meaning from sources), clay (assessment and scaffolding of research skills)

Concept IDs: read-informational-text, read-primary-sources, read-digital-reading, read-technical-documents

The Research Process

Research is not a linear sequence but a recursive cycle. Researchers move between stages, refining questions as they learn and circling back to earlier stages when new information changes the picture.

Stage 1 -- Formulate a Research Question

A good research question is:

• Focused -- narrow enough to be answerable within the scope of the project
• Open -- not answerable with a simple yes/no or a single fact
• Arguable -- reasonable people could disagree about the answer
• Researchable -- evidence exists or can be gathered to address it

Weak: "What is climate change?" (Too broad, factual.) Better: "How have Pacific Northwest salmon populations responded to warming stream temperatures since 2000?" (Focused, researchable, arguable.)

Stage 2 -- Identify Sources

Source type	Characteristics	When to use
Primary sources	Original documents, data, artifacts -- the raw material of research	When you need firsthand evidence: speeches, letters, data sets, original research studies, interviews
Secondary sources	Analysis, interpretation, or synthesis of primary sources	When you need expert analysis: textbooks, review articles, documentaries, biographies
Tertiary sources	Compilations and summaries of secondary sources	When you need background: encyclopedias, Wikipedia, almanacs (starting points, not endpoints)

Stage 3 -- Evaluate Sources

See "Source Evaluation Frameworks" below.

Stage 4 -- Synthesize Information

Synthesis is not summarizing sources one by one ("Source A says... Source B says..."). It is organizing information by theme, identifying patterns of agreement and disagreement, and constructing an integrated understanding.

Summary-based organization (weak): "Smith (2020) found X. Jones (2021) found Y. Lee (2022) found Z."

Synthesis-based organization (strong): "Stream temperature increases above 18C consistently reduce juvenile salmon survival (Smith, 2020; Lee, 2022), though the mechanism varies: Smith attributes mortality to direct thermal stress while Lee identifies reduced dissolved oxygen as the primary pathway. Jones (2021) complicates this picture by showing that populations with access to cold-water refugia maintain pre-warming survival rates."

Stage 5 -- Cite and Attribute

All information drawn from sources must be attributed. This is not merely a rule -- it is an intellectual practice that makes knowledge traceable, verifiable, and accountable.

Search Strategies

Keyword Development

The words you search for determine what you find. Effective searching requires translating a research question into searchable terms:

1. Identify core concepts in your question.
2. Generate synonyms for each concept.
3. Consider related terms (broader, narrower, disciplinary vocabulary).

Example. Research question: "How does social media affect teenage mental health?"

• Core concepts: social media, teenagers, mental health
• Synonyms: Instagram/TikTok/Facebook, adolescents/youth, depression/anxiety/well-being
• Related: screen time, cyberbullying, body image, self-esteem

Boolean Operators

Operator	Effect	Example
AND	Narrows -- both terms must appear	"social media" AND "mental health"
OR	Broadens -- either term may appear	teenagers OR adolescents
NOT	Excludes -- removes results containing the term	depression NOT medication
" "	Exact phrase	"body image" returns the phrase, not separate words
*****	Wildcard / truncation	teen* finds teen, teens, teenager, teenagers

Database vs. Web Search

Dimension	Web search (Google)	Academic database (JSTOR, EBSCO, PubMed)
Content	Everything: reliable, unreliable, commercial, academic	Curated: peer-reviewed journals, books, proceedings
Ranking	Relevance algorithm (popularity, recency, SEO)	Relevance to search terms (no SEO manipulation)
Quality control	None -- the user must evaluate	Pre-filtered by editorial/peer review process
Coverage	Broad but shallow	Deep within specific disciplines
Best for	Starting exploration, current events, popular sources	In-depth research, scholarly evidence, primary studies

Source Evaluation Frameworks

CRAAP Test

Criterion	Key questions
Currency	When published? Updated? Is currency important for this topic?
Relevance	Does it address your question? At the right level (not too basic, not too advanced)?
Authority	Who created it? What are their credentials? Is the publisher reputable?
Accuracy	Is it supported by evidence? Can claims be verified? Are there errors?
Purpose	Why was it created? To inform, persuade, sell, entertain? Is the purpose declared?

SIFT Method (Caulfield, 2019)

A faster, action-oriented framework:

Step	Action
Stop	Before reading, pause. Do not engage until you know what you are looking at.
Investigate the source	Who created this? What is their reputation? Check Wikipedia, organizational "About" pages.
Find better coverage	Is the claim covered by sources you already trust? Look for independent reporting.
Trace claims to the original	Follow citations to their source. Does the original say what the citing source claims?

Lateral Reading

Professional fact-checkers do not evaluate a source by reading it carefully (vertical reading). They immediately leave the source and check what others say about it (lateral reading). This escapes the source's self-presentation and provides independent assessment.

Practical steps:

1. Open a new tab.
2. Search for the source/author/organization.
3. Read what independent sources say about their reliability.
4. Return to the original only after you know its reputation.

Media Literacy

News Literacy

News comes in many forms with different levels of reliability:

Type	Characteristics	Reliability
Reported news	Original reporting, named sources, editor oversight	High (not infallible)
Opinion/editorial	Argues a position, labeled as opinion	Varies -- evaluate the argument
Analysis	Expert interpretation of events	Varies -- check the analyst's track record
Aggregation	Repurposes others' reporting	Only as good as the original source
Sponsored content	Paid by an advertiser, may look like news	Low -- the funder's interest shapes the content
Misinformation	False information shared without intent to deceive	Unreliable
Disinformation	False information deliberately created to deceive	Dangerous

Algorithmic Curation and Filter Bubbles

Social media algorithms optimize for engagement, not accuracy or breadth. This creates filter bubbles (Pariser, 2011) where users see information that confirms their existing views and rarely encounter opposing perspectives. Critical information literacy requires:

• Awareness that your feed is curated, not neutral
• Active seeking of diverse sources and perspectives
• Skepticism of content that triggers strong emotional reactions (engagement bait)
• Understanding that virality does not correlate with accuracy

Ethical Use of Information

Plagiarism

Plagiarism is presenting someone else's words, ideas, or data as your own. It includes:

• Direct copying without quotation marks or attribution
• Paraphrasing without attribution (changing the words but taking the idea)
• Self-plagiarism -- resubmitting your own previous work as new
• Mosaic plagiarism -- patching together phrases from multiple sources

Plagiarism is not just an academic infraction. It is a failure of intellectual honesty that undermines the trust on which all knowledge-sharing depends.

Citation Purpose

Citation serves three functions:

1. Credit -- acknowledges the intellectual work of others
2. Evidence -- allows readers to verify your claims by checking your sources
3. Conversation -- positions your work within the ongoing scholarly dialogue

Fair Use

Not all use of copyrighted material requires permission. Fair use (in U.S. law) considers:

• Purpose -- educational, critical, and transformative uses are favored
• Nature -- factual works are more freely usable than creative works
• Amount -- small portions are more defensible than large ones
• Effect -- use that does not replace the market for the original is favored

Reading Across Multiple Sources

The highest-order information literacy skill is constructing knowledge from multiple sources that may disagree. This requires:

1. Identifying each source's contribution -- what unique information or perspective does it provide?
2. Mapping the conversation -- where do sources agree, disagree, or talk past each other?
3. Weighing evidence quality -- which sources have stronger evidence, better methodology, more relevant expertise?
4. Constructing your own position -- informed by all sources but owned by you, with explicit reasoning for your conclusions.

When to Use This Skill

• Conducting research at any level
• Evaluating sources for credibility and relevance
• Teaching research and search strategies
• Navigating digital information environments
• Addressing plagiarism and citation practices
• Building media literacy

When NOT to Use This Skill

• For reading comprehension strategies -- use reading-comprehension
• For literary interpretation -- use literary-analysis
• For argument analysis in a single text -- use critical-reading
• For vocabulary instruction -- use vocabulary-development
• For decoding and phonics -- use phonics-decoding

Cross-References

• achebe agent: Perspective analysis in sources -- whose voice is represented, whose is absent? Achebe's critical practice extends naturally to evaluating the diversity and representativeness of research sources.
• rosenblatt agent: The reader as active constructor of meaning. Rosenblatt's transactional theory applies to research reading: the researcher does not passively receive source information but actively constructs understanding from it.
• clay agent: Assessment and scaffolding of research skills at developmental levels.
• critical-reading skill: Source evaluation overlaps significantly. Critical-reading focuses on evaluating individual texts; information-literacy focuses on finding, comparing, and synthesizing across multiple sources.
• reading-comprehension skill: Comprehension of individual sources is prerequisite to synthesis across them.

References

• Association of College & Research Libraries. (2016). Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education. American Library Association.
• Caulfield, M. (2019). Web Literacy for Student Fact-Checkers. Self-published (Creative Commons).
• Pariser, E. (2011). The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You. Penguin Press.
• Wineburg, S., & McGrew, S. (2019). Lateral reading and the nature of expertise: Reading less and learning more when evaluating digital information. Teachers College Record, 121(11), 1-40.
• Wineburg, S., McGrew, S., Breakstone, J., & Ortega, T. (2016). Evaluating Information: The Cornerstone of Civic Online Reasoning. Stanford History Education Group.