Bibliographic record
Abstract
Proven Strategies for Building an Information Literacy Program. Edited by Susan Carol Curzon and Lynn D. Lampert. New York, NY: Neal-Schuman Publishers, 2007. 350 pp. 75.00 USD. ISBN-10: 1-55570-608-8; ISBN-13: 978- 1-55570-608-1. 8 Unlike many books in this subject area, Proven Strategies for Building an Information Literacy Program is not the work of one or two collaborating authors. Rather, it is a well-organized and cohesive exploration of literacy with contributions from twenty practitioners who have broken down many of the common roadblocks facing instruction librarians today. We should heed their words and build on their experience. We have heard and read much about the need for faculty/librarian collaboration in an academic setting; however, this work takes the discussion beyond that relationship, stressing the valuable role that school and public librarians can play in literacy. For this reason, the volume should be read by librarians working in public, school and university settings. The editors, Susan Carol Curzon and Lynn D. Lampert, have developed an information literacy with eighteen sections corresponding to the eighteen chapters of the book; included are such topics as goals, planning, timing, curriculum, teaching and assessment. The preface provides an explanation of the wheel and recommendations on how to use the book. Each chapter begins with a brief introduction which places the content in context and introduces the author. Chapters conclude with a list of recommended readings, though a more general reading list is located at the end of the volume. Creation of an literacy program that addresses the needs of clients while integrating with the institutional setting is a major challenge for instruction librarians. Increasingly, alliances with student services/student success initiatives or affiliations with writing centres and academic departments are established. While these alliances can be effective, they often stem from a lack of our own resources and are not lasting because they focus on one component rather than the whole program. This book promotes the careful, step-by-step development of a sustainable program. A successful, sustainable program must encompass a broad range of strategies that involve the various factions present in academia: faculty, librarians and administrators. To facilitate buy-in and ensure sustainability, it is essential to integrate the literacy program into the very fabric of the institution: into the mission, vision and values of the organization as a whole. The culture of the organization can be a make-or-break factor. Judith Peacock illustrates her discussion of strategic planning with the Information Literacy Framework developed at Queensland University of Technology and its three components (extra, inter and intra-curricular). Her insightful analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the program is instructive. Scott Walter explains that the organization, or campus is really a melding of separate cultures: those of individual disciplines, departments, professional communities and perhaps the library itself. He begins his essay with the question Why do some libraries seem to have such success in developing powerful partnerships with classroom faculty in support of literacy instruction, while others struggle so mightily to little effect? (p. 55). The resulting essay formulates underlying reasons and offers useful strategies to overcome obstacles. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.006 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".