Dorothy Anne Warner. A Disciplinary Blueprint for the Assessment of Information Literacy. Westport, Conn.: Libraries Unlimited, 2008. 116p. alk. paper, $35 (ISBN 9781591585930). LC 2008-03775.
Written as a practical guide for librarians, A Disciplinary Blueprint for the Assessment of Information Literacy provides curricular models for teaching and assessing information literacy skills in eight academic disciplines. Dorothy Anne Warner, Library Instruction Coordinator at Rider University, creates a framework for integrating bibliographic and information literacy instruction into courses for majors in Film Studies, Integrated Sciences and Mathematics, Teacher Preparation, Communication and Journalism, Business Administration, Economics, Entrepreneurial Studies, and Sociology. Drawing on her teaching experience, Warner suggests that library instruction is most effective when students are taught the research process using standard sources from primary, secondary, and tertiary literature for their major. The author has designed a series of models that integrates these sources and information literacy skills into required courses for the majors listed above. While some of the models are developed in more detail than others, and only two had been piloted at the time this work was published, Warner maintains that each model can be adapted at other institutions.
The design of each model began with the examination of a major. Warner created a curriculum map that lists factors such as core courses, required courses, course sequences, and information literacy components found in the syllabi or course descriptions. The map also includes assessments of those components, the professors scheduled to teach the courses, the numbers of sections taught, and notes on whether library instruction had been provided within the major. This map was used by librarians to identify courses in which library instruction would be appropriate and to determine a potential sequence of information literacy units within those courses.
As a second step in the design of her models, Warner wrote information literacy objectives and linked them to specific courses in the major. To design these objectives, she used the ACRL Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education (2000), Bloom’s Taxonomy of Cognitive Objectives, bibliographic guides for each discipline, and the requirements for the major. Where appropriate, she consulted professional standards such as The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business Standards and the New Jersey Department of Education Core Curriculum Content Standards and Frameworks. Warner’s objectives are detailed, linked to appropriate levels of instruction and course assignments, and measurable. These objectives are some of the strengths of Warner’s work, because she relates them to Bloom’s Taxonomy and to the course level at which they should be taught. Each objective could be adapted to information literacy programs at other institutions.
Warner developed assessment tools as the final step in her information literacy framework. In each model, students keep electronic research journals, logs, or planners to track their use of information resources in their research. Librarians used these planners to evaluate student progress in mastery of objectives and to assess areas in which students needed additional instruction. In some models, librarians and professors jointly evaluated student mastery of the specific information literacy objectives using rubrics; in others, professors provided feedback to librarians. The purpose of assessment in this information literacy program is to provide feedback for the improvement of teaching.
Warner applies the framework outlined above in chapters three through eight of A Disciplinary Framework. Each chapter describes the process of applying the curriculum map to a discipline, lists information literacy objectives, discusses the incorporation of research skill sequences into courses, notes assignments, and delineates assessment tools. Some of the models are proposals, while others are fully developed, but all contain the basic information needed to initiate an information literacy program in that major. Since each model follows the same basic format, the chapters become redundant if read sequentially. Readers might prefer to read the preface, introduction, and first two chapters; then move to the chapter(s) in which they are most interested; and, finally, use the index to compare curriculum maps, objectives, and assessment tools for the majors.
A Disciplinary Blueprint for the Assessment of Information Literacy will be most useful to librarians looking for a "how-to-do-it" guide for establishing or modifying information literacy programs that are based on a standard disciplinary guide to the literature in each major rather than on Internet research. Her detailed models are well conceived, theoretically based, and adaptable. The linkage of Bloom’s cognitive outcomes to instructional objectives is especially helpful because outcomes are linked to expected levels of student mastery. An examination of the chapter entitled "Recommended Sequence for Bibliographic and Information Literacy: Teacher Preparation" is a case in point. This reviewer notes that she could easily follow Warner’s framework to evaluate courses within the education curriculum and use some of Warner’s objectives to broaden her information literacy instruction at Appalachian State University.
Warner’s extensive list of references and additional readings will benefit those who wish to read more about this topic. This book will provide ideas for librarians who want to create, expand, or deepen an information literacy program. It is recommended.—Margaret N. Gregor, Appalachian State University.