.flickr-photo { border: solid 2px #000000; }
.flickr-yourcomment { }
.flickr-frame { text-align: left; padding: 3px; }
.flickr-caption { font-size: 0.8em; margin-top: 0px; }
I was in a meeting yesterday as part of a group assembling orientation and self-help materials for students. A point that came up was how best to describe resources concerning how to identify, assess and analyze online information. There’s the old standby, “information literacy” — but interestingly enough the librarians in the room suggested that a less intimidating (or perhaps less formal) term would be preferable. To a lesser extent, there was a concern that the existing approach does not really address the issues raised by the increasingly emergent and socially constructed nature of online information.
Of course, the subject of “information literacy” has been around for some time… which may be cited as an argument either for or against the notion of another term.
In any event, I’m stumped.
That’s easy! Lit 2.0!
Isn’t (and has always beeb) all information always “emergent and socially constructed”? Online this just happens in a time span we can more easily follow and understand.
Fair enough Teemu, I guess I’m referring to the new dynamics that emphasize those elements. And I guess it was my way of saying that most traditional information literacy guidelines don’t seem to account for the new forms that information is taking.