The Information Literacy needs of Select Committee researchers (Information Scrutiny series part 2), by Anne-Lise Harding
Anne-Lise is a chartered librarian and currently holds the
position of Senior Liaison Librarian at the House of Commons. With previous
experience in library management in the education sector, Anne-Lise has diverse
experience in systems, collection management, customer service and many more
but is passionate above all about information literacy. As part of her role in
the committee, Anne-Lise attends meetings of the Government Information Group
to ensure a consistent liaison between both groups. When she is not busy
training or working with others to better services, Anne-Lise loves to play
video games, DIY and travelling. There is nothing Anne-Lise enjoys more than
plotting with fellow librarians over a cup of good coffee!
In this guest blog post, Anne-Lise Harding shares some of
the practitioner research she has carried out during her first year working in
the House of Commons library with Select Committees, and the specificities of
their Information Literacy needs.
This blog post was originally published on the Information Literacy Group blog in March 2021.
In the first post in my series on
introducing formal Information Literacy to the work of Select Committees I
discussed scope, audience and finished by asking three questions:
- How do
you train highly competent researchers?
- How do
you enrich fully functioning practices?
- How do
you go beyond traditional, HE-focused Information Literacy?
In this post I will discuss how I
resolved these questions.
How do you train highly competent
researchers?
This was a difficult issue for me to
wrap my head around. I have a background working in academic libraries,
delivering IL instruction mainly to undergraduates. With a heavy focus in the
IL research, I had a community of practice to rely on and students to take on a
well mapped-out learning journey.
In the research I conducted in my
earlier post, I was able to discuss with Select Committee colleagues:
-
Their research practices
-
How they had evolved to suit the needs of the
Select Committee
-
How policy area affects their research
-
The typical running of an inquiry
This allowed me to build broad
profiles to differentiate what interventions to build for each group:
-
Early career generalist
-
Generalist
-
Early career specialist
-
Specialist[1]
Additionally, I investigated the
lifecycle of an inquiry in depth in order to pinpoint the different stages
information literacy-related activities happen and drew out five focuses to
articulate modules around:
-
Identifying information need
-
Searching for information
-
Assessing information
-
Manage information needs
-
Communicating information
Through both activities I had a good
understanding of my primary audience and their research needs.
How do you enrich fully functioning
practices?
This takes me to my next question. Select
Committee researchers are highly competent and already use high-level skills to
support Parliamentary scrutiny.
Here the word enrich is key. As opposed to my previous roles, I am not teaching
anything new, only thinking about best practice in the Information Literacy
field in Select Committees and in carrying out research. The last thing I want
to do is stand in front of an expert crowd and tell them what they already know!
I had to come up with a blend of existing practices and library expertise, but
also find a meaningful element to Select Committees and Parliamentary scrutiny.
Diversity and inclusion are at the
forefront in Parliament. For Select Committees it translates in increasing the
diversity of evidence received, the diversity of witnesses, and the effort to
make everybody able to participate in this democratic process from start to
finish. I felt this was a very relevant to Information Literacy education and
be an effective way to create a relevant curriculum for Select Committee
colleagues.
How do you go beyond traditional,
HE-focused Information Literacy?
With diversity at the heart of
Information Literacy or Information Scrutiny as I have chosen to call it, an
enrichment approach, and the researchers' profiles and focuses were highlighted. I had enough information to build a curriculum offer that pushed the boundaries.
But this is for a next blog post…
[1]
Denotes a research professional with an advanced knowledge and/or qualification
in the policy area they cover.
Another thought-provoking posting Anne-Lise. This is really helpful in shaping thought processes at my own department. Many thanks!
ReplyDelete