The Collision of Two Lexicons: Librarians, Composition Instructors and the Vocabulary of Source Evaluation

Abstract

the terms of the Creative CommonsAttribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike License 4.0 International (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-ncsa/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly attributed, not used for commercial purposes, and, if transformed, the resulting work is redistributed under the same or similar license to this one. AbstractObjective -The study has two aims. The first is to identify words and phrases from information literacy and rhetoric and composition that students used to justify the comparability of two sources. The second is to interpret the effectiveness of students' application of these evaluative vocabularies and explore the implications for librarians and first-year composition instructors' collaborations.Methods -A librarian and a first-year composition instructor taught a class on source evaluation using the language of information literacy, composition, and rhetorical analysis (i.e., classical, Aristotelian, rhetorical appeals). Students applied the information learned from the instruction session to help them locate and select two sources of comparable genre and rigor for the purpose Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 2016, 11.1 24 of an essay assignment. The authors assessed this writing assignment for students' evaluative diction to identify how they could improve their understanding of each other's discourse. Results -The authors' analysis of the student writing sample exposes struggles in how students understand, apply, and integrate the jargon of information literacy and rhetoric and composition. Assessment shows that students chose the language of rhetoric and composition rather than the language of information literacy, they selected the broadest and/or vaguest terms to evaluate their sources, and they applied circular reasoning when justifying their choices. When introduced to analogous concepts or terms between the two discourses, students cherry-picked the terms that allowed for the easiest, albeit, least-meaningful evaluations.Conclusion -The authors found that their unfamiliarity with each other's discourse revealed itself in both the class and the student writing. They discovered that these miscommunications affected students' language use in their written source evaluations. In fact, the authors conclude that this oversight in addressing the subtle differences between the two vocabularies was detrimental to student learning. To improve communication and students' source evaluation, the authors consider developing a common vocabulary for more consistency between the two lexicons.

Teaching and Un-Teaching Source Evaluation: Questioning Authority in Information Literacy Instruction

“…Traditionally, librarians provided students with a checklist of indicators common to evaluation, such as accuracy, reliability, and purpose. There has been increased criticism of this method, primarily because it does not authentically address student information needs or encourage a multifaceted retrieval process (Carter & Aldridge, 2016). Mathson and Lorenzen (2008) devised a unique approach to teaching critical evaluation skills.…”

Preparing For College: The Effects Of High School Speech Experience On Critical Thinking, Information Literacy, Communication Apprehension, And College Preparedness

“…Information literacy instruction needs to come from the collaborative effort of instructors and librarians (Herakova, Bonnet, & Congdon, 2017). Collaboration is essential to ensuring that classroom instructors and librarians are using the same, or similar, lexicon when describing the research process (Carter & Aldridge, 2016). One study (Natalle & Crowe, 2013) Specifically, the researchers asked students to complete three tutorials prior to visiting the library, provided instruction after students had chosen a research topic, and both the librarian and the course instructor provided feedback on a research worksheet.…”

“…Assignments in the basic course call on students to challenge those beliefs. Moreover, Carter and Aldridge (2016) warned that students need instruction that goes beyond a traditional checklist of indicators to evaluate the credibility of a source. They argued that students do not develop the ability to discern between sources without in-depth instruction which includes questioning preconceived notions about a given source.…”

“…The instructor may emphasize information literacy skills and collaborate with a librarian or other media specialist to develop curricula. The collaborative relationship between instructors and librarians is essential to the development of information literacy skills(Carter & Aldridge, 2016; Herkeva et al, 2017;Natalle & Crowe, 2013). Second, an elective course may focus more on the delivery of speeches and the development of theory.…”