1. Research on Information Literacy Language Arts Revision Committee Presented by Patti Stevenson Kristin Groninger Terry Morriston December 13, 2007

2. Four Essential Questions Why teach information literacy, particularly in Language Arts? What is the best approach for teaching information literacy? What should be taught and when? What else is the research telling us?

3. “ School library services exert a 10.6% statistically significant impact on student achievement…. The relationship between school library services and student achievement was not negated by other school or community demographics.” Quantitative Resources LLC, 2003 Why teach information literacy….

4. Library factors alone accounted for an increase on state assessments of 3.2%-3.4% at the elementary level 9.2% at the middle school level 7.9% - 19% at the high school level Smith 2006 Why teach information literacy….

5. Iowa reading test scores rise with the development of school library programs. This relationship can not be explained by other school or community conditions (class size, socioeconomic factors, etc.) at the elementary level. Rodney, Lance & Hamilton-Pennell, 2002 Why teach information literacy….

6. In Pennsylvania schools, there is a “positive and statistically significant” relationship between PSSA reading scores and the staffing of the school library. Lance, Rodney and Hamilton-Pennell, 2000 Why teach information literacy….

8. How should information literacy be taught? The research is adamant. Collaboration is the key.

9. How to teach information literacy…. http://www.k12library.info/toolkit/Templates/Levels%20of%20Collaboration%202.PDF

10. “ This study shows that integrated information skills instruction appears to have had a significant positive impact on students’ mastery….” Todd, 1995 Research on Collaboration’s Effect Elementary students who had teachers who collaborated closely with librarians scored 21% higher on the state reading exams than those students who had teachers who didn’t collaborate with librarians. Lance, et. al., 1993, 2000

11. Collaboration at this deep level of thinking will have the most impact on student learning outcomes because it develops critical teaching, which results in critical thinking on the part of students . It also brings together a rich array of resources to enhance the learning of all involved. Collaboration that integrates curriculum is complex and necessitates schoolwide decision making. Montiel-Overall, 2005 Research on Collaboration’s Effect

12. Critical factors in collaboration The Media Center must have flexible scheduling Students from elementary schools with flexible scheduling scored 10% higher in reading and 11% higher in writing than schools without flexible scheduling. HS students showed a 5% improvement . Lance, Rodney and Hamilton-Pennell, 2005 Classes are 4 times more likely to use the library if there is flexible scheduling . Lance, Rodney and Hamilton-Pennell, 2003 “… overwhelming evidence that flexible schedules are more conducive to learning than fixed library hours (Haycock 1998; Callison 1999; Donham, van Deusen, and Tallman 1994) Montiel-Overall, 2005

13. Critical factors of collaboration Research projects must be integrated into the curriculum “ [Library media] collections only make a positive difference when they are part of a school wide initiatives to integrate information literacy ….” Lance, Rodney and Hamilton-Pennell, 2005 “… must be more than a laundry list of isolated skills such as …writing drafts and…searching…the World Wide Web.” Eisenberg, 2002

14. Students must be taught an information literacy process that is used consistently throughout the district “ A disciplined approach to research ….rewards participants with greater search precision, razor-sharp filtering…., credible analytical techniques and…presentation methods.” Solomon, 2005 Research methods that include reflection have also been effective in helping students improve reading and gives teachers a framework to discuss plagiarism. Long, 2007 Critical factors of collaboration Research evidence proves that a process approach improves student mastery of content. Todd, 2002 After a one-year implementation of the Big 6 approach, the percentage of students in one class passing the NY Regents History test went from 53% to 91%. Berkowitz, 2003

17. What else can we learn from the research? Libraries & Literacy Support “ Clear evidence that active reading programs encouraged by the school library can foster higher levels of reading…Research evidence shows that providing opportunities for voluntary reading impacts positively on reading comprehension scores (Elley, 1991; Foertsch, 1992; Krashen, 1993, 2001; Lipscomb, 1993; Digiovanna, 1994; Halliwell, 1995 McQuillen, 1997).” Todd, 2002 In 8 out of 10 studies of SSR programs lasting at least 12 months, students who read recreationally outperformed those who didn’t. Krashen, 2006

18. What else can we learn from the research? Libraries & Critical Thinking Development In the research process, students “are guided through a process of intellectual construction that enables them to build on what they already know and to come to a deeper understanding.” Kuhlthau, 1999 “ Kuhlthau’s research establishes the cognitive, behavioural and affective dimensions of the search process…these stages are critical to ..knowledge construction rather than students merely manipulating …final products. Learners acquire the intellectual scaffolds to engage with multiple perspectives….” Todd, 2003 Success is dependent upon connecting relationships so that the “magnificence exceeds the sum of its parts.” Pink, 2006.

20. In a nutshell… Research proves that libraries and librarians can be lifesavers as we strive to increase student achievement.