Final presentation for 559M Social Media @ SLAIS, UBC

1. Jeff Verbeem LIBR 559M, School of Archival, Library and Information Studies, UBC Information Literacy 2.0: The Instructional Role of Facebook

2. contents Definitions of terms Social media in IL instruction Affordances and Constraints of Facebook Examples of Facebook as IL gateway Example of Facebook as courseware Guidelines Summary

4. The ‘2.0’ suffix has been applied to name the move in various online sectors towards a more interactive, user-centred online presence that fosters creativity.

5. Library 2.0, for example, refers to the range of internet tools that libraries now use to deliver a range of promotional, reference, and instructional services (Carpan, 2010).DEFINITION OF TERMS: Web 2.0

7. not reflecting the new capabilities for creating new content individually or collaboratively as afforded by social media.

8. over-emphasizing discrete skill development (from a preprint of Mackey & Jacobson, 2010) DEFINITION OF TERMS: information literacy 2.0.(IL)

9. Information literacy 2.0 Information Literacy (2.0) encompasses the old competencies as well as those that relate to collaboration and creativity.

11. 84%: to deliver course content

12. 38%: to illustrate IL concepts (From Luo, 2010) Web 2.0 and il instruction

14. Privacy concerns

16. Usability

17. Flexibility

18. Communication

19. Organization

20. Collaboration

21. Creativityfacebook for il instruction

23. subject guides

24. Libguides and online tutorials.

25. library digital reference “Ask a Librarian” service(Mitchell & Watstein, 2007, p. 523)

26. Facebook as courseware Mitchell & Smith (2009) describe adding a Facebook component to their F2F information literacy course at the Z. Smith Reynolds library at Wake Forest University Facebook applications used at WFU: ◦ ZSR Library search (http://apps.facebook.com/searchzsr/) ◦ WorldCat (http://apps.facebook.com/worldcat/) ◦ JSTOR (http://apps.facebook.com/jstorsearch/)

28. reasons for positive response to Facebook included novelty, familiarity with Facebook, and the superior usability of the interface over other course management systems.

29. BUT: limited functionality of Facebook compared with Blackboard, etc and the uncertain division between the personal and academic spheres were identified as drawbacks. Described in Mitchell & Smith, 2009

30. Guidelines FB should work in tandem with other modes of instruction delivery. While limitations of time and space make completely online courses sometimes necessary, even these can be augmented with alternative avenues of communication. While diversity of media can be a good thing, this diversity brings with it the risk of feeling fragmented among different platforms (Mitchell & Smith, 2009). Take advantage of Facebook’s affordance of flexibility to quickly adapt course content and shift direction when necessary (Mitchell & Smith, 2009). Citing loss of data concerns, Mitchell & Smith (2009) argue against putting any crucial content in an uncontrolled environment.

31. Guidelines As with all interactive media, Facebook requires time and effort by administrators to keep content relevant. Time should be spent reflecting on your goals and getting to know your target population, whether they are students in a course or visitors accessing resources from the Facebook platform. On a related note, remember that Facebook is primarily a medium for social and personal interaction. Not all environments would be appropriate for using Facebook. If new to Web 2.0,, do your best to educate yourself about a number of technologies and how they relate to library services.

35. Click, A., & Petit, J. (2010). Social networking and Web 2.0 in information literacy. International Information & Library Review, 42(2), 137-142. doi:10.1016/j.iilr.2010.04.007.

36. Luo, L. (2010). Web 2.0 Integration in Information Literacy Instruction: An Overview. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 36(1), 32-40. Retrieved from Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts with Full Text database.

37. Mitchell, E., & Watstein, S. (2007, November). The places where students and scholars work, collaborate, share and plan. Reference Services Review, pp. 521-524. Retrieved from Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts with Full Text database.

38. Mitchell, E., & Smith, S. (2009). Bringing Information Literacy into the Social Sphere: A Case Study Using Social Software to Teach Information Literacy at WFU. Journal of Web Librarianship, 3(3), 183-197. doi:10.1080/19322900903113381.

39. O’Reilly, T. (2005, September) What is Web 2.0. [web log comment] Retrieved from http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html

41. Mackey, P. and Jacobsen, T. (2010). PREPRINT of: Reframing Information Literacy as a Metaliteracy. College and Research Libraries, Anticipated Publication Date: January 2011 Retrieved from http://api.ning.com/files/kCBYlBVOpZhEdjomANEXEVTHPrEIWM5YVYCzFlRvxWj*uMwM8nhiR38wIg9RgGRo2D8hY8azVlHvzKAwTT1OXM0hAqnlnAEd/metaliteracy.pdf

43. Social media bandwagon by Matt Hamm at http://www.flickr.com/photos/matthamm/2945559128/sizes/m/in/photostream/