Information Literacy Instructional Practices Among Academic

Librarians Within the Asia and Asia-Pacific Region:

A Comparative Analysis

Dayang Norsheila Abang Mohtar

and Fitri Suraya Mohamad

Faculty of Cognitive Sciences and Human Development, Universiti Malaysia Sarawak,

Kota Samarahan, Sarawak, Malaysia

Keywords: Academic Librarian, Information Literacy, Higher Education, University, TPACK.

Abstract: This study examined the level of understanding needed by academic librarians working at university libraries

in Asia and Asia-Pacific to produce practical teaching skills in Information Literacy (IL) courses. Data were

analysed using Braun and Clarke's 2006 thematic analysis approach. Respondents were those teaching IL at

five universities in Malaysia, one in Singapore, and one in New Zealand. Analysis indicated stark differences

in how IL is taught in all participating universities. The findings helped identify the challenges faced by

librarians as a result of the behavioural change brought about by 21st-century learners in higher education

institutions which led respondents to question their teaching efficacy and how their work as informed

instructors in delivering IL module content to students have informed the shifting roles of academic librarians

in teaching IL.

1 INTRODUCTION

Pedagogical shifts across the globe have created a

challenge for higher education institutions to produce

competent graduates who are lifelong learners

(Abeyrathne & Ekanayake, 2019). Students need to

prepare themselves with lifelong learning skills

(Kumar & Surendran, 2015), and academic librarians

need to assist them in learning these abilities and

promote the mentioned roles to recognise the

Information Literacy (IL) professors’ top-quality

instructional practices.

Librarians must consider how appropriate and

beyond conventional instructional methods affect

students' learning engagement and outcomes when

delivering IL skills teachings (Eke et al., 2010). This

study explored whether academic librarians have

sufficient knowledge and understanding about

learning theories and commonly used Technological

Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK)

framework to teach IL and prepare for 21st-century

skills, active learning, and innovative pedagogical

skills.

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8287-5315

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4460-8061

The TPACK framework defines the knowledge

necessary for teachers to integrate technology into

teaching and learning, consisting of Technological

Knowledge (TK), Pedagogical Knowledge (PK), and

Content Knowledge (CK) (Mishra, 2019). TK is

knowledge of conventional and sophisticated

technologies, PK is knowledge of teaching and

learning processes, and CK is knowledge of the

subject matter to be taught (Mishra & Koehler, 2006).

TPACK is later upgraded with the inclusion of

Contextual Knowledge, teachers' knowledge of the

context, ranging from the school, district, state or

national policies they operate within (Mishra, 2019).

2 RELATED WORK

2.1 Roles of Academic Librarians in IL

and Instruction

Academic librarians’ roles have shifted from

directing learners to the appropriate sources of

information to facilitating them and ensuring they

434

Abang Mohtar, D. and Mohamad, F.

Information Literacy Instructional Practices Among Academic Librarians Within the Asia and Asia-Paciﬁc Region: A Comparative Analysis.

DOI: 10.5220/0011987300003470

In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2023) - Volume 2, pages 434-441

ISBN: 978-989-758-641-5; ISSN: 2184-5026

 2023 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. Under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

actively participate in the process of identifying,

finding, evaluating, applying, and acknowledging

information. However, librarians are unprepared for

this shifting role as informed educators

(Montgomery, 2015). Wilson (1979) stated that

although librarians are forced to educate, teaching is

not part of their professional responsibility. Peele

(1984) also argued that librarians must be well-versed

in various fields to be effective agents of knowledge

structure.

Academic librarians are responsible for teaching

the IL skills required to discover, access, and utilise

information (Fernandez-Ramos, 2019, as cited in

Moin Ud Din et al., 2022) as they are essential for

teaching university students bibliographic, research,

and critical thinking skills (Hess, 2020) while

ensuring that librarians' IL skills are parallel to users'

technological needs (Moin Ud Din et al., 2022).

Librarians should teach IL skills to ensure students

are well-versed in them and implement learning

theories to improve instruction and user interactions

(Guder, 2010). Mashiyane et al. (2020) found that

only a few librarians used technological tools in their

IL instruction due to a lack of infrastructure and poor

tool skills in South Africa. University librarians in

Islamabad, Pakistan were confident in their IL skills,

such as searching for information, locating sources,

and using computer applications and Microsoft

Office products.

Librarians used their best methods to teach

students to become information-literate, but

Montgomery (2015) and Elmborg (2012) expressed

disappointment that librarians are not well-groomed

to become informed educators. Librarians with close

ties to academics are better equipped to use IL

teaching techniques and incorporate new theoretical

perspectives as pedagogy courses are not mandatory

(Hodge, 2015).

2.2 21

-Century Learners and

Learner-Centred Approach

21st-century learners are independent learners who

should focus on gaining experiences and knowledge,

striving to remain current, and learning as time passes

(Das, 2021). However, they may need research

confidence and IL skills which are essential for

academic performance and life skills (Bond, 2016).

Learner-centred learning is an essential concept for

librarians, focusing on what students do to promote

their learning rather than what instructors do. IL

training can be problem-based, project-based, or

inquiry-based (An & Mindrila, 2020), and requires

more dynamic and appealing instructional

experiences (Aharony et al., 2019). The lack of time

allotted to IL training impede the implementation of

more effective teaching methods (Schachter, 2018).

2.3 Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Emerging Tools

Academics and researchers increasingly use online

library digital sources due to the transformation in

information and communication networks. They offer

practical values based on current technologies

(Komosany & Alnwaimi, 2021) and emphasise the

emergence of AI tools in academic libraries

(Vijayakumar & Sheshadri, 2019). AI adoption by

libraries has been part of library services, such as

Chatbots and Text and Data Mining. Chatbots are

able to imitate intelligent conversations and provide

direct answers to predictable enquiries, offering 24-

hour response availability and consistency. The

chatbot tool offers a user-friendly experience for

students (Vincze, 2017).

3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The objectives of this case study are:

1) To investigate the current practices among

academic librarians responsible for

information literacy.

2) To identify academic librarians’ knowledge

about learning theories for better IL teaching

practices.

3) To identify the theoretical knowledge of

librarians about technological knowledge,

pedagogical knowledge, and content

knowledge when teaching IL

4) To investigate the awareness and

preparation towards 21

-century skills,

active learning, and innovative pedagogical

skills.

4 RESEARCH DESIGN

This study used a qualitative method to distribute

open-ended questions among academic librarians

responsible for IL teaching and learning. Part 1

focused on typical IL practices among librarians, Part

2 emphasised on components of the TPACK

framework, to determine how the teaching is

conducted. The last three sections, i.e. 21st-Century

Learning Skills, Innovative Pedagogical Skills, and

Active Learning focused on level of awareness in

Information Literacy Instructional Practices Among Academic Librarians Within the Asia and Asia-Paciﬁc Region: A Comparative Analysis

435

each aspect, followed by preparedness towards

adapting these skills in teaching IL.

5 METHODS

The data for this study was obtained in 2019 and

2020. This study used a qualitative approach to

collect data from academic librarians' responses to

open-ended questions about teaching and learning,

components of the TPACK framework, 21

-century

learning skills, Active Learning and innovative

pedagogical skills. These librarians are among those

who teach IL skills at their respective universities.

Lengthier replies were received for questions on

teaching and learning while more direct questions like

existing IL practices received shorter responses. Only

8 out of 34 respondents from 7 university libraries in

Asia and the Asia-Pacific area volunteered to

participate in this survey. Data were collected within

six months and analysed using Quirkos. Inductive

analysis was implemented as the data interpretation

method and thematic analysis was conducted using

Braun and Clarke's (2006) six-step guide. The themes

identified in the inductive approach are firmly linked

to the data retrieved (Patton, 1990 as cited in Braun

& Clarke, 2006).

6 PARTICIPANTS/ SAMPLING

CRITERIA

This study focused on librarians working at university

libraries in Asia and Asia-Pacific, specifically those

with experience in teaching IL. 8 participants were

recruited from different universities in Malaysia,

Singapore, and New Zealand, all of whom were

familiar with Information Literacy courses. Purposive

sampling was used to select participants according to

the purpose of the research. This group helps us gain

insight into several perspectives of IL-related matters

experienced by librarians.

7 RESULTS

Six themes were identified throughout the thematic

analysis of the open-ended survey, namely teaching

skills, teaching skills awareness, teaching and

learning impact, module design, teaching and

learning preparation and teaching challenges. This

section discusses how librarians engage themselves in

IL-related responsibilities from various perspectives.

7.1 Teaching Skills

Malaysian universities have IL-teaching librarians,

liaison librarians and librarians from specified units

or branch libraries, while non-Malaysian participants

have Education Services and Learning Innovation

(ESLI) cluster and Subject Librarians to support

teaching and learning. Participants used similar

tactics in addressing students' inquiries during IL

classes, with students encouraged to ask related

questions to ensure they understand the lesson and are

on the right path. Two participants preferred to take

questions during and after class. One said that some

questions require to be answered offline or to speak

to students in person after class. It supports Thorn's

(2022) best practice article, suggesting that librarians

should research articles and ask questions to meet

adult learners' needs, which informs the

implementation of Active Learning in IL's teaching

and learning sessions (Maybee et al., 2016).

Teaching IL tests librarians' confidence in using

technology to teach, with some claiming to be

competent and others seeing it as a learning

experience. They stated, “We’re still learning and

still trying to find the perfect set of tools. The Library

has recently created a role of Digital Media Assistant

which will aid the creation of these modules and have

the required technical skills”, and “Not so confident.

Because the librarians are not using them in daily

basis”. Responses illustrate the need to learn 21st-

century skills and attend appropriate training or gain

skills to provide better services (Eke et al., 2010).

Librarians are adopting their best teaching

techniques without adequate training in educational

theories or pedagogical practices. IL teaching

experience allows participants to self-assess their

teaching abilities, which are adequate and suit IL

content delivery (Montgomery, 2015). Most

participants reported that their teaching was

influenced by students’ class behaviour, creativity,

level of education, student feedback, student group,

librarians’ teaching skills, and librarians’ teaching

experience. However, two participants responded

differently, “My teaching strategies are guided by

what I am teaching, the time given and the student

level and discipline (e.g. 1st years are very different

compared to 3rd years; Humanities students are

different from Engineering students). Generally, I

take a hands-on approach. Give students an activity

or an exercise to do first before giving them the

principles behind it. Also, any explanation or lectures

should not be more than 15min. If I have more time, I

will prefer to guide my students to come up with the

principles on their own”, and “We have a teaching

CSEDU 2023 - 15th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

436

template that can be used to develop a session based

on the learning outcomes. Any strategy will be based

on those outcomes. We used to have a formal

strategic library learning and teaching strategy,

however, we now defer to the University one”. The

response alludes to a need to improve the roles of

librarians throughout their professional careers as

lifelong learners for better teaching skills (American

Library Association, 2022).

Findings also indicated that participants prepared

for 21st-century skills by using technology,

incorporating new knowledge, developing interactive

modules, and holding online classes. However, two

individuals responded that they were unsure, and one

opted to apply flexibility to the mentioned skills. The

responses implied the necessity for librarians to

develop themselves to become lifelong learners and

to be skilled in shaping students into lifelong learners.

Malaysian participants prepared for this by creating

learning activities and holding quizzes and Q&A

sessions during IL classes. They also encouraged

students to interrupt during learning sessions,

increasing learner participation and holding forum

discussions. One indicated that Active Learning is not

an option at her workplace, while another remarked

that librarians should consider it for learning

evaluations. This study supports Korber and

Shepherd's (2019) finding that IL training has yield

favourable outcomes since adopting Active Learning.

According to Detlor et al. (2012), active IL

instruction directly influences student learning

outcomes, while passive IL instruction does not.

However, some educators may find it challenging to

accept Active Learning strategies, as may

instructional librarians who believe it will result in

time constraints (Korber & Shepherd, 2019). Detlor

et al. (2012) also stated that Active Learning had been

demonstrated to provide positive learning outcomes

among students due to their participation during the

learning process.

Being inventive in teaching IL can be challenging.

One participant chose to create IL educational

materials and teaching strategies. Two participants

chose to include more technology in their classroom

instruction. The remaining participants chose the

Backward design method when teaching IL. The

findings suggest that librarians should consider new

techniques for teaching IL. However, it is argued in

the literature that librarians should consider broader

perspectives and align teaching and learning activities

with institutional goals when redesigning IL

education (Corrall & Jolly, 2020).

7.2 Teaching Skills Awareness

The study found that university requirements,

librarians' ideas, top management instructions and

tools, and the most recent trend all influenced

participants' use of technology in teaching IL.

However, Hanbidge et al. (2016) in their study on

mobile technology usage for IL skills improvement

and learning experience found that only 11% of

participants used mobile devices to search for

academic-related information.

Librarians should be aware of their students'

learning preferences to meet their needs, and it was

found that five participants met this criterion.

However, one chose not to cater to it 100% by

mentioning “No, I don’t think we meet all the

learning styles of the students. If it is a one-shot ILP,

it is not possible to meet all styles due to the limitation

of time”. Another participant conducted surveys and

sought feedback from course coordinators, tutors and

subject librarians. This research has demonstrated the

beneficial influence of IL skills on students' academic

achievement. However, learning styles cannot help

students gain a deeper understanding and retention of

learning (Intan Azura Mokhtar et al., 2008).

For best content delivery methods, 4 participants

opined that librarians should be up-to-date with the

latest technologies in the Library Science field, be

prepared to modify content delivery based on

experience and feedback, and be open to having

colleagues observe each other teach and learn. One

argued that teaching should not be limited to one hour

or less, and the other suggested knowledge of learning

frameworks and objectives. Intan Azura Mokhtar et

al. (2008), in their study, specified that IL instruction

must be integrated with educational technology to

ensure students and instructors benefit from their

learning and also inform them as information literate.

In self-evaluation, all participants had sufficient

knowledge regarding this matter. There were also

suggestions from librarians on the modules that need

to be improved, such as “Citing and Referencing”,

“E-Resources”, “Publication”, “Mendeley”,

“Searching Techniques” and “Referencing”. One

participant stated that work-in-progress modules

constantly change due to amendments, feedback, and

requirements from librarians, students, and lecturers.

All study respondents expressed their initiatives

to reconstruct their IL modules based on students'

feedback, except for one Malaysian participant. The

factors which drove such effort include students' level

of understanding being challenging to pre-determine,

and instances of information overload in one session,

leading to difficulty in accepting the content being

Information Literacy Instructional Practices Among Academic Librarians Within the Asia and Asia-Paciﬁc Region: A Comparative Analysis

437

taught. However, another respondent argued that their

modules were based on what the librarians thought

should be constructed at once. The content of IL

modules is updated according to the needs of students

and the university, and the syllabus can be changed at

any time. Results showed that two participants

conducted the realignment and syllabus

improvements annually or whenever the need arose,

while others kept to a routine in which their module

was updated twice a year. The respondents also

indicated that when new modules needed to be added

to the existing ones and four agreed they would work

on it immediately. Three participants opined that new

modules could be added when needed, while only one

participant found it unnecessary to add new modules.

Respondents were generally satisfied with the content

of their IL modules, except for one non-Malaysian

participant. However, all agreed that the current

content is relevant and meets the student's learning

needs. Indian research indicated that librarians and

teachers should organise and prepare an IL module

based on course material and accessible resources as

it will help users become more information literate

and increase library utilisation (Vishala, 2017).

7.3 Teaching and Learning Impact

According to the Association of College and

Research Libraries (ACRL), IL establishes the

foundation of lifelong learning and helps learners to

master information and extend their studies (Stellah

et al., 2022). Students learning measurement is

determined by the impact of IL classes conducted by

each library. Three respondents measured student

satisfaction through students' level of satisfaction,

another two based on students' performance, and one

from a class survey, better usage of resources,

improved information searching and citation skills,

and plagiarism awareness. IL classes improve

students' learning experiences and serve as a tool for

lifelong learning, with different learning activities

such as quizzes, hands-on activities, assignments,

exercises, worksheets, peer discussions, and informal

assessments. However, two non-Malaysian

participants argued that IL classes do not measure

student learning outcomes and success.

7.4 Module Design

When creating an IL module, it is vital to understand

how it is designed and developed to inform the type

of content and how librarians go about it. Two

Malaysian participants developed modules based on

the Big 6 Model and SCONUL 7 Pillars. In contrast,

another Malaysian participant referred to the

Australia and New Zealand Information Literacy

Framework, Guideline on Information Literacy for

Lifelong Learning (IFLA), and ACRL's Information

Competency Standards for Higher Education.

However, non-Malaysian participants argued that

their IL modules are designed according to their

needs and not based on any model or framework,

depending on the library’s goals for its students.

Moreover, findings revealed that Malaysian

university libraries are structured by a variety of

elements, such as previous practises, updated

subscribed sources, discussion among librarians,

input from librarians' readings, input from a seminar,

best practices from others, students' feedback,

instructions from mother campus, and IFLA

standards. Students' information needs are a

significant factor in the development of IL modules

in Malaysian university libraries, with modules at

another library being constructed using the IL

framework from other libraries.

7.5 Teaching and Learning

Preparation

Librarians should attend training for technology tools

before teaching IL classes. According to the findings,

six individuals attended the training, while two did

not. Results showed that one participant prepared

subject-related examples, two focused on database

updates, teaching aids, and teaching venues, one

prepared for presentation slide updates, facility

checks, and Internet connection, and one checked and

updated library module content and ensured that

research tools were functioning well. Non-Malaysian

participants focused more on time allocated for each

IL session, class size, and lesson content, while

another emphasised determining IL objectives with

the course coordinator. The last two focused more on

lesson plan preparation. Interestingly, a Canadian

national survey found that librarians completed

formal teaching courses to prepare for the teaching

job and read and attend professional or research

literature and workshops (Julien & Genuis, 2011).

Furthermore, results showed that librarians'

strategies for IL lesson arrangements differed, except

for one technique that two individuals shared:

matching their lessons with library aims. One

participant follows the instructional method besides

evaluating students' information needs, collecting

relevant materials, and providing research tools for

the learning process, while another creates an outline

of the session's content, establishes the calendar for

lessons, and identifies class attendees. Non-

CSEDU 2023 - 15th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

438

Malaysian participants spend more time designing

and creating modules, revamping old modules,

meeting with the course coordinator for discussion,

and cooperating or co-presenting with one of the

university's complementary central services. The

remaining participants believe it is essential to focus

on their lesson plan.

Librarians must develop 21st-century skills,

Active Learning, and creative pedagogical abilities to

teach effectively. Malaysian participants expressed

different opinions on the importance of attending

relevant courses, enhancing knowledge and skills,

adhering to lifelong learning principles, reading more

articles, joining a support group on social media, and

associating with experts. The remaining participants

stated that it is essential to incorporate media literacy

in IL modules and apply critical thinking through

questioning skills. However, findings of a study by

Dixon-Thomas (2012) indicated that librarians and

faculty must collaborate to expand IL instruction and

assessment into the college curriculum and use 21st-

century technological tools to better prepare college

students for global communication, workforce, and

lifelong learning.

The findings suggest that librarians must become

familiar with Active Learning and ways to utilise it in

teaching IL. One participant associates Active

Learning with improved communication abilities,

while another sees it as part of the trial-and-error

process in the learning modules, while two believed

that Active Learning might recognise different types

of students. Besides a learning route within online

modules, one non-Malaysian participant suggested

that librarians should be mindful of Active Learning

while constructing an evaluation or feedback for

learning. The remaining participant has a different

perspective, claiming that IL modules are not

organised enough without this capability.

Active Learning may be related to pedagogical

skills in teaching instruction. Librarians may or may

not be familiar with innovative pedagogical skills

because formal teaching is not required within the

industry. However, each participant has expressed a

distinct point of view on the subject. The findings

revealed that each Malaysian participant had a unique

point of view on the subject. It was found that

librarians needed to be well-versed in pedagogy to

establish or innovate ways of teaching and learning.

Additionally, librarians must have expanded IT

abilities to give interactive presentations and tutorials,

and they should be encouraged to study books and

articles on the subject to better grasp the expertise.

Non-Malaysian participants, on the other hand, had

differing perspectives on the subject, with librarians

keeping pedagogy in mind and that the learning

designer (subject librarian) can specify the type of

approach to be taken in designing their teaching

strategy, and are being encouraged to attend

workshops hosted by the Centre for Development of

Teaching and Learning to stay current on innovative

pedagogical skills.

Technology facilitates the transmission of

material and tools to teach students IL skills. The

findings revealed that all participants used technology

tools to teach IL courses. One participant used

EndNote for citation, the library website to search for

e-resources, and PowerPoint presentations for

instruction. One uses EndNote for a similar purpose

and additional unmentioned tools are utilised based

on the appropriate IL module. Another participant

used PCs or laptops for hands-on training, PowToon

and PowerPoint slides for library briefing, SlideShare

or videos for lesson notes, and Kahoot to complete

projects linked to any single IL module. The other

uses online databases to look for resources, such as

online journals, and e-books, in addition to Mendeley

for citations and references and Turnitin for

conducting similarity checks. Two participants also

mentioned using other technologies like YouTube,

Google Forms, Kahoot, and Moodle. YouTube serves

as a venue for students to post video assignments,

Google Forms is utilised for feedback, Kahoot is used

for pertinent IL activities, and Moodle acts as a

learning platform. One of the remaining participants

employs various technologies in the IL learning

sessions, including Learning Management System

(LMS), Kahoot, H5P, Adobe Captivate, PowToon,

Video Scribe, and PowerPoint. The LMS acts as a

platform for disseminating learning resources or

engaging students in their learning activities, whilst

the other technologies work to engage students, in

learning activities to increase learning or to support

flipped classes. The final participant had a distinct set

of tools, such as PowerPoint, Adobe Creative Cloud,

Camtasia, Audacity, Panopto, Quizlet, and Qualtrics.

These tools were used to create storyboards, videos,

and audio recording, and administer quizzes.

Participants were asked if additional technical tools

may be appropriate for IL modules. The findings

suggest that Massive Online Open Courses

(MOOCs), Smart Sparrow, and Adobe Captivate are

appropriate for IL programmes. Local participants

also suggested grammar checker tools and statistical

tools for study and data analysis and one of the non-

local participants mentioned that Smart Sparrow and

Adobe Captivate are suitable for IL courses.

However, one local and one non-local participant did

Information Literacy Instructional Practices Among Academic Librarians Within the Asia and Asia-Paciﬁc Region: A Comparative Analysis

439

not believe that any potential tool could be used in

any IL module.

7.6 Teaching Challenges

Findings revealed that technology tools are the most

critical factor contributing to IL teaching issues, and

Malaysian librarians have opinions on the need to

expand their expertise and comprehension of

technology tools. However, one participant is

undecided and another stated that such knowledge

and expertise are unnecessary for librarians. Results

also revealed challenges librarians face, which

include difficulty dealing with students of varying

levels of competency, incompatibility with research

tools, difficulty accepting the tools, and passive

students who cannot cope with online learning. Non-

local participants reported that they do not teach

students to use technological tools besides

encountering audio and video problems.

Libraries should retain professional librarians to

develop and share information to meet students'

demands. Continuous Professional Development

(CPD) is essential for information professionals in

academic libraries to retain current skill levels to cope

with emerging ICTs (Abdelrahman, 2009).

8 CONCLUSION

This study revealed a glimpse of how knowledge and

practice gaps exist among librarians and their

teaching methods in the Asia and Asia-Pacific

environments. However, there was a limitation in the

number of participants who agreed. Future work will

include more participants being recruited to build on

the findings. It is also recommended to add time for

IL classes, so librarians to become more up-to-date

with technological tools, receive adequate training on

the tools, be introduced and familiarised with

pedagogy, and have the ability to transform theory

into practice.

With the emerging advancements in AI in

education, academic librarians must use AI to help

students understand strategies to use information and

create a meaningful learning experience. The study

presented how librarians have individual ways of

applying knowledge to help students become

information-literate, and their current challenge is to

improve their knowledge and skills further to ensure

the effectiveness of their IL classes.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors wish to thank Universiti Malaysia

Sarawak – Research, Innovation and Enterprise

Centre and Centre for Graduate Studies, for their

invaluable support to enable the conduct of this study.

REFERENCES

Abdelrahman, O. H. (2009, October 5-8). The state of ICT

implementation and training at the University of

Khartoum library system (UKLIS) [Paper

presentation]. International Conference on Academic

Libraries 2009, New Delhi, India. https://www.

semanticscholar.org/paper/The-State-of-ICT-Impleme

ntation-and-Training-at-theAbdelrahman/3f71872e896

1c91c168eb1d3 f7b0d2783ce7527b

Abeyrathne, D. K., & Ekanayake, S. Y. (2019). The role of

academic librarians for augmenting self-directed

learning in higher education. The Reference Librarian,

60(1), 14-28.

Aharony, N., Julien, H., & Nadel-Kritz, N. (2019). Survey

of information literacy instructional practices in

academic libraries. Journal of Librarianship and

Information Science 52(4), 964-971.

American Library Association. (2022). Roles and strengths

of teaching librarians. Association of College Research

Libraries. https://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/teachingl

ibra rians

An, Y., & Mindrila, D. (2020). Strategies and tools used for

learner-centered instruction. International Journal of

Technology in Education and Science 4(2), 133-143.

Bond, P. (2016). Addressing information literacy through

student-centered learning. Education for Information

32(2016), 3-9.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in

psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3(2):

77-101.

Corrall, S. & Jolly, L. (2020). Innovations in learning and

teaching in academic libraries: Alignment,

collaboration, and the social turn. New Review of

Academic Librarianship 25(2-4): 113-128.

Das, S. (2021). Characteristics of 21

century learners: Role

of teacher education in India. International Education

& Research Journal 7(8): 10-12.

Detlor, B., Brooker, L., Serenko, A. & Julien. H. (2012).

Student perceptions of information literacy instruction:

The importance of active learning. Education for

Information 29(2): 147-161.

Dixon-Thomas, C. (2012). Information literacy and the 21

century academic librarian: A Delphi study [Master’s

thesis, Capella University]. https://www.proquest.

com/pagepdf/922671414 /Record/A989F222859E4C

94PQ/1?accountid= 40705

Eke, H. N., Orji, D. I., & Abraham O. C. (2010). Quickies

for the 21

century librarian: 1-7.

CSEDU 2023 - 15th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

440

Elmborg, J. (2012). Critical information literacy:

Definitions and challenges. In Wilkinson, C. W.,

& Bruch, C. (Eds.), Transforming information literacy

programs: Intersecting frontiers of self, library culture,

and campus community (pp.75-95). The Association of

College & Research Libraries.

Guder, C. (2010). Patrons and pedagogy: A look at the

theory of connectivism. Public Services Quarterly 6(1):

36-42.

Hanbidge, A. S., Tin, T., & Sanderson. N. (2016).

Information literacy on the go! Adding mobile to an

age-old challenge. Journal of Information Literacy

12(1): 118-136.

Hess, A. N. (2020). Teaching identities and work

experiences: Exploring relationships to support

perspective transformation in information literacy

instruction. Journal of Library Administration 60(4):

331-353.

Hodge, M. (2015). Pedagogy for librarians. VCU Libraries

Faculty and Staff Publications: 1-16.

Intan Azura Mokhtar, Shaheen Majid, & Foo, S. (2008).

Teaching information literacy through learning styles:

The application of Gardner’s multiple intelligences.

Journal of Librarianship and Information Science

40(2): 93-109.

Julien, H., & Genuis, S. K. (2011). Librarians’ experiences

of the teaching role: A national survey of librarians.

Library & Information Science Research 33(2011):

103-111.

Komosany, N. A., & Alnwaimi, G. R. (2021). Emerging

technologies in academic libraries: Artificial

intelligence and big data. International Transaction

Journal of Engineering, Management, & Applied

Sciences & Technologies 12(4): 1-17.

Korber, I., & Shepherd, J. (2019). Teaching the information

literacy framework: Creating choose-your-own-advent

ure flip-books. Reference Services Review 47(4): 461-

475.

Kumar, S. K., & Surendran, B. (2015). Information literacy

for lifelong learning. International Journal of Library

and Information Studies 5(2): 130-137.

Mashiyane, D. M., Bangani, S., & Deventer, K. V. (2020).

The awareness and application of multimedia tools for

information literacy instruction at an African

University. The Electronic Library 38(4): 711-724.

Maybee, C., Doan, T., & Flierl, M. (2016). Information

literacy in the active learning classroom. Journal of

Academic Librarianship 42(6): 705-711.

Mishra, P. (2019). Considering contextual knowledge: The

TPACK diagram gets an upgrade. Journal of Digital

Learning in Teacher Education: 1-3.

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological

pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for

teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record 108(6): 1

017-1054.

Moin Ud Din, G., Mairaj, M. I., & Sheikh, A. (2022).

Information literacy instruction in university libraries

of Islamabad, Pakistan: A study of librarians’

perceptions, practices, barriers, and strategies. The

Electronic Library 40(6): 698-711.

Montgomery, M. (2015). Pedagogy for practical library

instruction: What do we really need to know?

Communications in Information Literacy 9(1): 19-23.

Peele, D. (1984). Librarians as teachers: Some reality

mostly myth. Journal of Academic Librarianship 10(5):

267-270.

Schachter, D. (2018, August 24-30). Critical information

literacy teaching in British Columbia academic libraries

[Paper presentation]. 2018 IFLA World Library and

Information Congress, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. http://

library.ifla.org/2151/1/116-schachter-en.pdf.

Stellah, B., Namande, B., & Wabwire, J. (2022). Strategies

used to impart information literacy skills among library

users at the Catholic University of Eastern Africa,

Kenya. Scholars Journals of Arts, Humanities and

Social Sciences 10(6): 249-254.

Thorn, J. (2022). How librarian involvement enhances

students’ information literacy. Nordic Journal of

Information Literacy in Higher Education 13(1): 63 -

70.

Vijayakumar, S., & Sheshadri, K. N. (2019). Applications

of artificial intelligence in academic libraries.

International Journal of Computer Sciences and

Engineering 7(16): 136-140.

Vincze, J. (2017). Virtual reference librarians (chatbots).

Library Hi Tech News 4(2017): 5-8.

Vishala, B. K. (2017, April 27-28). Information literacy

module for college libraries in India [Paper

presentation]. National Conference on Professionalism

in Library and Information Services for User

Empowerment: Opportunities and Challenges 2017,

Mangalore, India. https://www.researchgate.net/

publication/31892 2046_INFORMATION_LITERAC

Y_MODUL E_FOR_COLLEGE_LIBRARIES_IN_

INDIA

Wilson, P. (1979). Librarians as teachers: The study of an

organisation fiction. The Library Quarterly k49(2):

146-162.

Information Literacy Instructional Practices Among Academic Librarians Within the Asia and Asia-Paciﬁc Region: A Comparative Analysis

441