"It's in the Syllabus": Identifying Information Literacy and Data Information Literacy Opportunities Using a Grounded Theory Approach

Journal of Academic Librarianship

Volumn 41, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 369-376

  Maybee, Clarence ^a   Carlson, Jake ^b   Slebodnik, Maribeth ^c   Chapman, Bert ^a  

^a PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

Author keywords

Curriculum; Data information literacy; Information literacy; Syllabi

Indexed keywords

EID: 84937164071     PISSN: 00991333     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.acalib.2015.05.009     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Accreditation Council for Education in Nutrition and Dietetics of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics ACEND accreditation standards for dietitian education programs 2015, (Retrieved from http://www.eatrightacend.org/WorkArea/linkit.aspx?LinkIdentifier=id&ItemID=6442485377&lib%20ID=6442485355).
2. Association of College and Research Libraries Information literacy competency standards for higher education 2000, ACRL, Chicago.
3. Author Guidelines Nutrition Reviews 2014, ((Revised, 2014, September). Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.ezproxy.lib.purdue.edu/journal/10.1111/%28ISSN%291753-4887/homepage/ForAuthors.html).
4. Biglan A. Relationships between subject matter characteristics and the structure and output of university departments. Journal of Applied Psychology 1973, 57(3):204-213.
5. Biglan A. The characteristics of subject matter in different scientific areas. Journal of Applied Psychology 1973, 57(3):195-203.
6. Birks M., Mills J. Grounded theory: A practical guide 2011, Sage, London.
7. Boss K., Drabinski E. Evidence-based instruction integration: A syllabus analysis project. Reference Services Review 2014, 42(2):263-276.
8. Carlson J., Fosmire M., Miller C., Sapp Nelson M. Determining data literacy needs: A study of students and research faculty. Libraries and the Academy 2011, 11(2):629-657. Portal.
9. Data literacy: Librarians, data and the education of a new generation of researchers 2015, Purdue University Press, West Lafayette, IN. J. Carlson, L.R. Johnston (Eds.).
10. Coates H.L. Building data services from the ground up: Strategies and resources. Journal of eScience Librarianship 2014, 3(1). (Retrieved from). 10.7191/jeslib.2014.1063.
11. Data Access and Research Transparency (DA-RT) A joint statement by political science journal editors 2014, (Retrieved from http://media.wix.com/ugd/fa8393_da017d3fed824cf587932534c860ea25.pdf).
12. Dewald N.H. Anticipating library use by business students: The uses of a syllabus study. Research Strategies 2003, 19:33-45.
13. Dinkelman A.L. Using course syllabi to assess research expectations of biology majors: Implications for further development of information literacy skills in the curriculum. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship 2010, 60. (Retrieved from http://www.istl.org/10-winter/refereed3.html).
14. Glaser B., Strauss A. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research 1967, Aldine, Chicago.
15. Lattuca L.R., Stark J.S. Will disciplinary perspectives impede curricular reform?. The Journal of Higher Education 1994, 65(4):401-426.
16. Lauer J.D., Merz L.H., Craig S.L. What syllabi reveal about library use: A comparative look at two private academic institutions. Research Strategies 1989, 7(4):167-174.
17. Law and Political Science Section, ACRL Political Science Research Competency Guidelines 2008, (Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/acrl/aboutacrl/directoryofleadership/sections/lpss/lpsswebsite/publications/publications).
18. Law and Political Science Section, ACRL Report: LPSS political science research competency guidelines survey 2014, (Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/acrl/aboutacrl/directoryofleadership/sections/lpss/lpsswebsite/publications/publications).
19. Neumann R. Disciplinary differences and university teaching. Studies in Higher Education 2001, 26(2):135-146.
20. O'Hanlon N. Information literacy in the university curriculum: Challenges for outcomes assessment. Libraries and the Academy 2007, 7(2):169-189. Portal.
21. Peters C., Vaughn P. Initiating data management instruction to graduate students at the University of Houston using the New England Collaborative Data Management Curriculum. Journal of eScience Librarianship 2014, 3(1). (Retrieved from). 10.7191/jeslib.2014.1064.
22. Rambler L.K. Syllabus study: Key to a responsive academic library. Journal of Academic Librarianship 1982, 8(3):155-159.
23. Sayles J.W. Course information analysis: Foundation for creative library support. Journal of Academic Librarianship 1985, 10(6):343-345.
24. Smith C., Doversberger L., Jones S., Ladwig P., Parker J., Pietraszewski B. Using course syllabi to uncover opportunities for curriculum-integrated instruction. Reference & User Services Quarterly 2012, 51(3):263-271.
25. Stark J.S., Lowther M.A., Bentley R.J., Martens G.G. Disciplinary differences in course planning. The Review of Higher Education 1990, 13(2):145-165.
26. Tenopir C., Sandusky R., Allard S., Birch B. Research data management services in academic libraries and perceptions of librarians. Journal of Academic Librarianship 2014, 36(2):84-90. 10.1016/j.lisr.2013.11.003.
27. VanScoy A., Oakleaf M.J. Evidence vs. anecdote: Using syllabi to plan curriculum-integrated information literacy instruction. College & Research Libraries 2008, 69(6):566-575.
28. Webber S., Boon S., Johnston B. A comparison of UK academics' conceptions of information literacy in two disciplines: English and marketing. Library and Information Research 2005, 29(93):4-15.
29. Williams L.M., Cody S.A., Parnell J. Prospecting for new collaborations: Mining syllabi for library service opportunities. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 2004, 30(4):270-275.