Reframing Information Literacy Competency Standards and Frameworks for Higher Education in the Age of Artificial Intelligence
Abstract
rocking the academic landscape worldwide.1 Generative AI is an artificial intelligence technology
that uses large language models and deep learning technology to generate new content, including
text, images, audio or video.2 According to OpenAI (https://openai.com/), ChatGPT stands for
Generative Pre-Trained Transformer. Based on a large language model, ChatGPT is an AI-powered
chatbot generating natural language responses when it interacts with online users.3 Announced
by OpenAI on September 25, 2023, ChatGPT(4.0) can speak, listen, and process images while
interacting with users.4 ChatGPT(4.0) will provide ChatGPT Plus users with two new innovative
functions: voice interaction and image interaction. Instead of typing texts, users can directly talk to
ChatGPT(4.0) and ChatGPT(4.0) will respond with five different synthetic voices, including different
emotions, pitches, speeds, and tones, to create an immersive feeling like conversing with a real
person. Also, the updated ChatGPT(4.0) can see and analyze the images uploaded by ChatGPT Plus
users. The rise of Generative AI and ChatGPT has revived the scholarly enthusiasm of reinspecting
information literacy competency standards and frameworks in the age of artificial intelligence
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Rita Mathew and Jill E. Stefaniak, “A Needs Assessment to Support Faculty Members’ Awareness of Generative AI
Technologies to Support Instruction,” TechTrends: Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning A Publication
of the Association for Educational Communications & Technology 68, no. 4 (2024): 773–89, https://doi.org/10.1007
/s11528-024-00964-z.
George Lawton, “What is Generative AI? Everything You Need to Know,” Tech Target: Enterprise AI, last modified
June 2024, https://www.techtarget.com/searchenterpriseai/definition/generative-AI.
“Introducing ChatGPT,” OpenAI, last updated November 30, 2022, https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt.
“ChatGPT Can Now See, Hear, and Speak,” OpenAI, last modified September 25, 2023, https://openai.com/index
/chatgpt-can-now-see-hear-and-speak/.
RUSQ 60:3 152
Laura Saunders, “Information Literacy Now: Examining Where We Are to Understand Where We Are Going,” Journal
of Information Literacy 18, no. 1 (2014): 69–77, https://doi.org/10.11645/18.1.560.
Paul G. Zurkowski, “The Information Service Environment Relationships and Priorities. Related Paper No. 5,” last
updated November 1974, https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED100391.pdf.
“American Library Association Presidential Committee on Information Literacy. Final Report,” American Library
Association, last modified January 10, 1989, https://www.ala.org/acrl/publications/whitepapers/presidential.
Shirley J. Behrens, “A Conceptual Analysis and Historical Overview of Information Literacy,” College & Research
Libraries 55, no. 4 (1994): 309–22.
Loanne Snavely and Natasha Cooper, “The Information Literacy Debate,” Journal of Academic Librarianship 23, no.
(1997): 9–14, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-1333(97)90066-5.
“Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education,” Association of College and Research Libraries,
last modified January 18, 2000, https://alair.ala.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/ce62c38e-971a-4a98-a424
-7c0d1fe94d34/content.
Hannelore B. Rader, “Information Literacy 1973–2002: A Selected Literature Review,” Library Trends 51, no. 2 (2002):
–59; Edward K. Owusu-Ansah, “Information Literacy and the Academic Library: A Critical Look at a Concept
and the Controversies Surrounding It,” Journal of Academic Librarianship 29, no. 4 (2003): 219–30; United Nations
Education, Scientific, and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), National Forum on Information Literacy (NFIL), and
International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA), “Beacons of the Information Society: The
Alexandria Proclamation on Information Literacy and Lifelong Learning,” last modified November 9, 2005, https://
repository.ifla.org/items/a96d5213-9754-481b-939b-7fd4b53dc77b; Dane Ward, “Revisioning Information Literacy
for Lifelong Meaning,” Journal of Academic Librarianship 32, no. 4 (2006): 396–402; B. Ramesh Babu, “Information
Literacy—Competency Standards and Performance Indicators: An Overview,” DESIDOC Journal of Library &
Information Technology 28, no. 3 (2008): 56–65; Alejandro Uribe-Tirado and Wilson Castano, “Information Literacy
Competency Standards for Higher Education and Their Correlation with the Cycle of Knowledge Generation,”
Liber Quarterly: The Journal of European Research Libraries 22, no. 3 (2012): 213–39; Nancy B. Talley, “Are You
Doing It Backward—Improving Information Literacy Instruction Using the AALL Principles and Standards for Legal
Research Competency, Taxonomies, and Backward,” Law Library Journal 106, no. 1 (2014): 47–68; Eamon Tewell,
“A Decade of Critical Information Literacy: A Review of the Literature,” Communications in Information Literacy
, no. 1 (2015): 24–43; Rajesh Singh and Shailendra Kumar, “Information Literacy Competency of Social Science
Researchers in Different Periods of Research: A Study,” Journal of Library and Information Science 43, no. 1 (2018):
–40; Shohana Nowrin, Lyn Robinson, and David Bawden, “Multi-Lingual and Multi-Cultural Information Literacy:
Perspectives, Models and Good Practice,” Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication 68, no. 3 (2019):
–22; Ane Landøy, Daniela Popa, and Angela Repanovici, Collaboration in Designing a Pedagogical Approach in
Information Literacy (Springer Nature, 2020), https://library.oapen.org/viewer/web/viewer.html?file=/bitstream
/handle/20.500.12657/23299/1006856.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y; Logan Rath, “Factors That Influence Librarian
Definitions of Information Literacy,” Journal of Academic Librarianship 48, no. 6 (2022): 1–7; Winfried Gödert and
Klaus Lepsky, Information Literacy and Autonomy: A Cognitive View (De Gruyter Saur, 2023).
Kaija Saranto and Evelyn J. S. Hovenga, “Information Literacy—What It Is About?: Literature Review of the Concept
and the Context,” International Journal of Medical Informatics 73, no. 6 (2004): 503–13, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ij
medinf.2004.03.002.
“ISO Standards,” The Institute of Environmental Sciences and Technology, last updated 2024, https://www.iest.org
/Standards-RPs/ISO-Standards.
“Framework,” Merriam-Webster, Last modified August 21, 2024, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary
/framework.
Association of College and Research Libraries “Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education”
American Library Associaiton, 2000, p. 3, https://alair.ala.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/ce62c38e-971a
-4a98-a424-7c0d1fe94d34/content.
Patricia A. Iannuzzi, “Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education,” Community and Junior
College Libraries 9, no. 4 (2000): 63–68; Ann M. Fiegen, Bennett Cherry, and Kathleen Watson, “Reflections on
Collaboration: Learning Outcomes and Information Literacy Assessment in the Business Curriculum,” Reference
RUSQ 60:3 153
Services Review 30, no. 4 (2002): 307–18; Molly R. Flaspohler, “Information Literacy Program Assessment: One Small
College Takes the Big Plunge,” Reference Services Review 31, no. 2 (2003): 129–40; Annmarie B. Singh, “A Report
on Faculty Perceptions of Students’ Information Literacy Competencies in Journalism and Mass Communication
Programs: The ACEJMC Survey,” College & Research Libraries 66, no. 4 (2005): 294–310; Shelley Gullikson, “Faculty
Perceptions of ACRL’s Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education,” Journal of Academic
Librarianship 32, no. 6 (2006): 583–92; Margaret Adolphus, “Using the Web to Teach Information Literacy,” Online
, no. 4 (2009): 20–25; Marcus Banks, “Time for a Paradigm Shift: The New ACRL Information Literacy Competency
Standards for Higher Education,” Communications in Information Literacy 7, no. 2 (2013): 184–88; Benjamin R.
Harris, “Information Literacy Competency Standards: Revising Reception,” Communications in Information Literacy
, no. 2 (2013): 139–45.
“The Project SAILS Information Literacy Assessment,” Project SAILS, Last upgraded 2024, https://www.project
sails.org/site/.
Jesús Lau, “Guidelines on Information Literacy for Lifelong Learning,” IFLA, last modified August 10, 2006,
https://repository.ifla.org/items/9b11eb30-799e-4fd2-a3e5-628204b12ac3/full.
“Information Literacy,” UNESCO, last modified April 20, 2023, https://www.unesco.org/en/ifap/information-literacy.
Eleanor Mitchell and Sarah Barbara Watstein, “Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education
Redux,” Reference Services Review 42, no. 1 (2014), https://doi.org/10.1108/RSR.24042aaa.001.
Ian Beilin, “Beyond the Threshold: Conformity, Resistance, and the ACRL Information Literacy Framework for Higher
Education,” In the Library with the Lead Pipe, February 2015, p. 1–9, https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor
/plink?id=ef98ed8c-c163-3097-af13-0d12c706d932.
“ACRL Board Takes Action on Information Literacy Standards,” Association of College & Research Libraries Board of
Directors, last modified June 25, 2016, https://acrl.ala.org/acrlinsider/acrl-board-takes-action-on-information
-literacy-standards/.
“Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education,” Association of College and Research Libraries, last
modified January 11. 2016, https://www.ala.org/sites/default/files/acrl/content/issues/infolit/framework1.pdf.
Siegfried Kracauer, “The Challenge of Qualitative Content Analysis,” The Public Opinion Quarterly 16, no. 4 (1952):
–42, http://www.jstor.org/stable/2746123.
Burton Callicott et al., “Google Scholar vs. Library Scholar: Testing the Performance of Schoogle,” Libraries and
Google 10, no. 3–4 (2005): 71–88, https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=13b078fc-fc54
-3515-afc2-8a5c4936c705.
Kyong Eun Oh and Mónica Colón-Aguirre, “A Comparative Study of Perceptions and Use of Google Scholar and
Academic Library Discovery Systems,” College & Research Libraries 80, no. 6 (2019): 876–91, https://doi.org
/10.5860/crl.80.6.876.
Youming Ge, Zitong Chen, and Yubao Liu, “An Efficient Keywords Search in Temporal Social Networks,” Data
Science and Engineering 8, no. 4 (2023): 368–84, https://doi.org/10.1007/s41019-023-00218-7.
David Bawden and Lyn Robinson, Introduction to Information Science (Facet, 2022), https://research.ebsco.com
/linkprocessor/plink?id=61b24f3c-45b6-338e-8c10-9e379ab995b3.
Claude Elwood Shannon and Warren Weaver, The Mathematical Theory of Communication (University of Illinois
Press, 1964), https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=60ef135c-a4cf-3c78-a8a5-487869031c33.
Norbert Wiener, The Human Use of Human Beings: Cybernetics and Society (Avon Books, 1967), https://research
.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=f0907169-febe-3383-bc33-05584fba65e0.
Sanjay Jain, “Data vs information: What’s the Difference?” Bloomfire, last updated June 5, 2023, https://bloomfire
.com/blog/data-vs-information/.
Luis Freeman, Information Literacy: Progress, Trends and Challenges (Nova Science, 2018), https://research.ebsco
.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=6e408e51-cf18-34c1-b5e5-4c8aa52d2ba7.
Teresa Welsh and Melissa S. Wright, Information Literacy in the Digital Age: An Evidence-Based Approach (Chandos,
, https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=02be574b-7d28-324f-89cb-feb5fa73f9a5.
RUSQ 60:3 154
Jane Secker and Emma Coonan, Rethinking Information Literacy : A Practical Framework for Supporting Learning
(Facet, 2013), https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=c94783f4-c41c-33df-9838-b1941ae41164.
C. Shannon, J. Reilly, and J. Bates, “Teachers and Information Literacy: Understandings and Perceptions of the
Concept,” Journal of Information Literacy 13, no. 2 (2019): 41–72.
“Digital Literacy,” UNESCO-UNEVOC, last updated June 2018, https://unevoc.unesco.org/home
/TVETipedia+Glossary/lang=en/show=term/term=Digital+literacy.
William Badke, “AI Challenges to Information Literacy,” Computers in Libraries 43, no. 3 (2023): 41–42; Joel
Blechinger, “Reflections on Information Literacy in the ChatGPT Era,” Journal for Information Science Students
and Early Career Professionals 4, no. 1 (2023):163–72; Lee De Groft, “Teaching Students AI Literacy: The Road
Ahead,” School Library Journal 69, no. 9 (2023): 26; Nicole Johnston, “Conversations About and With ChatGPT: Two
Case Studies,” InCite 44, no. 2 (2023): 25–27; Lucinda Ward and Thomas Kmetz, “Using the ACRL Framework for
Information Literacy to Revise a for-Credit, Online Course,” Journal of Library & Information Services in Distance
Learning 17, no. 1–2 (2023): 15–28.
Amy B. James and Ellen Hampton Filgo, “Where Does ChatGPT Fit into the Framework for Information Literacy? The
Possibilities and Problems of AI in Library Instruction,” College & Research Libraries News 84, no. 9 (2023): 334–41,
https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.84.9.334.
Ginny Boehme et al., “Harnessing Pandora’s Box: At the Intersection of Information Literacy and AI,” Associaton of
College & Research Libraries, last modified July 17, 2023, https://sandbox.acrl.org/system/files/resources
/Harnessing%20Pandora%E2%80%99s%20Box_0.pdf.
Saipraneeth Devunuri, Shirin Qiam, and Lewis J. Lehe, “ChatGPT for GTFS: From Words to Information,”
Semantic Scholar, last updated August, 2023, https://www.semanticscholar.org/reader/fb2008d6325
e2732816ce836b33944ff231d43.
Bo Li et al., “Evaluating ChatGPT’s Information Extraction Capabilities: An Assessment of Performance,
Explainability, Calibration, and Faithfulness,” Semantic Reader, last modified April 23, 2023, https://www.semantic
scholar.org/reader/88abef771472c3aa46c53d5d626a0d0c3b66e8cd; Aman Rangapur and Haoran Wang,
“ChatGPT-Crawler: Find Out if ChatGPT Really Knows what It’s Talking About,” Semantic Reader, last modified April
, 2023, https://www.semanticscholar.org/reader/c2074a186f143f6a8f082747d431ab85f90a4fb5; Weiwei Sun
et al., “Is ChatGPT Good at Search? Investigating Large Language Models as Re-Ranking Agents,” last modified
October 27, 2023, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2304.09542; Coco Feng, “Chinese Tech Giant Embeds ChatGPT-like Service
on Flagship as Global Race to Bring Similar Tools to Market Heats Up,” South China Morning Post (Hong Kong), last
modified May 12, 2023, https://www.scmp.com/tech/big-tech/article/3220351/chinese-tech-giant-baidu-embedschatgpt-
service-flagship-search-engine-global-race-bring-similar; Marydee Ojala, “Search Evolves into Copilots,
Chatbots, and Research Assistants,” Computers in Libraries 43, no. 7 (2023): 43–44; Chirag Shah, “AI Information
Retrieval: A Search Engine Researcher Explains the Promise and Peril of Letting ChatGPT and Its Cousins Search
the Web for You,” Modern Sciences, last modified April 18, 2023, https://modernsciences.org/ai-information
-retrieval-a-search-engine-researcher-explains-the-promise-and-peril-of-letting-chatgpt-and-its-cousins-search
-the-web-for-you.
Tiernan, Peter, Eamon Costello, Enda Donlon, Maria Parysz, and Michael Scriney. “Information and Media Literacy in
the Age of AI: Options for the Future.” Education Sciences 13, no. 9 (2023): 906. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci
Ying Chen, “Information Valuation for Information Lifecycle Management,” Second International Conference on
Autonomic Computing (ICAC’05), Autonomic Computing, 2005. ICAC 2005. Proceedings. Second International
Conference On (June 13–16, 2005): 135–46, https://doi.org/10.1109/ICAC.2005.35.
J. H. F. Meyer and R. Land, “Threshold Concepts and Troublesome Knowledge: Linkages to Ways of Thinking and
Practising within the Disciplines,” Improving Student Learning-Symposium (January 2002): 412–24, https://research
.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=73773561-c63d-32ce-a04f-0f63c5ba3665.
Ben Lutkevich, “Framework,” TechTarget, last modified August 2020. https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/definition
/framework.
RUSQ 60:3 155
Larissa Garcia and Jessica Labatte, “Threshold Concepts as Metaphors for the Creative Process: Adapting the
Framework for Information Literacy to Studio Art Classes,” Art Documentation: Journal of the Art Libraries Society
of North America 34, no. 2 (2015): 235–48, https://doi.org/10.1086/683383.
Lana W. Jackman and Sharon A. Weiner, “The Rescinding of the ACRL 2000 Information Literacy Competency
Standards for Higher Education—Really?” College & Undergraduate Libraries 24, no. 1 (2016): 117–19, https://doi.org
/10.1080/10691316.2016.1217811.
“Perspectives on the ACRL Framework, Comparing Standards, and Creating Learning Activities for Information
Literacy: Framework & Standards Overview,” University of Missouri Libraries, last updated May 10, 2017, https://
libraryguides.missouri.edu/frameworkperspectives; “Information Literacy Standards (Rescinded),” Adelphi
University Libraries, last updated August 21, 2024, https://libguides.adelphi.edu/faculty-infolit/standards;
Wilmington University Library, “Information Literacy Faculty Toolkit,” last updated December 9, 2022, https://lib
guides.wilmu.edu/ILFacultyToolkit; Bentley University Library, “Information Literacy and Instruction,” last updated
August 21, 2024, https://libguides,bentley,edu/informationliteracy/standards/acrlstandards; “Information Literacy,”
Iowa University Libraries, Last modified August 13, 2012, https://www.lib.uiowa.edu/instruction/info_literacy/.
Donna Witek, “The Past, Present, and Promise of Information Literacy,” Phi Kappa Phi Forum 96, no
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5860/rusq.60.3.8428
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
© 2025 RUSA