Reflective Information Seeking: Unpacking Meta-Research Skills Through Digital Storytelling

  • Brian Leaf
  • Karen R. Diaz
Part of the Digital Education and Learning book series (DEAL)


Librarians are tasked with helping students navigate content and discourse across disciplines as well as within their particular major. At times this requires a non-discipline-based form of teaching information seeking, gathering, and sharing that is often called information literacy. Digital storytelling provides a process for uncovering many of these unspoken, unobserved, and yet critical skills for developing the meta-skills needed in our complex information environment. More importantly, it can do so in the most authentic of ways, by incorporating personal reflection and metacognition into the information creation process itself. Academic libraries sit between disciplines and, in a way, have served as untapped grounds for the scholarship of integration.


Information Literacy Digital Storytelling Academic Library Digital Story Information Landscape 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. ACRL. (2000). Information literacy competency standards for higher education. Available at: Accessed 23 Sept 2015.
  2. ACRL. (2015). Framework for information literacy. Available at: Accessed 23 Sept 2015.
  3. Australian and New Zealand Institute For Information Literacy. (2004). Australian and New Zealand information literacy framework: Principles, standards, and practice. Available at: Accessed 23 Sept 2015.
  4. Baro, E. E. (2011). A survey of information literacy education in library schools in Africa. Library Review, 60(3), 202–217. doi: 10.1108/00242531111117263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bobish, G. (2011). Participation and pedagogy: Connecting the social web to ACRL learning outcomes. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 37(1), 54–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boyer, E.L. (1996). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.Google Scholar
  7. Braxton, J., Luckey, W., & Helland, P. (2002). The scholarship of integration. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, 29(2), 45–53.Google Scholar
  8. Daniels, W., Darch, C., & de Jager, K. (2010). The research commons: A new creature in the library? Performance Measurement and Metrics, 11(2), 116–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Eisenberg, M. B., & Berkowitz, R. E. (n.d.) The Big 6: Information and technology skills for student success. Available at: Accessed 23 Sept 2015.
  10. ERIAL Project. (2012). Available at: Accessed 23 Sept 2015.
  11. Gergen, K. J. (1999). An invitation to social construction. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  12. IFLA. (2015). Guidelines on assessing information literacy for lifelong learning. Available at: Accessed 23 Sept 2015.
  13. Knapp, J. (2011). Plugging the ‘Whole’: Librarians as interdisciplinary facilitators. Social Science Libraries Section, 2011 International Federation of Library Associations and Institution Conference Proceedings, p. 142.Google Scholar
  14. Knight Commission. (2009). Informing communities: Sustaining democracy in the digital age. Washington, DC: Aspen Institute. Available at: Accessed 25 Sept 2015.
  15. Lippincott, J. K. (2007). Student content creators: Convergence of literacies. Educause Review., 42(6), 16–17.Google Scholar
  16. Mackey, T. P., & Jacobson, T. E. (2011). Reframing information literacy as a metaliteracy. College & Research Libraries, 72(1), 62–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mackey, T. P., & Jacobson, T. E. (2014). Metaliteracy: Reinventing information literacy to empower learners. Chicago: ALA Neal Schuman.Google Scholar
  18. Metaliteracy. (n.d.). Available at: Accessed 23 Sept 2015.
  19. Oldfather, P., & Dahl, K. (1994). Toward a social constructivist reconceptualization of intrinsic motivation for literacy learning. Journal of Reading Behavior., 26(2), 139–158.Google Scholar
  20. OSU Digital Storytelling. (2014a, October 29). City roots, Country heart. Available at: Accessed 1 Sept 2015.
  21. OSU Digital Storytelling. (2014b, October 29). Filling a gap in my confidence. Accessed 1 Sept 2015.
  22. OSU Digital Storytelling. (2014c, December 12). Life in moments. Available at: Accessed 1 Sept 2015.
  23. OSU Digital Storytelling. (2014d, December 12). Our family’s pacemaker. Available at: Accessed 1 Sept 2015.
  24. Piaget, J., & Piaget, J. (1973). To understand is to invent: The future of education. New York: Grossman Publishers.Google Scholar
  25. Project Information Literacy. (2015). Available at: Accessed 23 Sept 2015.
  26. SCONUL. (1999). The SCONUL Seven pillars of information literacy core model for higher education. Available at: Accessed 23 Sept 2015.
  27. Talja, S., Tuominen, K., & Savolainen, R. (2005). “Isms” in information science: Constructivism, collectivism and constructionism. Journal of Documentation, 61(1), 79–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. UNESCO. (2003). Prague declaration. Available at: Accessed 23 Sept 2015.
  29. UNESCO. (2006). Alexandria proclamation. Available at: Accessed 23 Sept 2015.
  30. Wijetunge, P., & Alahakoon, U. (2009). Empowering 8: The information literacy model developed in Sri Lanka to underpin changing education paradigms of Sri Lanka. Sri Lankan Journal of Librarianship and Information Management, 1(1), 31–41. doi: 10.4038/sllim.v1i1.430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brian Leaf
    • 1
  • Karen R. Diaz
    • 2
  1. 1.National Network of Libraries of Medicine South Central RegionFort WorthUSA
  2. 2.West Virginia UniversityMorgantownUSA

Personalised recommendations