Conference Agenda

The rise of ChatGPT unveiled the gap between what students know and are used to, and what teachers at university expect. Swedish students’ preparedness for higher education has been in decline for years, and an individualized elementary school system seems to be setting students up for failure when embarking on an academic career (Skolverket, 2023). Moreover, the gap between students from the city and from the countryside widens, as well as the gap between students from opposite ends of the socio-economic scale (SOU 2021:3, 2021). In Swedish elementary schools, many students use platforms like Google classroom or publishers’ sites to access snippets of information, seldom reading entire books. The infrastructure of information becomes invisible (Haider & Sundin, 2022, p. 58). The quality of school libraries has varied and has been under-financed for decades (SOU 2021:3, 2021). It could be perceived as a case of worst practice opening up for best practices. When we understand this, new possibilities open. There is no point in talking about generative AI-tools that can be of help in students’ studies, when students themselves find it hard to tell an academic article from an anthology. We already have knowledge about students’ use of AI, interacting with them daily in the library, and they ask us questions that they may not want to ask their teachers. Students in several studies and in various countries express uncertainty in how to apply generative AI in their academic work without cheating or discrediting their work (Schei et al., 2024). All signs point to students being aware of their lack of information literacy (IL) in terms of generative AI, but perhaps not in their basic IL skills. Our first step in attempting to meet this perceived student demand at Karlstad University was to make all our academic IL courses available as Open Educational Resources. These courses are self-assessment courses students and the general public can access as them many times as they need. Our second step was to invite all upper secondary school librarians to meet and discuss how to work better together. By sharing our resources and talking about our common goal of making students better equipped for further studies – and life in general – in times of AI, we feel we are on our way to close the gap on students’ IL. Thirdly, we decided to initiate the conversation on generative AI when we meet students at our library and on campus and use our tacit knowledge about our library users. Librarians need to engage in understanding and guiding the use of generative AI, helping students critically evaluate AI outputs and integrate these tools into their study and research process, as we do with other sources of information. As academic teaching librarians it is obvious that generative AI does not make the students’ academic literacy abilities stronger by default. AI literacy means more than just using AI tools; it involves an understanding of how AI works and how to make ethical decisions about its use. AI literacy includes skills evaluating, communicating and collaborating with AI (Lérias et al., 2024). Many students use AI chatbots as personal tutors and appreciate the anonymous support and user-friendliness (Schei et al., 2024). However, students also express concerns about the accuracy of information from AI chatbots and the difficulty in fact-checking their outputs (Schei et al., 2024), and they worry about potential negative impacts on their learning and thinking skills (Malmström et al., 2023). To develop better AI literacy and empower students to better decision-making concerning AI, students need firstly to be strengthened in IL and overall academic know-how, and able to summon that strength when they use generative AI. It is also our experience that university teachers are more focused on the cheating aspect of generative AI. We understand that the cheating aspect of generative AI is perhaps a more urgent issue for them, but we want to encourage the conversation to be about more than cheating.

References

Haider, J., & Sundin, O. (2022). Paradoxes of Media and Information Literacy. Routledge.

Lérias, E., Guerra, C., & Ferreira, P. (2024). Literacy in Artificial Intelligence as a Challenge for Teaching in Higher Education. Information, 15(4): 205.

Malmström, H., Stöhr, C., & Ou, W. (2023). Chatbots and other AI for learning.

Schei, O. M., Møgelvang, A., & Ludvigsen, K. (2024). Perceptions and Use of AI Chatbots among Students in Higher Education. Education Sciences, 14(8): 922.

Skolverket. (2023). PISA 2022. Retrieved 22 August, 2025 from https://www.skolverket.se/getFile?file=12177

SOU 2021:3. (2021). Skolbibliotek för bildning och utbildning. Retrieved 22 August, 2025 from https://www.riksdagen.se/sv/dokument-och-lagar/dokument/statens-offentliga-utredningar/skolbibliotek-for-bildning-och-utbildning-_zzb33/html/

We will present how we use Wikipedia as a tool for information literacy (IL) instruction in our undergraduate IL course. After learning how people add content to the online encyclopedia, students make their first edit on the site. This assignment requires students to identify a fact from a library source and add it to their adopted Wikipedia article. The student must paraphrase their fact from the source, rather than copy and pasting or lightly changing the original text. In previous iterations of the course, this has been particularly challenging for students as they try to ensure their paraphrases are different enough from the original. In the last year, we have required students to use ChatGPT as a paraphrasing tool in this assignment, asking them to critically evaluate the resulting paraphrase. Once satisfied, they publish it to Wikipedia, making sure to cite the original source. We value this use of ChatGPT because we can focus more on the point of the assignment, which is to contribute to this public information resource, rather than teaching paraphrasing. Students seem better able to critically assess the quality of the paraphrase when it came from ChatGPT, often asking for multiple revisions from the tool. Some students refined the AI-generated text further, adding their own final touches before publishing the text in Wikipedia. This practice is affirmed by Wiki Education (n.d.), who strongly caution users to practice “rigorous editing and fact-checking” if they use any generative AI.

This assignment supports our students’ understanding of authority, which is a concept key to IL. Students become Wikipedia creators rather than only consumers. Unlike the traditional research paper, which often stays within the confines of a class and may only be read by their instructor, Wikipedia articles are immediately accessible to anyone. As editors of Wikipedia, any edits students make are attributable to them via their username, so they also must evaluate whether they want the addition to be attached to their account. Finally, they are working within an already established community. While we grade them, their work also may be assessed by Wikipedia community members.

The Association of College & Research Libraries’ (2016) Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education highlights authority as key in the development of information literacy: “Authority is constructed and contextual.” The Framework states: “Authority is constructed in that various communities may recognize different types of authority. It is contextual in that the information need may help to determine the level of authority required.” Students do not need to be experts in the topic of their Wikipedia article. Instead, they develop their authority by identifying the information need for their Wikipedia article, improving the article, and becoming members of the Wikipedia contributor community. While we focus on the Framework, this exercise supports other information literacy models like SCONUL’s (2011) Seven Pillars of Information Literacy. ChatGPT to paraphrase facts removes a significant barrier for students, allowing them to focus on the more impactful elements of the exercise.

References

Association of College & Research Libraries. (2016). Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education. Retrieved 31 January, 2025 from https://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework

SCONUL. (2011). The SCONUL Seven Pillars of Information Literacy Core Model for Higher Education. Retrieved 31 January, 2025 from https://www.sconul.ac.uk/SCONULDownloadController/Download?iType=1&iID=1737&cGUID=32310a52-b3d3-4689-bdec-cadf5192494f&cTempLocation=

Wiki Education. (n.d.). What About Using ChatGPT or Other AI Tools? Retrieved 18 March, 2025 from https://dashboard.wikiedu.org/faq/24

Struggling with Lack of Motivation

As information literacy (IL) instructors we strive to teach students the skills needed to be lifelong learners. Over the years, a recurring topic of discussion among colleagues has been the lack of student motivation to really comprehend the topics we teach in our IL courses. In our experience, this is not only an issue at our universities but a problem that IL instructors worldwide struggle with. Naturally, in order to become successful information searchers, we want our students to be more motivated to learn and realize the importance of IL skills. In the fall of 2024, we introduced self-assessment as a method to improve students’ learning at our IL courses. Correctly implemented, student self-assessment, according to McMillan and Hearn (2008), can work as an effective motivator and promote more meaningful learning. Additionally, self-assessment impacts on student performance by giving students the opportunity to guide their own learning and by making the assessment criteria a part of their own evaluation process (McMillan & Hearn, 2008).

Self-assessment as a Motivator

In an attempt to increase student motivation, we created a compulsory self-assessment assignment in order for students to reflect on their own learning during IL courses and to evaluate their skills as information searchers by answering a set of questions. The assignment was created to increase student motivation at IL courses by students evaluating their own strengths and weaknesses, this hopefully also leading to them getting more aware of the significance of IL. Self-assessment can furthermore be a way to strengthen self-efficacy regarding a specific subject, which can motivate learners and lead to more confidence in these skills (Folk, 2016; Kurbanoglu, 2010). This, for example, was something we could observe from the answers students gave in the assignment. Students who experience high self-efficacy are more likely to develop IL competencies that promote lifelong learning (Ross et al., 2016), which is what we aim for with this self-assessment assignment.

References

Folk, A. (2016). Academic self-efficacy, information literacy, and undergraduate course-related research: Expanding gross’s imposed query model. Journal of Library Administration, 56(5): 540–558. https://doi.org/10.1080/01930826.2015.1105545

Kurbanoglu, S. (2010). Self-Efficacy: An alternative approach to the evaluation of information literacy. Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Libraries: 323–328. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814299701_0040

McMillan, J. H., & Hearn, J. (2008). Student self-assessment: The key to stronger student motivation and higher achievement. Educational horizons, 87(1): 40–49.

Ross, M., Perkins, H., & Bodey, K. (2016). Academic motivation and information literacy self-efficacy: The importance of a simple desire to know. Library & Information Science Research, 38(1): 2–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2016.01.002

In an effort to bridge the information literacy gap between high school and college, we initiated a program called “Your Senior is my First-year” in 2018. Research Days was a concept derived from previous years of doing high school tours and library instruction. It has evolved to include information literacy instruction, hands-on research, searching the library, and critical thinking skills. Within this instruction, high-school learners are introduced to such skills through a progressive framework that focuses on building relational capacity between learners and facilitators. With the help of a high school coaching program called Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID), Research Days empower high school learners to engage with and learn how information is valued, how they can find it, and how they can engage with it in ethical and responsible ways (Shapiro & Cuseo, 2018).

This best practices presentation looks at the advent of Research days, its progress, and its strengths and challenges. Participants will learn about AVID’s Writing to learn, Inquiry, Collaboration, Organization, and Reading to learn (WICOR) concept that allows facilitators and instructors to gradually build relational capacity with learners through scaffolded discovery and progressive risk-taking activities. They will also learn about the journey of a new librarian to seek out training through a faculty-led AVID workshop facilitated by an award-winning AVID coach and how they incorporated it into library instruction for Research Days (Salmans & Durham, 2023). We will also look at the specifics of this instruction and how information literacy is taught and learned in that transition from high school to college, and what it’s like working with the dual credit program. With the future of information literacy involving things like artificial intelligence (AI), we are also looking to incorporate AI literacy skill building into Research Days to help learners understand the dynamics of mis- and disinformation, how social media impacts the way we think, see, and use information, and what the future of information might be.

References

Salmans, J., & Durham, J. (2023). Purple bricks of library instruction: An academic success program and libraries collaborate to integrate active-learning into library pedagogy. In A. N. Hess (Ed.), Instructional Identities and Information Literacy, Vol. 3: Transforming student learning, information seeking, and experiences (pp. 159–17). Association of College and Research Libraries. Retrieved 21 August, 2025 from https://ttu-ir.tdl.org/bitstreams/03933b92-b4d2-414e-87c8-59e3fa3a688c/download

Shapiro, D., & Cuseo, J. (2018). AVID for higher education: High engagement practices for teaching and learning. Avid Press.

Today’s American college students are technologically proficient with evolving learning preferences. They have varied racial, socioeconomic, and cultural backgrounds, with many identifying as students of color and first-generation college attendees. They are inundated with fake news and AI generated content (Mowreader, 2025). Educators need new strategies to meet these students where they are. One new strategy used by librarians and instructors at Tennessee State University and the University of South Florida is teaching academic competency through involving students in Wikipedia edit-a-thons. This illustrates incorporating AI into critical thinking exercises (Roberto, 2024).

Wikipedia English skews towards white males for article topics and editors (Davis, 2023). Along with Wikipedia suffering from a deficit of diverse voices and perspectives, American college students have a deficit in information literacy (IL) and critical thinking skills. By contributing to Wikipedia, students learn to navigate and apply the Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education, including the frames of understanding information creation as a process and recognizing the value of information (Stine, 2022). Teaching students to edit Wikipedia stands at the intersection of editing to fill in content gaps and editing to teach students IL, critical thinking skills, and research skills while making Wikipedia a more diverse and inclusive resource (McDowell & Vetter, 2022).

We aligned our three-hour events with Black History Month, Women’s History Month, Native American History Month, and Latin American History Month. During the first hour, Wikimedia Foundation DC teaches attendees how to edit Wikipedia and provides articles on subjects that need creation or more information. The rest of the session is devoted to adding Wikipedia content.

To recruit new editors, we have cooperated with professors who agreed to give extra credit to participating students. The benefits besides improving Wikipedia are that editing helps to teach IL skills, critical thinking, and academic research (Murphy et al., 2021, p. 64). Wikipedia editing also instills a sense of advocacy and belonging in students (Ju & Stewart, 2019, p. 1486).

With the success of these edit-a-thons we are moving into the next phase: at TSU where we are encouraging faculty to assign Wikipedia editing projects instead of traditional research assignments. At USF we are transforming a more traditional IL course into one where Wikipedia editing is the focus. We are including using generative AI to guide students to leverage AI tools for deeper understanding rather than superficial answers, using AI to enhance their learning experience while developing their critical thinking and problem-solving skills (Roberto, 2024).

References

Davis, L. (2023). Diversifying Wikipedia’s U.S. editors. Wiki Education. Retrieved 28 August, 2025 from https://wikiedu.org/blog/2023/08/11/diversifying-wikipedias-u-s-editors/

Ju, B., & Stewart, B. (2019). “The right information”: Perceptions of information bias among Black Wikipedians. Journal of Documentation, 75(6): 1486–1502. https://doi.org/10.1108/jd-02-2019-0031

McDowell, Z. J., & Vetter, M. A. (2022). Wikipedia as open educational practice: Experiential learning, critical information literacy, and social justice. Social Media + Society, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051221078224

Mowreader, A. (2025). Meet the Class of 2029. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved 28 August, 2025 from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/student-success/college-experience/2025/03/24/survey-understanding-incoming-college-student

Murphy, M., Perrill, E., Gaal, A., Kelly, C., & Simmons, M. (2021). Editing Wikipedia, discovering inquiry. Art Documentation: Journal of the Art Libraries Society of North America, 40(1): 64–80. https://doi.org/10.1086/714390

Roberto, M. (2024). Help students think critically in the age of AI: 3 ways to adjust your assignments to encourage deeper thought. Harvard Business Publishing Education. Retrieved 28 August, 2025 from https://hbsp.harvard.edu/inspiring-minds/enhance-critical-thinking-students-ai-assignment-strategies

Stine, C. (2022). Crowdsourced pedagogy: Editing Wikipedia and the framework for information literacy for higher education. College & Research Libraries News, 83(4). https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.83.4.166

Wiki Education. (n.d.). Retrieved 3 February, 2025 from https://wikiedu.org/