Conference Agenda

This article discusses the learning process and outcomes of the most recent iteration of the project “Intercultural Perspectives on Information Literacy and Metaliteracy” (IPILM) during the winter term of 2024–2025. IPILM is a discourse-oriented learning environment that brings together students from diverse cultural backgrounds to engage in collaborative knowledge construction. Its primary goal is to promote intercultural learning, information literacy and metaliteracy while exploring topics related to current developments in information behavior and information environments in transnational teams (Griesbaum et al. 2023). The topical focus of the course in 2024-2025 was on cultural, societal, educational and ethical dimensions of artificial intelligence (AI).

This presentation will address two primary research questions: RQ1: What is the feasibility and acceptance of the IPILM concept? RQ2: What is the learning success of the students?

IPILM realizes a unique learning environment with a low participation threshold. Based on our observations over several years of teaching this course, we have found that students and instructors are predominantly enthusiastic about the project. This tentative assessment indicates that IPILM is a worthwhile initiative and may also serve as a model for similar Virtual Exchange and Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL) initiatives in the information literacy community and even beyond. As part of our current research, we are interested in moving beyond anecdotal evidence presented in Griesbaum et al. (2023). For that purpose, a research instrument is developed. We enthusiastically seek feedback from the ECIL community to expand our research project to the next level and to share the collaborative strategies we have developed to engage students with AI.

For the study, a combination of data collection methods is employed. Student perspectives were captured through pre- and post-course surveys on perceived learning achievements. Additionally, students’ written reflections are analyzed to gauge their interest, enjoyment, perceived competence, effort, and sense of social interdependence. Observations and evaluations from instructors further contribute insights, particularly regarding group conflicts, conflict resolution, and the academic, media, and legal quality of the knowledge produced. Overall, the evaluation uncovers the educational value of IPILM in depth. Possible weak points and options for improvement are identified. The findings highlight the potential of transnational groups to foster intercultural learning, information literacy, and metaliteracy. Simultaneously, the evaluation provides valuable data to refine the IPILM concept further.

References

Griesbaum, J., Dreisiebner, S., Mackey, T. P., Jacobson, T. E., Thadathil, T., Bhattacharya, S., & Adilović, E. (2023). Teaching internationally, learning collaboratively: Intercultural perspectives on information literacy and metaliteracy (IPILM). Communications in Information Literacy, 17(1): 260–278. Retrieved December 10, 2024 from https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/comminfolit/vol17/iss1/4

In recent years, numerous AI assistant tools have entered the market. These tools aim to integrate generative AI’s ability to process natural language prompts with real-time database searches. The goal is to mitigate AI hallucinations by incorporating verified academic sources while maintaining the convenience of natural language prompting. Such tools are often referred to as retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems.

In the fall of 2024, we tested four such tools: Scite, Scopus AI, Web of Science Research Assistant, and Primo Research Assistant. Our aim was to evaluate the usefulness of these tools, considering both ease of use and relevance of search results. The evaluation included a survey and a series of workshops with researchers at KTH Royal Institute of Technology, as well as additional tests conducted by library staff following a structured search protocol.

Our findings suggest that, at this stage, these tools cannot replace traditional systematic database searches. However, they are valuable for identifying supplementary sources that may be difficult to find using conventional search techniques. They are also useful for researchers exploring unfamiliar fields. Notable differences emerged in the ease of use and quality of search results among the tested tools. These results align with similar observations reported by others.

A key weakness of these tools is the lack of context provided with the search results. These tools often generate results even when little relevant information exists, potentially misleading users into believing that research on a given topic is more extensive than it actually is. Often, an AI’s response provides little or no indication that the requested information does not exist or is very limited. Other tools, such as Undermind.ai, appear to address this weakness and will be included in future studies.

The results of this study help inform us when these tools are useful, or perhaps harmful, for students and researchers. Drawing from both experience and research literature, we propose some guiding principles for evaluating when different search tools would be appropriate to use. Use cases might include lookup searches, exploratory searches, and searching for the purposes of a systematic review. One important guiding principle can be stated as saying that the more systematic a search, the higher the need for transparency of search tool. While AI tools will continue to evolve, these principles are expected to remain relevant in the foreseeable future.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is becoming a ubiquitous element in workplaces with profound implications and a transformative impact and potential which is both beneficial and deleterious for workers. While it may be responsible for increased flexibility for workers and a reduction of rote tasks (Brynjolfsson & McAfee, 2014), AI is expected to have a disruptive effect on workers’ rights and to increase the loss of decent work (Ponce, 2018). There is a widespread anxiety among workers about the tangible concerns that AI raises: job losses; decreasing wages; work intensification; ethical challenges around data protection and privacy; discrimination and bias; and a lack of autonomy (OECD, 2023).

A central concern with AI is related to agentic power, the power and capacity to act, which also entails new capabilities and resources needed to protect agency (Hirvonen, 2024: 48-49). In the workplace context, this affects workers’ ability, and that of trade unions, to curb the deleterious effects of AI and make sure that it delivers for all, not just a few. A key precondition for that is for workers to develop an understanding of the role and the (in)visible impact of AI on work along with a capacity to engage critically with it, thereby to be able to contest its deployment and assert themselves in a rapidly changing work environment (Ponce, 2018). This is where critical information literacy (IL) and critical AI literacy can help to meet the objectives of decent work.

This research aims to identify the extent and the potential deployment of AI to advance workers’ rights and to establish a framework for critical AI literacy instruction supportive of a decent work agenda. It seeks to determine to what extent, and in what ways, AI is being used by trade unions to improve the services they provide to their members; what are the benefits experienced, if any; what are the potentials of its future use; what impact will AI have on the world of work and union activity; what are the skills and training that unionists need for using AI to advance workers’ rights and for evaluating critically its functioning and outputs; and what should be the role of unions in respect of AI. The research will be conducted using the survey method, with a quantitative online questionnaire comprising 31 mostly closed questions, on a sample of Croatian trade unionists, including union reps, specialists and leaders. The survey will be followed up with qualitative methods, including focus groups and interviews with an international pool of union AI experts, forming the foundation for a more in-depth, practice-based understanding and work.

Drawing on the research outcomes, the framework for critical AI literacy instruction in the workplace will be a practical tool containing guidance for workers and trade unionists, as well as recommendations for employers and relevant advice for collective bargaining, including policy and research recommendations. It will facilitate a well-informed multidisciplinary dialogue on AI which IL theorists and researchers are uniquely positioned to lead (Flierl, 2024). Thus, it is hoped that the outcomes of the research will help resolve a key question for the next decades of IL research, posed by Hirvonen (2024: 50): ‘how can we foster IL amid and beyond the AI revolution?’.

References

Brynjolfsson E., & McAfee A. (2014). The second machine age. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.

Flierl, M. (2024). Artificial intelligence and information literacy: Hazards and opportunities. In S. Kurbanoğlu, S., Špiranec, S., Ünal, Y., Boustany, J., Kos, D. (Eds.), Information Experience and Information Literacy, The Eight European Conference on Information Literacy, ECIL 2023, October 9-12, 2023: Revised Selected Papers. Part I. CCIS, vol. 2042. (pp. 52−63). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

Hirvonen, N. (2024). Information literacy after the AI revolution. Journal of Information Literacy, 18(1): 47−54.

OECD. (2023). OECD Employment Outlook 2023: Artificial intelligence and the labour market. Paris: OECD.

Ponce, A. (2018). Artificial Intelligence: A game changer for the world of work. Brussels: European Trade Union Institute.

The Knowledge Centre for Health Ghent (KCGG) is experiencing a growing demand from the community for guidance on finding and using reliable (health) information. Health literacy is a key determinant of public health, influencing healthcare utilization, costs, and individual behaviours. Improved health literacy leads to greater participation in public health programs and supports more equitable and sustainable interventions (Sørensen et al., 2012). As Rondia et al. (2019) highlight, promoting health literacy is a shared responsibility of both individuals and healthcare systems. Addressing this societal need requires collaborative training programs involving academic medical libraries and healthcare institutions (Vassilakaki & Moniarou-Papaconstaninou, 2023).

Community outreach is an integral part of the Knowledge Centre’s mission. The Knowledge Centre partners with public libraries, local governments and patient organizations to enhance health literacy among citizens, healthcare professionals, patients and even public librarians. This initiative is particularly novel in Belgium, as information specialists collaborate with content experts from various health sciences fields. These experts value the opportunity to extend their knowledge beyond academia through community engagement in information literacy. Through interviews, the authors were able to capture the advantages and challenges of this collaboration. To engage a wide audience and create a recognizable identity, the sessions titled “Dr. Google: seeking reliable health information” were developed. These sessions ensure that complex innovations are made accessible and actionable. The sessions are tailored to specific target groups and can address current issues such as “How reliable are AI tools for skin cancer detection?”, “Which health applications are suitable for my needs?”, and “What can I do to sleep better?”. Such collaborative efforts, driven by knowledge-sharing and transparency, are crucial in aligning technological advancements with public health needs, ensuring equitable access to reliable information and fostering informed decision-making. This paper does not present research-based evidence but aims to inspire medical information professionals to develop health literacy through expert collaborations. Drawing on both literature and firsthand experience, the authors offer practical guidelines for effectively managing community engagement projects that promote health literacy.

References

Rondia, K., Adriaenssens, J., Van Den Broucke, S., & Kohn, L. (2019). Health literacy: What lessons can be learned from the experiences of other countries? KCE Reports 322. Health Services Research (HSR), Brussels, Belgian Health Care Knowledge Centre (KCE).

Sørensen, K., Van den Broucke, S., Fullam, J., Doyle, G., Pelikan, J., Slonska, Z., & Brand, H. (2012). Health literacy and public health: a systematic review and integration of definitions and models. BMC Public Health, 12(1): 1–13.

Vassilakaki, E., & Moniarou-Papaconstaninou, V. (2023). Librarians’ support in improving health literacy: A systematic literature review. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 55(2), 500–514.