The purpose of the paper which was presented using this presentation at the 3rd European conference on information literacy was to contribute to the understanding of critical perspectives in information literacy whose importance has been recognized by a number of authors in the field. This paper was a preliminary report on a research project that aims to describe the field of critical information literacy (CIL) based on a comprehensive descriptive statistical analysis of the qualities of CIL literature. The analysis was undertaken on a sample of 102 full-text scientific and professional articles. The sample was created based on a preliminary analysis of Google Scholar, SCOPUS and WOS databases. Authors presented findings on the established authorship, publication and research patterns in the field.

1. Understanding the Field of Critical
Information Literacy: A Descriptive
Analysis of Scientific Articles
Denis Kos and Sonja Špiranec
University of Zagreb, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
Department of Information and Communication Sciences
Ivana Lučića 3, 10 000 Zagreb, Croatia
{dkos, sspiran}@ffzg.hr

2. 2
TheWhat?

3. • Research problem
– assessment of critical IL perspectives unavailable
and the true influence and nature of CIL not
thoroughly researched
• Research goals
– reveal the established author, publication and
research patterns in the CIL subfield by employing
a descriptive statistical literature analysis
3Understanding Critical Information Literacy - by Denis Kos and Sonja Špiranec

4. 4
TheWhy?
?

5. • Rationale for a bibliometric approach
– sample creation for inductive literature analyses
– (ultimately) defining the thematic scope to
facilitate curriculum integration
– the size of the subfield
– state of the field and further areas of
development
5Understanding Critical Information Literacy - by Denis Kos and Sonja Špiranec

6. 6
TheHow?

7. bibliometrics
– a descriptive analysis of
authorship , research and
publication patterns
Methodology
• a comprehensive analysis (three databases)
• combination of quantitative and qualitative
methods
• project began in March, 2015
7
deductive content analysis
– a descriptive analysis of
established literature qualities
and categories
Understanding Critical Information Literacy - by Denis Kos and Sonja Špiranec

8. “critical information literacy”
OR
“critical library instruction”
8Understanding Critical Information Literacy - by Denis Kos and Sonja Špiranec

9. The project
- focus on critical perspectives
in IL related issues (including
insights from CP, CT,
psychology, etc.)
9Understanding Critical Information Literacy - by Denis Kos and Sonja Špiranec
This preliminary report
- focus on the literature
returned by the formulated
query

10. Google Scholar
SCOPUS
WoS
4.6%
95.4%
10Understanding Critical Information Literacy - by Denis Kos and Sonja Špiranec
805 search
results

11. 805 search
results
66.34 %
duplicates
non-article entries
not mentioning CIL
mention only in ref.
mention in citing art.
critical as important
11.55%
non-English
not accessible
178 articles
22.11%
11Understanding Critical Information Literacy - by Denis Kos and Sonja Špiranec

12. frequency
<3
102 core CIL
articles
12.67%
(including 22 book
chapters)
178 articles
22.11%
12Understanding Critical Information Literacy - by Denis Kos and Sonja Špiranec

13. frequency
<3
frequency
=>3
mention CIL only
in references
The research sets
13Understanding Critical Information Literacy - by Denis Kos and Sonja Špiranec
102 articles
312 articles

14. 14
Theresults Temporal evolution -> 312 articles
Authorship patterns
Institutions and countries
Journal productivity and contribution sources
Contribution types
Article classification
Deductive content analyses
102 core CIL articles

15. 15Understanding Critical Information Literacy - by Denis Kos and Sonja Špiranec
Temporal evolution in the sets
N=312 articles

16. 16Understanding Critical Information Literacy - by Denis Kos and Sonja Špiranec
Authorship patterns in core articles
N = 102
• 109 unique authors
• most articles published by:
– Heidi Jacobs (6)
– Alison Hicks (4)
– Troy Swanson (4)
• 17.43% published 2 articles
• 79.82% published 1 article

17. 17Understanding Critical Information Literacy - by Denis Kos and Sonja Špiranec
Institutions and countries
• 69 institutions, 7 countries
USA 73,53%
Canada 12,75%
UK 5,88%
Australia 4,9%
New Zealand
Croatia <1%
BIH

18. Contribution type N %
Journal article 59 57,84%
Book chapter 31 30,39%
Conference paper 12 11,76%
Total 102 100,00%
18Understanding Critical Information Literacy - by Denis Kos and Sonja Špiranec
Contribution type
• Accardi, Drabinski and Kumbier: Critical library instruction :
Theories and methods
• Gregory, Higgins – Information literacy and social justice :
Radical professional praxis

19. Behavioral & Social
Sciences Librarian
9% The Journal of
Academic
Librarianship
9%
Communications in
Information Literacy
5%
Library Philosophy
and Practice
5%
portal: Libraries and
the Academy
5%
Urban Library
Journal
5%
Community College
Journal of Research
and Practice
3%
In the Library with
the Lead Pipe
3%
Library Trends
3%
Others (N = 1)
53%
Total
0%
19
Journal productivity - 1

20. N %
Original scientific paper 12 11,76%
Scientific review 34 33,33%
Preliminary report 0 0,00%
Professional paper 51 50,00%
Professional review 5 4,90%
Total 102 100,00%
20Understanding Critical Information Literacy - by Denis Kos and Sonja Špiranec
Article classification

21. 21Understanding Critical Information Literacy - by Denis Kos and Sonja Špiranec
Deductive content analyses
Subject area
• 84,31% LIS
• 15.69% non-LIS (Education, Politics)
Social level
• 88.24% organizational
• 7.84% societal
• 3.92% individual

22. 22
Discussion
• fluctuating publishing patterns
• field activity due to high referal
to the concept
– actual engagement?
• small number of constant
contributors
– need for a CIL journal?
– more CIL focused events?
• the issues of diversity
• more research in transformative
IL pedagogy

23. 23
Conclusion
• not a mature subfield
• more research needs to
focus on IL’s inherent
criticality
• inductive thematic analyses
• taking publishing patterns
seriously

24. 24
References
1. Andrés, A., Measuring Academic Research. Chandos, Oxford (2009)
2. Burdenuk, G.: Living and Learning in the Global Village. In: Lighthall, L.,
Haycock, K. (eds.) Information Rich, but Knowledge Poor? Emerging Issues for
Schools and Libraries Worldwide. 109--117. IASL, Seattle (1997)
3. Elmborg, J.: Critical Information Literacy: Implications for Instructional
Practice. Journal of Academic Librarianship. 32, 2, 192--199 (2006)
4. Harzing, A. W., Wal, R. van der: Google Scholar: A New Data Source for
Citation Analysis. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics. 8, 1, 62--71
(2008)
5. Jacobs, H.: Information Literacy and Reflective Pedagogical Practice. Journal
of Academic Librarianship. 34, 3, 256--262 (2008)
6. Reference Services Review Article Classification,
http://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/products/journals/author_guidelin
es.htm?id=rsr
7. Simmons Holschuh, M.: Librarians as Disciplinary Discourse Mediators: Using
Genre Theory to Move Toward Critical Information Literacy. portal: Libraries
and the Academy. 5, 3, 297--311 (2005)
8. Tuomaala, O., Järvelin, K., Vakkari, P.: Evolution of Library and Information
Science, 1965-2005: Content Analysis of Journal Articles. Journal of ASIS&T.
65, 7, 1446--1462 (2014)
9. Whitworth, A.: The Reflective Information Literacy Educator. Nordic Journal
of Information Literacy in Higher Education. 4, 1, 38--55 (2012)
10.Whitworth, A.: Radical Information Literacy: Reclaiming the Political Heart of
the IL Movement. Chandos, Oxford (2014)

25. 25
Thankyou!