1. 1 Enabling Knowledge Creation: An Organizational Development Approach for Library Centrality Mary M. Somerville, Ph.D. California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo, CA msomervi@calpoly.edu

2. 2 Organizational Development Ideal The organizational learning environment will foster deeper – and ‘actionable’ - understanding of issues inherent in developing information literacy within various educational contexts.

3. 3 Organizational Assumptions and Learning Priorities Organizational conception of information is ‘real problem’ so ‘knowledge enabling’ experiences aim to: Surface information conceptions and advance their complexity – e.g., understand ‘sources’ (textual, social, physical, and sensory) as more than ‘in need of’ metadata description (’control’) Stimulate information sharing and reflective dialogue – e.g., activate learning experiences that produce appreciated benefits from exposure to diverse perspectives

4. 4 Organizational Knowledge Creation Theories Systemic ‘big picture’ thinking (Checkland/UK) Social ‘information to knowledge’ exchange and creation processes (Nonaka/Japan) Differentiated ‘information encounter’ (and usage outcomes) experiences (Bruce/Australia)

5. 5 Early Information Literacy Conception

6. 6 Shared Workplace and Classroom Learning Results Intellectual—question assumptions, improve thinking, and deepen understanding. Social—encourage cooperation and awareness, develop social identity, and foster belonging and community. Personal—develop self-awareness and self-efficacy, encourage commitment, and enable self-expression. Practical—develop teamwork skills, expand written and oral communication, and advance group proficiencies.

7. 7 Emergent Workplace Information Conceptions Information control paired with information usage Information literacy aligned with disciplinary mastery ‘Meaning making’ occurs through social negotiation

8. 8 Formative and Summative Learning Assessment Continuous KWL reflection: What do you know? What do you need to know? How do you want to learn it? … informs Research Information Services & Education (RISE) forum, database, and education system design and content.

9. 9 Initial Interactive Processes Assessment

10. 10 Soft System Methodology Processes for Organizational Meaning (POM)

11. 11 Participatory Design & Organizational Evaluation User generated, user implemented, user interpreted research on library systems and services, including focus groups, usability studies, campus surveys, and stakeholder interviews Qualitative, evidence-based, interactive ‘sense making’ dialogue that promotes learning through iterative problem identification and exploration

12. 12 ‘Master Teacher’ Leadership Principles Leaders foster a learning environment conducive to enabling knowledge creation through reflective inquiry and information exchange. They consistently demonstrate and encourage contextualizing systems thinking. They encourage – and acknowledge – boundary crossing relationship building. They practice explicit ‘relational information literacy’ in the workplace.

13. 13 Sustaining Organizational Synergies Illuminating ‘intersubjective’ dialogue and reflection (Lloyd) Expanding boundaries of concern and influence Continuing evidence-based information practice (Partridge & Hallam) Evolving purposes, processes, and relationships

14. 14 New Campus Learning and Teaching Roles Creators of applied educational theory and producers of active learning experiences, which are information-resource based and information literacy-enabling... that build upon (and extend) workplace learning experience outcomes.

15. 15 Knowledge-able University Outcomes Knowledge Management ‘Learning collections’ development – faculty curricular collaborations Digital research portals – student research partnerships (Rogers) Knowledge Integration ‘Knowledge Making’ New Media course (Gillette) Literature-Based Scientific Learning (LBSL) case studies (Elrod)

16. 16 Information Literacy Education Conceptions Content Frame – disciplinary viewpoint Competency Frame – performance orientation Learning-to-Learn Frame – constructivist process Personal Relevance Frame – experiential engagement Social Impact Frame – societal implications Relational Frame – experiential discernment (Bruce, Edwards, Lupton)

17. 17 Theoretical Foundation for Advancing Library Centrality Originating, exchanging, and exercising individually held information to enable collective knowledge sharing and creation (Nonaka) Valuing campus constituencies’ situated perspectives and establishing exchange relationships that support inquiry and build community (Checkland) Applying expanded information finding, interpreting, and using conceptions for social learning through ‘meta-level’ reflection and dialogue (Bruce)

18. 18 Selected Core References Bruce, C. (1997). The Relational Approach: A New Model for Information Literacy. The New Review of Information and Library Research 3: 1-22. Bruce, C., Edwards, S., & Lupton, M. (2006). Six Frames for Information Literacy Education: A Conceptual Framework for Interpreting the Relationship between Theory and Practice. Italics 5(1): 1-18. http://www.ics.heacademy.ac.uk/italics/vol5-1/pdf/sixframes_final%20_1_.pdf http://www.ics.heacademy.ac.uk/italics/vol5-1/pdf/sixframes_final%20_1_.pdf Checkland, P. B. (1999). Systems Thinking, Systems Practice: Includes a 30- year Retrospective, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, England Lloyd, A. (2005). Information Literacy: Different Contexts, Different Concepts, Different Truths? Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 37 (2): 82- 88. Nonaka, I, Konno, N., & Toyama, R. (2000). SECI, Ba and Leadership: A Unified Model of Dynamic Knowledge Creation. Long Range Planning 33:5-34. Partridge, H., & Hallam, G. (2005). Developing a Culture of Evidence Based Practice Within the Library and Information Profession. Paper presented at IFLA World Library and Information Congress, Oslo, Norway.