[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-598780-105":59,"doc-detail-598780-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","rethinking-the-2000-acrl-standards-volume-7-issue-2-reflecting-on-the-standards","Rethinking the 2000 ACRL Standards - Volume 7 - Issue 2 - Reflecting on the Standards","","A reflective article proposes three “rethinks” for recasting the ACRL Standards for information literacy in the coming decades. It challenges the idea of information need as fixed, arguing that needs evolve and uncertainty drives learning. It critiques “extracting information” as an oversimplified, cut-and-paste model, emphasizing constructive learning. It also reframes information literacy as a holistic learning process grounded in the ISP six-stage model, integrating affective, cognitive, and physical actions.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/rethinking-the-2000-acrl-standards-volume-7-issue-2-reflecting-on-the-standards/598780/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/rethinking-the-2000-acrl-standards-volume-7-issue-2-reflecting-on-the-standards/598780.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"awa","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-27","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":24},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What are the three “rethinks” proposed for recasting the ACRL Standards?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"The article proposes rethinking information need, rethinking “extracting information,” and rethinking the holistic learning process from a variety of sources central to information literacy.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"Why does the article reject treating information need as fixed?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"Information need changes and evolves as new information is encountered. In early stages, extensive information seeking often increases uncertainty, and that uncertainty is presented as the beginning of learning and deep understanding.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"What criticism does the article make of the “extracting information” concept?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"It argues that “extracting” promotes a simplistic cut-and-paste approach, implying a single correct set of ideas. The article instead stresses the creative, constructive process of building understanding from conflicting and incompatible sources.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},598780,1792188979,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":24,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":29,"language":139,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144},3985747858093,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_3d24733baf745e90a7e4bdd5f77d97b2","Volume 7, Issue 2, 2013  \nREFLECTING ON THE STANDARDS [ARTICLE]  \nRETHINKING THE 2000 ACRL STANDARDS  \nSome things to consider  \nCarol C. Kuhlthau  \nRutgers, the State University of New Jersey  \nABSTRACT  \nI propose three “rethinks” to consider in recasting the ACRL Standards for information literacy for the coming decades. First, rethink the concept of information need. Second, rethink the notion that information literacy is composed of a set of abilities for “extracting information.”Third, rethink the holistic process of learning from a variety of sources of information that is central to information literacy. The necessity for these “rethinks” are grounded in my extensive studies of students’ experience in the information search process that reveal an evolving, dynamic, holistic process incorporating a series of feelings (affective), thoughts (cognitive) and actions (physical) as described in the six stage model of the ISP (Kuhlthau, 2004) . The challenge is to begin with the premise that information literacy enables a person’s deep thoughtful process of learning from a variety of sources that is essential in a dynamic information environment  \nKuhlthau, Rethinking the 2000 ACRL Standards Communications in Information Literacy 7(2), 2013  \nSometime after the 2000 Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education were published, I gave a talk at an international conference where I defined information literacy according to the Standards as “a set of abilities requiring individuals to recognize when information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate, and use effectively the needed information.”Following my talk, Bob Hayes, the noted library and information science scholar and eminent UCLA professor, suggested that I add wisely to this description of information literacy. He made me question whether a person’s capacity for gaining wisdom through information literacy is captured in the Standards. Over the years I have wondered if the Standards (ACRL, 2000) fully capture the role of information literacy in a person’s capacity, not only for wisdom, but also for deep thinking, reflecting, constructing, innovating, and learning that are the most important purposes of information seeking and use. I have been invited to write this short perspectives piece to share some ideas about rethinking the ACRL Standards. We might start with the premise that information literacy enables a person’s deep thoughtful process of learning from a variety of sources that is at the very core of what it is to be educated in the global information environment. Here are three rethinks to consider in recasting the Standards for information literacy in action for the coming decades.  \nRETHINK THE INFORMATION NEED  \nInformation need is a slippery concept. It doesn’t stay put. A person’s information need changes and evolves with each new piece of information she or he encountersand thinks about. In the 2000 Standards,  \ninformation need sounds like a concrete, fixed thing. Information need often begins with a vague notion that changes with the information found, as Taylor (1968) discovered in his studies at Lehigh so may years ago. In my studies of students’information search process, I found that information actually increases uncertainty rather than reducing it in the early stages of extensive information seeking such as that associated with conducting research paper or term assignment (Kuhlthau, 2004) . What seems like a simple question is really a complex problem as one gets further into the information search. Information need changes as the person progresses through the stages of the information search process. Uncertainty is the beginning of learning and deep understanding. Without a healthy respect for one’s own uncertainty, a person commonly has the sense that something is going wrong when sources seem incompatible and inconsistent with eachother and with one’s preconceived n","cbCaitFsmI9zHUCw","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaitFsmI9zHUCw","pdf",515925,"English","# Reflecting on the Standards\n## Rethink the Information Need\n## Rethink Extracting Information\n## Rethink the Holistic Process of Learning","[{\"question\":\"What are the three “rethinks” proposed for recasting the ACRL Standards?\",\"answer\":\"The article proposes rethinking information need, rethinking “extracting information,” and rethinking the holistic learning process from a variety of sources central to information literacy.\"},{\"question\":\"Why does the article reject treating information need as fixed?\",\"answer\":\"Information need changes and evolves as new information is encountered. In early stages, extensive information seeking often increases uncertainty, and that uncertainty is presented as the beginning of learning and deep understanding.\"},{\"question\":\"What criticism does the article make of the “extracting information” concept?\",\"answer\":\"It argues that “extracting” promotes a simplistic cut-and-paste approach, implying a single correct set of ideas. The article instead stresses the creative, constructive process of building understanding from conflicting and incompatible sources.\"}]","Rethinking the 2000 ACRL Standards - Volume 7 - Issue 2 - Reflecting on the Standards | PDF",1792087585,15]