[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-598778-105":59,"doc-detail-598778-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","revising-reception-the-new-acrl-information-literacy-competency-standards","Revising reception - The new ACRL Information Literacy Competency Standards","","The educational standards for information literacy generate a spectrum of reactions, ranging from full acceptance and implementation to criticism and blame. This paper argues that revising the ACRL Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education requires librarians and information literacy advocates to practice critical, conscious, and conscientious reception. It emphasizes shared responsibility for reading and deploying the standards and calls for deeper community-focused understanding of information literacy development.",{"@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/revising-reception-the-new-acrl-information-literacy-competency-standards/598778/",{"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/revising-reception-the-new-acrl-information-literacy-competency-standards/598778.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"awa","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-05","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":34},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What responses to the educational standards does the paper discuss?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"The paper describes reactions ranging from wholesale acceptance and deployment to criticism, blame, and even indifference.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"What does the author argue should accompany the revision of the ACRL standards?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"The revision must be matched by librarians’ and advocates’ critical, conscious, and conscientious reception, including careful reading and deployment.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"Why does the paper challenge the “individual learner” model?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"It argues that people produce, read, and interpret texts in communities, so information literacy development should reflect social complexities rather than learning in isolation.","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},598778,1792165621,{"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":34,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":34,"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]  \nTHE NEW ACRL INFORMATION LITERACY COMPETENCY STANDARDS  \nRevising reception  \nBenjamin R. Harris Trinity University  \nABSTRACT  \nThe publication of educational standards inspires a variety of responses, from wholesale acceptance and deployment to criticism and blame. The author of this paper contends that therevision of the ACRL’s Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education must be accompanied by a critical, conscious, and conscientious reception by librarians and information literacy advocates.  \nHarris, The New ACRL Competency Standards Communications in Information Literacy 7(2), 2013  \nINTRODUCTION  \nThe ACRL Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education (Standards) is currently undergoing revision and will be finished and published to fanfare and angst. Some of us will take hold of the new Standards wholesale and revise our instruction programming and planning. Some of us will resist, critique, and question the new version of learning goals, outcomes, and performance indicators; and some of us will long for the former document. Some of us may even be indifferent to this publication. These are all normal responses to change. We should encourage and understand these varied reactions.  \nBut we should not forget the most important part of the process involved in the revision of the Standards. We have seen the current Standards criticized because they do not include or do everything we could possibly have imagined; likewise, we have seen amass genuflection to their authority. We know better, this time. As we anticipate their revision, as professionals and information literacy advocates, we must prepare to revise our reception of the Standards. We must place the responsibility for a conscious and conscientious reading and deployment of the Standards squarelyon the shoulders of those of us who utilize it to guide our teaching, instruction programs, professional practice, and research efforts.  \nWe must do more and better work to understand information literacy development as a community activity.  \nThe Standards include learning outcomesand performance indicators that hinge on an individual and his or her growth and development during the process of finding, evaluating, selecting, citing, and using  \ninformation. We know, however, that the individual as a learner is something of a fallacy. James Elmborg (2006) agrees, writing that “people produce, read, and interpret texts in communities, not in isolation. Communities reach consensus about interpretation, sometimes easily and sometimes contentiously”(p. 195) .  \nThe academic disciplines and educational programs that produce graduates—future professionals and, in some cases, professors—are the communities with whom most higher education librarians interact. We know that this is just one of many communities in which one may participate. Information is found, read, translated, and also created by a wide variety of formal and informal communities, from small social groups to large professional organizations. The individual is rarely in the position of learning and growing outside of these social interactions and responsibilities. Rather, it may be within the structure and order or the chaos and confusion of other voices from those communities that our most transformative information literacy learning events occur.  \nDo we change the word individual that is used in the Standards to better reflect the social complexities inherent in learning? This would be only a cosmetic change. The use of the word may stand, but it is our understanding of the word that must be complicated to consider the potential and limitations of learning objectives that focus on an individual who exists outside of time, history, and context.  \nInstead, we may begin by looking at ourselves, at the myriad communities that have helped us to form and hone our information literate practices, but also the ways that in","cbCais24eTfXmBDC","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCais24eTfXmBDC","pdf",400451,"English","# Introduction\n## Anticipating and preparing for revision\n## Reception as a shared professional responsibility\n## Learning as a community activity","[{\"question\":\"What responses to the educational standards does the paper discuss?\",\"answer\":\"The paper describes reactions ranging from wholesale acceptance and deployment to criticism, blame, and even indifference.\"},{\"question\":\"What does the author argue should accompany the revision of the ACRL standards?\",\"answer\":\"The revision must be matched by librarians’ and advocates’ critical, conscious, and conscientious reception, including careful reading and deployment.\"},{\"question\":\"Why does the paper challenge the “individual learner” model?\",\"answer\":\"It argues that people produce, read, and interpret texts in communities, so information literacy development should reflect social complexities rather than learning in isolation.\"}]","Revising reception - The new ACRL Information Literacy Competency Standards | PDF",1792087582,18]