Week 3 Reading Reflection

The first article I read this week was A Discipline-Based Approach to Information Literacy by Ann Grafstein. Grafstein argues that information literacy instruction is the responsibility of both librarians and faculty members, and that their roles are complementary in teaching students "both knowledge about the subject-specific content and research practices of particular disciplines, as well as the broader, process-based principles of research and information retrieval that apply generally across disciplines." This seemed like a strong point to me, particularly as it relates to my own field of law librarianship. The principles of searching for information can be applied broadly, but applying those principles to searching for cases, statutes, law review articles, etc. in legal databases like Lexis and Westlaw is a skill that is almost exclusively taught in law schools. Librarians have the responsibility for teaching those strategies, but faculty members have to model good strategies in the classroom when they're relevant, and should take advantage of "teaching moments" when they appear.

This collaborative approach was discussed in its practical application in On Solid Legal Ground: Bringing Information Literacy to Undergraduate-Level Law Courses by Kenneth H. Ryesky. This piece had what I considered the most ambitious proposals for information literacy instruction. Ryesky not only supports the collaboration between librarians and instructors to maximize students' information literacy development, but also proposes introducing students to legal information search and retrieval strategies in undergraduate-level law courses. Since it's widely accepted among law faculty that students come to their 1L year with little to no knowledge of research strategies that are specific to the study of law, the idea of an incoming class with students who already know their way around Lexis and Westlaw is a little mind-boggling.
Ryesky acknowledges potential problems with his proposal, including the unique citation conventions of legal writing and the lack of standardized pre-law curricula. Although he mentions plenty of other issues as well, these two really stuck with me. Legal citation is tough, requiring strict adherence to a set of standardized formats, commonly the ones from the Blue Book. The average 1L spends many hours struggling with case, statute, and law review citations, and many of them shed a few frustrated tears as they struggle through it. I actually think that forcing undergraduates to grapple with legal citations would cut down on the number of law school applicants pretty significantly, since it's one of the most technical and least rewarding aspects of the first year of law school. That might not be a bad thing; it would be an opportunity to weed out potential law students who would not ultimately enjoy or succeed in studying law.
The lack of standardized curricula could likewise be a problem, although it's possible that increasing information literacy instruction related to law would help to standardize pre-law coursework. As of now, there is no requirement for pre-law education; law students come from disciplines ranging from engineering to English to medicine to anthropology. If students with a designated pre-law background really came to law school with some information literacy already established by their undergraduate coursework, those students would have a clear advantage, and I think that pre-law programs would quickly become more desirable for aspiring lawyers.
Ryesky also presents his own practical approach to implementing information literacy instruction in his undergraduate business law courses. It's helpful and interesting to see how an instructor's approach to information literacy can complement the instruction provided by an academic law library.

Finally, I read Information Literacy Plans: Does Your Law Library Need One? by Judith Gire, which specifically addresses information literacy in the academic law library. This short article made some excellent points about the value of an information literacy plan, including some of the positive outcomes that the law librarians experienced as a result of their plan: greater faculty participation in information literacy education for students, easier program planning for legal research instruction, and (the original motivation for the creation of an information literacy plan in this law library) compliance with accreditation requirements. As a sidenote, I think it's interesting that an accrediting body would require an information literacy plan, and wonder whether that will become a widespread requirement in coming years.
Gire's article also laid out a very practical plan for creating an information literacy plan, and is frank about the lack of available resources for information literacy planning in academic law libraries. I like this article very much, and could see myself returning to it as a resource when I begin my own career as a law librarian.