Looking In By Looking Out: The DNA of Composition in the Information Age

Conclusion

In this essay, we argue several points: the value of faculty-librarian partnerships; the importance of correlation/triangulation for developing information literacy skills, specifically those related to research and critical thinking; and the need for course redesign to impact curricular change. Re-envisioning the context and content of information literacy within the parameters of composition instruction is emerging as a field of research for both compositionists and librarians, and more scholarship on this and related topics are likely forthcoming. We believe the reports by Veronica Reyes (2006) and Leslie Sult and Vicki Mills (2006) represent only a few examples of the evolving partnerships between faculty and librarians designed to address information literacy in the digital age, and we expect more reports to follow soon.

It is interesting to note Reyes argues against library instruction and calls for librarians to “become consultants to teaching faculty and graduate students, encouraging and helping them to incorporate research/information literacy skills into their class curricula” (Reyes, 2006, p. 307). While we support in part these sentiments, we believe it prudent to issue a caution against the notion of incorporating information literacy into composition curriculum when in fact it should be acknowledged information literacy is or should be an integral part of the composition curriculum. We also caution against the abandonment of traditional library instruction in that although it may be true “the traditional one-shot [library] instructional session could never teach students everything they need to know about information literacy” (Sult & Mills, 2006, p. 370); it nevertheless serves a vital role in introducing students to the resources and services of the library.

Furthermore, given correlation is largely dependent on collaborations that emerge from the inside out, from teachers and programs to librarians and libraries, it seems unwise for library instruction to disappear as “the primary means of building information competencies in students” (Reyes, 2006, p. 307) when these endeavors could potentially serve to increase the breadth and depth of collaborative efforts focusing on the delivery of information literacy instruction. It is our fervent hope the end result of correlation will be to facilitate the reshaping of composition curriculum as information literacy becomes entrenched or re-entrenched in the standards established for academic success. We acknowledge there are significant philosophical chasms and logistical barriers to cross first, including many of the issues raised here such as “college-eligible” versus “college-ready,” proscriptive curricular guidelines versus prescriptive learning outcomes, and ultimately the course content for composition instruction. Librarians like Reyes have made a passionate plea for collaboration, yet the success of collaborative efforts may very well be dependent upon compositionists coming to terms with the idea that information literacy is the DNA of composition. Until then, Composition Studies as a field will fall short in its response to this plea.

The opportunity to respond is at hand. In fact, it seems from the perspective of this writing program administrator and academic librarian, a hallmark of professionalism in both fields is collaboration. Since librarians are charged with supporting the curriculum and compositionists typically support collaborative pedagogy (see Rebecca Moore Howard’s summary essay “Collaborative Pedagogy” (2001)), it seems time to forge stronger, macrocosmic relationships—in other words move from building relationships between composition instructors and librarians to building relationships between composition programs and college and research libraries. As society moves further and further into the digital age, some would argue these types of collaborations are critical to the future success of composition and library instruction.

Finally, we cannot overemphasize the need for compositionist-librarian collaborations. In fact, it has been fifteen years since Duane Roen and Geraldine McNenny made one of the most poignant calls for collaborative scholarship in “The Case for Collaborative Scholarship in Rhetoric and Composition,” published in a 1991 issue of Rhetoric Review. Roen and McNenny cite many reasons for the need and value of collaborative scholarship, with many of these arguments now commonly accepted. One argument they make for collaborative scholarship is the need for composition professionals to inform others of the value of their work (p. 296). This need still exists though it may not be as pressing now as it was then; however, we would argue the larger need is to be more informed by the work of others. Composition professionals have always looked out to look in, exploring the research of other fields to learn more about themselves and their work. And since composition students are immersed in a world of rapidly evolving technologies and are confronted by a rapidly increasing number of potential information resources, the notion of what is information has expanded as well. Given the current state of events it seems both well-timed and most productive for composition specialists to enter into collaborative endeavors with librarians to conduct research focused on theoretical considerations, pedagogical explorations, and curricula redesigns.

Collaboration manifests itself in the work of composition instructors and librarians, yet these two groups rarely enter into formal collaborations called for in this essay. In a recent national study conducted by researchers at the University of Rochester (2006), for example, Shirley Ricker and Isabel Kaplan found less than half (47%) of the 336 respondents who identified themselves as writing program administrators, composition instructors, writing center staff, and librarians have participated in some type of formal collaboration for the delivery of information literacy instruction. As it was argued earlier, change requires work at the local level. Nevertheless, we are compelled to recognize the phenomena of confluence and the implementation of triangulation at the system, institutional, and programmatic levels as these all have an impact on the teaching of college composition, and we argue these phenomena are greatly enhanced by collaborations emerging from the inside out. In fact, the University of Rochester researchers point out that in instances of library-composition collaboration 65% of such have been initiated by librarians (Ricker & Kaplan, 2006). Since those in first-year composition programs can likely impact the development of students' information literacy skills more than their library counterparts (due both to the current structure of general education and to the importance of connecting information literacy skills to actual curricula), it seems appropriate for compositionists to initiate more collaborative efforts with their campus librarians.