Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T05:46:41.051Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Metaliteracies, creative practitioners and art libraries: a critical review of the literature

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 April 2017

Duncan Chappell
Duncan Chappell*
Affiliation:
Academic Liaison Librarian, Glasgow School of Art, 164 Renfrew Street, Glasgow G3 6RF, UK Email: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

How do artists, designers, architects and craftspeople seek and deploy information in support of their practice? It is a question that is of central importance to the learning and teaching that art libraries provide, yet one that has also been subject to much debate within the historical and contemporary literature. An attentive reading of this literature reveals three fundamental metanarratives, each underpinned by a particular epistemology, and it is these narratives that have then informed how institutions construct, embed and assess the teaching of information skills to their readers. Only by critically evaluating the literature is it possible to resituate our own practice and that of our respective institutions within a paradigm that is most appropriate for our particular contexts. It is also possible to identify gaps in our collective professional understanding, in the hope of signposting avenues of research potential for the future.

Type
Research Article
Information
Art Libraries Journal , Volume 42 , Special Issue 2: Information Literacy in UK and US Art Libraries , April 2017 , pp. 66 - 72
Copyright
Copyright © ARLIS/UK&Ireland 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Zach, L., “When is ‘enough’ enough? Modelling the information seeking and stopping behaviour of senior arts administrators”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 56(1) (2005): 23–35 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2. Beaudoin, J., “Image and text: a review of the literature concerning the information needs and research behaviours of art historians”, Art Documentation 24(2) (2005): 34–37 Google Scholar

3. Stam, D. C., “Tracking art historians: on information needs and information-seeking behaviour”, Art Libraries Journal 14(3) (1989): 13–16 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4. Cowan, S., “Informing visual poetry: information needs and sources of artists”, Art Documentation 23(2) (2004): 14 Google Scholar

5. Cobbledick, S., “The information-seeking behaviour of artists: exploratory interviews”, Library Quarterly 66(4) (1996): 343–372 Google Scholar

6. Hemmig, W. S., “The information-seeking behaviour of visual artists: a literature review”, Journal of Documentation, 64(3) (2008): 343–362 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7. Rockenbach, B. & Fabian, C. A., “Visual literacy in the age of participation”, Art Documentation 27(2) (2008): 27 Google Scholar

8. Association of College & Research Libraries, Visual Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education (Chicago: ACRL, 2011)Google Scholar, Available http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/visualliteracy

9. Rockenbach & Fabian, “Visual literacy”, 26

10. Rockenbach & Fabian, “Visual literacy”, 29

11. Ipri, T., “Introducing transliteracy: what does it mean to academic libraries?”, College & Research Libraries News 71(10) (2010): 532 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

12. Mason, H. & Robinson, L., “The information-related behaviour of emerging artists and designers: inspiration and guidance for new practitioners”, Journal of Documentation 67(1) (2011): 160 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

13. Gregory, T., “Under-served or under-surveyed: the information needs of studio art faculty in the South Western United States”, Art Documentation 26(2) (2007): 57–66 Google Scholar

14. Mason & Robinson, “The information-related behaviour”, 159–180

15. Reed, B. & Tanner, D. R., “Information needs and library services for the fine arts faculty”, Journal of Academic Librarianship 27(3) (2001): 229–233 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

16. S. Cowan, “Informing visual poetry”, 15

17. Chappell, D., “Information skills for art and design: the InfosmART project at the Glasgow School of Art”, SCONUL Focus 47 (2009): 12 Google Scholar, Available http://www.sconul.ac.uk/page/focus-47

18. Association of College & Research Libraries, Visual Literacy Competency Standards

19. S. Cowan, “Informing visual poetry”, 18

20. Hatt, F., “Towards a rationale for library user education in art and design”, in User Education in Art and Design: Theory into Practice, ed. Avann, M. & Wood, K. (London: Art Libraries Society, 1980), 9 Google Scholar

21. Stam, D. C., “How art historians look for information”, Art Documentation 16(2) (1997): 30 Google Scholar

22. Stam, D. C., “Artists and art libraries”, Art Libraries Journal 20(2) (1995): 21 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

23. S. Cowan, “Informing visual poetry”, 14

24. Avann, M. & Wood, K., ‘Theory into practice’, in User Education in Art and Design: Theory into Practice, ed. Avann, M. & Wood, K. (London: Art Libraries Society, 1980), 11–13 Google Scholar

25. S. Cowan, “Informing visual poetry”, 15

26. Bawden, D., “Information systems and the stimulation of creativity”, Journal of Information Science 12(5) (1986): 203–216 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

27. Pacey, P., “How art students use libraries – if they do”, Art Libraries Journal 7 (1982): 33–38 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

28. Rockenbach & Fabian, “Visual literacy”, 30

29. Schiff, D., “Information behaviors of deaf artists”, Art Documentation 29(2) (2010): 44–47 Google Scholar

30. S. Cowan, “Informing visual poetry”, 17

31. Jiao, Q. G. & Onwuegbuzie, A. J., “Identifying library anxiety through students' learning-modality preferences”, Library Quarterly 69(2) (1999): 202–216 Google Scholar

32. Van Zijl, C. & Gericke, E. M., “Information seeking patterns of artists and art scholars at the Vaal Triangle Technikon”, South African Journal of Library and Information Science 66(1) (1998): 24 Google Scholar, Available http://sajlis.journals.ac.za/pub/article/view/1451

33. Rom, C. & Lantz, E. A., “Embedding library instruction in the design curriculum”, Art Documentation, 7(4) (1988): 137–139 Google Scholar

34. Frank, P., “Student artists in the library: an investigation of how they use general academic libraries for their creative needs”, Journal of Academic Librarianship 25(6) (1999): 445–455 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

35. Greer, K., “Art students and information literacy activities”, College and Research Libraries News, 77(5) (2016): 231 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

36. Bliss, L. & Rockenbach, B., “Persuading architecture faculty that library instruction is essential: a Yale case study”, Art Documentation 21(2) (2002): 22 Google Scholar

37. Pisciotta, H. A., “Let's talk: an approach to bibliographic instruction for the studio major – part one”, Art Documentation 8(1) (1989): 24–25 Google Scholar

38. Van Zijl & Gericke, “Information seeking patterns”, 23–33, and, Van Zijl, C. & Gericke, E. M., “Methods used by South African visual artists to find information”, Mousaion 19(1) (2001): 3–24 Google Scholar

39. Lo, P. & Chu, W., “Information for inspiration: understanding information-seeking behaviour and library usage of students at the Hong Kong Design Institute”, Australian Academic and Research Libraries 46(2) (2015): 101–120 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

40. Schiff, “Information behaviors”, 44–47

41. Van Zijl & Gericke, “Information seeking patterns”, 23–33

42. Graveline, L., “Library services to the African American art community”, Art Documentation 17(2) (1998): 8–9 Google Scholar

43. Pawley, C., “Information literacy: a contradictory coupling”, Library Quarterly 73(4) (2003): 445 Google Scholar

44. Walczak, D. A., Sammet, D. L. & Reuter, M. E., “A program for introducing information literary to applied art and design students”, Communications in Information Literacy 3(2) (2009): 194 Google Scholar, Available http://www.comminfolit.org/index.php?journal=cil&page=article&op=view&path%5B%5D=Vol3-2009AR11

45. Halverson, A. & Volker, J., “Information literacy in the electronic arts library: strategies for the hybrid professional”, IFLA Journal 26(2) (2000): 120–122 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

46. Gregory, “Under-served or under-surveyed”, 58

47. Avann & Wood, “Theory into practice”, 11

48. Rom & Lantz, “Embedding library instruction”, 138

49. Halverson, A., “Confronting information literacy in an academic arts library”, Art Documentation 27(2) (2008): 34–38 Google Scholar

50. Johnson, D., “An integrated bibliographic instruction program for the architectural studies program at Clemson University: planning and early implementation”, Art Reference Services Quarterly 1(2) (1993): 21–29 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and, McCleskey, S. E. & Allison, D. J., “Collaboration for service learning in architectural education”, Art Documentation 19(1) (2000): 40–43 Google Scholar

51. Stylianopoulos, L. W., “It's all in the company you keep: library skills credit courses in the art library”, Art Documentation 22(1) (2003): 29–32 Google Scholar

52. Vecchiola, R., “Using ARLIS/NA ‘Information Competencies for Students in Design Disciplines' in course integrated information literacy instruction at Washington University in St Louis”, Art Documentation 30(1) (2011): 74–78 Google Scholar

53. Greer, “Art students”, 231

54. Bliss & Rockenbach, “Persuading architecture faculty”, 21–24

55. McGuinness, C., “Exploring strategies for integrated information literacy: from academic champions to institution-wide change”, Communications in Information Literacy 1(1) (2007): 30–31 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, Available http://www.comminfolit.org/index.php?journal=cil&page=article&op=view&path%5B%5D=Spring2007AR3

56. Rom & Lantz, “Embedding library instruction”, 139

57. Zanin-Yost, A. & Tapley, E., “Learning in the art classroom: making the connection between research and art”, Art Documentation 27(2) (2008): 44 Google Scholar

58. Haines, A., “Out in the left field: the benefits of field librarianship for studio arts programs”, Art Documentation 23(1) (2004): 18–20 Google Scholar

59. Salisbury, F. & Ellis, J., “Online and face-to-face: evaluating methods for teaching information literacy skills to undergraduate arts students”, Library Review 52(5) (2003): 209–217 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

60. Walczak, Sammet & Reuter, “A program for introducing”, 194

61. Stylianopoulos, “It's all in the company”, 29–32

62. Halverson, “Confronting information literacy”, 36

63. Bliss & Rockenbach, “Persuading architecture faculty”, 21–24

64. Zanin-Yost & Tapley, “Learning in the art classroom”, 40–44

65. Association of College & Research Libraries, Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education (Chicago: ACRL, 2000)Google Scholar, Available http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/informationliteracycompetency

66. Chappell, “Information skills”, 12–15

67. Quality Assurance Agency, UK Quality Code for Higher Education: Subject Benchmark Statement for Art and Design (Gloucester: QAA, 2008)Google Scholar, Available http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/Publications/Documents/Subject-benchmark-statement---Art-and-design-.pdf

68. ARLIS/NA, Information Competencies for Students in Design Disciplines (Oak Creek WI: ARLIS/NA, 2006)Google Scholar, Available https://www.arlisna.org/publications/arlis-na-research-reports/148-information-competencies-for-students-in-design-disciplines

69. SCONUL, Seven Pillars of Information Literacy (London: SCONUL, 2011)Google Scholar, Available http://www.sconul.ac.uk/page/seven-pillars-of-information-literacy

70. Vecchiola, “Using ARLIS/NA”, 75

71. Ball, H. et al. , Core Competencies and Core Curricula for the Art Library and Visual Resources Professions (Oak Creek WI: ARLIS/NA, 2006)Google Scholar

72. Walczak, Sammet & Reuter, “A program for introducing”, 193–203

73. Halverson, “Confronting information literacy”, 36

74. Salisbury & Ellis, “Online and face-to-face”, 215

75. Wayne, K. M., “Form follows information”, Journal of Architectural Education 49(4) (1996): 271 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

76. Salisbury & Ellis, “Online and face-to-face”, 211

77. Kirkpatrick, D. L., Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels, Second edition (San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 1998)Google Scholar

78. Salisbury & Ellis, “Online and face-to-face”, 212

79. Salisbury & Ellis, “Online and face-to-face”, 214