Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.

The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year.

ANCIL: a new curriculum for information literacy: case study

Secker, Jane, Coonan, Emma·2018·Information Literacy Beyond Library 2.0

Abstract

You have learned something. That always feels at first as if you had lost something. (H. G. Wells) Introduction Recent research suggests that the information-seeking behaviour and needs of students are changing (CIBER/UCL, 2008; SCONUL, 2011 among others), driven largely by the changing experiences and expectations of ‘the Google generation’, who have grown up with access to the internet being the norm. While the Google generation and ‘digital native’ terms have been debated and widely criticized (Jones et al., 2010), it is clear that information literacy programmes over the next five years will need to adapt and respond to the needs of current students. This case study describes a short project based at Cambridge University Library and funded by the Arcadia Programme (http://arcadiaproject. lib.cam.ac.uk), a three-year initiative designed to explore the role of academic libraries in the digital age. The project ran from May until July 2011 and sought to develop a practical curriculum for information literacy that meets the needs of the undergraduate student entering higher education over the next five years. A new curriculum for information literacy: project overview Aims and objectives The project sought to develop a practical curriculum for information literacy that meets the needs of the undergraduate student entering higher education over the next five years. Specifically, the project aimed: • to understand the information needs of future undergraduate students on enteri…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.29085/9781856048804.017

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

See all 4

Metadata

Authors
Secker, J., & Coonan, E.
Affiliations
  • London School of Economics and Political Science (GB)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
Venue
Information Literacy Beyond Library 2.0
Publisher
Facet
Published
2018-07-05
Pages
171-190
OpenAlex
W4247315616
Cited by
3
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2020: 1
FWCI
2.49
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Facet eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Library Science and Information Literacy
  • Social Sciences › Education › Literacy, Media, and Education
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
Keywords
information literacy, curriculum development, academic libraries, undergraduate students, information needs, Google generation, digital natives, information seeking, Cambridge University Library

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: ANCIL: a new curriculum for information literacy: case study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.29085/9781856048804.017
The paper
Secker, J., & Coonan, E. (2018). ANCIL: a new curriculum for information literacy: case study. Information Literacy Beyond Library 2.0. https://doi.org/10.29085/9781856048804.017

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.