Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 165Library Science and Information LiteracyInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsEducational Strategies and Epistemologies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 38 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Sociocultural Learning Theories and Information Literacy Teaching Activities in Higher Education

Open access
Wang, Li·2007·Reference & User Services Quarterly
DOI 10.5860/rusq.47n2.149
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This article introduces collaborative learning models based on sociocultural learning theories and discusses their potential for developing more effective learning opportunities in information literacy teaching. As described in the research of Vygotsky and other theoreticians, sociocultural learning theories are learner-centered and provide insight into collaborative approaches to student learning. These theories take into account the social and cultural aspects of acquiring knowledge. Collaborative learning, as outlined in the literature review, is an effective means of increasing student achievement and cognitive development. Research also shows that in a community-of-learners, a learner's potential performance level is increased. In the last section of this article, several collaborative learning models are introduced: the jigsaw model, the reciprocal model, and collaborative peer groups, including problem-and resource-based learning. These models are then applied to information literacy teaching to demonstrate how collaborative learning approaches enhance the teaching. At the end, a comparison of the traditional library classroom and the community-of-learners environment is introduced; the article concludes that the information literacy community-of-learners is an effective learning environment to improve student learning.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5860/rusq.47n2.149

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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

Show all 38 references

Cited by

See all 165

Related

Metadata

Authors
Wang, L.
Affiliations
University of Auckland (NZ)
Corresponding author
Wang, Li
ORCID
Wang, Li
Venue
Reference & User Services Quarterly
Publisher
American Library Association
Published
2007-12-01
Volume
47
Issue
2
Pages
149-158
ISSN
1094-9054 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.5860/rusq.47n2.149
OpenAlex
W2074972138
Cited by
160
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 3
FWCI
27.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Reference & User Services Quarterly (publishedVersion)
  • ResearchSpace (University of Auckland) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Library Science and Information Literacy
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
Keywords
sociocultural theory, information literacy instruction, cooperative learning, community of learners, reciprocal teaching, peer learning groups, problem-based learning, resource-based learning, Vygotsky, higher education, library instruction

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

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.