ERIC EJ1089004: Info Lit 2.0 or Déjà Vu?

2013·0.4 MB·English

by  ERIC

Volume 7, Issue 2, 2013
REFLECTING ON THE STANDARDS [ARTICLE]
I L 2.0 D V ?
NFO IT OR ÉJÀ U
Patricia Anne Ianuzzi
University of Nevada—Las Vegas
ABSTRACT

In 1999, the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) convened a national task
force to draft Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education. ACRL has
recently launched a revision to those standards. The original standards were influential because
they helped advance a national need in higher education at the time: a shift to outcomes based
learning. Fourteen years later, information literacy stands alongside oral and written
communication, critical thinking and ethical reasoning as learning outcomes broadly
acknowledged as needing to be integrated, with disciplinary content, into the curriculum. This
author believes that, in contrast to the first process, the current recommendations for revision
are focused on the wrong question and include the wrong people to address it. The point isn't to
further define, redefine and write more, less or different learning outcomes. The challenge now
is to move ahead and address the current concerns of education reform: vertical integration with
disciplinary knowledge, curriculum mapping, and assessment. There are a host of challenges
and libraries and librarians are perfectly poised to help.
98
Ianuzzi, Info Lit 2.0 or Déjà Vu? Communications in Information Literacy 7(2), 2013
I appreciate the invitation from recommendations would suffice. However,
Communications in Information Literacy I see little to gain from continuing the
(CIL) to write this essay for this special decades-old battle of the literacies. That
issue, “Reflecting on the Standards.” Upon discussion is a red herring, which leads
reflection, my thoughts on this topic are ACRL and advocates of reform down the
better expressed by another title, “Info Lit path of professional naval gazing at a time
2.0 or Déjà Vu?” when academic librarians should expand
their focus to the challenges of
In June 2012, the Association of College undergraduate and graduate education.
and Research Libraries (ACRL) Information
Literacy Competency Standards Review Fourteen years ago, the first task force
Task Force submitted a recommendation became embroiled in the debate over
that the Information Literacy Competency semantics, and advocates on all sides
Standards for Higher Education (herewith lobbied for their favorite phrases from lofty
referred to as Standards), adopted in 2000 soapboxes. These advocates jockeyed for
“should not be re-approved as they exist their favorite slice of the literacy pie:
today, and should be extensively revised in computer literacy, IT literacy, technology
the near future” (ACRL, 2012). It is worth literacy, technoliteracy, digital literacy,
noting that of the eight recommendations in visual literacy, media literacy, multimedia
the task force report, seven focus on the literacy, textual literacy, new literacies,
articulation of the learning outcomes; and multiple literacies, 21st-century literacy,
the eighth calls for better alignment with the metaliteracy, emotional literacy, civic
American Association of School Librarians’ literacy, health literacy, financial literacy,
Standards for the 21st Century Learner scientific literacy, ethical literacy, moral
(2007). literacy, intercultural literacy, multicultural
literacy, cultural literacy, international
The original Standards proved influential in literacy, etc., etc., etc.
2000 because they had the right focus at the
right time. Within the broader context of Educational literature abounds with authors
education reform, there was a pressing need who are trying to label and make sense of
for colleges and universities to articulate the outcomes associated with the literacy du
measurable learning outcomes that extended jour. The 2000 Standards provided one of a
beyond disciplinary content knowledge. handful of possible frameworks at a time
Much has changed in the past 14 years, in when campuses struggled mightily with
some part due to the influence of the work defining learning outcomes. The
of information literacy advocates. I believe participation of the accreditation
that the new recommendations are focused associations and the American Association
on the wrong issues and that the process is of Higher Education (AAHE) helped the
flawed by excluding a wide range of original task force to focus on broader
education professionals who are focused on learning outcomes that addressed the
the reform of the assessment of student widespread and enduring consensus of the
learning. need to address critical thinking. Ultimately,
the task force chose an approach that
If the challenge before the reviewers was to applied critical thinking in the information
reword, reframe, and rehash the writing of environment.
each learning outcome, then the
99
Ianuzzi, Info Lit 2.0 or Déjà Vu? Communications in Information Literacy 7(2), 2013
If academic librarians determine that and oral and written communication, the
another approach is needed now, that is all Standards provided a focal point for others
well and good; but a new approach should to determine their own definitions. In 2013,
move research librarians forward. I believe it is common for institutions to articulate
librarians are long past the need to define or their own sets of learning outcomes,
redefine information literacy. That concept, informed by their own unique cultures,
thanks in part to the tireless work of our disciplinary or otherwise. The Task Force
professional colleagues, is recognized and did not create the Standards to be adopted
linked to broader national frameworks for by others, and indeed numerous
defining student learning outcomes. accreditation associations at that time stated
that they do not adopt or endorse learning
In the late 1990s, accreditation associations outcomes. These groups expect each
shifted their focus from input/output campus to develop its own relevant
measures to the articulation of student outcomes.
learning outcomes. While many colleges
and universities indicated they wanted If I have learned anything in working on this
students who could think critically, write, issue, it is that the process of developing
solve problems, and navigate the standards is important for teaching faculty.
technologically complex information Educators need to use language that
environment, few had identified metrics to resonates best with their unique campus
measure such skills; and fewer knew how culture and values. And it is at this level that
these skills and abilities might be integrated individuals advocating for linkages to other
and assessed within the disciplines. literacies and learning outcomes can step up
to demonstrate those connections, be they
Two institutions—Alverno College and through global learning, civic engagement,
Kings College—were frequently cited for the importance of affect, or the centrality of
their focus on articulated student learning student research. This enables learning
outcomes and developmental assessment outcomes to be owned at the course and
plans. These institutions provided one of the curriculum level. The Standards simply
first clearly articulated sets of student serve as a framework for campuses to
learning outcomes for skills and abilities to develop their own measurable outcomes.
stand alongside content knowledge. Created
with the involvement of AAHE and the Over the years, information literacy learning
Middle State Commission on Higher outcomes evolved and were applied and
Education (MSCHE), the Standards debuted integrated on campuses and in higher
on the national stage at a time when many education. Thanks to a host of academics, in
other campuses sought similar products. libraries and beyond, information literacy
learning outcomes are now ubiquitous. As a
Advocates of information literacy have result of the work of Patricia Breivik and the
come a long way. The Standards provided National Forum on Information Literacy
a framework for both campuses and (NFIL), information literacy is broadly
associations to develop their own recognized as a skill for lifelong learning.
articulation of needed skills and abilities. By
reviewing specific outcomes that resonated Following the release of the Standards in
with those advocating for critical thinking— 2000, almost every subsequent education
problem-based learning, inquiry learning, initiative has called for an assessment of
100
Ianuzzi, Info Lit 2.0 or Déjà Vu? Communications in Information Literacy 7(2), 2013
learning outcomes, whether labeled as help advance this national movement to
information literacy or critical thinking or shift to outcomes-based learning, including
communication skills. The Association of information literacy. Fourteen years later,
American Colleges and information literacy stands alongside oral
Universities (AAC&U, 2007a) LEAP and written communication, critical
report, College Learning for a New Global thinking, and ethical reasoning as a learning
Century, identifies information literacy as outcome that needs to be integrated with
one of the essential learning outcomes that disciplinary content and embedded into
prepare students for 21st century challenges. curricula. The DQP is a national framework
It stands alongside other “Intellectual and that defines the learning outcomes, a
Practical Skills,” such as oral and written framework in use by institutions of higher
communication, inquiry, and critical education in 45 of 50 states (National
thinking (AAC&U, 2007a) The recent Institute for Learning Outcomes
Degree Qualifications Profile (DQP) from Assessment, 2012).
the Lumina Foundation recommends a
specific list of learning outcomes for all The DQP is gaining traction across different
graduates of postsecondary institutions. As types of institutions. In its 2012 report,
described in the report, those outcomes Reclaiming the American Dream, the
serve collectively as a “qualifications American Association of Community
framework” that “illustrates clearly what Colleges (AACC) recommended
students should be expected to know and be “incorporating incentives for student
able to do once they earn their degrees—at performance and progress into student
any level” (Lumina Foundation, 2011). The financial aid programs at the federal, state,
DQP articulates specific learning outcomes and local levels and implementing the
“that benchmark the associate, bachelor’s Degree Qualifications Profile to ensure
and master’s degrees—which constitute the credentials earned represent real knowledge
great majority of postsecondary degrees and skills.”
awarded by U.S. colleges and universities—
regardless of a student’s field of I agree that academic libraries should
specialization” (Lumina Foundation, collaborate with K-12 colleagues, and I co-
2011a). chaired the inaugural AASL/ACRL Joint
Task Force on the Educational Role of
The learning outcomes in the DQP are rife Libraries in 1998-2000. I am gratified that
with outcomes that reflect those articulated the National Governor’s Association
in the Information Literacy Standards, Common Core Standards now includes
regardless of the fact that the authors use information literacy learning outcomes,
terms such as “analytic inquiry,” included in the section on English Language
“communication fluency,” and “use of Arts (National Governor’s Association,
information resources” (Lumina Foundation, 2010). The Common Core is sweeping the
2007). nation’s school districts. Our work with K-
12 should:
The influence of AAC&U is clear in the
DQP, and it comes as no surprise when one  Support this specific learning
notes the involvement of AAC&U President outcome within the context of the
Carol Geary Schneider in both efforts. Common Core, even though it is
AAC&U was strategically positioned to not labeled as information
101
Ianuzzi, Info Lit 2.0 or Déjà Vu? Communications in Information Literacy 7(2), 2013
literacy; careers (CUR, 2013).
 Strengthen the recognition for the
role of school media specialists/ In 2010 AAC&U and CUR partnered to
librarians within their schools; advance their mutually supportive agendas
 Prepare future educators to teach in the 2010 Conference on Creativity,
to the suite of information Inquiry, and Discovery: Undergraduate
literacy learning outcomes Research In and Across the Disciplines.
through our work with schools of However, of the 40 conference breakout
education; and sessions, 28 posters, and several keynote
 Develop strategic programming presentations to hundreds of participants,
in partnerships with our local there was only one session led by librarians
schools to prepare students for from the University of Las Vegas (UNLV)
the transition to our institutions. and one poster given by librarians from
Ferrum College (AAC&U, 2010a).
Likewise, higher education has also
experienced a tremendous evolution in the As a result of the accomplishments in
undergraduate curricula of research defining national standards, higher
universities. The practice of undergraduate education organizations, accreditation
research has evolved, in large part due to the associations, campuses, and disciplinary
seminal work of the Boyer Commission on associations now face a different challenge.
Educating Undergraduates in the Research That challenge is how to embed learning
University and its publication, Reinventing outcomes such as information literacy,
Undergraduate Education: A Blueprint for critical thinking, and related oral and written
America's Research Universities (1998). communication in a coherent developmental
The special one-on-one mentorship model pathway for student learning so that the
of undergraduate research has expanded to outcomes are 1) introduced, reinforced, and
provide broad access to more students and applied to the discipline through integration
to better prepare all students for research with disciplinary content; and 2)
projects. The traditional model of demonstrated through a culminating
undergraduate research has been a single experience. Institutions are struggling with
student mentored by a faculty member the need for both formative and summative
outside of the classroom (e.g., in a assessments—ways to diagnose; intervene
laboratory or in the field). The concepts of with authentic learning activities; and
inquiry learning or research-based learning provide strategic, timely, experiential
within the curriculum, as promoted through experiences for students—while at the same
the Boyer Report, are now common. With time meeting the need for robust program
or without the use of the phrase information evaluations and institutional data on student
literacy, the learning outcomes of success.
undergraduate research and information
literacy are intertwined. One need only The information literacy Standards need not
browse the publications of the Council on be revised; they should evolve into an even
Undergraduate research (CUR) to see rapid broader framework to guide these
development of research-based challenges. They should be clearly linked to
opportunities, in and out of the classroom; the many frameworks and proposals in
these opportunities begin in the first year higher education that now include
and continue throughout students’ academic information literacy. The Standards should
102
Ianuzzi, Info Lit 2.0 or Déjà Vu? Communications in Information Literacy 7(2), 2013
demonstrate how learning outcomes can be written communication, critical thinking,
developmental, mapped within any and information literacy (WASC, 2013).
curriculum to provide a coherent pathway,
and integrated with other intellectual skills. After 15 years of promoting the
Just as the 2000 Standards provided a expectations of critical thinking,
framework for articulation of learning information literacy, oral and written
outcomes for colleges and universities, for communication, and in spite of the
disciplinary and regional accreditation integration of statements about information
associations, and for higher education literacy into mission statements and general
associations, the new leadership opportunity education requirements, there is little
for the academic library profession is to evidence that the graduates of institutions in
evolve that framework to offer a new the WASC region can demonstrate
assessment methodology for our competency. Colleges and universities in
institutions. the WASC region are no longer challenged
to define information literacy and related
To provide an example of the current learning outcomes, but rather to embed the
challenge facing higher education, a recent learning outcomes across the curriculum by
project allowed me to work with the introducing them early on and reinforcing
Western Associations of Schools and the objectives throughout the process.
Colleges (WASC) on its core competencies Institutions accredited by WASC are
initiative. The Western Associations challenged to do the following:
Schools and Colleges, together with the
Middle States Commission on Higher 1. Integrate core competencies with
Education (MSCHE) and the Southern disciplinary learning outcomes,
Association of Colleges and Schools 2. Encourage faculty to teach in a
(SACS), was one of the first regional way that provides authentic
accreditation associations to embrace and formative assessments for their
require evidence of information literacy students,
competencies. This progress can be traced 3. Develop assessments that scale,
to the 1990s and the excellent work of the and
California State University (CSU) system to 4. Collect program and institutional
develop information competency standards. evidence of student success.
One of the members of the original
Standards task force, Donald Farmer (then Academic librarians need to be facile with
Vice President for Academic Affairs at and to help advance an assessment agenda
Kings College), was also a consultant to best characterized as assessment for
WASC. In 2013, the challenge for WASC learning that is ongoing, diagnostic, and
is to collect evidence to verify that students formative; assessment as learning that
possess and demonstrate core competencies actively involves students in their own
by the time of their graduation. The WASC assessment; and assessment of learning that
recently launched a pilot project with a is a summative assessment at the end of a
cluster of its member institutions using the period of time.
DQP (WASC, 2012); it also offers retreats
for colleges and universities in their region Colleges and universities are looking for the
designed to help institutions embed and silver bullet: namely a standardized test for
assess the core competencies of oral and assessing integrated intellectual and
103
Ianuzzi, Info Lit 2.0 or Déjà Vu? Communications in Information Literacy 7(2), 2013
practical skills. Those who signed up for the was developed in close concert with
joint project from the American Association librarians and mapped to the information
of State Colleges and Universities literacy standards. iSkills is performance-
(AASC&U) and the Association of Public based, not multiple choice; and it includes
and Land Grant Universities (APLU) interactive tasks that are real time and
Voluntary System of Accountability (VSA) scenario-based. The instrument is designed
are committed to the Collegiate Learning to evaluate critical thinking in the digital
Assessment (CLA), Collegiate Assessment environment with scores in seven sections:
of Academic Proficiency (CAAP), or the define, access, evaluate, manage, integrate,
Educational Testing Service (ETS) create, and communicate (ETS, 2013).
Proficiency Profile (formerly MAAP). An
examination of the questions and/or scoring Although iSkills is useful in terms of
rubrics used by these tests reveals that this measuring information literacy skills, the
set of standardized tests, broadly used by instrument is expensive and can be difficult
large public institutions, do not include to administer, especially when used with
information literacy. While information large numbers of students. Colleges and
literacy overlaps with critical thinking, some universities looking for an easy solution in
definitions of critical thinking—most the form of a standardized test are more
notably, reasoning and logic—do not likely to adopt one that is more broadly
necessarily include information literacy. endorsed and that better integrates critical
Therefore, some critical thinking thinking and communication skills such as
instruments exclude the selection, CLA, CAAP, and MAAP. For far too long
evaluation, and use of information the library community has gone its own way
resources. Where were academic librarians to develop an information literacy test,
when these initiatives evolved? Where are rather than to work with developers of these
they now that the instruments are in place? broader instruments to integrate information
literacy into their products. The same is
Instruments designed exclusively to assess true with rubric design. While standardized
information literacy competencies face a tests may help institutions with
host of challenges. For example, despite its accountability demands from accrediting
name and widespread endorsement from the bodies and might also be used to diagnose
library community, the Standardized baseline skills to inform intervention, the
Assessment of Information Literacy Skills true assessment of student learning is
(SAILS) does not assess information through direct assessment of academic
literacy. The SAILS instrument is designed work. E-portfolios are gaining in popularity
to measure only a portion of the learning as a preferred method of assessment,
outcomes in information literacy; it fails to although many of the larger institutions
evaluate those that are more cognitively struggle with the challenge of scale. Fifteen
complex and impossible to measure through years ago, the word rubric was largely
its multiple choice method (Radcliff, 2007). limited to the area of K-12 education.
It is, however, a valid and reliable However, in 2007 AAC&U launched its
instrument to measure library skills. Valid Assessment of Learning in
Undergraduate Education (VALUE) Project
The iSkills instrument from the Educational and developed a suite of nationally normed
Testing Service (ETS) is designed to assess VALUE rubrics (AAC&U, 2007b). The
information literacy skills. The instrument AAC&U partnered with AASC&U and
104
Ianuzzi, Info Lit 2.0 or Déjà Vu? Communications in Information Literacy 7(2), 2013
APLU on a demonstration project to apply agendas and are challenged to
those rubrics to meet Voluntary System of position themselves with faculty
Accountability (VSA) accountability on campus).
requirements (VSA, 2012); and in May  Abandon the focus on defining
2013, those rubrics were included along and redefining student learning
with standardized tests as meeting the outcomes but focus instead on
requirements for the VSA. In May, the VSA existing national frameworks to
Oversight Board approved an expanded a clarify how information literacy
set of instruments for the Student Learning is included within them.
Outcomes report on the College Portrait  Assist others to plan for
from the three pilot tests—CAAP, CLA, and curriculum mapping by creating
ETS Proficiency Profile—to include the developmental models.
AAC&U VALUE rubrics. Additionally, the  Address issues of assessment
reporting options for each for the through leadership on
instruments were expanded to include both standardized testing (perhaps a
values-added and benchmarking (VSA, joint project with grant funding).
2013).  Partner to promote already
developed, normed, and reliable
There is not only a VALUE rubric for rubrics that integrate information
information literacy, but several of the other literacy with related skills and
rubrics include language that relates to abilities.
information literacy (e.g., critical thinking,  Promote research on the
inquiry and analysis, oral communication, relationship between information
written communication) (AAC&U, 2010b). literacy and student success.
The ACRL could partner with others to
advance the use and application of rubrics to We cannot afford to return to the debate
assess student learning, including about literacies and the difference between
information literacy. And the revision of the literacy and fluency. Now that information
Standards should most certainly align with literacy as a phrase and a concept has
rubrics already in place. become widespread in higher education,
standing alongside critical thinking and oral
Given all that I have said, I believe ACRL and written communication, we should not
should take the following steps: go backwards and redefine within a
technology framework. If ACRL wants to
 Work with higher education provide a seat at the table for our
associations and groups involved information technology colleagues who are
in education reform (i.e., less embedded than libraries, then by all
AAC&U, APLU, AACC, POD means the new task force should proceed
Network, CUR, CHEA and any along its current path. However, if ACRL
of the regional accreditation wants to support our academic institutions
associations, Lumina and Teagle and remain vital partners in meeting the
Foundation, and others involved challenges of evolving faculty culture and
in program assessment). faculty development, curriculum revision,
 Distance itself from technology program evaluation, and assessment of
associations on this issue. (These student learning, then it needs to rethink its
associations often have their own collaborators with this revision. The ACRL
105
Ianuzzi, Info Lit 2.0 or Déjà Vu? Communications in Information Literacy 7(2), 2013
should be working with faculty groups and that first one builds something and then
administrators involved in learning devotes time and energy to defending what
outcomes assessment of critical thinking, is built.
oral and written communication,
undergraduate research, and, in general, I do not wish to defend the ACRL
undergraduate education reform. It should information literacy Standards.
be inviting representatives from higher
education associations leading education I have moved on and so should ACRL.
reform.

Our profession should be deeply involved in REFERENCES
the national efforts of AAC&U, DQP,
AACC, and a host of other higher education American Association of Community
initiatives that currently promote Colleges (AACC). (2012). Reclaiming the
information literacy, rather than involving American Dream: Community Colleges and
itself with the initiatives coming out of the Nation’s Future. Retrieved July 3, 2013,
distance education, online learning, and our from http://www.aacc.nche.edu/
colleagues in instructional technology. AboutCC/21stcenturyreport/21stCenturyRe
Education technology experts, instructional port.pdf
designers, and other professionals involved
in online, distance, blended, and hybrid Association of American Colleges and
learning have a lot in common with Universities. (2007a). College Learning for
librarians. We both recognize the need to the New Global Century. Retrieved July 3,
partner on course and curriculum design, 2013, from http://www.aacu.org/leap/
possess technology as well as pedagogical documents/GlobalCentury_final.pdf
skills, and struggle to partner with faculty
who believe the ownership of the course and Association of American Colleges and
the curriculum begins and ends with the Universities. (2007b). VALUE: Valid
instructor. Assessment of Learning in Undergraduate
Education: Original VALUE Project
Successful academic libraries have Description. Retrieved July 3, 2013, from
developed the infrastructure necessary to http://www.aacu.org/value/
step into this partnership role, and we project_description.cfm
should certainly include our instructional
technology colleagues. To lead in the Association of American Colleges and
national arena, we must be seated at the Universities. (2010a). Creativity, Inquiry,
table with those leading educational reform. and Discovery: Undergraduate Research In
One of my professional strategies is to and Across the Disciplines. Conference
either get a seat at the right table or to set Highlights. Retrieved July 3, 2013, from
my own table and invite others to join me. http://www.aacu.org/meetings/
With the next step ahead for the Standards, undergraduate_research/2010/documents/
ACRL is setting an important table right URProgram.pdf
now, and I encourage it to invite the right
people to join. Association of American Colleges and
Universities. (2010b). VALUE: Valid
I once heard that the danger of leadership is Assessment of Learning in Undergraduate
106
Ianuzzi, Info Lit 2.0 or Déjà Vu? Communications in Information Literacy 7(2), 2013
Education. [VALUE rubrics]. Retrieved National Institute for Learning Outcomes
July 3, 2013, from http://www.aacu.org/ Assessment. (2012). Degree Qualifications
value/rubrics/index.cfm Profile Corner. Retrieved July 3, 2013,
from http://learningoutcomeassessment.org/
Association of College and Research DQPCorner.html
Libraries. (2012). ACRL Information
Literacy Competency Standards Review Radcliff, C. J., Salem, J. A. Jr., O'Connor,
Task Force, Task Force Recommendations. L. G. & Gedeon, J. A. (2007). Project
Retrieved July 3, 2013 from http:// SAILS Skill Sets for the 2013-2014
www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/ Academic Year. Retrieved July 3, 2013,
content/standards/ils_recomm.pdf from https://www.projectsails.org/SkillSets
Voluntary System of Accountability.
Boyer Commission on Education (2012). Administration and Reporting
Undergraduates in the Research University. Guidelines: AAC&U VALUE Rubrics—
(1998). Reinventing Undergraduate DEMONSTRATION PROJECT. Retrieved
Education: A Blueprint for America's July 3, 2013, from https://cp-
Research Universities. Stony Brook, NY: files.s3.amazonaws.com/32/
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement AAC_U_VALUE_Rubrics_Administration_
of Teaching. (ERIC Document: ED Guidelines_20121210.pdf
424840). Retrieved July 3, 2013 from
http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ Voluntary System of Accountability.
ED424840.pdf (2013). Voluntary System of Accountability
[VSA update]. Retrieved July 3, 2013, from
Council on Undergraduate Research. http://www.aacu.org/meetings/
Publication listings. (2013). Retrieved July generaleducation/gened2013/documents/
3, 2013 from http://www.cur.org/ Poster-VSA.pdf
publications/publication_listings/
Western Association of Schools and
Educational Testing Service. (2013). iSkills Colleges. (2012). Degree Qualifications
Assessment Content. Retrieved July 3, Profile. Retrieved July 3, 2013, from http://
2013, from http://www.ets.org/iskills/about/ www.wascsenior.org/redesign/dqp
content/
Western Association of Schools and
The Lumina Foundation. (2011). Degree Colleges. (2013). Retreat on Core
Qualifications Profile. Retrieved July 3, Competencies: Critical Thinking and
2013, from http:// Information Literacy. Retrieved July 3,
www.luminafoundation.org/publications/ 2013, from http://www.wascsenior.org/
The_Degree_Qualifications_Profile.pdf content/retreat-core-competencies-critical-
thinking-and-information-literacy
National Governor’s Association. (2010).
Common Core State Standards Initiative.
English Language Arts Standards: Writing:
Grade 11-12. Retrieved July 3, 2013, from
http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-
Literacy/WHST/11-12

107