Home

Library Instruction Lesson Plans

 

Articles About Library Instruction

 

Articles About Information Literacy

 

Links to Resources

 

Bibliography of Library Instruction Papers

 

Privacy Policy

 

Information Literacy Blog

(This paper originally appeared in Illinois Libraries in 2001.)

It is likely that librarians have always to a limited degree been involved in classroom teaching. For example, it is hard to imagine that the librarians at the Great Library of Alexandria did not assemble from time to time small groups of students and visiting scholars and instruct them on the proper handling and use of the valuable scrolls that resided there. Throughout most of history librarians have been members of other professions (the clergy and scholars of various disciplines) who took on the additional duty of maintaining the library collection of their institutions. It is highly likely that these individuals introduced library concepts into their regular lectures pertaining to their area of expertise. Unfortunately, no written record appears to exist detailing how library instruction in the classroom was carried out or how often it was conducted. 

German library literature records various examples of library instruction from the 17th to 19th Centuries. Ewert (1986) gave a summary of this literature and detailed where the library instruction occurred, who generally was conducting it, and what was covered. Unfortunately, the article was written in communist East Germany and most of the examples are tied into how these instruction sessions ultimately aided the climate of revolution against capitalism. This makes it difficult to determine what the curriculum of the classes was or how many non-revolutionary library instruction examples may have occurred. Regardless, it shows that a tradition of library instruction in academic institutions had developed in Germany prior to the its origins in the United States in the late 19th Century. As the United State's higher education system is based on the German model, this may have influenced the earliest academic library instruction practitioners in the US. 

Origins in the United States of America 

Melvil Dewey, the founder of the modern American library profession, articulated early on the view of the librarian as that of an educator. Wrote Dewey (1876), "The time is when a library is a school, and the librarian is in the highest sense a teacher." (pp. 5). It was about this time that libraries on academic campus became significant. According to Hardesty, Schmitt, and Tucker (1986), academic libraries prior to late 19th Century were small. However, the introduction of graduate level education drove the creation of much larger libraries. This in turn created a need to educate patrons in how to use these larger, more complicated collections. 

Winsor (1880) advocated a library centric view of higher education. He saw the library as the center of the university and the natural location to teach classes. He was skeptical of textbooks and believed that students should use the library collection to learn instead. His belief was that librarians and professors were equally important in educating students and that they should work together in teaching classes. This view would naturally lead to a great deal of classroom instruction for the librarian in the library. Winsor was head of the library at Harvard University when he wrote his article and he worked with Harvard's president Charles Eliot to spread this view of the importance of the library and the librarian. 

In the 1880s, some academic librarians were already lecturing in the classroom. Robinson (1880) described his lectures to freshmen and sophomore classes. His main objective was to turn the student into real scholars who would be able to educate themselves and do future research without the aid of either a professor or librarian. Robinson wrote that personal inquiry was the most important trait that any student could acquire from higher education. 

Many of the librarians in the late 19th Century were also professors. They taught in their areas of specialty on a regular basis. Teaching in the classroom was not a new idea for them. Dedicating a class, or a course, to the use of libraries however was a new idea. Davis offered the first college for credit course in bibliography at the University of Michigan in the 1880s. Davis (1886) described how he had begun frustrated with classroom library lectures. The students were not acquiring the skills in library use that he felt they needed in one or two or even three lectures. He remedied this by offering an entire course on library use. Davis's course on bibliography became the model for many other similar courses at other universities. 

One of the early academic librarian lecturers was Edwin Woodruff. He wrote (1886) about his classroom lectures at Cornell. His main message appears to have been to teach the importance of books in finding knowledge. He specifically wrote that he taught the students that the word of no professor is final. One can imagine he taught that the words in any given book were not final either. After all, most of the books had been written by professors. It appears as though Woodruff was successful in being considered an educator at Cornell. 

A good summary of the initial academic library instruction pioneers is provided by Hardesty, Schmitt, and Tucker. They wrote (1986), "They gave book talks, bibliography lectures, and orientation tours. Their experimentation did not produce any established structure or even a generally accepted method for effective instruction...They did, however, begin the dialogue about the nature and purpose of user instruction." (pp. 4). The examples provide by Winsor, Woodruff, Robinson, and Davis allowed for the next generation of academic librarians in the early 20th Century to build upon their tradition. 

Early 20th Century 

There was overlap between the 19th and 20th Centuries in academic library instruction as many of the instructional librarians who started their work in the 19th Century were still practicing in the 20th Century. Azariah Root at Oberlin College is an example of this. Rubin (1977) wrote that Root taught a sequence of courses from 1899 until 1927 on library organization, bibliographic resources, and the history of the book. Joseph Schneider also bridged the gap. He was teaching library skills at Georgetown University in the 1890s and was teaching library skills in for-credit courses at Catholic University of America as late as the 1920s. Schneider (1912) argued for the teaching of the contents of books. 

Bishop (1912) was concerned about the exponential growth in the production of books. He believed training was necessary for students and faculty to deal intelligently with the vast amount of new material being published yearly. Bishop wrote that training should help the student acquire a scholar's attitude towards the printed page. He hoped this would allow students to discriminate among books and authors for research purposes. 

The first negative response to the appearance of librarians in the academic classroom came at this time as well. Lucy Salmon was a history professor at Vassar College from 1887 until 1927. She did not take kindly to librarians invading her classroom. She wrote (1913) that library instruction should not be taught as a separate credit-bearing course. Instead, it should be taught as part of other classes as an integrated part of the curriculum. She also wrote that the professors, not the librarians, should give the instruction in library use. She believed the responsibilities of librarians were to keep accessible libraries and help faculty in book selection. Further, she felt librarians should stick to non-curricular areas (such as advising the debate team) if they wanted to interact with students. 

Despite Salmon's negative reaction towards academic library instruction, it continued to develop. The actual call for the appearance of specialized instructional librarians was made by Charles Shaw at Swathmore College in the 1920s. He wrote (1928) that most one-shot library instruction classes were haphazard and unscientific. He believed that students should be required to take required courses in bibliography. He wanted a new species of librarian who combined the librarian's knowledge of books with an instructor's training and ability to teach. This call for a hybrid instructional librarian went out almost fifty years before Dillon (1975) published the first article describing a librarian position that was primarily focused on classroom teaching. 

B. Lamar Johnson was Librarian and Dean of Instruction at Stephens College from 1931 to 1952. He used his dual position to introduce three objectives into the library instruction program on campus. He wrote (1933) that the librarian needed to teach students how to use reference sources effectively. He wrote that the librarian needed to teach good study skills to students. Finally, he wanted to teach students that the library was the center of the instruction occurring on campus. Johnson realized that most librarians would not have the political power to do as he had at Stephens College but he hoped that his work would serve as an intellectual model for others to emulate. 

While many had spoke of the need for academic library instruction during this time, it was not until the early 1930s that research was published on the need for it. Two psychologists and then a librarian published articles using valid design and measurement techniques. Louttit and Patrick (1932) publishing in the highly visible Journal of Applied Psychology and Hurt (1934) showed that students lacked the knowledge to properly use academic library resources. These appear to be the first use of research data that was used in any article dealing with academic library instruction. 

Shores (1935) echoed Winsor (1880). Shores advocated an idea that he called the library-college concept. He believed that undergraduates should be taught in the library. Rather than lecturing to students, faculty and librarians would emphasize problem solving within a liberal arts curriculum. The library would be the laboratory where students would discover knowledge with the aid of the librarian and professor. This role of the librarian and library as central in undergraduate education is nearly identical to Winsor's ideas of 55 years earlier. 

A similar but slightly different view was advanced by Branscomb (1940). The library was still important in Branscomb's view but the librarian was required to leave it. He wrote that the librarian was the assistant of the professor and that the librarian should work to establish good communication with the professor and attend classes. At the same time, the professor should leave the classroom and work in the library. Here, the professor would be the assistant of the librarian and help to direct students in doing independent research using the stacks. The librarian and professor would teach in both the classroom and the library but the library would be the main venue for learning. 

Articles on academic library instruction become scarce between the late 1930s and the 1960s. The most important article published during this time attacked the concept of the academic librarian as classroom teacher. Shera (1955) was opposed to a classroom role for academic librarians. He wrote that librarians should "forget this silly pretense of playing teacher." (pp. 13). As evidenced by the lack of articles on academic library instruction during this time, it appears a large number of academic librarians held this view. 

Despite the examples of academic library instruction and the writings that advocated it, academic library instruction never really caught on. A few libraries were implementing instructional programs and many were publishing their views on the importance of instruction. But at most libraries, the librarian never went into the classroom. Wrote Hopkins (1982), "A bibliography of articles on academic library instruction published between 1876 and 1932 documents the decline from instruction in use of library materials for research to instruction in access procedures…From 1907 on there is increasing incidences of articles on teaching basic access skills to freshmen…and by 1926 the opinion was published that freshmen instruction is remedial and should be the responsibility of the high schools." (pp. 194). 

It would be easy to characterize the initial 50 years from 1880 until the early 1930s as the false dawn of the academic library instruction movement. The idea was originated and implemented in many academic institutions. Yet, even though some of the most important librarians and universities of the day were participating in academic library instruction, it did not become a standard for the academic library community as a whole. Still, the foundation that was laid during this time would prove a useful ground for advocates of academic library instruction when it reemerged successfully in the 1960s. 

The reemergence of academic library instruction 

Academic library instruction was for the most part dormant in the library profession from the late 1930s until the early 1960s. Some librarians were still participating in classroom instruction but the literature shows little activity on the topic. The most prominent article, Shera (1955), was opposed to most academic library instruction. Still, the academic library instruction movement reemerged. Wrote Hopkins (1982), "Just as the decline of BI early in the century had been the product of social forces in the professional and academic environments, so was its revival in the 1960s. Two problems related to developments in education can be tackled only through systematic group instruction, and librarians, equipped now with better training and higher status, were ready for the challenge." (pp. 195). The two challenges that Hopkins wrote brought about this reemergence were the effects of academic specialization and the consequences of rapid democratization combined with increasing complexities of libraries. 

Academic library instruction mushroomed during the 1960s and early 1970s. This resulted in the founding of the Library Orientation Exchange (LOEX), a non-profit, self-supporting educational clearinghouse, in the early 1970s. The first conference was held at Eastern Michigan in 1973 and has been held annually around the United States ever since. The LOEX borrowing collection consists of print materials such as one page handouts, bibliographies, and subject guides; instructional videos and audio tapes; and CD-ROMS. By 1999, LOEX had over 650 members in the United States, Canada, the Caribbean, Europe, Australia, Israel, Lebanon, and South Africa. 

A great deal of significant writing accompanied the renewed interest in academic library instruction. Knapp conducted research in the early 1960s at Wayne State University. From 1960 until 1962, Knapp used anthropological and sociological methods to study the implementation of problem solving techniques in undergraduate students in the academic library. This research became known as the Monteith Library Project. Knapp published articles in 1964 and 1966 describing the results. The results were mixed. The faculty and students resisted many of Knapp's attempts to collect data or implement changes in the classroom. Her main finding was that library competence is a liberal art that is systematically ignored by subject specialists intent on imparting content rather than competence in learning. Since faculty were the subject specialists ignoring the library, it is important for the librarian to intervene and teach library competence. 

Farber (1975) looked at the teaching role of librarians at college libraries. He contrasted college and university libraries and determined that college faculty and librarians are confused about the teaching role of college libraries. University libraries are on large campuses and even aggressive library instruction programs have limited success due to the high number of students and faculty. College librarians can be more effective in teaching on campus because the numbers are more manageable and it is easier to make good contacts with the faculty. Yet, college faculty are influenced by the university library model because that is where they received their graduate education. Librarians have the same problem. Both the professor and the librarian need to recognize the differences between university and college libraries to take advantage of the teaching role of the college library. 

Librarians, like most professionals, have a certain degree of clerical work that takes up a great deal of time. Librarians in higher education however often have a large number of support staff who can take on much of the clerical work. Dillon (1975) argued that academic librarians should eliminate most clerical work from their daily work lives. He believed this would allow the librarian to devote more time to classroom instruction, collection development, and other collegial activities on campus with faculty. This would enhance the professionalism of the librarian and make him/her more effective in organizing and conducting classroom instruction. 

Academic library instruction can be as simple as a tour or as complicated as an in-depth look at information sources in a particular discipline. Frick (1975) wrote that too much academic library instruction was of the former rather than the latter kind. Frick advocated for a higher level of instruction involving an understanding of the different types of information sources as they exist in different subject areas. Vuturo (1977) held the same view and further pushed the use of educational media on fulfilling the greater instructional role. 

Academic librarians often take on teaching duties in the classroom unrelated to the library. Borchuck and Bergup (1976) examined how they were perceived by others on campus when they began teaching non-library courses on campus. The results were mostly positive. Their status appeared to have improved in the campus hierarchy and they were seen more as peers by the teaching faculty. Borchuck and Bergup's experience leads to another question. If non-library teaching on campus raises the profile of librarians, is it also raised by library classroom teaching? If so, then status may be a good reason for academic librarians to engage in classroom instruction. 

Pearson (1978) discussed the need to teach students information skills by building them into the higher education curriculum. The article appeared in a non-library journal and it encouraged classroom faculty to work closely with librarians. Pearson wrote of the importance of involving librarians in both curricular planning and decision making. Further, it touched on the importance of allowing librarians to teach students library skills. 

The role of academic library instruction in accrediting institutions of higher education has been written about as well. Lutzker (1990) wrote about the decision of the Middle States Commission on Higher Education requirement for accredited institutions to have library instruction programs. Lutzker wrote about the ways libraries can help their institutions meet this requirement. Adams (1992) wrote about why the Middle States Commission on Higher Education choose to make academic library instruction a requirement for accreditation. Basically, the accrediting organization believed the library had an important role in the teaching/learning process and that many institutions did not grasp this. The requirement by an accrediting agency that an institution have librarians teaching library skills in the classroom is an important development. Prior to this requirement, academic library instruction has always been optional. Now, in some universities, this will become a mandated activity. 

The role of new information technologies 

The development of academic library instruction has been impacted the most and in a dramatic fashion in the last two decades by the emergence of new information technologies. The demise of card catalogs and the introduction of online catalogs has changed the way that librarians teach. The existence of electronic versions of reference sources that used to exist only in paper has required alterations in lectures. The advent of the Internet and the World Wide Web has required librarians to take the lead in teaching what the Internet and Web are useful for and what they are not. Further, the emergence of online distance education has required librarians to examine their roles as classroom teachers when the classroom is a web page. 

The first article detailing teaching computerized library catalogs was published in 1979. The University of Toronto Library was one of the first academic libraries to convert their card catalog to an electronic format. This immediately created problems for patrons who were used to finding books using the card catalog. As such, an orientation program had to be created to teach patrons to use the new online system. Blackburn (1979) appears to be the first published description of librarians teaching patrons how to use an online catalog. 

McDonald and Searing (1983) further described how librarians could help orient patrons to online systems. Since this was a large task at first at an institution, since few if any of the patrons had ever used such a system before, they advocated the inclusion of a variety of library staff, not just librarians, in teaching the new online systems. More importantly, they wrote that instruction librarians should be involved in designing the online systems. Since instruction librarians had the skills, knowledge, and experience needed for teaching and designing instructional aids, they believed incorporating their experience in developing online catalogs was imperative. 

As early as the late 1970s, some reference sources began to appear in online formats. Most were not accessible to patrons and needed librarian mediation to use. Knapp (1979) wrote about methods that could be used to teach patrons about these resources. Just as online catalogs were new and often times daunting concepts for patrons, so were online reference sources. One of goals that Knapp wrote about was getting patrons to think about and accept these resources when appropriate. 

Tuckett (1989) wrote about the issues facing academic librarians who were teaching with computers. Information literacy is tied directly to computer technologies. As a result, librarians need to teach literacy in both finding and evaluating information in the best use of computers. This can get complicated and can place the librarian into unfamiliar teaching situations. Librarians need to stay abreast of developments in computers and learn them early so they can teach patrons. Tuckett believed that academic institutions needed to broaden their institutional goals to encompass both information literacy and computer training and to teach them jointly. 

The Internet and World Wide Web have brought many benefits to patrons and librarians seeking information. It has also confused many patrons. Doran (1995) wrote about this by describing the Web in terms of the "Internot." Many patrons have come to mistakenly believe that the Web is the equivalent of and the equal to a library. However, most material in libraries does not appear on the Web for a variety of reasons the biggest being copyright. In particular, the Web is a bad place to find scholarly, peer-reviewed information. Doran advocated teaching about the Web in a balanced way that encouraged its use but still made patrons aware of its huge limitations. 

Distance education is not a new idea. Students have been taking courses via the mail or by using radio or television for decades. However, only recently with the transference of these programs to the World Wide Web has the librarian taken on a significant role. If you never meet with a class, how do you teach them about a library the students will only use remotely? Are you a classroom teacher if you have no classroom to teach with? These are the same issues facing the faculty teaching these online courses. Rice (1987) wrote about these issues a few years before the Web came into focus by talking about using the different interactive communications technologies that are available. She also wrote about making information available in a variety of formats to reach the student. Much of what she wrote applies to teaching courses on the Web as well and is important to consider when a librarian becomes involved in developing a Web course. 

The convergence and constant change in the electronic world is challenging to academic instructional librarians. Loomis and Fink (1993) wrote about teaching in this new virtual library. Their main point is that the principles of good instruction apply regardless of what you are teaching. Much of what has been learned about academic library instruction in the last 150 years is still relevant. However, librarians will need to stay alert to changes and be constantly willing to change how and what they teach in the classroom. 

Criticism of academic librarians as classroom teachers 

There has been plenty of opposition to librarians moving into the classroom. Some of it, Salmon (1913) and Shera (1955), has been addressed already in this paper. However, a great number of other authors have written articles criticizing academic library instruction for a variety of reasons. They range from the practical (library instruction does not work) to the political (library instruction as tool of the capitalistic state). Young (1980) observed that most criticisms of library instruction focused on three points of concern. The first is that library instruction is not a valid function of reference services and does not fit the library mission of providing information to patrons. The second is that library instruction does not work in educating library patrons. The final reason was that librarians do not fit well in the academic model of classroom teacher. 

One of the biggest criticisms of academic librarians teaching is that it takes librarians away from their primary role of delivering information. The librarian answers the question rather than teaches the patron how to find the answer herself in this view. Schiller (1965) wrote that she questioned the need for anyone in an academic library to be involved in classroom teaching. Schiller believed that academic library instruction took away from the information-providing obligation of the academic library. Later, Schiller would change this view and accept librarians as classroom teachers. She wrote in 1981 that economic and technological developments had made bibliographic instruction and reference services less distinguishable from one another than when she had originally written in 1965. 

Biggs (1979) also felt that academic library instruction detracted from the main role of the library to deliver information. Her reasons were economic. She wrote that library instruction programs would increase the need for space, materials, and public service personnel. This would drain money from other more important services such as reference. She also wrote that instructional programs would create personnel problems relating to scheduling, incompetence, and evaluation of teaching. Davinson (1984) echoed the view that academic library instruction was too expensive. He called for user instruction use studies to see if library instruction was worth the money spent on it by academic libraries. 

The ideas of one of the earliest critics of academic librarians as classroom teachers is used by Peele (1984). Salmon (1913) felt librarians should stick to non-curricular areas (such as advising the debate team) if they wanted to interact with students. Peele concluded that teachers are originating forces while academic librarians are a responding force. As such, teaching in a class would not be appropriate for an academic librarian but advising a group of students might be suitable. Like others, Peele wrote that academic librarians should focus on delivering information through reference services. 

Many writers have questioned the effectiveness of academic library instruction. Shrigley (1981) believed that academic library instruction was ineffective due to the tendencies of academic librarians to go into "overkill" mode. Academic librarians provide too much information for students to observe. The librarian has a long list of ideas and concepts that he/she wants to share but the student can only be expected to remember a few simple points. Shrigley thought one-on-one user instruction was more effective. This view lends itself to supporting reference services rather than instructional services. 

Probably the foremost critic of academic library instruction in the 1990s is Tom Eadie. Originally in favor of library instruction, he concluded that it was largely a waste of time. Eadie (1990) wrote that gathering students into a classroom and teaching them about the library would fail in educating students. Since students had yet to ask the question that the librarian was teaching about answering, the student would probably not remember the answer. The student would still need assistance later when they think to ask the question (usually when the paper is being written) and come to the reference desk. Since Eadie questioned the effectiveness of library instruction, he recommended that the money and effort used for it be used on reference services instead. 

The idea of library instruction for information literacy has been attacked as well. McCrank (1991) wrote that the information literacy campaign by academic libraries was merely an attempt by libraries to increase status and gain more funding. He saw most of the information literacy movement as rhetoric and "advertising hoopla." He concluded that academic librarians are ineffective in helping students become information literate. 

Hopkins (1981) argued against the criticism that library instruction is ineffective. Even if the student still shows up at the reference desk later, the instruction was worthwhile in doing. Library instruction, Hopkins contended, was not meant to make students totally independent. Instead, instruction is meant to increase the number of serious reference questions resulting from student awareness or resource possibilities and librarian expertise. A student will feel more confident in going to and using an academic library even if they are not experts if they have had an instruction session with an academic librarian. 

Another reason many criticize academic library instruction is that they see librarians using it to justify their status on campus as teaching faculty. Wilson (1979) saw academic librarians as classroom teachers as an organizational fiction. Academic librarians desire greater status in the campus community. They imagine that faculty have greater status because they teach. Librarians then create ways in which they can teach too. The librarians then become convinced of the fiction that they are also teachers just like the faculty. However, few outside the library buy into the organizational fiction that the librarians are perpetuating about their teaching. Wilson saw this whole process as counter-productive to the academic librarian. 

Miller and Tegler (1987) also wrote that academic librarians were trying to use classroom instruction as a way to increase their status on campus. They wrote, "While their colleagues in special and public libraries have made information delivery a goal, academic librarians are so uncomfortable with the role of information provider that they have developed an entire movement, bibliographic instruction, which is based on the promise that librarians are teachers." (pp. 122). They also saw this as futile and the equivalent of Don Quixote chasing after windmills. 

Hopkins (1981) argued against this criticism of library instruction as well. She did not see the issue of status as important in justifying it since it probably would not have much impact on their status on campus. What is important to Hopkins is that the instructional librarians receive political recognition and informal social acceptance within the academic library. She wrote that the academic librarians relationship with teaching faculty was neither dependent on nor motivated by their role as teachers. 

The most extreme criticism of academic librarians as classroom teachers comes from a political perspective. Duff (1995) wrote the academic library instruction has a hidden ideology and secret curriculum. By advocating proper citation and discouraging plagiarism, instructional librarians are in fact functioning as tools of the capitalist state. Wrote Duff, "Modern intellectual property law, which grants virtual monopoly rights to authors and publishers, essentially extends individualistic ideology to encompass the fruits of mental labor. In current BI, the validity of this doctrine is not questioned, and students are duly urged to respect the sanctity of private property by paying their intellectual debts in the currency of bibliographic citations." (pp. 143.) Like real property, intellectual property is held by Duff to belong to everyone. This belief is that since no thinks or writes in a vacuum (all writers have been influenced by others) individual work belongs in the public domain. Since instructional librarians teach proper citation styles and urge respect for copyright, they are unwitting tools of the current capitalistic system and its emphasis on private property rights. 

Summary 

Academic library instruction may be ancient but its roots can only be traced as far back as Germany in the 17th Century. Academic librarians in the United States began teaching in classrooms and writing about it in the late 19th Century. These writers laid the groundwork for those who came later. Academic library instruction continued in the early 20th Century but it never became standard in academic libraries and by the 1940s it seemed to have lost most of its importance in the academic community. In the 1960s the academic library instruction reemerged and academic librarians taking on classroom roles became standard. 

Academic librarians have had to deal with the emergence of new information technologies in teaching library skills. Online catalogs, electronic reference sources, the World Wide Web, and online courses have changed the way that librarians teach. The entire concept of academic librarians as teachers has been attacked frequently as well. The criticism came early in the 20th Century and has been expressed frequently and for a variety of different reasons in the last several decades. 

Selected references 

Ackerson, L. G. and Young, V. E. (1994). Evaluating the impact of library instruction methods on the quality of student research. Research strategies, 12 (Summer), pp. 132-44. 

Adams, M. (1992). The role of academic libraries in teaching and learning. College and research libraries, 53 (July/August), pp. 442-45. 

Allen, D. Y. (1982). Students need help in learning how to use the library. Chronicle of higher education, (June), pp. 56. 

Anderson, M. A. (1997). Designing outcomes standards for information literacy. Colorado libraries, 23 (Winter), 41, 42. 

Baker, S. (1990). Providing library services to overseas students. Library association record, 92 (July), pp. 509, 510. 

Baldwin, J. F. and Rudolph, R. S. (1979). The comparative effectiveness of a slide/tape show and library tour. College and research libraries, 40 (January), pp. 31-35. 

Baker, B. (1986). A new direction for online catalog instruction. Information technology and libraries, 5 (March), pp. 35-41. 

Baker, B. et al. (1991). Making connections: Teaching information retrieval. Library trends, 39 (Winter), pp. 210-21. 

Barclay, D. (1993). Evaluating library instruction: Doing the best you can with what you have. RQ, 33 (Winter), pp. 195-202. 

Bechtel, J. (1988). Developing and using the online catalog to teach critical thinking. Information technologies and libraries, (March), pp. 30-40. 

Benson, S. H. (1984). The library's status in undergraduate instruction: "Far from the heart of things". In Academic libraries: Myths and realities, proceedings of the third national conference of the Association of College and Research Libraries, ed. S. C. Dodson and G. L. Menges. Chicago: ACRL, 215-21. 

Bernnard, D. F. (1999). Teaching web-based full-text databases: New concepts from new technology. Reference and user services quarterly, 39(1), pp. 63-70. 

Biggs, M. (1995). Librarians as educators: Assessing our self-image. Public access quarterly, 1, pp. 41- 50. 

Biggs, M. M. (1979). On my mind - "The perils of library instruction". Journal of academic librarianship, 5 (July), pp. 159+. 

Bishop, W. W. (1912). Training in the use of books. Sewanee review, 20 (July), pp. 265-81. 

Blackburn, R. (1979). Two years with a closed catalog. Journal of academic librarianship, 4 (January), pp. 424-29. 

Bodi, S. (1990). Teaching effectiveness and bibliographic instruction: The relevance of learning styles. College and research libraries, 51 (March), pp. 113-119. 

Borchuck, F. P. and Bergup, B. (1976). Opportunities and problems of college librarians involved in classroom teaching roles. ERIC ED 134 216. 

Branscomb, H. (1940). Teaching with books: A study of college libraries. Chicago: American Library Association and Association of American Colleges. 

Breivik, P. S. (1975). Effects of library-based instruction in the academic success of disadvantaged college freshmen. In Academic library instruction: Objectives, programs, and faculty involvement, ed. by H.B. Rader. Ann Arbor, MI: Pierian Press, pp. 45-55. 

Cameron, S. H. and Messinger, K. W. (1975a). Face the faculty prevalent attitudes regarding librarian- faculty relationship, part one. Pennsylvania Library Association bulletin, 30 (March), pp. 23-26. 

Cameron, S. H. and Messinger, K. W. (1975b). Face the faculty prevalent attitudes regarding librarian- faculty relationship, part two. Pennsylvania Library Association bulletin, 30 (May), pp. 48-51. 

Cannon, A. (1994). Faculty survey on library research instruction. RQ, 33 (Summer), pp. 524-541. 

Carlson, D. and Miller, R. H. (1984). Librarians and teaching faculty, partners in bibliographic instruction. College and research libraries, 45 (November), pp. 483-91. 

Currie, M. et al. (1982). Evaluating the relationship between library skills and library instruction. Canadian library journal, 39 (February), pp. 35-37. 

Davidson, N. M. (1983). Bull's-eye! Hitting targets for BI at Winthrop College. Florida libraries, 33 (September/October), pp. 7, 8. 

Davis, J. Y. and Bentley, S. (1979). Factors affecting faculty perceptions of academic libraries. College and research libraries, 40 (November), pp. 527-32. 

Davis, R. C. (1886). Teaching bibliography in colleges. Library journal, 11 (September), pp. 289-94. 

Dewey, M. (1876). The profession. American library journal, 1 (September), pp. 5, 6. 

Dillon, H. W. (1975). Organizing the academic library for instruction. Journal of academic librarianship, 1 (September), pp. 407. 

Doran, K. (1995). The internot: Helping library patrons understand what the Internet is not (yet). Computers in libraries, 15 (June), pp. 22-26. 

Dreifuss, R. A. (1982). Library instruction in the database searching context. RQ, 22 (Spring), pp. 233-38. 

Duff, A. S. (1995). Is intellectual property theft? BI's hidden agenda. Research strategies, 13 (Summer), pp. 132-37. 

Eadie, T. (1990). Immodest proposals. Library journal, 115 (October 15th), pp. 42-45. 

Ewert, G. (1986). The beginnings of instruction in library use: Selected German examples from the 17th to 19th centuries. Research strategies, 4 (Fall), pp. 177-84. 

Farber, E. I. (1974). College librarians and the university-library syndrome. In The academic library: Essays in honor of Guy Lyle edited by E. I. Farber and R. Walling. Metuchen, New Jersey: Scarecrow Press, pp. 12-23. 

Frick, E. (1975). Information structure and bibliographic instruction. Journal of academic librarianship, 1 (September), pp. 12-14. 

Gilliam, B. H. (1981). Beyond bibliographic instruction. Southeastern librarian, (Spring), pp. 8-10. 

Gorman, M. (1991). Send for a child of four! Or creating the BI-less academic library. Library trends, 39 (Winter), pp. 354-62. 

Gresham, K. (1997). Electronic classrooms: Linking information concepts to online exploration. RQ, 36 (Summer), pp. 514-20. 

Hardesty, L. (1977). Use of slide-tape presentations in academic libraries: A state-of-the-art survey. Journal of academic librarians, 3 (July), pp. 135-40. 

Hardesty, L. (1991). Faculty and the library: The undergraduate experience. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. 

Hardesty, L. (1995). Faculty culture and bibliographic instruction: An exploratory analysis. Library trends, 44 (Fall), pp. 339-67. 

Hardesty, L. et al. (1979). Evaluating library-user instruction. College and research libraries, 40 (July), pp. 309-17. 

Hardesty, L., Lovrich, N. P. and Mannon J. (1982). Library-use instruction: Assessment of the long-term effects. College and research libraries, 43 (January), pp. 38-46. 

Hardesty, L. L., Scmitt, J. P., and Tucker, J. M. (1986). User instruction in academic libraries: A century of selected readings. Metuchen, New Jersey: The Scarecrow Press. 

Hopkins, F L. (1981). User instruction in the college library: Origins, prospects, and a practical program. In College librarianship, ed. By W. Miller and D. S. Rockwood. Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press, pp. 173-204. 

Hopkins, F. L. (1982). A century of bibliographic instruction: The historic claim to professional and academic legitimacy. College and research libraries, 43 (May), pp. 192-98. 

Hurt, P. (1934). The need for college and university instruction in the use of the library. Library quarterly, 4 (July), pp. 436-48. 

Isbell, D. and Kammerlocher, L. (1998). Implementing Kuhlthau: A new model for library and reference instruction. Reference services review, 26(3/4), pp. 33-44. 

Jacobson, T. E. and Vallely, J. R. (1992). A half-built bridge: The unfinished work of bibliographic instruction. Journal of academic librarianship, 17(6), pp. 359-63. 

Jakobovits, L. A. and Nahl-Jacobovits. (1987). Learning the library: Taxonomy of skills and errors. College and research libraries, 48 (May), pp. 203-14. 

Johnson, B. L. (1933). Stephens College library experiment. ALA bulletin, 27 (May), pp. 205-11. 

King, D. and Baker, B. (1987). Human aspects of library technology: Implications for academic library user education. In Bibliographic instruction: The second generation, ed. C. Mellon. Littleton, Colorado: Libraries Unlimited, pp. 85-107. 

King, D. N. and Ory, J. C. (1981). Effects of library instruction on student research: A case study. College and research libraries, 41 (January), pp. 31-41. 

Kirkendall, C. (1983). The efficiency of library literature…and a few other statements. Research strategies, 1 (Fall), pp. 185-187. 

Knapp, P. B. (1958). College teaching and the library. Illinois libraries, 40 (December), pp. 829. 

Knapp, P. B. (1964). The methodology and results of the Monteith pilot project. Library trends, 13(1), pp. 84-102. 

Knapp, P. B. (1966). The Monteith College library experiment. New York: Scarecrow Press. 

Loomis, A. and Fink, D. (1993). Instruction: Gateway to the virtual library. In The virtual library. Visions and reality. Wesport, CT: Meckler, pp. 47-69. 

Loomis, A. and Fink, D. (1996). Met-learning: A transformational process for learning and teaching. In New ways of "learning the library" and beyond, ed. by L. Shirato. Ann Arbor, MI: Pierian Press, pp. 19-25. 

Lorenzen, M. (1995). Remember the gin and tonic! Using alcohol to teach boolean searching. Library instruction roundtable news, 17(4), pp. 10. 

Lorenzen, M. (1999). Using outcome-based education in the planning and teaching of new information technologies. Journal of library administration, 26(3/4), pp. 141-52. 

Louttit, C. M. and Patrick, J. R. (1932). Study of students knowledge in the use of the library. Journal of applied psychology, 16 (October), pp. 475-484. 

Lutzker, M. (1990). Bibliographic instruction and accreditation in higher education. College and research libraries news, 51 (January), pp. 14-18. 

MacGregor, J. and McInnis, R. G. (1977). Integrating classroom instruction and library research. Journal of higher education, 48 (January/February), pp. 225, 226. 

McCarthy, P. (1999). Teaching effective use of the World Wide Web. Colorado libraries, 25 (Spring), pp. 19-21. 

McCrank, L. J. (1991). Information literacy: A bogus bandwagon. Library journal, 116 (May 1st), pp. 38- 42. 

McDonald, D. and Searing, S. (1983). Bibliographic instruction and the development of online catalogs. College and research libraries, 44 (January), pp. 5-11. 

Miller, C. and Tegler, P. (1987). In pursuit of windmills: Librarians and the determination to instruct. The reference librarian, 18 (Summer), pp. 119-34. 

Nahl-Jacobovits, D. and Jacobovits, L. A. (1990). Learning principles and the library environment. Research strategies, 8, pp. 74-81. 

Oberman, C. (1996). Library instruction: Concepts and pedagogy in the electronic environment. RQ, 35(3), pp. 315-23. 

.Patterson, E. P. (1979). How effective is library instruction? RQ, (Summer), pp. 376, 377. 

Patterson, M. C. (1977). Library literacy - A cumulative experience. Literary research newsletter, 2 (October), pp. 180-86. 

Peele, D. (1973). The hook principle. RQ, 13 (Winter), pp. 135-38. 

Peele, D. (1984). Librarians as teachers: Some reality, mostly myth. Journal of academic librarianship, 10 (November), pp. 267-71. 

Pierce, B. A. (1981). Librarians and teachers: Where is the common ground. Catholic library world, 53 (November), pp. 164-67. 

Ragains, P. (1995). Four variations on Drueke's active learning paradigm. Research strategies, 13 (Winter), pp. 40-50. 

Ragians, P. (1997). Evaluation of academic librarians' instructional performance: Report of a national survey. Research strategies, 15, pp. 159-75. 

Rice, J. L. (1987). Using interactive communication technology to extend bibliographic instruction to off- campus students. In Off-Campus Library Services Conference proceedings, 1986 Reno, Nevada, ed. Barton, B. M. Mount Pleasant, MI: Central Michigan University Press. 

Rubin, R. (1977). Azariah Smith Root and library instruction at Oberlin College. Journal of library history, philosophy and comparative librarianship, 12 (Summer), 250-61. 

Salmon, L. M. (1913). Instruction in the use of a college library. ALA bulletin, 7 (July), 301-09. 

Schiller, A. R. (1965). Reference service: Instruction or information. Library quarterly, 35 (January), pp. 52-60. 

Schiller, A. R. (1981). Instruction or information: What's changed? Reference Librarian, ½ (Fall/Winter), pp. 3-11. 

Schiller, N. (1994). Internet training and support. Academic libraries and computer centers: Who's doing what? Internet research, 4 (Summer), pp. 35-47. 

Schneider, J. (1912). A college course in bibliography. Catholic educational review, 3 (March), pp. 215- 22. 

Shaw, C. B. (1928). Bibliographical instruction for students. Library journal, 53 (April 1), 300, 301. 

Shera, J. (1955). The role of the college librarian -- A reappraisal. In Library-instruction integration on the college level, report of the 40th conference of eastern college librarians. Chicago: Association of College and Reference Libraries, pp. 10-21. 

Shores, L. (1935). The liberal arts college, a possibility in 1964? School and society, 41 (26 January), pp. 110-14. 

Smalley, T. N. (1977). Bibliographic instruction in academic libraries: Questioning some assumptions. Journal of academic librarianship, 3 (November), pp. 280-83. 

Stevenson, M. B. (1975). Library instruction and the development of the individual - A comment. Journal of librarianship, 7 (January), pp. 66-68. 

Sturges, R. P. (1978). Subject bibliography in the service of history. Library review, 26 (Summer), pp. 90- 94. 

Taylor, J. H. (1978). Research resources for the college. Improving college and university teaching, 26 (Winter), pp. 89, 90. 

Tucker, J. M. (1980). Articles on library instruction in colleges and universities, 1876-1932. ERIC ED 187 330. 

Tuckett, H. (1989). Computer literacy, information literacy, and the role of the instruction librarian. In Coping with information illiteracy: Bibliographic instruction for the information age, ed. by G. E. Mensching and T. B. Mensching. Ann Arbor, MI: Pierian Press, pp. 21-31. 

Vuturo, R. (1977). Beyond the library tour: Those who can, must teach. Wilson library bulletin, 51 (May), pp. 736-40. 

Whitehead, A. and Long, M. M. (1995). Providing off-campus bibliographic instruction: When off-campus means someone else's campus. Reference librarian, 51-52, pp. 171-80. 

Wilson, P. (1979). Librarians as teachers: The study of an organization fiction. Library quarterly, 49 (January), pp. 146-62. 

Winner, M. C. (1998). Librarians as partners in the classroom: An increasing imperative. Reference services review, 26 (Spring), pp. 25-29. 

Winsor, J. (1880). College libraries as aids to instruction: The college library. In Circulars of information of the Bureau of Education; No. 1. Washington, D. C.: United States Government Printing Office, pp. 7-14. 

Woodruff, E. H. (1886). University libraries and seminary methods of instruction. Library journal, 11 (September), 219-24. 

Young, A. P. (1980). And gladly they teach: Bibliographic instruction in the library. Advances in the librarianship, 10, pp. 64-69. 

Copyright (c) 2003, Michael Lorenzen.  All rights reserved