Demonstrate information literacy and technological agility.

Understanding of the Objective

     Demonstrating information literacy and technological agility means being able to identify where there information is needed, develop an effective search strategy, evaluate evidence, understand how users are seeking such information, apply appropriate research methods, communicate findings, and use technology critically and ethically. Information literacy involves more than locating sources, it also requires understanding authority, bias, context, its origin, privacy, and the responsibilities involved in creating and sharing information.

     Technological agility involves more than knowing how to use a particular tool. Technologies are in a constant state of change making it important to understand systems, data, interfaces, and user behavior well enough to learn new tools, recognize limitations, and determine whether a technology is appropriate for a particular community. Accessibility, privacy, security, cost, sustainability, data quality, and potential bias must be considered before adopting a new technology. Patrons may need help evaluating online information, navigating databases, protecting privacy, or understanding the evidence behind any claim. Community archives require careful research, source authentication, digitization, metadata, preservation, and transparent interpretation. Technology can increase access while also making misinformation, decontextualized images, and insecure data practices easier to spread. For library and information professionals, information literacy and technological agility are both essential skills for helping users navigate these challenges responsibly.

     My career in quality assurance also provided a strong technical foundation before beginning the MLIS program. Graduate study added information-behavior theory, research methods, ethical frameworks, and archival perspectives, helping me approach technology confidently while continuing to question whether it truly serves users and the public good.

​

Evidence

     One of my strongest pieces evidence for PLO 5.1 is my IST 605 Reference Librarian Scenario: Dearing Family and Piedmont History project. The project began with a complex information need involving a family whose history had been erased by the dominant local narrative, our official historical society. I identified research questions, recognized gaps in the existing information, and developed a more systematic search process. Fifteen source types were evaluated, including newspapers, genealogical records, maps, directories, legal and municipal records, archival collections, scholarly materials, photographs, descendant knowledge, and local historical publications. Because no single source provided a complete answer, evidence had to be compared across records, dates and names verified, contradictions documented, and the authority and potential bias of each source considered. This in depth project also strengthened my understanding of user information behavior under PLO 5.2. Researchers can hesitate to seek assistance when a topic is sensitive, when an institution feels unwelcoming, or when they believe digital searching alone should provide everything they need. Working with librarians and archivists demonstrated the importance of specialized collections, vertical files, local knowledge, reference networks, and mediated access. The experience also reinforced the idea thatfull transparency by clearly stating what the evidence supports, what remains uncertain, and where interpretation begins. 

​

     My IST 623 Change Healthcare cybersecurity and privacy case study demonstrated research and analysis under PLO 5.3. Working with a team, I investigated the ransomware incident's timeline, security failures, privacy concerns, operational and financial consequences, regulatory responsibilities, response efforts, and recommendations. The project required comparing official guidance, public statements, news reporting, and technical explanations before communicating the findings to an audience with varying levels of cybersecurity knowledge. This assignment showed me that technological incidents can also be information problems. Incomplete disclosures, inaccurate timelines, confusing technical language, and unclear responsibility can make it difficult for people and organizations to understand risks and make informed decisions.

​

     Another form of research through systemic observation was my IST 564 Library Observation. I documented how catalog stations, self-checkout kiosks, computers, surveillance, entrances, seating, and accessibility features shaped use of the library. The assignment required comparing direct observation from assumptions and connecting observations with supporting information. It also demonstrated that information behavior varies drastically among library users. A library may function as a research space, technology-access point, employment resource, meeting place, third space, refuge, or source of social connection in addition to its traditional lending of literature role. Evaluating the technology in this setting required considering privacy, independence, accessibility, and different levels of digital confidence for the community.

​

     The History of the Book: Technology, Power, Access, and Preservation Timeline assignment from IST 632 demonstrates my ability to analyze technological change over time. The timeline traced developments from early writing materials and manuscripts through printing, public libraries, cataloging systems, OPACs, e-books, audiobooks, metadata, and reparative description. Creating it required selecting meaningful developments and examining how technologies affect who can create, organize, preserve, and access information. This work reinforced that new technology does not automatically equal progress; new systems can expand access while introducing new exclusions and ethical concerns.

​

     My independent work on PaintingPiedmont.com: The Crowd and Jack London Research demonstrates research, source evaluation, and digital communication. Books, newspapers, photographs, interviews, scrapbooks, and biographical sources I collected were used to investigate Piedmont's artistic and literary community and its connections to Jack London, Xavier Martinez, George Sterling, and others. All findings were then organized into a public digital exhibit on my site. This process required comparing sources, providing historical context, documenting citations, and distinguishing historical evidence.

​

     Finally, my IST 621 Information Management and Technology Portfolio and professional quality assurance experience demonstrate technological agility under PLO 5.4. My career requires continually learning new software systems, evaluating data quality, investigating unexpected behavior, testing integrations, and communicating any technical risks to other team members. The MLIS program helped me view those skills through additional considerations such as accessibility, privacy, information behavior, organizational change, and ethical technology use.

​

     Together, this evidence demonstrate smy ability to identify and evaluate information under 5.1, understand user information behavior under 5.2, apply research methods and communicate findings under 5.3, and critically evaluate and use technology under 5.4.

​

Learning Transfer

     Professional practice will require a structured approach to future research. I will begin by defining the question, intended audience, scope, available time, and required level of certainty before selecting appropriate sources. Complex projects may also require documenting search terms, repositories consulted, citations, and unresolved gaps.​ Any uncertainty from my research will be communicated honestly, particularly in community-history work where records may be incomplete or contradictory. Rather than filling gaps with assumptions, interpretations will be identified as such, and origins will be preserved so future researchers can understand the evidence behind a conclusion.

​

     Information-literacy instruction will also need to reflect each patron's immediate goal and experience. Some users may need a detailed research strategy, while others need a clear first step to start their research. Skills such as source comparison, lateral reading, image verification, database searching, privacy awareness, and citation can be introduced in ways that relate directly to the person's question.

​     Technology decisions will remain both practical and critical. Before recommending or implementing a tool, I will consider accessibility, privacy, data collection, staff training, cost, sustainability, interoperability, and what happens if a platform or vendor disappears while we are using the product. Testing and user feedback can help reveal problems before they become barriers.​ Technological agility also requires continual learning. Professional development in digital preservation, metadata, cybersecurity, accessibility, privacy, emerging research tools, and responsible uses of artificial intelligence will help me remain current without assuming every new technology should be adopted.

​

     PLO 5 has shown me that information literacy and technological agility are inseparable from professional ethics. Research and technology can make information more discoverable and useful, but they also create responsibilities involving accuracy, privacy, access, context, and preservation. My goal is to use these skills confidently while remaining transparent about uncertainty, being attentive to users, and willing to adapt my methods as technologies and communities change.