Algorithm literacy

Augustinus, M. (2022). What do we talk about when we talk about algorithmic literacy? A scoping review. (Masters dissertation). University of Boras. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1732027/FULLTEXT01.pdf. A useful review. 

Archambault, S.G. (2023). Toward a new framework for teaching algorithmic literacy. Information and Learning Sciences, (early online publication) https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-07-2023-0090. This is not open access, so here is some more information:
"Eleven semistructured interviews and one focus group were conducted with scholars and teachers of critical algorithm studies and related fields. A content analysis was manually performed on the transcripts using a mixture of deductive and inductive coding. Data analysis was aided by the coding software program Dedoose (2021) to determine frequency totals for occurrences of a code across all participants along with how many times specific participants mentioned a code. Then, findings were organized around the three themes of knowledge components, coping behaviors and pedagogy. Findings: The findings suggested a set of 10 knowledge components that would contribute to students’ algorithmic literacy along with seven behaviors that students could use to help them better cope with algorithmic systems. A set of five teaching strategies also surfaced to help improve students’ algorithmic literacy."
The knowledge components were: Bias causes (what causes bias); Black box (understanding how much of algorithms was hidden);common misconceptions; algorithm strengths; machine learning vs rule based; key algorithmic operations; human-algorithm interplay; algorithmic reasing vs human reasoning; commodification; infrastructure.
The coping behaviours were: Recognise across domains in everyday life; privacy of personal data; folk theories; gaming the system; broader advocacy (becoming an activist in raising issues); critical evaluation; scepticism anarchy.
The pedagogogic strategies were: tactile (buildingalgorithms); data transparency tools; speculative futuring; perspective taking; expectancy violation.
Image by Sheila Webber using Midjourney AI - using the prompt Sheila Webber. I don't look like that

Demystification: how librarians can bring order to algorithmically driven transactions; Running practice; @asist_ec #ist23

This is today's first liveblog from the Information Science Trends conference taking place in Uppsala, Sweden and online. First I'll blog Demystification: how librarians can bring order to algorithmically driven transactions, presented by Maureen Henninger and Hilary Yerbury (who presented virtually with a 16 time difference between them - one having to stay up very late and the other get up very early). The abstract is at https://zenodo.org/record/7911991
Algorithms are often considered as "black boxes" and there are frequent calls for people to be algorithmically literate, and this research probed the understanding of librarians. 30 university librarians from aross Australia were interviewed using a practice-based approach. The presenters used as a key note one interviewee's reflection that they had an "official brain and unofficial brain" (indicating a split between their professional and everyday practice). 

In terms of developing students' information literacy, interviewees talked about taking students from naive to autonomous learner, there was an emphasis of structured searching and also an emphsasis on evaluating information and identifying authoritative information. The autonomous student was seen as one who could identify trustworthy sources (rather than the emphasis on being able to engage with content to judge for yourself). Critical thinking was talked about in an academic education context (for example - health information seen in terms of what was needed for a medical and health course rather than in the context of everyday health).

Participants hadn't necessarily connected algorithms and literacy, and were not sure how they would explain algorithms to a student. Their responses were more socio-cultural (aware of issues around alogrithms affecting social media) than socio-technical. The metaphorical language (e.g. talking about "magic") in relation to algorithms illustrated this. Interviewees were aware of the role of algorithms in everyday life, and there was a notable concern about privacy (rather than concern about misinformation, with few exceptions). This could be interpreted as a tussle between the official and unofficial brain - which I interpret as a disconnect between people's everyday experience and practice of information  and their official identity as professional practitioners, the latter with a focus on a structured and focused approach to information literacy. 

The presenters felt that the picture was not particularly optimistic for librarian practice: information literacy education needed to be changed (so it didn't cling to over-structured approaches which were limited in scope). They felt librarians were capable of this, but there were challenges. The proposed responses were grouped under "utilise expertise in processes without fear or favour" and "emphasise a critical and reflexive approach to all information". (see the slide, above) As an educator of LIS students, I can see the implications for LIS students developing their professional identity (and reflecting more on the relationship with their personal identity) as well as teaching IL and IL education.

More briefly: Lee Pretlove talked about A record of a run: documenting running through self-tracking data and personal (digital) archive practices. He focused on the methods used in his research into runners' use of self tracking data, and also the data the participants collected about themselves. The study's mobile data collection showed how the runner pressed their tracking device at teh start and finish of the run. The data was uploaded using apps, and this process was something of a black box for most runners, and it involved little effort on the part of a runner. The complex digital records and any print records (e.g. in a diary) were used and valued in different ways, and there could be a strong emotional attachment to the records as a history of their running (particularly from male runners).

Also in this session was An information framework for research on difficult heritage, memory and identity practices on social network sites, presented by Costis Dallas, also authored by Ingrida Kelpšienė, Rimvydas Laužikas and Justas Gribovskis https://zenodo.org/record/8056443, a qualitative work.

Assembling fragments: a two-layer knowledge management tool to explore algorithms and their social functions #IST23 @asist_ec

My second liveblog from the Information Science Trends conference taking place in Uppsala, Sweden and online. It is Assembling fragments: a two-layer knowledge management tool to explore algorithms and their social functions, from Rayya Roumanos and Olivier Le Deuff. The abstract is in this archive https://zenodo.org/communities/information_science_trends/?page=1&size=20 and also here Roumanos started by explaining the aims and scope of the ALGO-J research project - which arises from collaboration between journalist and other organisations with the researchers. The aim is to to provide journalists with the necessary resources to understand and critique algorithms.
Journalists are now dependent on algorithms for various aspects of their craft, including gathering and disseminating news - as well as reporting on stories to do with algorithms. However, journalists are not necessarily algorithm-literate. The fact that the code for algorithms is hidden does not help. However there is also a certain lack of knowledge, skill and curiosity about algorithms amongst journalists. Roumanos talked about the need to opt for taking a socio-technical (rather than just a technical) perspective - there are issues of power, bias etc. in algorithms.
In order to investigate algorithms, theere is a need to make the algorithms not just visible, but hypervisible. LeDeuff talked about the Cosma tool, which enables document graph visualisation and demonstrated https://cosma.graphlab.fr/ (see photo) - leDeuff mentioned influences from the documentalist Paul Otlet and also Ted Nelson The data within the system (the "index cards" are produced by the researcher (with definitions etc. based on the literature)  and also including articles about journalism and algorithms).
Algorithms are used to create the graph, and people will be able to play with it to see the impact of the algorithm and the effect of changes to the algorithm (via sliders that are on the tool's screen). Journalists will have input to how it is developed and how it can be used, which should help them be able to understand and investigate algorithms.
The project website is at https://algoj.hypotheses.org/

Intercultural perspectives on Information Literacy

There are recordings from the Intercultural perspectives on Information Literacy project's Intercultural Perspectives on Information Literacy and Metaliteracy conference, that took place on 25 February 2023. This project involves experts and students from different countries working together, and then the students making presentations on their projects. In 2022/3 it was Intercultural Perspectives on Information Literacy and Metaliteracy: A transnational online course with partners from Germany, Bosnia-Herzegovina, India and the USA (see here). The student presentation videos are
- Researching and comparing national initiatives to foster information literacy
- Impact of algorithms on information consumption - Gamification of information literacy learning scenarios
- Corporate misinformation and financial scandals
- Digital rights for a digitally literate citizen
- Building Research Capacity through Information Literacy
- Surveillance and data protection on the Internet
- Google as an information gatekeeper
The recordings are at https://www.youtube.com/@interculturalperspectiveso2656/videos

Image created by Sheila Webber and Midjourney AI, using prompt Intercultural, transnational, Information Literacy, Metaliteracy, online, learning, paul klee

The bigot in the machine

Sometimes I like to highlight someone else's blog post I enjoyed, and this one by Barbara Fister is double value, since it is a transcript of a talk for New York Technical Services Librarians, and you can either read the transcript or watch the talk (or both). It is called The bigot in the machine (published June 2020) and the abstract reads "We are living in an “age of algorithms.” Vast quantities of information are collected, sorted, shared, combined, and acted on by proprietary black boxes. These systems use machine learning to build models and make predictions from data sets that may be out of date, incomplete, and biased. We will explore the ways bias creeps into information systems, take a look at how “big data,” artificial intelligence and machine learning often amplify bias unwittingly, and consider how these systems can be deliberately exploited by actors for whom bias is a feature, not a bug. Finally, we’ll discuss ways we can work with our communities to create a more fair and just information environment."
Blog post at https://barbarafister.net/political/the-bigot-in-the-machine/#more-899

Here is the recording https://youtu.be/PBixDFVfekM There is five minutes of introduction, 55 minutes of the talk, and then Barbara responds to questions.