Attitude of Undergraduate Students to Information Literacy: Bowen University Experience

Full text

1
Journal of Balkan Libraries Union
ISSN 2148-077X
http://w ww.balk anlibrar ies. org/jour nal
http://der gipark .org. tr/jbl u
Attitude of Undergraduate Students to Information Literacy: Bowen University
Experience
Adesola P. Adekunle *, Grace Omolara O. Olla, Afolabi Adebayo Olajide, Chioma Ngozi Osuji,
and Adeola Olapeju Adedoyin
Bowen University, Nigeria
*Corresponding author. E-mail:adekunlesola1@gmail.com
I. Introduction
Information literacy (IL) is a very fundamental
ingredient to students' success in the digital age,
particularly in higher education and lifelong learning. It
has therefore become a significant issue in many
academic communities. Coming on the heels of rapidly
emerging information and communications technologies
(ICTs) and increasing quantities of information, but
broader than fluency in the use of ICTs, it has been
recognised globally by institutions of higher learning as a
sine qua non for the information society, thereby making
it imperative for students to accurately understand, and
integrate information literacy (IL) skills.
Many universities have integrated IL into their
curriculum and also put much work into developing
information literacy programmes that students can
properly understand. However, students seem to struggle
with IL skills when claiming to search for, evaluate and
use appropriate information sources. Literature clearly
accentuates the importance of integrating IL skills into a
comprehensive university education (Kim & Shumaker,
2015; Saunders, 2012; Tumbleson & Burke, 2013), in
order to enhance students’ tertiary education experience,
and provide a basis for independent life-long learning and
effective participation in their communities. It therefore
initiates, sustains, and extends lifelong learning through
abilities that may use technologies but are ultimately
independent of them (Anyaoku, Ezeani & Osuigwe,
2014).
Librarians in Bowen University have long recognised
that "the quality and quantity of information needed to
function effectively in the society and workplace
continues to increase" (Association of College and
Research Libraries, 2016), and this calls for everyone
Research Article
ART ICLEI NF OR MATION
ABS TRACT
Article history:
Received 20 May 2019
Received in revised form 3 October 2019
Accepted 2 November 2019
Available online 30 November 2019
The study investigated the rationale behind undergraduates’ apathy for information literacy
(IL) programme at Bowen University, Nigeria. A descriptive survey design was adopted for the
study and a multi-stage sampling method was used to select a sample size of five hundred
participants spread across disciplines and levels of study. A questionnaire containing close-
ended, structured items was used to gather data from the respondents and descriptive analyses,
including percentages and frequency count were used to analyse the data collected. Three
research questions were developed and answered and three research hypotheses were tested
through the instrument. Results show that students’ attitude to information literacy significantly
influences their information literacy skill and students’ perception of information literacy
significantly influences their information literacy skills. Although perception of IL does not
predict influence of IL on students, attitude to IL determines the influence of IL on students’
information literacy skills. The study further revealed that the erroneous equation of technology
literacy with information literacy was largely responsible for students' lukewarm disposition to
information literacy. The study concludes by recommending a paradigm shift from the
traditional teaching delivery to a technology-driven, interactive pedagogy that will ginger the
interest of the students and thus effect the desired attitudinal change to IL.
Keywords: Attitude, Information literacy, Digital literacy, Information communication
technologies, Undergraduate students, Bowen University, Nigeria.
Journal of Balkan Libraries Union
Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 1-11, 2019.
Copyright © 2019 Balkan Libraries Union-All rights reserved.

Journal of Balkan Libraries Union
2
who desires to succeed in this rapidly growing
information society to "master rapidly changing
information technology and possess the information
literacy skills to act independently in this information rich
environment" (ACRL, 2016). From "Use of Libraries" in
2002, to "Library and Information Literacy Skills" in
2007, and then "Use of Libraries, Study Skills and ICTs"
in 2018, Bowen University has endeavored to develop
and integrate information literacy programmes into the
university curriculum, to ensure that students survive in
the midst of the ever-increasing volume of information
they face daily.
II. Statement of the Problem
The age we live in is characterised with the use of
information as an economic resource, intense use of
information by members of the society to take informed
decisions and the emergence of an information sector
within the knowledge society (Moore, 1997). And as
noted by Bulls (2016), it is a global knowledge economy,
where information is currency and wallets are digital
which makes access a sine qua non. As a result,
institutions of higher learning all over the world have
proactively incorporated information literacy course into
students curriculum to equip them with lifelong skills
required to survive in the technology driven, global
knowledge economy. That the knowledge economy is
driven by an enabling technology which is growing
exponentially in capacity and reducing sporadically in
cost without any scintilla of abating, are pointers to an
enduring and long lasting epoch. Hence, the necessity for
impartation of information literacy skills to the teeming
population especially, the undergraduate students.
However, there is a common and growing
misconception that students enter higher institutions with
the skills necessary for success, therefore, making
information literacy courses unnecessary. Although
technological advances have made access to information
easier, university students are still not information literate
and cannot confidently locate, retrieve, evaluate and use
required information. Studies reveal such skill
deficiencies among students (Buzzetto-Hollywood,
Elobeid, &Elo-baid, 2017; Hanson, Kilcoyne, Perez-Mira,
Hanson, & Champion, 2011; Mishra, Cellante, &Ka-
vanaugh, 2015). As cited in Buzzetto-Hollywood, et al.
(2018), Hargittai (2005) explains that students express
this inflated sense of confidence in their digital literacy
because they have mastered the small portion of familiar
technologies that they use on a daily basis, and thus
assume they are information literate.
The assumption that this generation of students is born
into the digital age and so is digitally literate is
unfortunately proven to be wrong most of the time. As a
sub-component of digital literacy, information literacy has
become, maybe has always been, an indispensable
objective in course design and delivery in the age of
technology. The literature on undergraduate students’
competency in information and computer technologies
confirm that today’s undergraduate students are highly
immersed in and familiar with digital technology and
online information so that they can easily utilise online
information for their studies. However, their ‘technical
proficiency’ does not necessarily make them information
literate, which requires the capacity to locate, identify and
critically appraise resources in order to determine which
are the most relevant and reliable (Judd & Kennedy, 2011;
O’Reilly, 2014).
This accordingly has placed a challenge and additional
responsibility on universities to meet the needs of
students with varying levels of technological readiness,
with digital and information literacy deficiencies so as to
enhance their academic success and prepare them for
lifelong, real life information society.
Propelled by this scenario, this study seeks to confirm
and unravel the reasons behind perceived Bowen
University students' negative attitudes and apathy towards
information literacy programmes. Moreover, the dearth of
literature on students’ attitudes to information literacy
from the Nigerian landscape will be filled by this study.
III. Objectives of the Study, Research Questions
and Research Hypothesis
Objectives of the Study
To determine students' perception of information
literacy programme.
To ascertain students' attitude to the information
literacy programme.
To evaluate the result/influence of information literacy
programme on students’ information literacy skills.
Research Questions
1. What perception do students have of information
literacy programme?
2. What are the attitudinal traits students exhibit
with information literacy programme?
3. How does the information literacy programme
influence students’ IL skills?
Research Hypothesis
H01: Students’ attitude to information literacy does
not significantly influence their information literacy skill
H02: Students’ perception of information literacy does
not significantly influence their information literacy skills
H03: Students' attitude to, and perception of
information literacy programme do not determine its
influence on students’ information literacy skills.
IV. Literature Review
Various studies have revealed that there are many
types of literacies existing in gradations with the meaning
and value of literacy depending on the social contexts.
However, literacy alone does not give benefits when
separated from its original purpose, but can be acquired
with education and culture in combination with power
(Shapiro and Hughes, 2009; Warschauer, 2011).
There is no ambiguity as to what information literacy is
as the literature is replete with its descriptions. However,
there seems to be a dearth of literature on the attitude of

Journal of Balkan Libraries Union
3
students to information literacy programme. Hence, Tella
and Bashorun (2012) opine that attitude is one of the most
prominent variables that have not been so much
considered in various related studies particularly from the
African context and Nigeria particularly; and Reetseng
(2016) noted that there is less literature on the assessment
of students' attitude to information compared to literature
on the assessment of information literacy skills. At best,
vague reference has been made to students’ attitude to
information literacy. Some of the available literature will
be reviewed accordingly.
Information literacy is about understanding
information and how it works, about introducing students
to the forms of information available to them, and helping
them determine what sort of information they need in any
specific context, how to find it, evaluate it, and use it
effectively and ethically. Thus, Pinto (2010) defines
Information literacy (IL) as "the set of literacies or
competencies that an informed citizen needs in order to
participate judiciously and actively in an information
society". In addition, Adetoro, Simisaye and Oyefuga
(2010) state that information literacy is a critical input in
today's learning environment and indeed for lifelong
learning. It is the foundation for survival in the
information society, aiding individuals in identifying
when information is needed and the type of information
needed. It therefore becomes necessary for students to
develop the required IL and information seeking skills in
order to function perfectly in whatever discipline, level or
environment they find themselves and be successful both
academically and professionally. Hence, Pinto and
Fernández-Pascual (2017) state that information literacy
is vital for the modern information-intensive world,
enabling personal, economic, social and cultural
development. The importance of teaching IL skills,
"clearly linked with academic and critical thinking skills,
as part of a comprehensive university education" has also
been variously emphasised (Kim & Shumaker, 2015;
Saunders, 2012; Tumbleson& Burke, 2013).
V. The Concept of Digital/ Technology and
Information Literacies
Reetseng (2016) reveals that students have their own
perceptions of information needs, which happen to be
different from the academic environment that they enter.
These are contemporary students (referred to as “digital
natives”) who think and process information differently
from their predecessors (referred to as “digital
immigrants”), because they are surrounded by new
technology. There is therefore this fallacy that students
already possess the necessary skills for success, hence,
information literacy courses were unnecessary in the
higher institution. However, various studies have revealed
the contrary (Buzzetto-Hollywood, Wang, Elobeid,
&ElobeidElobeid, 2017; Hanson, Kilcoyne, Perez-Mira,
Hanson, & Champion, 2011; Mishra, Cellante, &Ka-
vanaugh, 2015), showing that students were only "digital
literates", knowing how to use information and
communication technologies without particular
concentration on information literacy.
Digital literacy, has been noted to play crucial parts
both in students’ abilities to perform well academically
(Mckee-Waddell, 2015) and to eventually function and
succeed in areas such as employment and civic
involvement (Murray and Pérez, 2014). According to
American Library Association (ALA, 2013) digital
literacy is "the ability to use information and
communication technologies to find, understand,
evaluate, create, and communicate digital information, an
ability that requires both cognitive and technical skills".
Beetham (2011) cited in Ondari-Okemwa (2016)
pictures digital literacy as "the awareness, attitude and
ability of individuals including undergraduates to
appropriately use digital tools and facilities to identify,
access, manage, integrate, evaluate, analyse and
synthesise digital resources, construct new knowledge,
create media expression, and communicate with others in
the context of specific life situations, in order to enable
constructive social actions; and to reflect upon this
process". Zwimpfer (2016) defined it as a person’s
confidence and ability to use digital devices and the
internet to find, evaluate, create and communicate
information. JISC (2014) noted that digital literacy looks
beyond functional IT skills to describe a richer set of
digital behaviours, practices and identities. Hence, digital
literacy encompasses various skills identified in the
"Seven Capabilities Model of media literacy" by JISC
(2014) in Fig. 1.
Fig. 1. Seven capabilities model of media literacy. Adapted from
“Developing digital literacies” by JISC, 2014.
According to Ondari-Okemwa (2016), digital literacy
does not just happen, it has to be planned for and
implemented. Buzzetto-More (2009) states that
technological literacy, which is the understanding of the
uses, functions, and purposes of technology for the
achievement of goals, is increasingly being tied into
information literacy. Students nowadays have the ability
to manipulate digital technology and process online
information, but that does not make them particularly
information literate. According to Judd & Kennedy
(2011), their ‘technical proficiency’ does not necessarily
make them information literate. Information literacy
requires ‘the capacity to locate, identify and critically
appraise resources, in order to determine which are the
most relevant and reliable’.
Considering a library and information science
perspective also, the Association of College & Research
Libraries (ACRL, 2016) states that “Information literacy

Journal of Balkan Libraries Union
4
is the set of integrated abilities encompassing the
reflective discovery of information, the understanding of
how information is produced and valued, and the use of
information in creating new knowledge and participating
ethically in communities of learning”. Ogunlana,
Oshinaike, Akinbode and Okunoye (2013) and Reetseng
(2016) reveal that information literacy is a valuable skill,
required for every aspect of students' lives such as their
discipline, studies, occupation and career. Thus, Ogunlana
et al. (2013) define information literacy as a necessary
skill that enables both students and the researchers to
recognise when information is needed and have the ability
to locate, evaluate, and use effectively the needed
information.
The foregoing reveals that there is a clear-cut
difference between digital literacy and other literacies it
compasses such as information literacy. Hence, Dunn
(2010) states that "information literacy is about
developing a wide range of cognitive skills which goes
beyond understanding technologies". It is therefore
important for students to be able to both understand, and
integrate information literacy skills, as these are "needed
for lifelong learning and perceived as an essential skill
that supports learning" (Reetseng, 2016). And as
Anyaoku, Ezeani and Osuigwe (2014) stated, "it initiates,
sustains, and extends lifelong learning through abilities
that may use technologies but are ultimately independent
of them".
VI. Conceptualisation of Attitude
It has often been said that attitude determines not only
altitude but everything in life. It dictates how individuals
respond to situations and shapes decisions and actions. It
sums up individual perceptions, dispositions, inclinations
and worldview. Attitude is defined by Hornby (2010) as
the way that you behave towards somebody or something
that shows how you think and feel. Tella and Bashorun
(2012) see attitude as an inner psychic state influencing
behaviour. It is not inborn, but depends on a person’s
experience and its impact in a new situation. Gajalakshmi
(2013) notes that attitudes have three main components
which are affective (the way we feel), cognitive (the way
we think) and behavioural (the way we act) towards a
particular entity. Also, Adekunle, Ogie and Tella (2007)
see attitudes as inclinations and feelings, prejudices or
bias, preconceived notions, ideas, fears and convictions
about any specific topic.
VII. Attitude and Learning
Beetham's (2011) study referred to by Ondari-Okemwa
(2016) draws attention to the importance of individual
attitude as a catalyst of learning experience. Researchers
in different parts of the world also realise that attitude
plays an important role in academic achievements of
students (Ahmed & Bora, 2012; Beetham, 2011, Mckee-
Waddell, 2015). Perkins, Adams, Pollock, Finkelstein and
Wieman (n.d.) observe positive correlations between
students' attitudes and conceptual learning gains,
concluding that students who come into a course with
more favorable attitudes are more likely to achieve high
learning gains. However, students’ perceptions of courses
and attitudes toward learning both play significant roles in
retention and enrollment (Gasiewski, Eagan, Garcia,
Hurtado and Chang, 2012), and their eventual success as
learners. Gajalakshmi (2013) adds that if students have a
positive attitude towards any subject, they can achieve
many things in that specific area. Hence, a student has no
possibility of succeeding in a course, no matter how
effective the instructor or instruction is as long as the
student believes that no matter what he does, he will not
succeed in that course (Gasiewski et al., 2012). Ogunlana
et al's (2013) study revealed that students’ negative
attitudes to information literacy may reflect a lack of
skills and understanding that needs to be addressed before
they gain confidence to attempt information-related tasks.
This is because whatever attitude students have towards
the training will eventually determine the success of the
instruction.
Valerie (2015) posits that the issue of attitude can be
understood from the perspective of the subject-object
relationship. The subject enters in diverse relations with
the object. In such relationships, the subject does not
manifest uniformly, but manifests differently towards
diverse objects: some he likes, other he dislikes, some
attract him, others repel him, some interest him, others he
is indifferent towards, some he wants, other he refuses
etc. thus confirming that students attitude to a given
subject determines their performance in such subject.
Hence, Freeman (2004) observes that if students perceive
library instruction as unimportant, they will certainly
never take advantage of the available library instruction
opportunities. Thus, the students will never benefit from a
service proven to enhance research skills. The fact that
library instruction is effective makes no difference if
students are unwilling to give instruction a chance.
However, a student that perceives information as
important recognises information literacy as both a means
to and an outcome of learning.
VIII. Students' Attitude and Information Literacy
As noted by Pinto (2010), learning involves three
domains of educational activities: knowledge, skills and
attitude (KSA). Every student's personal KSA will
therefore determine improvement in IL since each person
possesses a particular and unique KSA level. The attitude
of a student is therefore affected by the student's favourite
source of learning, motivation and self-efficacy. Also, the
student's favourite source of learning will significantly
affect both learning and "the path towards the full
training" of the student Fig. 2.
Fig. 2. Importance of attitude in the educational triangle. Adapted from
“Design of the IL-HUMASS survey on information literacy in higher

Journal of Balkan Libraries Union
5
education: A self-assessment approach.” by M. Pinto, 2010, Journal of
Information Science, 36 (1), 86–103.
Pinto (2010) reveals that students can become
information literate only if they proactively and
independently choose to pursue the opportunities that are
available to them during the course of their education, are
properly motivated and possess a strong self-assurance
concerning their capabilities. This attitude will enable
them approach difficult tasks as challenges to be mastered
rather than as threats to be avoided. Hence, Ogunlana et
al. (2013) and Adebamigbe, (2004) posit that attitude is
the most powerful determinant of literacy skill acquisition
by students and students’ perception, attitude and
experience are significantly related to information literacy
skills. Students with negative attitudes have been realised
to have formed a premonition about the librarian and his
duty (Driscoll, 2010), including library instruction.
Baro and Zuokemefa (2011) therefore recognise the
need for librarians to make use of available opportunities
in order to spearhead IL as well as tackle the identified
challenges including lack of interest by students, teachers,
and management, inadequate human resources to handle
IL training, lack of facilities, low acceptance of online IL
delivery approach and absence of IL policy, lack of
facilities, lack of understanding of IL, students’
nonchalant attitude towards attending IL sessions, and
low acceptance of the online approach, as factors
militating against librarians’ efforts in providing IL
training in Nigerian university libraries, and barriers such
as lack of time allotted for teaching IL skills, students
tendency to be apathetic and bored, and a lack of
understanding of what IL identified by the libraries
studied in the UK and US.
Although first-year students are usually sentimental
about the trainings they are exposed to, they sometimes
lack an understanding of what they need to learn or how
research can benefit them, were overconfident,
indifferent, and had short attention spans which make
them less willing to attend or absorb new training
(Buzzetto-Hollywood, Wang, Elobeid and Elobeid; 2018;
Schmidt, Tin & Sanderson, 2018). Reetseng (2016)
reporting a study by Julien et al. (2009) revealed that
students eventually benefitted from the IL training and
had gained searching skills, and confidence in efficient
use of resources, believing that these skills would reduce
time used in conducting searches.
IX. Methodology
Descriptive survey research design was adopted for
this study. The population comprised 5,500
undergraduates in the surveyed university and multistage
sampling method was used to select a sample size of 550.
A structured questionnaire was the instrument of data
collection to selected respondents from among the 200 to
500 level students of the university who were expected to
have taken the information literacy course titled "Library
and Information Literacy Skills". The questionnaires were
administered to the 550 students and 514 completed
copies were returned and found valid for the study. These
were analysed using SPSS, ANOVA and regression
analysis.
X. Results
a. Demographic Characteristics of the Respondents
1.1 Respondents’ Demographics
The demographic characteristics of Bowen University
students are presented in Fig. 3. The distribution shows
the normal expected age of undergraduate students. The
table revealed that 20 years has the highest percentage
(30.4), followed by 19 years (17.9%) then 21 years
(15.8%). The ages with low percentages are 27 and 35
years with 0.2 % followed by 14 and 15 years with 0.4%.
Fig. 3. Age of respondents
The demographic characteristics of Bowen University
library students as presented in Fig. 4 revealed that the
male respondents were 215 which accounted for 41.8%
while female respondents were 299, accounting for 58.2%
Fig. 4. Gender of respondents
Respondents were asked to indicate their levels of
study. The distribution for the levels of study in Fig. 5
showed that most of the respondents were in 400 level
(40%), a few other respondents were in 300 level (29.8%)
while a small number of respondents were in 500 level
(1.4%) and the least number were in 100 level (0.2%).
Percentage
Age
Male; Percentage;
41,8
Female;
Percentage; 58,2
GENDER
Male
Female

Journal of Balkan Libraries Union
6
XI. Results of the Analysis
The results of the analysis are presented in this section.
The study was guided by the following three research
questions:
Research Question 1. What perception do students
have concerning information literacy programme?
Fig. 5. Respondents’ level of study
TABLE I
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION OF INFORMATION LITERACY PROGRAMME
Variables
VH
H
AV
L
VL
Mean
Library and information literacy skills
course is important to my academic
pursuit
10(1.9)
33(6.4)
69(13.4)
192(37.4)
208(40.5)
4.07
The lectures were always boring
37(7.2)
69(13.4)
129(25.1)
165(32.1)
113(22.0)
3.48
Lecture time was always time to sleep,
chat, ping, play online games, copy
notes of other courses*
100(19.5)
121(23.5)
99(19.3)
106(20.6)
86(16.7)
2.90
Library sessions were like field trip
and very boring
45(8.8)
112(21.8)
122(23.7)
142(27.6)
93(18.1)
3.25
The information literacy course was
interesting and helpful
25(4.9)
51(9.9)
122(23.7)
215(41.8)
99(19.3)
3.60
The lectures were always interesting
and I was always eager to attend
54(10.5)
87(16.9)
131(25.5)
172(33.5)
68(13.2)
3.21
Library instruction is important for
learning how to use the library and
information
24(4.7)
44(8.6)
89(17.3)
180(35.0)
177(34.4)
3.86
Library and information literacy skills
should not be a compulsory course
33(6.4)
80(15.5)
119(23.2)
155(30.2)
127(24.7)
3.51
The librarians teaching the course
were friendly
43(8.4)
58(11.3)
177(34.4)
153(29.8)
83(16.1)
3.34
The lecture room was not conducive
for learning
68(13.2)
135(26.3)
112(21.8)
122(23.7)
77(15.0)
3.01
The class was too large for learning
75(14.6)
118(23.0)
143(27.8)
105(20.4)
70(13.6)
3.07
The lecture note was self-explanatory
42(8.2)
94(18.3)
113(22.0)
170(33.1)
95(18.5)
3.35
The teaching methodology used by
lecturers was poor
63(12.3)
149(29.0)
151(29.4)
94(18.3)
57(11.1)
2.87
The lecture environment was too noisy
for any meaningful assimilation
69(13.4)
136(26.5)
132(25.7)
119(23.2)
58(11.3)
2.92
There were distractions when classes
were going on
48(9.3)
110(21.4)
105(20.4)
153(29.8)
95(18.5)
3.25
The classes were not well ventilated
67(13.0)
146(28.4)
117(22.8)
103(20.0)
78(15.2)
2.94
The lecture note was too voluminous
47(9.1)
120(23.3)
129(25.1)
135(28.3)
80(15.6)
3.14
I did not see the relevance of the
course to my programme
63(12.3)
136(26.5)
117(22.8)
111(21.6)
84(16.3)
3.02
The lecture delivery was abstract and
non-interactive
59(11.5)
127(24.7)
152(29.6)
97(18.9)
76(14.8)
2.99
The lecture period was most
unsuitable
48(9.3)
130(25.3)
152(29.6)
122(23.7)
59(11.5)
3.01
3.24
[VH: Very High; H: High; AV: Average; L: Low and VL: Very Low]
The results in Table 1 show that majority of the
respondents perceived that lecture time is a time to sleep,
chat, ping, play online games, copy notes of other courses
(X=2.9); the lecture room not conducive for learning
(X=3.0); the class was too large for learning (X=3.0); the
teaching methodology used by lecturer was poor (X=2.9);
the lecture environment was too noisy for any meaningful
assimilation (X=2.9); and the classes were not well
ventilated (X=2.9).
The addition of "very low (VL)" and "low (L)"
responses together revealed that 61.1% had a low
perception that the information literacy course was
interesting and helpful; 46.7% did not feel that the
lectures were always interesting and they were not always
eager to attend; 69.4% of the respondents had a low
perception that library instruction is important for
learning how to use library and information; 45.9% did
not think the librarians teaching the course were friendly;
and 51.6% did not perceive that the lecture note was self-
explanatory.
Although the result on the table shows that majority
(77.9%) of the respondents had a low (37.4%) and very
low (40.5%) perception of the importance of Library and
Information Literacy Skills course to their academic
pursuit, majority (X=3.5) however, did not support that
Library and information literacy skill should not be a
Percentage; 100;
0,2
Percentage; 200;
27,8
Percentage; 300;
29,8
Percentage; 400;
40,9
Percentage; 500;
1,4
PERCENTAGE
LEVEL
RESPONDENTS’ LEVEL
OF STUDY

Journal of Balkan Libraries Union
7
compulsory course, most respondents (X=3.5) did not
think that the lectures were always boring and majority
(X=3.3) did not perceive that library sessions were like
field trips and very boring.
Research Question 2: What are the attitudinal traits
students exhibit toward information literacy programme?
TABLE II
STUDENTS ATTITUDINAL TRAITS TOWARDS INFORMATION LITERACY PROGRAMME
Variables
SD
D
NT
A
SA
Mean
I enjoyed taking lecture in library and
information literacy skill course
60(11.4)
76(16.7)
111(21.6)
152(29.6)
102(19.8)
3.27
I benefitted from library and information
literacy skill course
33(6.4)
40(7.8)
85(16.8)
231(44.9)
122(23.7)
3.70
I paid rapt attention during classes
33(6.4)
68(13.2)
160(31.1)
176(34.2)
74(14.4)
3.35
I sat for and passed information literacy
course in my first year
19(3.7)
41(8.0)
75(14.6)
192(37.4)
183(35.6)
3.91
Librarians can teach me a lot about
information literacy skill course
43(8.4)
47(9.1)
103(20.0)
179(34.8)
139(27.0)
3.61
I find it difficult to comprehend during
lectures
54(10.5)
135(26.3)
131(25.5)
129(25.1)
60(11.7)
2.99
I felt nervous and worried when I have to
attend information literacy classes
79(15.0)
134(26.1)
130(25.3)
100(19.5)
70(13.6)
2.89
I felt overwhelmed with the volume of notes
I had to read for the course
48(9.3)
112(21.80
129(25.1)
144(28.0)
78(15.2)
3.16
I always had fear or failure whenever I
thought about the course
59(11.5)
125(24.3)
117(22.8)
114(22.2)
96(18.7)
3.11
I experience negative feelings about the
course
61(11.9)
118(23.0)
124(24.7)
118(23.0)
90(17.5)
3.10
It was sometimes hard for me to concentrate
because of my perception
65(12.6)
102(19.8)
128(24.9)
125(24.3)
91(17.7)
3.13
I dislike the information literacy course
because of what I heard about it from other
people
76(14.8)
128(23.9)
135(26.3)
99(19.3)
78(15.2)
2.94
3.26
[SD: Strongly Disagree; D: Disagree; NT: Neutral; A: Agree; SA: Strongly Agree]
In Table 2, the findings of this study in respect of
research question 2 revealed that majority of the
respondents usually enjoyed taking lecture in library and
information literacy skill course (X=3.3), benefitted from
library and information literacy skill course (X=3.7), paid
rapt attention during classes (X=3.4) and sat for and
passed information literacy course in their first year
(X=3.9).
The results also show that although most respondents
affirmed that librarians can teach them a lot about the
information literacy skill course (X=3.6), majority usually
find it difficult to comprehend during lectures (X=3.0),
felt nervous and worried when they had to attend
information literacy classes (X=2.9), felt overwhelmed
with the volume of notes they had to read for the course
(X=3.2), always had fear of failure whenever they thought
about the course (X=3.1), experienced negative feelings
about the course (X=3.1), sometimes found it hard to
concentrate because of their perception (X=3.1), and
disliked the information literacy course just because of
what they had heard about it from other people (X=2.9).
Research Question 3: What is the effect of information
literacy programme on students’ IL skills?
TABLE III
INFLUENCE OF INFORMATION LITERACY PROGRAMME ON STUDENTS’ IL SKILLS
Variables
S.D
D
NT
A
S.A
Mean
I can effectively use the computer and
other technologies, therefore I
consider myself to be information
literate
22(4.3)
28(5.1)
60(11.7)
159(30.9)
242(47.1)
4.09
I use and borrow library books
68(13.2)
73(14.2)
89(17.3)
154(30.0)
127(24.7)
3.37
I can differentiate between
information and data
14(2.7)
29(5.6)
103(20.0)
161(31.3)
204(39.7)
3.98
I understand how the library is
organised
22(4.3)
46(8.9)
118(23.0)
179(34.80)
143(27.8)
3.70
I am able to use the library effectively
to find information
32(6.2)
30(5.8)
101(19.6)
198(38.5)
146(28.4)
3.73
I am aware of the different
information sources available in the
library
25(4.9)
51(9.9)
109(21.20)
194(37.7)
131(25.50
3.67
I always search OPAC to find books
on a topic that interests me before
retrieving resources from the shelves
50(9.7)
87(16.89)
104(20.2)
182(35.4)
88(17.1)
3.25
I always seek assistance form
librarians on how to find information
in library
35(6.8)
59(11.5)
131(25.5)
172(33.5)
113(22.0)
3.32
It is easy to find books and other
resources in the library for useful
20(3.90)
56(10.9)
131(25.5)
156(30.2)
149(29.0)
3.50

Journal of Balkan Libraries Union
8
articles for research
I can differentiate between primary,
secondary and tertiary sources of
information
28(5.4)
66(12.8)
144(28.0)
166(32.3)
104(20.2)
3.68
I can tell the difference between
scholarly and popular journals without
any problem
16(3.1)
61(11.9)
102(19.8)
182(35.4)
150(29.20
3.46
I can cite sources I use
58(11.3)
83(16.1)
124(24.1)
152(29.6)
93(18.1)
3.74
I can tell the difference between a
citation to a book and a citation to an
article
25(4.9)
46(8.9)
129(25.1)
173(33.7)
138(28.8)
3.67
I also search research databases in the
library for useful articles
23(4.5)
89(13.4)
120(23.3)
174(33.9)
125(24.3)
3.58
I prefer to use only web resources for
my assignment and term/seminar
papers
21(4.1)
74(14.4)
144(22.2)
164(31.9)
135(26.3)
3.58
I can perfectly form a search strategy
34(6.6)
70(23.6)
136(26.5)
169(32.9)
100(19.5)
3.42
I can confidently use search engines to
retrieve relevant information from
web-based resources
23(4.5)
36(7.0)
109(21.2)
186(36.2)
157(30.5)
3.80
I am confident that I will retrieve
relevant information whenever I
search information
15(2.9)
39(7.6)
97(18.9)
198(38.5)
163(31.1)
3.84
I can confidently apply Boolean
operators to retrieve relevant
information
21(4.1)
61(11.9)
171(33.3)
149(27.0)
109(21.2)
3.50
I can define and articulate my need for
information
16(3.1)
50(9.7)
139(27.0)
192(37.4)
14(22.2)
3.64
I am able to formulate relevant
information to help solve my
information needs
14(2.7)
62(12.1)
106(21.0)
196(38.5)
129(25.1)
3.69
I am capable of retrieving relevant
information from different formats of
information
26(5.1)
51(9.9)
114(22.2)
194(37.7)
125(24.3)
3.65
3.63
[SD: Strongly Disagree; D: Disagree; NT: Neutral; A: Agree; SA: Strongly Agree]
Considering the influence of the information literacy
programme on information literacy skills of the
respondents, the results in Table 3 show that majority of
the respondents can effectively use computer and other
technologies, therefore consider themselves to be
information literate (X= 4.1), use and borrow library
books (X= 3.4), can differentiate between information and
data (X=4.0), understand how the library is organized
(X=3.7), able to use the library effectively to find
information (X=3.7), aware of the different information
sources available in the library (X=3.7), always search
OPAC to find books on a topic that interests them before
retrieving resources from the shelves (X=3.3), always
seek assistance form librarians on how to find information
in library (X=3.3), easy to find books and other resources
in the library useful for research (X=3.5), can differentiate
between primary, secondary and tertiary sources of
information (X=3.7), can tell the difference between
scholarly and popular journals without any problem
(X=3.5), can cite sources used (X=3.7), can tell the
difference between a citation to a book and a citation to
an article (X=3.7), search research databases in the library
for useful articles (X=3.6), can perfectly form a search
strategy (X=3.4), can confidently use search engines to
retrieve relevant information from web-based resources
(X=3.8), are confident that they will retrieve relevant
information whenever they search for information
(X=3.8), can confidently apply Boolean operators to
retrieve relevant information (X=3.5), can define and
articulate their need for information (X=3.6), are able to
formulate relevant information to help solve their
information needs (X=3.7), and are capable of retrieving
relevant information from different formats of
information (X=3.7). However, majority (X=3.6) prefer to
use only web resources for their assignments and
term/seminar papers.
Hypothesis one: Students’ attitude to information
literacy does not significantly influence their information
literacy skill.
Table 4 shows that the overall mean score of students’
attitude to information literacy (IL) is 39.16. This reveals
that t-value associated with df = 512 at .005 significance
level for a two tailed test is +or- 1.96. The calculated t-
ratio of 97.59 is greater than the critical value of 1.96;
therefore the null hypothesis is rejected and the alternate
will be accepted. Consequently, Students’ attitude to
information literacy significantly influences their
information literacy skill.
TABLE IV
HOW STUDENTS’ ATTITUDE TO INFORMATION LITERACY INFLUENCES
THEIR INFORMATION LITERACY SKILL
N
Mean
Std.
dev
Df
T
Sig(p)
Remark
Attitude
to IL
513
39.16
7.93
512
97.59
.005
Hypothesis two: Students’ perception of information
literacy does not significantly influence their information
literacy skills
Table 5 shows that the overall mean score of students’
perception of information literacy is 64.78. The table
reveals that t-value associated with the df =513 at .005
significant level for a two-tailed test is +or-1.96. The
calculated t-ratio of 137.89 is greater than the critical
value of 1.96; therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected
and the alternate is accepted. Consequently, Students’

Journal of Balkan Libraries Union
9
perception of information literacy significantly influences
their information literacy skills
TABLE V
HOW STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION OF INFORMATION LITERACY INFLUENCES
THEIR INFORMATION LITERACY SKILL
N
Mean
Std.
dev.
Df
T
Sig
(p)
Remark
Perception
of IL
514
64.78
9.83
513
137.89
.005
Hypothesis three: Students' attitude to, and perception
of information literacy programme do not determine its
influence on students’ information literacy skills.
Dependent variable: the influence of IL
In Table 6,
B =0.009, t(507)=0.202, p>0.05. This indicates that
perception of IL is not a predictor of influence of IL. The
observed is not significant at p< .05 level
B= 0.359, t(507)=7.841, p<0.05. Attitude to IL is a
strong predictor of Influence of IL. The small
observed significance level (P<.05) associated with the
slope of IL supports the hypothesis that attitude to IL
and Influence of IL are linearly related.
TABLE VI
INFLUENCE OF ATTITUDE TO, AND PERCEPTION OF INFORMATION
LITERACY PROGRAMME ON STUDENTS’ INFORMATION LITERACY
PROGRAMME
Unstandardised
coefficient
Standardized
coefficient
T
sig
Model
B
Std
Error
Beta
Constant
52.545
4.351
12.076
.000
Perception
of IL
.014
.069
.009
.202
.840
Attitude of
IL
.673
.086
.359
7.841
.000
In Table 7 the regression analysis result indicates that
the model (perception of students to IL, attitude of
students to IL) significantly predicts information literacy:
R=0.363; R2 adj = 0.129; F(2,507)= 38.56; p<0.05. The
model accounts for 13.2% of variance of influence on
information literacy.
TABLE VII
MODEL SUMMARY AND ANOVA TABLE
R= 0.363a
R square =0.132
Adjusted R square =0.129
Model
Sum of
squares
Df
Mean
square
F
Sig
Regression
14852.047
2
7426.024
38.557
.0006
Residual
97648.716
507
192.601
Total
112500.763
509
Dependent variable: influence of information literacy
Predictors: (constant), attitude of students to
information literacy and perception of students to
information literacy.
XII. Conclusion
Despite the increasing sophistication of ICTs and the
ease with which the technology native generation adopts
every emerging technology, this study established the
need for a holistic paradigm shift from the traditional
teaching delivery to a more robust and technology driven
interactive pedagogy that will ginger the interest of the
learners and effect the desired attitudinal change in the
generation of undergraduate students. The study therefore
recommends that since these students are known to be
technology savvy, there is the need to increase mobile
educational applications in order to meet them at their
familiar terrain, develop and enhance the content, videos
and interactive tools to potentially support greater positive
outcomes as asserted by Schmidt, Tin & Sanderson
(2018).
Furthermore, IL teaching should be made a dedicated
element in the main curriculum as well as staggering it to
last the duration of an undergraduate programme since it
has been established that skills transfer is a process which
takes time. Librarians should teach for long-term transfer
by working closely with faculty and ensuring that
assessment of IL skills continues for the full duration of
the academic programme, since management support is
essential for a successful implementation as asserted by
Pinto (2010).
References
Adebamigbe, D. A. (2004). Attitude of Nigerian
university students towards information literacy.
Librarian and Information Journal Review, 4(2), 106-
123.
Adekunle, P. A., Ogie, R. O., & Tella, A. (2007).
Attitudes of librarians in selected Nigerian Universities
toward the use of ICT. Library Philosophy and Practice.
Adetoro, N., Simisaye, A., &Oyefuga, A B, (2010).
Relationship between perceived self-efficacy and
information literacy among library and information
science (LIS) undergraduates in a Nigerian University of
Education. Ife Psychologia, 18, 172-191. DOI:
10.4314/ifep.v18i2.56758.
Ahmed, S., & Bora, A. (2012). The relationship between
teachers' attitude about teaching mathematics and
students' mathematics achievement in India. Journal of
International Education Research, 80(28).
American Library Association. (2013). Digital literacy,
libraries, and public policy: Report of the office for
information technology policy’s digital literacy task force.
Retrieved from
http://www.districtdispatch.org/wpcontent/uploads/2013/
01/2012_OITP_digilitreport_1_22_13.pdf
Anyaoku, E. E, Ezeani, C. N., & Osuigwe, N. E. (2014).
Building a knowledge society: Information literacy skills
and practices of librarians in universities in South East
Nigeria. Paper presented at the 52nd National conference
and Annual General Meeting in Enugu, Nigeria.
Association of College & Research Libraries. (2016).
Framework for information iteracy for higher education.
Retrieved
fromhttp://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content
/issues/infolit/Framework_ILHE.pdf
Baro, E., & Zuokemefa, T (2011). Information literacy
programmes in Nigeria: A survey of 36 university

Journal of Balkan Libraries Union
10
libraries. New Library World, 112(11/12), 549-565. DOI:
10.1108/03074801111190428
Beetham, H. (2011). Digital literacy anatomised: Access,
skills, and practices. [online] Joint Information System
Committee (JISC) Design Studio. Retrieved from
http://jiscdesignstudio.pbworks.com/w/file/40474828/Dig
ital%20literacies%20anatomy.pdf
Bulls, L. (2016). De-myth-tifying the gender digital
divide in Latin America: Libraries as intermediaries in
bridging the gap. Dalhousie Journal of Interdisciplinary
Management, 12, 1-18. DOI: 10.5931/djim.v12.i1.6448
Buzzetto-Hollywood, N., Wang, H., Elobeid, M., &
Elobeid, M. (2018). Addressing information literacy and
the digital divide in higher education. Interdisciplinary
Journal of e-Skills and Lifelong Learning, 14, 77-93.
DOI: 10.28945/4029
Driscoll, M. A. (2010). Information literacy seven
corners: Improving instruction by reviewing how
librarians, faculty culture, professional literature,
technology, and today’s college students converge.
Library Students Journal, 5.
Dunn, H. S. (2010). Information literacy and the digital
divide: Challenging e-Exclusion in the Global South In
Ferret, E. et al. (eds.) Handbook of research on
overcoming digital divides: Constructing an equitable
and competitive information society.
Freeman, C. A. (2004). The relationship of undergraduate
students’ self-assessment of library skills to their
opinion of library instruction: A self-reporting survey The
Southeastern Librarian, 52(3) Article 8. Retrieved from
http://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/seln/vol52/iss3/8
Gajalakshmi. (2013). High school students’ attitude
towards learning English language. International Journal
of Scientific and Research Publications, 3(9), 1-7.
Gasiewski, J. A., Eagan, M. K., Garcia, G. A., Hurtad, O.
S., & Chang, M. J. (2012). From gate-keeping to
engagement: A multi contextual, mixed method study of
student academic engagement in introductory STEM
courses. Res High Educ., 53, 229-261.
Hargittai, E. (2005). Survey measures of web-oriented
digital litercy. Social Science Computer Review, 23(3),
371-379. DOI: 10.1177/0894439305275911
Hanson, B., Kilcoyne, M., Perez-Mira, B., Hanson, T., &
Champion, S. (2011). Digital knowledge and application
skills: A comparison study of entering freshman. Journal
of Research in Business Information Systems, 4(4), 55-68.
Hornby, A. S. (2010). Oxford Advanced Learners’
Dictionary of Current English. New York: Oxford
University Press.
JISC. (2014). Developing digital literacies. Retrieved
from https://www.jisc.ac.uk/guides /developing-digital-
literacies on January 14, 2016.
Judd, T., & Kennedy, G. (2011). Expediency-based
practice? Medical students' reliance on Google and
Wikipedia for biomedical inquiries. British Journal of
Educational Technology, 42(2), 351-360. DOI:
10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.01019.x
Kim, S. U., & Shumaker, D. (2015). Student, librarian,
and instructor perceptions of information literacy
instruction and skills in a first year experience program: A
case study. The Journal of Academic Librarianship,
41(4), 449-456. DOI: 10.1016/j.acalib.2015.04.005
Mckee-Waddell, S. (2015). ‘Digital literacy: Bridging the
gap with digital writing tools. Delta Kappa Gamma
Bulletin, 82(1), 26-31.
Mishra, S., Cellante, D., & Kavanaugh, L. (2015).
Assessing the usefulness of a core introductory
information systems course in undergraduate curriculum:
An experimental study. Issues in Information Systems,
16(1), 31-40.
Murray, M. C., & Pérez, J. (2014) Unraveling the digital
literacy paradox: How higher education fails at the fourth
literacy. Issues in Informing Science & Information
Technology, 11, 85-100.
Moore, N. (1997). Issues and trends: The information
society In Mayor, F. (ed.) World information report,
1997/1998, UNESCO, 271-284.
Ogunlana, E. K, Oshinaike, A. B, Akinbode, R. O., &
Okunoye, O. (2013). Students’ perception, attitude and
experience as factors influencing learning of information
literacy skills in public universities in Ogun State,
Nigeria. Information and Knowledge, 3(5), 127-134.
Retrieved from
https://www.iiste.org/Journals/indexphp/IKM/article/view
File/5613/5725 on March 27, 2019
Ondari-Okemwa, E. (2016). Developing digital
information literacy at institutions of higher learning in
sub-saharan Africa: Opportunities and challenges.
Standing Conference of Eastern, Central and Southern
Africa Library and Information Associations (SCECSAL),
1-20.
O’Reilly, C. (2014). Searching for French civilization:
Reflections on situating information literacy skills in an
undergraduate curriculum. In J. D. James (Ed.), The
Internet and the Google age: Prospects and perils (pp.
99-115). Dublin: Research-publishing.net. DOI:
10.14705/rpnet.2014.000180
Pinto, M., & Fernández-Pascual, R. (2017). How a cycle
of information literacy assessment and instruction
stimulates attitudes and motivations of LIS students: A
competency-based case study. Journal of Librarianship
and Information Science. DOI:
10.1177/0961000617742447
Pinto, M. (2010). Design of the IL-HUMASS survey on
information literacy in higher education: A self-
assessment approach. Journal of Information Science,
36(1), 86-103. DOI: 10.1177/0165551509351198
Perkins, K. K., Adams, W. K., Pollock, S. J., Finkelstein,
N. D., &. Wieman, C. E. (2005). Correlating student
beliefs with student learning using the Colorado learning
attitudes about science survey. AIP Conference
Proceedings, 790 (61). DOI: 10.1063/1.2084701

Journal of Balkan Libraries Union
11
Reetseng, M. P. (2016). An Assessment of the attitudes of
undergraduate. Retrieved from
https://repository.up.ac.za/bitstream/handle/2263/58606/R
eetseng_Assessment_2016.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=
y
Saunders, L. (2012). Faculty perspectives on information
literacy as a student learning outcome. The Journal of
Academic Librarianship, 38(4), 226-236. DOI:
10.1016/j.acalib.2012.06.001
Schmidt Hanbidge, A., Tin, T., & Sanderson, N. (2018).
Information literacy skills on the go: Mobile learning
innovation. Journal of Information Literacy, 12(1), 118-
136. DOI: 10.11645/12.1.2322
Shapiro J. J., & Hughes S. K. (1996) Information Literacy
as a liberal art: Enlightenment proposal for a new
curriculum. Educom Review, 31(2).
Tella, A., & Bashorun, M. T. (2012). Attitude of
undergraduate students towards computer-based test
(CBT): A case study of the University of Ilorin,
Nigeria. International Journal of Information and
Communication Technology Education, 8(2), 1-13
Tumbleson, B. E. & Burke, J. J. (2013). Embedding
librarianship in learning management systems: A how-to-
do-it manual for librarians. Chicago, IL: ALA Neal-
Schuman.
Valerie, D. (2015). Factors generating of positive
attitudes towards learning of the pupils. The 6th
International Conference Edu World 2014 “Education
Facing Contemporary World Issues”, 7th - 9th November
2014, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 180,
554-558.
Warschauer, M. (2011).A literacy approach to the digital
divide. Cadernos de Letras (UFRJ), 28(1), 1-14.
Retrieved from
http://www.letras.ufrj.br/anglo_germanicas/cadernos/num
eros/072011/textos/ cl31072011mark.pdf
Zwimpfer, L. (2016) ‘Digital literacy: What are we really
talking about?’, Collected Magazine, 18, 20.
Adesola Paul ADEKUNLE is a Certified
Librarian of Nigeria (CLN), currently heads the
Periodical Section of the library and had at
various times headed the Cataloguing and
Classification as well as Information Access
Management sections of Timothy Olagbemiro
Library, Bowen University, Iwo, Osun State,
Nigeria. He holds a Bachelor of Science degree
B. Sc. (Hons) Political Science and Master of
Library and Information Studies (M.L.S.) both
from the University of Ibadan. He has attended a
lot of trainings, conferences and workshops on
Social Media and Web 2.0 applications for
information gathering, processing and
dissemination, Open Source Management
Software for institutional repository, etc.
In addition to his highly demanding professional
and administrative duties, Adekunle teaches
information literacy as an academic librarian in
Bowen University. A savant of information
science and au fait with ICTs and library
software, Adekunle has published sizable number
of articles in reputable and peer-reviewed
international journals. His research interests
include social media applications, library
software, assistive and interactive technologies,
current and emerging ICTs, digitization, digital
and information literacy, information retrieval,
competitive intelligence, information use/user
studies, information theories and knowledge
management.
Grace Omolara O. OLLA is a Certified Librarian
of Nigeria (CLN) with over a decade experience
as a Librarian at Bowen University, Iwo, Osun
State. She holds a Bachelor of Science degree in
Library Science (B.L.S) and a Master in
Information Science (M. Inf. Sc.), from Delta
State University, Abraka and the University of
Ibadan respectively.
She has served as the Head of the Collection
Development and Acquisitions and is the current
Head of Information Resources Management
Section, Cataloguing and Classification Unit,
Bowen University Library. In addition to her
extremely challenging professional and
administrative duties, she has taught indigenous
knowledge systems, collection development,
records management and bibliography, and still
teaches information literacy, as an academic
librarian. She has also published several articles in
reputable, peer-reviewed journals. Her research
interests include information literacy, information
and communication technologies in libraries and
user studies.
Adebayo Afolabi OLAJIDE is currently the head
of Medical Library of Bowen University
Teaching Hospital, Ogbomoso Nigeria. I am also
the Liaison Librarian to Faculty of Basic Clinical
Sciences and Faculty of Clinical Sciences. I
teach Library and Information Literacy Skills to
first year students at Bowen University and
organizes library & electronic resource training
for medical staff and students at the medical
college. My area of research interest is social
media, electronic libraries, information resources
and use, information literacy & teaching,
reference services, knowledge management and
electronic resources. He graduated with B. Tech
(Hons) Chemistry from Ladoke Akintola
University of Technology, Ogbomoso, Nigeria,
and MLIS in 2010 from university of Ibadan,
Nigeria. I have published some articles locally
and internationally within the 8 years’
experience of library work
Chioma Ngozi OSUJI is the Law Libraian,
Bowen University, Iwo, Osun state, Nigeria. She
obtained her first degree in Law (LL. B.) from
Obafemi Awolowo University, (OAU) Ile-Ife,
before proceeding to the Nigerian Law School
(Enugu Campus). She holds a Master degree in
Library and Information Science from the
University of Ibadan. She is also a Certified
Librarian of Nigeria (CLN). Presently, she is the
Acting Head, Law Library Bowen University,
Iwo Osun State Nigeria where she also teaches
Use of Library and Information Literacy Skills.
Adeola ADEDOYIN is a Librarian at Bowen
University, Iwo. She has two degrees, one in
English Education from Adeyemi College of
Education, Ondo State and a Masters in Library
and Information Science (MLIS) from the
University of Ibadan, Oyo State. She teaches
"Use of Library and Information Technology" to
fresh students in Bowen University and her area
of interest include school library administration