Discover

Digital Information Literacy Guidelines for Academic Libraries

Nov 13, 2025 |

14 Mins Read

Information literacy is the skill of finding, evaluating, and using information effectively. Data literacy is the skill of understanding numbers and datasets, reading charts, checking how data was collected, and spotting mistakes. Critical thinking is the skill of analysing information, questioning assumptions, and making sound judgments. With so many digital tools today, students and researchers need all three skills, not just to find information, but also to make sense of it and communicate it clearly.

Why Academic Libraries Should Offer Literacy Programs

Let’s face it: research can be overwhelming. Over 5 million research papers are published every year. This information overload means researchers spend 25-30%1 of their time finding and reviewing academic literature, according to the International Study: Perceptions and Behavior of Researchers. Predatory journals, low-quality datasets, and confusing search results can make learning stressful. Libraries are more than book storage, they’re a place to build practical skills. Programs that teach information and data literacy help students think critically, save time, and feel more confident with research.

Key Skills Students, Researchers, and Librarians Need

Finding and Using Scholarly Content

Knowing how to search a database efficiently is a big deal. Students should learn how to use filters, Boolean logic, subject headings and, of course, intelligent search. They should also know the difference between journal articles, conference papers, and open-access resources.

Evaluating Sources and Data

Not all information is equal. Programs should teach students how to check if sources are reliable, understand peer review, and spot bias in datasets. A few practical techniques, like cross-checking sources or looking for data provenance, can make research much stronger.

Managing Information Ethically

Citing sources properly, avoiding plagiarism, and respecting copyright are essentials. Tools like Zotero or Mendeley help keep references organised, so students spend less time managing files and more time on research.

Sharing Findings Clearly

Communicating is sharing, and sharing is caring. It’s one thing to collect information; it’s another to communicate it. Using infographics, slides, or storytelling techniques to make research more memorable. Ultimately, clear communication ensures that the work they’ve done can be understood, used, and appreciated by others.

Frameworks That Guide Literacy Programs

ACRL Framework: Provides six key concepts for teaching information literacy.
EU DigComp / DigCompEdu: Covers digital skills for students and educators.
Data Literacy Project: Helps students understand how to work with datasets, complementing traditional research skills.

These frameworks help librarians structure programs so students get consistent, practical guidance.

Steps to Build a Digital Literacy Program

Audit Campus Needs: Talk to students and faculty, see what resources exist, and find gaps.
Set Learning Goals: Decide what students should be able to do at the end, and make goals measurable.
Select Content and Tools: Choose databases, software, and datasets that fit the library’s budget and tech setup.
Create Short, Modular Lessons: Break skills into manageable pieces that build on each other.
Launch and Improve: Introduce the program, gather feedback, and adjust lessons based on what works and what doesn’t.

Teaching Strategies and Online Tools

Flipped and Embedded Instruction

Students watch a short video about search techniques at home, then practice in class.
A librarian might join a research methods class, helping students build search strings live.
Pre-class quizzes on topics like peer review versus predatory journals prepare students for hands-on exercises.

Short Videos and Tutorials

Quick videos (2–5 minutes) can teach one skill at a time, like citation management, evaluating sources, or basic data visualisation. Include captions, transcripts, and small practice exercises to reinforce learning.

AI Summaries and Chatbots

AI tools can summarise articles, suggest keywords, highlight main points, and even draft bibliographies. But they aren’t perfect, they can make mistakes, miss nuances, or misread complex tables. Human oversight is still important.

Free Resources and Open Datasets

Students can practice with free databases and datasets like DOAJ, arXiv, Kaggle, or Zenodo. Using one of the open-access resources keeps programs affordable while providing real-world examples.

Checking if Students Are Learning

Before and After Assessments: Simple quizzes or tasks to see how skills improve.
Performance Rubrics: Compare beginner, developing, and advanced levels in searching, evaluating, and presenting data.
Analytics: Track which videos or tools students use most to improve future lessons.

Working With Faculty

Embedded Workshops: Librarians teach skills directly tied to assignments.
Joint Assignments: Faculty design research projects that naturally teach literacy skills.
Faculty Training: Show instructors how to integrate digital literacy into their courses.

Tackling Challenges

Staff Training: Librarians may need extra help with data tools. Peer mentoring and workshops work well.
Limited Budgets: Open access tools, collaborative licensing, and free platforms help make programs feasible.
Distance Learners: Make videos and tutorials accessible anytime, account for different time zones and internet access.

Looking Ahead

AI, open science, and global collaboration are changing research. AI can personalise learning, but it still needs oversight. Open science and FAIR data principles (set of guidelines for making research data Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable to both humans and machines) encourage transparency and reproducibility. Libraries can also connect with international partners to share resources and best practices.

FAQs

How long does a program take to launch?
Basic services can start in six months; full programs usually take 1–2 years.

Do humanities students need data skills?
Yes, focus is more on qualitative analysis and digital humanities tools.

Where can libraries find free datasets?
Government repositories, Kaggle, Zenodo, and university archives.

Can small libraries succeed without data specialists?
Yes, faculty collaboration and online resources can cover most needs.

Research Integrity, Partnership, and Societal Impact

Research integrity extends beyond publication to include how scholarship is discovered, accessed, and used, and its societal impact depends on more than editorial practice alone. In practice, integrity and impact are shaped by a web of platforms and partnerships that determine how research actually travels beyond the press. University press scholarship is generally produced with a clear public purpose, speaking to issues such as education, public health, social policy, culture, and environmental change, and often with the explicit aim of informing practice, policy, and public debate. Whether that aim is realised increasingly depends on what happens to research once it leaves the publishing workflow. Discovery platforms, aggregators, library consortia, and technology providers all influence this journey. Choices about metadata, licensing terms, ranking criteria, or the use of AI-driven summarisation affect which research is surfaced, how it is presented, and who encounters it in the first place. These choices can look technical or commercial on the surface, but they have real intellectual and social consequences. They shape how scholarship is understood and whether it can be trusted beyond core academic audiences. For university presses, this changes where responsibility sits. Editorial quality remains critical, but it is no longer the only consideration. Presses also have a stake in how their content is discovered, contextualised, and applied in wider knowledge ecosystems. Long-form and specialist research is particularly exposed here. When material is compressed or broken apart for speed and scale, nuance can easily be lost, even when the intentions behind the system are positive. This is where partnerships start to matter in a very practical way. The conditions under which presses work with discovery services directly affect whether their scholarship remains identifiable, properly attributed, and anchored in its original context. For readers using research in teaching, healthcare, policy, or development settings, these signals are not decorative. They are essential to responsible use. Zendy offers one example of how these partnerships can function differently. As a discovery and access platform serving researchers, clinicians, and policymakers in emerging and underserved markets, Zendy is built around extending reach without undermining trust. University press content is surfaced with clear attribution, structured metadata, and rights-respecting access models that preserve the integrity of the scholarly record. Zendy works directly with publishers to agree how content is indexed, discovered, and, where appropriate, summarised. This gives presses visibility into and control over how their work appears in AI-supported discovery environments, while helping readers approach research with a clearer sense of scope, limitations, and authority. From a societal impact perspective, this matters. Zendy’s strongest usage is concentrated in regions where access to trusted scholarship has long been uneven, including parts of Africa, the Middle East, and Asia. In these contexts, university press research is not being read simply for academic interest. It is used in classrooms, clinical settings, policy development, and capacity-building efforts, areas closely connected to the Sustainable Development Goals. Governance really sits at the heart of this kind of model. Clear and shared expectations around metadata quality, content provenance, licensing boundaries, and the use of AI are what make the difference between systems that encourage genuine engagement and those that simply amplify visibility without depth. Metadata is not just a technical layer: it gives readers the cues they need to understand what they are reading, where it comes from, and how it should be interpreted. AI-driven discovery and new access models create real opportunities to broaden the reach of university press publishing and to connect trusted scholarship with communities that would otherwise struggle to access it. But reach on its own does not equate to impact. When context and attribution are lost, the value of the research is diminished. Societal impact depends on whether work is understood and used with care, not simply on how widely it circulates. For presses with a public-interest mission, active participation in partnerships like these is a way to carry their values into a more complex and fast-moving environment. As scholarship is increasingly routed through global, AI-powered discovery systems, questions of integrity, access, and societal relevance converge. Making progress on shared global challenges requires collaboration, shared responsibility, and deliberate choices about the infrastructures that connect research to the wider world. For university presses, this is not a departure from their mission, but a continuation of it, with partnerships playing an essential role. FAQ How do platforms and partnerships affect research integrity?Discovery platforms, aggregators, and technology partners influence which research is surfaced, how it’s presented, and who can access it. Choices around metadata, licensing, and AI summarization directly impact understanding and trust. Why are university press partnerships important?Partnerships allow presses to maintain attribution, context, and control over their content in discovery systems, ensuring that research remains trustworthy and properly interpreted. How does Zendy support presses and researchers?Zendy works with publishers to surface research with clear attribution, structured metadata, and rights-respecting access, preserving integrity while extending reach to underserved regions. For partnership inquiries, please contact: Sara Crowley Vigneau Partnership Relations Manager Email: s.crowleyvigneau@zendy.io .wp-block-image img { max-width: 65% !important; margin-left: auto !important; margin-right: auto !important; }

Dec 18, 20256 Mins ReadDiscover

Beyond Publication. Access as a Research Integrity Issue

If research integrity now extends beyond publication to include how scholarship is discovered and used, then access is not a secondary concern. It is foundational. In practice, this broader understanding of integrity quickly runs into a hard constraint: access. A significant percentage of academic publishing is still behind paywalls, and traditional library sales models fail to serve institutions with limited budgetsor uneven digital infrastructure. Even where university libraries exist, access is often delayed or restricted to narrow segments of the scholarly record. The consequences are structural rather than incidental. When researchers and practitioners cannot access the peer-reviewed scholarship they need, it drops out of local research agendas, teaching materials as well as policy conversations. Decisions are then shaped by whatever information is most easily available, not necessarily by what is most rigorous or relevant. Over time, this weakens citation pathways, limits regional participation in scholarly debate, and reinforces global inequity in how knowledge is visible, trusted, and amplified. The ongoing success of shadow libraries highlights this misalignment: Sci-Hub reportedly served over 14 million monthly users in 2025, indicating sustained and widespread demand for academic research that existing access models continue to leave unmet. This is less about individual behaviour than about a system that consistently fails to deliver essential knowledge where it is needed most. The picture looks different when access barriers are reduced: usage data from open and reduced-barrier initiatives consistently show strong engagement across Asia and Africa, particularly in fields linked to health, education, social policy, and development. These patterns highlight how emerging economies rely on high-quality publishing in contexts where it directly impacts professional practice and public decision-making. From a research integrity perspective, this is important. When authoritative sources are inaccessible, alternative materials step in to fill the gap. The risk is not only exclusion, but distortion. Inconsistent, outdated, or unverified sources become more influential precisely because they are easier to obtain. Misinformation takes hold most easily where trusted knowledge is hardest to reach. Addressing access is about more than widening readership or improving visibility, it is about ensuring that high-quality scholarship can continue to shape understanding and decisions in the contexts it seeks to serve. For university presses committed to the public good, this challenge sits across discovery systems, licensing structures, technology platforms, and the partnerships that increasingly determine how research is distributed, interpreted, and reused. If research integrity now extends across the full lifecycle of scholarship, then sustaining it requires collective responsibility and shared frameworks. How presses engage with partners, infrastructures, and governance mechanisms becomes central to protecting both trust and impact. FAQ: What challenges exist in current access models?Many academic works remain behind paywalls, libraries face budget and infrastructure constraints, and access delays or restrictions can prevent researchers from using peer-reviewed scholarship effectively. What happens when research is inaccessible?When trusted sources are hard to reach, alternative, inconsistent, or outdated materials often fill the gap, increasing the risk of misinformation and weakening citation pathways. How does Zendy help address access challenges?Zendy provides affordable and streamlined access to high-quality research, helping scholars, practitioners, and institutions discover and use knowledge without traditional barriers. For partnership inquiries, please contact:Sara Crowley VigneauPartnership Relations ManagerEmail:s.crowleyvigneau@zendy.io .wp-block-image img { max-width: 65% !important; margin-left: auto !important; margin-right: auto !important; }

Dec 18, 20255 Mins ReadDiscover

Beyond Peer Review. Research Integrity in University Press Publishing

University presses play a distinctive role in advancing research integrity and societal impact. Their publishing programmes are closely aligned with public-interest research in the humanities, social sciences, global health, education, and environmental studies, disciplines that directly inform policy and progress toward the UN Sustainable Development Goals. This work typically prioritises depth, context, and long-term understanding, often drawing on regional expertise and interdisciplinary approaches rather than metrics-driven outputs. Research integrity is traditionally discussed in terms of editorial rigour, peer review, and ethical standards in the production of scholarship. These remain essential. But in an era shaped by digital platforms and AI-led discovery, they are no longer sufficient on their own. Integrity now also depends on what happens after publication: how research is surfaced, interpreted, reduced, and reused. For university presses, this shift is particularly significant. Long-form scholarship, a core strength of press programmes, is increasingly encountered through abstracts, summaries, extracts, and automated recommendations rather than sustained reading. As AI tools mediate more first encounters with research, meaning can be subtly altered through selection, compression, or loss of context. These processes are rarely neutral. They encode assumptions about relevance, authority, and value. This raises new integrity questions. Who decides which parts of a work are highlighted or omitted? How are disciplinary nuance and authorial intent preserved when scholarship is summarised? What signals remain to help readers understand scope, limitations, or evidentiary weight? This isn’t to say that AI-driven discovery is inherently harmful, but it does require careful oversight. If university press scholarship is to continue informing research, policy, and public debate in meaningful ways, it needs to remain identifiable, properly attributed, and grounded in its original framing as it moves through increasingly automated discovery systems. In this context, research integrity extends beyond how scholarship is produced to include how it is processed, surfaced and understood. For presses with a public-interest mission, research integrity now extends across the full journey of a work, from how it is published to how it is discovered, interpreted and used. FAQ Can Zendy help with AI-mediated research discovery?Yes. Zendy’s tools help surface, summarise, and interpret research accurately, preserving context and authorial intent even when AI recommendations are used. Does AI discovery harm research, or can it be beneficial?AI discovery isn’t inherently harmful—it can increase visibility and accessibility. However, responsible use is essential to prevent misinterpretation or loss of nuance, ensuring research continues to inform policy and public debate accurately. How does Zendy make research more accessible?Researchers can explore work from multiple disciplines, including humanities, social sciences, global health, and environmental studies, all in one platform with easy search and AI-powered insights. For partnership inquiries, please contact:Sara Crowley Vigneau Partnership Relations Manager Email: s.crowleyvigneau@zendy.io .wp-block-image img { max-width: 65% !important; margin-left: auto !important; margin-right: auto !important; }

Return to blogs

Accelerating Research