# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Hansel, L. (2019) World map wall decor. [Photograph]. Available at: Unsplash (Accessed: 23 November 2025).

# data[].attributes.body
Buitrago-Ciro, J. et al. (2025) ‘Bridging the AI gap: Comparative analysis of AI integration, education, and outreach in academic libraries’, IFLA Journal, 51(3), pp. 682–702. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/03400352251325274

# data[].attributes.body
Authors are a mixture of librarians and researchers. Their qualifications range from PhD to Masters level in Library-related subjects. They argue that the availability of AI education and engagement vary significantly by geographic region, particularly between the Northern and Southern hemispheres. Environmental scanning was used to identify trends, challenges, and opportunities. They found that academic libraries in certain regions faced greater challenges when integrating AI technologies into their services, especially Latin America Sub-Saharan Africa. Libraries in North America had the greatest range of AI policies and training initiatives, while European libraries largely relied on institutional AI policies and training. They suggest that these differences may be due to inequalities in access to technology and infrastructure. This study is not without its limits, including – geographical (Brazil and Asia excluded due to linguistic capabilities of research team). Researchers sought to minimise bias in their methodology by using selective sampling beyond relying on regional bias in THE university rankings.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Kadri, N. (2024) The word "AI" written on whiteboard. [Photograph]. Available at: Unsplash (Accessed: 23 November 2025)

# data[].attributes.body
This bibliography is designed for use by academic librarians developing AI literacy training resources for their user populations. The need to ensure users of academic libraries are familiar with the potential and limits of Generative AI tools has never been more urgent, as GenAI technology is becoming increasingly embedded into search tools utilised by users of academic libraries, including open web search engines, research databases, research programs, word processing software, and more.

The range of content presented here includes: academic research, case study, survey report, teaching framework, Online tutorial, and even an AI prompt library developed by librarians.

The aim of this bibliography is to present a range of sources that represent the existing body of research on the topic, as well as some useful practical examples of training development and frameworks. Despite the availability of GenAI programs being a relatively recent phenomenon, it was impossible to present the rich range of sources available on this subject here, and so this bibliography presents a distilled yet ultimately incomplete body of information.

It is hoped that the range of information presented here demonstrates the challenges, possibilities and potential for academic librarians seeking to offer profound and transformative GenAI literacy training to their users.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Agence Olloweb (2018) Il s’agit d’une photographie réalisée pour illustrer la page de recherche du site internet. [Photograph]. Available at: Unsplash (Accessed: 23 November 2025).

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Karimov, Z. (2025) Untitled. [Photograph]. Available at: Unsplash (Accessed: 23 November 2025).

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Rosenke, G. (2020) Stacked masonry stones of various sizes. [Photograph]. Available at: Unsplash (Accessed: 23 November 2025).

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Steffens, L. (2022) Question marks against a dark background. [Digital Image]. Available at: Unsplash (Accessed: 23 November 2025)

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Teneva, M. (2023) Untitled. [Photograph]. Available at: Unsplash (Accessed: 23 November 2025).

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Radebe, B. (2025) Untitled. [Digital Illustration]. Available at: Unsplash (Accessed: 23 November 2025).

# data[].attributes.body
Chaudhuri, J. and Terrones, L. (2025) 'Reshaping Academic Library Information Literacy Programs in the Advent of ChatGPT and Other Generative AI Technologies', Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 29(1), pp. 1–25. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/10875301.2024.2400132

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Fewings, N. (2022) Team, Lead, Succeed. [Photograph]. Available at: Unsplash (Accessed: 23 November 2025).

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Cartsens-Peters, G. (2017) If you feel the desire to write a book, what would it be about? [Photograph]. Available at: Unsplash (Accessed: 23 November 2025).

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Montgomery, C. (2020) Zoom call with coffee. [Photograph]. Available at: Unsplash (Accessed: 23 November 2025).

# data[].attributes.body
Boyle, C. (2025) 'ChatGPT, Gemini, & Copilot: Using generative AI as a tool for information literacy instruction', The Reference Librarian, 66(1-2), pp. 13–29. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/02763877.2025.2465416

# data[].attributes.body
Buetow, S. and Lovatt, J. (2024) 'From insight to innovation: Harnessing artificial intelligence for dynamic literature reviews', The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 50(4), article number 102901. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2024.102901

# data[].attributes.body
Cox, A.M. (2025) AI and the UK library profession: Survey results. Available at: https://www.cilip.org.uk/resource/resmgr/cilip/research/tech_review/airesearchsurvey25/aisurveyreport2025web.pdf (Accessed: 23 November 2025).

# data[].attributes.body
Hauck, M., Moore, E. and Wright, C. (2025) A framework for the learning and teaching of critical AI literacy skills. Available at: https://www.open.ac.uk/blogs/learning-design/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/OU-Critical-AI-Literacy-framework-2025-external-sharing.pdf (Accessed: 23 November 2025).

# data[].attributes.body
Kaminska, M. and Maastricht University Library (2024) AI Prompt Library. Available at: https://library.maastrichtuniversity.nl/apps-tools/ai-prompt-library/ (Accessed: 23 November 2025).

# data[].attributes.body
Schmidt, L., Fruehauf, E. and Beman-Cavallaro, A. (2025) 'Becoming a leader in AI literacy instruction by not reinventing the wheel', Journal of Academic Librarianship, 51(5), article number 103117. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2025.103117

# data[].attributes.body
University of Sheffield Library (2025) Critical GenAI Literacy, Articulate Rise Tutorial. Available at: https://rise.articulate.com/share/ckJWIit1oGFbVpNkjQwGaA4_lrFSEawS#/ (Accessed: 23 November 2025).

# data[].attributes.body
Author is a College Librarian at City University New York (CUNY). In this article, they discuss their experiences integrating GenAI tools into developing their Information Literacy (IL) teaching, and in training students in the use of GenAI. They prompt ChatGPT, Gemini, and CoPilot for assistance in developing lesson plans for an IL course taught by library faculty. The author refined the suggested plans provide by the three GenAI responses into a single lesson plan for their own purposes. They undertook an exploratory training exercise with a group of students where GenAI programs proved unsuitable as a retrieval method for academic research. Another activity was conducted where students used the tool to develop research questions, which was something the AI tool could do successfully. The small class sizes reduced the generalisability of the study, but the study does not involve collecting or analysing student feedback, or evaluate student learning.

# data[].attributes.body
This case study represents only a handful that explore GenAI impacts for literature reviews, and displaying potential applications for users beyond student groups. The authors are a healthcare researcher and a librarian, both based at University of Auckland, New Zealand. They discuss the promise, uptake, and risks associated with implementing AI in reviews. Specifically, they mention the capacity for AI programs to revolutionise systematic reviews, which take on average 67 weeks for a team of researchers to complete, where it may take an AI program a matter of hours. They note a dearth of published research on actual instances of AI programs implemented by researchers in their literature reviews, beyond purely theoretical applications. They posit there may be either a lack of uptake by researchers due to lack of trust, or a lack of disclosure for fear of how journal editors and publishers may react to GenAI use.

# data[].attributes.body
Authors are university librarians, one of whom has previously published research in the LIS field. In this research article they seek to develop new training initiatives to assist their student population in learning to use GenAI tools, specifically ChatGPT, responsibly. They developed an online ChatGPT tutorial in Canvas, a ‘Two-Minute Tutorial’ on using ChatGPT for social media, and a live research skills webinar on the viability of ChatGPT as a research tool. Their results show that workshop participants use ChatGPT to gather background information on a topic, gather citations, and to assist with paraphrasing and writing. In response, they are collaborating with their university’s centre for Academic Success to develop advice on the use of GenAI in academic writing and research. The data gathered was limited to attendees at the three workshops only. However, the process demonstrates that a holistic response from both the library and other university departments may be necessary.

# data[].attributes.body
This survey was carried out in November/December 2024 by Dr Andrew Cox, an experienced LIS researcher with many recent research publications on AI in libraries, and sought to canvas UK librarians on their opinions regarding AI. The study sought to explore how librarians use AI, how they are responding to AI policies in their workplace, and what barriers do librarians recognise in their work. Overall, 65% of 162 respondents stated they use AI in their work, with most perceiving that AI saves them time (83%) and makes things easier (77%). Of the respondents, 36% indicated they use AI to help library users develop AI/data literacy. Respondents indicated that ethical issues of AI use (91%) was their top barrier to using it. Response numbers were too low to be representative of the entire UK library profession, with some fields such as public libraries, and younger professionals aged 18-24, being underrepresented. This study indicates that while AI use may be treated as a given by certain institutions, that some librarians are resistant to its implementation.

# data[].attributes.body
This framework was developed by staff at the Open University (OU) and includes a librarian as well as educators and learning designers from the university among its authors. The framework was created with the recognition that university staff and students need to adapt to the pace of technological change, by maintaining their awareness of the capacities of GenAI, and developing critical AI literacy. The framework has been designed around the following concepts: applications, learning and teaching, creativity, ethics, society, and careers. The framework is encouraged for use in OU courses and critical AI literacy is encouraged to be embedded across the curriculum at all levels where applicable. The framework also provides practical suggestions for how educators can implement these concepts. This development represents how academic librarians can contribute to their organisation’s policies and guidance around the use of AI, and the importance of collaboration within academic institutions on this front.

# data[].attributes.body
Librarians at Maastricht University have developed a library of AI prompts that can be used when students and educators interface with Gen AI programs. They provide a list of instructions to users regarding how the prompts should be used, as well as emphasising the principles around responsible use of GenAI tools. There are a range of options available, organised into the following categories: exams (including development of questions), feedback, learning, and writing (including translation of text from other languages). They also provide links showing how these prompts have been used (in ChatGPT specifically). Overall, these prompts represent a step beyond the usual type of generic AI training materials provided by academic libraries. While these templates may offer a pathway for academic library users to engage with GenAI critically, there is also a risk that users could treat these templates as the ‘correct’ way to engage with GenAI without exploring further.

# data[].attributes.body
Librarians at the University of South Florida present this case study, which explored how leveraging existing Information Literacy practices, relationships across their institution, and online guidance and training programs. They have been involved with several initiatives across their institution, including the developing of AI communities of practice, collaborating with academic and professional support colleagues in both existing partnerships and via outreach programs, and even representation on the university’s AI taskforce. They also began to embed frameworks such as CLEAR alongside their application of the ACRL framework in their teaching and training workshops and online guidance. They emphasise that these are extensions of existing structures, rather than true innovations. What is new is the use of IL training and institutional partnerships directed at the problems and opportunities presented by GenAI. This offers hope to some libraries that may be under-resourced that 'reinventing the wheel' is not necessary in order to have an impact on your institution's adoption of GenAI.

# data[].attributes.body
Librarians at the University of Sheffield have developed an online GenAI training module using the Articulate Rise platform. It covers several key areas of GenAI, including ethics, societal impacts, and defining what is considered ‘responsible use’ in an academic context. It provides practical examples and case studies alongside its general advice. It provides links to other resources, and media such as podcasts as well as providing content in text form. It provides information that allows learners to come to their own conclusions about GenAI, without credulously hailing it as a new technological revolution, or limiting its criticism to the usual ethical problems of GenAI – going further in encouraging users to consider cognitive offloading and its implications for their education. While it is perhaps a missed opportunity not to have integrated some more interactive elements of Articulate Rise, such as quizzes, this is an impressive example of how a university library can make a significant contribution to the AI literacy potential of users beyond what academic institutions provide in their own guidance.

# data[].attributes.body
Willenborg, A. and Withorn, T. (2025) 'Generative AI for College Students: A Collaboratively Developed Online Microcourse on GenAI in the College Classroom', Communications in Information Literacy, 19(1), pp. 113–130. Available at: https://doi.org/10.15760/comminfolit.2025.19.1.7

# data[].attributes.body
Librarians at the University of Louisville (academically qualified to Masters level) present their efforts in developing an online training module, what they call a ‘microcourse’, on GenAI for college students. They adapted the lesson content from an asynchronous ACRL teaching module that was itself designed to assist librarians develop Information Literacy courses. They created the course within the Blackboard Ultra Virtual Learning Environment, and it consisted of six modules. Since their microcourse was created independently of any existing curriculum, they decided to market it towards academic faculty in the hopes that it would become assigned to students by faculty themselves. Despite a large number of enrolments for an optional module (93 total), only 30 participants completed more than a single module and almost half (49.5%) did not begin any lessons. This is perhaps illustrative that embedding AI literacy training within existing teaching frameworks may be more helpful to encourage participation than creating independent learning modules.