Information Literacy Skills and Organizational Learning Among Administrative Officers of Agricultural Research Institutes in Southwest Nigeria

materials, databases, websites and other electronic resources. They need to also be able to access specific information within these resources through other resource specific retrieval systems including tables of contents, indexes, online public access catalogues , and so on. They should also be aware of the properties of various types of information, know how publication practices affect information quality and currency, and know the variety of information services that can assist in accessing information. Location of information is also related to the context of information seeking. In libraries and subscription databases, information resources are normally subjected to quality control prior to publication. Information gathered from the Internet search engines, on the other hand, has a wide range of credibility and reliability, as it is not always subjected to a rigorous evaluation. Information-literate people, therefore, need to be able to evaluate information for accuracy, authority, relevance, and trustworthiness before using it. Education and training is therefore crucial in empowering people to find information, but also critically evaluate it. Effective information location also requires knowledge of the organization of information resources in a digital environment, and the role libraries play in making physical and electronic resources accessible. Information-literate people should be aware of the ways in which digital technologies can facilitate collaboration, information creation and information sharing. They should also know how information is collected, how to create accurate citations, and the ethical use of information. They also should understand the value of abstracts, keep abreast of new electronic information sources, differentiate between free and subscription-based sources and understand the risks of working in a virtual environment, and critically assess search results before using the information retrieved. Information Synthesis is a process of integration, organization and presentation of information gained from several sources in a coherent and meaningful way. In this competency, the individual will be required to synthesize information from a variety of sources to form new understandings and communicate these effectively. Information-literate people should be able to record information systematically and ethically and use bibliographic management software as needed. They should also be able to reference electronic information sources correctly, create a correctly formatted bibliography and act ethically in relation to information use. These ethical obligations involve respecting copyright laws, not plagiarizing, abiding by data protection laws, being aware of intellectual property rights, and upholding academic integrity in handling information. As well, people are required to have the ability to apply suitable data managing tools and techniques and be honest and accountable in gathering, managing and sharing information. Information evaluation is the critical analysis of information resources to assure their appropriateness in a specific context. It allows for the consideration of information from multiple viewpoints in order to determine which information is best suited for use. If you want to evaluate effectively in digital environments you must have a knowledge of the organization of electronic databases, how search systems work and how information retrieval tools work. People should then be able to read the entire research process; check the information they've found from various electronic sources and examine the quality of the information they found. This involves evaluating the accuracy, relevance, authority and credibility of information sources and the credibility and reputation of data, as well as the potential bias of data and information sources. Information-literate people also are expected to differentiate between the various types of electronic information resources, to select materials for appropriate evaluation, to critically analyze key arguments, to relate information retrieved to the original information needs, to jpaswr evaluate their information and that of others, to know when adequate information has been obtained to satisfy the information needs, and to access electronic information resources for purposes of decision-making and creating value. Information use is the effective use of information resources available to achieve the required academic, professional or organizational goals. Information-literate people should use the knowledge they have learned in an appropriate manner, combine new knowledge with already known knowledge, develop new knowledge and convey their new knowledge by appropriate means. They should be aware of the difference between summarizing and synthesizing information to generate new knowledge. In addition, they should identify the need for different approaches of communication and presentation to different audiences and be able to choose the right style of writing, format of presentation and dissemination strategy. Information use also expects that people will have an understanding of their personal responsibility in storing, sharing and disseminating information and be aware of the processes of publication and the need to recognize the work of the original source of the information by giving credit to the original author. Ethics are integral to the proper use of information. Authorial perspectives are always present in information, information-literate people should be aware of the potential for bias in information production and dissemination. This bias can be unintentional or can be a result of deliberate efforts to manipulate public opinion. Therefore, people should think about all sources of information when using them, and mention any limitations or biases that they may have when sharing information from others, instead of just repeating what is said. Effective information use will also help people to answer research questions, to summarize information accurately in writing and orally, to bring new information into their existing knowledge, to analyze and present information appropriately, and to communicate effectively with appropriate written and oral communication skills. It also includes choosing suitable platforms for publication and dissemination and building professional visibility through engagement in scholarly communities and digital networks. To accomplish these goals, citizens should be able to effectively use a variety of information retrieval tools, develop complex search strategies for different kinds of electronic information sources, retrieve and access full text materials, get online information and download it, search for new information using effective methods, stay informed about new information sources, share knowledge in professional communities, and know when they need more information to satisfy a perceived information need. Communication transmission is a process that's shared between a sender and a receiver. This process transfers information from sender to receiver, understood and interpreted by the receiver, and possibly communicated back to the sender, which can result in a loop of information transfer. In organizations, information is a crucial input to the operational effectiveness and organizational sustainability. If it wasn't for the prompt and accurate information, activities of organizations and decisions would be seriously affected. Information is thus essential in running the day-to-day activities of an organization and facilitating its operations. Information is comprised of data, facts, ideas, opinions, experiences, cultural values, and other types of knowledge that are transmitted through printed media, AV media, and the electronic media. The flow of information in and between organizational units illustrates how knowledge is created, shared and used. Data is the source that produces information, which is then used to build knowledge and shared with others via communication tools like documentation, electronic networks, verbal communication, and observed behavior. Information has also been explained as a symbolization of human experience passed on by a signal or message from which answers or reactions can be provoked. Thus, psychologists consider the need for communication, as well as other basic needs, and philosophers see it as a right to jpaswr freedom of information, which is essential for the meaningful participation of people in organizational activities. If information is available, it will help organizational staff to make informed and rational decisions about issues that impact their responsibilities. Alternatives are then evaluated, and decisions made on the basis of information. Organizations use many ways to spread information and the success of any dissemination strategy will vary based on the nature of the information being disseminated, target audience, and the communication channel used. Therefore, it is important to use a medium that will allow for the effective delivery of information, and the accomplishment of the desired outcome. Communication channels are also important in the organization and management. Within hierarchical organizations, managers can serve as intermediaries in the communication network, helping to convey information between various organizational levels. Communication flows are hierarchical, meaning they are directed and restricted in flow by the hierarchical structure. Generally, policies, instructions and management decisions trickle down from senior management to lower levels within the organization, and reports, feedback, and responses flow upward from lower levels of the organization to senior management. In order to be effective in the dissemination of information, it is important to be mindful of the communication process and the means of communication used. Organizational communication generally takes place through formal, informal, and unofficial channels. Formal communication can be in written or verbal form and can include the chain of command in the organization. Information passes through a series of managers and to their subordinates who in turn pass it on to lower levels of management or other appropriate staff. This formalized communication process is used to cascade organization policies, directives, memoranda, reports and other official communication to the entire organization. In the same way, communication in an organization also flows up the hierarchy, allowing employees to report, give feedback, and share other information necessary for successful management and decision-making. There are three important aspects of information behavior, namely information use. The other two are information need and information seeking. Information use underpins all other information behaviors as it is the end-goal to which information is required and desired. Universities rely on information from a variety of sources to inform decision-making, develop plans and coordinate administrative activities. The information to be used for effective administration should be relevant to the purpose, be accurate and reliable, be complete and be targeted to the right people. It should also be communicated quickly, clearly and via appropriate communication channels. These attributes assure that information is contributing to any organization's effectiveness and administrative decision-making. Educational administration can be complex and changing with solutions to problems in areas leading to new problems in other areas that need to be solved. To enhance the effectiveness of administration, more systematic decision-making processes, structured problem-solving methods, and effective leadership in organization change need to be introduced. Administrative staff will not be very effective if they are not given information that is relevant, complete or appropriate to the work they are asked to do. While information should be completely accurate, this is not always possible as it consumes time and resources. Rather, information should be accurate and comprehensive enough to enable informed decision-making. It should include all essential information, otherwise administrators may make poor decisions and the consequences of administration are likely to be ineffective. Administrators may need to use more than one information source to get a full picture of information and evidence to guide decision-making for various reasons. In addition, information must be delivered in a concise and well organized format that allows for rapid information jpaswr assimilation and processing, but also allows enough detail to provide for effective analysis. Information must be readily available and accessible; otherwise it may be irrelevant to administrative decision-making because of limited time. Another important criterion of the usefulness of the information is the trustworthiness of the sources, for decision makers may only accept information that they think is trustworthy. A good decision-making process can be broken down into a number of steps: problem identification and definition, constraint recognition, alternative generation, option evaluation, decision selection, solution implementation, and monitoring and assessing the results. Of these phases, the precise definition of the problem is a critical one as it lays the groundwork for all decision-making and action moving forward. A wrong definition of the problem might jeopardize the complete decision-making process and make the chances of success less. A good way for administrative staff to find out if there's a problem is to differentiate the problem from its visible signs. In this way, managers can divert their attention away from problem symptoms and concentrate on the root causes of the problems. Good management relies on the availability of resources - accurate information, enough time, competent staff, equipment and other resources. Before selecting a course of action, it is important that administrative staff recognize any constraints that may impact on the decision- making process. Managers should consider a number of possible solutions before deciding on the best option to ensure the quality of their decision. Brainstorming is one of the commonly used methods for developing alternatives where members of a group brainstorm ideas together to come up with creative and practical solutions to an organizational problem. While some scholars argue that the quality of managerial decisions is probably the most important, because making an imperfect decision is better than no decision at all. The quality of managerial decisions is still very important. The involvement of decision-making directly affects employee morale, organizational commitment, and retention. Bad decisions can have a detrimental impact on employee confidence, organizational performance and finally, on institutional productivity. Therefore, decisions made by the organization need to be based on sufficient, reliable and unbiased information. The results of decisions made with bias can be negative, such as hiring unfit candidates for positions, loss of employee trust in management, and loss of trust between supervisor and subordinates. Therefore, it is crucial for an organization to make decisions based on data and facts to ensure its effectiveness and a positive working culture. In knowledge management, knowledge utilization is the use of research and learning outputs in real life contexts, in and out of the university. For knowledge to be effectively utilized, there must be ongoing interaction between knowledge creators and potential users to enable information to be exchanged, interpreted and utilized. Knowledge utilization is not just about gathering information but also about putting it into practice to address issues and enhance performance of an organization. 2.6 Application of the Big Six Model to Administrative Work The Big6 created by educators is an information literacy skill, an information problem-solving process, and a set of skills which provide a strategy for effectively and efficiently meeting information needs. The first writing in professional circles on Big6 was in 1987; it was presented as “The Big6 Skills Approach to Information Problem Solving”. Some years later, the Information Problem-Solving book was presented in 1990. The Big6 Skills model won instant attention because of its simplicity and ease of use by a wide cross section of the field. Since 1990, both creators of the model have done extensive speaking and traveling and have created The Big Six Listserv of persons in the field using the model. jpaswr This model consists of six steps, with two sub-stages under each, which provides support in the activities required to solve information problems through task definition by defining information problem and identification information needed, information seeking strategies to determine all possible sources and select the best source of information, locate and access information intellectually and physically then find information within different sources, use of Information by engaging the information in a source (read, hear, view, touch) and extract relevant information, synthesis information by organizing from multiple source of information and presenting the needed information and finally evaluate and judge the process efficiently and effectively. What makes Big6 significant is the fact that it teaches how to use “critical thinking skills” in evaluating tasks, research, and information, as well as communicating the results; and Big6 develops these skills in a natural, logical way. People learn how to recognize their information needs, and how to progress through a sequence of stages to solve information problems effectively and efficiently. In sum, Big6 connects information problem-solving and critical thinking. Furthermore, technology skills including word processing, multimedia production, Web use and creation are not considered or taught as a separate set of learning objectives. Rather, they are presented as part of the overall information process to solve real situations and needs. This means moving from teaching “isolated” computer skills to teaching “integrated” information and technology skills. Thus, people are provided with a comprehensive set of powerful skills to conquer the information age, allowing them to make quick decisions and take action without wasting precious time. Administrative skills focus on knowledge and understanding of specific sources (which are lower cognitive skills) versus the ability to use critical thinking skills and manipulate information into a meaningful solution. Big6 skills help learners achieve information literacy skills and provide a full understanding beyond merely being able to locate resources within an administrative department. Applying these six steps may be effective in administrative departments, in order to help administrative officers effectively develop skills to select, analyze, organize, synthesize and critically evaluate information, allowing them to solve real information problems readily. Task definition is where administrative officers identify the problem, task or questions that need to be answered. It is the first part of the information problem-solving process, which involves identifying that an information need exists. Information seeking strategies is the step where administrative officers identify reliable sources of information. Step 2 engages deciding all possible sources and selecting the best of them. Habitually these sources of information are electronic and print journals and books, CD ROMs, multimedia, databases, Web sites, bulletins, among others, all organized by the most to least useful ones, on the basis of accuracy and validity. Location and access where administrative officers find and access the information recognized in Step 2. Locating sources, intellectually and physically, involves browsing the shelves, making use of online catalogs, search engines or metasearch tools (preferably scholarly ones), periodical indexes, electronic encyclopedias, and any other online searching tools to locate useful and reliable information. Synthesis is where administrative officer’s information is organized and presented through spreadsheets, charts, graphs, pictures, sound, word processing, multimedia, among others; and shared via e-mail, social networking or Web pages, etc. For this, administrative officers will be able to write a paper, speech, or debate; to create slideshows and Web pages, pamphlets, posters, or videos. So, administrative skills for users may be considered as an innovative part of the Big6 model training. These actions may encourage administrative officers to make use of information communication technologies to promote health messages to the community, for instance. The evaluation determines how effectively and jpaswr efficiently the process of solving the information problem was carried out. Here administrative officers determine what skills they have learned and if their work is complete. It is also stated what to do differently or similarly the next time 3. Methodology The study used a descriptive survey design. The population comprised 311 administrative officers from nine Agricultural Research Institutes in Southwest Nigeria, and total enumeration was adopted. A structured questionnaire was used. The information-literacy section contained 30 items measuring task identification, information-seeking strategy, location and access, information use, synthesis, and evaluation. Responses were scored on a four-point scale ranging from very low to very high. The information-literacy subscale recorded a Cronbach alpha of 0.820. Face and content validity were established through expert review, and the full instrument was pilot-tested outside the main study institutions. Of the 311 questionnaires administered, 259 were reported as valid, representing an 83.3% response rate. Descriptive statistics answered the research question, while simple linear regression tested the null hypothesis that information literacy skills had no significant influence on organizational learning. The significance level was .05, and analysis was conducted with SPSS version 27. 4. Results 4.1 Level of Information Literacy Skills The overall information-literacy mean was 3.27, indicating a moderately high level. Information- seeking strategy was the strongest dimension (3.49), followed by task identification (3.42), location and access (3.37), and information use (3.28). Synthesis (3.14) and evaluation (3.02) were comparatively weaker. The pattern shows that respondents were most confident in identifying tasks and locating information, but had greater difficulty integrating evidence and judging its quality. Table 1. Summary of information-literacy dimensions Dimension Mean Interpretation Task identification 3.42 Very high Information-seeking strategy 3.49 Very high Location and access 3.37 Very high Use of information 3.28 Very high Synthesis 3.14 High Evaluation 3.02 High Overall information literacy skills 3.27 High/moderately high Source: Extracted from the thesis field survey (2026). 4.2 Influence on Organizational Learning The reported regression model showed a positive relationship between information literacy skills jpaswr and organizational learning (R = .500). Information literacy explained 25.0% of the variation in organizational learning (R2 = .250; adjusted R2 = .247). The model was statistically significant (F = 99.321, p < .001). The unstandardized coefficient indicated that a one-unit increase in information literacy was associated with a 0.184-unit increase in organizational learning, holding other influences outside the simple model constant. The null hypothesis was therefore rejected. Table 2. Regression summary for information literacy skills predicting organizational learning Statistic Reported value R .500 R2 .250 Adjusted R2 .247 F 99.321 P < .001 B (information literacy skills) .184 Standard error .018 Standardized beta .500 T 9.966 Source: Extracted from the thesis field survey (2026). 4.3 Detailed Item-Level Findings Detailed responses extracted from the main project field survey Task Identification VH H L VL Mean I easily identify the tasks required to complete my job responsibilities 126 (48.7%) 100 (38.8%) 32 (12.5%) - 3.66 I understand the objectives and priorities of the tasks assigned to me 87 (33.4%) 106 (41.1%) 37 (14.3%) 29 (11.2%) 3.47 My organization provides clear guidelines or instructions to help me identify my tasks 116 (44.6%) 195 (40.5%) 39 (14.9%) - 3.50 My supervisor communicates expectations clearly to help me understand my tasks 112 (43.1%) 101 (38.9%) 10 (3.7%) 37 (14.3%) 3.21 Effective task identification improves my overall productivity as an administrative officer 97 (37.4%) 116 (44.6%) 16 (6.1%) 31 (11.9%) 3.28 Average Mean 3.42 Information Seeking Strategy VH H L VL Mean I actively seek out information to complete my tasks effectively 112 (43.3%) 111 (42.9%) 10 (3.7%) 28 (11.0%) 3.50 jpaswr Task Identification VH H L VL Mean I know where to find reliable sources of information relevant to my job responsibilities 117 (45.2%) 103 (39.9%) 13 (4.9%) 26 (10.0) 3.50 I have access to up – to – date technology or tools that support my information seeking efforts 89 (34.4%) 65 (35.2%) 27 (10.4%) 52 (20.0%) 3.24 I feel confident in my ability to evaluate the reliability and relevance of the information I find 116 (44.8%) 87 (33.6%) 19 (7.4%) 37 (14.2%) 3.29 My organization encourages employees to seek out new information to improve performance 108 (41.7%) 104 (40.3%) 16 (6.1%) 31 (11.8%) 3.32 Average Mean 3.49 Location and Access VH H L VL Mean I know where to find the information needed to perform my job responsibilities effectively 116 (44.8%) 92 (35.4%) 21 (8.0%) 31 (11.8%) 3.33 I am familiar with both internal and external sources of information 100 (38.7%) 111 (42.7%) 22 (8.6%) 26 (10.0%) 3.30 My organization provides adequate training on how to locate and access information effectively 118 (45.4%) 100 (38.5%) 42 (16.1%) - 3.39 The organization has clear systems or processes in place to ensure information is well – organized and accessible 119 (45.8%) 100 (38.7%) 11 (4.3%) 29 (11.2%) 3.49 Easy access to information improves my efficiency in completing administrative tasks 111 (42.9%) 104 (40.3%) 17 (6.7%) 26 (10.0%) 3.36 Average Mean 3.37 Use of Information VH H L VL Mean I regularly use the information I access to complete my administrative tasks effectively 110 (42.3%) 122 (47.2%) 27 (10.5%) - 3.32 I do adapt information I find to address specific challenges in my work 91 (35.0%) 132 (50.9%) 33 (12.9%) 3 (1.2%) 3.20 My supervisor encourages me to use information to improve my work processes 92 (35.6%) 129 (50.3%) 30 (11.7%) 6 (2.5%) 3.19 Using information effectively enhances the quality of my work outputs 89 (34.4%) 164 (63.2%) 6 (2.5%) - 3.32 I feel confident in my ability to select and use information appropriately for my tasks 108 (41.7%) 135 (52.1%) 16 (6.1%) - 3.36 Average Mean 3.28 Synthesis VH H L VL Mean jpaswr Task Identification VH H L VL Mean I do analyze and integrate information to make informed decisions in my work 110 (42.3%) 88 (33.9%) 36 (13.8) 26 (10.0%) 3.22 The organization offers training to improve my work 114 (44.1%) 95 (36.7%) 29 (11.2%) 21 (8.0%) 3.03 Synthesizing information improves the quality and accuracy of my administrative tasks 98 (37.9) 104 (40.2%) 57 (21.9%) - 3.15 The ability to synthesis information enhances my decision – making process in my role 116 (44.9%) 85 (32.7%) 40 (15.3%) 19 (7.2%) 3.09 Synthesizing information helps me contribute to better team outcomes and organization goals 113 (43.7%) 93 (36.1%) 37 (14.3%) 15 (5.9%) 3.21 Average Mean 3.14 Evaluation VH H L VL Mean I do evaluate the accuracy of information before applying it to my administrative duties 115 (44.3%) 104 (40.2%) 14 (5.3%) 26 (10.2%) 3.11 The organization gives access to verified databases to support information evaluation 109 (41.9%) 97 (37.3%) 54 (20.8%) - 3.02 I feel in my ability to distinguish credible information from unreliable sources 101 (39.1%) 104 (40.2%) 41 (15.7%) 13 (5.0%) 2.97 Management emphasizes the need for accurate information 115 (44.3%) 101 (39.1%) 14 (5.3%) 29 (11.3%) 3.21 I am satisfied with my ability to evaluate information for my role 101 (39.1%) 126 (48.5%) 32 (12.4%) 2.80 Average Mean 3.02 Weighted Mean for Information Information Literacy Skills 3.27 Source: Extracted directly from the corresponding Chapter Four table of the main project field survey (2026). Based on the results in Table 4.4. The percentages of very high, high and low rating regarding 'I can readily identify tasks needed to complete my job responsibilities' were 48.7%, 38.8% and 12.5% respectively. The mean score for this item was 3.66, indicating that they easily know what tasks are necessary to carry out their job responsibilities. The results also showed that 33.4% of the respondents very high their awareness of the goals and priorities of the tasks assigned to them, 44.1% agree, 14.3% low, and 11.2% very low. The mean of the respondents' responses for understanding the goals and priorities of the tasks assigned to them was 3.47. Results also showed that 44.6% of the respondents are very high that there are clear guidelines/instructions provided to them to help them identify their tasks in their organization, 40.5% high, and 14.9% low. The mean of the respondents was 3.50 when they were asked about the extent to which they are guided or instructed in their organization to determine their tasks. Table 4.4 showed that 43.1% rated very high that their supervisor communicated expectations well to help them understand their tasks, 38.9% high, 3.7% low and 14.3% very low. The jpaswr respondents gave the mean value of 3.21 for their supervisor's clearly communicating expectations to assist them in understanding their tasks. Other results showed that 37.4% rated very high, 44.6% high, 6.1% low and 11.9% very low that effective task identification enhanced their overall productivity as administrative officers. The mean of the results answers regarding how well task identification is helping them to be productive as administrative officers is 3.28. Results also indicated that 43.3% of respondents rated very high that they actively sought information to complete their tasks effectively, 42.9% high, 3.7% low and 11.0% very low. The mean response of the respondents for the item. On average, actively seeking information to complete tasks effectively had a mean of 3.50. Further, it was found that 45.2% of the respondents rated very high that they can access reliable sources of information for their job responsibilities, 39.9% high, 4.9% low and 10.0% very low. On average, the results indicated that they know where to find reliable sources of information relevant to their job responsibilities had a mean of 3.50. The result also revealed that 34.4% of the respondents gave a very high rating for availability of up to date technology or tools that assist in their information seeking, 35.2% high rating, 10.4% low rating and 20.0% very low rating. On average, the results indicated that they have access to up - to - date technology or tools that support my information seeking efforts had a mean of 3.24. Based on the results from Table 4.4. 44.8% extremely confident in my ability to assess the validity and usefulness of information I locate; 33.6% fairly confident; 7.4% not very confident; and 14.2% not at all confident. The mean for respondents who rate their confidence in the reliability/relevance of information they find is 3.29. The results also showed that 41.7% very high, 40.3% high, 6.1% low, and 11.8% very low that their organization encourages their employees to explore new information to enhance their performance. The mean for the item 'Employees are encouraged to look for additional information to enhance performance' is 3.32 by the respondents on average. Results also showed that 44.8% of respondents rated very high in relation to their knowledge of information they need to accomplish my job responsibilities well, 35.4% high, 8.0% low and 11.8% very low. The mean for the results on the item 'I know where to find information necessary to do my job responsibilities effectively' is 3.33. It was also found that 38.7% of the respondents rated very high that they were familiar with internal and external sources of information, 42.7% high, 8.6% low and 10.0% very low. On average, the respondents indicated that they were familiar with both internal and external sources of information had a mean of 3.30. The other results showed that 45.4% of the respondents gave a very high rating for their organization giving adequate training in locating and accessing information effectively, 38.5% availed of high rating while 16.1% gave a low rating to the same aspect. The mean of the results was 3.39 on the average training and location of information to be accessed in the organization. According to results in Table 4.4 45.8% of the respondents rated very high that their organization has clear systems or processes in place to ensure information is well-organized and accessible, 38.7% high, 4.3% low, and 11.2% very low. On average, the respondents indicated that after processing, records are released from their office/unit/section almost immediately their organization has clear systems or processes in place to ensure information is well-organized and accessible had a mean of 3.49. Results also showed that 42.9% of the respondents gave very high rating, 40.3% high rating and 6.7% low rating and 10.0% very low rating for the question of easy access to information improves my efficiency in completing administrative tasks. On average, the respondents indicated that easy access to information improves my efficiency in completing administrative tasks had a mean of 3.36. Results also indicated that 42.3% of the respondents rated very high that they regularly use the jpaswr information they accessed to complete their administrative tasks effectively, 47.2% high, and 10.5% low. The mean value for the respondents is 3.32 when asked their average frequency of use of the information they used to complete their administrative work effectively. Results also showed that 35.0% of respondents very high that they do adapt information they found to address specific challenges in their work, 50.9% high, 12.9% low and 1.2% very low. The mean for the respondents is 3.20 when they respond to the question of the extent of adaptation of information they found to address specific challenges in their work. As seen in the results in Table 4.4. 35.6% indicated very high, 50.3% high, 11.7% low, and 2.5% very low for their supervisor encouraging them to use information to improve their work processes. On average, results indicated that their supervisor encouraged them to use information to improve their work processes had a mean of 3.19. Results also showed that 63.2% rated very high, 34.4% high and 2.5% low in regard to the use of information to improve the quality of their work output. The mean of the results was 3.32 indicating that they agree that information is useful in improving their work output. Results also showed that 6.1% of the respondents rated very low, 52.1% rated high, and 41.7% rated very high that they feel confident in their ability to select and use information appropriately for their tasks. The mean of the respondents on the issue of 'On average, confidence in finding and using information appropriately for work had a mean of 3.36. It was also found that 42.3% of the respondents rated very high that they do analyze and integrate information to make informed decisions in their work, 33.9% high, 13.8% low and 10.0% very low. The average for the respondents of the question: On average, do you analyze and integrate information to inform your decision-making in their work? is 3.22 on a scale from 1 to 5. The result further showed that 44.1% of the respondents rated very high, 36.7% high, 11.2% low and 8.0% very low that their organization provides training to enhance their work. On average, the respondents indicated that their organization offers training to improve their work had a mean of 3.03. According to results in Table 4.4. 40.2% very high, 37.9% high and 21.9% low in synthesizing information to improve the quality and accuracy of their administrative work. The average for respondents was 3.15 for synthesizing information to make my administrative tasks more quality and accurate. Results also showed that 44.9% of the respondents rated very high that their ability to synthesis information enhanced their decision-making process in their roles, while 32.7% rated high, 15.3% low and 7.2% very low. On average, the results indicated that their ability to synthesis information enhanced their decision-making process in their roles had a mean of 3.09. The results also showed that very high, high, low and very low rates were 43.7%, 36.1%, 14.3% and 5.9% respectively in regard to synthesizing information to contribute to better team outcomes and organization goals. On average, the results indicated that synthesizing information helped them contribute to better team outcomes and organizational goals had a mean of 3.21. Results also indicated that 44.3% of the respondents rated very high that they do evaluate the accuracy of information before applying it to their administrative duties, 40.2% high, 5.3% low and 10.1% very low. On average, the results indicated that they do evaluate the accuracy of information before applying it to their administrative duties had a mean of 3.11. These results also showed that 41.9% of the respondents rated very high that their organization has access to verified databases to support information evaluation, 37.3% very high and 20.8% low. The mean of the respondents showed that access to verified databases to support information evaluation in their organization is 3.02. According to results in Table 4.4 39.1% of the respondents rated very high that they feel in my ability to distinguish credible information from unreliable sources, 40.2% high, 15.7% low, and 5.0% very low. On average, the respondents indicated that they feel in my ability to distinguish jpaswr credible information from unreliable sources had a mean of 2.97. Results also indicated that 44.3% of the respondents rated very high that management emphasizes the need for accurate information, 39.1% high, 5.3% low and 11.3% very low. On average, the results indicated that management emphasizes the need for accurate information had a mean of 3.21. Results also revealed that 39.1% of the participants rated very high in the aspect of the information evaluation competence in relation to their jobs, 48.5% high, and 12.4% low. The respondents' mean of 2.80 was used to rate their ability to evaluate information for their roles as satisfied. The weighted mean of information literacy skills was 3.27, implying that the respondents agreed with the statements representing information literacy skills on the high scale which were task identification, information-seeking strategy, location and access, use of information, synthesis, and evaluation skills. This implied that the level of information literacy skills of administrative officers in Agricultural Research Institutes in Southwest, Nigeria is moderately high and there were opportunities for management to continue providing a work environment that supported the acquisition and utilization of appropriate skills. 5. Discussion The moderately high information-literacy level indicates that administrative officers generally possess the competencies required to identify information needs, select sources, retrieve information, and use it in their work. The strongest score for information-seeking strategy suggests that respondents are able to determine where relevant information may be found. This is consistent with studies showing that workplace professionals can develop effective information practices through training, collaboration, and repeated engagement with digital resources (Naveed & Rafique, 2018; Kharat & Sahu, 2021). The lower synthesis and evaluation scores identify an important developmental gap. Finding information is only the beginning of an effective information process. Administrative decisions require officers to compare sources, identify inconsistencies, combine evidence, and distinguish credible information from unreliable material. The findings therefore support continued professional development focused on critical evaluation, data interpretation, evidence synthesis, and the ethical use of information. The significant regression result demonstrates that information literacy is not merely an individual technical competence; it contributes to organizational learning. Officers who identify, evaluate, and apply information effectively are better able to acquire useful knowledge, share it with colleagues, and integrate it into institutional practice. The finding aligns with Ahmad et al. (2020), who associate workplace information literacy with organizational innovation, and with the Big Six Model's view of information handling as a structured problem-solving process. Nevertheless, the model explains only part of organizational learning. The remaining variation may reflect leadership, organizational culture, technology, incentives, communication patterns, document systems, professional experience, and other institutional conditions. Information-literacy interventions should therefore be integrated with broader knowledge-management and organizational-learning strategies. 6. Conclusion Administrative officers in the selected Agricultural Research Institutes demonstrated a moderately high level of information literacy. Their strengths were concentrated in information seeking, task identification, and access, while synthesis and evaluation were weaker. Information literacy was also a significant positive predictor of organizational learning and accounted for 25% of the reported variation. Strengthening higher-order information competencies can jpaswr therefore improve both administrative decision-making and institutional learning. 7. Recommendations Management should provide periodic training in source evaluation, fact-checking, evidence synthesis, digital searching, and the interpretation of administrative and research data. Institutes should provide access to verified databases, reliable internet services, digital repositories, and clear information-quality standards. Supervisors should require staff to document the sources used for significant administrative decisions and encourage peer review of important reports. Information-literacy development should be linked to knowledge-sharing platforms and organizational-learning objectives rather than treated as an isolated computer-skills programme. 8. Limitations The cross-sectional design and use of self-reported measures limit causal interpretation. The study was also restricted to Agricultural Research Institutes in Southwest Nigeria. Replication with objective performance measures, interviews, and longitudinal data would strengthen the evidence. Pre-submission data verification note. The thesis reports 259 valid questionnaires, but the embedded information-literacy regression table displays total degrees of freedom of 299. The coefficients above are reproduced exactly as reported, while degrees of freedom are intentionally omitted from the article narrative. Confirm the original SPSS output and analytic sample before submission to a journal. 9. Contribution to Knowledge This study contributed conceptually by integrating the concepts of information literacy skills, document governance, and organizational learning within the context of Agricultural Research Institutes in Southwest Nigeria. Previous studies had often examined these variables separately, particularly in educational institutions, libraries, or corporate organizations. However, this research established a conceptual linkage showing how information literacy skills and document governance jointly influenced organizational learning among administrative officers. The study further expanded the conceptual understanding of organizational learning by positioning administrative officers as active knowledge actors rather than merely support personnel. It demonstrated that the ability of administrative officers to identify, access, evaluate, organize, preserve, and utilize information significantly enhanced institutional learning processes and administrative effectiveness. Another conceptual contribution lay in the introduction of years of experience as a moderating variable. The study explained how professional experience could strengthen or weaken the relationship between information literacy skills, document governance, and organizational learning. This offered a more nuanced understanding of organizational learning dynamics in research institutes and broadened the discourse on workplace learning in public-sector institutions. Additionally, the study contributed to the emerging discourse on document governance by conceptualizing it beyond traditional records management. It presented document governance as a strategic administrative mechanism involving document security, accessibility, accountability, compliance, preservation, and information sharing that supported institutional memory and continuous learning. Theoretically, the study enriched Organizational Learning Theory by demonstrating that organizational learning was not only dependent on leadership structures or institutional policies jpaswr but also on the information competencies and document management practices of administrative personnel. The findings showed that administrative officers contributed significantly to knowledge creation, storage, dissemination, and utilization within Agricultural Research Institutes. The study also extended the theory by incorporating document governance as an important enabling structure for organizational learning. It suggested that effective governance of institutional documents facilitated knowledge retention, decision-making, and organizational adaptation. Furthermore, the moderating role of years of experience provided theoretical insight into how accumulated workplace exposure influences learning capability within organizations. The study advanced the application of the Big Six Model of Information Literacy skills by extending its relevance from educational environments to administrative and research-based institutional settings. The study contributed to knowledge by demonstrating how the six stages of the information problem-solving process- task definition, information-seeking strategies, location and access, information use, synthesis, and evaluation- enhanced administrative efficiency and promote organizational learning among administrative officers in Agricultural Research Institutes. The study further contributed theoretically by validating the Big Six Model as a framework for understanding workplace information behavior among administrative officers in Nigeria. It highlighted how mastery of information literacy competencies influenced document governance practices and institutional learning outcomes. The study contributed to Data Life Cycle Theory by demonstrating the relevance of the theory to document governance and organizational learning in public research institutions. It applied the stages of data creation, storage, processing, sharing, preservation, retrieval, and disposal to administrative document practices within Agricultural Research Institutes. The research theoretically established that proper management of documents throughout their lifecycle enhanced institutional memory, accountability, transparency, and knowledge continuity. It further showed that document governance served as a practical expression of the Data Life Cycle Theory in organizational settings. Moreover, by examining the moderating role of years of experience, the study contributed to the theory by suggesting that experienced administrative officers could demonstrate better understanding and application of lifecycle management practices, thereby improving organizational learning processes. Empirically, the study provided current evidence on the levels of information literacy skills, document governance, and organizational learning among administrative officers of Agricultural Research Institutes in Southwest Nigeria. This filled an existing gap in literature because most previous empirical studies focused on universities, libraries, or private organizations rather than agricultural research institutes. The study also generated empirical evidence on the influence of information literacy skills on organizational learning, thereby confirming and extending previous findings in information science and organizational studies. Similarly, it provided empirical data on how document governance practices affected institutional learning and administrative performance. Another major empirical contribution was the examination of the combined influence of information literacy skills and document governance on organizational learning. This multidimensional approach offered broader empirical understanding than studies that considered the variables independently. The inclusion of years of experience as a moderating variable further enriched empirical literature by revealing whether experienced administrative officers exhibited stronger relationships between the study variables than less experienced officers. This contributed fresh evidence to discussions on workplace learning, professional development, and administrative competence in Nigerian public institutions. jpaswr 10. Suggested Areas for Further Research 1. Since this study was conducted in Agricultural Research Institutes located in Southwest Nigeria, future studies should extend the investigation to other geopolitical regions of the country. Such comparative studies would provide empirical evidence on whether significant regional differences exist in information literacy skills, document governance, and organizational learning among administrative offices across Nigeria. 2. To explore the influence of information literacy skills and document governance on organizational learning at different levels in agricultural research institutes, future research ought to consider a longitudinal study to address this research question. 3. Future studies should consider adopting a mixed-methods approach by combining questionnaires with other data collection techniques, such as interviews or focus group discussions. The inclusion of qualitative methods would provide deeper insights into respondents' experiences and perceptions, thereby enriching the interpretation of findings and enhancing the robustness of the study. jpaswr References Ahmad, F., Widen, G., & Huvila, I. (2020). The impact of workplace information literacy on organizational innovation: An empirical study. International Journal of Information Management, 51, 102041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.102041 Baro, E. E., & Idiegbeyan-ose, J. (2019). Digital information literacy skills of librarians in Nigerian universities: A case study of Federal University of Technology, Akure. Library Philosophy and Practice, 2231, 1-15. Bedford, D. (2021). Evaluating confidence in information literacy. Journal of Information Literacy, 15(1), 96-104. Eisenberg, M. B., & Berkowitz, R. E. (2001). The Big 6 information process model. http://www.big6.com/ Hajibayova, L. (2019). Digital information literacy of public librarians in Azerbaijan. Library Hi Tech, 37(2), 289-302. Kharat, A. S., & Sahu, S. K. (2021). Digital information literacy of librarians in academic libraries: A study of central universities in India. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, 26(2), 39-52. Li, Y., Chen, Y., & Wang, Q. (2021). Evolution and diffusion of information literacy topics. Scientometrics, 126, 4195-4224. Naveed, M. A., & Rafique, F. (2018). Information literacy in the workplace: A case of scientists from Pakistan. Libri, 68(3), 247-257. Odede, I. R., & Zawedde. (2018). Information literacy skills in using electronic information resources. Library Philosophy and Practice, 17-26. Omekwu, C. O., Ibegbulam, I. J., Aiyebelehin, J. A., Ejikeme, A. N., & Ezema, E. N. (2019). Assessment of the information literacy competencies of academics in Nigeria. The Information Technologist, 16(1), 189-202. Yang, S., & Kwak, D. (2020). Development and validation of a digital information literacy scale for academic librarians in Korea. Library Hi Tech, 38(1), 102-117. Zeng, X., & Li, Y. (2020). Digital literacy education for librarians: A review of the literature. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 52(1), 214-224.