Pathfinder

I'm way behind in posting feedback from Assignment 1. In the meantime,I've just submitted Assignment 2. If it is of interest, here's the URL for my Assignment 2 Pathfinder.

http://medievalpathfinder.wikispaces.com

Reference Interview

I thought that I'd share the three versions of my response to James Herring's challenge to define a reference interview in twenty words or less. Two and three are just modifications of the original.I like 1 and 3.

Number 1

Identify needs
Note specifics
Questions or keywords
Utilise Information Literacy
Instruct how to locate information
Range of information needs
Evaluate

Number 2

After Kluegel and Ross

After Kluegel and Ross and ORC


Invisible
Narrowing, clarifying
Questions or keywords
User-Librarian Collaboration
Interactive communication
Remote or in person
Evaluate and monitor


Invisible
Narrowing, clarifying
Questions or keywords
User-Librarian Collaboration
Interactive communication
Referal in person or online
Evaluate and monitor

Number 3

ETL 503 Assignment 2 Useful Link for Policy Development

Here's a site with a pro forma for developing Collection Policy and other useful evaluation material.

http://www.det.wa.edu.au/education/cmis/eval/library/domains/index.htm#teachers

ETL 501 Assignment 1

Some quick thoughts about the ETL 501 assignment 1. Firstly, you may not be aware that CSU have their own website evaluation criteria. It can be found doing a search in the library.

Secondly, I received some excellent advice about doing the critical evaluation. Pick the things that matter educationally and explain, from your reading or criteria, why those aspects are important.
•Easy to navigate? Yes/No? Why does this matter?
•Great graphics or interactivity? Why does this matter?
•Why could interactivity be a problem as well as a positive?
•Author's name easy to find? Why does this matter?
•Domain name .edu or .org Why is that helpful?
•Evidence of bias? Does this matter? Why or why not?
•Links work or they don't? What does this say about the site?
•What is the student's purpose for the site and what is my student audience?
•Will the site suit their purpose?
•Will it cater for all or just some of them?


Here are some references that may be of interest.

Bomar, S. (2010) The annotated bibliography: A schoolwide instructional framework for evaluating sources. In Knowledge Quest Volume 38 No. 3 January/February pp. 72-75 American Library Association. Retrieved from CSU Library.

Brown, J., Hickey, K., and Pozen, V. (2002 revision). Methods of evaluation. In An educators’ guide to credibility and web evaluation. Retrieved from http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/wp/credibility/

Gaffney, M. (2010). Enhancing teachers’ take-up of digital content: Factors and design principles in technology adoption. Education Services Australia.

Standards of professional excellence for teacher librarians. Australian School Library Association. Retrieved from: www.asla.org.au/policy/standards.htm

Hague, C. and Payton, S. (2010). Digital literacy across the curriculum. Futurelab. Retrieved from www.futurelab.org.uk

Herring, J.E. (2004). The internet. In The internet and information skills: a guide for teachers and school librarians. London: Facet

Hughes-Hassell, S. and Mancall, J. (2005). Collection management for youth: Responding to the needs of learners. ALA Editions. Retrieved from CSU EBook library.

Johnson, L. and Lamb, A. (2007). Evaluating internet resources. In Teacher tap: Professional development resources for educators and librarians. Retrieved from: http://eduscapes.com/tap/topic32.htm

Kennedy, J. (2005). A collection development policy for digital information resources. In The Australian Library Journal. April 2005. Retrieved from: http://alia.org.au/publishing/alj/54.3/full.text/kennedy.html

Kennedy, J. (2006). Collection management: A concise introduction. Wagga Wagga: Charles Sturt University Centre for Information Studies

Latham, B., & Poe. J. (2008). Evaluation and selection of new format materials: electronic resources. In J.R. Kennedy, L Vardaman, & G.B. McCabe (Eds.), Our new public, a changing clientele: bewildering issues or new challenges for managing libraries (pp. 257-265). Westport, Conn.: Libraries Unlimited.

Naidu, S. (2005) Evaluating the Usability of Educational Websites for Children. In Usability News. Vol. 7(2) July. Retrieved from http://psychology.wichita.edu/newsurl/usabilitynews/72/children_internet.asp

Nielsen, J. (2005). Usability of websites for teenagers. January 31st. Retrieved from: Jakob Nielsen’s Alertbox http://www.useit.com/alertbox/teenagers.html

Osborne, H. (2000). In Other Words... Assessing Readability. . .Rules for Playing the Numbers Game. In Boston Globe's On Call Magazine, December Retrieved from: http://www.healthliteracy.com/article.asp?PageID=3806

Pfoeffer, P. (2002). Web usability and children: Current research and implications for information professionals. In Orana. July. pp. 11 to 13
Retrieved from: http://search.informit.com.au.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/fullText;dn=119869;res=AEIPT

Shrock, K. (2002). The ABCs of Web Site Evaluation. Retrieved from http://school.discoveryeducation.com/schrockguide/eval.html

South Regional Educational Board: SREB (2010). Criteria for evaluating web sites. Retrieved from http://www.evalutech.sreb.org/criteria/web.asp

ETL401 Collaboration

Just in case there are links out there to those doing ETL 401, I'm providing this link for an article on Collaboration between teacher librarians and teachers. You will recognise many of the researchers cited.

http://www.ericdigests.org/2001-2/librarians.html

ETL 401 Information Literacy

Those who subscribers to the OZTL_NET will already be aware of this site that links to podcasts about teaching Information Literacy in libraries. It might be of interest to ETL 401 students.

This is a great idea! Adventures in library instruction is a monthly hour long podcast (available in mp3) ”about teaching information literacy in libraries.”


http://adlibinstruction.blogspot.com/

and this one for both ETL 401 and ETL 501

http://www.rusq.org/2010/06/23/instructional-strategies-for-digital-reference-methods-to-facilitate-student-learning/

Reference, The Net and the Nature of Truth

In ETL 501 we have been considering the future of reference material. Of first interest is the multi-faceted nature of reference material. On one hand, it is the books that are not available for loan and can only be used in the library itself. The State Library of NSW is a reference library in keeping with this definition. In school and public libraries, the reference books tend to be the most expensive books or books of which there may be only one copy. Print encyclopaedias, some dictionaries, year books and so on are classified as reference books because they are unavailable for borrowing and can only be used within the library.

Somehow, this means that the term "reference" has also come to mean those books, such as encyclopaedias, that have been designed for easy reference to information, facts and images. It has also come to mean academic or authoritative texts to which one refers for reliable, verifiable facts and information.

However, post-modernism does not sit comfortably with the notion that there is such as thing as reliable, verifiable facts and information. According to post-modern thinking, the authority or reliability no longer lies necessarily with an academic researcher, expert author or even scientific paper. It lies with the individual reader and their experience and understanding. If it's true for them, then it's true.

There is a positive and negative aspect to this. One the positive side we have come to recognise and respect the authority and reliability of other traditions, such as the oral tradition of indigenous cultures as having equal standing with Western academic knowledge. We also acknowledge that not all knowledge and wisdom lies in the realm of academia or rational modernism.

On the negative side, there is no longer a consensus of what constitutes an objective, testable truth. The growing awareness that observations and records can consciously or unconsciously influenced by the observer or author themselves has led to mistrust of much that would have been taken for granted as fact in years gone by.Scientific measurement may suggest an objectivity but the purpose and design of the experiment or empirical observation or the use, projection and interpretation of the measured observations have left contemporary citizens less inclined to view the results as infallible.

While this situation perplexes neo-Darwinists such as Dawkins and Hitchin, science has itself to blame. Ordinary citizens see the result of the arrogant assurance of science in the arms race, the space race and the dehumanising effect of technology. They see the champions of scientific progress choosing between a sterile, anti-spiritualism and a fanatical and fervent religious belief in the ability of science as the saviour of humankind.

This post-modern view of knowledge is evident in a resource such as Wikipedia. Obviously, there is also a financial saving to having willing contributor share their knowledge for free but the key element is the democratic approach that honours the knowledge of each individual and the ability of the collected readership to approve or correct the knowledge being provided.

At one level it serves the original purpose of the world wide web, to allow researchers around the world to share their knowledge but the pool of knowledge and expertise has been expanded or democratised. Somehow the arbiter of truth or fact is now the collective mind of the world.

Where does that leave the internet and Wikipedia as a reference source? It is a product of the desire to make information instantly available to whoever wants it. It is also a victim of the scepticism that underscores post-modern society. If it taken with these characteristics in tension, then Wikipedia and similar online references deliver exactly what they were created to provide.If we can educate our students to use them with this understanding AND to seek information and verification from a number of sources then we are contributing to their development as successful users of online information.

If we can reinstate trust both through our relationships with them and through the quality and usefulness of information and resources to which we direct them, we will do them an even greater service.