The Web, Students, Research, and Libraries How students use the web Impact of student web use on research Implications for libraries Critical thinking.
Post on 21-Dec-2015
218 Views
Preview:
Transcript
The Web, Students, Research, and Libraries
How students use the web Impact of student web use on research Implications for libraries Critical thinking for librarians
How Students Use the Web: What the Studies Show
First stop for research Strategies, behaviors, ominous signs Evaluation Misconceptions
First Stop for Research
Lubans (1997 - )– Library’s gatekeeper role shared with search
engines, class web pages, favorite sites– .Increasing proportion of student research from non-
traditional library sources– Students go to Web first, although 75% use
traditional library sources as supplement Reference desk and librarians more isolated from research
process – last to ask about Web
Some stats
– 1997: 50% got 20% research from Web, 80% from traditional library sources (OPAC, databases)
– 1999: 33% pre-college students verified above ratio– 1999: 2nd semester freshmen - 57% get 50% from
Web, 50% traditional– 2000 – Shippensburg – 76% of students go to
Yahoo first when starting research, then library– Kibirige - search engines preferred tool for 84% of
students (4 NYC colleges, 2000)
Strategies: two student assumptions
Web contains “everything”
– Why research starts in directories or search engines
– Why topics are changed rather than search strategies if no information found
– Why Web has priority over the library
Strategies: two student assumptions: looking for answers
Research involves looking for “answers” – Adapt question to the information available on Web– Accept information uncritically if it answers
questions; do not sift judgmentally or consciously look for verification
– “Answer mindset” encourages surfing, skimming vs. analysis, simplicity vs. ambiguity, superficiality over depth
– Students find things, content, reinforcing Web’s value in their eyes
Behaviors
Scan sites quickly, rarely scroll to bottom of page Judge relevance by what’s on top of screen Let retrieved items determine relevance Non-linear searching – promote serendipity and distraction,
wasted time, fruitless site hopping, poor concentration, thought
Unable to limit results, increase relevance Too much material means students fail to continue
investigations to logical end – use what comes first, regardless of how it shapes study.
Ominous signs
Links used less often than thought: move no more than 4/5 links from landmark site
If they scroll to bottom of page (rare), more rarely do they scroll to bottom of site
Spend little time on content (31%/content, 69%/search results, Solowey, middle school)
Rarely read content online even when relevant Not as intellectually engaged or thoughtful as
expected, task-oriented rather than seek understanding
Evaluation
Top criteria– Validation from other/print source– Graphics, appearance (professional looking)– How much content– Referred to by teachers, peers– Authorship, dates– URL gov/edu domains– Links to other sites
General attitude– 43% rate web 4/5 for trust, 43% rate 3 (healthy balance)– Authoritativeness: 50% say 3, 25% 4/5, and 25% ½– 1998 study: 50% trust web, 35% trust TV, newspapers
Evaluation
Lubans and Shippensburg study affirm:– Undergrads think critically about site trustworthiness– Ranked order of criteria
Based on print source – 67% URL has edu, gov, org Referred by peers, teacher Ownership is clear
Other findings contest this based on examination of student research papers
Frequent Misconceptions
Web is easy to use– Lubans: 60% rated self good, better, or best in using
the Web– Shippensburg: 79% rate Web ability as good to
excellent Web is up-to-date, reliable
– Lib sci students: 87% found answers but 47% incorrect; 77% confident no errors since expected Web to be current.
Frequent misconceptions
Search engines, directories, databases same– Little knowledge of engine, directory sizes, coverage– Confuse copyright and non-copyright databases
Web has it all, if it’s not there, it’s nowhere
Impact of Student Web Use on Research
Decline in research paper quality?– Blumberg, Grimes– Herring, Knowlton– Leibovich, Rothenberg, Schaffner
More full-text but less diversity?– Jackson– Valentine
Decline in Research Paper Quality?
Law of least effort: Web wins, Library loses– Too many sources from Web search engines – Students unwilling to make effort at evaluation
Unevaluated, out of date, disappearing, untraceable
Fewer books, quality journal articles
Decline in Research Paper Quality?
– More data (some suspect, frequently unverified in other sources), but less thought, originality
– More cutting, pasting, plagiarizing, less writing quality
– More pictures and graphs, unattributed quotes– Reading, understanding replaced by quips, blips,
pictures, summaries
More full-text but less diversity
1999 Mercer University study– Convenience more important variable than quality
influencing which journals used– Full-text availability led to decline in use of scientific
studies, from 27% to 15% Valentine
– Resources for papers inferior– Reliance on full-text avoids ILL, restricts access– Often too many references from same journal
Implications for Libraries
Marginalization of library and librarians What students want What students need What librarians need
Marginalization
Most searching in dorms or labs, less access to librarians, ref desk less active, less reliance on library selected resources
Reference desk transactions 1991-1999 (Duke) Decline from 71,403 annually to 32,102 Cost per question rises from $2.68 to $4.65
Lubans; students learn about Web from search engines, surfing, other students, last – librarians (9%).
Marginalization
Whitmire (Wash State) 3 yr study of 1,000 students:– Increase in use of Web, databases, reading in ref, browsing– Declines in OPAC use– Biggest decline in asking librarians for help
Desposito– library evokes old, books, journals, difficult, reliable, historical,
scholarly (note even librarians remove “libri” – cybrarian)– Web – new, technology, cutting-edge, easy, quick, efficient,
high rate of success
What students want from librarians
77% - digital finding aids 65% - rate search engines 93% - live links from OPAC, rate Web sites Most want library Web page as portal to
research– Payette, Zemon (MyLibrary, personal web space)
42% - one on one instruction not important 36% - classes not worthwhile
What students need
Learn how to evaluate Web sources Learn limitations of Web search engines
– Difference between contents of commercial databases and Web databases with non-copyright protected information
Learn how to search, how to limit and increase relevancy
Guidance and pressure to incorporate valuable non-digitized sources into research
What librarians need
Closer collaboration with faculty to improve student research, prevent deterioration
Instruction for faculty and students about Web Membership on learning ship: presence where
users are (near and distant): promote integrated info seeking environment (research, services, computing)
What librarians need
Develop library portals where students will go before search engines
Provide guidance to quality Web resources via OPAC, finding aids, specialized user services
Critical Thinking for Librarians
Countering negative trends Thinking outside the technology box: don’t be
‘terminally correct” (TC) Face realities Restore balances, reaffirm goals
Countering negative trends
Become more judgmental– Reject consumer model of giving customer what he
wants– Assert standards, shape practices, change user
behavior
Countering negative trends
– Reject cyberspace tendency to level authoritativeness of sources, depreciate book, promote facts over ideas (sources, ideas, knowledge not equal, require discrimination)
– Uphold value of concentration, lingering, thinking, paging (codex vs. scroll), understanding, appreciating that comes from experience of profound texts available in the library – get more book-centered
Think outside the technology box: don’t be “terminally correct” (TC)
– All formats equally important:; low regard for books as more important in hierarchy of awareness (data, info, knowledge, understand, wisdom)
– Tacit message real libraries unnecessary – distance ed without visit or understanding of real library is acceptable
Think outside the technology box: don’t be “terminally correct” (TC)
– Illusion - electronic formats will replace print – even where flourish they are turned into print if over 500 words
– Utopian idea - copyright restrictions will vanish, all information will be freely accessible on web to all at anytime
– Library unnecessary as on-ramp to Web – downgrades classified book collections, upholds search software over librarians
Face realities
Copyright an economic necessity, here to stay, problem is piracy
All info will not be available to all, anywhere, anytime – and that’s why we have libraries
Web boxed by restrictions on what it can mount that will not go away
Library is niche for info and knowledge that cannot be filled by the Web and that is superior to Web
Embracing technology as new center of information solar system will leave libraries and librarians in dust, damage our cultural values
Restoring balances, reaffirming goals
Broaden presence in network without sacrificing library’s mission
Affirm technology as an addition, a supplement to traditional concerns (books, knowledge, wisdom, liberal arts)
Reject technology as a transformation of those values with narrow focus on access to information, data
Restoring balances, reaffirming goals
Restore balance for online and print; emphasis on online is restrictive, negates wealth of knowledge in print, likely to remain so and available now in libraries
Affirm: facility to surf is no substitute for struggle to understand; research difficult, involves going back again and again, testing, sifting, drawing own conclusions
Consider: Web may be better for simple questions, specific answers, statistics, raw data than open-ended research which requires quality, in-depth sources
Restoring balances, reaffirming goals
Refocus on the value of the book in accordance with its importance in the learning process, the liberal tradition, and in society (note rising book production and sales)
Keep administrators aware of need for traditional print sources so they provide print budgets
Ponder: the paradox that the more librarians embrace technology (as center of information universe), less relevant libraries become in the eyes of students
top related