Transcript The Web, Students, Research, and Libraries

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 nontraditional 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