In the Eyes of the Beholder: Finding the Beauty in Discovery Tools

http://www.pondly.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/close_by_-Mark-Bridger600_400.jpg

Nikki Krysak, Norwich University Nancy Fawley, University of Nevada Las Vegas

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-similar

Background

The Survey

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fractal_Broccoli.jpg

What are your reasons for using a discovery tool in instruction?

“Google-like” search interface is intuitive to students Tool is multidisciplinary It is the default search tool on the Library webpage Searches many different formats Good starting point for research 60 65 70 75 80

“I use it as a springboard of fast-food drive thru… then do the fine dining in subject specific databases not covered by EDS.” “Students are going to see the tool and use it anyway, so I might as well tell them about it so they use it well.” “It’s prominent on the library home page and students can’t make sense of it on their own.” - survey respondents

What are your reasons for not using a discovery tool in library instruction?

Does note encourage good searching habits Does not encourage critical thinking Too many technical glitches Too many search results Relevancy ranking is not reliable 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

“I selected quite a few reasons why I’m unlikely to use it in instruction, but I should point out that it ‘does not encourage good reasons.” searching habits’ and ‘does not encourage critical thinking’ are easily the two biggest “Discovery tools can be incredibly frustrating for students who don’t understand or know how to filter the results.” “Just because you label a tool as being ‘a discovery tool,’ it does not mean that you are able to identify what you are looking for.” --survey respondents

Student Research Habits: Recent Studies

http://kathleenclemons.blogspot.com/2011/05/patterns.html

“Google’s simplicity and single search box seems to have created the expectation among students of a specific search experience within the library: in particular, a single search box that quickly accessed many resources and an overreliance on simple keyword search.” Asher, A.D. & Duke, L.M. (2012). Searching for answers: Student research behavior at Illinois Wesleyan University. In L.M. Duke & A.D. Asher (Eds.), College libraries and student culture: What we now know (pp. 71-85). Chicago: ALA Editions.

“Students rarely investigated or evaluated sources past the first page of results. … By following this practice, students are de facto outsourcing much of the evaluation process to the search algorithm itself. “ Asher, A.D., Duke, L.M., & Wilson, S. Paths of discovery: Comparing the search effectiveness of EBSCO Discovery Service, Summon, Google Scholar, and conventional library resources. College & Research Libraries 74(5), 464-488.

Focus on What You Can Control

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x7032051

“A good librarian teaches the research process and does not solely focus on the current ‘hot tool’ of the day.”

--survey respondent

Evaluate Sources

• • • Introduce primary sources Evaluate the efficacy of the discovery tool Compare and contrast sources http://eofdreams.com/data_images/dreams/fern/fern-10.jpg

Search Strategies

• • Toolbox of search terms Use controlled vocabulary as a source of keywords http://www.levensgarden.com/2011/05/bleeding-hearts.html

Consider the Context

• • Freshman course vs. a capstone course Consider what has been taught previously http://www.levensgarden.com/2011/05/bleeding-hearts.html

Extend Your Comfort Zone

• • Flipped classroom Unmediated learning http:// wall.alphacoders.com/big.php?i=373719

“sometimes we love it, sometimes we hate it.”

--survey respondent http://www.gapingvoid.com/Moveable_Type/archives/003142.html

Questions?

Source: http://www.pondly.com/2013/04/nature-photoraphy-by-mark-bridger/

Works Cited

Asher, A.D. & Duke, L.M. (2012). Searching for answers: Student research behavior at Illinois Wesleyan University. In L.M. Duke & A.D. Asher (Eds.), College libraries and student culture: What we now know (pp. 71 85). Chicago: ALA Editions.

Asher, A.D., Duke, L.M., & Wilson, S. Paths of discovery: Comparing the search effectiveness of EBSCO Discovery Service, Summon, Google Scholar, and conventional library resources. College & Research Libraries 74(5), 464 488.

Cowan, S.M. (2014). Information literacy: The battle we won that we lost? portal: Libraries and the Academy 14(1), 22-32.

The Flipped Learning Network. (2014). The four pillars of F-L-I-P™. Retrieved from http://fln.schoolwires.net/cms/lib07/ VA01923112/Centricity/Domain/46/FLIP_handout_FNL_Web.pdf

Head, A.J. (2013, December 5). Learning the ropes: How freshmen conduct research once they enter college. Project Information Literacy Research Report: The Passage Studies. Retrieved from http://projectinfolit.org/pdfs/PIL_2013_FreshmenStudy_ FullReport.pdf

Maid, B.M. & D’Angelo, B.J. (2013). Teaching researching in the digital age: An information literacy perspective on the new digital scholar. In R. McClure & J.P. Purdy (Eds.) The new digital scholar: Exploring and enriching the research and writing practices of nextgen students. (pp. 295-312). Medford, New Jersey: American Society for Information Science and Technology.

Mutra, Sugata. (2011). Hole-in-the wall: Lighting the spark of learning. Hole-in-the-Wall Education, LTD. Retrieved from http://www.hole-in-the-wall.com/MIE.html