Photo from gptechnicalsolutions.com
While I was reading the crap detection article, I was struck by an observation made in a information literacy class I recently attended. During the class (which mainly consisted of freshmen), the librarian was asking students to complete research for a specific search term using three specific library databases (that were all very nicely gathered for them by the librarian and available on the class libguide). During one part of the class, the librarian asked that students find a newspaper article in a major publication such as the New York Times using a specific database. One of the students was 'caught' using Google instead. When the librarian asked him why he was using Google, he answered that Google was a 'short-cut'. But was it really?Library databases allow students to find reliable and pre-vetted information so that students do not need to use the 'crap detection' technique when researching for a paper or project. Yet, students seem determined to use the 'easy' search engine instead of one that is going to give them better results. Why is this? How do we as librarians combat this?
Information literacy is so important at every level of education. Students need to learn how to successfully search for topics using search engines and databases. They also need to learn how to determine if the information is valid or not both in educational and everyday situations.
I think the quick fix is a sign that most students (people in general?) do not plan to look in depth at anything assigned/required. If all they need is available as ready reference, then they can get away with Google.
ReplyDeleteWait until said student is purchasing their first car, researching a rare medical condition with which they're afflicted, or actually having to research at length on a humanities topic (or the assigned ILI topic) and perhaps they'll look beyond Google.
I do keep coming back in my mind to the statistics on Wikipedia's reliability. Did we ever get into trouble for using an encyclopedia as our first resource in school reports? Of course we had to find more sources, but we were encouraged to start with the Encyclopedia. Wikipedia is usually the top return on a Google search.
I would contend that finding an article on a topic in the NYT is probably easy via Google. Not that this what he should necessarily do, it misses the important point of the exercise, but if the assignment was to find specific info from a specific newspaper or group of newspapers...well, that's already a pre-vetted query.
ReplyDeleteBut beyond that, we should not be surprised if a student chooses the apparent "short cut"...it is the human tendency in information seeking. People will take the path of least resistance. When purchasing a car the typical person doesn't go to consumer reports or maybe even google. They ask their friends. (Personally, I would do both)
We simply do not immediately go to formal sources about most things. If we did, maybe we would talk to each other even less. I am being facetious in that last comment, of course, but it is true that there is a great deal of evidence that no matter how critical the information people, in general, will initially follow the path of least resistance.
It may have been an interesting exercise ... to see who found the article first (a librarian trained how to use databases versus a student using google). I would argue that Google might not be a shortcut, and maybe that could be a good opener for a lesson :)
ReplyDelete