This was an excellent talk and a lot of thoughts started running through my head. If anyone else is reading this, you will find that my thoughts are running through as well so please don't think Caroline Williams said everything here!
Changing User Behavior on the web—what does this mean for the development of online information literacy tools?
Caroline Willaims, Exec. Director of Intute and Deputy Director of Mimas
A focus on the national perspective.
MIMAS: National Data Center (one of two—Manchester and Edinburgh). Provides infrastructure for large data sets (census) but also library as well as assistance through helpdesk, training, etc. Web of Knowledge.
The Alternate Title: Shall we give up and leave it to Google?
Not a throw away question. Are we fighting a loosing battle?
What is research telling us right now about user behavior?
CIBER 2008, “The Google Generation”.
Even though more people have more access to technology, little time is spend evaluating information. There is not an improvement in how we use, evaluate, or select information.
Two camps of thinking:
Make it easy for students to find what they need
Teaching them skills to be able to find what they need themselves
Higher Education in a Web 2.0 World, March 2009
IL should be treated as a high priority—critical evaluation of information.
A new trend in Higher Ed that IL is getting this level of support, although it is focused on digital literacy.
Isn’t this only a greater call of transliteracy???
Digital Britain: digital literacy impacts equality through employability.
Andrew Whitworth and Information Obesity.
This isn’t new information but the emphasis it is getting from government and outside of the academic realm is new.
Q: What are libraries doing to connect to that energy? Or is government turning to Google or to other corporate services as the venue for education?
Mimas Market Research:
1. Project Fusion: the indispensability of Google and Google Scholar
2. Intute Web 2.0
3. ViM Project
4. Mobile Internet Detective
It is not just about information literacy but the complete way we categorize and share information. Catalogers are just as important to the success of information distribution and information seeking success as the skills that users apply in a variety of information environments.
Other resources were used but the emphasis remains on ease of use in terms of searching for resources but also for specific information in the material itself (searching within electronic resources—what Amazon has over libraries).
“Centrifugal model of information gathering—scholarly work and the shaping of digital access”, Carole Palmer 2005.
The habits of researchers: Once they start doing it a certain way, it is hard to change.
Confidence and satisfaction are inextricably linked. Their awareness that they could do it better and that opportunities to improve exist but students won’t seek out that help. Why? What is it that they are afraid of? Confidence and satisfaction are inextricably linked.
Intute Web 2.0:
Perceptions of librarians on undergraduate behaviour
Perceptions of web 2.0 in education: they have a place but they should be adopted because the technology exists. Social use is not the same as academic use. Not in the habit of rating and commenting and were even suspicious of those that did. Students WANT to separate the social and working dimensions of their lives.
Value for Money in Automative Metadata Generation:
Google: Students might use their institutions’ resources but Google remains pervasive and popular.
When it comes to Google, words don’t do it justice.
Undergrads are ignorant of how to undertake effective searches. Students like that iGoogle or Amazon “get to know you”. Aligns to the point about digital natives that they don’t care about privacy in the same way that we might.
Mobile Internet Detective: translating an online IL tutorial to something that can be used on a phone.
Library users will start to demand that everything happen on a phone: a behavior changer.
“Why walk to the library if it’s on the Internet” (not a comment about the resources but rather, about the value of the electronic library).
What about the value of the PERSON. We need to be focusing our attention on the human dimension to information rather than trying to compete with Google in searching.
Concerns over access, speed. Students might not be using their phones during university for information seeking BUT what about the emphasis on the lifelong component? Once they get out into the “real world” and are working with smart phones…
Pack to the question: shall we give up and leave it to Google?
Two sides to the coin:
On one side, digital and information literacies
On the other: interface and sharing information, improving access.
The actions that are being taken libraries to improve is not enough. How can we get Google to participate more fully? What is it that libraries can offer Google?
Taking the step to include Widgets and Feeds so people can put information where they want.
Balancing Child Protection with Web 2.0 tools. Students will bypass school internet protection by using their phones.
Stop saying Google is bad and help students use it better. THAT is where libraries need to put more focus.