The Communication Journal Collection

In The Communication Journal Collection, much was made of the fact that there is little sense of continuity or agreement as to the function and purpose within the field of communications.  The debate rages regarding the identity of the field and it has been likened to an adolescent in that it is struggling to make its own way.  (Popoff, 2006, 70).  This may be true but I wonder why other social sciences do not share this same struggle.  Sure, each of the other social sciences we studied this semester have different schools of thought within the discipline, yet the discord within communications seems more prevalent. Is it because they are more willing to communicate the dissonance? 

In discussing the lack of agreement on the key journals of the field and the presentation of journals and information in the databases Communication Abstracts and ComAbstracts, the sentiment that kept echoing in my head as I read was eloquently stated regarding the opinion of Thomas F. Gordon (the editor of Communication Abstracts), “For him, and for those who take an inclusive approach to communication journals, the loss caused by restricting research to core communication journals demands to great a sacrifice for the discipline.” (Popoff, 2006, 76). 

Popoff suggests that it is imperative for librarians working in an institution of higher education to understand the definition of communication held by the faculty and scholars of communication within their institution (2006, 70).  This seems to be the cautious and conservative approach and yet like Gordon, I cannot help but feel that this conservative approach may limit future scholars.  Of course, it is a fine line to walk and I do not profess to have the answers.  It is important to understand the process by which communication scholars access and assess information and to understand that the limitations set forth by one database with a stringent interpretation of the field may not exist in another. This will allow librarians to direct information seekers to other sources of information.  This difference of presentation within databases is likely common in other disciplines as well.  For example, when creating my pathfinder for Juvenile Justice, it was apparent that different databases valued different information within the field.  As long as a librarian is aware of the differences and keeps an open mind to positions beyond the immediate definition of the field (if it is a limiting definition), the needs of the communications scholar will be met by utilizing a variety of sources and also by accessing sources that are not technically labeled “communications.”

References

Popoff, D. (2006).  Collection management.  Collection Management, 30: 3, 67-85.

Communications Resource: Writing Public Policy

Smith, C.F. (2013). Writing Public Policy (3^rd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

I can appreciate a book that in the Preface answers such questions as the scope of the resource, the intended audience and the structure of the resource. It also provides a small section regarding the differences between the third edition and previous editions, such as a new chapter on policy evaluation, new illustrations, more samples and more information on writing and critical thinking.  This is a relevant reference for those in communication as it incorporated the social sciences of political science and also regarding public policy on any number of subjects, many of which are social sciences.  Writing public policy is about persuasion and convincing others to support or change public policy.  The Preface begins with a quote of a student who interned in public policy- “In public policy work, if you can’t write it or say it, you can’t do it.” (Smith, 2013, xi).

Scope:  Writing Public Policy addresses public policy making, communicating the process, defining and framing the process, the process of evaluating, analyzing and advising public policy.  Specifically for those focusing on communication, Writing Public Policy focuses on the process of communication in public policy, including the standards and expectations within the field.  This is accomplished by providing background information on each of the topics presented and then case studies, real life examples of each of the issues addressed.

Audience:  Catherine Smith is very helpful; in the preface, she states that the intended audience is “…undergraduate and graduate students of public policy, political science, public administration, public discourse, writing, and communication, along with their teachers.” (Smith, 2013, xiii).  It is also intended for entry level professionals working in nonprofits, government, social work, and in dealing with public policy.  The book also proposes that is intended for the active citizen and civic organizations.

Timeliness:   The third edition has a publication date of 2013 so it is quite current.  It provides information regarding legislative history in Chapter 5: Legislative History: Know the Record.  In the digital information age, the Internet must be a factor when considering public policy. Writing Public Policy addresses Public Policy writing for the web in an appendix.  And while email was addressed in a previous chapter, the appendix only briefly discusses podcasts, wikis, blogs, and webpages.  There is very little addressing social media.  Public policy writing likely translates well to the digital age but future editions will likely contain more information about Public Policy and the Web, especially as more and more public policy publications are published solely online.

Authority:  According to the book jacket, Catherine Smith is a professor Emerita of English at East Carolina University and an Adjunct Professor of Public Policy at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. 

Documentation:  Each chapter provides references for the section provided but there is not a single section that contains all references.  It makes it difficult to search citations for references in the research process. However, it is also nice to be able to quickly access the references within the chapter that is relevant only to what was just read.

Relevance:  This is a relevant resource for not only those working directly in public policy but also for those studying communication.  It is a valuable guide for communication process in public policy.

Juvenile Justice LibGuide/Pathfinder

Just to cover all my bases:  Here is the link to my Juvenile Justice Pathfinder through the class wiki:

Juvenile Justice Reference Background
Juvenile Justice Key Resources at a Glance
Juvenile Justice More Resources
Juvenile Justice Databases

I did not quite follow the directions exactly.  I took a little liberty in how I created the pathfinders but then had second thoughts.  However, at that point, I could not figure out how to change the name of my pages.  Therefore the naming conventions do not quite match but the content should all be there.

I used Rhode Island resources where I could but I believe that the HELIN database is accessible to the public.

Global Voices: 'Women should be Submissive' and other Google Autocomplete Suggestions

Bohdanova, T. (2013, Nov. 5). ‘Women should be submissive’ and other Google autocomplete suggestions. Retrieved from http://globalvoicesonline.org/2013/11/05/women-should-be-submissive-and-other-google-autocomplete-suggestions/

Global Voices asked its contributors to Google “Women should” based on a UN Campaign and it had interesting results. According to the results posted in this article, the implications are suggestive of a pervasive misogynistic opinion of the role of women. Is this the popular global view? Is it something put forth by Google?  The article does not delve that deep but it is interesting and I cannot help but wonder how does the Google algorithm work that the results seem to be so misogynistic?  I decided to test this and do a couple of Google searches of my own.  Here are my results for “Women should”

I also Googled Women should not and received the following results:

What do you think?

Information Literacy and Measurable Learning Objectives

This has been a very tough week for me as we experienced the loss of our beloved Abby this week.  I apologize in advance for the quality of this week’s posting.  It is difficult to fully investigate the material when dealing with a tragic loss.  I will do my best.

           

I love information literacy.  This is good since I have chosen to study a field in which it weighs heavily.  So, I have to admit that I was intrigued to read Information Literacy: The Partnership of Sociology Faculty and Social Science Librarians.   As many have posted in the class blog, it seems common sense what is presented in this article and it could easily be tailored to meet the needs of each higher education discipline.  As librarians, we must work to ensure that this happens. So many people, and I am sure that this includes faculty and instructors at institutes of higher education in addition to the students of these programs, believe that they are information literate. After all, most are adept at searching Google.  And while there is perfunctory instruction on assessing sources in some high school programs, does it go far enough?  Couldn’t each discipline work to ensure that the standards of its discipline are incorporated within information literacy?  In my Foundations class, we read Instructional Preferences of First-Year College Students with Below-Proficient Information Literacy Skills.  It was eye opening to see that most students, even honors students grossly overestimated their own information literacy skills.  Librarians cannot wait for faculty and students to come to them; they are not likely to seek help if they do not realize that their skills are lacking.  Librarians should seek out faculty and students, not just within the sociology field, but also in all fields to assist in developing information literacy skills that work in conjunction with the standards of each discipline. 

So back to Sociology and Information Literacy. I really appreciate what has gone into developing the Anthropology and Sociology Information Literacy Standards.  It adapts the ACRL’s generic Information Literacy Standards to meet the needs of the fields of Anthropology and Sociology. Because sociology works so closely with human subjects, ethics is not a separate standard but is incorporated within each of the standards (Caravello, Kain, Kuchi, Macicak, Weiss, 2008, 11). 

            Reviewing the Anthropology and Sociology Section of the Association of College & Research Libraries (ANSS) was interesting. As you may have guessed, I was first drawn to the information literacy standards to review them myself and not simply rely on the review put forth by Caravello ET all.  The next thing I did was review the most current and the oldest Newsletter available to see what had changed since 1997. In 1997, the newsletter appears to have been scanned in and the Spring 2013 is much more reader friendly. In 1997, members of the ANSS were looking for tips on instruction.  This continues today but now there is a committee for the Information Literacy Standards for Anthropology and Sociology Students (ANSS Currents, Spring 2013, 6).  What I found most interesting was that the ASA is also looing at developing “…clearly defined assessment strategies” (ANSS, 2013, 7).    And while the separation of Anthropology and Sociology within the ANSS indicates that the differences between sociology and anthropology are important, I was more interested in the development of measuring success of the learning outcomes of information literacy instruction. As important as information literacy instruction is within all disciplines, not just sociology, it is important to develop measurable learning outcomes.  The trends in education require measurable learning outcomes and we must keep pace.  It is important to consider this within all disciplines. I am interested in this trend of providing measurable outcomes and hope to see it develop throughout the LIS field.

References:

ACRL Anthropology & Sociology Section.   (1997, May).  ANSS Currents.  12 (1).  Retrieved from http://anssacrl.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/anss-currents-spring-1997.pdf.

ACRL Anthropology & Sociology Section.  (2013, Spring).  ANSS Currents.  28,  (1). Retrieved from http://anssacrl.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/anss-currents-spring-2013.pdf.

Caravello, P.S., Kain, E.L., Kuchi, T., Macicak, S. & Weiss, G.L.  (2008).  Information literacy: The partnership of sociology faculty and social science librarians. Teaching Sociology, 36, 8-16).

Latham, D., & Gross, M. (2013). Instructional Preferences of First-Year College Students with Below-Proficient Information Literacy Skills: A Focus Group Study. College & Research Libraries, 74(5), 430-449.

Encyclopedia of Sociology (2nd Edition)

Borgatta, E.E. and Montgomery R.J.V. (Eds.).  (2000).  Encyclopedia of sociology (2^nd ed.). New York, NY: Macmillan Reference USA. 

Scope:  August Comte deemed Sociology the “Queen of the Social Sciences” as cited in the Preface of volume 1 of Encyclopedia of Sociology (1991, vii).  In the preface to the second edition, Borgatta states “We reminded authors that the purpose of the reference section is to provide users with an opportunity to explore the area further.” (2000, xii).  Encyclopedia of Sociology, Second Edition provides a broad scope of terminology and areas of sociological interest ranging from abortion to world religions. It is a five volume set that provides a background on the subject area but also a starting point for further research.

Audience:  The intended audience is the undergraduate or graduate student studying sociology or other social sciences and those professionals working in the field of sociology or other social sciences. Sociology encapsulates many, if not all the other social sciences and contains many fields and subfields. 

Timeliness:  Sociology, like most of the social sciences, is a relatively young science with much of the development occurring during the 1930s and 1940s.  Due to its relative infancy, it is likely that there have been changes in the field in the past 13 years. In fact, when Borgatta, there were significant turnaround in the field between the writing of the preface of the first edition in 1991 to the writing of the second preface in 2000.  He made mention in the first preface that while Sociology had once been the Queen of the social sciences, there were factors that had detracted sociology from that role.  Borgatta speaks of the “blossoming of applied fields” in which sociology in general seemed “indifferent and uninvolved.” (vii).  The technical training for Sociology became more advanced, the involvement of sociologists in civil rights movements and other political activities, technicalogical development and the increase of special subfields were all deteriorating the field of sociology.  Yet, less than ten years later, Borgatta states that there were areas of sociology that had changed with the approach of the Millennium and that “…the social sciences appear to have softened their borders….” (xi).  This leads me to believe that there are likely substantial changes in sociology in the past 13 years. This publication occurred before 9/11 and many other technological advances that have been made.  I failed to find a newer edition of the Encyclopedia available.

Authority:  Edgar Borgatta does not have a Wikipedia page, though a Google search of his name retrieved many hits and indicates that he has published a number of books on the subject of sociology. He is listed as an Emeritis professor at the University of Washington, though not much additional information is provided.

Rhonda J. V. Montgomery is listed as a professor of sociology at the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, where she holds the title of  Helen Bader Endowed Chair of Applied Gerontology in the Helen Bader School of Social Welfare.  Her areas of speciality are gerontology and family and she also has a list of selected publishings.

Documentation: It is very interesting that Borgatta made the following statement in his preface to the second edition: “ Thus, we asked authors to give special special attention to providing direction rather than overwhelming the reader…In addition to the work of the authors, the professional sociological staff of the Encyclopedia prepared for the article a short list of additional reference to broaden the scope of coverage and provide additional transitions to related concepts.” (2000, xii)

Relevance: In spite of changes that may have occurred in the past 10-13 years, this is still a relevant resource for those working in the field of sociology or the social sciences in general.

References:

University of Washington. (n.d.)  Department of Sociology University of Washington.  Retrieved from http://www.soc.washington.edu/faculty-details/borgatta.

University of Wisconsin Milwaukee.  (n.d.).  UW-Milwaukee: Sociology – Rhonda Montgomery. Retrieved from http://www4.uwm.edu/letsci/sociology/faculty/montgomery.cfm

Geography Online Tutorial and the Needs of Online Library Tutorials in General

            Having recently created an online module myself for information literacy, I have a firsthand appreciation of the work that goes into the preparation, roll out, instruction and assessment of the online tutorial.  Of course, these are challenges also are in play within the traditional instructional setting; but by nature, it seems that the instructional design seems more imperative in the online environment.  With an asynchronous learning environment, it is not possible for the instructor to adjust to the nuances and immediate needs of the students.  To provide an environment that allows asynchronous, self-directed learning, the library instructor must be extremely prepared.

A common problem, as described by Salmon (2003), is that resources are largely reading and writing based.  For an online tutorial to succeed in developing student skills, it must incorporate a combination of activities and information to encourage learning by doing – promoting student interaction and engagement (Hutchings et al. 2007; Race and Pickford, 2007; Roberts and Levy 2005; Biggs 2003). Incorporating audio, video, animation, and interactive exercises along with text-based instruction can be used to better meet the needs of students with a range of different learning styles –especially those who are more visual thinkers (Cornelius and Gordon 2009; Lo and McCraw Dale 2009; Greener 2008; Silver and Nickel 2007; Peacock 2005).  (Thornes, 2012,  84). 

            In the initial preparation the library instructor must understand the learning needs of the students in order to determine the proper learning outcomes for the tutorial. As she gathers materials for the online tutorial or module, she must keep in mind that students learn in different ways. She must work to provided material in a variety of media that are relevant and current.   Thornes indicates that the library instructors creating the geography tutorials consulted the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) for the recommended benchmarks for students studying geography. (2012, 85).  As librarians, they likely married the QAA benchmarks with the Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL) Standards for Information Literacy Competency when the tutorials were developed. 

            Creating an online instruction module or tutorial requires collaboration between the departmental faculty but also with instructional designers.   The images provided by Thornes showing the before and after PowerPoint slides were great examples of successful results when librarians and instructional designers work together (89).  Online instruction also requires interaction with the students; this can be hard to manage in an online environment.  Thornes indicates the troubles that the librarians had in obtaining student feedback and usage statistics. In my recent module, I found that I did not receive one question from students, even when I reached out to them.  However, in reviewing my students’ comments, each of them had questions about my module and were unsure of the assignments.  This tells me that even with careful preparation and development, a concept that seems clear to the instructor may not be clear to the students.  The lack of questions does not indicate that there is a lack of confusion.  I am not sure how to balance this within the online instructional module.  It seems that it is an open point for many librarians working within the online learning environment.

            It would be helpful if LIS programs would address the aspect of teaching and instruction within its programs. For students who plan to work in higher education, not just those students studying geography or other social sciences, having a background and training in instructional technology, online teaching and basic principles of pedagogy will go a long way in developing programs as librarians transform from the keepers of information to facilitators of information and instructors of information literacy.

References

American Library Association. (2006, September 1) Information literacy competency standards for higher education. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/informationliteracycompetency.

Thornes, S.L. (2021).  Creating an online tutorial to support information literacy and academic skills development.  Journal of Information Literacy, 6(1), pp. 82-95.  Retrieved from http://lis60621-09f.iwiki.kent.edu/file/view/geography module IL and distance students.pdf/368446070/geography module IL and distance students.pdf.