Getting beyond the mechanics of search

There's a great new list called ngc4lib that is officially devoted to discussions of the "next generation catalog." In its brief existence so far, it has launched dozens of fascinating conversations that extend far beyond what you might expect a "catalog" discussion to touch upon.

One quote in a recent message that really resonated with me came from Thomas Arendall-Salvetti, a reference/instruction librarian at the University of Baltimore:

I would like to echo what Emily Lynema has said: “Why don't we smarten up the catalog back-end so that we can dumb down the front-end interface and still have it work well?” Amen. Critics who complain of dumbing down the catalog have it all wrong. We want smarter OPACS that will do more of the behind the scenes work and make searching simpler for our patrons.

This ties in well to what Dan Lester has said about “upgrading info skills” and educating users about when to search different types of sources. If the library catalog and online databases were truly easy for our patrons to use, we could spend less time teaching the mechanics of searching and more time teaching higher order information literacy skills. As an instruction librarian, I would love to be able to spend all of my time teaching students when to use various types of information, how to evaluate information, how to use it ethically, etc. Smarter catalogs would lead to better library instruction.

I couldn't agree more. I would love to have more time in my workshops teaching about who creates information, how information gets disseminated, and how some kinds of information dominate the information ecology.

One of the exercises I would like to have time to do more often with students asks them to make a map of who might be likely information producers (i.e., authors) on their given topic and where those producers might be publishing. I give the students a blank map template for them to fill out for an in-class exercise. In the center of the map in a small box, the student writes in one or two sentences what his/her topic is. Surrounding the box where that topic is written is a series of circles, each of which has a line connecting it to the topic box in the center. I ask the students to write in each circle the name of one information producer. For example, if the student had written as a topic, "Assault rifles should be outlawed in the United States," then the student might write in the circles for information producers: politicians, journalists, advocacy groups (e.g., NRA, gun control groups), legal scholars, criminologists, and the law enforcement community.

Surrounding each circle for an information producer are a list of common forms of information: books, magazine/newspaper articles, journal articles, web sites. The student then must circle those forms of information that seem to be the most likely places that information producer would be writing on that topic. So for "advocacy groups," the most likely place might be "web sites." For "criminologists," it might be "journal articles" and "books."

Here's the blank template for the map.

Before letting the students start their own maps, I might first walk them through an already filled out topic map to explain the exercise. At other times, I changed the exercise by having the class all write in the same research topic and then, with the students volunteering who would be information producers and where they would likely be publishing, work with me to fill out the information producer map.

As a teacher, my expectation is not that students will thereafter regularly generate such a map every time they have an information need; instead, I am interested in having them begin to think a bit more systematically about where they might find information. I tell students that if you have a good sense of who might be producing information on a given topic (for example, psychologists) then you will also have an idea of what tool to use find information they have produced (PsycINFO to help you find journal articles by psychologists). The more information producers you think might care about your topic, the more options you have for finding information. Having a list of information producers in mind also allows you to begin making critical judgments about which ones might be most useful for the information need you have. If you have a passing interest in learning more about schizophrenia, then knowing that is the kind of topic a journalist might cover in magazines and newspapers may be enough to lead you in right direction in your search; if you are researching different treatment options for schizophrenia, it helps to be aware of the fact that in addition to journalists who might write on this, there are others--psychologists, psychiatrists, physicians, and social workers--who are also publishing information in this area with greater expertise and depth.

On a related note, I should mention that Peter Morville recently posted on his blog his interview with Peder Soderlind, a Swedish researcher who has a similar exercise he calls "society mapping."

UPDATE 6-14-2006: The archives of the NGC4LIB list can be found here.