Seeking Knowledge: Student Judgment, Epistemology, and First Year Writing

1
Seeking Knowledge Student Judgment,
Epistemology, and First Year Writing

• Troy SwansonTeaching Learning Librarian
• Moraine Valley Community College
• swanson_at_morainevalley.edu
• http//troyswanson.pbwiki.com

2
Information Literacy and the Knowledge-Based
Society

• Peter Drucker (Post-Capitalist Society 1993)
  indicates that the knowledge economy needs
  individuals that can think across disciplines.
• This would require a methodology for problem
  definitioneven more urgently perhaps than it
  requires the currently fashionable methodology
  for problem solving. It requires systematic
  analysis of the kind of knowledge and information
  a given problem requires...(p.193)

3
Source-Based Writing Project(Critical Approach
to Information Literacy)

• Problem (circa 2000) Students were making
  uninformed choices when selecting sources for
  papers and tools to use in research.
• Class First-Year Composition, COM 101

4
Novice vs. Experts

• Novice
• Knows comparably little about topic
• Unaware of existing sources, experts, or search
  tools
• Has little to no experience interpreting metadata
  (publication, type of information, etc)
• Does not make Predictive Judgments

• Expert
• Internal Knowledge-base
• Has expectation for existing knowledge
• Collects Most Information from colleague or
  citations
• When searching, evaluates results with past
  knowledge using metadata (publication, type of
  information, etc)
• Makes Predictive Judgments

5
Difference Between Novice and Expert

• Expert can more clearly articulate an Information
  Need
• Expectation for level of credibility for desired
  information
• Recognition of possible points-of-view to
  consider
• Definition of various topics that might be
  relevant to the topic
• Consideration of timeliness of needed sources
• Use this understanding to select tools to use to
  search for desired information

6
Sections of ACRL Info. Literacy Standards
Emphasizing the Understanding of Information

• Standard One The information literate student
  determines the nature and extent of the
  information needed.
• Performance Indicator 2 The information literate
  student identifies a variety of types and formats
  of potential sources for information.
• Outcome C Identifies the value and differences
  of potential resources in a variety of formats
  (e.g., multimedia, database, website, data set,
  audio/visual, book)
• Outcome D Identifies the purpose and audience of
  potential resources (e.g., popular vs. scholarly,
  current vs. historical)

7
Sections of ACRL Info. Literacy Standards
Emphasizing the Understanding of Information

• Standard Two The information literate student
  accesses needed information effectively and
  efficiently.
• Performance Indicator 4 The information literate
  student refines the search strategy if necessary.
• Outcome A Assesses the quantity, quality, and
  relevance of the search results to determine
  whether alternative information retrieval systems
  or investigative methods should be utilized
• Outcome B Identifies gaps in the information
  retrieved and determines if the search strategy
  should be revised

8
Sections of ACRL Info. Literacy Standards
Emphasizing the Understanding of Information

• Standard Three The information literate student
  evaluates information and its sources critically
  and incorporates selected information into his or
  her knowledge base and value system.
• Performance Indicator 2 The information literate
  student articulates and applies initial criteria
  for evaluating both the information and its
  sources.
• Outcome A Examines and compares information from
  various sources in order to evaluate reliability,
  validity, accuracy, authority, timeliness, and
  point of view or bias
• Outcome B Analyzes the structure and logic of
  supporting arguments or methods
• Outcome C Recognizes prejudice, deception, or
  manipulation
• Outcome D Recognizes the cultural, physical, or
  other context within which the information was
  created and understands the impact of context on
  interpreting the information

9
Our COM 101 Objectives

• Students will
• Be able to identify the information type of a
  given source.
• Be able to select search tools and sources for
  information based on their information need.
• Be able to locate, evaluate and select sources
  that satisfy their information need.
• Assignment 2 Papers
• Paper about 2 sources
• Paper about a problem in a community

10
3 Class Sessions

• Session 1 Types of Information
• How are information sources different?
• How do we define credibility?
• Session 2 Defining an Information Need
• What is my task?
• What do I know about a topic?
• What predictions can I make about what I need?
• How do I link my results with Information need?
• Session 3 Searching for Information
• What tools have the needed information?
• How can I use them to access this information?

11
Linking Needs to Outcomes

• Relevance? topics, search terms
• Credibility? type of information, who should I
  listen to?
• Point-of-View? recognition of bias, seeking
  balance
• Timeliness? answering the when question
• Durability? here today, still here tomorrow?

12
Understanding the Process

• Idea (thesis statement) ? Info need defines
• Test (find outside sources)
• Learn (consider new knowledge to modify your
  thesis)
• Use? How will you use what you find and learn?
• Answers the Standard 4 Question

13
Personal Epistemology

• Nature of Beliefs
• Self Reinforcing
• Established Early in Life
• Classroom Setting Not Conducive to Change
• Lisa Bendixen (UNLV)
• Simple Knowledge
• Certain Knowledge
• Omniscient Authority
• Quick Learning
• Fixed Ability

14
Assessment

• Sources of Student Papers
• Surveys
• Bendixen Survey
• Information Use Survey (MVCC)
• Project SAILS (Kent State)
• Focus Groups

15
Key Leanings

• Students understand they need to recognize good
  vs bad information
• Students are more savvy than anticipated
• Should vs. Actual is different
• Students base views of research process on style
  of paper they are writing
• Used to Just Throw Things Together
• The library Web thing
• Growth in conceptualization about expectations
  and research process

16
Selected Readings

• Bates, M., (1989). The design of browsing and
  berrypicking techniques for the online research
  interface. Online Review 13, (5) 40910.
• Bell, D. (1973). The coming of post-industrial
  society a venture in social forecasting. New
  York basic books.
• Bendixen, L. and Rule, D. (2004). An integrative
  approach to personal epistemology Educational
  Psychologist. 39, 1, 69-80.
• Drucker P. (1993). Post-Capitalist society.
  Harpercollins.
• Kuhlthau, C. (1993). Seeking meaning a process
  approach to library and information science.
  Norwood, NJ Ablex Publishing.
• Rieh, S. (2002). Judgment of information quality
  and cognitive authority in the Web. Journal of
  the American Society for Information Science and
  Technology. 53(2) 145-161.
• Schommer-Aikins, M. (2004). Explaining the
  epistemological belief system introducing the
  embedded systemic model and coordinated research
  approach. Educational Psychologist. 39, 1 19-29.
• Wilson, P. (1983). Second-hand knowledge.
  Westport, CN Greenwood Press.