1. Behrens, Shirley J. (1994). A conceptual analysis and historical overview of information literacy. College & Research Libraries, 55(4), 309-22. – Cited 178 times.
2. Breivik, P. S. (1991). Information literacy. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, 79(2), 226. – Cited 184 times
3. Bruce, C. (1997). The seven faces of information literacy. Auslib Press Adelaide. – Cited 516 times
4. Bruce, C. (2002). Information literacy as a catalyst for educational change: A background paper. In White Paper prepared for UNESCO, the US National Commission on Libraries and Information Science, and the national Forum on Information Literacy, for use at the Information Literacy Meeting of Experts, Prague, the Czech Republic. – Cited 99 times
5. Bruce, Christine Susan. (1995). Information literacy: A framework for higher education. Australian Library Journal, 44(3), 158-70. – Cited 54 times
6. Dewald, N., Scholz-Crane, A., Booth, A., & Levine, C. (2000). Information literacy at a distance: instructional design issues. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 26(1), 33-44. doi:doi:10.1016/S0099-1333(99)00121-4 – Cited 86 times
7. Doyle, Christina S. (1994). Information literacy in an information society: A concept for the information age. - Google Books. Darby, PA: DIANE Publishing. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=Z1IJ6A97WnsC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=information+literacy&ots=cyToYI75Je&sig=gD7JTAwcvv2Tm00izq3BSw6z2Ns#v=onepage&q&f=false – Cited 153 times
8. Eisenberg, Michael B. (2008). Information literacy: Essential skills for the information age. Journal of Library and Information Technology, 28(2). Retrieved from http://www.indianjournals.com/ijor.aspx?target=ijor:dbit&volume=28&issue=2&article=005 – Cited 89 times
9. Grafstein, A. (2002). A discipline-Based approach to information literacy. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 28(4), 197-204. – Cited 130 times
10. Grassian, Esther S., & Kaplowitz, Joan R. (2010). Information literacy instruction - Encyclopedia of Library and Information Sciences, Third Edition. Encyclopedia of Library and Information Sciences, 3rd Edition. Retrieved from http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a917629725 - Cited 83 times
11. Horton, Forest Woody, Jr. (1983). Information literacy vs. computer literacy. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science, 9(4), 14-16. – Cited 51 times
12. Jacobs, S. K., Rosenfeld, P., & haber, J. (2003). Information literacy as the foundation for evidence-based practice in graduate nursing education: a curriculum-integrated approach. Journal of Professional Nursing, 19(5), 320-328. – Cited 60 times
13. Literacy in the information age: Inquiries into meaning making with new technologies. (n.d.). . Retrieved August 16, 2010, from http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED474205&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED474205 – Cited 50 times
14. Marcum, James W. (2002). Rethinking information literacy. The Library Quarterly, 72(1), 1-26. – Cited 98 times
15. Rader, H. B. (2002). Information literacy 1973-2002: a selected literature review. Library trends, 51(2), 242–259. – Cited 83 times
16. Shapiro, J. J., & Hughes, S. K. (1996). Information literacy as a liberal art? EDUCOM review, 31, 31–35. – Cited 174 times
17. Spitzer, Kathleen L., Eisenberg, Michael B., & Lowe, Carrie A. (1998). Information literacy: Essential skills for the information age. Syracuse, NY: Information Resources Publications, Syracuse University. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED427780&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED427780 – Cited 82 times
18. Webber, S. and Johnston, B. Conceptions of information literacy: new perspectives and implications. (2000). Journal of Information Science, 26(6), 381-397. doi:10.1177/016555150002600602 – Cited 138 times
Analysis
During the process of compiling my first bibliography for assignment number eight, I experienced a great deal of frustration while toggling between the two databases. It seemed unusually difficult. When I would find an article that appeared in both the Library Literature and Information Science Full Text Database that was relevant to the topic of information literacy, I would then search the Social Sciences Citation Index to find its number of times cited and would find that the article in question was not found. It seemed for the first hour or so of working on this project that when I found an article that was indexed in both databases, it was often not cited the required number of times to be used in my bibliography. I attempted to search using Boolean operators, by author, title, keyword, and subject (or any combination of the four), and often found that the article from the Library and Literature Information Science Full Text Database could not be found in the SSCI. I also connected using the Kent VPN Client because I am a Columbus student, and was logged out on a few different occasions.
I finally began finding articles listed in both databases after approximately an hour and a half of work on this project, and was able to create a relevant bibliography. From this experience I was led to believe that the Social Sciences Citation Index was not very extensive, because most of the searches I performed yielded no useable results.
However, when using Google Scholar to locate articles concerning information literacy, not only did the search yield many pages of results with the amount of times an item has been cited listed in the result summary, but it also returned articles that had been cited many times. If I were actually writing a scholarly paper using these search results, I would be assured that these were reliable and important sources in the subject area because of the amount of their use in other work. For the purposes of this project, I easily found many results that were relevant and useable in my bibliography.
I often find that Google products consist of very user-friendly interfaces. The technology Google uses is highly efficient in that it returns relevant search results and information. I believe that as Google and similar companies expand, it is possible that such organizations could become a dominating presence in the library and information science arena simply due to their accessibility, accuracy, and usability. To use Weinberger’s terminology, the differences I experienced between my KentLINK searches and my Google Scholar search seemed to be an issue of “intertwingularity”. The Google search that I performed demonstrated that technology’s ability to navigate the “intertwingularity” of the search terms I used and the items indexed in the database in a relevant way, where as the “intertwingularity” of information indexed in the SSCI was not well navigated. Terminology, metadata, and language did not seem to be tied together in relevant ways that enabled an easy search of a topic. Instead, searches needed to be very exact, in a way that was both overly simplistic and extremely complicated at once, using both advanced search features and the exact words of a title, author, or journal publication.
References
Weinberger, D. (2008). Everything is miscellaneous: The power of the new digital disorder. New York: Henry Holt.
No comments:
Post a Comment