Reflective Searching

I admit that I have often, rather immodestly, considered myself to be the self-appointed "Queen of Googling." After obtaining my MLIS from Valdosta State University where I had many reference based classes, I thought I knew how to properly craft the most effective reference queries possible. However, after watching the Even Better Search Results: Getting to Know Google Search for Education, this old dog learned many new tricks for crafting a search; especially in regards to the education world (of which I am quite a novice).

Google is often our one-stop shop for finding information. According to information established in the Information Behaviour of the Researcher of the Future, a member of the "Google Generation" is anyone who was born after 1993 (2008, p. 5). I would argue that the Google Generation is now and that anyone who attempts to surf the web, even one time a year is subject to the rules of the Google Generation. The authors of this study state "in general terms, this new form of information seeking behaviour can be characterised as being horizontal, bouncing, checking and viewing in nature. Users are promiscuous, diverse and volatile and it is clear that these behaviors represent a serious challenge for traditional information providers, nurtured in a hard copy paradigm and, in may respects, still tied to it. Libraries must move away from bean counting dubious download statistics, and get much closer to monitoring the actual information seeking behaviour of their users" (CIBER, 2008, p. 9).

After attending Library School and also attending Georgia Southern University's School Library Media M.Ed. program, I realize that my current searching behaviors are an example of "squirrelling" as outlined by the authors of the Information Behaviour of the Researcher of the Future (2008 p. 10). As mentioned before in this post, I want to quickly craft an effective search query, and then will take the time to evaluate the results that are returned. The authors state that someone who "squirrels" information "...assess authority and trust for themselves in a matter of seconds by dipping and cross-checking across different sites and by relying on favoured brands (e.g. Google)" (2008 p. 10).

As mentioned in a prior blog posting, we are constantly being bombarded by information. Likely any Google search we conduct will provide some relevant results. The question we as Media Specialists and Librarians are facing is: How do we effectively craft a search that will result in information that provides all distinct points of view about the topic? Eli Pariser's TED talk Beware online "filter bubbles" should allow us to realize and understand how information is presented to us and how to overcome and provide different points of view to our students and patrons.

Pariser establishes that the internet provides users with what it thinks we want to see versus what we are actually asking about. A quote was presented by a representative from Google in this TED talk, Erc Schmidt from Google stated, "it will be very hard for people to watch or consume something that has not in some sense been tailored for them." I don't want to sound like a conspiracy hound or even someone who predicts doom and gloom, but there is a distinct possibility for an abuse of power in this situation, and therefore, we must be vigilant in the quality and differing types of information that is provided to our patrons and students. It is our responsibility to provide high-quality information that properly presents all points of view about a given subject.

In comparison with the "typical teen," I believe that my research strategies and reliance upon technologies are somewhat above their grasp, but this expected after attending 2 years of library school and thus far 1 year into an M.Ed. program. However, prior to attending this level of school about libraries and accessing information, I was very much on the level of the "typical teenager." I admit that my searching strategies would often lead to incorrect information and also could become easily distractable. I admit that I would often research one topic and end up serendipitously learning information about another topic. In the study How Teens Do Research in the Virtual World establishes the information seeking behaviors a myriad of participating AP and NWP (Advanced Placement and National Writing Project) teachers witnessed. Their findings indicated that predictably, students are more likely to rely upon search engines without the addition and juxtaposition of printed materials, reliable news sources, and assistance from a research librarian or Media Specialist (2011, para 4-5).

The authors of this study later point out that "overall, the vast majority of these teachers say a top priority in today's classrooms should be teaching students how to "judge the quality of online information." As a result, aignificant portion of the teachers surveyed here report spending class time discussing with students how search engines work, how to assess the reliability of the information they find online, and how to imporve their search skills. They also spend time constructing assignments that point students toward the best online resources and encourage the use of sources other than search engines" (2011, para 6).

As a future Media Specialist one of my driving educational goals will be spreading the "gospel" of critical thinking, evaluating informaiton, and teaching my students to look beyond the first five results of a Google Search or a Wikipedia page. Students must be taught about finding quality information, rather than just merely regurgitating information from a simple Google search or from a Wikipedia page. Students must learn to evaluate information for themselves and to pick and choose from higher quality results.