Statement of Competence
Information seeking is generally viewed as the process one goes through to acquire new knowledge. Information-seeking behavior is when the person consciously seeks the information, instead of finding it unexpectedly. Any position in the field of library and information science requires a deep knowledge of information-seeking behavior because each patron potentially seeks information in an unique way.
Over the decades of research on the subject several different scholars have become prominent in their research of different information-seeking behavior theories. During my time at SJSU I was made aware of the work of Carol Kuhlthau on several occasions. Her theory, based on research by psychologist George Kelly, is called the Information Search Process. This theory breaks the information seeking process into stages with the focal point being the emotional state of the information seeker. Kuhlthau’s six stages of information-seeking behavior are initiation, selection, exploration, formulation, collection, and presentation (Information Behavior Theories, 2015). This information-seeking theory is well-rounded and represents each stage of finding and utilizing information. A public library patron would go through each stage of Kuhlthau’s theory, as I will illustrate in the following example. The patron first initiates his research, or decides what subject he needs to investigate. Next, using the library catalogue he selects the materials he needs and locates them physically on the shelf or digitally on the website. He explores the materials, and while doing so he formulates a more concrete idea of what his research will specifically entail. Finally, he collects all the information he needs from those sources and presents his findings in a report. Depending on the researcher’s mental state the time period over which this process takes place might vary. He might be preoccupied thinking about a problem in his personal life and let his mind wander between the second and third step, elongating the process. Conversely, he might be hyperfocused because the research is due in 24 hours, cutting down on time because he is pushing to finish. Kuhlthau’s theory of information seeking is straightforward and inclusive without being complicated. Even if the information seeker is not doing it consciously, I believe that most go through these steps each time they need to find materials.
Another theory of information-seeking behavior with which I am familiar is that of T. D. Wilson. Wilson’s theory delves into the complexities of the “why” aspect. Why do some questions result in more information seeking than other questions? Why do some information sources get used so much more often than others? Why does a person’s perception of their own productiveness and success seem to influence how quickly and efficiently they meet their information-seeking goal? (Information Behavior Theories, 2015). Kuhlthau’s theory explores the psychological side of information-seeking behavior, but Wilson’s theory gets caught up in it. Rather than viewing the process as successive, where a researcher follows a series of steps to get to the end goal, Wilson views the process as repetitive at certain points. In an example of a researcher adhering to the Wilson theory of information-seeking behavior, they might begin to question why they have chosen the question at hand to study instead of another one. If they have low self-esteem or wavering self-expectations, they might get caught up in wondering whether they can actually finish their research project in a timely manner instead of actually working on their research. According to the diagram exerpted from one of Wilson’s studies (pictured below), the context of the information need comes first. This includes environmental, social, and personal context. The barriers one might face from context to the actual seeking of information are also personal and environmental. When the researcher finally reaches the actual information-seeking behavior stage they have overcome several boundaries already. When they get there, they go through an eight-step process. After starting this process the researcher experiences the steps of chaining, browsing, differentiating, monitoring, extracting, verifying, and ending.
Kuhlthau and Wilson are two well-respected scholars in the field of information-seeking behavior, and both of their theories have merit. There are also many more diverse theories on the subject, because the process of information seeking is arguably as unique as each individual information seeker. The best way an information professional can aid researchers is by being aware of as many different theories of information-seeking behavior as possible, and to always be open to learning new theories. The field of information science is constantly evolving, and scholars are constantly discovering new things about the way the human mind processes and seeks information. Knowing about various information-seeking behaviors can lead to improved service because every patron learns and processes information differently. Librarians need to be prepared for anyone to walk through the door. Especially in a public library, the facility is open to everyone and the staff is ready to help with the needs of all. Being educated on as many information-seeking behavior theories as possible will raise the level of service at the library as a whole, because more patrons will leave satisfied to have found the information they sought in a manner that made them comfortable.
 |
| (Wilson & Walsh, 1996) |
Wilson, T. & Walsh, C. (1996). Information behaviour: An interdisciplinary perspective. British Library Research and Innovation Report. Retrieved from http://www.informationr.net/tdw/publ/infbehav/chap2.html
Evidence
Reflection Paper
View Here (opens in new window)
Description
My first piece of evidence for Competency J was completed during LIBR 202: Information Retrieval System Design in the Fall 2014 semester. It is a reflection on my work in the class as it related to Core Competency E: Design, query, and evaluate information retrieval systems. In the essay I detail each of the three aspects of Competency E as they relate to work completed for the class. The aim of the assignment was to identify the way our coursework in LIBR 202 has prepared us for a career in library and information science. Because it is a core class that everyone in the iSchool must take within their first two semesters in the program, the concept of understanding what fundamental elements we are being educated on is especially important as we begin our journey. The introduction gives a detailed analysis of what I perceive the competency to mean, and briefly speculates on how I might use the concepts in my future career as an information professional. I identify the class’ Exercise 1 as an example of querying, Project 1 and Project 2 as an example of designing, and Project 3 as an example of evaluating an information retrieval system. I conclude the paper by discussing how I plan to apply this knowledge to my future career, citing the class textbook by Chowdhury.
Argument
This reflection of my work in LIBR 202 demonstrates my mastery of Competency J because it draws a direct line between using information retrieval systems and the understanding of information-seeking behavior. I identified “Exercise 1” from this class as an example of my understanding of querying an information retrieval system. I explain that Exercise 1 analyzes Core Competency J, and Competencies E and J are similar in concept. I argue that my analysis of Competency J contributes to my understanding of Competency E, supporting this argument by mentioning my skill using various search engines and reference-storing websites. Querying a database is directly connected to understanding the fundamental concepts of information-seeking behaviors, because in studying how a database works one must understand the habits and expectations of users who will be searching on the information retrieval system.
This section of the assignment shows my understanding that knowing about information-seeking behaviors can lead to improved service in a library setting. It does this by demonstrating “my understanding of...information retrieval systems,” a skill that is fundamental to an information professional who works directly with the public. At this early point in my time at SJSU, I understood that a well-rounded knowledge of various information-retrieval systems leads to a well-rounded knowledge of information-seeking behaviors. The more one is able to operate and query databases, the more one can assist information seekers in a way that is helpful to them. It is arguably beneficial for an information professional’s knowledge of information retrieval systems to get even deeper, including design and evaluation, in order to provide the best service possible to a variety of information seekers. By finding a comparison between Competencies E and J, and drawing a direct line from knowledge of a database to improving service with this knowledge, this assignment demonstrates my mastery of Competency J.
Information Sources Survey
View Here (opens in new window)
Description
This assignment was completed in the Fall 2014 semester for LIBR 200: Information Communities. The paper provides an in-depth look at the specific information community that I chose to study for the duration of LIBR 200, the University of Oregon Special Collections and University Archives (SCUA) repository within the university’s Knight Library. The aim of the assignment is to relate the specific facility chosen to others of its kind in order to gain a complete understanding of the type of information community it is. The main body of the paper is a section entitled “Survey of Resources.” This section is broken up into several subsections depending on the type of resource. Each source is cited in APA format, then examined to determine specific aspects of the source. These aspects include “position within the information cycle,” “scope and content,” “credentials and authority of author,” “purposes, uses, and intended audience,” “design,” “currency and frequency of update,” “biases and gaps,” and “value for your information community.” I relate the SCUA to points made in five scholarly, peer-reviewed articles and several community-based information sources such as Reddit threads and Wikipedia entries. The subsections listed above create a direct comparison between all the sources, even if they are seemingly completely different. The “purposes, uses, and intended audience” of a Wikipedia article might be identical to that of a peer-reviewed article, thus creating an unexpected parallel and revealing new information about the community I have chosen. The diversity in resources consulted assisted me in understanding what type of information and services are important to members of the SCUA information community, and members of similar communities, meaning any special collections repository that houses rare books and archives.
Argument
I chose this assignment as evidence that I have mastered Competency J because it demonstrates my awareness of many different types of resources, and my ability to deftly navigate them. This expertise will improve the level of service for information seekers operating under a variety of theories. If I encounter a library patron who appears to be following Kuhlthau’s Information Search Process, I might help them in the selection and exploration of research materials in an academic database because they have a concrete idea of what they want to study and have already concretely decided upon their initial research questions. If I encounter a library patron who appears more listless in their search for information, perhaps with a vague idea of what they want to study but caught up in worry about the project itself à la Wilson, I might start them off with an easier process. After a search on Google, Wikipedia, or similar engines that give adequate information without the pressure of documented academia, that patron might be ready to move on to peer-reviewed sources to add depth and credibility to their research. Because I have demonstrated my ability to use an academic database just as well as Wikipedia and Reddit, I have indicated my understanding of how knowing about information-seeking behaviors can lead to improved service. For this reason, I believe the Information Sources Survey reflects my mastery of Competency J.
Reading Plan
View Here (opens in new window)
Module 1 Synthesis Paper
View Here (opens in new window)
Description
My last pieces of evidence for Competency J are two assignments completed for INFO 250: Design and Implementation of Instructional Strategies for Information Professionals in the Fall 2016 semester. The Reading Plan shows four concept maps that I made on Google Drawings that illustrate my intentions for research in the completion of the class’ Module 1. The four maps represent the four overlying sections the professor wanted students to familiarize themselves with over the course of the semester: Educational Theory and Best Practices in Teaching and Learning, Curriculum and Assessment, Collaboration and Coteaching, and Process Skills. The aim of this self-guided assessment (before the module began) was for the student to recognize their own gaps in knowledge and take an active role in filling those gaps. Each concept map illustrates points about the subject with which I am already familiar, and includes a rating I gave myself based on how knowledgeable I already felt in the area. Under each map is a bulleted list of aspects of the subject I would like to study. These are not included in the concept maps because I am not already familiar with them.
The second assignment is entitled “Module 1 Synthesis Paper,” and was written at the end of the module. It analyzes the efforts I made to fill my knowledge gaps identified in the Reading Plan by breaking the commentary into the same four sections and exploring them in depth. At the end of each section, a bibliography lists sources I encountered in my research that assisted me in my research of the subject. These assignments show the beginning and end of a full learning experience. Looking at them from the point of view of Kuhlthau’s theory of information-seeking behavior, they unite to form the full process from initiation to presentation.
Argument
The two assignments combined show my personal information-seeking behaviors. While researching these subjects I did not consciously subscribe to any particular theory, but it is similar to Kuhlthau’s Information Search Process. I initiated specific research questions based on the professor’s subjects, selected and explored my research materials, formulated answers to the questions based on my collected research, and presented all the information I found in a comprehensive manner. Because I went through this process slowly and deliberately, over the course of several weeks and more than one assignment, I am now more equipped to help others who are starting from the beginning of a subject they may know very little about. As I state in my Synthesis Paper, I was a beginner in the field of education practices when the Module began. I followed a research plan and worked hard to fill my gaps in knowledge in all four areas designated by the professor. Completing these assignments has lead to me providing more effective service to the patrons in my library, because my demonstrated mastery of Competency J will allow me to tailor my assistance to their specific information-seeking behavior and connect them with resources that are right for them.
Conclusion
In any type of library, it is very important to be aware of at least a few different theories of information-seeking behavior. My aspiring career is as a public services librarian, and in a public library it is never certain who will walk through the door. In the same day I might encounter ten people who each want to research the same subject, but who each learn differently. After completing these assignments and fully understanding Competency J, I feel much more equipped to work with each of those ten patrons to find the method of information-seeking that is right for them.
No comments:
Post a Comment