notes 3/2/08 Lohnes lit review
She notes that information fluency is "seen as a logical fit with the mission of liberal education," and that it tends to go hand in hand with the library. (But what is it?) Notes that many of the pieces on liberal arts colleges and technology are on developing "skills-based" information literacy programs, and that they do not attend to practice-based models of literacy. Cites a couple of pieces outlining the meaning of information literacy that I should look into.
notes 2/28/08 Leu et al 2007, Defining Online Comprehension (aka the Northwest Tree Octopus piece)
they've developed a taxonomy of skills and strategies, could be nice to draw off this and/or combine with Case or others
Their taxonomy is actually kind of vague when it comes to search -- it's its own category w/o subcategories
They say the taxonomy is not so helpful for practitioners and have turned it into something more for schools and instruction
Did an initial survey, which I looked over -- it was mostly Net behaviors by location (home or school),
it listed myspace as a kind of blog?! Would students agree with this?
and then it had a handful of questions about elements of websites
- header at top of page: tabs for different parts of site, how do you get home
- what is a URL
- what does it mean when it says you need a plugin
- which link would you visit for useful reliable info for report on ancient egypt
- which URL (when it's the only info given) is best for reliable info, then describe why
- a question you'd like to discover for reports
- first search string you'd use
- second search string you'd use
- steps to search for wyoming state bird (fields only)
- how would you check whether octopus site info was correct (small blurry screenshot)
- steps to send report as attachment to email (fields only)
these were coded from 0-2 with interrater reliability
rank how comfy you are using certain internet things how comfy would you be thinking aloud to an adult about searching
3 difft online reading sessions w thinkalouds, trained on how to think aloud
- First session: researcher-determined. Uninterrupted think aloud.
- Second: co-determined. Prompted at fixed points in thinkaloud. "Can you tell me what you are thinking" when:
- reading any web page
- about to make a decision what to click next (This one seems a little odd but how else to capture this)
- entering key words into search engine
- Third: student determined. Think aloud, 1/2 of them prompted and 1/2 of them not. Then viewing of video and followup think aloud
GREAT paragraph about the balance of think-alouds from personal correspondance with Afflerbach: "To the extent that a researcher does not interrupt reading during think-aloud protocols, data are obtained that are less likely to be influenced by a researcher's prompts or probes, but fewer data are likely to be generated and it is not always at locations of interest to the experimenter. To the extent that a researcher prompts thinking aloud, more data are obtained and it can be obtained at important locations for building theory. However, additional data comes at the potential cost of being influenced by an experimenter's probes. " They ended up doing both and that is probably a really good idea.
Prompt for searches was a message from another class about website in question
Octopus was 1st session Asked students if octopus site was "reliable," and did check to be sure they understood what that meant
2nd session: evaluate reliability of two sites, email a doc and revise wikipedia if there's time OR choose 2 qns from set, research online and report on blog
3d session: students were to bring in a question to research, and not have researched it before they came in
they transcribed all files HHHARRGGGGUUUGHGH poor things and they did a time stamped transcription of all video actions, put alongside transcript
Wow, lost 17 of 159 sessions to technical problems (mostly bad audio)
Codes from both theory and grounded in research
"Locating information" and "critically evaluating" its usefulness as "circuitbreaker" skills which make or break success
(I'm increasingly thinking we need to define what "critically evaluate" means)
"Our data indicate that the critical evaluation of information takes place at multiple points in time during online reading comprehension." they include question formulation and synthesis as well as steps engaging with search and sites themselves
only 6 of 53 students thought octopus site was unreliable -- and they had encountered that particular site in a class teaching them to be suspicious
students were prompted to find info proving site's reliability
ooh, apropos of nothin I just discovered that educators are being exhorted to googlebomb bad info off the front page of google: http://edu.blogs.com/edublogs/2006/11/info_lit_you_ca.html
Their section "An Example Of A Reader Who Is More Successful With The Evaluation Of Online Information. " included a kid who had been told by the librarian that he should not trust the octopus site.
They note that this is not really a strategy. (But it is -- it's listening to a grownup. As they say, it's using prior knowledge, and I'd say it's also cleaving to the presumed context of the task -- they were asked by a grownup to read the email ostensibly from students which told them to do the task)
They're currently evaluating the effects of their probes/prompts on response -- this is good, keep an eye out for it
they've done a second study on a spoof site and it suggests that the framing of "a grownup told me to read this so it can't be wrong" wasn't the only reason students didn't read more questioningly
they emphasize critical thinking's importance because of voting. It does come back to this, frequently, does it not?
they aim to look @ differences between student-directed and teacher-directed online reading
so far: student reading sessions apppear to be shorter
notes 2/26/08 Coiro 2003
RAND Reading Study Group report (2002):
"They proposed a developmental heuristic of reading comprehension that includes three elements: "the reader who is doing the comprehending, the text that is to be comprehended and the activity in which comprehension is embedded" (p. 11). "
"Once again, new comprehension processes are required for these electronic text environments. With traditional texts, prereading thought processes focus on questions such as the following: What will happen next? What do I know about this topic? What is the author's purpose? What do I expect to learn from this text? Within interactive Web-based environments, however, proficient readers also need to plan answers to questions like these: How should I navigate this information? How can I expect to interact with this environment? What is my role or task in this activity? How can I add to this body of knowledge?"
I am struggling with observations like these because they feel really School to me. Those pre-reading questions are not things I think people learn to do outside of school -- they're school-valued, school-trained. I don't know that anyone really asks the second set of questions of themselves when using the net. Should they? The first two questions can be answered by simple experiments on the user's part, most of which are nonlethal: making a mistake won't cripple your reading process. The second two, yeah, we WISH trolls on forums would ask themselves these questions. But do purposeful, earnest commenters ever ask themselves these questions? Do bloggers? Is "adding to a body of knowledge" really the point of the Internet? Again, these questions feel totally School.
Brunner and Tally's seven habits of mind for students approaching new (and old) media looks like it will be useful -- see cite
notes 2/25/08 Leu et al, 2 articles
suggests utility of "think-alouds" -- see how they did it
suggests use of camtasia
Check out ORCA and their other skills assessments, they might be useful to compare the different groups you're looking at
More than once now Leu has said online reading "always begins with a question or problem." I find this pretty problematic. He does cite a study which says question-driven reading is different, though, and *that* could be useful to me.
Book chapter p 46, gives a good justification for including both searching and page reading. Also think about it: I don't know where people are misreading these blogs, I need to look at the whole process in order to find where they are making the error, such as it is. Or rather, where their reading of the blogs differs from that of insider commenters
See file "notes on Leu chapter 2-21-08" for additional thoughts.