Comments on: Sudden Thoughts and Second Thoughts http://acrlog.org/2008/01/15/sudden-thoughts-and-second-thoughts-9/ Blogging by and for academic and research librarians Sat, 04 Feb 2012 22:32:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: AnnaLaura Brown http://acrlog.org/2008/01/15/sudden-thoughts-and-second-thoughts-9/comment-page-1/#comment-60900 AnnaLaura Brown Wed, 16 Jan 2008 01:51:23 +0000 http://acrlblog.org/2008/01/15/sudden-thoughts-and-second-thoughts-9/#comment-60900 You make some great points. I read recently an article where a teacher decided to do the exact opposite of what the teacher you mentioned is doing. He assigned this students to use wikipedia to write a paper. They also had to justify why the articles they chose to use did or did not have correct information. I thought it was clever. You make some great points. I read recently an article where a teacher decided to do the exact opposite of what the teacher you mentioned is doing. He assigned this students to use wikipedia to write a paper. They also had to justify why the articles they chose to use did or did not have correct information. I thought it was clever.

]]> By: Lisa Allen http://acrlog.org/2008/01/15/sudden-thoughts-and-second-thoughts-9/comment-page-1/#comment-60823 Lisa Allen Tue, 15 Jan 2008 19:42:01 +0000 http://acrlblog.org/2008/01/15/sudden-thoughts-and-second-thoughts-9/#comment-60823 Joan, you make a good point. I've run into a few faculty who think that print journals and e-journals are entirely different. They don't seem to understand that it's a format issue, not a content issue, which I find peculiar. It's an opportunity to educate the faculty I suppose, but every time it happens I'm surprised. I also agree with what you said about the novice researcher. I don't think Google or Wikipedia should be banned, but used as a point of comparison and therefore a teaching tool. Joan, you make a good point. I’ve run into a few faculty who think that print journals and e-journals are entirely different. They don’t seem to understand that it’s a format issue, not a content issue, which I find peculiar. It’s an opportunity to educate the faculty I suppose, but every time it happens I’m surprised.

I also agree with what you said about the novice researcher.

I don’t think Google or Wikipedia should be banned, but used as a point of comparison and therefore a teaching tool.

]]> By: Joan Petit http://acrlog.org/2008/01/15/sudden-thoughts-and-second-thoughts-9/comment-page-1/#comment-60798 Joan Petit Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:16:21 +0000 http://acrlblog.org/2008/01/15/sudden-thoughts-and-second-thoughts-9/#comment-60798 Steven, you wrote: "...what I find refreshing is a faculty member who at least cares enough about the quality of student research to take a stand on the matter. Too many faculty simply pay too little attention to the need for students to develop effective research skills." My experience has been different, in that I've met many faculty who take a stand, often, in my opinion, the wrong one. In my work with faculty over the past few years, I've encountered several who "ban" Wikipedia. And many others who ban the Internet. And many who insist sources must be from print journals (which can be a real challenge as e-collections grow and print journals are shipped off-site). And I suspect all of these faculty think they are working to improve student research. I've met their students, who've come to the reference desk asking how to find articles but not use the Internet; or how to track down a print copy of an article when there's a PDF of that same article right there in a library database. I think part of the problem is that these faculty have their own way of doing research as experts in their field, and don't appreciate what it means to be a novice researcher. Steven, you wrote: “…what I find refreshing is a faculty member who at least cares enough about the quality of student research to take a stand on the matter. Too many faculty simply pay too little attention to the need for students to develop effective research skills.”

My experience has been different, in that I’ve met many faculty who take a stand, often, in my opinion, the wrong one.

In my work with faculty over the past few years, I’ve encountered several who “ban” Wikipedia. And many others who ban the Internet. And many who insist sources must be from print journals (which can be a real challenge as e-collections grow and print journals are shipped off-site).

And I suspect all of these faculty think they are working to improve student research.

I’ve met their students, who’ve come to the reference desk asking how to find articles but not use the Internet; or how to track down a print copy of an article when there’s a PDF of that same article right there in a library database.

I think part of the problem is that these faculty have their own way of doing research as experts in their field, and don’t appreciate what it means to be a novice researcher.

]]>