Google Scholar Tutorial

As a way to document and share my work, I wanted to post this short online tutorial I made about using Google Scholar and the Brandel Library.  I manage the data feeds (from SFX and now from EBSCO) that make these library links possible but I also feel like I needed to do more to make these connections apparent to our users. There are a number of reasons for this:

  • First, I love Google Scholar and I find it very useful for known item searching. Given students and faculty another tool seems very helpful.
  • Second, given the movement toward Open Access, I think “open” tools like Google Scholar do a better job searching that “gray” content that traditional databases struggle with.
  • Lastly, the connections between Google Scholar and the Library are seamless and relatively transparent – which are good things! – some faculty believe that everything is “on Google Scholar” without realizing that the library is providing many of those links. So I think this is an opportunity to demonstrate value and market the library.

The tutorial making process at North Park is really quite nice – we have a dedicated terminal with a high quality microphone and specialized programs like Audacity and Camtasia that make it easy to create high quality tutorials. I’ve done several and am definitely getting better at using these tools – though I still don’t love the sound of my voice!

Review/Notes – “Behind the Point-and-Click Discovery Tool: Integrating Critical Thinking in Finding Resources”

Rob Hallis presenting on Behind the Point-and-Click Discovery Tool: Integrating Critical Thinking in Finding Resources

History of discovery: silos of databases to federated searching to “pushed suggestions”. Pulled data = what you “pull” from a system; Pushed data = what a system (like Amazon) “pushes” at you. Is critical thinking an “autonomous activity?” I don’t think so! Move from a bibliographic paradigm to a constructive process where there is uncertainty and confusion. He is using “Seeking Meaning: A process approach to Library and Information Science” by Kuhthau. (http://vufind.carli.illinois.edu/all/vf-npu/Record/2557683).

Questions/Thoughts unrelated to the main presentation:

  • Do we really know enough about how students think/learn through online searching in any form (OPAC, database, discovery)?
  • He uses this metaphor for searching for information resources: online shopping. You know what you want and where to look – but you don’t click the first thing. You shop around. Is this a good metaphor? What’s a better metaphor/image to use?
  • These presentations are really demonstrating the huge range of what falls under library “instruction” – from simple multiple choice tutorials to walking through a very complicated search processes. I wonder if that’s even a meaningful term at some point. How involved in the thesis creation process are libraries/librarians? It seems like this presenter portrays libraries as very active in the thesis/research process from the very beginning…but is that the case at our institutions? That seems like the role of the classroom professor.
  • Many presenters use the passive voice or at least speak passively when talking about Discovery Services. For example, “the resources that the discovery services provide” instead of “discovery services provide resources.” I wonder what this reflects – a mistrust of discovery? A lack of understanding of what discovery layers do or how they actually work? Or is this verbiage trying to focus on the actions of the user over the actions of the discovery service?