1,721,030 research outputs found
Researching information experience : object and domain
No full textInformation experience has emerged as a new and dynamic field of information research in recent years. This chapter will discuss and explore information experience in two distinct ways: \ud
\ud
(a) as a research object, and;\ud
\ud
(b) as a research domain. \ud
\ud
Two recent studies will provide the context for this exploration. The first study investigated the information experiences of people using social media (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, YouTube) during natural disasters. Data was gathered by in-depth semi-structured interviews with 25 participants, from two areas affected by natural disasters (i.e., Brisbane and Townsville). The second study investigated the qualitatively different ways in which people experienced information literacy during a natural disaster. Using phenomenography, data was collected via semi-structured interviews with 7 participants. These studies represent two related yet different investigations. Taken together the studies provide a means to critically debate and reflect upon our evolving understandings of information experience, both as a research object and as a research domain. This chapter presents our preliminary reflections and concludes that further research is needed to develop and strengthen our conceptualisation of this emerging area
Exploring information literacy during a natural disaster: The 2011 Brisbane Flood
No full textThis chapter presents the preliminary results of a phenomenographic study aimed at exploring people’s experience of information literacy during the 2011 flood in Brisbane, Queensland. Phenomenography is a qualitative, interpretive and descriptive approach to research that explores the different ways in which people experience various phenomena and situations in the world around them. In this study, semi-structured interviews with seven adult residents of Brisbane suggested six categories that depicted different ways people experienced information literacy during this natural disaster. Access to timely, accurate and credible information during a natural disaster can save lives, safeguard property, and reduce fear and anxiety, however very little is currently known about citizens’ information literacy during times of natural disaster. Understanding how people use information to learn during times of crisis is a new terrain for community information literacy research, and one that warrants further attention by the information research community and the emergency management sector
Library and information science education 2.0 : guiding principles and models of best practice : interview with John Terrell
No full textIn 2005, Stephen Abram, vice president of Innovation at SirsiDynix, challenged library and information science (LIS) professionals to start becoming “librarian 2.0.” In the last few years, discussion and debate about the “core competencies” needed by librarian 2.0 have appeared in the “biblioblogosphere” (blogs written by LIS professionals). However, beyond these informal blog discussions few systematic and empirically based studies have taken place. A project funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council fills this gap. The project identifies the key skills, knowledge, and attributes required by “librarian 2.0.” Eighty-one members of the Australian LIS profession participated in a series of focus groups. Eight themes emerged as being critical to “librarian 2.0”: technology, communication, teamwork, user focus, business savvy, evidence based practice, learning and education, and personal traits. Guided by these findings interviews with 36 LIS educators explored the current approaches used within contemporary LIS education to prepare graduates to become “librarian 2.0”. This video presents an example of ‘great practice’ in current LIS education as it strives to foster web 2.0 professionals
Establishing the human perspective of the information society
No full textThe digital divide is a core issue of the information society. It refers to the division\ud
\ud
between those who have access to, or are comfortable using, information and\ud
\ud
communication technology (ICT) (the "haves") and those who do not have access\ud
\ud
to, or are not comfortable using ICT (the "have-nots"). The digital divide is a complex\ud
\ud
phenomenon. The majority of studies to date have examined the digital divide from\ud
\ud
a socio-economic perspective. These studies have identified income, education and\ud
\ud
employment as the key factors in determining the division between the "haves" and\ud
\ud
the "have-nots". Very little research has explore the psychological, social or cultural\ud
\ud
factors that contribute to digital inequality in community. The current study filled this\ud
\ud
gap by using Bandura's social cognitive theory (SCT) to examine the psychological\ud
\ud
barriers that prevent individuals from integrating ICT into their everyday lives.\ud
\ud
SCT postulates that a person will act according to their perceived capabilities and\ud
\ud
the anticipated consequences of their actions. Four studies have explored the digital\ud
\ud
divide using SCT. Because of limitations in the research design these studies have\ud
\ud
shed only limited light onto current understanding of digital inequality in community.\ud
\ud
The current research was the first study exploring the digital divide that (i)\ud
\ud
incorporated both socio-economic and socio-cognitive factors, (ii) used a community\ud
\ud
context that ensured the recruitment of participants who represented the full\ud
\ud
spectrum of the general population, and (iii) was conducted in both the US and\ud
\ud
Australia. Data was gathered via self administered questionnaires in two\ud
\ud
communities: Brisbane, Australia and San Jose, USA. Completed questionnaires\ud
\ud
were obtained from 330 and 398 participants from the US and Australia,\ud
\ud
respectively.\ud
\ud
Hierarchical regression analysis was used to explore the research question: what\ud
\ud
influence do socio-cognitive factors have in predicting internet use by members of\ud
\ud
the general population when the effects of socio-economic factors are controlled?\ud
\ud
The results of this analysis revealed that attitudes do matter. The US study found\ud
\ud
that socio-economic factors were not statistically significant predictors of internet\ud
\ud
use. The only factor that found to be a significant predictor of use was internet self\ud
\ud
efficacy. In short individuals with higher levels of internet self efficacy reported\ud
\ud
higher levels of internet use. Unlike the US study, the Australian study found that by\ud
\ud
themselves several socio-economic factors predicted internet use. In order of\ud
\ud
importance these were age, gender, income and ethnicity. However, the study also revealed that when socio-economic factors are controlled for, and socio-cognitive\ud
\ud
variables included into the analysis, it is the socio-cognitive and not the socioeconomic\ud
\ud
variables that are the dominant (in fact the only!) predictors of internet\ud
\ud
use.\ud
\ud
The research illustrated that the digital divide involves more than just the availability\ud
\ud
of resources and funds to access those resources. It incorporates the internal forces\ud
\ud
of an individual that motivates to them to use or integrate ICT into their lives. The\ud
\ud
digital divide is not just about ICT such as computers and the internet. It is about\ud
\ud
people. As such, the key to solving the issue of digital inequality is not going to be\ud
\ud
found with corporate or government funds providing physical access to technology.\ud
\ud
Instead, the key to solving digital inequality is inside the individual person. The\ud
\ud
alternative view of the digital divide presented in this research is by no means\ud
\ud
intended to minimise the role played by socio-economic factors. Indeed, the socioeconomic\ud
\ud
perspective has helped shed light on a very real social issue. What this\ud
\ud
research has done is suggest that the digital divide is more complex and more\ud
\ud
involved than has been imagined, and that further and different research is required\ud
\ud
if genuine insights and real steps are going to be made in establishing an\ud
\ud
information society for all
Library and information science education 2.0 : guiding principles and models of best practice : interview with Kate Davis.\ud
No full textIn 2005, Stephen Abram, vice president of Innovation at SirsiDynix, challenged library and information science (LIS) professionals to start becoming “librarian 2.0.” In the last few years, discussion and debate about the “core competencies” needed by librarian 2.0 have appeared in the “biblioblogosphere” (blogs written by LIS professionals). However, beyond these informal blog discussions few systematic and empirically based studies have taken place. A project funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council fills this gap. The project identifies the key skills, knowledge, and attributes required by “librarian 2.0.” Eighty-one members of the Australian LIS profession participated in a series of focus groups. Eight themes emerged as being critical to “librarian 2.0”: technology, communication, teamwork, user focus, business savvy, evidence based practice, learning and education, and personal traits. Guided by these findings interviews with 36 LIS educators explored the current approaches used within contemporary LIS education to prepare graduates to become “librarian 2.0”. This video presents an example of ‘great practice’ in current LIS education as it strives to foster web 2.0 professionals.\ud
\u
Library and information science education 2.0 : guiding principles and models of best practice. Interview with Jake Wallis.
No full textIn 2005, Stephen Abram, vice president of Innovation at SirsiDynix, challenged library and information science (LIS) professionals to start becoming “librarian 2.0.” In the last few years, discussion and debate about the “core competencies” needed by librarian 2.0 have appeared in the “biblioblogosphere” (blogs written by LIS professionals). However, beyond these informal blog discussions few systematic and empirically based studies have taken place. A project funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council fills this gap. The project identifies the key skills, knowledge, and attributes required by “librarian 2.0.” Eighty-one members of the Australian LIS profession participated in a series of focus groups. Eight themes emerged as being critical to “librarian 2.0”: technology, communication, teamwork, user focus, business savvy, evidence based practice, learning and education, and personal traits. Guided by these findings interviews with 36 LIS educators explored the current approaches used within contemporary LIS education to prepare graduates to become “librarian 2.0”. This video presents an example of ‘great practice’ in current LIS education as it strives to foster web 2.0 professionals.\ud
\u
A framework for the education of the information professions in Australia.
No full textIn recent years there has been considerable discussion afforded to the challenges facing the future of library and information science (LIS) education in Australia. This paper outlines a twelve-month project funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council that was undertaken by eleven institutions representing university and vocational LIS education in Australia. The project established a Framework for the Education of the Information Professions in Australia that provides a set of strategic recommendations that will inform future directions of Australian LIS education. This national project represented a bold move within Australian LIS education, and provided a unique opportunity for LIS educators across Australia to collectively unite in order to\ud
‘future-proof’ education for future generations of LIS professionals
Librarian 2.0 : it’s all in the attitude!
No full textIn 2006 Stephen Abram stated that we must “become librarian 2.0 now”. But what is librarian 2.0? This pa- per will present the results of a project that identified the skills, knowledge and attributes required by the successful librarian in the web 2.0 world (and be- yond!). Eighty-one Australian librarians participated in a series of 14 focus groups. Eight themes emerged: technology, communication, team work, user focus, business savvy, evidence based practice, learning, and personal traits
Redefining the digital divide: attitudes do matter!
No full textFor the majority of current day internet researchers they key issue is not "who" is connected to the internet but "what" are people doing when they are connected. In particular there is a growing interest in social computing, and especially technology such as blogs, wikis, myspace, and the like. But have we abandoned the issue of "who" for "what" too soon? This paper will present a research project that explores the psychological barriers that prevent people within community from integrating information and communication technology into their lives. The research will use the Social Cognitive Theory by Bandura to examine the psychology of the digital divide. Participants in the study are members of the San Jose community. Self administered surveys are used for data collection. The research influences our understanding of the digital divide by providing evidence that the characteristics or make up of the digital divide is more complex than the current understanding of the phenomenon. Existing digital divide studies have taken primarily a socio-economic perspective, and portray the digital divide as a relatively simple premise: the digital divide is a dichotomous concept - you either have access to ICT or you don’t. And this access is determined by factors such as income, employment and education. This research illustrates that psychology does matter; and that the digital divide involves both more members of the population and different members of the population then current research has shown to date. As such the current research has brought to light elements of the digital divide which have not being considered in contemporary discourse about the phenomenon
E-Learning & Learning Objects: Learning Information Searching in an E-Learning Environment
No full textThe benefits of e-learning, and consequently the driving forces behind the e-learning uptake in higher education have been widely discussed. They include greater accessibility and flexibility, a more cost effective and cost efficient program of study, and a higher quality of student learning experience. However, in 2001 Zenger and Uehlein observed that in the recent "rush to e-learning the emphasis has been largely on the e and not on the learning" (p. 60). What Zenger and Uehlein are suggesting is that in the current focus on technological applications in higher education the reason for the application (i.e. meaningful learning for students) has been forgotten. \ud
The Queensland University of Technology (QUT) is committed to "[providing] outstanding learning environments and programs that lead to excellent outcomes for graduates" (QUT, 2003, p. ii). In pursuit of this goal the university has identified as one of its "top priorities" the "[integration of information and communications technology into our teaching…functions and infrastructure" (QUT, 2003, p.ii). In direct defiance to the observations of Zenger and Uehlein, QUT will "make a coordinated and strategic effort to use the increasing capacity and flexi-bility of technologies to transform our teaching and learning environment in ways which engage and challenge students, and which enable different learning envi-ronment [italics added], on-campus and off-campus, to be used in ways which are complementary and mutually reinforcing" (QUT, 2003, p. 4). This chapter will provide a case study on how e-learning is being de-signed, developed and implemented with QUT with a balanced focus on both the e and the learning.\ud
The Faculty of Information Technology at QUT is dedicated to the development of graduates who are not only discipline savvy but also highly information literate. To facilitate the development of informa-tion literacy the Faculty supported a project which involved the crea-tion of an online learning tool known as the Reflective Online Search-ing Skills (ROSS) Environment. ROSS is a flexible and interactive online learning tool for developing student skills and knowledge within the area on online searching. It was developed for use within the un-dergraduate unit ITB322 Information Resources. This chapter will dis-cuss how ROSS was developed to take advantage of emerging technol-ogy (the e) whilst grounded in sound instructional theory and meaning-ful learning principles (the learning). In this paper we will also briefly outline the various types of e-learning models and indicate which of these models we used in our design, and explain the learning theory and research findings which underpin the overall development of ROSS. The learning theory is variation theory and the research method was phenomenography. In our work, the student perspective was also con-sidered with student expectations and perceptions informing both the design and the use of ROSS. The paper will also discuss how ROSS, an e-learning strategy developed for use within a specific undergraduate IT unit, is being developed into an online learning object for use by other QUT academics regardless of discipline.\ud
The many challenges in the creation and use of ROSS will be outlined, as well as examples from the Pilot product in one subject unit, and its subsequent beta version used in other faculties. These challenges occur for both the teaching staff during the instructional design phase and for the students during the implementation phase. The lessons learnt, or the pitfalls, in the development of re-usable learning objects will all be discussed and summarised at the end of the chapter. The chapter will provide recommendations on how to ensure the design and implemen-tation of e-learning and learning objects is considered in a holistic man-ner guided by sound pedagogy and student needs and attitudes. The chapter is significant because it provides a best practice example of how to blend together imaginative use of technology, instructional theories and principles, and student’s expectations, to careful craft e-learning and learning objects so as to facilitate the learning experience of stu-dents in a holistic manner
- …
