Theme #3: Prepare them for Life

As the 13 weeks of this course conclude, it is this final third of the course that I found the most challenging.  It had me stepping outside of my comfort zone for sure.  I was comfortable learning about evaluating and selecting common tools of the reference collection in my library, but the gray literature, catalogue searching and deep web topics were….well, deep topics for me to delve into.  A solid piece of advice I took from the UC Berkeley, Invisible or Deep Web article is to simply add the word database to my subject term and voila I find a searchable database. 

http://lfb.org/access-the-dark-web-in-5-minutes-or-less/

Some time and patience and I am already more comfortable than I was a few short weeks ago.  Our colleague whom compared the deep web with an iceberg gave me an excellent visual that I have already shared with my four grade 6/7 classes to give them an explanation as to why research requires us to dig deeper than Wikipedia or Google.  All my time spent exploring the UBC catalogue and deep web has given me a better understanding of what students must think and feel when doing research!

          I enjoyed the debates with my fellow students in this section of the course, about the value of Wikipedia versus encyclopedia.  Although I see value in Wikipedia, I also understand that it has its place and use.  The week’s readings led me to Wikipedia to search the “reliability of Wikipedia” from Wikipedia's own point of view.  I wanted to see what hoaxes and such existed according to Wikipedia themselves (Interesting to note that Wikipedia admits their own errors but also have a page of errors on Encyclopedia Britannica).  I found this interesting:  In a 2004 piece called "The Faith-Based Encyclopedia", Robert McHenry, a former editor-in-chief of Encyclopedia Britannica, stated that Wikipedia errs in billing itself as an encyclopaedia, because that word implies a level of authority and accountability that he believes cannot be possessed by an openly editable reference.  McHenry argued that "the typical user doesn't know how conventional encyclopaedia achieve reliability, only that they do (Reliability of Wikipedia, 2016).  However, leaders of Wikipedia like Jimmy Wales are honest about Wikipedia’s limitations and agree with schools that prohibit citing Wikipedia for research (Harris, 2007).  The long of the short is, information literacy skills need to be taught and according to Berinstein (2006) that because of Wikipedia's known methodology and vulnerabilities, it provides opportunities to teach (and learn) critical thinking.  We all need to adapt to our changing world and garner the most use of Wikipedia and from encyclopdias.  Christopher Harris (2007) summed up encyclopedia/Wikipedia use very well in my opinion:  

1) At least three sources are required to verify research.

2) General encyclopedias like Wikipedia are a great place to get started, however …

3) Serious research projects cannot cite general knowledge encyclopedias.

https://storify.com/millere93/britannica-vs-wikipedia

         As far as my skills matching the right tool to the information need, I am feeling more confident with this each day.  With time exploring the existing resources in my library and the ease of using Riedling's criteria for selecting and evaluating resources, I feel I have a good grasp of what I have for resources and what I need to add to my library.  Of the criteria suggested by Riedling (2013), two statements stay with me and apply to all references, from the atlas to the thesaurus, in my quest for selecting perfect references: items must be based on the needs of the school, students, and community (p. 52) and ease of use is a critical factor (p.53).

c

Teaching is a calling.  We are here to inspire and nurture student interests.  Teacher librarians do that but also promote collaboration, integrate technology, teach information literacy, and move forward with research inquiry.  We help students become successful as lifelong learners.

Errors in the Encyclopædia Britannica that have been corrected in Wikipedia. (2016). Wikipedia. Retrieved 31 March 2016, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Errors_in_the_Encyclop%C3%A6dia_Britannica_that_have_been_corrected_in_Wikipedia

Guides, B., & Events, N. (2016). Wikipedia and Britannica: The Kid’s All Right (And So’s the Old Man). Infotoday.com. Retrieved 1 April 2016, from http://www.infotoday.com/searcher/mar06/berinstein.shtml

Harris, C., Karen Jensen, T., Karen Jensen, T., Commander, B., Jonker, T., & Bird, E. et al. (2016). Can We Make Peace with Wikipedia?. School Library Journal. Retrieved 1 April 2016, from http://www.slj.com/2007/06/reviews/reference/can-we-make-peace-with-wikipedia/#_

Kodama, C. (2014). Reference Skills for the School Librarian: Tools and Tips . 3rd ed. By Ann Marlow Riedling, Loretta Shake, and Cynthia Houston. Santa Barbara, CA: Linworth, 2013. Pp. viii+148. $45.00 (paper). ISBN 978–1–58683–528–6. The Library Quarterly, 84(2), 252-254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/675336

Kupersmith, J. (2016). Invisible Web: What it is, Why it exists, How to find it, and Its inherent ambiguity. Lib.berkeley.edu. Retrieved 1 April 2016, from http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/TeachingLib/Guides/Internet/InvisibleWeb.html

Kupersmith, J. (2016). Invisible Web: What it is, Why it exists, How to find it, and Its inherent ambiguity. Lib.berkeley.edu. Retrieved 1 April 2016, from http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/TeachingLib/Guides/Internet/InvisibleWeb.html

McHenry, R. (2016). The Faith-Based Encyclopedia - TCS Daily. Ideasinactiontv.com. Retrieved 1 April 2016, from http://www.ideasinactiontv.com/tcs_daily/2004/11/the-faith-based-encyclopedia.html

Reliability of Wikipedia. (2016). Wikipedia. Retrieved 31 March 2016, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliability_of_Wikipedia

•