III. COURSE PURPOSE
AND OBJECTIVES
The course
purpose is to study the human-human and human-computer interaction as relevant
to effective searching of contemporary information resources on behalf of
users seeking information. The course provides a base for further and life-long
education necessary to cope with the ever-changing pragmatic world of searching.
Therefore it includes both, theoretical and practical aspects.
The objectives
are for students to achieve an integrated understanding of the complex
relations in searching in respect to:
- Content:
The content structure of a variety of information resources in
databases, on the Web, and in reference, as they affect searching.
- Systems:
Various models of information retrieval (IR) systems, the Web
search engines, and reference services, particularly as relevant to
searching.
- Human-human
interaction: User information seeking as the context for searching,
the process of mediation and interviewing involved in user modeling.
- Human-computer
interaction: Principles for effective searching and variations
in search strategies and tactics.
- Results:
Alternatives in presentation of results to users and evaluation
of retrieval results.
IV. ORGANIZATION
OF THE COURSE
Introduction
1.
Overview of the complex set of variables, treated as themes, involved
in searching, and the variety of information resources and systems
available for searching - commonalties and differences.
Theme
A. Structure of content
2. Types
of databases. Structure of records in IR databases and on the Web.3.
Structure of indexes and files. Vocabularies - free and controlled.
Theme B. Systems for searching
4.
Search models in IR- Boolean (exact match), and ranking (best match).
Implications for search construction. Use in command-driven systems.
5.
Web search engines. Classifications on the Web. References resources.
Theme
C. Human-human interaction
6.
Information seeking by users. Task and context orientation of users.
7.
Roles of users and intermediaries. Effective mediation and interviewing
of users.. User modeling.
Theme
D. Human-computer interaction
8.
Variations and commonalties in interfaces. Navigation and browsing.
Command and menu interfaces.
9.
Construction of search strategies. Search tactics for given effectiveness
levels. Advanced search features.
Theme
E. Results
10.
Preparation and display of results. End-user assistance and services.11.
Evaluation of results. Criteria, measures, methods. Evaluation projects.
V. MAJOR
ASSIGNMENTS
The class
is structured around five components: (i) lectures, (ii) readings
with summaries, (iii) home and laboratory exercises and assignments,
(iv) discussions, and (v) term project.
The students
should organize themselves into study groups consisting of 3-4 students.
Each group will be given a number. Within groups students should discuss
readings and assignments, perform together laboratory exercises, and report
to the class as a whole. The groups are intended for more intensive discussion
and for exchange of experiences in exercises and readings.
A.
Required Readings
Students are
required to read during each assignment period a given set of readings consisting
of journal articles and/or selected chapters from books. A bibliography
of readings is appended. Additional readings, as published, may be added
or substituted. Some readings are to be summarized, others read for discussion
only, as indicated in the schedule. In
order to provide students with broader sources of interest, the bibliography
contains more articles than assigned .
B.
Summaries
Each reading
required for summary shall be briefly synthesized as to major points made
and learned, and, if possible, critically reviewed. Or, instead of critical
remarks one or more of the following may be indicated as related to the
content of a given reading:
- relevant
examples or extensions from personal or professional experiences;
- translation
into or implications for IR and reference practice.
- questions
for discussion; questions about clarification of contents; and/or,
- relations
to other courses and readings.
The summaries
must follow the prescribed format (see instructions below). Reading summaries
should be handed in as indicated in the enclosed schedule.
C.
Laboratory exercises
Laboratory
exercises will consist of using DIALOG, LexisNexis, Web search engines,
and library resources to search for answers for a given set of questions,
using a variety of tactics to vary effectiveness. Various advanced features
will be also subject of experimentation.
For some exercises laboratory will be used during regular
class periods. There will be five lab sessions according to the schedule.
For other exercises, assignments will be given as homework.
Students can use SCILS lab facilities at their convenience. Students should
check the laboratory hours available for free access. Alternatively, students
can use their home computers or computers in Rutgers computing facilities
at all campuses. The nearest to SCILS are the Computing Center at Records
Hall and Alexander Library Graduate Computing Lab.
Lab exercise assignments will be presented in form of summary
of tactics or steps undertaken. Students should work cooperatively in their
group on exercises and other assignments; they are urged to discuss among
themselves various approaches to search strategy and tactics.
D.
Discussions, presentation
At each class
period there will be a discussion of the readings and/or discussion and
presentation of exercises. Discussions will also be held during and following
laboratory assignments. Each student shall be prepared for the discussion
and/or for asking and answering of questions based on the readings or laboratory
experiences.
E.
Term project
Each student
shall undertake a term project resulting in a technical report, which is
the term paper. The purpose of the project is for the student to act as
an intermediary for answering a user information need using various resources,
as necessary. The situation should be real-life, i.e. involving a real user
with a need, real interactions, and real submitted answers.
The project
shall involve the following:
- Selection
of a user with an information need that could be satisfied with
an online search, by searching DIALOG, LexisNexis, the Web, and/or
reference resources. The student will act as an intermediary for the
user. [Note: No family members or significant others as users.]
- Interviewing
the user (if necessary on several occasions as the search progresses),
and construction of a user model representing user information need.
- Selection
of appropriate databases, search engines, or resources for searching.
- Construction
of search strategy(ies), and conduct of the search using appropriate
and/or varying search tactics.
- Presentation
and delivery of the search results to the user, in an agreed upon
format(s).
- Evaluation
of results by the user. If necessary, doing reiterative searching
and evaluation, also possibly involving modification in the user model.
- Writing
of a technical report.
The project
has two ‘deliverables':
- one
is the set of search results given to the user (does NOT have
to be handed in as a part of the technical report), preceded by a
one page executive summary, and
- the
other is a technical report, handed in at the end of the class,
summarizing student’s approach to every aspect of interaction with
the user, preceded by the executive summary given to the user..
The technical
report should include a discussion and factual presentation of (the
list suggests topics that should be covered and not necessarily a table
of content):
selection
and characteristics of the user; user’s question; mode of and results
from interview; user model and changes in user model as the search progresses;
construction and variations in search strategies and tactics; discussion
of changes and reasons for these changes; consideration of modes of
presentation of results; user evaluation; and resulting changes.
In the technical
report the student should stress the dynamics of the process. Questions
to be asked: what were student experiences and evaluations during the whole
process? what works? what doesn’t? what alternatives proved most fruitful?
what have I learned? And very important: what would have I done differently?
Various aspects of the project will be presented by each student
during class discussion, as indicated in the schedule.
E.
Format
The summaries
and term paper should follow the standardized format as suggested by:
Publication
Manual of the American Psychological Association (2002). (5th ed.).
Washington, D.C: American Psychological Association.
The Manual
can be obtained from a bookstore. It serves as a manual for other LIS and
Ph.D. courses at SCILS, thus it is a valuable tool above and beyond this
course. The Manual also provides useful suggestions for writing of reports
and articles.
At the beginning
the summaries MUST contain these five items (points will
be deducted if not present):
(i)
student’s name,
(ii) course number,
(iii) assignment or exercise number as listed in
the schedule
(iv) for each reading the reading number from the
bibliography, and
(v) the full citation of the reading, APA style
(can be copied and pasted).
If references
to other works (articles, books...) are included in the summary, they must
be properly cited in the summary, e.g. Kantor (1995). The references
at the end must follow the APA style. The course bibliography is
an example of the APA style. The style and form of the narrative of summaries
are up to the student.
As in most
reports, the technical report must be double-spaced throughout.
It must contain a title page with course number and name, title
of the paper, author’s name and address, and an executive summary. The
style of the narrative of the paper is up to the student. APA Manual contains
suggestions on how to structure a report, and break it into sections
VI. COURSE
WEB SITE
The course
web site will contain all relevant course material, including lectures,
and a number of Web links to helpful sites, including to various tutorials,
different web search engines, variety of reference sources and the like.
The students are expected to familiarize themselves with the materials
on the site. This syllabus and the class schedule are also on the class
web site. Other information may be placed on the site throughout the semester.
Ahead of
each class, the lecture slides, exercise or other material relevant for
that given class will be placed on the site. Students shall download and
as necessary print the material for the class before the class date and
bring it to the class. These are considered class handouts, but they are
on the Web site and will not be distributed in class.
VII. METHODS OF
ASSESSMENT
The final
grade will be derived as follows:
Summaries
and lab results - 50% of grade.Term paper - 50% of grade.
VIII. CONTACT
Students can
contact instructors in person, by phone, fax, or email at addresses indicated
on the cover page.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Book:
Walker,
G. & Janes, J. (1999). Online retrieval: A dialog of theory and
practice. 2nd ed. Ingelwood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.
In the schedule
of assignments the chapters for required reading are listed as "W&J
Ch. xx."
DIALOG
and LexisNexis:
Links to
tutorials for Dialog and Lexis-Nexis are on the class Web site.
Dialog Corporation.
Dialog Pocket Guide: http://library.dialog.com/pocketguide/pktgde.pdf
Dialog Corporation.
Dialog Worldwide Database Catalog. http://support.dialog.com/publications/dbcat/
Other
online tutorials, guides
Links and
descriptions are on the class Web site.
Articles
and chapters
Note:
In the schedule of assignments the readings are referred to by their
number under Summaries - Article no. Substitions may be made during
the semester.
The
articles or chapters can be found through RUL (http://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/)
either through online access (online journals or through online databases,
such as EBSCOhost) , or as placed on electronic and print reserve.
(For online access see instructions on the RUL Web site under How
do I ?...find an article? and for electronic reserve How do I?...
find an electronic reserve?). They can also be found in print in many
libraries.
- Bates,
M. (1989). The design of browsing and berrypicking techniques for the
online search interface. Online Review, 13 (5), 407-424. On electronic
reserve at Alexander Library.
- Beeking,
M. (2000). Training end-users: Using scientific Internet-subject directories.
Econtent, 23 (2), 57-60.
- Bellardo-Hahn,
T.(1996) Pioneers of the online age. Information Processing & Management,
32 (1), 33-48.
- Belew,
R. K. (2000) Finding Out About: Search engine technology from a cognitive
perspective. London: Cambridge University Press. Preface and Chapter
1. Overview. HTML version on author's site http://www.cs.ucsd.edu/~rik/foa/l2h
. PDF vesrion of Ch. 1. on authro's site http://www.cs.ucsd.edu/~rik/foa/
- Eysenbach,
G. & Kohler, C. (2002, March 9). How do consumers search for and
appraise health information on the world wide web? British Medical Journal,
324, 7337, 573+
- Feldman,
S. (2002). This is what I asked for? The searching quagmire. In: Mintz.
A. P. Web of deception. Misinformation on the Internet. Medford, NJ
Information Today. On electronic and print reserve.
- Frants.
V.I. et al. (1999) Boolean search: Current state and perspective. Journal
of the American Society of Information Science, 50 (1), 86-95.
- Hawking,
D., Bailey, P, & Griffiths, K. (2001). Measuring search engine quality.
Information Retrieval, (4) 33-59.
- Hert,
C.A (1997) Understanding information retrieval interactions: theoretical
and practical implications. Greenwich CT: Ablex. Reading: Chapters 1
and 2. pp 1-50. On electronic reserve at Alexander Library.
- Hock,
R. (2001). The extreme searcher’s guide to web search engines: A handbook
for the serious searcher. 2nd ed. Metford, NJ: Information Today. Reading:
Introduction and chapter 1 and 2. pp.xxi-xxv, 1-56. On electronic reserve
at Alexander Library.
- Hock,
R. (2000) Web search engines: (More) features and commands. Online,
24 (3), 17-26.
- Iacovino,
L. (2002). Ethical principles and information professionals: theory,
practice and education. Australian Academic & Research Libraries,
33 (2) 57-74.
- Janes,
J. (2002). Digital reference: reference librarians' experiences and
attitudes. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and
Technology, 53 (7), 549-566.
- Jones
K. (1999). Linguistic searching versus relevance ranking: DR-LINK and
TARGET. Online & CDROM Review, 23 (2), 67-80.
- Kassel,
A. (2002). Value-added deliverables: Rungs on the info pro's ladder
to success. Searcher: The Magazine for Database Professionals, 10 (10),
42-53.
Kuhlthau,
C. C. (1993). Seeking meaning: A process approach to library and information
services. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation. Reading: Ch. 3, pp.
33-51. On electronic reserve at Alexander Library.
- Lipow,
A.G. (1999). Serving the remote user: Reference service in the digital
environment. Paper presented at the Ninth Australasian Information Online
and ON Disc Conference and Exhibition. Available : http://www.csu.edu.au/special/online99/proceedings99/200.htm
- McInerney,
C. R. (2000). Establishing and maintaining trust in online systems.
Proceedings of the Online 2000 Meeting, New York, May, 2000. http://scils.rutgers.edu/~clairemc/onlinepaper.htm
- Nardi,
B. A. & O’Day, V. L. (1999). Librarians: A keystone species. In:
Information ecologies: Using technology with heart. (Ch 7.pp. 79-104).
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. On electronic reserve at Alexander Library.
- Notess,
G. R (1999). On-the-fly search engine analysis. Online, 23 (5), 63-66.
- Pitkow,
J., Schutze, H., Cass, T., Cooley, R. Turnbull, D., Edmonds, A., Adar,
E. and Breuel, T. (2002). The consumer side of search: Personalized
search. Communications of the ACM, 45 (9), 50 - 55.
- Port,
O . (2002, March 4). The next web. Business Week, 3772: 96+.
- Price,
G. (2001). Web search engine FAQs: questions, answers, and issues. Searcher:
The Magazine for Database Professionals, 9 (9) 39-51.
- Robins,
D. (2000). Shifts of focus on various aspects of user information problems
during interactive information retrieval. Journal of the American Society
for Information Science, 51 (10), 913-928.
- Saracevic,
T., Spink, A., Wu, M.M. (1997). Users and intermediaries in interactive
information retrieval (IR): what are they talking about? User Modeling.
Proceedings of: the sixth international conference UM97. New York: Springer,
43-54. On electronic reserve at Alexander Library.
- Savage-Knepshield,
P.E. & Belkin, N. (1999) Interaction in information retrieval: Trends
over time. Journal of the American Society of Information Science, 50
(12), 1067-1082.
- Savoy,
J. & Picard, J. (2001). Retrieval effectiveness on the web. Information
Processing & Management, 37 (4), 543-569.
- Shaver,
D.B., Hewison, N.S., & Wykoff, L.W. (1985). Ethics for online intermediaries.
Special Libraries, 76 (), 238-245. On electronic reserve at Alexander
Library.
- Sturges,
P. (2002). Remember the human: the first rule of netiquette, librarians
and the Internet. Online Information Review,26 (3), 209-216.
Tomaiuolo,
N. G. (2000). Ask and you may receive: Commercial reference services on
the Web. Searcher: The Magazine for Database Professionals, 8 (5), 56-62.
- Vakkari,
P. (1999) Task complexity, problem structure and information actions.
Integrating studies on information seeking and retrieval. Information
Processing & Management, 35 (6), 819-839.
- Wathen,
C. N.; Burkell, J. (2002). Believe it or not: factors influencing credibility
on the Web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science
and Technology, 53 (2), 134-44.
- Zhang,
X., & Chignell, M. (2001). Assessment of the effects of user characteristics
on mental models of information retrieval systems. Journal of the American
Society for Information Science and Technology, 52 (6), 445-459.
last update
8 May 2003, Tefko Saracevic
|
|