Students use of search engines -Reply

[Michael Haseltine]

Well, I think the entire process needs to be included in the quest for how
to reach people to teach them better search techniques.

Are these searches part of a formal education process, like papers for a
class? If so, then it seems that the real crux is how their papers turn out.
The test is in the end result, and the instructor should be saying "You just
don't have relevant information for your paper," or something to that
effect. Either that or you're wrong, they aren't lousy seaches, because
their papers are OK.

I guess what I'm aiming at here is that if there's no consequence to lousy
searches, you aren't going to be able to get the attention of the searchers
to learn better techniques. You can tell them all you want, but if lousy
searches get them enough of what they need, you words will be in vain.

Relevant cliches:
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.
You have to hit the burro upside the head with a 2X4 to get his attention
before you can get him to do what you want.

At 07:16 AM 5/31/96 -0700, you wrote:
>"Are librarians encountering evidence that these disparate
>protocols are contributing to end-users' confusion
>concerning the correct way to search?"
>Nicholas G. Tomaiuolo
>__________________________
>Whew! There's room for a few dissertations here.
>
>I am *very interested* in how people are using the Web
>search tools. I've tried to teach the complexity of searching
>the Web in my "Intro to the Web class" (that topic takes
>up one of the three hours of the class). After a 30 lecture
>and demonstration, I handed out search questions that
>illustrated some of the points I just made:
>--since each search tool has a different database and
>works differently, you often must use more than one
>search tool to find the best information
>---the differences between "directories" (Yahoo,
>Magellan,...) and "search engines" (Alta Vista, OpenText,
>Lycos...)
>---the need to evaluate the search results instead of
>immediately clicking on the first link in the list
>etc.
>
>The results: the students did surprisingly well (the students
>have been teen-ages, college staff and faculty, and adults
>from the general public). Most answered the questions
>without too much time or difficulty, and few expressed
>displeasure with the search-tool interface.
>
>*On the other hand*, outside of the Internet training
>seminar environment, I've noticed that *few* people who
>use my college library (students and the general public)
>take the time to learn about whatever search engine they
>happen to be using (whether it's a Web search engine or a
>periodical index on CD-ROM). They sit down and starting
>typing keywords, without reading the FAQ, or seeing if
>there is a subject index (for a CD-ROM), or even looking
>at the concise, one-page hand-out written by a librarian
>and displayed right next to the monitor. Because they don't
>learn how a database works or what their option are, they
>end up with a lousy search -- extremely low relevancy.
>Garbage in, garbage out!
>
>How can we convince our patrons that finding good
>information takes a little planning and a little work?
>
>Steve Cramer
>Library, Davenport College of Business
>Holland, Michigan USA
>scramer at davenport.edu

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Haseltine -- Arid Lands Information Center, University of Arizona
haseltin at ag.arizona.edu