[WEB4LIB] RE: Information Literacy (was Jargon...which was

[Nancy Sosna Bohm]

> Most of this thread has taken on the academic library discussion.  I am
> with a public library ...
> ... last thing we want to do is burden them with
> technical jargon.  Instead, we work toward the lowest common
> denominator.  The less jargon the better.

I've worked on both High School Library and 4-year College Library sites,
and would still agree that "the lowest common denominator" is better. There
are ESL students, the pre-computer era population, and others to consider.
With that in mind, as well as considering the above discussed concept of
Information Literacy delivered via the Library Web site, perhaps terms like
"newspaper and magazine articles" can be followed by ubiquitous jargon terms
like "databases" in parentheses, thereby defining the jargon term.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Edelblute" <thomas at anaheim.lib.ca.us>
To: "Multiple recipients of list" <web4lib at webjunction.org>
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 4:05 PM
Subject: [WEB4LIB] RE: Information Literacy (was Jargon...which was


> This is an odd place for me to jump into this thread, but here I go.
>
> Most of this thread has taken on the academic library discussion.  I am
> with a public library with my own perspective.  Only two-thirds of the
> American population graduate from high school.  Half of those graduating
> high-schoolers will go on to college.  Only of that population will
> graduate.
>
> Therefore, from my perspective, when a person comes through the door
> looking for something the last thing we want to do is burden them with
> technical jargon.  Instead, we work toward the lowest common
> denominator.  The less jargon the better.
>
> --
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Tom Edelblute
> Public Access Systems Coordinator
> Anaheim Public Library   phone: (714) 765-1759
> 500 West Broadway        fax:   (714) 765-1730
> Anaheim CA 92805         e-mail: thomas at anaheim.lib.ca.us
>
> Leo Robert Klein wrote:
> >
> > At 01:23 PM 5/17/2002 -0700, Bill Drew wrote:
> > >I am going to play the devil's advocate here.  Why should we use jargon
> > >written for librarians by librarians?  The users could really care less
> > >about such things.  I am not talking about dumbing down.  that is a
> > >different issue entirely.
> >
> > I agree with the devil here.  Many librarians who I've talked to would
like
> > to make the site "an instructional opportunity".   They're not at all
> > comfortable putting things in terms the students use themselves or would
> > understand.  In fact, the very idea that we should actually cater to
what
> > the students _want_ is a foreign notion --- since everyone knows
students
> > don't have a clue.  As far as I know, the students _want_ to hang out on
> > the beach -- an option of course which the library currently doesn't
> > supply.  What the students want from us -- and generally what they've
been
> > sent by their instructors to get -- is three articles and a book or two
in
> > order to complete an assignment.  There's no "dumbing down" to my mind
in
> > fulfilling this need in terms the students can understand.
> >
> > But still the counter-argument rages.  After a while, my mind tends to
> > wander and I start seeing visions of Steve Krug's book dancing around
the
> > light fixtures.
> >
> > LEO
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Leo Robert Klein                                Library Web Coordinator
> > home :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: http://leoklein.com
> > office :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: http://newman.baruch.cuny.edu
> > radio station ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: http://patachon.com/radio
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>