Digitization and information literacy

Jacqueline de Ruiter

University for higher vocational education, Utrecht (The Netherlands)

Ancient Studies, New Technologies Conferense; December 6th-8th 2002; Rutgers University, New Brunswick (USA)

Introduction

The Société Rencesvals pour l’étude de l’épopée romane is an international society that concerns itself with the literary tradition around Charlemagne and his heroes. The society publishes an annual bibliographical journal with in each issue an index, but in the 33 years of its existance no cumulative index has been composed. As a member of the society, and as a scholar who conducts literature searches, I feel the need for such an index. Being a librarian, I have decided to compile one as a service to myself and my colleagues; and also being an information technology enthousiast, I intend to make it available on line. (It isn’t a complex task that I have set myself, but I grossly under­estimated the amount of work involved. Not a single bit of these data has been digitized so far, so I need to type out the lot, and every entry has to be checked because of inconsistencies in the way of indexing.) In my eyes the benefits of having a cumulative index, especially one on line, will be worth the trouble, yet no-one asked me to undertake this enterprise. In fact the international comitee even felt it necessary to express that they didn’t object to the initiative.

In the contributions to this conference that address the construction of databases, we have seen that this kind of enthousiasm is at the root of many scholarly databases. But the point I want to make here is that availablity of digital information often is a question of supply, rather then demand. A fact that influences the quality and presentation of the information and hence the skills a user needs to benefit from the available sources. The skills of the ability to find sources that are relevant, to assess the quality of their content, and the competence to use them are refered to as “information literacy”.

In my paper I would like to discuss the relation between the emphasis on supply and the skills of information literacy. Many of the topics that I raise have been touched on in other papers during the course off the conference, and I intend to show how the separate issues are connected.

Focus on supply

Motivation to digitize

The main reason why the owner or keeper of information may decide to digitize, is the gain that he expects in the maintenance and publication of the information, as digitizing usually rationalizes workflow and simplifies publication.

efficiency

From the beginning computerisation was directed toward improvement of work processes. This is illustrated by the digitization of library catalogues, which started out in the early years. It meant that references no longer needed to be duplicated to create different types of catalogues that might be ordered by e.g. author, subject or shelfnumber. Backoffice processes benefitted, but to the library patron there was little difference yet. Wether the reference to a book that you want is on a card or on a screen is of little consequence. Only when database technology improved and it became possible to search full text, new functionality was added to the service provided so far.

distribution

The real strenght of digital information, however, lies in the potential of electronic communication. With the help of internet technology it can be made available on line, for anyone to access at any time. If you aim to provide information for the widest possible audience against the lowest possible costs, this is invalueable.

But in the publishing of traditional materials there are well established channels through which publication is announced, and those channels can easily be monitored by interested parties. For digital publications there isn’t yet such a clear network for the communication of new products. Even worse, digital information is often launched silently, as the publisher whishes to remove any bugs and imperfections before going public, and later on feels that no extra publicity is needed. This means that a researcher has little overview over the sources that are available, and that he has to perform random searches regularly on the off chance that something new has appeared.

Quality control

Before computerization, publishing was the field of professional publishers, and maybe some large institutions like universities. This had positive and negative sides to it. An unfortuned development is that publisher tend to consider themselves owner of the information they are middleman for. So the scientific community ends up paying copyright for the use of knowledge that they have provided in the first place. But now that on line publishing has made it possible to omit the role of the professional publishers, a positive aspect of their work threatens to be lost, namely that of quality control. A publisher has his reputation (and his livelyhood) at stake with his publications, so he makes sure that the quality of his products meets with a certain standard of quality. On the internet, however, anybody with an internet service provider and a keyboard can publish anything; and as we all know, they dó. As a consequense the task of quality assessment has shifted almost entirely from publisher to user.

Focus on use

Added value

The decision of a researcher to choose a digital source is based on wether it has added value compared to paper sources. In my view the four following features contribute most.

availability

The all-important characteristic of on line digital information is that it can be made accessable 24/7 from literally anywhere in the world (provided that you have the right equipment). With paper sources, access is decided by possession because you need to be in fysical contact with your source. Library opening hours will decide when you can consult the information you want. (Mind, a digital database that is stand alone has the same disadvantage in this respect.)

full text search

The second important feature is the possibility of full text search. This is far more effective then search by fixed indexes. The only way to search a paper source with the same thoroughness would be reading it from cover to cover. A good example of this is provided by the most extensive dictionary in the world, the Dutch Woordenboek der Nederlandsche taal. The compilation of this dictionary took over a century. In all those years the language developed and new words came into use. When the letter B was being compiled, for example, the word baby hadn’t entered our language yet, so no entry for that word is to be found. By the time compilation had progressed to Z baby was in common use. So if you search the digitized version, baby turns up allright, but only as a synonym to the rather antiquated headword zuigeling. (In a supplement that was published after completion of the dictionary "baby" is present with an entry of its own.)

multimedia

The third property that gives added value to digital information is the possibility to combine different types of files in multimedia applications. In our field these possibilities still are much under exploited (and underrated?), though we have seen that the use of multimedia is on the increase in technology-assisted teaching. The on line publication of manuscript reproductions is a hugh improvement for researchers. An unexpected side-effect is that the presure on the fysical copies increases, as the interest in certain manuscripts is fired by the on line attention. But apart from this obvious utilization of multimedia, a scholarly source on, say, medieval musical instruments might benefit a lot from sound files.

hyperlinking

The last feature I want to discuss is the hyperlink. Links can be made within one document, between documents, and between sources. They make it possible to browse a single document by jumping crisscross from one part to another. Links between two (or more) documents place them in context to one another. Links between sources can support a researcher in locating new information. Within databases, the hyperlink is an important tool to connect referential and full text data.

New users

The group that uses digital information is changing. At first, only those with a more then average interest in technological developments ventured into the digital world. They were prepared to try out new programs, just for the fun of it.

With the growing quantity of useful information, new groups recognise the value of on line sources. One such group is well versed in the use of paper sources and they know how to work with computers, but find it annoying rather then challenging to have to master new tools. Another group has grown up with internet and they are apt at its use, but they never learned to search methodically. Both groups do need support in developing their information literacy skills.

A third group that can be discerned are the information professionals, who act as a kind of intermediary between content providers and individual researchers. Libraries for instance, have taken it upon themselves to collect links to digital sources as if it were paper documents. In this fashion they act as “super-users” searching and assessing systematically on account of many individuals. They also take on the role of digital publisher when they put annotated links in their catalogues or on separate library-web-pages.

Obstacles

Obstacles

New possibilities, of course, create new obstacles that demand new skills to overcome them. Libraries and educational institutions put a lot of effort into supporting their patrons in aquiring those information literacy skills.

tracing

The first obstacle is how to find digital information. The quantity of information available is growing quickly. Search engines, link-indexes and professional pages with annotated links are all attempts to support the researcher in his quest. One of the main problems in searching is, that one needs to adapt to different search strategies. We are trained to search in a structured fashion while internet is unstructured by nature.

access

When a source has been found, access is by no means granted. Particullary databases with full text documents and specialized professional databases are often only accessable by licensed account. Large institutions often have campuswide licences, but an individual working from home may get barred by login messages unexpectedly. The major on line library catlogue in the Netherlands, the Nederlandse Centrale Catalogus was devised as a tool for library professionals, and even though there is now a large number of individual users, you still need an account to get access. And the only way to get such an account? Right, at the library desk.

assessing

If you have found information and have gained access, you need to be able to assess its quality. This can prove quit difficult as only a minority of on line sources have imprint information on their homepage, or in a separate credits page. Besides, in printed publishing peer review is a much practised way of assessing the content of any publication. In digital publishing the best you may hope for are annotations on link pages. And of course the occasional review in some printed journal.

navigation

Both on internet and within digital souces there is little or no standardisation in userinterfaces and navigational aids. Even library OPAC’s, with their long digital history and similar composition are still quit diverse in their appearance.

re-tracing

Finally, it must be possible to duplicate a search with the same result. Scientific information that can’t be checked is of little value. Corporate or institutional sources do appear to be more reliable then personal sites, but this need not be true. I was sure I was at fault when I was unable to locate the Argos search engine last summer. Only after a lot of trouble did I discover that it had been temporarily removed, without even the slightest indication on the host site.

Improvements

Improvements

We have seen that publishers and users have different interests in the digitizing of information. Publisher are looking for efficiency, while users are interested in the added value of e.g. better availability and full text search. The emphasis on the publishers view has contributed to the obstacles for the user.

communication

The difficulty one has in finding new sources, is partly due to the fact that no propper channels of communication have been established yet. The fact that sources can be taken off line without warning underlines this

on line subscription

The frustrating experience of finding what you need and not to be able to access it, can be avoided with good arrangements for on line subscription. (Even better would be, a guest account for temporary access to the occasional visitor)

credits / colophon

Assessment would be much easier if every site had a clear colophon, stating f.ex. the title of the source, the responsibility for its content, startingdate, origin of materials, method of editing and date of latest update. This would also provide a good handle to device a sensible way of refering to information in digital sources.

standardisation

Every publisher thinks that he is uniquely qualified to design the best presentation of his information for his audience. This may be true for the specifif content, but with respect to general design it is NOT in the best interest of the user, who tends to use more then one source, and has to get used to a different interface every time. Standardisation should be aimed for in certain features, such as icons and lay-out of navigational pointers, should be aimed for.

reliability

Whenever information is taken off line, propper notice should be given.

Where do we go from here?

How do we go on from here

Users can come a long way in getting to grips with the obstacles by improving their information literacy skills. Even if they feel that they are experienced enough, they should be prepared to hone those skills continually. Content providers can make a number of practical adjustments in their publishing methods, such as suggested above.

Both parties can work together on the front of improving communication. Users should take an active interest in the ongoing process of digitization. They have valueable expert knowledge that can contribute to, for example, the choice of the materials to digitize, the editing methods and assessment of past projects. Digital publishers should be more attentive to their role as a component in the larger whole of information dissemination, and should not insist on their best knowledge of the best interest of the users.

As there are not yet clear channels for communcation that can compare to those for printed matters, I propose that this conference establishes a platform in which publishers and users can meet to exchange views. Here publishers can announce new products, updates and upgrades and invite feedback from their users. And users can discuss the qualities of sources that they have evaluated.

Jacqueline de Ruiter

Utrecht, July 30th 2003

J.deRuiter@bookmark.demon.nl