Ha! It is the new Summer Season and yesterday an otherwise bright young law student asked me what digest was, when I suggested that a digest might be a good source to answer her research question.
looking forward to your list
Anna Cole
[http://www.mspclaw.com/bcards/acole.gif]<http://www.mspclaw.com/bcards/acole.map>
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-law-lib@ucdavis.edu [mailto:owner-law-lib@ucdavis.edu] On Behalf Of Cohan, Jeffrey
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 6:02 PM
To: Kent Olson
Cc: Law Lib
Subject: [LAW-LIB:59299] RE: In search of bad online searches
Kent
I work in the law firm world. My comments are based on experiences in
several AM law firms.
I take the time to comment because the situation you describe is
emblematic of the frustration we all feel when working with summer and
incoming associates in the library.
It is not a personal comment directed toward you or your colleagues.
The problem is that that your student was using a keyword approach for a
legal concept. The fact that she added the keyword NY to the search
probably means she was in the wrong database and she probably hadn't
though much about jurisdiction before she started either. At least she
could have used the segment for NY.
Law students are coming to us without a good handle on generalized
sources in which to begin research nor an overall sense of jurisdiction
and controlling authorities.
Jeff Cohan
my opinion and not that of my employer
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-law-lib@ucdavis.edu [mailto:owner-law-lib@ucdavis.edu] On
Behalf Of Kent Olson
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 5:31 PM
To: AALL Academic Law Libraries SIS; law-lib@ucdavis.edu
Subject: [LAW-LIB:59297] In search of bad online searches
Yesterday I was reviewing a law student's Westlaw research. She was
looking for cases and articles about conservators' power of attorney in
New York. When her initial search:
"power of attorney" "conservator"
turned up a few hundred thousand documents, she modified it:
"power of attorney" "conservator" "new york"
and instead got almost three million documents.
This particular instance is an example of the Googlization of search --
adding more words narrows a Google search but does the opposite in
Westlaw. It's probably a familiar problem for many of us. But it got me
thinking about using really unsuccessful searches as a teaching tool. We
show our students how to construct good Lexis and Westlaw searches, but
it could also be a good classroom exercise or assignment to give them a
series of bad searches and ask "What's wrong with these searches? What
would you do to fix them?"
Legal writing instructors sometimes hand out lists of error-riddled
citations for students to correct, but I don't recall seeing anything
similar with bad online searches. And so I'm soliciting your help. If
you have a record of any memorable searches, please send them my way.
I'll compile a "Kids Write the Darndest Searches" list (without
identifying contributors, unless you ask for attribution) and share the
results with the group.
thank! appreciat! /s "very much"
- Kent
Kent Olson
University of Virginia Law Library
kolson@virginia.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This email message and any attachments are intended for the use of
the addressee(s) indicated above. Information that is privileged or
otherwise confidential may be contained therein. If you are not the
intended recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, review or use of this message, documents or
information contained therein is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this message in error, please immediately delete it and
notify us by telephone at (212) 218-2100. Thank you.
==============================================================================
In accordance with Internal Revenue Service rules, any federal tax advice provided in this communication is not intended or written by the author to be used,
and cannot be used by the recipient, for the purpose of avoiding penalties which may be imposed on the recipient by the IRS. Please contact the author if you
would like to receive written advice in a format which complies with IRS rules and may be relied upon to avoid penalties.
Confidentiality Notice:
This e-mail, including any attachment(s), is intended for receipt and use by the intended addressee(s), and may contain confidential and privileged
information. If you are not an intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any unauthorized use or distribution of this e-mail is
strictly prohibited, and requested to delete this communication and its attachment(s) without making any copies thereof and to contact the sender of this
e-mail immediately. Nothing contained in the body and/or header of this e-mail is intended as a signature or intended to bind the addressor or any person
represented by the addressor to the terms of any agreement that may be the subject of this e-mail or its attachment(s), except where such intent is expressly
indicated.
==============================================================================
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 19 2009 - 06:31:56 PDT
