Folks,
*****************************************************************************
With
my biology students I often stress
the need to search both the common and scientific name of an organism
to get
results. The example I usually use is "killer whale" vs.
"orca" - the latter almost always gets significantly more results,
and of course, searching both with the Boolean 'OR' is best.
Louisiana State University
jryan1@lsu.edu
I use
the example of trying to find
articles about "Martin Luther King Jr." but getting information about
Martin Luther and his relationship with the King during the
Reformation. Also,
I had a friend who would use the example of trying to find information
about
the history of cowboys in Texas and finding articles about the football
team.
Loyola University Chicago
lhaas@luc.edu
*****************************************************************************
In my
library we have nursing students
searching for topics that have no relation to each other. I can't
remember the
exact search but I mimic one that goes along the line like "pregnancy
AND
bone fractures". I explain that these topics have plenty of results
individually but not very many useful ones together.
In
the history end I demonstrate the
difficulties of searching for historical eras or years. Many students
want to
search for "women's rights AND 1800s". I explain how searching for
eras are difficult because there are so many ways of referring to time
periods.
Andy Heiz
amh_library@YAHOO.COM
*****************************************************************************
One
that worked well for me in Academic
Search Premier was "civil war" and causes. It pulled up a lot of
articles about Africa and Bosnia, and the students and I got to chat
about why
that happened and the importance of choosing the right database. I also
use
words that have two meanings but are spelled the same as examples:
Indian
(Native Americans or Indians), China (the country or the porcelain),
and bass
(the guitar, fish, and beer).
Utah
Valley University Library
smithan@uvu.edu
*****************************************************************************
I
think it is interesting to do a search
that is misspelled and compare it to one that is spelled correctly. If
one were
to search "sexual harassment" (correct spelling) and compare the
results with a search for "sexual harrassment (incorrect spelling). I
find
it interesting how many items come up when searching with the incorrect
spelling. You can do this on an article database, such as Academic
Search
Complete, as well and often get a few results with the incorrect
spelling. Students
might assume that is all there is, since a few results (instead of
zero)
appear.
Dr.
John Jaeger
Dallas Baptist University
johnja@DBU.EDU
*****************************************************************************
One I
can think of is the difference
between www.whitehouse.gov and www.whitehouse.com. Be prepared for the
difference. An explorer’s hint is to key in www2 at the beginning of
headings
and see where you get.
Niema
Jones
thinker_i@hotmail.com
*****************************************************************************
These
are not exactly bad examples, but
some of my favorites:
Phyllis Bratton
pbratton@JC.EDU
*****************************************************************************
An
example on the limits of Boolean.
Several
years ago, I was helping a
student who was researching Black soldiers in the U.S. West. We did a
keyword
search using "black" and "soldiers" and "west"
and among the items that came up was a collection of Rudyard Kipling
stories
which contained "Soldiers three," " East and West" and
"In Black and White." Which is why I often refer to Boolean as a
shotgun search, sometimes you hit the target but you can get a lot of
scatter.
Cindy Rosser
Waco-McLennan County Library
cynthiar@ci.waco.tx.us
*****************************************************************************
I use
our online catalog to find
examples of non-productive searches. Within our Admin mode, I can
retrieve
actual searches done by patrons (with no patron identification, of
course). You
can see false drops, bazillions of hits, and zero hits, as well as
misspellings, the wrong first name with the last name, and synonyms
that don't
work.
Pearson@LEMOYNE.EDU
*****************************************************************************
I'm
not sure if this is the type of
thing you mean, but if you search Martin Luther King Jr on Google, one
of the
top 5 results is from an organization run by David Duke of the KKK. The
site
looks deceptively legitimate at a glance. In fact we had an interview
in which
the librarian had to do a library instruction class for the library
staff as if
we were students, she chose MLK as the subject and did a search on
Google and
apparently hadn't looked at it closely because she pulled it up as if
it were a
legit site.
And
if you search for just about anybody
famous by name or any topic by one word (abortion, genocide, etc.),
which most
undergrads want to do, in any database you will get far too many hits
the
majority of which won't be helpful without adding additional search
criteria.
Susan
R. Barber
Christopher Newport University
sbarber@cnu.edu
*****************************************************************************
Subject:
[LAW-LIB:59297] In search of
bad online searches
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 17:31:19 -0400
From: Kent Olson
<kolson@virginia.edu>
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.
Kent
Olson
University of Virginia Law Library
kolson@virginia.edu
*****************************************************************************
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
Jcohan@fchs.com
*****************************************************************************
I
concur with Jeff's comments. It is not
enough to simply think about query construction. I bang into my
student's heads
the concepts of database content and selection until they're sick of
me. And,
as Jeff notes, that database selection is part of the
jurisdiction/controlling authority
decision that is fundamental to doing competent legal research.
I am
wondering what database(s) Kent's
student was working in. I just replicated the 2 searches in the
ALLCASES
database and adding "new york" narrowed the results significantly,
which is what I expected.
Matt
Morrison
mmm72@cornell.edu
*****************************************************************************
And
what about Boolean operators...that
is another thing students have no concept about, and of course Google
has not
helped in this area. If the student had used the proper connectors the
search
would have been more successful.
Dawn
Urquhart
Librarian, Aird & Berlis LLP
durquhart@airdberlis.com
*****************************************************************************
Of
course, the main problem with the
search is, if entered as Kent described it, it or'd all the phrases. Of
course
each addition is going to keep increasing the results. It's as Kent
said. The
same technique decreases the number of hits on Google.
Students
today are coming to us with the
Google search strategy in hand. The idea of using an or, and, pre or +,
w/ etc.
is foreign to them.
What
I had never thought about until I
saw Kent's message is that running the same search in Google versus
Westlaw is
that the consequences are exactly opposite each other. If we take this
one step
further, think about the results you get if you use the same search in
LexisNexis.
I would guess no results since what is the likelihood of this phrase?
>"power of attorney" "conservator" New York.
Mariann
Storck
Legal Information Specialist/Library
Manager
U.S. Attorneys Office
1225 17th St, Ste 700
Denver, CO 80202
mariann.storck@usdoj.gov
*****************************************************************************
I
agree with Mariann, and I work in a
law firm library. Kent's point was that the incoming law students and
lawyers
are all members of the Google generation and apply that searching
technique to
other sources in a "one size fits all" way. We experienced legal
researchers know it doesn't work that way, particularly with Westlaw or
Lexis
searches. Those who teach students and attorneys need to keep it in
mind and I
thank him for pointing it out. I also look forward to some examples of
bad
searches that can be used in a teaching context.
Lauri
R. Flynn
Gunderson Dettmer LLP
1200 Seaport Blvd.
Redwood City, CA 94063
lflynn@gunder.com
*****************************************************************************
Although
I don't normally post to the
list, I wasn't sure if anyone had seen this recent survey of UK studies
on
legal research behavior
(http://legalinformatics.wordpress.com/tag/calr/). Some
really interesting findings, and it certainly highlights the challenges
that so
many law librarians, other educators, agencies, and firms face with
research
training issues for this current crow of law students.
Jason
E. Wilson
Vice President
Jones McClure Publishing
jwilson@jonesmcclure.com
*****************************************************************************
This
is a really intriguing thread. Thanks
for posting the question, Kent.
I’ve
taught at law firms and in a law
school and have found that students seem to be genuinely interested in
understanding Boolean logic. My course is always a work in progress,
but lately
I've started by explaining three manifestations of Boolean – full,
implied and
template. Next we explore how Google, Lexis and Westlaw translate those
three
types of Boolean into their systems. I think the comparison helps them
think
about the impact a few thoughtful choices can have on their search
results. The
biggest take-away for them (I hope!) is to use Google’s Advanced Search
as
their default in order to make the use of the powerful template Boolean
a bit
easier.
Ellen
Callinan
ellen.callinan@gmail.com
*****************************************************************************
I
must chime in on this topic. It's not
just the students...
This
is my 10th year of teaching
internet research full time to lawyers and they have NO idea of what
Boolean
and proximity connectors are used for.
We
start each 6 hour CLE seminar with
those concepts and the lawyers who think they know how to use the
Internet
(that is "Googling" to most of them) are simply amazed (and quite
grateful to learn these basic concepts).
Carole
Levitt J.D., M.L.S.
President, Internet For Lawyers
clevitt@netforlawyers.com
*****************************************************************************
I
have an article from a very long time
ago that speaks to the issue of student searching that may be of
interest to
some on this list.
jwne@TEMPLE.EDU
Interesting
article sent to me by one of
our library staff members:
Dr. John Jaeger
Doctoral Research and Reference
Librarian
Dallas Baptist University
johnja@DBU.EDU
*****************************************************************************
Interesting
(and not entirely
surprising) that Wikipedia came out smelling the best in this test.
Louise E. Alcorn
West Des Moines Public Library
louise.alcorn@wdm-ia.com
*****************************************************************************
Date:
Fri, 19 Jun 2009 19:51:03 -0700
From: LIBREFED <librefed@KENT.EDU>
Subject: REFQ: "Fake History"
question
I
have a patron who is looking for
examples of "fake history". He wants examples where an someone
claimed a historical fact, and later it was proved that the "fact"
was based on falsified evidence. These examples should be unambiguous,
clear
cases of fraud - not simply differences of opinion - and not inteneded
as a
joke, parody, satire or fiction. He is particularly looking for
examples from
the 20th or 21st centuries, but 19th century might be ok.
I've
been going round and round all day
on this, and I can't think straight any more. Does anyone out there
have any
ideas on this? Any help would be appreciated.
Mary
Buelow
Hedberg Public Library
Janesville, WI 53545
MBuelow@Hedbergpubliclibrary.org
*****************************************************************************
Dear
Mary Buelow:
The
case of the crystal skulls is an
interesting one. When I worked at the US Geological Survey Library we
would
occasionally get questions about the skulls found among Mayan ruins,
etc.
Actually, they were 19th century fakes. See:
http://www.si.edu/opa/insideresearch/articles/V9_CrystalSkulls.html
Speaking
of which, there are plenty of
examples in the art world.
Another
case is the Russian insistence
that the Allies open up a "Second Front" during World War II to
relieve German pressure on them. However, the Russians were not at war
with
either Japan or Italy. At that time, when the Russians insisted on a
second
front, the US was fighting on seven fronts, and the British on nine
fronts.
However, even today people still speak of the "Second Front" in WWII.
The
Kensington Runestone is another
artifact that is dismissed as a hoax. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kensington_Runestone
R.
Lee Hadden
Geospatial Information Library (Map
Library)
U. S. Army Geospatial Center
Robert.L.Hadden@usace.army.mil
*****************************************************************************
The
bust of Nefertiti was recently found
to be a fake.
Brenda
Myc
Dragonlocke87@AOL.COM
-- Bryan M. Carson, J.D., M.I.L.S., Ed.D. Special Assistant to the Dean for Grants & Projects/ Coordinator of Reference & Instructional Services Western Kentucky University Libraries Author, "The Law of Libraries and Archives" (Scarecrow Press) 1906 College Heights Blvd. #11067 Bowling Green, Kentucky 42101-1067 Phone: 270-745-5007; Fax: 270-745-2275 bryan.carson@wku.edu | bryan.m.carson@gmail.com All original content copyright 2009 Bryan M. Carson
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 23 2009 - 16:56:54 PDT