Wikipedia is a great thing. The fact that anyone can contribute to an article is one of its best features. Besides making philosophical claims about Wikipedia being a collective project that anyone with internet access can share their knowledge and be a part of, there is a more practical reason why this is a good feature. Wikipedia is a continually growing project with millions of entries, while according to the Runciman article, Encyclopedia Britannica managed to add only 300,000 entries (for a total of 700,000) in the eighteen years between 1989 and 2007.
Wikipedia’s egalitarian policy toward editing allows for it to grow exponentially. Even if a more traditional encyclopedia had many more scholars working on the project, they would not be able to keep up with Wikipedia’s growth. Scholarly articles, where all the facts are checked, take a lot longer to write. Also, there is no way that a set of books could be big enough to hold all the entries that Wikipedia does. And as new editions of a set of encyclopedias are produced yearly at most, it is not possible for scholars to keep up with the change of information the way an online encyclopedia can.
At the same time, Wikipedia is not written by scholars. I would never personally use it for a report or research paper. Not only do I mean to say I would not cite a Wikipedia article (because one shouldn’t be citing any encyclopedic entry), I would not trust the information that I found on Wikipedia. This is especially true if it was something that I was unsure enough about to have to be looking the information up in the first place. Scrutinizing the quality of information available on the internet is important to remember, whether one is writing a report or not. This is why more scholarly sources like Encyclopedia Britannica will continue to be important in the future. I use Wikipedia all the time, like if I happen to be curious where Belarus is, but I would not trust most of the facts I read there without double checking them. A traditional encyclopedia may be more selective about its entries, but one can be reasonably sure that the information they read is of a good quality.
I think this relates to some of the other ideas I have been formulating this semester. I think there is a lot to be said for newer technologies, like EBooks. But for now at least, I do not think they are going to completely obsolete the older, more reliable technologies.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Darnton article and research paper ideas...
I have decided to do my research project on the technological changes in libraries. I feel like this is an easier subject to research than my other ideas and that it is more directly related to the subject matter of the class. I am not one hundred percent sure what my thesis will be though, because I still have a lot more research to do over the next couple of days. I am thinking of concentrating more on academic libraries, and how new technologies like the Google Book Search may virtually make books obsolete.
I found some of this week's readings to be related to this topic. "The Library in the New Age" by Robert Darnton was especially relevant. His eight point argument for the continued relevancy of traditional libraries (ones which contain actual books)was very interesting; it raised several issues that had not occured to me previously. For example, it is likely that Google Book Search and similiar tools would miss editions of books, or even some books entirely. It would certainly be very helpful, but it would take decades before it could be thorough, if this ever happened. And of course the issues of copyright involved with more recently published books also pose a problem for this type of technology. Darnton's arguments, that libraries should continue to purchase books, certainly makes a lot of sense in this context.
On the other end of the spectrum I found a Boston Globe article on the Delicious part of the course website called "A library without the books." This article is about Cushing Academy in Boston, which has recently donated nearly all of it's books to make room for a $500,000 "learning center." Proponents of the "bookless library" see this as the way of the future, and view traditional libraries as outdated.
I am sure I will have to read many more articles on the subject before I write my paper. But the problem that I am having is not so much whether or not libraries are going to be changed by newer technologies, that much is obvious, but just how large these changes will be. Is the library of the future more like Darnton's or more like the one at Cushing Academy? Are research books clunky relics of the past? Or will they continue to be relevant as they have for the past several centuries?
I don't know, but I better do some more research and come up with a thesis. :)
I found some of this week's readings to be related to this topic. "The Library in the New Age" by Robert Darnton was especially relevant. His eight point argument for the continued relevancy of traditional libraries (ones which contain actual books)was very interesting; it raised several issues that had not occured to me previously. For example, it is likely that Google Book Search and similiar tools would miss editions of books, or even some books entirely. It would certainly be very helpful, but it would take decades before it could be thorough, if this ever happened. And of course the issues of copyright involved with more recently published books also pose a problem for this type of technology. Darnton's arguments, that libraries should continue to purchase books, certainly makes a lot of sense in this context.
On the other end of the spectrum I found a Boston Globe article on the Delicious part of the course website called "A library without the books." This article is about Cushing Academy in Boston, which has recently donated nearly all of it's books to make room for a $500,000 "learning center." Proponents of the "bookless library" see this as the way of the future, and view traditional libraries as outdated.
I am sure I will have to read many more articles on the subject before I write my paper. But the problem that I am having is not so much whether or not libraries are going to be changed by newer technologies, that much is obvious, but just how large these changes will be. Is the library of the future more like Darnton's or more like the one at Cushing Academy? Are research books clunky relics of the past? Or will they continue to be relevant as they have for the past several centuries?
I don't know, but I better do some more research and come up with a thesis. :)
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Cat People -- don't take me too seriously
Did anyone else find Louis Menard’s article “Cat People” extremely weird? Don’t get me wrong, parts of it were really interesting. And it definitely was amusing. But it was also really weird.
It was interesting to learn how influential and revolutionary The Cat in the Hat was when it was published. I found Flesch’s theory about phonics incredibly interesting. Unlike Menard, I cannot remember reading my first word. (How the heck old was he to remember something like that? I can remember knowing how to read simple words when I was four, and my memory doesn’t really go back farther than that. Was this kid eight before he learned how to read?) And yet though I don’t remember learning the very basic aspects of reading, I do remember sounding out words in elementary school. Once I was able to figure out how a word might sound, I could connect it to a word that I had heard. Although perhaps the first words must come from memorization, I think that Flesch is right that later words are mostly learned through phonics. I think to some degree we still do this as adults when we see an unfamiliar word. In contrast, when I studied French in college I had to memorize words. Not being familiar with oral French, I had no idea what “est-ce que” or “les petits pois” meant, unless I looked it up and memorized it. Although in some ways this is a very effective way of learning, it’s also kind of boring and it does take a lot longer to learn that way. I don’t really care about “the sad sad cat”anymore than Flesch did, though I do remember reading books like that as a child.
But I must repeat myself; this article was really weird. I was never personally a big fan of Dr. Seuss as a child, in fact I think I like him better as an adult. You might say I was suspicious of all the strange rhyming words, and weird characters doing absurd things. What was with the king's obsession with stilts anyways? Didn’t he have a country to be running? If he was the king he was presumably rich, why not commission some new stilits? I'm sure the stilt industry could use a boost anyways. And why did the Sneetchs care so much about stars anyways? (Obviously I hadn’t quite grasped the concept of metaphor.) But worst of all were those green pants that walked around by themselves, scaring that naked yellow animal that looked like a cross between a lamb and a bear. Damn did those pants piss me off sometimes. And yet… I’m not sure if I really buy into the Cold War conspiracy theories about pink stains. Maybe the cat was just doing what he did best; causing chaos. Maybe he never washed his hat before, and the red dye bled. And though I agree that the mother was sort of unstable, or at least neglectful, to leave her children in the care of a fish for the day, we don’t really know that she was having an affair. Neither does calling the bed "Dad’s bed." The kids may have said that for the sake of simplicity. And maybe she was just going shopping, or having tea, or doing whatever house wives did in the fifties.
P.s. Those pants are still stupid.
It was interesting to learn how influential and revolutionary The Cat in the Hat was when it was published. I found Flesch’s theory about phonics incredibly interesting. Unlike Menard, I cannot remember reading my first word. (How the heck old was he to remember something like that? I can remember knowing how to read simple words when I was four, and my memory doesn’t really go back farther than that. Was this kid eight before he learned how to read?) And yet though I don’t remember learning the very basic aspects of reading, I do remember sounding out words in elementary school. Once I was able to figure out how a word might sound, I could connect it to a word that I had heard. Although perhaps the first words must come from memorization, I think that Flesch is right that later words are mostly learned through phonics. I think to some degree we still do this as adults when we see an unfamiliar word. In contrast, when I studied French in college I had to memorize words. Not being familiar with oral French, I had no idea what “est-ce que” or “les petits pois” meant, unless I looked it up and memorized it. Although in some ways this is a very effective way of learning, it’s also kind of boring and it does take a lot longer to learn that way. I don’t really care about “the sad sad cat”anymore than Flesch did, though I do remember reading books like that as a child.
But I must repeat myself; this article was really weird. I was never personally a big fan of Dr. Seuss as a child, in fact I think I like him better as an adult. You might say I was suspicious of all the strange rhyming words, and weird characters doing absurd things. What was with the king's obsession with stilts anyways? Didn’t he have a country to be running? If he was the king he was presumably rich, why not commission some new stilits? I'm sure the stilt industry could use a boost anyways. And why did the Sneetchs care so much about stars anyways? (Obviously I hadn’t quite grasped the concept of metaphor.) But worst of all were those green pants that walked around by themselves, scaring that naked yellow animal that looked like a cross between a lamb and a bear. Damn did those pants piss me off sometimes. And yet… I’m not sure if I really buy into the Cold War conspiracy theories about pink stains. Maybe the cat was just doing what he did best; causing chaos. Maybe he never washed his hat before, and the red dye bled. And though I agree that the mother was sort of unstable, or at least neglectful, to leave her children in the care of a fish for the day, we don’t really know that she was having an affair. Neither does calling the bed "Dad’s bed." The kids may have said that for the sake of simplicity. And maybe she was just going shopping, or having tea, or doing whatever house wives did in the fifties.
P.s. Those pants are still stupid.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
research project ideas...still very vague. Help!
When I tell people that I am almost finished with my undergraduate degree, they often ask me what I plan to do after graduation. Often I tell them that I am considering library school. This usually gets one of two reactions. “You have to have a master’s degree to be a librarian?” (I frequently agree that this seems sort of surprising.) Or “wow, I didn’t really know that they still had librarians.”
The second reaction is an exaggeration, but only slightly. Frequently at work I hear about the new technologies that are altering not only book history, but libraries. Will there be libraries in a couple of decades? Probably, but it is likely they will be very different from the one’s that exist today. Basically, I was thinking it would be interesting to look at how new technologies are changing libraries, as sort of an extension of how they are changing literacy. I know I have to be more specific than “new technologies,” so I was thinking of looking at one particular technology, perhaps the E-book.
I’m not exactly sure which direction I would go in with such a project. It would be interesting to look at the differences between various types of books. Like is it more likely that academic books would be replaced by newer forms of technology than fiction books that are read for pleasure? Obviously I would need a more concrete angle at which to look at this subject, and…a thesis.
The other idea that I thought might be sort of interesting is not nearly as relevant to this course. It sort of has more to do with sociology than book history, but as I just thought of it this morning, there might still be a way to connect it to the class. I believe it was in the Diebert readings that we learned how the development of silent reading changed mans relationship with himself and the world around him. This was a topic that I found especially interesting, because it was something that had never occurred to me before. My second idea kind of relates to this idea. How have modern technologies such as web 2.0 changed modern people? In class we talked jokingly about how much more self-center people seem to be on their blogs and facebooks, and at times it certainly seems to be true. But is there truth to this? Also I remember reading in a magazine about a year ago that 2007 (or 2008) was the first year that more people reported meeting their significant other online than the old-fashioned way. Certainly this is a large change. Also, we have all seen a group of friends (or been in a group of friends) that go out somewhere, sit at a table, and promptly ignore one another to text message other friends. What the heck does that say about new technologies?
But as on the previous idea, I’m not sure exactly what position I would take in this sort of project.
So basically the point of this blog is to ask you guys what you think of these two ideas? Which idea seems more interesting to you? Which project do you think it would be easier to find credible sources for? Can I even tie the second one to the class closely enough, or do you think I’ll be stretching it? I’ll attempt to figure some of this stuff out myself and update in a few days with my clarifications, but any suggestions would be much appreciated. Incidentally, I will probably be writing a traditional research paper because I don’t have internet access at home, so if you think one works better as a paper than the other let me know that, too.
The second reaction is an exaggeration, but only slightly. Frequently at work I hear about the new technologies that are altering not only book history, but libraries. Will there be libraries in a couple of decades? Probably, but it is likely they will be very different from the one’s that exist today. Basically, I was thinking it would be interesting to look at how new technologies are changing libraries, as sort of an extension of how they are changing literacy. I know I have to be more specific than “new technologies,” so I was thinking of looking at one particular technology, perhaps the E-book.
I’m not exactly sure which direction I would go in with such a project. It would be interesting to look at the differences between various types of books. Like is it more likely that academic books would be replaced by newer forms of technology than fiction books that are read for pleasure? Obviously I would need a more concrete angle at which to look at this subject, and…a thesis.
The other idea that I thought might be sort of interesting is not nearly as relevant to this course. It sort of has more to do with sociology than book history, but as I just thought of it this morning, there might still be a way to connect it to the class. I believe it was in the Diebert readings that we learned how the development of silent reading changed mans relationship with himself and the world around him. This was a topic that I found especially interesting, because it was something that had never occurred to me before. My second idea kind of relates to this idea. How have modern technologies such as web 2.0 changed modern people? In class we talked jokingly about how much more self-center people seem to be on their blogs and facebooks, and at times it certainly seems to be true. But is there truth to this? Also I remember reading in a magazine about a year ago that 2007 (or 2008) was the first year that more people reported meeting their significant other online than the old-fashioned way. Certainly this is a large change. Also, we have all seen a group of friends (or been in a group of friends) that go out somewhere, sit at a table, and promptly ignore one another to text message other friends. What the heck does that say about new technologies?
But as on the previous idea, I’m not sure exactly what position I would take in this sort of project.
So basically the point of this blog is to ask you guys what you think of these two ideas? Which idea seems more interesting to you? Which project do you think it would be easier to find credible sources for? Can I even tie the second one to the class closely enough, or do you think I’ll be stretching it? I’ll attempt to figure some of this stuff out myself and update in a few days with my clarifications, but any suggestions would be much appreciated. Incidentally, I will probably be writing a traditional research paper because I don’t have internet access at home, so if you think one works better as a paper than the other let me know that, too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)