![]() ![]() This is particularly the case in introductory courses. Librarians and faculty could use time dedicated to teaching Boolean logic to teach other IL concepts (such as question development and source evaluation) in courses or disciplines in which Boolean searching is not essential. Anecdotally, librarians have seen students’ natural language searches yield relevant results explaining why students often find Boolean searching superfluous. Interestingly, while the ACRL Standards specifically mention Boolean, the new Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education 2 only refers to searching (controlled vocabulary, keywords, natural language).įor students, it is not always clear that using Boolean logic is better than a natural language or phrase search in the style of Google. Anecdotally, the authors have worked at multiple institutions and taught Boolean regularly, generally introducing the concept at the first-year (introductory) level, and building on that in upper-level classes. This has led to many librarians teaching Boolean logic in one-shot instruction sessions, first-year IL modules and tutorials, and reference interactions. In studies of first-year students’ IL skills, demonstrated knowledge of Boolean logic is frequently evaluated as a determinant of information retrieval proficiency. 1 These standards, though rescinded in 2016, influenced IL education across the United States and beyond for more than fifteen years. However, the concept can be difficult for first-year (introductory) students to grasp, and it can take multiple sessions before a student demonstrates effective use of Boolean logic.Ī student’s ability to use Boolean operators is a performance indicator within the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education. Librarians and other information professionals are taught the value of Boolean searching (referred to throughout this article interchangeably as “Boolean”) in professional education, and it is seen in instruction, reference interactions, and database interfaces. IntroductionĬonventional wisdom considers knowledge of Boolean logic a basic information retrieval Information Literacy (IL) skill. ![]() As the Framework for Information Literacy does not specifically address Boolean operators, the authors suggest it should have less prominence in first-year Information Literacy instruction. With evidence that students struggle to grasp Boolean searching, and may not use it even after instruction, it could be left out of first-year instruction, freeing up valuable class time to focus on concepts such as question development and source evaluation. Overall, natural search language is at least as good as Boolean searching. Performance differences between databases varied. This paper compares the results of Boolean and natural language searching across several databases with searches created from student research questions. ![]() Stone, Willie Miller, Eric Snajdr, and Kathleen Hanna *īoolean logic can be a difficult concept for first-year, introductory students to grasp. The Boolean Is Dead, Long Live the Boolean! Natural Language versus Boolean Searching in Introductory Undergraduate Instruction
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |