Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Uskg so s_kavli_13.


Published on

Published in: Spiritual, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Uskg so s_kavli_13.

  1. 1. Writing and ethical use of sources in students’ work A presentation of the online tutorial Søk & Skriv (Search and Write), used in students’ work. For the UKSG Break out sessions April 8 and 9, 2013 By Academic Librarian Solveig Kavli
  2. 2. Outline• Ethics• Search & Write as a pedagogical construction• Findings from the evaluation used as a tool to improve the product• How Search & Write promotes ethical awareness• The new version Bigger, Better, Stronger?
  3. 3. Information Literacy” An information literate person is someonewho knows when and why they needinformation, how to find the information andhow to evaluate, use and communicate theinformation in an ethical way.” (Chartered Institute ofLibrary and Information Professionals 2004).
  4. 4. ‘Ethics’” The discipline concerned with what is morally good andbad, right and wrong. The term is also applied to anysystem or theory of moral values or principles.” (Encyclopaedia Brittanica, 2011)For staff at UoB:“The fundamental values for academic activities at UoBare openness, verifiability, scientific integrity and criticaldiscussion.” (Action plan for the work on academic integrity at theUniversity of Bergen 2009-2012)
  5. 5. ‘Morality’Morality (from the Latin moralitas "manner, character,proper behavior") is the differentiation of intentions,decisions, and actions between those that are "good" (orright) and those that are "bad" (or wrong). Thephilosophy of morality is ethics. A moral code is a systemof morality (...) and a moral is any one practice orteaching within a moral code. Morality may also bespecifically synonymous with "goodness" or "rightness.”(Wikipedia, 2013)
  6. 6. ‘Moral’“It is your duty as a student to learn the rulesthat apply to how you should refer to sources ofdifferent kinds in written work. This duty is notlimited to learning how to include references; italso includes you following the rules andreferring to sources in a proper and honestmanner.” (The use of sources in written work at the University ofBergen, Handout from UoB)
  7. 7. Search & Write as a pedagogical constructionFrom 2007-20111.Emphasis on Dewey’s Learning by doingcombined with Khulthau’s Seeking Meaning.2.Learning through information searching processcombined with Bean’s view on writing as a process.
  8. 8. Version from 2009
  9. 9. Learning objects Information Writing actions Other actions or search process (Dysthe, strategies (Khulthau, 2004) Hertzberg, & Hoel, 2000)1. Task initiation Task initiation (stage 1) Brain storming Mind mapping Reflecting on research ethics The focus of the Topic selection Think texts first product was (Stage 2) on process.2. Obtain an Pre-focus Annotatedoverview exploration bibliography (Stage 3)3. Find and Focus formulation Listing andcombine (Stage 4) structuringkeywords keywords4. Search and Information Draft writing Critical evaluationwrite collection of sources Referencing5. Closure Search closure Conclusion Ethical use of writing sources (Skagen et al., 2008, p.88) Final writing up Presenting one’s work
  10. 10. DID WE REACH OUT?- Numbers from Google Analytics indicated heavy use of the part on referencing and ethics.- A satisfied academic staff regarded the part on critical evaluation on sources as important
  11. 11. Findings from the evaluations1. All students were very satisfied with the part on how to evaluate sources and the part on referencing.2. Students found the differentiation in two levels confusing3. The intention on process from the developers did not reach the students (Hyldegård et al.,2011).4. Divided when it came to the use of student- stories.
  12. 12. ”Miss: Templates for structuring assigments ”I think it is great that you have “ (What does an academic included three persons that thesis look like, really?) undergo a writing process, so Search field (so that it will that we can get an insight. I also like that it is possible to be easier to find different comment upon these matters, themes) Remove the though I haven’t done it, it is examples on students!!! great that it is possible to do so.” They are of NO relevance to others! Gives a childish impression. Make something that is directed to a reader(…)”(Student 3)(Forras, 2011, p.16. (my translation)) (Student 4)
  13. 13. ” My experience is that students are not conscious regarding what kind of information they need. A lot of the students are aware that they must use scholarly articles, when actually they will do just as fine by using a textbook, public information, or other kinds of documents.. There is some information on this in S&S, but that is far too much and boring, and I doubt that there are many students that actually read all that information. What about jazzing it up by adding some illustrations or photos? Exercises? A lot of this information is present in the part on source evaluation, but the choices you make as a student ( regarding choosing source/type of documentation) happens long before one applies source evaluation.”(Forras, 2011, p.17. (my translation)) (Academic staff, 2)
  14. 14. From process….
  15. 15. …To tool …to tool
  16. 16. (Search! Illustration: Pedro Vásquez)
  17. 17. 1. Searching1. While searching students must decide and evaluate whether and how the information at hand will be useful for their research.2. Like Dervin we understand searching as sense- making (Dervin, B.,1999, p.745).3. The source alone is not the authoritative voice, but is dependent on the student who must define the value of the text.
  18. 18. 2. Reading• Stephen Toulmins model on argumentation as a tool on how to read and evaluate the sources by questioning the sources at hand.• Is the source useful for your research?
  19. 19. Stephen Toulmins model on argumentation (
  20. 20. 3. Writing• Templates on how to write• Structuring your thesis• Writing as a process• Writing groups• Disseminating your text
  21. 21. 4. Sources and referencing• Academic guidelines• Assurance of quality• Tools on ethics and academic integrity“Evaluate the sources for your thesis carefully. Take a stand on the sources you have chosen and explain why you rely on these particular sources.”
  22. 22. The improvement• From a being a joined project between the libraries of HiB, NHH and UoB, we have joined forces with the academic writing unit from UoB, and Oslo university library joined the group.
  23. 23. Choice of platform and design• Wordpress• Dialogue with the users• S&S is no longer a stand-alone product, but leans on other sources both nationally and internationally.
  24. 24. Some remarks from the students• The students get by well on searching. The information is good, and there are specific examples on information sources.• The students expect that the site gives them support from the start of their studies until they have completed their degrees.• One of the students tells us that she gets more than she expects, and brings up copy right issue as very important. (User evaluation fall 2012)
  25. 25. Ethics again• Use of Toulmin’s model on reading and writing shows the students through exercises the importance of backing your argument relying on scholarly authorities.• Sources must be evaluated• Students must take a stand on the sources they use and present them in an ethical manner.
  26. 26. Better!As a student I just wanted to say that the way Searchand Write now appears is close to perfection. Iespecially enjoyed reading"Structuring a thesis."(…)-Regards from a content student(e-mail from a content user 5 april 2013)
  27. 27. Questions?Contact informationsolveig.kavli@ub.uib.noVisit us at for your attention!
  28. 28. ReferencesDervin, B. (1999) On studying information seeking methodologically: the implications of connecting metatheory to method.Information Processing and Management 35, p.727-750.Forras, P., Kavli, S., Mikki, S., Austrheim, G. og Elvebakk, E. (2011) Søk & Skriv iet brukerperspektiv: Rapport fra spørreundersøkelsen høsten 2010 . Availablefrom: <>[Accessed 2 april 2013]Hafstad, S., Hunskår, I.,Kavli, S.M.L., Mikki, S., Skagen, T., og Torras, M.C.(2007)Søk og skriv for kursholdere: Bibliotekundervising i høyere utdanning . Available from:<>Hyldegård, J, Lund, H., Moring, C., Pors, N.P., og Schreiber, T. (2011) Studerende, læring og webtutorials : En analyse af 3 norske læringssystemer. København : Det informationsvidenskabelige akademi. Available from:<>[Accessed 2 april 2013]Roham Academic computing The Toulmin model. San Diego State University. Available from:<>[Accessed 6 april 2013]Skagen, T., Torras, M.C., Kavli, S., Mikki, S., Hafstad, S., and Hunskår. I. (2009). Pedagogical considerations in developing an onlinetutorial in information literacy . Communications in information literacy. 2 (2(2008))(2), p. 84- 98.Søk og Skriv. Available from: < >[Accessed 2 april 2013]Wikipedia Morality[Internet]. Available from: <>[Accessed 8 april 2013]