Thomas Mann, The Oxford Guide to Library Research, Fourth Edition. New York: Oxford University Press, 2015. ISBN: 978-0-19-993106-4.
Genre: nonfiction, guides
Subgenre: academic research, LIS
Format: trade paperback
Source: Hutchins Library, Berea College
Our
library recently acquired this for the reference collection as an
update to the third edition that we had. I did notice this edition's
publishing date is 2015, so it already may be falling behind in some
details. When I investigated, I did not see a fifth edition forthcoming.
Still this is a pretty good book overall.
This
book is a guide to help readers do research online and offline with an
overview of various online and offline sources. Though it goes over
online and offline sources, there is some bias or preference expressed
in the book for print sources found in libraries, especially large
research libraries. Naturally it also favors subscription based online
resources, again found in libraries, especially large research
libraries. The publisher describes this book as "the gold standard in
the field," but it is so as long as you are using and accessing large
research libraries. There is not much here about smaller academic
libraries, like ours, and even less about public libraries. Though the
strategies presented can apply for any researcher, the book is mainly
for academic researchers at large research universities and
institutions, for example, the Library of Congress, which is by the way
where the author works.
The
book is arranged into 15 chapters. Some of the chapter topics include:
specialized encyclopedias, use of subject headings in library catalogs
and databases, citation searches, people sources, and hidden treasures
(other not so visible at times sources like microforms and government
documents). The book definitely strives to be as inclusive of various
resources as possible.
This
is a guide mainly for academic researchers. The book is also commonly
used as a textbook in library school programs (or "i-Schools" as they
often call themselves now), and a lot of the material in the book is
written more for librarians in training than actual non-librarian
researchers. At times, some topics, such as cataloging and subject
headings, may into more depth than most researchers may need, but that
depth is necessary for librarians to understand how the systems work in
order to better help their patrons. For other readers, some of the
material may be way more technical than they want or need to know.
For
librarians in the field, like me, parts of this book may serve as a
skills refresher. I did read it all to write this review, but for my
brethren in the field I recommend you read what you need when you need.
The
book may not be too accessible for undergraduates. It does offer good
research tips, but undergrads may need to dig through the more dense
material first to find the good tips they can use. The book may be more
geared to graduate students, research faculty, and especially librarians
in training. Thus I would recommend the book for academic libraries,
especially R-1 and similar institutions.
For small academic libraries, I'd say this is optional. I am good with
having it in our small collection, but having read it I can see it can
be optional for us.
In the end, I liked some parts better than others, and I think many academic readers can find some use in it.
3 out of 5 stars.
*****
Additional reading notes:
The book is designed to answer three questions:
"First, what is the extent of the significant research resources you will miss if you confine your research entirely, or even primarily, to sources available on the open Internet? Second, if you are trying to get a reasonably good overview of the literature on a particular topic, rather than just 'something quickly' on it, what are the methods of subject heading that are usually much more efficient for the purpose rather than typing keywords into a blank search box? And third-- a concern related to the first two-- how do you find the best search terms to use in the first place?" (xv).
A
challenge is convincing researchers, especially students on tight
schedules and deadlines who DO want it quickly and just good enough to
do the assignment. Then again, a lot of what those students do is not
"real" research. It's rather synthesis and compiling of sources on a
decided topic, but that is a whole other conversation.
This is a good point that many folks often miss or conveniently refuse to understand:
"In the overall universe of information records, three considerations are inextricably tied together: (1) copyright protection; (2) free 'fair use' of the records by everyone; and (3) access limitations of what, who, and where.
It is not possible to combine (1) and (2) without restricting at least one element of (3)" (xvii).
Now
things like copyright and access to research are debatable, but at the
moment the above is the reality, unless you do as some faculty,
researchers, and increasingly students do and find your sources in some
shady parts of the Internet (and no further comment from me on that).
A
bad habit many librarians, especially the cool and hip ones like the
"doers and stirrers," tend to have, which irks me a bit to be honest:
"(The library field, unfortunately, has a habit of simply following Google rather than focusing on alternatives to it that work much better in the niche areas libraries must fill)" (115).
That
is also why so many libraries go to big default search boxes on their
websites to "search everything" or do one "big search" without regard to
trade offs of such decision in terms of focus, relevance, and useful
results. It's a jump on the Google bandwagon of big search box and
hoping the algorithm is on your side, except the algorithm is usually
not on your side. Librarians jump on this for convenience, to make it
"easier" for themselves and for impatient patrons instead of putting in
the work and teaching students and/or patrons properly. Again, this can
be a whole other conversation for another time.
A
growing problem in open Internet searching. I often mention this in
library instruction, but few students seem to really appreciate it. Less
savvy faculty often gloss over it:
"(The growing proliferation of echo chambers and filter bubbles-- i.e. producing search results weighted and skewed by individuals' own idiosyncratic past search histories-- further diminishes the Web's capacity to provide inclusive overview perspectives)" (133).
The author gives a nod to Reader's Advisory:
"Bibliographies are also frequently more useful than databases when questions of 'reader's advisory' nature arise-- that is, when people just want recommendations of good books to read, in any subject area" (184).
No comments:
Post a Comment