What are Footnotes and Endnotes?
Footnotes are the notes found at the foot, or bottom of a page. They are usually separated from the main text on the page by a space or line and are smaller in print size than the main text.
Endnotes are found at the end of a chapter, article or section. They contain the same information and features as footnotes, but are on a different page to the text to which they refer.
Footnotes and endnotes offer more information about some aspects of the main text. They can be a reference, some more facts related to a topic or a commentary on that topic.
Footnotes and endnotes always comment on something in the main text, and are connected to that part of the text by a number or a symbol. Footnotes and endnotes often (but not always) contain information that is not necessary for the text itself, but can add to the understanding of certain aspects of the text.
What do I do when I see them?
Read them. Information which is placed in a footnote or endnote is information the author thought was relevant, even if it did not necessarily belong in the main part of the text.
Sometimes very useful and relevant information can be held in a note - sometimes the notes have exactly the information you need, even though the main text doesn't.
Footnotes and endnotes often hold the reference for a quote or statement, and will help you follow your line of research.
Can I cite/quote them in my assignment?
Yes, a note is as legitimate a source of information as the rest of the text - although some referencing styles have certain rules for citing from a footnote or endnote. You should check your styles guide to see what these rules are.
Can I use footnotes or endnotes in my own assignments?
Sometimes.
Some styles won't let you cite your references in text, and insist you use footnotes and endnotes for your citations. Other's frown on the use of footnotes and endnotes, preferring that all information be held in the main text or in an appendix. Check with your lecturer or tutor to see what is expected of you.
Remember, you can only use footnotes or endnotes, not both. Check which one belongs with the style you are using, or which one your lecturer prefers.
Footnotes, endnotes and appendices are often outside of the word limit, as well, so you should check with your lecturer to see if they count towards the word limit or not.
Further Reading
Mock, William B.T. (2006). When a Rose Isn't 'Arose' Isn't Arroz: A Student Guide to Footnoting for Informational Clarity and Scholarly Discourse. International Journal of Legal Information, 34 (1) 87-97. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1019891
Cermak, B. & Troxell, J. (2006). A Guide to Footnotes and Endnotes for NASA History Authors. Available at: http://history.nasa.gov/footnoteguide.html
Ohrstrom Library Staff. (1999). Giving Credit to Sources: Footnotes. Available at http://library.sps.edu/reference/Hypertext_tutorial/ht_footnoteform.shtml
When and how do I use footnotes or endnotes? http://www.noodletools.com/kb/index.php?article=61
Monday, December 10, 2007
Monday, December 3, 2007
Why use journals?
Once upon a time students asked me why they should use journals when all of the information should be in a book some where. These days they ask me why they should use journals when all of the information should be on a website some where.
Well, there are a number of very good reasons why journals should be at the top of your "must see" list whenever you do any research. Here are some of them:
Journals have the latest research. Information will appear in journals years before it turns up in a book - and if new studies reveal that the old information is incorrect, those studies will be published in journals fairly quickly, while the books will take a lot longer to correct.
Some articles will only appear in journals. Not everything that is published in a journal will make it to a different form of publication (no, not even on the web). A lot of the best research will only ever appear in journals.
Journals can be more trustworthy than other sources. Peer reviewed journals have been checked and vetted by a number of other experts in the fields. Books don't always have the same checks and balances (it depends on the publisher), and web pages can be downright dangerous (although some are trustworthy). Information in a peer reviewed journal is usually a safe bet.
Journals are indexed. Most journals - especially peer reviewed journals - are indexed in databases. Someone has gone through and taken not of every aspect of the journal articles - their titles, authors, subject areas, keywords... And all of this information is searchable through the databases. This means they are actually one of the easier forms of information to look for, if you know how to use the databases to find them. Very few books are indexed, so it's much harder to find a book that has the information you want. Technically, almost all web pages are indexed, but not generally in databases. To find them you have to use a search engine, and search engines are not as powerful or useful as databases.
A lot of journals are online. If your library subscribes to the electronic version of the journal, you may find that you can download most of the articles you want from the comfort of your own computer. Now, the older the journal issues are, the more likely it is that you'll have to find them in print, but most of the journals published in the last ten years have electronic versions.
Journals are almost always available. Most academic libraries (and some others) treat their journals like reference books - they are not available for loan, so they are always available for use. Even if every decent book on the subject was borrowed out weeks ago, you can usually find enough journal articles to produce a quality assignment. Plus, electronic subscriptions very rarely go "missing from the shelves", so even if the library burns down you would still be able to do your research.
All in all, journals are the best resources to use when researching. They are the kings of the information world, and you should get into the habit of using them as soon as possible. Your grades will thank you for it.
Well, there are a number of very good reasons why journals should be at the top of your "must see" list whenever you do any research. Here are some of them:
All in all, journals are the best resources to use when researching. They are the kings of the information world, and you should get into the habit of using them as soon as possible. Your grades will thank you for it.
Sunday, December 2, 2007
What are Journals?
To put it in simple terms, journals are like magazines with research instead of news.
They are serials (which means new issues are published on a regular basis) produced by professionals in a certain field for the use of other professionals in that field.
Journals come in two main types: peer reviewed and non-peer reviewed.
Peer reviewed journals are the most reliable and respectable form of published research you can use. Every article in a peer reviewed journal has been read by several other leading experts and researchers in the field and has met a strict standard for the research, analysis and writing.
It takes at least a year for an article to be published in a peer reviewed journal, and during that year it is read, checked, examined and tested by a number of the authors' "peers", who have all decided that it meets the standards necessary to be published in their journal, and they believe it is reliable.
Non-peer reviewed journals don't have that safety net. This doesn't mean that the articles published in non-peer reviewed journals aren't worth reading, or that you can't use them in your assignment. However, it does mean that the articles won't be as respected and reliable as those from a peer reviewed journal, and you may find that there are problems with the article. For example, if the article was a report on a study, the study might be flawed or the analysis of the results might be incorrect. Without the peer review process, these mistakes would not be picked up before publication.
Sometimes your lecturer will specifically ask you to use peer reviewed journals. There are a number of different lists of peer reviewed articles on the web. If you want to find a list, you should try putting in the name of your field of study (e.g. Education) and the words "peer reviewed journals" in a search engine.
If you want to know if the particular journal you are using is a peer reviewed journal, you could put the title of the journal and the words "peer reviewed" into a search engine.
You can also ask a faculty librarian at the nearest academic library. They are usually highly familiar with the peer reviewed journals in their faculty's field, and can steer you in the right direction.
They are serials (which means new issues are published on a regular basis) produced by professionals in a certain field for the use of other professionals in that field.
Journals come in two main types: peer reviewed and non-peer reviewed.
Peer reviewed journals are the most reliable and respectable form of published research you can use. Every article in a peer reviewed journal has been read by several other leading experts and researchers in the field and has met a strict standard for the research, analysis and writing.
It takes at least a year for an article to be published in a peer reviewed journal, and during that year it is read, checked, examined and tested by a number of the authors' "peers", who have all decided that it meets the standards necessary to be published in their journal, and they believe it is reliable.
Non-peer reviewed journals don't have that safety net. This doesn't mean that the articles published in non-peer reviewed journals aren't worth reading, or that you can't use them in your assignment. However, it does mean that the articles won't be as respected and reliable as those from a peer reviewed journal, and you may find that there are problems with the article. For example, if the article was a report on a study, the study might be flawed or the analysis of the results might be incorrect. Without the peer review process, these mistakes would not be picked up before publication.
Sometimes your lecturer will specifically ask you to use peer reviewed journals. There are a number of different lists of peer reviewed articles on the web. If you want to find a list, you should try putting in the name of your field of study (e.g. Education) and the words "peer reviewed journals" in a search engine.
If you want to know if the particular journal you are using is a peer reviewed journal, you could put the title of the journal and the words "peer reviewed" into a search engine.
You can also ask a faculty librarian at the nearest academic library. They are usually highly familiar with the peer reviewed journals in their faculty's field, and can steer you in the right direction.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
What is information?
This question is not as odd as it might seem.
For one thing, "information" means different things in different contexts. Someone studying communication theory will have a different use for the word "information" than someone studying computer science, for example.
One definition of "information" that I have read in a couple of books on information literacy referred to information as "change". According to that definition, information was any state in which something was different to what it was before. For example, if what you knew about chemistry was different after reading a chemistry text book, then you had been exposed to information. This definition owes a lot to communication theory, and is really more appropriate to that field than to information literacy (although communication theory can play a role in information literacy).
Obviously, this definition does not take into account the concept of pre-existing knowledge as information. If you read the textbook on chemistry and found that it only confirmed what you already knew, then, according to that definition, you didn't encounter any information. If nothing in your knowledge or understanding changed, then there was no information involved. Now, clearly, the textbook held information, it just didn't have any new information as far as you were concerned.
In the world of research and academia, information that is already known and can be confirmed is as useful and valid as any new information that you might discover, so the definition of "information as change" is somewhat inadequate.
A better, if messier, definition for "information" is the old proverb (often attributed to Confucius): "know what you know and know what you do not know". It could be argued that this proverb defines knowledge rather than information, but information is in there. It's the "what" in that saying. When you know something, information is that "something" that you know. When you do not know something, information is that "something" that you don't know.
To be information literate, it is important to know what you do know and know what you don't know.
For example, I might think I know what the chemical symbol for gold is on the elemental chart. However, if I only think I know it, then I don't really know it. I could be wrong, after all. If I looked it up and found out that I was correct, then I would know that I actually know this information - that it is correct and true and I can rely on this knowledge with some confidence.
In this way, reading the textbook on chemistry would still be important even if it doesn't add anything knew to my knowledge because it helps me to know that what I know is correct.
This is what I mean by "know what you know" - you can recognise the difference between what you think you know (which you might remember hearing somewhere or reading once) and what you actually do know (because you have learnt this information and can find a source that will back you up if you need it).
Now when it comes to "know what you do not know", there are two sides to that coin. On the one hand, I can know that I need to look something up because I only think I know it - I don't actually know if I know it. On the other hand, there are things I know that I definitely do not know. These I the things I have never learnt, the questions I have no answer for at present.
I might think I know the symbol for gold, but know I have no idea what the symbol for magnesium oxide is. Or, I can know that I do not know where iron is on the elemental chart. When I find out, this is new information - the "information as change" that we were talking about before. It also turns into something I know I know.
The whole purpose of information literacy is to take the second form of information (what you know you do not know), and take steps to turn it into the first type of information (what you know you know). Knowing what those steps are and how to take them is what it means to be information literate.
While there are many skills involved with becoming information literate (and I'll be discussing many of them here), they all start with three simple questions:
"Do I know this information?"
"If I don't know it, do I know where to look for it?"
"If I don't know where to look for it, do I know where to find out?"
The aim is to be able to answer "yes" to those last two questions most of the time.
For one thing, "information" means different things in different contexts. Someone studying communication theory will have a different use for the word "information" than someone studying computer science, for example.
One definition of "information" that I have read in a couple of books on information literacy referred to information as "change". According to that definition, information was any state in which something was different to what it was before. For example, if what you knew about chemistry was different after reading a chemistry text book, then you had been exposed to information. This definition owes a lot to communication theory, and is really more appropriate to that field than to information literacy (although communication theory can play a role in information literacy).
Obviously, this definition does not take into account the concept of pre-existing knowledge as information. If you read the textbook on chemistry and found that it only confirmed what you already knew, then, according to that definition, you didn't encounter any information. If nothing in your knowledge or understanding changed, then there was no information involved. Now, clearly, the textbook held information, it just didn't have any new information as far as you were concerned.
In the world of research and academia, information that is already known and can be confirmed is as useful and valid as any new information that you might discover, so the definition of "information as change" is somewhat inadequate.
A better, if messier, definition for "information" is the old proverb (often attributed to Confucius): "know what you know and know what you do not know". It could be argued that this proverb defines knowledge rather than information, but information is in there. It's the "what" in that saying. When you know something, information is that "something" that you know. When you do not know something, information is that "something" that you don't know.
To be information literate, it is important to know what you do know and know what you don't know.
For example, I might think I know what the chemical symbol for gold is on the elemental chart. However, if I only think I know it, then I don't really know it. I could be wrong, after all. If I looked it up and found out that I was correct, then I would know that I actually know this information - that it is correct and true and I can rely on this knowledge with some confidence.
In this way, reading the textbook on chemistry would still be important even if it doesn't add anything knew to my knowledge because it helps me to know that what I know is correct.
This is what I mean by "know what you know" - you can recognise the difference between what you think you know (which you might remember hearing somewhere or reading once) and what you actually do know (because you have learnt this information and can find a source that will back you up if you need it).
Now when it comes to "know what you do not know", there are two sides to that coin. On the one hand, I can know that I need to look something up because I only think I know it - I don't actually know if I know it. On the other hand, there are things I know that I definitely do not know. These I the things I have never learnt, the questions I have no answer for at present.
I might think I know the symbol for gold, but know I have no idea what the symbol for magnesium oxide is. Or, I can know that I do not know where iron is on the elemental chart. When I find out, this is new information - the "information as change" that we were talking about before. It also turns into something I know I know.
The whole purpose of information literacy is to take the second form of information (what you know you do not know), and take steps to turn it into the first type of information (what you know you know). Knowing what those steps are and how to take them is what it means to be information literate.
While there are many skills involved with becoming information literate (and I'll be discussing many of them here), they all start with three simple questions:
"Do I know this information?"
"If I don't know it, do I know where to look for it?"
"If I don't know where to look for it, do I know where to find out?"
The aim is to be able to answer "yes" to those last two questions most of the time.
Monday, November 26, 2007
What is Information Literacy?
Information Literacy is the ability to find, sort and evaluate information so that it becomes something useful.
Information is held in many forms in many locations. In order to produce good, relevant research you need to know where to look for information, what to look for, and how to tell if it is good and useful.
This blog will help you learn skills that will improve your ability to find good information, and encourage the development of good research practices.
Information is held in many forms in many locations. In order to produce good, relevant research you need to know where to look for information, what to look for, and how to tell if it is good and useful.
This blog will help you learn skills that will improve your ability to find good information, and encourage the development of good research practices.
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
A couple of Search Engines
While it may seem as if the entire world is covered by Google, and therefore one need not look elsewhere, Google is not the be-all and end-all of search engines, and anyone serious about finding good information on the Web should have at least two decent search engines in their bag of tricks.
Why do you need more than one search engine? Because of maths.
You see, no matter how smart and pretty computers may appear, they can still really only do one thing well: count. They're still giant calculators at heart. In order to "think" about web pages, they have to give every factor involved (the words in your search, how often they turn up on a page, where they turn up on the page) a numerical value. They then use a mathematical formula, or algorithm, to rank the pages in a list. Different search engines use different algorithms, which means you get different results.
Google and Yahoo! are both general search engines. Their algorithms are designed to find the most "popular" websites by canvassing all of the sites they know about, picking the ones with the most links pointing to them and ranking them according to factors like commercial relevance. They are the K-marts and Targets of search engines. By all means, use them - you'll probably find something that's just what you're looking for, but remember to shop around in the specialty stores as well.
A personal favourite of mine has always been Ask. Well, technically, it hasn't 'always' been Ask. It used to be about three different search engines, Hotbot, Teoma and Ask Jeeves, which were all available separately and via the Hotbot home page. Hotbot sold out to Google then curled up and died, while Teoma and Ask Jeeves merged into Ask.
Ask combines the best features of both search engines, using the Teoma algorithm and Ask Jeeve's ability to recognise questions. Where Google's algorithm goes for the most popular web sites across the board, Ask attaches a few more numbers to the web sites in it's database and looks for the sites which are most popular amongst their peers.
In addition, Ask also offers three sets of results. There's the normal "hit list" of links to web pages, and two areas where they offer search suggestions based on tallied results of other, similar questions: "Narrow Your Search" and "Expand Your Search". Depending on what you search for, you'll also see examples from the Images search in another part of the screen.
Another search engine I have discovered very recently is Vivisimo (which also seems to be Clusty - I'm not entirely sure what the exact relationship is between these two). Vivisimo/Clusty subdivides it's results and groups (clusters) them together based on common content, which makes it much easier to sort through the results and hone in on those which seem most relevant. I spent several hours looking for information through several other search engines which I managed to find in minutes using Vivisimo, so it's definitely worth adding to the toolbox.
Have a play with them and get a feel for the ways they complement each other. Try putting the same search terms (or question) into each, and see what comes up. And remember to look beyond the first ten results - you can often find just what you're looking for on page 5.
Why do you need more than one search engine? Because of maths.
You see, no matter how smart and pretty computers may appear, they can still really only do one thing well: count. They're still giant calculators at heart. In order to "think" about web pages, they have to give every factor involved (the words in your search, how often they turn up on a page, where they turn up on the page) a numerical value. They then use a mathematical formula, or algorithm, to rank the pages in a list. Different search engines use different algorithms, which means you get different results.
Google and Yahoo! are both general search engines. Their algorithms are designed to find the most "popular" websites by canvassing all of the sites they know about, picking the ones with the most links pointing to them and ranking them according to factors like commercial relevance. They are the K-marts and Targets of search engines. By all means, use them - you'll probably find something that's just what you're looking for, but remember to shop around in the specialty stores as well.
A personal favourite of mine has always been Ask. Well, technically, it hasn't 'always' been Ask. It used to be about three different search engines, Hotbot, Teoma and Ask Jeeves, which were all available separately and via the Hotbot home page. Hotbot sold out to Google then curled up and died, while Teoma and Ask Jeeves merged into Ask.
Ask combines the best features of both search engines, using the Teoma algorithm and Ask Jeeve's ability to recognise questions. Where Google's algorithm goes for the most popular web sites across the board, Ask attaches a few more numbers to the web sites in it's database and looks for the sites which are most popular amongst their peers.
In addition, Ask also offers three sets of results. There's the normal "hit list" of links to web pages, and two areas where they offer search suggestions based on tallied results of other, similar questions: "Narrow Your Search" and "Expand Your Search". Depending on what you search for, you'll also see examples from the Images search in another part of the screen.
Another search engine I have discovered very recently is Vivisimo (which also seems to be Clusty - I'm not entirely sure what the exact relationship is between these two). Vivisimo/Clusty subdivides it's results and groups (clusters) them together based on common content, which makes it much easier to sort through the results and hone in on those which seem most relevant. I spent several hours looking for information through several other search engines which I managed to find in minutes using Vivisimo, so it's definitely worth adding to the toolbox.
Have a play with them and get a feel for the ways they complement each other. Try putting the same search terms (or question) into each, and see what comes up. And remember to look beyond the first ten results - you can often find just what you're looking for on page 5.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)