Drastic changes in the way people do research..Lots of changes.

[Stuart G]

...When I was teaching high school students, I remember in the 70s, 80s and early 90s spending a lot of time teaching the students how to use the ...LIBRARY.. !!!!!!
............(I taught history and how to do research papers) ...........................................
...That included knowing of to use .."Reader's Guide to Periodical Literature." How to look for periodicals in the library. How to use encyclopedias. How to made note cards, and how to write and use footnotes. I told the students that they had to give credit to sources of information, and the person who wrote it. Of course, the date of the periodical, and if it was a magazine, newspaper or book. All the information had to be total and precise. Even the page numbers from the sources needed to be shown in the ...BIBLIOGRAPHY....

...TODAY...one machine does it all..Using just two words or 5 words at most. First you need to know how to work the machine that I am working now at this very moment..Then you need to know how to....COPY AND PASTE...and insert the words that you copied and pasted into.........GOOGLE SEARCH....that is all..The machine does the rest.

...A student will still need to know how to write a sentence, and possibly use the notecards to get the materials together. Knowing how to write a paragraph is still important...but a student does not need to go to the........
LIBRARY ..any more...
..I can sit at this machine, and watch live television shows, or old movies. I can get cooking lessons, or watch a variety of shows that I used to need a TV for....I can even listen to old "records" that I used to collect. I think they were called.....45s....... Is that correct?.....
....These machines have changed everything. Some people hold these machines in their hands, and do not look where they are going when they cross the street, or look where they are going while driving a car. Yes, I could go on and on and on and on....What's the use? Besides, I need to order a pizza using this machine..........
.................. ......................... ................. ........ .............

.....Hope all goes well for you today and every day.....In some ways, times have really changed.....

[Hoyt]

1. Today's research should yield more than old methods and ways of

preparing reports of findings.

Although I don’t consider it a waste, getting to a library, finding reliable information and confirming it in multiple sources, typing out reports (and proofing reports typed by staff), etc., took a lot of effort that could have been used elsewhere. Then, there were the jerks who’d checkout important publication and keep it forever.

One big issue today is learning to recognize BS.

And you are right, we can order pizza, groceries, a new monitor, pay bills, submit bills, communicate with others, and so much more, on the same machine. Heck, we can even find a date.

[yonder]

4. The effort it took for library research had another benefit.

In my opinion, retention was much better because of that effort.

Today, one easily looks something up and then weeks later, forgetting it, looks the same thing up. It happens to me often enough because of that ease.

[Hoyt]

5. That's a good point. Although, it doesn't take long to refresh our memory.

Sometimes I find myself just starting over, rather than going back to my original findings. Often I have new insights or there is something new to consider. Heck, it takes awhile to find where I filed what I did previously. But, it beats paper files.

[yonder]

6. For me, it happens with music too.

I think you and I are both musicians, right? I can learn a tune from a recording, the dots or from a friend. Sometimes it will stay put upstairs but too often, I'll lose it, especially if I don't stay after it.

Now, if I take the time to put the dots down on paper, most of the time I'll remember it. Don't know why that works, but for me, it does.

[Hoyt]

12. In my case, the term "musician" would have to be used very loosely.

I can play along with just about anything, or play solo. "Solo" is more aptly described as noodling on guitar, bass, mandola, bouzouki, hand drums, etc.

I have never been able to learn someone else's song well enough to do it justice. I do sing some other folk's lyrics, but the song sure doesn't sound the same.

Heck, I've recorded some of my own songs that I think sound pretty good, but couldn't even remember how I did it just minutes afterwards. Wish I had paid more attention in school to reading music.

I'm quite deficient when it comes to musical memory, but I sure have fun playing.

[Arkansas Granny]

2. Things have indeed changed. My siblings and I were talking about this

the last time we got together. We attended a one room school in rural Missouri in the 50's. The first computer I remember knowing about was Univac. It was as big as a room and sorted punch card (do not fold, spindle or mutilate). Art Linkletter used one to do match-making on his tv show.

Now we carry these machines with us every day that can connect us to anyone else in the world who has one of these machines. We hold unlimited amounts of knowledge in the palm of our hands.

I've seen man break the sound barrier and go to the moon. I can't imagine the advances my grandchildren will see in their lifetimes.

[msongs]

3. students just buy their finished projects/papers on the net nt

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

7. I miss the Reader's Guide to Periodical Literature.

It could be tedious and time-consuming to use, but boy, did I constantly stumble across interesting stuff. Same with the old card catalogues.

[lastlib]

15. In college, I had to use the "Current Digest of Soviet Press".......

for several of my research papers. Talk about ponderous digging.............phew! I don't miss it!

[csziggy]

8. When I was in high school in the 1960s our tiny libraries were limiting

Both the school and the town libraries were very small and it really restricted how much research could be done.

Then I got to my first college which was small with a small library - but I could get access to a state university across the bay. For one of my projects I found the one book that was the definitive source for the subject and had to get my professor to get it through interlibrary loan for me to complete my project.

When I transferred to a different state university with a huge library, it was like heaven. I found information on just about any subject I wanted. One of my projects was cataloging the books on his specialty for a professor and was disgusted that he had no idea how to find the books that I had listed for him, even though I included the Library of Congress catalogue numbers for him.

With our first computer the way to get online was to use the state library system which could connect to the library catalogs of universities all over the world. My husband was researching the early history of Macau and accidentally got into their main university library. He got a listing of book titles to request through interlibrary loans so he could further his interests. We were disappointed that none came from Macau, but from other university libraries in the US.

Now, to do the same research no one has to know LC or Dewey Decimal numbers - just look up the info online. Though if you really want to find older original sources, you do need to actually locate the books or publications at a real library.

[KY_EnviroGuy]

9. I can see a cople of advantages to the process you had to go through...

1. You had to have a strong desire and ethic to acquire the knowledge you needed and you felt rewarded when you finally got it. There's a lot of mental and emotional reward from that process.

2. You probably had little doubt as to the authenticity of the material you were seeking because it probably came with strong references. The internet does not provide that degree of validation for easily available info, which may be biased in many ways (or outright propaganda) or just commercial bullshit.

I've noticed when searching on-line for many things I probably could find in a large library that I usually run into a brick wall of subscription services (Elsevier comes to mind, for example), typically because the info was published in a subscription-based magazine or journal.

In other words, as a public service our libraries subscribe to many professional journals that we can't afford as individuals, thereby providing free access to many good articles with very high credibility.

Therefore, a rational person would conclude that the internet is not always a good source for free, broad-based, high credibility information as many would suggest.

KY.......

[csziggy]

11. True, but libraries can lead you astray

Maybe not as much as the internet now, but for instance - while working my way through the small non-fiction section of my home town library, I discovered Charles Fort and his ilk. For a few months, I read every one of the books that little library contained that were what is now called conspiracy theory subjects.

After a while, the sensationalistic nature and lack of facts convinced me of the silliness of those types of theories. I grew very skeptical of these things. Unfortunately, the internet does not lead people in that direction.

On the other hand, my early experiences taught me to rely on original sources. Even though people are rightfully leery of believing all Wikipedia articles, I find them a really good way to find and check sources.

Maybe that is the major problem now - we are not teaching people to look for the sources that back claims that support information set out. It's easier now to look them up, but few do.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

10. I sure wish I had the Internet when I was in college.

We had a huge card catalog and the Dewey Decimal System. We barely even had photocopiers. There was one in the library. It was about the size of a commercial refrigerator. You put your book down on the glass, put a nickel in the thing, pushed the button and waited. And waited. And waited. Finally it would spit out a page and you'd do it again. You could waste a whole evening just trying to make copies of stuff, so mostly you'd just sit in the library and take notes. I wrote my papers on a manual Smith Corona typewriter and used carbon paper so if I made a mistake, which I did frequently, I'd have to erase both the original and the copy.

I also had to walk to school in the snow, uphill both ways.

[hunter]

14. I had the internet when I was in college. It was tiny then.

You could have easily fit it all on a modern USB memory stick with plenty of room to spare.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARPANET

[malthaussen]

17. Look at all those PDP-10s and -11s. n/t

[hunter]

13. You still have to go to a library to access many scientific and medical journals.

A personal subscription to the journal nature, for example, is $199 a year.

If you have general interests in science and medicine then libraries are still essential.

I simply can't afford subscriptions to everything I read. My reading budget is already strained.

[Hortensis]

16. And in some ways some things are still the same. I'm wishing

I was far better at open sourcing, but those are learned, technical skills requiring special tools. Someone like you has to be teaching or at least introing the basics in schools.

[malthaussen]

18. Unprecedented access to information has not led to...

... unprecedented advances in interpretation. This is unfortunate, but a symptom of how our minds are not keeping up with our technology.

-- Mal

[Stuart G]

19. In order to have advances in "interpretation" people need to be taught how to interpret..

....I tried to teach that. It is one of the most difficult ideas to teach to high school students. And the students must be open to learning that difficult idea. Looking beyond the obvious is not necessarily what people do because it is complicated and difficult. If that were easy, people would do it.

[malthaussen]

20. It should be taught in high school.

It should be taught as soon as the student attains the age of reason. Unfortunately, when I was in the public school system, "objective" tests were the norm: so history became a discipline of fact-gathering, and not much concern was paid to what was done with those facts after they were gathered. Some of my undergrad courses fell under the same spell. "Social Studies" teachers in that era thought they were doing their jobs if they could gin up a 10-question "true or false" quiz.

Facts may be foundational, but it is the structure built on that foundation that is interesting. But what am I saying? Nowadays, there are no "facts" at all, an interesting reaction to the concentration on facts which dominated an earlier generation.

Categorization, OTOH, seems to have replaced interpretation in the past generation. If one can define what category something fits in (or force something into a convenient category), then again, one has done his job. It's an interesting shorthand that assumes everyone defines the categories in the same way.

-- Mal

[hunter]

21. It's scary, but even medical students have to be taught how to do internet research.

God only knows how they get through four years of college unable to discern actual science from internet bullshit.

Computerized testing probably plays a large part in this. You can pass tests by choosing the right answer, A-F, but that doesn't really measure anyone's critical thinking skills.

The doctors who never really "get it" are probably the ones most vulnerable to the charms of pharmaceutical industry sales representatives.

It's a huge problem in our society. One person's lack of critical thinking skills means profits for somebody else.

That's why we have doctors prescribing expensive pharmaceuticals when an inexpensive generic, or maybe no medicine at all, would be the most appropriate choice.