Session 1: August 19, Introductions; Scope of ILS; Being a doctoral student
What are your current interests? What does it mean to pursue those interests as a doctoral student?

• Bent, M., Gannon-Leary, P., & Webb, J. (2008). Information literacy in a researcher's learning life: The seven ages of research. New Review of Information Networking, 13(2), 81-99. [UNC libraries]

Session 2: August 26, Scope of ILS, continued
What subjects and approaches characterize information and library science? What other topics should we add to this list? Whom should we invite to speak to us?
Interest groups will be formed.

• Form interest groups

• Saracevic, T. (1999). Information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(12), 1051-1063. [UNC libraries]
• Bates, M. (1999). The invisible substrate of information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(12), 1043-1050. [UNC libraries]
• Buckland, M.K. (1991). Information as thing. Journal of the American Society for Information science, 42(5), 351-360. [UNC libraries]
• Clark, A. (1999). An embodied cognitive science? Trends in Cognitive Science, 3(9), 345-351. [Available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Never Ending Friending: A Journey into Social Networking. Fox Interactive Media, 2007. Read pages 1-36. http://blogs.forrester.com/Never_Ending_Frieding_April_2007.pdf.
• Optional: Bates, M. (2006). Fundamental forms of information. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 57(8), 1033-1045. [UNC libraries]
• Optional: Wang, F.-Y., Zeng, D., Carley, K.M., & Mao, W. (2007). Social computing: From social informatics to social intelligence. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 22(2), 79-83. [UNC libraries]

Session 3: September 2, Doctoral student tour (note special time and place: begin at 2:15 in room 214 DAVIS LIBRARY)
The SILS doctoral students will be invited to participate in a "5-minute madness" (i.e., brief) overview of their current research interests.

• Alter, S., & Dennis, A. R. (2002). Selecting research topics: Personal experiences and speculations for the future. Communications of the AIS, 8, 314-329. Read sections I and II (pages 314-316). [UNC libraries]
• Scan the web pages or vitae of the current doctoral students, available at http://sils.unc.edu/people/phd.html

• Participating doctoral students (tentative schedule):
  • 2:15-3:25
    • Meredith Weiss, Evidence-based management, IT leadership, Results-based interaction design (first in order)
    • Cassidy Sugimoto, Mentoring, collaboration, and interdisciplinarity in the ILS doctoral dissertating process
    • Derek Rodriguez, Methods for understanding library contributions to undergraduate learning (first half)
    • Dana Hanson-Baldauf, Exploration of everyday information needs and accessibility issues of teens with developmental disabilities
    • Fred Stutzman, Online social support and transitional populations (early in session)
    • Jung Sun Oh, Network analysis of social bookmarking
    • Sanghee Oh, Social questioning and answering
    • Yan Zhang, Psychological processes in human-computer interaction
    • Jacob Kramer-Duffield, Identity and social media
    • Laura Christopherson, Cyberlanguage
  • 3:35-4:45
    • Marco Schmitt, visiting from Europe
    • Weimao Ke, Collaborative expertise retrieval: A referral approach to finding distributed experts
    • Chirag Shah, Collaborative information seeking
    • Jed Dube, Towards a Web environment for the exploration of film
    • Amber Cushing, How people keep track of their past
    • Hollie White, Interdisciplinary knowledge organization and scientific PIMs
    • Carolyn Hank, Digital repositories
    • Kathy Wisser, The organization of knowledge and classification in early nineteenth-century America
    • Simon Spero, LCSH is to thesaurus as doorbell is to mammal
    • Jewel Ward, Metadata extraction and the NARA transcontinental persistent archive prototype

Session 4: September 9, Two critical aspects of scholarly work: theory and methods
What is theory, and why do researchers use/need theory? What methods are used in ILS research, and why?

• Guest speaker: Joanne Marshall (4:00-4:30)
  • Marshall, J.G., et al. (June 2008). Workforce Issues in Library and Information Science (WILIS): Preliminary findings from a career tracking study of LIS graduates. Library Research Round Table, American Library Association Annual Meeting, Anaheim, CA. Also presented at the Deans and Directors Council, Association of Library and Information Science Educators Annual Meeting, Jan 2008. http://www.wilis.unc.edu/docs/ALA-LRRT%20presentation.pdf.
  • Marshall, J.G. (2007). Measuring the value of library and information services: Past reflections, future possibilities. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 24(s1), 4-17. [UNC libraries]

• Seminal work, selected by Julia Kampov-Polevoi: Kuhlthau, C.C. (1991). Inside the search process: Information seeking from the user's perspective. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42(5), 361-371. [UNC libraries]

• Case, D.O. (2007). Theories (section 7.2), and Sources of theory in information seeking (section 7.3). In Looking for Information: A Survey of Research on Information Seeking, Needs, and Behavior. 2nd ed. Amsterdam: Academic Press, 145-151. [Available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Truex, D., Holmström, J., & Keil, M. (2006). Theorizing in information systems research: A reflexive analysis of the adaptation of theory in information systems research. Journal of the AIS, 7(12), 797-821. [UNC libraries]
• Gregor, S. (2006). The nature of theory in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 30(3), 611-642. Read pages 611-622. [UNC libraries, EBSCOhost]
• Case, D.O. (2007). The research process (Chapter 8). In Looking for Information: A Survey of Research on Information Seeking, Needs, and Behavior. 2nd ed. Amsterdam: Academic Press, 173-190. [Available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Budd, J.M. (2007). What we say about research: Rhetoric and argument in library and information science. Library Quarterly, 76(2), 220-240. [UNC libraries]
• Optional: Wilson, T.D. (2002). 'Information science' and research methods. Paper to appear in Slovak, in Knižnicná a informacná veda (Library and Information Science), published by the Department of Library and Information Science, Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovak Republic. Updated 26th March 2002. http://informationr.net/tdw/publ/papers/slovak02.html.
• Optional: Pettigrew, K., & McKechnie, L. (2001). The use of theory in information science research. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 52(1), 62-73. [UNC libraries]
• Optional: Bates, M. (2005). An introduction to metatheories, theories, and models. In Fisher, K. E., Erdelez, S., & McKechnie, L. (eds.), Theories of Information Behavior. Medford, N.J. : Published for the American Society for Information Science and Technology by Information Today, 1-24. [SILS Library - ZA3075.T465 2005]

Session 5: September 16, Reading and writing in ILS; Literature reviews
What is a literature review? Why are they important for researchers? How do I find and analyze the literature that's most pertinent to my research questions? How do I write up what I've learned, and get it published?

• Guest speaker: José-Marie Griffiths (2:00-2:30)
  • Griffiths, J.-M. (n.d.) Model for an understanding of digital information, production, distribution and use [slides]. [Available in Resources section of course Sakai site]
• Guest speaker: Brian Sturm (2:30-3:00)
  • Sturm, B. (2008). Imaginary "geographies" of childhood: School library media centers as secret spaces. Knowledge Quest, 36(4), 46-53. [UNC libraries; clearer copy available in Resources section of course Sakai site]
  • Stanley, S., & Sturm, B.W. (2008, in press). Sequential art books and beginning readers: Can the pictures help them decode words? Knowledge Quest, 37(2). [Available in Resources section of course Sakai site]

• Inspirational work, selected by Ernie Cox: Rosenblatt, L. (1986). The aesthetic transaction.Journal of Aesthetic Education, 20(4), 122-128. [UNC libraries, via JSTOR]

• Webster, J., & Watson, R. (2002). Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review. MIS Quarterly, 26(2), xiii-xxiii. [UNC libraries, JSTOR]
• Lunenburg, F.C., & Irby, B.J. (2008). Writing the literature review [and] Synthesizing the literature. In Writing a Successful Thesis or Dissertation: Tips and Strategies for Students in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 142-164. [Davis - LB2369 .L814 2008; also available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Mingers, J. (2002). The long and winding road: Getting papers published in top journals. Communications of the AIS, 8, article 22. [CAIS online]
• Syrett, K.L., & Rudner, L.M. (1996). Authorship ethics. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 5(1). http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=5&n=1
• Clarke, R. (2006). Plagiarism by academics: More complex than it seems. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 7(2), 91-121. [UNC libraries]
• Optional: Kock, N., & Davison, R. (2003). Dealing with plagiarism in the information systems research community: A look at factors that drive plagiarism and ways to address them. MIS Quarterly, 27(4), 511-532. [UNC libraries, via EBSCOhost]

Session 6: September 23, Creation of knowledge; The scholarly publication process
The information life cycle begins when someone records their current knowledge. These information objects are of great interest to information professionals, and their later use is affected by how they are created and recorded. They are also the means by which scholars' work can have an impact, and so may be viewed as an indicator of scholarly productivity.

• Guest speaker (2:00-2:45): Phil Edwards
  • Edwards, P.M. (2007). Mapping scholars' decision processes and factors that influence how they publish and distribute their work. Proposal awarded the ASIST Thomson ISI Dissertation Proposal Scholarhip, 2007. http://www.unc.edu/home/pmedward/ThompsonISI2007_Edwards.pdf.
  • Edwards, P.M. (2008). Proposal for UNC-CH Faculty Engaged Scholars Program (2008 cohort). http://www.unc.edu/home/pmedward/EDWARDS_2008_FacEngSchPro.pdf.

• Inspirational work, selected by Julia Kampov: Levy, D.M. (2005). To grow in wisdom: Vannevar Bush, information overload, and the life of leisure. Proceedings of the 5th ACM/IEEE-CS joint conference on Digital libraries, June 7-11, 2005, Denver, CO, USA. [ACM Digital Library]

• Bichel, R., & Cheney, D. (2004). The information cycle: How today's events are tomorrow's information. http://www.libraries.psu.edu/instruction/infocycle/infocycle.html.
• Lee, A.S. (2007). Crafting a paper for publication. Communications of the AIS, 20, article 7, 33-40. [CAIS online]
• Ashford, S. J. B. (1996). The publishing process: The struggle for meaning. In Frost, P., & Taylor, M. S. (eds.), Rhythms of Academic Life: Personal Accounts of Careers in Academia. Thousand Oaks: SAGE, 119-127. [Available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Shaw, D., & Vaughan, L. (2008). Publication and citation patterns among LIS faculty: Profiling a "typical professor". Library & Information Science Research, 30(1), 47-55. [UNC libraries]
• Cronin, B., & Meho, L. (2006). Using the h-index to rank influential information scientists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 57(9), 1275-1278. [UNC libraries]
• Lane, N. (2008). US science and technology: An uncoordinated system that seems to work. Technology in Society, 30(3-4), 248-263. [UNC libraries]
• Optional: Browman, H.I., & Stergiou, K.I. (eds.) (2008). The use and misuse of bibliometric indices in evaluating scholarly performance. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 8(1). Theme issue. [http://www.int-res.com/abstracts/esep/v8/n1/]
• Optional: Bollen, J., Van de Sompel, H., Smith, J.A., & Luce, R. (2005). Toward alternative metrics of journal impact: A comparison of download and citation data. Information Processing & Management, 41(6), 1419-1440. [UNC libraries]
• Optional: Birnholtz, J.P. (2006). What does it mean to be an author? The intersection of credit, contribution, and collaboration in science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 57(13), 1758-1770. [UNC libraries]

Session 7: September 30, Collaboration in research; Interdisciplinary research issues
Most social science research today is conducted in collaborative teams. What's the most effective way to identify potential collaborators? What skills are needed to collaborate successfully?
Bates (1999) positioned ILS as a meta-discipline, and it's certainly true that ILS researchers often collaborate with scholars from other disciplines. Why is interdisciplinary research important and what are its key characteristics?

• Guest speaker: Cathy Blake (2:00-2:30)
  • Atkins, D.E. (n.d.). Global interdisciplinary research [slides]. http://www.csl.uiuc.edu/specialfiles/panel1/Atkins_NSF.pdf.
  • National Science Foundation, Cyberinfrastructure Council. (2007, March). NSF 07-28, Cyberinfrastructure Vision for 21st Century Discovery. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2007/nsf0728/index.jsp. [Read Executive Summary in Front Matter.]
  • Atkins, D.E., et al. (2003, January). Revolutionizing Science and Engineering through Cyberinfrastructure: Report of the National Science Foundation Blue-Ribbon Advisory Panel on Cyberinfrastructure. http://www.nsf.gov/od/oci/reports/toc.jsp. [Read Executive Summary.]
• Guest speaker: Stephanie Haas (4:00-4:30)
  • Travers, DT & Haas, SW, (2003). Using nurses' natural language entries to build a concept-oriented terminology for patients' chief complaints in the emergency department. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 36(4-5), 260-270. [UNC libraries]
  • Haas, SW (2008). Many actors, many sources: Medication reconciliation in the Emergency Department. To be presented at the SIG HCI Research Symposium: Human Computer Interaction in Interactive Information Environments with a Focus on Groups, ASIST 2008 Annual Meeting. DRAFT- DO NOT QUOTE. [Available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]

• Current work, selected by Day Alaba: Flake, G.W., & Pennock, D.M. (2004). Self-organization, self-regulation, and self-similarity on the fractal Web. In Lesmoir-Gordon, N. (ed.), The Colours of Infinity: The Beauty, the Power, and the Sense of Fractals.Clear Books, 96-127. http://dpennock.com/papers/flake-colours-2004-fractal-web.pdf. [Slides available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Inspirational work, selected by Ericka Patillo: Honea, S.M. (2000). The impact of professionalism on library administration. Journal of Library Administration, 31(1), 1-28. [UNC libraries]
  

• Wuchty, S., Jones, B.F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science, 316(5827), 1036-1039. [UNC libraries]
• Cronin, B. (2004). Bowling alone together: Academic writing as distributed cognition. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 55(6), 557-560. [UNC libraries]
• Birnholtz, J.P. (2007). When do researchers collaborate? Toward a model of collaboration propensity. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 58(14), 2226-2239. [UNC libraries]
• Nissani, M. (1997). Ten cheers for interdisciplinarity: The case for interdisciplinary knowledge and research. Social Science Journal, 34(2), 201-216. [UNC libraries]
• Cronin, B., & Meho, L.I. (2008). The shifting balance of intellectual trade in information studies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 59(4), 551-564. [UNC libraries]
• Optional: Bronstein, L. R. (2003). A model for interdisciplinary collaboration. Social Work, 48(3), 297-306. [UNC libraries, EBSCOhost]
• Optional: Kouzes, R.T., Myers, J.D., & Wulf, W.A. (1996). Collaboratories: Doing science on the internet. IEEE Computer, 29(8), 40-46. [UNC libraries]
• Optional: Pierce, S. (1999). Boundary crossing in research literature as a means of interdisciplinary information transfer. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(3), 271-279. [UNC libraries]

Session 8: October 7, Reviewing the work of others
Scholarly communication, particularly the peer reviewing process, depends upon the quality of the reviews that scholars provide for each other. Even more important than their advice to editors about whether an article should be accepted is the reviewer's advice to the author about how to improve the work.

• Guest speaker: Sandra Hughes-Hassell

• Inspirational work, selected by Javier Velasco: van Zwol, R. (2007). Flickr: Who is looking? IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence (WI'07), 184-190. http://www.semedia.org/PubFolder/vanZwol-FlickrWhoLooking.pdf.

• Edwards, P.M. (2007). Developing as a writer: Refereeing manuscripts for peer-reviewed LIS journals. College & Research Libraries News, 68(10): 630-631. [Available online]
• Lee, A.S. (1995). Reviewing a manuscript for publication. Journal of Operations Management, 13(1), 87-92. [UNC libraries]
• Romanelli, E. (1996). Becoming a reviewer: Lessons somewhat painfully learned. In Frost, P., & Taylor, M. S. (eds.), Rhythms of Academic Life: Personal Accounts of Careers in Academia. Thousand Oaks: SAGE, 263-267. [Available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Optional: Koh, C. E. (2003). IS journal review process: A survey on IS research practices and journal review issues. Information & Management, 40(8), 743-756. [UNC libraries]

Session 9: October 14, Interest group presentations
Each interest group will be invited to present a summary of what they've learned. Assigned readings will be selected by the interest groups.

• 2:00-2:25, The dynamics of online social networks, presented by Day Alaba, Ericka Patillo, and Javier Velasco
• 2:25-2:50, Researchers' citation behavior, presented by Xi Niu and Sarah Ramdeen
• 2:50-3:15, Improved semantics in the context of Web retrieval, presented by Heather Bowden, Sarah Carrier, and Xiangyu Fan
• Break
• 3:25-3:50, Reading for learning: The Web versus print, presented by Ernie Cox and Julia Kampov
• 3:50-4:15, Frameworks for describing patient hand-off, presented by Earl Bailey and Lauren Kearns

Session 10: October 21, Preservation: personal and cultural

• Guest speakers (2:00-2:45): Helen Tibbo and Cal Lee

• Current work, selected by Heather Bowden: Pearson, D., & Webb, C. (2008). Defining file format obsolescence: A risky journey. International Journal of Digital Curation, 3(1). http://www.ijdc.net/ijdc/article/view/76.
• Seminal work, selected by Heather Bowden: O'Toole, J.M. (1989). On the idea of permanence. American Archivist, 52(1), 10–25. [Available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Additional article of interest, selected by Heather Bowden: Entlich, R., & Buckley, E. (2006, Oct 15). Digging up bits of the past: Hands-on with obsolescence. RLG DigiNews. [http://worldcat.org/arcviewer/1/OCC/2007/08/08/0000070519/viewer/file2514.html#article1]

• Smith, A. (2007). Valuing preservation. Library Trends, 56(1), 4-25. [UNC libraries, EBSCOhost ]
• Marshall, C.C. (2008). From writing and analysis to the repository: Taking the scholars' perspective on scholarly archiving. Proceedings of the 8th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, 251-260. [ACM Digital Library]
• Dumais, S., Cutrell, E., Cadiz, J., Jancke, G., Sarin, R., & Robbins, D.C. (2003). Stuff I've seen: A system for personal information retrieval and re-use. Proceedings of the 26th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, 72-79. [ACM Digital Library]
• Lee, C. (2007). A talk on digital preservation. UNC-CH/YouTube Information in Life Series. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHy9CW_vMp4&feature=PlayList&p=19189F4C412A6E09&index=1.

October 28 , ASIST; class cancelled

Session 11: November 4, Representing/describing knowledge objects so they can be retrieved
Information/knowledge objects may exist, but they are not useful unless the person needing them can discover them. One important role of the information professional is to represent and organize information/knowledge objects in ways that support effective information retrieval.

• Guest speaker: Reagan Moore (2:00-2:30)
• Rajasekar, A., Wan, M., Moore, R., & Schroeder, W. (2006). A prototype rule-based distributed data management system. Workshop on Next Generation Distributed Data Management, 2006. http://irods.org/pubs/RODs-paper.doc.
• Moore, R.W. (2002). The San Diego Project: Persistent objects. Proceedings of the Workshop on XML as a Preservation Language, Urbino, Italy, October 2002. http://www.sdsc.edu/srb/Pubs/persistent-objects.doc.

• Inspirational event, selected by Sarah Carrier: Dublin Core Conference
• Current work, selected by Xi Niu: Meho, L.I., & Yang, K. (2007). Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of Science versus Scopus and Google Scholar. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 58(13), 2105-2125. [UNC libraries]
• Current work, selected by Sarah Ramdeen: Curry, G.B., & Connor, R.C.H. (2008). Automated extraction of data from text using an XML parser: An earth science example using fossil descriptions. Geosphere, 4(1), 159-169. [UNC libraries]

• Brachman, R.J., & Levesque, H.J. (2004). Section 1.1, The key concepts: Knowledge, representation, and reasoning. In Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. Amsterdam: Morgan Kaufmann, 2-4. [Available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Sowa, J. (2000). Chapter 1, Logic. In Knowledge Representation: Logical, Philosophical, and Computational Foundations. Brooks/Cole, 1-43. [Available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Chu, H. Information representation I: Basic approaches, [and] Information representation II: Other related topics. In Information Representation and Retrieval in the Digital Age. ASIST Monograph Series. Medford, NJ: Information Today, 25-46. [Available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Optional: Miller, G. (1995). WordNet: A lexical database for English. Communications of the ACM, 38(11), 39-41. [ACM Digital Library]
• Optional: Binwal, J.C., & Lalhmachhuana. (2001). Knowledge representation: Concept, techniques and the analytico-synthetic paradigm. Knowledge Organization, 28(1), 5-16. [SILS Library]

Session 12: November 11, Organizing knowledge objects so they can be retrieved
In addition to describing individual knowledge objects, information professionals develop schemes (including semantic frameworks, ontologies, etc.) to organize collections of objects.

• Guest speaker: Jane Greenberg (2:00-2:30)
  • Cutter, C.A. (1904). Rules for a Dictionary Catalog. Washington, DC: 4th edition, rewritten. http://digital.library.unt.edu/permalink/meta-dc-1048:1.
    • Preface to the fourth edition, pages/sequences 5-6.
    • General remarks, and Objects -- means -- reasons, pages/sequences 11-12.
  • World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). (2008). Semantic Web Activity Statement. http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Activity.
  • Skim: Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. (2007). DCMI Abstract Model. http://dublincore.org/documents/abstract-model/.
  • Skim: Greenberg, J., & Méndez, E. (2007). Abstracts and Introduction to special issue, Knitting the Semantic Web. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 43(3/4). http://www.catalogingandclassificationquarterly.com/ccq43nr3-4.html.

• Inspirational work, selected by Heather Bowden: Hillis, D. (2004-2007). Aristotle: The knowledge web. Also addendum, discussion, and New York Times article by J. Markoff . http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/hillis04/hillis04_index.html.
• Current work, selected by Xiangyu Fan: Hu, J., Fang, L., Cao, Y., Zeng, H.J., Li, H., Yang, Q., & Chen, Z. (2008). Enhancing text clustering by leveraging Wikipedia semantics. Proceedings of the 31st annual international ACM SIGIR conference,179-186. [ACM Digital Library]

• Hjørland, B. (2008). What is knowledge organization? Knowledge Organization, 35(2/3), 86-101. [SILS Library; also available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Jacob, E. K. (2004). Classification and categorization: A difference that makes a difference. Library Trends, 52(3), 515-540. [UNC libraries, EBSCOhost]
• Shadbolt, N., Hall, W., & Berners-Lee, T. (2006). The semantic Web revisited. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 21(3), 96-101. [UNC libraries]
• Listen to: Schachter, J., Butterfield, S., Wales, J., & Shirky, C. (2005). Folksonomy: How I learned to stop worrying and love the mess. Panel discussion from ETech 2005. (35 minutes). [http://www.itconversations.com/shows/detail464.html]
• Optional: Kwasnik, B. (1999). The role of classification in knowledge representation and discovery. Library Trends, 48(1), 22-47. [UNC libraries, EBSCOhost]
• Optional: Mai, J.-E. (2004). Classification in context: Relativity, reality, and representation. Knowledge Organization, 31(1), 39-48. [SILS Library]
• Optional: Fonseca, F. (2007). The double role of ontologies in information science research. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 58(6), 786-793. [UNC libraries]
• Optional: Pinto, H.S., & Martins, J.P. (2004). Ontologies: How can they be built? Knowledge and Information Systems, 6(4), 441-464. [UNC libraries]

Session 13: November 18, Oral presentation of mini-reviews

• 2:00-2:50
  • Julia Kampov, Media richness theory
  • Day Alaba, Swarm intelligence and the dynamics of information
• 3:00-4:15
  • Xi Niu, Relevance feedback
  • Heather Bowden, iRODS and implications for automated file format migration
  • Sarah Carrier, Tools to assist in automatic generation of RDF and ontological structures

Session 14: November 25, Oral presentation of mini-reviews

• 2:00-3:40
  • Ericka Patillo, Managerial decision making in academic libraries
  • Ernie Cox, Works in progress: Youth fan fiction and the Web
  • Javier Velasco, Intimacy levels on online social networks
  • Sarah Ramdeen, XML and geodata preservation
• 3:50-5:00
  • Lauren Kearns, Standardized controlled vocabularies
  • XiangYu Fan, Latent semantic analysis in information retrieval
  • Earl Bailey, Impact of bias on information systems

Session 15: December 2, 6:00pm , Dinner meeting at Barbara's home, 110 Silver Cedar Lane; Reflections on what we've learned so far

Friday, December 5, 5:00pm: Second (written) mini-review due

Session 16: January 13, Personal information management

• Guest speakers: Deborah Barreau and Rob Capra (2:00-2:30)

• Current work, selected by Earl Bailey: Karger , D.R., & Jones, W. (2006). Data unification in personal information management. Communications of the ACM, 49(1), 77-82. [ACM Digital Library]
• Current work, selected by Julia Kampov: Dearman D., & Pierce, J.S. (2008). “It’s on my other computer!”: Computing with multiple devices. Proceedings of the 26th Annual SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 767-776. [ACM Digital Library]

• Jones, W. (2007). How people keep and organize their information. In Jones, W., & Teevan, J. (eds.), Personal Information Management. Seattle: University of Washington Press, pages. [Davis - HD30.2 .P472 2007; also available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Barreau, D. (2008). The persistence of behavior and form in the organization of personal information. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 59(2), 307-317. [UNC libraries]
• Kelly, D. (2006). Evaluating personal information management behavior and tools. Communications of the ACM, 49(1), 84-86. [ACM Digital Library]
• Optional: Barreau, D.K., & Nardi, B.A. (1995). Finding and reminding: File organization from the desktop. ACM SIG CHI Bulletin, 27(3), 39-43. [ACM Digital Library]
• Optional: Jones, W. (2007). Personal information management. Annual Review of Information Science & Technology, 41, 453-504. [SILS Library Reference - Z699.A1 A65; also available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]

Session 17: January 20, Writing a research proposal; Managing a research project
Writing a research proposal is a critical skill that doctoral students must develop; in addition, you need to be able to manage a research project,if approved/funded. Some of these basic skills will be discussed in this session.

• Brause, R.S. (2000). Writing your dissertation proposal while designing your dissertation research. Writing Your Doctoral Dissertation: Invisible Rules for Success. London: Falmer, 97-110. [UNC libraries, online text]
• Dalton, R., & Siverson, R. (1998). Gee! I've never spent $5.5 million before: The six fallacies of NSF proposal writing. PS: Political Science and Politics, 31(1), 74-76. [UNC libraries, JSTOR
• Optional, but do take a look at the figure: Locke, L.F., Spirduso, W.W., & Silverman, S.J. (1992). Developing proposals: Some common problems. In Galliers, R. (ed.), Information Systems Research: Issues, Methods and Practical Guidelines. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific, 182-207. [SILS Library - T58.6 .I515 1992; also available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Optional: Robson, C. (2002). Appendix A: Writing a project proposal. In Real World Research. 2nd ed. Blackwell, 526-533. [SILS Library - H62 .R627 2002]
• Optional: Trochim, W.M.K. (2006). Research Methods Knowledge Base.
  • Foundations: Philosophy of Research, http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/philosophy.php
  • Foundations: Conceptualizing, http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/resprob.php
• Optional: Metoyer-Duran, C., & Hernon, P. (1994). Problem statements in research proposals and published research: A case study of researchers' viewpoints. Library & Information Science Research, 16(2), 105-118. [SILS Library]

Session 18: January 27, Research ethics; Research with human subjects
Particular issues arise when your research involves human subjects/participants. this session will cover research ethics generally and, more specifically, the ethical issues associated with working with human subjects.

• Current article, selected by Ericka Patillo: Lakos, A. (2007). Evidence-based library management: The leadership challenge. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 7(4), 431-450. [UNC libraries]
• Inspirational work, selected by Day Alaba: Gleick, J. (1988). Chaos: Making a New Science. Penguin. (See p. 368.) [Davis Library - Q172.5.C45 G54 1988; other editions/copies available in Davis, the Undergraduate Libary, and the Geological Sciences Library]

• the Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research. Office of the Secretary, The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. April 18, 1979. http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/belmont.htm.
• A guide to the IRB process. http://ohre.unc.edu/guide_to_irb.php.

Session 19: February 3, Information retrieval systems
Information retrieval systems provide access to recorded information/knowledge objects. The design and evaluation of such systems is a core area of research in ILS.

• Final product: Brief description due

• Guest speaker: Bob Losee (2:00-2:30)
• Guest speaker: Javed Mostafa (2:30-3:00)

• Baeza-Yates, R., & Ribeiro-Neto, B. (1999). Modern Information Retrieval. ACM Press, Addison-Wesley. [SILS Library - Z667 .B34 1999]
  • Chapter 1, Introduction, 1-18 [Available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Croft, W. B. (ed.) (2000). Advances in Information Retrieval: Recent Research from the Center for Intelligent Information Retrieval. Boston: Kluwer. [UNC libraries, search in NetLibrary]
  • Chapter 1, Combining approaches to information retrieval, 1-36
• Kekalainen, J., & Jarvelin, K. (2002). Evaluating information retrieval systems under the challenges of interaction and multidimensional dynamic relevance. Proceedings of the 4th CoLIS Conference, 252-270. [http://www.info.uta.fi/tutkimus/fire/archive/JK05.pdf]
• Callan, J., Allan, J., Clarke, C.L.A., Dumais, S., Evans, D.A., Sanderson, M., & Zhai, C.X. (2007). Meeting of the MINDS: An information retrieval research agenda. SIGIR Forum, 41(2), 25-34. [ACM Digital Library]
• Optional: Wleklinski, J. M. (2005). Studying google scholar: Wall to wall coverage? Online, 29(3), 22-26. [UNC libraries, EBSCOhost]

February 10: No class; Participate in i-Schools Conference, Chapel Hill

Session 20: February 17, Interactive information retrieval

• Guest speaker: Diane Kelly (2:00-2:30)

• Belkin, N.J. (1990). The cognitive viewpoint in information science. Journal of Information Science: Principles and Practice, 16(1), 11-15. [SILS Library; also available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Belkin, N.J. (1993). Interaction with texts: Information retrieval as information-seeking behavior. In Information retrieval '93. Von der Modellierung zur Anwendung. Konstanz: Universitaetsverlag Konstanz, 55-66. [Available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Ingwersen, P., & Willett, P. (1995). An introduction to algorithmic and cognitive approaches for information retrieval. Libri, 45(3/4), 160-177. [Available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Savage-Knepshield, P.A., & Belkin, N.J. (1999). Interaction in information retrieval: Trends over time. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(12), 1067-1082.
• Optional: Järvelin, K. (2007). An analysis of two approaches in information retrieval: From frameworks to study designs. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 58(7), 971-986. [UNC libraries]

Session 21: February 24, Information needs and their expression
It could be argued that the raison d'etre of the ILS profession is to bring together information that has been created with the people who need it for their own purposes. This will be the first of a series of sessions examining the processes by which this professional goal can be reached. We'll begin from the perspective of the person needing information.

• Guest speaker: Claudia Gollop (2:00-2:30)

• Current work, selected by Ernie Cox: Harris, R., & Wathen, N. (2007). "If my mother was alive I'd probably have called her": Women's search for health information in rural Canada. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 47(1), 67-79. [UNC libraries, via EBSCOhost]

• Wilson, T. D. (1997). Information behaviour: An interdisciplinary perspective. Information Processing & Management, 33(4), 551-572. [UNC libraries]
• Belkin, N. J. (1980). Anomalous states of knowledge as a basis for information retrieval. Canadian Journal of Information Science, 5, 133-145. [SILS Library; also available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Borlund, P. (2003). The concept of relevance in IR. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 54(10), 913-925. [UNC libraries]
• Taylor, R. S. (1968). Question-negotiation and information seeking in libraries. College & Research Libraries, 29(3), 178-194. [SILS Library; also available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Optional: Spärck-Jones, K., Robertson, S.E., & Sanderson, M. (2007). Ambiguous requests: Implications for retrieval tests, systems and theories. SIGIR Forum, 41(2), 8-17. [ACM Digital Library]

Session 22: March 3, Information seeking behaviors: models and frameworks
When someone experiences an information need, what happens next? What theoretical models and frameworks can we use to anticipate people's information seeking behaviors?

• Final product: Extended outline due

• Guest speaker: Gary Marchionini (2:00-2:30)

• Bates, M. (1989). The design of browsing and berrypicking techniques for the online search interface. Online Review, 13(5), 407-424. [SILS Library; also available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Kuhlthau, C. C. (1991). Inside the search process: Information seeking from the user's perspective. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42(5), 361-371. [UNC libraries]
• Ellis, D. (1993). Modeling the information-seeking patterns of academic researchers: a grounded theory approach. Library Quarterly, 63(4), 469-486. [SILS Library; also available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Chatman, E. (1996). The impoverished life-world of outsiders. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 47(3), 193-206. [UNC libraries]
• Marchionini, G. (2006). Exploratory search: From finding to understanding. Communications of the ACM, 49(4), 41-46. [ACM Digital Library]
• Fisher, K.E., & Naumer, C.M. (2006). Information grounds: Theoretical basis and empirical findings on information flow in social settings. In Spink, A., & Cole, C. (eds.), New Directions in Human Information Behavior. Springer, 93-111. [UNC libraries, online book]
• Optional: Chatman, E. (1999). A theory of life in the round. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(3), 207-217. [UNC libraries]
• Optional: Erdelez, S. (2004). Investigation of information encountering in the controlled research environment. Information Processing & Management, 40(6), 1013-1025. [UNC libraries]
• Optional: Vakkari, P., Pannanen, M., & Serola, S. (2003). Changes of search terms and tactics while writing a research proposal: longitudinal case study. Information Processing & Management, 39(3), 445-464. [UNC libraries]
• Optional: Ingwersen, P. (1982). Search procedures in the library--Analyzed from the cognitive point of view. Journal of Documentation, 38(3), 165-191. [SILS Library]

March 10: No class (spring break)

Session 23: March 17, Information seeking processes: empirical studies and methods
The processes by which people find the information they need are of interest to both practitioners and researchers in ILS. How can we study people's responses to their information needs?

• Guest speaker: Brad Hemminger (2:00-2:30)

• Rieh, S.Y. (2004). On the web at home: Information seeking and web searching in the home environment. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 55(8), 743-753. [UNC libraries]
• Wildemuth, B.M. (2004). The effects of domain knowledge on search tactic formulation.  Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 55(3), 246-258. [UNC libraries]
• Vakkari, P. (2001). A theory of the task-based information retrieval process: A summary and generalisation of a longitudinal study. Journal of Documentation, 57(1), 44-60. [UNC libraries]
• Savolainen, R. (1993). The sense-making theory: Reviewing the interests of a user-centered approach to information seeking and use. Information Processing & Management, 29(1), 13-28. [SILS Library; also available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Optional: Hert, C.A. (1997). What do we know about user behavior on information retrieval systems? In Understanding Information Retrieval Interactions: Theoretical and Practical Implications. Greenwich, CT: Ablex, 13-50. [SILS Library - ZA4060 .H67 1997]
• Optional: Buente, W., & Robbin, A. (2008). Trends in internet information behavior, 2000-2004. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 59(11), 1743-1760. [UNC libraries]

Session 24: March 24, Information services

• Guest speaker: Jeff Pomerantz (4:00-4:30)

• Saracevic, T., & Kantor, P. B. (1997). Studying the value of library and information services. Part I. Establishing a theoretical framework. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48(6), 527-542. [UNC libraries]
  
• Spohrer, J., Maglio, P. P., Bailey, J., & Gruhl, D. (2007). Steps toward a science of service systems. Computer, 40(1), 71-77. [UNC libraries]
• Pomerantz, J., & Marchionini, G. (2007). The digital library as place. Journal of Documentation, 63(4), 505-533. [UNC libraries]
• Burnett, G., Jaeger, P.T., & Thompson, K.M. (2008). Normative behavior and information: The social aspects of information access. Library & Information Science Research, 30(1), 56-66. [UNC libraries]
• Optional: Saracevic, T., & Kantor, P. B. (1997). Studying the value of library and information services. Part II. Methodology and taxonomy. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48(6), 543-563. [UNC libraries]

Session 25: March 31, Information organizations and their management; Information professions and the workforce
Information activities happen within organizational settings, and many of the activities are carried out by professionals working in those organizations. In this session, we'll consider some of the organizational and staffing issues associated with the information professions.

• Guest speaker: Barbara Moran (2-2:30)

• Readings to be assigned

Session 26: April 7, Final presentations
Each class member's final product will be discussed

Session 27: April 14, Final presentations
Each class member's final product will be discussed

Session 28: April 21, Year-end review
What have you learned? Re-read the description of your interests that you posted to the class list last August. Have they changed? In what way? What research opportunities and hot topics interest you? How do you want to contribute to them in the next year? During the rest of your doctoral studies? Afterwards? What do you need to learn to accomplish these goals?

April 30, 5:00pm: Final product due

Syllabus / Assignments / Sakai class site

© Barbara M. Wildemuth, 2008. All rights reserved.