Competency 5

Competency 5: design, query and evaluate information retrieval systems

Information retrieval systems are the mainstay of libraries. This is where Metadata (data on data) becomes a science. Without Information Retrieval (IR) Systems there would be no ability to access, store, or search items that have been tirelessly cataloged. In fact without an information retrieval system, or an OPAC, cataloging would would render the collection virtually private or inaccessible. However, one can not truly remove cataloging from Information retrieval, but rather begin to understand how every aspect in information retrieval plays off each other. What's more, Information retrieval isn't reserved solely for libraries. One doesn't realize how often the public uses information retrieval systems beyond our library's OPAC. To better understand what an IR is think of Google, imdb, Amazon, OPACs (Online Public Access Catalog) in public libraries, and many other systems one may use search for information on any given day. What one doesn't realize is the care and evaluation that goes into creating and maintaining an information retrieval system. Without this care, in the case of the library, the collection would be a waste and the library (or catalog of information) would cease to function at all. If one can not actually find and retrieve information then the system must be re-evaluated. And in the case of a library, when a patron searches for titles, keywords, subjects, and so on, if the information retrieval system isn't set up thoroughly and properly, a patron will never be able to find and check out items. This would not only be a disservice to the patron, but could potentially affect funding, statistics, and other crucial records that a library may need to survive.

There are three major components of an information retrieval system for a library. There is the data structure, the language we use, and lastly, studying how users interact with a system and how they naturally search for information. It may seem that the theory and practice of creating a structure or database would be the single most important proficiency a librarian can hold. This is true, vocabulary and design are VERY important. However, the user side of IR is a extremely important as well. No matter how much work goes into figuring out the "rules" for your structure (i.e. vocabulary), if users' information seeking behaviors are not accounted for then the database structure may not be successful at all. In fact, user interaction is equal in importance to the creation and design and ultimately will allow the librarian to maintain and improve upon the system. A good example of an Information Retrieval system that puts a large emphasis on user input can be seen in my first artifact.

Demonstrative Works

In Artifact 1, I visited and reported on the Thousand Oaks Public Library's OPAC. I met with a Librarian who both demonstrated how their OPAC worked as well as showed me the way they tailor designed their OPAC to meet their users' needs. Their philosophy was to mimic Google. They removed the "Advanced Search" option and created a single search bar that users would be familiar with due to the popularity and widespread use of Google. Furthermore, this OPAC neutralizes the fear many advanced searchers (or Librarians) may have with the lack of an Advanced Search option, by having better language and structure behind the scenes. Just as we are not used to Google searching with Boolean principles (although it does work on this theory we just don't see it), the Thousand Oaks Librarian explained that the search was designed so as to over compensate for the lack of Boolean search rules and directions for users (as you see in many other library catalogs) by automatically omitting general search directions for users. So the same principles are applied but in a more familiar way. No longer do patrons need to follow strict search rules when entering search terms. The closest thing to an advances search this library has is the "Keyword" tab (another user friendly term). The review, interview, and evaluation of the Thousand Oaks Public Library's OPAC not only gave me perspective but made me understand Information Retrieval in a real world application. It gave me the opportunity to apply the theory and philosophy behind the science of Metadata and ultimately Information Retrieval Systems.

Artifact 2, the final exam for LIBR 202 Information Retrieval, tested our knowledge of database structures and our ability to put theory into practice. The final contained a real life situation and we had to evaluate and propose a design for the given, topical database. This final demonstrated and proved my ability to create the rules and guidelines for a database by carefully considering all possible entries and the language that would go along with it. One could see how a title would be a required entry, however, it would not be repeatable. But other information may be included but not required. I also include notes to explain my rules as well as a longer rationale following each exercise. This final showed my overall ability to understand the importance of Information Retrieval theory and how to practically apply it. As a result of this class, I understand why we use practices such as controlled vocabulary, and how understanding the technical side of IR affects the three components of Information Retrieval as a whole.

Artifact 1: Evaluation of the Thousand Oaks Public Library's OPAC - LIBR 202

Artifact 2: Final for Information Retrieval 202 - LIBR 202