Running head: DIAGNOSTIC INTERVIEW

Diagnostic Interview Adriene Staggs Emporia State University

DIAGNOSTIC INTERVIEW Diagnostic Interview Many graduate students conduct elaborate searches for information pertaining to assignments given in class, their thesis topics, or their personal desire for knowledge. Katelynn, a graduate student at Emporia State University, is no exception. She performs well academically. Katelynns dominate learning style is intrapersonal as defined by Howard Gardner. This style is characterized by having an understanding [of] one's own interests, goals. These learners tend to shy away from others. They're in tune with their inner feelings; they have wisdom, intuition and motivation, as well as a strong will, confidence and opinions. They can be taught through independent study and introspection. . . . They are the most independent of the learners (Lane, 2004, Chapter 5). Ample evidence supports the characterization of Katelynn as an intrapersonal learner. First, she describes herself as someone who retains and understands information best through reading and lecture. She frequently engages in independent study. Last semester she completed an independent study of Latin. This semester she is taking a class about reading and speaking Middle English a second time because she wants to explore additional material not covered in the previous class. While Katelynn is very independent, she interacts well with others. These interactions offer further evidence of her intrapersonal learning style. During our short interview her strong opinions were evident as she spoke decidedly about her evaluations of sources she found. Information Need that Prompted Search Katelynns learning style partially prompted her information search. As a third semester graduate student, she is beginning to look for information related to her thesis. The thesis explores Orfeo, a poem written in Middle English. Katelynn discovered a reference to Ovids

DIAGNOSTIC INTERVIEW Metamorphosis in the poem. She wanted to find an English/Latin translation of Metamorphosis in order to better understand its relation to Orfeo, her thesis topic. Katelynn wanted a Latin translation because it was the original language of the text. Although she knows some Latin, she hoped the parallel English text would supplement her limited knowledge. A class or teacher did not mandate the search. This fact reinforces the assertion that Katelynn is an intrapersonal learner. Process and Rational Employed in the Search When Katelynn realized that she needed a translation of Ovids Metamorphosis, she asked for the recommendation of a professor who specialized in Early and Middle English. He recommended reading the 1914 Lobe Library edition of the text. He thought the universitys library carried a copy and advised Katelynn to begin her search there. Katelynn proceeded to the library where she searched the on-line catalog by the works title. While her query returned several results, she could not tell from the entries if any of the books were Lobe Library editions. She recorded the call numbers of the titles and went to search among the stacks. She found the titles on the shelves to be unhelpful. Most of the titles were written strictly in English. Some were composed during the Renaissance period, and the version that Katelynn needed was written earlier. Other titles were verse translations. Katelynn decided these translations were not authoritative because the translated rhyme schemes and meter compromised some of the original ideas. She did not find a single Latin translation that was complete. Katelynn would have preferred a hard copy of the text with mirroring English and Latin passages. She believes readers can better understand the authors intent using books formatted in this way. However, the failure of the librarys holding to fulfill her information need caused

DIAGNOSTIC INTERVIEW Katelynn to turn to the internet. She began her internet search using the Google search engine. Her knowledge of several specific versions of Ovids Metamorphosis led her to enter these titles into the keyword search box. The displayed results did not satisfy her. Next, Katelynn went to Project Gutenberg because the website is known for having specific versions of older texts. She believed the works she found at this website would better serve her purposes. At Project Gutenberg, she conducted a keyword search using the phrase Ovids Metamorphosis. The returned results did not include editions of the text with English and Latin side-by-side. Katelynn settled for separate prose English and Latin translations. She verified the authority of the English translation by manually translating the first sentence of the Latin text. She then compared her own translation with the English translation she found on Project Gutenberg. After the comparison, she was satisfied that the two documents basically said the same thing in their respective language. She believes they are both translations completed in the Victorian era, but she has not checked the credentials of the publisher. Searchers Feelings about the Process Katelynn describes herself as a moderately advanced searcher because she understands how to use the library and the internet to navigate information. One example she cites is the fact that she can use the find function in PDF documents while some of her colleagues do not know the tool exists. She also acknowledges that she regularly evaluates her sources. She credits her searching ability to library instruction and extensive practice. Nonetheless, Katelynn often became annoyed throughout the search when she could not find what she wanted. It appears she was somewhat vocal about her dissatisfaction because another colleague joined the search when he heard her complaining about the lack of success. She maintains that she is relatively happy

DIAGNOSTIC INTERVIEW with the results of her search. She said, Im happy with what I got even though its not exactly what I want. They work (K. Robinson, personal communication, September 22, 2010). Evaluative Criteria For the most part, the criteria that determined the success or failure of the search was determined by the specific nature of the material Katelynn needed. The ideal information source would be an authoritative, side-by-side English/Latin, prose translation of Ovids Metamorphosis. Taylor (1968) characterizes this type of search as a command because it denotes the request for a specific item or specific subject combination which the inquirer has already assumed will satisfy his need (p. 188). Katelynns standards of authority were somewhat inconsistent. She carefully evaluated the texts found in the universitys library, yet she assumed validity by the time she printed off the internet sources. Additionally, her criteria relaxed as the search continued. Barriers Katelynn considered the availability of information a barrier. She had several good suggestions from professors and colleagues of titles. Unfortunately, neither the library nor Project Gutenberg contained those sources. Despite Katelynns assertion that she experienced only one barrier, I believe her frustration may have also served as a sort of barrier. Dervins(1992) sense-making metaphor lists angst as a barrier to sense-making (as cited in Goldbold, 2006, Dervin and Sense-Making, para. 1). Seemingly, Katelynns annoyance with the results of many of the queries caused her to change her criteria. In effect, she sidestepped this barrier. Level of Assistance Although Katelynn is a skilled searcher, she began her search by seeking assistance. She asked a professor of who specialized in Early and Middle English what source he recommended.

DIAGNOSTIC INTERVIEW He named the Lobe Librarys 1914 version of Metamorphosis and directed Katelynn to the university library. A search of the librarys holding proved unsuccessful. Additionally, a colleague heard her complaining about her lack of usable results; he secretly joined the search. The next day, he emailed Katelynn a link to a website that contained a version of Metamorphosis that alternated between English and Latin. This version met most of Katelynns criteria; however, the specific passage she needed was contained in volume ten of the text. The website ended its translation at volume four. Analysis As I interviewed Katelynn, her extensive knowledge of Middle English, Latin, and the subject matter became clear. She also displayed an above average command of system searching techniques. Nonetheless, she began by speaking with an expert. Her willingness to engage other people in her search for information allowed her to begin navigating through a somewhat unusual search process. This technique could be considered a best practice of accomplished searchers. During the interview, I asked Katelynn if she had considered inter-library loan. She said that she did not think about that option because she assumed the information would be readily available on-line. This assumption reflects Taylors (1968) conclusion that ease of access to an information system is more significant than amount of quality of information retrievable (p. 181-182). A great possibility exists that the information could have been retrieved from a larger academic library. However, the retrieval would have taken time. Katelynn was willing to sacrifice quality for availability. Although Katelynn maintained she was happy with her eventual texts, her body language and tone of voice suggested otherwise. None of her materials met her initial criteria; the

DIAGNOSTIC INTERVIEW standards were lowered. Even her measure of the sources authority seemed to lessen. She may have made these concessions based on the gravity of her information need. On a 1 10 scale with ten being the highest, she ranked the importance of finding her information a seven. She admits she could have kept looking but just did not want to do so. The information seeking model proposed by Savolainen (as cited in Case, p. 131) accounts for many of the decisions Katelynn made. Savolainens model recognizes the searchers evaluation of the problem influences her process. Further, Savolainens inclusion of the searchers attitude and the influence of situational factors such as time apply to Katelynn. Possibly, she lowered her standards based on the results mid-level of importance, time constraints, and her attitude of frustration.

DIAGNOSTIC INTERVIEW References Case, D. O. (2008). Looking for information: a survey of research on information seeking, needs, and behavior (2nd ed.). Bingley, United Kingdom: Emerald. Godbold, N. (2006). Beyond information seeking: towards a general model of information behavior. IR: information research, 11(4). Retrieved from http://informationr.net/ir/114/paper269.html Lane, C. (2004). Chapter 5: learning styles. DLRN Technology Resource Guide (WestEd Regional Technology in Education Consortium). Retreived from http://rtecexchange.edgateway.net/cs/rtecp/view/rtec_sub/131 Taylor, R. S. (1968). Question-negotiation and information seeking in libraries. College and Research Libraries, May, 178-194.

DIAGNOSTIC INTERVIEW Appendix A The texts Katelynn found cover many pages. Consequently, they are not included in their entirety in this appendix. However, readers may view Katelynns final selections by navigating to the websites listed below.
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/26073/26073-h/26073-h.htm http://www.hs-augsburg.de/~harsch/Chronologia/Lsante01/Ovidius/ovi_me10.html

DIAGNOSTIC INTERVIEW Appendix B The interviewee consented to the following conditions. The student researcher has filed a copy of the form below that contains both the interviewer and interviewees signatures.

10

Emporia State University School of Library and Information Management Diagnostic Interview Release Statement Student Researcher: Adriene Staggs (864) 590 1327 astaggs@emporia.edu Supervisor: Robert Gibson 620-341-6694 rgibson@emporia.edu

I am a student at Emporia State University and I am conducting an interview for a class I am currently enrolled. During this interview, you will be asked to answer some questions regarding your library research habits. This interview was designed to be approximately forty-five minutes in length. However, please feel free to expand on the topic or talk about related ideas. Also, if there are any questions you would rather not answer or that you do not feel comfortable answering, please say so and we will stop the interview or move on to the next question, whichever you prefer. All the information will be kept confidential and stored secure location. Only the faculty mentioned above and I will have access to this information. Upon completion of the project, all data will be destroyed or stored in a secure location. Participant's Agreement: I am aware that my participation in this interview is voluntary. I understand the intent and purpose of this assignment. If, for any reason, at any time, I wish to stop the interview, I may do so without having to give an explanation. I am aware the data will be used in a course project. I have the right to review, comment on, and/or withdraw information prior to the project's submission. The data gathered in this study are confidential with respect to my personal identity unless I specify otherwise. [If participant is being tape recorded:] I understand if I say anything that I believe may incriminate myself, the interviewer will immediately record over the potentially incriminating information. The interviewer will then ask me if I would like to continue the interview.

DIAGNOSTIC INTERVIEW If I have any questions about this study, I am free to contact the student researcher or the faculty. If I have any questions about my rights as a research participant, I am free to contact the Dean, School of Library and Information Management Dr. Gwen Alexander (galexan1@emporia.edu) I have been offered a copy of this consent form that I may keep for my own reference. I have read the above form and, with the understanding that I can withdraw at any time and for whatever reason, I consent to participate in today's interview. _______________________ Participant's signature _______________________ Interviewer's signature ___________________ Date

11