Posts Tagged ‘models’

My final project in LIS 5053: Information Users in the Knowledge Society involved the preparation of a detailed critique of the International Children’s Digital Library (ICDL) web site as an information resource and recommendations for improvement.  By analyzing characteristics of the target audience and the web site’s application of information behavior models, cognitive and learning styles, design principles and environmental factors, I evaluated the ICDL web site’s success in meeting user needs.  This blog represents a summary of my findings.


The ICDL is designed primarily for children approximately ages 3 to 13, but also serves the parents, teachers and librarians who seek to provide reading material for these children.  Individuals of any age who are conducting research in the area of children’s literature or are learning a new language may also benefit from the ICDL’s multilingual resources.  Launched in November 2002, this information product provides an online forum for users to browse, search, read and write reviews for children’s books.  The ICDL web site provides access to 3,887 children’s books in 53 different languages (ICDL Fast Facts).  Over one million unique visitors have viewed the web site since its debut, including users from 166 different countries (ICDL Fast Facts).  The variety of the ICDL collection fosters appreciation for cultural diversity and development of a global perspective.  The multitude of languages and cultures represented in the ICDL collection allows readers of almost any cultural or ethnic background to feel a sense of membership and of sharing a common world (Trace 2008, 1542) with other users of this resource.

Information Behavior Models:

The ICDL web site particularly appeals to users whose information behavior maps to the models described by Marcia Bates, David Ellis, Robert Taylor and Sanda Erdelez.  Berrypicking; Starting, Chaining, Browsing, Differentiating, Monitoring and Extracting; Information Retrieval Filters; and Information Encountering are all evident within the ICDL design.

Learning, Thinking and Cognitive Styles Best Served:

The ICDL makes an exemplary effort of accommodating the variety of its users’ learning and cognitive styles.  The concept of cognitive style refers to “a person’s typical or habitual mode of problem solving, thinking, perceiving and remembering” (Riding and Cheema 1991).  The ICDL best serves visualizers, verbalizers, reflective and impulsive users, convergent and divergent thinkers, holist and serialist thinkers, analytics, abstract sequential learners, abstract random learners, concrete sequential learners, concrete random learners, field dependent and independent users, and all types of thinkers identified by Li-fang Zhang and Robert Sternberg.


The ICDL web site is a fun, vibrant information resource for children and the adults who work with them.  The content, organization and design of the ICDL web site exhibit a remarkable amount of consideration for the needs of diverse users with a wide variety of cognitive and physical preferences and abilities.  Nonetheless, a few improvements could significantly enhance the accessibility and utility of this resource.

1. Provide Audio Format for All Books in the ICDL Collection

Offering an audio version of each book in the ICDL collection would enhance accessibility for users with auditory perceptual modality preferences (Keefe 1987, 8 ) or with visual disabilities.  An audio format for content would reinforce the experience for linguistic learners who learn best by saying, seeing and hearing words (Learning Disabilities Resource Community 2002) and verbal learners who absorb information more easily when it is presented in written and spoken format (Felder and Soloman n.d.).  Users who are learning to read a given language can access information in that language by having it read to them, even when no fluent speakers of that language are physically present to assist them.  An audio component would also assist users with disabilities like dyslexia and aphasia, who often have difficulty reading.  Users could choose to have the book read aloud in its entirety or page by page by clicking an audio button located either on the About This Book page or on the book page-viewing screen.  Including a pictorial representation of an ear or speaker on the button would express the purpose of this feature to visualizers (Riding and Cheema 1991), and listing the words “hear it” beneath would clarify the purpose for users with limited literacy skills.  The ICDL currently offers audio content for only five books.  This burgeoning effort is applauded and should be expanded to include the entire collection.

2. Provide Video Format for All Books in the ICDL Collection

A video component would enhance accessibility for users with visual and interpersonal preferences as well as users with both literacy and auditory limitations.  Making a video recording of a child reading the selected book aloud while another child or adult interprets the words in sign language would allow deaf users with low literacy skills to enjoy the books in the ICDL collection.  The visual stimulus of seeing other people engaged in reading books from the collection will also appeal to users with external or interpersonal learning styles, who are only minimally served through this resource at present.  If the user clicks the video icon, a small video window would appear in the bottom corner of the screen while the remainder of the screen would display the page currently being read.  Additionally, highlighting each word as it is read or signed would help children identify the sound of or sign for the word with its textual representation.  Currently the web site only provides four video clips about the creation and design of the ICDL.   

Of course, audio and video enhancements may be cost prohibitive.  Perhaps students working towards a degree in deaf education or an interpreter’s license could be recruited for video production with the incentive of receiving credit towards their degrees.  Audio and video applications should not be designed to play automatically as this would slow the time required for pages to load.  Users should be able to select these features by clicking a button or opt to not use these applications.  ICDL could utilize plug-ins such as RealPlayer or Windows Media Player to provide these features.

3. Provide Textual Content for All Books in More Languages

While the ICDL makes an exemplary effort to provide some information services in a wide array of languages, many books in the ICDL collection are only available in one language.  The ICDL’s presence on the Internet makes it internationally accessible to users, most of which only speak one or two languages fluently.  Offering all ICDL books in multiple languages would expand access to users not comfortable or fluent in a book’s original language of publication.  However, translating each book would require ICDL staff to secure permission from each author and/or publisher, which may be difficult if not impossible in some instances.  The ICDL currently has several books with text available in more than one language, although the majority of books are only available in one language.  While current progress is commendable, efforts should be continued to provide all web site and collection content in as many languages as possible.

4. Provide Search Box in Consistent Location on All Web Site Pages

The ICDL does not provide a search box on all web site pages.  The search box tool is very familiar to users with even a basic level of Internet experience.  Keyword searching will appeal to verbalizers and help to orient them within an exceedingly image-rich web site.  Providing access to this tool on every page within the ICDL web site will enhance site navigation and searching capabilities.  The search box provides another means by which users can recover from navigational errors and allows users to locate desired content regardless of memorability issues.  Placing the search box in one consistent location on each page will enhance the learnability of the web site.


Bates, Marcia J. 1989. The design of browsing and berrypicking techniques for the online search interface. Online Review 13 (5): 407-24.

Ellis, David. 1989. A behavioural approach to information retrieval system design. Journal of Documentation 45 (September): 171-212.

——. 2005. Ellis’s model of information-seeking behavior. In Theories of information behavior, ed. Karen E. Fisher, Sanda Erdelez, and Lynne McKechnie, 138-42. Medford, NJ: Information Today.

Erdelez, Sanda. 2005. Information encountering. In Theories of information behavior, ed. Karen E. Fisher, Sanda Erdelez, and Lynne McKechnie, 179-84. Medford, NJ: Information Today.

Felder, Richard M. and Barbara A. Soloman. (n.d.). Learning styles and strategies. http://www.4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/ILSdir/styles.htm.

Keefe, James W. 1987. Learning style: An overview.  In Learning style: Theory and practice, 3-15. Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals.

Krug, Steve. 2006. Don’t make me think: A common sense approach to Web usability. 2nd ed. Berkeley: New Riders Publishing.

Learning Disabilities Resource Community. 2002. Multiple intelligence inventory. http://www.ldrc.ca/projects/miinventory/miinventory.php?eightstyles=1.

Nielsen, Jakob. 2003a. Homepage real estate allocation. Alertbox 10 February.

——. 2003b. Usability 101: Introduction to usability. Alertbox 25 August.

North Carolina State University. College of Design. Center for Universal Design. 2008. About UD: Universal design principles. http://www.design.ncsu.edu/cud/about_ud/udprincipleshtmlformat.html#top

Rayner, Stephen and Richard Riding. 1997. Toward a categorization of cognitive styles and learning styles. Educational Psychology 17 (1/2): 1-24.

Riding, Richard and Indra Cheema. 1991. Cognitive styles- An overview and integration. Educational Psychology 11 (3/4): 193-215.

Sadler-Smith, Eugene. 1997. Learning style: Frameworks and instruments. Educational Psychology 17 (1/2): 51-63.

Taylor, Robert S. 1968. Question-negotiation and information seeking in libraries. College and Research Libraries 29 (May): 178-94.

Trace, Ciaran B. 2008. Resistance and the underlife: Informal written literacies and their relationship to human information behavior. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 59 (August): 1540-54.

Wooldridge, Blue. 1995. Increasing the effectiveness of university/college instruction: Integrating the results of learning style research into course design and delivery. In The importance of learning styles, ed. Ronald R. Sims and Sebrenia J. Sims, 49-67. Westport, CT: Greenwood.

Zhang, Li-fang and Robert J. Sternberg. 2005. A threefold model of intellectual styles. Educational Psychology Review 17 (March): 1-53.

Read Full Post »

In a discussion about Robert S. Taylor’s article “Question-Negotiation and Information Seeking in Libraries,” there was some uncertainty as to whether Taylor is describing information behavior or information seeking.  I think at the beginning of the article, when Taylor talks about the various actions a user may engage in before ever coming to the library (talking to colleagues, consulting personal files), I think that may embody information behavior.  But when the user comes to the library and engages in the reference interview, I think that’s information seeking.  Perhaps visceral and conscious information need are vague and undirected enough to consider actions related to them information behavior, but I think compromised information need is definitely information seeking.   


The key concepts of Taylor’s model include the four levels of information need and the five filters, but I found it interesting that when customers come to librarians with a compromised need, the librarians must work backwards toward the customer’s conscious need in order to get to the heart of the need and formulate the best search strategy. 


This model is unique in that it is modeled on information service interactions in the specific context of Special Libraries, in which the time frame is limited, but not as limited as it would be in a public library, or other venue.  This model emphasizes the importance of feedback, whereas some models, such as the Johnson Model, does not.  Taylor mentions that users may consult their personal files when seeking information, instead of or in addition to seeking information at the library.  James Krikelas’s model also notes that users may consult internal resources (such as memory and personal files) or external resources (such as people and recorded literature).


Now, applying Taylor’s model to an information service:


Information service designers must realize that users are likely to ask friends and acquaintances and consult their personal files before asking the info service staff for assistance directly.  To disseminate information about services, the info service staff may want to send out Public Service Announcements via the mass media (i.e.: TV, radio, newspapers).  Thus, even if a user doesn’t see or hear the advertisements, if they ask a friend who has seen them, that friend may be able to direct them to a useful information service.


Also, users are likely to go to the information service website and try searching for the information they want themselves before asking for help.  Thus the information service designers should make every effort to make their website as user friendly as possible: provide clear links to the most popular resources, anticipate user questions and provide an FAQ page.  And list contact information somewhere on every page, a hotline or email address, so that users don’t have to look too hard to find help.


If the information service staff can get the users to contact them with questions, then they can engage in the question-negotiation process to get to the root of what the user wants.  In actual practice, however, I fear that many information service providers must try to answer so many questions from so many people, they probably simply answer compromised (4th level) questions, rather than trying to get to the root of the need.  They probably just want to get people off the phone as quickly as possible, which is not likely to ensure the user’s satisfaction with the information source.

Read Full Post »