IS 505: Information Organization and Access

This course was taught by Dr. Manika Lamba to MS in Library & Information Science (MSLIS) students at the School of Information Sciences, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign in Spring 2024.

GitHub Repo

https://github.com/manika-lamba/Spring-2024/tree/main/IS-505

Syllabus

Assignment Description

1. Weekly Discussion Posts

You should come to class ready to discuss the assigned readings for that week. Discussion posts for each week will be due before class, on Sundays at 9 pm. This is so that we can review them and prepare our class discussion. There are two kinds of posts students can make: a. Discussion Questions OR b. Reading response.

Discussion questions posts should contain two discussion questions. Each question should be approximately a paragraph in length and include background from the reading to contextualize the question. Label each question with the first author's name and the title of the reading. We will select questions to prompt the class discussion. Students should be prepared to discuss their questions in class as well as all the assigned readings

Reading response posts should be about two to three paragraphs in length and focused on making a critique, developing a further argument, or describing a relevant example of a concept or theme from your personal or professional life. Reading responses that only summarize a reading will not receive full credit. Reading responses that describe and discuss a theme that you have identified across several readings or previous weeks from the course are encouraged. You are also encouraged to critique and challenge research methods, assumptions, or conceptual frameworks encountered in readings. You may also use a reading response to describe and discuss a theme that you have identified across several readings or previous weeks from the course. You may write a reading response that expands on or critiques a post from another student; if you do so, you must engage positively and respectfully.

Your response does not need to be strictly limited to the readings assigned for the week, although it must relate strongly to at least one reading from the week at hand. You may also refer to readings from other courses or material from your life beyond this academic program. You do not need to include citations for readings assigned for this class, although you should be clear about which readings you are writing about. Sources that are not assigned for the class should be cited appropriately (we prefer APA style, but there is no specific style requirement) so that your instructor and classmates can find the thing you are writing about. Demonstrating correct technical writing skills and professional tone are part of this assignment.

Assessment of this assignment group will contribute 30% of your final grade for the class. Each reading response is worth a possible 10 points.

Grading Rubric:

Description	Points possible
Response makes original argument or critique in response to an assigned reading, or develops an original example of a concept from a reading. Arguments or critiques use clear and correct reasoning. Examples are correct and their relevance is clearly explained. Response uses correct grammar, spelling, and style throughout. For discussion questions, questions explore a topic or open a critique. Questions are framed with relevant and clear context	9-10
Response makes an argument or critique or develops examples. Arguments are not fully backed up by reasoning. Examples are correct but need more explanation to make the relationship clear. Alternatively, argument or example is strong and well-explained, but response includes technical writing errors. For discussion questions, questions are relevant but could have been developed more. Questions have some context	7-8
Response includes argument, critique or example, but is not well developed with reasoning or explanation. Alternatively, response includes combination of argumentation problems and technical writing problems. For discussion questions, questions are surface-level or not given context	5-6
Response only includes summary of readings, and does not develop argument, critique or example. Alternatively, technical writing problems are so prevalent that the post is difficult to understand. For discussion questions, questions are not relevant or are very unlikely to open conversation	1-4
No discussion post posted	0

2. Class Activities

Class activities are designed to help students engage with their classmates and with course topics and concepts, and to help students contextualize those concepts in practice. Some class activities will take place in groups, and students are expected to be ready to contribute by having completed the readings and previous assignments. Class activities are required but not graded for accuracy.

3. Professional Leadership/Technical Learning Posts

Post your selection to the Professional Engagement Canvas discussion forum: Engage with a professional association or organization in the Information Sciences. Locate one that you are intrigued by; research it; and engage in some way. “Engagement” may be defined any or all of the following: attending an informational meeting/program; following/participating on social media (e.g., reading a blog post, writing a blog post, writing for a professional outlet); talking with a member and/or subscribing to a listserv; etc. Membership is NOT required.

Grading Rubric:

Factor	Points possible
Contains all the required elements	4
Why you selected it is clear	1
Total	5

Practice a technical skill that could be used as an information professional. For example:

• Learn how to use a new tool or technology, hands-on

• Significantly improve your skills with a tool or technology you already use

Post your selection to this Technical Learning Canvas discussion forum.

Example settings & things to learn:

• Makerspace: 3D printing

• Adult services: podcasting (for public usage)

• Teen librarian: digital storytelling tools

• Technical services: text editors, metadata tools, regular expressions, OpenRefine

• Digital preservation: command line batch processing, bit level preservation, scanning

• Information architecture: card sorting tools

• Data curation: naming conventions, file curation

• Digital humanities: OCR, Omeka, programming

• GIS: OpenStreetMap, QueryMap, Quantum GIS

• Your choice!

Your Technical Learning Post must include:

• Name of the tool or technology

• Summary of its purpose

• What you did to learn it/improve your skills

• One resource you suggest for others who want to learn more about the tool or technology

• How this tool or technology relates to a professional interest (for instance: that you’ve seen it in job postings, how it would be used on the job, etc.)

Grading Rubric:

Factor	Points Possible
Contains all the required elements	4
Why you selected it is clear	1
Total	5

4. Information Problem and Technology Review (Final Paper)

A. This is your initial proposal for your Information Organization Problem and Review paper.

This initial proposal should outline an information organization problem and potential solutions. An information organization problem is a situation where information is not being effectively described or organized. The technology may be a metadata schema, a kind of software, a database design, or some combination. For example, Dr. Zbornack is a field ecologist with all her field observation data in little yellow notebooks and Excel spreadsheets. She plans to retire but wants to make her data available for future scientific uses. What is the nature of this problem? What kinds of technologies can be recommended for her? How can a librarian working with Dr Zbornack learn how to address this problem?

Initial proposal requirements

• A 2-3 paragraphs long;

• The population, community, group, institution, or organization that has the information problem;

• A 1-paragraph description of the information problem;

• The primary solution you plan to propose. Include a reference or link that describes the technology, workflow, or organizational strategy.

Criteria	Ratings	Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIndicates organization or group	This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.	1 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeParagraph describing the organization information problem	This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.	2 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePrimary approaches to addressing the problem, with link or citation	This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.	2 pts
Total Points: 5

B. This is your final paper for the class.

Submit your paper and resource guide as a single file.

This paper will identify an information organization problem for a particular organization or population and then propose and review a technological approach to addressing the problem. An information organization problem is a situation where information is not being effectively described, organized, The technology may be a metadata schema, a kind of software, a database design, or some combination. You will submit an initial proposal outlining the information organization problem and potential solutions, and receive feedback and guidance on your proposal.

For example, Dr. Zbornack is a field ecologist who has all her field observation data in little yellow notebooks and in Excel spreadsheets. She is planning to retire, but wants to make her data available to future scientific uses. What is the nature of this problem? What kinds of technologies can be recommended for her? How can a librarian working with Dr Zbornack learn how to address this problem?

After receiving the feedback and guidance on your initial proposal, you should prepare an essay identifying the information organization problem, based on the institution context, a description and discussion of the problem constructed using course readings to argue your perceptions, and a recommendation for addressing the information problem.

Essay requirements

• Should be 5 pages long (between 2500 and 4000 words)

• A description of the specific context of your community or organization of interest. You should include a discussion of limitations that may be encountered in addressing the problem in this context.

• A description and discussion of the information organization problem within the context of your community or organization of interest. This should include discussing how information is not being effectively shared, used, or accessed. In this section, you should use course readings to contextualize your problem.

• A proposed recommendation for an enhancement, improvement, or a new approach to address the problem. This section should include an argument for why your solution is a good one in the context of the organization or community. You should include a discussion of possible issues or roadblocks that might be encountered in carrying out your recommendation.

Strategies for improving writing quality (grammar, citations, and syntax):

Read your draft out loud. Even better, get someone else to read it. Purdue OWLLinks to an external site. has great writing resources, including a citation chartLinks to an external site.. Automatic spelling and grammar checkers in your word processor catch many basic mistakes. Plan ahead to get help from iSchool writing coaches and the campus Writers Workshop.

Besides the bibliography used to list the resources cited in the essay, you should submit a resource guide with relevant sources related to the information problem presented.

Resource guide requirements:

• 10 resources minimum, 15 resources maximum;

• Each source should be described with 2-3 complete sentences briefly describing the source and its relevance to the information problem;

• All sources should be high-quality published materials. They don’t need to be from peer-reviewed publications and may include magazine articles or book chapters;

• at least one should be at an introductory level to understand the recommended technology

• at least one should give practical advice about implementing the technology

• at least one should have some discussion of evaluating the effectiveness or impact of the technology, or a more general related technology

• one source can be a literature review of research related to your information problem

• one can be a literature review discussing your selected technology or related technologies

• one source can be a video demonstrating some aspect of the technology or how to implement it.

Criteria	Ratings	Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeClearly describe the problem contextualized in the community or organization of interest, discussing how information is not effectively shared, used, or accessed	This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.	3 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeUse course readings to contextualize the information problem	This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.	7 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePropose a recommendation, improvement, or new approach, or enhancement to address the information problem, using arguments to justify the choice	This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.	15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting quality: grammar, citations, and syntax	This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.	3 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBibliography (e.g., APA, Chicago, MLA, etc.) with citing resources	This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.	2 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe guide has 10 to 15 published resources	This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.	2 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEach source is described with 2-3 complete sentences with a brief description and its relevance to the information problem	This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.	2 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAt least one source has an introductory level	This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.	2 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAt least one source gives practical advice about implementing the solution	This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.	2 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAt least one source has a discussion of evaluating the effectiveness of the proposal technology	This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.	2 pts
Total Points: 40

READINGS

Week 1 (Jan 16): Course Introduction and Important Concepts

Required Readings:

1. Buckland, M. (1997). What is a "document"? Journal for the American Society of Information Science. 48(9): 804–809.

2. Bates, M. J. (2015). The information professions: knowledge, memory, heritage. Information Research. 20(1), paper 655.

3. Bawden, D. & Robinson, L. (2022). Documents and documentation. In Introduction to information science. (2nd. ed., pp. 216-231). Facet.

Optional Readings:

1. Buckland, M. K. (2017). Introduction. In Information and Society. (pp. 1-19). MIT.

2. Gleick, J. (2011). Drums that talk. In The information: a history, a theory, a flood. (chapter 1). Pantheon Books.

3. Bawden, D. & Robinson, L. (2022). Information. In Introduction to Information Science. (2nd. ed., pp. 87-98). Facet.

Week 2 (Jan 23): Information Organization

Required Readings:

1. Svenonius, Elaine (2000). Information organization. In The Intellectual Foundation of Information Organization. (pp. 1-14). MIT Press.

2. Pomerantz, J. (2015). Introduction. In Metadata.(pp. 1-18). MIT Press.

3. Bawden, D. & Robinson, L. (2022). Information organization. In Introduction to Information Science. (2nd. ed., pp. 274-283 [read-only until Metadata part]). Facet.

4. Svenonius, Elaine (2000). Principles of description. In The Intellectual Foundation of Information Organization (pp. 67-85). MIT Press.

Optional Readings:

1. Gilliland, A. (2016). Setting the stage. In M. Baca (ed.), Introduction to Metadata (3rd ed., pp. 1-19). Getty Research Institute.

2. Bawden, D. & Robinson, L. (2022).Information organization. In Introduction to Information Science (pp. 133-160). Facet.

3. Pomerantz, J. (2015). Definitions. In Metadata (pp. 19-64). MIT Press.

Week 3 (Jan30): Information Needs and Users

Required Readings:

1. Savolainen, R. (2016). Elaborating the conceptual space of information-seeking phenomena. Information Research. 21(3)

2. Bawden, D. & Robinson, L. (2009). The dark side of information: overload, anxiety and other paradoxes and pathologies. Journal of Information Science. 35(2): 180-191.

3. Bush, V. (1945). As we may think Download As we may think. Atlantic Monthly.

Optional Readings:

1. Blair, A. (2003). Reading strategies for coping with information overload ca. 1550-1700. Journal of the History of Ideas. 64(1): 11-28.

2. Johnson, J. D. (2014). Health-related information seeking: is it worth it? Information Processing & Management. 50(5): 708-717.

3. Kuhlthau, C. C. (1991). Inside the search process: Information seeking from the user's perspective. Journal of the American Society of Information Science, 42(5): 361-371.

4. Connaway, L. S. & Faniel, I. M. (2014). Same laws, new lens ; Conclusion. In Reordering Ranganathan: shifting user behaviors, shifting priorities (pp. 1-5 ; pp. 103-108). Dublin, OH: OCLC Research.

Week 4 (Feb 6): Understanding Metadata

Required Readings:

1. Gartner, R. (2016). What metadata is and why it matters. In Metadata: shaping knowledge from antiquity to the semantic web (pp. 1-13). Springer.

2. Beall, Jeffrey (2005). Metadata and data quality problems in the digital library. Journal of Digital Information, 6(3).

3. Warren, J. W. (2015). Zen and the art of metadata maintenance. Journal of Electronic Publishing. 18(3).

Optional Readings:

1. Zeng, M. L. & Qin, J. (2022). Fundamentals of metadata. In Metadata (pp.36-101 [focus on p. 36-61 and 67-85]). ALA Neal-Schuman.

Week 5 (Feb 13): Structure and Standards in Information Organization

Required Readings:

1. Gartner, R. (2016). Metadata becomes digital. In Metadata: shaping knowledge from antiquity to the semantic web (pp. 27-39). Springer.

2. Zeng, M. L. & Qin, J. (2022). Metadata standards. In Metadata. (pp.527-653) [focus on p. 528-548 and 591-607]). ALA Neal-Schuman.

3. Tillett, B. (2003). What is FRBR? A conceptual model for the bibliographic universe.

Optional Readings:

1. Yasser, Chuttur M. (2011). An analysis of problems in metadata records. Journal of Library Metadata. 11(2): 51-62.

2. Kennedy, M. R. (2008). Nine questions to guide you in choosing a metadata schema. Journal of Digital Information. 9(1).

3. Pomerantz, J. (2015). Descriptive metadata. In Metadata (pp. 65-91). MIT Press.

Week 6 (Feb 20): Collections

Required Readings:

1. Lee, H.-L. (2000). What Is a Collection? Journal of the American Society for Information Science 51(12): 1106-13.

2. Caro, R. A. (2019, January 28). The secrets of Lyndon Johnson's archives: on a Presidential paper trail. The New Yorker Download The New Yorker.

3. Cascone, S. (2020 June 9). People Are Unaware of Their History’: why museums are collecting artifacts from the Black Lives Matter protests as they’re happening. Museums are reacting quickly to protests across the country. Art News.

4. Walters, W. H. (2018). The death and migration of book collections in academic libraries. Portal: Libraries and the Academy. 18(3): 415-422.

Optional Readings:

1. Bowley, Graham (2017 Oct 1). In an Era of Strife, Museums Collect History as It Happens. New York Times Download New York Times.

2. Moloney, W. (2018). Uncovering surprises in the collections, serendipitously. Library of Congress Blog. December 10

3. Barbakoff, Audrey (2017). Balancing connections and collections. Library Journal, New York, 142(15), Sept.

Week 7 (Feb 27): Subject Access

Required Readings:

1. Svenonius, Elaine (2000). Chapter 8: Subject Languages: Introduction, Vocabulary Selection, and Classification The Intellectual Foundation of Information Organization. MIT Press. p. 1-14.

2. Joudrey, Daniel and Taylor, Arlene. (2018). Chapter 9: Subject Analysis. The Organization of Information. 4th ed.

3. Lamba, Manika, Madhusudhan, Margam. (2022). Chapter 4: Topic Modeling. Text Mining for Information Professionals. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85085-2_4

Optional Readings:

1. Gross, T.; Taylor, A. G.; Joudrey, D. N. (2015). Still a lot to lose: The role of controlled vocabulary in keyword searching. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 53(1): 1-39.

2. Koraljka Golub (2021) Automated Subject Indexing: An Overview, Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 59:8, 702-719, DOI: 10.1080/01639374.2021.201231

Week 8 (Mar 5): Justice and Representation in Information Systems

Required Readings:

1. Pomerantz, J. (2015). Chapter 5. Use Metadata. In: Metadata, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 115-131.

2. Noble, Safiya Umoja. (2018). Chapter 1: A Society, Searching. Algorithms of Oppression : How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. New York: New York University Press, p.15-63.

3. Noble, Safiya Umoja. (2018). Chapter 5: The Future of Knowledge in the Public. Algorithms of Oppression : How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. New York: New York University Press, p.134-152.

Optional Readings:

1. Coded Bias. (2020). MIT Movie

2. Reidsma, M. (2016). Algorithmic Bias in Library Discovery Systems.

3. Adler, M., Huber, J. T., & Nix, A. T. (2017). Stigmatizing disability: Library classifications and the marking and marginalization of books about people with disabilities. The Library Quarterly, 87(2): 117-135.

4. Christine Bone & Brett Lougheed (2018) Library of Congress Subject Headings Related to Indigenous Peoples: Changing LCSH for Use in a Canadian Archival Context, Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 56:1, 83-95