In the last section we discussed library resources, in particular library databases. There are now an increasing number of scholarly research materials also available on the World Wide Web, including those that are “born-digital,” such as government-issued publications. This module will focus on material freely-available on the Web.

There is another part of the World Wide Web, often referred to as the deep Web, which is estimated to be 500 times larger than that of the free Web, that will not be discussed here. Web-based library databases, such as those discussed in our previous Course Content topic, are considered part of the deep Web. For more information on the deep Web, see the Internet Tutorial on the Deep Web created by the University Libraries, University at Albany, SUNY.

As you know, search engines “crawl” the free Web searching for Web sites and Web-based documents and publications, which they then index. When you query a search engine, it goes through the pages that are found and matches them to your search, ranking them according to relevancy determined by the criteria of that search engine.  Because each search engine has its own criteria for relevancy ranking, it is important to remind students to use more than one search engine when conducting research in order to be as comprehensive as possible.

The Web provides unprecedented access to a sea of information. Locating targeted information and then separating the wheat from the chaff can be daunting. However, using more specialized search engines and evaluating the results based on established criteria will help make this process easier and more reliable.

There are also various search engines, called meta-search engines, that allow you to enter a search term and then run a simultaneous search through various other search engines, compiling one listing of results. Meta-search engines have their own mechanisms for searching and ranking results. There are a variety of meta-search engines. Included here are two popular ones.

Dogpile meta-searches Google, Yahoo, MSN, Ask.com, About, MIVA, LookSmart, and more. Using its own technology, Dogpile will then remove duplicates and sort results by relevancy. In addition, it will cluster results. For example, if you do a search on the term fruit flies, the results page includes a section entitled “Are you looking for?” with a series of subcategories. One of the subcategories for this search is Fruit Flies Genetics. If you click on this subcategory, you will be presented with a results list pertaining to this topic as well as a choice of even more specialized subcategories.

Clusty is a relatively new addition to meta-searching and follows the same patterns of searching and relevancy ranking, based on its own system. Clusty clusters results according to various related categories, but goes an extra step and includes the number of results per subcategory. For example, if you once again enter fruit flies as your search term, your results will be automatically clustered by topic. One topic cluster result is Drosophila with 25 possibilities.

3. Subject-specific Search Engines

Depending on the subject matter, there are times when a more targeted Web search may be necessary. Using search engines geared to particular subject areas provides for a more focused Web search. Here are two especially useful subject-specific search engines:

USA.gov, the U. S. government’s official Web portal, is an excellent source for government information. Government agencies, as you know, are major producers of scientific information. USA.gov makes it possible to search countless federal, state, and local government Web pages. For example, a search on the term fruit flies retrieves results from the National Institutes of Health, the U. S. Department of Agriculture, the Human Genome Project, and other agencies. USA.gov is at http://www.usa.gov/. The USA.gov page devoted to science, science.gov, is at http://www.science.gov/.

A note about government Web sites:

As we all know, and as the Union of Concerned Scientists vigilantly reminds us, the government's dissemination of science information does not occur in a political vacuum. Are students aware of the potential for bias in government science? In a 2005 article, government information librarian Karen Hogenboom observes that students are frequently told to trust .gov Web sites because they contain government information. Such advice, Hogenboom points out, grossly oversimplifies a complex situation. One example Hogenboom gives is how sex education information from Health and Human Services changed between the Clinton and Bush administrations. You can read Hogenboom's article by clicking on the link below and logging in to the library database:

Hogenboom, K. (2005). Going beyond .gov: Using government information to teach evaluation of sources. Libraries and the Academy, 5, 455-466. Retrieved April 18, 2007, from Project Muse database.

Learning opportunites abound, as students can identify and discuss examples of political pressure affecting government science. As a result, students will be able to critically evaluate .gov information in the same way they would any .com Web site.

Search engines have their own idiosyncrasies, so check out the HELP section of whatever search engine you are using. However, here are few general tips that apply to most search engines:

• The more terms you include the more targeted the search.
• Search engines automatically put AND between the terms so AND is not needed.
• Exact phrases should be entered with quotation marks around the phrase.
• Limiting by domain may exclude useful information. For example, although .com designates a commercial site, there are commercial sites which provide reliable research information.

As you know, there is no “gatekeeper” on the Web. Rich sources of scholarly research information as well as absolute junk both can turn up in a search because there is no ones vets the Web as a whole. However, by applying critical thinking skills, your students can be encouraged to effectively evaluate Web sites, using such criteria as:

Our library guide Evaluating Web Resources will help students determine the value and appropriateness of a Web site. The guide contains a checklist of evaluation criteria. It is a great resource that you can provide to your students!

V. Wikipedia: The Bete Noir of Academic Research

Following is some language that UMUC librarians often use when visiting a WebTycho class, to educate students about Wikipedia. Feel free to use this in your classrooms if you think it may be helpful:

Because of its popularity and easy accessibility, Wikipedia is a source often consulted by students when conducting research. However it is important to keep the following in mind before considering Wikipedia as a potential source:

1. Anyone can author. Unlike traditional encyclopedias, Wikipedia entry authors are not required to have any expertise in the subject they are writing on. Anyone, regardless of their knowledge of a topic or their agenda, can write for the site. Authors are rarely identified, and some of those who are have been been caught lying about their credentials.
   
2. Anyone can edit. Once created, entries can be changed by anyone, and neither the original author of an entry, or of later changes, are generally ever identified in a way that would allow you to find out more about them.
   
3. Who checks for errors? While errors in entries are often found by other users of the site and corrected, entries are not subject to a formal fact-checking process like that used by traditional encyclopedias. Many entries are never subject to any fact-checking at all.

Wikipedia can be useful when researching certain topics, especially popular culture topics (movies, television shows, pop music, etc.) and very current events, which traditional encylopedias can take quite a while to deal with, or simply do not cover. However, the information found in Wikipedia should always be checked against other sources - where possible, scholarly sources - to determine its credibility.

Wikipedia should be used with great caution, especially when information sources are not cited and when researching topics that can attract the attention of political extremists or self-promoters. Entries on controversial topics have been "vandalized" (sometimes subtly through the inclusion of misleading information) in the past.

More information about Wikipedia's editorial policies is available on their "Who Writes Wikipedia" page, and a useful summary of its strengths and weaknesses as a research tool can be found on their "Researching With Wikipedia" page. If you have any questions about using online encyclopedias, evaluating the quality of information you find online, or need help finding information for one of your classes, please contact the library.

Conference: The Free Web

Please go to the Conferences area, Days 5-6: The Free Web (Discussion), and post your answer to the discussion topic.

Discussion Topic:

Do you encourage, discourage, or put any restrictions on the use of the free Web in your research assignments? Why?