Seminar in Information Science
Topic: Digital Libraries
Summer 2017 Syllabus
Canvas Information: Courses will be available beginning June 5th, 6 am PT unless you are taking an intensive or a one unit or two unit class that starts on a different day. In that case the class will open on the first day that the class meets.
You will be enrolled into the Canvas site automatically.
Exploration of issues related to digital libraries (DL) including electronic publishing; preservation of digital media; the future of books and libraries.
Assignments and Grading
The assignments for this course and their proportion to your course grade are:
(Supports CLO#1, CLO#2)
|Project (Supports CLO#2)||20%|
(Supports CLO#1, CLO#2)
Note: * indicates required readings
Bawden, D. & Vilar, P. (2006). Digital libraries: to meet or manage user expectations. Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives, 58(4), 346-354.
Bearman, D. (2007). Digital libraries. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology. Medford, NJ: Information Today. Volume 41. 223-272
*Borgman, C. L. (1999). What are digital libraries? Competing visions. Information Processing & Management, 35: 227-243.
Borgman, C. L. (2000). Digital Libraries and the Continuum of Scholarly Communication. Journal of Documentation, 56: 412-430.
Borgman, C. L. (2001). Where is the librarian in the digital library? Communications of the ACM, 44(5): 66-67.
Buchanan, S., Gibbs, F., Simmons, S. & McMenemy, D. (2012). Digital library collaboration: A service-oriented perspective. The Library Quarterly, 82(3), 337-359.
Buckland, M. (2008) Reference library service in the digital environment, 30( 2), 81-85.
Budzise-Weaver, T., Chen, J., & Mitchell, M. (2012). Collaboration and crowdsourcing: The cases of multilingual digital libraries. The Electronic Library, 30(2), 220-232.
*Choi, Y., & Rasmussen, E. (2006). What is needed to educate future digital librarians. D-Lib Magazine, 12(9). Available at: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/september06/choi/09choi.html
Chowdhury, G. G. (2002). Digital libraries and reference services: Present and future. Journal of Documentation, 58(3): 258-283.
Fox, E. A. et al (2002). Toward a global library. D-Lib Magazine, 8(10). Available at: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/october02/fox/10fox.html
Greenstein, D. (2000). Digital libraries and their challenges. Library Trends, 49: 290-303.
Huwe, T. (2010). Building digital libraries. Hearts, minds, and the library's physical space. Computers in Libraries, 30(8), 29-31.
*Jeng, J. (2005). What is usability in the context of the digital library and how can it be measured? Information Technology and Libraries, 24(2): 47-56.
*Kani-Zabihi, E., Ghinea, G., & Chen, S. Y. (2006). Digital libraries: What do users want? Online Information Review, 30(4), 395-412.
*Lagzian, F., Abrizah, A., & Wee, M. (2013). An identification of a model for digital library critical success factors, The Electronic Library, 31(1), 5 – 23.
*Levy, D. M. (2000). Digital libraries and the problem of purpose. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science, 26(6): 22-25.
*Liu, Z. (2004). The evolution of documents and its impacts. Journal of Documentation, 60(3): 279-288.
Liu, Z. & Luo, L. (2011). A Comparative study of digital library use: Factors, Perceived Influences, and Satisfaction. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 37(3), 230-236.
*Lynch, C. (2002). Digital collections, digital libraries and the digitization of cultural heritage information. First Monday, 7(5). Available at: http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue7_5/lynch/index.html
*McCray, A. T.; Gallagher M. E. (2001). Principles for the digital library development. Communications of the ACM, 44(5): 48-54.
*Pomerantz, J. & Marchionini, G. (2007). The digital library as place. Journal of Documentation, 63(4), 505-533.
*Thong, J., Hong, W., & Tam, K. Y. (2004). What leads to user acceptance of digital libraries? Communications of the ACM, 47(11), 79-83.
Hsu, R. C.; Mitchell, W. E. (1997). After 400 years, print is still superior. Communications of the ACM, 40(10): 27-28.
*Liu, Z. (2006). Print vs. electronic resources: A study of user perceptions, preferences, and use. Information Processing and Management (in press).
*Liu, Z.; Stork, D. (2000). Is Paperless really more? Rethinking the role of paper in the digital age. Communications of the ACM, 43(11): 94-97.
*Samuelson, P. (1991). Digital media and the law. Communications of the ACM, 34(10): 23-38.
*Foderaro, L. (2010, October 19). In a digital age, students still cling to paper textbook. New York Times.
Liu, Z. (2003). Trends in transforming scholarly communications and its implications. Information Processing & Management. 39 (6): 889-898.
*Rudner, L. M.; Miller-Whitehead, M.; Gellmann, J. S. (2002). Who is reading on-line education journals? Why? And what are they reading? D-Lib Magazine, 8(12). Available at: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/december02/rudner/12rudner.html
*Schöpfel, J. (2013). Adding value to electronic theses and dissertations in institutional repositories. D-Lib Magazine, 19(3/4). Available at: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/march13/schopfel/03schopfel.html
Chowdhury, G. (2010). From digital libraries to digital preservation research: The importance of users and context. Journal of Documentation, 66(2), 207-223.
Evens, T., & Hauttekeete, L. (2011). Challenges of digital preservation for cultural heritage institutions. Journal of Librarianship & Information Science, 43(3), 157-165.
*Hahn, T. B. (2008). Mass Digitization: implications for preserving the scholarly record. Library Resources & technical Services, 52(1 ), 18-26.
*Hart, P.; Liu, Z. (2003). Trust in the preservation of digital information. Communications of the ACM, 46(6): 93-97.
*Houghton, B. (2016). Preservation challenges in the digital age. D-Lib Magazine, 22(7/8). Available at: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/july16/houghton/07houghton.html
*Marcum, D.; Friedlander, A. (2003). Keepers of the crumbling culture. D-Lib Magazine, 9(5). Available at: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/may03/friedlander/05friedlander.html
*Rothenberg, Jeff (1995). Ensuring the longevity of digital documents. Scientific American, 272(1): 42-47.
*Grafton, A. (2007, November 5). Future reading: Digitization and its discontents. New Yorker, 83(34).
Jabr, F. (2013). The reading brain in the digital age: the science of paper versus screens. Scientific American, 309(5). Available at http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/reading-paper-screens/
*Konnikova, M. (2014, July 16). Being a better online reader. New Yorker. Available at: http://www.newyorker.com/science/maria-konnikova/being-a-better-online-reader
Liew, C. & Cheetham, F. (2016). Participatory culture in memory institutions: of diversity, ethics and trust? D-Lib Magazine, 22(7/8). Available at: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/july16/liew/07liew.html
*Liu, Z. (2005). Reading behavior in the digital evnironment: Changes in reading behavior over the past 10 years. Journal of Documentation, 61(6), 700-712.
*MacFadyen, H. (2011). The reader's devices: The affordances of ebook readers. Dalhousie Journal of Interdisciplinary Management, 7(1).
Vaidhyanathan, S. (2011). The googlization of everything (and why we should worry). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
*Worcman, K. (2002). Digital division is cultural exclusion. But is digital inclusion cultural inclusion? D-Lib Magazine, 8(3). Available at: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/march02/worcman/03worcman.html
Course Workload Expectations
Success in this course is based on the expectation that students will spend, for each unit of credit, a minimum of forty-five hours over the length of the course (normally 3 hours per unit per week with 1 of the hours used for lecture) for instruction or preparation/studying or course related activities including but not limited to internships, labs, clinical practica. Other course structures will have equivalent workload expectations as described in the syllabus.
Instructional time may include but is not limited to:
Working on posted modules or lessons prepared by the instructor; discussion forum interactions with the instructor and/or other students; making presentations and getting feedback from the instructor; attending office hours or other synchronous sessions with the instructor.
Student time outside of class:
In any seven-day period, a student is expected to be academically engaged through submitting an academic assignment; taking an exam or an interactive tutorial, or computer-assisted instruction; building websites, blogs, databases, social media presentations; attending a study group;contributing to an academic online discussion; writing papers; reading articles; conducting research; engaging in small group work.
INFO 200, other prerequisites may be added depending on content.
Course Learning Outcomes
Upon successful completion of the course, students will be able to:
- Analyze administrative concerns with the creation, access, and storage of digital information.
- Identify and evaluate the social nature of digital libraries and the implications for design and evaluation.
INFO 287 supports the following core competencies:
- F Use the basic concepts and principles related to the selection, evaluation, organization, and preservation of physical and digital information items.
- H Demonstrate proficiency in identifying, using, and evaluating current and emerging information and communication technologies.
- L Demonstrate understanding of quantitative and qualitative research methods, the ability to design a research project, and the ability to evaluate and synthesize research literature.
No Textbooks For This Course.
The standard SJSU School of Information Grading Scale is utilized for all iSchool courses:
|97 to 100||A|
|94 to 96||A minus|
|91 to 93||B plus|
|88 to 90||B|
|85 to 87||B minus|
|82 to 84||C plus|
|79 to 81||C|
|76 to 78||C minus|
|73 to 75||D plus|
|70 to 72||D|
|67 to 69||D minus|
In order to provide consistent guidelines for assessment for graduate level work in the School, these terms are applied to letter grades:
- C represents Adequate work; a grade of "C" counts for credit for the course;
- B represents Good work; a grade of "B" clearly meets the standards for graduate level work;
For core courses in the MLIS program (not MARA or Informatics) — INFO 200, INFO 202, INFO 204 — the iSchool requires that students earn a B in the course. If the grade is less than B (B- or lower) after the first attempt you will be placed on administrative probation. You must repeat the class if you wish to stay in the program. If - on the second attempt - you do not pass the class with a grade of B or better (not B- but B) you will be disqualified.
- A represents Exceptional work; a grade of "A" will be assigned for outstanding work only.
Students are advised that it is their responsibility to maintain a 3.0 Grade Point Average (GPA).
Per University Policy S16-9, university-wide policy information relevant to all courses, such as academic integrity, accommodations, etc. will be available on Office of Graduate and Undergraduate Programs' Syllabus Information web page at:
In order to request an accommodation in a class please contact the Accessible Education Center and register via the MyAEC portal.
Download Adobe Acrobat Reader to access PDF files.
More accessibility resources.