¿qué hacen las redes?

Un viejo modelo, hoy negocio, sobre aprendizaje en recuperación de información: fases The Big6 is a process model of how people of all ages solve an information problem. Recomendado por Cristobal Cobo. PDF

1. Task Definition 1.1 Define the information problem 1.2 Identify information needed (to solve the information problem) o What is my current task? o What are some topics or questions I need to answer? o What information will I need?

2. Information Seeking Strategies 2.1 Determine all possible sources (brainstorm) 2.2 Select the best sources o What are all the possible sources to check? o What are the best sources of information for this task?

3. Location and Access 3.1 Locate sources (intellectually and physically) 3.2 Find information within sources o Where can I find these sources? o Where can I find the information in the source?

4. Use of Information 4.1 Engage (e.g., read, hear, view, touch) 4.2 Extract relevant information o What information do I expect to find in this source? o What information from the source is useful?

5. Synthesis 5.1 Organize from multiple sources 5.2 Present the information o How will I organize my information? o How should I present my information?

6. Evaluation 6.1 Judge the product (effectiveness) 6.2 Judge the process (efficiency) o Did I do what was required? o Did I complete each of the Big6 Stages efficiently?

También se puede ampliar con un estudio también conocido y citado, de A.W. Lazonder, J.-F. Rouet (2008) en Computers in Human Behavior 24 (2008) 753–765

Information problem solving instruction: Some cognitive and metacognitive issues, en pdf.

La lectura completa de este texto completo sobre estudios infantiles de estos problemas con información, puede llevar una media hora. También recomendado por Cristobal Cobo, extracto algunos párrafos para su reflexión.

De Vries et al. restricted the search space by providing a list of pre-selected Websites. They emphasized that ‘‘. . . narrowing the search space by providing a portal can free learners from selecting relevant Websites so that they can concentrate on locating and processing relevant information’’. Merely preselecting relevant sources, however, proved to be insufficient. In their second study, de Vries et al. improved the visual structuring of the information by categorizing the Websites according to the specific topic or aspects of the problem space. In the study by Stadtler and Bromme, the structuring of contents was facilitated by providing students with pre-defined categories on a note taking window. As mentioned in their discussion, the provision of categories did not just facilitate note taking. It also ‘‘stimulated laypersons to seek new elements of the categories at hand’’.

¿Cómo resolver la infoxicación?

In computerized IPS, on the other hand, the student is usually faced with more information than needed. Furthermore, the texts available are multiple and not always mutually coherent. Thus the student cannot and does not have to integrate all available information. Instead, he or she must make informed decisions about what to consider and what to ignore. These decisions rely strongly on the student’s initial interpretation of the problem (see above) but also on their ability to activate and use their prior knowledge (Symons & Pressley, 1993).

¿cómo construir categorías (etiquetas) cooperativas (colaborativas, incluso se integran de modo congruente y coherente)?

There are also two basic approaches to supporting metacognition (Lin, 2001). On the one hand, support can be given through metacognitive interventions such as strategy training programs, metacognitive prompts, and modeling. While the scope and nature of these interventions can be quite diverse, they all relate directly to the students’ metacognitive actions. Support may also be offered by creating a supportive social environment for metacognition. This usually involves a change in classroom culture and arrangements in order to stimulate the use of metacognitive activities. For example, allowing students to work together will lead to higher instances and increased awareness of metacognitive activities (Lazonder, 2005). Collaboration also encourages students to engage in spontaneous reflec- tion when they compare their work with that of others or are exposed to multiple perspectives in the classroom (Lin, 2001).

¿cómo organizar y acompañar tareas y prácticas informacionales?

The effects of the embedded instruction were assessed on a post-test that asked students to solve an unfamiliar information problem. This measure seems consistent with the study’s central aim to enhance students’ performance on future search tasks. Post-test results showed that students who received the embedded instruction regulated their search more often than students from the control group. However, within-group comparisons revealed that the frequency of regulation on the pre- and post-test was comparable. The between-group difference seems therefore at least partially attributable to the observed decrease in regulative skill use in the control group. Apart from that the interpretation of the higher frequencies in the trained group is complicated by the absence of data on the quality of the regulation. Frequent regulation of search behavior is desirable; frequently performing high-quality regulative skills is even more desirable.