Kirk Jones SLIS 60621

Intercultural Communication: A Global Reader--Review and Evaluation

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 26 Oct 2014 16:47:00 +0000

Jandt, F.E. (Ed.). (2004). Intercultural Communication: A Global Reader. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Intercultural Communication is a handbook of readings on the interplay of language, culture, and identity on a global scale. While the focus of the book is on intercultural communication, as the title suggests, the book is as much a sociological examination of globalization and the changing relationships between nations as it is a treatise on communication. Consequently, the scope of this work is quite broad. It covers several broad topics on communication between cultures, and narrows down towards the end of the book to talk specifically about globalization and the relationships between the developed and developing parts of the world. Consequently, this work covers a myriad of issues from a variety of cultures, and contains enough on each that there is depth to every topic covered. Thus, this work succeeds in achieving both breadth and depth of scope, making it a particularly useful resource.

This work is written for an undergraduate audience. The language is fairly simple, and the readings are relatively straightforward. Thus, this work would be accessible to a large portion of the general public. Researchers in the field of communication may find this work useful, and the overall scholarship of its constituent articles is good. However, most serious researchers or professionals in communications would desire to seek other, more in-depth resources to meet their needs. The entries in this work are deeper than an encyclopedia, but not as rigorous as would be found in a typical scholarly handbook.

Even though it is ten years old, this work still remains relevant. The topics that it covers include issues of national identity, dying languages, conflict in the Middle East, fallout from nineteenth and twentieth century colonialization, and globalization as a result of leaps forward in communications technology. Each of these topics are still relevant in today’s world. Even though the information this book has to offer is a bit dated, and the perspective on any of the given topics may feel a little old, the overall themes and subjects covered in this work remain highly relevant and timely in the modern field of communications. As a result, this remains a work that could be used to reach a better understanding of modern communications.

The authority of this work is also quite sound. The lead editor holds a doctorate in the field of communications and has spent decades performing research on intercultural communications around the world. Furthermore, he has taught on communications at several prestigious institutions (Jandt 2004, pg. viii). Thus, the lead editor of this work is quite qualified to oversee the editing and compilation of this handbook because of his decades of education and hands-on research in international and intercultural communication. Moreover, the authors selected for this work are all respected in their field and writing about their own cultures (Jandt 2004, pg. ix). Thus, each is well suited to speak on their particular area of expertise, and relay that information in this handbook. All of this lends this work a good deal of authority.

The documentation of Intercultural Communications is its weakest point. Like many undergraduate handbooks, most of the articles have had their bibliographies excised from the text and put elsewhere, probably online. Therefore the documentation of this work is inconsistent. Several articles retain their full bibliographies, some have partials, and a few have absolutely no references whatsoever. This lack further removes this work from being useful for a serious communications researcher or professional, and even weakens its utility for the undergraduate student.

Finally, this work is designed specifically to present an unbiased take on the topics being presented. Jandt writes that he chose authors for each part of this work from around the world. Furthermore, no author writes on a topic that is outside of their own culture. Thus, no authors are imposing their own viewpoints on the cultures or perspectives outside of their own. This removes much of the danger for bias inherent in writing a text on intercultural communication because it ensures that one viewpoint is not being imposed on every aspect of the issue, but rather allows multiple peoples and cultures to speak for themselves. This lends a good deal of weight to the words in this text, and makes it that much more powerful of a tool for providing and introduction to intercultural communications.

Communications Module Synthesis

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 24 Oct 2014 18:49:00 +0000

In examining the ACRL EBSS website, I found two main things. The first is that the site is poorly maintained. I noticed the same thing that many of my classmates commented on, which is that not all of the links work, and even some that do no longer direct to the pages they are supposed to. I clicked one link that was supposed to lead to collection development suggestions from the University of San Diego only to find that USD has since remodeled its website, and the linked page no longer existed. Furthermore, some of the information presented in the site itself has not been updated since before I graduated high school. While I think this is partly understandable, given that some of the standards are still quite relevant seven years later, I do wish that there was a more frequent review done by the web master for ACRL EBSS. Overall, the site needs to be revisited and updated.

Furthermore, I noticed that most of the information on the site was geared towards collection development, and not necessarily reference work. While the lists of resources and journals could prove useful to a reference librarian, the bulk of the wiki was dedicated to providing standards and context for creating a sound collection of communications material. Thus, while I think the site has merit for any librarian, it is certainly not a resource that I would recommend for patron use.

The first article we read, on “Information Literacy and Communication Research” I found both insightful and refreshing. As I state in my Reddit review of the article, I was taken with two main aspects of it. First, the article was published in 2013 meaning that it is up-to-date. I am pleased with this because it means the article is still of relevance, and the conclusions the authors reach are not using antiquated search or information seeking strategies. Second, this study was finally done by people who seem to understand that the best way for undergraduate students, or anyone for that matter, to learn how to use library resources is to do so in the context of what they are already learning. At every point in the program, it was designed to seamlessly bring the library into the research work the students were performing and thus aid them, rather than hinder or frustrate them, in writing their research paper. I am confident that the overwhelmingly positive results the researchers report come in no small part from designing an information literacy program that directly aids the students in their work, rather than a program that is wholly divorced from the students’ coursework. As an aspiring reference librarian, this is the type of information literacy program that I hope to one day run.

The second article, on the ambiguity of communication and finding good communications resources, was interesting. I did not realize that the boundaries of the discipline were so poorly defined, nor that there was so much infighting as to what should and should not be included under the heading of “communication”. Moreover, I did not realize that there was such debate over which journals should actually be accepted in the field of communications proper, and which describe subjects that reside predominately outside the field of communications. This was an insightful article because it helps me to be more aware that in communications finding the right sources may not always be a clear-cut process. There could be very good information on a topic I am searching in a resource that is, at least ostensibly, totally unrelated to that field. Especially if I ever do work in the field of communications, knowing that it is an ill-bounded discipline will help me to perform more targeted searches and also to cast a wide net to see what else could be brought in.

I opted to examine the Communication and Mass Media Complete database by performing a simple search for the keyword “librarian”. I am familiar with EBSCO, and am generally impressed with the quality of their databases, so I was not all that surprised that I found this one to be of usefulness and good integrity. What did surprise me, though, was the amount of material the search returned. There are almost three hundred articles discoursing on various topics related to librarians. What this brought up to me is something that I intuitively grasped, but had never specifically thought about: the role of communications in the work of librarians. As librarians in general, and especially as reference librarians, most of the work we do has to do with communicating information. Thus, the field of communications has a lot to offer us as we learn to better communicate and perform our tasks. I would argue that it is of no small importance for the discerning librarian to familiarize themselves with some of the principles of communication to help aid in their professional development.

Finally, I was disappointed that there was no sub-Reddit on communications. I have come to enjoy browsing the humanities sub-Reddits, and I was a bit let down we did not get to do that this week.

Handbook of Sociology--Review and Evaluation

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 19 Oct 2014 18:56:00 +0000

Smelser, N.J. (Ed.). (1988). Handbook of Sociology. Newbury Park: SAGE.

The scope of Smelser’s Handbook of Sociology is relatively broad. It covers the major topics of theory, inequality, organizations, and social change. Although this is not an exhaustive list of fields under the sociology umbrella, the articles in each section do contain information that touches on many of the theories and ideas in sociology. This handbook is somewhat less broad than others examined on other subjects, but the scope is still wide enough that it could be useful to any sociologist, regardless of how they have specialized in their discipline.

The audience intended for this handbook is upper-level undergraduate students and masters students. The language in the text is geared towards an individual with a good background in the discipline, however it is not totally opaque to a reader with only minimal background in sociology. The topics presented in the articles, however, assume that the reader is well-acquainted with both the discipline and its history. Consequently, the reader with no background in the field would struggle to fully utilize this text. On the same token, however, a Ph. D in sociology would probably find this work somewhat pedestrian. The material contained within it is excellent, but the articles are designed to give the reader a broad understanding of the topic. This could help a serious researcher or post-doctorate find new resources or act as a quick reference guide, but this text would probably do little to meet their more extensive needs.

The timeliness of this book is lacking. This text was written some thirty years after sociology was formed as a discipline, and almost that much time has elapsed again since its printing. In terms of its usefulness today, it provides a good retrospective look at the historical trends and ideas in sociology. It also provides commentary on the theoretical and methodological framework of the discipline that could still prove relevant in today’s world. But any cutting-edge studies performed in this work, and any suggestions about the “modern” state of sociology, are quite outdated.

Despite being old, this work is fairly authoritative. The author of the work, Neil Smelser, is a member of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, former president of the American Sociological Association, and a professor emeritus at the University of California, Berkeley (UC Berkeley). Consequently, he is quite qualified to oversee the editing and compilation of a text that seeks to present a broad overview of sociology. His credentials show that both his understanding of sociology at large, and his connection to other sociologists, is quite strong. Moreover, the book is published by SAGE, a respected academic publisher that is known for producing good texts in a variety of disciplines. Thus, despite its age, this handbook does carry with it a lot of authority.

The documentation for this work is also extensive. Each article is meticulously cited and presents an exhaustive list of material used in its writing. In fact, if the reader were to open the handbook to a random page, it seems that there is about even chance of finding either text or bibliography. The works cited are from respected books and journal publications, which lends further weight to the quality and authority of this work.

Finally, this work is fairly objective. The topics are portrayed in a rational and even-handed manner, and each of the articles that make up this work are objective in both their tone and presentation of the given material. The only weakness that may exist in the objectivity of this handbook is that each major topic is covered only by a handful of articles. Thus, it is doubtful that both sides of any given debate are adequately presented in the work at large, even if each of its constituent parts remain relatively neutral. As a result, the discerning reader would find this work an excellent starting point, but would want to pursue further study in any of the given topics covered in this work. A starting point is, however, exactly what this work is supposed to provide.

UC Berkeley. “Neil J. Smelser.” Center for Studies in Higher Education. Retrieved from http://www. cshe.berkeley.edu/neil-j-smelser

Sociology Module Synthesis

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 17 Oct 2014 21:10:00 +0000

I found the YouTube video on the introduction to sociology interesting, and I thought it provided an excellent introduction to the subject. I was particularly taken with its use of visual media. I admit that when I first started watching it I assumed that it was going to be a PowerPoint video, but instead it was a series of clips that went well with what the narrator was explaining. I thought that this helped hold the viewers’ interest better than mere words alone. This is the type of video resource that I would want to point users towards as a librarian. It balances information and entertainment quite well.

I liked the article that we read this week, although my issues with it are similar to those that I took with last week’s article. The author takes a set of respectable standards such as teaching students how to use the library and its resources, and unfortunately comes out with a mode of execution that fails to place library skills in the context of what the students are already doing. I think that good library work should be like a well-designed door handle: it is so well made that its use is natural and mostly unnoticed, and it does not hinder its user in accomplishing their task. I think library skills, and the help offered by reference librarians should be accomplished in a manner that does not distract or detract from the task the patron is trying to accomplish. Thus, even in teaching students how to use library resources that instruction must come within context, or students will not learn.

I was incredibly fond of the Library of Congress’s sociology resource page. It presents a good list of resources on a variety of sociology topics that would be useful for both the lay user and the serious researcher. The three that I looked at were all well designed and provided good information. The National Opinion Research Center was the site I thought would be most useful for those seeking to perform research in the field of sociology. It presented a long list of studies that have either been completed, or that are in process, and a brief summary of each. I admit that I was somewhat frustrated because I could not find the full version of any of the studies. Nevertheless, the descriptions alone could help a researcher narrow their topic, and also avoid overlapping work that others have already done. I will certainly add this site, and the Library of Congress’s sociology research list, to my arsenal as a reference librarian.

The ACRL ANSS site was not what I was expecting. I thought it was going to be predominately geared towards helping patrons find information in the social sciences, but it was more about providing social science librarians with both resources and information geared towards enabling them to be effective librarians. I poked through some of the meeting minutes, and it was interesting to see what ANSS is focused on and how they make decisions about moving forwards in the field. I also found it equally as interesting to read through the amount of standard meeting bureaucracy that exists even in an organization that is clearly designed to do nothing but help people access information. Although this is not a resource that I would recommend to patrons per se, it is certainly one that I will keep in mind for my own edification. I think that it provides an invaluable professional development resource for the social science reference librarian.

The Google Scholar search for sociology and library returned many results that would be useful to a patron in the field of sociology, and more than a few for a sociology subject librarian, but very few that struck me as germane to the actual topics of sociology and libraries. Many of the hits were returned because they contained the word “library” in their text. However, this word could be wholly unassociated with the actual subject of the article. “Library of Congress” was the most frequent culprit for causing an article that had nothing to do with libraries nevertheless show up in the results. Consequently, I think that Scholar is an excellent engine to cast a wide net, or to try and gain traction with a topic in which a librarian or researcher lacks understanding. However, to actually find good information, I would much prefer to utilize more targeted resources that are indexed by subject, and not just by word.

Finally, I explored the sociology sub-Reddit. I read several of the top articles and found the information in them to be good. One of the aspects about Reddit that I have commented on briefly before, but really struck me this week, is how it can be used as a forum. I think that Reddit has the potential to be a good resource for asking questions and gaining answers. The user would need to be discerning in weighing the results, but that does not mean this site should be completely ignored. I will continue to keep Reddit in mind as a useful tool in my arsenal as a reference librarian. Who knows, one day I may be one of the people asking a question on Reddit because I cannot find the information a patron is searching for.

Encyclopedia of Geographic Information Science--Review and Evaluation

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 12 Oct 2014 17:53:00 +0000

Kemp, K.K. (2008). Encyclopedia of Geographic Information Science. Los Angeles: SAGE.

The Encyclopedia of Geographic Information Science is a single-volume text that provides a broad range of entries on topics throughout the geographic information science (GIS) field. Consequently, the scope of this work is quite broad. The entries within the Encyclopedia do not only provide a definition and understanding of the topic being covered, many also explain how the topic is situated within the GIS field, and how it relates to other topics also covered in the Encyclopedia. Thus, this work presents not only a broad understanding of the GIS field, but it also helps the reader to create a mental map of how ideas and terms fit together and interplay with each other. The end result is far more useful, and gives a greater sense of scope, than if each of the entries had been written in a vacuum.

This work is written in clear, simple language and is presented in text that is slightly larger than the standard for reference works. Moreover, many of the entries are accompanied by pictures and graphics that either serve as examples illustrating their respective topic, or help graphically explain what the author is driving at. Consequently, this piece is easy to understand, even for the user that has no background or experience with GIS. In many ways, it seems to be an introductory encyclopedia that is designed to acquaint the reader with GIS topics, and it may not be as useful for a GIS professional seeking to deepen their knowledge of the field.

The timeliness of this work is acceptable, as it is only six years old, but with how rapidly tech is changing, it can no longer be considered as the cutting edge of GIS. Some of the entries mention technology that is already out of date, or that has changed significantly in the last six years. However, in spite of this, the basic workings of GPS systems and their applications have not changed too much in the last half decade. So although some of the material may feel a bit dated to the reader, the work still presents information on subjects and practices that are of current value.

The authority of the Encyclopedia is quite sound. The work is lead and edited by Karen Kemp, who holds a Ph. D in geography, and has sat on several academic counsels in the fields of GIS and geography. In addition to her academic credentials, Kemp also has extensive experience in the field working with GIS over the last thirty years (Kemp 2008, pg. xv). Thus, she is quite qualified to oversee the creation and editing of this Encyclopedia because she has not only the theoretical, but also the practical knowledge of the field. The contributors of the entries themselves are all from respected, accredited academic institutions and government agencies from around the world (Kemp 2008, pgs. xvii-xxii). Thus, this work was not only edited and established with good authority, each of the entries are also provided by individuals that are qualified to present information in the field of GIS. This lends a great deal of authority to the Encyclopedia.

The documentation of this work is also sound. Each of the entries contains suggestions for further reading and research. These readings are from respected institutions, websites, and publishers, which further backs up the quality of the information contained within this encyclopedia. There are only two real weaknesses to the suggested readings and references. The first is that they are out of date, and suffer from the same timeliness issues as the Encyclopedia at large. The other is that there is no general bibliography that would allow the reader to extensively examine the articles, books, and research that went into the creation of each individual entry. That being said, neither of these weaknesses is great enough to impinge the overall excellent documentation of this work.

Finally, this work is quite objective. GIS as a discipline tends to be a field that is based on factual research and the manipulation of data, so it does not lend itself to a heavy bias as could be found in a history or sociology text. Furthermore, any bias that could come from having a team of contributors that failed to represent a global perspective is resolved in this work. The entries are contributed by individuals from several continents and backgrounds, thus solidifying its objectivity.

Geology Module Synthesis

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 12 Oct 2014 17:53:00 +0000

The geography module has been one of my favorites thus far. This is due in no small part to the inclusion of National Geographic as one of the primary resources explored. I thoroughly enjoyed looking through their website, and I was unaware of the array of resources they provide. There are three main categories, however, that stuck out to me. The first is information and news on topics in both physical and cultural geography. This information tended to be geared towards a primary or secondary level of education, but would act as a good online encyclopedia for a patron interested in an introduction to a particular topic. The second was information on photography. National Geographic is widely renowned for its phenomenal photography. Contained within the website are several blogs that offer tips and tricks for how to shoot good-quality photographs. This information would be helpful for patrons interested in photography, especially for those that desired to shoot animals or in remote locations. Finally, the website offered a decent section on trip planning with suggestions for destinations and ways to arrive there. Consequently, this would be a good resource for adventurous patrons seeking a starting point for a vacation or expedition. Frankly, I intend to use it myself for that very purpose. Finally, I thoroughly enjoyed the National Geographic YouTube channel. This related resource would be extremely useful for patrons wanting a general overview of a topic, and for younger patrons who desired something more dynamic than a traditional print resource.

The Atlantic Cities site presented a lot of good information on topics germane to urban environments. I was particularly taken with its presentation of news and articles on crime, poverty, and the utilization of resources. The site not only provided good information, it is also extremely well designed and easy to navigate. While the information it contains is not necessarily of scholarly research quality, it certainly would meet the needs of the lay user, and provides a good jumping-off point even for an individual seeking scholarly information. I have definitely added this cite in my arsenal of reference tools because it provides easy to read, good information in a site that is intuitive to use and navigate. This makes it perfect for users with a variety of interests, backgrounds, and technical expertise.

The article on “Creating an Online Tutorial” was interesting and of particular relevance to Kent State’s online SLIS program since it detailed the creation of a resource specifically for use with postgrads in an internet environment. I thought that some of the suggestions presented in the article were good, especially the authors’ recommendation for a pre-test to ascertain the user’s knowledge. Overall, however, I thought that the authors missed the forest for the trees. I have used resources like the one described in the article before, and given the choice, I would prefer not to. In making a post on the course Reddit, I was amused to see that I am not the only one that holds that opinion. Consequently, as a reference librarian, I will strive not to create resources like the one described in the article because they seem to be poorly utilized and generally disliked.

I admit that I had trouble getting access to the GeoRef resources as Kent seemed to only have physical copies of the articles that EBSCO returned. That aside, I was taken with one of my classmate’s postings that detailed an article describing how geology librarians are falling behind in expertise in the field because they have focused too much on user services. I think this is an important issue for us as reference librarians to be aware of, regardless of the discipline. Ideally, we should strive to balance the depth of our expertise and the depth of the services we provide, never sacrificing the quality of one for the benefit of the other. I think this would be a delicate balance to obtain, and is something that I definitely want to be aware of as I enter the library field.

I liked the geography sub-Reddit because of its breadth. The home page offered the typical mix of decent links to popular sources and requests for jobs and advice. However, the links to the additional sub-Reddits in fields like GIS, urban planning, and cartography provide the user with an incredible amount of useful information. I spent some time examining the GIS and map sub-Reddits, and I was impressed with the information they provide. Similar to the Atlantic Cities site, this would not be a good academic or professional resource, but it certainly provides excellent information for the lay user.

Finally, I was enthralled with the number of academic institutions that the Google search for “Geography Librarian” returned. The site I chose to feature was from the UCSB geology web page, and talked about zip codes. In spite of being a generic Google search, many of the links that came back seemed to be of some quality. This reinforced to me the importance of knowing how and when to Google information. I read an article over a year ago where a reference librarian explained that, when stuck, he would Google his patron’s question and see what emerged. He commented that this is a viable search strategy for the discerning reference librarian. It is one that I will keep in mind.

A Handbook for the Study of Mental Health--Review and Evaluation

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 05 Oct 2014 19:58:00 +0000

Horwitz, A.V. & Scheid, T.L.(1999). A Handbook for the Study of Mental Health: Social Contexts, Theories, and Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

This work, A Handbook for the Study of Mental Health, presents a broad-spectrum look at a variety of psychological and sociological issues ranging from diagnosis of mental health to an examination of the policies that affect those who either have or work with those who have mental disorders. Consequently, the scope of this work is quite broad. It presents a variety of information on a plethora of topics dealing with mental health; however it does not dig too deeply into any one of those topics. The focus of the work is on the effects of stress and social factors on mental health (Horwitz & Scheid 1999, pg. XV). So, the broad scope of this work is narrowed somewhat by a focus on these two themes.

The authors state that the intended audiences for this work are, “Upper level undergraduates, and lower level graduate students,” (Horwitz & Scheid 1999, pg. XV). The authors accomplish this goal by writing a handbook that provides a good overview of issues in mental health, but keep the language and topics accessible to college students. Most of the articles that make up this work can be easily understood with only a little background in psychology. Even the layman should be able to read and grasp the majority of what is being presented. But this handbook also provides good depth of information that would give even the graduate reader material on which to build their own research, or to broaden their understanding of the field.

This work is dated. It was written in 1999, and thus it presents information and classifications that are out of date. Perhaps the greatest indicator of this is that the primary sourcebook used for the writing of the articles in this piece is the DSM-III-R. Since its publication, two more iterations of the DSM have been published, the most recent being the DSM-V-R. Thus, the primary diagnostic and classification tool referenced in this handbook is itself out of date. As a result, this particular work may not be terribly useful for the individual studying mental health issues in the present day.

While dated, this handbook still carries a good deal of authority. Its two lead editors, Horwitz and Scheid, are both respected academics from Rutgers University and the University of North Carolina Charlotte, respectively. Both are broadly published and have decades of experience in fields dealing with mental health (Allan V. Horwitz, Ph. D, Teresa Scheid). Additionally, the contributing authors are all Ph. D’s in the fields of sociology or psychology, and come from an assortment of well-respected universities and government institutions, lending even greater credence to the authority of this handbook. Finally, it is published by the Cambridge University Press, which is a well-known and respected academic publishing company. Consequently, this handbook is incredibly authoritative in the field of mental health.

In addition to having strong authority, this work is also well documented. At the end of the work is an extensive list of references used by each of the contributing authors in the formation of this work. The only down side to this style of documentation is that the references are not divided by author, nor are the book sections demarcated. This means that a reader wishing to access the references used by a particular author would have to locate the source in the list of all of the references used in the writing of the book. While unwieldy, this still does provide the reader with the documentation necessary to both affirm the reliability and academic rigor used in the writing of each article, and also provides a jumping off point for the reader to perform their own research.

Finally, this work is also relatively objective. It is written with the goal of providing the reader with a good overview of issues pertaining to mental health, and in doing so it balances a variety of viewpoints and issues. Because there is a heavier focus on how stress and society impact an individual’s mental health, there is a topical bias towards those two issues. However, this is clearly stated by the authors in their introduction to the work, and thus does not handicap its overall quality. As far as any other type of bias or leaning, this work appears to be relatively free of it.

Rutgers Department of Sociology. Allan V. Horwitz, Ph. D. Rutgers Univesity Department of Sociology. Retrieved from https://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~avhorw/content.html

University of North Carolina at Charlotte. Teresa Scheid. UNC Charlotte Department of Sociology. Retreived from http://sociology.uncc.edu/teresa-scheid

Psychology Module Synthesis

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 05 Oct 2014 19:56:00 +0000

I particularly liked the article on embedded librarians that we read this week, as it presented a discussion that is germane to some of what I am working with in my practicum. Similarly, I was able to read an editorial from PubMed that dealt with a similar issue. I found this piece particularly interesting because it presented the author’s opinion that medical libraries will more or less disappear as physical institutions unless their directors act creatively to market the services the library has to offer, and seek to proactively meet the needs of the institution they serve (Starr 2011, pgs. 267-268). As I commented in my Reddit post earlier this week, these are issues currently facing Mount Carmel West, where I am doing my practicum. I have had more than one conversation with the director of the library there where he has expressed sentiments similar to those of the editorial.

I explored the article, “Psyched about Psychology Internet Resources,” and found a few that I liked. Although some of the links were broken or had not been recently updated, it seemed that many of the resources it presented would be useful tools for helping a patron find psychological information. That being said, I would probably not rely on this article as a frontline resource because of its dated nature. If I ever did reference work in psychology, I would want to find a more updated resource list that would give more current options for perusal.

As part of this exploration, I poked around the online Encyclopedia of Psychology. I liked the information that it presented, and its entries were succinct, well-sourced, and easy to read and understand. This would thus be a good tool to ether quickly grasp what a patron was searching for, or to help a patron better understand a psychology-related question they may have. That being said, I did not like that some of the entries are significantly older and thus may not reflect the most current research on those particular topics. Furthermore, I found the search box clunky and outdated. I was also frustrated that the Boolean searching was done with radio buttons. This is a feature that needs to be updated, although it works well enough for what it is designed to do.

Vanguard University’s Amoeba Web on psychology was strong in all of the ways that the Encyclopedia of Psychology is weak. The information from the Amoeba web is up-to-date and presents classifications and diagnoses from the DSM-V, the most current iteration of that work. Furthermore, its links to outside resources are also current and broad. One particular aspect that I found useful was what it had to provide on the pharmacological side of psychology. Information on drugs and drug interactions is something that I recently had a patron express difficulty in finding, as many medical resources provide information on drug treatments without delving into the pharmacological issues associated with managing a myriad of drug interactions. I would definitely add this resource to my arsenal as a reference librarian, and I would probably turn here first over either of the aforementioned resources.

The APA’s website was appropriately up to date and easy to navigate. I was also impressed at the array of resources they presented, and I was particularly taken with the section devoted to librarians. I was able to quickly look over the major databases and publications accredited by the APA. This would be extremely useful in assisting a patron doing a literature review in psychology because it would provide me with not only material to recommend, but also the tools to help the patron perform their own literature searches at their leisure.

In doing a Google Scholar search, I will admit that I was not terribly impressed. It did return some good results, but it is a less efficient and less effective means of searching for literature on psychology, or any subject, than it would be to go to a subject-specific database. Google Scholar could be useful for casting a wide net, or trying to find resources across a broad range of disciplines, but overall I have never particularly cared for it as a research tool. There are far better ways to do searches. Therefore, even in making recommendations to patrons, I would want to point them away from Google Scholar and towards database searchers and resources like the APA’s website and Vanguard’s Amoeba Web.

I liked the YaleCourses YouTube channel’s introduction to psychology. I poked around some of the videos and found them interesting and readily accessible. I could see these being used as a resource to reinforce introductory psychology courses, or also a means by which to help orient a patron with the field of psychology. Having non-print resources for any subject is a plus.

Finally, I liked the Psychology SubReddit. Most of the links go to either respected psychology resources, or to popular material that seems to be reinforced by reasonably academic resources. This SubReddit would be an excellent tool for staying abreast of news and current trends in the field of psychology, and also maintaining an understanding of what is being communicated via the popular media about psychological issues. This could help me to understand what patrons are asking about, and also provide a means by which to point patrons towards helpful resources based on their questions.

Starr, S. (2011). The Librarian in the Cloud: Or Beware of Unintended Consequences. Journal of the Medical Library Association 99(4). Pgs. 267-269. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3193357/

Handbook of Cultural Anthropology--Review and Evaluation

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 28 Sep 2014 20:06:00 +0000

Bock, P.K. (Ed.). (1994). Handbook of Psychological Anthropology. Westport: Greenwood Press.

Bock’s Handbook of Cultural Anthropology presents an overview of the discipline as it has existed since the 1930’s, and also provides information on the trends and new discoveries being made in the field at the time of the book’s publication (Bock 1994, pg. vii). Consequently, the scope of this work is broad. A history and critique of the discipline is provided that will help the reader understand both the origins of psychological anthropology, and how the study has changed over the sixty years between its conception and the Handbook’s publication. Furthermore, in the second part of the book, information is presented on the cutting edge of psychological anthropology, and articles describe studies being done in fields from dream research to child development.

In spite of its broad scope, this work is intended for a fairly narrow audience. The language and topics presented are written for an individual who is already familiar with the major areas of study and terminology in psychological anthropology. It would be difficult for a layman to pick up the work and really grasp what each of the contributing authors describe in their respective articles. In spite of that, it is still possible to glean some information from the work with just a little bit of background in the field. Therefore this work should be recommended primarily to those who are studying psychological anthropology, although it could serve as a helpful source even for an individual who has not been initiated in the field. It would just need to be paired with an introduction to the discipline so that the lay reader could better grasp what the authors write.

The timeliness of this work leaves some to be desired. On the one hand, the examination of the history of psychological anthropology from the mid to late twentieth century would still be of use to a reader interested in researching how the discipline has changed and grown since its conception. On the other hand, this work has become an historical artifact in itself. The information it presents is over twenty years old, and is therefore outdated. Even the critique that it has to offer on historical methods and theories could be outdated as well. Moreover, the current research presented in Part II of this work is now all dated; new studies have almost certainly been done that replace everything presented here. Thus, the timeliness of this work is less than desirable, unless the reader is seeking historical perspectives.

The authority of the Handbook makes up for its age. The editor, Philip K. Bock, was a professor of Anthropology at the University of New Mexico with decades of experience in both fieldwork and academic research. He is widely published and the editor of the Journal of Anthropological Research (Bock 1994, pg. 402). As a result, Bock is well qualified to oversee the assembly and publication of this Handbook. Not only is he well-versed in the specific discipline of psychological anthropology, he is also experienced with other sub-disciplines of anthropology, and would thus be able to choose contributions that amply reflect the then-current state of psychological anthropology, but that also would contribute to the broader field of anthropology as a whole. The contributing authors for this work are also well respected, well-published anthropologists from a wide variety of well-known institutions.

In addition to being very authoritative, this work is also exceedingly well documented. Each of the contributing authors presents an extensive bibliography for their articles. Also, the editor provides a select bibliography at the end of the Handbook that provides even more resources. Thus, this work is extremely well documented with good resources, and this gives even more weight to its authority in the field.

Finally, this work contains articles on a broad spectrum of topics dealing with issues in a variety of cultures. There is no real bias that I could discern in examining the text, although I admit that I am not well versed enough in psychological anthropology to definitively say that this work provides an accurate overview of the discipline. If there is a bias, it would be towards certain theories and academic pursuits, and not towards any individual or group of individuals. So, this book appears to be reasonably free of bias.

Anthropology Module Synthesis

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 28 Sep 2014 20:05:00 +0000

The article for this week, “Evolving Internet Reference in Anthropology,” presented a list of sources for anthropological research and offered some critique on each. Although the list appeared to be good, many of the electronic resources are now available collectively through a few anthropology databases. Thus, I would think that since 2005 finding literature and sources in anthropological research has probably become significantly simpler. Moreover, I checked a few of the links to see if they are still active, and I was not surprised to find that in the nine years since the article’s publication, there were more than a few broken links. Consequently, although the information the article provides on the changing nature of anthropology reference work is still good, the resources it suggests are largely outmoded.

The second article I read, on CRL’s resources for colonial Latin America, was good but also outdated. It was published in 2002, and as one of my classmates commented, CRL’s collection has probably changed significantly since then. Even so, I was impressed at the scope of CRL’s holdings in terms of breadth within the study of colonial Latin America, but also age. Some of the documents available were several hundred years old. Consequently, it seems like CRL would be a fantastic institution to point users towards if they are looking for rare or very old resources.

I also perused the suggested links on the course wiki. The American Anthropological Association website was extremely helpful as it presented a long list of resources presented by each of the sub-disciplines of anthropology. This would be a good tool to use to help patrons who are seeking information on a specific anthropological topic. The list of Top 100 Anthropology Blogs was somewhat helpful, but I found some broken links, and others require the user to either log in or create an account. While I am fine with creating a free account to access information, some older library users are either unwilling to set up a plethora of accounts, or lack the technical skills to do so. Thus, the list of blogs would be a useful starting point, but the discerning librarian would need to be aware that parts of it may be inaccessible. The Cultural Survival Quarterly website was an interesting resource on the plights and status of different indigenous peoples around the world, many of whom are vanishing. This would be a good resource for individuals doing research on the current state of indigenous peoples, or for those researching how modern nations interact with the native peoples in their lands. Since many indigenous populations are marginalized, this could also be a useful resource for anthropologists studying marginalized peoples and cultures. Finally, although the information it presents appears to be good overall, some of it was preachy and sensationalist. Although many of the claims made were likely true, I was put off by the strong tone.

The YouTube videos were my favorite activity coming out of this week for two reasons. First, they were a reminder that in spite of its somewhat checkered reputation, there is good information to be found on YouTube, and this is a resource that we as reference librarians should not be ignorant of. As such, this is another tool that I am adding to my reference arsenal. Second, some of the videos found by my classmates were absolutely fascinating. There was one documentary in particular, which examined an Indian arranged marriage, which I thought was extremely well done. Outside of print resources, the documentaries and lectures on YouTube do a lot to add to the field of anthropology. And even though they may not be as traditionally academic as journals or books, they certainly should not be ignored by either the librarian, or the patron doing research in the discipline.

Finally, I briefly examined the Anthropology SubReddit. I was disappointed that it did not contain any sub-SubReddits like the Economics module did. However, I found this resource to be a useful jumping off point for anthropological research. Likewise, I was pleasantly surprised that the links on this Reddit tended to be for reputable resources, more so than the other modules that we have examined thus far. I could honestly see myself recommending the Anthropology SubReddit to a patron seeking more information on the discipline.

Economic Handbook of the World: 1982--Review and Evaluation

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 21 Sep 2014 19:52:00 +0000

Banks, A.S (Ed.). (1982). Economic Handbook of the World: 1982. New York: McGraw Hill.

The Economic Handbook is a resource designed to give the user a quick guide to the economic standing of every nation existing in the world in 1982. It presents basic information, such as monetary unit, GNP, GDP and debt, but also adds some geography and politics to provide context for the economic standing of each nation. An article goes on to expound on the current state of each nation’s economy, domestic trends, foreign relations, and the future of the economy in the nation. This handbook is part of a larger series published yearly; however this was the only copy I could find on library shelves.

As a result, the scope of this work is very broad, but rather shallow. It provides a snapshot of each nation’s economy as it existed in 1982, and also gives some high-level commentary on current status and future trends. Thus, a lot of ground is covered and this work is very broad in terms of the geographic area it relates to, but does not provide a ton of information on any one country.

This work is written for an audience that is familiar with both economics and the state of political affairs in the early eighties. Although the language is simple and the information presented is relatively straightforward, there are frequent references to economic terms and world events that would cause the lay reader some trouble. Furthermore, even for a reader familiar with economics, the casual references to 1980’s world events would also prove puzzling to an individual who did not have some understanding of history. In spite of this however, the book still remains relatively accessible and could prove a useful resource to an individual studying economic history.

The timeliness of this work suffers from its design. The Handbook was written to be published yearly, and thus each iteration is designed to be used only within very narrow time constraints. As a result, this work is quite outdated. The world has moved on in the last thirty-two years and there is little information in this book that is directly relevant to the state of affairs today, outside of the examination of historical trends. For example, economic data are presented for both East and West Germany, and also the USSR, none of which have existed since 1991. It could serve as a good resource for an economic historian, or an economist who was searching for information regarding past trends and states of affairs, but beyond that, this work would not be terribly useful to the modern economist.

The head editor of the series, Arthur Banks, was a respected political science professor at Binghamton University. He passed away in 2011. He was an avid worker in broad-spectrum data analysis, and personally oversaw the writing and editing of each iteration of the Handbook (Ellis 2011). As such, this work has a decent amount of authority. It is overseen and edited by an individual uniquely qualified to present information on the global state of affairs who was a professor at a reputable institution. Furthermore, the work is published by McGraw-Hill, which is a well-known and respected academic publishing company. Thus, in spite of its poor timeliness, this work carries a decent amount of authoritative weight.

The documentation for this work is abysmal. There are no cited references, and only the briefest suggestion of the international agencies that served as the sources for the information contained within the Handbook. I would speculate that this information was probably given in an accompanying volume that has since been lost or misplaced by the library. However, as a standalone piece, the Handbook’s information is significantly weakened by the lack of even a partial reference list.

Finally, this work is relatively objective. In stereotypical economic fashion, it merely presents facts and figures and provides little in the way of interpretation. Because it was published in the US, there is some western-centric bias. In spite of that, said bias is barely noticeable throughout the work and does not present a serious barrier to the information being presented. Overall, the work is quite objective.

Ellis, K. (2011). “Arthur S. Banks, professor emeritus of political science, dies”. Binghamton University. Retrieved from http://www.binghamton.edu/inside/index.php/inside/story/1546/arthur-s.-banks-professor-emeritus-of-political-science-dies/.

Economics Module Synthesis

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 21 Sep 2014 19:48:00 +0000

The American Economic Association Resources for Economists was a resource that I do not quite understand how to use. I searched through data for different states, and had no idea what I was looking at. I am sure that a little more background in economics would have provided me with some grounding as to how this resource could best be used, but I was mystified. I was also frustrated with the user interface, which I found slow, antiquated, and difficult to understand. As a reference librarian, I could see recommending this resource if a patron was requesting specific information not available elsewhere, but overall, I was not impressed. I would assume that much of the data presented on this site is probably available in other resources that are better designed and maintained.

On the flip side, I was rather taken with the Econ Talk site from the Library of Economics and Liberty. I found their searchable archives to be intuitive, and the topics of the talks seemed both timely and germane to the current state of affairs in economics. The talks are also presented in a manner that does not require an economics degree to grasp the information being presented, but they still contain enough depth to interest economists of all levels. This site would be a useful resource for a patron seeking to keep up to date on economics, or to provide background or deeper insight into a specific topic. Again, the searchable archives make this resource especially useful.

Another good resource I found was the Iowa State University e-Library LibGuide. It provides a cornucopia of economics resources from reference-based material to journal articles to raw data. Furthermore, what stood out to me about this particular Guide is that it contains a series of tabs dedicated to educating the user on how to use the resources it presents, and also how to find good economic information in general. I think that providing the tools to help users learn to research on their own, and explanation of the use of the various sources, is what separates good Guides from the great ones. The Iowa State Economics Guide is one that I would recommend in a heartbeat.

On the other end of the spectrum, as contrast, is the Worcester Polytechnic Institute Economic Science Guide. It merely gives a list of databases with no explanation as to how to search them, and little or no commentary as to what each of them contains. I found this guide to be rather opaque. Its only redeeming quality was the link to ask a librarian for help on the left side.

Finally, I was more taken with Reddit’s Economics subReddit than I have been with any of the other subReddits we have examined thus far in the course. The general subReddit provided the standard mix of quasi-scholarly posts, trolls, and requests for help. I felt about this page as I have the other Reddit pages we have examined; it would serve as a good starting point, like Wikipedia, but would not be that useful for anyone who was seeking more than pedestrian economic information. Where this subReddit really shines, though, is in the specific economics subReddits. I examined two in a little more depth. The first is the Economics subReddit of economics, which presents links to good, up-to-date economics information and articles from respected publications like the Atlantic. This is a resource that I would recommend as a reference librarian. It looks like it could be useful for patrons seeking economics information in a variety of depths.

The other subReddit I looked at was badeconomics, and this one was hilarious. While not meant to be serious in any way, this site presented a series of opinion posts and humorous ponderings on economics. This is not a viable resource for doing good economics research, but it is certainly a noteworthy diversion. I would probably recommend this tongue-in-cheek to patrons that I knew well or who looked like they could use a laugh. I think that it is as much the reference librarian’s role to help users access information is it is to relieve some of the stress often associated with hunting for it. This resource fits the latter bill, and as such has a place in my personal arsenal.

World War II in Europe: An Encyclopedia--Review and Evaluation

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 14 Sep 2014 17:15:00 +0000

Zabecki, D.T. (Ed.). (1999). World War II in Europe: An encyclopedia. (Vols. 1-2). New York: Garland.

The scope of Zabecki’s World War II in Europe: An Encyclopedia is limited by its topic, but provides a thorough treatise of all major aspects of the European Theatre in the Second World War. The work is divided into two volumes, six sections, and a variety of appendices that make navigation of the information easy and intuitive. The encyclopedia is not designed to be an exhaustive examination of the Second World War in Europe, but rather to acquaint the reader with the major events, players, weapons, campaigns and strategy of that conflict. Thus, the entries do not include some of the lesser-known battles and figures, but it does include good information on all major players. Furthermore, Zabecki purposefully extended the scope of the book to include entries describing people or events that occurred before the war started in 1939, and also entries that include information coming from after the end of the war in 1945. He states that the reason for this is that the events leading up to the war started long before the German invasion of Poland, and the effects of the conflict have extended far past the annihilation of Nazi Germany. For instance, it was not until October 3, 1990 that Germany was finally reunited, and Berlin was released from control by occupying forces (Zabecki 1999, pg. XI). Consequently, the encyclopedia does an excellent job balancing the need for a broad scope of information, and a desire to keep the information succinct and relevant. What this work lacks in specificity it makes up for in convenience.

This encyclopedia is intended for use by any individual. It includes specific historical information and additional reading lists that make it an excellent starting point for the professional historian. However, its entries are written in a manner and language that make it easily accessible to the lay reader as well. It does not assume that its audience has any but the most general prior knowledge of the European Theater or World War II in general, and by reading several entries, even the most uninitiated reader would be able to grasp the themes, significant events, and major currents of the European conflict.

The timeliness of this work is perhaps its greatest weakness. As Zabecki comments in his Preface, the history of World War II is a dynamic and ever-changing subject (1999, pg. XI). There is research being done today that is still turning up new information about the war that would not be included in this resource written fifteen years ago. Thus, in spite of its thorough treatment of the European Theatre, the discerning historian or librarian would need to seek other, more modern resources to fact-check and expand on the entries included in this encyclopedia. On the other hand, the history contained in this work is well-sourced and solid. So although some of it may be a bit dated, the vast majority of the information provided is still timely and appropriate.

The head editor of this work, David Zabecki, is a retired Major General of the U.S. Army. He holds a PhD in military science from Britain’s Royal Military College of Science, served as a Senior Security Advisor, and is the author of several historical works (U.S. Naval Institute 2014). Consequently, he is uniquely qualified to serve as the head editor for such a work as he has both a firsthand understanding of the military, and also an extensive background in studying military science. As such, this encyclopedia presents a significant amount of authority on the subject. The entries were contributed by one hundred and fifty-five authors from eight different countries, which further lends credence to the work as an authoritative piece because it is not written from a purely British or American perspective. Moreover, the resources included in the additional reading lists at the end of every entry are significant secondary sources. This shows that the information used to build this encyclopedia was carefully researched and synthesized, providing highly authoritative information on the subject.

World War II in Europe is also well documented. Every entry contains a list of works that were either used to help construct the entry, or that are related to it and can serve as additional reading. Moreover, there is a select bibliography included in the second volume of the encyclopedia that provides an impressive list of other resources used in the construction of this work.

Finally, this encyclopedia remains fairly objective. The team of contributors from a variety of nations ensures that the information contained within does not lean too heavily on any one national viewpoint. Furthermore, this diversity provides entries written from perspectives that readers may be unfamiliar with. Lastly, the entries present just the facts of their subjects, and do not speculate. Consequently, the reader is left to draw their own conclusions about the events and individuals described in the pages of this magnificent resource.

Work Cited

U.S. Naval Institute. 2014. David T. Zabecki. Retrieved from http://www.usni.org/author/david-t-zabecki

History Module Synthesis

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 14 Sep 2014 17:13:00 +0000

The resources we visited this week have been some of my favorite that I have encountered in the LIS program at Kent thus far. As an undergraduate history major, I have a love for history, and the resources presented here really appealed to my personal interests.

On that note, I was intrigued by the article, “Historians and Their Information Resources.” I agreed with much that was included in the article, but was surprised when the authors stated that historians tend to avoid e-journals (Dalton & Charnigo 2004, pg. 414). I have extensively used e-journals in historical research throughout my time as an historian, and have been encouraged to do so by my professors. When I posed this quandary to the class, one of my colleagues commented that he thought the authors may have meant e-journals to refer to those periodicals published solely online, with no print edition. That would make more sense, but I still would want to read a more updated article on historians’ use of sources in their research to see if e-resources have gained any traction in the last ten years. I had meant to try and track down such an article on my own, but ended up running out of time this week. If I find anything, I will post it as an attachment to this post.

Part of the reason I would want to read an update on how historians use e-resources is because there were several presented this week that were quite impressive. The first one I examined was the Library of the Royal Society Centre for the History of Science’s website which contains many impressive print documents magnificently scanned for use online. I perused an anatomy sketchbook from some few hundred years ago, and tried to decipher the handwritten notes from the captain of a sea voyage. These two primary source documents were accessed for free, and were presented at a high enough resolution as to allow for detailed study. The controls of the viewer were a bit clunky, but overall I was impressed with the presentation. I think that digitizing books and displaying them in a format similar to how the Library of the Royal Society Centre for the History of Science exhibits some of their works would allow for public access to works that are too old or too brittle to remain in circulation. Doing so would prove a powerful tool to librarians seeking to connect their patrons with historical resources. This also has implications for the future of preservation. If we are able to virtually recreate a book down to the almost microscopic level, it could provide far more widespread and far longer access to material that is currently falling prey to decay. I work daily with books from the mid-fifteenth century to the mid-eighteenth, and I can say unequivocally that even print material housed in ideal preservation conditions does not last forever. I know that digital media does not either, but creating copies of works that might otherwise molder in obscurity would help prolong access to that information.

In examining the LibGuides this week I continued to be impressed by the scope of resources presented. One of my colleagues highlighted Theresa Murdock’s Guide from the University of Washington. I was also impressed with the quality and depth of the guide. I have noticed, too, that the University of Washington consistently creates very good LibGuides. Their guides for both their medical residents and their College of Nursing are also well done and intuitive to use. I explored those two in conjunction with the work I am doing for my practicum. Knowing this about the University of Washington is helpful, because it provides an additional resource I can turn to for help as a librarian. If I am posed a question on a subject I do not know well, it seems that university’s guides could offer another good portal to information.

I was taken with the Digital Librarian’s History Section for reasons similar to why I liked the Library of the Royal Society Centre’s website. Both resources offer access to good electronic versions of primary sources. I spent some time looking through the Alexander’s Palace Time Machine which contains a myriad of pictures depicting the palace as it stood in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The opulence of the palace is stunning, and so is the quality of the prints that are presented on the website. This type of access to electronic versions of primary sources is something that has not existed for long, and something that would be of great importance to a researching historian. For the first time we, as librarians, have the power to connect historians with primary sources from thousands of miles away, without either of us ever having to leave our office. This has huge implications for both the nature and the quality of research that can be supported for a relatively low cost.

Finally, I liked looking through the History subReddit. Like Political Science’s sub Reddit last week, it was not populated with good resources for research, but it is certainly an amusing read. I continue to think that Reddit, like Wikipedia, is a good jumping-off point for further study, but should never be used as a source in and of itself. As a librarian, I think that this source could be used as a recommendation for people with interests in specific areas of study, or as a way to keep up on the current state of a particular subject, but I would never recommend it as a good research tool.

Political Science Module Synthesis

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 08 Sep 2014 02:53:00 +0000

I was impressed with the variety of nontraditional resources presented in this week’s activities. The first of these I examined was the political science librarian blogs feed. I was amazed to see a plethora of different types of information, including news on current events, political theory, commentary on politics, and many others. I spent some time perusing a couple of librarians who had collected resources on ISIS and the ongoing crisis in the Middle East. I found these resources particularly helpful because the librarians succinctly put together information that gave background, up-to-date new stories, and commentary. I was able to quickly find all of the information that I wanted to brief myself on what is happening in Syria and Iraq, and was also able to find intelligent commentary from professional political scientists.

As such, I was taken with the librarian blog feed as a resource. I have never encountered a similar resource before now, and in all of my classes blogs have been more or less ignored as a means of finding information. This activity has added a new tool to my information seeking arsenal. Furthermore, from my experience, it seems that blog feeds such as this can act as electronic encyclopedias on current events. However, any librarian using such a resource would want to ensure that it was coming from a reputable creator, and that it did present information from authoritative, unbiased sources. Otherwise, using blogs could lead users down long rabbit trails of bad information.

The link to the MIT Opencourseware site further revealed to me the breadth of the field of political science. In scanning the options, it is clear that political science as a discipline spills into the fields of law, history, and sociology. I was also impressed with the opportunities presented by the site as a resource. A librarian could use the Opencourseware as a starting point to help identify material for any of the fields of study identified by the course’s title. And because MIT is a respected institution, it can be assumed that the required reading for the different classes would be good resources, and also useful for providing the reader with a strong understanding of the topic at hand.

Reddit, too, is a resource that I have never considered using as a portal to information, and certainly have not encountered in any of my other library science coursework. The information on Reddit differed from that on the librarian blog feed in that Reddit contained a little less breadth, was less authoritative, and had more information on how to find jobs and the viability of political science as a marketable degree. Thus, Reddit would be a useful tool to help a patron make a decision about obtaining a degree in political science, and also to help point a political science graduate down the right path to career or further degrees. Because Reddit lacks good authority I would not use this as a primary tool for information seeking, but it is an excellent one to have in my arsenal.

LibGuides are a resource that I have only been introduced to in the past week, and I have grown fond of them. They are an outstanding and succinct way to stand on the shoulders of other librarians in a given field. As my undergraduate degree is in history, I am uninitiated in the field of political science. However, scanning through a few of the LibGuides, I was quickly able to identify major publications in the field, and also was able to identify how the discipline branches out into sub-disciplines. I think that these guides are an amazing resource for a librarian to use for answering a patron’s question if it falls outside their area of expertise. Already I have personally seen this in my practicum, where I am using them to become familiar with nursing as an academic discipline. I have no prior training in the medical field, but by using LibGuides I am gaining a good understanding of the current state of nursing, and what publications and resources I should focus on.

The CQ Press Electronic Library was a far more traditional resource. It reminds me a lot of JSTOR, or the Wiley databases that I have used in my work both at OSU and Mount Carmel. I think that it is a wonderful resource, and an excellent finding tool. I particularly liked the ability to save citations in a personal profile that remedies the need to perform searches multiple times. This is a feature that JSTOR also provides, and one I used extensively during my undergraduate research. Consequently, the CQ Press Electronic Library is something that I would suggest to patrons for continued exploration of their topic, and as a good tool for doing political science research.

On another note, the article that I read from the International Political Science Abstracts, “The Library Re-Visited,” was critiquing undergraduate political science research in a manner that was in line the goals stated in the Political Science Research Competency Guidelines. From both works I gathered that librarians play a significant role in assisting political science students gather and synthesize information. Both the article I read and the Guidelines focused on students being able to identify good resources, and also broaden their search to find information they had previously missed. As librarians, that is our specialty, and we play a strong role in helping to ensure that we are teaching our patrons how to search, as well as providing information. With both the traditional resources that are usually taught in library school, and the non-traditional resources introduced in this module, we should be able to help students find all of the information they need and more.

The Oxford Handbook of Political Theory--Review and Evaluation

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 08 Sep 2014 01:28:00 +0000

Dryzek, J.S., Hong, B., & Phillips, A. (Eds.). 2006. Oxford Handbook of Political Theory. New York: Oxford University Press.

The Oxford Handbook of Political Theory is a well-rounded, well-researched political science resource. The Handbook is published by the Oxford University Press, a reputable publisher of academic materials with a long and respected history. Furthermore, the contributing authors for the handbook are all professors or other respected political theorists from major academic institutions from around the world. Finally, in performing a quick scan of the sources each of the contributing authors use to write their articles, it can be quickly seen that they are all pulled from other reputable publications and resources. Consequently, the Handbook is a highly authoritative work. The information that it presents is clearly backed by rigorous scholarly study, and is presented by excellent authors coming from esteemed institutions.

As an authoritative work, the documentation contained within the Handbook is superb. All of the contributing authors’ sources are included in references appended to each article, and the editors include their own reference list for their introduction. Moreover, as previously mentioned, the documented sources are from reputable publications and institutions.

The scope of the Handbook is quite broad. In the introduction the editors state that their goal is to provide information on everything from the core of political theory to its cutting edges as they existed at the time of the book’s publication (Dryzek et al. 2006, pg. 34). And it seems that this is a goal that they accomplish. The book includes articles on every major aspect of political theory as it existed in the early part of the twenty-first century. The book is not designed to be a historical retrospective on political theory, however. The articles are focused on the major parts of political theory from the end of the twentieth and the beginning of the twenty-first centuries (Dryzek et al. 2006, pg. 31). Furthermore, because the Handbook is written to provide a broad-spectrum look at political theory, it does not delve too deeply into any one aspect of the discipline. Consequently, the scope of the work provides the reader with a good understanding of major, recent issues in political theory, but does not provide an historical or granular examination of political theory as a discipline.

The broad scope of this work makes it a relatively objective resource as well. Even though individual contributing authors within it may have biases, the editors selected and arranged the works so that multiple viewpoints on a variety of topics are presented. This enables the reader to make up their own mind about the theories and issues being presented. Thus, the individual parts of the work may lack in objectivity, but the Handbook as a whole is an objective piece.

The Handbook is written for an audience that is familiar and comfortable with political theory. The lay reader would struggle to follow the discussions contained within, and the editors and contributing authors frequently reference theories and works that are not commonly known. The authors’ introduction provides some assistance in giving brief descriptions of the major theories presented, but it is not a resource that is designed to introduce its readers to the discipline. Rather, it is intended for academic political theorists who are already established in the study. The goal of the work is to keep its audience up to date on what is happening in the field of political theory.

As this resource was written over eight years ago, the timeliness of the work is not as strong as it could be. Political theory is a discipline that tends to transform and move fast, as is commented on by the editors in their introduction (Dryzek et al. 2006, pgs. 14-15). Accordingly, it can be expected that there are already new theories, critiques, and revisions of the theories contained within this Handbook. Also, it is likely that there are a slew of new resources and authors that have arisen since its publication. In spite of this, however, the work is still recent enough to be a useful tool in political theory research, or to help acquaint the political theorist with the modern state of the discipline. Furthermore, the authoritativeness of the work means that it still stands as a relevant, powerful resource that accurately reflects the state of the discipline at the time it was written.

System Test

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 31 Aug 2014 18:38:00 +0000

Hello all,

I am rather new to blogging, so this is my attempt to see if I can actually make this happen. I've included the text of a short story I wrote in high school just to get an idea of how long posts lay out. Hopefully this works.

The Mountain

Wind screamed around them all, a howling blizzard pouring down the mountainside. Dr. Landers kept his head down, fighting through the storm. Behind him, Terrence Williams struggled to match the Doctor’s rugged pace. Behind him, Dr. Caldwell was growing nervous. For three hours they’d been fighting their way up Mt. McKinley through ice, snow and ravaging wind. He was growing worried about the grad student roped in between him and Dr. Landers. The kid was barely into his twenties, and smart as he was, just wasn’t prepared for this kind of punishment.

Not to say that he was faring much better. Caldwell was an outdoorsman at heart, and had weathered fierce storms, but this was ridiculous. Visibility was down to a matter of feet, and it was all he could do to stay standing. He checked the watch on his wrist, then the thermometer. The temperature was plunging fast, and the short night was coming on soon. They needed to get to shelter, and fast, or they would freeze to death in the storm. Caldwell grasped the braided nylon rope and pulled sharply three times, signaling Terrence to stop. Soon, all three members of the NOAA/NASA research expedition were huddled together, heads pressed together to hear each other over the storm.

“James, we need to stop!” shouted Caldwell, trying to be heard over the force of the storm.

“But Richard, it’s only another mile to the site!”

“If we go another mile, we’re gonna lose the kid.” Terrence was breathing heavily, swaying as he stood. What skin showed was bright red. Caldwell wished he could see Terrence’s eyes. The eyes are the best way to judge the true fatigue of an individual.

“I’m game,” croaked Terrence. His voice betrayed that he truly was not.

“James, I’m exhausted. This storm is only getting worse, and it’ll be dark in an hour. If we try and make the ridge, we’ll all be dead. We need to stop.”

“Richard, this is important. If we stop now---“

“If we stop now, we might get to walk down this mountain. If we keep going, we’re as good as committing suicide.”

“But the research! The grant!”

“No grant is worth my life, James. Or yours. Or the kid’s. We stop here, make as best a shelter as we can, then move on when the weather clears.”

Terrence looked wearily back and forth between the two older men. The wind continued to tear at the little group, piling snow against their legs even as they stood.

“Fine,” Landers sounded thoroughly pissed, almost desperate, “We’ll camp here. We move out first thing in the morning. But dammit, Richard, if we lose the grant, it’s on your head!”

The three men set about setting up their shelter for the night: a single dome tent, staked as best it could be and weighed down by their gear. The wind made it nearly impossible to erect, and at several points threatened to tear the whole contraption off the side of the mountain and down into the abyss. But they got it done. Half an hour later, they were all in out of the cold sipping hot chocolate heated over a heat brick, and eating energy bars. With his mask off, Dr. Caldwell could immediately see that stopping had been the right choice. Terrence was sheet white where he wasn’t red from the wind. Dark circles hung beneath his eyes, and his movements were lethargic, his speech slurred. Caldwell recognized the symptoms of both hypothermia and exhaustion, a dangerous and often lethal combination on a mountain at any time, but especially in a storm like this.

“Here, eat this,” said Caldwell, passing Terrence a piece of his energy bar. It was homemade, and contained slightly more than the store-bought brands could give. Terrence accepted the morsel silently, munching absentmindedly. Caldwell was growing seriously concerned about the graduate student. He’d started the climb in good shape, but by the time they’d reached their first camp, he’d been coughing and breathing heavily. When Caldwell offered oxygen, Terrence had flatly denied him, and Landers had backed him up.

“He’s healthy as a horse, Richard, why would he need oxygen at this altitude? Let the boy live a little.”

Caldwell had relented, reluctantly. Now he wasn’t so sure. Oxygen deprivation and altitude sickness added to hypothermia and fatigue would kill the grad student as sure as a bullet. Or, he’d catch pneumonia and they’d get to watch him die as they descended the mountain. Like the Frenchman that he and Landers had climbed with back in ’87.

Landers. There was a problem. He’d always been the more reckless of the two, the more headstrong. Caldwell had known him since near birth, and they’d been fast friends for almost that length of time. Landers had been Caldwell’s best man when he married Geneva. Caldwell had always wanted to return the favor, but Landers viewed women as something to be conquered, not loved and cherished. Thus, he’d never settled down, and Caldwell was starting to think he never would.

In Antarctica, when a windstorm had forced him and Caldwell to camp on the ice for nearly a week in conditions much like this, it had been Landers determination that had saved the men. And again in Borneo when the locals had gotten pissed. But as he got older, it seemed that his reason started to leave him. Case in point, the Frenchman they’d left dead on the snow not a half a mile from base camp on Everest. Landers had refused to turn back when the Frenchman, Andre was his name, had developed a nasty cough and complained of fatigue. They’d summited a day later, and by noon the following day, the Frenchman could barely stand. They’d raced down the mountain as fast as they could, Caldwell carrying Andre with one of the other team members, Landers walking ahead grimly, saying little, just pushing on in silence. Caldwell had wanted to scream at him, call him out in his recklessness that was going to kill the man he carried, but he had held his tongue.

They hadn’t climbed for two decades following the tragedy on Everest. They hadn’t done much of anything, really, outside of their typical teaching and research. But then Landers got it in his head they should try again, something daring but not as daring as Everest. He submitted a proposal to the NOAA and NASA about high-altitude climate research, dealing both with pollutants in the jet stream (the NOAA) and human endurance in extreme conditions (NASA). Caldwell had reluctantly agreed, mostly because he knew Landers would go whether or not he did, and the thought of the man trying to take the mountain without him mortified him. Heavens knew what trouble he’d get in without Caldwell to talk him down. Like today. Landers would have kept walking until he or the kid dropped from fatigue or hypothermia.

Even now, Landers lay opposite Caldwell, sipping hot chocolate and staring into space with an expression intense enough to cut steel. He was removed from the situation, and rapidly losing touch with reality. All that mattered to him were the grants, and proving that at fifty seven, he still could climb mountains. His recklessness had pushed them past the point of intelligence and out into the margin where people got killed, and quickly. Three days up and three days down had been the plan. They were now almost a day ahead of schedule, against Caldwell’s better judgment, and it was turning into Everest all over again.

“James, we need to start thinking about our descent.”

“This storm will pass. We’ll wait it out. We’re ahead of schedule.”

“Terrence isn’t going to wait it out. He’s sick, and getting sicker.”

“He’s just tired from the climb. He’s fine.”

“Dammit, James, look at him,” Caldwell felt terrible, talking about the kid in this way with him sitting right there. His eyes were big, red-rimmed, scared. He was failing, and he knew it. But he idolized Landers, would do anything for the charismatic professor. And that’s what scared Caldwell.

Landers finally turned to Terrence, his stony visage showing a crack at the grad student’s exhaustion painted so clearly on his face.

“Really, Dr. Landers, I’ll be fine,” Terrence’s voice was barely audible over the wind. Caldwell felt like he was watching the kid fall apart before his very eyes. Landers gave a half-hearted smile to Terrence, then turned back to Caldwell, his eyes moist.

“What have I done, Richard?” All color was draining from his face, “It’s Everest all over again. Richard, why didn’t I listen?”

Caldwell didn’t know what to make of this one-eighty in attitude. Either Landers was trying to manipulate him, or the man was cracking up. Caldwell favored the latter theory. The tent lapsed into silence, Caldwell looking from the thin body of Terrence, and his haggard face, to the thick, muscular form of his closest friend, who refused to meet his eyes. Caldwell was afraid. He was trapped on the side of a mountain, in a snowstorm, with a deteriorating sick man and another who was slowly losing his sanity.

“I think we all better just get some rest. You might be right, James, maybe this will all have stopped in the morning.”

But it hadn’t. Dawn broke sometime after four AM, the cold light piercing the shivering tent. The wind still howled down the mountain, and peeking outside, Caldwell could see treacherous drifts against rocks, and even the tent. The temperature was well below zero.

Things in the tent were bleak, at best. Landers was barely speaking, muttering to himself on and off. Terrence appeared to have gotten even worse in the night. The boy was shivering with chills, sheet-white. Caldwell didn’t know if the kid would be able to make it back. He shook his head, angry with himself for not forcing Landers to turn back earlier. Now this… And the kid had that girl back at CalTech, that beautiful blonde he wanted to marry.

Landers surprised Caldwell by breaking the relative silence as the men packed.

“I had a nightmare last night.” Caldwell didn’t know what to say. Landers had never talked about his dreams before, as far as Caldwell knew.

“We were back on Everest, in ’87. It was the second day, when---when--- you know. Except instead of you carrying Andre, it was me. And he talked to me all the way. When we reached that point, where he---he---“

Caldwell remembered it well. His shoulders burning under the strain of the stretcher, having jury-rigged and finagled and brute-forced his way down the mountain for thirty-six hours straight, he was almost relieved when the burden was relieved. Then he realized what had happened. He turned back to see Andre sprawled in the snow. It was a beautiful day, and the Frenchman’s eyes were on the summit of the mountain, clearly visible from their position.

“C’est belle, le fin de tous…” He’d whispered, The end of all… Then he had turned to Landers, his voice barely a whisper, coughs wracking his thin body, drowning on his own mucous.

“My business is not finished with you, folle,” and then he’d died. Caldwell remembered checking his pulse, starting CPR, feeling Michael Williams, the other scientist on the trip, pulling him gently off the dead Fenchman. He remembered punching Landers, shouting. But he never remembered the actual descent into base camp, the last half-mile into the warmth at the knees of the greatest mountain on Earth.

“Anyways,” continued Landers, “He said it again. And then I woke up. And… and…” Landers’s face was the color of ash. Caldwell’s nervousness increased tenfold.

“And then I heard him outside our tent. Walking. Waiting. Oh, God! It was terrible! I heard him out there, crunching in the storm!” Landers lapsed into silence, shuddering. Terrence looked to Caldwell, his eyes a portrait of pure misery.

“Landers, I don’t know what you heard, but it wasn’t Andre. There’s no one up here but us. The storm does---“

“James, you idiot, I know what a storm sounds like and this wasn’t it!” Landers was suddenly beet-red, furious. Caldwell frowned. Now sudden emotional shifts, delusions, hallucinations. James looked to Terrence, and felt like he was staring into the eyes of death. Terrence knew. Caldwell would be lucky to make it off the mountain alive. If Landers did, too, it would be a certifiable miracle. But without Landers and Caldwell together, the sick graduate had no hope. He was doomed. Caldwell felt like crying for the poor boy.

They got going just after eleven, five hours later than the previous two days. The wind was fierce, visibility limited, but the temperature started climbing again. Caldwell prayed that the storm was breaking, and fast. However, the higher temperatures were a blessing and a curse: while they made living easier, they greatly increased the chance of avalanche.

The three staggered through the morning, Caldwell leading, Landers at the rear. Terrence was barely mobile, plodding along through the storm, every now and then crying out in pain or frustration. Caldwell figured that he was losing touch with reality, becoming delusional. Landers remained quiet, any mutterings he made were instantly torn from his mouth by the fierce wind, and they never reached Caldwell.

Caldwell himself admitted that his shape was poor, and growing poorer. He was tired, sucking oxygen at an alarming rate, and bitterly cold even through his layers. He was not too far behind Terrence. Even his mentality was going. Several times he could swear that he saw a shadowy figure through the snow, just ahead or just to his side. Every time he shook his head, and the image was gone. But it was beginning to unnerve him. Especially after Landers’s rant about the Frenchman. Caldwell checked his GPS, they only had about thirteen miles back to their base camp, only six of which were going to be descending the dangerous parts of this godforsaken mountain.

Noon came, and lunch. The storm hovered on the mountainside, but the wind was abating. Landers seemed back to normal, gruff and businesslike. He forced Terrence to start taking antibiotics, and gave most of his meal to the sock undergrad. He chose to lead for the next leg, and Calwell let him, foolishly hoping that the man was feeling better now that they’d started their descent, foolishly hoping they’d be able to get Terrence down.

The walk that afternoon was strange. Caldwell was rear guard, the last man on the rope, and Terrence swam in and out of visibility with the wind-driven snow, sometimes leaving Caldwell completely alone. Caldwell acknowledged that traveling in such conditions was about as foolish as could be imagined, but he saw no other options. If they took shelter, Terrence would certainly die, Caldwell wouldn’t follow far behind, and Landers would be left alone with his thoughts. Caldwell didn’t fool himself: they’d all be dead a day later if they stopped now. And then there was the “fifth man on the rope,” a sensation described by mountain and rock climbers pushing their limits, a character that was usually a hallucination brought on by fatigue or hypothermia. This figure always appeared in times of need, sometimes in the form of someone the climber knew, sometimes not. Sometimes this figment would help, sometimes it would hinder. Caldwell had long scoffed at this, sure he’d experienced hallucinations climbing mountains, it was unavoidable, but a real person?

Now Caldwell wasn’t so sure. Every now and then he felt a tug at his waist, not Terrence but backwards, as if someone were tied on the line behind him. Every time he looked back, and nothing was there but the swirling snow. Other times, he could swear he heard voices on the wind, sometimes shouting his name, sometimes screaming, sometimes just whispering in his ear. Caldwell tried to pass it off as fatigue, but as the climb wore on, he grew increasingly distraught.

Night fell again, they were almost out of the danger zone and the storm had all but stopped. Inside the tent, the tension was palpable. Terrence had collapsed shortly after erecting the structure and was nonresponsive. Landers and Caldwell had bundled him in his sleeping bag, and then tried to force some water into him. It didn’t work. The boy’s pulse was fast and erratic, his forehead not just hot but burning. He was pale beneath two burning points of red on each cheek.

“We can’t move him,” it was Landers, his voice relatively even, “He’ll die. You go down, get help. I’ll stay here, keep watch. You’ll move faster.”

“Don’t be absurd, James, if I leave you up here, you’re both dead.”

Landers gave a small smile, “I don’t think there’s much you can do about that now, Richard. I’m… I’m cracking up, I know it. I’ll just slow us down.”

“But you were great today.”

“It was a last gasp. I’m more tired than I realize. And…” He gazed off, his body shuddering involuntarily.

“And what?”

“Andre,” the name was a whisper, Landers turned terrified eyes to Caldwell, “Richard, I’m so scared. When I was in back, I kept feeling him on the rope. I heard his voice on the wind.”

It was Caldwell’s turn to be uneasy. He’d experienced that very same thing, only he hadn’t attached Andre’s identity to it.

“He’s coming for me, I know he is. He always said that he would.”

“James, that’s ridiculous. Andre’s dead. It was a terrible accident---“

Landers fixed Caldwell with a haunted gaze, “I could have turned us back. I was the expedition leader. When he got sick, I could have turned us back, but I chose not to.”

“James, I didn’t stop you either, I’m as much to blame---“

“But you tried to, Richard, you tried. And all the way down you refused to talk to me. You blamed me for his death. It’s never been the same since, more than twenty years later.”

“James, I…” But Caldwell had no words. He wanted forgive James, to let him know he didn’t hold it against him, that it was okay, but he couldn’t. Not a day had gone by that he hadn’t thought about that afternoon high in the Himalayas. He loved Landers like a brother, but his own guilt, his own pride, denied him the ability to forgive him. He could have forced James to turn back, could have forced the expedition around. But the unspoken truth was that he’d wanted the summit as badly as Landers. He was willing to turn a blind eye to the Frenchman, whom he barely knew, to reach a life goal. And he’d sacrificed a life to do it.

Instead of saying what needed to be said, Caldwell turned over in his sleeping bag and refused to speak to Landers. He hated himself for it, hated himself all the more when he heard his friend shaking with quiet sobs on the other side of the tent, punctuated by throaty, wet coughs from Terrence. Caldwell finally fell asleep, and didn’t dream.

He awoke three hours later in pitch black. Landers was screaming.

“He’s here! He’s here! Richard, he’s back!”

“James, quiet, get a grip on yourself!” shouted Caldwell, rising from his sleeping bag, grabbing the big man and shaking him.

“Andre is dead! Because of us, maybe. But he’s dead, and dead on a mountain ten thousand miles from here.” Landers continued to shake. Caldwell flipped on a flashlight, pointing the beam into the frightened man’s face.

“James, listen. Andre. Is. Dead. End of story. He is not on this mountain, and he surely is not hunting you.”

“But the rope, yesterday in the storm, I felt him Richard, he was back there.”

Caldwell had no easy answer to this. He had felt him, too, felt the phantom jerk, heard the voices. He tried to shrug it off as hallucination, but it hadn’t felt like one.

“And just now, oh Richard, just now I heard him outside the tent. He was walking around and around. I could hear him whispering. He wants me, he wants revenge! Richard, I’m scared.”

“I am, too, James,” and it was the truth. Landers had always been big and strong, showing no or little emotion. This new Landers, this mewling puppy, scared Caldwell on a base level. Scared him almost as badly as this deal about the Frenchman. Caldwell held Landers until the big man fell back asleep,then quietly got up and unzipped the tent flap. Outside the wind still howled, though its fury was considerably less than it had been for the past two days. Caldwell shined his light around, but there were no tracks. He shone his light farther away, and his heart stopped. Barely visible in the driven snow, maybe eight feet from the tent opening was a set of tracks, nearly filled by the drifting snow, but visible nonetheless. Caldwell stifled a scream. There was no one else on this mountain, he knew the records, had confirmed it all with the Alaskan department of the interior. They were utterly alone. And yet… There was proof. The prints clearly did not match their own, those had already been erased by the storm. Terrence was too sick to have gone outside, and Caldwell would have heard Landers, since the big man would have had to climb over him to get out of the tent.

Slowly, very slowly, Caldwell eased back into the tent. He zipped the flap shut, and lay for a long time, his mind turning this over and over. They needed to get off this mountain, and they needed to do it now.

The next morning, Terrence couldn’t be aroused and Landers was barely coherent. Somehow, Caldwell got both men dressed and suited up. He wasn’t leaving either on the mountainside. Somehow he rigged a stretcher for Terrence and got Landers to help him for it. Somehow. Caldwell’s condition was deteriorating faster than he cared to admit to himself. He was moving in a daze, more on autopilot than on conscious thought. He was feverish, and hallucinating again, but he had to push on.

The day passed in a blur. At about noon (or so Caldwell thought) the sun came out, pushing aside the grey clouds. Then it had disappeared sometime later, but the team was below the danger line, and only a mile or two above the treeline.

They hit the forest at nightfall, assembling shelter in the dark. Snow drifted peacefully between the dark pines, the wind deadened by the closeness of the trees. Caldwell fell into a heavy, almost drugged sleep as soon as his head hit the pillow.

Dawn woke him, and he felt better. His fever had broken sometime in the night, amidst wild dreams of Everest and Landers and snowstorms. Snatches of the previous day came back to him, bits and pieces tossed almost haphazardly into his consciousness. He remembered the sun. He remembered the tug of the rope at his back all day, even though he’d been tail-end-Charlie for the whole climb. He remembered flashes of figures glimpsed in swirls of snow, and in pools where sunlight met shadow. Caldwell shook his head to clear it, and sat up. He immediately noticed two things: Terrence looked better and Landers was gone. Quietly, so as not to wake the boy prematurely, Caldwell slipped from the tent. Outside, he found that the snow had stopped and the sky hung leaden and cold high overhead. He immediately found Landers’s tracks, and followed them into the woods.

The farther he went the more confused Caldwell became. What had Landers been thinking? What was he doing? He became worried, the big man had been really unstable the previous night and yesterday, and Caldwell had been too sick to really appreciate that. Landers was probably no longer following reason.

After about a six hundred feet, a second set of tracks joined Landers, and the Landers tracks elongated. He’d started running. Caldwell followed the chase, seeing places where Landers had slipped and fallen, through thickets and pine boughs. He finally came to a clearing, both sets of tracks leading out into the middle. Caldwell ran out then, throwing caution to the winds, shouting Landers’s name. He arrived in the center of the clearing and stopped short. There was blood, a lot of it. The snow was churned all around, and there were other signs of struggle, torn clothing, body prints in the snow where the attacker had forced his assailant (though who the attacker was and who the assailant was, Caldwell’s brain couldn’t somehow seem to process). Caldwell walked all around the mashed snow, finally finding a set of tracks leading away. They were smaller than Landers’s boots, maybe a size ten, Andre was a ten. The thought came, unbidden, and Caldwell found himself very afraid. He followed the tracks into the forest for a few hundred feet, where they stopped. Not wiped out, not petering out onto rock, just stopped, as if whoever made them had been lifted into the air without a trace. Caldwell frantically searched all around for where the tracks continued, but couldn’t find any. He ran back to where the tracks had joined Landers before the clearing, and the same thing. The tracks simply began in the woods: nothing around them, no other tracks besides those of Landers, and Caldwell’s own. And then there was the blood in the clearing… Caldwell ran all the way back to the tent, not stopping to think. Because if he did, he feared he’d go mad.