From LIS5313 Course Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
by Nathaniel Finley
Contents
[hide]
* 1 Introduction
* 2 Electracy
* 3 electracy:literacy as literacy:orality
* 4 Atmosphere
* 5 Atmosphere at the Community College versus Research Universities: A Literate Distinction
* 6 Finding the right tool for the right audience for the right situation
* 7 Mentors and Donors
* 8 The Atmosphere of a Donor
* 9 References
* 10 Resources
* 11 Multimedia Project
Introduction
IPs in the academic environment are presenting a great deal of literature focused on internet tutorials devoted to information literacy. A recent article by Sharon Yang (2009), for example, gives an excellent overview of the types of tools which are available and are being implemented in online tutorials, making strong arguments for developing online tutorial using more advanced and up-to-date technology. Most of the literature follows a similar format: the article reviews the history of online tutorials and then presents one example of a tutorial that is using an approach which the author argues can be successfully implemented at other institutions. Just to take one example, Kathryn H. Reynolds and M. Suzanne Franco argue that an online tutorial offered by Wright State University in Dayton, Ohio effectively employs a number of technological innovations to bolster the HTML-generated text-driven tutorials of the 90's and offer the students a more satisfying learning experience.
While these discussions are almost always fruitful and encourage the deployment of innovative approaches to the online tutorial schema, what is missing in the literature is a strong theoretical approach to the entire issue of online tutorials. There are a number of exceptions such as a very thorough and thought provoking piece by Therese Skagen Maria Carme Torras, Solveig M. L. Kavli, Susanne Mikki, Sissel Hafstad, and Irene Hunskår which describes the pedagogical theories that guided the development of the online tutorial "Search and Write" (Skagen et. al, 2008). The problem with this piece is perhaps indicative of the lack of theoretical discourse on the subject of information literacy in general: Skagen and her companions employ a traditional and "literate" pedagogical theory to a revolutionary and "hyper-literate" environment. This paper argues that such traditional approaches do not fully capture the essential characteristics of the new media technology which are being employed in online tutorials. In the hopes of beginning to bridge the gap between practical and theoretical discussions, as well as in the hopes of updating our philosophy, this article applies components of the theory of "electracy" as they have been developed by Gregory Ulmer to the online tutorial environment.
Electracy
electracy:literacy as literacy:orality
Gregory Ulmer [1] is a scholar noted for his work on film and new media theory over the last 20 years. Working primarily from the "grammatological" theories of Jacques Derrida [2], Dr. Ulmer first enumerated his theory of "electracy" in his 1989 book Teletheory. According to Ulmer, humanity is today experiencing a shift in communication and thinking which is spurred particularly by visual and electronic communication and is as revolutionary as the development of the alphabet.
“What literacy is to the analytical mind, electracy is to the affective body: a prosthesis that enhances and augments a natural or organic human potential. Alphabetic writing is an artificial memory that supports long complex chains of reasoning impossible to sustain within the organic mind. Digital imaging similarly supports extensive complexes of mood atmospheres beyond organic capacity. Electrate logic proposes to design these atmospheres into affective group intelligence. Literacy and electracy in collaboration produce a civilizational left-brain right-brain integration. If literacy focused on universally valid methodologies of knowledge (sciences), electracy focuses on the individual state of mind within which knowing takes place (arts) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electracy)[3]."
One of the best analyses of the emerging electrate logic is Ulmer’s 1997 essay "I Untied the Camera of Tastes (Who am I?) the Riddle of Chool (A reply and Alternative to A. Sahay)." In this article Ulmer reacts to critics of his notion of electracy and electrate logic in an attempt to "learn something..that I have not been able to grasp in my previous attempt to say what I am doing (p. 570)." In "I Untied the Camera of Tastes" Ulmer enunciates the following categories as important to electrate logic:
* mystory[4]
* heuretics[5]
* hyperrhetoric[6]
* Choragraphy [7]
* atmosphere (or alternatively "mood")[8]
* the tool CATTt[9]
Of these, the most important to electrate logic is atmosphere.
Atmosphere
atmosphere:electracy as concept:literacy as story:orality
-"The invention of Philosophy…is the story of the gradual apprehension and separation of the abstract notion of 'justice' out of the action of an Agamemnon or an Achilles. This process culminates in the invention of the concept—the complete abandonment of the epic story—that produced philosophy…(The) juxtaposition of the invention of the concept in association with the technology of alphabetic writing establishes what is emerging within our new recording technologies: the electrate equivalent of the concept. This equivalent is precisely 'mood' (Ulmer 1997, pp. 590-591)."
-"Mood or atmosphere is the fundamental unit of logic in electracy." (Ulmer 1997, p. 573).
When employing the notion of "atmosphere" (or "mood"), Ulmer springboards off of the workd of Jean-Francois Lyotard[10], who said "'Any act of thinking is thus accompanied by a feeling that signals to thought its 'state'(Lyotard 1994, p. 11, quoted in Ulmer 1997, p. 580)'".
Ulmer defines atmosphere in the following terms: "the disciplinary work of doing physics, making art, or any other career activity, is experienced within a specific emotional atmosphere or mood of an aesthetic nature (Ulmer 1997, p. 580)." Because the logic of atmosphere is a poetic or imagistic logic it is exactly a logic of atmosphere which governs the invention and use of electrate tools such as the internet.
-All thought, all research, all knowledge creation occurs within a framework (or "territory" in Lyotards terms) of affect (emotional response) to aesthetic stimuli.
-The stimuli (which are social), the framework (which is personal), and the relationship between the two are all defined broadly by the term atmosphere.
-Electrate media depends upon atmosphere for its functionality because they present "concepts" (the fundamental analytic of literacy) in a mixture of text, image and sound.
Atmosphere at the Community College versus Research Universities: A Literate Distinction
atmosphere:electrate technology as culture:physical environment
Using Ulmer's theory of atmosphere I want to look more closely at a possible way to use atmosphere to create online tutorials at academic university and community college libraries. My argument has three parts:
1. Every website has an atmosphere. It is intrinsic to the online environment. We cannot escape the logical parameters of atmosphere online anymore than we can escape the logical parameters of literacy in print material, although some formats blur the lines between these parameters (comic books are able to employ electrate logic, for example). Information literacy tutorials should be created with a mind toward atmosphere.
Ulmer's argument is pretty clear on this issue. Atmosphere, the basic logical modality of electracy, is intrinsic to the online environment. Whether a web site employs text-only or uses audio or visual features or incorporates Web 2.0 tools is immaterial. The website has an intrinsic 'atmosphere', and it is 'atmosphere' which distinguishes electrate communication from literate communication.
2. Every institution of higher learning also has an atmosphere which is communicated in its own specific and general "culture".
Electrate communication has "atmosphere" because it mimics the physical environment. "Atmosphere" is not the fundamental unit of logic of physical experience, but "atmosphere" is the fundamental point of intersection between the physical environment and the online environment.
A community college's atmosphere can be vastly distinct from that of a four-year or research institution. The atmosphere at a state university is itself far different from a private four year school. A research university has a different atmosphere from a small liberal arts college. And each school is going to have its own unique "mood" as well. The community college’s student body consists of many non-traditional students. Many of the traditional students are at a community college rather than a four year college due to either a lack of funds, geographical or personal restrictions, or academic exclusion. Most community colleges do not provide living space for the student populations. The faculty members at a community college are more interested in teaching than publishing, and as such devote more time exclusively to students. All of these variables help to create a "atmosphere" (or more precisely, a "culture") at the community college.
On November 24, 2009 I conducted an interview with Laurel Gregory, the head librarian at the University of Hawaii Center West Hawaii (UHWH). Ms. Gregory made the issue of culture and online atmosphere central to her concern for the information literacy of her students.
UHWH is small institution that offers AA degrees in liberal arts through in-class training and BA and MA programs through distance learning at other University of Hawaii institutes. Most of the students are enrolled 3/4 time. The students are for the most part below academic standards, which means that UHWH offers supplemental courses meant to strengthen the student's core skills such as writing and mathematics. For example, UHWH offers two English courses which are meant to prepare students for the freshman comp courses (English 100 courses). These are listed as "English 21 and 22". At least half of the first year students at UHWH start in pre-100 English classes (Laurel Gregory, personal communication, November 24, 2009).
Because of this situation Gregory finds that the information literacy tutorial which is provided by the University of Hawaii (LILO) to be unsuitable for the needs of her students. LILO is a largely text-based tutorial which the students have to read, and to paraphrase Laurel's argument, "My students are not going to read the text. They need a talking head telling them what and where to click and enter information (Laurel Gregory, personal communication, November 24, 2009)." In other words, the atmosphere of the provided tool does not match the culture of the UHWH center.
3. Online tutorials should be created in such a way that the tutorial matches or attempts to reflect the culture of the institution they represent.
The UHWH center demonstrates yet another way in which culture is distinct between institutions. Not only is the culture of the community college distinct from that of the university but there can be large distinctions between various community colleges. Gregory points out another problem when trying to think through an effective online information literacy tutorial. She argues that the familial and communal nature of the Hawaiian culture is so pronounced that an effective tutorial for her students must somehow incorporate elements of the "talking-story" and collaborative cultures of her students. In an atmosphere where everything is discussed and every problem is analyzed by the community Gregory asks "how do we build a bridge between that culture and the culture of individual analytical/critical thought" that is so central to the academy (Laurel Gregory, personal communication, November 24, 2009).
Finding the right tool for the right audience for the right situation
Implementing new media tools is more than a practice of technological savvy. It can be a refined art which targets the specific needs of individual institutions. New Media tools greatly impact the atmosphere of an online tutorial, and can create an atmosphere which allows the students to experience a personal and fulfilling learning process or can also contribute to impeding this experience.
New Media technology is being successfully implemented into a number of online academic library tutorials, while others still operate under a text-heavy presentation with a "sterile" atmosphere. The consequences of Ulmer's argument are that not only is the student non-responsive to text-heavy or sterile atmosphere tutorials, but they are non-receptive because these tutorials do not pique the emotional centers of learning which are the primary logical foundations of new media technology. It is not that students will not learn, it is that the tool provided is working against itself: the students cannot learn. The students who are exceptions to this rule are just that: exceptions.
There is a lot of discussion in the professional literature concerned with online tutorials about the role of IPs or professors as "mentors". In Ulmer's theory there is a distinct and important distinction between "mentors" and "donors". Understanding this distinction is one way in which online tutorial creators can re-orient themselves to the electrate mindset.
Mentors and Donors
mentor:socialization as donor:self-discovery
"The theory of the apparatus in grammatology indicates that electracy should be to invention what literacy has been to proof. The first step toward making good on this possibility is to introduce into schooling the aesthetic register of thought; learning, that is, may stimulate discovery (Ulmer, p. 581)."
The primary action of the electrate mode of being is invention/discovery (heuretics) which fosters an atmosphere of "co-creation". The online tutorial, therefore, is not a "mentor" of learning but rather a "facilitator" of learning. Ulmer calls such a facilitator a "donor".
"The donor is not a mentor in this model; the mentor, if there is one, is part of the domestic site, the home, the family, the ordinary world from which the hero has taken leave once the challenge to act has been accepted...(t)he donor...tests the hero, often by posing riddles...If the hero passes the test, the donor supplies a magic tool that the hero may use to overcome the obstacle, acquire the desired object, the elixir, and return home to claim the rewards (Ulmer 1997, p. 582)."
While this might seem to be an outlandish role for an academic librarian to consider fulfilling, it need not be. In this model, the action shifts from guiding the student along Socratic or Platonic principles to becoming a "trickster" of sorts. In online tutorial such a shift would entail treating the student as a co-creator, rather then taking the student by the hand and guiding him or her. It should be noted that this type of relationship is meant to bolster rather than to supersede the types of mentor-pupil relationships which are personal and still valid in the academic library (see, for example, Stamatopolos 2009). The distinction between "mentor" and "donor" is an electrate distinction whose proper environment is the online community or other electrate modes, not necessarily oral or literate modalities. Ulmer's point is that the internet is a domain of co-creators, where the overarching logic is the atmosphere of co-creation and heuretics.
Consider the following screen shots from online tutorials:
The University of Hawaii library system's LILO tutorial homepage. (December 2009) Login as a guest user
The screenshot on the left is from a linear "mentor" type tutorial, almost exclusively text based, which guides the user through the process of writing a research project. It includes lessons on information literacy and thesis development. But it does so with an attitude of a "mentor", taking the student by the hand and guiding them step by step. There is little room for co-creation in this environment, it is text heavy, utilizes only a minimum of Web 2.0 tools, and the navigation bar on the left of the page is "table of contents" style. The atmosphere remains literate whereas the technology and logic has moved beyond into the electrate, and it does so because this tutorial attempts to mimic in an electrate environment the role of "mentor".
The Penn State University library system's online information literacy tutorial homepage. (December 2009)
The tutorial represented on the right is ostensibly non-linear, by which it is meant that the student can decide where to begin and how to advance through the tutorial. Unfortunately the tutorial does not follow up with this style, and the atmosphere of the tutorial lapses with every selection into a text-heavy, linear style which also attempts to act as a "mentor".
Now consider a non-linear, Web 2.0 tutorial.
The Bowling Green State University library system's online information literacy tutorial homepage. (December 2009)
The screenshot above is from the homepage for the basic information literacy tutorial at Bowling Green State University. Notice that the navigation bar also has very clearly defined steps, but that the screen itself is full of choices for the students. There are Web 2.0 technologies employed such as RSS feeds, sharing selections, and video. Also, once the student begins the tutorial, each step is actually full of information presented in two or three columns with numerous links, videos, and analyses of tools which are available. While the steps are presented in linear fashion, what the student does in each step is his or her own choice, and the tutorial has the capacity to act as an "anchor" from which the student can self-navigate the web and learn about information literacy. This tool follows the pattern of Ulmer's "donor". The tutorial, in fact, is both the donor and the "magical gift", offering student a powerful tool to help them understand information literacy.
BGSU has developed one of the most exciting and multi-dimensional information tutorials online. The tutorial homepage [11] lists 8 separate tutorials, any of which a student or guest is free to navigate, with a link to "more" at the end of the list. Each tutorial, such as that designed for the GSW 1120 course [12] is a "gift" in the Ulmer sense, and most are self-navigating, non-linear, and exploit Web 2.0 tools to a high degree without overburdoning the page.
The Atmosphere of a Donor
The above analysis is not meant to say that every online tutorial must be as Web 2.0 savvy or operate with as much co-creation as does the BGSU tutorial. What I would like to argue, rather, is that an online tutorial should:
1. demonstrate an awareness of a post-literate logic. By this I mean not be exclusively text-base or linear, but implement Web 2.0 tools and allow for self-nagivation and co-creation to the extent that it is fitting for the institution.
2. reflect the culture of the institution. For example, at the UHWH center a successful online tutorial should try to reflect the students' needs for collaborative learning, "talking-story", and other community-based paradigms which are apparent in the culture of the institution. This type of tutorial would have a different atmosphere, utilize different methods, and provide different approaches to information literacy as would an institution where students are used to individual or independent work. Just as LILO currently turns the students at UHWH away because of too much text, so too might the BGSU tutorial swamp the student with too much choice and too much self-navigation.
Bearing these two goals in mind, I believe that creators of online tutorials will be greatly empowered in "donating" a powerful and useful tool to the students at their distinct institutions.
References
Lyotard, Jean-Francois (1994). Lessons on the Analytic of the Sublime: Kant's Critique of Judgement[sections] 23-29. Stanford University Press: Stanford, California.
Reynolds, Kathryn H. and M. Suzanne Franco (Fall, 2008). "Education Tutorials: Online Research Tutorial Meets Students' Needs." Ohio Media Spectrum 60 no1 28-33.
Stamatoplos, Anthony (May, 2009). "The Role of Academic Libraries in Mentored Undergraduate Research: A Model of Engagement in the Academic Community." College & Research Libraries 70 no3 235-49.
Skagen, T., et. al. (Fall, 2008). "Pedagogical Considerations in Developing an Online Tutorial in Information Literacy." Communications in Information Literacy v. 2 no. 2 p. 84-98.
Ulmer, Gregory (Summer, 1997) "I Untied the Camera of Tastes (Who Am I?) the Riddle of Chool (A Reply and Alternative to A. Sahay)." New Literary History, Vol. 28, No. 3, Critical Exchanges pp. 569-594.
Yang, Sharon (2009) “Information literacy online tutorials: An introduction to rationale and technological tools in tutorial creation.” The Electronic Library v. 27 no. 4 p. 684-93.
Resources
Bowling Green State University Online Information Literacy Tutorial [13]
Multimedia Project
Finley.5271.researchproposaltopic
Towards a Theory of Online Information Tutorials: Bridging the Electrate Divide
A research proposal by Nathaniel Finley
For LIS 5271 Spring, 2010
Introduction:
Information professionals in the academic environment are presenting a great deal of literature focused on internet tutorials devoted to information literacy. A recent article by Sharon Yang (2009), for example, gives an excellent overview of the types of tools which are available and are being implemented in online tutorials, making strong arguments for developing online tutorials using more advanced and up-to-date technology. Most of the literature follows a similar format: the article reviews the history of online tutorials and then presents one example of a tutorial that is using an approach which the author argues can be successfully implemented at other institutions. Just to take two examples, Kathryn H. Reynolds and M. Suzanne Franco argue that an online tutorial offered by Wright State University in Dayton, Ohio effectively employs a number of technological innovations to bolster the HTML-generated text-driven tutorials of the 90's. Reynolds and Franco also argue that such innovations offer students a more satisfying learning experience. Similarly, in a 2008 article Paul Betty presents a paper which “describes the use of screencasting software to create library tutorials and related issues including software options, production tips and techniques, and project management (Betty 2008, 295).”
While these discussions of pragmatic “tips and techniques” are certainly fruitful in encouraging the deployment of innovative approaches to the online tutorial schema, what is missing in the literature is a strong theoretical approach to the entire issue of online tutorials. There are a number of exceptions such as a very thorough and thought provoking piece by Therese Skagen, et. al which describes the pedagogical theories that guided the development of the online tutorial "Search and Write" (Skagen et. al, 2008); however, whereas Skagen’s team locates student’s learning processes across a wide range of fields of stimuli (i.e., the physical environment as well as the online, the individual learning environment as well as the classroom), the current project attempts to locate emotive and intellectual processes that might be tapped into solely via technological methods (i.e., the online tutorial itself).
The hypothesis of this project is that traditional approaches toward developing a theoretical foundation for online tutorial development do not fully capture the essential characteristics of the new media technology which are being employed in online tutorials, and as such are less capable of delivering the information which users need when turning to such tutorials. By applying to the online tutorial environment components of the theory of "electracy" this study purposes to measure how effective such a paradigm is as a criteria for assessing and discussing the development of digital tutorials.
Gregory Ulmer and Electracy
Gregory Ulmer is a scholar noted for his work on film and new media theory over the last 20 years. According to Ulmer, humanity is today experiencing a shift in communication and thinking which is spurred particularly by visual and electronic communication and is as revolutionary as the development of the alphabet.
What literacy is to the analytical mind, electracy is to the affective body: a prosthesis that enhances and augments a natural or organic human potential. Alphabetic writing is an artificial memory that supports long complex chains of reasoning impossible to sustain within the organic mind. Digital imaging similarly supports extensive complexes of mood atmospheres beyond organic capacity. Electrate logic proposes to design these atmospheres into affective group intelligence. (Ulmer, “Remediating the Apocalypse”).
In a piece entitled "I Untied the Camera of Tastes (Who am I?) the Riddle of Chool (A reply and Alternative to A. Sahay),” Ulmer identifies many of the important characteristics of electrate logic, including mystory, heuretics, hyperrhetoric, choragraphy, atmosphere (or alternatively, mood), and the tool CATTt. Of these, the most important as it applies to the present study is atmosphere.
According to the theory, atmosphere is to electracy what “the concept” is to literacy: it is that upon which an entire communications technology is centered:
The invention of Philosophy…is the story of the gradual apprehension and separation of the abstract notion of 'justice' out of the action of an Agamemnon or an Achilles. This process culminates in the invention of the concept—the complete abandonment of the epic story—that produced philosophy…(The) juxtaposition of the invention of the concept in association with the technology of alphabetic writing establishes what is emerging within our new recording technologies: the electrate equivalent of the concept. This equivalent is precisely 'mood' (Ulmer 1997, 590-591).
Just as “concept” is vital to literacy, so “atmosphere” is paramount to electracy. Without these components we would have neither literature nor electrate media: “Mood or atmosphere is the fundamental unit of logic in electracy (Ulmer 1997, 573).”
Ulmer describes atmosphere in the following terms: "the disciplinary work of doing physics, making art, or any other career activity, is experienced within a specific emotional atmosphere or mood of an aesthetic nature (Ulmer 1997, 580)." In electrate media, the artist is attempting not only to convey concepts, but more importantly, to convey the atmosphere in which those concepts exist inside of him or herself. Electrate media is essentially, therefore, aesthetic in nature, and the logic of electracy calls for the employment of multiple communication mediums at once, as well as an interconnectivity with other websites. One of the hypotheses of the current study, therefore, is that a successful online information tutorial will have moved beyond the simple layouts of early text-based world wide websites (which presented literary logic in an electronic format) and will embrace the use of audio, visual, network, and hyperlink possibilities which abound on the internet.
The Hypothesis
New Media technology is being successfully implemented into a number of online academic library tutorials which create true “electrate” atmospheres, while others still operate under a text-heavy presentation with what might be termed a “literate” atmosphere. The consequences of Ulmer's argument are that not only is the student non-responsive to text-heavy or “literate-atmosphere tutorials”, but they are non-receptive because these tutorials do not pique the emotional centers of learning which are the primary logical foundations of new media technology. It is not that students will not learn, it is that the tool provided is working against itself: the students cannot learn. This study attempts to test this hypothesis.
This study proposes to evaluate whether a learning differentiation exists between students using literate-atmosphere tutorials and those using electrate-atmosphere tutorials.
Methodology
Two separate web-sites will be developed, each presenting the same basic information except that one will present that information as a “literate-atmosphere” website and the other on an “electrate-atmosphere” site. A random selection of freshman students will be asked to participate in an online study and will be placed into two groups where they will be assigned to be a user of one of the two websites and administered a pre-test and a post-test. . The following parameters will be used as criteria for creating the websites:
1. This study will follow the similar format as was followed by Tornstad, et. al.,
when they developed testing for use in analyzing the TIP project at the
University of Wyoming. Specifically, Tornstad et. al. report the following
subject areas as important skills for a student to acquire through use of TIP:
“investigate a topic, search for information, locate information in
the library, evaluate the quality of information, and
use the information ethically and legally in papers, speeches, or projects.”
(Tornstad et. al. 2008, 55). Both websites will be developed with these
subject areas as their primary focus.
2. The E.A.T will be non-linear in organization. Rather than presenting the subject areas as chapters of the lesson links will be provided to each module without any preferred order. Similarly, the text will be non-linear, employing links to exterior pages and multimedia resources in order to convey the desired information of the subject area. For an example of something similar see: http://libguides.bgsu.edu/content.php?pid=54229&sid=397141
3. The L.A.T. will be developed in a linear and text-heavy manner. Each subject will build sequentially upon the last and the students will be instructed to work sequentially through the tutorial from the first to the last module. Diagrams might be used, but no multi-media sources and no external links. For an example of something similar see the LILO tutorial here: http://www.hawaii.edu/lilo/summer09/begin_tutorial.php
The pretest and the post test will follow the examples of the researchers at the University of Wisconsin (Tornstad…et. al., working from the ideas of L.A. Suskie), by employing both qualitative and quantitative segments. The pre-test will test students’ prior knowledge of information literacy and their attitudes toward information behavior. The post-test will analyze the student’s abilities to perform specific tasks after having used the tutorial, as well as asking for qualitative feedback from the students regarding the experience of using the websites.
While Ulmer’s theories have their share of critics, including detractors of a political nature, they are nonetheless theoretical foundations upon which information professionals can begin to build a discourse that penetrates beneath only the pragmatics of digital media in general and online information tutorials specifically. It is in testing the theory of electracy in a real-world situation that this study has the potential to offer a lasting contribution to the field.
References
Betty, P. (2008). “Creation, Management, and Assessment of Library Screencasts: The
Regis Libraries Animated Tutorials Project.” Journal of Library Administration
48 (3/4), 295-315.
Reynolds, Kathryn H. and M. Suzanne Franco (Fall, 2008). "Education Tutorials: Online
Research Tutorial Meets Students' Needs." Ohio Media Spectrum 60 (1), 28-33.
Sahay, Amrohini (Summer, 1997). “…Is the Riddle of History.” New Literary History
28 (3), 595-599.
Skagen, T., et. al. (Fall, 2008). "Pedagogical Considerations in Developing an Online
Tutorial in Information Literacy." Communications in Information Literacy 2 (2),
84-98.
Slebodnik, M., et. al.(Fall 2009). “Creating Online Tutorials at Your Libraries: Software
Choices and Practical Implications.” Reference & User Services Quarterly 49 (1) 33-7, 51.
Stamatoplos, Anthony (May, 2009). "The Role of Academic Libraries in Mentored
Undergraduate Research: A Model of Engagement in the Academic Community." College & Research Libraries 70 (3), 235-49.
Tornstad, B., et. al. (2009). “Assessing the TIP online information literacy tutorial.”
Reference Services Review 37 (1), 54-64.
Ulmer, Gregory (Summer, 1997) "I Untied the Camera of Tastes (Who Am I?) the Riddle
of Chool (A Reply and Alternative to A. Sahay)." New Literary History, 28 (3), 569-594.
Ulmer, Gregory, “Remediating the Apocalypse.” Retrieved February 16, 2010, from
Marcus O'Donnell’s website: http://www.apocalypticmediations.com/hypertext/ulmerele.html.
Yang, Sharon (2009) “Information literacy online tutorials: An introduction to rationale
and technological tools in tutorial creation.” The Electronic Library, 27 (4), 684-93.
