Skip to main content
Log in

Is information acquisition still important in the information age?

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

How should the information age affect teaching goals and methods? One of the claims voiced by educators is that computerized information tools make systematic study and acquisition of information redundant. Put bluntly this claim states that students should no longer ‘waste’ their time learning or memorizing texts and facts that can be retrieved in a keystroke. We attempted to examine the current role of information acquisition in learning processes by interviewing 24 expert academic researchers who work regularly with computerized information tools. Analysis of the researchers’ descriptions of their learning and thinking processes revealed that, according to the majority of the researchers, computerized information tools have not reduced the importance learning and acquiring information. These exploratory findings suggest that information acquisition should still be an important part of the curriculum in the age of information.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • American Library Association (ALA) (1989). American Library Association Presidential Committee on Information Literacy: Final Report. Retrieved March 12, 2005: http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlpubs/whitepapers/presidential.htm

  • Anderson, J. R. (1990). Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications, 3rd edn. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barry, C. A. (1997). The research activity timeline: A qualitative tool for information research. Library and Information Science Research, 19(2), 153–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barzilai, S., & Zohar, A. (2006). How does Information technology shape thinking? Thinking Skills and Creativity, 1, 130–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking R. R. (eds) (1999). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Committee on Developments in the Science of Learning, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington DC.

  • Breivik, P. S. (1998). Student learning in the information age. Phoenix: American Council On Education / Oryx Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. L., Ash, D., Rutherford, M., Nakagawa, K., Gordon, A., & Campione, J. C. (1993). Distributed expertise in the classroom. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 188–227). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burbules, N. C. (1998). Digital texts and the future of scholarly writing and publication. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 30(1), 105–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cobb, P. (2005). Where is the mind? A coordination of sociocultural and cognitive constructivism perspectives. In Fosnot, C. T. (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (pp. 39–60). New York and London: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, M., & Engstrom, Y. (1993). A cultural–historical approach to distributed cognition. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 1–46). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, M., & Derry, J. (2005). We have met technology and it is us. In R. J. Sternberg, & D. D. Preiss (Eds.), Intelligence and technology (pp. 209–227). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, D., Cox, D., & Hall, K. (1993). A Comparison of the information seeking patterns of researchers in the physical and social sciences. Journal of Documentation, 49(4), 356–369.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eylon, B., & Linn, M. C. (1998). Learning and instruction: An examination of four research perspectives in science education. Review of Educational Research, 58(3), 251–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finholt, T. A., & Brooks, J. M. (1997). Analysis of JSTOR: The impact on scholarly practice of access to on-line journal archives. Paper presented at the Conference on Scholarly Communication and Technology (Atlanta, GA, April 24–25, 1997). Retrieved March 12, 2005: http://www.arl.org/scomm/scat/finholt.html

  • Glaser, R. (1984). The role of knowledge. American Psychologist, 39(2), 93–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. G. (1997). On claims that answer the wrong questions. Educational Researcher, 26(1), 5–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. G., Collins, A. M, & Resnick, L. B. (1996). Cognition and learning. In D. C. Berliner, & R. C. Calfee (Eds), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 15–46). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karasavvidis, I. (2002). Distributed cognition and educational practice. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 13(1), 11–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Land, S., & Greene, B. (2000). Project-based learning with the World Wide Web: A qualitative study of resource integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(1), 45–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linn, M. C., Eylon, B., & Davis, E. A. (2004). The knowledge integration perspective on learning. In M. C. Linn, E. A. Davis, & P. Bell (Eds), Internet environments for science education (29–46).Mahwah: Mahwah, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, J. L., & Rocklin, T. R. (1998). The distribution of distributed cognition: Multiple interpretations and uses. Educational Psychology Review, 10(1), 97–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, J. (2000). Trojan horse or teacher’s pet? Computers and the culture of school. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(1), 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Owston, R. (1997). The world wide web: A technology to enhance teaching and learning? Educational Researcher, 26(2), 27–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pea, R. D. (1987). Integrating human and computer intelligence. In R. D. Pea, & K. Sheingold (Eds), Mirrors of minds: Patterns of experience in educational computing (pp. 128–146). Norwood: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pea, R. D. (1993). Practices of distributed intelligence and designs for education. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed Cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 47–87). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, D. N. (1993). Person-Plus: a distributed view of thinking and learning. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 88–110). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, D. N., Crismond, D., Simmons, R., & Unger, C. (1995). Inside understanding. In D. N. Perkins, J. L. Schwartz, M. West, & M. S. Wiske (Eds), Software goes to school: Teaching for understanding with new technologies (pp. 70–88). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, S. (1998). Into the future. Scholarly needs, current provisions, and future directions. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 4, 190–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Resnick, L. B. (1991). Shared cognition: Thinking as a social practice. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 1–19). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, E. M., & Shoemaker, F. F. (1971). Communication of innovations: A cross-cultural approach, 2nd edn. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salomon, G. (1993). No distribution without individuals’ cognition. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 111–138). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salomon, G. (2000a). Technology and Education In The Age Of Information (In Hebrew). Haifa and Tel-Aviv: University of Haifa and Zmora-Bitan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salomon, G. (2000b). It’s not just the tool, but the educational rationale that counts. Keynote address at the 2000 Ed-Media Meeting. Retrieved March 12, 2005: http://www.aace.org/conf/edmedia/00/salomonkeynote.htm

  • Schwarz, D. L., & Bransford, J. D. (2002). A time for telling. Cognition and Instruction, 16(4), 475–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slotta, J. D., & Linn, M. C. (2000). The Knowledge integration environment: Helping students use the internet effectively. In M. L. Jacobson, R. B. Kozma (Eds), Innovations in science and mathematics education: Advance designs for technologies of learning (pp. 193–226). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarit Barzilai.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Barzilai, S., Zohar, A. Is information acquisition still important in the information age?. Educ Inf Technol 13, 35–53 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-007-9046-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-007-9046-4

Keywords

Navigation