INF 1002: Representation, Organization, Classification and Meaning-Making

Fall 2009

Basics | Schedule | Assignments | Resources | Readings | Practical Stuff

This syllabus can also be accessed by going to http://bit.ly/inf1002.

The readings and some of the lecture slides are available from UToronto’s Portal (aka "Blackboard").

The Basics

About the course

Course Catalogue Description

“Fundamental epistemological and ontological issues in the use of knowledge and information in human activities. Analysis of issues in language, representation, interpretation, semantics, meaning-making, perception, conception, and cognition, integrating perspectives from multiple disciplines and traditions.”

This course serves as one of the four core courses in the MI program and as such is designed to provide students will basic, fundamental and core ideas, principles and questions that penetrates the entire information profession. Students will encounter a range of issues in this course that today’s information professionals must grapple with and consider, regardless of job title and workplace.

One key aspect of the information profession is how and on which basis items are named and assigned to categories - almost any information professional will at some point name and categories items or work with names and categories assigned by others. These names and categories reflect particular views of the world and reflect the meaning that particular people or groups of people attribute to the items. This course explores how meaning is created, and the ethical, social and epistemological consequences and constraints of naming and categorization.

Students will gain understandings of:

• The complexities of naming and categorizing
• Basic dilemmas in naming and categorizing
• Ethical, social, linguistic and epistemological aspects of naming and categorizing

Schedule

The schedule lists the readings for each week. For the full citation, see the Readings section on information. The actual readings are on the Blackboard site, accessible through the U ot T's Portal. Lecture slides are available on the Blackboard side as well.

Assignments

Students are required to complete three assignment to gain credit for the course. The final grade for the course are calculated according to the weighted grades received fro each individual assignment in the course:

Please make see to consult the iSchool’s official interpretation of the UofT’s letter grade system.

Assignment 1. Sorting things out: an epistemological case study

The goal of this individual assignment is to think critically about the ways in which objects in your everyday life are organized and about the commitments and assumptions the particular organization entails. You will reflect on the object’s organization in two parts:

• In the first part, you will describe the physical or intellectual organization of a specific object (e.g., a database, a cell-phone, an ATM kiosk, the layout of a museum, a buffet, an art gallery, a department store, a grocery store, children’s library, a menu, a store catalogue) and analyze that organization in relation to its underlying social and/or epistemological commitments and/or assumptions.

• In the second part of the assignment, you will describe an alternative organization of the same entity that is based on different commitments and assumptions.

The final product for the assignment will be a paper of 2000-3000 words in length, due at the beginning of the lecture on October 5 (week 4).

Assignment 2. Representation project

For this assigment you will work in groups of 4-6 to prepare a representation of the content of an assigned news article. The representation of the news article can take a variety of forms, e.g., a poem, a performance, a visual image, an XML schema. The representation will be used as a basis for analyzing the article in terms of amplification, distortion, signal loss, etc., and for examining how the article’s content or “essence” is affected or shifted by the different representations of it. Each group will deliver a presentation in a tutorial section and a paper that discusses and analyzes the representation. Each group produces one paper.

The presentation will take place in the tutorial sections of Week 8 (November 2-5) and Week 9 (November 9-12). Each group is allocated 15 min. to present or perform their representation. The presentation will be evaluated according to its ability to engage the audience, to communicate the ideas, and to give a succinct representation of the content of the article.

The paper is due at the beginning of your tutorial in Week 9, regardless of the when you do your presentation. (This may be the same day as your presentation or a week after your presentation.) The paper should be approximately 2000-3000 words in length.

Assignment 3. Individual position paper and group debate on ROCM issue

The assignment consists of two parts:

• a group debate, worth 10% of the final grade, which will happen in tutorials of Week 11 (November 23-27).
• an individual position paper, worth 30% of the final grade, due at the beginning of the lecture on December 7.

The debates

The students will form six groups per tutorial session. The groups can be the same as that for Assignment 2. Each group will inform their tutorial instructor with names of individuals in the group, and with the following three topics ranked in order of preference from 1st to 3rd choice:

1. “The Internet makes libraries irrelevant.”
2. “Users should play an active role in classifying materials in society’s memory institutions.”
3. “ROCM systems should be designed to avoid cultural biases.”

The groups will then be assigned topics on the first-come-first served basis. Each topic will be assigned to two groups in each tutorial.

At the beginning the tutorial session in Week 10 (Nov. 16-22) a coin will be tossed to determine which team will argue “pro” and “con” for each topic. The teams can then use the rest of the tutorial to prepare for defending their side.

The debates will take place in the tutorial of Week 11 (Nov. 23-27). Each topic will be debated for 15 minutes.

The individual position papers

Each student will write an individual paper of 2000-3000 words in length, defending either side on the debate topic assigned to their group. The paper will be worth 30% of the course grade and should include background research, supported by appropriated cited references, defining the problem, putting it in context, and articulating points to support the position taken.

Resources

Epistemological Lifeboat

“The Epistemological Lifeboat is an attempt to guide students and researchers into the complex field of epistemology/philosophy of science. It is intended as a “lifeboat” or a “philosophy for dummies”. It is obviously not enough for serious studies, but it provides an overview and refers the reader to further sources of information.”

Lifeboat for Knowledge Organization

Birger Hjørland’s comprehensive dictionary of KO terms and ideas.

International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences

“This Encyclopedia is the first attempt in a generation to map the social and behavioral sciences on a grand scale.”

Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

“Most of the articles in The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy are original contributions by specialized philosophers around the Internet.”

Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy

“Comprehensive resource. Articles from all continents, all periods and cultures.”

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

“From its inception, the SEP was designed so that each entry is maintained and kept up to date by an expert or group of experts in the field. All entries and substantive updates are refereed by the members of a distinguished Editorial Board before they are made public."

Wikipedia

Never a bad place to begin...

Readings

This is a partial list of readings - more readings will be added.

The readings are posted on UToronto’s Portal. Look for INF1002, after logging in. Then click on “Readings” on the left hand side.

Bann, Stephen (2004) “Poetics of the Museum: Lenoir and Du Sommerard.” In D. Preziosi, Grasping the World, pp. 65-84.

Beghtol, Clare (2002) “A Proposed Ethical Warrant for Global Knowledge Representation and Organization Systems.” Journal of Documentation, 58 (5), pp. 507–532.

Beghtol, Clare (2005) “Ethical Decision–Making for Knowledge Representation and Organization Systems for Global Use.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 56 (9), pp. 903–912.

Borges, Jorge Luis (1973) “The Analytical Language of John Wilkins.” In Other Inquisitions 1937-1952. London: Souvenir Press. Pp. 101–105.

Bowker, Geoffrey C. & Susan Leigh Star (1999) Sorting Things Out: Classification and its Consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

• “Introduction: To Classify is Human” (pp. 1-32)
• Chap. 1, “Some Tricks of the Trade in Analyzing Classification” (pp. 33-50)
• Chap. 2, “The Kindness of Strangers: Kinds and Politics in Classification Systems” (pp. 53-106)

Buckland, Michael (1991) “Information as thing.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science, vol. 42, no. 5, pp. 351-60.

Buckland, Michael (1997) “What is a 'document'?” Journal of the American Society for Information Science, vol. 48, no. 9, pp. 804-9.

Choo, Chun Wei (2001) “Environmental Scanning as Information Seeking and Organizational Learning.” Information Research, vol. 7, no. 1. Available at: http://InformationR.net/ir/7-1/paper112.html

Duguid, P. (2005) “'The Art of Knowing': Social and Tacit Dimensions of Knowledge and the Limits of the Community of Practice,” Information Society, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 109-118.

Duguid, P. (2006) “Limits of Self–Organization: Peer Production and 'Laws of Quality',” First Monday, vol. 11, no. 10. Available at http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1405/1323.

Eco, Umberto (1999) Kant and the Platypus: Essays on Language and Cognition. London: Secker & Warburg.

• Chap. 4, “The Platypus Between the Dictionary and Encyclopedia” (pp. 224-279)

Fox, Michael J. & Peter L. Wilkerson (1988) “Introduction to Archival Organization and Description.” Available at http://www.getty.edu/research/conducting_research/standards/introarchives/.

Frohmann, Bernd (2009) “Revisiting 'what is a document?'” Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 65, no. 2, pp. 291-303.

Gregory, Kate & Andrea Witcomb (2007) “Beyond Nostalgia: The role of affect in generating historical understanding at heritage sites.” in Knell, Museum Revolutions, pp. 263-275.

Lakoff, George (1987) Women, Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal About the Mind. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.

• “Preface” (pp. xi-xvii)
• Chap. 1, “The Importance of Categorization” (pp. 5-11)
• Chap. 2, “From Wittgenstein to Roach” (pp. 12-57)
• Chap. 3, “Prototype Effects in Language” (pp. 58-67)

Lam, A. (1997). “Embedded Firms, Embedded Knowledge: Problems of Collaboration and Knowledge Transfer in Global Cooperative Ventures,” Organization Studies, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 973–996.

Pargman, Daniel & Jacob Palme (2009) “ASCII Imperialism.” In Standards and their Stories: How Quantifying, Classifying, and Formalizing Practices Shape Everyday Life, Martha Lampland & Susan Leigh Star (eds). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. (p. 177-199)

Shirky, Clay (2005) “Ontology is Overrated: Categories, Links, and Tags.” Available at: http://www.shirky.com/writings/ontology_overrated.html

Smith, Brian Cantwell (2009) “Rehabilitating Representation.” Unpublished manuscript.

Weinberger, David (2007) Everything is Miscellaneous: The Power of the New Digital Disorder. New York: Times.

• Chap. 1, “The new order of order” (pp. 8-23)
• Chap. 2, “Alphabetization and its discontents” (pp. 24-45)
• Chap. 3, “The geography of knowledge” (pp. 46-63)
• Chap. 4, “Lumps and splits” (pp. 64-83)

White, Hayden (2004) “The Fictions of Factual Representation.” In D. Periozi, Grasping the World, pp. 22-35.

Yakel, Elizabeth (2003) “Archival Representation,” Archival Science, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–25.

Wikipedia (2009a) “Wikipedia,” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia.

Wikipedia (2009b) “Academic Studies of Wikipedia,” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_studies_of_Wikipedia.

Practical stuff

Late assignments

Students are expected to turn in all assignments by the specified deadlines. Late assignments may be accepted without academic penalty if the student has made an arrangement with her or his tutorial instructor prior to the due date of the assignment.

Academic integrity

The essence of academic life revolves around respect not only for the ideas of others, but also their rights to those ideas and their promulgation. It is therefore essential that all of us engaged in the life of the mind take the utmost care that the ideas and expressions of ideas of other people always be appropriately handled, and, where necessary, cited. For writing assignments, when ideas or materials of others are used, they must be cited. The format is not that important–as long as the source material can be located and the citation verified, it’s OK. What is important is that the material be cited. In any situation, if you have a question, please feel free to ask. Such attention to ideas and acknowledgment of their sources is central not only to academic life, but life in general.

Please acquaint yourself with U. of T.’s Code of Behaviour on Academic Matters.

Students with a disability or diverse learning styles

Students with diverse learning styles and needs are welcome in this course. In particular, if you have a disability or health consideration that may require accommodations, please approach your tutorial instructor and/or the Accessibility Services office as soon as possible. The Accessibility Services staff are available by appointment to assess specific needs, provide referrals and arrange appropriate accommodations. The sooner you let them and us know about your needs, the quicker we can assist you in achieving your learning goals in this course.