Initially, my process for making sense of the Dervin article was to frequently reread a sentence more slowly (word by word) to make sure I was getting the meaning. Once I got into a rhythm of the reading, I also noticed that I would stop on key words or phrases where sense-making was defined or explained. I found myself trying to connect ideas to my prior knowledge. For example, when I started the section on transmission versus construction, I immediately connected to those terms that we use in describing pedagogy and looked for how the author’s use was similar to my own understanding or context. I also noticed that the reading became more comfortable for me when the authors referred to human understanding or experience. This helped me to begin to look for a way I could relate to the information. But I also found my mind drifting a lot and wanting some actual practical examples to help me see why this should matter to me. Finally, about a third of the way through, I was able to get to what I thought was their thesis. They actually stated the purpose of the chapter which would have been helpful earlier on. Some of the illustrations were helpful in that they diagramed visually the concept of the article, but again without a real-life example it was hard to find a compelling connection.
It took me about half way through the chapter for me to figure out what I think is its purpose. I found myself seeking real life examples of what they were referring to for much of the reading. I struggled to stay focused with all the jargon and redundancies because I wasn’t finding anything particularly relevant to me or to my work. Once they began sharing the exemplars, then I began to see how these theories were applicable to something that might matter to me or others. I could then see the purpose in trying to determine how a user seeks and finds information or not and how it can help institutions get better at helping people have a better experience. When the authors shared the interviews with hospital patients and blood donors for example, it helped me to think that perhaps this research holds some interest for me because it can apply to serving customers. I am both a consumer or user of information as well as part of providing a service to others (namely students and their families), so here there was some connection for me. For the most part, I found myself frustrated by what seemed like a lot of unnecessarily dense, complex, and repetitive language to explain the concept of how we as humans use information to make sense of our experiences.
Based on the challenges for me to access the article, I think for high school students, I would start with some kind of experience or provocation to get them thinking and wondering before they begin to try to make sense of the article. Maybe they could create an online survey for one another about a common experience similar to the exemplars shared in the chapter. Then in discussion, they could find similarities in what information was missing that would have been useful in that situation. In addition to chunking it into smaller sections, I might also rearrange it for groups to collaborate on one piece at a time. Perhaps they could create a visual model of their own using the figures in the article as an example.
It took me about half way through the chapter for me to figure out what I think is its purpose. I found myself seeking real life examples of what they were referring to for much of the reading. I struggled to stay focused with all the jargon and redundancies because I wasn’t finding anything particularly relevant to me or to my work. Once they began sharing the exemplars, then I began to see how these theories were applicable to something that might matter to me or others. I could then see the purpose in trying to determine how a user seeks and finds information or not and how it can help institutions get better at helping people have a better experience. When the authors shared the interviews with hospital patients and blood donors for example, it helped me to think that perhaps this research holds some interest for me because it can apply to serving customers. I am both a consumer or user of information as well as part of providing a service to others (namely students and their families), so here there was some connection for me. For the most part, I found myself frustrated by what seemed like a lot of unnecessarily dense, complex, and repetitive language to explain the concept of how we as humans use information to make sense of our experiences.
Based on the challenges for me to access the article, I think for high school students, I would start with some kind of experience or provocation to get them thinking and wondering before they begin to try to make sense of the article. Maybe they could create an online survey for one another about a common experience similar to the exemplars shared in the chapter. Then in discussion, they could find similarities in what information was missing that would have been useful in that situation. In addition to chunking it into smaller sections, I might also rearrange it for groups to collaborate on one piece at a time. Perhaps they could create a visual model of their own using the figures in the article as an example.