Meghan O’Keefe

LIS 880 99

Professor Annala

October 15, 2017

Directed Writing

Knowledge is a concept that everyone seemingly understands but would often

have trouble defining accurately. Most would run into even more trouble when asked to

differentiate it from information or data. However, there are precise differences between

these concepts and understanding those differences can help library professionals with

knowledge management.

The general assumption of how best to begin a conversation on knowledge would

likely be to start with a clear definition of the term. However, it actually is easier to grasp

what knowledge is by first explaining the connected concepts of data and information.

Data is the most clear cut of these ideas. In the fourth edition of Foundations of

Library and Information Science, it is defined as, “Data are the building blocks of

information and knowledge. In this sense, data are numbers, letters, or symbols. Some

data are more readily processed by a computer than others. The term often implies that

meaning is as yet absent, or unassigned, as in raw data” (Rubin, 360-361). Though this

could consist of many things, the basic idea is that data refers to results of some kind not

yet connected to any meaning. Examples of this could be statistics, timetables, records,

or other sources of research often found in libraries and information centers. Though

users often glean meaning from such data, the term data does not refer to this resulting
understanding. After all, two people can look at the same data set and come to

separate conclusions.

It would be a normal instinct to use the terms data and information

interchangeably. However, the above distinction regarding the lack of meaning data

conveys makes it clear that they are not in fact the same. “Although the terms data and

information are often used synonymously, a greater understanding can be gained by

noting their distinctive characteristics” (Rubin, 361). To understand the difference,

information must also be defined.

A clear definition of information is harder to pin down, however, as there is less of

an established agreement in what exactly it means. The term has a long history of use

which has evolved over the years. A great starting point that is generally agreed upon

for libraries is, “LIS professionals commonly see information as an aggregation,

organization, or classification of data, and perhaps more importantly, as data that has

been assigned meaning. This also seems to imply that some type of human

understanding and processing has occurred” (Rubin, 362). So the baseline concept of

information is the understood meaning of data. An example here might be that data

shows the numbers of users attending a program over time and information would be

learning that attendance is increasing, decreasing, or stable based on those recorded

numbers.

Others have more requirements regarding the concept of information. One of

which being, “Somewhat more restrictive definitions hold not only that information must

contain meaning, but that the meaning must be previously unknown to the recipient; in
other words, it is something new” (Rubin, 362). So, this still holds true to the baseline

concept outlined above, but also determines that if it is something the reader or user did

not already know. Reading something that confirms already known by the individual

would therefore not be considered information by this definition. Others also insist on

other elements being present for something to be classified as information such as,

“Some argue that the information must also be true or accurate, or that it must be

conveyed from one person to another” (Rubin, 362). For them, articles with inaccurate

news or research information would not actually be considered information at all. So the

ongoing issues with articles being shared through social media platforms that are from

poor sources that contain falsehoods would not be information even though users are

considering it as such. In terms of how this relates to libraries, Rubin suggests, “One

might argue that libraries and information centers hold data that are often processed

either by staff or users, creating information.” (Rubin, 362).

Now that data and information are clearly understood, it is easier to determine a

working definition of knowledge. Rubin defines knowledge as, “Knowledge is defined as

a cohesive body of information or information that is integrated into a larger body of

knowledge. Knowledge is applied or potentially applicable to some end.” (Book, 362).

An example of this might be that data shows the numbers of Hoopla downloads per

month, this gives us the information that the average use count per user is 5 items a

month, we therefore have the knowledge needed to understand we can reduce our

Hoopla subscription from 12 allotted items a month to 8 items a month without negatively
impacting many users and lowering costs. So combining information with other known

information and experiences results in knowledge.

This is clearly related to libraries in a multitude of ways. This course often rightly

focuses on the aspect of knowledge for library professionals in terms of operating the

library (as it is a knowledge management class), but this knowledge is also a key part of

user experience in libraries. Rubin explains, “From our perspective, one presumes that

knowledge as well as information is gained through libraries- that users can gain an

understanding of the interrelationship of the information obtained and its applicability to a

particular setting. Such a view recognizes the potential of libraries and LIS professionals

to help make connections wherever possible so that people can translate information

into knowledge.” (Rubin, 362). It is important to acknowledge this value for users, since

it helps us remember the foundational goals of libraries in regards to knowledge when

making knowledge management choices for the libraries in which we work.

Also relevant to the discussion of values is a final term connected to knowledge.

“Wisdom, although not always part of the discussion, is also an important notion.

Wisdom can be appreciated as knowledge applied to human ends to benefit the world.

In this sense, wisdom is imbued with values. One can apply knowledge to immoral ends,

but there is a beneficial end to the application of wisdom” (Rubin, 362). This distinction

is important and a reminder to include wisdom in these discussions, particularly for

libraries.

While libraries can and should adopt models or aspects from the business world

in order to run more efficiently or not waste funds (especially in a world of constant
budget challenges), they are not corporations and their goals are not the same as

corporations striving to be profitable. “The goal of LIS professionals as agents of an

important social institution is to provide the data that becomes information that increases

knowledge that results in wisdom to benefit society.” (Book, 362). So, when focusing on

knowledge and libraries, wisdom is an important element to consider as it aligns the

topics here with the core values of librarianship.

By defining wisdom and showing that it brings moral value to the discussion, it

also makes it clear that such moral value assessments are not a factor of knowledge.

This brings to the table questions regarding whether or not knowledge can be

manipulated (and in what ways).

This has come to the forefront a great deal recently. The strongest examples

come from the political sector. Social media sites in particular were struggling to deal

with allowing users to share links to whatever they pleased while trying to combat

misinformation spreading as legitimate news stories to their users. After all, “Knowledge

and information is power” (Blom, 2). Manipulating knowledge spreading to create

propaganda instead of actual knowledge has been in existence for a long time, but can

spread much more rapidly and effectively than in previous eras with new technology.

This brings back the point some have made in determining what qualifies as

information (and thereby knowledge), since false propaganda might not be considered

knowledge at all. “For something to count as knowledge, it has to be- you name it:

proved rationally, established beyond doubt, protected from universal daydreaming and

powerful, maleficent geniuses” (Bencivenga, 4). However, for this limit to exist, it
requires an arbiter of legitimacy to be in place. This brings a new set of problems to the

table though. Who gets to determine what is and is not legitimate. One the one end of

the spectrum, there is a growing distrust and disregard for experts or intellectual elites in

the culture who would be qualified to determine legitimacy rather well that is rather

troubling, so likely there would be issues convincing all to listen to these determinations.

Also, while there needs to be an effort to value the legitimacy and accuracy of

knowledge spreading through society, it is important on the other side to ensure that all

are able to speak their opinions, share views they agree with, and discuss them openly

as they please in order to protect the democratic freedoms so important to American

ideals. To this end, “Digital media are an ever-increasing presence in social movements,

political participation and civic engagement” (Elwood, 1). So, while there are challenges

in this regard, there are also positives from this open exchange of knowledge of all sorts

that should not be ignored.

Libraries are also facing this challenge in a unique way. “For LIS professionals,

the question of what constitutes knowledge is very important, because we rely on bodies

of knowledge, or knowledgeable works, to perform many of our question-answering

functions. That is, although the library and the Web are full of information, when LIS

professionals attempt to respond to someone’s question, we prefer to use

knowledgeable or authoritative works to provide the most dependable responses.”

(Rubn, 363). In terms of knowledge management (and librarianship as a whole), library

professionals must balance the opportunity for open access and presenting all sides of
an issue fairly and as objectively as possible with the need to purchase reliable materials

and resources to maintain the trustworthy legacy libraries have built for themselves.

So how can libraries make these judgment calls? The key to this answer comes

from understanding not only certain criteria that assists with these determinations

(reviews, trusted sources, duplicated and timely information, etc), but also understanding

how something is qualified as knowledge for users.

Many users do not use the same standards library professionals might in judging

sources and knowledge. “But how does something come to be accepted as

knowledge...most of the knowledge people acquire does not come from direct

experience (firsthand knowledge), but from secondhand knowledge: we mostly depend

on others for ideas, as well as for information about things outside the range of direct

experience...much of what we think about the world is what we have second hand from

others.” (Rubin, 363). This is important to factor in when helping teach library users how

to judge knowledge or information going forward. Not only will this assist them with

research or learning that they seek from the library, but will also help them as they

navigate various resources offered from libraries and elsewhere, strengthening

communal knowledge.

It is just as important to remember how knowledge comes to be when determining

how best to grow and shape the library progress. Libraries are not just sharing

knowledge to users, but also amongst staff. This is why there have been situations

discussed in class where information has been accurately provided, but not properly

applied with knowledge which resulted in poor decision making. “The term tabula rasa
(“blank slate”) refers to the belief that people are born without knowledge and that their

knowledge is gained through experience and perception. The concept describes how

pieces of data, such as observations, sights, sounds, smells, are received and written on

a blank slate, and, subsequently, how those data are manipulated to create knowledge”

(Austin, 1). So, staff with accurate, up to date, reliable information, who are not

experienced in specific areas of library work, around certain communities of users, or for

a long enough period of time might not be able to apply this information best. Staff with

actual experience and knowledge should always be included in these decisions to best

combine new information with the working knowledge of the library to avoid these

problems.

Knowledge is acquired in a variety of ways. These ways include, “Perceptual: the

direct evidence of our senses, Testimonial: facts we acquire from other people and

media, Inner Sense: awareness of our own feelings and states, such as pain and

hunger, Inferential: knowledge we stitch together ourselves from raw inputs” (What is

Knowledge, 4). In order for knowledge to work best to our benefit, it is important that it is

widely shared, but also judged for accuracy in order to avoid unethical manipulation from

others.

It is also important to remember what qualifies as knowledge and what does not.

Reviewing these definitions helps to clarify each individual term. “In sum, there appears

to be a conceptual ladder: data are raw and unprocessed; information is processed data

from which meaning arises and is communicated; and knowledge is further processed

information that is organized and interrelated and more broadly understood and applied.
Wisdom is knowledge applied to the benefit of humanity.” (Book, 362-363). By

understanding these concepts and the issues that come with them, library professionals

should be able to use them to best foster their community, serve their users, and grow

their library to its betterment.

Works Cited:

Austin, Robert F. "Geospatial Data-Information-Knowledge-Wisdom Hierarchy."

Solstice: An Electronic Journal of Geography & Mathematics, vol. 26, no. 2, Dec. 2015,

pp. 1-35. EBSCOhost,

dom.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h

&AN=112255411&site=ehost-live&scope=site.

Bencivenga, Ermanno. "Knowledge Vs. Belief." Philosophical Forum, vol. 30, no.

1, Spring99, p. 3. EBSCOhost,

dom.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h

&AN=5304233&site=ehost-live&scope=site.

Blom, Dennis. "Skills of Knowledge and Information Managers -- Are Curricula

Up-To-Date (Enough)?." Information Services & Use, vol. 19, no. 1, Jan. 1999, p. 3.

EBSCOhost,

dom.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h

&AN=2014001&site=ehost-live&scope=site.

Elwood, Sarah and Agnieszka Leszczynski. "New Spatial Media, New Knowledge

Politics." Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, vol. 38, no. 4, Oct. 2013,

pp. 544-559. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1111/j.1475-5661.2012.00543.x.

 Rubin, Richard E. Foundations of Library and Information Science.

Neal-Schuman, 2016. \

"WHAT IS KNOWLEDGE? (Cover Story)." New Scientist, vol. 234, no. 3119, Apr.

2017, pp. 30-41. EBSCOhost,

dom.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h

&AN=122203418&site=ehost-live&scope=site.