Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

0.003462655 = product of:
  0.010387965 = sum of:
    0.010387965 = weight(_text_:a in 659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010387965 = score(doc=659,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.19940455 = fieldWeight in 659, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=659)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Marginalia or 'scribbling in the margins' is a means for readers to add a more in-depth level of granularity and subject representation to digital documents such as those present in social sharing environments like Flickr and del.icio.us. Social classification and social sharing sites development of user-defined descriptors or tags is discussed in the context of knowledge organization. With this position paper I present a rationale for the use of the resulting folksonomies and tag clouds being developed in these social sharing communities as a rich source of information about our users and their natural organization processes. The knowledge organization community needs to critically examine our understandings of these emerging classificatory schema and determine how best to adapt, augment, revitalize existing knowledge organization structures.

Type

a

0.0030970925 = product of:
  0.009291277 = sum of:
    0.009291277 = weight(_text_:a in 2252) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009291277 = score(doc=2252,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 2252, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2252)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

Subject access and controlled vocabularies used for representing children's resources are examined. Wittgenstein's Language Games theory is presented as a possible framework for determining sources to use for controlled vocabulary construction. Preliminary results regarding existing controlled vocabulary use in databases and digital libraries designed for children are presented, as are extent of match findings comparing users' search terms with LCSH, Sears, and a subject-specific proprietary controlled vocabulary are reported.

Type

a

0.00296799 = product of:
  0.00890397 = sum of:
    0.00890397 = weight(_text_:a in 4816) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00890397 = score(doc=4816,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 4816, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4816)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Representation and retrieval obstacles within a digital library designed for use by middle school children are presented. Representation of objects is key to retrieval. Tools used to create representations for children's resources, such as controlled vocabularies, need to be more age appropriate. Development of age-appropriate controlled vocabularies requires us to learn more about the ways children interact with systems and form search strategies to represent their information needs. Children's search terms and questions are a rich resource for learning more about their information seeking process, their question state, and their formulation of searches. A method for gathering and using children's own search terms and the benefits of their utilization in developing more age-appropriate controlled vocabularies are discussed.

Type

a

0.0029264777 = product of:
  0.008779433 = sum of:
    0.008779433 = weight(_text_:a in 480) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008779433 = score(doc=480,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.1685276 = fieldWeight in 480, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=480)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

LIS professionals use structures for organizing knowledge when they catalog and classify objects in the collection, when they develop databases, when they design customized taxonomies, or when they search online. Structures for Organizing Knowledge: Exploring Taxonomies, Ontologies, and Other Schema explores and explains this basic function by looking at three questions: 1) How do we organize objects so that they make sense and are useful? 2) What role do categories, classifications, taxonomies, and other structures play in the process of organizing? 3) What do information professionals need to know about organizing behaviors in order to design useful structures for organizing knowledge? Taking a broad, yet specialized approach that is a first in the field, this book answers those questions by examining three threads: traditional structures for organizing knowledge; personal structures for organizing knowledge; and socially-constructed structures for organizing knowledge. Through these threads, it offers avenues for expanding thinking on classification and classification schemes, taxonomy and ontology development, and structures. Both a history of the development of taxonomies and an analysis of current research, theories, and applications, this volume explores a wide array of topics, including the new digital, social aspect of taxonomy development. Examples of subjects covered include: Formal and informal structures Applications of knowledge structures Classification schemes Early taxonomists and their contributions Social networking, bookmarking, and cataloging sites Cataloging codes Standards and best practices Tags, tagging, and folksonomies Descriptive cataloging Metadata schema standards Thought exercises, references, and a list of helpful websites augment each section. A final chapter, "Thinking Ahead: Are We at a Crossroads?" uses "envisioning exercises" to help LIS professionals look into the future.

0.0027093915 = product of:
  0.008128175 = sum of:
    0.008128175 = weight(_text_:a in 252) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008128175 = score(doc=252,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.15602624 = fieldWeight in 252, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=252)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The issue of how teens choose social networks and information communication technologies (ICT's) for personal communication is complex. This study focused on describing how U.S. teens from a highly technological suburban high school select ICT's for personal communication purposes. Two research questions guided the study: (a) What factors influence high school seniors' selection of online social networks and other ICT's for everyday communication? (b) How can social network theory (SNT) help to explain how teens select online social networks and other ICT's for everyday communication purposes? Using focus groups, a purposive sample of 45 teens were asked to discuss (a) their preferred methods for communicating with friends and family and why, (b) the reasons why they chose to engage (or not to engage) in online social networking, (c) how they selected ICT's for social networking and other communication purposes, and (d) how they decided whom to accept as online "friends." Findings indicated that many factors influenced participants' ICT selection practices including six major categories of selection factors: relationship factors, information/communication factors, social factors, systems factors, self-protection factors, and recipient factors. SNT was also helpful in explaining how "friendship" was a major determining factor in their communication media and platform choices.

Type

a

0.002212209 = product of:
  0.0066366266 = sum of:
    0.0066366266 = weight(_text_:a in 1314) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0066366266 = score(doc=1314,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.05209492 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045180224 = queryNorm
        0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 1314, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1314)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

A survey of 4,032 youth in grades 5 through 12 was conducted to determine the impact youth's use of the Internet was having on their use of the public library. Results indicated that 100% of the youth had access to the Internet from one or more locations, and that although one quarter of the youth accessed the Internet at the public library, the public library was the least frequently used source of Internet access. For youth without Internet access at home, the public library was also the least used alternate source of access. Approximately 69% of the youth reported that they had visited a public library during the school year. Having Internet access at home did not affect whether or not youth visited the library however, Internet access at home appears to have affected the frequency with which youth visit the library. Youth without Internet access at home visited the library more frequently, whereas youth with Internet access at home visited the library less frequently. Use of the Internet also appeared to have diminished youth's need to use the public library as a source of personal information however, use of the Internet appeared not to have affected their use of the public library for school work or for recreation. Among youth, use of both the Internet and the public library appear to be complementary activities.

Type

a