Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

7.48963E-4 = product of:
  0.0104854815 = sum of:
    0.0104854815 = weight(_text_:information in 2278) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0104854815 = score(doc=2278,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 2278, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2278)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Abstract

This article describes the development and application of the Cat with Moose courseware in the cataloging curricula at Temasek Polytechnic, Singapore, which offers diploma-level, paraprofessional training in library and information service (LIS). The aim of Cat with Mouse is to provide students with practice in cataloging a range of materials, both print and nonprint, in an online environment. The courseware checks the entries as students progress through the record template and allows them to simultaneously consult windows containing the relevant sources of information. The product is designed to be used as a revision tool and is accessible to students through the Internet. The development team revised a prototype version after feedback was collected by means of a questionnaire. Most students found the courseware useful and that it made revision easier. It is argued that, as an assessment tool, Cat with Mouse is also reliable and valid, and that the distinctive benefits the courseware offers has made the investment in the project worthwhile.

Source

Journal of education for library and information science. 41(2000) no.3, S.187-196

6.241359E-4 = product of:
  0.008737902 = sum of:
    0.008737902 = weight(_text_:information in 2808) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008737902 = score(doc=2808,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 2808, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2808)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to consider the nature of community information (CI) and proposes a data model, based on the entity-relationship approach adopted in the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR), which may assist with the development of future metadata standards for CI systems. Design/methodology/approach - The two main data structure standards for CI, namely the element set developed by the Alliance of Information and Referral Systems (AIRS) and the MARC21 Format for CI, are compared by means of a mapping exercise, after which an entity-relationship data model is constructed, at a conceptual level, based on the definitions of CI found in the literature. Findings - The AIRS and MARC21 data structures converge to a fair degree, with MARC21 providing for additional detail in several areas. However, neither structure is systematically and unambiguously defined, suggesting the need for a data model. An entity-relationship data modelling approach, similar to that taken in FRBR, yielded a model that could be used as the basis for future standards development and research. It was found to effectively cover both the AIRS and MARC21 element sets. Originality/value - No explicit data model exists for CI, and there has been little discussion reported about what data elements are required to support CI seeking.

4.32414E-4 = product of:
  0.0060537956 = sum of:
    0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 2995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0060537956 = score(doc=2995,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2995, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2995)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Abstract

Resource Description and Access (RDA) includes new lists of content and carrier types intended to replace the General Material Designations (GMDs) and Specific Material Designations (SMDs) of the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR), and which represent taxonomies designed to facilitate searching on content and carrier attributes of resources. However, these taxonomies were not constructed through analysis of end-user categorizations, nor have they been tested on end-users. This study investigates how end-users categorize library resources by employing the free-listing technique, commonly employed by cognitive scientists and information architects. The results indicate that end-user categorizations of library resources may emphasize other facets, such as purpose, audience and extent, in addition to content and carrier, and also levels of the content and carrier facets other than those represented by the RDA terms.