Search (23 results, page 2 of 2)

0.001757696 = product of:
  0.003515392 = sum of:
    0.003515392 = product of:
      0.007030784 = sum of:
        0.007030784 = weight(_text_:a in 4391) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007030784 = score(doc=4391,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 4391, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4391)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Results of a project focusing on six Web-based collections in education. Our analysis of homegrown classification structures considers three dimensions. "Structure" is described through quantitative data (e.g. Number of main categories, Number of hierarchical levels, etc.). "Logic" concentrates on two aspects of the subdividing process: division principle, and type of hierarchical relation. "Semantics" relates to concepts and their representation in the form of terms. In our sample, the classification structures are hierarchical, not overly complex and not very specific. The choice, arrangement and sequence of classes are logical. Conceptual and terminological inconsistencies are due to significant gaps in conceptual coverage and lack of terminological control.

Source

Knowledge organization for a global learning society: Proceedings of the 9th International ISKO Conference, 4-7 July 2006, Vienna, Austria. Hrsg.: G. Budin, C. Swertz u. K. Mitgutsch

Type

a

0.0014351527 = product of:
  0.0028703054 = sum of:
    0.0028703054 = product of:
      0.005740611 = sum of:
        0.005740611 = weight(_text_:a in 2655) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005740611 = score(doc=2655,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 2655, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2655)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Five controlled vocabularies currently used for content representation in collections of non art moving images were examined to determine their level of conceptual compatibility. Methods borrowed from previous research in the area of indexing language compatibility were used. Quantitative data and qualitative observations allowed us to estimate more precisely and realistically the actual degree of conceptual redundancy in these indexing languages. It was found that the conceptual overlap is high enough to justify the pursuit of research and development work an a common basic indexing and access language that could be used to name objects, events, categories of persons, and relations most frequently depicted in non art moving image collections.

Type

a

0.0014351527 = product of:
  0.0028703054 = sum of:
    0.0028703054 = product of:
      0.005740611 = sum of:
        0.005740611 = weight(_text_:a in 4616) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005740611 = score(doc=4616,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 4616, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4616)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Cataloguing and classification were at the core of the first librarian training programs In 2011, LIS educators continue to believe in the importance of teaching the basics of the classification process to all future information professionals. Information on classification instruction was collected through a survey of instructors in ALA-accredited LIS masters' programs. The survey was structured around issues touching several dimensions of any teaching endeavour, with an emphasis on the tools used to help students develop several types of skills involved in the classification process. This article presents quantitative data provided by respondents representing 31 distinct LIS masters' programs. We hope it can be used as foundation to pursue the examination of classification instruction in an ever changing information world.

Type

a