Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Joint, N."
  • × theme_ss:"Informationsdienstleistungen"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Joint, N.: Traditional bibliographic instruction and today's information users (2005) 0.01
    0.010632597 = product of:
      0.03189779 = sum of:
        0.03189779 = weight(_text_:information in 4742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03189779 = score(doc=4742,freq=26.0), product of:
            0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051966466 = queryNorm
            0.34965688 = fieldWeight in 4742, product of:
              5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
                26.0 = termFreq=26.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4742)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - This paper takes forward strands from "Evaluating the quality of library portals" by the author and places them in the context of different approaches to teaching students about information use. Design/methodology/approach - An opinion piece which examines the impact on user behaviour of traditional mechanical library skills training (such as "library orientation", "bibliographic instruction", or "information skills training" rather than true information literacy-based teaching). The paper points out the similarity in the effects of such teaching to the effects of offering users a more powerful mechanical information retrieval tool (such as a library portal or internet search engine) without effective support on how the information retrieved should be used for significant educational outcomes. Findings - For librarians to be custodians of the highest standards of intelligent information use, they must demonstrate a meaningful, rather than a mechanical understanding and application of information literacy in their everyday practice. Without this, information users will rightly turn to new, non-mediated forms of information use such as internet search engines, which can deal with purely technical challenges of information retrieval superficially well. Both the users and the profession itself will be the poorer as a result. Research limitations/implications - An expression of opinion about the dangers of pedagogically underdeveloped user education on user behaviour. Practical implications - This opinion piece gives some clear and practical insights for the application of information literacy principles to library practice. Originality/value - This piece points out the ironic similarities in the effect of a mechanistic or tool-based approach to user education and unmediated user access to internet search engines or Library portals: above all, a "more is better" approach in the information user, marked by citing too much poorly digested, poorly evaluated data.
  2. Joint, N.: eLiteracy or information literacy : which concept should we prefer? (2005) 0.01
    0.007077485 = product of:
      0.021232454 = sum of:
        0.021232454 = weight(_text_:information in 4744) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021232454 = score(doc=4744,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.09122598 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051966466 = queryNorm
            0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 4744, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4744)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - To give a comparative analysis of the validity of the concepts of eLiteracy (eL) and Information Literacy (IL). Design/methodology/approach - A purely abstract, conceptual discussion. Findings - That eLiteracy and Information Literacy are different but mutually compatible concepts with validity within specific contexts. Research limitations/implications - An entirely abstract discussion of theoretical descriptions. Practical implications - By defining concepts clearly, this paper attempts to inform and clarify the framework for practical LIS research. Originality/value - In contrast to other discussions (which tend to focus either on eLiteracy, or on Information Literacy) this editorial squarely addresses criticism of the eL concept in comparison to IL. It sets out the difference with IL and recognises the strength of both ideas, as long as they are each applied within their appropriate frame of reference.