Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Radford, M.L."
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Radford, G.P.; Radford, M.L.; Lingel, J.: ¬The library as heterotopia : Michel Foucault and the experience of library space (2015) 0.01
    0.012841367 = product of:
      0.05136547 = sum of:
        0.05136547 = weight(_text_:library in 2140) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05136547 = score(doc=2140,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.38975742 = fieldWeight in 2140, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2140)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose Using Michel Foucault's notion of heterotopia as a guide, the purpose of this paper is to explore the implications of considering the library as place, and specifically as a place that has the "curious property of being in relation with all the other sites, but in such a way as to suspect, neutralize, or invent the set of relations that they happen to designate, mirror, or reflect" (Foucault, 1986a, p. 24). Design/methodology/approach The paper draws upon a range of literary examples and from biographical accounts of authors such as Alan Bennett, Michel Foucault, and Umberto Eco to show how the library space operates as a heterotopia. Findings The paper finds that drawing together the constructs of heterotopia and serendipity can enrich the understanding of how libraries are experienced as sites of play, creativity, and adventure. Originality/value Foucault's concept of heterotopia is offered as an original and useful frame that can account for the range of experiences and associations uniquely attached to the library.
  2. Radford, M.L.; Connaway, L.S.; Mikitish, S.; Alpert, M.; Shah, C.; Cooke, N.A.: Shared values, new vision : collaboration and communities of practice in virtual reference and SQA (2017) 0.01
    0.0061664553 = product of:
      0.024665821 = sum of:
        0.024665821 = product of:
          0.049331643 = sum of:
            0.049331643 = weight(_text_:project in 3352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.049331643 = score(doc=3352,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.23317845 = fieldWeight in 3352, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3352)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    This investigation of new approaches to improving collaboration, user/librarian experiences, and sustainability for virtual reference services (VRS) reports findings from a grant project titled "Cyber Synergy: Seeking Sustainability between Virtual Reference and Social Q&A Sites" (Radford, Connaway, & Shah, 2011-2014). In-depth telephone interviews with 50 VRS librarians included questions on collaboration, referral practices, and attitudes toward Social Question and Answer (SQA) services using the Critical Incident Technique (Flanagan, 1954). The Community of Practice (CoP) (Wenger, 1998; Davies, 2005) framework was found to be a useful conceptualization for understanding VRS professionals' approaches to their work. Findings indicate that participants usually refer questions from outside of their area of expertise to other librarians, but occasionally refer them to nonlibrarian experts. These referrals are made possible because participants believe that other VRS librarians are qualified and willing collaborators. Barriers to collaboration include not knowing appropriate librarians/experts for referral, inability to verify credentials, and perceived unwillingness to collaborate. Facilitators to collaboration include knowledge of appropriate collaborators who are qualified and willingness to refer. Answers from SQA services were perceived as less objective and authoritative, but participants were open to collaborating with nonlibrarian experts with confirmation of professional expertise or extensive knowledge.