Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

0.01673975 = product of:
  0.05021925 = sum of:
    0.0075724614 = weight(_text_:in in 5685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0075724614 = score(doc=5685,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.12752387 = fieldWeight in 5685, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5685)
    0.042646788 = weight(_text_:und in 5685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042646788 = score(doc=5685,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.09675359 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.4407773 = fieldWeight in 5685, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5685)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

1. Was ist Informationskompetenz? Was macht Informationskompetenz im Kern aus? Wie weit greift sie, wo endet sie? Inwiefern spielt Informationskompetenz mit weiteren Kompetenzen zusammen? 2. Wie soll man Informationskompetenz vermitteln? Wie soll Informationskompetenz am besten vermittelt werden? Wie werden Menschen am besten zu informationskompetentem Verhalten motiviert und geführt? 3. Welches sind die zentralen Entwicklungen im Bereich der Informationskompetenz und Informationskompetenzvermittlung? Wie entwickelt sich Informationskompetenz? Welche Bereiche werden künftig wichtiger? 4. Weitere Aspekte des Themas - Welche? Warum sind diese wichtig? Was folgert daraus?

Footnote

Leicht veränderte Fassung eines Beitrages, der für das Projekt "Informationskompetenz und Demokratie" erstellt wurde (Daphné Çetta, Joachim Griesbaum, Thomas Mandl, Elke Montanari). Die ursprüngliche Fassung ist enthalten in: Çetta, D., Griesbaum, J., Mandl, T., Montanari, E. (Hg). (2019). Positionspapiere: Informationskompetenz und Informationskompetenzvermittlung: Aktueller Stand und Perspektiven. Projekt: Zukunftsdiskurse: Informationskompetenz und Demokratie (IDE): Bürger, Suchverfahren und Analyse-Algorithmen in der politischen Meinungsbildung, Universität Hildesheim, http://informationskompetenz.blog.uni-hildesheim.de/files/2019/10/Projekt_Informationskompetenz_und_DemokratieKompilation_aller_Positionspapiere.pdf. Die Fragen, die den Beitrag strukturieren und entsprechend hervorgehoben werden, wurden von den Hildesheimer Forschern gestellt.

0.001821651 = product of:
  0.010929906 = sum of:
    0.010929906 = weight(_text_:in in 526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010929906 = score(doc=526,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.18406484 = fieldWeight in 526, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=526)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The present study contributes to the development of integrated models for information behavior and practices at the domain-specific level. To this end, the model for everyday information practices proposed by Savolainen in 2008 is enhanced by integrating the element of information creating, based on Thomson's recent 2018 study. The integration resulted in the expanded model for everyday information practices. Using conceptual analysis, the above model was examined in light of conventional (positivist and post-positivist) and interpretive (social constructivist) criteria for theory assessment. The findings suggest that the integrated model meets best the interpretive criteria such as meaningfulness and understandability, mutuality of concepts and descriptive logic, empirical verifiability, and usefulness. In contrast, theoretical potential of the model is fairly limited when weighed against the conventional criteria, such as generalization and prediction. Overall, the findings suggest that, in its current form, the expanded model cannot be regarded as a "genuine theory" of everyday information practices. However, the model does incorporate many of the qualities characteristic of social scientific theories, and thus exhibits considerable theoretical potential. This is even more so if the interpretive, naturalistic basis of the data in which the expanded model is based is considered.