Search (7 results, page 1 of 1)

0.009748395 = product of:
  0.01949679 = sum of:
    0.01949679 = product of:
      0.03899358 = sum of:
        0.03899358 = weight(_text_:p in 711) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03899358 = score(doc=711,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.23835106 = fieldWeight in 711, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=711)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.008123662 = product of:
  0.016247325 = sum of:
    0.016247325 = product of:
      0.03249465 = sum of:
        0.03249465 = weight(_text_:p in 4076) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03249465 = score(doc=4076,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.19862589 = fieldWeight in 4076, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4076)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Editor

Bergmann, J. u. P. Danowski

0.007705845 = product of:
  0.01541169 = sum of:
    0.01541169 = product of:
      0.03082338 = sum of:
        0.03082338 = weight(_text_:22 in 767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03082338 = score(doc=767,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 767, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=767)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 3.2008 14:24:08

0.00649893 = product of:
  0.01299786 = sum of:
    0.01299786 = product of:
      0.02599572 = sum of:
        0.02599572 = weight(_text_:p in 342) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02599572 = score(doc=342,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.15890071 = fieldWeight in 342, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=342)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.006164676 = product of:
  0.012329352 = sum of:
    0.012329352 = product of:
      0.024658704 = sum of:
        0.024658704 = weight(_text_:22 in 2249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024658704 = score(doc=2249,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2249, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2249)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 3.2008 18:05:16

0.005744297 = product of:
  0.011488594 = sum of:
    0.011488594 = product of:
      0.022977188 = sum of:
        0.022977188 = weight(_text_:p in 1717) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022977188 = score(doc=1717,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.14044972 = fieldWeight in 1717, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1717)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

The release of Stimulated Recall and Mental Models, therefore, could not have been timelier. It describes an empirical qualitative, case study research conducted by authors Lyn Henderson and Julie Tallman in which they studied the mental models of school librarians teaching K-12 students how to use electronic databases. In this research, funded by the Spencer Foundation, Henderson and Tallman studied and analyzed the mental models of their subjects, six American and four Australian school librarians, as they went about the task of teaching students one-on-one how to access and retrieve the information they needed for class assignments from electronic databases. Each librarian and student underwent a structured pre-lesson interview to ascertain their mental models (the sum of their prior learning and experiences) regarding the upcoming lesson. The lesson followed immediately and was carefully video- and audio-recorded, with the full knowledge of the librarian and her student. After the lessons, both student and librarian were interviewed with the intent of learning what each were thinking and feeling at specific points during the lesson, using the recordings as memory joggers. After the first librarian-pupil session, the student was freed but the librarian was re-studied tutoring a second learner. Again, the teacher and new student were preinterviewed, their lesson was recorded, and they were debriefed using the recordings for stimulated recall. It is important to note here the use of the recordings to create stimulated recall. Though considered a dubious practice by many respected researchers, Henderson and Tallman expend considerable time and effort in this book trying to establish the credibility of stimulated recall as a valid research tool. I find it interesting that the authors report that their realization of the value of stimulated recall was a collateral benefit of their study; they claim the original objective of their research was to analyze and compare the pre- and post-lesson mental models of the teacher-librarians (p.15). Apparently, this realization provided the inspiration for this book (pp. I & 208). Hence, its place of importance in the book's title.
This book is evidence that Henderson and Tallman were meticulous in following their established protocols and especially in their record keeping while conducting their research. There are, however, a few issues in the study's framework and methodology that are worth noting. First, although the research was conducted in two different countries - the United Slates and Australia - it is not clear from the writing if the librarian-pupil pairs of each country hailed from the same schools (making the population opportunistic) or if the sampling was indeed more randomly selected. Readers do know, though, that the librarians were free to select the students they tutored from within their respective schools. Thus, there appears to he no randomness. Second, "[t]he data collection tools and questionnaires were grounded in a [single] pilot study with a [single] teacher-Iibrarian" (p. 7). Neither the procedures used nor the data collected from the pilot study are presented to establish its reliability and validity. Therefore, readers are left with only limited confidence in the study's instrumentation. Further, it is obvious from the reading, and admitted by the researchers, that the recording equipment in open view of the study's subjects skewed the data. That is, one of the librarians tinder study confessed that were it not for the cameras, she would have completely deserted one of her lessons when encountering what she perceived to be overwhelming obstacles: a classic example of the Hawthorne Effect in research. Yet. despite these issues, researchers Henderson and Tallman make a respectable ease in this book for the validity of both mental models and stimulated recall. The mental models developed during the prelesson interviews seem remarkably accurate when observing the school librarians during the lessons. Additionally, while the librarians were able to adapt their lessons based on situations, they generally did so within their mental models of what constitutes good teachers and good teaching.

0.005448855 = product of:
  0.01089771 = sum of:
    0.01089771 = product of:
      0.02179542 = sum of:
        0.02179542 = weight(_text_:22 in 677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02179542 = score(doc=677,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.13679022 = fieldWeight in 677, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=677)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Inhaltsbeschreibung Die verschiedenen Initiativen zum Open Access führen zu zwei Systemen, dem so genannten »grünen Weg«, der bereits in gedruckter Form veröffentlichte Publikationen ins Internet stellt, und dem »goldenen Weg«, bei dem die Volltextspeicherung die einzige oder jedenfalls die vorrangige Form darstellt. Die Internationalisierung des Open Access erfolgte auf drei Konferenzen, die 2001 in Budapest, 2003 in Bethesda und im gleichen Jahr in Berlin stattfanden. Diese Volltextspeicherung war ursprünglich auf die naturwissenschaftlich-technischen Disziplinen konzentriert. Doch treten in zunehmendem Maße auch die Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaften dem Prinzip bei. Dabei entstehen natürlich sehr differenzierende Aspekte, zum Beispiel für die Bibliotheken - etwa der Erwerb gedruckter Zeitschriften, Langzeitarchivierung von Interneteintragungen, für den Buchhandel wie für die Autoren - etwa das Urheberrecht, aber auch dort das ökonomische Interesse, wie der Plan des Börsenvereins des Deutschen Buchhandels zu einer eigenen Volltextspeicherung zeigt, dem die Deutsche UNESCO-Kommission eine Ergänzung zum vorliegenden Text nachsandte. Open Access hat mittlerweile ein so weites Interesse gefunden, dass das Auswärtige Amt zusammen mit der Deutschen UNESCO-Kommission 2006 zu einer Konferenz einlud, über deren Ergebnisse die Deutsche UNESCO-Kommission dieses Handbuch veröffentlicht hat, das neben einer definitorischen und einer historischen Einleitung (Norbert Lossau S.18-22 und Peter Schirmbacher S. 22-25) in vier weiteren Kapiteln die Möglichkeiten und Probleme darstellt. Im zweiten Kapitel werden drei verschiedene Modelle vorgestellt: Open-Access-Repositories am Berliner Beispiel des edoc-Servers (Susanne Dobratz S. 28-32), Open-Access-Journale am Beispiel des New Journal of Physics (Eberhard Bodenschatz S.33-36) und ein Verlagsmodell (Springer Open Choice) von Jan Velterop (S. 37-40). Das dritte Kapitel ist den Formen der Realisierung gewidmet, z. B. der Finanzierung (Stefan Gradmann S.42-45), des Urheberrechts (Karl-Nikolaus Peifer S.46-59), der Qualitätssicherung (Eberhard Bodenschatz und Ulrich Pöschl S.50-55), der Langzeitarchivierung (Ute Schwens und Reinhard Altenhöner S. 50-58), der Struktur der Wissenschaftskommunikation (Hans Pfeiffenberger S.59-62), der Datenverarbeitung (Wolfram Horst-mann S. 65) sowie der Akzeptanz (Johannes Fournier S. 66-70).