Zhang, Y.: Developing a holistic model for digital library evaluation (2010)
0.04
0.037439607 = product of:
0.074879214 = sum of:
0.074879214 = sum of:
0.037876792 = weight(_text_:b in 2360) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.037876792 = score(doc=2360,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16126883 = queryWeight, product of:
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.045518078 = queryNorm
0.23486741 = fieldWeight in 2360, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2360)
0.037002426 = weight(_text_:22 in 2360) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.037002426 = score(doc=2360,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15939656 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045518078 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2360, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2360)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This article reports the author's recent research in developing a holistic model for various levels of digital library (DL) evaluation in which perceived important criteria from heterogeneous stakeholder groups are organized and presented. To develop such a model, the author applied a three-stage research approach: exploration, confirmation, and verification. During the exploration stage, a literature review was conducted followed by an interview, along with a card sorting technique, to collect important criteria perceived by DL experts. Then the criteria identified were used for developing an online survey during the confirmation stage. Survey respondents (431 in total) from 22 countries rated the importance of the criteria. A holistic DL evaluation model was constructed using statistical techniques. Eventually, the verification stage was devised to test the reliability of the model in the context of searching and evaluating an operational DL. The proposed model fills two lacunae in the DL domain: (a) the lack of a comprehensive and flexible framework to guide and benchmark evaluations, and (b) the uncertainty about what divergence exists among heterogeneous DL stakeholders, including general users.
