Search (143 results, page 1 of 8)

0.1276723 = product of:
  0.31918073 = sum of:
    0.07979518 = product of:
      0.23938553 = sum of:
        0.23938553 = weight(_text_:3a in 5955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.23938553 = score(doc=5955,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.36509076 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043063257 = queryNorm
            0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 5955, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5955)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.23938553 = weight(_text_:2f in 5955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.23938553 = score(doc=5955,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.36509076 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 5955, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5955)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Footnote

Rez. in: Philosophisch-ethische Rezensionen vom 09.11.2019 (Jürgen Czogalla), Unter: https://philosophisch-ethische-rezensionen.de/rezension/Goedert1.html. In: B.I.T. online 23(2020) H.3, S.345-347 (W. Sühl-Strohmenger) [Unter: https%3A%2F%2Fwww.b-i-t-online.de%2Fheft%2F2020-03-rezensionen.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0iY3f_zNcvEjeZ6inHVnOK]. In: Open Password Nr. 805 vom 14.08.2020 (H.-C. Hobohm) [Unter: https://www.password-online.de/?mailpoet_router&endpoint=view_in_browser&action=view&data=WzE0MywiOGI3NjZkZmNkZjQ1IiwwLDAsMTMxLDFd].

0.09119449 = product of:
  0.22798622 = sum of:
    0.056996554 = product of:
      0.17098966 = sum of:
        0.17098966 = weight(_text_:3a in 5895) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17098966 = score(doc=5895,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.36509076 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043063257 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 5895, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5895)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.17098966 = weight(_text_:2f in 5895) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17098966 = score(doc=5895,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.36509076 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 5895, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5895)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Source

Politische Meinung. 381(2001) Nr.1, S.65-74 [https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dgfe.de%2Ffileadmin%2FOrdnerRedakteure%2FSektionen%2FSek02_AEW%2FKWF%2FPublikationen_Reihe_1989-2003%2FBand_17%2FBd_17_1994_355-406_A.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2KcbRsHy5UQ9QRIUyuOLNi]

0.09119449 = product of:
  0.22798622 = sum of:
    0.056996554 = product of:
      0.17098966 = sum of:
        0.17098966 = weight(_text_:3a in 76) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17098966 = score(doc=76,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.36509076 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043063257 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 76, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=76)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.17098966 = weight(_text_:2f in 76) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17098966 = score(doc=76,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.36509076 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 76, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=76)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Source

http%3A%2F%2Fcogprints.org%2F1380%2F1%2FvdM_correlation.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0g7DvZbQPb2U7dYb49b9v_

0.053910848 = product of:
  0.13477711 = sum of:
    0.10560473 = weight(_text_:education in 2277) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10560473 = score(doc=2277,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20288157 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.520524 = fieldWeight in 2277, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2277)
    0.029172383 = product of:
      0.058344766 = sum of:
        0.058344766 = weight(_text_:22 in 2277) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.058344766 = score(doc=2277,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15080018 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043063257 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2277, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2277)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Date

31. 7.2001 20:22:57

Source

Journal of education for library and information science. 41(2000) no.?, S.294-306

0.032346506 = product of:
  0.08086626 = sum of:
    0.06336284 = weight(_text_:education in 408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06336284 = score(doc=408,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20288157 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.3123144 = fieldWeight in 408, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=408)
    0.01750343 = product of:
      0.03500686 = sum of:
        0.03500686 = weight(_text_:22 in 408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03500686 = score(doc=408,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15080018 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043063257 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 408, 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=408)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

The dominant approaches in information literacy scholarship and research conflict with constructivist approaches to learning preferred by educators. Proposes an alternative, 'relational', model of information literacy which reveals a picture of information literacy that is constructed in terms of varying relations between people and information. These relations are captured in 7 categories, graphially conveyed through awareness structures, which together represent information literacy as it is experienced. Information literacy education may be interpreted as helping people to experience information use differently. This model demonstrates that: the meanings associated with information literacy by information professionals may not be shared by users; the experienced meaning of information literacy is fluid and contextually bound; and, understanding of information literacy and related concepts will deepen if the experience of information users is given priority in research. Proposes an agenda for information literacy research based upon the relational approach

Source

New review of information and library research. 3(1997), S.1-22

0.029569326 = product of:
  0.14784662 = sum of:
    0.14784662 = weight(_text_:education in 6139) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14784662 = score(doc=6139,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20288157 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.7287336 = fieldWeight in 6139, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6139)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Science and education. 9(2000) no.6, S. -

0.02880378 = product of:
  0.07200945 = sum of:
    0.060340498 = weight(_text_:great in 3077) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060340498 = score(doc=3077,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2424797 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.24884763 = fieldWeight in 3077, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3077)
    0.011668953 = product of:
      0.023337906 = sum of:
        0.023337906 = weight(_text_:22 in 3077) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023337906 = score(doc=3077,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15080018 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043063257 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3077, 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=3077)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

The new term Representation of knowledge, applied to the framework of electronic segments of information, with comprehension of new material support for information, and a review and total conceptualisation of the terminology which is being applied, entails a review of all traditional documentary practices. Therefore, a definition of the concept of Representation of knowledge is indispensable. The term representation has been used in westere cultural and intellectual tradition to refer to the diverse ways that a subject comprehends an object. Representation is a process which requires the structure of natural language and human memory whereby it is interwoven in a subject and in conscience. However, at the present time, the term Representation of knowledge is applied to the processing of electronic information, combined with the aim of emulating the human mind in such a way that one has endeavoured to transfer, with great difficulty, the complex structurality of the conceptual representation of human knowledge to new digital information technologies. Thus, nowadays, representation of knowledge has taken an diverse meanings and it has focussed, for the moment, an certain structures and conceptual hierarchies which carry and transfer information, and has initially been based an the current representation of knowledge using artificial intelligence. The traditional languages of documentation, also referred to as languages of representation, offer a structured representation of conceptual fields, symbols and terms of natural and notational language, and they are the pillars for the necessary correspondence between the object or text and its representation. These correspondences, connections and symbolisations will be established within the electronic framework by means of different models and of the "goal" domain, which will give rise to organisations, structures, maps, networks and levels, as new electronic documents are not compact units but segments of information. Thus, the new representation of knowledge refers to data, images, figures and symbolised, treated, processed and structured ideas which replace or refer to documents within the framework of technical processing and the recuperation of electronic information.

Date

2. 1.2005 18:22:25

0.026955424 = product of:
  0.06738856 = sum of:
    0.052802365 = weight(_text_:education in 1344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052802365 = score(doc=1344,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20288157 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.260262 = fieldWeight in 1344, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1344)
    0.014586192 = product of:
      0.029172383 = sum of:
        0.029172383 = weight(_text_:22 in 1344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029172383 = score(doc=1344,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15080018 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043063257 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1344, 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=1344)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

This review introduces a comprehensive model of the cognitive process and mechanisms of individual sensemaking to provide a theoretical basis for: - empirical studies that improve our understanding of the cognitive process and mechanisms of sensemaking and integration of results of such studies; - education in critical thinking and sensemaking skills; - the design of sensemaking assistant tools that support and guide users. The paper reviews and extends existing sensemaking models with ideas from learning and cognition. It reviews literature on sensemaking models in human-computer interaction (HCI), cognitive system engineering, organizational communication, and library and information sciences (LIS), learning theories, cognitive psychology, and task-based information seeking. The model resulting from this synthesis moves to a stronger basis for explaining sensemaking behaviors and conceptual changes. The model illustrates the iterative processes of sensemaking, extends existing models that focus on activities by integrating cognitive mechanisms and the creation of instantiated structure elements of knowledge, and different types of conceptual change to show a complete picture of the cognitive processes of sensemaking. The processes and cognitive mechanisms identified provide better foundations for knowledge creation, organization, and sharing practices and a stronger basis for design of sensemaking assistant systems and tools.

Date

22. 8.2014 16:55:39

0.025345135 = product of:
  0.12672567 = sum of:
    0.12672567 = weight(_text_:education in 5713) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12672567 = score(doc=5713,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.20288157 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.6246288 = fieldWeight in 5713, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5713)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to draw on the philosophy of information, specifically the work of Luciano Floridi, to argue that digital civics must fully comprehend the implications of the digital environment, and consequently an informational ontology, to deliver to students an education that will prepare them for full participation as citizens in the infosphere. Design/methodology/approach Introducing this philosophy for use in education, the research discusses the ethical implications of ontological change in the digital age; informational organisms and their interconnectivity; and concepts of agency, both organic and artificial in digitally mediated civic interactions and civic education. Findings With the provision of a structural framework rooted in the philosophy of information, robust mechanisms for civics initiatives can be enacted. Originality/value The paper allows policy makers and practitioners to formulate healthy responses to digital age challenges in civics and civics education.

0.023895623 = product of:
  0.119478114 = sum of:
    0.119478114 = weight(_text_:education in 2340) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.119478114 = score(doc=2340,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.20288157 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.5889057 = fieldWeight in 2340, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2340)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Recent advances in the neurosciences have begun to elucidate how some fundamental mechanisms of nervous systems activity can explain human information processing and the acquisition of knowledge. Some of these findings are consistent with a cognitive view of constructivist models of learning and provide additional theoretical support for constructivist applications to science education reform. Current thought at the interface between neurocognitive research and constructivist philosophy is summarized here and discussed in a context of implications for scientific epistemology and conceptual change processes in science education

0.023895623 = product of:
  0.119478114 = sum of:
    0.119478114 = weight(_text_:education in 111) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.119478114 = score(doc=111,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.20288157 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.5889057 = fieldWeight in 111, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=111)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This chapter maps the Association of College and Research Libraries' Information Competency Standards for Higher Education to the cognitive development levels developed by William G. Perry and Patricia King and Karen Kitchener to suggest which competencies are appropriate for which level of cognitive development.

Series

Special issue: Information Literacy: One key to education

0.023613935 = product of:
  0.11806968 = sum of:
    0.11806968 = weight(_text_:education in 5039) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11806968 = score(doc=5039,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.20288157 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.58196354 = fieldWeight in 5039, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5039)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The almost universal reliance upon digital tools for social, academic, and career development will only become more pronounced in the years to come. Teacher education programs remain ill-equipped to adequately prepare educators with the pedagogies needed to foster digital literacies. What is needed is a set of best practices towards teaching digital literacies so that teachers can better meet the emerging needs of their students in today's classrooms. Where should teachers begin? What are the essentials of digital literacies within K-12 contexts? And how might we reimagine teacher education programs to optimally prepare teachers for working with technologically connected youth, whose literacies are more complex, interconnected, and diverse than ever?This edited volume provides a practical framework for teacher education programs to develop K-12 students' digital literacies. It serves as a set of best practices in teaching digital literacies that promotes access to research-based pedagogies for immediate implementation in their classrooms

LCSH

Internet in education

Subject

Internet in education

0.021949533 = product of:
  0.10974766 = sum of:
    0.10974766 = weight(_text_:education in 84) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10974766 = score(doc=84,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.20288157 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.54094446 = fieldWeight in 84, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=84)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Since 2004, the authors have designed a proposal of paradigms for the Documentation-Information field, which starts from a comprehensive meaning of the concept and is based on identifying the presence of a custodial, cultural, historicist- and-humanist, and technicist paradigm that has shaped the professional activity, education, and public policies of the archival, librarian, and museologist universe from the early 1800s to the mid-20th century. It also includes pointin out the emergence of a new post-custodial, informational, and scientific paradigm, generated by the profound changes taking place worldwide and that are summarized in strong, yet too generic, expressions such as "information era" or "globalization." This paper characterizes the two paradigms proposed, highlighting their dominant traits and showing their operational relevance at the level of education, research, and professional practice.

0.021120947 = product of:
  0.10560473 = sum of:
    0.10560473 = weight(_text_:education in 2245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10560473 = score(doc=2245,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20288157 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.520524 = fieldWeight in 2245, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2245)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Information on knowledge elicitation methods is widely scattered across the fields of psychology, business management, education, counselling, cognitive science, linguistics, philosophy, knowledge engineering and anthropology. Identifies knowledge elicitation techniques and the associated bibliographic information. Organizes the techniques into categories on the basis of methodological similarity. Summarizes for each category of techniques strengths, weaknesses and recommends applications

0.021120947 = product of:
  0.10560473 = sum of:
    0.10560473 = weight(_text_:education in 4740) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10560473 = score(doc=4740,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.20288157 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.520524 = fieldWeight in 4740, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4740)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Purpose - To demonstrate existing definitional consensus on information literacy, and outline the main and unique areas of concern resulting from that consensus for libraries desiring to contribute to information literacy education. Design/methodology/approach - Leading attempts at defining information literacy are examined to demonstrate their lack of substantive definitional differences, and to establish parameters for the library's participation in information literacy education. Findings - Examines the leading definitional contributions since the American Library Association's 1989 seminal work on information literacy. Demonstrates the lack of substantive definitional differences between those and the ALA definition. Suggests librarians concentrate on the expectations deriving from such unanimity, and outlines those expectations. Practical implications - Clarity of definitions provides more stable atmosphere for practical initiatives, while controversies over definitions distract from action. By pointing out the fundamental agreements between seemingly competing definitions of information literacy, this article underscores the need for librarians to fully concentrate on ways to achieve information literacy. By specifying the library's unique place in that process and outlining the concrete things it can do, the article also provides practical guidance for more focused activity on the part of the library in information literacy education. Originality/value - This article demonstrates a consistently overlooked definitional consensus on information literacy, and shows how the purported differences in definition actually represent delineations of steps and approaches that facilitate practical implementation. It also outlines the specific areas and activities that are legitimate responsibilities of the library in information literacy education, and notes areas outside the library's reach.

0.021120947 = product of:
  0.10560473 = sum of:
    0.10560473 = weight(_text_:education in 5886) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10560473 = score(doc=5886,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.20288157 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.520524 = fieldWeight in 5886, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5886)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This article undertakes a literature review to examine learning analytics through the lens of attention engineering. Informed by a critical literature synthesis from the fields of cognitive science, history, philosophy, education, technology, ethics, and library science, this analysis situates learning analytics in the context of communication and education technologies as tools in the manipulation of attention. The article begins by defining attention as both a cognitive activity and a metaphysical state intrinsic to intellectual freedom. The Progressive Era concept of attention engineering is then introduced and reinterpreted in the context of attention scarcity and academic capitalism in the Knowledge Era. The affordances of information and communications technology replicated in educational technology to facilitate data capture, analysis, and intervention in the form of "nudge" learning analytics are outlined as evidence of contemporary attention engineering in education. Attention engineering in education is critiqued as antithetical to students' intellectual freedom and development as self-sufficient learners and independent thinkers. The academic library's role in teaching and promoting attentional literacy and attentional autonomy is explored as a response to the intellectual freedom challenges posed by learning analytics as a form of attention engineering.

0.021119175 = product of:
  0.10559587 = sum of:
    0.10559587 = weight(_text_:great in 2128) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10559587 = score(doc=2128,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2424797 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.43548337 = fieldWeight in 2128, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2128)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

A great deal of information and knowledge is available in the form of full text, multimedia and other databases, as well as traditional information services. One of the issues of using information is to process meanings which are closely related with the sophisticated functiones such as learning, reasoning, inductive inference and problem solving. Automatic classification and intelligent access are straightforward applications and are useful when they are used togehter with thesauri and taxonomies which represent conceptual structures. Describes the basic principles and formulation of a new information model with flexible representation of meaning, and the direction of applications to advanced research of science and technology

0.020908669 = product of:
  0.10454334 = sum of:
    0.10454334 = weight(_text_:education in 1205) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10454334 = score(doc=1205,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.20288157 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.51529247 = fieldWeight in 1205, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1205)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Content

Der IFLA Kongress in Glasgow stand in diesem Jahr unter dem Thema "Libraries for life: democracy, diversity, delivery". Eine wichtige Voraussetzung für das Leben in einer demokratischen Gesellschaft ist Kompetenz zur selbständigen effizienten Nutzung des wachsenden Informationsangebots. Entsprechend wurde in zahlreichen Veranstaltungen "Information Literacy" als eine fundamentale Methodenkompetenz thematisiert, an deren Vermittlung die Bibliotheken mitwirken sollten. Der Bericht wird sich schwerpunktmäßig mit den Veranstaltungen des Round Table User Education (RTUE) befassen, aber daneben auch punktuell auf Veranstaltungen eingehen, die sich ebenfalls mit dem Thema "User Education" befassten. Angestrebt wird dabei weniger eine detaillierte Wiedergabe der Inhalte einzelner Veranstaltungen, als ein Bericht über Entwicklungen, die für die Aktivitäten deutscher Bibliotheken im Bereich der Informationskompetenz relevant sein könnten.

0.01810215 = product of:
  0.09051075 = sum of:
    0.09051075 = weight(_text_:great in 7143) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09051075 = score(doc=7143,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2424797 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.37327147 = fieldWeight in 7143, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7143)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

0.01810215 = product of:
  0.09051075 = sum of:
    0.09051075 = weight(_text_:great in 824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09051075 = score(doc=824,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2424797 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.37327147 = fieldWeight in 824, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=824)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Library science has no strong scientific image bacause it lacks a consistent theoretical framework. The key element is information, information is knowlegde, and library science is knowledge in the service of society. Society itself is sustained by development, information and ideology, with information as the transforming element. Because of the universal need for information, library science is increasingly valued. The great problem is to delimit the object of study because of its vast area of application. The goals of library science are utopian, bound up with making information available to everyone in the best possible way. But although developments suchg as the Internet seem able to make this possible, in reality computerised information is available only to a minority