Borgman, C.L.; Smart, L.J.; Millwood, K.A.; Finley, J.R.; Champeny, L.; Gilliland, A.J.; Leazer, G.H.: Comparing faculty information seeking in teaching and research : implications for the design of digital libraries (2005)
0.08
0.08372104 = product of:
0.2093026 = sum of:
0.020807989 = weight(_text_:study in 3231) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020807989 = score(doc=3231,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1448085 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2514048 = idf(docFreq=4653, maxDocs=44218)
0.044537213 = queryNorm
0.14369315 = fieldWeight in 3231, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2514048 = idf(docFreq=4653, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3231)
0.18849461 = sum of:
0.1643579 = weight(_text_:teaching in 3231) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1643579 = score(doc=3231,freq=16.0), product of:
0.24199244 = queryWeight, product of:
5.433489 = idf(docFreq=524, maxDocs=44218)
0.044537213 = queryNorm
0.6791861 = fieldWeight in 3231, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
5.433489 = idf(docFreq=524, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3231)
0.02413671 = weight(_text_:22 in 3231) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02413671 = score(doc=3231,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15596174 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044537213 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3231, 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=3231)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- ADEPT is a 5-year project whose goals are to develop, deploy, and evaluate inquiry learning capabilities for the Alexandria Digital Library, an extant digital library of primary sources in geography. We interviewed nine geography faculty members who teach undergraduate courses about their information seeking for research and teaching and their use of information resources in teaching. These data were supplemented by interviews with four faculty members from another ADEPT study about the nature of knowledge in geography. Among our key findings are that geography faculty are more likely to encounter useful teaching resources while seeking research resources than vice versa, although the influence goes in both directions. Their greatest information needs are for research data, maps, and images. They desire better searching by concept or theme, in addition to searching by location and place name. They make extensive use of their own research resources in their teaching. Among the implications for functionality and architecture of geographic digital libraries for educational use are that personal digital libraries are essential, because individual faculty members have personalized approaches to selecting, collecting, and organizing teaching resources. Digital library services for research and teaching should include the ability to import content from common office software and to store content in standard formats that can be exported to other applications. Digital library services can facilitate sharing among faculty but cannot overcome barriers such as intellectual property rights, access to proprietary research data, or the desire of individuals to maintain control over their own resources. Faculty use of primary and secondary resources needs to be better understood if we are to design successful digital libraries for research and teaching.
- Date
- 3. 6.2005 20:40:22
Leazer, G.H.; Smiraglia, R.P.: Bibliographic families in the library catalog : a qualitative analysis and grounded theory (1999)
0.02
0.020747647 = product of:
0.051869117 = sum of:
0.036783673 = weight(_text_:study in 107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036783673 = score(doc=107,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1448085 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2514048 = idf(docFreq=4653, maxDocs=44218)
0.044537213 = queryNorm
0.25401598 = fieldWeight in 107, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.2514048 = idf(docFreq=4653, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=107)
0.015085445 = product of:
0.03017089 = sum of:
0.03017089 = weight(_text_:22 in 107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03017089 = score(doc=107,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15596174 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044537213 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 107, 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=107)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Forty-five years have passed since Lubetzky outlined the primary objectives of the catalog, which should facilitate the identification of specific bibliographic entities, and the explicit recoguition of works and relationships amongthem. Still, our catalogs are better designed to identify specific bibliographic entities than they are to guide users among the network of potential related editions and translations of works. In this paper, we seck to examine qualitatively some interesting examples of families of related works, defined as bibliographic families. Although the cases described here were derived from a random sample, this is a qualitative analysis. We selected these bibliographic families for their ability to reveal the strengths and weaknesses of Leazer's model, which incorporates relationship taxonomies by Tillett and Smiraglia Qualitatice analysis is intended to produce on explanation of a phenomenou, particularly an identification of any palterns observed. Patterns observed in qualitative analysis can be used to affirm external observations of the same phenomena; conclusions can contribute to what is knoton as grounded theory-a unique explanation grounded in the phenomenon under study. We arrive at two statements of grounded theory concerning bibliographic families: cataloger-generated implicit maps among works are inadequate, and qualitative analysis suggests the complexity of even the smallest bibliographic families. We conclude that user behavior study is needed to suggest which alternative maps are preferable.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
