Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Taylor, A.G."
  • × language_ss:"e"
  1. Taylor, A.G.: On the subject of subjects (1995) 0.03
    0.0277539 = product of:
      0.0555078 = sum of:
        0.0555078 = product of:
          0.1110156 = sum of:
            0.1110156 = weight(_text_:22 in 6087) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.1110156 = score(doc=6087,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17933457 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051211677 = queryNorm
                0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 6087, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6087)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    11. 1.1997 19:22:24
  2. Taylor, A.G.; Joudrey, D.N.: On teaching subject cataloging (2002) 0.02
    0.023527324 = product of:
      0.04705465 = sum of:
        0.04705465 = product of:
          0.0941093 = sum of:
            0.0941093 = weight(_text_:headings in 5458) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0941093 = score(doc=5458,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.24837378 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051211677 = queryNorm
                0.3789019 = fieldWeight in 5458, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5458)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The authors, Professor Arlene G. Taylor and her doctoral student, Daniel N. Joudrey, discuss their approach to teaching subject cataloging in the graduate library and information sciences (LIS) program at the University of Pittsburgh's School of Information Sciences. This essay discusses the authors' thoughts on the importance of subject cataloging in graduate LIS education, the theory versus practice debate, goals, class work, grading, making it concrete to the students, ordering topics in the courses, separating subject analysis from descriptive cataloging, and concerns for the future. In the not too distant past, library schools considered the teaching of Dewey Decimal Classification and Library of Congress Subject Headings to be totally adequate preparation for graduates to function subject-wise in their chosen profession. As time has moved on we have gone through periods in which even these were considered unnecessary "because keyword searching is better than subject headings" and "classification is only a location device." The complexities of the current world of subject access (or lack thereof), however, demand that a more complex and thorough approach be taken.
  3. Gross, T.; Taylor, A.G.; Joudrey, D.N.: Still a lot to lose : the role of controlled vocabulary in keyword searching (2015) 0.02
    0.023290861 = product of:
      0.046581723 = sum of:
        0.046581723 = product of:
          0.093163446 = sum of:
            0.093163446 = weight(_text_:headings in 2007) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.093163446 = score(doc=2007,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.24837378 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051211677 = queryNorm
                0.37509373 = fieldWeight in 2007, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2007)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    In their 2005 study, Gross and Taylor found that more than a third of records retrieved by keyword searches would be lost without subject headings. A review of the literature since then shows that numerous studies, in various disciplines, have found that a quarter to a third of records returned in a keyword search would be lost without controlled vocabulary. Other writers, though, have continued to suggest that controlled vocabulary be discontinued. Addressing criticisms of the Gross/Taylor study, this study replicates the search process in the same online catalog, but after the addition of automated enriched metadata such as tables of contents and summaries. The proportion of results that would be lost remains high.
  4. Taylor, A.G.: Implementing AACR and AACR2 : a personal perspective and lessons learned (2012) 0.01
    0.012142331 = product of:
      0.024284663 = sum of:
        0.024284663 = product of:
          0.048569325 = sum of:
            0.048569325 = weight(_text_:22 in 2546) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.048569325 = score(doc=2546,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17933457 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051211677 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2546, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2546)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22