Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × classification_ss:"06.04 / Ausbildung, Beruf, Organisationen <Information und Dokumentation>"
  1. Information Macht Bildung. : Zweiter Gemeinsamer Kongress der Bundesvereinigung Deutscher Bibliotheksverbände e. V. (BDB) und der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Informationswissenschaft und Informationspraxis e. V. (DGI), Leipzig, 23. bis 26. März 2004, zugleich 93. Deutscher Bibliothekartag (2004) 0.01
    0.009912886 = product of:
      0.04956443 = sum of:
        0.04956443 = weight(_text_:22 in 3018) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04956443 = score(doc=3018,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052260913 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3018, 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=3018)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Date
    22. 2.2008 14:21:53
  2. IFLA Cataloguing Principles : steps towards an International Cataloguing Code. Report from the 1st Meeting of Experts on an International Cataloguing Code, Frankfurt 2003 (2004) 0.00
    0.004732525 = product of:
      0.023662625 = sum of:
        0.023662625 = weight(_text_:it in 2312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023662625 = score(doc=2312,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052260913 = queryNorm
            0.15654828 = fieldWeight in 2312, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2312)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Footnote
    Rez. in: KO 31(2004) no.4, S.255-257: (P. Riva): "Cataloguing standardization at the international level can be viewed as proceeding in a series of milestone conferences. This meeting, the first in a series which will cover different regions of the world, will take its place in that progression. The first IFLA Meeting of Experts an an International Cataloguing Code (IME ICC), held July 28-30, 2003 at Die Deutsche Bibliothek in Frankfurt, gathered representatives of almost all European countries as well as three of the four AACR author countries. As explained in the introduction by Barbara Tillett, chair of the IME ICC planning committee, the plan is for five meetings in total. Subsequent meetings are to take place in Buenos Aires, Argentina (held August 17-18, 2004) for Latin America and the Carribean, to be followed by Alexandria, Egypt (2005) for the Middle East, Seoul, South Korea (2006) for Asia, and Durban, South Africa (2007) for Africa. The impetus for planning these meetings was triggered by the 40th anniversary of the Paris Principles, approved at the International Conference an Cataloguing Principles held in 1961. Many will welcome the timely publication of the reports and papers from this important conference in book form. The original conference website (details given an p. 176) which includes most of the same material, is still extant, but the reports and papers gathered into this volume will be referred to by cataloguing rule makers long after the web as we know it has transformed itself into a new (and quite possibly not backwards compatible) environment.
    The book is organized into four sections: introduction and results; presentation papers; background papers; and an appendix. The introduction by Barbara Tillett serves as a summary and report of the IME ICC meeting itself. The statement of the purpose of the meeting bears reporting in full (p. 6): "The goal for this meeting was to increase the ability to share cataloguing information worldwide by promoting standards for the content of bibliographic records and authority records used in library catalogues." The next item is a report summarizing the cataloguing Code comparisons prepared prior to the conference. As a mechanism for discussion, 18 codes were compared with the Paris Principles, the extent of compliance or divergence noted and discussed by representatives from the respective rule-making bodies. During the meeting the presentation of the comparisons took up half of the first day, but for the detailed responses one must return to the IME ICC website. The published summary is very dense, and difficult to follow if one is not very familiar with the Paris Principles or the codes being compared. The main outcome of the meeting follows, this is the Statement of International Cataloguing Principles (draft, as approved Dec. 19, 2003 by IME ICC participants), accompanied by a useful Glossary. The most important eontribution of this volume is to serve as the permanent and official record of the Statement as it stands after the first IME ICC meeting. Subsequent meetings will surely suggest modifications and enhancements, but this version of the Statement needs to be widely read and commented on. To this end the website also makes available translations of the Statement into 15 European languages, and the glossary into four languages. Compared to the Paris Principles, this statement covers some familiar ground in the choice of access points and forms of names, but its overall scope is broader, explicitly referring to the role of authority records, entities in bibliographic records and relationships. It concludes with an appendix of "Objectives for the construction of cataloguing codes."
    Ton Heijligers reflects an the relation of the IME ICC effort to AACR and calls for an examination of the principles and function of the concept of main entry in his brief paper "Main entry into the future?" Ingrid Parent's article "From ISBD (S) to ISBD(CR): a voyage of discovery and alignment" is reprinted from Serials Librarian as it tells of the successful project not only to revise an ISBD, but also to harmonize three Codes for serials cataloguing: ISBD (CR), ISSN and AACR. Gunilla Jonsson's paper "The bibliographic unit in the digital context" is a perceptive discussion of level of granularity issues which must be addressed in deciding what to catalogue. Practical issues and user expectation are important considerations, whether the material to be catalogued is digital or analog. Ann Huthwaite's paper "Class of materials concept and GMDs" as well as Tom Delsey's ensuing comments, originated as Joint Steering Committee restricted papers in 2002. It is a great service to have them made widely available in this form as they raise fundamental issues and motivate work that has since taken place, leading to the current major round of revision to AACR. The GMD issue is about more than a list of terms and their placement in the cataloguing record, it is intertwined with consideration of whether the concept of classes of materials is helpful in organizing cataloguing rules, if so, which classes are needed, and how to allow for eventual integration of new types of materials. Useful in the Code comparison exercise is an extract of the section an access points from the draft of revised RAK (German cataloguing rules). Four short papers compare aspects of the Russian Cataloguing Rules with RAK and AACR: Tatiana Maskhoulia covers corporate body headings; Elena Zagorskaya outlines current development an serials and other continuing resources; Natalia N. Kasparova covers multilevel structures; Ljubov Ermakova and Tamara Bakhturina describe the uniform title and GMD provisions. The website includes one more item by Kasparova "Bibliographic record language in multilingual electronic communication." The volume is rounded out by the appendix which includes the conference agenda, the full list of participants, and the reports from the five working groups. Not for the casual reader, this volume is a must read for anyone working an cataloguing code development at the national or international levels, as well as those teaching cataloguing. Any practising cataloguer will benefit from reading the draft statement of principles and the three presentation papers, and dipping into the background papers."
  3. Crowley, W.: Spanning the theory-practice divide in library and information science (2005) 0.00
    0.0027323244 = product of:
      0.013661622 = sum of:
        0.013661622 = weight(_text_:it in 439) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013661622 = score(doc=439,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052260913 = queryNorm
            0.09038319 = fieldWeight in 439, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=439)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Footnote
    Rez. in: JASIST. 58(2007) no.4, S.606-607 (L.E. Harris): "Spanning is not a methodological "how-to"; rather it is a "how-tothink" book, intended for academicians and practitioners, on developing useful theory. Each chapter opens with a brief scenario, generally derived from Crowley's extensive personal experience as a librarian, university professor, and consultant, exemplifying the theme for that chapter. In chapter one, "Theorizing for Diverging Contexts: Why Research Results and Theory Development are So Little Used Outside the Campus," Crowley describes a doctoral candidate's experience in presenting her research at a national conference of working professionals. When the presentation is negatively received, the student's mentor rationalized the response by stating, "You have to remember, most of the people in the audience only have a master's degree" (p. 2). From this example, a cogent argument is distilled on how pervasive the theorypractice divide is in various academic domains, such as business, law, sociology, and LIS. What is useful research and theory for academicians seeking career and professional advancement does not translate into for practitioners engaged in specific institutional/organizational environments. Cultural pragmatism is introduced as an aid to researchers in both camps for its inclusion of context specificity and the need for testing a theory's usefulness through continually analyzed experience. Herein, the structural foundation for the bridge is constructed in the section on communication. The development of an interlanguage between academicians and practitioners will minimize incommensurability, "the perceived inability of humans to communicate effectively with one another due to a lack of common standards for meaning and other shared foundations" (p. 15). In this vein, Crowley presents five maxims, based on the works of John Stuart Mill, for developing useful, real world theory. The chapter ends, as do several others, addressing the divide specifically in the LIS domain. One of the most thought-provoking chapters is "Developing a Research Philosophy," which includes sections on inductive reasoning, how people really think, and a discussion of the battle between intellectual formations and internalized models. As a teacher of experienced and/or mature students in an LIS program, I instantly recognized the description of a reoccurring classroom event: what happens when introducing theory or research results that contradict students' experiences, and therefore, their internalized models of "how things really work in the field." Crowley suggests that in seeking a research philosophy, persuasion should not be a primary concern. This simple suggestion encouraged me to reconsider my posture when faced with this classroom issue. However, this chapter may be considered one of the weakest in the book, because of its rather slim treatment of considerations for selecting a useful research philosophy, despite the emphasis on the importance of the concept. Nevertheless, this chapter is foundational to the work presented in the remaining chapters.
    In the next four chapters, Crowley takes on the particulars involved in the divide by looking at library and information professionals engaged in and transitioning to various research and theory development roles. In "The Academic as Practitioner," he examines how the publishing world influences how academics communicate with practitioners and the difficulties in writing for practitioner-oriented publications. The history of religion in the development of higher education in general, and the research focus of doctoral-degree granting institutions, is offered to explain the dominance of the academic practitioner. The paradoxical edicts of the Ohio legislature, which sought to balance classroom time for professors by law, paint a vivid picture of the results-oriented public and the research-oriented academic institution. In "The Practitioner as Academic: Adjunct Faculty/Lecturers," the question of the perceived lack of "rigor" in practitioner-conducted research is illustrated and illuminated. While Crowley points out the value of "how we did it good" research, as providing material for qualitative analysis, I found myself desiring a bit more methodological instruction. Given where and when such articles are published, how such qualitative analysis could be conducted called the value of this research into question, given the prior treatise on conducting research in an academic environment. "Other Worlds of Practice: The Field Practitioner" and "Other Worlds of Practice: The Consultant" are extremely short expositions which, while addressing alternative professionals' roles, do not significantly further the premise of the work. Nonetheless, Crowley might have been considered remiss if he had excluded these professionals.