Search (10 results, page 1 of 1)

0.061456952 = product of:
  0.122913904 = sum of:
    0.022971334 = weight(_text_:library in 1468) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022971334 = score(doc=1468,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 1468, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1468)
    0.09994257 = sum of:
      0.059197973 = weight(_text_:project in 1468) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.059197973 = score(doc=1468,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050121464 = queryNorm
          0.27981415 = fieldWeight in 1468, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1468)
      0.0407446 = weight(_text_:22 in 1468) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0407446 = score(doc=1468,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050121464 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1468, 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=1468)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

In a research project focusing on knowledge organization and classification education, 407 learning objectives proposed in courses entirely or partially dedicated to these subjects in North American Library and Information Science programs were categorized with the help of the Benjamin Bloom's Taxonomy of cognitive objectives. The analysis reveals that the vast majority of course objectives remain at the lower levels of the Taxonomy. These results tend to reinforce observations made over the past 30 years in relation to KO and classification education. While KO and classification educators recognize the necessity for students to develop high-level analytic and evaluative skills, there are few references to those skills in current course objectives.

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.035046883 = product of:
  0.070093766 = sum of:
    0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 5193) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030628446 = score(doc=5193,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 5193, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5193)
    0.039465316 = product of:
      0.07893063 = sum of:
        0.07893063 = weight(_text_:project in 5193) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07893063 = score(doc=5193,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.37308553 = fieldWeight in 5193, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5193)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

A model for standardizing existing definitions and/or writing new definitions for thesaurus descriptors has been developed, within the framework of a research project concerned with the usefulness of terminological definitions for indexers working with a thesaurus. The proposed model is an expansion of a model presented by Sager and L'Homme in 1994. Examples of its application in a thesaurus describing the field of Adult literacy programming and training are introduced

Source

Knowledge organization and change: Proceedings of the Fourth International ISKO Conference, 15-18 July 1996, Library of Congress, Washington, DC. Ed.: R. Green

0.030157281 = product of:
  0.120629124 = sum of:
    0.120629124 = weight(_text_:digital in 2967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.120629124 = score(doc=2967,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.61014175 = fieldWeight in 2967, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2967)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.024370763 = product of:
  0.097483054 = sum of:
    0.097483054 = weight(_text_:digital in 4741) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.097483054 = score(doc=4741,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.493069 = fieldWeight in 4741, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4741)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Challenges and opportunities for knowledge organization in the digital age: proceedings of the Fifteenth International ISKO Conference, 9-11 July 2018, Porto, Portugal / organized by: International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO Spain and Portugal Chapter, University of Porto - Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Research Centre in Communication, Information and Digital Culture (CIC.digital) - Porto. Eds.: F. Ribeiro u. M.E. Cerveira

0.015078641 = product of:
  0.060314562 = sum of:
    0.060314562 = weight(_text_:digital in 5899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060314562 = score(doc=5899,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.30507088 = fieldWeight in 5899, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5899)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

S.R. Ranganathan is credited with the introduction of the term "facet" in the field of knowledge organization towards the middle of the twentieth century. Facets have traditionally been used to organize document collections and to express complex subjects. In the digital world, they act as filters to facilitate navigation and improve retrieval. But the popularity of the term does not mean that a definitive characterization of the concept has been established. Indeed, several conceptualizations of the facet co-exist. This article provides an overview of formal and informal definitions found in the literature of knowledge organization, followed by a discussion of four common conceptualizations of the facet: process vs product, nature vs function, object vs subject and organization vs navigation.

0.009475192 = product of:
  0.03790077 = sum of:
    0.03790077 = weight(_text_:library in 3569) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03790077 = score(doc=3569,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.28758827 = fieldWeight in 3569, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3569)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Cataloging and classification education has been a recurring topic in the library and information science literature since the creation of the first library school toward the end of the nineteenth century. This article examines the literature of the past 20 years, in an era of major changes in the way documents and information transit from their creators to their ultimate users. It concludes by suggesting several aspects of classification education that need to be investigated further, in light of these new circumstances.

0.009475192 = product of:
  0.03790077 = sum of:
    0.03790077 = weight(_text_:library in 697) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03790077 = score(doc=697,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.28758827 = fieldWeight in 697, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=697)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The content of master's programs accredited by the American Library Association was examined to assess the status of knowledge organization (KO) as a subject in current training. Data collected show that KO remains very visible in a majority of programs, mainly in the form of required and electives courses focusing on descriptive cataloging, classification, and metadata. Observed tendencies include, however, the recent elimination of the required KO course in several programs, the reality that one third of KO electives listed in course catalogs have not been scheduled in the past three years, and the fact that two-thirds of those teaching KO specialize in other areas of information science.

0.0073997467 = product of:
  0.029598987 = sum of:
    0.029598987 = product of:
      0.059197973 = sum of:
        0.059197973 = weight(_text_:project in 4391) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.059197973 = score(doc=4391,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.27981415 = fieldWeight in 4391, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4391)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Results of a project focusing on six Web-based collections in education. Our analysis of homegrown classification structures considers three dimensions. "Structure" is described through quantitative data (e.g. Number of main categories, Number of hierarchical levels, etc.). "Logic" concentrates on two aspects of the subdividing process: division principle, and type of hierarchical relation. "Semantics" relates to concepts and their representation in the form of terms. In our sample, the classification structures are hierarchical, not overly complex and not very specific. The choice, arrangement and sequence of classes are logical. Conceptual and terminological inconsistencies are due to significant gaps in conceptual coverage and lack of terminological control.

0.0057428335 = product of:
  0.022971334 = sum of:
    0.022971334 = weight(_text_:library in 116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022971334 = score(doc=116,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 116, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=116)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.004785695 = product of:
  0.01914278 = sum of:
    0.01914278 = weight(_text_:library in 117) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01914278 = score(doc=117,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.14525402 = fieldWeight in 117, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=117)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Most moving image collections have existed for less than a century, and as we enter the new millennium we observe that the organisation of these collections is still characterized by ad hoc practices. An important stream of research in this area focuses on high-level access to images using methods from library and information science, and using text to create information useful for retrieval. It has been established that common names for objects seen in the image are the key to retrieval in such collections. On a day-to-day basis, those responsible for collection management build indexing vocabularies, creating terms as necessary, and often structuring them loosely into a thesaurus. Discussions with moving image collection librarians have led us to believe that there may be an optimal number of common names a thesaurus for managing general collections of moving images should contain, and that the terms may even be the same from one thesaurus to the next. In this paper, we describe the methodology adopted for studying this question, and report preliminary results