Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

0.06394275 = product of:
  0.1278855 = sum of:
    0.051698197 = weight(_text_:digital in 13) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051698197 = score(doc=13,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.26148933 = fieldWeight in 13, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=13)
    0.076187305 = weight(_text_:library in 13) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.076187305 = score(doc=13,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.5781037 = fieldWeight in 13, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=13)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Librarians have many and varied difficulties. For some library problems research is not the best remedy. Improved coordination, clarification of values, or drawing on existing research results may suffice. When research is indicated, it pays to be selective. Investing in research, like any other kind of investment, should be judged in terms of the probability of success, the likely delay before results are achieved, and the impact on the population of competent researchers, as well as the perceived importance of the problem. New technology permits new forms of service, generates new data for analysis, and supports new tools for researchers. Normal research is repetitious and progresses incrementally. A bolder strategy is to seek significant advances in library service by challenging researchers to achieve a deeper understanding of important, but inadequately understood, library phenomena. Five Grand Challenges are proposed: 1. Library service: Could library services be made more meaningful? 2. Library theory: Who knew what when? 3. Library design: Have digital libraries been designed backwards? 4. Library values: How neutral can libraries be? and 5. Library communities: How do communities differ?

Source

Library trends. 51(2003) no.4, S.675-686

0.0132625075 = product of:
  0.05305003 = sum of:
    0.05305003 = weight(_text_:library in 1962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05305003 = score(doc=1962,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.40253976 = fieldWeight in 1962, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1962)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

A recent article by Joseph Buschman regrets that democratic theory is an unfinished idea. The argument appears to assume an essential relationship between library and information science (LIS) and democratic theory. Libraries services are important for undemocratic purposes also, and like other sociotechnical systems, partake on the cultural context in which they are deployed.

Footnote

Bezugnahme auf: Buschman, J.: Democratic theory in library information science: toward an emendation. In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.10, S.1483-1496.