Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

0.010796317 = product of:
  0.021592634 = sum of:
    0.021592634 = product of:
      0.043185268 = sum of:
        0.043185268 = weight(_text_:core in 1464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043185268 = score(doc=1464,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25797358 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.0504966 = idf(docFreq=769, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051078856 = queryNorm
            0.1674019 = fieldWeight in 1464, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.0504966 = idf(docFreq=769, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1464)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

As the editors note in their introduction, "Standards that guide data structure, data values, and data content form the basis for a set of tools that can lead to good descriptive cataloging, consistent documentation, shared records, and increased end-user access" (p. xi). The VRA Core Categories, for example, represent a set of metadata elements expressed within an XML structure (data structure). Likewise, the Art Architecture Thesaurus contains sets of terms and relationships, or defined data values. While much effort has been expended on developing both data structures and values, the editors argue, the third leg of the stool, data content, has received less attention. Unlike the library community with its Anglo-American Cataloging Rules [sic though RDA is referenced in the Selected Bibliography], or its archival equivalent, Describing Archives: A Content Standard (DACS), those in the domain of cultural heritage responsible for describing and documenting works of art, architecture, cultural artifacts, and their respective images, have not had the benefit of such data content standards. CCO is intended to address (or redress) that gap, emphasizing the exercise of good judgment and cataloguer discretion over the application of "rigid rules" [p. xii], and building on existing standards. ... Overall, Cataloging Cultural Objects with its attending guidelines for descriptive metadata and authority control for "one-of-a-kind cultural objects" should merit a place among the "well-established" data content standards of the library and archival communities that CCO references with obvious regard."

0.0071975444 = product of:
  0.014395089 = sum of:
    0.014395089 = product of:
      0.028790178 = sum of:
        0.028790178 = weight(_text_:core in 439) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028790178 = score(doc=439,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25797358 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.0504966 = idf(docFreq=769, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051078856 = queryNorm
            0.11160126 = fieldWeight in 439, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.0504966 = idf(docFreq=769, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=439)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

In "The Revival of Pragmatism," the distinction between theory (how things work) and paradigm (how we look at the world) forms the basis for the exposition on competing paradigms. From Kuhn's traditional scientific paradigm (empiricism) to classical pragmatism, to the variants of modernism, specifically critical theory and feminism, the ability of cultural pragmatism to bridge the divide is promoted. The twelve core assertions and the role of religious beliefs in the creation of classical pragmatism are surely the stuff of which debates are made. While I was readily able to accept the first ten assertions, the eleventh ("Humans have the most opportunity to develop their capabilities in a democracy.") and twelfth ("Scientific and other knowledge progresses best in a democratic context that encourages freedom of inquiry.") certainly gave me pause (p. 60). Even Crowley admits, later in the text, that these two assertions may not be verifiable and indeed may conflict with the principle of freedom in research. In defining the applicability of cultural pragmatism to bridging the theory-practice gap, Crowley relates John Dewey's desire to rename his Experience and Nature to read Culture and Nature as a tribute to the power of readers' ability to understand the meaning of culture versus experience. Drawing on the work of Charles Sanders Peirce, cultural pragmatism treats "truth" as agreed-upon opinion, which is therefore continually tested and revised. The concepts of interlanguage and incommensurability are revisited, as they apply to the need to transcend cultural norms and create cross-cultural understandings. The increased complexity of modern work, partially related to the pervasiveness of technology, is established as an obvious factor. As a result, the validity and reliability of generalizing in a global environment is called into question. Cultural pragmatism does not demand an adherence to an objective reality. "For pragmatism, cultural complexity can be an intellectual positive, offering a seemingly endless source of remarkably interesting research questions" (p. 82). This chapter is highly recommended for LIS professionals interested in a brief yet coherent overview of the prevailing paradigms discussed and utilized in the field, as well as those who like to stir up lively discussions. A description of how the Maryland Division of Library Developments improved reference service by turning tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge opens the next chapter, "Tacit Knowledge: Bridging the Theory-Practice Divide." This example illustrates concretely the impact of an interlanguage on communication effectiveness within a library setting and as part of a research project. The role of time in the transformation of tacit into explicit knowledge, however, is apparent yet not fully explored. In this chapter, Crowley directly addresses the "how-to-think" issues and the role of a research philosophy as structural components of the bridge. Tacit knowledge becomes an integral component which researchers must recognize if they are to construct useful research and theory. The discussion of Georg Simmel's stranger as an analytical tool, however, seemed out of place.

0.006116898 = product of:
  0.012233796 = sum of:
    0.012233796 = product of:
      0.024467591 = sum of:
        0.024467591 = weight(_text_:22 in 2392) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024467591 = score(doc=2392,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17886946 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051078856 = queryNorm
            0.13679022 = fieldWeight in 2392, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2392)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Classification

323.44/5 22 (GBV;LoC)

DDC

323.44/5 22 (GBV;LoC)