Search (65 results, page 1 of 4)

0.022207877 = product of:
  0.111039385 = sum of:
    0.111039385 = weight(_text_:22 in 5649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.111039385 = score(doc=5649,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 5649, 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=5649)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

20. 4.2002 17:30:22

0.019431893 = product of:
  0.09715946 = sum of:
    0.09715946 = weight(_text_:22 in 7585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09715946 = score(doc=7585,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 7585, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7585)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 1.2000 17:52:11

0.019431893 = product of:
  0.09715946 = sum of:
    0.09715946 = weight(_text_:22 in 1381) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09715946 = score(doc=1381,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 1381, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1381)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

25. 3.2003 13:22:23

0.019431893 = product of:
  0.09715946 = sum of:
    0.09715946 = weight(_text_:22 in 4364) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09715946 = score(doc=4364,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4364, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4364)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 1.2000 19:29:08

0.018317504 = product of:
  0.09158752 = sum of:
    0.09158752 = weight(_text_:books in 2999) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09158752 = score(doc=2999,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.36995593 = fieldWeight in 2999, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2999)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The "teaching librarian" or "librarian as teacher" is a professional role that has been discussed in the literature of library and information science in recent decades, particularly in relation to bibliographic instruction and information literacy development. This paper reports on a small-scale research project, undertaken in 2002, that investigated the demand for library professionals with knowledge of or skills in instructional techniques and strategies. The project was based on an extensive literature review, plus content analysis of library and information science job advertisements on the international LIBJOBS listserv. The literature review has been updated for this BOBCATSSS paper, as have aspects of the content analysis, in order to provide delegates with more recent information. The idea of a teaching role for librarians is far from new. Michael Lorenzen (2002) has traced academic library-based instruction as far back as the seventeenth century when German academic libraries provided instructional programmes for library users. In academic and school libraries in the nineteenth century it usually took the form of "library orientation" - making sure that students and faculty knew how to find the books and other material for their courses. In the United States, some American university librarians were lecturing to students as early as the 1880s (Lorenzen, 2002). In nineteenth and early twentieth century public libraries, library instruction often took the form of literature promotion or reading promotion activities for children and young people, and even of "lessons" on how to look after books, right down to the need for washing hands before handling books. The introduction of card catalogues and classification systems such as the Dewey Decimal Classification resulted in a need for user education in all kinds of libraries, with sessions based on topics such as "The card catalogue: The key to the library" and "How to find a book on the shelves". The introduction of automated catalogues from the 1960s, and later, databases on CD-ROMs, online information services for end users, and the Internet, have increased the need and demand for formal and informal user education, regardless of the type and size of library. Indeed, there is no doubt that interest in library-based instruction has increased in recent decades: on the basis of an analysis of the literature related to the instructional role of librarians, Edwards (1994) noted that "during the past quarter century, interest and concern for library instruction has grown dramatically", while Marcum said in 2002 that "Over the past decade ... information literacy has emerged as a central purpose for librarians, particularly academic librarians".

0.016655907 = product of:
  0.083279535 = sum of:
    0.083279535 = weight(_text_:22 in 2973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.083279535 = score(doc=2973,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 2973, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2973)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

9. 2.2008 17:52:22

0.016655907 = product of:
  0.083279535 = sum of:
    0.083279535 = weight(_text_:22 in 5498) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.083279535 = score(doc=5498,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 5498, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5498)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

21. 2.2003 14:18:22

0.016655907 = product of:
  0.083279535 = sum of:
    0.083279535 = weight(_text_:22 in 4585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.083279535 = score(doc=4585,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4585, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4585)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

25.11.2005 18:58:22

0.014956179 = product of:
  0.0747809 = sum of:
    0.0747809 = weight(_text_:books in 2786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0747809 = score(doc=2786,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.30206773 = fieldWeight in 2786, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2786)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

LCSH

Reference books / Bibliography

Subject

Reference books / Bibliography

0.013879924 = product of:
  0.06939962 = sum of:
    0.06939962 = weight(_text_:22 in 198) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06939962 = score(doc=198,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 198, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=198)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

4. 3.2006 16:29:22

0.013879924 = product of:
  0.06939962 = sum of:
    0.06939962 = weight(_text_:22 in 2318) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06939962 = score(doc=2318,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2318, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2318)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 8.2009 19:51:28

0.01321952 = product of:
  0.0660976 = sum of:
    0.0660976 = weight(_text_:books in 6047) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0660976 = score(doc=6047,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.2669927 = fieldWeight in 6047, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6047)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

In this paper, made tip of parts 1 and 11, we investigate the complex relationships between knowledge, information and activity in order to study how a system of activity assistance can help the actor to solve his information problems. Through the example of the completion of a pharmacy thesis, we have tried, in part 1, to describe, schematize and model the successive phases that make up the whole of this activity. Our method of observation and analysis combined the observation of two students preparing their pharmacy theses, the reading of five theses and the reading of six books. We thus propose in a table form, a modelling outline that presents the sequential succession of the ten operational phases describing the completion of a pharmacy thesis following a chronological order: (1) Subject definition, (2) Documentary research, (3) Documents analysis, (4) Conceiving of the experimental strategy, (5) Experimentation, (6) Results interpretation, (7) Writing of the thesis, (8) Administrative procedures, (9) Preparation of the viva, (10) Viva. The table also presents the succession of the structural, operational, material and human elements: Referents of the activity, Subject of the activity, Location of the activity, Identification of the operations, Handled objects, and Actors. We have refined the activity analysis by drawing up a structured list, showing the organization of the terms related to the different operational phases. This work is presented in part II

0.01321952 = product of:
  0.0660976 = sum of:
    0.0660976 = weight(_text_:books in 6048) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0660976 = score(doc=6048,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.2669927 = fieldWeight in 6048, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6048)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Following the modelling of the activity related to the completion of a pharmacy thesis, as presented in part 1, we have completed the activity analysis by drawing up a structured word list to show the terminological organization around the ten operational phases. Indeed, it seemed obvious to us that the reasoning at the root of any activity is based on words used to describe it. This terminology inventory which we called Structured Terminology Environment (STE), together with the modelling diagram, could eventually be directly used during the conceiving of a software tool specific to the studied professional activity. The STE is a thesaurus of 565 words selected on the basis of a corpus stemming from five pharmacy theses and six books, where we put the significant terms which represent the actors and actions we observed during the ten phases, as well as the handled tools. Once the terms were shared out among the ten basic operations, we structured the terminology by grouping the concepts of a same nature so that the sub-categories show a certain homogeneity around the action. We used the following basic relationships: generic/specific relationships, whole/part relationships and finally, we completed the categorization with the help of classes induced by facets (process, phenomenon, properties, material or object, tool or equipment and operating conditions.)

0.01321952 = product of:
  0.0660976 = sum of:
    0.0660976 = weight(_text_:books in 4577) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0660976 = score(doc=4577,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.2669927 = fieldWeight in 4577, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4577)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

To better understand how individuals and groups derive satisfaction from information, it is important to identify the information source preferences they apply in information seeking and decision making. Four informal propositions drove the structure and underlying logic of this study, forming a preliminary outline of a theory of information source preference profiles and their influence an information satisfaction. This study employed Social Judgment Analysis (SJA) to identify the information judgment preferences held by professional groups for six selected information sources: word of mouth, expert oral advice, Internet, print news, nonfiction books, and radio/television news. The research was designed as an hypotheses-generating exploratory study employing a purposive sample (n = 90) and generated four empirically supported, testable hypotheses about user satisfaction with information sources. The SJA judgment functions revealed the influences of volume and polarity (i.e., positive versus negative information) an information satisfaction. By advancing the understanding of how information source preferences can be identified empirically and their influence an information satisfaction, this research reflects a first, small step toward understanding "satisficing." Satisficing behaviors result in early termination of information search processes when individuals, facing incomplete information, are sufficiently satisfied to assume risks and execute decisions.

0.01321952 = product of:
  0.0660976 = sum of:
    0.0660976 = weight(_text_:books in 742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0660976 = score(doc=742,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.2669927 = fieldWeight in 742, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=742)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Purpose - This study seeks to apply ecological psychology's concept of "affordance" to graduate students' information behavior in the academic library, and to explore the extent to which the affordances experienced by graduate students differed from the affordances librarians were attempting to provide. Design/methodology/approach - In-depth, qualitative interviews with graduate students and academic librarians explored how the students perceived and used the library's various "opportunities for action" (e.g. books, databases, instructional sessions, librarians, physical space, etc.) and compared these perceptions and behavior with librarians' intentions and expectations. Findings - Findings indicate a disparity between expectations and experience and point to graduate students as an underserved population in this context, especially in terms of the library's outreach efforts. In addition, because graduate students are increasingly teaching introductory undergraduate courses, communication methods that bypass graduate students tend to miss undergraduate students as well. Practical implications - Practical implications discussed in this paper include possible methods of improving communication channels between graduate students and academic librarians, and considerations for information literacy instruction. Originality/value - This paper presents a unique perspective by using affordance theory to frame students and librarians' expectations about library services. The findings are particularly valuable for their implications for library-patron communication and information literacy.

0.011777506 = product of:
  0.05888753 = sum of:
    0.05888753 = weight(_text_:22 in 4441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05888753 = score(doc=4441,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 4441, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4441)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 2.2000 10:25:05

Series

Kölner Arbeitspapiere zur Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaft; Bd.22

0.011103938 = product of:
  0.055519693 = sum of:
    0.055519693 = weight(_text_:22 in 4913) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055519693 = score(doc=4913,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4913, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4913)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 7.2000 16:36:09

0.011103938 = product of:
  0.055519693 = sum of:
    0.055519693 = weight(_text_:22 in 1761) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055519693 = score(doc=1761,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1761, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1761)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 3.2008 13:31:09

0.011103938 = product of:
  0.055519693 = sum of:
    0.055519693 = weight(_text_:22 in 1765) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055519693 = score(doc=1765,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1765, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1765)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 3.2008 13:37:50

0.011103938 = product of:
  0.055519693 = sum of:
    0.055519693 = weight(_text_:22 in 1766) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055519693 = score(doc=1766,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1766, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1766)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 3.2008 13:40:19