MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2082656529 · doi:10.1353/pla.2006.0002

The Eleventh Off-Campus Library Services Conference Proceedings (review)

2006· article· en· W2082656529 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nancy J. Burich

Notice bibliographique

Revueportal Libraries and the Academy · 2006
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésEleventhLibrary scienceTechnicianTheme (computing)Metropolitan areaSociologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceHistoryWorld Wide Web

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: The Eleventh Off-Campus Library Services Conference Proceedings Nancy J. Burich The Eleventh Off-Campus Library Services Conference Proceedings, ed. Patrick B. Mahoney. Binghamton, NY: Haworth Information Press, 2004. 574p. $49.95 (ISBN 0-7890-2785-2) Co-published simultaneously as Journal of Library Administration 41, no. 1/2 and 3/4, 2004 This collection of papers represents research that was presented at the Eleventh Off-Campus Library Services Conference in Scottsdale, Arizona in 2004. Though other conferences are offered on various aspects of distance learning, including teaching, the use of new technologies, and digital resources, this conference concentrates on topics of interest to librarians who are providing services to nontraditional faculty and students who do not have access to a traditional academic library. The conference, sponsored by Central Michigan University, has a British counterpart in the Libraries Without Walls Conference hosted by Manchester Metropolitan University. The conference program advisory board employs a juried abstracts process to review the papers submitted for consideration. Researchers who presented at the conference are well known in the field and come from institutions across the United States, Canada, and the West Indies. Several contributors discuss various forms of collaboration to enhance distance information services. Especially relevant is the article by Robin Lockerby et al. that describes working with faculty who are remote from campus. The paper by Anne Marie Casey et al. describes the collaboration between a librarian, a faculty member, and a technician to develop a Web-based research readiness assessment tool. Another theme of the papers addresses the importance of needs assessment, especially in serving various types of students (for example, non-affiliated, the disabled, Native American, and those enrolled in off-campus programs). These papers describe the obstacles faced by various groups of students and suggest solutions that may serve as models for others to follow. Two articles focus on questionnaire design. The first is by Lynn M. McMain and Judy Ann Jerabek, and the second is by Evadne McLean and Stephen H. Dew. This is a subject of great importance to librarians who may have a limited knowledge about developing effective assessment tools. Various administrative issues, including strategic planning, marketing, and institutional issues are the topics of several papers. Marianne A. Buehler's article about inserting the library into course management software is especially important for distance learners because such a link may provide the only a gateway to library services and collections for these users. [End Page 109] Articles about student support services provide practical approaches to the services that are important to distant learners: electronic books, electronic reserves, document delivery, instruction, and virtual reference or chat. Naturally, these same articles describe how technologies (especially CD-ROM, Web, multimedia, and videoconferencing) are used to provide services and to raise awareness of their availability. For example, Tina Adams talks about educating educators to the importance of library services and resources for their distance learning students. This is a very useful publication for anyone interested in innovative solutions to current problems in distance learning library services. The contributors' index provides a list of active researchers for others who may be seeking research partners. The index provides a list of topics and the institutions where the research was undertaken. The exclusion of Siva Vaidhyanathan's keynote address, "Copyright as an Instrument of Censorship," is regretted. It would have been a valuable addition to the proceedings because of widespread interest in copyright issues across the academy. An excellent complement for locating related current and historical research is Alexander L. Slade's standard work, Library Services for Distance Learning: The Fourth Bibliography, http://uviclib.uvic.ca/dls/bibliography4.html. Nancy J. Burich University of Kansas Copyright © 2006 The Johns Hopkins University Press

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCommunication savante
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,994
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,193

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,020
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0030,002
Bibliométrie0,0090,013
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0060,005
Science ouverte0,0030,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0580,020

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,007
Tête enseignante GPT0,232
Écart entre enseignants0,225 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2006
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueportal Libraries and the AcademyMême sujetLibrary Science and Information LiteracyTravaux en français237 207