MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2086579897 · doi:10.5703/1288284314841

Teaching Electronic Resource Management

2012· article· en· W2086579897 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.

Notice bibliographique

Revuenon disponible
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineComputer Science
ThématiqueLibrary Collection Development and Digital Resources
Établissements canadiensPurdue Pharma (Canada)
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésComputer scienceResource management (computing)Distributed computing

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Electronic Resource Management (ERM) is a specialization that impacts and is impacted by the work of librarians in public services, technical services and systems. All Library and Information Science (LIS) students that wish to work in libraries should have exposure to the concepts and practices of ERM. While LIS programs often convey this knowledge in bits and pieces through existing courses, I believe it is essential to pull this knowledge together into a single course, integrating the various components and providing an overarching perspective on the ERM environment. This presentation conveyed my experience developing an ERM course for the fall semester of 2009. I discussed the combinations of theory, concepts and practice that framed the course and I shared challenges that I encountered. ERM IN PRACTICE AND LIS EDUCATION In 2003, Fisher published an article that posited “the position title of Electronic Resources Librarian has been pre-empted by the public service sector of the profession” (p. 3). It was thought by many at the time that the functions of managing electronic resources would be integrated into the work of existing personnel. As challenges providing technical access to electronic resources arose, systems personnel became involved. As electronic resources proliferated and interfaces evolved, evaluation and selection responsibilities were given to reference and collection development staff. And as licensing terms and pricing schemes became more complex, acquisitions librarians often handled vendor relations and negotiations. ERM management tools have been introduced over the past decade and overall change in the area has slowed, giving libraries to opportunity to more efficiently adapt their organizational structures and workflows to the new environment. Libraries today often have a librarian or team of librarians directly responsible for ERM. Whereas reference and instruction positions may have once included ERM responsibilities, today, ERM positions may include some reference or instruction responsibilities. These inclusions have been declining however. In her study of ERM job announcements from 2000 to 2008, Murdock (2010) noted that “some responsibilities that were considered extraneous to e-resource specific tasks, such as reference service and cataloging, did show an overall declining trend”(p.39). Regardless of the type of library or area of librarianship in which a student may eventually work, she will likely engage in some way with the provision of electronic resources. While new librarians will have the opportunity to learn the specifics of their part in the ERM workflow while on the job, understanding how the work do impacts the work of their colleagues is essential for effective ERM. All students preparing for librarianship would benefit from understanding the big picture of ERM; LIS programs should offer a course dedicated to the subject. Many LIS programs cover this information in bits and pieces through a wide variety of courses, ranging from information organization to reference sources and services. Rarely do students gain knowledge about how the integration of those bits and pieces occurs in practice. This

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.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,972
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,272

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,002
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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 Opus0,008
Tête enseignante GPT0,205
Écart entre enseignants0,196 · 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