Review and Revision of Library and Information Science Curriculum in a South African University and the Usage of Follow-Up Study and Advertisement Scanning Methods
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.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Two methods for curriculum review and revision are used to review and revise the Library and Information (LIS) curriculum at the University of Zululand, South Africa. Firstly, as an exercise in product analysis, a case study of the graduates of the University of Zululand between 1996 and 1999 was conducted. Graduates were traced to their current places of employment and interviewed together with their employers in order to determine whether the knowledge, skills and attitudes gained during training were adequate for their current job requirements. Secondly, a market-type analysis was conducted by scanning job advertisements in the field of library and information science appearing in a popular national weekly newspaper over a period of three years. Details regarding date and location of advertisement, type of employer, job details and job specifications and requirements in terms of qualifications, experience, knowledge, skills and attitudes were captured from this source and analysed. Whereas the aforementioned two methods still enjoy popularity, arguably, they alone do not necessarily provide an accurate picture of the demand and supply matrix that can enhance effective and beneficial LIS education for service and employability of graduates. Evidently, the public sector and in particular the public and academic libraries, dominate this specific segment of the employment market in South Africa. Sound education in the fields of management, information and communication technologies, information searching, analysis and synthesis, as well as the ability to perform practical work is regarded as essential. The use of the aforementioned two methods exploits techniques which play a crucial verification role and which effectively supplement other methods such as reviewing existing curriculum and literature, consulting with colleagues and observing national and international trends as well as the focus-group method for academic programme development. Other intervening variables in the study are discussed. The paper addresses issues that can benefit theoretical and methodological issues in library and information science education and curriculum development.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,080 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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