MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W345371815

Fundamentals of Information Studies: Understanding Information and Its Environment

2008· article· en· W345371815 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
David Michels

Notice bibliographique

RevuePartnership The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research · 2008
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésTable of contentsSubject (documents)Scope (computer science)Library scienceIndex (typography)Resource (disambiguation)Computer scienceTask (project management)World Wide WebEngineering
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Lester, June and Wallace C. Koehler, Jr. Fundamentals of Studies: Understanding and Its Environment. 2nd Edition. New York, NY: Neal-Schuman Publishers, 2007. 444 pp. 65.00 USD. ISBN-13: 978-1-55570-594-7. 8 We live in the age, but what is, how it is created and used is only beginning to be explored in earnest. This exploration is generating new subdisciplines, with theories, methods and applications. How then do we attempt to tie up all this activity with a bow and present it comprehensibly to our students? This is the ambitious task that Lester and Koehler have attempted with Fundamentals of Studies, now in its second edition. The scope of this survey work is broad as surmised from the six LC subject headings attached to the work, covering the science of information, in society, resources, services, technology and policy. Not surprisingly, the text itself spans fourteen chapters and over 400 pages. It includes a detailed table of contents, index and glossaries of terms and acronyms. Each chapter includes a reference list, and additional helpful resource lists. These references and resource lists are by necessity representative and the authors do not state why they include certain works and not others. For those familiar with the previous edition, there are several additions. There is a new chapter on needs and seeking behaviour and a chapter on analyzing power and information. Aids to teaching have also been added to each chapter as guide and idea components. We are told that this is intended to be an introductory textbook for undergraduate and graduate courses thus accounting for the layout of the chapters. The new learning guides introduce key ideas and learning outcomes for each chapter. Most of these outcomes relate to foundational knowledge (understand, define, identify) and only a few relate to application (analyze, assess). There are discussion questions at the end of each chapter that do encourage reflection and synthesis. I found the style of writing to be accessible and the book itself was a relatively quick read. The authors stated that they attempt to trace several themes throughout the book but identified the most prominent as the impact of the development of technology on the access and use of information (p. xv). Other themes which surface later are as commodity and authorship. I did find that technology issues loomed large and even when dealing with interpersonal or policy, a discussion about technological influences was rarely more than a page away. At times I found the chapter divisions in the book to be somewhat arbitrary. For instance, I found it baffling that the printing press would merit only a sentence in History of Technology (Chapter 4) but received detailed coverage in the chapter on Societal Institutions (Chapter 6). In social science survey texts it can be difficult to separate concepts into distinct topics resulting in overlap and repetition. This was the case here. The instructor will need to note the interconnections within these chapters lest the student be left thinking didn't we already cover this? Although I commend the authors for including the new chapter on Information Needs and Seeking Behaviour (Chapter 3), I found it somewhat thin. The authors introduce several key figures in the field, but I felt they failed to present a clear overview of the field's history, theories and directions before departing into a discussion of organization. …

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)0,007
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,014
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: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: Théorique ou conceptuel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,983
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,052

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0070,014
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0080,010
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,014
Communication savante0,0170,028
Science ouverte0,0020,004
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,005
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0160,006

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 Opus0,210
Tête enseignante GPT0,386
Écart entre enseignants0,176 · 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'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

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

En bref

Citations9
Publié2008
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePartnership The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and ResearchMême sujetLibrary Science and Information LiteracyTravaux en français237 207