Dervin and Nilanâ s (1986) article, â Information needs and uses,â has been an influential article in Library and Information Science (LIS), because it calls for a paradigm shift in LIS away from research that focuses on systems and standards to research that focuses on users. This article also has been influential on library and information practice. Librarians and other information workers are called on to be user-centered and place users at the center of library programs and services. Conforming to the user-centered paradigm, however, has been problematic for broad representational systems, like library cataloging, that must meet the diverse needs of global users. Despite calls to focus on users, the cataloging field has not taken a user-centered approach in research or in the development of cataloging standards. Instead, the responsibility to meet usersâ needs has been placed on cataloging practitioners, who are encouraged to customize bibliographic records to meet their local usersâ needs. Dissertation research by Hoffman (2008) suggests that catalogers are limited in their ability to customize bibliographic records, because catalogers do not know who their users are and cannot identify their usersâ needs. In addition, library administrators discourage customization in favor of efficient cataloging processes. There are limits to LISâ s user-centered paradigm in the area of cataloging, and perhaps it needs to examined and reconsidered. Is the user-centered paradigm still applicable to cataloging? How should cataloging meet usersâ needs? This paper will examine the problems of the user-centered paradigm in cataloging.

Papers from the 17th ASIST&T Special Interest Group for Classification Research Workshop. The workshop ran November 4, 2006 in Austin, Texas.

Submitted by ISABELA SANTANA DE MORAES null (isabela.santanademoraes@hotmail.com) on 2017-05-25T14:07:16Z No. of bitstreams: 1 DissertaçãoFinal-Isabela Santana de Moraes_Os conceitos de sistemas de organização do conhecimento e de linguagens documentárias - análise de domínio nos PPGCIS UNESP e UFMG.pdf: 1283535 bytes, checksum: 8e785223852a2e5cfc4fa0514b942b27 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Luiz Galeffi (luizgaleffi@gmail.com) on 2017-05-30T15:51:03Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 moraes_is_me_mar.pdf: 1283535 bytes, checksum: 8e785223852a2e5cfc4fa0514b942b27 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-05-30T15:51:03Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 moraes_is_me_mar.pdf: 1283535 bytes, checksum: 8e785223852a2e5cfc4fa0514b942b27 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-04-25 / A Organização do Conhecimento, deve dialogar de maneira produtiva com os instrumentos de recuperação da informação, tendo em vista sua eficácia , utiliza-se das linguagens documentárias (LDs)e dos sistemas de organização do conhecimento (SOCs). Considera-se oportuno apontar semelhanças e diferenças entre os SOCs e as LDs, para posteriormente melhor caracterizar o conceito de sistemas de organização do conhecimento e identificar quais são os autores mais utilizados por essa temática na Ciência da Informação no Brasil. Assim, esta pesquisa tem como objetivo analisar as teses de doutoramento dos Programas de Pós Graduação em Ciência da Informação com nota 6 pela Capes no Brasil, sendo estes o PPGCI-UNESP e PPGCI-UFMG, na linha de Produção e Organização da Informação (POI) com cobertura de (2001-2015). Justificativa-se a importância de discutir as diferenças conceituais de LDs e SOCs, pois é com a definição conceitual de cada termo de especialidade que se caracteriza determinada área de conhecimento. O corpus de análise foi composto por: teses da linha POI dos PPGCI-UNESP e PPGCI-UFMG cuja temática, principal ou secundária, envolva LDs e/ou SOCs. Para a coleta de dados, utilizou-se de estratégias de busca que contemplem os conceitos do objeto da análise: sistemas de organização do conhecimento, linguagens documentárias, tesauros, sistemas de classificação, taxonomias, ontologias e etc.. A análise a ser realizada segue a abordagem conceitual, alicerçado pela análise do conteúdo de Bardin (1977), a fim de identificar pontos de convergências e as complementariedades entre os conceitos de LDs e SOCs nos trabalhos analisados e assim traçar o caminho conceitual proposto por esses PPGCIs com maiores notas no Brasil. Realizou-se quadros conceituais a fim de constatar se há diferenças conceituais dos pesquisadores pertencentes ao mesmo programa de pós graduação. Utilizou-se ainda a abordagem bibliométrica, a fim de identificar a referência bibliográfica mais utilizada e seguida por essa comunidade discursiva. Desta forma, entende-se que a presente pesquisa foi desenvolvida a luz da Análise de Domínio, abordando análises do conteúdo, a fim de entender os conceitos proposto e analise bibliométrica para identificar a base bibliográfica mais referenciada. Com a análise do conteúdo observou-se que uma das complementariedades de LDs e SOCs está na função de representação e organização em ambientes digitais onlines, tal função só é alcançada pelos SOCs. Identifica-se com a análise bibliométrica que para a definição de SOCs é utilizada a mesma base bibliográfica para os PPGCIs UNESP e UFMG, enquanto para o conceito de LDs as referências são distintas. / The Knowledge Organization must interact in a productive way with the instruments of information retrieval, using documentary languages (LDs) and knowledge organization systems (SOCs). It is considered opportune to point out similarities and differences between SOCs and LDs, in order to better characterize the concept of knowledge organization systems and to identify which authors are most used by this subject in Information Science in Brazil. Thus, this research has the objective of analyzing the PhD theses of the Graduate Programs in Information Science with note 6 by Capes in Brazil, these being PPGCI-UNESP and PPGCI-UFMG, in the Line of Production and Organization of Information (POI) With coverage of (2001-2015). We justify the importance of discussing the conceptual differences of LDs and SOCs, since it is with the conceptual definition of each specialty term that a particular area of knowledge is characterized. The corpus of analysis was composed by: theses of the POI line of the PPGCI-UNESP and PPGCI-UFMG whose main or secondary theme involves LDs and/or SOCs. In order to collect data, we used search strategies that contemplate the concepts of the object of the analysis: knowledge organization systems, documentary languages, thesauri, classification systems, taxonomies, ontologies and etc. The analysis to be carried out follows The conceptual approach, based on the analysis of the content of Bardin (1977), in order to identify points of convergence and the complementarities between the concepts of LDs and SOCs in the analyzed works and thus to draw the conceptual path proposed by these PPGCIs with higher grades in Brazil . Conceptual frameworks were carried out in order to verify if there are conceptual differences of the researchers belonging to the same postgraduate program. The bibliometric approach was also used in order to identify the most used bibliographic reference and followed by this discursive community. In this way, it is understood that the present research was developed in the light of Domain Analysis, addressing content analysis in order to understand the proposed concepts and bibliometric analysis to identify the most referenced bibliographic base. With the content analysis it was observed that one of the complementarities of LDs and SOCs is in the function of representation and organization in online digital environments, such a function is only achieved by the SOCs. It is identified with the bibliometric analysis that for the definition of SOCs the same bibliographic base is used for the PPGCIs UNESP and UFMG, whereas for the concept of LDs the references are different.

A guide to the mindset needed to perform competent knowledge work.

The Centre for Management of Innovation and Technology (CMIT) of the International Management Institute (www.imi.edu), New Delhi organized the Second Workshop on "Creation and Dissemination of Knowledge" during 15-17 October, 2008 at the National Institute of Technical Teachers' Training and Research (NITTTR), Chandigarh. The Workshop was organized in association with the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR), Ministry of Science and Technology, Government of India. The focus of this Workshop was creation and dissemination of knowledge in the backdrop of India's aspirations to emerge as a knowledge economy and compete with the developed world. To meet this purpose, the Workshop discussed major factors that impinge on the creation and dissemination of knowledge. For pursuing its objectives, the Workshop discussed, among others, trends and prospects of socio-economic and technological growth, role of knowledge in supporting growth, policy statements, and the role of government, research institutes, universities and corporate sector in promoting knowledge creation and dissemination. The Workshop was conducted in an interactive mode through a mix of lectures and discussions. Workshop proceedings contain following background papers: (1) India as a Leading Player in the Global Knowledge Economy (M. K. Khanijo); (2) Trends and Prospects of Socio-economic and Technological Growth and Role of Knowledge in Supporting Growth across Indian States: A Co-integration and Causality Approach (Arindam Banik and Shromon Das); (3) Managing Knowledge Creation and the Knowledge Organization (Parthasarathi Banerjee); (4) Increasing Innovation & Productivity with Knowledge â Integrating Workers in the Organisation Larger System (Y.K. Anand and Manmohan Singh); (5) Human Resource Development and Utilization in R&D Activities (M. K. Khanijo); (6) Knowledge Management Practices and Application in Pharma Company: Case Study (Gunmala Suri); (7) Knowledge Management for Educational Practices and Policy Making in Technical Education (Ganesh Dalvi and K.M. Rastogi); (8) Knowledge Process Outsourcing (KPO) in India - Opportunities, Trends and Skills (D.D. Sharma); (9) Bibliography on Knowledge Management (compiled by M.K. Khanijo); (10) Glossary of Terms in Knowledge Management: Draft Indian Standard (Bureau of Indian Standards).

This submission reports on a cross-disciplinary inquiry into topicality and relevance, involving an in-depth literature analysis and an inductive development of a faceted typology (containing 227 fine-grained topical relevance relationships arrayed in three facets and 33 types of presentation relationships). This inquiry reveals a large variety of topical connections beyond topic matching (the common assumption of topical relevance in the field), renders a closer look into the structure of a topic, and induces a generic topic-oriented information architecture that is meaningful across topics and domain boundaries. The findings from the analysis contribute to the foundation work of information organization, metadata development, intellectual access / information retrieval, and knowledge discovery. The typology of topical relevance relationships is structured with three major facets: * Functional role of a piece of information plays in the overall structure of a topic or an argument; * Mode of reasoning: How information contributes to the userâ s reasoning about a topic; * Semantic relationship: How information connects to a topic semantically. This inquiry demonstrated that topical relevance with its close linkage to thinking and reasoning is central to many disciplines. The multidisciplinary approach allows synthesis and examination from new angles, leading to an integrated scheme of relevance relationships or a system of thinking that informs each individual discipline. The scheme resolving from the synthesis can be used to improve text and image understanding, knowledge organization and retrieval, reasoning, argumentation, and thinking in general, by people and machines.

This is a scan of Memorablia Ranganathan edited by M.A. Gopinath. It contains quotes from Ranganathan's other books. and below is the Introduction by M.A. Gopinath, the Editor: 1. Memorablia Ranganathan is an attempt to make live the thoughts of Prof. S. R. Ranganathan. 2. He was a thinker, analyser, consolidator of his thoughts and used to put them in a crisp and telling manner. 3. His thoughts ranged on many subjects, but most of them were on libraries, library and information science and service. 4. To help Ranganathan Reader with a sort of a ready reckoner on his thoughts and expressions, they are brought together in the form of a book. 5. This forms part of Ranganathan Birth Centenary Celebrations and this book is published in this series. 6. This document is compiled by the younger generation of librarians. 7. It also contains a short biography of Ranganathan. This is a title in the dLIST Classics project. © Sarada Ranganathan Endowment for Library Science (SRELS). Permission for non-profit use granted by SRELS. To purchase reprints of this work, please visit Ess Ess Publications at http://www.essessreference.com/.

Champions of social classification praise its flexible and collaborative nature, in contrast to the rigidity and authoritarianism that they see in traditional classificative structures (such as Kroski, 2005; Shirky, 2005c; Merholz, 2004). In the view of these writers, social classification applications such as the photo storage Web site Flickr and the Web bookmarks manager del.icio.us are both democratic, incorporating the participation of all Web users, and emergent, changing rapidly in response to new content. On the other hand, traditional methods for organizing information, particularly those that involve hierarchy, are seen as exclusive, because they may not represent all usersâ viewpoints, and imprecise, because they cannot be easily adapted for the rapid pace of content development engendered by Web publishing. Two claims appear to underlie these descriptions of social classification. One, that the goal of classification is to identify and locate items based on a personal sense of appropriate categorization, and two, that, if enough other users index (or tag) items according to their own personal ideas of appropriate categorization, then all possibilities will be represented, and both searching and browsing will be facilitated. This paper will evaluate these claims, particularly in regards to the role and nature of authority in organizational schemes, and the intersection of authority with an organizational schemeâ s purpose. I consider these issues for three services often associated with social classification systems: * Indexing of personal collections. * Sharing of indexed personal collections. * Merging of personal collections into a group-indexed aggregate collection. The bookmarks manager del.icio.us is the primary example of a social classification system used throughout this paper.

This presentation was made at the 30th Anniversary Celebrations of the Dept. of Management Information Science, Eller College, University of Arizona, held at the Hilton El Conquistador, Tucson, AZ, Nov. 3-5, 2004. Knowledge organization (KO), knowledge representation (KR) and knowledge management (KM) are described and methods used in the models classsification research project from these disciplines are described.

This presentation is based on the refereed paper published in the ISKO 8 proceedings (see References for citation). It describes a study of the language used by undergraduate engineering students engaged in a civil engineering laboratory. Learnerâ s concepts and relationships in the area of soil consolidation were elicited in order to provide an understanding of the structural knowledge of novices and compare it with the knowledge structures of a human expert and a thesaurus tool. Concept maps and pathfinder networks were used to visualize and analyze the resultant knowledge structures of novice learners, expert, and tool. Results show that there is little similarity between the knowledge structures of the novice, the expert, and the tool. There is preliminary evidence that students with complex knowledge structures earn better grades thereby, encouraging collaborative research between instructional evaluation and knowledge organization in order to measure the educational impact of digital libraries (DL); for example, cause-effect relationships could be studied between the vocabularies used in browsing and other navigational systems in a DL and the educational outcomes achieved.