Search results

While there is a huge literature devoted to information literacy (IL), much of which is devoted to course or content design and some sort of assessment. What is presented in this paper is the proposition that the design of IL would benefit greatly by the infusion of the development of consciousness and conscious states. The understanding of consciousness and its place in the absorption of information, and ultimately, knowledge growth is presented.

Reviews of information literacy (brief) and consciousness (more extensive) are applied to the proposition that consciousness is an essential element of successful information literacy instruction. The reviews are of a critical nature.

Consciousness and its complexity are explicated to a considerable extent. While there are somewhat varied conceptions of consciousness, a relatively unified definition is suggested. The complexities of consciousness and its development render students more able to explicate the agreements and disagreements in the information landscape. In short, a developed consciousness among students makes for more critical approaches to difficult informational events. Then, the connections between IL and consciousness, which includes the awareness of informational states, conclude the paper.

This paper offers a new mode for an inquiry into the content and structure of information literacy instruction.

The paper adds a heretofore unattended condition for success in information literacy for instructors and students.

Gail Bader is Assistant Professor, Department of Anthropology, Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana. A cultural anthropologist, Bader’s research interests include educational anthropology, the cultural construction of work, computing and technology, and U.S. and Japanese culture.John M. Budd is Professor and Associate Director of the School of Information Science and Learning Technologies at the University of Missouri – Columbia. He is the author of numerous journal articles and books, including The Academic Library and Knowledge and Knowing in Library and Information Science.Bambi Burgard has served as Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs/Student Achievement at the Kansas City Art Institute since May 2002. Upon completion of her undergraduate education, she began doctoral study in counseling psychology at the University of Missouri-Kansas City where she earned her Ph.D. in 1999. She completed her predoctoral and postdoctoral internships at the University of Missouri-Kansas City counseling center.Harvey R. Gover is on the library faculty of Washington State University (WSU) Libraries and is the Assistant Campus Librarian for WSU Tri-Cities. Formerly, he was Public Services Librarian, Tarleton State University, a branch campus of Texas A&M. He was a principal author of the 2000 edition of ACRL Guidelines for Distance Learning Library Services.William Graves III is Associate Professor of Humanities at Bryant College in Smithfield, Rhode Island. A linguistic anthropologist, Graves is interested in the diverse roles that language and communication play in social and cultural change. He has conducted fieldwork on issues of social and cultural change among Native Americans, in diverse organizational settings in the U.S., in enterprises undergoing privatization in Russia and, most recently, among small-scale entrepreneurs in Belarus.José-Marie Griffiths served as the Chief Information Officer at the University of Michigan and Vice Chancellor for Information Infrastructure at the University of Tennessee. She was responsible for strategic IT planning; the development and implementation of academic and administrative computing, telecommunications and networking activities; and IT alliances with external organizations. She is the recipient of numerous awards for her contributions to information science, the development of the IT industry, and support for women in computing. She currently holds an endowed chair and professorship in the School of Information Sciences at the University of Pittsburgh and is Director of the University’s Sara Fine Institute for Interpersonal Behavior and Technology.John B. Harer has been a school and academic librarian for over twenty-seven years. As an academic librarian, he has held various positions in access services, reference, and personnel administration. He is currently the Director of the Library at Catawba College in Salisbury, NC.Donna Meyer’s career has included management of computer labs, teaching computer skills, designing curricula that integrated information skills into core subject areas, creating web sites, and managing library collections. She currently works as Director of Library Resources at Northcentral University in Prescott, Arizona, providing quality online graduate research services.Rush Miller has been Hillman University Librarian and Director of the University Library system at the University of Pittsburgh for eight years. He serves as co-chair for the Association of Research Libraries e-Metrics Project. Miller is active in the profession and writes regularly on library management, international librarianship, diversity, digital library content and e-Metrics.James M. Nyce, a cultural anthropologist, is interested in how information technologies are used in and can change workplaces and organizations, particularly in medicine and higher education. A docent at Linköping University, Nyce’s research interests include the historical, social aspects of library and information science, the design and evaluation of information systems, and information use in science and medicine. Nyce is Associate Professor at the School of Library and Information Management, Emporia State University, Emporia, Kansas, and Visiting Associate Professor at the Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis.Charles Oppenheim is Professor of Information Science at Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK. His main professional interest is where the law interacts with information services. He is also interested in knowledge management, measuring the value and impact of information, citation studies, bibliometrics, national and company information policy, the electronic information and publishing industries, ethical issues, chemical information handling, patents information and policy issues related to digital libraries and the Internet.Roswitha Poll is chief librarian of the University and Regional Library Münster. From 1991 to 1993 chair of the German Association of Academic Librarians, since 1997 chair of the German Standards Committee for Information and Documentation. She chaired the IFLA group for the handbook on performance measurement in libraries and is now convener of the ISO working group for the International Standard of Library Statistics and member of the ISO group for performance measurement. She is working in national and international groups on collection preservation, quality management, statistics and cost analysis in libraries.Mary Jane Rootes is a Public Services librarian at Abraham Baldwin Agricultural College in Tifton, Georgia. She worked previously at the Pitts Library of Andrew College in Cuthbert, Georgia.Sherrie Schmidt is the Dean of University Libraries at Arizona State University. She began her tenure at ASU as Associate Dean of Library Services in 1990 and was named Dean in 1991. Prior to that, she worked at Texas A&M University, the University of Texas at Austin, the FAXON Company, the University of Texas at Dallas, AMIGOS, the University of Florida, and Ohio State University. Most of her professional activities relate to the use of technology in libraries.Joan Stenson is a Research Associate in the Department of Information Science at Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK, where she is currently undertaking a doctorate.Richard Wilson is Professor of Business Administration and Financial Management at Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK. He has inter-disciplinary interests in the valuation of information assets. His publications reflect his research interests in management control, financial control, marketing control and strategic control.

The debate over quality versus demand in public libraries has been argued for some time, largely without resolution. In 1981 Nora Rawlinson wrote, “A book of outstanding quality is not worth its price if no one will read it.” The view espoused by Rawlinson and others gives a great deal of attention to best sellers, since it is demand which makes a book a best seller. This is not a new issue; Rawlinson quotes John Cotton Dana, writing nearly a century ago.

The purpose of this paper is to update and review the concept of warrant in Library and Information Science (LIS) and to introduce the concept of epistemic warrant from philosophy. Epistemic warrant can be used to assess the content of a work; and therefore, it can be a complement to existing warrants, such as literary warrant, in the development of controlled vocabularies. In this proposal, the authors aim to activate a theoretical discussion on warrant in order to revise and improve the validity of the concept of warrant from the user and classifier context to the classificationist context.

The authors have conducted an extensive literary review and close reading of the concept of warrant in LIS and knowledge organization in order to detect the different stances and gaps in which the concept of epistemic warrant might apply. The authors adopted an epistemological approach, in the vein of some of the previous commenters on warrant, such as Hope Olson and Birger Hjørland, and built upon the theoretical framework of different authors working with the concept of warrant outside knowledge organization, such as Alvin Plantinga and Alvin Goldman.

There are some authors and critics in the literature that have voiced for a more epistemological approach to warrant (in opposition to a predominantly ontological approach). In this sense, epistemic warrant would be an epistemological warrant and also a step forward toward pragmatism in a prominently empiricist context such as the justification of the inclusion of terms in a controlled vocabulary. Epistemic warrant can be used to complement literary warrant in the development of controlled vocabularies as well as in the classification of works.

This paper presents an exhaustive update and revision of the concept of warrant, analyzing, systematizing, and reviewing the different warrants discussed in the LIS literary warrant in a critical way. The concept of epistemic warrant for categorizational activities is introduced to the LIS field for the first time. This paper, and the proposal of epistemic warrant, has the potential to contribute to the theoretical and practical discussions on the development of controlled vocabularies and assessment of the content of works.

The purpose of the paper is to provide a critical reply to Robert Lingard's close reading of a previously published paper of the present author's, “Meaning, truth, and information.”

The approach adopted in this paper is an examination of Lingard's argument and counter‐points, employing (primarily) logical and rhetorical analysis of his claims.

While some of Lingard's criticisms are legitimate and must be admitted, many have to be subjected to rebuttal on the basis of misreading, logical error, and discursive misapprehension of points made in the original article.

Since the present paper is a reply to another author's work, originality is constrained by the arguments and claims made by that author. That said, additional analysis is added to the matters of meaning, truth, and information in an effort to clarify and expand upon the essence of the original article.

This paper aims to demonstrate that fundamental aspects of quantum theory can be applied to work in information studies (IS).

The field of information studies is so broad and extensive that it requires similar breadth of epistemic and methodological features in order to fulfill its inherent promise as a human enterprise. Quantum theory holds promise as a way to shape questions and inquiry in information studies (IS).

The revolutionary elements of quantum theory, such as entanglement, nonlocality, etc. can be applied to information, especially language‐based communication.

Perhaps most especially, the non‐ or extra‐mathematical components of quantum theory offer ontological and epistemic modes of thought which apply to information. Those modes of thought are ripe with conceptual promise for examination of, for example, information as objective entity and as complex material substance. This paper explores some of the potentially promising ways to explore information as a complex phenomenon.

While some work in IS has considered quantum phenomena, there has not been a thorough investigation of the theory's application to inquiry in IS.

This paper aims to examine the relationships between meaning and truth as they may contribute to a constitutive definition of information. The thesis is primarily that “information” cannot be defined unless within the context of meaning and truth, and that any theory based on, or related to, information is not possible without the foundational definition.

A review of related literatures and an arrangement of frameworks forms the design of this conceptual proposal.

While other definitions of information have been presented, the present one integrates meaning and truth in ways that others do not. The thoroughgoing semantic examination provides a starting‐point for a much deeper analysis of the integral role that language plays in the formation of any theory related to information. Truth tends not to be spoken of a great deal in information science; the definitional positioning of truth adds to a more complete definition and basis for theory.

This paper proposes a new definitional and theoretical construct for information.