The Politics of Knowledge Organization: Introduction to the Special Issue

2020 ◽  
Vol 47 (5) ◽  
pp. 367-371
Author(s):  
Gregory H. Leazer ◽  
Robert Montoya

Politics is about the distribution of goods and risks. We can describe the distribution of goods, and we can also characterize those distributions as a kind of inequality. As a baseline definition of “politics of information” we mean the distribution of information goods across different populations. Despite a strong tradition of disciplinary focus in information science, much of the literature is still given over to fairly simple notions of social form and structure. A nascent knowledge organization practice dedicated to social difference is explicitly motivated by justice and nomenclature. Not only is knowledge organization a tool of cultural hegemony, but also it can be read as a product of cultural ordering and bias. Identifying unjust and politically oppressive practice must be part of the path to justice. Understanding the political construction of knowledge organization is essential for the theory of information service in order to build a more just professional practice.

Author(s):  
Yuri N. Stolyarov

The article considers the contradiction in concepts connected with key content of the library activity. Some fundamental documents use the term “library service”, others use “information and library service”, “library and information service” terms. The different content is also given to these concepts. The inconsistency is increased by the fact that since Soviet times the library services have often been understood as library activity in general. There is given the brief review of primarily positions on the conceptual framework of library service: library activity, work with readers, guidance of reading, library service, library and information service, information and library service. In violation of the Federal Law № 78-FZ “On Librarianship”, the term “library and information service” is enshrined in the names of textbooks, GOST R 7.0.103—2018 “Library and information service. Terms and definitions” and GOST R 7.0.104—2019 “Library and information services of scientific library. Types, forms and modes of delivery”. While library science is striving hard to integrate itself into information science, information science itself is far from recognising library and bibliographic science as an integral part of it. “Library service” is considered both as specific and general library science concept. The definition of “work” in relation to library science is given: it is the function of library staff to create values, provide benefits or meet the informational, cultural, educational needs of readers. The author proposes to intensify the concept of “library readers study”, to develop thoroughly its theory and methodology. The paper provides additional arguments in favour of the concept of “library readers study” in addition to the well-known ones. It is argued that in addition to revealing the links between the readers’ contingent and the library staff, it is necessary to reveal the links of the “readers’ contingent” subsystem with other subsystems of the first and second circuits of the library as a system.


2010 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gustavo Silva Saldanha

Resumo Analisa o campo da organização dos saberes a partir da filosofia da linguagem. Problematiza a virada lingüística e sua importância no campo informacional. Critica a terminologia adotada para classificar o campo que atua com preservação, representação e transmissão de conceitos e artefatos que possibilitam a construção coletiva do conhecimento. Categoriza a tradição representacionista e a tradição pragmática. Descreve as tradições epistemológicas do campo informacional fundadas em uma filosofia da linguagem através das manifestações institucionais que atravessaram o século XX.Palavras-chave epistemologia da ciência da informação; filosofia da linguagem; tradição epistemológica; tradição pragmática; tradição representacionistaAbstract The article examines the field of organization of knowledge building on the philosophy of language. Questions the linguistic turn and its importance in the informational field. Criticizes the terminology used to classify the field that works with preservation, representation and transmission of concepts and artifacts that allow the collective construction of knowledge. Categorizes the representationalist tradition and the pragmatic tradition. Describes the epistemological traditions of the informational field based on a philosophy of language in institutional manifestations across throughout the twentieth century.Keywords epistemology of information science; philosophy of language; epistemological tradition; pragmatic tradition; representationalist tradition 


2018 ◽  
Vol 56 (1(111)) ◽  
pp. 7-20
Author(s):  
Mustafa El Hadi Widad

PURPOSE/THESIS: This paper presents a review of the French contribution to the epistemology and theory of documentation and information science. It is focused on the authors, theories, and practices that have been neglected, or forgotten by French information specialists. An attempt was made to assess their contribution and influence on information science and the theory of the document. APPROACH/METHODS: The author focused on the analysis of the literature either printed or available as online texts, and proceedings of the ISKO-France conference held in Paris in 2017. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The review of the French contribution to the epistemology and theory of documentation and information science is carried out according to a triple chronological perspective. The first one goes back in time, as far as the contribution to the development of knowledge organization methods and theories of Enlightenment French philosophers’ and Gabriel Naudé. The second period covers relatively recent history, from the nineteenth to the twentieth century with the birth of the francophone document theoreticians such as the philosopher Auguste Comte and his Broad System of Ordering, and later Suzanne Briet’s view of a document as something (potentially anything) made into a document, offering the view that the word “document” should be used in a technical sense within information science to denote anything regarded as signifying something. The third period is represented by the thriving activities of what we call in France the forerunners among whom I have focused on the specific position of Eric De Grolier for his role in defining and expanding Ranganathan’s categories as well as that of Jean-Claude Gardin, their contribution and their impact on information science with a special focus on knowledge organization. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: The theme of the 4th International Scientific Conference on Information Science in the Age of Change: Innovative Information Services from which this paper is derived implies that speakers would give a state of the art on Innovative Information Service. However, I would like to suggest that talking about the European tradition of information science underpinning the innovation in information services would be worthwhile. It is because this tradition played a central role in developing the connection between modernism and information science, especially in relation to schemes for bibliography and documentation that emerged in the late 19th and early 20th century. The impact of the French tradition and its modernism in documentation and information theory is tremendous, but I chose only a few of these authors, mostly those understudied, because I find it surprising that there is so little reference to them in more recent work.


2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shamima Yesmin ◽  
S.M. Zabed Ahmed

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate Library and Information Science (LIS) students’ understanding of infodemic and related terminologies and their ability to categorize COVID-19-related problematic information types using examples from social media platforms. Design/methodology/approach The participants of this study were LIS students from a public-funded university located at the south coast of Bangladesh. An online survey was conducted which, in addition to demographic and study information, asked students to identify the correct definition of infodemic and related terminologies and to categorize the COVID-related problematic social media posts based on their inherent problem characteristics. The correct answer for each definition and task question was assigned a score of “1”, whereas the wrong answer was coded as “0”. The percentages of correctness score for total and each category of definition and task-specific questions were computed. The independent sample t-test and ANOVA were run to examine the differences in total and category-specific scores between student groups. Findings The findings revealed that students’ knowledge concerning the definition of infodemic and related terminologies and the categorization of COVID-19-related problematic social media posts was poor. There was no significant difference in correctness scores between student groups in terms of gender, age and study levels. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first time an effort was made to understand LIS students’ recognition and classification of problematic information. The findings can assist LIS departments in revising and improving the existing information literacy curriculum for students.


2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jackie Druery ◽  
Nancy McCormack ◽  
Sharon Murphy

Objective - The term “best practice” appears often in library and information science literature, yet, despite the frequency with which the term is used, there is little discussion about what is meant by the term and how one can reliably identify a best practice. Methods – This paper reviews 113 articles that identify and discuss best practices, in order to determine how “best practices” are distinguished from other practices, and whether these determinations are made on the basis of consistent and reliable evidence. The review also takes into account definitions of the term to discover if a common definition is used amongst authors. Results – The “evidence” upon which papers on “best practices” are based falls into one of the following six categories: 1) opinion (n=18, 15%), 2) literature reviews (n=13, 12%), 3) practices in the library in which the author works (n=19, 17%), 4) formal and informal qualitative and quantitative approaches (n=16, 14%), 5) a combination of the aforementioned (i.e., combined approaches) (n=34, 30%), and 6) “other” sources or approaches which are largely one of a kind (n=13, 12%). There is no widely shared or common definition of “best practices” amongst the authors of these papers, and most papers (n=94, 83%) fail to define the term at all. The number of papers was, for the most part, split evenly amongst the six categories indicating that writers on the subject are basing “best practices” assertions on a wide variety of sources and evidence. Conclusions – Library and information science literature on “best practices” is rarely based on rigorous empirical methods of research and therefore is generally unreliable. There is, in addition, no widely held understanding of what is meant by the use of the term.


IFLA Journal ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 288-301 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fiona Blackburn

Two examples of community engagement in Australian public libraries, drawn from the author’s experience, are analysed using Sung and Hepworth’s (2013) community engagement model for public libraries and Overall’s (2009) definition of cultural competence in a library and information science framework. The examples are examined for the community engagement characteristics identified by Sung and Hepworth; each is also considered for cultural competence, using the domains which Overall posits are the sites where this competence occurs or is developed. A virtuous circle of community engagement is extrapolated from the second example. ‘Hierarchical equivalence’ between organizations, a group’s proportional presence in a population and the nature of each group’s aims, are suggested as further factors in sustainable community engagement. That culture is an asset on which communities draw to engage with libraries and the broader community, and that communities will respond to engagement approaches if they offer the possibility of meeting community aspirations, is evident in both examples.


2015 ◽  
Vol 64 (6/7) ◽  
pp. 480-488 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saowapha Limwichitr ◽  
Judith Broady-Preston ◽  
David Ellis

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to review the literature on organisational cultural change and problems in its implementation, focussing on the case of building a learning organisation (LO) within university library context. Design/methodology/approach – Key literature published within Library and Information Science, Business and Management and other related fields were reviewed to identify themes regarding organisational cultural change in relation to development of an LO emerging in the recent years. Findings – Reviewed literature in this paper highlights key challenges in examining organisational cultural change for the purpose of building an LO. These include a lack of an agreed definition of the LO concept, practical approaches and measure for assessing achievement of the cultural change. A need for in-depth studies which focus on current practices and related problems in this regard is also revealed, and the systems approach is proposed as a suitable approach for holistic investigation of all critical elements that possibly affect establishment of an LO. Originality/value – The paper raises awareness of the importance of examining organisational cultural change as a critical supportive influence of developing an LO. Problems to be considered in its implementation are synthesised and served as a basis for further investigation in the author’s doctoral research project.


Author(s):  
Mauricio Barcellos ALMEIDA ◽  
Renata Abrantes BARACHO

Within the realm of Information Science, information retrieval is a seminal issue. Knowledge organization systems are instruments that organize knowledge by connecting concepts through semantic relations for purposes of information retrieval. One of the most important of these semantic relations is the so-called part-whole relation. In this paper, we revisit some peculiarities of part-whole relations that are often overlooked by the Information Science community. In order to do this, we provide a theoretical investigation of two perspectives used to explain the notion of parts and wholes: a formal perspective, which is based on the philosophical study usually called mereology; a non-formal perspective, which is based on the linguistic study about a relation called meronym. We discuss the relationship between these perspectives through the issue of transitivity, which is an important property of part-whole relations for information retrieval. We find that these perspectives, although distinguished, are somehow complementary. The results of our analysis suggest that the choice for either a formal or a non-formal perspective could be based on a pragmatic criterion in the scope of development of knowledge organization systems. We conclude by offering some considerations correlating two main sorts of these systems, namely ontologies and thesauri.


2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-17
Author(s):  
Jian Qin

AbstractPurposeThis paper compares the paradigmatic differences between knowledge organization (KO) in library and information science and knowledge representation (KR) in AI to show the convergence in KO and KR methods and applications.MethodologyThe literature review and comparative analysis of KO and KR paradigms is the primary method used in this paper.FindingsA key difference between KO and KR lays in the purpose of KO is to organize knowledge into certain structure for standardizing and/or normalizing the vocabulary of concepts and relations, while KR is problem-solving oriented. Differences between KO and KR are discussed based on the goal, methods, and functions.Research limitationsThis is only a preliminary research with a case study as proof of concept.Practical implicationsThe paper articulates on the opportunities in applying KR and other AI methods and techniques to enhance the functions of KO.Originality/value:Ontologies and linked data as the evidence of the convergence of KO and KR paradigms provide theoretical and methodological support to innovate KO in the AI era.


Author(s):  
Michel Nguessan ◽  
Shima Moradi

In a context of global mobility of skilled professionals, this is a comparative study of library science education and librarianship in the USA and Iran. The study attempts to determine how education and professional skills may transfer from one country to another. Historically, the USA and Iran are two different major centers of development of knowledge, science and technology and culture. Each one of these two countries developed its own system of general education and library science education and professional practice. This study investigates the definition of the librarian profession, historical perspectives, types of librarians and librarian-related positions, the initial academic training of librarian (schools, duration, curriculum, and accreditation), daily activities of librarians, continuing education, and opportunities and challenges of the profession in each country. The qualitative research methods was selected to conduct this study. This investigation leads to a comparative analysis pointing out similarities and differences. The first part of the paper present historical perspectives and library science education and librarianship. The second part of the paper presents contemporary library science education and librarianship in each country. The last part of the paper is a comparative critical discussion of both systems. This study concludes that, even though both systems are different, with the globalization of knowledge, education, and communications, under certain circumstances, one could consider a librarian “qualified” to practice across the border. Contributions: The comparative investigation of LIS profession and education have been conducted for the first time.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document