Home page

Annotations

Database project

Information theory project

ANNOTATIONS

Tenopir, C. (2002). Sorting through online systems [Electronic version]. Library Journal, 127(8), 32.

Explains the similarities and differences of various online database systems accessible to library patrons. Describes structures of databases, search techniques and output formats that could be abstracts or full texts.

Webber, N. (2004). Choosing good websites [Electronic version]. School Arts, 103(5), 50.

Points out features of good websites. Mentions conciseness and accuracy of content, easy navigation, relevance and pertinence of images, and versatility as important features. Advises browsers to check if website has current information and is sponsored by a reliable institution.

Hayes, F. (1995). Object lesson in patience. InformationWeek, 536(7), 40(6).

Demonstrates superiority of Object databases to Relational and Hierarchial databases as the former can store large, complex groups of data. Informs readers of advantages like built-in security and easy maintenance of databases. Predicts a hybrid approach and an integration of object database and relational database technology in many industries.

Aduwa-Ogiegbaen, S., & Iyamu, E. (2005). The Role of communication in effective instructional delivery [Electronic version]. Language in India, 5, 50(4).

Identifies challenges of communication in schools in pluralistic societies like India and Nigeria. Illustrates the use of Berlo's model for effective instructional communication. Explains how the awareness of the SMCR model would help teachers enhance their communication skills. Reiterates the efficacy of using the sensory approach in a learning environment.

Wiggins, R. (May 2001). Digital preservation-paradox and promise. School Library Journal, 47(5), 12(3).

Analyzes problems related to preservation of digital information. Enumerates them as follows - Reorganization of data leading to over-writing and loss of old data, latest software rendering older versions obsolete or a disaster resulting in destruction of data. Emphasizes the importance of developing offline archives and using optical and magnetic disks as storage devices.

Barnett-Ellis, P., & Charnigo, L. (2005). Wireless networks in medium-sized academic libraries. Information Technology and Libraries, 24(1), 13(9).

Notes that academic libraries use wireless networking as it is cost-effective and provides more flexibility and wider access to students and faculty. Lists the result of a survey - smaller schools have campus wide access; most schools allow laptop checkout; more than half offer technical help. Concludes that libraries must have wireless networks to keep up with technological innovation.

Crawford, W. (2005). Library policies and social policy issues. Library Technology Reports, 41(2), 45(8).

Questions policy decisions made by libraries while introducing new technology. Cautions service providers to be sensitive and assess the likely impact on patrons who could be early adopters or slow adopters. Advises policy makers to consider the community's needs and to have a balance between serving the underserved and keeping up with technology.

Frappaolo, C. (1998). Four basic functions (defining knowledge management). Computerworld, 32(8), 80(1).

Defines the four functions of a knowledge management system as externalization, internalization, intermediation, and cognition. Explains that externalization involves capturing and organizing knowledge and internalization is identifying the seeker's need and interpreting it. Describes technology that automates intermediation and incorporates cognition in workflow. Concludes that a knowledge management solution should be flexible, user and context-sensitive.

Geisler, E. (2001). The Mires of research evaluation. The Scientist, (15)(10), 35(2).

Evaluates the use of bibliometrics as indicators of research output. Cites advantages as affordability and flexibility as bibliometrics can be applied to individuals or institutions. Details weaknesses associated with generalization and biases and the difficulty of cross-disciplinary analyzing of publications. Suggests that peer-review process, a subjective evaluation, should be integrated with bibliometrics.

Stephens, D., & Russell, K. (2004). Organizational development, leadership, change, and the future of libraries. Library Trends, 53(1), 238(20).

Clarifies the need for organizational development in libraries and states that libraries should anticipate paradigm shifts and conflicts when changes occur. Emphasizes user-feedback as a factor in planning and decision-making and explains the role of leaders in initiating change. Concludes that libraries should adapt to changing environments and redesgn themselves to meet new challenges.