Refine your search
Collections
Co-Authors
Journals
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z All
Chandrappa,
- A Comparative Study of Subject Headings in University Libraries in Karnataka
Abstract Views :338 |
PDF Views:1
Authors
Affiliations
1 Department of Library and Information Science, University of Mysore, Manasagangothri, Mysore- 570006, IN
2 Department of DLISc, University of Mysore,Mysore- 570006, IN
1 Department of Library and Information Science, University of Mysore, Manasagangothri, Mysore- 570006, IN
2 Department of DLISc, University of Mysore,Mysore- 570006, IN
Source
Journal of Library Development, Vol 4, No 2 (2018), Pagination: 17-26Abstract
Subject cataloguing is considered more intellectually intriguing than the descriptive cataloguing. Quality of subject catalogues have been the area of interest for researchers. The present study attempted to analyse the subject catalogue records from four university libraries in Karnataka. The result showed that the subject access to the holdings of the university libraries need to be improved. Subject cataloguers have to pay immediate attention in improving the subject access.Keywords
Subject Headings, Folksonomies, Vocabularies, Subject Cataloguing, Subject Access, Tags, University Libraries, Karnataka, India.Full Text
References
- Drabenstott K. M., Simcox, S., & Fenton, E. G. (2011). End-user understanding of Subject Headings in library catalogs. Library Resources & Technical Services, 43(3), 140–160. https://doi.org/10.5860/lrts.43n3.140
- Lu C., Park, J., Hu, X., & Song, I.-Y. (2010). Metadata effectiveness: A comparison between user-created social tags and authorprovided metadata. In 2010 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 1–10). Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2010.273
- Lu C., Park, J., & Xiaohua Hu. (2010). User tags versus expert-assigned subject terms: A comparison of LibraryThing tags and Library of Congress Subject Headings. Journal of Information Science, 36(6), 763–779. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551510386173
- Maurer M. B., & Shakeri, S. (2016). Disciplinary differences: LCSH and keyword assignment for ETDs from different disciplines. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 54(4), 213–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2016.1141133
- McCutcheon S. (2009). Keyword vs controlled vocabulary searching: the one with the most tools wins, 27(2), 4. Rolla, P. J. (2009). User tgs versus subject headings. Library Resources & Technical Services, 53(3), 174–184. https://doi.org/10.5860/lrts.53n3.174
- Schwing T., McCutcheon, S., & Maurer, M. B. (2012). Uniqueness matters: author-supplied keywords and LCSH in the library catalog. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 50(8), 903–928. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2012.703164
- Spiteri L. F. (2006). The use of folksonomies in public library catalogues. Serials Librarian, 51(2), 75–89.
- Strader C. R. (2009). Author-assigned keywords versus Library of Congress Subject Headings. Library Resources & Technical Services, 53(4), 243–250.
- Wetterstrom H. M. (2007). The complementarity of tags and LCSH: A tagging experiment and investigation into added value in a New Zealand library context: submitted to the School of Information Management, Victoria University of Wellington in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Library and Information Studies (PhD Thesis). Victoria University of Wellington.
- Yi K., & Mai Chan, L. (2009). Linking folksonomy to Library of Congress subject headings: an exploratory study. Journal of Documentation, 65(6), 872–900. https://doi.org/10.1108/00220410910998906
- Next Generation of Catalogues:A Comparative Analysis of Opacs of University Libraries in India
Abstract Views :228 |
PDF Views:2
Authors
Chandrappa
1,
M. V. Sunil
2
Affiliations
1 Indian Maritime University, Chennai Campus, Chennai, IN
2 SDM Institute for Management Development (SDMIMD), Mysore, IN
1 Indian Maritime University, Chennai Campus, Chennai, IN
2 SDM Institute for Management Development (SDMIMD), Mysore, IN
Source
Journal of Library Development, Vol 3, No 1 (2017), Pagination: 25-37Abstract
The Next Generation Online Public Access Catalogue (OPAC), generally termed as OPAC 2.0, is the results of continuous rethinking and reworking to make the information retrieval more effective, efficient and elegant with improved searching experiences. This paper attempts to list the OPAC functionalities by studying the OPAC 2.0 features available in representatives of all three types of software – commercial, open source and free. This paper attempts to compare the features available in the OPAC of ten universities against the listed expectations. Effort is also made to understand the level of OPAC 2.0 in the software adopted by these universities for integration of e-Resources, and interoperability standards.Keywords
OPAC, Information Retrieval, OPAC 2.0., Library Automation, Online Catalogue.Full Text
References
- Aligarh Muslim University (1875). Retrieved September 11, 2015, from http://webopac.amu.ac.in:8080/opac/
- Ballard, T., & Blaine, A. (2011). User search-limiting behaviour in online catalogs: Comparing classic catalog use to search behaviour in next-generation catalogs.New Library World, 112(5/6), 261-273.
- Breeding, M. (2014).Perceptions 2013: an International survey of library automation. Retrieved from http://www.librarytechnology.org/perceptions2013.pl
- Calcutta University Library. (1857). Retrieved September 20, 2015, from http://www.caluniv.ac.in/opac/index.html
- Delhi University Library. (1922). Retrieved September 20, 2015, from http://dulsopac.du.ac.in/Default.aspx
- Dempsey, L. (2006). The library catalogue in the new discovery environment: Some thoughts. Ariadne, (48), 4.
- Golder, S. A., & Huberman, B. A. (2006). Usage patterns of collaborative tagging systems. Journal of information science, 32(2), 198-208.
- Gujarat University Library. (1949). Retrieved September 20, 2015, from http://14.139.122.29/webopac/main.aspx
- Gupta, A., & Kumar, A. (2006).Handbook of universities (Vol. 1, p. 472). New Delhi: Atlantic & Distributors.
- Gupta, A., & Kumar, A. (2006).Handbook of universities (Vol. 2, p. 897). New Delhi: Atlantic & Distributors.
- Haravu, L.J. (2004). Library automation: design, principles and practice. New Delhi: Allied Publishers.
- Karnatak University Library. (1949). Retrieved September 20, 2015, from http://kul-koha.informindia.co.in/
- Luong, T., & Liew, C. (2009). The evaluation of New Zealand academic library OPACs: A checklist approach. The Electronic Library, 27(3), 376-393.
- Madhusudhan, M., & Aggarwal, S. (2011). Web-based online public access catalogues of IIT libraries in India: an evaluative study. Program: electronic library and information systems, 45(4), 415-438.
- Mercun, T., & Žumer, M. (2008). New generation of catalogues for the new generation of users: a comparison of six library catalogues. Program: electronic library and information systems, 42(3), 243-261.
- Mumbai University Library. (1857). Retrieved September 20, 2015, from http://121.241.25.77/soulwebopac/main.aspx
- Mysore University Library System catalog. (1916). Retrieved September 20, 2015, from http://libcatmysore-koha.informindia.co.in/
- Naun, C. C. (2010). Next generation OPACs: A cataloging viewpoint. Cataloguing & Classification Quarterly, 48(4), 330-342.
- Saurashtra University Library. (1967). Retrieved September 20, 2015, from http://14.139.121.46/SOULWEBOPAC/main.aspx
- Tam, W., Cox, A. M., & Bussey, A. (2009). Student user preferences for features of next-generation OPACs: a case study of University of Sheffield international students. Program: electronic library and information systems, 43(4), 349-374.
- The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda Library. (1949). Retrieved September 20, 2015, from http://14.139.121.106/webopac/Default.aspx
- Welcome to Osmania University Library. (1918). Retrieved September 11, 2015, from http://14.139.82.46:8080/newgenlibctxt/
- Yang, S. Q., & Wagner, K. (2010). Evaluating and comparing discovery tools: how close are we towards next generation catalog?. Library Hi Tech, 28(4), 690-709.
- Yang, S. Q., & Hofmann, M. A. (2011).Next generation or current generation? A study of the OPACs of 260 academic libraries in the USA and Canada. Library Hi Tech, 29(2), 266-300.
- Measuring up to Standards:A Case Study of Adoption of a School Library
Abstract Views :275 |
PDF Views:1
Authors
Affiliations
1 Department of Studies in Library and Information Science, University of Mysore, Manasagangotri, Mysuru, IN
2 SDM Institute for Management Development, Chamundi Hill Road, Siddharthanagar Post, Mysuru, IN
3 Mysore University Library, Manasagangotri, Mysuru, IN
1 Department of Studies in Library and Information Science, University of Mysore, Manasagangotri, Mysuru, IN
2 SDM Institute for Management Development, Chamundi Hill Road, Siddharthanagar Post, Mysuru, IN
3 Mysore University Library, Manasagangotri, Mysuru, IN
Source
Journal of Library Development, Vol 2, No 2 (2016), Pagination: 66-75Abstract
Library has the motherhood status in the society. Everybody wants it. Nobody questions its importance. However, in reality, in many academic institutes – schools and colleges in particularthey exist more like an ornament. It receives the attention when committees visit the institutes for accreditation or some other similar purpose. Teachers, students, and the public rarely complain about the non-availability of library services. A school library, unfortunately, is no exception.Full Text
References
- Proofs Google is God. (n.d). Retrived May3. 2016, from http://www.Patheos.com/blogs/unreasonablefaith/2009/02/9-proofs-google-is-god/
- About Us.(n.d).Retrived May 3,2016,from http:/mylismysore.weebly.com/about-us.html
- ALA Archive.(n.d).Retrived May 3, 2016, from http://www.ala.org/Printer Template.cfm?section=archive&templets=/Content Management/ContentDisply.cfm&COntentID-7286
- Arivu Habba 2016/Arivu School Mysore.(n.d). Retrived May 3, 2016, from http://arivu.org/en-2016
- Carr.N.(2008).Is Google Making Us Stupit: Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education. 107(2),89-94.http://doi.org/10.111.j.1744-7984.2008.00172.x
- Jabr.F.(2013). The Reading Brain in the Digital Age: The Science of Paper versus Screens. Retrieved May3.2016, from http://www.scientifcamerican.com/article/reading-paper-screens/
- Myberg.C. & Wiberg.N.(2015). Screen vs. paper. What is the difference for reading and learning? Insights. 28(2). http://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.236
- Palfrey. J. (2015). BibblioTech: Why Libraries Matter More Than Ever in the Age of Google. Basic Books.
- The Measure of Things-100.47 zettabytes. (n.d). Retrieved May 3. 2016, from http://www.bluebulbprojects.com/MeasureofThings/results.php?comp-data&unit-zb& amt-100.47&sort-pr&p=1
- Methodological Approach to Assess the Library Catalogues
Abstract Views :308 |
PDF Views:3
Authors
Affiliations
1 Indian Maritime University (A Central University), Chennai, Tamil Nadu, IN
2 Department of Library and Information Science, University of Mysore, Mysuru, Karnataka, IN
1 Indian Maritime University (A Central University), Chennai, Tamil Nadu, IN
2 Department of Library and Information Science, University of Mysore, Mysuru, Karnataka, IN
Source
Journal of Library Development, Vol 7, No 1 (2021), Pagination: 37-56Abstract
The study focused on assessing the quality of catalogue records of university libraries in Karnataka available through their Web OPACs. The study assessed the various parameters of cataloguing records which determines the quality of the records. This study explains the methodology adopted for this research work in detail. The methodology gives describes the design of the study and procedures, the universities and sample records, instruments, methods of data collection, and treatment of data. The researcher identified nine of the existing 44 universities of Karnataka for the collection of data for the study. Only nine universities provided access to their catalogue records via the internet-based OPACs and hence, they have been selected.Keywords
Web OPAC, Catalogue, Metadata, Cataloguing Quality, Cataloguing Procedures, MARC 21, Metadata Quality, Library Automation, KOHA, University Libraries.Full Text
References
- Avdoyan, L. (1995). Cataloging quality/ : A Library of Congress symposium. In Opinion Papers: Vol. 6. Quality cataloguing (p. 31). Washington D. C.: Library of Congress.
- Chandrappa, & Harinarayana, N. S. (2016). An investigation into the diligence in metadata records of Mysore University Library. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 36(6), 431–436. https://doi.org/10.14429/djlit.36.6.10608
- Chandrappa, & Harinarayana, N. S. (2018a). An examination of the quality of catalogue records of management institutes in India. SRELS Journal of Information Management, 55(2), 73–81. https:// doi.org/10.17821/srels/2018/v55i2/119051
- Chandrappa, & Harinarayana, N. S. (2018b). Quality of cataloguing records of university libraries in Karnataka: A study. Gyankosh: The Journal of Library and Information Management, 9(2), 66–74. https:// doi.org/10.5958/2249-3182.2018.00007.2
- Chandrappa, & Harinarayana, N. S. (2018c). What constitutes cataloguing quality? a review of issues and perceptions. ILIS Journal of Librarianship and Informatics, 1(1), 85–93.
- Graham, P. S. (1990). Quality in cataloguing: Making distinctions. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 16(4), 213-218.
- Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607–610. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F001316447003000308
- Library of Congress Cataloging Forum. (1995). Cataloging quality: A Library of Congress symposium: Opinion papers, no. 6. Washington, D.C.: Library of Congress Cataloging Forum.
- Zeng, L. (1992). An evaluation of the quality of Chinese-language records in the OCLC OLUC database and a study of a rulebased data validation system for online Chinese cataloging (Doctoral dissertation). University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh.
- Zeng, L. (1993). Quality control of Chinese-language records using a rulebased data validation system-part 1: An evaluation of the quality of Chinese-language records in the OCLC OLUC database. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 16(4), 25-66. https://doi.org/10.1300/J104v16n04_03
- Zeng, L. (1994b). Quality control of Chinese-language records using a rule-based data validation system-part 2: A study of a rule-based data validation system for online Chinese cataloging. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 18(1), 3-26. https://doi.org/10.1300/ J104v18n01_0