Document (#26266)

Author

Hjoerland, B.

Title

¬The special competency of information specialists

Issue

Letters to the editor.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 53(2002) no.14, S.1275-76

Year

2002

Content

"In a new article published in Journal of Documentation, 2002, I claim that the special competency of information specialists and information scientists are related to "domain analysis." Information science grew out of special librarianship and documentation (cf. Williams, 1997), and implicit in its tradition has in my opinion been a focus an subject knowledge. Although domain analysis has earlier been introduced in JASIST (Hjoerland & Albrechtsen, 1995), the new article introduces 11 Specific approaches to domain analysis, which I Claim together define the Specific competencies of information specialists. The approaches are (I) Producing and evaluating literature guides and subject gateways, (2) Producing and evaluating special classifications and thesauri, (3) Research an and competencies in indexing and retrieving information specialties, (4) Knowledge about empirical user studies in subject areas, (5) Producing and interpreting bibliometrical studies, (6) Historical studies of information structures and Services in domains, (7) Studies of documents and genres in knowledge domains, (8) Epistemological and critical studies of different paradigms, assumptions, and interests in domains, (9) Knowledge about terminological studies, LSP (Languages for Special Purposes), and discourse analysis in knowledge fields, (10) Knowledge about and studies of structures and institutions in scientific and professional communication in a domain, (11) Knowledge about methods and results from domain analytic studies about professional cognition, knowledge representation in computer science and artificial intelligence. By bringing these approaches together, the paper advocates a view which may have been implicit in previous literature but which has not before been Set out systematically. The approaches presented here are neither exhaustive nor mutually exhaustve, but an attempt is made to present the state of the art. Specific examples and selective reviews of literature are provided, and the strength and drawback of each of these approaches are being discussed. It is my Claim that the information specialist who has worked with these 1 1 approaches in a given domain (e.g., music, sociology, or chemistry) has a special expertise that should not be mixed up with the kind of expertise taught at universities in corresponding subjects. Some of these 11 approaches are today well-known in schools of LIS. Bibliometrics is an example, Other approaches are new and represent a view of what should be introduced in the training of information professionals. First and foremost does the article advocates the view that these 1 1 approaches should be seen as supplementary. That the Professional identity is best maintained if Chose methods are applied to the same examples (same domain). Somebody would perhaps feel that this would make the education of information professionals too narrow. The Counter argument is that you can only understand and use these methods properly in a new domain, if you already have a deep knowledge of the Specific information problems in at least orte domain. It is a dangerous illusion to believe that one becomes more competent to work in any field if orte does not know anything about any domain. The special challenge in our science is to provide general background for use in Specific fields. This is what domain analysis is developed for. Study programs that allow the students to specialize and to work independent in the selected field (such as, for example, the Curriculum at the Royal School of LIS in Denmark) should fit well with the intentions in domain analysis. In this connection it should be emphasized that the 11 approaches are presented as general approaches that may be used in about any domain whatsoever. They should, however, be seen in connection. If this is not the case, then their relative strengths and weaknesses cannot be evaluated. The approaches do not have the same status. Some (e.g., empirical user studies) are dependent an others (e.g., epistemological studies).
It is my hope that domain analysis may contribute to the strengthening of the professional and scientific identity of our discipline and provide more coherence and depth in information studies. The paper is an argument about what should be core teachings in our field, It should be both broad enough to cover the important parts of IS and Specific enough to maintain a special focus and identity compared to, for example, computer science and the cognitive sciences. It is not a narrow view of information science and an the other hand it does not Set forth an unrealistic utopia."

Theme

Information
Ausbildung

Similar documents (author)

1. Hjoerland, B.: ¬The concept of 'subject' in information science (1992) 4.49

   4.491267 = sum of:
     4.491267 = weight(author_txt:hjoerland in 2247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
       4.491267 = fieldWeight in 2247, product of:
         1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:
           1.0 = termFreq=1.0
         7.1860275 = idf(docFreq=90, maxDocs=44218)
         0.625 = fieldNorm(doc=2247)
   

2. Hjoerland, B.: Subject representation and information seeking : contributions to a theory based on the theory of knowledge (1993) 4.49

   4.491267 = sum of:
     4.491267 = weight(author_txt:hjoerland in 7555) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
       4.491267 = fieldWeight in 7555, product of:
         1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:
           1.0 = termFreq=1.0
         7.1860275 = idf(docFreq=90, maxDocs=44218)
         0.625 = fieldNorm(doc=7555)
   

3. Hjoerland, B.: Theory of information science : Reply to Professor Gernot Wersig (1998) 4.49

   4.491267 = sum of:
     4.491267 = weight(author_txt:hjoerland in 403) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
       4.491267 = fieldWeight in 403, product of:
         1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:
           1.0 = termFreq=1.0
         7.1860275 = idf(docFreq=90, maxDocs=44218)
         0.625 = fieldNorm(doc=403)
   

4. Hjoerland, B.: Information retrieval, text composition, and semantics (1998) 4.49

   4.491267 = sum of:
     4.491267 = weight(author_txt:hjoerland in 649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
       4.491267 = fieldWeight in 649, product of:
         1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:
           1.0 = termFreq=1.0
         7.1860275 = idf(docFreq=90, maxDocs=44218)
         0.625 = fieldNorm(doc=649)
   

5. Hjoerland, B.: ¬The classification of psychology : a case study in the classification of a knowledge field (1998) 4.49

   4.491267 = sum of:
     4.491267 = weight(author_txt:hjoerland in 3783) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
       4.491267 = fieldWeight in 3783, product of:
         1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:
           1.0 = termFreq=1.0
         7.1860275 = idf(docFreq=90, maxDocs=44218)
         0.625 = fieldNorm(doc=3783)
   

Similar documents (content)

1. Saye, J.D.: ¬The cataloging experience in library and information science education : an educator's perspective (1987) 0.54

   0.5402225 = sum of:
     0.5402225 = product of:
       0.7202967 = sum of:
         0.025708385 = weight(abstract_txt:information in 387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.025708385 = score(doc=387,freq=3.0), product of:
             0.06539699 = queryWeight, product of:
               2.4209464 = idf(docFreq=10677, maxDocs=44218)
               0.027012985 = queryNorm
             0.3931127 = fieldWeight in 387, product of:
               1.7320508 = tf(freq=3.0), with freq of:
                 3.0 = termFreq=3.0
               2.4209464 = idf(docFreq=10677, maxDocs=44218)
               0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=387)
         0.1288424 = weight(abstract_txt:special in 387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.1288424 = score(doc=387,freq=1.0), product of:
             0.2762194 = queryWeight, product of:
               2.0551722 = boost
               4.9754615 = idf(docFreq=829, maxDocs=44218)
               0.027012985 = queryNorm
             0.4664495 = fieldWeight in 387, product of:
               1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:
                 1.0 = termFreq=1.0
               4.9754615 = idf(docFreq=829, maxDocs=44218)
               0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=387)
         0.5657459 = weight(abstract_txt:specialists in 387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.5657459 = score(doc=387,freq=3.0), product of:
             0.5135572 = queryWeight, product of:
               2.802306 = boost
               6.784232 = idf(docFreq=135, maxDocs=44218)
               0.027012985 = queryNorm
             1.101622 = fieldWeight in 387, product of:
               1.7320508 = tf(freq=3.0), with freq of:
                 3.0 = termFreq=3.0
               6.784232 = idf(docFreq=135, maxDocs=44218)
               0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=387)
       0.75 = coord(3/4)
   

2. Kaliyan, S.; Rao, V.K.: Information dissemination through document translation : subject specialist or translator? (1993) 0.47

   0.47031868 = sum of:
     0.47031868 = product of:
       0.6270916 = sum of:
         0.019790325 = weight(abstract_txt:information in 807) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.019790325 = score(doc=807,freq=1.0), product of:
             0.06539699 = queryWeight, product of:
               2.4209464 = idf(docFreq=10677, maxDocs=44218)
               0.027012985 = queryNorm
             0.3026183 = fieldWeight in 807, product of:
               1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:
                 1.0 = termFreq=1.0
               2.4209464 = idf(docFreq=10677, maxDocs=44218)
               0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=807)
         0.17178987 = weight(abstract_txt:special in 807) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.17178987 = score(doc=807,freq=1.0), product of:
             0.2762194 = queryWeight, product of:
               2.0551722 = boost
               4.9754615 = idf(docFreq=829, maxDocs=44218)
               0.027012985 = queryNorm
             0.6219327 = fieldWeight in 807, product of:
               1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:
                 1.0 = termFreq=1.0
               4.9754615 = idf(docFreq=829, maxDocs=44218)
               0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=807)
         0.4355114 = weight(abstract_txt:specialists in 807) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.4355114 = score(doc=807,freq=1.0), product of:
             0.5135572 = queryWeight, product of:
               2.802306 = boost
               6.784232 = idf(docFreq=135, maxDocs=44218)
               0.027012985 = queryNorm
             0.848029 = fieldWeight in 807, product of:
               1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:
                 1.0 = termFreq=1.0
               6.784232 = idf(docFreq=135, maxDocs=44218)
               0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=807)
       0.75 = coord(3/4)
   

3. Jackson, R.: Information Literacy and its relationship to cognitive development and reflective judgment (2008) 0.44

   0.44102472 = sum of:
     0.44102472 = product of:
       0.88204944 = sum of:
         0.019790325 = weight(abstract_txt:information in 111) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.019790325 = score(doc=111,freq=1.0), product of:
             0.06539699 = queryWeight, product of:
               2.4209464 = idf(docFreq=10677, maxDocs=44218)
               0.027012985 = queryNorm
             0.3026183 = fieldWeight in 111, product of:
               1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:
                 1.0 = termFreq=1.0
               2.4209464 = idf(docFreq=10677, maxDocs=44218)
               0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=111)
         0.8622591 = weight(abstract_txt:competency in 111) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.8622591 = score(doc=111,freq=1.0), product of:
             0.8097438 = queryWeight, product of:
               3.518803 = boost
               8.518833 = idf(docFreq=23, maxDocs=44218)
               0.027012985 = queryNorm
             1.0648541 = fieldWeight in 111, product of:
               1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:
                 1.0 = termFreq=1.0
               8.518833 = idf(docFreq=23, maxDocs=44218)
               0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=111)
       0.5 = coord(2/4)
   

4. Hjoerland, B.: Domain analysis in information science : eleven approaches - traditional as well as innovative (2002) 0.42

   0.41865537 = sum of:
     0.41865537 = product of:
       0.55820715 = sum of:
         0.021423655 = weight(abstract_txt:information in 4464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.021423655 = score(doc=4464,freq=3.0), product of:
             0.06539699 = queryWeight, product of:
               2.4209464 = idf(docFreq=10677, maxDocs=44218)
               0.027012985 = queryNorm
             0.32759392 = fieldWeight in 4464, product of:
               1.7320508 = tf(freq=3.0), with freq of:
                 3.0 = termFreq=3.0
               2.4209464 = idf(docFreq=10677, maxDocs=44218)
               0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4464)
         0.15184222 = weight(abstract_txt:special in 4464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.15184222 = score(doc=4464,freq=2.0), product of:
             0.2762194 = queryWeight, product of:
               2.0551722 = boost
               4.9754615 = idf(docFreq=829, maxDocs=44218)
               0.027012985 = queryNorm
             0.549716 = fieldWeight in 4464, product of:
               1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                 2.0 = termFreq=2.0
               4.9754615 = idf(docFreq=829, maxDocs=44218)
               0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4464)
         0.3849413 = weight(abstract_txt:specialists in 4464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.3849413 = score(doc=4464,freq=2.0), product of:
             0.5135572 = queryWeight, product of:
               2.802306 = boost
               6.784232 = idf(docFreq=135, maxDocs=44218)
               0.027012985 = queryNorm
             0.7495588 = fieldWeight in 4464, product of:
               1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                 2.0 = termFreq=2.0
               6.784232 = idf(docFreq=135, maxDocs=44218)
               0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4464)
       0.75 = coord(3/4)
   

5. Hoskisson, T.: Making the right assumptions : know your user and improve the reference interview (1998) 0.39

   0.3858966 = sum of:
     0.3858966 = product of:
       0.7717932 = sum of:
         0.017316535 = weight(abstract_txt:information in 2194) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.017316535 = score(doc=2194,freq=1.0), product of:
             0.06539699 = queryWeight, product of:
               2.4209464 = idf(docFreq=10677, maxDocs=44218)
               0.027012985 = queryNorm
             0.264791 = fieldWeight in 2194, product of:
               1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:
                 1.0 = termFreq=1.0
               2.4209464 = idf(docFreq=10677, maxDocs=44218)
               0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2194)
         0.75447667 = weight(abstract_txt:competency in 2194) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.75447667 = score(doc=2194,freq=1.0), product of:
             0.8097438 = queryWeight, product of:
               3.518803 = boost
               8.518833 = idf(docFreq=23, maxDocs=44218)
               0.027012985 = queryNorm
             0.9317474 = fieldWeight in 2194, product of:
               1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:
                 1.0 = termFreq=1.0
               8.518833 = idf(docFreq=23, maxDocs=44218)
               0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2194)
       0.5 = coord(2/4)