Analysis of format duplication in an academic library collection     

Amanda Maple  Carol Wright  Robert Seeds 《Library Collections, Acquisitions, and Technical Services》2004,27(4):425-442

The issue of format duplication in academic library collections is increasingly complicated and perplexing in an environment of static or dwindling resources, soaring user expectations, dynamic access models, and inconsistent and changing publisher and vendor pricing structures. The problem is further complicated for libraries serving a university with multiple campus locations. This paper surveys recent investigative projects and highlights the work of a Duplicate Formats Task Force at Pennsylvania State University charged with determining the extent and nature of format duplication at that institution.  相似文献   

Editorial     

Carol Peters  Martin Braschler 《Information Retrieval》2004,7(1-2):5-5

  相似文献   

Bubble Trouble     

Carol Iannone 《Academic Questions》2011,24(3):258-261

  相似文献   

An Interdisciplinary Dialog About Teaching and Learning Dialogically     

Carol Thompson  Michael Kleine 《Innovative Higher Education》2015,40(2):173-185

  相似文献   

Of Frogs & Rhetoric: The Atrazine Wars     

Carol Reeves 《Technical Communication Quarterly》2015,24(4):328-348

In a scientific dispute over the effects of atrazine on amphibians, chemical industry–funded and publically funded scientists present stunningly contrasting constructions of atrazine's environmental concentrations, persistence, and potential to harm. Considerable scientific uncertainties and variable ranges allow authors to construct preferred versions of the story of atrazine. These incommensurate rhetorical constructions, more the result of competing economic and environmental interests than of any paradigmatic misalignments, have prolonged the dispute not only over atrazine's effects but also over whether its sales should be banned.  相似文献   

Shine a Light on Us     

Carol Iannone 《Academic Questions》2016,29(1):5-9

  相似文献   

Access to human,animal, and environmental journals is still limited for the One Health community     

Carol E. Vreeland  Kristine M. Alpi  Caitlin A. Pike  Elisabeth E. Whitman  Suzanne Kennedy-Stoskopf 《Journal of the Medical Library Association》2016,104(2):100-108

Objective

“One Health” is an interdisciplinary approach to evaluating and managing the health and well-being of humans, animals, and the environments they share that relies on knowledge from the domains of human health, animal health, and the environmental sciences. The authors'' objective was to evaluate the extent of open access (OA) to journal articles in a sample of literature from these domains. We hypothesized that OA to articles in human health or environmental journals was greater than access to animal health literature.

Methods

A One Health seminar series provided fifteen topics. One librarian translated each topic into a search strategy and searched four databases for articles from 2011 to 2012. Two independent investigators assigned each article to human health, the environment, animal health, all, other, or combined categories. Article and journal-level OA were determined. Each journal was also assigned a subject category and its indexing evaluated.

Results

Searches retrieved 2,651 unique articles from 1,138 journals; 1,919 (72%) articles came from 406 journals that contributed more than 1 article. Seventy-seven (7%) journals dealt with all 3 One Health domains; the remaining journals represented human health 487 (43%), environment 172 (15%), animal health 141 (12%), and other/combined categories 261 (23%). The proportion of OA journals in animal health (40%) differed significantly from journals categorized as human (28%), environment (28%), and more than 1 category (29%). The proportion of OA for articles by subject categories ranged from 25%–34%; only the difference between human (34%) and environment (25%) was significant.

Conclusions

OA to human health literature is more comparable to animal health than hypothesized. Environmental journals had less OA than anticipated.Keywords (Medical Subject Headings) Publishing, Periodicals as Topic, Access to Information, Veterinary Medicine, Environment, Environmental Health, Medicine“One Health” is an integrated, transdisciplinary approach to solve complex problems at the diverse interfaces shared by humans, animals, and the environment [1]. The One Health approach to evaluating and managing the health and well-being of humans, animals, and the environments that they share relies on knowledge from the domains of human health, animal health, and the environmental sciences. Although there is a growing body of literature about the development of the One Health concept as documented by Pepper, Carrigan, Shurtz, and Foster [2], this literature is not the same as the combination of literature from the three domains that is applied in service of One Health. Every discipline related to One Health has its unique mindset and language, with corresponding lists of acronyms that are frequently an impediment to effective communication across the participating professions. Relevant papers guiding a One Health approach may never specifically use “One Health” as a term or concept.To promote better communication and collaboration among health professionals and environmental scientists, a public monthly One Health Intellectual Exchange Group (IEG) hosted by the North Carolina Biotechnology Center was launched in 2009. In 2011, faculty from the North Carolina State University College of Veterinary Medicine, University of North Carolina''s Gillings School for Global Public Health, Duke Global Health Institute, and Nicholas School of the Environment at Duke University expanded the IEG series into a weekly seminar course with eight One Health focus areas [3]. The eight focus area modules were the following: an introduction to One Health; environmental health and ecology; the human and animal bond; zoonoses and emerging infectious diseases; food and water safety; disease surveillance, informatics, and disaster preparedness; benefits of comparative medicine; and policy and education (Appendix A, online only). Each seminar speaker recommended papers to read prior to the session to provide a foundation for the topic because student backgrounds and majors were quite diverse. Represented student majors included master''s of public health, master''s of animal science, doctor of veterinary medicine, graduate-level environmental sciences, and undergraduate-level biochemistry, engineering, and biology.Open access (OA) to relevant literature is very important to scholars and practitioners working on interdisciplinary problems. The One Health Proof of Concept Workgroup found that few studies assess outcomes in human, animal, and environmental spheres simultaneously [4], making it important to be able to access articles from each of the three domains to get a more complete picture.The objective of this study was to evaluate the extent of OA to journal articles in a sample of literature relevant to One Health from the human, animal, and environmental domains. Working in a college of veterinary medicine and supporting faculty, staff, and students addressing interdisciplinary problems under the One Health umbrella [5], the authors were familiar with the extent of OA in human biomedical and public health literature and the literature of veterinary medicine but were less familiar with environmental journals. In light of general availability of environmental information and OA to publications such as Environmental Health Perspectives, we thought it likely that environmental literature would be relatively open compared to the other subject areas. Therefore, we hypothesized OA to articles from human health or environmental journals was greater than access to animal health literature. We chose to look at article-level subject categorization and access, as well as journal-level categorization and access, because they might differ. Article-level access relates more to authors'' decisions about OA for a content domain, while journal-level access and subject categorization are driven by publishers and associations. Understanding the distinction and having data would inform our efforts to promote increased OA to this literature.  相似文献   

Disruptive silence: deepening experiential learning in the absence of technology     

Carol A. Smith  Rodney Parks  Jesse Parrish  Ryan Swirski 《Journal of Adventure Education & Outdoor Learning》2018,18(1):1-14

Technology plays an integral role in the lives of the majority of the US population. As technology becomes integrated into young people’s lives, questions arise regarding its effects on learning. This exploratory study draws on interviews with students who attend university in the United States to determine how separating students from technology deepens experiential learning. Participants were interviewed following a study abroad course to New Zealand, during which they were disconnected from technologies such as cell phones, the Internet and social media. In the interviews, students discussed their feelings of being disconnected and describe how disconnecting impacted their overall experience. Participants agreed that disconnecting from technology had positive effects on experiential learning and the global experience. Major themes that emerged include students’ enhanced immersion and engagement, the value of disconnection in providing opportunities for personal growth and the difficulty of initial separation from technology as a result of conditioning.  相似文献   

Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Evaluating the Developmental Course of Gender Differentiation: Compliments, Queries, and Quandaries     

Diane N. Ruble  & Carol Lynn Martin 《Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development》2002,67(2):148-166

  相似文献   

The selection of instructional options in a computer-based coordinate concept lesson     

Carol Carrier  Gayle Davidson  Michael Williams 《Educational technology research and development : ETR & D》1985,33(3):199-212

  相似文献