Course  

The second set of assignments are listed below and represent as a whole 80% of the course grade.These require that you turn in to the instructor written work. That work must be submitted (in order of preference) in the following formats: printable pdf, html, or Word. Other formats will be considered non-responsive and not accepted. Why? I am not equiped to open every conceivable format. Some formats are more prone to carry viruses than others, and I AM VERY DISEASE aversive.

Communicate  ALL Assignments by e-mail to wkoehler@valdosta.edu 

1. Ciolek describes six methods for assessing Web documents. What are they? Find current examples in the literature in each of the six categories.  Augment Ciolek's bibliography -- that is find literature not listed at http://www.ciolek.com/WWWVL-InfoQuality.html

Develop an annotated bibliography of those new information sources of no more than two works for each of his six methods. Each annotation should not exceed one paragraph.

Due Jan 28 Grade Weight 15%

2. Is the WWW a library? If it is not a library, what is it? If it is manageable, what can we do to manage it? Find examples on the Web and elsewhere that seek to incorporate WWW material into a library environment.

Due Feb 18 Grade Weight 15%

3. Examine the Web indexing tools available at http://www.ifla.org/II/metadata.htm#general-indices. Each member of the class is to become very familiar with one (1) of these and report back on its uses, applications, and efficiencies. Inform us of how it works, whether it works, what is does, what is costs (in money and time). Would you recommend this as a cataloging tool?

Have you created a Web site as a SLIS class assignment or for any other reason? If so, develop, assign, and apply both Metatags and Dublin Core tags to your site. If not, choose some other site and do the same.

Using  automated software referenced in this course, generate USMARC code for the Dublin Core metatags you wrote. How satisfactory was the translation? Do you think it was a software problem, or was "something lost in the translation." By that I mean, are the MARC and Dublin Core fields not quite so compatible as they may seem?

Send me a copy of the DC and metatag source code incorporated in the site code. Send me also your MARC markup together with the answers to the questions posed in this question.

Due March 24 Grade Weight 15%


4. Wells, Calcari, and Koplow have produced a very interesting book that describes twelve major Web cataloging efforts. These are AgNIC, Argus, Blue Web'n, BUBL, EEVL, INFOMINE, IPL, LII, Math Archives, OMNI, Signpost, and SOSIG. You have by now seen all of these and more.

Wells, Calcari, and Koplow also developed an analytical metadata framework (p. vii). It contains thirteen (13) elements. These are:

1. Responsible persons
2. Mission statement
3. Funding sources and budgets
4. Target and secondary audiences
5. Collection description
6. Selection and evaluation criteria
7. Mechanics of production - includes software and hardware
8. Classification taxonomy
9. Project strengths
10. Project weaknesses
11. Project timeframe
12. Project future goals
13. "A vision statement concerning the future of resource location and description"
The assignment is:
1. Stake a claim to a major Web cataloging effort NOT -- REPEAT -- NOT already described by Wells, Calcari, and Koplow and NOT -- REPEAT -- NOT already claimed by someone else in the class. Announce your choice and stake your claim on the class discussion list. There are many of these "out there." Subject to my veto and the above conditions, what you choose is yours to do. Do this no later than July 3.
2. Using the Wells, Calcari, and Koplow framework, describe and critique the Web catalog you selected.

         Due April 7. Grade Weight 20% - On-line"in-class" discussion of assignment 4: 5%

Pay attention to the new initiatives -- including CORC, Dublin Core, and Semantic Web. What are the comparitive strengths and weaknesses of Dublic Core and Semantic Web?
Due April 28

TOP