North American Symposium on Knowledge Organization
June 18-19, 2009
Syracuse, New York
Abstracts of Presented Papers
The
data-information-knowledge-wisdom hierarchy and its antithesis
Jay H. Bernstein,
Kingsborough Community College
The now
taken-for-granted notion that data lead to information, which leads to
knowledge, which in turn leads to wisdom was first specified in detail by R. L.
Ackoff in 1988. The
Data-Information-Knowledge-Wisdom hierarchy is based on filtration, reduction,
and transformation. Besides being
causal and hierarchical, the scheme is pyramidal, in that data are plentiful
while wisdom is almost nonexistent.
Ackoff’s formula linking these terms together this way permits us to ask
what the opposite of knowledge is and
whether analogous principles of hierarchy, process, and pyramiding apply to
it. The inversion of the
Data-Information-Knowledge-Wisdom hierarchy produces a series of opposing terms
(including misinformation, error, ignorance, and stupidity) but not exactly a
chain or a pyramid. Examining the
connections between these phenomena contributes to our understanding of the
contours and limits of knowledge.
Treatment
of georeferencing in knowledge organization systems
Olha Buchel &
Linda L. Hill, The University of Western Ontario
Recent research
projects in North America that have advanced the integration of formal mathematical
georeferencing and informal placename georeferencing in knowledge organization
systems are described and related to visualization applications.
Tensions
between language and discourse in North American knowledge organization
D. Grant Campbell,
University of Western Ontario
This paper
uses Paul Ricoeur's distinction between language and discourse to help define a
North American research agenda in knowledge organization. Ricoeur's concept of discourse as a set
of utterances, defined within multiple disciplines and domains, and reducible,
not to the word but to the sentence, provides three useful tools for defining
our research. First, it enables us
to recognize the important contribution of numerous studies that focus on acts
of organization, rather than on standards or tools of organization. Second, it
gives us a harmonious paradigm that helps us reconcile the competing demands of
interoperability, based on widely-used tools and techniques of library science,
and domain integrity, based on user warrant and an understanding of local
context. Finally, it resonates
with the current economic, political and social climate in which our
information systems work, particularly the competing calls for protectionism
and globalization.
Classical
pragmatism and its varieties: On a pluriform metatheoretical perspective for KO
Thomas M. Dousa,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Pragmatism is
a metatheoretical perspective within knowledge organization (KO) deriving from
an American philosophical tradition active since the late 19th century. Its
core feature is commitment to the evaluation of the adequacy of concepts and
beliefs through the empirical test of practice: this entails epistemological
antifoundationalism, fallibilism, contingency, social embeddedness, and
pluralism. This article reviews three variants of Pragmatism historically
influential in philosophy—Pierce’s scientifically oriented pragmaticism, James’s
subjectivist practicalism; and Dewey’s socially-directed instrumentalism—and
indicates points of contact with KO theories propounded by Bliss, Shera, and Hjørland.
KO applications of classical Pragmatism have tended to converge toward a
socially pluralist model characteristic of Dewey. Recently, Rorty’s
epistemologically radical brand of Neopragmatism has found adherents within KO:
whether it provides a more advantageous metatheoretical framework than
classical Pragmatism remains to be seen.
Evolutionary
order in the classification theories of C. A. Cutter & E. C. Richardson:
Its nature and limits
Thomas M. Dousa,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
In recent
years, evolutionary order has been used as the favored mode of determining
class sequence by classificationists using integrative levels as a theoretical
framework for classification design. Although current advocates of evolutionary
order are based in Europe, use of the concept in library and information
science (LIS) can be traced back to two North American pioneers in
classification theory, C. A. Cutter (1837–1903) and E. C. Richardson (1860–1939).
Working in the heyday of evolutionism and influenced by the developmental
classifications of the sciences of Auguste Comte and Herbert Spencer, Cutter
and Richardson introduced evolutionary order as an explicit principle into LIS
classification theory, defining it as encompassing a conceptual progression
from the general to the specific, the simple to the complex, and the past to
the present. This idea proved influential, being appropriated by later
theoreticians like H. E. Bliss; it also reinforced the realist tendency of
early LIS classification theory. However, for Cutter and Richardson,
application of evolutionary order to bibliothecal classifications proved
problematic. Cutter applied the concept inconsistently; Richardson viewed it as
theoretically ideal, but subject to so many exceptions for pragmatic reasons
that it could not be attained in practice. Cutter’s and Richardson’s use of
evolutionary order reveals the tension between enunciating a principle of
classificatory ordering in theory and applying it in practice.
Melvil
Dewey's ingenious notational system
Rebecca Green,
Dewey Decimal Classification, Online Computer Library Center, Inc.
Historically,
the notational system of the Dewey Decimal Classification provided for
non-institution-specific, relative location shelf arrangements, thus
substantially reducing bibliographic classification effort. Today its decimal notation continues to
provide the classification scheme with flexible granularity, is hospitable to
expansion, expresses relationships, interfaces well with modern retrieval
systems, and is internationally understood.
User-Centered
Paradigm to Cataloging Standards in Theory and Practice: Problems and Prospects
Gretchen L.
Hoffman, Texas Womans University
Dervin and
Nilan’s (1986) article, “Information needs and uses,” has been an influential
article in Library and Information Science (LIS), because it calls for a
paradigm shift in LIS away from research that focuses on systems and standards
to research that focuses on users. This article also has been influential on
library and information practice. Librarians and other information workers are
called on to be user-centered and place users at the center of library programs
and services. Conforming to the user-centered paradigm, however, has been
problematic for broad representational systems, like library cataloging, that must
meet the diverse needs of global users. Despite calls to focus on users, the
cataloging field has not taken a user-centered approach in research or in the
development of cataloging standards. Instead, the responsibility to meet users’
needs has been placed on cataloging practitioners, who are encouraged to
customize bibliographic records to meet their local users’ needs. Dissertation
research by Hoffman (2008) suggests that catalogers are limited in their
ability to customize bibliographic records, because catalogers do not know who
their users are and cannot identify their users’ needs. In addition, library
administrators discourage customization in favor of efficient cataloging
processes. There are limits to LIS’s user-centered paradigm in the area of cataloging,
and perhaps it needs to examined and reconsidered. Is the user-centered
paradigm still applicable to cataloging? How should cataloging meet users’
needs? This paper will examine the problems of the user-centered paradigm in
cataloging.
North
American facet heritage: Past lessons as pathways for contemporary exploration?
Kathryn La Barre,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
This paper
will contrast the broad contours of Ranganathan’s legacy in North America with
a general assessment of contemporary North American facet applications. It will
also offer a potential model for contemporary researchers that will outline
heritage facet-analytical protocols currently in use.
The
KO roots of Taylor's value-added model
David M. Pimentel,
Syracuse University
The model
developed by Bob Taylor for his book Value-Added Processes in Information
Systems (1986) has been highly influential in the field of library and
information science. Yet despite its
impact on the broader field, the potential of the Value-Added Model has gone
largely unexplored by knowledge organization researchers. Unraveling the history behind Taylor’s
development of the model highlights the significant role played by professional
indexers. The Value-Added Model is
thus reexamined for its potential as a flexible framework for evaluating
knowledge organization systems.
Modulation
and specialization in North American knowledge organization: Visualizing
pioneers