User:KYPark/2002

Navigate 1900's
'00	'01	'02	'03	'04	'05	'06	'07	'08	'09
'10	'11	'12	'13	'14	'15	'16	'17	'18	'19
'20	'21	'22	'23	'24	'25	'26	'27	'28	'29
'30	'31	'32	'33	'34	'35	'36	'37	'38	'39
'40	'41	'42	'43	'44	'45	'46	'47	'48	'49
'50	'51	'52	'53	'54	'55	'56	'57	'58	'59
'60	'61	'62	'63	'64	'65	'66	'67	'68	'69
'70	'71	'72	'73	'74	'75	'76	'77	'78	'79
'80	'81	'82	'83	'84	'85	'86	'87	'88	'89
'90	'91	'92	'93	'94	'95	'96	'97	'98	'99
Navigate 2000's
'00	'01	'02	'03	'04	'05	'06	'07	'08	'09
'10	'11	'12	'13	'14	'15	'16	'17	'18	'19

Blair

David Blair

Exemplary Documents: A Foundation for Information Retrieval Design

Information Processing and Management, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 363-379. ACM Portal

Abstract, etc.

Documents are generally represented for retrieval by either extracting index terms from them or by creating and selecting from an external set of candidate terms. There are many procedures for doing this, but while work continues along these dimensions, there have been relatively few attempts to change this basic process. Of particular importance is the creation of indexing schemes for retrieval systems in non-library contexts. Here, the cost of developing an indexing scheme independent of the documents to be retrieved is often considered too high to implement. As a result, simple full-text retrieval or, to a lesser extent, automatic extractive or associative indexing methods are the predominant methods used in non-library contexts. This paper suggests an alternative document representation method based on what we call exemplary documents. Exemplary documents are those documents that describe or exhibit the intellectual structure of a particular field of interest. In so doing, they provide both an indexing vocabulary for that area and, more importantly, a narrative context in which the indexing terms have a clearer meaning. Further, it is much easier to develop an indexing scheme by using exemplary documents than it is to do so from scratch.

Authored by

• David C. Blair, Computer and Information Systems, Graduate School of Business, University of Michigan. DBLP ACM
• Steven O. Kimbrough, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania. DBLP

Received 8 April 2000

Accepted 19 January 2001

Available online 3 January 2002.

{{{1}}}

• David Blair (1989) in memoriam of Manfred Kochen
• David Blair (2005) on Wittgenstein
• David Blair (2006) on Wittgenstein

Knowledge Management: Hype, Hope, or Help?

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, vol. 53, no. 12, pp. 1019-1028. ACM

Abstract

This article examines the nature of Knowledge Management - how it differs from Data Management and Information Management, and its relationship to the development of Expert Systems and Decision Support Systems. It also examines the importance of Communities of Practice and Tacit Knowledge for Knowledge Management. The discussion is organized around five explicit questions. One: What is "knowledge"? Two: Why are people, especially managers, thinking about Knowledge Management? Three: What are the enabling technologies for Knowledge Management? Four: What are the prerequisites for Knowledge Management? Five: What are the major challenges for Knowledge Management?

Peter Burke

Context in Context

Common Knowledge, 8 (1): 152-177

Alan Farstrup

What Research Has to Say about Reading Instruction

3rd ed. (1st ed. 1978)

eds. Alan E. Farstrup, and S. Jay Samuels

http://books.google.com/books?id=R7DmBsTzhZAC

Jean S. Chall 1921-1999

It is with a profound sadness that we acknowledge the death of Jean Chall, Professor Emerita at the Harvard Graduate School of Education. [...] In her 1967 book, Learning to Read: The Great Debate, she reviewed and summarized the published research on meaning-focused versus phonics-focused approaches to reading, and concluded that phonics provided the better start for early reading. Chall defended this position despite criticism as the pendulum shifted and other approaches became more fashionable. If she were alive today, she would be pleased to know that the National Reading Panel report came to the same conclusion that she reached more than 30 years ago. (p. vi)

• S. Jay Samuels. "Reading Frequency: Its Development and Assessment," p. 166.

Excerpt

The method I developed -- repeated reading -- was simple (Samuels, 1979). With this method, student would reread a short meaningful passage several times until a satisfactory level of fluency was reached. Fluency was defined as an 85 word per minute speed. Although accuracy in word recognition was a goal, I did not require error-free reading because I had fond that students would become so fearful of making an error that it crippled their attempt to reach the speed goal. When the desired speed was reached, the procedure was repeated on the next passage in their text.

[...]

I found that with each rereading of the passage the number of word recognition errors decreased, reading speed increased, and there was increased oral reading expression. After successfully completing one section of text, the student went on to the next section in the book. Each time a new passage from their book was started, the beginning reading rate was faster than on the first time through for the previous passage. Also, there were fewer word recognition errors. Faster reading rates and fewer errors each time a new reading section was started can be interpreted as good transfer effects. Of course, one can explain this positive transfer by the fact that there was a lot of word overlap from the previous passage to the next one. The downside of the method is that it is labor intensive, but as we shall see, the newest ways to use the method are far easier and just as effective.

At Harvard University, Carol Chomsky, the other developer of repeated reading, had friends who reported that they were having trouble teaching reading to a few students, and they asked for her help. Chomsky (1978) devised a method in which the text was recorded the words in the text. The tape-assisted reading was repeated until the student could read the passage without help from the tape at a rate that was the same as the tape. Neither Chomsky nor I knew of each other's work until a colleague pointed out that we were each working on a similar solution to a common problem. (p. 176-177)

• Carol Chomsky (1978)
  cf. Jean S. Chall above (Harvard Graduate School of Education)

Steven Haggbloom

The 100 Most Eminent Psychologists of the 20th Century

Review of General Psychology, 2002, Vol. 6, No. 2, 139–152 (et al) PDF

Paul Hildreth

The Duality of Knowledge

Information Research, 8(1) [1] (with Chris Kimble)

• explicit knowledge, information management
• tacit knowledge, knowledge management, community of practice

Moira Inghilleri

Britton and Bernstein on Vygotsky: Divergent Views on Mind and Language in the Pedagogic Context

Pedagogy, Culture & Society, vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 467-482. pdf

• James Nimmo Britton Obituary
• Basil Bernstein
• Lev Vygotsky

Ray Jackendoff

Foundations of Language: Brain, Meaning, Grammar, Evolution

Oxford University Press

• cf. Ray Jackendoff#Interfaces and generative grammar
• ``Fodor reappears as a foil in the concluding chapters on semantics, where Jackendoff forcefully argues against Fodor's "language of thought" idea. He also comes down against the philosophers' habit of trying to relate language directly to the world. This is a mistake: the relation is mediated through the conceptual schemes or mental models of language users. When everything is working properly, this mediation is so transparent we can almost ignore it, but analytically it's wrong to do so. I think Jackendoff concedes too much to subjectivism on this basis, i.e., more than he has to, but that's really an issue at the margin. One topic I wish had received more attention here is the way a coherent discourse builds up a conceptual structure in the minds of its recipients.`` -- review by Cosma Shalizi [2]

Colin McGinn

Knowledge and Reality: Selected Essays

McGinn's aim is two-fold: to undermine both descriptive and causal theories of reference, and to argue for his preferred, ‘contextual’ theory of reference. McGinn is moved to this position by emphasizing indexicals—which he takes to be the primary referential devices—rather than proper names. Linguistic reference, for McGinn, is a conventional activity governed by rules that prescribe the spatio-temporal conditions of correct use; the semantic referent of a speaker's term is given by combining its linguistic meaning with the spatio-temporal context in which the speaker is located. McGinn concludes his defence of this theory by demonstrating the plausibility of its implications for such topics as abstract objects, self-reference, attribution, the language of thought hypothesis, truth, and the reducibility of reference.

— Abstract of Chapter 10. The Mechanism of Reference

Ruth Millikan

The Varieties of Meaning

The 2002 Jean Nicod Lectures pdf

• Jean Nicod Prize
• Language, Thought and Other Biological Categories (1984)
• http://www.philosophy.uconn.edu/department/millikan/

Parker Rossman

The Future of Higher (Lifelong) Education for All Worldwide: A Holistic View

http://ecolecon.missouri.edu/globalresearch/index.html

• Sequel to Parker Rossman (1993)

References

Navigate 1900's
'00	'01	'02	'03	'04	'05	'06	'07	'08	'09
'10	'11	'12	'13	'14	'15	'16	'17	'18	'19
'20	'21	'22	'23	'24	'25	'26	'27	'28	'29
'30	'31	'32	'33	'34	'35	'36	'37	'38	'39
'40	'41	'42	'43	'44	'45	'46	'47	'48	'49
'50	'51	'52	'53	'54	'55	'56	'57	'58	'59
'60	'61	'62	'63	'64	'65	'66	'67	'68	'69
'70	'71	'72	'73	'74	'75	'76	'77	'78	'79
'80	'81	'82	'83	'84	'85	'86	'87	'88	'89
'90	'91	'92	'93	'94	'95	'96	'97	'98	'99
Navigate 2000's
'00	'01	'02	'03	'04	'05	'06	'07	'08	'09
'10	'11	'12	'13	'14	'15	'16	'17	'18	'19