Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Publications
  3. Publishing partners
  4. Facet Publishing
  5. Content Listing

Refine listing

Refine listing

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

5856 results in Facet Publishing

Page 147 of 293

  • 1 - Introduction and getting started

  • Kath Owen, Margaret Watson
  • Book:
    Building Your Portfolio
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 May 2015, pp 1-6

  • Summary

    The purpose of the book

    The Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals (CILIP) introduced a professional registration scheme in December 2013. There are four elements in the scheme: Certification, Chartered Membership, Fellowship and Revalidation for Chartered Members and Fellows. The assessment of each level is by submission of an electronic Portfolio. This book has been written to support any Member of CILIP who wishes to apply for professional registration. This third edition reflects the introduction of professional registration and contains some personal contributions. For many of us working in the library and information profession the production of a Portfolio is a new experience and there has been much discussion about the nature of the Portfolio. This book is designed to answer some of those questions, sharing the experience, hints and tips of putting a Portfolio together from colleagues who have successfully achieved professional registration. Some of the contributors have completed their Portfolios very recently using the current regulations, others worked to the old regulations and, as the content requirements are so similar, their experiences are still relevant and a useful source of help for new candidates.

    Each chapter deals with a specific aspect of the Portfolio, giving examples from each level as appropriate. The book can be either read straight through by potential candidates or used with greater discretion by applicants who may be having difficulties with particular elements of the Portfolio.

    In the Foreword, Keith Wilson provides an overview of how Portfolios can be used in all aspects of a career and how important reflection is for the information professional.

    This first chapter is an introductory chapter, looking at the purpose of the book and briefly outlining CILIP's Framework of Qualifications.

    It discusses the process of getting started and the support available to Members as they put together their Portfolios, especially the CILIP Mentor Scheme. There are two very important aspects to the Framework: all Portfolios must meet specified assessment criteria, and applicants must demonstrate an appropriate level of reflective writing within their Portfolios. Chapter 2 discusses the assessment criteria and attempts to show how applicants can build their Portfolio to ensure that it meets those criteria; in a case study Keith Wilson, a previous Chair of the Chartership Board, gives his views on assessment.

  • 3 - Working with a mentor

  • Kath Owen, Margaret Watson
  • Book:
    Building Your Portfolio
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 May 2015, pp 21-30

  • Summary

    Finding a mentor

    All candidates for Certification, Chartership and Fellowship are required to have a mentor. Mentors for Certification and Chartership must be on the CILIP Register of Mentors and must be Chartered Members of CILIP. A Fellowship candidate may choose a mentor from outside CILIP if they wish; some may already have a mentor with whom they have worked for some time and who is willing to continue in this role to support an application for Fellowship.

    CILIP maintains a register of mentors who have attended training on professional registration. This ensures that they are up to date with the current requirements of professional registration, which will often be slightly different from the regulations under which the mentors themselves completed Chartership. Candidates can approach mentors on the register to ask if they are willing to mentor them. Some candidates may know a registered mentor who is willing to work with them. Candidates are strongly advised to find a mentor who works in a different sector from them. This enables candidates to see their work from a different perspective and to gain a wider view of the profession through discussion and possible visits to a different working environment.

    It is not appropriate for your mentor to be your line manager. Working with a mentor should allow the candidate to benefit from the knowledge and experience of someone who is at least one step and preferably several steps away from their day-to-day work environment. Meetings with a mentor should focus on the professional development and views of the candidate without getting tied into or side tracked by the job role and the demands of the organization.

    Mentoring does not have to involve face-to-face meetings. It can take place online using Skype, e-mail or any other communication system. It can also take place by phone. This can often help candidates who are based in remote places, who are solo workers, who do not have opportunities to leave the workplace for a meeting, who are based in areas where there are few registered mentors, or who work overseas. For many candidates, and indeed mentors, this may be a new way of working and may take a little time to get used to. It can be very successful.

  • Foreword

  • Kath Owen, Margaret Watson
  • Book:
    Building Your Portfolio
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 May 2015, pp xv-xviii

  • Summary

    Society, clients and employers have become more demanding and sceptical of the library information and knowledge professional. The increasingly complex and international nature of society, pressures on clients from information overload and scarcity of time, and constantly changing emphases of political, economic, social, technological, legal and environmental (PESTLE) factors on employers are continuing to increase expectations of professional skill and behaviour. Meanwhile accountability of some professionals, lack of transparency, perceived self-interest and examples of poor performance and behaviour in some sectors are being increasingly forcefully reproached by those whom professionals serve.

    Nothing less than a guarantee of skills, knowledge and a deep and ethical commitment to engaging with the most difficult, ‘wicked’ problems is required from clients and stakeholders.

    CILIP Members work alongside those belonging to other professional bodies. Many are also members of other professional bodies. Stakeholders hearing the word ‘professional’ will assume high standards and confident practice irrespective of the particular profession a practitioner belongs to. Proving our right to be a CILIP professional begins with a qualification as the most important indicator of achievement and commitment. It is the start. The professional registration programme supports Members with a range of qualifications and tools to ensure you continue to prove your right to be a CILIP professional.

    For some years the Portfolio has been increasingly widely adopted by professions as their main way of assessing applications to practise as a professional. It has been a foundation of CILIP's professional registration programme for a decade. What benefit does this bring to society, clients and employers?

    The Portfolio is a record of the journey you have been on to date, including your academic study and training. However, it is much more than this. It is a gallery in which your developing professional inquisitiveness, reflection and personality can be shown. Once you have qualified, it is there to be developed and drawn upon through your career, including when you apply for a higher level of CILIP professional registration. It will help you to plan your professional development, reflect on your professional journey to date, and spot opportunities to exploit and weaknesses to fix.

  • 6 - The Professional Knowledge and Skills Base

  • Kath Owen, Margaret Watson
  • Book:
    Building Your Portfolio
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 May 2015, pp 55-64

  • Summary

    What is the Professional Knowledge and Skills Base?

    The Professional Knowledge and Skills Base (PKSB) encompasses the broad range of skills that are required by workers across all sectors of the library, knowledge and information profession. It is an interactive PDF which can be found at www.cilip.org.uk/cilip/jobs-and-careers/ professional-knowledge-and-skills-base and can be used as:

  • • a self-assessment tool for you to consider your personal and professional development needs and achievements

  • • a means of demonstrating your unique skills set to employers

  • • a framework for planning your CPD.

    • The PKSB is an essential part of professional registration and is a required document at all levels. It will assist you in demonstrating how you meet Criterion 1 of the CILIP assessment criteria (see Chapter 2 and Table 7.1) and may help you with the other criteria.

    It consists of several elements:

  • • At the centre are ethics and values which underpin all work in the sector. All workers should have an understanding of these. A good starting point can be found at www.cilip.org.uk/cilip/about/ethics. Your employer may well have their own statement. A combination of both can provide useful food for thought which you could use to reflect on your views on the subject. Your reflections could form part of your evidence for criteria 2 and 3.

  • • Professional expertise and generic skills are broken down into sets of skills and knowledge which have been identified as essential to our profession. The 12 headings, shown on the wheel diagram, have in turn been broken down into further detail.

  • • All the above has been set within the wider library, information and knowledge sector context and the wider organization and environmental context. As required by Criterion 3 this shows the importance of maintaining current awareness and an understanding of the wider profession which exists outside your workplace.

    • How to use the PKSB

    You are required to include two copies of your personalized PKSB in your application. The first should be completed as you start your application for professional registration; the second should be completed just before submitting your application. The interactive document, which you can only access if you are a Member of CILIP, enables you to record your self-assessment currently and at an ideal level.

  • 2 - Assessment criteria

  • Kath Owen, Margaret Watson
  • Book:
    Building Your Portfolio
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 May 2015, pp 7-20

  • Summary

    What are assessment criteria?

    At its simplest, assessment can be defined as the process whereby evidence of achievement is judged. Each CILIP award recognizes the achievement of the applicant. For professional registration the evidence put forward is the Portfolio. Your Portfolio is assessed by at least two professional colleagues who are members of the Professional Registration and Accreditation Board. It is essential that you become familiar with the particular assessment criteria against which your Portfolio will be judged.

    You should keep a copy of the criteria next to your PC or on the desk where you are working on your Portfolio. It is so easy to get carried away by collecting evidence that you can sometimes forget to focus on the criteria. The assessment criteria tell you what you need to demonstrate. Ask yourself frequently whether your Portfolio presents the correct evidence to meet the criteria.

    The assessment criteria for each level are discussed in this chapter and broken down to help you ensure that all essential areas are covered. These are followed by reflections on assessment by Keith Wilson. (There are further guidelines for each element of your Portfolio in succeeding chapters.)

    Certification (ACLIP)

    Identify areas for improvement in personal performance and undertake activities to develop skills and enhance knowledge

    Key words and terms:

  • • identify

  • • improvement in personal performance

  • • undertake activities

  • • develop skills

  • • enhance knowledge.

    • Think about your performance at work, what is going well and what you could improve. How can you make improvements, what could you do, on your own or with help from other people?

    What sort of activities would help? Possible activities include reading, online or offline, journals or books; watching other people; attending a training event; or just talking to your manager or a colleague.

    Your starting point for this is the PKSB (see Chapter 6). This will help you to reflect on your current performance and identify needs for further development. Remember that you will only be working on selected areas that are relevant to your work. An additional aid may be any performance appraisal or development scheme that you already have in your workplace.

  • 5 - Web and social media metrics for the cultural heritage sector

  • Edited by Ben Showers
  • Book:
    Library Analytics and Metrics
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    09 June 2018
    Print publication:
    30 April 2015, pp 113-152

  • Summary

    Chapter overview

    We have, until now, largely stayed within both the physical and virtual confines of the library, archive or institution as we have explored how analytics and metrics can improve services and help to support decision making. However, it is now time to step outside the boundaries of the institution and look at analytics and metrics in relation to the open web; in particular, to explore examples and approaches for cultural heritage institutions using web analytics and metrics to help drive and improve impact and user engagement on the web.

    This chapter provides two case studies which present a picture of how some of the UK's biggest and most popular cultural heritage organizations (like the British Museum, British Library, Tate Gallery, V&A [Victoria and Albert Museum] and Wellcome Collection) take advantage of web metrics and analytics. The case studies provide unique insights, tips and examples of how institutions are utilizing web metrics to better understand their users’ behaviours, to improve their web and digital presences and to ensure maximum impact for what they are doing on the web. The two case studies in this chapter are:

    • CASE STUDY 5.1 Stuart, D., The web impact of cultural heritage institutions, p. 117

    • CASE STUDY 5.2 Malde, S. et al., Let's Get Real: a Journey Towards Understanding and Measuring Digital Engagement, p. 136.

    Before we explore our case study examples it is worth dwelling on two new terms that this chapter has introduced – web metrics and social media metrics – and considering further why the web has become such a critical part of the work of the cultural heritage institution.

    Web metrics and analytics in the cultural heritage sector

    The Wikipedia entry for Web Analytics defines web metrics and analytics as ‘the measurement, collection, analysis and reporting of web data for purposes of understanding and optimizing web usage’. As libraries, archives, galleries and museums direct greater focus and resources to the development of their online presence, so it becomes increasingly critical to capture and analyse users’ online interactions and experiences. Like the institution's physical building, its web presence represents a vital part of an institution's existence.

  • 13 - Ecologies of research and performance: preservation challenges in the London Charter

  • Edited by Janet Delve, David Anderson
  • Book:
    Preserving Complex Digital Objects
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    13 September 2022
    Print publication:
    30 April 2015, pp 169-184

  • Summary

    Introduction

    This chapter has two primary concerns. First, it asks what the London Charter for the Computer-based Visualization of Cultural Heritage has to say that is relevant to the preservation of complex digital objects? Second, it looks at the nature of some of the complex objects (note, not just complex digital objects) that are produced by multifaceted projects – in this instance, projects with both humanities research and artistic dimensions – as well as projects that span digital and non-digital materials.

    The London Charter

    The London Charter started off in February 2006 with a symposium and workshop called ‘Making 3D Visual Research Outcomes Transparent’, which was held at both the British Academy and King's College London as part of our ‘Making Space’ AHRC ICT Strategy Project. There was, at that time, no international consensus or standard about the type or level of documentation needed to communicate to scholarly audiences the methods and outcomes of visualization-based research projects. A computer visualization of an historical monument or object is really no more than a picture unless we also communicate to people what has gone into the making of that visualization: what is the evidence, how reliable is the evidence, what decisions have been made in order to create this digital object. Without such information, the visualization cannot be properly understood or evaluated.

    At this symposium in 2006, the question was posed: ‘How do we move from the idea of good practice to a culture of good practice within the heritage visualization domain?’ I suggested that we needed a ‘Charter’, which would enable us to draw the community's attention to a formal, consensus-based statement of best practice for heritage visualization. A working group was established and released the first version of the London Charter in March 2006, with a more detailed version (Draft 2.1) being published in February 2009 (London Charter, 2009). All the drafts of the Charter, together with its detailed history and an introduction, can be seen on the London Charter website.

    The Charter has six principles, each of which addresses a specific topic:

    • • Principle 1, ‘Implementation’, addresses the scope of the Charter's applicability.

    • • Principle 2 discusses the importance of making aims and methods cohere with each other.

    • • Principle 3, ‘Research Sources’, discusses the importance of publishing the evidence upon which research visualizations are based, and of demonstrating the systematic and rigorous evaluation of that evidence.

  • 8 - Laying a trail of breadcrumbs – preparing the path for preservation

  • Edited by Janet Delve, David Anderson
  • Book:
    Preserving Complex Digital Objects
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    13 September 2022
    Print publication:
    30 April 2015, pp 91-106

  • Summary

    Introduction

    Recent decades have seen an exponential increase in the use of computer systems in academic disciplines traditionally thought of as being non-technical. This has partly been driven by the opportunities which computational tools and techniques make possible, and partly by a perceived need to position research at the ‘cutting edge’ of technology. The use of computing is seen as enhancing research funding applications and improving institutional profiles. The rapid uptake of computing has not, however, been accompanied by a commensurate attention to ensuring that digital-based research and deliverables are preserved in the long term.

    The process of ensuring long-term access to non-digital material is well understood and while not always fully implemented, it is nevertheless relatively uncomplicated. The situation is markedly different when dealing with material that is wholly, or partly, digital. The preservation of, and provision for long-term access to, even the simplest digital object typically involves marshalling a surprisingly large number of technologies and specialized curatorial skills and tools, and no small degree of expense. In the case of complex digital objects, or hybrid objects, there are only a handful of centres in the UK or internationally which possess the knowledge or resources to tackle the preservation issues involved.

    In this introductory chapter we will set out very briefly, and in fairly general terms, the overall preservation landscape as it applies to digital objects. We will try to give some sense of the main approaches available, and their strengths and weaknesses.

    Traditional objects and the digital counterparts

    Before looking at the principal preservation approaches currently in use, it is probably worth mentioning a fundamental difference between traditional objects and their digital counterparts. A standard textbook is capable of being read and understood by anyone who has sufficient intellectual capability, language skills, comprehension and so on, together with physical access to the material. The very same material in digital form requires something more – a facilitating layer of technology through which access to the content must always be mediated. It is usually possible to access the contents of digital files using more than one particular technology – one might use a Kindle or a PC, for example – but direct unmediated access is not possible.

  • 14 - A tangled web: metadata and problems in game preservation

  • Edited by Janet Delve, David Anderson
  • Book:
    Preserving Complex Digital Objects
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    13 September 2022
    Print publication:
    30 April 2015, pp 185-200

  • Summary

    Preserving virtual worlds: an introduction

    At the beginning of the first decade of the 21st century, the digital preservation community faced a world in which models for preservation were at best inchoate and functioning preservation systems practically non-existent. By the end of the decade, functional, data and economic models (CCSDS, 2002, 2008; Kejser, Nielsen and Thirifays, 2011; Hole et al., 2010) were developed and under active refinement, and open-source software for repository systems intended to preserve digital content, such as DAITSS, DSpace, ePrints, iRods and LOCKSS1, were well developed and in production use at a variety of institutions. Our knowledge of digital objects and our ability to manage and preserve them has undergone a dramatic advance.

    The inevitable price of these early successes, of course, has been the discovery of even more difficult problems. As we apply the models and tools developed to date to support digital preservation efforts, we encounter new and more complex problems in the technical, legal and administrative aspects of digital preservation. This is particularly true with respect to commercial digital media, where the complex technical nature of these objects, combined with their equally complex intellectual property status (and our occasionally challenging intellectual property laws), create an administrative headache for anyone trying to preserve these digital works in the long term. Web archiving, interactive fiction and multimedia and software of all sorts present a number of issues with which the digital preservation community has struggled, but cannot yet be said to have completely solved.

    The Preserving Virtual Worlds project, a joint effort of the Rochester Institute of Technology, Stanford University, the University of Illinois and the University of Maryland, has been studying one sub-domain of these problems, the preservation of computer games, for the past four years. With support from both the Library of Congress’ NDIIP Program and the Institute of Museum & Library Services, our team has investigated what makes digital games difficult to preserve, how we might approach the preservation of these complex objects using existing tools, and how the significant properties of these objects are defined by their creators and users. As might be expected, a close examination of computer games reveals that they pose a number of unique challenges to the digital preservationist.

    One of the keys to confronting those challenges is creating and maintaining appropriate metadata for the objects to be preserved.

  • Preface

  • Freda Matassa
  • Book:
    Organizing Exhibitions
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    10 September 2022
    Print publication:
    30 April 2015, pp xvii-xviii

  • Summary

    Any subject can be the inspiration for an exhibition. It may be large or small, may consist of one exhibit or hundreds of items, and can range from unique, high-value works of art to small-scale, local-interest topics of no financial value. Once the domain of museums, exhibitions may be held in nontraditional venues and can be organized by anyone. In fact, any suitable space can be used to display cultural objects in a curated and organized way for the delight and benefit of the public.

    Producing an exhibition can be exciting and absorbing. The process is challenging and creative and the results can have significant impact. Exhibitions do not organize themselves, however, and the range of possibilities for selecting objects, arranging displays and choosing venues can lead to a greater potential for things to go wrong. It is also important to understand exhibition rules and regulations and the laws governing loans, particularly if borrowing from abroad.

    Each exhibition is unique: the same objects look completely different when shown in another space. The fundamentals of process, planning and organization, however, apply to any exhibition. Selecting objects, negotiating with lenders, and arranging transport and installation all need to be arranged so that everything goes smoothly. Ethical issues such as due diligence must be taken into account and legal requirements, including customs and excise and copyright law, must be followed. The objects must be properly cared for and safely returned, and the exhibition should open on time and on budget.

    This book explains everything an exhibition organizer needs to know. Part 1 is a step-by-step process. Each stage, from initial idea through installation and maintenance to closure and evaluation, is set out in a clear sequence. Any project can follow the procedure and ensure that no key stage is left out. Part 2 is a reference section for readers who require in-depth advice on specific aspects of exhibition organization. It features international standards, law and due diligence and includes information on subjects such as copyright, hazardous materials and managing unclaimed loans. The book includes a list of the most common mistakes in mounting an exhibition as well as the top ten tips for a successful display. Using examples from real organizations and drawing on international standards for cultural collections, the book provides guidelines rather than rules and can be adapted to any situation.

  • 11 - The sustainability of information models

  • G. G. Chowdhury
  • Book:
    Sustainability of Scholarly Information
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    10 September 2022
    Print publication:
    30 April 2015, pp 191-202

  • Summary

    Introduction

    Sustainable developments rely on the three pillars of sustainability – economic, social and environmental sustainability – and this chapter discusses various aspects of sustainable communication processes in today's digital age. It proposes an integrated model for study of the sustainability of scholarly communication processes in general, and sustainability of information services in particular. First a generic framework for study of the sustainability of information systems and services is proposed. The model is then used to investigate various factors responsible for the economic, social and environmental sustainability of information systems and services. It is shown that the conceptual model can be used to study the sustainability of the scholarly communication processes in general. The proposed model can also be used to identify factors responsible for the sustainability of any digital library or information service.

    The three pillars of sustainable information services

    In today's world typical scholarly information systems and services comprise library and information services, commercial journal and database services, open access journals and database services, digital libraries and repositories, and even various search engine services. These services deal with different types of content and data in order to meet the information needs of different types of users and communities. They may be offered or controlled by various institutions, funding bodies and business models; and governed by institutional, national and international regulations and policies. However, as argued throughout this book, in order to achieve sustainability, information systems and services should be economically, socially and environmentally sustainable. Various research issues in information science and their implications for the three forms of sustainability are discussed in this chapter.

    Scholarly communication processes

    Scholarly communication is a process through which research and scholarly outputs are created, peer reviewed and disseminated, and preserved for future use (ARL, 2013). Traditionally a large part of the scholarly communication process is publicly funded. For example, the research and scholarly activities that generate scholarly output are funded by governments or research funding agencies. Such funding usually comes either directly through research and/or dissemination grants or indirectly through staff remuneration in education and research institutions where academics and researchers produce research output as part of their activities.

Page 147 of 293