{"title":"评估opac,或者opac也是参考工具!","authors":"Lynne M. Martin","doi":"10.1300/J120V17N38_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The evaluation of reference service is complex and subjective, because reference service itself is complex and subjective. Reference service is more easily evaluated if its facets are judged against corresponding, known criteria. The core facet of reference service, for an automated library, is its online public access catalog (OPAC). Although the library literature contains numerous papers on the functional and performance evaluation of OPACs, as well as on the evaluation of many facets of reference service, it presents little assistance for the evaluation of OPACs as the central facet of reference service. In order to alleviate this lack, this paper evaluates OPACs as if they were any other reference tool, judging them against Norman D. Stevens' classic eighteen criteria for the evaluation of reference books. A selective bibiography of works on both OPAC and reference book evaluation is included.","PeriodicalId":422871,"journal":{"name":"Assessment and Accountability In Reference Work","volume":"118 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1992-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating OPACs, or, OPACs Are Reference Tools, Too!\",\"authors\":\"Lynne M. Martin\",\"doi\":\"10.1300/J120V17N38_22\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The evaluation of reference service is complex and subjective, because reference service itself is complex and subjective. Reference service is more easily evaluated if its facets are judged against corresponding, known criteria. The core facet of reference service, for an automated library, is its online public access catalog (OPAC). Although the library literature contains numerous papers on the functional and performance evaluation of OPACs, as well as on the evaluation of many facets of reference service, it presents little assistance for the evaluation of OPACs as the central facet of reference service. In order to alleviate this lack, this paper evaluates OPACs as if they were any other reference tool, judging them against Norman D. Stevens' classic eighteen criteria for the evaluation of reference books. A selective bibiography of works on both OPAC and reference book evaluation is included.\",\"PeriodicalId\":422871,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Assessment and Accountability In Reference Work\",\"volume\":\"118 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1992-08-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Assessment and Accountability In Reference Work\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1300/J120V17N38_22\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Assessment and Accountability In Reference Work","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1300/J120V17N38_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
参考咨询服务的评价是复杂的、主观的,因为参考咨询服务本身是复杂的、主观的。如果参考服务的各个方面是根据相应的、已知的标准来判断的,那么它就更容易得到评价。参考咨询服务的核心是自动化图书馆的在线公共访问目录(OPAC)。虽然图书馆文献包含了许多关于opac的功能和性能评价的论文,以及关于参考咨询服务的许多方面的评价,但它对作为参考咨询服务中心方面的opac的评价几乎没有帮助。为了缓解这一不足,本文将opac作为任何其他参考工具进行评估,并根据诺曼·d·史蒂文斯(Norman D. Stevens)的经典参考书评价标准对其进行评价。一个选择性的传记作品对OPAC和参考书评价包括在内。
Evaluating OPACs, or, OPACs Are Reference Tools, Too!
The evaluation of reference service is complex and subjective, because reference service itself is complex and subjective. Reference service is more easily evaluated if its facets are judged against corresponding, known criteria. The core facet of reference service, for an automated library, is its online public access catalog (OPAC). Although the library literature contains numerous papers on the functional and performance evaluation of OPACs, as well as on the evaluation of many facets of reference service, it presents little assistance for the evaluation of OPACs as the central facet of reference service. In order to alleviate this lack, this paper evaluates OPACs as if they were any other reference tool, judging them against Norman D. Stevens' classic eighteen criteria for the evaluation of reference books. A selective bibiography of works on both OPAC and reference book evaluation is included.