On Sun, 19 Dec 1999, Liddy Nevile wrote:
> I read Rachel as giving us a chance for a last call on audience (not making
> us do something extra) = Rachel please let us know if this is how you see
> it.
Just to clarify, my previous mail was communicating the withdrawal of the
'audience' qualifier from the DC Description qualifier proposal. This
proposal is due in just about now..... and obviously discussion is still
on-going within the dc-education WG on this very area.
So I am just acknowledging that consideration of how 'audience' is dealt
with has passed to the dc-education group.
Rachel
>
> I suggest then that the DC.education troops should work towards a shared
> position on this.
>
> It seems there is general agreement about the need for a place in which to
> register some classification of the intended audiences of a
> resource/service. There is the added complication within the educational
> community that there are often two audiences - the one for whom the resource
> is intended to have value and the one who is expected to mediate that
> ultimate beneficiary's access to the resource. In some cases, the ultimate
> beneficiary does not ever get to see the resource as it is published on the
> web.
>
> So have I just solved my own problem? Does education need
> DC.something.audience and DC.something.beneficiary? That is, does the
> education community not need to worry 'in particular' about where to
> classify audiences but, given what DC general adopts, does DC.education need
> to split it to have audience and beneficiary?
>
> This is not to trivialise the problem of classification of the two kinds of
> recipients within education - but for that issue we can work on value
> qualifiers. This is a substantial task and we, as an educational community,
> should work hard together to find a way of specifying meaningful, useful
> values that will accommodate the needs of the discoverers.
>
> Theoretically, I like the model of a triad with teachers, students and
> materials/experiences in constant interaction. The idea that the web
> resource mediates between the student and the teacher's goal for the
> student, and that the teacher in some cases mediates between the student and
> the teacher, makes sense to me. If all is well, the goal of those involved
> (teacher, student and resource provider) is to advance the learning of the
> student and so I think that calling the student the beneficiary might be
> reasonable. The teacher as mediator works well for me.
>
> Liddy
>
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rachel Heery
UKOLN (UK Office for Library and Information Networking)
University of Bath tel: +44 (0)1225 826724
Bath, BA2 7AY, UK fax: +44 (0)1225 826838
http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|