바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

논문 상세

이전 다음
논문 투고

Vol.43 No.3
Citation Share

문화예술교육 패싯 분류체계 설계에 대한 연구

A Study of Facet Classification System Development for Arts and Cultural Education

한국문헌정보학회지 / Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, (P)1225-598X; (E)2982-6292
2009, v.43 no.3, pp.197-219
https://doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2009.43.3.197
박옥남 (성균관대학교)
오삼균 (성균관대학교)
김세영 (성균관대학교)
박옥남, 오삼균, & 김세영. (2009). 문화예술교육 패싯 분류체계 설계에 대한 연구. 한국문헌정보학회지, 43(3), 197-219, https://doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2009.43.3.197
  • 다운로드 수
  • 조회수
PDF 다운로드

초록

본 연구에서는 문화예술교육 분야 분류체계의 필요성을 인식하고 패싯 기반의 분류 시스템을 설계하게 되었다. 본 연구는 체계적인 방법론을 적용하여 분류시스템을 구축하였고, 국내외 도메인 전문가와 분류전문가가 협력을 통해 분류시스템을 향상시켜 그 결과 13개의 메인 패싯과 다양한 하위 용어를 추출하였다. 본 연구에서 설계된 분류시스템의 목적은 문화예술교육의 다양한 자원을 보다 체계적이고 효율적으로 관리․이용 할 수 있는 기반을 마련하는데 있으며 이는 나아가 문화예술교육 분야의 개념에 대한 문화적 격차를 해소시키는 데 사용되기를 바란다.

keywords
분류시스템, 패싯, 문화예술교육, 협력, Classification System, Facet, Arts and Cultural Education, Collaboration, Classification System, Facet, Arts and Cultural Education, Collaboration

Abstract

The study acknowledges the need for classification systems in arts and cultural education. The study constructs a faceted classification system for this domain based on systematic methods. The study utilized iterative collaboration between domain experts and classification system developers. The classification system consists of 13 main facets and terms. The classification system has values to manage information resources effectively and efficiently. It is also beneficial for reducing cultural gaps in arts and cultural education as well as providing an information gateway for users.

keywords
분류시스템, 패싯, 문화예술교육, 협력, Classification System, Facet, Arts and Cultural Education, Collaboration, Classification System, Facet, Arts and Cultural Education, Collaboration

참고문헌

1.

이병준. 2007. 문화예술교육정책의 비판적 재구성과 미래전망: 문화정책과 교육정책의 불완전한 통합을 넘어서. ꡔ문화정책논의ꡕ, 17: 9-38.

2.

Aitchison, J., Gilchrist, A., & Bawden, D. 2000. Thesaurus construction and use: a practical manual. Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers.

3.

Bamford, A. 2006. The WOW-Factor. Germany: Waxmann Verlag GmbH.

4.

Bishoff, L., & Meagher, E.S. 2004. “Building Heritage Colorado: The Colorado digitization experience." Metadata in Practice. Diane I. Hillmann, & Elaine L. Westbrooks. ed., Chicago: American Library Association. 17-36.

5.

Broughton, V. 2006. “The need for a faceted classification as the basis of all methods of information retrieval.” Aslib proceedings, 58(1/2): 49-72.

6.

Chiu, M. L. 2002. “An organizational view of design communication in design collaboration." Design Studies, 23(2): 187-210.

7.

Foster, A., & Ford, N. 2003. “Serendipity and information seeking: an empirical study." Journal of Documentation, 59(3): 321 - 340.

8.

Gilchrist, A. 2000. “Taxonomies for business: description of a research project." [online]. [cited 2009.8.10]. <http://www.bokis.is/iod2001/papers/Gilchrist_paper.doc>.

9.

Hjørland, B., & Albrechtsen, H. 1995. “Toward a New Horizon in Information Science: Domain- Analysis." Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 46(6): 400-425.

10.

Kwasnick, B. H. 1999. “The Role of Classification in Knowledge Representation and Discovery." Library Trends, 48(1): 22-47.

11.

Leonard, W. 2004. “Thesaurus Consultancy." Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 37(3-4): 75-85.

12.

Ranganathan, S. R. 1967. Prolegomena to library classification. New York: Asia Publishing House.

13.

Spiteri, L. 1998. “Simplified Model for Facet Analysis." Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science, 23: 1-30. [online]. [cited 2009.8.15]. <http://www.iainstitute.org/en/learn/research/a_simplified_model_for_facet_analysis.php>.

14.

Sutton, S.A. 2004 “Digital Library Infrastructure: Metadata and the Education Domain." Metadata in Practice. Diane I. Hillmann, & Elaine L. Westbrooks. ed., Chicago: American Library Association. 1-16.

15.

Trigg, R., & Clement, A. 2000. CPSR- participatory design. [online]. [cited 2009.8.10]. <http://www.cpsr.org/prevsite/program/workplace/PD.html>.

16.

Uschold, M., & Gruninger, M. 1996. “Ontologies: Principles, Methods and Applications." Knowledge Engineering Review, 11(2).

17.

Wimmer, M. 2009. Reflecting on the Domain of Arts Education. [online]. [cited 2009.8.10]. <http://www.educult.at/fileadmin/files/Text/Preliminary_final_draft_MW240609.pdf>.

18.

Woods, E. 2004. Building a corporate taxonomy: Benefits and Challenges. [online]. [cited 2009.8.15]. <http://tinyurl.com/ao22w>.

19.

Wyllie, J., Skyrme, D. J., & Lelic, S. 2003. Taxonomies: frameworks for corporate knowledge: the shape of things to come. London, UK: Ark Group.

20.

Art & Architecture Thesaurus. [online]. <http://www.getty.edu/research/conducting_research/vocabularies/aat/>.

21.

Compendium Initiatives for Cultural Policies and Trends in Europe. [online]. <http://www.culturalpolicies.net/web/profiles-download.php?cid=0&aid=1>.

22.

Epicurious. [online]. <http://www.epicurious.com/>.

23.

ERIC Thesaurus(Education Resources Information Center) [online]. <http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/resources/html/thesaurus/about_thesaurus.html>.

24.

European Glossary. [online]. <http://www.cultuurnetwerk.nl/glossary>.

25.

UNESCO Road Map for Arts Education. 2006. [online].<http://portal.unesco.org/culture/en/ev.php-URL_ID=30335&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html>.

한국문헌정보학회지

논문 투고 OA 정책