Intellection and Intuition

Thomas M. Dousa — Thu, 24 Oct 2019 00:00:00 -0500

he Indian librarian and library theorist S.R. Ranganathan (1892-1970) is generally recognized as a seminal figure in the development of facet analysis and its application to classification theory. In recent years, commentators on the epistemology of knowledge organization have claimed that the methods of facet analysis reflect a fundamentally rationalist approach to classification. Yet, for all the interest in the epistemological bases of Ranganathan’s classification theory, little attention has been paid to his theory of how human beings acquire knowledge of the world – i.e., his epistemology proper – or to the question whether this theory reflects a rationalist outlook. This paper examines Ranganathan’s statements on the origins of knowledge to assess if they are congruent with rationalist epistemology. Ranganathan recognized two different modes of knowledge – intellection (i.e., intellectual operations on sense data) and intuition (i.e., direct cognition of things-in-themselves) -- and it is in virtue of the latter that his epistemology can be considered to fall within the ambit of rationalism. Intuition as a source of knowledge plays a role in Ranganathan’s classification theory, most notably in his model of scientific method underlying classification development, his vision of the organization of classification design, and his conceptualization of seminal mnemonics and a reduced number of fundamental categories as important elements in the design of classification notation. Not only does intuition subtend the rationalism of Ranganathan’s epistemology but it also serves as a bridge to another often-neglected aspect of his thought, namely his valorization of mysticism. Indeed, Ranganathan’s theory of knowledge is best characterized as mystical rationalism

Sharing Success

Elizabeth Edwards — Thu, 24 Oct 2019 00:00:00 -0500

Objective – This paper reports on a study which explored web-based information sharing practices in North American academic libraries. This study specifically focused on how selected academic libraries use data, reports, and other strategic planning documents to communicate success and demonstrate impact to stakeholders, administrators, and peers.

Methods – An environmental scan was conducted to explore the assessment programs and communication practices of 97 North American academic libraries. The population for this study was identified on the basis of several metrics: consortial membership, Association of Research Libraries (ARL) ranking on various criteria, and institutional attendance at the 2014 and 2016 Library Assessment Conferences (LAC). Researchers conducted content analyses on the websites of the 97 libraries to identify measures of institutional support for assessment and to explore the range, depth, and quality of data made available. These iterative analyses were supported by the use of a rubric developed based on emergent criteria observed during multiple phases of review.

Results – Of the libraries reviewed, 57% made some form of data available to the public. The most robust and effective use of data observed in this study involved the use of data to tell stories about the library and its impact. While this study found a positive correlation between libraries with clear investments in assessment and their use of data in public documents, it found that other factors such as an institution’s consortial memberships or funding model may more strongly influence a library’s decision to make data available.

Conclusions – While observations gleaned from this study may serve as a benchmark for evaluating communication practices in academic libraries, further research is necessary to understand how factors within an academic library, its parent institution, or the profession at large may contribute to this decision making process.

UChicago Demo OJS Journal

Intellection and Intuition

Sharing Success