avocets
Avocets
rss 2.0 subscribe to this page
search


related to knowledge
1 + &
1 + academic
1 + disease
1 + hist/environment
1 + librarians
1 + p2p
view all
•  projects
•  owners
•  tags
Title: Inescapable ecologies : a history of environment, disease, and knowledge /
Author(s): Nash, Linda Lorraine. 
Publication: Berkeley : University of California Press,
Year: c2006.
Description: xiii, 332 p. : ill., maps ; 23 cm.
Language: English
Contents: Introduction -- Body and environment in an era of colonization -- Placing health and disease -- Producing a sanitary landscape -- Modern landscapes and ecological bodies -- Contesting the space of disease -- Conclusion.
tagged & disease hist/environment knowledge by dbarnes ...on 14-FEB-09

Hendrix, Dean. “Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Knowledge, Use, and Attitudes of Academic Librarians.” Libraries and the Academy 7.2 (2007): 191-212.

While this article comes up with similar findings as in previous researched articles it does so by a different method. Through statistical analysis and polling of individuals a common consensus was determined. P2P file sharing was an ironic revolution in the academic circle that was as both potentally beneficial and harmful at the same time. Furthermore, Hendrix provides an elaborate analysis by means of a mailed in questionnaire. Other findings include; an active participation from the librarians to harness this new technology, a more than half percentage ignorance of the significance of this technology, positive responses from users, among others. This article is uniquely researched as compared to previous articles. It was not merely a numerical evaluation but in addition anecdotal evidence found in empty boxes for participants to comment. With this said, the significance does lay in the evaluation of numerical evidence. Revising an earlier statement in which I said the results should speak for themselves, I revise that by saying that the numbers should not speak for themselves because an evaluation of these numbers would of course lead to diverse reactions and opinions of the evaluator. These reactions and opinions are a mixed baggage of subjective and objective frameworks of the mind.