You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Documentation’ category.

For assigning a value to an object or situation, you must have a reference. In assessing, the measure is only one of its components and the value judgement is given to interpret the difference resulting from the comparison of two measures: that it is, and that it is expected of result. The measures themselves are not good or bad, are simply a reflection of a situation. The meaning of these depends on what is considered as what “should be”1 .

Reasons to evaluate:

1. Measure the achievement of its goals.

– Does the system in accordance with its operational objectives?

– Is the system cost effective?

– The system produces the desired effect?

– Does the system work better than the procedures they replace?

– Does the system have any impact on its users?

– Does the system have any impact on the organization?

2. Having a tool to diagnose weaknesses in the functioning

– Does the information handling system quality requirements needed to produce the desired results?

– Is done with correction documentary operations in the system?

– Does the system all the information needed to respond to the needs of their users?

3. Facilitate decision-making process

– Continue or cancel the service being evaluated.

– Add or disposal techniques and procedures.

– Modify strategies.

– Establish new information systems.

– Accept the introduction of new theories and techniques.

4. Allow comparison between systems through the construction of reference standards.

5. Justify the existence of services and information systems

Determine the value, revealing that the system meets its objectives and that the products offered have a acceptable level of operational quality and meet the group of its intended users. Ie objective indicators showing the degree of user satisfaction, that the information provided improves the performance of its duties and  benefits for the organization.

1 Van House, Weil et al., (1990): Measuring academic library performance: a practical approach. American Library Association. Chicago

Choosing the subject of the investigation stage is perhaps the most complex of all that occupies an investigation or research. Choosing a theme may seem apparently the result of systematic research, but usually is the result of circumstances and actions that involve chance and conscience (1). This last statement is common to any creative activity, either invention or reinvention.

We can generalize that an artist -the researcher is one- is a collection of cultural resources: where and how raised, and where you live, what books -or documentary sources- read, which are their nearby circles or groups of opinion -collectivities- … Ultimately, the particularities and peculiarities of his own life, determine what your interests are and where their learning targets.

Starting from an initial theme, the researcher follows a modeling process to suit their abilities and interests. This process can be defined as follows (2):

Planning time.

Although not very accurate in our forecasts, it is always advisable to list specific activities and assign them a specific time. This planning should include the phases of the selection of the topic and all its development, inefficient task in not having enough information to write it.

Guided by their own interests.

A very practical way to start the search is to remember what we want, think what we know and determine the starting point. Is there an easy way to do it, prepare three lists: the first with the issues that we have knowledge; the second, with that we would like to explore and the third set as the intersection of the first two.

Ferment of ideas.

The drawing up of lists we have provided a good range of ideas to be polish. Melissa Walker (p-47, 2000) states that “The branch is the alternative that presents the right cerebral hemisphere rather than the scheme.” Mind maps give us good support for organizing information and the projected structure before the setting-definitely-a logical sequence in a schema (3). However, be aware that the creative process is really complex and there is no one model that represented the rise (4).

Make the right questions.

Often, an excessive concentration or focus towards something translates into a loss of perspective. To recover from a perspective, one of the best tools available for a researcher is contrast it with others. To prepare for this action is recommended to ask the questions that we would respond on the issue. Once the need to rank their priority. Presenting them in this way, its contrast with other people is usually much more efficient.

Make a decision.

After the contrast and the implications that have led our sketch on the subject, we will be able to determine its structure and will have a rough idea of how we present, then the research should be addressed to someone . The final result of our investigation is a communicative act (5), document (6) that outlines the content, a message class (7).


  1. Romo, Manuela, Psicología de la Creatividad. Editorial Paidós, Barcelona (1997).
  2. Walker, M. Cómo escribir trabajos de investigación. Ed. Gedisa, Barcelona (2000).
  3. In this blog I usually use this type of tool, called generic mind maps software, and in this case is FreeMind.
  4. Tabor Greene, Creative Process Dynamics
  5. Pinto, M et al. Indización y resumen de documentos digitales. Ed. Trea, Gijón (2002).
  6. López Yepes, J. Manual de Ciencias de la Documentación. Ed. Pirámide, Madrid (2006).
  7. Pinto, M et al. Classificació dels Gèneres Comunicatius

Tribute to a great digital archaeologist and innovator, Jordi Adell

Three passions, simple but overwhelmingly strong, have governed my life: the longing for love, the search for knowledge, and unbearable pity for the suffering of mankind.

Bertrand Russell

Source: and

The Bibliography is the search, identification, description and classification of printed documents, in order to establish a reference appropriate to facilitate intellectual work.1

The bibliography2 is to search for materials by consulting the sources of information, identifying themselves by verifying their existence and the analysis of each document and its description, by adopting a particular policy.

The scheme of Pensato3 reflects the process of developing a reference, organized into three levels:

  • cultural or preliminary,
  • technical, or methodology and techniques of bibliographic work and
  • typographical-publishing, as its printed representation.

Or expressed in other words, we must plan, compiling and presenting the reference4 .

The model proposed by Pensato can be summarized5 as follows

  1. Elaboration and delineation of the object
  2. Search and collected material
  3. Identification and weighting of the collected material
  4. Choosing the method of the document, its range of references and annotations.
  5. Indexation
  6. Formal presentation and printing.

“The quality of the work of one machine is always the result of the technic or specialist that feed it. The search for basic documents, their choice, their analysis, the ranking criteria [used], constitute the major part of the bibliographic work that no electronic brain can make.” 6


  1. Malclès,L-N. Manuel de Bibliographie. Presses Universitaires de France. Paris 1985)
  2. Moll, J. La bibliografía en la investigación literaria en Métodos de estudio de la obra literaria de J. M. Díaz. Editorial Taurus. Madrid 1985.
  3. Pensato, R. Corso do Bibliografia Guida alla compilaziones e all’uso dei repertori bibliografici. Editrecie Bibliográfica. Milano 1987.
  4. Villaseñor, I. Las fuentes de información (II) en Manual de Información y Documentación de J. López Yepes. Editorial Pirámide. Madrid 1996.
  5. Simón Díaz, J. La bibliografía concepto y aplicaciones. Editorial Planeta. Barcelona 1971.
  6. de Torres Ramírez, I. Las fuentes de información. Metodología del repertorio bibliográfico en Manual de Ciencias de la Documentación de J. López Yepes. Editorial Pirámide. Madrid 2006.



Juny 2017
dl. dt. dc. dj. dv. ds. dg.
« maig