EVALUATION OF EDUCATION SECTOR LIBRARY COLLECTION BY CONCEPTION METHOD IN LIBRARY
Abstract
The library collection evaluation of education based on the conceptus method aims to determine the conditions of the distribution scope, chronological scope, language scope, depth, strength, and weakness of the education collection. This study used a quantitative evaluative approach and to obtain data that supported this method, researchers conducted surveys, document analysis and interviews. Analysis of the data is done by matching the title, year of issue, information content, and use of the language of the collection, to the standards present in the conceptus. The actual level of the educational subject collection will also be matched or compared to the level expected by the evaluator to know the level gap. The evaluation of the distribution scope of the collection in the education sector has not been evenly distributed, but it is in accordance with the needs. The evaluation of the chronological scope of the education field collection is not yet up-to-date. The evaluation of the scope of language collection in the education sector is still in the range of level I to W with predominantly level I. The evaluation of the depth of the collection in the education sector is in the range of 0 to 4 levels, which is dominated by 1b levels. The strength of the education collection is in class numbers 371 and 378, while the weaknesses are in class numbers 376 and 377.
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Ari, A., & Madeten, S. S. (2019). Evaluasi Ketersediaan Koleksi Di Perpustakaan Sekretariat Daerah Provinsi Kalimantan Barat. Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Pembelajaran Khatulistiwa (JPPK), 8(10), 1–8.
Badriyah, N. (2007). Penerapan Metode Conspectus Untuk Mengukur Perpustakaan Daerah Propinsi Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta Periode Pengadaan Tahun 2003. http://digilib.uin-suka.ac.id/id/eprint/18662
Kelisanan dalam..., Rahman, FIBUI, 2011. (2011). https://lib.ui.ac.id/file?file=digital/old26/20271626-T29273-Evaluasi koleksi.pdf
Maryam, S. (2015). Evaluasi Koleksi Perpustakaan UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta berdasar Analisis Sitasi Penelitian Dosen. Pusat Penelitian Dan Penelitian UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, 121. http://repository.uinjkt.ac.id/dspace/handle/123456789/29673
Munthe, A. P. (2015). PENTINGYA EVALUASI PROGRAM DI INSTITUSI PENDIDIKAN: Sebuah Pengantar, Pengertian, Tujuan dan Manfaat. Scholaria : Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Kebudayaan, 5(2), 1. https://doi.org/10.24246/j.scholaria.2015.v5.i2.p1-14
Nazim, M. ; B. M. (2016). Knowledge Management Approaches.
Novita Ernaningsih, D., & Nurma Dewi, A. (2016). Urgensi Komunikasi Dalam Implementasi Kebijakan Pengembangan Koleksi Di Perpustakaan Pascasarjana Universitas Negeri Malang. Pustakaloka, 8(2), 185–200. https://jurnal.iainponorogo.ac.id/index.php/pustakaloka/article/view/682
Rahmawati, G. (2016). Buku Teks Pelajaran Sebagai Sumber Belajar Siswa Di Perpustakaan Sekolah Di Sman 3 Bandung. Edulib, 5(1), 102–113. https://doi.org/10.17509/edulib.v5i1.2307
Sugiyono. (2016). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D.
Supriyana, S., & Taftrikhudin, T. (2021). Evaluasi Koleksi Bidang Kedokteran Umum dengan Menggunakan Metode Conspectus di UPT Perpustakaan Universitas Jenderal Soedirman Purwokerto. Jurnal Pustaka Ilmiah, 7(2), 64. https://doi.org/10.20961/jpi.v7i2.54140
Tuflasa, B. E., & Tambotoh, J. J. C. (2022). Evaluasi Layanan Sistem Informasi Perpustakaan Menggunakan Metode Pieces. Jurnal Pendidikan Teknologi Informasi (JUKANTI), 5(2), 240–251. https://doi.org/10.37792/jukanti.v5i2.751
Yim, M., Fellows, M., & Coward, C. (2020). Mixed-methods library evaluation integrating the patron, library, and external perspectives: The case of Namibia regional libraries. Evaluation and Program Planning, 79(January), 101782. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2020.101782
Yusuf, R. (2021). Analisis metode evaluasi koleksi sebagai acuan kegiatan pengembangan koleksi (UPT Balai Informasi Teknologi LIPI dan Perpustakaan IAIN Syekh Nurjati Cirebon). Pustaka Karya : Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Perpustakaan Dan Informasi, 9(2), 29. https://doi.org/10.18592/pk.v9i2.3398
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.