Library and information science education 2.0 : guiding principles and models of best practice. Interview with Jake Wallis.

In 2005, Stephen Abram, vice president of Innovation at SirsiDynix, challenged library and information science (LIS) professionals to start becoming “librarian 2.0.” In the last few years, discussion and debate about the “core competencies” needed by librarian 2.0 have appeared in the “biblioblogosphere” (blogs written by LIS professionals). However, beyond these informal blog discussions few systematic and empirically based studies have taken place. A project funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council fills this gap. The project identifies the key skills, knowledge, and attributes required by “librarian 2.0.” Eighty-one members of the Australian LIS profession participated in a series of focus groups. Eight themes emerged as being critical to “librarian 2.0”: technology, communication, teamwork, user focus, business savvy, evidence based practice, learning and education, and personal traits. Guided by these findings interviews with 36 LIS educators explored the current approaches used within contemporary LIS education to prepare graduates to become “librarian 2.0”. This video presents an example of ‘great practice’ in current LIS education as it strives to foster web 2.0 professionals.

Library and information science education 2.0 : guiding principles and models of best practice. Interview with Lyn Hay.

In 2005, Stephen Abram, vice president of Innovation at SirsiDynix, challenged library and information science (LIS) professionals to start becoming “librarian 2.0.” In the last few years, discussion and debate about the “core competencies” needed by librarian 2.0 have appeared in the “biblioblogosphere” (blogs written by LIS professionals). However, beyond these informal blog discussions few systematic and empirically based studies have taken place. A project funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council fills this gap. The project identifies the key skills, knowledge, and attributes required by “librarian 2.0.” Eighty-one members of the Australian LIS profession participated in a series of focus groups. Eight themes emerged as being critical to “librarian 2.0”: technology, communication, teamwork, user focus, business savvy, evidence based practice, learning and education, and personal traits. Guided by these findings interviews with 36 LIS educators explored the current approaches used within contemporary LIS education to prepare graduates to become “librarian 2.0”. This video presents an example of ‘great practice’ in current LIS education as it strives to foster web 2.0 professionals.

Library and information science education 2.0 : guiding principles and models of best practice. Interview with Roy Crotty.

In 2005, Stephen Abram, vice president of Innovation at SirsiDynix, challenged library and information science (LIS) professionals to start becoming “librarian 2.0.” In the last few years, discussion and debate about the “core competencies” needed by librarian 2.0 have appeared in the “biblioblogosphere” (blogs written by LIS professionals). However, beyond these informal blog discussions few systematic and empirically based studies have taken place. A project funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council fills this gap. The project identifies the key skills, knowledge, and attributes required by “librarian 2.0.” Eighty-one members of the Australian LIS profession participated in a series of focus groups. Eight themes emerged as being critical to “librarian 2.0”: technology, communication, teamwork, user focus, business savvy, evidence based practice, learning and education, and personal traits. Guided by these findings interviews with 36 LIS educators explored the current approaches used within contemporary LIS education to prepare graduates to become “librarian 2.0”. This video presents an example of ‘great practice’ in current LIS education as it strives to foster web 2.0 professionals.

Library and information science education 2.0 : guiding principles and models of best practice. Interview with Mary Anne Kennan.

In 2005, Stephen Abram, vice president of Innovation at SirsiDynix, challenged library and information science (LIS) professionals to start becoming “librarian 2.0.” In the last few years, discussion and debate about the “core competencies” needed by librarian 2.0 have appeared in the “biblioblogosphere” (blogs written by LIS professionals). However, beyond these informal blog discussions few systematic and empirically based studies have taken place. A project funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council fills this gap. The project identifies the key skills, knowledge, and attributes required by “librarian 2.0.” Eighty-one members of the Australian LIS profession participated in a series of focus groups. Eight themes emerged as being critical to “librarian 2.0”: technology, communication, teamwork, user focus, business savvy, evidence based practice, learning and education, and personal traits. Guided by these findings interviews with 36 LIS educators explored the current approaches used within contemporary LIS education to prepare graduates to become “librarian 2.0”. This video presents an example of ‘great practice’ in current LIS education as it strives to foster web 2.0 professionals.

Library and information science education 2.0 : guiding principles and models of best practice. Interview with Huan Vo-Tran.

In 2005, Stephen Abram, vice president of Innovation at SirsiDynix, challenged library and information science (LIS) professionals to start becoming “librarian 2.0.” In the last few years, discussion and debate about the “core competencies” needed by librarian 2.0 have appeared in the “biblioblogosphere” (blogs written by LIS professionals). However, beyond these informal blog discussions few systematic and empirically based studies have taken place. A project funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council fills this gap. The project identifies the key skills, knowledge, and attributes required by “librarian 2.0.” Eighty-one members of the Australian LIS profession participated in a series of focus groups. Eight themes emerged as being critical to “librarian 2.0”: technology, communication, teamwork, user focus, business savvy, evidence based practice, learning and education, and personal traits. Guided by these findings interviews with 36 LIS educators explored the current approaches used within contemporary LIS education to prepare graduates to become “librarian 2.0”. This video presents an example of ‘great practice’ in current LIS education as it strives to foster web 2.0 professionals.

Library and information science education 2.0 : guiding principles and models of best practice ALTC Fellowship Report

This ALTC Teaching Fellowship aimed to establish Guiding Principles for Library and Information Science Education 2.0. The aim was achieved by (i) identifying the current and anticipated skills and knowledge required by successful library and information science (LIS) professionals in the age of web 2.0 (and beyond), (ii) establishing the current state of LIS education in Australia in supporting the development of librarian 2.0, and in doing so, identify models of best practice. The fellowship has contributed to curriculum renewal in the LIS profession. It has helped to ensure that LIS education in Australia continues to meet the changing skills and knowledge requirements of the profession it supports. It has also provided a vehicle through which LIS professionals and LIS educators may find opportunities for greater collaboration and more open communication. This will help bridge the gap between LIS theory and practice and will foster more authentic engagement between LIS education and other parts of the LIS industry in the education of the next generation of professionals. Through this fellowship the LIS discipline has become a role model for other disciplines who will be facing similar issues in the coming years. Eighty-one members of the Australian LIS profession participated in a series of focus groups exploring the current and anticipated skills and knowledge needed by the LIS professional in the web 2.0 world and beyond. Whilst each focus group tended to draw on specific themes of interest to that particular group of people, there was a great deal of common ground. Eight key themes emerged: technology, learning and education, research or evidence-based practice, communication, collaboration and team work, user focus, business savvy and personal traits. It was acknowledged that the need for successful LIS professionals to possess transferable skills and interpersonal attributes was not new. It was noted however that the speed with which things are changing in the web 2.0 world was having a significant impact and that this faster pace is placing a new and unexpected emphasis on the transferable skills and knowledge. It was also acknowledged that all librarians need to possess these skills, knowledge and attributes and not just the one or two role models who lead the way. The most interesting finding however was that web 2.0, library 2.0 and librarian 2.0 represented a ‘watershed’ for the LIS profession. Almost all the focus groups spoke about how they are seeing and experiencing a culture change in the profession. Librarian 2.0 requires a ‘different mindset or attitude’. The Levels of Perspective model by Daniel Kim provides one lens by which to view this finding. The focus group findings suggest that we are witnessing a re-awaking of the Australian LIS profession as it begins to move towards the higher levels of Kim’s model (ie mental models, vision). Thirty-six LIS educators participated in telephone interviews aimed at exploring the current state of LIS education in supporting the development of librarian 2.0. Skills and knowledge of LIS professionals in a web 2.0 world that were identified and discussed by the LIS educators mirrored those highlighted in the focus group discussions with LIS professionals. Similarly it was noted that librarian 2.0 needed a focus less on skills and knowledge and more on attitude. However, whilst LIS professionals felt that there was a paradigm shift within the profession. LIS educators did not speak with one voice on this matter with quite a number of the educators suggesting that this might be ‘overstating it a bit’. This study provides evidence for “disparate viewpoints” (Hallam, 2007) between LIS educators and LIS professionals that can have a significant implications for the future of not just LIS professional education specifically but for the profession generally. Library and information science education 2.0: guiding principles and models of best practice 1 Inviting the LIS academics to discuss how their teaching and learning activities support the development of librarian 2.0 was a core part of the interviews conducted. The strategies used and the challenges faced by LIS educators in developing their teaching and learning approaches to support the formation of librarian 2.0 are identified and discussed. A core part of the fellowship was the identification of best practice examples on how LIS educators were developing librarian 2.0. Twelve best practice examples were identified. Each educator was recorded discussing his or her approach to teaching and learning. Videos of these interviews are available via the Fellowship blog at .The LIS educators involved in making the videos felt uncomfortable with the term ‘best practice’. Many acknowledged that there simply seeking to do the best by their students and that there was always room for improvement. For this reason these videos are offered as examples of “great practice”. The videos are a tool for other educators to use, regardless of discipline, in developing their teaching and learning approaches to supporting web 2.0 professionals. It has been argued that the main purpose of professional education is transformation (Dall’ Alba, 2009; Dall’Alba & Barnacle, 2007). As such professional education should focus not just on skills and knowledge acquisition but also on helping students to develop ways of being the professionals in question (ie LIS professionals, teachers, lawyers, engineers).The aim of this fellowship was to establish Guidelines for Library and Information Science Education 2.0 it has however become apparent that at this point in time it is not yet possible to fulfil this aim. The fellowship has clearly identified skills and knowledge needed by the LIS professional in web 2.0 world (and beyond). It has also identified examples of ‘great practice’ by LIS educators as they endeavour to develop LIS professionals who will be successful in a web 20 world. The fellowship however has also shown that the LIS profession is currently undergoing significant attitudinal and conceptual change. Consequently, before a philosophy of LIS education 2.0 can be expressed, the Australian LIS profession must first explore and articulate what it means to be an LIS professional in the 21st century (ie a world of web 2.0 and beyond). In short, the LIS profession in Australia must take stock not of “what we know and can do” but on “who we are becoming” (Dall’Alba, 2009, p 34).

Observing the relevance of an information systems success model

This paper contributes to the rigor vs. relevance debate in the Information Systems (IS) discipline. Using the Action Research methodology, this study evaluates the relevance of a rigorously validated IS evaluation model in practice. The study captures observations of operational end-users employing a market leading Enterprise System application for procurement and order fulfillment in an organization. The analysis of the observations demonstrates the broad relevance of the measurement instrument. More importantly, the study identifies several improvements and possible confusions in applying the instrument in the practice.

Engaging middle school students in context-based science : One teacher's approach

In Australia, there is a crisis in science education with students becoming disengaged with canonical science in the middle years of schooling. One recent initiative that aims to improve student interest and motivation without diminishing conceptual understanding is the context-based approach. Contextual units that connect the canonical science with the students’ real world of their local community have been used in the senior years but are new in the middle years. This ethnographic study explored the learning transactions that occurred in one 9th grade science class studying an Environmental Science unit for 11 weeks. Data were derived from field notes, audio and video recorded conversations, interviews, student journals and classroom documents with a particular focus on two selected groups of students. Data were analysed qualitatively through coding for emergent themes. This paper presents an outline of the program and discussion of three assertions derived from the preliminary analysis of the data. Firstly, an integrated, coherent sequence of learning experiences that included weekly visits to a creek adjacent to the school enabled the teacher to contextualise the science in the students’ local community. Secondly, content was predominantly taught on a need-to-know basis and thirdly, the lesson sequence aligned with a model for context-based teaching. Research, teaching and policy implications of these results for promoting the context-based teaching of science in the middle years are discussed.

Expert science teacher's notion of scientific literacy

This paper will report on the way expert science teachers’ conceive of scientific literacy in their classrooms, the values related to scientific literacy they hold and how this conception and the underpinning values affect their teaching practice. Three perceived expert science teachers who teach both at senior and middle school levels and across the range of sub-disciplines (one senior biology, one senior chemistry and one senior physics) were interviewed about their understanding of scientific literacy and how this influenced their teaching practice. The three teachers were video recorded teaching a junior science class and a senior science class. The data were analysed to identify values that underpin their conceptions of science and science education. The analysis focussed on the matching of the verbalised conceptions and values with their practice of teaching science. This paper will report on these data.

Boundary weaving : the social structure and processes of organizational boundaries

Boundaries are an important field of study because they mediate almost every aspect of organizational life. They are becoming increasingly more important as organizations change more frequently and yet, despite the endemic use of the boundary metaphor in common organizational parlance, they are poorly understood. Organizational boundaries are under-theorized and researchers in related fields often simply assume their existence, without defining them. The literature on organizational boundaries is fragmented with no unifying theoretical basis. As a result, when it is recognized that an organizational boundary is "dysfunctional". there is little recourse to models on which to base remediating action. This research sets out to develop just such a theoretical model and is guided by the general question: "What is the nature of organizational boundaries?" It is argued that organizational boundaries can be conceptualised through elements of both social structure and of social process. Elements of structure include objects, coupling, properties and identity. Social processes include objectification, identification, interaction and emergence. All of these elements are integrated by a core category, or basic social process, called boundary weaving. An organizational boundary is a complex system of objects and emergent properties that are woven together by people as they interact together, objectifying the world around them, identifying with these objects and creating couplings of varying strength and polarity as well as their own fragmented identity. Organizational boundaries are characterised by the multiplicity of interconnections, a particular domain of objects, varying levels of embodiment and patterns of interaction. The theory developed in this research emerged from an exploratory, qualitative research design employing grounded theory methodology. The field data was collected from the training headquarters of the New Zealand Army using semi-structured interviews and follow up observations. The unit of analysis is an organizational boundary. Only one research context was used because of the richness and multiplicity of organizational boundaries that were present. The model arose, grounded in the data collected, through a process of theoretical memoing and constant comparative analysis. Academic literature was used as a source of data to aid theory development and the saturation of some central categories. The final theory is classified as middle range, being substantive rather than formal, and is generalizable across medium to large organizations in low-context societies. The main limitation of the research arose from the breadth of the research with multiple lines of inquiry spanning several academic disciplines, with some relevant areas such as the role of identity and complexity being addressed at a necessarily high level. The organizational boundary theory developed by this research replaces the typology approaches, typical of previous theory on organizational boundaries and reconceptualises the nature of groups in organizations as well as the role of "boundary spanners". It also has implications for any theory that relies on the concept of boundaries, such as general systems theory. The main contribution of this research is the development of a holistic model of organizational boundaries including an explanation of the multiplicity of boundaries . no organization has a single definable boundary. A significant aspect of this contribution is the integration of aspects of complexity theory and identity theory to explain the emergence of higher-order properties of organizational boundaries and of organizational identity. The core category of "boundary weaving". is a powerful new metaphor that significantly reconceptualises the way organizational boundaries may be understood in organizations. It invokes secondary metaphors such as the weaving of an organization's "boundary fabric". and provides managers with other metaphorical perspectives, such as the management of boundary friction, boundary tension, boundary permeability and boundary stability. Opportunities for future research reside in formalising and testing the theory as well as developing analytical tools that would enable managers in organizations to apply the theory in practice.

Regenerateengageexperiment in 2011! - News from Spatial Science Discipline at QUT

Abstract: Goals and potential impacts of QUT corporate Blueprint3 framework, university has made significant investments in physical infrastructure, and investments to improve staff profiles, particularly in relation to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines. The most significant physical change to the Faculty’s infrastructure has seen new workshop and teaching and research spaces located in Science and Technology precinct under construction. Also includes Alumni news, input and output numbers Spatial Science discussion, Work Integrated Learning (WIL) in 2011, some key teaching administrative dates in 2011.

Spatial Science News from QUT April 2011

Multiple awards for Spatial/Surveying lecturer, raising entry quality and commencing numbers at QUT, Gardens Point rapt in promise of things to come, STEM building progress.

Understanding the phenomenon of IS success in China through the lens of the IS-Impact model

This study is conducted within the IS-Impact Research Track at Queensland University of Technology (QUT). The goal of the IS-Impact Track is, “to develop the most widely employed model for benchmarking information systems in organizations for the joint benefit of both research and practice” (Gable et al, 2006). IS-Impact is defined as “a measure at a point in time, of the stream of net benefits from the IS, to date and anticipated, as perceived by all key-user-groups” (Gable Sedera and Chan, 2008). Track efforts have yielded the bicameral IS-Impact measurement model; the “impact” half includes Organizational-Impact and Individual-Impact dimensions; the “quality” half includes System-Quality and Information-Quality dimensions. The IS-Impact model, by design, is intended to be robust, simple and generalizable, to yield results that are comparable across time, stakeholders, different systems and system contexts. The model and measurement approach employ perceptual measures and an instrument that is relevant to key stakeholder groups, thereby enabling the combination or comparison of stakeholder perspectives. Such a validated and widely accepted IS-Impact measurement model has both academic and practical value. It facilitates systematic operationalization of a main dependent variable in research (IS-Impact), which can also serve as an important independent variable. For IS management practice it provides a means to benchmark and track the performance of information systems in use. The objective of this study is to develop a Mandarin version IS-Impact model, encompassing a list of China-specific IS-Impact measures, aiding in a better understanding of the IS-Impact phenomenon in a Chinese organizational context. The IS-Impact model provides a much needed theoretical guidance for this investigation of ES and ES impacts in a Chinese context. The appropriateness and soundness of employing the IS-Impact model as a theoretical foundation are evident: the model originated from a sound theory of IS Success (1992), developed through rigorous validation, and also derived in the context of Enterprise Systems. Based on the IS-Impact model, this study investigates a number of research questions (RQs). Firstly, the research investigated what essential impacts have been derived from ES by Chinese users and organizations [RQ1]. Secondly, we investigate which salient quality features of ES are perceived by Chinese users [RQ2]. Thirdly, we seek to answer whether the quality and impacts measures are sufficient to assess ES-success in general [RQ3]. Lastly, the study attempts to address whether the IS-Impact measurement model is appropriate for Chinese organizations in terms of evaluating their ES [RQ4]. An open-ended, qualitative identification survey was employed in the study. A large body of short text data was gathered from 144 Chinese users and 633 valid IS-Impact statements were generated from the data set. A generally inductive approach was applied in the qualitative data analysis. Rigorous qualitative data coding resulted in 50 first-order categories with 6 second-order categories that were grounded from the context of Chinese organization. The six second-order categories are: 1) System Quality; 2) Information Quality; 3) Individual Impacts;4) Organizational Impacts; 5) User Quality and 6) IS Support Quality. The final research finding of the study is the contextualized Mandarin version IS-Impact measurement model that includes 38 measures organized into 4 dimensions: System Quality, information Quality, Individual Impacts and Organizational Impacts. The study also proposed two conceptual models to harmonize the IS-Impact model and the two emergent constructs – User Quality and IS Support Quality by drawing on previous IS effectiveness literatures and the Work System theory proposed by Alter (1999) respectively. The study is significant as it is the first effort that empirically and comprehensively investigates IS-Impact in China. Specifically, the research contributions can be classified into theoretical contributions and practical contributions. From the theoretical perspective, through qualitative evidence, the study test and consolidate IS-Impact measurement model in terms of the quality of robustness, completeness and generalizability. The unconventional research design exhibits creativity of the study. The theoretical model does not work as a top-down a priori seeking for evidence demonstrating its credibility; rather, the study allows a competitive model to emerge from the bottom-up and open-coding analysis. Besides, the study is an example extending and localizing pre-existing theory developed in Western context when the theory is introduced to a different context. On the other hand, from the practical perspective, It is first time to introduce prominent research findings in field of IS Success to Chinese academia and practitioner. This study provides a guideline for Chinese organizations to assess their Enterprise System, and leveraging IT investment in the future. As a research effort in ITPS track, this study contributes the research team with an alternative operationalization of the dependent variable. The future research can take on the contextualized Mandarin version IS-Impact framework as a theoretical a priori model, further quantitative and empirical testing its validity.

David F. Treagust : congenial soul, science educator, and international research leader

For almost a half century David F. Treafust has been an exemplary science educator who has contributed through his dedication and commitments to students, curriculum development and collaboration with teachers, and cutting edge research in science education that has impacted the field globally, nationally and locally. A hallmark of his outstanding career is his collaborative style that inspires others to produce their best work.

Re-conceptualising and re-positioning Australian library and information science education for the 21st century [Final Report 2011]

How can Australian library and information science (LIS) education produce, in a sustainable manner, the diverse supply of graduates with the appropriate attributes to develop and maintain high quality professional practice in the rapidly changing 21st century? This report presents the key findings of a project that has examined this question through research into future directions for LIS education in Australia. Titled Re-conceptualising and re-positioning Australian library and information science education for the twenty-first century, the purpose of the project was to establish a consolidated and holistic picture of the Australian LIS profession, and identify how its future education and training can be mediated in a cohesive and sustainable manner. The project was undertaken with a team of 12 university and vocational LIS educators from 11 institutions around Australia between November 2009 and December 2010. Collectively, these eleven institutions represented the broad spectrum and diversity of LIS education in Australia, and enabled the project to examine education for the information profession in a holistic and synergistic manner. Participating institutions in the project included Queensland University of Technology (Project Leader), Charles Sturt University, Curtin University of Technology, Edith Cowan University, Monash University, RMIT University, University of Canberra, University of South Australia, University of Tasmania, University of Technology Sydney and Victoria University. The inception and need for the project was motivated by a range of factors. From a broad perspective several of these factors relate to concerns raised at national and international levels regarding problems with education for LIS. In addition, the motivation and need for the project also related to some unique challenges that LIS education faces in the Australian tertiary education landscape. Over recent years a range of responses to explore the various issues confronting LIS education in Australia have emerged at local and national levels however this project represented the first significant investment of funding for national research in this area. In this way, the inception of the project offered a unique opportunity and powerful mechanism through which to bring together key stakeholders and inspire discourse concerning future education for the profession. Therefore as the first national project of its kind, its intent has been to provide foundation research that will inform and guide future directions for LIS education and training in Australia. The primary objective of the project was to develop a Framework for the Education of the Information Professions in Australia. The purpose of this framework was to provide evidence based strategic recommendations that would guide Australia’s future education for the information professions. Recognising the three major and equal players in the education process the project was framed around three areas of consideration: LIS students, the LIS workforce and LIS educators. Each area of consideration aligned to a research substudy in the project. The three research substudies were titled Student Considerations, Workforce Planning Considerations and Tertiary Education Considerations. The Students substudy provided a profile of LIS students and an analysis of their choices, experiences and expectations in regard to LIS education and their graduate destinations. The Workforce substudy provided an overview and analysis of the nature of the current LIS workforce, including a focus on employer expectations and employment opportunities and comment on the core and elective skill, knowledge and attitudes of current and future LIS professionals. Finally the Tertiary Education substudy provided a profile of LIS educators and an analysis of their characteristics and experiences including the key issues and challenges. In addition it also explored current national and international trends and priorities impacting on LIS education. The project utilised a Community Based Participatory Research (CBPR) approach. This approach involves all members of the community in all aspects of the project. It recognised the unique strengths and perspectives that community members bring to the process. For this project ‘community’ comprised of all individuals who have a role in, or a vested interest in, LIS education and included LIS educators, professionals, employers, students and professional associations. Individuals from these sub-groups were invited to participate in a range of aspects of the project from design through to implementation and evaluation. A range of research methodologies were used to consider the many different perspectives of LIS education, including employers and recruiters, professional associations, students, graduates and LIS teaching staff. Data collection involved a mixed method approach of questionnaires, focus groups, semi-structured interviews and environmental scans. An array of approaches was selected to ensure that broadest possible access to different facets of the information profession would be achieved. The main findings and observations from each substudy have highlighted a range of challenges for LIS education that need to be addressed. These findings and observations have grounded the development of the Framework for the Education of the Information Professions in Australia. The framework presents eleven recommendations to progress the national approach to LIS education and guide Australia’s future education for the information professions. The framework will be used by the LIS profession, most notably its educators, as strategic directions for the future of LIS education in Australia. Framework for the Education of the Information Professions in Australia: Recommendation 1: It is recommended that a broader and more inclusive vocabulary be adopted that both recognises and celebrates the expanding landscape of the field, for example ‘information profession’, ‘information sector’, ‘information discipline’ and ‘information education’. Recommendation 2: It is recommended that a self-directed body composed of information educators be established to promote, support and lead excellence in teaching and research within the information discipline. Recommendation 3: It is recommended that Australia’s information discipline continue to develop excellence in information research that will raise the discipline’s profile and contribute to its prominence within the national and international arena. Recommendation 4: It is recommended that further research examining the nature and context of Australia’s information education programs be undertaken to ensure a sustainable and relevant future for the discipline. Recommendation 5: It is recommended that further research examining the pathways and qualifications available for entry into the Australian information sector be undertaken to ensure relevance, attractiveness, accessibility and transparency. Recommendation 6: It is recommended that strategies are developed and implemented to ensure the sustainability of the workforce of information educators. Recommendation 7: It is recommended that a national approach to promoting and marketing the information profession and thereby attracting more students to the field is developed. Recommendation 8: It is recommended that Australia’s information discipline continues to support a culture of quality teaching and learning, especially given the need to accommodate a focus on the broader information landscape and more flexible delivery options. Recommendation 9: It is recommended that strategies are developed that will support and encourage collaboration between information education within the higher education and VET sectors. Recommendation 10: It is recommended that strategies and forums are developed that will support the information sector working together to conceptualise and articulate their professional identity and educational needs. Recommendation 11: It is recommended that a research agenda be established that will identify and prioritise areas in which further development or work is needed to continue advancing information education in Australia. The key findings from this project confirm that a number of pressing issues are confronting LIS education in Australia. Left unaddressed these issues will have significant implications for the future of LIS education as well as the broader LIS profession. Consequently creating a sustainable and cohesive future can only be realised through cooperation and collaboration among all stakeholders including those with the capacity to enact radical change in university and vocational institutions. Indeed the impending adoption and implementation of the project’s recommendations will fundamentally determine whether Australian LIS education is assured both for the present day and into the future.