Library and Information Science Education and eScience: The Current State of ALA Accredited MLS/MLIS Programs in preparing Librarians and Information Professionals for eScience Needs

The purpose of this study is multifaceted: 1) to describe eScience research in acomprehensive way; 2) to help library and information specialists understand the realm of eScience research and the information needs of the community and demonstrate the importance of LIS professionals within the eScience domain; 3) and to explore the current state of curricular content of ALA accredited MLS/MLIS programs to understand the extent to which they prepare new professionals within eScience librarianship. The literature review focuses heavily on eScientists and other data-driven researchers’ information service needs in addition to demonstrating how and why librarians and information specialists can and should fulfill these service gaps and information needs within eScience research. By looking at the current curriculum of American Library Association (ALA) accredited MLS/MLIS programs, we can identify potential gaps in knowledge and where to improve in order to prepare and train new MLS/MLIS graduates to fulfill the needs of eScientists. This investigation is meant to be informative and can be used as a tool for LIS programs to assess their curriculums in comparison to the needs of eScience and other data-driven and networked research. Finally, this investigation will provide awareness and insight into the services needed to support a thriving eScience and data-driven research community to the LIS profession.

FOIA, Inc.

Government transparency is imagined as a public good necessary to a robust democracy. Consistent with that vision, Congress enacted the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to allow oversight and accountability of governmental activities. No actors are more central to the design than journalists, who were not only the prime intended users, but who were intimately involved in crafting the law itself. But this democracy-enhancing ideal is at odds with FOIA’s reality: at some agencies, commercial — not public — interests dominate the landscape of FOIA requesters. This Article provides the first in-depth academic study of the commercial use of FOIA, drawing on original datasets from six federal agencies. It uses these agencies as case studies to examine the way that businesses derive profit-making value from free or low-cost federal records. Remarkably, these datasets also reveal a cottage industry of companies whose entire business model is to request federal records under FOIA and resell them at a profit. Information resellers are not isolated occurrences, but rather are some of the most frequent FOIA requesters — often submitting hundreds or even thousands of requests a year — at a variety of federal agencies. Commercial users certainly have legitimate information needs, but, as this Article demonstrates, the volume and character of the current commercial use of FOIA undermines its efficacy as a transparency tool. Private businesses in essence receive a substantial subsidy without any corresponding public good, all while draining agency resources that might otherwise be used to respond to FOIA requests that serve its central oversight and accountability aims. Moreover, information resellers have become the de facto locus for federal records for whole industries, effectively privatizing an important public function. Counter-intuitively, limiting commercial requesting will not solve this problem. Instead, this Article proposes a targeted and aggressive policy of requiring government agencies to affirmatively disclose sets of records that are routinely the subject of FOIA requests — a surprisingly large number of the documents sought by commercial requesters. By meeting information needs in a more efficient manner that is available equally to all, affirmative disclosure will enable federal agencies to reclaim public records from the private market and free up resources to better serve FOIA requests that advance its democratic purpose.

FOIA, Inc.

Government transparency is imagined as a public good necessary to a robust democracy. Consistent with that vision, Congress enacted the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to allow oversight and accountability of governmental activities, imagining the prime intended users to be journalists. But this democracy-enhancing ideal is at odds with FOIA’s reality: at some agencies, commercial—not public—interests dominate the landscape of FOIA requesters. This Article provides the first in-depth academic study of the commercial use of FOIA, drawing on original datasets from six federal agencies. It documents how corporations, in pursuit of private profit, have overrun FOIA’s supremely inexpensive processes and, in so doing, potentially crowded out journalists and other government watchdogs from doing what the law was intended to facilitate: thirdparty oversight of governmental actors. It also reveals a cottage industry of companies whose entire business model is to request federal records under FOIA and resell them at a profit, which distorts the transparency system even further. Counterintuitively, limiting commercial requesting will not solve this problem. Instead, this Article proposes a targeted and aggressive policy of requiring government agencies to affirmatively disclose sets of records that are the subject of routine FOIA requests—a surprisingly large number of the documents sought by commercial requesters. By meeting information needs in a more efficient manner that is available equally to all, affirmative disclosure will enable federal agencies to reclaim public records from the private market and free up resources to better serve FOIA requests that advance its democratic purpose.

Effects of Institutional Factors on the Retention of Graduate Students of Color in Schools of Library and Information Science

The intent of the study was to understand the changes that have occurred over the last 25 years in library programs as far as enrollment and diversity of students, number and ethnicity of the faculty, program income and expenses, cost of attendance, and scholarship and fellowship aid, in an effort to better understand library programs granting the MLIS degree. The study also endeavored to identify institutional factors associated with the retention and productivity rates of White students and students of color in schools of library and information science. During the period studied, the proportional representation of White students decreased. For students of color, proportional representation was stable during the same time period. Results revealed a medium effect size of time with productivity rates for both groups declining over time. Retention rate differed significantly by time, with a small effect size with retention rate that initially increased over time, but is now decreasing. The final analyses were meta-regressions to determine if retention and productivity rates can be predicted by cost of attendance, scholarship and fellow aid, and program size. Results indicated that for students of color, program size in 2000 was significantly predictive of retention, cost of attendance was predictive in 2002, and scholarship and fellowship aid was predictive of retention in 2004. No variables were significantly predictive for retention of White students. The last analysis was to determine if productivity rate can be predicted by cost of attendance, scholarship and fellow aid, and program size. Results indicate that for White students in 2002, the cost of attendance was predictive of productivity rating. In 2003, scholarship and fellowship aid was predictive of productivity rate and in 2004, scholarship and fellowship aid was predictive of productivity rating. For students of color, results indicate that only scholarship and fellowship aid in 2005 was predictive of productivity rate. No other variables in any of the years studied showed any significant prediction of productivity rating for students of color.

JRNL: Journal Retention and Needs Listing — A Software Tool for Managing Print Journal Archives

The Journal Retention and Needs Listing (JRNL) program: 1) allows libraries to expose lists of print journals for which they have made retention commitments; 2) express needs (or gaps) in their holdings; and 3) communicate offers to fill the gaps in other participating libraries’ holdings. Multiple library consortia and their member libraries use JRNL to facilitate communication between library staff to identify holding commitments, fill gaps, and guide deselection decisions. JRNL is commonly developed and governed by the participating consortia. Currently, those consortia are the Florida Academic Repository (FLARE), the Association of Southeastern Research Libraries (ASERL)/Washington Research Library Consortium (WRLC), and the Western Regional Storage Trust (WEST).