Profile of planning: A study of a three-year project on the implementation of collaborative library media programs

The implementation of collaborative planning and teaching models in ten flexibly scheduled elementary and middle school library media centers was studied to determine which factors facilitated the collaborative planning process and to learn what occurs when library media specialists (LMSs) and classroom teachers (CTs) plan together. In this qualitative study, 61 principals, CTs, and LMSs were interviewed on a range of topics including the principal's role, school climate, the value of team planning, the importance of information literacy instruction, and the ideal learning environment. Other data sources were observations, videotapes of planning sessions, and documents. This three-year school reform effort was funded by the Library Power Project to improve library programs, to encourage collaborative planning, and to increase curricular integration of information literacy skills instruction. ^ The findings included a description of typical planning sessions and the identification of several major factors which impacted the success of collaborative planning: the individuals involved, school climate, time for planning, the organization of the school, the facility and collection, and training. Of these factors, the characteristics and actions of the people involved were most critical to the implementation of the innovation. The LMS was the pivotal player and, in the views of CTs, principals, and LMSs themselves, must be knowledgeable about curriculum, the library collection, and instructional design and delivery; must be open and welcoming to CTs and use good interpersonal skills; and must be committed to information literacy instruction and willing to act as a change agent. The support of the principal was vital; in schools with successful programs, the principal served as an advocate for collaborative planning and information literacy instruction, provided financial support for the library program including clerical staff, and arranged for LMSs and CTs to have time during the school day to plan together. ^ CTs involved in positive planning partnerships with LMSs were flexible, were open to change, used a variety of instructional materials, expected students to be actively involved in their own learning, and were willing to team teach with LMSs. Most CTs planning with LMSs made lesson plans in advance and preferred to plan with others. Also, most CTs in this study planned with grade level or departmental groups, which expedited the delivery of information literacy instruction and the effective use of planning time. ^ Implications of the findings of this research project were discussed for individual schools, for school districts, and for colleges and universities training LMSs, CTs, and administrators. Suggestions for additional research were also included. ^

An examination of Lotka's law in the field of Library and Information Studies

The purpose of this study was to test Lotka’s law of scientific publication productivity using the methodology outlined by Pao (1985), in the field of Library and Information Studies (LIS). Lotka’s law has been sporadically tested in the field over the past 30+ years, but the results of these studies are inconclusive due to the varying methods employed by the researchers. ^ A data set of 1,856 citations that were found using the ISI Web of Knowledge databases were studied. The values of n and c were calculated to be 2.1 and 0.6418 (64.18%) respectively. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) one sample goodness-of-fit test was conducted at the 0.10 level of significance. The Dmax value is 0.022758 and the calculated critical value is 0.026562. It was determined that the null hypothesis stating that there is no difference in the observed distribution of publications and the distribution obtained using Lotka’s and Pao’s procedure could not be rejected. ^ This study finds that literature in the field of Library and Information Studies does conform to Lotka’s law with reliable results. As result, Lotka’s law can be used in LIS as a standardized means of measuring author publication productivity which will lead to findings that are comparable on many levels (e.g., department, institution, national). Lotka’s law can be employed as an empirically proven analytical tool to establish publication productivity benchmarks for faculty and faculty librarians. Recommendations for further study include (a) exploring the characteristics of the high and low producers; (b) finding a way to successfully account for collaborative contributions in the formula; and, (c) a detailed study of institutional policies concerning publication productivity and its impact on the appointment, tenure and promotion process of academic librarians. ^

An Examination of Lotka’s law in the Field of Library and Information Studies

The purpose of this study was to test Lotka’s law of scientific publication productivity using the methodology outlined by Pao (1985), in the field of Library and Information Studies (LIS). Lotka’s law has been sporadically tested in the field over the past 30+ years, but the results of these studies are inconclusive due to the varying methods employed by the researchers. A data set of 1,856 citations that were found using the ISI Web of Knowledge databases were studied. The values of n and c were calculated to be 2.1 and 0.6418 (64.18%) respectively. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) one sample goodness-of-fit test was conducted at the 0.10 level of significance. The Dmax value is 0.022758 and the calculated critical value is 0.026562. It was determined that the null hypothesis stating that there is no difference in the observed distribution of publications and the distribution obtained using Lotka’s and Pao’s procedure could not be rejected. This study finds that literature in the field of library and Information Studies does conform to Lotka’s law with reliable results. As result, Lotka’s law can be used in LIS as a standardized means of measuring author publication productivity which will lead to findings that are comparable on many levels (e.g., department, institution, national). Lotka’s law can be employed as an empirically proven analytical tool to establish publication productivity benchmarks for faculty and faculty librarians. Recommendations for further study include (a) exploring the characteristics of the high and low producers; (b) finding a way to successfully account for collaborative contributions in the formula; and, (c) a detailed study of institutional policies concerning publication productivity and its impact on the appointment, tenure and promotion process of academic librarians.