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).

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.

Phenomenography : opening a new territory for library and information science research

Phenomenography is a research approach devised to allow the investigation of varying ways in which people experience aspects of their world. Whilst growing attention is being paid to interpretative research in LIS, it is not always clear how the outcomes of such research can be used in practice. This article explores the potential contribution of phenomenography in advancing the application of phenomenological and hermeneutic frameworks to LIS theory, research and practice. In phenomenography we find a research toll which in revealing variation, uncovers everyday understandings of phenomena and provides outcomes which are readily applicable to professional practice. THe outcomes may be used in human computer interface design, enhancement, implementation and training, in the design and evaluation of services, and in education and training for both end users and information professionals. A proposed research territory for phenomenography in LIS includes investigating qualitative variation in the experienced meaning of: 1) information and its role in society 2) LIS concepts and principles 3) LIS processes and; 4) LIS elements.

Australian Library and Information Association Course Accreditation Review 2013

This report has been prepared for the Australian Library and Information Association (ALIA) in response to the request to undertake a literature review and environmental scan to inform discussions of the issues associated with professional accreditation. ALIA is the peak body which develops and monitors the professional standards that ensure the high quality of graduates entering the library and information services (LIS) profession in Australia. The report presents a themed discussion of the issues identified in the literature review and environmental scan to build a full picture of the role of course accreditation in LIS education. This is set against developments in the wider context of quality assurance in Australian tertiary education, to analyse the implications of this changing environment for ALIA’s accreditation policies and ractices.

Indonesian library and information science professionals’ understanding of Library 2.0: A pilot study

The literature around Library 2.0 remains largely theoretical with few empirical studies and is particularly limited in developing countries such as Indonesia. This study addresses this gap and aims to provide information about the current state of knowledge on Indonesian LIS professionals’ understanding of Library 2.0. The researchers used qualitative and quantitative approaches for this study, asking thirteen closed- and open-ended questions in an online survey. The researchers used descriptive and in vivo coding to analyze the responses. Through their analysis, they identified three themes: technology, interactivity, and awareness of Library 2.0. Respondents demonstrated awareness of Library 2.0 and a basic understanding of the roles of interactivity and technology in libraries. However, overreliance on technology used in libraries to conceptualize Library 2.0 without an emphasis on its core characteristics and principles could lead to the misalignment of limited resources. The study results will potentially strengthen the research base for Library 2.0 practice as well as inform LIS curriculum in Indonesia so as to develop practitioners who are able to adapt to users’ changing needs and expectations. It is expected that the preliminary data from this study could be used to design a much larger and more complex future research project in this area.

Investigating the supply and demand relationship in a profession: the English and Welsh schools of librarianship and information Studies and the Higher Education Library and Information Services employment sector in England and Wales.

Concern has been expressed in the professional literature - borne out by professional experience and observation - that the supply and demand relationship existing between the 13 English and Welsh Library and Information Studies (LIS) Schools (as providers of `First Professional' staff) and the Higher Education Library and Information Services (HE LIS) sector of England and Wales (as one group of employers of such staff) is unsatisfactory and needs attention. An appropriate methodology to investigate this problem was devised. A basic content analysis of Schools' curricular and recruitment material intended for public consumption was undertaken to establish an overview of the LIS initial professional education system in England and Wales, and to identify and analyse any covert messages imparted to readers. This was followed by a mix of Main Questionnaires and Semi-Structured Interviews with appropriate populations. The investigation revealed some serious areas of dissatisfaction by the HE LIS Chiefs with the role and function of the Schools. Considerable divergence of views emerged on the state of the working relationships between the two sectors and on the Schools' successes in meeting the needs of the HE LIS sector and on CPD provision. There were, however, areas of substantial and consistent agreement between the two sectors. The main implications of the findings were that those areas encompassing divergence of views were worrying and needed addressing by both sides. Possible ways forward included recommendations on improving the image of the profession purveyed by the Schools; the forming of closer and more effective inter-sectoral relationships; recognising fully the importance of `practicum' and increasing and sustaining the network of `practicum' providers.

Information literacy programs and research: reflections on 'Information literacy programs and research: An international review' by Christine Bruce. 2000. The Australian Library Journal 49, 3: 209-218

Although in the late 1990s there was much discussion as to whether the idea of information literacy was necessary or had longevity, global interest in the phenomenon has increased rather than diminished. In the midst of all this activity, what has happened to the way in which we interpret the idea of information literacy in the last decade or more? The label of information literacy has certainly become widely applied, especially to library based programs and remains more popular in formal learning environments.Ultimately information literacy is about peoples’ experience of using information wherever they happen to be. Information literacy is about people interacting, engaging, working with information in many contexts, either individually or in community. Emerging technologies may transform the kinds of information available and how it is engaged with. Nevertheless, we continue to need to understand the experience of information use in order to support people in their information environments. We continue to need to develop programs which reflect and enhance peoples’ experiences of using information to learn in ever widening and more complex settings (Bruce, 2008; Bruce & Hughes, 2010).

Evidence-based practice and information literacy

Evidence-based Practice (EBP) has recently emerged as a topic of discussion amongst professionals within the library and information services (LIS) industry. Simply stated, EBP is the process of using formal research skills and methods to assist in decision making and establishing best practice. The emerging interest in EBP within the library context serves to remind the library profession that research skills and methods can help ensure that the library industry remains current and relevant in changing times. The LIS sector faces ongoing challenges in terms of the expectation that financial and human resources will be managed efficiently, particularly if library budgets are reduced and accountability to the principal stakeholders is increased. Library managers are charged with the responsibility to deliver relevant and cost effective services, in an environment characterised by rapidly changing models of information provision, information access and user behaviours. Consequently they are called upon not only to justify the services they provide, or plan to introduce, but also to measure the effectiveness of these services and to evaluate the impact on the communities they serve. The imperative for innovation in and enhancements to library practice is accompanied by the need for a strong understanding of the processes of review, measurement, assessment and evaluation. In 2001 the Centre for Information Research was commissioned by the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals (CILIP) in the UK to conduct an examination into the research landscape for library and information science. The examination concluded that research is “important for the LIS [library and information science] domain in a number of ways” (McNicol & Nankivell, 2001, p.77). At the professional level, research can inform practice, assist in the future planning of the profession, raise the profile of the discipline, and indeed the reputation and standing of the library and information service itself. At the personal level, research can “broaden horizons and offer individuals development opportunities” (McNicol & Nankivell, 2001, p.77). The study recommended that “research should be promoted as a valuable professional activity for practitioners to engage in” (McNicol & Nankivell, 2001, p.82). This chapter will consider the role of EBP within the library profession. A brief review of key literature in the area is provided. The review considers issues of definition and terminology, highlights the importance of research in professional practice and outlines the research approaches that underpin EBP. The chapter concludes with a consideration of the specific application of EBP within the dynamic and evolving field of information literacy (IL).