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

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 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).

A framework for the education of the information professions in Australia.

In recent years there has been considerable discussion afforded to the challenges facing the future of library and information science (LIS) education in Australia. This paper outlines a twelve-month project funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council that was undertaken by eleven institutions representing university and vocational LIS education in Australia. The project established a Framework for the Education of the Information Professions in Australia that provides a set of strategic recommendations that will inform future directions of Australian LIS education. This national project represented a bold move within Australian LIS education, and provided a unique opportunity for LIS educators across Australia to collectively unite in order to ‘future-proof’ education for future generations of LIS professionals.

Validating the design science research roadmap : through the lens of "the idealised model for theory development"

Design Science Research (DSR) has emerged as an important approach in Information Systems (IS) research. However, DSR is still in its genesis and has yet to achieve consensus on even the fundamentals, such as what methodology / approach to use for DSR. While there has been much effort to establish DSR methodologies, a complete, holistic and validated approach for the conduct of DSR to guide IS researcher (especially novice researchers) is yet to be established. Alturki et al. (2011) present a DSR ‘Roadmap’, making the claim that it is a complete and comprehensive guide for conducting DSR. This paper aims to further assess this Roadmap, by positioning it against the ‘Idealized Model for Theory Development’ (IM4TD) (Fischer & Gregor 2011). The IM4TD highlights the role of discovery and justification and forms of reasoning to progress in theory development. Fischer and Gregor (2011) have applied IM4TD’s hypothetico-deductive method to analyze DSR methodologies, which is adopted in this study to deductively validate the Alturki et al. (2011) Roadmap. The results suggest that the Roadmap adheres to the IM4TD, is reasonably complete, overcomes most shortcomings identified in other DSR methodologies and also highlights valuable refinements that should be considered within the IM4TD.

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.

Principals, Teachers, and Student's Perception of the Information and Communication Technology in Kuwait Secondary Schools (Rhetoric and reality)

ICT integration has been advocated to provide opportunities to improve students’ achievement and engagement through transforming the educational setting. A valuable tool that contributes in enhancing and developing students’ cognitive skills for lifelong learning, ICT integration has introduced a new educational philosophy, shifting the role of students into a more central position in the pedagogical processes. Kuwait, as with many other countries, has recently planned ICT integration to develop its citizen’s capacities. This study sought to capture the principals’, teachers’, and students’ perceptions of ICT integration in pedagogical activities, as well as how ICT is being used for learning and teaching activities in three ICT leading Kuwaiti secondary schools. Interviews with principals, teachers, and students were conducted, along with an open-ended questionnaire for the teachers, researcher observations, and document analysis. The findings revealed that ICT integration in Kuwait needed to be reinforced to accomplish the ICT integration objectives. A call for further support for teachers, and a reconsideration of the ICT integration strategies were also recommended.

State of multilevel research perspective in the information systems discipline

Existing distinctions among macro and micro approaches have been jeopardising the advances of Information Systems (IS) research. Both approaches have been criticized for explaining one level while neglecting the other; thereby, the current situation necessitates the application of multilevel research for revealing the deficiencies. Instead of studying single level (macro or micro), multilevel research entails more than one level of conceptualization and analysis, simultaneously. As the notion of multilevel is borrowed from reference disciplines, there tends to be confusions and inconsistencies within the IS discipline, which hinders the adoption of multilevel research. This paper speaks for the potential value of multilevel research, by investigating the current application status of multilevel research within the IS domain. A content analysis of multilevel research articles from major IS conferences and journals is presented. Analysis results suggest that IS scholars have applied multilevel research to produce high quality work ranging from a variety of topics. However, researchers have not yet been consistently defining “multilevel”, leading to idiosyncratic meanings of multilevel research, most often, in authors’ own interpretations. We argue that a rigorous definition of “multilevel research” needs to be explicated for consistencies in research community.

Designing the information architecture of governmental one-stop portals : on the application and analysis of card sorting

The latest paradigm shift in government, termed Transformational Government, puts the citizen in the centre of attention. Including citizens in the design of online one-stop portals can help governmental organisations to become more customer focussed. This study describes the initial efforts of an Australian state government to develop an information architecture to structure the content of their future one-stop portal. Hereby, card sorting exercises have been conducted and analysed, utilising contemporary approaches found in academic and non-scientific literature. This paper describes the findings of the card sorting exercises in this particular case and discusses the suitability of the applied approaches in general. These are distinguished into non-statistical, statistical, and hybrid approaches. Thus, on the one hand, this paper contributes to academia by describing the application of different card sorting approaches and discussing their strengths and weaknesses. On the other hand, this paper contributes to practice by explaining the approach that has been taken by the authors’ research partner in order to develop a customer-focussed governmental one-stop portal. Thus, they provide decision support for practitioners with regard to different analysis methods that can be used to complement recent approaches in Transformational Government.

BWW ontology as a lens on IS design theory: Extending the design science research roadmap

The Design Science Research Roadmap (DSR-Roadmap) [1] aims to give detailed methodological guidance to novice researchers in Information Systems (IS) DSR. Focus group evaluation, one phase of the overall study, of the evolving DSR-Roadmap revealed that a key difficulty faced by both novice and expert researchers in DSR, is abstracting design theory from design. This paper explores the extension of the DSR-Roadmap by employing IS deep structure ontology (BWW [2-4]) as a lens on IS design to firstly yield generalisable design theory, specifically 'IS Design Theory' (ISDT) elements [5]. Consideration is next given to the value of BWW in the application of the design theory by practitioners. Results of mapping BWW constructs to ISDT elements suggest that the BWW is promising as a common language between design researchers and practitioners, facilitating both design theory and design implementation

The design science research roadmap : in progress evaluation

Although Design Science Research (DSR) is now an accepted approach to research in the Information Systems (IS) discipline, consensus on the methodology of DSR has yet to be achieved. Lack of a comprehensive and detailed methodology for Design Science Research (DSR) in the Information System (IS) discipline is a main issue. Prior research (the parent-study) aimed to remedy this situation and resulted in the DSR-Roadmap (Alturki et al., 2011a). Continuing empirical validation and revision of the DSR-Roadmap strives towards a methodology with appropriate levels of detail, integration, and completeness for novice researchers to efficiently and effectively conduct and report DSR in IS. The sub-study reported herein contributes to this larger, ongoing effort. This paper reports results from a formative evaluation effort of the DSR-Roadmap conducted using focus group analysis. Generally, participants endorsed the utility and intuitiveness of the DSR-Roadmap, while also suggesting valuable refinements. Both parent-study and sub-study make methodological contributions. The parent-study is the first attempt of utilizing DSR to develop a research methodology showing an example of how to use DSR in research methodology construction. The sub-study demonstrates the value of the focus group method in DSR for formative product evaluation.