EN:

Objective – As reference services continue to evolve, libraries must make evidence based decisions about their services. This study seeks to determine the value of reference services in relation to student learning acquired during research consultations, by soliciting students’ and librarians’ perceptions of consultation success and examining the degree of alignment between them.

Methods – The alignment of students’ learning outcomes (reported skills and knowledge acquired) with librarians’ expectations for student learning during consultations was assessed. An online questionnaire was conducted to gather responses from students who had sought consultation services; 20 students participated. In-person interviews took place with eight librarians who had provided these consultations. The online questionnaire for students included questions about students’ assessments of their self-identified learning goals through consultation with a librarian and their success at applying the knowledge and skills gained. Librarian interviews elicited responses about students’ prior research experience, librarians’ objectives for student learning, librarians’ perceptions of student learning outcomes, and perceived consultation success. The responses of both the students and the librarians were coded, matched, and compared.

Results – Students and librarians both considered the consultation process to be successful in advancing learning objectives and research skills. All students reported that the consultations met their expectations, and most reported that the skills acquired were applicable to their projects and significantly improved the quality of their work. Librarians expressed confidence that students had gained competency in the following skill sets: finding sources, search strategy development, topic exploration, specific tool use, and library organization and access. A high degree of alignment was observed in the identification by both students and librarians of “finding sources” as the skill set most in need of enhancement or assistance, while some disparity was noted in the ranking of “search strategy development,” which librarians ranked second and students ranked last.

Conclusion – The data demonstrate that both students and librarians perceived individual research consultations as an effective means to meet student learning expectations. Study findings suggest that as reference models continue to change and reference desk usage declines, research consultations remain a valuable element in a library’s service model and an efficient use of human resources.

EN:

Objective – While library literature contains many studies examining faculty perceptions of the value of librarian-led information literacy (IL)instruction, there is little evidence regarding IL instruction practices of disciplinary faculty independent of librarians. In a climate of uncertain budgets, increasing student enrollment, and increased conversation around the need for IL, media, and digital literacy skills, this study aimed to investigate a little-researched area of the IL instruction, learning, and development milieu.

Methods – In collaboration with the institutional research office, a data and methods triangulation approach was used. A survey of disciplinary faculty was administered and disciplinary faculty focus groups were also conducted. Student outcomes and annual assessment reports, documents that describe teaching and assessment methods for courses across the university, were analyzed. Voyant, a text-mining tool, was also used to determine key phrases and terms related to IL in these documents.

Results – Results revealed that disciplinary faculty highly value skills and understandings affiliated with IL competency. Faculty provide the majority of IL learning opportunities independent of librarians, although these learning opportunities are generally provided through implicit, rather than explicit, methods. Pedagogical methods that may enable explicit practices, such as the use of standards and competencies, are infrequently used.

Conclusion – Evidence and findings from this study are being used to inform several initiatives to work with disciplinary faculty for IL instruction, including new services, resources, and instruction models to support IL development in students.

EN:

Objective – This research aimed to examine the characteristics of the current health library professional workforce in Australia. The study also sought to explore the areas of health library competency domains and job functions that may reflect progress toward a specialized digital health information capability.

Methods – Health librarians’ responses to the May 2018 Australian Health Information Workforce Census were analysed and compared with results obtained in earlier census counts. The health librarian characteristics were also compared with other health information occupations included in the Census.

Results – There were 238 usable health librarian responses. These indicate that the health librarian workforce continues to be a comparatively mature population, with substantial experience, increasing involvement in data- and technology-intensive functions, high levels of professional association membership, and participation in continuing education activities. Notably there are emerging role titles and job functions which point to a greater digital health focus in the changing work realm.

Conclusion – The health librarian workforce has adapted its skills, in line with the increased digital emphasis in health information work. However, as with other health information occupational groups, it is possible that health system planners and funders are not aware of librarians’ current functions and skills. This mature workforce may undergo significant attrition and consequent loss of expertise in the next decade. Continued advocacy and strategic planning around these factors with workforce, healthcare quality, and educational organizations will be required.

EN:

Objective – This study examines differences in university students’ library use and satisfaction (e.g., in-person library visits, online and print resource use, space satisfaction, and library website use) between 2016 and 2018 based on local survey data. It also discusses how these findings provided guidance for future planning and action.    

Methods – The academic university library developed the surveys for undergraduate and graduate students and distributed them in Spring 2016 and 2018. Both student surveys focused on examining students’ needs relative to library resources and services, although the 2018 student survey also attempted to quantify students’ library visits and their use of library resources. While the surveys were not identical, the four questions that appeared in both surveys (i.e., library visits, resource use, library space satisfaction, and library website use) were recoded, rescaled, and analyzed to measure the differences in both surveys.

Results – The survey results reveal that students’ library visits and use of library resources in 2018 were higher than in 2016. In particular, undergraduate students’ use of library resources in 2016 were lower than those in 2018, whereas graduate students’ use of library resources remained similar in both years. Another key finding indicates that the mean score of students’ library quiet study space satisfaction in 2018 was higher than in 2016. However, when compared to the 2016 survey, there was a decrease in students’ ease of library website use in the 2018 survey.

Conclusion – Assessing students’ behavior and satisfaction associated with their use of library physical spaces, resources, and services should be conducted on an ongoing basis. Over time, the survey findings can be used as evidence based data to communicate patterns of users’ behavior and satisfaction with various stakeholders, identify areas for improvement or engagement, and demonstrate the library’s impact. Survey results can also inform further strategic and assessment planning.

EN:

Objective - Existing research around evidence based practice in the LIS (library and information science) professional context over the past two decades has captured the experience of individual practitioners, rather than the organization as a whole. Current models of evidence based library and information practice (EBLIP) relate to, and apply predominantly to, individuals or specific scenarios. Yet despite a growing demand from institutional and library leaders for evidence to demonstrate why investments in libraries should continue, little is known about how an organization can enhance its maturity in evidence based practice. This paper addresses this gap by seeking to understand what an evidence based university library looks like and answering the questions: how does a university library leader know the library’s service and practice is evidence based? How can a university library measure and progress its maturity in evidence based practice?

Methods - Sixteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with library professionals employed at Australian and New Zealand university libraries. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis techniques. The interviews, combined with a literature review and environmental scan of evidence based practices in university libraries, informed the development of a draft capability maturity model as a framework for developing evidence based practice in university libraries.

Results - The model identifies and describes characteristics at five different levels of evidence based practice maturity from least mature (Ad hoc/Sporadic) to most mature (Transforming). Three dimensions of experience help to define the characteristics at each level of maturity and provide a framework to understand how a university library might develop its organizational capacity in evidence based library and information practice.

Conclusion - Library leaders and practitioners will benefit from the model as they seek to identify and build upon their evidence based practice maturity, enabling more robust decision-making, a deeper understanding of their clients and demonstration of value and impact to their stakeholders.

EN:

Objective - To review mixed methods research trends in the field of library and information science (LIS). In particular, we examine the extent to which research about or using mixed methods has been occurring in library and information science over the past decade (2008-2018), and how much of that mixed methods research is done in health contexts.

Methods - We conducted a methodological review and analysis of mixed methods research (MMR) in LIS for published articles indexed in LISTA and Web of Science. After deduplication and verification for inclusion, we coded 417 articles to identify contributions using or about MMR. Given the connections between evidence based practice in health and LIS, we also identified whether articles about or using mixed methods were health-focused.

Results - We found MMR to be a tiny proportion (less than 0.5%) of the overall LIS research literature. In terms of observable trends, while contributions about MMR remain fairly static, there has been an increase in articles using mixed methods. Of the 417 included articles, 373 (89.5%) primarily used mixed methods and 44 (10.5%) were primarily about MMR. Results also demonstrated that health-related research both using and about mixed methods has a strong presence in the LIS literature, with 136 published articles (32.6% of the total).

Conclusion - Confirming findings of prior analyses of research methods in LIS, our methodological review shows current opportunities to adopt and expand the use of mixed methods research processes. Further contributions about mixed methods research, and ideally connecting research and practice in LIS, are needed. Despite the small proportion of MMR in LIS research, there is an observable increase in the number of publications using mixed methods during this timeframe. The LIS research community can promote additional growth by leveraging this momentum around using mixed methods, and look to translate lessons learned about mixed methods research and practice in health contexts to other LIS settings. Recommendations include developing educational opportunities and learning resources that facilitate wider engagement with MMR in LIS contexts.

EN:

Objective – Feminist pedagogy in library instruction presents a new approach to actively engaging students in the research process. While feminist pedagogy in universities found early adoption in the 1970s, it is a newer phenomenon in library instruction, finding its early roots in works by Ladenson (2010), Accardi (2010), and Accardi and Vukovic (2013).

By fostering active engagement and critical thinking skills, feminist library instruction sessions encourage students to question authority, actively participate in the knowledge production process, and become aware of their power and information privilege as they navigate increasingly complex information environments. At its core, this specific pedagogical approach subverts traditional classroom dynamics by focusing on diversity and inclusion.

This literature review demonstrates how feminist pedagogy is currently being practiced in academic library information literacy sessions and how students can be assessed in a feminist manner.

Methods – Practitioners of feminist pedagogy draw on techniques and methodologies designed to emphasize and value different experiences, such as cooperative learning, collaborative learning, inquiry-based learning, and inquiry-guided learning. These techniques and methodologies are used to develop students’ information literacy skills, to take ownership of the research process, and to stimulate critical inquiry.

For the literature review, the following databases were searched: Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) on the ProQuest platform; Library & Information Science Abstracts (LISA); Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts (LISTA); Scopus; and Web of Science Core Collection. Hand searching in WorldCat, as well as cited reference searching and bibliography mining, were also conducted. The searches were run between November 2018 and April 2019, followed by a second round in July 2019 based on participant feedback from the 2019 EBLIP10 conference. Case studies, books, book chapters, literature reviews, research papers, interviews, surveys, and papers based on statistical and qualitative analysis were consulted.

Results – While some librarians may lack familiarity with feminist theory, feminism writ large influences academic librarians’ professional practice (Schroeder & Hollister, 2014). Librarians can incorporate feminist pedagogy into their practice and assessment in many concrete ways. However, librarians who focus on feminist pedagogy may face obstacles in their teaching, which may explain why publications on feminist pedagogical discourse within library and information studies have emerged only within the last decade (Fritch, 2018; Hackney et al., 2018). The most common challenge feminist librarians face is the restrictive nature of the standalone, one-shot information literacy session. Moreover, there is much room for improvement in library and information studies programs to introduce students to the theory and practice of feminist pedagogy.

Conclusion – This paper highlights examples of feminist methods librarians can put into practice in their information literacy sessions and ways in which students can be assessed in a feminist manner. The literature demonstrates that feminist pedagogy has been successfully implemented for decades in universities. By comparison, practicing feminist pedagogy at the library instruction level is a relatively new area of focus within the profession. Hopefully, this growing trend will lead to more evidence based literature in the near future.

EN:

Objective – Doctoral studies offer a unique phase in the development and legitimization of researchers, in which PhD students shift from the consumption to the production of knowledge. If librarians are to support this process in an evidence based manner, it is essential to understand the distinct practices of this user population. While recent reviews exist concerning the information behaviours of graduate students and researchers, there is little knowledge synthesis focused on the information literacies of PhD students in specific disciplines. The aim of this article is to explore the depth and breadth of recent evidence which describes the information literacies of students pursuing a doctoral degree in the health sciences.

Methods – Strategic searches were performed in databases, hand-searched key journals, and reference lists. Records were screened independently by both authors based on pre-determined criteria. General trends within the literature were mapped based on the extraction of the following data: geographic location, population, study aims, and method of investigation. Further analysis of the articles included charting the academic disciplines represented, summarizing major findings related to PhD students in health sciences, and which databases indexed the relevant articles.

Results – Many studies fail to treat doctoral studies as a unique process. PhD students are often grouped together with other graduate students or researchers. Studies tend to be based on small populations, and the number of PhD students involved is either unclear or only equals a few individuals within the entire group of study. In addition, of the limited number of studies which focus exclusively on PhD students, few conduct explicit examination of information practices in the health sciences. The result is that this user group is underrepresented within recent journal publications.

Conclusion – This review highlights the need for more primary, in-depth research on the information literacies of PhD students in the health sciences. In addition, librarians are encouraged to share their knowledge in scholarly publications which can reach beyond their own professional circles.

EN:

Objective – This work explores potential factors that may contribute to a librarian becoming a highly productive researcher. An understanding of the factors can provide evidence based guidance to those at the beginning of their research careers in designing their own trajectories and to library administrators who seek to create work conditions that contribute to librarian research productivity. The current study is the first to explore the factors from the perspective of the profession’s most accomplished librarian-researchers.

Methods – This exploratory and descriptive study recruited 78 academic librarians identified as highly productive researchers; 46 librarians participated in a survey about their professional training and research environments, research networks, and beliefs about the research process. Respondents supplied a recent CV which was coded to produce a research output score for the past 10 years. In addition to fixed-response questions, there were five open-ended questions about possible success factors. All data were analyzed with descriptive statistics and tests of significance correlations.

Results – Accomplished librarian-researchers have professional training backgrounds and research environments that vary widely. None is statistically associated with research output. Those with densely connected networks of research colleagues who both know each other and do research together is significantly related to research output. A large group of those identified in the research networks are “both friend and colleague” and offer each other reciprocal support. In open-ended questions, respondents mentioned factors that equally span the three categories of research success: individual attributes, peers and community, and institutional structures.

Conclusion – The authors found that that there are many paths to becoming an accomplished librarian-researcher and numerous factors are conducive to achieving this distinction. A positive research environment includes high institutional expectations; a variety of institutional supports for research; and extrinsic rewards, such as salary increases, tenure, promotion, and opportunities for advancement. The authors further conclude that a librarian’s research network may be an important factor in becoming an accomplished librarian-researcher. This finding is supported by both the research network analysis and responses to open-ended questions in which collaboration was a frequent theme.