Library/information education programs in Pakistan: a comparison with IFLA Guidelines

Abstract

Purpose

This multi-method study is aimed at assessing the quality and alignment of 11 Pakistani library and information science (LIS) master’s programs’ orientation, curricula and course contents, by comparing them with the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) Guidelines for Professional Library/Information Programs (2012).

Design/methodology/approach

The study is based on a documentary analysis and telephonic interviews with master’s programs’ coordinators of all LIS departments. The data were collected on the 11 master’s programs from three sources: programs’ web pages, prospectuses and curricula with detailed course contents. The principal researcher also conducted 11 structured telephonic and face-to-face interviews with master’s programs’ coordinators.

Findings

Findings of the study show that while there is some compliance with IFLA core elements, the courses are largely inclined toward the management and less toward the information communication technologies (ICTs) components. Generally, the courses are traditional in nature, indicating a problem of widespread reliance on outdated and some irrelevant contents that do not reflect the current needs of the changing environment.

Practical implications

The findings highlight the need of increased efforts for seeking alignment with international standards by redesigning and reorienting LIS curricula. Mission and vision statement, planning and evaluation are the areas that need to be focused on to ensure the future survival of academic programs.

Originality/value

This is the first study of its nature in Pakistan that will be beneficial for Pakistan and other developing countries in their curriculum review and development process and future programs orientation.

Citation

Malik, A. and Ameen, K. (2017), "Library/information education programs in Pakistan: a comparison with IFLA Guidelines", Library Review, Vol. 66 No. 4/5, pp. 297-309. https://doi.org/10.1108/LR-11-2016-0098