Search results

Purpose – There is a dichotomy within library and information science (LIS) education today. It has been a long time coming, and the rise of information schools (iSchools) in LIS education, with their focus on skill sets that complement libraries and their mission but ultimately prepare students for careers and jobs outside of librarianship, is one of many contributing factors. Many accredited library programs that used to focus on preparing students for work in libraries are now expanding their courses and degrees more toward “information” rather than “libraries.” This is understandable given that many library science programs have been subsumed into other departments and colleges such as business, education, and information technology, where their expertise in educating and training students toward graduate degrees is highly regarded and where the available jobs and salaries outside of libraries are much more numerous and desirable. This chapter hopes to frame the current challenges from the perspective of one member of the ALA Committee on Accreditation (COA).

Design/Methodology/Approach – This is an opinion piece, based on the author’s current membership on COA and focus on the library profession.

Findings – As an opinion piece, there are no findings.

Originality/Value – This chapter tries to show the value of the library profession and its curriculum in today’s society.

This chapter updates earlier research that analyzed mergers, collaborations, and similar trends in LIS education, and provides a more comprehensive current summary of those trends. Three distinct patterns are beginning to emerge in both organizational structure and collaboration: changes in the nature of LIS program partnerships within parent educational institutions; the impact on LIS education by prominent academic associations that are not reliant on ALA accreditation recognition; and the growth in the number and type of academic offerings in LIS schools themselves. Among some notable changes are the establishment of the Consortium of iSchools Asia Pacific (CiSAP), continued growth in the iSchool caucus and its increasing international membership. Additionally the number of dual degree master’s programs in which LIS departments partner is on the rise, as is the number of degrees now being offered at LIS schools (both at the undergraduate and graduate levels) that are not “traditional” MLS degrees. Inter-institutional collaborative MLIS programs are also emergent, evident in such programs as the Web-based Information Science Education (WISE) consortium. The data presented here seem to suggest that the face of LIS education continues to change as the 21st century gets underway.

Education in library and information science (LIS) in the first decade of the 21st century is reviewed and discussed in terms of changes, developments, and associated issues. Specifically, courses and concentrations newly added to the LIS curriculum are described along with a summary of what has been revised, including the core. Distance education in LIS is presented as a result of technology application while reposition, relocation, and closures of LIS schools are also examined. Of the organizational changes among LIS schools, the emergence of iSchools and related topics received particular coverage with data gathered recently. Issues persistent in LIS education (i.e., accreditation of LIS programs, library education crisis, and chasm between LIS education and practices) are revisited with analysis. The author believes on the basis of this review that the digital age has brought us in LIS education with opportunities greater than ever. LIS education will move forward and even thrive in this digital age when the field not only makes intelligent use of the technology but also changes in other dimensions as the society advances.

Why evaluate quality in Library and Information Science (LIS) schools? From a historical perspective, quality assurance always has been considered a strategic issue by LIS schools for improvement of the teaching and learning experience and for accountability. Internationalization has added a new role to quality assurance in LIS. In terms of the context of the World Trade Organization General Agreement on Trade in Services (WTO-GATS), LIS is increasingly recognized as part of the knowledge sector. The WTO-GATS has approved a multilateral framework that sets out rules for the conduct of international trade in services, including educational services. The GATS includes both general rules—for example, those related to the transparency of trade-related regulations—and a framework for specific commitments under which countries choose whether, and under what conditions, to allow access to their markets for foreign suppliers. The provisions in the GATS related to trade regulations and ways countries choose to allow access to their markets are relevant to the recognition of international standards or qualifications for professionals. Although not mandatory, international standards are encouraged, both for quality assurance of LIS school offerings in general, and for recognition of a specific LIS school outside its home country. Additionally, in the context of an increasingly internationalized job market, employers need reliable information on how to evaluate specific higher education degrees and assess degrees recognized and granted in their domestic market. The goals are to facilitate the mobility of students and to increase employability. The need to reinforce the comparability of higher education internationally through quality assurance systems is now becoming more pressing.

This chapter explores the question of where and how leaders in the library field gain the knowledge, skills, and ability to lead and manage people. The authors report empirical evidence to answer this question based on the results of the third stage of an ongoing study—a study which examines the academic preparation of professional librarians who have become directors of libraries. The results of a survey inquiring into the formal training received by practicing library directors are detailed. Among other findings, 55.1% of the library directors surveyed and observed that graduate library school did not prepare them to become library directors. There is some evidence that a shift of perception regarding the need for traditional management training has begun to occur in library schools. The authors contend that this trend needs to accelerate if the information profession intends to prepare library directors to assume leadership roles in the future. This chapter briefly reviews the research findings from stage one and two research, which provided the foundation for the current study. As a result of this research a fourth stage of research is planned which will use in person in-depth interviews of library directors. The influence of leadership on organizational results has been explored within the broader management literature. There is clearly a relationship between leadership and results. What is unclear is how and where these leaders gain the knowledge, skills, and ability to lead and manage.

Libraries and librarians have long been early adopters of information technologies. For decades, librarians have applied computerization to library operations. Standardization and computerization of bibliographic records decades ago made possible automation of library systems, the creation and utilization of giant bibliographic utilities such as OCLC with its 52 million records. Collaborative adoption of information technologies decades ago brought shared cataloging, on-line public access catalogs, bibliographic databases, enhanced interlibrary loan and document delivery, and acquisition of information in digital formats, resulting in worldwide access to library resources. Nonetheless the revolution in information technologies that produced the World Wide Web in the mid-1990s hit the information profession of librarianship and the educational establishment like an earthquake.