Search results1 – 10 of 173
Purpose – Academic librarians are well positioned to take on the role of the informed learning developer, working with teachers to design coursework in which students…
Purpose – Academic librarians are well positioned to take on the role of the informed learning developer, working with teachers to design coursework in which students learn to use information as they engage with course context. This chapter aims to provide insights to academic librarians of how they may approach integrating information literacy into courses using an informed learning approach by identifying key aspects of this collaborative work.
Methods The literature on educational development, specifically outlining the core responsibilities, activities, skills, and models used by educational developers is reviewed and key aspects are identified and applied to describe the role of a developer working with teachers to foster learning through engagement with information in higher education.
Findings – Four key aspects of the work of educational developers are identified: collaborative, scholarly, contextual, and reflective. When adapted to describe the efforts of a developer focused on creating informed learning experiences for students, the four aspects include:
partnering with teachers to develop informed learning experiences by leveraging the expertise of the teacher and the librarian;
applying an informed learning pedagogic approach, and drawing from and sharing information literacy scholarship illuminating how information is used in the learning process;
creating informed learning experiences that are responsive to institutional and disciplinary perspectives; and
encouraging teachers to reflect on their intentions for content-focused learning and how learning outcomes may be shaped through interactions with information.
Implications – Drawing upon their expertise in how learners use information, academic librarians can use the findings to concentrate their consultative efforts to effectively partner with teachers to transform student learning experiences in higher education.
Librarianship, the comprehensive title Mr. R. Irwin has given to the small, concentrated series of discourses recently published by Messrs. Grafton & Co., is a sort of landmark in our thinking. It is a valiant attempt to establish some sort of arena for librarians ; not, indeed, a “philosophy of librarianship”—that, Mr. Irwin asserts, is not feasible as the term philosophy can be applied correctly only to subjects which are part of philosophy itself, although he admits a philosophy of religion, of science and, tentatively, of history. In spite of this precision, the book is what we ordinary librarians call a philosophy of librarianship. Like all good books, it will be the cause of considerable discussion and probably a good deal of argument, some of which the Editor of a library journal thinks it appropriate to indicate, for the book goes to the roots of current activities. But, in the first place, the author Stands apart as it were to get a comprehensive view and then asserts that librarianship is a word for “ applied bibliography ” and that definition covers every activity, book‐selection, bibliography popularly named, cataloguing, classification and the general exploiting of books. Librarianship is one technique, not several, and he implies that it has suffered from the tendency to teach library subjects as separate techniques, for example, cataloguing and classification which are actually one process. This separation was the result of part‐time and other fortuitous forms of teaching. Since the advent of library schools the tendency of the training and examination courses of the Library Association, and as a consequence of the schools themselves, has been to create a unity of Studies which is the perfect librarian's soundest equipment. That is the briefest Statement is the purpose.
IN 1946 there was in the British Isles a clear image of librarianship in most librarians' minds. The image depended on a librarian's professional environment which was of the widest possible range, not less in variation than the organisations, institutes or types of community which required library services. Generalisations are like cocoanuts but they provide for the quickest precipitation of variant definitions, after the stones have been thrown at them. A generalisation might claim that, in 1946, public librarians had in mind an image of a librarian as organiser plus technical specialist or literary critic or book selector; that university and institute librarians projected themselves as scholars of any subject with a special environmental responsibility; that librarians in industry regarded themselves as something less than but as supplementing the capacity of a subject specialist (normally a scientist). Other minor separable categories existed with as many shades of meaning between the three generalised definitions, while librarians of national libraries were too few to be subject to easy generalisation.
Not many weeks back, according to newspaper reports, three members of the library staff of the School of Slavonic and East European Studies in London were dismissed. All had refused to carry out issue desk duty. All, according to the newspaper account, were members of ASTMS. None, according to the Library Association yearbook, was a member of the appropriate professional organisation for librarians in Great Britain.
This article aims to describe how a college library critically examined its maintenance of a traditional reference desk for in‐person services and changed its service model to suit local needs.
The author examined quantitative and qualitative reference use data prior to changing the service model, and the purpose of reference services was formally articulated. Following the change the author again examined use data, conducted a convenience sample survey, and measured visits to the web site.
The author came to the conclusion that while maintaining in‐person reference was important for the library, a separate desk was not the best means of providing service at the college. Following the change to the service model, use of reference and consultation services dramatically increased.
The new on‐call, consultative reference service model is described, as is a description of how they managed the change process internally, how they marketed reference services to the students, and how they are assessing the results. Considerations for choosing a reference model appropriate to one's local conditions are outlined.
It all began a very long time ago, sometime before 1876, that annus mirabilis of librarianship during which the American Library Association was founded, Library Journal…
It all began a very long time ago, sometime before 1876, that annus mirabilis of librarianship during which the American Library Association was founded, Library Journal debuted, and Samuel Green published in its pages the first article about reference librarianship. And it continues today. In April 1994, an unidentified library school student from the State University of New York at Buffalo queried the participants of the LIBREFL listserv, asking them, “Can you give a summary of the ‘hot’ library reference issues of the week? I'm working on a project for my Reference course, and would like to find out what is REALLY vital to refernce (sic) librarians out there today.” I was tempted to reply that all of that week's “hot” issues were identified in Green's 1876 article. In that article describing the phenomenon we today call reference service, Green touched on issues such as the librarian's obligation to provide information without injecting personal values, the inability of any librarian to know everything, the need sometimes to refer a patron to another information agency, SDI services, the value of proactive rather than passive service, the challenges of the reference interview, and, of course, what has come to be called the “information versus instruction debate.”
The Seminar on Library Interior Layout and Design organised by IFLA's Section on Library Buildings and Equipment, and attended by people from over twenty‐two countries, was held at Frederiksdal, Denmark, in June 1980. This present article neither reports on the Seminar's proceedings, as it is hoped to publish the papers in due course, nor describes fully the Danish public libraries seen, but rather uses the Seminar's theme and the library visits as a point of departure for considering some aspects of the interior layout—the landscape—of public libraries. Brief details of the new Danish public libraries visited are given in a table at the end of the article.
IT is well known that librarianship or library science and information work or information science as the common educational, professional and scientific discipline is everywhere undergoing great change and development. During its continual and relatively fast development, this discipline has at the same time to solve the increasing tasks connected with the problems of the so‐called information explosion.