Search results

Information literacy (IL) is increasingly becoming an explicit learning outcome for college graduates, and some libraries are playing a role in planning and teaching IL instruction to students. Amidst the overall trend of shrinking budgets that libraries are experiencing, what strategies can be employed by libraries that support large universities to plan IL instruction? The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Inspired by curriculum mapping, staff in the library assessment department created teaching maps which match the curriculum from seven colleges with the library’s teaching efforts. To create them, they combined information about: first, courses that librarians have instructed over the last three years with; second, required courses for majors within the colleges; and third, typical enrollment for each course.

Easily accessible information was combined to create the teaching maps, which enable the library to realign efforts to maximize IL instruction and best utilize library staff resources.

Teaching maps serve as a portal to quickly understand majors, courses and course enrollment, and provide baseline information on past library instruction activity to inform future IL instruction strategy. Library directors and teaching staff are utilizing them to realign instruction efforts.

Assessment strategies, such as curriculum mapping, serve not only the institution’s teaching mission, but also help strategize for effective and efficient stewardship of staff resources. These methods will be useful for library directors, assessment and instruction librarians at large research universities.

In 1989, Cornell University embarked on a collaborative project experimenting with the concept of digital preservation. With Cornell's commitment to a universal network infrastructure on campus, the network would provide a natural home for the proposed digital library. Anne Kenney, from Cornell University Library (CUL), and M. Stuart Lynn, from Cornell Information Technologies (CIT), established a partnership, developed a plan, and assembled staff to implement it. Working closely with Xerox Corporation and with support from the Commission on Preservation and Access, and later Sun Microsystems, they defined the requirements for library preservation and access.

The purpose of this article is to review the trend in academic libraries toward including scholarly communication, and by extension, electronic publishing, as part of their core mission, using the Cornell University Library as an example.

The paper describes several manifestations of publishing activity organized under the Library's Center for Innovative Publishing, including the arXiv (http://arxiv.org/), Project Euclid (http://projecteuclid.org), and DPubS (http://DPubS.org).

Libraries bring many competencies to the scholarly communications process, including expertise in digital initiatives, close connections with authors and readers, and a commitment to preservation. To add publishing to their responsibilities, they need to develop expertise in content acquisition, editorial management, contract negotiation, marketing, and subscription management.

Academic libraries are making formal and informal publishing a part of their core activity. A variety of models exist. The Cornell University Library has created a framework for supporting publishing called the Center for Innovative Publishing, and through it supports a successful open access repository (arXiv), a sustainable webhosting service for journals in math and statistics (Project Euclid) and a content management tool (DPubS) to enable other institutions (libraries, scholarly societies, presses) to engage in similar ventures to increase the dissemination of scholarship and to lower the barriers to its access.

This paper aims to analyze the intersection of LibGuide authors (producers) and LibGuide users (consumers) at University Library, Cornell University, New York, USA. In consideration of this previous finding, the authors felt it was vital to address the question of how Cornell University Library (CUL) LibGuides can better serve Cornell’s user base. By posing questions such as, “what are authors’ intentions in creating LibGuides” and “how are local users finding, accessing and/or engaging with LibGuides”, this paper hopes to make nuanced recommendations to authors.

This paper addresses two key pieces of data: browser search terms from the Springshare log files and interviews from authors of 20 different LibGuides. The author interviews gave us insight into the purpose, use and marketing of specific library guides for CUL, while browser search terms revealed how our users constructed Internet searches that resulted in that hit on a CUL LibGuide.

Data uncovered in our analysis of affiliated search terms provide great insight into users’ expectations or perception of what they are seeking: 39 per cent of searches performed by affiliated users contained terminology of either the name of the course, the four-digit letter-number code for the course (e.g. ANTH 2300), the name of the professor and the course or some other similar permutation. This suggests that the LibGuides software needs a better way to index institutional courses by number and name, a finding the authors will return to later.

As LibGuides are ephemeral and constantly changing, rather than creating a LibGuides based on the premise of its purpose – course guide, subject guide or other – perhaps, authors should consider how the LibGuide will live online and specifically, what is its life cycle? The longevity of a LibGuide ensures that it will be discovered in some way or another; however, the discovery of outdated material is not the best introduction to these vehicles of information. If LibGuides aim to serve as an unmediated stand-in for librarians, its online life expectancy needs to be considered at the point of creation.

Recommendations for LibGuide authors/producers: place most important content in the first tab (over 50 per cent of hits are to the homepage); minimize the total number of tabs. Fewer tabs are likely to encourage more in-depth browsing and facilitate better discovery of key content; include interactive content in LibGuides, such as assignments and tutorials that increase the use of that LibGuide; identify LibGuides and/or tabs in terms of function – teaching or discovery – within a search environment.

The tension between LibGuides as a teaching tool and LibGuides as an answer to a student’s research is an issue that we should resolve to fix. This tension is often eased in classroom instruction or during mediated interactions at the reference desk or via chat reference. However, in the online environment of LibGuides, librarians must be cognizant that students will often not be seeking the instruction on locating resources but rather will focus on simply locating the resource itself. Course guides might be better served online by pushing the instructional components toward the final tabs and relocating the valuable resource content to the Home tab. Promoting the use of library guides beyond the classroom or the event that they were designed for may not be necessary or desirable; however, as LibGuides have a lengthy life cycle, consideration about how they might meet a user’s online needs is worthwhile.

This paper offers a unique perspective in the use of a common library tool from two points of view: the producers and the consumers of library guides. Too often, people take for granted the idea that they know and understand what librarians and/or library staff do and intend with the creation of LibGuides, without informing our perspective with actual data. The authors realize that the sample size of their interviewee pool was small, but nonetheless, deemed it an essential aspect to consider when evaluating the interaction of library guides or other library content put forth for the constituents we serve. In terms of user research, the authors are in a privileged position given the quantity of attention directed at the consumers of library guides; this study contributes to the conversation by highlighting the rare access people have to the results of unmediated user practices in the information gathering process.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the major factors necessary for engaging university campus community in sustainability. While general awareness in sustainability issues has improved in recent years through mass media coverage, this knowledge is not always translated into actual sustainable practice. Studies have indicated that there are many factors for engaging the community in sustainability.

A multi-disciplinary literature review is first undertaken to distil the drivers that enhance participation in sustainability programmes by the university community. Next, to illustrate the applicability of the factors identified in the community engagement framework, two case studies are undertaken to highlight the importance of the identified factors in influencing the level of community participation in their sustainability programmes.

The 6-P framework for community engagement includes factors such as psychological needs, physical facilities, personal motivations, public perception, price mechanisms and policies. The case studies of two universities’ sustainability projects illustrate that the framework is highly applicable to university communities.

While research on behaviour change has been undertaken by various disciplines such as urban planning, marketing and psychology, these have been done in isolation. The originality of this paper is therefore achieved by drawing together the knowledge from these well-established disciplines to develop an original 6-P framework. This framework has the potential of assisting university leaders in the development of their community engagement strategy to mobilise and motivate their community members to take practical steps towards building a sustainable campus. However, the robustness of this framework will need to be further validated in future studies.

Metadata and information technology staff in libraries that are building digital collections typically extract and manipulate MARC metadata sets to provide access to digital content via non‐MARC schemes. Metadata processing in these libraries involves defining the relationships between metadata schemes, moving metadata between schemes, and coordinating the intellectual activity and physical resources required to create and manipulate metadata. Actively managing the non‐MARC metadata resources used to build digital collections is something most of these libraries have only begun to do. This article proposes strategies for managing MARC metadata repurposing efforts as the first step in a coordinated approach to library metadata management. Guided by lessons learned from Cornell University library mapping and transformation activities, the authors apply the literature of data resource management to library metadata management and propose a model for managing MARC metadata repurposing processes through the implementation of a metadata management design.

Kibok Baik is a professor of management at the College of Business and Economics, and Head of Strategic Leadership Center, Kookmin University, Seoul, Korea. He earned his Ph.D. in organizational behavior from the University of Houston. His research interests focus on leadership, cross-cultural issues, and human resource development in multinational corporations. He currently advises dozens of firms in Korea.John W. Boudreau, Ph.D., Professor of human resource studies at Cornell University is recognized worldwide for breakthrough research on the bridge between superior human capital, talent and sustainable competitive advantage. His research has received the Academy of Management’s Organizational Behavior New Concept and Human Resource Scholarly Contribution awards. He consults and conducts executive development with companies worldwide and has published more than 40 books and articles, including the best-selling Human Resource Management (Irwin, 1997), now in its eighth edition in multiple languages worldwide. In addition to HR metrics, Dr. Boudreau’s large-scale research studies and highly focused qualitative research have addressed decision-based HR, executive mobility, HR information systems and organizational staffing and development. Winner of the General Mills Award for teaching innovations, Dr. Boudreau also founded the Central Europe Human Resource Education Initiative, and directed the Center for Advanced Human Resource Studies (CAHRS).Janet L. Bryant is a doctoral student in the Ph.D. program in industrial and organizational psychology at Old Dominion University. Her research interests include leadership, virtual work and cross-cultural issues. She completed her undergraduate degree at the University of Tennessee-Knoxville.Maxine Dalton is an industrial/organizational psychologist who received her education at the University of South Florida. Her research interests include adult learning and executive development. Her current research is on leadership and social identity conflict in organizations. She has published numerous book chapters, articles and a recent book on global leadership.Donald D. Davis received his Ph.D. in psychology from Michigan State University in 1982, where he also served as assistant director of the Center for Evaluation and Assessment. He has been a professor of organizational psychology at Old Dominion University since that time. He served for seven years as director of the Ph.D. Program in Industrial and Organizational Psychology and has served as a member of the board of directors of the Institute for Asian Studies since its creation in 1989. He has been awarded two Fulbrights – Asian Scholar in Residence (with Zhong-ming Wang, Hangzhou University – now Zhejiang University – Hangzhou, China) and Senior Scholar (Wuhan University, Wuhan, China). He has also held a visiting appointment at the University of Virginia. His research interests include virtual organizations, organization change, technological innovation, cross-cultural organization and management practices, and Chinese organizations. He has published one book and a number of papers on these topics.Jennifer J. Deal is a Research Scientist at the Center for Creative Leadership in San Diego, California, concentrating on global leadership and managing the Emerging Leaders project, which focuses on generational issues in the workplace. She has published a number of articles on topics including generational issues in the workplace, working globally, executive selection, and women in management, and a recent book on global leadership. She holds a B.A. from Haverford College, and a Ph.D. in industrial/organizational psychology from The Ohio State University.Daniel Denison is Professor of Management & Organization at the International Institute for Management Development (IMD) in Lausanne, Switzerland and is the Founder of Denison Consulting in Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. He is former Professor of Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, Michigan. He is the author of Corporate Culture and Organizational Effectiveness (1990) and a number of articles on the link between culture and business performance. His survey assessments of culture, teams, and leaders are widely used by many organizations around the world. His website, www.denisonculture.com has extensive information on his work.Joseph John DiStefano is Professor of Organizational Behavior and International Business at IMD International Institute for Management Development (Lausanne, Switzerland) and Professor Emeritus of the Richard Ivey School of Business, The University of Western Ontario (London, Canada). He was educated at R.P.I., Harvard Business School and Cornell University and has been active as a teacher, researcher and consultant on issues of cross-cultural effectiveness since the early 1970s.Peter J. Dowling (Ph.D., The Flinders University of South Australia) is Pro Vice-Chancellor and Professor of International Management & Strategy in the Division of Business, Law & Information Sciences, University of Canberra. Previous appointments include Foundation Professor of Management at the University of Tasmania, Monash University, the University of Melbourne, and California State University-Chico. He has also held visiting appointments at Cornell University, Michigan State University, the University of Paderborn (Germany) and the University of Bayreuth (Germany). His current research and teaching interests are concerned with International HRM and Strategic Management. His co-authored text International Human Resource Management: Managing People in a Multinational Context, published by South-West, is now in a third edition. He is a former national Vice-President of the Australian Human Resources Institute, past Editor of Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources (1987–1996), and a Life Fellow of the Australian Human Resources Institute.Chris Ernst is a Research Associate at the Center for Creative Leadership with an international background, and a Ph.D. in Industrial/Organizational Psychology from North Carolina State University. His work centers on advancing the capacity for leadership in a diverse and globally interconnected world.Ping Ping Fu is an assistant professor of management at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. Her research interests are mainly in leadership and cross-cultural areas. She was the coordinator for the Chinese part for the Global Leadership and Organizational Effectiveness (GLOBE), and is now leading the CEO study in China. She has published in Journal of Organizational Behavior, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Journal of International Applied Psychology and Leadership Quarterly.Paulo Goelzer is President of the IGA Institute, an educational foundation providing training to 40 countries in five languages and oversees their international operations. He began his career in the food industry very early, working in a family food business. He has also worked as a senior consultant for Strategy and Food Package Goods Industry Practice for a German/Brazilian consulting company, a researcher and consultant for the Brazilian Wholesaler Association (ABAD), and as a Marketing Director for a grocery wholesale company.

Robert Franklin Hoxie was of the first generation of University of Chicago economists, a figure of significance in his own time. He is often heralded as the first of the Institutional economists and the impetus behind the field of labor economics. Yet today, his contributions appear as mere footnotes in the history of economic thought, when mentioned at all, despite the fact that in his professional and popular writings he tackled some of the most pressing problems of the day. The topics upon which he focused included bimetallism, price theory, methodology, the economics profession, socialism, syndicalism, scientific management, and trade unionism, the last being the field with which he is most closely associated. His work attracted the notice of some of the most famous economists of his time, including Frank Fetter, J. Laurence Laughlin, Thorstein Veblen, and John R. Commons. For all the promise, his suicide at the age of 48 ended what could have been a storied career. This paper is an attempt to resurrect Hoxie through a review of his life and work, placing him within the social and intellectual milieux of his time.