Search results

This paper aims to present recently published resources on library instruction and information literacy. It provides an introductory overview and a selected annotated bibliography of publications organized thematically and detailing, study populations, results and research contexts. The selected bibliography is useful to efficiently keep up with trends in library instruction for academic library practitioners, library science students and those wishing to learn about information literacy in other contexts.

This article annotates 340 English-language periodical articles, dissertations, theses and reports on library instruction and information literacy published in 2022. The sources were selected from the EBSCO platform for Library, Information Science and Technology Abstracts (LISTA), Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), Elsevier SCOPUS and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. Sources selected were published in 2022 and included the terms “information literacy,” “library instruction,” or “information fluency” in the title, subject terms, or author supplied keywords. The sources were organized in Zotero. Annotations were made summarizing the source, focusing on the findings or implications. Each source was then thematically categorized and organized for academic librarians to be able to skim and use the annotated bibliography efficiently.

The paper provides a brief description of 340 sources from 144 unique publications, and highlights publications that contain unique or significant scholarly contributions. Further analysis of the sources and authorship are provided.

The information is primarily of use to academic librarians, researchers, and anyone interested as a quick and comprehensive reference to literature on library instruction and information literacy published within 2022.

The authors examine how performance measurement systems (PMSs) and academic agency influence the meaning of research quality in practice. The worries are that the notion of research quality is becoming too simplistically and narrowly determined by research quality's measurable proxies and that academics, especially manager-academics, do not sufficiently realise this risk. Whilst prior literature has covered the effects of performance measurement in the university sector broadly and how PMSs are mobilised locally, there is only little understanding of whether and how PMSs affect the meaning of research quality in practice.

The study is designed as a comparative case study of two university faculties in Finland. The role of conceptual analysis plays a notable role in the study, too.

The authors find that manager-academics of the two examined faculties have rather similar conceptual understandings of research quality. However, there were differences in the degree of slippage between the “espoused-meaning” of research quality and “meaning-in-practice” of research quality. The authors traced these differences to how the local PMS and manager-academics’ agency relate to one another within the context of increasing global and national performance pressures. The authors developed a tentative framework for the various “styles of agency”. This suggests how the relationship between the local PMS and manager-academics’ exerted agency shapes the “degrees of freedom” of the meaning of research quality in practice.

Given that research quality lies at the heart of academic work, the authors' paper indicates that exploring the three matters – performance measurement, the agency of manager-academics and the meaning of research quality in practice – in combination is crucial for the sustainability of the academe. The authors contribute to the literature by detailing the way in which local PMS and manager-academics' agency have material impacts on what research quality means in practice. The authors conclude by highlighting the pressing need for manager-academics to exercise the agency in efforts to safeguard a broad and pluralistic understanding of research quality in practice.