Search results

The present study aims to assess the enrollment scenario of Library and Information Science (LIS) education across different states in India. The study is purely based on the secondary data collected and compiled by the Ministry of Human Resource and Development, Govt. of India under All India Survey of Higher Education (AISHE). The data were retrieved from the official website of the Ministry of Human Resource Development, Govt. of India, for the period from 2011–2012 to 2017–2018. From the data analysis, it emerged that of the 36 states and union territories in India, LIS education is being imparted across 32 states and union territories, accounting nearly 90% states of the country. Tamil Nadu is the leading state in India, producing nearly one-fourth of Library Science graduates each year. The male–female enrollment at the national level stands in the ratio of 48:52 students, respectively. Of the total enrollments made during the period of study, 96% students enrolled in Nagaland were male, while nearly 72% students enrolled in Goa were females. These and many more related aspects of LIS education in India have been discussed in detail.

The central place that education has in the strength and well-being of any profession is widely accepted. Australia presents an interesting case study of a country where Library and Information Studies (LIS) education moved from being conducted by practitioners under the guidance of the professional association to being provided in institutions of higher education in 1959. The 50 years (1959–2008) saw substantial changes in Australian LIS education with a rapid proliferation of schools which was later followed by closures, mergers and changes of focus. This chapter charts LIS education during this period focusing on organizational and structural aspects of the placement of LIS education in tertiary institutions, on the academization of LIS educators who had in the early days mainly been drawn from practice, and on the development of LIS educators as academic researchers and authors as represented by their productivity and visibility in national and international databases. In addition to giving an account of these areas of LIS education over the 50 years, the chapter seeks to offer explanations for what has occurred and some views of strategies which may assist the development of LIS education in Australia and in other countries which possess similar characteristics.

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.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the significant factors which encourage and motivate the library and information science (LIS) academics to respond to and embrace e‐learning (EL), to explore how EL tools and technologies support the LIS education process, and to measure weights of factors constraining the use of EL in LIS education. It also reports perceptions of how LIS academics manage EL‐knowledge resources, the problems they face in managing those resources, the ways to solve those problems, and their predictions about future usage of EL in LIS education.

The methodology includes a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods. The authors used an exploratory online e‐mail interview method to gather experiences and data from LIS academics worldwide. The authors also used (www.docs.google.com) to prepare a questionnaire, and sent a link to the questionnaire to 85 LIS academics globally to gather their perceptions regarding EL in LIS schools.

The findings confirmed that EL overcomes location and time constraints, provides opportunities for employed and/or busy people, etc. is a driving force in education, which encourages and motivates LIS academics to respond to and embrace EL in LIS education, and EL accelerates accessibility of a wide range of knowledge, supports the process of exchanging knowledge, and increases knowledge storage capacity to enhance the LIS education process. This paper concludes that the respondents hold highly positive perceptions regarding the future of EL in LIS schools.

The paper explores the original perceptions of LIS academics, and their predictions regarding future usage of EL in LIS schools.

Purpose – This chapter examines the use of high-impact student engagement practices in library and information science (LIS) education programs.

Approach – This chapter opens with an overview of systematic planning, an outcomes-based process used to support the continuous development and improvement of higher education programs. It then details the essential contributions that students can make in systematic planning through high-impact student engagement practices, and summarizes the core competencies that students develop through these practices. A synthesis of the extant research on high-impact student engagement practices in LIS education and the results of a content analysis of select accreditation self-study reports were used to identify how these practices are utilized in LIS programs.

Findings – Five high-impact student engagement practices were used by LIS education programs: student advisory boards, student-organized meetings, student-run surveys, student-led course evaluations, and student-led curriculum development programs. These practices may be used as pedagogical tools to support mutually beneficial outcomes for LIS students and their educational programs.

Originality/Value – Student leadership in systematic program planning promotes positive student and programmatic outcomes. Broader adoption of these practices across LIS education programs will help promote student learning, prepare students for professional practice, and improve the quality and relevance of LIS education programs.

Purpose – This chapter provides a historical overview of libraries and library and information science/studies (LIS) education in Australia, charting the changing nature of the LIS academy and the profession. The chapter then examines the knowledge, skills, and qualifications required for current and emerging LIS professionals, discussing how we embrace new knowledge and analyzing whether there are aspects of current LIS education that we need to hold on to or let go of in order to re-envision LIS education in the future.

Design/Methodology/Approach – A brief historical analysis of Australian librarianship, library associations, and LIS education, dating from European colonization in 1788 to the present, 2017, sets the context and informs the discussion.

Findings – This chapter demonstrates how social, political, technological, and educational forces have influenced libraries, librarianship, and LIS education. Within this context, we propose ways forward, such as partnering with broader information communities, adopting emerging specialties, building closer relationships between academia and practice, and considering “letting go” of some of the old as we add the new.

Originality/Value – By providing an original historical overview of librarianship in Australia with a particular focus on LIS education and how the goals and focus of both librarianship and LIS education have evolved over the centuries, this chapter contributes to an informed discussion designed to assist in re-envisioning the information professions and disciplines in the future.

Major collaborative schemes and initiatives in library and information science (LIS) education are outlined. It is observed that networking and mobility efforts in European LIS education have not yet produced spectacular or convincing results. On the whole, progress measured in synergy, co‐ordinated curricular structures, “joint ventures”, joint degrees, equivalence of qualifications, etc., is meagre. Some progress can be noted, but visible effects of intensified links between LIS schools in Europe are not conspicuous. Overall, transparency in the European LIS education seems to suffer. The Bologna Declaration (June, 1999) speaks of the “establishment of a European area of higher education” and outlines a number of objectives relevant to the pursuit of that purpose. In addressing the challenges of the Bologna Agreement for LIS education, discussions at an international meeting on globalisation and LIS at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, April 2002, are considered. The paper concludes by pointing to a number of steps that should be taken in working towards the objectives of the Bologna Agreement.

A comprehensive analysis of the LIS education system was carried out covering the 2004‐2007 period and it was established that currently 24 LIS education programs are conducted in Sri Lanka by eight educational institutions. The purpose of this paper is to present a critical evaluation of the curriculum development strategy of the LIS education programs in Sri Lanka based on the major research.

The research used both quantitative as well as qualitative research methods to determine the present status of affairs and the study was based on primary and secondary data collected by means of questionnaires, semi‐structured interviews, participatory observations and review of documents. Primary data were collected from the LIS course co‐ordinators, teachers and policy makers. Researcher's own reflections were also used.

The empirical survey identified that six main subjects are taught across most of the LIS programs; that most programs provide a general knowledge in LIS but not opportunities for specialisation; appropriate levels of complexity were not evident across the different levels of programs; and there is no national core in LIS so that all programs cover a set of common subjects at appropriate depths and breadths suitable for different levels of programs. Findings with regard to the curriculum development strategies identified that most of the curricula documents are not comprehensive, and that the Sri Lankan LIS curriculum developers do not use any formal curriculum development model. Analysis of the curriculum development teams indicated that most members have no training in curriculum design, and the teams lack contributions by other stakeholders except LIS professionals. Several recommendations are presented to eliminate the weaknesses of the curriculum development strategy in the LIS programs.

This paper is based on a broader empirical study of the LIS education system of Sri Lanka and throws some light on specific research on identifying the most appropriate curriculum development model for Sri Lanka.

The findings of the research are directly applicable to the tasks of the curriculum developers and the LIS education policy makers in Sri Lanka and they can use the findings for the improvement of the LIS education programs.

Contents or the curriculum development strategy of the current Sri Lankan LIS education programs have not been critically analysed before and this paper presents the original research findings relevant to all the programs conducted in 2007.

This investigation aims to highlight the need for the information professions globally to value diverse knowledge paradigms in a world where people from diverse cultures and backgrounds interact with information on a daily basis. We provide examples from the Library and Information Science (LIS) profession in New Zealand which has been shaped by socially and culturally inclusive education and practices which take into account diverse ways of knowing and understanding the world and information.

An investigation into socially and culturally inclusive LIS education initiatives worldwide contextualizes a discussion of current LIS curricula in New Zealand and their delivery. The achievements and challenges in LIS education, the library profession, and library service are considered alongside the rich and varied nature of New Zealand society and the provision and accessibility of library services.

LIS education is at the start of this process, and New Zealand education providers promote a range of socially and culturally inclusive practices within their programs resulting in LIS graduates who are equipped to make ongoing contributions to an inclusive society through their professional work. We conclude that these three inseparable components of LIS in New Zealand result in social and cultural inclusion, but can always be further enhanced.

This chapter draws attention to the absence of consideration for non-Western knowledge paradigms in LIS curricula worldwide, and brings together diverse examples, mandating for library services and a library profession that reflect the rich social and cultural makeup of the communities we serve. We conclude that three inseparable components of LIS in New Zealand result in social and cultural inclusion, and there is always opportunity for further enhancement.

The background and context of Australian Library and Information Services (LIS) education and the role LIS education plays in constructing the Australian workplace are explored in this chapter. It provides an analysis of the broader historical, social and educational imperatives which have shaped Australian LIS education. It also examines the pedagogical, structural and epistemological construct surrounding the development of education for LIS in that country. Specific questions are raised about divisions in LIS education and training which lay the framework for further research and discussion. The historical context for LIS education is covered and insights into the nature and background of the broader educational frameworks which have influenced it are provided.