the impact of scholarly communication on lis education carol tenopir university of tennessee...
TRANSCRIPT
The Impact of Scholarly
Communication on LIS Education
Carol TenopirUniversity of [email protected]/~tenopir/
What is the role of scholarly communication in LIS Education?
1. An extension of our academic home and discipline
2. A methodological framework
3. A specific area of research
LIS programs in North America
56 programs accredited by the American Library Association in the U.S. and Canada
ALA accredits only masters degree program
30 years ago most were separate programs or part of humanities or education
University Of Tennessee
College ofCommunication
AndInformation
School of Information
Sciences
School ofCommunication
Studies
School ofJournalism and
Electronic Media
School of Advertising
And Public Relations
College ofCommunication
AndInformation
School of InformationSciences
School ofCommunication
Studies
School ofJournalism and
Electronic Media
School of AdvertisingAnd Public Relations
Conveying Meaning
Science Communication
Risk Communication
Scientists Working Photos
Data Sets
Direct Observations
Sounds
Conversations
Meetings
Publications
SpecimensLab/Field notebook
• Proceedings
• Preprints
• Journal Articles
• Books
PhotosData Sets
Direct Observations
Sounds
Conversations
Meetings Publications
Specimens Lab/Field notebook
Scientists Working
The Information Life Cycle
Shared Theories
Diffusion of innovations Sense Making Grounded Theory Shannon-Weaver Communication Model
LIS Course Titles Influenced by Scholarly Communication
Scientific and Technical Communications Computer Mediated Communication Computer supported collaborative work Human Information Interactions Biodiversity Informatics Information Policy
Switching to methods…
Main Methods for Studying Scholarly Communication and Users
Usage transaction logs Surveys (questionnaires or interviews) Observations and other experiments Focus groups Bibliometrics (citing and authoring
patterns)
What Conclusions Can You Draw?
• Usage logs • What people do on specific online systems
• Interviews/surveys • Opinion, what individuals say they do, and why, and outcomes
• Experiments • What individuals do in a controlled or natural setting, and why
• Focus groups • What individuals say they prefer and might do in the future
Usage logs give much useful data, but…
Logs don’t show why or outcomes Requests or downloads may not equal
use or satisfaction Log sessions may be difficult to
differentiate or compare across systems For privacy or other reasons, logs do not
show behavior by demographic groups Logs show only a fraction of total use
Surveys use different types of questions
Demographic Recollection of behaviors (how often
something is done) Opinions (reactions to statements on a
scale, valuing services on a scale) Critical Incident (specific event and
outcomes)
420
348288
240
156
0
50100
150
200
250300
350
400
450
Med Science Eng Soc Sci Hum
Average Articles Read per year per faculty academic discipline
Year of Studies
Recollection and demographic and opinion questions only go so far…
…add longitudinal to get a picture of trends
…add critical incident and you get a more detailed picture
150172 188
216252
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
1977 1984 93-98 00-03 04-06*
Average Articles Read per year per University Faculty Member
*280 with outliers
48 47
36 34
05
101520253035404550
1977 1993-1998
2000-2003
2004-2006
Average Minutes per Article by University Faculty Member
Ave
rage
Min
utes
Per
Art
icle
Year of Studies
24
35
43
36 37
0
510
15
20
2530
35
40
45
Med Science Eng Soc Sci Hum
Average Minutes per reading per University Faculty Member
Ave
rag
e n
um
be
r o
f art
icle
s re
ad
pe
r sc
ien
tist
Year of Studies
Demographic (faculty or student) plus critical incident (source of article)
Faculty
11%14%
75%
PersonalSubscriptions
LibraryProvided
SeparateCopies
46%
12%
42%
Doctoral StudentsFaculty Doctoral Students
Keeping Up 22%
Consult/treatingOther
4%9%
Teaching 17%
Research 48%
#4#1
#5#3
#2
Purpose and Ranking of Importance: Medical Faculty
33.5%
10.3%
56.3%
1st1st YearYear
28.8%
18.1%
53.2%
Library
Personal
Separate
2-5 Years2-5 Years9.2%
17.5%
73.3%
Over 5Over 5 YearsYears
Older articles are judged more valuable Older articles are judged more valuable & are & are more likely to come from more likely to come from librarieslibraries
Surveys provide much useful data, but…
All surveys rely on truthfulness Surveys rely on memory Response rates are falling
Scholarly Communication and LIS