Content area
Purpose
This paper aims to review changes related to library and information science (LIS) education over the past 20 years.
Design/methodology/approachThe literature reviewed for this paper is obtained by internet and database searches and personal communication and is conducted to look for similarities and differences in LIS program changes. A time period for the review is set from 1997 to 2017, and is completed between January and October of 2017. The majority of the searches are conducted in English.
FindingsNumerous similarities in changes were evidenced in areas of LIS education, such as curriculum, identification of new training and skills, instructional methods, follow-up on graduates, research on the current job market and post-graduate training support. Differences were identified in areas of capability of program change due to country regulation and course change flexibility.
Originality/valueA review of global program changes is relevant for LIS programs to realize and maintain their value in today’s workforce. It is significant for LIS programs all over the globe to realize that their shifts in curricular and program changes are similar to other LIS programs or where differences can be equally important.
Introduction
Information is literally at the fingertips of users 24 hours a day, seven days a week, thanks to search engines such as Google and an array and expansion of mobile devices and the size and complexity of datasets. Because of this, training in the traditional library science profession is being transformed. At the heart of these changes is the professional mission and commitment of library and information science (LIS) programs to train library science students to be responsive to current needs and better prepared for the workplace upon graduation. This paper presents viewpoints on the current literature to put a global perspective on the changes facing and transforming LIS education.
For the past 20 years, LIS programs around the world have been reviewing and rethinking training for their students. While some transformations and changes were nominal, other efforts to restructure LIS curricula and instruction have been substantial. More importantly, as Kaur stated, “LIS educators throughout the world have a great deal to learn from each other” (Kaur, 2015a).
Paths to change
Flexibility with LIS program change varies from country to country and three Eurasian countries, Ukraine, Azerbaijan and Turkey, approached change through different paths, primarily due to government agencies and ministries dictating program change. For example, after receiving their independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, the Ukraine and Azerbaijan revisited their LIS programs. What made their tasks different from other countries was that program approval had to be reviewed and approved through their countries’ ministries.
While the task was lengthy, by the time they were finished, LIS programs in the Ukraine were offering new courses related to information-seeking behavior, information architecture, structuring of information, network administration and metadata design (Chukanova, 2015).
Azerbaijan was also calling for change and while library science education had been upgraded to independent university department status in 1962 (Kuzmin, 2008), career directions for majors in Azerbaijain included static library science training that remained limited to positions such as bibliographer, collection management and publishing/editing (Sharma, 2012). What has continued, to some extent, is that many state libraries and librarians throughout the country are still working with standards applied in Soviet times and there is a gap between modern librarianship education and matching modern information needs, such as information engineering and data management.
A significant event for Azerbaijan was the Presidential Decree of 2008 encouraging LIS students to study in graduate programs in LIS under the 2007-2015 State Program for Azerbaijani Youth Education Abroad proposal (Azərbaycan, 2008). Another significant movement for Azerbaijan in 2013 was the introduction of LIS programs organizing English language cohorts with courses taught in English (Education at BSU, 2018).
Turkey, however, began with a different background as early as 1952 with program support from the USA with funding through the Ford Foundation and Fulbright Scholar faculty-teaching exchanges (Atılgan, 1999). An initial library science education course was offered to support training for librarians, archivists and documentation-information majors (Atılgan, 1999). Since these early beginnings, Turkey has continuously been making curricular changes to their LIS programs and ultimately taking the direction to prepare LIS students to meet the requirements of information management (Külcü, 2000). Similar to Azerbaijan, Turkey’s LIS programs commenced English language foundation training programs. Furthermore, LIS courses in Turkey introduced modular-based courses allowing students to choose according to their interests from lists of alternative courses such as:
medical resources;
modern publishing;
rare manuscripts;
Web design;
rare manuscripts;
proposal writing;
electronic delivery;
school libraries;
research librarian;
proposal writing;
customer relationships; and
proposal writing (Çakın, 2012).
More recently, LIS programs in Turkey involve securing positions for students into direct practices in different libraries, working in archives and information centers to gain more first-hand experience (Tonta, 2012).
Program name transformations
In an overview of LIS education in Africa, authors Jain and Jorosi commented that “change of department names has become a norm in LIS Schools” (Jain and Jorosi, 2017). Universities in Ethiopia, South Africa and Namibia had major name changes from Library Science to Information Science, Department of Information and Knowledge Management and Department of Information and Communication Studies. In the USA, a number of the largest library school education programs adopted the term “iSchool,” such as the library school at the University of Illinois-Urbana-Champaign (History of the school, 2018).
As well, in the USA, program name changes began occurring as early as 2000 with nearly half of the 58 accredited LIS programs in the USA changing their names (Saunders, 2015) and likewise in Australia where the term “library” was dropped from school names and the study of Library Science moved to Information Management (Pawley, 2005). Even one of the leading journals in the field has undergone a name change, New Library World to Information and Learning Science, to emphasize “library provision – of all types and across all sectors” (Baker, 2017).
Curricular transformations – technology skills
As early as 2005, Germany was in the process of a nation-wide core curricular review for LIS schools. New fields were identified: knowledge management, competitive intelligence, change management and innovation management. Other library science programs, as well, began reviewing their course offerings and Zimbabwe heralded the need to extend their LIS programs to reach cyberspace, and faculty there also acknowledged that the new breed of graduating LIS professionals needed to take on the additional training related to system design, knowledge management, Web design administration and the attributes of problem-solving, navigation and publishing thus indicating a strong shift from a book-centered focus to one of information transfer and the brokering of information (Pedzisai and Mutula, 2016). Likewise, as the faculty from the University of KwaZulu Natal reviewed their course offerings, it became apparent that graduates were not adequately trained for the existing technology workforce and that the programs were not turning out “industry ready” graduates (Pedzisai and Mutula, 2016).
Similarly, Ethiopia was also reviewing programs to reorient their course materials to meet the rapid changes in technology. They saw the need to stay on top of information and communication technologies as well as increasing LIS program marketing (Mammo, 2011).
Currently, the American Library Association Office of Accreditation requires LIS programs to integrate the theory, application and use of technology into the curriculum as stated in the Standards of Accreditation (American Library Association [2015], Office for Accreditaion). Likewise, as the faculty at Kuwait University identified information technology competencies, the university created internship opportunities in traditionally what would have been thought to be the arena of business information management rather than library information management (Marouf and Lehman, 2007).
After reviewing the 58 accredited LIS programs in the USA, a team of researchers found that 45 of the 58 schools had some technology skill requirements. However, there was an uneven distribution of those skills with some of the incoming students being far more savvy with new technologies than others (Scripps-Hoekstra et al., 2014).
Another trend coming to the forefront is to meld students with information skill sets with science background skills to work in an emerging field: the eScience professional. In a study supported by faculty at the LIS program at Syracuse University, students were asked to keep logs of their internships and met in focus groups to determine what new areas they would need training to handle the new area related to the generation of mega datasets and subsequent analysis. Essentially, the researchers identified 11 areas that would have value for students aspiring to be eScience professionals. In reality, the researchers realized it might be impossible for the students to take all 11 courses plus carry out a targeted internship. However, the researchers also realized that students interested in becoming eScience professionals could enhance their chances by being embedded in the programs of research in science and engineering endeavors where they could serve as “bridges” working alongside scientists and technology specialists (Stanton et al., 2011).
Curricular transformations – soft skills
A number of authors reported that LIS graduates were lacking in the area of “soft skills,” such as communication, customer service, flexibility and commitment to continuous learning. The Saunders study also identified important communication skills starting with improving listening skills, developing conflict resolution skills and also working on how to articulate messages and paring down information to essential points along with learning to accept criticism. Another author echoed the importance of hiring library employees with “positive and winning attitudes” and suggested that the value of addressing this as early as possible in the hiring process and that training whatever library skill was needed would result in a more positive work place in the long run (Massis, 2015). As Michael Stephens described the situation in an interview for Library Journal, he commented that librarians these days:
[…] must understand customer service and be willing to do everything and anything thrown at you, whether it’s shelving, weeding, working the desk, or reading a story to kids. The new keys are versatility and flexibility (Casey and Stephens, 2009).
Yukawa (2015), writing about the need to train graduates to be innovative leaders, proposed several ways of using transformational learning techniques to increase the likelihood that LIS students would be more capable of handling multi-tasking and solving complex problems as more valued skills. In a 2013 publication titled The Librarian’s Skillbook: 51 Essential Career Skills for Information Professionals, Hunt and Grossman thought of their 51 skills as career goals leading toward a more transformational type of librarianship. They described the “hottest skills” for librarians and information professionals to develop, acquire or polish. These include everything from the ability to digitize maps, photos and legal documents, to grant writing, and interpersonal skills such as improving active-listening skills. Another aspect or skill they felt would be useful for everyone was developing an attitude of being a “team player” (Hunt and Grossman, 2013).
Another recommendation has been for students to earn an additional master’s degree in a new content area: Latin American Studies, Women’s Studies, Gender Studies, Middle Eastern Studies, Global Policy Studies, Public Affairs or Juris Doctor. It was also suggested that students write a thesis rather than complete a Capstone Project (usually a two-semester project related to solving a research question or design problem) to demonstrate solid research and writing skills with a publishable component and oral presentation in the end (Saunders, 2015). Certain programs could then offer a certificate once the Capstone Project was completed.
That more emphasis on research is needed in LIS is given (Luo, 2011), and a new attempt to integrate relevant research for LIS students is suggested by Mandel with the “unClassroom” experiential learning approach. This involves incorporating research into a field experience to “demonstrate programmatic efficacy” and to hopefully secure real-time funding and project development with an outside client (Mandel, 2017). Other schools have suggested that graduates receive formal training in classroom instruction so that they are better prepared to provide full class or even small-group information literacy instruction (Saunders, 2015). Taking this one step further, in India, there has been a suggestion that there also be international exchanges of faculty and students to deepen collaborations and partnerships and increase an understanding of challenges facing today’s information rich world (Kaur, 2015b).
Consider the next generation of information users and seekers, in the USA. The American Association of School Librarians (AASL) developed learning standards to be used in elementary school libraries to help school librarians teach younger students how to expand their definition of information literacy to include a variety of literacies. These new areas use an information-rich society as the arena for students to address and pursue information digitally, visually, textually and technologically. The AASL publication, Standards for the 21st-Century Learner In Action (American Association of School Librarians (AASL), 2009), emphasized the importance of skills that focus on drawing conclusions, making informed decisions, applying knowledge to new situations and creating new knowledge both ethically and productively with AASL striving to prepare the next generation of information seekers, consumers and creators.
In Denmark, as well as the USA, LIS program models have been inverted and theoretical coursework semesters have been alternated with project semesters (Martens, 2015) thus forcing the students to examine librarian roles and begin practical problem-solving roles while on the job. The Royal School of Library and Information Science’s “embedded model” along with the Hack Library School collaborative provides a venue for LIS students to “take the future of librarianship into their own hands” (About, 2018).
Research on the current job market
LIS programs around the world began looking at job ads for their graduates to better meet future employers’ needs. The first notable change in job ads came from an article by Crowley when he noted that information professions would need to change the notion of hiring librarians to hiring information intermediaries. He focused on the idea that training should be more than database skills and should focus on in-depth knowledge (Crowley, 1999). One of the early studies looking at job ads from 1974 to 2004 found that in the 1970s, it was assumed that librarians had certain skills such as cataloging and answering reference questions and the ads were short. By comparison, in 2004, the ads for library positions were much lengthier and far more detailed (Kennan et al., 2006). In New Zealand, the LIS program at Open Polytechnic worked with industry to help re-shape their program and be better prepared for the opportunities and challenges occurring within the rapidly transforming library, archives and record and information management sectors (New Library and Information qualifications launched by Open Polytechnic, 2017).
Also, job title advertisements did not resemble the simple librarian qualifications of the past such as Reference Services, Reference and Instruction, Government Documents or Serials. Modern-day library positions now include job titles such as Embedded Librarian, Student Enrichment Librarian, Librarian for Instructional Design and Outreach and Training Librarian (Roy and Hallmark, 2015). A very recent job posting in May of 2017 offered a whole new shift in thinking about job duties with this position posting: Discovery Librarian. The responsibilities for this position, coming from the University of Maryland College Park in the USA, included improvement of “discovery and access to the libraries’ digital and print collections” through a wide array of activities. The ad goes on to suggest that the likely candidate will collaborate across divisions and departments to help “cultivate a seamless discovery experience for staff and users” (Wilson, 2017 April).
Major developments surrounding what is predicted as a data deluge and big data movement are also causing LIS schools to add courses to their programs (Tonta, 2000). Job titles are reflecting Digital Media Manager, Information Architect, Coordinator of Digital Products and Information Security Coordinator with technical skills involving data manipulation, media coding, contract negotiations and knowledge of digital assessment management (Roy and Hallmark, 2015).
In May 2017, a recent workshop announcement through American Library Association (ALA), and the Association for Library and Information Science Education (ALISE) was sent to all ALISE members and ALA attendees supporting the need for a workshop titled, From MLS to MLD: It’s Time to Integrate Design Thinking and Philosophy into LIS Education. The session emphasis proposed, “design thinking and philosophy must be integrated into the LIS curriculum.” And went on to state, “tomorrow’s librarians, in addition to basic information organization and service skills, must receive a design-influenced education that equips them with a problem-finding and solution-oriented mindset. A Masters of Library Design is the path forward for professional librarianship” (Bird, 2017, personal communication).
Similarly, a major shift has taken place in India regarding employment criteria. Initially, a double master degree was required for entry-level library work. More recently, a national eligibility test in LIS is now a prerequisite (Kaur, 2015b).
Following and supporting graduates
A number of LIS programs have also attempted to stay in touch with their graduates to see what they are experiencing on the job. As an example, Sen and Ford (2009) in the UK reported asking graduates to keep reflective journals to help monitor the needs of students and make possible program alterations. A side result of reviewing the journal entries showed that the students indicated they had become more self-aware of their behaviors and actions and of particular interest were the entries reflecting on group interactions and behaviors, all of which could prove beneficial in the work place (Sen and Ford, 2009). Elsewhere, LIS alumni have been followed with surveys and emails to check on job qualifications and atypical employment opportunities in a variety of new and emerging information fields, such art, photography, business, insurance and medicine.
With the graying of the library profession, the likelihood that young, freshly minted LIS graduates are being offered administrative positions directly out of library school is on the rise (Arthur, 1998). This has then presented LIS programs with even more areas to direct new courses and coursework. Examples of coursework to support these new graduates would involve financial and budget management, professional communication and public speaking skills along with project management and effective proposal, fund-raising and grant-writing skills. Additional suggestions include an option for students to participate in internships or practical and embarking on degrees in business education or management, marketing, accounting, finance or managing information systems (Mackenzie and Smith, 2009).
Another approach with graduates and their alma maters is for LIS schools to offer post-graduate workshops, certificates and courses. Pratt Institute in the USA has also presented a new online platform by hosting a website for graduates to showcase their portfolios for future employers (Pratt, 2017).
Conclusion
Globally, LIS programs in the past 20 years have made extraordinary changes due to the explosion of information both consumed and created, thanks to the phenomenon of the internet and the use of various mobile devices such as iPhones, tablets and portable computers. Much to the credit of many LIS programs, through their careful insight into the expansion of the world of information, the changes have been positive and moved the discipline forward. These shifts have also come about as the library science profession is being directed toward a new framework in which knowledge, thought and technology are integrated along with acknowledging the existence of a workforce where jobs are no longer “for life” and there is more call for social and personal transferable skills (Moniarou-Papaconstantinou et al., 2008). What has evolved are trends in LIS education: the need for further research and curricular change and changes to first-hand experiences for LIS students that can be translated into workplace practicality along with turning out prospective graduates who are job market ready.
Implications for further research
One factor that began to become clear as we worked through the literature was that much of the published material came heavily from the sectors of public and academic libraries, leaving out special, corporate, medical and law libraries along with archivists or any librarian in a nontraditional sector of librarianship. These librarians are also facing similar issues of an explosion of information, a shifting from print to digital collections and a changing job market. This is a sector ready for further research. We also noticed a lack of research on what LIS programs could be doing to reach out to working librarians. Post-graduate certificate programs with new technologies? Webinars? Cross-training? Again, yet another area of research potential.
We also noticed a dearth of literature related to LIS faculty as instructors and were wondering about their thoughts and concerns as teachers with this new generation of information users, and information consumers/creators, and whether or not this could be another possible area of future study. One LIS faculty member we met this past year was still teaching at the age of 80 and made it clear to us that he had no interest in changing his opinion or course content instruction. This meeting left us curious to know whether currently teaching LIS faculty would be willing to attempt a reverse-internship: going back into libraries as working librarians for a sabbatical/internship/field placement ready to answer reference questions, engage in selecting and de-selecting, using chat interfaces and working amongst eBook collections rather than print collections. An activity like this would certainly be worth studying and be unique.
Trends in the field of LIS are certainly apparent especially as LIS programs begin merging pedagogy with practice and turning to industry for insights into what relevant skill sets are most valued out of the traditional core library skills currently being taught. With suggestions for an emphasis on the teaching of soft skills, however, this new direction poses its own set of concerns. First, what one employer might see as a list of important soft skills, another employer might completely reject and for the LIS faculty, an additional question becomes one of what course goals and objectives are aligned with teaching soft skills and the even more slippery notion of how soft skills are adequately weighted and adequately assessed in coursework, as an end product for course evaluation and ultimately in several countries with program accreditation requirements.
One suggestion we have is to more carefully screen entering students regarding their already existing soft skills and to their review of their academic content area preferences plus seeing whether candidates are interested in aspiring to management or leadership roles in librarianship. These issues could track students more quickly into their LIS preference areas and ensure their projected career pursuits. As one US school has already started to do, USC Marshalls’ entry page for their Master of Management in Library and Information Science online program markets their Degree for the 21st – Century Librarian. They ask users up front to declare what area interests them most: library leadership, academic librarianship, digital librarianship, urban public librarianship or other. Their early survey is clearly a new program entrance protocol.
Another suggestion would be to move LIS students into fieldwork earlier in their programs so that they would shadow, observe and become more directly involved in assisting with meaningful and active problem-solving within the library setting. This would then help students currently in the field correlate practices with theories and methods studied in the classroom. Typically, a student does not receive remuneration for fieldwork and would be in their placement for two to three times a week; however, this might give both the student and the library involved valuable insight into what would be best for both. In our opinion, this earlier movement into fieldwork is a much better solution rather than internships adjacent to graduation, which we believe are too late in the typical sequence of LIS coursework. Earlier practicums would also have two potentially valuable outcomes: a student’s comfort level with the type of library work they are interested in could be more readily and quickly identified; and the individuals in the workforce would be in a better position to start indicating what types of soft skills are relevant to their library thus working with LIS students to foster or even fine-tune those early skills that could potentially lead to enhanced job application qualifications.
We raise the question: Should this begin at the undergraduate level where the timeline for completion provides for a more advantageous length of study or remain at the graduate level where coursework is already compressed to 18 or 24 months? As it now stands, this call for expanding courses would mean that some traditional library courses would need to be switched out for newer ones, if so, then what to drop or what to add? Would it be blasphemous to the profession that certain traditional courses should go such as cataloging? Or combining some of the early exploratory courses like information and society, information for life or information organization all in favor of earlier field experiences? Then, too, we saw a call through the literature review for more specifics on how to instruct as a teaching librarian from the development of lesson plans to managing classroom behavior during library instruction or writing exams that accurately assess what was taught. In our opinion, this is a very valid question because it is the same question that transpires for university-hired teaching faculty who graduate with a PhD in a content area and yet have never had one educational course in how to teach.
The area of LIS education will be shifting, exploding, reshaping and melding to the changing needs of the new shape of information. What this literature review for global LIS education has revealed is that the future of information is really beyond anyone’s comprehension at this moment in time and also beyond the possibility of information transformation and transmittal. Our suggestions and conjectures may only offer a venue for possible change, but upon reviewing the literature and talking with current LIS faculty currently teaching in the field, we present our interpretations and suggest some possible program transformations.
© Emerald Publishing Limited 2018