Search (1 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Crowley, W."
  • × classification_ss:"06.00 / Information und Dokumentation: Allgemeines"
  1. Crowley, W.: Spanning the theory-practice divide in library and information science (2005) 0.00
    0.0019730842 = product of:
      0.007892337 = sum of:
        0.007892337 = weight(_text_:information in 439) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007892337 = score(doc=439,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034944877 = queryNorm
            0.12865502 = fieldWeight in 439, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=439)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    BK
    06.04 / Ausbildung, Beruf, Organisationen <Information und Dokumentation>
    06.00 / Information und Dokumentation: Allgemeines
    Classification
    06.04 / Ausbildung, Beruf, Organisationen <Information und Dokumentation>
    06.00 / Information und Dokumentation: Allgemeines
    Footnote
    In the next four chapters, Crowley takes on the particulars involved in the divide by looking at library and information professionals engaged in and transitioning to various research and theory development roles. In "The Academic as Practitioner," he examines how the publishing world influences how academics communicate with practitioners and the difficulties in writing for practitioner-oriented publications. The history of religion in the development of higher education in general, and the research focus of doctoral-degree granting institutions, is offered to explain the dominance of the academic practitioner. The paradoxical edicts of the Ohio legislature, which sought to balance classroom time for professors by law, paint a vivid picture of the results-oriented public and the research-oriented academic institution. In "The Practitioner as Academic: Adjunct Faculty/Lecturers," the question of the perceived lack of "rigor" in practitioner-conducted research is illustrated and illuminated. While Crowley points out the value of "how we did it good" research, as providing material for qualitative analysis, I found myself desiring a bit more methodological instruction. Given where and when such articles are published, how such qualitative analysis could be conducted called the value of this research into question, given the prior treatise on conducting research in an academic environment. "Other Worlds of Practice: The Field Practitioner" and "Other Worlds of Practice: The Consultant" are extremely short expositions which, while addressing alternative professionals' roles, do not significantly further the premise of the work. Nonetheless, Crowley might have been considered remiss if he had excluded these professionals.
    "Theory and Revelation" is devoted to encouraging LIS researchers, in any capacity, not to dismiss the role of faith, beliefs, and religion. The ending section presents "A Nine-Step Model for Pragmatic Research," which stops just short of being a "how-to" by not elucidating on the methodological considerations for each step. The model, while textual, bears a striking resemblance to the flow charts for approaching research found in many research instructional works, even though the entertaining of "solutions" to problems is an iterative element of the process. The text concludes with "The Foundations for Building Bridges," a fivepage summary section, almost woefully inadequate given the substantial issues developed and presented throughout the work. Crowley must be commended for his comprehensive approach to the subject, the detailed annotations, the glossary, the summary of works cited, and the index. The format of starting each chapter with a themed scenario prevented the writing from becoming dry and sleepinducing. Most of the chapters end with a specific section addressing how the issues relate to LIS. The overall structure of the text follows logically from the more theoretical to the more applicable. However, there is a definite bias towards occurrences where practitioners and academicians tend to co-exist and function in a research environment, i.e., library science and academic institutions. Information professionals working in public and community college libraries are discussed in a rather superficial manner. How cultural pragmatism can influence research and theory centered in the information science domain must still be considered in more depth than presented in this text. Further expansion on, and a critical analysis of, cultural pragmatism as a metatheoretical perspective is definitely in order. Hopefully, Spanning the Theory-Practice Divide in Library and Information Science will be an introduction to the use of cultural pragmatism in LIS research and in the development of useful theory. In response to an e-mail from me upon first reading the text, the author informed me of his contact with several other doctoral students interested in furthering their understanding of cultural pragmatism. Inspiring other professionals is certainly a testament to the value of the work and supports my recommendation for this text as essential reading for LIS professionals interested in producing research and theory that are truly useful."
    LCSH
    Information science
    Subject
    Information science