Search (1 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Mulvaney, J.P."
  • × theme_ss:"Ausbildung"
  1. O'Connor, D.; Mulvaney, J.P.: LIS faculty research and expectations of the academic culture versus the needs of the practitioner (1996) 0.01
    0.012546628 = product of:
      0.037639882 = sum of:
        0.037639882 = weight(_text_:resources in 500) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037639882 = score(doc=500,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.20165458 = fieldWeight in 500, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=500)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Library and information studies (LIS) education may be misreading the academic community's expectations. A programme's viability may hinge on a counterintuitive premise, where the academic culture allows each discipline to create its own criteria for its own evaluation. LIS programmes may have unwittingly assumed that adopting the scientific mode might gain the currency in the academic realm; yet there is little evidence that LIS programmes has the prerequisite infrastructure to compete with a science discipline in terms of sustained funded research, teaching assistant and postdoctoral assistant services, laboratory equipment, and other resources. Many LIS students and faculty do not come from the scientific disciplines, and this further inhibits their ability to compete in that arena. LIS programme and faculty evaluators have used criteria from the sciences to measure LIS progress and to determine individuals' suitability for promotion. Contends that this application of inappropriate criteria has done unnecessary harm to LIS and the individual involved. An examination of selected Committee on Accreditation (COA) self study responses and other sources indicates the LIS may misread the academic culture because LIS does not appear to be central to university governance. The waning of LIS's affiliation with libraries may do LIS irreparable harm and the focus may need to be recentred on educating librarians