Narrowing the Gap Between LIS Research and Practice in Australia

被引:14
作者
Linh Cuong Nguyen [1 ]
Hider, Philip [2 ]
机构
[1] Queensland Univ Technol, Sch Informat Syst, Fac Sci & Engn, Brisbane, Qld, Australia
[2] Charles Sturt Univ, Sch Informat Studies, Fac Arts & Educ, Wagga Wagga, NSW, Australia
基金
澳大利亚研究理事会;
关键词
Library and information science; research and practice; research collaboration; LIS research; Australia; INFORMATION-SCIENCE; UNIVERSITY LIBRARIANS; PRACTITIONER RESEARCH; RESEARCH ENGAGEMENT; ACADEMIC-LIBRARY; REFLECTIONS; RELEVANCE;
D O I
10.1080/24750158.2018.1430412
中图分类号
G25 [图书馆学、图书馆事业]; G35 [情报学、情报工作];
学科分类号
1205 ; 120501 ;
摘要
Concerns about the gap between LIS theory and practice have been voiced by many commentators over the years. A moderate gap was identified between the research priorities of practitioners in the Relevance 2020 project's focus groups, convened across Australia in late 2016, and the LIS research actually being conducted. A total of 172 Relevance 2020 participants, from a wide range of sectors, identified 96 priority topics, in areas such as the role of libraries and librarians, promotion, information service operations and information literacy. The participants also suggested ways in which LIS research could be better supported and made more relevant to practice. All stakeholders need to play their complementary parts: employers need to support practitioners' involvement in research, as well as their engagement with it; professional networks can help lobby for funds and resources, and facilitate the development of research capacity; academics can identify areas in which their own agendas coincide with those of practitioners, and explain the relevance of their research findings. Strong partnerships between individual practitioners and researchers can be formed by first identifying common ground and aims, through the sort of constructive dialogue generated at the Relevance 2020 events.
引用
收藏
页码:3 / 19
页数:17
相关论文
共 47 条
  • [1] Abbas J., 2016, Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, V57, P94, DOI [DOI 10.12783/ISSN.2328-2967/57/2/2, 10.3138/jelis.57.2.94, DOI 10.3138/JELIS.57.2.94]
  • [2] [Anonymous], J LIBRARIANSHIP INFO
  • [3] Aytac S., 2014, Collaborative Librarianship, V6, P147
  • [4] Bhatti R., 2012, LIB PHILOS PRACTICE, V839, P1
  • [5] Booth A., 2003, New Review of Information and Library Research, V9, P3, DOI 10.1080/13614550410001687909
  • [6] Writing for the profession: the experience of new professionals
    Bradley, Fiona
    [J]. LIBRARY MANAGEMENT, 2008, 29 (8-9) : 729 - +
  • [7] Carson P., 2014, PARTNERSHIP CANADIAN, V9, P1, DOI [https://doi.org/10.21083/partnership.v9i2.3037, DOI 10.21083/PARTNERSHIP.V9I2.3037]
  • [8] Characteristics of Articles Coauthored by Researchers and Practitioners in Library and Information Science Journals
    Chang, Yu-Wei
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC LIBRARIANSHIP, 2016, 42 (05) : 535 - 541
  • [9] Clapton J., 2010, LIB INFORM RES, V34, P7, DOI [10.29173/lirg217, DOI 10.29173/LIRG217]
  • [10] Connaway L.S., 2010, BASIC RES METHODS LI, V5th