Search

We examine 12 library skills curricula developed for two formalized undergraduate research training programs that occurred between the time periods, 1999–2008 and 2013–2015, at the University of Tennessee to answer the question: how has library skills instruction for these programs adapted to changing technologies, tools, and expectations of student performance? Our analysis is based upon data mined from course documents. We contextualize these data with reflections on the course design experience from the principal course designer and knowledge holder. Findings from our constructivist analysis of course curricula demonstrate the value of formal partnerships between academic libraries/librarians and undergraduate research training programs/administrators on college and university campuses. Although such relationships seem unnecessary, given the increase in students' unmediated access to research tools, we find that innovations in research tools and other technologies create opportunities to deepen students' engagement with academic librarians. While the more recent curricula (2013–2015) have required students to demonstrate traditional library (research) skills, such as the ability to search and retrieve information and to properly cite sources, they have also challenged students to think and behave as scholars: to critically evaluate sources and information, to seamlessly integrate information into original scholarship, and to disseminate original scholarship among their respective scholarly communities.

Since the earliest days of the profession, academic librarians have attempted to reconcile their status within the academy. This project takes a new approach to this effort by using Lee Bolman and Terrence Deal’s “Four Frames” model to analyze the issues. To more closely examine the dynamics, tensions, and implications associated with librarians’ professional status within the academy, we discuss the role of the academic librarian in the context of each of Bolman and Deal’s frames: Structural, Human Resource, Political, and Symbolic. In this discussion, we demonstrate that librarians are positioned to address human resource (as defined by Bolman and Deal), political, and symbolic factors contributing to their status within the academy. Also, while we establish that the relationship between library faculty and disciplinary faculty plays a role in library faculty status, we conclude that library faculty status is constructed by a number of forces. We further conclude that many of the political and symbolic conditions experienced by librarians are rooted in structural and human resource factors controlled by upper-level administration in both libraries and the universities.

This paper examines how scientists working in government agencies in the U.S. are reacting to the “ethos of sharing” government-generated data. For scientists to leverage the value of existing government data sets, critical data sets must be identified and made as widely available as possible. However, government data sets can only be leveraged when policy makers first assess the value of data, in much the same way they decide the value of grants for research outside government. We argue that legislators should also remove structural barriers to interoperability by funding technical infrastructure according to issue clusters rather than administrative programs. As developers attempt to make government data more accessible through portals, they should consider a range of other nontechnical constraints attached to the data. We find that agencies react to the large number of constraints by mostly posting their data on their own websites only rather than in data portals that can facilitate sharing. Despite the nontechnical constraints, we find that scientists working in government agencies exercise some autonomy in data decisions, such as data documentation, which determine whether or not the data can be widely shared. Fortunately, scientists indicate a willingness to share the data they collect or maintain. However, we argue further that a complete measure of access should also consider the normative decisions to collect (or not) particular data.

This theoretical paper uses Bolman and Deal’s (2013) Four Frames Analysis to define the information world of families of children who present symptoms associated with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). ADHD is explored here as an information challenge imposed by fragmented views of an ADHD information world. This call to action explores and organizes the transdisciplinary literature about ADHD experiences into a guide that informs the social justice efforts of public libraries/librarians, who can serve as intermediaries between information stakeholders and the vast array of information resources about ADHD. These intermediaries can develop collections and services to support shared decision making among various ADHD stakeholders. To support these efforts, we identify information resources needed by users. More importantly, however, we help libraries/librarians recognize the frames they use to interpret users’ information needs for collection development.

Regardless of the primary motive, international military intervention aimed at nation building is partly intended to establish democratic societies. And scholars have demonstrated that intervention does have a positive impact on democratization. With democratization generally follows greater support for human rights. Feminist scholars, however, have questioned definitions of democracy in which at minimal, women’s political rights are absent. This brings into question the impact of intervention on the status of women. Particularly in both Iraq and Afghanistan women’s rights have become prominent in the post-invasion American political rhetoric. Since intervention seems to be associated with the spread of democratic principles, we seek to discover whether intervention actually moves societies toward gender equality. We examine all six cases of completed military intervention aimed at nation building in sovereign states during the post Cold War period. Three of the cases—El Salvador, Mozambique, Namibia—evidence democratic change; whereas, the remaining three states—Cambodia, Haiti, Somalia—remain undemocratized. We test the extent to which intervention has or has not improved women’s equality and find no dramatic effect, either positive or negative, of intervention on the status of women in any of the six states.

BACKGROUND: Scientific research in the 21st century is more data intensive and collaborative than in the past. It is important to study the data practices of researchers--data accessibility, discovery, re-use, preservation and, particularly, data sharing. Data sharing is a valuable part of the scientific method allowing for verification of results and extending research from prior results. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: A total of 1329 scientists participated in this survey exploring current data sharing practices and perceptions of the barriers and enablers of data sharing. Scientists do not make their data electronically available to others for various reasons, including insufficient time and lack of funding. Most respondents are satisfied with their current processes for the initial and short-term parts of the data or research lifecycle (collecting their research data; searching for, describing or cataloging, analyzing, and short-term storage of their data) but are not satisfied with long-term data preservation. Many organizations do not provide support to their researchers for data management both in the short- and long-term. If certain conditions are met (such as formal citation and sharing reprints) respondents agree they are willing to share their data. There are also significant differences and approaches in data management practices based on primary funding agency, subject discipline, age, work focus, and world region. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Barriers to effective data sharing and preservation are deeply rooted in the practices and culture of the research process as well as the researchers themselves. New mandates for data management plans from NSF and other federal agencies and world-wide attention to the need to share and preserve data could lead to changes. Large scale programs, such as the NSF-sponsored DataNET (including projects like DataONE) will both bring attention and resources to the issue and make it easier for scientists to apply sound data management principles.