Scholarly communication competencies: An analysis of confidence among Australasian library staff
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•164 views
These slides are from a talk given on 19 January 2022 CISC Research Seminar at Charles Sturt University. The paper to which these slides talk is available at: https://dx.doi.org/10.25911/45BB-9Y24 ABSTRACT: This talk will discuss the results from a nationwide survey of the level of confidence that librarians working in scholarly communication in Australia and New Zealand have in their current competencies. The work showed that while respondents were generally confident across seven competency areas (Institutional repository management, Publishing services, Research practice, Copyright services, Open access policies and scholarly communication landscape, Data management services, and Assessment and impact metrics), the majority combined their scholarly communication tasks with other roles. There are challenges across the sector in updating skills and knowledge to keep abreast of current trends and developments were identified. This work has significant implications for improving both the education provision in this area and creating more professional development opportunities.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Scholarly communication competencies: An analysis of confidence among Australasian library staff
Similar to Scholarly communication competencies: An analysis of confidence among Australasian library staff (20)
More from Danny Kingsley
More from Danny Kingsley (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Scholarly communication competencies: An analysis of confidence among Australasian library staff
- 1. Scholarly communication competencies: An analysis of confidence among Australasian library staff SICS Research Seminar – Charles Sturt University - 19 January 2022 Dr Danny Kingsley @dannykay68 Dr Mary Anne Kennan @MaryAnneKennan Dr Joanna Richardson @jprglobal Image:
- 2. Why this study? • No & range of scholarly communication-related roles within academic libraries, and other departments and divisions, have been growing steadily for nearly 20 years • Distinct lack of formal education and training opportunities - sensed anecdotally and demonstrated in multiple US and UK studies • Recent US study on impostor phenomenon in scholarly communication practitioners elicited interesting discussion on CAIRSS list • Decision to investigate the current Australasian context Image: Danny Kingsley
- 3. Expanding body of work – UK & US US study (2020) “…formal training on scholarly communication topics in LIS is rare, leaving many early career practitioners underprepared for their work. …” US study (2020) “scholarly communications librarians experience impostor phenomenon more frequently and intensely than academic librarians more broadly” https://shsu-ir.tdl.org/handle/20.500.11875/2866 https://jlsc-pub.org/articles/abstract/10.7710/2162-3309.2328/ https://unlockingresearch-blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=1313 UK study (2016) hypothesis: “there is a systematic lack of education on scholarly communication issues available to those entering the library profession. This is creating a time bomb skills gap in the academic library profession and unless action is taken we may well end up with a workforce not suited to work in the 21st century research library.”
- 4. Which competencies? Multiple & misaligned https://www.coar-repositories.org/files/Competencies-for- ScholComm-and-OA_June-2016.pdf https://www.nasig.org/Competencies- Scholarly-Communication https://www.alia.org.au/foundation-knowledge-skills-and- attributes-relevant-information-professionals-working- archives ALIA : 2014-2020 https://read.alia.org.au/foundation-knowledge-entry-level- library-and-information-professionals ALIA : Dec 2020 onward
- 6. Definition of “scholarly communication” Includes tasks associated with: • Institutional repository management • Publishing services • Research practice • Copyright services • Open access policies and the scholarly communication landscape • Data management services • Assessment & impact metrics Also included questions about ‘Personal Strengths’ (as described in the NASIG competencies) Image: Danny Kingsley
- 7. Our study (2020-2021) https://cpas.anu.edu.au/research/research-projects/scholarly- communication-knowledge-and-skills-australasian-research Openly accessible material related to paper: • Authors’ Accepted Manuscript: https://dx.doi.org/10.25911/45BB-9Y24 • Supporting datasets https://dx.doi.org/10.25911/45BB-9Y24 • Survey instrument • The raw responses to the survey • Analysis of number of responses for each question • File detailing how charts and tables in the paper were generated • Comparison of competencies: https://dx.doi.org/10.25911/5BPD-6X95 Paper accepted to be published in College & Research Libraries November 2022
- 8. Summary of the research process • Questions on: • confidence in the core competencies of scholarly communication • education and training background of the respondents • The survey used Qualtrics software. Participants were recruited through communication mediums used by the target cohort. Responses received from 21 October to 3 December 2020. • ANU ethics panel required that no question would be compulsory - not all respondents answered all questions. Pre-analysis undertaken for each of the questions to determine the no of responses for each question • 160 valid responses received & analysed: • Excel and descriptive statistics for the quantitative questions • NVivo and manual thematic coding for the qualitative questions • Each member of the team took responsibility for analysis of different quantitative questions and coding of the qualitative questions, after which the team came together and confirmed each other’s work • Initial analysis of the Confidence in Competency Areas included a set of specific Tasks for each Competency Area from matrix questions. The results from these questions were initially individually analyzed for each Competency Area. We analyzed the level of confidence the responses showed across a Competency Area by adding together all of the Tasks listed in each Competency Area and then charting the total Confidence for each Competency Area
- 9. The respondents (n=160) Of Australian respondents: 35.1% were at HEW6 with only (6.7%) at a lower level HEW7 and above = 58.2% Experienced librarians, newish roles – similar to the findings from Owens in 2020 (<12% more than 10 years) and Sewell in 2016 (<15% more than 10 years)
- 10. Only two areas where majority are confident Two Competency Areas had the majority of Confidence Levels as A great deal or A lot: • Open Access Policies & Scholarly Communication Landscape • Assessment & Impact Metrics Two Competency Areas where the positive Confidence Levels were considerably lower: • Publishing Services • Data Management Services
- 11. Time is a major factor impacting confidence
- 12. New services = new roles & new skills https://www.liberquarterly.eu/articles/10.18352/lq.10336/ Finland (2020) It soon became evident that open science would require an expansion of traditional library services and the adoption of new roles. The development of new open science and research support services, infrastructures and tools would also require qualifications beyond those of traditional library skills The skills required of people working in libraries in institutions that *produce* information as well as *consuming* it are different.
- 13. The role of formal education Image: Danny Kingsley
- 14. Library & Information Science qualification • 88% (n=141) held a LIS qualification • 1.8% (n=33) were studying for such a qualification • Only 10% (n=16) did not hold an LIS qualification
- 15. LIS qualification equipped them for scholarly communication work? • 122 respondents: 57.4% answered No (n =70) • Of 92 comments, 25 respondents noted scholarly communication knowledge and skills were not included in their degree at all: My LIS qualification barely touched on scholarly communication issues … My experience with work placement students is that they do not get great insight into scholarly communications. This is a crying shame, not just for their own professional development, but for the industry. We need graduates who are aware of the big issues and who have knowledge in emerging and current issues in Scholarly Communications. Just look at the impact COVID had on publishing! My qualification (…) felt overly basic and general, not offering much depth at all about the complexities of scholarly communication, emerging platforms, the changing landscape in university libraries, etc. The course itself however didn't teach me much/anything about what I actually do at work. It's been a steep learning curve
- 16. Highly educated cohort • 81.3% (n=130) had a qualification other than LIS • 1.9% (n=3) working towards one • Only 16.9% (n=27) having no additional qualification
- 17. Comments from respondents with a research background It is an evolving and changing landscape where a qualification does not necessarily equip you with the knowledge required. To be professionally active in this area and to continuously build my knowledge are required to effectively work in the current scholarly communication environment. Part of the problem librarians face in this area is the issue of Universities being hierarchical institutions where the PhD is a piece of cultural capital that is often necessary to be taken seriously by academics. I don't think my PhD will make me a better librarian but it will make them think I am a better librarian! I understand first-hand the scholarly writing and publishing process, although I have learned more about research metrics and journal rankings as a professional staff member than I did when I was research active.
- 18. So how have respondents gained their skills? Image: Danny Kingsley
- 19. How the study defined skills acquisition methods Formal training refers to courses with a structured plan that have some formal recognition upon completion, e.g. participation certificate or certification Professional development refers to training related to your job that did not lead to any formal recognition, e.g. supervisor or colleague-assisted training, live or virtual classes, conference sessions, webinars Staying up to date / self-directed learning refers to a form of study in which you are to a large extent responsible for your own instruction
- 20. Formal training is not where skills are acquired
- 21. Reflects UK 2016 study: Mostly ‘on the job’ & ‘self-directed’ learning Skills in scholarly communication – needs & development https://unlockingresearch-blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=1943
- 22. Some confusion about definitions Several respondents nominated ’23 research things’ (a self-directed training concept) as Formal training rather than Self-directed learning. One respondent nominated Leiden University’s CWTS course on Bibliometrics and Scientometrics for Research Evaluation as Professional development rather than Formal training Of the 32 people who had responded Yes, at least 14 were not formal training or certification courses. This amends the proportion of responses to 18 Yes (11.3%) and 140 No (88.7%). It is highly probable that some of the respondents who chose Yes but did not comment would also have had in mind courses and / or training which does not meet the Formal training criteria for this survey.
- 23. Self-Directed Learning • Landscape is: • “a fast-moving and diverse area such as this” • “such a quick-moving and varied research environment” • “a space [which] changes so rapidly” • Perceived value of conference attendance appears to be high • Strong engagement with organisations, e.g., OA Australasia & ARDC • 68% spend <2 hours per week
- 24. Opportunity to improve • The frustration expressed about LIS qualifications could reflect the previously low level of reference to any scholarly communication skills in ALIA’s Foundation Knowledge, Skills and Attributes relevant to Information Professionals working in Archives, Libraries and Records Management (which provided the key knowledge skills and attributes required by ALIA for courses to be accredited). • As of December 2020, scholarly communication and other research support services have now been included as an element of foundation knowledge by ALIA. • LIS Education programs now need to consider adding scholarly communication more explicitly to their programs. Image: Danny Kingsley
- 25. Additional opportunities arising from responses • Structured professional development & training • Keep staff up to date with the constant change • Recognised by professional organisations, e.g., ALIA & ARMS • Community of practice & Australasian capacity- building programs or initiatives • National level changes, potentially through: • Existing professional organisations, or • Development of a new scholarly communication- focused group
- 26. So where to now? • The situation is clearly sub-optimal • Where does the responsibility lie? • This is not simple! • We welcome your discussion Image: Danny Kingsley