Value of academic reading and value of the library in academics' own words

Emerald - Tập 65 Số 4 - Trang 425-440 - 2013
Rachel Volentine1, Carol Tenopir1
1Center for Information and Communication Studies, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee, USA

Tóm tắt

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to ask: What is the value and outcome of scholarly reading for academic staff? How do academic library collections support research and teaching activities of academic staff? How do reading patterns of articles, books, and other materials differ? What is the role of the academic library collections in teaching and learning?Design/methodology/approachThe paper provides insight into the values and outcomes of scholarly reading, identifies overall reading patterns, and illuminates issues academics address. Approximately 2,000 academic staff members from six UK universities completed a web‐based survey. Both qualitative and quantitative data were collected through the survey. The survey used the critical incident of last reading by academics to gather information on the purpose, outcomes, and values of scholarly readings and access to library collections. The survey concluded with open‐ended comments, which is the focus of this article.FindingsThe open‐ended comments focused on the importance of article readings to all work activities, in particular research. They also placed emphasis on the value of the library's e‐journal collections, but they had some issues with electronic access. The role of book reading was also discussed.Research limitations/implicationsOpen‐ended comments are only one way of measuring the value of scholarly reading and library collections. Ongoing studies and examinations of the findings from the other sections of this study will add to the overall findings of the value of the academic library.Originality/valueThis paper further illustrates the essential role of scholarly reading and the library's collections on the academic enterprise. This type of qualitative “story” helps libraries demonstrate their value and assess areas of concern.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Andrews, J. (1991), “The use of the critical incident research technique in an academic library”, Library and Information Research News, Vol. 14 No. 50, pp. 22‐27.

Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) (2010), Value of Academic Libraries: A Comprehensive Research Review and Report, Association of College and Research Libraries, Chicago, IL, researched by Megan Oakleaf.

Brown, C.M. (2003), “The role of electronic preprints in chemical communication: analysis of citation, usage and acceptance in the journal literature”, Journal of the American Society of Information Science and Technology, Vol. 54 No. 5, pp. 362‐371.

Budd, J.M. (2006), “Faculty publishing productivity: comparisons over time”, College and Research Libraries, Vol. 67 No. 3, pp. 230‐239.

Butz, H.E. and Goodstein, L.D. (1996), “Measuring customer value: gaining the strategic advantage”, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 24, pp. 63‐77.

CIBER (2009), “JISC National E‐books Observatory Project: key findings and recommendations, final report”, available at: www.jiscbooksproject.org/reports.

Everest, K. and Payne, P. (2001), Leeds, “The impact of libraries on learning, teaching and research”, report of the LIRG Seminar, Leeds.

Flanagan, J.C. (1954), “The critical incident technique”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 52 No. 4, pp. 327‐358.

Fry, J. and Talja, S. (2004), “The cultural shaping of scholarly communication: explaining ejournal use within and across academic fields”, Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 41, American Society for Information Science, Washington, DC, pp. 20‐30.

Griffiths, J.M. and King, D.W. (1991), A Manual on the Evaluation of Information Centers and Services: NATO, AGARD, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, New York, NY.

Healy, L.W., Wilkie, K.M. and Dagar, L. (2002), Custom Report Prepared for the Digital Library Federation/Council on Library and Information Resources, Outsell, Burlingame, CA.

King, D.W. and Tenopir, C. (2001), “Using and reading scholarly literature”, in Williams, M. (Ed.), Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, Vol. 34, Information Today, Medford, NJ, pp. 423‐477.

Kling, R. (2004), “The internet and unrefereed scholarly publishing”, Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, Vol. 38, pp. 591‐631.

McClanahan, K., Wu, L., Tenopir, C. and King, D.W. (2010), “Embracing change: perceptions of e‐journals by faculty members”, Learned Publishing, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 209‐223.

Machlup, F. (1979), “Uses, value, and benefits of knowledge”, Science Communication, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 62‐81, doi: 10.1177/107554707900100104.

Matthews, J.R. (2007), Library Assessment in Higher Education, Libraries Unlimited, Westport, CT.

Maughan, P.D. (1999), “Library resources and services: a cross‐disciplinary survey of faculty and graduate student use and satisfaction”, Journal of Academic Librarianship, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 354‐366.

Nicholas, D., Rowlands, I., Huntington, P., Jamali, H.R. and Salazar, P.H. (2010), “Diversity in the e‐journal use and information‐seeking behaviour of uk researchers”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 66 No. 3, pp. 409‐433, DOI: 10.1108/00220411011038476.

Radford, M.L. (2006), “The critical incident technique and the qualitative evaluation of the connecting libraries and schools projects”, Library Trends, Vol. 55 No. 1, pp. 46‐64.

Research Information Network (2009), Patterns of Information Use and Exchange: Case Studies of Researchers in the Life Sciences, RIN, London.

Research Information Network (2011a), Research Information Network Reinventing Research?, RIN, London.

Research Information Network (2011b), Collaborative Yet Independent: Information Practices in the Physical Sciences, RIN, London.

Research Information Network (2011c), The Value of Libraries for Research and Researchers, RIN, London.

Sánchez, A.M. and Pérez Pérez, M. (2001), “Lean indicators and manufacturing strategies”, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 1433‐1451.

Talja, S. and Maula, H. (2003), “Reasons for the use and non‐use of electronic journals and databases: a domain analytic study in four scholarly disciplines”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 59 No. 6, pp. 673‐691.

Tenopir, C. and King, D.W. (2000), Towards Electronic Journals: Realities for Scientist, Librarians and Publishers, Special Libraries Association, Washington, DC.

Tenopir, C. and King, D.W. (2001), “The use and value of scientific journals: past, present, and future”, Serials, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 113‐119.

Tenopir, C. and Volentine, R. (2012), “UK scholarly reading and the value of library resources: summary results of the study conducted Spring 2011”, available at: www.jisc‐collections.ac.uk/Reports/ukscholarlyreadingreport/.

Tenopir, C., Volentine, R. and King, D.W. (2012), “Scholarly reading and the value of academic library collections: results of a study in six UK universities”, Insights: The UKSG Journal, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 130‐149.

Tenopir, C., King, D., Boyce, P., Grayson, M. and Paulson, K. (2005), “Relying on electronic journals: reading patterns of astronomers”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 56 No. 8, pp. 786‐802.

Tenopir, C., King, D., Clarke, M., Na, K. and Zhou, X. (2007), “Journal reading patterns and preferences of pediatricians”, Journal of the Medical Library Association, Vol. 95 No. 1, pp. 56‐63.

Tenopir, C., King, D., Edwards, S. and Wu, L. (2009), “Electronic journals and changes in scholarly article seeking and reading patterns”, Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives, Vol. 61 No. 1, pp. 5‐32.

Tenopir, C., King, D.W., Spencer, J. and Wu, L. (2009), “Variations in article seeking and reading patterns of academics: what makes a difference?”, Library and Information Science Research, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 139‐148.

Tenopir, C., Wilson, S., Vakkari, P., Talja, S. and King, D.W. (2010), “Cross country comparison of scholarly e‐reading patterns in Australia, Finland and the US”, Australian Academic and Research Libraries (AARL), Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 26‐41.

Woodruff, R.B. (1997), “Customer value: the next source for competitive advantage”, Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 139‐153.

Zeithaml, V.A. (1988), “Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means‐end model of synthesis evidence”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 52 No. 3, pp. 2‐22.

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Emerald

Tập 65 Số 4

425-440

Thông tin tác giả