The “Developing Research Excellence and Methods” project launch event “Out of the Comfort Zone”, held at the British Library on Tuesday 19th July 2011, highlighted some important issues surrounding Library and Information Science research. As a recipient of a sponsored place at the launch event, I was extremely interested to hear more about the challenges and complexities of LIS research and practice. I would like to give my thanks to TFPL Intelligent Resources , Sue Hill Recruitment and Glen Recruitment for enabling me to attend this conference through their support of sponsored places for new professionals.
Professor Hazel Hall opened the conference by outlining the main aims and goals of the DREaM project. The project, funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council and the LIS Research Coalition, aims to develop a formal network of LIS researchers and practitioners in order to build the capability and capacity of LIS research. The goal is to raise the quality and perceived importance of LIS research across disciplines in order to build a foundation for long-term inter-disciplinary research collaborations. The project consists of this launch conference, three workshops throughout the year where cross-discipline research methodologies will be analysed in detail, and a concluding conference in July 2012. Hall spoke of a ‘cadre’ of committed individuals that the project aims to bring together. After the concluding event next year, it is vital that there remains a core group of professionals who are committed to the aims of the project.
Professor Blaise Cronin then gave an insightful and interesting keynote speech on the historical and current problems surrounding LIS research. Collaboration appears to be the key to strengthening confidence. Cronin took us on a history of LIS research and asked whether there really was a Golden Age for our discipline. The problem is that LIS research has for too long been seen by researchers in other disciplines as a hobby, rather than a rigorous and scientific discipline. Take for example the area of information behaviour. This is a logical area in which LIS research should collaborate with educational and cognitive psychological research. Yet the body of LIS research is often overlooked. Cronin asks us to ask why. He suggests various reasons, including the lack of metadata analysis and the weak experimental design of much LIS research. Citation analysis shows whether or not articles are being cited outside the LIS sphere but I would be cautious about drawing too many conclusions from such a figure. After all, information behaviour is an area which is of great interest to practitioners in many fields. A lack of citation figures does not mean than these articles are not being read. Cronin asks us to look at methodologies from other disciplines, for example evidence-based practice, to evaluate their usefulness within LIS research. By using different methodologies, it is possible that the research output will be perceived as more reliable by other disciplines. The ‘One Minute Madness’ session that followed was really interesting as delegates heard about a number of various projects currently taking place in the LIS field.
After an exquisite lunch, we moved into our selected breakout groups . With my focus on developing and maintaining networks, I was fortunate to attend the session ran by Professor Gunilla Widén on the topic of network development in the Nordic countries. Despite their differences, the Nordic countries historically feel a wealth of commonality between them. There are established trends of formal co-operation throughout the Nordic countries, built on common values and willingness by all to develop Nordic competencies and competitiveness. This established collaboration smoothed the path to establishing networks in the LIS sphere. However, there are also problems. A delicate balance has to be maintained between national, Nordic and international interests. Different emphases and different personalities also bring challenges. Yet together they promote the Nordic countries as a whole much more strongly than they could do individually.
For me, the discussion that followed the breakout session was one of the most important parts of the day. One member of our group asked why there was such a gap between research and practice, a question that sparked intense and passionate debate. Some felt that there was little practical relevance in research. Others stated that research was not lofty and irrelevant to practice but instead was crucial to helping practitioners to solve problems. Yet it is true that research output often does not affect organisational practice, a point which was used by some to state that practitioners were thus not engaging with research. I put myself well and truly out of my comfort zone by jumping in and stating that this was often not the case. As a practitioner, but also as a new professional, I certainly engage with LIS research. However, organisational culture and the constraints of practice limit the extent to which research can be implemented. It is important not to assume that, because things are not rapidly changing on the ground, research is not being evaluated by any practitioners. The discussion veered then onto networks. What drives a network after the funding runs dry? I am a part of several networks, including CILIP’s Career Development Group and my area specific German Studies Library Group. I participate in these groups, I give my time to attend events, I am on the committee of CDG in the East of England. I do it because it is valuable professionally. It develops me as a person and as a professional. I am doing something useful and creating a network of practitioners. There is no financial incentive and yet I and my fellow members are committed and enthusiastic enough to establish and build a network.
Dr Dylan Evans gave the closing keynote speech, which was interesting and fascinating. His career spans a number of roles and disciplines, which makes him the perfect candidate to speak about inter-disciplinary collaboration. Collaboration encourages creative thinking as preconceived knowledge and assertions are washed away. In order to become cross collaborative, we must engage with other disciplines and move forward into other spheres.
The two main themes that emerged from the day concerned the need to assess the current situation with LIS research and research methodologies whilst exploring how we can establish a formal network of LIS researchers and practitioners. Discussing the gap between research and practice was a crucial part of the day. Collaboration between researchers and practitioners is the first step to closing this gap within our own profession before we move forwards into cross-discipline collaboration. This is achievable by networking to understand the perspectives and challenges that researchers and practitioners face. I sincerely hope that through the course of this year, the first steps towards this mutual understanding can be taken in order to move forward in establishing a formal LIS network. Research should inform practice but practical problems should also determine the focus of the LIS research landscape to an extent. Understanding each other is the first step towards the formation of a solid permanent network.
Friday 22 July 2011
Thursday 21 July 2011
IRL In 'Better Than Twitter' Shocker
As someone who over the last few years has come to rely heavily on Twitter.com as a networking tool, I was happily surprised to discover last night that IRL can actually be even more fun sometimes!
IRL - or In Real Life - networking is scary, much more difficult that online networking, because we actually have to put ourselves out there. So it was with no small amount of trepidation that I went to the cpd23 Thing 7 tweet-up last night. Walking towards the pub, I'll admit I was nervous.
It is only once you've arrived and started talking to people that you remember how much fun real-life networking can be. Catching up with people, sharing current news, makes all the online networking that we do more real somehow. Face to face networking reminds us about how every other part of our networking life fits together.
I was also at the event last night as a representative of a spcial interest group, namely CDG. I was pleased that I managed to chat to a few people, including new professionals, about the group and the benefits of joining CILIP. The main criticism was that if people can go to events as non-members at only slightly more cost then members, what incentive is there to join? And I'm not sure about that really. Limiting events to members would remove a revenue source and make the group more elitist, but perhaps it would encourage membership. It is a risky strategy. I took the line that if you are a passive CILIP member then it is true that you do not get the most out of your subscription. You need to be actively engaged in order to fully be a part of a professional body. Everything that you experience as a committee member, the positive and the negative times, develop you both personally and professionally. And I think I even convinced one person to consider joining a committee, so my work there was certainly done!
Many thanks to the East of England CILIP branch for organising such a worthwhile event.
IRL - or In Real Life - networking is scary, much more difficult that online networking, because we actually have to put ourselves out there. So it was with no small amount of trepidation that I went to the cpd23 Thing 7 tweet-up last night. Walking towards the pub, I'll admit I was nervous.
It is only once you've arrived and started talking to people that you remember how much fun real-life networking can be. Catching up with people, sharing current news, makes all the online networking that we do more real somehow. Face to face networking reminds us about how every other part of our networking life fits together.
I was also at the event last night as a representative of a spcial interest group, namely CDG. I was pleased that I managed to chat to a few people, including new professionals, about the group and the benefits of joining CILIP. The main criticism was that if people can go to events as non-members at only slightly more cost then members, what incentive is there to join? And I'm not sure about that really. Limiting events to members would remove a revenue source and make the group more elitist, but perhaps it would encourage membership. It is a risky strategy. I took the line that if you are a passive CILIP member then it is true that you do not get the most out of your subscription. You need to be actively engaged in order to fully be a part of a professional body. Everything that you experience as a committee member, the positive and the negative times, develop you both personally and professionally. And I think I even convinced one person to consider joining a committee, so my work there was certainly done!
Many thanks to the East of England CILIP branch for organising such a worthwhile event.
Tuesday 19 July 2011
Online Networks, Networking and Netting an Opportunity
Thinking about online networks for Thing 6 got me thinking about the online networks in which I participate and why I take an active part in these communities. I tweet, I blog, I read and comment on other blogs. I am also an active member of Librarians as Teachers (LAT) and the LIS New Professionals Network (LISNPN) I am on LinkedIn and maintain a current profile. I do this because I enjoy being professionally linked in to the sector, to other professionals, to keep up to date with activity across sectors and to maintain an online profile.
Today I attended the LIS DREaM conference launch at the British Library. In our breakout session, a lively discussion took place on the topic of networking and sustaining collaboration. One of the questions raised concerned motivation: who is motivated to not only contribute to these online networks but also to lead the action in these networks? Any network needs motivated leaders who are able to rouse and inspire other members. Networks tend to come together due to a shared interest or area of expertise. For example, LAT concerns people across sectors involved in information skills teaching whereas LISNPN concerns people from all sectors but only if they happen to be a new professional. Are we able to communicate across sectors and stages of our careers? If we can do this, could we start to move to the next phase of cross-discipline networking?
There are formal and informal networks, online and in the real world. This got me thinking about the other networks that I am involved with, ones that don't happen in the online sphere but rather in the physical space.
I am a member of the Career Development Group committee. CDG is a network of professionals at all stages of their career from all sectors. I am a member of the German Studies Library Group, a group of library and information professionals working in some way with Germanic collections. I am an editor of CULIB, a newsletter for staff at the University of Cambridge . My conclusion is that networks are everywhere. We should not forget that, in this online digital age, not every network to which we belong will have an online space.
Which leads me on nicely to tomorrow night's CPD23 meet-up. We can network with each other in reality as well as online. True, online networking overcomes barriers of travel and cost. However, reality networking is crucial to development and must not be forgotten as an important tool.
Finally, today one delegate asked the conference how a network is expected to survive once there is no longer funding. Answers ranged from strong leadership to formalised sturctures. However, it is my honest opinion that networks do survive without funding, both formally and informally, online and offline. All we need is a group of committed individuals with vision and focus who support and inspire each other.
Today I attended the LIS DREaM conference launch at the British Library. In our breakout session, a lively discussion took place on the topic of networking and sustaining collaboration. One of the questions raised concerned motivation: who is motivated to not only contribute to these online networks but also to lead the action in these networks? Any network needs motivated leaders who are able to rouse and inspire other members. Networks tend to come together due to a shared interest or area of expertise. For example, LAT concerns people across sectors involved in information skills teaching whereas LISNPN concerns people from all sectors but only if they happen to be a new professional. Are we able to communicate across sectors and stages of our careers? If we can do this, could we start to move to the next phase of cross-discipline networking?
There are formal and informal networks, online and in the real world. This got me thinking about the other networks that I am involved with, ones that don't happen in the online sphere but rather in the physical space.
I am a member of the Career Development Group committee. CDG is a network of professionals at all stages of their career from all sectors. I am a member of the German Studies Library Group, a group of library and information professionals working in some way with Germanic collections. I am an editor of CULIB, a newsletter for staff at the University of Cambridge . My conclusion is that networks are everywhere. We should not forget that, in this online digital age, not every network to which we belong will have an online space.
Which leads me on nicely to tomorrow night's CPD23 meet-up. We can network with each other in reality as well as online. True, online networking overcomes barriers of travel and cost. However, reality networking is crucial to development and must not be forgotten as an important tool.
Finally, today one delegate asked the conference how a network is expected to survive once there is no longer funding. Answers ranged from strong leadership to formalised sturctures. However, it is my honest opinion that networks do survive without funding, both formally and informally, online and offline. All we need is a group of committed individuals with vision and focus who support and inspire each other.
Monday 18 July 2011
RSS and All That Jazz
This week in the cpd23 programme, we are covering Thing 4: current awareness.
I really don't have much to say about this one. I actively use Twitter.com in order to keep up to date professionally and I also follow some celebrity-type people. The debate as to whether a Twitter presence should be purely professional or whether it should show our rounded personalities has been had many times and will probably continue to be a topic of hot debate. For me, I walk a middle line. I tend to keep things professional but I am not averse to having an exchange with a fellow professional about their cat's odd habits. Twitter is primarily a way to keep up with breaking news and events within our profession.
RSS feeds have been a staple part of my professional life for many years now, although I tend not to use them for websites of personal interest as I enjoy browsing in my leisure time. Professionally, the amount of sites, journals and blogs that I try to keep up to date with would only be possible through RSS feeds. It is a great invention. We can pull everything together into one reader. We can even categorise our reader to make it even more useful. And yet, I still have 400 unread items in my RSS reader. Whilst it is indispensable to have the technology to gather everything in one place, there is still the problem of having the time to sit down and read everything!
Pushnote is something to which I'll return at a later date.
I really don't have much to say about this one. I actively use Twitter.com in order to keep up to date professionally and I also follow some celebrity-type people. The debate as to whether a Twitter presence should be purely professional or whether it should show our rounded personalities has been had many times and will probably continue to be a topic of hot debate. For me, I walk a middle line. I tend to keep things professional but I am not averse to having an exchange with a fellow professional about their cat's odd habits. Twitter is primarily a way to keep up with breaking news and events within our profession.
RSS feeds have been a staple part of my professional life for many years now, although I tend not to use them for websites of personal interest as I enjoy browsing in my leisure time. Professionally, the amount of sites, journals and blogs that I try to keep up to date with would only be possible through RSS feeds. It is a great invention. We can pull everything together into one reader. We can even categorise our reader to make it even more useful. And yet, I still have 400 unread items in my RSS reader. Whilst it is indispensable to have the technology to gather everything in one place, there is still the problem of having the time to sit down and read everything!
Pushnote is something to which I'll return at a later date.
Wednesday 6 July 2011
I no haz Brand, I haz a presence
The concept of "brand" to me conjures up many things, none of which I would like to apply to me as a person. I have an online presence, an online space. Whilst I understand the concept of having a stable "brand identity" across all platforms used, I can't say that I feel it is necessary.
We are all people who have at least two sides to our personalities: our professional self and our personal self. Some of us are mothers or fathers, we are all someone's son or daughter, we could be a Brown Owl or a hockey coach. We all have different interests and different obsessions. We watch television programmes, we consider ourselves to have a political position, we read books, we travel to different places, we like different colours - I could go on. The point is that we are all different multi-faceted people who cannot be reduced down to a brand which attempts to encapsulate our entire personalities in two or three concepts. And I do not want to be. Of course we have to be careful and mindful when we post anything online. We can do this whilst retaining our complex individuality.
I have an online presence, yes. But a brand? I don't think I have got a brand. My blog's template represents my love of inky colours, however it also represents the fact that only these colours were available in this template on Blogger. My twitter name was chosen because I really like the name Lottie although no one calls me that in the "real" world despite my attempts to encourage people to use it a few years ago. It never caught on - it just sounded odd in reality. My various professional profiles all tend to say the same things about my professional interests. My Facebook is my only truly personal space online where I shed my professional skin and communicate solely with friends. My cat however is mentioned everywhere as it is impossible for me to separate any facet of myself from his presence (he would get grumpy and pull a LoL-cat pose...)
So essentially these are my feelings about brands. In theory, I can see why it is a helpful idea. Yet the reduction of the complex individual to a couple of specific traits troubles me. I'll stick with my online presence.
We are all people who have at least two sides to our personalities: our professional self and our personal self. Some of us are mothers or fathers, we are all someone's son or daughter, we could be a Brown Owl or a hockey coach. We all have different interests and different obsessions. We watch television programmes, we consider ourselves to have a political position, we read books, we travel to different places, we like different colours - I could go on. The point is that we are all different multi-faceted people who cannot be reduced down to a brand which attempts to encapsulate our entire personalities in two or three concepts. And I do not want to be. Of course we have to be careful and mindful when we post anything online. We can do this whilst retaining our complex individuality.
I have an online presence, yes. But a brand? I don't think I have got a brand. My blog's template represents my love of inky colours, however it also represents the fact that only these colours were available in this template on Blogger. My twitter name was chosen because I really like the name Lottie although no one calls me that in the "real" world despite my attempts to encourage people to use it a few years ago. It never caught on - it just sounded odd in reality. My various professional profiles all tend to say the same things about my professional interests. My Facebook is my only truly personal space online where I shed my professional skin and communicate solely with friends. My cat however is mentioned everywhere as it is impossible for me to separate any facet of myself from his presence (he would get grumpy and pull a LoL-cat pose...)
So essentially these are my feelings about brands. In theory, I can see why it is a helpful idea. Yet the reduction of the complex individual to a couple of specific traits troubles me. I'll stick with my online presence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)