School of Information
and Library Science
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
INLS 881 – Research Issues and Questions
[Last Updated: 2018-08-26]
Fall 2018
Meeting Time: 2:00-4:45
Location: Manning 303
Credits: 3
Instructor: Cal Lee
Office: Manning 212
Phone: 919-962-7024
E-Mail: callee [at][ils - DOT - unc DOT - edu]
Office Hours: By appointment
Course Web Site: http://sakai.unc.edu/
COURSE DESCRIPTION
Overview. Intensive and systematic investigation of the
fundamental ideas in information and library science. Exploration and
discussion in seminar format.
The goal of this year-long course is to prepare students to become
productive scholars. Students will be introduced to the range of research
questions and issues that arise in the field of information and library
science, with particular emphasis on the research interests of the current
SILS faculty and doctoral students. The role of both theory and prior
empirical research in generating research questions will be discussed. The
variety of methods available to conduct ILS research will be reviewed.
The class members will participate in reading, reviewing, analyzing, and
discussing, in some detail, relevant research literature in six particular
facets of information and library science:
- Describing and organizing information,
- Curation, management, and preservation of materials,
- Information services and the organizations that provide
them,
- Information needs, information seeking, and information
sources,
- Information retrieval systems, interactive information
retrieval, and human-computer interaction, and
- Information use and sharing, with special emphasis on
scholarly communication.
As we explore each of these areas, you will be asked to
consider how your own research interests interact with them. Is your
research interest fully included in one of these areas? Is it a
combination of two or more of the areas? Is it related to one or more of
these areas, but also brings in the perspectives of other disciplines?
Through our discussion and the assignments, you will have the opportunity
to further develop your own interests in relation to the larger field of
information and library science.
A second goal of this seminar is to assist the participants in being
successful as doctoral students at SILS and as future scholars. This goal
will be addressed by providing opportunities for you to develop particular
research-related knowledge and skills, particularly in the following
areas:
- Literature searching, managing your literature, and writing a
literature review,
- Peer reviewing, and receiving and giving feedback,
- Project management,
- Research ethics and working with human
subjects/participants,
- Presenting your work in various formats (orally, in a
poster, in a paper),
- Collaboration, including interdisciplinary
collaboration,
- Proposal writing, and
- Data management.
Rationale and relationship to the current curriculum. It is
required that students take INLS 881 and INLS 882 in consecutive semesters
at or near the beginning of their doctoral studies. The discussions in
this seminar will help students identify research questions of particular
interest to them and will provide a context within which initial
explorations of those questions can be conducted.
Special Needs: If you feel that you may need an
accommodation for a disability or have any other special need, please make
an appointment to discuss this with me. I will best be able to address
special circumstances if I know about them early in the semester. My office
hours and contact information are listed at the beginning of this syllabus.
Diversity Statement
"In support of the University’s diversity goals and the mission of the
School of Information and Library Science, SILS embraces diversity as an
ethical and societal value. We broadly define diversity to include race,
gender, national origin, ethnicity, religion, social class, age, sexual
orientation and physical and learning ability. As an academic community
committed to preparing our graduates to be leaders in an increasingly
multicultural and global society we strive to:
- Ensure inclusive leadership, policies and practices;
- Integrate diversity into the curriculum and research;
- Foster a mutually respectful intellectual environment in which diverse
opinions are valued;
- Recruit traditionally underrepresented groups of students, faculty and
staff; and
- Participate in outreach to underserved groups in the State.
The statement represents a commitment of resources to the development and
maintenance of an academic environment that is open, representative,
reflective and committed to the concepts of equity and fairness."
~The faculty of the School of Information and Library Science (http://sils.unc.edu/about/diversity)
NOTE ON WRITING IN YOUR OWN WORDS
It is very important that you both attribute your sources and avoid
excessive use of quotes (see separate document called "In Your Own
Words"). Be aware of the University of North Carolina policy on
plagiarism. Your written work must be original. Ask if you have any doubts
about what this means.
All cases of plagiarism (unattributed quotation or paraphrasing) of
anyone else's work, whether from someone else's answers to homework or
from published materials, will be officially reported and dealt with
according to UNC policies (Instrument of Student Judicial Governance,
Section II.B.1. and III.D.2, http://instrument.unc.edu).
EVALUATION AND ASSIGNMENTS
The assignments for the two-semester seminar aim to foster your growth as
a scholar and researcher in information and library science, through
participation in discussions, reviews of current issues and the relevant
literature, and development of research questions and proposals. They
include:
Seminar participation and contributions (15%)
You are expected to complete reading assignments prior to the class in
which they will be discussed. I will be expecting you to be an active
participant in class, remembering that the quality of your comments and
questions is as important as the quantity. Other contributions to the
seminar are also important, such as sharing interesting articles you have
read, things you have learned, or questions to which you do not know the
answer. As a researcher, you are expected to express opinions, as well as
the reasons and evidence for them.
Seminal works; inspirational works/events (5%)
As we read and discuss important topics in information and library
science this year, we will have the task of exploring each area’s
underlying theories, the methods used, and current work in the area. We’ll
increase our exposure to these research areas through your contributions.
Each semester, each student will be expected to select, read, and report
on (a) one seminal work and (b) one inspirational work or event, in the
context of a class discussion.
Seminal works
A seminal work is one that initiates a new area of research – it might
propose a different way of understanding some phenomenon and/or be a
ground-breaking empirical study. In all cases, it was work that later
scholars built upon fruitfully. For the purposes of this assignment, any
article that was published prior to 1998, that has been cited more than 50
times, and that you believe was important to the development of the field
is eligible.
Read a seminal article of your choosing. Are there issues or questions
from the literature we discussed that built on this work or were informed
by it? In what way is this article still important for current research?
Be prepared to give a brief, informal summary of the selected article and
your thoughts and ideas about it (5 minutes, no slides). You should report
on the seminar work during the section of the course to which it is
pertinent. Send the article citation to the class list before the class
session in which you will present it, as well as posting the full text in
the Resources section of our Sakai site.
Inspirational works/events
An inspirational article or event may help you develop or understand a
research question, make you think about something you thought you
understood in a new way, serve as the basis for a line of research, model
a particular research method, drive you to demonstrate that the
author/speaker is wrong, or be an example of excellent research.
Select your inspirational work or event (it could be an article, a book
chapter, a web site, a lecture, a video, or a conference presentation). As
soon as possible after you’ve identified the inspirational work or event,
you will share it with us in class.
Please notify me when you’re ready to tell us about this work or event —
why you find this work or event inspirational, and how it is helping you
or will help you with your work. (Note that I am not asking you to
summarize it.) Send the work’s citation or a link to the event’s website
to the class list before the class session in which you will present it,
as well as posting the full text (if applicable) in the Resources section
of our Sakai site.
Evaluation criteria
This assignment will be evaluated in terms of the selection of the
works/event (i.e., it was important for the field and relevant to the
topic at hand), the clarity of your summation and analysis, and the
originality of your ideas about it. This assignment (seminal work and
inspirational work/event combined) will account for 5% of your grade each
semester.
Looking outward: Understanding the field in relation to your own
research interests (60%)
Throughout the course, we will examine current research questions
(including current studies, relevant theories, and applicable methods) in
six areas:
- describing and organizing information;
- curation, data management, and preservation;
- information services and the organizations that provide them;
- information needs, seeking, and sources;
- information retrieval (IR), interactive IR, and human-computer
interaction; and
- information use and sharing, with particular emphasis on scholarly
communication.
You will be asked to conduct an analytical literature review in each of
these areas (three in the fall and three in the spring), with a focus on
how your own research interests are related to the area. In each review,
you should focus on the literature in a particular area that connects with
your own research interests.
Milestones
You will write a brief description (about 1 paragraph) focused on the
particular facet of our field that the review will cover, along with how
your own research interests connect with that facet of the field. You
will then informally discuss your work with your classmates.
Schedule of due dates
Describing and organizing information
Brief description - October 2 at 2pm
Informal discussion in class - October 2
Final product - October 23 at 2pm
Curation, data management, and preservation
Brief description - November 6 at 2pm
Informal discussion in class - November 6
Final product - November 13 at 2pm
Information services and the organizations that provide them
Brief description - November 20
Informal discussion in class - November 20
Final product - December 4 at 2pm
Evaluation criteria
Each review should be approximately 8-12 pages (single-spaced). While the
number of citations included in each will vary, each review should
incorporate at least 20 references. (You’ll likely read/examine more than 50
works for each review, in preparation for writing it.)
The criteria used to evaluate each of your analytical reviews will be
similar to the criteria routinely applied to scholarly literature reviews.
These include the significance of the question/problem to the field, the
adequacy of the citations to previous work, the validity and logic of your
analysis of that literature, the originality of your perspective on past
work and its relationship to your own interests, and the organization,
clarity, and style of your presentation.
Looking inward: Developing your own research interests in relation to
specific aspects of the field (20%) [Due: December 11 at 5pm]
In each of the reviews just described, you are considering a particular
aspect of the field of information and library science, and how your
research interests are positioned in relation to that aspect of the field.
In other words, you’re taking the broad view and positioning your interests
within it. In this assignment, you’ll focus on your own research interests
and try to specify them more clearly, still keeping in mind their position
within the field. In other words, you’ll take the specific view based on
your own interests, and discuss them in relation to what you’ve learned
about the broader field. As you consider the various things that you’ve
learned about these three areas in the first semester, your own interests
will likely evolve.
For this assignment, you will write an analytical literature review focused
very specifically on your own research interests. In addition, you will
include a brief prospectus for a study that you’d like to conduct as a
preliminary look at your research area. The introduction and literature
review of the paper should provide a rationale for conducting the study; the
prospectus should provide a brief explanation of how the study will be
carried out.
Evaluation criteria
The final paper should be approximately 10-12 pages, single-spaced, plus
references; the prospectus portion should be approximately 1-2 pages of the
12.
The criteria used to evaluate your final product will be similar to the
criteria routinely applied to research proposals. These include the
significance of the question/problem to the field, the adequacy of the
citations to previous work, the feasibility, validity and logic of your
plans for a study, and the organization, clarity, and style of your
presentation.
Note: (S) = Skills, (T) = Topic
Week 1 (August 21) - Course Introduction
(S) - Being a doctoral student and beyond
Week 2 (August 28) - Scope of Library and Information Science (T)
Assigned Readings:
Bates, Marcia. "The Invisible Substrate of Information Science." Journal
of the American Society for Information Science 50, no. 12 (1999):
1043-50. https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(1999)50:12<1043::AID-ASI1>3.0.CO;2-X
Buckland, Michael. "What Kind of Science Can Information Science Be?" Journal
of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 63,
no. 1 (2012): 1-7. https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.1002/asi.21656
Saracevic, Tefko. "Information Science." Journal of the American
Society for Information Science 50, no. 12 (1999): 1051-63. https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(1999)50:12<1051::AID-ASI2>3.0.CO;2-Z
Tuomaala, Otto, Kalervo Järvelin, and Pertti Vakkari. "Evolution of
Library and Information Science, 1965–2005: Content Analysis of Journal
Articles." Journal of the Association for Information Science and
Technology 65, no. 7 (2014): 1446-62.https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.1002/asi.23034 (Focus on the results reported in
Tables 2, 4, 5, 11 (or Appendix C), and 14, and the discussions of them.
Skim the rest.)
Week 3 (September 4) - Anatomy of a Research Question (S)
Assigned Readings:
Alter, Steven, and Alan R. Dennis. "Selecting Research Topics: Personal
Experiences and Speculations for the Future." Communications of the
Association for Information Systems 8 (2002). [Sakai] Read the
first sections, through the presentation of the framework; skim the two
authors’ personal stories as you wish; you can skip section V.
Leek, Jeffery T., and Roger D. Peng. "What Is the Question?" Science
347, no. 6228 (2015): 1314-15. http://science.sciencemag.org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/content/347/6228/1314
This brief article demonstrates that not only information and library
science struggles with formulating research questions. Consider it in
relation to questions you might pursue in your research.
Wildemuth, Barbara M. Applications of Social Research Methods to
Questions in Information and Library Science. Westport, CT:
Libraries Unlimited, 2017. [SILS Reserves – Z669.7 .W55 2017] Read
Chapter 2 (p.11-20) [available in Sakai along with table of contents]
and at least one of the other chapters in Part II of the book. Consider
possible sources for research questions in your area of interest.
Week 4 (September 11) - Work-Life Balance, Health and Wellness (S)
Assigned Readings:
Aguilar, Stephen. "We
are not impostors." Inside Higher Ed. April 13, 2015. https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2015/04/13/essay-how-graduate-students-can-fight-impostor-syndrome
Levy, David M. "No Time to Think: Reflections on Information Technology
and Contemplative Scholarship." Ethics and Information Technology
9, no. 4 (2007): 237-49. https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.1007/s10676-007-9142-6
Week 5 (September 18) - No Class
Week 6 (September 25) - Representing/describing knowledge objects (T);
Conducting a Literature Review Search (S)
Assigned Readings:
Blair, David C. "Information Retrieval and the Philosophy of Language."
Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 37, no. 1 (2003): 3-50.
https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.1002/aris.1440370102
This review provides an introduction to and overview of description as a
problem of language and meaning. It also connects description with
information retrieval concerns.
Furner, Jonathan. "Frsad and the Ontology of Subjects of Works." Cataloging
and Classification Quarterly 50, no. 5-7 (2012): 494-516. https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.1080/01639374.2012.681269
This article concentrates on representing the subject of a work. Focus
your reading on pages 494-501 and 510-513. consider your own position on
the ontology of aboutness.
Krathwohl, David R., and Smith, Nick L. "The description of the problem." In
How to Prepare a Dissertation Proposal: Suggestions for Students in
Education and the Social and Behavioral Sciences, 45-74. Syracuse, NY:
Syracuse University Press, 2005. [SILS reserves – LB2369 .K723 2005; Sakai].Read
pages 45-52, focusing on the problem description. We’ll be working on
search strategies during class, so you don’t need to read beyond page 52.
Locke, Lawrence F., Spirduso, Waneen W., and Silverman, Stephen J. "Content
of the Proposal: Important Considerations." In Proposals that Work: A
Guide for Planning Dissertations and Grant Proposals, 63-90. Los
Angeles: Sage, 2014. [SILS reserves – Q180.55 .P7 L814p 2014; Sakai]
Olson, Hope A. "The Power to Name: Representation in Library Catalogs." Signs
26, no. 3 (2001): 639–668. https://www-jstor-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/stable/3175535
Wilson, Patrick. Two Kinds of Power: An Essay on Bibliographic Control.
Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1968. [SILS
reserves - Z674 .C3 v. 5 v.5; Sakai] Chapter 1: The bibliographic universe;
Chapter 2: Describing and exploiting.
Week 7 (October 2) - Organizing knowledge objects (T); Reading
Literature Reviews (S)
Assigned Readings:
Boote, David N., and Penny Belle. "Scholars before Researchers: On the
Centrality of the Dissertation Literature Review in Research Preparation."
Educational Researcher 34, no. 6 (2005): 3-15. https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.3102/0013189X034006003
This article is based in education research, but almost all of it also
applies directly to research in ILS. Read the first sections carefully,
through the first column of page 9. Then you can skip to the section,
Refining our conception of literature reviewing. You can skip the final
section, Looking forward.
Bowker, Geoffrey C., and Susan Leigh Star. Sorting Things Out:
Classification and Its Consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1999.
[SILS Reserves – BD175 .B68 1999; Sakai]
- Introduction: To classify is human, p1-32 (read p1-16 only)
- Chapter 10, Why classifications matter, p.319-326
- These two sections provide a rationale for classification and
its importance.
Clifford, James. "Four Northwest Coast Museums: Travel Reflections." In
Exhibiting Cultures: The Politics and Poetics of Museum Display,
edited by Ivan Karp and Steven Lavine, 212-54. Washington, DC: Smithsonian
Press, 1991. [SILS reserves - AM151 .E94 1991 c. 3; Sakai]
Cvetkovich, Ann. An Archive of Feelings: Trauma, Sexuality, and
Lesbian Public Culture. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2003.
Ch. 7, 239-271. https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.1215/9780822384434
Mai, Jens-Erik. "The Modernity of Classification." Journal of
Documentation 67, no. 4 (2011): 710-730. https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.1108/00220411111145061
Wilson, Patrick. Two Kinds of Power: An Essay on Bibliographic
Control. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press,
1968. [SILS reserves - Z674 .C3 v. 5 v.5; Sakai] Chapter 5, Subjects and
the sense of position
Week 8 (October 9) - Personal Information Management (T); Scientific
Data Management (T); Managing the Literature you Find (S)
Assigned Readings:
Ailamaki, Anastasia, Verena Kantere, and Debabrata Dash. "Managing
Scientific Data." Communications of the ACM 53, no. 6 (2010): 68-78.
https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.1145/1743546.1743568
Ekbia, Hamid, Michael Mattioli, Inna Kouper, G. Arave, Ali Ghazinejad,
Timothy Bowman, Venkata Ratandeep Suri, et al. "Big Data, Bigger Dilemmas: A
Critical Review." Journal of the Association for Information Science and
Technology 66, no. 8 (2015): 1523-45. https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.1002/asi.23294
Good, Katie Day. "From Scrapbook to Facebook: A History of Personal
Media Assemblage and Archives." New Media & Society 15, no. 4
(2013): 557-73. https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.1177/1461444812458432
Jones, William. The Future of Personal Information Management, Part
I: Our Information, Always and Forever. Synthesis Lectures on
Information Concepts, Retrieval, and Services, Lecture #21. San Rafael,
CA: Morgan & Claypool, 2012. https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.2200/S00411ED1V01Y201203ICR021
Read Chapter 2, The Basics of PIM. Jones examines the basic concepts of
information, personal, and managing/management.
Jones, William. Transforming Technologies to Manage Our Information:
The Future of Personal Information Management, Part 2. Synthesis
Lectures on Information Concepts, Retrieval, and Services, Lecture #28.
San Rafael, CA: Morgan & Claypool, 2014. https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.2200/S00532ED1V01Y201308ICR028
Read Chapter 9, PIM transformed and transforming.
Marshall, Catherine.C. "Rethinking Personal Digital Archiving, Part 1:
Four Challenges from the Field." D-Lib Magazine 14, no. 3/4
(2008). http://www.dlib.org/dlib/march08/marshall/03marshall-pt1.html
Marshall, Catherine.C. "Rethinking Personal Digital Archiving, Part 2:
Implications for Services, Applications, and Institutions.." D-Lib
Magazine 14, no. 3/4 (2008). http://www.dlib.org/dlib/march08/marshall/03marshall-pt2.html
Week 9 (October 16) - Locating your Research Interests within this Area;
Two Critical Aspects of Scholarly Work: Theory and Methods (S)
Assigned Readings:
Case, Donald O. "Metatheories, perspectives and paradigms" (section
8.1), and "Theories" (section 8.2). In Looking for Information: A
Survey of Research on Information Seeking, Needs, and Behavior. 4th ed.,
178-186. Amsterdam: Academic Press, 2016. [SILS reserves – ZA3075
.C36 2016; Sakai] Case
provides an introduction to theories and their role in information and
library science.
Halverson, Christine A. "Activity Theory and Distributed Cognition: Or
What Does CSCW Need to DO with Theories? Computer Supported
Cooperative Work (CSCW) 11, no. 1-2 (2002): 243–267. http://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015298005381
[Sakai] (Read through the end of section 2 – “Why Theory?”)
Truex, Duane,
Jonny Holmström, and Mark Keil. "Theorizing in Information Systems
Research: A Reflexive Analysis of the Adaptation of Theory in
Information Systems Research." Journal of the Association for
Information Systems 7, no. 12 (2006): 797-821. https://auth.lib.unc.edu/ezproxy_auth.php?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=24979089&site=ehost-live&scope=site This article focuses on
the challenges of importing a theory from another discipline into your
own work. Since this practice is fairly common within information and
library science, we’ll want to become familiar with the possible
pitfalls of this approach.
Week 10 (October 23) - Current Research in Archives and Curation (T);
Writing a Literature Review (S)
Assigned Readings:
DCC Curation LIfecycle Model. Digital Curation Centre. 2014-2015. http://www.dcc.ac.uk/resources/curation-lifecycle-model.
Review the components of this model, with an eye toward identifying
research questions related to each component.
Flinn, Andrew, Mary Stevens, and Elizabeth Shepherd. "Whose Memories, Whose
Archives? Independent Community Archives, Autonomy and the Mainstream." Archival
Science 9, no. 1-2 (2009): 71-86. https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.1007/s10502-009-9105-2
Lee, Christopher A. "A Framework for Contextual Information in Digital
Collections." Journal of Documentation 67, no. 1 (2011): 95-143.
https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.1108/00220411111105470
Read the first five sections (p95-115).
Lunenburg, Fred C., and Irby, Beverly J. "Writing the literature Review
Chapter." In Writing a Successful Thesis or Dissertation: Tips and
Strategies for Students in the Social and Behavioral Sciences,
137-164. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2008. [SILS reserves – LB2369
.L814 2008; Sakai]
Sutherland, Tonia. “Making A Killing’: On Race, Ritual, and
(Re)Membering in Digital Culture.” Preservation, Digital Technology
and Culture 46, no. 1 (2017): 32-40. [Sakai]
Todd-Diaz, Ashley, and Sheila O'Hare. "If You Build It, Will They Come?
A Review of Digital Collection User Studies." In Annual Review of
Cultural Heritage Informatics, 2012-2013, edited by Samantha K.
Hastings, 257-275. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, 2014. [SILS Reserves –
CC135 .A56 2014; Sakai]
Webster, Jane, and Richard T. Watson. "Analyzing the past to prepare for
the future: Writing a literature review." MIS Quarterly 26, no. 2
(2002): xiii-xxiii. https://www-jstor-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/stable/4132319
Yakel, Elizabeth, Ixchel Faniel, Adam Kriesberg, and Ayoung Yoon. "Trust
in Digital Repositories." International Journal of Digital Curation
8, no. 1 (2013): 143-156. https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.2218/ijdc.v8i1.251
Week 11 (October 30) - Information and Health (T); Peer Reviewing (S)
Assigned Readings:
Costello, Kaitlin Light. "Social Relevance Assessments for Virtual
Worlds: Interpersonal Source Selection in the Context of Chronic Illness."
Journal of Documentation 73, no. 6 (2017): 1209-27. https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.1108/JD-07-2016-0096
Donovan, Stephen K. "How to be an Effective Peer Reviewer: Some Personal
Thoughts." Journal of Scholarly Publishing 46, no. 1 (2014):
89-95. https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp.46.1.005
[Sakai] Donovan provides concrete advice for those asked to review a
research paper for a journal.
Greyson, Devon L., and Joy L. Johnson. "The Role of Information in
Health Behavior: A Scoping Study and Discussion of Major Public Health
Models." Journal of the Association for Information Science and
Technology 67, no. 12 (2016): 2831-41.
Kellermann, Arthur L., and Jones, Spencer S. "What it will Take to
Achieve the As-Yet-Unfulfilled Promises of Health Information Technology."
Health Affairs 32, no. 1 (2013): 63-68. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2012.0693
Lee, Carole J., Cassidy R. Sugimoto, Guo Zhang, and Blaise Cronin. "Bias
in Peer Review." Journal of the American Society for Information
Science and Technology 64, no. 1 (2013), 2-17. https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.1002/asi.22784
The introductory and concluding sections of this article will give you
an overview of how peer reviewing fits into the scholarly publishing
process. Read p. 2-4 and 10-13; quickly skim the section on bias, the
main focus of the article.
Romanelli, Elaine. "Becoming a Reviewer: Lessons Somewhat Painfully
Learned." In Rhythms of Academic Life: Personal Accounts of Careers in
Academia, edited by Peter J. Frost and M. Susan Taylor, 263-73.
Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1996. http://sk.sagepub.com.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/books/rhythms-of-academic-life/n26.xml
[SILS reserves – LB1778.2 .R59 1996; Sakai]
Week 12 (November 6) - Information Technology Services (T); Information
Professions and the Workforce (T)
Assigned Readings:
Gallagher, Kevin P., Kate M. Kaiser, Judith C. Simon, Cynthia M. Beath, and
Tim Goles. "The Requisite Variety of Skills for IT Professionals."
Communications of the ACM 53, no. 6 (2010): 144-148. https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.1145/1743546.1743584
Maglio, Paul P., and Jim Spohrer. "Fundamentals of Service Science." Journal
of the Academy of Marketing Science 36, no. 1 (2008): 18-20. https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.1007/s11747-007-0058-9
Moore, Reagan, and Barbara Wildemuth. "Information Trends: Summary of the
Symposium Discussion." In Information Professionals 2050: Educational
Possibilities and Pathways, edited by Gary Marchionini and Barbara M. Moran,
145-54. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, School
of Information & Library Science,, 2012.
http://sils.unc.edu/sites/default/files/news/Information-Professionals-2050.pdf
Saracevic, Tefko, and Paul B. Kantor. "Studying the Value of Library and
Information Services. Part I. Establishing a Theoretical Framework." Journal
of the American Society for Information Science 48, no. 6 (1997):
527-542. https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199706)48:6<527::AID-ASI6>3.0.CO;2-W
Week 13 (November 13) - Locating your Research Interests within this
Area (T); Project Management (S)
Assigned Readings:
Gosling, Patricia, and Lambertus D. Noordam. Mastering Your PhD:
Survival and Success in the Doctoral Years and Beyond. Berlin:
Springer, 2006. https://link-springer-com.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/book/10.1007%2F978-3-642-15847-6
[Sakai]
- Chapter 3, Setting goals and objectives, p11-19
- Chapter 6, Charting your progress month by month, p37-42
- Chapter 13, Celebrate your success, p101-104
Lauriol, Jacques. "Proposals for Designing and Controlling a DoctoRral
esearch Project in Management Sciences." Electronic Journal of Business
Research Methods 4, no. 1 (2006): 31-38. http://www.ejbrm.com/volume4/issue1
Week 14 (November 20) - Information organizations and their management
(T); Information behaviors within organizational contexts (T); Diversity,
inclusion, and cultural competency (S)
Assigned Readings:
Cooke, Nicole A., Miriam E. Sweeney, and Safiya Umoja Noble. "Social
Justice as Topic and Tool: An Attempt to Transform an LIS Curriculum and
Culture." Library Quarterly 86, no. 1 (2016): 107-124. https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.1086/684147
Models in LIS research and teaching that continue to perpetuate white
privilege, but that also have potential for positive transformation.
Gilstrap, Donald L. "A Complex Systems Framework for Research on
Leadership and Organizational Dynamics in Academic Libraries." portal:
Libraries and the Academy 9, no. 1 (2009): 57-77. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/256655/pdf
Hudson, David James. "On 'Diversity' as Anti-Racism in Library and
Information Studies: A Critique." Journal of Critical Library and
Information Studies 1, no. 1 (2017). https://doi.org/10.24242/jclis.v1i1.6
Jones, Matthew R., and Helena Karsten. "Giddens’s Structuration Theory
and Information Systems Research." MIS Quarterly 32, no. 1 (2008):
127-157. https://www-jstor-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/stable/25148831 Structuration theory has been
relatively influential in information systems research, so we should get
a taste of that work. Read these sections: Structuration Theory
(p129-130), Table 1 (p135), and The Use of Structuration Theory in IS
Research (p.138-142). If you have time, skim the rest, too.
Overall, Patricia Montiel. "Cultural Competence: A Conceptual Framework
for Library and Information Science Professionals." Library Quarterly
79, no. 2 (2009), 175-204. https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.1086/597080
Skim as much of this article as you can. Focus your reading on the
framework itself, pages 190-198.
Weick, Karl.E., Kathleen M. Sutcliffe, and David Obstfeld. "Organizing
and the Process of Sensemaking." Organization Science 16, no. 4
(2005): 409-421. https://www-jstor-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/stable/25145979
Weick’s work on sensemaking, in contrast to Dervin’s theory, takes an
organizational view. Read at least the introduction and first section
(p.409-413). If you have time, review the other sections of the paper,
too.
Winter, Susan, Nicholas Berente, James Howison, and Brian Butler.
"Beyond the Organizational ‘Container’: Conceptualizing 21st-Century
Sociotechnical Work." Information and Organization 24, no. 4
(2014): 250-269. https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2014.10.003
The sociotechnical systems (STS) approach is often used to
conceptualize information system design and implementation. Read
sections 1-2 (p.251-258) and more if you have a chance.
Week 15 (November 27) - Professional ethics (T); Information policy (T);
Locating your research interests within the areas of information services
and the organizations that provide them
Assigned Readings:
Gorman, Michael. "History and philosophy." In Our Enduring Values
Revisited: Librarianship in an Ever-Changing World, 23-38. Chicago:
ALA Editions, 2015. [SILS Reserves – Z716.4 .G673 2015]
Holt, Jennifer., and Steven Malčić. "The Privacy Ecosystem: Regulating
Digital Identity in the United States and European Union." Journal of
Information Policy 5 (2015): 155-178. https://www-jstor-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/stable/10.5325/jinfopoli.5.2015.0155
Differing regulatory strategies for governing privacy in digital space
(i.e., the cloud) have been taken in the European Union and the United
States, and are compared here.
Jaeger, Paul T., and John Carlo Bertot. "Transparency and Technological
Change: Ensuring Equal and Sustained Public Access to Government
Information." Government Information Quarterly 27, no. 4 (2010): 371-76.
https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.1016/j.giq.2010.05.003
E-government and social media services may be seen as a means to make
government policymaking more accessible to citizens; this article
explores the challenges of this approach.
Richards, N. M., & King, J. H. (2014). Big data ethics. Wake Forest
Law Review. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2384174
Choose 2 of the 3:
Week 16 (December 4) - Research ethics, including research with human
subjects (S); Reflections on what we’ve learned so far
Assigned Readings:
Allen, Gove N., Nicholas L. Ball, and H. Jeff Smith. "Information
Systems Research Behaviors: What Are the Normative Standards?". MIS
Quarterly 35, no. 3 (2011): 533-51. https://www-jstor-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/stable/23042795
This article reports on a study of AIS members and their ethical
reasoning related to research. Read pages 533-545. We’ll speculate about
whether the survey results would be different if it had been conducted
among members of our own professional associations.
The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection
of Human Subjects of Research. Office of the Secretary, The National
Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and
Behavioral Research. April 18, 1979. http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/belmont.html.This
brief report is the basis for most of our IRB regulations to date.
Locke, Lawrence F., Spirduso, Waneen W., and Silverman, Stephen J.
"Doing the right thing: 'The habit of truth.'" In Proposals that Work:
A Guide for Planning Dissertations and Grant Proposals, 25-40. Los
Angeles: Sage, 2014. [SILS reserves – Q180.55 .P7 L814p 2014; Sakai] This
chapter discusses the ethical issues that arise during both the process
of conducting research and the process of writing it up and publishing
it.
A guide to the IRB process. http://ohre.unc.edu/guide_to_irb.php.
- Complete the Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative online
training course for human subjects research, linked from
http://research.unc.edu/offices/human-research-ethics/getting-started/training/.
To conduct human subjects research at UNC, you need to be familiar
with these resources and complete the required training module.
I would like to express my gratitude to Barbara Wildemuth and Amelia
Gibson for sharing materials from earlier iterations of this course. This
syllabus builds directly from theirs.