ACRL STS Research Committee Science and Technology Section

Feature Paper Submission 2 (Extended Call)

  • 1.  Feature Paper Submission 2 (Extended Call)

    Posted Feb 12, 2010 07:56 AM

    Assessing the Information Needs of Computer Scientists and Engineers

    This study was the first phase of a multi-phase study to assess and provide for the information needs of the Engineering and Computer Science Faculty at the XXX in the Digital Age.  The objective of this phase was to obtain an in-depth understanding of how faculty members currently obtain information and thus influence students, and what role the library could have to facilitate the information flow. No previous assessment had been done. The study included new untenured faculty, tenured faculty and department heads.  The method chosen for this phase was a series of focus groups led by a trained facilitator and unbiased recorder.  Through the creative process of listening and sharing of experiences ten major issues were identified:  1)  gateway to information has migrated to the library and the internet;  2) library, book collection, and  the online catalog were underutilized;  3)  more subject databases were needed;   4) accessibility was more important than relevance;  5)  free online databases were heavily utilized;   6) printed journals and books were obsolete;   7) improved communications with faculty were needed;  8) traditional academic interlibrary loan policies were limiting;  9) open access was important;  and 10) increase in interdisciplinary scholarly research was expected.  Conclusions  recommend that librarians:  1) acknowledge they do not control the information gateway; 2) collaborate and communicate more with faculty; 3) increase information literacy efforts; 4) envision and prepare for future disruptive technologies, like a Google search charge; and 5) plan for second phase of study which includes questionnaires with quantifiable results.

  • 2.  RE: Feature Paper Submission 2 (Extended Call)

    Posted Feb 16, 2010 10:47 AM

    I think this has potential for a short paper. The researcher has completed one phase of the study, and would benefit from feedback from peers on where to go with the second phase.

    - Lindsay

  • 3.  RE: Feature Paper Submission 2 (Extended Call)

    Posted Feb 19, 2010 11:58 AM

    Because this is just phase one maybe this should be a short paper??;  however, I think this methodology has been well enough developed that it could be a long paper just talking about the methodology which is extensive and would be of benefit to many.


  • 4.  RE: Feature Paper Submission 2 (Extended Call)

    Posted Feb 19, 2010 12:43 PM

    This is my second favorite among the new feature paper submissions. 

    I find it difficult to decide whether I prefer this or feature submission 1.  I might enjoy this presentation more than the medical education presentation.  I'd enjoy hearing the reports of focus group discussions. 

    But the medical education presentation is in a way more practical, since it deals with a problem that all librarians face, especially science librarians.  More important than practicality by itself is that practical motivation tends to push people toward good research. 

  • 5.  RE: Feature Paper Submission 2 (Extended Call)

    Posted Feb 22, 2010 02:02 PM

    I was surprised to see the comment that no-one had done this before, but I

    assume they mean just at this institution. Lots of studies have been done and still

    are considered useful, on how scientists and other researchers get their information.

    We have had a few focus groups here on the topic. It works well as a short paper and maybe at some point could be expanded into a longer article. But since I prefer  the feature

    paper number 1 on medical information as a feature article, this would be a good short

    paper submission.



  • 6.  RE: Feature Paper Submission 2 (Extended Call)

    Posted Feb 22, 2010 02:31 PM

    I went back and looked at our previous submissions because this one rang my bells. Its a rewrite of one of the papers proposed before. The presenter has fleshed out the conclusions and the goals for further study. I's say its a good candidate for a short paper, since they are working on the next phase of the study.

  • 7.  RE: Feature Paper Submission 2 (Extended Call)

    Posted Feb 22, 2010 03:30 PM

    I also thought that this sounded familiar.  I like this abstract much better than the original (if indeed they are by the same person(s).  Since this is just the first phase, I agree that it might be better either in a short format or later (with more parts completed) as a long paper.  Focus groups can be very useful ways of gathering information, so I don't want to shut the door completely on this. 

  • 8.  RE: Feature Paper Submission 2 (Extended Call)

    Posted Feb 23, 2010 10:58 AM

    I still would like to know why they chose to use a focus group with a trained facilitator.  Yes the rewrite is better but it is the same study.  Some of the issues identified here do seem more relevant in the digital age and I agree the method has merit. II do not think this is a featured paper but it is my first choice for short paper.