Fostering Collaboration by Leading Communities of Practice

IF 0.8 4区 管理学 Q3 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Portal-Libraries and the Academy Pub Date : 2022-10-01 DOI:10.1353/pla.2022.0048
Jacqueline L. Freeman, Karen E. Downing, Claire A. Myers, Allison Thorsen, J. York, Joseph Muller, E. Yakel
{"title":"Fostering Collaboration by Leading Communities of Practice","authors":"Jacqueline L. Freeman, Karen E. Downing, Claire A. Myers, Allison Thorsen, J. York, Joseph Muller, E. Yakel","doi":"10.1353/pla.2022.0048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Librarians continually seek innovative ways to integrate library expertise and resources into campus research endeavors. Although qualitative research has grown across disciplines, researchers using these methods often receive little campus-based support. The authors investigate this shortfall in support of qualitative researchers through interviews and a survey with respondents from a range of academic disciplines to better understand the challenges these scholars face. Findings suggest researchers who use qualitative methods employ make-do and expedient means to gather expertise from colleagues within their professional networks. They have multiple unmet needs and would welcome the opportunity to participate in groups of fellow practitioners to advance their skills. The authors propose and explore the communities of practice model, wherein participants gather to learn from one another around an area of common interest. This model offers a way for libraries to provide needed leadership and support for qualitative researchers. Librarians, in their roles as liaisons, domain specialists, and curators of methodology texts, are in prime position to foster collaborations between researchers who have or need qualitative research skills.","PeriodicalId":51670,"journal":{"name":"Portal-Libraries and the Academy","volume":"1 1","pages":"943 - 974"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Portal-Libraries and the Academy","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/pla.2022.0048","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract:Librarians continually seek innovative ways to integrate library expertise and resources into campus research endeavors. Although qualitative research has grown across disciplines, researchers using these methods often receive little campus-based support. The authors investigate this shortfall in support of qualitative researchers through interviews and a survey with respondents from a range of academic disciplines to better understand the challenges these scholars face. Findings suggest researchers who use qualitative methods employ make-do and expedient means to gather expertise from colleagues within their professional networks. They have multiple unmet needs and would welcome the opportunity to participate in groups of fellow practitioners to advance their skills. The authors propose and explore the communities of practice model, wherein participants gather to learn from one another around an area of common interest. This model offers a way for libraries to provide needed leadership and support for qualitative researchers. Librarians, in their roles as liaisons, domain specialists, and curators of methodology texts, are in prime position to foster collaborations between researchers who have or need qualitative research skills.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
通过领先的实践社区促进合作
摘要:图书馆员不断寻求创新的方式,将图书馆的专业知识和资源整合到校园研究工作中。尽管定性研究已经跨越了各个学科,但使用这些方法的研究人员通常很少得到校园的支持。为了更好地理解这些学者所面临的挑战,作者通过访谈和对来自不同学科的受访者的调查来调查定性研究人员的支持不足。研究结果表明,使用定性方法的研究人员采用权宜之计和权宜之计,从他们的专业网络中的同事那里收集专业知识。他们有许多未满足的需求,并欢迎有机会参加同行从业者的小组,以提高他们的技能。作者提出并探索了实践模型的社区,其中参与者聚集在一起,围绕共同感兴趣的领域相互学习。这种模式为图书馆提供了一种方法,可以为定性研究人员提供必要的领导和支持。图书馆员作为联络人、领域专家和方法论文本的管理者,在促进具有或需要定性研究技能的研究人员之间的合作方面处于主要地位。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Portal-Libraries and the Academy
Portal-Libraries and the Academy INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
8.30%
发文量
53
期刊最新文献
Student Preferences for Reference Services at a Remote Biological Station Library Addressing Classification System Bias in Higher Education Libraries in England A Case for Open Peer Review Podcasting in Academic Librarianship Requesting Librarian-Led Information Literacy Support: Instructor Approaches, Experiences, and Attitudes Meaningful Work when Work Won’t Love You Back: Sociological Imagination and Reflective Teaching Practice
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1