I understand the nature of research, research methods and research findings; retrieve, evaluate and synthesize scholarly and professional literature for informed decision-making by specific client groups
Introduction
Reitz (2007) defines research as the “Systematic, painstaking investigation of a topic . . . undertaken to [reveal] new facts, theories, or principles . . . or [determine] the current state of knowledge of the subject.” This “painstaking investigation” can take different forms (e.g., quantitative vs. qualitative research), employ a wide variety of data collection methods (interviews, observation, surveys, etc.), and often follows a series of prescribed, formalized steps (topic formulation, literature review, operationalization of variables, data collection, etc.). Understanding the nature of research, research methods, and research findings is essential for librarians. Librarians who understand the nature of research are in a better position to evaluate the research of others. This in turn helps librarians identify reliable sources of information for patrons. The librarian’s understanding of research is important for another reason. Some librarians must perform research themselves, either for different client groups or for the library itself. The librarian’s knowledge of research and research methods allows her to select and implement appropriate research methods toward informing the decision-making of client groups. Through my SLIS coursework I have gained an understanding of research, research methods, and research findings. I also know how to retrieve, evaluate, and synthesize scholarly and professional literature for informed decision-making by specific client groups.
Commentary
Research methods are broadly classified as either quantitative or qualitative. “In the social sciences, quantitative research can be defined as any research that uses numbers as the basis for making inferences about the phenomenon under study” (Valentine, 2008, p. 112). There are two major categories of quantitative research: experimental and nonexperimental. In experimental research, an independent variable(s) is manipulated in order to measure “the effect of the independent variable on one or more dependent variables (experimental outcome)” (Kalaian, 2008, p. 725). A key feature of the experimental method is the random assignment of subjects to either a control group or an experimental group. Random assignment minimizes the influence of extraneous variables on the dependent variable; ideally, it isolates the influence of the independent variable(s) on the dependent variable, revealing cause-effect relationships that may exist between the two variables.
In contrast to quantitative, experimental research, quantitative nonexperimental research does not “control . . . the variables, conditions, and settings of the study” (Kalaian, 2008, p. 725). Consequently, it is not considered a reliable means of establishing cause-effect relationships between variables. Quantitative, nonexperimental research is instead aimed at description. As Kalaian (2008) explains,
Nonexperimental . . . research designs aim to answer research questions about the current state of affairs, identify factors and relationships among them, and create a detailed quantitative description of phenomena. Thus, it provides a snapshot of the feelings, opinions, practices, thoughts, preferences, attitudes, or behaviors of a sample of people, as they exist at a given time and a given place. (p. 728)
Surveys, interviews, and observation are common means of gathering data for quantitative, nonexperimental research.
Like quantitative, nonexperimental research, qualitative research is primarily descriptive in orientation. However, qualitative research does not rely on “statistical procedures or other means of quantification” (AlphaPlus Centre, 2009). Qualitative research employs narrative description as opposed to numeric or statistical description. According to Kalaian (2008), “qualitative research . . . provide[s] a detailed narrative description and holistic interpretation that captures the richness and complexity of behaviors, experiences, and events in natural settings” (p. 729). Qualitative research methods include case study, ethnographic research, phenomenological research, action research, usability testing, and historical research (Kalaian, 2008; Manuel, 2004). Data collection methods that tend to be associated with qualitative research include interviews, observation, focus groups, think aloud protocols, and content and thematic analysis of texts (Manuel, 2004; Morse, 2005; Kalaian, 2008).
As a future librarian, my understanding of research is important for two reasons. First, it helps me evaluate the research of others. This is important when helping patrons find reliable information. For example, my knowledge of research methods and practices may alert me to problems concerning the operationalization of variables (Manuel, 2004). In other words, is the method used to measure a variable an adequate representation of the phenomena under investigation? Additional questions that may guide the evaluation of research include: Is the sample size adequate to support the researcher’s findings? Does the researcher overgeneralize the significance of her results (Manuel, 2004)? In experimental research, is the sampling method truly random? Does the research design adequately control for the influence of extraneous variables?
Second, my understanding of research makes it possible for me to perform research myself, specifically, qualitative research using content and thematic analysis of primary and secondary texts. My own research background is heavily weighed toward this form of research. Prior to entering the MLIS program, my academic work was almost exclusively in the humanities, where qualitative, text-based research is the dominant (if not the only) research paradigm. As the culminating project for my Ph.D. in religious studies, I wrote a dissertation comparing Medieval German mysticism and the rDzogs-chen tradition of Tibetan Buddhism. (The dissertation was published in 2005 by Brill Academic Publishers under the title The Unity of Mystical Traditions.) Writing the dissertation involved using advanced searching skills to retrieve a comprehensive selection of relevant sources. It involved careful consideration of methodological issues, focusing particularly on the relationship between theory and interpretation. It also involved the analysis and synthesis of information from my sources toward supporting an interpretation of the nature of mystical transformation. My dissertation/book demonstrates my ability to retrieve, evaluate and synthesize scholarly and professional literature.
Information retrieval, evaluation and synthesis have also been central to my work in the MLIS program. Like my dissertation, the research papers I have written in my MLIS courses have involved qualitative research using content and thematic analysis of documents (in this case, the professional and scholarly of library and information science). Each required me to retrieve information, evaluate information, and synthesize findings from scholarly and professional sources. Many of these papers explore specific questions or issues faced by library managers when making service or policy decisions. Though I did not write these papers to serve clients, my findings in these papers could potentially inform decision-making by library management. In this sense, they demonstrate my ability to retrieve, evaluate and synthesize scholarly and professional literature for informed decision-making by specific client groups.
For example, In LIBR 200 I wrote a paper that explores the problem of clarifying vague information needs. N. J. Belkin has argued that IRSs need to be fundamentally redesigned to facilitate searches by users with vague information needs. In the paper I argue that a “vague information need” is in fact an indicator of precise information needs for domain knowledge in a subject area or field. The problem is not IRS design, but a failure by students/users to critically reflect on their own information needs. Librarians, then, do not need to redesign the IRS (at least not in the way that Belkin recommends); rather, they need to continue helping users clarify information needs through asking critical questions. These findings could potentially inform IRS design decisions.
In LIBR 230 I wrote a paper on undergraduate students’ low motivation to learn. My findings in this paper might potentially inform librarians’ decisions regarding information literacy instruction. I argue that the most serious “information literacy problem” is not a lack of skills, but students’ lack of intellectual curiosity or desire to learn. I pose the question: how worried should we be about teaching information literacy skills if most students don’t care about learning anything? Academic librarians are of course committed to teaching information literacy skills. Nevertheless, my findings suggest that library managers recognize that students’ difficulties are not necessarily or only rooted in a lack of skills. Librarians need to work with university administrators and faculty to develop university-wide initiatives that might influence students’ motivation to learn.
In LIBR 204 I wrote a paper on Total Quality Management (TQM). In the paper I retrieve, evaluate, and synthesize information from scholarly and professional sources in order to (1) provide an overview of the core principles and practices of TQM, and (2) evaluate the merit of TQM as a management philosophy. The paper not only demonstrates my ability to perform research. It also demonstrates my ability to synthesize information in order to inform management decision making. Library managers who are exploring possible changes or reforms in management approaches might seek information on different management styles. My paper on TQM could potentially inform decision making in this area.
In LIBR 246 I created an online research guide using pbworks. Creating the guide included an exploration of existing professional and scholarly literature that might inform organization and design decisions. This research yielded specific findings that might inform design and marketing decisions regarding online academic subject guides. It provided concrete recommendations for designing effective research guides, e.g., creating course or assignment specific guides rather than subject guides, providing prominent links to research guides on library home pages, and utilizing platforms (such as wikis) that facilitate collaboration and revision of online content.
In LIBR 234 I wrote a report to a hypothetical school board to help guide its decision to either keep or remove Huckleberry Finn from the district’s school libraries. I gathered information from professional, scholarly, and reliable online sources pertinent to the controversy, and then synthesized my findings to make a specific recommendation to the Board (Huckleberry Finn should be kept on the library shelves). The paper demonstrates my ability to perform research that specifically serves a hypothetical client group (a school board).
Evidence
I am submitting two assignments as evidence of my competency in this area. The first is an assignment from LIBR 244 (I also submitted this assignment for Competency E). The assignment documents a Dialog search. It records the steps and strategies I employed to find information about candy manufacturers in California. The assignment demonstrates my mastery of database features and search strategies when using an advanced database to identify and retrieve information. The assignment is relevant to this competency because search skills are one of the foundations of research. The ability to gather a set of records or documents relevant to a research question is an important element in many forms of research.
The second assignment I am submitting is a revised version of a final paper I wrote for LIBR 234. (This paper has been accepted for publication by the Library Student Journal.) The paper is a research paper addressing the issue of a student’s right to receive information in public school libraries through an exploration of the Supreme Court’s Pico decision. The paper demonstrates all the essential elements of the research process. In order to write the paper I used my searching and evaluation skills to identify a set of relevant and reliable articles, court cases, and web sites. I then synthesized information from these sources to draw general conclusions about the scope and durability of student rights in public school libraries. The paper was written to satisfy the requirements of a course assignment. Nevertheless, its content might be useful as a guide to decision making by client groups. For example, a school might need clarification of student rights in the library in order to respond to parental calls for censorship of library materials. The paper might also help a school craft a policy regarding censorship and book removal that is legally sound and protects student rights in the face of parent or student complaints.
Conclusion
A familiarity with research forms and methods is essential to effective librarianship. The librarian’s understanding of research gives her the ability to evaluate the research of others – an essential skill when helping patrons evaluate the reliability of sources. It also allows her to synthesize information from reliable sources to guide decision making by specific client groups. In many cases, the “client” is the library itself committed to making research-based decisions about how to best serve patrons. Given the role that research plays in librarianship, librarians must understand the nature of research, research methods, and research findings. They must be able to retrieve, evaluate and synthesize scholarly and professional literature for informed decision-making by specific client groups. Through my coursework in the MLIS program I have gained these skills. I understand the nature of research, and I am prepared to perform research that informs the decision-making process of library clients.
References
AlphaPlus Centre. (2009). Glossary of research terms. Retrieved February 20, 2010, from http://alphaplus.ca/pdfs/glossaryresrch.pdf
Davis, M. A. & Poston Jr., D. L. (2008). Methods, research (in sociology). (2008). In International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, 2nd ed. (Vol. 5, pp. 113-115). Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA. Retrieved February 20, 2010, from Gale Virtual Reference Library via Gale: http://go.galegroup.com/ps/start.do?p=GVRL&u=ucsantacruz
Kalaian, S. A. (2008). Research design. In Encyclopedia of Survey Research Methods (Vol. 2, pp. 724-731). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Retrieved February 20, 2010, from Gale Virtual Reference Library via Gale: http://go.galegroup.com/ps/start.do?p=GVRL&u=ucsantacruz
Manuel, K. (2004). Research methodology 101: Yes! You CAN do research study in your library [PowerPoint Presentation]. Retrieved February 19, 2010, from http://lib.nmsu.edu/~susabeck/Research%20Methodology%20101.ppt
Morse, J. M. (2005). Qualitative research. In Encyclopedia of Science, Technology, and Ethics (Vol. 3, pp. 1557-1559). Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA. Retrieved February 20, 2010, from Gale Virtual Reference Library via Gale: http://go.galegroup.com/ps/start.do?p=GVRL&u=ucsantacruz
Reitz, J. M. (2007). Online dictionary for library and information science. Retrieved February 11, 2010, http://lu.com/odlis/odlis_r.cfm
Valentine, J. C. (2008). Methods, quantitative. In International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, 2nd ed. (Vol. 5, pp. 112-113). Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA. Retrieved February 20, 2010, from Gale Virtual Reference Library via Gale: http://go.galegroup.com/ps/start.do?p=GVRL&u=ucsantacruz