Search results

In March 1996, American Libraries featured a piece about a librarian at the University of California/Irvine whose supervisor intercepted her e‐mail while she was absent on medical leave. As a result of this, UC's Office for Academic Computing began a review of e‐mail privacy on the nine‐campus system. This article and UC's reaction prompted my research into this topic.

Prior research has highlighted the isolation felt by some researchers engaged in academic writing. This article aims to examine whether such isolation might be partially overcome by membership of an online community of writers (CoW), hosted by higher education (HE) library services.

A review of the literature was followed by an innovative piece of action research based around the authors' own long distance collaborative writing task in order to explore the issues at first‐hand. Case studies of existing online writing communities known to the authors but not currently hosted by libraries were also undertaken.

Themes emerging include the importance of finding a medium for a CoW that is familiar and comfortable. Motivators to join a CoW include demands that academics be research active. Demotivators may include lack of trust and reluctance to share.

There are still questions to be answered and decisions to be taken about the initiation of a CoW. Further research is needed into topics such as mentoring roles and trust‐building but this work should provide a springboard.

HE libraries might consider a CoW as a research support mechanism.

The concept of a CoW is a novel one, as is the idea that such a collaboration might be hosted by HE libraries that might consider a CoW as an innovative addition to their existing portfolio of research support services.

This article reports on findings from the first cycle of the three year JUBILEE (JISC User Behaviour in Information‐seeking: Longitudinal Evaluation of EIS) project, being undertaken at the Information Management Research Institute at the University of Northumbria, in respect of the degree to which students and academics in Higher Education lack the necessary skills to take full advantage of EIS. The skills are examined in subsets: IT literacy skills; information searching skills; evaluative & critical skills; and information handling skills. In addition there is discussion on how best to upskill students and at what point in their academic careers. Another debate, common at several JUBILEE case study sites, focuses on whether such upskilling is better delivered by academics or LIS personnel.

The three‐year JUBILEE project – JISC User Behaviour in Information seeking: Longitudinal Evaluation of EIS – is being funded by the UK Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC). It is seeking to predict, monitor and charcaterise the information seeking behaviour of UK students and academics in relation to electronic information services (EIS) and is providing illuminative and contextualised pictures built up over time and in different disciplines. The project began in August 1999 and is approaching the end of the first annual cycle. Data are being collected and analysed in each cycle, to inform subsequent cycles. Preliminary analysis of the first cycle is already characterising the differences and similarities existing between the disciplines studied in cycle one, with some general themes emerging. The picture is not straightforward, with a very wide variation of views and experiences already reported within as well between disciplines at different sites.

Details the first stage of a project which looked at the impact of S/NVQs on the ILS and records management sectors. A literature review identified five areas in which the impact of S/NVQs was claimed to be discernible. These were: employers; staff; customers; service; and the profession. Within these, certain subsets exist. For example, with regard to the impact on employers, there are effects on the use of resources; planning implications; relations with quality; and the HRM dimension. The areas identified will form the basis for further, in‐depth discussions with those involved in ILS NVQs to test the validity of the claims that these areas are where the impact of S/NVQs are perceivable.