Search results

The purpose of this paper is to show how the digital divide has become a common metaphor originating from now nearly obsolete phrases such as “information have and have nots” and “information rich and information poor”. The article aims to focus on several dimensions of the digital divide that pertain to service as well as the responsibilities of libraries.

This article places emphasis on the role of librarians and information professionals in bridging the digital divide by indicating some aspects related to it as evidenced in the literature including its definition, aspects, factors affecting, and internet users.

Libraries are treated as one of the major social tools which can solve the information divide rooted in the digital divide and contribute to the realization of democratic society.

This article revolves around the authors' points of view. So, further studies, especially comparative research between developed and developing countries which vary in terms of digital divide rate, can help to understand the real role librarians and information professionals play.

Rethinking the digital divide, librarians must redesign and redefine their service menu for their customers through thinking functionally. They also need to review the various IT devices and information services available and examine which can be employed to present a more effective library service. In addition, policy‐makers should consider the vital role that librarians can play in the realization of knowledge‐based society and sustainable development.

This paper provides a theoretical basis for librarians to be more active and sedulous and policy‐makers to be vigilant and place much value for information sector and its professionals, particularly librarians working in various libraries.

The present paper's purpose is to review the literature related to quality assessment and performance evaluation in academic libraries, whether empirical or theoretical, and to extract key issues. It aims to explore which criteria exert a significant relationship with the academic libraries' performance quality; identify a set of criteria that appears to be useful for assessing the quality of academic libraries ITBS; and use these criteria to develop an instrument or evaluation checklist for evaluating the quality of academic libraries ITBS.

Related keywords such as “academic libraries research”, “academic libraries evaluation”, “academic libraries assessment” were searched on the web as well as some leading databases. In addition, available library resources as well as online book databases were consulted. Key issues were identified, categorized and discussed to develop the evaluation checklist suggested by the paper.

A number of indicators have been developed and tested in quality assessment studies debated in the paper. The literature reveals that evaluating ITBS in academic libraries should be considered to a greater extent and thus, more evaluation studies on the basis of validated tools are needed.

The review does not claim to be comprehensive.

The paper can serve as a research roadmap concerning quality assessment of ITBS in academic libraries for researchers, managers, academic authorities and users.