Article Review #2

Brent Domann
October 7, 2011
Article Review # 2

This is a review of:

Taylor, S.D., Perry, R.A., Barton, J.L., & Spencer, B. (2010).  A follow-up study of the factors shaping the career choices of library school students at the University of Alabama.  Reference & User Services Quarterly, 50(1), 35-47.

Introduction

The purpose of this article and its underlying research is to explore the reasons given by current library and information science (LIS) students for choosing LIS careers.  It follows up on a nearly-identical examination that took place in 2004 (also at the University of Alabama).

This article relates to my proposed methodology (survey research) in that it not only asks questions about motivation for choosing higher education, it speaks specifically to some of the motivating factors that I hypothesize have contributed to graduate dissatisfaction with employment prospects.  As mentioned in my previous article review, I wish to explore the weight given to post-graduation employment statistics by prospective law school students.  This article very closely mimics some of the questions and data analyses that I wish to utilize (for example, Figure 4 details factors affecting students’ decisions to enter an MLIS program including “compensation” and “prestige”) (Taylor, Perry, Barton, & Spencer, 2010, p. 41).

Below are examinations of this article based on nine considerations given in Chapter 13 of Fred Pyrczak’s Evaluating research in academic journals: A practical guide to realistic Evaluation (2008).

Problem Statement

This research and report identify several important problems.  First, despite the existence of a previous study using an almost identical questionnaire for LIS students, the researchers recognize that several changes have taken place in the field of LIS education.  Among these are economic recession, continued technological change, the rise of new subfields in LIS, and a growing number of distance-learning LIS programs.  Second, the researchers note that recent data indicate two-thirds of the librarian population as forty-five years in age or older, which will manifest in a growing need for librarians in the near future.  Combined with a diversification of opportunities and responsibilities in the field, there is created a third problem of attracting highly-skilled LIS candidates from a wider variety of backgrounds.

In order to meet these challenges, the authors note a need to “identify and enlist outstanding new professionals” (Taylor et al., 2010, p. 36) and suggest that gathering data about what attracts students will improve the field’s chances of replenishing and growing its new generations.  This study is designed to gather such data.

Literature Review

Taylor et al. do not have an extensive literature review in this article.  Instead, they refer back to a study and analogous sample set from which they take their methodology (again, this is a follow-up to that 2004 study) and note that since then, no general studies have been conducted to survey American LIS students to examine and identify the factors that motivated them to attend library school or to enter the LIS profession.  They do discuss some more specifically-focused studies to which their general research might apply, but this review still would not likely satisfy a reader looking for background information on the research at hand.

This is not perhaps the best of reports, then, in terms of reflectivity.  However, the authors redeem themselves a bit in their discussions of several studies that have been conducted regarding specific types of librarianship and also on specific aspects of career development in LIS.  The general study on which this report is based is stated to touch on many aspects of these more specific reports, and several of them are therefore detailed in a short literature review.

Method

This study was done using questionnaires that were given to current library students.  The researchers noted using the same 2004 questionnaire with only “minor updates” (Taylor et al., 2010, p. 37).  The original questionnaires requested basic demographic information like age, gender, and level of progress through the LIS program.  It also contained questions  regarding motivations for entering an LIS program, preferences for specialty tracks or specific careers, employment outlook, expectations regarding salary, and perceptions of the profession. 

Five items were added to the 2004 questionnaire including questions regarding the importance of information technologies (IT) in libraries, IT proficiency prior to library school, previous careers, and education.  The questionnaires were distributed to online and onsite students in the LIS program at the University of Alabama.  Questionnaire results were analyzed for trends.

Caveats

There are no major methodological flaws that were unavoidable, though the researchers themselves carefully note the boundaries of their work.  They make a point to state that generalizations regarding all LIS students (presumably nationwide) cannot be made from a sample only consisting of students at one university.  However, they note that the goal of this study was to contribute to a knowledge base of ideas for recruitment and at least some data regarding the preferences and attitudes of LIS students.  In both of these senses, the research was successful enough to produce some strong suggestions for LIS recruitment strategies and to encourage future interest in such questions.

Conclusion

This research study is very well-written and identifies a much-bemoaned problem in the LIS field: high attrition and a growing need to attract talent.  Despite its somewhat-frustrating literature review (which could have at the very least summarized its predecessor to save readers the time of hunting down another paper), it does demonstrate its viability considering a changing market for librarians.  Further, it improves upon and updates its predecessor study, asks pointed and revealing questions of its survey participants, and contributes meaningfully to the fields of LIS and of higher education in a very cohesive way.  Additionally, the authors were not embarrassed to admit the limitations of their work and in doing so actually improved the efficacy and applicability of their results. 

Especially considering the study’s self-identified implication that a larger sample set is needed, this report is very likely to inspire additional research on why LIS students choose their paths accordingly.  It also gives enough on its own to allow for some implementation of evidence gained while engaging in future decision making, and so extends the boundaries of knowledge on the topic of LIS career choice motivation.

Although Reference & User Services Quarterly is more than just a pure research journal, this report is based on careful academic research and is worthy of publication, suitable for academic and theoretical use, and finely-crafted enough that I would put my own name on it.  It is well-written, identifies a practical problem, and successfully collects a set of data that can contribute to pragmatic solution-building. 

Bibliography

Taylor, S.D., Perry, R.A., Barton, J.L., & Spencer, B. (2010).  A follow-up study of the factors shaping the career choices of library school students at the University of Alabama.  Reference & User Services Quarterly, 50(1), 35-47.

Pyrczak, F. (2008). Evaluating research in academic journals: A practical guide to realistic evaluation. Glendale, CA: Pyrczak Publishing.