Tag Archives: research

Conducting a Statistics Survey on Visible Minority Librarians in Canada

Posted on by

by Maha Kumaran
Leslie and Irene Dubé Health Sciences Library, University of Saskatchewan

The Visible Minority Librarians of Canada (ViMLoC) Network was established with help from the Canadian Libraries Association (CLA) in December 2011. While working on a research project on leadership among minority librarians I needed to send out a survey to all Canadian minority librarians. There was no single forum or network through which I could do this. Unfortunately CLA does not, for understandable reasons, collect information on ethnic backgrounds of librarians to determine if they identify themselves as minority librarians; and unlike the American Library Association, CLA does not have various affiliates for its different minority groups. This meant sending out the survey through CLA and all the provincial library associations.

This situation prompted me to create a common forum for Canadian visible minority librarians. After consulting with CLA, I worked closely with them on creating a Network that would not only collect statistical information about minority librarians in Canada, but also serve as a common forum for this group to discuss their concerns, share ideas and success stories, have peer mentorship support, and in the future provide continuing education options tailored to this group. An email to the CLA listserv was sent in November 2011 calling for all librarians interested in this initiative to contact me and become founding members of this initiative.

11 librarians, not all visible minorities, from all over Canada became founding members of this initiative and after approval in December 2011, the Network started to function in January 2012. Heather Cai (McGill University) and I served as co-moderators of the Network for the first two years and have passed now it off to Norda Majekodumni (York University) and Kam Teo (Weyburn Public Library) for 2013-2015.

When invited for a round table conference at the Ontario Library Association Super Conference in January 2013 in Toronto, Ontario, attending conference members expressed an interest in ViMLoC undertaking two projects: gathering statistics on the number of visible minority librarians working for Canadian institutions (which was the motivation for creating this Network); and creating a mentorship program for minority librarians.

Heather and I worked on the statistics project. A short electronic questionnaire using Fluid Surveys was created with 12 questions – open ended, multiple choice, yes/no, qualitative response. After ethics approval from both institutions (for Maha and Heather), the survey was sent out through CLA, Canadian Medical Libraries and Special Libraries Association list servs. The survey was also posted on ViMLoCs listserv and website. It ran from December 9th, 2013 to January 31, 2014.

The opening question defined visible minorities as per the Canadian Employment Equity Act and asked if the participant was a minority librarian. If they answered no, they were thanked for their participation and logged out. The purpose of this survey was to gather statistical information on visible minority librarians and we needed to ensure that responses were only from minority librarians.

Of the 191 who attempted to fill out the survey, 120 completed it. The survey had many questions on ethnic backgrounds, educational background, current employment status, etc. There is rich qualitative data that is still being analyzed for future publication. In the survey responses, minority librarians have identified areas where they need help or support and have expressed gratitude for having ViMLoC as a common forum to discuss their concerns, find mentors or friends and fellow researchers to collaborate with.

Results from the survey are currently being analyzed and written as an article to be submitted to a library journal. Please stay tuned.

This article gives the views of the author(s) and not necessarily the views of the Centre for Evidence Based Library and Information Practice or the University Library, University of Saskatchewan.

Sometimes you just need a librarian. And sometimes, you just need a statistician.

Posted on by

by Christine Neilson
Information Specialist, St. Michael’s Hospital
Toronto, Ontario

Statistics has been on my mind for a variety of reasons lately. As a practitioner/researcher (emphasis on the practitioner part!) I dabble in library research when I can find the time, but I often feel inadequate when it comes to stats. Based on anecdotal evidence, I believe that I’m not alone. I’ve taken introductory stats classes and I know what a p value is, but I feel ill prepared to conduct statistical analysis beyond basic descriptive stats; averages, percentage, and that kind of thing.

The issue of different types of evidence aside, conducting meaningful statistical analysis – correctly – is a matter that has troubled me for a long time. There are a variety of statistical programs available but these tools can’t substitute for actually knowing what you’re doing, and thinking that they will can only lead to trouble. It’s similar to using bibliographic databases without knowing how searching works; thinking that a person should be able to sit down and immediately do an effective, efficient search when they don’t know what the process is, what the commands mean, and when it is appropriate to use which one. But the idea of contracting statistical analysis for a research project to someone else with serious statistical chops somehow seems like cheating. If I’m going to be a real researcher, my internal voice tells me, I should be able to do it myself. I want to be able to do it myself.

Unlike many of the contributors to the Brain-Work blog, I work in a hospital library rather than in academia, and one of my major roles is doing literature searches for health professionals who are conducting research. My colleagues and I provide consults for the do-it-yourselfers, but we encourage our clients to take advantage of our literature search services because we can search better and faster; this isn’t a slight against anyone, it’s simply a fact that we have different areas of expertise. As one of my colleagues likes to say, “Sometimes you just need a librarian”.

So what’s my problem then? We are asking our clients to let go a little bit and trust someone with a specialized skill set, shouldn’t I be able to do the same? If sometimes you just need a librarian, then sometimes you just need a statistician. I’ve been involved in a research team where statistical analysis was delegated to a research assistant with experience doing statistical analysis. A sensible division of labour? Sure. Am I a little relieved that someone who knows what they are doing is in charge of that piece? Honestly, yes. Deep down, do I still want to be able to do it all? You better believe it. But maybe – just maybe – striving for a moderate level of statistical literacy and letting people with more expertise do the heavy lifting might not be such a bad idea after all. I do need to be able to make sense of data analysis when I see it, but whether I like it or not, it is very unlikely that I will have the opportunity to develop real statistical expertise in the foreseeable future.

As I understand it, one of the barriers to librarians conducting research is the intimidation factor. I wonder if more librarians would feel better about the idea of doing research if we embraced the idea that one doesn’t necessarily have to handle every aspect of the endeavour by oneself. Because sometimes you just need a statistician.

This article gives the views of the author and not necessarily the views of St. Michael’s Hospital, the Centre for Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, or the University Library, University of Saskatchewan.

Breaking the time barrier: Making time for research in a busy world

Posted on by

by Denise Koufogiannakis
University of Alberta Libraries

Finding the time to do research is a huge issue that many librarians face. Research studies have shown that librarians perceive time as a barrier to both doing research and being an evidence based practitioner (Turner, 2002; Booth, 2011). My own research found that time was a determinant of evidence use by academic librarians. It acts as both a barrier and an enabler depending upon an individual’s circumstances, particularly with respect to their work environment (Koufogiannakis, 2013). In general, though, we usually think and talk about time as a barrier, so the focus is negative, often without any solutions to the problem being proposed.

I think one of the biggest issues in relation to time being a barrier is the “culture of busy” that surrounds us. A culture of busy is one where we talk about being “busy” as if it were a status symbol, a badge of honour, a way to show we are important and successful. It’s a way of bragging, masked within a complaint. But it is not meaningful. Unfortunately, we talk this way a lot, including in the workplace.

Busyness also an easy excuse for saying no to doing something, when you don’t want to dig deeper. It’s is way too easy to simply say “I’m too busy,” or, “I don’t have time,” without giving it a second thought. Sometimes you actually face a different barrier such as needing to improve your research skills, or not feeling confident enough to do research, but it is easier to just blame a lack of time.

In librarianship, I think we also worry that doing research is an ‘extra’ and that our peers will judge us negatively for doing research, especially during a time when we all seem to be doing more with less – that others will say, “if you had enough of a job – were as busy as me – you would not have any time for research”. This is the culture and attitude that we need to try and break! Librarian contributions to our profession through research are very important in order to tie research to areas of practice and advance knowledge in our field.

“It’s not enough to be busy, so are the ants. The question is, what are we busy about?” – Henry David Thoreau

I don’t want to dismiss librarians’ feeling that time is a barrier to doing research, but I do want to step back and ask that we start to think about what we might be able to do to make time, and how we can place time for research as a priority. Let’s reframe how we look at the time we have and where research fits within our overall landscape. We need to fight against the culture of busy that makes it much easier to simply say I don’t have time rather than figuring out how we can make time. Let’s start reframing our discussions in order to move toward a place where doing research is more important than being busy with a bunch of other “stuff”. Ultimately, this means looking at time as something that is ours individually to shape and take greater control over.

The premise that librarian research is important is key to all of this. If something is important then you will make time for it. It becomes about prioritizing all the things you have to do and not letting research always sink to the bottom. I’m not saying research has to be your top priority – for most librarians it is not. But if it is at all important to you and you want to do research, then you can prioritize it over other things, and find ways to make time for it.

How do we make this idea work in reality? It starts with being mindful about what you spend your time on, your priorities, what you want to achieve, and where research fits in that mix. Above all, do research that interests you, that you are passionate about, that you are curious about; research that will sustain and fulfil you. It’s also important to take a pragmatic approach to doing research – plan what you can reasonably achieve, schedule time for research just like anything else you do, set reminders, give yourself deadlines, aim for presentation or paper submission dates, and find someone who will push you along. If you are doing all or some of these things, research is going to become a normal part of your day, part of what drives you, and hopefully, something you want to keep doing and will make time for.

Let’s drop the busyness and take back our time to do research. Let’s make time because research is important to our profession. Let’s show one another that we can make time, and support one another in doing research so that it becomes a norm and something to be celebrated.

“You will never ‘find’ time for anything. If you want time, you must make it.” – Charles Bruxton

References

Booth, A. (2011). Barriers and facilitators to evidence-based library and information practice: An international perspective. Perspectives in International Librarianship, 2011(1). doi: 10.5339/pil.2011.1

Koufogiannakis, D. A. (2013). How academic librarians use evidence in their decision making: Reconsidering the evidence based practice model. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Aberystwyth University, Wales, U.K.

Turner, K. J. (2002). The use of applied library and information studies (LIS) research in New Zealand libraries. Library Review, 51(5), 230-240.

This blog post is based on a presentation given at the C-EBLIP Fall Symposium, October 14, 2014.

This article gives the views of the author(s) and not necessarily the views of the Centre for Evidence Based Library and Information Practice or the University Library, University of Saskatchewan.

Reflections on Research

Posted on by

by Margy MacMillan
Mount Royal University Library

With apologies to Shakespeare: Some are born to research, some achieve research, and others have research thrust upon them . . . and it sometimes feel as though all three are true, often all at once. Whether research is something you have to do, love to do, or just plain do as a part of solving problems, reflecting on what aspects of the tasks YOU find most appealing might reveal some useful patterns.

How do I know this? I did the research! With me as a subject. Yes, it was as uncomfortable as it sounds, at least at first. Then it was… fun, and ultimately very helpful.
When I said I could talk about the What and the Why of research at the C-EBLIP Fall Symposium, I thought it would be easy. What could be simpler than expounding on the motivations for research and the questions that might arise? Teaching an elephant needlepoint. Does the Why lead to the What or vice versa – or do What and Why, the question to be investigated and the reason for the investigation have to occur at the same time? I started thinking in moebius loops where the What and Why become one another simultaneously.

Moebius photo

I searched for answers within. Why had I done research? Were there patterns in the questions? This research required a sunny day, a comfortable chair, and a beverage and was repeated until saturation was achieved. To keep track of reflections I developed a chart.

chart_blank

In filling out my chart, I realized I had NEVER looked at the whole pattern of my research experience. (Have you?) Using mixed methods, noting frequencies, and identifying themes emerging from the discourse, I was quite relieved to find there were patterns, although not always the patterns I thought I’d find. I also discovered connections between what I had thought were a series of random acts of research, and a path that led naturally to where I am now, at the intersection of EBLIP and SoTL – more about that in another post.

chart_filledin

It turns out, getting angry with the literature, borrowing from or intruding upon other disciplines and having a practical outcome have consistently been important to me. Some ‘ideal research conditions’ have changed over time – collaboration was not a key factor at the beginning of my library work but has become something I now seek out. As Dr. Vicki Williamson noted about library staffing in her presentation, research sometimes requires Buying, Building, Borrowing, Balancing and Blending.

In subsequent reflection on this reflection, my conditions for memorable research were not strict either/or conditions but points on continua. It’s not that I don’t like theory, it’s just that while I appreciate those who do, I’m drawn more to applied projects. This kind of realization means that while I may not always be able to control the What or the Why, by paying attention to the How, I can work toward more memorable, even enjoyable research experiences.

A comment in the session by Jo Ann Murphy at USask sparked yet more reflection. She talked about research we do on a regular basis – the kind of research that ends when the problem is solved, and not when the presentation is over. This ‘unsung’ research also requires refining questions, developing methods and analyzing results, we just don’t write about it much, and we should. It’s something we need to MAKE time for (thanks Denise Koufogiannakis!) individually so we can spend less time collectively answering the same questions.

On a final note, what a treat to be on the beautiful UofS campus in a room full of engaged, fascinating library folk, listening to an amazing range of presentations. I’m still processing what I heard, and hoping to network with more than a few of you for ideas/ tips/ tools and theories for my next projects.

The presentation is here. I invite you to chart your profile and comment on the common factors in YOUR memorable research experiences below. Hmmm, sounds like an interesting study…

This article gives the views of the author(s) and not necessarily the views of the Centre for Evidence Based Library and Information Practice or the University Library, University of Saskatchewan.

Are Students Succeeding with a Library Credit Course? C-EBLIP Journal Club, October 6, 2014

Posted on by

by Rachel Sarjeant-Jenkins
Client Services, University Library, University of Saskatchewan

I recently had the opportunity to lead our C-EBLIP Journal Club in a discussion of Jean Marie Cook’s article “A library credit course and student success rates: A longitudinal study” in College & Research Libraries 75, no. 3 (2014) (available at http://crl.acrl.org/content/75/3/272.full.pdf+html). This article had been sitting on my desk for a few months waiting for that magical moment when I found the time to read it thoroughly. Then came my turn to host journal club. What a perfect opportunity to finally delve into Cook’s article! And it couldn`t have come at a better time in light of our library’s focus on developing a programmatic approach to library instruction and the broader teaching and learning environment in which academic libraries currently find themselves.

Following some ‘proper’ journal club discussion about the article’s methodology and findings, Cook’s article proved a wonderful catalyst for a conversation about library instruction at our institution. Initially we were simply envious of Cook’s situation, where a library-focused course is one of the areas within her institution’s priorities. But then the questions started.

• Is there value in having a stand-alone library course or is it better to have instruction firmly embedded or integrated into academic program courses? (Of course, this question did not mean we ever stopped desiring that institutional commitment to information literacy — who would!?)
• How do you assess student learning? And, more importantly, how do you gauge the actual ongoing use of that learning by students?

We also talked about library value. The impetus for Cook’s work was institutional interest in ROI; the result was her quantitative research project.
• How, we asked, can qualitative data be used to support (and enhance) quantitative data when demonstrating library value to the parent institution?
So many questions, and only a lunchtime to discuss.

Not surprisingly, our hour just wasn’t enough. What that hour did do, however, was get us thinking. We talked about the known information literacy courses on campus and learned about pockets of embedded instruction by our librarians that we were completely unaware of. We had a lively debate about quantitative and qualitative research and the benefits of each. And of course we talked about assessment, not only that we need to do more of it and do it more consistently, but also the importance of knowing what we are trying to assess and therefore when we want to assess it.

Our journal club hour got me excited and primed for the next steps in developing our library’s programmatic approach to instruction. Cook’s article, and the energetic conversation it inspired, was an excellent beginning.

This article gives the views of the author(s) and not necessarily the views of the Centre for Evidence Based Library and Information Practice or the University Library, University of Saskatchewan.

On biting off a little more than you can chew

Posted on by

by Lorie Kloda
Assessment Librarian, McGill University

Advice requested: Currently writing two manuscripts, one from a sabbatical that ended two years ago, and another from a recently completed research study. Also, data analysis from a third project is almost complete, and just began data collection on a fourth. Grant application for a follow-up study due in a month. Recently attended a conference and connected with a stellar researcher who wants to collaborate on nation-wide survey in an emerging area. Is a sixth research project one too many? Asking for a friend.

Sound familiar? Or perhaps unimaginable? For some, once the research bug hits, it can be hard to stop. For others, the idea of working on multiple research projects seems impossible. I find myself in the former group, always saying yes to new opportunities, starting a new research study before the current project is wrapped up. Sometimes I stop and ask myself, why am I doing this? Am I not just adding to already busy workload? Can I really do good quality research if I am trying to manage several vastly different projects simultaneously?

I decided that, yes, for me, having multiple research projects on the go is possible, and even ideal. I will try to present the case for taking on as much as (or, maybe a little more than) you can handle, when it comes to research.

Learn from your collaborators. Working on research with colleagues, including fellow librarians and other researchers, from within or outside your organization, can lead to a lot of new knowledge and skills. It’s also an added opportunity to learn how to work with different teams, sometimes in very different time zones. You can use the knowledge from one project to inform another.

Learn from, and about, yourself. Different stages of the research process require different abilities. Working on a project solo, or being responsible for an aspect of the research allows you to discover how you work best – be it that you prefer writing in a quiet, dark room late at night, or that you do, in fact, like making graphs and tables. You can then take this knowledge into other aspects of your work, and other research projects.

Experience with different methods and different topics. The more projects you get to work on, the more experience you obtain with different methods, and on different topics. This guarantees that you will not only increase your expertise over time, but that you will not likely get bored.

Contribute to the evidence base. Some individuals lament the dearth of high quality research in librarianship. If research is as important for practice as we claim, then we need to make the time to do the research that could inform our practice. As suggested by Pam Ryan and Denise Koufogiannakis in Librarianship and the Culture of Busy, “If something is important to you, make time for it.” Many research ideas arise because they are timely ¬– to the profession, not to your schedule.

All of the reasons above are good reasons to conduct research. But why get involved with multiple projects with overlapping timelines?

Research takes a long time. Anyone who has conducted research knows that there are times where the project stalls or is delayed: waiting for research ethics board approval, waiting for responses to a survey, waiting for a draft manuscript to be returned by a co-author. And, some stages of the research can be more appealing than others. When managing multiple projects, it is more likely that some aspect with engage you at a given moment. Use this momentum to push you in your other research projects. Because some research can take a lot a long time to complete, shorter projects can also provide a rewarding boost to one’s sense of accomplishment. Beginning a research study is a daunting undertaking, but being able to experience different stages of the research process at the same time can be stimulating.

In the grand scheme of things, juggling several research projects may not be the best strategy for everyone. But for some, it may be just the thing to get motivated. If you’ve had an idea bubbling away on the back burner for some time, or if you’ve been tempted by a colleague’s invitation to collaborate but always thought you should wait until that older project is finished, I would encourage you to reconsider.

My “friend” is still accepting advice, by the way.

This article gives the views of the author(s) and not necessarily the views of the Centre for Evidence Based Library and Information Practice or the University Library, University of Saskatchewan.

Taking Time for Research

Posted on by

by Kristin Hoffmann
Associate Librarian, University of Western Ontario

Usually I have to make time for research in my daily work life. This past year, I was fortunate to be able to take time for research by going on a sabbatical leave. I highly recommend a sabbatical for any librarian who has the opportunity to take one.

In a study conducted by Leona Jacobs of the University of Lethbridge and presented at the 2007 CLA conference, librarians who had taken sabbaticals said that their experience was “refreshing,” “fabulous,” and “energizing.” They also said that it was “hard work but … quite interesting.” My sabbatical experience was definitely all of those things!

Kristin Hoffman

Here are a few specific things that I realized about research from the process of doing my sabbatical:

A sabbatical is a good time to really delve into an area. I had done a research project related to the development of librarians’ professional identity, and I knew that I wanted to continue to focus on professional identity. As I was thinking about possible professional identity-related projects, I kept telling myself, “I’ll need to do more background reading before I can write my application.” Finally I realized that I could use the sabbatical to do the background reading. That was a good choice: I now have a much fuller sense of my research agenda, and I feel more like a ‘real’ researcher, knowing that I have such an intimate familiarity with my research areas.

A sabbatical is also a good time to try something new. I focused on research areas that weren’t new to me (librarians as practitioner-researchers, as well as professional identity), but my previous research had been with qualitative or quantitative approaches and during my sabbatical I wanted to try synthesizing my background reading with a critical/theoretical approach. It was a big stretch for me—my undergraduate education was in Engineering Physics—and it was frustrating and difficult at times, but I felt like I had really achieved something by breaking out of my research comfort zone.

Know your work style and make sure you can work that way on sabbatical. For me, this meant that I needed to have people with whom I could talk about my research, because I often develop my thoughts much better through conversation. Working with co-researchers was one way I did that, and I am fortunate to have a partner who is an academic, was also on sabbatical, and is interested in my research. I also attended conferences where there was a fit with my research interests, and had some great conversations with conference presenters and attendees.

Doing research is one of my favourite things about being an academic librarian, and the chance to focus on research during my sabbatical was wonderful. I learned a lot about myself as a researcher, and as a librarian.

If you have taken a sabbatical, how did it affect your research? If you are planning one, what are you hoping to achieve with your research?

This article gives the views of the author(s) and not necessarily the views of the Centre for Evidence Based Library and Information Practice or the University Library, University of Saskatchewan.