EBL and Library Assessment: Two Solitudes?

As Booth notes in a recent commentary on the conceptual and practical links between performance measurement and evidence based library and information practice (EBLIP), there has been a discernable creep among segments of the library community that seemingly existed as two solitudes: those in eviden...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Pam Ryan
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University of Alberta 2006-12-01
Series:Evidence Based Library and Information Practice
Subjects:
Online Access:http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/EBLIP/article/view/136/177
id doaj-cd2119b9e7d0498f8c520f03e8df8d01
record_format Article
spelling doaj-cd2119b9e7d0498f8c520f03e8df8d012020-11-24T21:49:55ZengUniversity of AlbertaEvidence Based Library and Information Practice1715-720X2006-12-01147780EBL and Library Assessment: Two Solitudes?Pam RyanAs Booth notes in a recent commentary on the conceptual and practical links between performance measurement and evidence based library and information practice (EBLIP), there has been a discernable creep among segments of the library community that seemingly existed as two solitudes: those in evidence based librarianship (EBL) circles and those in the library assessment practitioners group (“Counting What Counts” 63). Beginning in 2005, individuals from one group have been showing up at the others’ conferences and events to discuss their methods, frameworks and processes. Are these separate movements within librarianship forming theoretical bridges? Is some sort of merger, fusion or takeover in the future? Or are these simply collegial discussions about our evidence‐based leanings in librarianship? Is all evidence based practice in librarianship, that is, some form of research‐derived data guiding the decision‐making of practitioners, subject to the theoretical framework proposed by the EBL movement? If so, are the tools and practices of library assessment rigorous enough, by EBL theory standards, to afford equal participation in these evidence‐based practice circles or will assessment practitioners forever be relegated to wallow as devotees of the lowest cells of Eldredge’s(2002) exploratory research evidence chart? If we are just now coming to understand our similarities, will our differences be enough that we wish never to be one movement and therefore forever remain as two solitudes in evidence‐based practice?http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/EBLIP/article/view/136/177Evidence Based PracticeOperations ResearchMission Oriented Research
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Pam Ryan
spellingShingle Pam Ryan
EBL and Library Assessment: Two Solitudes?
Evidence Based Library and Information Practice
Evidence Based Practice
Operations Research
Mission Oriented Research
author_facet Pam Ryan
author_sort Pam Ryan
title EBL and Library Assessment: Two Solitudes?
title_short EBL and Library Assessment: Two Solitudes?
title_full EBL and Library Assessment: Two Solitudes?
title_fullStr EBL and Library Assessment: Two Solitudes?
title_full_unstemmed EBL and Library Assessment: Two Solitudes?
title_sort ebl and library assessment: two solitudes?
publisher University of Alberta
series Evidence Based Library and Information Practice
issn 1715-720X
publishDate 2006-12-01
description As Booth notes in a recent commentary on the conceptual and practical links between performance measurement and evidence based library and information practice (EBLIP), there has been a discernable creep among segments of the library community that seemingly existed as two solitudes: those in evidence based librarianship (EBL) circles and those in the library assessment practitioners group (“Counting What Counts” 63). Beginning in 2005, individuals from one group have been showing up at the others’ conferences and events to discuss their methods, frameworks and processes. Are these separate movements within librarianship forming theoretical bridges? Is some sort of merger, fusion or takeover in the future? Or are these simply collegial discussions about our evidence‐based leanings in librarianship? Is all evidence based practice in librarianship, that is, some form of research‐derived data guiding the decision‐making of practitioners, subject to the theoretical framework proposed by the EBL movement? If so, are the tools and practices of library assessment rigorous enough, by EBL theory standards, to afford equal participation in these evidence‐based practice circles or will assessment practitioners forever be relegated to wallow as devotees of the lowest cells of Eldredge’s(2002) exploratory research evidence chart? If we are just now coming to understand our similarities, will our differences be enough that we wish never to be one movement and therefore forever remain as two solitudes in evidence‐based practice?
topic Evidence Based Practice
Operations Research
Mission Oriented Research
url http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/EBLIP/article/view/136/177
work_keys_str_mv AT pamryan eblandlibraryassessmenttwosolitudes
_version_ 1725886458415284224