图书馆资源建设学科化的组织模式与保障机制研究

图书馆资源建设学科化是指资源建设工作按学科专业来划分组织的模式,依据学科馆员在其中的角色定位可概括为传递式、介入式和主导式三种类型。以学科馆员为主导的资源建设学科化模式,是保障学科资源建设更加科学合理、学科服务更加高效顺畅的有效模式,是资源建设学科化的发展方向。图书馆应积极探索和建立学科资源建设与服务一体化的组织、团队以及人才保障机制,不断提高图书馆资源建设与服务的整体质量和水平。     

省属高校图书馆学科馆员角色定位探讨

"学科馆员"是图书馆学界的一个全新的研究领域,在高校学科建设中起着重要作用。高校图书馆学科馆员的角色定位直接关系到学科服务工作的开展与成败。省属高校无论在硬件、软件方面都与重点高校存在距离,所以重点高校对学科馆员的定位并不适合省属高校。省属高校图书馆学科馆员的角色定位应为"联络、导航、教育"。     

省属高校图书馆学科馆员角色定位探讨

＂学科馆员＂是图书馆学界的一个全新的研究领域,在高校学科建设中起着重要作用。高校图书馆学科馆员的角色定位直接关系到学科服务工作的开展与成败。省属高校无论在硬件、软件方面都与重点高校存在距离,所以重点高校对学科馆员的定位并不适合省属高校。省属高校图书馆学科馆员的角色定位应为＂联络、导航、教育＂。     

高校图书馆学科馆员必将取代采访馆员

文章介绍了国内外高校图书馆学科馆员的工作职责和服务架构情况,阐述了学科馆员工作与采访工作的关系,提出学科馆员的优势,并以扬州大学图书馆学科馆员制度为例加以分析,得出了学科馆员必将替代采访馆员的结论,对学科馆员工作的未来发展趋势进行展望。     

学习共享空间环境下图书馆员的素质研究

目前,学习共享空间(LC)服务不同于传统的图书馆服务,使馆员普遍面临科技压力、组织文化压力、人际关系压力。同时,LC环境对参考咨询馆员、学科馆员、信息技术馆员、写作指导馆员的素质提出了新的要求。图书馆应加强与各院系的沟通与合作,培养馆员协作精神;建立馆员培训长效机制,培育创新型馆员队伍;大力推广LC理念,激励馆员终身学习能力;拓宽人才引进渠道,提升馆员综合素质;建立健全轮岗机制,增强馆员应变能力;营建和谐LC人际氛围,激发馆员工作热情。     

Self-Efficacy of Academic Librarians: Implications for Public Services Managers

The question of academic librarian status has resulted in academic librarians approaching relationships with faculty as one of deference, where they cede power to disciplinary faculty regardless of their own expertise. To date, no research has explored why academic librarians engage in deference behavior when working with disciplinary faculty. Self-efficacy, a person's beliefs in their ability to perform a task, may be an appropriate theoretical framework to begin exploring this behavior. This pilot study explores the perceived self-efficacy of Colorado academic librarians holding an instruction and/or liaison role (n = 68) in order to examine academic librarians' levels of perceived self-efficacy and its relationship to faculty status and years in profession. Results indicate that there is not a significant relationship between perceived self-efficacy and faculty status or years in profession but that gender is significantly associated with perceived self-efficacy. Results also indicate a change in self-efficacy as library faculty progress between faculty ranks. Avenues for future research on academic librarian self-efficacy are suggested and implications for public services managers are discussed.     

“学部制”背景下高校图书馆工作的创新——以重庆大学为例

针对高校实行“学部制”改革后,图书馆工作如何创新的问题,介绍学部制下学科的发展、科研集群的形成、院系的整合对图书馆信息服务工作的要求。图书馆可以通过服务体制的优化、服务方式的转化、系统平台的升级以及鼓励馆员研究学术等措施来创新服务。学术信息资源、馆员学科背景、用户需求以及学术氛围是学部制下图书馆工作的关键因素。     

转型变革期高校图书馆馆员能力建设策略

根据新型图书馆的发展需求,对当前高校图书馆发展的基本态势进行分析,揭示高校图书馆馆员队伍存在的问题,在此基础上提出转型变革期高校图书馆馆员能力建设的总体策略是：图书馆员队伍的主体应为学科馆员与嵌入式信息专员;图书馆员个体应成为学科情报专家;重点培养情报分析与知识服务专家;加快培养数据管理与服务专家队伍;引进和培养信息技术开发与应用专家。     

综合性高校弱势学科文献资源保障体系建设

本文总结"985"高校、"211"高校文献资源保障体系建设的经验和教训,基于某校"新诗所"文献资源保障体系建设实践,提出弱势学科文献资源保障体系的建设应以学科馆员牵头,采用"学科馆员+馆藏纸质资源+Internet资源导航+大型文献资源共享平台"的资源保障模式,并尽力完善"图书馆员-读者"、"读者-读者"之间的沟通渠道。     

技术环境变革中国外图书馆员角色转变特点初探

[目的/意义]随着图书馆技术环境变革和职能拓展,图书馆员角色和形象被赋予许多新的期望。分析图书馆员的角色转变既能了解环境变化对职业发展的要求,也能为馆员素质提升和更好应对技术变革压力提供建议。[方法/过程]利用从数据库中搜集到的关于图书馆员角色的外文期刊文献题录信息,利用标题词分析方法对已有研究中的图书馆员角色进行分类,并根据角色定位描述图书馆员的岗位职责内容。[结果/结论]已有研究对学科馆员、教学馆员、医学馆员等关注度最高,技术变革也催生了数据馆员、社交媒体馆员等新岗位,图书馆员角色呈现分类细化、专业化和交互性增强、角色重叠明显等特点,技术对图书馆员角色的影响逐渐加强。     

图书馆员“去职业化”辨析

目前学术界有观点认为图书馆员正在走向"去职业化",体现为图书馆学院系易名、图书馆业务外包、图书馆人员结构呈非专业化、存在图书馆专业歧视等。然而,这些观点没有客观、全面地反映出图书馆员职业化建设的实质性问题和职业发展趋向,更多的只是一种对图书馆发展与变革的职业担忧,不足以支撑"去职业化"的推论。     

基于情境分析的高校学科服务边界探讨

[目的/意义]在情境分析的基础上,探讨国内50所高校图书馆学科服务现状的边界。从不同图书馆学科服务边界、差别及影响因素的分析中为个馆（某个特定馆）学科服务的定位提供现实参考与理论支持,为学科馆员认清自我角色与考核标准以及用户评价提供界定支撑。[方法/过程]以50所高校图书馆学科服务现状作为情境的主要素材,从学科馆员工作职责、服务内容、服务时间和服务态度等维度探讨学科服务边界。[结果/结论]学科服务精准定位需要结合个馆的综合服务层次与水平、制度、文化环境和服务理念、学科馆员与用户的知识势能等影响因素综合分析。准确清晰的职责定位是学科馆员绩效考核和用户评价的基础。     

Breaking Out of the Basement:

The library literature records that bibliographic instruction (BI) has taken its rightful place in the academic library repertoire. The literature also records that technical services librarians (including cataloging librarians), continue to "break out of the basement," actively participating in BI since at least the late 1880s, although few articles codify specific contributions. In 1993, 124 librarians, currently working in State University of New York (SUNY) academic librarian positions, were surveyed regarding the extent of their participation in bibliographic instruction activates. Survey results are reported in detail, indicating that slightly less than half (47.6% or 39) of the 82 respondents do provide bibliographic instruction, not only catalog and library research instruction, but also instruction for a broad range of specialized subject areas. Conclusions challenge cataloging librarians to take a continuing more active role in BI, and challenge BI librarians to more actively embrace their cataloging colleagues. Conclusions also challenge both groups to collaborate in order to effectively teach their constituencies. Includes two tables, two charts, and numerous references.     

Reference Collection Development Using the RLG Conspectus

Reference collection development should be seen as an integral part of the overall management of academic research library collections. The reference librarian benefits from participation in the development of collection development policy statements based on a collection evaluation using the Research Libraries Group (RLG) Conspectus. The writing of cormprehensive collection development policy statements using the RLG Conspectus to evaluate subject collections requires that collection management librarians and reference librarians work closely together and integrate the development of the reference collection into overall collection development plans for the library. This article discusses some of the functions of collection management divisions and the potential components of a Conspectus-based comprehensive collection development policy statement. The sharing of the process between the collection management librarian and the reference librarian/selector is described. Benefits the reference librarian gains from the process are discussed.     

面向知识服务的高校图书馆学科馆员培养模式

学科馆员在高校图书馆知识服务中扮演着非常重要的角色,高校图书馆知识服务的开展对学科馆员的素质和知识结构提出了较高的要求。在分析图书馆知识服务内涵的基础上,探讨了学科馆员的培养模式,以提高学科馆员知识服务能力。     

Exploring library service models at Fudan University and Appalachian State University: Experiences from an International Librarian Exchange program

In 2008, Fudan University Library (FDUL) in Shanghai and Belk Library and Information Commons at Appalachian State University (ASU) in Boone, North Carolina created a three-year librarian exchange program. The first pair of librarian exchanges occurred during the 2009–2010 academic year, with the Appalachian State librarian traveling to Fudan for five weeks during the Fall of 2009, and the first librarian from Fudan traveling to Appalachian State for five months in the spring and summer of 2010. This paper documents how the first exchanges revealed interesting similarities and differences in the academic library service models between the two universities which are illustrative of general similarities and differences between Chinese and American academic library services. The paper also discusses how any academic library can benefit from the experience of a librarian exchange program with a partner library in another country.The experience gained from these first exchanges confirms on an international level the basic assertion that a major role of an academic library is to support the university’s curriculum.Moreover it can be extrapolated from discussions held between librarians of the two institutions that in both the United States and China the curriculum evolves in response to reforms on campus and to changing trends within the country’s education system. It was also determined that the modes of library services in both cultures change as new technologies arise and that the pace of technological change within academic libraries is rapid and ongoing. Participants in the exchange discovered that there are strengths and weaknesses in both the ASU and FDUL service models and that the librarians from both systems can learn from one another and absorb best practices from their exchange partners. This paper reflects the views and experiences of the exchange librarians (Shi and Johnson) and also author Shao, who is a Chinese national working as a faculty fellow librarian at Appalachian State University.     

数据时代图书馆员角色的转变——数据馆员的兴起

［目的/意义］ 通过对比分析国外数据馆员和学科馆员的岗位能力,提出我国数据馆员的人才培养策略。［方法/过程］ 调研国外典型高校图书馆的招聘信息,从职位名称、教育背景、岗位职责、技能要求以及综合能力5个方面比较分析学科馆员和数据馆员之间的差异,并指出数据馆员应该具备的任职条件。［结果/结论］ 总结国外高校数据馆员的岗位能力,指出从学科馆员到数据馆员的角色拓展的必要性,对国内高校图书馆培养数据馆员提供借鉴建议。     

Enhancing resident morning report with "daily learning packages"

The daily "Morning Report" is a fixture in many residency programs. In the past, librarians have attended this meeting and, in various ways, worked to enhance the resident learning experience. At the academic children's hospital discussed in this study, the concept was taken a step further. Together with the chief residents, the librarian provided a complete "learning package" consisting of the case write-up along with relevant, librarian-filtered, evidence-based information. The learning package was then e-mailed to all residents and some of the attending physicians. This program led to a huge increase in the use of library resources and services as well as a renewed recognition of the value of the library and the librarians.     

“四全媒体”视域下高校图书馆学科馆员胜任力素质提升策略研究

以全程媒体、全息媒体、全员媒体、全效媒体为核心的“四全媒体”是媒介融合的发展方向,四全媒体背景下高校图书馆用户服务质量受学科馆员胜任力素质的影响较大。论文通过分析四全媒体对高校图书馆学科馆员胜任力的现实性影响,围绕用户需求跟踪、资源数据呈现、社群化参考咨询、全链条数据服务等方面论述高校图书馆学科馆员需要具备的四全媒体胜任力素质,提出高校图书馆学科馆员应成为科研型馆员、全媒体馆员、咨询型馆员与数据型馆员,促进高校图书馆学科服务实现四全媒体转型。     

Exploring library service models at Fudan University and Appalachian State University: Experiences from an International Librarian Exchange program

In 2008, Fudan University Library (FDUL) in Shanghai and Belk Library and Information Commons at Appalachian State University (ASU) in Boone, North Carolina created a three-year librarian exchange program. The first pair of librarian exchanges occurred during the 2009–2010 academic year, with the Appalachian State librarian traveling to Fudan for five weeks during the Fall of 2009, and the first librarian from Fudan traveling to Appalachian State for five months in the spring and summer of 2010. This paper documents how the first exchanges revealed interesting similarities and differences in the academic library service models between the two universities which are illustrative of general similarities and differences between Chinese and American academic library services. The paper also discusses how any academic library can benefit from the experience of a librarian exchange program with a partner library in another country.

The experience gained from these first exchanges confirms on an international level the basic assertion that a major role of an academic library is to support the university’s curriculum.

Moreover it can be extrapolated from discussions held between librarians of the two institutions that in both the United States and China the curriculum evolves in response to reforms on campus and to changing trends within the country’s education system. It was also determined that the modes of library services in both cultures change as new technologies arise and that the pace of technological change within academic libraries is rapid and ongoing. Participants in the exchange discovered that there are strengths and weaknesses in both the ASU and FDUL service models and that the librarians from both systems can learn from one another and absorb best practices from their exchange partners. This paper reflects the views and experiences of the exchange librarians (Shi and Johnson) and also author Shao, who is a Chinese national working as a faculty fellow librarian at Appalachian State University.