IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jpubli/v6y2018i1p12-d136407.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Library Assessment Research: A Content Comparison from Three American Library Journals

Author

Listed:
  • Ethan J. Allen

    (Florida Atlantic University Libraries, Florida Atlantic University, Jupiter, FL 33458, USA
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Roberta K. Weber

    (Department of Curriculum, Culture, and Educational Inquiry, College of Education, Florida Atlantic University, Jupiter, FL 33458, USA
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • William Howerton

    (Florida Atlantic University Libraries, Florida Atlantic University, Jupiter, FL 33458, USA
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

Abstract

Improvement of academic library services as an outcome of continuous assessment is an aim of libraries of higher education institutions. Academic libraries are realizing the need to document evidence of their value to the institutions and the patrons they serve. Publications that include assessment research are reaching library decision makers, who seek to apply evidence to improve services or implement best practices that benefit all stakeholders. Following two previous studies that reported longitudinally on front-line library services, this paper investigates current five-year trending of three prestigious academic library journals in the publication of assessment studies. Data for this study were drawn through a content analysis process, in which the investigators selected studies for inclusion using a set of criteria developed in a pilot exercise. After individually examining 649 research articles, published between 2012 and 2016, 126 met the study’s selection criteria and were categorized according to the type of service they studied. Papers on information literacy instruction dominated, while reference services, technology, and general assessment studies saw less representation in the three journals. This finding reflects the priority placed upon information literacy instruction and describes how three American library journals are responding to current trends across academic libraries.

Suggested Citation

  • Ethan J. Allen & Roberta K. Weber & William Howerton, 2018. "Library Assessment Research: A Content Comparison from Three American Library Journals," Publications, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-22, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:6:y:2018:i:1:p:12-:d:136407
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/6/1/12/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/6/1/12/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Megan Oakleaf, 2009. "Using rubrics to assess information literacy: An examination of methodology and interrater reliability," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 60(5), pages 969-983, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhang, Baolong & Wang, Hao & Deng, Sanhong & Su, Xinning, 2020. "Measurement and analysis of Chinese journal discriminative capacity," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(1).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. María Pinto, 2015. "Viewing and exploring the subject area of information literacy assessment in higher education (2000–2011)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 227-245, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:6:y:2018:i:1:p:12-:d:136407. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.