Towards a more meaningful involvement of librarians in academic program reviews
Abstract
Purpose
Using a descriptive case study approach, this paper aims to validate academic librarians’ perceptions that they are marginalized by faculty during academic program reviews, and recommends ways for the two groups to collaborate more effectively to make program reviews more meaningful.
Design/methodology/approach
The paper describes a case study at a Canadian university where the six types of documents produced as part of the program review process for ten graduate programs were analyzed using corpus analysis tools and techniques, such as keyword generation and key word in context analysis. For each program, documents were examined to determine the volume and nature of the discussion involving libraries in the self-study, library report annex, site visit itinerary, external reviewers’ report, academic program’s response and final assessment report.
Findings
The empirical evidence from the corpus analysis validates the findings of previous perception-based studies and confirms that librarians currently have a minor role in program reviews. Best practices and gaps emerged, prompting five recommendations for ways in which academic librarians can play a more meaningful role in the program review process.
Practical implications
The results suggest that programs are not currently putting their best foot forward during program reviews, but this could be improved by including librarians more fully in the program review process.
Originality/value
The present study contributes to the existing body of knowledge about the role of academic librarians in the program review process by providing direct and empirical measures to triangulate previous perception-based investigations that rely on surveys and interviews. It summarizes limitations of the current institutional quality assurance process and the benefits to be gained by involving librarians more in the process. It offers recommendations for policymakers and practitioners with regard to potential best practices for facilitating librarian involvement in academic program reviews.
Keywords
Acknowledgements
This study was funded by a 2016 Canadian Health Libraries Association Research Grant and an Insight Grant (435-2017-0075) from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. We are grateful to Mike Scott, developer of the WordSmith Tools corpus analysis software package, for permission to use screenshots. As stated on the WordSmith Tools site, “For non profit-making academic use: No need to ask. You are hereby granted permission”. (http://lexically.net/publications/copyright_permission_for_screenshots.htm). Thanks are also due to the three University of Ottawa librarians who took the time to review and offer valuable feedback on an initial draft of this paper and its recommendations.
Citation
Bowker, L. (2018), "Towards a more meaningful involvement of librarians in academic program reviews", Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 131-148. https://doi.org/10.1108/QAE-10-2017-0068
Publisher
:Emerald Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2018, Emerald Publishing Limited