Core competencies for academic librarians: a framework model from systematic literature review

Throughout our history, the field of librarianship has adapted to rapid changes in society and technology. In recent years, the list of challenges to which librarians must either adapt or push against has only continued to grow. In this context, the evolving field of library and information science (LIS) demands renewed attention into how LIS as a domain supports its researchers, educators, and practitioners and prepares students for practice in a field where our work is often subject to transitions, disruptions, and transformation. These challenges occur at many levels, from the macro-level of the social and political climate, the field-level with shifting demands on library practitioners, the education-level with the need for educators to meet these shifting demands, and the individual-level where personal circumstances shape our career trajectories. Much has already been written about the evolving nature of LIS and the need for library education to respond, though the nature of these recommended responses varies (Abels et al., 2015; Cronin, 2012; Godsett & Koziura, 2016; Lillard & Wales, 2003; Myburgh, 2003; Sutton, 1999; Van House & Sutton, 1996; Wilson, 2002). This research is often motivated by the belief that “a system of professional education can purposefully adapt and that an understanding of environmental change and the strategies by which its components can enhance their survival is therefore useful” (Van House & Sutton, 1996, p. 133). Sutton (1999) describes both the slow, incremental changes and the discontinuous, rapid changes that the library field experiences and points to the need to prepare professionals for both. He argues that while the field may prepare librarians for the former, it may not be adequately preparing them for the latter. LIS professional associations exist to support the profession and the professionals engaged within it (Henczel, 2015). They, along with LIS education, engage with and define the LIS habitus, or perceptions and assumptions, in the field (Van House & Sutton, 1996). Loan (2019) expands on this, offering five laws of Library and Information Science associations that outline ways associations can or should support individuals and advance the profession. The five laws include the “law of mission,” “law of action,” “law of identity,” “law of recognition,” and “law of unity” (p.1-6). ALISE, founded in 1915 as the Association of American Library Schools, is a professional organization that serves the LIS educator (ALISE, 2025). Summers (1986) notes that the organization has undergone many different and sometimes disparate themes. As a professional organization, ALISE supports its members through the annual conference, annual awards and grants, and the doctoral poster competition, designed to help engage and welcome new future LIS educators into the field (Julien, 2007). However, how ALISE’s support is perceived by its members and information professionals outside of the organization is unknown. This panel shares preliminary findings from the 2024-2025 Inaugural ALISE Leadership Development Internship project, which examined how practicing information professionals (both educators and practitioners) understand and experience the benefits and challenges of our field, including the professional organizations that support us. This project aims to help bridge the gap between LIS practitioners and educators, which was noted among participants and has been observed in the field more broadly (Lillard & Wales, 2003; Van House & Sutton, 1996). Drawing on 38 semi-structured, in-depth qualitative interviews with both information science educators and practitioners conducted between February and May of 2025, this panel centers on three key research questions (RQs): RQ1: What challenges do LIS educators and librarians experience in the field of library and information science? RQ2: What do practicing librarians want LIS educators to know about their jobs and preparation to work in the field? RQ3: What is the role of professional organizations in supporting both LIS educators and librarians? Through qualitative thematic analysis, we developed a four-domain framework (M.L.I.S) which we used to further organize how participants articulated challenges and opportunities: Macro Domain (M); LIS (L); Institutional Domain (I); and Self Domain (S). The Macro Domain included participant responses to national and structural forces shaping LIS work, including national referendums, policy, funding, and shifting technologies. The LIS Domain included participant responses to pedagogical approaches, potential gaps in their Master's curriculum, and research relevance within LIS education. The Institutional Domain included participant responses on organizational culture within their institution (library or university), administration, and the expectations of LIS professionals on the job. Finally, in the Self Domain, we included participant comments focused on professional identity, self-efficacy, and emotional labor. Findings reveal gratitude for LIS training yet persistent disconnects between education and professional demands. Within the Macro Domain, participants noted a need for LIS programs to better engage with professional challenges like funding cuts and censorship as well as build advocacy skills. In the LIS Domain, interviewees emphasized the importance of grounding curriculum in practical skills, including management training and adapting to new technologies. Within the Institutional Domain, participants discussed the pressure to manage workloads, navigate internal hierarchies, and respond to emergent crises (e.g., book challenges). Many felt LIS programs did not adequately prepare them to understand institutional dynamics or practices. Participants described how their personal values, well-being, and evolving identities shaped how they approached their work. They acknowledged the emotional dimensions of the profession, like burnout and the resilience required in public-facing roles. In this panel, the 2024-25 internship cohort will share the findings from this project, explain our motivations for pursuing this project, and seek input from participants on how they might consider these findings in the context of their own instruction. This panel session features three segments: (1) A 30-minute presentation of qualitative findings from the 2024-2025 Inaugural ALISE Leadership Development Internship Project; (2) A 30-minute moderated panel discussion of each domain’s tensions and opportunities; and (3) A 30-minute facilitated interactive segment inviting participants to share experiences and reimagine the MLIS framework. This panel is especially relevant for LIS educators and practitioners, doctoral students, early-career professionals, and professional association leaders. It encourages a nuanced, reflective conversation about how to co-create a more responsive, sustainable, and values-centered vision for LIS education and professional development.

A Review of:
 Vassilakaki, E. & Moniarou-Papaconstantinou, V. (2015). A systematic literature review informing library and information professionals’ emerging roles. New Library World, 116(1/2), 37-66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/NLW-05-2014-0060
 
 Abstract
 
 Objective – To provide a systematic review of the emerging or newly adopted roles of information professionals, over the past 14 years, as described in the Library and Information Science (LIS) professional literature. 
 
 Design – Systematic review of the literature.
 
 Setting – Databases featuring information science content, including ACM Digital Library, Library, Information Science and Technology Abstracts (LISTA), Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA), Citeseer, Google Scholar, e-prints in Library and Information Science (e-LiS), Digital Library of Information Science and Technology (DLIST), Scopus, and Science Direct. The database Library Literature & Information Science Index was not included.
 
 Subjects – Through a systematic literature search, the authors identified 114 peer-reviewed studies published between 2000-2014. 
 
 Methods – The authors searched selected databases using the terms “librarian/s role” and “information professional/s role” to collect literature about the roles of information professionals. The authors searched the selected databases in two phases. The initial search yielded 600 search results and the authors included 100 articles about “roles” information professionals have adopted. The authors excluded articles focused on specific positions, health and medical libraries, librarians’ professional skills, and development of specific programs or initiatives within libraries. In the second phase of searching, the authors refined search terms to include phrases specifically related to the roles identified in the 100 articles initially included in the review. There were 48 articles identified in the second search and 14 were included in the final pool of articles. The authors also cross-checked the references of all included literature.
 
 Main Results – The authors identified six roles of information professionals described in the literature during the review period. The role of “embedded librarian” was described in the largest number of articles (42%), followed by “librarian as teacher” (20%), “knowledge manager” (20%), “technology specialist” (9%), “subject librarian” (6%), and “information consultant” (3%).
 
 The study did not identify a dominant journal title or professional conference publishing research on information professionals’ roles. Some included literature reported a specific method for investigation, including questionnaires, content analyses, and mixed methods. However, the researchers report that the majority of articles represented personal views or perceptions of the authors.
 
 Conclusion – The roles of information professionals are continually changing, both in practice and in description. In particular, information professionals expanded their roles in teaching during the review period, shedding light on institutional and professional priorities.

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to determine the place of library and information Science (LIS) research within leading knowledge management (KM) journals and conferences.Design/methodology/approachAuthors examined articles published from 2000-2018 in top-20 KM publications identified by Google Scholar to look for relationship with LIS. Authors analyzed the identified LIS-related articles to determine the publication trends based on LIS terms used, populations, authorship pattern, country, information setting type and top-cited articles.FindingsAuthors found that the coverage of LIS-related articles within leading KM publications was very low. From the more than 10,000 KM research articles, less than 1 per cent were LIS-related.Research limitations/implicationsThis study would help LIS researchers measure the space they have created for their field within leading KM research. By showing the relatively low coverage of LIS within KM research, the study demonstrates that LIS researchers/practitioners need to do more for LIS to be recognized as an important area within KM. KM publications can also enable greater synergies with LIS for mutual benefit.Originality/valueLIS researchers have increasingly called for KM implementation within libraries. The KM field has a long history in library practice in the context of managing and organizing codified knowledge. Both KM and LIS share the common goals of providing access to knowledge for sharing, transfer and use. However, hardly any studies have looked at the amount of synergy or overlap between these two different but related areas, and whether LIS matters to KM, even though LIS practitioners have been highlighting that KM matters to LIS.

Introduction: This study uses bibliometric methods to evaluate research articles within the library and information science (LIS) domain. The focus is to uncover trends and patterns in social network analysis related to LIS, particularly examining research collaborations and content within highly cited articles. By analyzing these aspects, the study seeks to identify influential authors, prominent research themes, and key contributors in the LIS field. Methods: A dataset of 14,517 articles published between 1954 and 2023 was extracted from the Scopus database for bibliometric analysis. The study concentrated on publications in the LIS domain, focusing on the journal Library Philosophy and Practice. Multiple Correspondence Analysis (MCA) was used to identify clusters within the research field, while content analysis was performed to determine prevalent topics and disciplinary influences within the articles. Results: The analysis revealed that China is home to many of the most influential authors in the LIS domain, with the United States, China, and the United Kingdom identified as the top contributing countries to LIS research. Common research themes include information science, bibliometrics, academic libraries, information literacy, and LIS education. Two main clusters emerged from the MCA: one focused on information-related concepts and the other on bibliometrics and scholarly communication. Content analysis indicated a significant presence of topics from physics, computer science, and information technology within LIS research. Conclusions: This study highlights key trends and patterns in LIS research, with academic libraries, information literacy, LIS education, and librarians' roles identified as critical areas for future exploration. Expanding databases and refining keyword searches are recommended to enhance knowledge dissemination and educational adaptability in the LIS field. The findings aim to support LIS researchers, facilitate research planning, and promote global interinstitutional cooperation

Entrepreneurial skills are considered one of the most important competencies expected to be possessed by Library and Information Science (LIS) faculty and academic librarians as information professionals. These skills include technical skills, managerial skills, business skills, personal maturity skills, ICT skills and information literacy skills. The context observation and literature review indicated limited research on the entrepreneurial skills of Library and Information Science (LIS) faculty and academic librarians in Nigerian universities. The need to fill this inadvertently created gap initiated this study. The study aimed to assess entrepreneurial skills level as well as identify entrepreneurship issues and prospects of LIS faculty and academic librarians in South-West Nigerian universities with library schools. This paper was anchored on survey research design. The study employed the total enumeration method to cover all LIS faculty and academic librarians in these universities. An adapted structured questionnaire was administered and responses were analyzed quantitatively using frequency, percentage, mean and standard deviation. Findings revealed lackluster technical, business and ICT skills of these information professionals including unacceptable managerial skills. Furthermore, entrepreneurship issues showed government-centered, institutional and personal subjects such as government policies, economic problems, legal registration, funding, excessive workload and lack of entrepreneurial attitude. The study also uncovered dwindling entrepreneurship prospects. The study recommends premeditated efforts by LIS faculty and academic librarians and universities at entrepreneurial development and the advancement of citizen-friendly entrepreneurial policies and a blueprint by the government.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to introduce the notion of a collaboratory as a virtual learning community and discuss its significance to support collaboration between library and information science (LIS) researchers and practitioners.Design/methodology/approachThe LIS literature describes various forms of inter‐institutional collaboration involving librarians and information professionals, but there is an apparent lack of documented cases of collaboratories involving LIS practitioners and researchers. The paper draws from the literature about collaboratories in the fields of social informatics and information systems and describes the notion of collaboratory, its characteristics and main functions.FindingsIt is argued that a LIS collaboratory in the form of a virtual learning community has the potential to provide researchers and practitioners the opportunity to bring in and integrate their respective knowledge, expertise and connections, as well as expand participation of practitioners in research projects. Another claim is that this virtual learning community may fill a critical niche for small institutions as LIS schools and practitioners, and give them the opportunity to choose and work together on relevant research projects. While the prospect of LIS collaboratory looks promising, the challenges to building one need not be overlooked, in particular working at distance and crossing institutional boundaries. More research is needed on the socio‐organizational issues that can influence collaboration between LIS researchers and practitioners.Research limitations/implicationsThe discussion is based on the author's review of the literature and observations.Originality/valueThe notion of collaboratory is still new to the LIS field. This paper offers the opportunity to trigger a new discussion on collaboration between researchers and practitioners and the potential of collaboratories to support new forms of collaboration.

An important role of library and information professionals is in assisting others to find the information they need. As such, these professionals are themselves expected to have the necessary competencies to identify, access and communicate the required information, i.e. to be information literate. The foundations for these competencies are laid during their library and information science (LIS) education programs. This study investigated the role and contributions of LIS programs in Iran to the development of information literacy (IL) competencies among LIS students. It also examined the challenges in the development of these competencies and approaches to overcome the challenges. Taking an exploratory approach, the study used semi-structured interviews to gather the data. Using the 2000 ACRL standards as a framework, the fieldwork questions were designed around the five areas of IL competencies, viz. determining information needs, locating information, evaluating information, using information ethically, and using information for a specific purpose. A total of 15 academics teaching 18 different LIS courses from six universities were interviewed. They were asked to reflect on the IL competencies in the context of their teaching experience and dealing with students’ projects, and to identify how their course(s) contributed to the development of these competencies. A thematic approach was used to analyze the data. The findings suggest that the existing LIS curriculum does contribute sufficiently to the development of “determining information needs” competency explicitly. Through the module outline, students just learn how to develop a research statement in the “Methodology in Library and Information Science” course. Although the educators took some effective approaches, such as getting students to find and select a topic, scoping and breaking it down, making presentations, using journal clubs and having interactions, further considerations are needed to equip students with this competency. The main challenges facing educators were a lack of clear understanding of LIS as a discipline, the gap between the way students learn in schools and the expectations in a university, shortcomings in teaching styles, and the fixed nature of the LIS education system.

The study aims to analyse the evolving trends in research methodologies and paradigms in Library and Information Science (LIS), using articles indexed in the ScienceDirect database from 2015 to 2023. Using a Systematic Literature Review (SLR), this article analyses how LIS scholars apply three primary research methods, quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods, and situate their work within broader philosophical paradigms, including positivism, interpretivism and critical theory. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) framework was employed to guide the transparent reporting of the review process, not as a methodological tool. From an initial pool of over 210,000 articles, 47 met the inclusion criteria. The results highlighted researchers’ preferences for various research methods in LIS research. The analysis showed that 16 articles (34.04%) employed qualitative research, followed by 15 studies (31.91%) using mixed methods and 12 studies (25.53%) adopting quantitative approaches. In addition, the paradigmatic analysis revealed limited explicit engagement with critical theory (6.38%) and positivism (2.13%), indicating either under-articulation of paradigms or growing methodological pluralism in LIS. These findings reflect a dominant trend towards qualitative and integrative methodologies, with limited adoption of critical and positivist approaches in the reviewed literature. This study is limited to English language articles that include the key term ‘Library and Information Science’ focusing on three methods and three research paradigms: positivist, interpretive and critical theory. While some overlap exists between methodological and paradigmatic categories, the review identifies key trends and underexplored areas, offering valuable insights to inform future research design and methodological training in LIS.

This paper presents findings from a survey of 291 Australian library and information science (LIS) practitioners, examining their research capacity by identifying attitudes towards, and experiences of research activities, including support needs and barriers. This study found that supported LIS practitioners will be confident LIS practitioner-researchers. Findings reveal that in addition to fostering research skills and knowledge strategies to build LIS practitioners’ research capacity, the profession must acknowledge and address the feelings that underlie resistance to research. In addition, before mentoring can be used as a meaningful research support mechanism, LIS practitioners need to first develop confidence that their experiences are sufficient to provide support to others and receive training in research methods to bridge the gap between research as service, and research as partnership. LIS academics, with their expertise in research, are well placed to take an active role in collaboration with LIS practitioners to provide research training and mentoring. For LIS practitioner-researchers’ potential to be realised, developmental interventions need to be addressed within LIS institutions. As a supportive research culture within a workplace is enhanced, mistrust in research and anxiety about research practices will diminish, and practitioners will build their identities as practitioner-researchers.

Due to rapid growth of different types of data, scholarly publications, and scientific research, vast amount of data is being produced but managing this data for future use is a huge challenge for libraries and library and information science (LIS) schools and professionals. Thus, there is an urgent need to adopt an effective mechanism or method to collect, store, arrange, preserve, and utilize this data in the future. This article aims to learn the perceptions of the library and information professionals about data curation activities through a survey. The results of the study revealed that the majority of LIS professionals were working in academic libraries as librarians but are slightly aware about data curation concept from the first year. Most of these LIS professionals are involved in data curation activities due to their job responsibilities but majority of them lack adequate skill sets for the same. The results of the study also disclosed that large numbers of LIS professionals were involved in metadata activities, awareness towards data curation activities which can be developed by adding data curation concept in the curriculum of library and information science courses, and skills regarding data curation activities will be mandatory to the LIS professionals in future.

Canada’s research productivity in Library and Information Science (LIS) is significant: studies have found that Canada ranks third globally in terms of output. As the LIS field continues to grow, the pace of output accelerates, and the scope of this work expands. The recently launched Canadian Publications in Library and Information Science Database compiles all Canadian scientific publications, including those authored by faculty members and academic librarians. This database offers the advantage of encompassing articles and librarian publications that may not be typically included in traditional bibliometric surveys, such as those conducted using databases like Web of Science, Scopus, and Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA). Using this data, this study maps the scholarly contributions of Canadian LIS scholars and academic librarians to the field of LIS and examines whether Canadian LIS research is characterized by silos. This paper examines the similarities and differences in research output, impact, topics, and publication venues between academic librarians and scholars in Canada, as well as the extent to which academics and practitioners engage in research collaborations or reference each other’s work. We find that while there is some degree of overlap in research topics and publication venues between LIS academics and academic librarians, the two groups appear to act as distinct research communities with distinct topical foci and publishing habits. The two groups also do not appear to engage with each other strongly, either through collaboration or citing each other’s work.

The study was conducted to identify effective strategies for recruiting and retaining students of color in library and information science (LIS). Using a Web-based survey, the study collected data from librarians of color, enrolled in, or graduated from, ALA-accredited LIS programs. Study Findings help reassess the efforts that LIS programs made in recruiting and retaining students of color, and shed light on some key areas of focus and improvement for such efforts. Suggestions are made to develop strategies for diverse LIS community and programs. Introduction According to the Association for Library and Information Science Education (ALISE) statistical reports, the student population in Library and Information Science (LIS) schools/programs has not been as ethnically diverse as the U.S. population. Among the students enrolled in American Library Association (ALA)-accredited LIS schools, only 1 1 .3% are ethnic minorities including the four main groups, African Americans, American Indians, Asian Americans, and Hispanic Americans.1 This proportion at LIS schools is significantly lower than the proportion of minorities enrolled in graduate programs (26.4%)2 and those in the U.S. population (31.3%).3 The under-representation of ethnic minorities is also reflected in the library community. Librarians of color constitute about 12-12.5% of academic and public librarian populations.4 More recently, the ratio of librarians of color among credentialed librarians has actually dropped from 1 2% in 1 990 to 1 0% in 20O0.5 As in the LIS student population, the proportion of ethnic minorities in the librarian population (10-12.5%) is significantly lower than the proportion in the U.S. population (31.3%) (See Figure 1 ). Recent projections of the U.S. population indicate that, by 2050, the four ethnic minority groups will represent almost half of the U.S. population.6 As Josey has pointed out, unless the LIS schools and other related organizations develop and support a more comprehensive and aggressive recruitment program, the gap between LIS and U.S. populations will widen even further.7 Such a gap could be a serious issue, especially to public organizations like libraries. The mission of libraries is to serve the public, and the public is becoming more ethnically and culturally diverse. The increasing diver- sity in the user population requires changes in library services including reference, collection management, and outreach.9 Libraries whose staff is not as diverse as their users might not be able to serve the public effectively, as their employees' lack of expertise in different cultures and languages could be a barrier in understanding and helping users. Another issue is re- lated to users. Research suggests that interpersonal similarity can increase the ease of communication, foster relationships of trust and reciprocity, and also create a sense of belonging and membership. I0 Ethnicity is a key factor for interpersonal similarity, as it is closely related to the cultural as well as physical connections between individuals. In libraries, as in other public organizations, it is important to have enough librarians of color so that all users, regardless of their ethnic and cultural background, can see authority figures (such as librarians and teachers) who look like them. This would make the users feel comfortable and affirmed that they are in the right place. Furthermore, ethnic diversity is important because it enriches a society by offering all citizens more opportunities to experience, learn, and understand one another. Over the last few decades, LIS schools/programs have worked diligently to recruit people of color into the information profession, and other related organizations also have been stalwart in supporting recruitment programs. ALA, for example, created the Spectrum Initiative in 1997, to promote diversity in the library community and recruit minority librarians by providing scholarships, mentoring, and training programs. …

==Background== In most academic disciplines journals play an important role in disseminating findings of research among the disciplinary community members. Understanding a discipline's body of journals is therefore of grave importance when looking for previous research, compiling an overview of previous research and and in order to make a decision regarding the best place for publishing research results. Furthermore, based on Bradford's Law of scattering, one can assume that in order to be able to compile a satisfying overview of previous research a wide range of journals has to be scanned, but also that there are some "core" journals which are of more importance to specific disciplines than others. ==Aim== This thesis aims to compile a comprehensive master list of journals which publish articles of relevance to Library and Information Science (LIS). A method to rank journals by their importance is introduced and some key characteristics of the disciplines body of journals are discussed. Databases indexing the disciplines journals are also compared. ==Method== The master list of LIS journals was created by combining the journal listings of secondary sources indexing the field's literature. These sources were six databases focusing on LIS literature: INFODATA, Current Contents, Library and Information Science Abstracts, Library Information Science Technology Abstracts, Information Science and Technology Abstracts, and Library Literature and Information Science, the LIS subsection in three databases with a general focus: Social Science Citation Index, Academic Search Premier, and Expanded Academic ASAP, and the listing of LIS journals from the Elektronische Zeitschriften Bibliothek. Problems related to editorial policies and technical shortcomings are discussed, before comparing: predominant publication languages, places of publication, open access, peer review, and the ISI Journal Impact Factors (JIF). Journals were also ranked by the number of occurrences in multiple databases in order to identify "core" publications. The number of journals overlapping between databases are estimated and a matrix giving the overlap is visualized using multi dimensional scaling. Lastly, the degree of journals overlapping with other disciplines is measured. ==Results== A comprehensive master list of 1,205 journals publishing articles of relevance to LIS was compiled. The 968 active journals are mostly published in English, with one third of the journals coming from the US and another third from the UK and Germany. Nearly 16% of all journals are open access, 11% have a ISIJIF, and 42% are peer reviewed. Fifteen core journal could be identified and a list of the top fourteen journals published in Germany is introduced. Databases have between five to 318 journals in common and the journal collection shows an substantial overlap with a wide range of subjects, with the biggest journal overlap with Computing Studies, and Business and Economics. ==Conclusion== The aim of compiling a comprehensive list of LIS journal was achieved. The list will contribute to our understanding of scholarly communication within the LIS discipline and provide academics and practitioners with a better understanding of journals within the discipline. The ranking approach proved to be sufficient, showing good similarity with other studies over the last 40 years. The master list of LIS journals has also potential use to further research.

The present communication attempts to trace the research trends in library and information science (LIS) carried out by the researchers in Tilak Maharashtra Vidyapeeth (TMV), department of LIS. It presents the analysis of thesis/dissertations submitted by research scholars for getting degrees of M.Phil. and Ph.D. during the academic period 2008–2018. During this period, 168 thesis/dissertations have been submitted by research scholars of M.Phil. and Ph.D and 160 have been accepted by Tilak Maharashtra Vidyapeeth, Pune. The analysis mainly focused on the productivity of research output, subject areas represented, type of libraries covered and gender-wise analysis of the research students, etc. The research topics undertaken during the period included areas like information science, academic libraries, library management, ICT, use, user studies, etc. The research output indicates the growth in the doctoral research in LIS of this Vidyapeeth. The research data gathered has been analysed systematically and presented under different heads like chronological distribution, subject-wise analysis, guide-wise analysis and it also reflects the emerging trends/areas in the field of library and information sciences. The research findings indicate the current research trends in TMV, which covers areas like IT applications, digitization, preservation and conservation of literature, disaster management, internet resources, bibliometrics, institutional repositories, etc. This study may be useful to the research scholars and guides in planning and selecting the topics for the research in library and information science. The efforts made by the department of LIS, Tilak Maharashtra Vidyapeeth in bringing out the research environment are also traced systematically. The objective of this communication is to assess the research output of TMV, Department of LIS. Keywords : LIS research, evaluation of research studies, M.Phil. dissertations, Ph.D. Thesis, Tilak Maharashtra Vidyapeeth, research analysis Cite this Article Khandare Dhanishtha S. Research Output of Department of Library and Information Science, Tilak Maharashtra Vidyapeeth, Pune. Journal of Advancements in Library Sciences. 20 20 ; 7 (20-27p).

Alabamians about immigrants, offering increased outreach and awareness to, 204 Algorithms, 116 algorithm-driven search