History Erased

IntroductionWorkforce Issues in Library and Information Science Joanne Gard Marshall (bio), Paul Solomon (bio), and Susan Rathbun-Grubb (bio) Beyond buildings, collections, and services, the library and information science (LIS) workforce is key to the success of many aspects of a knowledge economy. LIS professionals partner with educators in the instruction of youth and young adults, support reading and information literacy required for productive participation in society over the life course, enable research and development through access to research findings and translational systems, and promote commerce through Web development and organization and retrieval of information, to name just a few of their service objectives. Whereas librarianship has a long history as a profession, the expanded field of library and information science presents many new opportunities for information professionals to work in non-library settings. Occupational employment data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2008) estimate that there are 151,170 librarians, 113,510 library technicians, 5,330 archivists, and 3,960 library science post-secondary faculty in the workforce (not including self-employed workers). The American Library Association (2009) estimates the number employed in academic, public, and school libraries at 329,941. Library and information science professionals working outside of libraries are much harder to identify and their numbers tend to be spread among various occupational categories. The U.S. National Center for Education Statistics (2008) reports that there were 6,767 master's degrees in library science conferred by degree-granting institutions in the academic year 2006–7. While the number of degrees has been slowly increasing since the late 1990s, the supply of new graduates does not appear to be adequate for the number of retirements that will take place as the baby boomers leave the workforce. According to Dohm (2000), the impact of the retirement of seventy-six million boomers on U.S. labor supply will be greatest in the decade following 2008. As [End Page 121] shown in table 1, Dohm (2000) presented Bureau of Labor Statistics data that placed librarians seventh on a list of occupations with the highest percentage of workers aged forty-five years and older in 1998, at which time the median age of librarians was forty-seven, compared to age thirty-nine for all twenty-four occupations on the list. Concern continues to be expressed about potential LIS workforce shortages, given the expected baby boomer retirements, and the need for increased recruitment, diversity, succession planning, and leadership development in the profession. Less attention has been paid to retention of LIS professionals at various career stages, although this is another strategy that is worthy of consideration, given the nature of the workforce challenges that lie ahead. Given this concern, it is an ideal time for an issue of Library Trends that begins to take stock of some of the major issues related to the LIS workforce and to lay a foundation for future research and workforce planning at all levels. In 2004, the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) initiated the 21st Century Librarian Program, which made workforce research a priority. In the same year, IMLS funded a national study on the Future of Librarians in the Workforce being conducted by Griffiths, et al. (www.libraryworkforce.org). The national study aims to project the supply and demand for librarians and to provide data from a wide variety of surveys of libraries, library employees, employers, career counselors, educators, and other groups. In 2005, IMLS funded another large scale workforce study by Marshall, et al. (www.wilis.unc.edu), which provided an in-depth look at the careers of graduates of the six LIS programs in North Carolina from 1964–2007. A follow-up study known as WILIS 2 is using the recent graduates' portion of the full retrospective career study as a basis for creating an alumni tracking survey that a wide range of LIS programs can potentially use. Other major LIS research studies have also been undertaken by the 8Rs Research Team in Canada (2005) and the Colorado State Library (Steffen, Lance, Russell, & Lietzau, 2004). In 2004, the Archival Census and Education Needs Survey in the United States, also funded by IMLS, was conducted by the Society of...

Unfinished Business: Race, Equity, and Diversity in Library and Information Science Education edited by Maurice B. Wheeler. Lanham: Scarecrow Press, 2005. 203 pp. ISBN 0-8108- Discovery. Colonization. Slavery. Civil war. Reconstruction. Civil rights. And finally, Brown v. Board of Education in 1954. Was this a new beginning or a false start? Race has played a salient role in the history of the United States; racism, discrimination, and the degradation of African Americans and other minorities existed in this country for more than 200 years before the peak of the Civil Rights Movement.¹ Indeed, 50 years before Brown v. Board of Education, W.E.B. Dubois proclaimed that “the problem of the twentieth-century is the problem of the color line” (1996, p. 11). Clearly, race continues to play an important role in America: almost 40 years after the historic Supreme Court decision, John Hope Franklin (1993), a prominent historian, echoed Dubois’ proclamation by stating that the problem of the twenty-first century will continue to be the color line. Like Dubois and Hope, the contributing authors of Unfinished Business: Race, Equity, and Diversity in Library and Information Science Education draw a similar conclusion—that racial inequity remains in both intellectual and professional pursuits in the field of Library and Information Science (LIS). That is not to suggest that progress has not been made; it has, but the authors pose the question, “to what extent?” Contributors, which include graduate students, practicing librarians, and experienced LIS faculty, collectively argue that despite the Brown v. Board of Education decision that occurred 50 years ago, the LIS field has never been fully integrated. Unlike most publications that argue for diversity merely because it is the right thing to do, Unfinished Business argues that diversity is necessary in order to challenge the historical patterns of institutional racism upon which many segments of American society are built. Unfinished Business successfully shows that despite efforts to integrate LIS, much more work needs to be done. In the first chapter, Elizabeth Figa, a specialist in LIS history and culture, and Janet Macpherson, a doctoral student, provide a brief yet rich historical snapshot of American libraries and library schools before and after the Brown decision. As Figa and Macpherson show, segregation was standard practice among libraries before the Brown decision: in 1948, only four states offered integrated library services for blacks and whites. After Brown, the move towards integrating libraries was slow, and the American Library Association (ALA) made few efforts to facilitate integration. In 1961, for example, the ALA approved an amendment prohibiting refusal of library services based on race, but the amendment went largely ignored. LIS education has faced similar challenges in the realm of inclusion and integration. In 1966, 4 percent of

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. …

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

Purpose – The convergence of librarianship and information science to form library and information science (LIS) is seen as a recent phenomenon, with the term “information science” originally focused on the application of computers to library operations and services. LIS as a science and multidisciplinary field applies the practice and perspective of information with the aim of answering important questions related to the activities of a target group. As a science, LIS is more than a collection of facts to be memorised or techniques to be mastered but is instead an inquiry carried out by people who raise questions for which answers are unknown and who have gained confidence in their ability to reach conclusions, albeit tentative ones, through research, experiment and careful thought sharpened by the open criticism of others. What is described here is a dynamic and changing field of study called LIS which differs from Cronin ' s (2004) conclusion that library science or LIS is neither a science nor a discipline. Like any other science, LIS continues to emerge, evolve, transform and dissipate in the ongoing conversation of disciplines. Design/methodology/approach – To understand LIS, this paper thoroughly reviewed the literature by paying attention to the genesis of the terms “information”, “documentation”, “science” and “librarianship”, and then the interdisciplinary nature of library science and information science. Findings – The differences between librarianship and information science are an indication that there are two different fields in a strong interdisciplinary relation, rather than one being a special case of the other. LIS has grown to be a scientific discipline, knowledge and a process that allows abandoning or modifying previously accepted conclusions when confronted with more complete or reliable experimental or observational evidence. Therefore, like any other science, LIS is a science and discipline in its own right that continues to emerge, evolve, transform and dissipate in the ongoing conversation of disciplines. Originality/value – What is described here is a dynamic and changing field of study and a science called LIS that differs from Cronin ' s (2004) assessment that library science or LIS is neither a science nor a discipline. The originality of the paper is rooted in a growing discussion to understand the relevance and appreciate the continued existence of LIS as a science and a field of study.

The Future Voices in Public Services column is a forum for students in graduate library and information science programs to discuss key issues they see in academic library public services, to envision what they feel librarians in public service have to offer to academia, to tell us of their visions for the profession, or to tell us of research that is going on in library schools. We hope to provide fresh perspectives from those entering our field, in both the United States and other countries. Interested faculty of graduate library and information science programs who would like their students' ideas represented in these pages are invited to contact Nancy H. Dewald at nxd7@psu.edu. Martha Stortz is a student in the Library and Information Science (LIS) program at the University of Western Ontario. In this essay she offers her perspective on the teaching of librarianship. The University of Western Ontario's LIS program is part of the Faculty of Information and Media Studies (FIMS) and enjoys the benefits of interdisciplinarity brought about by collaboration with other FIMS programs such as Journalism and Media Studies. Originally founded as the independent School of Library and Information Science in 1967, the school merged with other programs in 1996 to form FIMS. Two major LIS programs of study are offered: one leading to the Master of Library and Information Science (MLIS) and the other to the Doctor of Philosophy (PhD). The MLIS program is accredited by the American Library Association. *****

This study investigated the external contributors of library and information science (LIS) knowledge who were unaffiliated with LIS-related institutions but published their research results in LIS journals. Differences between the contributors to library science (LS) and contributors to information science (IS) were considered. Articles published in 39 strongly LIS-oriented journals indexed in the Web of Science database between 2005 and 2014 were analyzed. The results demonstrated that 46.5% of the LIS articles were written by at least one non-LIS author; authors’ backgrounds ranged across 29 disciplines. An increasing trend was observed in degrees of interdisciplinarity of LS and IS. An increase in proportion of articles by LIS and non-LIS authors was identified in LS and IS as well. Those with medical backgrounds were the primary non-LIS authors contributing to the LS field and collaborated the most frequently with LIS authors. Those with computer science backgrounds were the most prevalent non-LIS contributors to the IS field and preferred to publish individually. A critical difference was also identified in research topics between LS and IS. The foundations of LIS and scientometrics were the largest research topics in LS and IS, respectively.

One area in many library and information science (LIS) education programs consistently occupies the far end of the prestige spectrum: school librarianship. As Evelyn Daniel wrote in the Reader in Library and Information Services, “School librarianship [is] frequently regarded as a low status and alien activity by both the education and library professions” (1974, p.57). To gain necessary recognition and continue to develop as a field, she concluded, awareness and understanding of the complexities of school libraries must come from library and information science educators, practitioners, and researchers (Daniel, 1974). The intent of this issue of Library Trends is to begin to shift staid conceptions of school librarianship in the LIS academy to the idea of dynamic educational informatics in schools; this shift in perception can have tremendous impact upon preparation curriculum, professional practice, and research trajectories in all areas of library and information science. At present, few opportunities to encounter school library-related research exist in the information science community. School librarianship has only two peer-reviewed journals, School Library Media Research and School Libraries Worldwide. Research articles about school libraries appear infrequently in information and library science periodicals aimed at a broader audience.

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).

The purpose of this article is to document the demographic characteristics of the library and information science (LIS) workforce and to discuss the implications of these findings for education and workforce planning. Workforce Issues in Library and Information Science 1 (WILIS 1) is a collaborative research partnership of the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill School of Information and Library Science and the University of North Carolina Institute on Aging, funded by the Institute of Museum and Library Services through its Librarians for the 21st Century Program. Workforce Issues in Library and Information Science 1 (WILIS 1) is a comprehensive study of the career patterns of graduates of LIS programs in North Carolina since 1964. This article examines data from 1,903 working LIS graduate respondents. The results of this study suggest that the LIS workforce is predominantly female, underrepresented in terms of race/ethnic minorities, and consists of slightly older workers than the workforce overall. Comparisons of earnings reveal a substantial wage gap between the males and females in the sample (men earn more). We also find significant race, sex, and gender differences in factors that motivated respondents to enter an LIS program and qualities of jobs that respondents find desirable. Based on these findings, we suggest the following strategies to increasing diversity: (1) focus efforts on recruiting race/ethnic minorities to the LIS profession; (2) structure LIS jobs to accommodate the needs of women workers; and (3) plan for and accommodate the large segment of older and retiring workers.

Ten years after the Medical Library Association (MLA) adopted its first research policy, the 1995 Using Scientific Evidence to Improve Information Practice [1], MLA President Joanne Gard Marshall, FMLA, appointed a task force to research and publish a new official statement [2]. The resulting MLA research policy statement, The Research Imperative, was approved by the MLA Board of Directors in 2007 and “challenges MLA members to build a supportive culture that values and contributes to a research base that is recognized as an essential tool for future practice” [2]. It describes domains of research as well as basic, advanced, and specialized research skills sets. The Research Imperative encourages health sciences library and information science (LIS) practitioners to take advantage of different educational opportunities to acquire and build on that skills set. Specifically, it recommends, “4. MLA will provide and promote education and training to support health sciences information research. To accomplish this recommendation, MLA will work with academic programs to ensure that opportunities to develop quantitative and qualitative research knowledge and skills appear throughout the curriculum, provide a complete range of basic and advanced courses in quantitative and qualitative research methodology through MLA's continuing education (CE) program, and encourage graduate LIS schools to require master's degree students to undertake a research project in information science” [3]. Curricular decisions for programs leading to the LIS master's degree (MLIS) are shaped by many factors, not the least of which is the very wide variety of careers that holders of such degrees can expect to have. Many will undoubtedly work in school, public, academic, or special libraries. Many others will be information professionals in archives, museums, corporations, and other organizations. In any case, a major driver for MLIS curricula is program accreditation by the American Library Association (ALA). The ALA Standards for Accreditation do not specify exactly what courses should be taught, but the accreditation seeks evidence of various curricular elements. In particular, the standards require that a program's mission, goals, and objectives include: “the importance of research to the advancement of the field's knowledge base…the importance of the contributions of library and information studies to other fields of knowledge [and]…the importance of the contributions of other fields of knowledge to library and information studies.” Furthermore, they seek evidence that the curriculum of an accredited program “emphasizes the evolving body of knowledge that reflects the findings of basic and applied research from relevant fields” [4]. Do MLIS academic programs “ensure…opportunities to develop quantitative and qualitative research knowledge and skills?” Do they “require master's degree students to undertake a research project in information science” [3]? Evidence of such opportunities would include (but not be limited to) courses and evidence of whether research projects are required for graduation from such programs. In a comparison of LIS research course requirements with those of other master's level programs in related disciplines, Park studied the 2002 graduate catalogs of fifty-two of the then fifty-six ALA-accredited MLIS programs as well as the catalogs of master's of business administration, master's of social work, and master's of education programs at some of those schools. She found that all but three of the MLIS programs offered research methods courses, but only twenty required such a course for graduation [5]. Park reported that “LIS does not use consistent terminology across schools to identify what constitutes a ‘research methods’ course” and that the courses “vary from comprehensive coverage of both quantitative and qualitative methods to superficial inclusion of simple survey methods.” Park discussed aspects of the MLIS degree that related to research “at the consumer level” and “at the contributor level” [5]. Evidence-based LIS (and other types of evidence-based practice) are examples of the use of the consumer level of research expertise. Practitioners in many fields can confuse the two functions, especially when the word “research” is taken to include searching literature for published scientific studies, as opposed to actually carrying out such studies. The Research Imperative quite rightly calls for health sciences librarians to practice as consumers of and contributors to research in the discipline. This study seeks evidence of the current availability of required or elective research methods courses and research projects as a graduation requirement in ALA-accredited masters' programs in library and information science.

The COVID-19 pandemic, the treatment and death of George Floyd, the Black Lives Matter and the MeToo movements, and restrictive immigration policies have more recently brought to the forefront the inequities in our everyday lives. From the inequity of access to COVID-19 vaccines across the globe, inequities of the treatment of people of color and women and access to broadband and online information, social justice issues have prompted not only increased media attention but also an increase in scholarly research. “There are five goals of social justice: access to resources, equity (provision of equitable resources that focus on the needs of communities and their members), diversity, participation in policy making by diverse groups, and human rights regardless of socioeconomic status (freedom of speech, voting rights, and other basic rights)” (Connaway and Radford, 2021, 442). These also correspond to the underlying principles of librarianship – access to information and the technology to obtain this information regardless of religion, political affiliation, gender identity, race, or economic and educational levels and intellectual freedom. The digital divide, the disparity between those who have access to technology and those who do not based on educational and economic levels, creates an imbalance of access to information. Equal access to broadband, information, healthcare, education, and socio-economic opportunities are critical issues in engaging social justice in LIS pedagogy and research. Social justice research is not new to the scholarly community, including the library and information science (LIS) community. However, the current social and economic environments have increased the awareness of inequitable practices and policies and the shortcomings of LIS offerings, programming, collections, procedures, and practices. These biases are present in our classification systems, knowledge management, vocabularies, algorithms used for discovery and access, and in our hiring, promotion and retention practices and policies in regard to diversity, equity, and inclusion in an international and development context. Integrating inclusive and equitable policies and practices into the LIS curricula also is imperative for preparing future professionals to meet the continually changing needs of diverse staff and communities. The panelists will discuss how LIS researchers and educators are integrating social justice into their scholarship and teaching, within a context of decolonizing research and advancing multiple ways of knowing. They then will highlight LIS social justice research, methodologies, and frameworks as well as future directions for research. Examples of how these research findings can be translated into LIS curricula will be highlighted. Lynn Silipigni Connaway will provide an overview of some of the social justice research topics being addressed in the LIS literature. She also will discuss ways to include diversity in research sampling and to be more inclusive in our participant recruitment and collection, analysis, interpretation, and dissemination of our findings. Clara M. Chu will introduce the scholarship of dialogue framework for LIS research that engages the voice of the research participants to provide them agency and enhance equity throughout the research process. She will discuss the perils of drive-by and helicopter research when studying the Other, including conducting research in marginalized and Global South communities. Dick Kawooya will discuss information policy research, why it is important, and how to integrate it into LIS curricula. Information policy research provides a unique opportunity to address social justice and inequality because it focuses on identifying social problems associated with information, segments of society affected by the problems, recommends solutions in the form of policy choices and if policy choices are implemented, it informs distribution of public and private resources (Braman, 2011). Information policy research focuses on issues such as the digital divide, library funding (school and public), censorship, privacy, net neutrality, data protection and integrity, intellectual property, and others. He will show why and how the above policy issues should be integrated across the LIS curriculum and which marginalized communities should be the center for each policy issue. Andiswa Mfengu will provide a discussion on socially just research impact assessment support from the LIS discipline. Research and research impact assessment have been greatly transformed over the years and thus providing an opportunity for the LIS discipline to explore equitable and context-sensitive approaches that cater for marginalized groups; and how these approaches can be embedded in LIS scholarship and education. She will discuss challenges and propose solutions on how research impact assessment support from the LIS discipline can be more inclusive, flexible, and equitable in practice and in curricula.

The purpose of this article is to discuss competencies required for practicum supervision within the field of library and information science (LIS) education. In doing so, this study attempts to propose Practicum Supervision Competencies Framework for professionals working in libraries and similar information organisations. The study aims to contribute to the body of knowledge on supervision of experiential learning programmes such as practicum and internships in the field of library and information science. Constructivist Grounded Theory approach was used for collection and analysis of data. Qualitative data was collected through semi-structured interviews with 43 participants that included library and information science professionals and students. Using constant comparative method, suggested in the Constructivist Grounded Theory literature, the components of the framework were developed and then validated and strengthened through the literature on competencies for library and information science professionals. Qualitative data analysis software NVivo 12 pro was used to support coding, category development and constant comparison methods in the data analysis process. Results of this study propose a framework for library and information science practicum supervision competencies and signify its importance for the academia and industry. The proposed framework is composed of five distinct but interrelated components, that is, Interactive, Management, Pedagogical, Professional and Technology which are important for practicum supervision in the field of LIS. The study also discusses empirical insights about the significance of research on practicum supervision within the field of library and information science as a distinct area. Practical implication of research encompasses several dimensions: methodological, theoretical, managerial and academic. For example, the framework should attempt to help better understand gaps between potential and actual competencies required by practicum supervisors in the field of library and information science. Research results may lack generalisability because of the chosen research method. However, researchers in other regions of the world are encouraged to test the proposed framework further.

This article provides an overview of Workforce Issues in Library and Information Science 2 (WILIS 2), a study aimed at developing a career-tracking and program evaluation system that can potentially be used by all library and information science (LIS) programs. Such a system could enable stakeholders at all levels to collect data on an ongoing basis, informing their planning process and resulting in more effective ways to educate, manage, and retain the LIS workforce. WILIS 2 is informed by the experience of the research team in developing WILIS 1, an in-depth career retrospective study conducted between 2005 and 2009. WILIS 2 is using a community-based participatory research approach that involves members of the LIS community in the major aspects of project design and implementation. Three working groups on survey design, data reporting, and sustainability have been formed to increase the likelihood that the data collection system will meet the needs of a wide range of LIS programs. Members of the working groups are being drawn from the WILIS project advisory committee and representatives of the participating LIS programs as well as stakeholder groups such as the Association for Library and Information Science Education (ALISE), the American Library Association (ALA), and the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS). Eight programs are participating in a pilot test of the survey, and an additional thirty-five programs will join in the full launch. Results from a WILIS survey of LIS program administrators regarding their existing alumni-tracking practices as well as key results from the recent graduates section of the WILIS 1 survey are included in this paper. The administrators' survey found a high level of interest in a shared approach to alumni tracking, and the results from the recent graduates section of WILIS 1 serve to illustrate the type of data that programs can gather through a recent graduates' survey.

Library and information science (LIS) research is becoming more quantitative. However, statistics is not extensively taught within LIS research methods courses, and statistics courses are uncommon within LIS programs. Previous research on statistics in LIS revealed that researchers have mainly relied on descriptive statistics in publications. This article argues that LIS’s partner disciplines, such as sociology, emphasize statistical training more so than do LIS programs at the master’s level. Sociology serves as an appropriate comparison to LIS because of its central status in the development of both qualitative and quantitative research methods and its relevance for library science. The author analyzed the curricular requirements of 109 master’s degree programs (47 sociology and 62 LIS programs) and 81 research methods syllabi (60 in sociology and 21 in LIS). The analysis of master’s in LIS (MLIS) and sociology MA curricula revealed that MLIS students took 0.6 research methods courses while sociology MA students took 2.7 methods courses. LIS programs typically required one methods course, whereas sociology MA programs required three. LIS methods courses spent on average 19% of instructional time on statistics, whereas 64% of sociology MA programs’ instruction in methods focused on statistical analysis. 86% of LIS research methods courses covered descriptive statistics and only 38% of LIS courses discussed inferential statistics. Statistical training in LIS programs remains limited. LIS departments could approach statistical training as sociology has done by teaching inferential statistics and other advanced techniques. Thereafter, information professionals can publish more widely and provide improved research support.