Business librarians and new academic program review

Wu, Kerry; Senior, Heidi

doi:10.1080/08963568.2016.1140547

Cited by 4 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, when WordSmith's keyword generator was applied to the self-studies, the reviewers' reports, program responses and final assessment reports, not a single term on the resulting lists of keywords was related to libraries. The groups responsible for authoring each of each of these types of report consist primarily of academic faculty, and this lends support to observations made by researchers such as Wu and Senior (2016), who note that librarians are given the impression by faculty members that library-related issues are not central to program reviews.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 61%

“…Unfortunately, as reported by Wu and Senior (2016), the situation has not improved much in the past quarter century. Although more than 60 per cent of the 75 academic librarians who responded to their survey felt that librarians should play a part in the review process, over 65 per cent of respondents indicated that they were never involved (Wu and Senior, 2016, p. 119).…”

Section: Librarians In Academic Program Reviewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nevertheless, many librarians report feeling marginalized in this process. For instance, Wu and Senior (2016) recently published the results of an extensive survey of academic business librarians in the USA, which sought to shed light on the role that these librarians play in the new program review process. Their findings reveal that many librarians perceive their participation to be "often a mere formality and an afterthought", noting that in the opinion of the librarians surveyed:…”

Section: Background and Institutional Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Towards a more meaningful involvement of librarians in academic program reviews

Bowker

2018

QAE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 61%

Section: Librarians In Academic Program Reviewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Background and Institutional Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Towards a more meaningful involvement of librarians in academic program reviews

Bowker

2018

QAE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In general, with over half of this study's identified components being required in at least 60% of the sample, it seems the field is incorporating program review complexity at greater levels than previous studies found, such as Wu and Senior's (2016). One significant departure is from Conrad and Wilson's 1986 study, which found four models of program review: goal-based, responsive, decision-making, or connoisseurship.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

“…A cyclic academic program review is a focused method for gathering evidence of programmatic practices and policies including inputs, outputs, processes, and mapping between each in a continuous improvement framework. For some institutions and academic field organizations, program review processes are still being formalized, usually to promote accountability, legitimacy and effective change (Sowcik, Lindsey, & Rosch, 2012;Wu & Senior, 2016). Increasingly, field literature is advocating for strong connections between program review and strategic planning in order to impact institutional efficiency (Coombs, 2017).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Not Too Small to be Strategic: The State of Academic Program Review Guidelines and Instrumentation in Public Institutions

McGowan¹

2019

AIJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In higher educational settings, the academic program review process allows academic units to solicit feedback, make data-driven decisions regarding effectiveness and sustainability, and report to stakeholders. In order to discover trends and best practices in the current state of academic program review in higher education, examined was a sample of 53 processes representing a range of small-to-large public institutions in the United States in the categories of associate-degree granting, bachelors-degree granting, and masters-degree granting. Using a content analysis methodology, outcomes assessment and the use of data results featured prominently with 86.7% of the sample requiring their incorporation in academic program review, followed closely by judgments of resource adequacy and demonstration of program necessity and efficiency.

show abstract

Investigating the participation of business librarians in academic program reviews using corpus-based methods

Bowker

2018

Journal of Business & Finance Librarianship

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prior research into the role of business librarians in academic program reviews has relied on surveys and interviews, revealing that librarians perceive that they are marginalized in the review process. Using a collection of program review documentation produced for the reviews of nine graduate programs offered at a Canadian business school, this study employs corpus-based techniques to obtain direct measures of librarian involvement. The findings provide objective confirmation that business librarians are not well integrated into program reviews overall, and that their contribution to the reviews of professional programs is even more limited than their contribution to the reviews of research-oriented programs. Based on best practices and missed opportunities observed as part of this study, seven strategies are suggested for integrating business librarians more fully in the program review process for the benefit of all program stakeholders.

show abstract

Business librarians and new academic program review

Cited by 4 publications

References 11 publications

Towards a more meaningful involvement of librarians in academic program reviews

Towards a more meaningful involvement of librarians in academic program reviews

Not Too Small to be Strategic: The State of Academic Program Review Guidelines and Instrumentation in Public Institutions

Investigating the participation of business librarians in academic program reviews using corpus-based methods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About