Education for Information 

About: Education for Information is an academic journal published by IOS Press. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Information science & Higher education. It has an ISSN identifier of 0167-8329. Over the lifetime, 697 publications have been published receiving 15345 citations.

Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects

Abstract: Although many critics are reluctant to accept the trustworthiness of qualitative research, frameworks for ensuring rigour in this form of work have been in existence for many years. Guba’s constructs, in particular, have won considerable favour and form the focus of this paper. Here researchers seek to satisfy four criteria. In addressing credibility, investigators attempt to demonstrate that a true picture of the phenomenon under scrutiny is being presented. To allow transferability, they provide sufficient detail of the context of the fieldwork for a reader to be able to decide whether the prevailing environment is similar to another situation with which he or she is familiar and whether the findings can justifiably be applied to the other setting. The meeting of the dependability criterion is difficult in qualitative work, although researchers should at least strive to enable a future investigator to repeat the study. Finally, to achieve confirmability, researchers must take steps to demonstrate that findings emerge from the data and not their own predispositions. The paper concludes by suggesting that it is the responsibility of research methods teachers to ensure that this or a comparable model for ensuring trustworthiness is followed by students undertaking a qualitative inquiry.

The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) Version 2018 for Information Professionals and Researchers.

Abstract: INTRODUCTION: Appraising the quality of studies included in systematic reviews combining qualitative and quantitative evidence is challenging. To address this challenge, a critical appraisal tool was developed: the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). The aim of this paper is to present the enhancements made to the MMAT. DEVELOPMENT: The MMAT was initially developed in 2006 based on a literature review on systematic reviews combining qualitative and quantitative evidence. It was subject to pilot and interrater reliability testing. A revised version of the MMAT was developed in 2018 based on the results from usefulness testing, a literature review on critical appraisal tools and a modified e-Delphi study with methodological experts to identify core criteria. TOOL DESCRIPTION: The MMAT assesses the quality of qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies. It focuses on methodological criteria and includes five core quality criteria for each of the following five categories of study designs: (a) qualitative, (b) randomized controlled, (c) nonrandomized, (d) quantitative descriptive, and (e) mixed methods. CONCLUSION: The MMAT is a unique tool that can be used to appraise the quality of different study designs. Also, by limiting to core criteria, the MMAT can provide a more efficient appraisal.

The system of professions

Abstract: What is an ‘information professional’? For that matter, what is a ‘professional’? These questions are awkward because they are difficult to answer with precision or certainty. ‘The professions’ have been an object of study by sociologists for many decades, but only one author has meaningfully ventured into the information professions. The System of Professions is now somewhat elderly, but the foundational theory developed here is very well-suited to a field like Information – weakly delineated and continually evolving. The purpose of this review is to explore whether this classic sociological work, following its thirtieth birthday, might have new relevance to students and practitioners of both traditional and emerging information professions, given their rapidly changing work environments. Andrew Abbott is a professor of Sociology at the University of Chicago, and he served as the long-time editor of the American Journal of Sociology (2000–2016). This was his first book, notably winning the prestigious American Sociology Association’s Distinguished Scholarly Book Award (1991). Abbott’s own doctoral research had focused on the emergence of psychiatry as a profession; it was from this work that he abstracted his general conceptual model of professions as a ‘survival-of-thefittest’ ecology, and one that is set in a frequently changing social, epistemological, and technical landscape. Abbott’s distinctive contribution to the discourse is to methodically define professions wholly in terms of an elbows-out application of expertise; professions compete with each other for expertise-based jurisdiction over solvable problems. Competition

Strategies for Gaining Access to Organisations and Informants in Qualitative Studies.

Abstract: One of the most fundamental tasks relating to the undertaking of fieldwork for a qualitative research study lies in “gaining access”. This involves both securing entry into a particular organisation and ensuring that individuals associated with it, such as employees or users, will serve as informants. In terms of the first problem, a range of strategies that may be adopted by the investigator is highlighted in this paper. The methods include using endorsements from “authorities”, gradually phasing one’s entry into the organisation, offering benefits of some kind to managers in the event of their cooperation, responding to gatekeepers’ concerns honestly, demonstrating one’s suitability for entry in terms of professional background and experience, and remaining receptive to managers’ suggestions for the study. To encourage the cooperation of those associated with the organisation, the researcher may well favour a policy of prolonged engagement, seek to blend in with the community, offer incentives where appropriate and acknowledge openly the value of informants’ contributions. These strategies are considered in detail. The article also stresses the importance of gaining the approval of any “third parties” that may be responsible for the welfare of those people whom the researcher has targeted as informants.

Student perceptions of information literacy instruction: The importance of active learning

Abstract: This study investigates the merits of employing active learning strategies in the delivery of information literacy instruction (ILI). Traditional approaches to the teaching of information literacy skills – where students are passive recipients of the information they receive – are challenged. Rather, methods that encourage students to actively engage themselves in the learning process are posited to yield heightened student learning outcomes. To test this assumption, a survey was administered to 372 undergraduate students who experienced both passive and active learning ILI opportunities. Results indicate that passive instruction is not an effective style of teaching in yielding positive student psychological, behavioural or bene� t outcomes. Rather active instruction yields more positive effects. Importantly, the amount of active ILI received does not matter; a single active learning instructional session may be suf� cient to yield signi� cant and sustaining student learning outcomes. This is particularly good news for ILI practitioners working in resource-constrained higher educational environments.