Research, evidence and practice – working together

By Clare Thorpe

The eighth International Evidence Based Library and Information Practice conference (EBLIP8) is returning to Australia in July 2015. Ten years after the third conference ventured to the southern hemisphere, Brisbane is again host city for EBLIP8 from July 6th to 8th 2015. This biennial event aims to promote the use of the best available evidence in practices and processes particular to the library and information profession. The conference provides an opportunity to bring together researchers and practitioners from all sectors to discuss and explore contemporary issues and topics of relevance to evidence based practice.

So what is the connection between research and evidence based practice? Is there a difference within professional practice?

Evidence based practice within the library and information professions emerged around the turn of the 21st century, promoting an approach that intricately linked research with professional practice. Evidence based practice was initially adopted and adapted by health librarians drawing on the models developed by the medical professions, growing and evolving to become important resource in the LIS professionals’ toolkit across all sectors and roles. Early definitions from Booth (2002) and Eldredge (2002) emphasised the critical use of research to improve decision making. Crumley and Koufogiannakis (2002) extended these definitions, focussing not only on the use of research but also encouraging librarians to become researchers and to “conduct high quality qualitative and quantitative research”. (p.62)

In its short history, the literature and discussion around EBLIP has primarily focussed on the analysis, validation and application of research literature to a specific problem to inform decision making. But it is fair to argue that evidence based practice as imported from the medical profession has never been a perfect match for library and information sciences. Although synonymous with information sciences, librarianship at its best is a combination of both “science” and “art”. Koufogiannakis (2013) describes this as the application of both “hard” and “soft” evidence within professional practice. Hard evidence sources are those more scientific in nature, including traditional published research sources. Soft evidence includes “non-scientific” sources such as accumulated knowledge, opinion, instinct and relationships. Speaking at the opening of the EBLIP7 conference, Koufogiannakis argued that research may not always be the best form of evidence given the collaborative (or committee) approach to decision making often applied to specific problems within individual libraries. EBLIP discussions may need to recognise the diverse range of legitimate sources of evidence that librarians use in their decision making processes, including research publications. This is not to discredit the importance of research but rather to highlight it as one key element which evidence based library and information practitioners use, combined with other aspects of evidence, to make informed decisions. Research, evidence and professional experience together combine to create the evidence based library and information practice picture.

The theme of the EBLIP8 conference is “evidence and practice: working together” and reflects our focus on narrowing the gap between practice and evidence and in promoting evidence based practice in all parts of the library and information professions. For the Australian LIS community, this is an opportunity to showcase the way in which we are developing practices and processes particular to the library and information profession and reconfiguring the traditional evidence based philosophy to suit individual circumstances and locations. Australian researchers and practitioners are among notable contributors to the contemporary EBLIP dialogue, with Lewis (2011), Gillespie (2010), Partridge (2010) and others leading the way in Australia and internationally. Initiatives such as the Australian Evidence Based Practice Librarians’ Institute are fostering strong engagement and mentoring a new generation of evidence based practitioners in the health sector. Collaboration across institutions and sectors is fundamental to foster learning through the sharing of experiences, publication of quality research results, and a sustainable and connected EBLIP community. 

The organising and program committee of EBLIP8 welcome submissions from practitioners and the research community to explore these ideas in Brisbane next July. Submissions close October 13, 2014. Find out more at http://eblip8.info/callforcontributions/ 

References

Booth, A. (2002). From EBM to EBL: two steps forward or one step back? Medical Reference Services Quarterly, 21(3), pp. 51-64.

Crumley, E. and Koufogiannakis, D. (2002). Developing evidence based librarianship: practical steps for implementation. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 19, pp. 61-70.

Eldredge, J. D. (2002). Evidence based librarianship: an overview. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, 88(4): 289-302.

Gillespie, A.M. (2010) Valuing the impact of the teacher librarian from an evidence base. In Proceedings of SLAQ / IASL 2010 Conference, School Library Associations of Queensland and International Association of School Librarianship, Brisbane Convention & Exhibition Centre, Brisbane, Queensland. 

Koufogianniakis, D. (2013) EBLIP7 Keynote: What we talk about when we talk about evidence. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 8(4). Retrieved 23 September 2014 from: http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/EBLIP/article/view/20486/15965. 

Lewis, S. (2011), Evidence based library and information practice in Australia: defining skills and knowledge. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 28, pp. 152–155. 

Partridge, H., Edwards, S. & Thorpe, C. (2010) Evidence-based practice: Information professionals’ experience of information literacy in the workplace. In A. Lloyd & S. Talja (eds.) Practising information literacy: Bringing theories of learning, practice and information literacy together. Wagga, NSW: Charles Sturt University.

Clare Thorpe is Project Officer at the State Library of Queensland

Standard story

By Suzana Sukovic

During a time of frequent change and, in many areas, increasing regulation, the library and information profession often revisits its professional standards. LIS professionals who work in educational and medical organisations are particularly used to constant references to standards – from professional credentials to standards in behaviours and recommended practices. It is hardly surprising that a search for information about LIS professional credentials and standards on ALIA’s ProQuest database returns numerous articles about school libraries and, sometimes, the medical profession. Many refer to requirements in health and education, some to standards which we, as LIS professionals, should set for ourselves. Two articles which caught my attention, however, took a different perspective, suggesting stories and experiences as an insightful way of thinking about standards and norms.

The first article by Nes and Moen discusses how multiple modes of knowledge are critical in formulating the constantly evolving nursing practice. Standards can’t be divorced from the workplace and local knowledge, argue the authors. They look into a case of developing hospital procedures for stain disinfection in which medical staff draw upon existing professional standards as well as local practices and experiences to set standards for their workplace. Personal experience, collective expertise and formalised knowledge are all modes of knowledge which shape accepted practices in this case. Standards are not prescriptive documents. Nes and Moen “have demonstrated how standards challenge local expertise and create tensions leading to expansion and construction of a new standard”. Formalised knowledge, as presented in official publications, is a major factor in standard-setting, but the local culture and professional experiences shape it in accepted norms and procedures.

The second article is about the power of the story to create a vision for school libraries. Ross Todd argues for the use of narratives and stories to develop rich insights. By looking into stories of how school libraries helped students in developing life skills, librarians gather ideas about their role and purpose. In a research study into the status and context of school libraries in New Jersey, Todd listened to stories of many stakeholders. Stories about the role of libraries in learning confirm and strengthen librarians’ understanding that educational standards, and the development of students’ knowledge by applying these standards, is at the core of school library practice. The school library as a pedagogical centre, the school librarian as a co-teacher, and the focus on curriculum standards and inquiry-based learning emerge from study narratives and form a strong vision for libraries to be shared with school communities.

For a professional who considers ways of balancing the needs of the workplace with wider professional standards, these articles offer a useful perspective on, and methods for, the development of our own standards. A view that our professional insights, and stories of our clients and stakeholders matter, offers a liberating approach to standard-setting in practice.

References
Nes, Sturle, and Anne Moen. 2010. Constructing standards: a study of nurses negotiating with multiple modes of knowledge. Journal of Workplace Learning 22 (6):376-393.

Todd, Ross J. 2012. Visibility, core standards, and the power of the story: creating a visible future for school libraries. Teacher Librarian 40 (1):8-14,4

This article was first published in Incite, April 2014