Linh Cuong Nguyen

Understanding the participatory library through a grounded theory study

Lankes and Silverstein (2006) introduced the “participatory library” and suggested that the nature and form of the library should be explored. In the last several years, some attempts have been made in order to develop contemporary library models that are often known as Library 2.0. However, little research has been based on empirical data and such models have had a strong focus on technical aspects but less focus on participation. The research presented in this paper fills this gap. A grounded theory approach was adopted for this study. Six librarians were involved in in-depth individual interviews. As a preliminary result, five main factors of the participatory library emerged including technological, human, educational, social-economic, and environmental. Five factors influencing the participation in libraries were also identified: finance, technology, education, awareness, and policy. The study’s findings provide a fresh perspective on contemporary library and create a basis for further studies on this area.

Narrowing the Gap Between LIS Research and Practice in Australia

Abstract Concerns about the gap between LIS theory and practice have been voiced by many commentators over the years. A moderate gap was identified between the research priorities of practitioners in the Relevance 2020 project’s focus groups, convened across Australia in late 2016, and the LIS research actually being conducted. A total of 172 Relevance 2020 participants, from a wide range of sectors, identified 96 priority topics, in areas such as the role of libraries and librarians, promotion, information service operations and information literacy. The participants also suggested ways in which LIS research could be better supported and made more relevant to practice. All stakeholders need to play their complementary parts: employers need to support practitioners’ involvement in research, as well as their engagement with it; professional networks can help lobby for funds and resources, and facilitate the development of research capacity; academics can identify areas in which their own agendas coincide with those of practitioners, and explain the relevance of their research findings. Strong partnerships between individual practitioners and researchers can be formed by first identifying common ground and aims, through the sort of constructive dialogue generated at the Relevance 2020 events.