Wednesday, May 15, 2013

competency definition article finally done!!

So the article looking at how we define competency in our LIS journal literature is finally published! Now I can move on to the juicy questions, such as why we are approaching competency this way, are there better alternatives to this evaluative mechanism, and what is competency's/framework's relationship to neoliberalism, if any?

Competency article's Abstract:

Information Science (LIS) and are being used not only to describe library positions but also as a means of assessment. This study investigates competency in the LIS academic context using English language peer-reviewed articles from the LIS journal literature for 2001‒2005, with findings tested by the later inclusion of 2011 data. A quadripartite definition consisting of cognitive, functional, behavioral, and meta-competence elements is used as a template against which to explore definition creation and use. Results offer a template for critical analysis of competency as found within the LIS journal literature. The methodology used, one of coding, reveals a commonality to discussions of competency within these articles, reflecting a more holistic understanding than expected. But authors’ highlighted competency definitions tend not to parallel the discussion in their respective articles, as shown by the lack of inclusion of multiple elements from the same quadripartite definition.


Article in our Institutional Repository Scholarship@UWindsor
Article in the Partnership: the Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research

Friday, May 03, 2013

examples of neoliberalism "on the ground"?

I've been busy trying to build up my understanding of how neoliberalism works "on the ground". The idea is to ultimately have librarians identify the presence of neoliberalism in academic libraries using a survey. Is it present and how prevalent is it? One approach is to identify neoliberal activities and list them, as part of a survey, for respondents to choose from. And/or to identify outcomes of neoliberal activities in academic libraries and choose from that list. If you think of a different approach please let me know. I'm kinda stuck on that one approach, creatively (not) speaking. There have to be easier ways?

Since all my research to date is about neoliberalism generally speaking, or neoliberalism in universities, I am making an assumption that the same trends, pedagogy and other indicators of neoliberalism's presence are leaking through "the membrane" and into libraries within the university setting. I have no proof of that. I hope to get an answer to that question from the future survey.

It is interesting that the more theoretical/overview books (Giroux 2008, Bourdieu 2003, Duggan 2003) are helpful but not as instructive as Turk's (2008) edited book Universities at Risk re: how neoliberalism is implemented.  Specific cases allow me to come to grips with such approaches as the "means... coming to displace the end they were meant to promote (Schafer, 67)," marginalizing you as a critic of neoliberalism by co-opting colleagues, scrutinizing for possible legal actions, mining your friends/colleagues for information, complaints to external bodies re: alleged infractions and monitoring your communications (Healy, 119) and generally implementing "attack the man" and "straw man" arguments.

Healy, in Turk's edited book, outlines 4 strategies (134-135) currently in play specific to the health industry that I think are transferable to a university/library setting: 1. selling disorders (x is a problem, x being the issue of the month put in play by your administration, for example), 2. marketing of risk and fear (what will go wrong if we don't do this, even if there is no evidence or indication), 3. nothing is o.k. and everything is problematic, and 4. viral transmission with the knowing/unknowing participation of members of the unit who are taken in by these strategies.

Stonechild, same book again, comments on moves by neoliberals to protect the right of political leaders (in other words your administration, not the front line librarians) to speak and the reduction of academics (and librarians) to the role of "technicians" (141), moves he noted when looking at the controversy around the First Nations University. Gutstein later in the book (167), when addressing think tanks, covers how administrations use think tanks as a front or a Trojan horse, buying expertise in order to claim expertise. He also mentions that when you agree with the powers that be you get more support politically and monetarily and may also become mouthpieces and fronts for neoliberal ideas (175).

These are overly simplistic renderings of the arguments offered by the various authors, of the complex and multi-faceted approaches taken by neoliberals. I am still reading this monograph and suspect I will have more to add to this list.