The academic–practitioner gap in Spanish library and information science: An analysis of authorship and collaboration in two leading national publications

Abstract

It is not unusual to hear that a significant separation or divergence exists between the interests of LIS professionals who work in library and information services and those who are university teachers. This division results in limited cooperation between the two communities and further debilitates already weak international collaboration in the discipline. This article first conducts a qualitative review of the various types of literary evidence that address the divergence and lack of cooperation, and subsequently presents quantitative evidence for the Spanish geographical context.

Cross-disciplinary collaboration versus coexistence in LIS serials: analysis of authorship affiliations in four European countries

“…This strong presence of authors from the professional field, regardless of whether they were classified by discipline, helps contextualize the low level of cross-disciplinary collaboration as a whole, since much of the work by these professionals consists of the communication of experiences and case studies that are not explicitly linked to research projects, and the authors of which are the professionals of the centres. As analysed in other works (Ardanuy and Urbano 2019), there is a considerable gap between scholars and professionals that helps partially explain the low level of cross-disciplinary collaboration, since 47% of the total authorships corresponded to non-academic staff. The number of authorships by area linked to titles ranked by quartile in the SJR and JCR editions corresponding to the publication year of each paper studied was also analysed.…”

Closing the researcher-practitioner gap

“…Williamson, 1931), LIS researchers continue to draw attention to the distance between the two parties, and the challenges that this poses (see, e.g. Ardanuy and Urbano, 2017;Bawden, 2008, p. 420;Bowler and Large, 2008;Feather, 2009, p. 173;Klobas and Clyde, 2010, p. 237;Kloda et al, 2014, p. 30;McMenemy, 2010;Ponti, 2008, p. 265;Sonnenwald et al, 2009, p. 194). It has been noted that:…”

Research, impact, value and library and information science (RIVAL): Development, implementation and outcomes of a Scottish network for LIS researchers and practitioners

“…Often characterised as a mutual lack of understanding between practitioners and researchers, the research‐practice gap in LIS has been acknowledged for several decades. Nevertheless, almost a century since some of the earliest references to this (e.g., Williamson, 1931), LIS researchers continue to draw attention to the distance between researchers and practitioners, and to the challenges that this poses (e.g., Ardanuy & Urbano, 2019; Bawden, 2008, p. 420; Booth, 2003; Bowler & Large, 2008; Klobas & Clyde, 2010, p. 237; McMenemy, 2010; Ponti, 2008, p. 265; Sonnenwald, Lassi, Olson, Ponti, & Axelsson, 2009, p. 194).…”

“…challenges that this poses (e.g., Ardanuy & Urbano, 2019;Bawden, 2008, p. 420;Booth, 2003;Bowler & Large, 2008;Klobas & Clyde, 2010, p. 237;McMenemy, 2010;Ponti, 2008, p. 265;Sonnenwald, Lassi, Olson, Ponti, & Axelsson, 2009, p. 194).…”