Chief Administrator of the Unit: Dr. Alvin M. Schrader, Director

Parent Institution: University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

Chief Executive: Dr. Roderick D. Fraser, President and Vice-Chancellor

Chief Academic Officer: Dr. Douglas R. Owram, Vice-President (Academic)and Provost

Administrative Officer to whom the Unit's Administrator reports: Dr. Larry S. Beauchamp, Dean, Faculty of Education

Parent Institution's accrediting agency: Universities Act (Alberta) and The Universities Coordinating Council

Program brought forward for accreditation: Master of Library and Information Studies (MLIS)

The School of Library and Information Studies offers the only graduate education program in library and information studies in the Prairie Provinces. Its establishment was originally approved in principle in 1965 by the University of Alberta as the School of Library Science, the first Director was hired in 1967, and the first students were admitted the following year. The School became the Faculty of Library Science in 1975 and changed its name to the Faculty of Library and Information Studies in 1988. In 1991, the unit was restructured administratively as a department in the Faculty of Education and renamed the School of Library and Information Studies.

The initial mandate of the School was to offer a one-year Bachelor of Library Science (BLS) degree program and in 1969 the first BLS degrees were awarded to 42 students. In 1976, with the phasing out of the Bachelor's program, the two-year Master of Library Science (MLS) program was approved as the first professional degree and in 1978 the first MLS degrees were awarded to 29 students. In 1988, with the name change to the Faculty of Library and Information Studies, the first Master of Library and Information Studies (MLIS) degrees were awarded at Fall Convocation to 13 students. In 1995, the School assumed an important share of the curricular and administrative responsibility for the diploma program in teacher librarianship, a post-BEd distance learning program that is Internet-based, that had hitherto been housed solely in the Department of Elementary Education.

Since its inception, the School has awarded 1,110 degrees: 408 BLS degrees (1969-1976), 5 one-year MLS degrees (1971-1976), 697 two-year MLS and MLIS degrees (1978-Fall 1998), and one individual PhD degree (1992). There are presently 91 students in the MLIS program, full- and part-time (70 FTE), and one student in the individual PhD program. The student currently enroled in the individual PhD program is co-supervised by the Department of Elementary Education.

In addition to the accreditation process, the School has also undergone a number of internal reviews prompted by widespread concern among the University community and administration about how to facilitate faculty renewal in times of severe financial retrenchment: a review of the School's administrative status under the auspices of the Vice-President (Academic) in 1987; the PACCR study in 1989-90, part of a process of review of all faculties under the President's Advisory Committee on Campus Reviews; the administrative restructuring mandated in 1991 in the University of Alberta review document Maintaining Excellence and Accessibility in an Environment of Budgetary Restraint; the review of the graduate programs in the Faculty of Education in 1994 resulting in the Shapiro Report; a review of departmental structure in the Faculty of Education, also in 1994; and the graduate program review in 1994-95, which was part of a cyclical review process of all graduate programs at the University of Alberta that was initiated in 1994 by the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research (FGSR).

One result of the graduate program review was the development of a strategic plan for the School in 1995, focussing on faculty renewal through retention and recruitment, curricular review and cooperation in course offerings with other academic units, and strengthening of the School's research culture and productivity.

This document was revisited in faculty planning meetings held in May and July 1996, on the occasion of the appointment of Dr. Alvin Schrader as Acting Director of the School, to articulate the School's character and culture in terms of a vision statement, to identify areas of research specialization within the School, to explore research links with other scholars in the Faculty of Education, to identify MLIS curricular needs for the following two to three years, and to establish priorities for hiring new faculty over the same period.

Out of these meetings emerged the faculty's current encapsulation of the School's culture, values, and vision: "The School is a small collegial unit with a vision for teaching, research, and service that is grounded in a multi-disciplinary focus on issues of information access and equity."

The School is scheduled for the next graduate program and research review by FGSR in 1999 or 2000, but a date has not yet been established. The School is in negotiations with FGSR with a view to minimizing the overall workload associated with the next review and in particular with a view to exploring the feasibility of coordinating a single site visit in tandem with the accreditation site visit scheduled for March 1999.

Accreditation under the 1992 Standards involves a process of self-evaluation broadly based among all of the School's constituencies that culminates in an outcomes assessment document, the Program Presentation. It is grounded in an assessment of program objectives, resources, strengths, and limitations. The overall emphasis is on the development of a continuous process of program planning, development, and improvement, with the ultimate purpose of improving the educational effectiveness of the program. Broadly, the purpose is to answer the question: To what extent do our graduates acquire the competencies needed for professional practice?

More specifically, the Program Presentation has four main goals:

• to document how the program meets the 1992 Standards for Accreditation
• to describe how the School plans to maintain the program and continue to meet the Standards
• to serve as an ongoing planning tool for the School
• to serve as a communications tool for the School to the University and professional communities ("An Overview" 1995, p. 7).

While preliminary planning by the faculty for the accreditation review process began in the spring of 1997, a Steering Committee to oversee the review process was formally established in the fall with a mandate to review the School's mission and MLIS program goals and objectives, decide how constituency input would be obtained, provide guidance on timelines, and review draft versions of the Plan and Program Presentation. At the same time that the Steering Committee was set up, a Working Committee was established for each of the six program accreditation Standards, with a mandate to draft the relevant chapter for the Program Presentation report. Each faculty member was appointed to chair or co-chair a Working Committee, and a one-day policy meeting was held in December 1997 to identify broad issues, establish priorities, and develop a coordinated approach to the accreditation review process. The December 1997 meeting of the School Council discussed and approved the process and structure described above.

Membership and constituency representation of the Steering Committee, with the School Director as chair and the School Administrator as administrative support, are as follows:

Full-time Faculty - chairing Working Committees

Linda Cook, Director, Edmonton Public Library - representing adjunct

Jeannine Green, Librarian, University of Alberta - representing sessional instructors

Dena Heilik, President, Library and Information Studies Students' Association -

Danial Duda - representing part-time students

Dianne Tinnish, President, Library and Information Studies Alumni Association -

Karen Adams, Director of Library Services and Information Resources, University of

Pilar Martinez, Past President, Library Association of Alberta - representing

Dr. Grace Malicky, Associate Dean (research and graduate studies) - representing the

Dr. Linda McDonald, Associate Dean - representing the Faculty of Graduate Studies

Working Committee chairs for designated program accreditation Standards are as follows:

I. Mission, Goals, and Objectives - Dr. Margaret Mackey

II. Curriculum - Dr. Anna Altmann and Dr. Toni Samek

III. Faculty - Dr. Dianne Oberg

IV. Students - Dr. Hope Olson

V. Administration and Financial Support - Dr. Alvin Schrader

VI. Physical Resources and Facilities - Dr. Dennis Ward.

Each of the Working Committee chairs solicited the cooperation and participation of appropriate individuals and constituency representatives, including at least one Steering Committee member to provide feedback on their chapter draft.

The accreditation review process was widely publicized in the fall of 1997 and the winter of 1998. Announcements appeared in the newsletters of the Library and Information Studies Alumni Association and the Library Association of Alberta, and readers were invited to submit comments to the Director of the School, or to participate in focus groups. The same invitation was made by the Director at alumni receptions held in conjunction with association annual conferences in Winnipeg, Regina, Jasper, and Ottawa. The School's process was featured in a lengthy article in the June 1998 issue of Feliciter ("University of Alberta SLIS gears up for reaccreditation" by Hilary Crane).

Individual invitations to assist in the accreditation review process were also sent under the Director's signature to all practitioners in the library and archives community who had supervised practicum and reference service field experiences in the MLIS program during the previous two years, as well as to all alumni who had contributed financially to the School over the same time period; altogether, some 54 supervisors and 120 alumni were contacted.

A public information session was held at the School on March 23, 1998 to launch the information gathering phase of the accreditation review process, invite students and others to participate in focus group sessions, and report on the status of the development of the Plan.

The Steering Committee met the same day to review the draft Plan, which was approved with minor revisions. The final version of the Plan was submitted to COA and the External Review Panel chair in early April. The Plan described the following components of the self-evaluation process: committee structure; faculty and staff assignments; identification of special areas for emphasis; identification of special areas of expertise for External Review Panel membership; and timelines for preparation of the Program Presentation, including alternative dates for the Panel's visit.

Ten focus group meetings were held during April and May 1998, five student groups and five professional community groups consisting of alumni, student supervisors and employers, and association executive members. Altogether, some 35 students and 35 practitioners contributed to the review process through focus groups, and an additional four written submissions were received from individuals who could not attend a focus group meeting.

Working Committees used many other sources of evidence in their reviews, some of which were of an ongoing nature such as the annual recruitment survey of new students, the annual placement survey of recent graduates, and minutes of the School's standing committees. Other sources of evidence were custom-designed for the review process itself such as the student questionnaire distributed by the Working Committee on Students in April 1998, and still others consist of dialogue among full-time faculty, sessional instructors, field experience supervisors, and other practitioners and employers. Focus group questions and the student questionnaire are reproduced as Appendix C.

Draft chapters were reviewed by Working Committee members and then by a Steering Committee member. Revised drafts were submitted to the Director for overall coordination and synthesis in August and early September 1998. Faculty met to discuss successive working drafts of the Program Presentation in September and early October, and a combined meeting of the Steering Committee and School Council was held at the end of October to review and approve the penultimate draft. Appendix B chronicles the major events and activities that have culminated in this penultimate version of the Program Presentation.

Self-evaluation involves the judicious selection of materials and samples together with focused summaries that together render the Program Presentation a succinct and coherent statement about the program being presented for accreditation ("Guidelines for the Program Presentation" 1995, p. 2). Each of the following six chapters therefore provides and evaluates evidence to support the School's assessment of its compliance with the six Standards relating to Mission, Goals and Objectives; Curriculum; Faculty; Students; Administration and Financial Support; and, Physical Resources and Facilities. Each chapter is structured to provide the following information:

• a brief description of the topic and its relationship to the School's mission, goals, and objectives
  
• evidence for compliance with the Standard stated in terms of selected outcomes
  
• planning initiatives in which specific actions are identified and three to five year timelines are set to ensure that the MLIS program continues to meet accreditation standards.

A concluding chapter summarizes the planning initiatives and implementation timelines that have been identified in individual chapters relating to each Standard, with the result being a draft strategic plan for the School's next three to five years of operation.

Through the School's standing committees and School Council, through continuous feedback from sessional instructors and full-time faculty, through regular reviews of curriculum, staffing, and administrative resources, through systematic feedback on the curriculum and instructional quality through student evaluation of every course in every term, through annual surveys of incoming students and of graduates, through the budgetary cycle and financial accounting, and through ongoing consultations and interactions with faculty and administrators in the Faculty of Education and with those in other academic units, the School maintains a continuous process of evaluation in pursuit of excellence.

The accreditation review process followed by the School has incorporated all of these elements in preparing its Program Presentation. Therefore, the School believes that the final Program Presentation reflects the range and depth of views expressed by its various constituencies during the accreditation review process, that the evaluation and strategic planning framework described in the chapters that follow represent a carefully reasoned response to these views and concerns, and that the School meets each of the six Standards articulated in the 1992 Standards for Accreditation of Master's Programs in Library and Information Studies.

The School of Library and Information Studies has a vision statement and a mission statement for the School as a whole and statements of goals and objectives for the MLIS program. These statements are included at appropriate points in this review.

The following discussion of Standard I Mission, Goals, and Objectives will take account of the vision and mission statements of the School and the related goals and objectives of the MLIS program under separate headings. A further section will discuss how the School fits within the broad vision and mission statements of the University of Alberta, as newly defined in the document Degrees of Freedom--1998 Supplement, which was approved in June 1998.

Plans are in place to re-assess the School's statements of mission, goals and objectives. (As discussed below, the vision statement has only recently been implemented and there appears to be general agreement that it does not need further attention at this point.) A schedule for reconsideration of the mission, goals and objectives concludes this section Program Presentation report.

Of all the various guiding principles of the School, the vision statement has been the most recently and thoroughly discussed. The motto was developed through extensive faculty discussions throughout 1996, in conjunction with the creation of the School logo (see also the Students chapter, Vision, part (i) recruitment).

Reports from the focus groups'discussions of the vision statement generally indicated support for this vision, or were silent. Thus, the School assumes that there is a general level of agreement that the vision statement adequately expresses the priorities of the communities consulted through this process.

Mission of the School

The mission statement has been in place since 1990, when it was approved by the Faculty Council. There are two ways of looking at its role:

1) to explore whether it clearly and comprehensively states the overarching purpose of the School, and

2) to work through the consequent ramifications of the mission statement for different statements of goals and objectives.

Some preliminary discussions at the faculty level have begun in both areas, and a more detailed analysis of the mission statement is scheduled to take place by the year 2001. The following commentary represents particular discussion points that have arisen in faculty explorations to date, and also takes account of guidance provided by the focus groups.

The mission statement is broken down into three categories: education, scholarship, and research. The education mission is further developed in the goals and objectives of the MLIS program. Both faculty members and focus group respondents have suggested that it might be useful to develop goals and objectives for the scholarship and service sections as well.

The three divisions of the mission statement correspond to the three-fold enterprise espoused by the University of Alberta. The School could find it useful to relate the development of the scholarship and service elements in the mission statement to the School's role within the University structure.

Under the heading of scholarship, it might be useful to consider how the research component of the School's mission does and should affect students. Is enough explicit attention paid within the context of this statement to the ways in which research affects teaching? Some participants in the focus groups suggested that it might be helpful to develop forums for faculty to describe and explain ongoing research projects. (At present there is an annual series of lunchtime research seminars and many faculty participate each year, but there is no formal requirement for faculty to take part in this seminar series each and every year.) There was also some suggestion from the focus groups that it might be useful to develop a section of the mission statement regarding student opportunities and obligations with regard to research work. One immediate response to the interest in highlighting the School's research component was to incorporate research overviews by all full-time faculty into the 1998 term course LIS 501 Introduction to Library and Information Studies, with a two-fold purpose: 1) local awareness, to acquaint students with the research being done in the School, and with the faculty's areas of specialization, and 2) understanding of the field, to give students an appreciation of the range of research that contributes to the knowledge base of library and information studies.

One focus group suggested that there could be useful connections made between the scholarship and the service aspects of the School's mission, with the School offering the potential for field-oriented research (the example given was the utility of summer reading programs) which working librarians do not have the time to do. This is a possibility that faculty members could discuss; even if they have full research commitments already, there might be some utility in looking into the possibility of making connections with student research.

The University definition of service which operates in the assessment of faculty performance involves service to the University, rather more than service to the field. It might be possible to reword the mission statement to take account of this divergence. Such a step would take some account of the pressure on faculty members to perform numerous roles in relation to their University commitments, but it would be important not to lose sight of the imperative of serving the community as part of the School's vital function.

A different, but related, issue is the degree to which the mission statement supplies priorities for the faculty rather than for the students, a question raised by one of the focus groups. It would be possible to reword the current statement of the School's mission in order to make more room for the priorities and contributions of the student members of the School and this possibility should be discussed at the relevant levels.

A more general question which needs to be addressed at the level of School Council is the issue of the degree to which the mission statement should take account of the School's particular and developing emphasis on research and teaching in the area of services to children and youth. The framing documents of the School could take more account of this focus, and its role and priority at each level of statement needs to be considered. It may be that the best location for a statement of this focus is at the level of goals, but this judgement represents the kind of decision that needs to be developed through discussion by all of the relevant stakeholders.

• To provide the knowledge, understanding, and skills sufficient for the practice of library and information service at a basic professional level, including the foundation on which further competence and specialization may be built.
• To examine the cultural and informational role in society of library and information services.
• To emphasize, where appropriate, the Canadian geographic, cultural, social, and governmental context in which libraries and information agencies operate.
• To stress the professional obligation to keep informed of social and technological developments, with particular emphasis on Canadian issues.

The vision and the mission statements address the School as a whole. At the level of goals, there is a shift to the program being offered by the School, and some of the questions raised by focus groups address that discrepancy, either explicitly or implicitly. It seems clear that discussions at the level of School Council need to consider whether explicit goals for each of the strands of the mission (education, scholarship, and service) need to be worked out. It is possible that this exercise alone would contribute substantially to developing greater clarity of purpose in these different statements.

For example, one focus group addressed questions of the School's role in educating the public on the role of the librarian, in undertaking a professional advocacy position, in clarifying and advertising to the public the rigorous and extensive nature of librarian education. This may well be an appropriate goal for the School of Library and Information Studies at the University of Alberta, but it is not necessarily a goal usefully pursued within the MLIS program. Similarly, there were questions about the role of the School in participating in the development of standards for librarians, again a purpose outside the goals of the MLIS program, as narrowly defined.

A reworking of the mission statement and its relationship to the goals and objectives could also make room for another issue raised in focus groups, the responsibility (and opportunities) of the School to take account of the need for continuing education of professionals. Once again, this is a topic that could legitimately be discussed by School Council, but it would be difficult to see how goals in this area could be framed within the MLIS program, given that the professionals looking for continuing in-service would by definition have the MLIS degree already. At present, the fourth goal statement acknowledges that professionals need to keep informed of social and technological developments, but makes no provision to explore the School's potential role in this process after its students graduate. Current School policy on continuing education and recent initiatives are described in the section on Continuing Education in the Curriculum chapter.

The goals statement already acknowledges the importance of the Canadian context and some of the focus groups were clear that this emphasis must remain, or even be augmented, and that the practical implications for such issues as course resources should be taken into account.

The objectives, like the goals, operate at the level of the MLIS program. They represent the most detailed working-out of the implications of the larger framing statements, and it is perhaps not surprising that the most detailed responses of the focus groups addressed questions of objectives.

Points of discussion have arisen both at the faculty level and among the focus groups, and these provide a useful starting point for more general discussions leading to a School Council decision.

Some issues clearly belong in the program statement of objectives. For example, the question of whether the Canadian nature of the program needs to be more firmly addressed (and supported with a better range of Canadian resources--a matter that is to some extent outside the School's hands). Some questions may or may not be part of the goals and objectives of the MLIS program (as discussed above), for example, the issue of the need to educate the public about the nature of a librarian's role and extensive background preparation.

The MLIS program objectives, as listed below, all function as completions of a sentence which begins, "Upon completion of the program...." Comment follows only those points where discussion has already begun; an absence of commentary may be taken as a sign that the communities consulted so far are largely in agreement with these points.

The intention of the School is to develop a profound awareness of the importance of intellectual freedom, both to society at large and to the profession in particular. The School should discuss whether to strengthen the wording of this objective in order to align it more closely with the strong emphasis on this priority which is actually expressed in the MLIS program. Questions have arisen in the focus groups about the obligation of the School to participate in the education of the public about the importance of the librarian's role in this regard. Clearly such a discussion does not pertain to roles of the MLIS program per se, but the issue raised is an important one.

Discussion of this objective in the focus groups again wavered on the borderline between whether the objective itself is appropriate and whether it is achieved in the program, with one group reporting that it is possible to meet this objective but only if you take the right courses. This remark, of course, raises interesting questions of the degree to which the School simply provides the opportunity to meet all of the objectives, and the degree to which it has a responsibility to ensure that no one can graduate without meeting all of the objectives. Such questions will clearly inform the discussion of mission, goals and objectives to be conducted before the year 2000.

This is a subject that warrants some further discussion, taking account of the diverse disciplinary backgrounds of students in the MLIS program. Emphasizing crossovers with other faculties may be a positive step in clarifying this objective.

It might be useful for this objective to be outlined in more specific terms involving questions of networking and of leadership in the field.

There should be some discussion about whether this objective needs to be supported by putting some formal mechanisms in place for making and maintaining links with continuing education and professional activities. Once again, the question arises of whether or not this is an appropriate objective for the program, or whether it needs to be included more broadly as a goal for the School as a whole.

Responses from the focus groups on particular issues serve to supplement faculty discussion of ways to rework the various statements of intent of the School. Not every question can be answered to the complete satisfaction of each interested party, but all of these questions can and will be addressed over the next two years. This overview in the Program Presentation provides a useful summary of questions that were perceived as important at this time.

The University's mission statement reads as follows:

This statement has not changed since 1993. However, the 1998 supplementary document has now added a vision statement which reads as follows:

The School's statements are compatible with these new statements, and indeed the new emphasis on community service provides a useful frame for the School's discussions on how best to define the service element in the objectives statement.

Similarly, the University's goals are highly compatible with the goals of the School. They read as follows:

Professional schools are particularly well placed to meet such goals. Indeed, the accreditation review process for the MLIS program and, in particular, the External Review Panel's on-site visit are part of the institutional framework within which the School is accountable to the needs of employers.

The University's supplementary document contains a section on graduate programs, and elements of that statement are also relevant to the School. The statement says: "The University of Alberta must ensure...that it continues to foster graduate programs, ensures high quality, and works to develop the needed resources to build graduate work." (14)

This is not the place for a detailed assessment of the specific recommendations of the University's goals and priorities as reflected in the 1998 supplementary document. The School will schedule a full discussion of it at the faculty level or at the School Council level, as seems appropriate, and this discussion will be part of the timetable for reassessing the School's statements of mission, goals and objectives. However, an overview of the main headings of the University's document shows that the School is well positioned with regard to the main priorities.

The document addresses the need to develop a process for evaluating the quality of graduate programs. The School participates in this process; the next review is scheduled for 1999-2000. The report also speaks of the need to establish scholarship support for outstanding foreign students. The School is involved in recruiting foreign students and in exploring ways of finding tuition support where possible; the University<'s support in this endeavour is welcome (see also the Students chapter, Vision, part (i) recruitment and Table 3, Out-of-Province/Out-of-State MLIS Students).

In the field of research, the University is interested in finding ways of measuring research performance, and also of encouraging the identification of areas of research excellence within the different Faculties. In the Faculty of Education, the identified areas of excellence are as follows: school, teacher, and curriculum transformation; literacy for all Canadians; learners with special needs; multiculturalism and international education; and, information technologies and multimedia studies. Clearly, School personnel already do play an important role in some of these areas and any discussion about research priorities should continue to take account of these perceived areas of focus.

The University is also interested in fostering new areas of research, particularly ones with an interdisciplinary focus. The dynamic nature of library and information studies means that the School is well placed to make a contribution in interdisciplinary ways.

The University is also interested in focussing on lifelong learning and on increasing access by the community to educational offerings. The School is already active in this field, with some evening courses offered on a regular basis, particularly in the spring and summer, and an increasing number of distance courses available to MLIS students. These initiatives, and our connections with the field, strengthen the potential role that the School can play in ongoing professional development. This University priority needs to be a factor in discussions of the School's goals and objectives.

The University also places a high priority on increasing access to networked teaching and research tools. The School Council might eventually wish to discuss whether the School can or should make a specific contribution in this area, focusing on the University's commitment to "support a basic level of student and staff access to networked teaching and research tools." (21)

The increasing emphasis on internationalization on the part of the University needs to be taken into account in School discussions. There are many courses with explicit international components already, and much of the research done in the School has an international aspect to it, but it may be that the goals and objectives need to be made more explicit in this area.

All of these elements need to be discussed both separately and as part of the more general discussion of the School's mission, goals and objectives.

At the same time, however, there is a need to sort out the question of appropriate goals and objectives for the School as a whole, in addition to those for the MLIS program. This aim should be achieved in a context which takes account of: a) the overall goals and objectives of the University of Alberta, and the duties of the faculty with regard to the University; b) the School's vision; c) the focus of the School on services to youth as a research specialization; and, d) the importance of the western Canadian setting of the School.

MLIS program goals and objectives should also be reviewed to make them more useful as a tool for evaluating the curriculum.

The School is committed to dealing with these questions by the year 2001; at that time, a newly clarified statement of mission, goals and objectives will be put in place.

The following recommendations for the future are made to maintain and enhance excellence in relation to Standard I Mission, Goals, and Objectives:

The broad context for curriculum development is the School's vision statement formulated as part of the School's curricular and staffing review of priorities in 1996. The School's vision for teaching, research, and service is grounded in a multi-disciplinary focus on issues of information access and equity. This vision is encapsulated in the School's motto: "Understanding information: exploring issues, creating access, pursuing equity." In addition, the School has a mission statement, formulated in 1990, and goals and objectives for the MLIS program, which were reviewed and amended as part of the recommendations arising from accreditation in 1992.

In 1990 the School instituted an annual planning meeting called the Advance. Annual "retreats" for long-range planning at the departmental, faculty, and university level were common, but we wanted to emphasize movement forward and outward rather than back and inward, so we jokingly began to call our first meeting an "advance," and the term has stuck. The main focus of the annual Advance is the curriculum, which is the heart of the MLIS program. Cuts to the University's budget by the provincial government, external reviews of the School, and the retirement and replacement of faculty members have made long-range consideration of the curriculum even more important than it is in times of institutional stability. In the Fall of 1997, for example, the School obtained a new tenure-track position based on an analysis of curriculum and staffing needs. Annual assessment and planning for development of the curriculum has been, and will continue to be, on-going.

The following discussion of Standard II Curriculum is informed by the vision and mission statements of the School and by its statements of MLIS goals and objectives, organized around the themes of: general description of the curriculum, curricular content, evaluation of courses, curriculum development, and curricular outcomes.

The MLIS curriculum is an integrated program of courses that begins with LIS 501, Introduction to Library and Information Studies. Students are normally admitted to the program in September of each academic year, because LIS 501 is taught in the Fall term. The six core required courses are offered only once in each academic year, in the Fall and Winter terms, as daytime courses, but some electives are taught as evening courses, and four LIS courses are offered in the evening during the Spring (May-June) and Summer (July-August) terms.

The minimum requirement for the MLIS degree is either 16 single-term courses and a Capping Exercise (course-based route), or 13 single-term courses and a thesis (thesis route). Students must maintain an average of 6.5 on the University's 9-point grading system to remain in the program. The passing grade for a course is 6. A failed course must be repeated if it is a required course; a failed elective course may be repeated or replaced with another course.

A student who is registered full-time will normally complete the degree requirements in two academic years. A maximum of six years is allowed for completion of the degree.

Students in the thesis route must fulfil a residency requirement of one academic year. There is no residency requirement for students in the course-based program.

The program accommodates part-time students as much as possible. Until 1991, the core courses had to be taken as a package of four in the first term of studies and two in the second term. Therefore, anyone admitted to the program had to begin as a full-time student. Recognizing the growing need to accommodate students with financial and familial obligations that made full-time attendance impossible, the School "unbundled" the core so that the entire program could be taken part-time. This was facilitated by two concurrent changes in the regulations of the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research: removal of residency requirements, and the extension of time limits for completing course-based programs from four to five years (now six).

As well, in response to changes in the field and in the technological environment of the University, the sequence of the core courses was changed so that LIS 506, Introduction to Automation and Bibliographic Information, is offered in the first rather than in the second term. This results not only in a greater immediate awareness of the impact of technology on the profession, but also encourages students to use technology as a tool in their own learning from the start of their MLIS program.

Full-time students will normally take four of the six core required courses in their first term and the remaining two in the second term. This sequence of courses in the first year is:

Fall

LIS 501 Introduction to Library and Information Studies

LIS 502 Organization of Knowledge and Information

LIS 503 Introduction to Reference Services and Resources

LIS 506 Introduction to Automation and Bibliographic Information

LIS 504 Management Principles for Library and Information Services

LIS 505 Research Methods for Library and Information Studies

LIS 600, the Capping Exercise required of students taking the course-based route, must be completed in the student's final term of course work.

Part-time students must begin their program with LIS 501. They determine the sequence of the remaining courses with the advice of their program supervisor, but generally speaking the other five required courses are completed as quickly as possible so that more advanced course options can be taken. The School developed an informal list of course prerequisites and corequisites that needs to be reviewed and reaffirmed on a periodic basis.

Each student is assigned a full-time (tenured or tenure-track) faculty member as program supervisor. Students are strongly encouraged, but not required, to plan their programs in consultation with their supervisors. Directed Study courses (LIS 599) and courses outside the MLIS program require the approval of the program supervisor.

Students registered in the program may take up to three courses outside the MLIS program. These must be graduate-level courses for students in the course-based program. Final approval rests with the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research. Credit for courses taken elsewhere than at the University of Alberta may be granted as transfer credit by the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research (FGSR), on the recommendation of the School, provided that the courses have not been counted toward a previous degree or diploma.

Students admitted with advanced standing may receive credit for up to 8 three-credit graduate courses, but not more than half of the program requirements, if they are taken at a university program accredited by the American Library Association.

This arrangement is an authorized variation of the normal policy of the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research, which states that "The number of courses nearest to, but not exceeding, 1/3 of the total units of course weight of a student's program can be met through transfer credit and/or course exemption if recommended by the department and approved by FGSR on a case-by-case basis. In exceptional circumstances and with the explicit prior approval of FGSR, up to 1/2 of the total units of course weight for the program may be met through transfer credit and/or course exemption."

In September, 1997, four students transferred to the School of Library and Information Studies from other Canadian programs. A case-by-case approach to this situation seemed administratively unnecessary. After negotiation with the Dean of the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research, the FGSR Executive Committee approved the blanket policy to cover MLIS transfer students up to one-half of their program requirements.

All applicants receive a handbook entitled "Information for Prospective Students", colloquially referred to as the "blue book", that gives the program requirements and lists the courses available in the MLIS program with their University Calendar descriptions. The Curriculum Committee monitors courses listed in the University Calendar that are offered infrequently. It also organizes lunch-time student information sessions ("brown bags") in the Fall term each year at which instructors introduce their courses in the coming Winter, Spring, and Summer terms. Course outlines are available in print form and on the School's LAN. Students are encouraged to speak with the instructors of courses they wish to take, as well as with their program supervisor. Thus, students should know as much as possible about what courses will be offered over the next two years, including, for example, which faculty members will be on leave during that period.

The Directed Study courses (LIS 599) and the thesis route offer flexibility for students wishing to specialize beyond the level of the elective courses. A maximum of two Directed Study courses may be taken by students who have completed the required Research Methods course (LIS 505) and seven other courses within the program. LIS 597 Seminar in Advanced Research Methods for Library and Information Studies allows students to undertake a research project in an area of particular interest.

• To provide the knowledge, understanding, and skills sufficient for the practice of library and information service at a basic professional level, including the foundation on which further competence and specialization may be built.
• To examine the cultural and informational role in society of library and information services.
• To emphasize, where appropriate, the Canadian geographic, cultural, social, and governmental context in which libraries and information agencies operate.
• To stress the professional obligation to keep informed of social and technological developments, with particular emphasis on Canadian issues.

Because the School is relatively small and has no PhD program, the curriculum is designed to produce well-rounded general practitioners for the entry level of the profession. The six required, or core, courses lay a common foundation of skills and theory for all students. The six core courses, in sequence, are LIS 501 Introduction to Library and Information Studies, LIS 502 Organization of Knowledge and Information, LIS 503 Introduction to Reference Services and Resources, LIS 506 Introduction to Automation and Bibliographic Information, LIS 504 Management Principles for Library and Information Services, LIS 505 Research Methods for Library and Information Studies.

The elective courses allow students to develop more advanced expertise in the specializations within the field as follows.

Technology: LIS 537 Management of Information Technology; LIS 538 Automation in Libraries and Information Centres; EDIT 535 The Internet: Communicating, Accessing and Providing Information; EDAL 547 Administrative Applications of Computing.

Information Storage and Retrieval: LIS 532 Cataloguing and Classification; LIS 535 Indexing and Abstracting; LIS 536 Electronic Reference and Information Retrieval.

Management: LIS 545 Management of Resources in Library and Information Services; LIS 546 Marketing Library and Information Services; LIS 588 Communications.

Reference: LIS 525 Reference Service Theory and Field Experience; LIS 536 Electronic Reference and Information Retrieval.

Collections: LIS 531 Collection Management; LIS 586 History of the Book; LIS 591 Publishing.

Youth Services: LIS 402/510 Storytelling; LIS 515 Materials for Young Adults; LIS 519 Introduction to Children's Literature; LIS 548 Library Services to Children and Young Adults.

Teacher Librarianship: EDES 540 School Librarianship; EDES 543 School Library Programs; EDES 546 School Library Information Materials; EDES 547 Organization of School Library Materials.

Records Management and Archives: LIS 593 History of the Record; LIS 594 Records Management; LIS 595 Special Media Archives.

Other Specialized Collections and Services: LIS 517 Government Publications; LIS 520 Information Resources in Specialized Fields; LIS 511 Materials for Adults; LIS 512 Information Resources for Academic Disciplines; LIS 587 Facilities Planning for Libraries and Information Centres.

LIS 590 Practicum offers field placements for students who have little practical experience in libraries or who wish to acquire experience in a particular library environment. A history and assessment of the School's practicum experience was featured in a lengthy article in the May 1998 issue of Feliciter ("A New Model for Field-Based Learning in Today's LIS Education" by Toni Samek and Dianne Oberg).

LIS 597 Seminar in Advanced Research Methods for Library and Information Studies allows students to pursue an interest in research. LIS 582 Contemporary Issues in Library and Information Studies and LIS 589 Feminism and Library and Information Studies are used to explore topics of concern or debate in library and information studies. And LIS 599 Directed Study allows students to pursue their interests in areas in which the program does not offer courses, or to specialize beyond the level of the other courses. LIS 598 Special Topics is used to develop new courses. The Special Topics number allows for testing and refinement of a new course before it is given its own course number and title. LIS 598 is also used to offer courses that will be taught only once, perhaps to take advantage of a visitor with particular expertise. LIS 600, the Capping Exercise, is a requirement set by the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research for all course-based Master's programs.

In addition to the courses that make up the curriculum, the School offers its students opportunities for informal learning. The Research Seminar Series, held during the noon hour, presents the research of faculty members, alumni, and scholars working in fields that relate to library and information studies. Two other initiatives that offer opportunities for learning and mentoring are Partner's Day and Professional Development Day.

Partner's Day, a Library and Information Studies Students' Association initiative, arranges for students to accompany practitioners on the job for half a day in the Fall and/or Winter term to gain practical experience and insight into the profession. Students may shadow staff working for libraries or information centres as well as for alternative information-related venues. The Winter term event is followed by a reception sponsored by Partners in Education, an informal coalition currently consisting of 11 Edmonton-area agencies and associations: Alberta Association of College Libraries, Canadian Association of Law Libraries, Canadian Association of Special Libraries and Information Services-Edmonton chapter, Edmonton Law Library Association, Edmonton Public Library, Greater Edmonton Library Association, Library and Information Studies Alumni Association, Library Association of Alberta, Northern Alberta Health Libraries Association, Special Libraries Association-Western Canada Chapter, and the University of Alberta.

Professional Development Day (PD Day) is organized by the students as an occasion for both students and practitioners to hear speakers on topics of current interest, and to allow students to present their research to a wider audience. A "Welcome to the Profession" reception is sponsored by the Library and Information Studies Alumni Association every year.

The School encourages student attendance at the annual Alberta Library Conference and the CLA annual conference, subsidizes students who are presenting papers at the Alberta Library Conference, and finances the attendance at the CLA conference of the incoming president of the Library and Information Studies Students' Association through the Student-to-CLA program.

Finally, the relatively small size of the School, the sense of group identity developed by the way the courses are structured, the student organization, and the School's separate quarters with common study and social space for students provide an environment that encourages students to learn from each other as well as contribute their particular experience, expertise, and understanding to the common pool of knowledge.

The following table links the objectives of the MLIS program with those courses that are primarily related to each objective and with other educational experiences available to students in the program.

All of the required courses are normally taught by full-time faculty members to ensure the coherence of the program. As far as possible, faculty members teach within their areas of research interest and are assigned courses that form a coherent specialization to ensure that the courses are taught from strength. Faculty research is an important factor in course revision and development and in the supervision of directed studies and theses. Teaching methods vary depending on the content of the courses, the teaching styles of the instructors, and the size of the class. The largest course is LIS 501, which is taken by all entering students in a single section; the class size varies from around 30 to around 45 students. The other required courses are each taught in two roughly equal sections. The more specialized elective courses may have as few as three students in a given year. Regardless of class size, discussion is an important part of all courses.

Sessional instructors are partnered with a full-time faculty member who normally teaches in a related subject area. The faculty member is available to advise the sessional instructor about teaching methods, grading, dealing with student problems, and School practice and policy. At the same time, however, this informal liaison system provides valuable opportunities for feedback from sessional instructors to the full-time teaching faculty about students and curriculum. In other words, learning and dialogue flow in both directions, and for this reason we have studiously avoided characterizing the liaison system as "mentorship". The liaison system has been praised by several sessional instructors as an excellent means of enhancing their effectiveness in the classroom, as well as of facilitating their understanding of the School and its aspirations.

Students are evaluated in each course according to criteria set by the instructor. The final grade can be based on papers, examinations, class presentations, projects, or any combination of these. Class participation is also given a mark in many courses. A well-defined procedure is in place for the appeal of a grade, beginning with discussion with the course instructor and ending with a hearing by the Faculty of Education's Academic Appeals Committee. Student progress is discussed in faculty meetings. If a student is having difficulty in a course, the instructor notifies the student's program supervisor of the apparent problem. Whenever a student requests an incomplete in a course, the program supervisor must be notified. Whether the student's difficulty is academic or personal, the program supervisor advises the student about strategies that will lead to successful completion of the MLIS program.

Course evaluation is mandated at a number of different levels. Students are asked for oral but anonymous feedback in each course halfway through every term (informal mid-term feedback sessions). At the end of the term, students complete anonymous written course evaluations, with set questions determined by the University (Universal Student Ratings of Instruction). The course evaluation forms also have space for unsigned student comments. The course evaluation forms and a statistical summary are reviewed by the Director and given to the course instructors in the following term for their use in revising courses. Faculty members must respond to the evaluations of their courses in their annual report to the Director, and submit the statistical summaries with the annual report for their yearly performance review.

The School approved a general model for all course outlines several years ago, and revisited it in 1997. In addition to the course number, title, and structure (academic term, hours/week, and class-seminar-laboratory relative weighting), the model stipulates the following required and optional components of a course outline:

- course instructor name, with optional position title

- University Calendar description (exact wording)

- course objectives, which are stated as observable learning outcomes, competencies, knowledge, understandings, skills, attributes, and attitudes, and are related to official MLIS program objectives

- course content, consisting of a listing of major categories of subject content

- teaching methods, consisting of identification of major instructional methods

- course relationships, which identifies official prerequisites and courses for which this course is a prerequisite

- course assignments and evaluation, listing all assignments, the percentage weighting of each, and the evaluation criteria for each assignment; late penalties if any are stipulated, as is the grading process (raw scores (marks on assignments) are totalled at the end of the course and converted to the nine-point grading scale)

- inclusive language and equity policy, which states that: "The Faculty of Education is committed to providing an environment of equality and respect for all people within the university community. Accordingly, staff and students should adhere to the principles of inclusive language use so that students' experiences and views are treated with equal respect and value in relation to their gender, racial background, sexual orientation, and ethnic background."

- required text/readings and recommended text/readings, both optional.

Changes in course titles or descriptions and new courses go from the Curriculum Committee to the School Council for approval. The Council is made up of all permanent and sessional faculty, and of representatives from the Students' Association, the Alumni Association, the Library Association of Alberta, the University Library, the Faculty of Education, and other faculties such as the Faculty of Arts and the Faculty of Business. Therefore, no significant curriculum revision occurs without comment and approval from the students, the field, the Education Faculty, and the University. Revised and new course titles and University Calendar descriptions go to the University's General Faculties Council for final approval.

New courses are identified during an Advance or proposed by individual faculty members. They are discussed in faculty meetings before they are developed by a faculty member and sent to the Curriculum Committee and School Council for discussion and approval.

The small size of the School has the potential to create both strengths and weakness in the curriculum. The School has worked hard to make full use of the strengths and to minimize the weaknesses. The strengths are: the high level of interaction among faculty, which contributes to the coherence of the curriculum and the maximization of resources; the high level of interaction among students, which encourages informal learning; and, the high level of interaction between students and faculty, which encourages informal learning and flexibility in the program. The limitations are a shortage of full-time teaching faculty to cover all of the courses, and a lack of faculty expertise in some subject areas of the curriculum. To compensate for these limitations, the School makes use of experts from the field as sessional instructors and as guest lecturers, and has identified courses in other departments of the University that are appropriate electives within the MLIS program and count as MLIS courses. These courses are EDIT 535 The Internet, EDAL 547 Administrative Applications of Computing, and the EDES courses in teacher librarianship.

Moreover, the fact that courses offered in the Spring and Summer terms are not paid for out of the School's budget has helped to keep a satisfactory range of elective courses in the program. Spring and Summer course offerings by all departments are funded and administered by the Special Sessions Office, which is financed separately from the departmental budget process. As such, Special Sessions funding represents an additional source of University financial support for course offerings.

The School's primary approach to continuing education is collaboration with professional associations and library institutions to support programs and events through financial and resource contributions; for example, the School provided free meeting space in May 1997 for a consulting skills workshop designed for regional library system consultants.

The School co-sponsors programs and speakers with a particular focus on those that will benefit MLIS students; for example, in October 1997 the School co-sponsored with Edmonton CASLIS the Special Libraries Association videoconference on "Giving Users What They Really Want/Need", and in November 1998 the School co-sponsored with the Edmonton chapter of the Special Libraries Association a workshop presented by Ulla de Stricker on alternative career choices for library and information studies professionals. The School's annual Research Seminar Series is also planned with the MLIS student body in mind; for example, there were two Seminars in the fall 1998 that were well attended by students, the first on the topic of electronic text and humanities research, presented by Dr. Susan Hockey, professor of English at the University of Alberta and Director of the Canadian Institute for Research Computing in Arts, and the second on libraries and the Web, by Dr. Terry Noreault, Director of Research and Special Projects for OCLC Inc.

The School is actively engaged in offering a great variety of continuing education opportunities for the professional community. Some of the major components are as follows:

1) late afternoon and evening courses for credit, or audit, in both the regular academic year, and in the spring and summer;

2) the annual Research Seminar Series, consisting of four or five lectures around a theme, that are given throughout the year by faculty members in the School, by faculty from other departments on campus, and by visiting experts--in 1996-97 the theme was "Celebrating Library and Information Services and Materials for Youth", in 1997-98 it was "Intellectual Freedom and Censorship", and in 1998-99 "Information Technology";

3) the annual Professional Development Day, a research-oriented event consisting of student and guest speakers that is held at the beginning of March every year--in 1997 the theme was "Libraries--Approaching 2000," in 1998 it was "Connecting Libraries," and in 1999 it will be "Crossing the Bridge from Theory to Practice."

4) presentations and workshops at the annual conferences of various professional associations, including the Library Association of Alberta (LAA), the Canadian Library Association, the Canadian Association for Information Science, and the American Library Association; of particular mention is the annual session at LAA sponsored by the School that showcases faculty and student research and curriculum updates;

5) workshops, book talks, and invited lectures sponsored by libraries and schools;

6) Search Services Project - searching of the professional literature on Library Literature (CD-ROM) by senior MLIS students in LIS 536 on a voluntary basis during the academic year (the School acknowledges the very generous support for purchase of the Library Literature CD-ROM subscription by the Library Association of Alberta - $1000 in 1997, $500 in 1996); and

7) the inauguration of JEROME-L, a listserv created and maintained by the School to foster communication among librarians and others to distribute announcements about activities sponsored by professional associations, news of professional interest including job openings, reminders about workshops, seminars, and events in local communities, and questions and information exchange relevant to the profession.

In past years, the School has also taken advantage of the University's competitive Distinguished Visitors Program. The School has had five scholars in eight years, each funded for a period of 10 days to give lectures and hold seminars on campus and for the community at large (our last Distinguished Visitor was Dr. David Jenkinson, Professor of Education at the University of Manitoba, in 1994). The School is in the process of submitting an application for a proposed Distinguished Visitor in the fall of 1999; an internationally renowned expert in the organization of information has agreed to serve if the application is successful.

MLIS students participate in and contribute to all of these forms of continuing education, and they benefit from these opportunities to network with practitioners and share ideas grounded in professional experience. This is particularly true of practitioners who take or audit specialized courses in the MLIS curriculum, for example, materials for young adults (LIS 515), contemporary issues (LIS 582) such as those courses on women's issues, intellectual property issues, and globalization issues, facilities planning (LIS 587), feminism (LIS 589), records management (LIS 594), and reading theory and practices (LIS 598).

In 1997, the School adopted an informal policy on additional forms of support for continuing education activities:

There are at present two other collaborative opportunities that the School is exploring with great interest: The Alberta Library initiatives for continuing education, and the University of Alberta's Institute for Professional Development. The Alberta Library has an Education and Training Work Group, of which the Director of the School is a member, that is mandated to identify continuing education needs, and to act as a clearinghouse for continuing education opportunities. Its major contributions to date are a province-wide questionnaire survey of the continuing education needs of library staff at all levels, and a calendar of current provincial education and training opportunities of interest to Alberta library personnel accessible on The Alberta Library web site.

Another collaborative opportunity is provided by the University's recent establishment of an Institute for Professional Development that is intended to capitalize on the latest developments in communications technology to offer customized professional learning programs on and off campus to facilitate lifelong education. The School has been invited to explore the feasibility of delivering a mid-career program for library and information service professionals in some form of partnership with the University of Toronto's Faculty of Information Studies.

The following outcomes are derived from the preceding description of the program, from meetings with student members of the Curriculum Committee, and from the comments of focus groups convened as part of the School's preparation for COA.

As appropriate, the annual Advances, regular faculty meetings, the Curriculum Committee, and the School Council will address the following initiatives:

The School of Library and Information Studies has an excellent faculty, capable of accomplishing the objectives of the MLIS program. The 6.67 FTE regular faculty members all hold doctoral degrees and have diverse backgrounds and expertise. Another tenure-track faculty position has been posted, with appointment expected for July 1, 1999, and the School has been invited to submit a proposal to the Faculty of Education for an additional position. Adjunct professors and sessional instructors enrich and expand the teaching and scholarly activities of the School.

The School has a balance of experienced and new faculty with appointment dates ranging from 1982 to 1997; the median length of appointment with the School as of July 1, 1998 was 5.6 years. This balance is also reflected in the dates for PhD completion which range from 1976 to 1998. Two of the current faculty received their doctoral degrees from the University of Alberta. Other faculty have doctoral degrees from Cornell University, Simmons College, Indiana University, and the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

All of the regular faculty have worked to some extent as professionals in the field of library and information studies-in public libraries, academic libraries, school libraries, special libraries, as library vendors, in publishing, and as consultants to libraries. Several also bring work experience from areas outside libraries-as a planner in several government departments, as a public school teacher, and as a research officer in biotechnology, for example.

The School values the professional knowledge and experience of its part-time instructors. They are selected on the basis of specialized expertise combined with experience in or potential for teaching. At the present time, three sessional instructors have the added special designation of "adjunct professor" in recognition of their commitment to the School as demonstrated by long-term contributions that go beyond their work as sessional instructors.

The adjunct and sessional instructors bring their knowledge and experience of current practices in the field. History of the Book is taught by a Special Collections librarian; Government Publications, by co-instructors from the Legal Studies Program in the University of Alberta and the Information Services Division of the Edmonton Public Library; Management of Information Technology, last year by co-instructors from the library of the Northern Alberta Institute of Technology and the Bibliographic Services Division of the St. Albert Public Library and this year by co-instructors who are the Technical Services librarian at the Yellowhead Regional Library and a library consultant with an Edmonton-based library consulting firm. Courses in Archives and Records Management are taught by an archivist formerly at the Provincial Archives of Alberta and now at the Historic Sites Service. The advanced management courses, Management of Resources in Libraries and Information Centres, and Marketing Library and Information Services are taught, respectively, by the Director and the Associate Director, Public Services, of the Edmonton Public Library. Courses in storytelling and in children's and young adult literature are taught by a professional storyteller and author of several prize-winning professional books who frequently speaks at workshops across Canada and the United States.

All faculty members are involved in service to the profession through reviewing materials and/or systems or through writing regular columns for professional journals. Several have research and service involvements that take them beyond the University of Alberta-executive and/or committee service for national and international associations (Canadian Association for Information Science, Canadian Library Association, Canadian Association of Public Libraries, Canadian School Library Association, International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions, International Society for Knowledge Organization, International Association of School Librarianship) and international research projects (National Program Evaluation of Library Power, Principals and Teacher-Librarians Working Together to Develop Information Literate School Communities).

Three faculty members have editorial responsibilities for international journals in the youth services area, School Libraries Worldwide and Children's Literature in Education. They and other faculty are regularly asked to referee manuscripts for journal publication as well as to referee research grant proposals and conference abstracts. Most have also been invited to act as external evaluators of tenure and promotion applications by faculty members in other Canadian schools of library and information studies.

All faculty are involved in service to the academic community, through committee work at the School, Faculty, and University level.

Standard III Faculty is addressed below in terms of three focuses of the MLIS program at the University of Alberta: (1) vision of the School; (2) Canadian and Prairie context; and (3) research.

The vision of the School is formally articulated through a collaborative process involving all faculty members and the School Council. Commitment to the vision was and continues to be a key aspect in the recruitment of new faculty members and this is clearly indicated in the postings for new positions: "The School is a small collegial unit with a vision for teaching, research, and service that is grounded in a multi-disciplinary focus on issues of information access and equity." The vision of the School is reflected in the teaching areas and research interests of regular, adjunct and sessional faculty members, particularly in the areas of service to young people and other marginalized groups, intellectual freedom and social responsibility, librarianship from a feminist perspective, and the representation of information on marginalized topics. This vision also is implemented through the selection of course content and through the use of diverse teaching methodologies. Many courses challenge students to consider the current and future roles of the library and information professional. The faculty members meet high standards for teaching competence, on an individual and program basis, and they work to address student learning needs in ways that honour the vision of the School.

The School offers the only program of graduate education in library and information studies within the three Prairie Provinces of Canada. The School serves primarily students from the Prairies, its local constituency is the Prairies, and the majority of its graduates find employment in the Prairies and other areas of Canada. Knowledge of the Canadian and Prairie context is valuable in the areas of teaching, research, and service.

Instructors often address issues in the library and information services field from a Canadian and/or Prairie perspective. For example, in the core management course the Canadian interpretation of the concept of employment equity is explored and both federal and provincial legislation is reviewed. This perspective can also be seen in the research work of the faculty-some examples include censorship in academic libraries in the Canadian Prairie provinces, peace resource materials in Canadian public libraries, reviewing of young adult books in Canadian serials, a database of Canadian children's literature, and the impact of United States library associations on the development of Canadian library associations.

The faculty of the School have the knowledge and experience to effectively address issues in the library and information field from a Canadian and/or Prairie perspective. Six of the seven tenured and tenure-track faculty are Canadian citizens, and all of the regular, adjunct, and sessional instructors have lived and worked in Canada for considerable lengths of time. Four of the regular faculty are native Albertans who have spent the majority of their working lives in Alberta; others have worked in other Canadian provinces, in the United Kingdom, and in the United States. Maintaining the School's Canadian and Prairie focus is facilitated by the Government of Canada's university employment policy which requires consideration of qualified Canadian and permanent resident applicants before other applicants.

The School's position in a large research university necessitates a focus on research productivity for all regular faculty, and faculty members continue to increase both research funding and research productivity. There is a strong research culture and considerable collaborative activity within the School and beyond. Faculty members supervise graduate student research within the School and within a wide range of other departments within the University, including Computing Science, English, Elementary Education, Secondary Education, Sociology, Political Science, and Women's Studies.

In their research and scholarly work, faculty members utilize a diverse range of methodologies--textual analysis, historical research, deconstruction, definitional analysis, qualitative content analysis, systems analysis and design, bibliometrics, bibliographic database analysis, survey research, focus groups, and case studies. They publish their work in varied forms and for both academic and professional audiences. The faculty believe that research and teaching are interrelated and mutually enhancing.

The following summaries of research interests serve to demonstrate the range and diversity of research programs and specializations that full-time faculty members are currently engaged in:

Dr. Anna Altmann's research area is children's and young adult literature. Her particular interests are feminist issues, folktale and myth, and the development of readers. One on-going project, a consideration of women's spaces in the World Wide Web, is not related to children's literature, but does draw on myth and folktale in its examination of the web as metaphor.

Dr. Margaret Mackey's research interests centre on young people's literate behaviours, a subject involving responses to both print texts and texts in other media. She is especially concerned with questions of how a particular text in any medium affects readers' strategies and behaviours, and of how responses to different versions of a text may affect and interact with each other. These questions connect with issues of supply and access, and link with her ongoing work in the field of literature for adolescents and children. A three-year project funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) is currently allowing her to study these questions in depth.

Dr. Dianne Oberg's primary research focus is on the development, implementation, and evaluation of school library programs, with emphases on the roles of teachers, teacher-librarians, principals, and district personnel. Her other research areas currently include use of the Internet in schools and the effectiveness of distance education. She has also obtained major Learning Enhancement Envelope (LEE) funding for educational innovation in the delivery through distance learning of the diploma program in teacher librarianship.

Dr. Hope Olson's current research encompasses a three-year SSHRC funded project in concert with Dr. Dennis Ward that identifies the shortcomings of the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) for feminist and women's studies by endeavouring to link individual terms in the feminist vocabulary, A Women's Thesaurus, to DDC numbers, and then suggests and tests adaptations and supplements to DDC. A related project involves a content analysis of the library literature regarding subject representation of marginalized groups. Her sabbatical project in 1999 will produce a book proposal on cultural conceptions of classification in libraries, in mainstream western societies in general, and in significantly different societies such as indigenous cultures.

Dr. Toni Samek's current research program focuses on libraries and their social context. Her specific interests include the ethos of the professional jurisdiction of librarianship, especially the ethos of intellectual freedom, the responsibility of librarians to society, the history of alternative library discourse and publishing, and the impact of social dissent in the 1960s on the politics and culture of American librarianship.

Dr. Alvin Schrader's current research focus is intellectual freedom and censorship issues in public and school libraries. Current projects are critical analysis of the implications of indexing theory or Internet filtering and rating software, and a study of the theoretical limitations of complaint avoidance behaviour ("censorproofing") by public and school librarians. A second area of research focus involves conceptualization of the field of library and information studies; of particular current interest is a study of definitions of information management as the term is used in the literatures of business and library and information studies.

Dr. Dennis Ward's research interests are the application of technology to libraries and information management, with an emphasis on development of computer databases and user interfaces. His current research activities are focused on building prototype systems and software toolkits to facilitate improved access to library materials for user groups who are outside the mainstream. A major undertaking with this research focus is the three-year SSHRC funded project with Dr. Hope Olson as principal investigator that involves the Dewey Decimal Classification.

Full curriculum vitae are available on-site for the following faculty and sessional instructors in the School of Library and Information Studies:

Dr. Alvin Schrader, Professor and Director

Dr. Anna Altmann, Associate Professor

Dr. Dianne Oberg, Associate Professor

Dr. Hope Olson, Associate Professor

Dr. Dennis Ward, Associate Professor

Dr. Margaret Mackey, Assistant Professor

Dr. Toni Samek, Assistant Professor.

Linda Cook, Adjunct Professor, and Director, Edmonton Public Library

Dr. David Leonard, Adjunct Professor, and Project Historian, Alberta Historic Sites

Services

Gail de Vos, Adjunct Professor, and Consultant and Storyteller.

Dr. Robert Brundin, Sessional Instructor, and Professor Emeritus, School of Library

and Information Studies

Kathleen DeLong, Sessional Instructor, and Associate Director, University of Alberta

Libraries

Dr. Merrill Distad, Sessional Instructor, and Assistant Director, Development and

Public Relations, University of Alberta Libraries

Valerie Footz, Sessional Instructor, and Librarian, Legal Resources Centre, Legal

Studies Program, Faculty of Extension

Yvonne Footz, Sessional Instructor, and Librarian, Edmonton Public Library

Jeannine Green, Sessional Instructor, and Assistant Special Collections Librarian,

University of Alberta Libraries

Margaret Harris, Sessional Instructor, and Consultant and Trainer, CIRC: Crozier

Information Resources Consulting, Ltd.

Pat Jobb, Sessional Instructor, and Associate Director, Public Services, Edmonton

Public Library

Stuart MacKay, Sessional Instructor, and Librarian, Yellowhead Regional Library

Linda Seale, Sessional Instructor, and Librarian, Health Sciences Library, University

of Alberta Libraries

Sandra Shores, Sessional Instructor, and Librarian, Health Sciences Library,

University of Alberta Libraries.

At the University of Alberta, assessment of the performance of academic staff members, including awarding of tenure and promotion as well as merit increments, is the responsibility of the Faculty Evaluation Committee (FEC). The Faculty of Education's FEC is composed of the Dean of the Faculty, all department heads including the Director of the School of Library and Information Studies, and four additional members elected by the faculty as a whole.

The performance of faculty members is assessed annually using a variety of measures. Each faculty member provides an annual report, giving evidence of performance in five areas: (1) teaching; (2) research development and scholarly work, (3) knowledge of the discipline and specialization; (4) contributions to the department, faculty and university; and (5) public service to academic and professional bodies. The Director of the School assesses individual faculty performance on the basis of the faculty member's annual report and makes recommendations for merit increments to the Faculty Evaluation Committee.

The performance of adjunct professors and sessional instructors is addressed more informally by the Director of the School. Their recruitment and selection is considered by the tenured and tenure-track faculty as a whole, and evaluation of their performance is addressed by the Director. Performance is considered in the areas of teaching, knowledge of the discipline and specialization, and public service to professional bodies. Sessional instructors with the designation of adjunct professor also provide to the Dean of Education an annual report of their contributions to the School and the University.

The criteria for the selection and evaluation of new faculty and sessional instructors should continue to include commitment to the School's vision as well as the usual criteria related to teaching, research, and service.

1. Teaching - A multi-faceted approach to the evaluation of teaching is expected at the University of Alberta. This may include observations of classroom teaching or review of course outlines and teaching materials by another faculty member or by the department head. However, the primary measure of the quality of teaching at the University of Alberta remains the student course evaluation questionnaires which are routinely administered in all classes. The student course evaluations consistently place the School's instructors (including regular, adjunct, and sessional instructors) above the median of all instructors at the University, and very frequently in the top quartile.

2. Research Development and Scholarly Work - All tenured and tenure-track faculty are expected to have well-developed programs of research and to disseminate their research findings through conference presentations and publications on a regular basis. Evaluation of research development and scholarly work at the University of Alberta is measured by quantity of publications and presentations and by level of funding. Research productivity and funding in the School of Library and Information Studies is growing steadily. All tenured and tenure-track faculty have research funding. Three hold major grants from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, a national research granting agency.

3. Knowledge of the Discipline and Specialization - All instructors are members of several professional associations, and many have served in executive capacities. Some examples include: Councillor of the Bibliographical Society of Canada; President of the Library Association of Alberta; Director of the Library Association of Alberta; President of the Canadian Association of Children's Librarians; President of the Professional Librarians at the University of Alberta; President of the Canadian School Library Association; Councillor of the Canadian Library Association; and President of the Canadian Association for Information Science. They attend and/or contribute to conferences in their area of specialization on a regular basis. They build upon current expertise and/or develop new expertise through courses and workshops.

4. Contributions to the Department, Faculty and University - All tenured and tenure-track faculty contribute to administration and committee work of the School. Service to Faculty and University level committees is distributed carefully to ensure visibility for the School and to ensure that the concerns of the School are heard within the larger academic community. All faculty serve on one or more Faculty and/or University level committees. In the past five years, there have been faculty members on bodies such as: the General Faculties Council, the major policy and decision making body of the University of Alberta; the Faculty of Education's Faculty Evaluation Committee; the Faculty of Education Nominating Committee; the Academic Planning Committee; the Planning and Priories Committee; the Academic Appeals Committee; and, the Panel for Selection of Department Chairs.

5. Public Service and Contribution to Academic and Professional Bodies - All instructors provide public service, through working with academic or professional bodies. Several instructors are very active in giving workshops and seminars in the library and education community. Several others have done consultative work in relation to library catalogue systems and for library program development and evaluation. Most of the tenured and tenure-track, adjunct, and sessional instructors have served on advisory bodies such as: the Advisory Committee on Administrative Structure for Women Studies; the Advisory Council of the Library Technician Program, Grant MacEwan Community College; the Equity Issues Committee of the AASUA (Association of the Academic Staff of the University of Alberta); and, the Alberta Public Library Directors' Council.

The following recommendations for the future are made to maintain and enhance excellence in relation to Standard III Faculty:

The Program Presentation regarding students analyses six functions:

(i) recruitment

(ii) admissions

(iii) support and services

(iv) student involvement

(v) placement, and

(vi) alumni involvement.

They are viewed in the following discussion of Standard IV Students through the three lenses of the School's vision, the School's identity as a Canadian Prairie institution, and the School's continued development of its research profile. The major sources of data for measuring outcomes in this section are the standard statistics about students, annual surveys of students and graduates, and a questionnaire and focus groups gathering quantitative and qualitative data specifically for the Program Presentation. (Results of the questionnaire and reports of the entrance and placement surveys are available on-site.) Of the six functions, recruitment is the major focus for planning. The other five require maintenance of already sound performance.

Fall 1998 enrolment in the MLIS program totaled 91 students, 63 full-time and 28 part-time (70 FTE); in January 1999 one transfer student joined the School from the University of Toronto. At present the student body consists of 69 percent full-time enrollment and 31 percent part-time. A total of 34 students graduated in 1998, 27 at spring convocation and 7 at fall convocation.

The School's vision - grounded in a multi-disciplinary focus on issues of information access and equity as encapsulated in the School's motto: "Understanding information: exploring issues, creating access, pursuing equity" - is integrated into all six functions, primarily in terms of encouraging diversity, fairness, and inclusiveness.

Recruitment of a diverse student population addresses multicultural, geographic and subject area diversity. The recruitment plan developed in 1996-97 set specific goals which the School has begun to pursue.

The goals of the recruitment plan are to:

• ensure a continuing high quality pool of applicants

• seek a diversity of applicants in terms of:

- disciplinary background

- ethnic/racial background

- geographic distribution.