Volume 25, Issue 1 (5-2019)
Research on Information Science and Public Libraries 2019, 25(1): 15-41 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Geraei E. Eco-cybernetics Approach to Knowledge and Information Science Education in Iran. Research on Information Science and Public Libraries 2019; 25 (1) :15-41
URL: http://publij.ir/article-1-1807-en.html
URL: http://publij.ir/article-1-1807-en.html
Knowledge and Information Science, faculty of literature and humanities, Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Iran. Email: ehsan.geraei@gmail.com , ehsan.geraei@gmail.com
Abstract: (4650 Views)
Purpose: The purpost of this research is to provide a theoretical model for educational planning in the field of Knowledge and Information Science (KIS) in Iran. To do so, while addressing the concepts of ecology and cybernetics theories and combining them with each other, a new approach called “Eco-cybernetics Appraoch” is introduced and explained.
Method: This research was conducted using the documentary-analytical method. To gather the required information, a literature review of the cybernetics' and ecology's concepts and of the studies carried out into the future of KIS education was conducted.
Findings: Eco-cybernetics approach to KIS education, like biological ecosystems, concerns simultaneously the environmental factors and pillars of education. Eco-cybernetics approach studies the interactive relationships between the pillars of KIS education and its environment. This approach regards the future of KIS education as a function of the interaction between the pillars of KIS education and its einvironment as well as its feedback and feed-forward systems.
Originality/value: The attitudes put forward about the future of KIS can be divided into four groups. The first group includes a pessimistic approach to the future and a belief in the extinction and destruction scenario. The second group distinguishes between the "Library Science" and the "Information Science" and other new titles. They have warned the library science community against the pure optimism about their high share in the future jobs of the information society. In fact, they are concerned with the challenge of library science in its traditional concept and information science and other similar disciplines in its modern sense. The third group maintains that the path to the future passes through the past and present. In order to survive, KIS must focus on the intradisciplinary and extradisciplinary factors. In fact, this perspective refers to the progression and survival in a steady manner without major changes. The fourth group believes in a favorable future for KIS. They see planning and designing an education system aimed at educating the future generation students as the key to achieve this desirable future. The present research, for the first time, has addressed the Eco-Cybernetics approaches to the analysis of KIS education planning in Iran and can serve as a basis for the KIS education.
Method: This research was conducted using the documentary-analytical method. To gather the required information, a literature review of the cybernetics' and ecology's concepts and of the studies carried out into the future of KIS education was conducted.
Findings: Eco-cybernetics approach to KIS education, like biological ecosystems, concerns simultaneously the environmental factors and pillars of education. Eco-cybernetics approach studies the interactive relationships between the pillars of KIS education and its environment. This approach regards the future of KIS education as a function of the interaction between the pillars of KIS education and its einvironment as well as its feedback and feed-forward systems.
Originality/value: The attitudes put forward about the future of KIS can be divided into four groups. The first group includes a pessimistic approach to the future and a belief in the extinction and destruction scenario. The second group distinguishes between the "Library Science" and the "Information Science" and other new titles. They have warned the library science community against the pure optimism about their high share in the future jobs of the information society. In fact, they are concerned with the challenge of library science in its traditional concept and information science and other similar disciplines in its modern sense. The third group maintains that the path to the future passes through the past and present. In order to survive, KIS must focus on the intradisciplinary and extradisciplinary factors. In fact, this perspective refers to the progression and survival in a steady manner without major changes. The fourth group believes in a favorable future for KIS. They see planning and designing an education system aimed at educating the future generation students as the key to achieve this desirable future. The present research, for the first time, has addressed the Eco-Cybernetics approaches to the analysis of KIS education planning in Iran and can serve as a basis for the KIS education.
Type of Study: qualitative |
Subject:
Library and Information Science Education
Received: 2017/05/2 | Accepted: 2017/12/20 | Published: 2017/12/20
Received: 2017/05/2 | Accepted: 2017/12/20 | Published: 2017/12/20
References
1. Abbott, A. (1988). The system of professions – A study of the division of expert labour. London: University of Chicago Press.
2. Abbott, A. (1998). Professionalism and the future of librarianship. Library Trends, 46(3), 430-443.
3. Ardakani, M. R. (2001). Ecology. Tehran: University of Tehran Press. (in Persian)
4. Ashby, W. R. (1956). An introduction to cybernetics. London: Chapman and Hall.
5. Banning, J. H. , & Hughes, B. M. (1986). Designing the Campus Environment with Commuter Students. NASPA Journal, 24(1), 17-24.
6. Beer, S. (1985). Diagnosing the system for organizations. London and New York: John Wiley.
7. Birnbaum, R. (1991). How Colleges Work: The Cybernetics of Academic Organization and Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
8. Britain, S., Liber, O., Perry, S., & Rees, W. (2007). Modeling Organisational Factors Affecting the Development Of E-Learning in a University Using a Cybernetics Approach. Journal of Sociocybernetics, 51(2), 6-22.
9. Buckland, M. K. (1986). Educational for librarianship in the next century. Library Trends, 34(4), 777-788.
10. Chitsaz, A. (2006). A Value-based Approach to Academic Transformational Management. Paper presented at the First National Conference on Transformational Management, Future Studies National Conference. Isfahan: University of Isfahan. (in Persian).
11. Conway, M. (2003). Scenarios and university planning. Retrieved October 8, 2015, from http://aair.org.au/jir/Oct03/Conway.pdf.
12. Dayani, M. H. (2011). Short Essays about Library and Information Science. Mashhad: Ketabkhane Rayaneie Publication. (in Persian).
13. Fadaie, G. R. (2009). Future of Library and Information Science. Journal of Academic Librarianship and Inforamtion Research, 40(46), 95-100. (in Persian).
14. Fadaie, G. R. (2015). Library and Information Science Requires Specialization for Survival. Research on Information & Public Libraries, 21(1), 7-11. (in Persian).
15. Farajpahlou, A. B. (2011). Library and Information Education’s prospective. Information & Communication Quarterly Book Review, 14(10), 28-33. (in Persian).
16. Fattahi, R. (2004). Specialization in Profession. Library and Information Science, 28(4), 1. (in Persian).
17. Fattahi, R. (2011). Inter-ralation of Library and Information Science Departments in Iran: Does it possible? Information & Communication Quarterly Book Review, 14(10), 12-14. (Persian).
18. Fattahi, R., Rajabali Beglou, R., & Akhshik, S. (2014). Past, Present and Future of Library and Information Science in Iran: A Look at the Achievements and Challenges of Developing Knowledge and Information Science. Shiraz: RICeST. (in Persian).
19. Finn, A., Ratcliffe, J., & Sirr, L. (2007). University futures: The direction, shape and provision of higher education in the university of the future (Rep.). Dublin: Dublin Institute of Technology. Retrieved October 8, 2015, from http://arrow.dit.ie/beschrecrep.edu.
20. Geraei, E., & Heidari, G. R. (2015). Core Competencies Theory: A Plan for Knowledge and Information Science Education. Research on Information & Public Libraries, 21(3), 467-490. (Persian).
21. Geraei, E., Heidari, G. R., & Kokabi, M. (2018). A Bibliographic Approach to Fundamental Issues of Knowledge and Information Science (KIS) Education in Iran. Research on Information & Public Libraries, 24(1), 51-80. (in Persian).
22. Gholamzadeh, A. (1998). Cybernetics and its Role in Creating Information Systems: Theoretical Foundations of the Basic Logistics Information Management System. Tehran: ImamHossein University. (in Persian).
23. Gorman, G. E. (1999). The Future of Library Science Education. Libri, 49(1), 1-10.
24. Gorman, M. (2004). Whither library education? New Library World, 105(9): 376-380.
25. Hayati, Z. (2008). The Issues of Library and Information Education at Universities. Library and Information Science, 2(1), 3-26. (in Persian).
26. Heidari, G. R. (2010). Changing the Name and Educational Content of Library and Information Science Based on the Core Concept and Present day Paradigm: a Faramework for Thinking. Journal of Studies in Library and Information Studies, 3(6), 135-156. (in Persian).
27. Heidari, G. R. (2011). Library and Information Science Education in Iran: Barriers and Solutions. Journal of Studies in Library and Information Studies, 14(2), 71-105. (in Persian).
28. Heidari, G. R. (2011). The Contraction and Expansion of the field of Library and Information Science. Journal of Studies in Library and Information Studies, 18(7), 1-3. (in Persian).
29. Horri, A. (2005). Library and Information Science Education: Challenges and Solutions. Information & Communication Quarterly Book Review, 8(6-7), 6-17. (in Persian).
30. Horri, A. (2008). An Introduction to Informology. Tehran: Dama: Ketabdar. (in Persian).
31. Horri, A. (2009). Library and Information Science Education in Iran. Information & Communication Quarterly Book Review, 12(4), 4-13. (in Persian).
32. Horri, A. (2011). A Tridimensional Approach to Library and Informaiton Science Education. Information & Communication Quarterly Book Review, 14(10), 10-11. (in Persian).
33. Hurst, J. C. (1987). Student development and campus ecology: A rapprochement. NASPA Journal, 25(1), 5-17.
34. Lewis, D. A. (1980). Today’s challenge—tomorrow’s choice: Change or be changed or the doomsday scenario. Journal of Information Science, 2(2), 59-74.
35. Mansourian, Y. (2011). Specialization and Interdisciplinary Trends in Library and Information Science. Information & Communication Quarterly Book Review, 14(10), 58-63. (in Persian).
36. Mehrad, J., & Hasanzadeh, M. (2011). Strategies for the Planning Committee of Library and Information Science (2011-2014). Shirza: RICeST. (in Persian).
37. Millwood, R., & Powell, S. (2011). A cybernetic analysis of a university-wide curriculum innovation. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 28(4), 258-274.
38. Mirzaei Ahranjani, H. (1988). Cybernetics in Management. Knowledge Management, 1(1), 17-23.
39. Moran, B., & Marchionini, G. (2012). Information professionals 2050: Educating the next generation of information professionals. B. B. Moran and G. Marchionini (Eds.), Information Professional 2050: Educational Possibilities and Pathways (pp. 2-17). Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina.
40. Nancarrow, S. A., & Borthwick, A. M. (2005). Dynamic professional boundaries in the healthcare workforce. Sociology of Health and Illness, 27(7), 897-919.
41. Schoemaker, P. (1995). Scenario planning: A tool for strategic thinking. Sloan Management Review, 36(2), 25-34.
42. Shahbazi, R., Fahimnia, F., & Hakimzade, R. (2014). Modern Information Technology-Based Librarian Jobs for LIS Graduates: A Content Analysis of Job Advertisements. Journal of Academic Librarianship and Inforamtion Research, 47(3), 229-250. (in Persian).
43. Toroghi, J. (2012). A Proposed model for Scenario Planning in University Development. Paper presented at the First National Conference on Future Studies. Tehran: University of Tehran. (in Persian).
44. University Futures (2007). University futures. Retrieved October 8, 2015, from www.universityfutures.org/university_futures.
45. Vallandingham, C. (2003). Propagating the species: will libraries go the way of the Dodo bird? AALL Spectrum Magazine, 7(5), 16-21.
46. Van House, N. A., & Sutton, S. A. (1996). The Panda syndrome: An ecology of LIS education. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 37(2), 131-147.
47. Wikipedia (2015). Ecological niche. Retrived from, http://fa.wikipedia.org/wiki/%DA%A9%D9%86%D8%A7%D9X85.
48. Wilson, E. O. (1992). The diversity of life. New York: WW Norton and Co.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
