'''පුස්තකාල හා විඥාපන විද්යාව''' (LIS) (sometimes in plural: '''library and information sciences''')is a merging of the two fields [[library science]] and [[information science]]. The phrase "library and information science" is associated with schools of library and information science (abbreviated to "SLIS"), which generally developed from professional training programs (not academic disciplines) to university institutions during the second half of the twentieth century. In the last part of 1960s [[library school|schools of librarianship]] began to add the term "information science" to their names. The first school to do this was at the University of Pittsburgh in 1964.<ref>Galvin, T. J. (1977). Pittsburgh. University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Library and Information Sciences. IN: Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science (Vol. 22). Ed. by A. Kent, H. Lancour & J.E.Daily. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc. (pp. 280–291)</ref> More schools followed during the 1970s and 1980s and during the 1990s almost all library schools in the USA had added information science to their names. The trend was more for the adoption of information technology rather than the concept of a science. In other words, schools were using Information Technologies as a given practice, rather than using concepts of a science.
A similar development has taken place in large parts of the world. In Denmark, for example, the 'Royal School of Librarianship' in 1997 changed its English name to [[The Royal School of Library and Information Science]]. Another indication of this name shift is that ''Library Science Abstracts'' in 1969 changed its name to [[Library and Information Science Abstracts]].In spite of this merge are the two original disciplines ([[library science]] and [[information science]]) still by some considered as separate fields while the main tendency today is to use the terms as [[synonym]]s, but with different [[connotation]]s.
==Relations between library science, information science and LIS==
==Difficulties defining LIS==
=== Poor terminological hygiene ===
=== A multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary or monodisciplinary field? ===
=== A fragmented adhocracy ===
=== Scattering of the literature ===
==What is the unique concern of library and information science?==
==Theories, approaches and "paradigms" in LIS==
==Core journals==
==Core conferences==
==Common subfields==
*a. [[Knowledge organization]]
*b. [[Library studies]]
*c. [[Information architecture]]
*d. [[Information behavior]]
*e. Interactive [[information retrieval]]
*f. [[Information systems]]
*g. [[Scholarly communication]]
*h. [[Digital literacy]] (cf [[information literacy]])
*i. [[Bibliometrics]] or [[scientometrics]]
*j. [[Interaction design]] and [[user experience]]”
* [[Information seeking]] and [[Information retrieval]] 100%
* [[Library management]] and promotion 96%
* [[Knowledge management]] 86%
* [[Knowledge organization]] 82%
* [[Information literacy]] and learning 76%
* Library and society in a historical perspective ([[Library history]]) 66%
* The [[Information society]]: Barriers to the [[free access to information]] 64%
* [[Cultural heritage]] and digitisation of the cultural heritage ([[Digital preservation]])62%
* The library in the multi-cultural information society: International and intercultural communication 42%
* Mediation of culture in a special European context 26% "
It is a question, however, whether all these subfields really are subfields of LIS or rather fields that belongs to other fields? Most information retrieval research, for example, belongs to computer science; Knowledge management is considered a subfield of management studies. To the degree that these subfields are not based on research in library and information science, but are based on knowledge imported from other disciplines, they cannot be considered parts of LIS understood as a research based field.
==Adjacent fields==
Swedish Library Research, 1993, issue 2-3 (cover) displayed the following adjacent disciplines to Library and information science:
* Cognition
* History
* Philosophy
* Management
* Social science
* Sociology of literature
* Technology
* Theory of science
Many more could be mentioned, for example:
* Anthropology
* Communication studies
* Cultural studies
* Educational studies
* Legal studies
* Linguistics
* Logics
* Mathematics
* Philology
* Sociology of science
* Visual arts
How do we decide which fields are important adjacent fields? We have to make a distinction between which fields have actually been most used and cited in LIS on the one hand and on the other hand which fields are most important from a normative point of view (important fields may have been neglected because nobody in LIS has so far mastered them). In the end is the question of adjacent fields dependent on a theory of LIS: unless we have a some kind of consensus how such a theory might look like, the question of adjacent fields can only be illuminated by historical and bibliometric studies of the relation between LIS and other disciplines.
==See also==
*[[Archival science]]
*[[Bibliography]]
*[[Documentation science]]
*[[Education for librarianship]]
*[[Glossary of library and information science]]
*[[I-school]]
*[[Informatics (academic field)]]
*[[Information history]]
*[[Information management]]
*[[Information systems]]
*[[Knowledge management]]
*[[Library and information scientist]]
*[[Museology]]
*[[Museum informatics]]
==Literature==
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed in any way by the Wikimedia Foundation or any of its affiliates. In fact, we fucking despise them.
|
