Library and Information Science (LIS)

LIS as a term is a combination of Library Science and Information Science. It is associated with schools of library and information science, which generally developed from professional schools to research based university institutions during the second half of the twenty century. In the last part of 1960s began schools of librarianship to add the term "information science" to their names. The first school to do this was at the University of Pittsburgh in 1964. More schools followed during the 1970s and 1980s and during the 1990s had almost all library schools in the USA added information science to their names. A similar development have taken place in large parts of the world. For example, in 1997 the ‘Royal School of Librarianship’ in Copenhagen changed its name in English to the ‘Royal School of Library and Information Science’.

About the first library school to adopt Information Science: ”On January 29, 1964, accreditation of the new school’s first professional degree program was announced by the Committee on Accreditation of the American Library Association, following a visit earlier in that academic year. In that same year, the name of the school was officially changed from the Graduate Library School to the Graduate School of Library and Information Sciences, recognizing a growing emphasis on the application of new electronic and computer technologies attributable in large part to the appointment to the faculty a year earlier of Allan Kent, formerly associate director of the Center for Documentation and Communication Research at Case Western Reserve University. In 1964 a doctoral program was established in library and information science” (Galvin, 1977, p. 285).
 

The development towards the term LIS has been very strong but not without exceptions:

In 1997 decided Tromsø University in Norway to use the term documentation science and at the Scarlid-conference in Uleåborg (Finland) 2001 the term "Library, Information and Documentation" (LID) was proposed as a better term compared to LIS (see Rayward, 2004). Also the definition provided by Jack Andersen belov reflects the view that the concept of documents is important for LIS. Many people feel that documents and documentation are core concepts defining the essence of the field, why documentation should be included in the name of the field. In Danish the term "BDI" [Library, Documentation, Information] is used and covers both practical activities and research.

What happened to Library Science and to Information Science as a result of the formation of this new hybrid? Do they still co-exist as two different approaches within the same organization? This issue has still to be investigated, but some points are rather evident: The curriculum in library schools incorporated online databases, thesauri, evaluation measures and related issues.

LIS as a field of research should not be confused with librarianship and information management as practical activities. Sometimes the label "science" is used about activities, which do not in any way match this label. 

Also, LIS should not be confused with research based on library collections and materials. The Royal Library in Copenhagen publishes "Fund og forskning i Det kongelige Biblioteks Samlinger". [Finds and Research in the Collections of The Royal Library]. This publication represents high quality research in various fields in the humanities, but it does not represent LIS.

There is also some confusion about the label. Some synonyms or near synonyms for LIS are: Library Science, Library Studies, Documentation Science, Documentation Studies, Information Science, Information Management, "Information Science and Technology" and the plural form: Library and Information Sciences. In order to understand the relations of these terms, it is necessary to have some historical knowledge of each term and the development of the field. It is also necessary to have theoretical knowledge about different perspectives, what theoretical role such concepts as "library", "document" and "information" play in forming the identity of the field.

Meta-analyses of the field of LIS may be bibliometrically orientated and analyze quantative trends in the field. A content analysis of LIS is presented by Järvelin & Vakkari (1993). Some analysis focus on theoretical assumptions and "paradigms", for example, Olaisen (1985).

Michael Buckland wrote:

"I suggest that the historical development of conceptions of Library and Information Science can be better understood if we think in terms of two different traditions, which I call a "document tradition" and a "formal tradition."

In the "formal tradition" I include all those techniques and technologies based on logic and algorithms: punch cards, digital computers, data-processing, computing, artificial intelligence, and historic traditions of information retrieval as reflected in meetings of ACM SIGIR. It is this formal tradition that has done so much to make our conference topic--digital libraries--possible. But this tradition depends on definitions and reliable procedures and is at odds with the variability of human language and of human behavior.

In the "document tradition" I would place the historic practices of document services, such as bibliography, librarianship, archivists and records managers. In this tradition the concern has been with documents in the sense of signifying objects and their use in the service of multiple objectives: practical utility, education, recreation, literacy, and diverse social services. This tradition has a certain logic: It entails that professional practice extends to any kind of signifying object in any format, that it include (potentially) anything that helps knowledge, and an understanding that documents have to do with knowledge, meaning, learning, description, language, and ambiguity (Buckland 1997). It follows that every conception of Library and Information Science cannot be complete if it does not incorporate cultural studies, and that, ultimately, a mature, well-developed conception of Library and Information Science must necessarily have lively roots in the concerns of the humanities and qualitative social sciences.

Two traditions appear to be, ultimately, incompatible because they start from fundamentally different bases. Nevertheless, we cannot choose either one exclusively if we are to be both effective and practical. " (Buckland, 1999).

One thing is how LIS developed until now, another thing is how it should develop in the future. Jack Andersen provides the following understanding of LIS:

"Library and information science (LIS) is the study of knowledge production as it is materialized in documents, and of through which channels this knowledge is communicated and how one can make access to this knowledge in terms of organization and representation of documents. In this way, the study of knowledge organization plays a crucial role in LIS.

    The study of knowledge organization has a long tradition in LIS. However, this tradition has been characterized by searching for techniques for knowledge organization rather than having arrived at an profound understanding of the nature and function of knowledge organization in society. Therefore, it is important to connect the study of knowledge organization and its problems with analyses of society’s production of knowledge.

    In order to arrive at an understanding the production of knowledge in society, philosophical, historical, sociology of science and knowledge, cultural, literary, and social aspects of knowledge production need to be recognized. Knowledge should not be conceived of as scientific knowledge only, but also as artistic, technical, and ‘everyday life’ knowledge; that is a basic pragmatic view on knowledge. A practical consequence of this conception must be to contribute to an understanding of why it is important to ”keep the valuable from oblivion” (Patrick Wilson, 1968, p. 1). " (Andersen, 2001).

Literature:

Aharony N (2006). The librarian and the information scientist: Different perceptions among Israeli information science students. Library & Information Science Research, 28(2), 235-248.
 

Andersen, J. (2001). Homepage. http://www.db.dk/jan/home_uk.htm

Buckland, Michael (1999). Vocabulary as a central concept in library and information science. Preprint of paper published in: Digital Libraries: Interdisciplinary Concepts, Challenges, and Opportunities. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science (CoLIS3, Dubrovnik, Croatia, 23-26 May 1999. Ed. by T. Arpanac et al. Zagreb: Lokve, pp 3-12. ISBN 953-6003-37-6.
http://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/~buckland/colisvoc.htm (Hentet 2007-08-30).

Fund og forskning i Det kongelige Biblioteks samlinger. Copenhagen: The Royal Library.  http://www.kb.dk/kb/publikationer/fundogforskning/online/

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)

Hansson, J. (1999). Klassifikation, bibliotek och samhälle : en kritisk hermeneutisk studie av "Klassifikationssystem för svenska bibliotek".  Borås: Valfrid.  (Skrifter från Valfrid; 19).

Hjørland, B. (2000). Library and Information Science: Practice, theory, and philosophical basis. Information Processing and Management, 36(3), 501-531.

Höglund, L. (1999). Biblioteks- och informationsvetenskap som studie- och forskningsområde. Högskolen i Borås, Bibliotekshögskolan. 18 pp. (In Swedish). Pdf

Järvelin, K. & Vakkari, P. (1993). The Evolution of Library and Information Science 1965-1985: A Content Analysis of Journal Articles. Information Processing & Management, 29(1), 129-144.
 

Kajberg, L. (1992). Library and Information Science Research in Denmark 1965-1989: A Content Analysis of R&D Publications. IN: Teknologi och kompetens. Proceedings. 8:de Nordiska konferencen för Information och Dokumentation 19-21/5 1992 i Helsingborg. Stockholm: Tekniska Litteratursällskapet,  233-237.
 

Kajberg, L. (1993). Indholdsanalyse af forskning på BDI-området i Danmark 1965-1989. Bibliotek­sarbejde nr. 38, 41-63.

McNicol, S. (2003). LIS: The Interdisciplinary Research Landscape. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 35(1), 23-30.
 

Olaisen, J. (1985). Alternative Paradigms in Library Science: The Case for Paradigmatic Tolerance and Pluralism. Libri, 35(2), 129-150.

Olausen, C. (Ed.). (2004). Utvärdering av ämnen arkivvetenskap, biblioteks- och informations-vetenskap, bok- och bibliotekshistoria, informations- och medievetenskap, kulturvård och museologi vid svenska universitet och högskolor. Stockholm: Högskoleverket. Appendix: En historisk och kritisk belysning av ämnet biblioteks- och informationsvetenskap (B&I) med fokus på dess identitet och olika benämningar. [A Historical and Critical Examination of the Discipline Library and Information Science (LIS) with focus on its identity and different designations]. (Pp. 99-135). (In Swedish, Click for fulltext). 

McClure, C. R. & Hernon, P. (eds.). (1991). Library and Information Science Research: Perspectives and Strategies for Improvement. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.

Rayward, W. B. (Ed.) (2004). Aware and responsible. Papers of the Nordic- International Colloquium on Social and Cultural Awareness and responsibility in Library, Information, and Documentation Studies (SCARLID). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
 

Schwartz, C. A. (1992). Research Significance: Behavioral Patterns and Outcome Characteristics. The Library Quarterly, 62(2), 123-149.

Wilson, P. (1968). Two Kinds of Power. An Essay on Bibliographical Control. Berkley: University of California Press.

Åström, F. (2006). The social and intellectual development of library and information science. Doctoral theses at the Department of Sociology, Umeå University,. No 48 2006. http://www.diva-portal.org/diva/getDocument?urn_nbn_se_umu_diva-943-3__fulltext.pdf

Åström, F. (2007). Becoming a discipline: The institutionalization of library and information science in the Nordic countries. Journal of documentation. Submitted.

See also: Documentation; I-school; Information management; Information Science; Knowledge organization (Lifeboat for KO); Library and Information Sciences;  Library Science;

Birger Hjørland

Last edited: 31-08-2007

Home