Although survey data disclose that traditional content and delivery continue to be stressed, educators still ponder the fact that the new combinations of knowledge, attitudes, and skills in the workplace may require something more of library and information science (LIS) educators. A de-emphasis on traditional content has resulted. Professional education and practice call for multiplicity, academic self-sufficiency, and adjustment to local needs and aspirations. The problem surfaces when students are so exceedingly diverse as to resist common boundary. There is a need for these types of problems to be discussed in light of curriculum changes and for a common boundary in instruction to be defined. Analytical studies to articulate the unarticulated part of the information paradigm may help to conceptualize the information science substance more clearly.

This article presents the background of Sukhothai Thammathirat Open University, its history, and its major study areas. It goes into some detail about the School of Liberal Arts before concentrating on the Information Science Programs offered by that school. The objectives, qualifications of applicants, and the details of the different Information Science Programs are presented at length. The article then goes on to give a detailed outline of the distance-teaching system as used by STOU. It concludes with a statement as to the unique value of the Information Science Programs offered by STOU.

This article summarizes the differences between teaching adults and teaching children. It evaluates the concept of andragogy â a term that describes the teaching of children â in order to conclude the major characteristics of adult learning. It also makes some suggestions for the development of curricula of graduate programs.

The author began working by asking a question: how well are library schools preparing students for future participation in the library profession? She thought that one year is not long enough for students to gain what they need to become a library and information science professional. She suggested library schools to undertake a major restructuring of their programs and recommended a two-year M.L.S. program.

This paper reviews a paradigm shift in library science education in the 1950s and advocates another change in the future. This potential change is a response to the advances of information technologies and will be reflected in the curricula of LIS programs. According to the author, such paradigm shifts should happen at different levels, i.e., at the levels of undergraduate degrees, the Masterâ s degree, the PhD, and continuing professional education.

Distance learning using telecommunications technologies holds new and challenging promises for library and information science (LIS) education. Pedagogical, technological, cultural/sociopolitical issues and their impact upon the constituents involved--faculty, accrediting bodies, students, employers and educational administration--need to be systematically studied. Findings of a research project that examined one of the human agencies involved in distance learning, full-time faculty at library schools who have taught LIS courses for graduate credit to distance learners using a telecommunications technology, are reported. The primary research questions were exploratory ones that sought answers about the impact of the distance-learning educational model upon faculty. The methodology used was a mix of written survey, telephone, and direct interview techniques. Faculty perceived that their role changed in the distance-learning model from what it was in the traditional classroom-based model. "Teaching is no longer a private act; it is a public performance." Other findings are that more time is required for class preparation; patterns of interaction and communication between students and faculty are different; technical and managerial skills are needed; sociopolitical issues (such as copyright) need to be addressed; and specific knowledge about learning behaviors within this model is needed. Teaching, in this model, is a complex performance that may conflict with the prevailing organizational culture of both the institution and the academic profession. However, the "critical mass" of a library school teaching faculty (conspicuous for its small size) requires several changes if distance learning is to be pursued successfully, and these are discussed briefly. Salient, early historical points about the Board of Education for Librarianship (BEL, American Library Association), American Association of Library Schools (AALS), forerunner to the Association for Library and Information Science Education (ALISE), and the Gaylord Brothers (New York) financed American Correspondence School of Librarianship (ACSL) are included.

The authors respond to the issues presented in the article "Crying Wolf: An examination and reconsideration of the perception of crisis in LIS education," published in the same issue of the Journal of Education for Library and Information Science.

The organizational culture school of thought is a relatively recent notion in the field of organizational theory and is a response to the perceived shortcomings of other modes of thinking that may miss some important aspects, not just of organizing and the purpose of organizations, but of the real workings of organizations. The organizational culture of the research university is highly complex, because, in part, of the multifarious demands on and activities of the institution. This article examines the culture that pervades the research university, the problematic conflict between the cultures of university and of discipline, the implications of organizational culture for meaning formation and the reduction of uncertainty. Since this is the culture in which many LIS programs exist, the implications of the culture, especially regarding determination of success, are explored.

Library and information studies (LIS) education may be misreading the academic community's expectations. A program's viability may hinge on a counterintuitive premise, where the academic culture allows each discipline to create its own criteria for its own evaluation. LIS programs may have unwittingly assumed that adopting the scientific mode might gain them currency in the academic realm; yet there is little evidence that LIS programs had the prerequisite infrastructure to compete with a science discipline in terms of sustained funded research, teaching assistant and postdoctoral assistant services, laboratory equipment, and other resources. There is an irony that many LIS students and faculty do not come from the scientific disciplines, and this further inhibits their ability to compete in that arena. LIS program and faculty evaluators have used criteria from the sciences to measure LIS progress and to determine an individual's suitability for promotion. We contend that this application of inappropriate criteria has done unnecessary harm to LIS and the individuals in it. An examination of selected COA self-study responses and other sources indicates that LIS may misread the academic culture because LIS does not appear to be central to university governance. Finally, the waning of LIS's affiliation with libraries may do LIS irreparable harm. LIS's focus may need to be recentered on educating librarians.

Since the 1970s, most disciplines and schools of professional studies have developed their areas of curriculum, research, and theory construction by including race and ethnic studies. At the same time, library and information studies has lagged in providing a broader understanding of race and librarianship. Although attempts have been made to fill the racial-understanding gap, most of the work is characterized as exceptional/pioneer biography, with little attention given to broader social constructs of race and racism. This article explores how library and information science education falls short in contributing to the literature on race and racism. The current multicultural movement in library science is to be addressed.