Abstract
Research-support librarians have to play an effective role in supporting learning, providing services and anticipating the requirements of academic researchers. However, previous studies revealed that these librarians lacked the competencies to keep abreast of new resources, services and technologies. Although there is a large body of literature discussing the comprehensive competencies required of research-support librarians, very few have attempted to investigate this issue in the Malaysian context. Based on this situation, this study attempts to investigate the self-directed learning traits and competencies of research-support librarians in Malaysian public universities. This study also aims to identify the influence of self-directed learning on competencies. A total of 215 research-support librarians from Malaysian public universities were selected. The findings revealed that the competencies of these librarians are still at medium level. The most noticeable and lowest competency was in information technology skills, followed by research and contributions to the profession and library management. The most prevalent competencies were interpersonal skills, followed by information literacy, entrepreneurialism, foundational knowledge and collections development.
Introduction
Previous studies have pointed out the essential importance of self-directed learning among research-support librarians in supporting positive behavioural changes (Boyatzis, 2004) and improving their skills and knowledge of digital library development and emerging technologies (Lai and Wang, 2012; Reid and Tairi, 2012), as well as enhancing their interpersonal development (Wiebrands and Wiebrands, 2014). Conceptually, Merriam et al. (2007) defined self-directed learning as a process of learning whereby an individual on their own initiative is accountable for their own learning accomplishments. In this sense, any individual will try to plan, implement and assess their learning without any assistance. In the case of research-support librarians, self-directed learning is operationally defined as a continuous erudition mode that allows them to constantly search for new and better ways to enhance their competencies and expertise. The term ‘research-support librarian’ refers to a librarian who works professionally in an academic research library environment and who supports learning, enhances teaching, improves research, provides services and anticipates the needs of academic researchers (MacColl, 2010; Research Information Network, 2008).
Previous studies agreed that self-directed learning has a significant influence on competencies (Galbraith and Quinney, 2013; Irfan et al., 2015). Accordingly, self-directed learning approaches were the most established methods used by research-support librarians to improve their proficiencies (Hashim, 2008; Shin et al., 2017; Yang and Jiang, 2014), which is believed to derive from librarians acting on their own initiative (Ley et al., 2005; Viliunas, 2013) and presumably happened within a librarian’s workplace setting. According to Tomaszewski and MacDonald (2009), by attending librarianship seminars, workshops and conferences, a librarian will be able to access recent knowledge and information that is essential to their professional performance. Currently, this consists of problem-solving abilities, creativity and changing adaptation processes (Beitler, 2005).
Empirically, only a few studies have been carried out in the area of self-directed learning within the library context or on the self-directed learning traits of librarians. Moreover, there is little or no literature, so far as is known, on the self-directed learning traits among research-support librarians serving at Malaysian public universities. In addition, whether Malaysian research-support librarians are different in terms of their self-directed learning and their perceived competencies empirically based on their demographics (length of service, professional grades and their genders) is considered under-researched within the Malaysian context of librarianship. However, studies have in fact been conducted to address ways of measuring and enhancing competencies in general and among librarians in particular by various researchers in the area of librarianship (Auckland, 2012; Ferreira et al., 2007; Hansson and Johannesson, 2013; Koufogiannakis and Crumley, 2006; Kwanya et al., 2012; Marcum, 2012; Robati and Tahavori, 2014), and little could be found in the literature on the influence of self-directed learning on the competencies of research-support librarians in Malaysian public universities.
To fill this gap, this study aimed to investigate the self-directed learning and competencies among Malaysian public universities’ research-support librarians. Furthermore, we also tried to determine whether research-support librarians serving in Malaysian public universities have significant differences in terms of their self-directed learning processes and their competencies based on their demographic variables. Finally, we also attempted to see whether the self-directed learning processes used by research-support librarians have a strong influence on their competencies.
Reviewing the literature
Theoretical framework
In synthesis, a combination of theory and model is used in this study. The theory and model chosen for this study are Knowles’ Andragogy-Adult Learning Theory and Core-Competencies for 21st Century CARL (Canadian Association of Research Libraries) Librarians Model. The theoretical framework is shown in Figure 1. Knowles’ Andragogy-Adult Learning Theory was chosen as the most appropriate theory for this study because of the concept of self-directed learning that was introduced by Malcolm Knowles. Knowles (1975, 1980, 1990; Knowles and Associates, 1984) listed several assumptions of andragogy which make up the dimensions or constructs of this study.
Theoretical framework.
The first dimension is the concept of the learner. In this concept, it is assumed that human beings grow in capacity and need to be self-directing as an essential component of maturing, and that this capacity should be nurtured to develop as rapidly as possible. The second dimension is that the learner’s experiences become an increasingly rich resource for learning which should be exploited along with the resources of experts.
In the third dimension, it is assumed that individuals will become ready to learn what is required to perform their evolving life tasks or to cope more adequately with their life problems, and that each individual therefore has a somewhat different pattern of readiness from other individuals. Fourth, in the orientation to learn, the subject-centred orientation is a result of individuals’ previous conditioning in school and that their natural orientation is task- or problem-centred, and that therefore learning experiences should be organised as task-accomplishing or problem-solving learning projects. The final dimension is that learners are motivated by internal incentives such as the need for esteem, especially self-esteem, the desire to achieve, the urge to grow, the satisfaction of accomplishment, the need to know something specific and curiosity.
Also selected as the basis of the competencies of research-support librarians model is the Core-Competencies for 21st Century CARL Librarians Model which consists of dimensions or constructs such as (1) foundational knowledge, (2) interpersonal skills,; (3) management, (4) entrepreneurialism, (5) collections development, (6) information literacy, (7) research and contributions to the profession and (8) information technology skills.
The Core-Competencies for 21st Century CARL Librarians Model was selected as a suitable model for this research as it draws from other existing librarian competency statements and from competency research in general (Abels et al., 2003; American Library Association, 2009; Association of Southeastern Research Libraries, 2001; Federal Library and Information Center Committee, 2008).
This model addresses the recruitment and restructuring issues in terms of a set of key competencies which are suggested as integral to building and maintaining a nimble staff which ably serves its community and continually adapts to a dynamic, constantly evolving research/information landscape. It is meant to act as a guide to help librarians working in research libraries and attempts to reflect the unique composition of competencies required by academic librarians working in an intense, 21st-century academic research environment.
Self-directed learning: Concept and past studies
Initially, Schugurensky (2000) defined self-directed learning as a ‘learning assignment’ undertaken by any individual (unaccompanied or as part of a group) without the assistance of an instructor (teacher, educator or facilitator), but it can include the presence of a ‘resource person’. Later, Merriam et al. (2007) defined self-directed learning as a learning process in which each individual is empowered and responsible for his or her own learning by taking the initiative to learn and improve their knowledge without receiving any assistance. In addition, the individual is taking responsibility for preparing, implementing and assessing their own learning process. To categorise self-directed learning, Hiemstra (1994) listed four features: (1) a continuous process of learning, (2) transferable knowledge and skills, (3) various activities such as electronic dialogues, critical reflections and internship and (4) open learning programmes that enhance the modern learning process. Thus, self-directed learning can be seen as an adult’s diverse learning processes, workplace education and vocational training. Some definitions associate self-directed learning with tightly constrained activities, for example, programmed learning (Gerber et al., 1995). In this sense, Tough (1978: 250) defined self-directed learning as a process of learning and understanding which entailed much effort to gain and retain a certain definite knowledge and skill. The learning is intentionally based on the individual’s own resourcefulness and conducted at a pace and with resources of their own choosing.
Some studies are emerging that have explored self-directed learning (Confessore and Kops, 1998). As mentioned by Ellinger (2004), there are various types of studies which relate to various elements of self-directed learning such as the concept and prevalence, learning resources, models and theories, individual characteristics, capabilities, readiness and, finally, individual determination. However, most previous studies that had explored the practice of self-directed learning concluded that self-directed learning involves a job-related approach within a workplace setting (Clardy, 2000) and deals with continuous change and increasing complexity (Park, 2008) within that workplace setting. Thus, the conclusion is that self-directed learners mostly practise self-planning and learn informally (Merriam et al., 2007). In Taiwan, Lai and Wang (2012) have examined self-directed learning in the public libraries of three major Taiwanese cities: Taipei, Taichung and Kaohsiung. They conclude that these librarians have a strong belief in their self-learning practices and prefer to act on their own initiative to create a learning process which results in improvements in their competencies. In terms of their demographic differences, there are differences between the library science graduates and the non-library science graduates in terms of the major variables studied. In addition, librarians who received training have greater knowledge and expertise, which ensures positive feedback from their learning.
Despite this, and so far as is known, little could be found in the literature on the five constructs of librarians’ self-directed learning traits. Thus, it is necessary to examine these self-directed learning traits with the challenge of making them relevant, especially in the higher education context. As research-support librarians, it is essential that they are responsive to emerging technologies and the changing needs of their customers; hence, they themselves must continually acquire new competencies.
Research-support librarians’ competencies
As substantial studies are being done to examine and investigate the competencies required in various professions, the present literature review will focus only on studies addressing librarians’ competencies. In Malaysia, Sa’ari et al. (2013b, 2014) focused on the managerial and entrepreneurial competencies of research-support librarians. They concluded that librarians in Malaysia should adopt an entrepreneurial approach in order to become more innovative, creative, effective and efficient in promoting the resources and services provided by their libraries as revenue-generating opportunities and for maximising working competitiveness. Robati and Tahavori (2014), on the contrary, examined the research competencies required of special library managers in Iran. They identified the vital competencies of a research-support librarian as the ability to conduct research and to collaborate and cooperate in research activities.
Similarly, Brown and Tucker (2013) listed key competencies of research-support librarians including (1) assisting researchers, (2) helping others to find related information, (3) selecting the research materials, (4) providing training to faculty members on new databases and research tools, (5) monitoring the relevant use of new databases for faculty research, (6) offering library online technical support and resources and (7) providing guidance on how to deal with copyright issues. Similarly, Hansson and Johannesson (2013) reported on academic librarians’ views on the competencies required to manage and access institutional repositories, finding citations and impact factors, the skills needed in bibliographic research and cataloguing, knowledge of copyright law and agreements, citations, parallel publishing and reference management software. In another study, Jaguszewski and Williams (2013) claimed that the user-engagement element is considered an influencing factor for librarians to improve their competencies. Besides, they also listed some vital knowledge that librarians require: (1) establishing collaborative partnerships within and across institutions; (2) designing and developing new institutional repositories; (3) the need for liaison librarians to be team-builders among library experts where this advances client research; (4) advising on issues such as copyright, managing data and knowledge, intellectual property and information literacy; (5) providing guidance to students to enhance the library research skills required for their academic courses; (6) engaging in digital humanities and scholarly communication; (7) developing tools and software such as Geographic Information System services; and (8) social and entrepreneurial skills.
Meanwhile, in Kenya, Kwanya et al. (2012) identified five competency areas for research librarians as (1) technical, (2) personal and interpersonal, (3) information and communication technologies (ICTs), (4) management and (5) research. Technical competency covers professional foundations, the techniques for managing information and resources, information services for projects and distribution. The personal and interpersonal areas comprise individual attributes, communication skills, public relations and networking. Meanwhile, librarians need to become competent in ICT and understanding the hardware and software, the Internet, the web and digitisation. The management area covers competencies in general management, funding, project management and legal affairs. The final area – research – addresses details of a research librarian’s general skills to support researchers in universities. Next, Marcum (2012) emphasised that librarians must understand the research and scholarship processes at a deep level to meet the collection and service needs of research institutions. Research-support librarians must develop a scholarly instinct and inclination and transform themselves into partners in the scholarly enterprise. They also need to help researchers take full advantage of the available technologies.
Previously, Auckland (2012), under the auspices of Research Libraries of the United Kingdom (RLUK), issued a report that explores in detail 32 potential skills and knowledge areas that research-support librarians need to have. They are basically related to the subject and discipline, research process, partnerships, information, research data, information literacy, scholarly communications, funders’ mandates, assessment and other ‘legal’ requirements, metadata, and emerging technologies. Furthermore, in South Africa, Hart and Kleinveldt (2011) enquired how academics employed their institution’s library in their research since librarians were expected to assist researchers in accessing e-resources, borrowing print resources and using inter-library loan services. Librarians must also possess strong subject knowledge. Similarly, the Canadian Association of Research Libraries/Association des bibliothèques de recherche du Canada (CARL/ABRC), Library Education Working Group and the Building Capacity Subcommittee (2010) have also outlined librarians’ lists of personal competencies, which include elements such as basic knowledge about librarianship, interpersonal skills, leadership and management, collections development, information literacy, research and information technology skills.
In another study, Kroll and Forsman (2010) emphasised the importance of information technology, collections development and competence in interpersonal skills for research-support librarians. This is because libraries need to manage the storage, maintenance and retrieval of documents and datasets over time. In addition, scholarship rests on the foundation of personal relationships where libraries have to provide customised and user-centred services. Similarly, Gannon-Leary and Bent (2010) studied the need for libraries to better support researchers. They conclude that competencies in foundational knowledge, information literacy and research are fundamental for librarians who are supporting any research activity. In Malaysia, Kaur (2009) described the need for libraries to engage in marketing initiatives in order to promote their collections and services to their clientele. One marketing approach is via academic library websites, which can be used for promotional and public relations activities targeted at academic researchers. Hence, librarians need to possess both interpersonal and information technology competencies to manage such activity. Earlier, Gannon-Leary et al. (2008) emphasised the need for libraries to promote their resources and collections by means of social networking. Their study described librarians as ‘patient’, ‘helpful’ and ‘knowledgeable’, thereby indicating the importance of interpersonal skills, while pedagogical and subject expertise, and the ability to train others were seen as competencies in foundational knowledge and information literacy.
Moreover, Haglund and Olsson (2008) argued that librarians must be competent in using new technology to determine whether it might be used to improve library services. He also mentioned the use of the departmental internal web as a starting point where librarians should establish a presence with direct links targeted to particular groups. In addition, a report by the Research Information Network (2008) concluded that librarians should engage in processes such as cataloguing, navigation, discovery, delivery and access which fulfil researchers’ needs by sharing skills and expertise, communicating and evaluating research output, and engaging in the activities of preservation and disposal in order to sustain resources.
Relationship between self-directed learning and competencies
Many previous studies have concluded that there is a significant relationship between self-directed learning and the competencies of librarians. For instance, Irfan et al. (2015) investigated within a university context in Kerala, India, whether the competencies of professional librarians were derived from their self-directed learning process. Their findings show that most of the librarians studied were highly self-motivated individuals, which strongly influenced their self-development and competencies. Also, Wiebrands and Wiebrands (2014) suggested ways of providing improved learning opportunities for two university library staff members in a changing environment. They discovered that self-directed learning was vital to ensuring that learning remained relevant to each individual learner since only if learning is relevant can the learner gain a meaningful understanding of what is learned. Thus, to provide resources to facilitate self-directed learning among librarians, a library can provide support for their staff by creating a more comprehensive learning programme that realises the full potential of the library.
Similarly, another study conducted at a university library in the state of Utah, USA, found that the librarians’ self-directed approach to learning had nurtured their technology skills and competencies, which later resulted in improved services for students (Galbraith and Quinney, 2013). Furthermore, a self-directed programme – the Technology Challenge – was officially developed by the public university to promote lifelong learning practices for librarians to keep abreast of emerging technologies. In the study, they noticed that the employment of experience as a source of learning is vital to adult learners, especially librarians. Furthermore, librarians felt more successful when they obtained new knowledge or skills. Finally, learners need to see an opportunity for the immediate application of their knowledge. In addition, Reid and Tairi (2012) who had explored the barriers to, and enablers of, informal learning among librarians concluded that, by providing real-life examples, librarians will know how to overcome barriers so that an environment with elements conducive to the spreading of emerging technologies can be created.
In addition, in the context of public libraries in three major Taiwanese cities – Taipei, Taichung and Kaohsiung – Lai and Wang (2012) quantitatively examined 385 librarians’ perceptions of three major variables: information literacy, self-directed learning readiness and librarians’ attitudes towards e-learning. Findings indicated that public librarians provided positive feedback on the elements of information literacy, self-directed learning and their attitudes towards the use of e-learning. In terms of prediction, public librarians in Taiwan have chosen the element of information evaluation– a sub-construct of self-directed learning – as a strong predictor for their positive attitude towards e-learning. Similarly, Vega and Connell (2007) also found that two of the most-cited reasons librarians gave for going to conferences were professional rejuvenation and networking, both of which are benefits not directly related to conference content. Furthermore, Flatley and Weber (2004) reviewed and commented on various self-directed learning activities that can promote professional development and competencies in new academic librarians. Such activities include involvement in promotion and tenure, writing or publishing, presentations, continuing education, university service, community service, specialised opportunities, and internal training courses or workshops. In addition, related to the practice of self-directed learning among librarians, Varlejs (1999) revealed that 77% of American Library Association members believed that the training provided to them has contributed to improvements in their competencies. Earlier, Giuse et al. (1999) studied the development of a training programme for medical library professionals at the Eskind Biomedical Library (EBL), Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC). They found that an adequate, broad-based, training programme that combines organisational commitment with tangible rewards for employee initiative was successful in increasing overall skill levels throughout the Library.
Methodology
Sample
In this study, a total of 215 librarians were randomly selected to provide feedback on their self-directed learning activities. All 215 librarians served within Malaysian public universities at grade S41, S44 or S48 within Peninsular Malaysia. According to the Public Service Department Malaysia (2005), the S41 grade librarians are professionals who implement information resource development, documentation and information management programmes; provide the services and facilities required by library users; carry out administrative and financial management tasks and supervision; and undertake human resource management. They also implement the preservation and security of information resources and ICT applications in libraries. Meanwhile, grade S44 librarians are professionals who supervise the development of information resources, documentation and information management, and the provision of services and facilities required by library users; carry out administrative and financial management tasks; undertake human resource development; and supervise new methods of preservation and security of information resources, and new applications of ICT in the library. The grade S48 librarians are professionals who coordinate, evaluate and analyse the development of information resources, documentation and information management, and the provision of services and facilities required by library users. They regulate financial matters as well as coordinating new methods of preservation and security of information resources and ICT applications in libraries.
Thus, the reason for selecting the above-mentioned grades is based on their job specifications that frequently specified the need for personal interaction and communication with academics and researchers when providing services at reference desks, road shows, meetings and library instruction programmes. On the contrary, the research-support librarians from the S52 grade and above were not selected for this study as their jobs are more focused on planning, managing, formulating and defining policies; the direction of the library organisation; and the range of services provided (Public Service Department Malaysia, 2005). In addition, the research-support librarians who participated in this study were also clustered according to three public university groups: Malaysian Research Universities (MRU); Malaysian Technical Universities Network (MTUN) and Malaysian Comprehensive Universities (MCU) (MOHE, 2016).
The instrumentation
The variables measured for this study were in three parts. First are the demographic variables, namely, research-support librarians’ gender, length of service, current position grades, academic qualifications and age. The second section contained a total of 19-item self-directed learning traits comprising the following five constructs or dimensions from the ‘Knowles’ Andragogy-Adult Learning Theory’: ‘concept of the learner’ (3 items), ‘role of the learner’s experience’ (4 items), ‘readiness to learn’ (4 items), ‘orientation to learn’ (4 items) and ‘motivation to learn’ (4 items). For the pilot study, Cronbach’s alpha was 0.96 (25 items), which indicates an acceptable level of consistency for the self-directed learning trait items.
In the third section, items comprised the self-developed ‘competencies of research-support librarians’ instrument. This was based on a bank of constructs and items from the ‘Core-Competencies for 21st Century Librarians Model’ (2010) as well as on an exhaustive review of the literature. It consists of eight constructs and 37 items. The constructs or dimensions are ‘foundational knowledge’ (11 items), ‘interpersonal skills’ (3 items), ‘library management’ (4 items), ‘entrepreneurialism’ (3 items), ‘collections development’ (5 items), ‘information literacy’ (4 items), ‘research and contributions to the profession’ (4 items) and ‘information technology skills’ (3 items). For the pilot study, the Cronbach’s alpha value was 0.90 (48 items), which indicates an established level of internal consistency for the Competencies of Research-Support Librarian instrument. All items are rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale that ranged from ‘1’ (strongly disagree) to ‘4’ (strongly agree).
Data collection and analysis
Ten university libraries were randomly selected to carry out the survey. Each university library representative was then contacted to request permission to distribute the questionnaires among research-support librarians. As soon as the permission was granted, a cover letter introducing and explaining the purpose of the study, as well as assuring that respondents’ anonymity and confidentiality would be preserved, was provided. The cover letter together with the questionnaires was delivered by post to each university library representative (e.g. librarians in charge and personal assistants to chief librarians).
Descriptive statistics and inferential statistics were employed in this study. Descriptive statistics, such as mean scores and percentages, were employed to measure the feedback of research-support librarians on their self-directed learning and competencies. As for inferential statistics, the t-test and the analysis of variance (ANOVA) were employed to identify significant differences based on research-support librarians’ demographics. Finally, multiple regression tests were employed to analyse the relationship between research-support librarians’ competencies and their self-directed learning.
Findings
Research-support librarians’ demographics
The respondents in this study were drawn from librarians at 10 public universities in Malaysia. A total of 219 research-support librarians of grades S41, S44 and S48 responded to the survey. Four questionnaires were discarded due to missing items and were omitted during the data analysis phase. Therefore, the overall total number of research-support librarians in this study was 215. Table 1 shows the profile of these librarians.
Research-support librarian demographic profiles.
Table 1, above, indicates that most of the research-support librarians participating in this study were female (68% of 215 respondents). In terms of age group, a majority were aged 36–45 years (44%) with a slighter lower proportion aged 26–35 years (40%). In terms of academic background, 49% of the librarians held a bachelor’s degree, while half of them held a master’s degree (50%). In addition, most of the research-support librarians were at grade S44 (57%). Finally, most research-support librarians had 5–10 years (36%) of working experience, followed by 11–15 years (32%) and 16–20 years (16%), with 19 (8%) having more than 21 years’ experience.
Descriptive findings
In this study, the research-support librarians’ self-directed learning was being examined based on a mean score for the overall self-directed learning traits as well as the mean score for each dimension or construct. For the purpose of determining the level of the mean score, the interpretation of Nunnally and Bernstein (1994) was used. The mean score is low between 1.00 and 2.00, medium-low between 2.01 and 3.00, average between 3.01 and 4.00, and high between 4.01 and 5.00. The mean score of the competencies of research-support librarians is medium-low (between 2.01 and 3.00). Table 2 illustrates the findings for self-directed learning of research-support librarians based on their feedback.
Mean score of dimensions of research-support librarians’ self-directed learning traits.
Highest mean score based on research-support librarians’ assessment.
Lowest mean score based on research-support librarians’ assessment.
The dimension or construct ‘role of the learner’s experience’ had the highest score (mean = 3.42; SD = 0.38), while the second highest score was for ‘readiness to learn’ (mean = 3.39; SD = 0.40). The third highest score was ‘orientation to learn’ (mean = 3.23; SD = 0.39), while the lowest self-directed learning trait was ‘motivation to learn’ (mean = 3.06; SD = 0.42) with ‘concept of the learner’ as the second lowest.
Furthermore, the questionnaire items were analysed to determine the competencies of research-support librarians. Analysis was performed based on a mean score for the overall competency assessment results as well as the mean score for each dimension or construct. The analysis to determine the competencies was based on feedback from 215 research-support librarians. The ‘interpersonal skills’ dimension
Mean score of dimensions of research-support librarians’ competencies.
Highest mean score based on research-support librarians’ assessment.
Lowest mean score based on research-support librarians’ assessment.
Significant difference analyses
Besides measuring the research-support librarians’ feedback using the descriptive statistics, we also examined the significant differences based on the 215 librarians’ demographics: gender, length of service, academic qualifications and their current position grades. Using the t-test and ANOVA tests, we analysed the librarians’ self-directed learning traits and competencies. The results show no significant differences based on research-support librarians’ genders, length of service and academic qualifications at Malaysian public universities on their self-directed learning traits except for ‘role of the learner’s experience’ which has a significant difference based on research-support librarians’ current position grades (N = 215; t = 3.97; Sig. = 0.02). Furthermore, we examined the mean differences for three clusters of research-support librarians based on their current position grades (grades 41, 44 and 48). Using Scheffe’s post hoc comparison analysis, the two cluster groups that have significant differences are ‘research-support librarians of grade 41’ with those on ‘grade 48’ (mean difference = 0.230; Sig. = 0.21).
However, based on the mean scores, female research-support librarians believed that they frequently practised self-directed learning compared to male research-support librarians in all five self-directed learning constructs. Based on research-support librarians’ length of service, senior research-support librarians having 11 to 15 years of service believed that they benefitted from the self-directed learning process compared to both the younger and more senior groups. Similar patterns also existed in the competencies elements when they achieved the highest mean scores in all six elements except for ‘information technology skills’ which was preferred by the younger batch of research-support librarians (5–10 years) and ‘entrepreneurialism’ which was preferred by the senior librarians (more than 26 years). In comparing the mean scores based on academic qualification, data showed that there was little difference between all five elements of self-directed learning traits and research-support librarians’ academic qualifications. Finally, based on their professional grades, the middle professional grade librarians (grade 44) have higher mean scores in all five constructs of self-directed learning compared to the senior (grade 48) and the younger (grade 41) groups.
Based on data in Tables 4 and 5, we also analysed the research-support librarians’ competencies based on gender, academic qualification, length of service and current position grades. To inspect the significant differences based on research-support librarians’ genders versus their competencies, we employed t-test and ANOVA analyses. This revealed that there are significant differences in two sub-constructs of research-support librarians’ competencies, namely, ‘library management’ (N = 215; t = 2.17; Sig. = 0.03) and ‘information technology skills’ (N = 215; t = 2.24; Sig. = 0.02). There is no significant difference in the other six competencies sub-constructs.
Comparing significant differences in research-support librarians’ demographics (gender and length of service).
N = 215.
p < 0.05.
Significant differences in research-support librarians’ demographics (academic qualifications and profession grades).
N = 215.
p < 0.05.
In analysing the librarians’ length of service, findings from the ANOVA tests indicate that four elements within the competencies constructs have significant differences. These are ‘foundational knowledge’ (N = 215; F = 2.23; Sig. = 0.04), ‘library management’ (N = 215; t = 2.44; Sig. = 0.02), ‘entrepreneurialism’ (N = 215; t = 4.96; Sig. = 0.00) and ‘collections development’ (N = 215; t = 2.81; Sig. = 0.01). Furthermore, the post hoc analysis reveals which cluster of research-support librarians’ length of service displays significant differences. Through the post hoc comparison analysis, the two cluster groups that have significant differences within the ‘foundational knowledge’ construct are the research-support librarians who have 11–15 years of service and those with more than 25 years of service (mean difference = 0.103; Sig. = 0.02). As for the ‘library management’ construct, a mean difference is indicated between research-support librarians who have less than 5 years of service and those who have 11–15 years of service (mean difference = 0.511; Sig. = 0.00). In the ‘entrepreneurialism’ construct, the mean differences are between librarians with less than 5 years of service and those with 11–15 years of service (mean difference = 0.299; Sig. = 0.01). The last post hoc analysis is for the ‘collections development’ construct which shows the mean difference between research-support librarians with 5–10 years of service and those with more than 25 years of service (mean difference = 0.510; Sig. = 0.00).
In addition, ANOVA tests were conducted to examine the significant differences in research-support librarians’ competencies based on their academic qualifications. Through the analysis, the element of ‘information literacy’ (N = 215; F = 3.69; Sig. = .02) and ‘research and contributions to the profession’ (N = 215; F = 11.65; Sig. = 0.00) showed significant differences. Furthermore, post hoc comparison analysis was conducted, which indicated that research-support librarians’ academic qualifications show significant differences between the holders of master’s and bachelor’s degrees (mean difference = 0.141; Sig. = 0.02) within the ‘information literacy’ construct. As for ‘research and contributions to the profession’, post hoc comparison analysis also indicated a significant difference between master’s and bachelor’s degree holders (mean difference = 0.266; Sig. = 0.00).
Furthermore, the analysis of research-support librarians’ competencies based on their current position grades revealed that four constructs have significant differences: ‘interpersonal skills’ (N = 215; F = 4.55; Sig. = 0.01), ‘library management’ (N = 215; t = 9.41; Sig. = 0.00), ‘entrepreneurialism’ (N = 215; t = 8.39; Sig. = .00) and ‘collections development’ (N = 215; t = 3.31; Sig. = 0.03)). Through the post hoc comparison analysis, the two cluster groups that have significant differences are the research-support librarians in grade 41 and those on grade 48. These are librarians’ ‘interpersonal skills’ (mean difference = 0.248; Sig. = 0.20), ‘library management’ (mean difference = 0.423; Sig. = 0.00), ‘entrepreneurialism’ (mean difference = 0.361; Sig. = 0.00) and ‘collections development’ (mean difference = 0.241; Sig. = 0.04). Based on these findings, it is revealed that the senior research-support librarians on grade 48 have higher levels of self-perceived competencies compared to those on grade 41.
Prediction analysis
In this study, we also examined whether the research-support librarians’ self-directed learning traits which comprised five constructs – ‘concept of the learner’, ‘the role of the learner’s experience’, ‘readiness to learn’, ‘orientation to learn’ and ‘motivation to learn’ – are predictors of the competencies of research-support librarians. To answer this research question, stepwise regression analysis was performed to examine the relationship index with reference to beta. Table 6 shows the results of the stepwise regression analysis between the five elements of self-directed learning given above.
Predictors of the competencies of research-support librarians.
N = 215 research-support librarians; R = 0.565.
p < 0.05.
The results of the data analysis show that two predictor variables are significant as factors that contribute to the competencies of these university research-support librarians: first, ‘readiness to learn’ (β = 0.565, t = 7.117, Sig. = 0.000), which contributed 36.6% of the variance towards their competencies, and, second, ‘concept of the learner’ (β = 0.217, t = 3.409, Sig. = 0.001), which contributed 3.2% of the variance. On the contrary, three of the predictor variables did not contribute to the competencies, namely, ‘role of the learner’s experience’ (β = −0. 02, t = −0.2, p > 0.05), ‘orientation to learn’ (β = 0.01, t = 0.125, p > 0.05) and ‘motivation to learn’ (β = 0.02, t = 0.32, p > 0.05).
Discussion
This study elicited the views of a total of 215 research-support librarians at grades S41, S44 and S48 through the administration of questionnaires to examine the descriptive elements which impacted their competencies and self-directed learning traits. Descriptively, the ‘interpersonal skills’ were the most prevalent competency of research-support librarians in Malaysian academic libraries as they are eager for new knowledge, they communicate the importance of the library to users and they are involved in meetings. Among the efforts made for effective communication with customers is the dissemination of information through the publications of handbooks and bulletins via portals or websites and through dialogues with faculty members. Others include consultation and reference enquiries and managing customer feedback – which includes complaints, suggestions and acknowledgments. Internal two-way communication is also being given due attention. In addition, staff members convey information and report to management on matters like consumer needs and expectations, consumer satisfaction, quality achievement and quality management system effectiveness, and room for improvement. The least prevalent competency of research-support librarians was ‘information technology skills’ including managing the library’s Integrated Library Systems (ILS) and handling the library’s online social networking tools and reference management software. Taking everything into account, the findings are very similar to those of Osman et al. (2004) that librarians in Malaysia lack competencies in four main areas: management and administration, ICT skills, professional knowledge and skills, and personal relationships.
Furthermore, Gannon-Leary and Bent (2010) concurred that research-support librarians lack ‘interpersonal skills’ and ‘information literacy’. However, the researcher challenges these statements as the findings showed that research-support librarians in Malaysian academic libraries scored well in both competencies, if not the highest and second highest among all competencies required. Similar to Yaacob (2004), this study found that the ‘information technology skills’ of librarians are at a very low level. In terms of ‘entrepreneurialism’, the research-support librarians fared well as opposed to those in studies by Sa’ari et al. (2012) and Kaur (2009). These studies argued that academic librarians in Malaysia lacked initiative and capabilities in promoting library activities, services and collections – all of which are components of entrepreneurial competence.
Next, the study investigated whether research-support librarians in Malaysian public universities are self-directed learners. In this study, the self-directed learning of research-support librarians was considered average to high. The dimension
In examining the significant differences between research-support librarians’ self-directed learning, competencies and their demographics, findings revealed that female research-support librarians have slightly higher levels of self-directed learning traits compared to their male counterparts. However, the male research-support librarians perceived that they have higher levels of competencies compared to their female librarians. The results revealed that female research-support librarians believed that they benefitted considerably from the self-directed learning approach compared to their male colleagues. In terms of their length of service, research-support librarians with 11–15 years of experience were the largest cohort of librarians who believed that they have practised self-directed learning according to professional expectations in order to enhance their competencies and performance. This also applied to the same group for the six elements of competencies, except for the ‘information technology skills’ and ‘entrepreneurialism’ constructs. As for research-support librarians’ academic qualifications, there is no significant difference indicated within their self-directed learning traits. However, within the eight elements of competencies, significant differences are indicated for ‘information literacy’ and ‘research and contributions to the profession’ which disclosed that research-support librarians who obtained a master’s degree perceived that they have a high level of competencies compared to those holding bachelor’s degrees. These findings coincide with the explanation provided by Lai and Wang (2012) which emphasised that it is common for librarians, as in other professions, to have significant differences based on their demographics.
The results of data analysis for a sample size of 215 participants show that ‘concept of the learner’ and ‘readiness to learn’ are identified as factors that contribute to the competencies of research-support librarians in Malaysian public universities, namely, ‘role of the learner’s experience’, ‘orientation to learn’ and ‘motivation to learn’. In relation to Knowles’ (1970) Assumptions of Andragogy, ‘concept of the learner refers to the process of growth by which a person moves from dependency towards increasing self-directedness, but at different rates for different people and in different dimensions of life. In this context, research-support librarians who are individual learners willing to do whatever it takes to learn and decide what they want to learn and self-evaluate their progress after an assignment in order to improve their competence.
Again according to Knowles (1970), readiness to learn happened when research-support librarians show their readiness to learn and experience practicality related to real-life tasks and problems. That is why research-support librarians in this study tend to learn concepts that have immediate relevance to their work, enhance their competencies, gain knowledge through diverse tasks and wish to become exemplary research-support librarians. Taking everything into account, it is appropriate to propose that library management has a huge role to play in inculcating a self-directed learning environment among research-support librarians.
Implication of the study
The findings of this study shed new light on the competencies and self-directed learning traits of research-support librarians at Malaysian public universities. They show that the characteristics of self-directed learning traits (‘role of the learner’s experience’, ‘readiness to learn’ and ‘orientation to learn’) contribute averagely to these librarians’ competencies. Therefore, the findings of this study are believed to have implications for the self-directed learning traits and the competencies of research-support librarians.
Theoretically, a model that integrates the dimensions of ‘concept of learner’ and ‘readiness to learn’ was constructed. This model can be applied to improve and enhance the competencies of these university librarians. The integration of these two dimensions resulted in the development of the Competencies of Research-Support Librarian Catalyst Model (CRSLCM) as laid out in Figure 2. Based on this model, the self-directed learning traits that serve as a catalyst for the competencies are ‘concept of the learner’ and ‘readiness to learn’. The suggested model below is aligned based on Knowles’ (1990) view that within the adult education learning process, the starting point for learning commenced with his or her intention and what they want to become, which later enhances their competencies.
Suggested model for a catalyst for the competencies of research-support librarians.
From the diagram, concept of the learner (Knowles, 1970) refers to the process of maturation whereby a person moves from being dependent to self-directed. This occurs at different rates for different individuals and in different dimensions of life. In this context, research-support librarians are definitely learners who are willing to do whatever it takes to learn, who decide what they want to learn and self-evaluate their progress after an assignment in order to improve their competence.
Readiness to learn in accordance with Knowles’ (1970) Assumptions of Andragogy is when people experience a need to learn and are ready to cope with real-life tasks and problems. That is why research-support librarians in this study tend to learn things that have immediate relevance to their work and which allow them to gain knowledge through diverse tasks in order to fulfil their wish to enhance their competencies so as to become exemplary, supportive librarians. Library management has a responsibility to create conditions and provide tools and procedures for helping librarians discover their ‘need to know’. Learning programmes should be organised around real-life application categories and sequenced according to librarians’ readiness to learn. However, in Knowles’ own experience, the excellence of a model is not the most critical factor in the contribution that competence-based education makes to the effectiveness of learning. The most critical factor is how learners acquire the competencies and elements that will add to their abilities to perform better in life (Knowles, 1990).
As for the policy implications, based on the findings, most of the research-support librarians preferred a job rotation policy. They believed that job rotation assisted in their skills development, built new relationships within the library and made their work more enjoyable and less dull. The job rotation programme enabled them to acquire the necessary skills to work effectively and productively, especially in the digital environment, becoming equipped with diverse knowledge and skills, ranging from technical skills – such as cataloguing skills and computer skills – to interpersonal communications skills (Baro, 2012). Second, it is suggested that library management provides training opportunities which are related to competencies. Such training can arouse interest, build knowledge and provide an opportunity for group involvement and discussion (Green et al., 2000). Accordingly, training for research-support librarians involves attending workshops or classes, delivered either externally by commercial training companies or internally by in-house trainers or external consultants. Third, study-leave opportunities should be offered to all research-support librarians as a means of enhancing their competencies to avoid the issue of hiring new staff with skills or competencies other than those of a librarian. Neal (2006) addressed the scenarios whereby academic libraries in the West brought PhD graduates into librarian assignments. Consequently, employing numbers of librarians who hold doctorates definitely broadens the professional ranks of librarians in academic libraries by including people from a variety of backgrounds.
Fourth, it is suggested that the management of self-directed learning activities with which research-support librarians can engage should include a ‘break’ for immersive reading activities during working hours, either singly or in groups. For instance, by creating book clubs, research-support librarians can share a recently read book or article and set up a time to discuss the ideas raised. Therefore, library management should encourage a positive learning environment by encouraging research-support librarians to adopt a continuous learning mode, by consistently searching for new ideas and minor improvements in results, trying new methods, sharing ideas, learning with and from others, and also finding new and better ways to achieve individual, group and organisational goals. Fifth, one of the ways of enhancing the competencies of research-support librarians is through inculcating a ‘knowledge-sharing culture’ where ideas for improvements are openly solicited from staff members at all levels, both formally and informally. Another way is to celebrate staff members’ ideas, observations and recommendations on how problems can be solved. Also, focus-group-like meetings should be encouraged where staff members can express their ideas and receive feedback on them. The same goes for brainstorming sessions.
Limitations
This study has several limitations. First, the feedback provided is limited to 215 research-support librarians from 10 Malaysian public universities that were involved in this study. Thus, their perceptions and feedback might differ from research-support librarians who did not participate in the study. Hence, it is essential to review this to increase the number of research-support librarians to ensure that they are a representative sample of the issues affecting research-support librarians in Malaysia. Thus, the findings of the study may be easily generalised.
Second, the competencies of research-support librarians for this study are limited to eight constructs or dimensions: ‘foundational knowledge’, ‘library management’, ‘interpersonal skills’, ‘entrepreneurialism’, ‘collections development’, ‘information literacy’, ‘research and contributions to the profession’ and ‘information technology skills’. The constructs or dimensions were adapted from the Core-Competencies for the 21st Century CARL Librarians Model which were developed in 2010.
Third, in measuring the research-support librarians’ self-directed learning traits, five constructs are being employed and analysed in depth in this study. These are the ‘concept of the learner’, ‘role of the learner’s experience’, ‘readiness to learn’, ‘orientation to learn’ and ‘motivation to learn’. These five constructs or dimensions are adopted from Knowles’ (1970) Andragogy-Adult Learning Theory.
Fourth, in this study, survey questionnaires were widely employed, which also limits the qualitative perceptions and feedback of research-support librarians. Thus, for a future study, it is suggested that fully qualitative interviews with selected groups of experienced and novice research-support librarians should be conducted and the in-depth exploration of the research-support librarians’ competencies and self-directed learning traits evaluated.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the study serves as a useful snapshot of the self-directed learning traits and competencies of research-support librarians in Malaysian public universities. In particular, research-support librarians also perceived that their competencies were predicted from their readiness to learn and orientation to learn. Thus, it is disclosed that Malaysian research-support librarians perceived that they favour the element of readiness to learn as part of their self-directed learning traits, which later leads to the improvement of their competencies.
Based on the findings, it is believed that the research-support librarians have acknowledged their preferences for the self-directed learning traits associated with their competencies. In this sense, they assumed that to be competent, they should have positive and supportive attitudes and also readiness to learn since the 21st-century context requires them to be competent and knowledgeable on digital library development and emerging technologies. In this sense, tremendous effort is required by the library leadership to implement effective strategies that can enhance self-directed learning and hence the competencies of research-support librarians. In particular, findings of the study suggest the need for library management practices that improve the competencies of research-support librarians while raising awareness of their critical role in the era of the fourth industrial revolution. Simultaneously, this study investigated the extent of research-support librarians’ underlying self-directed learning traits as manifested through their actions and, usually, from their habitual behaviour.
Footnotes
Declaration of conflicting interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.
