Research Article
Perceptions of the Skills of Graduates in the Library and Information Science and Technology Degree of P. Porto, Portugal: A Statistical Data Analysis of the Alignment Between Students, Teachers, and Employers
Susana Martins
Senior Lecturer, Library and
Information Science and Technology
Porto Accounting and
Business School (ISCAP) of Polytechnic of Porto
Porto, São Mamede Infesta, Portugal
Email: susanamartins@iscap.ipp.pt
Isabel Cristina Lopes
Senior Lecturer, Library and
Information Science and Technology
Porto Accounting and
Business School (ISCAP) of Polytechnic of Porto
Porto, São Mamede Infesta, Portugal
Email: cristinalopes@iscap.ipp.pt
Milena Carvalho
Senior Lecturer, Library and
Information Science and Technology
Porto Accounting and
Business School (ISCAP) of Polytechnic of Porto
Porto, São Mamede Infesta, Portugal
Email: milenacarvalho@iscap.ipp.pt
Received: 5 Mar. 2021 Accepted: 4 June 2021
2021 Martins, Lopes, and Carvalho. This
is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons‐Attribution‐Noncommercial‐Share Alike License 4.0
International (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/),
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly attributed, not used for commercial
purposes, and, if transformed, the resulting work is redistributed under the
same or similar license to this one.
DOI: 10.18438/eblip29944
Abstract
Objective – The objective
of this research was to identify the four professional competences of
graduates in Library and Information Sciences and Technologies (LIST)
considered most pertinent, from the points of view of students, teachers, and
employers. We also sought to compare the perceptions of the different groups. The study was
based on the premise that alignment of these perceptions may enhance the
employability of LIST graduates.
Methods – A
questionnaire, used and validated by Arias-Coello et
al. (2014), was further translated by Martins and Carvalho
(2018). The questionnaire
consisted of a set of questions regarding four dimensions: Information
Management; Communication and Interpersonal Relationships; Domain and
Application of Information Technologies; Organization Management. We sent the
survey by email to the target audience; it was available to complete in April
and May 2018.
Data analysis included calculating mean and
standard deviation, as well as Shapiro Wilk normality tests, statistical tests
for multiple comparisons, ANOVA, Kruskal Wallis test, Friedman test, Wilcoxon
test, and Pearson's correlation.
Results – In relation to certain dimensions, one could think that
age would be a determining factor, but this has not been proved. In fact, results showed
that age is not a factor that influenced the importance attributed to different
competences in the several dimensions. The respondents'
academic degrees and areas of knowledge were linked to significant differences
transversally. The Kruskal Wallis test indicated that students, teachers,
and employers perceived the importance of Information and Communication
Technologies (ICT) skills equally. As for the
other competences, overall there were significant differences between students
and employers, and there were significant differences between students and
teachers regarding the perceived importance of organization management skills.
There were also significant differences between teachers, students, and
employers regarding the perceived importance of communication skills. We also found
that responses within the teacher group had less dispersion of answers, therefore there was greater internal agreement. The
opposite occurred in the employer group.
Conclusion – The differences detected in the perception
of the different groups were minor. However, it is necessary to create
initiatives for the alignment of the perceptions of students and employers,
because if all groups have the same perception, they will develop
and value the same skills, responding to the needs of the labor market, thus
promoting the employability of LIST graduates. The inclusion of a curricular
internship, even one of short duration, in the first year of the degree could
also be a way of endeavoring to bring together the expectations of both groups.
These suggestions are part of a proposal to change
and update the study plan
and enhance the performance of course management.
Introduction
At the beginning of the 21st century, the
Portuguese higher education system underwent major changes for compliance
to the Bologna Declaration. As higher education
lecturers, the authors experienced this change in the first person and, in addition to the change in form, the assumptions
inherent to higher education have also changed. On the one hand, at the level
of teaching, new methodologies, which should benefit from Information and Communication
Technologies (ICT), were implemented, as well as information literacy and
active teaching strategies, such as the use of laboratories and tutoring. On
the other hand, at the level of learning, students became responsible for their
own learning, taking up a proactive posture and becoming aware that their
learning does not end with the completion of the degree, but will take place
throughout their life: Lifelong Learning.
These
changes, among other objectives, were intended to facilitate the employability
and mobility of the youngest students (European Higher Education Area, n.d.).
Amaral (2005) believed that the change of paradigm that
underlies the effective implementation of the principles contained in the
Bologna Declaration presupposes an adaptation of the degrees to the new
professional and social reality.
Information
literacy is of vital importance in this context. The evolution of information science has led to a user-centered paradigm,
as well as to the enhancement of the importance of information and of the
social role of success in shaping a more democratic and inclusive society (Comissão Europeia, 2009). It is
now certain that the work of the information professional must be based on the
needs and interests of the users and, at the same time, must support their
activity in the mediation of information, that is, in the construction and
consolidation of mechanisms and instruments that allow users to appropriate the
information they need, to stimulate and facilitate access to and use of information.
In the Library and Information Sciences and Technologies
(LIST) degree, we believe that the training of professionals and the increase
of their ICT skills is necessary in order to achieve the full valorization of
information as a human and social phenomenon. That is why each year the LIST
meetings (Encontros de CTDI) are organized. The LIST
degree and the Master in Business Information are both degrees of ISCAP-P,
Porto (Portugal) which have been structured as stipulated in the Euro-Referencial I-D (2005). This is the document that, to this
date, characterized the "Skills and Aptitudes of European
Information-Documentation Professionals" (Volume I) and their
"Qualification Levels of European Information-Documentation Professionals”
(Volume II). As said in the document, it was intended for a number of
categories of users (information-documentation professionals in progress,
employers-recruiters, people wishing to be oriented to these activities,
trainers) and implied various uses (writing a curriculum vitae, career
advancement, self-assessment, development of a training program). Their content
presupposed a certain standardization of the profession which, despite the
changes, continues to have to search and find information, describe, organize
it, and make it accessible to those who need it.
With this work we intend to assess the perceptions of
three different groups (students, teachers, and employers) linked to LIST
regarding information management, communication skills, information
technologies and management. The study is based on the
assumption that the alignment of these perceptions, although not always
perfect, may, in our understanding, enhance the employability of LIST
graduates. Conclusions will be drawn regarding the data collected, as well as
their subsequent analysis.
This study originated from a Spanish study entitled
“Professional Skills of Post-Graduates in the Master in Documentation,
Libraries and Archives Management from the Perspective of Employers, Students
and Teachers” published by Arias-Coello et al. (2014), in which the
professional skills of the graduates of a master's degree in Documentation,
Libraries and Archives were identified precisely considering three
perspectives: student, teacher, and employer. In 2018, Martins and Carvalho
presented a paper which, at the time, was based on a descriptive statistical
analysis of the data collected. The data collection tool was translated and
adapted by the authors to their national reality.
Literature Review
According
to Ribeiro and Silva (2004), the Euro-Referential has a vision about the
information and documentation professional and about his profession that “is
defined by its fundamental mission of researching, treating, producing and
disseminating information - incorporating added value - in order to meet the
needs of information, expressed or not, by a target audience, and propose
information resources, usually consisting of ‘documents’ (texts, images,
sounds)” (p. 4). Naturally, the constant mutability of the context and
technologies requires a persistent adaptation of the professional and the
profession itself. Also, according to the authors, the components of the
information professional's performance are knowledge (know and know how to do) and skills (referred to as know-how to be).
Pinto
and Ochôa (2006) stated that “The strategies to
rethink the profession imply career enhancement, both by professionals and by employers" (p. 39). Lou and Pang (2003, as cited
in Pinto & Ochôa, 2006) categorized these strategic initiatives in three areas: promotion of
employability, improvement image with employers, and strengthening of external
contacts. Effectively aligning perceptions of the information and documentation
profession is essential for the success of the employability indicator.
For Ribeiro (2008), the traditional training (custodial,
historicist, and patrimonialist) of information professionals centered their
performance in the cultural world although, due to technological evolution,
another technical approach anchored in the need to describe, organize, and make
information available has emerged. It would have been, however, in the middle
of the 20th century that a paradigm shift occurred, as a consequence
of the explosion of scientific and technical information, together with the
development of information technology and with the treatment and recovery of
information. This new context converged to a new reality, with new demands, not
only at the level of the profession, but also at the disciplinary level and in
the training of professionals.
Indeed, throughout the
years, programs and projects for the sensitization, training, and adaptation of
professionals in this area have emerged, developed both by professional
associations and higher education entities. In particular, we wish to highlight
changes in the academic training of information professionals in Portugal,
where the main pioneers in 2001 were the Faculty of Arts and Humanities of the
University of Porto (with a degree in Information Science, jointly taught with
the Faculty of Engineering) and the School of Industrial Studies and Management
of the Polytechnic Institute of Porto (with a LIST degree and the Master in
Business Information, structured as stipulated in the Euro-Referential).
It should be noted that the Euro-Referential is the document that
characterized the "Skills and aptitudes of European
Information-Documentation Professionals" and the "Qualification
Levels of European Information-Documentation Professionals. According to the
Euro-Referential I-D (2005), "this Euro-Referential was carried out by
professionals from a European perspective. The skills and aptitudes
demonstrated in the different occupations of the information-documentation
profession (archivist, librarian, documentalist, alert service, etc.) were
identified and compared. This tool is intended for a number of categories of
users (information-documentation professionals- in progress,
employers-recruiters, people wishing to be oriented to these activities,
trainers) and various uses (writing a curriculum vitae, career advancement,
self-assessment and development of a training program)” (p. 11). These
guidelines presupposed a certain standardization of the profession which,
despite the changes, continues to have to research and find the information,
treat it, and make it accessible to those who need it.
We
are not aware of studies that have similar objectives to this in national
territory. Some studies have been carried out, such as Pradhan (2015) and Kumar
(2010), which show that employability of LIST graduates is around 100% and that
communication skills as well as information and technology (IT) skills are of
great importance regarding employability. The importance of a hands-on practice
is also present in these studies, alongside the need to develop adaptation
skills to a constantly changing environment. Good communication skills, for example, conduct a negotiation that brings
together multiple actors with antagonistic interests, taking
into account the strategic interests of the company, problem-solving
attitude, good knowledge of IT, presentation skills, and ability to provide
services with motivation and commitment. These are some of the assets which the
authors consider likely to increase the probabilities of employment.
This research was based on a 2014 study developed by
Arias-Coello et al. entitled “Professional Skills of
Post-Graduates in the Master in Documentation, Libraries and Archives
Management from the Perspective of Employers, Students and Teachers,” and on a
more recent study by Martins and Carvalho (2018), who developed a first
analysis of the data collected.
We believe it is important to know the extent to which
there is convergence in what concerns the immediate actors of higher education
and the labor market, namely finalist students, teachers, and employers, in
particular with regard to the perceptions about the relevant skills for
professional practice. We also believe that this convergence will facilitate
greater success in employability and that actions, at the level of the degree,
can be conducted to refine these perceptions and obtain the desired
convergence.
Aims
In
this research, we assessed the perceptions of three different groups
linked to a LIST degree (LISTs’ last year students,
LIST teachers, and LIST graduates’ potential employers) regarding four
dimensions. The study is based on the assumption that
the alignment of these perceptions may enhance the employability of LIST
graduates.
We based the study on the premise that identical expectations
and perceptions of professional needs among the different actors in the
training process in higher education and in the consequent entry into
professional life are drivers of greater employability. The research questions
that guided this work were: Are the perceptions of students, teachers and
employers regarding different sets of skills all aligned? And if not, what can
we do to promote that alignment and consequently foster employability?
Methods
Regarding
the methodology, we applied the same questionnaire used in and validated by the
study of Arias-Coello et al. (2014), and formatted it in Google Forms. The questionnaire consisted of 4
dimensions, subdivided
into 29 factors, which resulted in 29 questions. The four dimensions were:
1.
Information Management;
2.
Communication and
Interpersonal Relationships;
3.
Domain and
Application of Information Technologies;
4.
Organization
Management.
The
response scale comprised values between 1 and 10 to rate the perceived
importance of each skill, with 10 being the highest value of importance (most
important) and 1 the lowest value (least important). The questionnaire was made
available electronically via email to the three groups: a) the finalist
students (N=28); b) the teachers of the degree (N=12) and c) the employers
(here represented by the institutions of traineeship) (N=84), which were first
contacted by telephone. The groups a) and b) were previously contacted in
person in order to raise awareness for the completion of the questionnaire that
was subsequently sent by email. The group c) was contacted by telephone. During
the period of the data collection, from April to May of 2018, weekly reminders were made by phone and by email. The
response rate of potential employers was below expected, only 26% (22
entities), the response rate of the students and teachers was close to 100%, respectively 82% (23 last year students) and 92% (11
teachers).
The
data collected was later exported. IBM SPSS was the software used for data
analysis, alongside descriptive statistics—namely mean and standard
deviation—as well as Shapiro Wilk normality tests, statistical tests for
comparisons such as ANOVA, Kruskal Wallis, Wilcoxon and Friedman tests, and
Pearson's correlation. The results obtained are described in the next section.
Figure 1
Boxplot of the importance of information management skills
for students, teachers, and employers.
Results
The analysis of individual competences within each
dimension, separated by the respondents' role (Student / Teacher / Employer) in
relation to the degree, and taking into account the importance of Information
Management skills for the three groups of subjects, revealed that, on average
for students, the most important competence was “Knowledge to navigate
communication networks through search engines and other tools” (For details on
the descriptive statistics, see Appendices A, B, C, and D). The second most
important was “Ability to analyze and synthesize information”, whilst the third
most important was “Knowledge about information sources, retrieval and its
storage.”
Figure 1 shows a box around the quartiles, the median in
the center of the box, and the minimum and maximum values assigned by students,
teachers and employers to each aspect evaluated in this study. The stars and
circles represent outliers.
Regarding the teachers, this group appeared, as a whole,
as the group with the least dispersion in the answers and presented the two
most important answer options: “Knowledge about information sources, retrieval
and its storage” and “Ability to analyze and synthesize information”, followed
by a parameter which also included two answers, namely “Ability to manage
information management and control systems” and “Knowledge in database
management.” The third most important were “Knowledge about content management”
and “Knowledge of standardized methods of description, presentation and
transmission of information.”
In
regard to employers, this group presented, in general, a greater dispersion in
the respondents' answers. “Knowledge in database management” proved to be the
first most important answer, followed by “Ability to analyze and synthesize
information”, whereas “Knowledge to navigate communication networks through
search engines and other tools” was the third most important.
Developing a similar analysis, yet considering the
importance of Communication skills for students, teachers and employers, Figure
2 evinces that, for students, the first most important competence is the
“Ability to work as a team,” the second most important is the “Ability to
train, coordinate and direct teams,” and the third most important is the
“Ability to communicate orally and in writing in their native language.”
Regarding the teachers, similarly to what happened with
the previous item, this group was also the one with the lowest dispersion of
responses. The first most important option was “Ability to communicate orally
and in writing in their native language,” followed by “Ability to speak and
write in English,” while in the third most important this group presented two
tied options: “Ability to work as a team” and “Ability to socialize with
classmates and superiors.”
In regard to employers, this group was the one with the
greatest dispersion in responses. The most important answer was shown to be the
“Ability to socialize with classmates and superiors,” followed by the “Ability
to work as a team,” leaving the “Ability to relate to users” for third.
Figure
2
Boxplot
of the importance of communication skills for students, teachers, and
employers.
Figure
3
Boxplot
of the importance of skills in information technology for students, teachers,
and employers.
If
we take into account the importance of skills in
information technology for students, teachers and employers (Figure 3 and Appendix
C), we can say that, regarding the average, for students the first most
important option was the “Domain of web applications,” while the second most
important was the “Knowledge of electronic resources and applications to manage
a changing technical process.” As for the third most important, two options
arose: “Sufficient technical knowledge to solve unforeseen problems” and
“Knowledge about management and design of intranet and web pages.”
Throughout
this analysis, for teachers (this group had less dispersion in their answers)
the most important option was the “Ability to implement a management system,”
the second most important was the “Domain of web applications,” and the third
most important was “Sufficient technical knowledge to solve unforeseen
problems” (see Figure 3).
With
regard to employers, overall, the dispersion of responses by this group was the
highest. The first most important option was the “Domain of web applications,”
the second most important was “Knowledge of electronic resources and
applications to manage a changing technical process,” and the third most
important was “Sufficient technical knowledge to solve unforeseen problems.”
Finally, regarding the importance of the Organizational
Management skills (Figure 4 and Appendix D), in tune with the previous
analysis, for students, the first most important was the “Ability to manage
projects,” the second most important was “Problem solving ability,” and the
third most important was the “Ability to analyze and organize statistical
data.” As for teachers, and in agreement with what happened in the other
dimensions, this was the group that presented least dispersion in the answers.
The first most important proved to be “Problem solving ability,” followed by
“Analytical ability to combine and organize complex information,” while the
third most important remained the “Ability to analyze and organize statistical
data.” With regard to employers, also in line with what happened in the other
dimensions, they were the ones who presented the greatest dispersion in the
answers given. For them, the first most important was “Problem solving
ability,” the second most important was the “Analytical ability to combine and
organize complex information,” and the third most important was the “Ability to
manage projects.”
Figure 4
Boxplot of the importance of organizational
management skills for students, teachers, and employers.
For each individual who answered the questionnaire, we
calculated the average of the scores attributed in the questions for each of
the four dimensions, as well as the global average of the scores attributed in
all questions. We analyzed these five quantitative variables using inferential
statistical tests. Shapiro Wilk Normality Tests were performed for the four
dimensions and for the global average (see Appendix E), considering the three
groups surveyed. With a significance level of 5%, the Shapiro Wilk normality
tests revealed that only the variable of the average importance of Information
Management skills, spread by the three roles in relation to the degree, could
be considered normally distributed, while the other variables could not be
considered normally distributed.
Thus, to determine whether students, teachers and
employers assigned equal average importance to the skills listed, the ANOVA
test was used for the first variable and the Kruskal-Wallis non-parametric test
for the others.
In Figure 5, the average of the importance of skills in
the four dimensions are compared regarding the three roles under analysis, and
also the global average of all skills. Students and teachers seemed to assign
more importance to Communication and Interpersonal skills and employers to
Organizational Management skills.
Figure
5
Boxplot
of the average importance of skills in the four dimensions and
the global average.
Throughout the ANOVA Test and the Kruskal Wallis Test (Tables 1 and 2), it was found that there were significant differences
for students, teachers, and employers regarding the importance of skills in
dimensions 1, 2, 4 and, globally, at the level of 5% of significance. The
Kruskal Wallis test indicated that students, teachers, and employers perceived
the importance of ICT skills equally.
Multiple comparisons with the Tukey HSD test (Table 3)
resulted in significant differences, at the level of 5% of significance,
between the average importance of Information Management skills for students
and employers, but not between students and teachers, nor between teachers and
employers.
The statistical tests carried out for multiple
comparisons also indicated that there were no differences between teachers and
employers in the importance attributed to Communication and Interpersonal
skills, but there were significant differences, at the level of 5%, between
teachers and students and between students and employers.
Tukey HSD tests also indicated that there were no
differences between teachers and employers or between students and employers in
the importance attributed to the Organization Management skills, yet that there
were significant differences, at the level of 5%, between teachers and
students.
Statistical tests for multiple comparisons indicated that
there were no differences between teachers and employers nor between teachers
and students in the global average importance attributed to all skills under
analysis, and that there were only significant differences, at the level of 5%,
between students and employers (Table 3).
Table 1
ANOVA Test to Determine Whether Students, Teachers, and
Employers Assigned Equal Average Importance to Information Management Skills
|
Average
Importance of Information Management Skills |
Sum of Squares |
df |
Mean Squares |
F |
p-value |
|
Between Groups |
21.197 |
2 |
10.599 |
4.067 |
0.022 |
|
Within groups |
148.530 |
57 |
2.606 |
|
|
|
Total |
169.728 |
59 |
|
|
|
Table 2
Kruskal Wallis Tests to Determine Whether Students,
Teachers, and Employers Assigned Equal Average Importance to Skills in Several
Dimensions
|
|
Average
Importance of Communication and Interpersonal Skills |
Average
Importance of Information Technology Skills |
Average
importance of Organizational Management skills |
Global Average
Importance of Skills |
|
Chi-Square |
11.469 |
4.324 |
6.096 |
7.523 |
|
Df |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
|
p-value |
0.003 |
0.115 |
0.047 |
0.023 |
Table 3
Tukey HSD Tests for Multiple Comparisons of the
Importance of Skills Regarding the Different Roles
|
Skills |
Roles |
Test Statistic |
Std. error |
p-value |
|
Average
Importance of Information Management Skills |
Employer – Teacher |
-0.74786 |
0.58061 |
0.408 |
|
Employer – Student |
-1.31308 |
0.46208 |
0.017 |
|
|
Teacher – Student |
-0.56522 |
0.59176 |
0.608 |
|
|
Average
Importance of Communication and Interpersonal Skills |
Teacher - Employer |
-0.202 |
6.203 |
0.974 |
|
Teacher – Student |
15.638 |
6.285 |
0.013 |
|
|
Employer – Student |
15.437 |
4.954 |
0.005 |
|
|
Average
Importance of Organizational Management Skills |
Teacher - Employer |
-4.963 |
6.269 |
0.428 |
|
Teacher – Student |
14.310 |
6.389 |
0.025 |
|
|
Employer – Student |
9.347 |
4.989 |
0.061 |
|
|
Global Average
Importance of Skills |
Employer – Teacher |
1.101 |
6.280 |
0.861 |
|
Employer – Student |
13.018 |
4.998 |
0.009 |
|
|
Teacher – Student |
11.917 |
6.401 |
0.063 |
Regarding the analysis of the average competences in each
dimension, aggregated for all roles, the reduced p-values obtained in the
Shapiro Wilk normality tests indicated that the aggregated variables did not
have a normal distribution (Table 4), therefore non-parametric tests were used
to analyze the aggregated variables.
Regarding the comparison of the aggregated average skills
in the four dimensions, the Friedman test indicated that the four dimensions
were not considered by the respondents to have equal importance (c2=19.183,
with 3 degrees of freedom produced a p-value<0.0005).
Wilcoxon's tests for multiple comparisons of the four
dimensions (Table 5) indicated that, at the 5% level of significance, there
were no significant differences between the average importance of skills in
Organizational Management and in Information Management, nor between average
importance of skills in Organizational Management and in Information
Technology. There was statistical evidence to consider that there were differences
when comparing the averages of the importance of skills in the remaining
dimensions.
When separating by area of knowledge of the respondent,
the only variable that the Shapiro Wilk Test considered normally distributed
was the variable on the average importance of the skills in Information
Management. For this variable, the ANOVA test was used, and, for the others,
the Kruskall Wallis test.
In the analysis of significant differences in the average
importance of skills separated by area of knowledge, the ANOVA test produced a
p-value of 0.024, which indicated that there were significant differences in
the importance of skills in Information Management for the various areas of
knowledge of the people who responded to the survey. The Kruskal Wallis test
indicated that there were significant differences at the level of 5% for the
various areas of knowledge regarding the importance of skills in Information
Technologies (p-value=0.034), Organizational Management skills (p-value=0.005)
and globally (p-value=0.021), but not in Communication and Interpersonal skills
(p-value=0.055).
If we separate the groups by academic degree, the only
variables that the Shapiro Wilk Test considered normally distributed were the
variables on the average importance of the skills in Information Management and
Organizational Management. The ANOVA test was used for these variables, and the
Kruskall Wallis test for the others. These test
results indicated that there were only significant differences in the
importance of Communication and Interpersonal skills (c2=12.702 and p-value=0.005) and globally (c2=9.109 and p-value=0.028) for the various academic
degrees.
Regarding age, Pearson's correlation test showed that
there were no significant linear relationships between the respondent's age and
the importance attributed to competences in any of the dimensions (all
correlations were less than 0.134 in absolute value).
Table
4
Shapiro
Wilk Test for the Importance of Skills in the Four Dimensions (Normality Tests)
|
|
Shapiro-Wilk |
||
|
Test Statistic |
df |
p-value |
|
|
Average
Importance of Information Management Skills |
0.948 |
59 |
0.014 |
|
Average
Importance of Communication and Interpersonal Skills |
0.913 |
59 |
0.000 |
|
Average
Importance of Information Technology Skills |
0.937 |
59 |
0.004 |
|
Average
Importance of Organizational Management Skills |
0.921 |
59 |
0.001 |
|
Global
Average Importance of Skills |
0.919 |
59 |
0.001 |
Table
5
Wilcoxon
Tests for Multiple Comparisons
|
|
|
Test Statisticsa Z |
p-value |
|
|
Average
importance of Communication and Interpersonal skills |
-
|
Average
importance of Information Management skills |
-3.032b |
0.002 |
|
Average
importance of Information Technology skills |
-
|
Average
importance of Information Management skills |
-2.326c |
0.020 |
|
Average
importance of Organizational Management skills |
-
|
Average
importance of Information Management skills |
-1.010c |
0.313 |
|
Average
importance of Information Technology skills |
-
|
Average
importance of Communication and Interpersonal skills |
-4.275c |
0.000 |
|
Average
importance of Organizational Management skills |
-
|
Average
importance of Communication and Interpersonal skills |
-3.775c |
0.000 |
|
Average
importance of Organizational Management skills |
-
|
Average
importance of Information Technology skills |
-1.102b |
0.270 |
|
a Wilcoxon
signed rank test |
||||
|
b
Based
on negative ranks. |
||||
|
c Based on
positive ranks. |
||||
Discussion
As stated in the Introduction, the present study was
based on the premise that identical expectations and perceptions of
professional needs among the different actors in the training process in higher
education and in the consequent entry into professional life are drivers of
greater employability.
However,
the desired alignment in relation to the perceptions of the different actors in
the teaching and learning process did not exist in the way it was assumed to
exist by the authors because the skills acquired by
graduates will be able to, in theory, meet the needs of the labor market. Indeed, a
notorious gap exists, above all, between the perceptions assumed by students
and their future employers.
A research question that guided this work was: Are the
perceptions of students, teachers and employers, regarding different sets of
skills, all aligned? As seen, they were not fully aligned. However, there was a
group that was closer to the other groups: teachers. In fact, considering the
several tests and data analysis, there were significant differences at the
level of 5% of significance between the average importance of information
management skills for students and employers, but not between students and
teachers, nor between teachers and employers. They also showed that there were
no differences between teachers and employers in the importance attributed to
communication skills, but there were significant differences, at the level of
5%, between teachers and students and between students and employers. The statistical
tests for multiple comparisons indicated that there were no differences between
teachers and employers or between students and employers in the importance
attributed to the Organizational Management skills, yet that there were
significant differences, at the level of 5%, between teachers and students; and
there were no differences between teachers and employers nor between teachers
and students in the global average importance attributed to all skills, and
that there were only significant differences, at the level of 5%, between
students and employers. The reason could be the age difference and the
incipient knowledge of professional practice by students.
In view of the data collected and their interpretation,
it is necessary to put into practice some actions that promote maximum
alignment, namely clarification actions targeted at students and degree
candidates. In-office training sessions on the skills of information
professionals and on ways they can work in an organization, addressing
different dimensions and competences, would be a further action that could have
a positive impact. The creation of a curricular unit in the first year aimed at
bringing students closer to their employers also seems to be a viable way of
promoting this connection.
The
skills of an information professional are broad and diverse and can be used in
business in order to promote its efficiency. This principle will be the guiding principle of the whole process.
Conclusion
Skills
currently required of the information professional are diverse and from
different spheres. The Euro-Referential
Information-Documentation, which framed and normalized the profession of
information professionals in Europe, bears witness to this, including diversified competences, some transversal, and
assuming different levels. The acquisition of these skills by students in the
Information Science area will therefore be essential for entering the job
market.
This
work was based on the premise that the perception of the necessary competences
for the exercise of the information profession among the three groups involved
in the teaching and learning process of the degree in LIST are properly
aligned. However, the basic premise has
not been proven. There was no total alignment and, overall, the largest
differences existed between students and employers, which can be an obstacle to
the employability of new graduates.
Based on this result, different actions, such as
information actions for both groups, in-office training for the employers, and
the inclusion of a curricular internship, even one of short duration, in the
first year of the degree, are proposed in order to harmonize the perceptions of
the groups and therefore clarify and promote the relevant competences for
entering and working in the labor market.
The main limitation of this work was the low response
rate obtained from potential employers. Another limitation was the fact that
the implementation of some of these suggestions, in particular, of the
internship in the first curricular year of the degree, require a lengthy
process to obtain authorization from the national entity that accredits higher
education degrees in Portugal.
As future work, it is suggested to repeat this study
after implementing the actions identified as necessary, so as to identify the
success of the proposed approach.
Author Contributions
Susana Martins:
Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Writing – review & editing,
Investigation, Methodology Isabel Cristina Lopes: Formal analysis,
Writing – review & editing, Investigation, Methodology, Validation
Milena Carvalho: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation,
Methodology
References
Amaral, A. (2005). Bolonha, o Ensino Superior e a competitividade
económica. In O Processo de Bolonha e a formação dos educadores e professores
portugueses. Porto: Profedições. pp. 35–45.
Arias-Coello, A., Simón-Blas, C., & Simón-Martín, J. (2014). Competencias profesionales
de los postgraduados en el Máster de Gestión de la Documentación, Bibliotecas y
Archivos desde la perspectiva de empleadores, estudiantes y professores. [Professional Skills of Post-Graduates in the Master in Documentation, Libraries and Archives Management from
the Perspective of Employers, Students
and Teachers.] Revista Española de Documentación Científica, 37(3). https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2014.3.1121
Carvalho, M. (2014). Estudo da
mediação e do uso da informação nos Arquivos Distritais. Coimbra:
Universidade de Coimbra.
Comissão Europeia. (2009). Recomendação da Comissão Europeia sobre
literacia mediática no ambiente digital
para uma indústria audiovisual e de conteúdos mais competitiva e uma sociedade
do conhecimento inclusiva. Jornal Oficial da União Europeia, L 227/9. Retrieved from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2009:227:0009:0012:PT:PDF
Conselho Europeu das Associações de Informação e Documentação. (2005). Euro-referencial
D. Lisboa: INCITE-Associação Portuguesa para a Gestão da Informação. Retrieved from http://www.eseig.ipp.pt/documentos/doc_noticias/EuroReferencial_P.pdf
European Higher
Education Area and Bologna Process. (n.d.). Employability in the Bologna
Process. Retrieved October 10, 2020, from http://www.ehea.info/page-employability-in-the-bologna-process
Kumar, B.
(2010). Employability of library and information science graduates:
Competencies expected versus taught—A case study. DESIDOC Journal of Library
& Information Technology, 30(5), 74-82. https://publications.drdo.gov.in/ojs/index.php/djlit/article/view/621
Martins, S. (2015). Tecnologias de
informação, literacia e bibliotecas do ensino superior da área Metropolitana do
Porto. Porto: Universidade Portucalense Infante D. Henrique.
Martins, S.
& Carvalho, M. (2018). Professional skills of the graduates in library and
information sciences and technology from the point of view of the potential
employers, students and professors. EDULEARN18
Proceedings, 2814-2820. https://doi.org/10.21125/edulearn.2018.0751
Morgado, J. C. (2009). Processo de Bolonha e ensino superior num mundo
globalizado. Educação & Sociedade,
30(106), 37–62. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-73302009000100003
Ochôa, P. & Pinto, L.G. (2006). Observar a profissão: Fundamentos,
metodologias e práticas. A imagem das competências dos profissionais de Informação-Documentação:
relatório. Lisboa: Observatório
da Profissão de Informação-Documentação.
29-59.
Pradhan, S.
(2015). Study of employability and needed skills for LIS graduates. DESIDOC
Journal of Library & Information Technology, 35(2), 106-112. https://publications.drdo.gov.in/ojs/index.php/djlit/article/view/8312
Ribeiro, F. (2008). A formação dos profissionais de informação na
Universidade do Porto: Um modelo teórico-prático inovador assente numa
perspectiva integrada. Retrieved from https://repositorio-aberto.up.pt/bitstream/10216/14050/2/formacaoup000073241.pdf
Ribeiro, F. & Silva, A. M. (2004). Formação, perfil e competências do
profissional da Informação. In Actas do Congresso Nacional de Bibliotecários,
Arquivistas e Documentalistas 8.
Appendix A
Mean and Standard Deviation Regarding the Importance of
Information Management Skills for Students, Teachers, and Employers
|
|
Role |
|||||||||
|
Student |
Teacher |
Employer |
|
|||||||
|
|
Mean |
Standard Deviation |
|
Mean |
Standard Deviation |
|
Mean |
Standard Deviation |
|
|
|
Knowledge about content management |
|
8.30 |
1.460 |
|
7.73 |
.905 |
|
6.73 |
2.031 |
|
|
Knowledge
about information sources, retrieval and its storage |
|
8.35 |
1.668 |
|
8.00 |
1.095 |
|
6.85 |
2.130 |
|
|
Ability
to analyze and synthesize information |
|
8.43 |
1.502 |
|
8.00 |
1.000 |
|
7.12 |
1.840 |
|
|
Knowledge
of data base management |
|
8.09 |
1.756 |
|
7.82 |
1.168 |
|
7.15 |
1.891 |
|
|
Ability
to manage information management and control systems |
|
8.04 |
1.796 |
|
7.82 |
1.250 |
|
7.00 |
2.000 |
|
|
Knowledge
about information providers and users |
|
8.00 |
1.567 |
|
6.91 |
1.136 |
|
6.58 |
2.101 |
|
|
Capacity
for planning information systems |
|
8.09 |
1.411 |
|
7.45 |
1.440 |
|
6.81 |
2.191 |
|
|
Knowledge
of standardized methods of description, presentation and transmission of
information |
|
8.09 |
2.151 |
|
7.73 |
1.191 |
|
7.00 |
1.980 |
|
|
Knowledge
to navigate communication networks through search engines and other tools |
|
8.70 |
1.743 |
|
7.55 |
1.635 |
|
7.04 |
1.990 |
|
|
Valid N |
|
23 |
|
|
11 |
|
|
26 |
|
|
Appendix B
Mean
and Standard Deviation Regarding the Importance of Communication and
Interpersonal Skills for Students, Teachers, and Employers
|
|
Role |
||||||||
|
Student |
Teacher |
Employer |
|||||||
|
|
Mean |
Standard Deviation |
|
Mean |
Standard Deviation |
|
Mean |
Standard Deviation |
|
|
Ability to socialize with classmates and superiors |
|
8.83 |
1.193 |
|
7.73 |
1.191 |
|
7.79 |
1.668 |
|
Ability to work as a team |
|
9.04 |
1.224 |
|
7.73 |
.905 |
|
7.83 |
1.606 |
|
Ability
to relate to users |
|
8.87 |
1.180 |
|
7.64 |
1.027 |
|
7.87 |
1.392 |
|
Ability to
communicate orally and in writing in their native language |
|
8.91 |
1.379 |
|
8.09 |
1.136 |
|
7.58 |
1.640 |
|
|
8.70 |
1.222 |
|
7.45 |
.934 |
|
7.46 |
1.693 |
|
|
|
8.96 |
1.364 |
|
7.18 |
.982 |
|
7.52 |
1.470 |
|
|
|
8.39 |
1.828 |
|
7.82 |
1.328 |
|
7.48 |
1.537 |
|
|
Valid N |
|
23 |
|
|
11 |
|
|
21 |
|
Appendix C
Mean
and Standard Deviation Regarding the Importance of Skills in Information
Technology for Students, Teachers, and Employers
|
|
Role |
||||||||
|
Student |
Teacher |
Employer |
|||||||
|
|
Mean |
Standard Deviation |
|
Mean |
Standard Deviation |
|
Mean |
Standard Deviation |
|
|
Domain
of web applications |
|
8.39 |
1.438 |
|
7.64 |
1.027 |
|
7.04 |
1.907 |
|
Knowledge
of electronic resources and applications to manage a changing technical
process |
|
7.83 |
1.642 |
|
7.18 |
1.079 |
|
6.96 |
2.107 |
|
Sufficient
technical knowledge to solve unforeseen problems |
|
7.91 |
2.234 |
|
7.45 |
1.508 |
|
6.88 |
2.142 |
|
Knowledge of systems’ architecture |
|
7.52 |
2.064 |
|
6.82 |
1.722 |
|
6.42 |
1.880 |
|
Knowledge
about management and design of intranet and web pages |
|
7.91 |
1.832 |
|
7.27 |
1.272 |
|
6.54 |
1.816 |
|
Ability
to implement a management system |
|
7.70 |
2.439 |
|
7.73 |
1.272 |
|
6.46 |
2.064 |
|
Valid N (listwise) |
|
23 |
|
|
11 |
|
|
26 |
|
Appendix D
Mean
and Standard Deviation Regarding the Importance of Organizational Management
Skills for Students, Teachers and Employers
|
|
Role |
||||||||
|
Student |
Teacher |
Employer |
|||||||
|
|
Mean |
Standard Deviation |
|
Mean |
Standard Deviation |
|
Mean |
Standard Deviation |
|
|
Ability
to manage human and financial resources |
|
7.65 |
2.124 |
|
6.00 |
1.612 |
|
6.77 |
2.519 |
|
Ability
to manage and implement policies, deontological, social and legal codes |
|
7.57 |
2.212 |
|
5.73 |
1.421 |
|
6.73 |
2.539 |
|
Ability
to create and organize services for the user |
|
8.04 |
1.492 |
|
7.18 |
1.471 |
|
6.85 |
2.461 |
|
Analytical ability to combine and organize complex
information |
|
8.22 |
1.650 |
|
7.73 |
1.272 |
|
7.04 |
2.522 |
|
Ability to manage projects |
|
8.61 |
1.530 |
|
7.00 |
1.000 |
|
6.96 |
2.441 |
|
Problem solving ability |
|
8.57 |
1.409 |
|
7.82 |
.874 |
|
7.19 |
2.530 |
|
Ability to analyze and organize statistical data |
|
8.26 |
2.050 |
|
7.64 |
1.433 |
|
6.81 |
2.367 |
|
Valid N |
|
23 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
26 |
|
Appendix E
Shapiro
Wilk Test (Normality Test)
|
|
Role |
Shapiro-Wilk |
||
|
|
Test Statistic |
df |
p-value |
|
|
Average Importance of Information Management Skills |
Student |
0.931 |
23 |
0.115 |
|
Teacher |
0.945 |
11 |
0.575 |
|
|
Employer |
0.953 |
25 |
0.291 |
|
|
Average
Importance of Communication and Interpersonal Skills |
Student |
0.857 |
23 |
0.004 |
|
Teacher |
0.934 |
11 |
0.455 |
|
|
Employer |
0.915 |
25 |
0.039 |
|
|
Average
Importance of Information Technologies Skills |
Student |
0.947 |
23 |
0.249 |
|
Teacher |
0.966 |
11 |
0.838 |
|
|
Employer |
0.861 |
25 |
0.003 |
|
|
Average
Importance of Organizational Management Skills |
Student |
0.936 |
23 |
0.149 |
|
Teacher |
0.900 |
11 |
0.183 |
|
|
Employer |
0.910 |
25 |
0.031 |
|
|
Global
Average Importance of Skills |
Student |
0.941 |
23 |
0.186 |
|
Teacher |
0.954 |
11 |
0.691 |
|
|
Employer |
0.920 |
26 |
0.046 |
|