scholarly journals Compliance with legislative framework in implementing recognition of prior learning (RPL) by South African library and information science (LIS) schools

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ike Hlongwane
Keyword(s):  
South African ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Prior Learning ◽  
Recognition Of Prior Learning ◽  
Legislative Framework

The Use of Principles of Good Assessment in Recognition of Prior Learning Practice in Library and Information Science in South Africa

Mousaion ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ike Khazamula Hlongwane
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Good Practice ◽  
Survey Method ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Prior Learning ◽  
Good Assessment ◽  
Recognition Of Prior Learning ◽  
Appeals Process ◽  
South African Higher Education

Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) practice offers sound benefits to library and information science (LIS) schools. Despite these envisaged benefits, very little is known about RPL practice in LIS schools in South Africa. This study sought to establish whether principles of good assessment were being followed in the LIS schools to ensure the integrity of the RPL outcomes. A combination of a questionnaire and document analysis were used to collect data from the ten LIS schools in the South African higher education and training landscape. The questionnaire was used to collect quantitative data through a survey method. In addition, the researcher employed content analysis to collect qualitative data from institutional RPL policy documents. The findings indicate that RPL assessment processes across LIS schools in South Africa were largely subjected to principles of good practice. The study found that in accordance with the SAQA RPL policy the purpose of assessment was clarified to the candidate upfront, the quality of support to be provided to the candidate in preparing for the assessment was established, an appeals process was made known to the candidate, and the choice of assessment methods was fit for purpose to ensure credible assessment outcomes. It is therefore recommended that other disciplines or departments use LIS schools’ experiences as a benchmark to improve their own RPL endeavours.

scholarly journals Recognition of prior learning: its relevance to the proposed unified model o f education and training for South African nurses.

Curationis ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
T Khanyile
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
South African ◽  
Nurse Educators ◽  
Education And Training ◽  
Unified Model ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
Nurse Training ◽  
Prior Learning ◽  
Recognition Of Prior Learning ◽  
And Training

Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) is a fairly new concept in South Africa, and hence different people have different views about RPL . Through this paper, an attempt is made to shed some light on the historical background as well as the philosophical and theoretical underpinnings of RPL . It is hoped that this information will help those nurse educators wishing to experiment with RPL to have a better understanding of how the concept came about. The relevance of RPL to the Unified model of nurse training proposed by the South African Nursing Council is also discussed.

scholarly journals Transition to open: A metrics analysis of discoverability and accessibility of LIS scholarship

2019 ◽  
Vol 115 (7/8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaya Raju ◽  
Andiswa Mfengu ◽  
Michelle Kahn ◽  
Reggie Raju
Keyword(s):  
South African ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Performance Metrics ◽  
Numerical Data ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
South African Journal ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Multiple Metrics ◽  
Journal Content ◽  
African Journal

Metrics analysis of journal content has become an important point for debate and discussion in research and in higher education. The South African Journal of Libraries and Information Science (SAJLIS), a premier journal in the library and information science (LIS) field in South Africa, in its 85-year history, has had multiple editors and many contributing authors and has published over 80 volumes and 160 issues on a diversity of topics reflective of LIS theory, policy and practice. However, how discoverable and accessible has the LIS scholarship carried by the Journal been to its intended readership? SAJLIS transitioned to open access in 2012 and this new format in scholarly communication impacted the Journal significantly. The purpose of this paper is to report on a multiple metrics analysis of discoverability and accessibility of LIS scholarship via SAJLIS from 2012 to 2017. The inquiry takes a quantitative approach within a post-positivist paradigm involving computer-generated numerical data as well as manual data mining for extraction of qualitative elements. In using such a multiple metrics analysis to ascertain the discoverability and accessibility of LIS scholarship via SAJLIS in the period 2012 to 2017, the study employs performance metrics theory to guide the analysis. We highlight performance strengths of SAJLIS in terms of discoverability and accessibility of the scholarship it conveys; identify possible growth areas for strategic planning for the next 5 years; and make recommendations for further study for a more complete picture of performance strengths and areas for improvement.

Legislative framework for implementing recognition of prior learning

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 775-787
Author(s):  
Ike Hlongwane
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
South Africa ◽  
Education And Training ◽  
Policy Environment ◽  
Prior Learning ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Low Level ◽  
Recognition Of Prior Learning ◽  
Legislative Framework ◽  
And Training

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify and highlight the key constructs of an enabling policy environment and their probable impact on development and implementation of recognition of prior learning (RPL) process in higher education and training in South Africa with reference to library and information science (LIS) field. Design/methodology/approach The study adopted quantitative methods, and utilised questionnaires and document analysis to collect data. The study used a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods to collect data from all the ten LIS schools in the South African higher education and training landscape. The questionnaire was used as the main data collection tool to collect quantitative data through a survey research design. In addition, the researcher employed content analysis to analyse qualitative data collected from institutional RPL policy documents. Findings The study found that the LIS schools have aligned most of their institutional RPL policies and procedures with South African Qualifications Authority’s national RPL policy (2013). However, in terms of the institutional RPL policy environment, the study found that there was a low level of compliance regarding certain aspects of the policy environment among LIS schools despite their express explicit commitment to the principles of equity of access and redress. Research limitations/implications In-depth interviews were not conducted to ascertain the reasons for low level of compliance regarding certain aspects of the RPL policy. Practical implications This study is valuable for higher education institutions, policy and governance, government and other stakeholders to assess the level of compliance to legislative and regulatory framework in RPL implementation in higher education and training in South Africa. In addition, the study was important for LIS schools in particular as RPL can be used as a tool to open access and increase participation in learning programmes to counteract low level of student enrolments in this field. Originality/value There is very little published concerning compliance to legislative framework RPL implementation in higher education and training. Furthermore, most published work relate to RPL implementation in higher education and training in general. The paper describes compliance to legislative framework to RPL implementation in higher education and training in South Africa with special reference to LIS field.

scholarly journals The Power and Perils of Participant Observation in Library and Information Science Research: Reflections on Three South African Studies

Mousaion ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Genevieve Hart
Keyword(s):  
South African ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Participant Observation ◽  
Cape Town ◽  
School Libraries ◽  
Research Literature ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Western Cape ◽  
Ethical Challenges ◽  
The Impact

This article reports on three participant observation studies conducted in schools and libraries in South Africa, between 1999 and 2015. The study findings have been reported on elsewhere, thus the focus is on the methodologies used, with the common thread being the author’s preoccupation with the information literacy education of South African pupils. The author’s purpose was to provide evidence of the impact of the dire lack of resources and libraries at South African schools. The first study in 1999 explored how teachers at an underresourced primary school in Cape Town, Western Cape, were coping with the demands of the new curriculum. The second study in 2006 examined two public libraries in a rural town in Mpumalanga, with seven local schools, but no school libraries. The third study in 2015 involved the library at a high school in Kayelitsha township outside Cape Town, which is part of a non-governmental organisation (NGO) project to employ school leavers to manage school libraries. Participant observation is rare in the Library and Information Science (LIS) research literature and the author’s aim is to demonstrate its power to dig beneath the surface. The article uncovers the complex relations and tacit beliefs that existed at the three research sites, which are probably at play in other contexts and which have to be taken into account in planning effective programmes in South African schools and libraries. The article also acknowledges the ethical challenges, arguably inherent in participant observation, which relate to the often sensitive relations among participants, and to the researcher’s positioning.

scholarly journals Much Library and Information Science Research on Open Access is Available in Open Access, But There Is Still Room to Grow

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-70
Author(s):  
Rachel Elizabeth Scott
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
South African ◽  
English Language ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Academic Library ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Free Access ◽  
Dataset Analysis ◽  
Academic Resources

A Review of: Chilimo, W. L., & Onyancha, O. B. (2018). How open is open access research in library and information science? South African Journal of Libraries & Information Science, 84(1), 11-19. https://doi.org/10.7553/84-1-1710 Abstract Objective – To investigate the open access (OA) availability of Library and Information Science (LIS) research on the topic of OA, the relative openness of the journals in which this research is published, and the degree to which the OA policies of LIS journals facilitate free access. Design – Bibliometric, quantitative dataset analysis. Setting – African academic library and information science department. Subjects – 1,185 English-language, peer-reviewed articles published between 2003 and 2013 on OA and published in journals indexed by three major LIS databases, of which 909 articles in the top 56 journals received further analysis. Methods – Authors first searched LIS indexes to compile a dataset of published articles focusing on OA. They then manually identified and evaluated the OA policies of the top 56 journals in which these articles were found. The openness of these journals was scored according to a rubric modified from the Scholarly Publishing and Academic resources Coalition’s (SPARC’s) 2013 OA spectrum. Finally, authors manually searched Google Scholar to determine the OA availability of the articles from the dataset. Main Results – Of the 909 articles published in the top 56 journals, 602 were available in some form of OA. Of these, 431 were available as gold copies and 171 were available as green copies. Of the 56 journals evaluated for openness, 13 were considered OA, 3 delayed OA, 27 hybrid/unconditional post-print, 2 hybrid/conditional post-print, and 11 had unrecognized OA policies. Conclusion – The increasing amount and significance of LIS research on OA has not directly translated to the comprehensive adoption of OA publishing. Although a majority of the articles in the dataset were available in OA, the authors indicate that some measures of OA adoption and growth assessed in this study are only somewhat higher than in other disciplines. The authors call upon LIS professionals to become more conversant with journals’ OA policies. An acknowledgement that not all LIS scholars researching OA are necessarily advocates thereof led the authors of this study to recommend further investigation of OA research not available in OA to shed light on those scholars’ perceptions and preferences.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document