Dear professionals, I really confused by the reply of "*Sukhdev Singh, NIC" *every employer has his own requiremnts, it may be certain technique, skill, knowledge on subject, or way of communicating and behaving etc based on the work /job to be performed. We being information professional can't say no. Regarding newness of issue, i have to appreciate "*Mr.Sukhdev Singh, NIC"* * *because he mention's back to 1986-87, where MLIS course was for one year and he had specialization in social science and other subjects then why its not continued, i wish to go through syllabus of "PU Chandigarh 1986-87" if he has a copy. Up to my knowledge non of indian universitie's MLISc has specialization in other subjects(law,medicine,engineering, subjects in science nor in social science). They teach topics related to LIS, hardly with application of ICT and Management. Now after 20 years also we are not in a position to change, learning social science and learning specialized subject makes lot of difference. I dont know why some of experianced persons are agnist change (may be not willing to learn and may have to face job security problems, if that's case hopefully they can stay in position by learning and guideing, younger generation to right direction, we has respect them whole heartedly, since they are flag barrer's and taken your profession to respectful position but don't misguide us. I will raise this issue possible very soon after searching few facts and figures.) Hence friends lets change with need and take profession towards growth. On 11/27/07, Sukhdev Singh wrote:

Dear All,

*Sukhdev Singh*. I still remember, We had a paper in our MLIS (1986-87, PU Chandigarh), where we had studied "Social Sciences" as such including it's philosophers and their works.

I can not forget it!!! Coming form 'Science' stream - the things were quite alien to me. But I enjoyed it and still boast of my knowledge in these disciplines.

So, I think the options for specialization might still available at Master's level.

The problem in this particular case [ asking a candidate to draw "Benzim" structure] is with the employer. They do not know what to look for in an Information Professional.

--Sukhdev Singh, NIC.

On Nov 26, 2007 5:04 PM, J. K. Vijayakumar wrote:

...

Dear Professionals,

I fully agree with Rajesh. We need specialized courses to make specialized Librarians. That is the need of the hour. Adding elective modules (papers) about resources and systems in Law, Medicine, Sciences and all specialized subjects in 4th Semester is absolutely a good suggestion. Off course, our library schools should involve practicing Librarians in these specialized courses.

-- RAJESH ALDARTHI LIBRARIAN (Jain Institute of vocational and Advanced Studies) #127/3, Bull Tempel Road, Chamarajpet, Bangalore-560096 Email: deepakdeepa89@gmail.com Phone: 9886268857 -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.

Dear Mr. Singh: Please allow me to reflect on this. I am not particularly aware of recent research on these questions, as focus of my work and research areas is quite different. My comments are inline: On 27/11/2007, Sukhdev Singh wrote:

- What is more important? Information Professionals recognized for their expertise in their own domain without depending upon any other special education (Arts, Science, Social Science) background.

- Or do we need professionals from other domains having working knowledge of Information Science?.

I would prefer the first one - Professionals not at mercy of other domains.

This approach will have both its limitations and advantages. The virtue is that information science is by nature and origin multidisciplinary and it has significant bearing from diverse subjects, as diverse as economics, sociology, philosophy and computer science. In most of the research exploring implications of knowledge on socio-economic development, I have seen that existing research is heavily draws from sociology, economics and more recently, management (information systems). Knowledge management as a concept from library science point of view is often perceived as a 'practice' rather than a theoretical approach to the notion of knowledge (by J. C. Thomas, W. A. Kellogg, and T. Erickson. The knowledge management puzzle: Human and social factors in knowledge management. Online: http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/sj/404/thomas.html). The significance of this notion is that information professionals are viewed as people responsible for practicing of processes (as in cataloging, classification of knowledge records). My submission is that this notion is in a way hindrance for maintaining a status quo as an academic discipline vis-a-vis with other science or social science subjects. Perhaps this explains why many information architecture are developed and managed without consultations with information science professionals. As you are aware, information systems are now developed, at least in the West with close involvement of people with IT as well as psychology, behavioral science and arts backgrounds. It would be very critical for information professionals in coming days to gain and deliver this strength and skill of problem analysis, solving and delivering in design and development of domain specific information systems. Involvement of LIS professionals in system design and development is as important as their involvement in the management of such systems. If your organisation designs and develops such a search engine for Employment News ( http://www.employmentnews.gov.in/search_job.html?id=152), that does not allow me to search jobs by ministry and department, I am not able to fulfill my customer's query and this in return takes the good old library another step away from its customers. Coming back to the question of skills and knowledge that enables LIS professionals to be able to provide leadership in this 'information domain', the approach will vary from person to person. I can not see a 'one size fit for all' solution for all the LIS students. At times, they will be required to undergo further education and training in during their career in their business domains. The concept of dual degree like US and European universities can also be adopted by universities. I have been suggesting the following model time and again.

It consists of three encapsulating cores.

1 - CORE - having the essential LIS philosophy, theory, Tools and Best Practices.

2 - MIDDLE CORE - comprising of Information Technologies (All ICE Technologies) that boosts the effectiveness of the CORE (1).

3 - INTERFACE CORE - This is the face that is perceived by Prospective Employers. It takes the feedback from the job market, adjusts the MIDDLE Core to satisfy the Employers' requirements.

LIS philosophy and theory will be most important with or without the concept of technologies applicable to them. However, the significance of philosophy and theory is compromised before greater need of technologies. As far as syllabus goes, this would be sufficient, but the quality of study materials and lectures should further be improved. At least, in most study materials, direct and logical relationship between theory and tools are missing. And when it comes to IT tools and technologies, the demarcation line is very clear and straightforward. Though the relationship still under research, we fail to see the concept of knowledge organisation in LIS reflected in standards like RDF, XML, among others. It is important that we make bridge this gap of LIS and computing at theoretical level; once this is done learning IT is a matter of time. Regards Atanu Garai -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.