Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society (한국도서관정보학회지)

Korean Library and Information Science Society (한국도서관정보학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Study on the Roles of Library in the Era of K-MOOC

K-MOOC 시대 도서관의 역할에 관한 연구

  • 문방희 (경기대학교 문헌정보학과)
  • Received : 2018.02.06
  • Accepted : 2018.03.18
  • Published : 2018.03.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study aimed to exploratorily investigate the new roles of libraries in the era of K-MOOC. For this, potential roles were derived and categorized from former researches and practices. And to evaluate the appropriacy of those roles, two expert surveys were conducted. Panel A was comprised of 30 professors who had been running K-MOOC classes and Panel B was comprised of 30 librarians of Universities that had adopted K-MOOC. The result shows that they both agree about distinct roles of library as information provider such as licensing and providing digital contents requested from information users, while technological part, for example, recording video and audio, managing website, and providing open access, was considered inappropriate because those roles were already taken by CTLs. Also, professors agree that information literacy education is required for teachers not just for students as the speed of technological development is too swift and librarians agree that they have to equipped with core competence in preparation for upcoming change by creating added value, establishing closer relationship with various educational and technological institutes, and securing organizational flexibility.

본 연구의 목적은 K-MOOC 시대 도서관이 수행해야 할 역할이 무엇인지 탐색적으로 확인하는 데 있다. 이를 위해 국내 외 문헌 및 사례를 조사하여 도서관의 역할을 도출한 뒤, 이러한 새로운 역할들의 국내 교육환경 도입 시 적절성 여부를 평가하기 위해 전문가 조사를 실시하였다. 전문가 조사는 K-MOOC 강좌를 담당하고 있는 교수자 30명으로 구성된 패널과 K-MOOC를 도입해 운영하고 있는 대학의 사서들 30명으로 구성된 패널을 대상으로 각각 실시하였다. 분석 결과, 두 전문가 패널은 공통적으로 저작권 청산, 정보이용자가 원하는 디지털 콘텐츠의 제공 등 정보제공자로서의 도서관의 고유 역할에 대하여는 동의하는 반면, 촬영 및 녹음, 홈페이지 운영, 오픈액세스 제공 등의 기술적인 영역은 교수학습개발센터가 전담하고 있으므로 도서관의 역할로서 적절치 못하다고 평가하였다. 또한 교수자들은 기술발달속도가 빠르게 변화하고 있는 만큼 학생뿐만 아니라 교수자들을 대상으로 한 정보문해교육이 이루어져야 한다는 점에 동의하고 있으며, 사서들은 부가가치 창출, 여러 교육기관 및 기술협력체와의 긴밀한 관계 구축, 도서관 조직유연성 확보 등을 통해 새로운 변화에 부응하는 핵심역량을 갖추어야 한다는 데 동의하는 것으로 나타났다.

Keywords

References

  1. Kang, Minseok and Kim, Myounglang. 2012. "Analysis of teaching and learning factors and teachers' perception in the design of lesson with ICT." Research of Educational Methodology, 24(1): 89-106
  2. Koo, Yesung. 2016. Needs analysis and suggestion on development and implementation of K-MOOC in university. M. A. thesis. Sookmyung Women's University, KR
  3. Bae, Yesun and Jun, Woochun. 2014. "A study on analysis of current status and improvement suggestions for Massive Open Online Courses." Journal of the Korean Institute of Information and Communication Engineering, 18(12): 3005-3012. https://doi.org/10.6109/jkiice.2014.18.12.3005
  4. Son, Taeik. 2016. "A study on library engagement and models for support of MOOC." Journal of Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 50(3): 293-308. https://doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2016.50.3.293
  5. Lee, Changhoon and Seo, Wonseok. 2016. "Extracting the skill level for human resource in the field of science and technology using the delphi technique." Research of Engineering Education, 19(6): 32-37. https://doi.org/10.18108/jeer.2016.19.6.32
  6. Joo, Youngju and Kim, Dongsim. 2017. "A study of satisfaction and intention to use MOOC based on UTAUT2 in Korea." Society of Lifelong Learning, 13(1): 185-207. https://doi.org/10.26857/JLLS.2017.02.13.1.185
  7. Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information. 2016. Base investigation for information resource reclamation and distribution commercialization of MOOC.
  8. Ahlberg, C. 2014. "MOOCs at Karolinska Institutet University Library." UKSG Insights, 27(2): 160-165. https://doi.org/10.1629/2048-7754.116
  9. Barnes, C. 2013. "MOOCs: The challenges for academic librarians." Australian Academic & Research Libraries, 44(3): 163-175. https://doi.org/10.1080/00048623.2013.821048
  10. Compeau, D. and C Higgins. 1995. "Computer self efficacy: development of a measure and initial test." MIS quarterly, 19(2): 189-211. https://doi.org/10.2307/249688
  11. Ecclestone, M. 2013. "MOOCs as a professional development tool for librarians." Partnership, 8(2): 1-6.
  12. Jaguszewski, J. and K Williams. 2013. New Roles for New Times: Transforming Liaison Roles in Research Libraries. Washington: Association of Research Libraries.
  13. Lawshe, C. H. 1975. "A quantitative approach to content validity." Personnel psychology, 28: 563-575. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x
  14. Mahraj, K. 2012. "Using information expertise to enhance massive open online courses." Public Services Quarterly, 8(4): 359-368. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228959.2012.730415
  15. Miller, P. 2006. "Coming Together around Library2.0: A Focus for Discussion and a Call to Arms." D-Lib Magazine, 12(4): 1.
  16. Pritchard, S. M. 2013. "MOOCs: An opportunity for innovation and research." Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 13(2): 127-129. https://doi.org/10.1353/pla.2013.0015
  17. Association of Research Libraries. 2012. "21st-century collections: Calibration of investment and collaborative action." ARL Issue Brief, March 10. < http://www.arl.org/storage/documents/publications/issue-brief-21st-century-collections-2012.pdf>
  18. Chauhan, S. K. 2009. "Key 2 information: Library 3.0."
  19. Class Central. 2016. By The Numbers: MOOCs in 2016. < https://www.class-central.com/report/mooc-stats-2016/>
  20. OCLC. 2013. MOOCs and Libraries: Massive Opportunity or Overwhelming Challenge.
  21. OCLC Research. 2013. MOOCs and libraries: copyright, licensing, open access.
  22. OCLC Research. 2013b. MOOCs and libraries: an overview of the (current) landscape presentation.
  23. OCLC Research. 2013c. MOOCs and libraries: new opportunities for librarians.
  24. OCLC Research. 2013d. MOOCs and libraries event.

Cited by

  1. 한국 도서관경영 연구의 동향과 과제 - 2014~2020 학술논문을 중심으로 - vol.55, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.4275/kslis.2021.55.1.209