Comparative Analysis of Professional Journals

An important part about being in the LIS field is staying informed on various topics, aspects, and issues within that field. There are multiple different publications and journals that cover topics and news on a more general level, but there are also sources that hone in on more specific specializations of LIS, such as public librarianship, academic librarianship, information technology, and digital preservation and archiving. Because of this wide assortment, any professional can be informed on news not only in their chosen fields, but also in other fields of interest or general curiosity. Taking myself as an example, as I continue on in my education and future career, I would want to read and possibly write for a journal that focuses on digital preservation and/or archiving. However, it would also benefit me to read journals on the topics of information technology or general library news. Today, I would like to unpack two such journals to see who they are really written for and what kinds of materials that can be found in them.

First, I would like to look at The American Archivist. This journal was “established in 1938 [and is] the best publication of its kind in the archives field” (CommonPlaces e-Solutions, LLC, 2014). The Society of American Archivists (SAA) describes this publication as the following.

“This journal seeks to reflect thinking about theoretical and practical developments in the archival profession, particularly in North America; about relationships between archivists and the creators and users of archives; and about cultural, social, legal, and technological developments that affect the nature of recorded information and the need to create and maintain it” (CommonPlaces e-Solutions, LLC, 2014)

Available both online and in print, this journal is free to the public, but is intended for members of SAA, as well as, others in the archiving profession. The materials published in this journal include, but are not limited to “digitization and digital preservation, reference and public services, preservation, records management, photographs and visual arts, disaster and contingency planning, copyright, intellectual property, legal issues, and authenticity” (Society of American Archivists, 2014).  Moreover, it offers “peer-reviewed research articles, case studies, in-depth perspectives, and international scene papers addressing a wide variety of topics” (Society of American Archivists, 2014). These peer-reviews are important to editor, Gregory S. Hunter. He states, “as SAA members and subscribers, this is [their] journal. [Hunter’s] goal is to make it as meaningful and useful … as possible.” (Hunter, 2013). By providing peer-reviews in the journal, it allows subscribers to talk to and influence other subscribers. It also provides continued success of the journal. The information found in this journal would be of particular interest to me because it provides interesting articles and visuals.

Another publication, different from The American Archivist, is the Reference and User Services Quarterly. This scholarly journal is “the official journal of the Reference and User Services Association of the American Library Association. Its purpose is to disseminate information of interest to reference librarians, information specialists, and other professionals involved in user-oriented library services” (RUSA, 2014). More specifically “the scope of the journal includes all aspects of library service to adults, and reference service and collection development at every level and for all types of libraries” (RUSA, 2013). The material covered in this journal include, but is not limited to recreational reading, volunteering, self-censorship, the adventures of learning, social media and reader’s advisory, reference and research resources, marketing in the library, and the value and effects of programs in the library (RUSA, 2013). While this journal is peer-reviewed, it was difficult for me to find reason behind why.  Regardless, this journal is not something that I would find particularly interesting.

The comparing and contrasting features of both journals are apparent. A similarity they both share is the fact that they are written for a specific audience. They both also strive to publish materials that are important to their designated fields and further the learning and understanding of their audience. Moreover, they both allow peer-reviews to give their audience a voice. To contrast that, though, the audiences they write for and the materials covered are vastly different. Also they contrast to me specifically because I find one interesting and the other not as interesting. However, I do see the value in both.

All of the similarities and differences show that each field within LIS is very different and can cover very different information from another. To imagine one journal containing it all would result in a thick, heavy book that only covered each topic superficially instead of in-depth. Moreover, I believe these journals and their features prove that you can’t know everything about everything. The journals allow for individuals to further their learning and understanding of any field.

 

References

CommonPlaces e-Solutions, LLC. (2014). The American Archivist. Retrieved from Society of American Archivists: http://www2.archivists.org/american-archivist

Hunter, G. S. (2013). From the Editor. The American Archivist, 76(2), 299-301. Retrieved from http://archivists.metapress.com/content/d67760v45683j65n/?p=e871bc20646c4ba582e1893bfc8eb392&pi=0

RUSA. (2013). Frontmatter. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 53(2), i-93. Retrieved from http://rusa.metapress.com/content/gl6570020747/

RUSA. (2014). Welcome to Reference & User Services Quarterly (RUSQ). Retrieved from RUSA: Reference and User Services Association A Division of the American Library Association: http://rusa.metapress.com/home/main.mpx

Society of American Archivists. (2014). Welcome to American Archivist Online! . Retrieved from Society of American Archivists: http://archivists.metapress.com/home/main.mpx