librarianship education programs*

(1)

Feasibility

and

marketing

studies

of health sciences

librarianship

education programs*

By Carolyn E. Lipscomb, M.S.L.S., AHIP

Library

Consultant 1515 Hermitage Court

Durham,

North Carolina 27707 Barbara B. Moran, Ph.D.

School

of Information

and

Library

Science Carol G. Jenkins, M.L.S., AHIP

Health Sciences

Library

Keith W Cogdill, M.L.S.

School

of Information

and

Library

Science Charles P Friedman, Ph.D.t

School

of

Medicine Claudia

J.

Gollop, Ph.D.

School

of Information

and

Library

Science MargaretE. Moore, A.M.L.S., M.PH.

Health Sciences

Library

Margaret L. Morrison, A.M.L.S.t

Health Sciences

Library

Helen R. Tibbo, Ph.D.

School

of

Information

and

Library

Science Barbara M. Wildemuth, Ph.D.

School

of Information

and

Library

Science UniversityofNorth Carolina at Chapel Hill

Chapel

Hill,

North Carolina 27599

The University ofNorth Carolina at

Chapel

Hillevaluated five curricular models designed to improve education forhealth sciences librarianship. Three of the modelsenhanced existing degree and certificate programs, and two were newprograms forworking information professionals.

Models were developed withinput from experts and a Delphi study; the marketability ofthe models was tested

through

surveys of potential students and employers; and recommendations were made as a guide to implementation. The results demonstrated a demand for more

specialized curricula and for retraining opportunities. Marketing data

showed a strong interest from potential students in a specialized master's degree, and mid-career professionals indicated an interest in post-master's programs that provided the ability to maintain employment.

*Thiswork was supported by NIH Grant no. 1 T15 LM 07113-01 from the National Library of Medicine. The views expressed are solely those

ofthe authorsand donotrepresenttheofficial view oftheNational Library of Medicine. t Nowwith theCenter for Biomedical Informatics, University of Pittsburgh.

(2)

The study pointed to theopportunity for a center of excellence in health sciencesinformation education to enable health sciences librarians to respond totheir evolving roles.

INTRODUCTION

With the support of a planning grant from the Na-tional Library of Medicine, the University of North

Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC) School of Information and Library Science (SILS), in collaboration with the

UNC Health Sciences Library and the Program in Medical Informatics, evaluated five curricular models

designed to improve education for health sciences

li-brarianship. These

models fitinto acontinuallearning

process from the initial professional preparation to

lifelong learning opportunities, with

the

aim of

en-abling

health

sciences librarians to respond to their evolving roles in a rapidly

changing

environment.

Three

of

them

enhancedexistingdegree and certificate programs in SILSwitha

health

sciencesspecialization, and two were new programs for working information

professionals.

The following programs,each withahealthsciences

specialization, wereincluded in the study:

* masterofsciencedegreesinlibrary andinformation

science (M.S.L.S. and M.S.I.S.)

* certificate of advanced study (CAS)

* doctor of

philosophy

degree

(Ph.D.)

* executive certificate ofadvanced study (ECAS)

* advanced

internship

program (AIP)

The goals of

this

study were to develop detailed de-scriptions of

the

programs, totestthemarketpotential

and market demand for each alternative, and to make

recommendations concerning

the

implementation of theviable alternatives.

Marketing data

showed

strong interest in a health

sciences

specialization

from

potential

students in

the

master's degree program. Inaddition,

the

expert

pan-els in

the

Delphi

study rated the master's

degree

spe-cialization as

the

most valuable in terms of contribu-tion to the preparation of tomorrow's health sciences

librarians. Mid-careerprofessionals indicated

the

most

interest in participation in the ECAS and the AIP,

among

the

post-master's programs, withtheability to

maintainemployment

the

mostimportant factorinthe

decisiontoapply.

Although respondents

indicatedthat employer support for participation in the programs would be minimal, many employers stated

they

pro-vided release time, funding, or bothfor participation inrelevantadvanceddegreeprograms.ThePh.D. with health sciences specialization received lessbacking in themarket studies, butthe expertadvisory group

rat-ed it as the most valuable among the various

ap-proaches.

METHODS

Inputfrom experts

The firstphase ofthe study assessed the feasibility of

the programs. Discussion of the programs may be found in a previouslypublishedaccount ofthe intend-edstudy [1]. An expert advisory group, which includ-ed nine leaders in health sciences library and infor-mation services,

health

care and administration, and

education in

health

sciences librarianship and infor-matics, was convened to provide guidancethroughout the course ofthe project. The members of this group reviewed

the

initial descriptions of the educational models and the research design and methods of the study, and

they

provided input

with

particular

em-phasis

on thetwo programs with whichSILShad the

least experience,

the

ECAS and the AIP. To test as-sumptions about

these

programs gained from the ex-pert advisory group meeting, the internal planning team conducted interviews with seven information

professionals and employers inthe local area.

Delphi study

The

nextstep was a

Delphi

study,

which

provided ad-ditional expert opinion torefinethedescriptions ofthe

modelsofthe fiveeducational programs.Threepanels

of experts-employers of

health

sciences librarians,

practicing mid-career health sciences librarians, and

the existing expert advisory group-agreed to partic-ipate. A panel of twenty-six employers included aca-demic

health

scienceslibrary directors,

hospital

library directors, Veterans Affairs and government library di-rectors,

hospital

administrators, corporate administra-tors, academic administrators, and public health

offi-cials.

Another

panel consisted of twenty-five mid-ca-reer professionals,

with

categories of academic

health

sciences librarians,

hospital

librarians, systems librar-ians and information science professionals, and

pro-fessionals in

other

settings represented.

The

Delphi

study consisted of two rounds of

sur-veys

that

asked forrankingsof components ofthefive educational programsintheareasofprogramcontent (academic content and experiential content) and pro-gram design (prerequisites, delivery

method,

and structure). (SeeAppendixAfor anexampleofa

ques-tion on academic content.) Panelists rated each

com-ponent on its importance to the relevant educational program and commented on the options. During a

second

Delphi

round, panelists received feedback on

responses fromthefirstround,and

they

provided

new

(3)

in order to move toward further consensus. Options

were ordered by frequency of selection inround one,

with the number of responses noted. The question-naire omitted questions on which there was already

consensus and options that had a low

frequency

of selection, and it added new questions and response options suggested in round one ofthe study.

Market surveys

Inthesecondphaseofthe study, threemarketsurveys were conducted.

The

intent of

these

surveys was to

estimate

the

demand from potential students for

en-rollment in the five educational programs and from employers for graduates of theprograms.Basedonthe information refined by

the

Delphi

study, the market surveys describedthe models of

the

proposed educa-tional programs. (See Appendix B for

these

descrip-tions of the programs.)

The

importance of particular

components was explored, as well as barriers to

en-rollment and ways to overcome

those

barriers.Surveys

were distributed to approximately 750 persons in

stratified random samples.

The planningteamdecided tofocusongroups

clos-er to

the

"purchase"

decision, inother words, persons

who

would be knowledgeable and have convictions about the information

sought.

Therefore, the

samples comprisedpersons in

health

scienceslibrariesand

stu-dents interested in library and information science programs as well as persons inclosely related

profes-sions. Long-term strategies to attract other potential

students and mid-careerprofessionals

who

maynotbe

awareof careersin

the health

sciences

library

and in-formation field will be addressed inlater stagesof im-plementation.

The

first surveyaddressed

the

master'sdegree

with

a

health

sciences specialization. It was distributed to potential students, asking

them

about their interest, the factors thatwouldinfluencetheir decisiontoenroll,

and their plans to meet the costs of a program. One

sampleincludedrecentlyacceptedapplicantsto Amer-ican Library Association-accredited North and South

Carolina library and information science (LIS) pro-grams (UNC, North Carolina Central University, and

University of

South

Carolina). A variation of the sur-vey went to all academichealth sciences library direc-tors inthe southeast (Region 2) and to arandom sam-ple of

hospital

library directors withatleast one

para-professional. The directorswere asked to give the sur-veys to one or four (depending on the size of the

library) paraprofessional staffmembers with a bache-lor's degree andpossiblywithanexpressedinterest in

a career inlibrarianship.

A second survey, sent to mid-career members of professional associations, asked about interest in the

post-master's programs, factors that would influence thedecision to apply (seeAppendix Cfor anexample

ofa

question),

and

potential employer

supportfor

par-ticipation.

Random

samples

of

seventy-five

members each were drawn from the Medical

Library

Associa-tion

(MLA)

and the American

Library

Association

(ALA) membership lists, fifty

from the American

Health Information

Management

Association

(AHI-MA)

list,

and

twenty-five

eachfrom the American

So-ciety

for Information Science

(ASIS)

and the

Special

Libraries Association

(SLA)

lists. Where possible,

cat-egories

of membersnot

likely

to bemid-career

profes-sionals were eliminated. The AHIMA sample was

re-stricted to members with at least a bachelor's

degree

and with two to nineteen years of experience.

Demo-graphic

data were also

requested

from the

potential

students in the first two surveys.

The final survey was sent to employers of health

sciences librarians

asking

them about numbers and

typesof

professional staff,

criteriaconsidered in

hiring

staff,

and support offered to staff for

professional

growth.

The survey also described the five

planned

educational programsand asked employersto ratethe

importance

they

would attachto completionof each of the programs and the likelihood of their

supporting

participation

in them

by

their own staff. The

sample

wasdrawn from MLA institutional members,because thisgroup was

weighted

toward the employers ofthe

largest

number of health sciences librarians

(hospital

libraries and academic health sciences libraries) while

including

a cross-section of other types of

organiza-tions.Directors wereasked tocomplete thesurvey,or,

inthe case of smaller

libraries,

asked to give it to an

appropriate

supervisor.

Information gainedfrom themarketstudywasused

to determineto what groups theprogramswould

ap-peal,

what factors needed to be addressed to

imple-mentprograms,where resources would need to be

ac-quired

or

redirected,

and what programs should be

implemented.

RESULTS

Input

from experts

The expert advisory group sawthe proposed alterna-tivesforeducating professionals aspart of a continual

learning process to maintain a high level of expertise, necessary because ofrapid changesintheinformation

and health care environments [2]. Future economic conditions will lead togreater diversity in an individ-ual's career over a lifetime; and individuals will need

totake moreresponsibility for adding new knowledge

and skills in order to be marketable and to meet the complex demands of information management in all

health-related environments. SILS, in partnershipwith

other academic units andemployers, has the potential

to assume responsibility for sustaining aswell as cre-ating awork force.

(4)

boundaries be established for the programs. Health

sciences information management should be defined as encompassing all types of information, including patient data, clinical information, research data, and

knowledge-basedinformation.Although theprograms meet different needs, a core set of knowledge and skills common to them all

should

be identified. Pro-grams

that

attract persons from diverse information

backgrounds couldproduce anenrichedlearning pro-cess and meet organizational needs for persons with

broader skills and the perspective to provide

leader-ship.

The interviewswith local information professionals and employersof

health

information professionals val-idated the vision of the educational programs and

helped

the planning team answer questions aboutthe

audience, structure, content, and expected outcomes of

the

two proposed new programs.

They

emphasized

the

need for training in

both technical

and personal skills and flexibility in program design.

The

input

from

the

interviews, combined with

the

results from

the

expert advisory group meeting, was used to

de-velop features of

the

programs

that

could be rated

through the

Delphi

study.

Delphi study

The Delphi

study provided additional expert opinion on

the

models for

the

educational programs. Some

generalizations can be made across programs.

Panel-ists favored

the

master's degree in library or

infor-mationscience as

the

prerequisite for

the

post-master's

programs; experiential content

such

as a site-related

project,

internship

or field experience, or

research

practicum; flexible structure

such

as part-time status and combination of on-campus and off-campus,

dis-tance learning (including use of the Internet); the awarding ofsomesortofcredential; andfocuson

con-tent tailored to individual needs.

There

was some

overlap among programs concerning academic con-tent:designand evaluationofinformationservicesand programs; health care environment; and creation, management, and use of health information systems

were

highly

ratedin most orallof

the

programs with required academiccontent.

There

werealsodifferences

due to

the

focusof

the

programs.

The

instrumentsand

complete results fromthe

Delphi

study

maybe found in

the

final report [3]. Response rates are in Table 1.

Round two of

the

Delphi

study

also asked respon-dents to estimate

the

value of

each

of the five pro-grams in terms of contribution to the preparation of tomorrow's health sciences librarians. Across all the panels, themaster's degreeprogramwithahealth sci-ences specialization was rated most

highly

(4.2

on a

scale of 1-5,with 1 representinglow value and 5

high

value); the other programs received ratings between

3.6 and 3.9. However, there were differences among

Table 1

Survey response rates

Sample Usable Survey size responses Delphi study, round one 60 55 (91.6%) Delphi study, round two 60 54 (90.0%) Marketsurvey, applicants 123* 69 (56.1%) Marketsurvey, paraprofessionals 141 80 (56.7%) Marketsurvey, mid-career professionals 242* 96 (39.7%) Marketsurvey, employers 249* 98(39.4%)t

*Surveys returned due to incorrect address or deceased recipient were

de-ductedfrom sample size.

t Of thecompletedsurveys,forty-sixwerefrom academiclibraries,forty-six from hospital libraries,and six from other categories.

the three

panels. The expert advisory group rated the Ph.D. program

highest

(4.4), followed by the master's

degree program (4.0). The mid-career respondents ranked the master's degree program first (4.3),

fol-lowed bythe ECAS (4.0).The employer panel also put

the master's degree program at the top (4.4), with the

AIP second (4.2). Market surveys

The instruments andfull results ofthemarket surveys may be consulted in

the

final report

[4].

A summary

of significant outcomesby programfollows.

Master of science degree program.

There

was strong interest in

the

master's degree with specialization amongpotential students (25%ofapplicants and 50%

ofparaprofessionals). Evenif

this

result was overstat-ed (in

the

caseof paraprofessionals, respondents were

already familiar with

the health

sciences library set-ting and may

have

been interested in a professional

career),

this

indication wasmeaningful.Forapplicants,

geographic

proximity to

home

and

schedule

flexibility and availability of

night

courses were themost impor-tant factors when

they

made

the

decision about

en-rollinginanLIS program.Consistencyofcontentwith

career goals and general reputation of

the

program were also

highly

ranked as very important factors. Among paraprofessionals, the most important factors

in a decision to apply to a master's degree program

with specializationwould beavailabilityofapart-time programand flexibility ofschedule and availability of

night

courses.Consistencyofcontentwithcareergoals

and cost of program would also be

highly

ranked as

very important factors. Most ofthe

paraprofessionals

who rated

teaching

reputation of faculty as most

im-portantwereinterestedin

applying.

Acombination of sources of support for meeting the costs of the pro-gram was citedby both groups.

Post-master's degree programs. Mid-career respon-dents expressed the most interest in the ECAS

(24%)

(5)

and the AIP (23%). The data suggest that AHIMA,

ASIS, and MLA sample memberswere more likely to

be interested in the ECAS than were members of the

ALA and SLA samples. AHIMA respondents, in par-ticular, were more interested in theECAS (35%) than mightbe anticipated because

they

likely did not have

LIS degrees. Across programs, the ability to maintain

employment was themostimportantfactorthatmight

influence the decision to apply to a program. Little support from employers was anticipated; the highest

expectations were for partial tuition and unpaid time

off for participation inthe ECAS program and partial

tuition for the AIP. Respondents were asked the

max-imum dollar amount

they

might

contribute to their

own support, given their interest in a program and

the estimated cost.

Employers. The most important criterion considered by employers in hiring professional staff, now and overthenextfive totenyears,waspersonaltraits,such

as flexibility, initiative, willingness to

change,

and communication skills. Other important factors were

graduate LIS degree and previous work

history.

A

graduate LIS degree with health sciences

specializa-tion was more important to employers in anticipating recruitment in

the

futurethanithadbeenwhen

hiring

current staff.

In terms of support, employers were mostlikely to

provide assistance for

on-the-job

training and

atten-dance at conferences and continuing education

cours-es. Over a third of the respondents provided release time for participationinrelevantadvanceddegree pro-grams (38%) and/or funding (37%).

They

could envi-sion providing periodic time off over a longer period

for professional

growth

(58%). When evaluating the

value of the five programs, the respondents were slightly more likely to support participation by staff members in the AIP and ECAS. The category of em-ployer and size of staff had some statistically signifi-cant effect onthe willingness to support participation in professional development and on the type of sup-port. More academic employers provided release time for degree programs, while more hospital employers offered funding fordegree programs. Employers with

larger staffs were more willing to support participa-tion in theAIP, ECAS, and Ph.D. programs.

Response rates.Theresponse rates between 39.4% and 56.7% (Table 1),with an overall response rate of 46.5%, probably reflected several factors that tended to lower returns. Two surveys required the intermediate step of original recipients identifying appropriate respon-dents and giving the questionnaires to them. Several samples were made up of groups of persons who

might not identify with health sciences librarianship. Some ofthe records from which samples were drawn were somewhat dated or did not permit the exclusion

ofpersonswho wouldnotfitthe definitionofthe

cat-egory. The questionnaires were fairly complex and ranged from four to twelve pages in length. Finally, the computation of the response rates was done in a conservative manner, counting refusals to participate for whatever reason as nonresponses. Overall, the re-sponse rates seemed satisfactory and within the

stan-dard of the 40% to 75% range for specific audiences [5].

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPLEMENTATION The final stage of the study was to make recommen-dations on how SILS should expand its educational programs in

health

sciencesinformation.Theplanning team evaluated the relative feasibility and marketabil-ity of the programs and assessed

their

fit with the goals of SILS and in the availability of new resources to implement them. Theprograms varied inpotential demand as well as how easily

they

could be offered. For example, a health sciences specialization in the

master's degree program met with strong interest from potential students and would require relatively

few additional resources to implement, primarily

fac-ultytime todevelop andteachone ormorenew cours-es.

The other

existingdegreeand certificate programs,

the Ph.D. and CAS, were not rated as

highly

in the

market surveys;

however,

a

health

sciences

speciali-zation could be added to them withminimal new re-sources. At the

other

end of the scale,

the

new pro-grams for working professionals, the ECAS and AIP, evidenced market demand but would be resource-in-tensive. These programs would require development ofnew coursematerial orrepackaging of existing

ma-terialfor a nontraditional

schedule

and distance learn-ing, identification andoversightof experiential oppor-tunities, integrationoftechnology inthe programs, fi-nancial support forfaculty and students, and a longer timetable for implementation. External funding and

partnerships

with other organizations would make

themmore feasible.

Instead of choosing an individual program to im-plement, thestrategyof a center of excellence inhealth sciences information education emerged. This center would operate on several levels. On the institutional level, SILS could build an infrastructure of health sci-encesinformationeducation by planning to implement gradually aspects of each of the programs. The con-siderable overlap among programs would allow the development and packaging of course content and ex-periential opportunities, as well as utilization of pos-sible newfaculty, for morethanoneprogram. The

cen-ter would increase visibility for SILS in the area of

health sciences information education, building on emergent strengths and an identified strategic focus. SILShas the advantages of a two-year master's degree program and a Ph.D. program; an extensive roster of

(6)

courses within the school and in other university units;theaccess torelevant curricula in medical infor-matics, public health, and other disciplines; and the

availability of experiential opportunities inthe Health

SciencesLibrary and numerous informationcenters in clinical settings.

The center would also function on a broader level. SILS could collaborate

with

other LIS programs in a virtual center of excellence to share in course devel-opment, marketing, on-campus time, and institutional supportfor Internet coursesand programs suchasthe

ECAS and AIP. Model interinstitutional programs would also have the potential for attracting external funding. To be most effective, leadership and coordi-nation atthelevel ofagencies suchas theNational

Li-brary of Medicine and MLAwould identify gaps,

fos-ter collaboration, and offer support. For example,

funding from

the

National Library of Medicine will support librarian training

through

the Medical

Infor-matics Training Program at UNC and

other

institu-tions.

Atthe institutionallevel, proposals for

the

five pro-grams

have

been developed and may be found in

the

final report [6]. A specialization is proposed for

both

the

M.S.L.S. and M.S.I.S. programs at UNC.

Each

would require five

health

sciences courses

(three

re-quired courses and two electives) and a practicum, in addition to the basic core courses all students must take. The courses,whicharealready

taught

bySILS or

the

Program in Medical Informatics except as noted, respond directly tothe sevenareasofknowledgeand

skillsidentifiedbyMLA[7] andprovidestudents

with

the

foundation for a career in

health

sciences

infor-mation. Required courses for

the

M.S.L.S. would be: science information,

health

sciences information, and

healthcare environment (a new course). Inaddition,a new elective on

teaching

and learning in

the

infor-mation environment is proposed. TheM.S.I.S. would require

health

sciences information,

health

care

envi-ronment, and introduction to medical informatics.

Specific

technology

courses would not be

prescribed,

but students would be strongly encouraged to take

those that

fittheirbackground andgoals.Besides com-pleting requirements for

the

core curriculum and

spe-cialization, students would be able to take three

ad-ditional electives. New courses

developed

forthe spe-cialization would be available to all students in other degree and certificate programs as well.

The

existing CAS program allows students to de-velop

their

own

package

ofcourses

according

totheir

individual goals.An expanded rosterofhealth scienc-es coursscienc-es for SILS programs, in combination with courses in othercampusunits, would

provide

the op-tion ofa specialization in thisarea.

The Ph.D. specialization would be structured as a

minor inmedical informatics.Theminorrequires

com-pletion of fifteen credit

hours,

including

the core

cur-riculum inthemedical informatics program: introduc-tion to medical informatics, medical information sys-tems, research and evaluation methods in medical

in-formatics, and clinical reasoning and decision making.

The emphasis would be on preparation for research.

The proposed ECAS would emphasize preparation for administrativepositions and would combineshort

on-campus sessionsfollowed byindependent study at

thestudent's work site [8]. Requirements for admission to the program wouldbe five years' professional ex-periencewithsome experience in ahealthsciences set-ting. As the Internet would be used to maintain con-tact amongstudents and faculty for collaborative pro-jects and to provide feedback on assignments, read-ings, and course content, computer competency and access tonecessary technologywould be required.

Options for

internship

experiences in

the

AIP and

theexperiential component oftheECASemphasizethe

use of information in clinical settings and innovative uses of technology in library and information center environments.

CONCLUSION

The

results of the study support the need for more extensiveeducationprograms in

health

sciences

infor-mation

both

for entering students and working

pro-fessionals.

The

results demonstrate a demand for more

specialized curricula and forretrainingopportunities,

especially forprogramstailoredto

the

requirementsof

individual students.

They

also suggestthatemployers can provide some support for professional

develop-mentand

that

professionals inmany cases arewilling totakeindividual responsibility forfurthereducation.

The

studypoints to

the

opportunityforUNCand

oth-erpartners to increase

their

functionin

helping health

sciences information professionalsmeet

changing

and

expandingroles. A jointplanningeffortby library and

information scienceprograms,

the

National Libraryof

Medicine, and MLAfora centerofexcellenceinhealth

sciences information education would

have the

most impact on

the

successof

such

a venture.

Study data may be useful to these other organiza-tions.

Although

UNC

has

usedtheresultstomake de-cisions about its own programs,

the

information is

generalizableandcanbeappliedto

other

settingswith different actions

possible.

Data concerning desired components ineducational programs,

delivery

meth-ods, factors

influencing

a decision to participate in a degree orcertificate program, and interest indifferent

types of programs have beencollected from a variety of perspectives and may be relevant in other educa-tional contexts.

REFERENCES

1. MORANBB, JENKINS CG,FRIEDMAN CP, LIPSCOMBCE, ET

(7)

feasibil-ity and marketing studies. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1996 Oct;84(4):541-8.

2. IBID.,542-3.

3. MORAN BB. Preparing tomorrow's health sciences

librar-ians: feasibility and marketing studies; final report. [Web

document]. Chapel Hill,NC:University of North Carolinaat

Chapel Hill, 1997. [Sep. 1997; cited 1 Sep. 1998]. Available from Internet: <http:/ / www.ils.unc.edu / ils /grants/tthsl/

final.html>.

4. IBID., appendicesF-I.

5. POWELLRR. Basicresearch methodsfor librarians. 2nd ed. Norwood, NJ:Ablex, 1991.

6. MORAN, Preparing tomorrow's ... final report, op. cit., appendixK.

7. MEDICAL LIBRARY AssocIATION. Platform forchange: the

educational policystatementof the MedicalLibrary

Associ-ation. [Web document] Chicago: The Association, 1991. [25

Aug. 1998;cited1Sep. 1995]. Available fromInternet: <http:

// www.mlanet.org/education/platform.html>.

8. MORAN, Preparing tomorrow's ... final report, op. cit., appendixK, 6-10.

ReceivedMay 1998; accepted August 1998

Appendix A

Sample Delphi study question: Ph.D. withhealth sciences specialization

Programcontent:Inthissectionofthequestionnaire,

ques-tions address the desired competencies or areas of knowl-edge that would result from the Ph.D. with health sciences

specialization.

Academic content: The Ph.D. requires at aminimum one

basic seminar in information retrieval, anotheron scholarly

communication, two statistics courses, and a dissertation. From thefollowing areasofknowledge, please circle FOUR

that you consider MOST important to add to the core of requirements forthe successful doctoral candidate.

1. Advanced communications and presentation skills (e.g.,

graphicpresentation, proposal development)

2. Advanced management skills (e.g., human resources, planning, financial management, marketing, economics

ofinformation)

3. Advanced systemsdesignandnetworking(e.g.,database

systems, interface design, telecommunications)

4. Biomedical and health sciences information resources (e.g.,currentandhistoricalresources, printand

electron-icformats, courseware, consumerhealth information) 5. Creation, management, and use of health information

systems (e.g., integrated health information systems, computer-based patient records, decision support sys-tems, coding, and thesaural systems for information or-ganization and retrieval)

6. Design and evaluation of information services and pro-grams (e.g., needs assessment, outcomes measurement,

benchmarking, evaluation oftechnologies)

7. Design, delivery, and evaluation of education in

infor-mationmanagement (e.g., instructional design, cognitive

psychology)

8. General knowledge of biomedical and health sciences (e.g., basic and clinical sciences, public health, allied

health)

9. Health care environment (e.g., trends affecting the de-sign and delivery of health care, biomedical research, healthsciences education)

10. Research skills (e.g., researchmethods, statistical

analy-sis, qualitative analysis)

11. The role of professional education and of graduate ed-ucationinthecurrentacademic environment(e.g.,

teach-ing, research, and serviceresponsibilities)

12. Specialized knowledge in atleast onebiomedical disci-pline (e.g., anatomy, molecular biology, epidemiology, pharmacy)

AppendixB

Program descriptions

Master's degree with health sciences specialization The master's degree programs in library

science/infor-mation science prepare students for professional

employ-ment in library service and the information industry. The

proposed health sciences specialization will be compatible,

inits generalrequirements, with the requirements ofa

non-specialized master's degree. Students in theseprogramsare

expected to enter a career in health sciences librarianship

and/orinformation management.

1. Specialized academiccontentemphasizes:biomedical and

health sciences informationresources; design and

evalu-ation of information services and programs; and health

care environment. Internship/field experience and thesis

also required.

2. Structure: currentlengthofthedegree program (16

cours-es;2 academic yearsfull-time) willberequired. Part-time student statuspossible.

3. Estimated annual cost: tuition and feesfor full-time

stu-dent: $2,200 for North Carolina resident and $10,700 for out-of-stateresident;thisdoesnotincludebooksand

ma-terials orliving expenses.

Advanced internshipprogram (AIP)

A post-master's work-site-based internship to expose new

and experienced professionals to innovative practices and

technologies in health information management. Custom-ized to meet the educational needs of the individual with flexibility inthechoiceof sites and environments.

1. Contentemphasizes:supervisedwork experience at ahost

site, includingaspecialprojectand final report.

2. Structure: 6-month site-based internship; scheduled

tele-conferences, ongoing electronic discussions, and/or on-line assignments will supplement experience. Certificate awarded upon completion.

3. Estimated cost: $2,000 program fee; this does not include travel orliving expenses atthe internship site.

Certificate of advanced study (CAS)

Anon-campus, post-master's program designed for both

new and experienced practitioners who seek an articulated and systematic continuing education program to redirect

theircareer paths or toupdate their skills.

1. Contentemphasizes:design and evaluation of information services; creation, management, and use of health

(8)

systemsdesignandnetworking. Includesamajor

site-re-latedproject in ahealthsciencesinformationsetting. 2. Structure: 30 credits (3 semesters full-time); primarily

on-campus courses, supplementedwithelectronic/ Web-sup-ported materials.

3. Estimated annual cost: tuition andfees for full-time

stu-dent: $2,200for NorthCarolina resident and $10,700 for

out-of-state resident; this does notincludebooks and

ma-terials or livingexpenses.

Executive certificate of advanced study (ECAS)

Apost-master'sprogramdesigned for currently employed

information professionals, combining short on-campus ses-sions followed by independent study at the student's work site. Focuses on executive-level preparation. Provides opportu-nities to enrichand strengthenexisting capabilities, develop

subjector functional specialty, or toredirecta career. 1. Content emphasizes: advanced management skills;

ad-vanced communications and presentation skills; health

care environment; design and evaluationofinformation

services; and creation, management, and use of health

information systems. Includes a major site-related pro-ject.

2. Structure: 30 credits (2 years part-time); on-campus time

scheduled inperiodic weekend seminarsandsummer in-stitutes;scheduledteleconferences,ongoingelectronic

dis-cussions, and online assignments will supplement

leam-ing on campus. Program assumesparticipants will con-tinue currentemployment.

3. Estimated total cost: tuition and fees: $4,500 for North Carolina resident and $10,500 for out-of-state resident;

this doesnotinclude travel and livingexpensesfor about

16 days, during five trips to campus.

Ph.D. withhealthsciences specialization

Thepurpose ofthis doctoral program is to educate scholars

who are capable of addressing problems of scholarly

con-sequence inthefields of informationandlibraryscience and,

specifically, related to health sciences information manage-ment.

1. Content emphasizes: research skills; design and evalua-tionofinformationservicesandprograms;medical infor-matics; andcreation, management, anduse ofhealth

in-formationsystems. Includesaresearch practicum. 2. Structure: minimumof36 credits(2 years full-time) plus

the dissertation; primarily on-campus courses in the School of Information and Library Science and other

de-partments.

3. Estimated annual cost: tuition andfees for full-time

stu-dent: $2,200 for North Carolina resident and$10,700 for out-of-stateresident; this doesnotincludebooksand

ma-terialsorlivingexpenses.

Appendix C

Sample market surveyquestion: certificate of advanced study

Anumberof factorsmightinfluenceyourdecisiontoapplytothisprogram. We are interested inhowimportanteachofthese

factors would be on your decision toapply tothis program.

A) Abilityto maintain employment B) Academicreputation ofUNC-CH

C) Availability ofdependent familycareassistance

D) Consistency ofcontentwithmy career goals (see

de-scriptionabove)

E) Costofprogram

F) Diversity/compositionof studentbody G) Flexible schedule and classstructure

H) Formal recognition/certification ofcompletion

I) Geographicproximity tohome J) Lengthofprogram

K) Library and computerlab resources

L) Opportunities for personal interaction among

stu-dents

M) Opportunities for personal interaction with working

professionals andbeingmentored

N) Opporunities for professional involvement such as

conferencesandparticipation inresearch projects

0) Recommendation from a colleague, alumni, current

student, orrelative

P) Research reputation offaculty

Q) Size of classes

R) Teaching reputationoffaculty

S) Other(please specify):

Veryimportant

Li

El

Li

El

Li

El

Li

0

Li

Important Less important

Li

R

LI

El

Li

L

Li

El

L

Li

El

Li

El

Li

C1

Li

Fi

Li

Fo

Li

L

Li

L-i

Li1

Notapplicable Li Li

n

R R M Eli Li M EliLi M

o~~