Sample
Analysis of Academic Journals
This essay will compare and contrast three journals and consider their differences in approach, style, methodology, their aims and objectives, as well as any other differential points of interest. Such a comparison requires that they be separated by at least ten years in order that substantive differences can be described and analysed. The starting point is with an introduction to the journal followed by a brief review of each one chosen. This logically begins with the first issue.
The Australasian Public Libraries and Information Services
The Australasian Public Libraries and Information Services (Aplis) was first published in 1988 and it publishes “articles and shorter items on public libraries and other publicly accessible information services in Australia, New Zealand and the South Pacific” (Aplis 1988, p. 1). It further considers accepting articles from other librarianship areas as well as from wider public information service providers. It particularly welcomes articles from “newer and student members of librarian services,” especially if they have not published before. Aplis is published three to four times a year and may include book reviews as well as letters to authors along with their replies. It may also include features up to 1,000 words and the length of the articles is up to 5,000 (Aplis 1988, p. 1).
The first issue of Aplis included a note from the Director-General of the national library of Australia as well as a brief explanatory feature from the editor. The Director-General notes that public libraries in Australia “face a potentially exciting future,” (Horton in Aplis 1988, pp. 3). The Editor noted that at the time of writing, Australia and New Zealand had “over 600 public library services, with 1,500 static service points and bookmobiles available to nearly 100 per cent of the population of both countries” (Bundy in Aplis 1988, p. 3). He notes two further aims, namely to “enhance a better awareness of public library developments throughout our region and between Australia and New Zealand in particular” and to establish connections between public libraries and “other community information services” in the region (Bundy in Aplis 1988, p. 3).
Aplis Issue 1, April 1988
One review article published in the first issue of Aplis is by Ross Gibbs, the then Director of Carringbush Regional Library Service in Melbourne. He is considering the second edition of the Directory of Australian Public Libraries, which was edited by Alan and Judith Bundy. His style is quite warm and he speaks, in the introduction, directly to the reader by fundamentally asking how the task of reviewing a directory could be anything other than a minor or congratulatory task? He then explains why this was an inaccurate first prognosis and that the Directory actually contains “a wealth of statistical and service details that give a unique insight into the condition of Australian public libraries in the mid 1980’s” (Gibbs in Aplis 1988, p. 52).
The Review is initially wholly supportive not only of the Directory, but also of the Australian Library Service generally, for example “it highlights for us what a wonderful achievement the Australian public library service really is” (Gibbs in Aplis 1988, p. 52). He then gives a statistical breakdown on the increases across a range of service provisions over the previous decade and lauds the achievements. However, he then goes on to rationally discuss the relative weaknesses that exist within the library system, for example gross inequalities between rural and urban provision and even between states. He also highlights the lack of information provision in libraries, for example the relative dearth of reference librarians (a total of 39 in the whole country). Interestingly, he also draws attention to a lack of provision for non-English speaking Australians and suggests that this indicates something which is “gravely wrong.” Gibbs (1988) emphasizes that he is not at all critical of the editors, but notes (paradoxically?) some areas where information is lacking within the Directory and criticizes a lack of initiative within the management of the system.
This review gives an interesting insight. On the one hand, it seems to want to be fair and equitable, but in doing this switches from gushing praise to serious criticisms, particularly of the administration. On the other hand, it is clear that his praise for the editor is absolute despite criticizing the book. Perhaps this suggests some sort of solidarity approach, where the ‘system’ as opposed to colleagues working within the it are at fault. On the whole, whilst sometimes conversational and casual, the review in interesting and informative.
We can further note the section of Aplis (Issue 1), namely the book reviews. There are a total of nine, ranging from a study of acronyms, library management methods and online cataloguing to trends in library services for children and sound recording in libraries (Book reviews, Aplis 1988). All are written with a sense of dedication and interest and, while there is both praise and criticism of the books, there is a heavy leaning towards (polite) praise.
Aplis Issue 12, March 1999
The same editor, Mr Bundy, introduces this issue of Aplis and he starts by drawing attention to the similarities existing between the public library services of Australia and Canada. He notes that both have excellent services, and that these are characterized by “undue political and bureaucratic ignorance about what they contribute to society” (Bundy in Aplis 1999, p. 3). His language is very critical of governments and there is a strong focus on funding issues. For example, increasing demands on services and resources but a “lack of funds to achieve their technological potential without draining much needed funding from other areas.” He makes critical assumptions about governments and parliamentarians in both nations by suggesting that these people do understand the popularity of the services provided, how well such services are regarded by the public, and how “relatively inexpensive” they are. Yet, he contends, their “thrust” to try and make libraries do more with less “is driven more by ideology than any real concern for the availability of quality public libraries to all” (Bundy in Aplis 1999, p. 3).
This brings us to a paper written by Laurelle Johnstone, the Assistant Director of the Public Libraries Division State Library of Queensland, who concerns herself with libraries in shopping centers and is clearly a proponent of such arrangements. For example, she notes the advantages to customers, to the shopping center, and also the financial implications, which she believes can also be beneficial inasmuch as there are opportunities to negotiate favorable leases based on the economic advantages that having a public library located within it brings to shopping centers (Johnstone in Aplis 1999, pp 25-28). The paper is written in a pragmatic style and assumes a concern with cost and economic matters as well as social benefits. Indeed, it is somewhat difficult at times to garner which is most important to the author – cost or social benefits, but perhaps a summary notation may be ‘maximizing’ all benefits. Furthermore, by proposing the benefits of shopping centers, there may be an implicit assumption that such places, as opposed to neighborhoods, are now ‘the community.’
Tim Bowcock, in the same issue, writes an article about electronic information sources and considers that there was a great challenge in finding a balance between ‘traditional’ informational mediums and electronic resources. Interestingly, the paper is based in a discussion of the relative success of an initiative to introduce the public to what was perceived as being the library service of the future with regard to electronic usage, and particularly the internet (Bowcock in Aplis 1999, pp 31-40).
A number of aspects of what was generally regarded as a successful event are noted by Bowcock. One was the willingness of customers to participate and enjoy internet usage, with praise for its user-friendliness and ease of use. Alongside this, it is of further interest to note the user comments, many of which expressed fears about books – “Don’t get rid of the books” is cited by the author as a common sentiment. Of further note is the finding that library staff believed that books would always remain the primary focus, which was somewhat asymmetric with the views expressed by the users.
The author rightly notes that the ACT library service was in a time of transition and recommended that the introduction of electronic information should become a regular rather than a featured aspect of Australian libraries. The article is comprehensive in its analysis, as well as pragmatic and rational. Perhaps one summary quotation from it can be made – “the changes the service must make” (Bowcock in Aplis 1999, p. 38).
Aplis Issue 24, No. 1, 2011
In this issue, Mr Bundy is still the Editor and he continues to show concerns about funding issues. Unlike the previous editorial reviews, this one focuses solely on Australia and makes the points that on the one hand “although Australia now has a universally accessible public library system of some 1520 public libraries, at only 10c per Australian per day it still invests sparingly and very unevenly in that system” (Bundy in Aplis 2011, p. 3).
He goes on to discuss the “meager” $880 million invested by Australia compared, for example, with the comparative triple of that amount spent by Denmark. He continues in an increasingly vociferous style by suggesting of the government that it their “lack of recognition of their constitutional responsibility for the performance of their public library systems” which is at fault (Bundy in Aplis 2011, p. 3), rather than any shortage of funds.
Comparisons, Contrasts and Conclusions
At one level, an article, or review, is good, poor, well or badly researched etc. regardless of when it was written, and that aspect was very clear in considering these. However, attitudes and priorities show clear changes over time. The first issue preceded the change by governments not only in Australia but across the world to focus more on economic liberalism, privatization and competition. By the second, public services had been through a period of ‘hard changes’ and ‘hard lessons’ regarding funding and accountability. So whereas Gibbs in 1988 could show solidarity with colleagues and criticize the ineptitude of management, there was nothing said about funding as the underlying problem or issue. Even the Editor, Bundy, had not yet felt any of the ‘squeezes’ which dominated his future editorials, focusing more on expansion and growth. This change is easily seen in the 12th Issue, with pragmatic discussion of the economic as well as social benefits of shopping centers and a wider notion that this is where ‘communities’ now lived. By the 24th issue, funding dominated the thoughts of the editor to the extent that this was the only area that he discussed.
Although it is impossible to draw general conclusions over style by considering so few articles, it may be said that a noticeable confidence and even ‘commitment’ to public service seemed to be more apparent in the first, then became more introverted and defensive in the subsequent issues. Gibbs criticized more in terms of professionalism and duty rather than in economics or funding. By the 24th Issue, Bundy is becoming more extreme and more political in his criticisms than in the earlier periods. Subliminally, a sense of duty is being gradually replaced by a sense of accountability.
We can also see a sense of the great changes that have occurred generally being crystallized and juncture in the 1999 article by Bowcock, and a recognition that information changes were here to stay, despite some potential resistance for such changes by public sector staff and management.
If we must consider methodology and style, it may be said that the highlighted article in the first issue, as well as the book reviews, were more discursive and confident rather than based in pragmatism and quasi cost-benefit analysis as time moved on. Perhaps we can say that even a journal about public library issues cannot avoid reflecting the changes in the world, in our politics, and in how we live and describe our lives.
References
Book Reviews (1988) in The Australasian Public Libraries and Information Services (Aplis), pp 57-63
Bowcock T. (1999), Striking the Balance, in The Australasian Public Libraries and Information Services (Aplis), pp 31-40
Bundy A. (ed.), (1988), The Australasian Public Libraries and Information Services
Bundy A. (ed.), (1999), The Australasian Public Libraries and Information Services
Bundy A. (ed.), (2011), Needed – Better, more accessible, libraries for all. But who should pay? The Australasian Public Libraries and Information Services (Aplis)
Gibbs R. (1988), Review article: Review of Australian public libraries in The Australasian Public Libraries and Information Services (Aplis)
Horton W. (1988), Note in Bundy A. (ed.), (1988), The Australasian Public Libraries and Information Services (Alpis)
Johnstone l. (1999), Public libraries and shopping Centers, in The Australasian Public Libraries and Information Services (Alpis), pp 25-30