A Meta-Framework for Evaluating Library Science Education Outcomes

Thesis Abstract

This study addresses the persistent gaps in measuring outcomes in library science education by proposing a meta-framework that integrates program-level, student-level, and workforce-aligned indicators to capture learning, competencies, and impact on professional practice. The aim is to develop a robust evaluative framework that synthesizes existing assessment models, identifies core constructs, and prescribes instrumented metrics for cross-institutional comparability. Specific objectives include (1) articulating core outcome domains for library science education grounded in constructivist and social cognitive theory, (2) synthesizing diverse assessment instruments into a cohesive meta-framework with standardized indicators, (3) validating the framework through a mixed-methods pilot across five accredited programs, and (4) evaluating the framework’s predictive validity for graduate employment outcomes and professional performance. The study adopts a mixed-methods sequential explanatory design. The population comprises 28 accredited Master of Library and Information Science (MLIS) programs across North America and Europe, with a target sample of 14 programs selected via stratified purposive sampling to ensure representation by program size, delivery mode, and institutional type. Data collection comprises (a) quantitative measures including standardized exit assessments, curriculum mapping rubrics, and anonymized graduate employment records, with instruments adapted from validated scales such as the Library Anxiety Scale, Information Literacy Competency Rubrics, and employability indices, and (b) qualitative data from semi-structured interviews with program directors (n=14) and recent graduates (n=72) to illuminate contextual factors and interpretive meaning. Instrument validity and reliability are established through content validity checks with an expert panel, pilot testing (n=3 programs), and Cronbach’s alpha, aiming for internal consistency coefficients above 0.80 for key scales. Data collection occurs over two cycles to capture longitudinal changes. Analytical procedures include (i) confirmatory factor analysis to ascertain the measurement model of the proposed outcome domains, (ii) structural equation modeling to assess relationships among program inputs, learning experiences, and outcomes, (iii) regression analyses to determine the predictive power of framework indicators on postgraduate employment status, starting salary, and performance appraisals, and (iv) thematic analysis of interview transcripts to extract recurrent themes that explain quantitative findings and identify contextual moderators. Triangulation will be employed to enhance validity, with meta-inference integrating quantitative patterns and qualitative insights. A crosswalk of existing accreditation rubrics and national competencies will inform the framework’s indicators, and the Theory of Planned Behavior and Social Cognitive Theory will ground the interpretive lens for how attitudes, self-efficacy, and perceived behavioral control influence outcomes. Key expected findings include (a) a validated meta-framework comprising core domains—learning outcomes, competency attainment, pedagogical process quality, assessment integrity, and workplace impact—with standardized indicators and scoring rubrics; (b) empirical evidence of significant associations between curriculum alignment, authentic assessment practices, and favorable employment outcomes; (c) demonstration of the framework’s predictive validity for early-career professional performance; and (d) identification of moderator effects, such as program modality (online vs. on-campus) and regional accreditation standards, on outcome attainment. The study anticipates that higher fidelity in curriculum mapping and stronger alignment of assessment with professional standards will correlate with improved graduate readiness and job market success. The study contributes to knowledge by delivering a replicable, cross-institutional meta-framework for evaluating library science education outcomes that integrates theoretical constructs with practical measurement tools, enabling benchmarking, quality assurance, and continuous improvement in LIS education. It advances the literature by bridging theory and practice through a validated model capable of informing accreditation processes, curriculum design, and resource allocation. The main conclusion is that a coherent meta-framework, underpinned by construct validity and predictive analytics, can produce reliable, comparable, and actionable evidence of library science education effectiveness. Recommendations include adopting the framework in accreditation cycles, embedding authentic assessment across curricula, expanding data-sharing agreements to enhance longitudinal tracking, and conducting follow-up studies with larger program samples to further refine and generalize the model.