This thesis describes the introduction of Web 2.0 education into Swedish LIS education with emphasis on the driving forces and obstacles in the process. It also discusses the possibilities of estimating the appropriate time for the start of new educational courses introducing new technologies, when it is uncertain if the technologies in question will sustain for a long enough period of time to make the educational effort worthwhile. The data on the Web 2.0 education was collected during the spring of 2010 from the Web pages of the five LIS departments in Sweden, namely Borås, Lund, Umeå, Uppsala and Växjö, as well as by 10 interviews during November and December 2010 with two representatives from each LIS department..The key finding is that Web 2.0 is covered in Swedish LIS education and embracing both practical and theoretical issues. The main driving forces have been both the needs of the profession and an academic research interest. It is concluded that Rogers’“S-curves” as described in “Diffusion of Innovation” can be used as a tool in order to improve the understanding of when to introduce education in new technologies. Departments with no research in the new technology will probably start education in the new technology later due to the lack of scientific literature, while departments with research in the new field will have the potential to start earlier. / Program: Bibliotekarie

The purpose of this thesis is to explore how categorisation of marginalised groups is done on Swedish Wikipedia. Taking its starting point in social constructionism and critical knowledge organisation research, classic knowledge organization is seen as inherently flawed. In its quest for universal knowledge organisation systems, the fact that knowledge is contingent (emerging and constructed), is obscured. This runs the risk of marginalising marginalised groups further. Instead it is claimed that knowledge organization systems ought to strive for transparency by inviting its users to witness and take part in the knowledge process. A discourse analysis was made on two source materials: an interview study with three editors of Swedish Wikipedia and openly available discussion threads from Swedish Wikipedia. The result of the discourse analysis shows that the wider to write at Wikipedia discourse contains two nodal points: neutrality and consensus. The neutrality nodal point is a floating signifier in the sense that two different discourses try to give it two different meanings. In one of the discourses neutrality is seen as possible to achieve when describing reality. Categorisation is uncomplicated, it is simply a case of reflecting the categories that already exist ”out there”. In another discourse neutrality is seen as something impossible to achieve when describing reality because it is ever-changing and many-faceted. Categorisation is hard and complicated. Between these two discourses there is a discursive struggle which is mitigated by the nodal point consensus. Through discussions leading to consensus a ”neutral enough” way of describing the world is achieved. Categorisation on Wikipedia can thus be seen to achieve the transparency that critical knowledge organization research requests: the categories are results of discussions that all reading users can access. But there is doubt as to how many of the reading users of Wikipedia actually find and read the discussion pages. If there are only a few who ever finds the discussions, the transparency remains low and the constructed nature of Wikipedias knowledge organization system remains obscured. This is a two years Master’s thesis in Library and Information Science.