由於國內圖書館學科服務仍在起步階段，關於此方面的研究十分缺乏，尤其專門領域對圖書館學科服務的需求方面。本研究藉由SCONUL資訊素養標準架構設計訪談大綱，以瞭解數學領域碩博士生與教授之資訊素養行為，並探索其對圖書館學科服務之需求。本研究採用半結構式訪談法，深度訪談台灣大學數學系18位碩博士生與教授，分析受訪者之資訊素養行為與學科服務需求。資訊素養行為以寫作論文或研究計畫時經歷的各項過程為主，包括如何決定研究題目、選擇資訊工具及檢索策略、收集資訊、評估資訊、管理資訊到應用資訊各方面。
研究結果顯示：由於碩博士生與教授處於學術研究的不同階段，其資訊素養行為確實如本研究所採用SCONUL英國高等教育資訊素養標準七柱說所述，呈現由新手初學者進階者勝任者熟練者專家，各種不同資訊尋求行為與圖書館技能的階段。碩士生屬於新手階段，博士生屬於進階者階段，而教授則算是專家的階段。
本研究發現數學領域碩博士生與教授之資訊素養行為有幾項特點：（一）碩士生主要依賴教授指引論文主題方向（二）博士生及教授的研究主題可能是碩博士論文研究的延伸（三）Google為碩士生尋求資訊的主要途徑（四）博士生會進一步使用Google Scholar、MathScinet或ArXiv作為資訊搜尋途徑（五）同儕為教授取得資訊的重要管道（六）純數領域對新知通訊的訂閱需求不甚高（七）經由網路參與學術社群的比例不甚高（八）教授十分推崇Research Gate學術網站之交流功能（九）博士生比碩士生更能使用引用指標（如引用次數、期刊impact factor）做為論文品質評估方式（十）教授很肯定同儕審閱報告（peer review report）對擴展研究視野的回饋功能（十一）普遍使用LaTex論文寫作排版軟體而非Word（十二）碩士生大多自學LaTex或其他應用軟體，如R統計軟體或MATLAB（十三）書目管理軟體的選擇上偏好使用與BibTeX格式相容的軟體，例如Papers（十四）碩博士生論文引用篇數不多，因此較無書目管理的概念與需求（十五）碩博士生對於論文引用應改寫至何種程度才能避免抄襲並不確定（十六）教授認為對於經由口耳相傳提供研究想法者應予肯定尊重並於研究中提及（十七）教授對於未來圖書館進行資料庋用（data curation）抱持樂觀審慎看法（十八）碩博士生在分析和閱讀文獻上常遭遇困難（十九）教授認為碩博士生很缺乏科學論文寫作方面訓練（二十）碩博士生投稿期刊的選擇主要仰賴教授指導（二十一）教授對投稿新興open access期刊，基於審稿制度尚未建立完善，抱持謹慎保留態度（二十二）研討會或專題討論為重要資訊管道。
經由訪談發現數學領域碩博士生與教授對圖書館學科服務可能的需求主要有（一）舉辦數學資料庫利用講習（二）協助LaTex數學編排軟體介紹（三）提供書目管理軟體Papers的應用介紹（四）加強學術影響力指數（impact factor）以及SCI引用次數的介紹（五）協助科技論文寫作指引（六）協助投稿指南的蒐集與推廣（七）提供人際互動的場所與活動。

As the domestic library subject service is still in its infancy, research is lacking on this aspect, especially in the field of specialized library subject services. This study utilized the SCONUL information literacy standard architecture to design interview outline, in order to better understand the information literacy practices for mathematical graduate students and professors, and to explore their needs for library subject services. This study used semi-structured, in-depth interviews to 18 graduate students and professors in the Department of Mathematics, National Taiwan University, analyzing their information literacy behavior and subject service needs. Information literacy effects various behavior of writing a thesis or research project, including how to determine the research topic, select information and search strategies, gather information, evaluate information, management information to the application of information.
The results show that in different levels of academic achievements, such as master students, doctoral students, and professors showed different literacy behaviors, as the SCONUL seven pillars of information literacy of UK higher education, showing from the novice, beginner, advanced, competent, skilled, to the experts, the various stages of information seeking behavior and library skills. Master students are the novice stage, PhD students belong advanced stage, while professors are expert stage.
The study found that mathematics graduate students and professors of information literacy behavior has several characteristics : 1) Master's thesis topic is mainly dependent on the guidance of advisor; 2) doctoral research topics may be extended from Master thesis; 3) Google is the main way to graduate students seeking information; 4) doctoral students further use Google Scholar, MathScinet or ArXiv as information search channels; 5) peers are important source of information for professors; 6) news subscription is not highly demand in the pure math field; 7) participate in the academic community via the Internet is not very high; 8) Research Gate is highly recommended of communication capabilities by professors; 9) doctoral students using reference index (such as citations, journal impact factor) are better than master students as the paper quality assessment methods; 10) peer review report is assured by professors for feedback function; 11) the LaTex typesetting software is more popular than Word software; 12) LaTex or other application software, such as R statistical software or MATLAB, were self-guided by graduate students; 13) bibliographic management software compatible with BibTex format is preferred, for example the Papers; 14) graduate students thesis cite less papers, therefore less demand for bibliographic management; 15) graduate students are not clear on how the reference articles should be rewritten to avoid plagiarism; 16) professors think the verbal communication of ideas should be respected and mentioned in research paper; 17) professors are optimistic for library data curation ; 18) graduate students often encounter difficulties in literature reading and analysis; 19) professors believe graduate students are lack of scientific training in thesis writing; 20) graduate students submit manuscript to journals rely on the guidance of professor; 21) professors hold cautious reservations to the emerging open access journals due to the peer review system has not been well established; 22) seminars and workshops are important source of information.
The demand for library subject services by mathematics graduate students and professors, found through interviews, are mainly: 1) holding workshops of the mathematical database; 2) introducing the LaTex mathematical typesetting software; 3 ) providing introduction to bibliographic management software, Papers; 4) strengthen the academic influence index (impact factor) and SCI citations introduction; 5) assisting guidelines to scientific paper writing; 6) assisting the information collection of paper submission; 7) provide interpersonal venue and activities.

一、 中文部分
王春明、張海惠、徐鴻、楊志萍（2013）。匹茲堡大學圖書館系統學科服務新進展--建立支持科研與教學的學科化服務體系。圖書情報工作，10，58-62。

王晶、鐘紫紅（2013）。全球出版倫理委員會流程圖對期刊編輯應對學術不端的啟示。中國科技期刊研究，1，11-15。

中華民國圖書館學會資訊素養委員會（2013）。上網日期：2013年12月20日。檢自：http://www.cila.org.tw/?p=2511

艾春艷、游越、劉素清（2011）。讀者參與的高校圖書館學科服務新模式探討。 大學圖書館學報，5，70-72。

行政院國家科學委員會數學研究推動中心（2005年）。學門與資源規劃報告：數學。上網日期：2013年12月20日。檢自： http://proj1.sinica.edu.tw /~mrpcwww/html/mathplan/95mathplan.pdf

李力（2013）。國外研究型圖書館學科服務的發展態勢及啟示--以康乃爾大學為例。圖書館學研究，14，82-85。

李春旺（2004）。國內學科館員研究綜述。圖書情報知識，2，26-28。

李桂貞（2013）。泛在知識環境下高校圖書館嵌入式學科服務模式探究。圖書館工作與研究，3，30-32。

肖瀟、呂俊生（2012）。圖書館嵌入式學科化科學數據服務研究。圖書館學研究，21，85-89。

初景利（2012）。我國圖書館學科服務的難點與突破。中華醫學圖書情報雜誌4，1-4。

初景利、張冬榮（2008）。第二代學科館員與學科化服務。圖書情報工作，52（2），6-10。

初景利、許平、鐘永恒、楊志萍、秦聿昌、宋亦兵...張小云（2011）。在變革的環境中尋求圖書館的創新變革--美國七大圖書情報機構考察調研報告。圖書情報工作，1，10-16。

林荷鵑（1992）。大學圖書館設置學科專家之研究。國立台灣大學圖書館學系，台北市。

邱子恒（2008）。台灣大學校院資訊素養相關課程之現況。中國圖書館學報，34，46-55。

查天佑、謝寶煖（2009）。大學教師對資訊素養融入課程之看法與態度。大學圖書館，13（1），85-106。

胡陳華（2013）。北美大學圖書館嵌入式館員的實踐及啟示。圖書館學研究，2，94-97。

高青（2009）。朝向用戶的高校圖書館學科化信息服務體系構建。圖書館管理與資源建設，29（5），80-84。

張如瑩、楊美華（2010）。我國大學校院資訊素養通識課程之規劃。圖書與資訊學刊，75，72-96。

張玲、初景利（2011）。嵌入學位論文撰寫過程的信息素質教育研究。圖書情報工作，13，16-19。

郭利紅（2013）。論高校圖書館學科館員制度的建設。呂梁學院學報，3，76-79。

郭晶、林琪（2008）。圖書館學科服務規劃及制訂方法。圖書館雜誌，27（10），32-34。

陳世娟、唐牧群（2011）。傳播學領域碩博士生研究歷程中之資訊尋求行為。圖書資訊學刊，9（2），91-122。

陳靖儀（1996）。專訪王振鵠教授--談資訊素養與圖書館使用者教育。社教雙月刊，73，22-23。

陳廉芳、許春漫（2010）。高校圖書館嵌入式創新服務模式探討。圖書館工作與研究，8，4-7。

黃昭妍（2013）。我國生醫領域碩博士生資訊素養初探--以分子生物學碩博士生論文題目發現歷程為例。國立臺灣師範大學。

傅寶真（1975）。學科專家在蛻變中之大學圖書館。國立中央圖書館館刊，8（2），1-8。

蔡妍芳（2011）。大學圖書館對學科服務的認知態度研究。國立臺灣師範大學圖書資訊學研究所，台北市。

董麗梅（2013）。大學圖書館嵌入式服務研究評述。圖書館學研究，14，2-5。

趙奕（2013）。中外高校圖書館學科館員工作比較研究。高校圖書館工作，2，71-75。

劉素清、艾春艷、肖瓏（2012）。學科服務的多維拓展與深化--北京大學圖書館學科服務聚焦與思考。大學圖書館學報，5。

二、英文部分
American Library Association, Association of College and Research Libraries, and Science and Technology Section’s Task Force on Information Literacy for Science and Technology.（2006）. Information Literacy Competency Standards for Science and Engineering/Technology. Retrieved December 20, 2013, from http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/infolitscitech

American Mathematical Society.（2010）. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Retrieved December 20, 2013, from http://www.ams.org/publications /math-reviews/math-reviews

Association of College and Research Libraries.（2000）. Information Literacry competency standards for higher education. Retrieved December 20, 2013 , from http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/informationliteracycompetency

Barker-Mathews, Sue, & Costello, Maggie.（2011）“If the library is the heart of the university, then information literacy is the brain：Promoting Information literacy week at Salford University“, SCONUL Focus, 52, 28-30. http://www.sconul.ac.uk /sites/default/files/documents/10_2.pdf

Bauerlein, Mark, & Walesh, Stuart G.（2009）. The Dumbest Generation—How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes Our Future: . Jeremy P. Tarcher/Penguin, New York, 2008; 978-1-58542-639-3. Leadership and Management in Engineering, 9（2）, 100-100.

Beck, S. E., & Turner, N. B.（2001）. On the fly BI: reaching and teaching from the reference desk. Reference Librarian（72）, 83-96.

Bewick, Laura, & Corrall, Sheila. （2010）. Developing librarians as teachers: a study of their pedagogical knowledge. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 42（2）, 97-110.

Brewerton, Antony.（2012）. Re-Skilling for Research: Investigating the Needs of Researchers and How Library Staff Can Best Support Them. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 18（1）, 96-110. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080 /13614533.2012.665718

British Library & JISC（2010）. Researchers of Tomorrow: A three year （BL/JISC） study tracking the research behaviour of 'Generation Y' doctoral students. http://efc.idnet.net/projects/researchers_of_tomorrow.jsp

Bundy, Alan. （2004）. Australian and New Zealand information literacy framework. Principles, standards and practice, 2. Retrieved December 20, 2013, from http://www.library.unisa.edu.au/learn/infolit/Infolit-2nd-edition.pdf

Bury, Sophie. （2011）. Faculty Attitudes, Perceptions and Experiences of Information Literacy: A Study across Multiple Disciplines at York University, Canada. Journal of Information Literacy, 5（1）, 45-64.

Carpan, C. （2011）. The Importance of Library Liaison Programs. College & Undergraduate Libraries, 18（1）, 104–110. doi:10.1080/10691316.2011.550536

Catts, Ralph, & Lau, Jesus. （2008）. Towards information literacy indicators.

Corbin, Jennifer L. （2008）. Resumption and expansion of outreach activities at Tulane University. Louisiana Libraries, 70（4）, 59-61.

Covert-Vail, Lucinda, & Collard, Scott. （2012）. New Roles for New Times: Research Library Services for Graduate Students. Retrieved December 20, 2013, from http://www.arl.org/focus-areas/space-facilities-services/2538-nrnt-graduate-roles

Derntl, Michael. （2003）. Basics of research paper writing and publishing. Faculty of Computer Sciencie, University of Vienna, Austria.

Donham, Jean, & Green, Corey Williams. （2004）. Developing a culture of collaboration: librarian as consultant. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 30（4）, 314-321.

Fink, Arlene （2005）. Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From the Internet to Paper. SAGE.

Fitzgerald, Kathryn, Anderson, Laura, & Kula, Helen. （2010）. Embedded librarians promote an innovation agenda: University of Toronto libraries and the MaRS discovery district. Journal of Business & Finance Librarianship, 15（3-4）, 188-196.

Flaspohler, Molly R. （2003）. Information literacy program assessment: one small college takes the big plunge. Reference Services Review, 31（2）, 129-140. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00907320310476602

Freiburger, Gary, & Kramer, Sandra. （2009）. Embedded librarians: One library's model for decentralized service. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA, 97（2）, 139.

Gaston, R. （2001）. The changing role of the subject librarian, with a particular focus on UK developments, examined through a review of the literature. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 7, 19-36.

George, Carole, Bright, Alice, Hurlbert, Terry, Linke, Erika C., St Clair, Gloriana, & Stein, Joan. （2006）. Scholarly use of information: graduate students' information seeking behaviour. Information Research, 11（4）.

Haglund, Lotta, & Olsson, Per. （2008）. The Impact on University Libraries of Changes in Information Behavior Among Academic Researchers: A Multiple Case Study. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 34（1）, 52-59. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2007.11.010

Hardesty, Larry. （1995）. Faculty culture and bibliographic instruction: An exploratory analysis. Library Trends, 44（2）, 339-367.

Hardy, Georgina, & Corrall, Sheila. （2007）. Revisiting the subject librarian A study of English, Law and Chemistry. Journal of librarianship and Information Science, 39（2）, 79-91.

Hay, F. J. （1990） The subject specialist in the academic library: a review article. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 16 （1）,11-17.

Hedreen, Rebecca. Frequently Questioned Answers : Answers questioned about education, distance learning, and library services. Retrieved December 20, 2013, from http://frequanq.blogspot.tw/2005_04_01_archive.html.

Hemminger, Bradley M, Lu, Dihui, Vaughan, KTL, & Adams, Stephanie J. （2007）. Information seeking behavior of academic scientists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58（14）, 2205-2225.

Holbrook, A. （1972）. The subject specialist in polytechnic libraries. New Library World, 73（15）, 393-396.

Hubbs Motin, Susan, & Salela, Pamela M. （2006）. A liaison model for integrating the library, IT, Web, and marketing teams. Technical Services Quarterly, 24（1）, 1-15. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J124v24n01_01

Humphreys, Kenneth. （1967）. The subject specialist in national and university libraries. Libri, 17（1）, 29-41.

Jackson, Pamela Alexondra. （2007）. Integrating information literacy into blackboard: building campus partnerships for successful student learning. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 33（4）, 454-461.

Jankowska, Maria Anna, Hertel, Karen, & Young, Nancy J. （2006）. Improving library service quality to graduate students: LibQual+（super tm） survey results in a practical setting. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 6（1）, 59-76.

Kearley, Jamie P, & Phillips, Lori. （2005）. Embedding library reference services in online courses. Internet reference services quarterly, 9（1-2）, 65-76.

Kotter, W. R. （1999）. Bridging the great divide: improving relations between librarians and classroom faculty. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 25（4）, 294-303.

Kuruppu, Pali U. （2006）. Recruitment of science and technology librarians - a review. Science & Technology Libraries, 27（1/2）, 11-39. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300 /J122v27n01_03

Leckie, G. J., & Fullerton, A. （1999）. Information literacy in science and engineering undergraduate education. College and Research Libraries, 60（1）, 9-29.
MacLellan, Fiona.（2012）. Retrieved December 20, 2013, from http://www.slideshare.net/ fmmacle/sconul-7-pillars

Manus, Sara J Beutter. （2009）. Librarian in the classroom: An embedded approach to music information literacy for first-year undergraduates. Notes, 66（2）, 249-261.

Martin, John V. （1996）. Subject specialization in British university libraries: a second survey. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 28（3）, 159-169.

Maynard, J. Edmund. （1990）. A case study of faculty attitudes toward library instruction: the Citadel experience. Reference Services Review, 18（2）.

Mount, Ellis. （1985）. Data manipulation in sci-tech libraries. Science and Technology Libraries, 5（4）.

Nilsen, Per, Nordstrom, Gunilla, & Ellstrom, Per-Erik. （2012）. Integrating research-based and practice-based knowledge through workplace reflection. Journal of Workplace Learning, 24（6）, 403-415. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108 /13665621211250306

Noh, Dong-Jo, Kim, Sung-Jin, Ahn, In-Ja, & Noh, Younghee. （2011）. Progress toward Subject Specialization in Korean Academic Libraries. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 37（2）, 177-182. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2011.02.007

Ortega, Lina, & Brown, Cecelia M. （2005）. The face of 21st century physical science Librarianship. Science & Technology Libraries, 26（2）, 71-90.

Owens, Rachel. （2008）. Where the students are: The embedded librarian project at Daytona Beach College. Florida Libraries, 51（1）, 8-10.

Pamela Kobelski and Mary Reichel, "Conceptual Frameworks for Bibliographic Instruction," Journal of Academic Librarianship 7 （May 1981）: 73-77.

Prusin, Todd. （2012）. Laboratory Office Hours as Outreach in the Health Sciences: Better Research Skills for Better Careers. Public Services Quarterly, 8（1）, 1-11. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15228959.2011.562110

Ramsay, Karen M, & Kinnie, Jim. （2006）. THE EMBEDDED LIBRARIAN-At the University of Rhode Island, librarians are getting out there via technology to help students where they learn. Library Journal, 131（6）, 34-35.

Reitz, Joan M. （2004）. Online dictionary for library and information science. Retrieved December 20, 2013, from http://www.abc-clio.com/ODLIS /odlis_h.aspx

Rempel, Hannah Gascho, & Davidson, Jeanne. （2008）. Providing information literacy instruction to graduate students through literature review workshops. Issues in Science & Technology Librarianship（53）

Rodwell, John, & Fairbairn, Linden. （2008）. Dangerous liaisons?: defining the faculty liaison librarian service model, its effectiveness and sustainability. Library Management, 29（1-2）, 116-124. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108 /01435120810844694

Rudin, Phyllis. （2008）. No fixed address: the evolution of outreach library services on University campuses. Reference Librarian, 49（1）, 55-75.

Sadler, Elizabeth, & Given, Lisa M. （2007）. Affordance theory: a framework for graduate students' information behavior. Journal of Documentation, 63（1）, 115-141. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00220410710723911

Saunders, Collette. （2008）. Proven strategies for building an information literacy program. Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, 3（1）.

Scherrer, Carol S. （2004）. Reference librarians perceptions of the issues they face as academic health information professionals. Journal of the Medical Library Association （ JMLA ）, 92（2）, 226-232.

Shumaker, David. （2009）. Who let the librarians out? Embedded librarianship and the library manager. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 48（3）, 239-257.

Shumaker, David, & Tyler, Laura Ann. （2007）. Embedded library services: An initial inquiry into practices for their development, management, and delivery. Paper presented at the Special Libraries Association Annual Conference.

Society of College, National and University and University Libraries. （2011）. The SCONUL seven pillars of information literacy: core model. Retrieved December 20, 2013, from http://www.sconul.ac.uk/sites/default/files/documents /researchlens.pdf

Society of Colleg, Natioinal and University Libraries.（2011）.The SCONUL Seven Pillars of Information Literacy：a research lens for higher education. Retrieved Dec.16, 2013,from http://www.sconul.ac.uk/sites/default/files /documents/researchlens.pdf documents/coremodel.pdf

Tennart, M. R., Butson, L. C., Rezeau, M. E., Tucker, P. J., Boyle, M. E., & Clayton, G. （2001）. Customizing for clients: Developing a library liaison program from need to plan. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, 89（1）, 8-20.

Tomaszewski, Robert, & MacDonald, Karen I. （2009）. Identifying Subject-Specific Conferences as Professional Development Opportunities for the Academic Librarian. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 35（6）, 583-590.

Winston, M. D. （2001）. Academic science and engineering librarians: a research study of demographics, educational backgrounds, and professional activities. Science and Technology Libraries, 19（2）, 3-24.

Woodhead, PA, & Martin, JV. （1982）. Subject specialization in British university libraries: a survey. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 14（2）, 93-108.