« So, what did the FBI do with the Patriot Act? | Main | Discord Over Dewey »
July 18, 2007
How did professionalism get pitted against tradition?
A post from several days ago on Library Garden, written by Tyler Rousseau, "Librarian 2.0- The new professional or the responsible one?," hit home with me. I encourage you to go read the whole thing, but here is a snippet to whet your appetite. He is discussing how we got to a point where librarianship isn't about serving the users anymore, how we've lost sight of that goal.
But how did we get to this stage? Why do we have professional librarians who refuse to keep up with the professional and technological requirements? How did we reach a point where the patrons’ needs were less important than the traditional way of doing things?
All along, the job of a reference librarian has been to find the information patrons need. We are in the business of connecting people to the information they require... so why care about the format that information is found in?
All I can say is "right on." And I think that librarians being stretched too thin staff-wise has contributed to the unwillingness to take on anything new. It's just too much...not because people aren't smart enough to get it, or even afraid. But they're overloaded and don't want to make that situation worse. Now, we could argue that some of the new technologies actually save time (and they do), but the learning process takes time that these staff feel they do not have to give. Just think about how many times someone has said, "Oh, I'd love to go to that training but it would be too hard to get someone to cover the desk. I'll skip it this time." It makes me cry.
July 18, 2007 | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c511253ef00e55051fdb08833
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference How did professionalism get pitted against tradition?:
» The Library 2.0 professional, and all the rest from Subject/Object
I think the real danger is to see technology as the complete solution. Patrons not coming to the library: must be because there is no Flickr group. Reference service stats down: must be because IM reference is so horrible, or non existent. Teenagers... [Read More]
Tracked on Jul 18, 2007 3:38:56 PM
Comments
Re: "People are people, and very few people reject all technology out of hand."
Meg, you're absolutely right that many technophile librarians tend to be overly critical, quick to label, and are downright rude when it comes to their less-techie colleagues, but being one of those brash young hooligans, I have to say that it's very frustrating. I used to work with an older librarian who used to be a college Spanish professor: incredibly intelligent, constantly learning new languages (was tackling Urdu and Japanese at one point), was fascinating to talk to, knew his areas of responsibility like the back of his hand, was a world traveller, loved astonomy, and was always friendly and cheerful to me, his coworkers and his customers. But he refused to learn how to change the printer toner cartridges. He knew his Dewey areas inside and out because he had to - he didn't want to use the online catalog. This was not a man who could not learn it, nor a man who was making a professional point. He just didn't want to do it. I had no problem helping him in these areas because, god knows, he helped me more than once. I was happy to.
But it was still frustrating. And especially so with ALL the others who held back to some degree or another. He is an exceptional case but although "very few people reject all technology out of hand", entirely too many librarians are incredibly hesitant to dive into anything technology related, whether it's web pages, PCs, printers or even just the photocopiers.
I think the reason that most of us on the "techie side" feel so frustrated with those on the "print side" is that we feel as though this is yet another example of fearing change and wanting to keep doing things "the traditional way", the way we've always done it. You may say that it's just as bad to want change for change's sake, but I disagree. All things being equal, I think it's probably better to change than not to change. At least with the "change philosophy" you always have the option of going back to the old way. If you never try the new way, you'll never figure out which one's better.
But you're absolutely right. We need to stop insulting, assuming, bickering, and blaming. We need to realize that we're not on different sides. We're on the same side. Against the patrons, right? LOL
Posted by: Matthew Thomas | August 3, 2007
But I also think it goes the other way. I've seen many people push for digital formats simply because they are digital and pooh-pooh paper formats as being old-fashioned. That's just as destructive, and that's why I want to say that format IS important because how a patron holds and uses and searches and sees the information is very important.
I'd also argue that coming to librarianism with an us vs. them mentality is never good, and I do seem to see that with a lot of talk of 2.0 vs. traditionalists. People are people, and very few people reject all technology out of hand. So when I read posts lamenting the huge numbers of technodinosaurs and using rather unflattering terms with a sense of superiority, I find that I see a writer who exaggerates and who can't see both sides of the argument. The world is grey. Librarians are complex people. Reducing this to attacks on coworkers spurred by professional goals is mindboggling and silly to me. There are just as many unbending technonut librarians as there are reactionary technophobe librarians--but the truth is that most of us live soemwhere in between, and we'd get a hell of a lot farther if we stopped typing up diatribes and started sucking up and trying to learn from each other.
Posted by: Meg | July24, 2007
I agree with you Meg. But I think you are misreading what Tyler wrote. We shouldn't care what format the material is in , in terms of denigrating or pooh-poohing all digital material--which is something I can say I've seen many librarians do first-hand. Digital data is data--just like printed data. You need to evaluate the source, check your facts in other sources too, and be thoughtful about what you internalize as fact. To dismiss digital material altogether is not only ridiculous in today's environment, but highly unprofessional for a librarian. I believe that is what Tyler was getting at, and it's something I firmly believe in as well.
Posted by: Sarah Houghton-Jan (LiB) | July21, 2007
We are in the business of connecting people to the information they require... so why care about the format that information is found in?
I agree with the heart of what is said, but not this specific comment.
We care about format because our patrons care what format the information is in. Let's use the awful Medicare changeover as an example. The government kept directing people to the Medicare Website, which most of the senior citizens we had in could not understand, navigate, or SEE without help. The options could be printed out as pdfs--with tiny type. Our Computer Center staff spent time printing out magnified copies and then assembling them with tape into huge sheets that senior citizens could sit at a table and read.
Format matters. Certain disabled patrons prefer paperbacks because they are lighter and easier to hold. Some with sight problems prefer cassette tapes to CDs because they are easier to handle and tell apart.
So really, we should be exploring new technologies for people for whom it may be an improvement over the old, and so we can speak knowledgeably about what needs to be changed in new technologies to help others want to use it.
Posted by: Meg | July21, 2007
Libraridan, I'm going to disagree with one thing you said: "If all staff are not inclined, they should not be pressed. There is still enough of the "traditional" that needs doing."
Let me set up a scenario for you. A user comes into the library (or phones in, or IMs) and requests help with the library's eBooks collections. If that person happens to get a "traditional" librarian who chooses not to learn about new resources, services, and ways of getting information. That librarian will be unable to help that patron at his/her point of need. Perhaps that person will be told that we'll get back to them later, and then the librarian asks the "Techie" librarian on staff (at that location or another) for help. That places an undue burden on the Techie, as all of the librarians who choose not to keep their skills up are now relying on that person to do part of their jobs for them. That is not only not fair, it is not professional.
Conversely, if some brand spanking new librarian chose not to be aware of the print resources at hand, or readers advisory skills, and a patron needed that kind of help, I would be just as disappointed if the patron needed to be punted off to another librarian for help.
For me, it's not a choice of traditional skills or new technology skills. It's both. We work in a profession that demands that we have both. That's the way it is. If that is too much for people, and they don't want to keep their skills up, then they have two choices: hope to goodness that they have a supervisor or system that won't discipline them for lacking fundamental skills OR leave the profession for another one.
I truly feel that people should not be in our profession if they have chosen not to stay up with how to use search engines effectively, online resources for our users (both paid and unpaid), and social software opportunities for information harvesting. It is doing our users a disservice to only demand of yourself partial skills. And if the problem lies not with you, but with your system--if the library hasn't encouraged you, trained you, given you time to learn--then that library system needs a major overhaul and the governing bodies need to be made aware of this need.
This profession is no longer one where things are stable and unchanging. And I understand that for many people who came into the profession at that point, they may be saying "Hey, I didn't sign on for this...I'm not doing it." But the reality is that the profession _has_ changed. That is not going to go away, or be undone. The question is, I suppose, do you want to excel at your job and truly uphold the rights and principles that librarians have always upheld? If so, learning these technologies, these ways that our users want to find information, is part and parcel of that now. Our principles haven't changed, but the way we uphold them has.
In the end, it is our users who lose when we don't maintain our professional skills. And I never want to be the one standing in front of the public telling them that we're sorry, we're not able to keep those promises we made due to a lack of staff training or a lack of desire to keep up.
Posted by: Sarah Houghton-Jan (LiB) | July20, 2007
I think there are many influences at work here, making this a certifiable conundrum, as your title indicates. As Eliza (who was the librarian at my branch before my tenure) points out - and you affirm - much of it is indeed a time crunch. When that happens, old patterns very naturally hold sway. There simply are not enough resources to allow for, and then to stabilize, a change, or expansion, of the service model. However, it is my experience that even in larger, more well-funded systems there is also what I would argue is a "natural" conservancy. I say natural because it is part of the nature of the beast, especially among older staff, to be inclined to preserve, whether it is materials or procedures. The net result is the same lack of resources, but in this case it arises from an "artificial" internal resistance rather than external lack. While I remain skeptical of the notion of L2.0 as the grand panacea for libraries, it is distressing to see so little effort put into really implementing, or even experimenting with, these technologies.
I think the solution for larger systems is to radically re-adjust staffing structure and expectations. My system has an Electronic Services Librarian, but it is neither a job for just one person nor an orientation that should be so compartmentalized. If all staff are not inclined, they should not be pressed. There is still enough of the "traditional" that needs doing. However, those who are so inclined should be given the resources they need to make it work.
Posted by: Libraridan | July19, 2007
Eliza, thank you for replying. While I have read a few librarians posting in the line you’re talking about—harping on everyone to get on board with 2.0—that is not my position by any means and my writing will hold that up. Nor is it the position of most people who are promoting new technologies in our libraries. The problem in your library system is one that is seen in many public libraries, not just rural ones—you are underfunded, understaffed, and overworked—to an absurd degree. That does mean that some things get cut, ignored, and undone. I have been in your position myself—and what I did was advocate to the stakeholders (the public) and to the governing agency that controlled our funding. I showed them all the things that were being left undone. Today, there are hundreds of things you could list from Library 2.0 technologies that could be done differently if only there was funding. Sometimes governing agencies need a slap in the face to wake them up to what they’re missing. If they still think that libraries are just about stamping books and using computers to write resumes, they’re mistaken, but they don’t know they are because no one has told them. I would recommend, however, that you not discount Library 2.0 altogether. Not all of Library 2.0 is about technology. Most is, but a lot isn’t. There are so many things that can be done that don’t take any extra time or money. Take a look at your policies—do they match up to the image you really want to present to your community? Do they still work for you? Look at your signage—is it full of “NO”s? If so, reword them to make them friendlier. Sign up for a free Flickr account and put the digital photos you take of your library’s events there, instead of just on your hard drive (it takes all of 60 seconds). Sign up for 5 RSS feeds from library blogs so you can keep up on what’s happening in the LIS profession. With 5 minutes a day, you can stay up to date. The list goes on and on. These are the things I recommend for people with no time and money, and there are a lot of people in that situation, unfortunately. It’s a crime against our culture, in my opinion.
Posted by: Sarah Houghton-Jan (LiB) | July19, 2007
I am the only Reference Librarian in Mendocino County, Lake County has no Reference Librarians. Sometimes I feel guilty about not being able to do more than hand out tickets and mediate squabbles over internet use while answering reference questions in person and over the phone and of course while climbing under tables to re-connect computers, bring the system back up etc etc and sometimes I think that more Librarians should visit rural counties and stop harping that many of us do not have time for anything 2.0.
I have dropped out of two of InfoPeople's online classes because when there are not enough of us the needs of the circulation desk and all the holds coming and going take precedence. I have worked in a wealthy county where there were always 2 Reference Librarians on the desk and on two hour shifts. Try all day, one librarian. I have changed webpages, started blogs, email reference, radio spot telling all what we have to offer. Our county interface does not allow for My Space etc even if I had time. I think our patrons get good Reference service, but those of you from well funded systems need to cut some slack. There must be hundreds librarians like me, in small rural systems. We know most of our patrons by name, call back and make sure they got what they really wanted, e-mail to those who have it, mail to those who don't. Go easy and try not to preach too loudly.
Eliza
Posted by: Eliza Wingate | July18, 2007
