(Not entirely sure who to attribute this article to. Web source here)
The entirety of this reading was something like 108 pages, so I did tend to skip around a good deal. I may actually end up breaking this into sections, as there was a great deal to take in and a great deal that caught my attention.
What hooked me first about this campaign was the use of the word “geek” as a verb used to simplify the object of this campaign. To be a geek about something is to compulsively love or obsess, pretty exclusively, over one thing. It’s the love of an object or a craft or a hobby or an anything that, when effort is put forth into the object of geekiness, one can see great returns—like investing in stocks. So to “geek” a library or to be a geek for a library is to put a great deal of dedication and love into the organization. It would seem, however, that there is not much return or growth in the area of libraries for the geek. They don’t seem to receive the attention they deserve, being always in the public eye. But libraries seem to be getting something like the billboard effect, where a public billboard may always be in sight, but could lose meaning or relevancy to the eye the more one sees the same billboard. They’re matter-of-fact and they can be ignored, consciously or unconsciously.
“Geek the Library” wishes to put libraries back into public vision in a big way, and not in the way a billboard works. The report spells out exactly what could bring about public awareness for libararies:
“A successful community awareness campaign has to do three things:
1. Wake up potential supporters to the fact that the library is relevant in the 21st century
2. Put libraries squarely in the mix of important community infrastructure, alongside fire, police and schools
3. Activate conversations about the vital and transformative role that the library plays, and its value to the community.”
Point number 2 seemed especially significant to me. The report mentions often the necessity of opening up a dialogue about libraries with those on a level kind of “outside.” That is to say, it would do no good to raise awareness about libraries within the library infrastructure itself—that’s just preaching to the choir. Instead the initiative should be taken to all facets of the community, and made relatable to those who don’t necessarily “geek” libraries.
It’s the way in which the campaign seeks (sought?) to make libraries relatable to everybody—to find out what people “geek” about—and show how libraries support all kinds of geeking.
All of this geeking was for the goal of generating funding for public libraries. A point is reached in the report where I admit I was reading more and taking notes less, so I’m not certain how to summarize or explain how the campaign was first launched. It seems that what contributes most to campaign success starts first with some kind of voting, and the categorization of voters who would be less or more helpful toward success of the campaign. On page 13 of the report, there is a run-down of different ways in which people support libraries and the perception of this support, and some actually surprised me. If I’m interpreting this correctly, it seems most people would rather support their library financially from a distance—that is, without actually using the library. Perceptions of librarians themselves also seem to factor into financial support of a library. However, of the voters mentioned earlier, many do or would support their library.
What I love about this campaign is that it is not a “poster campaign”—these librarians want people talking about what is important to them and how the library can support that.
One thing I’ll admit to not quite understanding—maybe because my own perceptions of public libraries are rather skewed—is the reason why public libraries required additional funding (something really noticeable in 2005, the report says). According to the report, funding was required because of the demands being placed on libraries. My own perception has always told me that libraries are kind of a dying thing, and library awareness was something necessary to resuscitate them. However, the report talks about heavier demands on resources, staff, and so on, which makes me think that people must be utilizing their libraries fairly well for the demand being created. There’s something in the middle here I believe I’m missing.
I’ll stop here for now and pick up on this article later, as it is kind of a demanding read. I’ll post a part two to this later on.
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Saturday, February 12, 2011
Entry 6 - The Ivory Tower as Preparation for the Trenches: The Relationship Between Library Education and Library Practice
Article by Robert P. Holley.
Original source: College & Research Libraries News 64 no3 172-5 Mr 2003 (web source here)
"Why can't library education and library practice get along better?" is the opening question of Robert Holley's article, a question that also opens the floor to addressing several issues within the library community. Mr. Holley's article I found positively reassuring after reading Mz. Bates' article. Though Mr. Holley does propose change in several areas of the field, he embraces also several "old world" practices (my terminology).
(If I could take an aside here: I find it kind of disturbing that both articles, regardless of stance, use the term "the L word" to refer to Libraries, or when talking of removal of the word from teaching establishments. Is this such an issue? I really had no idea.)
Mr. Holley, in his article, seeks to offer a "dual perspective"--and he really does deliver. He divides his article into three parts, concerning "program name, the curriculum, theory versus practice, and accreditation." The first matter on the agenda actually addresses my earlier aside about the removal of "L word" from program names. While Mr. Holley addresses the fact that the removal of the word "library" from program names and so forth could alienate some, as words like "information" are incredibly open to interpretation, he also can see the need for such a change; he reports that, in creating "information schools," closures of schools have decreased dramatically. Better to have the "L word" removed than the schools, I suppose.
The article's next point concerns the shaping of a curriculum for schools, and seems almost a direct attack on Mz. Bates' article on how programs should be programmed to make students more marketable. Bates a remarks that there is a rigidity already in library programs that is almost equivalent to what a lawyer might have to go through in his or her education. There is, of course, the recognition that the programs in a library school of thirty years ago would, of course, fail to meet the new technological and information standards of today, so of course programs would have to meet those standards.
The next section, "Theory versus Practice," flows right from the last section. Where Bates' article seemed to argue that graduates of LIS programs should have the kind of hands-on experience that would prepare to them to attack a first job readily, which seems almost an unrealistic expectation for me. Holley seems to argue that the first job out of a library program is really the kind of hands-on experience that librarians will get to prepare them for a career in the field, as students will prepare for a first job through theory, research methods courses, and so on. This I feel more inclined to agree with; it seems a more natural process.
The next section in Holley's article talks about the importance of accreditation in LIS programs--but I admit to not understanding, really, a word of it. What I believe I understand of accreditation is that a committee determines criteria shaped for a school's curriculum, this criteria determines what a student must have under their belt to be properly graduated--but that's about it. This is something I think I should definitely know more about.
Holley concludes his article talking about the fact that practice and education have more in common than they think they do, and wishes they (a kind of big "they," I don't suppose to know exactly who "they" are) would realize the congruence between the two. I agree with a great deal in this article--and not only because I'm most comfortable, at all times, in a more moderate position, but because these two aspects, education and practice, do make up one large whole, which seems kind of obvious.
Original source: College & Research Libraries News 64 no3 172-5 Mr 2003 (web source here)
"Why can't library education and library practice get along better?" is the opening question of Robert Holley's article, a question that also opens the floor to addressing several issues within the library community. Mr. Holley's article I found positively reassuring after reading Mz. Bates' article. Though Mr. Holley does propose change in several areas of the field, he embraces also several "old world" practices (my terminology).
(If I could take an aside here: I find it kind of disturbing that both articles, regardless of stance, use the term "the L word" to refer to Libraries, or when talking of removal of the word from teaching establishments. Is this such an issue? I really had no idea.)
Mr. Holley, in his article, seeks to offer a "dual perspective"--and he really does deliver. He divides his article into three parts, concerning "program name, the curriculum, theory versus practice, and accreditation." The first matter on the agenda actually addresses my earlier aside about the removal of "L word" from program names. While Mr. Holley addresses the fact that the removal of the word "library" from program names and so forth could alienate some, as words like "information" are incredibly open to interpretation, he also can see the need for such a change; he reports that, in creating "information schools," closures of schools have decreased dramatically. Better to have the "L word" removed than the schools, I suppose.
The article's next point concerns the shaping of a curriculum for schools, and seems almost a direct attack on Mz. Bates' article on how programs should be programmed to make students more marketable. Bates a remarks that there is a rigidity already in library programs that is almost equivalent to what a lawyer might have to go through in his or her education. There is, of course, the recognition that the programs in a library school of thirty years ago would, of course, fail to meet the new technological and information standards of today, so of course programs would have to meet those standards.
The next section, "Theory versus Practice," flows right from the last section. Where Bates' article seemed to argue that graduates of LIS programs should have the kind of hands-on experience that would prepare to them to attack a first job readily, which seems almost an unrealistic expectation for me. Holley seems to argue that the first job out of a library program is really the kind of hands-on experience that librarians will get to prepare them for a career in the field, as students will prepare for a first job through theory, research methods courses, and so on. This I feel more inclined to agree with; it seems a more natural process.
The next section in Holley's article talks about the importance of accreditation in LIS programs--but I admit to not understanding, really, a word of it. What I believe I understand of accreditation is that a committee determines criteria shaped for a school's curriculum, this criteria determines what a student must have under their belt to be properly graduated--but that's about it. This is something I think I should definitely know more about.
Holley concludes his article talking about the fact that practice and education have more in common than they think they do, and wishes they (a kind of big "they," I don't suppose to know exactly who "they" are) would realize the congruence between the two. I agree with a great deal in this article--and not only because I'm most comfortable, at all times, in a more moderate position, but because these two aspects, education and practice, do make up one large whole, which seems kind of obvious.
Entry 5 - Is an M.L.S. Still Relevant?
Article by Mary Ellen Bates (Bates Information Services)
Originally published in Online 34 no2 Mr/Ap 2010 p. 64 (websource here)
My knowledge of Library Education is rudimentary at best; what I know comes from the articles I've read and the blogs I've perused, and still I have not really obtained a good knowledge of how a modern (modern being within, say, the last five years) MLS or LIS program or however they'd like to title it these days actually functions and what it produces. I have discussed library education with those I've interviewed and those librarians I've just happened to meet, and the answer I seem to get most of the time, when I ask about education, is something along the lines of "Well, things have really changed since I was there (some number of years) ago."
And this is true, things have changed--and according to the author of this article, Mary Ellen Bates, things are still changing and need to change even further still.
As far as I can gather from the article (which, admittedly, is not a lot), Mz. Bates looks quite a great deal from the view of the potential employer of the person of the MLS or LIS or information- or library-related schools. It's something I suppose I had never considered, Librarianship as a competitive venture. That a degree in such programs could be used to look for jobs in fields outside libraries is something I had not thought of.
I suppose what Mz. Bates is looking at in her article is not to introduce the fact that this is a competitive field, for certainly any field of employment is. What she seems to be looking at is what is being "produced" through LIS programs, and whether these programs are producing people with skills that are "marketable," to libraries and otherwise.
As far as I can tell (and I hope I'm seeing this correctly), the author's beef is not with the "product" itself, really, but with the production process. What are LIS programs doing to market their graduates? Are theory and lessons in cataloging and so on as important a learning tool as hands-on experience? Mz. Bates brings up the fact that those looking to practice law, medicine and so forth are all required to have some kind of hands-on experience in their education. So is the lack of practical experience where LIS programs fail in producing marketable employees? I can't say I know a great deal about the job market for librarians or those graduated from LIS programs looking to work outside the library field, so I'm not certain exactly sure how Mz. Bates' argument for change in LIS programs stands. Is the job market a difficult operation for LIS graduates? Or is Mz. Bates simply precipitating a coming difficulty for LIS graduates?
Either way, should I be concerned right now?
Originally published in Online 34 no2 Mr/Ap 2010 p. 64 (websource here)
My knowledge of Library Education is rudimentary at best; what I know comes from the articles I've read and the blogs I've perused, and still I have not really obtained a good knowledge of how a modern (modern being within, say, the last five years) MLS or LIS program or however they'd like to title it these days actually functions and what it produces. I have discussed library education with those I've interviewed and those librarians I've just happened to meet, and the answer I seem to get most of the time, when I ask about education, is something along the lines of "Well, things have really changed since I was there (some number of years) ago."
And this is true, things have changed--and according to the author of this article, Mary Ellen Bates, things are still changing and need to change even further still.
As far as I can gather from the article (which, admittedly, is not a lot), Mz. Bates looks quite a great deal from the view of the potential employer of the person of the MLS or LIS or information- or library-related schools. It's something I suppose I had never considered, Librarianship as a competitive venture. That a degree in such programs could be used to look for jobs in fields outside libraries is something I had not thought of.
I suppose what Mz. Bates is looking at in her article is not to introduce the fact that this is a competitive field, for certainly any field of employment is. What she seems to be looking at is what is being "produced" through LIS programs, and whether these programs are producing people with skills that are "marketable," to libraries and otherwise.
As far as I can tell (and I hope I'm seeing this correctly), the author's beef is not with the "product" itself, really, but with the production process. What are LIS programs doing to market their graduates? Are theory and lessons in cataloging and so on as important a learning tool as hands-on experience? Mz. Bates brings up the fact that those looking to practice law, medicine and so forth are all required to have some kind of hands-on experience in their education. So is the lack of practical experience where LIS programs fail in producing marketable employees? I can't say I know a great deal about the job market for librarians or those graduated from LIS programs looking to work outside the library field, so I'm not certain exactly sure how Mz. Bates' argument for change in LIS programs stands. Is the job market a difficult operation for LIS graduates? Or is Mz. Bates simply precipitating a coming difficulty for LIS graduates?
Either way, should I be concerned right now?
Sunday, February 6, 2011
Entry 4 - Reconnecting with Reading
By Robert Rua, Communications Coordinator for Cuyahoga County (Ohio) Public Library; article pulled from website Public Libraries Online
Fairly recently, in 2008, a library system in Ohio—the Cuyahoga County Public Library system (CCPL) began a rather astonishing initiative to re-boot, one could say, and bring attention to what the members of the CCPL system believe to be the “core values” of public library services: “books and reading.” This article is a story of success—or at least the beginnings of a successful campaign—to get the patrons of the CCPL system, as the population of the County itself drops, to revitalize an interest in reading among its patrons.
The initiative started by CCPL, focusing on the “core values,” with a focus on “organization efforts toward finding ways to improve customer convenience, increase accessibility, and, ultimately, connect customers with books” was titled Reconnect with Reading. To help efforts, in 2008, a Cleveland research team was led to conduct phone surveys of adult reading levels in Cuyahoga County, the results of which were to be compared against from the 2007 study to Read or Not to Read, conducted by the National Endowment of the Arts (NEA), which examined adult reading levels on a national scale. (A small run-through of the NEA study can be found here.
I feel I ought to step back some at this point to avoid simply summarizing and quoting the entire article, but to talk simply about what I found most interesting in this project—an enormous endeavor on the part of the library staff of the CCPL system—and also try to draw some conclusions from their success story.
What I found most astounding about this project to inspire reading was what as titled “Phase Two” of the project: an enormous ad campaign, driven by celebrities, local and otherwise, as well as the use of internet avenues such as Google Advertising, billboard advertising, airport ads, radio ads—all utilized in order to keep in the public eye the importance and the appealing nature of the “core values” of public library services. And although “books and reading” are the primary values in the mission, one of the Library world’s Superstars was brought in—Nancy Pearl (website here)—to help reinforce the importance of the modern library in contributing to modern literacy, apparently dropping in on library staff of the CCPL system monthly to conduct various workshops for subject specialists, helping to increase enthusiasm among library employees for the initiative. Some “helpful tips” given by Nancy and shared within the article I must also share here, as they feel incredibly relevant to myself, being interested in the works of the reference librarian:
• Always remember that RA (Reference Assistance?) isn’t about the books you think people ought to read. It’s about engaging people and talking with them about the books they enjoy—and really listening to what they have
to say.
• Ask, what was the last great book you read? What did you like about it? The way your customer talks about it will tell you how they found the doorway to that book. Then suggest a book with the same doorway.
• Look for openings to get a conversation going. For example, display a book at the checkout desk. People will take a look. This is your opening to start a conversation.
• When you’re giving RA, get out from behind your desk and into the stacks so you can give the person your undivided attention. Don’t let your desk be a barrier between you and your customer.
• Hand your customers the book as you recommend it. Let them hold it and read the flap. Do this and you’ve broken another barrier—and your customer will be more likely to check out the book.
• Prepare a small list of “can’t miss” books that you are comfortable recommending to customers.
With these tips from Nancy, the bond between an initiative for reading and the spark for finding that initiative in a library setting was cemented. I was, initially, concerned for the Reconnecting with Reading initiative as its main focus seemed to be solely on reading—but Nancy’s tips make clear that libraries play an essential role in not only getting people to increase their own intake of written materials and information, but that librarians play a most key role in guiding library-goers toward materials they might enjoy or need and to become more independent readers.
The implementation of advertising technologies is something I thought rather astounding, as its usage is not something one might immediately connect with libraries. But the success of the program, as explained by the article’s author, makes it seem to me that more county and state library systems should begin implementing the same kinds of tools, which are readily available and produce an almost immediate feedback. In my past experience, the extent of advertising libraries decide to utilize seems to be restricted to paper print-outs tacked on signboards within the library itself, or tucked away in the advertising columns of a local newspaper. And not only that, but the advertising for library programs and services seem very self-contained—that is to say, systems don’t seem to work together to advertise; rather, a single library within a system is left alone to advertise whatever it can offer to its particular town or city setting. It is kind of a sad thing to me that these technologies are not being utilized currently; it seems almost the next logical step in a world where libraries are more and more becoming dependant upon technology services to aid patrons.
However, this study being fairly recent (about 2009), I am hopeful that the success of the reading initiative started in Ohio’s Cuyahoga County will soon begin to catch on. If advertisements for library patrons and workshops for library employees are what it takes to get people’s noses in books once more, I do believe this is the logical and progressive step that libraries all over the U.S. need to be making.
Fairly recently, in 2008, a library system in Ohio—the Cuyahoga County Public Library system (CCPL) began a rather astonishing initiative to re-boot, one could say, and bring attention to what the members of the CCPL system believe to be the “core values” of public library services: “books and reading.” This article is a story of success—or at least the beginnings of a successful campaign—to get the patrons of the CCPL system, as the population of the County itself drops, to revitalize an interest in reading among its patrons.
The initiative started by CCPL, focusing on the “core values,” with a focus on “organization efforts toward finding ways to improve customer convenience, increase accessibility, and, ultimately, connect customers with books” was titled Reconnect with Reading. To help efforts, in 2008, a Cleveland research team was led to conduct phone surveys of adult reading levels in Cuyahoga County, the results of which were to be compared against from the 2007 study to Read or Not to Read, conducted by the National Endowment of the Arts (NEA), which examined adult reading levels on a national scale. (A small run-through of the NEA study can be found here.
I feel I ought to step back some at this point to avoid simply summarizing and quoting the entire article, but to talk simply about what I found most interesting in this project—an enormous endeavor on the part of the library staff of the CCPL system—and also try to draw some conclusions from their success story.
What I found most astounding about this project to inspire reading was what as titled “Phase Two” of the project: an enormous ad campaign, driven by celebrities, local and otherwise, as well as the use of internet avenues such as Google Advertising, billboard advertising, airport ads, radio ads—all utilized in order to keep in the public eye the importance and the appealing nature of the “core values” of public library services. And although “books and reading” are the primary values in the mission, one of the Library world’s Superstars was brought in—Nancy Pearl (website here)—to help reinforce the importance of the modern library in contributing to modern literacy, apparently dropping in on library staff of the CCPL system monthly to conduct various workshops for subject specialists, helping to increase enthusiasm among library employees for the initiative. Some “helpful tips” given by Nancy and shared within the article I must also share here, as they feel incredibly relevant to myself, being interested in the works of the reference librarian:
• Always remember that RA (Reference Assistance?) isn’t about the books you think people ought to read. It’s about engaging people and talking with them about the books they enjoy—and really listening to what they have
to say.
• Ask, what was the last great book you read? What did you like about it? The way your customer talks about it will tell you how they found the doorway to that book. Then suggest a book with the same doorway.
• Look for openings to get a conversation going. For example, display a book at the checkout desk. People will take a look. This is your opening to start a conversation.
• When you’re giving RA, get out from behind your desk and into the stacks so you can give the person your undivided attention. Don’t let your desk be a barrier between you and your customer.
• Hand your customers the book as you recommend it. Let them hold it and read the flap. Do this and you’ve broken another barrier—and your customer will be more likely to check out the book.
• Prepare a small list of “can’t miss” books that you are comfortable recommending to customers.
With these tips from Nancy, the bond between an initiative for reading and the spark for finding that initiative in a library setting was cemented. I was, initially, concerned for the Reconnecting with Reading initiative as its main focus seemed to be solely on reading—but Nancy’s tips make clear that libraries play an essential role in not only getting people to increase their own intake of written materials and information, but that librarians play a most key role in guiding library-goers toward materials they might enjoy or need and to become more independent readers.
The implementation of advertising technologies is something I thought rather astounding, as its usage is not something one might immediately connect with libraries. But the success of the program, as explained by the article’s author, makes it seem to me that more county and state library systems should begin implementing the same kinds of tools, which are readily available and produce an almost immediate feedback. In my past experience, the extent of advertising libraries decide to utilize seems to be restricted to paper print-outs tacked on signboards within the library itself, or tucked away in the advertising columns of a local newspaper. And not only that, but the advertising for library programs and services seem very self-contained—that is to say, systems don’t seem to work together to advertise; rather, a single library within a system is left alone to advertise whatever it can offer to its particular town or city setting. It is kind of a sad thing to me that these technologies are not being utilized currently; it seems almost the next logical step in a world where libraries are more and more becoming dependant upon technology services to aid patrons.
However, this study being fairly recent (about 2009), I am hopeful that the success of the reading initiative started in Ohio’s Cuyahoga County will soon begin to catch on. If advertisements for library patrons and workshops for library employees are what it takes to get people’s noses in books once more, I do believe this is the logical and progressive step that libraries all over the U.S. need to be making.
Monday, November 15, 2010
Entry 3 - What a Great Place to Work! by Robert F. Moran Jr.
In reading this article, which deals with finding enjoyment or satisfaction in the library profession, I found myself relating very much to Mr. Moran Jr. I think it’s safe to say that, like me, Moran Jr. is somewhat of an Idealist. There is a terrific quote in which he gives his take on the role of the library:
“Libraries are about service, about helping people.
They exist to help children learn about the value and satisfaction
in reading and investigation. They exist in
conjunction with schools-to help teens develop their
minds and discipline through reading and research. They
exist to help adults solve problems and to grow intellectually.
They exist to provide enjoyment of mind and heart for
seniors. They exist as a bonding force in the community, a
growing force for the community.”
Being an Idealist, of course I would relate to this. This is the kind of thing I like to hear. However, Moran Jr. adds practical thought to his ideals, asking “why shouldn’t librarians enjoy their work?” Specifically, why shouldn’t librarians be satisfied and happy in their work the way an artist finds satisfaction in creation?
Most of this article has the feel of being addressed specifically to library managers, with Moran Jr. suggesting ways in which personal fulfillment and job fulfillment should be able to overlap. On the first page under the heading “What Have We Learned About Personal Fulfillment and Satisfaction in the Workplace?” Moran Jr. posits some ideas about the workplace that would make staff “feel more human and less like unthinking tools.” His workplace assessment seems rather general and applicable to almost any working environment. So how does he make the library a particularly special place to work?
The truth is, as far as I can see, he really doesn’t. Besides his savory, Idealistic view about the library that I quoted, most every instance where suggestions are made to improve the library work environment, the word “library” could be replaced by almost any other kind of job. So although Moran Jr. makes some great suggestions to help librarians in their environment, this article could just as easily have been about job satisfaction in any other environment.
“Libraries are about service, about helping people.
They exist to help children learn about the value and satisfaction
in reading and investigation. They exist in
conjunction with schools-to help teens develop their
minds and discipline through reading and research. They
exist to help adults solve problems and to grow intellectually.
They exist to provide enjoyment of mind and heart for
seniors. They exist as a bonding force in the community, a
growing force for the community.”
Being an Idealist, of course I would relate to this. This is the kind of thing I like to hear. However, Moran Jr. adds practical thought to his ideals, asking “why shouldn’t librarians enjoy their work?” Specifically, why shouldn’t librarians be satisfied and happy in their work the way an artist finds satisfaction in creation?
Most of this article has the feel of being addressed specifically to library managers, with Moran Jr. suggesting ways in which personal fulfillment and job fulfillment should be able to overlap. On the first page under the heading “What Have We Learned About Personal Fulfillment and Satisfaction in the Workplace?” Moran Jr. posits some ideas about the workplace that would make staff “feel more human and less like unthinking tools.” His workplace assessment seems rather general and applicable to almost any working environment. So how does he make the library a particularly special place to work?
The truth is, as far as I can see, he really doesn’t. Besides his savory, Idealistic view about the library that I quoted, most every instance where suggestions are made to improve the library work environment, the word “library” could be replaced by almost any other kind of job. So although Moran Jr. makes some great suggestions to help librarians in their environment, this article could just as easily have been about job satisfaction in any other environment.
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Entry 2 - General Interview Questions for Library Employees!
Hey! So here's what I've got.
Of course, there’s no predicting how these interviews will go precisely, but I’ve drafted 10 questions for potential Interviewees, which I hope focus in enough on the Realistic and the Now, as opposed to the Ideal to which I'm always inclined to focus on.
1) Please briefly describe your Title/Position.
2) Can you describe what a typical work week would be like for you?
3) [At this point I will probably ask about the demographics particular to the library I am focused on. Questions will most likely focus on age, gender, and racial statistics and how they effect how that particular library operates.]
4) Since you’ve entered this field, do you find that it is what you expected? How so?
5) How do you view the need for Degreed Librarians?
6) What kinds of changes would you like to see in the future, pertaining both to [this library] and the greater library system? Why?
7) Are there any kind of changes happening now that you are excited about? Why?
8) Do you have any particular regrets concerning your job? What would you have done differently?
9) Do you have any advice for an aspiring librarian—particularly for one who is perhaps more Idealistic than Realistic?
10) What is your view on Graduate programs for Library Science? If you see them as necessary for someone wanting to enter the field, do you have any advice regarding finding the right program/getting accepted/[anything else]?
I hope these questions are straight-forward enough! And realistic. Let me know if I need to go over them further!
Dana
Of course, there’s no predicting how these interviews will go precisely, but I’ve drafted 10 questions for potential Interviewees, which I hope focus in enough on the Realistic and the Now, as opposed to the Ideal to which I'm always inclined to focus on.
1) Please briefly describe your Title/Position.
2) Can you describe what a typical work week would be like for you?
3) [At this point I will probably ask about the demographics particular to the library I am focused on. Questions will most likely focus on age, gender, and racial statistics and how they effect how that particular library operates.]
4) Since you’ve entered this field, do you find that it is what you expected? How so?
5) How do you view the need for Degreed Librarians?
6) What kinds of changes would you like to see in the future, pertaining both to [this library] and the greater library system? Why?
7) Are there any kind of changes happening now that you are excited about? Why?
8) Do you have any particular regrets concerning your job? What would you have done differently?
9) Do you have any advice for an aspiring librarian—particularly for one who is perhaps more Idealistic than Realistic?
10) What is your view on Graduate programs for Library Science? If you see them as necessary for someone wanting to enter the field, do you have any advice regarding finding the right program/getting accepted/[anything else]?
I hope these questions are straight-forward enough! And realistic. Let me know if I need to go over them further!
Dana
Friday, October 8, 2010
Start Again! Entry 1 - Analysis of Reading: "Perceptions of Libraries and Information Sources"
Hey! Back to business. For my first reading, I chose to take a look at the article "Perceptions of Libraries and Information Resources". I downloaded this report as a .PDF and was surprised to find that this report is rather... lengthy. About 290 pages of lengthy. It is, however--mercifully--split into five sections, with an Introduction and Conclusion. As I don't think I'd be doing it (or my brain) much of a service by trying to summarize or interpret 290 pages in one post, I've decided to cover my analysis in parts, as well, starting today with the Introduction.
Introduction to Perceptions of Libraries and Information Sources
As readers, we are first introduced to a concept apparently first presented in a report from 2003, that posits an overall "dissonance" between "library consumer" and Libraries, I suppose, as a person-less entity. This dissonance is derived from what the library consumer seems to desire from a library experience but which the Library--or the 2003 Library-Entity--does not seem to provide. The idea of a disconnect between library consumers and Libraries causes some rather probing questions in the author(s) of the PLIS report (we're calling it that now): How are libraries perceived by today’s information consumer? "Do libraries still matter? On what level? Will library use likely increase or decrease in the future?"
To answer these and other questions, the OCLC (Online Computer Library Center) Market Research Team with the aid of other OCLC staff and hundreds of Librarians conducted a study, the goals being to know more about " . . . people’s information-seeking behaviors, how familiar people are with the variety of e-resources libraries provide for their users and how libraries fit into the lives of the respondents."
In large part, the study seems to deal primarily with the library consumer's awareness of electronic resources available and how library consumers perceive what the author(s) refer to as the "Library" brand. Though I think the technicalities of the survey for the most part were well over my head, I did gather that the availability of Internet resources and the library consumer's awareness was key in the study--which, in the end, proved more to "confirm" ideas than to illuminate.
As I said, a great deal of the Introduction was well over my head as it discussed results of the various surveys, even though there were several helpful (and colorful!) charts provided. If I have more to add to the reading of the Introduction I certainly will do so, but I feel I should probably end here, as there is a great deal to wade through in Part 1 of PLIS!
As readers, we are first introduced to a concept apparently first presented in a report from 2003, that posits an overall "dissonance" between "library consumer" and Libraries, I suppose, as a person-less entity. This dissonance is derived from what the library consumer seems to desire from a library experience but which the Library--or the 2003 Library-Entity--does not seem to provide. The idea of a disconnect between library consumers and Libraries causes some rather probing questions in the author(s) of the PLIS report (we're calling it that now): How are libraries perceived by today’s information consumer? "Do libraries still matter? On what level? Will library use likely increase or decrease in the future?"
To answer these and other questions, the OCLC (Online Computer Library Center) Market Research Team with the aid of other OCLC staff and hundreds of Librarians conducted a study, the goals being to know more about " . . . people’s information-seeking behaviors, how familiar people are with the variety of e-resources libraries provide for their users and how libraries fit into the lives of the respondents."
In large part, the study seems to deal primarily with the library consumer's awareness of electronic resources available and how library consumers perceive what the author(s) refer to as the "Library" brand. Though I think the technicalities of the survey for the most part were well over my head, I did gather that the availability of Internet resources and the library consumer's awareness was key in the study--which, in the end, proved more to "confirm" ideas than to illuminate.
As I said, a great deal of the Introduction was well over my head as it discussed results of the various surveys, even though there were several helpful (and colorful!) charts provided. If I have more to add to the reading of the Introduction I certainly will do so, but I feel I should probably end here, as there is a great deal to wade through in Part 1 of PLIS!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)