LIS 701 – Fall 2007 Discussion Blog

First post!

It’s like walking through new-fallen snow.

… I do understand the plight of the librarian who “didn’t get [her] mls to_____”. I simply do not agree. My attitude falls more in line with the blogger. Although I have actually uttered the words: “I didn’t go to college to _____”, the “_____” was never directly related to my degree. So, yes, I empathize with disenchanted librarian.

However, as she holds an advanced degree in a field that promotes service and scholarship, I’m surprised that the reality of the situation elluded her for so long, and cannot sympathize. The library’s breadth of service is expanding, so too will the skills of the staff. Perhaps the librarian that inspired the original post was not honest with herself when she entered the field, and is now resentful of the users and their needs.

ALA’s Code of Ethics states in item VIII: “We strive for excellence in the profession by maintaining and enhancing our own knowledge and skills, by encouraging the professional development of co-workers, and by fostering the aspirations of potential members of the profession.” That mystery librarian’s refusal to progress in the profession by choosing to remain ignorant of certain technologies is, to my mind, unacceptable. The technology can be intimidating, of course, and it changes so quickly that even those who consider themselves to be technologically advanced in one way or another can feel left behind. It is not the lack of knowledge or skill that I cannot empathize with (because I can), but rather it is the notion that it does not need to be learned. I don’t know when it was decided that new technologies (chiefly, the Internet and its many manifestations) was in any way the intellectual inferior of older ones (chiefly, books), but this is hugely false. Dispensing with the belief that technology is frivolous and not “part of the job” is absurd because it is everywhere. Technology is the job! I know Kyle mentioned the following line from ALA’s Code, but it bears repeating: “Enhancing our own knowledge and skills” is something that all librarians should strive for, and refusing to learn or attempt to learn new technologies relevent to the profession is not only a hindrance to that individual who will eventually be left in the dust of all other, more adaptable professionals, but it reflects poorly on the image of librarians as a whole. Someone in the chain of responses to that initial post mentioned “lifelong learning.” That is something I think is important in any profession, but especially in ours. Librarians exist to provide a service, and if you are unable to provide a requested service, then you are not doing your job.

I agree with Sarah and Kyle on bringing up Sections VII and VIII of the ALA Code of Ethics but how can you enforce these codes. If a doctor mistreats a patient there is an investigation into it. However with the ALA Codes they are really just more guidelines.

The writer of the blog brings up some excellent points in that professions do not stand still. This is especially true of anything relating to computers. I recall the Apple 2E my parents had when I was growing up and if we look back that was only roughly 20 years ago. Things have progressed so rapidly. We may see a peak at some point but it pry won’t be for a while.

As a service profession we must try to help. If we can’t find someone who can. I think that the technology requirements for entrance to library school is a good thing because of this increasing need for assistance on different programs.

When a person decides to get an MLS, they have decided that they wish to better themselves and patrons. When obtaining their degree they learn how to serve the patrons in the best way possible. One of those ways happens to be by providing computer assistance. In order to make yourself a better librarian, you have to change and adapt to the world around you and computers are now a part of the library world. If someone is not willing to grow or jump in and complete a task they may not want to do, then they are not using their degree to its fullest. An MLS teaches you how to be a well rounded individual.
I think that just because you have a MLS does not mean that you have to be a computer technician, but it does mean that you have to help the person at least get started on the computer. The amount of the help that we offer the patron also depends on the situation. If they expect us to do it for them, then that is wrong. We should give them guidance, not complete the task for them. Also, the patron needs to be understanding that the librarian may not have the time sit down and help them. This is why I believe that all libraries should host a computer training class for their patrons and staff. At Dupage Library System, they offered a basic computer class for staff members. It taught how to turn the computer one, bring up Microsoft word and other basic functions.

Addendum to post:

I realized that I neglected to comment on the ALA Code of Ethics in relation to the blog entry. My oversight has actually proven useful as it gave me the opportunity to see what moved my LIS contemporaries.

A phenomenal point was made in Kyle’s post that questioned the librarian’s membership in the ALA as her own career agenda was out of step with “The Code”.

As membership is voluntary, and the code is not offically enforced, the ALA Code of Ethics provides more of a framework for a personal-professional honor system observed by like-minded individuals.

I feel the articles outlined by the ALA are well worded to allow for growth and inference– I’m reminded of the Bumstead quote featured in the Wesch video, “A Vision of Students Today”.

Josiah Bumstead: “The inventor of the system deserves to be ranked among the best contributors to learning and science, if not the greatest benefactors of mankind.”

Only loosely contextualized, this quote could be lauding anything related to “learning and science”. We may unconsciously attach the latest and greatest of advancements as the subject– but he was refering to the chalkboard. It’s this style of language that infuses lasting currency into the ALA Code of Ethics.

Article 1: “…equitable service policy; equitable access…”

This is the type of broad language that allows for interpretation. But do the varying interpretations of the whole expand the responsibilities of the individual? Would the librarian who refused to learn EXCEL for the benefit of the users continue to be code compliant if they still provided equal access to the computer terminals?

Perhaps the ALA Code can be thought of as a musical instrument, and we express ourselves professionally through our interpretation of the articles– how we adapt those malleable points. If the code can be characterized as a guitar, some may take a classical approach, or experimental, or improvizational… some may compose, and some may do DMB covers… and still others may leave their instrument in the rain where it warps and rots.

Hi all,

The point of the original post was not just that individuals are failing to live up to their professional obligations, but also that the profession and the employers have failed the individuals.

There are no requirements to maintain any particular skill sets once a person receives their MLS. To me that is the real problem, that in a professional field there is no demand to seek continuing education or to remain up to date.

When I read “I didn’t get an MLS to do that” I was quickly transported to an experience during my LIS 704 class which required an observation and critique of a brick and mortar library. During this experience I asked what I believed to be a fairly basic question regarding fair use. I received a perfunctory answer during which I was reminded that the person I asked was “only a librarian.” He provided a surface search based solely on my question, rather than the detailed and accurate information that may have come had he asked clarifying questions and attempted to understand my question more fully (i.e. a reference interview). This librarian clearly did not have the desire to ride the technological bandwagon but was happy remaining on their comfortable stoop (in my mind I picture him sharing a cup of coffee with Pearl Shay from the classic TV show 227). I am reminded of the tenured teacher who is comfortable in their teaching style and does not seek to move forward to learning and implementing new methods. Such a teacher produces students who are not given the quality education that they deserve. We must continually put ourselves in the shoes of our users when organizing information to determine how the information will be most useful. The Gilbert library should be applauded for moving away from the Dewey Decimal to a system, organized similarly to a bookstore, that is user friendly rather than librarian friendly. Afterall, we must remember that the library belongs to the users, not to the librarians. As I enter information into my daily blog I try to consider what areas a person might search who would find this information useful. I am constantly baffled as I see the 30 or more hits that daily arrive to my blog to view my posting on mini-pigs. I have apparently been able to step into the shoes of another person and they are able to access the information I provide.

Respectfully submitted,

Mr. Schu

I wasn’t as surprised by the librarian’s comment as some of the others were. I think she is older and not as comfortable with technology as most of her younger colleagues. Rather than admit her lack of knowledge however, she chose to complain about her job responsibilities. The irony of this situation is that the patron’s at her library were coming to her because they felt that she was the expert.

Librarians today and in the future must be comfortable with technology. It is something we will use every day regardless of the type of library we work in. As I see it, the primary responsibility of a librarian is to provide information or to provide someone with the tools to acquire that information. In order to do this, we will need to be familiar with the latest technology tools. This isn’t to say we have to know everything, of course we don’t. But we are a service profession and we are obligated to learn as much as we can to help our patrons.

I think this issue brings into focus the ALA code of ethics. Especially the section that states “We strive for excellence in the profession by maintaining and enhancing our own knowledge and skills,”. This speaks to the heart of the matter that we must always strive to do our best and be willing to learn. We don’t need to change the code to reflect the changing technology. The ALA code of ethics is as relevant today as it was when it was revised. They should be viewed as guidelines.

Maggie

With the proper frame of mind, any task can be enjoyable no matter how mundane. I think there is room for further investigation before criticizing librarians who do not want to teach computer skills. Why don’t they want incorporate technology? Is it fear, reluctance, prejudice, or another factor altogether? Are librarians simply averse to teaching at all? Some people are more introverted than other people. It’s not a crime to enjoy solitude more than servicing the public. Special librarians work alone more often than not.

Only in America will people say that certain occupational responsibilities are “below” them. If you are getting the same wage per hour, what difference does it make if you are vacuuming the carpets or assisting a researcher? People really might consider themselves fortunate to have jobs, much less relatively clean and peaceful jobs like those in libraries.

The Code of Ethics is actually a statement of ideals. We can strive to provide accurate information and we can try to overcome our biases when we assist patrons, but we’re only human. To enforce the code of ethics would be to mandate perfect knowledge and behavior. It’s impossible. Not that we should change the code, because it’s good to have things to strive toward. Tacitly both patrons and librarians should understand that no one is going to actually attain the ideals stated in the Code of Ethics. The best we can do is try.

Article VIII of the ALA code of ethics includes,”…encouraging the professional development of co-workers”, which acknowledges the understanding that librarians don’t work in a vacuum. As individuals we have a big impact on our fellow workers and it’s possible for us to address reluctance to change with friendly and helpful attitudes. Many times in this class we’ve come across the statistic that most people choose to go to someone they know for information or knowledge, so I believe it applies to situational learning for librarians as well.

The ALA Code of Ethics is a broad umbrella for the entire profession, but I believe that the individual library must also have its Mission Statement address this issue and ensure further education and training in the various aspects of evolving technology to its employees. It is reasonable to expect that a professional in any given field keep up with the applicable advanced technology, but it is definitely in the employers best interest to provide such training in a friendly and non-threatening atmosphere. Isn’t this what we strive for in the librarian/patron relationship?

Sue H.

I wonder if the librarian who didn’t get her MLS to help with the patrons on the computers is one of those people who just walk away from a jammed copier because “it isn’t my job to fix it” or takes the last cup of coffee in the pot and just puts the empty carafe back on the burner because “it isn’t their job to make coffee”. I always hated working with those people who were too good to do things that were outside of their job description. It reminds me of a stock broker I used to work with who had the same attitude as if she were better than the rest of us but she was just a salesperson with credentials and money. To that (and that particular person) I say, yeah, well it isn’t anyone else’s “job” here to do it either but that does not mean it isn’t a part of the job. Sometimes things that are a part of the job aren’t written into the job description because it is assumed that everyone knows that it is their responsibility to do it if it needs to be done. I agree with Steve, jobs change and those that do not change with them are left behind and although we all would like to think we are an irreplaceable employee, in truth, we all are replaceable and the next person will not only have that knowledge, but they will probably do it for less money.
I was also really surprised to see comments like “When libraries were solely about books, did we teach the illiterate how to read? Did we teach librarians how to teach people to read? Rarely that happened, but mostly we didn’t do those things.” Uh, really we didn’t? Then why do we have literacy programs in libraries then? Hmmm. Yeah we did, what about the librarians in ancient Greece who were the advisors, and teachers of the people? I think that if you don’t want to help people learn things that are in the library, then you might want to think about working in a different area of the field, I know there are lots of openings for people in tech services, or archives or special libraries. Taking a job in public libraries implies that you actually want to help the public the library serves. Of course, we could just allow the public to go at the technology offered at the library without direction of any sort with a “hey man, we just provide the technology, it is up to you to figure out how to use it” attitude but when the machines all break because people misuse it while using the trial and error method of learning and you have to have them all replaced, don’t complain.

While I wasn’t there last Monday, I do feel strongly about this statement. I don’t think we need to revise our code of ethics, I think we need to find people that are willing to live up to those ethics. Libraries are an ever changing organism and librarians need to be willing to change and evolve with it. Perfect example, we recently started using a special pad in the computer to have paperless library cards. The people at the circulation desk don’t think that this new technology is going to work and that it will screw everything up and no one will know how to use it. We have only had it for three days. Of course it’s new, of course there will be a few mistakes in the beginning, but if you start with a negative mindset, nothing will get done. I believe we need open-mindedness in order for our libraries to change with ease.
Laura W.

It is certainly unsettling to hear this sort of ‘not my job’ attitude. As several people have pointed out, it is not limited to computers in libraries. There are people in all fields with all levels of education who are willing to adapt and grow and others who refuse to advance and insist upon stagnation. However, I can understand this librarian’s possible frustration that patrons are more interested in checking email or printing garage sale flyers than reading one of the thousands of books available to them. But, as a publicly funded service organization, it is our job to serve the public – what ever their interest or levels of competency may be. The comment about reading a book to an illiterate person really struck me. It is no mystery what our mission is and how we should conduct ourselves in the line of work. The code of ethics certainly doesn’t limit us, the values are consistent through time. The code doesn’t have to be changed to specifically instruct us to stay current with new technology because the greater message makes that clear.