Look-a-likes

Walk into any library in the United States, you will see shelves filled with books, perhaps a few study tables for people to do work at, computers perhaps scattered around the library or in an individual room, a circulation desk a reference desk, etc. So how can I know this? Am I so well traveled that I have visited every library in the United States? No, truth is libraries are built and organized very similarly. Yes, there are differences, one has a coffee shop while another does not, but on the whole libraries all look a like. Honestly I didn't even think this was true until it was pointed out to me in IST 511. At first I was like, they are not always the same. And then I stopped and thought and reviewed all the libraries I had gone to and behold they are very very similar.

In class we discussed that libraries are similar because they were built after the model developed in the 1800s. thus, you get the typical stereotype of what libraries have to look like. In some ways it does not make sense to keep a model from the 1800s. If libraries and patrons of libraries have changed so much, why shouldn't the way the library is designed be changed too? Why doesn't a library look like what is in their community. For example, if the community has a lot of people interested in wood carving then why can't the library have a room and material set aside for people to practice wood carving. That may seem like a silly example, but the point is there. You don't see libraries differentiating too much. Sometimes they do, for example, a library with a large family population may have a whole room dedicated to children so that there is space for children's activities, books and games. Yet, even this is relatively common. So why aren't libraries changing their view?

I think that this mostly comes down to what people assume libraries look like. Children read books, see pictures and visit libraries that all look the same. They grow up to expect that libraries will look a certain way. They know a building is a library if they walk in and see lots of bookshelves and a check out desk. Libraries don't want to change for fear of making their patrons uncomfortable because a different looking library is "not a library." I'm not saying people won't change and that we don't have to start somewhere, I just think there is a very strong stereotype of what libraries look like and people tend to feel more comfortable with what they know. Yet, that can change. Look at the concept of putting coffee shops in libraries. People were dead set against it because "that is not what a library looks like", but now go to many libraries around the country and you will see coffee.

I think libraries should be encouraged to design themselves around the communities needs. And I think, slowly, as librarianship is changing, so will the design of libraries. So the question is, what might libraries look like in the future?

The School Librarian Perdicament

So last week in class we went through the various types of libraries, and since I want to be a school librarian this post is going to focus on school libraries. I know no real surprise, but what I want to talk about is the issue school librarians face: not being seen as a important part of education.

A few weeks ago I had to interview a school librarian for another class. The librarian I talked to had taught elementary school for years and really enjoyed her job. When I asked her what she though her role in the school was she informed me that she believed her role was to teach information skills that will help her students be prepared for middle school and for life in general. However, when I asked her what other people thought her role in the school was she told me library time was considered a break. For teachers, this was the time of day when they could drop their students off at the library and get other things done. Some teachers collaborated with the librarian, but many teachers did not think they needed to collaborate with the librarian as to them, the librarians job wasn't an important part of a child's education. Now last class I couldn't help but think of this interview. When Professor Lankes talked about how many administrators are cutting librarians because they didn't think of them as teachers I was baffled. In my school media classes I learned about  how school librarians can collaborate with teachers to reinforce information taught in the classroom and how school librarians can stress information literacy and help students understand the research process. Yet, even though we are taught that librarians can do all this, school districts are still having trouble grasping the idea that the librarian is a teacher too. Now I'm not saying all school districts are bad. Many school districts really use the librarian and the librarian and the teachers really do try to work together to bring the students into the library as much as possible. In fact, one school librarian I talked to told me she had a blog for collaboration with other teachers. Many teachers were too busy to meet in person so they found it easier to blog about ideas and lessons that would work well with the library.  Nevertheless, there are still so many school districts who think that just having a library is enough. But a room full of books is not going to help with a child's education. A librarian is, without the person all you have is a quiet room to work and read in.

One of things many school districts do is split a librarian between two different schools. The librarian that I talked with for my interview worked at two separate elementary schools. At one school she was there Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday and then she was at the other school on Wednesday. As a result she did not collaborate as often with the teachers at her second school. Because she was there only once a week it was harder to learn the student's names or keep track with what teacher was doing what unit. That conversation made me realize how many school districts don't realize the benefits of a librarian.

So what I think we need to do is tell them. When a new school year starts send emails out to parents or send parents the link to the school library web page. On the web page explain what students do in the library and what a librarians role is. Explain different projects students might do and how a school library and the school librarian are important to a child's education. The same goes with teachers. Librarians can send emails to teachers explaining the resources of the library and how they can help their students. People want to know why a librarian is important to a school, well we need to tell them why. 

The Many Roles of the Librarian

When I decided I was going to be a librarian many people I talked to didn't understand what a librarian did. Honestly, I didn't really understand what a librarian did. Yes I knew that it was more than hosting book clubs and checking out books, but what did they spend most of their time doing? Mostly this is because librarians try and help patrons and make their lives more simple. As such, the librarians don't usually explain how difficult the question was to answer, or how long it took to get the library director to agree to have a square dancing night, etc. Basically librarians do a lot and people have no idea.

While doing my video project for IST 511 I have learned several things. 1.) editing takes a LONG LONG time, especially when you have never edited something before. 2.) Voice overs are not as easy as I thought they would be, especially when I keep messing up my lines, or I stumble over a word, etc. 3.) (the lesson most relevant to this blog post) Librarians do a lot.

Librarians are teachers, who help their members become information literate, teachers who can explain how to use the latest technology from the new Kindle to 3D printing. Librarians are collaborators, who work with other librarians, experts and members to bring new information and programs into the library. Librarians are searchers, who can find that piece of information Google won't quite answer. Librarians are bloggers, twitter users, and chat users, who will use any means to communicate to their members whether it be over the internet, over the phone or in person. They are organizers who will sort, catalog and describe information so it is easier to find and store. Librarians are a lot of things, and honestly I could probably name more. But these are just some of the things that the video project has got me thinking about.  

I guess my question is why do so few people know what librarians do? Why do so many people still see librarians as little old ladies who "shhhh" to anyone who talks above a whisper? How can we change this view? How can we show people that we do so much more?

An interesting dilemma with summer reading

In class last night we  discussed a variety of topics. We discussed things that made me think, like the idea that all the MP3 songs I buy I don't actually own (mind blown). But towards the end of class we discussed a topic, for a split second. This topic is summer reading. We had been discussing why we need libraries and had just gone over the idea that a library could be a 'safety net' in which librarians provided access to technology that the poor or working class might not be able to afford on their own. Then, Dave mentioned the problems with summer reading. The summer reading programs give kids prizes for reading a certain amount of books. This sounds great right? Kids are now motivated to read, but suddenly reading for the love of reading is now replaced by reading for a prize. It becomes less about the intrinsic value and more about an extrinsic value. So next year, if a kid does not enter in the summer reading program that kid might not read, because whats the point if they don't get a prize.

Though we didn't talk about this for long, this concept stuck with me. I have always been a huge supporter of summer reading programs. As a kid I loved the read, like I devoured thirteen books in a month and then rushed out to read more. This is a trend that still continues today. If you ever see me, chances are you are going to see me with a book in my hand. Being an education major in undergrad I supported any program that got children to read. I used to go into libraries and smile as I saw the signs that said "100 kids are participating in our summer reading program and they have read 1,000 books." I used to smile and think, wow look at all of those kids who the libraries summer reading program made a difference. Ironically, I never questioned how much of a difference those programs were really making.

For my library interview, I interviewed a youth librarian who dealt with the summer reading programs over the summer. To my shock, I found that she believed there was a major problem when it came to the summer reading programs. She informed me that libraries cared too much about the numbers. That too many libraries focused on how many kids were involved in the program and how many books they had read. She used the example, that if a 7th grader reads twenty-five picture books, he may get a prize for reading books, but they were below his reading level and thus, thats not really improving his reading skills or interest in reading. Should the library really be excited because he read twenty-five picture books? The librarian I talked to suggested that libraries focus on promoting discussion between kids. Have kids review books, or share their excitement in reading with other kids. Unfortunately, with the idea of prizes kids end up only reading to get a prize. This doesn't instill a love of reading, people won't want to read if there is no prize. I know some summer reading programs where kids read a book, jot down the title on a piece of paper and then bring that paper to the library to get stamped each week. If they have read a book each week then they get a prize. Since summer months are really busy, there are tons of kids going to get their papers stamped. So more often then not, the kid gets his paper stamped, gets a prize and then that's it. The child never gets to discuss the book he read, why he might want to read more, find out from others books he might want to read next.

Now I'm not saying that summer reading is bad. I still am a huge fan of it. I think that summer reading promotes children reading and hopefully that will allow them to develop an interest in a topic. Summer reading may help a child find out that he loves books on Dinosaurs. He would have never known it if he hadn't picked up a dinosaur book and he might not have done that if not for summer reading. Plus, summer reading brings children to the library. Going to the library to get a prize means that kids who might not have otherwise gone to a library, now are going. They might stick around and see some of the other programs the library might have to offer, etc. The summer reading program has lots of benefits. I just think that it should be less about prizes and more about discussion. Even if summer reading programs had a way for kids to discuss the books they read and libraries could post these reviews on their website.

I suppose I'm saying, if summer reading is just about the numbers. How many books, how many kids participated, etc, and not about what the kids got out of it, then does it really make a difference?

The Questions about Questions

There were a lot of topics discussed in the librarians thread, but the topic that I want to discuss was the idea of Reference transactions. Now I have heard a lot about reference so far this semester...mainly because I am taking a reference course. We have been told of the various ways to conduct a reference interview and that if possible what we want to do is be able to teach the patron the art of doing searches. In other words, during a reference interview we are not just supposed to be like "ok let me look that up", ignore the patron for fifteen minutes, then come back, hand them a piece of paper and be like, "here you go have a nice day." At the very least, we are supposed to discuss with the patron the steps we are going through to find the answers. Tell them where we looked, why we looked there and how we came across the knowledge. Librarians should be able to provide the patrons with a variety of sources that give different view points, opinions, etc and then allow us to make a decision on the information. Now the question I have been thinking, and lucky for me the question that was discussed in the Atlas is what if the patron does not want to learn. What if they don't want a ton of information, or multiple sources or don't care how you got the answer, they just want the answer. Working at a library I have watched the librarians answer reference questions. Some patrons looking for help are really trying to understand how to better get information, while others are looking for a quick answer and don't care how they get it. Are we really helping the community if we ignore what the patron wants and try to push them to learn the techniques we use. Does it do any good if the patron will not listen to these techniques anyway?

One of the questions the Atlas asked was at what point should a librarian stop providing answers if they are a school or academic librarian and don't want to make the task too easy? I thought that was a great question and one that I had been wondering myself. If a student comes to a librarian for help with their homework is the librarian supposed to look up the answer, or show the student how to find the answer and let them work out what the answer is. I would assume the latter, but I suppose, as the Atlas says it all depends on the situation. The Atlas suggests that to come up with answers for questions like the ones I stated above one must have conversations with the community. What does the community expect when they go to the library and what does the library expect from the community. I guess this really struck me as interesting, because I never realized how important figuring out expectations might be for the library. When I thought of community conversation, I originally thought things like "what programs do you want", etc. But I never thought of it in terms of reference. If you don't figure out what the community wants and expects, a library could end up with unsatisfied patrons who won't use the library again.

But...there is no room

I know this doesn’t really follow the topics of the book since we discussed space in libraries a little while ago, however; while working on my interview with a librarian, I got to thinking about the role space really takes in a library. In class we saw pictures of libraries cluttered to the brink and were told that if libraries were not libraries they would be considered hoarders. It’s funny because I never thought of it that way. The libraries I grew up with had massive amounts of books, so it didn’t accrue to me that libraries should not be a room with huge piles and piles of books. I think back to the libraries I have been in where the book shelves were so tall that you needed a step stool just to see what was on the top shelf. Now this may seem fine for a few shelves, but all the shelves were really tall and there weren’t nearly enough step stools. Why must a library have so many books that they have to stack them on ridiculously tall shelves where no one can see the books anyway?

                When I did my interview with a librarian we discussed various trends in libraries and how she would change the library.  The librarian simply stated that what she wanted most was to invest in a media room or buy game console for teens to use. The problem wasn’t that her fellow librarians were interested in doing that; it was that there was no room! The library had been built to house books, and therefore didn’t have a room where there were lots of electrical outlets or even storage space for game consoles. The librarians had great ideas of what they wanted to do with the library, but all of those ideas involved altering things around the library to fit the new media. In other words, they would have to (dun dun dun) get rid of some of the books! (Insert shock and horror here). But seriously, I and many librarians know that the collection isn’t driving libraries forward anymore. It is what the library is doing for the community and if the library and the community are interested in a media room or a space to store video games and they have to remove some of the collection to do it, why not? The librarian’s response threw me for a loop; it was the patrons who did not like the idea of getting rid of books. Regardless of the fact that they wanted the new technology, if it came at the expense of getting rid of books then the answer was no. Ironically, most of the books were books that were not used and that patrons would probably never have picked off the shelf. Still, the concept of removing books was a “no no.”

                So instead we have libraries that either don’t have the newest things, because there is no room, or there are libraries that just try to fit everything. In that case it’s more of a maze to figure out where everything is. So what happens when space in a library is a problem? How do we fix it? What do we do if there simply is no room? Can libraries move their programs somewhere else? Will patrons still come if the program isn’t in the library? Just food for thought.

Being Neutral

There are a lot of stereotypes surrounding librarians. People picture us as little old ladies in quiet rooms, with huge signs that say QUIET, and a finger always to our lips prepared to shush anyone who speaks at any volume above a whisper. Having met librarians, talked to librarians and wanting to become a librarian myself, I can say that this is a pretty untrue notion of librarians. Another untrue stereotype surrounding librarians is that we are completely neutral.             

                I suppose it’s only natural. You go to someone to ask them a question and you except them to give you an answer or several sources that will provide you with an answer and these are supposed to be completely unbiased, no sides taken, neutral. The problem with this theory is that no matter how hard a librarian may want to be neutral, may try to be neutral, or may insist that they are in fact neutral, they probably aren’t. You see the thing I learned when I talked to librarians is that they are in fact human. Granted I suppose there could be a couple space aliens out their biding their time before they take over the planet, but the majority of librarians are human, and to be human means to be biased.

                The Atlas of New Librarianship puts it perfectly, stating that humans are predisposed to “certain ways of thinking and seeking new information” (Lankes, 2011, p. 123). Basically we all have biases, they come from the way we grew up, the people we met, even what knowledge we learned. However, having a bias doesn’t mean you have to be ruled by it. If that were true then there would be a lot more bigoted people in the world. Being a librarian doesn’t mean that you have to be completely neutral about everything, you may have an opinion on things, you may not agree with your members, but that doesn’t give you the right to stop helping them. For example, a librarian who believes in evolution cannot simply ignore all questions directed to them about creationism. The librarian may not believe in creationism, but he or she may still help that patron find resources on the topic without being judgmental or disputing the member’s question. One of the things The Atlas of New Librarianship discussed that I found really meaningful was the idea that librarians should capture all viewpoints, even the minority views. Librarians don’t have to be some mystical completely neutral person; instead they can acknowledge their biases and try to be open to new ideas or ways of thinking.

Lankes, D. (2011). Atlas of new librarianship (pp. 122-125). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 

Credible or not Credible that is the question

When I decided I wanted to be a librarian I asked several people what are some of the roles a librarian has. The word credibility was thrown out there a lot. A librarian’s role is to make sure that the members have credible information, from credible resources so they can make credible arguments, etc.  Ironically, when I told people that I wanted to be a librarian most of them told me that this wasn’t the wisest choice as people didn’t need librarians anymore. The way my friends saw it was that people today are self-sufficient when it came to the internet. Many people when faced with a research question hop on to their computers type the topic into Google and away they go. My friends saw the role of librarian as obsolete. People could obtain their own information; they didn’t need the middle man. Problem with this theory is that yes people can obtain their own information, but how good is that information? That’s where the concept of credibility as a librarian’s main role came into play.

                The Atlas of New Librarianship had a really interesting point. The Atlas discussed how there is a paradox that goes on today. This paradox is that people have access to more information than they could ever dream of, but because of this people have to rely more on those who provided the information. The Atlas gave the example of buying airplane tickets. Yes, you can go online to Jet Blue’s website and buy your ticket yourself, but who is the person that tells you the price of the tickets….Jet Blue. I thought this was a really interesting point. Many people today just look for information without wondering who is the person supplying the information. Could there be bias to the information?  Could the information be out of date? That’s where the word credibility comes in. A librarian’s role is to find information that is credible.  But what is credible? I think I have used the word credible thousands of times, but never really was able to define it. The Atlas suggests that credibility is not just about the believability of the information, but that the information changes your behavior.  Think about it, people who believe that certain news programs are credible will change how they view certain topics. Say a news program discusses the health care system. If someone believes that to be credible then chances are this will affect how they vote in regards to health care, or what politician or programs they support. So believing, truly believing, in information can change the way you see things. If this is true, no wonder credibility was the first word out of everyone’s mouth when I asked about the role of the librarian.

                Yet, we as librarians are not providing credible information by just providing one resource. The thing that makes librarians important is that they often provide multiple resources and multiple perspectives. As an education major in undergrad, my professors constantly berated into me how important it was to teach a topic from multiple perspectives. For example, if I was teaching the Revolutionary War I wouldn’t just want to teach students with only the viewpoint of the American Loyalists. If I did that the students would miss out on the views of the Patriots or the views of the Native Americans who fought in the war. How could they truly learn about the Revolutionary War if they only learned from one resource or one perspective? The same thing goes to all other types of information.  If as a librarian I hand over just one article to a member, then that member does not necessarily learn quite as much and that member must take the word of the article as being correct. With multiple resources from multiple perspectives members gain a larger overview of the topic they are looking for and can compare and contrast information to see what is truly correct.

                The last thing about credibility that I found really interesting was the concept that librarians should be authorities not authoritarians. I did not realize until I read the Atlas how easy it would be to slip into authoritarian mode.  If librarians only give members are predetermined list of what are good resources and do not give them a variety from multiple perspectives then the librarians are not allowing members to learn and grow. Instead librarians should show members how to make good choices when it comes to information in sources, and then provide them with multiple perspectives. The final choice of whether the source is good or not depends on the context and the goal of the member not necessarily the predetermined views of the librarian.

The Importance of Environment (and I’m not just talking Global Warming)

OK so it has been established that, to quote Neon Trees and their incredibly catchy song that I can’t stop singing, “everybody talks.” (I seem to be developing a theme where I quote songs). We know that knowledge is created through conversation. That the act of learning involves going over ideas with others and even yourself, but the real question is how as librarians are we supposed to start this conversation? The second thread in the Atlas of New Librarianship explains this.

                Librarians go about facilitating conversation in four main ways. First the librarians must provide access to that information (show people reference books, helping them create a blog to express their ideas or directing them to a review of new concepts in a scholarly journal). Then librarians must make sure the member has some knowledge about what is being discussed. Next, the librarian must ensure that the member feels comfortable and safe to be a part of the conversation and finally the librarian has to be able to encourage that patron to join into the conversation.  Though all four of these items (access, knowledge, environment and motivation) are very important, I want to focus on environment and how policies and a level of comfort in the environment severely effects whether people will be motivated to join the conversation or not.

                The issue that really resonated with me was the issue of filters, whether they hurt or hinder.  In the Atlas of New Librarianship it was argued that filters, especially used in schools, can prevent students from being able to participate in conversation. This is because students using filters don’t properly learn what online information is credible. If filters completely block out all non-credible information then how will students learn to distinguish credible information from non-credible. To a degree I see this point. If a school provides filters that stop students from going to  non-credible websites then students will get used to the idea that most websites are credible and they won’t know what they should look for to see if a website really does have credible information. This could lead to a scenario where the student gets to college and suddenly is in a panic as they are now faced with much more information and they are unsure how to navigate it all. However, I don’t necessarily feel that this scenario will happen. In schools filters are necessary as it is impossible for a teacher to constantly hoover over every student to ensure they are not going to inappropriate websites.  Nevertheless, even though students are given class time during the school day to use the computer for their project, report, etc., most likely many students will end up completely or doing most of the assignment at home or outside school. Many students tend to procrastinate and waste class time and must continue the project at home. However, the home computer may not have those particular filters on it. The home computer or the computer at the public library may not stop students from seeing negative and positive examples of credible information. As such, students do get the experience of deciding what source is credible and what source is not. Also many teachers before research assignments will sit down with their students and explain ways to tell the difference between credible and non-credible information.  Some teachers will even break down assignments so students must illustrate they found credible resources before they can continue the assignment. All of this allows teachers to spot if students are confused on credible information and try to correct and teach the proper information.

                The other issue that dealt with environment that resonated with me was feeling safe and comfortable in the library. Though this means physical safety (you don’t feel like you’re going to get stabbed for saying the wrong thing) it also means feeling free to speak up without being treated like your opinions count for nothing.  Anyone who has ever been assigned to a group in school has probably been in the following scenario.  You are in a group and it is your job to discuss a particular topic. One student feels very strongly about the topic and takes over the conversation. They completely dominate the conversation and when you attempt to chime in your views are shoved down. The dominate speaker does not even allow your views to reach the table. This is a major problem when it comes to conversation. Librarians should attempt to motivate the members of the library to join into conversations, however; this may be very difficult if the member’s first experience was one in which his or her opinions were not taken serious. I really liked the idea of librarians moderating in-person meetings to try and keep the conversation going and prevent one person dominating the discussion or the discussion going completely off topic. Of course when I say moderating I don’t mean patrolling the room pointing your finger at someone who goes slightly off topic, I mean being a part of the conversation and at the same time suggesting we hear from a person who hasn’t talked yet, or that we go back to the topic of whatever is being discussed.  I see this as a perfect way to be involved in conversations and still working to make sure the members feel comfortable talking in the first place.