A very well balanced response I must say.
f
-----Original Message-----
From: Chartered Library and Information Professionals
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Henley, Caroline
Sent: 22 February 2005 12:58
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: What Future for Public Libraries? New Laser Foundation
paper published today
Whilst not necessarily agreeing with everything in the report - I think
the point made about library schools and the relevance of their
curricula to the profession is a valid one.
Having been in my first professional post for 18 months now I can say
that significantly less than 50% of the skills I learned at library
school have been relevant to me in my post (adult services librarian in
a relatively small public authority) and that my employer had to spend a
great deal of time and effort training me in fundamental areas of my
role which they, quite reasonably, would have expected me to have at
least been given an introduction to.
During my placement I had several interesting discussions with library
professionals regarding their concerns at the gaps in knowledge they
noticed in graduates from my course. I have also had the opportunity to
speak to those graduating throughout the five years before me who all
pointed out their own, and their employers' frustrations with areas of
librarianship which had been ignored by the course.
My own main frustration was that in each year students had given
feedback, had mentioned these issues and all met with the same response
as my own year - zero.
Yes - accreditation is a form of feedback - but it doesn't go far enough
- I feel there is a need for the criteria for accreditation to be
revisited and for the profession as a whole to become involved in a
dialogue with library schools to ensure that the qualification meets the
needs of prospective employers. Of course the library world is evolving
and library schools have to adapt to provide the skills needed for a
constantly changing environment - but not at the expense of skills which
remain both relevant and necessary - a balance has to be struck.
-----Original Message-----
From: Chartered Library and Information Professionals
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of David McMenemy
Sent: 19 February 2005 22:49
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: What Future for Public Libraries? New Laser Foundation
paper published today
Well I'm sure we have another report here that will kick off a debate.
So here's my tuppenceworth....
On first reading for me the report is full of broadly-sweeping
statements backed up with little or no data. I'm also concerned that
there seemed to be no discussion of the development needs of
professional and para-professional staff. Staff are talked of as a
single entity, which is very warm and cuddly, but not realistic if
public libraries are to retain their position as a profession and not a
chain of shops. But then I have to admit that reading the report, I
felt no sense of a profession in it at all, I felt the words of an
organisation who wish to raise their profile with the powers that be.
Indeed given the criticism CILIP have had on this list over the fact
they don't over-sell their press releases, maybe they should look to the
press release for this as the way forward when you want to make
something out of nothing!
The report is obviously designed to be controversial, which isn't
necessarily bad, but like I said on this list last year I'd love to see
LASER actually conduct proper research that helped the profession as a
whole REALLY discover the issues at stake, rather than what we see at
the moment, what looks like a turfwar for who is the best pressure group
for libraries.
My favourite quotes in the report include:
"Some staff in the retail sector appear well suited to libraries'
changing requirements"
Based on what exactly? Their cheesy grins; their knowledge of
literature; their all-round joi-de-vivre? Some data or facts to back
such tired statements would be nice? Which sector of retail staff? Is
this just the old "book shop staff are better" mantra? Are we talking
about McDonalds here, or Marks and Sparks? I've always felt Big W was a
great store myself!
"These changes in library staff requirements will draw attention to
staff who will have little to contribute to the new service and who are
unable or unwilling to change, or who may even actively work against the
revised objectives of the service organisation. It is vital that these
people leave and a variety of methods should be used to assist them in
this."
Oh dear! So gone is the era of trying to take your staff with you I
guess.
What if the collective feeling among good, highly expereinced, staff is
that the new objectives are smoke and mirrors and have no place in
public libraries? More worryingly, what if they are correct. What if
the much lauded Retail Guru comes along with ideas that are
ill-conceived and unworkable in a public library? I love the notion of
"assisting" staff in leaving, too. Would this be the kind of
"assistance" that included a wee piece of paper with the letter P and
the number 45?
And of course if in doubt, have a go at the library schools:
"staff will need skills which go well beyond the content of any present
day library school syllabus. This will have to change if the schools are
to remain relevant."
OK, if so, what exactly is the content that is missing? Facts, please!
And, ever heard of CPD or lifelong learning? Library schools throughout
the UK offer entry-level degrees for the profession PLUS enhanced career
opportunities in degrees like Health Information Management
(Aberystwyth) and Digital Libraries (which we're launching later this
year - cheap plug), to name just two I'm aware of. Speaking for myself
I am not aware that anyone from LASER or the futures group has been in
touch to review our curriculum and point out our inadequacies. Can any
other library schools confirm this? Broad statements such as this made
without investigating the facts do not help the debate. And I'm sure
library schools would welcome constructive feedback about where their
curricula may be failing the
profession. This is exactly what they get when the CILIP accreditation
panel visit each institution, they receive REAL input and suggestions as
to how the courses need to be tweaked and bettered. More sinister is
the charge that the library schools may cease to become relevant.
Relevant to whom? The Government? Just what is their real stake in
librarianship?
But of course given the tired old "libraries need a retail mentality"
mantra espoused by this report and Coates, if by meaning that library
schools don't teach "Supermarket 101" in library schools we are out of
touch with today's needs, then I'm delighted to say that they are
correct. But frankly, it's time people who criticised curricula
actually started offering some examples of what they think IS missing,
rather than hinting at the Utopia that would exist in the profession if
the big bad evil library schools could just toe the line.
I'm actually looking forward to the day when LASER put all of their
ideas into the library school curricula; how's "Point-Scoring Tips for
Malcontents!" as the module title?
More seriously such reports, with follow-up conferences headlined by
Ministers and Downing Street Policy people, just confirm that there are
some people in the profession who think that their priority is the needs
of the Government and not their customers or their profession. Please
spare us the
ludicrous notion that the needs of the three are one and the same.
That
road leads to the intellectual death of public librarianship in the UK.
With apologies for the length of the post, I would just add that all
views expressed are of course mine and not my institution's.
Cheers
David
---------------------------------------
David McMenemy
Lecturer
Department of Computer and Information Sciences University of
Strathclyde Glasgow
_____________________________________________________________________
This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by MCI's Internet Managed
Scanning Services - powered by MessageLabs. For further information
visit http://www.mci.com
**********************************************************************
Email Disclaimer - East Lothian Council
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are
addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the
sender and ensure it is deleted and not read copied or disclosed to
anyone else. It is your responsibility to scan this email and any
attachments for computer viruses or other defects. East Lothian Council
do not accept liability for any loss or damage which may result from
this email or any files attached. Email is not secure and can be
intercepted, corrupted or amended without the knowledge of the sender.
East Lothian Council do not accept liability for errors or omissions
arising as a result of interrupted or defective transmission.
**********************************************************************
_____________________________________________________________________
This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by MCI's Internet Managed
Scanning Services - powered by MessageLabs. For further information
visit http://www.mci.com
|
