Week 5 Already

Christine Pawley, Hegemony's Handmaid? The Library and Information Studies Curriculum from a Class Perspective

I've found myself expecting others, even my peers in SLIS, to think less of my studies when I mention that I'm interested in children's librarianship. I really do feel, as Pawley says, that there is a "low status of courses for those intending to work with children and young people.” Her comment that we sometimes tend to focus on already privileged groups (such as doctors and lawyers) reaffirmed my desire to work with children or non-native English speakers. It’s not that I think other kinds of information assistance isn’t valuable, but I came into the program hoping to end up in a job where I felt like I was helping people who need it and might otherwise not be helped. Pawley claims (and I think I agree) that librarians’ work ends up protecting current class structures. How do we shift our work to helping ensure equality in the spread of information without losing support (and funding) from those in power?

Christine's comments on corporate power the production and distribution of information reminded me of the uneasiness I felt when San Francisco's relatively new (I just looked it up—I suppose1996 doesn’t quite qualify as “new”) main public library branch opened with rooms such as the "Chevron Corporation Teen Center" and the "BankAmerica Jobs and Careers Center." Several of the rooms seem to have been sponsored by individuals or foundations, but many have corporate names, raising interesting questions about which names we choose to have in our public library areas.

What are some other possible homes for LIS departments if not in universities?

J.K. Elmborg, Teaching at the Desk: Toward a Reference Pedagogy

As a former college writing tutor and half-English major, I was intrigued by Elmborg’s proposal to use composition studies as a basis for re-shaping our view of reference. I hadn’t really drawn a connection between my English/writing background and my library studies education other than the obvious ones of research and dealing with texts. The general move toward student-guided learning and teaching independence seems to me a sound one, though I did have an internal moment of “there go our jobs!” when Elmborg suggested that we create self-sufficient patrons. The strongest part of his argument, in my mind, is that in finding materials for a user, we impose our values and ideas on their work—a reference librarian can’t help but weed out some of the results of a search, but what the user would weed out herself might be different. The greatest difficulty in moving toward a teaching-based reference desk would be, I think, overcoming the patron’s expectation of a fast and relevant answer. This becomes especially difficult when the reference is handled by telephone, email, a Web-based form, or online chatting. I also believe that there is a time and place even in a traditional setting for a librarian to hand a user a list of materials, especially when the user is already well-versed in information searching.

Ruth C.T. Morris, Toward a User-Centered Information Service

Even with all of the definitions of “information” we’ve come across in the past few weeks, one succinct statement that Morris made stuck with me throughout the article: “Information does not exist in the abstract—it needs to be interpreted.” We don’t call a table of random numbers “information” unless we want to use it in some way, or to make a point about it. Her argument really hinges on this. The “sense-making model” sees information as subjective and changeable, and I agree both that this is a more accurate representation of information and that we don’t normally think of information this way—we normally see information as something objective and concrete and found in print. It’s a hard process to change this, both for users and librarians. How do we go about it? Specifically, how do librarians go about handling a new way of reference without alienating users who are accustomed to the old method? I’m also curious: how much has already changed in the 14 years since publication? In closing, I love that “Ambiguous Information Needs” has an acronym.

Wayne Wiegand, Mom and Me: A Difference in Information Values

Who hasn’t had a similar experience with a parent? My mom recently bought a cordless phone for her parents and spent 3 evenings at their house trying to install it, only to discover eventually that a component of the phone was bad. She finally acknowledged that Grandma and Grandpa were perfectly right that their rotary phone is all they need. We’ve tried to get them to watch DVDs, to try out the Internet, and to use a video camera that takes something smaller than full-size VHS tapes… all with minimal success. Wiegand’s car-shopping tale was a great example of the information gap between generations. What was less obvious and needed to be pointed out was his call to see information as a social construct, and his explicit statement that we need to “respect the ability of people to determine for themselves the value of the information they seek or come in contact with.” I think many of us might roll our eyes or try to change a technologically-challenged older relative, and that we might extend the same reaction to people of different class systems, cultural heritage, or geographic location is a scary thought. It seems to me that the best approach to introducing something (a new way of researching, for example) is to do it in a neutral way, a way that says, here’s an idea: take it if it’s useful to you, but I’m not offended if you choose to use something else.