Are academic librarians becoming extinct?

If you are a librarian and/or library school student, I really encourage you to take a moment and read this article that was posted by Karen over at the Free Range Librarian-- it really speaks to our profession and where it is headed.

Karen Schneider is the director of the Cushing Library at Holy Names University in Oakland, California. She has over 20 years of library experience and has published over 100 articles, along with 2 books. In this blog post, she responds to Jeff Trzeciak, the University Librarian at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario.

Trzeciak (no clue how that's pronounced) gave a talk earlier this month having to do with the direction that academic libraries should be headed in. The new trend, according to him and many other college library directors, is to do away with traditional library services and replace them with large-scale digital projects carried out by PhD-level academics and  IT professionals. Why? Because digital projects put college libraries on the map and make library directors look good. Problem? Not every college library has the funding, resources or even the need for huge digital collections-- but they are being pursued nonetheless. The result has been many librarians quitting or being laid off because they simply weren't trained to be IT professionals.

So basically (If Jeff's vision goes through), all of us bumbling, old-fashioned librarians will no longer have a place in the academic library world. Oh, and all of us newly-graduated library school students? Yeah, those MSLIS's and MLIS's aren't going to land us an academic librarian job any time soon-- we may as well have paid $50,000+ to have a piece of paper to hang on the wall, because from now on directors will only be hiring candidates with extensive IT backgrounds and even higher-level (and multiple) degrees.

I can speak from personal experience that I have seen this trend occurring in university libraries-- even small ones, and that for me is what is so disturbing. Yes, large schools like Syracuse University and UNC have both the funding to carry out large-scale digital projects AND the kind of collections that draw researchers to their campuses from all over the world. Umm... smaller schools don't have either of those, and yet their directors are still forcing them to compete with the big fish in order-- I am assuming-- to make themselves look good. It's almost as if, and maybe I'm wrong, but it's almost as if the new plan is to have college libraries go in whatever direction is most gratifying to the director's ego. And you know what? I think that any director who values these kinds of projects over traditional library services will ultimately ruin the library they are supposed to be leading.


Our place as librarians in the academic world is to provide research assistance and information literacy instruction to students and faculty-- that is our number one purpose, whatever any director has to say about it. I can only hope that there are more directors out there like Karen who are still realistic enough to understand the value of librarians in the academic world. Otherwise, I truly weep for our profession.

Librarian Lessons: Electronic Resource Management

So every now and then, I take it upon myself to read an article about something I know next to nothing about, in the hopes that I will learn something new. Now, I am far from being a technology-guru (I may have mentioned this before but me and phrases like "structural metadata" and "syntactic interoperability" don't mix). I remember taking a class in digital libraries when I was in library school, and anything that went beyond the bare basics left me with a headache. So with that being said, I stumbled upon a fun-looking article (and I mean that in the broadest sense) in last month's Library Journal called "Building A Better ERMS," written by Maria Collins and Jill E. Grogg.

Electronic Resource Management. Huh. Now here was something that would take me some time to mentally digest. It did turn out to be somewhat thought-provoking for me and I felt even a little smart just sitting there reading it, so that was a plus. Here is a summary of this article and what I managed to carry away from it:

Topic: ERMS, also known as "Electronic Resource Management Systems"

Intro: Librarians have been struggling over the past decade or so, trying to figure out what the best way is to handle the influx of new electronic resources. Learning to manage these resources is no simple matter. According to Collins & Grogg, "the problem is that managing e-resources is a distinctly nonlinear and nonstandardized process." And while the ERM systems that have developed recently address some issues (like license management and storing administrative info) they are still far from being the answer to other librarian needs, such as being interoperable with other systems. In a nutshell, ERM systems are mighty complicated, and the purpose of this article was to take a look at what we currently have, and see how it can be made better based on the needs/wants of today's librarians.

So what are librarians asking for from their typical ERM systems? What are the most important aspects of these tools that make them so valuable to what we do on a daily basis? Here are the 6 top priorities that librarians see for building a good ERMS:

PRIORITY #1: They have to be able to manage workflow and help make it more (not less) efficient

A large chunk of the librarians surveyed for this study said that one of the biggest problems they have with current ERMS is that they aren't efficient and they have poor functionality. ERMS right now make it pretty difficult to move from Task A to Task B because there are so many different systems being used to get library work done, and they're all owned/run by different vendors- none of them work together very well so getting things done takes forever. Besides this, nothing is standardized or centralized in one overall system, so trying to manage e-resources can be a real nightmare. Instead of having a bunch of clunky systems that can't "bend" to the needs of individual branches, digital collections librarians have said that a good ERMS will be flexible enough to adapt to local needs, which are unique to each library. I know all too well how the details of processing collections can differ between various branches! A good ERMS needs to be specific enough that it can support the details of local workflows (AKA how things are done at one branch) but general enough that it's adaptable/customizable across many branches.

PRIORITY #2: They have to be capable of license management


Now, I'm only a part-time librarian at the moment, but I do know that librarians have to deal with licenses and licensing terms A LOT. So far, it seems that ERMS have done a pretty good job in this area. Managing licenses and contracts, being able to categorize them, link them, and make them easily searchable has been one achievement in the development of ERMS. Being able to find specific terms of use, rules and policies, etc. makes it easier for librarians in every department of the library to make informed decisions. The only major issue right now is that a lot of library license terms need to be input manually into the system, which can be a drag and take a lot of time. Things get even trickier when you're using services from a bunch of different vendors, since now you have multiple licensing terms to keep tract of.

PRIORITY #3: They have to be able to manage statistics

Ahh yes, statistics. A part of every librarian job-- love 'em or hate 'em, you need to use them and appreciate how they help increase the value of library resources and services. In general, usage reports are needed to:

                                         *Build monthly and annual overviews of usage at your library
                                         *Measure usage of new publications
                                         *Make informed purchasing decisions
                                         *Understand and predict user patterns

Now, when dealing with statistics it's always helpful to have some sort of standardization so that you can relate the stats to each other, make sense of them and how they connect, and get an overall picture of how your library is doing. With this being said, did you know that librarian-lingo includes an acronym called "SUSHI?" OK, I didn't either, but it does. It stands for "Standardized Usage Statistics Harvesting Initiative," and it's a standard with open source codes (ie. it's free to access and can be re-programmed to suite your needs) to measure how e-resources are being used. Using this code, libraries can retrieve and enter usage statistics (in the form of "COUNTER reports") in a standardized/consistent way, and librarians are saved the laborious process of generating spreadsheet reports themselves (which doesn't sound like much fun).
Basically, as it stands right now, statistics management is difficult with ERMS because they don't support the SUSHI standard, so librarians are still entering stats and generating reports manually. This is another thing they would like fixed with current ERMS.


PRIORITY #4: They'll be able to efficiently store administrative information


ERMS need to be able to store and make accessible info like staff usernames and passwords, vendor contacts, orders, and notes on past problems. So far, they have done a pretty good job of sticking all this metadata into one centralized place, but it still has to be entered manually, which is a pain.

PRIORITY #5: They'll support acquisitions functionality


Librarians really want a centralized, stream-lined system that can support all acquisition functions- managing funds, projecting budgets, generating expenditure reports (by category)- and be able to track all of this data over time. Right now ERMS aren't very good at this, and librarians are still entering things like cost data manually.


PRIORITY #6: They should be interoperable


Interoperability is a big one. Pretty much all librarians have identified the need for systems that can work together, but it's still something that's largely absent in current ERMS. For the most part they work just swell by themselves, but try to get them to work together and talk to one another, and they freak out. This makes data transfer nearly impossible. There needs to be a greater level of integration between library systems: the ILS (Integrated Library System) should work with various knowledgebases and vendor systems. Right now, the lack of interoperability is due to a lack of standards between vendors, libraries, and publishers. Luckily, all of these entities are working together with standards organizations (like NISO) to develop said standards and make systems more integrated. This, in theory, will make them able to function between each other and not just as a stand-alone system.

Up until now, the implementation of data standards and best practices has been minimal, so interoperability between ERMS is still a big issue. A lack of system interoperability has led to a bunch of other frustrating problems for librarians-- poor reporting of statistics, no data maintenance (so it just sits there, static and not updated), and inconsistent info being given to the public are just a few.

[NOTE: NISO stands for the National Information Standards Organization- I know we all learned about this in library school, but I always need reminders for all these acronyms. NISO sets technical standards for publishing, bibliographic and library applications.]

*****

So... what exactly does all this add up to and why the heck is it so important to me? Well, the whole reason I wanted to look at ERM systems and what they're meant to accomplish is because we are heading into an ever-evolving digital world, and it's essential for today's librarian to at least be aware of new resource types, access methods and purchasing models if they want to stay on top of their game. There are many challenges that go along with electronic resource management: how do we buy/acquire these resources? How do we keep and maintain them? How do we provide access to them? Right now, there is no one, single system that can do all of this.

A final note

The article ends with this: "Building a better and more responsive ERMS is an iterative process, and no emerging system is a silver bullet. Nonetheless, it is possible to work together toward a more integrated e-resource solution." I think that what they're getting at is taking a more holistic approach to managing e-resources, instead of concentrating on the smaller aspects of management that have gotten to be so disconnected.

[Article: Collins, M. & J. E. Grogg. (2011, March 1). Building a better ERMS. Library Journal.]

I know that, for me anyways, a lot of this stuff can seem pretty dry, but hey, it's definitely good to be aware of! Have you had any experience with electronic resource management in your libraries, or have you had the chance to wrap your head around the kinds of issues presented in this article? Just wondering-- I don't think that we necessarily have to be computer geniuses, but getting a handle on what's up will help make us that much more valuable in our own jobs :)

And on that note, it is almost Friday and time to enjoy one (or two!) of these...

 

To all my librarians out there, have a great weekend!!

The Naughty Librarian

OK, so I had to post about this after I saw it on one of my fave librarian blogs-- the lovely ladies (Mary and Holly) over at Awful Library Books posted a real gem today! Check out What the Librarian Did, a steamy Harlequin Romance with an equally juicy synopsis :) I was laughing pretty hard when I saw this-- especially the sub-title: "She's got a secret that's long overdue." C'mon now. If that's not the most awesome hook ever, I don't know what is. I just might have to go find this in one of my local libraries...

Have a lovely Tuesday and happy reading to all of my fellow librarians :)

Measuring Success in Academic Libraries

How do you measure the success of academic libraries and librarians?

This is the question brought up by Jennifer Howard in an article recently published in The Chronicle of Higher Education. The important issue of effectively demonstrating in a meaningful way the library's value to the academic institution as a whole was one of the main points of discussion at ACRL's conference last week. As an academic librarian, this article really got me thinking about how success can be measured to show how the library is having a positive impact on students, faculty and the overall institution.

Howard states that, "Like most of academe, libraries have been feeling increased pressure to justify themselves quantitatively." Now, when I think of quantitative research, I think statistics, statistics and more statistics. Graphs, charts, tables, numbers, blah, blah, blah-- don't get me wrong, they are definitely important, but they hardly paint the complete picture of how successful the library is at creating a presence and fulfilling the needs of students and faculty. Empirical observation and basic measurement are absolutely necessary to understanding the impact an academic library is having. I think this numerical basis gives weight to the librarian's claim that, hey, we are doing a good job. See? Look at what we've done and here are the numbers reflecting our success.

However, and this is a BIG however, I do not think that libraries should be forced to justify themselves or their success based on quantitative standards alone. Numbers after all, can only reveal so much.

Enter return on investment. The disturbing fact is that many academic libraries are now being forced to show in quantitative terms just what they are contributing financially to the institution. I don't want to go off on a tangent about how so many colleges and especially universities have become nothing more than cash cows, but this new trend seems pretty ludicrous to me. James G. Neal, the Vice President for Information Services
and University Librarian at Columbia University, seems to think so, too:

Return on investment "has become the new mantra of academic libraries, a relentless and in many ways foolish effort to quantify impact in the face of budget challenges and the questioning of our continuing relevance to the academy in an all-digital information world... ROI instruments and calculations fundamentally do not work for academic libraries, and present naive and misinterpreted assessments of our roles and impacts at our institutions and across higher education. New and rigorous qualitative measures of success are needed."

Neal believes that libraries need to be focusing much more on going back to the basics: WHO are our users, WHAT is it that they need and WHAT is it they want. HOW are they interacting with librarians, the library space and the resources/services being offered? HOW can librarians interact with library patrons and find out what is needed to make them happy and satisfied with their library? HOW do we draw in new patrons who have never even been inside the library and keep them coming back? The focus should be on the how's, not the how many's. 

I am only too aware of how undervalued the academic library is at many of today's educational institutions; both large and small, rural and urban, public and private. After reading this article, it has become even more apparent how librarians really need to spend more time assessing their own assessments and making qualitative measurements just as much of a priority as quantitative ones. This is the only way to reveal the hidden value that libraries otherwise have no way of showing through numbers alone.

Patrons, Computers, and the Red Tape In-Between

I was working at one of the city branches the other day and I had a patron come up to the circulation desk and say that she needed to use one of the computers but she had left her library card at home. My initial reaction was to simply ask her for some form of I.D. so I could look up her card number so she could get on. Simple, quick solution to make the patron happy, right?

Um, well, the branch manager wasn’t too happy. Right after, he took me aside to say that’s not how things are done (at that specific branch—as I’ve mentioned before, all the city branches are supposed to follow the same rules and policies, but they almost never do. I highly doubt this is an issue only in my local library system!). The rule was: no library card, many hoops to jump through to get onto a computer. Ask for I.D. Has the patron already been given a guest pass to use the computers without a card before? Then we can’t give them one again. Is the patron’s account delinquent? Has it gone to collections? Can’t issue a new card. If they want to pay a dollar, they can get a temporary paper card with their library card number on it to use the computers (which is, essentially, what I did—only I didn’t ask for a dollar and I didn’t bother looking at anything besides the patron’s I.D.)

So… I don’t know about you, but I have some serious problems with this whole convoluted procedure of giving patrons access to the computers. Now, obviously, I don’t think it should be a free-for-all where anyone can come in and sit on a computer surfing facebook all day while other patrons need to get on and look for jobs or work on their online classes—but at the same time, I really believe that if a patron comes in and asks to use a computer for the given 60 minutes—we should let them, library card or not. I think we should encourage patrons to get library cards, and I think there should be certain consequences for overdue accounts that have over a hundred dollars worth of fines on them—but I don’t like the idea of taking away the Internet as a way of doing that. I believe having equal access to computers in libraries should not be considered a “privilege” with lots of red tape barring the way to getting on one—it should be a basic service that we offer to anyone and everyone, regardless of the status of their library card.

What do you think? Should we restrict computer and Internet use to only those patrons that 1.) have library cards, 2.) bring their cards, or 3.) have no fines on their account? When is it O.K. to give a patron their library card number in the case where they forget it? Is it a big deal to hand out their numbers if they bring proper I.D. or does this lead to security issues? Should there be a limit as to how many times a patron is allowed a “guest pass” to get onto the Internet without their own card?

These are all questions that I have been asking myself lately, because I think it is important that libraries offer certain things to their patrons that have little to no strings attached—we are here to serve our communities and grant access to information, especially to those that have no other way of getting it. While I can see both sides of this issue, I lean more towards making it easy for patrons to use the computers without lots of red tape. This not only helps them; it also puts libraries in a more positive light, supporting the ideals that we uphold- namely, free and equal access to knowledge and information. As librarians, I think we should be doing all that we can to support this.

"Who Needs Libraries?"

I just finished reading a short yet passionate article on the increased need for library services in the midst of budget cuts during difficult economic times. The article (don't let the length of the title scare you, it's only like a page)-- Let-Them-Eat-Cake Attitude Threatens to Destroy a Network of Public Assets-- was written by Scott Turow, who is an author as well as president of The Authors Guild. I believe that every librarian should know and understand the points that Turow brings up here, since we are living in a world where so many people have come to believe that libraries are completely out-dated and out of place in a society as "developed" as our own.

If you are a librarian or library-student, I am sure that you have experienced the same reactions from people as I have when you get asked the question, "What are you majoring in?" or, "What do you do for a living?" I have found that about 80% of the time, when I say "Oh, I'm a librarian," they give me an awkward look and say something equally awkward like, "Oh... that's-- nice." (This is usually followed by the sound of crickets in the background.) I may as well have said that I'm a telephone switchboard-operator. Sometimes, a person will stop and say something along the lines of: "Huh. But don't you think libraries will eventually fade out? Along with books? I mean, we have the Internet..."

Honestly, I never really know how to respond to this because, first of all, where do I begin trying to point out that libraries are not exclusively synonymous with BOOKS? Secondly, how do you make someone understand the incredible importance of libraries in communities that are not entirely made up of nice, middle-class families with 2+ computers at home and unlimited access to the Internet all the time? Thirdly, how do I explain that the Web is hardly the greatest source for many kinds of information without making it sound condescending?

Well, studying this article might be a good start.

Turow points out the many great things that libraries provide for the communities they serve-- and how those services are now being threatened by so many disproportionate budget cuts from local and state governments. Here are a few things that Turow highlights:

• Libraries are one of the greatest ways to "guarantee that we can maintain a well-informed citizenry."
• Having the "mistaken belief that [libraries] are somehow anachronistic in an age when so many Americans have instant computer access to information through the Internet... is, frankly, a let-them-eat-cake attitude that threatens to destroy a network of public assets that remains critical to our society."
• Two-thirds of libraries have reported that they are the only source for free access to computers, computer training, and the Internet in their communities.
• For thousands of American kids, "libraries are the only safe place they can find to study, a haven from the dangers of the street..." (I know this all too well from working at over ten city branch libraries!)
• "For the elderly, libraries are often important community centers that help them escape the loneliness of old age."
• "Most important of all, perhaps, a library within a community stand as a testimonial to its values, and its belief in universal access to literature and knowledge."

Hopefully, we can work to peacefully tear down the elitist attitude that says libraries are no longer relevant in America-- because it is clearer than ever that they are not only relevant; they are integral to the very fabric of our society, and they are continuing to bring aide to millions of people in our troubled economy. As a public librarian, I fully support the message Turow presents here in this article, and  hope I will be able to share that message with others.

You might also want to check out SaveLibraries.org and ALA's ILoveLibraries.org to learn more about advocacy for your local libraries :)

"You Know What Really Grinds My Gears...?" A Much-Needed Rant from a Substitute Librarian

**Long, heavy sigh**

OK, I don't want to include too many "rants" here, but there's something I have to get off my chest. Let me preface this by saying- I am a substitute librarian for a city. As such, I am sent to sub at approximately ten different branches. Now, these are all under central administration, so technically they're all supposed to follow the same rules and policies, but in reality this usually isn't the case. Each branch has a slightly different way of doing things, different places where they keep things, completely different layouts, and about 50 different names I have to remember to match to faces. I really don't mind working in such varied circumstances- in fact, I enjoy the experience of getting to see the unique character of each library and the community it serves, while also getting really good on-the-job training as a newer librarian. I consider myself pretty lucky to have this job.

But here is what I cannot stand: I am sent to a new branch I've never been to before and the staff treat me 1.) like I'm a complete imbecile who has no clue how to work in a library or 2.) like it's incomprehensible that I don't know something specific to that branch. Usually, though not always, this is an issue I have with the clerks. And today I got to work with some real gems.  The two clerks there had clearly been working together at this branch for a long time and were not too thrilled to have to work with someone new (ie. me). The entire day I was there they either ignored my presence completely or acted like I was a nuisance/in their way. And forget about asking simple questions like, where do you put the holds, or what is your policy on computer use? Each time I received the most condescending answer ever- like how could I not know how they do things? And get this: they actually said I needed to be initiated! Now, I don't mind some good-natured joking around or poking fun but really? C'mon, this isn't a sorority, although I kind of felt like I was in one with these two...

I took it all in stride but by the end of the day I was super frustrated. Even worse than their incredibly unprofessional behavior towards me, they were very unpleasant and abrasive towards patrons-- and even justified being rude and grumpy because "they had been there so long." Apparently I was supposed to be impressed that they had such a long record of working there. Ugh.

Honestly, I very rarely run into library staff that act this way, and in most cases I receive the greatest help and understanding from librarians and clerks who get the fact that, hey, how they do things at one branch can be completely different from how they do things at another, and it can be very difficult to keep tract of all those things. To all of those wonderful library staff, I am very grateful, because they have taught me a lot and have been very supportive as I learn the ropes at all the different city branches.

I guess what really irritates me is that I try at all times to be as professional as possible. I am only 26 years old, but I still expect the people I work with to be equally professional and to treat me as their colleague, not as their inferior. I don't know if any other younger librarians, or substitute librarians, or other professionals for that matter, have experienced less-than-desirable treatment from certain people who assume that age is an indicator of competence and ability to perform well on the job. 

I will end this on a positive note: besides the two "sorority sisters" I worked with, I really had a great day working with patrons. There were a lot of reference questions dealing with all sorts of different things, which kept me on my toes and made the time go by really fast. Thanks to my patrons, I left in a good mood, knowing that I had been of some useful service to them :)

And that, after all, is what really matters.