Author: Derek Murphy

In social psychology, the contact hypothesis of prejudice reduction holds that sustained personal interaction with members of a group can decrease negative feelings and prejudice toward that group. Following this principle, a recent development in public and academic libraries has made a marked difference in divided communities.

Beginning at an anti-violence festival in Copenhagen in 2000, the Human Library has taken on a life of its own, with events held at public and academic libraries, festivals, and conferences in every continent. At a Human Library event, it’s not books or media that are on loan, it’s people. Patrons, or “Readers”, at the library can check out “Human Books”, volunteers who represent a marginalized group or who have a unique story to tell. Typically, Readers are presented with a list of Books and allowed to choose whom they’d like to check out. When a Reader checks out a Book, the two individuals sit down for a conversation. Readers are able to ask the Book the questions they’ve always wondered but been too afraid to ask. Often Readers are encouraged to ask about common stereotypes related to the Book. For example, those who are misinformed about Islam and harbor negative views towards Muslims could speak with a Muslim Book and have their prejudices weakened through friendly, compassionate discourse.

Potentially rocky conversations like this need to happen in the right kind of venue, to minimize the potential for conflict and foster positive interactions. Libraries are a natural fit. As community learning centers, they promote a spirit of inquiry and discovery. They are calm, quiet, and comfortable. People are used to keeping interactions calm and low-key in a library. Libraries are widely recognized as a safe space.

I recently spoke with Rosanne Rosella, Adult Program Coordinator at the Henrietta Public Library (HPL), about a Human Library program they conducted in September of this year. Lately the HPL has been experimenting with new types of programming including running pop-up libraries around town. They’re currently planning to build a little free library. Running a Human Library program fit right in with these initiatives.

Their first challenge was seeking out volunteers to serve as Human Books. They first made a list of potential demographics their Books could represent. They considered the dynamics of their local community when brainstorming ideas. Rochester has the nation’s largest deaf population per capita, so they sought to include a deaf person in their program.  They contacted high profile community members (like Arun Gandhi, non-violence activist and grandson of Mohandas Gandhi), people who’d broken new ground in the community (like a black woman who’d served as the first woman patrol officer in Rochester’s police force), and people whose personal lives intersect with political controversy (like a married gay couple living in Rochester). Some of their Books came to them unbidden—one employee asked if she could represent people with learning disabilities in the program. They interviewed their potential Books to ensure that they’d fit the goals of the program and would be able to carry on potentially difficult conversations with strangers in an amiable way.

The event was a success. Attendance was good for a mid-sized community library. The demographics of the attendees were in line with the general demographics of their other programs’ attendees: mostly young seniors around their early 60’s. There were a few younger couples and a family with teenagers as well. Many of the Readers were regular program attendees, but there was also a surprising boost in attendance thanks to the efforts of the Books. One Book advertised the event at her church, and a lot of her fellow churchgoers came to see her at the library. The Readers in attendance were very positive about the experience. The Books had enjoyed the experience as well, and some of them were very moved by it. The previously-mentioned gay couple remarked that they were surprised at how deep the Readers’ questions were, and said they’d been changed by the experience. Rosella hopes that Readers had their minds changed in positive ways from the interactions the program had fostered.

Rosella would love to run a Human Library program again. She feels that about eighteen months would be a good buffer period between Human Library programs, so that it’s a fresh and surprising experience every time. For librarians looking to run their own Human Library programs, she recommends that special attention be paid to the logistics of connecting Readers with Books. Typically Readers are given a set period of time to converse with a Book, to ensure that the Book is able to speak with every interested Reader during the program. It can be difficult to organize the transitions from Reader to Reader, as keeping the timing straight for all of the Books at once can be daunting. Rosella recommends having an individual volunteer assigned to each Book, if possible, to help keep things running smoothly. Before running a Human Library program, it’s a good idea to contact the Copenhagen-based Human Library Organization. They provide free support to all Human Library events in the form of print training materials, web publicity, and more.

Human Library programs aren’t just bringing community members together, they’re also bringing organizations together. The HPL’s program was not the first Human Library event in Rochester, NY; the Rochester Public Library had previously teamed up with the University of Rochester’s libraries to run a successful event this past January. This partnership is an excellent example of how public and academic libraries can collaborate to better serve both of their patron pools. Their collaboration didn’t stop with their first program either. They’re now planning on teaming up to create a catalog of all Human Books who have made appearances in Rochester to date, to facilitate in running future Human Library Programs. The University of Rochester produced this lovely video of one of their past Human Library Programs:

You’ve probably been there at some point in your life: You’ve met someone whose lived experience is completely different to yours. You want to learn more about them, but you worry that your questions might come off as uninformed, gauche, or flat-out offensive. Usually these questions go unasked, but now librarians have the power to create safe spaces for this kind of dialog, and in this way help to stamp out prejudice in our communities.

 

(Post by Derek Murphy)

Open access is a matter of publishers and paywalls, research and restrictions, copyright and creative commons. Just last week, librarians and information professionals of all stripes spoke out in support of open access publishing, as part of International Open Access Week 2014. Open access publishing is an often-overlooked issue that has an outsized impact on everyone—academics, publishers, scientists, medical practitioners, students, and even the everyday person-on-the-street.

When an academic paper is published in a subscription journal, it’s traditional for the publisher to assume control of the paper’s copyright, and release the paper only to those institutions that pay a subscription fee. Unfortunately, as The Guardian notes, “the price of journals has exploded. Harvard, the richest university in the world, says it can’t keep up and has started cutting subscriptions. This is happening everywhere.” It’s already extremely difficult for members of the public who aren’t affiliated with major universities to access many traditionally published papers. Now that universities are being priced out of the game too, even those who’d normally have full access are finding themselves wanting.

Most cutting-edge research in the US is funded in some way by the federal government and, ultimately, the tax-paying public. When access to these papers is restricted to wealthy institutions, members of the general public who contribute to the process are unable to see the results. Though public libraries do their best to provide access to major databases, when high-powered schools like Harvard can’t keep up, it’s hard to imagine public libraries’ comparatively smaller budgets being sufficient. Oftentimes, new research contains information with the power to potentially change the lives of regular people, but they aren’t able to see it or make use of it.

Proponents of open access are working on ways to curb these problems. An open access paper is one which can be accessed on the internet for free, with no restrictions on who can view and download it. In its purest form, sometimes called libre open access, it guarantees that papers are subject to less restrictive copyright controls. Libre open access papers let users “copy, use, distribute, transmit and display the work publicly and to make and distribute derivative works, in any digital medium for any responsible purpose, subject to proper attribution of authorship…” Not all open access papers have this quality, but it is generally striven for.

There are any number of ways for an author to release their paper as open access, but two paths are the most common. First off, in the last decade we’ve seen a proliferation of new open access journals entering the picture. An open access journal does not place any restrictions on who can access its contents, and does not charge a fee for access. Its contents are available for free on the internet. Open access journals still conduct peer review, so there is still robust quality control on what gets selected for inclusion. Open Access Journals are funded in a variety of ways. Some accept author fees, some are funded by an institution, some feature advertising, et cetera. The Directory of Open Access Journals indexes all open access journals to facilitate discovery.

The other most popular way of releasing an open access paper is to place it in an open repository or archive. Repositories don’t peer review papers or institute any other method of quality control. They mainly serve as a simple access point for papers, though they also often do what they can to provide long-term preservation as well. An open repository is accessible to anyone, without restrictions. Even if a paper has been published by a closed journal, if the original author has retained the paper’s copyright then she or he can still put it in an open repository without consequence. Traditionally, closed journals retain a paper’s copyright, but as part of the push for open access many authors have insisted on retaining control of the copyright when publishing.

Open access does more than just help people read your paper. It also allows more options for its usage. In his article on Massive Open Online Course syllabuses, Simmons SLIS alumnus Kyle Courtney points out that MOOCs don’t have the same legal fair-use protections that regular university courses do, making it very hard to assign readings. Because a MOOC’s students are not necessarily enrolled in the college, it’s considered copyright infringement for the school to provide them access to articles from closed journals and databases. In some cases, instructors can’t even share their own writing without breaking the law, as they’d assigned their copyright to a publisher upon publication. In his article, Courtney recommends four different strategies for solving this problem, and the strongest of them involve open access. He recommends using open access articles in MOOCs, and either publishing your paper as open access in the first place, or striking a contractual deal with your publisher allowing you the rights to your own open access copy of the paper for unrestricted use in the future. This way, you maximize availability to course readings for students who may not have access to closed databases or the money to purchase assigned texts.

The American Library Association officially supports the open access movement, and has published a handy briefing summarizing it and explaining its relevance for librarians. It includes this pretty definitive list of ways that librarians can support the open access movement:

• Plan workshops for faculty about why open access is important to them and what they should know when publishing.
• Advocate for the inclusion of open-access journals in the pool of publications used when evaluating for tenure.
• Educate public library users on how open-access issues impact their ability to access pertinent information, particularly medical and other scientific information.
• Encourage the use of open-access repositories and journals by including them in our electronic resources, LibGuides and other local information sources.
• Promote the copyright rights of authors by educating faculty on negotiating with publishers regarding the deposit of published articles in digital repositories for access and preservation.
• Avoid looking at open access as a “technology issue.” Open access is as much an information freedom issue, and librarians outside of digital collections, scholarly communications and IT departments are needed to engage with stakeholders, both representing their interests to the library and educating them about open-access issues.
• Subscribe to discussion lists and use RSS feeds to remain abreast of changes and advancements in the open-access movement.
• Learn about the relationship between open access and copyright.
• Remind patrons that if they pay federal taxes, they have funded federal research, including research conducted by federal grant recipients.

The open access movement appears to be making good progress, as Nature’s news blog recently announced that more than half of research articles published from 2007-2012 are now free to read. Hopefully we’ll see this trend increasing in the future as early-career researchers stick to their guns on open access.

 

P.S. For further information on open access, please see Peter Suber’s extremely thorough and elegant overview of the subject, as well as Simmons SLIS’s own Open Access Directory, which links to a panoply of related resources. Also of interest is Jill Walker Rettberg’s explanation of how she was able to publish a full scholarly book with an open access license.

 

(Post by Derek Murphy)

Last week, the Knight Foundation held a competition to find and fund new proposals on the prompt: “How might we leverage libraries as a platform to build more knowledgeable communities?” The Knight News Challenge is now closed for entries, and their site has offered up the submissions they received for the public’s perusal. Browsing through them, I noticed a common goal: furthering use of open-source programming by LIS professionals. In her eloquent proposal, Simmons GSLIS alum Andromeda Yelton explained why this is important: “When librarians have programming skills, they can build better services for patrons, save time, and customize their software tools for their local mission.”

One of the most helpful tools librarians are using for programming projects is the open-source development application GitHub. GitHub is a cloud-based service which is used to organize efforts among multiple programmers working together on the same open-source software project. Similarly to Dropbox, it connects local files on your computer with copies of those same files stored on the cloud.

GitHub is capable of much more than storage, though. The main draw of GitHub is its implementation of source code management. GitHub can track many aspects of the project’s code, both in the relationships between files and within the files themselves. It can work with all major text-based coding files, including HTML, LaTeX, XML, SQL, config, and more. It allows for version control, which gives the user the ability to revert parts of a project, or an entire project, to any previous version through the history of the project. This means that if a glitch is introduced in February but you don’t notice it until June, you could roll back the project to February’s version in order to fix it. GitHub keeps track of which files have been edited by which users and when, and it automatically syncs these edits into one common project folder. This functionality also allows for file conflict resolution: if two programmers edit the same file at the same time, then GitHub will point out which lines in the code were changed, and which lines were edited by both users. This means that multiple users can work in tandem without worrying about inconsistencies because of the fail-safes GitHub puts in place. This also allows for “branching” the project so that two versions of the project can be worked on independently from the same root. This comes in handy when developers keep one branch of the project as a “stable” version while working on an “unstable” branch, which gets more frequent updates but is also more prone to unexpected glitches.

In his article “The Librarian’s Arsenal: Git & GitHub”, Topher Lawton points out a use case of GitHub that has proven very helpful to LIS professionals: “GitHub expands the branching abilities of Git into “forking,” which allows users to clone code into their own repository . . . Forking code makes it possible for librarians to tailor other projects to the specifications we need. It’s a shared, open-source way of co-creating content that librarians should take advantage of.” He then mentions a salient example of this in the field: the LibraryBox.

The LibraryBox project was originally forked from another GitHub project, David Darts’ “PirateBox”. The PirateBox is a portable hardware device which allows for the anonymous local spread of digital files independently from the internet. It’s a small box which any devices in range can connect with wirelessly to download files from it or upload files to it. During the PirateBox’s development, librarian Jason Griffey created a fork from the project where he endeavored to work from the PirateBox’s source code in order to create a new tool for libraries. The LibraryBox does the same things as the PirateBox, but it locks down control over the device to one user, so that it’s more useful for distribution than back-and-forth filesharing. This way, an institution running a LibraryBox can use it to distribute digital items such as ebooks to patrons in areas that lack consistent internet access without worrying about bad actors uploading copyrighted works or objectionable material.

Another GitHub-based LIS project, “Project GITenberg”, is currently a part of Knight News Challenge’s submissions roster. They’re using GitHub to crowdsource metadata for Project Gutenberg’s 45,000 public domain ebooks. In this case, the work that needs to be done isn’t especially difficult, but there’s a whole lot of it and it’s difficult to coordinate. GitHub’s unique ability to organize many contributors’ efforts under one project makes this challenge much less daunting. If their ambitions are met, then it will be a great deal easier for libraries to offer these ebooks to their patrons.

As the ability to program becomes more and more essential, it’s little wonder that a good number of libraries are currently making use of GitHub for many kinds of projects. Code4Lib has collected a handy list of them here. If librarians can adopt open source programming on a large scale, then one can only imagine the breadth of innovations ahead of us.

 

 

(Post by Derek Murphy)

The 2014 Horizon Report for Higher Education, released by the New Media Consortium and EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative, identifies trends, challenges, and technologies that they predict will have a significant impact on the short-term future of higher education. In two-to-three years, they predict, games and gamification will reach mainstream adoption.

The American Library Association defines gamification as “the process of applying game-thinking and game dynamics, which make a game fun, to the non-game context in order to engage people and solve problems.” Gamification is already widespread in non-higher-ed contexts. Because gamification can take so many forms, there are a number of organizations using it to accomplish a large range of goals.

The web application Habit RPG helps users manage their personal affairs by gamifying their to-do lists. Users have an avatar which they can level up, go on quests with, and buy equipment for. This is all accomplished using the gold and experience points they gain from “defeating” the tasks they’ve set for themselves. I’ve personally used Habit RPG to help me stay on task while editing a feature film, and it’s helped me get work done more consistently than I would have otherwise.

Foldit is a web game designed by Biology researchers at the University of Washington. Players solve spatial reasoning puzzles which are designed such that their solutions contribute to research on protein folding. The top-scoring solutions to these problems are analyzed by the university’s researchers for valuable insights into the structural configuration of real-world proteins. Most of those who play Foldit aren’t even involved in biology research! By adding an abstract gaming layer over a difficult computational problem, the researchers were able to crowd-source important contributions to the field from non-experts.

Corporations often use gamification as a marketing tool, to encourage customers to give them repeat business. Starbucks has had remarkable success with a gamified rewards system. Whenever customers use Starbucks’ rewards app to make a purchase, they’re given a gold star. After a certain number of stars, customers level up, unlocking perks like free refills, free drinks, etc. This program was a major success, with membership in the rewards program doubling from 2012 to 2013.

With the success these applications of gamification have had, it’s little wonder that educators are looking to harness it for their classes. I spoke with one of our own professors here at Simmons College, Mary Wilkins-Jordan, about her experiences using gamification in an academic course.

In the summer of 2013, Wilkins-Jordan was teaching three online LIS classes: “Management,” “Reference”, and “Management in Public Libraries”. She had just read Jane McGonigal’s book on gamification, Reality is Broken, and it had inspired her to action. She decided to unify her three classes by introducing an original Alternate Reality Game (ARG) titled “Saving Kingston”.

At the very beginning of the summer session, along with their syllabi, students received a cryptic email introducing Kingston, a New England town which was having some trouble keeping corporeal. The city was constantly vanishing and appearing at different points in space-time. This being very bad for business, tourism, and peace of mind, the town decided to hire some LIS contractors to tighten up their epistemological/ontological standing. Wilkins-Jordan’s students were to take the role of the contractors, improving the city’s LIS capabilities to help it maintain its reference points.

We all hope they can help us; they only have until Aug 2 to accomplish everything. Otherwise we disappear – possibly forever! #SaveKingston

— City of Kingston (@SavingKingston) June 2, 2013

In order to integrate three separate classes into one ARG, Wilkins-Jordan created a fourth course page on Moodle (the main SLIS LMS) specifically for the game. Students visiting the page were greeted with a representation of the town with various locations that could be visited and NPCs which could be interacted with. Kingston’s accessible locations included examples of most major types of library, and when students requested more (e.g. a correctional facility library and an art museum library) Wilkins-Jordan added them. Students visiting Kingston’s libraries found them completely disorganized and poorly run. There were staff lists, budget write-ups, disaster plans, and other organizational documents available, but they betrayed an unfortunate lack of competence. As the city’s new LIS contractors, students were able to join an organization that aligned with their career goals and endeavor to improve their functioning. Such was the game’s goal: to elevate these organizations enough to level them up from Aluminum to Platinum by the end of the summer session.

Wilkins-Jordan had some lofty goals when she began this ARG. First off, she wanted to encourage personal interaction between students, a factor that is all too often lacking in online courses. To this end, she equipped the ARG moodle with many discussion boards for every aspect of the game. She encouraged students to use them by decreeing that she would not answer any questions until they had first been posed to other students on a discussion board. Additionally, she incorporated teams into the game—each organization in Kingston needed multiple students on board, handling different leadership roles according to which of the three courses they were enrolled in. This aspect of the course was a resounding success. Students were not only interacting via the discussion boards, they were also emailing, collaborating through Google Docs, and even video chatting. The game fostered relationships more memorable than most online courses.

Another main goal of the game was to foster creativity. In his article “Games, Gamification, and the Quest for Learner Engagement”, Karl M. Kapp argues that games which allow for frequent, low-consequence failure encourage learners to “explore the content, take chances with their decision making, and be exposed to realistic consequences for making a wrong or poor decision.” Saving Kingston made use of this principle by including a large number of low-stakes tasks with built-in feedback and revision. This allowed students to be creative in their work and modify their approaches on the fly based on peer responses.

Lastly, Wilkins-Jordan hoped her game would bring about a high level of self-motivation in her students. To this end, she did not make playing the game fully mandatory (though the syllabi did state that students who participated were more likely to receive an A). Because the game allowed for a choice in whether or not to fully participate, students felt more ownership over their participation. All students were given instructor privileges, allowing them to edit the ARG’s moodle to add locations and NPCs to the game, further increasing their ownership over it. The fantasy storyline, the incremental leveling up, and the peer interaction all contributed to a sense of fun that kept students going. In the end there was 100% participation in the game, and many students continued playing until the end, even after they’d already reached their personal goals.

Wilkins-Jordan admitted that running the ARG added a lot of time and effort on top of her usual course preparation, but for her it was worth it. She enjoyed running the game, and plans to try another course ARG in the future. Some of the course’s students were outspoken in their enjoyment of the course, as seen in this series of blog posts by Julie Steenson.

Mary Wilkins-Jordan is not the only LIS educator experimenting with gamification. The Syracuse University iSchool’s Scott Nicholson runs the Because Play Matters Game Lab, which studies the ways that games can support education. At Purdue University, educators are using a new Learning Management System called Passport which awards students with virtual badges for accomplishing academic achievements. At the University of Michigan’s School of Information, Professor Cliff Lampe uses role playing and game-based tasks in his introductory courses. It’s clear that there’s a trend forming, and it will be interesting to see the direction it takes in the next few years.

 

(Post by Derek Murphy)

Since the tail end of the 20^th century, there have been a multitude of major changes to the field of information science. New technology, new practices, and new types of positions have all made their mark. With this in mind, it seems fruitful to seek out the perspectives of some of the field’s newest members. This is the first in a new series of interviews on UNBOUND, where we talk with young recent graduates from LIS Master’s programs, seeking their perspectives on important issues affecting librarians and information professionals today and in the future.

Stephen Hall is a 24-year-old museum curator and special collections archivist. He has a Bachelor’s in Art History and a Master’s of Information Resources and Library Science from the University of Arizona, along with a combined seven years’ experience working in four repositories. His current occupation is Assistant Curator of the History of Pharmacy Museum at the University of Arizona, where he oversees a world-class collection of hundreds of thousands of historic items relating to the practice of pharmacy. On the side, he serves as the Director of Archival Operations for the Learning Games Initiative Research Archive, one of the world’s premiere collections of video games and electronic entertainment.

UNBOUND: Could you tell us a bit about your work at the History of Pharmacy Museum?

Stephen Hall: As Assistant Curator of the History of Pharmacy Museum, I help to manage a collection of several hundred-thousand items, mostly circa 1880 to 1930. These items include historic medicines, apothecary tools and equipment, store fixtures, mortars and pestles, and somewhere in the realm of 100,000 pieces of glassware. We also have a lot of old snake-oil “miracle cures,” claiming to cure anything from earache to cancer. Everything from bottled radium water to anti-malarial medicine, laxatives, lotions, you name it, we have it. My responsibilities vary from day to day. Some days, I do exhibit research and design. Some days, I do website development. Some days, I update our self-guided tour brochure to reflect new stuff. Some days, I shoot and edit videos. Some days, I give tours. Some days, I just do simple cleaning and upkeep. My job is pretty versatile. I do whatever needs to get done in a given day.

UNBOUND: What unique challenges are you faced with when working with historical medical supplies?

SH: We have hundreds (probably thousands, really) of containers of raw chemicals, historically used in the pharmaceutical manufacturing process. We have a lot of materials that are poisonous/volatile/etc. It goes without saying, but I am extremely careful. I am not a scientist by trade, so I exercise extreme care when handling dangerous stuff. The truth is, I never really handle the materials at all. We might have a bottle of something poisonous, but that’s all I come in contact with, the bottle itself. I have no formal training in handling chemicals, but it’s ok, because I’m not really doing chemistry. I’m not opening the bottles and making a Polyjuice Potion. I am simply doing what anyone in my field does: managing a collection of things. It just so happens that the things I handle are sometimes highly radioactive. And honestly, if there ever is an accident, spill, or anything like that, the University of Arizona has protocols in place, as well as an Emergency Response Team, that would assist me. So I’m not worried.

UNBOUND: What’s it like to work at a video game archive?

SH: As Director of Archival Operations at the Learning Games Initiative Research Archive (LGIRA), I wear a lot of hats. Primarily, I help the two Co-Directors to curate the entire collection. This means I help things stay organized, and I try to make sure the archive is accessible to any interested party. Curating a special collection like this involves many unique tasks. Because most electronics often require specialized hardware/software (i.e. to play a game for an Apple II computer, you need to have a physical Apple II.), it’s important that we not only keep games themselves, but also the necessary peripherals. We do a lot of repair, too. Old-school games were never built to last, so the solid-state electronics need some TLC. We also need to periodically test things to make sure they work (yes, that means we get to play video games). Work at LGIRA mostly consists of stuff like this, super-specialized day-to-day operations.

At LGIRA, we have a lot of cool things in our collection. I think my favorite is a copy of “Halo” for the original Atari. Yes you read that right. Designer Ed Fries, who worked on the first XBox “Halo” made a retro, re-imagined version for the Atari 2600. It’s a very interesting nod to the past, and a symbol of the continuing influence of old-school games.

Some other notable items are the Magnavox Odyssey (the first home video game console), the Power Glove, adult video games and game-inspired XXX movies, and various food/beverage tie-ins like Mountain Dew “Game Fuel” and Japanese Pokémon-brand fish sausages. FISH. SAUSAGES.

Basically, I use these items to demonstrate how vast video game culture is, and how significant of an impact it has on our society. If a visitor comes to the archive and tries out the Magnavox Odyssey, they might just develop a new appreciation for modern gaming. By learning the history of something, we can enhance our understanding of it. By experiencing the simple “blinking dot on a screen” games of the 1970s, how much more can we enjoy and celebrate the innovations that have happened since? By playing the games that today’s designers played as kids, how much more can we appreciate their work today?

UNBOUND: What skills could be taught by MLIS programs which would aid you in your positions today?

SH: I have worked in four repositories, so I have seen several different management methods, cataloging schemes, etc. In the Pharmacy Museum, for example, because our collection is so specialized, you have to think outside the box to manage it. There isn’t really a classification scheme for pharmaceutical artifacts, and you can’t exactly use the Dewey Decimal System for it. Thus, I have to come up with my own strategies to catalog and manage the collection.

I deal with thousands of medicine bottles. I could organize them alphabetically, by the name of the medicine inside, but then what if I want to retrieve all the medicines from one manufacturer? They would be all spread out and tough to find. What about corporate buyouts? Schering was recently bought out by Merck, so do I put Schering stuff with Merck stuff? It’s the same type of problem that traditional librarians face, just with different metadata.

There are too many different types of collections out there, enough that it’s simply impossible to train students on how to manage every possible kind of collection. Let’s be honest, how many other pharmacy museums do you know of? Thus, I don’t think LIS programs should try to educate their students about everything. Odds are, about .001% of librarians will work in a pharmacy museum, so teaching that formally seems fruitless.

I think LIS programs need to emphasize the ability to learn new and unfamiliar cataloging systems on the job. Instead of teaching how you manage specifically books within specifically the Dewey Decimal System, specifically in a public library setting, they can teach the general facets of the theory. How do these problems differ if you’re using LOC classification? MeSH? What if, instead of books, you’re working with a giant collection of Pez dispensers? You can teach students how to think critically and problem-solve on the fly, without relying purely on book shelving theory.

UNBOUND: What areas of digital media and information technology should LIS programs focus on?

SH: All of them. Digital media and the internet are here to stay. They have completely reshaped the way our entire world runs. We as information mediators need to embrace that. Yes, that means teaching programming. Yes, that means teaching social media. Yes, that means completely rethinking the way LIS programs have traditionally been run. In order to best prepare the information professionals of tomorrow, we need to be pushing boundaries. We need to be on the cusp of technology and innovation. We need to be forward-thinking.

As information grows and changes at an ever-increasing rate, we as information professionals need to keep up with the tide, lest we get swept away in it. We always need to be looking ahead, never getting comfortable with the way things are.

Ultimately, we as librarians and information professionals need to face the facts: the times, they are a’changin’. The old model of librarianship simply doesn’t work anymore. This is not to say that libraries aren’t important. Quite the opposite. Libraries are critically important. That’s why we need to fight so hard to keep them alive. But this might mean changing the way we do things. And that’s okay.

 

For more of Stephen’s writing, you can visit his two blogs. One contains general musings on geek culture, the other contains reviews about board games.

 

(Post by Derek Murphy)