Short notes and thoughts on Congress.gov webinar

I watched this live webinar from the Law Library of Congress on June 11, 2026. Topic was the congress.gov website. Here are some of my notes from the event, mainly for me to look back later, and some small random thoughts. 

Webinar notes: 

• Overview of the website. 
• The search allows for quotation marks on phrases. 
• For things like keeping track of a committee, email alerts are an option, for example, to get a committee's schedule. 
• You can also search for CRS (Congressional Research Service) reports on the website. Before, you had to use FAS (Federation of American Scientists), where they kept a list (apparently no longer there) or Open CRS, which is no longer there either. Those were the days. Now they are in one place in congress.gov. I've often encouraged students where they can to use CRS reports in their research assignments if they find a relevant one. 
• U.S. Constitution Annotated. This includes the Constitution with legal analysis. Note additional features offered.
• Use the Support button (upper right on top) then click on Browse Help Center, then scroll a bit down to Collections. This allows you to see what a specific resource collection may cover and contain. 
• Also under Support, there is a Glossary for federal terms, in case you need them. 
• Under Support you can also find Ask a Law Librarian, if you need help search help, or finding a resource, or an answer from a librarian. 
• In addition to finding members of Congress from the main website, you can find them under Support. Just browse Help Center then Collections.  
• See also and use the Advanced Search for precise and/or specific searches. Use the Query Builder when you have few but specific details of your search. 
• See also Search Tools (on top of main page, next to the Support link). This tells you what tools, wildcards, so on you can use on the search. This is a detail I also encourage my students to do, though I am sure a lot of them ignore it anyhow. When it comes to a database, especially one you may be using often, take a moment to check the Help/Tools (or whatever similar name) section to see what wildcards and other search tips it offers. Knowing things like wildcards (also known as truncation of terms) can save you some time and make your searching better, but you got to put in a little time to learn the tricks. 
• See also More Options under the main search bar for some quick search options. It is a small pull down menu that opens filters and other limiters you may find useful. 
• If you make a congress.gov account, you can save searches and do email alerts. When they are available. There is a note today saying "accounts are temporarily unavailable" as of this post, and I do hope it is a temporary thing. 
• Using filters in searches as much as possible is helpful to narrow a search and make it more specific.  

 

Side notes: 

This is the the kind of thing that regular people need to know and use to see what the federal government does. Librarians certainly need to know this in order to help their patrons wanting information on the federal government, especially Congress and legislation. 

We don't get many U.S. government questions here often, but we do get one now and then. At times I do wonder what they teach in political science when it comes to the federal government. 

At times I also wonder how many librarians show interest in this kind of stuff. I do, and I try my best to keep up my reference skills and knowledge base, but some colleagues could not care less. I've been told that if they get that kind of question, they can always send it to me. And while I do not mind, I think other reference librarians in general need to nurture this kind of knowledge too. 

As I wrap up this post, the thought occurs to me I am sure a few researchers, and more than a few librarians who should know better, would be happy to ask an AI Slop machine to look up the kind of information a site like congress.gov would offer. It is a sad reality, but that is a thought for another time. 

 

  

Dialectical notebook and some short thoughts on privilege

A note to remember a small exercise a professor showed their students in class. This happened prior to a library instruction session; instructor had some additional class activities to do before I did my part. They write to three categories, three lists: 

• Privileges I have
• Privileges I lack
• Benefits

 

Idea is students make their list, then pass their notebook around and others comment on what they wrote. After that, teacher discusses some of their lists and comments with the class. 

I have some time, so I will try to write my lists:

•  Privileges I have: 
• Being male. 
• Being Caucasian. 
• A good education: private schooling as a child and youth, relatively good universities. 
• Stable family. Many of my peers had divorced parents. 
• Having enough and a bit more. 
• Access to certain resources such as Internet, good libraries, books, water, food.  
• Privileges I lack: 
• Privilege of money. I am not wealthy, but I have enough. Here I mean not having the ability to just wave money around and make problems vanish or seriously minimize problems. 
• Health. This may be mixed. While I do have some health issues, I suppose I could be in worse shape, so maybe this is more a privilege I have. However, I am, like many folks, one medical catastrophe away from ruin, see above idea of money privilege I lack.  
• Second class US citizenship being Puerto Rican. This is a bit more a political thing, what I call being a colonial. It does bring in some degree of discrimination in the U.S.  
• Benefits: 
• Got a decent job. On a side note, the job provides mostly decent health care plan (it does the job for now). 
• A roof over the head. 
• Food on the table.  

I am sure there may be other privileges I have that I cannot recall, and a few that I lack that do not occur to me at the moment. This is just a short quick exercise just as the students did in the class.  

Book Review: The Internet Con

 (Crossposted from The Itinerant Librarian.)

Cory Doctorow, The Internet Con: How to Seize the Means of Computation. London, UK: Verso Books, 2024. ISBN: 9781804292143.  (link to publisher)

Genre: technology, Internet

Subgenre: social media, corporations, essay

Format: trade paperback

Source: Hutchins Library, Berea College 

 

In this small book, the author explains how major Internet companies became the monopolistic behemoths they are now. He also explains how these large companies manage to hold us hostage, making us stay with them even as we hate them and perhaps hate ourselves for staying. 

One thing I've learned in my years online, especially with social media, is that you have to be willing and ready to move on when a site goes to hell. By now, if I have to leave some people behind, so be it, but as much as possible I am ready to pack and go elsewhere when things get bad. In the book, the author reminds us we have the option to move, and he offers some tools to help make the move less painful. 

The book is organized in two major parts: 

• Part I: Seize the Means of Computation. Here the author explains how the companies get big and how for the most part they stay big due to influence, corruption, and legalized extortion. Add to this governments that are either lazy, clueless, and/or in league with said companies, and it does not leave room for hope. However, where there is a will there is a way, and the author provides some possible solutions. 
• Part II: What About. Here the author addresses possible objections including some corporate excuses not to do the right thing. 

The main concept to understand from the book is that of interoperability. It's the ability of different services to connect with each other and users in different places to interact on common ground. What the book explains: 

• "What interoperability is
• How interoperability works
• How we can get interoperability
• How we can mitigate interoperability's problems" (3). 

Mastodon and the Fediverse embody this pretty well. In simpler terms, this is what allows your GMail to communicate with someone else's Yahoo! email and both to communicate with Outlook Email.  For the most part, services like Facebook are walled prisons keeping users hostage. Once you understand interoperability, it makes sense. The author takes time to explain it, shows why it is important, and worth fighting for. 

The book for the most part is accessible, though there are some passages that may get too technical for some readers. The first part also has some repetitive passages, and it is a bit slow reading at times. The second part is an easy read in contrast to the first part. 

The author strives to give solutions, and points out some positive bits of legislation, but in these Hard Times it is difficult to be optimistic our governments would do anything right that would benefit regular people, less so if those things would displease those big tech companies that often keep those politicians in their pockets through political donations as well as dark money. So in the end, this all sounds great, but I would not hold my breath. What I will keep doing is using and learning more about Mastodon and the Fediverse and other open access options. They may be small and not glamorous, but they are not beholden to Big Tech. 

In the end, this is a good read even if it is not an easy read. It's not easy in the sense many folks may not want to hear the truth. Staying in Big Tech's prisons is easier for many folks than making a liberatory effort. 

Overall, I recommend the book for public and academic libraries. For me, as I am starting some research to craft a social media policy for our library, the book gives me plenty of food for thought. Maybe it will give more folks out there something to think about as well. 

4 out of 5 stars.

 

Additional reading notes: 

Why we need to fix tech: 

"Fixing tech isn't more important than fixing everything else, but unless we fix tech, we can forget about winning any of those other fights" (18). 

 

What is reverse engineering: 

"'Reverse engineering' is a time-honored and important guerrilla tactic in all technological struggles. Its meaning is well captured by its name: reverse engineering takes place when a technologist deeply probes a finished product or service to determine how it works, and also how to change or replicate the way it works" (84).  

 

This book qualifies for the following 2025 Reading Challenge: 

 

 

Book Review: Literacy in America

 (Crossposted from The Itinerant Librarian) 

Lawrence R. Samuel, Literacy in America: a cultural history of the past century. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2024.  ISBN: 9781538189542.

Genre: literacy, reading

Subgenre: history, education

Format: hardcover

Source: Hutchins Library, Berea College 

This book presents a history of literacy in the United States over the last century. Literacy here refers to learning how to read and the ability to read. This is not a book about what Americans may or not have been reading.

The book makes some good points, but it is a seriously slow read, and it is pretty much a dry textbook. Sure, it considers how literacy is a contested ground for race, gender, and class, and those are important topics. However, the important ideas get buried in the constant citing of scholarly articles, trade publications, and other academic sources. To be honest, the book reads like a student research paper where the student, instead of being selective in what sources to cite to support their claims, just cited everything they found to fill up the page quota. Whatever voice the author has gets lots in citation after citation of this scholar in a journal article or that teacher in an education magazine.  

This is what the author intended with the book: 

"Supported by hundreds of research studies conducted throughout the years as reported in scholarly journals and popular magazines, the book intends to make a contribution to the histories of education, language, and literature, sociology, and the United States as a whole" (vii). 

Oh, he lays those research studies and periodical articles pretty thick. As for the contribution statement, that is an ambitious declaration.

I was honestly hoping this would be more interesting, but it was not. One detail I will mention is that history often repeats itself. Some of the concerns today on whether kids can read or not are pretty much the same as concerns back in the day. Every time a new technology comes along, be it radio, television, or the internet educators freak out about kids abandoning reading. For the most part, the kids are still reading, even if it is not the "classics," but that is another conversation. 

For example, back in the 1920s aand 1930s, pearls were clutched because kids were not reading classics or wholesome books: 

"Students tendency to choose less than hearty literary fare was just one problem associated with literacy in the 1920s and 1930s" (1). 

Gee, the generation coming out of the Great War (World War I) and its horrors wants to read light, fluffy, escapist fare. The humanity! I would say not unlike today with readers seeking light, fluffy, escapist fare to forget the Hard Times for a while. 

Overall I would say this book was just OK. For libraries, this is highly optional. If I had been able to read a review copy beforehand, I would not have ordered it for our library. This may be one for larger academic libraries with comprehensive collections in education and maybe some large library school libraries. Small academic libraries can pretty much skip this. 

2 out of 5 stars. 

Book Review: Information Literacy and Social Media

 (Crossposted from The Itinerant Librarian)

 

Michele Santamaria and A. Nicole Pfannenstiel,  Information literacy and soci@l medi@ : empowered student engagement with the ACRL framework. Chicago, IL: ACRL, 2024.  ISBN: 9798892555456.

Genre: library science

Subgenre: Information literacy, social media, higher education

Format: trade paperback

Source: Hutchins Library, Berea College

 

I ordered this book for our library with high hopes, but in the end I was not really impressed. In addition, I do not think the $50.00 price was worth it for this very slim volume. 

As many of these LIS books, and articles as well, often do, this one starts with the common alarmist tone that most librarians are barely competent, mostly technology illiterate, and are clueless about the tech young ones today use. That could not be further from the truth, but I've read enough LIS books and articles to keep seeing that trope. Naturally, the authors are cool, hip, and knowledgeable and bring you their knowledge. The book shows a bit of the messianic tone some parts of librarianship embrace. 

Once you get past the opening we get a lot of LIS theory, reminders, and connections to the ACRL Framework, and arguments for bringing it and information literacy to social media. Some of the authors' points are valid, and others feel a little forced. In the end, the second chapter is a heavy literature review that is a bit of a slog to read. 

The one useful element of Chapter 2 are the reflection questions for teachers and/or library instructors. Taking the time to answer the questions, do some writing and journaling, can be a good preparation for teachers. It can also just be a good reflection exercise. I probably should take some time and do some of the writing. I have done some writing on my social media experiences, but I can always explore and reflect some more. 

The strength of the book is in Chapter 3 where you get the lesson plans and exercises. The plans are cross-disciplinary. The plans are detailed and well-structure. Activities are interactive and encourage students and their instructors to reflect on their experiences of social media and information literacy. Whether we like it or not, and there is a lot to dislike about social media, it is a big part of our students' lives and we should do better in educating them on how to navigate, use it, and evaluate better. This is where the lessons help. 

Every chapter includes a list of notes, and there is also a bibliography at end of the book for further reading or just to check the references. 

Overall, the good part is in the lesson plans. The rest of the theory could have been summarized better and/or kept brief. I do not think the contents justify the book's high cost. I'd say if you must read it to borrow it, scan the lesson plans, skip the rest. Still, I may try to implement a plan or two from the book down the road. Our students spend some time on social media, though from what I see it's not too connected to news and information. It is more for interpersonal connections, but that could be a topic to investigate down further. 

Overall, I liked the idea of the book. I did not like some of the tone of the book, its execution, nor the pricing. Still, it could've been worse. In the end as a whole it was just OK .

2 out of 5 stars. 

 

Additional reading notes: 

 

Students may push back on social media in the classroom: 

"Students bring with them the idea that social media should be reserved for non-academic purposes, an idea reinforced through schooling, teachers, and responsible use policies" (11).  

I somewhat agree with the students. Heck, I remember the days of early social media where librarians were given all kinds of warnings about not mixing work and personal online and where the wrong social media post could get you fired. Librarians on social media now are mostly normalized, but it is still wise at least to keep the professional and personal  somewhat separated. I say that based on experience, but I do admit it is easier said than done to keep the two aspects separate online. Note that while the authors acknowledge the negatives and dangers of social media, they downplay them somewhat to make their argument. I am not saying to completely disengage from social media, though complete disengagement should be an option if desired, especially in the current Hard Times. 

The list of reflection questions for teachers and librarians, starting in page 17 of the book: 

• What social media platforms do I currently use? What do I use them for?
• What do I believe to be true about the social media platforms I am familiar with (such as Facebook, Instagram, Tik Tok, X, and Pinterest?).
• What negative ideas about these spaces do I need to question and complicate/unravel so I can support learner engagement? 
• What positive ideas about these spaces do I need to question and complicate/unravel so I can support learner engagement? 
• What more would I like to know about these spaces to use them more effectively?

 

The list of classroom space reflection questions, to consider as you use the lesson plans here or for other social media activities, from page 48 of the book: 

• How collaborative is the instructional relationship? 
• How many sessions do you anticipate working on this threshold concept?
• Will the librarian be embedded in the course?
• Will the librarian provide ongoing social media and/or learning management system support to students?
• Does the library have library-specific content available within social media sites that can model social media use in support of learning?
• Does the library have social media accounts used to foster interaction between students and librarians?
• What will librarian instructor presence be like, on and offline?

 

Being a librarian who reads books helps me help students better

As I am preparing for a research consultation, I had a random thought that it pays off as a librarian to be a reader as well. Especially so if you read books from your own library on various topics. I can then recall book options for students that may come in for a consultation. 

For example, for the student writing on George Orwell, fascism, and the United States, Antifa (link to my review) comes to mind right away. 

For the student writing on Black history and suppression of Black history in schools, Our history has always been contraband comes to mind (link to review). 

I went to the library stacks, found them, and added them to the materials I would offer those students when they came in to meet with me. 

By the way, this can also include articles I may have seen and read on a student topic that I can then share with a student. At times, I have sent a student a link to an article on their topic after a research consult in the hopes they will find it helpful. 

I will note further that I have met librarians who, for whatever reason, declare that they do not read, or read as minimally as possible. For me, reading broadly helps me in my work. Even if it is just being aware and reading reviews as part of collection development can be helpful in helping students. But when I can put a book in their hands I have read and tell them that I have read it I think it has a bit more power. Now whether the student reads it or not, or at least skims it, is their choice. I am under no delusions they will read a whole book for a research assignment. All I can do is offer. Up to them to then use the resource or not. 

As I am typing this, I am thinking of making the occasional list of books I have read from our library that I can recommend for certain topics. It could be an occasional blog post here in part for my own reference. 

 

 

Book Review: Verified

 (Crossposted from The Itinerant Librarian)

Mike Caulfield and Samuel S. Wineburg, Verified: How to think straight, get duped less, and make better decisions about what to believe online. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, 2023. ISBN: 9780226822068.

Genre: reference

Subgenre: information literacy, internet, research

Format: trade paperback

Source: Hutchins Library, Berea College

 

This book is an essential guide everyone using the internet needs to have handy. This book teaches how to be skeptical of what you see online and how to evaluate it. In these Hard Times where the internet and social media are full of scams, click bait, rage bait, and all sorts of assorted bullshit, this book gives you the tools to separate the crap from the few good things that remain. This guide can help you navigate the enshittified internet. 

The book is arranged as follows: 

• Introduction.
• Chapter 1: Get quick context.
• Chapter 2: Cheap signals. 
• Chapter 3: Google.
• Chapter 4: Lateral reading. 
• Chapter 5: Reading the room.
• Chapter 6: Show me the evidence. 
• Chapter 7: Wikipedia.
• Chapter 8: Video games. No, it is not about games. This is more about how videos are used to deceive. 
• Chapter 9: Stealth advertising. 
• Chapter 10: Once more with feeling. 
• Chapter 11: Conclusion. 
• Postscript, which briefly covers large language models, so-called AI, and verification.
• Notes and bibliography. 

Caulfield, one of the two coauthors, created the SIFT method (Stop, Investigate, Find other coverage, Trace the claim). Along with Wineburg, they basically give you a full course on how to evaluate what you see online so you can be empowered and act accordingly. The authors take you through the process step by step. These are skill you can learn with relative ease, and you develop the critical habits taught in the book you'll be able to better navigate the internet. A strength of their lessons is that often they do not take a lot of time. That is because you learn to assess quickly. If you decide to pursue a topic further, the authors show you how to do so. If you assess and decide something is not valid, relevant, or just not worth your energy, you can swiftly move on. Being efficient is a key element here. 

The book is relatively easy to read. Each chapter gives you practical examples and then they explain how to best handle each situation. You then learn the overall lesson so you can apply it when you go online. Chapters also include various tips and pieces of advice. Every chapter ends with a list of takeaways summarizing what you are learning. 

By now I am sure many academic librarians apply the lessons from the book in library instruction. We've done some some of it, but we will be working on adding more formal elements from the book in our instruction sessions. However, you do not have to be in an academic setting. This accessible book works for anyone wanting to learn how to find reliable information, evaluate it, and avoid the rest of the crap out there. In a time when Google largely has gone to shit, this book gives you steps and advice for making some good from Google. You learn how to do lateral reading like fact checkers do, and Wikipedia can be your ally, contrary to what some old time educators may claim. Learn that and more reading this book, then keep it handy for when you need a reminder now and again. 

This book is essential for all libraries. Librarians who have not ready it need to read it and then promote it to their patrons. The book can be beneficial for students in composition classes that require research. It may also be of interest to journalism students, journalists, and other writers who do or should be doing research. I recommend it fully, and I would buy a copy for my personal shelf. 

5 out of 5 stars. 

Additional reading notes: 

What this book can help you with: 

"Instead of being driven by emotion and outrage, you'll come to see your gut reactions as precious gifts that signal you to pause, take a breath, and ask a basic question: Is what I am looking at even what I think it is?" (3) 

 

Google is a search engine, not a truth engine:

"Google is not a dispassionate partner in information seeking who diligently corrects you when you've taken a wrong turn. Google is out to please, trying to determine what you want-- even if doing so means giving you a dubious answer but one you want to hear" (78). 

 And with its high commercialization, predominant advertising model, and now integrating LLM and AI features, it's gotten worse in terms of finding what you actually need. 

Need to beware expertise cynicism: 

"In authoritarian regimes, creating a broad cynicism about all sources of expertise-- the press, academics, professionals-- serves to make sure political power, not truth-seeking, is the ultimate arbiter of what is true" (109). 

This book qualifies for the following 2024 Reading Challenges: 

Book Review: The College Student's Research Companion

(Crossposted from The Itinerant Librarian)

Arlene Rodda Quaratiello, The College Student's Research Companion: Finding, Evaluating, and Citing the Resources You Need to Succeed. Chicago: ALA Neal-Schuman, 2024. ISBN: 9780838938386.

Genre: academic writing and research

Subgenre: reference, guides

Format: paperback

Source: Hutchins Library, Berea College 

 

This is basically a research guide to academic research for undergraduate students. In the preface, the author argues what many of us librarians argue: "to write better research papers, you must go beyond the basics of googling your topic and learn how to use the wealth of other resources available to you" (ix). That argument sounds great in theory, but in my many years as a librarian and teacher, I am concerned many students still do the superficial path of googling and hoping to find something just good enough. They also hope they can get it past their professors. The issue of students finding materials just "good enough" to pass and the faculty who may let them pass is a question I ponder here or there, but it is not something to consider now. I will just say I am not too optimistic. 

The book takes students through the research process from selecting a topic, finding and evaluating resources, and then how to use the sources ethically. Each chapter includes review questions to reinforce learning. The book also includes appendices with extra information like classification lists and citation style. 

The book is relatively an easy read, and the author keeps a light humor at times to keep things accessible. Comparisons and analogies to illustrate ideas are plentiful. Explanations are clear and straightforward. This can be a good resource for undergraduates to learn about research. It is not a substitute for library instruction, but it can supplement it. I can see some undergraduate writing class adding this to their textbook list. It's a pretty good guide with some good advice. 

However, the book suffers the issue of so many LIS texts: it falls out of currency as it is published. This edition has a 2024 publishing date, but the material was likely  written in 2023, maybe 2022. That is just the academic publishing cycle. The point here is the book has no mention of AI (artificial intelligence) and/or LLMs (Language Learning Models) that are becoming the latest issue in information literacy and academia at the time I am writing this. I have a 7th edition is already in the works. Still, the book covers the basics well, but you may want to consider whether to get this edition and add supplementary material as needed or wait for a later edition. At this moment I am good with this edition. 

This book is a good option for academic libraries to have a copy on hand, maybe on their ready reference shelf (if they still have a ready reference shelf). We bought a copy at my library, and it is a circulating copy. We'll see over time if it circulates or not. I'll make a small promotional post on the library blog later on. For now, I like this book overall. It has a good presentation of academic research skills for undergraduates. 

4 out of 5 stars. 

Article Note: On adapting the Project Outcome model in libraries

 This article looks at Project Outcome, a toolkit designed for public libraries to assess the impact of their programs and services. It is a collection of short patron-focused surveys. Idea is to measure things that public libraries have in common, and it then allows for comparisons between libraries. Soon, academic librarians decided they wanted in on this, and ACRL (Association of College and Research Libraries) partnered with PLA (Public Library Association) to create a version for academic libraries. Part of why I am reading this now is that our library is working to adapt it as we move to a more simplified way to assess our library services, in particular reference and instruction services. Survey options include immediate surveys designed to be done after a service and follow-up surveys to be done some time after a program. For us here at the moment, we are interested in doing immediate surveys. In my unit, this would be post-library instruction surveys of students in a class.

Some notes from the article: 

What this paper does: 

"This paper describes the task force's work to establish standard learning outcome measures for academic libraries, initial field-testing results, and how Project Outcome can create opportunities for growth and change" (1) . 

What the outcomes are based on: 

"These key outcomes are based on social theory that performance is more adequately measured when capturing the outcomes of knowledge, attitude, and behavior change (Schrader and Lawless 2004)" (2). 

The Project's definition of outcome: 

"Project Outcome has defined an outcome as: 'a specific benefit a patron receives from a library program or service. They can be quantitative or qualitative and are expressed as changes that individuals perceive in themselves'" (5).

The focus of the Project Outcome tools is "on generating useful actionable new knowledge (practical, local, applied, 'good enough') for improvement. . . "(6). 

Article includes table with activities, some suggestions for use, and sample survey questions. 

 Concerns, from their key findings from field-testing:

"Interest or need for assessment does not always translate into practice. Both survey fatigue and lack of time (users' or librarians') can make librarians reluctant to administer surveys, even if the results may be useful" (13).

Our campus is notorious for survey excess (I am sure we are not the only campus, but surveying is pretty heavy here), and survey fatigue among students is a significant issue that is rarely acknowledged as yet another survey goes out from some campus unit. In our case, by doing small surveys at the end of class sessions we hope to get better response and catch the students on the spot so to speak. We hope it will be easier to collect meaningful data to help us keep improving and growing our programs, as well as appease the higher ups.  

Citation for the article: 

Ackermann, Eric, Sara Goek, and Emily Plagman, "Outcome Measurement in Academic Libraries: Adapting the Project Outcome Model." Library Assessment Conference, 2018 (link to PDF document). 

Article Note: on Chat GPT and academic librarians

This short article out of C&RL News is mostly a very flattering paean of LLM's (large language models) and ChatGPT (one of those LLM's). The authors basically envision ways the tool will displace some workers for an AI (artificial intelligence) assisted future. To be honest, a good amount of this has echoes from the days of Library 2.0 and the hype that went along with it. As I read the piece, I found myself writing small comments and questions in the margins. At times I wondered if the authors had read or seen various news on ChatGPT and AI that are not exactly worshiping the models. 

Here are then some highlights that caught my eye: 

ChatGPT is a...

"...tool that uses deep learning techniques to generate text in response to questions posed to it. It can generate essays, email, song lyrics, recipes, computer code, webpages, even games and medical diagnoses" (99). 

It can also generate, to put it bluntly, a lot of bullshit and right out make up stuff (CNN; AP). 

Also, 

"...ChatGPT has been trained on a large corpus of text, including news articles, books, websites, academic articles, and other sources." (99).

Yes, and a lot of it is outright stolen from creators and/or scraped from the web without any form of compensation or attribution. In fact, some news organizations are suing due to what they see is content theft from the AI companies (via CBS News).  See also this piece out of Futurism on a guy basically stealing content and using AI to "repackage" it to sell. 

One detail from the article that also caught my eye is an optimism that seems to have little regard for any ethical concerns, a somewhat naive assumption that everyone involved will be honest. Keep in mind that very often plagiarism is a concern of faculty in academia. In earlier days, they might ask a librarian for assistance, then they turned to Google, and now they rely on tools like Turnitin (another tool that comes with its own ethical issues, but let's not digress further), and next it is AI. Somehow using a tool that basically steals content to check if content is stolen does not feel right, to this librarian at least. 

The authors do mention plagiarism, but then ask, gee, is a student turning in work done with ChatGPT really plagiarizing? (101). I'd say yes they are, and I say it both as a librarian and a former writing teacher, but the authors use a loophole: since plagiarism is defined as "presenting someone else's work or ideas as your own" and ChatGPT is not a someone, well, you get the idea. That is a nice loophole if you can get away with it.

As for librarian roles, a lot of it according to the article will be basically working as "prompt engineers" to "assist researchers by providing tips in asking the right questions to get the best results" (100). Uh huh. At least we may have some job security teaching faculty, and especially students (we all know faculty are not exactly known for wanting to be taught anything, but I digress), how to tell if some text or piece of art is real or AI generated. That will not be an easy task. 

Authors also mention that researchers may have concerns AI could seep into academic writing. Well, it is already happening as researchers are getting caught passing ChatGPT generated essays as their own for publication (via Futurism, but a small search will yield a few other stories).  

I could go, but I am stopping here because I just do not share the rose colored vision the authors of the article appear to have. At any rate, as I was reading this mercifully short article, other thoughts came to mind. Below then are some links that may not be as rosy in their view of ChatGPT and AI that I read recently as of this post. 

Citation for the article noted: 

Christopher Cox and Elias Tzoc, "ChatGPT: Implications for Academic Libraries." C&RL News, March 2023: 99-102.

 The additional links to consider against the whoopee of the original article in addition to the links I included in my comments above:

• "Researchers warned against using AI to peer review academic articles" via Semafor. 
• "'At best it's wrong, at worst it's dangerous:' More generative AI impacts" via The Wild Hunt.
• "This girl does not exist: how generative AI is destroying commercial art and killing an industry" by Michael M. Hughes.
• And speaking of issues with Turnitin, according to them, "more than half of students continue to use AI to write papers."
   

 

Article Note: On using library chat reference to answer campus questions

This article caught my eye initially because I do not recall people using our library chat reference much to answer campus specific questions. I would have to dig into our local statistics to be more certain, but at least from what I have observed in our chat reference service questions related to the campus are minimal. A good question for us to explore down the road may be where are people going then to get campus-specific answers, but that is another story for now. 

This article's goal is to investigate how academic libraries not only provide academic assistance but whether they are seen as an option to provide information on their campuses. In their opening, the authors remind us how chat reference services in libraries picked up during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our virtual services certainly picked up during the pandemic's prime time days. 

Authors establish topic relevance for the article by connecting the growth of chat services to the need of libraries to prove their value to stakeholders, in this case campus administrators. That is certainly one of the reason we and other libraries are always collecting a variety of service statistics; we have to justify our existence to the bean counters. For example, we collect data on things such as number of research consults and library instruction sessions. One of the places that data ends up is on the campus fact book, which is available online on the campus website. So in a way an ulterior motive for this article is to show a library's value to its campus community.

The significance of this study is that, unlike previous studies of reference chat services in libraries, none up to now has focused on whether a reference chat service answers campus related questions that are not related to the library. 

Some highlights from the article: 

• Method: Analysis of chat transcripts from 5 large four-year public universities during the 2-year period of 2019 to 2021. The choice of campuses "were selected based on only the affiliations of the collaborating authors and do not necessarily reflect a representative sample" (15). To be honest, that is a small sample, but that is somewhat consistent with this type of LIS article.
• What they found: "This study found that non-library campus questions, on average, accounted for 2.44% of library chat questions, a relatively small proportion of all library chats" (12). At this low percent, I would not call this "filling a gap." Again, I do wonder where are patrons and others going for that information. 
• A curious to me finding is that this kind of information from reference chat may be "a more significant resources for less privileged student populations" (12). Not sure at this point what to make of that. 
• They did notice that reference chat often gets IT-related questions. A possible reason could be "their I.T. department may have insufficient hours of staffing" (13). I can testify to this a bit since our I.T. department is fairly notorious for their insufficient hours of staffing. I'd call them bankers' hours except bankers these days actually open late and on weekends. 
• Call for further research: "Further research building on this study could examine the prevalence of campus-related questions at physical service points in the library and compare this to chat" (15). They also suggest doing some comparisons with private institutions. 
• One good thing of analyzing chat reference transcripts: "...these transcripts provide a unique opportunity to identify areas where students are in need of additional information and support. The data can help identify offices and services on campus with which library chat operators should be most familiar and prepared to address in chat inquiries" (16). 

Article citation: Erin Owens, et.al., "Beyond the Library: the Role of Academic Libraries' Chat Reference in Answering Campus Questions." The Reference Librarian (April 2024): 1-24. 

I got this one via Interlibrary Loan.

Article Note: On Chinese aid in developing libraries in Africa

This is a short article that begins to explore the topic of Chinese investment in the African continent, specifically investing in developing local libraries. The reason I read this was one of my students. They were doing broader research on China and its Belt and Road Initiative. When helping them with their research, this article came up. I figured they could maybe mine the citations for additional resources, but otherwise this article was not for them. However, an article about libraries often catches my eye, and since it was short, I read it. 

I wrote that the article begins to explore the topic as the author states that little research has been done on this area. The author's study then strives to see how China is investing in libraries on the continent. To do so, the author does a newspapers and news content analysis; the study relied on China Daily. China Daily is a Chinese English language newspaper; it is controlled by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and it is a source many around the world read even with that caveat as it provides important information on Chinese issues. Author does acknowledge there are limitations to using China Daily as the research source such as possible biases from the newspaper's ownership. 

Author found that the Chinese invest in library development in three main ways: 

• China provides direct funding and is involved in a library's construction.
• A Chinese multinational corporation may be involved, a form of corporate social responsibility. 
• Other NGOs may be involved in developing a library 

Forms of aid can range from infrastructure and construction to donating books. Author notes book donations can have mixed results, especially if a lot of the donations are books written in Chinese that may have limited use and/or interest in the African nations. Author ends by calling for further research in this area. 

Citation for the article: 

Swapan Kumar Patra, "Chinese aid in the library development of Africa: a brief survey." Annals of Library and Information Studies Vol. 70 (2023): 126-131.

Book Review: Revenge of the Librarians

(Crossposted from The Itinerant Librarian)

Tom Gauld, Revenge of the Librarians. Montreal, Quebec: Drawn and Quarterly, 2022. ISBN: 9781770466166.

Genre: comics and graphic novels

Subgenre: literary, humor, comic strips

Format: small hardcover

Source: Eastside Branch, Lexington (KY) Public Library 

This is the latest, as of this post, collection of literary humor comics by Tom Gauld. If you've seen his comics, you can easily recognize his art style featuring simple figures, a style that works very well. Gauld has a good imagination and often he comes up with literary situations that many readers and writers can find relatable. This particular collection was published in 2022, and it contains many comics with pandemic humor. It is a nice way to make light of the lockdowns and the pandemic at least for a while. 

Some highlights include: 

• The revenge of the librarians (opening strip).
• The bookshop cat and the pandemic.
• The library of terror.
• A conversation with the author.
• Village murder mysteries. I've been watching Midsomer Murders, and this reminded me of the series right away.

The humor is nice, but it is not laugh out loud humor. Most cartoons may cause a chuckle, maybe make you smile. There are some comics that are nice but fall a bit flat. I like the book, but it is not terribly memorable. Fans will likely enjoy it, so will folks who like literary humor. It is a nice book book to pick up, read and smile a bit, then move on. It is more a book to borrow. I'd recommend it for libraries with large graphic novel collections. For a small library like ours, I'd consider this optional. 

3 out of 5 stars.  

 

 

Book Review: Reading Novels During the Covid 19 Pandemic

(Crossposted from The Itinerant Librarian.)

Ben Davies, Christina Lupton, and Johanne Gormsen Schmidt, Reading Novels During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2022. ISBN: 9780192857682.

Genre: literary studies, literacy, academic treatise, reading

Subgenre: COVID-19, pandemics 

Format: hardcover

Source: Interlibrary Loan (ILL) via Hutchins Library. It came from Fondren Library, Rice University, Houston, Texas.

 

Now that most people think the COVID-19 pandemic is over we're seeing all sorts of books and retrospectives of the pandemic time. This book would fall in that category, though the study it discusses was done during the pandemic. The book aims to provide a look at reading habits of folks during the pandemic, specifically reading fiction. Bottom line, for me at least, is this is a book by academics written for other academics. This is not exactly a book for light or pleasure reading. I picked it up to see what insights it might have offered to librarians and to see another side of the pandemic. 

The book is arranged into an introduction and nine chapters. The introduction describes the parameters of the study. The chapters look at different types of books people chose to read and reasons to do so. Among the selections were books about plagues, old books, and romances. The book includes a bibliography, which is extensive but it also features a lot of popular magazine articles. The book also features an appendix with the survey instrument. 

Note that the study sample readers in two countries: Denmark and the United States. Once we get past the introduction, the chapters look at different kinds of reading. Bring a typical academic book, the authors fill a lot of pages with literary and critical theory to support their findings. Between all the theory  you get selected quotes from the readers they interviewed. The reader quotes may be the most interesting part, but they get drowned by all the theory.

To be honest, if you strip out a lot of the theory, you end with what feels like material for popular magazine articles. The book's findings often read like headlines for a popular magazine article. Some examples of findings: 

• How people perceived time/made time to read during lockdown.
• Why Camus's book The Plague makes for popular pandemic reading.
• Unable to buy books, more people read what is already on their shelves. 
• You said you'd read that big, long, thick book some day. Well, the day is here, so start reading War and Peace. 

That is pretty much what the authors' research confirms, things that we sort of knew. I am sure plenty of librarians observed some of the reading patterns presented in the book. I will also notes the book looks at people who were mostly locked down at home and stuck there. I was deemed essential, so I worked at the library, albeit virtually with my office door closed. So my lockdown experience was very different. 

Overall, this is a dense academic book looking at a limited sample of readers. The themes do not seem to be particularly breaking news, and much of it seems like material for articles rather than a cohesive book. Research libraries interested in literacy and literary studies may want to acquire it. It may also be of interest to large LIS program libraries. I would consider it highly optional, and I would not acquire it for our library. 

1 out of 5 stars.

Book Review: Temples of Books

 (Crossposted from The Itinerant Librarian.)

Marianne Julia Strauss, et.al., Temples of Books: Magnificent Libraries Around the World. Berlin, Germany: Gestalten Verlag, 2022.  ISBN: 9783967040241.

Genre: libraries

Subgenre: photography, travel

Format: oversize, coffee table book

Source: Interlibrary Loan (ILL) at Hutchins Library. The book came from Lutnick Library, Haverford College, Haverford, Pennsylvania.

 

This is an oversize book highlighting libraries from around the world. It includes 54 libraries, large and small, and it includes at least one virtual library. On reading it, I felt the book was very Western and Eurocentric, so I went back and did the locations breakdown: 

• United States: 10.
• Europe: 25.
• Asia: 6.
• Africa: 6.
• Latin America: 3.
• Australia: 1.
• Canada: 1.
• Oceania: 1.
• Online: 1.

I think the numbers speak for themselves. I honestly wonder if the editors really could not find more great libraries outside of Europe and the United States.  For example, I am sure Latin America has more than three libraries that could qualify as a "magnificent library." 

In addition to the library entries, the book includes an introduction by author and volume co-editor Marianne Julia Strauss. She opens the introduction and book referring back to the ever popular Borges quote about imagining paradise as a library. She describes then what the book covers, such as: 

"Temples of Books explores the history, mission, architecture, and changing role of selected libraries around the world. The following pages reveal extraordinary public and private collections, national and monastery libraries, repurposed engine sheds, and UNESCO-protected mud buildings from Mexico to Vietnam to Mauritania" (4).

So while there is not much geographic diversity, the editors do provide a good sampling of different types of libraries. Each library entry includes: 

• Library name.
• Design/designer name/style.
• When/date built.
• Location.
• Descriptive text and narrative about the library.
• A selection of photos of the library.

The entries vary in length from a couple of pages to five pages give or take. The text is interesting and informative, though some of the short entries do seem short leaving the reader to ask if there was not more that could be written. Text can include a history of the library, who it serves, and other highlights. 

The strength of the book is in the photography. The photos vary in size, but they are beautiful, and it is a pleasure to view them. The photos are in full color. Do note more prominent libraries get more photos. 

This is a great book to casually browse. You can read it cover to cover, or you can just browse for what catches your eye. 

I recommend the book for armchair travelers who enjoy large travel photography books. Fans of libraries will likely enjoy it as well. I'd also recommend it for public and academic libraries. Libraries with LIS programs will want to add this one. Overall, despite some issues, I really liked it. 

4 out of 5 stars. 

Additional reading notes: 

Jay Walker's advice on creating your own private library: 

"Collect to learn! Books that can teach you what you never thought you were interested in or can inspire you in ways that stretch your imagination-- no matter the resale value-- are worth their weight in gold" (113). 

Malala Yousafzai's quote on the power of books: 

"Let us not forget that even one book, one pen, one child, and one teacher can change the world" (qtd. in 297). 

Reading the highlights of the ACRL Academic Library Trends and Statistics Survey for 2021

Took a look at this article out of College and Research Libraries (CR&L) on the 2021 ACRL Academic Library Trends and Statistics Survey. I can only look at the highlights because you need to be subscriber to see more, which I am not. The article has a enough to get a basic picture of what is going on. 

This is a survey designed to help show how libraries have academic libraries have an impact in their institutions and show value to their users and stakeholders. Notice that this survey would cover part of the period of the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey has a standard set of questions, but this edition also featured a set of additional questions specific to topics in library instruction and presentations to groups.

Some details with a bit of comment from me: 

• Data was collected from 1,533 libraries. The response rate was close to 42%. 
• The number of FTE (full time equivalent) librarians stayed stable over the past three annual surveys. However the number of FTE student workers went down by 40%. 
• In person reference transactions and library instruction declined. This is less surprising given the Hard Times and the pandemic. Like other campuses, we did have a period of campus closing down where we went fully virtual. It is 2023, and we are still not quite recuperating in terms of getting classes to come back into the library for instruction nor in terms of traffic in the building. 
• Virtual transactions and consultations went up. Also the survey found more libraries delivered services online. Given the Hard Times, that is not surprising either. We did our part to deliver more services online. 

To be honest, kind of nice to see some numbers, but there is nothing that is earth shattering so to speak. 

 

 

Reading ALA's "State of America's Libraries" 2023

I do not always read this report (link to ALA page, where you can get a summary and download the full PDF report, which I did save and read), but given the situation in the last few years, I took a look. After reading it, I see a lot of the usual feel good rhetoric about the nobility of our libraries, about their bravery in these Hard Times, and how they do more with less. Those are not necessarily new things, but they have been aggravated by current threats to our collections as well as to librarians. 

I am just going to quickly note a couple of things that caught my eye or made me react. You can click on the link above and read the full report or as much of it as you wish. The most useful part of the report are probably the various infographics and charts with information on book challenges, lists, and other issues. You can use some of those graphics to help promote the report as well as raising awareness overall. 

Some highlights then with a comment or two from me: 

From the executive director message: 

Librarians "found themselves contending with reduced funding and staffing, threats to personal safety in the form of bomb scares and to professional livelihoods from firings and job losses, and bills threatening to criminally charge librarians or defund libraries altogether for making certain materials available on their shelves or findable through reference services" (2). 

What often is happening is that some angry "Karen" from some terrorist astroturf group like "Moms for Liberty" throws a hissy fit, and then the administrators to keep the peace just fold. As P.Z. Myers writes, "That’s all it takes, one prude from the fascist group “Moms for Liberty” complains, and administrators instantly surrender." Not exactly the bravest of actions. The result is that these well organized Party of Stupid conservative Christofascists get emboldened when they see they can get away with some small challenge, try for a bigger one, and before you know it they get legislators to defund libraries. They were not challenged back early when they were small, and thus a lot of the mess we have now. 

From the 2022-2023 ALA President: 

"As trusted institutions, libraries are the last bastion of democracy that is truly inclusive and free" (3). 

Unless you happen to be in one of those communities who are happy to let their elected officials defund their libraries and threaten the safety of their librarians. But other than that, sure. Heck, even here in Kentucky the book challenges are on the rise. 

From the director of ALA's Office of Intellectual Freedom: 

The rising numbers of challenges and book bans "are evidence of a growing, well-organized, conservative political movement whose goals include removing books addressing race, history, gender identity, sexuality, and reproductive health from America's public libraries and school libraries that do not meet their approval" (4). 

That is a polite way of saying a well-organized right wing Part of Stupid Christofascist bunch of bigots who more often than not have not even read the books they are challenging. Also ignores the fact that in many libraries the administrators flat out ignore their own book challenge procedures to appease them. So allowing them to escalate has led to the following: 

"Both school and public librarians are increasingly in the crosshairs of conservative groups during book challenges and subject to defamatory name calling, online harassment, social media attacks, and doxxing, as well as direct threats to their safety, their employment, and their very liberty" (4). 

This is the America we live in now. These are Hard Times to be a librarian and/or an educator for that matter.  

To be honest, the best part of the report that is really worth reading is the "Forward Momentum" article edited by Phil Morehart. It highlights some interesting and innovative things that some libraries are doing including a cellphone lending program, enhanced library cards for ID use, and lending utility wagons. 

The report is 18 pages long in PDF form. It is an ALA report, which means it focuses mainly on public libraries. For academic libraries, there is the ACRL Library Trends and Statistics Survey (latest out now is the 2021 edition, which I will look at later).

Short book review: A Library Miscellany

Claire Cock-Starkey, A Library Miscellany. Oxford, UK: Bodleian Library, 2018. ISBN: 9781851244720.

Genre: nonfiction

Subgenre: trivia, libraries

Format: small hardcover

Source: Hutchins Library, Berea College

 

This is a small book of library histories, lists, and trivia. The book also looks at library collections, individuals, and facts. Many of the lists and material has an anglophile focus; the book is published by the Bodleian library. 

Some of the topics included in the book are: 

• The ten largest libraries in the world. 
• Some fictional libraries of note. 
• Charles Darwin's library aboard the Beagle. 
• Some famous librarians of note.
• Library treasures: the Gough Map.

Overall, this is a nice small interesting book. Librarians and library fans will likely appreciate it. Readers who enjoy trivia books will probably enjoy this one. The book is nothing spectacular, but it is an easy and quick read where you learn a few things about libraries. I liked it, and I would suggest it for trivia readers and library fans. 

3 out of 5 stars. 

Article Note: A Bit More on Librarian Sabbaticals

This article was cited in the previous article I read about factors that contribute to librarian turnover. Sabbaticals were discussed a bit in that article. I was able to get a hold of this article, so I figured I would read it too. I will disclose up front that librarians in my small college do qualify for sabbaticals, though there are issues with that I will mention as I comment on this article. 

This article looks at academic librarian participation in sabbaticals. The research was based mainly on a survey sent to library directors that included some open-ended questions; answers to those open-ended questions are discussed in the article. A significant part of the argument for librarians taking sabbatical if they are able is that the experience can provide some respite and refreshing for the librarians. To be honest, for me at least, besides not being able to take a sabbatical (a full one that is), a sabbatical would not be the respite and/or break from the daily grind writes like the author make it out to be. It would just be taking time off to do more work, different work, but still a lot of work, then write reports about it when I get back while catching up on the work I was not able to do while I was gone on said sabbatical. That is not less stress. That sounds like more stress, and I can do without that. 

 

Some takeaways from the article: 

• A 2001 study by Gaskell and Morril, which this article's author relies on quite a bit, found that a bit over half of the academic institutions the researchers surveyed offered sabbatical to academic librarians; however, only the most "avid" librarians applied for the programs (153). 
• I can't imagine why more librarians would not apply. I will disclose also that prior to my current job, I never had sabbaticals as an option, so personally I fail to see the big deal. 
• Author points out that literature related to sabbaticals in academia is small, even smaller when it deals with academic librarians. This literature tends to be either personal narratives or descriptive and informative review articles. In other words, the kind of LIS articles that may get written because someone needs to get tenure, but are not persuasive to administrators. In fact, the author mentions this: "Regrettably, this kind of writing is simply not likely to convince those college administrators, 'who really have not plans or expectations for the library except the hope that it will stay withing the allocated budget and that the faculty and the students...will not complain too strenuously about it'" (154). 
• Then there are administrators who would love to cut the library budget even more (or entirely if they could get away with it), but that is another story. 
• The author discloses: "It is now time to acknowledge that this author is one of the fortunate few within the library profession to currently be enjoying a year-long sabbatical. Yet, my own experience also demonstrates that such 'acceptance into full faculty collegiality is not generally extended'" (154). 
• Must be nice and duh! Further, the author describes their institution: "Our leadership is strong and the staff highly skilled and service-oriented. We work with an exceptional teaching faculty, a reasonably engaged student body and the librarians at my institution look forward to lengthy, fulfilling careers" (154). To be honest, the author's description of their institution does have echoes of Lake Wobegon.
  
• Author goes on to write after that disclosure about a colleague who had a sabbatical project rejected, a project that was related to the library and its work (I guess it was not deemed academic enough). Not exactly a supportive administration there, but not surprising. For me, that is another reason I do not bother applying for sabbatical: I honestly do not think based on local conditions that I can get the upper ups to approve anything I would care enough about to work on during a sabbatical. 
• Adding to my comment above, this finding from the article is not encouraging: "The following respondent's comment was representative, 'there is no specific prohibition against it, but it is unclear if a request for a sabbatical would be approved by the faculty committee or college administration.' Other participants noted that sabbatical leaves could be provided 'on (the) whim' or 'at the discretion' of administrative personnel outside of the library" (155).
   
• Key question from the article author: "...librarians do suffer job-dissatisfaction and burnout. Shouldn't we be making a more determined effort to get out a bit more?" (154). 
• Yes, and it's called taking a vacation, not a sabbatical. 
• Barely 50% of respondents said that sabbatical offerings from librarians were equivalent to what "real" faculty get. The article goes on to state that "a number of respondents report that librarians at their institutions receive sabbaticals that are significantly shorter in duration than those of their teaching faculty colleagues" (158). This also brings up an issue of equity.
  
• I can assure you we would be one of those places where the sabbatical offering for librarians is not equivalent to what the "real" faculty get. Our situation here is very much like situations reported in the article where "another person who also noted that at his/her institution librarian leaves needed to 'coincide with summer, whereas faculty can go for half or full years. . .'" (158). 
• "And yet, the issues described by survey participants in this study are hardly new or earth-shattering" (160).
• And yet this article got written and published. 

 

Citation for the article: 

Molly R. Flaspohler, "Librarian Sabbatical Leaves: Do We Need to Get Out More?" The Journal of Academic Librarianship 35.2 (March 2009): 152-161.  

Article Note: On Factors That Contribute to Academic Librarian Turnover

As I started to read this article, I recalled my days in library school. Early on in the program one of the assignments in a library management class I was taking was to interview a library manager/supervisor. So I went back to my previous graduate school and interviewed their head of the reference department at the time. They told me, among various insights, that turnover in her unit was part of the trade as other librarians would move up to promotions elsewhere. She tried to make an environment to make sure her librarians and workers did well at their job so they could succeed wherever they ended up. I admit that at the time, and even now, I have some mixed feelings about that. 

This article looks at reasons librarians gave for leaving one academic institution for another within a five-year period. I will mention upfront that I would've fallen within the changing jobs in 5 to 7 years, though for me it was not just in libraries. But that is another story. 

Some takeaways from the article, with a bit of my commentary: 

• "Library managers and their supervisors do not benefit from new librarians every two years as much as they benefit from librarians that believe in their institution and stay with it" (Cottrell, qtd. in 579).
• And yet, more often than not library managers are on the lookout for the next library messiahs and young librarians versed in the latest "flash." See also the phenomenon of "new-hire messianism" identified by the Library Loon back in 2011. Some things have not changed over time. By the way, finding that 2011 link took some doing on the search engine. Part of it I am sure is because as library blogs age, and are mostly forgotten except by a few of us, content like the Library Loon's gets buried deeper in the web.
  
• Purpose of the article is to "examine the contributing factors to academic librarian turnover and begin a conversation about retaining 21st century library professionals" (580). 
• The study defined academic librarians as "any professional holding a Master's degree in Library Science and currently working in an academic setting" (582). To be included in the survey, "participants had to be currently employed as an academic librarian within the United States and have voluntarily left an academic librarian position within the last five years" (582). 
• The survey ended up with 275 participants who completed the survey and met the criteria to be included. 
• Note that most of the participants worked and/or work at large public universities of 20K+ students.
  
• A study by M. Becher, quoted in the article, found that "among librarians with faculty status, tenured librarians have the highest levels of job satisfaction. Meanwhile, non-tenured librarians reported lower overall job satisfaction, particularly among those not on the tenure-track but who work alongside tenure track librarians" (qtd. in 581). 
• I would buck this trend given my low regard for tenure and librarianship. A couple of my colleagues here would likely buck the trend as well, but I will note no one was asking me. 
• "In recent years, the concept of job burnout has become more prevalent in the library literature. One of the primary causes of burnout is work overload" (581). 
• Gee, can't imagine why. 
• "Quantitative data showed that participants were most dissatisfied with the morale in the library" (585). Again, I can't imagine why. Keep in mind this article came out in 2020, which means the research was done in 2019 or so, i.e. mostly before the COVID-19 pandemic hit. If morale in libraries was low then, it took another major hit during the pandemic. Issues that respondents identified related to morale included ineffective library management (things like micromanaging, poor decisions, unethical behavior), campus administration issues (such as poor leadership), and lack of growth opportunities (585). 
• Toxic and dysfunctional library culture and environment was also identified as a morale issue, though to be honest, it did not score as high as I would have expected. Still, I would say the old adage is applicable: people don't quit jobs. They quite bad managers and supervisors. Turns out a bit later in the article, the authors mention this too: "Results from the study indicate that employees are not fleeing their positions, they are fleeing work environments they feel are toxic" (591). Way I see it this kind of finding should be an indictment of how some libraries are run and the shameful fact that a good amount of toxic library supervisors and directors are not only tolerated but even rewarded. But do not take my word for it. Read on.
  
• "Low morale (M=3.17, SD- 1.01) was the area of highest dissatisfaction and was often tied to library leadership and culture within the open-ended responses. Direct supervisors were a frequently cited source of conflict due to bullying, neglect, or biased behavior. These behaviors were exhibited by the supervisors themselves, but also between colleagues and departments" (591). Good thing they did not ask me because I could have shared a horror story or two about workplace bullying and spineless administrators.
  
• An interesting to me finding: "This means that academic librarians who previously worked at smaller institutions (in terms of enrollment) were more dissatisfied with aspects related to their job duties and compensation and benefits than academic librarians who worked at larger institutions" (590). 
• In my experience, and I emphasize it is my experience, I have been more satisfied working in a smaller campus. There are reasons for that, and I probably should write about that some day. 
• Another interesting to me finding: "In the open-ended portion of the survey, participants reported that being classified as staff meant having less conference and travel funding and feeling less respected by colleagues within the university" (592). 
• To which I ask if they feel more respected if they have tenure. Because from experience in more than one campus I have worked in, I can safely tell you that "real" faculty don't give a shit about us librarians being "faculty" too. We are not "real" to them. 
• And speaking of messianism and librarianship, "other librarians reported that newly hired librarians in instruction or technical services were offered lower salaries than new librarians that worked in digital fields" (593). As if overall inequity issues were not bad enough. 
• A possible solution in hiring: "honestly during the recruitment phase about the surrounding area in order for candidates to make informed decisions about whether it will be a good fit" (594).
• Yea, right. On a very anecdotal side notes, some hiring committees locally have reported that "the surrounding area" (i.e. the state) has created some difficulties in attracting quality candidates to come work here. Catch is that much like libraries can't control local weather (and yes, in some cases, unhappiness with weather was a reason for a departure), they can't really control if their locale is less than desirable (for whatever reasons, including the political climate for instance). 
• "As reflected in burnout literature, librarians exceed what is considered a typical work week to fit in their service and scholarship elements on top of their work tasks" (594). 
• And with little to no appreciation (let alone compensation) I will add. On a positive for me, I am glad I am not on a tenure line, which means I do not have to worry about "scholarship" requirements that would be more of a distraction to me doing my actual work. 
• And yet another of those gee I wonder why findings: The authors mention that "while about half of academic librarians are eligible for sabbatical, less than a third take advantage of the privilege" (594). 
• Where do I even start with that one. One reason may be the workloads we often have combined with an inability to realistically take time off. I happen to have the so-called privilege of sabbatical, but when it came up for me I did not take it. One of the reasons is that, although I get it, I cannot take it in the way a "real" faculty would be able to take it (six months to a year straight through). My duties pretty much prevent this. I am one of the primary library instructors and my duties in a regular semester are quite heavy. This would mean a disruption to the library. Not to mention likelihood of getting a sabbatical replacement for me is fairly low (again, unlike "real" faculty who can likely count on that). Here, the one or two colleagues who took a sabbatical had to split it, and not even a fair split. It was basically two summers (because again, we have to work during the year), so they do not even get a full sabbatical (two summers is not even six months). I am sure there are other reasons those librarians choose not to take their sabbaticals if they even get them. To be honest, from what I gather, an academic librarian getting sabbaticals as a job privilege is rare. I may need to check on that at some point. Having said that, I will note that before I came to my current job, I never had sabbatical as an academic librarian so to be honest to the so-called privilege does not really impress me. 
• "Retaining employees is especially important because while waves of new employees can bring with them waves of new ideas, longtime employees identify more closely with and have more loyalty to their institution's mission" (Cottrell qtd. in 594). 
• This becomes a question of hoe much administrators value loyalty to the institution and workplace or not If all they care about is the latest messiah and flash, then turnover might not be as big an issue. It can be the price of doing business, get a nice project going and as long as someone who remains behind can maintain it the originator can leave (or the project falls apart, but by then the next new person brings along the next new thing, and repeat the cycle). 
• "Retention strategies should begin at the start of a librarian's time at an institution, not when they are already thinking about leaving" (595). 
• Duh. I can assure you that no one really thought of this in places I was hired previously, and if we are being honest, I do not think they gave it that much thought at my current workplace. 
• "Recruiting and retaining librarians of color is particularly problematic in environments that do not protect employees from racial microaggressions, isolation, invalidations and microinsults..." (596).
• Again, duh. See also the previous point here about employers being honest or not about ground conditions when they are doing hiring. 
• The authors note that the study did not consider librarians who left the profession entirely, and that can be a subject for further study.

 

Citation for the article: 

 Christina Heady, et.al., "Contributory Factors to Academic Librarian Turnover: a Mixed-Methods Study." Journal of Library Administration 60.6 (2020): 579-599.