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).

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.  

Article Note: On the experience of uniqueness and difference for librarians of color

The article argues that due to lack of diversity in the profession, the experiences of librarians of color are often ignored by the white majority. The white majority may be unaware of the challenges their colleagues of color face. Personally, I think at times the majority is fully aware, but they just ignore it, minimize, or make it worse, but the article is much more charitable overall (that is another story for another time). 

Once again, I want to jot down some takeaways from the article I want to remember with some comments of my own. 

• "The lack of diversity in librarianship is a well-known and well-documented problem" (285). And yet, here we are again with another article discussing that lack of diversity in the profession that is so well-known and well-documented. The article goes to point out further that progress has been slow and that we need more than statistics and calls for action. Again, nothing new here. 
• What the article aims to do: ". . .articulate with rich detail how a group of librarians of color experience uniqueness and difference in a predominantly white profession" (286). Does it succeed? I would say not quite. Once you get past the literature review and the method, there is just not that much to consider in the discussion. Actual descriptions of what the librarians of color experience are pretty brief. 
• On participants for the study: "The eight participants included four women and four men who self-identified as African American, Asian, and LatinX, with some multiple identities also offered. Participants were employed in a number of environments including academic research libraries, community college libraries, public libraries, and school libraries. A challenge to the study was some participants' concern that their anonymity would not be protected if demographic detail was provided, due to the small number of librarians of color in the profession" (287-288). So basically they had a sample so small that participants could be easily identifiable, so the authors need to keep things very vague. This is a common concern for librarians of color, including me. It is a big reason I never participate in any campus survey that asks for my demographic information. Once they know my gender, ethnicity, and department, there is NO anonymity for me no matter what they claim. 
• Big themes to emerge from this limited study is the experience of uniqueness and difference among librarians of color. Another theme they found is that intersectionality can play a role as well, where there are layers of diversity, for example being a librarian of color and male (in a female dominated profession). 
• Some librarians of color would argue, and I would probably agree, that times our presence contributes to making things inclusive. We do the work just by being there, showing up, doing our work. 
• Participants felt that being a librarian of color allowed them to better related to library patrons of color. Part of it due to shared experience. I can related to that. 
• Participants also felt that there are burdens to being a librarian of color such as the expectation of serving in every diversity committee, service job, initiative, etc. a campus creates. I can relate to that too, though I have done my best personally to distance myself from some of that. For good or ill, there are always new faculty on my campus willing to do that to get their service requirements for their tenure line. Note that while I have "faculty" status, I am not "real" faculty nor am I on a tenure track. While I do get roped into committee work now and then, it is not a strict requirement, so when it comes to DEI, I tend to avoid it because, well, I do not wish nor need to be the token guy (but that is another story). Bottom line here, as the article points out, is that the work of librarians of color is often very different than the work of the white colleagues in terms of having to do things like the diversity committee, collection development in some area based on race and/or ethnicity (oh, you are LatinX, and you speak Spanish? you are the new Spanish liaison, for example).
  
• "The microaggressions and discrimination experienced by participants reinforce the need for diversity policies, as well as a creation of a culture of support and inclusion" (294). Gee, you think? One thing the article does not consider, and it is probably something for another article, is what happens when one member of a color group does the microaggressions and discrimination towards another member of another color group, say a black person discriminating against an Asian. And yes, that can happen (but so far not something I have seen in the literature. I suppose folks of color have enough problems as is from outside to check on the problems in their houses, but again, that is another story). 
• From the conclusion: "Some findings of this study may sound all too familiar to librarians of color" (295). Again, you think? 
• Also from the conclusion: "There is frustration with seeing endless papers about diversity issues and racism in information professions that raise problems but offer little in way of solutions" (295). Kind of like this paper. To be honest, as I mentioned, actual accounts from the librarians of color are very brief and minimal. It does not feel like enough. As for the findings, a lot of this is not really new. 

 Citation for the article: 

Amy VanScoy and Kawanna Bright, "Articulating the Experience of Uniqueness and Difference for Librarians of Color." The Library Quarterly 89.4 (2019): 285-297.

Article Note: On top trends in academic libraries for 2022

The article summarizes and discusses trends in academic librarianship for the previous two years, going back to 2020. This report from Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) seeks to provide a snapshot of what has been going on. I read through this, and I am jotting down a few takeaways and comments from my reading. Keep in mind this is an ACRL report, which means it is mostly looking at R-1 universities and other really big schools. My college would not be on their radar, but I still find some things in the article can be applicable here.

 

• COVID-19 pretty much dominated the time period. It forced libraries to adapt and offer new online services and/or expand the online services they had already. Locally, we had to significantly expand our online services.* Like other libraries, we did have a lockdown period. 
• Like many other workplaces and the rest of society, the pandemic exposed the many inequity issues in library employment. The authors write that "inequities between librarians and other library staff were heightened" (244). Locally, well, this would include the already existing inequity issues between the "real" faculty and the "library faculty. 
• In addition, the authors also write that "low morale continues to be an area of concern in librarianship, particularly for librarians of color, nonlibrarian staff, and members of underrepresented groups" (244). Add other life pressures, and librarians who happen to be on tenure lines are seriously suffering. Personally, I am glad I am not on a tenure line. There are issues that cause me stress, but publish or perish is not one of them.
• Yes, the pandemic also made us more aware of space and its utilization. Signage, enforcing masking rules (which have been relaxed by now), social distancing, so on, were and are issues. 
• A side note from the space issue. An investigation the authors cite looked at "pre-COVID, how collaboration spaces are used and found that furniture or spaces intended for multiple people are frequently being used by single individuals" (245). We certainly jumped on the collaboration spaces bandwagon here. I would say we need to investigate here how exactly are collaborative spaces used, to verify if use is consistent with the investigation mentioned or not. 
• Sharing collections more and more emphasis on open access.  On open access, the authors point out that while there is a lot of talk about OA, librarians being typically in favor, it has not translated into any substantial OA policies. 
• Apparently artificial intelligence (AI) is a growing trend in academic libraries, but to be honest, that is not something that has appeared on our radar at this point, and as of this writing, it would not be a priority to any degree. For us, it would be a very low concern if at all at this point in time. 
• Data and data management. At times, administrators speak about it, but so far no one really has presented any ideas or paths to execute or make it meaningful. 
• Why this can be significant for libraries, including for libraries like ours? "Libraries are taking a greater interest in data visualization as they seek to tell their own story, including assessment, value of the library, collection analysis, and internal capacity building" (249). 
• Critical librarianship continues to be a trend. 
• Defined: "For instance, critical librarianship argues that libraries are not neutral and challenges librarians to take steps towards antiracist and aintioppressive practices for the benefit of users but also for the benefit of the profession itself" (249). 
• This is an area that I admit we need to work on and explore further here. 
• A key area of this is critical information literacy (CIL). "CIL literature discusses why and how information professionals should ask questions about power dynamics within academia, equal access to information, and the economic incentives around how information and data are created, stored, and used" (249). While we do some of that in our information literacy sessions, it is nowhere near being systematic or consistent. Clearly an area we need to explore. Given where I work, this kind of labor makes sense as well as would go with the overall institutional mission. As I said, needs further investigation at this time. 

On a final note, I did find copies of some items from the article's references list, which I will read and make notes here as I get to them.  

Citation for the article: 2021-2022 ACRL Research Planning and Review Committee, "Top Trends in Academic Libraries: a Review of Trends and Issues." C&RL News, June 2022: 243-256.

* Here is our webpage for COVID-19 online services we set up in 2020 shortly after the initial lockdown. The website has been updated as changes happened over time. 

Article Note: Caring in First Year Library One-Shot Instruction

I picked this up to read in my quest to keep up with the literature in library instruction. Here are some takeaways and notes I want to remember from the article, with a bit of comment. 

• Author's main argument: "an academic librarian providing one-shot instruction sessions to first-year students is uniquely positioned to enact a feminist ethic of care in the classroom" (96). A key is to think of the session as the start on an open librarian and student relationship.
  
• The author further argues that the instruction session is a first impression for first year students and a way to inspire a relationship with the librarian and the library. This is a big reason why here in our library we promote our other services during instruction sessions, especially availability of appointments for research consultations with a librarian. 
• I'd give this article some bonus points for mentioning bell hooks and her work. To be honest, if you are writing about feminism and education, odds are good you have to bring up bell hooks.
• Author making reference to O'Keefe: "Studies have shown that a sense of connectedness and feeling cared for can have dramatic impact on student retention rates and ensuring that students perform to the best of their abilities; that sense of connectedness can come from a caring relationship with just one key person in the student's institution" (qtd. in 97). This is also why our librarians strive to demystify academia, make transparent assumptions that professors often take for granted and fail or neglect to explain to students. On a side note, I may need to check the literature for anything on this demystifying process; I am sure there is something out there, yet for us here seems like just something we do. 
  
• Citation for the reference: O'Keefe, P. (2013). "A sense of belonging: Improving student retention." College Student Journal, 47 (4): 605-613.
• Defining feminist pedagogy, from Crabtree, et.al.: "Feminist pedagogy is marked by a desire to break down the classroom hierarchy that traditionally puts the teacher in a position of power over the students, favoring instead an egalitarian community of learners who respect individuals and differences" (97).
•  Citation for the reference: Crabtree, R.D., Sapp, D.A., and Licona, A.C. (eds.). (2009). Feminist pedagogy: Looking back to move forward. The Johns Hopkins Press. 
• Though the author argues that our classrooms may be places of radical possibilities, I do have to question that. Just how much "freedom" do we really have given certain faculty demands and other restrictions? 
• The author highlights that the one-on-one reference consultation is a good fit for a caring relationship to develop. We often find here that we are better able to care for and help our students in consultations. In addition, the feedback from post consultation surveys we do as part of our assessment process tend to be positive. 
• A tip: "It is important to show availability outside the classroom for a future encounter" (100). We certainly do this. I even keep late hours for consultations. 
• The author probably needs to work on limits and boundaries given that she "gives students her email address and cell number and asks them to email/call/text anytime" (100). I give my students my email address, but that is it. They do not get my cell, and I do not think a librarian should be giving out their personal cell number. Heck, in previous workplaces some of the female librarians had to be concerned about stalking to the point they did not even want their full names on name tags. So no, not giving out my cell. Besides, as much as my current employer loves the idea of 24/7 availability, reality is workers including me do have lives outside of work that do not include our students. Healthy boundaries need to be enforced. Besides, there is no reference question that would require an emergency call at 3am for instance. 
• A big part of the reason I choose to work in a small college: "What if our first-year students came to the library for the first time and discovered there a librarian who knew their names, was interested in their research assignment and its relation to their lives, reflected carefully and responded to their expressed needs, was knowledgeable and credible, indicated wide availability outside of the library session, and sought further and deeper relationships with them as individuals?" (101-102). That is basically a lot of what my colleagues and I do here. The small college setting does make it a bit easier. 
• To be honest, a lot of this material is not so much "feminist" caring. It is just plain caring, making an effort to know the students. The article could have left out the feminist theory at the start of the article, and this would still work. 

 

Citation for the article: Leah Morin, "The First-Year Library Instruction One-Shot: A Place for Caring." Communications in Information Literacy 15.1 (2021): 95-103. 

Some additional items from the references list I may want to look at: 

Accardi, M.T. (2013). Feminist Pedagogy for Library Instruction. Library Juice Press. 

Kumbier, A., Drabinkski, and M.T. Accardi, (2010). Critical Library Instruction: Theories and Methods. Library Juice Press.  

I already read and reviewed bell hooks book Teaching to Transgress (link to review and reading notes part one and part two).

 

 

 

 

Additional notes from US Book Show 2022: Libraries are Essential, Part 2 session

This is one of the sessions I watched on demand after the conference. 

 

Session: Libraries are Essential, Part 2. 

Session to look at critical areas, especially in the "post-pandemic" times. 

Access to e-books and digital content:

• Yes, publishers' onerous restrictions on e-book purchases for libraries are inequitable (i.e. nothing new here). Publishers then suing libraries over it is just bullying. The bottom line on this issue is that it is about fair and equitable digital access. Publisher greed is not a good look no matter what lip service they give about libraries being good, etc. 
• On digital lending and e-book demand: 
• E-book usage continues to grow. Foot traffic in libraries fell with the pandemic and is not back to pre-pandemic levels yet in many places. Some libraries in fact encouraged use of electronic resources (my library certainly did). 
• Other libraries do report lower materials circulation. For electronic resources, again, publisher onerous demands and restrictions mean that libraries are less able to meet patron demand at a time when demand is increasing. 
• Defining equitable digital access. Collections bridge content gaps. To provide quality content for all in a safe environment. Equitable access to content that reflects the community. 
• Equitable digital access is difficult given publishers' exploitative pricing on e-books, which is often at least 3 times higher or more than print book pricing. So librarians are more likely then not to "license" more e-books and buy print, but this means many patrons can be left out, thus an inequitable situation. This can be blamed on publishers' greed. 
• Advances in technology have allowed publishers to avoid/refuse to offer fair pricing on e-books and electronic resources. Playing victim for them is a common disinformation tactic in their industry. Meanwhile publishers continue to disadvantage libraries. 
• Despite publishers' clout, some librarians are working to advocate for themselves and their patrons. However, it may be serious time, as stated by the librarian from Maryland, for libraries to withhold funding from publishers, i.e. time for boycotts of certain publishers. 
• Contrary to what publishers say, librarians do defend and support copyright. Libraries and schools teach about copyright. When we help a student cite their sources properly, we are defending copyright. 
• With better terms from publishers (as if, but work with me here), libraries could buy more content, including more diverse authors, debut authors too instead or in addition to just the "usual" bestsellers. Libraries propose digital access should be as access for print resources. Bottom line: librarians need to continue and expand their role as advocates, but also steer themselves and patrons to smaller and indie publishers willing to give libraries a better deal. This means then also to steer away from large exploitative publishers. Libraries need to put contingency plans in place. 

Interview with Jennie Rose Halperin, of Library Futures (advocacy group).  

• Publishers may not see everything libraries do to promote reading, culture, uplift communities, and providing new ways for people to understand their world (this is true as libraries go, but it is a very charitable way to see publishers. I'd say publishers are just willfully blind). 
• On a tech positive future for libraries. There are many reasons we need access and use electronic resources. The world is moving more to digital content, and libraries need to be part of this future. However, libraries, largely due (we are saying it again) to publisher onerous restrictions, face various challenges. 

Panel discussion: "We are still not OK: Protecting library workers after the pandemic." 

 

• (I should mention that I loathe the "after the pandemic" phrasing. At this point, the pandemic is not over no matter how much wishful thinking most of society is doing now.)
• This sessions mostly looks at libraries' work during the pandemic (a lot of this falls under the "we did good" category of library presentation). What many often did not realize was library workers' trauma at the time (and still ongoing). Many library workers remained at work in libraries that stayed open. (I worked even as the campus was, mostly, locked down in the early stages of the pandemic. Personally, I never "went home.) The issue of trauma has an impact on everyone. 
• "Normal" is a problem. The pandemic exposed various critical needs and forms of suffering. 
• Keep in mind that libraries, especially public libraries, had been suffering divestment and defunding before the pandemic. The pandemic just made things worse for libraries. 
• Trauma is endemic at all library levels according to researchers. Yet attitudes in library workers can be cavalier, meaning they may leave the work in libraries, get transferred out of public services, or just "mentally check out." 
• On defining trauma. A key difference is when people feel supported and able to cope they tend to see it more as a "bad experience" than as trauma. 
• The pandemic has disproportionately affected library workers of color (PoC). In addition, issues of low pay, white supremacy, mission creep need to be addressed. Still, the pandemic has shown and exposed changes that need to be done. 
• To library directors: it is a certainty your PoC library staff have endured abuse in some form at the reference desk. You nor the rest of the staff should be OK with that nor just let it slip. Directors, you need to make choices then, including policy changes. As leaders, you need to lead, not tolerate racist or otherwise abusive behavior. Period. Full stop. 
• A question asked: what if nothing changes? (I think that scenario is possible if not very likely.) The speakers believe change will come, even if some need to get out of the way. Thinking in 20th century terms is no longer an option. Overall, the speakers are optimistic (but again, what if nothing changes? As I often say, a magnificent question. I do want to believe.)

Panel on library leadership. 

 

• R. David Lankes, on panel, says library leaders need "radical empathy." However, leaders more than not are NOT in touch with front line workers (not surprising. That is a common situation, and one I have witnessed often. But heaven forbid you point it out if you are like me, i.e. a front line worker with no clout). 
• A lot of healing needs to happen in the profession. Asking your front line workers about "the future of libraries" may not be the best thing for leaders to be doing at this time (yea, you may want to shut up about that topic in the Hard Times, at least in front of your library workers). Instead of trying to speculate about futures take care of your library workers first.
   
• Flexibility is necessary in the Hard Times. Leadership needs to communicate consistently and clearly. It might also help if leaders take the same risks as everyone else (I am definitely not holding my breath on that). 
• Leaders need to do more than give pretty speeches (and this was said without irony given that we are listening to some very pretty speeches).
   

 

 

Article Note: Suggesting librarians develop an information scientist identity

To be honest, this short piece is a lot of text to say very little. The author claims that new information demands and the Hard Time we live in, including the pandemic and the constant threat of misinformation and disinformation, necessitate that librarians shift their self-image and identity to that of information scientist. Librarians do have a niche, or I would say an advantage, in the ability and skill to provide the best possible information to our patrons. The author makes the suggestion for the new title basically because, according to what the author found in the literature, titles like "information scientist" and "information specialist" sound like they have more status, cachet if you will, than just the word "librarian." 

The rest of the article basically becomes yet another article about librarian insecurity about their title, what librarians do, and how they do it. The author sees the "librarian" stereotype as a handicap, a liability. To be honest reminds of the Library 2.0 days when librarians all rushed to become 2.0 specialists in order to remain relevant, show they were useful, show they had skills, etc. We've moved on, the profession has survived, and the 2.0 movement is mostly a page in history by now. Adding a fancier title is not going to suddenly make faculty members, in the case of academia at least, actually pay attention to librarians if they were not doing it before. 

However, because again librarians are oh so insecure, while the author advocates librarians embracing the new title the author also cautions that "we do not want to alienate ourselves from them [the scientists] by claiming to have a role or job title which is not ours to claim." So which is it? Do we claim the title? Which by the way, given our strong skill sets I'd say it is one we can easily claim. Or do we not because heaven forbid we step on some toes? 

And while I am at it, I did not particularly appreciate the bit of condescension about librarians with humanities degrees and backgrounds suggesting we need to learn about science and how it works. Odds are good many of us in humanities have a fairly good understanding of science, how it works, and how policy makers mess it up more often than not. We are not science illiterate, so please keep your assumptions to yourself. 

Overall, as I said at the beginning, a lot of text that says very little. 

Citation for the article: 

Donna Ellen Frederick, "Why Librarians Need to Develop Their Information Scientist Identity in the Age of COVID." Library Hi Tech News, 2021. 

Article Note: On the question of "genuine" faculty-librarian partnerships

I read this article a while back, and I reread it in order to make this post. I usually print out articles to read so I can make notes as I read. I wrote a lot of notes on this one. Do note that this article came out way before the 2020 pandemic, although at least anecdotally, I can say that not much has changed since then. I am going to highlight a few quotes and make some notes of things I want to remember about this article and for later reference. Given some of the questions and issues I expressed when I read that article about workshop attendance recently, well, I will try not to be too pessimistic, but don't hold your breath on it.

Purpose of the article: 

"The purpose of this paper is to ask, how can librarians and faculty become genuine partners in student learning and move towards the common goal of getting students to think critically?"(80).

That is what I would call a Magnificent Question. 

"In this article, the authors argue that librarians must cease being at the service of faculty. That is, librarian need to declined the aforementioned types of requests, especially they are not in the best interests in students" (81).

An example of an aforementioned faculty request is the often annoying and ill informed request for "the library talk." The authors argue that librarians should say no to requests like these and try to engage the faculty in a more constructive conversation. If you are a librarian, try not to laugh here. I have said the above about saying no to certain requests from faculty a few times. Usually, the result is that my library bosses cringe, and then they say "we can't do that." To which I reply, "why not?" only to get the "because that is not good librarian ethic" or some other variant. Or more often than not librarians fall for one of these old lines:

 

 "But at least I get in front of the students.

I want the professor to know I can be helpful.

It's the students who will suffer if I don't do it.

Even if they get a little out of it, it's worth it.

Students will know that the library is a friendly place" (81).

 

 

 

I used to be comforted by the line of at least the students see me (or us), then I gained experience as I learned that without follow-up or additional services, the students just seeing us is pretty meaningless. As for the students suffering if you do not do it, that was often used by library administrators to guilt librarians into compliance without questioning. But heaven forbid you suggest something different to a stubborn faculty member, and deity help you if they complain to your boss that you won't do the "library talk" (and actually expect the faculty member to put in some effort to teach information literacy to their class). 

 

In a way, as vulgar as it may sound, librarians at times "whore ourselves" out to get some library instruction done. Though to be honest it is worse than that in our profession. The ladies of the night DO negotiate their services and state clearly what they will or not do, and if a client does not like it, no service is provided (but I digress).  When I read this article a while back, this thought came to mind, and as I reflect again on it I do not think things have changed that much. Librarian skills and techniques in library instruction have improved, technology has gotten better, and some things have gotten flashier, but we still get the "library talk" faculty. That remains a constant. 

"Educating a faculty member who is not aware of and not convinced that a different approach will benefit their students, can strike fear in the heart of even veterans of instruction. Furthermore, responding different than your colleagues could violate a set of accepted norms within a group of librarians at a university, which creates a problematic situation for librarians who are newer to the profession" (82). 

I recall earlier in my career a time in my career (before I came to my current workplace) where I suggested to other librarians that faculty needed to be educated. The other librarians pretty much looked at me like I was delusional, like "shut up, don't rock the boat." I have moved on since then, and I still do believe faculty DO need to be educated on how we can partner genuinely for student success. It is hard work, and it is often one faculty member at a time. If fortune favors you, that one faculty member can help you persuade and educate their peers. It is a given faculty members are a bit more open to listening to their colleagues. By the way, as I am reading the article and reflecting a bit, it is like the authors at times were reading my mind and they are saying things that do need to be said. 

 

Also, as the authors state, if we keep doing the bad requests, like the "library tour," it just encourages the faculty to keep making those bad requests. The challenge here is to find advocates for the librarians, say a supportive library administrator or again, a friendly faculty member who does see the value in a collaborative and genuine relationship and can speak to others on your behalf. What I have learned over time is that to make things work you have to build relationships, again, often one faculty member at a time. In previous workplaces, often those relationships began with adjunct faculty who tended to be more receptive to collaborations. While adjuncts are on the low end of the faculty pecking order, they often teach the essential gateway classes, and some of them do have relationships with the tenure line faculty, so there was another entry for building relationships with other faculty. To be honest, relationship building is another those things not taught in library school, or not taught very well at all if it is ever taught. I know I had to learn a lot of it by trial and error. 

The authors suggest that a way to change things is to change the conversation. For example, they suggest educating faculty on topics like "research assignments that work." Some of the points the authors reinforced include: 

"Students do not understand when you say 'do not use the internet.' Librarians see this time and again in the assignments of students who come in for help. Students think that this means they cannot use databases or the catalog to access the appropriate resources for their paper; while we understand that faculty want their students to use tools beyond Google tm. Faculty need to be clear in the requirements for sources" (84). 

To be honest, the "can't use the internet" has decreased dramatically since this article was published. We do not get much of that anymore, though once in a while you get the one old timer professor saying it, but it has become rare. What we do get, especially here, is the "you can't use reference books." For many faculty here, a reference book is not an option. We do teach students here how to use reference books as part of the research process, and if the faculty member does not relent, we just work around it. We get the students to use the reference book to get started on a topic, get some background, some keywords to use for later searching, and some basic citations for further reading, and we advise them not to cite the reference book in the paper. In other words, use a reference work as a tool to support your research, just not as one of your sources in the assignment. Same goes for Wikipedia, which is another thing professors forbid without thinking, but as the authors point out for Wikipedia, students can be more savvy about how to use it than faculty give them credit for. 

This next point reminds me of a recent research consult I had with a student. 

"Be explicit in your expectations. . . .Librarians may understand why faculty have the requirements they do, but students do not" (85).

And faculty, it is your job to make sure your students understand. It is not on the librarians, or the writing center tutor, so on to have to interpret the assignment for the students. Anyhow, what came to mind from the consult is making sure students know the stages of an assignment, what they need and when. Recently the student came to me with what seemed a vague topic: "I need peer reviewed articles on (insert pop culture topic here)." It initially sounded like that would not be possible as it sounded like just a popular topic. However, when the student came in for consultation, what they needed was some theoretical background and base to apply to said popular topic. Once we talked, I explained to the student the kind of sources needed and how to use them to make progress on the assignment. Some of that is stuff that as a librarian I can and do explain but part of it was also something the faculty member should have explained as part of their expectations: we have a theoretical frame in this class, and you are applying it to X topic, here is how you do it, and if you need materials on it, talk to your librarian. I will add that I was a school teacher as well as professor in a previous time, so doing a bit of extra teaching is fine by me, but I know not every librarian feels comfortable doing that. Granted, sending the student back the professor for clarification is an option,  but once in a while when the student says "the professor is not really that helpful," well, I try to do what I can to alleviate the student's needs and concerns. As I think about it, this kind of situation may be one to think about further, but that is another thought for another time. 

"We are a teaching university not a research university" (85).

The authors work in a teaching university (so this may not apply to you if you do work in a research university). For the most part, I have worked and taught in teaching colleges as well. As they point out, and I have learned over time, certain new faculty need a serious reminder of that idea that some institutions are primarily for teaching. As the authors state, and we also tell this to faculty here: 

 

"Our collection supports the curriculum of the university, not necessarily the research needs of faculty" (85).

This is something they need to hear and hear it often if you also work and teach in a teaching institution. For research support, you can always teach them about interlibrary loan. 

The article also provides some suggestions on better options for research and library assignments that you could suggest to your faculty. The idea is that we show faculty that yes, we do have student learning and pedagogy expertise. Just remember to keep things gentle so no faculty feathers get ruffled. 

The authors also advocate for us instruction librarians to write and articulate our teaching philosophy. I admit I did this, but it may be time to revisit the document and revise it and/or update it a bit. 

 

In addition, for a library instruction unit it is necessary to articulate, put it writing, the professional policies, in other words things that the unit may or not do, and get everyone on the same page. Articulate what you are willing to do or not, and be fair and consistent. This is about parameters and having healthy boundaries. If faculty push back, well, they need to learn about boundaries then. Rehearse your philosophy and policies so they become second nature when you need to discuss them. 

Citation for the article: 

Meulemans, Yvonne Nalani and Allison Carr, "Not At Your Service" Building Genuine Faculty-Librarian Partnerships." Reference Services Review 41.1 (2013): 80-90. 

Book Review: The Oxford Guide to Library Research, 4th edition

Thomas Mann, The Oxford Guide to Library Research, Fourth Edition. New York: Oxford University Press, 2015. ISBN: 978-0-19-993106-4.

 

Genre: nonfiction, guides

Subgenre: academic research, LIS

Format: trade paperback

Source: Hutchins Library, Berea College 

 

Our library recently acquired this for the reference collection as an update to the third edition that we had. I did notice this edition's publishing date is 2015, so it already may be falling behind in some details. When I investigated, I did not see a fifth edition forthcoming. Still this is a pretty good book overall.  

This book is a guide to help readers do research online and offline with an overview of various online and offline sources. Though it goes over online and offline sources, there is some bias or preference expressed in the book for print sources found in libraries, especially large research libraries. Naturally it also favors subscription based online resources, again found in libraries, especially large research libraries. The publisher describes this book as "the gold standard in the field," but it is so as long as you are using and accessing large research libraries. There is not much here about smaller academic libraries, like ours, and even less about public libraries. Though the strategies presented can apply for any researcher, the book is mainly for academic researchers at large research universities and institutions, for example, the Library of Congress, which is by the way where the author works. 

 

The book is arranged into 15 chapters. Some of the chapter topics include: specialized encyclopedias, use of subject headings in library catalogs and databases, citation searches, people sources, and hidden treasures (other not so visible at times sources like microforms and government documents). The book definitely strives to be as inclusive of various resources as possible. 

This is a guide mainly for academic researchers. The book is also commonly used as a textbook in library school programs (or "i-Schools" as they often call themselves now), and a lot of the material in the book is written more for librarians in training than actual non-librarian researchers. At times, some topics, such as cataloging and subject headings, may into more depth than most researchers may need, but that depth is necessary for librarians to understand how the systems work in order to better help their patrons. For other readers, some of the material may be way more technical than they want or need to know. 

For librarians in the field, like me, parts of this book may serve as a skills refresher. I did read it all to write this review, but for my brethren in the field I recommend you read what you need when you need. 

The book may not be too accessible for undergraduates. It does offer good research tips, but undergrads may need to dig through the more dense material first to find the good tips they can use. The book may be more geared to graduate students, research faculty, and especially librarians in training. Thus I would recommend the book for academic libraries, especially R-1 and similar institutions. For small academic libraries, I'd say this is optional. I am good with having it in our small collection, but having read it I can see it can be optional for us. 

In the end, I liked some parts better than others, and I think many academic readers can find some use in it. 

3 out of 5 stars. 

*****

Additional reading notes: 

The book is designed to answer three questions: 

 

"First, what is the extent of the significant research resources you will miss if you confine your research entirely, or even primarily, to sources available on the open Internet? Second, if you are trying to get a reasonably good overview of the literature on a particular topic, rather than just 'something quickly' on it, what are the methods of subject heading that are usually much more efficient for the purpose rather than typing keywords into a blank search box? And third-- a concern related to the first two-- how do you find the best search terms to use in the first place?" (xv).

A challenge is convincing researchers, especially students on tight schedules and deadlines who DO want it quickly and just good enough to do the assignment. Then again, a lot of what those students do is not "real" research. It's rather synthesis and compiling of sources on a decided topic, but that is a whole other conversation. 

This is a good point that many folks often miss or conveniently refuse to understand: 

"In the overall universe of information records, three considerations are inextricably tied together: (1) copyright protection; (2) free 'fair use' of the records by everyone; and (3) access limitations of what, who, and where. 

It is not possible to combine (1) and (2) without restricting at least one element of (3)" (xvii). 

Now things like copyright and access to research are debatable, but at the moment the above is the reality, unless you do as some faculty, researchers, and increasingly students do and find your sources in some shady parts of the Internet (and no further comment from me on that). 

A bad habit many librarians, especially the cool and hip ones like the "doers and stirrers," tend to have, which irks me a bit to be honest: 

"(The library field, unfortunately, has a habit of simply following Google rather than focusing on alternatives to it that work much better in the niche areas libraries must fill)" (115). 

That is also why so many libraries go to big default search boxes on their websites to "search everything" or do one "big search" without regard to trade offs of such decision in terms of focus, relevance, and useful results. It's a jump on the Google bandwagon of big search box and hoping the algorithm is on your side, except the algorithm is usually not on your side. Librarians jump on this for convenience, to make it "easier" for themselves and for impatient patrons instead of putting in the work and teaching students and/or patrons properly. Again, this can be a whole other conversation for another time. 

A growing problem in open Internet searching. I often mention this in library instruction, but few students seem to really appreciate it. Less savvy faculty often gloss over it: 

"(The growing proliferation of echo chambers and filter bubbles-- i.e. producing search results weighted and skewed by individuals' own idiosyncratic past search histories-- further diminishes the Web's capacity to provide inclusive overview perspectives)" (133). 

The author gives a nod to Reader's Advisory: 

"Bibliographies are also frequently more useful than databases when questions of 'reader's advisory' nature arise-- that is, when people just want recommendations of good books to read, in any subject area" (184). 

Article Note: On Value of Marginalia

This article looks at marginalia that people leave in an academic library's book. In other words, it looks at writing that readers may leave in the books, books they are not supposed to be writing on by the way. The author offers this definition of marginalia:

"Marginalia is defined as '. . .unique records of the reader's experience offering insights into how and why a reader reads. . .'" (1).

I will admit that I am not one to do much marginalia in my books, even though when I was an undergraduate it was encouraged that I write in my textbooks, especially in the literature classes. Still, it was not a habit that stuck with me. I either make reading notes in my journals, or if I am using an e-reader, I use the note functions to do my marginalia. I should also note that when I read articles like this, I print them out, and I do write notes on the margins of the text. Some of those notes help me recall things or add questions and comments I may integrate in these article note blog posts. Still, the topic of this article caught my eye.

The author states that there is very little on the subject of marginalia written by common people. We usually think of marginalia when it comes to famous authors and other famous people writing in the margins of their books. Often those books sell for astronomical value after those famous people pass on and their books hit the auction blocks. The author then in his literature review looks a bit at the history of marginalia and some authors who have written about it.

The author's study takes place at the library of Queensborough Community College, City University of New York. He points out that the common response to marginalia from patrons in library books is to view it as aberrant behavior, and such marginalia is often erased or removed. For this study, the author focused on the literature section of his library (LOC call number ranges: PR, PS, and PT), and ten books were chosen for the study. The article includes the list of the ten books selected. A capture tool was created in order to capture data including specific types of marginalia such as underlining, highlighting, use of brackets and/or parenthesis, and symbols. The data was then put into an EXCEL spreadsheet. The author then provides abbreviated data in the article from the large spreadsheet. Rest of the article then discusses specific marginalia found in the 10 books.

Some findings: 

 

•  The assumption was that various authors wrote the marginalia, "but of the 10 books sample, the analysis shows that, with few exceptions, a single marginalia writer wrote throughout the book" (7).

• What marginalia does: "Anecdotally and from personal experience we know that marginalia is a technique used to help the reader more fully engage in the subject matter. It is used to enhance concentration and focus, thereby improving memory and learning. It reminds us to dig deeper, stimulates questions and helps to draw conclusions" (19). 

As he gets to the conclusion, the author notes that with print diminishing due to the rise of electronic reading options that readers may not have as accessible means to make notations in books (24). I would say such options are not totally lost. E-readers often feature options for making notes about texts as well as highlighting parts of texts. When available, I make use of those features, which I find helpful later when I am reviewing a book or other text. 

Naturally I would say to many librarians people writing in books may be more of a horror than something to be studies. In that sense, this article is different than so many other LIS articles. Overall, this was an interesting read. 

Items from the references list I found of interest, possible adds to my TBR list: 

Author cites this site on "How to Leave Masterful Marginalia" from the Levenger stationery company. It does include a printer friendly version of their chart. 

H.J. Jackson, Marginalia: Readers Writing in Books. The author cites the 2001 edition, which my library has. There is a 2010 edition, but I am not sure how much of an improvement or not the new edition is.

I will miss you my friend, Mark Lindner

On Sunday, February 13, 2022, as I was heading out of my Sunday reference shift, this blog post by Meredith Farkas appeared on my feed reader. And thus I found that my friend and colleague in the profession Mark Lindner died by suicide. 

I met Mark first online like many of us did, back in the so-called golden days of the biblioblogosphere when many fine librarians wrote about libraries, librarianship, and a bit about their lives. Mark kept a blog for many years, and he was one of the most insightful thinkers among the librarians. He always found a way to reflect on important topics as well as small details. He often provided perspectives that others missed. He did all that with kindness and generosity. When I could I would add a comment here and there to his blog posts. 

 

I know I met him in person eventually at some library conference, and I wish I could remember exactly which one. This was at a time that feels like so long ago, a time long before COVID. I followed him on social media, including Facebook, but probably not as closely as others did. In recent years I've just moved away from engaging librarianship on social media. But I was always glad when he wrote something new. He was always thinking, tinkering, probing, reflecting, and I always admired and appreciated that. For me, it was often an opportunity to learn something new, to think about something in a new or different way. 

I wish I had something more eloquent I could say about my friend that has not been said already. Farkas sums up a lot of who Mark was and how he lived. So I will finish here with two things. 

One, if I had to draw a Tarot card for my friend, it would be the Knight of Cups. He was generous, kind, curious, and willing to follow his imagination. He was active in our community. He was also a caring individual. 

And two, a small musical tribute, a song by poet, songwriter, and singer Alberto Cortez, who can express so well what happens when a friend leaves, "Cuando un amigo se va." 

 

I hope you found the peace and rest that eluded you in this life. Hope to see you on the flip side. In the meantime, I will miss you my friend.   

From the lyrics (with my translation): 

"Cuando un amigo se va
Una estrella se ha perdido
La que ilumina el lugar
Donde hay un niño dormido..."

"When a friend leave us

a star has been lost

the one that shines upon the place

where a child sleeps. . . "

In some library land fuckery for early August 2021

It is not often I just open the blog to post something right away, but I had to jump in to share this post from Librarian Shipwreck: "All grievances do, in fact, remain connected."

 

Most of the time I do my best to tune out the drama in library land because more often than not it can be either champagne problems or just petty, but this week upped the ante. We are getting some serious drama and fuckery going on in #libraries and librarianship in the past week or so. So just read the thing. I was not aware of the assholery of the American Historical Society, but I am not surprised. Our Special Collections and Archives here I am sure gets their share of ungrateful and inconsiderate prima donnas who could not care less who keels over as long as they get their precious archival materials. As the writer states, they need to learn that "there is no such thing as a bibliographic emergency. . .". The second story story about the Temple librarian I've spoken of here and there on social media.  

 

The blog post has some very good quotes, but this one really caught my eye as it is something I have pondered often (and I may have written about it on this blog but I honestly do not feel like looking it up now): 

 

"Here’s the commonality: library workers are expendable and we are not trusted. We serve and serve and serve, and when we burn out or just up and die, that’s acceptable and there’s always more cannon fodder to replace us — or maybe the positional will be cut and our overburdened coworkers will have to pick up the slack, because they are expendable, too. Despite what should be seen as a miraculous collective track record of service, we are not trusted to do our work without close oversight from administration, whether the question is remote work or sick time. The fact of being largely a female profession double all these things down, even as they are the general neoliberal worklife condition, and Blackness, queerness, disability and other intersections multiply it more for some of us. Even those closest to us professionally, historians, value their research more than our lives. We are not considered the experts on our own profession, not trusted or allowed autonomy over our work, a resource to be burnt to fuel PR campaigns and university rankings."

 

 

A side note to thoughts on ALA Annual (Virtual) 2021, including stuff on not being a member

While I was writing the previous post, I decided for some strange reason to check this blog for any previous posts on ALA. I found at least three that I had written between 2005 and 2007. On rereading them I found that much of what I wrote then remains very relevant now. It resonates quite a bit now, for me at least. Here are some of those posts: 

• "ALA and membership." 12/16/2005. These were the days when there was still such as thing as a biblioblogosphere and I found that "this poor fellow who flies under the radar really, really gets to thinking about what exactly the dues do for him." 
• "My last on the membership thing, or librarians as martyrs?" 12/22/2005. My key question in that post, which nowadays I'd call one of those Magnificent Questions: ". . .why should librarians, or other social professions for that matter such as teachers and social workers, be martyrs just to practice their craft? How long do we let others inflict that guilt-trip on us, which is nothing more than excuse to continue exploiting those of a generous nature?"
• "Participation blues, or how many more have to be lost?" 11/13/2007.  Who would have guessed a small bit I wrote then could be prophetic? Keep in mind, these posts are all way before the pandemic. I wrote then: "And it usually boils down to this: Participating in ALA is cost prohibitive; it is pretty much limited to the few who can afford it; it would be nice if they did more things virtually." Imagine that, be nice if they did more things virtually. We have come a bit further along on that front, and the pandemic certainly proved a lot of things can easily be done virtually if there is a will. In the end, well, ALA and such "already lost me. Not that I am a big loss (or a loss of any kind, haha)."

Additionally, while I ran the searches in the blog for posts on ALA, I found other posts on small state conferences I have attended as well as other semi-related topics. I was trying to write up my thoughts on ALA Annual Conference (Virtual) 2021, and I find myself seeing topics I could update or write something new given my experiences over time. I've learned a few things. I've also learned not to give a crap about other things, things that back then as a newish librarian felt like a big deal only to discover they were not, but that may be another post for another time. 

 

Some thoughts and observations from ALA Annual Conference (Virtual) 2021

 

 

This was my first ALA Annual Conference, and I was glad that it was virtual. I was glad not just due to the ongoing pandemic but also because it meant I did not have to travel anywhere. In addition, it also meant that neither me nor my library had to get a small mortgage or a "juice loan" for me to travel someplace, pay for accommodations and travel plus the cost of the conference itself.

Let me disclose upfront that the main reason I went was because the Appalachian College Association (ACA), one of our local consortia, had some spots for college members to send some of their staff to ALA Annual. Apparently there were some leftover professional development funds that had not been used due to the pandemic. At any rate, I applied, and I got them to pay for the conference. Thank you ACA. Otherwise I probably would not have bothered. I have not been an ALA member for years, and a big reason is ALA's prohibitive costs for things, plus I will just say I have other issues with ALA and how they run things, but that is another post for another time. 

ALA Annual is not know for its academic offerings. That is what ACRL (Association of College and Research Libraries) is for, which I attended once back in 2013 (link to my first post on the conference. If you search the blog you can find the other post notes I made). So I decided to focus more on collection development, specially graphic novels. Our library has an excellent graphic novels collection, and as of this post it is our most circulating collection. I also tried to focus on civics and civil rights issues, topics important to librarians, but that I rarely hear about here. A lot of not hearing about such things here is having to deal with the daily grind of everyday work. There is not much time left to think about things like big picture politics when I am more concerned with working with my students, local projects, so on. But I am digressing, so let me get back on track. 

I did the following sessions at the conference: 

• Wednesday, June 23: 
• Danny Trejo, speaker. Sponsored by Simon and Schuster. I did a few other sessions, but for me this first session set the tone for the rest of the conference, and it was my highlight. Like most speakers at ALA Annual, he was pitching his new book, his memoir Trejo: My Life of Crime, Redemption, and Hollywood. As of this post, I am currently reading the book, and I hope to have a review of it on The Itinerant Librarian soon. Danny Trejo is very strong as a moving and authentically sincere speaker and individual with a raw honesty. 
• Declan Shalvey, author of Time Before Time, presented by Image Comics. I made a note that this title can be a possible addition to our library's graphic novel collection. 
• Darryl Cunningham, the cartoonist of Billionaires: the Lives of the Rich and Powerful, presented by Drawn and Quarterly. I noted this one sounds like a good addition to my personal TBR list as well as possible acquisition for our library. The book looks at the lives of Jeff Bezos, the Koch brothers, and Rupert Murdoch. I think it may be a timely selection in these Hard Times. On a side note, Mr. Cunningham also has a forthcoming graphic novel about Vladimir Putin that sounds interesting too: Putin's Russia: the Rise of a Dictator.
  
• Guy Delisle, cartoonist of Factory Summers, presented by Drawn and Quarterly. In the book, the author looks back at his high school job. During the presentation, author mentions all the years he can spend writing on a book we might read in two hours, but if we are reading it, he feels he has done his work. He adds comics are good for illustration and also for explaining things. As reader and librarian, I've often found a good nonfiction GN can be a great tool to explain and teach on a complex topic (or not so complex but visual works better). 
• Keiler Roberts, cartoonist of My Begging Chart and Joe Ollman, cartoonist of Fictional Father, both from Drawn and Quarterly.
• June 24: 
• I listened to Nicole Hannah-Jones discuss her 1619 Project. She spoke on how in school African American history was never taught. Now that you mention it, I did not get a whole lot of that either in school nor even as an undergrad. I think 1st formal African American history course I took was in grad school.For me, aside from grad school, a lot of what I have learned on this has been effort on my own to find books and resources to learn. 
• Listened to Belgian author Judith Vanistendael now. A new author to me, presented by Europe Comics. The author was a pleasure to listen to, very warm, and the company rep was good too overall. At one point during the presentation, audience member asked about her art process (she is author/illustrator). She has actually pulled out some of her sketches to show us the process of how the book developed, then compared to a book page. Very visual. 
• David Copperfield speaking of magic, his personal magic museum, and his new book David Copperfield's History of Magic.  Presented by Simon and Schuster. Copperfield speaks of magic as an art form. Magic brings out in us a sense of wonder and discovery.
• Via Gibbs Smith, I listened to Peter Hiller, author of The Life and Times of Jo Mora: Iconic Artist of the American West. I knew very little of Jo Mora, so finding this fascinating.
• Listened to the Red Hen Press author showcase featuring Dariel Suarez, Lily Hoang, Thea Prieto, and Kazim Ali. Ali's book, New Moons, sounded interesting and possible acquisition for our library. It is a compilation of Muslim voices in America.At the time of this post, Edelweiss Plus had a review copy of this, which I downloaded. I hope to write a review of it for The Itinerant Librarian after I read it.
• Dr. Leana Wen spoke on public health, COVID-19, the pandemic, and her memoir Lifelines.  Her three takeaways: 
• Public health saved your life today. You just don't know it. 
• All of us and all of you (in libraries) are public health warriors too. 
• We all need to make our own tables, not wait for anyone else to go first.
• June 25: 
• Via Drawn and Quarterly, listened to Sophie Yanow, cartoonist of The Contradictions.
• Stanley Tucci talking about cooking, and of course his new cookbook, Taste: My Life Through Food, was interesting and a bit of fun. 
• June 28:
• I caught the encore of the session on the First Amendment and libraries. What I noted at the time: To be honest, as much as they are trying to be somewhat optimistic, this is seriously depressing given the clusterfuck in the U.S. and how rights are being suppressed in states while the federal administration seems asleep at the wheel.
• And I ended it listening to former President Barack Obama on June 29. What I jotted down at the time: There may be things I do not agree with him (I think like many Dems he can be seriously milquetoast), but some good points, and he seems to mostly act in good faith.

A challenge for me is that the conference offered sessions with many authors and publishers that sounded interesting, so selecting which ones to listen to at the time was not easy. Still, I do appreciate some of the recordings of sessions were available later for me to go back and listen to things I may have missed the first time. 

Since I am not a member, I pretty much ignored the administrivia and member organization meetings. To be honest, if I was a member, I'd probably ignore them too. This makes me glad that as a librarian, I am not on a tenure line or such. One of my colleagues was on a tenure line at a previous place, and she says only reason she had to go to ALA or ACRL was because tenure work required it (the "service" part). 

I took very minimal notes, and at the time I mostly did small live tweets on Twitter mentioning sessions and brief impressions or comments. You can look up my handle (@bloodravenlib) and add the hashtag #ALAAC21 to the search, and you can find my notes if interested. I also used that thread to make a list of titles I was interested in both to read personally as well as for possible library acquisition. 

 

Overall, I did like the virtual experience. Getting some professional development done from my desk without expensive travel was worth it. Would I do ALA Annual again? If they offer a virtual option for folks like me, I'd consider asking if my library would fund it. I am not saying for them not to do in person. Go right ahead, and if travel is your thing and you got the money for it, you do you. I am saying the virtual option should also be available as an alternative for folks who may need a more affordable option, refuse to or cannot travel, so on.