Because I am in a distance program (everything is online), us students learn to rely on the online resources (databases, tutorials, etc.) and sources (articles, e-books, etc.) that our campus library offers for information and research. There is a lot available, and so far I haven't found myself struggling to find information in order to complete the papers, projects, and other assignments required in my courses. Anything that I needed to use physical resources for was accomplished by visiting my local public library branch. This is certainly a good thing, and has saved me from much hair-tearing.
But this really is no surprise. In order for any program (or any school) to be accredited, there need to be adequate resources available for students to perform the work required by the program (or school) for successful completion. I know, because I have looked over the accreditation criteria when I was working as part of a departmental committee on the program's self-assessment in preparation for SLIS's ALA re-accreditation next year. ACCSC, the organization that oversees the accreditation for the trade school where I work requires the same thing (funny enough, we're also preparing for a re-accreditation scheduled for next year). And the idea is logical; you can't require students to do things for a given program if you don't provide them with the (re)sources that will allow them to accomplish the assigned work.
So where am I going with this? Well, in my advanced reference class our first assignment was to answer a question made up by a classmate and provide them with both sources (print and other types) that would help them get the information they need to answer the question and some ideas on where to go to find more information. My question was from a classmate posing as a freshman college student looking to find information on Pompeii and Herculaneum. My professor told us that we could recommend print sources based on the available online information about them (such as in a catalog entry). Since the question I chose to work on was supposed to be from a college freshman (no college/university specified), I decided to use the academic library that I have access to--King Library. And because I could conceivably visit the library to look at print sources since I live within driving distance (rather than relying on the online catalog information which can be spotty), I did. This prompted my first ever on-site visit to my campus library.
Yes, I know. I'm able to travel to campus, and yet it took over three years before stepping foot in the library I know so well virtually. After visiting, I'm sorry that it took so long for me to go there. It's well worth going just to see it (if you're in to "library sightseeing"--yes, I am a library nerd). To give you a little background, King Library is not only the academic library for SJSU, it's also a branch of the San Jose Public Library system. So residents that go to SJPL can also get access to all that King Library has to offer. Lucky them! The building is a newer modern-looking building housing seven floors of resources for patrons (my undergrad campus library that I worked in was only a mere four floors and a basement). Escalators can take patrons beween the first four floors. There is one entire floor dedicated to reference sources. The first-floor circulation desk had a large counter on the wall above it; I couldn't figure out what the number stood for and there was no notation as to what it could be, but it was steadily climbing. The children's and teen areas looked interesting and I wanted to explore a bit; sadly, I was a woman with a mission on my visit so I couldn't linger and look around as much as I wanted to.
One thing that threw me off as I was looking for sources was that some of the collection is classified under the Dewey Decimal Classification system and the other part of the collection is classified under the Library of Congress Classification system. It took a minute to realize that the former is part of San Jose Public Library's collection, and the latter is the collection owned by SJSU. They must be able to keep it all straight, but I would find such a situation confusing. I can only imagine how much of a nightmare it would be to keep the different budgets straight.
To all SLIS students: if you're ever in the area and can visit King Library, take the opportunity to do so. It's fun being able to see the place from whence all our resources come, and I enjoyed seeing what a combination public/academic library looks like.
Showing posts with label library. Show all posts
Showing posts with label library. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 18, 2013
Monday, August 6, 2012
Collection Management
One could argue that a library isn't a library without the resources (in whatever form they come) used to provide patrons with the information they desire. Nowadays, more and more of these information resources are digital, and it is common for even smaller libraries to subscribe to at least one online database. But determining the resources a library should choose to provide falls under the ongoing task of collection management.
In public libraries, you'll see a significant portion of the collection dedicated to fiction items--as this is what patrons often want to borrow from their local library--as well as non-fiction items. University library collections (at least from my observation) tip the scale to be heavily in favor of non-fiction in order to support the research community they serve. To my understanding, special libraries seem to be much more specialized and focus on a much more specific range of topics in order to serve whatever group of people rely on their resources. The library in which I work, while it does serve an academic community, is more specialized than the norm in a college or university library because the programs here are so specialized. So in that regard, it would have more in common with a special library.
And now I have to consider some long-term development for the collection. This campus has not had a change in the programs offered here for some time. However, within the next year, there will be some programs added to those we currently offer, which means that the collection will have to reflect these additional programs as well. It's a challenge especially since space is at a prime and I will need to do some serious weeding in order to make room. Not only that, but I will need to consult with the faculty on both items to weed and items to add since I'm no expert in the programs here (which are all mechanics and trade-based). I have learned quite a bit since I started working here, but I know that the instructors know their trades far better than me, and I bow to their many years of experience in their chosen field.
So it is rather well-timed that I have registered for a Collection Management class for this upcoming semester of my program. I have many questions: How do you successfully elicit input on materials from faculty? Should students also be consulted for recommendations and how would you collect such recommendations? How do you determine what percentage of the collection should be given to each subject area? How often should you update your materials? How often should you weed out older materials? How old is too old? How do you budget for your collection and anticipated materials requisitions? It will be incredibly useful to find out how to successfully manage a collection right when I need to utilize those skills in a real-life work experience.
I know that I have some posts to catch up on--and some recipes too! I will do my best to post a new recipe this week.
In public libraries, you'll see a significant portion of the collection dedicated to fiction items--as this is what patrons often want to borrow from their local library--as well as non-fiction items. University library collections (at least from my observation) tip the scale to be heavily in favor of non-fiction in order to support the research community they serve. To my understanding, special libraries seem to be much more specialized and focus on a much more specific range of topics in order to serve whatever group of people rely on their resources. The library in which I work, while it does serve an academic community, is more specialized than the norm in a college or university library because the programs here are so specialized. So in that regard, it would have more in common with a special library.
And now I have to consider some long-term development for the collection. This campus has not had a change in the programs offered here for some time. However, within the next year, there will be some programs added to those we currently offer, which means that the collection will have to reflect these additional programs as well. It's a challenge especially since space is at a prime and I will need to do some serious weeding in order to make room. Not only that, but I will need to consult with the faculty on both items to weed and items to add since I'm no expert in the programs here (which are all mechanics and trade-based). I have learned quite a bit since I started working here, but I know that the instructors know their trades far better than me, and I bow to their many years of experience in their chosen field.
So it is rather well-timed that I have registered for a Collection Management class for this upcoming semester of my program. I have many questions: How do you successfully elicit input on materials from faculty? Should students also be consulted for recommendations and how would you collect such recommendations? How do you determine what percentage of the collection should be given to each subject area? How often should you update your materials? How often should you weed out older materials? How old is too old? How do you budget for your collection and anticipated materials requisitions? It will be incredibly useful to find out how to successfully manage a collection right when I need to utilize those skills in a real-life work experience.
I know that I have some posts to catch up on--and some recipes too! I will do my best to post a new recipe this week.
Wednesday, June 20, 2012
Illegal Immigrant vs. Naturalized Citizen
Forgive the perhaps disjointed writing here. This is a complex issue (with roots that go much deeper than the level of discussion here), and one perhaps I'll explore more in future posts. For now, please bear with my jumbled thoughts.
As librarians, I'm sure most of us recognize that our libraries are nothing without the communities they serve. Our goals, our purpose, our reasons for being guides to the vast information resources (and other things) that our public requires and requests would be for naught without the individuals that make up our communities. And these communities come in all shapes and sizes, rural and urban, predominantly one ethnicity and greatly multicultural, rich and poor, haves and have-nots. Immigrants from a large number of countries are found in many of these communities, and many libraries don't make any bones about their immigration status; they are given the same access to resources as the rest of the community. So it is in this spirit of brotherhood (for lack of a better term) that I was happy to hear about President Obama's declaration on the hold of young illegal immigrant deportation.
The issue started to make me think about what an illegal immigrant is. If you really examine this "class" of person (as it seems they have become), there are not a whole lot of differences between them and naturalized citizens other than a piece of paper declaring them American. Both illegal immigrants and naturalized citizens come to this country hoping for a better future for themselves and their families. In some ways, I think that some illegal immigrants may want this ideal future (the American Dream) more than those that become naturalized citizens. Many illegal immigrants work jobs that "regular" citizens would never consider, even in a state of unemployment, but these people do it because they don't see another choice--and maybe even such work is better than they would have had in their native countries. (This puts me in mind of an article I read awhile back looking at agriculture in Alabama and the response farmers had to the ban on illegal immigrants passed in that state last year.)
I find it sad that only the government's declaration of "legal" or "illegal" can create such a social gulf between "us" and "them" and essentially put them in a social caste that is considered the lowest of the low. It seems that "illegal immigrant" is synonymous with "having no basic human rights." These are people, even though many of us would dismiss them. They deserve consideration at the very least, especially when our eyes would glaze over and and our gaze purposely slide over them. How did this group of people become so stigmatized? When did that seemingly unanimous unspoken decision happen? I'm trying to put myself in their position and find I can't even come close to imagining what it would be like to be told "you're not wanted; you don't belong here" my whole life.
And before you stand up and say "No, agreeing with Obama's executive decree is wrong!" please remember that President Obama is providing young illegal immigrants--those who were brought here by their parents--this option his declaration describes, as long as they have conducted themselves as law-abiding citizens. Personally, I would rather have these people here contributing to our society in valuable ways than many of the naturally-born miscreants that participate in violent crime. How does it make sense to keep the latter (and spend public money on those that find their way into the penal system) and throw out the former? I would ask everyone to remember that our country was literally built on the backs of immigrants, illegal and legal alike--from the Africans forced to work the fields in the South, to the Chinese and Irish given back-breaking work building the railroads. Heck, even the Pilgrims immigrated here. We are a nation of many people with many backgrounds and cultures. We are virtually just as likely to see celebrations for Cinco de Mayo or Chinese New Year as we are Independence Day (and I don't hear people decrying their un-Americanness).
So, in closing, I guess my feelings about this issue can be summed up in two words: have compassion. Many of the "illegal immigrants" here are just trying to make the most out of this Land of Opportunity, as are we all.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Author Note: This was first written last week in the initial wake of President Obama's declaration. I've added more of my personal reflections since.
As librarians, I'm sure most of us recognize that our libraries are nothing without the communities they serve. Our goals, our purpose, our reasons for being guides to the vast information resources (and other things) that our public requires and requests would be for naught without the individuals that make up our communities. And these communities come in all shapes and sizes, rural and urban, predominantly one ethnicity and greatly multicultural, rich and poor, haves and have-nots. Immigrants from a large number of countries are found in many of these communities, and many libraries don't make any bones about their immigration status; they are given the same access to resources as the rest of the community. So it is in this spirit of brotherhood (for lack of a better term) that I was happy to hear about President Obama's declaration on the hold of young illegal immigrant deportation.
The issue started to make me think about what an illegal immigrant is. If you really examine this "class" of person (as it seems they have become), there are not a whole lot of differences between them and naturalized citizens other than a piece of paper declaring them American. Both illegal immigrants and naturalized citizens come to this country hoping for a better future for themselves and their families. In some ways, I think that some illegal immigrants may want this ideal future (the American Dream) more than those that become naturalized citizens. Many illegal immigrants work jobs that "regular" citizens would never consider, even in a state of unemployment, but these people do it because they don't see another choice--and maybe even such work is better than they would have had in their native countries. (This puts me in mind of an article I read awhile back looking at agriculture in Alabama and the response farmers had to the ban on illegal immigrants passed in that state last year.)
I find it sad that only the government's declaration of "legal" or "illegal" can create such a social gulf between "us" and "them" and essentially put them in a social caste that is considered the lowest of the low. It seems that "illegal immigrant" is synonymous with "having no basic human rights." These are people, even though many of us would dismiss them. They deserve consideration at the very least, especially when our eyes would glaze over and and our gaze purposely slide over them. How did this group of people become so stigmatized? When did that seemingly unanimous unspoken decision happen? I'm trying to put myself in their position and find I can't even come close to imagining what it would be like to be told "you're not wanted; you don't belong here" my whole life.
And before you stand up and say "No, agreeing with Obama's executive decree is wrong!" please remember that President Obama is providing young illegal immigrants--those who were brought here by their parents--this option his declaration describes, as long as they have conducted themselves as law-abiding citizens. Personally, I would rather have these people here contributing to our society in valuable ways than many of the naturally-born miscreants that participate in violent crime. How does it make sense to keep the latter (and spend public money on those that find their way into the penal system) and throw out the former? I would ask everyone to remember that our country was literally built on the backs of immigrants, illegal and legal alike--from the Africans forced to work the fields in the South, to the Chinese and Irish given back-breaking work building the railroads. Heck, even the Pilgrims immigrated here. We are a nation of many people with many backgrounds and cultures. We are virtually just as likely to see celebrations for Cinco de Mayo or Chinese New Year as we are Independence Day (and I don't hear people decrying their un-Americanness).
So, in closing, I guess my feelings about this issue can be summed up in two words: have compassion. Many of the "illegal immigrants" here are just trying to make the most out of this Land of Opportunity, as are we all.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Author Note: This was first written last week in the initial wake of President Obama's declaration. I've added more of my personal reflections since.
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
A subscription costs HOW much?
My work is done for the semester and I have officially reached the halfway point. During the last bit of course project polishing yesterday, I got an email from one of my subscription discussion lists about Elsevier. The email pointed to an article criticizing Elsevier's subscription prices. Now, I'm not naive; I know that libraries pay lots of money for subscriptions to journals and databases that they provide to their patrons. For universities, this cost is huge (for my university, knowing how many databases I have access to--well over one hundred--I cringe to think what the cost is) because of the need for research material for students and faculty, and it's even more if the university provides both print and digital access. But finding out what the cost is for some of the journals that Elsevier provides was, in a word, shocking.
One of the titles mentioned in the above article is Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, a journal with a subscription price of a mere $20,930 to US subscribers (the libraries in Japan must pay $31,000 a year for the same title). I took a look at the subscription list that is available to view to verify the price and to see how many issues that annual subscription pays for. It looks like there are 100 issues, as this subscription includes several titles, not just one; however, that still amounts to $209 per issue. And I found a few other gems: Analytica Chimica Acta for 1 year is $11,994 (48 issues which amounts to about $250 per issue), Annals of Nuclear Energy for 1 year is $4637 (12 issues which amounts to about $383 per issue), and Atherosclerosis--a medicine journal--for 1 year is $5955 (12 issues which amounts to about $496). This was just from skimming through the list of titles beginning with an A. Take a look for yourself; you can find the librarian subscription list here: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journalpricing.cws_home/subscrippricelistlibr/description.
I find it hard to justify these exorbitant costs especially since, as Rob Kirby said in a letter to his colleagues, "We mathematicians produce the papers, serve as editors, and serve as referees, all for free (except of course for our support by our universities and employers). Then with relatively small improvement to the product, publishers turn around and sell it to our libraries at (in many cases) a very high price" (view the full letter). Those academics in the field do the groundwork, and Elsevier (and other publishers of scholarly work) take the final product and sell it for a huge mark-up. And for the most part, they've done it with impunity. Libraries bow their heads and find ways to shoulder the subscription prices, sometimes having to make cuts in other areas in order to continue receiving a title considered "vital." This is exploitation, and it is wrong.
Tim Gowers very eloquently explores this issue in two posts on his blog. The first post, from late January, notes four of the biggest criticisms of Elsevier's business practices and explores ways in which academics and libraries could take a stand, but the key to both solutions relies on strength in numbers to gang up on the "bully" and tell Elsevier that the academic community will not put up with their exorbitant subscription prices. The second post was made in response to Elsevier's open letter defending their practices. Gowers addresses the points that Elsevier tries to make and raises some valid questions.
One thing that I question is the legality and ethics of this. The public is essentially paying twice for the research being closely guarded by Elsevier and other publishers. #1 The public pays the taxes that helps to fund the research grants that universities apply for to fund the projects that allow the faculty to do the research that's used to write the articles sent to the journal for publication. #2 The public pays the taxes or tuition that help to fund the libraries that purchase the published journals with the articles written to explain the research. Still with me? It's criminal to force libraries to pay through the nose for information the public served by the library has already paid for. I agree with Gowers in that it is time for a change--this system is broken and it's long been time for us to throw it away. Research is done with the intent to provide important/new/meaningful knowledge for the field its done for and to help make advances that better us--not to help publishers line their pockets.
If you're an academic and wish to show your support and protest against Elsevier's practices--and hopefully send a message to other journal publishers--please consider adding your name to The Cost of Knowledge, a website for researchers who are taking a stand and promising to refrain from publishing, refereeing, or performing editorial work on any Elsevier publication. Once I receive my degree and/or begin submitting my work for publication, I will be adding my name to this list as well.
One of the titles mentioned in the above article is Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, a journal with a subscription price of a mere $20,930 to US subscribers (the libraries in Japan must pay $31,000 a year for the same title). I took a look at the subscription list that is available to view to verify the price and to see how many issues that annual subscription pays for. It looks like there are 100 issues, as this subscription includes several titles, not just one; however, that still amounts to $209 per issue. And I found a few other gems: Analytica Chimica Acta for 1 year is $11,994 (48 issues which amounts to about $250 per issue), Annals of Nuclear Energy for 1 year is $4637 (12 issues which amounts to about $383 per issue), and Atherosclerosis--a medicine journal--for 1 year is $5955 (12 issues which amounts to about $496). This was just from skimming through the list of titles beginning with an A. Take a look for yourself; you can find the librarian subscription list here: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journalpricing.cws_home/subscrippricelistlibr/description.
I find it hard to justify these exorbitant costs especially since, as Rob Kirby said in a letter to his colleagues, "We mathematicians produce the papers, serve as editors, and serve as referees, all for free (except of course for our support by our universities and employers). Then with relatively small improvement to the product, publishers turn around and sell it to our libraries at (in many cases) a very high price" (view the full letter). Those academics in the field do the groundwork, and Elsevier (and other publishers of scholarly work) take the final product and sell it for a huge mark-up. And for the most part, they've done it with impunity. Libraries bow their heads and find ways to shoulder the subscription prices, sometimes having to make cuts in other areas in order to continue receiving a title considered "vital." This is exploitation, and it is wrong.
Tim Gowers very eloquently explores this issue in two posts on his blog. The first post, from late January, notes four of the biggest criticisms of Elsevier's business practices and explores ways in which academics and libraries could take a stand, but the key to both solutions relies on strength in numbers to gang up on the "bully" and tell Elsevier that the academic community will not put up with their exorbitant subscription prices. The second post was made in response to Elsevier's open letter defending their practices. Gowers addresses the points that Elsevier tries to make and raises some valid questions.
One thing that I question is the legality and ethics of this. The public is essentially paying twice for the research being closely guarded by Elsevier and other publishers. #1 The public pays the taxes that helps to fund the research grants that universities apply for to fund the projects that allow the faculty to do the research that's used to write the articles sent to the journal for publication. #2 The public pays the taxes or tuition that help to fund the libraries that purchase the published journals with the articles written to explain the research. Still with me? It's criminal to force libraries to pay through the nose for information the public served by the library has already paid for. I agree with Gowers in that it is time for a change--this system is broken and it's long been time for us to throw it away. Research is done with the intent to provide important/new/meaningful knowledge for the field its done for and to help make advances that better us--not to help publishers line their pockets.
If you're an academic and wish to show your support and protest against Elsevier's practices--and hopefully send a message to other journal publishers--please consider adding your name to The Cost of Knowledge, a website for researchers who are taking a stand and promising to refrain from publishing, refereeing, or performing editorial work on any Elsevier publication. Once I receive my degree and/or begin submitting my work for publication, I will be adding my name to this list as well.
Thursday, March 29, 2012
Privatizing Libraries--The Debate Goes On
I've posted in the past about library privatization, specifically through the company named LSSI. A recent article brought to my attention through this week's email edition of American Libraries Direct illustrates that the debate is still far from over. The article, titled "Are Privatized Libraries So Bad?", once again explores this hot-button topic that often evokes a passionate response from librarians and library supporters. I will let you read the article and develop your own opinion about whether or not library privatization is desirable or not, but I would like to outline my reasoning as to why I will not support such a move for any library system--especially if the company in question is LSSI.
First of all outsourcing really blurs the lines of responsibility. Public libraries are directly answerable to those in their communities because these individuals pay the taxes that pay for library activities and operations. When a third party enters the mix, this relationship between the library and the community is not as clear-cut. Things get even more complicated based on the terms of the contract a library or city may sign with the third party. When service is poor or issues need to be addressed, who is responsible and how is that party held accountable? When materials are needed, who pays for them? Who gets to decide what materials to purchase in the first place? Before privatization, the library would have to address these issues; after privatization the library or the third party (for example, LSSI) would have to address them according to how the contract delegates responsibility. Time is wasted determining who is supposed to do what (possibly wasted further as solutions are debated).
In a number of its contracts, LSSI has provided managerial support--often in the form of LSSI employees being put into upper management roles. It has also reorganized library staff to include fewer MLIS-to-non-MLIS staff ratios and increased library volunteers. In all fairness, many of these changes seem to have some short-term benefits with addressing management and operational issues. However, librarians as professionals follow a code of ethics that those outside of the professions 1) would likely not recognize and 2) would probably not follow as strictly. This code includes standards on things like providing free information to all without bias, protecting the privacy of patrons, and advocating and protecting intellectual freedom. I was surprised to find no mention in the article of how LSSI addresses any of these issues--and a bit alarmed at the thought that such library ethics may not carry over when LSSI has operational and managerial control. ALA Code of Ethics item VI states: "We do not advance private interests at the expense of library users, colleagues, or our employing institutions." I find it hard to believe that a for-profit company would be able to refrain from advancing their private interests--wouldn't they need to do so to some extent to be able to make a profit?
A third party company like LSSI is a for-profit company. I know public librarians across the nation shudder at the thought of turning a public library into a money-making organization. It goes against our ethics, especially our dedication to free information for all. So how is such a company able to reconcile a for-profit mentality with the public library's mission? Good question, one that is still unanswered. LSSI refuses to disclose where and how it makes its money, and I would be very wary of a company that would not release information on how it makes a profit. Take a look at this article about LSSI. It provides a lot more detail on how LSSI operates, and some of the questionable things it has done. I found the commentary on some of their marketing claims and their lack of transparency rather interesting. It also shows that issues with LSSI's methods are not new (the article is from 2004) and that library privatization itself is not a recent development.
LSSI's methods work to turn public libraries into businesses--which they aren't. They are publicly-funded centers of information. They really don't fit into any class except their own. Public libraries (and libraries in general) have a mission and purpose unique from any for-profit "business." Libraries know their communities like no outside third party would or could. I wouldstrongly caution warn (with red flashing lights and big letters) libraries against contracting with a third party, especially LSSI. If necessity drives libraries to even remotely consider this option, please, PLEASE look over ALA's Checklist for Communities Considering Privatization of Public Libraries. Times are hard, but some sacrifices may be too dear, so consider carefully and exhaust all other resources first.
First of all outsourcing really blurs the lines of responsibility. Public libraries are directly answerable to those in their communities because these individuals pay the taxes that pay for library activities and operations. When a third party enters the mix, this relationship between the library and the community is not as clear-cut. Things get even more complicated based on the terms of the contract a library or city may sign with the third party. When service is poor or issues need to be addressed, who is responsible and how is that party held accountable? When materials are needed, who pays for them? Who gets to decide what materials to purchase in the first place? Before privatization, the library would have to address these issues; after privatization the library or the third party (for example, LSSI) would have to address them according to how the contract delegates responsibility. Time is wasted determining who is supposed to do what (possibly wasted further as solutions are debated).
In a number of its contracts, LSSI has provided managerial support--often in the form of LSSI employees being put into upper management roles. It has also reorganized library staff to include fewer MLIS-to-non-MLIS staff ratios and increased library volunteers. In all fairness, many of these changes seem to have some short-term benefits with addressing management and operational issues. However, librarians as professionals follow a code of ethics that those outside of the professions 1) would likely not recognize and 2) would probably not follow as strictly. This code includes standards on things like providing free information to all without bias, protecting the privacy of patrons, and advocating and protecting intellectual freedom. I was surprised to find no mention in the article of how LSSI addresses any of these issues--and a bit alarmed at the thought that such library ethics may not carry over when LSSI has operational and managerial control. ALA Code of Ethics item VI states: "We do not advance private interests at the expense of library users, colleagues, or our employing institutions." I find it hard to believe that a for-profit company would be able to refrain from advancing their private interests--wouldn't they need to do so to some extent to be able to make a profit?
A third party company like LSSI is a for-profit company. I know public librarians across the nation shudder at the thought of turning a public library into a money-making organization. It goes against our ethics, especially our dedication to free information for all. So how is such a company able to reconcile a for-profit mentality with the public library's mission? Good question, one that is still unanswered. LSSI refuses to disclose where and how it makes its money, and I would be very wary of a company that would not release information on how it makes a profit. Take a look at this article about LSSI. It provides a lot more detail on how LSSI operates, and some of the questionable things it has done. I found the commentary on some of their marketing claims and their lack of transparency rather interesting. It also shows that issues with LSSI's methods are not new (the article is from 2004) and that library privatization itself is not a recent development.
LSSI's methods work to turn public libraries into businesses--which they aren't. They are publicly-funded centers of information. They really don't fit into any class except their own. Public libraries (and libraries in general) have a mission and purpose unique from any for-profit "business." Libraries know their communities like no outside third party would or could. I would
Monday, March 26, 2012
Britannica is going paperless
A recent article explains Encyclopaedia Britannica Inc's change to go completely digital. The printed set has been around for almost 250 years--a venerable collection of the knowledge of the ages, and I'm sure a very interesting record of how information changed over the course of its printed history (perhaps an enlightening study could be made of this?). Just seeing what someone 200 years ago thought was important to know would be fascinating. The social changes that have come about during its existence--and all being documented to some effect simply by what is included and how it's discussed--are staggering in number.
But enough reminiscing. The company's decision is certainly keeping up with the times. It joins many other well-known and well-respected subscription services that are available only online (many research databases come to mind). And I can understand why Britannica made the decision: the print version is not in high demand and could be seen as an "outdated" mode of information. The article mentioned above states that the vast majority of the company's sales are through its digital version. Good business dictates that the company "give the people what they want," which their sales show is, by and large, the online encyclopedia. And I do have to say that I like the online version and see it as a valuable resource that libraries should try to provide.
And yet such a decision bothers me somewhat. The Encyclopaedia Britannica is a great source of information, and with the death of the print version the "have-nots" in our society will be left without an alternative. Many people accept that online sources are the new reality and assume that everyone is "plugged in," when in actuality we are not in a time when the Internet is accessible to all. So how do we serve them? Libraries do their part to provide Internet services as much as they can to as many patrons as they can, but there are many the Internet still does not reach. Patrons from low-income families and libraries serving low-income populations may lose out here. Libraries that can't afford an annual subscription (but could afford to purchase the set every 3-4 years) will soon be left with outdated material they will need to find a substitution for--which may not be as well-written or as comprehensive.
In addition, I would like to humbly point out the inherent problem of relying too much on digital sources. A printed source has a permanence in its physicality that digital sources will never have; they can be too easily changed--or lost. (Think about this for a moment--who owns a digital copy of The Hunger Games on a Kindle or Nook? The person who purchased it? The company that provided it? The publisher? The author? Consider that Amazon can remove any book you purchase for a Kindle with no more compensation that a refund, regardless if you wanted to keep that book. This has happened to Kindle owners on a number of occasions and has helped to create a debate about digital ownership and access to controversial materials.) Aside from digital ownership issues, there another issue to consider. Computers are not perfect, and access can be affected by faulty devices trying to access the resource or the server used by the resource going down or experiencing functionality issues. What happens when everything is digital and the servers go down? Does that mean we won't be able to access anything?
As much as I like the possibilities that digital and online services provide (and I use them on a daily basis), I hope that print resources stick around for many more years.
But enough reminiscing. The company's decision is certainly keeping up with the times. It joins many other well-known and well-respected subscription services that are available only online (many research databases come to mind). And I can understand why Britannica made the decision: the print version is not in high demand and could be seen as an "outdated" mode of information. The article mentioned above states that the vast majority of the company's sales are through its digital version. Good business dictates that the company "give the people what they want," which their sales show is, by and large, the online encyclopedia. And I do have to say that I like the online version and see it as a valuable resource that libraries should try to provide.
And yet such a decision bothers me somewhat. The Encyclopaedia Britannica is a great source of information, and with the death of the print version the "have-nots" in our society will be left without an alternative. Many people accept that online sources are the new reality and assume that everyone is "plugged in," when in actuality we are not in a time when the Internet is accessible to all. So how do we serve them? Libraries do their part to provide Internet services as much as they can to as many patrons as they can, but there are many the Internet still does not reach. Patrons from low-income families and libraries serving low-income populations may lose out here. Libraries that can't afford an annual subscription (but could afford to purchase the set every 3-4 years) will soon be left with outdated material they will need to find a substitution for--which may not be as well-written or as comprehensive.
In addition, I would like to humbly point out the inherent problem of relying too much on digital sources. A printed source has a permanence in its physicality that digital sources will never have; they can be too easily changed--or lost. (Think about this for a moment--who owns a digital copy of The Hunger Games on a Kindle or Nook? The person who purchased it? The company that provided it? The publisher? The author? Consider that Amazon can remove any book you purchase for a Kindle with no more compensation that a refund, regardless if you wanted to keep that book. This has happened to Kindle owners on a number of occasions and has helped to create a debate about digital ownership and access to controversial materials.) Aside from digital ownership issues, there another issue to consider. Computers are not perfect, and access can be affected by faulty devices trying to access the resource or the server used by the resource going down or experiencing functionality issues. What happens when everything is digital and the servers go down? Does that mean we won't be able to access anything?
As much as I like the possibilities that digital and online services provide (and I use them on a daily basis), I hope that print resources stick around for many more years.
Wednesday, November 16, 2011
Getting involved
I recently (about a month ago) became a member of the Friends of the Library group for my local public library. The last newsletter noted that the next meeting would be November 15th (last night). I joined the Friends partly because I wanted to do something good for our public library and show support through the fact of my membership, and partly I joined because I wanted to be more involved. It was probably the best choice I could have made.
My full-time job does restrict my ability to do big things with and for my library. My hours and my commute preclude me from being able to attend virtually all events at the library I would like to--they happen during the day when I am at work. I'm not able to participate in a formal internship at the library for the same reason. It requires too many weekly hours. Until technology allows me to be in two places at once, I have to say no to a lot of events and opportunities I wish I could say yes to.
Which is where the Friends come in. Last night's meeting was really enlightening and encouraging. It's wonderful to see "my" library doing so well (I was definitely feeling a sense of civic pride) and I was so glad to learn about some of the many things the Friends group does for the library. Being a library student, I learn about one side of the picture (the librarian's side), and I don't really get to learn about everything that happens on the community side. The branch manager attended last night's meeting and presented her "wish list" for the library for the next year--and all of it is being factored into the Friends' budget for next year. How incredibly lucky the community is to have the library, and how incredibly lucky the library is to have its Friends group. I feel so privileged to have a library that is doing so well because it really speaks to how much support its community provides.
I know a few library students that also work full-time and not at libraries. For those individuals, I would recommend getting involved with the local library's Friends group. As a member of the Friends, I can get involved and be active with the time I'm able to offer. I've already offered my services for the December booksale, and I intend to help out on both days. I'm only giving four hours of my time the whole weekend, and I get to start directly helping out my library (which I've wanted to do for some time now).
I'm really looking forward to future involvement with my library and its Friends.
My full-time job does restrict my ability to do big things with and for my library. My hours and my commute preclude me from being able to attend virtually all events at the library I would like to--they happen during the day when I am at work. I'm not able to participate in a formal internship at the library for the same reason. It requires too many weekly hours. Until technology allows me to be in two places at once, I have to say no to a lot of events and opportunities I wish I could say yes to.
Which is where the Friends come in. Last night's meeting was really enlightening and encouraging. It's wonderful to see "my" library doing so well (I was definitely feeling a sense of civic pride) and I was so glad to learn about some of the many things the Friends group does for the library. Being a library student, I learn about one side of the picture (the librarian's side), and I don't really get to learn about everything that happens on the community side. The branch manager attended last night's meeting and presented her "wish list" for the library for the next year--and all of it is being factored into the Friends' budget for next year. How incredibly lucky the community is to have the library, and how incredibly lucky the library is to have its Friends group. I feel so privileged to have a library that is doing so well because it really speaks to how much support its community provides.
I know a few library students that also work full-time and not at libraries. For those individuals, I would recommend getting involved with the local library's Friends group. As a member of the Friends, I can get involved and be active with the time I'm able to offer. I've already offered my services for the December booksale, and I intend to help out on both days. I'm only giving four hours of my time the whole weekend, and I get to start directly helping out my library (which I've wanted to do for some time now).
I'm really looking forward to future involvement with my library and its Friends.
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Libraries are growing out of the box
We are living in interesting times. Global stability is not a reality but a dream (and perhaps for some a goal). The worldwide economy is currently in upheaval, from our own recession (funny how they won't use the D-word and yet we're seeing some of the worst unemployment rates and economic outlooks since the 1930s) to the financial crisis in Greece. People in other nations are forming their own revolutions against their leaders; Egypt and Libya did it, who's next? Protest seems to be the buzzword of the day, and even here in the US we have no end in sight for dedicated groups of people participating in the Occupy Wall Street movement. Take a moment and think about this: we're all right now in the middle of history. Each one of these events will be making it into history books and will almost certainly be discussed and theorized about; students will be writing papers about these events. And we're living it.
Libraries, in their own way, are also going through revolutionary changes. Even before some of the more recent economic and political struggles, libraries were evolving. Technology can take some (a lot) of the credit for that. Our libraries have had to change and adapt to match their communities' needs, and so many of the "traditional" ideas about libraries have been turned upside-down. For decades, libraries were seen as a place that houses books, and librarians were the gatekeepers (perhaps "guards" better describes the public attitude). Now, more and more libraries have drawn away from the idea that they are a house of books and now try to promote the idea that they are a haven of information. And that information takes any and all forms: books, DVDs, CDs, websites, classes and workshops, story times, game nights, job seeking support, and on and on. Libraries are growing out of the box they had been in for some time, and the rate of change seems to be increasing, not slowing down. Librarians now wear more hats then ever: researcher, guide, tech savant, entertainer, social worker (often not by choice), decoder, event coordinator, career advisor, detective, and any other position needed to provide their patrons with needed information or services.
The Occupy Wall Street libraries that have cropped up seem to be "breaking the rules" even more drastically. Instead of having a building that patrons must go to in order to access the physical materials, the libraries have gone to the people. At Zuccotti Park, books are stored in bins at the OWS camp's People's Library. They are cataloged--a nod to a traditional part of the life of a book in the library--but its circulation system is one that would likely make many library administrators shudder. There is no formal system policing the taking and returning of books. Anyone can come by and take a book if they want it, and they can keep it as long as they like, returning it only when they're done (or not at all). The catalog, then, is not the accurate listing of materials in the library that its counterpart in brick-and-mortar libraries is. Rather, it's a record of what has passed through the OWS library. To those long used to the "normal" way libraries are run, this kind of library (and it is a library in truth) is drastically different, maybe even alarmingly so. For more information about the People's Library, you can check their blog.
On another note, Scooter and I have continued to try recipes from the slow cooker cookbook I mentioned in my last post. This last Sunday, we made the slow cooker risotto recipe. Now, I love risotto, and I was a little unsure about how good this recipe would taste. I was pleasantly surprised. It was easier than my favorite recipe, and it still delivered a good flavor and texture. Scooter and I, as always, changed some of it, so here's our recipe:
What you'll need:
1/4 c. olive oil
4 shallots, minced
1/2 c. white wine (we used a Riesling)
1 1/4 c. Arborio rice
3 14.5-oz. cans chicken broth
1/2 c. grated Romano cheese
salt to taste
What you'll need to do:
1. In a skillet (cast iron preferred), heat the oil over medium heat. Add the shallots and saute until softened. You don't want to brown them, so if they are cooking too fast, turn down the heat a little.
2. Add the wine and cook 1-2 minutes, allowing the liquid to cook down a bit. Add the rice and cook for 2-3 minutes, stirring often. Don't brown the rice.
3. Remove from heat and scrape the rice mixture into the slow-cooker. Add the broth and salt, then set to HIGH. Cook for 2 hours until the broth and wine have been absorbed by the rice. The rice should be moist, not dry.
4. Turn off the heat or put on KEEP WARM and add the grated Romano cheese. Stir it in completely and serve.
We fried up some chicken in the skillet and had the risotto with it (yum!). The shallots have a mild flavor, so if you like the flavor of onions, I would recommend substituting the shallots with either yellow or red onion. Also, you want the Arborio rice or another thick-grain rice for this recipe; something like a basmati rice is too thin and won't hold up. The original recipe calls for Parmigiano-Reggiano cheese, but I like a stronger flavor, so we opted for the Romano. One great thing about risotto is that you can add other ingredients along with the basics. I like mine with mushrooms too. However, since this recipe uses a slow cooker, you may have to experiment a little since not everything can keep its texture and flavor in a slow cooker.
Enjoy!
Libraries, in their own way, are also going through revolutionary changes. Even before some of the more recent economic and political struggles, libraries were evolving. Technology can take some (a lot) of the credit for that. Our libraries have had to change and adapt to match their communities' needs, and so many of the "traditional" ideas about libraries have been turned upside-down. For decades, libraries were seen as a place that houses books, and librarians were the gatekeepers (perhaps "guards" better describes the public attitude). Now, more and more libraries have drawn away from the idea that they are a house of books and now try to promote the idea that they are a haven of information. And that information takes any and all forms: books, DVDs, CDs, websites, classes and workshops, story times, game nights, job seeking support, and on and on. Libraries are growing out of the box they had been in for some time, and the rate of change seems to be increasing, not slowing down. Librarians now wear more hats then ever: researcher, guide, tech savant, entertainer, social worker (often not by choice), decoder, event coordinator, career advisor, detective, and any other position needed to provide their patrons with needed information or services.
The Occupy Wall Street libraries that have cropped up seem to be "breaking the rules" even more drastically. Instead of having a building that patrons must go to in order to access the physical materials, the libraries have gone to the people. At Zuccotti Park, books are stored in bins at the OWS camp's People's Library. They are cataloged--a nod to a traditional part of the life of a book in the library--but its circulation system is one that would likely make many library administrators shudder. There is no formal system policing the taking and returning of books. Anyone can come by and take a book if they want it, and they can keep it as long as they like, returning it only when they're done (or not at all). The catalog, then, is not the accurate listing of materials in the library that its counterpart in brick-and-mortar libraries is. Rather, it's a record of what has passed through the OWS library. To those long used to the "normal" way libraries are run, this kind of library (and it is a library in truth) is drastically different, maybe even alarmingly so. For more information about the People's Library, you can check their blog.
On another note, Scooter and I have continued to try recipes from the slow cooker cookbook I mentioned in my last post. This last Sunday, we made the slow cooker risotto recipe. Now, I love risotto, and I was a little unsure about how good this recipe would taste. I was pleasantly surprised. It was easier than my favorite recipe, and it still delivered a good flavor and texture. Scooter and I, as always, changed some of it, so here's our recipe:
What you'll need:
1/4 c. olive oil
4 shallots, minced
1/2 c. white wine (we used a Riesling)
1 1/4 c. Arborio rice
3 14.5-oz. cans chicken broth
1/2 c. grated Romano cheese
salt to taste
What you'll need to do:
1. In a skillet (cast iron preferred), heat the oil over medium heat. Add the shallots and saute until softened. You don't want to brown them, so if they are cooking too fast, turn down the heat a little.
2. Add the wine and cook 1-2 minutes, allowing the liquid to cook down a bit. Add the rice and cook for 2-3 minutes, stirring often. Don't brown the rice.
3. Remove from heat and scrape the rice mixture into the slow-cooker. Add the broth and salt, then set to HIGH. Cook for 2 hours until the broth and wine have been absorbed by the rice. The rice should be moist, not dry.
4. Turn off the heat or put on KEEP WARM and add the grated Romano cheese. Stir it in completely and serve.
We fried up some chicken in the skillet and had the risotto with it (yum!). The shallots have a mild flavor, so if you like the flavor of onions, I would recommend substituting the shallots with either yellow or red onion. Also, you want the Arborio rice or another thick-grain rice for this recipe; something like a basmati rice is too thin and won't hold up. The original recipe calls for Parmigiano-Reggiano cheese, but I like a stronger flavor, so we opted for the Romano. One great thing about risotto is that you can add other ingredients along with the basics. I like mine with mushrooms too. However, since this recipe uses a slow cooker, you may have to experiment a little since not everything can keep its texture and flavor in a slow cooker.
Enjoy!
Friday, July 29, 2011
Keeping the "free" in public libraries
I came across an editorial today titled "Rethinking Government: Why We Need Library Rental Fees." The article discusses how incorporating operational fees into more public library services could help to bridge the budget gap that threatens so many public libraries. My first reaction was a gut-wrenching "NO WAY!" followed swiftly by a mental call-to-arms to denounce and take down this town selectman who thinks he knows everything. But then I took a step back and tried to see his points in a more objective way.
When the modern library was still in the process of evolution, there were several "types" that emerged before the public library as we know it dominated the industry (if such a thing can be called that). One of these, as the writer of the article points out, was the subscription library that required a membership fee to be able to utilize its resources. It seems that Mr. Greenfield wants to reinstate this idea to a certain degree and charge patrons $.50 per book they wish to borrow. He notes that the cost of a new book has greatly increased since the beginnings of the free public library, which of course means that the cost for the library to acquire said books has also greatly increased--a valid point. A vast majority of the money to pay for these and other costs comes from local taxes, and most if not all of us are aware how much local governments across the nation are struggling to afford many necessary services that include not only libraries but fire and police forces, social services, and educational programs. Knowing all this, I can understand Mr. Greenfield's suggestion that the community pitches in a little more to boost the library's available monies and provide some relief to the local budget.
Yet I still feel that his solution would not really solve the problem. A $.50 fee per book would be prohibitive. Statistics produced by many sources (including the ALA's 2011 State of America's Libraries Report) show library use increasing, a fact Mr. Greenfield mentions in his article. What he doesn't note is that a large percentage of those who do visit and use the library are those with little money, the unemployed, and the undereducated--all evidenced by the trends that libraries continue to see increase: more demand for job-seeking and job preparation resources, patrons placing higher value in programs promoting education and life-long learning, and increased circulation as patrons try to cut back their own personal costs by utilizing the free services and resources offered by public libraries. How would these patrons be able to afford more charges and more fees for things they rely on being able to use or borrow for free? Realistically, there will be patrons who can afford the additional costs, but there will always be a number of patrons who will not. This distinctly conflicts with the mission of the library to provide equal (and free) access to materials to all patrons. Tagging on borrowing fees will not provide equal access to patrons--the additional costs will prohibit some patrons from utilizing those resources.
I wonder if Mr. Greenfield also thought about the many families that use the library. A poorer family would be able to afford borrowing items even less than poorer individuals. Children often rely on library materials for school projects and to supplement their own education. Many schools have had to close or severely restrict their own library operations, meaning that children in those schools would be relying on their local public library even more. Children of the poorer families who need information for projects would not be able to borrow the resources they require--thereby diminishing their educational success. Every child in this country has the right to a public education. One could argue that this would include access to the public library.
Just to put a more practical face on this, let's assume there is a public library that decided to take Mr. Greenfield's advice and each item is $.50 to borrow. A mother takes her three children there after school one afternoon to get some books the school recommended for her sixth grader's India project and her first grader's bean seed project, and a couple of picture books for her toddler. She also wants to get a book for herself to read in the evening after her children have gone to bed. After her children have made their selections, they check out all the items and the mother has to pay $4.00 for the eight items they have borrowed. This is a weekly visit, so the mother will end up spending $16.00 a month (perhaps more) for their library privaledges. This may not seem like a lot, but to someone who is trying to make ends meet, every dollar is precious.
As a side note, my local public library system allows patrons to take out 65 books at a time--a limit that would cost a patron $32.50 who was being charged per item. That doesn't take into account the CD or DVD limit, which combined would add on another $15.00. Granted very few people actually do reach that limit, but it shows potentially how expensive using the library could be.
My point is that $.50 an item can easily add up and become cost-prohibitive to many patrons, discouraging continued visits and usage of library items. Circulation is one of the quantitative measurements that can be taken of library patronage (qualitative measurements are much harder to acquire). Libraries often rely on their circulation to help support their efforts to have their budgets approved: "See how many items have been borrowed over the last three months compared to the same time last year? Patrons are increasing their use of our resources, so we need the funding to continue to provide them." (Yes I know this is a rather simplified version of any library's budget discussion and the actual debate would include a lot more talking points.) If additional fees cause circulation to decrease, that could have lasting ramifications affecting many aspects of a library's operation since such a trend could directly affect future budget proposals.
And here's another thought: who would want to spend money for a service their taxes already pay for?
I would highly recommend reading through the comments of Mr. Greenfield's article. There were a lot of interesting points made on both sides of the table. Which side do you agree with?
A response to Mr. Greenfield's editorial written by ALA's executive director can be found here. He discusses a few of the points I made above, as well as a number of other points.
When the modern library was still in the process of evolution, there were several "types" that emerged before the public library as we know it dominated the industry (if such a thing can be called that). One of these, as the writer of the article points out, was the subscription library that required a membership fee to be able to utilize its resources. It seems that Mr. Greenfield wants to reinstate this idea to a certain degree and charge patrons $.50 per book they wish to borrow. He notes that the cost of a new book has greatly increased since the beginnings of the free public library, which of course means that the cost for the library to acquire said books has also greatly increased--a valid point. A vast majority of the money to pay for these and other costs comes from local taxes, and most if not all of us are aware how much local governments across the nation are struggling to afford many necessary services that include not only libraries but fire and police forces, social services, and educational programs. Knowing all this, I can understand Mr. Greenfield's suggestion that the community pitches in a little more to boost the library's available monies and provide some relief to the local budget.
Yet I still feel that his solution would not really solve the problem. A $.50 fee per book would be prohibitive. Statistics produced by many sources (including the ALA's 2011 State of America's Libraries Report) show library use increasing, a fact Mr. Greenfield mentions in his article. What he doesn't note is that a large percentage of those who do visit and use the library are those with little money, the unemployed, and the undereducated--all evidenced by the trends that libraries continue to see increase: more demand for job-seeking and job preparation resources, patrons placing higher value in programs promoting education and life-long learning, and increased circulation as patrons try to cut back their own personal costs by utilizing the free services and resources offered by public libraries. How would these patrons be able to afford more charges and more fees for things they rely on being able to use or borrow for free? Realistically, there will be patrons who can afford the additional costs, but there will always be a number of patrons who will not. This distinctly conflicts with the mission of the library to provide equal (and free) access to materials to all patrons. Tagging on borrowing fees will not provide equal access to patrons--the additional costs will prohibit some patrons from utilizing those resources.
I wonder if Mr. Greenfield also thought about the many families that use the library. A poorer family would be able to afford borrowing items even less than poorer individuals. Children often rely on library materials for school projects and to supplement their own education. Many schools have had to close or severely restrict their own library operations, meaning that children in those schools would be relying on their local public library even more. Children of the poorer families who need information for projects would not be able to borrow the resources they require--thereby diminishing their educational success. Every child in this country has the right to a public education. One could argue that this would include access to the public library.
Just to put a more practical face on this, let's assume there is a public library that decided to take Mr. Greenfield's advice and each item is $.50 to borrow. A mother takes her three children there after school one afternoon to get some books the school recommended for her sixth grader's India project and her first grader's bean seed project, and a couple of picture books for her toddler. She also wants to get a book for herself to read in the evening after her children have gone to bed. After her children have made their selections, they check out all the items and the mother has to pay $4.00 for the eight items they have borrowed. This is a weekly visit, so the mother will end up spending $16.00 a month (perhaps more) for their library privaledges. This may not seem like a lot, but to someone who is trying to make ends meet, every dollar is precious.
As a side note, my local public library system allows patrons to take out 65 books at a time--a limit that would cost a patron $32.50 who was being charged per item. That doesn't take into account the CD or DVD limit, which combined would add on another $15.00. Granted very few people actually do reach that limit, but it shows potentially how expensive using the library could be.
My point is that $.50 an item can easily add up and become cost-prohibitive to many patrons, discouraging continued visits and usage of library items. Circulation is one of the quantitative measurements that can be taken of library patronage (qualitative measurements are much harder to acquire). Libraries often rely on their circulation to help support their efforts to have their budgets approved: "See how many items have been borrowed over the last three months compared to the same time last year? Patrons are increasing their use of our resources, so we need the funding to continue to provide them." (Yes I know this is a rather simplified version of any library's budget discussion and the actual debate would include a lot more talking points.) If additional fees cause circulation to decrease, that could have lasting ramifications affecting many aspects of a library's operation since such a trend could directly affect future budget proposals.
And here's another thought: who would want to spend money for a service their taxes already pay for?
I would highly recommend reading through the comments of Mr. Greenfield's article. There were a lot of interesting points made on both sides of the table. Which side do you agree with?
A response to Mr. Greenfield's editorial written by ALA's executive director can be found here. He discusses a few of the points I made above, as well as a number of other points.
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Another amusing video
The library has existed for millennia--although it has not by any means existed in the same form or even always for the same purpose. It was not always a "public" institution, even though that term seems almost synonymous with the library today. Before the invention of the printing press, books were much rarer and much more valuable because of the enormous amount of time and energy that went into the creation of a single volume. Books were not available to the average person, but the "average" person during that point in history also could not read most of the time.
A colleague sent me this video on the Medieval helpdesk of a library. While there are a lot of historic inconsistensies, I found it a rather amusing video. I bet a vast number of librarians would be able to find some similarities between this exchange and many of their own!
A colleague sent me this video on the Medieval helpdesk of a library. While there are a lot of historic inconsistensies, I found it a rather amusing video. I bet a vast number of librarians would be able to find some similarities between this exchange and many of their own!
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
This may put a smile on your face...
A podcast I listened to recently mentioned that what is new in libraries is not new FOR libraries--meaning that "new ideas" used in the library world have been--to borrow a phrase--begged, borrowed, or stolen from other industries (and please don't mistake me for condemning libraries for that). Example: the bar code is used by libraries everywhere to scan items for circulation purposes (in layman's terms: to check items in and out), but the bar code was invented for the food industry. There is a lot of creativity in the profession, but we unfortunately don't have time or the budget to fund serious inventing endeavors. Listening to the podcast made me wonder what truly new innovations librarians would be able to come up with if we were given the time and the money to do it.
A colleague of mine sent me links to a few videos that put me in mind of library innovation. Each video is a funny and creative way the Harold B. Lee Library at Brigham Young University is working to promote their services.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ArIj236UHs
http://www.youtube.com/user/hbllproduction#p/u/2/GIUiH3PNOAE
http://www.youtube.com/user/hbllproduction#p/u/5/llD1AY5fsjc
I bet they'll put a smile on your face. They certainly put a smile on mine.
A colleague of mine sent me links to a few videos that put me in mind of library innovation. Each video is a funny and creative way the Harold B. Lee Library at Brigham Young University is working to promote their services.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ArIj236UHs
http://www.youtube.com/user/hbllproduction#p/u/2/GIUiH3PNOAE
http://www.youtube.com/user/hbllproduction#p/u/5/llD1AY5fsjc
I bet they'll put a smile on your face. They certainly put a smile on mine.
Friday, May 13, 2011
Yet Another Reason to Support your Public Library
I’m thinking of a place where you can go for free computer classes that can help you learn basic computer programs. This same place will have free workshops on everything from Chinese Medicine to the culinary arts to knitting blankets. You’ll also be able to pick up the latest book by Charlaine Harris for free, then log on to check your email (for free) before getting your pressing question about the national health care plan answered. Meanwhile, your 9-year-old son is getting (free) help with his homework assignment for Math before choosing a copy of “Shrek 3” to take home and watch. A coffee for you and an orange juice for him wrap up your visit to this magical place where all this happens on a regular basis.
What place could I possibly be talking about? The public library.
Our society has turned into one where money is no longer the only currency: information is the new fad. And libraries, information brokers since the dawn of time (not literally, but you know what I mean), are uniquely positioned to take advantage of this. And the kicker is that they provide their services for free. An article I read mentioned that if the idea of libraries had been proposed now, there would be no way that they would have been created. I have to agree; there would not be nearly enough funding to create enough public libraries across the nation, and people would likely begrudge the thought of any more money being squeezed out of what little they have by the government. In a time when it seems that nothing is free anymore and people’s ability to afford more than the bare minimum is almost non-existent (and in some cases it is), we should be valuing the benefit of the public library.
Lucky for us, it seems that a significant percentage of the population does. ALA’s 2011 The State of American Libraries Report has shown that visits to the library and the utilization of library services continue to steadily increase. People know and appreciate what the library can provide for them. After all, the library is the only free place you can go that connects people with the information they need and helps to bridge the Digital Divide (a claim Google would not be able to make).
If you’re not convinced that the library is still valuable with all of the digital and Internet resources you now have at your fingertips, I encourage you to take a look at this article. I think that the first point is the most important: “Libraries serve the disenfranchised.” Right now, there are a lot of have-nots in the country. People can’t afford the hardware/software/Internet connection/Wi-Fi/etc (the Digital Divide issue I just mentioned) that is steadily becoming the norm for looking up government forms (ex. unemployment benefit forms), searching and applying for jobs (many if not most companies only post open positions online), and staying connected with family and friends (social networking). So what happens to those that don’t have a computer but still want to be able to do these things? They go to their local library.
Sony, Google and Apple are all under fire for various reasons regarding their customer’s privacy. Sony’s PS3 Network was hacked, and millions of users’ information was obtained in the attack. Google and Apple are currently dealing with lawsuits that allege their violation of users’ privacy in the type and amount of information that their smart phones have been secretly collecting. I take comfort that I will never have this problem in the library: “Libraries are interested in your privacy.” The librarian is no stranger to defending her patrons’ privacy, and the ALA also offers guidelines on confidentiality and privacy in the library.
The public library—and what it has to offer—is a role model for society.
What place could I possibly be talking about? The public library.
Our society has turned into one where money is no longer the only currency: information is the new fad. And libraries, information brokers since the dawn of time (not literally, but you know what I mean), are uniquely positioned to take advantage of this. And the kicker is that they provide their services for free. An article I read mentioned that if the idea of libraries had been proposed now, there would be no way that they would have been created. I have to agree; there would not be nearly enough funding to create enough public libraries across the nation, and people would likely begrudge the thought of any more money being squeezed out of what little they have by the government. In a time when it seems that nothing is free anymore and people’s ability to afford more than the bare minimum is almost non-existent (and in some cases it is), we should be valuing the benefit of the public library.
Lucky for us, it seems that a significant percentage of the population does. ALA’s 2011 The State of American Libraries Report has shown that visits to the library and the utilization of library services continue to steadily increase. People know and appreciate what the library can provide for them. After all, the library is the only free place you can go that connects people with the information they need and helps to bridge the Digital Divide (a claim Google would not be able to make).
If you’re not convinced that the library is still valuable with all of the digital and Internet resources you now have at your fingertips, I encourage you to take a look at this article. I think that the first point is the most important: “Libraries serve the disenfranchised.” Right now, there are a lot of have-nots in the country. People can’t afford the hardware/software/Internet connection/Wi-Fi/etc (the Digital Divide issue I just mentioned) that is steadily becoming the norm for looking up government forms (ex. unemployment benefit forms), searching and applying for jobs (many if not most companies only post open positions online), and staying connected with family and friends (social networking). So what happens to those that don’t have a computer but still want to be able to do these things? They go to their local library.
Sony, Google and Apple are all under fire for various reasons regarding their customer’s privacy. Sony’s PS3 Network was hacked, and millions of users’ information was obtained in the attack. Google and Apple are currently dealing with lawsuits that allege their violation of users’ privacy in the type and amount of information that their smart phones have been secretly collecting. I take comfort that I will never have this problem in the library: “Libraries are interested in your privacy.” The librarian is no stranger to defending her patrons’ privacy, and the ALA also offers guidelines on confidentiality and privacy in the library.
The public library—and what it has to offer—is a role model for society.
Saturday, April 30, 2011
Catching Up: Part 1 of 3?
There’s a lot to right about. This weekend, food, and a webinar I attended are only some of the topics I wish to cover today. So to accommodate all the information, I will be posting a few times today. Here is the first.
The webinar that I attended was one for librarians regarding serving a physical and digital population of patrons. In this day and age when so many services are being offered both in-person and online, I think it's important to see what libraries (in the case of this webinar, academic libraries) are providing to their local and distant patrons, and how equivalent services are being offered and conducted for both groups. For schools that offer distance education, I can see how valuable equivalent services become for DE students. From the standpoint of a librarian, I would want to ensure that students are getting the best and most helpful and relevant services available. From the standpoint of a student (and being a DE student myself), I want to know that I can get the resources and services that I need to successfully complete my program. DE students should never feel short-changed because they are not located on or near their school’s campus.
One of the panelists who presented at the webinar offered a lot of suggestions that I really liked and would like to implement at the school I currently work at. Things like online tutorials for database searching, using the school library’s OPAC (in layman’s terms: online catalog), even things like working out math problems or a specific objective from one of our programs—done by an instructor of course—would be very helpful both for our on-campus students and our students currently taking online classes. I could get really creative and even do virtual tours of the library, showing where everything is located and how to find physical materials. One thing about our library’s website is that it has a lot of text—not overwhelmingly so, but enough that upon reflection I realize many of our students would not find it attractive. So in order to make it attractive to our students, I’ll need to add more in the way of other mediums to get our information to them.
Another panelist talked about a number of “untraditional” projects that the library on his campus sponsored. This did two thing: effectively got the name and presence of the library out to the students on campus, and created things that student want and continuously use. A few examples: a piranha tank with a live piranha donated by a student, a Frisbee golf course, a skateboard half-pipe, and a music recording studio. These were all projects that fit that population of students well, they add a new dimension to the campus’s student life, and they really made the library known around campus. While these projects would not be possible at my school, they do open the door to more creativity that what is “normally” found in a library. Plus, it gives me inspiration for projects that the student leadership team could develop and initiate, with the help of the campus library of course.
There were a lot of helpful ideas and advice given by the panelists of this webinar. One goal I’m setting for myself is to come up with my own creative contribution to the school that can inspire students and possibly help spread the name of the library. This summer would be the perfect time to get started.
The webinar that I attended was one for librarians regarding serving a physical and digital population of patrons. In this day and age when so many services are being offered both in-person and online, I think it's important to see what libraries (in the case of this webinar, academic libraries) are providing to their local and distant patrons, and how equivalent services are being offered and conducted for both groups. For schools that offer distance education, I can see how valuable equivalent services become for DE students. From the standpoint of a librarian, I would want to ensure that students are getting the best and most helpful and relevant services available. From the standpoint of a student (and being a DE student myself), I want to know that I can get the resources and services that I need to successfully complete my program. DE students should never feel short-changed because they are not located on or near their school’s campus.
One of the panelists who presented at the webinar offered a lot of suggestions that I really liked and would like to implement at the school I currently work at. Things like online tutorials for database searching, using the school library’s OPAC (in layman’s terms: online catalog), even things like working out math problems or a specific objective from one of our programs—done by an instructor of course—would be very helpful both for our on-campus students and our students currently taking online classes. I could get really creative and even do virtual tours of the library, showing where everything is located and how to find physical materials. One thing about our library’s website is that it has a lot of text—not overwhelmingly so, but enough that upon reflection I realize many of our students would not find it attractive. So in order to make it attractive to our students, I’ll need to add more in the way of other mediums to get our information to them.
Another panelist talked about a number of “untraditional” projects that the library on his campus sponsored. This did two thing: effectively got the name and presence of the library out to the students on campus, and created things that student want and continuously use. A few examples: a piranha tank with a live piranha donated by a student, a Frisbee golf course, a skateboard half-pipe, and a music recording studio. These were all projects that fit that population of students well, they add a new dimension to the campus’s student life, and they really made the library known around campus. While these projects would not be possible at my school, they do open the door to more creativity that what is “normally” found in a library. Plus, it gives me inspiration for projects that the student leadership team could develop and initiate, with the help of the campus library of course.
There were a lot of helpful ideas and advice given by the panelists of this webinar. One goal I’m setting for myself is to come up with my own creative contribution to the school that can inspire students and possibly help spread the name of the library. This summer would be the perfect time to get started.
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Libraries and World Events
The world is moving.
It is being shaken by protests and people crying out and voicing their needs/wants/demands for betterment and acknowledgement of their rights. We all watched in awe as, day after day, the people in Egypt went to the streets and demanded change in their country, change to make their lives better. I was amazed at the dedication and responsibility that the protestors exhibited. Far from being a mindless mass, these people had a purpose and took steps towards reaching their goal. They remained mindful of the situation, creating checkpoints to deter those with violent intentions, because nothing causes more havoc in a crowd than an armed assailant shooting at anyone nearby. They impressed me, these people that showed an uncanny sense of duty to their fellow citizens. Things there could have been so much worse than they were. And in the end, the people got what they wanted: their president is president no more. (A perspective of the protests from Bibliotheca Alexandrina Director can be seen here.) Now the people in the neighboring countries are looking at this model of human achievement and thinking that maybe things could be different for them too.
An earthquake has razed the town of Christchurch in New Zealand. For this, the earth has literally moved. Buildings are down, people are dead or still missing, and the town has suffered billions of dollars in damage. Growing up where I did, earthquakes are a fact of life; but that doesn't lessen the impact that this natural disaster has on the community where it occurs. It's always a trajedy. It is in Christchurch; it was in Haiti and Chile too.
Even here in the US, there is unrest. Wisconsin especially is a current mover and shaker. The governor is trying to ban collective bargaining rights. This situation is troubling at best; mostly it has me scratching my head wondering "is that even legal?" What I find remarkable is the overwhelming support the opposers of this bill have received, from every thinkable source. Fire fighters, police, university students, teachers, nurses, electrical engineers, sheet metal workers, iron workers--public sector, private sector, people from all walks of life are joining together to show Governor Walker that he needs to re-think his bill. (One article on the protests can be found here.)
I'm sure you're thinking "what does this have to do with the topic of your blog?" Most people wouldn't think that these three world events have a common thread, but they do: libraries.
Remember those protests in Egypt? Well, Cairo is the city where the Alexandria Library (Bibliotheca Alexandrina) is located. There are thousands of items in there that, if destroyed, would be a great loss. Not only are those items still safe even through the protests, but many of the protestors themselves were barring the way with a human chain around the library. Throughout this time of unrest, the library sustained not one fingernail's worth of damage (for more, you can read this article). A library by its very nature is a symbol of democracy; the information it holds is available to any who want it. The Alexandria Library embodies democracy both in this way and its symbolic role in the protests.
Unfortunately, not all libraries in Egypt were so well protected. An article in American Libraries Magazine highlights the damage two libraries sustained in Egypt during the protests. Books, computer equipment, and even furniture were stolen from one library before it was set on fire. Over 19,000 books were lost. The day after this attack, locals helped to save 13,000 books by moving them into their homes. The other library was also looted and lost 1,200 books and some equipment. Luckily, police, local residents, and security officers were able to prevent the building from being burned.
As for Christchurch, there are several libraries in the city that have sustained damage along with the rest of the buildings. This article looks at the damage sustained and people's experiences in buildings across the city, including the library. The Library and Information Association of New Zealand Aotearoa posted a blog entry about the effects of the earthquake to the various libraries in Christchurch. As with damage to any library that houses not only contemporary books and sources but also historic items, these libraries and the cultures of this community have felt a great loss.
The Wisconsin protests also have connections to libraries. The most obvious reason is because many librarians are union workers. While I fully admit that unions do have some flaws, I do not think that eliminating bargaining rights is the answer. The whole purpose behind bargaining rights is to attain fair wages and working conditions for workers. The ALA headquarters is in Chicago, only a hop, skip, and a jump away from where this legislation is being proposed. ALA President Roberta Stevens issued a statement regarding the issue stating that "the ALA supports library employees in seeking equitable compensation and recognizes the principle of collective bargaining as an important element of successful labor-management relations. We affirm the right of employees to organize and bargain collectively with their employers, without fear of reprisal. These are basic workers' rights that we defend for thousands of academic, public and school library professionals." A post on the Union Librarian blog says that employees from the Library of Congress have joined a rally in Washington DC--it seems that union rallies are popping up all over the country to address this issue and protest Governor Walker's proposed legislation (here's a list of nation-wide locations of rallies).
Whoever thought that libraries merely witness history in the making have gotten the story wrong. When the world moves, the libraries move with it.
It is being shaken by protests and people crying out and voicing their needs/wants/demands for betterment and acknowledgement of their rights. We all watched in awe as, day after day, the people in Egypt went to the streets and demanded change in their country, change to make their lives better. I was amazed at the dedication and responsibility that the protestors exhibited. Far from being a mindless mass, these people had a purpose and took steps towards reaching their goal. They remained mindful of the situation, creating checkpoints to deter those with violent intentions, because nothing causes more havoc in a crowd than an armed assailant shooting at anyone nearby. They impressed me, these people that showed an uncanny sense of duty to their fellow citizens. Things there could have been so much worse than they were. And in the end, the people got what they wanted: their president is president no more. (A perspective of the protests from Bibliotheca Alexandrina Director can be seen here.) Now the people in the neighboring countries are looking at this model of human achievement and thinking that maybe things could be different for them too.
An earthquake has razed the town of Christchurch in New Zealand. For this, the earth has literally moved. Buildings are down, people are dead or still missing, and the town has suffered billions of dollars in damage. Growing up where I did, earthquakes are a fact of life; but that doesn't lessen the impact that this natural disaster has on the community where it occurs. It's always a trajedy. It is in Christchurch; it was in Haiti and Chile too.
Even here in the US, there is unrest. Wisconsin especially is a current mover and shaker. The governor is trying to ban collective bargaining rights. This situation is troubling at best; mostly it has me scratching my head wondering "is that even legal?" What I find remarkable is the overwhelming support the opposers of this bill have received, from every thinkable source. Fire fighters, police, university students, teachers, nurses, electrical engineers, sheet metal workers, iron workers--public sector, private sector, people from all walks of life are joining together to show Governor Walker that he needs to re-think his bill. (One article on the protests can be found here.)
I'm sure you're thinking "what does this have to do with the topic of your blog?" Most people wouldn't think that these three world events have a common thread, but they do: libraries.
Remember those protests in Egypt? Well, Cairo is the city where the Alexandria Library (Bibliotheca Alexandrina) is located. There are thousands of items in there that, if destroyed, would be a great loss. Not only are those items still safe even through the protests, but many of the protestors themselves were barring the way with a human chain around the library. Throughout this time of unrest, the library sustained not one fingernail's worth of damage (for more, you can read this article). A library by its very nature is a symbol of democracy; the information it holds is available to any who want it. The Alexandria Library embodies democracy both in this way and its symbolic role in the protests.
Unfortunately, not all libraries in Egypt were so well protected. An article in American Libraries Magazine highlights the damage two libraries sustained in Egypt during the protests. Books, computer equipment, and even furniture were stolen from one library before it was set on fire. Over 19,000 books were lost. The day after this attack, locals helped to save 13,000 books by moving them into their homes. The other library was also looted and lost 1,200 books and some equipment. Luckily, police, local residents, and security officers were able to prevent the building from being burned.
As for Christchurch, there are several libraries in the city that have sustained damage along with the rest of the buildings. This article looks at the damage sustained and people's experiences in buildings across the city, including the library. The Library and Information Association of New Zealand Aotearoa posted a blog entry about the effects of the earthquake to the various libraries in Christchurch. As with damage to any library that houses not only contemporary books and sources but also historic items, these libraries and the cultures of this community have felt a great loss.
The Wisconsin protests also have connections to libraries. The most obvious reason is because many librarians are union workers. While I fully admit that unions do have some flaws, I do not think that eliminating bargaining rights is the answer. The whole purpose behind bargaining rights is to attain fair wages and working conditions for workers. The ALA headquarters is in Chicago, only a hop, skip, and a jump away from where this legislation is being proposed. ALA President Roberta Stevens issued a statement regarding the issue stating that "the ALA supports library employees in seeking equitable compensation and recognizes the principle of collective bargaining as an important element of successful labor-management relations. We affirm the right of employees to organize and bargain collectively with their employers, without fear of reprisal. These are basic workers' rights that we defend for thousands of academic, public and school library professionals." A post on the Union Librarian blog says that employees from the Library of Congress have joined a rally in Washington DC--it seems that union rallies are popping up all over the country to address this issue and protest Governor Walker's proposed legislation (here's a list of nation-wide locations of rallies).
Whoever thought that libraries merely witness history in the making have gotten the story wrong. When the world moves, the libraries move with it.
Monday, January 31, 2011
A Speech to Inspire the Masses
This is just going to be a short post for today; I'm almost caught up with duties and projects at work, so today has been a concetration of getting all things current.
However, I now subscribe to a mailing list for individuals in the profession, and one of the members sent out an email regarding a situation with the libraries in Oxfordshire county in the UK. Right now, drastic budget cuts are threatening to close almost half of the 43 libraries across the county, a decision that would be a huge loss to the public. One of the solutions that has been suggested by the county council is to turn over the running of these libraries to volunteers--a suggestion that is rather unrealistic for many reasons.
Yet the best, most eloquent response I've seen yet to the current situation that libraries across the nation and the world are facing is the speech that Philip Pullman (author of the His Dark Materials trilogy I love) gave to a few hundred people at a library campaigners meeting for the Oxfordshire libraries. Please take the time to read his speech. It really illustrates the dire situation the Oxfordshire libraries (and even other libraries in like situations) are in.
However, I now subscribe to a mailing list for individuals in the profession, and one of the members sent out an email regarding a situation with the libraries in Oxfordshire county in the UK. Right now, drastic budget cuts are threatening to close almost half of the 43 libraries across the county, a decision that would be a huge loss to the public. One of the solutions that has been suggested by the county council is to turn over the running of these libraries to volunteers--a suggestion that is rather unrealistic for many reasons.
Yet the best, most eloquent response I've seen yet to the current situation that libraries across the nation and the world are facing is the speech that Philip Pullman (author of the His Dark Materials trilogy I love) gave to a few hundred people at a library campaigners meeting for the Oxfordshire libraries. Please take the time to read his speech. It really illustrates the dire situation the Oxfordshire libraries (and even other libraries in like situations) are in.
Monday, October 25, 2010
Online Library Catalog (and some pasta too!)
One of the topics in my current class is the online library catalog and how easy various types of catalogs are to navigate for novice users. We've looked at examples from all over the nation, including the Aquabrowser catalog as it's being used in the Santa Cruz Public Library system. Many of the online catalogs out there have their strong and weak points. The biggest concern of course is if it makes sense to the user and organizes information in a way that the user can 1) easily understand what information is being presented and 2) find the information that he/she was trying to locate. The Aquabrowser reminded me in some respects of Amazon.com in the look of the results (minus the word cloud, a feature I find distracting and useless) and the refine search options that the user is given. While this familiar look to the results would help the novice user, I feel like there should be another even more "friendly" option.
And so I posed the making of a new type of online catalog to my instructor and classmates. This catalog would read (pardon the pun) much like Facebook does--which would lend to user comfort and familiarity since so many people are using Facebook nowadays. Each item, be it book, movie, CD, or other type, would have its own page. The "profile" would include the bibliographic information of each item, including its physical location--or a link if it's an e-source--in the library. Each item would then be "friended" to other items that are related by title, author, subject, genre, or any other way the library deems appropriate to make a connection. Library patrons would be able to "like" items, and even post on each item's "wall" (maybe providing additional information about the item, for example a review). Tags would be initially set by library catalogers, but patrons would be able to then add their own tags, which may end up helping those users who are unfamiliar with formal catalog searching keywords.
My instructor seems to love the idea, even going so far as to suggest I talk about this with someone to make it a reality. The only problem is that I don't know who to talk to. So if anyone with experience in searching programs and online catalogs would like to flesh out this idea, please leave me a comment! Better yet, if anyone from Facebook decides to use this idea to create a program that libraries can subscribe to (for a REASONABLE fee!!!), then please contact me so we can talk about me selling you my idea.
Now for this week's recipe. This is a recipe that Scooter and I came up with. We had only a little help from a pasta sauce we saw on the back of a package of lobster raviolis. We took down the ingredients needed, added some, took some away, changed around the amounts, and came up with the following pasta sauce:
What you'll need:
2 shallots, diced
5 large cloves of garlic, minced
2 sausages, precooked
1 1/2 Tbs. olive oil
1/2 c. white wine (Chardonnay preferably)
1 lemon, juiced
2 Tbs. flour
1 1/2 c. cream
1/2 milk
1 lb. fettuccine pasta, cooked
What you'll need to do:
1. Cut the sausages up into small chunks. You can also substitute 1/4 lb. cooked loose sausage meat.
2. In a large sausepan over medium heat, heat the olive oil. Add the garlic and shallots and cook until the shallots are soft, stirring occasionally.
3. Add the sausage and cook until sausage is heated through, about 2-3 minutes.
4. Add the flour and stir until completely mixed in.
5. Add the white wine and lemon juice and cook until liquid is reduced, about 5-7 minutes.
6. Add the cream and milk and cook until the sauce is slightly thickened.
7. Remove from heat and serve over fettuccine pasta or another pasta of your choice.
You should be able to get 4-6 servings out of this recipe, and I would highly recommend having a slice of french bread on hand to catch any extra sauce still left in your plate. Also, a disclaimer: this is NOT by any means a low-fat food. However, I can almost guarantee that you will enjoy it!
And so I posed the making of a new type of online catalog to my instructor and classmates. This catalog would read (pardon the pun) much like Facebook does--which would lend to user comfort and familiarity since so many people are using Facebook nowadays. Each item, be it book, movie, CD, or other type, would have its own page. The "profile" would include the bibliographic information of each item, including its physical location--or a link if it's an e-source--in the library. Each item would then be "friended" to other items that are related by title, author, subject, genre, or any other way the library deems appropriate to make a connection. Library patrons would be able to "like" items, and even post on each item's "wall" (maybe providing additional information about the item, for example a review). Tags would be initially set by library catalogers, but patrons would be able to then add their own tags, which may end up helping those users who are unfamiliar with formal catalog searching keywords.
My instructor seems to love the idea, even going so far as to suggest I talk about this with someone to make it a reality. The only problem is that I don't know who to talk to. So if anyone with experience in searching programs and online catalogs would like to flesh out this idea, please leave me a comment! Better yet, if anyone from Facebook decides to use this idea to create a program that libraries can subscribe to (for a REASONABLE fee!!!), then please contact me so we can talk about me selling you my idea.
Now for this week's recipe. This is a recipe that Scooter and I came up with. We had only a little help from a pasta sauce we saw on the back of a package of lobster raviolis. We took down the ingredients needed, added some, took some away, changed around the amounts, and came up with the following pasta sauce:
What you'll need:
2 shallots, diced
5 large cloves of garlic, minced
2 sausages, precooked
1 1/2 Tbs. olive oil
1/2 c. white wine (Chardonnay preferably)
1 lemon, juiced
2 Tbs. flour
1 1/2 c. cream
1/2 milk
1 lb. fettuccine pasta, cooked
What you'll need to do:
1. Cut the sausages up into small chunks. You can also substitute 1/4 lb. cooked loose sausage meat.
2. In a large sausepan over medium heat, heat the olive oil. Add the garlic and shallots and cook until the shallots are soft, stirring occasionally.
3. Add the sausage and cook until sausage is heated through, about 2-3 minutes.
4. Add the flour and stir until completely mixed in.
5. Add the white wine and lemon juice and cook until liquid is reduced, about 5-7 minutes.
6. Add the cream and milk and cook until the sauce is slightly thickened.
7. Remove from heat and serve over fettuccine pasta or another pasta of your choice.
You should be able to get 4-6 servings out of this recipe, and I would highly recommend having a slice of french bread on hand to catch any extra sauce still left in your plate. Also, a disclaimer: this is NOT by any means a low-fat food. However, I can almost guarantee that you will enjoy it!
Thursday, October 7, 2010
There's politics in everything!
This last week in my class, I was surprised by how much politics is involved with libraries and librarians. I just wanted to note a few of my thoughts about this here.
My instructor brought to our attention a recent piece of news: privatizing libraries. In this story, we hear about LSSI--a privately-owned and run company--taking over public libraries in order to deal with the budget crisis that many libraries are facing. While this may come from good intentions, it really leaves a lot of questions unanswered. How will the libraries be run? Will the libraries still follow the value systems and credos inherent in the public library system? What about privacy--will the private company be as active in protecting its "customers" (patrons) as public libraries are now? I also find several of Mr. Pezzanite's comments to be very misleading, specifically those discussing the work ethic of librarians. "You can go to a library for 35 years and never have to do anything and then have your retirement." Despite what many people may think, librarians work hard. They have to in order to meet the needs of the patrons--and now more so than ever with the recession. Librarians assist patrons in a multitude of ways--and on many levels--while also often managing the administrative side of the library like building collections, managing budgets (which often includes grant-writing), and planning for future development. Many librarians publish in journals and/or teach on top of that. Mr. Pezzanite's practice of automatically getting rid of unionized employees just because they belong to a union isn't ethical either. Employees should be hired/fired based on ability (or lack thereof) and performance. It's not a guarantee that anyone the private company brings in has the level of training that librarians go through either. And I seriously question any company that won't discuss its profitability, especially in this case--it's too close to acting like there's something to hide.
The other hot topic in my class right now is the presence of homeless in public libraries. Some public libraries around the nation are enacting things like "odor policies" and other regulations that, in the end, exclude the homeless from public library services. Putting those policies/regulations on top of other laws that have been put into place, it's turned into a situation where we are criminalizing the poor/homeless by punishing them for something that's out of their control. We've taken their dignity by no longer treating them as human. In one of my posts to my class, I likened them to the Untouchables of the pre-modern Indian caste system. Many times, the local public library is the only sanctuary these folks have to rest, relax, and feel safe. To this end, I would like to see more social workers connected with libraries or groups of libraries (like those that are part of the same county system, for example) in order to provide services to the homeless and the poor that frequent the buildings (we learned that San Francisco Public Library is one of the few--if not the only--libraries that has a social worker on at the library for this reason). I've also decided that my first large-scale (grant) project will be to develop a directory of public libraries that offer any programs that focus on the poor and/or homeless and what those programs are. Librarians have become de facto social workers, but lack the training to effectively help these people. My instructor helped explain why this is--she said that often, this topic isn't taught in MLIS or MLS programs because it's thought to be too radical. I'm hoping the directory can provide guidance to those libraries that have no programs already in place. And maybe something even bigger will come out of it.
There are a lot more political topics in librarianship--censorship (Banned Book Week just went by recently), freedom of information, open access, and others--but I'll leave these other topics for another day.
My instructor brought to our attention a recent piece of news: privatizing libraries. In this story, we hear about LSSI--a privately-owned and run company--taking over public libraries in order to deal with the budget crisis that many libraries are facing. While this may come from good intentions, it really leaves a lot of questions unanswered. How will the libraries be run? Will the libraries still follow the value systems and credos inherent in the public library system? What about privacy--will the private company be as active in protecting its "customers" (patrons) as public libraries are now? I also find several of Mr. Pezzanite's comments to be very misleading, specifically those discussing the work ethic of librarians. "You can go to a library for 35 years and never have to do anything and then have your retirement." Despite what many people may think, librarians work hard. They have to in order to meet the needs of the patrons--and now more so than ever with the recession. Librarians assist patrons in a multitude of ways--and on many levels--while also often managing the administrative side of the library like building collections, managing budgets (which often includes grant-writing), and planning for future development. Many librarians publish in journals and/or teach on top of that. Mr. Pezzanite's practice of automatically getting rid of unionized employees just because they belong to a union isn't ethical either. Employees should be hired/fired based on ability (or lack thereof) and performance. It's not a guarantee that anyone the private company brings in has the level of training that librarians go through either. And I seriously question any company that won't discuss its profitability, especially in this case--it's too close to acting like there's something to hide.
The other hot topic in my class right now is the presence of homeless in public libraries. Some public libraries around the nation are enacting things like "odor policies" and other regulations that, in the end, exclude the homeless from public library services. Putting those policies/regulations on top of other laws that have been put into place, it's turned into a situation where we are criminalizing the poor/homeless by punishing them for something that's out of their control. We've taken their dignity by no longer treating them as human. In one of my posts to my class, I likened them to the Untouchables of the pre-modern Indian caste system. Many times, the local public library is the only sanctuary these folks have to rest, relax, and feel safe. To this end, I would like to see more social workers connected with libraries or groups of libraries (like those that are part of the same county system, for example) in order to provide services to the homeless and the poor that frequent the buildings (we learned that San Francisco Public Library is one of the few--if not the only--libraries that has a social worker on at the library for this reason). I've also decided that my first large-scale (grant) project will be to develop a directory of public libraries that offer any programs that focus on the poor and/or homeless and what those programs are. Librarians have become de facto social workers, but lack the training to effectively help these people. My instructor helped explain why this is--she said that often, this topic isn't taught in MLIS or MLS programs because it's thought to be too radical. I'm hoping the directory can provide guidance to those libraries that have no programs already in place. And maybe something even bigger will come out of it.
There are a lot more political topics in librarianship--censorship (Banned Book Week just went by recently), freedom of information, open access, and others--but I'll leave these other topics for another day.
Thursday, August 12, 2010
The Good and the Bad
Admittedly, being a librarian is fun for a vast majority of the time. I get to live in a world full of books and media, where knowledge is the currency and I am seen as the One With the Answers. However, there are those moments where I'm sometimes made to feel like the bad guy: informing patrons of money (late fees) they owe, reminding patrons about overdue materials, and enforcing library policies. Today's incident involved the latter.
We have a policy of no cellphones in the library, meaning no conversations on the cellphone. It's annoying to other students who are using the library to study, and the space is also used for students who have to make up a test. Needless to say, it's imperative that while in the library, all students 1) use low voices if they want to talk to each other; 2) keep loud noises to a minimum; and 3) stay off the cell phone. There are signs posted in various locations reminding patrons of the cell phone policy. If a student needs to take a call, they are asked to take it outside and have their conversation away from this "sacred space." A student here this morning took exception to this policy and let me know it loud and clear.
The student (we will call him "Bob") was belligerent and rude in response to my (repeated) polite request that he follow the policy and take it outside. Bob didn't think he should follow the policy if no one else was around, regardless that the policy is enforced with no discrimination during all hours of operation. I will not go into detail about the conversation/confrontation that took place (it wouldn't be flattering to Bob), but it left a bad taste in my mouth and really put a damper on the rest of my morning.
I didn't ask Bob to leave simply because I didn't want to make an even bigger deal than he was already making it (he ended up leaving on his own shortly afterward anyway). But how else can you deal with a patron who, in effect, decides to have a fit because things aren't going the way he or she would like? I need some ideas on other ways to (politely) deal with patrons who, like Bob, decide that they are right, regardless of the policies in place or library staff who say otherwise. Customer service is such an important aspect of library service. I'm well prepared for the many positive encounters I have with patrons (and continue to have on a daily basis), yet I feel so under-prepared for those problems that do arise and lead to confrontations. Any ideas or similar stories that you want to share?
We have a policy of no cellphones in the library, meaning no conversations on the cellphone. It's annoying to other students who are using the library to study, and the space is also used for students who have to make up a test. Needless to say, it's imperative that while in the library, all students 1) use low voices if they want to talk to each other; 2) keep loud noises to a minimum; and 3) stay off the cell phone. There are signs posted in various locations reminding patrons of the cell phone policy. If a student needs to take a call, they are asked to take it outside and have their conversation away from this "sacred space." A student here this morning took exception to this policy and let me know it loud and clear.
The student (we will call him "Bob") was belligerent and rude in response to my (repeated) polite request that he follow the policy and take it outside. Bob didn't think he should follow the policy if no one else was around, regardless that the policy is enforced with no discrimination during all hours of operation. I will not go into detail about the conversation/confrontation that took place (it wouldn't be flattering to Bob), but it left a bad taste in my mouth and really put a damper on the rest of my morning.
I didn't ask Bob to leave simply because I didn't want to make an even bigger deal than he was already making it (he ended up leaving on his own shortly afterward anyway). But how else can you deal with a patron who, in effect, decides to have a fit because things aren't going the way he or she would like? I need some ideas on other ways to (politely) deal with patrons who, like Bob, decide that they are right, regardless of the policies in place or library staff who say otherwise. Customer service is such an important aspect of library service. I'm well prepared for the many positive encounters I have with patrons (and continue to have on a daily basis), yet I feel so under-prepared for those problems that do arise and lead to confrontations. Any ideas or similar stories that you want to share?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)