- Email: [email protected]
Educating collection developers: In the classroom or on-the-job? Report of the program sponsored by the Education for Collection Development Committee of CMDS of ALCTS
ALAAnnualConference-- 1995
203
Specifically, Misirliyan mentioned copyright violations and the difficulties of obtaining materials from non-Russian former Republics, where the level of Russian-language publishing is on the decline while vernacular-language publishing is increasing.
PII S0364-6408(96)00036-1
Lydia W. Wasylenko Syracuse UniversityLibrary Syracuse, NY 13244-2010 [email protected]
Educating Collection Developers: In the Classroom or On-the-Job? Report of the Program Sponsored by the Educationfor Collection Development Committee of CMDS of ALCTS Is collection development best taught on the job or is the classroom setting a more effective venue to teach library collection management skills? A standing room only crowd of nearly 200 conventioneers discussed this issue on Monday afternoon. In addition to its primary sponsor, five additional ALA groups co-sponsored the program, indicating the wide interest of this topic. Speakers and panelists represented academic and public libraries, library and information science educators, and librarians involved in both selection and acquisitions work. John Budd, Associate Professor of Library and Information Science at the University of Missouri at Columbia, stated at the start of his remarks that he was presenting his personal views and did not speak for all library science educators. As further explanation of his perspective he cited the context within which he studies and works, that of the research library. The pressures and demands of the research library community inevitably influence his course and curriculum. He is expected to provide solid, graduate, theoretical education in contrast to practical, hands-on training. This requirement for the theoretical can cause disagreements and tension with those who propose a more practical approach. While sometimes uncomfortable, this tension often proves productive, prompting flexibility and creativity. In response to the theme question, Budd said "yes and no." Both classroom and on-the-job education are necessary to prepare collection development librarians. Some elements lend themselves to formal, organized study: how to review, methods of assessing subject content areas, the basics of selection decision making, delineation of the elements involved in analyses of user communities, and an awareness of the current issues in collection development. Formal instruction provides a forum to discuss and debate critical collection issues. A successful library education program must look at its entire program to understand where collection development training fits and integrate it into the full library science and information curriculum. But, formal, classroom library science education cannot, nor should it be expected, to teach some aspects of collection development. For example, it cannot teach depth of knowledge in content areas. Experiential operations such as working with faculty members and the politics of selection are not well taught in the classroom, but are more effectively learned by doing, by working in the real world. When they do address these problems, LIS programs are most effective when they offer field experience or apprenticeship mechanisms, i.e., when they provide some type of on-the-job training. Budd closed his remarks with the statement that the primary failing of educators regarding this issue is its lack of communication with practicing librarians. He suggested that educators and librarians in the field need to talk together more to provide a reality check for one another. He further proposed that library science educators participate more actively with working librarians in ALA, and that ALISE strive to broaden the spectrum of participants in its work.
204
ALAAnnualConference- - 1995
Peggy Johnson, Assistant Director of the St. Paul Campus Libraries of the University of Minnesota, confessed that she was inclined to confirm Prof. Budd's statements with a loud "I agree." She admitted to ambivalent feelings toward this topic; she could take either side of the debate. Perceiving this ambivalence as confirmation that both the theoretical and the practical must be part of collection development training, she organized her talk into the following areas: skills that should be taught in the classroom; skills that cannot be taught in the classroom, but are learned in the field; and what remedies could be employed to address the failures in this training. There are elements appropriately taught in the classroom. Many include the principles that constitute the competencies assumed to be part of the makeup of a professional librarian. To name just a few: the raison d' etre of librarians and librarianship, the philosophical basics of bibliographic organization, intellectual freedom issues, subject review capabilities, publishing and acquisitions practices, knowledge of technologically sophisticated sources of information such as the Web and Internet, analysis of user/circulation statistics, and the elemental needs of the reference desk. Still further are a number of basics that should be taught in professional library classes but either are not or are not taught well. Among these are: f'mancial skills - - how to use and understand fund reports; statistical skills - - how to use data obtained from automated integrated library systems; ethical considerations - - how they can vary from situation to situation; communication skills; resource sharing; and issues of access vs. ownership. Where they are taught Johnson pleaded for a move away from a "best case" scenario to one grounded more on reality and true library circumstances. There are areas that cannot be taught in the classroom, but must be gleaned from life experiences. A classroom can't teach you to be real. Using the example of the horse in the children's story, The Velveteen Rabbit, whose skin had been worn away by years of love and caring, so too, Johnson stated, did it take extended practice time to become skilled at collection development. While you can learn the skills in the classroom, only real world practice will produce mastery. There is no substitute for "doing it." There should be no confusion between intellectual understanding and the practical, holistic realization of proficiency. Training in collection development should start with the essential basics offered in classroom instruction followed by years of application of these elements until mastery is achieved. Carol Pitts Hawks, Head, Acquisition Department at Ohio State University, was the fast panelist to respond to the speakers. As a full-time professional librarian and as an adjunct faculty member in the Kent State University graduate library science program, Hawks represented both viewpoints. Once every 12-15 months she teaches a course in collection development and acquisitions at an extended campus of KSU's graduate library science program. She described her students as nontraditional students who work full-time during the day and attend library science classes in the late afternoon, evenings and/or weekends. Most work in some sort of library setting, and a few work in situations that are near that of a professional librarian. Hawks described her curriculum as a blend of research and practical application. Students evaluate selection tools, present papers on current issues, and take part in a major project that attempts to recreate a life-like situation for selection and acquisition of library materials. Students choose a library (it may be real or imaginary), pick a subject area, and make selections for the library with a limited amount of money. Choices are defended on business and subject selection bases, applying theoretical and practical principles to the selection process. Hawks believes the use of controlled experiments where students struggle to blend theoretical learning with real world circumstances provides effective teaching. In turn, she finds she, broadens and increases her own knowledge while directing and interacting with her students.
ALAAnnualConference- 1995
205
Sheila Intner, Professor, Graduate School of Library and Information Science, Simmons College, began her remarks with another affLrmation that both the theoretical and the practical are necessary for fully rounded training in collection development. Without both organized study and its practical application, training will be short-changed. We should demand effective measures of both. Intner stated that collections are a library's greatest asset, and attention spent on the management of this asset will produce positive returns. Collection development is one of the central tenets of professional librarianship. She intensely defended the organized, formal study of this discipline. While she acknowledged that practical, on-the-job experience with circumstances grounded in the real world must be part of the study, she argued that ad hoc trial and error study in contrast to systematic learning devalues scholarship and research. Intner described her course in Collection Development and Management and provided a hand-out of its syllabus. Together with formal lectures on the basic elements of budgeting, development of goals and objectives, user analyses, etc., she presents her students with life-like situations in which they are permitted to fail. Projects are designed to apply theories to local situations; to force students to make decisions on the basis of measurable conclusions and to assess the effectiveness of the applications. The hardest skill to learn is the creation of goals and objectives that are balanced between vision and reality. In addition she presses her students to courageously take control of the process of collection development and to believe where their investigation and "first time" eye leads them. The third reactor, panelist member Merle Jacob presented the public librarian's viewpoint. As Head of Adult Services for the Chicago Public Library, she criticized the study of collection development offered in library information science curriculums. She wondered why the program's topical question would even be raised. Of course training in collection development should be taught in graduate school; it is one of the basics of our profession. She criticized graduate programs for putting too much emphasis on reference courses while neglecting the management of collections. All librarianship is based on collections. Reference work often is only as good as the collection within which it is practiced. Yet, even librarians with subject masters degrees understand tittle of the elements of good collection development. Most collection development is performed on a trial and error basis with little or no evaluation and follow-up assessment. Jacobs placed some of the fault at the feet of library professors. She feels they are not grounded in the realities of real world library situations and certainly not in the reality of the public library scene. Acknowledging her bias toward public libraries, Jacobs described professors as too focused on academic libraries. It is assumed that what works in an academic library works in a public library. Not true. There needs to be more dialogue between academics and public librarians. She suggested that library and information science curriculum once again include readers' advisory courses. Jacobs suggested broadening the concept of collection development beyond the elements of selection and acquisitions. Librarians need to understand that collection development is more than just ordering books. They need to understand selection bias; the censoring impact of insufficient money; the balance between response to popular demands and critical evaluation; the publishing process; gifts and rental plans; the use of reviewing tools (many items added to a public library are never reviewed); community and institutional profiles, etc. She emphasized the importance of written collection development policies. Librarians need to be aware of the value of written collection development policies. They need to see them as organic, evolving outgrowths of the library's mission and learn to write them when necessary. Weeding and deselection are needed but are also neglected. In public libraries they are essential; librarians must regularly remove out-dated informarion. She further cited efforts to prepare budgets and to write annotations as other overlooked elements of CD training. The final panelist reactor was Michael P. Olson, Librarian and Selector for Germanic Collections, Widener Library, Harvard University. He forcefully initiated his remarks with the statement he did
206
ALAAnnualConference-- 1995
not believe that the formal, classroom venue was the proper place to learn collection development. Rather, collection development is best learned in an apprenticeship in a real job situation. He feels the crucial question when hiring a collection development librarian is the match between the job and the individual, regardless of how or where the individual obtained the skills needed for the job. He feels collection development librarians should be critical thinkers, information junkies who both dabble in the superficial and focus on specific areas of expertise. He believes libraries must develop new hiring procedures that recognize these capabilities and depend less on classroom credentials. Time spent in the classroom is wasteful and would be more usefully spent if it were applied to a real world situation that permitted hands-on training in the elements of review and selection. A lively question and answer session followed the speakers' presentations. Olson's remarks provoked spirited responses. One commentor remarked that apprenticeship training is chancy at best, as it is based on the competency of whomever happens to be in the position to provide the training. Further, the job turnover rate is too high to be able to guarantee mastery of collection development skills. Often the teacher in an "on-the-job" situation knows little more than the student. One participant stated that a formal, graduate library science education is only a f'Lrststep. It should not be expected to produce individuals fully adept at all elements of librarianship. Rather, it provides a foundation upon which experience can mold, refine, and shape the collection development librarian. Comments were made that there is not enough time in real-life library situations to ensure thorough training; the basics are too often missed under the demanding pressures of the workday. Public librarians particularly feel that there is too tittle work time that can be devoted to education and training. PH S0364-6408(96)00035.X
Penny Schroeder Collection Management~Acquisitions Librarian Bowdoin College Library Bowdoin College Brunswick, Maine 04011 Internet: [email protected]
Cooperative Collection Development Discussion Group This discussion group on cooperative collection development was small, numbering five professional librarians and one library materials vendor representative, but the discussion was detailed and satisfying. Perhaps because of the small size of the group, all participants were active, and the idea of a forum where specifics of real library situations could be addressed was realized. The convener of the discussion, Suzanne Fedunok, Assistant Director of Resources at the State University of New York at Binghamton, opened by introducing the convener elect, Susan Vaughan from Brooklyn College. Susan Vaughan will take over as group discussion leader at the close of the Annual Conference. Fedunok briefly stated that ALA is questioning changes in the management of discussion groups. Apparently, there is some consideration that discussion groups be presented only during the Midwinter meetings. There has been no decision on this arrangement, but it was noted that the small size of our group today might indicate that a new schedule could prove to be a better fit. After brief introductions, members of the group each described their local situation in terms of cooperative collection development. Within the discussion group were libraries situated in
203
Specifically, Misirliyan mentioned copyright violations and the difficulties of obtaining materials from non-Russian former Republics, where the level of Russian-language publishing is on the decline while vernacular-language publishing is increasing.
PII S0364-6408(96)00036-1
Lydia W. Wasylenko Syracuse UniversityLibrary Syracuse, NY 13244-2010 [email protected]
Educating Collection Developers: In the Classroom or On-the-Job? Report of the Program Sponsored by the Educationfor Collection Development Committee of CMDS of ALCTS Is collection development best taught on the job or is the classroom setting a more effective venue to teach library collection management skills? A standing room only crowd of nearly 200 conventioneers discussed this issue on Monday afternoon. In addition to its primary sponsor, five additional ALA groups co-sponsored the program, indicating the wide interest of this topic. Speakers and panelists represented academic and public libraries, library and information science educators, and librarians involved in both selection and acquisitions work. John Budd, Associate Professor of Library and Information Science at the University of Missouri at Columbia, stated at the start of his remarks that he was presenting his personal views and did not speak for all library science educators. As further explanation of his perspective he cited the context within which he studies and works, that of the research library. The pressures and demands of the research library community inevitably influence his course and curriculum. He is expected to provide solid, graduate, theoretical education in contrast to practical, hands-on training. This requirement for the theoretical can cause disagreements and tension with those who propose a more practical approach. While sometimes uncomfortable, this tension often proves productive, prompting flexibility and creativity. In response to the theme question, Budd said "yes and no." Both classroom and on-the-job education are necessary to prepare collection development librarians. Some elements lend themselves to formal, organized study: how to review, methods of assessing subject content areas, the basics of selection decision making, delineation of the elements involved in analyses of user communities, and an awareness of the current issues in collection development. Formal instruction provides a forum to discuss and debate critical collection issues. A successful library education program must look at its entire program to understand where collection development training fits and integrate it into the full library science and information curriculum. But, formal, classroom library science education cannot, nor should it be expected, to teach some aspects of collection development. For example, it cannot teach depth of knowledge in content areas. Experiential operations such as working with faculty members and the politics of selection are not well taught in the classroom, but are more effectively learned by doing, by working in the real world. When they do address these problems, LIS programs are most effective when they offer field experience or apprenticeship mechanisms, i.e., when they provide some type of on-the-job training. Budd closed his remarks with the statement that the primary failing of educators regarding this issue is its lack of communication with practicing librarians. He suggested that educators and librarians in the field need to talk together more to provide a reality check for one another. He further proposed that library science educators participate more actively with working librarians in ALA, and that ALISE strive to broaden the spectrum of participants in its work.
204
ALAAnnualConference- - 1995
Peggy Johnson, Assistant Director of the St. Paul Campus Libraries of the University of Minnesota, confessed that she was inclined to confirm Prof. Budd's statements with a loud "I agree." She admitted to ambivalent feelings toward this topic; she could take either side of the debate. Perceiving this ambivalence as confirmation that both the theoretical and the practical must be part of collection development training, she organized her talk into the following areas: skills that should be taught in the classroom; skills that cannot be taught in the classroom, but are learned in the field; and what remedies could be employed to address the failures in this training. There are elements appropriately taught in the classroom. Many include the principles that constitute the competencies assumed to be part of the makeup of a professional librarian. To name just a few: the raison d' etre of librarians and librarianship, the philosophical basics of bibliographic organization, intellectual freedom issues, subject review capabilities, publishing and acquisitions practices, knowledge of technologically sophisticated sources of information such as the Web and Internet, analysis of user/circulation statistics, and the elemental needs of the reference desk. Still further are a number of basics that should be taught in professional library classes but either are not or are not taught well. Among these are: f'mancial skills - - how to use and understand fund reports; statistical skills - - how to use data obtained from automated integrated library systems; ethical considerations - - how they can vary from situation to situation; communication skills; resource sharing; and issues of access vs. ownership. Where they are taught Johnson pleaded for a move away from a "best case" scenario to one grounded more on reality and true library circumstances. There are areas that cannot be taught in the classroom, but must be gleaned from life experiences. A classroom can't teach you to be real. Using the example of the horse in the children's story, The Velveteen Rabbit, whose skin had been worn away by years of love and caring, so too, Johnson stated, did it take extended practice time to become skilled at collection development. While you can learn the skills in the classroom, only real world practice will produce mastery. There is no substitute for "doing it." There should be no confusion between intellectual understanding and the practical, holistic realization of proficiency. Training in collection development should start with the essential basics offered in classroom instruction followed by years of application of these elements until mastery is achieved. Carol Pitts Hawks, Head, Acquisition Department at Ohio State University, was the fast panelist to respond to the speakers. As a full-time professional librarian and as an adjunct faculty member in the Kent State University graduate library science program, Hawks represented both viewpoints. Once every 12-15 months she teaches a course in collection development and acquisitions at an extended campus of KSU's graduate library science program. She described her students as nontraditional students who work full-time during the day and attend library science classes in the late afternoon, evenings and/or weekends. Most work in some sort of library setting, and a few work in situations that are near that of a professional librarian. Hawks described her curriculum as a blend of research and practical application. Students evaluate selection tools, present papers on current issues, and take part in a major project that attempts to recreate a life-like situation for selection and acquisition of library materials. Students choose a library (it may be real or imaginary), pick a subject area, and make selections for the library with a limited amount of money. Choices are defended on business and subject selection bases, applying theoretical and practical principles to the selection process. Hawks believes the use of controlled experiments where students struggle to blend theoretical learning with real world circumstances provides effective teaching. In turn, she finds she, broadens and increases her own knowledge while directing and interacting with her students.
ALAAnnualConference- 1995
205
Sheila Intner, Professor, Graduate School of Library and Information Science, Simmons College, began her remarks with another affLrmation that both the theoretical and the practical are necessary for fully rounded training in collection development. Without both organized study and its practical application, training will be short-changed. We should demand effective measures of both. Intner stated that collections are a library's greatest asset, and attention spent on the management of this asset will produce positive returns. Collection development is one of the central tenets of professional librarianship. She intensely defended the organized, formal study of this discipline. While she acknowledged that practical, on-the-job experience with circumstances grounded in the real world must be part of the study, she argued that ad hoc trial and error study in contrast to systematic learning devalues scholarship and research. Intner described her course in Collection Development and Management and provided a hand-out of its syllabus. Together with formal lectures on the basic elements of budgeting, development of goals and objectives, user analyses, etc., she presents her students with life-like situations in which they are permitted to fail. Projects are designed to apply theories to local situations; to force students to make decisions on the basis of measurable conclusions and to assess the effectiveness of the applications. The hardest skill to learn is the creation of goals and objectives that are balanced between vision and reality. In addition she presses her students to courageously take control of the process of collection development and to believe where their investigation and "first time" eye leads them. The third reactor, panelist member Merle Jacob presented the public librarian's viewpoint. As Head of Adult Services for the Chicago Public Library, she criticized the study of collection development offered in library information science curriculums. She wondered why the program's topical question would even be raised. Of course training in collection development should be taught in graduate school; it is one of the basics of our profession. She criticized graduate programs for putting too much emphasis on reference courses while neglecting the management of collections. All librarianship is based on collections. Reference work often is only as good as the collection within which it is practiced. Yet, even librarians with subject masters degrees understand tittle of the elements of good collection development. Most collection development is performed on a trial and error basis with little or no evaluation and follow-up assessment. Jacobs placed some of the fault at the feet of library professors. She feels they are not grounded in the realities of real world library situations and certainly not in the reality of the public library scene. Acknowledging her bias toward public libraries, Jacobs described professors as too focused on academic libraries. It is assumed that what works in an academic library works in a public library. Not true. There needs to be more dialogue between academics and public librarians. She suggested that library and information science curriculum once again include readers' advisory courses. Jacobs suggested broadening the concept of collection development beyond the elements of selection and acquisitions. Librarians need to understand that collection development is more than just ordering books. They need to understand selection bias; the censoring impact of insufficient money; the balance between response to popular demands and critical evaluation; the publishing process; gifts and rental plans; the use of reviewing tools (many items added to a public library are never reviewed); community and institutional profiles, etc. She emphasized the importance of written collection development policies. Librarians need to be aware of the value of written collection development policies. They need to see them as organic, evolving outgrowths of the library's mission and learn to write them when necessary. Weeding and deselection are needed but are also neglected. In public libraries they are essential; librarians must regularly remove out-dated informarion. She further cited efforts to prepare budgets and to write annotations as other overlooked elements of CD training. The final panelist reactor was Michael P. Olson, Librarian and Selector for Germanic Collections, Widener Library, Harvard University. He forcefully initiated his remarks with the statement he did
206
ALAAnnualConference-- 1995
not believe that the formal, classroom venue was the proper place to learn collection development. Rather, collection development is best learned in an apprenticeship in a real job situation. He feels the crucial question when hiring a collection development librarian is the match between the job and the individual, regardless of how or where the individual obtained the skills needed for the job. He feels collection development librarians should be critical thinkers, information junkies who both dabble in the superficial and focus on specific areas of expertise. He believes libraries must develop new hiring procedures that recognize these capabilities and depend less on classroom credentials. Time spent in the classroom is wasteful and would be more usefully spent if it were applied to a real world situation that permitted hands-on training in the elements of review and selection. A lively question and answer session followed the speakers' presentations. Olson's remarks provoked spirited responses. One commentor remarked that apprenticeship training is chancy at best, as it is based on the competency of whomever happens to be in the position to provide the training. Further, the job turnover rate is too high to be able to guarantee mastery of collection development skills. Often the teacher in an "on-the-job" situation knows little more than the student. One participant stated that a formal, graduate library science education is only a f'Lrststep. It should not be expected to produce individuals fully adept at all elements of librarianship. Rather, it provides a foundation upon which experience can mold, refine, and shape the collection development librarian. Comments were made that there is not enough time in real-life library situations to ensure thorough training; the basics are too often missed under the demanding pressures of the workday. Public librarians particularly feel that there is too tittle work time that can be devoted to education and training. PH S0364-6408(96)00035.X
Penny Schroeder Collection Management~Acquisitions Librarian Bowdoin College Library Bowdoin College Brunswick, Maine 04011 Internet: [email protected]
Cooperative Collection Development Discussion Group This discussion group on cooperative collection development was small, numbering five professional librarians and one library materials vendor representative, but the discussion was detailed and satisfying. Perhaps because of the small size of the group, all participants were active, and the idea of a forum where specifics of real library situations could be addressed was realized. The convener of the discussion, Suzanne Fedunok, Assistant Director of Resources at the State University of New York at Binghamton, opened by introducing the convener elect, Susan Vaughan from Brooklyn College. Susan Vaughan will take over as group discussion leader at the close of the Annual Conference. Fedunok briefly stated that ALA is questioning changes in the management of discussion groups. Apparently, there is some consideration that discussion groups be presented only during the Midwinter meetings. There has been no decision on this arrangement, but it was noted that the small size of our group today might indicate that a new schedule could prove to be a better fit. After brief introductions, members of the group each described their local situation in terms of cooperative collection development. Within the discussion group were libraries situated in