The generalist versus the subject specialist librarian: a critical choice for academic library directors in Nigeria

ht. Libr. Rev. (1991) 23, 11 l-120

The Generalist Versus the Subject Specialist Librarian: a Critical Choice for Academic Library Directors in Nigeria ADAKOLE

OCHAI* INTRODUCTION

When in the 1970s library educators engaged themselves in the controversy over the most appropriate level of educational preparation for librarians in this country, they were not doing something entirely new; they were merely echoing the sentiments of the various foreign consultants’ sent to the country to study and recommend the most appropriate level of training for librarians. They were, in fact, dissipating energy on issues that had been resolved elsewhere. They could have taken a cue from the developments in other parts of the world instead of starting all over again. However, relevance demands that such issues be examined in the context of our local situation. Apart from r-e-inforcing library consciousness in the minds of librarians, educators and students, the debate helped to focus attention on the level of training, as well as the products of the different levels of training programmes. In effect, librarianship in the country became besieged by two different but interwoven problems namely, (1) the entry level qualification for librarians, and (2) the conflict of the generalist versus the specialist. While recent developments give the impression that the former problem has been resolved, the actions of academic library directors indicate otherwise. Champions of subject specialization among university library directors resisted, and still continue to resist, recruiting holders of the bachelors degree in library science (BLS) as they are considered as generalists and therefore “inferior” to those having degrees in other subject areas in addition to the BLS. If this group of university library directors do engage the services of BLS degree holders (the generalists) they do so reluctantly and on an “experimental” basis. However, one should not be misled into thinking that because the generalist librarian is found in many of our academic libraries today * Dr. Adakolr Ochai, University ofJos Library, P.M.B. 2084, Jos, Nigeria. 0020-7837/91/020111+

10 $03.00/O

c, 1991 Academic Press Limited

112

A.

OCHAI

and because “those who about a decade ago felt that the undergraduate programmc in library education had very little to recommend it and should be in fact discouraged”’ have back-pedalled and embraced it, that the issue has been resolved. One would have thought that the mounting of the BLS programmes, after the Ibadan Colloquium of 1974 on library education, at Imo State University, as well as the universities of Maiduguri, Kano, Nsukka and now possibly at Ibadan in addition to the one at the Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, meant that the problem of level of training and, therefore, the “discriminatory” tendencies in recruitment, had become a non-issue. However, the continued expression of concern regarding recruitment into the profession and the pattern of recruitment by some academic library directors suggests a re-examination of this supposedly dead issue. Their actions are more puzzling when it is known that such actions are in defiance of the guidelines set by the Committee of University Librarians of Nigerian Universities, which stipulate the entry qualifications for academic librarians to be “a good university degree plus professional qualifications or a good university degree in librarianship”.” This paper, therefore, examines both the general and subject specialist librarian, the reasons for the move towards subject specialization, and the local realities, and then draws conclusions.

THE

GENERALIST

The generalist can simply be defined as a non-specialist, “a jack-of-alltrades”. As used in this paper the generalist is a holder of the bachelor of it, and because of library science degree (BLS), or variations librarianship, at least as practised in this country, has no specialization at the undergraduate level he has no specialization, even within the field of librarianship. He has entered the library school after having satisfied the general entry requirements and may, in addition, have worked for several years in a library as an attendant/assistant or even as a library officer, having acquired either the Associateship of the Library Association of Britain (ALA) or a diploma in Library Science (DLS). As in most other courses he has spent three or four years in a library school to obtain the BLS degree. In general he is seen performing identical functions to the librarian with a specific subject background or the subject specialist. He therefore holds such titles as the librarian, reference librarian, circulation librarian, acquisitions librarian, serials librarian, cataloguer, etc. Given the proliferation of the undergraduate programme in Library Science, it may be safe to conclude that the majority of librarians in

GENERALIST

VERSUS

SUBJECT

SPECIALIST

LIBRARIAN

113

this country today belong to this group of staff. Some have climbed to the top either at federal, state, university levels, or at research institutes or similar places, where they have performed, or seem to be performing creditably well. Because he has no subject degree (apart from the BLS) the performance of the generalist at the various levels of library work, be it as a cataloguer/classifier or in reference services, must be partly achieved through on the job training, continuing education, and partly through the skills acquired while in the library school.

THE

SUBJECT

SPECIALIST

Variously called the subject librarian, subject specialist, subject reference librarian, subject bibliographer, these terms refer to one and the same individual “who has been trained as a librarian and has, in addition, a formal subject qualification or knowledge of the literature of the subject”.4 In other words, the subject specialist may have a degree or a postgraduate diploma in library science in addition to a degree in another subject. It appears from writings that this is also true of the Nigerian situation. Nwafor5 maintains that the basis for the practice of librarianship in Nigeria will be nothing short of a first degree in a field other than library science plus a graduate degree in library science. Avafia’ talks of a degree or as an alternative a mere “knowledge of the literature of the subject” to qualify as a subject specialist. The definition of the word “specialize” in Chambers 20th Century Dictionary (New edn., 1983) is “to narrow and intensify”. Rodale’s Synonym Finder gives the following words as synonymous with “specialist”--expert, authority, master, maestro and proficient. A bachelor’s degree or mere knowledge of the literature of a given subject area does not make one a specialist. Take for instance, the case of a social sciences librarian or natural sciences librarian who has a degree in one of the subject areas. He can only be a specialist in one subject. To qualify as a specialist would require possession of higher degrees beyond the level of bachelors degree. To be an authority would entail the study of a narrow aspect of a field of study and to be so proficient in that area that one cannot be easily faulted. A bachelor’s degree alone certainly does not provide such in depth knowledge. This is why the German definition of a subject specialist, as having “an additional masters degree or doctorate in a subject field”,’ and the emerging patterns, at academic libraries in the USA, of hiring candidates holding a masters degree apart from the master’s degree in librarianship to fill many positions, are more acceptable practices of subject specialization.

114

A.

OCHAI

Subject specialization in libraries requires a departure from the traditional library organization on functional lines to a “user centred” organization whereby the resources are organized on subject basis with librarians qualified professionally and academically to develop the collection, provide reference services, catalogue and classify materials in their disciplines, liaise with the faculty and engage in some other marketing techniques that would encourage the use of library facilities.

THE

CHANGING

ACADEMIC

ENVIRONMENT

Supporters of subject specialization argue that the issue in question is not so much that of discrimination against the generalist as the uncertainty about his capability of performing effectively in the new information and ever changing academic environment. This school of thought holds tenaciously to the conviction that information/knowledge is proliferating at such a rate that even the specialist in his own field today may become a novice tomorrow. Just as information is proliferating, the requirements of the information users are becoming more detailed and beyond the ability of the “general” librarian to handle. There is, therefore, the need to have more than a peripheral knowledge in a subject area in order to be effective as an academic librarian. The changing conception of the role of the academic librarian is a world-wide phenomenon. In the US for nearly a decade now, the question of the education and training of academic librarians has been the major concern of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) . In Britain, Germany, etc. the thinking tends to be the same and that is, that subject specialization is an inevitable consequence of developments in library and information science. Most writers on this subject are unanimous on the question of a subject degree. In a Delphi study, conducted in 1982, participants agreed that a master’s degree in a separate subject, in addition to the professional degree, would be a regular requirement for appointments to an academic library public services position by the year 2000.8 Academic librarianship is seen as becoming an increasingly “specialized profession with scholarly and technical tracks, more selective recruitment, more rigorous professional training, graduate education to supplement the professional degree, and a greater emphasis on research”.g

To function effectively in the new, more complicated academic and research environment, librarians must possess an excellent undergraduate education, professional education in academic librarianship and graduate preparation in a subject or technical field.”

GENERALIST

VERSUS

SUBJECT

SPECIALIST

Battin succinctly summed up the position specialization when she said: In research libraries today, we need people who assumptions, who are able to collect data, resolve ments, and take decisive action. We need people how to learn in a constantly changing environment.. interact effectively with a broad range of scholarly

Referring

to the situation

in Britain,

LIBRARIAN

115

of the advocates of subject have been trained to question conflicts, make informed judgewho have been taught to learn we need individuals who can experts.”

Havard-Williams

maintains

that:

In the future, it is likely that the BAs or BScs (in Library Science) will do more of the basic library work, while the major information and library posts will go to postgraduates. However, the BAs and BScs do have their advantages, which must not be ignored: they are much better trained as librarians, because they have better time to learn about library information problems over three years.. they do not, however, have the same range of subject knowledge, and this tends to be a disadvantage in the contemporary specialized information oriented world we live in.”

In Nigeria, a number of librarians, Adelabu,” Onyechi,14 Nwafor I5 have written on this subject aid Ogundipe,” Fadiran,17 Avafia,‘* pointed out the virtues of subject specialization in our university libraries. They have urged for a change from the traditional functional arrangement to one based on subject division. The question to ask at this point is whether we are prepared for the recommended change.

THE

NIGERIAN

SCENE

It is pertinent to examine the local situation to determine its readiness to adopt subject librarianship. As of today, of the 24 university libraries, Avafialg reports that three-at the universities of Benin, Jos and Port Harcourt have either wholly or partially adopted the subject organizational structure. The University of Port Harcourt adopted a pattern in which subject specialization is grafted onto a library run on functional lines by retaining staff in their functional posts, while giving them responsibility for various subject areas. The l’niversity of Jos Library, and to a limited degree the University of Benin Library, are arranged on subject divisional basis. Materials in these libraries are arranged by broad subject content irrespective of format and are manned by librarians who have a background in an area covered by these broad subject divisions. It may be useful to examine the local situation to determine the educational preparation of librarians needed to support subject specialization. Such an approach, it is hoped, may reveal whatever gaps or shortcomings may exist and therefore lead to the search for the cure.

116

A.

OCI1AI

An examination of the Norminal List of Practicing Librarians in Nigeria’” revealed the following about librarians in the country. ?‘hey numbered (those listed) 610 in 1982. Of this number 60 were nationals of other countries. These were excluded from the analysis. Table I shows the distribution of the 550 librarians amongst the various types of libraries, their subject backgrounds and library qualifications. It is important, at this stage, to point out the impossibility of distinguishing between BSc social sciences and BSc pure sciences. The difference between the BA and MA in the arts, and the BA and MA in library science, since the source used for this analysis does not make provision It is, therefore, difficult to say how many for area of specialization. of those with BSc/MLS degrees, for instance, have a social science background. The distribution oflibrarians as shown in the table supports an earlier study*’ which found that the majority of librarians in this country have an arts background. Only a few have masters degrees (science or arts) in disciplines other than library science. People with the bachelors degree in library science form the majority. Only a small number, eight (1.45O/,), were practising with degrees in some other subject but without library qualification. Apart from law, there is an absence of librarians whose subject background falls within the older, more familiar and respected professions such as medicine and engineering. The dearth of librarians with subject background is attributable to two main factors: (1) the lack of aggressive recruitment by our library directors, and (2) the lack of status of the profession. The fact that only eight people are found without library qualification in addition to their other degrees supports the former view. If our library directors are anxious to recruit people with a specialist background into academic librarianship, the most effective way, in view of increasing undergraduate programmes, is to recruit people with the desired background and send them for library training. This has been suggested previously.*’ The fact that librarianship lacks status, in comparison with the other professions, is not in doubt. This makes the profession unattractive to those with degrees in other disciplines. Even the present economic depression and the consequent flooding of the employment market with unemployed graduates has not helped matters. Rather than go into librarianship, such graduates are increasingly going into law and medicine-two lucrative professions. The lack of government jobs means that people are looking more towards professions which offer greater prospects of self-employment, and librarianship is not one of them. However, the point must be made that if efforts had been made to promote library services amongst graduates of other disciplines, giving the assurance of job opportunities in our libraries, we may have seen a

TABLE

I

ljpe oJlibrary/institution

y -s a

k-, $S .M c A%

ilr sb 6

7

1 7

3 2

1 2

62

5

11

3

8

88

4

1

5

3

1

Qualification S/No

Non-libraq BA

BEd

BSC

LLB

LLM

MA

MEd

MPA

Library PhD MLS BLS FLA DIP/ALA PhD MLS BLS FLA DIP/ALA PhD MLS BLS FLA DIP/ALA PhD MLS BLS FLA DIP/ALA PhD MLS BLS FLA DIP/ALA PhD MLS BLS FLA DIP/ALA PhD MLS BLS FLA DIP/ALA PhD MLS BLS FLA DIP/ALA

where emplcyed

41

15

30

5

7

2

4

6 1 52

1

1

4

44

1 7

7

2 3

1

1

12

1 1 5

1 3 1

2

2 13 1 6 14

11%

A . 0 c II.4 1

I

TABLE

Conlinufd

Qualification S/No 9

10

11

Non-library MSc

PhD

Library PhD MLS BLS FLA DIP/ALA PhD MLS BLS FLA DIP/ALA

BA BSC MA MSC

Total

1

3

3 6

3

2 1 1 1 PhD MLS BLS FLA DIP/ALA

12

1

1

2 12 29

2 18

2 18

2 2

3 32

6

2 12

2 1 3 2 3 23 117

6 207

12 71

4 69

2 27

28 99

24

7 48

59 550

2 I 1

little improvement. However, the dwindling funding of our libraries is an inhibitory factor. It is puzzling that the University of Ibadan Library School, which had championed the call for postgraduate training for librarians, recently indicated its intentions to mount a parallel undergraduate programme. In the absence of publicly declared reasons one can only speculate. Was this decision taken because of the merits of the undergraduate programme which were not seen before, or was the decision based on expediency? It is unlikely that Ibadan has changed its stand on the issue, therefore some other factors may have necessitated the recent move. On the other hand one should not lose sight of the admission problems that the institution has faced from the onset. This decision may have been fuelled by the possibility that the institution is no longer able to justify its continued mounting of the postgraduate programme in the face of difficulties in attracting graduates in other

GENERAL

VERSUS

SUBJECT

SPECIALIST

LIBRARIAN

119

fields. This has been the problem with the postgraduate programme since its inception. It is reported that after 15 years (1960-1975) of existence, Ibadan had turned out only 150 postgraduate students.“’ The Ahmadu Bello University, the other university that runs the postgraduate programme, mostly admits people with an undergraduate degree in library science. These factors may seem to constitute impediments to subject librarianship. It is probably because of this that a few library schools have mounted a hybrid programme of a combined degree (library science and some other discipline). Such degree programmes are a recognition of the interdisciplinary nature of library science as well as the importance of subject specialization. We do not have to run such programmes if our only reason for doing so is because it is done elsewhere. When shall we take the lead instead of following indefinitely?

CONCLUSION

The comments made so far are not meant to imply that the writer does not recognize the changes taking place, and the desirability ofrecruiting into academic librarianship people with a subject background. Issues that could constitute stumbling blocks in the implementation of subject librarianship, such as problems of recruitment of specialist librarians, have been focused upon. Ways and means of tackling such issues must be found as we forge ahead! This is not to say that we do not acknowledge the need for subject specialization in our academic libraries. In future I see subject specialization as a major criterion for appointment in our academic libraries. There is not much choice for our libraries if they have to provide effective services to the academic community. There is no doubt that an individual with two degrees, one in library science and the other in another subject field, provides the required expertise. This view is based on the conviction that, ail things being equal, the specialist would perform better than the generalist in positions requiring subject knowledge. When the major employers of the products of our educational system begin to show interests in a particular level of preparation for practice, there is an obvious need for both employer and educator to come to a round table to analyse the new thinking and its implications for the future. The views of an American university librarian may be a good way to end this discussion. Battin is of the view that, “if the choice lies between credentials and talent, we must opt for the talent and hope that the MLS will follow . WC can brrak through thr barrirrs of

120

A.

OCHAI

misunderstanding that have prevented a co-operative approach to this problem. As a profession, neither employers nor educators can continue to wait for the other side to clean up the act.“24 REFERENCES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Lancour and Williamson had supported the postgraduate and undergraduate level of training respectively. Akinyotu, A. (1971) Proposals for reconstructing library education in Nigeria. Nigerian Libraries 7, April and August, p. 39. Committee of University Librarians of Nigerian Universities (1983/84) Guidelines for Libraries No. 1, p. 4. Avafia, K. (1983) Subject specialisation in African university libraries. Journal of Librarianship 15(3), 183. Nwafor, B. U. (1984) Education for University Librarianship in Nigeria. A paper presented at Bayer0 University Kano, 14-17 April 1984, p. 12. Avafia, K. Op. cit., 183. Danton, J. P. (1967) The subject specialist in national and university libraries, with special reference to book selection. Libri 17, 44. Otto, M. (1982) The academic librarian of the 21st century: public service and library education in the year 2000. Journal of Academic Librarianship 8(2), 85588. Abell, M. D. and Coolman, J. M. Professionalism and productivity: Keys to the future of Academic Library and Information Services (unpublished draft, p. 12). Ibid., p. 19. Battin, P. (1983) Developing university and research library professionals: a director’s perspective. American Libraries, January, p. 24. Havard-Williams, P. (1986) The future of library and information education. Library Waves l(l), 21. Adelabu, A. (1974) Professional staff of tomorrow’s future in African university libraries: some postulates and proposals. International Library Review 6, 299-308. Onyechi, N. I. (1975) Full academic status for Nigerian university librarians, through the divisional/subject specialist plan. Libri 25(3), 188-l 98. Nwafor, B. U. (1981) The problem of the blanket cheque. Nigerbiblios, 5(1-2), 9, 15. Ogundipe. 0.0. (1981) Collection development by subject specialisation. Paper presented at the Nigerian Library Association Seminar on Collection Development, held at Enugu, 2-6 November, 1981. Fadiran, D. 0. (1982) Subject specialisation in academic libraries. Zntemational Library Review 14, 933104. Avafia, K. Op. cit. 183-203.

18 19 Ibid. 86-87. 20 Nigerian National Library: Nominal List of Practising Librarians in 1982. P. (1982) The education, 21 Nzotta, B. C. and Havard-Williams, qualifications of librarians in Nigeria. Libri 32(4), 316326. 22 Battin, P. Op. cit., 22. 23 Agada, J. (1985) The search for an appropriate level of training librarians in developing countries. The Nigerian experience. Journal 17(l), 41. 24 Battin, P. Op. cit., 22.

Nigeria,

training

198 1, and

for practising of Librarianship