Sept 29th readings

The readings this week made me want to sit down and read to my kids.  I know how important literacy and reading, in all its forms, is. Some of the statistics in the articles were a little shocking to me. People in the US watching 27-30 hours of TV a week (21 Ross), as well as finding that literacy skills aren’t actually declining.

One point in “The Company of Readers” was that throughout history, whenever the way we read has changed, people have assumed that reading would be changed for the worse. Socrates believed that the written word was not as good as the spoken word. Printing presses made the written word more available, but people felt the “quality” of mass produced literature was sub-par. This relates to the topic of e-readers my group will be presenting on. Are they a good thing? How will they change the way we read? What about blogs? Social networking sites? Many people think that doing much of our reading on the internet will lead to decreased literacy skills, but apparently so far, it has not.

This article seemed to be saying that any reading is good reading. While I agree with that, I still think some reading is better than others. It’s hard to learn how to think critically about something you have read when it is 2 sentences long.  I’m not saying the only good reading is a 1000 page tome on a scientific subject, but there is certainly more value in some things than in others.  As librarians, it is not our job to judge too harshly when making choices of what to add to collections or what to recommend to patrons. I think this will be a hard line to walk, finding reading materials that I personally think are not the best choices.

The Pawley article was interesting in that she was talking about the difference between writers and readers, and how they are viewed by different schools of thought. The thought I kept returning to as I read this article, was that the line is continually blurring. Take our blogs as an example, we can write about what we have read, and publish it for anyone to see. Does that make us readers or writers? We’re both, and I think that the division between readers and writers will continue to shrink.

She also talked a lot about the importance of the “middle layer” in reading. Meaning reading materials that come from somewhere other than a traditional publisher. Reading materials from a church, or a book club, or an ethnically centered group.  I never thought about the distinction between these types of reading materials before, but essentially publishers are commercially driven, and other types of organizations, presumably, are not. This will make a difference in what types of writing they publish, especially about topics that are not currently popular.

A few thoughts on last night's discussion

When we first started discussing a "race neutral" space in class last night, I was hoping we would discuss what that would look like. As far as I can see, there is no such thing as truly race neutral, because the neutrality would all depend on what metrics you use to define neutral.
To give an example, would you be neutral based on the reported number of "races" in a community? Say the community is 54% race A, and 46% race B, would you then have 54% books race A might be interested in, and 46% books race B might be interested in? But say the users of the library are 90% race A and 10% race B, would you then balance your collection 90/10 based on usage? And who decides what is a book any give race might want? There is a bias built into that decision right there.
Could you make the library neutral by making the collection reflect the books actually checked out at the library? Taking into account all books gotten through ILL, could you build a neutral collection that way? If 50% of books checked out are on topic A, 25% on topic B and 25% on topic C could you then build a collection that is 50/25/25? But that doesn't reflect the wants of the whole community, that only reflects the wants of the library users. Perhaps members of the community can't even get what they want at the library, and so they don't use it.
This is a really sticky, convoluted problem, and I can't see any clear answer. I hope this makes sense, since I haven't even had my first cup of coffee yet...so feel free to comment.

The State of Idaho Libraries

The articles I read touched on a variety of topics we have or will discuss in class. What is information, what constitutes a book and how to deal with some of the social and economic issues that contribute to library use.  I was surprised at the variety of articles I found. I found many listings of the programs available at libraries, but I also found a lot of budget information, and many articles about art exhibits and other services provided by libraries. The following articles are the ones I found most interesting.

The Spine Down the Center is an article about a special type of library, the Idaho Center for the Book. It is a library that concentrates on books as an art form.  Before starting this class I probably wouldn’t have even considered the Idaho Center for the Book a library.  I held a pretty narrow view of what a library actually is. The Idaho Center for the Book is an affiliate of the Library of Congress and its mission is to promote literacy and books in Idaho.  It is supported by grants and the Library of Congress, and is open to the public.

The director of the Center, Stephanie Bacon, says “If they [artists] think in terms of making their own books or if they think about books not behaving in the way they expect books to behave, it enriches their entire relationship with reading and literacy.”  A book, according to the article may be “codex-format works, such as accordion fold, rivet, spiral or ring-bound, loose-leaf/boxed, sculptural or die-cut books. They may be traditionally bound codices with “eccentric” features, such as pop-ups, folded pages, inserts, pull-tabs or volvelles.” Yes, I had to look up the definition of volvelle; I didn’t even know what it was! This article highlights the many different ways people can read, use and understand books.

The second article is about the Caldwell school district linking all their elementary school libraries by computer and keeping them open year round.  Caldwell’s district has grown 46% from 2000 to 2006, and has about 68% of its students coming from low income families. Keeping school libraries open all summer will increase the access that many families have to books. If a student can get to their elementary school, it should be reasonable to assume they can get to the library at the school during the summer. Often times, access can be a big deal for low income families.  Not having to travel as far to get to the library could make a big difference in the amount of books those families read over the summer.

 I received a note from my daughter’s kindergarten teacher at the end of the school year, telling us that if children can just read a minimum of 7 books over the summer they will maintain most of their reading skills. My first thought when I read that was just 7 books all summer?!?! We often read 7 books in 1 day! Granted, I’m a little biased towards reading and literacy, but really, 7 books all summer? If books are made more available by being available year round in every elementary school’s library, children will have more chances to read. Keeping literacy skills honed over the summer, will allow for more progress the following school year.

The last article I read was about the Idaho Falls Public library installing an automated checkout system. I am not a fan of the self checkout for my own use, but reading this article made me appreciate how it can help the library as a whole.

One benefit of the self checkout system is that the library can use the money it would have spent staffing the circulation desk in other areas. No library staff cuts were made as a result of the self checkout system, the money was used in other areas such as new materials.  

The self check outs also increase privacy for patrons. Patrons don’t have their name verified out loud by the librarian, and they can keep the materials they are checking out private. If a patron wanted to check out a book on a sensitive personal subject, they can use the self check out, and no one else will know what they checked out. Hopefully, having the choice to use self check out will make people more likely to check out books on sensitive personal subjects.  

A few thoughts on the readings for Sep 22

“Tunnel Vision and Blind Spots” by Wayne Wiegand

Whew! This was a whirlwind history of the last century or so of librarianship. I actually found it very interesting. I liked how the author pointed out which parts of the motto “The best reading for the largest number at the least cost” libraries held most dear at different points in history. Just because libraries held the same motto for the last 100 years, doesn’t mean they held all parts of that motto in the same esteem throughout that time period.

I thought a lot about bias in library collections in reading this article. The article touches on what some think the public “should” be reading as opposed to what they actually are reading. It talks about clear cut censorship in Nazi Germany and the McCarthy era. It talks about creating subtle bias in the form of book lists published to help librarians choose what to acquire for their collection. Even if the list is put together without the intention of biasing a libraries’ collection, it inherently will. So my question is, how can a library choose materials for its collection without that bias? Is it even possible? How do librarians resist the winds of political change? Is there such a thing as an unbiased library?

“Unequal Legacies” by Pawley

I found this article a little uncomfortable to read. I hadn’t thought about how the established library system has a bias built in. For example, the author points out that there are separate subject heading for “services to” several minority groups. Then the author notes how many cultural groups are not mentioned under the service headings. Thus, implying that those groups that were mentioned were inherently needier than others.  On the flip side of that, if some cultural groups search for or request services more often, wouldn’t it make sense to have a separate subject heading for them? Is that bias, or is it good service?

Reading this article really made me think.  I liked the suggestions the author made to create libraries as a “race-neutral space.”  It is a nice change to read about a problem that needs fixing, and then reading an upbeat conclusion that gives concrete suggestions for fixing the problem. A few of the other articles we read for this week seems a little more doom and gloomy. Lots of problems, without a lot of solutions suggested. Certainly there is no one cookie cutter answer to this problem, but acknowledging it exists is a great first step. I’m interested to hear what others in the class think of some of the solutions suggested.

“Information Technology and the De-skilling of Librarians” by Roma Harris

This article hit home to me, as a woman who formerly worked in research science.  At my previous job, all of the managers were men. The “data workers” at that job were evenly balanced between men and women.  As a woman, I often felt a little bit dismissed, and a little like I had to work harder to prove my worth.  While I’m disappointed to hear that this same hierarchy exists in library science, I’m not surprised.  Unfortunately the author doesn’t seem to give any suggestions to resolve this problem.

The author also predicts, essentially, the demise of librarianship without giving any suggestions of how the field might adapt. This would not be the article to give to people to read if they are considering entering the field of library and information studies!  I do agree that to some extent many skilled jobs will be replaced by computers. However, there always has to be someone around who knows how to work the computers, and someone who knows how to talk to people. Sometimes people don’t know how to articulate what they need, and in that case Google isn’t going to help them, as was pointed out in “This Book is Overdue!”

“Librarians and Party Girls” by Radford and Radford

The authors gave some great background on cultural studies. Being a person with a science background, I don’t have much experience in cultural studies myself. ”Cultural texts…are regarded as not simply reflecting history and society but as integral components in the making of history and society” made things very clear for me. I always thought of media reflecting society, but that is not always the case. I also found the information on stereotyping useful and concise.

I didn’t like the amount of space dedicated to analyzing the movie Party Girl. I haven’t seen the movie, but it sounds a little silly and trite. I think the authors’ point of the stereotypical librarian in the media could have been made without the lengthy description of the movie.  We are all aware this stereotype exists; whether it will change any time soon remains to be seen.  Is that media image of librarians a problem? If it inhibits people from asking for help, it certainly is.

“The Ugly Side of Librarianship” by Klaus Musmann

This article is a brief account of the history of African-Americans and libraries. It discusses the accessibility of libraries, the number of African-American librarians, and how the ALA handled integration.

I found it interesting (and confusing) that different cities had such widely different policies. Some would allow African Americans more or less full access to the library. Some would not allow African-Americans inside at all, and there seemed to be every variation in between. The same could be said for African-American staff at libraries.

One point that struck me was the ALA meeting in 1936 in Richmond, VA which allowed African-Americans to attend, but they were not allowed to eat or stay at the conference hotel. Some people called for a boycott of any city that would not allow full access to African-Americans, but the ALA didn’t listen.  It continued to use hotels that restricted access to African-Americans for several years.

"Libraries", "Information Science" and "This Book is Overdue!"

“Libraries” by Pawley

This article is a very good beginning article on the types of libraries, librarians and the modern (as of 2001) library. It very succinctly summarizes national, public, special, academic and school libraries as well as librarianship.

The author does make the statement that digital libraries threaten the traditional library. I don’t agree with this statement. As digital media becomes more and more common, I think the digital aspects of libraries will keep libraries current, user friendly, and essentially save the “traditional” library, not threaten it.

The author also comments “…while conversion to digital format can solve libraries’ twin problems of space and conservation, it raises new issues, especially the rapid obsolescence of hardware need to “read” the digital materials.” I am interested to learn what has happened between 2001, and the present to address this problem.

“Information Science” by Saracevic

This article discusses, in depth, the definition of information science, and where the field currently stands.  First of all, I found this article a little difficult to read, it was a bit philosophical for me.  For example, when the author answers the question “What is “information” in Information Science” with the answer “We don’t know.”  Farther into the article it seemed to become a little more factual and a little less philosophical.

Something that really caught my attention was in the “proprietary IR” section. The author seems to think that proprietary IR programs are not beneficial to the science. The author says that those particular programs did not communicate their “intellectual advances with the rest”. And “The flow of knowledge, if any, is one sided, from IR research results into proprietary engines. The reverse contribution to public knowledge is zero.” In the sense that the actual programming is proprietary and is not shared, the author is correct. However, I would argue that the “contribution to public knowledge is zero” is not true. Any IR program that is easy to use, and provides good results is helpful to the general public.  While Google might not be the preferred search engine for a lot of things, I think it is a great place for the general public to begin a search on most any topic.  

“This Book is Overdue!” by Johnson

This book was a very upbeat overview of the modern field of librarianship.  I think this book was a great first reading assignment. It wasn’t very technical, and it was very positive.

One area I found to be particularly interesting was how much librarians rely on computer scientists, and their software. I don’t think this position is unique to librarianship. I had the same problems with the software that I used in a biochemistry lab. Software is needed to run the hardware, different software is needed to interpret the data, and still more software is needed to store the data. All this software (and hardware) needs a full-time IT staff to trouble shoot problems and keep everything up to date.  Without that IT staff, most work would come to a halt.

Integrity of electronic records (D.D. Rusch-Feja and McKemmish)

An interesting point raised in “Libraries: Digital, Electronic, and Hybrid” by D.D. Rusch-Feja is that “Traditional subscriptions to scientific literature are being made subject to access only through licensing agreements, as opposed to ownership, as was possible with printed versions of the same item.” Think of all the censorship possibilities built into this function!  This is the same issue I was struggling with when making a decision to purchase an e-reader.  I did decide to buy a kindle, and I do like using it, but I think it has its limitations. The kindle owner does not own the material they are reading. And so, at any time the materials could be changed, or deleted all together. If I’m choosing a book to read at the beach, I may not be as concerned as if I was reading something potentially controversial. Until this technology changes I won’t buy anything for my kindle that I would ever want to reference at a later date.

This topic is addressed in “Traces” by McKemmish in a slightly different way. She comments on the ability of the ruling body to choose information that might be dangerous or controversial, and intentionally destroy it. She discusses this in the broad examples of Bosnia and South Africa, but this is an issue on a very small scale as well. Sometimes individual books and artwork that are considered offensive in some way are changed to be more agreeable. Physical records can certainly be destroyed, but it seems to me that electronic records are subject to many subtle types of tampering as well as deletion.  

I think this is an issue that is related to all forms of electronic media to some degree.  How can information scientists be sure that any data stored electronically is safe from tampering? It may be easier to see when a paper record has been altered. Changes in electronic records can be subtle and hard to see. And not only changes in the record itself, but what about weighting electronic searches to pull up some information in preference over another? I’m interested to learn what steps are being taken to protect electronic records.

My first blog post!

I'm new to writing a blog, but not to reading one. This is my first attempt at posting on my brand new blog, so here's hoping everything goes smoothly.

My 2 favorite readers in action...they look so serious!