Category: 647

In the ongoing discussion of the state of reference, Kenney, Albanese, and Sweeney attempt to put in their thoughts to the conversation that seems to be taking a long time to settle in the library world. From discussions on what modern reference should look like to the declaration that reference is dead, not only does it seem that information professionals cannot agree on the state of affairs of reference, but they also seem to disagree on how reference has gotten to where it is.

Starting with the 2015 and 2016 articles Kenney participated in, broad claims with little evidence are used to make his points. One of the glaring problems I saw with his argument came at the end of his 2015 post, where he states that little formal research has actually been done on the issue he is addressing. If this is truly the case, which, I feel, to a point it is, his claims hold less credence, as there is little evidence to back it up. Still, his perceptions due warrant investigation, which may be the true point he is trying to make. Kenney’s inability to state this is a public library issue and placing the implications of suffering reference on all libraries also concerns me to a point.

His collaboration with Albanese in 2016 addresses some of these issues as other information professionals saw them. I was glad to see that Kenney’s assumptions caught the eyes of professionals in the field. Like Goldwater stated in the Albanese and Kenney post, I feel that the conversation about the state of reference and its future clearly needs to be had, but the assumptions without follow up that are postulated in Kenney’s original post are unwarranted. Even small amounts of evidence to back his claims would have placed his original work in much higher regard, to me at least.

Sweeney attempted to address the many reasons as to why reference is believed to be dead by many in the profession. I agree in his assessment that it is “all about perception,” but I feel he also falls short in his argument. While it seems that his postulation lies with the statement “I think there is something better than reference,” I feel that Sweeney’s arguments become convoluted due to lack of clarity. Yet, maybe this is exactly the point, as the information professionals that are addressing the issue of reference often find themselves incapable of articulating what they truly mean. As he concludes his short piece, I was left questioning whether he was arguing to rid library training of reference training altogether or just enhancing it with the services that would better replace it. The TED Talk he included made this even more confusing, as he seemed sure that all information professionals needed to be aware of Tim’s discussion about the economy and its effect on the environment, but didn’t find it fitting to inform us why he felt this way or how it pertained to the issue at hand.

 

These articles did open up to the suggestion of readers advisory as services that have become more prominent and important to public libraries though. In my search to better understand this portion of reference service, I came across an article about a public library’s unique approach to reference and an article discussing the importance of reader’s advisory from different aspects. Interestingly, the article discussing reader’s advisory at large mentioned the program I found in the other article.

Alison Kastner discussed “The Personal Touch” one Portland, Oregon public library put on readers advisory to better address the needs of users. The My Librarian Program started as a virtual library service privately funded by a foundational grant and this funding has allowed not only the development of the program but user testing that has led to improvements over time. Essentially, librarians associated with the program create profiles to provide general information about their interests and patrons can choose from librarians to seek recommendations. This allows for a more personal connection, and creates a unique interaction between patron and librarian. While the service is virtual in nature, it also allows for the implementation of face-to-face interactions for patrons that wish to use it. The idea behind the entire project was to humanize the librarian to encourage interaction, while using the interests of librarians to provide better reader advisory service. Focus groups and other user testing has informed the library of the program’s flaws, which has allowed for the program to grow into a service more tailored to the needs of the patrons. Still, Kastner discusses that their private funding is not something that all libraries have access to, and provides information for making steps toward programs like this in instances where such funding may not be available. Interestingly, it seemed their take away from this was that the downfall of reference and readers advisory, at least in their library, was that people misunderstood what librarians do. This is not the first time this notion has occurred to me, and, so, I wonder if this is the issue that information professionals may need to be addressing.

The second article on readers advisory had Duncan Smith addressing the who, how, and why of readers advisory. Arguing that reader’s advisory is the “cornerstone of the public library’s future,” Smith addresses the service from the aspects it must be understood to be implemented (Smith, 11). In reaction to Bill Crowley’s article “Time to Rethink Reader’s Advisory Education?,” Smith addresses the points Crowley makes by stating his opinions on the who, how, and why. While Crowley feels that reader’s advisory education should be implemented throughout library schools, Smith counter argues stating the like other library services, reader’s advisory can be taught on the job. He states that RA needs to be professionalized, but not necessarily at the degree level. This is furthered as he goes into his discussion of “how.” Pulling from studies into the implementation of reader’s advisory in libraries, Smith gives suggestions on how best to capitalize on reader’s advisory practices. While it is not necessarily an issue of librarian education, he does feel that institutionalized standard practices, which can be implemented through training, peer coaching, and performance reviews, is the best approach to the issue. Still, the “why” is the crux of the argument. While Smith argues that funding goes best with education-based RA practices, he states that there is a resistance to these due to an anti-fiction sentiment that has been overcome in libraries within the last century. Yet, in his work he also feels that librarians do not properly address the influence of books, and that may be why the acceptance of reader’s advisory training has come by so slowly. Essentially, Smith states that the lack of education in reader’s advisory is not about education at all, but lies with the profession’s general attitude toward books, which is interesting given the nature of the librarian profession.

Beginning class with our discussion of the readings, and the seamless transition into discussing the unobtrusive observations really made me feel that many of my fellow classmates had similar reactions to this week’s preparation as I did. While I thankfully did not have issues with Course Reserves, I did not find the situation that did occur all that surprising. Maybe that unsurprising response is the reason that I bought the book outright, so I knew I would face no such hardship. The discussion that followed this about how we could fix some of these issues really spoke to me though, especially the bit about proper training. Do these issues really come down to training? I think in some instances, maybe even most, the answer is definitely yes. These readings made me even more self-conscious about my work in the library. While I do not work at a reference desk specifically, the lack of an individual reference desk makes me a stop for many patrons. My lack of training, or more, my training by equals that received the same minimal training as I did, makes me feel inadequate in most cases. Like our fellow classmate said, I don’t even have the knowledge to direct patrons to rooms, or answer questions that are often asked in my position. A more thorough training, possibly by someone other than a fellow student, may have better prepared me for some of these interactions. I do notice that I try to counteract that knowledge gap with a good attitude and an approachable presence, which we have discussed, may be more helpful than I realize.

In our more in depth talk about the unobtrusive observations, this line of thought continued, as the interactions we had with others led me to inwardly contemplate my own interactions with patrons. It seems most of us have our own understandings of bad service in the library, often with instances occurring prior to this assignment, and, due to that, we are all blown away when we receive exceptional service. Yet, when we discuss why these interactions continue to have such results, we lack comprehension on why there isn’t a stronger push to provide better library service. This is not to say that librarians are not working on this issue, but, as patrons, we don’t necessarily see any dramatic changes. Other than my changes as a patron over time, my library experiences tend to reflect the same types of interactions. Though, I do wish we had gotten a little further into the discussion about subjectivity of the elements in the instrument, I do think the light touch on how all interactions are subjective is important to note. The same interaction could occur for both people, and they would have different understandings and feelings about them.

The practice reference interviews was a very interesting, unsettling, but, in the end, helpful exercise I feel that not only do I need to work more on, but all library workers, and future library workers, need to have. In particular, I noticed as we worked as a team in the first exercise, we did fall into the routine of essentially playing “20 Questions,” a communication accident Ross et al. describes. Even in this barrage of questions among a group of library students, obvious questions were not asked by the librarian trying to provide reference (How did we not consider asking if the patron knew her name?). The biggest issue I faced was when I was role playing as the patron myself, as I constantly wondered how much the patron would reveal about their inquiry to a library professional in such a brief interaction. It seems that my fellow classmates had various degrees of that as well, especially when it came to the situation addressing possible drug use by a child. While one poignantly avoided addressing the issue in her interaction, some broke down after some questions to reveal the true nature of the inquiry. These varying degrees of patron openness must be accounted for, which I think is the importance of practicing microskills, especially those that help build rapport.

It is not often that I leave this class thinking more about the warm-up than the actual class interaction, but, I couldn’t get Ranganathan’s five laws out of my head. Maybe it’s because I now have words to describe beliefs I’ve always had. Maybe it’s because the discussion that came out of it was truly interesting. Or, maybe it’s because I’m going to have to track down that 500 page book and take in the knowledge in all that extra free time I don’t actually have. In any of these cases, I just feel, someway, that I am not quite done with these laws. So, I want to address them a little more thoroughly here.

Books are for Use

While this just seems obvious, even as early as the writing in 1931, the importance of making the statement just rings true. No book was ever written without a purpose, and, denying that purpose denies the importance of what books truly mean to the world. Literature is at the forefront of education. Whether you are a student striving for knowledge or a patron seeking entertainment, every book has a purpose and that purpose changes from person to person. While I pride myself on the small collection of varying volumes I have collected over the years, the fact that most of them reside in boxes due to lack of space seems like an injustice. Neatly packed away, awaiting the day to grace the shelf again, leads to an inaccessibility that denies a book its purpose. In more than one instance through the years, I have ravenously searched through these boxes in attempts to find a particular quote from a particular book that has only fleeted through my head. This travesty of storing books out of sight also makes the sharing of the knowledge within the books almost impossible, as, if I want to suggest a reading to someone, and I know I have the volume myself, it is extremely difficult to provide the physical copy of the reference I make.

Every Reader his/her book : Every Book its Reader

While I understand the separation of these two laws, in understanding them, they meld into one for me. The reflection of a book on its reader and the readers reflection on a book are essential to understanding what makes up a full person, or, at least a person that is a reader. From books that entertain to literature that educates, every piece every consumed by a person places a new piece into the jigsaw that creates the entirety of that reader. Some books of entertainment have shaped me far more than the academic volumes I’ve consumed in my past. I reference many things back to literature. Childhood memories of immersing myself into J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series comes to mind just as quickly as the first time I read Emily Yellin’s Our Mother’s War and truly understood the part women played in all aspects of World War II, from military to baseball. These placed important aspects of myself into my greater being and shaped the ideas and values I still carry with me. Understanding these reflections also speaks to why I reference literature whenever I can, as it grounds me in the world I know, and sharing the knowledge of a book, or the book itself, shares a piece of my identity with someone. The understanding of both these laws, from the perspective of librarian, could go further to solidify the neutrality that the ALA claims to strive for in attending to patrons. If the reader is a reflection of a book and the book is the reflection of the reader, how can we deny the information that can be garnered by such a truly important interaction?

Save the Time of the Reader

This law can be applied to both organization and education. In organization, as the law was intended, libraries should attempt to decrease their intimidation factor. Humans, by nature, seek an organized way of living. Categorical beings, being able to understand organizational structures is of the utmost importance to encourage use. With proper organization, readers perceive better access, though the conversation about this organization is constantly in flux as the library evolves. These ideas build on the concepts of readers as students as well. The more one knows about the foundation of a subject, the less time they have to spend in building new knowledge on the understanding of foundational knowledge. For example, understanding the foundations of history allows for the building of new historical knowledge on the foundations of what is already known, saving a reader time as they become more familiar with topics. A proper organizational scheme in libraries also fosters this type of knowledge accumulation and time saving.

The Library is a Growing Organism

If the library did not grow, its purpose could not be understood. The focus of research in the library speaks to this. To help accentuate the importance of the library, to the reader and to the nonreader (though, the nonreader just seems like a sad state of being), research into libraries fosters the ability to emphasize the value libraries on their own hold. If libraries are responsible for the accumulation of knowledge and the shaping of world views, their influence on the people it serves, in and of itself, shows growth as an organism. As people that have been touched by these institutions grow, converse, and act in the world, the library grows with it. Then, to continue to serve new readers and current readers, the institution itself, must grow, bringing in new physical (and now digital) resources to serve the needs of new, current, and potential users to spread its influence and quench a thirst for knowledge. Just as the book lives within us, once a reader has consumed it, the library also lives within us, once it has served our information needs just once. Bringing that influence with us into the world, as readers, we help the library to grow.

The overarching theme of all these readings, I feel, can be summed up in five words: information needs are always evolving. From Janes and Taylor discussing how the future holds two possible outcomes for the information profession to O’Brien and Greyson’s discussion on information needs as a whole, the flexibility of information needs was paramount. For O’Brien and Greyson, their main point was that information needs change and that information seekers have various reasons behind why they search for answers in the way that they do. I think the most important idea to come from their entire chapter is that information seeking is not always the response to information needs. Yet, it is just as important that they state that needs cannot be observed while actions can, as they proposed research approaches to help bridge the gap for the people who do not information seek for their needs (O’Briend and Greyson in Hirsh). Their brief discussion about context forming needs also speaks to the way that people seek information, as the context that formed the need may also be the context keeping a person from responding with information seeking behavior.

Simmons follows the discussion of information needs with the logical next step: finding information. I enjoyed that she was clear in stating, regardless of the interface, mediations for information to seeker should always have the following characteristics: quality service, knowledgeable process, and user education. These three qualities have been discussed at length in lecture and indirectly through our other readings, but having them laid out as the pillars of information intermediation made the ideas much more concrete. The varying types of reference that have developed as the information profession has changed has also been interesting. I think the most interesting concept I saw here was “Librarian with a Latte,” as I find that this would be an odd interaction for most. While I am much more likely to make an appointment with a reference librarian, I understand the appeal of placing a librarian on a campus coffee shop might have for some. It was also nice to see that embedded librarians were discussed, because I know it has been much easier to speak with Shevon knowing that she has knowledge of our particular program and can help me navigate information from that perspective. The emphasis of convenience and scalability, I feel, may be the take-aways from this chapter, as I have seen both discussed over and over in the research of trying to highlight the importance of libraries in the university structure.

Janes and Taylor both attacked the issue regarding the “future of reference” (Janes, 21). While both agreed that there are two outcomes as the reference world changes, revolutionary and evolutionary, both focused on the evolutionary path (Taylor, 179). Janes provided an overview of what reference is, for, and how information professionals will always have an edge on the rest of the population in this particular field. Janes seemed to conclude that while ready reference’s importance may deplete as more information is available at a user’s “finger tips,” there are services that reference librarians will always be better at and that those skills should be the focus, moving forward, as they will never be in short supply (Janes, 25). Taylor’s approach addressed the current situation of the reference librarian and how it may develop as the profession moves forward with changes. Like Simmons, Taylor addresses the reference librarian as information intermediator, discussing the formulation of a query and search (visceral à conscious à formalize à compromised) to the importance of the reference librarian’s knowledge of the process (user terminology à system terminology), and how a library packages such services to appeal to the user (wholesaler vs. retailer).

Kuhlthau addressed the search process instead of the information professional, providing several helpful models to make the process more visual to those that do not understand the most common steps. The Search Process, according to Kuhlthau, appears in 6 stages that have varying feelings and actions attached to them: Task Initiation, Topic Choice, Exploration (General à Focused), Focus Formulation, Focus Information Collection, and Conclusion of Search (Kuhlthau, 38-40). Decision points throughout this process are determined by personal interest, assignment requirements, available information, and time allotment (Kuhlthau, 42). Kuhlthau’s major findings and problems are what draw the most interest though. Throughout her research, she seems confident in concluding that this process does meet the same criteria of the constructionism process, which she set out to prove, but that understanding and actual experience differ for the user and that librarians are only seen as source locators instead of additional points of reference.

I feel that these readings pulled some ideas that have been touched on into greater focus to me. While I had these general understandings of information needs, the search process, and the evolution of the information profession, these articles provided more concrete understandings. The connections I was capable of making to the real world throughout these readings was also important as well. While I was amused by the different types of references Simmons discussed, they stuck with me more because I could relate Shevon to such innovations. In reading Taylor, he quoted a librarian from one of his interviews, stating, “If you don’t interrupt me, I don’t have a job,” in response to a patron apologizing for making a query (Taylor, 180). This brought me back to my former university’s library that post signs on their computers encouraging patrons to interrupt them. Actually, it made me think about how I found it odd that the same thing does not seem to be a trend in the University of Michigan’s library system.

(NOTE: Title quote is from Dewey, “Libraries as Related to the Educational,” p. 5.)

It still takes my breath away sometimes when I can read the passion someone feels for a subject in their words. Samuel Green and Melvil Dewey are two such characters that have words dripping with passion. While Green’s work seemed to be a pamphlet, Dewey’s call to action was clearly a speech and reading it aloud to myself in my apartment made the words carry so much more weight. Two men of the same era, determined to establish the library at its rightful place among education and the clergy, carved particular strains into their communities to emphasize the importance of free public libraries. While I didn’t agree with all of the things they stood for, as these men were very much products of their time, they instilled the sense of urgency to create this realm of libraries that I believe we still need today. No one may deny the importance of libraries in our culture (well, most people anyway), but we have lost the urgency (aside from the current professionals) to truly make libraries’ evolution a top educational priority.

   Many similar themes flowed through the works of both men, but their close association and connections to similar institutions probably allowed for this. Green’s focus remained on the responsibilities of the librarian though. His examples highlighted the vast knowledge a head librarian should possess, which made me think of the NYC reference librarians of yesteryear that Kristin has mentioned. Though, I suppose they got their start from librarians like Mr. Green. He focused on the guidance a librarian should provide to “wholesome” materials of “rational curiosity” that did not overshadow the “degree of enlightenment” a patron may possess (Green, 77). Librarians, and their helpful female assistants (to encourage patrons with a sense of approachability) had certain responsibilities in their guidance, and Green’s views on what made libraries popular emphasized the proper ways for a librarian to act. Rapport, experience, and friendliness of a librarian coupled with a diverse, accessible collection set libraries apart from one another (Green, 78). These types of behaviors were further reflected in Dewey’s convocation.

Dewey addressed the State of New York to call for action a new type of library, yet he wasn’t really calling for a library, but to strive to create an ideal library through a process (Dewey, 2). His call to action was to consider modernization and played off the pride of New York. He appealed to the historical avenues of New York LEADING to the establishment of new standards in a field he believed they had fallen behind in. If the state waited much longer, he urged, it would again follow in the footsteps of progress, instead of piloting it (Dewey, 16). In order to get his point across, Dewey used metaphor upon metaphor that drew from his vast knowledge, highlighting the prowess of a librarian’s reference abilities and creating a more persuasive argument. Then, he called to the parts of life he knew would pique the interests of his audience the most: school and church. He called for the establishment of a “people’s university” as a way to move past the negative associations of inaccessible libraries of old (Dewey, 8). Stating that the goal of libraries, like that of schools and the church, was to rid the culture of incompetents, he introduced the librarian as a customer service representative that was improving society through their guidance (Dewey, 2).

     Samuel Green and Melvil Dewey are two very prominent figures in library history, but I knew very little about Green, and, therefore, curiosity got the better of me. Upon finishing his article, I did a quick search on him and came up with a plethora of information. Like Dewey, he was involved with the formation of the American Library Association and had ties to the School of Library Economy at Columbia University. While these are expected from a man that shared an important time period with Melvil Dewey, it is the other things he accomplished in the field that struck me. Green is known as the pioneer of libraries being public service oriented. His expansion of library access, from opening the doors on Sunday to establishing an Interlibrary Loan system, led to many of the modern pieces of libraries today. His father founded the Worcester Public Library, which he later ran as Head Librarian from 1871 to 1909. When he retired, the Worcester Public Library created the Samuel Green Resignation Memorial. Just as important as Dewey in the American public library movement, I was actually a bit disappointed that I hadn’t learned more about him previously.

It will never get old how lively this class is, whether we are discussing difficult materials or going wildly off-topic as librarians are so known to do. The more I sit in and take in the course’s atmosphere, the more I am reminded of a professor who used to state that focusing history graduate students was like herding cats. He would often make several references throughout a seminar discussion about his inability to wrangle the “cats” of the class, and every time Kristin tries to get us back on topic, his voice pops into my head with a little chuckle stating, “It’s just like herding cats.”

Still, the inability to stay strictly on-topic is not necessarily a bad thing. Our anecdotes and branches bring in interesting qualities to our discussion that staying completely on-topic would never allow for. I think this was particularly highlighted, in a good way, through our brief presentations in the class this week, and emphasized why such paths are not necessarily hindering our learning in this profession. Librarians and other information professionals work with a variety of people at various education levels and other diversifying factors. General knowledge about an array of subjects, whether it is slang (“perfect 10”) or visual word mapping (“outer space”  “astrology”  “stars”), slightly off-topic discussions opens our minds to different subjects and ideas. The diverse collection of perspectives in such a small class I think is even more important for this type of learning. I know I have personally gone home from several questions and looked further into concepts, ideas, and subjects that have been brought up in class that I didn’t have a general working knowledge of when it was mentioned. I think it makes me a better student, in the long run.

A round discussion on readings in any course is always extremely helpful for me, but this one, in particular, was important. Due to the varying backgrounds of the classes in the entirety of the School of Information, everyone picks up on something different from readings. While this is true no matter what type of group you come in contact with, it is especially true in a program like this, and it is really appreciated. It is clear that there are several people in our class that are comfortable with Search and with Statistics. While I feel confident that I can often “muddle through,” I am not confident enough to consider myself comfortable with either. Hearing from these individuals and noting some of their thoughts on the readings actually helped me to further understand the pages of notes that I took on the material. Their perspectives and ideas actually make me want to become more comfortable. I know, especially as I reorient my way of thinking, that confidence is further being shaken. I knew how to conduct searches and write in my other focus, and now I feel as if I am in a foreign world trying to do the same for this focus. While the same principles should easily transfer from one profession to another, being confident in the types of sources and how to search for them does differ. The comments about both the statistical and search topics made me feel like it is possible to regain such confidence in this new field, by working with colleagues who understand certain aspects of information better than I do, and by employing new approaches to enhance my searching skills.

This week’s readings brought in a lot of information about the same subject in so many different ways that, at times, it was difficult to process. While I enjoyed the Markey chapters that addressed the more formal terminology in approaches to searches, I feel it was harder to comprehend because I first dealt with the Bergson-Michelson materials that address the same material in a much more informal way due to the audience she is often addressing. As she stated in her chapter, “informal language lightens the tone,” and while she was speaking of another scholar, I found Bergson-Michelson’s work much easier to digest because of the tone she took in both her webinar and her writing (Bergson-Michelson, 45).

Bergson-Michelson’s webinar made me think about sources in a more concrete terms than I ever have in research. The idea of imagining your source was a completely new subject to me. While she discussed this idea I understood it as the way I did process my search for sources, but having a way to organize my thoughts in such searches may have made research more productive in my past. This was made clearer as she began her discussion on the differences between fishing searches and stepping-stone sources. Being able to distinguish the two make searches and research more productive in the long run. She makes a statement that most students are not educated how to search, which I can agree with. My research practices, by the time I needed to develop them, were expected to already have been established. A concrete approach to searching and researching as Bergson-Michelson sets out in her webinar, I feel, will create more capable information users from an earlier age. We shouldn’t be expected to either know how to research or not, all users should be given the foundations that Bergson-Michelson has so clearly established here.

Bergson-Michelson continues her clear-cut explanations in “Statistical Storytelling” chapter. It is often easy for me to forget a common theme that was brought up throughout this chapter, data is evidence not an argument, which makes statistical storytelling so important in writing. Bergson-Michelson hits this fact even harder in her discussion in the importance of language and how language changes from reading, writing, and searching. She also brought to the forefront concepts that often slip through the cracks when researching and writing. I know I’ve forgotten them on more than one occasion. Audience and users matter. The audience must be thought of when a researcher writes, as to provide the correct type of language for optimal understanding. This exact approach is also why the user matters. To properly analyze evidence, whether it is an historical document or a secondary source, the writer is important to understand motivations, biases, and perspectives of the topic being addressed. The way that writers discuss and interpret data to support their argument, for example, provides understanding for the writer’s views, but most be written in a way that the target audience can understand, which is why statistical storytelling becomes so important for data-based writing.

Markey was much more formal in the discussion of search and its intricacies. While she provided a great general overview of search and brought up tools I didn’t know existed (like Controlled Vocabularies in databases), her work was more difficult to digest after the informality of Bergson-Michelson. Still, Markey took keys of the search that I believed I understood decently, and broke them apart in a way I never considered. The CV was the one that sticks out most poignantly, as I search most databases the same way, not understanding the basic makeup of their search abilities. I will consider this in my future research, and hopefully it will make my searches more fruitful.

Josh Catone’s “Google-fu” also will influence the ways that I search. While I do not often do research on Google, unless I am searching for a known item on Google Scholar upon failing to find it in a database I have access to, I was completely unaware of how to set up a true Google search to get the best results. The infographic was not only helpful, it opened my mind to a whole new way of considering the search engine in the beginnings of my research process.

Learning new libraries and library systems can be a daunting task, and I really appreciated the time we took to look at Hatcher Graduate Library. Pulling from the questions the class was asking, I feel that this was a mutual feeling. In my short time on campus, the only campus library I have been in is the one I work at, the Art, Architecture, and Engineering Library on North Campus, and because of my duties there, I have not truly gotten the chance to fully explore its wonders, though it is on my long list of things to do. The entire University of Michigan’s Library System, is complex and hard to understand at times, and this look into how one library is set up can open doors to make other libraries throughout campus more approachable. Even just the task of finding the Gallery was intimidating at first, as I did not come in the main entrance of Hatcher, but the moment I hit the stacks, it was like coming home. I have spent many days among the stacks in different libraries, and I hope to become just as comfortable with the stacks of Michigan’s campus libraries as well.

The reference guide activity following out tour, I feel, brought the lesson home. While it is important to understand how a library or library system is set up and run, it is even more important to be able to do your duty as an information professional. This exercise I feel encapsulated the importance of understanding the plethora of resource materials at the fingertips of most librarians, whether they be print or electronic materials. I think the most interesting part of this assignment was being able to compare materials that are accessible in both formats and how using these guides changes from one platform to another. The Chicago Manual, for example, I find to be much easier to browse through the print copy than the online interface, though I know those preferences most likely differ from person-to-person.

The introduction of these seemingly traditional reference resources also opens the door to more unorthodox materials that may be used, depending on the audience the information professional is trying to serve. While researchers often need access to references such as basic statistics or biographical information, children may require references to other resources that draw in their attention. While it is less likely to be adopted by the world of information professionals, an article Kristin sent me after a conversation we had following class kept bringing me back to the idea of reference resources, especially after our exploration of the Reference Reading Room and the types of sources I saw on the shelves. When Brian Ash and Yehudi  Mercado were approached by Rabbi Shmuel Herzfeld about a Yom Kippur project to engage young Jewish children in learning about the importance of the holy days, a reference resource was created that engaged the religion’s literature in a fun way that kept children interested. Exploring more types of reference resources that have developed in these sorts of ways definitely holds some interest for me as well.

Katie Dunn’s informational session was extremely appreciated with all the overwhelming information we have been thrown in the last few months as we prepared to begin our journal with UMSI. The information has just been increased since the semester began, and it was a little refreshing to hear about opportunities that were really just focused on our interests instead of trying to sort through all the information about other aspects of the program. Notes I jotted down as she spoke will be extremely helpful as I start to build on my ideas for the next steps in my career. The information that was supplemented by this by some of the second years somehow made it seem much less daunting than the constant stream of information we are supposed to be digesting and acting upon through our devices.

The jobs that the rest of the class pulled were varying in interest and made me think of different ways I could enter the library profession myself. While the academic approach has always been my focus, I have also never really considered the public library system, which was an important staple from my own childhood. My interests for my future oddly meld those two together, as well, and some of these job descriptions made me consider putting a little more work into the public library aspect, as my limited experience is strictly with academic institutions. While we joked about jobs calling for “pizzazz,” positions that inherently hold that type of description seem interesting and something I might want to consider in my professional capacity to connect with different members of diverse communities.

Our final portion of class, as we discussed the Code of Ethics, Bill of Rights, and Freedom to Read Statement from the American Library Association, I feel, truly brought to life the essence of this course’s personality. Extremely critical for varying reasons, I feel that the conversation was valuable and made me think of the documents in entirely different ways than I already was. Emma’s point about the nuances between “neutral,” “equitable,” and “equal” were among the top comments that truly made me rethink, again, what I had read. While I had also made the mental note that “equal” and “equitable” mean different things and the documents focused on “equitable access,” I had not noticed that at no point is there a call for librarian neutrality. This, I believe, opens up a new slew of issues within the right to information for users, but I think it is important by not addressing the librarian as neutral, these documents did a service by maintaining that librarians are bias, as all people are due to their own lives and experiences.

Part I of Information Services Today: An Introduction reintroduces the idea of information professionals to me in a way that I had not thought of them before. Librarians are not just librarians anymore, but full-fledged information professionals that helm a ship of possible services to be used at the will of the people. Understanding the people and the services available are essential for an information professional to be successful and this introduction to the profession today provided a compact and easy-to-understand overview of what it truly means to be an information professional, from the political, social, and cultural implications that are attached to every profession and career. Even as a constant user of library services, I often forget the importance of providing technology services, which this summary was clear to indicate was essential to the profession today. Information Services Today is also clear in stating that a librarian is an information professional, but not all information professionals are necessarily librarians (Hirsh, 3-4).

The importance of community, a topic that appeared in last week’s discussion, was also addressed, and the issues that come with it, such as denoting what the nature of the community being served truly is (Hirsch, 20). This may be due to the fact that the information communities being served may differ from other communities surrounding the information organization providing services. The final chapter of Part I continued to highlight these issues with community including: multiculturalism, inclusion, and diversity (Hirsch, 28). In a world that continues to emphasize the need for inclusion, a profession that is meant to address equal access to information for everyone cannot overlook the importance of multiculturalism. To achieve the goal of true cultural competence, there must be a diversity of services and collections that address the intersectionalities of people seeking information. Cultural competence thus makes the information profession more integral and helps information organizations reach their full potential through a mission to serve (Hirsch, 35).

The American Library Association’s (ALA) “Code of Ethics,” “Bill of Rights,” and “Freedom to Read” statement continue to highlight the importance of community and access to information. Speaking to the idea of cultural competence, each of these documents commits the information professional to providing a safe environment to all people to inspire a collaboration of information from all perspectives. These statements go so far to say that intervention to those attempting to prevent the dissemination of information may be needed to assure that all users are capable of remaining able to expand their knowledge regardless of anything deemed controversial. This means information professionals should not advocate censorship and should provide information regardless of their own biases, as the freedom to read and think critically is essential to the maintenance of democracy.

Due to my own academic background, historical issues stuck out to me that are not addressed in the readings, or, at least, not addressed as a historian would discuss them. Though, I suppose that should be expected in a text that is addressing the information profession. Hirsch states that “information organizations that fail to engage diverse communities are likely also to fail to preserve their historical records,” which speaks volumes to emerging focuses in the history profession today (Hirsch, 35). I believe this could have been furthered in the discussion on multiculturalism by discussing how this lack of historical preservation has effected historical research due to lack of access to information. In social histories today, there is an ever growing focus on “silent” histories that have not been addressed before. These histories are often considered unorthodox, but are essential to creating cultural competence historically and in the world’s present political climate. For example, an emerging field of study in history revolves around the LGBTQ community, as this history has been silenced throughout the centuries, and evidence has become increasingly difficult to find. A failure to engage with this community by information professionals could continue the difficulties of securing historical preservation for this community.

The original publications of the ALA’s documents on access to information also bring up interesting historical concerns. The “Code of Ethics” and “Bill of Rights” were both published in 1939 and included terminology to encourage equal access for everyone, yet libraries, paired with the Catholic Church and several school systems, were part of the censorship movement in the 1940s that led to comic book burnings that mimicked the book burnings of Nazi Germany. The “Freedom to Read” statement which furthered this idea of access to all people on information of all perspectives was published in 1953, just one year before another round of censorship rocked the literary world when comic books were officially censored due to the popular book, Seduction of the Innocent, that scared a generation to the effects comic subject-matter was having on children, depleting a rich literary and art genre for decades to come. If these issues were had at the original publications of such documents, is it any wonder that there are still issues surrounding these notions of equal access to all people and all information today?

In a search for postings I may qualify for once I finish my education and one I may qualify for after 3-5 years of experience, I came across two levels of outreach positions that would focus on client relationships. With the experiences I hope to attain while at the University of Michigan, I feel that I would qualify for the Williams College position of Reference and First Year Outreach Librarian. This would highlight my skills with the social sciences, the specialty the reference librarian should have, and my interactions with users at the university level would enhance the skills I want to develop as an information specialist. These skills would also provide me with the experience I would need for the job I found for 3-5 years after entering the workforce: the UCLA Head of Outreach and Community Engagement for Library Special Collections. The importance of user outreach to further encourage information seekers to use information organizations and the focus on specific work, such as reference or special collections, would better prepare me for my ultimate goal to run an information organization that specializes in a specific topic. Such a position would require extensive knowledge and experience with topic focuses and community outreach.