Blatant Berry: Old Debates Renew Libraries

It seems like rehash, but it is really rejuvenation

By John N. Berry III, Editor-at-Large, jberry@reedbusiness.com -- Library Journal, 9/1/2007

I just received word from American Library Association (ALA) headquarters that the President's Task Force on Library Education has refined its charge. Leslie Burger, now immediate past-president of ALA, appointed the task force (TF) earlier this year to bring the many efforts aimed at “reforming” library education to some kind of closure. You may remember that library education was the central theme of ALA president Michael Gorman's 2005-06 term. Several events concerned with changing LIS programs took place during his presidency. Prior to that, a series of events, often labeled as “Congresses,” produced minutes and recommendations that have been languishing there at ALA HQ.

This new TF has edited its charge down to a simple but incredibly ambitious effort: to “bring all stakeholders in library education together for a focused and defined period to create a series of actionable recommendations to ensure that library and information science education programs produce librarians who understand the core values of our profession and possess the core competencies of the profession needed to work in today's libraries and information environment.” Now we even hear cries for a rebirth of the undergraduate library degree, an idea killed off in the 1940s when the profession upgraded its entry-level credential to a master's degree.

Meanwhile, in Sacramento and Washington, DC, to name just a sampling, library users have joined the debate on how collections should be built. While centralized acquisitions and selection of materials have become the standard, and popularity is the main measure of a collection, there is new resistance from both working librarians and staff and from a public disappointed when they can't find their old favorites or even “classics” in their libraries.

Then there's the ongoing debate over what Gorman, on the Britannica Blog, has called “The Siren Song of the Internet.” His criticisms of emerging technologies, and signs that such technologies might distort traditional library practice, hearken back to his notorious “Revenge of the Blog People” essay more than two years ago (see LJ 2/15/05, p. 44). John Blyberg of the Darien Library, CT, one of the digital innovators out there, offered an eloquent response on his blog.

These are just some of the many debates in our profession that never seem to end. Most date back to the very origins of the U.S. library movement. They still rage in both the profession and among the public libraries we serve.

My first reaction to being appointed to that library education TF was, “Haven't we resolved this LIS debate yet?” When some DC library users complained that their classics had been weeded, I thought, “Didn't this happen when Charlie Robinson first proposed it in Baltimore County, or when Nicholson Baker attacked San Francisco PL's weeding for its new building?” When I read Gorman's attack on bloggers, I thought, “You're kidding. We had this same debate about film vs. video and quite a bit earlier about the use of the typewriter in cataloging.”

Each time we reopen one of these ancient disputes, each time some new development brings change to our practice and our philosophy, we have to reargue the questions and arrive at our new position. This is how our profession re-creates itself, strengthened and renewed.

Of course, I get frustrated with and tired of hearing the same old polemics about what appear to be the same old subjects. I yearn for the profession to reach some kind of closure in library education, in its methods of building collections and serving users, and, of course, in its application of new information technologies to its practice. Still, these old but newly focused wrangles help keep us and our libraries current, relevant, and dynamic.