Karen M. Drabenstott
Associate Professor
School of Information
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1092 USA
Voice: (734) 763-3581
Fax: (734) 764-2475
karen.drabenstott@umich.edu
New topic -- "Post-MLS Education: Options for Bridging the Technology Gap"
Many thanks to Hunter Kevil for hosting our discussion on "The Paper Library: Beyond the Automated Card Catalog." Hunter's introduction certainly made me pause and think about our traditional methods of organizing information in libraries and how to introduce significant changes in technical services operations. I believe we might revisit some themes that emerged from our discussion in a few weeks when Boyd Holmes focuses on Nicholson Baker's criticisms from New Yorker articles published several years ago. Thanks Hunter for making us ponder some difficult topics.
Let's now turn to our new topic entitled "Post-MLS Education: Options for Bridging the Technology Gap" hosted by Elizabeth Lane Lawley and Jeffrey Lasky.
Elizabeth Lane Lawley is an assistant professor of information technology at the Rochester Institute of Technology. Liz received her MLS from the University of Michigan in 1987, and is completing her doctorate in library and information studies at the University of Alabama. She has worked for the Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress, and supervised PC support for the publishing company CIS. An active member of ALA and LITA, Liz has chaired several interest groups and committees, and served as a LITA board member from 1994-97. In addition to her position at RIT, she runs an Internet training and consulting business that she founded in 1992, and has written several books on libraries and information technology. When she's not trying to integrate LIS and IT perspectives, Liz spends time with her husband and her two young sons, which, unfortunately, doesn't leave her much time for other outside interests.
Jeffrey A. Lasky is professor of information technology at Rochester Institute of Technology. In prior lives, he was an associate professor of computer science at RIT and an assistant professor of information systems at the Graduate School of Management, University of Rochester. An incurable seeker of research sources, Jeff acknowledges long-standing debts of gratitude to the many research librarians who have saved him countless hours of toil. He is currently working on the seemingly impossible task of defining the contours of information technology as a distinct academic discipline.
Please welcome our two guest editors from the Rochester Institute of Technology and take part in the discussion.
Welcome! With this discussion, my RIT colleague Jeff Lasky and I would like to approach an aspect of LIS education that isn't often discussed -- specifically, education that follows the MLS, rather than education that is part of the MLS.
While many MLS programs are now including instruction in the technology that has become ever-present in library settings, there are plenty of existing MLS-holders out there who are struggling to keep up with the changes in information technology, and the effects of those changes on the nature of their jobs.
Here in the Department of Information Technology at RIT, we've begun talking about developing a post-MLS program that will address these needs for updated technology skills in library contexts. What we envision is a version of our graduate information technology curriculum that's geared towards the needs of librarians, and that draws on our considerable experience in distance delivery of programs in order to make this program widely accessible.
We wish to draw on the collective knowledge and opinions of the folks who populate this list, so that our curriculum design meets real needs. Towards that end, we're posing these questions to you:
First, do you believe that there is a need for a coordinated academic program (as opposed to a series of training courses, or an occasional continuing education course) to provide up-to-date knowledge and skills related to library implementations of information technologies?
Second, if your answer to the first question is "Yes," what do you see as the key elements to include in such a program? What do you believe people in our profession need to know in order to survive and thrive in an increasingly technological context?
Related to the second question, we have developed a (very) tentative list of courses to offer through such a program. These six graduate courses would lead to an advanced certificate, (registered with the New York State Board of Education) and would represent 50 percent of the coursework required for RIT's MS in Information Technology should someone completing the certificate choose to matriculate into our degree program. If you'd like to use that list as a jumping-off point for answering the second question, you can view it.
We look forward to hearing your comments on this topic!
Mark T. Bay
School of Library and Information Science
Indiana University-Bloomington
Voice: (812) 323-1483
mbay@indiana.edu
Well, as an education person in a previous life, I have to say that continuing education is a great thing. Doctors and veterinarians are required to do it, as are teachers in many states, so why not librarians and other education professionals? Technology changes so quickly that I think it should be required to do some continuing education just to attempt to keep up with it!
As for what's needed. I'm not really sure, since I'm not in a position to say (not being a working librarian, just a student).
John M. Cys
Catalog Librarian
Moffett Library
Midwestern State University
3410 Taft Blvd.
Wichita Falls Texas 76308-2099
Voice: (940) 397-4175
As a former professional scientist I am a firm believer in continuing education. I was both a teacher and student of continuing education courses. This was a good method of keeping abreast of the latest developments and advances in the field. The courses were in the form of a 1-3 day short course, seminar, conference, or workshop. instructors were usually nonacademic researchers, or practitioners. Limiting continuing education courses to a university setting would effectively eliminate a lot of nonacademic instructors who can teach a 1-3 day short course but cannot teach a semester-long course in an academic setting. Also there are many participants that can attend a 1-3 day event but not a university course. In recognition of this problem some university professors offer 1-3 day workshops or seminars for practicing professionals. The bottom line is to keep in mind the important role of continuing education courses in the nonacademic setting.
Also in my former profession there was a wide choice of continuing education events each year. As a librarian I find the choice rather limited. I would like to see continuing education in librarianship (and information science) increased in both academic and nonacademic settings.
Rich Leegant
MLA Grad Student
Southern Connecticut State University
richardleegant@Ridgefield-CT.com
I also have had a previous life as a computer professional for over 25 years and seminars providing current techniques, methodologies, and concepts were pervasive and considered an integral part of professional growth by most members of the profession. I think it's important to note that often the providers of such continuing professional education were members (or former members) of the academic community and the offerings were geared almost exclusively to day-to-day practitioners. Isn't this the same model we see in medicine, law, and accountancy for continuing professional education? (Albeit theirs is tied to a recertification requirement.) Perhaps this would move librarianship toward a greater universal acceptance as a profession.
Ling H. Jeng, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
School of Library and Information Science
University of Kentucky
502 King Library South
Lexington, KY 40506-0039
Voice: (606) 257-5679
Fax: (606) 257-4205
LHJENG00@ukcc.uky.edu
Liz asked about what contents to include in a post-MLS continuing education program for technology. That's a very specific question that cannot be easily answered without information regarding several parameters.
"Bridging the technological gap" also implies that there is a part of technology competency that MLS graduates need but do not get from MLS education. What is that part? Or is the phrase intended to mean only regular update of technology for MLS graduates?
The options of continuing education to bridge the technology gap will surely vary depending upon how one answers the above questions.
Continuing education as a general concept has been raised almost regularly in our field. The necessity or importance of continuing education has also been affirmed and reaffirmed just as frequently. What I think is one of the most frustrating elements in the issue of continuing education in our profession is the lack of positive correlation between continuing education and employment. A study published in Ohio Libraries (Winter 1996) reached three conclusions regarding a survey among Minnesota public librarians:
Many educational institutions have designed their own continuing education workshops for MLS graduates. And a small portion of MLS graduates do participate in continuing education activities voluntarily, some at their own expense. Yet, any reasonable effort to achieve a broader impact of continuing education on the profession (and lending more credibility to it) must enlist support from two key constituents: the professional organizations and the employers.
If you can specify clearly what benefits participants can get from this past-MLS training in terms of wage increase, promotion and job responsibilities, AND convince employers to take the results of this continuing education activity into account in recruitment and promotion, then you have succeeded more than half way.
Robert W. Bauchspies, Jr.
Research Library and Information Services
Export-Import Bank of the United States
811 Vermont Ave. NW, Room 966
Washington DC 20571
Voice: (202) 565-3982
Fax: (202) 565-3985
robert.bauchspies@exim.gov
Post-MLS education may be No-MLS education if we are to take John Berry's comments regarding the "L" word to heart (available for those who do not subscribe to Library Journal [crf. Feb. 15 editorial]).
As many of the themes we discuss here are interrelated and overlapping, carry overs can be expected. In this light I suggest consideration of the following:
Post MLS education for librarians (I'm assuming) could follow the route of the information industry successes with certification. Certain navigational and searching aptitudes as well as new applications should be self taught assuming that one competency gained from an MLS program would be victory over fear from anything technological, i.e., new applications.
Certification however, designed by major vendors of integrated library systems (ILS) could be a plus. This would allow new graduates to combine a library program with a vendor supported certification which in turn would leverage an expectation on the graduate by would-be employer -- in turn, allowing new graduates ready access to the "experience required" note in many systems positions where additional server or network competency is needed. Someone, for example, with an MLS and III/UNIX certification would find ready employment. It does beg the question again however, regarding the "nebulosity" of the MLS degree. What "kind" of technology is really the issue here in terms of what librarians ought to know. But again with the qualification, no two librarians are the same nor have the same skills, responsibilities, etc. (even though you might think so...).
On the other hand there remains in place (in response to the previous post) a host of post-MLS education opportunities for "bridging the technology gap." These would include training provided at conferences, private organizations, computer based training (CBT) at your local desktop via an online or stand alone tutorial, continuing education at academic institutions, association sponsored programs, discussion lists, etc.
The major point of emphasis I suppose should be that whatever education is sought to buttress and enhance current technology skills and competencies, the initiative must come from the individual. Securing institutional support helps on the financial end as it does provoke the need for justifying the expense. Otherwise you enhance your skills with ambitions which may take you beyond your current employer. Educating those that the need is real is as important as the perception that you would like to enhance your skills should you be in a position requiring argument. The reverse would be that your employer is telling you that you need to know more to do your current job or one which is being ambitioned for you. And yes, they can meet in the middle.
Elizabeth Lane Lawley
Assistant Professor
Department of Information Technology
Rochester Institute of Technology
ell@it.rit.edu
John Cys wrote:
"Also there are many participants that can attend a 1-3 day event but not a university course. In recognition of this problem some university professors offer 1-3 day workshops or seminars for practicing professionals."
I agree. It seems to me that there are two different topics here; one is the traditional form of continuing education, as described above, and as practiced in a variety of professions. The other is what we've been discussing at RIT; something that blends the continuing education idea with the certification topic that was discussed in 1995 on CRISTAL-ED.
While I'm a big fan of short courses (and teach quite a few of them, myself), I also believe that there is much more out there related to technology that librarians need to know now than can be covered in an occasional short course. While a second master's might be overkill for this purpose, a coordinated series of academic classes -- offered in distance learning format so that working professionals could participate in them -- might not be.
So to get a little more discussion started, let me make some assertions for folks to agree or disagree with:
Yes or no?
William Birdsall
birdsall@is.dal.ca
It seems to me practicing professionals face a dilemma. They are under tremendous pressure to keep up on changes in technology, etc. This is reinforcing tendencies towards specialization. Unable to keep up with everything, individuals tend to concentrate on being good in at least one or two areas. Being short of time, they seek out short term learning opportunities, e.g., 1-3 day workshops. However, there are many developments on so many front that practicing professionals should be aware of and that cannot really be covered in short workshops, etc. For example, with regard to technology, I would add telecommunications policy to your list. Telecommunications is the foundation of the "information highway" and policy will impact more on the technology than vice versa. I have been spending a sabbatical researching telecommunications policy. There are obviously important implications for libraries, the "information highway," etc., etc., which are difficult to cover in short presentations (as I found just giving one to a SLIS class and in preparing one for a provincial library association conference.) I can see that some might want to pursue this and similar topics in longer term programs. In sum, what is probably needed is everything from one hour workshops to longer term certificate programs. Alas, not much new to that idea.
Karen G. Schneider
Internet Filter Assessment Project: Councilor-at-Large
American Library Association
kgs@bluehighways.com
Absolutely!
Don't care what it's called, as long as it is coordinated and a lot of it can be offered via distance ed.
Yes, and: evaluating, negotiating licenses for and assessing the impact of fee-based services; long-range technology planning ("long" meaning more than one year or past the end of one's nose); new topics in networked services for special and underserved communities; security and authentication issues for networked services; issues in content organization...
One thing I could see useful would be to take one topic and give it longevity, e.g., I'd like to see formal instruction once a year on new issues in, say, content organization. Metadata, Dublin Core, PICS, RDF, Intercat, etc. As these tools develop, disappear, and change, some formal education in what they are, how they are used, why they exist, and what this means to me would be greatly appreciated. Rather than pick up a patchwork of information now and then at workshops, some of which overlaps and a lot of which is strictly practical, I'd like to build on formal education, stay current, and develop a theoretical framework. And to parlay that into a certificate -- yes, that would be good, and useful.
Shirley Richardson
Catalog Librarian
Angelo State University
San Angelo, Texas 76909
Voice: (915) 942-2221
Fax: (915) 942-2198
Shirley.Richardson@mailserv.angelo.edu
I agree that post-MLS training and continuing education are highly desirable, but I also realize that for many, myself included, it is very difficult to pack up and leave home for even a few days. There is simply no way that I can be away from home more than overnight, for a number of reasons. Therefore, I would say that my best opportunity for continuing education would be distance learning.
If distance learning were offered, with courses available from various universities, I believe that many librarians would take the opportunity to expand their knowledge. I would like to see courses in cataloging offered, as well as courses related to technology. Since I am the only professional librarian involved in cataloging at my university, I do not have the opportunity to discuss cataloging issues with other cataloging librarians which catalogers at larger institutions have. It would benefit me to be able to "catch up" on rule changes, interpretations, etc.
I also liked the suggestion that system vendors provide training and certification in the use of their systems. This would be very helpful, since every system has its individual quirks. Unfortunately, I feel sure that, as another respondent pointed out, the continuing education credits would quite likely go unrewarded by employers.
Robert W. Bauchspies, Jr.
Research Library and Information Services
Export-Import Bank of the United States
811 Vermont Ave. NW, Room 966
Washington DC 20571
Voice: (202) 565-3982
Fax: (202) 565-3985
robert.bauchspies@exim.gov
Regarding Prof. Lawley's comments:
I disagree although you could make a case for a before and after client/server innovation scenario. Moreover as library programs responded with more technology offerings in their curriculum, a knowledge gap developed between the "befores" and the "afters" some of which falling along generational and demographic lines. My experience with librarians and their technology know-how varies greatly and broad stroking comments such as this can be taken by some as near insulting or with silent admittance by others.
Disagree. Continuing education courses often serve to introduce and expose whereby the individual is left with how much detailed knowledge to genuinely absorb. Or they tend to be immersion oriented again with the onus on the individual to learn the details desired.
Agree if you agree with continuing ed being inadequate. Community colleges in our very high-tech region offer cutting edge intensive, competency rated, continuing ed courses where the majority of attendees are working professionals sponsored by their respective employers. Academic courses for technology involve history, theory and time whereas the CE is strictly hands-on in orientation. Big pictures do help however.
Agree in the context that such would plug big holes and provide valuable chronological scope. Information technology is changing so fast however (e.g., NCs) that semester long courses of this sort should be part of an existing MLS or otherwise stated "information studies" program be it at undergraduate or graduate levels.
It really depends of the substance of the certification, by who, how relevant and so on. For those without a clue, any IT certification may sound fancy but might not amount to much. On the other hand those following the industry know what certification credentials leverage salaries, impact change etc. where "value" is broadly defined.
I would only add that a distillation might be worthwhile where IT training can be divided into "core competencies" and "specializations" where basics are expected of everyone with the subsequent electives geared toward specific roles in the library and information arenas. What is core and what is elective remains worthwhile to debate and for who, what objective, etc.
Rick Gates
rgates@nassets.com
I would agree with this. Many library professionals feel that Information Technologies (IT) have little to do with their current tasks, but I think few would argue that their situations will remain so.
I think this depends on the type of learning we're talking about. Those who already have a good understanding of a particular topic would benefit from these short, staccato bursts of update information. For instance, those already quite familiar with HTML could benefit from short courses in cascading style sheets or DHTML.
However, for broader based coverage of the major topics, short courses fall, well... short. Many topics within IT are best learned in a hands-on, up-to-your-neck environment of constant reinforcement. This type of learning would not be well-served by the occasional short course.
For instance, teaching people how to create and maintain Web sites requires a lot of reinforcement and the opportunity to make (and learn from), mistakes.
I agree with the concept of a coordinated series. These technologies do not exist in isolation. Expertise in one area can help greatly in learning others.
Should these be academic courses? If the alternative is "Wally's School of Trucking and Internet for Librarians," then yes. But if the goal is to reach the maximum number of professionals then I think most large academic institutions are going to need to review their policies.
For instance, I teach a grad-level distance course at just such an institution (nameless please). I had several students who wished to participate, but were put off by the high fees for "out-of-state" students.
For academic institutions to be players in this arena, they'll need to think carefully about how to place distance students into traditional geographic fee structures.
To this I would strongly suggest remedial modules in such topics as basic microcomputing. For instance, roughly a third of the problems my students experience can be traced to a poor conceptual understanding of file systems on their own hard drives. Strong understanding of the basics will aid in all these other areas.
I'd also add Web design, and information gathering techniques to this list.
I suppose I'd have to agree with this, though reluctantly. I have some philosophical problems with certification in such a quickly changing area as IT. But if this is the carrot needed for both professional and employer, then so be it.
Comments back to CRISTAL-ED please.
Fran Gaynor
Senior Research Officer
ARC Collaborative Grant
Developmental Assessment of Project Management Competence
Faculty of Design, Architecture and Building
University of Technology, Sydney
Fran.Gaynor@uts.edu.au
Just as the technologies we, and our library users face, change and evolve, so we as professionals must evolve. This brings with it two considerations - the nature of the industry or environment, and the nature of the role of a professional. It's easy to hide behind the rapid changes of technology with comforting thoughts that there is no point in trying to learn to deal with new technologies because as soon as we do another takes over. We will always be behind and our efforts will be fruitless! I PLEAD GUILTY.
One of the problems with many of the innovations of the technologies we deal with are that they determine our roles rather than letting us determine their application. The previous discussion on catalogues is evidence of the reactive, rather than proactive nature of the professionals in this industry. We need to drive the changes and foster the development and utilization of information technologies in our environment. ONE GOOD REASON: How much of the library budget is spent on technologies that don't really add qualitatively to the accessibility or management of information, for users and for us? There needs to be a point from which professionals can guide the implementation and foster change, both within their environment, and within the community of users more broadly.
My second concern is perception of the library professional, both from within the profession itself and the community.
Continuing education is a key to effective performance in any professional role. It should be the responsibility of anyone who holds himself to be "expert" in a field of endeavour to maintain their practice by a) keeping up to date with knowledge, b) competently adopting the techniques used in the field. In libraries this means learning to work with the information technologies, it doesn't have to mean having complete hands on expertise in everything. The ability to manage and work with the technologies is important. (Mind you I recently noticed that the salary level for the IT librarian was twice that of an academic liaison librarian in the same institute. Perceptions of value at work?)
Continuing education does not necessarily mean annual enrollment in course after course to gain external/formal recognition of skills, although these are important. By formal education I mean short course and long courses. The principles of adult education tell us that the individual's own experience, peer networking, critical reflection on practice, are part of the portfolio of learning and development. As an exercise in self-awareness and professional responsibility, perhaps we should question ourselves as to our need for further education in an application of technology. If perhaps the technology itself is the barrier (guilty again) then use our own critical thinking processes to question the role we are playing, or failing to play because the technology has been adopted. This approach puts us back in control by allowing us to make informed choices about our own educational needs. If formal education or short courses are going to help solve the knowledge gap then take that course of action. If wider reading and discussion with peers can help, use those informal strategies. The benefit from formal learning experiences are realized when we are motivated by interest or need to seek new information. Once we take responsibility for determining that need for ourselves we start on the pathway to professional development. Translating that into a framework for developing continuing education in LIS and IT at post-graduate level becomes a question of learner focused educational delivery. Negotiated Learning Contracts can represent the learners needs, reflect academic standards and respond to the challenges and opportunities presented by IT solve the problem for the critical needs of the learner. Those delivering the education must them move toward facilitating a range of experiences -- lectures, workshops, field trips, moderated discussion groups, problem scenarios requiring individual and/or group effort. Scope and time constraints will constrain some institutions, unfortunately often at the expense of satisfying potential students.
Let the course components fit the needs and aspirations of the learner by structuring the challenges and opportunities rather than specifying requirements. For continuing professional education we don't need to conform to universal validation and pre-set skill levels. Instead respond to the diversity of professional needs and get swamped by the interest in the programmes.
Dan Heenan
danh6000@aol.com
RE: Ling H. Jeng's comments:
As another ex-librarian, I'd like to point out that certification in the latest information technology will be rewarded in the workplace. That workplace will likely not be within a library, but within an information systems organization. Certification for Novell, Lotus Notes, Microsoft, Oracle, et. al., is in big demand. Salaries are over $100K with a little experience, so there might be incentives to bridge the gap.
Chris Andrews
A.V. Director
New London High School
New London, Ct. 06320
Woolly_Wks@aol.com
I just read Mark Bay's comment. I have to agree. I also am a library student. I just conducted a telephone interview with Nolan Lushington, library design consultant and member of the staff at Southern Connecticut State University Library Department. He commented that librarians have no experience with the use of cable television as a public access. Nor are there courses in using television access.
I am the A.V. director in my local school library. We have an interactive television link with a consortium of high school libraries. I think libraries of the future need to promote themselves. Local cable providers are contracting with the FCC to provide local schools, and municipalities, with cable drops.
Either these drops will go to "Town Halls" or libraries. Local librarians need to contact their cable providers to investigate the possibility of creating public access TV studios in the library setting. It may sound "futuristic," and it is, but it is "free" and it is now. The expense is minimal for equipment necessary to export a signal. The subject matter is limited only by the library's imagination and the public relations impact is phenomenal.
On the question whether there is a need for a coordinated academic program as opposed to a series of training courses or an occasional continuing education course to provide up-to-date knowledge and skills related to implementation of IT applications in libraries, I say yes, definitely. There is a need for a coordinated approach, because we have to ensure that the modern trends and way of thinking are gradually built in the minds of those entering the profession, as well as those who will be teaching and providing the reservoir of trainers. The series of training courses and occasional, specialized continuing education type are equally needed to re-train the vast number of practitioners who are out there who needed to be re-orientated.
I think when designing the courses, we have to remember that not everyone even in one particular country have the same level of understanding and development. So the key elements must conform to the situation under which the people to be trained are in.
I've looked at the list of courses that Ms. Lawley has posted and I certainly think that they are very important and must be the core of the Post-MLS certificate programme. Perhaps we can add a course on comparative way(s) of providing library and information services, highlighting how we used to do things and how they can be done now with IT, at what costs and what benefits. I would even recommend to be expansive in doing that by really going over each of the major activities in the library and information centers to demonstrate this aspect. In so doing may areas of improvement can perhaps be discovered, further enriching the course.
Many times the same word or phrase can be understood in many different ways, and here I hope you will be patient enough to kindly explain what you meant by coordinated academic program. Is it coordinated within the faculty or among several related faculties?
This is just my preliminary thoughts on the subject. I hope to be able to contribute somehow to this discussion group. Good luck to all your members and thank you for allowing me to participate.
Angelynn King
Reference and Access Services Librarian
University of Redlands
liaking@jasper.uor.edu
If we're going to talk about the value of certification, I think we need to talk about standards. If the programs that pop up to meet demand (and, let's face it, to generate income) admit anyone and graduate everyone, we can't expect employers to take them seriously. While there is some small value in demonstrating that you take your career seriously enough to put your own time and money into it, this is no indication that you have actually learned anything that makes you better at your job. This is what has happened to the MBA degree -- now that there is a diploma mill on every street corner, an MBA and $2 will get you a cappuccino.
You may join the discussion and look over the list of past and future topics.
 |
|