Home
The Vital Role of Librarians in
Creating Information Communities: Strategies for Success

Joan C. Durrance, Professor
University of Michigan School of Information
durrance@umich.edu


Introduction—A Lesson in Leadership
A decade ago librarians, under the leadership of A.L.A. President, Patricia Brevick, began the task of introducing a new term—not only to librarians—but to educators and others who are concerned with preparing people to be life-long learners. That term was "information literacy." The concern a decade ago was the need to develop a more effective field response to problems that people have when they try to get and use information. The Final Report of the American Library Association Presidential Committee on Information Literacy (1989), defined the information literate person as, someone who is "able to recognize when information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate, and use it effectively."

Not five years after the initial use of the term, the technological revolution reinforced the importance of information literacy, but by that time a core group of librarians who believed that this was a national problem that required collaboration had formed the National Forum on Information Literacy (NFIL). Now NFIL is a coalition of over sixty-five national organizations representing libraries business, government, and education. Its members include ALA and several of its divisions, the Discovery Channel, EDUCAUSE, National Education Association, National Council of Teachers of English, American Society for Public Administration, and many other organizations concerned with fostering "information literacy." These organizations have agreed that:

Information is expanding at an unprecedented rate, and enormously rapid strides are being made in technology for storing, organizing, and accessing the ever-growing tidal wave of information. The combined effect of these factors is an increasingly fragmented information base, a large component of which are available only to people with money and/or acceptable institutional affiliations.

In an information society, ALL people should have the right to information that can enhance their lives. To promote economic independence and quality of existence, people need to be informed and up-to-date. Out of the overabundance of available information, people need to be able to find and use a variety of information to meet a wide range of personal and business needs.

Now the term information literacy is widely known among librarians, educators as well as business and government leaders. Now hundreds of librarians in schools, colleges, and universities engage in activities that foster information literacy, including incorporating those that focus on developing critical thinking skills in students, coordinating information literacy efforts at a local level, and developing indicators that will measure the impact of information literacy activities on students. Just as importantly, through the efforts of the national coordinating body, the National Forum on Information Literacy, the sixty plus member organizations, representing 65,000,000 people, have found a common purpose and are working together to assure that people have the skills to get the information and knowledge they need.

What Does This Have to Do With Information Communities?
The work described above is powerful testimony to the influence of adopting a new term, the impact of the changed approaches that accompany its use, and the power of librarians as leaders with the vision to harness the energies of scores of national organizations and, ultimately, to influence the lives of millions of people. With that as an introduction, we now turn to "information communities." Although a number of librarians have undertaken the vital role of creating and strengthening information communities with the aim of harnessing the power of the Internet for their constituencies, the following tasks remain undone.

Librarians have not begun to use a common term to describe what they do, they have not yet devised adequate approaches to assess need; they have only begun the exploration of the functions of information communities.

Librarians have not begun to share effective strategies and approaches (and there are many which are essential to the success of ICs), nor have they begun to develop critical measures of success.

Finally, librarians have not yet undertaken the vital task of identifying and communicating with others who are pioneering in this work.

The American Library Association’s Library Administration and Management Association (LAMA) has assumed leadership in this area by identifying the importance of information communities and launching a series of workshops to foster their development across types of library lines and in conjunction with appropriate stakeholders. In fostering an understanding of the actions needed to develop information communities, LAMA has undertaken the same kind of efforts which over a decade ago launched massive efforts by librarians to foster information literacy.

Information Communities—A Working Definition
LAMA defines an information community as "a constituency united by a common interest in a set of dynamic, linked, and varying resources." Likewise it may be "a partnership of institutions and individuals forming and cultivating a community of interest around the provision and exchange of information, or knowledge, aimed at increasing access to that information or increasing communication, and thereby increasing that knowledge." These working definitions incorporate under one umbrella term, various types of services and collaboration which are currently being undertaken by librarians.

As a vehicle for the meaning of information communities in this article and in the workshop, I have chosen to develop thumbnail sketches of several ICs. These include two created to better share historical resources, an IC created to increase access of health information to professionals, and a community network. The Information Communities website <http://www.si.umich.edu/helpseek/Resources/index.html#InfoCommunities>

provides numerous examples of ICs, including those that have arisen completely outside of libraries and function (to their detriment) without the guidance of librarians. It also contains detailed information about the LAMA Information Communities Workshop.

But first, I will briefly address several common attributes of the many information communities we have identified.

Attributes of Information Communities
Each information community is unique, but there are common patterns. They may cut across type of library lines. They are likely to involve collaboration with a variety of organizations as well as some sort of resource sharing (including in-kind contributions). They may be the responsibility of more than one organization. Given the state of information technology, they are likely to be dynamic and distributed. Information communities form around the need that people have to get and use information, they may have a fairly well developed constituent group, and their leaders have some understanding of how the constituency uses information.

While the circumstances surrounding each information community differ, most of the model ‘ICs’ discussed below owe their creation and development to: the values of librarians (the desire to increase access, the interest in better understanding the need for and use of information, etc.) as well as their knowledge, abilities and approaches (knowing the community, their knowledge of how to effectively organize information, and their ability to collaborate and share resources, etc).

Information communities effectively exploit the information sharing qualities of the Internet. As a result, ICs, may incorporate diverse information providers, use collaborative approaches, make effective use of information technologies, communicate across geographic and other barriers, and adopt entrepreneurial approaches. Some ICs form in a geographic community because leaders realize that resources that are needed by people are scattered throughout the community and thus are less accessible to those who need them. Other ICs are created by the common need to more effectively create, disseminate and use information across a community of interest.

The Internet, as these librarians have learned, is the perfect medium to use to create new and enhanced access to knowledge/information for people, in particular those who need and use similar knowledge/information, particularly distributed resources. In addition, librarians as leaders of information communities make effective use of getting people together in person, especially information providers. They may also provide training or mentoring opportunities to assure that the clientele make effective use of the information.

That fact that we are in the early stages of the use of the term information communities makes it difficult to identify the exciting emerging models and the benefits that they bring both to the communities they serve and to the institutions themselves. LAMA’s leadership in this area is moving librarianship closer to the day when librarians and leaders in many communities will be able to recognize in their own situations the circumstances, vision, approaches, strategies, and benefits that will result form the creation of information communities.

Examples of Information Communities

Information Communitiess that Bring Together Digital Resources for the Benefit of a Geographic Community

The Making of Ann Arbor--http://www.aadl.org/moaa/simpleindex.html
The 'Making of Ann Arbor' (MOAA) is an illustrated narrative about Ann Arbor from its pioneer days when it was part of Michigan Territory to the early twentieth century. The project draws upon the three libraries’ resources and the expertise of all three partners to build a website needed by groups of people interested in historic Ann Arbor. In addition to the illustrated narrative history of the city, the website has a searchable image database, including many photographs and other visual images not used in the narrative.

MOAA represents an initial attempt at developing an information community within a single geographic community that transcends the boundaries

that traditionally separate libraries. It’s partners--the Ann Arbor District Library, the University of Michigan's Bentley Historical Society, and the University of Michigan Digital Library Initiative each have collections of digital resources that are valuable far beyond their core constituencies.

The partners view their initial collaborative efforts as laying a foundation for an ongoing, evolving project about the history of Ann Arbor from the 1820s to the present. Developers say that:

In envisioning future plans, we plan to add more narrative to bring the city’s history forward in time, to contribute additional historical materials in digital form, and to extend our partnership by seeking other collaborators in the community who will enrich the site with historical narratives, photographs, and other materials about Ann Arbor, its people, businesses, and organizations.
Developers comment that three elements were required to take on this digital project: historical content, technical skills in the digital arena, and experience and expertise in working with a wide and diverse public. "Over the years, the three partner institutions collectively have accumulated a rich documentary and visual history of Ann Arbor and surrounding areas; the institutions have developed a strong staff expert in working in the digital arena; and they have each interacted with students at all levels, local history enthusiasts, and other citizens interested in the forces and events that have defined Ann Arbor. Each partner has made invaluable contributions to The Making of Ann Arbor."

The success of this type of information community depends not only on cutting across type of library lines and communicating with schools, teachers, local newspapers, non-profit groups, and genealogists who need and use these resources. This IC builds upon the strengths of each institution while adding greater value to the community. The result is that these three institutions have brought the early history of Ann Arbor to life by creating a Web-accessible, digital collection of information and images.

LA As Subject--http://www.getty.edu/gri/public/lasubject.htm

LA as Subject represents an information community developed from a partnership between the Getty Research Institute and twenty-five "lending institutions," including local private collections as well as universities such as the Claremont Graduate University. The archives, collections, monuments, and cultural practices included in this exhibit are all vehicles to bring diverse communities and individuals from the past and present to the present.

L.A. as Subject was a four-year research project designed to facilitate the critical recovery of historical narratives about Los Angeles. Its goal was to

illuminate diverse and unique archives and collections and examine their role in the transmission of cultural values through lectures, symposia, exhibitions, and public forums. (For more information please refer to the LA as Subject profile developed at the University of Michigan Information Community Website). http://www.si.umich.edu/helpseek/InfoCommunities/examples.html.)

HealthWeb--http://healthweb.org/index.cfm

Key Partners: Greater Midwest Region (GMR) of the National Network of Libraries of Medicine (NN/LM); Committee for Institutional Cooperation; the National Library of Medicine.

Aim: Provide organized access to evaluated non-commercial, health-related, Internet-accessible resources.

HealthWeb is a collaborative project of over twenty health sciences libraries and supported by the National Library of Medicine (NLM). In 1994 a couple of health sciences librarians from institutions affiliated with the Committee for Institutional Cooperation (CIC) schools decided that their work with health sciences professionals—as well as their knowledge of, access to, and ability to use these resources--would be greatly enhanced if health sciences librarians worked together. At that time—the beginning of the expansion of the Internet through the World Wide Web—they decided to work cooperatively to: "develop an interface which will provide organized access to evaluated non-commercial, health-related, Internet-accessible resources." They decided at that time that the resources for the newly created HealthWeb would include those currently available as well as new resources developed in collaboration with other organizations. Their vision was to create an interface designed "to integrate educational information so the user has a one-stop entry point to learn skills and use material relevant to their discipline."

HealthWeb has won a number of awards and influenced the development of other information communities. Its website includes an extensive bibliography of article that have been written about HealthWeb.

Community Networks as Information Communities
A community network, a term that came into common use in the 1990s, is a prototypical information community. The Association for Community Networking’s (AFCN) describes community networking includes: "projects [that] bring local people together to discuss their community's issues and opportunities, learn about Internet technology, and decide upon and create services to address these community needs and opportunities." Related to this, a CN is comprised of a wide variety of groups that make up a community (e.g., libraries, Universities, K-12 schools, local government, businesses, media, individuals), "with special focus on including those who are traditionally left out of community decision making in general, and technology decision making in particular (e.g., low-income, minorities, senior citizens). CN projects value collaboration and participation, and are usually noncommercial." Distilling this definition, the Community Connector, the University of Michigan community focused web site, indicates that "A community network is a locally based, locally driven communication and information system designed to enhance community and enrich lives."

These functions are all encompassed within the emerging definition of information communities. The University of Michigan IMLS funded research project, "Help Seeking in An Electronic World" has studied community networks with affiliations to public library systems. The project website provides several case studies and thus a great deal of detail about how these information communities function. The brief description below describes one community network—The Three-Rivers Free-Net affiliated with the Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh.

Three Rivers Free-Net--http://trfn.clpgh.org/

Pittsburgh is a product of its geography. Many of the characteristics that make Pittsburgh a scenic place--its three rivers, its many neighborhoods built upon rolling hills--are also those that tend to separate municipalities from each other. This results in a patchwork of towns and boroughs that oftentimes do not communicate well with each other or collaborate on programs. In fact, there are 130 municipalities in Allegheny County--TRFN's home county--alone. There are over 3000 health and human service organizations in the area. Area non-profits are very interested in working together to solve problems and TRFN works to build connections between Pittsburgh's many dispersed resources so that they can make things happen. TRFN creates an internal geography to counter Pittsburgh's segmented physical geography.

Approaches Used by TRFN include:

TRFN staff apply their librarian’s knowledge and display a variety of leadership skills. They: The LAMA Information Communities Workshop focus on strategies used by a number of information communities including those identified by participants. The website encourages submission of additional examples. They should be addressed to: howlibhelp@umich.edu

Toward Impact Evaluation Benefits of Information Communities
In mid-2000 the Institute of Museum and Library Services issued a white paper that challenged librarians and museum curators to rethink they the way they evaluate public services. The authors of this report caution that "in growing numbers, service providers, governments, other funders and the public are calling for clearer evidence that the resources they expend actually produce benefits for people." The authors of the IMLS report warn that "if museums and libraries do not take the responsibility for developing their own set of credible indicators, they risk having someone else do it for them." They declare that the old question, "What have we done to accomplish our goals?" must be replaced with one that asks, "What has changed as a result of our work?"

Our current IMLS funded study indicated that the tools that public librarians currently use to evaluate the public's use of community information are woefully inadequate. The vast majority of librarians (78%) indicated that their current tools were not effective or only marginally effective. We also found, however, that librarians engaged in activities resulting in information communities were in a position to know what has changed as a result of their work. We have identified a wide range of benefits and are in the process of developing a framework for these benefits. Thus librarians have given researchers the knowledge needed to develop indicators of impact which will, in turn, be turned into tools for librarians librarians can use to determine impact. The LAMA Information Communities workshop devotes a session to developing indicators of impact.

LAMA’s Challenge:
Information communities reflect the best in professional practice. However, these communities are also developing outside of librarianship—most often among communities of scholars. When they do, they fail to incorporate the knowledge and skills possessed by librarians and thus are diminished. With leadership and vision, librarians can capture the leadership in this emerging area. LAMA’s challenge is to share the vision and show the leadership needed to make information communities work across all library environments and in the process make this term a household word—not only within library land. LAMA can take a lesson from the success of President’s Commission on Information Literacy whose activities catapulted librarians into a leadership position among educators, the business community and public sector groups in a crucially important area. LAMA has had its own successes. For example it has raised the understanding and quality of library marketing efforts through its John Cotton Dana Awards and their attendant activities. LAMA can and should develop approaches that showcase librarians’ contributions to information communities. It can work to raise visibility information communities to the status of the JCD Awards and in the process increase citizen access to information.

To the top

Back to Publications & Presentations