ACRL College & Research Libraries News

Association of College & Research Libraries

Annual Conference: Meetings for all minds

Political correctness, recruitment to the pro- fession, librarians’ public image, the problems of East European librarianship, and off-campus services were some of the varied topics covered by ACRL at ALAs 111th Annual Conference in San Francisco, June 25-July 2, attended by 19,261 registrants. Highlights of some ACRL programs are given below; part 2 will appear in October. See the accompanying sidebar for information on ordering audiotapes of selected programs. Ed. note: Thanks to the many individuals who contributed to this article.

Influencing career decisions

During the program of ACRL President Anne Beaubien, “Prospecting for the Future: How You Can Influence Career Decisions," a psychologist, career counselor, librarians, and library school faculty offered their perspec- tives on how to recruit tal- ented people to librarian- ship. Psychologist John Krumboltz of Stanford Uni- versity revealed that only about ten percent of college undergraduates accept re- sponsibility for their career decisions and that most ca- reer decisions are made by others. He affirmed that ste- reotypes really do influence people’s career deci- sions and can prevent individuals from considering career paths. “Complete and accurate information is the best defense against stereotypes,” said Krumboltz as he cautioned the audience not to allow themselves or anyone else to be blocked by misperceptions. University of Michigan career counselor Sharon Vaughters suggested that parents, friends, and a professional in the field are the biggest influences on students’ career decisions. She advised librarians to help stu- dents take risks. Speakers Susana Hinojosa of the University of California, Berkeley, and Evan Farber, Earlham College, discussed their tech- niques for recruiting students (including minor- ity students) to librarianship and recommended taking a proactive approach. Jane Robbins and Mary Jane Scheredin of the University of Wis- consin reviewed characteristics of library school students and encouraged practicing librarians to recruit students into librarianship. All those attending the program completed Krumboltz’s “Career Beliefs Inventory” designed to assess beliefs related to career goals.

John Krumboltz examined career beliefs.

How do you describe a librarian?

In “Guts, Brains and Sensitivity or the Ability to Stoop, Lift and Reach to High Places—What Makes a Good Librarian?” ACRL’s Vocational Interest Inventories Task Force reported on its work of changing the occupational profiles of librarians to better reflect today’s profession. ALA Mi- nority Fellow Sheila Delacroix spent the last year trying to convince publishers to update the profiles of the occupation of librarian on two com- puter-assisted career guid- ance programs that are prevalent in secondary schools. To give you a sense of the problems with the profiles, students using SIGI PLUS, published by the Educational Testing Ser- vice (ETS), were told by the system that historians “discover new sources of information” and use imagination, persistence, and luck, and that their work “can be exciting.” Within that same category students learned that librarians may be required to work nights and weekends, and “may need to stoop, lift, or reach to high places for books." When exploring what supervising and directing skills librarians needed, students learned that librarians must “restrain children from running around and making too much noise.” ETS has agreed to make many, although not all, of the changes Delacroix’s research and survey of librarians had indicated. Mary Jane Scheredin, University of Wisconsin, reported on her work of developing a profile of librarians using the Strong Interest Inventory (SSI) and the Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). A random sample of 3,500 librarians received the SSI and MBTI which are now in the process of being scored. Preliminary results indicated that 96% of the respondents liked working with computers, 60% said that librarianship was their first career choice, and 80% felt that the public views librarians positively. Plans call for the complete results of the survey to be shared at a program at next year’s Annual Conference in New Orleans.

Improving off-campus services

Off-campus students have the same right to scholarly services as on-campus students, said the speakers at “The Right to Know and Learning at a Distance” program sponsored by the Extended Campus Library Services Section. Ralph C. Bohn, dean of continuing education, San Jose State University, and Elizabeth Salzer, university librarian, Santa Clara University, stated that there are two forms of accreditation: regional and discipline. Regional associations have focused fairly well on off-campus library support while discipline accrediting bodies have a more mixed history. Generally, there are two levels of library services that are considered by accrediting associations: course level and degree level. A fundamental question that should be answered is whether the needs of the student scholars on and off campus are being met. An additional consideration is the level of library support and use by off- campus faculty.

Accreditation aims to attain a minimum level of activity and ensure a periodic self examination of existing programs and activities. There are three “I’s” that relate to off-campus library services: intelligence, investment; and integration. Library resources on and off campus need not be identical but they should be equitable.

Here is a checklist for library resources off- campus programs: 1) Define the nature of the program to be supported; 2) Profile the students who will be enrolled in the program; 3) Coordinate planning for library services with other units involved in delivering off-campus instruction; 4) Identify goals and objectives clearly; 5) Identify the best methods for delivering services and resources; 6) Develop realistic budget goals and proposals; be prepared for this to take three years and try to project for five years; 7) Determine the evaluation measures to be used with library services; 8) Set up the initial program of library services and make sure they are advertised; 9) Set up a communication mechanism between the main library and off-campus library sites; 10) Be creative and take advantage of opportunities for innovation.—Ken Marks, East Carolina University

Linking community college libraries

Speaking with a sense of humor and adventure, J. Richard Madaus, director, College Center for Library Automation, described the saga of successfully linking Florida’s 28 community colleges into an online catalog network. The first of four speakers for “The Virtual Library: The Florida Community College Experience” sponsored by the Community and Junior College Library Section, Madaus said, “In a network you really don’t plug it in and have it work; you plug it in and start trying to make it work.” Stating that automation takes a long time, he advised librarians to stay flexible, look forward to the future, keep things in perspective, and be willing to take risks.

Derrie Roark, chair, College Center for Library Automation Advisory Board, discussed the board’s role in the Florida project. Her tips included involving as many people as possible, taking plenty of time, and deciding ground rules before playing the game. She recommended that a board be of “one voice even if you are not of one mind” to keep the goodwill of the funding agency.

Bill Odom, Florida Association of Community Colleges, stated that the key to success in Florida was the legislature’s commitment to the concept that centralized resource sharing is more economical than campuses purchasing separate systems. Bill Schmid, director, Florida Information Resources Network, said that the value of a computer depends more on what it’s connected to than on what it does by itself.

Michelle Dalehite, assistant director, Florida Center for Library Automation, observed that after government document records were loaded on a Friday night, the use of documents rose 400 percent the following week. Referring to the continuing increase in use of public access catalogs, she said, “Build it, and they will come.”—Rebecca B. Kiel, Cottey College

Discussing the future

Over 450 people turned out on Saturday afternoon to hear Berkeley vice chancellor John Heilbron and Stanford English professor David Riggs address “Views from Across the Quad: The University’s Expectation for the Library of the 21st Century,” sponsored by the University Libraries Section.

Positing a Gresham-like law that “People will tend to use the most readily available documentation, not the best documentation,” Heilbron warned against playing into the hands of computer-addicted undergraduates by increasing the existing overabundance of electronic information. Instead, librarians should seek to reduce barriers to actual reading, to fight for library support, and to build strong collections through shared purchases.

Noting that consensus cannot be found among university faculty regarding libraries or anything else, Riggs argued that librarians should shape their own destinies by taking the initiative to become full partners in team-based faculty research. This role can be best achieved not by imitating computer programmers, Riggs argued, but by using subject expertise and bibliographic sophistication to help sort out knowledge from information.

Both speakers argued that, at least for humanities scholars, the traditional on-site collection of printed texts was the optimum library. Riggs stated that the humanist will always study “the book, the painting, the recorded sound,” while Heilbron characterized the library as a “place for alchemy and necromancy, which needs the relevant devices: shelves, books, and catalogs." For these scholars, at least, the “virtual library” would be seen as virtually useless.

Sharon Hogan, Richard DeGennaro, and Nancy Van House responded to the principal speakers’ remarks. Hogan argued for the library’s role in undergraduate education, maintaining that libraries have too faithfully echoed their parent institutions’ misplaced values. Van House noted the difficulties of simultaneously maintaining the “Ptolemaic” model of traditional libraries while introducing “Copernican” revolution. DeGennaro observed that “most faculty library committees favor the old library paradigm (which was created by librarians to fit a world that no longer exists), but do not trust librarians to create a suitable new paradigm for a future only dimly perceived.” —Paul Metz, Virginia Tech University

The PC backlash

“For a sane, just, humane, and joyful future, keep talking back and refuse to be silenced,” advised keynote speaker Gloria T. Hull, University of California, Santa Cruz, in the program “Is the ‘Political Correctness’ Backlash Controlling Women’s Right to Know? Information Suppression in the Information Age” sponsored by the Womens Studies Section. Oppressive academic climates attempt to silence women by labelling their writing or speech hostile, frivolous, not academic, or too radical and marginalizing their research as unimportant. Citing Audre Lorde’s observation, “Your silence will not protect you,” Hull called for women to find the courage to speak out and experience the transformation of silence into language and action.

“‘PC’ is a code word for ‘She hit me first’— but she didn’t,” observed school librarian Christine Jenkins. The right wing’s protesting the use of inclusive language, gender neutral pronouns, and illustrations free of stereotypes in children’s books reveals its longing for a return to the all- white world of children’s books of yesterday and resentment over the fairer representation of diverse groups in modem literature.

Calling the PC backlash “business as usual,” Ellen Broidy of the University of California, Irvine, considers the PC debate a diversionary tactic used by those with the most to gain from the status quo. Drawing attention to the “unholy alliance of PC and traditional values,” Broidy warned that these phrases serve as code words for critiquing feminist curriculum content via highly subjective moral judgments. Reflecting on the Women’s Studies Section’s decision to stay away from Salt Lake City because Utah’s laws endanger women’s lives, Broidy concluded, “Perhaps in the future we won’t be asked to endorse business as usual when that business puts women at risk.”—Betty J. Glass, University of Nevada, Reno

New challenges for Slavicists

“Slavic and East European Collections and the Dilemmas of the Non-Specialist,” sponsored by the Slavic and East European Section, featured some of the nation’s leading Slavic librarians discussing a wide range of topics. The speakers—Allan Urbanic, University of California, Berkeley; Wojciech Zalewski, Stanford University; Leena Siegelbaum, Michigan State University; Laszlo Kovacs, St. Olaf College, Hungary; and Susan Burke, University of Washington—each addressed a different geographic reference region, covering some or all of the following areas: reference sources; acquisitions operations such as selection sources, major bookdealers, major publishers, current publishing, and acquisition difficulties; and types of collections.—Tanja Lorkovic, Yale University

Information expertise

The Bibliographic Instruction Section celebrated and synthesized 15 years of knowledge-base development with a retro- spective slide show that highlighted BI history and goals, and personal per- spectives from seasoned and new “BI recruits.”

The program “Bulletins from the Recruits: Sharing Information Expertise in the Global Learning Com- munity” focused on how various BI recruits have shared their individual ex- pertise across disciplines to develop a rich and valu- able knowledge base in li- brary instruction programs.

Virginia Tiefel, Ohio State University, spoke about the Gateway Project and other BI programs using technology to achieve information literacy. She outlined various factors in evaluating such programs.

Alan Wallace, University of Tennessee-Knoxville, gave a presentation on making the connection between BI and staff development. He believes that BI librarians’ knowledge and prac- tice in learning and instructional theory makes them ideal proponents in the design and imple- mentation of staff development programs. Oftentimes libraries turn to outsiders for special expertise when they should be utilizing exist- ing staff. Instructional li- brarians are in a position to apply their expertise to a new group—their col- leagues within the library.

Members of the ALA Gay and Lesbian Task Force march at the Gay Pride Parade in San Francisco.

Photo credit: Merri Monks

Diane Nahl-Jakobovits, University of Hawaii, sum- marized the essential ele- ments of instructional de- sign, described several models, and introduced a taxonomic approach to bibliographic instructional design. This matrix in- cludes various levels (ba- sic, intermediate, advanced), domains (affective, cognitive, sensorimotor), and areas of information-seeking skill. Behavioral objectives should integrate the three domains. This model was then applied to testing information-searching competence.—Beth Sibley, University of California, Berkeley ■