Comments on: would tenure pressures in public libraries make good changes?

By: Sarah

Sarah — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 21:01:18 +0000

Boy do I love #19 just above – I am a damn good, non-management librarian. I was a branch manager at one point, but this is NOT a good time to be in “management” at my particular library. I would love to take on longer projects and have more time to gaze at my navel. How many hours a week do academic librarians work on the reference or other public desk? And as for “funding models would have to change” – good luck. We’re just happy there is funding. So what are academic librarians doing when they are not “more focused on getting the essentials done”? Aren’t the essentials supposed to come first?

By: ontheriversedge

ontheriversedge — Sat, 16 Aug 2008 02:25:11 +0000

Boy am I late to this party…

I was talking with a public library director at a conference and we were both noting the main means toward higher pay in public libraries was management. She said there should be a category of master librarian for damn good, but non-management, librarians.

Obviously, being a non-management librarian, I liked the idea.

I would think hard-research and problem solving of this sort would be among the means of attaining this title and better pay she envisioned.

By: Laura

Laura — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 03:04:10 +0000

I don’t like the pressures that a tenure track position brings and that’s a large reason why I chose the public library route. I would be constantly worried about whether or not I would be awarded tenure for my accomplishments and the worry would make my position less enjoyable and fulfilling. I want to publish because I’m inspired to do so, because I have something that I think is worth saying to the library community. I don’t want to publish to meet some quota or because I’m required to. I think the quality of what’s published would also suffer if people were publishing because its required of them rather than because they genuinely want to.

By: Eva G.

Eva G. — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 03:28:51 +0000

See, I really liked the idea of tenure in public libraries. I already see librarians who have one foot in retirement land who are already stagnant – maybe they would finally be required to do something other than coast along with tenure-type responsibilities. I suppose I would say that a promotional track could be developed – something that says you want to be a Lib II, why don’t you prove you’re worth it rather than just base it on seniority? Of course, this really isn’t too feasible with the economy the way it is. Public librarians are over-worked, under-paid and dealing with, well, the guy with nothing on under the trench coat. However, I’d like to see something, anything to kind of shake up the old guard a little. That’d be pretty nice and fantastically interesting.

By: Erika

Erika — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 19:00:11 +0000

“little time, space, resources are provided to resolving thorny issues in public librarianship.”

You said it.

Larger systems may have some resources for their upper level staff to deal with some of those issues, but really, we’re there to serve the public and that takes up most of (if not all of) our time, space and resources.

By: Kevin

Kevin — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 18:53:31 +0000

Why expect the public librarians to do this kind of research? You would think that there would be some LIS faculty members who would want to do research that would have direct impact on the kind of facilities where many–if not most–of their graduates end up working. By doing so, their research could really be used to enhance the classroom learning experience of their students. Not that eye movement/screen studies and retrieval algorythms aren’t useful, but it could be argued that this type of research is a bit more removed from the everyday challenges faced by the profession–and some of those everyday challenges are worthy of being investigated, too.

Just my personal two-cents’ worth.

By: Jeff

Jeff — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 18:07:58 +0000

Great conversation here. I won’t go over the many good points about innovation in public libraries or tenure for public librarians. I think librarians who are dedicated to their communities will be innovative. Furthermore, there is just as much dead wood in academic than in public.

To the original point, genre classification is an art not a science. This author has written Romantic Suspense, is it a romance, or does it go into Action Suspense Horror? She has also written mysties, do you break the author up so it is in the right genre? What is the disservice to the author if you cannot find all of their work, especially if you love their writing no matter what the genre? Is this a system, technological, or tenure problem? No, it is the overcomplication of a simple question and it is all based on local interpretation (or if you are a copy cataloger, don’t care).

By: Beth

Beth — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:39:21 +0000

Yes, there is innovation in public libraries–but it does tend to be in the area of public services, not cataloging. Hey, Maricopa Co. is doing away w/ Dewey completely. That may be innovation, but it also may not address structure of information issues. Do issues w/ quality of genre cataloging lie w/ individual public libraries or rather w/ other institutions? I don’t know of a single public library that does original cataloging of genre fiction–they’re using CIP data; does responsibility lie w/ LOC?
The other issue is that for academic librarians, their peers within the parent institution are professors (or so they assert). Many public libraries are part of municipal governments; who then are their peers? City planners, public health nurses, street engineers–tenure is a completely foreign concept in those fields. City Human Resources departments have the legal obligation to treat employees in all departments equally; you can’t impose a standard to retain one’s position in one department that isn’t equally applied in another.

By: SovietBear

SovietBear — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:30:42 +0000

The issues I have with librarian tenure (after almost 10 years as a public library professional) are as follows:

1) I have no intention of staying at the same library system for more than 3-5 years at a stretch. There’s a whole caste of mercenary public librarians who have to job-jump at the best offer whenever possible. Having to compete with even more entrenched interests would be unnecessary, especially if I were leaving after 2 or 3 years.

2) ‘Library Research’ is regarded by my peers (defined as public librarians ages 22-32) as mostly a joke. My first question for all of the new professionals who visit my department is ‘What did you hate about Library School.” The answers I get are hilarious and unprintable in most forums. We all agree that the best education we received in our Master’s programs was from adjunct faculty and local library directors.

The ever-changing nature of the public library environment awards experimentation and quick, budget-based thinking. We do not have the luxury of time.

3) Many public librarians avoided academic libraries for precisely the reasons you listed as strengths. I don’t want to do research, start petty battles over titles and stature in an institution, or become entrenched in an institution. I thrive in the dynamism of the public library.

By: rudibrarian

rudibrarian — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 16:45:24 +0000

Ryan, not troublemaking at all– you’re completely spot on. I had forgotten about how much of the 2.0 clamor was from public libraries (and how much that irked me for a long time — I’ve apparently gotten so over that not that I had forgotten!)

I hope no one was hearing me say Public libraries are not innovative! I was pondering why some of the “big” infrastructure issues that relate more to Public than Academic libraries have not been resolved yet. And wondering if Academic libraries had similar in the past, and tenure was an engine towards resolving them.

I accept that (1) my ponderings were ill worded, and perhaps ill conceived, and (2) there are better answers to the question of why.