Library schools: Get Real?
We have probably all heard someone express the opinion that library schools are not preparing librarians for reality. I hear this all the time from students and colleagues, and I must admit that when I started my first professional position, I was concerned about how much my MLS program didn’t teach me. I felt that I had to learn everything I needed to know on the job.
This is also reflected in the LIS literature. A search for education for librarianship on the Library Literature database reveals that much has been written about “what we didn’t learn in library school” or the importance of “bridging the gap” between practitioners and educators. The discussions revolve around the idea that library schools are “out of touch”. Many have gone so far as to declare that there is a “crisis” in LIS education. Some authors have offered solutions, such as creating a core curriculum for LIS education (Mulvaney, O'Connor). Some have advocated the idea of forging stronger ties between practicing librarians and the LIS faculty who teach librarians (Dougherty). Others have challenged this idea. In a recent article (entitled “Crying Wolf”), Andrew Dillon contends that the data do not support the assertion that library schools are failing students.
When I hear or read things like this, I must first wonder how different we are from other professions? Do other professional programs (engineering, nursing, etc.) do a better job at preparing students for “the real world”? Is this problem unique to MLS programs and library schools? Whether or not this is the case, it seems clear that the negative perception is real. If we take the debate a step further and focus on how library schools are preparing students for academic librarianship, it becomes even more complex. Academic librarians are often expected, on top of their “regular duties”, to take on research activities. I don’t know about the rest of you, but my MLS program certainly didn’t prepare me for that!
I would like to know what others think. Did your MLS program prepare you for the real world? If you are in a senior position, do you find that recent graduates are adequately prepared to work as librarians, and more specifically as academic librarians? And perhaps most importantly…rather than simply complaining about it, what can we do to improve the situation? Can practicing librarians help library schools to better prepare our future colleagues?
________________________________________
Yes, like a true librarian, I have cited some sources…
Dillon, Andrew, and April Norris. "Crying Wolf: An Examination and Reconsideration of the Perception of Crisis in LIS Education." Journal of Education for Library and Information Science 46.4 (2005): 280-98.
Dougherty, Richard M. "Building Bridges: Library Educators and Practitioners." The Journal of Academic Librarianship 32.3 (2006): 221-2.
Mulvaney, John Philip, and Dan O'Connor. "The Crux of our Crisis." American Libraries 37.6 (2006): 38-40.
posted by Pascal @ 10:50 AM
4 comments
4 Comments:
Well, it’s a difficult question. I don’t necessarily think that it’s reasonable to expect programs to completely prepare students for the 'real-world’ of librarianship – especially since librarianship is rapidly changing. At some point, the student has to demonstrate, to some extent, independence. Having said that, though, programs should place a greater emphasis on computer skills, for they will be indispensable to the future librarian.
I have been reading a lot of library history recently (for my thesis, which will include research - most MLIS programs offer such an option for those who want it). In 1923 C.C. Williamson was asked to undertake a study (on behalf of the Carnegie Corporation) on library education. One of his findings included that there was a difference between clerical and professional work. Namely, that "professional work deals with theory and the applications of principles and the requires a broad education. ... Clerical work involves the following of rules and as such requires far less education" (Rubin, 2004, p 449). This is the foundation of all MLIS programmes today. We have been (or are being) taught the higher level thinking of librarianship. If nothing else, we should level library school with the "why" of librarianship answered. The "how" can always come later.
This does not make us unique in the world of "professionals." Doctors have internships and residencies, lawyers have articling years. Perhaps the problem isn't with MLIS programmes or new MLIS grads, but with employers who are not giving entry-level librarians enough time to turn their "whys" into "hows."
To continue the citation theme:
Rubin, R. (2004). Foundations of library and information science(2nd ed.). New York: Neal-Schuman Publishers, Inc.
This is a topic also explored in this post (where you can find some of my thoughts in a comment):
http://younglibrarian.blogspot.com/2006_10_01_younglibrarian_archive.html#115993885935840629
I'm not sure about other professions and how they prepare others for the "real world." While I was getting my MLS, I was grateful to finally take courses with practical application--but as you mentioned, the research was nothing like the level I learned during my MA. I think that this is a secondary reason why many academic libraries require (or prefer) their librarians to have a second master's; the second master's is where you learn the truly deep, serious research (the primary reason being to have subject-expert librarians).
Then again, many librarians--particularly those who work in academic libraries--are in the profession *because* they enjoy research, so perhaps it's part of our profession's assumption that if we pick a job that requires it, we'll gain or already possess that skill ourselves.
(Sorry, that's the wrong URL. I'll post it if I can find it in my del.icio.us account.)
Post a Comment
<< Home