03.22.08
Does the MLS really mean anything?
Rachel Singer Gordon has an interesting post about who or who isn’t a librarian.
While I do recognize that many of the people I work who do not hold an MLS are just as capable and knowledgeable as many of the MLS holders, I’m still concerned with the trend of those who seem to place no value on the effort that many of have made in getting this degree.
Unfortunately, not all library schools are created equal and not all MLS holders are getting the training they need to make a good argument in defense of keeping the MLS requirement in what has traditionally been professional librarian positions. And on some level, if ALA is certifying programs, we need to hold them accountable part of the problem. One thing I take issue with is people teaching in libraries schools who have never practiced as librarians. Who cares if they hold a PhD if they have no idea what the real world is like and are so out of touch? What good are they doing future librarians? (I’d caution those considering library school to look closely at who the faculty are. Have they been or are they practicing librarians? Have they contributed to the field in any significant way? If not, you might want to look at another school.)
I do agree that there are plenty of paraprofessionals and other types of library workers who are very engaged in their jobs, go to conferences, and are absolutely fabulous. And there are plenty of people with MLS degrees who aren’t worth the paper that degree is printed on. I’m not sure what the answer is here.
And I do agree that no matter what, regardless of if you have the MLS or not, library workers need to see themselves as on the same side. Anyone who is dedicated to doing a good job, taking care of patrons, learning more about what we do, etc. has something to offer and it’s unfortunate that some people work in places where they feel undervalued.
We all need to be working together to remind “outsiders” that libraries are still a necessary part of our society.
The Liminal Librarian » Blog Archive » Who is a librarian? Links said,
March 24, 2008 at 6:59 am
[...] Does the MLS really mean anything? – New Librarians Blog [...]
Dale Prince said,
March 24, 2008 at 4:10 pm
I think that you may be getting to one of the problems with the degree. You say that people who teach in library school should have real world experience, that the PhD, an indication of a piece of theoretical research done in the realm of librarianship is not really of particular value. This means that, in fact, library school, unlike other disciplines where the PhD is a measure of one’s engagement with one’s field of study, is a technical degree and that library school is merely a series of apprenticeships to a practicing librarian.
If this is the case, what matter where the education comes from: from the librarian in the field training the non-MLS learner or the instructor who is merely doing the equivalent of on-the-job training to people who are getting an MLS. The only difference is the setting.
I, in fact, was disgusted with the library school I went to because it taught so little of the theoretical background of why librarianship exists, why it’s important. With that in mind, we are very much ill-equipped to say why the degree itself is important.
If we are just doing the equivalent of technical training, why is on-the-job training to be denigrated or even considered less important than a MLS program? Because the non-MLS learner doesn’t have to write papers? I remember my library-school papers. I could have written them in my sleep. And sometimes did. And still had a high grade point average.
So I will take a contrary stance: If we want the MLS to mean something. To be something other than a technical degree, the equivalent of on-the-job training in a classroom, I suggest that our instructors should have PhDs and a real grounding in the theoretical aspects of what librarianship–the organization and representation of knowledge–is about. MLS programs lack rigor and need to address that so that the degree is indicative of engagement, not just the jumping through of hoops.
J said,
March 24, 2008 at 4:20 pm
Good point. I really hadn’t thought about it in that way. But I have to wonder about the disconnect between the theory and the application. That’s what I’m seeing in the field. I worry when someone with a PhD doesn’t have the faintest idea what Library 2.0 is or how a real reference transaction works.
I think good library programs should have a combination of both. I think in my program that I did receive both which is perhaps why I value my degree more than some people seem to.
There is value in both approaches and a blending of the two seems most appropriate to what we do. At least from what I’ve seen so far. This makes me think of psychologist training where the graduate degree combines theory and practice and you don’t graduate with both. Seems like other advanced degrees do this as well, so why aren’t we?
Kind of thinking through my fingers here!
Dale Prince said,
March 24, 2008 at 8:02 pm
I’m not so worried about the PhD who doesn’t know what Library 2.0 is since it’s one of those instances of “I don’t know what it is, but I know it when I see it.” And that’s because it’s a terrific marketing slogan that is as meaningless as “The Pepsi Generation.” It becomes problematic in trying to define either of those because they are, upon the mildest scrutiny, exclusionary. And exclusionary of many things they mean to contain. Having said that, I do expect my library school deep thinkers to know this: there is a marketing slogan, “Library 2.0,” that is making the rounds now. It might be of substance, but may also be a mark of generational dissatisfaction. That dissatisfaction, imagined or real, is what’s important to me, not the rubric it gives itself.
And you are right about a blending of approaches. A good program does do those things. Increasingly, though, I’m hearing of too many programs stuffed with adjuncts who are teaching from their library departments rather than from a deep understanding of the need to categorize knowledge.
Rich said,
March 25, 2008 at 7:40 am
I agree that library school should be a mixture of the theoretical and the practical, and I feel that I got that when I attended back in the late ’90s. But I have to say, with a couple of exceptions, most of my best instructors were adjuncts who working as real, live librarians in real, live libraries. I felt that most of them gave me a much better idea of what working in a library is like, what issues I would face as a professional, and what I needed to be thinking about as I prepared myself for a career. Maybe I got a warped impression because I’d been working as a paraprofessional for several years and continued to work full-time while I went to liberry skool, but some of the PhDs were so far removed from the reality of a library career that their classes were like a visit to Fantasyland, except without the fun of Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride.
It’s important to remember, though, that there are exceptions on both sides. I had some non-PhD adjunct instructors who were great at explaining and making us think about the theory, and I had some PhDs who had a great grasp on reality. (More of the former than the latter.)
bluestockinglibrarian said,
March 25, 2008 at 11:56 am
EdD/Education PhD programs usually have a prerequisite of so many years practical teaching experience out in the real world; one cannot simply get one’s teaching license, MA in teaching, and doctorate in one straight shot the way those in many other disciplines can. The premise being, of course, that one cannot teach others about teaching without having taught yourself.
Maybe LIS schools should take these programs as an example?
Dale Prince said,
March 25, 2008 at 12:14 pm
An advanced degree is not about preparation for the real world. If that’s what we want from an MLS, then we should relocate our programs to tech schools or AA programs. The advanced degree is there to provide us with the philosophical underpinning informing our discipline, not with the best way to deal with a difficult patron.
In my career, I’ve had to face the question: Is a librarian necessary to do this task? And the answer is usually: Well, no. Anyone with appropriate on-the-job training could do most of the tasks we do. So what should be the dividing line? Why are librarians necessary? Because being a librarian is not about performing some task. We are necessary because we have knowledge of the importance, in human endeavors, of easily accessed information. We understand how we (we=librarians, libraries, and information users) arrived, through history, to the point at which we now stand, how search behaviors are as much a cultural display as simply the easiest way to get to information and why this is important in regard to the way we run our institutions, how information systems grow out of the study of human consciousness, and, even more importantly, how information seeking is benefited by this knowledge.
When I worked on my literature degree, no one said, “well, lets talk about the reality of tenure, adjunct work, putting together a syllabus, creating a poster.” There was not enough time within that advanced degree program to work on those real world issues. Instead we looked at how culture informed literature, etc., learning the philosophical underpinnings of the study of literature. I guess the belief was that, as recipients of advanced degrees, we could find out ourselves about the real world. We were not apprentices and probably would have resented time spent away from the study of literature, just as I resented, in library school, time spent away from the study of epistemology, history, and information management since I felt that the real world training was preparing me to be a library worker, not a librarian.
J said,
March 25, 2008 at 3:24 pm
So maybe what we see in some MLS programs really need to be an undergraduate degree or as suggested an AA or tech program. Then the MLS could become all about the theory, research, etc.
I do see the disparity as I work through my MA in English. I’m not learning how to teach. Although I guess the GTA’s do have some instruction on how to do that. But my program really is all about theory and research into literature.
Dale Prince said,
March 25, 2008 at 4:53 pm
Ha! My experience as a GTA was a week-long boot camp that really taught nothing in re: actual teaching. I don’t really remember what we did learn, though. I think we learned how to write a 5 paragraph essay.
libraries go corporate « the bluestocking librarian said,
March 26, 2008 at 8:17 am
[...] has no library experience whatsoever. She has made no effort to learn how to be a librarian (again, something Jill has talked about), so no adult/YA books have been ordered since January. She’s kicked my librarian out of [...]
Melissa said,
March 30, 2008 at 9:45 pm
I have to agree to the comment that maybe some form of actual library experience should be involved before moving forward to the next level/degree. I have my undergrad in education and now about to complete my MLIS (online). This qualifies me technically to manage library facilities, but I have absolutely no experience other than my studies so far. I feel inferior to library aids and assistants who have all of this working knowledge, but lack the educational background. I would not even attempt to become a supervisor at this point. So, yes. I do feel that experience is an absolute MUST.
Kendra said,
March 31, 2008 at 2:41 pm
I agree that practical experience is key to people entering the library profession, which may actually be hard to get. I’m finishing my (online) MLIS degree, and there have been many times in my courses that it was clear that people who had practical experience (they’ve worked in libraries) had a distinct advantage over those with no experience. Assignments tended to focus on working with common tools, so people who weren’t familiar with many OPACs or databases could learn, but it still doesn’t make up for using them regularly. I really like that most of my instructors (all of them who teach actual library science courses, as opposed to information science) work in libraries as well, so they never actually leave “the trenches”.
As for whether the degree really matters, I think it really depends on what people want for themselves in their situations. I know my degree will help me get an academic library position, but I also know many people around the campus I work at who don’t have the degree but know more about libraries than I ever will. It’s not a clear dichotomy.
Library Attack » Blog Archive » Do I really need an MLIS? said,
April 1, 2008 at 8:27 am
[...] took time away from her cats and martinis to weigh in, and The New Librarians blog has a very good examination of the [...]