David Lee King has a post up about peer review. He raises a good question about what is a better type of peer review. Just go read it, because I really hate paraphrasing stuff.

As a tenure-track librarian floating around in academia, I find that I’m struggling to get people to look at the whole concept of peer review in a new way. I have to publish. I don’t mind writing and don’t even have a problem with doing the traditional thing of getting myself published in some sort of peer reviewed journal, if I eventually have something to say that is fresh. One of my complaints with journals is that sometimes it seems to be the same stuff rehashed over and over and over or the information is out of date by the time the journal is actually published. It was likely innovative and exciting when the author(s) sat down to write the article 2 years previously, but things are changing quickly in our world.

To keep up, I read blogs or other such things. If you’re a blog reader, you know that if people disagree or have something to say or want to correct facts, there are plenty of folks who feel perfectly free to comment on posts. Isn’t this essentially peer review? I’d say if you are writing a blog on a regular basis, you’re publishing. And if people are reading it and commenting, it’s getting peer reviewed.

So, it’s time to start recognizing this as a legitimate form of publication and peer review. Sure, there are people out there writing complete drivel, but I think most of us are intelligent enough to distinguish that. There are debates about citing blog posts as research, but if it’s legitimate, intelligently written information, then cite it. As librarians, we usually advocate that people use many sources anyway and I think we need to be willing to accept the fact that people are actually writing about things on blogs that is timely and important. (Which is getting a big off the point I think David was trying to make.)

The thing is, there are numerous ways that our work is being peer reviewed on a regular basis. When you present at a conference that has feedback forms, you are being peer reviewed. When you post to a listserv, your comments and ideas are being peer reviewed.

Maybe our perception of peer review and the purpose of it needs to change. What is the point of the anonymous group of reviewers who provide no feedback, other than to allow your article to be published, and don’t even interact with each other and acceptable form of peer review in this age of easy communication and interaction. I do understand the blind review in terms of people getting a fair chance regardless of who they are. But with the ease of disseminating information today, is that really necessary anymore?

Let’s discuss.

I really think the world has gone mad…for many reasons. The latest news about the mayor of Memphis has me almost convinced that there is something rotten in the state of Tennessee.

Something is fishy when a library director who has garnered a national award for her library suddenly decides to retire. And it gets even smellier when the mayor doesn’t bother to search nationally for a replacement, instead putting two former bodyguards with no library experience AT ALL in place to lead the library.

Adding insult to injury, this mad mayor also wanted to close four libraries because of the findings of an efficiency expert. Except in terms of workflows in staff areas, I don’t really get the point of using an efficiency expert. IMO, you can’t measure what libraries do the same way you do a corporation.

Fortunately, there are sane and intelligent people in Memphis who kept the library closings from happening. As to the director thing, the mayor seems like just another slimy politician with no regard for what’s really best for his constituents. I hope the people of Memphis keep this in mind at the next mayoral election.

As for what we library-types can do. The usual advocating for why we’re needed. I wish I’d kept closer attention to the news because somehow this seems to have been a non-issue outside of Tennessee. But this is the exact type of thing we need to be fighting against. It’s the type of thing ALA should be taking a stance on, not non-library related things like the plight of the polar bear.

The post title is actually search terms that somebody used to find this blog. It’s always interesting to see how people get here. Fortunately all the terms that I’ve seen have something to do with libraries.

But “what questions to ask when interviewing ” is a very good question.

First off, let me say that not asking any questions is not a good idea, unless they really have been so thorough and covered everything. Chances are that is not the case.

I think one of the big questions people worry about asking is the salary/benefits question. It’s not wrong to ask this question, but there are bad times to ask it. Right off the bat in a phone interview may be bad timing. This is one of those things that you might have to get a feel for the atmosphere before asking. One thing to also think about when asking about benefits is conference funding/support or other educational funding.

Definitely ask questions about projects that are being worked on and future plans for things. You want to make sure that you are going to be the right fit. This is also a round-about way of finding out what kind of support there might be for new ideas and what kind of innovative things are happening, if that’s important to you. There is nothing wrong with starting a discussion about potential ideas and current projects, although keep in mind when you ask during the interview process.

If you’re interviewing at a university, it’s fine to find out about collaborations between the library and other departments on campus. You might already have some ideas about what’s going on if there is info on the library’s website. Feel free to ask more specifics. If it’s a public library, find out what types of partnerships they’ve developed in the community.

My point is that it’s okay to ask questions when you interview. It shows that you are interested in the library and the job (and if you’re not that interested, then you better think about why you’re interviewing in the first place!) Take a look at the library’s website ahead of time and write down potential questions. You won’t look silly. In fact, that might just be the edge you need over an equally qualified applicant.

(This post is a bit in the style of the Librarian’s Guide to Etiquette. In other words, don’t take it too seriously.)

This seems to be the season for new librarians to start that first “professional” job. So here a few pointers on how to get started off on the wrong foot.

1. Establish yourself as the library know-it-all. More experienced people are sure to dislike you from the beginning when you come in a tell them what they are doing wrong. You can add to the fun by pointing out all their mistakes and then talking about how you could do it better. There is really no need to elaborate on how you’d improve things because at this point it’s better to run in the other direction.

2. Don’t bother learning names. Chances are if you’re on the track of making your co-workers hate you from the start, you don’t need to spend time learning who they are. You likely won’t be around long enough. Seriously though, there is no better way to make people feel that aren’t that important in your world than by calling them by the wrong name or referring to them as she, he, or it. Of course, you can just yell at people with the always useful “you”.

3. Be late for everything. The more you make people wait for you, the less likely they are to want to have anything to do with you. Who knows? You might even get out of things just because you can’t be relied on to be on time.

4. Dress and act like a slob. We librarians are often branded as too uptight anyway, so you could just be shaking things up a bit. After all, if you don’t have a problem with your muffin top, dirty jeans, and the cascading piles of paper on desk, why should anyone else? If you want to make it even better, don’t bathe often and give up toothbrushing. It’s a good way to keep people away from you.

5. Don’t follow through on things. There really is no need to do stuff that your promise to do. Most places will have someone who will grudgingly pick up after you fail to finish whatever it is. Eventually they’ll just stop giving you stuff to do and you can spend more time surfing the web or whatever it is that you really want to do. Chances are you won’t be getting another library job after this one anyway, so you don’t need to worry about having stuff to add to your resume either.

Okay, now to be serious. Some of this sounds pretty preposterous, but I actually have worked with people who have been at least one of the above. Not to say that I’m perfect either. But there are some definite ways to get started off wrong. And if the job market is as tight as everyone says, you’re likely wanting to keep your first job until you are ready to move on. When you move on, it also helps to have positive references and good professional relationships with former co-workers. In many ways, we are a small profession and librarians can gossip. I know it’s hard to believe, but there it is.

So, let’s take the list a different way.

1. Be open to ideas and experiences. More experienced people have a lot to offer those of us who are new to the profession. The thing is that we all have something to offer no matter what our background. It’s fine to be gung-ho about technology or whatever, but sometimes you need to tread carefully when you are the new person. (I speak from personal experience.)

2. Learn everyone’s names as quickly as you can. I’ll admit that this is a hard one for me. I actually have to stand in front of person when I’m introduced and repeat their name a couple of times to make it stick. But I also have found that when I make an effort, they’re understanding if I do forget. When I say everyone, I also mean everyone. Learn the custodial staff, your student workers, the volunteers, the office staff, etc. These people are important too and you never know when you might need something. Having a MLS does not put us on a pedestal.

3. Be on time for your commitments. There are times when something happens and a delay is unavoidable. People will excuse you on occasion. But the chronically tardy are rarely appreciated and while you may think it’s a small thing, depending on the environment, it may not be. (Tardiness is one of my pet peeves.) If you need to adjust your way of thinking to prepare yourself fifteen minutes ahead of when you’d usually get ready, then do it. Being on time is a sign of reliability, like it or not.

4. Don’t be a slob. The whole thing about a messy desk being a sign of genius…I don’t know. Organized piles aren’t a big deal. Despite all the electronic stuff we work with, librarians still manage to generate tons of paper. (If you can, encourage using things like wikis and blogs to cut down on paper.) And how organized and tidy your desk space needs to be will depend on your actual position. Since I conduct research appointments with students, I probably tend to keep a neater desk because I need open space for them to spread out stuff. As to the clothing thing, dress codes vary, but looking neat doesn’t. This doesn’t mean buttoned up cardigan and bun (I look far from that stereotype.) but lounge pants are probably not a good thing either. You can still have your own style, but keep in mind that some things are better for outside of work. As to the other personal hygiene stuff, do I really need to say anything on that?

5. Follow through! If you say you are going to do something, do it. Do it on time. Do it well. I think that’s enough on that one. Hopefully you are professional enough to understand.

So, good luck all you new graduates as you look for your first “professional” job. (Yes, I’m using quotes because many of you have already worked in libraries.) And good luck to those of you just starting out in libraries.

I joined the New Lib listserv when I officially became a new librarian, mostly because I didn’t know about it before then. Anyway, at times, I find the discussions to be enlightening and informative. At other times, not so much. Of all the listservs I do subscribe to, this is definitely the most active. I’m going to leave it at that.

But if you belong to any sort of listserv, I think Guardienne’s post is quite appropriate and an important read.

The New-Lib listserv is all abuzz right now about that sticky thing called the GRE. If you aren’t familiar with the term, it’s the Graduate Record Exam and tests you in some the major core areas which I can’t remember right now and am admittedly too lazy to go find out about. I did take the GRE. Mostly I did really well except in the part that required math skills because I’ve forgotten about everything I ever learned in College Algebra, which was the only math class I took in college. I was a music major. Basically all I needed to do was count to three. And I actually did study. I bought one of those review books with the CD-Rom and spent some time preparing. Can’t say if that really helped me out or not. But I helped pay someone’s weekly wage with what I spent on that book.

Personally, I don’t see a problem with requiring the GRE or something equivalent to that. And I don’t say that just because I had to take it for my program (which was, and still is, one of the better LIS programs out there, imo.) As a few people pointed out, it’s not a bad thing to have some basic requirements besides the application. I have to wonder about those programs that don’t require things like a GRE, a writing sample, statement of intent, and minimum GPA. And I’m sure it’s not only LIS programs that do this if anybody wanted to do some research into it. But, I digress.

Like most people, I don’t like the idea that our grad programs are a joke. So, how do we fix this? Who should fix this? What does an excellent LIS program look like, from getting admitted to the graduated degreed librarian? How do we put value into our education and our field?

Pretty serious questions these and there are so many different points of view. I don’t have any good answers to them.

Despite the mess that all this seems to be, there are great people working in libraries. Is this in spite of our education? And how do we explain those people who haven’t bothered (and potentially wasted their money) on the grad degree who are often better “librarians” than those with the MLS.

This obviously is a many faceted problem. Am I even asking the right questions?

I must say that I really disagree with a recent post by Meredith Frakas. (I know…how dare I disagree with one of those movers and shakers in Libraryland!)

Now there is a debate raging about the value of speakers/presenters at conferences/workshops/whatever. By nature I’m really not a cranky or annoyed person, but some of the whining going on in the comments just made me want to say “Get it over it!” I’ve spent probably close to $2000 in the past month to speak/present at conferences and while money isn’t growing on the trees around my house, from the reactions I received from attendees of my presentations, it was money well-spent.

I will admit that I’m not entirely altruistic and am not presenting for the pure joy of it. And any person who is getting paid to present can’t entirely claim altruism either. I just don’t believe it…and you people know who you are. I present because I do have requirements for tenure as an academic librarian who wants to keep my job.

The thing I really disagree with it that whole thing about by presenting for free we are devaluing ourselves and our profession. This might be true if we’re doing this at non-library conferences. But when we share information with other librarians about innovations, new ideas, interesting ways of looking at problems, etc. we are actually adding value to the profession and helping others. I’m glad that people are willing to do so and still pay their way into a conference. The whole thing about getting everyone together to say no to not having expenses covered is frankly rather immature and selfish. How does this help anyone in the end and how does it add value to what we do when we cripple our state and regional organizations with demands for hotel, travel, food, drinks, massages, and fancy chocolates? (Hyperbole to prove the point here people.)

Okay, I will concede that maybe the registration fees could be waived or even drastically reduced. Early bird fees honestly are not that low for most conferences. An early bird fee that still runs in the $300 is still pretty expensive and it would be nice if there was some flexibility. However, for many organizations the other stuff is really not possible. It’s up to people putting in proposals to consider if they can really manage the expense of going. I hope that they can, because I know that I’ve heard some great presentations recently and am glad that these people were willing to pony up.

And it was rather glossed over that the committees that plan these things don’t get paid anything. Some of them do far more work than the presenters…particularly those presenters who do the circuit with the exact same content. (I groan when I see those names on programs because I’m easily bored…and some of those people are getting honorariums for being there and they really aren’t saying anything new.) These committees must have some belief that sharing and contributing and networking keeps the profession alive. And I doubt that presenters and attendees are really being thankful to them. Want to put money on the thought that most of what they get are complaints? The rooms are too cold/hot/moist/tropical/arctic. There weren’t enough vegetarian options at the reception/lunch/dinner/luau. Why couldn’t we have bottled water? Why are we polluting the environment with bottled water? The bathrooms were too far away. I’m sure you get the idea.

So let’s just heap one more huge complaint on top of everything else that people trying to organize good, useful, informative, exciting conferences are already getting. And if you think things are really being badly done, get on the next conference planning committee.

Sure, it would be nice to get some sort of “thank you”. At MPLA/ULA, the presenters got nice bags full of goodies and a thank you letter. I only did a poster presentation and got nothing except the entertainment of watching hotel staff drop plates all over the floor in the hallway where our posters were. (And that’s not a complaint because I got enough compliments and questions to keep me quite content.) The previous week, as an actual presenter of a session, I got nothing.

Maybe someday, I’ll be important enough to actually get honorariums. (Probably not. At least, I’m not holding my breath.) And I hate presenting because I get butterflies the size of elephants. However, I’ll keep on doing it because I strongly believe that it is important to share new ideas, blah, blah with other librarians and even those few outside the profession who decide to attend our conferences.

And to those who having to pay their own way to present still find the whole thing sticking in their craws, you have other ways to share you information. There are wikis, blogs, online conferences that don’t require travel, etc. The physical conference is not your only option these days and I encourage you to find other avenues. In fact, please do. Chances are some of us interested in what you have to say aren’t going to be in California or Florida or Australia.