There's an interesting post over at librarian.net ("putting the rarin' back in librarian") about the Canadian effort to recruit people into the field. Not just any people, but those who will bring the leadership skills and creativity the profession needs. There has been some controversy over a US federal grant intended to bring more people into the field by getting more PhDs who can teach in library schools - and since there are always librarians who will complain about their education being a) boring b) irrelevant c) too easy d) too theoretical, including the past president of the American Library Association, Michael Gorman, cranky comments come up a lot in blogs. (Michael Gorman comes up a lot too, but that' s another story.)
The Canadian effort, though, is smart in that it doesn't focus on a supposed shortage (which is a hard argument to swallow for young librarians who don't find jobs as easily as they were led to expect as geezers like me fail to drop by the wayside) but rather on the value of the profession and finding people who are a good match for its challenges.
I must be a geek (and a nerd), I enjoyed library school, especially the theory. But the fact is if you're a librarian you're going to be learning for life, so don't expect a measily year of graduate study to be anything but the beginning of your education. That must be why I like it so much!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
"I must be a geek (and a nerd), I enjoyed library school, especially the theory. But the fact is if you're a librarian you're going to be learning for life, so don't expect a measily year of graduate study to be anything but the beginning of your education. That must be why I like it so much!"
I couldn't agree with you more, Barbara.
Likewise!
Although I'll soon be finishing two measily years of graduate study, the reason I chose this field is so that I could study lots of different subjects (and because Charles Cutter is really quite inspiring when you actually sit down and read his work).
Going to be a cataloger, Emily? ;-)
I'm sure I could be, but I think my personality is better suited to reference.
While compiling a bibliogrpahy for a professor, I read Cutter's introduction to Rules for a Dictionary Catalog. In the edition I read, he knew his system was on the way out, but very eloquently acknowledged that as long as readers were able to find information, it didn't matter what system we used.
I had read about Cutter in class, but it didn't hit me until I actually read his words how passionate he was about making information accessible. Whether we're cataloging, doing a reference interview or shelf-reading, this job is about helping people find information. That's why I love it.
Post a Comment