ANALYSIS AND COMMUNICATIONS PAPER

Christopher Schoenherr LIS 701-01 February 7, 2010

Dr. Crowley makes many valid arguments drawing from a countless wealth of sources. To me, neither of the reviews of Dr. Crowleys work made any outrageous claims and despite the fact that individuals reviewing the work had two completely different opinions on the work, neither of the reviews in my opinion were too far from the mark. On one hand Bob Usherwoods review was much more critical and his opinions, whether he agreed or disagreed with Dr. Crowley, were much more well supported than the latter review by Joyce Deming. It is also important to note Joyce Demings background in regards to her opinion on Dr. Crowleys book. Deming openly admits that she came from one of those information provider library school programs (Deming 2009). And at the time of the publication of her review, she was, and still may be an Information Services Librarian (Deming 2009). Demings review is not as well supported as Usherwoods and she draws from no apparent outside sources other than her own intellect and personal experience. Still, as a library and information professional, her insights are just as valid as anyone elses. A good deal of Usherwoods criticism of Dr. Crowelys work comes out of defense of a library system in which typically I have limited knowledge of. Not to say I am completely ignorant of library systems in foreign lands, but my knowledge of Great Britains library system comes primarily from both Dr. Crowleys work and Usherwoods defense of his countrys library education system. As a Library professional in Great Britain, Usherwood makes a very strong case in defense of library education in his country, stating that Academics with a strong library background and a passion for its values can still be found teaching at Sheffield and other British universities (Usherwood 2009, 186). Aside from Usherwoods differences in opinion to that of Dr. Crowleys, He can still find a number of valid points in Dr. Crowleys work. One of these points in particular that I agree with is the relative danger of applying a commercial business

model in public libraries (Usherwood 2009, 186). The emphasis should not necessarily be on efficiency, but on quality. Both authors can agree that a librarian is an educator and a library is an educational institution. While it is not necessarily a complete contrast to Usherwoods review, Joyce Demings brief review is a little more forgiving than Usherwoods criticisms. She states towards the end of her one page review, that this book is more of a conversation starter (Deming 2009). Deming does however agree that the definition of a library must be changed to include and emphasis on education (Deming 2009). Referring back to Dr. Crowleys work, where he provides the ALAs definition of the field of library and information studies, you can clearly see that now more than ever, there is less of an emphasis on the personal connection that libraries should have with the communities they serve. Nowhere in the definition is there any mention of librarians serving as educators or even advocates of change, which is one of the key reasons that I dedicated myself to studying library and information science. I would say that for the most part I agree with Dr. Crowley. As I stated earlier, my passion for library and information science comes from my own desire to be an advocate for change. The concept of Lifecycle Librarianship (Crowley 2008, 3) is extremely powerful, and speaks about the relationship that a librarian should have with the community they serve. That being said, I do not necessarily agree with everything that is being implied by this particular work. I see Dr. Crowleys view as a bit black and white. It may be presumptuous of me in thinking that a librarians job is not having a solid, unchanging definition. Having read this work and comparing it to the opinions and views expressed by other library professionals, I can see what I would call an old versus new relationship. It is human nature to resist change. Drawing from my own experiences, I can remember when I was a child the introduction of the first electronic library

catalog at my own public library. It was met with some hesitance by some of the staff and patrons. I can imagine that to some degree librarians may have felt a little threatened. Also, when the Algonquin Area Public Library first made more public computers available, and the addition of free, wireless internet access. Most people are resistant to change, but the evolution of the field is inevitable. If we are to consider a librarian an educator, we must understand what is an educators foremost responsibility. Above all , an educator is responsible for teaching people skills that will allow them to solve their own problems. Whether the problem is something like solving an algebraic equation, or how to selectively choose desired information from a database or online search engine. What is most important in my opinion and I believe it is safe to say that Dr. Crowley would agree is that the personal connection must always be present. The role of a librarian as an educator is core to the central set of values of librarianship (Crowley 2008, 33-36). Librarians must promote lifelong learning and literacy, and as Dr. Crowley states in chapter 6, the ALA must change the definition of the field to appropriately meet the needs of the changing field. Nowhere in the definition that the ALA has provided speaks about the relationship between libraries and their communities in any context (Crowley 2008, 131-132). I would also agree with Dr. Crowley regarding the problem of libraries choosing to hire less formally educated employees in support of a more commercial business model. In my own experiences, I have noticed this problem more and more while searching library and information science job listings. More and more jobs are being created with the title Assistant Librarian with nothing more than a 2-year degree and some library experience required. To me, this suggests that many libraries are adopting a policy of efficiency valued over quality with a less professional staff. To say that we are headed for a crisis might be a bit of an overstatement, but I would certainly agree with most of what Dr. Crowley suggests as possible solutions to the problem, such as his suggestion for a marketing

campaign that emphasizes the importance of libraries as resources for lifelong learning. Also, his suggestion to change the ALA definition of the field would help some (Crowley 2008, 148-149). What I think is most important is for librarians to really develop their relationships with their community. Ultimately, it is the practitioners who will be responsible for the fate of professional librarianship.

Crowley, William. 2008. Renewing Professional Librarianship: A Fundamental Rethinking. Connecticut: Libraries Unlimited. Usherwood, Bob. 2009. Book Review: Renewing Professional Librarianship: A Fundamental Rethinking by Bill Crowley. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 41: 185-186 Deming, Joyce. 2009. Book Review: Renewing Professional Librarianship: A Fundamental Rethinking by Bill Crowley. Colorado Association of Libraries. http://www.calwebs.org/reviews.html