August 29, 2016
Pushing the Margins: Women of Color and Intersectionality in LIS
Editors: Rose L. Chou and Annie Pho
Literature on diversity in librarianship has mainly focused on recruitment and increasing numbers of librarians of color. This book shifts the focus beyond numbers and instead on the lived experiences of those who are underrepresented in our profession. Using intersectionality as a framework, this edited collection explores the experiences of women of color in libraries. With roots in black feminism and critical race theory, intersectionality studies the ways in which multiple social and cultural identities impact individual experience. Looking at race and gender isolated from each other fails to see the many dimensions in which they intersect and overlap, creating a complicated lived experience that cannot be captured by studying one identity.
Libraries and librarians idealistically portray themselves as egalitarian and neutral entities that provide information equally to everyone, yet the library as an institution often reflects and perpetuates societal racism, sexism, and additional forms of oppression. Women of color who work in libraries are often placed in the position of balancing the ideal of the library providing good customer service and being an unbiased environment with the lived reality of receiving microaggressions and other forms of harassment on a daily basis from both colleagues and patrons.
Typically these conversations and discussions of our experiences as women of color have happened behind closed doors, within trusted circles of friends. Our hope and intention is that by bringing these conversations into a public space, we will raise consciousness of these experiences and start changing perceptions and expectations.
Proposals may consider the following themes and questions:
– Invisible and emotional labor
– Intersections of multiple identities, such as sexuality, gender identity, and socioeconomic class
– Leadership, management, promotion, and authority
– Gender presentation and performance
– Treatment of women of color library workers who are either not in librarian positions or do not have a library degree
– Experiences of women of color as library patrons
– How identity affects approaches to collection development
– How does structural oppression reproduce itself in spaces that are touted to be egalitarian and democratic?
– How does one maintain respect in the library when confronted with oppressive treatment or being stereotyped based on one’s race, gender, or other social categories?
– How can library organizations create better work cultures and environments for staff and patrons to exist as their true selves?
This is not an exhaustive list. Proposals are welcome from anyone involved in libraries, archives, and information science. Contributions from people of color, those who belong to communities underrepresented in LIS, and those who work in school and public libraries are strongly encouraged. Essays that are straightforward scholarship are invited and welcome, as are more hybrid or creative approaches that incorporate scholarly writing with personal narrative, illustrations, graphics, or other strategies consistent with feminist and antiracist methodologies.
This collection will contain papers and essays of approximately 2000 – 5000 words. Proposals should include an abstract of no more than 500 words describing the proposed contribution and a short biographical statement. Send proposals to firstname.lastname@example.org by October 28, 2016.
Notifications will be sent by November 4, 2016. First drafts of manuscripts will be due May 31, 2017. Editing and revision will occur June-December 2017, with an anticipated publication date of Spring 2018.
This book is forthcoming in the Litwin Books/Library Juice Press Series on Critical Race Studies and Multiculturalism in LIS, Rose L. Chou and Annie Pho, series editors.
About the editors
Rose L. Chou is Budget Coordinator at the American University Library. She received her MLIS from San Jose State University and BA in Sociology from Boston College. Rose serves on the ARL/SAA Mosaic Program Advisory Group and is part of the LIS Microaggressions project team. Her research interests include race, gender, and social justice in LIS.
Annie Pho is Inquiry and Instruction Librarian for Peer-to-Peer Services and Public Programming at UCLA Libraries. She received her MLS from Indiana University-Indianapolis and BA in Art History from San Francisco State University. She’s on the editorial board of In the Library with a Lead Pipe, a co-moderator of the #critlib Twitter chat, and a Minnesota Institute for Early Career Librarians 2014 alumnus. Her research interests are in critical pedagogy, diversity, and student research behavior.
August 18, 2016
This is a position for an independent contractor (so really a business relationship rather than a position), where the successful candidate would do straightforward research projects for Library Juice Press and Library Juice Academy on a contractual basis. A typical project might be a literature review on staff training and professional development for librarians, with document delivery (sending selected articles) as part of the deal. Payment would be on a per-project basis. Since you’re the contractor, you’re setting the price, as long as it is reasonable. This is a good way to make some extra money, put a nice item on your résumé or CV, and help out a publisher who you may believe in. A plus would be very good access to LIS literature through an academic library. Please send your resume and cover letter to Rory Litwin: email@example.com. Thanks!
August 11, 2016
From: Mary Ghikas
Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2016 3:14 PM
Subject: FW: ALA Task Force on the Context of Future Accreditation Webinars
On behalf of Peter Hepburn, chair of the ALA Task Force on the Context of Future Accreditation, I am sending this out with a request to forward to the groups with which you work. Thanks go to Danielle Alderson for setting up these sessions. Thank you all for forwarding the announcement. mg
The ALA Task Force on the Context of Future Accreditation is charged to develop a white paper that describes the fields and context for which we will be accrediting in the future and to make such recommendations as may arise in the process of that development to the ALA Executive Board.
Within its purview are
Accreditation of information programs — who is doing what, how do or might they relate to LIS programs; disconnect (or perceived disconnect) between skills increasingly needed (e.g., information architecture), the current curricula of LIS programs, and standards/statements of core competencies currently in place;
Values — e.g. public access, privacy, intellectual freedom — as common threads binding together LIS and related fields and a core element in curricula; and,
The changing institutional context for accreditation, including factors such as pedagogical innovation, assessment and resources.
The discussion/white paper should result in a conceptual statement as a framework for the development (by the ALA Committee on Accreditation) of future standards.
The Task Force on the Context of Future Accreditation seeks broad input from the LIS community. To this end, the Task Force will be staging a series of online forums targeting certain populations and capped with a general forum for those who have not otherwise had an opportunity to contribute.
The four sessions are as follows:
Thursday, August 18 10:00 am PDT/12:00 pm CDT LIS faculty (other than deans and directors).
To attend this event please register at:
Thursday, August 25 10:00 am PDT/12:00 pm CDT Librarians and LIS graduates in Canada
To attend this event please register at:
Wednesday, August 31 10:00 am PDT/12:00 pm CDT Current LIS students and recent LIS graduates
To attend this event please register at:
Friday, September 2 10:00 am PDT/12:00 pm CDT General forum
To attend this event please register at:
Each forum will be hosted by a facilitator from the Task Force. Attendance at each forum will be capped at 100. The facilitator will have a set of guiding questions, but discussion is otherwise open. The conversation will be recorded.
Please contact Task Force chair Peter Hepburn at firstname.lastname@example.org should you have questions.
We look forward to the conversations.
Peter Hepburn, chair, Task Force on the Context of Future Accreditation
Head Librarian, College of the Canyons
Santa Clarita, CA
August 8, 2016
Annie Downey has agreed to do an interview with me about her new book with Library Juice Press.
Dr. Downey is Associate College Librarian and Director of Research Services at Reed College in Portland, Oregon. Annie’s professional aspiration is to occupy a constant state of praxis in her daily work. Her research interests help her do that and include critical information literacy, women in librarianship and the status of women’s professions, service design and user-centered research methodologies in libraries, and library administration. She published two books in the summer of 2016: Critical Information Literacy: Foundations, Inspiration, and Ideas from Library Juice Press and Library Service Design: A LITA Guide to Holistic Assessment, Insight, and Improvement with Joe Marquez from Rowman and Littlefield.
Annie, thanks for agreeing to do this interview.
Thanks for inviting me! I am always excited to talk about critical information literacy.
Critical information literacy, or critical pedagogy in library instruction, is a hot topic in the library world right now, especially among Twitter’s #critlib participants. The discussion goes back a few years. I’d like to start by asking you first to summarize what critical information literacy is, and then to talk about how you first learned about it and got interested in it.
My favorite definition of critical information literacy is from Accardi, Drabinski, and Kumbier’s 2010 book Critical Library Instruction. They define it as “a library instruction praxis that promotes critical engagement with information sources, considers students collaborators in knowledge production practices (and creators in their own right), recognizes the affective dimensions of research, and (in some cases) has liberatory aims.” I am drawn to this definition in particular because the authors use plain language to attend to both the student and teacher roles, praxis, and empowerment, all of which are important components of CIL theory and practice.
As our definitions of information literacy have expanded – which we see reflected in the ACRL Framework – it has become harder to define critical information literacy as a distinct type of information literacy. But a primary signifier is that CIL is inspired and informed by critical educational theories and theorists, especially Paulo Freire’s critical pedagogy.
Like many CIL converts, I first became interested in critical education and the emancipatory potential of education, and then found my way to CIL when I was looking for ways to connect my burgeoning interest in that set of theories with my work as a librarian. As I was working on my PhD coursework, I had an opportunity to study education theory in depth for the first time. I was inspired by Freire’s work, but also by Myles Horton and Jack Mezirow. Freire, Horton, and Mezirow all worked on critical literacy with adults. The connections between critical literacy and information literacy jumped out at me right away so I began looking for other librarians who were doing work in that space. This was just a few years ago, but there was not a lot out there. I immediately found the work of James Elmborg, Troy Swanson, Kushla Capitzke, and Heidi Jacobs compelling. Of course, since then many others have come forward and a lot of great work is being done on CIL right now.
Regarding Freire, many readers caught that the cover of your book is a riff on the cover of Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed. I think it’s fun to make that reference, but I have to admit to feeling like it might be false advertising to an extent, because the book is not that directly tied to his educational philosophy. He was strongly marxist for one thing, and your book is not. I wonder if you have any comments about expectations people might form of a more radical book, looking at the cover.
First, let me just say that I love the cover and was so thrilled when I saw it. It’s true that the book is not tied strictly to Freire’s theory, nor is it Marxist. But I would argue that it is fairly radical and heavily influenced by Freire.
The majority of the librarians I interviewed were influenced by Freire either directly through reading his work or reading work inspired by it so the ideas and practices presented in the book provide examples of what librarians have done with his theory so far. In that sense, the cover is more than appropriate as a reflection of the contents providing a Freirian interpretaton of information literacy. However, I also tried to make it as authentic to the academic librarian experience as possible, and in many ways that resulted in me finding ties to critical education generally rather than Freire’s work specifically. I also wanted it to be an authentic reflection of my own interpretation of CIL, which is influenced Frieire, but also by other theorists.
Prior to my interviews, I was really into the type of critical pedagogy taught by Myles Horton, which is due at least in part to finding his work a lot more relatable and usable in a personal way. When I was first reading about critical education, I was also involved in a grassroots activism organization that used popular education to move people to action. I loved the curriculum we designed and were teaching, but getting people in the room to learn what we were trying to teach was close to impossible in my small Texas city. I always felt like we were teaching the already converted and the power to change anything in a meaningful way would ultimately reside in our ability to speak to people who weren’t already in the room. Horton, Freire, and other critical pedaogues encouraged teachers to start where their students were and then help them get where they wanted to be. Starting where the students are in order to make learning meaningful is a major rationale behind student-focused pedagogy. A major purpose of this book is to help librarians practice CIL and in order to do that, they have to start where they are and build their practice to include CIL.
All of the librarians I spoke with talked about their inability to do anything too radical in their classrooms – one of my participants was actually leaving the profession for this very reason. I understand that feeling because I am a radical in my own mind, but my at work radicalism has to be moderated because over time, librarians have not managed to position themselves very well institutionally. I believe we can change that, but the change has to be thoughtful and we have to start where we are. I know there are plenty of radical activists that will call this a cop out. But I decided many years ago that I did not want the typical activist life for me or my children. I want to do good meaningful work, but I also want my children to live fairly unstructured lives with one parent at home. I am the breadwinner for my family of five and I work at an institution where it is much easier for faculty and students to take an ideological stance than for staff, including librarians. My work in this area has to be more stealthy and that was definitely what I heard from participants as well. So I think this book is radical in part because we are talking about trying to move a whole lot of disempowerd people to action. When we know that librarians are starting from a fairly disempowered place organizationally and their values have gotten confused over time, big change starts with small steps. Personally, I will just be thrilled if this book convinces more librarians that we are not and should not pretend to be neutral actors in our work.
But I also think the Freirian pedagogy is there, even though the radical politics are largely missing. This is where the practicality and professionalism of librarianship often conflicts with the value structure and political philosophy of librarians, especially teaching librarians. What you’ll find in this book is that many librarians are taking the radical step of trying to adopt Freire’s critical pedagogy for their teaching, but as one participant said it is just really really hard. Feminist critical educators like bell hooks, Jennifer Gore, Carmen Luke, and others speak to this difficulty and I think that is really the next step for CIL – to look at, work with, and respond to the critiques of critical pedagogy. Freire said we have to remake critical pedagogy for our situations and contexts and that is what the librarians in my book are trying to do.
Yes, that makes perfect sense. One thing I have wondered about in relation to that is how Freire translates into the affluent first world context. He was an educator in the third world, and his efforts to empower students had to do with their situation as members of an oppressed class. In what ways are his ideas about student empowerment and student perspectives relevant when you are talking about students who are privileged, like the students at your institution? When they question authority, is it the same thing?
I can’t imagine anything bringing home the importance of questioning authority like the current presidential election. As unfortunate and distasteful as the whole thing is, I’ve definitely thought this book came out at a good time because it points to how important it is for even privileged students to question and challenge authority. It also illustrates how the breakdown of old gatekeepers have really changed what and how issues are talked about. It has turned older notions of information literacy on their head. And that is where the importance of talking about power with privileged and oppressed students alike really comes in. It is no longer acceptable to teach library literacy like it is information literacy or to ignore the power structures behind information access. Students have to be able to understand and use sources outside of our expensive (and privileged) databases and they need to understand the power structures that put that info behind pay walls to begin with.
When I urge students to analyze and question information power structures in my classes, I am also asking students to consider where they are and where others are and have been. A major issue over the last couple of years in higher ed and at my institution involves creating inclusive communities. One of the things that always comes up in trainings and discussions is the importance of identifying and being mindful of your biases. That also happens to be one aspect of CIL. You need to understand where you stand in the discussion. Students have to ask themselves what their privilege is and how that influences their understanding. Half of our student body receives need based financial aid, but the other half have families that can afford to pay around $50,000 per year. When you have classrooms that include students from all places on the financial spectrum, it is really important for everyone in the room to be able to identify and name privilege and power.
In an oppressive system, you obviously end up with people that are born into one side of the equation or the other. It is easier to change the equation if both sides see how it does not add up. My mother has recently been really surprised and upset to discover that so many of the people in her life are racist. What brought that to light for her? Facebook. It has become harder for people to keep their biases to themselves. But the good news is that finding ways to uncover bias and inequities helps us all to get to a place where we can start to analyze and question them. One of the things we can learn from Freire is how to do that in a productive way. One of my favorite pieces of Freire’s work is his explanation of the complexity of dialogue. For him, dialogue is much more than just a discussion where everyone shares their truth. Rather, it is about taking those truths and using them to look deeper, analyze, and make change.
Okay, I appreciate what you are saying, but there is an odd dynamic in current US media and politics, which is that the authoritative voices like objectivity-minded journalists and fact-checkers, as well as establishment politicians, are under attack mainly from the Right. It is Donald Trump and his ilk who claim that Politifact is biased and that scientific claims are politically biased. People on the left, including radicals, tend to be more fact-oriented and science-oriented, and depend for the arguments they make on the possibility of claims to an independent objective reality, facts that everyone must accept and understand for their implications. How does that jibe with ideas in critical information literacy about questioning authoritative information? And how do you deal with right-wing students rejecting Politifact?
CIL and critical education theory do not just demand that we question authority, but also seek social justice. Justice can only be found by seeking evidence and facts. But beyond that, we also have values to guide us. Part of critical pedagogy is naming values. When working with problem-posing methods and dialogue, teachers should always encourage students to name the values that underlie the evidence, in addition to looking at how they mesh with their own values. To question does not necessarily mean to deny or even disprove. When we say to question, we mean to look at the whole picture with authenticity and hope with the goal of getting closer to social justice. I think Freire’s book titles alone display that approach: Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Pedagogy of Hope, Pedagogy of Freedom, Teachers as Cultural Workers, Education for Critical Consciousness,…
The Right is doing exactly the opposite of looking at the big picture with authenticity and hope -they are focusing on pieces to obscure the whole and they are twisting the truth or outright lying to drive home political points. They lack important information literacy skills. They claim that the media, educators, and science are biased, but they use logically flawed or untruthful arguments. They bring up conspiracy theories for things like climate science because that works for them when actual facts would not. A student in a CIL class could not get away with this.
If you don’t trust the fact-checkers, you should check the facts. If a student disagrees with Politifact, they should fact check it. I actually did a little of that yesterday for my own enjoyment and would happily lead a student down that path. I might ask them to consider whether it is really the fact-checkers they don’t trust or if they don’t trust or want to believe facts, while also teaching them how to check the facts in question. Through this process, they may find that their favorite politicians often treat facts as though they are inconvenient or don’t mesh with how they have decided to interpret the world. But they could not do that with just a discussion or debate where I have my opinion and you have yours, but rather they would have to actually do some searching for facts. This is what Freire means when he says to structure the dialogue. How are you going to push students to ground themselves in their own experiences and think deeply while also considering others’ experiences, the evidence, and the overarching value structure you are working within? There are many levels of complexity there that go beyond an opinionated Twitter war.
There’s an example in my book of a librarian who had students research a fear that the media had perpetuated to try to find the science behind the fear. Basically, he wanted them to see that fears are often overblown by the media and scientific studies can be sensationalized. Unfortunately, almost all of the students found other newspaper articles on the fear rather than digging deeper to find the real science. This example shows that the layers of understanding are complex. I can see why the Right has such an easy time getting people to mistrust the media and I actually think that is an understandable impulse. But they stop there because it helps them meet their goal of obscuring and confusing in order to meet their political goals. With CIL, we teach students to take the next step and problematize, investigate, and dialogue about the issue, the evidence they’ve found, and the value structures they’ve uncovered.
I get what you’re saying, but I still feel like there is a tension involved in trying to empower students to question authority for themselves, and then at the same time exercising pedagogical authority in telling them the right and the wrong ways of doing that. Reed College, where you work, is a selective school, with students who bring their own intellectual motivation to the classroom. (Full disclosure: I know that because I was one of those students, a “Reedie,” for my first two years of college.) I’ve worked at other types of institutions though, where a lot of the students are just there because their families believe that college is the ticket to a middle class life, which is not their own background. Those students are more likely to feel alienated from the educational system and intellectual authorities in general. They might resent “elites” telling them what to think. This is the social position of typical Trump supporters, or so I have been reading. You probably don’t deal with a lot of them in your classrooms, but I wonder what you think about the difficulty of teaching students CIL when they are resistant to intellectual authority because of class dynamics?
I agree that there are students who resent elites telling them what to think. And they are right to resent that. I was poor when I started college and stayed that way until well into my first years as a librarian. My time in the middle class has been short so far. I personally felt disenfranchised for a very long time and I still have to stop myself from identifying as poor. My habit is always to go there, but doing so is not fair to people who are still in the middle of that struggle. I always think of the Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn quote: “How can you expect a man who’s warm to understand a man who’s cold?” I was once cold, but now I’m warm. And so I can and should maintain my empathy, but alienation sets in when those of us who are living a comfortable life tell others that we have the answers for them or tell them they should think about things a certain way because we know best. This includes questioning students’ motivations for being there. Going to college to try to work your way up the economic ladder is a smart thing to do, and I enjoy working with students who are motivated in that way because I understand it and I respect the stake they have in the game. I also enjoy and feel privileged to work with so many students that are intellectually motivated the way Reed students are, in the same way that I felt privileged to work with the many intellectually motivated students at my alma mater, the University of North Texas. But regardless of their intellectual motivations, I definitely believe almost all students hope to be able to support themselves financially when they graduate and they expect their educations to help them do that, even if they come from more privileged backgrounds.
But the alienation issue is very real. Students who’ve attended public education in this country are likely to have seen how the education system is often set up to keep them in their place. They are not wrong to feel that way because that is how our public education system is set up. It is very hierarchical and racist, funding is far from equitable, and teachers are often encouraged to control their classrooms above all else. It is very steeped in maintaining the status quo. One of the most remarkable things I discovered when I moved to Reed was how focused on personal empowerment liberal arts colleges are. Students are encouraged to think they are very special for being there. They are told they can change the world. And they have a lot of resources to help them think of ways to do that, including hands-on and involved faculty and staff, funding for research trips and projects, planned activities meant to engage them in the larger community, volunteer and paid opportunities in schools, labs, and non-profits, and of course a wonderful library. This is great for these students and this type of education benefits all of society because students from liberal arts colleges go on to do amazing things, but what if we told all students from Head Start through college that they were special? And then actually gave them tools to bring their gifts out?
Critical information literacy can actually help with alienation because it helps students of all backgrounds identify and reflect on where they are on the power structure underlying information availability, access, and distribution. I have found in my experience that students are empowered by that discussion alone. Seeing where you are and how you fit in a larger social system is something people crave, but there are few opportunities to discuss and problematize it in a group of people with a variety of backgrounds. The social system underlying information is something they live in, but may have never been asked to really think about. I find that I don’t need to say much to get that type of conversation going, which means I do very little telling students what to think.
Inequity is one of the things critical pedagogues hope to confront and challenge. But the change we hope to see will not come from us. It only starts with us. One of the librarians I interviewed said that we just have to hope students take what we’ve presented in our sessions and turn it into real learning later. We don’t have the time or space to make real lasting learning happen in our classrooms as librarians – what we are doing is planting seeds. As a librarian, the truth is I don’t get to deal in-depth with issues like intellectual authority or even motivation for being in college. The best I can do is plant seeds that encourage students to question. If there are students that question the questioning, I am open to them doing that. To take it back to the student who challenges Politifact and authority in general, I would say “good, you should be doing that. If you’re not questioning, you’re being complacent.” But I would also tell them that their arguments will be better and stronger and will be more likely to line up with their own views if they dig deeper and make sure they know the truth. Finally, I would encourage them to be open to what they find and realize they are seeing it through their own filter. If you’re going to mistrust someone you see as an intellectual authority, the best tactic is to know their arguments well and then find the facts that either prove or disprove their position.
Thanks for that explanation. I think you present a good way of thinking about it. I’d like to switch gears a bit. I’m curious about how the interviews you conducted changed the way you think about CIL or surprised you in some way. Could you talk a bit about that?
One of the biggest surprises for me was to hear how hard it was for so many librarians to get to practice CIL. I’ve long struggled with the relatively low status of librarians in education. I see library work as the very center or cornerstone of education and just don’t get why we often have to fight so hard to have a voice or be allowed to use our expertise to improve the educational experience of students. But when you’re struggling with something that is as personal as your own teaching practice, it is easy to think you are just doing something wrong when you feel like you have to work so hard to turn your teaching into what you want it to be. So I guess I thought my own teaching struggles reflected a weakness in my practice and hearing from so many librarians that they were having the same struggle was enlightening and oddly empowering. It made me realize that the status and stereotyping issues really do impact librarians’ ability to develop our own authentic teaching practices. It was not just me feeling this way – it is a real thing!
Another thing that surprised me was how little faculty status seemed to influence this. I asked participants to talk about their thoughts about faculty status and if they believed it helped librarians who teach. I don’t talk about this much in the book because it was not something I felt like I got enough information on to find patterns that I felt comfortable making assertions about, but the conversations I had with participants made me suspect that faculty status is not terribly important when it comes to empowering librarian teaching. Librarians that had worked in both types of institutions (as I have) did not find that their faculty status did much beyond giving them opportunities to build relationships through committee work. While I think relationship building is one of the most important things we can do as librarians, teaching faculty often see early career committee work as a distraction from developing their teaching practices. So why do librarians feel so differently about the interplay of committee work and developing a teaching practice? This would be a great research topic for someone interested in CIL!
Now that the book is complete and out in the world, what do you think remains to be said, by another work perhaps? Is there anything you regret you didn’t have a chance to cover, or would cover differently now?
There are so many aspects of CIL that still need to be covered! We need some actual classroom studies that look at how critical pedagogy works in our classrooms. We also have a lot of theoretical work still to do. Our theory is behind other educators so we need to take the time to consider what other educators and social scientists have been up to over the past couple of decades, while continuing to work on figuring out where librarianship and information literacy fit in that conversation. We also need to seek wider audiences for our information literacy imperative. You really make the case for this in your previous questions. There is a lot of evidence right now that society has to start paying attention to the importance of learning to understand and evaluate information. Information literacy is so much more than an academic skill and it is really very crucial for democracy. I would like to write something on the importance of CIL for a general audience.
Researching and writing this book really got me thinking about the positioning of librarians in education and in what ways our standing is related to being a historically women’s profession and librarianship’s bizarre stance on neutrality. The institutional barriers and professional philosophies that get in the way of librarians being able to teach CIL also lead to librarian disenfranchisement and burnout and limits our potential to positively impact students’ lives. This summer, I’ve returned to some previous research and done some new work to prepare a book proposal for you on these intersections. So much of the work that has been done on this has focused on women in public librarianship, but not as much has been done on women in academic libraries and even less on women librarians in K-12. Libraries were the most important part of building the first American colleges. Colleges with libraries made it and those without did not have a good chance. Likewise, the first academic librarians were often chosen from the best of the lecturers. How did we move from librarians holding a position of importance to becoming so disregarded intellectually? Somehow along the way, our management and clerical skills became what we are known for, rather than our intellectual skills. Everyone who knows several librarians knows this is crazy because the breadth of most librarians’ knowledge along with our capacity to problem solve, adapt to change, understand many disciplines and the publishing industry, and commitment to students should make our importance to education indisputable. Yet, many people don’t see our value and even write long, infuriating, ill-informed pieces stating that our profession is approaching its death. I want to investigate the history that led us to this point with the hopes that librarians will be empowered to reclaim our profession.
That’s an important topic, and it sounds like an ambitious project. I look forward to seeing the proposal. Thanks for doing this interview! I think it was enlightening. Best of luck with the book! I hope everyone reads it.
Thanks so much for the opportunity to talk a little about the book and CIL. I am excited to see where librarians take information literacy next. We still have work to do, but I have been really delighted to see how much critical engagement and reflection on information literacy has gained traction in recent years. It makes me feel really hopeful about the future of our profession.
 Maria T. Accardi, Emily Drabinski, and Alana Kumbier, eds., Critical Library Instruction: Theories and Methods (Duluth, MN: Library Juice Press, 2010), xiii.
August 4, 2016
Message from Diedre Conkling…
Believe it or not it is now time to start thinking about whether or not you would like to run for a position on SRRT Action Council. The terms are 3 year terms so would be from summer 2017 through summer 2020.
For information about SRRT Action Council just go to http://libr.org/srrt/council.php. There are 4 terms expiring, those of Laura Koltutsky, Charles Kratz, Nikki Winslow and me.
To run for a position you need to fill out the form at https://www.directvote.net/alanomination/2017users.html. The more complete the information you provide the better it is for all of us when we are voting.
All candidates running for round table positions must complete the biographical information form no later than 11:59 pm CST on January 26, 2017, after which point the form will go down and new candidates will not be accepted for the ballot.
Here are the instructions for candidates to register on the system:
1.) You will see a Self-Register link on the first page within the bolded text at the top of the page.
2.) Click on the Register link to fill out the registration information and to set your passcode for the Nominee/Candidate process.
3.) Once in the Nomination site you will need to select your ballot. Once you have made your selection, click on “GO”.
4.) Next you will select the office you wish to run for and then click on “GO”.
5.) The first entry, Display Name, is how you would like your name displayed on the ballot. Once you have filled in your name, click on “Next”.
6.) When you go to the page with all of the question/categories to fill in, you will notice the word count monitor. Once you reach the limit, the word count monitor turns RED. Please remember to save your work often.
7.) If you try and submit your work with one or more required questions/categories not completed properly, the system will not let you submit. If this is the case, you will notice the word “Required” by each required category or field that was missed.
8.) If you hit logout, the page will turn grey, provide a notification that your work must be saved before logging out.
9.) When you hit finish you will be able to view your work.
10.) Once you have reviewed your work, if you would like to make any changes, click the “Previous” button and if what you have entered meets with your approval, please hit the “Submit” button and then the “Finish” button.
11.) If at any time during the process, you run into technical difficulties or have a question, please click on the “Support” button located at the bottom of the page. Individuals at ALA cannot troubleshoot problems with the form.
Candidates must click the SUBMIT button, and then the FINISH button to successfully submit their info. Candidates who do not complete their bio form by January 26 will not be included on the ballot. Please let me know if there are any questions or concerns with use of the form.
All candidates must be a current member of the roundtable (ALA/SRRT) as of January 31, 2017 in order to stand for election. Those who are not members of the roundtable by that date will be removed from the ballot, including write-in candidates.
August 3, 2016
World Libraries — a peer-reviewed, open access LIS journal published by the Graduate School of Library and Information Science at Dominican University in River Forest, Illinois — invites submissions on library and information topics of interest to an international audience.
If libraries, museums and archives are windows to the world, it follows that those working in them must also be internationally engaged, sharing ideas across borders, profiting from the successes and discoveries of farflung colleagues, and strengthening alliances built upon shared philosophies.
World Libraries is a cooperative, collaborative project devoted to the free and unfettered sharing of knowledge. Working from the premise that librarianship has always had and should always have an international scope — and that we ignore ideas and neglect allies at our own peril — we invite LIS professionals and fellow travelers to engage in an ongoing conversation.
Topics may include but are not limited to:
– Library and information trends, including the maker movement, sharing economy, gamification, resilience, connected learning, haptic technology, linked data and elder services
– Disaster preparation and recovery, including crisis informatics
– Preservation and conservation, including the impact of global climate change
– Scholarly communication, including libraries as publishers and information creators
– International dialogue on LIS topics, including organizations such as IFLA and the International Librarians Network
– The impact of library and information services on political discourse and activity, socio-economic trends, and quality of life
– Marketing and advocacy, including case studies of approaches and campaigns
– Library design and innovative use
– The for-profit library sector and economic globalization
– Comparative librarianship, including postcolonial studies
– Information services and minority groups, including immigrant communities, indigenous people and LGBTQ+ people
– Literacy, including information and artifactual literacy
– Demonstrating the value of library and information services
– Access to information and intellectual freedom
– The future of library and information services
– Leaders or influential figures in the library and information sector
– And library and information topics in any country or region, particularly emerging countries and regions
Submissions may take the form of research papers, interviews, reportage and correspondence, opinion pieces, talks and lectures, roundtables, multimedia storytelling, and product and media reviews (including books, audio-visual works and electronic resources). Other types of submissions are welcome and will be given due consideration by our editorial team. Accepted research papers are evaluated by at least two peer reviewers.
World Libraries is published in English, but non-English content is welcome and translation assistance may be available.
Authors whose works are published in World Libraries are given the option of retaining the rights to their works. They may retain copyright or select a Creative Commons license that best suits their needs. More information will be provided upon acceptance of a submission.
For more information about World Libraries and to make a submission, visit http://worldlibraries.dom.edu/index.php/worldlib/about/submissions.
Questions? Please contact World Libraries editor Scott Shoger at email@example.com
More about World Libraries
World Libraries is a project of the faculty, staff and students of Dominican University Graduate School of Library and Information Science; an advisory board of library and information professionals from around the world; and an ever-changing cast of contributors and readers. It was established in 1990 under the title Third World Libraries.
Past contributors and editors include Marta Terry González, Loriene Roy, Ken Haycock, Sara Paretsky, Roderick Cave, D. J. Foskett, Norman Horrocks, Carlos Victor Penna, Josefa Emilia Sabor, Peter Havard-Williams, Herbert S. White, Jeanne Drewes, Lars-Anders Baer, Peggy Sullivan, Robert P. Doyle, Michael E. D. Koenig and John W. Berry.
Themed issues have focused on indigenous library services, Latin American librarianship, the Center for Research Libraries and information services in Cuba, Nigeria and Poland. The entire run of the journal is available at http://worldlibraries.dom.edu.