On Academic Librarians and the MLIS

During my year and five classes in library school, I have learned some crucial things, one of them being the importance of the MLIS to the profession.  From my readings, particularly “Academic/Research Librarians with Subject Doctorates:  Data and Trends 1965-2006″ by Thea Lindquist and Todd Gilman and “Just Another Field?” by B. Crowley, I can appreciate what an affront some librarians take the lack of an MLIS as.  Master’s degrees are not interchangeable, after all, and having subject knowledge in a field does not ensure that one can be an effective librarian in that field. 

[A digression:  consider, though, how many university faculty who divide their time between teaching and research have been trained as teachers.  Whether true or not, the assumption seems to be that strong enough subject knowledge will make up for any shortcomings or lack of training as a teacher.  I wonder if the same assumption gets transferred to librarianship--that is, if a person has spent enough time in a library, he or she should know how to be a librarian, because subject knowledge is the most important thing.]

As I stated in an early post, I am a “begin at the beginning” type of person, so even though I might have been able to finagle an academic library job without the MLIS, I am content to work my way steadily through the classes and bide my time.  Not only for the knowledge I am gaining along the way, but also for the slow process of transformation that is occurring.  I am coming to know what a librarian knows as well as to think as a librarian thinks.   And, importantly, to think of myself as a librarian. 

I attended last year’s orientation with a sense of panic.  I’m sure Dr. A. saw it in my eyes.  What am I doing, I thought.  I am making such a mistake.  Me, a librarian?  On paper, it sounded like a great idea, and I must have been convincing to be accepted into the program, but I was having the most difficulty convincing myself.  My memories of Tuscaloosa are of long, sweltering days and the sense that I didn’t belong there. 

This process of identification with the field, and learning to view myself as a librarian, has been gradual and is ongoing.  More and more, I feel at home in my classes, particularly in this class.  I understand more of what librarians are concerned with, what they value, what they strive to do. 

Issues of identity tend to be difficult.  Learning to feel like a librarian is not the only thing I’ve gotten out of the MLIS program, but it’s certainly one of the most crucial parts for me.  I would much rather learn it here rather than hastily try to put it together on the job.

A few thoughts on publishing and tenure

I read a slew of articles last week about academic librarians, publishing, advanced degrees, and tenure. So many, I didn’t have time to write about them. A week later, however, I still have a couple of comments to make, and I’ll share them here.

First, concerning the issue of tenure–I wonder how many academic librarians want tenure and its concomitant stresses and demands. Certainly, as professionals we all desire reasonable salaries, respect from university colleagues, and the right to participate in campus governing bodies. My question, perhaps overly naive, is, are these objectives attainable only via the gristmill of tenure? My impression from the readings is that the distinction between tenured and non-tenured library positions is neither strict nor uniform. It depends on the institution, in other words.

Some academic librarians surely want tenure and are willing (eager?) to perform the activities needed to attain it, including publishing. From my experience, however, publishing is typically the province of doctoral-holding faculty in academic departments, so I would expect the faculty of LIS programs to be responsible for the bulk of research and publishing in the field. In English, those with master’s degrees do the majority of undergraduate teaching, working as adjuncts and instructors at universities or at four-year, community, and technical colleges; the demands of these positions leave precious little time for research, whether it is encouraged by the institution or not. These faculty typically will not be the ones publishing in the top journals or writing definitive scholarly monographs–this is for those at research institutions.

Perhaps there is some snobbery that accompanies the whole hierarchical structure, but there’s also the belief that doctoral-level work equips one with the knowledge, experience, and ’seasoning’ (a combination of time and development of critical acuity) to compete as a researcher.  The doctoral student is groomed and ushered into that role.  Is there a different state of affairs in the field of academic librarianship?  Again, my impression from last week’s readings was that the MLIS does not consistently prepare its students for the demands of research and publication.  Some programs do, some programs don’t, and that appears to leave new academic librarians striving for tenure in a tough spot, relying on institutional programs, associations, and mentors to fill in the gaps. 

Although I have come across stray comments in the readings that disparage the general state of publications in the field, I don’t know enough to determine how accurate this assessment is.  However, it does make me question whether some adjustments need to be made in the MLIS, in mentoring/support/training for academic librarians, or in tenure requirements.