Public Libraries in our Changing Environment: WebJunction’s Building Bridges Series
Your Library’s Future
Thursday, February 2, 2012
2:00 pm, Eastern
Please join host Chrystie Hill, WebJunction’s Director of Community Services, and Martín Gómez, City Librarian at Los Angeles Public Library, for FREE interactive webinar about the future of public libraries.
Chrystie will host Martín as he answers questions and gives practical advice about the continued success of public libraries in our changing environment.
Tools and Inspiration Toward Successful Library Community Partnership
The library is the perfect place to encourage connections and partnerships of all kinds—whether it is to create unique volunteer opportunities, to provide “atypical” library services, or even to make a space for new ways of thinking! Libraries have become hubs for many community-related endeavors, and moving outside of its walls is no longer just a trend, it’s a necessity. But building community means actually getting the community involved. It also means establishing the right kind of connections.
Critical Librarianship Discussion at MW 2012
1) From an interview with Toni Samek:
http://bclaifc.wordpress.com/2007/11/13/critical-librarianship-an-interview-with-toni-samek/
Critical librarianship is an international movement of library and information workers that consider the human condition and human rights above other professional concerns. This critical community, from which the book draws upon for its optimistic vision for the future, has built up its visibility and momentum over the course of many decades.
Starting in the late 1960s, however, advocates of an alternative library culture based on the concept of library social responsibility, that included the librarian’s right to freedom of expression, lobbied the ALA to extend the concept of intellectual freedom to include library practitioners as well as library users. For example, these alternative library culture advocates believed that while, as professionals, librarians have “the responsibility for the development and maintenance of intellectual freedom,” as citizens, librarians have the fundamental right to freedom of expression (e.g. library employee freedom of speech in the workplace on professional and policy issues and freedom of the library press). So, the ethos of critical librarianship is inextricably linked to the ethos of intellectual freedom, and by extension then the concept of human rights. But as Al Kagan wrote in the context of the ALA Intellectual Freedom Committee’s opposition to an international boycott of an apartheid regime, “many intellectual freedom supporters do not appear to recognize that all human and political rights, including intellectual freedom, are constantly impacting on each other and as a consequence none are absolute.” Indeed, critical library discourse is a site of contestation for various stakeholders in the dominant culture of the profession, because it challenges librarianship to re-conceptualize the traditional ethic of intellectual freedom.
2) From Elaine Harger:
Those practitioners engaged in critical librarianship seek, in both theory and practice (1) to expose the means through which the library wittingly and unwittingly supports systems of oppression (whether they be physical, emotional, spiritual, systemic or personal) and, conversely, (2) to promote the library, its services, and collections as a means of liberation for individuals, communities, and society at large. As of January 2012, the editorial policies of the following journals (print and online) can be considered as embodying critical perspectives as defined above: Progressive Librarian (US), Information for Social Change and Library and Information Science Critique (UK), bis (Sweden).
3) From Rosenzweig, Mark. “The Basis of a Humanist Librarianship in the Ideal of Human Autonomy.” Progressive Librarian Issue 23, Spring 2004:
This paper will suggest the idea of “autonomy” as a key to humanism which also unlocks librarianship’s enmeshment with the goal of the “good society,” therefore as well in an overall project of social change for human development.
The support of this maxim’s realization is clear if we start with the fact that librarianship is based on the idea of a common heritage made intellectually accessible and usable to all – today, tomorrow and thereafter – an idea which rests in turn on: a) the implicit notion of the fundamental sociality of knowledge; b) an orientation towards preserving for the future, thus working, always, for the not- yet-existing – perhaps emergent – state-of-affairs; c) a strongly democratic commitment to free and equitable access to knowledge; and d) an ethos of cooperation, mutuality, an “ethic of care” devoted to unimpeded, self-development as imperative to collective well- being, the latter a social and cultural goal only very partially, unequally, distortedly realizable under the present circumstances.
Librarianship is an endeavor which, sometimes despite itself and despite its quotidian appearance, has acted as if, while serving the intellectual needs of the present, it is preparing for a “better day” when its “resources” will be more fully available and used as if in order to help build the bridge to a more just, more equitable, more humane order. In that way, librarianship would appear, in its way, a fundamentally “optimistic” endeavor, expressing – in the presence of so much evidence to the contrary in libraries’ collections – a faith, much to be valued today, in the very futurity of humankind. For librarians themselves it should be obvious, on reflection, in their own work-world (but seldom is, because of the often alienated and “unfree” nature of their own labor), that human freedom and “disalienation” are possible, achievable, if only because efforts such as theirs, quintessentially collective and cooperative, are possible and sustainable, deepening and ramifying human interconnectedness in efforts which prove by example that the prevailing mechanistic, atomized and positivist model of society is untrue and that “the market” which supposedly is the sole possible framework for human endeavor is not the necessary mediator for organized and effective human interaction, progress and development.
4) from Phenix, Katharine J., and Kathleen De la Peña McCook. “Human Rights and Librarians.” Reference & User Services Quarterly 45, no. 1:
Human rights – the assumption that all human beings, by virtue of their existence, deserve certain rights and dignity – is most eloquently defined in the preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world. What is the responsibility of the librarian to serve the cause of human rights? The oft-cited neutrality of a balanced collection is increasingly, and rightfully, being called into question. In a 2004 presentation before the Texas Library Association, professor Robert Jensen discussed “The Myth of the Neutral Professional” and observed:
The ideology of political neutrality, unfortunately, keeps professionals such as journalists, teachers, and librarians – as well as citizens – from understanding the relationship between power and the professions. Any claim to such neutrality is illusory; there is no neutral ground on which to stand anywhere in the world.
5) from Buschman, John. “Democratic theory in library information science: Toward an emendation.” Journal Of The American Society For Information Science & Technology 58, no. 10 (August 2007): 1483-1496
Democracy is not a specific thing to be attained (e.g., a possession or a perfected structure) but rather a process that enables—even requires—debate about its meaning, limits, and problems to realize authentic collective democratic action.
If states and families and local communities have an interest in the “ways of life most favored by parental and political authorities [— that is,] a commitment to share the rights and the obligations of citizenship with people who do not share our complete conception of the good life [—then] to the extent that [we] share…this … a democratic theory of education commands our allegiance” (pp. 41–47). Neither an a priori foundation nor a relativistic justification of the moment, this theory draws on questions of the public’s interests in its families, children, and investments made in a system of institutions meant to influence and shape the future of society. At a time when public functions and public institutions are being (minimally) subjected to market forces and (maximally) fully privatized (Buschman, 2003), a grounding purpose in democratic theory cuts through much of the dominant paradigm of neoliberal logic behind these social and economic choices of direction. Far from a neutral separate realm, LIS substantially shares this same raison d’etat.
Libraries and information systems, like education, can be and have been used to oppress, stifle, control, and direct information toward goals opposite these. If LIS makes any claim in terms of social and normative values or if LIS stakes any normative claim to the substantial public investments in libraries and information systems, then a democratic theory of LIS linked to the principles of the regime would go some ways to ground the field beyond an instrumental or relativistic basis. It commands our allegiance in Gutmann’s terms.
Rather than a set of answers or definitive directions toward a set end (like a road map), democratic theory raises different types of questions for LIS research. Rather than a focus on more and better refined techniques, democratic theory begins to answer the harder question: What are those techniques for? It is Gutmann who has sketched the outline of that answer: Educative institutions and systems (e.g., library and research resources) in democratic societies should be about replicating the bases of democratic culture.
Wolin’s work would seem to firmly place those information systems and institutions (e.g., education) within the reality of political interest (as does Gutmann). He further suggested that our formalized systems of rights (to information and perhaps its technologies, to balanced selections of materials, etc.) are mere formalities. The gap between these information structures and the polity as actor is now wider than ever, yet we live in a self-heralded age of vast information, more widely available, by easier means, with the implied claim that this translates to more/better democracy. Surely this disjuncture bears some relationship to or place within LIS research. Habermas in turn raises even broader research questions concerning the scientization of discourse in LIS systems and research (and thus the lack of ethical and normative content), or the flip side of the same coin in terms of a debased public communicative rationality in the form of the products of information capitalism. These perspectives again raise different questions for LIS. Is research on information seeking behavior a social science intervention into learning and inquiry merely in service to the information industry (to better hone products and marketing)? Do various search softwares shape or obfuscate results? If so how? Alternately, why is the broad debasement of public access to public information not the subject of LIS research (OpenTheGovernment.org, 2005)?
Gutmann’s work is suggestive of a mode of operation. That is, an institution cannot foster democracy without practicing it. … Can, for instance, a library support intellectual freedom for its community without practicing it as a workplace?
“Literacy A Way Out for At-Risk Youth” by Jennifer Sweeney
Literacy: A Way Out for At-Risk Youth
This exploration of juvenile corrections librarianship provides a complete description of these specialized services, addresses unique challenges in this library environment, and promotes intellectual and social growth for at-risk youth.
The ability to read is a learned skill that most take for granted. For at-risk youth or those within detention facilities, however, lack of literacy is a widespread problem. While literacy is not the only factor that determines whether young people transcend the cycle of crime and violence, the inability to read is a major obstacle to success “on the outside.”
Civic Learning and Democratic Engagement
Civic Learning and Democratic Engagement.
A Call to Action and Report from The National Task Force on Civic Learning and Democratic Engagement
A Crucible Moment: College Learning and Democracy’s Future
By The National Task Force on Civic Learning and Democratic Engagement
This report from the National Task Force on Civic Learning and Democratic Engagement calls on the nation to reclaim higher education’s civic mission. Commissioned by the Department of Education and released at a White House convening in January 2012, the report pushes back against a prevailing national dialogue that limits the mission of higher education to workforce preparation and training while marginalizing disciplines basic to democracy. The Task Force calls on educators and public leaders to advance a 21st century vision of college learning for all students—a vision with civic learning and democratic engagement an expected part of every student’s college education. The report documents the nation’s anemic civic health and includes recommendations for action that address campus culture, general education, and civic inquiry as part of major and career fields as well as hands-on civic problem solving across differences. AAC&U thanks the Bringing Theory to Practice project and its supporters, the S. Engelhard Center, and the Christian A. Johnson Endeavor Foundation, for funding the design, printing, and dissemination of this publication.
A Crucible Moment was prepared at the invitation of the U.S. Department of Education under the leadership of the Global Perspective Institute, Inc. (GPI) and AAC&U. The publication was developed with input from a series of national roundtables involving leaders from all parts of the higher education and civic renewal communities.
The project, Civic Learning and Democratic Engagement, has been funded at least in part with Federal funds from the US Department of Education under contract number ED-OPE-10-C-0078. The content of this publication does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the US Department of Education nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the US Government.
This entire report is available as a PDF document (see link below) and additional print copies can be purchased through AAC&U’s online publications catalog.
Protesting Detroit library closure–Losing an integral hub, an anchor.
A group of metro Detroit activists are protesting the closure of a Detroit city library today, calling the branch an integral hub in a neighborhood around 7 Mile desperate for havens.
Porter Memorial Branch Library Awarded LEED Gold certification [Newton County, GA}
“In many ways, Porter Memorial represents the past, present and future for Newton County,” said Library Director Lace Keaton. “One of the county’s goals for the Porter branch was to set an example for the environmentally conscious design of future buildings throughout the state. In addition to offering state-of-the-art library services, the building itself can actually be used as a teaching tool for sustainable design, renewability and the role architecture can play in preserving our environment.”
The Porter Memorial Branch Library was officially awarded LEED Gold certification Wednesday, becoming the second library in Georgia to receive that level of environmental honor.
Vernon Area Public Library (IL) is 2011 “Not-for-Profit Business of the Year”
The Greater Lincolnshire Chamber of Commerce (GLCC) has named the Vernon Area Public Library as their 2011 “Not-for-Profit Business of the Year” in honor of the library’s exemplary business practices, community involvement, customer service, and innovation.
“We are pleased to be recognized for our connections with the community,” said Library Director Cynthia Fuerst. “Our staff and Library Board of Trustees work hard to provide excellent resources and customer service to our individual and business patrons.”
Sno-Isle Libraries (WA): “Issues That Matter”
A screening and discussion of a new PBS documentary, “Not In Our Town: Light in the Darkness,” is planned for the Langley Library.
The screening is part of Sno-Isle Libraries’ “Issues That Matter” series of programs to encourage community dialogue.
“Not In Our Town: Light in the Darkness” tells the story of residents of a Long Island village taking action after an immigrant is killed in a hate crime attack by seven teenagers. The film offers a blueprint for people who want to do something before intolerance turns to violence.
The hour-long documentary, narrated by Alfre Woodard, will be followed by a discussion about what folks can do to stop hate in their community. Communities across the country use the film to initiate dialogue about intolerance and anti-immigrant violence.
Museums and Community Engagement
Museums & Community Resolution
The American Association of Museums urges all museums to embrace their responsibility to be active and collaborative civic institutions and to respond to the aspirations and needs of citizens in their communities.
