Or maybe it was just myself and my fellow students. Most all of us have enacted change and worked beyond the expectations of librarians in whichever field we’ve ended up. We were dedicated to doing that.

I see my degree as a stepping stone. Would I have done as good a job as I do now without it? Perhaps, but the MSLS gave me entry into seeing how things are done, why they are done and the best plan of attack to improve upon them. Just saying somthing “sucks” or the current librarians are out of touch means nothing. Knowing how to play in the sandbox while making a BETTER sandbox is what grad school should be. It certainly was for my second masters as well.

I enjoyed getting my degree and felt that it was reasonably rigorous (mostly theory, very little practice save for cataloguing and programming). However, my professors made it clear to our class that we were _not_ learning to be front-line staff because you didn’t need an MLS to do that… rather we were learning to be managers.

They compared the MLS stream to an MBA or MPA (the MIS stream was compared to an advanced computing degree). I vividly remember my management professor (and this was a required class) telling us on the first day of classes that we should not expect to be reference librarians or children’s librarians or cataloguers – we should expect to head those departments and then move up the chain of command if we so desired. Larger libraries were seen as the exceptions to this rule – though even then my professors felt that this would change. This made sense to me then (late 1990s) and it still does today.

A lot of the higher-ups in my institution also do not have library degrees, and they are very good at what they do. The problem is, they seem to look with slight disdain upon those of us working here who do have degrees, and usually the reverse of “Where did you get your MLS?”…“Do you have permission to speak?” results. Even though we have our degrees, we don’t get many chances to bring our ideas to the table.

That being said, I really like your response to Amanda’s query about the importance of an MLS. What matters most is the value brought to one’s library, and to the profession as a whole, degree or no degree.

I am halfway through an MLS, preparing for a second career (I’m a statistician). I do wish there was more theory and intellectual effort required in the program. I have been seeking outside readings to fulfill that part.

Well, we may or we may not, but here’s my .02 of a solution: divide up the LIS schools. What if current graduate programs offered two different degrees? With all the debate over “i” schools or traditional library programs, why couldn’t both exist under the same roof but with two separate tracks available? I’m thinking of something like an MIS available for those perhaps interested in research, academic or techie careers and something like a Master’s in Library Arts (like we needed another MLA acronym, but there it is) for those who want a professional career, but along a different track. Maybe this is just a polite way of shuffling along the Rock People into their own separate world, but the profession is pretty split already (unofficially), and keeps splintering under the weight of the many groups all identifying themselves as “Librarians.”

Just a suggestion – totally offensive or way off base?

This isn’t to place the blame entirely on library schools, however–I think that a lot of “traditional” library work has become unspecialized. And for good reason, because it’s not stuff you need a degree to learn (even if you did 10 to 15 years ago). It just does not take a MLS to perform much of the day-to-day library work anymore. Sure, some higher level and administrative positions should always be limited to degree holders. But I do believe that experience can substitute for an MLS in certain positions.

Overall, I just want to say that the MLS does not indicate one’s intelligence. I really wish people wouldn’t act like it is.

My early work in libraries was as a student assistant, a student supervisor, and as a paraprofessional. I have now done several years in various graduate assistant jobs. I have yet to have a professional librarian position. Does this mean that I am not a librarian? [That is directed more at others than to Meredith, btw.]

The best that can be said is that I have yet to hold a professional librarian position. Very true. So what? I have been doing original cataloging (serials, no less) for 2 years now, I have recently been given Enhance status so can now fix (most of) those ridiculous LC and OCLC QC records that often suck, and I have presented at a professional conference. [By the way, I did get several comments from people who attended that they were upset to find out I was not a "Librarian." Yep. Made me feel REAL good. But they learned something from me whether they chose to admit it or not. What did make me feel good were all the good comments I got and the fact that MANY people contacted me over the next few months for help and I was asked to present a version of my talk at our state group.]

Anybody that has the chutzpah to claim I am not a librarian had best be ready to be made a fool of. Because here is the deal … There will (always?) be vast disagreement over just which jobs are “professional librarian” jobs.

As soon as someone starts listing jobs that meet their version of the requirement to be one someone else will deconstruct that listing.

Another view I heartily laugh at is the whole “library school gives you the theoretical underpinnings necessary to be a true member of this profession; it allows us to work from a joint understanding of who we are and where we are going” and related mumbo-jumbo. That is pure rhetoric that is espoused by most any grad department and they want you to believe it. In some departments and some programs it may be true, for some people. But it is nigh on impossible in our short and highly varied programs.

Even here at UIUC–which I think has one of the finest LIS schools available today–that is complete and utter nonsense. Just look at all the talk in the biblioblogosphere and our “professional” listservs to see that there is little joint understanding and how much utter confusion there is over where we are going.

What title one is afforded is not relevant at all. What does matter are the skills, attitudes, and dedication with which one discharges their duties.

I do agree that LIS schools have a responsibility to help demonstrate the value of the MLS, but I am not sure that is even possible any more. The roles and functions in which we operate in libraries are far too divergent at this point for there to be much of a common core such that we “work from a joint understanding of who we are and where we are going.”

But if there is any such common core and particular value to be had by having this degree in common then THAT is where the discussion should be focussed–amongst ourselves as individuals, our professional associations, our so-called accrediting body, and the LIS schools.

Until that conversation is had then most of this discussion is at best a waste of time, imho. Although I do appreciate the sane voices of Meredith, Rachel and Dorothea. I just wish they were able to put that energy into a more holistically better discussion than in trying to add some sense to a nonsensical discussion.