I’m sure some of you remember the big push last year and early this year to require the MLS for the Executive Director of the American Library Association (ALA) — if you don’t, here is an article, column, and blog post about it. One big argument I kept hearing was that we needed someone who understood and had experience in libraries. What I found interesting was a lack of recognition that someone could be a leader of major libraries or library consortia and not have an MLS. It was almost as if there was no understanding of the fact that we have people who spend their entire careers in librarianship who do not have an MLS. Many, many ALA members do not have an MLS, yet somehow the idea of someone without an MLS representing the ALA was repugnant to some (and to others signaled the death knell for our profession). What became clear from this debate was that a good number of people — those nearing the end of their careers seemed to be the most outspoken — felt that we needed to defend our professional credentials against those who do not value libraries and do not see us as a profession. Here’s what John Berry of Library Journal said on the issue:
Now a growing chorus of “experts” from outside the field tell us that libraries and the professionals who administer them are obsolete. In truth, the profusion of information sources coupled with the erosion of the quality of the information they provide has added urgency to the fundamental work of the librarian. We collect and disseminate the facts of humankind after careful evaluation of sources as to their currency, accuracy, depth, breadth, biases, and prejudices. No other profession has that mission. The MLIS credential is one signal that the holder has at least studied and considered these issues and understands the need for an institution and a professional cadre to serve and protect the rights of all people to accurate information. ALA’s leaders, and indeed all librarians, must be holders of that important degree. We must not abandon it now.
How the Executive Director of the ALA not having an MLS actually detracts from our professional cred is still beyond me. The people who say libraries are obsolete are not thinking of librarians at all (or if they do, they are old ladies with buns) and many probably don’t even realize we have a professional Masters’ degree. I assume the search committee would make sure the Executive Director can adequately communicate the value of the profession to others. Whatever the argument, the motion did not pass in the election and the MLS is now a preferred qualification for the position.
But that sense of our profession being under siege and needing to barricade our professional doors was echoed in other things I’ve read recently and in experiences I’ve had. And, frankly, that attitude makes me ill.
I first read Peter Murray’s “Anxious Anger – or: why does my profession want to become a closed club” in which he describes a far-from-inspiring closing keynote at the Re-Think It conference given by Julie Todaro (just past past-president of ALA) and Jim Neal (just now past president of ALA):
I started taking notes at the beginning of their talks expecting there would be uplifting ideas and quotes that I could attribute to them as I talk with others about the aspirations of the FOLIO project (a crucial part of my day job). Instead, Julie kicked things off by saying the key task that she works on at her day job is maintaining faculty status for librarians. She emphasized the importance of credentialing and using the usefulness of skills to a library’s broader organization as a measure of value. Jim spoke of the role of library schools and library education to define classes of people: librarians, paraprofessionals, students, and the like, and that the ALA should be at the heart of minting credentials to be used (I think) as gatekeepers into ‘professional’ jobs.
Peter goes on to say that he knows many people working in vital roles in libraries who are well-steeped in the values and ethos of the profession and don’t have the MLS. I do too. And I’m frustrated as hell that people think that we need to create and enforce class boundaries in our field in order to protect our own status. People might have different roles in our libraries based on their skills and credentials, but it doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be treated like full and valued partners in the growth and improvement of the organization. Too often though, librarians feel like we need to protect our turf by marginalizing our colleagues without the MLS. And how is that anything less than discrimination?
I remember working as a library assistant while I was working on my library degree and I remember how marginalized those of us in the position were. I worked in circulation (at the check-out desk and upstairs information desk) at a small city public library in a county that had a branch in another part of our city. Often, if we didn’t have a book, we would end up looking to see if the county library had it for the patron. I had the simple, non-earth-shattering idea of creating a computer shortcut to the county library catalog on the circulation and information desk computers; an idea that my colleagues in Circ were in favor of as a helpful time-saver. I remember suggesting it to my supervisor and how tremendously dismissive she was of the idea and me. It was clear to me that I was in a class of people who were not paid to think of ways to improve the library, but just to do the tasks associated with their job. It was demoralizing.
I’m sure there are people working in staff positions in libraries who don’t see it as a career, but I know so many who do. And what do we do for those passionate, dedicated people working in our libraries who do not have the MLS? A friend of mine recently left libraries for a non-library job. She was an incredible go-getter who was full of ideas and committed to doing the work to make them happen. Only she rarely was in a position to make her ideas happen because she was a “paraprofessional” and in many libraries, paraprofessionals are not empowered to suggest projects or improvements the way “professionals” are. She was an exceptional employee who couldn’t afford to go to library school, and there weren’t really opportunities in her job for her to take on new challenges or get more autonomy, much less to advance. In a situation like that, what’s a dynamic, passionate, improvement-oriented person to do?
Kendra Levine has written three brilliant posts about people working in libraries without the professional credential and our responsibility to stand up for their rights in solidarity as library workers:
- Library Workers – Let’s Talk about Solidarity
- More on Library Worker Solidarity – Librarians Need to Make Amends
- More on Library Workers – What Path is Your Position On?
Her posts are on fire with their righteous awesomeness!! Here’s just one excerpt from her second post:
Librarians need to eat crow and apologize for past slights and insults. We need to begin with reflection and self education. Recognize the importance and dignity of all work, and embody that belief. Libraries are complex systems and operations that need lots of different kind of workers to function. When I hear librarians laughingly plead ignorance about bib records because why should they actually need to worry about them, it’s embarrassing and offensive. (And also reflects the deprofessionalization of tech services…) So think about what you are going to say and be careful with how you say it. I know for a profession of people who tend to be driven by words, we can often be very pedantic and precise with our own, but also carelessly punch down. So much that I think most people don’t think they’re going to do it.
Over the course of my career, I’ve seen people punch down at people in non-faculty positions, faculty librarians without tenure, and people in “paraprofessional positions.” I’ve seen people get their backs up when a “non-librarian” makes a suggestion about something that is the librarians’ domain and yet librarians in non-supervisory roles feel perfectly comfortable telling people in access services or technical services how to do their jobs better. I’ve probably been guilty of being territorial myself and I feel no lack of shame for that. I’ve seen the class divides everywhere I’ve worked, even when I’ve worked with people who were warm and wonderful and all liked their jobs. These divisions keep libraries from being a team environment where everyone feels like they are working towards a greater goal. Workers who are marginalized tend to focus only on their small area of the big picture because they aren’t empowered to think beyond it. They may have valuable insights and ideas that we will never learn about because we don’t value them.
Being territorial with our colleagues is not going to strengthen our profession or our libraries. If anything, it kills library workers’ passion for their work and their sense of being a member of a team. And if treating our colleagues with dignity and respect and advocating for them to get a decent wage will make people decide not to get an MLS, I think it’s on MLS programs to assert their value or improve what they offer. We shouldn’t have to prove the value of our professional credential by shitting on our colleagues.
I feel like Kendra’s third post speaks to my friend’s situation. The best supervisors learn what an employee’s goals are and help equip them for and move them toward that goal. Not all libraries have ample advancement opportunities, but I think a manager can do a great deal to support a direct report in developing leadership and other experiences that will help them move to a better job elsewhere. My library director at Norwich University absolutely saw this as her role and she gave me so many opportunities to grow and lead. This should not only be something that managers do for those with an MLS — all employees deserve to be seen as whole people with the desire to grow.
I honestly don’t know why those without the MLS are members of ALA, an organization that does not seem to have their interests at heart if the past two presidents’ attitudes are any indication. Frankly, I’ve always been puzzled by ALA’s lack of focus on the needs and labor issues of people working in libraries. ALA wants to strengthen the institutions (libraries) and the structures (our professional credential and the caste system it creates), but there’s little focus on the the rights and well-being of library workers (and thank you, April Hathcock, for suggesting that change at ALA Council). ALA-APA (which is supposed to be focused on library employees) is an unempowered, undersupported afterthought, but it doesn’t have to be.
Those of us who work in libraries are all professionals. We may work in different roles, but we all deserve equal dignity, respect, and a valued voice in our workplaces. We will strengthen our libraries by making sure that everyone working in libraries is valued and that doesn’t require “devaluing” the MLS.
Hi Meredith,
I agree completely with your post. I am an academic librarian and some of the condescending behavior of my fellow librarians towards staff is shameful. Many of our catalogers, acquisitions, and other tech workers have been here a lot longer than most of us, and have seen lots of us come and go. They know what they’re doing.
When I served as the training coordinator for my library, I always used the term “library personnel” when sending out training opportunities. I think this was a good way to get more participation by all of us in the library, and it was great to see staff taking advantage of training they didn’t have to pay for. As hourly workers, too, staff is constrained by the parameters of their jobs, while librarians go off to conferences and pretty much make their own hours. It doesn’t go unnoticed.
I love my job, and the professional requirements that go with it, but I’ve dropped my ALA membership precisely because of the issues you raised. Thank you for the thoughtful post.
I once worked at a library for years as a tech. Then, found out that the librarians would have parties and NOT invite the staff.
I had over 20 years of library experience including reference when I graduated library school. The library director told me it didn’t mean shit.
WTF is wrong with people?
Thank you for writing this article.
YOU changed my mind about this Meredith.
Thank you!
Max
The idea that all of that experience meant nothing is absurd. I can’t imagine how anyone could actually believe that. But I know I’ve seen the same in job ads. X years of “professional” or “post-MLIS” experience. I really appreciate job ads that look for related experience or relevant experience, which allows for people with a ton of library experience pre-MLS to deservedly climb the ladder more quickly. We need to respect all kinds of experience that enriches our work and makes our libraries better. I’m really sorry for your past experiences, Max. It’s terrible that you were treated that way.
Thank you!
I am so happy and feel confirmed to read this post. I have long felt that library professionals OFTEN discriminate against those who have much to contribute to the profession. There are classes, castes, silos – you name it. If you are not an academic librarian, you cannot begin to understand the experiences of the public librarian, and vice versa.
Well I have worked in other industries, in both public and academic libraries, and I find that we have far more in common than issues that separate us. And yet so many cling to the ALA-mandated MLS as the only conferment of competency in this field. This grasping at tradition without reflection is so self-defeating but unfortunately, pervades many aspects of library work . Thank you for this post and for recognizing that library professionals need more than degrees to truly do this work well. Diversity and inclusion are more than just a way to do the hiring decision – they are values we deliver when we opt to consider the contribution of all types of education, experiences, skills, knowledge and commitment to a field that must continue to grow.
When I interviewed the two candidates for ALA President this year on my podcast, I asked them both about ALA-APA. One of them was surprised I had asked about it because zero other people had even mentioned it to them, and the other barely seemed to understand what it was.
Steve
That doesn’t surprise me at all. And it shouldn’t be that way.
As incoming (and past) chair of the ALA-APA Salaries and Status of Library Workers Committee, I appreciate your support of the organization and recognition of it as a potential venue to address the persistent employment, status, and compensation issues in libraries.
Putting the ALA ED question aside, there is no certainty that a degreed librarian will lead an organization with more respect and understanding of occupational values or the day-to-day work of libraries! Surely we have all had experiences that speak to this reality.
We must jettison our tendency to point to the MLS as the primary avenue of achieving a living wage and respect in the field. Frankly, there aren’t enough librarian jobs, and our recruitment efforts should be tightly focused on diversifying the profession. The low pay and disrespect experienced by staff are a collective shame, but can be remedied if we hold our institutions accountable and work for change locally (as unions, as managers) and nationally (through our professional associations and unions).
I agree 100% Aliqae. Thank you so much for your advocacy and service on this important ALA-APA committee.
And, yes, I know several people who don’t have an MLIS who are leading libraries beautifully and humanely. And I know people with an MLIS who are not. Having the degree does not guarantee good managerial skills or even, frankly, competence in any role in a library. I still remember when I worked in a public library and a new MLIS grad was hired as the head of the children’s dept. over someone without the MLIS who’d worked in that department (quite well) for over a decade. The librarian ended up being an absolute disaster in the role and my colleague had to do a lot of the work of the head position without the recognition and pay. It was awful and far too common.
Pingback: Maybe We Shouldn’t Talk About Diversity Anymore | Donna Lanclos
Hi Meredith,
Thanks for a great post.
Sustaining libraries as relevant and useful is important as our industry continues to try to keep up with, and adapt to continually rapid cyber changes; while inter-generations strive to understand one another, in and out of the library. Inclusion and diversity is also important to moving libraries into the next century and this involves change. One change is how Library Science now includes Information Science, which can cross into various industries today, and is a great step toward attaining library usefulness. However, since change is not always perceived as necessary or positive; if we’d like the next gens to use the library at all, we will need their help in order to keep libraries going — this means we will need their input (and actually listen to them) on what changes are necessary to sustain our libraries relevancy and usefulness moving forward.
Hi Meredith,
Could not agree more, while I don’t see a lot of this happening where I work, wherever it is happening, it should be squashed.
Was listening to a Freakonomics podcast on my bike ride to work today and one of the quotes that stuck, was basically in order for an organization or cause to move forward incremental change is important, but you need the rest of the organization that is doing the day-to-day 60-80% of the work to be on board too in order to have a top notch organization. Otherwise whatever tweaks you’re considering are pointless.
I was having a conversation with a family member who works in an academic library in another state and we were talking about the differences in roles and classifications in the library and I thought his comment was quite appropriate:
“I just smile and be nice to everyone. I don’t care what their classification is.”
I think we would all do better to abide by this rule whether in a caste work environment system or life in general. Of course, it takes EVERYONE abiding by the rule to make it work. 🙂
While reading I couldn’t help thinking in the back of my mind that the library schools themselves have an ingrained interest to ensure that the barrier to entry stays as it is.
I think that’s it exactly!
I’m hesitant to weigh in here because I’m not an currently active ALA member and so haven’t been tracking this conversation too closely as of late–but when I was I always presumed that, and the reason I would support requiring an MLS for the ALA Director, is not to exclude non-MLS library staff, but rather to make sure the organization isn’t run by someone whose groundbreaking idea is to “run libraries like a business”–when so many of our administrators and fellow citizens have bought into the sham that “universities should be run like a business” and “government should be run like a business” and that all manner of institutions that ARE NOT BUSINESSES should be managed as such. To me that is one of the most dangerous ideas in our society, and it is rampant and often seductive, and we do need to secure our profession against it if possible. These are the “values” that are being spoken of in at least some of the statements you link to.
I could certainly be wrong, as I said I don’t have the opportunity to be an active participant in this conversation currently. I did spend more than a decade as an “assistant/specialist/staff/whatever” person in libraries before I got my master’s degree, so I like to think I have a very direct understanding of how important “non-degreed” personnel are to a library, and I do think that too often staff voices are diminished in our institutions. I also don’t doubt that there are some who are more concerned with maintaining traditional gatekeeper status than securing a truly egalitarian vision for our profession. But please let me know, am I really off in my understanding of the context of this conversation?
Ted, I’ve found that there are of degreed librarians who think that libraries should be run more like a business and are adopting business principles and practices in our libraries. Certainly that is one of many arguments that people have given for having a leader with an MLS, but there is no guarantee that all people with an MLS share the same views and values (as the “are libraries neutral” debate has certainly shown us). Requiring the degree leaves out people without an MLS who share our values and yet the degree itself is only a guarantee that a person has been exposed to somewhat similar course content in their degree program. Also, ALA is not a library — it is a large and complex non-profit association and the skills to run an organization like that are not ones any of us learned in an MLS program.
This probably should be the topic of a new thread, but Ted has raised a point that needs to be defined. I teach MLS students, and always ask those taking library management courses: What does it mean to “run something like a business”? That phrase does not mean the same thing to all people. Libraries are businesses, or divisions of businesses. I will guess the definition intended here is that libraries are not private, for-profit businesses. Does that mean we don’t want the most highly qualified people managing them?
Meredith thank you for speaking out. This is an issue that has been close to my heart for nearly two decades now.
I am of two minds on this. I was a law librarian for many years and have worked with people without MLS who were hired to negotiate database contracts and had no clue how to do research.
However, now I would prefer a job at a public library or community college (I was laid off from a corporate library last year and am approaching retirement) and no one will even look at me for a job at a circulation desk or something similar even though I have an extensive technical services background. “Overqualified” seems to be the popular way to reject people.
Karen, I’m sure there are people without an MLS who work in libraries who are not capable of doing the jobs they were hired to do. The same goes for people with the MLS. The degree only promise that people will have been exposed to certain coursework, not that they are going to be competent librarians. I’m sorry you’ve struggled to find a job in your area — I agree completely that discriminating against “overqualified” candidates is terrible too. And I think that creating a caste system that puts people without the MLS on the outside also creates barriers to people with the MLS getting jobs in libraries that do not require it. If those of us with MLS create barriers, why shouldn’t those library workers without it do the same to protect their class of jobs from us?
Getting a masters degree from an accredited institution does so much more than “promise that people will have been exposed to certain coursework.” That is where I learned the appropriate resources for the appropriate situation. I resent the fact that my institution is now hiring non-degreed associate librarians and is relying on me to train them to do the work I have a degree in. Let’s not make this about whose party we get invited to. Those are improper decisions made by snobby staff. Instead, let’s make this about having the appropriate skills to give the patron/students what they need and what the qualifications are for those skills.
I guess I’m not clear on whether it’s about skills or a degree. There are people who don’t have the degree have the requisite skills for many professional positions in libraries and likewise there are librarians with the degree who haven’t necessarily developed those skills because they don’t have enough experience. Trying to make people who don’t have the skills nor the degree do professional work for which they are not qualified for less money is a much bigger issue and it shouldn’t pit degreed library workers against library workers without the degree. It should pit all workers against administration, because that’s bad for everyone. My post was about treating colleagues as equal partners in improving one’s library and giving them the respect they deserve. Dismissing that as “whose party we get invited to” greatly minimizes the impact that behavior has on library workers (and, consequently, the organization).
The situation you are describing applies to education as well. I worked for years as a paraprofessional in public schools, and although the schools I worked in did view us as part of the teaching team, we did not have the same status as staff with teaching degrees. However, there are things that teachers know that parapros do not, especially when it comes to classroom management, student learning styles, teaching methods, etc. School libraries are now experimenting with replacing teacher-librarians with parapros who might be able to execute the functions of the library, but who do not know how to teach. A school principal is required to have a teaching certificate so that he/she understands educational philosophy and theories and not just be a staff manager. The former director at my current public library did not have an MLS degree, and while she managed the library, she did not have a mission or philosophy of where she wanted the library to go. She did not understand collection development and bought a bunch of technology without thinking through how it would be implemented and used, or even if it was something our patrons would benefit from. It just was the current “trend.” My concern with non-MLS degreed directors is that they will be just staff managers without a mission, direction or focus and fall prey to the current fad.
I don’t think there is anything wrong with there being different roles in libraries that require different skills, experience, or education. That’s the case in most workplaces. I do think it’s wrong to have class structures that put people in some roles over those in others (save of course management roles). Like you said, in your role, you were treated as a member of the team, not as less than, and each member of the teaching team brought their own strengths and experience to the role.
School systems that are replacing librarians with paraprofessionals for cost-cutting has nothing to do with showing respect for those without degrees. It is, in fact, pitting one “class” of workers against another.
In rural areas, towns frequently can’t afford to pay a library directory salary that a librarian with a degree would accept, so requiring an MLS would prevent them from having anyone run the library. That is why mentoring is so vital in rural areas where experienced (and/or degreed) rural librarians can support new library directors who don’t have the degree and/or experience. I’m sure we all have anecdotes of people with and without the MLS who did not do a good job in their role, did not have vision, were terrible at planning, etc. As I said above, I don’t think a library degree guarantees competence in the areas you described. I really didn’t learn enough about library planning in library school to do that work in any practical respect. I learned a whole lot more from working in a library. There are also a lot of librarians who are great librarians but horrible managers and create terrible organizational cultures. I just think we need to stop pretending the degree is more than it is.
Interesting. I’m a seasoned career educator;.I’m also a credentialed Media Specialist (i.e State Certified) w/ 17 years of experience in Elementary and High School Media Centers. I have several advanced degrees including an Educational Specialist degree in Educational Media.
Most people not in the field of education don’t know of the existence of a Specialist Degree and think it’s some sort of certificate. It’s actually a complete degree above and beyond a Masters usually requiring the completion of a Thesis and/or Practicum. I have 2. (Do the math, I have 4 degrees) Nevertheless, I noticed early on when applying for part-time positions in libraries that none of my experience /education mattered if I didn’t have an MLIS degree!
Desiring to make a career change after I retire from education, I had to swallow the fact that I would have to go back to school to get another Master’s degree if I hoped to gain entry into the Library profession beyond the K-12 environment. (to me that was like sending a high school graduate BACK to Jr. High)
That’s ok… I decided to have fun and make degree #5 ‘work for me’. I’ve taken the full amount of time allotted to complete the program requirements and have used each of my summers to complete paid internships somewhere in the CONUS. This is summer( #7) I’ve completed a variety of internships to include Archives, Metadata, Digital Imaging and stints w/ the CRS and DOD. I’ll finally be graduating this December. Now try to tell me I’m not qualified!
The profession needs to get on the same page on standards for librarians. What skills and knowledge are needed to be a competent librarian? An MLIS has served as shorthand for this, but just because you get that degree doesn’t guarantee you are a great librarian. So let’s have a credentialing exam like lawyers, accountants and other professions. If a librarian without a Masters has the knowledge, they should have an opportunity to obtain official credentials. If they have gaps, library schools should provide the opportunity to get that education without having to enroll in an entire Masters program.
I think I could have learned most of the basic skills as a BS, though of course it’s nice to have bragging rights to a Masters. Requiring a Masters to be an entry level librarian, as opposed to a baseline bachelors, is a barrier to diversity.
A masters program would cover library management skills and specialty libraries (medical, law, etc). I’d want to know that a candidate for managing a library has sufficient knowledge of vendor negotiations, budgeting, communications and personnel management.
I wish I hadn’t wasted money getting an MLIS if it doesn’t matter!
No one here said the degree doesn’t matter, only that everyone should be treated like valued members of a shared endeavor rather than using the degree to claim some sort of superiority. If you thought it would make you somehow better than others, then I think you got it for the wrong reasons. There’s enough respect to go around.