{"id":3721,"date":"2018-06-28T23:29:02","date_gmt":"2018-06-29T04:29:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/meredith.wolfwater.com\/wordpress\/?p=3721"},"modified":"2018-06-28T23:46:16","modified_gmt":"2018-06-29T04:46:16","slug":"devaluing-the-mls-vs-respect-for-all-library-workers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/meredith.wolfwater.com\/wordpress\/2018\/06\/28\/devaluing-the-mls-vs-respect-for-all-library-workers\/","title":{"rendered":"“Devaluing” the MLS vs. respect for all library workers"},"content":{"rendered":"

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\u00a0article<\/a>, column<\/a>,\u00a0and blog post<\/a> 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\u00a0of major libraries or library consortia and not have an MLS. It was almost as if there was\u00a0no understanding of the fact that we have people who spend their entire careers in librarianship who do not have\u00a0an MLS.\u00a0Many, 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\u00a0death knell\u00a0for our profession).\u00a0What\u00a0became clear from this\u00a0debate was that a\u00a0good number of people — those nearing the end of their careers\u00a0seemed to be\u00a0the most outspoken —\u00a0felt 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<\/em> said on the issue<\/a>:<\/p>\n

Now a growing chorus of \u201cexperts\u201d 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\u2019s leaders, and indeed all librarians, must be holders of that important degree. We must not abandon it now.<\/p>\n

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\u00a0Executive Director\u00a0can adequately communicate the value of the profession to others. Whatever the argument, the motion did not pass in\u00a0the election and the MLS is now a preferred<\/em> qualification for the position.<\/p>\n

But that sense of our profession being under siege and needing to barricade\u00a0our professional doors was echoed in other things I’ve read recently and in experiences I’ve had. And, frankly, that attitude makes me ill.<\/p>\n

I first read Peter Murray’s “Anxious Anger \u2013 or: why does my profession want to become a closed club”<\/a> 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):<\/p>\n

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\u2019s 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.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

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,\u00a0librarians\u00a0feel like we need to protect our turf by marginalizing our colleagues without the MLS. And how is that anything less than discrimination?<\/p>\n

I remember working as a library\u00a0assistant 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.\u00a0I had the simple, non-earth-shattering idea of creating a computer\u00a0shortcut 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\u00a0suggesting 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.<\/p>\n

I’m sure there are people working in staff positions in libraries who don’t see it as a career, but I know\u00a0so 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.\u00a0She was an incredible go-getter who was full of ideas and committed to doing the work to\u00a0make them happen. Only she rarely was in a position to\u00a0make her ideas\u00a0happen 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\u00a0employee who couldn’t afford to go to library school, and there weren’t really opportunities in\u00a0her\u00a0job for her to take on new challenges or get more autonomy, much less\u00a0to advance. In a situation like that, what’s a dynamic, passionate, improvement-oriented person to do?<\/p>\n

Kendra Levine has written three brilliant posts about\u00a0people working in libraries without the professional credential\u00a0and our responsibility to stand up for their rights in solidarity as library workers:<\/p>\n