Briefly Noted

IntroductionWorkforce Issues in Library and Information Science Joanne Gard Marshall (bio), Paul Solomon (bio), and Susan Rathbun-Grubb (bio) Beyond buildings, collections, and services, the library and information science (LIS) workforce is key to the success of many aspects of a knowledge economy. LIS professionals partner with educators in the instruction of youth and young adults, support reading and information literacy required for productive participation in society over the life course, enable research and development through access to research findings and translational systems, and promote commerce through Web development and organization and retrieval of information, to name just a few of their service objectives. Whereas librarianship has a long history as a profession, the expanded field of library and information science presents many new opportunities for information professionals to work in non-library settings. Occupational employment data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2008) estimate that there are 151,170 librarians, 113,510 library technicians, 5,330 archivists, and 3,960 library science post-secondary faculty in the workforce (not including self-employed workers). The American Library Association (2009) estimates the number employed in academic, public, and school libraries at 329,941. Library and information science professionals working outside of libraries are much harder to identify and their numbers tend to be spread among various occupational categories. The U.S. National Center for Education Statistics (2008) reports that there were 6,767 master's degrees in library science conferred by degree-granting institutions in the academic year 2006–7. While the number of degrees has been slowly increasing since the late 1990s, the supply of new graduates does not appear to be adequate for the number of retirements that will take place as the baby boomers leave the workforce. According to Dohm (2000), the impact of the retirement of seventy-six million boomers on U.S. labor supply will be greatest in the decade following 2008. As [End Page 121] shown in table 1, Dohm (2000) presented Bureau of Labor Statistics data that placed librarians seventh on a list of occupations with the highest percentage of workers aged forty-five years and older in 1998, at which time the median age of librarians was forty-seven, compared to age thirty-nine for all twenty-four occupations on the list. Concern continues to be expressed about potential LIS workforce shortages, given the expected baby boomer retirements, and the need for increased recruitment, diversity, succession planning, and leadership development in the profession. Less attention has been paid to retention of LIS professionals at various career stages, although this is another strategy that is worthy of consideration, given the nature of the workforce challenges that lie ahead. Given this concern, it is an ideal time for an issue of Library Trends that begins to take stock of some of the major issues related to the LIS workforce and to lay a foundation for future research and workforce planning at all levels. In 2004, the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) initiated the 21st Century Librarian Program, which made workforce research a priority. In the same year, IMLS funded a national study on the Future of Librarians in the Workforce being conducted by Griffiths, et al. (www.libraryworkforce.org). The national study aims to project the supply and demand for librarians and to provide data from a wide variety of surveys of libraries, library employees, employers, career counselors, educators, and other groups. In 2005, IMLS funded another large scale workforce study by Marshall, et al. (www.wilis.unc.edu), which provided an in-depth look at the careers of graduates of the six LIS programs in North Carolina from 1964–2007. A follow-up study known as WILIS 2 is using the recent graduates' portion of the full retrospective career study as a basis for creating an alumni tracking survey that a wide range of LIS programs can potentially use. Other major LIS research studies have also been undertaken by the 8Rs Research Team in Canada (2005) and the Colorado State Library (Steffen, Lance, Russell, & Lietzau, 2004). In 2004, the Archival Census and Education Needs Survey in the United States, also funded by IMLS, was conducted by the Society of...

American Library Association (ALA) standards for the accreditation of library schools emphasize the of student learning outcomes; this is part of a broader accountability movement in higher education. This study reviews accreditors' statements on assessment, past methods of evaluating library schools, and general definitions of measures of student learning. It then examines fifteen publicly-available program presentations, self-study documents prepared for ALA-Committee on Accreditation visits and review, for descriptions of or indirect measures of student learning outcomes and their use for program-level and improvement. Only seven of the Fifteen presentations describe the use of direct measures of student learning. Further research on program-level use of outcomes measurement would strengthen the profession and address external pressures for concrete accountability. Introduction As educational programs housed in institutions of higher education, library science programs are subject to a growing culture of assessment that has gained strength in recent years. There are increasing demands from state and national legislators for documentation of student learning1, and accrediting agencies, both regional (general institutional) and professional, have responded. The 1992 American Library Association Committee on Accreditation (COA) Standards for Accreditation of Master's programs in Library and Information Studies2 incorporate specific references to the importance of at several levels. The standard for faculty (HI) requires that faculty demonstrate skill in academic planning and Two other standards are even more and explicit: II. Curriculum The curriculum is continually reviewed and receptive to innovation; ils evaluation is used for ongoing appraisal, to make improvements, and to plan for the future. Evaluation of the curriculum includes of students' achievements and their subsequent accomplishments. IV: Students The school applies the results of evaluation of student achievement to development. Procedures are established for systematic evaluation of the degree to which a program's academic and administrative policies and activities regarding students are achieving its objectives.3 Because the standards specify the importance of evaluation and evaluative data, this article examines presentations prepared for ALA accreditation - the primary documentation of how the standards are met- to review in what way library and information science (LIS) masters programs report that student learning outcomes are assessed and their evaluation utilized in planning. Background Professional accreditation is part of overall academic evaluation. The public's view of institutional evaluation has largely revolved around input and process variables. For the 2006 U.S. News and World Report college rankings, the largest single factor (25%) was a reputational survey. Input data (quality of students, faculty characteristics, and spending per student) made up approximately 35%; process variables such as class size approximately 10%; and a type of indirect outcomes data - graduation and retention rates - the remainder.4 The National Survey of Student Engagement, something of a competitor in terms of institutional assessment, is primarily process-oriented, asking students what kinds of educational experiences they have engaged in at their institution.5 There have been relatively few attempts to rate or rank library schools. The U.S. News graduate school rankings for library science and the White studies use only reputational surveys.6 Other researchers have studied faculty (e.g. publications7 and general qualifications8); student or alumni feedback9 and employer feedback.10 Some review administrative inputs such as faculty-student ratio or budgets. To a large degree dissatisfaction with these reputational, input and process oriented approaches contributed to the growing development of an outcomes-based approach, strengthening in the 1980s and 1990s. …

Ten years after the Medical Library Association (MLA) adopted its first research policy, the 1995 Using Scientific Evidence to Improve Information Practice [1], MLA President Joanne Gard Marshall, FMLA, appointed a task force to research and publish a new official statement [2]. The resulting MLA research policy statement, The Research Imperative, was approved by the MLA Board of Directors in 2007 and “challenges MLA members to build a supportive culture that values and contributes to a research base that is recognized as an essential tool for future practice” [2]. It describes domains of research as well as basic, advanced, and specialized research skills sets. The Research Imperative encourages health sciences library and information science (LIS) practitioners to take advantage of different educational opportunities to acquire and build on that skills set. Specifically, it recommends, “4. MLA will provide and promote education and training to support health sciences information research. To accomplish this recommendation, MLA will work with academic programs to ensure that opportunities to develop quantitative and qualitative research knowledge and skills appear throughout the curriculum, provide a complete range of basic and advanced courses in quantitative and qualitative research methodology through MLA's continuing education (CE) program, and encourage graduate LIS schools to require master's degree students to undertake a research project in information science” [3]. Curricular decisions for programs leading to the LIS master's degree (MLIS) are shaped by many factors, not the least of which is the very wide variety of careers that holders of such degrees can expect to have. Many will undoubtedly work in school, public, academic, or special libraries. Many others will be information professionals in archives, museums, corporations, and other organizations. In any case, a major driver for MLIS curricula is program accreditation by the American Library Association (ALA). The ALA Standards for Accreditation do not specify exactly what courses should be taught, but the accreditation seeks evidence of various curricular elements. In particular, the standards require that a program's mission, goals, and objectives include: “the importance of research to the advancement of the field's knowledge base…the importance of the contributions of library and information studies to other fields of knowledge [and]…the importance of the contributions of other fields of knowledge to library and information studies.” Furthermore, they seek evidence that the curriculum of an accredited program “emphasizes the evolving body of knowledge that reflects the findings of basic and applied research from relevant fields” [4]. Do MLIS academic programs “ensure…opportunities to develop quantitative and qualitative research knowledge and skills?” Do they “require master's degree students to undertake a research project in information science” [3]? Evidence of such opportunities would include (but not be limited to) courses and evidence of whether research projects are required for graduation from such programs. In a comparison of LIS research course requirements with those of other master's level programs in related disciplines, Park studied the 2002 graduate catalogs of fifty-two of the then fifty-six ALA-accredited MLIS programs as well as the catalogs of master's of business administration, master's of social work, and master's of education programs at some of those schools. She found that all but three of the MLIS programs offered research methods courses, but only twenty required such a course for graduation [5]. Park reported that “LIS does not use consistent terminology across schools to identify what constitutes a ‘research methods’ course” and that the courses “vary from comprehensive coverage of both quantitative and qualitative methods to superficial inclusion of simple survey methods.” Park discussed aspects of the MLIS degree that related to research “at the consumer level” and “at the contributor level” [5]. Evidence-based LIS (and other types of evidence-based practice) are examples of the use of the consumer level of research expertise. Practitioners in many fields can confuse the two functions, especially when the word “research” is taken to include searching literature for published scientific studies, as opposed to actually carrying out such studies. The Research Imperative quite rightly calls for health sciences librarians to practice as consumers of and contributors to research in the discipline. This study seeks evidence of the current availability of required or elective research methods courses and research projects as a graduation requirement in ALA-accredited masters' programs in library and information science.

On LHRT’s Seventy-Fifth Anniversary

The World Wide Web has dramatically altered landscape of information seeking in health. The provision of medical information has historically been business of medical librarians, and their principal clientele has been nurses, and allied health professionals, as well as students in those fields. Accordingly, for decades library schools have seen medical library science as an arcane specialty. The Web, however, has democratized access to health information. Searching for health topics online is now most popular consumer activity after use of email. In this paper, I discuss changes in healthcare information use effected by World Wide Web; give examples of integration of medical librarianship into generalist courses in library and information science (LIS) degree programs; and finally discuss challenges of integrating medical specialization into generalist teaching. Introduction Twenty years ago, in last published survey on this topic, Detlefsen and Gal vin found that 41 of 54 American Library Association (ALA)-accredited library and information science (LIS) degree programs offered at least one course in health sciences or biomedical librarianship.2 Despite apparently high regard for medical specialty in these schools, Detlefsen and Galvin were worried by their findings - not by number of courses offered, but by fact that in these 41 schools, only 25% of full-time faculty self-identified as having a health-related specialty. That is: 75% of these 41 programs were relying on adjuncts to teach, adjuncts who were typically working medical librarians. Adjunct numbers have important implications for specialty fields. Detlefsen and Galvin argued that adjuncts who are working practitioners have content expertise, but because of their position in educational institution, are less able to advocate for change and defend their specialty in curriculum. Because adjuncts typically have full-time employment elsewhere, they are subject to their own employers' needs and responsive to their employers' reward systems before those of schools and programs in which they teach. Full-time faculty, conversely, exist by definition to be full-time educators and not practitioners; and as full-time educators, they are rewarded for maintaining a presence on curriculum and admissions committees that influence training of future specialists and availability of future courses. Finally, full-time faculty members are charged with formal student advising. Adjunct faculty can and do have informal mentoring relationships with their students, but this is not typically considered an explicit function of their job. A May, 2006 review of ALA-accredited LIS program Web sites reveals that of 47 programs either fully or conditionally accredited, virtually all had either medical or health information courses listed in their catalogs, offered at least every 2 years. Twenty-three LIS programs (50%) report a total of 39 full-time faculty identifying either medical librarianship or medical informatics as a research interest.3 Although both medical informatics and medical librarianship focus on medical information, two are not synonymous. Medical informatics is generally defined as the rapidly developing scientific field that deals with biomedical information, data, and knowledge as it intersects with information technology.4 It is an extremely interdisciplinary domain, to which library and information science is one of many important contributing fields. However, medical informatics is dominated by clinicians. Membership in American Medical Informatics Association (AMIA) includes physicians, nurses, dentists, biomedical engineers, medical librarians, researchers, scientists, educators, students and other health care professionals.5 This field, with its origins in medicine and computer science, demands a different, although occasionally overlapping, range of information technology competencies and training than does medical librarianship. …

From the old days, a librarian has been expected to have some knowledge of the subject his library aimes to cover, and of one or two foreign languages, besides his knowledge of library science.It is not quite unusual today for someone with some natural science background and library science education to seek a job at a medical library. However, it would be yet an exceptional case, if a medical doctor becomes a professional librarian. Accordingly, a course of elementary knowledge in medical science and its terminology is necessary for education of medical librarians.About 60 per cent of the books and journals in medical libraries in Japan are in foreign languages. And English is predominant as an international language in the medical science fields.Besides the knowledge of general library science a medical librarian is expected to have additional knowledge of medical library administration and of medical bibliography.Because of the development of MEDLARS, medical libraries in the United States became more active in literature search and other information services. And the Knowledge relating to these activities is getting to be another necessary requirement for medical librarians.In Japan, a nation wide network of interlibrary loan service among medical libraries has been well established by the effort of the Japan Medical Library Association. However, but when it comes to information service, even though the International Medical Information Center, Inc. (IMIC) is handling more than 700 manual search requests a year, and the Japan Information Center for Science and Technology (JICST) began its service as a MEDLARS search center for this country from June 1972, no systematic (nation wide) service exists.Computer applications in various medical information activities are being developed rapidly, but the Japanese medical librarians are left behind of this development. In the United States, as is it was shown in the effort of the Curriculum Committee of the Special Interest Group/Education for Information Science of the American Society for Information Science in determining the core curriculum of education for librarians and information specialists, the need for more advanced information services which require the knowledge of behavior science, computer science, system theory, mathematics, linguistics and traditional library and information science is fully realized.The IMIC is providing the scientists and other workers in the field of health science with various information services, such as retrospective and current awareness literature search, translation, indexing, abstracting and other similar activities. The core of the knowledge needed for the staff of the IMIC are elementary knowledge of health science and its terminology, and English, in addition to the basic theory of library and information science. The skill and knowledge of literature search technology is also required for the people who work at the various sections of the Literature Information Service Division of the IMIC.Among other knowledge and skills considered necessary for the Center’s staff, elementary of system theory and of computer science are regarded as more important ones.At the moment, in Japan, no library school is teaching any special course for medical librarians, but the course is necessary if medical libraries are expected to serve their clients satisfactorily in the new field of information service.In the United States, in 1968, there were already 17 library schools offering some specialized courses for education of medical librarians. These courses can be classified into three groups; those designed to provide a general introduction to medical librarianship, those devoted primarily to medical bibliography, and those developed to provide instruction in depth in specialized aspects of medical librarianship.The School of Library and Information Science of Keio University at the moment does not provide any specialized course for education of medical librarians. When we think about the fact that more than one fifth of their graduates work at medical libraries, it would be desirable for the school to establish such courses for medical librarians as those presently given by some of the American library schools.

w He ^ re write this article in early October 2008, coincidentally same time that American Library Association (ALA) has, since 1982, designated a Banned Books Week. This is a time, says ALA, to remind Americans not to take [a] precious democratic freedom for granted?the freedom of unrestricted access to and regardless of communication medium used, content of work, and viewpoints of both author and receiver of information (ALA, 2008, 1, 3). The ALA's expressed intent for Banned Books Week is to draw attention to First Amendment rights but also to the power of literature...and...to danger that exists when restraints are imposed on availability of in a free society (ALA, 2008, 5). Censorship occurs when published or shared works, like books, films, or art work, are kept from public access by restriction or removal from librar ies, museums, or other public venues. Though challenges or outright censor ship in our school libraries or classrooms often transpire out of noblest of reasons?most often with idea of protecting young people from some thing that someone finds offensive?the ALA sees attempts at censorship, nonetheless, as attempts to restrict someone's right to read, view, listen to, and disseminate constitutionally protected ideas (ALA, 2007, Who Attempts Censorship? section). We find such censorship of reading or viewing of mate rials in middle and high school classrooms disturbing and unjust to rights of both students and teachers.

Attempts to censor library materials and services are on the rise, with new data indicating that it ties most of library censorship to organized campaigns. The American Library Association (ALA), the ALA Office for Intellectual Freedom, and their ALA affiliates recognize that the education of librarians about intellectual freedom is important in defending First Amendment rights. A dominant response to the need for teaching about intellectual freedom in libraries invokes a critical inquiry into library and information science content and pedagogy used in intellectual freedom teaching and learning as an authentic expression of protecting legal rights to give and receive information. The voices of enrolled students in a new intellectual freedom course at Emporia State University, School of Library and Information Management, are authentic expressions of their new awareness of how policy and law are central to effective education, communication, and efforts to unite and protect the freedom to read and support library workers at a critical time in American history. The Unite Against Book Ban campaign and Law for Librarians and Lawyers for Libraries (L4L) programs are highlighted in their active pursuit to provide excellent educational opportunities and resources, and as examples of pedagogical and curricular resources for intellectual freedom education.

Index to Volume 62 Justine Carson Page references in boldface indicate major treatments of a topic. Italic locators indicate photographs. Italic t, f, or n indicates tables, figures or notes. A A-series paper formats, 485–486 Abbate, Janet, 706 Academic libraries, Chinese. See Chinese academic libraries Access to Learning Award (Gates Foundation), 210, 212 Acknowledgments, by W. Boyd Rayward, 289–290 ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union), 761 ACLU (Wisconsin) Civil Libertarian of the Year Award, 727 Action Plan for Agricultural and Rural Informatization in China, 49 Activism antigay, 735–736 library, 730–739 Adams, Scott, 690 ADI (American Documentation Institute), 689 Administrative surveillance, 644–645, 646. See also Surveillance Advertising etiquette books, 672–676, 675–676 relationship to Die Brücke, 479–480 source of commercial information, 637 AEG (Allgemeine-Elektricitäts-Gesellschaft), 479 Age of Reason. See Enlightenment Ai Hua Libraries, 164 AIBO Youth Center, 174 Air conditioning systems. See HVAC systems ALA. See American Library Association (ALA) Alingh Prins, Jan, 329–331, 383 Alkalimat, Abdul, 145, 255 All the World’s Knowledge: The Paper Internet, 285 Alle Kennis Van de Wereld, 285 Allgemeine-Elektricitäts-Gesellschaft (AEG), 479 American Association of Museums, 604, 607 American Bibliography (Evans), 461 American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression, 726–727 American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), 761 American Civil Liberties Union (Wisconsin) Civil Libertarian of the Year Award, 727 American Documentation Institute (ADI), 385, 689 American Family Association, 731, 735–736 American Institute of Higher Learning, 534 [End Page 773] American Library Association (ALA) attacks by social conservatives, 731–733 Code of Ethics, 742, 772 definition of censorship, 744 Library Bill of Rights, 742, 761, 771 WBCML controversy, 726–727 American Library Association (ALA). Office for Intellectual Freedom, 761, 763 “American Practice in Information Science” (Vormelker), 385, 389 American Society for Information Science and Technology. (ASIS&T) Special Interest Group. History and Foundations of Information Science, 305 Americans for Truth about Homo- sexuality, 749n Americans with Disabilities Act, 571 Amory, Hugh, 457 Amsterdam, Netherlands, 635–636 Amway (China) Co., Ltd., 165 Analogous Spaces: Architecture and the Space of Information, Intellect, Action, Ghent, 2008, 308 Andersen, Hendrik Christian, 531 Anderson, Augusta, 502n Anderson, H.C.L., 543, 546 Announcement for the Standardization of Commercial Activities in Cybercafes and the Strengthening of Security Management, 124 Annuaire de la vie internationale, 316 Annual Meeting of German Librarians (Bibliothekartag), Göttingen, 1928, 351 Anonymous scientific publications, identifying authors, 451–452 Anschluss, 380 Anthropometric classification, criminals, 446–450 Anthropometry, relationship to scientific bibliography and classification, 442–455 Antigay activism, 735–736. See also “Ex-gay” books Apers, René, 533 Appadurai, Arjun, 509–510, 512 Apprenticeship programs, museum, 597, 605–607, 609–610 Apres le Congrès Mondial (Otlet), 380 Archaeological Data Bank Conference, 601–602 Architectural elements. See also Library architecture basements and underground spaces, 537–538 books used as, 536–537 brickwork, 569, 578 historic library buildings, 556–559 terracotta, 568 towers, 532–536 Architecture of Knowledge: The Mundaneum and European Antecedents of the World Wide Web, Mondeneum, Mons, 2002, 308 The Architecture of Knowledge: The Mundaneum and European Antecedents of the World Wide Web, 323 Archives. See also Cultural heritage organizations functional integration with libraries and museums, 613–614, 615–616, 619, 621 of Otlet and La Fontaine, 319–320 Aristocracy, marketing of, 674 ARL (Association of Research Libraries), 689 Armstrong, Edmund La Touche, 544, 546 Armstrong, Henry Edward, 448 Art.sy, 438 Asbestos, 562 ASIS (American Society for Information Science), 696 ASIS&T SIG HFIS, 305 Aslib. See Association of Special Libraries and Information Bureaux (Aslib) Aslib-FID joint conference, Oxford, 1938. See Joint Conference of FID and Aslib, Oxford, 1938 Aslib Information, 383 Association des Amis du Palais Mondial, 318, 319–320, 321 Association of American Publishers, 727 Association of Research Libraries (ARL), 689 Association of Special Libraries and Information Bureaux (Aslib), 371, 396, 689 collaboration with BSIB, 468–469 [End Page 774] joint conference with FID, Oxford, 1938, 378–401 Association of the Friends of the Palais Mondial, 318, 319–320, 321 Astrographical Catalogue, 686 Astronomy, bibliographies, 686 Atheneums. See Mechanics institutes Atherton, Pauline, 431–432. See also Cochrane, Pauline Atherton Austin, Derek, 436 Australia federation period, 1880–1900, 542...

A Review of:
 Oltmann, S. M. (2019). Important Factors in Midwestern Public Librarians’ Views on Intellectual Freedom and Collection Development: Part 1. The Library Quarterly, 89(1), 2-15. https://doi.org/10.1086/700659
 Abstract
 Objective – The article sought to explore whether librarian attitudes regarding intellectual freedom conform to the stance of the American Library Association (ALA).
 Design – Electronic survey.
 Setting – Public libraries in the Midwestern United States.
 Subjects – Subjects were 645 collection development library professionals employed in public libraries.
 Methods – An electronic survey was distributed to public library directors in nine Midwestern states and was completed by the library professional primarily responsible for collection development. The survey focused on community information and probed the participants for their stances on several intellectual freedom topics. 
 Main Results – The survey was sent to 3,018 participants via each state’s librarian and had a response rate of 21.37%. The first section of the survey focused on broad strokes statements representing the ALA’s stance on intellectual freedom for public libraries. The results revealed widespread agreement on these issues. More than 88% of participants agreed with statements like “public libraries should provide their clients with access to information from a variety of sources.” Despite strong agreement among participants, particular demographic characteristics were more likely to lead to disagreement with all statements including working in rural communities and not holding a master’s degree in library science.
 The next section of the survey focused on how strongly participants’ personal beliefs conformed to the intellectual freedom statements in the ALA’s Library Code of Ethics. Again, there was widespread agreement, with 94.9% of participants indicating that they agreed with the statement “we uphold the principles of intellectual freedom and resist all efforts to censor library materials.” Only one participant disagreed with the statement “it is the right of every individual to both seek and receive information from all points of view without restriction.” When asked whether the ALA’s stance on intellectual freedom ever conflicted with their personal beliefs, 39.8% of participants indicated that it did, 22% were unsure, and 40% had never experienced conflict. Participants holding a master's degree in library science and librarians in large cities were less likely to experience conflict between their personal beliefs and the ALA’s stance on intellectual freedom. In the free text comments, several participants indicated that they experienced conflict when the ALA’s stance did not reflect their personal beliefs or community values.
 Conclusion – While the overwhelming majority of respondents indicated that they agreed with the ALA’s stance on intellectual freedom, a minority of participants experienced some conflict. Respondents indicated that personal belief could create conflict when librarians committed to intellectual freedom were required to make choices in their professional work that conflicted with their own views. Conflict could also arise when collection choices made to support intellectual freedom were not supported by patrons in the community.

Academic Library Residency Programs and Diversity Julie Garrison (bio) Since the 1940s, academic and research libraries have offered post-masters' residency programs (called internships, residencies, or fellowships interchangeably) to provide professional training and mentoring for new librarians entering academic library careers. Those who participate in residencies tend to appreciate the experience and find that it supports individual career growth. They report gaining useful knowledge, marketable skills, and professional connections. They also derive benefits from growing their networks, participating in professional-level work and meaningful projects, and experiencing the academic library culture.1 By the early to mid-1980s, residency programs began focusing on recruitment of minority librarians. Initially, these programs were inspired by affirmative action, a United States government policy that supported members of disadvantaged groups who had suffered discrimination. More recently, residency programs shifted to addressing the desire to grow a workforce more representative of society in general.2 Despite these efforts, however, change has been slow.3 Residents and Librarians: Still Predominantly White In 1997, Julie Brewer surveyed 230 prior post-master's residents. The majority of survey participants were white women, overrepresenting "the older, larger residency programs in government libraries." Only 19 of the 109 respondents stated they had taken part in a program "targeted to racial and ethnic minorities."4 Another survey of residency programs in 2013 more narrowly focused on evaluating residencies for librarians of color. It explored "the general structure of residencies, such as the number of residents in a cohort, efforts to promote diversity, and professional skills." Of the 68 who responded, nearly 40 percent (26) were white, and 84.8 percent identified as female.5 While the number of respondents from racially or ethnically diverse backgrounds in both surveys was small, each suggested that residencies attracted individuals who would not have otherwise considered academic librarianship as a career choice and succeeded in retaining professionals in library-related positions. [End Page 405] An examination of American Library Association (ALA) demographic data and Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) information indicates that the library profession remains predominantly white (86.7 percent according to the ALA in 2017, 87.8 percent per the BLS in 2019) and overwhelmingly female. While diversity has improved since the 2006 ALA membership report, in which 89 percent of members identified as white, the needle has scarcely moved toward building a more representative profession.6 A review of who received master's degrees in library and information science suggests that graduates have not increased in diversity either. A comparison of 2011 and 2017 graduation rates reported by the Association of Library Information Science Education (ALISE) shows that the percentage of Hispanic graduates doubled (6.2 percent in 2017 compared to 2.96 percent in 2011), but those from other racial groups increased by less than 1 percent. Given that fewer individuals graduate from LIS programs, the number of underrepresented minorities entering the profession remains nearly static. One caveat to these data is that both years report a relatively large pool of "unknown" and "international" students, and in 2017 an additional 2 percent (150) identify as "two or more races."7 The ACRL Diversity Alliance In 2014, when Jon Cawthorne became dean of libraries at West Virginia University (WVU) in Morgantown, he attempted to breathe new life into residency programs by forming the Diversity Alliance, a group of academic libraries that pledged to offer residencies to underrepresented groups. In addition to establishing a new institutional residency program at WVU, Cawthorne recruited like-minded institutions to do the same, growing a network of residencies aimed at supporting professionals from diverse backgrounds in "getting the experience they need to be successful in the academic library world." In 2016, the Diversity Alliance partnered with the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) to further expand its reach and broaden residency opportunities.8 For decades, ACRL had studied and analyzed opportunities for adding to the mix of ethnic and racial groups in the library profession. It had developed guidelines and stated its commitment to diversity in its strategic plans. It had produced reports with recommendations for advancing diversity efforts, and it had embraced the goal of recruiting a more representative workforce within academic libraries. The ACRL...

Information professionals in a globalized world: Kosova libraries: Where practical steps are most needed

Ensuring More Inclusive Hiring Processes Carmen Cole (bio) and Emily Mross (bio) The American Library Association (ALA) considers demonstrating “the principles of effective personnel practices and human resource development” a core competency of librarianship.1 Yet, few librarians receive specific training to serve on hiring committees as part of their degree studies, though most find themselves asked to participate in searches, sometimes frequently, depending on their institution. As early career librarians, the authors have served on multiple committees in a large academic library, gaining more experience about the process each time. Their work on search committees sparked an interest in implementing best practices to ensure a good experience for job candidates and successful searches that improve services to the university community. Their experience also inspired a research interest. Search committees are gatekeepers. Who is kept out, and why? Exploring library hiring from an academic perspective brings to light uncomfortable truths. Each person on a search committee has biases that must be confronted to minimize preconceived ideas, and the group must work together so that each candidate receives a fair evaluation based on objective criteria. This decision-making can be complicated and challenging, depending on many factors.2 A successful search not only means that a good candidate is hired but also requires that the search committee works together, communicates well, develops and uses a fair rubric to assess the applicant pool, gives candidates proper and equal consideration, and chooses a well-qualified finalist who accepts the job offer. It is not impossible, but it is not easy. What further complicates the hiring task is the lack of diversity in librarianship. Homogeneous libraries create homogeneous search committees. Without thoughtful, introspective work, such committees can perpetuate a homogeneous library rather than a diverse, inclusive one.3 The authors are not experts in diversity or hiring. They are practitioners who strive to improve the library hiring process for everyone involved, toward the goal of equitable, inclusive libraries for employees and users. Their responsibilities necessitated much questioning, reading, and research. Members of current and future search committees [End Page 507] at any library should take a similar perspective toward their work. Without a collective understanding of the barriers to equity, diversity, and inclusion in library hiring, nothing will change—and change is far overdue. “Fit” and Academic Librarianship The need to diversify librarianship and the lack of progress toward this goal are common topics of conversation in formal and informal spheres of the profession.4 Similar conversations take place throughout academe as well. A culprit often examined in the literature and in practice is the nefarious yet ubiquitous concept of “fit” in hiring.5 Those who serve on search committees have tried to quantify the notion in nonsubjective ways, but the perennial problem is that fit tends to be ineffable. Committee members may declare that a candidate “feels right,” but they often say so because the applicant shares many similarities to them.6 These resemblances tend to reinforce homogeneity and hegemony because librarianship, much like academe as a whole, is overwhelmingly White. The problem does not begin at the hiring stage.7 The notion of fit tracks back much further and can cause people who do not conform to that image to decide against librarianship as a career long before they would ever apply for a job.8 The Librarian Pipeline Frequently, librarians blame the pipeline of new librarians for lacking diversity. The pipeline myth is the persistent idea that diversity remains a challenge for library hiring because of a shortage of qualified, degree-holding persons from historically minoritized groups to fill vacancies.9 Most students pursuing a master of library and information science (MLIS) degree and most recent MLIS graduates are White. In 2020, approximately 60 percent of MLIS students were White, even though the number has dropped approximately 15 percentage points since 1990; currently nearly 40 percent of degree candidates come from other racial or ethnic groups.10 Data from the Association for Library and Information Science Education (ALISE) show that in 2020, 62 percent of those receiving a master’s degree from an ALA-accredited program were White.11 The overall percentage of Whites holding a graduate degree in library...

This study investigates the current coverage and treatment of strands of diversity in Library and Information Science (LIS) graduate curricula by examining 19 American Library Association (ALA) accredited Master of Library and Information Science (MLIS) programmes. The purpose is to analyze the depth and breadth of diversity-related topics in LIS programmes to determine the emphasis that LIS educators place on diversity-related content in the relevant coursework. Diversity-related topics were identified and categorized based on the published literature, and the contents of 84 course syllabi were examined. The findings show that while diversity-related topics are not prioritized in LIS programmes at present, the relevant content in curricula is increasing at a slow but significant rate. Diversity-related courses prepare aspiring librarians and information professionals to work with different cultural groups, young adults, and children. However, there is little interest in providing equitable services to minority groups in terms of gender and race/ethnicity, and people with disabilities. The findings of this study can provide a practical roadmap and useful insights for LIS educators, researchers, and practitioners.

This study explores the general perspectives of library and information science (LIS) professionals on knowledge management in the university libraries of Pakistan. The study specifically examines the perceptions, understandings, role and responsibilities of Pakistani LIS professionals toward knowledge management. A questionnaire was used as an instrument to evaluate the perceptions, understandings, role and responsibilities of LIS professionals toward knowledge management. The questionnaires were administered to subject librarians who were included in the sample at the universities of Rawalpindi and Islamabad. Generalising the findings of this study over the population of LIS community in Pakistan reveals that knowledge management is for the improvement of library services and productive purposes. Accordingly, the Pakistani LIS professionals use knowledge management practices for the improvement of their respective library service. The LIS community is also very familiar with the term “knowledge management”. It succeeded mainly to generalise that majority of the LIS professionals mentioned that they have used knowledge management in their libraries.