GSLIS InfoBlitz

Article by Patricia Hswe

Digital Content Strategist and Head, ScholarSphere User Services, and co-lead, Department of Publishing and Curation Services, at Penn State University Libraries

When I entered the MSLIS program at GSLIS in 2005, I was a second-year Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR) postdoctoral fellow, based in the former Slavic and East European Library in Main Library. In my first year as a postdoc, having been introduced to text encoding, GIS software, relational databases, and digitization operations, I was pretty much blown away by how much technology was changing the nature and products of scholarly research. My experience as a doctoral student, lo so many years previous to the postdoc gig, was highly traditional, in that it involved none of the methods I was learning about. In becoming a library student, I was eager to catch up and understand much more the impact of these and other related digital humanities methods, as well as to get a programmatic understanding of the discipline of LIS. I pursued a digital library concentration at GSLIS, with particular attention to use and users of digital resources and a growing interest in data curation for the humanities. I held graduate assistantships in Grainger Engineering Library and in the Mathematics Library, where I did regular hours at the reference desk, acquired some programming skills, and carried out special assignments (such as a website usability study) and consulted with students on their research projects. I also served as a research assistant on a set of digital preservation projects funded by the Library of Congress under the National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program (NDIIPP). I learned about repository services, interoperability, RDF and the Semantic Web, and project management. And it was as a research assistant that I got my first publication opportunity. Through these paraprofessional experiences, I realized that the so-called “back-end” work of software development, metadata creation, and repository service infrastructure rarely gets the visibility and appreciation it deserves as work that impacts “front-end,” or public, services – and, most crucial of all, our end users. I learned that what happens behind the scenes is as significant as what happens in the scenes themselves, and that the folks, including end users, in the two areas should always be talking. In other words, technology in the library is a public service.

With a concentration in digital libraries, a passion for prioritizing user needs and working directly with researchers, an interest in metadata issues, and a commitment to working in an academic library environment, what kind of positions was I headed for, ultimately? At the time I graduated, in 2008, it seemed that to do the work I wanted to do meant being either an institutional repository manager, or a metadata librarian, or a digital something. My first job out of GSLIS was as program manager for the five NDIIPP projects that the library school was collaborating on with various institutions. I loved this work, especially the challenge of keeping organizationally distributed projects on track, but I also missed being more fully part of a library.

Enter the next job – the digital something. In 2010 I took a position as digital collections curator at the Penn State University Libraries and found what has become my dream gig. I collaborate closely with colleagues in Information Technology Services (ITS), which has given me an understanding of technical infrastructure I would otherwise not have. Together, we run a repository service, ScholarSphere, which leverages Hydra architecture and thus open-source, community-developed software. A self-deposit service, ScholarSphere enables access, sharing, management, and preservation for research data and content produced by Penn State faculty, students, and staff. I also have also partnered with liaison librarians in providing data management services; in fall 2014 we will launch an online tutorial, geared largely toward graduate students, on data management planning. In addition, I engage in strategic thinking and planning around user and content issues that are central to decisions regarding technology implementations for curating our digital collections – as well as expanding the definition and scope of them.

With the beta release of ScholarSphere in 2012, my title changed to Digital Content Strategist and head of ScholarSphere User Services. I also became co-lead of a new department, Publishing and Curation Services (PCS), which merged Scholarly Communication Services and Digital Curation Services into a single unit. Through PCS we are setting up a framework that helps researchers put into practice a lifecycle management approach to the enterprise of scholarly inquiry. Our areas of focus for this framework are data curation services, scholarly publishing services, and digital scholarship services (e.g., support for the digital humanities). Running a department, particularly a unit as hybrid in its mission and operations as PCS, continues to be one of the most valuable learning experiences I have ever had as a librarian. Service models, staffing models, strategic and tactical planning for the department, budgets, position descriptions, process management, and expanded supervisory duties – all of these activities present opportunities to grow in my librarianship and as a leader. At the same time, I appreciate deeply the parts of my role, such as addressing user needs for ScholarSphere, that still allow me to be “hands on” and help shape and inform our libraries’ research service offerings.

It will be ten years ago this summer that I started my career in academic libraries, first as a postdoc in the library and now as a digital content strategist. At Penn State, I enjoy strong working relationships with smart, generous colleagues in the University Libraries, ITS, and various colleges, academic departments, and research institutes. I am learning how to co-lead, productively and efficiently, a trailblazing department – one that is transforming the notion of public services in libraries and redefining what it means to liaise with researchers. In short, I couldn’t have conjured a more substantive, endlessly fascinating gig even if I’d tried.

Article by Linda Kupferschmid

GSLIS Student, class of 2015; Student in Community Informatics and Youth Services, taught by Professor Kate Williams

Using a computer for the first time can be frustrating, but cybernavigators providing free computer technology support at various libraries are easing the transition to computer literacy. The Urbana Free Library (TUFL) offers free computer support at its Flex-n-Gate Computer Center through its adult library staff and technology volunteers.

Beginning May 3, 2014, TUFL will be providing drop-in times for the public to receive one-on-one support with a technology volunteer. Drop-in times are offered most Saturdays from 3-4 p.m.

Listed on the library calendar as “Computers 101,” this computer support is individualized, one-on-one support along the lines of a tutoring session, meeting the specific needs defined by the patron, rather than a class with formal group instruction. This structure is helpful for patrons requesting extended assistance, rather than single, quick questions.

This includes things such as how to create an email account, how to apply for a job online, how to use anti-virus and anti-malware, how to create a strong password, how to use Microsoft Word, and more.

Kelsey (not her real name) is a 31-year-old female seeking employment at a local business, who recently used the services of a cybernavigator. The job required an online application. The first step entailed creating an account on the business’s website and submitting an email address for verification. However, Kelsey did not have an email account and needed assistance setting one up.

After six tries with various usernames, she found success with one that was not yet taken. Then she created a strong password that she would be able to remember. Each step takes patience and leads to another step. With the support and encouragement from the tech volunteer, Kelsey experienced success in both setting up her email account as well as an account with the business where she was able to verify her email address for future notifications.

Kelsey’s first words to the tech volunteer were “I’m sorry. I’m computer illiterate,” but Kelsey is not alone in her computer struggles. Cybernavigators offer free assistance to patrons without judging them for a lack of knowledge of how to operate a computer or navigate the various web browsers and computer systems.

The support provided by tech volunteers allows librarians the time to provide reference work while patrons receive the basic computer assistance they require at a pace in which they can learn.

The patron and the libraries are not the only ones who benefit from this program; the volunteers themselves gain valuable experience in conducting interviews with patrons to define their needs and provide instructive support without doing the work for the patron. Cybernavigators frequently learn as much as the patron, albeit different lessons. Cybernavigating also requires volunteers to keep current on computer technology so they can give the clearest instruction to new users.

Amber Castens, an Adult Services Librarian at The Urbana Free Library, comments, “Volunteers are a crucial part of maintaining a functional computer lab. While librarians provide a wide range of tech support, tech volunteers can spend much more time working directly with patrons because they don’t get pulled away by other tasks.”

There is great potential to enhance intergenerational connections and community by training teens as cybernavigators. Since teens grow up in the information age and are exposed to technology, they may be able to learn and teach basic computer navigation skills to other generations who struggle with new technology. Teens’ frequent technology use increases their acquisition of skills in this area.

When provided with training on human development and patient interaction with older adults, teens placed in mentoring roles with older patrons will gain from the interaction with these generations. Teens can also use their experience in intergenerational cybernavigating as competencies they can list on job applications and resumes.

Students from the University of Illinois Graduate School of Library and Information Science had the opportunity to serve as cybernavigators as part of a collaborative service project of the Community Informatics course led by Dr. Kate Williams. Overall, the students served at twenty sites in Illinois, Michigan, and New York.

For more information on this collaborative community effort through Community Informatics, please contact Assistant Professor Kate Williams at katewill@illinois.edu. Individuals interested in serving as tech volunteers at The Urbana Free Library may contact Amber Castens at acastens@tufl.info.

Article by Maria Bonn

Senior Lecturer, Graduate School of Library and Information Science at the University of Illinois

In April of this year, I had the good fortune to attend the Fiesole Collection Development Retreat in Cambridge, England. It was good fortune because Cambridge is graced with both historical and architectural charm; because it’s just plain fun to drink bitter beer (ideally accompanied by salt and vinegar “crisps,” what we in the U.S. call chips) while watching undergrads and tourists punt by on the Cam; because it’s thrilling to share spaces with the likes of Stephen Hawking, Watson and Crick, and Richard Feynman; but it was also fortunate because of the chance to immerse myself in three days of concentrated and intelligent discussion on the future of libraries and publishing. The Fiesole retreat has been organized for the past fourteen years by the Casselini bookselling family in close collaboration with the Charleston conference, bringing together their partners from both the supplier and the distributor side, encouraging them to think together about the best ways to both survive and thrive in an ever-changing information world.

The theme for this year’s retreat was “Succeeding in the Next Decade.” My contribution to this theme was speaking on new directions in library education and training on a panel entitled “Big Libraries, Big Visions: New Roles for Librarians.” I was happy to be both sharing new ways in which Library and Information Schools are guiding their students and to be learning about the needs felt by many sectors of the information industry, and, of course, to learn about many cool projects along the way. If I had kept a tally of recurring points of reference and topics throughout the retreat, many marks would have appeared next to words like publishing, data curation and use, privacy, discoverability, scholarly communication, and rights. Many other things were discussed in both presentations and over lunch (fish and chips, shepherd’s pie and other British specialties like sushi), but these were touchstones.

My own presentation focused on educating Information School students to support scholarly communication, manage and provide research data services, work as publishers, and support online and open education. I tried to map these areas onto trends in the job market and to what we know about the priorities of the directors of large research libraries (as documented by the recent Ithaka report on its survey of library directors found here: http://sr.ithaka.org/research-publications/ithaka-sr-us-library-survey-2013). As the retreat progressed, I found myself wanting others to do the same. As an Information educator with the career interests of my students at heart, I wanted to see the way in which these areas of interest and need expressed by high level professionals translates into patterns of recruiting and hiring that impact Information education itself.

I cannot say that anyone handed me a clear road map. The paths of Information education sometimes feel as labyrinthine as the cobblestone streets of Cambridge. But I left infused with a sense of things happening and was reminded of the importance of attending smart and timely professional gatherings. Charting the path forward is the work of both educators and students. Both sides need to attend to the professional conversation as they emerge and to work on curricular programming and individual courses of study that will support interesting, fun and even profitable areas of information work. And, if we all succeed, in helping to make the world a better place.

 Correction May 9, 2014
An earlier version of this article included an incorrect link to the Ithaka library survey.

Article by Sarah Crissinger

GSLIS student, class of 2015; ACRL Co-Chair, Student Division; Graduate Assistant in Reference, Research, and Scholarly Services

When I started my journey at GSLIS as a Master’s student and graduate assistant in the Reference, Research, and Scholarly Services department, I started to skim relevant job postings in order to make a list of skills and competencies that I hoped to acquire before graduation. The list included skills that I was already familiar with, like reference, as well as items that I could improve upon, like web design and statistical analysis. Before I started in the fall, I made sure that both my coursework and my assistantship projects aligned with this list. I quickly realized that I left out an important skill—research.

Many academic LIS students make a similar oversight.  We are so focused on acquiring the skills that we think employers want—the ability to do instruction, a familiarity with assessment, and an understanding of web design—that we completely forget that many of us will be scholars as well. The most recent survey from the Association of Research Libraries concludes that ~ 35% of academic libraries offer tenure to their librarians (Gilman). That means that I have almost a one in three chance of being asked to come up with a research agenda and fulfill that agenda or risk losing my job.

A mentor of mine once asked me if I was interested in applying to institutions that granted tenure. I told her that it didn’t matter and jokingly replied that I would take a job anywhere I could get one! Her response was interesting. She insisted that deciding on what “type” of academic librarian I wanted to be should not be left to chance. She contended that there was a distinct difference between the two.  Being on a tenure track meant a significant sacrifice in personal time and work/life balance but it also meant recognition from the field and the satisfaction of adding to a body of work that you care about. I thought a lot about her point over the next couple of months.

During my first semester the Instructional Services Librarian, Merinda Hensley, asked me to assist her with a large research project that she was beginning before being reviewed for tenure the following year. The University of Illinois has very rigorous tenure requirements for their librarians and she found a great research niche to add to her publication list. The topic she chose was both original and substantial: how librarians participate in and facilitate formal undergraduate research. She wanted to explore how, and if, librarians are active in formal undergraduate research initiatives like the McNair Scholars Program or Honors Thesis programs.

My job as her hourly assistant was to perform a pearl-growing informational search for her literature review. I started with two related articles and then tracked down all of their citations, formatted them, and then annotated them. Merinda was then able to look at the list and discern what she could include in her review and what avenues she might want to explore more. While some could say that my role was somewhat menial and repetitive, it taught me a lot about research. This process has to be done for every literature review and smaller libraries probably do not give scholars the funds to hire GAs for hourly help. But beyond that, it taught me how systematic and time-consuming research is. It taught me the fundamentals of having a definitive research question. It also taught me how to think critically about engaging and conversing with other scholars.

An article in College and Research Libraries entitled “Publish or Perish” states that many think that applying tenure performance standards to librarians is harmful. Why? Because they are often ill-equipped to conduct the level of research that faculty members do (Mitchell and Reichel 233). They might not have the skill set because it is not addressed in the LIS curriculum or because they don’t think of it as being important. My hourly work convinced me to re-think the importance of scholarship. Next fall I will be taking LIS 519: Social Science Research in LIS, which introduces students to choosing the best methodology to fit their research question and is “recommended for any students expecting to do research as part of their future work” (Full Catalog). My hourly work for Merinda really made me reconsider the importance of research in preparing for my future career.

Conducting research often leads to effective library policies and services.  When we ground our actions in research they are usually more impactful (Mitchell and Reichel 233). Research within LIS also enhances and promotes the legitimacy of our profession. Further, librarians who participate in research “are thought to be more receptive to change and have more effective relationships with other faculty than do those who do not do research” (Mitchell and Reichel 233). In addition, many, but not all, academic library job postings ask for applicants who can do research by listing requirements such as familiarity with analytic methods, ability to conduct research, interest in scholarship that leads to improved practice, or participation in professional development.  (Examples drawn from the ALA Job Listings at https://joblist.ala.org. See for more examples.) Scholarship is an integral component of academic librarianship that we as future information professionals should not overlook.

Works Cited

Gilman, Todd. “Academic Librarians and Rank.” Manage Your Career. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 4 Jan. 2008. Web. 10 Mar. 2014. Retrieved from https://chronicle.com/article/Academic-LibrariansRank/45926/

Full Catalog. Graduate School of Library and Information Science (GSLIS), n.d. Web. 10 Mar. 2014. Retrieved from http://www.lis.illinois.edu/academics/courses/catalog

Mitchell, W. Bede, and Mary Reichel. “Publish Or Perish: A Dilemma For Academic Librarians?” College & Research Libraries 60.3 (1999): 232-243. Web. 10 Mar. 2014.

Recommended/ Related Readings

A Guideline for the Appointment, Promotion and Tenure of Academic Librarians. American Library Association, 2010. Web. http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/promotiontenure

Council on Undergraduate Research: Learning Through Research. The Council on Undergraduate Research, 2010. Web. http://www.cur.org/

Article by Kevin Hawkins

Director of Library Publishing at the University of North Texas Libraries

To many people’s surprise, when I applied to library school, I didn’t actually expect to end up becoming a librarian after graduating. As an undergraduate I had worked in a digital humanities center (then called a “humanities computing” center) and was drawn to theoretical questions around digital text, and found that a number of people working in this field had once gone to library school. Seemed like a good experience to have in any case, no matter what I ended up doing, since I was fond of libraries and thought it would be good to know some expert tips on how to use them more effectively.

For the career essay component of my application to GSLIS, I visited a small consulting firm that specialized in document processing applications to learn about their current work. I imagined I might end up working at such a place after graduating, or maybe working in a digital humanities center at a university. But I came to see that libraries have dedicated funding (and therefore positions) in a way that DH centers and consulting firms generally don’t, and an opportunity in a university library opened up for me. Though my roles have evolved, and I’ve changed institutions, my career has actually maintained a relatively straightforward path within academic libraries.

Then, as now, there were two required courses at GSLIS: “Information Organization and Access” in the fall semester and “Libraries, Information, and Society” in the spring. Unlike now, both were taught once a week—on Friday mornings at 8 a.m.—as a lecture for the entire cohort of students, with the time of the week and lecture format adding to students’ usual grumpiness about any required course. While the former provided a clinical overview of various aspects of librarianship, it was the latter course that made a greater impact on me. With alternating lectures by Leigh Estabrook and Dan Schiller on topics ranging from professional codes of ethics to the history of the postal service, this course more than any led me to identify with librarianship as a mode of professional behavior that transcends particular employers and job duties. Dan Schiller, like Dave Dubin in his teaching, illuminated the radical nature of the profession, and Dan gave evidence of the historical role of government in promoting communication. While the allusions to political radicals and the relationship between the post office and libraries were lost on many of my peers, it is this frame of thinking that I learned at GSLIS that has informed my career since then.