OBSERVATIONS FROM THE OTHER SIDE

One of the major problems library and information professionals face comes from the lack of understanding of their role by the administrators and professionals with whom they work.

Stereotypical and often caricatured representations of the "librarian", set in stone through movies, jokes, and even (unfortunately) some literature mean the role has been frozen in place.  The person in the position is always the "little old lady with the books", the "liberry man or woman", the gloried "book clerk" whose only task is to circulate and shelve those musty tomes, the Luddite with a detestation of all things technological or of the modern era.

This clear mental connection of the world of the library with all things dated, aged, or out of touch, has been hauled out in every teacher and administrator textbook of the last twenty years.  The library profession, in fact, seldom makes into the pages of those books, into the curriculum of roles in the school, or onto the radar of modern pedagogy.

The result is English instructors address how to use the library in research, business instructors teach students to use databases or develop search strategies, and the skills remaining are largely non-professional ("Can we get some paper in the computer lab?") and directional ("Where is the restroom?").   The concept of information literacy is confused with the same old bibliographic instruction and issues of information development, growth, and access go under addressed, if at all.  

The professional is left to wonder, "Why did I go to graduate school again?"   The only one who seems to consider them professionals, peers, and educated is another library professional.

The profession, however, has some blame in this.  It crumpled before the challenges of the 1960's that the term "library" could not expand to include non-book formats.  The resultant, and confusing, "Media Centers", "Resource Centers" and the like, eroded the strong and secure place of the idea of a library as a source for all information.  The reluctance of libraries to embrace and run with new technologies gravely handicapped them in the technology race.   The intense gatekeeping that kept change from occurring until almost too late gave others the lead as information mavens.   The library was left cooling its heels as the waltz it had prepared for turned into a foxtrot without warning.

Is it too late? Will it be necessary for the profession to re-invent itself and reassert its role?  If so, maybe this time the need for change will be made a part of the future.