Category Archives: Libraries

friends and foes

I have lots of thinks to write about, and no time in which to write them. So, instead, please go read what Kevin Smith has to say about the amicus briefs filed in the GSU copyright case. As always, he is readable and directly on point for academic libraries:

I was interested to see that one of the parties on the amicus brief filed by the Author’s Guild was a group called the “Text and Academic Authors Association,” of which I had never heard.  Was this really an group of academic authors opposed to fair use on campus?  Well, only sort of.  The website of this oddly named group (all authors write text; I think they mean “textbook”) shows that the majority of their leadership council is made up of non-academics or retired professors, who presumably no longer need to rely on fair use for good teaching.  And the strange perspective of the group can best be judged by this article arguing that textbook prices are justified and are not too high to interfere with quality education, a perspective thoroughly debunked by nearly every study as well as by day-to-day experiences on campus.  Indeed, the only sensible way to read the article is to recognize that every “myth” it undertakes to refute represents a demonstrable fact.

and

Note how clearly these friends of the court break down between those arguing for their own private gain versus those trying to uphold a public good.  Given all the rhetoric about copyright as primarily intended to benefit the public interest in hundreds of precedents, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals cannot help, one would think, but notice this disparity.

and

The ASERL brief develops this point a bit further, partly by pointing out that the licensing market touted so highly by publishers is already harming the ability of colleges and universities to teach students.  On every campus it is easy to find stories about how the inability to get permission, either because of the prohibitive cost of licensing or because no license for the particular work was available, forced a teacher to changed his or her plans and resort to “plan B” pedagogy.  Most librarians have had to assist such faculty to find other, less optimal, resources in those situations; it is something we do well, but wish we didn’t need to do.

Go forth. Read. Learn. Identify who our friends and allies are. Identify equally well who does not have our best interests at heart as we struggle to build better libraries and better institutions of higher education. And then take that knowledge about the state of our industry and make smarter choices as a result. Please.

 

Things academic library directors are asked to engage with

Topics on which I have had conversations and/or email communications in the last week:

  1. Open access, the state of publishing, and what libraries are doing about it.
  2. Textbooks, the cost of textbooks, and the open textbook movement, and what libraries are doing about it.
  3. Why ebooks suck and what libraries are doing about it.
  4. 3-D printers and their role in innovation and research, and what libraries are doing about it.
  5. Library policies as re: student expectations of service (in this case, “you don’t have enough computers”), and where our boundaries are on those questions.
  6. Library policies as re: faculty expectations of service (in this case, “I am dissatisfied with your collecting polices and practices”), and where our boundaries are on those questions.
  7. Massive online education, the library support needed to facilitate it, the complexities of delivering consistent services to geographically distributed and inconsistently institutionally affiliated students, and what libraries might do about it.
  8. Research compliance issues, data management for open data initiatives, and what libraries might do about it.

This job is certainly never boring.

Considering the librarian tech skills gap

There’s more to be said about my LibraryBox anecdote from my NLS6 keynote, and it’s chasing around my head and I want to get it out before I lose it, so envision your blogger sitting on her couch with a mug of green tea and a laptop, stealing from her exercise hour to write this. With all due credit to Andromeda Yelton for prompting me to take this one step further just as I was thinking about doing that.

I basically used the LibraryBox story to say “there’s cool stuff happening in the library technology space, but it’s often too complex for Generic Librarian M to figure out, and that’s a problem.” It is a problem. But I glossed over why.

Here are a few of the whys, as I see them, from my position as Generic Librarian M. (I know that I have a relatively powerful voice, and that I’m pretty tech-savvy, and privileged in those regards — but my tech skills are, truly, pretty generic. I pay people to maintain my WordPress installs.)

1. We aren’t taught crunchy tech skills. This is changing, I know, but it wasn’t true 10 years ago. But if you consider that many of the people in the heart of our profession — our Generic Librarians K, L, M, and N — got their degrees a decade ago, and learned the majority of their core skills while they were getting that degree, you can see that there might be a skill gap. It’s more problematic when you also consider that 10 years into your career you’ve often settled in a bit, and know where you’re going, and have more time and space to consider “fun projects”. You’ve proven yourself, and now you have a little room to move and stretch. And our current cohort of librarians ready to move, stretch, and fiddle with interesting projects weren’t taught to be software developers, or project managers, or to think entrepreneurially about library services.

2. We don’t know how to learn crunchy tech skills. So teach yourself, right? That’s what some of you are thinking. Some of you are thinking “I taught myself. Go learn.” And that’s fair, to some extent. It’s particularly fair coming from the subset of people who are very comfortable self-teaching, and the other (overlapping?) subset who are in jobs that require that they constantly self-teach new skills in order to get the job done. When your native headspace is “got a problem? Learn to solve it,” it’s easy to say “go teach yourself”. But if I’ve learned anything in my 4 years in this administrative chair (she types, from her couch), it’s that people learn in different ways. And some people — people who are valuable, valued, productive, and effective — don’t learn well in self-teaching environments. They need the structure and the assistance of a more formal learning space. And when it comes to hands-on, practical, applicable tech for libraries, those feel hard to come by. (Maybe they’re not; maybe there are dozens of ways to learn this stuff in formalized learning environments. I don’t know. I do know that they feel hard to access.) And that’s problematic: if we want to upskill broad swathes of our profession, we need more and better ways to do that.

3. It’s not our job to learn crunchy tech skills. And if we want to upskill broad swathes of our profession, it needs to be their job to do so. Each of us only has so much time in our lives and our days to dedicate to the dozens of things we’re supposed to be doing, the dozens more we want to do, and the yet dozens more we dream of doing. I want a PhD and to write a book; I don’t currently have time in my life for either project. So if I don’t have time to pursue my own heartfelt dreams, I certainly don’t have time for Code Year. And all of that is made more painfully obvious when I say that it’s also not my job to learn to code, or build a LibraryBox, or write a book. The things I make time for are the things that either are at the top of my passions list, or are my job. I do the things I adore, and the things for which I am paid. And that’s extrapolate-able onto lots of librarians: They do the things they love, and they do their jobs. The problem, in re: tech skills, is that we have  not, by and large, made it librarians’ jobs to do, learn, and know these things. (This is my gripe about “Emerging Technology Librarian” as a job title; if you hire one person to pay attention to emerging tech in libraries, aren’t you then giving all the other people tacit permission to ignore emerging tech? Because it’s not their job? It should be their job!) And if it’s not the job, and it’s not the passion, it doesn’t get done.

4. The technology headspace is openly hostile to most of the profession. And learning and upskilling  doesn’t get done when it’s hard to do. One thing that makes it hard to do is feeling unwelcome. The tech, code, software geek community has made your Average Librarian M feel particularly unwelcome. First, there’s the basic fact that when you let an analytically-minded expert write documentation and learning objects, they are not what one might call “user friendly” or “approachable”. The amount of jargon and out-of-reach baseline assumptions that litter most documentation and “outreach” from tech projects is absolutely daunting to Average Librarian M. It communicates, very clearly, that this is not your space. You do not belong here, you do not understand, go back to what you’re good at. And, yes, I advocate that you have to experience the discomfort of learning and failure in order to grow, but I don’t think that needs to mean that you feel actively disenfranchised before you can be a bigger person. The second thing that is a clear and obvious problem in terms of the hostility of the space is that librarians are, in majority terms, women. And the tech world is not only notoriously hostile to women in tech, but often gleefully so. See Kate Kosturski’s summation of the Adria Richards story for the most recent example. Check out the Tech Leaders section of the 2013 Movers and Shakers awards, where the gender balance literally flips from the other sections of the awards, for another less aggressive assessment of the state of library tech. Knowing that’s the set-state for the industry, and also knowing that the men willing to DDOS a company because they’re pissed at a female developer are the people gatekeeping the skills… someone tell me why I’d want to try REALLY HARD to gain entry? I’ll stay right here in my library, thanks very much.

And so. I don’t actually think it’s OKAY that I decided LibraryBox was too hard. I think that means I have a gap in my skills and abilities, and in a perfect world, I think I should fix that. But our world’s not perfect, and, like many among us, there are reasons why I’m not going to leap that gap right now.

But more of us need to be leaping. It needs to be easier to leap. I want to leap. What can we do to get us there?

Keynote from NLS6: Moving Beyond Book Museums

Based on my speaker’s notes and my imperfect adrenaline-fueled memory of that afternoon, and minus some asides that make no sense if you weren’t there (bananas!), this is approximately the speech I gave at NLS6 in February. Enjoy!

 

NLS6 Keynote speech.001

Hello. Thank you. I’ve had a wonderful time here this weekend, and meeting you all has been lovely. You’ve been kind and generous and thoughtful and funny and interesting, and it’s been my absolutely pleasure to be here.

You’ve also reminded me of something that I really do believe, but that is easy to forget: that even though things in libraries are chaotic and changing and weird and intimidating and seemingly insurmountable, you all exist. You’ve reminded me that there’s a world full of people coming up with smart solutions to the issues in front of us, full of crazy brave energy, and even when it seems like the future’s pretty challenging, all I have to do is look over my shoulder to see that the next generation of smart people is right behind me, waiting for the chance to shine. Thank you for that reminder.

So. Weird and intimidating and insurmountable or not, this is a brilliant time to be a librarian.

NLS6 Keynote speech.002

Seriously. It is. Here are some things I know to be true.

Historically, libraries have been pretty much book museums. The internet changed crucial things about how people access and think about information. Therefore the internet changed crucial things about how libraries position ourselves in our communities. And so our professional identity is in question. Our sense of purpose is a bit at sea. Then add in that economies are pretty terrible worldwide, and funding for libraries feels like it’s at a record low, and in some places it actually is. And mix it up with the truth that the future is now, but most certainly it’s unevenly distributed. Even in the midst of such abundance, fair and equal access to information is still a dream, not a reality.

That’s a downer.

But! But! It is still a brilliant time to be a librarian. Even with all those things being true. Why?

Because we are on the cusp of something absolutely remarkable. Think about all the things you heard here in the last two days. Discussions of the Edge and the Cube, of urban informatics and information jobs that don’t have librarian in the title. All the things you discussed, all the ideas you chewed on and played with and wondered about.

That’s all real, and just as true as my depressing facts about libraries. Right now, as the future comes slamming into our lives in ways we hadn’t anticipated, didn’t expect, and aren’t quite ready for, just about anything is possible. Hell, everything is possible. Some of it’s going to be hard, and some of it is going to continue to be unevenly distributed, but there is so much possibility that I can’t help but think that it’s a brilliant time to be a librarian.

I’m a bit biased in this, in that I’ve had the relative luxury of watching this revolution in libraries happen for the whole time that I’ve been clued into libraries. I started my time at university in 1994, and that’s when I got my first email address and had daily access to computers with always-on fast internet connections. And so I was paying attention as only an eager university student can when the IT staff installed NCSA Mosaic on all the lab machines, and introduced my generation to the world wide web. The graphical browser had arrived, and it quickly and with all due speed usurped our existing systems.

That happened to all of us, in one way or another, but I think that my window into the information revolution was apt for the path I’ve taken. My most serious educational years, and my development of my own perspectives on information, learning, and libraries, were all influenced by the evolution of the web. So I’ve moved through my education about libraries and the early part of my professional career with a clear sense that there was a revolution happening. And revolutions change everything, sometimes blowing things up while they’re at it.

But the other thing I know is that librarians like beginnings, middles, and ends, with all data in carefully coded slots. And you never know where a revolution really ended until someone writes the history about it… and we haven’t written that history yet.

NLS6 Keynote speech.003

So we don’t know yet where we’re ending up. The revolution’s not over, and librarians don’t know where we stand in this shifting and changing landscape.  But the damn thing started nearly 20 years ago. And my concern is that we should be responding by now.

I mean, we sort of are. But we sort of aren’t.

We have online catalogs, now… and they’re mired in MARC records and they still don’t really make sense to the average user, and they sure as hell aren’t Google.  And we’ve started digitizing our archives and special collections, but how long have we spent arguing about archival standards for .pdfs, and cost recovery on “extra” services like digitization, and what sort of discovery tools are we providing for users to get at our online things? And reference works are moving online, but not one of them can beat Wikipedia for ease of access or completeness – library resources are still locked into a paradigm that puts them behind a library-provided portal, and that values the traditional authority-based publishing process. Pick your own example. You can all come up with one, I’m sure, of the thing you look at in this field we all love and say, “That’s just not good enough.”

In a world that has cars that drive themselves, incredible processing power in our smartphones, and amputees with robot arms they control with their brains, I expect more from libraries than crappy OPACs and tepid forays into digitization. I expect better than venerating our tradition as book museums.

Of course, here’s the thing. I’m a library director. I’m one of our vaunted leaders, and I’m one of the people who should be providing direction and a plan of attack, developing strategy and vision. And I will tell you frankly that I don’t think that my library is on par with nearly-magic robot arms, either. So when I condemn the progress libraries have made, mine is included! I’m not responding the way I wish we were, either, and I know why: Because it’s hard, and I’m not quite sure how.

NLS6 Keynote speech.004

There’s clear evidence from both anecdote and survey that we lack compelling visionary leadership. There are a lot of compelling voices, and a lot of visionary figures, but we lack compelling practical visionary leadership.

Here are some more facts. These are from the 2010 Ithaka S+R study of library directors. Ithaka is the group that produces JSTOR, and S+R is their research arm, looking into issues of scholarship, digitzation, publishing, teaching, and learning. Good stuff. I keep hauling this data out, and I’m waiting eagerly for their next data release on libraries so I can have new numbers to use… because these are depressing. But they’re real. So here it is:

65% of respondents do not feel that their library has a well-developed strategy to meet changing user needs and research habits.

63% of Library Directors don’t feel they have enough information to deaccession print journals available online.

75% of Library Directors still think it’s very important that libraries be “gateway”s for information access.

I have serious arguments with the 63-75% of my peers who gave those answers, and I’d like to whack most of ‘em upside the head. Print journals are dead, libraries are no longer gateways for users, and we need some goddamned planning and strategy. End of story.

And as I noted, I’m also culpable here. While I love my library and my staff, we are not building mind-controlled robot arms. I think we’re doing really good work to move ourselves, our institution, and our services forward in meaningful ways. But despite that, we’re not building mind-controlled-robot-arm quality services and initiatives. And I think we need to be, collectively. The future is knocking, and we’re pulling the blinds and waiting for it to come back after we’ve had a chance to tidy up the parlor.

Many of us who could be driving our future from a position of strength and leadership aren’t doing so because, frankly, it’s hard. And we don’t know how. We’re not ready. So we need leadership, plans, and vision. And 63-75% of library directors can’t figure out how to do that.

Depressed yet? Let me keep going. We particularly need them in emerging areas. Because, come on, we’re all practical and functional and smart enough to figure out public service, book processing, and all of our traditional core areas. We’ve got that down, man. We’re good at it. Service is what we do. I mean, all those services can be improved, and they can all be innovation hubs, but they’re places where we’re already comfortable. We’re god at making plans and strategizing about information literacy and community building.

I’m thinking about our areas of discomfort.

Digitization in all its big messy glory.

Patron-initiated knowledge creation.

Publishing and how the industry is changing around ebooks.

Publishing and how we might participate in it.

Publishing and how patrons might participate in it.

Collection development and how patrons might participate in it.

With all those boundaries between our work and the user opening up, then we get to digital and media literacy. And then someone throws in big and open data, and what are we supposed to do with that? Well, maybe software development is the way to go. But we’re not so great at that, either. We usually rely on vendors. Except their products are largely crap, too, and sometimes they’re actively antagonistic to our needs instead of supporting them.

And that’s just some of them. (Seriously, are you depressed yet?) There are more areas of discomfort now, and there will be new areas of discomfort that pop onto our radar tomorrow, because someone somewhere is gonna build a cool thing that libraries will need to respond to in creative and useful ways.And our leadership isn’t ready for it. We don’t have a practical or sustainable vision from our leaders of what to do now, and do next.

And I’m not saying that cool shit isn’t happening in libraries: It is. It really, really is. Amy Buckland at McGill is working on digitization in their archives and special collections on a scale that we don’t often see, and she’s got big ideas about libraries and publishing that I’m looking forward to seeing materialize. Two guys I know, Jason Griffey at UTC-Chattanooga and David Fiander at University of Western Ontario are both working on wireless library projects that would allow each of us to walk around with a battery-powered wireless downloadable ebook library in our backpacks.

Here’s my issue: Those are just three of my friends. There are thousands of those projects out there. Each of you could think of a half dozen professional friends, new grads, mentors, colleagues, who are doing really cool things. But in my experience, doing cool things isn’t enough. In my experience, the coolest projects aren’t scalable. they only work because of the circumstances in which they were built.

A great idea proves not to be scalable because it’s small and focused and the second it goes big it fails somehow. An awesome information literacy tutorial only works because it’s tailored to the community it was written for, so when you try to make it applicable at your place, the whole thing has to be restarted from scratch.

Or it’s not reproducible, because it’s hyper-local and you need the resource set of Institution X to pull it off. I cannot do at SUNY Potsdam with my 25 staff what Amy can do at McGill with the resources of a research university. Full stop.

Or the best new idea requires skill sets we aren’t training for and don’t have, except for a dozen people who are all being hired by Google, and that one guy who can write his own ticket and you could never afford him anyway. Or even smaller scale: Griffey shows me his LibraryBox and enthuses about how straightforward it is, and I totally want to make one to take to every meeting I ever have and insist that people download the files we’re going to be working with instead of printing them out… and then my eyes glaze over when he starts talking about the code that you need in order to set one up. I, um, was hoping for a nice little point and click and stick the cord in the hole kind of interface and he’s talking about GitHub…

Or, most important, not enough people are standing up in venues where they can be heard and saying, “Hey! I did this thing! See my thing? Let me show you how I did my thing and how you could do my thing, so we can make more things like my thing, and we’ll all benefit!” There are tons of great websites out there, showing, sharing, and demonstrating results… but there are not nearly as many pages included in those sites that say “and here’s exactly how we made this, and here’s our license that openly allows you access to all of our work so you can do it, too.”

In short, we’re doing great things, but not in the best, most practical ways that would benefit our bigger communities as a whole, and we don’t have leaders who are standing up and saying, “here, this is really useful and here’s how you can do it too.”

So that’s enough of depressing. All that’s true, but it’s still a brilliant time to be a librarian, and I want to encourage all of you to help us all by being a better kind of librarian in this brilliant time. The question is: How do we model and build new cool shit, and develop librarians who can be our practical visionaries in these areas?

Three ways. And they all start with you lot, with your energy and your excitement and your ideas, and your relative lack of preconceptions about how this all ought to work.

First.

NLS6 Keynote speech.005

I need you all to stop fearing failure. There is genius and glory in our messes, and as Stuart Candy made clear, we cannot possibly predict what will come next. The future? It’s a giant chess board of infinite possibility and endless surprise. So we can’t fail making the wrong choice in that universe of billions of options. To anchor it down a bit, there is a TEDx Flint talk by a man named Peter Bregman in which he discusses fear and learning. In it, he talks about children. He notes that these small humans throw themselves face-first into life, toddling and falling through their environments for months on end as they explore, feel, smell, and lick everything they encounter. He says we lose something as we grow older, wiser, and taller. He says, “We learn by falling face first into the unknown, and then exploring our surroundings when we get there.” He goes on to suggest that if you know the falling is coming, it’s scary. Adults know the falling is coming. Our wisdom and experience tell us to stop licking everything we put our hands on. And as we work to protect ourselves, we don’t learn.

In short, Bregman asserts and I agree that if we want to learn, we have to feel the uncomfortable emotions that go along with learning — there’s no other way to do it. You can either stay comfortable, or reach for more of your full potential. You have to choose. Since Ruth Kneale took ObiWan in her talk, I’ll take Yoda. There is no try. And you WILL fail.

The best example I ever heard of this came from a workshop I attended about implementing new technologies in libraries, sometime more than 5 but less than 10 years ago.  It’s a good one, and stuck with me. In the early ’90s, a group of library technologists sat down and worked out the best possible technology implementation for their campus, studying what was available, how the industry was growing and changing, and they came to one conclusion: Gopher was the way to go. They worked out an implementation plan, put all the pieces into play, and launched what was certain to be a big leap forward for information access at their institution. And just after they launched, you know what happened? I said “early 90′s”. NCSA Mosaic was released. And Gopher  became exactly 100% the wrong solution to their problem, even though it was absolutely the right answer up until launch day. Things changed, and it was the wrong one immediately after. They were right, until they were wrong. There was nothing they could have done to prevent that, and nothing they could do once it had happened. It just was.

So you’ll fail. It happens. But you’ll learn from it, and you’ll move on, and you’ll know that you chose to stretch yourself and you lived through the experience. And then it’ll be time to save the world. again.

 

NLS6 Keynote speech.006

Because you’ve also got to stop waiting for a hero.

So let’s talk about the American Chemical Society.

It looked like a monopoly to me, in my first job out of graduate school. They had the content, they mandated we buy the content in order to be accredited, and they got to set the price on their content which we then had to pay for in order to have their approval of our program. But I was at a tiny tiny college, so who was I to complain? I told my boss it upset me, and why, and paid their invoices with a grimace.

And for the next 11 years, across different jobs in collection development, and watched as the paradigm did not change. And the prices rose. Again, and again, and again. In 2012 it looked like the ACS package — 40 journals serving one of 30 departments on my campus — would cost more than 10% of my materials budget. Costs had increased beyond my ability to pay. And finally, after years of hoping somehow, someone would do something, and something would change, I just said “To hell with it.”

And I did my job, and this time I did my job RIGHT. I worked with faculty so that they understood the issues. I worked with librarians to find alternate solutions. I ran the numbers again and again, and I talked to my boss about the the implications of what I saw there. I tried to negotiate with the publisher. I tried to get our consortium to negotiate with the publisher. Nothing worked.

And so I made the noise myself. We — SUNY Potsdam chemists, our collections librarians, and I — cancelled our ACS package. I blogged about it, telling other libraries that it was possible to walk away, laying out the steps of how I did it, describing what measures we were taking as a result, and asserting that the world probably wouldn’t explode as a result.

As confirmation, the world did not explode.

Interesting discussion ensued, for certain, and some other libraries were empowered to act, others to speak. I received more “thank you thank you thank you” emails and phone calls than I can effectively communicate. They were heartfelt, and they were real, and they mattered — and they were all from people waiting for someone else to be a hero. But if you wait for a hero, sometimes you wait for 11 years and nothing happens. Sometimes you wait longer. Is that the world you want to live in?

I have a tshirt referencing the classic Mario-rescues-the-Princess video games, except my tshirt says “self-rescuing princess.” I have another that says “I am my own hero.” Be your own damn heroes, and rescue yourselves.

NLS6 Keynote speech.007

Digitization. democratized information access and creation. Big open data. Digital literacy. Mind-controlled robot arms. These are all new fields for libraries. (Maybe not the robot arms.) They’re all big, and interesting, and absolutely brand new.

You know the best part about new stuff?

Nobody knows what success looks like. No one can tell you if you’re doing it right or wrong. That means you can try anything, and produce anything, and odds are… you’re succeeding. Because, really. Consider:

Do I, with the formal education I received in the late 90’s, really know more about what’s going to happen to libraries as big open data begins to explode in our environment? Maybe, right now, I do (I don’t, actually, but if I did), but it’s only because I’ve spent time educating myself about trends in our industry. You can do that, too, and you should.

You who are younger than I am have a very different perspective on the internet and our current information economy. And that perspective might mean you have an answer that I don’t. So educate yourself, and become the person who knows more than me about what might happen next.

And ebooks. Does someone in my position somehow have a magic 8 ball about what the publishing industry will do next as they flail about looking for a way to preserve their old profit model? Again, if so, it’s only because I’ve done my homework. You can do that, too. Nothing about my position privileges me to be the expert on these topics, or prevents you from becoming the expert instead.

The uncertainty of our future opens the door for new experts, new approaches, and new ideas about how to succeed in that new future. You can be those experts. And I’m not saying we won’t help you, mentor you, or support you — the best of those of us who came before you most certainly will. What I am saying is that YOU should be those new experts. Not us. So …

In this brilliant time to be a librarian, when we don’t know what the future is going to bring but we’re pretty sure it’s going to be amazing, I ask of you:

Redefine success.
Redefine libraries.
Redefine our future.
Don’t let people like me tell you how it should be.
Don’t let people like me tell you you’re doing it wrong.

Grab hold of your brave ideas, and make them real. Make them into scalable and reproducible projects, driven by vision but also by a desire to see every library pick up the concept and run with it in their own way. Use your vision to drive your library forward, to advance the information profession and our societies toward a better future.

Build the libraries we deserve, not the ones we’ve gotten used to.

Make sure that, as was said yesterday, we’re not talking about the same things at the next conference that we talked about at this one. Push your boss, push your library, push the obstructionists. Have faith in yourself, and insist on success, as you’ve defined it. As Ruth said, you have mad skillz. USE THEM.

Be different.
Be better.
I know you can.

NLS6 Keynote speech.008

 

Courtney Young for ALA President

I have had my issues with the ALA over the years, but I am a member, in part because I believe you can only enact change in organizations and institutions from the inside.

One of the ways you do that is by voting, and this year, I’ll be voting for Courtney Young. I invite you to do the same.

courtney

Why? Well, I knew the minute I read her candidate statement in American Libraries:

This will not surprise anyone, but libraries have always been a part of my life. My earliest library memory is of participating in San Antonio Public Library’s summer reading program. I toted home and read bags full of books. That summer I learned that knowledge is power, and from that point on I was never without some form of library card. While the materials I read and the technologies I found there changed over time, libraries have been an anchor in my life. It was as a college sophomore working in the library with my first librarian mentor that my appreciation for libraries blossomed fully into a professional passion.

That passion found its home in the American Library Association. ALA membership has given me opportunities for collaboration and promotion of diversity, and the joy of welcoming library school students to the profession, and has complemented my daily work by giving me access to a world of peerless peers. Through my years of service, I have learned that ALA is not just a club but an organization that demonstrates its real value through relevance to its members and the communities where they live and practice. And now, I am prepared to continue my service as president of the American Library Association by advancing what I believe are the key relevant issues to all of us.

This is a voice that represents the kind of librarian I strive to be. This is a woman who speaks to me, and who I believe can speak for me. This is the kind of leadership I want to see for our profession. Andromeda Yelton highlights a few other reasons why Courtney is uniquely suited to this role at this time.

So. Please explore the information the candidates have put forward about themselves, and I hope that you too will believe that Courtney Young is the right choice for ALA President.