In order to ensure that a library’s multicultural collection is not seen as an extraneous service and serves a purpose, communication with the population the library intends to serve is crucial.
Theresa Beaulieu compares many libraries’ multicultural collections and programming to the trope of surprise parties in television and movies (2013, p. 13). Does the party recipient even want a party? Do they like surprise parties in general? Would they prefer something different, or perhaps have a preferred way of celebrating? Beaulieu stresses this ‘surprise party’ approach to developing multicultural collections and programming can do more harm than good (2013, p. 13). Are the materials acquired actually beneficial, meeting the exact needs of the part of the community the library is trying to reach and feel included? Are these patrons seeing their culture misrepresented? Therefore, working with the multicultural community is much healthier, and allows for the library to have a strong relationship with the community, to more easily meet the exact needs and find ways to incorporate interests into the collection and programming (Beaulieu, 2013, p. 13-15).
In 2002, researchers Dilevko and Dali published the results of a study they undertook, evaluating multilingual collections and the challenges public libraries in Canada may face regarding those collections (p. 118). They found that many libraries wished to expand their collections in some areas—namely in the areas of adult fiction, adult non-fiction, and children’s materials—while wanting to maintain certain collections at current levels such as periodicals, ESL materials, DVDs, and reference items (Dilevko & Dali, 2002, p. 120). Only a very small portion of the participating libraries wished to reduce or completely remove entire multilingual collections (Dilevko & Dali, 2002, p. 120). The three biggest challenges the participating libraries found in growing their multilingual collections that these public libraries listed are, in order: demand, budget, and space (Dilevko & Dali, 2002, p. 122). Availability of materials was the third lowest challenge (Dilevko & Dali, 2002, p. 123). Many of the participating libraries reported that they found that many of their multilingual collections were deemed unnecessary by the multilingual members of the community for whom the materials were purchased for (Dilevko & Dali, 2002, p. 122).
Utilizing Beaulieu’s surprise party metaphor, this response may make sense: the libraries who did not find their multilingual collections in high demand may have attempted to throw a surprise party for the multilingual community, when instead of a big party they just wanted the library materials equivalent to a quiet night at home with a glass of wine and a rom-com marathon. In other words, the librarians may have purchased materials that they believed would be beneficial and appreciated, but the multilingual community actually had no need for. Dilevko and Dali also stress public libraries’ limited funds, and that librarians are “cautious about spending money on materials that are not expected to be used to any great extent”, with many of the participants responding that it was often a struggle to acquire enough materials in English (2002, p. 123). Therefore, having healthy relationships with the multicultural, multilingual communities would be incredibly beneficial for both the public library and the community: the community can express their needs, or lack thereof, and the library budget can be utilized wisely and accordingly.
As an addition to the book Librarians as Community Partners: An Outreach Handbook, the Arapahoe library district described their outreach initiatives to the Russian-speaking community (Dunatov, 2010, pp. 144-145). Their efforts are successful because of their methods. The Russian-language outreach librarian worked with Russian-speaking patrons to determine what to add to the collection and what services they needed the most (Dunatov, 2010, p. 144). The outreach-librarian then worked to offer classes in using reference resources, teach English classes, computer courses and some basic tech support sessions (Dunatov, 2010, p. 144). The library also translated computer instruction manuals into Russian to add to the reference collection and hosts Russian festivals (Dunatov, 2010, pp. 144-45). The librarians also ensured that “special care” was taken when planning programs for children, because, as Dunatov explains, “by doing so we are participating in bringing up a new generation of bilingual readers and patrons” (2010, p. 145). The Arapahoe library district went to great lengths to ensure that their multilingual library users had their needs met in the way the community needed.
Works Cited
Beaulieu, T. (2013) “No surprise, community engagement works.” From Smallwood, C. and Becnel, K. (Eds) Library services for multicultural patrons: Strategies to encourage library use. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, Inc. Pp. 13-20
Dilevko, J., & Dali, K. (2002). “The challenge of building multilingual collections in Canadian public libraries.” Library Resources and Technical Services, 46(4), 116–137. https://doi.org/10.5860/lrts.46n4.116
Dunatov, K. (2010) “Outreach to the Russian-speaking community in the Arapahoe library district.” From Smallwood, C. (Ed) Librarians as community partners: An outreach handbook. Chicago, IL: American Library Association. Pp. 144-145