Competency C

To address Competency C, my first impulse was to scan recent research for polished, professional perspectives to present in this introductory section. Indeed, I have read many nice treatises about library values. I intended to begin with orderly statistics about the lack of Spanish-speaking librarians, religious diversity in the collections, and report on the insubstantial number of minorities in librarianship today. No. Recognizing diversity in our collections, users and colleagues is simpler than that.

People are hungry to be heard. We all want to see ourselves reflected in our society. In a pointed Library Journal (L J) letter to the editor, D. Baker asks that African Americans be treated like people rather than statistics clumped into the “disadvantaged” category (2013). Baker urged L J editors to speak with and feature minority library directors about their motivations, programs and successes (Baker, 2013).

Recognizing diversity is about seeing people as individuals; not stereotypes of television characters or historical portrayals of heroes, or disadvantaged cohorts, but people who might have a different frame of reference to share. The problem with race in America is denial. Unlike the 1990s and 2000s trend of assuming everyone is the same; ignoring diversity in an attempt at colorblindness, or to deny our own complicity in a society of systemic racism, recognizing diversity is embracing difference (Bonnet & McAlexander, 2012). Ignoring that a minority colleague may be assaulted or killed during a routine traffic stop, or arrested for breaking into their own house, or worried about their children being targeted by hate groups, or followed by security around a store, does not honor the daily stress they live with. Recognizing diversity is recognizing that the world is not equitable. Diverse groups live with different stressors.

Touting a well-intentioned program to serve minorities or attract minorities to library professions is not recognizing diversity unless it is accompanied by honest value for what they can contribute to our culture, personal relationships, and progress at work (Baker). Similarly, the library community must honor the struggles, sacrifices and scars of our economically diverse users. We exist to serve everyone from the odiferous homeless person to the family planning a ski trip abroad. Librarians must enfold all differences into library programs, collections, facilities, services and recruiting. Everyone in the community belongs in the library, from mentally disabled persons to refugees: noisy babies to dementia-affected elderly; community reflection through diversity is the point.

The MLIS coursework provided a wealth of techniques for administering neutral, equal service to all. Such intents are written into the syllabi e.g. “230: Analyze and evaluate the information needs of various user populations within the academic community.” INFO 230; Issues in Academic Libraries provided rigorous attention to user populations and the social and political environments that affect them. Instruction covered standards and models of service that develop multicultural competence, such as the IFLA/ UNESCO Guidelines for Multicultural Library Service and accompanying toolkit.

Similarly, INFO 210; Reference and Information Services introduced me to the American Library Association’s guidelines for the behavioral performance of reference and information service providers. We learned about the actions reference desk librarians should take to be approachable. Physiognomy, the art of using outward appearance to determine character or temperament, is employed to some extent by most people who approach the reference desk. They are looking for clues. The coursework taught us to face users squarely and make eye contact, smile and respond. While that sounds mechanical, I have seen library workers face their screens, not turn to face users or look up.

The purpose of LIBR 200; Information and Society, was to introduce students to the complexity of our cultural, political, economic, social, technical and historical influences. We studied how information professionals navigate those interrelated attributes, past and present. The coursework emphasized being able to recognize differences among user behavior so that we could better serve everyone. We learned about physical cues such as maintaining polite distance, ideas about timeliness, hierarchy and status. The assignments included many opportunities to connect the history of librarianship to the world. For example, we contrasted observable service principles in several libraries by applying our coursework to observations. Another assignment was to report on a professional association. I remember being surprised by the rich, values-based history around the associations I researched in preparation for the paper.

As evidence of Competency C, I submit a research proposal for LIBR 200, from 2012. Unfortunately, the final paper is no longer with us, but the research process was memorable. Preparation for the proposal began by building familiarity with the literature. I incorporated a sample of potential resources in the proposal. I used survey models to design questions about what patrons were going to use at the library during their visit. I included several options for each stage of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. For example, several options reflected housing and social services. Others represented self-actualization in the form of self-improvement materials.

I used demographic data from the Colorado State Demographer to select six sample libraries: Three in Douglas County, two in north Denver, and one in Commerce City. Douglas county libraries were chosen because they are in the ninth wealthiest county in the nation. The North Denver libraries were located in minority communities, one of which was Spanish-speaking. I mailed a brief letter to the Librarians outlining my study and survey and followed up in person a week later. Five of them approved my request to conduct a survey near their library entrance. The unapproved library was in an urban neighborhood, so I conducted the survey on a nearby sidewalk. I collected over eighty surveys in total.

The data were sorted according to Maslow’s Hierarchy, and location. Concurrently, I used two methods to collect data on the participating libraries’ collections. One was focused on the total collection via OPAC, and the other was a physical count of materials faced out. For the latter, I categorized every book that was featured by facing the user on the shelf. Specially marketed displays were omitted. For the OPAC study, I used a set of keywords to compare the collections by retrieving the total number of materials per keyword and calculating what percent of the total collection that represented. I charted the three studies’ data and compared the results.

The findings were unexpected. The user surveys revealed nearly identical reported use of the libraries. Users in wealthy communities were just as likely to be looking for financial resources as users in impoverished communities. The leisure and self-improvement category findings were similar. I remember that five of the libraries’ collection percentages for job-related materials were within 5% of each other. That is, the collection managers of the wealthy and impoverished neighborhoods bought about the same percent of job-related materials. The self-actualization and leisure materials were mixed: The percentages were distributed equally between the sample libraries. The face out findings, however, were more drastic. The low-income libraries did feature more shelter, social service and job-related materials than the Douglas County set. However, the number of leisure materials in the low-income libraries was also high. Books featuring hobbies were very popular, and this was echoed in the user surveys as well.

What I learned from the data collection experience was that I enjoy collecting data about libraries, talking to users about their preferences and networking with staff. Categorizing materials to draw inferences from the results was just plain fun. Later, in INFO 285; Research Methods, I learned about the errors in my methodology. I did not calculate margins of error. I should have only conducted one research activity. Of the three, the OPAC analysis would have yielded the most repeatable results. I should not have completed the survey drive near the disapproving library. I hope to perform similar data collection and analysis for my future library district. Next time I will design much better survey questions, more easily quantifiable benchmarks, and the preliminary research will be outstanding.

As with the other competencies, the Competency C-related courses taught me that support materials are always available. Moreover, support materials help sublimate values into behaviors, techniques and actionable knowledge. Those resources and techniques have changed my thinking. Before my professional training, I might have gotten pulled into an immigrant’s housing battle, or lulled into commenting on a political idea if provoked with enough enthusiasm, but there is no chance of that now. Today I see that, as a librarian, I represent both sides of history and justice with neutrality. It is not a position for activism, but support for all positions.

Resources

Baker, D. (2013). Prove library diversity. Library Journal. 12. Retrieved from http://bi.galegroup.com.libaccess.sjlibrary.org/essentials/article/GALE%7CA322329913/9894e3b5b0fe8b05d0483b7b32e18f3c?u=csusj

Bonnet J., McAlexander B. (2012). Structural diversity in academic libraries: A study of approachability. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 38(5), 277-286

Evidence

LIBR 200 Information and Society

Proposal for Term Paper

Class differences in patron use: Do patterns in society’s public library use reflect Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs?

Subjects: (Social) CLASS (Library), MASLOW (Psychology), COLLECTION and DEVELOPMENT

(Library), PATRON and USE (Statistics), INFORMATION and SOCIETY (Sociology, Humanities),

SOCIOECONOMIC (Library)

I would like to compare low income public library usage with high income public library usage to see if society’s library use reflects Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. Do economic and educational (class) differences affect the use of public libraries? If Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs holds true, then higher income/ educated patrons, having their base, physical needs met, will use the library to support self-actualization at higher rates than low income/ lower educated patrons. My research might show that lower income patrons use the library to address topics that lead to the fulfillment of physical needs such as employment, basic education queries e.g. job skills, address safety issues like searching for housing and social services and emergency assistance at higher rates than the high income/ education group.

To accomplish this comparison of class use, I would perform primary research in the form of surveys at six Denver-area libraries; three low income public libraries and three high income libraries. I would use State of Colorado income and education statistics to determine which neighborhoods differ most dramatically. I would collect data from Librarians about patron use, and about how their perceptions about the patrons influenced collection and program development. The patron surveys would be used to collect data on patron use and seek to answer whether the library is meeting their needs. I also want to analyze the six sample sites’ collections. I should be able to determine ratios for materials that address physical needs compared with materials that address self-actualization topics.

Some publications that may be used in the research:

• Classism in the Stacks: Libraries and Poverty.Detail Only Available By: Berman, Sanford. Journal of Information Ethics, Spring2007, Vol. 16 Issue 1, p103-110, 8p

• Random Ramblings -- The Digital Divide.Detail Only Available By: Holley, Bob. Against the Grain, Feb2010, Vol. 22 Issue 1, p52-54, 3p

• Teaching About Class in the Library.Full Text Available By: Drabinski, Emily. Radical Teacher, 2009, Issue 85, p15-16, 2p

• Library Service to the Homeless.Full Text Available By: Mars, Amy. Public Libraries, Mar/Apr2012, Vol. 51 Issue 2, p32-35, 4p

• Public Library Services to Underrepresented Groups: Poor & Unemployed, Emphasizing Danville, Virginia.Full Text Available By: Alexander, Otis D.. Public Library Quarterly, 2008, Vol. 27 Issue 2, p111-133, 23p

• We Must All Serve the Disconnected.Full Text Available By: Kelleher, Mary. Library Journal, 10/15/2009, Vol. 134 Issue 17, p44-44, 1p

• The social weaving of a reading atmosphere.Detail Only Available By: Sequeiros, Paula. Journal of Librarianship & Information Science, Dec2011, Vol. 43 Issue 4, p261-270, 10p; DOI: 10.1177/0961000611425823

I will use the citations from these articles to reveal other sources, especially, data regarding wealthy patrons and their library use.

I will determine whether the research shows that patron use reflects Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. If the research does not support my hypothesis, the results would be even more interesting because, I suspect mine is a common assumption. When I go into low-income libraries, I notice the marketing focus on job hunting and basic literacy skills. Conversely, when I visit high income libraries, I notice the focus on hobbies, travel; leisure. Let us discover if the data agree with my personal observations and then close with some questions about how appropriate these differences, if they exist, are. Should a focus on self-actualization be reserved for wealthy patrons? What does the research say about information and society?