Libraries as a place are going through some very radical changes. However, I don't believe technology is wholly driving this train. In the mid-1990s, when I was on faculty at C.U.N.Y., slightly before the Internet exploded, a senior came into the Queens College library to check out a book for the first time. I was not surprised! My point is that there will always be a percentage of students and faculty who prefer not to use library services.

In terms of what we do for a living and what we value as a profession, I believe our basic role is essentially the same as it has been for the past five thousand years (we've got to be doing something right). Librarians must review, select, and improve their collections and also improve access to collections regardless of format. We must also teach and train our users in how to review and find appropriate materials to answer their questions.

We have to become better marketers (NOT JUST ADVERTISING) of library service to target groups. While I agree our success should be measured in quantifiable forms (door counts, circs., # questions asked & answered), I believe that the level of service and how well we've provided this service is just as important. My main criticism of the profession is that we tend to preach to the converted! We don't do a good job getting people in the door. We don't have greeters (like Wal-Mart) or "information specials"; our buildings are old and unappealing, the nature of the work is not conducive to speeding people through their contact with staff, we're not cool and we're not fun! That has to change!

Academic and public libraries are in a real schizophrenic situation. We are the retail side of the information trade (product/stock = information in all its forms; service = salesperson is the librarian; checkout = Circ desk instead of cash register) so; we have the same issues of staffing and keeping our product fresh. Yet, we exist for the public good so we don't make a profit and are in fact COST CENTERS. This means we have to provide retail services without the budget or staff to be 100% successful. I know too many retailers who were in it to make money but went out of business this way, remember Alexander's or Korvettes? Who's next NetLibrary?

Most academic reference librarians have incredible technical and people skills. They are good at finding information and have subject specialties and deep research interests. In technical services and automation, I know people who left six-figure computer jobs to work in libraries because of the perceived "calmness" of the profession only to find it is just as intense. They stayed for the challenges!

To sum up, we have to improve access; we have to keep reminding our public and ourselves that our services are important and critical for information access and democracy! Libraries will always be. The issue is how do we define what a library is and what services they provide for the customer.

-- David Orenstein, manager of libraries (posted 11/12, 3:10 p.m., U.S. Eastern time)

previous response

next response

STEP 1: Your contact information (required)

Your name: Your title & institution: Your phone: Your e-mail address:

STEP 2: Your comments

STEP 3: Submit!

Be sure to include your name and affiliation. Legitimate requests for anonymity will be honored.

The Chronicle maintains Colloquy as an open forum where readers can comment on issues. Submissions may be condensed or edited for clarity, but editing is kept to a minimum. We correct errors in spelling, punctuation, etc. In addition, we remove statements that have the potential to be libelous or to slander someone. In cases in which people make claims that could be libelous, we will remove the names of institutions and departments. But in those cases, we will not alter the ideas contained in the submissions.

Please read our privacy policy or our Colloquy help page if you have questions.

Check this box only if you would like this submission to be considered for publication as a letter to the editor in the printed Chronicle.