The post Fine Policies and Lost Item Policies first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

What strikes me about this movie is its universality. I am, thankfully, a long way from high school politics. However, I have found the politics of Library Land to not be radically different. Over the years I have joined several organizations and tired to become ‘involved’ in matters that I have felt strongly about. Most of these attempts have failed. Why? Mean people.

I believe we all would like to think of libraries and library workers in the same way much of the public views libraries: comfortable, safe places where mild-mannered people with shared interest gather to whisper and read. This is not true of libraries and not true of those who work in them.

Don’t get me wrong, I’ve met many friendly, wonderful, considerate, and generally nice librarians. But just like in the broader population, for every nice person, I’ve met a not so nice person. Although not generally discussed, I’m not alone in this. When I’ve raised this with colleagues, many squirm uncomfortably not wanting to tell their stories, but ultimately indicate that they too have been bullied, ignored, insulted, or otherwise treated badly by someone in a leadership or powerful library position. 

Recently I had a colleague lament that they were being ignored on a significant issue. Speak up, write, I urged. They told me I didn’t understand: I had this forum, but they had no way in and one could only bang their head against a wall, and then be hit for it so many times. I considered this.  And because I knew exactly what they meant, I am writing this blog.

Most who have experienced this alienation retreat. We stop volunteering for committees. We stop offering services such as website maintenance,  list management, newsletter contributions. We stop going to conferences, paying for memberships, and participating. We stop trying to be ‘involved’.  Despite this blog, I have done each of these things. It is just too painful and frustrating.

My experience has clearly indicated that many of the mean people I have encountered know what they are doing and saying. As a regional representative at a statewide meeting, one such person told me that I was lucky to even have a seat at the table; implying that I shouldn’t be speaking or listened to. They did not feel the region I represented was worthy enough. I have received responses to questions and requests that clearly indicate that I would be treated differently than others, through the use of phrases such as “in your case.”  I even was once involved in an exchange in which three or four people were actively seeking a volunteer in which I repeatedly was replying, “I will do it!”  The result of the conversation was that they decided to put out an ad for a volunteer – I resigned from the group, not wasting any more time.

The worst part of my experiences and those of others I’ve heard about are not the mean people and their negative actions. The worst part are those that have witnessed these events and said or did nothing. Those that approached later with a ‘me too,’ an apology for others, or a ‘yeah, it’s like that.’ It’s time for the non-mean people to band together. It’s time for people to say, ‘that’s not right! Do not treat my colleague this way.’ It’s time for us to tell our stories and not allow mean people to bully our profession. Too much is being lost.

The post Mean Girls first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

As the director of a nonprofit (versus municipal) library, I am painfully aware of shrinking grants, personal donations, and smaller amounts of available funding in our current economic circumstances. To this end, I fully understand the probable motivations behind a museum’s library pass policies and charges. However, museums and libraries have had a long and symbiotic relationship. The isolationist approach will surely hurt us both in the short and long term.

The pattern is easy to extrapolate. A local museum raises its pass rates and/or lowers its discounted value for pass users. Consequently, the library cannot afford the pass or its circulation dwindles when patrons cannot afford the museum’s cost even with the discount. Eventually the library discontinues its library pass program because the cost benefit is not worth it. In isolation, this pattern would likely go unnoticed, but the national and long term effects will be huge. This is not simply a pattern that would result in less circulation or patron visitor counts, but one that has large social justice and cultural implications that challenge the mission of both institutions.

Museums and libraries share a mission of education and cultural transmission. It is often through libraries and the free services we can offer that those in need gain access and advancement. Wealthy people do not come to the library for discounted admission to a museum; they simple go to the museum and pay the entrance fee. Without museum passes at the public library, how many economically-challenged individuals will not get to experience a museum’s collection and the knowledge it brings them?  We in effect will have created or enabled inequality of a kind that is antithetical to the library mission.

I believe there are solutions that can allow for both institutions, the library and the museum, to benefit. Some of us have approached our local museums with ideas: sliding scale fees linked to use or circulation, limited numbers of free passes, partnerships that allow patron’s free access at a particular time, or discounted pricing in exchange for marketing or fundraising assistance. These ideas, while fine, put the burden of a much larger issue on individuals.

It would seem to me that this kind of issue is exactly the sort that our larger professional organizations and associations should be addressing by seeking out partnerships with their sibling museum organizations. The relationships between libraries and museums would seem to be the ideal partnership opportunities sought by state libraries or organizations.

Sadly, the anecdotal evidence indicates our larger professional organizations do not seem to be interested in taking up this mantle at present. This doesn’t mean it should be let go. We can all go on doing our individual thing with those in our backyard, and/or we can all go on tsk-tsking about the increased cost of museum passes and the inadequate discount they may offer, or we can do something collectively. We can set up local plans and share ideas with libraries and museums in our own areas and we can continue to lobby library and museum professional organizations for help. If this is the pervasive problem I believe it is, it is my hope is that simply by raising this we can all help each other — help libraries; help museums; help patrons, and stand up for the culture and ideology that we value.

The post The Cost of Museum Passes first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

After much thought, I find myself in the same place. I will not decorate my library for Christmas, because Christmas is not a secular holiday. I will not decorate my library for any religious holiday. I feel that this is alienating for those who do not celebrate these particular faiths. In U.S. society we are inundated with Christmas. I cannot go into any store, access any form of media or even drive down any street without being flooded with Christmas. While there are some who insist that Christmas is non-religious, this is simply, factually incorrect and I would suggest equally as alienating for those who value its true meaning. Personally, as one who currently does not celebrate this holiday, I find the commercial predominance oppressive and I wonder how my non-Christian neighbors feel. The presence of Christmas can feel as though society is clearly accentuating what one is not.

At this junction in history many seem to be feeling estranged, and reluctant to demonstrate ethnically diverse culture. It is important to me that my library feel welcoming to all, regardless of race, religion, culture, or any other belief system. It is for this reason that I think it is of even greater importance to not decorate for a Christian holiday. I have decided to let the rest of society do this.
This does not mean, however, that I think libraries should not decorate. There is no reason why we cannot celebrate the season, with snow and snowflakes, snow people and mittens. We can still celebrate a season dedicated to love, peace and good will. We can still celebrate a commitment to family, friends, and cookies. We could highlight other focuses of December that are overlooked. December is national human rights month, national tie month and root vegetables and exotic fruit month. December is also national pear month, safe toy month and bingo month. All of these could be used as paths to colorful, creative and educational motifs to bring a festive flair.

I am not opposed to celebration and I am not opposed to decoration. I simply feel it is important to offer such things without any element that could make a person feel uncomfortable because of what they do (or do not) believe.

The post Why I Am Still Not Decorating My Library For Christmas first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

I have also heard that some books, though ‘picture books’ in appearance, are not actually meant for children. I find this doubtful, but it always prompted the idea: why not an adult book group focused on picture books? Since this thought persists to whisper in my ear, I went to my staff. Sitting both my children’s and adult services librarians down, I broached the subject. I was fully prepared for the long silent pause that indicates they are trying to figure out how to appropriately tell their boss she’s crazy. Much to my surprise, their reaction was instant and positive. One began discussing how to interlibrary loan the planned material and the other rattling off potential titles. In that moment the plan was born.

As good librarians, we also took to the internet searching for others who may have forged the way and could offer insight. Unfortunately, we found very little. But this has not discouraged us.
The format will be simple, three or four books chosen per session, like any other story time. The books available when members arrive so that each can read it in the five or so minutes at start, but a few copies also available between meetings to attract attention and offer option. At meeting time a discussion could ensue, like any other book group. We might discuss the intricacies of the illustration, the effectiveness of the message, and could branch out to a discussion of the underlying topic. Depending on the group, this could be beneficial to those in educational fields and parents as the conversation could also support a discussion of how to talk about an issue with children and others. Themes could be serious, such as social justice, activism, or gender issues. Or less heavy topics, such as wordless picture books, award winners, current holiday.

We have decided to start this plan in December and we already have two patrons who are as excited as we are. If anyone else has done this, we would love to hear your story. Share in the comments.

The post Picture Book Discussion Group at the Library first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

I began by speaking with staff about religious faiths that they would like to know about or which we knew nothing about. We asked ourselves what don’t we know or believe others don’t know.  As a result, I put together a three program series. The first session featured a local Wiccan who runs a small store and teaches classes at the local community college.  For the second, we partnered with the local nonprofit again for a program on  Baha’i and Sikh faiths and for the last, I have sought out different Christian groups to explain denominational differences.

Within a few weeks, the Wiccan program registration reached capacity. I also heard through the grapevine that the local politicians were concerned. The rumor mill told me that at least some did not think religion belonged in the library.  I agree completely. The challenge to our programs did not come to fruition. In some ways, I find this a shame, as it would have been a good ‘teachable moment’ as they say in education.

First, one must point out that many libraries do in fact include a lot of religion, almost all of it Christian. Many offer Christmas  and Easter programs. They put up Christmas tree displays and have the Santa Claus come visit. Others sponsor Easter Egg Hunts and feature a poor soul in a bunny suit. My library does not, but religion does dictate some of our holidays. I believe most  libraries close on December 24 and 25 and many on Good Friday, though we do not for any other religious holidays.

Second, it is important to note that our planned programs on religion do not involve any proselytizing. It is not solicitations for funding, recruiting, or converting. These programs are for educational purposes only.

This raises an important distinction. While the series is on the topic of religion, we are not engaging in religious programming, but theological programming. That is, we are pursuing an academic discourse on the nature of belief in the divine and the various rituals that might display this belief for particular groups.

I truly believe it is education, communication, and open discussion that will make our world a better place. While I do not relish any kind of ‘challenge issue,’ I still wish I had opportunity to explain religion is to theology as salaries are to financial planning. We can talk about things without treading on personal toes. There are many weighty topics for which this is needed. I have always heard one should never discuss religion or money, yet libraries have been running financial programs for years, maybe it’s time for us to offer theological programs as well.

The post Religion Versus Theology in Library Programming first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

For many of us, myself included, we have strong feelings and fears about what is happening in today’s world. We see challenges to concepts such as free speech and democracy, that traditionally public libraries hold dear. Because of this we have tried to expose a diversity of ideas and educate through our roles as librarians. Some have debated the process and policies that indicate all sides must be represented if any given topic is raised within the library. The current climate has prompted some institutions to formalize a politically neutral policy. This in turn has caused others to question and object to this path. Some have gone so far as to express anger at those who, for personal perspective or institutional policies, avoid all controversial topics.

Although I do not believe a library should avoid controversial topics, and that such action is against the mission and core values of a public library, I also understand the choice. A sad truth is that in many locations the public library is not an independent organization, but one that exists at the political mercy of others. As such, a policy on political neutrality maybe be a protection for existence. It may also be the only means possible to ensure that all views are represented within the institution.

I am not happy to see public libraries codify a neutral position. I do worry that there may come a time when in the name of neutrality, we will in fact ignore gross injustices. However, to force an individual or institution to take a political position can enable gross injustices that much quicker. The forced position can make the situation more divisive and more precarious.

I am very sensitive to the notion that when I start telling others, ‘you can’t…’ I am legitimizing their saying the same to me. I personally believe that politically neutral is a political position. I personally believe that neutral is a dangerous position to hold. But I also believe that to keep my freedoms and beliefs, we all must be very careful when we tell others what they can and cannot do. Given this, doesn’t everyone have a right to be apolitical?

The post The Right To Be Apolitical first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

We have had the disgruntled patron who bellows about the perceived injustice.  We have had those disengaged from the reality around them. I’ve been yelled at and called names by young men, angry at whatever rule I was trying to enforce. I’ve cajoled and threatened to get the unruly patron to behave appropriately or leave. While I do not enjoy this aspect of our work, it rarely bothers me.

In the past month, however, I had a new experience.  A young male patron locked himself in our public rest room. This alone would be a little odd, but not notable. The difference in this case, was when after thirty minutes passed and I went to knock and inquire on his wellness, he growled at me. This exchange occurred three times.  Each successive growl was more fierce sounding then the one’s before it.

I was at a loss. A growl hardly seemed justification to call the police; no law was being challenged nor even library policy. Still, this response to simple questions, “are you alright?” was shockingly chilling.

Thankfully, our growler soon left both the restroom and the building. We reported the incident to our local police, noting we were doing so, only because it was odd.  I was glad that I did. Despite our very sketchy physical description, the police knew the individual instantly. In this case, we learned that our growler was visiting neighbor libraries and did have a criminal history. He is a juvenile, so information is limited, as is our recourse. We received the generally unhelpful advice to ‘keep an eye on him’ and intercede if he approached children. An ominous request.

All in all, while the incident was unsettling and made the library’s staff nervous, our growler did not and has not actually violated any library or town policy or law. The situation did however, prompt us to review all our security measures and posting of emergency phone numbers. It has also prompted me to spend a great deal more time considering our limited protective options.

Having worked in city libraries where police are local and security guards are on staff, I know that not all are in the same position as we are. While urban problems are often more severe, in our circumstance, our police station is 20 miles away and we operate with few neighbors and an all female staff. Our incidents are thankfully few and far between, thus there is no justification or budget to hire security.  Still, how to keep staff safe and feeling secure?

At this writing, we have posted the police’s dispatch number in various locations along with several town employees who have offered to come hang out should any of us feel uncomfortable and want a more intimidating presence. Some have suggested staff carrying pepper spray in the building. I am not comfortable with any of these options, but what to do?

The post The Growler first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

It is important to make clear, civility is about presentation, not about content or disagreement. Likewise, leading tolerance is about accepting people, not their bad, hurtful or harmful behaviors.

My perspective that such terms are not being applied appropriately was reinforced recently upon hearing and reading of several librarians providing concrete examples of institutions and administrators giving lip service to diversity, while engaging in institutionalized racism, discrimination, and intolerance.  Sadly, I strongly suspect that these institutions and administrators are not even aware that they engaging in problematic practices.

As an administrator myself, this has sparked me to truly evaluate practice. Specifically to ask, while being civil how do we engage in leading tolerance and move beyond the labeling of diversity to action?

The first issue immediately visible to me is communication. Civility may require an avoidance of personal attack, but not avoidance of personal expression. One may argue, disagree, challenge, and in a manner express strong feelings and still be civil. Synonyms of civility include respect and politeness, not acquiesce. For librarians to move beyond a cursory acknowledgement of diversity to diversity in practice we must be able to talk about what we are doing right and wrong, what is being perceived and what we are attempting, what are extraneous limitations and what we can control.

This conversation is not easy.  If we want to lead tolerance and expand beyond multicultural collections and social issue displays, we must be willing to talk directly about uncomfortable issues. We may mistake discomfort and directness as impolite. This needs to change.

I recently heard a librarian telling of raising an issue with his director about a particular art work on the library wall that he found problematic. He asked that the picture be removed and reported that the director, while sounding sympathetic, did not remove the picture. From what I heard, the librarian described this art work as offensive, reminding him of an abusive and racist historical past. His lament was that it did not appear that the administration recognized the hurt he felt directly when he looked at the picture.

Unfortunately I did not get to ask this librarian what exactly was said to his administration, and I believe this makes a grave difference in the evaluation of this specific case.  But this serves as a solid example of a situation when an uncomfortable discussion is warranted.  While civility does dictate that the librarian not approach the administrator with elevated voice, belligerent tones, or personal accusations, it would be perfectly civil for the librarian to express the degree of upset and the nature of the upset, in this case the picture, causes. Wording matters — the strength of a word is important, for example ‘discomfort’ is not as strong as ‘offensive’  though both are civil.  Stating specifics should not be avoided, for example, ‘this painting invokes painful impressions of slavery for me.’

Many may believe that raising the issue of racism, slavery, or possibly pointing out that one person’s experience of something because of their demographic can be very different than another’s is being impolite. I would say, no, it is necessary. As an administrator, this is what I need to hear to understand the severity and impact of the situation that is not my experience.

While there is no assurance that approaching issues with such directness will facilitate change, I believe it is where we must begin. As librarians we are good at explaining why some resources are better than others, discussing why a patron’s behavior should shift, and the rationale behind our policies.  We do all of this while engaging in civil discourse with patrons that are not reciprocating.  Why then can we not apply the same rules of engagement and argument among these far more important issues?

The post In Practice: Civility first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

As a librarian, when my library was renovated, I was excited to plan open wall space that could be dedicated as gallery area. Given my past, I believed I was well prepared. Prior to our first show, I prepared a policy that outlined everyone’s responsibilities and liabilities. I researched various hanging systems and chose one that appeared easy to use and would not mar walls. I even received several suggestions for artists to contact.

Our gallery space has now completed three cycles. My library board and the public love the space; they are thrilled to see original art work in the library. However, I am now learning that I was not as prepared as I believed.

While our hanging system certainly prevents nail holes in our walls, it does not prevent the walls from minor damage.  It has become clear that a repainting schedule is going to need to be implemented and not on the time frame of decades like our past experience. Frames and hanging wires brush against the paint, causing scratches and wear. The removable labels that identify our artist’s work, do remove with relative efficiency, but while they do not remove patches of paint or worse, wall board, they are not removed without signs of wear.

While it is stated up front, that artists show their work at their own risk, I cannot help but worry. I see our young adults throw themselves into chairs near the wall. I see unaware adults stroll past, brushing the walls as they travel. Worse, I see the curious and the admirers reaching to touch. Thankfully, we have had no ‘accidents,’ but I am well aware that should one occur the costs, both financial and to good will would be great.

Last, I had always imagined an ‘if you build it, they will come’ approach to the showing of art work. I believed that of course, artists, upon hearing of an opportunity would seize the chance. What I did not anticipate was that artists are no different than any other group of humans. They forget. They procrastinate. They change their mind. Thankfully our gallery space operates on a quarterly showing basis or I would spend half of my job engaging in the administration of this one program.

Ultimately, is the gallery space worth it? I think it is. It certainly makes our library prettier. By the end of their shows, our artists always appear grateful. Some have even gotten sales as a result. But before anyone ventures into this task, I would advise them to remember, like a garden, gallery space is something that must be tended to, not planted and forgotten!

The post Behind the Scenes at the Library Gallery first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

I am very ambivalent about this. By no means do I want to add a publish or perish component to my already lengthy responsibilities. But I do find that the limited voice of the practicing public librarian in professional literature to be a problem. While there are many exciting things happening in academia at this point, and the academic librarian’s experience is valuable, the academic and the public library are not the same. When it comes to specificity, our differences are heightened.

As a former academic and a teacher of research methods, I am aware of how academics can investigate the public library and contribute, but there is something lacking when we read research that is not steeped in the insider information of those with direct experience.  I would like to see more primary research and the experience of the public librarian more present.

I recognize time is a huge factor. Without the mandate, even those with the desire to publish can find writing pushed to the wayside as other tasks seem more pressing. For many locations, publication can be considered part of professional development.  It can also be considered community service and it certainly serves as a means to advertise your library. Perhaps if thought of in these ways, time might be more easily made for the task.

A larger problem that I have encountered is that many public librarians I have spoken with feel unworthy of the task. Because they manage small, rural libraries, because they do not have experience, because they lack a degree or because their job title is not administrative, some very talented and knowledgeable librarians think they have nothing to offer. This is simply untrue.

I am a published librarian. More than this, I am an editor and a peer reviewer for two library publications and I can share with you in no uncertain terms, you can do this. Write. Submit. There are many who can benefit from your experience. The public librarian voice needs and deserves to be heard.

What is the worst that can happen? You get an email or letter that says, ‘We’re sorry we can’t accept your work.’ This is far less stressful than dealing with the problem patron. As the Nike slogan goes, “Just do it!”

The post Share, Write, Publish first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

My reasoning is not based on any fiscal basis. With my library’s fines set between $0.05 and$1.00, and individual items capping at $3.00, this is not and never will be a revenue stream. My reasons for keeping a fine based system have more to do with psychology. When I was a child, having fines for library books was a means of teaching responsibility and consequence for my actions (or inaction). For me then, and now, the cents per day fee was a gentle way to remind me that library borrowing should not be taken for granted. It was not merely a repository, kept available for my pleasure only, but a valuable service that others used besides me.

As a child, I secretly liked my overdue fine, because the responsibility of paying my overdue fine allowed me to feel ownership and grown-up. Like responsible grown-ups who paid their bills, I would also. But it was also something that I had control over. I learned to be responsible, not only to my debts, but to others. After all, I understood that the fine being imposed was to deter me from keeping the book that others might be waiting for. With adults, I find fines to still be a reminder of responsibility.

Although the charges are token amounts, the process of charging fines also serves to remind the public that we are providing a service of value and that we have expenses. It is a sad truth of American society that people associate value with cost. Generally, the more people pay for a service the more value they place on it. Libraries offer most of their services for free, thus in the collective consciousness we are already starting off at a disadvantage. If we then present rules – rules that exist for practical reasons – with no consequence for breaking said rules, we have undermined ourselves even further.

The charging of token library fines is a way to communicate to the public that libraries matter. Sure, we provide free access to materials, this is a great thing and we are able to do this because we also require that materials be returned to us in a timely manner. If it is not returned on time, a small fee communicates that social rules are broken. This act, while probably insignificant to the borrower, has, in fact, significance. It is significant enough that the borrower will have consequence. If the borrower continues their behavior, in not returning materials over long periods of time, their costs are higher, thus communicating the greater consequences of their behavior.

Fines are not about making money. Nor are they actually punitive, as we frequently ‘forgive’ fines for particular circumstances, and small fines can be carried on an account indefinitely. Fines are a tangible reminder of the patron’s responsibility, the library’s importance, and the consideration of others.

The post To Fine or Not To Fine first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

In asking myself these questions two experiences from my past came back to me.  The first, I recalled teaching women’s studies classes, watching talented, smart, capable, young women become alienated by a strident, authoritarian and narrowly defined dogma.  It wasn’t even that these young women disagreed with feminism, but that the manner in which it was presented, they found abrasive and unyielding.  The result, “feminism” became another bad F-word and the ideology and goals of the movement were set back in many frightening ways.  The second recollection was my favorite Star Wars quote.  Princess Leia looks to her capturers and says, “The more you tighten your grip…the more star systems will slip through your fingers.”

I see both of these memories as highly relevant in today’s world.  No one can deny that polarization of our country is present. There are groups with radically opposing views, but each believes their position to be morally correct. Even those who fundamentally agree are swiping at each other for how stridently positions should be put forth. Everyone’s grip seems white knuckle tight. I venture to say, all side are terrified.

Fear is a dangerous thing.  It makes us think dumb things, say hurtful things, and behave in ways we cannot explain.  It triggers flight or fight responses, each equally fatal for improving the situation. Ultimately what is needed is to show that fear is not warranted, but this requires time and the ability for opposing views to coexist. It is highly unlikely society will reach universal agreement.  But we can respond with sympathy and empathy. We can be strong enough in our beliefs to allow the beliefs of others to exist.  Like it or not, each side must listen to the other respectfully and reach an arrangement in which each side is allowed basic human rights and freedoms.  This includes the right to say what we think, feel, and believe.

The tighter the grip, the less flexible and more strident in our views we become, the more dangerous the situation becomes.  Social changes occur but in ways that ultimately are detrimental to all, as both sides use identical tactics to silence the other.

The public library by our mission and place within communities across the country is in a position to help facilitate positive social change. By illustrating and accepting multiple viewpoints and personalities, opinions and ideas, and treating ALL people as equal, we set an example. We can set a tone for our communities. We can, through our programs and daily interactions, educate on practicing civility. We can model appropriate responses to opposing viewpoints. We can show how by loosening the grip, we catch many more star systems.

The post Making Social Change: Promote Civility first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

In other communities, I hope all are reminded how quickly dangerous situations can arise.  Many have repeated the importance and need of having a disaster plan in place before disaster strikes.  The recent events have raised these questions in my own community.  While I have reassured questioners that the library does have a disaster plan in place, I have also reminded people of the importance of libraries as second responders.

I am not a first responder.  I have great respect for those that can do this work, because I am not one. My service as a librarian is not to be among the first people to enter a problem situation. I do not believe the library should serve as fallout shelter or that librarians should be on-call public servants. People have looked askance at me for closing the library during a storm or refusing a position in which I would have a mandatory requirement to stay in the library during a disaster.

In my view, librarians are second responders; a later role that is much needed and of significant importance.  We are the group that enters the picture during the second wave of disaster relief, when many others have forgotten or grown weary of hearing of the situation. In this position, we provide necessary and valuable services, albeit at a different stage of the recover process. We are not triage, but recovery.

As second responders, librarians can provide much needed information, comfort, and community support.  We are a centralized point for the sharing and disbursement of information. The library is the place that offers assistance for those needing to contact and pursue insurance, FEMA, or simply family in other locations. The library is the place where people can research information and get DIY project help.  The library is the place that can provide a free, safe outing for children and families who need distraction or diversion. Librarians can supply the sympathetic ear to those who need to tell their stories.

We are the second responders. Like first responders, we don’t do this for glory or fame. We certainly don’t do it for fortune. We do it because it’s our job and because we care about our communities. We do it because we can provide hope and normalcy. We do it because it’s important to continue to help long after the television crews have moved on.

The post We Are The Second Responders first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

For years I’ve witnessed librarians shy away from saying no.We try to phrase our signage positively or seek synonyms such as “refrain.” I’ve seen all staffing requests honored, even when it left institutions dangerously short of coverage. I’ve seen abusive patrons placated to the extent that staff was in tears and other library patrons alienated. I’ve seen librarians spend precious hours, made up on their own time, to entertain a vendor presentation for a product for which there was no need or budget. Worse, I’ve seen librarians purchase unneeded items from vendors, saying they didn’t want to hurt the vendor’s feelings by saying no.

Saying no does not mean being rude or mean. Sometimes saying no is necessary. Sometimes saying no is the responsible response. The important thing is knowing when to say it and how. Saying no is boundary setting. It should not be said in anger or vengeance, but with reason and purpose. In a library, we should say no with the same rationales present as when we say no to our family. We should say no for reasons of safety, fiscal management, protection, support, and education.

In the context of libraries, no one is fooled by word choices to soften a message. If anything, it confuses the reader or indicates that the message is insincere; that the message is not really meant to be followed or will not be strongly enforced. If something, such as no eating or cell phone use, should not be done, there is a reason for it and we would have more credibility (and respect) to be direct. Similarly, if there is a patron violating rules, we have an obligation to ourselves, our colleagues, our public, and to our problematic patron to indicate unacceptable behavior and consequences clearly. Patrons behaving badly have negative consequences for libraries. They scare others and they undermine the safety and mission of the library.

We, our co-workers, and vendors should be professional. As such, decisions regarding staffing, collections, or other management or operational concerns should not be happening based on interpersonal relationships. We shouldn’t be worried that our book vendor could be mad at us for a lack of purchase. If such decisions are made this way, it undermines our profession, our integrity, and all of our abilities to do our jobs.

No one likes to be perceived as the ‘bad guy’ and saying no can make us feel in this position. But we would not feel unjust telling our child not to run into the road, telling our spouse not to overspend our savings account, or telling a friend not to engage in dangerous behaviors. We do these things not to be mean, but to be benevolent. We do these things because we care.  Saying no in the library should be considered in kind.

The post The Value of No first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

Clearly patron data (from Internet use at the library) will be able to be harvested. This will undoubtedly have rippling effects for libraries. There is the obvious; patron’s information will not be secure. But this will now be true for everyone, everywhere and is a larger political issue. What concerns me are other, unintended factors. The most obvious for me is the concept of targeted advertisement. All who are online experience the eerie occurrences of push advertising. Search for information about a lawn mower and suddenly every ad that comes up on your computer screen is for that specific product. This is annoying, but if the push advertising is going to start surfacing from information pulled from what we generally think of as private communications (email versus Google searches), what will that mean for what pops up for our patrons? For those of us who do not filter, will this increase the visibility of inappropriate sites?  Will this allow private concerns to become more public, such as library patron’s health issues?

Another issue is intentional spying. More than once in my library I’ve had a parent or spouse actively try to spy on their child or significant other. I can imagine there have been even more nefarious attempts also, that staff was unaware of.  But since we know this actively occurs, what does this situation and newly revised law mean for the library?

Can a patron seek out our ISP and buy our information? Can a spy linger until a patron is done on a particular computer, and then use that computer to see what ads pop up? Whereas before the ad might reflect the person’s desire for shoes or Amazon book selection, what might it include now?

Further, will we have an economy of scale problem? For example, it is one consideration if an individual’s Internet use is purchased, but if a library’s use is purchased, it could reflect hundreds of people. This could be a convenient one stop shopping database for an entire community.

I am troubled by these thoughts, both privately and professionally. I am equally troubled that I am not sure how much of the public is currently aware of this. I am sure I am not the only librarian with concerns. The question is what can we do about it?

Prior to this law being repealed I posted the information by our public access computers. I will now revise that posting again. But I believe it’s time to start discussing what else we can do.

The post Big Brother Through the Library first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

People with little understanding of the process and seemingly no knowledge of the reasons behind research methods toss around terms and numbers with great pretense. Worse, others with potentially less knowledge are making policy decisions based on these numbers. With this lack of understanding, it is no wonder we have arrived at a world confused by “alternative facts,” “fake news,” and the disregard of scientific institutions and data.[1]

I am reminded of the popular belief “people lie with statistics.” As I told many a class, people can only lie with statistics to those that don’t know statistics. The same is essentially true of all information. People can lie about history, but only to those who don’t know history. People can lie about anything to those that do not know about the topic. The way to prevent this is to learn about the topic in question. In the case of trusting research and data, one needs to understand research methods and evaluate.

As librarians we are dedicated to seeking out information. While we generally do not engage in original scientific research ourselves, we refer people to such research and help people to evaluate the materials they find. Academic librarians may do this with greater depth and frequency, but I would argue the responsibility is even greater for the public librarian who serves a population that comes to them for information without any expectation of foundation and background knowledge. For the average public library patron there is no expectation that they possess a background in even website evaluation, let alone scientific research methodology.

For the public librarian we (rightfully) take pride in our role of evaluating material and educating others to do the same. As the evaluation process, not subject matter, is generally our expertise, we depend on other factors such as knowing the credentials of authors and publishers. A simplistic example is that we refer people to information produced by a journalistic news source rather than a tabloid. In the past, the expectation was that the most trusted information could be obtained from the juried professional journals of an academic discipline. If a cure was touted by the American Journal Of Medicine, we knew we could trust this cure more than if presented in The National Enquirer. The actual reason behind this had little to do with the publisher, and everything to do with the process. The material presented in the journal we knew was going to be based on data gathered by scientific methods and reviewed by experts in the field.

This week, I learned the American Psychological Association (APA) asked a journal editor to resign when he asked to see the data of the research he was evaluating for publication.[2] This is akin to the restaurant firing a chef when he asks for proof his ingredients are not spoiled or the hospital firing a surgeon when he asks to see a patient’s record before operating.

What began within me as minor annoyance has now developed into what can only be described as fearfulness. As librarians we are not only on the front line of information sharing, we are also its guardians. I believe we need to hold creators accountable. If you don’t know or understand research methods – learn them! If a source or organization will not provide or support the process, don’t support it. We need to start treating data with respect or all information will soon become meaningless.

References

[1] http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2015/03/science-doubters/achenbach-text

[2] http://boingboing.net/2017/03/02/psychology-journal-editor-aske.html

Resources
http://www.nature.com/news/peer-review-activists-push-psychology-journals-towards-open-data-1.21549

The post The Importance of Understanding and Evaluating Research first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

But it is the bookstores that truly intrigue me. Many librarians knew that the proclamations of the death of the book were premature. We now have statistics to support that e-book sales are trending down while print book sales are trending up.

Speculation for why Amazon is opening actual stores ranges from the recognition that people like physical books to the stores being fronts for other, more technological services. I would think it is likely that both are playing a role, as well as Amazon’s ability to take advantage of consumers’ desire to instantly possess an item.

What is most interesting is what this means for libraries. If even Amazon has gone physical, then—for the moment—libraries have a solid, tangible place to argue the notion that everything is and forever will be electronic. But skeptics can still point to disappearing independent booksellers and other struggling large chains to support of the bookstore-as-front-for-technology theory.

Still, if Amazon Books is, in large part, a way to attract people to support their devices, streaming media, and cloud technology, libraries can still point to this retail giant as justification for our existence. After all, libraries also now provide a wide array of devices and technology access.

Maybe the true point here is that there is a time and a place for everything. There is no one-size-fits-all solution. There is a place for the e-reader and a place for printed book, a place for online retail and brick-and-mortar stores. Libraries have always been and will remain places that are more than mere repositories for printed materials. What is old becomes new, what is new becomes old, and the world spirals.

The post Amazon Books – Another Turn in the Spiral? first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

I was particular concerned about potential issues with telephone and internet services. At the time, my fear was losing the various numbers hat identified our library, like our telephone and fax numbers. If any of them were changed, it would cause havoc.

I know that some people thought I was crazy taking the time to make notes of my conversations. They looked at my stack of “moving folders” with skepticism and smirked as I checked dates and times and recorded I said/they said logs. There were times in the frenzy when I, myself, wondered if I were just being paranoid and wasting time. Certainly, this tedious course was time-consuming, led to longer hours, and added to the paper trail.

When we returned home and all setups seemed to return to normal, I sighed with relief and put all my notes and logs in a large box. At that point I was thinking they would soon be headed to the shredder. Then I received a bill from our former telephone company. The bill, normally less than one hundred dollars, was for over a thousand dollars. The company informed me that they were charging an early contract-termination fee. No, no, no, I told them. I had asked multiple times and been assured there would be no such fees.

This dispute became a three-month-long battle as one department referred me to another, phone calls were not returned, and each person I spoke with started the review anew. Luckily, my records were comprehensive and well-organized. Because of my notes, I was able to fax a three-page log of my interactions to customer service in which I could identify names, times, and dates of the people I spoke with and what they had said.

Ultimately, the account balance shifted from the over-thousand-dollar fee to an apology and a refund of $180. If I had not been diligent in my note keeping, we would have been stuck paying a wrongful and costly bill.

Definitely take the time to get all the information you need, take detailed notes, and keep them until you are sure you do not need them. Some things you will not need until an account is closed, some will become unnecessary after the next bill or a problem is resolved. The hard and fast rule here is to keep reliable notes—you never know if you will need them, but you will be thankful to have them when you do.

The post How Keeping Records Paid Off first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

I believe leading tolerance is imperative in today’s world. Librarians are in a unique position not only to spearhead this path, but that the fundamental values of librarianship make this a responsibility. This is why I don’t decorate the library for Christmas.

I am aware that most Americans celebrate the holiday[1], including those who are not Christian. I am aware that the media and retail industry have tried to make this religious holiday secular, but by definition, it is not. However, I am one of the few who do not celebrate this particular holiday. There have been times when I have celebrated, and now I can admit I did so out of peer pressure. I did so because I felt like the only person in the country who was not celebrating Christmas.

Personally, it felt hypocritical being pressured to engage in a holiday that I felt should be religious, when I was not. Feeling this way, and choosing to celebrate other seasonal traditions, I have become very aware that is it impossible to avoid Christmas. Iconography is present from the grocery store to the television, to driving a mile down almost any roadway.

I do not mind that others celebrate, but I do mind that when I tell people I do not, the response is often harshly critical. I also mind that from October to New Year’s there is almost no place I can go where I am not bombarded with the holiday to the point of being overwhelmed.

Those of us who do not celebrate Christmas may be few and far between, but the irony is during this season of love, peace, and good will, many feel anything but those things. For that reason, I do not decorate the library for Christmas, Hanukkah, or Kwanza. I stick with neutral motifs of snow, snowmen, and the New Year in order to support all patrons. I want my library to be a safe haven for everyone, and in this way, I try to lead tolerance by not decorating the public, secular space of the library for Christmas.

References

[1] http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/12/21/5-facts-about-christmas-in-america/

The post Why I Do Not Decorate the Library for Christmas first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

As long as I can remember, we have printed out flyers to advertise programs, booklists, calendars, and reminders of closings. These items are posted on bulletin boards and placed around the library in strategic spots. They also reside, in colorful stacks, at the circulation desk for people to take on their way out and they do take them. The conundrum is that many library users complain about the flyers. Some complain the paper stacks are messy. Some say that we are wasting paper and killing trees. Others  opine that the flyer is too large or too small. Many say they would like us to stop printing the flyers, but just as many would like us to keep providing them.

Newly renovated, we have instituted a new communication mode. We’ve purchased three electronic frames. Two are hung in strategic places on the wall, one is on a shelf near a book display. Each one rotates through a variety of the informational flyers. Library users have noticed and so far all of the comments have been favorable. Then they ask us for a paper copy. We have resolved this by printing a limited number of flyers, and keeping them behind the circulation desk. Anyone requesting a flyer can receive one, but the stack of paper is kept hidden.

The public seems to be viewing this as a perfect solution. The staff sees this as a compromise. But for me, as the library director, I still have the conundrum. While I agree, the lack of multiple piles of paper stacked everywhere is an improvement visually, I wonder about functionality. The electronic frames are yet one more draw on the grid; one more piece of equipment to keep track of, turn on/off, trouble shoot, etc. Time is still spent creating well-designed flyers, but now those flyers also need to be formatted, uploaded, and deleted. Paper is still being printed, unused copies still becoming scrap paper. I see little gain, but lots of costs.

Despite my reticence, the electronic frames are here to stay.  They are providing important illusions and sometimes what people believe is more important that what is real. Some are asking questions, saying they know librarians’ time is now more available because of the frames. This is not true, but we are happy people are now asking questions. Despite all the other equipment in our building we use, loan, teach, it is the frames that people comment on as showing “our cutting edge” technology.  For me, all I can say is at least the desk is neater.

The post The Paper Conundrum first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

I have started another public service campaign in my library, linked to this broader one. Reminded of the threat of fire, I use this to prompt me to review my library’s emergency plan. Each year I re-read my plan, reflecting back on the past year not only in my library, but in the world. I consider if there has been any significant events that indicate I need to alter or add to my plan. For example, for a number of years tornadoes were unheard of in my region. Then, in one year, we had several touchdowns. That year, I added tornadoes to the plan. Most importantly, I examine names and phone numbers. In this world of competing cell phone plans, contact information can change. So, each October I make sure all names and phone numbers are accurate and up to date.

At the same time, I update my staff phone list. Working off a spreadsheet, I update the people who typically work on a given day along with their phone numbers and emergency contact. I then verify the information for who to notify in case of weather related closing. For ease, I also include the contact information for some other key players for the library: the head of facilities, the book keeper, the janitorial staff, and the head of the library board. This information is then assembled into a packet. I take home a packet and provide copies to key staff. One copy remains in the library.

Over the years, I have never needed to utilize the emergency plan. Though we once did have a car drive six feet into our building. That year, car accident was added to the plan, just in case it happened again. I have however, frequently appreciated my snow packet.  Having everything in one place is convenient, but having the contact list also sorted by work schedule has avoided many mishaps when the concerns of weather closings were distracting. I believe most libraries have these important documents, but linking an annual review of the information to something has helped us assure that these documents get updated.

The post Don’t Forget Your Emergency Plan first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

Daily in our choices of collection development, readers’ advisory, display creation and programming, we expose the public to ideas and issues.  Many make conscious choices to include a wide range of perspectives.  We focus on issues of diversity and multiculturalism. Often these are intentional decisions designed to inform and educate, two of the American Library Association’s library values.

Further, when we intentionally choose materials that represent a wide range of perspectives or a multicultural tale for story time, we implicitly are doing this to bring about social change.  Our goal may be to have the library be more inclusive, to reach out to a less dominant population, or to promote intellectual freedom and democracy.

The definition of social activism is an intentional action with the goal of bringing about social change. It is doubtful that any would say directly that we are doing the above activities to promote social change, but we do at times say we are doing this to promote peace, tolerance, and another ALA value, the public good.   Therefore, librarians inherently are social activists.

For me this raises several questions:  How do we actually define what the public good is?  How much do librarians realize they are subtly influencing the political world?  What happens when there is conflict between our personal and professional values?  Are librarians also political activists?  And if so, isn’t this actually a contradiction of the other values that we uphold?

I don’t know the answer to these questions.  I agree that librarians should not promote a particular party, candidate, or political position.  At the same time, I know that I often have strong feelings about such things.  Likewise, while I personally agree and support ALA’s values, they are still in fact values, a judgement on what is viewed as important or an appropriate standard.   So I wonder, is my interpretation and manifestation of these values appropriate?

Despite all the considerations this raises, I am also happy to be a social activist.  I am happy that in my own small way I can help encourage diversity.  I am happy that in so doing, I can help fight prejudice and discrimination.  I can encourage critical thinking and lifelong learning. As a librarian in this role, I am a leader in my community and I am choosing to be actively leading tolerance.

I am also happy that I question these things and question my personal values and their definitions.  I believe it is because I have these goals and I question myself in these ways, that I strive to present all perspectives, whether they match my politics or not.

The post Librarians and Social Activism first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

For our patrons, librarians should be considered experts in many areas. Certainly we should be considered experts in the areas of reader’s advisory and research. As such, I believe we should be the experts on experts. It is the librarian’s role to evaluate source material and information, specifically the content’s legitimacy. These tasks are fundamental to what we do. In reality, however, many librarians are not experts, in all areas of librarianship.

I have frequently found that library boards seek out external experts to counsel them on policy and procedure, often ignoring their experts on staff. Staff, in turn—often in retirement or upon not getting full time employment—become consultants to other libraries to give them advice. This rotation has always perplexed me. How is the hired consultant different than the resident staff member?

There are many things that I know nothing about; however, there are topics in which I consider myself an expert. I define myself as an expert because of my combined formal education and practical real-life experience. But the question plagues my mind: How does one identify an expert?

I’ve met many colleagues with whom I’ve disagreed on their self-definition as experts based on the sometimes-problematic advice they give. At the same time, I’ve sought advice from other colleagues who express that they don’t feel worthy of even being labeled a professional, let alone an expert.

How can the librarian evaluate an “expert”? How do we asses institutional consultants? How can we determine who has the expertise we want to invest in at a conference presentation or professional development? How can we decide who to suggest for our patrons?

There are paths to determining expertise, but everyone must commit to walking that path. One can usually learn about most consultants’ or presenters’ backgrounds, education, and experience. Many times we can even find a sampling of their work and make at least a preliminary assessment of their credibility based on these elements. We already do this when we read reviews for our collection development and when hiring staff. We do this in our personal lives when seeking product reviews, consumer guides, or even asking others for recommendations. But how often do we question our “experts”?

I believe everyone is an expert on something, but before I blankly follow another person (or ask that they follow me), I want them to consider and investigate. Before I call myself or another an expert, I need to be able to explain why they have earned that title. As librarians, we do not need to be “experts” for each other, simply “colleagues.” But I hope we all can explain why we have earned the title of “expert” for our patrons.

The post What Makes an Expert? first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

It is an economic truth that some have more than others. Some communities are wealthier, some have different core values, some have different economic structures, and all of these factors affect the local library. In practical terms, this means that some libraries are well funded, and others are not; some libraries have longer open hours, larger staff, more materials, better technology, while other libraries exist with volunteers, limited access, and few resources.

Often, these qualities of the library are a direct reflection of the community they serve. This is unfortunate as the effect becomes that those communities with the most need, the have-nots, end up with the least, because, they have not! What concerns me most, however, is how quickly many of the more fortunate seem to forget the complications and financial limitations of the less fortunate.

I realize this phenomenon is nothing new, as evidenced by the infamous call to “let them eat cake!” Still, I am dismayed to see this common lapse of understanding occur in libraries. Libraries at core are institutions designed to help and serve people—all people: however, I have frequently witnessed well-funded, well-staffed libraries with strong collections scoff at their poorer sisters. “Just purchase this or that…” seems to be a go-to position for financially comfortable librarians.

I understand this reaction. I have been fortunate at times to enjoy the financial security to operate this way. I have also had the misfortune to not have this ability and appreciate that financial security is a luxury, not a given.

I am a strong believer in being thankful for what one has, and I have muddled through many an event that reminded me of how things could be worse. While some have called this “could be worse” approach negative, this practice has given me great empathy and great respect for others. Thankfully, I have never experienced a devastating fire or flood. I have never lived in a war zone. I have never lacked for necessities. But I can appreciate the trauma of these events precisely because I can appreciate what I have and not take it for granted.

I have known many librarians, often in small rural libraries and destitute urban libraries, that work in tragic situations akin to states of emergency. They tirelessly seek creative solutions and focus on the needs of the “have-not” population they serve.

It is easy to become complacent. It is easy to forget that our circumstances are not the same. When you have, it is easy to forget what it is like to have not. I hope that we, particularly as librarians, remember our mission to serve and let that be a strong guiding force, regardless of our individual situations.

The post The Haves and The Have-Nots first appeared on Public Libraries Online.