This entry is part [part not set] of 9 in the series The MLS Project

This was the most eye-opening chapter for me, because it clearly demonstrated that the issues that created the MLS Project sixty years ago are the same damn issues we are fussing about today. Common goals between all parties in discussions of the 1940s were (see if this looks familiar) recruitment; differentiation between undergraduate and graduate program content; a stronger intellectual base for librarianship; increased status, prestige, and income for librarians (page 15). While Swigger doesn’t come out and say it (yet), I felt this was a ringing clear confirmation that the MLS Project has, on the whole, failed.

First off, two major problems that seem to be duplicated today are, first, that actual research (such as Swigger’s) is playing a small part of the discussion (“Like most social policy debates…the discussion was more historical than logical. Research played only a small part, at best.” (p.14)) and secondly, that the purpose of the MLS was not to advance librarianship education much less library theory or practice, but simply to advance the professional status of librarians (page 14). As Swigger states, “Noticeably absent from most of the discussions was the explicit attention to improvement of the quality of library services.” (p.16)

This isn’t to suggest that quality library/information services isn’t on the table at all, because most blogs I read and people I talk to are genuinely concerned with delivering above and beyond professional expectations. But I have seen little in regards to bringing this issue to the table of changing library school curriculums. There is a reason for that, which Swigger delves into in later chapters, but the heart of it is that as the system stands now most MLS/MLIS programs cannot change without sacrificing accreditation, quality, and funding.

One of the more revealing aspects of this chapter was Swigger’s coverage of a landmark study published in 1950 by Robert Leigh,  “The Public Library in the United States, which described the general situation of public libraries and and library education…” (p.12) This study   stated that librarianship was a skilled occupation on its way to being a profession, partially based on the fact that Leigh found two-thirds of work done to be technical or clerical, not professional. (page 12) Is that really so different from today?

In the end, Swigger shows that the purpose of the MLS was not to advance librarianship education much less library theory or practice, but simply to advance the professional status of librarians! “Librarians looked at what they could control and saw that they did have great influence on education…” (p.13)

The rest of the book goes on to do a thorough outcomes assessment of the MLS project, but I would say that the most damning conclusion was already reached here in chapter two: if we, as a profession, are still fighting the same paper tigers we were bitching about in 1950, then MLS programs (whatever slight advantages they have given us) have failed completely.

#

lovin' on kimboo

This puts you on my mailing list! You will get updates about, well, ME! ...and also my author platform, K.C. York. Hope that's what you want. 

You have Successfully Subscribed!

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This