I have to say, I couldn't agree more with John's sentiments about the
MLS not being as necessary for library technologists as the people
writing these job description seem to think it is. Between the time I
earned my MLIS and the time that I accepted my current position, I spent
seven years as a Web developer outside of libraryland. The technical and
communications skills I learned from my MLIS program helped me as a
consultant, both in getting started learning the technology that I used
in my practice, and developing a process in doing business analysis.
However, the MLIS was simply one path to that career, and I think, based
on the diversity of education I see in the IT and programming
professions, it is one of many, including a formal computer science
education.
What I hear on the inside of libaryland to justify the MLIS requirement
is something that I haven't heard as often on the outside. The core
assumption seems to be, "we're different", which is true, but the
conclusion, which I find to be erroneous, is, "therefore you must be one
of us". Than means, a candidate must have a MLS. Of course this is
malarkey. What makes a technologist good at their job in the vast
majority of situations, in my opinion, is not the individuals knowledge
of the domain that their client works in, but their ability to conduct
proper business analysis in developing technical strategies, without
applying too many implicit assumptions. In most cases, it is not
necessary for a programmer to have specific domain knowledge to work for
a particular organization or on a specific project. One needn't
necessarily be a CPA or an MBA to write financial software, or to have a
JD to write legal software, for instance. In some specific instances
domain expertise can be helpful, but usually lack of domain expertise is
successfully mitigated by a developer forming a working relationship
with a non-technical domain expert. Personally, I don't see why this
model, which is applied in most organizations and most situations,
cannot be successfully applied in a library setting.
In fact, I might go so far as to say that the MLIS in the hands of
someone who's experience is primarily as a technologist, may be as much
of a hindrance as a help. The fact is that they don't really teach you
that much in library school that maps to the day to day operations of a
library. The degree coursework generally involves a lot of information
theory and reading of scholarly literature. The reality is more about
maintaining regular operations and dealing with minutia of day to day
decision making. If I had walked into my current job without my
experience working with a diverse set of organizations (public, private,
small, medium, large), and the experience of sitting down with a person
who does something that I know nothing about, and then writing software
for them, I would be about as useful to my current employer as a brick.
If I had walked in with just the MLIS under my belt and some technical
knowledge, I would have made too many assumptions about my organization,
I wouldn't have asked enough questions, I wouldn't have engaged in
rigorous business analysis, and I certainly wouldn't have seen the
analogous nature of my library's operations with other organizations out
in the world that are <gasp> not libraries.
I'm not saying the MLIS degree is bad, or that a library technologist
should think themselves unqualified for having the degree. What I am
saying is libraries are unique, but that uniqueness is not in itself
unique amongst the universe of organizations, and does not disqualify
libraries from the benefits of working with a skilled, non-MLS
technologist. MLS or no MLS, a successful technologist in a library must
fundamentally have business analysis skills.
Currently in libraryland, I see a lot of excellent libraryish ideas
coming out non MLS technologists, and a lot of hogwash coming from MLS
technologists. I'm not saying that MLS necessarily equals hogwash in the
technology department, but what I will definitively say is that a lot of
the library technology pundants out there lack experience outside of
libraryland, and a lot of what I hear is proposed is done with a willful
ignorance of how the rest of the world approaches similar problems and a
broader perspective of current technology trends.
So, John, you get three big cheers from me for your CS degree, and your
experience outside of libraryland.
diversityOfExperience++
groupthink--
Sorry for the lengthy rant, everyone. This has been on my mind for a
while. Happy Thanksgiving to those of you in the US.
- David
---
David Cloutman <[log in to unmask]>
Electronic Services Librarian
Marin County Free Library
-----Original Message-----
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
John Fereira
Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2008 2:22 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Looking for your thoughts on the future of
Libraries
<snip>
Over the past several weeks I've taken notice of the many job opening
descriptions that have been posted here. There have been many which
describe positions which are essentially looking for developers of
digital technologies but in many cases, the first requirement listed is
a MLS, or basically is looking for a librarian with programming skills
without consideration for a programmer (rarely do we see a degree in
Computer Science in lieu of a MS) with library experience.
As you might have guessed, I fall into the latter category. I've have
been programming computers for over 25 years, working for a large
computer manufacturer with a two letter acronym for 13 years, a stint at
a well known entertainment industry company, and for the past 12 working
for a library. Although the domain has changed, it's my skills as
programmer/analyst/technology strategist that have led to my many
contributions to the flood of digital technologies.
Perhaps the future of libraries is a recognition of those that don't
have a MLS degree (or a degree at all, in my case) as valuable
contributors to the success of a library.
Email Disclaimer: http://www.co.marin.ca.us/nav/misc/EmailDisclaimer.cfm
|
