 |
 |
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