November 10–11, 2003 Chapel Hill, NC
Terry Belanger, Bob Byrd, Michele Cloonan, Prudence Dalrymple, Ellen Ellickson, David Ferriero, Joe Hewitt (Chair), DeEtta Jones, Kris Kiesling, Bill Landis, Joanne Marshall, Susan Nutter, Judy Panitch (Recording), Hoke Perkins, Alice Prochaska, Alice Schreyer, Brooke Sheldon, Deirdre Stam, Winston Tabb, Merrily Taylor, Duane Webster
Directors, special collections librarians, educators, and ARL representatives met for two half-day sessions to discuss issues related to training and education for careers in special collections. The wide-ranging conversation covered many aspects of attracting individuals at all levels (undergrads, MLS students, entry-level librarians, Ph.D.s, career-changers, etc.) to special collections, preparing them for productive careers, and developing mid-career practitioners. There was great similarity to current discussions regarding librarianship generally. Participants agreed that the moment is right to press for new opportunities in this area, stressing the need for creativity and collaboration. As a first step, the ARL Task Force on Special Collections will draft a white paper outlining the current environment and proposing possible strategies. Subsequent initiatives may include a poll of directors to determine hiring expectations, a request to RBMS for articulation of relevant competencies, and a "Dear Colleague" letter inviting LIS deans to partner with ARL and with each other in approaching this issue.
Joe Hewitt welcomed participants and provided background about the meeting. ARL's interest in training and education for special collections arose in early brainstorming sessions, when directors reported recruitment difficulties and concern about impending retirements. It also seemed that few LIS programs were preparing students for careers in this area. At subsequent meetings (Brown conference, RBMS 2002 preconference) special collections practitioners expressed concern about a perceived lack of jobs. This is the first ARL meeting devoted exclusively to education for special collections careers. The diversity of viewpoints at the table is very welcome as ARL is especially interested in partnering with the educational community and with organizations such as SAA and RBMS. The purpose of this meeting was to assess the environment and determine possible roles for ARL. Duane Webster also welcomed attendees and thanked Joe Hewitt for his leadership in the area of special collections.
Several institutions shared vacancy announcements and reported difficulty filling positions, especially at the senior level. Among the problems cited were: Small applicant fields; large pools of candidates, but with a "poor fit" for the job or institution; general lack of "pizzazz"; unstable applicant pools (especially for entry-level jobs); applicants currently holding a higher-level position; unreasonable expectations on the part of faculty; and budget considerations, especially institutional restrictions and concerns about salary compression. Candidates often lack the appropriate combination of subject specialization plus library expertise (sometimes in more than one area, such as reference and processing, or familiarity with multiple formats). Some recruitment difficulties can be viewed positively as reflecting growth in the nature of special collections jobs (e.g., Head of Public Services within special collections is a new type of position).
Job seekers also report difficulties. Students are dissuaded by the length of academic job searches, experience requirements, and searches that do not coincide with the academic calendar. As a result, students (many of whom ARE interested, especially in archives and visual media) go to other jobs where prospects seem better and hiring proceeds more quickly. Individuals already working in libraries find it difficult to advance within special collections or to switch career tracks (as from another specialization or type of library). In many cases, the salaries offered are inadequate.
Duane Webster classified the above difficulties as relating to: the character and nature of special collections jobs (changing, multi-dimensional, each position distinct); hiring processes (the nature of academic institutions and the procedures unique to each); and the credentials and preparation of candidates.
Discussion turned several times to recruitment of Ph.D.s for careers in special collections. Most major ARL and IRLA special collections are headed by Ph.D.s, although the preference may now be for dual-degree holders (Ph.D. plus MLS). The Ph.D. seems to be the exception at smaller institutions. Frequently, a leader with the doctorate performs development functions and provides vision, while a strong librarian fulfills management responsibilities. If we wish to develop subject Ph.D.s for special collections careers, we must do so in a way that does not polarize special collections staff, but involves them in developing new recruits. We must also provide ways for existing staff to build credentials for advancement. Ph.D. holders and candidates do seem interested in library careers (e.g., Yale symposium on "Things You Can Do with Books", Rare Book School course on "Teaching the History of the Book"). Many grad students who work in special collections go on to library school; internship programs (e.g., at, the Harry Ransom Center) have attracted excellent people to the field. A "Consortium for Careers in Research" helps Ph.D.s explore alternative careers and might be of assistance. (This was later identified as the Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation's "Humanities at Work" program and its associated "WRK4US" listserv).
Participants discussed the need for career development at all levels. Schools must attract promising students and help them build careers from the beginning. Post-graduate internships or fellowships are an ideal way for recent MLS graduates to gain experience, learn about a collection, and be socialized into the profession. It is important to capitalize on the previous professional experience of the many career-changers who attend LIS programs. For practicing librarians, more aggressive use of existing tools (research leave, sabbaticals) could be promoted. The old CLIR internships were cited as an excellent model for identifying and nurturing potential. Special collections can look to other areas of the library for interested and promising recruits (and must also encourage those working in special collections to branch out).
Concern was expressed that interested LIS students have few opportunities to specialize in special collections librarianship. Some institutions have reduced courses, perceiving that there are not enough jobs for graduates; students are reluctant to specialize in this area for the same reason. Even if jobs become plentiful, simply adding a few courses will not solve the problem since the skills required are increasingly diverse (e.g., both archives and rare books) and/or quite specialized. Some institutions (e.g., Simmons, Palmer School) give credit for courses at Rare Book School, where offerings are far more extensive than any LIS program could offer. At UNC, SILS has focused on "enhancements" (e.g., dual degree programs, certificate programs, field experience for course credit) that allow students to customize their experience. Some skills are difficult to teach in the LIS program; ARL/OLMS offers programs focusing on mid-level careers (e.g., fundraising, communication) that might be repackaged for the special collections community. LIS programs CAN be valuable for helping students make connections with others, for imparting a good understanding of the role of academic libraries, and for encouraging students to take advantage of other educational opportunities, such as RBS or SAA workshops or competitive paper presentations.
Throughout this conversation, two sets of competencies emerged and were captured by DeEtta Jones. General competencies include: Analytical skills (quantitative and qualitative studies); project management; oral/written communication skills; flexibility of mind (planning, scenario analysis); creativity/innovation; advocacy (ability to frame message); fundraising/development; digitization/technical skills; professional writing skills (research, thinking/organizing); organizational dynamics (understanding); budget and management skills; and political savvy. Skills and competencies unique to all or some positions in special collections are: Intellectual curiosity that extends to deep "interest in the stuff"; language skills; conservation; familiarity with pertinent legal and ethical issues ( for example appraisals, taxes, gifts, copyright); history of the book; knowledge of history; specific subject expertise; archival processing skill; willingness to accept responsibility that artifacts impose; appreciation of role of special collections in scholarship and teaching; metrics (how to and importance of measuring impact of special collections).
It was suggested that RBMS would be the most appropriate body to articulate competencies and that a request from the ARL Task Force would be persuasive. Also needed are ways to measure evidence of progress toward these competencies. SAA's Guidelines for a "Graduate Program in Archival Studies" might serve as a model.
Although few schools offer in-depth programs for special collections, students are interested in the field. As digitization revitalizes interest in special collections there is likely to be growth in the curriculum. If projects emerge from the Hidden Collections agenda, the number of processing positions may increase.
Deirdre Stam reviewed a small survey she conducted ("What Rare Books and Special Collections Courses are Taught Currently?") and noted that many schools offer at least one course. Caution was expressed about equating special collections with rare books. It was also noted that a list of courses is not the same as a program; there are many ways to gain experience in an area, but students may need to seek out options. More programs now require practical experience (see article "Library Practicum 101" in Information Outlook.) Effective partnerships will also be needed since even large schools can't afford comprehensive programs for special collections. Online courses might be appropriate for topics such as intellectual property issues.
Participants considered drafting a "Dear colleague" letter to library school deans encouraging increased attention to education for work in or with special collections. While perhaps only a few schools could invest in an intensive concentration in special collections, others should not abandon this field entirely. The letter could encourage collaboration (between schools, with ARL, with Rare Book School, with professional associations, etc.) and request help from the schools with mid-career training for practicing librarians. A letter might be strengthened by a small survey of ARL directors to assess the job market for special collections positions. ARL could issue a statement regarding the number of jobs we expect to fill and libraries should think about ways to guarantee these positions. This is a particularly opportune moment for libraries to make their needs known since LIS schools are again focusing on librarianship following the downturn in the technology sector.
Terry Belanger elaborated upon the description of RBS circulated prior to the meeting and he distributed copies of the most recent Index and Location Guide to Rare Book School's Teaching Collections and the 2004 course schedule. The finances of running RBS are currently solid, but depend in large part on the generosity of the University of Virginia and Terry's appointment as a University Professor there. Tuition covers 40% of direct costs, with an additional 20% coming from a Friends group, and the remaining 40% from the University of Virginia, which also covers most indirect costs. Ensuring financial independence for RBS would require an endowment of $4 million. RBS has incorporated as a 501C3 organization, which owns nearly all of the School's assets. RBS recently received its first grant from the Delmas Foundation; the Book Club of California sponsors a scholarship. An NEH challenge grant may be proposed in the future.
Although many institutions cannot give funds directly to RBS, other models of financial support were proposed. Libraries could subscribe for a fee to RBS publications (such as the Index). Alternately, libraries or universities could purchase a membership in RBS, which might include an annual meeting, receipt of publications, priority in enrollment, and other benefits. Meeting attendees agreed that RBS is a unique resource that fills a critical niche and they offered their support as needed.
(Day 2)
Joe Hewitt reported that early discussions within the ARL Task Force focused on developing a new immersion and internship experience, but that this approach had been overtaken by other developments in the field. Briefs on several of these initiatives were presented and discussed:
ARL/ALISE partnership—DeEtta Jones reported that ARL has formalized a partnership with ALISE to educate, recruit, and train academic and research librarians. The partnership's first project will be the creation of an "Executive MLS program." In the pilot phase, ARL will work with three to five schools to explore alternative paths to the MLS degree. IMLS has expressed interest in funding this project.
Participants reflected on the Executive MBA model, consisting of meetings throughout the year, followed by projects, and often a significant distance component. Fees for these profit-making programs are often high. An Executive MLS program could benefit LIS programs if libraries are willing to pay tuition for their hires.
There was approval that the program will lead to the MLS degree. Attendees remarked on the great deal of cohesion that characterizes librarianship. A talk given by Susan Allen at IFLA about collaboration between libraries, archives, and museums successfully articulated the shared community, values, and vocabulary that distinguish librarians. Recent interest on the part of libraries in looking outside the MLS reflects current recruitment difficulties, but libraries fear creating a two-caste system and of devaluing the profession. We need to find a way for interested individuals with other credentials to complete the MLS without forcing them to relocate, take on another degree program, or fulfill irrelevant or redundant requirements.
Others expressed a need for immersion programs in the history and values of academic librarianship for professional employees who do not want or need an MLS (e.g., functional specialists such as development officers, heads of accounting, and computing staff). Such programs would enable people to better perform their roles in the context of the academic library. Many librarians with collection development responsibilities do not have expertise in rare books or manuscripts; a mechanism to help them learn more about special collections would encourage a more holistic approach to collection building.
Finally, attracting people to special collections careers was discussed. Many special collections librarians have come from the non-professional ranks, but development opportunities for these individuals are often limited by institutional restrictions. The model of creative recruiting for public school teachers was proposed as an example.
CLIR Program—Winston Tabb, along with David Ferriero, Susan Nutter and, Alice Prochaska reported on the CLIR Post-Doctoral Fellowship in Scholarly Information Resources for Humanists, to be announced later this month. This program will assign recent humanities Ph.D.s to a participating library for one or two years, with CLIR to organize 2-week introductory and concluding sessions for all participants. CLIR will recruit participants and match them with each library; the library will bear the cost of hosting a Fellow. Appointments will include a relationship to an academic or administrative department at the parent institution. Following the fellowship, some participants may be hirable within the academic library market, others may pursue the MLS, and others may return to academia. It is unknown how many fellowships will be in rare books or special collections.
It was noted that our concern for special collections is part of a general concern for the profession and that whatever we do for special collections could serve as a model for other programs.
Palmer School Concentration in Rare Books—Deirdre Stam spoke about the "Models of Inclusion" approach taken by the Palmer School's concentration in Rare Books and Special Collections. The concentration exists within the MLS framework and takes advantage of many other resources to meet students' needs. The highly popular program includes cooperation with NYU, the Center for Book Arts, Rare Book School, Syracuse University, the Center for the Book, and the Grolier Club. This is a good model for doing a lot without engaging new or adjunct faculty.
Concern was expressed that rare books and archives are too often treated separately when, in fact, many special collections managers need expertise in both areas.
At this point, Duane Webster summarized several threads from the discussion that could guide the Task Force:
Understanding the pool of potential talent—Is there a way to better identify, describe, analyze, or characterize these pools (e.g., support staff, ABDs, career-changing academics) so that schools can better deal with each of these communities? How can we understand the expectations and needs of these groups?
Character and nature of the preparation—How to equip these talents properly? We have seen several models over the course of the meeting. There is a need for more effective exchange of information about existing programs and initiatives.
Career planning and building—How do we help this talent, once prepared, to be productive throughout their careers? What acknowledgement, recognition, coaching, and guidance opportunities are needed?
Evaluation—How do we assess efforts in order to build more effective programs?
The group realized that it had not discussed undergraduates. ARL could communicate (via a publication or website) ways to find out more about careers in academic libraries. An ARL/ACRL video on this topic will be released next year. Many college consortia and associations actively promote internships; it might be interesting to partner with ACRL to develop a program. Promising students who already work in a library could be a recruitment target.
The group agreed that the Task Force should draft a white paper identifying and articulating the issues raised at this meeting and describing building blocks that already exist. The paper should recommend multiple approaches, a high degree of flexibility, and the need to build strong partnerships. Two potential structures were discussed: the paper could focus on areas of need (credentialing, internships, short courses, etc.) or on career stages (recruitment to the profession, early career, mid-career, senior level). A working group consisting of Alice Schreyer (chair), Merrily Taylor, and Michele Cloonan will draft a paper by the January Task Force meeting. Other actions (requesting RBMS action in developing competencies for special collections librarianship, drafting a letter to LIS deans) should be deferred until the white paper has been completed. It might also be fruitful to meet with ALISE at midwinter.