Keeping current
Abstract:
What you learn in this book is just the beginning of the learning you will do as you progress in your training career. Continuing education is important for your career as a library professional and library trainer. This chapter will address the reasons for keeping current in the field, and various methods of acquiring new and diverse information that will enhance your training abilities.
Why continuing education?
The field of librarianship is ever expanding and changing, from exploding Internet and media technologies to ever-diverse patron groups with increasingly complex information needs. Library professionals need to be as savvy as the clients they serve, and the most productive and effective way for librarians to keep up with these changes is to seek out professional development opportunities. Librarians and library staff members owe it to their clients, and to themselves as competent professionals, to remain abreast of trends and developments in the field. This is particularly pertinent for those library staff members charged with teaching and training their colleagues and patrons.
Hopefully, you have gained some new information and ideas as a result of reading this text. However, the lessons provided only scratch the surface of the art of training and presenting. Training and presenting is an ongoing practice and set of skills that need continual tweaking and development.
Continuing education/professional development
Learning and education do not cease with the attainment of a Masters Degree in Library Science; quite the opposite, the degree is only the beginning of a librarian’s education. Weingand states that,
the shelf life of a degree is approximately three years and declining. Maintaining competence and learning new skills must be at the top of every professional’s ‘To Do’ list. It is an ethical responsibility, to be sure, but also one that is pragmatic and critical for career success … Continuing professional education is no longer an option, it is a requirement of professional practice. (Weingand, 1999: 201)
Weingand goes on to define continuing professional education (CPE) as ‘Education that takes place once professional qualification is achieved, with the intent of maintaining competence and/or learning new skills’ (ibid.).
As essential as CPE is, there are several fundamental dilemmas that will keep it from uniformly benefitting the field of librarianship. As a point of entry, the field of librarianship requires a Masters degree, and, with rare exceptions (some public librarians and school librarians), librarians do not need any form of licensure, certification, or credentials to assume professional positions. Therefore, with no requirements to uphold and maintain, CPE for librarians is voluntary. Certain specialties of librarianship, and their associated professional organizations (for example medical librarians and special librarians), offer regimented CPE and credentialing programs for their members; however, while such credentials may be desirable to certain employers, they are still optional endeavors and are not necessary for employment.
Two other significant dilemmas facing library and information science (LIS) CPE are the absence of a central repository or clearinghouse for educational offerings, and the lack of quality control mechanisms to govern said offerings. Because CPE is not a professional requirement, there are no regulations in place regarding the development and offering of CPE programs; any school or agency can offer CPE programs for librarians. As a consequence of not having a central agency regulating LIS CPE, there are no standards or quality control measures in place. Varlejs states that ‘Quality control in the LIS CPE field is very rare, if it exists at all’ (Varlejs, 2002: 235). Issues of quality control and a central repository for CPE offerings are a frequent topic of discussion at library conferences, most notably the American Library Association’s (ALA) Congress on Professional Education (COPE) summits, held in 2000 and 2001.
COPE garnered participation from all major professional library organizations, and the meeting’s recommendations included establishing an independent and comprehensive clearinghouse for CPE offerings, establishing congruence between CPE and library conference offerings, taking direction from other professions who mandate CPE from their practitioners (Varlejs, 2001), and encouraging LIS educators to infuse more of their research into professional practice, and to:
Inculcate the lifelong learning ethos, together with the skills to become an effective independent, self-directed learner.… It is crucial, however, to make students recognize that they are only at the beginning of their learning, and that they must accept responsibility personally for continuing their own professional development. (Varlejs, 2003: 371)
The ALA/APA’s Continuing Library Education Network and Exchange (CLENE), and the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions’ (IFLA) Continuing Professional Development and Workplace Learning Section are active organizations that have continued to discuss the issues and recommendations brought forth by COPE, but it appears that no substantial and lasting progress has been made as of 2008, most likely due to the huge financial and stakeholders coordination such an endeavor requires. Mayfield summarizes the current state of affairs by stating:
No single organization, institution, or agency could marshal the resources needed to address the agenda. A collaborate effort is required, an effort that itself may contain the seeds of the development of an integrated, holistic framework for education and training beyond the classroom. (Mayfield, 1993: 430)
With the aforementioned issues surrounding formal CPE, there have been new developments on the LIS CPE landscape, notably online professional development. With the rapid development of Web 2.0/social software tools, many librarians are supplementing, and even substituting, formal CPE for online tools such as blogs, wikis and social networking communities. These online tools are especially attractive because they are free, do not require dedicated blocks of time or travel, and they offer the potential to create lasting learning communities that foster ongoing professional development. Certainly, the same quality control issues that plague formal/in person CPE apply to online CPE, and the same considerations employed with online LIS education are applicable to online CPE development.
Web 2.0
Web 2.0/social networking software applications (Abram, 2008; Technorati, 2008; Anderson, 2007; Vickery and Wunsch-Vincent, 2007; Boulos and Wheelert, 2007; Laning et al., 2005; Bar-llan, 2004) continue to grow in popularity and are proving themselves to be worthwhile for more than just purely social uses. These tools, which are billed to be huge proponents of interactivity and community building, seem a natural extension for LIS CPE. Abram asserts,
Web 2.0 is ultimately about a social phenomenon – not just about networked social experiences, but about the distribution and creation of Web content itself, ‘characterized by open communication, decentralization of authority, freedom to share and reuse, and the market as a conversation.’ It moves the Web experience into a place that more closely resembles an academic learning collaboration environment than an information delivery and e-commerce vehicle. (Abram, 2008: 20)
Figures 9.1 and 9.2 provide very basic definitions of Web 2.0 and some of the most popular applications being used for online LIS CPE.
The emphasis on interactivity and community building are the qualities that make Web 2.0 tools especially applicable to LIS CPE and will make this method of learning successful. In particular, three concepts, self-directed learning, electronic culture, and communities of practice, contribute to our understanding of how online CPE with social software tools is a viable and beneficial alternative for librarians.
Building online learning communities
Self-directed learning
Self-directed learning is a concept borrowed from the field of adult education, and really speaks to the motivation of librarians seeking CPE, particularly in the unregulated and time-unconscious environment of the Internet. Self-directed learning is simply defined as learning that is ‘informal, self-initiated, independently conducted, and integrated into individuals’ daily work’ (Varlejs, 1996: 2). This is a most appropriate description of how library professionals might incorporate blog and wiki reading, and participation in online communities into their daily practice. Formal CPE is not to be negated or disparaged in any way, but is not always appropriate or available, because of various time and finanical constraints. It appears that their professional development activities are not influenced by the amount of release time, financial assistance, or other support provided in their work setting. Rather, they may be motivated by factors inherent in the nature of their work and by expectations of performance imposed by employers and clients. Or, perhaps, an ingrained affinity for learning may be the best explanation (Varlejs, 1999: 63–4).
Varlejs (1996), a library scholar whose body of work has contributed greatly to the field’s knowledge of self-directed learning and CPE endeavors, reported that a significant number of library professionals belonging to the American Library Association engage in self-directed learning.1 Varlejs also points out that self-directed learning is not to be conflated with formal CPE, formal learning associated with the pursuit of an academic degree, or current awareness activities (i.e., reading a professional article to acquire information about a specific event, trend, or tool).
Electronic culture: collective intelligence and knowledge communities
Mass media scholars Jenkins (2006), and Kahn and Kellner (2005) contribute to our understanding of how technology and media can foster and facilitate online culture and knowledge communities, which are especially pertinent when teaching and learning online. Jenkins (2006) mentions two interesting concepts, collective intelligence and knowledge communities. Collective intelligence is described by stating, ‘None of us can know everything; each of us knows something; and we can put the pieces together if we pool our resources and combine our skills. Collective intelligence can be seen as an alternative source of media power’ (Jenkins, 2006: 4).
I would argue that collective intelligence can also be seen as an alternative source of educational power. For example, in online LIS education, bulletin boards are often used to supplement and/or replace traditional face-to-face conversations. In this way, each learner has the opportunity to contribute their opinions, experiences, and interpretations to a common area, thereby shaping the learning experience and overall understanding. In effect, collective intelligence contributes to the formation of knowledge communities.
Referring more specifically to social software applications, Boulos and Wheelert (2007) feel that these technologies foster collective intelligence and decrease isolation, and have the ‘potential to promote active and engaged learning, where participants themselves construct their own knowledge through social interaction and exploration. Learning becomes an active process in which peers collaborate equally so none might dominate the interaction’ (Boulos and Wheelert, 2007: 18).
About knowledge communities, Jenkins says that ‘knowledge communities form around mutual intellectual interests; their members work together to forge new knowledge often in realms where no traditional expertise exists; the pursuit of and assessment of knowledge is at once communal and adversarial’ (Jenkins, 2006: 20).
Kahn and Kellner discuss blogs and wikis, which are enormously popular, powerful, and excellent examples of social networking and knowledge communities. If the WWW was about forming a global network of interlocking, informative websites, blogs make the idea of a dynamic network of ongoing debate, dialogue, and commentary come alive and so emphasize the interpretation and dissemination of alternative information to a heightened degree (Kahn and Kellner 2005: 88). While specifically discussing blogs and wikis in a political environment, there are many examples of blogs and wikis being used to facilitate communities in all types of specialized communities (ibid.: 91). These tools can be extended to include online LIS CPE communities, several examples of which are briefly presented below. While beneficial, care must be taken not to allow online knowledge communities to completely substitute for, or supersede other methods of communication and interaction.
Communities of practice
Another related concept, this time from the management literature, is communities of practice. The concept, developed by Wenger (1998, 2001), is not dissimilar from the concepts of collective intelligence and knowledge communities. Wenger defines a community of practice by stating,
Members of a community are informally bound by what they do together – from engaging in lunchtime discussions to solving difficult problems – and by what they have learned through their mutual engagement in these activities. A community of practice is thus different from a community of interest of a geographical community, neither of which implies a shared practice. (Wenger, 1998: 2).
Wenger continues by specifying three distinct dimensions of a community of practice: they are joint enterprises, meaning they are created and maintained by their members, they feature mutual engagement, meaning all members come together to form a social entity, and the members have a shared repertoire of resources and sensibilities that have been communally developed over time (ibid.). Wenger does caution that communities of practice should take care not to become insular, rather they should remain dynamic and fluid entities which constantly renew their learning, ‘for while the core is the center of expertise, radically new insights often arise at the boundary between communities’ (ibid.: 6).
Personal learning networks (PLNs)
Personal learning networks build upon the notions of collective knowledge, communities of practice and follow up on how to actually form such learning communities. Built upon the theories of social learning and connectivism,2 PLNs consist of a learner and the contacts and colleagues with whom they surround themselves. These networks need not occur face-to-face or in real time, nor does the learner have to personally know their knowledge collaborators. PLNs are often specifially devoted to professional learning and development, and are keen to apply technology which makes them as local or global in reach as the learner desires. ‘Including technology and connection making as learning activities begins to move learning theories into a digital age. We can no longer personally experience and acquire learning that we need to act. We derive our competence from forming connections’ (Siemens, 2005).
Professional development 2.0: examples
The concepts of self-directed learning, electronic culture and communities of practice frame and extend our understanding of how Web 2.0 tools can be successful vehicles for LIS CPE. The consistent and interactive nature of these tools allows learning to be more robust and enduring than a singular meeting of class session. Examples of social software applications being used for LIS CPE are blogs, wikis and social networking communities. Blogs are perhaps the most prolific and well known applications being used for CPE (Technorati, 2008; Laning et al., 2005; Bar-Ilan, 2004), because they are frequently free of charge, potential authors do not need to know programming languages or HTML to update and maintain their pages, and it is easy to keep blogs up to date.
Blogs, which began appearing in 1997,
can alleviate information overload by helping the reader filter the important news in any domain … the reader can use blogs as a professional development tool to stay abreast in the LIS field, and follow new resources, technological advances, research, vendor activity, new materials, conferences, and job postings. (Laning et al., 2005: 165)
When Laning et al. wrote this, there were over 400 blogs related to LIS issues and services; that number has surely increased since 2005, and it has been written that blogs have exploded in the last 10 years, from 23 blogs in 1999 to 10 million in 2004 (Bar-Ilan, 2004: 119), and to well over 78 million in 2008 (Technorati, 2008).
Wikis are also being increasingly used for collaborative work, and are sometimes preferred because they allow the creation of more traditional, or linear, pages and documents. Unlike blogs, wikis generally have a history function, which allows previous versions to be examined, and a rollback function, which restores previous versions. Proponents of the power of wikis cite the ease of use (even playfulness) of the tools, their extreme flexibility and open access as some of the many reasons why they are useful for group working (Anderson, 2007: 8).
Social networking sites are also growing in popularity, as they incorporate many social software tools into one platform. Social networking sites ‘enable users to connect to friends and colleagues, to send e-mails and instant messages, to blog, to meet new people and to post personal information profiles. Profiles include photos, video, images, audio, and blogs’ (Vickery and Wunsch-Vincent, 2007: 38).
Perhaps among the most popular social media tools for developing and maintain PLNs is Twitter. Twitter, the popular micro blogging service that requires posters to convey messages in 140 characters or less, allows access to a wide variety of educational and professorial colleagues and resources. Posts often contain links and citations, and there are many chats and discussions that are linked together by designated hash tags. The result is a 24/7, and in many instances instantaneous, network of likeminded people with similar academic interests. These short bursts of information are convenient. A learner could post a question about training and presenting to their Twitter PLN and within hours be provided with a wealth of tips and tricks, further reading and information.
Another example of social networking sites are Ning networks, which allow anyone to create a social network, based on any interest, similar to the ease with which people create blogs. Ning networks have an increased air of individuality and customization possibilities.
Social networking sites have quickly become a ubiquitous part of our culture. These sites provide ways for users to interact in online communities using blogs, discussion groups, e-mail, video and audio, and file sharing. Ning is one example of a growing number of sites that create a social network for a specific audience around practically any interest, group, or activity. Ning has great potential as an education tool, especially for professional development and building profession connections (Rosenfeld, 2008: 60).
Technology and media have changed the face of LIS education and extended its reach worldwide, and with these new technologies and opportunities come new considerations about communication and interaction. From a personal perspective, the most effective learning situations, face-to-face and online, are those that have included significant interaction and discussion with colleagues, in an environment where students are co-creators of knowledge with their peers and the instructor. Although this type of learning environment takes significant planning and effort to create and maintain in an online environment, it is certainly worthwhile and will further benefit online LIS continuing professional education.
Useful links and further reading
Dave Paradi’s PowerPoint blog – http://pptideas.blogspot.com/.
The Educator’s PLN – http://edupln.ning.com/.
The Eloquent Woman: Inspiration, ideas and information to help women with public speaking techniques, eloquence and confidence – http://eloquentwoman.blogspot.com/.
Presentation Zen – http://www.presentationzen.com/.
Prezi – http://prezi.com/index/.
Sacha Chua: living an awesome life – http://sachachua.com/blog.
Six Minutes: speaking and presentations blog – http://sixminutes.dlugan.com/.
SlideShare – http://www.slideshare.net/.
Speaking about Presenting – http://speakingaboutpresenting.com/.
Speak Schmeak – http://coachlisab.blogspot.com/
TED: Ideas worth spreading – http://blog.ted.com/
Teacher Librarian – http://www.teacherlibrarian.ning.com
Twitter – http://twitter.com/
Duarte, N. Resonate: Present Visual Stories that Transform Audiences. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media; 2010.
Duarte, N. Slideology: The Art and Science of Creating Great Presentations. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media; 2008.
Pike, R. Creative Training Techniques Handbook: Tips, Tactics, and How-to’s for Delivering Effective Training. Amherst, MA: Human Resource Development Press; 2003.
Reynolds, G. The Naked Presenter: Delivering Powerful Presentations with or without Slides. Berkeley, CA: New Riders Press; 2010.
Reynolds, G. Presentation Zen Design: Simple Design Principles and Techniques to Enhance Your Presentations. Berkeley, CA: New Riders Press; 2009.
Reynolds, G. Presentation Zen: Simple Ideas on Presentation Design and Delivery. Berkeley, CA: New Riders Press; 2008.
Terrell, S., 23 resources about personal learning networks (PLNs). 2010. Retrieved March 1, 2011, from. http://teacherbootcamp.edublogs.org/2010/05/09/16-resources-about-personal-learning-networks-plns/
References
Abram, S. Social libraries: The librarian 2.0 phenomenon. Library Resources & Technical Services. 2008; 52(2):19–22.
Anderson, P., What is Web 2.0? Ideas, technologies and implications for Education. JISC Technology & Standards Watch. 2007 Retrieved November 10, 2008, from. http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/techwatch/tsw0701b.pdf
Bar-llan, J. Blogarians: A new breed of librarians. Proceedings of the 67th ASIS&T Annual Meeting. 2004; 41:119–128.
Boulos, M.N.K., Wheelert, S. The emerging Web 2.0 social software: An enabling suite of sociable technologies in health and health care education. Health Information and Libraries Journal. 2007; 24:2–23.
Jenkins, H. Convergence Culture. New York: NYU Press; 2006.
Kahn, R., Kellner, D.M. Oppositional politics and the internet: A critical/reconstructive approach. Cultural Politics. 2005; 1(1):75–100.
Laning, M., Lavallee-Welch, C., Smith, M. Frontiers of effort: Librarians and professional development blogs. Journal of Library Administration. 2005; 43(3/4):161–179.
Mayfield, M.K. Beyond the classroom: self-direction in professional learning. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association. 1993; 81(4):425–432.
Rosenfeld, E. Expanding your professional network with Nings. Teacher Librarian. 2008; 35(3):60.
Siemens, G., Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning. 2005;2(1). available at. http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan_05/article01.htm
Technorati, State of the Blogosphere/2008. 2008. Retrieved November 20, 2008, from Technorati’s web site: http://technorati.com/blogging/state-of-the-blogosphere/
Varlejs, J. Quality control and assurance for continuing professional education. In: Continuing Professional Education for the Information Society: The Fifth World Conference of Continuing Professional Education for the Library and Information Science Professions, Saur, Germany. The Hague, Netherlands: International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions; 2002:232–234.
Varlejs, J. Profile of the academic librarian as self-directed learner. In: Libutti P.O., ed. Librarians as Learners, Librarians as Teachers: The Diffusion of Internet Expertise in the Academic Library. Chicago, IL: Association of College & Research Libraries; 1999:51–65.
Varlejs, J., Librarians’ Self-Directed Continuing Professional LearningPh.D. dissertation. WI: The University of Wisconsin at Madison, 1996. [Retrieved November 21, 2008, from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Database (Publication No. AAT 9622535).].
Vickery, G., Wunsch-Vincent, S. Participative Web and User-Created Content: Web 2.0, Wikis and Social Networking. Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development; 2007.
Weingand, D.E. Describing the elephant: What is continuing professional education. IFLA Journal. 1999; 26(3):198–202.
Wenger, E. Communities of practice. In: Smelser N.J., Baltes P.B., eds. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science; 2001:2339–2342.
Wenger, E. Communities of practice: learning as a social system. The Systems Thinker. 1998; 9(5):1–5.
1Varlejs’ dissertation study drew from a random sample of 39,900 ALA members, resulting in 849 survey recipients. Of those recipients, 521, or 58%, participated in self-directed learning.
2Siemens (2005) defines connectivism as “the integration of principles explored by chaos, network, and complexity and self-organization theories. Learning is a process that occurs within nebulous environments of shifting core elements – not entirely under the control of the individual. Learning (defined as actionable knowledge) can reside outside of ourselves (within an organization or a database), is focused on connecting specialized information sets, and the connections that enable us to learn more are more important than our current state of knowing.