Recognizing Andrew Carnegie as a hero in library history and library science

[Edited February 27, 2015]

For the wintry month of February [2015], I have undertaken to read leisurely the autobiography of the philanthropist Andrew Carnegie (You can access this on Project Gutenberg). This I do on the weekends, as I take a break from my dissertation work.

One of the reasons for my interest in Carnegie is that he perhaps one of the most central characters in library history. The NPR ran a story on his legacy in establishing libraries in 2013 (Stamberg, 2013). However, the scope of his legacy goes beyond just funding the building of public free libraries to be managed by municipalities. In a previous blog post, I remembered pointing out that Andrew Carnegie's finances also went into establishing library schools (Changing library education with the times). According to Rubin (2010), the Andrew Carnegie Foundation was very much involved in funding library education with the goal of producing graduates that would be able to effectively and efficiently manage the new libraries that were built by the foundation. As such, Carnegie's financial support underlies the foundation for library science and libraries not only in America, but internationally as well.

Prior to reading his story, I thought that Carnegie had used a private library to conduct research on investments,  that lead him to wisely invest in steel. Here, my biased perception towards libraries as places for supporting entrepreneurship associated Carnegie's financial support to libraries as being related to him benefitting financially from knowledge accessed in libraries. However, that narrative interpretation was "laid to rest" by reading his own personal account.


Andrew's autobiography tells of his story of poverty, where at his first job, his employment gave him the opportunity to access books from a private library. Carnegie felt that the experience of being able to borrow books and read improved him, and felt that this should be freely available to others. Hence, his commitment to using his fortunes to spread access to literature to the public.

One thing that I have recognized from Carnegie's story is that billionaires and the rich (or the 1%) as people today call them, are not necessarily villains as they are made out to be. It is these same billionaires that give away money to worthy causes to enhance the life and social experiences of others. Often, their motives come not from selfish ambition, but from pure desire to make their world a better place or help souls improve themselves. As such, I believe that we must resist the urge to divide people based on wealth into the 1% and the 99% and recognise that together, we the 100% have a role to play in making the world a community that recognizes the humanity of every human being.


References:

Rubin, R. (2010). Foundations of library and information science (3rd ed.). New York: Neal-Schuman Publishers.

Stamberg, S. (2013, Aug. 1). How Andrew Carnegie Turned His Fortune Into A Library Legacy. Retrieved from
http://www.npr.org/2013/08/01/207272849/how-andrew-carnegie-turned-his-fortune-into-a-library-legacy

Inskeep, S. (Host). (2014, July 8). Buddhist Monks Face Jail Time For July 4 Fireworks Display [Radio broadcast episode]. http://www.npr.org/2014/07/08/329731421/buddhist-monks-face-jail-time-for-july-4-fireworks-display

Read more : http://www.ehow.com/how_8568887_cite-npr-apa.html

skeep, S. (Host). (2014, July 8). Buddhist Monks Face Jail Time For July 4 Fireworks Display [Radio broadcast episode]. http://www.npr.org/2014/07/08/329731421/buddhist-monks-face-jail-time-for-july-4-fireworks-display

Read more : http://www.ehow.com/how_8568887_cite-npr-apa.html

Inskeep, S. (Host). (2014, July 8). Buddhist Monks Face Jail Time For July 4 Fireworks Display [Radio broadcast episode]. http://www.npr.org/2014/07/08/329731421/buddhist-monks-face-jail-time-for-july-4-fireworks-display

Read more : http://www.ehow.com/how_8568887_cite-npr-apa.html

Article on storytelling for entrepreneurs and [possibly] for libraries

I came across another good read on storytelling for companies and those who want to tell non-fiction stories.
Storytelling: Why Stories Attract More Customers by Social Media Examiner writer, Michael Stelzner. Hence, in keeping with my interest in library and information science considering storytelling as a method of conveying information, I review some of the points made by Stelzner and make a wider commentary on its application. In addition to my interest in storytelling for library and information science, I also have an interest in entrepreneur storytelling, especially as a librarian interested in entrepreneur/small business library services. As such, in this article, my comments and review will raise points relevant to both intersecting areas of interest.

In the article, Stelzner interviews Dave Kerpen, author of  Likeable Social Media and also the co-founder of Likeable, an INC 500 social media marketing firm. Kerpen is also the author of a new book entitled Likeable Business: Why Today’s Consumers Demand More and How Leaders Can Deliver. Kerpen therefore becomes the major source of the information in Stelzner's article, sharing his experience and practical advice on storytelling.

In the article it is stated that 'people love going to the movies and reading books...because we love to be engaged by stories.' In specifically talking about entrepreneur storytelling, the article states that 'everyone in business has a story to tell about how they started.' 'Wherever a company is started, no matter how big it is, it has a humble start'  and telling the story about how a company started can aid in making the company more 'likable'.

Stelzner's article also discusses how storytelling can be used convey non-fiction information. According to Kerpen, ones 'ability to take a piece of history and turn it into a story has to do with applying...traditional elements of storytelling with what really happens. Kerpen in Stelzner admonishes us to 'be truthful, but...embellish a little bit'. This I assume would be in conflict with my librarian's ethics of objectivity and telling the truth and nothing but the truth. Nevertheless, I also feel that librarians have a responsibility to convey people's ideas whether they be truthful, fictional or a blend of myth, legend and folklore.

Kerpen also advises that for our storytelling we must 'Make the characters come alive...set the stage and build a story that resonates with people.' He also advocates that with today's technology, storytelling is easier, cheaper and less risky, and that if it doesn't resonate with people, we can make changes and keep practicing and experimenting with storytelling until we get it right.

Kerpen also in final aspects of the article shares how social media has 'changed the barrier to entry to tell stories at scale.'

"It used to be that if you wanted to tell your story at scale, you had to buy your way in through media; for example, television or radio. You used to have to spend a significant amount of money on storytelling."

Today, this is no problem with the use of social media.

The article is useful to me both as an example of how business is using storytelling to convey information and continues to buttress my theories that libraries in order to keep up, will also need to explore this method in conveying information as well as in our offering of new and old services, especially via the Web. Currently, customers respond to stories, and libraries need to tell good stories in order to engage their customers. At the same time, as information providers and professionals responsible for information dissemination, we need to also consider whether or not using storytelling principles may be relevant for us to adopt in conveying non-fiction information. Can our profession begin a conversation on whether or not it is ethical for information professionals to use myths, folklore and even embellishments of the truth to convey important non-fiction information? Can our profession also ethically use storytelling which engages and takes advantage of people's emotions to lead them to truth?


Reference:

Stelzner, M. (2012, December 28). Storytelling: Why stories attract more customers. Social Media Examiner Retrieved from: http://www.socialmediaexaminer.com/storytelling-why-stories-attract-more-customers/#

Applying Linguistics to Library and Information Studies

By doing the course: Language technologies for Libraries and Beyond at my university got me interested in Linguistics and what it has to offer in libraries and information studies. I will basically summarise my thoughts based on what I have been exposed to in my course.

The area of applied linguistics and natural language computing is a relatively new area for library and information science (more so for information science than libraries). However there are a number of natural language processing applications that are useful to libraries including information extraction, automatic summarisation, computer assisted language learning, speech recognition, question answering systems and dialogue systems. So applied linguistics, and in particular, the computing of language is definitely an area that could be considered as an attractive course.

Applied linguistics could also be used in examining library service (reference query) transactions, plus studying problems of how language impedes or facilitates access to information. Development of ontologies is another area of relevance to libraries and to information science in particular.

Regarding my thesis idea, I Wanted to explore as my thesis the idea of using a Folkloric artificial intelligent conversational agent to provide business/government information to micro-enterprise owners. Still immature but I am trying to talk with potential advisers to help me refine it. The folkloric character - Anansi - and perhaps other Jamaican characters like Sly Mongoose, Doctorbird, Patoo Owl are some of the characters that I am considering using.

Regarding the artificial intelligent conversational agent, I am just using existing systems that attempt to simulate conversation with people, by pattern matching algorithms and extracting output responses from pre-populated databases of rules and responses.There are two systems that allow one to  freely develop a computer-based agent that simulates dialogue with human beings: http://site.mycybertwin.com/ and http://www.pandorabots.com/botmaster/en/~182d3afe91fba45b3cc71bda~/home.

I want to use such agents to provide information, perhaps providing a new way to access government documents through natural language query, that will reduce the hassle of interacting with unpleasant civil servants, using phone lines or waiting for response to emails. Not to mention the other issues with locating relevant documents or information within the documents.

The state of LIS as a discipline and its "research"

One of my course readings for the research methods course was on an article by Budd and Hill entitled "The Cognitive and Social Lives of Paradigms in Information Science". I must say that the reading by Budd and Hill makes me motivated to read Kuhn's work on the nature of scientific paradigms and revolutions for myself to form my own opinions about its relevance and application in Library and Information Science. The following reading was posted or submitted as part of my weekly reading reaction report

In this blog entry I want to discuss 3 main points:

1. How disciplines/theories/paradigms are formed?
2. Trends in LIS research
3. How can changes be made to LIS as well as how changes are stifled?

Most importantly for me, the reading caused me to reflect on how school of thoughts, theories disciplines and sub-disciplines are formed or emerge.These are all socio-economic products and constructs. In the previous class we concluded that research problems must be rooted in the social and situated in society, as well as in a discipline. This reading, was however not as normative, but more descriptive about the process.

Irwin Sperber is cited in Budd and Hill as indicating that funding impacts the development of science, as does politics in the case of political appointments to important, well-funded  and powerful agencies. Sperber is also cited as indicating that the audience to which a scientist must communicate and be accountable also impacts on science. This brings me to a critical look at LIS research trends in its publications and literature in general.

In the case of librarianship, I see where the audience, the practitioners and pragmatic professionals impact on the research of the field. The issues of practitioners or professionals do not necesarily overlap with the issues that academics want to study. Practitioners want research situated in practice, and in my view, academics question and criticize the nature of the practice in the first place. Practitioners are looking for ways to do their jobs better and improve their practice, while academics may question, what is it that is practiced and why?

With regards to funding, I see where vendors are sponsoring, partnering or encouraging librarians to present papers and to research their products and its use by library users. I have been to conferences where vendors and practitioners are co-presenters, and have seen in the LIS literature numerous publications that focus on technology products and how these were either implemented in libraries or are being received by library users. Can these be legitimately termed “research” and “scientific research” at that. Aren't these what we call “market research”?

Another issue to discuss is how can LIS change. From my reading and understanding of Kuhn through Budd and Hill's writing, because science is social (Sperber expands it to political and economics), if  young scholars and academics such as myself and my peers in the PhD programme want to change LIS and its direction as a discipline, then it begins with us making a strategic alliance and agreeing to principles, research methods and what constitutes the problems of LIS today. That is if we accept, as I do, the definition of a paradigm as a 'state of collaboration, agreement, attention to a specific set of problems, and co-citation...' (p.4).

At the same time, we are scientists bred after our own kind, by faculty. Our beliefs, principles and methods will be inherited from our socialisation with faculty members at FIMS UWO. FIMS will shape us and our scientific approaches to researching and thinking about LIS. We will see the problems of LIS through their eyes.

The reading has definitely caused me to reflect that LIS is an immature science, in danger of being subverted by politics, economics and pragmatism. Pragmatism according to Budd and Hill are the major forces that shapes science through funding sources and departmental faculties, an issue which I see aptly applicable to LIS. LIS is shaped by funding sources- whether government, corporate or private bodies in my view, and I am yet to see the extent of the influence of departmental faculties.

For LIS, with the evidence based practice movement, I see where more and more, LIS research and theories will be chosen based on social and economic pragmatic reasons, rather than by LIS community identifying the gaps in our current research and theories, and intellectually, rationally and objectively filling those gaps.

Reference:

Budd, John M. & Heather Hill. (2007). "The Cognitive and Social Lives of Paradigms in Information Science." Paper published in the proceedings presented at the Conference of the Canadian Association of Information Science. Information Sharing in a Fragmented World: Crossing Boundaries. McGill University, Montreal, Quebec. May 10 - 12, 2007. http://www.cais-acsi.ca/proceedings/2007/budd_2007.pdf

Library and Information Science as a discipline

Some discussions have caused me to reflect on library and information science (LIS) as a discipline. In fact the issues are so many that I wonder if LIS can really be called a "discipline". Today, we have little theory as we borrow our theories and methods from other disciplines.

Further, we are having trouble categorising and labelling ourselves especially as information and communication technologies have changed and revolutionised how people acquire, seek, access and create information. There are those with different philosophies that have removed the term "library" all together, and have just focused on 'information science'.  

Another problem is that the library and information science community, apart from being divided over labels as to what to call themselves, are also divided into two camps, the scholarly community and the professional or practitioner community. For the practitioners, research must be situated in practice, as they need answers to understand how to do their work better. For the scholars, they question the nature of the work being done by practitioners in the first place.

In my view, most LIS publishers for the main part are interested in publishing for practice and may not necessarily serve the interests of scholars in disseminating their research. Of course, publishers are driven by the need to profit from publications, and must seek to publish articles that they believe their audience will want to read. For scholars and academics, the issues of professional journals are not necessarily issues that they contemplate and have an interest in researching. For when you are an academic in the ivory tower, you get a license to research anything of interest and may pursue research that questions the very nature of what is currently practiced in the field of librarianship. Much of this research may never be integrated into practice.

I heard a view expressed that LIS should no longer be a discipline, as every discipline requires the methods, practices and skills of library and information science. In every discipline, information is being generated, and needs to be organised, managed, acquired and made accessible. Who better to do it that the persons who are already situated in those communities?

This has gotten me to think that library and information science should actually be a foundation course for all disciplines. Rather than train a group of professionals and practitioners who specialise in organising, managing and facilitating the acquisition and access to information, why not train every one to do it so that they can manage their own information.

The practitioners of librarianship are complaining that nobody values their work. Perhaps, the solution is to move from actually doing the work to training persons from all disciplines to do the work. Rather than teach specific techniques, methods and systems, why not teach generic methods for information organisation. Through this process we can raise awareness of the best practices that we have discovered and show the importance of what we know and have been doing and why it is important that persons of varying disciplines realise this.