Attracted to the event in Birmingham, by the fact that it was free, about libraries, something I had never done before and not far from my home in Derby, I was one of the early people to sign up. I also wanted to publicise my research, and where better than an event which attracted undelegates (if it is an unconference, they must be undelegates) from far and wide. The atmosphere was very supportive, enthusiastic and creative, with the first "Pitching" session inspiring many people to facilitate a discussion relevant to many groups in the room. I had gone along with the intention to lead a discussion on the way to make politicians realise that libraries enhance literacy, because of all the reports that I had read during this research journey that emphasised that libraries add to literacy and there is insufficient policy supporting this fact.
Here is a brief outline of the discussion, its outcomes and my thoughts after the discussion. I first asked everyone what their personal understanding was of the term "Literacy", so that everyone could come to a common understanding of what we were discussing. I was really shocked when one contribution was "surely its just reading and writing?" and chose to regard that as a "devil's advocate" answer because any trained and self respecting library or information professional should understand that literacy is so much more than that. Sure enough, the discussion wove around the concept of literacy being about words, the spoken word, comprehension, fluency, confidence, empathy, social skills, inspiration, visual skills, language, vocabulary, and a life long journey that constantly improves. The general feeling was that literacy was far more than decoding writing. I summed up the definition of literacy as the ability to understand symbolic events. Actually, I couldn't remember the exact words I used, but it was something like that. I posed the question "how can we teach literacy in libraries?" to get the response that we couldn't, that learning is a personal thing that comes from within, and actually libraries give people a chance to learn.
Unfortunately, no one easy answer of how to get Politicians to listen was found. We did find that there was problems in quantifying the work that libraries do, that reporting success is difficult in a public authority when staff are not allowed to talk to press, or talk about their work even though they want to boast about the positive things their service is achieving. There was also the comment that we know what is good and what is working, but there is not enough of it, for instance "rhyme time"s one day a week is not reaching all the children that it should. It was felt that maybe libraries are not giving out the right message to politicians, "Don't close us because we are great!" is not a powerful enough argument. Advocacy was suggested, libraries need a strong ally like a newspaper, money, or opinion leaders, such as certain bloggers with a reputation of leading thought. Although authors lend their voice to library campaigns, simple stating that they loved libraries as children and owed their writing career to a helpful librarian is not enough. Unions can speak their members voices, but librarians scattered as members of various unions. CILIP may have a role, and the National Literacy Trust. Political awareness is essential, knowing how to present the library case to fit in with political agendas. The policies to support public libraries need to be cross-governmental, not just in one department. Overall, libraries should
My thoughts on all of this led me to give the group an idea to think about. Maybe public libraries should not be run by local authorities, maybe they should be run by a national library trust?
Afterwards, I took to thinking, Cilip as a professional body that is gradually waking up to its role to defend and support all librarians everywhere, and I think that with the upcoming president and vice president it will become more militant. It is not a trade union however, so should we start a Library and Information Worker Union, and if so how do you go about doing it?
I also think that the media should be used, not by running "visit your library" campaigns, but by featuring library and information workers in dramas and soaps. This will dispel myths and show us as hero's! We are real people with real lives that can be just as dramatic and interesting as doctors and nurses, market stall holders and pub landlords, police and con-men. Maybe spies are a little more exciting. Well, any budding dramatists out there?
Here is a brief outline of the discussion, its outcomes and my thoughts after the discussion. I first asked everyone what their personal understanding was of the term "Literacy", so that everyone could come to a common understanding of what we were discussing. I was really shocked when one contribution was "surely its just reading and writing?" and chose to regard that as a "devil's advocate" answer because any trained and self respecting library or information professional should understand that literacy is so much more than that. Sure enough, the discussion wove around the concept of literacy being about words, the spoken word, comprehension, fluency, confidence, empathy, social skills, inspiration, visual skills, language, vocabulary, and a life long journey that constantly improves. The general feeling was that literacy was far more than decoding writing. I summed up the definition of literacy as the ability to understand symbolic events. Actually, I couldn't remember the exact words I used, but it was something like that. I posed the question "how can we teach literacy in libraries?" to get the response that we couldn't, that learning is a personal thing that comes from within, and actually libraries give people a chance to learn.
Unfortunately, no one easy answer of how to get Politicians to listen was found. We did find that there was problems in quantifying the work that libraries do, that reporting success is difficult in a public authority when staff are not allowed to talk to press, or talk about their work even though they want to boast about the positive things their service is achieving. There was also the comment that we know what is good and what is working, but there is not enough of it, for instance "rhyme time"s one day a week is not reaching all the children that it should. It was felt that maybe libraries are not giving out the right message to politicians, "Don't close us because we are great!" is not a powerful enough argument. Advocacy was suggested, libraries need a strong ally like a newspaper, money, or opinion leaders, such as certain bloggers with a reputation of leading thought. Although authors lend their voice to library campaigns, simple stating that they loved libraries as children and owed their writing career to a helpful librarian is not enough. Unions can speak their members voices, but librarians scattered as members of various unions. CILIP may have a role, and the National Literacy Trust. Political awareness is essential, knowing how to present the library case to fit in with political agendas. The policies to support public libraries need to be cross-governmental, not just in one department. Overall, libraries should
- Clarify their message
- Capitalise on research
- Find powerful advocates
My thoughts on all of this led me to give the group an idea to think about. Maybe public libraries should not be run by local authorities, maybe they should be run by a national library trust?
Afterwards, I took to thinking, Cilip as a professional body that is gradually waking up to its role to defend and support all librarians everywhere, and I think that with the upcoming president and vice president it will become more militant. It is not a trade union however, so should we start a Library and Information Worker Union, and if so how do you go about doing it?
I also think that the media should be used, not by running "visit your library" campaigns, but by featuring library and information workers in dramas and soaps. This will dispel myths and show us as hero's! We are real people with real lives that can be just as dramatic and interesting as doctors and nurses, market stall holders and pub landlords, police and con-men. Maybe spies are a little more exciting. Well, any budding dramatists out there?
No comments:
Post a Comment