Blog #10

I found an article in the New York Times that details the new stresses that have approached libraries since the economic downturn started. I think what confuses me most is how the article made the increase in library patronage to be a negative, or at least not a positive, thing. Having never worked in a public library, I do not want to offend or insult anyone; I acknowledge that I would be unable to truly understand the stresses that are involved when working with such a diverse population--even before the economic downturn. However, I don't think that an increase in the number of people coming to the library should be considered a bad thing. Granted, the violence in and around libraries and the increase of thefts and other illegal activity is not welcomed.

I think librarians have wanted to see an upswing in the number of people who visit the library, and now that it has happened, libraries are unsure of how to deal with their new found popularity. The filled programs is amazing, and bringing in volunteer professionals is a great idea. I also think that bringing in a therapist to help deal with the emotions that come along with the environment is a great idea. I think the main thing that librarians need to do is think ahead and anticipate what will be coming next. I think libraries should be looking at how they can market themselves in the local government so that they do not end up with budget cuts. Libraries should be illustrating how they have been and are helping in the economic crisis. Increased patronage at a library should not be looked at as a bad thing, nor should it be super stressful. One of the goals of a library should be to reach increased numbers. When that comes about, it shouldn't be seen as negative.

Blog #9

Rutgers University's School of Communication, Information and Library Studies (SCILS) will be known as the School of Communication and Information (SCI) as of July 1, 2009. This was reported by libraryjournal.com. My initial response is that I cannot believe that this is the issue taking up the time of the Rutger's faculty and Board of Governors; it seems to be a stupid trivial thing to spend a lot of time debating. However the more I think about it, the less I know how I feel about dropping the term library. I remember hearing from two of my professors in two different classes that Dean Cronin would be in favor of dropping the term library from IU's SLIS title. While this is hearsay, I don't think I'd be in favor of getting rid of the term. Coming from a family of librarians, all who refer to themselves as librarians, that is one of my defining characteristics--whether I end up working in a library or not. I'm fine referring to myself as an information broker, mainly because that does not hold the same stereotypes "librarian" has. But to delete library from a title takes away from the students who, like me, are drawn to the idea of being a librarian.

One thing that really irritated me about the article that is linked above is that a student raised their hand or stood up to respond to the statement that opposition to Rutger's name change was external was not recognized to speak by the chair. To not take into account the people who are currently taking out loans to attend the school is irresponsible and shows a complete lack of support for the position these students hold. Bringing in donations from alumni for the school is one thing, but it is irrelevant if there are no students attending the school.

I suppose one could take the stance that a name is just a name and to quote Shakespeare, "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet." But could it be that dropping library from a school that graduates MLS or MLIS students would make it smell far less sweet?