Non-MLS Library Careers: What Other Backgrounds Bring to Libraries
Guest Edited by Marci Cohen (Head, Music Library, Boston University, Retired)
Begins on Page 14
If Rumors Were Horses
There’s a lot happening in the library and information science world — some good, some bad — but we’re moving forward against the tides. Let’s get into it!
Conference News and Travel Updates
Spring conference season is drawing to a close, and there have been some excellent industry gatherings lately! Caroline Goldsmith and Liz Weiss attended ACRL on behalf of the Charleston Hub and reported a great mix of presentations and networking there. And (not to toot my own horn, but TOOT TOOT!) my book launch was held there at the University of Michigan Publishing booth. Doing the Charleston is now available to read for free online or order a print copy at https://services.publishing.umich. edu/Books/D/Doing-the-Charleston. Here’s a picture of Charles Watkinson and Martha Kyrillidou “Doing the Charleston” at ACRL! A note from Charles: “I’m learning that if you hang out even with a *picture* of Katina Strauch at Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) in Minneapolis, you hear some great stories about Charleston Hub and what has happened around the edges of the conference ... both business and (very) social. Thanks for coming by and #doingthecharleston, Steven Sutton, Mark McBride, Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe,
Digital Archives Options
Perpetual access to Optica Publishing Group content
Optica Publishing Group’s Digital Archive products provide you and your patrons with perpetual access to a wide variety of groundbreaking optics and photonics research published over the last 100 years.
The chart below provides the various Digital Archive options for Optica Publishing Group content, ranging from comprehensive packages to Individual Journal Digital Archives.
For additional information, please contact subscriptions@optica.org
Journal Titles
Advances in Optics and Photonics (launched 2009)
Applied Optics (launched 1962)
Journal of the Optical Society of America (1917-1983)
* Journal of the Optical Society of America A (launched 1984)
* Journal of the Optical Society of America B (launched 1984)
Optics Letters (launched 1977)
Optics and Photonics News (launched 1990)
Optics News (1975-1989)
Conference Papers (launched 1979)
* Also includes Journal of the Optical Society of America (1917-1983)
Against the Grain (ISSN: 1043-2094), Copyright 2025 by the name Against the Grain is published five times a year in February, April, June, September, and November by Annual Reviews. Mailing Address: Annual Reviews, PO Box 10139, Palo Alto, CA 94303-0139. Subscribe online at https://www.charleston-hub.com/ membership-options/
Editor Emerita:
Katina Strauch (College of Charleston, Retired)
Editor:
Leah Hinds (Charleston Hub)
Manager:
Caroline Goldsmith (Charleston Hub)
Research Editor:
Judy Luther (Informed Strategies)
International Editor:
Rossana Morriello (Politecnico di Torino)
Contributing Editors:
Glenda Alvin (Tennessee State University)
Rick Anderson (Brigham Young University)
Sever Bordeianu (U. of New Mexico)
Todd Carpenter (NISO)
Ashley Krenelka Chase (Stetson Univ. College of Law)
Eleanor Cook (East Carolina University)
Kyle K. Courtney (Harvard University)
Cris Ferguson (Murray State)
Michelle Flinchbaugh (U. of MD Baltimore County)
Dr. Sven Fund (Fullstopp)
Tom Gilson (College of Charleston, Retired)
Michael Gruenberg (Gruenberg Consulting, LLC)
Bob Holley (Wayne State University, Retired)
Matthew Ismail (Charleston Briefings)
Donna Jacobs (MUSC, Retired)
Ramune Kubilius (Northwestern University)
Myer Kutz (Myer Kutz Associates, Inc.)
Tom Leonhardt (Retired)
Stacey Marien (American University)
Jack Montgomery (Retired)
Lesley Rice Montgomery (Tulane University)
Alayne Mundt (American University)
Bob Nardini (Retired)
Jim O’Donnell (Arizona State University)
Ann Okerson (Center for Research Libraries)
David Parker (Lived Places Publishing) Genevieve Robinson (IGI Global)
Steve Rosato (OverDrive Academic)
Jared Seay (College of Charleston)
Corey Seeman (University of Michigan)
Bruce Strauch (The Citadel, Emeritus) Lindsay Wertman (IGI Global)
Graphics:
Bowles & Carver, Old English Cuts & Illustrations. Grafton, More Silhouettes. Ehmcke, Graphic Trade Symbols By German Designers. Grafton, Ready-to-Use Old-Fashioned Illustrations. The Chap Book Style.
Publisher:
Annual Reviews, PO Box 10139 Palo Alto, CA 94303-0139
Production & Ad Sales: Toni Nix, Just Right Group, LLC., P.O. Box 412, Cottageville, SC 29435, phone: 843-835-8604
<justwrite@lowcountry.com>
Advertising Information: Toni Nix, phone: 843-835-8604
<justwrite@lowcountry.com>
Send correspondence, press releases, etc., to:
Leah Hinds, Editor, Against the Grain <leah@charlestonlibraryconference.com>
Help Support Katina through Sponsorships and Advertising
At the 2024 Charleston Conference, the Charleston Hub unveiled Katina, a new digital publication that addresses the value of librarians to society and elevates their role as trusted stewards of knowledge.
Named after Katina Strauch, the visionary founder of the Charleston Conference, it is written by and for the international community of librarians, and will also be of special interest to publishers and vendors.
Your support during the inaugural year (2025) will help bring this engaging content to all, openly available without restriction
From Your (Thinking of Revisiting a Conference Theme) Editor Emerita:
Hey, y’all! As you know, the Charleston Conference has a different theme each year — something whimsical or thoughtful or apropos from literature, a musical, poem, or book title. I’m thinking of revisiting conference theme: “Two faces have I…” but we need more than two faces these days. What? Any suggestions?
I’d like to give a hearty thank you to Marci Cohen for guest editing this issue on non-MLS library careers in a pinch. She’s fabulous! Marci recently retired as head of the Music Library at Boston University. Have you read her music reviews for the Charleston Hub Blog? She creates a Spotify music playlist for each one and they’re great! https://www.charleston-hub.com/ category/blogs/
This issue features an interview with Marianne Siener, Library Accountant, Lamar Soutter Library. We also have an article with a reflection on nontraditional librarianship from Wes Smith, a former academic librarian. We have edited transcripts of two fantastic podcast episodes as well: a conversation with Michael Upshall and Elisabeth Bik, and a roundtable discussion about research impact with Caroline Goldsmith, Associate Director, Charleston Hub; Rachel Borchardt, Scholarly Communication
Letters to the Editor
Librarian and University Library Faculty, American University; Andrea Hebert, Research Impact Librarian, Louisiana State University; and Camille Gamboa, AVP of Corporate Communications, Sage.
Something new for this issue are our Librarian Luminaries! This exciting initiative was the idea of Caroline Goldsmith, our amazing Associate Director. Caroline describes this series as follows: “Academic librarians and library staff are a bridge between the vast world of knowledge and the needs of students, faculty, and researchers. ‘Librarian Luminaries’ is a new column which will feature a different librarian each month who has had a recent notable achievement, implemented a new idea or approach in their library, who is a trail blazer, or who is an overall exemplary model of service, scholarship and innovation.” Our luminaries this issue are Issac Gilman, Executive Director, Orbis Cascade Alliance, and Theresa Quiner, Director for the Kuskokwim Consortium Library.
Thanks to all of our authors and editors, and please enjoy reading this issue! Love, Yr.Ed.
Send letters to <editors@against-the-grain.com>, or you can also send a letter to the editor from the Charleston Hub at http://www. charleston-hub.com/contact-us/
Dear Leah and Toni:
Congrats on the release of the much anticipated memoir by Katina Strauch!
I know it is officially available now through the University of Michigan Press ( DOI: 10.3998/mpub.14621062 ), but I wanted to highlight that, as UMP’s RoW distributor, Doing the Charleston
AGAINST THE GRAIN ADVERTISING DEADLINES
VOLUME 37 — 2025
Issue Ad Reservation Camera-Ready
February 2025 01/09/25 01/23/25
April 2025 02/20/25 03/13/25
June 2025 04/17/25 05/08/25
September 2025 06/12/25 07/10/25
November 2025 08/21/25 09/11/25 FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT
Toni Nix <justwrite@lowcountry.com> Phone: 843-835-8604
is also available via the LUP website outside of the Americas: https://www.liverpooluniversitypress.co.uk/doi/ book/10.3828/9781941269619, along with all other Against the Grain publications.
Thanks, Jennie
Jennifer Collinson (Director of Sales & Marketing, Liverpool University Press, 4 Cambridge Street, Liverpool, L69 7ZU, UK) <J.Collinson@liverpool.ac.uk> www.liverpooluniversitypress.co.uk
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
DOI: 10.3998/mpub.14621062
178 pages | 6 x 9
25 b&w illustrations
Paper | 2025 | $2495 US
ISBN 978-1-941269-61-9
Open Access
ISBN 978-1-941269-62-6
For information on bulk orders or discounts, please contact:
Jamie Jones
Director of Sales, Marketing, and Outreach at Michigan Publishing jojamie@umich.edu
DOING THE CHARLESTON
My Personal History of Scholarly Communication
Katina Strauch with Darrell W. Gunter
In 1980, Katina Strauch started the Charleston Conference: Issues in Book and Serial Acquisition to bring together librarians, publishers, and vendors to discuss issues shared by the three groups The meeting has continued annually and boasts over 3,000 attendees in person and virtually This memoir is Katina’s diary and story of the Charleston Conference and its development concurrently with her career as a professional librarian. Over the last 45 years, there have been massive changes in scholarly communication, changes that Katina has been at the heart of Where and what will the library and publishing professions develop next? The sky’s the limit to reimagining! Let’s go
Rumors continued from page 1
Mike Furlough ... among others. Read more stories and keep Katina’s memoir #1 in Libraries and Information Science on Amazon by clicking here: https://a.co/d/aTXuSxZ (free, yes free, for Kindle, inexpensive in print).”
Leah Hinds attended UKSG and the Fiesole Retreat and sent an update on both. She plans to write a full-length report on Fiesole soon, too! UKSG was held in Brighton, UK, and showed an increase in attendance from last year. The traffic in the exhibit hall seemed to be a bit down, but perhaps it only seemed that way due to the layout across several areas. There were excellent keynotes and breakout sessions, including a fascinating plenary roundtable conversation about empowering neurodivergent staff, students, and faculty. The panelists were all neurodivergent in different ways and talked about their experiences in the library — when they first realized they were neurodivergent, various masking behaviors, and ways to make the library a more friendly and inclusive space for all.
The Fiesole Retreat celebrated it’s 25-year anniversary! Hosted by the European University Institute (EUI) in Fiesole, the retreat took place over three days of deep conversations on topics such as AI in the library, biodiversity in the scholarly
communication ecosphere, looking through the lens of the humanities, metrics, and more. Michael Upshall (he does a lot of our podcast interviews!) wrote a report on the retreat on his blog Thinking About Digital Publishing at https://www.consultmu. co.uk/the-fiesole-retreat-2025/. The inimitable David Worlock gave the closing summary talk in his usual fine style and wrote a piece about that on his blog as well! https://www.davidworlock. com/2025/04/john-milton-ai-florence-blindness-and-scholarlycommunications/. My dear friend Becky Lenzini sent me a photo of her, Michele Casalini, and other retreat attendees celebrating the olive tree we planted in honor of Michele’s father Mario in 1999 at the first retreat (see photo bottom left).
SSP’s 2025 annual meeting will be coming up soon. Are you attending? They just released the list of finalists for the Excellence in Publishing, Information Technology, & Communications (EPIC) Awards. From the announcement: “Launching this year, the EPIC Awards highlight the remarkable achievements of individuals and teams who are advancing scholarly publishing through creativity, collaboration, and cutting-edge innovation. Nominees have been selected across five top-level categories, each with multiple subcategories to recognize the diverse ways organizations and individuals are pushing the boundaries of scholarly communication. Winners will be announced during the highly anticipated EPIC Awards Ceremony on May 29 in Baltimore as part of SSP’s 47th Annual Meeting.” https://www.sspnet.org/community/news/societyfor-scholarly-publishing-announces-finalists-for-the-2025epic-awards/
In more travel news, Matthew Ismail is still living the traveling life! A recent update says, “I’m preparing to move along from Vietnam. I’ve been in Saigon since February — with a couple of weeks break in Phnom Penh — and I will certainly miss the many cool and mellow cafes where I can have a cup of ginger tea and watch the world go by. I won’t miss the traffic, however! One evening, it got so bad that I ditched my Grab bike and walked the final half hour! Something about a parade in District One…” WOW! Have you listened to his podcast Interesting People, Interesting Conversations: Conversations about Travel and Adventure ? https://open.spotify.com/ show/0reLnwObiXyuALumnm6r5A
He’s here, he’s there, he’s everywhere! I heard that Sven Fund has purchased a lovely property in the countryside of south France. Gee, sounds idyllic! He’ll be remodeling the house over the next few months. I can’t wait to see pictures! Have you seen his bees and garden at his home in Berlin? I don’t know how he finds the time in between all of his business ventures. Pretty amazing!
In Memoriam
In more somber news, several of our colleagues have departed us recently. I wrote a memorial remembrance of Clifford Lynch in this issue (see p.14). At our last conference directors’ meeting, we had discussed inviting Cliff to speak at this year’s conference. Leah wrote to him back when his retirement was announced, and he agreed tentatively at the time. I’m so sad he won’t be there to share his wisdom with us!
Another recent passing was Al Bertrant, Director, Georgetown University Press: https://press.georgetown.edu/In-MemoriamAl-Bertrand
And Bill Mischo, University Library, University of Illinois Urbana Champaign: https://www.library.illinois.edu/news/ remembering-bill-mischo/ May they all Rest in Peace!
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
Charleston Hub Updates
Planning for the 2025 Charleston Conference is in full swing! The Call for Papers is now open, and we’re seeking proposals on topics related to collection development and acquisitions, including but not limited to the following threads: Analysis and Analytics, Collections/Collection Development, Library Services, Management, Preservation/Archiving, Scholarly Communication, Technology & Trends, and Foundations (information for those new to the profession/industry). Submit your proposal at https://www.charleston-hub.com/ the-charleston-conference/call-for-papers/. The deadline for submissions is June 27!
We’re also planning a Charleston In Between event for this July! Stay tuned for more details coming soon.
Transforming Societies of Global South (SMARTS). See https:// thebreakthrough.org/people/joyashree-roy. More speakers to be announced soon!
Charleston Conference Asia will be held January 26-28, 2026, in Bangkok. Preliminary details such as dates and deadlines, registration rates, and sponsor/exhibit details have been added at https://www. charleston-hub.com/charlestonconference-asia/ . A confirmed keynote speaker is Dr. Joyashree Roy, Distinguished Professor, Asian Institute of Technology and Founder Director: South and South East Asia Multidisciplinary Applied Research Network on
Can you believe it? Katina Magazine will soon be celebrating six months since its launch. https://katinamagazine.org/ And what a first six months it’s been! We’ll be sending a report out soon with details and statistics. A big thank you to the staff, editors, authors, and sponsors for making the publication a success. Curtis Brundy, senior editor of the Open Knowledge section, recently took on a new job as Dean of University Libraries at UMass Amherst. Congrats, Curtis! And Tony Zanders, senior editor of the Future of Work section, recently had to step down from Katina as he’s taken on a new role as CEO of Nexus Louisiana, a tech start-up incubator (in addition to being Founder and CEO of Skilltype!!!). Congrats, Tony! And I can’t sing the praises of Liz Weiss enough. Liz is our top-notch developmental editor for Katina, but she goes above and beyond that role and brings the publication to life with her deft hand for edits and her pleasant, easy-to-work-with demeanor. To stay current with all the great articles published each week, subscribe to the newsletter at https://katinamagazine.org/newslettersignup. Publishers and vendors: we need your help! Learn how you can help bring this engaging content to all, openly available without restriction at https://katinamagazine.org/supporters.
That’s it for now! Remember to send your “Rumors” and announcements to us at editors@against-the-grain.com for inclusion in a future issue. Happy reading and see you next time!
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
Bet You Missed It — Press Clippings — In the News
Carefully Selected by Your Crack Staff of News Sleuths
Column Editor: Bruce Strauch (The Citadel, Emeritus) <bruce.strauch@gmail.com>
Bookshelves as Mere Decoration
British budget minister Liz Truss gave a televised speech. Alert viewers noted she sorted her books on the shelf by color and pronounced it “naff.”
Researchers (God bless ’em) have found 10% of book buyers only want them as decoration and never read them; another 9% pick covers to add to aesthetic of the home.
Not sure what the difference is.
31% make choices to project their personality to visitors while 14% choose them to look more intelligent.
Again there seems to be overlap. We need more research. Turn academe loose on this vital topic.
The study, done by bedroom furniture specialists Feather & Black, surveyed 2,000 adults. They feel it is “timeless and sophisticated” to be surrounded by books, and younger adults are tapping into the vibe.
See: David Jarvis , “Are your bookshelves really just wallpaper? Survey suggests many people only use books just to boost the look of a room,” The Daily Mail, Sept. 29, 2024 (www. dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13903069).
When Influencers Split
There can be big bucks for social influencer couples, but when they divorce, judges and lawyers are dumbfounded. It’s not like evaluating a house or car. Is one of the two the magic personality? Which one could continue to grow the brand?
This is not a negligible issue. America has 27 million paid content creators, and advertisers shelled out $26 billion to them in 2023.
You can imagine the squabbling. Who thought up the most pranks? What hours did each put in editing videos?
And what if their videos feature them as a happy couple having family time? Does the whole business die?
Vivian Tu posts about financial literacy. He jokes it’s like the NFL. A player gets “five or 10 good years, but one hit to the knee and you’re done.”
See: Katherine Hamilton , “When TikTok Stars Divorce, Dividing the Assets Is a Drag,” The Wall Street Journal, Oct. 24, 2024, p.A1.
Obit of Note
Edna O’Brien (1930-2024) was born in a small country village in County Clare. She married a Czech-Irish novelist and moved with him to London where she worked as a reader for a publisher.
Commissioned to write a novel, she turned out The Country Girl in “a fury of inspiration.” It’s a tale of two friends leaving their stifling Irish village to find sexual liberation in Dublin. It was banned in Ireland, her village priest publicly burned a copy and said she should be whipped naked through the streets.
Edna followed up with The Lonely Girl and Girls in Their Married Bliss — as the friends get married and divorced. She was proclaimed a “literary trailblazer” and found international fame.
Divorcing her own husband, she became a hostess of 1960s Swinging London mixing literary figures, A-list musicians, and film stars. She was wooed by Robert Mitchum.
Over time, she moved from outcast to icon in Ireland and won the Irish PEN lifetime achievement award in 2001.
See: “The novelist who plumbed women’s inner lives,” The Week, Aug. 16, 2024, p.35.
Leonard Riggio (1941-2024) grew up in an Italian part of Queens with a boxer/cabbie father and dressmaker mother. He studied metallurgical engineering at NYU night school until a job in the campus book store gave him the big idea.
He opened several student book exchanges, and then in 1971, with a $1.4 million loan, bought a Manhattan bookstore called Barnes & Noble. You know the rest.
Sprawling square footage, comfortable seating, cafés, clean restrooms. He drove independent bookstores to the wall with 700 stores and deep discounts. By the 1990s, he was selling 1 in 8 books in the U.S.
Then along came Amazon. Talk about creative destruction. He closed 100 stores and sold the rest to a hedge fund.
But he has three homes and an art collection. He’s also quite the philanthropist who believed his stores had done positive good.
See: “The entrepreneur who built a bookstore empire,” The Week, Sept. 20, 2024, p.35.
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
Special Libraries
Middleburg, VA is an equine town of lush grass and even more lush money. It has long been called “The Nation’s Horse and Hunt Capital.” A visitor finds a bucolic paradise of steeplechasing and fox hunting and 30 wineries in the area.
The Red Fox Inn & Tavern in a 300-year-old fieldstone building anchors the downtown. Celebrities from Jackie Kennedy to Elizabeth Taylor have stayed there.
Turner Reuter establiished the National Sporting Library & Museum in 1979. It’s just down the street.
And there’s a delightful independent bookstore called Middleburg Books. The owners, Mary Beth Morell and Christina Duffy, met working as librarians in DC. Middleburg gave them a warm welcome and made their shop a dynamic hub of activity for readers.
So, where did that currently overworked word originate? Why English philosopher John Stuart Mill coined it in 1868, using it in a Parliamentary debate on Ireland. He used it as the opposite of utopia, the Greek word for “no place.”
And dystopian fiction? It was presaged by Jonathan Swift in Gulliver’s Travels (1726) about the Houyhnhnms and Yahoos. But Russian author Yevgeny Zamyatin wrote the first true dystopian novel We (1924). Two communist space travellers with numbers instead of names fall in love and begin to question the strict control of the “One State.” And this was followed by Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World (1931) and George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949).
As an honorable mention, Mary Shelley’s The Last Man (1826) is set in the future where a plague is wiping out humanity.
See: Charles Legge, “ANSWERS TO CORRESPONDENTS: Who coined the term dystopian? What is considered the earliest dystopian novel?” The Daily Mail, Nov. 23rd, 2024.
Author of Cheap Travel
Arthur Frommer (1929-2024) came from a poor family of immigrants but, when drafted in 1953, his languages put him in Intelligence in Berlin. He travelled on weekends and, in 1955, published The G.I.’s Guide to Travel. Two years later came Europe on 5 Dollars a Day. Travel shifted from the rich in luxury hotels to the masses staying in rooming houses and eating at diners.
As transatlantic airfare plummeted, Frommer’s publishing empire took off selling 75 million copies. He sold the company in 1977, but bought it back in 2013, and battled the Internet with blogs and podcasts. By then, the title had grown to $95 a day.
Any Boomers among you will certainly remember the books fondly.
See: “The publisher who opened travel to the masses,” The Week, Dec. 6, 2024, p.35.
Grand Dame of Blockbusters
Barbara Taylor Bradford was rumored to be the bastard child of nobility. Her mother had big ambitions for her, educating her in art, lit and history, and planning a university degree. But Barbara dropped out of school at 15 and went to work as a typist for Yorkshire’s biggest newspaper. She became the paper’s first woman’s editor.
Moving to London in her upward career course, she met American movie producer Robert Bradford, and they fell in love. They married and moved to New York. Bob had produced El Cid, Fifty-Five Days at Peking, and John Paul Jones. He was rich and they lived rich. But Barbara wanted to write.
She finally hit it in 1979 with A Woman of Substance, a ragsto-riches story of a poor Yorkshire girl. She published 40 novels and sold more than 91 million copies. Husband Bob produced nine of her books as mini-series and movies.
She died at age 91.
See: Harry Howard, “Barbara Taylor Bradford dies aged 91: Typist from Leeds became the ‘Grand Dame of blockbusters’ and the toast of New York society with her film producer husband,” The Daily Mail, Sat. Dec. 7th, 2024. www.dailymail.co.uk/ news/article-14122747
The End Times Makes for Great Copy
Hal Lindsey (1929-2024) was a tugboat captain and smalltime evangelical preacher when he wrote The Late Great Planet Earth and got it published by a small religious publisher in 1970. He predicted a Russian invasion of Israel, global nuclear war leaving the world a smoking ruin, but ushering in the Second Coming of Christ.
He sold 35 million copies in 50 languages. Bantam books put it out in paperback, and The New York Times vowed it was the most popular book of the ’70s.
Lindsey made big bucks not just from book sales but speaking engagements, multi-media products, and a documentary narrated by Orson Welles. He drove flash cars and went through four marriages.
Then, none of the predicted events happened, and interest died hard. “There’s a split second’s difference between a hero and a bum,” he said.
See: “The best-selling minister who forecast end times,” The Week, Dec. 20, 2024, p.35.
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
Katina is a digital publication that addresses the value of librarians to society and elevates their role as trusted stewards of knowledge. Named after Katina Strauch, the visionary founder of the Charleston Conference, it is written by and for the international communities of librarians, vendors, and publishers and covers content across three core sections:
Resource Reviews, which provides critical reviews of products and resources for the information industry.
Open Knowledge, which addresses the evolving roles of libraries and librarians and their contributions toward an open knowledge ecosystem
The Future of Work , which offers practical insight into library careers and organizational development
www.katinamagazine.org
Ar ticle Proposals
our
Katina welcomes proposals from authors interested in contributing to any of our three sections We encourage prospective authors to familiarize themselves with the content of the publication before submitting a proposal . Our readership is broad and varied in their level of experience in the industry, from early career to advanced management level and beyond. Our goal is to provide easy-to-understand, engaging, informative, and accurate content that will be of general interest to the entire library and scholarly communications community.
Non-MLS Library Careers: What Other Backgrounds Bring to Libraries
By Marci Cohen (Head, Music Library, Boston University, Retired) <rockhackcohen@yahoo.com>
In this issue of Against the Grain , Wes Smith and Marianne Siener will discuss non-MLS professional careers in libraries. They touch on how their career paths led them to libraries and how their skills complement those of librarians. They bring different rather than lesser skills to the library environment. I met both at training workshops aimed primarily at librarians, ACRL Immersion 2019 with Wes and BLC (Boston Library Consortium) Leads 2017 with Marianne. I was impressed by their willingness to dive into settings where there was an assumption that everyone’s background included library school.
I was curious about what brought them to libraries, since so much library recruiting happens through library-specific channels. And I wanted to know about how people with different specialized skills help libraries carry out their missions.
Marianne has built her career at Lamar Soutter Library, UMass Chan Medical School, starting in a variety of public
and technical services paraprofessional roles. When she saw her work with print materials potentially disappearing with the shift to electronic resources, she studied accounting and moved into new financial roles at the library. She brings her education and experience to dealing with budget systems and evaluating vendor packages in consultation with the librarians.
Wes came to libraries as a graduate assistant who already had a background in multimedia production. His work included instructional design and supporting students in media-based scholarly communication. Despite doing work that embodied library values, he repeatedly encountered people who treated him as less than rather than parallel to peers with library degrees. His essay brings voice to how libraries can recruit and retain people with skills that fall outside traditional library training and duties.
In Memoriam: Clifford Lynch
By Katina Strauch (Editor Emerita, Against the Grain; Founder and Executive Advisor, Charleston Conference)
Clifford Lynch, 2023. Photo by Cecilia Preston.
Iwas terribly saddened to hear the recent news of Clifford Lynch’s passing. Way back when, I decided we should try to get Cliff as a keynote speaker for the Charleston Conference. I was young and stupid (read fearless). I didn’t know him or have any contacts. I just jumped in and asked him. I don’t think he had heard of the conference and he didn’t know who I was. But, miraculously, he agreed to come if it was on a Saturday. Then we had to find a time and place and a topic. Cliff wanted to speak early on Saturday morning (with backup plans if his flight was late or canceled). He wanted to take a red-eye flight, so we put him on the schedule at 9AM and held our breaths. He never had prepared notes. Of course, his speech was a huge success deftly encompassing all the current topics and emerging themes. Cliff spoke many times at the conference! He always took red eye flights and never encountered any delays! Amazing!
Earlier this year at the spring CNI meeting, it was announced that a Festschrift would be published in his honor: https://www. cni.org/news/announcing-a-festschrift-in-honor-of-clifford-lynch
In Memoriam from CNI: https://www.cni.org/news/in-memoriam-clifford-lynch Memorial from ARL: https://www.arl.org/news/memorial-clifford-lynch/ When Information is Networked: A Tribute to Clifford Lynch, by Dan Cohen: https://newsletter. dancohen.org/archive/when-information-is-networked/
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
An Interview with Marianne Siener, Library Accountant, Lamar Soutter Library
By Marci Cohen (Head, Music Library, Boston University, Retired) <rockhackcohen@yahoo.com>
Marianne Siener is the Staff Accountant at Lamar Soutter Library, UMass Chan Medical School, where she has built her career since 1989. In 2017, we met as part of the inaugural cohort of BLC (Boston Library Consortium) Leads, a leadership development workshop in which she was the only participant in a non-MLS role. In our interview, she discusses how her skills complement those of her librarian colleagues, especially regarding her love of digging into details and spreadsheets, and how she brings leadership skills to her position.
She is enthused about how meaningful her work at UMass Chan is. For example, she takes pride in playing a small role in supporting medical research. “I remembered when I was at the circ desk at night and I gave Craig Mello [future Nobel prize winner] his login and password when he was newly here.” Once she helped a family with limited English skills find their way to their appointment. “And the medical students are just awesome. And I’m doing my little part for helping medical education, for helping scientific research, and for helping the clinical side. It’s an awesome place to work.”
How did you come to a career in libraries?
I was a history major and was deciding on going to library school. My mom worked at UMass and saw a job on the board. I applied for a library assistant job while I was temporarily working at a bank. I started working there and I started [library school] at Simmons. But, then due to this and that reason, I gave it up and I didn’t do it. I was in the job already. I was working as the library assistant for the night shift when we were open until midnight and then later til 1am. For ten years, I worked at the circ desk, and I ended up working with the login/password system. I also updated our LAN – Medline things; we used CD-[ROM]s at that time.
Then I got a day job in the tech services, checking in the print journals, which I could have done til I retired at 75. That was fun. I really liked it. And I worked with standing orders and reference print books. I did some very basic cataloging that the cataloger taught me to get the standing orders in because I’d see her backlog. So she taught me some basic cataloging to help get things in. I had a part-time job at Holy Cross Science Library, where I did interlibrary loan and bindery. So I had my hands in all these different areas.
I saw the writing on the wall that things were starting to really convert from print to electronic. I thought, well, this job’s going to go away. My sister, an accountant, said I should go back to school for accounting. I was working in tech services full-time, going to school part-time, and their half-time financial assistant left. I did half-time financial, half-time tech service. And at the time, we were going through another budget cut, so I was also filling in at the desk. I ended up moving into full-time staff accountant work. But basically, I was still involved in the acquisitions, which is the biggest part of our budget. For example, I was still looking at a titles package from this vendor and seeing whether there was any
redundancy and is this package better to have than the single titles. Do the issues come sooner than getting it through a direct subscription through the vendor? But I still turn to librarians. I still rely on their help for sure.
So that’s how I got there. My mom saw an opening in the library and I was thinking of getting an MLS. So that’s how I ended up there.
How does your skillset complement the skillsets of the MLS employees in library operations?
I would first and foremost say the attention to detail and a systems view of things and being inquisitive, wanting to be accurate, those types of skills and proclivities. You want to dig deeper, you want to make sure what you’re looking into is reputable to begin with. I’m usually working with Excel. I’m a cell checker. One time I was working with someone who was in a panic because she thought she had gone over budget. I said, wait, before you panic, let’s go through the cells. Because more than likely, there’s just a little error somewhere. And sure enough, there was just a little error in one of the cells that needed to be tweaked, and boom! She actually had some available funds still rather than a deficit. My thinking is the 80/20 rule: usually the mistake is on the outside 80% of the time. Searching for information, trying to be accurate, serving people, helping them to get to really good information, that’s all very similar.
But at the same time, I am complementing them sometimes because I also have an outside view. One time, I was in a meeting and they were trying to figure out how to get something implemented where they needed another department’s help, and it wasn’t happening, and it was kind of just constantly delayed and delayed. I suggested, “Well, why don’t we ask to pay them? They can charge us back.” Because sometimes different departments do that. We did it even if we were doing systematic reviews, if it was a bigger job than usual, you might need to contribute a bit for the time and money. And so when they brought that up, the department they needed to help was able to make time for this. They didn’t even have to charge us for it, but it just helped because my thinking was in the different types of funds and how they’re used. Because I was the only non-librarian in the meeting, I was able to bring that complement in a way.
In terms of finding and creating professional development opportunities, are you a round peg in a square hole for libraryfocused training and conferences?
Something like the BLC Leads comes up because leadership can be horizontal. I can help to lead that way to get to a solution. And then the Charleston Conference, because of what I deal with, the acquisitions and the resources, I want to go to that at some point. That’s perfect because I deal with the vendors. It’s completely within my type of work. And I’ll do
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
webinars too, especially free webinars, so I can become more familiar with a resource. It just helps in doing your job. I’m not sitting there with a patron going through a systematic review with them. I don’t have the skillset for it. I don’t have any knowledge for it. But learning what it is helps if you’re then on a team looking for different options of resources or software.
What are perceptions and misperceptions of you as a professional with different credentials rather than lesser credentials?
From the outside, when you work at a library, you don’t sit there and read books. That’s not what we do. And it’s not quiet. It’s busy as heck, and you never have enough time to get everything you want to get done, everything you need to get done, let alone everything you’d like to get done. So the outside world still has that view with a bun and sitting there reading a book with their glasses. That impression is so wrong. And especially nowadays with all the problems with misinformation, it’s very important.
And then from the inside, because I put librarians on a pedestal, I see what goes into that. And sometimes my colleagues will say, “Oh, what would we do without you?” I think a lot of that might be the fear of math. I remember seeing something somewhere that if someone claims they are afraid of math, nine out of ten times others will say “Oh, me too!” That would not be the same if somebody said, “Oh, no, I can’t read.” It’s so funny because we had earlier talked about the similarities with accuracy, attention to detail, and searching and delving deeper. I’ve always been very dedicated. But I always have to remind them, “I come to you for help. For all that information expertise.” And there’s just so much to know, let alone doing systematic reviews, working in the systems that we have now, all the different software and software as service. It’s really complicated. I don’t think my brain could handle doing both.
What are some interesting things you do as part of your job that aren’t typically thought of as the work of librarians?
I have all the financial and administrative type work that I do. Because we do grant work, we always have to keep our effort certification and space survey things very accurate and up to date. There are very specific systems I have to keep up with for personnel and our space, things like that. I work with consultants for this or that. And then the budget, it’s not just Excel sheets. You get in and you work in a budget system that has these complicated areas, and it’s tough, but it’s extremely useful.
And then there is also expense/revenue type work. When we have an ILL trust, you are working within that and the budget. So it’s the financial and administrative type of work mostly. But then I also work with the resources and with the vendors. For example, sometimes we need an ebook, but find it’s only available as part of a package. And the package sometimes is absolutely unattainable financially. So I’ve expressed to vendors when I can, instances where we’d like to get this book, it’s being requested, but we can’t afford the package that it only comes in, so we actually have to order one or two print editions. I would actually express that to vendors whenever I’d be in meetings, that they are sometimes making us go backwards in a way. Hopefully they hear you, because isn’t it better that you sell this one eResource instead of this much smaller revenue from a print version? I would have to defer to the librarians for 80% of any kind of library type thing, for expertise, 85%, 90%, but I can at least help in my own way.
Author’s Note: this interview has been edited for length and clarity.
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
Out of Circulation: Reflections on Nontraditional Librarianship
By Wes Smith (Former Academic Librarian) <me@westhedesigner.com>
To My Friend’s Colleagues,
Hi! My name is Wes, and before you go looking up my CV or credentials, I’ll start with this: I’m no longer in the library profession. I’m unsure whether that revelation might cause you to stop reading or discount what I say, but I hope it doesn’t. I’m writing this to share my thoughts, feelings, and experiences, hoping they might help shape a more inclusive and expansive future for libraries.
Let me share a bit about who I am, or maybe who I was. I come from a background in multimedia production. I got my start in libraries as a graduate assistant in a multimedia lab, working in the library but not for the library. At the time, I didn’t realize this was even a full-time role in academic libraries. But when I graduated, I found that some libraries did hire for positions like mine and started my first role in a library.
That first job also marked my first real experience working alongside librarians. And it’s where I began to sense the disconnect between staff and faculty, between traditional and “nontraditional” roles, and between the work libraries had historically valued and the work I think they were starting to need.
During my first job, a full professor and tenured librarian told me, “The kind of work you do doesn’t need to be in the library. It should be in the building next door.” That was one of my first encounters with the idea that some people viewed what I did as something other than librarianship. It was a new thing, a novelty — one that would not last the time of “real” librarianship.
When I later accepted my first faculty position, I encountered something similar, this time on my very first day on the job. During the first faculty meeting I attended, as we were discussing the library faculty handbook, a tenured librarian made the case that we should not revise the handbook in a way that would not allow individuals without an MLS to qualify for librarian faculty status. And then, almost as an aside, acknowledged that the new faculty member without an MLS, me, was sitting in the room.
That meeting shaped my early understanding of librarianship and may be a contributing factor for me to leave. It left me with lingering questions about the work that I was brought here to do. What does it mean when someone views your work as essential, but not “library work”? What are we really saying when we draw a hard line around who belongs in the profession and who doesn’t?
The question of belonging continued to surface. One of the most persistent challenges I faced was the perception that, without an MLS, I didn’t fully belong. There’s a quiet assumption in some library spaces that credentials equate to commitment, or worse, to competence. I was sometimes viewed as a guest in a space where others were seen as permanent residents. The misperception was that I lacked the depth or context to contribute meaningfully to library strategy or pedagogy. My work wasn’t “less than.” It was simply different. But because that difference didn’t fit longstanding
definitions of librarianship, it occasionally felt invisible or undervalued.
I remember presenting at an ALA conference with a group of non-MLS librarians, and during the Q&A, someone in the audience made a comment: “Well, you’re librarians… but not Big L Librarians.” I don’t recall exactly how my colleagues or I responded in the moment, but I do remember how I felt afterward: taken aback, maybe even a little gutted. That moment stayed with me. It wasn’t the whole room, just one voice, but it echoed something deeper: that this profession doesn’t always know how to uplift work that doesn’t fit the traditional narrative. And when that happens, it risks sending a message that difference is less valuable, even when it’s deeply needed.
That feeling followed me into professional spaces. Through the first couple years of my career, I had the opportunity to present at both the ACRL and the ALA. And after attending a few sessions and chatting with colleagues, I had this strange feeling: I might be the only one of me here. We’re all unique, so let me explain what I mean. At the time, I was a tenure-track librarian at a mid-sized metropolitan university. I was a Black male who specialized in multimedia production. And I didn’t hold a degree in library science.
Out of more than 160,000 librarians worldwide, it seems unrealistic that I was the only one with that mix of characteristics, but it felt like I was. Finding one’s place in a new profession is always hard. It’s even harder when you’re not just new but viewed as an outsider.
And yet, my work aligned with librarianship in ways that deeply mattered. My work was similar, yet different, from that of my colleagues. Or maybe I just saw it differently, because I didn’t enter the profession with preconceived notions of what “librarian” work was supposed to look like. I didn’t work a traditional research services desk, but my role embodied the same core values of librarianship outlined by ALA. I provided access, but instead of databases or journals, it was to creative software and camera equipment. I supported equity by creating a space where students could express themselves through new mediums, often in vulnerable, courageous ways. It’s one thing to write a paper. It’s another to produce a short film and screen it at a student film festival in front of your peers and faculty members. When it came to intellectual freedom and privacy, media creation was a perfect entry point. I wasn’t teaching something unrelated to librarianship. I was simply helping students explore its values in a different format.
Professional development offered its own challenges. The first time I realized there wasn’t much professional development designed for someone like me was when my library sent me to ACRL Immersion. It was a great experience, and I met many thoughtful, passionate colleagues, but I was clearly an outlier. Much of the discussion and the activities were built around a different kind of librarian, one rooted in an area that I had no clue in. The real gap, in hindsight, wasn’t
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
the content. It was the assumption that everyone in the room shared the same professional identity. It left me wondering: what do we do with professionals who don’t fit the mold?
To be fair, ACRL Immersion may have evolved since my time there. But what would have helped me then was something simple: a clearer sense that I belonged, and my work belonged. I understand some of that work is internal, but it was also clear that the program didn’t quite know how to include someone with my background. Eventually, I found community elsewhere. Over time, as I began publishing and presenting, I discovered a more cross-disciplinary network, librarians and other faculty whose work also lived at the intersection of media, design, and scholarship. They helped me think more broadly about what it means to contribute meaningfully to a profession without matching its dominant narrative.
Recruiting others like me means rethinking how we advertise these roles. If libraries want to attract professionals with specialized skills, it’s not just about where you post. It’s how you label the job. Keep posting to places like LinkedIn and Indeed, not just ALA lists. And consider that someone with deep multimedia expertise might never search for a title like “Emerging Technology Librarian,” even if the role is tailormade for them.
And once those individuals arrive, we must consider how we welcome them. Sometimes, it takes someone from outside the profession to help us recontextualize the experience of others. When you’re embedded in a culture, any culture, it’s easy to miss the invisible rules, the subtle hierarchies, the stories we tell about who belongs and who doesn’t. To the future leaders of libraries: lean on outside expertise. Bring in those with different training, different lenses, and different stories. Nurture them in the values of librarianship, yes, but also give them the space to be fully themselves. Help them cultivate a sense of belonging, even when they can’t yet see a community that looks like them. I wrote a piece with a good friend on the future of libraries. We talked about the tension between joining and changing, between honoring a tradition and gently reshaping it.
This is what I carry with me. I’ve come to believe that it’s not the degree that makes someone a good librarian. It’s the community. Like in any profession, holding a credential doesn’t prepare you for every nuance of the work. What makes the difference is how well a community welcomes, supports, and mentors someone into the culture. We have the power to make great librarians. Cost and access barriers may prevent someone from pursuing an MLS, especially if they’ve already earned a different graduate degree while working in the field. These individuals often embody the very traits we celebrate in librarians: curiosity, service, adaptability, and a deep commitment to learning. But without the credential, they may never get the chance. That’s not just a loss for them. It’s a loss for the profession.
I may no longer work in libraries, but I carry the values I learned there with me every day. I still believe in access, in service, in intellectual freedom, and in the power of learning to change lives. And I believe the profession has room to grow, not just in its services, but in how it defines who belongs. If this letter reaches someone who feels like an outsider, I hope it gives them encouragement. And if it reaches someone shaping the future of the profession, I hope it gives them pause. Because libraries don’t just need people who fit the mold. They need people who can help reshape it.
Wes Smith is a former academic librarian with a background in multimedia production and instructional design. He began his career working in and alongside libraries in nontraditional roles and has presented at ACRL, ALA, and other conferences. Wes currently works in corporate learning and development and remains interested in the evolving boundaries of professional identity in libraries.
Column Editor: Corey Seeman (Director, Kresge Library Services, Ross School of Business, University of Michigan) <cseeman@umich.edu> Visit him at https://www.squirreldude.com/
Column Editor’s Note:
Despite what some say, the only thing looking up is this cute squirrel.
I am not sure I’ve placed a haiku in one of these columns before. A haiku is a great contribution to global culture from our friends in Japan who invented this structure. Only three lines long, you have five syllables in the first and third line, with seven syllables in the second or middle line.
While I dabbled in haikus from time to time, it was not until the pandemic broke out in 2020 that I started writing them more frequently. When my picture of the day features a squirrel - I almost always add one in my social media posts. For more on my photographic journey since 2008, visit https:// www.flickr.com/photos/cseeman/ albums/72157605585889763/ or https://www.squirreldude.com/ project-365
that money differently — but will be equally impacted.
If you did not use these databases, you might consider this money wastefully spent. That is at a core of what the problem here is. When you manage a library, you have a suite of resources that you make available to a diverse community of people who have different needs, different topics to explore and different desires to digest information. When you manage a library, you have a suite of resources that you provide equitably across your community. So for my business library, we have to purchase resources for each area (Marketing, Management, Finance, Strategy, Operations, etc.). When you manage a library, you have a suite of resources and services that is inclusive to our faculty and students, to let them know that we are listening to their needs. I wish there was an easy way to pull this together … oh well.
A squirrel is (as you might have gathered) an important part of my life. So the squirrels all get special treatment and a daily haiku. The haiku above was paired with this picture of a squirrel taken on March 13th, 2025.
Other recent ones include: Finding joy these days can be difficult. Fear not.
A dancing squirrel.
Are things looking up? Not likely. Fox squirrel at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor on March 13th, 2025.
See — https://www.flickr.com/photos/cseeman/54388088999
Let us not forget, the cannibal’s best friend is always eaten last.
See — https://www.flickr.com/photos/cseeman/54338361262
They might be a bit dark — but honestly, so is our world. Today, Wired Magazine (strangely one of the only media outlets really pulling their weight) reported on the demise of IMLS (the Institute of Museum and Library Services).1 The whopping savings from IMLS is less than $1 per person. And if you are reading this, you have been directly or indirectly impacted. In Michigan, the IMLS money has been used to purchase a suite of databases available to everyone in the state and administered by the Library of Michigan (https://www.mel.org/welcome). Besides making it easy for any state citizen to use, it also provides resources that every library (public, school and academic) can offer without having to license it. When the funding dries up in Michigan, it is unclear if someone else will be able to fill in the gap. If you are reading this from the States, your state used
Few books can ever be perfect for every library or useful for none. Some might be wasteful for some, but essential or others. Additionally, some books are attributes that make it essential for certain functions or purposes. Seth Rudetsky, the American musician, actor, writer, radio host and travel tour guide, has said essentially that not all Broadway shows are hits — but all have one or two songs that are great. Jules Massenet, the French composer, would almost never be played on classical radio were it not for his Méditation from Thaïs. This piece was written for a set change between acts, and is simply remarkable. We likely never hear anything else from this opera. So in the books that we have here, you have books that have good and not good elements. Hopefully, what you read below will help you make the decision. Waste is not simply what you do not like. But that is the state of affairs in our world.
Special thanks to our reviewers who take the time to explore these works to see if they are appropriate for libraries. Special thanks to my reviewers for this issue: Joshua Hutchinson (University of Southern California), Jylisa Kenyon (University of Idaho), Jennifer Matthews (Rowan University), and Rose Melonis (Creighton University). As always, I want to thank them for bringing this column together.
If you would like to be a reviewer for Against the Grain, please write me at <cseeman@umich.edu>. If you are a publisher and have a book you would like to see reviewed in a future column, please also write me directly. You can also find out more about the Reader’s Roundup here — https://www.squirreldude.com/ atg-readers-roundup.
Happy reading and be nutty! — Corey
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
Inglorious Pedagogy: Difficult, Unpopular, and Uncommon Topics in Library and Information Science Education. Dali, K. and Thompson, K. (eds.). Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2023. 9781538167779 (cloth), 9781538167786 (eBook), 308 pages. $120.00 (hardback), $50.00 (eBook)
Reviewed by Joshua Hutchinson (Director, Technical Services, University of Southern California) <joshuah8@usc.edu>
This book, which covers the topic of teaching and learning in Library and Information Science (LIS) programs, has some very strong chapters, but sadly is let down by its larger context. The ambitious goal and concept of the book is a good one, but there are some significant problems with its construction and some of the contributions. Ultimately, these detractions reduce the impact of what should otherwise be a significant contribution to LIS scholarship. Part of what reduces the book’s cohesiveness is that it is really two books — the first is a thoughtful and provoking intervention in LIS pedagogy — exactly what the editors want it to be. The other is a glib and unnecessary collection of essays that don’t necessarily fit with the theme of the book and add nothing to existing scholarship.
Examples of the weaknesses inherent in the book are chapters (including Chapter 11: “Tales from three countries and one academia”) which were republished (“revised reprints” according to the introduction) from elsewhere, and don’t contribute to the book’s theme or argument. These were previously published in widely available journals such as Library Quarterly and reprinting them seems unnecessary. Other chapters are poorly conceived or simply misplaced. The arrangement of the book is similarly unfathomable — in the introduction, the editors say “We do not divide [the chapters] into two different sections… Rather, we intermingle them due to the oscillating and somewhat circular and interdependent character of all the issues…” (page 3). The
Guide to the ATG Reviewer Ratings
The ATG Reviewer Rating is being included for each book reviewed. Corey came up with this rating to reflect our collaborative collections and resource sharing means and thinks it will help to classify the importance of these books.
• I need this book on my nightstand. (This book is so good, that I want a copy close at hand when I am in bed.)
• I need this on my desk. (This book is so valuable, that I want my own copy at my desk that I will share with no one.)
• I need this in my library. (I want to be able to get up from my desk and grab this book off the shelf, if it’s not checked out.)
• I need this available somewhere in my shared network. (I probably do not need this book, but it would be nice to get it within three to five days via my network catalog.)
• I’ll use my money elsewhere. (Just not sure this is a useful book for my library or my network.)
end result of this is a work that lacks a cohesive organization — making the book hard to read. An edited volume is not well served by an oscillating structure.
One chapter that seems surprising in its presence in this volume is Chapter 6: “The Difficulty of Training Students to do Research in Tangles of Discourse.” This chapter, co-written by a LIS professor and student researcher contains information about a failed research project, but very little about LIS education — thinking about the topic of the book, and what might connect the chapters, it is hard to determine how this chapter fits in. It seems like more of an exercise in finger-pointing (and primarily, a professor blaming their student) than one that says anything in particular about LIS education. The most astonishing chapter, though, is Keren Dali’s Chapter 8: “The Academia-Practice Gap,” which seems to be primarily focused on the fact that the author’s 2021 article has been apparently ignored by practitioners — and takes the approach that this is due to a fault in practitioners (many of whom “feel a sense of entitlement and impunity…” (page 152)). Dali even includes an anecdote (pages 165-166) about academics submitting review letters on time, while an elementary school librarian was delayed in submitting hers — and extrapolates to make conclusions about the relative merits of people on each side of the profession. This 40 page article is really just an airing of petty and childish grievances, which surely would not have been accepted in another edited volume — except that it’s written by one of the editors. Dali writes that “I am resigned to the fact that my research and publications will be appreciated by academic colleagues and students (and even get awards) but will rarely or never be noticed by practitioners” (page 177). Sadly, Dali’s self-absorption, lack of rigor, and reliance on petty grievances in this lengthy chapter casts a pall over the rest of the book.
However, there are some particular strengths including Chapter 5: “Teaching for Intellectual Humility and Chapter 2: Nice to Have, a Distraction from the Core Curriculum, or a Disruptive Element?” Both of these chapters introduce actionable, evidence-led theory into the practice of LIS teaching. They are thoughtful about what it means to be a student, and also — crucially — a teacher in the LIS classroom. Part of what makes both of these chapters so compelling is that they embed LIS at the very center of their work; they are chapters about pedagogy as it relates to library and information studies education, not about pedagogy that just happens to take place in an LIS classroom. Chapter 7: “Overwhelmed or Overteaching? Humanism for Time Use and Pedagogy” is also of interest. It contains useful, practical tips for teaching in general, and time management in particular. It may not be applicable to all LIS professors, but its strengths lie in that it offers both general tips (for instance about syllabi and grading) and very specific suggestions (such as recommendations for using calendars and timetabling).
One final note about the structure and contents. In the epilogue, the editors write that they “were unable to solicit chapters on other difficult topics that we really wanted to see. Sorely missing for us … are the chapters on the decolonization of pedagogical practices and the inclusion of indigenous knowledge in LIS curricula… Also missing is a chapter that would candidly and bravely dispense with the notion of all librarians being on the same page when it comes to the interpretation and implementation of social justice, diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility…” (page 296). They note something similar about the geographical reach of the chapters: “We certainly strove for a greater geographic reach… yet for a variety of reasons…
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
it did not happen.” This seems like the very definition of an afterthought — mentioning it solely in the context of excusing why the editors didn’t include it. That’s not good enough.
While some contributions to this work are interesting and provide valuable contributions to the field, unfortunately, the value of the whole book is damaged by some of the less relevant contributions. As a result, the worth of the book is only in those few chapters, and need only be available within your network.
ATG Reviewer Rating: I need this available somewhere in my shared network. (I probably do not need this book, but it would be nice to get it within three to five days via my network catalog.)
Issitt, Micah. Opinions throughout History: Truth & Lies in the Media. Amenia, NY: Grey House Publishing, 2024. 9781637008126, 600 pages. $195.
Reviewed by Rose Melonis (Social Sciences Librarian, Creighton University) <rosemelonis@creighton.edu >
The “Opinions throughout History” series by Grey House Publishing present in-depth overviews of significant topics affecting Americans today. Opinions throughout History: Truth & Lies in the Media is a well-written, sweeping overview of the history of media and journalism in the United States. The journey begins in Colonial America and ends in the modern day, with chapters divided by decades. The author, Micah Issitt, is a self-described “independent scholar, historian, journalist, editor and author.” He is the editor of H.W. Wilson’s Reference Shelf
The subject matter is a timely and thought-provoking topic and would be especially helpful for reference libraries in high schools. I can see a high school library or public library benefiting the most from this reference text. The information presented can benefit history, debate, journalism, and civics classes. Public libraries could benefit from this accessible work as well, especially those that serve many students.
Each chapter is supported by source documents, with excerpts or reproductions of the source. The chapters end with a conclusion and discussion questions to engage readers. A works cited section is included for further exploration.
The author draws many parallels to modern day history, keeping history alive for its readers. This is a major strength of the chapters. The text remains engrossing and enlightening, as it clearly outlines how media has been used for political manipulation throughout the history of the United States. Sadly, we are not living in such a unique time as one might imagine.
The text is especially fascinating in revealing the power of journalism in amplifying “radical” voices. New audiences are reached, as we learn of the growth from white, educated, and male-owned papers to more diverse voices. I enjoyed learning about the newspapers founded by women, Black, and Indigenous American over the history of the country. As the chapters reveal, these diverse papers are a challenge to the time period’s status quo.
Throughout the book, history unfolds for the reader, as major national and international events are discussed in relation to journalism. The text reveals how media portrays currents events of the day. The beginning of investigative and stunt journalism can be especially interesting for young people, with the story of Nellie Bly’s undercover work. Information on “yellow
journalism” as well could be of interest to students who learn about it in American history classes.
We move through the printed press to the age of radio, television news, and 24-hour cable news. News becomes piped into American homes and becomes more accessible than ever, as people got to witness the historic Kennedy debate on live television for the first time ever. The impact of social media and internet news sources are also covered. The dawn of the “Facebook” news area, with misinformation and media manipulation, can be of interest to librarians, teachers, and students alike.
Opinions throughout History: Truth & Lies in the Media ends with modern day journalism, giving us an overview with chapters such as Online Culture, Alternate Realties, and Fake News. These topics remain especially salient today. It is helpful, especially for young readers, to contextually place our current decade within the tumultuous evolution of journalism.
ATG Reviewer Rating: I need this in my library. (I want to be able to get up from my desk and grab this book off the shelf, if it’s not checked out.) — NOTE: Especially true if you are in a school or public library.
Little, Mary E., Slanda, Dena D., and Cramer, Elizabeth D. The Educators Guide to Action Research: Practical connections for Implementation of Data-Driven Decision-Making. London: Rowman & Littlefield, 2025. 9781538177433, $90.00
Reviewed by Jennifer Matthews (Collection Strategy Librarian, Rowan University) <matthewsj@rowan.edu>
In the United States, teachers are continually asked to assess their classrooms due to state and federal mandates. These mandates can require yearly assessments to ensure that students are meeting certain benchmarks and measurable learning outcomes. However, these same assessments do not inform teachers about how well students absorb material or if changes are necessary in how teachers provide instruction to their students. In The Educator’s Guide to Action Research: Practical Connections for Implementation of Data-driven Decision-making, Mary E. Little, Dena D. Slanda, and Elizabeth D. Cramer have provided a guide on how to do such an assessment.
Structured as a textbook that would work in the library science classroom as well as an individual guide, this book walks the individual through the concept of action research and how it applies within the multi-tiered support system (MTSS) and data-driven decision-making (DDDM). Additionally, the authors advocate for evidence-based assessment (EBA) for any projects conducted by teachers in this area.
The focus of the assessment projects in this book describes many different ways to conduct equity focused action research projects, but is particularly focused on culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) models. After diligently walking the reader through each aspect of action research, assessment, data collection and analysis, multi-tiered systems of support, and data-driven decision-making, the authors use two case studies to represent how projects could be designed to reflect an equity-based CLD action research model.
Authors also were diligent about including figures to explain the various aspects of the mentioned framework such as the data-driven decision-making process within the multi-tiered support system figure which appears twice in the book for ease
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
of finding and understanding the model. Additionally, each chapter includes objectives, reflection questions, key terms and takeaways, and vignettes to aid understanding.
Finally, the authors include an entire chapter detailing how individuals can share details about their projects. This ranges from small presentations within their institutions to presentations at conferences as well as publishing an article in a peer-reviewed journal. This information will be invaluable for those that may be unfamiliar with some, or all, of these methods and may be interested in how to do this and how to connect with the larger community.
ATG Reviewer Rating: I need this available somewhere in my shared network. (I probably do not need this book, but it would be nice to get it within three to five days via my network catalog.)
Rempel, Hannah Gascho, and Maribeth Slebodnik. Creating Online Tutorials: A Practical Guide for Librarians. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2024. 9781538177877, 208 pages. $68.00 Print, $64.50 eBook.
Reviewed by Jylisa Kenyon (Social Sciences Librarian, University of Idaho Library) <jylisadoney@uidaho.edu>
Creating Online Tutorials: A Practical Guide for Librarians (Practical Guides for Librarians series, no. 80) is a useful tool for library workers with varied experience creating online tutorials. The second edition of this work features updated terminology, images, references, and examples as well as additional material related to universal design for learning, designing inclusive tutorials, and technology enhancements for accessibility.
This volume is arranged into nine chapters that delve into each stage of the tutorial development cycle. Central to this work is its use of the iterative ADDIE model of instructional design (Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation). In Chapter 1, Rempel and Slebodnik introduce this model and share initial questions library workers can ask themselves when beginning the tutorial design process, while Chapter 2 includes a discussion of using the ADDIE model and example tasks that can be added to a project timeline. Each step in this model is covered in greater detail in subsequent chapters (three through eight), with a final chapter focused on tutorial maintenance. Each chapter also includes questions for reflection and more resources for readers.
Three features stood out during my review. The first is Rempel and Slebodnik’s prompt for readers to determine whether instruction via a tutorial is the best option for addressing an
issue or learning need (p. 40). This type of question could easily have been left out or glossed over in a book focused on creating tutorials, and I appreciate that readers are encouraged to reflect, even briefly, on this question. Another standout feature is that “Chapter 5 – Development: Tools for the Task Ahead” includes a range of tutorial output types. Online tutorials are often equated with videos or screenshots when, in fact, these tutorials can take various forms, including text (e.g., PDFs), websites (e.g., LibGuides), or even presentation slides. Rempel and Slebodnik’s recognition that there is no one-size-fits-all answer when designing tutorials is a strength that is seen again and again in this work. The third standout feature is the final chapter’s focus on tutorial maintenance. It can be easy to let a tutorial “go stale” and move onto the next project, but in Chapter 9, Rempel and Slebodnik provide concrete suggestions for how readers can build tutorial maintenance into their workflow. For example, they suggest that readers continue to use the ADDIE model of instructional design, first by reexamining audience needs (analysis), considering whether the tutorial still meets these needs (evaluation), then making changes as needed (design and development). Another suggestion that Rempel and Slebodnik reiterate is for creators to design modularly. This requires breaking tutorials into small chunks, which has the twofold benefit of creating tutorials that are more accessible for learners and also easier for library workers to update. Tied to this suggestion is the creation of a personal or shared repository of tutorial objects that can be used and updated in the future.
One modest improvement that would make this work even more useful would be creating online templates for the sample plans (e.g., pp. 42-43, 46-47, 50-51, 54-55, 59-61, 161, 199) and rubrics (e.g., pp. 97, 197) that are shared in this work. This would allow readers to quickly engage with this content without the added time of recreating these documents. Overall, both new and experienced tutorial creators will find Creating Online Tutorials to be a valuable professional resource for their toolkit.
ATG Reviewer Rating: I need this in my library. (I want to be able to get up from my desk and grab this book off the shelf, if it’s not checked out.)
Endnotes
1. Dave, Paresh and Louise Matsakis, The Doge Axe Comes for Libraries and Museums. Wired, April 1, 2025. Accessed on April 1st, 2025 here: https://www.wired.com/story/ institute-museum-library-services-layoffs/.
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
Booklover — Persistent Sleuthing and the Wonders of the Internet
Column Editor: Donna Jacobs (Retired, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425) <donna.jacobs55@gmail.com>
Twenty-three Nobel Literature Laureates left and this Booklover will have satisfied the goal of reading from the collection of works penned by all the Laureates of Nobel Literature. This has been an adventure. To my surprise, I learned this past year that I’m not the only one on this journey. I was contacted by an Aussie booklover who has been reading his way through the same list. What a joy to communicate with a fellow Booklover and one who is also geeking out on Nobel literature. He found me on the Internet just like I find works penned by some of the earliest prize winners.
Jacinto Benavente y Martínez is one of these early prize winners. He was awarded the 1922 Nobel Prize in Literature “for the happy manner in which he has continued the illustrious traditions of the Spanish drama.” He is also an author with a small digital footprint. But everyday provides greater opportunity in this digital realm, so persistent sleuthing is necessary. Wikisource and Project Gutenberg are two such opportunities but come with disclaimers for translation errors and proofreading validation.
The minimal biographical information found on Benavente has three main highlights, besides his birth in Madrid, Spain and the Nobel award: 1) his father was a celebrated pediatrician; 2) the large inheritance from his father’s estate allowed him the freedom to travel and pursue writing; 3) he excelled as a playwright creating a spectrum of theatrical subjects. His biographical sketch on www.nobelprize.org states that it was “chiefly as a writer of comedies of manners and of one-act farces that he made his name.”
Serendipity is now in play as it was a farce in one act that Wikisource had available in translation within a 1919 book entitled “Plays by Jacinto Benavente.” According to the cover, this was second in a series translated from Spanish and included
an introduction by John Garrett Underhill. Underhill is named as a representative of the Sociedad de Autores Españoles in the United States and Canada. The “Contents” page listed: “Benventiana,” “No Smoking,” “Princess Bebé,” “The Governor’s Wife,” and “Autumnal Roses.” The introduction of this book provides an in-depth analysis of these works which is a welcomed addition to this sleuth endeavor.
Now to the chapter page in Wikisource for No Smoking:
NO SMOKING
FARCE IN ONE ACT
First Presented at the Teatro Lara, Madrid, on the Evening of the Third of March, 1904
Just to be reacquainted with the definition of farce, Google provided this: https://literarydevices.net/farce/#google_vignette “A farce is a literary genre and type of comedy that makes use of highly exaggerated and funny situations aimed at entertaining the audience. Farce is also a subcategory of dramatic comedy, which is different from other forms of comedy as it only aims at making the audience laugh. It uses elements like physical humor, deliberate absurdity, bawdy jokes, and drunkenness just to make people laugh. We often see onedimensional characters in ludicrous situations in farces.”
I couldn’t have described this One Act better if I had tried.
And if your curiosity has been piqued, here is the weblink for this book: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:Plays_by_Jacinto_ Benavente_-_Second_series_(IA_playsbyjacintobe00bena).pdf/9 Trust the booklover.
ATG Seeking a New Columnist for Our Legally Speaking Column!
Are you a law librarian, or do you have experience with legal issues in libraries? We’re looking for a new editor for the “Legally Speaking” column. In this role, the column editor would write on legal issues in librarianship and scholarly communication, solicit articles from other authors, or a combination of both. There are five issues per year (February, April, June, September, November) having these editorial deadlines. Please contact us at editors@against-the-grain. com if you’re interested in finding out more! Or if you have suggestions/nominations for someone else who would be a good fit. Thank you!
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
LEGAL ISSUES
Section Editors: Bruce Strauch (Retired, The Citadel) <bruce.strauch@gmail.com> Jack Montgomery (Georgia Southern University) <jmontgomery@georgiasouthern.edu>
Questions & Answers — Copyright Column
Column Editor: Kyle K. Courtney (Director of Copyright & Information Policy, Harvard Library) <kyle_courtney@harvard.edu>
QUESTIONS FROM A LIBRARIAN: I keep hearing that there’s a big court case about AI training and fair use — something to do with legal research tools? What’s going on, and should we be worried?
ANSWER: Well, this issue’s column is all about the newest — and arguably one of the earliest — fair use cases involving AI training. The February 2025 decision in Thomson Reuters v. ROSS Intelligence marks a new moment in the legal conversation around artificial intelligence, copyright, and public access to information. At the heart of the case is a deceptively simple question: Can an AI system legally learn from copyrighted material if it never shares that material with users? The answer, at least from one federal court, is no. But the reasoning behind that answer raises big concerns — and potential big opportunities — for libraries and the public interest.
What was at stake in the ROSS Intelligence case, and why should librarians care?
The recent decision in Thomson Reuters v. ROSS Intelligence has stirred attention across legal, tech, and library circles. At the heart of the case was whether the use of copyrighted legal “headnotes” by ROSS Intelligence to train an AI legal research tool constituted fair use. Thomson Reuters, the owner of Westlaw, argued that ROSS infringed by using these headnotes — even though they were never shown to end users and were only used behind the scenes to teach the AI how to understand legal questions.
“Headnotes” are brief, numbered summaries of the legal issues addressed in a case, appearing at the beginning of the case record. They help researchers quickly identify the key legal points in a case and navigate to the relevant sections of the opinion. The Westlaw editors derive these points directly from the case. The cases themselves, by law, are in the public domain.
Now, this decision matters to librarians because it touches on foundational questions about access to information, fair use, and the future of knowledge systems built on public domain materials. The case raised the specter of whether copyright law can be used to lock up information tools and services that build upon, transform, or enhance access to public knowledge — something librarians have long fought against. The court’s decision, which sided with Thomson Reuters, challenges a long line of fair use precedent and potentially empowers copyright holders to exert more control over innovation, even when that innovation doesn’t expose or replicate the protected content itself.
For librarians, especially those working with AI tools, legal databases, or digitization projects, the implications are clear: copyright is increasingly being wielded not only to protect original works, but to regulate the tools that make public domain content more useful and discoverable. If training data becomes locked behind licensing walls, we risk a future in which only proprietary players can develop advanced tools for legal research, education, or even information literacy. That’s a future fundamentally at odds with library values.
What is “intermediate copying,” and how did the court address it in this case?
Intermediate copying refers to the use of copyrighted works behind the scenes in ways that support a final product which itself is not infringing. Courts have consistently held that such uses can be fair — particularly in technology cases — because the final output is transformative and doesn’t reproduce the copyrighted material. Examples include plagiarism detection systems [A.V. ex rel. Vanderhye v. iParadigms LLC, 562 F.3d 630 (4th Cir. 2009), search engines [Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corp., 336 F.3d 811 (9th Cir. 2003)], and digital research databases [Authors Guild Inc. v. HathiTrust, 755 F.3d 87 (2nd Cir. 2014)]. All these systems often rely on copying to analyze, train, or structure information, but they do not present the copyrighted content to the public.
In the ROSS case, the AI tool relied on intermediary text to learn how to interpret natural language legal questions and return relevant public domain court opinions. The copyrighted headnotes were used as scaffolding for this learning process. Importantly, these headnotes never appeared in the product available to users. All ROSS provided was access to full-text court opinions — documents that are themselves not copyrighted.
Unfortunately, in the ROSS case, Judge Bibas failed to fully consider this well-established body of law. While he briefly acknowledged intermediate copying in the context of software, he dismissed its relevance to other domains — despite persuasive precedents from cases involving search engines and digital libraries. These omissions are troubling not only because they sideline important doctrine but also because they reflect a broader misunderstanding of how innovation works in the digital realm.
Take Authors Guild v. Google , a landmark case in which Google scanned millions of books to create a searchable index.
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
Users could not read the in-copyright books in full via Google Books, but they could find snippets or determine whether a book was relevant to their research. The court found this use transformative and protected by fair use — even though it involved copying full works to create the index. The public benefit was clear: a revolutionary research tool that did not substitute for the original works. ROSS’ tool functions in much the same way, yet the court failed to draw the same parallel.
For librarians, the principle of intermediate copying is vital. It protects the ability to build tools that enhance discovery, aggregate metadata, and analyze collections. If this principle is undermined, the collateral damage could extend far beyond legal AI — affecting everything from text mining in the humanities to the creation of inclusive discovery platforms.
Did the court misunderstand the role of competition and market in fair use analysis?
Yes — and this is another critical point for librarians to understand. In ruling against ROSS, Judge Bibas leaned heavily on the idea that because ROSS’ tool competed with Westlaw in the legal research market, its use of the headnotes couldn’t be fair. He cited the relatively recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith, which held that Warhol’s artwork competed unfairly with a photographer’s original work by offering a stylized derivative version for the same commercial purpose.
But, according to some copyright experts, this comparison misapplies the law. In Warhol, the artist’s work was deemed a derivative because it directly reused and presented a substantial portion of the original image. In contrast, ROSS did not offer the headnotes or any other protected Westlaw content to the public. It used them solely to teach an AI system to map queries to public domain court opinions. That is not the same kind of market substitution that fair use disfavors.
The idea that any competition is inherently unfair misunderstands the role of copyright and the goals of fair use. Some of the most socially beneficial uses — criticism, research, education, journalism — often compete with the original work in the “attention economy.” In a world overflowing with information and constant stimulation, our attention is a limited resource, and businesses and platforms compete to capture it. Libraries know this well: reviews, research guides, and curated exhibits might impact a work’s market, but they are protected by fair use because they are transformative and in service of public discourse.
Additionally, fair use encourages disruptive innovation. Think of how open education platforms, citation tools, and open access works provide alternatives to commercial products. These innovations sometimes harm the markets of legacy players — but copyright law isn’t meant to offer complete and total protection forever; it’s meant to ensure creators are rewarded without choking off future creativity.
Libraries play a key role here by ensuring that researchers, educators, and the public retain access to innovative tools. When courts treat competition itself as a strike against fair use, they tip the balance away from users and toward entrenched rights holders. That’s a troubling precedent for libraries, which have a core mission of both access and transformation.
What does this decision mean for the future of fair use and AI — and how should libraries respond?
Although the ROSS decision may appear like a major setback for fair use in the age of AI, its long-term significance is still uncertain. The opinion’s analytical gaps — particularly its failure to fully engage with the precedents of the intermediate copying doctrine and its overbroad reading of market harm — make it less persuasive as precedent. Courts that do grapple seriously with the full fair use framework may very well reach different conclusions, especially in cases involving training on public or factual material to create tools that expand access to information.
Libraries have a unique vantage point in this evolving landscape. We are not only stewards of content but also conveners of ethical and equitable technology development. AI is already being embedded into library discovery systems, digital preservation platforms, and reference services. Whether we’re experimenting with large language models, recommending resources, or supporting data-driven scholarship, we rely on legal frameworks like fair use to make our work possible.
In the wake of the ROSS decision, librarians should keep an eye on three things: First, the trajectory of case law. Other courts may reject or limit the reasoning in ROSS, particularly if they more fully engage with the relevant precedents. Second, the role of licensing. If copyright holders begin demanding licenses for any AI training, even on factual or public domain material, we must advocate for clear exceptions that protect research and education. And third, library involvement in shaping public policy. Whether through comments on AI regulation, briefs in litigation, or participation in standards bodies, libraries must speak up for openness and fair use.
Coming from a law librarian background, I always think we should redouble our support for open legal information. As proprietary platforms increasingly wall off access, librarians can help build and sustain alternatives — whether through partnerships with legal aid organizations, support for “free the law” movements, or advocacy for machine-readable legal datasets.
Ultimately, the ROSS decision is a reminder that the AI landscape is still evolving. It’s up to advocates, including libraries, to ensure that fair use remains a robust safeguard for learning, research, and innovation in the digital age. Librarians are uniquely positioned to defend these values — not just in theory, but in practice.
What happens next?
The ROSS case will likely proceed with appeal, giving a higher court the opportunity to revisit Judge Bibas’ reasoning. On appeal, ROSS may argue that the district court misapplied fair use doctrine, particularly by failing to fully engage with intermediate copying precedent and by conflating market competition with market substitution. If the decision is overturned, it could reaffirm important protections for AI development, research tools, and transformative uses. In the meantime, librarians should monitor this and related cases closely, as the next round of rulings may reshape how copyright interacts with AI training and access to public domain information. There’s over 30 cases pending about AI in the courts, and the final rulings on all these case may take years.
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
And They Were There — Reports of Meetings 2024 Charleston Conference
Column Editor: Caroline Goldsmith (Associate Director, The Charleston Hub) <caroline@charlestonlibraryconference.com>
Column Editor’s Note: Thanks to the Charleston Conference attendees, both those who attended in person and those who attended virtually, who agreed to write brief reports highlighting their 2024 Charleston Conference experience. Our in-person event was held November 11-15, 2024 in historic downtown Charleston, with the virtual event following on December 9-13, 2024. The virtual event included recorded presentations from the in-person event followed by live Q&A sessions with speakers as well as exclusive “virtual only” content. There were more Charleston Conference sessions than there were volunteer reporters for Against the Grain, so the coverage is just a snapshot.
There are many ways to learn more about the 2024 conference. Please visit the Charleston Conference YouTube site, https://www.youtube.com/user/CharlestonConference/ videos?app=desktop, for selected interviews and videos, and the conference site, https://www.charleston-hub.com/thecharleston-conference/ for links to conference information and blog reports written by Charleston Conference blogger, Donald Hawkins, https://www.charleston-hub.com/category/blogs/ chsconfnotes/. The 2024 Charleston Conference Proceedings will be published in 2025, in partnership with University of Michigan Press.
The first installment of Conference reports for our 2024 event were featured in our February issue (v.37#1), and included key takeaways, top three things learned while at the conference, impressions from the vendor showcase, and summaries of 20 minute vendor information sessions. In this issue, we have the second installment of Conference reports, including individual reports and short summaries from Wednesday’s sessions. The next series of reports in our June issue will feature individual reports and short summaries on Thursday’s and Friday’s sessions, including poster sessions, as well as some virtual only sessions. Thank you again to all of our volunteer reporters! — CG
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 13
NEAPOLITAN SESSIONS
Challenges and Opportunities Around Research Integrity: A Conversation
Presented by Dr. Ivan Oranksy (Founder, Retraction Watch) and Elizabeth Bik (Science Consultant, Harbers Bik, LLC) — Video recording available at https://youtu. be/7XzhoUgTKSE?si=Td1hJuhE95JCue5y
This session featured Elizabeth Bik (integrity consultant and arguably the most well-known sleuth in the research integrity space) and Ivan Oransky (founder of Retraction Watch) in a direct and honest panel conversation with each other and the audience, about what got them into this field and what they
see as the critical problems. Bik’s greatest worry is AI for image generation, as fraudsters are able to stay one step ahead of current detection programs. While she is pessimistic about the future, Oransky expressed optimism because of the increasing number of people participating in the field. Scientific progress is built on hundreds of years of previous work; publications are bricks in a wall, and errors mean the wall could tumble. Sleuths are doing the work at legal risk to themselves, but they do it because of the importance of the problem. Libraries and publishers have potential roles to play, but the ultimate solution is to stop the demand for fraudulent services altogether.
Data, Disruption, and Defense: A Collaborative Approach to Cybersecurity in Academic Libraries
Reported by Eva Murphy (Electronic Resources Librarian, Knowledge Access & Resource Management, West Virginia University Libraries) <eva.murphy@mail.wvu.edu>
Presented by Roger Strong, Jr. (VP, Global Academic Sales, Gale), John Felts (Head of Information Technology and Collection, Coastal Carolina University), Michael Meth (Dean of University Libraries, San Jose State University), and Matthew Ragucci (Director of Product Marketing, Wiley) — Video recording available at https://youtu.be/ feYXZ88wtXI?si=EBaSb2LUILqSZ6xL
Panelists for this Neapolitan session were Roger Strong Jr. from Gale, John Felts from Coastal Carolina University, Michael Meth from San Jose State University, and Matthew Ragucci from Wiley. Knowledge institutions face an increasing barrage of attempted cyberattacks that plunder not only personally identifiable information, but financial and copyrighted information as well. These target-rich environments are more at risk because of the frequent use of legacy hardware and software that isn’t up to the task of fending off modern attacks, lack of training, and historical underfunding of cybersecurity initiatives.
The panelists highlighted the importance of collaboration between knowledge institutions and content providers to reduce friction to accessing licensed content and minimize disruptions caused by cybersecurity incidents. Furthermore, they noted that it is possible for bad actors to gain access to all member institutions of a consortia through a weakness in one member’s defenses. Steps for universities to minimize the risk and impact of cyberattacks include developing relationships with campus IT, educating staff and users, using two-factor authentication and federated access.
You can read the blog report by Donald Hawkins on this session here: https://www.charleston-hub.com/2024/11/ concurrent-sessions/
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
The Legislative Landscape — The Library’s Hand in the Higher Ed Game
Reported by Marion Archer (Acquisitions Librarian, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee) <archerm@uwm.edu>
Presented by Kathleen McEvoy (Senior Policy Fellow, The EveryLibrary Institute), Nancy Kirkpatrick (Dean of University Libraries, Florida International University), Lucilia Green (Director and Professor, University of Iowa School of Library and Information Science), and Carissa Vogel (Law Library Director and Professor of Instruction, College of Law, University of Iowa) — Video recording available at https://youtu.be/ KTsajm3Jh1Y?si=v9UPQN7vtGUy1Jot
The session The Legislative Landscape – The Library’s Hand in the Higher Ed Game was a panel presentation with three librarians well-versed in advocating for the place of the academic library in the higher education sphere and, consequently, the funding of the library. These librarians made salient points and offered helpful advice on when and where to speak on the importance of the library to stakeholders who may or may not be familiar with the role of the library in both student and faculty research. One of the biggest takeaways was to focus on making the implicit explicit; never assume that the person you are talking to knows what the library offers or how folks on campus are using it. Additionally, making it clear that the library was a partner in projects and initiatives across the institution is helpful in ensuring that the library is properly recognized for the important work it does for students, faculty, and beyond.
CONCURRENT SESSIONS
Beyond Backfiles: Innovative Approaches to Year-end, One-time Spending
Reported by Ellie Burnage (Head of Marketing and Publisher Operations, Exact Editions) <ellie.burnage@exacteditions.com>
Presented by Steve Cramer (Business Librarian, UNC Greensboro), Cynthia Cronin-Kardon (Resource Development and Reference Librarian, University of Pennsylvania), and Breezy Silver (Interim Director and Collections Coordinator, Gast Business Library, Michigan State University) — Video recording available at https://youtu.be/1KfAzpKXLLs?si=9_ CiNkSWBYKn7J8D
This insightful session comprehensively covered the delicate area of one-time spending. Speakers explained the processes of decision-making and liaising with vendors that happen when libraries receive extra budget (often in substantial amounts) at the end of a year, against a complex backdrop of ongoing commitments and deadlines. Several examples of successes and failures in their respective institutions were also highlighted. My main takeaway was that resources acquired through one-time spending must be carefully communicated to patrons and faculty to avoid a misunderstanding around how long they will be accessible for, as there is often a misconception that they are owned permanently. The main advice to the audience was to adopt the message that patrons should “enjoy these resources whilst they can” and consider them as “bonus content.”
Grain / April 2025
You can read the blog report by Donald Hawkins on this session here: https://www.charleston-hub.com/2024/11/ beyond-backfiles-innovative-approaches-to-year-end-onetime-spending/
But What Does the Quant Believe?: The Idea of the “Collection” in a Data-driven World
Reported by Brenda Sevigny-Killen (Colby College Libraries) <bsevigny@colby.edu>
Presented by David Givens (Director of Resource Acquisitions, Brown University), Sarah Forzetting (Associate Director, Acquisitions and Collections Services, Stanford University), Ana Noriega (Associate Director and Head of Collections Management, Colby College), and Emma Heet (Associate Dean of Collections Services, Loyola University Chicago) — Video recording available at https://youtu.be/x0EFpZfh7sg?si=Hs9muFyFat7RPeeo
In this lively session, panelists addressed questions about data driven methods of collecting and the pitfalls and shortcomings of the quant. They agreed that data is imperfect and needs more staff time to collect better metadata and ensure access to electronic materials. In the last few years, tech services has been decimated as it was built on print materials. They discussed what the reality of today’s collections are and what has happened to bring us to where collections are today. Points I took away include that data driven collections used to bring a level of security to back up collection decisions but that is not so true anymore. Collections tend to be an on-demand and/or controlled system whether purchasing faculty-produced publications, scholarly material, or materials requested to support the curriculum. Subject specialists, new librarians, and staff shortages can all affect approaches to collection methods. The panelists brought up a multitude of decisions that collection managers juggle and why new librarians have great anxiety over collection decisions. Other points made are: libraries simply cannot collect everything, consortia can be an answer to better collecting, AI will be a future concern especially in regards to metadata, and digital materials will always be vulnerable.
Expand Your Collection Horizons with Negotiation Skill Development to Address Today’s and Tomorrow’s Challenges
Reported by Karen Schifferdecker (Electronic Resources Librarian, Department of Library Collections & Discovery, Western Kentucky University)
<karen.schifferdecker@wku.edu>
Presented by Katharine V. Macy (Interim Associate Dean of Scholarly Communications & Content Strategies, Indiana University Indianapolis) — Video recording available at https:// youtu.be/Xy7NJAQaaXo?si=YikwTnq56vuWfnAS
Katharine Macy, Interim Associate Dean of Scholarly Communication and Content Strategies at Indiana University Indianapolis, shared her work as part of the ONEAL (Open Negotiation Education for Academic Librarians) Project. The ONEAL Project (https://oneal-project.org) is a grant-funded project working to create a curriculum to teach negotiation skills to academic library workers who work with vendors. Katharine shared that “learning negotiation skills allows library workers and vendors to have more productive conversations that create more options.”
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
Katharine started by sharing the results of a poll she posted in the Whova conference app prior to the presentation, asking attendees what words come to mind when they think about negotiating. The most common responses were “anxious” and “unprepared,” which mirrored her prior experiences that were the impetus for the ONEAL Project. Negotiating is, if covered at all, just a blip in library school, most negotiating skills are learned on the job, and librarians by default are “helpers” who are conditioned to be people pleasers and hesitant to ask for what we need to do our jobs well.
Katharine and the ONEAL Project believe strongly that there are best practices when negotiating and that we could all benefit from learning these communication tools — learning how to ask for what we need and make peace with the answer even if the answer is no. She shared her experience that vendors tend to prefer when librarians are direct even if our answer is no rather than dodging. Even just saying “please check in with me again in a year” is better than dodging the vendor and helps to foster better relationships overall. Ultimately, the most important component of the librarian/vendor relationship is communication.
Every single lesson in the ONEAL curriculum includes lesson plans, recorded lectures, hands-on exercises, case studies, workbook lessons, and group activities. It is made to be easily integrated into ILS/MLS courses. They also offer a library worker-centered Discord to get help while completing curriculum or to get help and support while negotiating. The ultimate point of the curriculum is to help participants get to “What does success look like?” It is offered in both PDF and Word format (so you can add/edit if needed).
A recent new “Strategies” module was added and future modules will be centered around privacy, surveillance, artificial intelligence, accessibility, and text data mining. A “Hot Topic in Resource Negotiations” handout was provided digitally (linked in the Whova app) with a robust list of resources.
Exploring Library-Publisher Collaboration to Make Backlist Books Available
Reported by Adam Mazel (Digital Publishing Librarian, Indiana University) <amazel@iu.edu>
Presented by Kathleen Riegelhaupt (Director, eReading, NYPL), Greg Cram (Associate General Counsel & Director, Information Policy, NYPL), Charles Watkinson (AUL for Publishing, University of Michigan Libraries & Director, University of Michigan Press and Michigan Publishing), and Aurora Bell (Associate Editorial Director, University of South Carolina Press) — Video recording available at https://youtu. be/9tjBJG3wFuA?si=UyQB-qEL2rJtP80R
This panel overviewed a New York Public Libraries initiative — the “Scholarly Press Backlist Revival” — in which the NYPL is partnering with book copyright holders, such as university presses, to provide digital access to out-of-print but in-copyright books. The numerous books in this category are hard to access due to copyright restrictions; moreover, their copyright holder is often unknown. To make these books available then, NYPL is seeking permission from scholarly presses to make their backlists available digitally in return for providing presses their now-digital books and their circulation counts. These counts will show whether the book is commercially viable, in which case the NYPL will remove digital access to the book so that it
can be sold by the publisher. This initiative’s initial partners are the University of Michigan Press and the University of South Carolina Press, who shared their reasons for participating and lessons learned, such as metadata challenges.
Generative AI and Scholarly Publishing
Reported by Adam Mazel (Digital Publishing Librarian, Indiana University) <amazel@iu.edu>
Presented by Tracy Bergstrom (Program Manager, Collections and Infrastructure, Ithaka S+R), Anu Vedantham (Assistant University Librarian, Princeton University), Judson Dunham (Senior Director of Product Management, Elsevier), and Ellen Kimmel (Research Operations Team Lead, National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine) — Video recording available at https://youtu.be/A_u20MLzcyo?si=EcXY3zifw5PvdleW
In response to a recent Ithaka S+R study, this panel discussed how Generative AI is affecting and can and should affect scholarly publishing. Regarding whether AI will replace jobs, panelists noted that, on the one hand, AI can advise students, and, on the other hand, AI will merely supplement positions to save time. Regarding whether Gen AI should automate cognition, e.g., summarizing documents: some panelists believe this is beneficial while others note that Gen AI tends to misread and hallucinate references — but also that Gen AI’s errors can valuably catalyze cognition. To evaluate AI, one panelist advocated building AI familiarity by using it to learn what it can and cannot and should and should not do. Gen AI is expected to improve search and discovery, including undoing confirmation bias in searching. It is also expected to improve publishing metrics by counting reads rather than merely downloads. Lastly, Generative AI can make publishing more equitable via translation: reducing English-language bias and translating scholarship for lay audiences.
I Wish They Taught Me That in Library School: Post-graduate Competencies for Scholarly Communication Professionals
Reported by Amanda Elzey (Metadata Cataloger & Database Specialist, J. Murrey Atkins Library University of North Carolina at Charlotte) <aelzey@charlotte.edu>
Presented by Matthew Ragucci (Director of Product Marketing, Wiley), Courtney McAllister (Senior Solution Architect, Atypon), Randyn Heisserer-Miller (Associate Dean for Collections and Discovery Services, San Diego State University), and Bob Boissy (Director of Account Development, Springer Nature) — Video recording available at https://youtu.be/ U20iAw7zSWo?si=1IwGf4kJm1_Sci9T
From the start, Matthew assured us that “this [session] is not an indictment of library schools,” but rather a discussion about what the four speakers experienced in different MLIS programs on their professional journeys; he joked that “even though n=4, it’s a nice cross-section” of experiences. Each touched on the idea that librarianship is a broad field with positions requiring varied skills, with financial and administrative competencies chief among the ones glossed over in classes on library theory. Threaded throughout was the value of hands-on experience and of continually working toward finding intersections — through professional organizations, field experiences, and mentorships — between librarianship and one’s interests. Robert
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
stressed that creating a showcase for oneself as competent and passionate will merely be the first time one has to make a case as a librarian; since “everything is sales,” he finds it essential to be comfortable interpreting and defending library data. Randyn and Courtney wish that MLIS programs could be more futurefocused, with technology at the forefront, so that library schools, and libraries themselves, can be as future-proofed as possible; Courtney commented that although future-proofing is not wholly attainable, MLIS programs can work toward emphasizing change management and resilience as the profession, inevitably, evolves.
Leveraging Library Collections to Cultivate Social Responsibility and Local Impact
Reported by Chuck Knight (Business Information Librarian for Collections, Vanderbilt University) <charles.d.knight@vanderbilt.edu>
Presented by Steve Cramer (Business Librarian, University of North Carolina Greensboro), Valery Linsinbigler (Business Librarian, James Madison University), Rebekah Shaw (Senior Market Research Analyst, Sage Publishing), and Robin Vickery (Library Services Professional, Business Liaison, The University of Arizona) — Video recording available at https://youtu.be/ gVTY_EzFciY?si=5R514Lw02b7DdEXw
This session offered several perspectives on social impact in business as an information literacy need. Rebekah Shaw (Sage) discussed Sage’s study of social impact in business education. The study indicates that social impact is a large part of the work among a large majority of faculty and librarians. Next, Valery Linsinbigler, Steve Cramer, and Robin Vickery (all business librarians) each addressed one of three prompts: what resources and skills are essential for students a) to assess social impact in their assignments, b) to partner with community organizations for hands-on learning, and c) to develop sustainable solutions after graduation. As each librarian spoke to their prompt using examples from their work, some key themes emerged. In terms of skills, students need to have mastery of information literacy, especially data literacy, and to know when and how to conduct primary research. For information resources, it is important to use a wide variety of information sources, including news and trade journals, business intelligence databases, datasets and data analysis tools, and local and national government information. This timely presentation provided an interesting confluence of perspectives.
Managing Transitions in Collection Development and Collection Management
Reported by Eva Murphy (Electronic Resources Librarian, Knowledge Access & Resource Management, West Virginia University Libraries) <eva.murphy@mail.wvu.edu>
Presented by Glenda Alvin (Dean of Libraries and Media Centers, Tennessee State University), Stephanie Rodriguez (Assistant Director for Collection Management, Tennessee State University), Mohammad Alhamad (Director of Resource Management and Discovery, Texas A&M University, Corpus Christi), and Lisa Louis (Director of User & Research Services, Texas A&M University, Corpus Christi) — Video recording available at https://youtu.be/9XeNOwAJ0_Y?si=UyWZOJdj1b8h0OLQ
In this session, Glenda Alvin and Stephanie Rodriguez of Tennessee State University and Mohammad Alhamad, Director of Resource Management & Discovery at Texas A&M – Corpus Christi spoke of their respective institutions’ responses to change. Both highlighted the importance of flexibility and effective communication when navigating transitions.
Alvin’s internal promotion to Dean of Libraries & Media Center at TSU presented unique opportunities for onboarding and training a new Assistant Director, the role she vacated. She and Rodriguez, the new AD, emphasized that careful and slow training coupled with the freedom to grow into the position were key to success.
Texas A&M – Corpus Christi’s shift away from the subject liaison model required Alhamad and his colleagues to develop new approaches to address the challenges of the new structure, including balance of resources, managing collection development, and ensuring effective communication. Alhamad stressed the importance of leadership’s support of change, risk, and experimentation during seasons of change.
Minding the Gap: Applying Established Methods and Core Values to the Evaluation and Assessment of New AI tools and Technology for Library Collections
Reported by Ramune K. Kubilius (Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine) <r-kubilius@northwestern.edu>
Presented by Joelen Pastva (Director of Library Services, Carnegie Mellon University Libraries), Christian Headley (Head of Customer Success, Keenious), and Gwendolyn Reece (Director of Research, Teaching, and Learning, American University) — Video recording available at https://youtu.be/ dlPCOlDAtpo?si=q-LJ4ABd2hRvY-gD
Reece set the stage, overviewing the ethical framework for assessment and described the working group at her university for “Responsible Use of AI.” Library collection development is impacted by AI, and requires “some sort of process and standards for vetting rooted in our values.” Scenarios mentioned: 1) Requests are coming into the library (with the expectation that collection funds can and will be used); 2) Free tools are being linked in LibGuides; 3) Vendors are incorporating AI into their products. Principles from “The Belmont Report” (U.S. Dept of Health and Human Resources, 1979) — Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research apply to AI , too, specifically on tools / collections (e.g., respect for persons, beneficence, justice). Sample questions she raised: What data is being collected by the tool? Keeping equity in mind, how balanced is the content AI created?
Pastva recommended working with vendor partners- do demos and beta tests (as CMU did with Keenious). She reviewed e-resource lifecycle management principles that are a great starting point for AI resources, too, but acknowledged that the variety of new (AI) tools require different evaluation criteria.
Headley overviewed the background of Keenious (a discovery tool) and spoke more generally, stating that libraries are the biggest ultimate customers of AI tools (such as Keenious).
During discussion, Pastva encouraged that libraries be involved in some capacity for the vetting process /committee. Apart from those involved in collection budgeting or vetting (e.g., by IT), other stakeholders are essential. Headley noted that collaboration is active engagement with vendors. On the topic of AI literacy, Reece shared information about the American
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
University’s toolkit for information literacy for AI and Pastvaabout CMU’s IMLS grant-supported initiative, POEM (Project on Open and Evolving Metaliteracies), designed to improve student literacy in AI and more.
Minding the Gap: Applying Established Methods and Core Values to the Evaluation and Assessment of New AI tools and Technology for Library Collections
Reported by Tonya Dority (Interim Acquisitions & Metadata Librarian, Liaison to the Department of Communication, Reese Library, Augusta University) <TDORITY@augusta.edu>
Presented by Joelen Pastva (Director of Library Services, Carnegie Mellon University Libraries), Christian Headley (Head of Customer Success, Keenious), and Gwendolyn Reece (Director of Research, Teaching, and Learning, American University) — Video recording available at https://youtu.be/ dlPCOlDAtpo?si=q-LJ4ABd2hRvY-gD
This presentation highlighted the importance of ethics in AI/collection development decisions, AIs impact on evaluation and assessment, and introduced Keenious, an AI research tool. Reece’s discussion on developing an Ethical Framework for Assessment defined the association between artificial intelligence and collection development and communicated the importance of values. Reece offered the Belmont Report as a resource, noting “three foundational principles,” Respect for Persons, Beneficence, and Justice. Pastva addressed AI and collection development using the Techniques for Electronic Resources Management Systems (TERMS) to evaluate new AI tools. Although some elements of this traditional method still applied, Pastva recognized the need for additional considerations and a separate framework for AI. Keenious, a resource recommender tool, served as an example of how ethics intersects with libraries and collection development processes. As Headley explained, Keenious was developed in partnership with a university library and thus subscribes to the same principles and values.
No One Owns That: Metadata, Copyright, and the Problems with Vendor Agreements
Reported by Karen Burton (Science Librarian, Clemson University) <kbburto@clemson.edu>
Presented by Matthew Kopel (Open Access and Intellectual Property Librarian, Princeton University), Kathleen Delaurenti (Director, Arthur Friedheim Library, Johns Hopkins University), Katie Zimmerman (Director of Copyright Strategy, MIT Libraries), and Kyle K. Courtney (Director of Copyright and Information Policy, Harvard University) — Video recording available at https://youtu.be/anMtsQjOaXU?si=Q2lOHzWQWcMt8nz6
The session No One Owns That: Metadata, Copyright, and the Problems with Vendor Agreements was hosted by a panel of library copyright experts who began with the point that open metadata is critical for the advancement of innovation and research. Then they reviewed the key legal cases on copyright in which it was determined that facts, such as catalog metadata, are not copyrightable. Then the presenters reviewed cases where metadata use was restricted through contracts. Notably, the 2022 OCLC vs Clarivate case, which claimed breach of contract, was referred to for understanding the potential risks in collaborative metadata sharing. The presenter’s interpretation
the Grain / April 2025
of the outcome of the case was that libraries should not transfer metadata records to competitors but could potentially transfer metadata records among libraries. Recommendations were made to begin a discussion of local library and consortia policies about metadata sharing, and that a CC0 Public Domain Dedication be applied to metadata records. The panelists advised further reading of their recently published white paper at https://dash. harvard.edu/handle/1/37379715
Raising the Curtain on Retractions: What Do Libraries Need to Know About the Research Integrity Landscape
Reported by Alice Nguyen, EM-MSIPP (Library Graduate Fellow, Savannah River National Laboratory) <alice.n.69521@gmail.com>
Presented by Adya Misra (Associate Director, Research Integrity, Sage), Michael Streeter (Director, Research Integrity Strategy & Policy, Wiley), Shannon Pritting (Director of Library Services, Empire State University), Sean Rife (PhD, Researcher, Murray State University, and Head of Academic Relations, Scite), and Scott Ahlberg (Chief Operating Officer, Research Solutions) — Video recording available at https://youtu.be/ cfPiqEUoC5o?si=34_jfcICgJmlITmE
Retractions are a point of worry for publishers and libraries in the research integrity landscape. Libraries are not, or should not, be responsible for retractions. However, they can still play a part in the process by having a position responsible for checking published articles and educating on retractions. There are also possible technology solutions to prevent retractions and use of retracted articles such as screening tools and tools to assist non-English speaking researchers. The discussion of retractions as being part of a corrective process in science presented an intriguing future pivot for retractions. However, this discussion does not change the fact that having a retracted article still negatively affects the research reputation of the author or authors involved. This was a good discussion for the audience to get the perspective of both publishers and librarians on the retraction process and its effects on research and researchers.
Recovering America’s Greatest Lost Fruits, Grains, and Vegetables: A Progress Report
Reported by Karen Burton (Science Librarian, Clemson University) <kbburto@clemson.edu>
Presented by Dr. David Shields (Carolina Distinguished Professor Emeritus, Co-Host “Savers of Flavor” SCETV 2024-25, University of South Carolina) — Video recording available at https://youtu.be/wk8fIwEwtLE?si=tKMnc9PsUjeFgQQF
Recovering America’s Greatest Lost Fruits, Grains, and Vegetables: A Progress Report , was presented by Dr. David Shields, Carolina Distinguished Professor Emeritus at the University of South Carolina. This session offered a fascinating narrative of the hunt through libraries, archives, and people’s freezers to recover America’s lost plants and bring back flavorful cuisine. Dr. Shields shared how in the 20th century the shift from small farms and locally sold crops to industrial agriculture and long-range food transport lead to taste becoming marginalized as a desirable trait and once common plants disappeared from gardens and fields. Chefs lead the resistance to this idea and, in 2006, the Carolina Gold Rice Foundation was formed and
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
initiated a restoration project for bringing back plant varieties once common in southeastern agriculture. They identified a list of 45 plants, but 42 of the 45 were functionally extinct. As of 2024, 42 of the plants had been recovered and work is ongoing.
Revolutionizing Librarianship in the Digital Age: Embracing AI and New Realities
Reported by Ramune K. Kubilius (Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine) <r-kubilius@northwestern.edu>
Presented by Jay Patel, Moderator (Head of Sales and UN SDG lead, Cactus Communications), Elizabeth Lorbeer (Chair and Professor, Department of Medical Library & Library Director, Western Michigan University Homer Stryker, M.D. School of Medicine), Scott Garrison (Executive Director, MCLS), and Joelen Pastva (Director of Library Services, Carnegie Mellon University Libraries) — Video recording available at https://youtu.be/ VZrzrDrshjA?si=CzCycrZcMv6_P6M5
AI-themed sessions abounded at the 2024 conference. Audience comments and questions confirmed that this “early in the conference schedule” panel’s approach resonated. Perhaps the word “revolutionizing” in the title would have been an interesting choice for the conference’s Hyde Park debate that same day, where the word “better” was used. (Blog report by Don Hawkins, https:// www.charleston-hub.com/2024/11/hyde-park-debate-2/.)
Moderator Patel posed a series of questions to two librarians who work in different academic library sectors, and to a consortium director. Pastva mentioned templates and recommendations for licenses involving AI tools, and posed questions: At what point does content become data? Is traffic a measure? Where does the value lie (in the content or the site)? Lorbeer raised the role of AI as an efficiency tool, how it can help with prompts and synthesis, perhaps even critical thinking, but lurking is the question of where the bias may lie. Garrison shared a variety of AI licensing scenarios, including output and use, and raised the potential downsides of AI, with its gaps, and, echoing Lorbeer- biases. Overreliance on AI may atrophy critical thinking, though admittedly, it may raise the profile of information as a commodity.
Revolutionizing Librarianship in the Digital Age: Embracing AI and New Realities
Reported by Sara Saddler (Head, Collection Services, Alyne Queener Massey Law Library, Vanderbilt University) <sara.c.saddler@vanderbilt.edu>
Presented by Jay Patel, Moderator (Head of Sales and UN SDG lead, Cactus Communications), Elizabeth Lorbeer (Chair and Professor, Department of Medical Library & Library Director, Western Michigan University Homer Stryker, M.D. School of Medicine), Scott Garrison (Executive Director, MCLS), and Joelen Pastva (Director of Library Services, Carnegie Mellon University Libraries) — Video recording available at https://youtu.be/ VZrzrDrshjA?si=CzCycrZcMv6_P6M5
This session presented key questions related to librarianship in the digital age. The panel discussion featured viewpoints from librarians across various institutions exploring the implications of artificial intelligence (AI) in academic settings. The session highlighted AI approaches and practices regarding various aspects of librarianship, such as faculty support, learning support,
policies, and copyright. The focus centered on approaches at Carnegie Mellon University, the experiences of a MD School of Medicine, and insights from Cactus Communications.
The session began by establishing each organization’s perspective in relation to the digital age. At Carnegie Mellon University, faculty members enjoy a great deal of autonomy in teaching and decision-making. They navigate the integration of AI tools in educational settings, focusing on fair use and responsible application. At MD School of Medicine, panelists noted that despite the lack of a specific AI policy, there is an emphasis on professionalism and integrity. The efficiency offered by AI editing tools like Paperpal is embraced both by faculty and students, reflected in the 40% publication rate among medical students who are not mandated to publish. After establishing a baseline of each institution’s perspective and approach to AI and librarianship, questions were presented to the panelist. The following sections are the topics that the panelists discussed throughout the rest of the session.
Guidelines in Absence of Formal AI Policy
When confronted with the absence of a formal AI policy, advice to stakeholders varied:
Elizabeth Lorbeer: Instructors urge students to adhere to publisher policies, which are increasingly leveraging tools to detect AI-generated content.
Joelen Pastva: Encourages case-by-case considerations emphasizing the impact and nature of the use of AI, particularly with large language models. Carnegie Mellon also acknowledged the complexities of large language models and suggests that there is still much to learn as these issues evolve.
Fair Use, Copyright Protection, and Copyright Reform
The panelists engaged in a discussion about the tension between fair use and copyright protection:
Jay Patel: Highlighted the ongoing battles and the anticipation of how courts will interpret these new technologies in relation to copyright.
Joelen Pastva: While legal frameworks are being decided, users continue to employ AI systems, raising the need for algorithmic literacy and proper interaction with these systems.
AI’s Role in Efficiency and Learning
Discussion based on efficiency tools and learning resulted in varied opinions from the panel:
Elizabeth Lorbeer: Emphasized AI’s role as an efficiency tool, stating that although some faculty members have reservations, AI tools are widely used for reviewing multiple papers. Assignments have been modified to prevent reliance on AI for synthesis, encouraging deeper interaction with the literature.
Joelen Pastva: Discussed speculations on the future of AI as an active agent, possibly replacing conventional search tools and impacting how librarians may use technology like Claude desktop applications. Joelen also discussed the book “Mastering AI,” where the author envisions an even more integrated AI presence in various applications.
Innovation, Interactions, and Business Implications
The panelists communicate the various interactions between AI innovations and business:
Joelen Pastva: The importance of determining where value creation lies in the age of AI content generation, whether in
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
the platform or the content itself, and how it affects metadata. Successful companies will establish a rapid feedback loop between people, AI, and data.
Elizabeth Lorbeer: Businesses are exploring AI tools for efficiency gains and communicating needs and feedback to vendors for future developments.
Upsides and Downsides of AI in Libraries
When discussing the upsides and downsides of AI in libraries, the panelist agreed:
Joelen Pastva: Joelen pointed out the inherent limitations of AI, which is only as adept as the data provided, expressing concern about the potential atrophy of students’ research and critical thinking skills. He further explained that Carnegie Mellon underscores AI’s role in raising awareness of information’s power, fostering discussions about transparency and responsibility.
Elizabeth Lorbeer: Highlighted the benefits for non-native English speakers, allowing for faster and more accessible writing assistance.
In summation of all information provided during the panel discussion, while AI is reshaping librarianship, it brings a set of challenges and opportunities for organizations. It is imperative for librarians to navigate these with a keen eye on policies, efficiency, pedagogy, and the evolving business landscape.
The Scholarly Communication Cycle and Disability Inclusion
Reported by Adam Mazel (Digital Publishing Librarian, Indiana University) <amazel@iu.edu>
Presented by Karen Stoll Farrell (Director of Scholarly Communication & Open Publishing, Indiana University Libraries), Rachael Cohen (Head of Discovery and User Experience, Indiana University), Simon Holt (Senior Product Manager, Content Accessibility, Elsevier), and Erin Osborne-Martin (Associate Director, Strategic Analytics, Wiley) — Video recording available at https://youtu.be/L0s2Ix6UBH4?si=nv1_bAtfGRbqnyiD
This panel discussed ableist barriers in scholarly communication and ways to improve its accessibility, since 15% of the world’s working-age population has a disability. Karen overviewed ableist barriers in the author-publisher relationship, as authors are often disconnected from their publishers and fellow authors (as in an edited volume). To remedy this, she encouraged publishers to relate to authors more inclusively: learn author needs, and build community between authors (in multi author publications) and between publishers and authors. In the same vein, Erin covered ableist barriers to authorship and how to overcome them. For example, submission platforms are often inaccessible to people with disabilities, thus excluding them. Likewise, Rachel discussed ableist barriers to search and discovery and how to improve them. Often, metadata related to accessibility is poor, and user interfaces and the user experience are inconsistently accessible. To remedy this, Rachel recommends adhering to user-centered design, involving disabled persons in testing early, creating customizable UI, and eschewing PDFs for more accessible formats. Lastly, Simon discussed ableism in recent US and European accessibility laws. While these laws are beneficial, they do not solve all accessibility issues, some of which could be helped by using text-to-speech, dyslexic-friendly fonts, and plain-language summaries, among other solutions.
STOPWATCH SESSIONS
Stopwatch Session 3 — Moderated by Meg White (Senior Consultant, Delta Think)
Reported by Elizabeth Jarcy (DMEP Librarian, Library of Congress) <ejar@loc.gov>
Presentations included the following:
Dataset Purchase Requests Rising — Presented by Suzanne Cohen (Collection Development Coordinator, Cornell University) Librarians as Fulbright Specialists: Amazing Experience and Lessons Learned — Presented by Martha Higgins (Library Director, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace)
What to leave in? What to leave out?: Reviewing Prospects for Monographic Retention — Presented by Edward Lener (Director of Collections, Virginia Tech University Libraries), Kat Brown (Resident Science Librarian, Virginia Tech University Libraries), and Bruce Pencek (Assistant Director for Collections Management, Virginia Tech University Libraries)
Towards a More Agile Library Material Budget Allocation: Implementing One-Fund Model for Firm Order Materials — Presented by Holly Yu (Head of Collections, Discovery, and Content Management, California State University, Los Angeles)
Finding evidence versus getting answers: The Evolving Role of Publishers in the Context of Generative AI and Evidence Synthesis — Presented by Cozette Comer (Assistant Director, Evidence Synthesis Services, Virginia Tech University Libraries)
Just ask! Drawing on strong library/vendor partnerships to make a difference — Presented by Amy Lana (Sales Profile Manager, GOBI Library Solutions), and Laura Sill (Head of Acquisitions, University of Chicago)
You can view the recording of this stopwatch session on the Conference’s YouTube channel here: https://youtu.be/m3Sfdp44ec?si=oabvknpxnQD6yBCd
This was my first stopwatch session and while I enjoyed the swift pace and broad subject matter, I learned that I have no sense of how quickly six minutes goes by. Of all the presentations, Cozette Comer’s analysis of ChatGPT’s impact on fact finding spoke to me the most. When a friend uses ChatGPT to snag an answer to something, I’ve always thought, “how do you know that’s true?” Well, you don’t! ChatGPT obfuscates its sources to the point where it’s impossible to know when, where, and how it harvested the information presented. Users are increasingly taking these results as objective truth, even when the AI is incorrect. Comer emphasized the responsibility of vendors and libraries alike to make sure that knowledge tools remain transparent, analyzable, and factual — a stance I heartily agree with. This session has definitely stuck with me post-conference both professional and personally as AI usage continues to grow.
This concludes the second installment of reports from the 2024 Charleston Conference. Make sure to check out the next batch of reports in the June, 2025 issue! You can also view recordings of all of our other conference sessions, podcast interviews and our new Charleston Conference leadership interview series on our YouTube channel. Thank you again to our volunteer reporters!
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
Libraries, Leadership, and Synergies — Missions at Risk: Knowledge Stewardship and the Subscription Economy
Column Editor: Antje Mays (Collection Analysis Librarian, University of Kentucky Libraries) <antjemays@uky.edu>
Column Editor’s Note: Clarivate’s recent decision to end one-time perpetual-ownership purchase options for eBooks and digital primary-source archives on ProQuest’s platforms in favor of subscription-only purchase models was reached without consulting its customer base of libraries. This article discusses stewardship, customer impacts, and business considerations. — AM
Introduction
ProQuest announced in late February 2025 its parent company Clarivate’s intention of transitioning all eBook purchases to subscription-only models.1 The ProQuest Ebooks page2 frames the subscription model as a mechanism for beneficial cost savings providing libraries with effortless access to over 700,000 eBooks with unlimited simultaneous user access. Mirroring the eBook changes, ProQuest announced it is phasing out perpetual purchase options for digital collections of primary sources in favor of subscriptions-only.3 Clarivate further detailed its phaseout timeline on its purchasing platform’s FAQ page.4
Subscriptions and Library Trends
Clarivate frames this shift toward subscription-only purchasing models as a reflection of libraries’ already increasingly large percentages of collection budgets spent on subscriptions in proportion to perpetual one-time purchases. To strengthen the case for subscription-only purchase models, Clarivate cites ACRL’s 2023 The State of U.S. Academic Libraries: Annual Survey 5 where libraries report ever-larger budget percentages committed to subscription models — an implied portrayal of the trend as library preference.
Libraries and macroeconomic reality: This same ACRL survey cited by Clarivate reports that libraries’ inflationadjusted purchasing power has steadily declined between 2015 and 2023, both in average and median measurements. 6 For all library types that responded, ACRL’s survey reports that, of total library expenditures, the proportion dedicated to library materials comprises an average of 44.4%. Of all libraries’ total expenditures, 34.9% is committed to recurring subscriptions.7 Subscriptions costs command 78.6% of overall materials outlays — this percentage becomes clear when calculating the recurring subscriptions specifically against all materials expenditures.8 Libraries have reported subscriptions’ everrising percentage of overall materials costs for decades — the result of continual price inflation in a context of flat or declining budgets as libraries endeavor to optimize content access as purchasing power shrinks.9 Library materials budgets are thus increasingly crowded out by subscription obligations — a source of tensions between continued servicing of recurring obligations and the rapidly growing range of digital licensed resources, open infrastructures, and related technologies exerting
increasing pressures on limited library budgets.10 Subscriptions’ outsized proportion of overall materials expenditures is a result of budgetary conditions, not an indication of library preference. A study of the serials crisis’s long-standing overcrowding of library budgets examines dynamics of industry competitiveness and price drivers in the context of scholarly serials pricing and the asymmetrical economics of scholarly production. The author attributes the continual rise of subscription costs to the uncompetitive market of mission-critical scholarly content in supporting education and research through specific knowledge delivery, in contrast with the dynamic mass market of widely interchangeable and duplicated consumer goods.11
Industry Response: Business Climate and Customer Needs
Reaction across the industry has been swift: Libraries have widely expressed disapproval of the decision’s release without consulting libraries, viewing the move as a betrayal and violation of trust. Libraries interpreted the decision as lacking consideration for libraries’ mission-driven obligation to long-term stewardship of knowledge production and preserving the scholarly record. Clarivate’s refocus on subscription-only purchase models and subsequent outcry across the library world has laid bare the tensions between customers’ need for a reliable foundation of stable resources and infrastructures on one hand and investor-driven earnings pressures on vendors on the other hand. Libraries are averse to overcommitting collection budgets to recurring subscription obligations and thereby increasing the risk of cancelling key access when faced with budget cuts. Libraries seek to avoid commoditized content bundles at the expense of persistently needed perpetual-ownership resources; research libraries in particular commit budget portions for perpetual one-time purchases of eBooks, eBook collections, and digital archives of primary sources to support long-horizon research and knowledge stewardship. Some libraries cited in recent reports have alluded to marketplace alternatives for meeting perpetual-ownership needs,12 while other vendors have come forward to reassure libraries of ongoing commitment to perpetual ownership.13
The subscription economy, investor pressures, and business trajectories: Libraries’ collective experience with the rollout of subscription-only purchase options invites inquiries into plausible reasons for the move. Across a wide range of industries, subscription models have gained favor and momentum as a mechanism for guaranteed recurring revenue and income growth.14 Business and economics literature places this movement in the context of the financializing of business operations and shift toward value extraction.15 The concurrent rise of hedge fund activism has intensified investor pressures on companies’ decisions regarding internal operations, business
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
directions, and mix of products and services. Such investor activism and interventions emphasize periodic earnings metrics — a dynamic which can insert distance between businesses and their customers and lead to overlooking the long-term merit of the vendors’ mix of products and services fulfilling missioncritical functions in the operations of their stable customer base.16 Investment analyst reports add pressure: Late 2024, reports emerged of quarterly declines in transactional sales and organic growth17 and of Clarivate’s reorientation phasing out its transactional sales.18 February 2025 reports cover Clarivate’s strategy of portfolio and operations streamlining, expanding AI product enhancements, 19 and shifting digital content purchases to subscriptions-only in pursuit of recurring income and strengthening its business.20 While the true drivers of Clarivate’s pivot are not known, the nature of the rollout creates an impression of financial metrics as primary decision driver. Clarivate’s decision misses the distinction between the library market’s mission-driven need for stable long-term customizable knowledge-stewardship support ecosystems and the consumer market’s fluid array of interchangeable commodities, thereby diluting libraries’ customer voice.
Untapped business opportunities: In this author’s direct experience, ProQuest’s perpetual ownership purchasing options included a willingness to negotiate eBook licenses with small, specialized, and obscure publishers covering literary classics, international literatures in their original languages, humanities, and other underrepresented content. This degree of differentiation gave ProQuest a unique competitive advantage.21 Not only was this approach highly valued for expanding digital access for library users, it also had potential for ProQuest as an untapped goldmine of fruitful marketplace partnerships: ProQuest would have gained more sales of completely new digital content, small publishers with no online licensing and dissemination infrastructures of their own would have increased sales via access through ProQuest’s long-established, well-
regarded eBooks platform, libraries would have benefited from perpetual purchase options for these materials, and libraries’ user communities would have benefited from the access. The Covid-19 pandemic with its physical facilities closures accelerated already-advancing growth in online education across an expanding range of disciplines.22 Thus growing need for online library content across an ever-widening knowledge scope was ready-made for a fruitful partnership across ProQuest, libraries, and small publishers with no digital dissemination capacities of their own.
Implications for Further Research and Industry Solutions
What are the implications when the breadth of missioncritical library resources and workflow and research lifecycle infrastructures are increasingly consolidated under the umbrella of ever-fewer marketplace providers who may cannibalize parts of their product portfolios to redirect attentions toward other portfolio parts while their customers continue to need the jettisoned product or service frameworks? Much has been written on oligopolistic marketplace consolidation23 of missioncritical components needed by libraries on an ongoing basis to facilitate the library mission of knowledge stewardship.24 Permanency in preserving the scholarly and historical record is a core component of libraries’ and heritage organizations’ missions. Libraries serve user groups from students and faculty to worldwide scholars and community researchers who rely on the stability of research collections and access frameworks. Libraries therefore require a stable foundation to facilitate supporting users with long-term knowledge stewardship and preservation of the scholarly record. As libraries navigate macroeconomic trends and vendors face pressures on business models from investment communities, all of us across the industry need frank communication and collaborative strategizing to viably preserve our knowledge ecosystem for all stakeholders.
endnotes on page 35
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
Endnotes
1. ProQuest. “Supporting our transformative subscription-based strategy with broad, simple access to trusted curated content.” Company blog post. March 5, 2025. https://about.proquest.com/en/blog/2025/introducing-proquest-ebooks-the-worlds-largestscholarly-ebook-subscription/
2. ProQuest. “The Largest Scholarly Ebook Subscription for Research, Teaching and Learning.” ProQuest Ebooks. 2025. Company webpage. https://about.proquest.com/en/products-services/proquest-ebooks
3. ProQuest. “Primary Source Digital Support Page.” Digital Collections Support Page, Article Number 000096403. Company webpage. February 2025. https://support.proquest.com/s/article/Digital-Collections-Support-Page?language=en_US
4. ExLibris. Rialto FAQ. Company webpage, March 13, 2025. https://knowledge.exlibrisgroup.com/Rialto/Product_Materials/ Rialto_FAQ
5. Association of College & Research Libraries. The State of U.S. Academic Libraries: Findings from the ACRL 2023 Annual Survey. Chicago: Association of College & Research Libraries, 2024. https://www.ala.org/sites/default/files/2024-10/2023%20State%20 of%20Academic%20Libraries%20Report.pdf
8. Calculated percentage of ACRL report’s recurring subscription cost of total library materials expenditures, where all materials expenditures comprise 44.4% of total library expenditures and recurring subscription expenditures comprise 34.9% of total library expenditures: 34.9 ÷ 44.4 = 78.6%
9. Lindsay Cronk. 2020. “Resourcefully: Let’s End the Serials Crisis.” Serials Librarian 79 (1/2): 78–81. doi:10.1080/036152 6X.2020.1832016.
10. Christina Geuther, Casey D. Hoeve, and Faye O’Reilly. “Trends in Content Development and Licensing of Electronic Resources.” Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship 33, no. 1 (January 2021): 1–12. doi:10.1080/1941126X.2021.1871195.
11. Bo-Christer Björk. 2021. “Why Is Access to the Scholarly Journal Literature So Expensive?” Portal: Libraries & the Academy 21 (2): N.PAG. doi:10.1353/pla.2021.0010.
12. Isaac Wink. 2025. “Guest Post – The Future Is Not Perpetual (But it could be yours for just several thousand dollars per year…).” Guest post, Scholarly Kitchen, March 5, 2025. https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2025/03/05/guest-post-the-future-is-notperpetual-but-it-could-be-yours-for-just-several-thousand-dollars-per-year/
13. Nathalie op de Beeck. “Library Database Providers Clash Over Subscription Models” Publishers Weekly (Online). February 24, 2025. https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/libraries/article/97170-library-database-providers-clashover-subscription-models.html
14. Justin Goodbread. “The Truth About Recurring Revenue.” Forbes (October 27, 2023). Web article. https://www.forbes.com/ councils/forbesfinancecouncil/2023/10/27/the-truth-about-recurring-revenue/
15. William Lazonick and Jang-Sup Shin. Predatory Value Extraction: How the Looting of the Business Corporation Became the U.S. Norm and How Sustainable Prosperity Can Be Restored. First edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020.
16. Mihaela Butu. Shareholder Activism by Hedge Funds: Motivations and Market’s Perceptions of Hedge Fund Interventions. 1st ed. Hamburg, Germany: Diplomica Verlag GmbH, 2013.
18. Rob Hales. 2024. “Clarivate Is in the Early Stages of a Multiyear Turnaround.” Morningstar Company Reports, Nov 7, 2024, N.PAG.
19. Rob Hales. 2025. “Clarivate Earnings: Strategic Review Initiated; Shares Fairly Valued.” Morningstar Company Reports, Feb 19, 2025, N.PAG.
20. PR Newswire. 2025. “Clarivate Reports Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2024 Results.” Morningstar News, Feb 19, 2025, N.PAG. Web article. https://www.morningstar.com/news/pr-newswire/20250219ny22183/clarivate-reports-fourth-quarter-and-full-year2024-results
21. Michael E. Porter. Competitive Advantage : Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance. New York: Free Press, 1985.
22. David Baker and Lucy Ellis, eds. Libraries, Digital Information, and COVID: Practical Applications and Approaches to Challenge and Change. Cambridge, MA: Chandos Publishing, 2021.
23. Sarah Lamdan, Jennie Rose Halperin, Shea Swauger, and Rob Montoya. 2021. “The Conquest of ProQuest and Knowledge Unlatched: How recent mergers are bad for research and the public.” Invest In Open Infrastructure. Dec 16, 2021. Blog post. https://investinopen.org/blog/the-conquest-of-proquest-and-knowledge-unlatched-how-recent-mergers-are-bad-for-researchand-the-public/
24. Jaclyn McLean and Elizabeth Stregger. 2021. “Sounding the Alarm: Scholarly Information and Global Information Companies in 2021.” Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library & Information Practice & Research 16 (2): 1–7. doi:10.21083/partnership. v16i2.6692.
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
Wandering the Web — Children’s Literature Resources to Help Make Readers’ Advisory and Collection Development Easier
By Karen Schifferdecker, MSIS (Electronic Resources Librarian, Department of Library Collections and Discovery, Western Kentucky University)
Column Editor: Lesley Rice Montgomery, MLIS (Catalog Librarian II, Tulane University Libraries’ Technical Services Department)
About the Author: Before moving to the world of higher education in the summer of 2023, I was a middle school English and Latin teacher and then a librarian at Montclair Kimberley Academy, a Pre-K through grade 12 independent school in Montclair, NJ, for almost 20 years. Personally and professionally, children’s literature was my first love. I love sharing great children’s literature resources with others! In my spare time, shockingly, I love to read. I love cozy mysteries with substance and a more literary quality to the writing, especially the Faith Fairchild mysteries by Katherine Hall Page (The Body in the Belfry, etc.). More in line with this article’s topic, the best middle-grade novel I read in the past year was A Place to Hang the Moon by Kate Albus — it’s so beautiful and I highly recommend it even to adults! As I always used to say, children’s literature is for everyone!
But if you find yourself in the position of needing to make children’s literature recommendations or engage in collection development in this area and you didn’t spend your entire childhood in the children’s section of your public library, don’t fret. There are many amazing resources available to help you find your footing or just discover what you might have missed in recent years. — KS
Kirkus Reviews
Kirkus Reviews (https://www.kirkusreviews.com) provides a well-laid-out and easy-to-navigate interface. Each book review provides a catchy tagline for very quick reference if you don’t have time to actually read the entire review — because anyone serving children knows how hectic reference and readers’ advisory time can be. (But the reviews are well worth it if you can find the time!) Included are publication date, publisher, number of pages, and category classifications both broad and specific, such as “Children’s Dinosaurs & Prehistoric Creatures.” Under “Book Reviews,” they offer reviews in genres such as “Graphic Novels & Comics,” “Children’s,” and “Teens & Young Adults.” They also offer curated book lists, such as the recent “20 Best January Books for Young Readers,” and their reviews for children and young adults include fiction as well as non-fiction.
School Library Journal
If you’re working with children in a reference or educational setting, you likely have access to School Library Journal via subscription, whether print or digital. For those that don’t, they do offer some content gratis via their website, https://www.slj. com. SLJ provides great thematic book review lists under both the “School Libraries” and “Public Libraries” tabs. Throughout fall and winter, leading up to the winners being announced
at ALA’s LibLearnX at the end of January, SLJ heavily covers Newbery and Caldecott Award contenders and finalists, if you’re on the hunt for a highly-recommended read as determined by children’s literature experts and aficionados.
Booklist
While not focused solely on children’s literature, Booklist (https://www.booklistonline.com) was always a go-to for me. (Bonus: It’s a great way to find new adult reads, too!) While you have access to more content with a paid subscription, you can get what you need for reference and collection-building purposes without one. On the website, you can easily search reviews by category (youth fiction, youth nonfiction, youth audio) and their thematic roundups can help busy librarians in terms of filling out an area of their collection. They include stars to call out the most-recommended titles and include suggested age/grade ranges. Click on the “Webinars” tab at the top and you can sign up for free, one-hour sessions covering trends in the book publishing world. You do not have to watch live and can request the video recording delivered to your email. Highly recommended is the picture book-themed edition in which they feature several illustrators sharing their process. If you do have access to a subscription, I also always enjoyed flipping through the hard-copy issues because I’m a bit of a traditionalist, which brings me to my next suggestion.
The Horn Book
I’ve always been a bit “old school” and have always favored The Horn Book ( https://www.hbook.com ) as a resource, especially from a more discerning literary perspective. Founded in 1924 “to herald the best in children’s literature,” the tradition, in my opinion, continues today. I always loved flipping through the beautifully illustrated hard copy bimonthly issues (bound in a non-traditional 6” x 9” more “book-like” size), but even if you don’t have access to a subscription, ample content is available for free on the website. I consistently found their starred reviews to be spot-on, and they are tagged on the website for easy searching. Beyond book reviews, their articles, commentary, and deep-dives into various authors and illustrators from children’s and young adult literary tradition (both veteran and modern) are extremely enjoyable to read and give interesting perspectives and background, especially if you feel like you need to brush up on the world of children’s literature.
Utilize Publisher Mailing Lists and Websites
I picked the brain of a dear friend, former colleague, and rock-star veteran children’s librarian (former New York Public Library librarian, 2023 Caldecott Medal Selection Committee
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
member, and current library director) Jenny Rosenoff, who suggested getting on publisher’s mailing lists. Publishers send seasonal and other topical “round-ups” (and often promotions) which will help you keep an eye on what’s new and upcoming. They also typically offer online webinars showcasing upcoming publications, and mailing list subscribers will receive those invites. Obviously, publishers love their own books, but while not necessarily objective, their sites can be useful for reference purposes. Here are a few publisher links to get you started: Chronicle Books — https://www.chroniclebooks.com/ collections/kids-teens?srsltid=AfmBOorKMvniLoPunW VXNhOATJNlzsJHvnYv94r94VWQHkxdoaupp5Uz
Penguin Random House — https://www. penguinrandomhouse.com/the-read-down/newnoteworthy-childrens-books/ Bloomsbury — https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/ childrens/
Hachette Book Group (Little Brown) — https://www. hachettebookgroup.com/imprint/little-brown-books-foryoung-readers/ Levine Querido — https://www.levinequerido.com/ picture-books-1
Another great reference site for finding top-recommended books and keeping track of buzz in the children’s book universe is “Among the Stars” (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ 1bNMHcEtzgsb0WGiVT5IFXWe7DlTw_4hzxTIaeyJzxug/edit?gi d=1541011976#gid=1541011976), a Google Sheet compilation of all starred children’s and young adult book reviews, tagged by publication the review appeared in, publication date, recommended target grades, and format/category. This resource was formerly called Jenn J’s list, retired to much dismay by the children’s literature world a few years ago, but fortunately recently resurrected.
LibraryMom
I cannot write a round up like this without including the work of another dear friend and former colleague, Rosemary D’Urso, aka LibraryMom (Blog tagline: Discover Your Child’s Next Favorite Book) (https://librarymom.com). Started as a passion project when she “retired” as a school librarian to raise her children, Rosie has created a compendium of topical and suggested book lists for any niche you can think of. You can simply browse the blog or sign up to have each new list sent straight to your inbox (for free!). You can search by intended age range, book format type, or theme (such as seasons, “kid picks,” or “transitional chapter books”). Rosie loves children’s literature but, more importantly, shares from the lens and experience of a public librarian, educator, and parent.
Round Ups
Staying on roundups, if you’re looking for more, check out free lists from Bank Street College of Education (https:// www.bankstreet.edu/library/center-for-childrens-literature/ childrens-book-committee/best-childrens-books-of-the-year/ edition/ ), New York Public Library ( https://www.nypl.org/ spotlight/nypl-recommends-book-lists), Chicago Public Library ( https://www.chipublib.org/kids-best-of-the-best/ ), just to start. Most large public library systems (and often even smaller local ones) will offer some kind of content like this. Librarians, especially public and school librarians, live to recommend books. If you can, stop by your library or send an email and chat with them — they are gems of our communities and have their fingers on the pulse of what kids are reading and requesting.
The New York Times
While access to free content is limited, you generally will be able to read a few articles before hitting the paywall, and it’s worth checking out The New York Times children’s book coverage (https://www.nytimes.com/column/childrens-books). I love their thoughtful, niche content such as the recent “Two’s a Crowd: 3 New Chapter Books Singing the Praises of Me Time” by author Vera Brosgol.
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
Biz of Digital — Building a Pragmatic and Sustainable Approach to Born Digital Preservation at Vanderbilt through Inventories and Ingestion Procedures
By Jacqueline Devereaux Asaro (Curator of Born Digital Special Collections, Jean & Alexander Heard Libraries, Vanderbilt University, 1101 19th Ave S Nashville,
Column Editor: Michelle Flinchbaugh (Digital Scholarship Services Librarian, Albin O. Kuhn Library & Gallery, University of Maryland Baltimore County, 1000 Hilltop Circle, Baltimore, MD 21250; Phone: 410-455-3544) <flinchba@umbc.edu>
During my first year as the first digital archivist at Vanderbilt’s Special Collections and University Archives, I focused on pragmatically establishing our department’s digital preservation methods. This grounding process involved documenting workflows and gathering an inventory of our holdings. Our department’s expansion into digital preservation aligns with “Our mission … to deliver a legacy of cultural heritage by acquiring, preserving, and making perpetually accessible, paper-based, analog, and digital collections of rare books, manuscripts, photographs, artifacts, audio-visual, Vanderbilt institutional archives, and any other information resources or data sets we deem under the aegis of special collections.”1 Our department is one of nine libraries on campus. Founded in 1965, our department recently shifted from primarily focusing on paper-based archives and rare books to acquiring, processing, describing, and providing access to born digital materials. I also shifted from my previous position in the department as an archivist for University Archives into the Curator of Born Digital Special Collections in March 2024. Digital preservation is currently a small sub team including our department director and my direct supervisor who oversees digitized collections.
Directing our efforts for digital preservation, Special Collections and University Archives, our department joined the Digital Preservation Coalition (DPC) as full members in 2023. Many of the department’s first steps reflect recommendations from the DPC. Two important stepping blocks in establishing our program were 1) completing a Rapid Assessment Model maturation model (RAM) and 2) drafting a Digital Asset Register or Inventory. The RAM determines what staff skills, technical infrastructure, documentation, and support we have in our department for digital preservation.2 To complement a RAM, a Digital Asset Register functions as a basic inventory listing for tracking disparate born digital categories and storage locations. This high-level inventory highlighted the backlog of unprocessed physical materials for uploading to long-term bit level storage and enunciated a baseline of how our department previously stored digital materials. Before filling out the inventory, I decided to pursue another way to collect historic background information. I arranged in person meetings with members of my department and other librarians to better understand the human decisions and perceptions behind digital preservation. Using a running document of my coworkers’ understanding of what materials we have and where they are located, I compiled my first draft of the inventory. Through this initial search, we discovered physical materials (floppy disks, DVDs) across our special collections and university archives, several personal
and networked shared drives, preservation systems such as Archivematica and Fedora, Microsoft’s SharePoint and Box and more! By combining these various locations into one central spreadsheet, I acquired an understanding for what types of materials we have, where they are located, and the scope. With this first benchmarking our digital preservation capability with the RAM and creating an overall inventory, I next tackled the question of ingesting physical materials into our repository.
Preparing for ingest, I needed a computer, workflow, USB readers, and digital objects. With establishing and documenting workflows, I treated ingest as an iterative process of using a few examples to build up documentation. First, I compiled a collection of born digital objects including a CD, external hard drive, and a floppy disk. Our small team portioned off a small room to run discarded older computers. The computers run a Linux environment with a few command line tools to help facilitate the process. Over the years, the department assembled a diverse collection of USB readers which helped read my test cases. I use a Tableau write blocker to avoid altering files or access dates on the materials, plug in the external reader, and use a USB reader to insert the digital object. First, I perform a virus check using Clamav, which is a command line tool for virus checking. Importantly, I can perform this “offline” on the isolated computer because it uses an ethernet cord to connect to the public campus Internet. During this step, I can simply unplug the cord. After running the virus check, I create a manifest using Sigfried which is a file format identification tool.3 In the command line, I prepare separate documents to capture a log report of the Sigfried process and a full manifest inventory listing with titles, dates, checksums, and PRONOM file types for each item. Placing these items in a “data” folder, I form a tarball, without compression, to tie up the archival material and manifest metadata files as a SIP also using the command line. For integrity and authenticity throughout the upload process, I generate a SHA256 checksum of the .tar file as well. The final step is transferring it to our holding server via SFTP. Once I reach out to the IT department, they transfer the materials to our temporary holding space.
As I sifted through my test cases, I documented step by step each command I typed, along with taking screenshots of the command line and attaching them to an “Ingestion Document.” The “Ingestion Document” follows the project planning RACI matrix format. The RACI format “is a tool in project management designed to clarify team roles and responsibilities across tasks. Each role is categorized as Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, or Informed.”4 With the standardized template, the aim is to
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
create a procedural document for a staff member or student worker. After testing several types of materials, I submitted the draft for department approval. Interested readers can find the ingestion procedure here: https://drive.google.com/file/ d/1nAf47X51x33ShLwS-GTeYYgGdBjkKWw8/view?usp=drive_ link. Other staff members were able to ask clarifying questions, and I especially appreciated comments clarifying technical parts in the document. The document needed to be understandable to a wider audience for use beyond myself to ensure sustainability in our digital preservation practices.
Armed with a document for ingesting materials, and an overall registry format to document the general categories and location of our digital holdings, I will continue searching for more digital materials. From the first bird’s eye view of a Digital Asset Register, I focused on attaining a broad snapshot of our holdings versus identifying specific numbers or sizes of each digital or hybrid collection. With the initial inventory, using ArchivesSpace, I narrowed down specific examples of materials by dates to determine if it had unprocessed born digital materials. After this exploratory search, I hired a student worker to help with the time-consuming tasks of searching box by box in our facilities and to ingest materials. He applied the “Ingestion Document” to uploading various items, and we further edited the document to include decision trees. For example, a staff member could bypass using the Tableau write blocker for DVDs because, as optic media, it was unlikely to be altered during ingestion. Documentation served as a foundational start to pursue more specific digital preservation tasks, including searching for more materials in existing collections.
After compiling an inventory of digital materials from my in-person meetings, independent search, and student feedback, I created a new iteration of the DAR that specifies details for individual collections instead of a general overview of storage locations. With these foundational steps, I will augment our
focus on appraisal and coordinating with other subject specialist archivists to conduct a more thorough appraisal of incoming digital donations. Documenting the procedures guaranteed that more staff and students could perform the tasks consistently and clearly. Establishing procedures and discovering born digital materials continues to be a protracted process but essential to developing a sustainable digital preservation program in special collections and university archives. With documentation and an inventory, our department will be able to advocate for resources, consistent staffing, and long-term digital preservation.
Endnotes
1. Vanderbilt Special Collections and University Archives, “About Special Collections,” https:// www.library.vanderbilt.edu/specialcollections/ aboutspecialcollections/ (accessed January 28, 2025).
2. Digital Preservation Coalition, “Digital Preservation Coalition Rapid Assessment Model (DPC RAM). Version 3” http://doi.org/10.7207/dpcram24-03 (accessed January 28, 2025).
Digital Preservation Coalition, “Digital Asset Register Toolkit, 1st Edition,” https://www.doi.org/10.7207/ dartool24-01 (accessed January 28, 2025).
3. Richard Lehane, “Siegfried,” https://www.itforarchivists. com/siegfried/ (accessed January 28, 2025).
4. Bradon Matthews, “What Is a RACI Matrix? Definition, Examples, Uses,” https://project-management.com/ understanding-responsibility-assignment-matrix-racimatrix/ (accessed January 28, 2025).
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
The Digital Toolbox — OverDrive and Ex Libris Partner to Enhance Academic Library Workflow with Digital Collections to Meet Librarian Needs
Column Editor: Steve Rosato (Director of Digital Book Services for Academic Libraries, OverDrive, Cleveland, OH 44125) <srosato@overdrive.com>
Librarians have long requested better integration of streaming video content into their discovery services, and the partnership between OverDrive and Ex Libris directly addresses that need. By enhancing the visibility of Kanopy films within Alma and Primo, libraries can now offer a more comprehensive search experience to their users.
Alma Discovery facilitates the integration of physical, electronic, and digital resources into a single search interface. Users can efficiently search across books, articles, films, databases, and digital collections. With this latest enhancement, Kanopy’s video content is now discoverable within the library’s discovery services, improving accessibility and usability for academic research and instruction.
Liz Siler, Associate Dean for Collections Services at UNC Charlotte provides this quote from a librarian’s perspective: “We don’t have Kanopy PDA on our campus, but based on the information provided, this new service will offer the ability to streamline the discovery and management of streaming video in Ex Libris Alma/Primo, which will maximize usage for the collection.”
Improved Access
As part of this initiative, Ex Libris now supports the inclusion of Kanopy’s catalog via the Patron-Driven Acquisition (PDA) model across nine global regions. To integrate this feature, libraries must identify and activate the PDA collection corresponding to their region within Alma’s Community Zone. Each region is assigned a distinct collection, ensuring precise content alignment and streamlined acquisition workflows.
This integration enhances:
• Search experience — Simplifies resource discovery for students and faculty.
• Collection visibility — Ensures Kanopy holdings are easily surfaced in searches.
• Usage and engagement — Increases discoverability, leading to higher utilization of digital resources.
• Access management — Enables libraries to support academic needs while maintaining budget-conscious acquisition strategies.
Currently, the integration supports only the PDA model, allowing libraries to provide access to Kanopy’s rich collection while ensuring acquisitions align with demonstrated patron interest.
Supporting Library Discovery and Workflow Optimization
This collaboration represents the culmination of months of development between OverDrive’s Kanopy team and Ex Libris. By integrating OverDrive’s MARC and KBART record feeds directly into Alma’s Community Zone, academic libraries can now activate Libby and Kanopy content within their institution’s Alma and Primo environments. This ensures seamless discovery of digital resources through established library workflows.
Molly Groves, Kanopy Product Support Team Lead, emphasizes the importance of this integration: “Kanopy offers valuable academic content, but without proper integration into a library’s discovery service, users may struggle to find it. This partnership addresses that challenge by making Kanopy’s films easily discoverable within Alma and Primo.”
OverDrive supplies regular MARC and KBART record feeds to Ex Libris, ensuring library catalogs remain up to date with newly acquired titles. Faculty, students, and researchers can effortlessly discover Kanopy films and OverDrive e-resources through their institution’s established library platforms, such as Libby and Kanopy.
Clark Turner, Team Lead, Academic & Professional at OverDrive, highlights the significance of this development: “Academic libraries have long sought a streamlined way to integrate OverDrive’s digital collections into their existing workflows. This partnership with Ex Libris fulfills that need, supporting institutions in providing seamless access to essential academic resources.”
Steps for Integrating OverDrive Content in Alma
Libraries looking to integrate OverDrive content within Ex Libris’ Community Zone can follow these steps:
1. Request OverDrive to configure your catalog for inclusion in the regular MARC records feed.
2. Obtain your Website ID from OverDrive and provide it to Ex Libris as part of your Alma setup.
3. Locate the OverDrive collection within Ex Libris’ Alma Community Zone and add it to your Institution Zone.
4. Use OverDrive Marketplace reports to generate a holdings file and upload it to the Portfolio Loader in Alma.
continued on page 42
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
Both Sides Now: Vendors and Librarians — SLA Announces Dissolution
I read the news today, that after 116 years of service to the profession of librarianship, the Special Libraries Association (SLA) will begin a dissolution process. My first inclination was to feel sadness in that SLA provided services to many librarians for many years and certainly was an integral part of my life for over 40 years. And yet, after thinking about the people, publishers, and information providers who I had the pleasure of knowing and working with, I smiled. SLA provided good years of service for many people and for me, and I cherish those memories,
My first job in this industry was working for a company called Disclosure. It was a small, not very profitable company formed for the sole purpose of creating a link to the Securities & Exchange Commission for a person who had questionable dealings with public companies.
Disclosure was the archivist for the commission. Our remit was to film every page from every document filed at the SEC by public companies at no cost to the government. Those pages were to be stored on microfiche masters. In return for archiving the information, we had permission to sell the documents, and the information contained therein.
When I was interviewed for the job as a salesperson for Disclosure, I was told that we had no competitors in the field of selling SEC documents on microfiche to libraries.
“Really? No competitors” I said.
“Yes, that’s true” was the response. However, a qualifier soon followed.
“Actually, people have the ability to go to any SEC reading room in NY, LA, Chicago and read these documents for free” I was told. “And if they chose to do so, they could make paper copies for 30 cents a page.” This was a good example of full disclosure.
“Your main audience to buy this information would be librarians” I was told.
And so, I left the interview with the knowledge that I would be tasked to sell a product on the unpopular media of microfiche that could be used for free by a community of librarians in a variety of cities.
I was also told that I would be handsomely compensated if I were to be successful. I kept thinking of the line in the Bob Dylan song that said, “If you ain’t got nothin’, you got nothin’ to lose.” Much against my better judgment, I accepted the job since, at the time, I had nothing to lose.
Disclosure, in the early days of my employment, was a small part of a billion-dollar conglomerate. Answering questions dealing with policy, direction, and other forms of conduct inherent in the sales process became an exercise in patience and futility when communicating with the “home office.” Answers and responses were not readily available and took many weeks even to get the most basic of questions answered.
Approximately six months after I accepted the job, the company was bought by two investors to whom I credit my learning about how to be successful in business. I have often proudly said that after my father, Bob Snyder and Phil Hixon taught me more unbelievably valuable life lessons in business than anyone else. The first lesson involved SLA. It made sense that creating a positive relationship between our company and SLA was a mutually beneficial one in that if the association was successful, then their members would appreciate the support given by the company and be more amenable to buying our products or at least accepting a request for a meeting.
That philosophy prompted meetings with the Executive Director of SLA, Dr. David Bender. Dr. Bender quickly realized that we were there to help him and established a quid pro quo for the two parties. We often donated funds in support of SLA activities. If SLA was undertaking a specific fund-raising project, I knew that a phone call from Dave Bender was in my future.
I never understood why other companies in our business did not follow our lead in supporting the Association. Our relationship with Dr. Bender prospered and his organization and ours grew exponentially.
Eventually, I was promoted to VP of Sales and, as a result, spent a considerable amount of time with our major NYC clients: the investment bank librarians. My boss, who became President of the company, had a philosophy of entertaining those key clients with expensive lunches and, on occasion, dinners as well. The owners of Disclosure suggested that a better way to spend that money that was allocated for in the budget was not to have many expensive meals, but more appropriately have one big party at the annual SLA meeting. As a result, we began to organize a party at every annual SLA meeting. What began as a consolidation of expenses became the hottest ticket in town as all our librarian clients wanted to be included on the guest list for our party. Besides overseeing the organization of the party, my role was to greet our guests at the door of every event. The personalization of interacting with our customers was always first. Another lesson learned.
Aside from the incredible variety of food served at those parties, we contracted to have those parties held at libraries, museums, and executive clubs in the cities hosting the annual meeting. Food and entertainment and just having an enjoyable time was the mantra that we religiously followed. To this day, when I speak to someone who attended one of those events, they will inevitably smile and recall with great enthusiasm the good times that they had courtesy of Disclosure.
Dave Bender eventually retired and was replaced by Janice Lachance. Times were changing in the library community. The incredible growth that was enjoyed by Dave Bender gave way to library closings, a reduction in staff at many libraries
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
and a general atmosphere for cutting costs. The SLA building in Washington, D.C. was sold and the organization moved to a less desirable location in suburban Virginia.
For those of us who knew SLA from afar, the writing was on the wall. There was an ill-advised campaign to change the name of SLA that was rejected by membership. The harmonious relationship that Dr. Bender enjoyed with the SLA board did not materialize for Ms. Lachance, but the bottom line was that the membership that financially supported SLA over so many years was shrinking at an alarming rate.
The profitable business of selling books through SLA was abandoned. The ability to interact with other librarians looking for work was diminished due to the increased use of the Internet. And finally, if you do not have members who pay dues, the inevitable result is restructuring or dissolution. The example of the three-legged chair applies here. If only one of those legs, membership dues, book selling and employment exchange are missing, then the chair collapses. If all three legs are missing, then the result is obvious.
None of us can predict the ultimate outcome of SLA in the coming years. I am reminded of rock stars and actors who, as they age, find ways to reinvent themselves to stay relevant and continue to make a living.
I for one am grateful to SLA for being such an integral part of my life for so long. I would love to give a shout to a whole host of people that I interacted with over those years, but that would be too long a list. You know who you are!
Finally, a remembrance of SLA would not be complete without a shout out to the members of the NY Chapter. We shared many good times, had productive meetings and ate some incredibly good meals together. You understood the role of the salesperson and made it a pleasure for the librarian and vendor to coexist and learn from one another with an order (or two) mixed in for good measure. We experienced some extraordinary times together.
Thank you, SLA. I hope that if some people do reinvent the organization, that you call on this old sales guy to be of assistance when, and if, you do. It would be an honor.
Mike is currently the Managing Partner of Gruenberg Consulting, LLC, a firm he founded in January 2012 after a successful career as a senior sales executive in the information industry. His firm is devoted to providing clients with sales staff analysis, market research, executive coaching, trade show preparedness, product placement and best practices advice for improving negotiation skills for librarians and salespeople. His book, Buying and Selling Information: A Guide for Information Professionals and Salespeople to Build Mutual Success has become the definitive book on negotiation skills and is available on AMAZON, Information Today in print and eBook, AMAZON Kindle, B&N Nook, Kobo, Apple iBooks, OverDrive, 3M Cloud Library, GALE (GVRL), My iLibrary, ebrary, EBSCO, Blio and Chegg. www.gruenbergconsulting.com
The Digital Toolbox continued from page 40
OverDrive provides weekly metadata updates to Ex Libris, ensuring newly acquired content is reflected in library catalogs. Kanopy PDA collections follow a monthly update cycle.
Activating Kanopy’s PDA Collection in Alma
To integrate Kanopy’s PDA collection, libraries should:
• Identify and activate the appropriate regional collection within Alma’s Community Zone.
• Ensure title URLs include the institution-specific identifier (VP Stem), formatted as: https://[institution]. kanopy.com/node/62746
• If uncertain about the institution’s VP Stem value, consult the Kanopy Account Team for assistance.
Looking Ahead: Enhancing Digital Access for Academic Libraries
As the demand for digital academic resources continues to grow, this integration represents a significant advancement in supporting library discovery and access. By streamlining content integration within Alma and Primo, OverDrive and Ex Libris are empowering libraries to efficiently manage and provide access to high-quality digital content.
For further details on activating Libby and Kanopy collections in Alma, academic librarians can explore the Libby support article and the Kanopy support article
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
Librarian Luminaries — Isaac Gilman
Executive Director, Orbis Cascade Alliance
Column Editor: Caroline Goldsmith (Associate Director, The Charleston Hub) <caroline@charlestonlibraryconference.com>
Academic librarians and library staff are a bridge between the vast world of knowledge and the needs of students, faculty, and researchers. “Librarian Luminaries” is a new column which will feature a different librarian each month who has had a recent notable achievement, implemented a new idea or approach in their library, who is a trail blazer, or who is an overall exemplary model of service, scholarship and innovation.
We’re happy to share this interview with Isaac Gilman, Executive Director of Orbis Cascade Alliance and formerly Dean of University Libraries at Pacific University, who was featured for our March 2025 Librarian Luminaries column!
ATG: Hi, Isaac! Can you share a little bit with us about your background and education?
IG: I come from an education and library background; my mother started out as a children’s librarian and my father as an elementary/middle school teacher, so my life has been filled with books and reading from a very early age — which helped shape my education journey through high school and beyond. The latter half of my father’s career was focused on restorative justice work, both in community and juvenile justice settings, and I can see the influences of my parents’ work both in my choice to pursue librarianship and in my interests in disrupting systemic issues within our profession.
ATG: We noticed that you first earned a BA in English, then obtained your MLIS, and eventually a PhD in Education and Leadership. Did you have a career first using your undergraduate degree? What made you decide to go to library school or drew you towards librarianship?
IG: My undergraduate degree focused on literature and filmmaking, and I didn’t have a clear path to a related job after graduation, so I worked briefly for a juvenile court, working alongside adjudicated youth on community service projects, followed by a stint as a high school security aide. During that time, I applied to library school (finally giving in to familial patterns), because it seemed like it would lead to a job that I could enjoy. So, yes, I fit the stereotype of “I like books, and I like research, so why not librarianship?”
ATG: For 17 years, you were at Pacific University working in many different capacities — you taught both undergraduate and graduate courses, and were instrumental in creating the Pacific University Press. You served as library director and then, in 2018, you were promoted to Dean of Libraries. Can you tell us more about the evolution of your role over the years?
IG: I was fortunate to be hired at Pacific shortly after completing my MLIS; I had no prior library experience, and I’m grateful they were willing to take a chance on hiring someone with a degree into an entry-level position. Initially, I worked in access services — and, being new to the work, I asked lots of questions and volunteered to do things that likely “weren’t my place” to be asking or doing. So within the first year or two, I was dabbling in subject cataloging for theses/dissertations, starting
to contribute to outreach sessions, and sending my director memos about how we could do things differently. From there, I moved into a faculty position supporting our graduate health programs, which led to my interest in creating an institutional repository both to help preserve student and faculty work and to create open access venues for sharing it more broadly. This evolved into my role leading our scholarly communication program, which included publishing student and faculty journals, as well as university-wide advocacy for open access and open educational resources. The culmination of this work was establishing a digital-first university press, which I was able to focus on during a sabbatical that took me to Australia to visit two library-based presses. Unbeknownst to me, the requirements of my work in scholarly communication and publishing were preparing me for a shift into library leadership — for example, the need to educate stakeholders, develop a case for support, collaborate across institutional structures, and demonstrate impact. When my director announced her retirement, I was appointed interim director and, eventually, made permanent director by the Provost. The shift from “director” to “dean” came two years later, as a result of my advocacy for the library’s significant academic role — which was buoyed by a successful effort to move peer tutoring services into the library organization.
ATG: This was shortly before emerging technologies like AI — at that time, what growing trends were you seeing in digital scholarship and data management, and how were they impacting your library?
IG: As you might expect, the impact of these areas for Pacific was not as significant as at larger research institutions. However, in some ways, the smaller scale made it more difficult to identify meaningful ways that the library could support faculty. We had just enough research and publishing activity that some faculty were dealing with funder data management and open access requirements, but not enough activity that would allow us to scale and sustain support services (e.g., for data management plans or for managing transformative agreements). This was compounded by what was — and continues to be — a trend in scholarly communication: a proliferation of approaches, platforms, and best practices that vary by discipline, funder, publisher, or project. With limited staffing and funding, the overarching challenge became: in the face of a continuallyevolving ecosystem, where do we invest (attention and money) for maximum impact, both for our own faculty and students and for the system at large?
ATG: What’s a major challenge you have faced in your role in academic librarianship and how did you overcome it?
IG: The most significant challenge I’ve had as a library leader was ongoing: consistent reductions in the library’s budget. If measured against successful advocacy for budget increases, then
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
it’s a challenge I never overcame — but if I consider the extent to which I was able to position the library to weather future budget challenges; to preserve core services; and to prioritize people, then my assessment is different. Core to this was a strategy of reinforcing the library as an indispensable center of academic support; this began with my predecessor, who advocated for a new educational technology unit within the library. I extended this by bringing tutoring services into the library, and ensuring that personnel in both units were integrated into our structures. While this heightened the library’s profile within the administration and university, some cuts to our budget were still required on a regular basis, especially in collections. In order to prioritize resources specifically requested by faculty and students — whether books, journal articles, or required course readings — I collaborated with our library staff to transition our spending to more patron-driven models that required less upfront investment, as well as to find some limited sources of new collections funding in the university budget. Within all of this, I was adamant that while library resources could be fungible, our people were not. Although I did eliminate some open positions, I managed the budget so that I never had to eliminate a position with a person in it — and even in the midst of budget reductions, I found ways to increase salaries for some of our lower-paid staff and faculty to better recognize their contributions. While I never realized the level of funding I was advocating for, I was successful in maintaining support for the library within the university and in ensuring that library faculty and staff were engaged in developing solutions to our budget challenges and felt confident in my advocacy.
ATG: In 2023, you became Executive Director of the Orbis Cascade Alliance and stepped down from your role as Dean. What do you view as your most notable achievement during your time at Pacific University?
IG: The achievement I am most proud of is something that is not necessarily visible but that I hope laid the foundation for long-term positive change: over the course of my time at Pacific, I made a consistent effort to improve the experience of library staff. The ways in which the hierarchies of higher education are inherited and adapted within academic libraries — and mingled with librarianship’s own distinctive culture — can contribute to an environment in which library workers who are not in faculty positions or not titled as ‘librarians’ can experience their voices as less important (e.g., in the ways decisions are made or in the ways they are compensated). My solutions to try and address this were not perfect, but I believe I made progress in creating a better work environment by restructuring positions, compensation, and the ways in which we worked together in the library.
ATG: What are some key strategies you have initially focused on as Executive Director of the Orbis Cascade Alliance?
IG: As a library dean, I was necessarily attentive to the overall priorities of the university, and made it a point to ensure the library was aligned with them — and when possible, helping to shape their direction. As I’ve stepped into the Executive Director role, I’ve translated that approach to the Alliance. Conceptually, that means that I’ve been thinking about us not only as a library consortium, but as a higher education consortium that is part of advancing individual members’ institutional goals and the collective goals of higher education in the region. One example of what that looks like in practice is that I’ve worked with the National Student Clearinghouse to define a custom research project for the Alliance that provides an annual report on academic program enrollment and student transfer patterns
across our members. Having that type of data can allow us to identify areas of potential common benefit (e.g., shared collections or services for high-enrolled programs), even across different types of institutions, and also enables me to speak more effectively about how we are serving a shared community of students. As our individual members, and the Alliance, continue to advocate for the value of libraries within our institutions and higher education, I believe stepping back and considering that broader context will make our strategies better-informed and our arguments more persuasive.
ATG: With Pacific University being a member of the Alliance, this made you a perfect fit for your current role. How do you feel you can further impact your alma mater, along with the other academic libraries in the Pacific Northwest, using your current position?
IG: “Perfect” might be a stretch, but it certainly gave me an appreciation for how the work of the Alliance extends the capacity of the work done within an individual library. Part of the way that happens is by the Alliance providing sustaining structures for library collaboration. Within a single library, capacity is often stretched so thin trying to manage the day-today that, even though external collaborations are beneficial to us and the people we serve, there isn’t the bandwidth to create and sustain the structures needed for them to be effective. And that is where the Alliance is particularly strong. For example, our physical resource sharing program (Summit) is directed by an Alliance program manager who provides structure and guidance, centralized services, and community-building — all of which would be too much for individual libraries to handle, but which serves as the critical connective tissue to keep that program running smoothly. I think my firsthand experience of that particular Alliance benefit — as a library leader trying to find ways to do more with increasingly less — motivates me to find new ways for the consortium to play that role for our members: to empower them to do more together than they might be able to coordinate on their own, and to facilitate and sustain new connections between themselves and other regional partners. I see myself as an individual, and the Alliance as an organization, as extending the ideation, planning, and management capacity of our members — and that’s where I see the potential for me to have a continued impact for Pacific and all of our libraries.
ATG: Can you tell us what Librarianship Elevated means to you?
IG: It has dual meanings — one externally focused and one internally focused. If access to information is a human right necessary for flourishing, then librarianship should be appropriately acknowledged and elevated for its role in preserving and promoting the exercise of that right. But in order to continue to be effective in that role, we need to be able to engage constructively with the world outside of librarianship — whether that is in higher education, public policy, government, philanthropy, etc. And to do that, we need to elevate our own knowledge, practice, and ability to advocate for our role and value in those spaces.
ATG: Thank you, Isaac, for this fascinating interview and for taking the time to talk with us about the work that you’re doing. We really appreciate it!
If you would like to nominate a librarian or library staff to be featured in this column, please reach out to us at info@charlestonhub.com.
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
Librarian Luminaries — Theresa Quiner
Director for the Kuskokwim Consortium Library
Column Editor: Caroline Goldsmith (Associate Director, The Charleston Hub) <caroline@charlestonlibraryconference.com>
Academic librarians and library staff are a bridge between the vast world of knowledge and the needs of students, faculty, and researchers. “Librarian Luminaries” is a new column which will feature a different librarian each month who has had a recent notable achievement, implemented a new idea or approach in their library, who is a trail blazer, or who is an overall exemplary model of service, scholarship and innovation.
We’re happy to share this interview with Theresa Quiner, Director for the Kuskokwim Consortium Library, who was featured for our April 2025 Librarian Luminaries column!
ATG: Hi, Theresa! Can you share a little bit with us about your background and education?
TQ: I have a bachelor’s degree in English literature with a minor in Spanish from the University of Iowa. I started working in my first library job as a page for the Des Moines Public Library in high school, and have continued working in libraries ever since including for the Iowa City, and Orange County, N.C. Public Libraries and now in the Kuskokwim Consortium Library in Alaska.
ATG: What made you decide to go to library school or drew you towards librarianship?
TQ: I have always loved to read which is what drew me to the profession, initially. However, what I realized pretty quickly after starting to work in libraries is that it is a great profession
for people who like helping others and solving problems. I decided to go back to school to get my Master’s in Library Science online through East Carolina University after being offered a promotion to the Library Director position for KCL.
ATG: For about ten years now, you’ve worked in the Kuskokwim Consortium Library in the small community of Bethel in Alaska. Can you tell us more about the evolution of your role and how you came to be library director?
TQ: I started as a Library Technician and my job involved day to day customer service, technical services, and interlibrary loan. Bethel is a pretty remote community in Alaska, and a lot of professionals come to Bethel for short stints and don’t stay and put down roots in the community. The previous director resigned fairly quickly after I started, and I was offered a promotion. I think my employer could see that I really liked the job and serving the community.
ATG: We understand that Kuskokwim Consortium Library serves as both a public library for your community and a university library for students at the Kuskokwim Campus of the University of Alaska Fairbanks, and that you have only three full time staff members in your library. What are some of the challenges of serving both the University and the community equally, and how do you balance those differing needs?
TQ: It is a challenge serving everyone equally, but I think we do a pretty good job. I have a small staff, but they are really great and have been with the library for a number of years, and we also have a full time Jesuit Volunteer which helps fill in the gaps, especially with providing one-on-one assistance with technology, helping with adult programs, and doing outreach with the Bethel Housing and Homelessness Coalition. We have a lot of really great support within the community and are able to do a lot because of the strong partnerships we have with other organizations and volunteers that are always willing to work with us. We have a routine with serving the academic community, and focus on outreach to classes at the beginning of the semester to teach students research and library skills basics which helps us build relationships with the students early in the semester.
ATG: That sounds like a great system that you have in place, and community support from those local organizations is invaluable, I’m sure. We noticed that your library has a checkout for household items. What types of items are available for check-out and what are the top items that community members and/or students are borrowing?
TQ: We started our “Library of Things” a couple of years ago because we had started purchasing some items to use in library sponsored workshops, and it works well to use the equipment in programs and then have it available for people to checkout later so they can try things at home. This is helpful for people that don’t want items taking up space in their kitchens that only get used a couple of times a year. The most popular item hands
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
down is our Pressure Cooker. We have a very active culture in Bethel of hunting, fishing and gathering, and the Pressure Cooker is frequently checked out during the summer harvest months.
ATG: What have been some recent successful services, initiatives or programs that you have offered to the community or university?
TQ: One of the most successful initiatives has been our ongoing outreach to the Bethel Housing and Homelessness Coalition. We have had library representation on the coalition since its inception in 2017. One of the goals of the coalition was to build a Permanent Supportive Housing facility for Bethel’s most chronically homeless individuals. To support this goal, the library has been organizing Project Homeless Connect events multiple times a year since 2017 to both provide services and to provide a venue for the coalition to collect the needed survey data to qualify for federal grant funding. The PSH facility opened this past year, and it has been gratifying to see unhoused community members who have used the library as a day shelter moving into their very own apartment building.
ATG: What’s a major challenge you have faced in your role in librarianship and how did you overcome it?
TQ: The ongoing challenge is that we have a small staff and even smaller budget, and are trying to provide all of the same services that much larger and better resourced libraries provide to their communities. We are also in such a rural and underserved area that community needs are very high. We have really hit our stride as a library though in large part because I have retained the same full time staff members for a number of years, and each of us has done a great job of building partnerships and volunteers from within the various parts of the community that we interact with. We have a ton of support from the community which allows us to do so much more than we would otherwise be able to.
ATG: Navigating budgetary constraints and added complexities with resource allocation are definitely a challenge most libraries are facing right now. You have obviously had an enormous positive impact on your community as they recommended you to ALA for their “I Love My Librarian” Award, for which you are the 2025 honoree — Congratulations! What does receiving this award mean to you?
TQ: It means so much to me. I have worked really hard over the years to build this library up so we can better serve the community, and I don’t think I always realized that the community sees this and appreciates it. It also means so much that my amazing employee Mikayla Miller spearheaded the nomination.
ATG: What does “Librarianship Elevated” Mean to you?
TQ: I love this term. Every community has it’s struggles and areas that they would like to improve to better the lives of the people who live there. To me, “Librarianship Elevated” means that librarians and the library are leaders in helping the community work towards those goals. Libraries are anchor institutions that bring the community together, and help people live healthier, happier, and more informed lives.
ATG: Is there anything that we didn’t ask you about that you’d like to talk about here?
TQ: I love being a librarian!
ATG: I love this response! I can tell that you love your jobthat is evident in your work and everything you’re doing at your library. Is there something that you enjoy doing in your “spare time” or a hobby that you enjoy that you want to share with us ?
TQ: My side passion is helping our local animal rescue. I have been on the board almost since I moved to Bethel. I am also very passionate about fishing and love to cook, and really enjoy experimenting in the kitchen with the fish and wild game that are staple foods in my community. I have been fortunate to use some of these passions in the workplace, like when we held a Puppy Playtime for college students during finals week, or when I led a Sous Vide cooking workshop and taught people how to cook wild game in a variety of ways.
ATG: That all sounds exciting (and delicious)! Thank you, Theresa, for this fascinating interview and for taking the time to talk with us. I know you’re very busy, and we really appreciate it!
If you would like to nominate a librarian or library staff to be featured in this column, please reach out to us at info@charlestonhub.com.
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
ATG Interviews Elisabeth Bik
Science Integrity Consultant, Harbers Bik LLC
Interview conducted by
Michael Upshall (ConsultMU) <michael@consultmu.co.uk>
The following is a lightly edited transcript of an excerpt from ATG the Podcast. The video for this episode can be found at https://youtu.be/ uEYsqTKHits?feature=shared.
This episode features guest host, Michael Upshall, Community and Outreach Manager at Core, who talks with Dr. Elisabeth Bik, Microbiologist and Science Integrity Consultant. Elisabeth is a prominent microbiologist and renowned investigator into scientific misconduct, particularly the manipulation and falsification of research data. She has uncovered issues in over 8,000 scientific papers, resulting in more than 1,400 retractions. Her work has gained international attention, earning her the 2021 John Maddox Prize and the 2024 Einstein Foundation Award for her work. This conversation explores Elisabeth’s career trajectory, her work on identifying scientific malpractice, and her thoughts on the systemic issues and potential reforms within the research and publishing ecosystem.
MU: Your PhD was on, I believe, cholera. Which doesn’t sound the most enticing of subjects to spend years of your life studying.
MU: Okay, well, welcome to ATG the Podcast, and I’m very pleased to have today the chance to talk to Elisabeth Bik, who’s one of the best known investigators into scientific malpractice. Elisabeth is a PhD microbiologist, but is better known today for identifying issues with more than 7,000 scientific papers and with over 1,000 retractions. She’s been featured in national newspapers, such as the New York Times and The Guardian, and she was awarded the 2021 John Maddox Prize for her work in science communication for exposing research misconduct. So good to talk to you, Elisabeth.
EB: Great to be here, Michael. Lovely. Good morning from California. It’s quite a time difference.
MU: Yeah, absolutely. Tell me, how did you become a scientist in the first place?
EB: Well, I guess I always wanted to be a biologist. When I was, I think, I don’t know, ten years old or so in elementary school, the teacher asked, what do you want to become? And you know, the boys wanted to become firemen or pilots, and the girls maybe wanted to become, we’re talking about the 1970s here, pretty stereotypical, maybe a nurse. But I wanted to become a biologist. So, I was already the weird one out. And I stuck to my plan and studied biology. Initially, I wanted, I liked birds, so that was what I thought I was going to do for the rest of my life. But then I really liked bacteria, and I liked my microbiology teacher very much and I liked the classes. And I, yeah, I just stayed, I loved lab work. I did internships in labs, really loved that. And then stuck in one of the labs at the Dutch National Institute for Health and did my PhD there.
EB: No, it’s a haunting topic. If you read about cholera and what it can cause and how horrible the disease is, it’s quite something that will stay with you for the rest of your life. If you read those descriptions of patients dying. And cholera also is not a disease that is really present in the Netherlands where I was at that time. But it was a topic, a research project that the person who became then my mentor, my PhD supervisor, wrote and it was approved. And he said, I think you’re the perfect person for it. Do you want to do your PhD on that? And it was about developing a vaccine for cholera, which we thought was a good thing, because we were working at the Institute that made all the vaccines for the Netherlands. So, but it turned out, of course, a little bit different. My topic, the vaccine part of my PhD thesis, didn’t work out. That was, I could not reproduce somebody else’s results. And that was quite frustrating. But luckily, another topic related to cholera came along, and I had much more success there and finished my PhD in that topic.
MU: That’s very interesting. So, you found lack of reproducibility actually made quite a difference to you.
EB: Absolutely. It was very frustrating; you see somebody else’s results, and I did exactly what that person before me did. And one day it worked, and this next day didn’t work, but I had to do ten replicates or so. It was just all over the map. And I said, I’m not quite sure what I do wrong, because I did exactly the same thing. So, there must be something very finicky that, you know, maybe it works on a Tuesday, but not on a Monday. You’re just starting to believe in all kinds of voodoo, of course. But yeah, it didn’t work out, I could not reproduce it. That was one of those points in your PhD, where you’re just ready to give up everything because it didn’t work.
MU: I can imagine. So, you then worked with microbiomes. And for the benefit of non-technical people like myself, can you tell me what a microbiome is?
EB: Yes, that was when I moved to the U.S. and started working at Stanford. A microbiome is a group of organisms, like an ecosystem, that lives at a particular place. So usually we refer to it, to the human microbiome. The bacteria that live in our bodies, in our mouths, on our skin, in our stomachs, in our guts, that’s where most of them live. They help you digest your food and they do some wonderful things. They can also, if there’s a bad bacteria or bad virus in there, they can make you sick. But it’s like a forest. It’s an ecosystem of different species. And we still know very little about them because it’s
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
not just one species that lives in our guts. There are probably thousands of them. Each of us has a unique collection of these bacteria and viruses and archaea and some yeasts in there. It’s a very complex situation. And each of these species has their own little biochemical factories in them. They can convert certain molecules into others. So, depending on which bacteria you carry, you might be able to convert, let’s say, a particular drug into a drug that is actually more active or less active. the microbiome that we carry and its uniqueness might be partially explaining why certain drugs don’t work in a person, but work in the other person, or why certain foods are maybe not going down well. And we’re still learning lots about it. It’s a fascinating topic.
MU: You spent 15 years at Stanford, and this is working with microbiomes. So why leave after that time?
EB: Because I saw a job advertisement for a scientific editor at a very new startup company called uBiome. And it didn’t end well, uBiome. But at that time, it was a nice startup. After working 15 years at a particular place, I just felt I couldn’t grow anymore there at Stanford, or at any university, I guess. In the U.S., you have a professor, and then you have the people working in their group. I felt I wasn’t learning anything more. And also, the topic changed a little bit more from less lab work and more bioinformatics work, which I just was never trained in, so I felt very uncomfortable trying. I was trying to learn it, but I just felt I didn’t have enough background to really enjoy using it. I wasn’t a Unix guru. You run into all these issues where your computer just says, nope, error. And I just couldn’t do that. I really liked doing the lab work, but that was less and less of it. I saw this job advertisement, and I really had started to enjoy scientific writing, peer review. I also was looking already at shoddy, bad papers. And so, the whole process about scientific editing and publishing became a little bit more interesting. And it was a job at a microbiome startup. There was a nice salary involved, much better than what I earned at Stanford, and what was not to like, and I got the job. I really liked the first year. The second year, the company was starting to do some shady stuff with insurances and prescriptions, so I left. And at some months after I left, the company got raided by the FBI, quite something, they confiscated all the computers, and of course, never recovered from that. And the founders fled to Europe, apparently, and from the U.S., this was in San Francisco. They were charged with, or at least indicted, and I, you know, I’m not a lawyer, so I don’t know the difference, but they were indicted with all kinds of insurance fraud, and money embezzlement, so all kinds of bad things.
MU: You already had exposure to research, and I don’t know if you can call it research misconduct, but non non-replicability. Was that something that started to develop during your time at Stanford, or when?
EB: Yeah, it was during my 15 years at Stanford, that I came across a paper that had plagiarized one of my papers. I’d written this review article on the human microbiome, my topic of interest. I’d heard about plagiarism, and I had a vague concept of what it was. But I thought, let’s just take a sentence from my review article, and put it in between quotes in Google Scholar, and probably nothing will come up, right? But something else came up, something that was not my paper, but somebody else’s paper that turned out that these authors had stolen several sentences from me, but also from other scientists, and made this patchwork of this Frankenstein monster of different paragraphs. That made me so mad that I started to work on plagiarism as a hobby. I started to find other plagiarized articles. Now, this was 2013. I’m finding all these articles from 2006 or so, before most
journals and publishers were starting to screen for plagiarism. I was finding all these old, plagiarized articles. But then one day, another coincidence, I found a PhD thesis with not only plagiarized text, but also an image that had been duplicated. I recognized that, and it was a western blot, a bit of a technical term. But it had basically looked like horizontal stripes, four horizontal stripes with a little dot in the top right corner. And then a couple of pages later, I’m like, hey, there’s that same photo again, except now, it’s, it’s a mirror image. Now the dot is on the top left, but it’s the same photo. It was used to represent a different experiment, so that was bad. And then I switched, because I switched from plagiarism searching to searching for these duplicated images.
MU: Tell us a bit more about the wonderfully named western blot, because that seems to be quite a central part of your work on image manipulation. What is a western blot?
EB: What is a western blot? Well, how long do we have? It’s a way to determine how much of a particular protein is present in a biological sample. Let’s say you’re testing mice, and you’re treating them with your drug, and you have your placebo group. So, you have two groups of mice, one that was treated and one that was not treated. But you want to see how the treatment of the drug affects the expression, or let’s say, roughly the quantity of a particular protein. That’s when you use a western blot. In a western blot, you run first your soup of proteins, let’s say it’s a serum sample or a liver sample from these mice, and you homogenize that. You run it in an electrical field. All the proteins will separate like a barcode, according to their weight or the height or the length of the molecule. First, you separate them like that. So, it looks then sort of like a barcode with different proteins all in a row. Then you transfer that gel to a membrane and you incubate it with a particular antibody to just search for your one protein that you’re interested in, in that big soup. Now, of that whole barcode, you only visualize one of the bands. The outcome is a film, and it starts to look like horizontal stripes, dark horizontal stripes on a white or light gray background. It will become a photo, and the photo of that western blot will show your five treated mice and your five untreated mice. Just that one stripe, that one little horizontal band, that is the protein of interest. And so, it’s a photo in a scientific article. Very often I find that there’s problems with these photos. Sometimes photos are reused to represent another experiment, like the one I initially found, or they are rotated, mirrored, stretched and representing different experiments. Or they’re even photoshopped where one band, one of those horizontal stripes, is photoshopped a couple of times. It basically looks like a photo of a dinner party to me, where you see the same people, you know, Uncle John is sitting both on the left side of the table, but you also see his face on the right side of the table of your photo of your dinner party. And that just doesn’t look right. It looks like the same, in this case, the same protein band visible twice in a photo. So that is what I’m looking for.
MU: It seems incredible to me that as an outsider, that anyone can even contemplate doing this kind of image manipulation. Why do you think, I know this is a tough question, but why do you think it takes place?
EB: I assume that people do it because then the results look better. Scientists might do an experiment, they might have a very firm hypothesis, they think they have an idea how a particular molecular pathway works, or whatever, and they do their experiments. And now the outcome is not as nice, or maybe it looks okay, but the blot looks smudged, or there’s a crack or continued on page 52
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
ATG Interview — A Conversation about Research Impact with Rachel
Borchardt, Andrea Hebert and Camille Gamboa
Interview conducted by Caroline Goldsmith (Associate Director, The Charleston Hub) <caroline@charlestonlibraryconference.com>
Transcript edited by Leah Hinds (Executive Director, Charleston Hub) <leah@charlestonlibraryconference.com>
The following is a lightly edited transcript of an excerpt from ATG the Podcast. The video for this episode can be found at https://youtu.be/ j_9r8igeJX4?feature=shared.
This episode features a roundtable discussion on Research Impact. Caroline Goldsmith, Associate Director, Charleston Hub, talks with Rachel Borchardt, Scholarly Communication Librarian and University Library Faculty, American University; Andrea Hebert, Research Impact Librarian, Louisiana State University; and Camille Gamboa, AVP of Corporate Communications, Sage. This conversation features both the librarian perspective and the publisher perspective of how each defines and supports research impact at their institutions, how the conversation has expanded over the years, and why forward thinking is crucial to meet the challenges such as academic silos, the dominance of traditional metrics, and the lack of commitment from U.S. universities to initiatives like DORA, and to support more effective impact of research. Librarians have an important role in shaping these conversations and helping institutions move beyond traditional metrics. We also discuss Policy Maps, which is a free tool offered by Sage for individual researchers to determine their policy impact.
CG/ATG: Hello and welcome to ATG the Podcast. I’m Caroline Goldsmith, Associate Director of the Charleston Hub, and today we’re doing a roundtable discussion around the topic of research impact, and we’ve invited three guests: Rachel Borchardt who is a Scholarly Communication Librarian and University Library Faculty at American University, Andrea Hebert who is a Research Impact Librarian at Louisiana State University, and Camille Gamboa who is AVP of Corporate Communications at Sage. And to all of you, I’d like to say welcome. Thank you for joining us today and, as I said, we’re focusing on research impact and how we come to understand and measure it and its effects. We’re going
to get the librarian perspective and the publisher perspective today on what research impact is, and we’re interested in the recent case study that Sage conducted regarding Policy Maps, which is a free tool for individual researchers to determine their policy impact. But first, before we jump into all of that, let’s go around the room and introduce ourselves. Tell us what you do at your institution and how you support research impact.
CG: Well, very happy to be here. Thank you so much for hosting. As you mentioned, I do communications and public affairs work at Sage and, so beyond the traditional communications duties, I’ve been lucky enough to have been given the remit to explore how I can make and how Sage can make the research that we publish more impactful. Exploring questions like what does it take to make our research usable outside of academia? How can we solicit the type of research that will be helpful in policy and in practice? What constraints do we see as an industry to do this type of work? I get to explore all these really impactful, important questions and so it’s a really meaningful part of my job.
Just quickly also to introduce Sage. If you don’t know Sage, we are an academic publisher that was founded 60 years ago. It’s our birthday, and we are very independent, very mission-driven, very values-driven, and we have our foundations in the social and behavioral science. And so, a lot of the work that we do in this area, a lot of what I will be saying, focuses on supporting the unique needs of social science.
RB: I can go next. So hi, I’m Rachel. I’m the Scholarly Communications Librarian at American University, which is located in Washington, DC. And a bit about American University, it is a private, mid-size university and, as of very recently, we now have the R1 designation. We really pride ourselves on having a blend of teaching and research. I think the other thing that’s pretty unusual about us, since we’re in the DC area, our focuses, our primary things that we’re known for, include policy, international service, government. So we really are,
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
Camille Gamboa
Rachel Borchardt
Andrea Hebert
like Sage, very social sciences focused. Not to say that we don’t have STEM and other disciplines, but those tend to drive some of our most high-impact research. For my job, part of my responsibilities include supporting and advancing research impact at the university. And that includes a wide range of activities from helping individuals with their tenure files and promotion to participating in university-wide initiatives related to research impact. I’m also on an NSF grant that focuses on research translation and public impact at my university.
AH: I’ll go ahead and wrap this part up. I’m Andrea and I work at Louisiana State University, A&M. It’s in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. It’s an R1, and it happens to be a public land, sea, and space grant university. We have about 40,000 students total, and there are 50 doctoral programs and about 3,500 graduate students. LSU is known for its STEM programs. So, my role as the research impact librarian is relatively new, and we’re still trying to figure out exactly what my work looks like. In addition to general scholcom work, I do tend to work with individual faculty who are interested in improving the visibility of their scholarship, and I can discuss traditional and alternative measures of scholarship and impact. Sometimes that translates into talking to departments about those things. I also give the institution and departments a broader view of their work and their impact using some of the more traditional measures.
CG/ATG: Well, thank you guys for that introduction and giving us some background on you. Let’s start with talking about how each of you define research impact and what it means to you, if you feel like you have a different perspective from your colleagues, and how you define it.
RB: I think I used to define research impact as more or less synonymous with the metrics that we’ve traditionally used to measure it; so, bibliometrics, citation counts, all that fun stuff. But, I think today, I would also describe it more as the total impact that all research and research outputs are having on a variety of individuals and populations, and that that can only be partially described and explained through metrics and qualitative measures.
AH: I agree with Rachel’s definition. However, I think that my view probably differs from that of my institution. Universities generally worry about rankings, and some of the rankings are definitely tied to traditional metrics. And because of LSU’s STEM focus, they are more accustomed to thinking about things like, you know, plain old bibliometrics. And they are probably more open to accepting things like patent citations. However, before I was the research impact librarian, I was the librarian for the schools of social work, education, and leadership and human resource development, so I was always aware that their work was not necessarily well represented in those traditional metrics. I’ve always been more able to see the value of things like policy.
RB: And I think for me, I forgot to say, in terms of alignment with my university, it’s been a process. I think when I first started getting interested in research metrics, there was more of a disconnect. I was really excited about all metrics as a way to start filling that gap. As I mentioned, the NSF grant that I’m on, public impact is a really big focus for us. And part of our work is trying to better align the broad spectrum of impact that we see with university policy. And there are definitely clashes between things like wanting to support public impact, but still wanting that good university ranking.
CG/ATG: Yeah. I’m glad you brought that up because I was just about to ask about altmetrics and things like social media posts and the impact that those have, and if that’s one
of the things you’re interested in? And speaking of that, the alt metrics and social media posts and all these things now that we’re looking at over the years, how have you seen the conversation change around research impact?
CG: I’ve been in the industry for 13 years, and I’ve definitely seen shifts in that time to greater emphasis on outside impact. I think, you know, the three of us are on the same page. I agree with your definitions in terms of impact. And I think that we’re starting to see that trickle out to the different kind of parts of the science ecosystem.
The funders, for example, are starting to ask more and more, before they award a grant, that they’re asking questions about what outside impact research they’re funding will make. Publishers, journals, and trade societies are putting more emphasis on research that supports the UN SDGs, the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, for example. Universities are rewriting their tenure and promotion practices so they’re more aligned with institutional values and less aligned with singular citation-based metrics that we were just talking about. And we have organizations like DORA, they’re having these big picture conversations about how to improve our research, how our research is evaluated, so it doesn’t all rely on impact factors. So there’s definitely an evolution happening. It’s maybe slow and steady, maybe slower than I would like it to be, but there is an evolution happening. At Sage, we’re definitely part of these conversations. I mentioned before that we were trying to bring attention to the unique needs of social science. So, for example, data has shown that public social and behavioral science research is cited for longer periods of time in scholarly literature, even though we use this three-year, two-year, three-year-based measure. Actually, in the social and behavioral sciences, research is cited for longer periods of time than that. It also makes outsized impact on policy, and we’ll talk about a new tool later on that can help us with this. But yeah, social science has kind of this unique value, these unique needs, and yet academe uses — or overuses — the same short-term literature-based metrics to decide what is or isn’t a successful science. So we’re trying to talk about things in terms of social science because it’s at our core.
RB: I definitely agree with that, and I think one of the big shifts that I’m seeing happening very recently is just taking best practices from other disciplines who are more used to thinking about this more holistically. So, for example, the humanities has always relied more on qualitative measures than quantitative because their publishing practices are so different, and what is impactful in their field can’t always be described by metrics. Or, say, community-based research, right, where the outcomes really depend on the community. You aren’t necessarily looking for those citation counts. You’re looking for community impact. So they’ve developed frameworks and models for measuring that kind of thing. And so, taking those best practices and spreading them out and understanding these don’t have to be confined to one specific discipline or type of research but can apply really broadly, and especially as we see more interdisciplinary research happening, and no one’s necessarily just doing traditional research within a department or a school. I think we’re seeing broader acceptance of these more holistic measures beyond their original disciplines.
AH: I agree that there have been so many positive developments from including things like policy and patent and even open science, but I still think there are some barriers to moving away from these traditional measures. So, for example, in the United States, there are very few universities who are
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
signatories of DORA. There may be some university libraries or even some departments within universities, but very few universities as a whole have endorsed it. And that’s really problematic, right? One of DORA’s key principles was that the scientific content of a paper was more important than where it was published. However, as I mentioned earlier, universities or many universities are very concerned with their rankings, and ranking agencies and AAU rely on these traditional citation data. So where are they publishing? How many citations are they racking up? And so as long as universities are tied to that, their faculty are also tied to it, and that’s unfortunate. I do know it’s changing, but I wish it were changing more quickly in all places.
CG/ATG: Why is looking at research impact important in today’s cultural and political environment?
RB: So I think higher education has a lot of significant issues right now, but one of the many issues is that we tend to silo our research work, and it excludes the majority of the population. It starts with access to research, which, open access is trying to account for, but it also means delivering information in a way that the general public or other populations, practitioners, community members can understand and use, and more importantly, trust. Ultimately, I see it as talking about return on investment. Where do your tax dollars go? If someone goes to college, how can we trust the information that’s being given to the college students? These are really basic ideas that academia has only recently tried to grapple with, and by and large, it’s still not reflected in the faculty incentive systems, and I include ranking in that, but promotion and tenure has the same problem of relying on those traditional metrics, and that tends to form the basis by which you get tenure, and these other considerations are definitely secondary. So if you’re saying, “I had this great public impact. Everybody uses my work, but it’s not cited. Is that tenureable?” And that’s a question that I think higher education really needs to start taking seriously.
AH: Right, so I mean, I think it’s very clear that a large section of the U.S. public have, you know, they’ve lost confidence in research and the institutions which produce research. Our researchers do good work, but we are not doing a good job of showcasing how that work actually impacts the public as a whole. Moving to a more holistic representation of research impact could really help with this. For example, does the average person at the grocery store care whether or not a paper was published in a journal with a high impact factor? Probably not. They probably don’t know what impact factor is. It’s a very niche topic, and we forget that sometimes, but what they are interested in is how that research impacts their life in a positive way. I think if we talked about that more, it would really bring back some of that trust.
CG: I totally agree with that. Can I just add just one other thing on that, which is to say that I remember back in 2016, which if you can believe it was almost a decade ago, everyone was talking about these new terms called misinformation and disinformation. We were always talking about how things like social media were spreading, you know, bad information, and back then I kind of thought, oh, this is kind of a passing thing. It’s a fad. If we as, you know, higher ed and research librarianship can get together, we can quickly tackle the problems associated with bad information so we can get back on the trajectory of valuing evidence, data, quality research, we’ll be fine. Again, we’re almost a decade later. I’m sad to say the problem of misinformation is at best, normalized, and at worst, deepened, and additionally, of course, as my colleagues were just mentioning, at the federal level, funding and evidence-based policy making are in a kind of
precarious state right now. Lots of change is happening. As we all know too well, cuts are happening within science agencies, and some agencies are being told that research that covers certain topics just cannot be funded. So it’s almost as if a new definition of impact, one that ignores real people or evidence, is emerging, which is kind of scary. But there is some good news. You know, I do think that we will get back on the right track. For example, in a recent survey that Sage put out, more than 1,800 researchers, 92% of them said that the ultimate goal of research is to make a positive impact on society. 92% didn’t, they didn’t say the ultimate goal was, you know, academic citations or, you know, anything else. They said it’s for research to make a positive impact on society. So their hearts are in the right place, and I think they do understand that their work can and should make a difference. Over the long term, I do think we’ll get back to putting increased emphasis on the intersection of research and, you know, policy impact, government, real world impacts, and supporting research so that it makes impact is not something that we should give up on.
CG/ATG: We’ve been looking back the last 10 years, now we’re going to kind of shift to looking forward to the future, and Rachel and Andrea, I’m going to ask you this about the librarian perspective on this first. What changes should be made for more effective impact of research, in your opinion?
RB: I think there’s a really interesting opportunity to join conversations that are happening, both within librarians’ individual institutions and more broadly, because we really have a unique perspective and knowledge on this topic. That said, there are relatively few research impact library specialists, and I think that’s a missed opportunity for librarians to help shape these conversations as they happen. And I can say I’ve been doing research impact for about 12, 13 years, and I’ve only had it as part of my job responsibilities for about three. I can count probably on two hands the number of research impact librarians that I know. It’s hard to see where this concentration of expertise is in libraries, and I think that there’s a lot more opportunity to gain that expertise and to label it as such. Looking more broadly, the UK has really effectively organized around research impact, and that’s largely thanks to the fact that there’s this research excellence framework that all UK institutions respond to. They’ve developed initiatives like “More Than Our Rank” that’s been a really good way for expert librarians to help shape the national conversation. For me personally, I’ve been lucky to be recognized as an expert at my university, so I often do have a seat at the table, and that’s enabled me to participate in initiatives like this public impact grant. But more broadly, I think conversations about impact in the United States are happening without librarian input or expertise at the table.
AH: I can definitely affirm what she said, that most of the conversations are not occurring with research impact librarians at the table. I’ve only been in my role for two years, and I definitely do not have a seat at the table. And making progress is difficult, right? I’m having to leverage relationships. I always trade on social capital. I help the faculty that I know with their individual issues, hopefully by word of mouth. They reach out to other people, either in their own department or others. Eventually, departments will come to me for my expertise, and I’m hoping it eventually crawls up the chain. But I will say that my library dean has done a really good job of highlighting the fact that the library does have the expertise to university administration, but it has yet to translate into actual voice.
CG/ATG: Camille, can you give us the publisher perspective on this and give us your thoughts?
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
CG: Yeah, happy to. First, I want to say thank you for the work that you both are doing as research impact librarians, because you’re right, there aren’t very many of you. And that’s kind of part of the reason why we wanted to have this conversation through the mouthpiece of the Charleston Hub, which, you know, has a great mouthpiece, a very powerful one to the library community. In terms of what publishers can say, I think upholding the DORA’s principles will help us have a more balanced approach to measuring research impact. I didn’t realize until you just said, Andrea, that so few universities were signed on. I think most publishers are, at least most of the bigger ones are. But yes, it’s not just signing it, but actually upholding those principles. For example, when the Journal Impact Factor comes out every year, let’s recognize them for what they actually are, which is a measure for the journal and not a measure of the quality of the individual articles within them, or a measure of the researchers who publish in those journals. If we can have these kind of more balanced, nuanced conversations and not rely or fetishize on one measure, we can improve the measures and
we can shift how our research is celebrated and incentivized. I’ll just mention one other thing briefly, which is that Sage is also looking into exploring the research on research impact. So, the scholarly world can, and we believe should, turn its attention to itself to help make improvements. We can use our own scholarly research measures to talk about this and have scholarly conversations that will shed light on what’s happening and where there’s success happening and how we can spread that. I’m excited about where that will take us. It’s early days on this new project we have but watch this space.
Editor’s Note: Thank you very much to Caroline Goldsmith for hosting this interview, and to Rachel Borchardt, Andrea Hebert and Camille Gamboa for speaking with us. Please tune into the podcast at https://www.charleston-hub.com/podcast/atgthepodcast-268-aconversation-with-rachel-borchardt-andrea-hebert-and-camillegamboa-about-research-impact/ to listen to the entire conversation, or watch the video at https://youtu.be/j_9r8igeJX4?feature=shared.
ATG Interviews Elisabeth Bik continued from page 48
a hair, and maybe they just try to Photoshop the crack or the hair away. They try to beautify it, or they might try to make the experiment look a little bit better than it actually was. Because if an experiment looks good, it’s easier to publish it. And if it’s easier, if it looks really good, you can even publish it in a high impact factor journal. And that is very good for one’s career. So Photoshopping in the end will enhance your career and just to make some shortcuts there. It’s tempting to do it, because it is possible within the digital age, you can actually easily Photoshop your experiments. You know, in the olden days, you brought your blots to the photographer in the basement, like I did, but now you can just take a photo with your cell phone and
Photoshop at home and it’s very easy. Who will ever find out? Well, sometimes, I will find out about it.
Editor’s Note: Thank you very much to Michael Upshall for hosting this interview, and to Elisabeth Bik for speaking with us. Please tune into the podcast at https://www.charleston-hub.com/ podcast/atgthepodcast-266-a-conversation-with-dr-elizabethbik-science-integrity-consultant-and-microbiologist/ to listen to the entire conversation, or watch the video at https://youtu.be/ uEYsqTKHits?feature=shared
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
ATG PROFILES ENCOURAGED
Marci Cohen
Head, Music Library, Retired Boston University Boston, MA 02215
BORN AND LIVED: Philadelphia, Chicago, and Boston.
PROFESSIONAL CAREER AND ACTIVITIES: Most of my library career has focused on music and public services. I’ve worked in collection development, reference, access services, and instruction in the Northbrook (IL) Public Library multimedia department, Berklee College of Music, and Boston University. I also had brief stints as the User Experience Analyst at RollingStone.com and Head of Instruction and Consultation at BU Libraries. In my retirement, I remain an active member of the Music Library Association and continue to write for a library audience. Building on my pre-library work as a music journalist and intellectual property paralegal, I have written and presented on popular music, music business, and music copyright.
IN MY SPARE TIME: I’m an avid cyclist. I sew clothing. When not going to concerts, I make needlepoint throw pillows of album cover images.
FAVORITE BOOKS: I’m usually reading about music. High Fidelity by Nick Hornby. Love Goes to Buildings on Fire by Will Hermes.
MOST MEMORABLE CAREER ACHIEVEMENT: I overhauled the first year instruction program at Berklee and even got a conference presentation out of it using the Beatles font and song titles as my slide deck.
GOAL I HOPE TO ACHIEVE FIVE YEARS FROM NOW: Maybe retire from retirement. I’m still spending a lot time on library-related activities.
Back Talk continued from page 54
Then third — and I’m a little surprised I put this so far down the list — of course, the library is a place where there are those magical people — librarians. On a campus, librarians are as safe as the library is. They are not there to judge or grade or challenge students — they’re there to be as helpful as you need, perhaps as inspiring as you might want, and to let you alone when you need to be left alone. Students will complain about lots of people they meet, but I’m not sure I’ve ever heard anybody grumbling about that so-and-so librarian they had in school or college.
You might have expected the last item on my list to be first: yes indeed, there’s knowledge in that library. It’s not quite the same as it was when I was younger, though, when the stacks of the first real university library I prowled seemed like an earthly paradise, full to bursting of wondrous lore and learning unimaginable anywhere outside those walls. The walls have become permeable now and one piece of my usual University
Librarian shtick is to boast about how many different countries show up each year as places where ASU students and faculty have logged into our earthly paradise from far away. (I usually say 175.) We know the magic is still here, but now the magic goes far beyond the walls. There’s a line of Evelyn Waugh that’s stayed with me, spoken by a mentor about a former student: “I caught him with an unseen hook and an invisible line which is long enough to let him wander to the ends of the world and still to bring him back again with but a twitch upon the thread.” Libraries have been hooking users like that for a long time.
Walking back to my car at the end of the day in Arizona, as the season turns towards summer, is usually a time to be scurrying through the heat, a little less meditative and more urgent with thoughts of today’s chores and tomorrow’s. But the spirit of the earthly paradise still follows me. These days, a hint or two of paradise comes in very handy.
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
Back Talk — What’s a Library For?
Column Editor: Jim O’Donnell (University Librarian, Arizona State University) <jod@asu.edu>
When I walk down Palm Walk on the ASU campus on my way to work, I like to let my eyes travel up to the palm fronds and the sky. It’s a small mental health moment, knowing that when I get to the office and open my computer, an astonishing world of news and needs, anxieties and sometimes these days a little anger, and the press of time and obligations will open before me. I’m anything but the typical library user, but today the blue sky made me think about all the things that our users value in libraries. Writing and thinking about those things would be its own kind of mental health moment. Perhaps reading about them can work that way for some of Against the Grain’s loyal audience!
I’ll start with the student I saw a few years ago, in what we call our premium seating, big comfortable chairs facing a campus lawn through floor-to-ceiling windows. I happened to notice that she was watching an episode of M*A*S*H on her laptop and I had three reactions: (1) This student was born twenty years after that show went off the air: how could she even know what it is?! (2) Harrumph (this was my inner pedantic professor speaking): a student in a library, surrounded by all the riches of knowledge, watching a sitcom? (3) But maybe she just came from her calculus class and faces organic chemistry next hour, so a little mental health moment with Hawkeye and Radar might be exactly the thing needed for her academic success.
midnight we all come out and scream for five minutes to relieve the tension, then go back and study till we drop. Made perfect sense, and I realized that if a couple of chairs were empty in my Latin class the next morning, it might not be because those students were feckless but because they were making a mature time management decision to concentrate on the urgent challenge of the moment.
Most likely, my third reaction was closest to the mark. Years ago, I was a faculty house master with 400 freshmen all around, and they would invite me, about six weeks into the year, to come out at midnight for the Econ Scream. What’s that?, I asked the first time. Oh, tomorrow is the first midterm in Econ 1, so at
ADVERTISER’S INDEX
2 ACS Publications
56 Against the Grain
3 Optica Publishing Group
9 ATGthePodcast
11 Charleston Briefings
7 Doing the Charleston
5 Katina Publication (Help Support Us through Sponsorship and Advertising)
13 Katina Publication (Article and Review Proposals)
55 Knowable Magazine
FOR ADVERTISING INFORMATION CONTACT
Toni Nix, Advertising Manger, Against the Grain, Charleston Hub <justwrite@lowcountry.com> • Phone: 843-835-8604
So now I think differently about all the folks who pass back and forth in our spaces. In our libraries, we bring them at least four things.
First, we are without question the most resolutely academic building on campus. We’re the house of knowledge and inquiry, here for that purpose and open to everyone in the community. Even when a student comes in to watch a sitcom, she knows it: that fundamental fact of why we are all here on this campus is visible all around. That should calm and inspire and, yes, occasionally raise a little anxiety. But the spirit of libraries past is, remarkably, always there to greet those who enter.
Second — and I’ve come to think this is very important — the library is a place where one is absolutely allowed to be oneself, whoever and whatever that self may be. When you’re in the library, nobody else around will think they own any of your time and attention, nobody will judge you, nobody will — how oddly important — care what you’re doing. If you’re by yourself, nobody will wonder if you don’t have any friends (the way they might if you were sitting solo at a table across the walk at the student union). Everyone is okay; they’re safe. Those of us with a few years under our belts can too easily forget how much relief it can be to have a place like that to go to any time you want.
(Yes, there are ways in which the social world invades our spaces. During my teaching years at Cornell, there were two library buildings facing each other across the walk, notionally the undergraduate and graduate libraries. The big reading room in the undergraduate library was the place for “putting in face time” — that is, the place to see and be seen and perhaps meet and chat up somebody. Undergraduates were allowed to get cards to go into the graduate library on a term-by-term basis if a professor signed a form for them, and my students were always lined up outside my door at beginning of term to get that form signed. We’d nod cheerfully when we saw each other in the graduate library and maybe chat about what we were reading.)
continued on page 53
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
Against the Grain needs your support!
TO ADVERTISE IN ATG
Contact Toni Nix at <justwrite@lowcountry.com>
Click the links below for information on how to Subscribe, Submit Content, or Contact Us
About Against the Grain
Against the Grain (ISSN: 1043-2094) is your key to the latest news about libraries, publishers, book jobbers, and subscription agents. Our goal is to link publishers, vendors, and librarians by reporting on the issues, literature, and people that impact the world of books and journals. ATG’s eJournal, with an open rate of over 51%, is published five times a year (February, April, June, September, and November) and distributed to ATG subscribers, Charleston Library Conference attendees, and registered members on the Charleston Hub.
Find ATG on the Charleston Hub at www.charleston-hub.com
