Posted on

Roadmap to Library Publishing

First, I’ve determined that there is no one “roadmap” that will lead my library into digital publishing. So, instead of creating a map, I’m going to do the best I can to sketch out the terrain ahead and think about questions that can guide our path.

Broader Context

This section tries to address two main questions: What is happening in the world of scholarly publishing that is relevant to North Park? What is happening within the North Park setting that is relevant to a library published endeavor? Quick thoughts:

  • Continued movement toward Open Access. There is still work to be done in our local context but that is the clear movement. The Covenant Quarterly and Journal of Hip Hop Studies indicate this trend is taking root on campus.
  • Institutional branding. There is a renewed focus in institutional branding and online presence. There could be powerful connections to make here.
  • Publishing and the North Park mission. My sense is that North Park values diverse contributions to the academic community more than creating a specialized repository
  • Chicago. There might be some opportunities to promote North Park within the regional context through research and student projects.

Scope

We need to define the scope of this project. There are many different efforts that fall under the broad category of “digital publishing”, including:

  • Institutional Repositories
  • Digital Humanities
  • Data Repository
  • Open Educational Resources
  • Campus multimedia (lectures, performances, etc.)

Of these options, I think the most appropriate level and scope would be an institutional repository that contains simple/static documents such as PDFs. A next step would be to curate multimedia from across campus.

Even within this scope, the library will need to make editorial and collection development decisions to make sure that (1) we have a critical mass of content and (2) that there is some editorial scope. I think we should prioritize the following content areas and focus on building relationships with relevant parties.

Student Research

  • Honor’s Projects and Papers
  • Student Research
  • Master’s Thesis
  • NPPress Student Research
  • Covenant History Papers
  • Partnerships with different courses/programs.

Faculty/Staff Scholarship

  • Journal Articles
  • Faculty/Staff Presentations and other “gray” literature
  • Papers from campus symposiums
  • Offer hosting/support for existing campus projects

Political Realities/Soft Skills

We would need some strong support from across campus to take on this project and lead the campus here. Given the proposed scope of this project, here are the people I think it would be important to connect with:

  • The President
  • Provost
  • Campus Deans
  • The University Marketing and Communication Office
  • Honors Program
  • Seminary Faculty
  • Faculty/Tenure Committee
  • NPPRESS Leadership
  • Student Research Committee

Some of these needed connections blend into the next set of questions that seeks to define the scope of this project and effort. I think if we have 5 strong allies (willing to contribute the content they are responsible for) that would make a strong starting point.

Management

Do we have the technical and social workflows to produce, distribute and preserve this content? There are many overlapping questions here, but here is an attempt to list the important ones:

  • Do we have the rights/permissions to publish these materials? Who will work with each group to determine these permissions and who will maintain the paperwork?
  • Do we have the staff expertise, staff time, and faculty/staff connections to successfully manage this projects?
  • What is the ongoing cost of this project in terms of hosting costs, incentives and open access fees, etc.?
  • Where does this rank compared to other library/institutional priorities?
  • What are peer institutions doing? What can we learn from them?
Posted on

A Pietist vision for libraries and librarians?

Now that I’m officially graduated from GSLIS, I am ready to take up a new project to keep me thinking and developing as a professional. One topic that I’ve been interested in exploring is how Pietism relates to the practice of libraries and librarians.

  • What would it mean to call myself a “Pietist Librarian” in the same vein as others identify themselves as “Pietist Schoolman” (like Chris Gehrz).
  • Do libraries associated with Pietist universities have distinctive collections? Do they offer different services? Is their outlook and role on campus different that Evangelical schools?
  • How have libraries evolved/developed alongside the educational institutions associated with Spener and Francke? Borrowing categories from Gehrz, this could explore the intersection of Pietism and Libraries within the movement itself (as opposed to the ethos that, quite frankly, I’m more interested in!).
  • What lines can be traced within my own context – North Park University – between people like Nyvall, Olsson, Hawkinson, Anderson, Weborg, Clifton-Soderstrom? What (if anything!) does this have to do with libraries and library services?

Personal Motivation

Those are the broad questions that I’m grappling with and want to address somehow. When I think about starting this – I feel a strange mix of fear and pride. I think I am afraid because the topic seems looming and largely unexplored. But I also feel pride and excitement – perhaps for a number of different reasons. Doing some soul-searching, here are some reasons for excitement:

  • In the broader theological landscape, I think Pietism adds a unique and distinctive flavor that serves as a corrective or encouragement for Christianity in general. Therefore, it would not be surprising if a Pietism librarian could offer correction or encouragement within the realm of theological libraries.
  • If libraries have a role in forming “Whole and Holy Persons” (borrowing the subtitle of Chris Gehrz’s book) certainly that is my story. So I think any exploration of libraries and Pietism would be deeply personal and enriching.

Next Steps

I like to chart out next steps in public for accountability and transparency. Here’s my plan:

  • Continue reading the book “The Pietist Vision of Higher Education” and related podcast.
  • Read more about theological librarianship generally – especially the stuff produced by the ATLA.
  • Start thinking about a particular focus or perspective to motive and guide this work.
Posted on

“Information-Seeking Behavior of Pastoral Clergy” – Review

A while back, I wondered about the Information Habits of Religious Leaders. Well, I was able to research this topic a bit and decided to post my analysis of one article here. Here is the article I read for the assignment

Wicks, Donald A. “The Information-Seeking Behavior of Pastoral Clergy: A Study of the Interaction of Their Work Worlds and Work Roles.” Library & Information Science Research 21, no. 2 (1999): 205–26. doi:10.1016/S0740-8188(99)00003-1.

I was very pleased to learn that there is a lot of scholarship on this topic and I look forward to reading more in the future!

CC image from Flickr - https://flic.kr/p/drFzGJ
CC image from Flickr – https://flic.kr/p/drFzGJ

 

For this assignment, I decided to explore the information habits of clergy and read the article “The Information-Seeking Behavior of Pastoral Clergy: A Study of the Interaction of Their Work Worlds and Work Roles” by Donald A. Wicks. This study used mailed surveys and structured interviews. The surveys were mailed to 989 participants spanning six denominational bodies in southern Ontario. These religious groups – Roman Catholic, United Church of Christ, Anglican, Presbyterian, Baptist, and Pentecostal – were selected because they represent the largest denominations in the province and because they span the religious spectrum.[1] The 38.2% response rate provided a confidence interval of 95% with a reliability of +/- 4%. Structured interviews with 20 of the potential respondents – selected randomly from the range of the groups represented – were conducted to “add depth and richness to the survey data.”[2]

Within the general field of information studies, this study’s theoretical approach was to combine social network theories with the role theories and determine how the interaction of those fields influenced information behaviors. Social network theory was defined as “the boundaries that may influence information seeking” and this study identified three ‘pastoral worlds,’ namely: the theological world, the denominational world, and the congregational world.[3] Various role theories assert that within a given populations, information behaviors vary based on task. In this study, Wicks identified three work roles – preaching, caregiving, and administrating – and indeed found that clergy information behaviors differed based on pastoral role.

This, in fact, was the study’s most general finding, that “pastoral clergy tended to use different types of sources in different roles and that certain combinations of pastoral worlds and roles influenced…information-seeking behaviors.”[4] Wicks, however, continues by exploring how each social world – theological, denominational, congregational – intersected with each work role – preaching, caregiving, and administrating – and introduces language of ‘open’ and ‘closed’ to describe this relationship. If information-seeking for a given role was governed by the social world, Wicks described that relationship as ‘closed’ and if information-seeking behaviors were not restricted by the social world, Wicks described that as ‘open.’[5] For example, considering theological worlds and the preaching role, Wicks found that both liberal and conservative clergy tended to seeking information within a closed system whereas moderate clergy were more open to using resources from different theological worlds. In terms of the denominational world, Wicks demonstrated the denominational influences varied based on pastoral task, concluding that “denominational world does not influence information-seeking behavior when the minister is performing the preacher role” but that denominational world has a mixed influence when a pastor is in a caregiving role.[6] Lastly, Wicks found that the congregational social world has relatively little influence on any of the pastoral roles; that the theological position of the pastor and the denominational world had a much stronger influence on all pastoral roles.

Overall, the theoretical approach of combining social network theories and role theory yielded a wealth of actionable information. In general, the findings of this study imply that information systems and services should designed with particular pastoral roles in mind. For example, information systems designed to support preaching should be different than systems designed to support caregiving and administration. Furthermore, these findings indicate that information systems and services should take a diverse approach by providing access to information objects through a range of means and modes. Additionally, because information systems and services do not exist outside of social networks but are often embedded within theological or denominational frameworks, these systems should be aware of the theological polarization Wicks discovered and how it affects their organizational mission. Wick’s overall conclusion, that “we must understand the context of the user, including the role being performed and the social network of the individual,” restates his main theoretical framework and provides a solid paradigm to explore additional questions about the information-seeking behaviors of clergy.

[1] Wicks, “The Information-Seeking Behavior of Pastoral Clergy,” 209.

[2] Ibid., 210.

[3] Ibid., 206.

[4] Ibid., 205.

[5] Ibid., 209.

[6] Ibid., 213.

Posted on

Information Habits of Religious Leaders

I want to jot down a quick research question so that I can pick it up at a later date.

Essentially, I’d like to research how religious leaders gather and use information. By religious leaders, I mean pastors and clergy (though I’d be interested in other religious traditions as well) and I think I’m defining “information” in the most general sense – including biblical and theological commentary. Here are a few more basic questions:

  • What is the role of technology (blogs, social media, etc.) in information gathering?
  • How can denominations and Christian organizations package content so that it is most meaningful to religious leaders?
  • What is the relationship between information gathering and “politics”. Does diversity (or lack of diversity) in information sources translated into a particular theological point of view?
  • How do seminaries (and seminary libraries/librarians) prepare students to succeed in this information landscape?

I’m interested and energized by this topic for several reasons:

  • It connects with my thesis work. I could extend the framing metaphor of that work – centripetal and centrifugal force – and look at how denominations (the Covenant in particular) could better use information resources to build and foster identity.
  • It connects to my work with the Covenant Quarterly. My strong sense – supported by research and other people’s experience – is that moving toward and online, Open Access publication will allow for the publication to have a greater reach and impact.
  • It connects to my work with the Commission on Covenant History and could guide our work there.
CC image – https://flic.kr/p/nK7kRW
Posted on

“The library is like…” Exploring metaphors and the language of libraries

I’ve been thinking a bit about language recently and the role language has in shaping our perceptions of reality. In summary, I’d like to catalog and analysis some frequently used metaphors and images for libraries, unpacking them to see what they mean and – ultimately – to make recommendations about what language is most appropriate or beneficial. Some quick notes with my own questions and ideas:

What are libraries like? What should they be like?

  • Cathedrals/Sanctuaries
  • Starbucks
  • Home
  • Portals
  • Purchase agents for communities
  • Warehouses
  • Google
  • Netflix
  • Amazon
  • Wikipedia
  • Community centers
  • Publishers

Who are the people that use libraries?

  • Users
  • Patrons
  • Community
  • Customers
  • “future generations”

What are librarians?

  • Tour guides
  • Instructors
  • Organizers
  • “better googlers”
  • Metadata experts
  • Community leaders
  • Creators

A few notes after making this list. First, some of the language isn’t exactly metaphoric, per se, but I’m still somewhat interested in how differences in language impact perceptions or library collections and services. Second, I’m also perfectly aware that there isn’t one “best” answer or word for these questions. For example, librarians sometimes acts as an instructor and other times act as a metadata expert for an institution. So my question is not to settle the debate by saying “libraries should be instructors and not googlers” but merely explore what difference the linguistic framing makes.

For example, popular culture often juxtaposes libraries and Google. The nature of this justaposition changes based on the context – are these competing forces? complimentary? has one superceded the other? – but that is the language of the conversation. Students want a “google like experience” – but what does that mean? Librarians want their collections to be searchable by google…but some are reluctant to embrace and endorse google as a good searching tool.

Additional Thoughts/Questions

Is there a relationship between the language people use to describe libraries (cathedral, starbucks, etc.) be related to library architecture and design? Those two examples seem clearly connected – but I’d like to explore that relationship in more detail. Or perhaps someone has already.

It seems like other fields have done similar research. A few come to mind immediately but my frame of reference is currently the church and the way language is used in that context. Is it a “congregation” or an “audience” – does it matter? What is a pastor: a leader? A shepard? A servant? Again – my contest is limited but I would imagine that other fields have studied how language shifts with role and culture.

Would there be cultural/national differences in the framing metaphors people use? Thinking just about the English language – what is the cultural element to this and how does it impact people’s thoughts or feelings?

How could I begin to answer/address the question? Through a literature review? Interviews? Testing? Seems almost like an ethnographic research project.

So that’s a sketch of a research project I’d like to tackle some day. At core, I think it would be an exploration of what libraries are on a very basic and philosophical level and that it would be impossible for me to “catalog” the metaphors and languages while remaining neutral.