The West Jordan Library, UT, is the new central headquarters for the Salt Lake County Library (SLCL) system. You might think a building of more than 70,000 square feet would not have to worry about efficient ways to make space do double, or even triple, duty. But when it houses 20,000 square feet of administration, management support, and information technology and another 20,000 square feet of library proper including room for 150,000 titles, it makes sense that the 7,100 square foot community room is designed to serve multiple functions.
Letters to the editor on gun control and librarianship, age discrimination, expanding network capacity, and more from the June 15, 2014 issue of Library Journal.
Timothy Cherubini named Executive Director, Chief Officers of State Library Agencies, Jeff J. Jacobs named Chief Information Officer at OCLC, Paula Miller appointed Director of Baltimore County Public Library, and more new hires, promotions, retirements, and obituaries from the June 15, 2014 issue of Library Journal.
In the past few months, LJ has looked at how libraries of all kinds can improve the way they serve their patrons by gathering better data on what their communities want and need. Of course, a good idea in theory can often seem out of the question for cash- and time-strapped libraries, with few having resources to spare for specialized staff or software. The good news is that much of the data librarians need to start making informed decisions that are right for their particular user base is free and already available to the public.
Radio frequency identification (RFID) systems offer libraries many ways to enhance productivity, ranging from self-check solutions to automated materials handling systems. RFID tags, which include a tiny chip for processing and storing information and an antenna for communicating with the readers in self-check stations, security gates, staff workstations, and other equipment, are a core component of any RFID system.
At Lead the Change workshops, local library leaders help facilitate the presentation, adding their own perspectives on the concepts presented by program developer David Bendekovic. But they don’t usually bring their own visual aids. The Southern California workshop, held on May 15 at the Pasadena Public Library (PPL), was an exception. PPL director Jan Sanders brought a giant foamcore version of one of Bendekovic’s slides, on which she’d asked library staff members to plot where they felt their library stood.
I have a theory that too many library trustees are underutilized in their board work. In far too many libraries, fear of meddling and of losing control have meant that directors don’t take advantage of the expertise and talent on their Board of Trustees. Where that is true, library leaders are squandering critical capacity and losing a potent edge in the key task of connecting to the community.
Throughout the United States and Canada, there are more than 63 ALA-accredited programs offering advanced degrees in library and information science. While the number of programs has grown over the years, the field has yet to develop any significant, rigorous measures of evaluation to assess them. Even as interest in LIS education grows, the tools for determining which programs will match a student’s goals or establishing a hierarchy of quality remain stuck in neutral.
With 63 accredited programs to choose from, assessing which is best is far from clear cut. To would-be librarians, the field offers a challenge in information gathering, assessment, and data-driven decision-making right off the bat: finding the facts about the different master’s degrees in library and information science and choosing the one that best fits their needs. Below, LJ offers an actionable checklist for today’s applicants.