MLIS (Masters in Library and Information Studies)

parker kent

Chinafoot wrote: »

eclectichoney said pretty much what I wanted to say but I have to respond to a few things here.

I completely and utterly disagree on this. UCD is not a suitable course for everyone. I, and many of my colleagues, have had to do the course via distance learning in Aber because UCD is not an option. A year off work unpaid, fees and then supporting yourself while you study? You might as well include a minimum bank balance in your admissions process. If UCD offered workable part-time, evening, distance learning aspects to the course then I might be more open to them being the only accredited course in this country. Until then, absolutely not.

I agree that there should be staff suited to working in libraries which is why I would drastically change the work experience required. 6 weeks of shelving books (and lets face it, that is the extent of many work experience placements duties) and then people walk out of that course calling themselves librarians? Give me a break. The current system doesn't ensure that the right people get a chance to work in libraries, I agree, and if you make the UCD course the only accredited course in the country you will prohibit that even further.


You say that as someone who has already completed the course. Restricting access to the qualification will not necessarily ensure you get the best employees. You might get the wealthiest though. :rolleyes:


I agree that they do have a better admissions process in terms of experience required but the job is unbelievably specialised. For every library department with a staff of 100 you could have one archivist.

parker, I don't mean to offend you but, to me anyway, your posts just seem to say "I have my qualification, now stop giving it to others because I can't get a job."

I do agree that changes should be made. I think people who approach this course need to have far, far more experience than is currently required.

Graduates also need to realise that they don't walk out of this course a librarian. I would actually love to see someone get their 6 weeks experience, get the qualification and walk into a librarian position. They wouldn't have a hope because the role of a librarian is something that can only be learned through working in a library. Much of the course is not relevant to the job, and the Aber course is the same.

I work with a lot of qualified library assistants. They aren't librarians. They are library assistants and they will remain library assistants until they get a librarian position. This is how it works. I also work with a lot of unqualified library assistants, senior library assistants and staff officers and they are some of the best library staff I have ever encountered.

People need to be far more realistic about what working in a library involves and 6 weeks experience is not going to provide that.

I've already said numerous times these are long-term issues I have had with the MLIS. I did the undergrad in UCD and had these opinions. I worked for a year to save money to do the course and had these opinions (and met people already qualified who had these opinions). I had them throughout the year in UCD and I've had them since. We had a focus group at the end of the MLIS and I said all I thought about the course, admissions etc in that meeting. I wasn't the only one who thought that way. Chinafoot, you have not done the course in UCD so you may not be aware of the issues with the course. I spent 4 years in that department, so I have had plenty of experience of the positives and negatives of library and information studies in UCD. I am NOT saying I just want less competition for jobs. That is grossly misrepresenting what I am saying.

I am certainly not in favour of restricting access to the wealthiest. I am an extremely passionate campaigner in favour of improving access to education. I'm not saying that as somebody from the middle class with no actual experience, I am saying that as somebody who grew up in a council estate and who has been on the backfoot ever since in terms of money. So I hardly want the MLIS to be open to only the wealthy. I know there are issues with library assistants who want to do the course. One of my best friends is a library assistant trying work out a way to become a librarian. And of course I would try to facilitate such people. Fees are a whole other argument, and there should be extra options for people with a job.

I am talking about changing numerous things about the course and the admissions procedure (as well as my ideal changes to the wider education system), but you are responding with opinions on the current procedures. I am basically saying that in an ideal world I would make numerous changes to the programme. You are focusing on the wrong aspects in my points and are not representing what I actually think.

My opinion is that there should be one course with a limited set of applicants (not 10 or 15 like the Archives MA, but not 70 either). They already have full and part time options. I'd favour adding a third option and having an evening course (as many other masters in UCD currently offer). It is impossible to write every single change that I'd make to the admissions procedures here, so anything I say will not convey my complete thoughts. So of course, people will able to pick holes and say you didn't think of X, Y OR Z. I want more people like you on the course who actually have worked in libraries and who know it is their long-term career goal.

Currently the course has lots of people who are blasé about libraries/information studies and have already moved on to another career path. I just think that is a waste when I personally know library assistants trying to save money/take a year out of work/get sponsored by their employers etc to do the course. There are ways that people like you can be facilitated. I am not saying that the MLIS should be a carbon copy of the Archives MA. I just would like the MLIS to match their process of getting the right people into the course. As I said earlier, I would make major changes the work experience needed. I'm extremely glad I got an actual position in a library before doing the course, instead of just the 6 weeks experience. Somebody with just 6 weeks experience is not a librarian. You only become one through a lot of actual real work experience (more than I have too).

I am also thinking about the course in terms of wider library related issues in Ireland. Is it really sustainable to have most new library assistants in public libraries being qualified librarians? This was the case in 2007, imagine what it will be now with the build-up over the past few years. Then I also have issues with the type of staff a sort of "free for all" admissions policy can bring. There's a study into Children and Libraries and one of the kids responded by saying that there should be a "niceness" test for librarians. That line always stuck with me. Obviously I know it cannot literally be done, but getting people into libraries who actually really want to be there will improve the service. A lot of people don't go to libraries because of librarians. That is not just my random thought, it is actually true and many research papers have proven that. So all I want is the best possible public library service.

And before anybody replies, of course I know the course needs to to cater for the myriad of areas librarians can work in, from cataloguer to systems to academic library to school library to information officer in a business etc. No course can ever compete with learning on the job, but I think the course could do a much better job of selecting the right people, the right amount of people and then teaching them the right things. I am not saying I only want people from the current UCD course as librarians in Ireland.

And just to repeat, I am not just saying these things with just personal interest in mind. I'd like to think that it is possible for somebody such as myself to be able to think of the wider picture.

eclectichoney

Chinafoot wrote: »

I work with a lot of qualified library assistants. They aren't librarians. They are library assistants and they will remain library assistants until they get a librarian position. This is how it works. I also work with a lot of unqualified library assistants, senior library assistants and staff officers and they are some of the best library staff I have ever encountered.

People need to be far more realistic about what working in a library involves and 6 weeks experience is not going to provide that.

On something of an O/T point (given this thread is really about UCD!), I do feel the current system is a little insane, simple because of the somewhat box-checking requirement of having completed the postgrad course. The first set of people are entitled technically in my view to refer to themselves as 'qualified librarians' as they have a professional qualification, but are trapped in some strange midpoint: they are qualified as librarians but aren't working as one, just like say, a formerly employed librarian who is now unemployed. It makes no sense for it to be this way: for a course to make somebody a librarian (technically) overnight, when it is about the ability to do the job in practice.

The second set of people, I have so much time for. As getting the qualification (especially when it is so unrelated to the actual job in many aspects) is largely just a box-checking exercise and has no real impact on your ability to do the job in practice, especially when many unqualified LAs can already catalogue and have the more 'technical' skills taught on the course. It is really a strange one that doesn't make sense, and will never make sense, but it is just the way it is I guess. These are issues with the way the library profession is structured by the way, and in no way related to UCD of their MLIS programme just to clear up any confusion (sorry UCD for posting this here when it is not directed at you )

There is going to be a problem down the line, given that there are simply no new library assistant jobs coming on stream nor will there be. Any jobs coming up seem to be for AL and upwards, so those people with the 6 weeks experience are essentially blocked out from getting a job. Those individuals with significant experience as a LA (who some would see as the 'right' people to be working in libraries) are in pole position in this respect and at the top of the queue for getting one of the very scarce jobs at the moment. So there is some filtering in this respect, based on experience rather than simply having the qualification.

There is a broader issue though in that, it is extremely difficult to get LA experience for new people who wish to enter the profession, and what can be done for these people?? I just don't know. Having a minimum requirement for experience of anything greater than 6 months (which I agree is absolutely desirable) would reduce the number of applicants to the MLIS by a vast amount alone, because people simply cannot get experience as (1) there are no LA jobs and will be no LA jobs in the medium term and (2) it is extremely difficult to get voluntary work with insurance issues etc. This would intrinsically have the limiting / filtering effect that parker kent is talking about, without having to go down the interview etc route.

It is just a depressing time for the profession though. I know of several really good, talented, passionate people, who are qualified, with maybe a year or so experience and they are essentially blocked off from ever getting a job because (1) there are no LA jobs (which they would jump at) and (2) they don't have enough experience to get a look in for the AL jobs out there. It is a sickening situation, an dthese people are now trapped because of there being no lower grade employment opportunities whatsoever. There is no channel for them to work their way up, nor will there be for the medium term at least, even though they are so passionate about doing so. What do these people do?? The UK is just as difficult if not more so. There is simply nothing

Chinafoot

parker kent wrote: »

I've already said numerous times these are long-term issues I have had with the MLIS. I did the undergrad in UCD and had these opinions. I worked for a year to save money to do the course and had these opinions (and met people already qualified who had these opinions). I had them throughout the year in UCD and I've had them since. We had a focus group at the end of the MLIS and I said all I thought about the course, admissions etc in that meeting. I wasn't the only one who thought that way. Chinafoot, you have not done the course in UCD so you may not be aware of the issues with the course. I spent 4 years in that department, so I have had plenty of experience of the positives and negatives of library and information studies in UCD. I am NOT saying I just want less competition for jobs. That is grossly misrepresenting what I am saying.

First of all, would you like to reel your neck in? I am not disgareeing that changes need to be made. I did not do the course in UCD, no. I do however work with many people who have done the course in UCD. I also complete my undergraduate in UCD so I am fully aware of the issues that their administration has. I don't believe I have grossly misrepresented anything. I stated my opinion on how your posts come across to me. I think you'll find I'm entitled to do that.

Would you like to show me where I have disagreed with what you are saying, other than on the issue of restriction the qualification to one institute? Did I say I think it's right to have 70+ people graduating every year? Pretty sure I didn't. I do however feel that it is naive in the extreme to expect an organisation that is ultimately a business to turn people away out of some moral obligation to the library industry. Thinking this view is naive does not mean I agree with what the organisation is doing.

parker kent wrote: »

I am certainly not in favour of restricting access to the wealthiest. I am an extremely passionate campaigner in favour of improving access to education. I'm not saying that as somebody from the middle class with no actual experience, I am saying that as somebody who grew up in a council estate and who has been on the backfoot ever since in terms of money. So I hardly want the MLIS to be open to only the wealthy. I know there are issues with library assistants who want to do the course. One of my best friends is a library assistant trying work out a way to become a librarian. And of course I would try to facilitate such people. Fees are a whole other argument, and there should be extra options for people with a job.

Restricting the course to UCD which does not provide suitable alternatives for those working full-time is restricting access to the wealthy. Having the course available elsewhere with viable options for part-time and evening courses will provide a better opportunity for those interested in the area to become qualified. Again, in your outrage, you appear to have missed the part of my post that said I would be more open to UCD being the only accredited course in the country IF they make these provisions. Without them it would be completely unfair. Do you have any idea how difficult it is to work a fulltime job which includes two late nights a week and every second Saturday while also trying to complete a masters via the internet? Its not easy and it is very off-putting for people who work in libraries and many decide not to go down this road. Christ, years ago the only option was to go to Aberystwyth to complete the diploma fulltime. Thats an enormous commitment and disruption for someone who is working and living in Ireland but it had to be done. There are people that I work with who would be excellent librarians but as they are not qualified, and are not in a position to get qualified as things stand, they can't be promoted despite being the right people for the job. If access to the course was made easier these people would be running our branches.

parker kent wrote: »

I am talking about changing numerous things about the course and the admissions procedure (as well as my ideal changes to the wider education system), but you are responding with opinions on the current procedures. I am basically saying that in an ideal world I would make numerous changes to the programme. You are focusing on the wrong aspects in my points and are not representing what I actually think.

With respect, it is not for you to decide that what I am focusing on is "wrong". We are discussing the course in UCD and the library profession in general. I disagreed with your assertion that the course should be limited to one body and I expressed an opinion that the level of experience needs to be drastically increased. I'm not attempting to represent your thoughts. I am responding to what you have written.

parker kent wrote: »

My opinion is that there should be one course with a limited set of applicants (not 10 or 15 like the Archives MA, but not 70 either). They already have full and part time options. I'd favour adding a third option and having an evening course (as many other masters in UCD currently offer).

Which, again, I said I would agree with.

parker kent wrote: »

It is impossible to write every single change that I'd make to the admissions procedures here, so anything I say will not convey my complete thoughts. So of course, people will able to pick holes and say you didn't think of X, Y OR Z. I want more people like you on the course who actually have worked in libraries and who know it is their long-term career goal.

I don't believe I have "picked holes".

parker kent wrote: »

Currently the course has lots of people who are blasé about libraries/information studies and have already moved on to another career path. I just think that is a waste when I personally know library assistants trying to save money/take a year out of work/get sponsored by their employers etc to do the course. There are ways that people like you can be facilitated.

I'm repeating myself at this stage, but I didn't disgaree with you on that. I said exactly the same thing.

parker kent wrote: »

I am not saying that the MLIS should be a carbon copy of the Archives MA. I just would like the MLIS to match their process of getting the right people into the course. As I said earlier, I would make major changes the work experience needed. I'm extremely glad I got an actual position in a library before doing the course, instead of just the 6 weeks experience. Somebody with just 6 weeks experience is not a librarian. You only become one through a lot of actual real work experience (more than I have too).

Yet again, didn't disagree. You become a librarian when you are appointed a librarian. Its really as simple as that. Until you actually do that job, and yes it is very different to that of an assistant, senior assistant or staff officer, you are not a librarian, regardless of your qualification. There are too many people referring to themselves as librarians and therefore having completely unrealistic expectations when it comes to looking for work.

parker kent wrote: »

I am also thinking about the course in terms of wider library related issues in Ireland. Is it really sustainable to have most new library assistants in public libraries being qualified librarians? This was the case in 2007, imagine what it will be now with the build-up over the past few years.

But again, those new library assistants are just that, library assistants. The fact that they are qualified is irrelevant until it comes time for promotion. I always think of The Office when I hear stuff like this. Gareth always referred to himself as "Assistant Regional Manner" and Brent would correct him by saying "Assistant to the Regional Manager." The distinction is important. Personally I don't see the problem with having highly qualified staff at all levels. It will enhance the service we provide.

parker kent wrote: »

Then I also have issues with the type of staff a sort of "free for all" admissions policy can bring. There's a study into Children and Libraries and one of the kids responded by saying that there should be a "niceness" test for librarians. That line always stuck with me. Obviously I know it cannot literally be done, but getting people into libraries who actually really want to be there will improve the service.

I agree, and again, until applicants have proper, on the job experience they won't know exactly what working in a library entails and if they are suited to the job itself. An interview will not necessarily help matters either. We can all put our best (and nicest) self forward. Unless the interviewer is a genius profiler there is no way to tell.

parker kent wrote: »

A lot of people don't go to libraries because of librarians. That is not just my random thought, it is actually true and many research papers have proven that.

Anyone who has worked in the service for longer than a few months could tell you that. I've worked in the service for almost 5 years now and I have seen people who shouldn't be working with the public and I have had borrowers tell me that they won't deal with specific people. Its not exactly an unknown fact. Unfortunately there are people in all walks of life that are in the wrong job.

parker kent wrote: »

So all I want is the best possible public library service.

As does everyone else, particularly those of us who actually work in it.

parker kent wrote: »

And before anybody replies, of course I know the course needs to to cater for the myriad of areas librarians can work in, from cataloguer to systems to academic library to school library to information officer in a business etc. No course can ever compete with learning on the job, but I think the course could do a much better job of selecting the right people, the right amount of people and then teaching them the right things. I am not saying I only want people from the current UCD course as librarians in Ireland.

And while I am repeating myself again, I fully believe that increasing the level of experience required dramatically will help make these changes. I would much rather see 20 fulltime library assistants take the course on an evening basis than 70 people fresh out of their undergrad doing the course fulltime with no idea of what the job involves . Thats just me though.

parker kent wrote: »

And just to repeat, I am not just saying these things with just personal interest in mind. I'd like to think that it is possible for somebody such as myself to be able to think of the wider picture.

You don't have to have done the course in UCD to see the "wider picture". :rolleyes:

Chinafoot

eclectichoney wrote: »

On something of an O/T point (given this thread is really about UCD!), I do feel the current system is a little insane, simple because of the somewhat box-checking requirement of having completed the postgrad course. The first set of people are entitled technically in my view to refer to themselves as 'qualified librarians' as they have a professional qualification, but are trapped in some strange midpoint: they are qualified as librarians but aren't working as one, just like say, a formerly employed librarian who is now unemployed. It makes no sense for it to be this way: for a course to make somebody a librarian (technically) overnight, when it is about the ability to do the job in practice.

You will be hard pushed to find anyone in the public library service (this is where I work so I am not going to speak for any other type of library service) who is qualified and referring to themselves as a librarian unless they are in a librarians job. Your example of someone who previously worked as a librarian and became unemployed is not the same thing. They had been appointed a librarian. They did the job. A library assistant is not doing the same job. Sure, some have the skills (cataloguing is a touchy subject though ) but it is not their role and while there is undoubtedly some overlap in duties, there are also some big differences.


For me, the qualification is just something that you have to get, and once you do it will come down to your level of experience and ability to do the job. I don't think we should get rid of it as I would hate to see the area being de-professionalised as is happening in the UK (customer service operatives!?), but I do agree that changes need to be made.

The rest of your post I agree with

eclectichoney

Chinafoot wrote: »

You will be hard pushed to find anyone in the public library service (this is where I work so I am not going to speak for any other type of library service) who is qualified and referring to themselves as a librarian unless they are in a librarians job. Your example of someone who previously worked as a librarian and became unemployed is not the same thing. They had been appointed a librarian. They did the job. A library assistant is not doing the same job. Sure, some have the skills (cataloguing is a touchy subject though ) but it is not their role and while there is undoubtedly some overlap in duties, there are also some big differences.


For me, the qualification is just something that you have to get, and once you do it will come down to your level of experience and ability to do the job. I don't think we should get rid of it as I would hate to see the area being de-professionalised as is happening in the UK (customer service operatives!?), but I do agree that changes need to be made.

Yes, sorry that is the point I was trying (badly!) to make - that when you have the qualification you are 'technically' a 'professionally qualified librarian' (whatever that is!) but you are not a librarian, it is simply because of the box-ticking aspect of the qualification, which is an extremely random and a bizarre situation imo, and should be changed.

parker kent

Chinafoot wrote: »

First of all, would you like to reel your neck in? I am not disgareeing that changes need to be made. I did not do the course in UCD, no. I do however work with many people who have done the course in UCD. I also complete my undergraduate in UCD so I am fully aware of the issues that their administration has. I don't believe I have grossly misrepresented anything. I stated my opinion on how your posts come across to me. I think you'll find I'm entitled to do that.

<SNIP for space reasons!>
You don't have to have done the course in UCD to see the "wider picture". :rolleyes:

My point about doing my undergrad in UCD is that I did one half of my undergrad in Information Studies, so I have spent longer in SILS (or the department as it was known!) than a lot of people. It is not really related to the admin side of UCD. Although I have worked in admin. In other words, I have had longer to think about the positives and negatives of SILS.

My points about misrepresenting what I am saying is that you are comparing what I am saying about any hypothetical changed course with what is the current course/set-up. Which you have done again by stating that I would be limiting the course to the wealthy. Check my post above, I have already said I am not, nor would I want to.

We agree that experienced library assistants doing the course is better than people fresh out of an undergrad doing the course. That pretty much represents one of the biggest changes I would make to the course (i.e people who know what they are doing and are sure it is what they want to do).

I clearly didn't say you have to do the course in UCD to understand the wider picture of the library sector. That line was a direct reply to you saying I am was thinking as somebody who has a qualification and am speaking purely in terms of self interest. My point is that it is possible to want to change the course and not be acting out of self interest. I was just re-iterating that I genuinely think the entire sector would be improved with a better Masters.

I have also said earlier than I am fully aware my views here are idealistic, not entirely realistic. I'm talking about a perfect world scenario.

Chinafoot

eclectichoney wrote: »

Yes, sorry that is the point I was trying (badly!) to make - that when you have the qualification you are 'technically' a 'professionally qualified librarian' (whatever that is!) but you are not a librarian, simply because of the box-ticking aspect of the qualification, which is an extremely random and a bizarre situation imo, and should be changed.

Sorry I don't quite understand what you mean by "box-ticking aspect of the qualification". Do you think we shouldn't have the a requirement for the qualification? Or that those who have the qualification should be referred to as librarians regardless of their role? You'll have to forgive me, I hurt my back recently and the pain coupled with the lack of sleep doesn't lend itself to coherent posting!

Personally I wouldn't be against having the qualification and a minimum length of experience as a requirement for a librarian position. In the public library service in order to go from a library assistant to a senior library assistant a minimum of 2 years experience is required. I wouldn't be against a minimum of 5 years when it comes to a librarian position, but I am aware that that can lead to people getting the position due to simply being there for that long, or that really wonderful people without that much time served who should get ahead won't. Its hard to know what to do for the best, but I do feel that the qualification should be kept but changed to be more relevant to the actual job.

eclectichoney

Chinafoot wrote: »

Sorry I don't quite understand what you mean by "box-ticking aspect of the qualification". Do you think we shouldn't have the a requirement for the qualification? Or that those who have the qualification should be referred to as librarians regardless of their role? You'll have to forgive me, I hurt my back recently and the pain coupled with the lack of sleep doesn't lend itself to coherent posting!

Personally I wouldn't be against having the qualification and a minimum length of experience as a requirement for a librarian position.

No it is definitely good that there should be a qualification, but the course alone should not 'tick a box' for people, which it does at the moment, like 'Great I have the qualification I am now a librarian', which some people believe (wrongly) to be the case. Instead I believe it should be a mix of experience & the qualification e.g. say something like 3-5 years and the qualification, or maybe even include other professional development aspects like the CILIP chartership requirements.

Chinafoot

parker kent wrote: »

Which you have done again by stating that I would be limiting the course to the wealthy. Check my post above, I have already said I am not, nor would I want to.

Hang on a second, so now you're saying that your talking about the course as it would be in your ideal, perfect world? Interesting given that when the issue of accrediting the course in one body only was brought up you said

I don't see the need for two courses, not just now but at any time really.

Now, to me, here you are saying that even in its current form you believe that the UCD course should be the only course in the country. I was responding to that assertion by you, because in its current form it is too restrictive.

Chinafoot

eclectichoney wrote: »

No it is definitely good that there should be a qualification, but the course alone should not 'tick a box' for people, which it does at the moment, like 'Great I have the qualification I am now a librarian', which some people believe (wrongly) to be the case. Instead I believe it should be a mix of experience & the qualification e.g. say something like 3-5 years and the qualification, or maybe even include other professional development aspects like the CILIP chartership requirements.

Gotcha!

Agree 100%

parker kent

Chinafoot wrote: »

Hang on a second, so now you're saying that your talking about the course as it would be in your ideal, perfect world? Interesting given that when the issue of accrediting the course in one body only was brought up you said

Now, to me, here you are saying that even in its current form you believe that the UCD course should be the only course in the country. I was responding to that assertion by you, because in its current form it is too restrictive.

I would have assumed it was pretty clear that I was saying there is no need for two courses. I was answering a specific question, "do I think there is a need for two courses?" I answered no and have said things such as this on a few occasions:

My opinion is that there should be one course with a limited set of applicants (not 10 or 15 like the Archives MA, but not 70 either). They already have full and part time options. I'd favour adding a third option and having an evening course (as many other masters in UCD currently offer). It is impossible to write every single change that I'd make to the admissions procedures here, so anything I say will not convey my complete thoughts.

I have said on numerous occasions that I'm talking about my ideal course, I didn't think I had to continually say so. The conversation between myself and electichoney last night was about the differences between what is realistic and what is idealistic. I said a few times in those posts that I was talking about creating an ideal course. I tried to re-state the points I was trying to make when you said that my attitude was "I have my qualification, now stop giving it to others because I can't get a job."" That is not at all what I'm saying. And that is partly why I keep saying you are misrepresenting me. As you genuinely seem to have missed that all my posts have been about this new, changed course (i.e I am not talking about the current course when I say there should just be one course). I am just simply saying there is scope to vastly improve the course and the wider library sector.

I'll make another suggestion which is extremely unrealistic for many reasons (union objections, costs etc). It would be great if the course offered a one-year placement as part of a re-designed 2 year course. Something like that would be great were the course to continue to attract people with just the 6-week requirement.

Chinafoot

parker kent wrote: »

I would have assumed it was pretty clear that I was saying there is no need for two courses. I was answering a specific question, "do I think there is a need for two courses?" I answered no and have said things such as this on a few occasions:

*sigh*

Nobody has disagreed that there should be an evening class option added to the UCD course. My point is that without these proposed "when I rule the world" changes that you would make you still said that you felt no need for two courses. And yes, that does smack of self-interest, in my opinion. Since you are clearly unable to talk about the situation in its present form we shall leave it there. I'm sure when you are made head of SILS the library world will be a much brighter place.

Good luck with the job hunt.

parker kent

Chinafoot wrote: »

*sigh*

Nobody has disagreed that there should be an evening class option added to the UCD course. My point is that without these proposed "when I rule the world" changes that you would make you still said that you felt no need for two courses. And yes, that does smack of self-interest, in my opinion. Since you are clearly unable to talk about the situation in its present form we shall leave it there. I'm sure when you are made head of SILS the library world will be a much brighter place.

Good luck with the job hunt.

There is really no need for the sighing or passive aggressive "you're irrational so I can't talk to you" approach. We nearly have 200 posts in this thread and I have said plenty about the present situation. I did not really originally want to end up talking about every change I would make in SILS but constant misunderstandings made me feel I had to continue to clarify my points. In doing so, I mentioned many changes I feel could be implemented. They may not all be possible (indeed I have even said it is not realistic for many of them to be implemented), but nonetheless they can be discussed.

For the record, I never said people were disagreeing that there should be an evening course, so there is no need to imply I had said that. I simply reposted that as proof that I did not think that the current system is sufficient. You had posted saying that I felt the current course at UCD was sufficient, despite me saying otherwise. Yes I think one course is sufficient in a perfect world, but that is not the same thing. I'm not saying that everything I think is what should be done. How can I say that? Nobody can say that without properly researching the possibilities. I'm just saying what I currently think should be done, given my and other peoples experiences.

The reason we can't seem to discuss this is because I have to keep restating my posts as they are bing misinterpreted. If at the first moment I mentioned my ideal scenario it had been understood, the conversation could have moved on. I originally stated I feel there is not a need for 60+ people to get an MLIS every year, regardless of how many courses there are. That is a valid opinion.

I also stated that I preferred SILS admissions procedure from a number of years ago. There was a better balance between the MLIS and the MA in Information Studies. That masters is being lost in the drive towards churning out librarians. That is not fair on those people who are joining a course with no intention of being librarians. So there should be a change in SILS to improve the experience of those students. Nor is it fair on undergrads to have SILS turn into a playground for MLIS students. It can unbalance classes and I know many people have had issues with the postgrads in undergrad classes. I also disagree with the wider implications of lowering the bar to entry to 4th level education. There are many masters in UCD which do not require a 2.1. That to me is not right. A masters should be somewhat rare or at least difficult to get. That is a wider comment, not necessarily aimed at the MLIS. It would be a shame if postgraduate courses became the new minimum requirement for students or if people get one despite not really earning one.

And lastly, these are just my opinions. I'm not saying that they all right or that only my opinion counts. electichoney made a very good point about the DBS course suiting people with different circumstance. I acknowledged that was an excellent point as DBS are filling a void. I had not considered that in my points and was wrong to do so. That does not mean that I still don't think it would be better if everybody was attending the same institution. I genuinely think that way.

The same way that I genuinely feel libraries in Ireland (public, private, academic etc) would be better served by a changed education process for librarians. I don't claim to know all the answers or that I should rule the world. I'm just saying there are issues with Irish libraries and a changed MLIS would deal with some of those issues.

I just want better libraries in Ireland. I know the MLIS cannot change financial issues or governmental policies. But any change for the better is welcomed. If you think I'm saying this from out of self-interest, then I can't change your mind. But I know that I am saying this because I feel there is scope for change. You don't know how I think, so I was a little insulted to be told I was thinking purely out of self interest. If anything, a streamlined course would produce a greater number of librarians who actually stay the course (as opposed to the many people who do the MLIS within 1-5 years of their undergrad and then decide they don't want to work in libraries), thus increasing competition for jobs.

To me better librarians equals better libraries. I am extremely passionate about them, so this is not some short sighted, self interested position I have taken.

Weepsie

I've been going through many LIS courses and comparing them where I can here, the UK and North America. UCD does have at the least a broad range of modules compared to the UK equivalents now, although the UK ones seem a bit more focused on specific areas.

None of them seem to have too much scope for any concentration on a speciality. They don't seem to have found the right mix of information or library studies modules from what I can gather, though they've only recently changed the course. Instead it appears overly IT & Management centric. I've an application pending, that should be succesful as I met with someone from UCD as part of my work interview last year but I'm still unsure.

I've applied to one in Canada too that seems to tick every box for me anyway, but that may have to be rejected.

I've also heard that the thesis option may be dropped in favour of a Capstone Project in UCD. This is something which would probably stop me from doing the MLIS and just taking the diploma. At least I know the Thesis is all my own work and it's shortcomings will be down to me rather than someone who is potentially unwilling to work. They're fine for some of the module but considerings its 33% percent of the overall mark, I don't know if I'd be willing to take the chance (there is also the possibility of letting people down myself)

Decisions, decisions!

parker kent

The Grad Dip is being phased out, or at least it has being spoken of before. They are just after offering an option for people who had previously completed the Grad Dip to upgrade to a Masters. Not sure how wise it would be to not do a Masters when you have the chance.

Weepsie

Thinig is I already have a Masters. Sure it's in another area, but I've shown I think, that I'm capable of achieving that standard. Again it was only if they took away the thesis option, which is unlikey. That said it seems to be that the 2 semesters are heavy on workload for the modules and then the summer is supposed to be for a thesis. Even though it's a minor one, 3 months is not much time, even if there is work done in the months previous. This is where I leaned towards Aber, you focus on the modular work for the year and then have 1-2 years to focus on the thesis. I don't think they have a broad enough range of options though as they seem to have gotten rid of a lot.


The place abroad I applied to has an option to work for an entire semester in a library. You have to pay for an extra semester and it only counts for a small number of credits, but you get paid enough to cover fees for 2 or 3 semesters. There is also the option of doing a dual degree, LIS & Archival studies and if results are good enough and you have the funds) you can go into that after a year and still only have to do one thesis.

There are a few (very few) studentships open for those that are interested in later going to do a MLIS. NLI has 1 for archival and library stuudies as does the Royal Irish Academy. Theyll be advertised sometime in April/May. The RIA pays more but possibly has less scope. Neither pay for the person to go onto UCD either and I believe a member of the UCD staff sits in the interviews.


On a separate note, I would say we need more institutions offering Library Studies courses. It would force them to each raise their game as far as I'm concerned. It can't be a surprise that many people think the UCD one is a bit hit and miss considering they had something of a monopoly on it. Trinity had something similar (a H. DIp of somesort) but there is a level of snobbery in some circles of the Library Council or was at least and they would never recognise it even though it had quite a good reputation. DBS might force ucd to shake up a bit but i doubt it

parker kent

Having another masters is irrelevant though to my point. Some countries (such as the US) specifically require an MLIS, MLS to be considered for positions as a librarian. That may become common everywhere. I've been party to discussions about the GradDip and this is one of the reasons it may be discontinued. And it is a reason that many people with one may upgrade to the masters.

You'll find that many people with an MLIS hold another masters degree.

vicecreamsundae

Weepsie, very much agreed with Parker Kentthere. If you're at all interested in working outside of Ireland, it's really in your best interest to have the MLIS.
And yes, the plan IS that from next year there will be no option to do a thesis, the capstone project will be mandatory for the MLIS.

I'm actually doing the thesis this year, but only because I had something specific in mind. It's true, by this stage everyone in the course is a little sick of all the groupwork (though think they took that feedback and will be lowering the amount of groupwork for next year!) but for the capstone it works out pretty good. firstly, the same wordcount is divided between 4-7 people, which is nice! and the projects are really hands-on and so are a good thing to put on your CV and discuss in interviews. Some of the one's this year are quite interesting (there's actually a couple about Boards.ie believe it or not!).
And even though group work can be a pain, I really don't think it will get to a stage that your grade suffers badly for it. you work closely with a lecturer and at that stage of the course if someone's not pulling their weight i think everyone would say it!!

though, in spite all of this, i believe the main reason they are getting rid of the thesis in favour of the capstone is for financial reasons... not enough staff/money to supervise 70 theses. (and wouldn't be surprised if they let even more people in next year...)

eclectichoney

parker kent wrote: »

The Grad Dip is being phased out, or at least it has being spoken of before. They are just after offering an option for people who had previously completed the Grad Dip to upgrade to a Masters. Not sure how wise it would be to not do a Masters when you have the chance.

God I was not aware of that - interesting development! I know most people do the MLIS now anyway but still. The change from thesis to capstone is a big change too - Never having done the latter I guess I can't really comment on which I think is more valuable.

parker kent

eclectichoney wrote: »

God I was not aware of that - interesting development! I know most people to the MLIS now anyway but still. The change from thesis to capstone is a big change too - Never having done the latter I guess I can't really comment on which I think is more valuable.

Yeah it is very new. When I did the MLIS, we did have one class where we discussed the Grad Dip and it's future. It might be a casualty of the popularity of the MLIS and the beginning of the capstone era.

This is the description of how people upgrade their Grad Dip.

If you successfully passed your higher diploma or graduate diploma courses, you need only complete 15 credits of course work and a 30 credit capstone project to earn a MLIS. The course work may include two 7.5 credit courses in research methods, or another combination of courses. We are planning to offer one research method course each semester during late afternoons, one afternoon per week. You can do this as a part-time student over the course of 12 months.

http://www.ucd.ie/sils/newsandevents/silsnewstitle,79535,en.html

Yeah I've never heard of anything like it before. 2 people doing a thesis is something I've seen a few times, but not that. Leaving budgetary issues aside, it might actually be a decent way of replicating actual research teams.

I'd still prefer though to do a thesis on my own. I'd rather everybody had shown they can carry out research on their own. In group work, the best method would be focus on what each person is best at, so there might be people in the group who don't carry out any research and just do things like writing the reports, proofing it etc.

Weepsie

parker kent wrote: »

Having another masters is irrelevant though to my point. Some countries (such as the US) specifically require an MLIS, MLS to be considered for positions as a librarian. That may become common everywhere. I've been party to discussions about the GradDip and this is one of the reasons it may be discontinued. And it is a reason that many people with one may upgrade to the masters.

You'll find that many people with an MLIS hold another masters degree.

I probably should have stated that I don't know all that much if I want to be a librarian but that there are aspects of the degree/PgDip that I would find useful to either further studies, combining this with History to do International relations, conflict studies and American studies.


I'm still not interested in doing it if they get rid of the thesis option. I was recently speaking to another student, 2 in fact and they said, it's looking more likely to happen. Capstone project could be great if you get good people with you, but I'd prefer to have projects throughout the year with others and then have a thesis. Having less control over what equates to 33% of the result doesn't sit well with me.

I've already given heavy consideration to two thesis ideas, and another one is swirling around the back of my mind. If they have so many of their modules in departments outside of theirs, could they have supervisors from other department, providing they were willing of course, for those who want to do a thesis.


They've formally offered me a place anyway, have to decide sooner than I'd like, though the other offer I have, is probably unrealistic, even if it is much preferred. I'm giving Digital Humanities in NUIM some consideration too, seeing as being a librarian is not my priority. They're taking too long answering my queries though.


Lastly, looking for info on this year's reading list if anyone has any. I'd be interested in checking costs and whatnot. For any and all modules (even if they have got rid of most of the modules I had highlighted last year

cazzywazzy

Weepsie, i got an offer too and in the letter that came with it, it said we'd have to complete capstone project and there was no mention of thesis. I emailed claire nolan and she said capstone is the only option now going ahead, which is very disappointing.

eclectichoney

Weepsie, I really get the impression that the MLIS is not the course for you tbh. The employment situation is so, so difficult out there right now that you need to be committed to it, and absolutely want it, 100%, as otherwise you'll just end up giving up out of sheer desperation (God knows it's hard enough to stick at it even when you are fully committed).

I have to say I am disappointed with the capstone-only development, though never having done one it is hard for me to really comment on the merits either way. I do think an optional system would have been better though - most likely a couple of groups would choose a capstone anyway due to the reduced workload which would have lessened the burden on supervisors somewhat.

But it seems like a strange decision to take if it is largely a function of the 'too many students and not enough supervisors' situation (There may be other valid reasons however) - if so, surely the answer was to cut back on intake a little bit to maybe still allow students to choose between a capstone & a thesis? Just my opinion, and like I say I am sure there are other reasons. But I know from my time, there was a lot of project / team work throughout the course, so these skills were already built up and developed without requiring a capstone type project. Maybe this has also changed (it is such a long time ago now! )

parker kent

Weepsie wrote: »

I probably should have stated that I don't know all that much if I want to be a librarian but that there are aspects of the degree/PgDip that I would find useful to either further studies, combining this with History to do International relations, conflict studies and American studies.


I'm still not interested in doing it if they get rid of the thesis option. I was recently speaking to another student, 2 in fact and they said, it's looking more likely to happen. Capstone project could be great if you get good people with you, but I'd prefer to have projects throughout the year with others and then have a thesis. Having less control over what equates to 33% of the result doesn't sit well with me.

I've already given heavy consideration to two thesis ideas, and another one is swirling around the back of my mind. If they have so many of their modules in departments outside of theirs, could they have supervisors from other department, providing they were willing of course, for those who want to do a thesis.


They've formally offered me a place anyway, have to decide sooner than I'd like, though the other offer I have, is probably unrealistic, even if it is much preferred. I'm giving Digital Humanities in NUIM some consideration too, seeing as being a librarian is not my priority. They're taking too long answering my queries though.


Lastly, looking for info on this year's reading list if anyone has any. I'd be interested in checking costs and whatnot. For any and all modules (even if they have got rid of most of the modules I had highlighted last year

If you don't want to be a librarian, why not do the MA in Information Studies?

Weepsie

Its probably because somewhere down the line I'll have an oppertunity that wouldn't be open to me otherwise without the Library aspect. The reluctance is also borne out of the other offer I have which I'd take without hesitation if I could ensure the finances but I can't. Though as said above I'd consider Digital Humanities which seems a bit more diverse than information studies.

My letter and e-mail said nothing about no thesis. They really shouldn't ask what you'd intend on writing a thesis on in the application if they're to get rid of it. I'd prefer more time to consider, as it has to be accepted 3 weeks with a deposit whereas UBC has given me until June.

I realise that compared to some, I'm fortunate to have choices so if it sounds like moaning I apologise. I consider it a fairly big decision though. I'm going to have to find out more about the capstone though

vicecreamsundae

Weepsie, I might be able to answer your questions about the capstone. I'm doing the thesis, but was considering the capstone for a good while, and most of my classmates are doing a capstone.

Most members of staff in SILS announced the topic of their capstone project -an area they were interested in, and then students had opportunities to ask questions about it, talk to other students about their ideas and the projects they were interested in, and signed up to the one that most interested them. There was also room for a group of students who had their own ideas, or who wanted to modify a lecturer's idea to do so.

The aim is that, as a practical project, it will be something you can put on your CV and discuss in interviews. The course this year did involve LOTS of groupwork, however I think they might tone that down a little for next year. The word count is the same as the thesis, split between the whole group.

I can definitely see why some people would rather do a thesis than depend on other people for such a big percentage of their degree, but I really think by this stage in the year everyone is so used to working in groups that it's really quite straightforward. In our whole year (70 people! probably more next year ) there is literally only two, three people tops who anyone might not want to work with.. pretty much everyone is dependably and a hard worker. Because it's a masters, you can't really get away with doing no work because you would be called out on it, but more importantly, everyone realises that the harder they work the better for the whole group.

I'm doing the thesis because I had an specific idea I wanted to work on before I even heard of the capstone, but otherwise I would be quite happy with the capstone, and my classmates who are working on capstones are all enjoying it (and have more work done so far than I have!).

It sounds like you have some other offers that may be better for you anyway, but certainly for anyone who *really* wants to be a librarian, I wouldn't let the capstone put you off, it's a lot more straightforward than it sounds.

Weepsie

I had/have a specific idea myself. Maybe, just maybe (unlikely) they are seeing how many applicants had put down something specific on the self assesment form. I put 2 down, one involving a very specific case study too. Considering I didn't get told anout the Capstone only option in the letter, I will retain some hope that it's open for me. I doubt it though

rottenhat

I'm fairly certain that form was just not updated from the previous year so I would not read anything into that in terms of thesis vs capstone. Dr. Wusteman told me last year that they were planning on doing away with the thesis option in favour of capstone only.

cazzywazzy

Weepsie wrote: »

I had/have a specific idea myself. Maybe, just maybe (unlikely) they are seeing how many applicants had put down something specific on the self assesment form. I put 2 down, one involving a very specific case study too. Considering I didn't get told anout the Capstone only option in the letter, I will retain some hope that it's open for me. I doubt it though

weepsie, it didnt say it in the offer letter or email, but in the 4 pages that came with the posted offer letter stabled together, its there on first page under the info on the masters. When i emailed them and said its on the website (the thesis option) I was told, information on the website only pertains to the current year. I'm abit like you in denial and hoping that it will be allowed as an option but its very doubtful that will happen. The decision seems to be made.

Weepsie

cazzywazzy wrote: »

weepsie, it didnt say it in the offer letter or email, but in the 4 pages that came with the posted offer letter stabled together, its there on first page under the info on the masters. When i emailed them and said its on the website (the thesis option) I was told, information on the website only pertains to the current year. I'm abit like you in denial and hoping that it will be allowed as an option but its very doubtful that will happen. The decision seems to be made.

Any chance you or someone else could scan this extra bit and upload it somewhere, or is it anywhere online. the site is something of a jumble, links have disappeared and reappeared on different pages for me. I only got the letter in e-mail and standard postal form. Nothing else came with it whatsoever

Edit, it's ok, I got a reply from the Department, and as feared they said no thesis option. Asked me about the MA instead of I was reconsidering. Anyway I know it says that options and modules will always be subject to change, but such a big one, and to be only told after applying when they've seemingly made their decision in advance doesn't seem right. I couldv'e gamebled that 45 euro application fee! who know's maybe id have won many hundreds or more