Guest authors at Hack Library School put together a really important post on how LIS students can get involved in the revision process for ALA’s accreditation standards. ALA also governs accreditation for archives students, since SAA does not have its own accreditation process for archives education. That makes it really important for new and aspiring archivists to participate in this process as well. I am going to try to make it to the Feb 20th virtual town hall (click through for more information).
Originally posted on Hack Library School:
Hello! Topher here, happy to introduce guest poster Elizabeth Lieutenant! If you’re like us, you followed all the advice out there and enrolled in an ALA-accredited institution. But what does that really mean? This is your chance to find out! We were fortunate enough to attend a session at ALA Midwinter about the changing world of LIS program accreditation standards. Here’s what we learned:
Meet the COA:
Accreditation has been a part of US librarianship since 1923. In 1956, ALA’s Committee on Accreditation (COA) became a standing committee of ALA. COA is responsible for the execution of the accreditation program of ALA, and to develop and formulate standards of education for library and information studies for the approval of ALA council. The mission of the ALA Office for Accreditation (OA) is to serve: “the general public, students, employers, and library and information studies Master’s programs through the promotion and advancement of education in library and information studies.”
Students and new professionals in the U.S. and Canadian archives fields should check out this great post on the internship/job market debate from our counterparts in the UK and Ireland.
Originally posted on Off the Record:
Following the recent debate on the JISC Archive-NRA list-serv about internships and volunteering (https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=ARCHIVES-NRA), the Archives and records Association (ARA) published an interim statement (http://www.archives.org.uk/latest-news/ara-publishes-interim-statement-on-interns.html). The ARA will issue a final statement on internship following the results of the research commissioned by the ARA Public Services Quality Group Volunteering Sub-Committee in the hope that it may provide additional information about the extent of unpaid work experience in the sector.
The Section for New Professionals (SfNP) raised concerns on behalf of new professionals with the ARA Board prior to the publication of the interim statement, summarised below. We would love to hear from the wider community, particular new professionals, who would like to share their views on our comments and the interim statement published by the ARA.
We are most concerned about the lack of clarity on volunteer and unpaid work experience on the ARA website. We realize that pre-course experience is an essential pre-requisite to acceptance on accredited training courses and that most qualified and established professionals have done voluntary work themselves in the past – a scenario which is not likely to change in the near future. Due to current financial circumstances, we are also aware that voluntary work is welcomed by both employers who are unable to offer a paid training position and those seeking work experience but unable to secure a paid position. However, there is a clear need for a set of guidelines from the ARA on best practice for volunteers’ supervisors working with those aiming to progress into the profession and for volunteers themselves.
Current SAA president Danna C. Bell provided a summary of the recent Council debate over archives employment issues.
Originally posted on Off the Record:
Special thanks to Nancy Beaumont and Kathleen Roe for their input on this post.
When I came back from Chicago after the SAA Council and Foundation Board meetings I had planned to write a brief post noting some of the highlights of both meetings. I was excited that we got our strategic plan actions finished and that we have a living document that will help guide us for the next few years. We also reviewed six issue briefs created by the Committee on Advocacy and Public Policy that we hope to have available in May, did background work to inform SAA’s next budget and reviewed the annual reports of the sections, roundtables, committees and task forces of the Society. The Foundation Board began discussing fund raising opportunities but also how the funds raised could support ongoing research projects and new educational programming.
But there is one issue that continues to be at the forefront for many of our members. It’s one we discussed several times during our Council meeting including spending one half day totally focused on this one issue. Before I could get unpacked and attack the massive piles on my desk, I felt it was important to share information on the topic of employment because it is of serious concern to our membership and to Council.
First, a disclaimer: This post represents my personal views. It should not be construed to reflect the views of my employer, professional associations, family, or Friday night karaoke group.
Last week the Archives & Archivists listserv hosted an extended and contentious conversation about the state of the job market for early career archivists. The whole thread is worth reading (part I, part II), but here is a brief summary:
On Tuesday, a recent University of Glasgow graduate shared a critique of a job posting by the New York School of Interior Design for a part time temporary archivist position. He expressed concern that “people with influence in our field are not more vocal about how positions like this exploit a buyers market, and the long term damage this will do to the profession’s ability to identify, acquire, develop, and retain a more talented and diverse workforce.”
A handful of listserv subscribers concurred. About six hours after the original post, a well-meaning adjunct lecturer in NYC shared his perspective on the job market quandary. In addition to advising archives students to pursue a diverse skill set, he wrote:
“Just don’t tell me the only world in which you are WILLING to look is the world of archives, libraries, and museums, because then I will tell you that you have wasted your time and money on that archives program.
You did so without beforehand checking out the employment marketplace.
This post triggered a small firestorm, with several authors (including former SAA president Richard Pearce-Moses) writing in with advice about alternative career paths while others questioned the ethics of a job posting that offers subpar compensation for advanced professional qualifications.
By the next morning, the debate had caught the attention of several archivists on Twitter (sample of Twitter reactions) who have been heavily engaged in the discussion of archives employment issues. Points that resonated most strongly with the Twitter crowd included cynicism about the concept of a “living wage” and contention over the concept of privilege.
UPDATE: A related conversation took place on the Lone Arrangers listserv during this same time period. You can review the thread with an SAA website account here: http://forums.archivists.org/read/messages?id=118594
Instead of posting a response to the listserv, I spent the past few days letting the cumulative debate percolate in the back of my mind. What follows are my thoughts on the meat of the labor equity issue and some suggestions for moving forward.
Question 1: Are we a profession?
For a comprehensive consideration of the term “profession”, I looked to Jon A. Schmidt’s 2008 article “What is a Profession?” for Structure magazine. Although the article focuses on engineers, it has significance for archivists as a defense of fair compensation for professionals.
Guided by a 1978 doctoral dissertation by Myron Lubell and the writings of Ernest Greenwood, Schmidt described five key components of a profession (listed below in italics). In terms of the archives profession as codified through SAA, we can identify several parallels.
1) Systematic theory – Professionals have a knowledge set that is based on abstract principles, more so than operational procedures, and thus must pursue an extensive formal education.
SAA’s Statement on the Core Values of Archivists emphasizes that archivists “accept an evolving theoretical base of knowledge, collaborate with colleagues in related professions, develop and follow professional standards, strive for excellence in their daily practice, and recognize the importance of professional education, including lifelong learning.” Archives students in accredited graduate programs are exposed to a growing corpus of professional theory that is rigorously peer-reviewed. Archives theory serves as the basis of our certification and informs our professional standards .
2) Authority – Professionals have significant control over the nature and extent of the services that they render, because they serve clients who are generally unable to judge the quality of those services.
SAA’s Statement on the Core Values of Archivists outlines the many ways that archivists meet this criteria, although we are often reluctant to declare ourselves a vital stakeholder the management of information. Schmidt addressed this dilemma in his article for structural engineers, writing, “If we wish to continue being acknowledged instead as true professionals, it is vital that we be more effective in communicating the unique value of our capabilities to our clients and to the public at large.”
In his statement to the International Council on Archives forum at the 2013 SAA Annual Meeting, ICA Secretary-General David Leitch cautioned that “we must stop apologizing for being archivists” lest we apologize ourselves out of a profession. This timidity is central to the debate I hope to address here.
3) Community sanction – Professionals are subject to licensure or certification that delineates varying degrees of occupational jurisdiction in accordance with criteria over which they have considerable influence.
The Academy of Certified Archivists offers formal certification which is universally recognized in the U.S. although it is not required. Certification criteria is determined by established professional archivists. Our support of ALA’s accreditation standards serves a similar purpose.
4) Ethical codes – Professionals adhere to standards of behavior that are explicit, systematic, binding, and public service oriented; prescribe colleague relations that are cooperative, equalitarian, and supportive; and are enforced by their associations.
SAA published joint statements on the Core Values of Archivists and the Code of Ethics for Archivists. Under the Code of Ethics, archivists have a professional obligation to “cooperate and collaborate with other archivists” in a way that is “honest, fair, collegial, and equitable.” The work of archivists is explicitly oriented towards public service. There is no mechanism in place to formally sanction professionals who violate this code; it is largely self-policing.
5) Culture – Professionals have a career orientation that leads them to high personal involvement in their work and satisfaction with not only monetary rewards, but also symbols such as titles and awards.
This last point is difficult to quantify, but it seems consistent with the archives profession. Through frequent engagement in professional organizations, conferences, publishing, and practice, archivists demonstrate high personal involvement in their career. SAA awards special recognition to individuals who have made outstanding contributions.
Question 2: If we are a profession, what does that mean for individuals?
Specifically, if we are professionals, what does that mean in terms of compensation? Are we, as Schmidt wrote, “mere technologists – and compensated accordingly”, or does our professional status entitle us to higher wages than a person lacking our unique qualifications? If not, what does that communicate about our intrinsic value as a profession?
The principle of “supply and demand” was repeatedly invoked in the recent A&A listserv debate as an argument against paying early career archivists a living wage (various resources define the concept of a living wage here, here, here, and here). It is signficant to note that the term “living wage” is typically employed in terms of setting a minimum wage for unskilled laborers, rather than defining a fair compensation structure for professionals.
Supply and demand assumes the supplier and the purchaser are perfect competitors, with neither having direct influence over the price of the commodity. Assuming perfect competitors on each side, the inclining slope of supply and the declining slope of demand will meet at the point of wage equilibrium. The behavior of the demand curve with respect to the supply curve depends on whether the commodity being traded is classified as an inferior good, an ordinary good, or a superior good.
Setting aside the question of whether or not people should be treated as commodities, an archivist’s advanced education and certification should elevate her value above that of an ordinary good (a person without said education and licensure). For a more serious discussion of how education impacts the labor market, I recommend H.G. van de Werfhorst’s 2011 article “Skills, positional good or social closure? The role of education across structural-institutional labour market settings”
In the real world, employers are willing to pay more to hire people with superior qualifications. Presumably, as members of the Society of American Archivists, we believe that archivists have a unique set of skills that allow them to contribute to society in meaningful ways. If employers are not willing to pay early career archivists a wage that reflects the value of their unique qualifications, I posit that we (the profession) are responsible for failing to communicate that value.
Question 3: What can be done?
Those of us who have criticized the professions’ dependence on volunteer labor, low wages, and adjunctification see a stark disconnect between our supposed value as professionals and the compensation we are able to demand. Unfortunately, as evidenced by the abundance of well-intentioned but misdirected advice in the “Do We Eat Our Young” debate, this is frequently misunderstood as an empty plea for “more jobs” (or, bizarrely, for career advice).
As I recently tweeted, the central issue is not that there are too few archives jobs to go around (although that may also be true); the issue is that too many of the jobs being posted are underpaid, overspecialized, or adjunctified. The proliferation of these substandard positions threatens to permanently devalue our profession.
SAA members have argued that the organization should do more to advance the public standing of archivists, although some members question the practicality of these expectations. Some archives professionals (including the original poster in the “Do We Eat Our Young?” thread) feel that responsibility for low wages lies in part with the individuals who pursue these jobs, while others question the fairness of blaming a job candidate who is looking for any job opportunity they can get. Some participants (including myself) argue that individual institutions and employers have a responsibility to create and maintain positions that reflect the professional value of archivists.
Personally, I think it will take a concerted effort from all stakeholders – professional organizations, new professionals, archives employers, educators, and institutions – to engage this topic. However, it is naive to pretend that all groups have equal capacity to affect change. Recent graduates in particular have little influence and even fewer resources to persuade employers to improve compensation practices.
New professionals may feel pressured to accept unpaid post-graduate internships, temporary jobs, or subpar compensation if they want to find work (especially when established archivists respond “if only life were fair.”) Others decide to leave the field entirely, taking their skills, ambition, and expertise to private industries. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but in high enough numbers it should raise serious concerns about the future of the archives profession (a point which was central to the argument of original poster Tom Tiballi).
Here are my suggestions for possible courses of action.
Revise formal recommendations on employing volunteer labor in archives to explicitly uphold the professional value of archivists
Draft formal recommendations for early career positions (See SAA Standards Committee draft on Best Practices for Internships as a Component of Graduate Archival Education for a related model)
Establish guidelines for jobs posted to the SAA Online Career Center, including a requirement that employers list salary ranges for the position
Revisit the issue of accreditation to determine whether archives programs are producing graduates with relevant skills to advance and sustain the profession
Support formal mechanisms for facilitating communication between recent graduates, new professionals, and change agents such as professors and the Committee on Education
- Continue to mainstream employment issues in its Council agenda (see January 23-26, 2014, Council Meeting Agenda, “IV. Mega Issue Discussion”) and throughout the work of SAA’s committees and subcommittees
Established archivists could:
Take concrete steps to improve the status of the positions they manage by advocating for professional titles, permanent appointments, and professional wages.
Responsibly steward their institutional resources to support these efforts (where possible)
Communicate and demonstrate the professional value of archivists to their clients
Engage with new professionals in productive discussions about the state of the job market
All archivists could:
Engage with other professionals to gain a more diverse understanding of their experiences
Challenge unethical and out of date practices
Engage with professional associations to enact change
Pursue fair compensation for their work
Advocate on behalf of those who cannot advocate for themselves
Carry out SAA’s call to “actively work to achieve a diversified and representative membership in the profession”
At this point, my treatise is long enough. If you have other suggestions for concrete action, please share them in the comments!
*When this post was originally published on January 27, the SAA Council had just concluded its January 2014 meeting in Chicago. The question of archives employment was discussed at length as a “Mega Issue” on the Council Agenda. More information from the council is forthcoming; when it is available, I will provide a link here. Thank you to all who have productively engaged on this issue so far.
#1 is my favorite! I’ve got to add that to my list as well.
Originally posted on Hack Library School:
With the holiday season wrapping up (pun intended) and the New Year quickly approaching, do you have your 2014 resolutions list made yet?
I am a huge fan of making lists, so the New Year always gives me the perfect opportunity to make another. Since I will be graduating next May my list includes things I want to accomplish while I am still a library student — also because it is too scary to plan anything post-graduation. Other than applying for jobs and networking, I also want to spend my last semester taking advantage of student discounts and the flexibility of grad life. Below is a broad list of my library student wishes and goals, but feel free to steal and adapt as your own!
My second post for Hack Library School!
Originally posted on Hack Library School:
There is no better time than graduate school to join a professional organization. Many LIS organizations have special incentives in place to attract library school students. The offerings will vary between organizations, but this post should give you an idea of what to watch for.
TYPES OF ORGANIZATIONS
Professional organizations exist at several levels, including international, national, regional, state, and local. Smaller organizations may give you more opportunities to participate directly, but larger organizations will offer a broader spectrum of roundtables and sections. As a student, I have found national and regional organizations to be the most beneficial because I am still figuring out what I want to do with my career. Some organizations offer joint membership programs for library school students and support staff. This is a great way to make your membership dues go farther. Additionally, student chapters on your campus can be a great way to get involved with your regional and national organizations.