Infomatters

That bastion of investigative journalism known as Forbes ran an updated article recently which was highly critical of the long-term prospects for library and information science degree holders. As the author puts it:

“Not all master’s degree holders enjoy anywhere near such optimistic job prospects or extraordinary pay. Getting a master’s in library and information science, English, music, or education can be extremely gratifying but pricy. Median mid-career median pay for all those degrees is under $63,000, and employment for them isn’t expected to grow significantly over the next few years….Library and information science degree-holders bring in $57,600 mid-career, on average. Common jobs for them are school librarian, library director and reference librarian, and there are expected to be just 8.5% more of them by 2020. The low pay rank and estimated growth rank make library and information science the worst master’s degree for jobs right now.”

Depressing reading, at first blush, for sure, especially if you equate education value with salary but let’s take a closer look at the facts. Leaving aside the sheer volatility of any predictive job numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics over time, are all masters degrees in ‘library and information science’ comparable? Our program offers a Masters of Science in Info Studies, which covers a broader and somewhat different set of career paths than Forbes seem to grasp. If you are seeking a career as a reference librarian or school librarian, the predictions they make might hold (though our school librarian oriented folks tend to do quite better than Forbes suggest), and there are clearly hiring constraints at play in these sectors which suggest huge growth is not likely. But our graduates pursue many more careers in both public and private sectors which you’d never guess from the article. In fact, our latest data suggest 40% of our graduates end up in an extremely diverse set of positions that are not linked to traditional collection agencies, many working in technology-oriented companies, and on average earning significantly more than their peers in library and archives positions. These are the types of jobs, such as information architect, intelligence analyst, software designer, that Forbes likely imagines are the future. Job path is really a matter of personal career choice, and our degree offers everyone the chance to make that choice for him or herself. I am not sure I would make this claim for every program that offers a masters in library and information science but it is more typical than one imagines.

The ability to predict job demand is a problem for everyone, not just politicians and guidance counsellors. Yahoo presented yet another version of the Forbes style categorization of good and bad masters programs with their Bankrate.com sourced article which identified a different set of programs as worst. The least valuable masters degrees according to this version are, perhaps surprisingly for some:

Fine Arts,
Computer Engineering
PR/Adverstising
A Law degree from a poor school
Atmospheric Sciences

A couple of key issues here are worth noting. This second survey speaks directly to the source of the degree and acknowledges that not all schools are equal. Though they don’t mention it in either study, the growing dominance of distance education in the LIS field is pertinent here. Many professionals are receiving their qualification from universities that are not particularly known for their research and teaching quality, but of course, this conversation makes everyone uncomfortable.

Another pertinent point is the expectations of employers. The reason Bankrate suggests Computer Engineering is a poor Masters choice results from the view of employers that further academic credentials on top of a bachelor’s degree is less important than demonstrable experience and knowledge. In this case, the Master’s degree is considered superfluous, so why invest time and money earning one? But employers think they understand computer engineering, they are far less clear what it means to be a specialist in information, but once they learn about our program, most employers are very sold on the value of our masters program. Clearly there is room for better explanation here.

So, rather than take such rankings at face value, it is more important to place the credential in context, with specific attention on personal goals, interests, the degree’s fit with your other education and experiences, and the quality of the institution where you will study. I think we all agree it’s better to do a job you love than not, but I don’t see that variable factored into many of these so called studies of ‘value’.

Predicting career prospects is something of a fool’s errand but I doubt anyone seriously argues that skills in information organization, digital interaction design, records and data management, information seeking and retrieval, and data mining will be overly plentiful in the near future. Selling our programs on those rather than traditional job labels offers a very different take on the future and the value of the right masters degree.

Cynics can sneer but I am impressed that President Obama recognizes information space as a forum for taking on oppressive regimes who track and suppress opposition voices online. The latest executive order which clamps down on visa and financial privileges for those known to be involved in campaigns against democracy movements in Syria and Iran might well be complicated and face challenges in implementation and appropriate use but the recognition that “malign use of technology” is widespread and should no go unchecked is worthy. Read more from the White House here

Am having a difficulty embedding it, so here’s the straight link to my intro section . Or find all four parts here: http://www.ischool.utexas.edu/about/news/view_news_item.php?ID=371

A new journal dealing with intelligence work related to homeland security has been launched in the UK. The Journal of the Gobal Homeland Security Education Network appears this month. The goal is to publish contributions in the examination of transnational, comparative, and cooperative international efforts to ensure and advance homeland security. Full issues are downloadable for free and oddly, for a journal based in the UK, at least two of the papers have Texas authors.

 

Excellent story in today’s Guardian outlining the latest exhibition of Vatican treasures. There’s not access yet to the records during the Nazi era, and you sure won’t find mention of the more recent child-abuse scandals and cover-up but this is one amazing collection. Signed documents from Galileo, letters requesting permission for Henry VIII to divorce, the 1521 decree excommunicating the German monk Martin Luther which helped launch the Reformation. Not your typical collection this! Now if Google could just scan it all we could see it online 🙂

 

I enjoyed the article by Robert Berring in the current issue of Law Library Journal wherein he examines the impact of technology on law libraries though it is more a meditation on the future of librarianship. His analysis builds on a four-activity model of the professional work: materials gathering, records generation, arrangement/preservation, and distribution, all of which have been or are in the midst of profound change. Successful information organization and retrieval now, he argues, is the product of new systems, driven by profit and geared up for efficiency and speed of retrieval. As he says:

“There is no point lamenting this development. The battle is over and mediation of information by librarians lost”.

Provocative stuff. But if that were not enough, he ends by arguing that the shift from the paper book to the digital document also marks the end of the best scholarship in librarianship which was premised on the physical artifact. Not sure I agree with that one Robert but time will tell.

Geoffrey Nunberg is giving the keynote at the iConf 2012 conference in Toronto and is offering a superb historical and linguistic overview of the term ‘information’.  Who knew that the data-information-wisdom progression was such an old saw, to use his term, traceable back centuries.  Information is “not a process” either he argues though stating that hardly makes it so (doesn’t something happen between data and knowledge?) Oddly, no push back form the audience on that one!  Information used to mean refinement of thought, and Jane Austen seem’s to have used the term a lot that way, though not necessarily with nuances that have survived Hollywood versions of the books.  Sadly, time may have worked against him as he rushed through tons of slides and it all sort of faded out at the end, though Jonathan Furner, as commentator, made a brave attempt to bring it all together.   More to follow, the slides are promised….