Another ALA down

Chicago in June is a pretty good location for a conference, even if the basic quality of food in the downtown area belies the other impression of the city as a truly impressive cultural center. ALA in town means thousands of people hauling bags of free books and pens around the streets, less like plundering hordes than old sherpas, but that’s what some folks go for surely, all the goodies they can grab. Someone should ask the airlines if the weight of personal luggage shifts up significantly on return flights this week – in the age of big data, this should be easily established.

Yes, there were guest speakers…very expensive ones, typically designed to deliver reinforcing rather than challenging speeches, and the usual too many sessions to be easily navigated (my strategy of avoidance is the best source of cognitive comfort in such circumstances). What does bother me most is the real purpose of this gathering and the enormous expense involved. Over 20,000 attendees across all days adds up to significant revenue for some, and those attendees I spoke with seemed happy, as I am sure were the hotels and bars in Chicago given the crowds but as I reflect on the last few conferences I’ve attended, and this most recent ALA in particular, I do wonder what purpose is served by such gatherings?

I know people will argue that meeting is vital to the functioning of the association and that yes, it can be fun to meet up with folks, but who pays for this and who profits? Moreover, what is the point of endless council meetings which seem to spend an inordinate amount of time passing motions, often not particularly related to or informed by the practices of librarianship? When I ask practitioners, I am usually politely chided that academics either do not understand or ‘should’ attend to show support. But what is it that we are supposed to be supporting? ALA always makes grand statements of intent, mission, vision, advocacy etc but what does it really achieve? And I’m not just picking on ALA, though it is a big, fat, easy target. I could say the same of most association meetings. At scholarly conferences we argue that we are sharing research, but to be honest, some venues are not even good at serving this function. But why ALA? We are facing a near crisis of fake news, loss of faith in rationality and the commercialization of access to information, but it’s hard to see much urgency in the response of professional organizations. Oh nevermind, an sure Hilary will make us all feel a bit better about it.

How our political representatives love to hear from us

After watching Paul Ryan on one of the Sunday political shows dismissing as a left-wing attack his own words from a couple of years ago on the need to properly vet bills before approving them, I started to think about the way our record of what we say and the means we enable things to be said are becoming messed up. So now, what I said last year on a topic has no relevance this year, if I say so, might be typical political discourse but when politicians are so dismissive of their own words, how likely is it that they will pay any attention to ours?

Mr Ryan’s office, I am informed, turned off their phones and fax machines last week when irate citizens started calling in large numbers to express their views on the proposed health care bill. My own representative in my gerrymandered state was even cleverer. His phone lines immediately went to voice mail, and in a pretense at listening, asked me to leave a msg. Amazingly, I had 2 seconds, after which I was told my time was up. Huh? I barely got my name out. So I called again. Same thing. So I called several times in a row, each 2 second recording continuing where I left off from the last one. Was Representative Williams listening? Of course not, but he could say he was. This is what technology has enabled. Fakery, chicanery and pretense, wrapped up in a advertising bubble of family values. Yeah, technology has made us smarter, right?

Journalism taking a stand on accreditation

Sound familiar at all?

“As we near the 2020s, we expect far better than a 1990s-era accreditation organization that resists change — especially as education and careers in our field evolve rapidly,” said Brad Hamm, Medill’s dean, in a message to alumni. “All fields benefit from a world-class review process, and unfortunately the gap between what it could, and should, be is huge.”

No, it’s not the ALA COA under discussion here — this is how one dean of a well regarded journalism program referred to the accrediting process in his discipline. The full article can be found here.

Seems like most professional fields, at least the fast moving ones like information and journalism, have common responses to the constraints of accreditors. What should be about quality assurance has become a vehicle for compliance and control by the conservatives. The suggestion of risk-adjusted accreditation would be welcomed by me, and fit with my general argument for a a process that spent more time improving the weak or under-resourced programs rather than mechanically demanding every program follow the same review schedule, but even this is insufficient. Until such time as real estimates of program quality are defined, and then applied fairly and uniformly, the process cannot have real value. Accreditors can hide all they want behind claims of protecting student interests but it’s a sham – and it’s a shame.

New book on Info Design

I’ve put a couple of new chapters together in the past year on the nature of design knowledge in information. The latest has just been published in an impressively large volume edited by colleagues at the University of Reading in the UK for Gower, entitled Information Design: research and practice Find out more here

Farewell to ALISE

Spent last week in Atlanta at the ALISE conference, my 16th consecutive one, I believe, and my last. We seem to have come a long way in some regards, and made little real progress in others, but that’s probably true of most annual gatherings. First impressions, it was a little light in attendance, there seemed to be fewer job interviews occurring, and perhaps a little less going on than some other conferences. Of course, I have no data to back that up but so it seemed to me and a few others I spoke with during the week.

I’m never a fan of poster sessions, and it’s not helped when a large convention room is broken up with posters at either end but tables and chairs in between. Hotels really need to better understand the logistics of human flow as it seemed designed to discourage people from visiting some areas and it can’t have been too helpful for those allocated space at the far end of the room. The organizers of the conference seemed to sense that too as they made far better use of the space for the final evening’s event. Of course, hotel arrangements for ALISE are never ideal, they are forced to take what they can get once ALA flexes its sizable muscles on bookings in the area.

Highlights were few (on the program side at least) but the Deans and Directors meet was unusually lively. A series of motions relating to accreditation revealed a stronger sense of disquiet and a shared desire for more control over the rather bloated accreditation process among the schools. How times have changed. Rather than have complaints dismissed by the majority as the whining of a few uppity schools, now there seems to be widespread recognition that the system is flawed, expensive and fails to deliver on its aims, which (lest we forget) is supposed to be about ensuring quality educational programs.  Not everyone feels quite the same, and some seemed to wanted to grandstand on procedural points of order, but on the whole, I was heartened to see that in 15 years, the tide has finally turned and schools are showing some backbone and initiative in seeking a better process. Long may this continue as I see more than a little resistance looming among the traditional stakeholders who won’t give up power easily and will no doubt find ways of blocking change.

I am not sure what the future is for ALISE. I find the program to be limited but the need for a hiring conference and space for programs to get together to share concerns and take collective action justify some role. Given the news from Allen Renear’s analysis that enrollment in ALA-accredited programs dropped 30% in the 5 years up to 2014, one wonders how long before another round of program closures looms. The schools doing well seem to be succeeding on the back of new degree programs which most are not putting up for accreditation by ALA, with good reason, but that trend was sadly not discussed widely at the conference.  All to say, I do think there is some grounds for arguing that ALISE split from ALA’s schedule and partner more with ASIST, allowing the latter’s program, which is usually far stronger, to benefit from ALISE’s job-market function. By holding some kind of joint conference in Fall, with six-month’s of separation between them and the similarly populated iConference, there would be better balance and functionality to the circuit for schools. Yes, I know, we recommended that a few years ago and the motion to move was rejected by a small margin but this idea is worth revisiting, if only to reduce costs and give the collective membership of the two groups a chance to gather more productively.

Ah but you say….the ALISE conf is for LIS programs, the iConf is for information programs and ASIST sits in the middle. There’s a lot that can be dissected there but the simple fact that practically any program can now call itself an iSchool, and the fact that many LIS programs have done precisely that, indicates to me that the once-meaningful lines drawn between the camps are blurred. I’d much rather see concerns with information education broadly embrace the L part than have the L part try to claim ownership of the information field, and to that end, a larger ASIST conference with an early component concentrating on education, led by what is now ALISE, has some attractions.

But that’s all another set of concerns for other people. To paraphrase the bard, I came to praise ALISE, not to bury it (no matter what other rumors you may have heard).

 

 

 

 

 

 

Job skills for 2017?

It’s that time of year, I know, when companies and various pundits vie for your attention with predictions about the coming year. Here’s an unsurprising cluster from Computer world:

Am slightly more impressed with (but only slightly) with Network World’s suggestion that “the employment of tech and computer occupations is expected to grow 12% by 2024″, more than all other sectors, and that within this, we will need more VR Engineers and Cognitive Computing experts. That’s virtual reality and AI-type skills coming to the fore.  No, you didn’t hear it here first, and no doubt you’ll be hearing it again for a while. Don’t panic, there’s likely a new set of skills predicted for 2020, but they all amount to pretty much the same thing — be smart with technology and your understanding of humans. Sound familiar?

Good trip to UNT

Well it took 15 years but I finally received an invitation to visit and talk at UNT’s College of Information. I enjoyed a splendid afternoon of discussion with the assembled doctoral students and faculty who were having a research day to kick of the new semester. The college is an amalgamation of what was the School of LIS, now renamed the Dept of Information Science, the Dept of Learning Technologies and the Dept. of Linguistics. Very interesting model here and the potential for collaborative work across some traditional boundaries seems high. Plenty of enthusiasm among the student body too and new leadership in Dean Kinshuk, though few faculty seemed to be about on this Friday.  Denton has some charms too in the downtown square where their famous music school’s presence is felt in the live shows. I am particularly grateful for the wonderful hospitality of my host, Dr. Suliman Hawamdeh. Hoping to build stronger ties from here.

Taking another view of the decanal life

After 15 years as dean of the iSchool here at UT, I have decided that it is about time to move on to other challenges in my career. To this end, I will be stepping up to the faculty as a professor next Fall. I do so with great anticipation of returning once again to faculty life and enjoying the role I coveted so much in my earlier years. I don’t quite understand how I came to being a dean, it certainly was not part of any career plan I made (did I even have a plan beyond getting a job, engaging in interesting research and someday earning tenure?). But as I tell all my graduate students, there will be opportunities for which you cannot plan, only accept, though it helps to prepare for most academic eventualities by doing your best work with consistency.

Life as a dean in a public university is challenging. The onslaught of human-resource challenges, the demands for appearances and short speeches, the constant signing off on forms and approvals fill the days but really are not considered even the important parts of your job. And did I mention the constant accreditation and assessment reports you must generate for internal and external bureaucracies? As dean you are responsible ultimately for the quality of your faculty and educational offerings. If enrollments are dropping, student placement not quite what it was, or the classroom technology needs updating, the buck eventually stops with the dean. And these are just outcome measures. The intangibles of departmental culture, staff morale and junior faculty comfort rest on your shoulders too. If a faculty member is denied tenure, it must be the dean’s fault.

Deans now are required to fundraise without pause, and while this was always considered a core responsibility, there is a danger that it is becoming the main one. As funding for public education is continually challenged, more and more of the financial support for any moderately ambitious school or college falls on other revenue streams. Faculty certainly feel the pressure to secure external grants to fund doctoral students and their own labs, but more of the routine operations involving space renovation, faculty conference travel, student recruitment, equipment updates and furniture renewal need to be funded through gifts. Colleagues vary in their commitment of effort here but I don’t know a single dean who does not feel the need to make ‘development’ (as we euphemistically term it) a priority.  In the arms race to advance an academic program over one’s peers, success is often measured rather simply in dollar terms.

None of this is too surprising, organizations require lines of responsibility through which to apportion credit and blame, though they would never use such terms. The challenge is to recognize these lines and shape communication through them in an open and two-way process that brings people into the decision making and collective goal-setting. What is surprising however, is how long it takes new deans to learn this and how little preparation universities provide to help them understand what is required. I remember asking, when I first joined UT, what training I could receive as a new dean? I was told there was none, the university expected us to learn by doing. I am not sure anything has changed in the intervening years but it’s a sad statement about higher education that its leaders are so informally prepared.

None of this will I miss too much but to linger on these misses the joys of the job. As dean, one gets to have final influence on the single most important determinant of program quality: faculty recruitment and promotion.  There are multiple decisions, acts of persuasion, paperwork drudgery, PR initiatives and yes, fundraising efforts in the job but the most important one, always, is shaping the make up of the faculty. I’ve always believed that by recruiting the best professors we would attract the best students, develop the most innovative curriculum, initiate the most productive research programs, and advance the school’s reputation where it mattered. Everything else a dean does has to be in service of this goal if a school or college is to improve.

Of course, faculty recruitment is not a precise science. Sure, we consider educational background, publication rates, research focus, teaching qualities etc, and we do use these filters to reduce the inevitable deluge of applicants we receive every time we announce an opening. Yes, we consider coverage in the curriculum, though by now our school has moved beyond hiring for turf areas. But even then, there is something intangible about faculty selection that comes down to impressions gained in campus visits. Faculty expect fellow professors to be collegial, willing to partner, enthusiastic about joining us, and open to teaching that core class that most wish to avoid. I’ve seen otherwise strong applicants lose the faculty during their visit, damning their chances by their lack of engagement, apparent surliness or generally giving the impression of being entitled. We never pay the most so we assume anyone we want has a better offer somewhere. It’s good to be honest, but don’t rub the faculty’s noses in it. Much as we find faculty selection to have intangible elements, we expect those who wish to join us to recognize the same in us, and to understand that life in our school might be a better choice regardless of better salaries elsewhere.  A school can only get to this point by hiring the right faculty, and it’s a slow process.

Once hired, a faculty member still has to earn tenure, and I use that term deliberately. Some young guns imagine it’s the department’s responsibility to tell them exactly what to do, and sadly, some senior faculty still act like they know. The reality here is that in most US public universities there remain senior faculty who would now not get tenure under current standards and are not well-positioned to advise new people on how to proceed productively. Again, this is where a dean is essential in communicating expectations and standards. It is sad to lose a faculty member at promotion and tenure time, but it is a travesty to ignore the limitations and promote anyway. Tenure is a near perfect reward system, but only if applied appropriately and consistently.

As I step back from the role, I am also reminded of the somewhat farcical nature of academic life: the egos, the arguments over minutiae, the comparative economy where office space, computer screens and scheduling form an unusual sense of worth and status for otherwise intelligent people, and where the humor is easily found but often unintentionally provided. I am promising the faculty that my time off will be spent producing a detailed account of my term here, replete with full character coverage and accurate plots based entirely on these years. This work will be written but almost certainly published as a novel since no normal reader would ever believe adults could actually behave this way.   Move over David Lodge!

 

 

 

 

 

Information industry take on Brexit

Outsell Inc held a session in the impact of Brexit on the information industry. You can view the slides here

Of course, nothing quite accounts for the lack of accurate information disseminated to the British people prior to the vote. Seems there’s plenty of claims that search traffic relating to queries of what the EU actually was, how Brexit might work etc increased significantly after the vote, though some dispute this is really accurate (but of course, that newpaper was pro-leave so…..). Friends and family there do tell me that most discussions of the vote were confusing, so clearly an information gap really did exist for ordinary voters. What this tells us about the modern information infrastructure and the average citizen’s access to reliable information is one for scholars to mull in the years ahead.

Social Widgets powered by AB-WebLog.com.