I've long been intrigued by the controversial debate in the library world about paraprofessionals doing professional librarian work, specifically, staffing the reference desk.
Can someone without an MLS/MLIS degree perform the duties of a reference librarian? Is the degree necessary, or just useful/helpful/beneficial? Can experience replace it? Anyone who works in a library, whether as a librarian, library technician, library assistant, circulation clerk, or cataloguer is familiar with this issue. As someone who has worked the reference desk as a non-MLIS holder as well as a MLIS holder, I've always been particularly interested in this debate.
The argument in favour of the necessity of the degree goes something like this: just as doctors, lawyers and other professionals don't have nurses and paralegals performing surgeries and arguing court cases, so too should librarians be the sole providers of reference service to patrons. For an excellent overview of this side of the argument I recommend reading the following:
"For Ethical Reference, Pare the Paraprofessionals." Author: McKinzie, Steve. Source: American Libraries v. 33 no9 (Oct. 2002) p. 42 ISSN: 0002-9769
McKinzie states:
"Most people believe that certain responsibilities of a profession should only be carried out by certified members of that profession. Indeed, part of the definition of a professional involves having the responsibility to execute certain specific tasks--things that no one else can or should do. For most of us, professionals who assign professional-specific responsibilities to someone other than members of their profession have let their standards slip to an unethical degree. They have shirked their duty... Frequently pressed into service by administrators who hope to forgo the cost of more expensive professional librarians, library support staff who routinely perform reference service resemble nurses who write prescriptions or paralegals who work as lawyers. The practice tends to exploit our staff and underserve our users. It isn't good policy. It isn't sound management. "
The other side of the argument is that this is simply an elitist attitude. Some might say the very term 'paraprofessional' is offensive since these non-MLIS individuals really are librarians, doing the very same work as the so-called professional librarian. This argument is based on the premise that librarianship ought to be based on competency, that the degree isn't the only path toward becoming a librarian. Unlike the case of doctors and lawyers, it is argued, the work of a librarian does not necessarily require an advanced degree, the required skills can be learned through experience and self-study. Lichtenstein* sums up the issues nicely:
Can someone without an MLS/MLIS degree perform the duties of a reference librarian? Is the degree necessary, or just useful/helpful/beneficial? Can experience replace it? Anyone who works in a library, whether as a librarian, library technician, library assistant, circulation clerk, or cataloguer is familiar with this issue. As someone who has worked the reference desk as a non-MLIS holder as well as a MLIS holder, I've always been particularly interested in this debate.
The argument in favour of the necessity of the degree goes something like this: just as doctors, lawyers and other professionals don't have nurses and paralegals performing surgeries and arguing court cases, so too should librarians be the sole providers of reference service to patrons. For an excellent overview of this side of the argument I recommend reading the following:
"For Ethical Reference, Pare the Paraprofessionals." Author: McKinzie, Steve. Source: American Libraries v. 33 no9 (Oct. 2002) p. 42 ISSN: 0002-9769
McKinzie states:
"Most people believe that certain responsibilities of a profession should only be carried out by certified members of that profession. Indeed, part of the definition of a professional involves having the responsibility to execute certain specific tasks--things that no one else can or should do. For most of us, professionals who assign professional-specific responsibilities to someone other than members of their profession have let their standards slip to an unethical degree. They have shirked their duty... Frequently pressed into service by administrators who hope to forgo the cost of more expensive professional librarians, library support staff who routinely perform reference service resemble nurses who write prescriptions or paralegals who work as lawyers. The practice tends to exploit our staff and underserve our users. It isn't good policy. It isn't sound management. "
The other side of the argument is that this is simply an elitist attitude. Some might say the very term 'paraprofessional' is offensive since these non-MLIS individuals really are librarians, doing the very same work as the so-called professional librarian. This argument is based on the premise that librarianship ought to be based on competency, that the degree isn't the only path toward becoming a librarian. Unlike the case of doctors and lawyers, it is argued, the work of a librarian does not necessarily require an advanced degree, the required skills can be learned through experience and self-study. Lichtenstein* sums up the issues nicely:
The copyright of the article Paraprofessionals at the Reference Desk in Library/Information Science is owned by . Permission to republish Paraprofessionals at the Reference Desk in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.
