SOLS/OLS-N (too much acronym to spell out, just go to the site) have put out an excellent pathfinder of Community Development Resources.
I also discovered that the CLA has a Libraries and Communities Interest Group which I hadn’t heard about before. Here is an excerpt from the terms of reference:
Concerned primarily with socially excluded communities and individuals the group focuses on the philosophies, strategies, empathies and self support that librarians need to reduce the rigidity of the relationships between socially excluded communities and the library. The approach is to encourage a dialogue within the interest group to identify and critically evaluate those values and cultures of our libraries that act as systemic barriers to library participation by those who are outside the mainstream of society. Members will challenge the broader library community to reflect on how our fundamental values of inclusiveness have drifted in the pursuit of efficiency and quantification.
Annette DeFaveri appears to be convening the group, though I’m not sure who else is involved. If I hear more, I’ll be sure to post.
Finally, one of my favourite articles on community development, which happens to be by DeFaveri, is not on the SOLS/OLS-N site yet. In it, DeFaveri goes through some of the social and cultural barriers that patrons may encounter by coming (nor not coming) into a library - forcing people to pay fines and cover the costs of damaged books no matter how poor they are, for example. There are many things library staff can do to change this culture she says, and I particularly like this community card idea:
One suggestion is to create a new “Community Card” for adults who cannot provide proof of a permanent residence. This card could be issued for other adults who, for reasons of poverty, mental or physical illness, and other conditions that create social exclusion, cannot meet the financial expectations of the current library card. People with a Community Card, which would be physically indistinguishable from other library cards, would not be stopped from borrowing library materials because of fines. Similarly, replacement costs and processing fees would be noted, but would not prohibit library use. The default position for this card would be no fines.
One of my friends who used to work in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside said that the Carnegie branch of the Vancouver Public Library has one of these community card programs and that they see their incidental loss of books well worth having such an open-door policy at the branch.
I think this all ties directly back into the whole argument about “professionalism” that we have so much in library school. Roma Harris has written a lot about the topic, and linked it directly to librarianship’s latent sexism. I haven’t read a lot of her articles or books, but I’ve used a few for papers I’ve written. One of the aspects of “professionalism” that so many people identify is the development and protection of a particular body of knowledge. That protection (and measurement and quantification and emphasis on management and technology that go along with it) seems to me so anti-librarianship - especially when we start addressing library service for the marginalized people in our communities! If our goal is to reduce the barriers, shouldn’t we be trying to back away from the ones we create ourselves?
This leads me straight into the enormous beef I have with the 8Rs report . . . but I’m not brave enough yet to venture into that arena - maybe look for that posting once I graduate from library school and find myself a secure job.
-S.