It may be well at the start to explain the terms used, to be sure that
we are looking at the matter in the same light. Teaching, in this
instance, I understand to mean that assistants shall have had library
school instruction, while training is the instruction which is given in
the library or department itself to fit the applicant for the special
work she is to do. When I say assistants, I also mean librarians of the
smaller libraries, such positions as the library school student has
been called upon to fill.
There are two points of view in looking at the question, that of the
assistant and that of the employer. On the first there can be little
discussion, as the same principles are here involved which underly all
education. It is certainly better for any person to have a view of the
whole field rather than of one small part of it. I was talking to the
head cataloger of a large department the other day, and she said that
one of her main troubles was in getting the assistant who has been
given a certain part of the work to do, to see that any other parts are
necessary or important. If the curriculum of our library schools does
not give our students this broader view, we are not living up to our
opportunities.
No library school, or any other school, for that matter, turns out a
finished product. I cannot say to you that the best pupil in my class
at the end of one or even two years is a first-rate cataloger. I can
only say that I hope and think that she understands the principles and
their relation to the rest of the work, and with experience will prove
competent, having shown capabilities which point in this direction. On
the other side, I have talked with many library people of experience
and they all say that, anxious as they are to give the persons under
their care all possible instruction, they are so busy with the pressure
of accomplishing so much work every day, that when they find a person
who does one kind of work well, they are very apt to keep her at that,
rather than to give her an opportunity to do all the kinds of work, for
the sake of her education.
I always have the greatest admiration, not unmixed with reverence, for
those who can conduct the business of a large department and a training
class at the same time, as either alone seems to me to take all the
energy of an ordinary person; also the more people you have to do work
which can be done by fewer, the greater the economic waste.
From the point of view of the employer there is something to be said on
both sides. Nowadays the old plea is seldom heard that library school
people know too much and have no idea that any method is feasible
but the one they have been taught. I did have once a graduate from a
so-called library school, to assist in my department while I was ill;
after she had been there about a week, she announced that she did not
like the way the library was classified and during my brief absence
she thought she would re-classify it. We had about 150,000 volumes at
that time and more than a million cards in our various catalogs. Thus
did ambition disqualify her, as we had regretfully to let her go, but
fortunately her kind is rare enough to be interesting.
The other objection to the employment of trained people is the
question of expense. The niece of the president of the board must have
occupation and is willing to work for her spending money, so as an
economical measure, it would be a good thing to employ her. This has
two fallacies: First, someone has to pay for the education of every
person and it is better from the point of efficiency to have this done
by the employee herself rather than by the institution. Secondly, we
should all be willing to pay for what we get, and you certainly get
more for your money in employing the skilled person than the amateur.
Miss Sutliff, after years of experience as a library school teacher,
and with both apprentices and graduates, said to me that she thought
that a person who was trained for a certain piece of work, at the end
of one year, did that work better than the school graduate, but at the
end of five years the second was a much better employee.
There is also this to be said on both sides of the question. There
are people constitutionally unfit for library work, training or no
training, just as there are people who can never run an aeroplane or
climb a greased pole or be a third-term president; they are not fitted
for it, and all of us have had more or less experience with these both
in school and out. They may be excellent people; in fact, it is exactly
this class of whom her friends say, "Isn't it too bad Mary never
married; she would make such a fine wife for some good man."
I have had a green girl who could never be taught to write a dozen
catalog cards correctly because she had no bump of accuracy; I also
had a library school graduate with the same failing, and when I mildly
suggested that the number of corrections seemed excessive, she replied,
"Oh yes, but, you see, I knew you were going to revise them, so I was
not more careful." She also did not remain with me.
There are many bright girls who will pick up knowledge of all parts
of the work on their own initiative and without any special effort on
your part, will be perfectly qualified to step into your place should
necessity arise. There is one danger which may be mentioned here and
that is the possible injustice done to this exceptional person when
library boards refuse to consider any person except library school
graduates. During the time students are at school, they and the faculty
are carefully considering for which branch of the work they are best
adapted, so the employer runs less risk in this respect also, than when
he takes an unknown quantity which he hopes may fit some particular
place. If the various library schools are not turning out people with
broader horizons and greater adaptability, they are not doing their
full duty; but if the students they have taught are better qualified
for the work, this fact should have due consideration in the selection
of assistants or librarians.
Miss JOSEPHINE A. RATHBONE, vice-director of the Pratt institute school
of library science, described a projected normal course.