Penumbra shadowing experience at the English Faculty Library

I was lucky enough to do a job shadowing afternoon at the English Faculty Library with Libby Tilley and Helen Murphy on Thursday the 8th of May. The shadowing experience was focused on user education, at my request, and so primarily involved sitting in on a training session entitled “Quickstart for Part 1 dissertations: processes and resources”. This built on a session held in Lent term on building bibliographies using Zotero, so knowledge of this was useful as a prerequisite, though they did cover it again for those who did not attend. The rest of my time at EFL was spent at Issue Desk and in conversation with Helen and Nora, a work experience employee about libraries in Cambridge, the differences in our libraries etc.

The training session

The EFL has a small but very nice IT training suite on site, and this was where the training session was held. There are laptops at each station and the person at the lectern is able to switch from projecting their screen to any of the laptop screens. The laptops can be locked away beneath the surface of the desk when the room is not in use.

The session was a quick overview of the process of planning and writing a dissertation, targeted at first year English students. Its purpose was to allay fears and also introduce students to some of the resources available, particularly those provided by the library. It was based on a hand-out that divided dissertation writing into 5 steps or sections, and each section had a “hook” or useful tidbit that I think students will find memorable when it comes time to start writing. Everything covered was on the hand-out and the services or resources provided by the library are highlighted in a different colour so that students know what the EFL provides. Furthermore, students were asked which section they thought they needed more help on. Responses were a little timid, I think possibly because no one had thought that far ahead yet, so all of the sections were covered.

SECTION 1: Choosing a topic

First, Libby emphasized that in the dissertation the library could help, but that students’ directors of studies/supervisors are gods as far as the dissertation is concerned. However, she pointed out that the first port of call for English students is the “Guidance on dissertations” on the faculty intranet. She recommended reading it over the holidays, since it’s quite comprehensive, and noted that in October there will be an additional and more comprehensive guide to referencing. The second resource she pointed to was a folder of past dissertation topics, which is available to use in the library and can be borrowed from the Issue Desk.

SECTION 2: Planning for effective working

Post-it note exercise - Everyone was handed a post-it note and asked to write one effective working habit they have. A couple of brave volunteers said theirs out loud, but the rest were collected and will be collated and passed on as advice to next year’s first years, so that they are getting advice from their peers rather than tutors, librarians etc.

Libby recommended starting early in case there are niche, hard-to-get resources, but emphasised that the library could get these resources for them if they were given enough warning. Additionally, the library is able to help by performing a literature search. They provide postcards that students fill in with their names and dissertation topics and hand in to the library if they are stuck, if they don’t know where to start, etc. This doesn’t take much staff time but sounds like a really big help to the students. The theory behind having a postcard rather than just giving out an email address is that there is a physical reminder of the service, and because you just fill in the back of the card advertising it and drop it back at the library, it’s a pretty user-friendly way of going about it.

Next, they did a refresher on Zotero, a free piece of referencing software that lives in your browser and recognizes bibliographical information, saves it, and automatically generates bib. references in your chosen format. The final useful advice on planning that was handed on had to do with time management and managing due dates from different libraries through the libraries@cambridge iCal app. (We could easily link to this from the web page and point it out to students who tend to get late fees.)

SECTIONS 3 and 4: Primary Reading and Secondary Reading

Most people indicated that they felt pretty confident with these aspects of dissertation research, but it was interesting to note that most of them had only one or two ports of call and did not cast their nets wider. Also they didn’t know the drawbacks of the databases they used (namely JSTOR and its out of date information, and the fact that many people assume that just because it’s from JSTOR it’s “solid”, so they don’t have to think critically about it). Of the sources listed on the handout, people seemed not to have heard of a few of them, and hadn’t used most of them.

They were given a chance to play around in some of the databases using a topic chosen from a list. This let people get more familiar with things like Project MUSE and LION, which have complementary coverage to what JSTOR provides. They also pointed out the UL’s uncatalogued book search function, which allows you to search for books by ISBN, request they’re moved to the front of the queue, and then have them put on hold for you. Because most people said they felt comfortable in this area, they did not cover every idea listed, but the handout would provide further guidance if people wanted it when it came to doing their literature searches, and it seemed like most people picked up on something new they could use.

SECTION 5: Writing and referencing

Libby once again emphasised the importance of the DoS/supervisor in this process, but pointed out some additional resources and tips, such as Transkills for English and Scrivener.

Overall impressions:

The teaching session worked really well. It never seemed to lag and it wasn’t too overwhelming. I think each section had a memorable hook that students will have come away with, and it was very nicely broken up with activities. I think it’s especially useful giving people the time and encouragement to try at least one new database on their own rather than doing a demo on a projector screen and mandating what they try. The EFL website is also really sensibly laid out with resources grouped by subject and then overarching, key resources like LION, Zetoc, Project Gutenburg, etc. down the side (grouped by primary and secondary resources). The single handout means that students weren’t sent away with loads to read so I think that was a really manageable amount of information overall, and the main starting point, the “Guidelines for Dissertations”, was reiterated at the end so people were reminded where to go first.

Other things I noticed about the EFL

- Duplication of knowledge and abilities: EFL tries to make sure that there is nothing that only one person knows how to do. This makes people’s roles more diverse and ensures that if someone leaves or is on holiday things get done. - Issue Desk entails other duties when the circulation slows down: Made possible by the fact that most users come just before or after lectures so the rest of the time is fairly quiet. Duties include checking the library email and sorting messages into relevant folders, book labelling, book repairs etc. - Issuing is done with RFID tag readers and there is self-issue as well as staffed issue desk, but books issued at the staffed one are still stamped out and in, which slows the process down. - Tea@3, poetry wall, relaxed rules about bags, comfy seats etc. make it a very comfortable library to use, people seem happy to approach library staff. Issue desk is low down, makes it look approachable. (Side note: I hate our Issue Desk. It’s like a fortress of doom.)

What I’ve taken away from the experience

First and foremost I’d say that it’s always worth visiting other libraries. It gets you to question the way you do things, generates ideas and promotes the sharing of knowledge and resources between libraries, which can only be good for the users of those libraries.

Second, I am very interested in and impressed by the reference help that the EFL provides. Not only are there clever and user-friendly schemes like the dissertation topic postcards, but the entire culture and design of the library promotes the impression that the staff are there to support learning, not as an obstacle to it. I think TCL needs to realise that whatever our sentiments about reader services may be, we do not give off a friendly and supportive impression and that should certainly be addressed.

Third, I feel like there is the potential for us to provide support in the form of user education initiatives. They would certainly look different from those at Faculty libraries, as they would not be subject specific, but we could have closer relationships with the directors of studies, point students toward the right sources of information and target our information toward the specific assessments that students of the College are doing. I will brainstorm ways of doing this. If we don’t have space to do it in person I think that we could develop something good online.

If nothing else, I think we should focus on structuring the library to be more approachable and develop some form of reference service, especially in subjects that do not receive that kind of support from their Faculty libraries, and on working more closely with Directors of Studies in the College.

Many thanks to Libby and Helen for letting me sit in/chat with you guys about library things!

My latest book haul from the UL

Book notes #1

In the autumn of last year I got an idea for a book. It's a book I want to read, but it doesn't exist, so, as many writers before me have done, I'm setting out to write it myself. I have only just begun really sitting down to think about it since my course ended at the end of December so these represent some of my first notes. I've written them out by hand and I think I might just transcribe them directly by way of backing them up somewhere other than a flimsy, eminently lose-able Moleskine notebook, in a city where Moleskines outnumber people 3 to 1. (Probably. I'm just making that up.) Feel free to skip this - it's for my own safe keeping, but together these entries may provide an interesting insight into my writing process, or a black box if the project fizzles out.

HWKWWK [my abbreviation for the working title "How We Know What We Know"] - 16/1/14

I spent the evening combing over the shelves of Waterstone's in Cambridge, looking for something useful, relevant or inspiring in some way to my endeavor, but found very little. In some ways this is comforting - apparently there is a niche, and given the prominence and recent proliferation of books on infographics, I think my book will look appealing to fans of that trend. However, I had hoped to draw inspiration from somewhere fairly directly. In the spirit of viewing nothing as a failure as long as it teaches you something, I did at least refine what my book is NOT, and the sort of sources I can safely avoid. I spent a lot of time in the popular science section, systematically disregarding books of 'facts', books about the internet, books about the brain etc. Dawkins' Magic of Reality still looks intriguing but perhaps more comparing science and mythology. One I did consider buying (and stupidly forgot to write down or take a picture of) was a collection of writings by scientists about their discoveries and claimed to be as much about the cultivation of a scientific way of thinking - insight into the scientific mind for 'outsiders'.

Overwhelmingly, however, anything that looked likely was either a compendium of scientific 'facts' designed to sell to the "Brainiac: Science Abuse" crowd with titles like Why Do Men Have Nipples? and taglines like "What your science teacher DIDN'T tell you!" The aforementioned books on infographics have a similar feel: dense with very visual information but with little to link them. It's like reading a novel abridged and posted on Twitter. Are you learning something? Sure. But is it deep learning you can transfer to other contexts? That is doubtful. In some ways, not only is this what my book is not, it's what my book sets out to remedy; the shallow, passive acceptance of facts presented in uncomplicated ways, which authors assume is okay because it's for the 'uninitiated'. Though I suppose it's likely to end up shelved here (or with philosophy?), my book should give people the tools to question this, social science books, news, political arguments, art criticism etc. Emma used the colourful phrase 'crap detector', which is partly true, but it is also about breaking down the idea/assumption that if you aren't part of the discipline you can't deconstruct an argument.

Emma helped me clarify what I mean by this. She said it's about allowing/enabling people to deconstruct an argument by a scientist, for example, on their own terms. As in, it isn't about a mathematician reading a social science paper and saying, 'Well, that was a logical leap and therefore invalid.' Rather it's saying these are the conventions and criteria for validity that this discipline has established. Does it meet those criteria? Y/N Where does the argument break down? Tied to this are the epistemological questions: are there really 'facts'? If so, why do 'facts' change over time? What is knowledge? What can we know? But there's also the practical element of giving people a key to the maps of different disciplines and conventions, such as academic writing, journalism, infographics etc.

This feels like an absolutely monumental undertaking and it is ambitious in the extreme, but it isn't intended to be a definitive work on any of the topics; I intend to provide a lot of suggestions for further reading. However, it should be a useful and engaging starting point. My own starting point may be with something like intellectual histories of disciplines - historiography, history of philosophy, history of science, history of criticism, etc. - as well as books on conventions for journalism, academia etc. and books on rhetorical techniques. I want to break down the imaginary barriers between disciplines and make readers feel empowered to investigate and question ANYTHING.
...
[Written later:] Rather than 'peering behind the curtain' [of other disciplines], [the book is about] arguing that the curtain is a false construct and the only barriers to understanding linguistic and conventional assumptions perpetuated to protect specialist knowledge. This is not to say experts are useless or don't exist. On the contrary, [I believe that] they should have the confidence in their own expertise to both allow their work to be questioned and to be able to explain it clearly to individuals who are not aware of the assumptions made in that discipline [e.g. 'outsiders'].
...
[In a list of areas to research:]
- History of epistemology: shows us that what we consider knowable ([within our] paradigm) shapes not only what is 'known' in disciplines but the very idea of disciplines and their relationships to each other [(their layout)]. Removing the assumptions that place FACTS at the centre of knowledge and disciplines at odds with one another allows one the freedom to investigate first principles and underlying assumptions within any framework. However, it's a 'threshold concept' and therefore very difficult to come to terms with, rather like identifying and subsequently questioning privilege. One could say that the current dominant epistemological paradigm privileges expertise and facts over trans-literacies, experiential learning etc. People working w/in that paradigm, e.g. academics, need to question that privilege.
...
"How we know what we know" : The mechanisms through which knowledge is created, both within the current paradigms and how those paradigms came to be.

LOL My Thesis

My fellow academics should appreciate this Tumblr I've been enjoying today:

LOL My Thesis

Academics submit one-sentence summaries of their theses and dissertations - the more trivial the more hilarious. Some of my favourites are:

Fake science sounds an awful lot like real science, except it’s fake.

Archaeology, University of Cambridge
Read Thesis

...

Rocks that are next to each other in Massachusetts now were also next to each other 400 million years ago.

Geology, Amherst College

...

14th and 19th century Londoners reacted differently to disease because of the shift in dominant cultural paradigms - or, you know, any number of other things.

Religious Studies, Elon University

...

Poetry is, and should be, like noodles.

Comparative Literature, Columbia College Chicago

...

Fox News is lying to us with graphs.

Graphic Design, University College Falmouth

...

So, colonialism.

History, Wesleyan University