Consultants in Academic Libraries: Challenging, Renewing, and Extending the Dialogue Marni R

Academic Librarianship bibliothéconomie universitaire

volum e 3 · spr ing 2018 pr in t em ps

Canadian Association of Professional Academic Librarians / Association canadienne des bibliothécaires académiques professionnels Welcome Bienvenue

The Canadian Journal of Academic Librarianship is an open-access, peer-reviewed journal published by the Canadian Association of Professional Academic Librarians (CAPAL). Content is published on a continuous basis and collected into one volume each year.

La Revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire est disponsible en libre accès et ses articles sont soumis à un comité de lecture. Elle est publiée par l’Association canadienne des bibliothécaires académiques professionnels (ACBAP). Les articles paraissent au fur et à mesure où ils sont prêts à être publiés et ils sont réunis en un volume chaque année. editors / éditeurs Monica Fazekas · University of Western Ontario Kristin Hoffmann · University of Western Ontario Marie-Ève Ménard · Université de Montréal Lisa Richmond · Wheaton College on the cover / sur la couverture Guy Laramée, ABOVE. 2017. Livre sculpté (Atlas du Canada 1957), pigments de qualité archive, fixatifs, huile sur couverture apprêtée (toile). 21 x 16,75 x 19,5(h) pouces. ©Guy Laramée 2017, tous droits réservés. Reproduction offerte par JHB Gallery, http://jhbgallery.com.

Online / En ligne

cjal.ca / rcbu.ca Table des matières

editorial in english

éditorial en fr ançais articles Consultants in Academic Libraries: Challenging, Renewing, and Extending the Dialogue Marni R. Harrington and Ania Dymarz Postwar Canadian Academic Libraries, 1945–60 Lorne D. Bruce reviews / comptes rendus Todd Gilman, ed., Academic Librarianship Today James E. Murphy

Janneke Guise, Succession Planning in Canadian Academic Libraries Mélanie Brunet

Jamie Brownlee, Academia, Inc. and Maggie Berg and Barbara Seeder, The Slow Professor Samantha Elmsley

François Séguin, D’obscurantisme et de lumières : la bibliothèque publique au Québec des origines au 21e siècle Mélanie Brunet

Andrea Baer, Information Literacy and Writing Studies in Conversation: Reenvisioning Library–Writing Program Connections Carly Diab

about the artist / à propos de l’artiste Editorial

In our third volume, we publish two articles that present historical analyses. Marni R. Harrington and Ania Dymarz examine the trend of hiring consultants in academic libraries, combining their historical presentation of literature about consultants in librarianship with a linguistic analysis of that literature. While they present a historical analysis, they do so in order to better understand the present-day role of consultants in academic libraries. Their critical perspective brings a helpful focus to the discussion about consultants and illuminates several ways in which the role of consultants can be further scrutinized. Lorne D. Bruce gives a historical survey of academic libraries in postwar Canada, identifying several themes that were prominent during that period. Today’s readers are unlikely to have first-hand memories of academic libraries from 1945 to 1960, and so Bruce’s discussion of these historical developments is enlightening. It is particularly timely and interesting to read about library organization, administrative changes, and evolution of roles for librarians, since many Canadian academic libraries are currently undergoing “organizational renewal” or re-organizations.

As in the previous volume of the Canadian Journal of Academic Librarianship, these articles show that we are open to all research methodologies and disciplinary perspectives. Literature in librarianship has been criticized for being overly preoccupied with quantitative, empirical research (Drabinski and Walters 2016), and we are pleased that CJAL’s volumes clearly show our commitment to approaches that may not have been as readily accepted by other journals. At the same time, we want to remind prospective authors that our commitment to all methodologies means that we are also open to quantitative research, and we would particularly welcome submissions of quantitative research addressed from critical perspectives. We also want to remind readers that we are also accepting submissions for two special issues, one on diversity and academic librarianship and one on research, scholarship, and Canadian academic librarians. Details are in the News section of the journal site. We are pleased to work with our guest editor colleagues on these special

Editorial. 2018. Canadian Journal of Academic Librarianship 3: 1–2. © The editors, CC BY-NC-ND. issues, and we look forward to receiving your submissions on these topics, or indeed any topic related to academic librarianship.

References Drabinski, Emily, and Scott Walter. 2016. “Asking Questions That Matter.” College & Research Libraries 77

(3):264–68. ht tps://doi.org/10.5860/crl .77.3.264.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 2 Éditorial

Dans notre troisième volume, nous publions deux articles qui présentent des analyses historiques. Marni R. Harrington et Ania Dymarz examinent la tendance consistant à embaucher des consultants dans les bibliothèques universitaires. Elles combinent une présentation historique de la littérature sur les consultants en bibliothéconomie à l’analyse linguistique de cette dernière. Leur analyse historique a pour objectif de mieux comprendre le rôle actuel des consultants dans les bibliothèques d’enseignement supérieur. Leur texte permet de poser un regard critique sur le phénomène des consultants et d’examiner de plus près leur rôle sous plusieurs angles. Lorne D. Bruce fait un survol historique des bibliothèques universitaires du Canada de l’après-guerre en identifiant plusieurs thèmes importants durant cette période. Étant donné le nombre restreint de lecteurs pouvant se souvenir des bibliothèques universitaires entre 1945 et 1960, la discussion de l’auteur sur ces développements historiques est éclairante. Il est particulièrement opportun et intéressant d’en apprendre davantage sur l’organisation des bibliothèques, les changements administratifs et l’évolution des rôles des bibliothécaires, puisque de nombreuses bibliothèques universitaires canadiennes font actuellement l’objet d’un « renouveau organisationnel » ou de réorganisations.

Comme dans le volume précédent de la Revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire, ces articles démontrent l’accueil que nous faisons à toutes les méthodologies de recherche et à toutes les perspectives disciplinaires. On a reproché à la littérature bibliothéconomique d’être trop préoccupée par la recherche empirique quantitative (Drabinski et Walters, 2016). Nous sommes heureux que les volumes de la RBCU démontrent clairement notre intérêt pour des approches qui ne sont pas nécessairement acceptées par d’autres revues. Aussi, nous rappelons aux auteurs que notre ouverture envers toutes les méthodologies signifie que nous nous intéressons également à la recherche quantitative. Nous recevrons donc avec plaisir des propositions d’articles de recherche quantitative abordée sous un angle critique.

Éditorial. 2018. Revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 3: 1–2. © Les éditeurs, CC BY-NC-ND. Nous acceptons également des propositions pour deux numéros spéciaux, l’un sur la diversité et la bibliothéconomie universitaire et l’autre sur la recherche, l’érudition et les bibliothécaires universitaires du Canada. Les détails se trouvent dans la section annonces du site Web de la revue. Nous sommes heureux de travailler avec nos collègues éditeurs invités sur ces parutions spéciales et attendons avec impatience de recevoir vos propositions sur ces sujets ou sur tout autre sujet lié à la bibliothéconomie universitaire.

Références Drabinski, Emily et Scott Walter (2016). « Asking Questions That Matter », College & Research Libraries, 77 (3), 264–68. ht tps://doi.org/10.5860/crl .77.3.264.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 2 Consultants in Academic Libraries: Challenging, Renewing, and Extending the Dialogue

Marni R. Harrington University of Western Ontario

Ania Dymarz Simon Fraser University

abstr act There is a trend in academic libraries to hire consultants for internal crises, change management projects, strategic planning processes, outcomes assessment, evidence-based decision making, information literacy instruction, and more. Although we hear informally about the use of consultants in academic libraries, the practice has gone unexamined. We employ a historical and linguistic analysis of consultants in academic libraries, using a critical framework for this research. A critical perspective provides a structure to discuss issues that librarians may not have been able to previously fit into library practice dialogue. A chronological history of consulting in libraries acts as our literature review. This review, along with a targeted examination of library and information science resources, is used to guide two lines of linguistic analysis. The first provides a critique of the core tenets used to define and characterize library consultants, namely, the claim that consultants are unbiased professionals who bring “expertise” and “fresh” ideas to libraries. The second analysis investigates the rhetorical strategies used in existing texts: polarizing language, straw man reasoning, and figurative and indirect language. The discussion section unpacks these linguistic strategies, reflects on what is missing from the texts, and considers how knowledge and power are exerted through language, making connections to the broader context of neoliberalism.

Keywords: academic libraries · consultants · neoliberal practices résumé La tendance au sein des bibliothèques universitaires est de confier à des consultants les dossiers touchant, entre autres, les crises internes, les projets de gestion du changement, les processus de planification stratégique, l’évaluation des résultats, la prise de décision fondée sur des données probantes, et la formation à la maîtrise de l’information. Bien que le recours aux consultants dans les bibliothèques universitaires est discuté de façon informelle, cette pratique ne fait l’objet

Harrington, Marni R., and Ania Dymarz. 2018. “Consultants in Academic Libraries: Challenging, Renewing, and Extending the Dialogue.” Canadian Journal of Academic Librarianship 3: 1–28. © Marni R. Harrington and Ania Dymarz. CC BY-SA-4.0. d’aucun examen. Notre recherche effectue une analyse critique à la fois historique et linguistique des consultants dans les bibliothèques universitaires. Cette approche critique permet d’encadrer une discussion sur des questions que les bibliothécaires n’ont pas nécessairement pu soulever auparavant dans le dialogue concernant la bibliothéconomie. Notre analyse documentaire se penche sur un historique des consultations dans les bibliothèques. Cet examen, ainsi que l’étude ciblée des ressources en bibliothéconomie et en sciences de l’information, guideront deux axes d’analyse linguistique. Le premier effectue la critique des principes fondamentaux utilisés pour définir et caractériser les consultants en bibliothèques. Particulièrement l’affirmation selon laquelle les consultants sont des professionnels impartiaux qui font bénéficier les bibliothèques de leur « expertise » et de leurs idées « nouvelles ». Le deuxième axe s’intéresse aux stratégies rhétoriques employées dans les textes actuels : le vocabulaire polarisé, l’argumentation épouvantail, et le langage figuratif et indirect. La section de discussion décortique ces stratégies linguistiques, examine les lacunes des textes, et s’interroge sur la manière dont les connaissances et l’influence sont exprimées par le langage, tout en établissant des liens avec le contexte général du néolibéralisme.

Mots-clés : bibliothèques universitaires · consultants · pratiques néolibérales

Aping business rhetoric and models doesn’t save libraries[;] it transforms them into something else. We’re a profession and an institution in crisis because we have a structural contradiction between our purpose and practices as they’ve historically evolved and our adaption to the current environment. — John Buschman, “Libraries and the Decline of Public Purposes”

There is a present trend in academic libraries to hire consultants for internal crises, change management projects, strategic planning processes, assessment of outcomes, evidence-based decision making, information literacy instruction, and more.1 Although we hear informally about the use of consultants in academic libraries, the practice has gone unexamined. In the context of academic libraries, we have found that there is no formal research about what consultants do, nor is there evidence to support successful outcomes of their work. Tracing the origin of the unquestioned use of consultants in libraries is critical for understanding where we are today. The limited research about consultants in libraries may be attributed to a view, advocated in texts about library consulting, that hiring consultants is a beneficial activity and hence need not and should not be challenged. It is understood that consultants have an unquestionable place in such areas as large-scale systems or building and renovation projects. When it comes to core library organizational activities, however, the roles afforded to consultants and the characteristics attributed to them invite criticism. Grounded in a call to engage critically with “the power structures, technologies,

1. The authors wish to thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable and considerate feedback, along with Courtney Waugh for her constructive and intellectual support as we adapted this work from chapter to journal format.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 2 histories, and ways of life of information societies” (Capurro 2000, 276), our research is an analysis and discussion about the use of consultants in academic libraries. We begin with a literature review consisting of three parts. First, we present an abbreviated historical review of consultants in libraries. This chronological review is followed by a short literature review to situate academic libraries in neoliberal times and an introduction to consulting as a neoliberal practice. Finally, to set the groundwork for the textual analysis used in our research, we conclude with a review of library and information science (LIS) literature that urges attentiveness to the discourse used in libraries.

I. An Abbreviated History of Consulting in Libraries While consulting in academic libraries is the focus of our research, a comprehensive examination of libraries is essential to capture the variety of literature written by consultants, scholars, librarians, and others. Consequently, we have also integrated into our review relevant literature written about academic, public, and special libraries and literature across disciplines such as management and organizational psychology.

Construction and Survey Work (1940s to 1960s) Consultants were part of the library landscape well before the 1930s, but it was during this decade that architectural and building expertise started to be regularly required for library planning and construction projects (Schell 1975, 201). In the 1870s, other types of consulting began in private, for-profit, and commercial organizations, when Frederick Taylor developed time-and-motion studies to increase efficiencies in the workplace (see review in Noble 1986). These “scientific management” studies addressed the improvement of human efficiencies to save time and money on repetitive tasks. Business efficiencies such as Taylor’s were transformed into survey work in libraries. Initially called surveyors, these library consultants conducted basic questionnaires and interviews that included reviews of library holdings, equipment, staff, facilities, and patrons. The earliest recorded library survey was in 1951, when the New York Public Library hired a management firm to create and implement a review of the library system to help library administration manage large-scale change (Dougherty 1980, 425). The outcome of the surveyors’ work was usually a formal report, which was not made publicly available due to the sensitive issues raised by respondents. The reports were regarded as significant despite a general lack of documented evidence about their results or contents. According to Dougherty, due to a problem with transparency of the survey data and reports, skeptics questioned the results and whether policies created from the data were implemented, and if so, whether they were effective

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 3 (1980, 426). In 1967, the director of the School of Library Science at Simmons College expressed his extreme discontent about library consultants in a Library Journal report: “Inept Library Consultants Attacked by Shaffer.” Shaffer claimed that consultants were not using current survey techniques and hired poorly qualified staff to administer the surveys (Library Journal News 1967, 3946). He dismissed the work and the role of consultants because the low quality of surveys meant the results were inaccurate and misleading. Just as corporate business practices directly influenced the early roles of consulting in libraries, LIS literature also relied on what was written for the business world. Schell acknowledged that there was little written about consulting in libraries specifically and recommended that library and information studies should bring basic theory and practice from business consulting and apply it directly to libraries (1975, 209). Dougherty reported that early consultants often made recommendations that were more appropriate for private corporations than for non-profit, socially oriented institutions such as libraries (1980, 425). The connection between consulting and corporate practices was explicit during this time.

In the introduction to the 1969 Directory of Library Consultants, Blasingame wrote that library problems large and small were now being solved by consultants, and he considered consultant activities to be commonplace in libraries. Consultants were involved in projects ranging from renovation, construction, and the development of new library services in public libraries to organizational, managerial, and financial rejuvenation in academic libraries. The consulting trend was not specific to North American libraries. In the mid- 1960s in the United Kingdom, the Association of Special Libraries and Information Bureaux (Aslib) established a consultancy service. Aslib members were primarily from industrial and commercial domains, and the association grew rapidly. Comparable to what was happening with survey data, transparency in consulting work was also minimal. That is, the advice of the consultants or outcomes of consulting projects were rarely reported beyond the host institution. Gilchrist believed that the more conservative and public service–oriented members of the UK Library Association were slower to accept consultants because they were more skeptical than their Aslib counterparts toward management strategies in general (1999, 211). The use of consultants in organizational management was a precursor to the widespread use of neoliberal strategies seen in libraries today.

Service and Operational Changes (1970s and 1980s) As technology continued to develop rapidly, libraries became increasingly dependent on consultants for supporting service and operational changes (Courtney and

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 4 Johnson 1992, 264). Additional comprehensive survey approaches evolved, such as problem analysis, data collection, mathematical models, and implementation plans (for an example, see Rouse and Rouse’s library operations model, developed at Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1973). Dougherty forecast that consultants would play an increasing role in academic libraries in the 1980s. He theorized that library managers would be plagued by pressures to keep current in a fast-changing economic and technological environment, which would require the use of “specialist problem-solvers” (1980, 427). He also speculated that management consultants would become increasingly important due to the fast pace of technological change, and he further predicted the concomitant growth of discontent and resistance among academic library staff because of these changes in libraries (429). He argued that the prosperity seen in academic libraries over the previous 40 years could not endure. Large comprehensive collections, new library construction, increased staff complements, and more services for users could not be sustained, particularly when the growth in post-secondary education and budget allocations started to slow. To help library directors manage organizational change and budgetary decline, the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) began a consulting program. Dougherty wrote that it was key for ARL to formalize its consulting service due to the complexities of the era and to expand the pool of qualified consultants for academic libraries (434). According to Adler, this was the beginning of neoliberalism’s hold on libraries. In her review of Library of Congress documents from the 1980s, she found that because libraries are supported by public funds and fall into the category of public goods, they faced serious governmental budget cuts, which led to strategic management practices within the library (2015, 30). Although consulting can now be considered common in libraries, as indicated by an increase in consultant contracts and the establishment of professional organizations and directories, there were no regulations guiding the practice until the 1980s. Blasingame originally called for professional and ethical guidelines for consultants in his introduction to the first directory of library consultants in 1969. But it wasn’t until 1983 that “Guidelines for Consultants Working in Librarianship and Information Science” were approved by the UK Library Association (Courtney and Johnson 1992, 272). The American Library Association (ALA) also developed a code of ethics through the Association of Specialized and Cooperative Library Agencies (ASCLA 2016, n.p.). Derived from the Institute of Management Consultants, the “Library Consultants Code of Ethics” is still used today, but the association does not offer certification. ASCLA currently has 800 members, including library agencies, networks, co-operatives, and consultants. The creation of ethical guidelines further

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 5 substantiated organizing practices and continued to establish the normative use of consultants.

Environmental Changes and Budget Challenges (1990s to 2000s) New Public Management (NPM) practices surfaced in the United States and United Kingdom during the 1980s, but it was not until the 1990s that the neoliberal doctrine of NPM seeped into the public sector and slowly reached the field of education (Serrano-Velarde 2010, 130). The NPM expectation that service provision in the public sector should operate like a private-sector venture became well established in higher education (Lorenz 2012, 601). Rapid changes in library technologies continued, and new expectations from user communities were widespread in the 1990s. Consultants were hired to help libraries adapt to these external environmental changes and user expectations. Four trends identified by Lippitt and Lippitt prompted the rise of consultants in libraries: technological development, crises in human resources, undeveloped consulting skills of workers, and discretionary time (1986, 28). Thus, new opportunities were created for library consultants to fill roles related to these trends and crises. In 1994, Rogers described LIS consulting as a small niche within a larger billion-dollar industry. Gilchrist proclaimed that library and information consulting in the United Kingdom could be regarded as “legitimate, professional, and almost respectable” (1999, 211). By 2006, Skrzeszewski stated that strategic planning consultants earned 15 percent of consultant revenues in the business and non-profit sector and predicted that the revenue for consultants in all sectors would continue to grow (2006, 125). Although there is no information to support why revenue for consultants might continue to grow, the increasing use of neoliberal management practices in library operations may be an indicator. For example, it was during this time that Stoffle, Renaud, and Veldof called for academic libraries to respond to the crisis in libraries with “unprecedented,” “radical,” and “revolutionary” change by using corporate business models and practices (1996, 213). As Harvey articulates, a key neoliberal strategy is to manufacture a crisis to justify change, and crisis talk has become common conversation in librarianship (2005, 2).

Organizational Changes and Change Management (2010–) Library consulting continues to grow in the 21st century. The use of consultants has become particularly prevalent during library restructuring and strategic planning initiatives, with the narrative of change becoming the norm in academic libraries. Today, professional library associations play a major role in the consultation process. The ALA currently supports two groups that provide consultancy services. ASCLA established a new library consultant interest group in 2011, with membership doubling from 32 to 63 members within the first year (Smithee 2013, n.p.). Targeting

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 6 academic libraries, the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) advertises consulting services to implement the “ACRL Standards for Libraries in Higher Education” (Mueller 2012, n.p.). ACRL consultants can also be hired for a broad range of other activities. These activities include planning and executing a library program review, preparing for accreditation, thinking strategically, environmental scanning, leading and managing change to enhance organizational effectiveness, facilitating retreats for leadership and team development, planning kickoff events, facilitating departmental and other stakeholder meetings, and developing and implementing focus groups. Seale proposes that professional associations such as ACRL work hard to maintain a single discourse (in this case, the value of consultants) to encourage members to follow the association, not question it (2013, 46). Following the lead of professional associations and accrediting bodies such as the ALA, it makes sense that a call emerges in the Associate University Librarian Handbook for LIS schools to offer coursework for students to learn how to set up and operate a consulting business (Eden 2012, 208). In recent years, little has been written about consulting in libraries. For example, only 16 articles were found with the descriptor “library consultant” in Library Literature & Information Science Full Text. This database indexes and abstracts over 400 key LIS journals, since 1980. Why is there such an imbalance between the growth of library consulting as a field and available literature on the topic? As Kaspar and vanDuinkerken, proponents of internal, do-it-yourself consulting, observe, there is a resignation with the profession over the last 20 years to accept consultants for internal organizational changes rather than owning it ourselves (2014, 1). This discrepancy between the indiscriminate and accepted use of consultants and the lack of discourse about their role and impact on libraries is addressed further in our discussion section.

II. Neoliberalism, Consultants, and Critical Perspectives Academic libraries do not exist in isolation but rather function within the governance and administrative structures of higher education and within the broader realities of public institutions in a time of neoliberalism. There are many examples of neoliberal practices within higher education, including what Mills calls a focus on “marketised and contractual knowledge exchange processes and flows” and the creation of other roles to support knowledge, including corporatized knowledge actors: “consultants, brokers and experts” (2015, 209). Similarly, there are many organizational behaviours in libraries that align with neoliberal practices. Adler suggests that some of these practices include “private sector’s involvement and influence, strategic planning, information commodification and marketing, deskilling and downsizing labor forces, commercial-technological approaches to market research, and entrepreneurial

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 7 funding structures” (2015, 34). When consultants are hired in public institutions such as libraries, the pressures of economic impact overshadow systems of education (Serrano-Valarde and Krücken 2012, 279). Nicholson proposes that librarians have accepted without question corporate models such as these in their workplaces (2015, 332). In academic libraries, there are many reasons why hiring a consultant may threaten the practice of librarianship. First, consulting is a business and aligns with neoliberal practices of employing business solutions to address crises and change. Second, the practice also raises questions of agency and power. Who has the power in a consultant/client relationship? And finally, using corporate solutions for library restructuring, strategic planning, or other organizational change may create conflict between the ethical guidelines and values of librarianship and the consultant’s recommendations for a library. Seale highlights issues around hiring an information literacy consultant to define and measure value in academic libraries. Seale questions how a critical distance from the consultant’s own work is maintained if the consultant is also a library and information scholar. Does the repeated use of the consultant’s work within academic libraries create a “closed discursive system that undoubtedly promotes the uncritical adoption of ideas that seem authoritative and obvious” (2013, 54)? A critical perspective gives us a structure to talk about issues that we may not have been able to historically fit into our dialogue about library practice. The growing critiques of neoliberalism in higher education (for example, Harvey 2005, Olssen and Peters 2005) lend themselves to a critical perspective and are well represented in literature written about higher education, including a recent proliferation of scholarship related to librarians and archivists in academic libraries (see Cifor and Lee 2017, Nicholson 2015, and Waugh 2014). The broader critical librarianship movement (#critlib) has resulted in new journals, conferences, and research dedicated to questions, structures, and assumptions that reinforce power and oppression in academic libraries. There are only a few substantive examples of scholarly literature about consultants in higher education, however. In 2015, the Journal of Educational Administration and History published a special issue offering a critical perspective on the use of consultants in higher education. Similarly, Serrano-Velarde investigated issues of importing private-sector practices into public-sector domains such as public universities, placing her analysis within a broader neoliberal critique (2010, 280). These examples demonstrate that there has been some engagement with the use of consultants within a broader academic discourse, but not specific to libraries. Fincham and Clark (2002) trace two distinct types of literature about consultants. The first type focuses on organizational development, which started in the late

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 8 1950s and continued into the 1980s. They characterize organizational development as primarily existing for and by consultants, a literature “located inside the activity itself” (6) that possesses an “essentially self-congratulatory manner” (7). In contrast to the literature on organizational development, Fincham and Clark refer to the second, emerging trend as the critical literature:

Critical literature on the whole has not been concerned with the effectiveness of consultancy work or been motivated by a wish to improve practice. Instead, the growth of the management consultancy industry has been seen as indicative of broader social and economic changes, and the critical literature has sought to utilize the example of the consultancy industry to contribute to academic debates in a number of discipline areas, particularly geography, history, management, and sociology. (7)

A lack of critical approach in libraries is also evident within LIS literature. That is, there are many examples of how-to guides, editorials, and literature by and for consultants, but there are remarkably few that critically engage with the practice. Literature that informs the reader about “how to hire a consultant” (e.g., Matthews 1994) or “how to be a good consultant” (e.g., Wormell, Olesen and Mikulás 2011) implicitly assumes that using consultants is standard, expected, beneficial, and conventional. For example, in Matthews’s “The Effective Use of Consultants in Libraries,” the role of consultants is not questioned. While this report aims to provide insight into selecting consultants and using them effectively, the consultant’s expertise is presumed, not discussed (1994, 747). Literature written by and for library consultants also reiterates the normative practice of hiring consultants (see, for example, the professional publication AIIP Connections, 2015). Fincham and Clark remind us that organizational development literature “assumes that management consultants have already convinced clients of their value and know how” (2002, 6). In the LIS scholarship to date, this assumption seems to have stifled any ongoing discussion about the practice or its efficacy.

III. Language in the Library The language of consumerism and commodification of knowledge is now part of the language of libraries, but this should not entail an uncritical acceptance of the ideology behind the language and what the language represents in practice. As Budd recommends: “The library’s language, and practice, should flow from as clear an idea of purpose as possible. And librarians should examine purpose independently from the pressures of capitalism and consumption” (1997, 319). A textual analysis allows us to unpack the discursive practices used in written work about consultants, because the ways in which realities are represented in language have effects beyond what is written. According to wa Mwachofi, Alfino, and Wynyard, language is not neutral but is a performative act that is able to negate or confirm the validity of social structures.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 9 The ideologies created and conveyed through language are reproduced in texts, providing the conditions or frame for the performance to happen:

The more a frame becomes part of our culture, the more it escapes scrutiny; also, the less “visible” it becomes. In other words, paradoxically, it becomes more absent as it becomes more present. And ironically, the less visible it becomes, the more power it gains because it escapes our scrutiny. (1998, 155)

Is this what has happened with the role of consultants in libraries? Are the language strategies used in texts about consulting negating or validating their use? As we consider the impact of neoliberalism, academic libraries serve as a particularly interesting context for asking these questions. Seale’s critique of ACRL’s information literacy standards demonstrates that discursive practices repeat themselves and may “constrain alternative discourses that might critique, contest and challenge their hegemony” (2013, 46). Seale submits that critical theories of knowledge production and discursive practices analyzed with a neoliberal lens in education also apply to libraries. And importantly, discursive practices are not innocent and need to be dismantled to allow space for further discussion and alternate perspectives.

IV. Methodology The goal of our research is to investigate the type of language used in published texts about library consultants. To reach this goal, we examined and categorized the words and phrases used to define, describe, and characterize consultants in a variety of texts. To begin, we reviewed dictionaries, encyclopedias, directories, handbooks, and guides—what we refer to here as LIS reference materials. We selected these materials by searching for LIS reference materials in the library catalogue of a research- intensive Canadian university. For materials published in more than one edition, we reviewed the editions available. This academic library houses a comprehensive collection of current and legacy LIS resources, as it supports an ALA-accredited master’s program in library and information science that is in its 50th year.

LIS reference materials are created for the teaching, learning, and research needs of a targeted audience: LIS students, scholars, and practitioners. The authors of these works include consultants, researchers, practitioners, LIS scholars, and others. We were motivated to analyze this literature because it is representative of the resources that influence student learning about LIS topics, which in turn may influence perceptions of the value of consultants. For a fuller analysis, materials presented in our chronological literature review were also considered for textual analysis even though they may refer to consultants generally or in other fields not specific to libraries. All reference materials were reviewed, along with a small number of works

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 10 in each category of directories, handbooks, and guides. Appendix A provides a full list of titles. To begin, formal definitions of library consultants in LIS reference materials were recorded. Clear themes emerged from these texts due to the repetition of words and phrases and noticeable use of a variety of linguistic strategies when describing what consultants do. Once these themes emerged, we re-examined the LIS reference materials to find other instances of the themes. We also re-examined materials from our literature review section to include in our findings. Weaving the two strands of literature together (LIS reference materials and other consulting literature that may be general or LIS-specific), we identified themes in language used in these texts.

V. Findings The first theme is consultant as expert: consultants are “experts” who bring “fresh” ideas and are “unbiased.” The second theme is the use of rhetorical strategies to talk abstractly and indirectly about consulting, specifically by using polarizing language, straw man reasoning, and figurative and indirect language.

Consultant as Expert To begin, we note that not all LIS reference materials we examined define or discuss library consultants. For example, neither The Bookman’s Glossary, a dictionary edited by Peters in 1975 and 1983, nor the Encyclopaedia of Librarianship, edited by Landau in 1961 and 1966, includes information about consultants. As shown in Appendix B, however, many of the reference materials that do define or characterize consultants do so within a range of three general themes: consultants are “experts,” consultants have “fresh” ideas, and they are “unbiased.”

Consultants Are “Experts” The first instance of defining and representing library consultants in reference literature appears in the ALA Glossary of Library Terms, published in 1943 (Thompson 1943). With subsequent editions published in 1983 (Young and Belanger 1983) and 2013 (Levine-Clark and Carter 2013), the representation of library consultants expands from an emphasis on the general value of consultants to the increased importance of their role. Specifically, a consultant is defined in the 1943 edition as a “specialist in a particular subject” working on “special problems” (Thompson 1943, 36). Forty years later, however, a consultant is “an expert in a specialized field brought in by a library or other agency for professional or technical advice” (Young and Belanger 1983, 57). Also, “library consultant” has its own entry in the glossary in the 1983 and 2013 editions and is defined as an “external expert,” “commissioned by a library to give professional or technical advice on planning, management, operations, physical

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 11 facilities, or other areas of concern” (Young and Belanger 1983, 131; Levine-Clark and Carter 2013, 153). The Dictionary for Library and Information Science also consistently includes a definition of library consultants across a ten-year span, reinforcing the expertise claim (Reitz 2004 and 2013). Over time, “consultant as expert” becomes a defined attribute. It must be acknowledged that there is a significant difference between a specialist, with special qualifications to offer, and an expert, who provides unchallenged recommendations. According to the OED Online, a specialist assumes training and skills for a specific subject, activity, or business. In contrast, an expert assumes competence, authority, proficiency, and comprehensive knowledge and skill in an area OED( Online 2017). By continually assigning the role of expert to the consultant, there is an unspoken assumption about levels of expertise available in the library. The implication is that those in the library lack that expertise or at the very least may not have adequate experience to fill the role. In the case where the expertise sought lies within another disciplinary field, such as architectural planning, the underlying assumption regarding the capacity available in the library is not meaningful. However, as consultants advance to roles related to the core work of librarians, the implication becomes more significant. Robbins-Carter attempts to clarify roles of consultants and clients, stating that hiring a consultant signals that library staff are not capable of solving a problem without external help (1984, 90). Although consultants are predominantly presented as experts, one notable exception is in Harrod’s Glossary, published in 1990, 1995, 2000, and 2005 (Prytherch). Across these editions, the definition remained the same:

An individual offering a range of professional skills and advice relevant to the operation of libraries. Usually these skills will be marketed on a commercial basis by a freelance, self- employed person who is not directly employed by the library concerned, but retained on contract for a fee. (2005, 420)

This characterization is neutral and acknowledges a commercial transaction, two key elements that are missing from other definitions.

Consultants Have “Fresh” Ideas The recurrent notion of library consultants who bring “fresh” ideas, solutions, perspectives, and approaches to the library undermines library workers. The “fresh” restatement is significant not because it is based on any real evidence but rather because it is repeated and affirmed. As with the use of the “expert” label, “fresh” may imply that the contributions from those in the library are stale. The “fresh” theme originates in the introduction written by Blasingame for the Directory of Library Consultants in 1969:

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 12 There are many potential advantages in having such a consultant to aid not only in the solution of specific problems but to bring into the organization a continuous supply of fresh ideas, unfettered by the traditions and limitations of the past. (n.p.)

Subsequently, Bob cites Blasingame’s passage in full in his 1969 professional article “And a Consultant Shall Lead Them.” Bob’s short, lighthearted exposé outlines problems that may be encountered with library consultants, then unexpectedly concludes with Blasingame’s tips on how to successfully select consultants (1969, 45). In their 1984 handbook, Rawles and Wessells continue to restate the fresh element of consultants. Similarly, in their six-page guide to selecting library consultants, Finn and Johnston propagate both the expert and fresh qualities of consultants (1986). Even in a work such as the International Encyclopedia of Information and Library Science (1997 and 2003), consultants are characterized by their “implementation of fresh solutions” (Feather and Sturges 1997, 105). De Stricker presents consulting as an option for graduating LIS students in her vocational guide Is Consulting for You?, stating that one of the reasons consultants are needed is that “consultants bring a fresh perspective” (2008, 4). Finally, in a guide to good practice for information consultants, consultants are identified as the evaluators and assessors “who come with fresh perspective, (without institutional or professional blindness)” (Wormell, Olesen and Mikulás 2011, 117). In these examples, the “fresh” agenda maintains the authority of the consultant and legitimizes the “expert” view afforded to them.

Consultants Are Unbiased The last concept that strengthens the theme of consultants’ expertise is that consultants bring an objective and unbiased perspective to an organization. As seen in her column for the Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, de Stricker claims that consultants bring an “unbiased approach” (2010, 46). LIS reference materials also reinforce this claim. The International Encyclopedia of Information and Library Science states that consultants offer “a detached and objective view of the organization’s needs and problems” (Feather and Sturges 1997, 105). Similarly, Lockwood characterizes the consultant as an “impartial, objective advisor” (1977, 498), and Skrzeszewski’s vocational guide for librarians supports “unbiased opinions and advice” provided by consultants (2006, 121).

Use of Rhetorical Strategies Three rhetorical strategies were identified in the texts we reviewed: polarizing language, straw man reasoning, and the use of figurative and indirect language. All three strategies act to persuade readers to accept the author’s characterization of consultants.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 13 Polarizing Language Beyond LIS reference materials, there is also a dichotomy of positive and negative characterizations seen in words and phrases used to describe consultants. Some examples include consultants writing in self-congratulatory to antagonistic styles, and non-consultants writing in conciliatory to combative tones. In one text, consultants are portrayed as innovative, forward thinking, and transformational (de Stricker 2010, 46). In another, there are expressions of skepticism and concern about the use of consultants because they are viewed as untrustworthy (Morris 2003, 3). De Stricker, a consultant herself, makes a case for hiring consultants using a “consultant as expert” statement: consultants as professionals bring “expertise, experience, and insight” to the organization. She also states that consultants are “experienced and capable people, with a track record of delivering worthwhile results [who can] minimize risk and maximize the likelihood of success” (2010, 46). Fincham and Clark would categorize this as “essentially self-congratulatory” literature (2002, 7). De Stricker further defines the powerful role of the consultant by positioning the client as naive in comparison: “The most important benefit clients mention is associated with peace of mind. . . . [T]hey like the stress reduction inherent in not having to venture into unfamiliar territory to take on tasks for which they are not prepared” (2010, 46). Additionally, de Stricker refers to “teaching by example,” positioning herself in the teacher role. In this scenario, the consultant is the teacher, the one with knowledge, and the one in control. Conversely, we infer that the client is the student, and the one with less agency. Others rebut pro-consultant claims and suggest that consultants “waste time, cost money, demoralize and distract your best people, and don’t solve problems” (Townsend 1970, 68). For those who disapprove, their representations of consultants are equally problematic. Morris’s editorial includes “why you should be suspicious of any consultant’s recommendations,” and “Consultants can give you a service, but watch out for their hidden agenda” (2003, 3). This rhetoric does little to substantiate the claim that “Any consultant with whom you might work automatically has baggage, and a routine which is followed that expands the sequence of steps to meet the consultant’s goals—a lucrative contract” (3). Rather, it serves to position consultants firmly on one end of a spectrum and fails to leave room for any nuance, let alone evidence of consultants’ successes or failures. Although conflicting representations may prompt a dialogue informed by a more critical perspective, in fact the opposite happens. The representation of consultants in the language of Morris’s editorial does not provide an alternative understanding but rather a hostile one that uses the same basic approach as the overly positive representation of consultants. In short, taking an antagonistic and

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 14 negative stance is just as problematic as taking an overly positive one, because it does not lead to an engaged dialogue to discuss the facts about consultants. Both the pro and con representations use language that portrays consultants through polarizing caricatures that the reader is asked to accept without evidence. Though much of the literature frames consultants as experts who impart knowledge, there are some examples that speak to the consultant/client relationship through the lens of a partnership (see Scale 2016). In their handbook for hospital libraries, Timour and Fink present an approach to library consultants in which the consultation is described “as a dialogue between two (or more) individuals about current operations and potential changes” (1972, 297). Beyond the library literature, Lippitt and Lippitt’s handbook on consultants in action frames consulting as a two- way interaction focused on the seeking, giving, and receiving of help (1986, 28).

Straw Man Reasoning Straw man reasoning consists of the use of unproven examples, exaggerations, or distortions to intentionally misrepresent a statement because it is easier than addressing pertinent questions in a nuanced manner (Walton 1987, 117). In consulting texts, we see a demonstration of straw man reasoning in relation to consulting work. For example, it is not uncommon for authors to use cliché when describing what they think a consultant does: “A consultant is someone who borrows your watch to tell you what time it is” (Morris 2003, 1). This straw man distortion is used to advance the author’s own arguments or agenda. Rather than truly engaging with fact-based arguments that may stand in contrast to the author’s views, the author opts for engaging a straw man purely to strengthen his or her own arguments. For example, de Stricker writes:

Some have an impression that consultants, as glib purveyors of the management fad of the day, cruise through client organizations leaving behind, along with their six-figure bills, politically fashionable but impossible-to-implement-in-practice recommendations—in other words, delivering no value but causing lots of resentment on the part of the staff on the group. Naturally, the truth is otherwise. (2010, 45)

In contrast, Morris, a librarian, offers:

If you contact a consultant . . . you are likely to hear the following: “I can help you choose a system that is the best for your library. I will help you save time and money, and give you a solution that meets all your need.” Tempting as it would be to believe those statements, it would be unfortunate for you to do so, since the promises are just not true. (2003, 1)

In both cases, writers choose to use a straw man to assert their truth claims. The trouble with straw man reasoning is that it fails to adequately substantiate the

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 15 author’s claims, and, more problematically, it fails to encourage a conversation that would engage people in detailed, objective discussions about consultants.

Figurative and Indirect Language Fincham asserts that metaphors are deeply ingrained in the discourse around consultants because this language can help to emphasize the varied aspects and perceptions of consultant work:

Metaphor may suggest the kinds of sharpened and polarized images needed for expressing such contradictions. Another factor may be that consultancy (or some of it) involves colorful and dramatic activities (and people); and to account for it, storytelling and emotive description are needed. (2002, 68)

The use of figurative language such as idioms, metaphors, similes, and hyperbole are present in the literature on consultants, within and beyond libraries. Fincham provides a concise analysis of this phenomenon, noting

the extent to which metaphors of consultancy have been employed. . . . [A]pparently, in not knowing what consultancy is, we can only say what it is like. For example, dramaturgical images of the consultant as performer, and consultancy as a kind of manipulative theatre[,] have been influential. . . . [T]he consultant as a type of magical figure, a shaman or witch doctor, has been even more widely used and emphasizes the surreptitious or insidious nature of the power of managers’ advisors. (2002, 68)

As demonstrated by the quotations from de Stricker and Morris, the use of figurative language does not help to clarify what consultants do or the impact they have. We noted above that consultants have been characterized as teachers. Smith also describes consultants through the proxy of mechanics and physicians (1992, 217), and Steele defines consultants through four roles: teacher-instructor, student-learner, detective, and barbarian (1975, 4). Robbins-Carter adds others to Steele’s list, including timekeeper, monitor, talisman, advocate, and ritual pig (1984, 92). Kakabadse, Louchart, and Kakabadse (2006) liken business consultants to “magicians” (435), “gardener, pilot, guide, troubleshooters, and parasites” (483). Similarly, consultants are characterized using figurative language, which signifies an abstract rather than straightforward description of their role. For example, Courtney and Johnson use “the chicken-and-the-egg dilemma” to highlight the inseparable roles of task and process that consultants use (1992, 263). Malinconico writes that being a consultant is not just to turn “a fool out of work into an expert” (1983, 2032). And Frankenhuis believes that a good consultant is a “living compendium of case studies” (1977, 136). By using figurative language, the unquestioned acceptance and outcomes of the use of consultants are obscured, compromising the possibility of a more nuanced

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 16 critique of the practice. Psychologists Roberts and Kreuz state, “Understanding when and why an utterance is produced is crucial in understanding its meaning” (1994, 159). Certain figures of speech are used to accomplish specific communicative goals, as when advertisers use figurative language to promote a product or service. Research analysts in advertising have discovered that advertisers who use figurative language produce more successful campaigns than those who do not (Kronrod and Danziger 2013, 726). The goal of figurative language in the case of advertising is to create a positive impression of a product or service. In the texts studied, positive and negative impressions are created with figurative language, depending on the sentiment of the writer. The use of rhetorical strategies such as metaphor is a shortcut to insinuating a value judgment and communicating assumptions about the impact of consultants without naming the assumptions or rigorously investigating them.

VI. Discussion The language strategies that we uncovered in texts about consultants blur the realities of the role of consultants in libraries and, in turn, point to the need for further analysis and research. Hence, we frame our discussion around gaps that emerge from our findings. First, we unpack the linguistic strategies we identified to reveal what is missing in the current literature. Next, we introduce agency theory to acknowledge and unpack the claim of objectivity in the texts. And third, we identify and acknowledge the unspoken implications of knowledge and power in consulting relationships in libraries.

Identifying Missing Elements in the Current Discourse Although the analysis of existing texts is enlightening, it is equally enlightening to consider and discuss the missing elements in the literature. Most notable is the absence of academic research with a critical examination of consultants in libraries. Scale found that there is minimal academic research, critical or supportive, about library consultants in any type of library setting (2015, n.p.). Fincham and Clark have noted that “the lack of research on management consultancy has constrained and even distorted our understanding of the phenomenon” (2002, 9), and we propose that the same is true for consultants in libraries. Theatrical metaphors make consulting sound like entertainment, and ambiguous and figurative language make the practice sound obscure and mysterious. Because of the prevalence of and focus on these rhetorical strategies, the need remains to examine some of the basic facts of consulting work: consulting is for-profit, commercially driven work that directly affects library workers and users. The very real and complicated impact that consultants may have on library organizations has not been addressed. Obscuring

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 17 this impact, whether it is significant or not, normalizes and entrenches the role of consultants in libraries. Literature focused on clients in a consultant/client relationship in libraries is also lacking. Pozzebon and Pinsonneault found literature reviews about consultants in management scholarship but no comparable reviews about clients in any field (2012, 37). The role of the client is discussed only in relation to the consultant. This imbalance demonstrates the dominant role afforded to consultants over clients. The imbalance between consultant and client continues as the “expert” role is also afforded to library consultants, without scrutiny. As demonstrated in our analysis, consultants are portrayed as unbiased professionals who bring “expertise” and “fresh” ideas to libraries. The “expert” claim, time and again, has the potential to disempower library workers. Furthermore, if we couple disempowered workers with constant concerns regarding deskilling and deprofessionalization in the profession, the seemingly harmless restatement of consultant as expert carries with it weighty implications for librarianship.

Questioning Objectivity with Agency Theory To unpack claims of unbiased, objective consultants, we turn to agency theory. Eggertsson offers a critique of bias using agency theory in economics (1990, 169). In the case of library consultants, agency theory explains how to best organize relationships in which one party (library administration) determines the work, while another party (consultant) does the work. Agency theory also assumes that both parties are motivated by self-interest. Eggertsson claims that there will always be an asymmetrical distribution that gives the consultant the strategic advantage in any consultant/client relationship. Consultants are also the agent in the relationship, working under the purview or bias of an economic rationale that both legitimates their practice (they get paid to do it) and affords them power in the consultant engagement. Fincham emphasizes that a consulting relationship is based on the set of rights given to the consultant by the client (2002, 72). The consultant is then bound by a formal or implicit contract to represent the client’s wishes and interests. Nevertheless, consultants will also have their own bias, as the interests of the client and consultant are never identical. Maintaining a veneer of objectivity is in the best interests of consultants and those who hire them. Serrano-Velarde offers a nuanced reading of objectivity in the context of higher education:

By introducing an “objective third person,” consulting reveals the demarcation line between the different actors involved in the change process and clarifies their scope of action. [Consultants] render managerial action possible/acceptable by serving as buffer between academics and administrators. [Furthermore,] knowledge transfer (from the consultant to the university community) thus consists of making the consultants’

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 18 “otherness” and their “objectivity” (or impartiality in the ongoing power struggle among academics and managers) work for the university’s change project. (2010, 141)

The claim of objectivity also adds value to the consulting practice. For example, with declining budgets to support academic libraries, there is external administrative pressure to demonstrate the return on investment in libraries (Kaufman 2012, 62). Neoliberal practices such as strategic planning, and hiring consultants to define and measure the library’s value, are implemented to demonstrate the importance of library services and resources. Consultants may be hired to assist with defining and measuring the library’s value, often through the development of a strategic plan. But the consultant’s work cannot be unbiased or objective, because consultants bring with them knowledge from previous projects. Paradoxically, consultants are hired because of their previous experiences.

Acknowledging Knowledge and Power in a Consulting Relationship Pozzebon and Pinsonneault theorize that there are two inseparable dimensions in a consulting relationship, power and knowledge, with power operating through knowledge production (2012, 36). Their work is based on Foucault’s proposition that “it is not possible for power to be exercised without knowledge, [and] it is impossible for knowledge not to engender power” (1980, 52). Pozzebon and Pinsonneault were unable to dissociate the roles of knowledge and power to demonstrate the independence of each concept in a consultant/client relationship (2012, 38). Because consultants are hired as “experts” (the knowledge dimension), they are given authority and control to make decisions (the power dimension). For example, consultants who are hired for their expertise in ACRL- sanctioned information literacy standards also bring with them the power of organizational standards, in this case, the standards of ALA. Seale indicates that professional organizations are motivated by power and have created a “claim to territory” within the information literacy sphere (2013, 46). As shown in our literature review, the same can be said for organizations that recommend and support consultants, particularly when they are maintained by divisions of ALA (ACRL and ASCLA), the organization that governs LIS accreditation. According to Fincham and Clark, the uncritical tradition of organizational development literature bases consultant power on “a body of expert knowledge,” where knowledge is a static entity that the consultant possesses and passes on to the paying client (2002, 6). While knowledge and power reside with the consultants in the organizational development view, the critical perspective enables us to question where that knowledge and power come from. To do so, we must still, or rather, more so, contend with the very real effects consultants have within an organization. If

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 19 consultants’ power does not come from their expert knowledge, where does it come from? Salaman suggests, “Although consultancy ideas may be ‘smoke and mirrors,’ faddish and false, they still contribute to the nature and exercise of power within the organization” (2002, 254). That is, even if specialized knowledge or expertise are absent, an enactment of power is still present. Serrano-Velarde and Krücken propose:

From a neo-institutional perspective, management consultants must be seen as knowledge carriers who transfer knowledge from one sector to another, thus helping to expand an economic rationale for organizing, deciding, and evaluating a “business” or organization. (2012, 277)

While both knowledge and power may reside with the consultant, they are further strengthened by the weight of the neoliberal ideals of evaluation and assessment. Not only does a critical perspective invite us to interrogate the knowledge claims in a consulting relationship and question the broader drivers behind a consultant’s power, it also allows for a more reflective reading of power that considers the interaction and mutual influence of the consultant and the client. Serrano-Velarde notes that consultants can succeed only “if the inner organization structure is open to it and they find support and translation for their ideas” (2010, 133). In fact, within the academic domain the imbalance between consultant and client is even starker, because consultants and clients are driven by different paradigms. Consultants are driven by a private and corporate agenda of economic rationale, whereas academics are driven by a public and humanistic paradigm of what Serrano-Velarde and Krücken label “scientific reasoning.” “As the knowledge base of consultants is seen as biased and insufficiently reliable for scientific reasoning, consultants are denied the status of peer in the academic community” (Serrano-Velarde 2010, 141). Consequently, for consultants to succeed in academia, they “must co-opt the ethos of science and a consensual, democratic approach” (Serrano-Velarde 2010, 141). How this plays out within academic libraries can be questioned: Are academic library consultants more credible if they have an degree, or were previously a chief university librarian, because they may understand and apply the core principles and values of librarianship? While academic libraries function within the academic domain (and could be assumed to function by the organizing dominant core values of the academy), they also have specific challenges that may put them on its periphery.2 This does not mean that the power landscape in academic libraries does not fit within the logic that Serrano-Velarde attributes to the university but rather that a closer reading and further research is necessary.

2. Some challenges include the influence of private enterprise when it comes to our collections and vendor relations, the varied access to academic freedom for librarians at some academic institutions, and the impact of precarious employment, as seen in non-tenured status for academic librarians.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 20 By recognizing the power dynamics at play and questioning the factors that influence these power dynamics, we can move beyond the existing language used about consultants. It is not necessary to frame consultants as unbiased experts who bring fresh ideas to the table. Instead, we understand that consultants are agents of capital who work within the confines of and are enabled by present-day neoliberal practices. From this perspective, we are better able to interrogate the choices made and evaluate the effects of consultants in our libraries.

VII. Conclusion and Next Steps Our research has uncovered an absence of scholarly scrutiny in LIS regarding the role of consultants in libraries. Such scrutiny is urgently needed in the broader context of neoliberal trends in both academia and librarianship. In our abbreviated history of consultants in libraries, we revealed an imbalance between the growth of the field and available literature on the topic. We presented the unchallenged hiring of consultants in libraries along with an evolution of language used to describe and characterize their role. A change in the description of consultants over time is reflected in the transformation from “specialist” to “expert” in our textual analysis. We also defined consulting as a neoliberal practice by framing academic libraries in neoliberal times. Then, by unpacking the specific language used in texts about consultants, we observed how consultants are defined and characterized in LIS texts. Importantly, we found that it is not only the lack of research about consultants that has blurred our understanding about their role but also the language strategies used in the texts about them. The theme “consultant as expert” reveals that consultants are assumed to be experts, without bias, and with perpetual access to fresh ideas. The theme is significant, not due to evidence of expertise but due to the restatement of these attributes across time and throughout the texts we analyzed. We also identified the overuse of rhetorical language strategies in texts about consultants. Polarizing language about consultants and clients creates diverging claims, not engaged dialogue. Indirect and figurative language provides emotive and dramatic descriptions of consultants, and abstract representations emphasize the variety of elements involved in consultant work. Straw man reasoning is used to cause exaggeration instead of engaging in a factual dialogue. Rather than clarifying the role of consultants, these strategies further obscure the impact of consultants, normalizing and entrenching their role in libraries. Our literature review has laid groundwork for further research on consultants. We plan to address missing elements in the current discourse, including the lack of scholarly research about consultants in academic libraries and the lack of attention to the voices of library workers and others involved in consultant/client relationships. Starting with a general survey of library workers and administrators,

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 21 we will extend the dialogue to capture the experiences, perspectives, and perceptions of those involved with consultants in academic libraries. Unpacking motivations for consultant use, we will identify similarities and differences across a variety of experiences. Following our initial survey, we plan to construct a case study of two Canadian academic libraries undergoing core organizational change: one library working with consultants, and one that is not. Library workers, administrators, and consultants will play a role in our case study. A combination of these analyses will allow us to look more closely at the impact of consultants on library organizations and library workers. Expanding on Nicholson’s ideas in “The McDonaldization of Academic Libraries,” we acknowledge the neoliberal context within which we practice librarianship and aim to think critically about its impact and consider the existing consequences (2015, 333). Our current research expands the LIS literature written about consultants in academic libraries with the goals of challenging, renewing, and extending the dialogue. By exploring some of the problematic aspects of language, we have made a space to proceed with a more nuanced approach to inform future research. The historical review and textual analysis is the first step to define our research and to extend the discourse about consultants in libraries. about the authors Marni R. Harrington is Associate Librarian in the Faculty of Information and Media Studies at the University of Western Ontario. Her previous publications encompass LIS education and academic librarian labour in Canada. Ania Dymarz is Head of Learning and Instructional Services at Simon Fraser University. She holds a MISt from the University of Toronto and an MA from the University of Alberta. Her previous scholarly work has focused on goal setting and self-assessment. She is interested in researching the formal and informal structures and practices that define, constrain, and enable work in academic libraries. references Adler, Melissa A. 2015. “Broker of Information, the ‘Nation’s Most Important Commodity’: The Library of Congress in the Neoliberal Era.” Information & Culture 50 (1): 24–50. doi: 10.7560/IC50102.

AIIP Connections 29 (3). 2005. ht tp://w w w.aiip.org/Resources/D o cuments/ Connections/2015ConnectionsV29N3.pdf.

ASCLA. 2016. “Library Consultants Code of Ethics.” Accessed April 22, 2017. ht tp://w w w.ala.org/ ascla /sites/ala.org.ascla /files/content/asclaprotools/libr aryconsultant _ codeofethics. pdf. Berry, John N., ed. 1969. Directory of Library Consultants. New York: Bowker. Blasingame, Ralph, Jr. 1969. “Introduction.” In Directory of Library Consultants, edited by John N. Berry, n.p. New York: Bowker. Bob, Murray L. 1969. “And a Consultant Shall Lead Them.” Library Journal 94 (1): 44–5. Budd, John M. 1997. “A Critique of Customer and Commodity.” College & Research Libraries 58 (4): 310–19. Buschman, John. 2005. “Libraries and the Decline of Public Purposes.” Public Library Quarterly 24 (1): 1–12.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 22 Capurro, Rafael. 2000. “Ethical Challenges of the Information Society in the 21st Century.” International Information & Library Review 32 (3–4): 257–76. Cifor, Marika, and Jamie A. Lee. 2017. “Towards an Archival Critique: Opening Possibilities for Addressing Neoliberalism in the Archival Field.” Journal of Critical Library and Information Studies 1 (1): 1–22. doi:10.24242/jclis.v1i1.10. Courtney, N., and A. Johnson. 1992. “Using Consultants in Libraries and Information Centers: Resources and Readings, 1970–1991.” In Using Consultants in Libraries and Information Centers: A Management Handbook, edited by Edward Garten, 263–77. Westport, CT: Greenwood. de Stricker, Ulla. 2008. Is Consulting for You? A Primer for Information Professionals. Chicago: American Library Association. ———. 2010. “Part II: Consulting: Helping Clients Plan, Adapt, Choose . . . and Much More.” Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 37 (1): 45–6. Dougherty, Richard M. 1980. “The Role of Management Consultants in the 1980s.” Library Trends 28 (3): 425–36. Drake, Miriam A., ed. 2003. Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science. 2nd ed. New York; Dekker. Eden, Bradford Lee, ed. 2012. The Associate University Librarian Handbook: A Resource Guide. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow. Eggertsson, Þráinn. 1990. Economic Behavior and Institutions. New York: Cambridge University Press. Feather, John, and R. P. Sturges, eds. 1997. International Encyclopedia of Information and Library Science. New York: Routledge. ———, eds. 2003. International Encyclopedia of Information and Library Science. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge. Fincham, Robin. 2002. “The Agent’s Agent: Power, Knowledge, and Uncertainty in Management Consultancy.” International Studies of Management & Organization 32 (4): 67–86. Fincham, Robin, and Timothy Clark. 2002. Critical Consulting: New Perspectives on the Management Advice Industry. Oxford: Blackwell. Finn, Richard, and James R. Johnston. 1986. Selecting Library Consultants. Chicago: Illinois Library Trustee Association. Foucault, Michel. 1980. Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, 1972–1977. New York: Pantheon. Frankenhuis, Jean Pierre. 1977. “How to Get a Good Consultant.” Harvard Business Review 55 (6): 133–39. Garten, Edward, ed. 1992. Using Consultants in Libraries and Information Centers: A Management Handbook. Westport, CT: Greenwood. Gilchrist, Alan. 1999. “Library and Information Consultancy in the United Kingdom.” In Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science, edited by A. Kent, v. 64, 211–18. New York: Dekker. Harvey, David. 2005. A Brief History of Neoliberalism. New York: Oxford University Press. Kakabadse, Nada K., Eddy Louchart, and Andrew Kakabadse. 2006. “Consultant’s Role: A Qualitative Inquiry from the Consultant’s Perspective.” Journal of Management Development 25 (5): 416–500. doi:10.1108/02621710610666268. Kaspar, Wendi Arant, and Wyoma vanDuinkerken. 2014. “Other Duties as Assigned: Internal Consultants in Academic Libraries.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (1): 1–2. Kaufman, Paula. 2012. “Let’s Get Cozy: Evolving Collaborations in the 21st Century.” Journal of Library Administration 52 (1): 53–69. Kent, Allen, et al., eds. 1975–. Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science. New York: Dekker.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 23 Klement, Susan, ed. 1984. Who Knows What: Canadian Library-Related Expertise. Ottawa: Canadian Library Association. Kronrod, Ann, and Shai Danziger. 2013. “‘Wii Will Rock You!’ The Use and Effect of Figurative Language in Consumer Reviews of Hedonic and Utilitarian Consumption.” Journal of Consumer Research 40 (4): 726–39. doi:10.1086/671998. Landau, Thomas, ed. 1961. Encyclopaedia of Librarianship. 2nd rev. ed. New York: Hafner. ———, ed. 1966. Encyclopaedia of Librarianship. 3rd rev. ed. London: Bowes. Levine-Clark, Michael, and Toni M. Carter, eds. 2013. ALA Glossary of Library and Information Science. 4th ed. Chicago: American Library Association. Library Journal News. 1967. “Inept Library Consultants Attacked by Shaffer.” Library Journal. November: 3946. Library Literature & Information Science Full Text, accessed July 4, 2017. Line, Maurice, Graham Mackenzie, and John Feather, eds. 1991. Librarianship and Information Work Worldwide. New York: Bowker-Saur. ———, eds. 1992. Librarianship and Information Work Worldwide. New York: Bowker-Saur. ———, eds. 1998. Librarianship and Information Work Worldwide. New York: Bowker-Saur. Lippitt, Gordon L., and Ronald Lippitt. 1986. The Consulting Process in Action. 2nd ed. San Diego: University Associates. Lockwood, James D. 1977. “Involving Consultants in Library Change.” College & Research Libraries 38 (6): 498–508. Lorenz, Chris. 2012. “If You’re So Smart, Why Are You under Surveillance? Universities, Neoliberalism, and New Public Management.” Critical Inquiry 38 (3): 599–629. doi:10.1086/664553. Malinconico, S. Michael. 1983. “Managing Consultants.” Library Journal 108 (19): 2032–34. Matthews, James R. 1994. “The Effective Use of Consultants in Libraries.” Library Technology Reports 3o (6). Mills, Colin. 2015. “‘Consultants, Brokers, Experts’: Knowledge Actors and Knowledge Exchange and Flows in Educational Administration.” Journal of Educational Administration and History 47 (3): 209–13. doi:10.1080/00220620.2015.1038698. Morris, Leslie R. 2003. “Library Consultants: An Editorial.” Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery & Electronic Reserves 14 (2): 1–4. Mueller, D. 2012. “ACRL Consulting Services.” Chicago: Association of College & Research Libraries. Accessed October 9, 2017. ht tp://w w w.ala.org/acrl/consulting. Murphy, Sarah Anne. 2011. The Librarian as Information Consultant: Transforming Reference for the Information Age. Chicago: American Library Association. Nicholson, Karen P. 2015. “The McDonaldization of Academic Libraries and the Values of Transformational Change.” College & Research Libraries 76 (3): 328–38. Noble, David F. 1986. Forces of Production: A Social History of Industrial Automation. New York: Oxford University Press. OED Online, s.v. “Consultant,” accessed March 2017. Olssen, Mark, and Michael A. Peters. 2005. “Neoliberalism, Higher Education and the Knowledge Economy: From the Free Market to Knowledge Capitalism.” Journal of Education Policy 20 (3): 313–45. Peters, Jean, ed. 1975. The Bookman’s Glossary. 5th ed. New York: Bowker. ———, ed. 1983. The Bookman’s Glossary. 6th ed. New York: Bowker.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 24 Pozzebon, Marlei, and Alain Pinsonneault. 2012. “The Dynamics of Consultant Relationships: Exploring the Interplay of Power and Knowledge.” Journal of Information Technology 27 (1): 35–56. Prytherch, Raymond John, ed. 1990. Harrod’s Librarians’ Glossary of Terms Used in Librarianship, Documentation and the Book Crafts, and Reference Book. 7th ed. Brookfield, VT: Gower. ———, ed. 1995. Harrod’s Librarians’ Glossary and Reference Book: 9,000 Terms Used in Information Management, Library Science, Publishing, the Book Trades, and Archive Management. 8th ed. Brookfield, VT: Gower. ———, ed. 2000. Harrod’s Librarians’ Glossary and Reference Book: A Directory of over 9,000 Terms, Organizations, Projects, and Acronyms in the Areas of Information Management, Library Science, Publishing, and Archive Management. 9th ed. Brookfield, VT: Gower. ———, ed. 2005. Harrod’s Librarians’ Glossary and Reference Book: A Directory of over 10,200 Terms, Organizations, Projects, and Acronyms in the Areas of Information Management, Library Science, Publishing, and Archive Management. 10th ed. Burlington, VT: Ashgate. Rawles, Beverly A., and Michael B. Wessells. 1984. Working with Library Consultants. Hamden, CT: Library Professional Publications. Reitz, Joan M. 2004. Dictionary for Library and Information Science. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited. ———. 2013 . ODLIS: Online Dictionary for Library and Information Science. Danbury, CT: Western Connecticut State University. Robbins-Carter, Jane. 1984. “Library Consultants: Client Views.” Drexel Library Quarterly 20 (2): 88–99. Roberts, Richard M., and Roger J. Kreuz. 1994. “Why Do People Use Figurative Language?” Psychological Science 5 (3): 159–63. Rogers, Helen, ed. 1994. Directory of Canadian Library & Information Science Consultants. Ottawa: Canadian Library Association. Rouse, William B., and Sandra H. Rouse. 1973. “Use of a Librarian/Consultant Team to Study Library Operations.” College & Research Libraries 34 (5): 242–48. Salaman, G. 2002. “Understanding Advice: Towards a Sociology of Management Consultancy.” In Critical Consulting: New Perspectives on the Management Advice Industry, edited by Timothy Clark and Robin Fincham, 247–60. Oxford: Blackwell. Scale, Mark-Shane. 2015. “Tales from the Tweets: Alternative Perspectives on Library Consulting.” Accessed October 11, 2017. ht tps://w w w.sla.org/wp- content/uploads/2015/06/1901 _ Contributed -Papers-SundayPaper-Scale.pdf. ———. 2016. “The Partner-Consultant: Partnering with Clients in Consulting.” AIIP Connections 30 (3): 8-9. Schell, Hal B. 1975. “Library Consultants and Consulting.” In Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science, edited by Kent Allen et al., v. 15, 201–24. New York: Dekker. Seale, Maura. 2013. “The Neoliberal Library.” In Information Literacy and Social Justice: Radical Professional Praxis, edited by Lua Gregory and Shana Higgins, 39–61. Sacramento, CA: Library Juice Press. ht tp:// eprints.rclis.org/20497/. Serrano-Velarde, Kathia. 2010. “A Fish out of Water? Management Consultants in Academia.” Minerva 48 (2): 125–44. doi:10.1007/s11024-010-9148-9. Serrano-Velarde, Kathia, and Georg Krücken. 2012. “Private Sector Consultants and Public Universities: The Challenges of Cross-Sectoral Knowledge Transfers.” European Journal of Education 47 (2): 277–89. doi:10.1111/j.1465-3435.2012.01523.x. Skrzeszewski, Stan. 2006. The Knowledge Entrepreneur. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow. Smith, Kitty. 1992. “Intervention into Organizational Conflict: How Far Dare the Consultant Go in Strengthening the Organization’s Future?” In Using Consultants in Libraries and Information Centers: A Management Handbook, edited by Edward Garten, 214–19. Westport, CT: Greenwood.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 25 Smithee, Jeannette. 2013. “Interface: Report from the Library Consultants Interest Group Interface.” September 19. ht tp://ascla.ala.org/interface/2013/09/report-from-the-libr ary- consultants-interest- group/. Steele, Fritz. 1975. Consulting for Organizational Change. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press. Stoffle, Carla J., Robert Renaud, and Jerilyn R. Veldof. 1996. “Choosing Our Futures.” College & Research Libraries 57 (3): 213–25. doi:10.5860/crl .57.03.213. Thompson, Elizabeth H., ed. 1943. ALA Glossary of Library Terms: With a Selection of Terms in Related Fields. Chicago: American Library Association. Timour, John A., and Wendy Ratcliff Fink. 1972. “The Role of the Consultant in Hospital Library Work.” In Library Practice in Hospitals: A Basic Guide, edited by Harold Bloomquist, 297–311. Cleveland: Press of Case Western Reserve University. Townsend, Robert. 1970. Up the Organization. New York: Knopf. wa Mwachofi, Ngure, M. Alfino, J. S. Caputo, and R. Wynyard. 1998. “Missing the Cultural Basis of Irrationality in the McDonaldization of Society.” In McDonaldization Revisited: Critical Essays on Consumer Culture, edited by Mark Alfino, John S. Caputo, and Robin Wynyard, 143–58. Westport, CT: Praeger. Walton, Douglas N. 1987. Informal Fallacies: Towards a Theory of Argument Criticisms. Philadelphia: Benjamins. Waugh, Courtney. 2014. “Balancing Visions and Values: An Exploration of Market Rhetoric in Canadian Academic Library Strategic Plans.” Progressive Librarian 43: 47–56. Wormell, Irene, Annie Joan Olesen, and Gábor Mikulás. 2011. Information Consulting: Guide to Good Practice. Oxford, UK: Chandos. Young, Heartsill, and Terry Belanger, eds. 1983. ALA Glossary of Library and Information Science. Chicago: American Library Association.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 26 Appendix A: LIS Reference Materials Consulted

Material Type Abbreviated Citation

Dictionary Thompson. 1943. ALA Glossary. Peters. 1975, 1983. Bookman’s Glossary. Young. 1983. ALA Glossary. Prytherch. 1990, 1995, 2000, 2005. Glossary. Reitz. 2004. Dictionary for Library and Information Science. Levine-Clark. 2013. ALA Glossary. Reitz. 2013. ODLIS.

Encyclopedia Landau. 1961, 1966. Encyclopaedia of Librarianship. Kent. 1975. Encyclopedia of LIS. Feather. 1997, 2003. International Encyclopedia of LIS. Drake. 2003. Encyclopedia of LIS.

Directory Berry. 1969. Directory of Library Consultants. Klement. 1984. Who Knows What. Rogers. 1994. Directory of Canadian LIS Consultants.

Handbook/Guide Rawles. 1984. Working with Library Consultants. Finn. 1986. Selecting Library Consultants. Lippitt. 1986. The Consulting Process in Action. Garten. 1992. Using Consultants in Libraries and Information Centers. Line. 1991, 1992, 1998. Librarianship. Matthews. 1994. “The Effective Use of Consultants in Libraries.” Skrzeszewski. 2006. Knowledge Entrepreneur. de Stricker. 2008. Is Consulting for You? Wormell. 2011. Information Consulting. Eden. 2012. The Associate University Librarian Handbook.

Professional/scholarly Bob. 1969. “And a Consultant Shall Lead Them.” publication Lockwood. 1977. “Involving Consultants in Library Change.” Robbins-Carter. 1984. “Library Consultants.” Morris. 2003. “Library Consultants.” de Stricker. 2010. “Part II: Consulting.” Murphy. 2011. Transforming Reference for the Information Age.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 27 Appendix B: Examples of Descriptions and Characteristics of Consultants across Three Themes

Year Language Used Abbreviated Theme Material Type Citation 1943 “specialist” Thompson. ALA Glossary. Expert Dictionary 1969 “fresh ideas” Berry. Directory of Library Fresh Directory Consultants. 1969 “outside experts” Bob. “And a Consultant Expert Professional Shall Lead Them.” publication 1977 “impartial, objective advi- Lockwood. Involving Con- Unbiased Scholarly sor” sultants in Library Change. publication 1983 “an expert in a specialized Young & Belanger. ALA Expert Dictionary field brought in by a library Glossary. or other agency for professional or technical advice” 1984 “the combination of Rawles & Wessells. Fresh & Handbook new ideas and fresh, Working with Library Unbiased disinterested confrontation Consultants. with the problem” 1986 “Consultant studies Finn & Johnston. Selecting Expert & Guide are regarded as expert Library Consultants. Fresh insurance”; “consultant’s expertise brings . . . fresh ideas and approaches” 1997 “implement fresh ideas” Feather & Sturges. Fresh Encyclopedia International Encyclopedia of LIS. 1997 “detached and objective Feather & Sturges. Unbiased Encyclopedia view” International Encyclopedia of LIS. 2003 “implementation of fresh Feather & Sturges. Fresh Encyclopedia ideas” International Encyclopedia of LIS. 2004 “expertise” Reitz. Dictionary of LIS. Expert Dictionary 2006 “unbiased opinions and Skrzeszewski. Knowledge Unbiased Guide advice” Entrepreneur. 2008 “consultants bring a fresh de Stricker. Is Consulting Fresh Guide perspective” for You? 2010 “expertise, experience, de Stricker. Consulting. Expert Professional insight” Unbiased publication 2011 “implementation of fresh Wormell, Olesen & Fresh Guide solutions” Mikulás. Information Consulting. 2013 “expertise” Reitz. ODLIS. Expert Dictionary 2013 “expert” Levin-Clark & Carter. ALA Expert Dictionary Glossary.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 28 Postwar Canadian Academic Libraries, 1945–60

Lorne D. Bruce University of Guelph (retired)

abstr act This article undertakes a historical survey of university and college library developments in Canada between 1945 and 1960. It examines contemporary accounts in relation to library architecture, the acquisition and organization of collections, administrative library structures and staffing, services for faculty and students, and efforts by librarians to realize professional standing. A national review of academic libraries and librarianship expands our knowledge beyond the typical themes applied to this era: “growth” and “progress.” The architectural redefinition of libraries, the impetus to establish research collections, the maturation of academic librarianship, and the increasing complexity of library operations were prominent features in the postwar period. The gradual evolution of academic libraries toward more uniform organizational purposes and structures on a national basis following World War II can be considered a period of “midcentury modernization” that preceded the more memorable and better documented decades of the 1960s and later.

Keywords: academic librarianship · Canadian college and university libraries · Canadian librarianship · Canadian library planning · library architecture · library collections résumé Le présent article fait un survol historique de l’évolution des bibliothèques universitaires et collégiales au Canada entre 1945 et 1960. Il examine des comptes rendus contemporains sur l’architecture des bibliothèques, l’acquisition et l’organisation des collections, les structures et la dotation en personnel des bibliothèques administratives, les services aux professeurs et aux étudiants et les efforts de professionnalisation des bibliothécaires. Un examen national des bibliothèques universitaires et de la bibliothéconomie élargit nos connaissances et transcende les thèmes caractéristiques de cette époque : « croissance » et « progrès ». La redéfinition architecturale des bibliothèques, l’impulsion donnée à la constitution de collections de recherche, la maturation de la bibliothéconomie universitaire et la complexité croissante des opérations des bibliothèques étaient des éléments marquants de l’après-guerre. L’évolution graduelle des bibliothèques universitaires vers des structures et des objectifs organisationnels plus uniformes à l’échelle nationale après la Seconde Guerre mondiale peut être considérée comme une période de « modernisation du milieu du siècle », laquelle a précédé des décennies plus mémorables et mieux documentées à partir des années 1960.

Bruce, Lorne D. 2018. “Postwar Canadian Academic Libraries, 1945–60.” Canadian Journal of Academic Librarianship 3: 1–34. © Lorne D. Bruce, CC BY-SA-4.0. Mots-clés : bibliothéconomie universitaire · bibliothèques universitaires et collégiales du Canada · bibliothéconomie canadienne · planification des bibliothèques canadiennes · architecture des bibliothèques · collections des bibliothèques

The historiography of college and university libraries in Canada is an undeveloped subject.1 There are few studies synthesizing the entire history of Canadian academic libraries, and normally two core themes are emphasized—library growth and progressive advances in librarianship (Briggs 1980, Peel 1977, Groen 2005). These two perspectives, which can be applied to many different historical periods, also permeate articles by librarians or briefer descriptions in institutional histories marking anni- versaries, retirements, accomplishments, or significant building projects. The use of statistics, analytical methodology, and alternative explanations to examine library trends, practices, or ideas has been limited. Local narrative histories and biographical notices that parallel the history of their parent institutions usually do not employ historical socio-cultural context or critical analysis. The absence of secondary histories of libraries or librarianship in Canadian higher education can be attributed in part to the fact that scholarly work in this field did not begin until the decade of the 1940s, when a few theses were published by Canadians attending American graduate library schools (Hamilton 1942, Snider 1948, Redmond 1950). Today, the judgment that library history (including its academic library component) has been “an area of traditional neglect within Canadian history” compared to its American and British counterparts continues to be a reliable assessment (McNally 1986). There are some valuable informative accounts of Canadian libraries in higher education. Because the library is positioned within its parent institution, librarians have understandably chronicled library support for the needs and plans of a particular university or college.2 Individual libraries, such as those at the Universities of Toronto, Dalhousie, and Alberta, are notable in this regard (Blackburn 1989, Wilkinson 1966, Distad 2009). Histories of specific events and biographical studies (Jobb 1987, Greene and LeBlanc 2000) have appeared, but these studies are less common. The influence of American librarianship and philanthropy on Canadian activities has been documented partially (Glazier 1967, Bruce 2016). Investigations considering national perspectives of academic librarianship have provided a firmer basis to explore historical themes pertaining to the collective status and professional recognition of librarians (Savage 1982, Wilkinson 1983, Jacobs 2014, Sonne de Torrens 2014). Collective bargaining and governance issues have also received attention

1. I am grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their helpful recommendations and insights. 2. All major colleges mentioned in this paper evolved into degree-granting universities.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 2 (Dekker 2014, Revitt and Luyk 2016, Bufton 2014). As well, some issues related to women’s and gender history have been explored (Harris and Tague 1989, DeLong 2013). These recent studies provide detailed information and use more analytical methods. My emphasis will be on a national interpretation of contemporary statements and assessments bearing on general library developments following the Second World War. This article reviews collective aspects of the history of Canadian academic libraries during the postwar era, approximately 1945–60. Two significant surveys of academic library holdings frame the body of historical evidence for this period: a shorter report on the humanities by two Canadian academics in 1947, and an extensive report by Edwin E. Williams3 on library resources in 1962 (Kirkconnell and Woodhouse 1947, Williams 1962). Secondary studies specific to this period commonly build upon the themes of “growth” and “progress.” From a historical perspective, library space, staff, and collections are typical measures of growth; progress, however, when applied to librarianship, professionalism, or leadership, can be an elusive, subjective term in need of critical consideration. This time period generally is regarded as a time of steady advances in library service preceding more dramatic activity beginning in the 1960s (Blackburn 1984). From a historical standpoint, the diversity of local settings between 1945 and 1960 can veil the similarities; for example, varying rates of library development, differentiated services, and regional inequalities among academic institutions may attract more attention. Nonetheless, there are common aspects to library buildings, the organization and improvement of collections, administrative structures, and efforts by professional librarians to develop services and facilitate use of resources. By reviewing these overarching features through contemporary statements, it is possible to elaborate upon national “growth” and “progress” and thus deepen our historical understanding about how and why these statements pertaining to academic libraries and librarianship in the mid- 20th century evolved during this period.

Published writings on libraries are plentiful in the postwar period. Many sources provide primary evidence for factual matters as well as for analysis and interpretation. Most authors were closely connected with institutions: they were librarians, professors, alumni, and students. These predominately library- institutional sources normally addressed library services, consequently over- representing administrative matters. Of course, library administrators, who made frequent contributions to the library literature, were conversant with the status of other libraries through “senior channels.” Their emphasis is weighted to commentary on physical campus expansion, student enrolment increases, direction of personnel,

3. Williams held many senior positions at the Harvard University library from 1940 to 1980.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 3 acquisition of resources, and organizing users’ access to the library. Sundry sources, especially student newspapers, highlight contemporary events, social practices, or issues within a short-term context—a snapshot of different viewpoints in time and place. Official publications or survey reports can highlight the library’s priorities or role vis-à-vis faculty and students. Accounts by external professionals, such as architects or consultants, offer helpful insights on building design, service delivery, and staffing. Observers frequently catered to a readership presumed to share their view, and they freely expressed their own perspectives. Although caution needs to be exercised in the use of contemporary statements as primary sources, they can nonetheless help situate library development within broader educational expansion. The expansion of Canadian post-secondary education after 1945 was notable for several modernizing trends: the infusion of federal funds for academic research, the frequent erection of campus buildings, increased enrolments, the establishment of new universities, the independence of previously affiliated small colleges, and the creation of comprehensive research efforts and graduate programs. In this changing environment, the pre-eminence of the humanities and undergraduate teaching gave way to scientific and technological research, business and professional orientations, and graduate studies (Cameron 1991, Massolin 2001). The discourse on college and university libraries often refers to these substantial changes, thus transcending individual institutions and offering a window on shared changes occurring on a national stage.

General Postwar Development By the early 1960s, education in Canadian colleges and universities was regarded as a necessary public investment. Federal and provincial governments were considering increased investment in universities and colleges (Harris 1976, 455–591) that would have a dramatic impact on the academic library sector. Federal interest in higher education, a provincial constitutional responsibility, had commenced with National Research Council support for university research. Student aid multiplied after 1945, when discharged veterans became eligible for special federal loans to pursue post-secondary education. For libraries, the report of the Royal Commission on National Development in the Arts, Letters, and Sciences, chaired by Vincent Massey from 1949 to 1951, was an important catalyst for federal support. The commission recommended that the Dominion government establish a national library and fund public universities. At the same time, the Massey report observed library inadequacy: “If a list of North American universities were to be arranged in accordance with the number of volumes in their academic libraries, the best-equipped Canadian universities would be distressingly far down in the roster” (Canada 1951, 139).

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 4 The Canadian Library Association (CLA), formed in 1946, was particularly warm to the Massey report’s recommendations. Academics also felt that a national library would aid researchers through the collection of books, creation of a national union catalogue to facilitate interlibrary loan, and publication of a national bibliography (Donnelly 1973, 45–77). Contemporary librarians such as Bruce B. Peel, the University of Alberta’s library director from 1955 to 1982 (Distad 2000), and H. Pearson Gundy, chief librarian at Queen’s University from 1947 to 1965, recognized that all of these activities improved library coordination and fostered a stronger national outlook among librarians (Peel 1982–83, Gundy 1961). Yet for most of the postwar era, the National Library was a developing institution working in concert with larger research libraries. In retrospect, its stimulus effect was a measured process beset by frugal budgets, limited staffing, and unsatisfactory housing before a new building was erected in 1967, Canada’s centennial year (Donnelly 1973, 108–60). By the mid-1950s, senior university administrators recognized that unmet research-library issues needed to be addressed. Continued—indeed, prompter— library development was emerging as a necessity. The expansion of undergraduate programs, the addition of medical, law, engineering, and business professional schools, and the deepening of graduate research demanded upgraded facilities, richer collections, increased staffing, and better services. A colloquium held at the opening of the University of Toronto’s Sigmund Samuel wing in November 1954 stressed the need to organize specialized collections and develop effective systems of nationwide cooperation, especially by the nascent National Library. The Toronto speakers and guests also divined a strategy for the future: “The next step is to have the problem studied not by the librarians but by the university presidents” (Research Library 1955, 8). Several years later, presidents attending the National Conference of Canadian Universities and Colleges agreed to fund a report by the American consultant Edwin Williams to appraise holdings in the humanities and social sciences at 14 larger universities. The Williams report (1962, 61) concluded that there were some outstanding collections but that “Canadian universities, for the most part, are only beginning to face the cost of providing resources genuinely adequate for advanced work.” Of course, its outlook was oriented to future action, not to the earlier history of the postwar era. A more extensive review beyond 14 institutions reveals that the evolution of university programs, facilities, and consequent library development began cautiously before 1960. There were almost 65 000 undergraduates and 4 500 full-time university teachers in Canada in 1945; by 1961, there were 129 000 students and 8 800 teachers.4

4. Full-time university enrolment, by sex, Canada and provinces, selected years, 1920 to 1975 (Series W340–448), and full-time university teachers, Canada and by province, selected years, 1920 to 1975 (Series W475–85). Historical Statistics of Canada, 2d ed. (Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 1983).

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 5 The Appendix demonstrates that academic libraries realized considerable advances in the number of books, periodical holdings, and circulation associated with this influx. Development quickened in the later 1950s. The 1961–62 Dominion Bureau of Statistics survey of universities and colleges reported increased book stock to meet new demands. In comparison with 1956–57, larger libraries with 500 or more full- time students increased book holdings by 50.4%, to 77 volumes per student, and expenditures by 162.7%, to $76.87 per student. For the same five-year period, 1957–62, in smaller colleges with fewer than 100 full-time students there was a 48.5% increase in books, to 101 volumes per student, and an expenditure increase of 160.2%, to $87.54 per student. Most reporting libraries (42 out of 67) were now conducting library- instruction programs for students: Acadia, Carleton, Dalhousie, Laval, and St. Francis Xavier reported such work for credit.5 A few programs, such as the one described by Sister Dolores Donnelly6 at Mount Saint Vincent, were uncredited short courses (Donnelly 1956). Many sources indicated improved reference services, longer hours, and expansion of interlibrary loan to senior undergraduates. These changes were noteworthy components in the evolution of library service after 1945 that go beyond quantitative statements about growth. Many significant improvements to library service evolved before the Williams report. Changes were managed locally, but the ideas and practices employed had a common basis. Throughout the sixties, the Williams report was a touchstone for building research collections. Long-serving library directors such as Robert Blackburn, the University of Toronto’s library director from 1954 to 1982, and Paul-Émile Filion, the director of Laurentian University’s libraries from 1960 to 1970, appreciated its forward-looking recommendations. Filion (1968) left a lasting impression about its dramatic impact. Although Edwin Williams acknowledged that a foundation for library improvement already existed, he stressed that much work remained to be done (Williams 1962, 60–61). The following examination of the postwar situation—the buildings, collections, library organization, and librarianship—through the lens of contemporary sources affords more details about associated library improvements and professionalization of librarian work.

Library Planning and Design With the return of war veterans seeking advanced education and the ensuing raised enrolments, expanded facilities became an immediate concern for library administrators. Between 1945 and 1953, an unprecedented investment of $4.8 million was expended on new or improved facilities at 16 reporting universities; a further

5. Survey of Libraries. Part II: Academic Libraries, 1961–62 (Ottawa: Dominion Bureau of Statistics, 1964), 14–17. 6. Donnelly was University Librarian at Mount Saint Vincent, 1957–68.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 6 $3.8 million was committed to existing projects in 1953 (John Price Jones 1953, 6–7). Increasingly, major new buildings and ubiquitous “library wings” appeared in the 1950s: • Alberta, 1951, Rutherford Library • Assumption, 1958, main library • Bishop’s, 1959, John Bassett Memorial Library • British Columbia, 1948, wing; 1960 Koerner wing housing the undergraduate library • Carleton, 1951 and 1959, Murdoch Maxwell MacOdrum Library • Lakehead, 1960, extension to main building • Manitoba, 1953, additions in 1960, named in honour of Elizabeth Dafoe in 1961 • McGill, 1953, Redpath extension with undergraduate facilities • McMaster, 1951, Mills Memorial Library • Mount Allison, 1960, William Morley Tweedie annex • Mount Saint Vincent, 1951, housed in Evaristus Hall after fire • New Brunswick, 1951, extension, renamed Bonar Law-Bennett Library • Memorial, 1961 main, named after Henrietta Harvey in 1970 • Saskatchewan, 1956, Murray Memorial Library • Sir George Williams, 1956, in new Norris Building • Toronto, 1954, Sigmund Samuel wing • Victoria (Toronto), 1961, named in honour of E. J. Pratt in 1967 • Western, 1954, Lawson north wing; 1962, Lawson south wing After many years of austerity during the Depression and World War II, the postwar years marked an unprecedented time of library construction that extended the life of older buildings while fostering the creation of separate structures. New architectural practices blended with tradition between 1945 and 1960. The University of Alberta’s Rutherford Library, opened in 1951, exemplified waning tradition. Contemporaries admired its load-bearing brick and stone walls, interior marble staircase, multiple oak-paneled rooms, decorative ceilings, and closed tiered stacks housing 265 000 volumes (Sherlock 1950 and 1952). Nevertheless, Rutherford stood in contrast to new architectural styling, construction methods, and interior planning. A decade later, when University of Alberta administrators explored expansion of Rutherford, the American consultant Keyes Metcalf 7 recommended

7. Metcalf was director of Harvard University libraries (1937–55) and a notable library planner. Rutherford South continues to be admired for its attractive and striking architectural qualities.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 7 a completely new building (Distad 2009, 82–90). Canadian libraries were evolving because conventional wisdom advised that “the best solution to our planning problems is generally to be found in a freer, more modern conception of [library] building” (Hilton Smith 1947, 38). Modernist architecture accentuated flexible- interior modular planning with subdued exteriors, combined with new construction materials and techniques (Macdonald 1948, Cooperative Committee on Library Building Plans 1949). The principle that “form follows function” was one of the pillars of the International Style and the Midcentury Modern movements that emphasized rectilinear forms; plane surfaces; the “open plan” for interiors; the use of glass, steel, and reinforced concrete in construction; and inviting decor, featuring geometric patterns and simple furnishings. With the erection of the 35 400–sq. ft. Mills Memorial Library at McMaster (Figure 1: Mills Memorial Library, c. 1950s), it can be said that “the architectural revolution came to Canadian university libraries in 1951” (Harland 1968, 164). Mills’s exterior featured large windows and a rectangular-block stone-faced facade. Inside, the modular design permitted flexibility and allowed columns to support stacks on three floors. According to Marget Meikleham,8 “Modular construction and the absence of bearing walls will simplify future alterations to meet changing conditions” (Meikleham and Hudson 1951, 2). She was correct: subsequent expansions to Mills in the 1960s, 70s, and 90s increased floor space to more than 230 000 sq. ft. Another

f i gu r e 1 Mills Memorial Library, 1950s. Credit: William Ready Division of Archives and Research Collections, McMaster University

8. Meikleham directed the McMaster library from 1944 to 1966.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 8 striking example of innovative design principles was the main 50 000–sq. ft. library at Victoria University, Toronto (1961), a plain, two-storey, granite-clad cube with extensive windows allowing users to view landscaping (“Victoria University Library” 1962). McMaster and Victoria manifested new, modern library features that obviously broke with the past. The Universities of Manitoba (1953) and Saskatchewan (1956) followed a less dramatic course but also declared themselves to be modern. At Manitoba, the main library exhibited expansive glass panels, flat surfaces, and an open interior for large reading rooms: one for reserve books, the other for reference books and periodicals (Figure 2: Elizabeth Dafoe Library, 1950s). Manitoba’s stacks were reserved for faculty and advanced students. Elizabeth Dafoe9 considered the library to be graceful, functional, and flexible (Dafoe 1959). The rectangular four-storey Murray Memorial Library used steel-frame construction and allowed open-stack access (“Murray Memorial Library” 1959, Appelt 1954). During the planning stage, David Appelt, the university librarian from 1946 to 1980, explained (Library Building Plans Institute 1953b, 9): “The plan has been strongly influenced by the desire to group around the catalog the elements likely to use it most—Reference, Technical Processes, and Charging Desk—and by an insistence on clarity of arrangement.” Yet, the Murray library retained the traditional reading room with books, as did Assumption’s new main library (1958) in Windsor. Rooms in the latter college were adjoined by stacks

f i gu r e 2 Elizabeth Dafoe Library, 1950s. Credit: University of Manitoba Archives & Special Collections

9. Dafoe headed the University of Manitoba’s libraries from 1937 to 1960.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 9 on two levels and adorned with internal glass partitions and large exterior windows (“Assumption University Library” 1959, Mate 1959). The accent on interior planning and future requirements manifested alternative approaches regarding the integration of resources, users, and staff. At Mills, the architect William L. Somerville (1952, 248) planned a modernist building: “There are four tiers of stacks, each on a separate concrete slab, which allows for the rearrangement of stacks or the substitution of additional seminar or other rooms when stack rooms are extended by addition to [the] rear of [the] building.” In the ensuing decade, the era of restricted, inflexible stack levels underwent re- examination. A young architect, Fernand Tremblay, proposed “de placer les étudiants en relation la plus directe possible avec les livres” (“bringing students as close to the books as possible,” Tremblay 1957, 93). Tremblay’s concepts (1955) would be realized in 1968 when Laval’s library opened in the Pavillon Jean-Charles Bonenfant. The future lay in use of open stacks, individual carrels, carpeting, unobstructed sightlines, and improved heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning systems, placing less emphasis on the typical noisy reading room with tile floors, lengthy tables, and perimeter shelving.

Hilda Gifford, Carleton’s librarian from 1948 to 1969, who assisted plans for the erection of two separate libraries in the 1950s, outlined her experience concisely. Carleton’s small two-storey building, opened in 1951 to accommodate 40 000 volumes, rapidly outgrew its usefulness (Gifford 1952). She noted that multiple questions needed resolution beforehand: whether to allow open or closed stacks; adjoin reading and book areas or retain larger reading rooms with perimeter shelving; confine supervision to exit points or continue surveillance throughout the building; resist the provision of space for administration, lecture rooms, or an auditorium; and unify staff in a central area (especially technical services) or disperse staff to assist the public on designated floors, perhaps on a subject-divisional basis (Gifford 1959, 104). At Carleton, the 1959 two-storey MacOdrum Library, extended to three levels by 1963, abandoned the reading room in favour of interspersing carrels and seating for reading areas; the librarian was satisfied that “nowhere are books more than thirty feet from reading tables” (Gifford 1963, 45). Traditional features did persist alongside new elements, especially in larger institutions where architects faced the prospect of modernizing older structures to satisfy new requirements. The Universities of Toronto, McGill, and British Columbia built extensions to main libraries in the 1950s that blended new styling and construction methods with older Collegiate Gothic, Romanesque, and Tudor styles. These libraries held to the idea of large reading rooms or sections primarily for undergraduates. Space for collections and readers was the primary objective: all

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 10 f i gu r e 3 Knowledge Denied at Carleton, 1955. Credit: The Carleton, 3 February 1955. three libraries had expanded collections significantly since 1939 (see Appendix) and faced serious congestion by the early 1950s. McGill’s new wing, promoted by Richard Pennington, University Librarian (1947–64), accommodated an undergraduate library

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 11 of almost 40 000 volumes, 400 seats, and stacking for 650 000 volumes (Pennington 1955). Toronto designed its undergraduate section, the Stewart Wallace Room, for 20 000 heavily used volumes and 380 seats (Foley 1957, “Addition to Library” 1960). British Columbia’s major extension, the Walter C. Koerner wing, opened in September 1960 and featured a “college library” for first- and second-year students as well as subject-division areas with stack access and specialized reference service. The Koerner extension allowed freer access to staff assistance and collections, now reaching 350 000 volumes (Harlow 1961). It was evident that more diverse, functional solutions were being employed in building construction and design by 1960. The frequency of articles devoted to academic library architecture by librarian administrators suggests a heightened realization that building design was an essential factor in how students and professors used space and interfaced with staff. Publications reveal more clarity about how the physical environment of libraries influenced working relationships and the patterns of activity and communication that users could enjoy. Elements such as room size, decor, and placement of furniture or equipment were more carefully arranged to accommodate user traffic and satisfaction. The awareness of interaction with clientele influenced the location of staff and the degree of access for users. The reaction of McGill students to a “brighter atmosphere” was not uncommon (McGill Daily 1953). Of course, there were student criticisms about the regulated environment, mostly about bothersome noise, cigarette use, overcrowding, and missing or stolen books (Figure 3: Knowledge Denied at Carleton, 1955). Student reactions to loud conversations were mixed because talking was ubiquitous during assignments (McGill Daily 1957). University of Alberta students were irritated when their request to relax the smoking ban under Rutherford’s rotunda was rejected (Gateway 1955a and 1955b). Even with state-of-the-art facilities, there was always room for improvement. After the new Assumption library opened, a student editorial suggested the installation of vending machines for soft drinks, coffee, and cigarettesPurple ( and White 1958). Obviously, the particular image or message each new library building conveyed about its atmosphere differed, but each one followed a modernist orientation after 1950. It was evident that the character of exteriors and planning of interior space had changed dramatically after 1945 to accommodate improved access for users and allow more efficient deployment of staff and holdings.

Collections “All in all, the general picture of university and college libraries in Canada is not a happy one,” Kirkconnell and Woodhouse (1947, 157) surmised in their review of academic library holdings immediately after World War II. Their judgment was based mostly on evaluations with established, wealthier American counterparts. The

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 12 outcome of this kind of comparison was predictable. Earlier, in 1944, Ann Smith10 had suggested that the disparity in library budgets between the two nations might be redressed only by provincial or federal financial transfers (Smith 1944). On balance, most Canadian libraries were treading the path of modest evolution that Fred Landon had described when he outlined the University of Western Ontario’s collection- building efforts (Landon 1945). However, other service considerations, namely, the potential of interlibrary loan, led one respected librarian, Sister Francis de Sales,11 to opine optimistically: “Fortunately, libraries are no longer judged solely by the number of the volumes, but on how well the collection fulfills the avowed aims of that library and satisfies the needs of its clientele” (de Sales 1946, 49). In fact, the state of collections was not entirely bleak: by 1951, a dozen institutions held more than 100 000 volumes, and seven circulated more than 100 000 items.12 Two detailed explorations of western (Hamilton 1942) and eastern (Redmond 1950) academic libraries revealed collection strengths as well as weaknesses. Using American accreditation checklists published by the North Central Association based in Chicago, periodical holdings at the Universities of British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba indicated some “strength” (in the range of 31 to 55 percent of 428 titles) in biology, chemistry, classics, English, geology, philosophy, and physics. For reference books, only Saskatchewan fell below the median, set at 490 titles. For 894 current book selections published after 1930, Saskatchewan held the fewest, with the other three libraries reporting that they owned approximately 50 percent (Hamilton 1942, 105–21). Applying similar methodology, the resources of major Maritime libraries—Dalhousie/King’s, Acadia, Mount Allison, and New Brunswick—were studied. This analysis found possible research caliber in six fields: theology, history, Canadian literature and history, English literature, law, and law, and biological sciences; it conceded, however, that work at the master’s level sometimes was conducted with holdings that were “hardly adequate” even for undergraduates (Redmond 1950, 113). Many collections reflected the cumulation of selections made by teaching faculty or library committees and featured materials suitable for specific courses. Altered postwar circumstances radically accelerated collection building for established and entirely new universities as well as formerly affiliated or denominational colleges that were acquiring public university status. Several major university libraries—York, Waterloo, Sherbrooke, Laurentian, and Carleton—were created during the postwar period. Establishing core collections “from scratch” and

10. She worked in various administrative capacities at the University of British Columbia from 1930 to 1964. 11. She was head librarian at Mount Saint Vincent, 1932–57. 12. Survey of Libraries, 1950–52 (Ottawa: Dominion Bureau of Statistics, 1954), Table 4.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 13 acquisition programs while dealing with the midcentury information explosion was a difficult although achievable undertaking: Lakehead, in Port Arthur, held 3 628 volumes in 1956 and 30 902 in 1962–63.13 York University’s situation at the onset of the 1960s presented a greater challenge than most, yet its ambitious plans met with success. York’s university librarian, Douglas Lochhead, was determined to build a collection as rapidly as possible. A small core moved to Glendon Hall in North York in 1961, and by the academic year 1962–63, when there were 303 undergraduates, the library already held 30 870 volumes and was expanding its book accessions at a rate of 10 000 per year.14 At the same time, York enlisted the aid of Stephen McCarthy, an American library consultant from Cornell University, to plan future expansion. He recommended a unified administration of decentralized services, with a collection of 100 000 volumes by 1965 and 250 000 by 1970. In fact, by 1965, York’s collection reached 100 000 at its new Leslie Frost and Stacie Science libraries (O’Connell 1965 and 1969). York’s initial experience demonstrated the ascendancy of library consultancy and multi-year planning. The trusted standby of yesteryear, a report from the chief librarian to the president, such as the projections for Memorial University by Sadie L. Organ,15 was receding in importance (Organ 1951). Cooperative endeavours and technology boosted the potential of library holdings. At the end of World War II, The Humanities in Canada (Kirkconnell and Woodhouse 1947, 165–67) addressed the inadequate collections in higher education by recommending nationwide coordination via the establishment of a national library in Ottawa, interlibrary loan, photo reproduction, and microform purchases. All of these services matured throughout the postwar period. The principal advantage of interlibrary-loan code revision in the 1950s was uniformity in staff workflow, and, for patrons, greater access to resources. Because interlibrary loan was a privilege reserved for faculty, graduate students, and a few senior undergraduates, exchanges were relatively modest: transfers reached 10 322 items borrowed and 16 212 items loaned in 1960.16 Microform eased storage considerations, permitted purchase of specialized resources at reasonable cost, and reduced binding and preservation costs (Gundy 1948). To this end, the CLA and Rockefeller Foundation launched a project to film 19th-century Canadian newspapers in 1947. Eventually more than 200 papers were filmed, a substantial aid to Canadian studies (Talman 1968). Microfilm was a cost-effective medium, although administrators realized that it required expensive readers, assistance to users, and educational efforts because acceptance was known

13. Survey of Libraries, 1954–56, Table “Academic Libraries,” and Survey of Libraries. Part II: Academic Libraries 1962–63, Table 2. 14. Survey of Libraries. Part II: Academic Libraries 1962–63, Tables 2 and 3. 15. Organ was Memorial’s head librarian from 1932 to 1958. 16. Survey of Libraries. Part II, 1959–60, Table 7.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 14 to be gradual (Harkins 1953). Overall, microform and non-print holdings did not accumulate rapidly. Canadian academic libraries in 1959–60 reported 7 929 filmed titles and 904 microcard sets. The same report noted that libraries held 6 987 films, 33 714 slides, and 15 506 sound recordings.17 Planning for specialized collections demanded more attention and new solutions after 1945.The Humanities in Canada briefly mentioned the country’s few significant holdings, such as Manitoba’s Icelandic collection (Johnson 1986), British Columbia’s Howay-Reid Collection (Owens 1959), Queen’s Edith and Lorne Pierce Collection (Gundy 1959), and New Brunswick’s Rufus Hathaway Collection (Lawrence 1947). These pre-1945 collections had been acquired mostly by donation through contacts with faculty, alumni, authors, and collectors. This customary process continued during the 1950s: notable additions were the Kipling Collection (Dalhousie), Buchan Collection (Queen’s), Simcoe Papers (Toronto), and Rutherford Collection (Alberta). James McGregor Stewart willed his extensive collection to Dalhousie in 1954. Queen’s acquired the personal library of John Buchan as a gift of Mr. and Mrs. Robert S. McLaughlin of Oshawa in 1955 (Wilmot 1958 and 1961). The McLaughlins had previously gifted the Simcoe Papers to the University of Toronto library in 1946 (Toronto Globe & Mail 1946a and 1946b). Mostly because of access restrictions, however, W. S. Wallace, Toronto’s chief librarian from 1923 to 1954, arranged to transfer these papers on indefinite loan in 1951 to the nearby Ontario Department of Archives (Blackburn 1989, 157). The University of Alberta separately housed former premier A. C. Rutherford’s personal library of historical publications relating to western Canada in the new Rutherford Library (Distad 2009, 76–77). Gradually, by means of benefactions and incremental library purchases, the value of special collections to university researchers and programs gained greater appreciation. The concept of a “special collection” was being recognized as an important regional or national source of published works significant to a discipline. Although the subject might be limited (e.g., an individual), the resources could provide the basis for dissertations and independent research. Rare book holdings also contributed to research intensity. “Rare” connoted many things: age, uniqueness, value, fragility, protective storage, and climatic controls. The University of Toronto took fledging steps to establish a separate room for this work in November 1957, after Marion E. Brown18 undertook to organize books and manuscripts assembled over more than half a century (Toronto Globe & Mail 1957, Brown 1957). The University of British Columbia established a special collections division headed by Basil Stuart- Stubbs in 1960. It housed rare books and manuscripts for advanced study in the humanities and social sciences (“Research and Special Collections” 1960).

17. Survey of Libraries. Part II, 1959–60, Tables 4 and 6. 18. Brown later served as president of the Bibliographical Society of Canada, 1964–66.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 15 Collection development and long-term funding practices were relatively undeveloped in postwar libraries. The employment of selectors, subject specialists, or bibliographers to address the needs of a library’s clientele was a future prospect. Coordinated purchases were difficult because departmental faculty or library committees typically did the selecting. Dorothy Ryder, the Calgary branch librarian of the University of Alberta from 1951 to 1964, declined to make selections in 1958 because she knew that certain professors “felt strongly against the librarian choosing the books” (Brydges 2009, 7). Holdings were seldom subject to thorough reviews. There were occasional criticisms: the inadequacy of the Canadian literature section at Dalhousie came under fire in the mid-1950s, for example Dalhousie( Gazette 1955a). Informed academics, namely A. E. Malloch (1946),19 sometimes disparaged the state of collections but pointed to inadequate budgets as the principal fault. At Alberta, student fees actually formed a substantial source of book revenue (Peel 1979, 15) for many years. Federal assistance for universities boosted the management of acquisitions on an ad hoc basis. The University of Toronto received an additional $50 000 for books (and $30 000 for salaries) in 1951–52. Federal aid increased Toronto’s book fund by 35 percent (Blackburn 1989, 163–64). A similar infusion of funds allowed the University of British Columbia library to increase its appropriation for books and periodicals by 91 percent during 1951–52 (University of British Columbia 1952). The state of collections clearly improved across the nation after wartime. Book stock more than doubled between 1939 and 1961 (see Appendix). Of course, the creation of new university libraries and duplicate undergraduate holdings inflated reported totals, and not always could library stock keep pace with student enrolment or library staffing in certain periods, such as the late 1950s.20 In some unreported areas, such as extramural and extension programs, main libraries were secondary sources in providing books: they often sent out requested materials “with little official knowledge of the work of the extension departments” that maintained separate collections for this purpose (Snider 1948, 42). Emerging trends such as the diversification of non-print formats, interlibrary loan, special collections, and rare books extended the ability of libraries to support teaching and research. Better planning, combined with more efficient methods of processing the mounting volume of acquisitions, were key factors in meeting collection targets at some new libraries, such as Waterloo (Beckman 1961). An intermittently growing maturity in collection building and access to resources was a meaningful part of the postwar “foundation” identified by the 1962 report by Edwin Williams.

19. Archibald Malloch taught English literature at McGill for many years. 20. Survey of Libraries. Part II: Academic Libraries 1960–61, Chart I.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 16 Library Organization New directions in library administration and management were no less important than buildings and collections. The immediate demands posed by returning veterans and enlarged enrolments were managed satisfactorily by 1948:

Statistical data on the academic libraries indicate that the libraries have kept pace with the inflated enrolment in the colleges and universities during the post-war years. Full-time enrolment in the institutions of higher education had increased 66 p.c. in 1947 over that of 1945. Expenditures on book stock by the libraries of these institutions had increased 65 p.c. in the same period. A similar increase occurred in the personnel of the libraries. (Survey of Libraries 1946–48, 18)

After the energetic surge of wartime veterans, ideas about services and reorganization of workflows proceeded with less urgency. In 1946, the American Library Association (ALA) completed a study on library conditions in higher education and issued recommendations for future development (College and University Libraries 1946), but no similar effort was conducted by the CLA. The spirit of independence and localism conditioned much of the library outlook on campuses across Canada in 1945. Debate on two fundamental issues, the library’s purpose and the role of the librarian, influenced the degree and speed of transformation related to internal organization. At the outset of the postwar period, the fundamentals of libraries and librarianship were described for recruitment purposes by the director of the University of Toronto Library School, 1928–51, Winifred Barnstead:

The essence of library work is the organization and interpretation of the book collection on the one side, the meeting of a human need on the other. The primary objective of a library is to satisfy the informational, recreational and cultural needs of its community. Few professions offer such varieties of work and such opportunities for service. (Barnstead 1945, 401)

Barnstead added that prospective university librarians should have general library qualifications (BA or BSc with the postgraduate BLS), specialized knowledge in the fields of a university’s curriculum, and scholarly interests. The director clearly viewed librarianship as a profession, and the term “professionalism” increasingly served as a centrepiece in postwar discourse. As for the university library’s purpose, a scholar of classical languages at Université Laval made the most articulate declaration about its humanistic contributions in the mid-1950s: it was an essential resource for supporting research, improving teaching, building student literacy, and promoting the entire nation’s cultural progress (Lebel 1956). Librarians generally supported the basis for his argument: the academic library was a mixture of administrative

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 17 and instructional work in support of the educational aims and purposes of its institutional parent. The delineation of work between professionals and clerical staff (Bishop 1973, 4–7) and the need for additional staffing were primary concerns in the postwar era. Marjorie Sherlock (1953, 62–63), Alberta’s director from 1945 to 1955, stated that “good library practice calls for a ratio of 60:40 between professional and clerical staff,” while depicting the library’s role as a potential “central power house of intellectual energy,” combining research resources and trained staff. The tendency to combine acquisitions, cataloguing, and serials into “technical services” to cope with ever-mounting purchases and government deposits entailed more coordinated processing and mixture of various grades of personnel. By 1965, both the CLA and Ontario Library Association (OLA) had reconstituted their cataloguing sections as technical services. Efforts to improve public services, such as the introduction of the “subject divisional plan” at Dalhousie in 1960 (Dalhousie Gazette 1960), required additional revenue for more public-service staff apportioned to the humanities, social studies, and natural sciences. More complex administrative structures increasingly replaced simple lines radiating from a chief librarian. McGill’s 1963 reassessment of its decentralized library resources, made with the assistance of two American consultants, illustrates the degree of postwar change. This study recommended at a minimum an associate (deputy) librarian, two senior coordinators for technical and readers services, and a personnel assistant (Logsdon and McCarthy 1963, 13–19). However, the task of organizing effective ways to group responsibilities and positions constructed on hierarchy-departmentalization precluded policies integrating library personnel with teaching faculty, governing library committees, and institutional officers. As efforts to reorganize and improve services in the academy evolved, the comparative analysis of operations with other libraries and establishment of “best practices” assumed greater significance. A few studies suggested that libraries could fall short of their promise. At Nova Scotia Technical College, a brief 1955 survey indicated that two-thirds of the engineering students did not know how to use the main library (Redmond 1955). In the same year, a survey of 42 research libraries revealed the nascent state of local, regional, or national library cooperation (Spicer 1955). By the early 1960s, it was evident that the complexities of organizing services inclined senior administrators to use consultants to plan future library growth. Consultancy and internal reviews often mimicked those that occurred at other libraries and encouraged uniformity in organizational design. In 1958, Toronto reviewed its main library, four college libraries, and 53 departmental libraries with the help of Stephen McCarthy, Cornell’s university librarian. This report

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 18 recommended more centralization and coordination of functions, the use of Library of Congress for classification, improved salaries, and more space (McLaughlin 1959, 36–38). Toronto immediately commenced the arduous task of converting to Library of Congress Classification in 1959 (Fraser 1961) and considering a new main library. Later, in 1962, Université Laval requested Edwin Williams and Paul-Émile Filion (1962, 1) to recommend wide-ranging improvements to its library facilities and services, because “elle est présentement inadéquate” (“it is currently inadequate”). Student dissatisfaction with library organization, regulations, and procedures surfaced frequently. On occasion, editorials urged students to guard against bureaucratic procedures threatening freedom in the library. One piece by a Manitoba exchange student contrasted the Dafoe (rules-bound) and MacOdrum (honour- system) libraries (Carleton 1961). Dalhousie’s loan system was critiqued in the mid- 1950s due to the lamentable habit, “well-developed in the scholarly” (mostly faculty), of book hoarding (Dalhousie Gazette 1955b). At Queen’s, H. P. Gundy addressed card catalogue problems after complaints from the Arts Society that many books could not be found or were not clearly described (Queen’s Journal 1950). The perpetual, time- consuming line-ups for book retrievals at the circulation desk in Toronto’s main library annoyed many and on one notable instance inspired a satirical retort by Harry Rasky (1949).21 Complaints about limited stack access for most undergraduate students were commonplace. Administrators insisted that space limitations and indifference on the part of first- and second-year students justified stack closures. One editorial (McGill Daily 1955) summarized a cogent point about indifference that belied the argument: “It seems unlikely that the stacks would be reduced to chaos by the widening of access. Surely the students who are interested and would profit from such access have a right to it.” Similarly, when Memorial’s three-storey library opened in 1961 after a long-anticipated gestation (Library Building Plans Institute 1953a), students protested supper-hour closures and the requirement to have their library cards signed by the librarian prior to using the library at night (Muse 1962). At Manitoba, more than 500 students signed a petition and staged a brief library sit-in to extend closing hours to 11 p.m. (Manitoban 1960). Criticism from users did little to alter the fundamental predisposition to intensify administrative structures. To deal with the quickening pace of change, managers relied on centralized decision-making and hierarchical departmental units to implement priorities, classify personnel, and allocate resources. There was little discussion about organizing positions in ways that would encourage collegiality with faculty, individual autonomy, and formal relationships with students. According to the 1938 “ALA Code of Ethics for Librarians,” which many Canadians accepted (Feliciter

21. Rasky became a noted filmmaker and was awarded the Order of Canada in 2002.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 19 1958, 45–49), issues such as the interaction between librarians and faculty/governing authority normally were the responsibility of library directors. Neal Harlow, the University of British Columbia’s library director from 1951 to 1961, believed that “the library administrator is a key individual, and his standing among faculty is probably one good indication of the status of the library on the campus” (Harlow 1956b, 25). Throughout the time span of this paper, advisory library committees, composed of appointed faculty members or university administrators, retained significant influence in the oversight of library policies, budgets, operations, and book selection (Downs 1967, 41–48). Serious debate about governance alternatives, such as participatory-management models or library councils, would not occur until the 1970s (Revitt and Luyk 2016, 60–79). By 1960, the adoption of centralized administration of campus-wide library service—main libraries, branches, departmental units, research centres—was replacing the diffuse arrangements of yesteryear.

Librarianship Many Canadian librarians and educators agreed that librarianship was a profession requiring advanced knowledge, ongoing dedication, and provincial certification (Althouse 1943). Winifred Barnstead’s description emphasized a librarian’s application of the knowledge of books and principles of library science to types of libraries and his/her clientele. Colleagues supported Barnstead’s stance on professionalism while at the same time emphasizing librarianship’s humanistic aspects and its relatively new status (Meikleham and Waldon 1944). When the French-American scholar Jacques Barzun (1946) criticized librarians for scholarly inattentiveness and lack of general knowledge, Elizabeth Dafoe responded that there was no shame in the professional work of maintaining the contents of a library, organizing resources, and making them available for patrons. She said it was commendable, but unnecessary, for librarians to pursue academic status by way of teaching responsibilities (Dafoe 1948). The issues of professional competencies and elimination of clerical routines accentuated higher standards of workplace performance and theoretical knowledge. Circulation control was becoming mechanized by use of punched cards in larger libraries such as the University of Toronto (Newton and Blackburn 1949). Cataloguers stressed the need for theoretical education to apply improved principles, championed by Seymour Lubetzky,22 to bibliographic description for creators, titles, and contents (Cockshutt 1954, Ball 1962). Advocates for improved reference service, such as Grace Hamlyn at McGill (1946) and Samuel Rothstein at the University of British Columbia

22. Lubetzky strongly influenced the 1961 international cataloguing statement (the Paris Principles) and the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, adopted in 1967.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 20 (1961),23 recommended the desirability of additional specialized subject backgrounds and bibliographical knowledge. Canadian library education followed many practices originating south of the border, but its American derivation and accreditation according to ALA standards were becoming less contentious by the end of the 1950s. A CLA study (Chatwin 1955) reported that “ALA accreditation has worked satisfactorily” and was likely to continue, and suggested the inclusion of Canadian representatives during library school program reviews. In the province of Quebec, where the Association canadienne des bibliothécaires de langue française, established in 1948, sought to strengthen French-speaking librarianship, one influential leader declared that libraries “must keep using American librarianship as a foundation but adapt it to meet special needs” (Desrochers 1961, 6). As “degree inflation” became more common, two Canadian library schools introduced master’s programs: Toronto in 1951 (thesis optional) and McGill in 1956 (thesis required). Both library schools were accredited by the ALA Board of Education for Librarianship under its revised 1951 standards. Auguste-M. Morisset, the university librarian at Ottawa, 1934–58, also sought to inject American ideas and practices into the master’s curriculum of the École de bibliothéconomie d’Ottawa that he founded in 1938 (Morisset 1958). At the Université de Montréal, the École de bibliothécaires, a training program established in 1937, was replaced by a university-level library school in 1961 that began the process of seeking ALA accreditation (Tanghe 1962). The outcome of professional education was the formation of a generalist, a librarian who could adapt to diverse types of libraries. Bertha Bassam (1956, 142) reported that the library school “core curriculum may be briefly described as dealing with the building of a library collection; its organization; its use; its service to the community; and the administration of the library.” The goal was a liberal education that would permit beginners to work in a library, large or small, in any type of professional role. Library schools seldom engaged with challenges from documentalists (information scientists), who were exploring computerized literature searching and applying new techniques in information storage and retrieval to cope with the proliferation of printed works (Stuart-Stubbs 1996, 289–96). Practitioners were more active in responding to information-science theory and scientific expertise. The McGill University conference in 1958 is notable in this regard (Proceedings of the Documentation Seminar 1958). Knowledgeable librarians realized that more complete bibliographic control and subject analyses in libraries, even at the existing embryonic stage, could be helpful (Harlow 1953 and 1956a, Dafoe 1955, Blackburn 1955) in the ever-expanding field of information work.

23. Rothstein was Assistant and Associate University Librarian at British Columbia, 1954–61. Hamlyn became Chief Medical Librarian at McGill, 1956–63.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 21 Advanced educational standards and intellectual linkages with academic disciplines bolstered arguments for professional status (Bassam 1956). Higher standards also promoted a modernized workplace and attracted qualified young graduates, especially women, to careers in post-secondary librarianship. But too often, according to a survey by the Women’s Bureau of theLabour Gazette (1957), wages for female librarians were not commensurate with qualifications, and men were landing the top positions while cataloguing and reference positions were predominately held by women. In fact, in 1956 there were only 12 female chief librarians in institutions reporting in the Appendix—just over 25 percent.24 A 1957 survey of almost 475 University of Toronto library school graduates confirmed that “wherever women predominate, pay is low” (Bassam 1958, 232). Yet gender imbalance remained a muted issue before 1960. Despite a modest increase in male graduates shortly after World War II,25 the recruitment of men seldom became a point of attention (Rothstein 1949). More likely, as voiced by a young BLS graduate working at Victoria University, Toronto, Barbara Sherwood (1965), there were complaints about clerical routines and the need for librarians’ work to be more “stimulating” and “rewarding.” To address inequity in management positions, Mary Henderson (1968, 191), chief librarian at the Regina campus of the University of Saskatchewan from 1960 to 1966, suggested an artful remedy to improve teamwork: “We will have to concentrate on scattering the men through the system.”26 Margaret Beckman (1973, 133), who reached the top ranks in academic management during the 1960s, offered franker advice to women: “Be prepared to work twice as hard as any man doing the same job.” Librarian activism on workplace issues associated with second- wave feminism would not emerge until after the Royal Commission on the Status of Women in Canada released its findings in 1970. Professionalism implied a formal course that presented its own challenges, such as the establishment of regulating bodies, development of codes of conduct, and passage of legislation. Margaret Gill, director of the National Research Council Library, 1928–57, asked, “Doctors and architects have their ‘Royal College’ and ‘Royal Institute.’ Would a nucleus of similar intent for librarians be a help or a hindrance to librarianship in Canada?” (Gill 1945, 19). A decade later, the divide was apparent between most librarians preferring a personal commitment to professional performance through self-improvement and a minority believing in organizing as an exclusive group with a code of ethics, standards, credentials, and commensurate salaries (Wilkinson 1955). The impetus to explore the formation of professional- librarian sections within provincial associations began tentatively in the mid-1950s

24. Survey of Libraries, 1954–56, 89–96. 25. Survey of Libraries. Part III: Library Education 1960–1965, Chart I. 26. Henderson directed the School of Library Science at the University of Alberta from 1971 to 1976.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 22 in British Columbia and Ontario. These groups were active before 1960, although major organizational efforts belong to a later period (Linnell 2006). The thrust for recognized standing encouraged the use of terminology—professional librarian, university librarian, and academic librarian—to differentiate work. Dalhousie’s library director from 1953 to 1960, Douglas Lochhead (1956, 100), described his work as a campus intermediary: “As a university librarian I feel it is my main responsibility to assist the teaching faculty in the stimulation of intellectual curiosity amongst students.” Despite his advocacy for the role of university librarians, he believed librarianship had not reached the status of a profession in the eyes of the public because librarians had yet to fully demonstrate their worth (Lochhead 1959). Because the establishment of professional organizations required provincial legislation, the CLA was satisfied to issue a 1961 report, “Information on the Certification of Librarians,” and act as a clearinghouse on the contentious issue. The inclination to emphasize librarians’ functional tasks (e.g., circulation) or their relationship to types of resources (e.g., undergraduate reading) yielded various outcomes. Initially, it drew university and college librarians together informally at regional and national conferences; ultimately, it led to the formation of dedicated groups to further their institutional work and sectoral distinctiveness. The CLA formed a Committee on University Libraries in 1959; by 1963 there were enough members to form a separate division, the Canadian Association of University and College Libraries (Jacobs 2014, 12–14). Similarly, dedicated workshops at the OLA conference meetings, beginning in Toronto (1957) and Kingston (1958), led to the formation of the Ontario College and University Libraries Section in 1963. These national and provincial groups embarked on ambitious goals. They aimed to develop standards of service, monitor salaries and working conditions, and promote professional development in library instruction, reference, cataloguing, circulation, classification, and salaries. Pursuit of professional ideals, the role of the library on campus, and commitments to academic communities were secondary activities. Eventually, after 1960 they did turn to broader issues, such as intellectual or academic freedom, and, in concert with the Canadian Association of University Teachers, which promoted faculty influence (Gidney 2012), academic status and governance for librarians. Postwar academic librarianship retained many humanistic qualities and developed its own identity incrementally on each campus across Canada. In describing the general role of the university library as a place to explore scholarship, Elizabeth Dafoe (1951) insisted it should have a comfortable lounge “where student may meet student, or professor, or librarian and share the results of his reading and contemplation.” As the term “professional librarian” gained prominence in

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 23 higher education, more proactive and specialized duties emerged that accentuated procedural issues internal to the library. In due course, the identity of librarians in academic institutions diverged from their librarian colleagues in larger public research or special libraries. This was a fundamental transformation from the wartime situation, when the determination to coordinate research in industry, education, and the sciences had advanced the national interest (Gill 1944). University of Alberta librarians were in the forefront of attaining academic status and improved salaries after Marjorie Sherlock convinced administrators to recognize their qualifications in 1946 (Distad 2009, 56–57). Across the nation, by the mid-1950s a majority of 25 libraries reported that their institutions granted librarians a form of faculty status (which also was undergoing fundamental change, Nelson 2006, 7–22), but they typically limited this to chief librarians and their senior assistants (“CLA- ACB Committee” 1956). The distinctiveness of college and university librarians was emerging slowly in each institution and in the wider Canadian library community where public, special, school, and government libraries were more numerous in library associations.

Postwar Modernization A review of contemporary sources, expressing the opinions and observations of librarians, professionals, faculty, and students, expands our knowledge beyond two terms, “growth” and “progress.” It demonstrates that the postwar history of academic libraries was deeply influenced not just by local conditions and persons but also by broader trends occurring in the nation’s universities and colleges and the library community across North America. Sources for the period mirror general currents in the Canadian post-secondary sector that made library provision of resources, assistance, and information more integral to the work of students and faculty. The injection of federal funds for higher research following the Massey commission offered direct support for collection building and prompted local budgetary increases to keep pace. Buildings were erected using innovative design and modern construction techniques. The creation of new universities and conversion of smaller colleges to public universities, combined with the explosion of published information, stimulated library planning for collections. As well, awareness developed about burgeoning needs in medicine, science, and technology, professional programs, and faculty research intensity that blossomed later (Simon 1964, Bonn 1966). All these trends invigorated thinking about libraries on a national basis during the postwar renewal, a pre-automation era that may be characterized as “midcentury modernization,” a generalization that captures many features and serves as a useful descriptive appellation.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 24 The postwar period may be considered an important transitional phase in Canadian academic library history; it was not merely a “foundation” for what followed. Buildings, collections, organization, and the profession of librarianship came under scrutiny, as the needs of parent institutions and users tested the capacity and adequacy of services. Underlying support on campuses for increased library funding recognized the value of collections and the emerging role of librarians in acquiring and making knowledge available. The expansion of collections and delivery of services contributed to the distinctiveness of “college” or “university” librarians. Special collections, reference, technical processes, and improved accommodations provided more opportunities for librarians to interact with clients. In the changing environment of 1945–60, new priorities emerged. The reconsideration of closed stacks and duplicate undergraduate collections in reading rooms led to the decision to adopt open collections. While the traditional emphasis on resources for undergraduate teaching and preservation of printed works continued, more comprehensive collection building, beneficial coordination with other libraries through interlibrary loan and the National Library, and administrative-managerial arrangements came to the fore. Technology and funding enabled administrators to improve the library’s processes and educational services in concert with a more informed consensus concerning professionalism. Librarianship in higher education gravitated to associations dedicated to the academy, especially the Canadian Association of College and University Libraries, formed in 1963. Although the “storehouse of knowledge” concept remained a powerful library metaphor, the delivery of information was assuming more prominence and suggested future roles. The national pace of change from 1945 to 1960 was moderate compared with the succeeding period, the dynamic 1960s that loom large in the history of Canadian libraries. The sixties ushered in many educational changes, especially the establishment of provincial systems of higher education. Nonetheless, library development in the 1960s should not be viewed simply as a break with the past but as an outgrowth of many changes already underway. Postwar modernization was far surpassed after the “baby boom” reached campuses: from 1961 to 1972, the student population that academic libraries served increased threefold, library holdings (books and periodicals) increased nearly four times, staffing multiplied almost six times, and operating expenditures increased about elevenfold. This subsequent stage was unique and unsustainable. While cautious steps were taken to establish better libraries after the Second World War, it is evident that contemporaries realized there were limitations to “midcentury modern” efforts. In a national exercise to ascertain the state of Canadian libraries, Atlantic librarians reported (“Atlantic Provinces” 1961, 11) that “the deficiencies common to all university libraries are the need for more well-qualified staff, more space for readers and staff, better balanced book

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 25 collections, and more funds to provide these things.” Experienced administrators and librarians agreed that the key to future national development lay in better regional and provincial plans, improved professional practices, computerized applications, and consensus about progressive steps to achieve continuous improvement. From an interpretation of the evidence at hand, it is apparent that these processes already were underway in the 1950s. about the author Lorne Bruce is retired from the University of Guelph Library, where he previously served as Head, Archival and Special Collections. He studied history at McMaster University and library science at Western University. Many of his publications have focused on the history of public libraries in Ontario. Currently, he is researching educational aspects of Canadian libraries. references “Addition to Library [Toronto with floor plan].” 1960. Journal of the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada 37 (1): 11–12. Althouse, John G. 1943. “The Status of the Librarian.” Ontario Library Review 27 (3): 310–12. Appelt, David C. 1954. “The Murray Memorial Library.” Canadian Library Association Bulletin 10 (5): 157–59. “Assumption University Library, Windsor, Ontario.” 1959. Journal of the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada 36 (4): 107–09. “Atlantic Provinces Library Association Program of Inquiry 1961–62.” 1961. In The Present State of Library Service in Canada: A Programme of Inquiry for 1960–61, Part IC, 8–47. Ottawa: Canadian Library Association. Ball, Katharine L. 1962. “The Paris Conference.” Library Resources & Technical Services 6 (2): 172–75. Barnstead, Winifred G. 1945. “Librarian: Canadian Census Classification Professional Service.” Ontario Library Review 29 (4): 400–04. Barzun, Jacques. 1946. “The Scholar Looks at the Library.” College & Research Libraries 7 (2): 113–17. Bassam, Bertha A. 1956. “Education for Librarianship To-day.” Canadian Library Association Bulletin 12 (4): 139–42. ———. 1958. “Library School, University of Toronto: Some Salary Statistics for 1957.” Ontario Library Review 42 (4): 230–32. Beckman, Margaret. 1961. “Experiment in the Use of the Revised Code of Cataloguing Rules.” Library Resources & Technical Services 5 (3): 216–20. ———. 1973. “Woman: Her Place in the Profession.” IPLO Quarterly 14 (4): 129–34. Bishop, Olga B. 1973. The Use of Professional Staff in Libraries: A Review 1923–1971. Ottawa: Canadian Library Association. Blackburn, Robert H. 1955. “Canadian Documentation.” In Future of Bibliography and Documentation, chaired by Elizabeth Dafoe, 7–10. Ottawa: Canadian Library Association. ———. 1984. “The Development of Canadian Academic Libraries since 1947.” In Canadian Contributions to Library and Information Science, edited by Jean-Rémi Brault and Robert H. Blackburn, 7–14. Montreal: Graduate School of Library Science, McGill University. ———. 19 8 9 . Evolution of the Heart: A History of the University of Toronto Library up to 1981. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Bonn, George S. 1966. Science-Technology Literature Resources in Canada. Ottawa: National Research Council.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 26 Briggs, Geoffrey. 1980. “The Development of University Libraries in Canada.” In University Library History: An International Review, edited by James Thompson, 269–86. New York: Clive Bingley. Brown, Marion E. 1957. “The Place of a Rare Book Room in a University Library.” Ontario Library Review 41 (1): 40–45. Bruce, Lorne D. 2016. “The Carnegie Corporation Advisory Group on Canadian College Libraries, 1930–35.” Historical Studies in Education / Revue d’histoire de l’éducation 28 (2): 97–125. Brydges, Barbara. 2009. “A Century of Library Support for Teacher Education in Calgary.” Education Libraries 32 (1): 4–11. Bufton, Martha A. 2014. “Solidarity by Association: The Unionization of Faculty, Academic Librarians and Support Staff at Carleton University (1973–1976).” MA thesis, Carleton University. Cameron, David M. 1991. More Than an Academic Question: Universities, Government, and Public Policy in Canada. Halifax: Institute for Research on Public Policy. Canada. 1951. Royal Commission on National Development in the Arts, Letters and Sciences 1949–1951. Ottawa: Edmond Cloutier. Carleton. 1961. “On Our Honour.” November 3. Chatwin, Dorothy B. 1955. Investigation Report on Library Education. Ottawa: Canadian Library Association. “CLA-ACB Committee on University Librarians, Salaries and Personnel, Summary of Replies to Questionnaires, 1955 and 1956.” 1956. Canadian Library Association Bulletin 12 (6): 225–31. Cockshutt, Margaret E. 1954. “The Lubetzky Report: Its Nature and Significance.” Ontario Library Review 38 (3): 243–51. College and University Libraries and Librarianship. An Examination of Their Present Status and Some Proposals for Their Future Development. 1946. Chicago: American Library Association. Cooperative Committee on Library Building Plans. 1949. Planning the University Library Building: A Summary of Discussions by Librarians, Architects, and Engineers. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Dafoe, Elizabeth. 1948. “What Is a Librarian?” Ontario Library Review 32 (1): 19–22. ———. 1951. “The University Library.” Canadian Library Association Bulletin 7 (1): 183. ———, chair. 1955. Future of Bibliography and Documentation. Ottawa: Canadian Library Association. ———. 1959. “A University Library [Manitoba].” Journal of the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada 36 (4): 106. Dalhousie Gazette. 1955a. “De Libries” [sic]. November 2. ———. 1955b. “Confess and Avoid.” November 2. ———. 1960. “New Boss [J. P. Wilkinson] Sparks Library Reform.” October 13. de Sales, Francis, Sister. 1946. “The Library in the Days Ahead.” Canadian Library Association Bulletin 2 (3): 48–50. DeLong, Kathleen. 2013. “Career Advancement and Writing about Women Librarians: A Literature Review.” Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 8 (1): 59–75. Retrieved from ht tp://dx.doi. org/10.18438/B8CS4M. Dekker, Jennifer. 2014. “Out of the ‘Library Ghetto’: An Exploration of CAUT’s Contributions to the Achievements of Academic Librarians.” In In Solidarity: Academic Librarian Labour Activism and Union Participation in Canada, edited by Jennifer Dekker and Mary Kandiuk, 39–60. Sacramento, CA: Library Juice Press. Desrochers, Edmond. 1961. “The Library Inquiry and the ACBLF.” In The Present State of Library Service in Canada: A Programme of Inquiry for 1960–61, Part IC, 1–7. Ottawa: Canadian Library Association.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 27 Distad, Merrill N. 2000. “A Tribute to Bruce Braden Peel (1916–1998).” Papers of the Bibliographical Society of Canada 38 (2): 19–26. ———. 2 0 0 9 . The University of Alberta Library: The First Hundred Years, 1908–2008. Edmonton: University of Alberta. Donnelly, F. Dolores. 1956. “The College Library.” Bulletin of the Maritime Library Association 20 (3): 42–43. ———. 1973. The National Library of Canada. Ottawa: Canadian Library Association. Downs, Robert B. 1967. Resources of Canadian Academic and Research Libraries. Ottawa: Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada. Feliciter. 1958. “Librarianship.” 3 (6): 43–51. Filion, Paul–Émile. 1968. “University Libraries before and after Williams.” In Librarianship in Canada, 1946–1967: Essays in Honour of Elizabeth Homer Morton, edited by Bruce Peel, 73–86. Victoria, BC: Canadian Library Association. Foley, David. 1957. “The University of Toronto Library.” Ontario Library Review 41 (1): 4–6. Fraser, Lorna D. 1961. “Cataloguing and Reclassification in the University of Toronto Library, 1959/60.” Library Resources & Technical Services 5 (4): 270–80. Gateway. 1955a. “University Regulations Governing Smoking in the Rutherford Library.” January 7. ———. 1955b. “Still No Smoking.” January 7. Gidney, Catherine. 2012. “The Canadian Association of University Teachers and the Rise of Faculty Power, 1951–1970.” In Debating Dissent: Canada and the Sixties, edited by L. Campbell et al., 67–79. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Gifford, Hilda. 1952. “The Carleton College Library.” Canadian Library Association Bulletin 8 (5): 130–35. ———. 1959. “Function and the Library Building.” Journal of the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada 36 (4): 104–05. ———. 1963. “The MacOdrum Library of Carleton University.” College & Research Libraries 24 (1): 43–46. Gill, Margaret S. 1944. “Canadian University and Reference Libraries in Wartime.” College & Research Libraries 5 (2): 99–104. ———. 1945. “Trade, Profession, or Occupation?” Canadian Library Association Bulletin 1 (3): 19. Glazier, Kenneth M. 1967. “United States Influence on Canadian Universities and Their Libraries.” College & Research Libraries 28 (5): 311–16. Greene, Richard, and Jean LeBlanc. 2000. “Un pionnier de la bibliothéconomie au Canada français: Auguste-Marie Morisset, OMI.” Documentation et bibliothèques 46 (3): 135–42. Groen, Frances. 2005. “Academic Libraries in Canada.” In Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science, 2d ed., 1st supp., edited by Miriam Drake, 1–11. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis. Gundy, H. Pearson. 1948. “New Tools for the Research Worker: Recent Advances in Microphotography.” Queen’s Quarterly 55 (3): 282–89. ———. 1959. “The Edith and Lorne Pierce Collection at Queen’s University.” Newsletter of the Bibliographical Society of Canada 3 (2): 5–6. ———. 1961. “A National Library for Canada: A Record and a Promise.” Canadian Library 17 (4): 170–77. Hamilton, Dorothy I. 1942. “The Libraries of the Universities of Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan: A Report.” MA thesis, University of Michigan. Hamlyn, Grace M. 1946. “Teaching Function of the Reference Libraries in the University Library.” In Papers Read at the First Annual Convention, Montreal, October 11, 12, 13, vol. 2, 12–14. Montreal: Redpath Library / Quebec Library Association.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 28 Harkins, William G., et al. 1953. “Microfilm in University Libraries: A Report.” College & Research Libraries 14 (3): 307–16. Harland, Sidney. 1968. “Architectural Trends in University Libraries.” In Librarianship in Canada, 1946 to 1967, edited by Bruce Peel, 163–70. Victoria, BC: Canadian Library Association. Harlow, Neal. 1953. “Bibliographers in an Age of Scientists.” Revue de l’Université d’Ottawa 23 (1): 37–49. ———. 1956a. “Documentation and the Librarian.” Library Journal 81 (May): 1083–85. ———. 1956b. “Improving Faculty-Library Relations: The Administrator’s View.” Pacific Northwest Library Association Quarterly 21 (1): 24–26. ———. 1961. “The UBC Library: Revised and Enlarged Edition.” Pacific Northwest Library Association Quarterly 25 (2): 119–22. Harris, Robin S. 1976. A History of Higher Education in Canada, 1663–1960. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Harris, Roma M., and Jean M. Tague. 1989. “Reaching the Top in Canadian Librarianship: A Biographical Study of Sex Differences in Career Development.” Library Quarterly 59 (2): 116–30. Henderson, Mary E. P. 1968. “The Changing Image of the Librarian.” In Librarianship in Canada, 1946 to 1967, edited by Bruce Peel, 188–95. Victoria, BC: Canadian Library Association. Hilton Smith, R. D. 1947. “Some Principles of Library Design.” Journal of the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada 24 (2): 36–38. Jacobs, Leona. 2014. “Academic Status for Canadian Academic Librarians: A Brief History.” In In Solidarity: Academic Librarian Labour Activism and Union Participation in Canada, edited by Jennifer Dekker and Mary Kandiuk, 9–37. Sacramento, CA: Library Juice Press. Jobb, Patricia A. 1987. “Biography of a Librarian: Bruce Braden Peel.” MLS thesis, University of Alberta. John Price Jones Company Canada, Ltd. 1953. Trends in University Libraries in Canada: A Survey. Montreal: The Company. Johnson, Sigrid. 1986. “The Icelandic Collection at the University of Manitoba: Fifty Years.” Icelandic Canadian 45 (2): 23–28. Kirkconnell, Watson, and A. S. P. Woodhouse. 1947. The Humanities in Canada. Ottawa: Humanities Research Council of Canada. Labour Gazette. 1957. “Occupations of University Women: 2: The Librarians.” 57 (January): 44–46. Landon, Fred. 1945. “The Library at the University of Western Ontario.” College & Research Libraries 6 (2): 133–41. Lawrence, Robert G. 1947. “A Descriptive Bibliography of the Manuscript Material in the Rufus Hathaway Collection of Canadian Literature, University of New Brunswick Library.” MA thesis, University of New Brunswick. Lebel, Maurice. 1956. “Le rôle de la bibliothèque de recherches dans la civilisation contemporaine.” Revue de l’Université Laval 11 (4): 311–22. Library Building Plans Institute. 1953a. “Memorial University of Newfoundland Library, St. Johns [sic].” In Proceedings of the Meetings of the Second Library Building Plans Institute at Midwinter ALA Conference, Chicago, Illinois, February 1 and 2, 1953, 57–62. Chicago: Association of College and Research Libraries [presented by Sadie Organ]. ———. 1953b. “University of Saskatchewan Library, Saskatoon.” In Proceedings of the Meetings of the Second Library Building Plans Institute at Midwinter ALA Conference, Chicago, Illinois, February 1 and 2, 1953, 8–18. Chicago: Association of College and Research Libraries [presented by David Appelt].

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 29 Linnell, Greg. 2006. “The Institute of Professional Librarians of Ontario: On the History and Historiography of a Professional Association.” Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science 30 (3–4): 175–99. Lochhead, Douglas G. 1956. “I Am a University Librarian.” Canadian Library Association Bulletin 13 (3): 100–05. ———. 1959. “Professional Librarians: The Crucial Problem.” Atlantic Provinces Library Association Bulletin 23 (4): 76–77. Logsdon, Richard, and Stephen McCarthy. 1963. Survey of the McGill University Libraries. [Montreal]: McGill University. Macdonald, Angus Snead. 1948. “A Library of the Future.” Canadian Library Association Bulletin 5 (1): 11–13, 29. Malloch, Archibald E. 1946. “Dear Editor: It Stinks in the Stacks.” Queen’s Journal 29 (October): 2. Manitoban. 1960. “518 Petition for Longer Library Hours.” March 22. Massolin, Philip A. 2001. Canadian Intellectuals, the Tory Tradition, and the Challenge of Modernity, 1939–1970. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Mate, Herb. 1959. “Assumption University at Windsor.” Ontario Library Review 43 (1): 16–18. McGill Daily. 1953. “Where Books Can Be Read in a Brighter Atmosphere.” October 16. ———. 1955. “Unreasonable Regulation.” May 20. ———. 1957. “The Campus Inquirer.” February 25. McLaughlin, Roland R. [chair]. 1959. Report of the Presidential Advisory Committee on the Planning for Future Library Facilities. Toronto: University of Toronto. McNally, Peter F. 1986. “The Historiography of Canadian Library History, or Mapping the Mind of the Canadian Past.” Journal of Library History 21 (2): 445–55. Meikleham, Marget, and Freda F. Waldon. 1944. “If You Like Books and People: An Open Letter to the Graduating Class of McMaster, 1944.” Ontario Library Review 28 (3): 292–93. Meikleham, Marget, and Paul H. Hudson. 1951. “Mills Memorial Library: David Bloss Mills.” McMaster Alumni News 21 (3): 2–7. Morisset, Auguste-M. 1958. “Twenty Years of Library Education at the University of Ottawa.” Canadian Library 14 (5): 220–23. “Murray Memorial Library, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon.” 1959. Journal of the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada 36 (4): 110–12. Muse. 1962. “Give Me the Library or Give Me Death.” January 12. Nelson, William H. 2006. The Search for Faculty Power: The History of the University of Toronto Faculty Association, 1942–1992. Toronto: Canadian Scholars’ Press. Newton, May L., and Robert H. Blackburn. 1949. “A Punched Card Charging System.” Canadian Library Association Bulletin 6 (2): 40–42. O’Connell, Thomas F. 1965. “The Beginnings of the Library of York University.” In These Five Years, 1960–65: The President’s Report, edited by Murray G. Ross et al., 57–61. Toronto: York University. ———. 1969. “The Creation of a Canadian Research Library.” Canadian Library Journal 26 (2): 132–35. Organ, Sadie L. 1951. “Outline of the Probable Development of the Library of the Memorial University of Newfoundland During the Years 1951–1961.” St. John’s, NL: n.p. Owens, Noel. 1959. “F. W. Howay and R. L. Reid Collection of Canadiana at the University of British Columbia.” British Columbia Library Quarterly 23 (2): 9–13.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 30 Peel, Bruce B. 1977. “Canadian University Libraries.” In Canadian Libraries in Their Changing Environment, edited by Carl and Lorraine Garry, 182–200. Downsview, ON: York University. ———. 1979. History of the University of Alberta Library, 1909–1979. Edmonton: University of Alberta Library. ———. 1982–83. “Librarianship in Canada before 1952.” Archivaria 15 (winter): 78–85. Pennington, Richard. 1955. “The New McGill Library.” Library Association Record 57 (8): 303–04. Proceedings of the Documentation Seminar “New Methods and Techniques for the Communication of Knowledge.” 1958. Ottawa: Canadian Library Association. Purple and White. 1958. “It’s Really Great, But . . .” November 6. Queen’s Journal. 1950. “A Promising Change.” January 27. Rasky, Harry K. 1949. “An Innocent’s Adventures in Bookland.” Varsity (February 17): 3. Redmond, Donald A. 1950. “Some College Libraries of Canada’s Maritime Provinces: Selected Aspects.” MSLS thesis, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. ———. 1955. “Engineering Students and Their College Libraries.” Bulletin of the Maritime Library Association 20 (1): 6–8. “Research and Special Collections.” 1960. UBC Alumni Chronicle 14 (4): 19–22. Research Library: Prospects for the Future; Summary of a Colloquium Held at the University of Toronto, on Saturday, November 27, 1954, on the Occasion of the Official Opening of the Sigmund Samuel Library. 1955. Ottawa: Canadian Library Association. Revitt, Eva, and Sean Luyk. 2016. “Library Councils and Governance in Canadian University Libraries: A Critical Review.” Canadian Journal of Academic Librarianship 1 (1): 60–79. Retrieved from ht tp://w w w. cjal .ca /index.php/capal/article/view/24307. Rothstein, Samuel. 1949. “Librarianship for Men: Some Points of Appeal.” British Columbia Library Association Bulletin 12 (2): 7. ———. 1961. “Reference Service: The New Dimension in Librarianship.” College & Research Libraries 22 (1): 11–18. Savage, Donald. 1982. “A Historical Overview of Academic Status for Librarians.” Canadian Library Journal 39 (5): 287–91. Sherlock, Marjorie. 1950. “Alberta Looks to the Future.” Library Journal 75 (March): 369–73. ———. 1952. “Rutherford Library ‘Gateway to Knowledge.’” Pioneer 15 (3): 1, 3–5. ———. 1953. “The Role of the University Library.” New Trail 11 (3): 61–64. Sherwood, Barbara. 1965. “The University Librarian: Complacent or Dynamic.” Ontario Library Review 49 (4): 176–78. Simon, Beatrice V. 1964. Library Support of Medical Education and Research in Canada. Ottawa: Association of Canadian Medical Colleges. Smith, Anne M. 1944. “The House That Jack May Build: Canadian University Libraries and Postwar Rehabilitation.” Wilson Library Bulletin 19 (3): 185–87. Snider, Winifred H. 1948. “Extramural Library Service in Libraries and Extension Departments of Canadian Universities.” MS thesis, Columbia University. Somerville, W. L. 1952. “Mills Memorial Library, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario.” Journal of the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada 29 (8): 246–48. Sonne de Torrens, Harriet. 2014. “Academic Librarianship: The Quest for Rights and Recognition at the University of Toronto.” In In Solidarity: Academic Librarian Labour Activism and Union Participation in Canada, edited by Jennifer Dekker and Mary Kandiuk, 81–106. Sacramento, CA: Library Juice Press.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 31 Spicer, Erik J. 1955. Library Co-Operation in Canada: College and University Libraries and Public Libraries. Ottawa: Canadian Library Association. Stuart-Stubbs, Basil. 1996. “Learning to Love the Computer: Canadian Libraries and New Technology, 1945–1965.” In Readings in Canadian Library History 2, edited by Peter McNally, 275–301. Ottawa: Canadian Library Association. Talman, James J. 1968. “Twenty-Two Years of the Microfilm Newspaper Project.” Canadian Library 25 (2): 140–48. Tanghe, Raymond. 1962. L’École de bibliothécaires de l’Université de Montréal, 1937–1962. Montréal: Fides. Toronto Globe & Mail. 1946a. “University Given Papers by R. S. McLaughlin.” April 9. ———. 1946b. “Simcoe Papers Valuable Gift to Varsity.” April 10. ———. 1957. “Rare Books on Display at University Library.” November 9. [Tremblay, Fernand.] 1955. “Une Bibliothèque Universitaire pour Laval.” Architecture, bâtiment, construction 10 (111): 22–25. Tremblay, Fernand. 1957. “Une bibliothèque universitaire.” Journal of the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada 34 (3): 93. University of British Columbia. 1952. Report of the University Librarian to the Senate. Vancouver: University of British Columbia. “Victoria University Library, Toronto.” 1962. Canadian Architect 7 (1): 26–29. Wilkinson, John P. 1955. “The Problem of Professionalism.” Ontario Library Review 39 (1): 5–7. ———. 1966. “A History of the Dalhousie University Main Library, 1867–1931.” PhD diss., University of Chicago. ———. 1983. “The Legitimization of Librarianship.” Libri 33 (1): 37–44. Williams, Edwin E. 1962. Resources of Canadian University Libraries for Research in the Humanities and Social Sciences. Ottawa: National Conference of Canadian Universities and Colleges. Williams, Edwin E., and Paul-Émile Filion. 1962. Vers une bibliothèque digne de Laval: Rapport d’une enquête sur la Bibliothèque de l’Université Laval. Québec: l’Université Laval. Wilmot, Blair C. 1958. “John Buchan Collection at Queen’s.” Ontario Library Review 41 (1): 18–20. ———. 1961. “A Checklist of Books by and about John Buchan.” Douglas Library Notes 10 (1): 1–2.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 32 A ppe n di x: Ac a de m i c L i br a ry Ho l di n g s a n d C i rc u l at i o n, 1939–62

Institution Monographs1 Periodical Titles2 Lending3 University or College Volumes Books, etc. Journals Journals Loans Loans 1939 1961–62 1939 1961–62 1945 1961–62 Memorial nr 68 768 nr 1 143 nr x St. Dunstan’s 7 282 18 500 50 167 2 450 10 742 Acadia 76 000 117 400 195 426 14 477 x Dalhousie* 57 735 186 358 x 1 634 x x King’s College 24 887 nr 43 nr 2 900 x St. Francis Xavier 47 000 75 000 90 519 x x St. Mary’s 7 000 48 000 45 300 x 8 500 Mount Saint Vincent 20 150 53 000 52 300 1 438 23 840 New Brunswick 30 000 113 838 54 1 244 5 477 61 177 Mount Allison 43 009 108 498 263 712 16 894 46 000 St. Joseph’s 15 000 14 328 23 50 x 1 167 Bishop’s 17 000 35 000 62 152 3 100 20 813 Sherbrooke nr 48 000 nr 900 nr 12 000 McGill* 394 050 807 597 2 045 11 077 155 154 319 285 Montréal** 99 462 259 590 548 6 100 9 000 97 841 Laval 231 093 294 985 425 3 304 12 550 40 400 Sir George Williams 5 636 45 869 46 556 33 932 86 881 Loyola College 17 850 41 000 x 200 x 10 000 Ottawa* 125 000 257 000 750 2 600 x 27 000 Carleton College nr 64 540 nr 723 nr 88 847 Royal Military 13 000 58 235 70 325 x 23 403 College Queen’s 188 674 354 938 753 2 507 66 245 102 262 Toronto* 368 280 805 398 3 560 11 280 260 000 495 465 Trinity College 38 643 64 917 52 128 9 345 22 772 St. Michael’s College 29 169 90 029 78 476 x x Knox College 35 036 nr 42 nr 7 850 x Victoria University 98 000 93 710 183 389 94 212 113 000 York nr 14 882 nr 343 nr 12 278 McMaster 49 949 137 541 204 1 979 42 609 94 116 Western* 143 978 299 394 742 2 100 53 120 138 753 Waterloo College 8 984 31 918 22 601 2 109 40 942 Waterloo nr 31 563 nr 1 102 nr 31 400 Assumption College 11 846 108 730 110 1 260 3 000 52 038 Laurentian nr 30 147 nr 535 nr 8 664 Manitoba* 88 453 276 679 799 3 224 102 933 259 903 United College 37 629 63 000 40 303 33 633 51 000 Saskatchewan 63 459 219 500 293 1 885 37 463 178 104

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 33 Alberta*** 69 890 309 190 562 4 522 25 000 452 263 British Columbia 120 000 525 161 510 5 600 92 470 594 240 Victoria College 5 818 74 832 16 858 x 142 234 TOTAL 2 588 962 6 247 035 12 727 71 524 1 087 361 3 667 330 notes 1. Dominion Bureau of Statistics reported volumes as books, bound journals, pamphlets, and theses in 1961–62. Reported volume count does not include pamphlets in 1939. 2. Many libraries included government serials in periodical totals for 1961–62. 3. Comparable data for 1939 is not available. * Totals are for main or central library unless noted. ** Montreal 1939 totals for volumes and periodicals includes faculty and departmental libraries with central library. *** Alberta 1961–62 totals includes Calgary campus. x – not stated for library. nr – no report for institution. sources Libraries in Canada, 1938–40. Ottawa: Dominion Bureau of Statistics, 1941. Libraries in Canada, 1944–46. Ottawa: Dominion Bureau of Statistics, 1948. Survey of Libraries. Part II, Academic Libraries 1961–62. Ottawa: Dominion Bureau of Statistics, 1964.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 34 Todd Gilman, ed., Academic Librarianship Today. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2017, 248pp., $70.00.

James E. Murphy University of Calgary

Until recently, those seeking a current overview of academic librarianship in one place had few options. With technology imposing new demands and user preferences, academic librarians have obligations to keep up with evolving priorities from both the academic community and tech-savvy patrons. A thorough and engaging exploration of academic librarianship in 2017, Todd Gilman’s compilation Academic Librarianship Today brings together 20 prominent voices in North America to deliver a single, essential volume on the field.

Academic Librarianship Today is at once both comprehensive in scope and succinct in delivery. The three themes addressed in the book are the current academic library landscape, academic librarians and their services, and changing priorities and directions for the future. Fifteen chapters include topics such as academic governance, budgeting, metadata, library as place, distance education, and institutional repositories. Each chapter concludes with discussion questions and assignments, adding value for classroom use, and many include bibliographies and further readings. The authors of the individual chapters include division heads, directors, and university librarians, topic experts representing a variety of North American post-secondary institutions. Almost all authors are based in the United States, with one author based in Canada. Gilman brings both library and literary experience, and the book reflects these dual strengths. Gilman’s roles include English literature librarian at Yale, part-time faculty member at the San José State University School of Information, and researcher and author in both academic librarianship and English literature. Section one, “The Academic Library Landscape Today,” provides the historical development of academic libraries, an overview of where they fit into their institutions, and key issues in funding and scholarly communication. As priorities at their institutions shifted over the years, academic libraries and librarians adapted from the early days of mainly supporting curriculum, to expanding local and research collections, to incorporating technological advances, to adjusting to

Murphy, James E. 2018. Review of Academic Librarianship Today, edited by Todd Gilman. Canadian Journal of Academic Librarianship 3:1–3. © James E. Murphy, CC BY-ND. users who became comfortable accessing information themselves. Deanna Marcum shows that change and adaptability have been constants through the history of academic libraries. Those seeking insight into the complicated structures of academic governance will appreciate an overview by Barbara Dewey. She discusses the groups that influence the academic library as well as the departments often closely linked, such as IT and student success centres. Dewey reminds readers that librarians and library staff must be present at the right tables and stay visible within the academic institution. Depending on its size, the academic library itself may also have a complicated organizational structure. Starr Hoffman sheds light on this and key human resources issues such as unions, job types, and the potential for a grey area between librarian and paraprofessional responsibilities. The funding issues academic libraries have faced and are facing is a timely topic explored in the first section. Canadian readers will find limited examples or discussion of additional hurdles faced by those north of the border, especially when it comes to currency fluctuations and differences in institutional funding channels. The authors show how, in the face of budgetary challenges, librarians have adapted by creating consortia to maintain collections offerings, building off-site facilities for lower-cost storage options, and becoming increasingly invested in more sustainable methods of scholarly communication. With the interesting and necessary background covered, the second section of the book, “Academic Librarians and Services Today,” provides a look at the essential units and functions within the academic library, including reference, instruction, collections, and technical services. Carrie Forbes and Peggy Keeran provide clarity around the role of liaison librarians as a bridge to their departments and discuss the evolution of information literacy instruction, from focusing on resources to skills. They present the ACRL Framework for Information Literacy as a flexible guideline open to implementation based on individual library needs. The authors also stress the necessity of teaching students about broader information issues as well as specific skills. Lydia Uziel recommends that, now and into the future, librarians continue developing skills in curating digital content and facilitating access to all types of collections, including research data, digital humanities projects, and all components of the scholarly life cycle. Autumn Faulkner’s chapter addresses the technical issues faced by cataloguing, now more commonly known as metadata. AACR2, MARC, and RDA are discussed, as well as emerging systems such as FRBR and BibFrame. Faulkner describes these in an accessible way, while highlighting the discoverability possibilities if library catalogues were interconnected with the semantic web. In addition, Faulkner states librarians would do well to pay closer attention to technological and web innovations in other industries to keep up with user expectations.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 2 The final section, “Changing Priorities, New Directions,” explores issues and directions for the future of academic libraries. Included is an examination of how librarian roles have evolved, with a key feature being an increased requirement for technology skills. Further educational achievements appear to be a trend among academic librarians, posing the question of whether the library degree is enough. In a discussion of library as place, David Lewis asks how students feel when they interact with library spaces, and as academic librarians regularly face renovation projects, whether big or small, he provides important considerations before undertaking one. With technological advances increasingly enabling education to be conducted at a distance, Debbie Faires explores key topics in provision of library services to remote users. There are many technology and software options today for the academic librarian conducting support at a distance, including chat reference, learning management systems, recording tools, and web conferencing software. This third section includes a chapter by the sole author at a Canadian institution, Brian Owen, covering institutional repositories, open access, and the ways academic librarians can contribute to effective service delivery in these evolving realms. Finally, Ronald Jantz charts a vision of the future by suggesting that today’s academic librarians carve out a portion of their time and workforce to devote to forward-thinking innovations, such as examining implications of artificial intelligence on academic libraries. Enabling a culture of regularly defining and striving toward a desirable future for academic librarians will require self-reflection, commitment, and continual change. In this book, Todd Gilman has curated and coordinated an expertly written collection of topics essential and relevant to academic librarians. This text would be an excellent choice for LIS academic library courses, new librarians interested in increasing understanding and scope in the field, as well as seasoned librarians looking to get up to speed on emerging issues. Academic Librarianship Today is also a valuable choice for addition to academic library collections. Although the scope would benefit from additional Canadian content, its North American context is relevant enough to be both practical and useful for academic librarians in Canada.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 3 Janneka Guise, Succession Planning in Canadian Academic Libraries. Waltham, MA: Chandos, 2016, 124pp., $55.00 USD.

Mélanie Brunet University of Ottawa

This book may not be a how-to manual on succession planning, but that does not make it any less useful. Based on an online survey and in-person interviews conducted in 2013–14 with librarians and archivists at English-language member libraries of the Canadian Association of Research Libraries (CARL), this study is an insightful and timely look at the dismal state of succession planning in those institutions. Guise situates her study in the context of the massive wave of retirements that was predicted in the 1990s but has yet to occur. It is clear from her observations and analysis that this lack of turnover among baby-boomer employees is a succession problem in itself that requires planning. With senior management positions occupied by one demographic for an extended period, there are concerns that current middle managers may not have the chance to gain top leadership experience to move into these positions when the time comes. Furthermore, will there be enough qualified and interested candidates among new professionals to take these supervisory roles? Along with budgetary constraints and the changing nature of academic librarianship, this succession challenge is one that most university libraries have yet to take on. Indeed, Guise cites a 2012 study reporting that only ten percent of Canadian libraries have some kind of succession plan in place.

Common themes emerge from the literature on the topic and from the participants’ responses in Guise’s study. For instance, because libraries are generally unprepared for changes in leadership, they tend to adopt a reactive approach to departures, leaving little chance for a smooth transition, whether the position is being re-filled or eliminated. Guise also finds that respondents were divided as to whose responsibility succession planning should be: some felt it rested firmly with senior management (with the disadvantage of being a top-down approach, lacking transparency), while others believed that employees at all levels have a role to play, since they are in a better position to communicate to their superiors what their work entails, which is a central element of planning. Indeed, communication is identified

Brunet, Mélanie. 2018. Review of Succession Planning in Canadian Academic Libraries, by Janneke Guise. Canadian Journal of Academic Librarianship 3:1–3. © Mélanie Brunet, CC BY 4.0. as a key factor in implementing a succession plan and understanding its benefits, something many respondents found lacking. Some expressed resentment and perceived unfairness in how certain individuals were given the opportunity to move into new roles or try their hand at management while others were left out. This is where sustained two-way communication between librarians and their supervisors, but also with the wider organization and social networks, would increase openness and provide a more accurate inventory of talents, interests, and aspirations across the library. Exposure to managers as leaders and motivators (not just as supervisors) to inspire the next generation, as well as equal access to professional development opportunities (even for short-term employees), were also mentioned as important measures. The chapter on barriers (real and perceived) to succession planning may be the most revealing of the book. These are reminiscent of the obstacles faced in the larger context of organizational renewal and can prevent the elaboration of a plan or complicate the plan’s implementation. Major hurdles singled out by participants include budgetary constraints resulting in more limited-term appointments that reduce the ability to train and retain the next generation of middle managers; a lack of transparency and fairness about who is being groomed to take on leadership positions and how one can even be considered and gain experience; an organizational structure that has a limited number of positions at the top, offering few opportunities for librarians and archivists to try on a management role; and the difficult task of transferring knowledge when it is not an institutional priority and overlaps between departing and incoming people are a rarity. Guise suggests that the current state of succession planning in academic libraries is not entirely surprising, considering that their parent institutions also fare poorly in this regard. Faculty, librarians, and archivists tend to enter academe with the principal objective of teaching and conducting research, not necessarily taking on managerial responsibilities. Providing proper support in the form of professional development, mentoring, management experience, and opportunities to exercise leadership are thus paramount for attracting qualified and interested candidates into senior positions. Even without providing a clear road map to succession planning, this book offers much insight into what such planning entails and the implications of the current situation. By getting to respondents’ own understanding of succession planning, Guise identifies barriers and even some existing best practices among CARL libraries. Missing from the equation, however, are the library and archival technicians, who were not surveyed or interviewed for this study. Arguably, college programs do not train these paraprofessionals for management roles, and they are not expected

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 2 to teach, conduct research, or serve on committees. Therefore they are unlikely to become senior library administrators. But this distinction between these groups can be counterproductive when preparing for the future. A succession or renewal plan that does not include paraprofessionals in the conversation runs the risk of alienating a significant segment of a library’s workforce, a situation that would merit its own study. Overall, Guise presents a thought-provoking study that will be of interest to senior library administrators and benefit all library employees, since we all have a role to play in succession planning. This book will hopefully spur a much-needed conversation.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 3 Jamie Brownlee, Academia, Inc.: How Corporatization is Transforming Canadian Universities. Halifax: Fernwood, 2015, 230pp., $23.95.

Maggie Berg and Barbara Seeder, The Slow Professor: Challenging the Culture of Speed in the Academy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2016, 128pp., $19.95.

Samantha Elmsley Workplace Safety and Insurance Board

With the recent Ontario college strike pushing labour conditions in higher education into the headlines, now would be a good time to brush up on the corporatization of higher education in Canada. Two recent publications, Jamie Brownlee’s Academia, Inc. and Maggie Berg and Barbara Seeder’s Slow Professor, offer excellent starting points. Brownlee’s Academia, Inc. provides a comprehensive study of the corporatization of the university, building on existing research by focusing specifically on Canadian higher education. Brownlee definescorporatization as both the adoption of business practices by universities (for example, prioritizing research that can be commercialized) and the increasing integration of corporate and academic interests (more privately funded research labs on campuses, to name one development). Brownlee demonstrates how, since the decrease in government funding of higher education beginning in the 1970s, universities have aimed to meet their financial needs in a number of ways that have contributed to corporatization: by relying on part-time, contract faculty for cheap labour, by raising tuition fees, and in particular by seeking out funding from private companies and individuals. Brownlee amasses considerable evidence that these practices jeopardize the mission of academe, which Brownlee sees as aiming to add to the store of public knowledge and to engage critically with our society. To take just one example, a study by the Canadian Association of University Teachers published in 2013 found that of the 12 partnerships between universities and corporations the study examined, ten “clearly violated standards for academic integrity” (119). Moreover, the study had aimed to look at 20 such partnerships, but a number of university administrators “refused to make [these deals] public” (119)—a recurrent theme throughout the book

Elmsley, Samantha. 2018. Review of Academia, Inc., by Jamie Brownlee, and The Slow Professor, by Maggie Berg and Barbara Seeder. Canadian Journal of Academic Librarianship 3: 1–3. © Samantha Elmsley, CC BY-NC-SA. that seems to add further weight to Brownlee’s claims. Ultimately, Brownlee argues that while the corporatization of universities has gone far enough, there are steps that can be taken to curtail this effect, including a prohibition on corporate research funding (among other measures). This book offers a considerable addition to the literature on Canadian universities specifically. While Brownlee does draw on the much larger body of evidence based in the United States, there are key differences between the Canadian and American systems that make this book a worthwhile read. The numerous concrete examples that Brownlee points to in support of the main argument are also a definite strength; readers will find their eyebrows rising at least a few times each chapter. Understandably, Brownlee mainly focuses on the implications of corporatization for professors and students. It might be of interest to this journal’s readership to expand on this by exploring the effects of corporatization on academic libraries specifically. While mostly of interest to those personally involved in academe, the language and material is highly accessible for anyone with a stake in higher education—which, as Brownlee argues, is everyone. Though Brownlee offers some persuasive ideas for curtailing corporatization, the proposals are high-level measures demanding effective group effort and organization. In The Slow Professor, Berg and Seeder take a different approach. Taking the corporatization of the university as a given, and citing numerous previous studies that lend evidence to this assertion, the authors focus on what individual professors can do to combat corporatization in daily practice. To do so, they draw on the principles of the Slow Food movement to showcase “individual practice as a site of resistance” (6). Some highlights of their recommendations include a dissection of the “curiously exploitative” (18) time management literature, which encourages professionals to download as much work as possible onto support staff and, in the case of professors, onto graduate students. Equally engaging is their discussion of the Western philosophical tradition that emphasizes a body/mind split, against more- contemporary neuroscientific evidence; Berg and Seeder argue that this contributes to a culture of overwork that encourages workers to push their body beyond what is healthy or even productive. Though the title makes clear that this book is written for professors, the recommendations are broad enough that almost anyone could apply at least some to their own practice, whatever profession the reader may hold. Of particular interest for librarians is the fifth recommendation from the “Research and Understanding” chapter, “walk to the library,” which encourages researchers to do more than just gather the online articles from a full-text link. For librarians with a teaching

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 2 mandate, this section and others could spark discussion of what librarians can do to encourage slow engagement in the academy. Furthermore, the book’s conversational tone and short length make it a pleasant introduction to an otherwise emotionally fraught topic. In their introduction, Berg and Seeder speak to the importance of studies such as Brownlee’s in detailing the progress and effects of corporatization on the mission and stakeholders of the academy. However, by relating their own sense of powerlessness in the face of this evidence, the authors open up a space for those who similarly wonder whether it is possible to push for an alternative. This guide is their way of showcasing a path to resistance, a way for individuals to move forward without waiting for wide-scale social change. Readers looking to expand their knowledge of corporatization in higher education will certainly benefit from Brownlee’s contribution; readers who are all too aware of the issue may want to turn to Berg and Seeder’s manual instead.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 3 François Séguin. D’obscurantisme et de lumières : la bibliothèque publique au Québec des origines au 21e siècle, Montréal : Éditions Hurtubise, 2016, 657 pp., 49,00 $.

Mélanie Brunet Université d’Ottawa

« À peine un obstacle est-il disparu qu’il s’en dresse un autre. Les douze travaux d’Hercule pâlissent auprès de cette tâche impossible » (439). Cette citation du 2 juillet 1912, tirée de La Presse par l’auteur pour illustrer les difficultés entourant la fondation de la Bibliothèque Municipale de Montréal, résume bien l’histoire des bibliothèques publiques au Québec. Ce fut une trajectoire tortueuse semée d’embûches idéologiques et politiques et, pour reprendre le titre de l’ouvrage, relevant davantage de l’obscurantisme que des lumières. Ce livre de François Séguin, qui a lui-même œuvré durant plus de trente ans dans le réseau des bibliothèques de la Ville de Montréal, est le résultat d’un travail colossal et d’une recherche méticuleuse. Bien que certains pans de cette histoire demeurent un mystère en raison de la nature éphémère de certaines bibliothèques, Séguin a recours à une variété de sources au riche contenu qu’il prend le plus grand soin de mettre en contexte : des inventaires après-décès, de la correspondance du clergé et des autorités coloniales, des journaux de l’époque, des rapports gouvernementaux et des archives provenant de divers types de bibliothèques. Du Régime français à l’ouverture de la Grande Bibliothèque en 2005, Séguin examine les établissements de lecture qui se sont succédé et qui ont cohabité sur le territoire québécois pour enfin aboutir à la bibliothèque publique actuelle. L’évolution laborieuse de cette institution, sur fond de luttes idéologiques et politiques ainsi que de transformations économiques, débute sous l’œil méfiant du clergé et des autorités coloniales françaises envers l’instruction des masses populaires. Il y a également pénurie de livres, qui explique la quasi-absence de lieux de lecture publiques. Après l’Acte de Québec de 1774, les autorités coloniales et l’Église cherchent à encadrer les habitants et tentent de mettre à leur disposition des ouvrages en français et en anglais faisant la promotion des valeurs de la Couronne britannique et de la morale catholique. Suivent les bibliothèques commerciales de prêt, un phénomène présent surtout du côté anglophone, puis les instituts d’artisans cherchant à améliorer la

Brunet, Mélanie. 2018. Compte rendu de D’obscurantisme et de lumières : la bibliothèque publique au Québec des origines au 21e siècle, par François Séguin. Revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 3:1–3. © Mélanie Brunet, CC BY 4.0. condition des ouvriers, mais qui contribuent également à démocratiser l’accès aux livres. Au 19e siècle, l’existence houleuse des Instituts canadiens capture l’essentiel de la lutte idéologique qui oppose un groupe d’intellectuels libéraux et l’Église catholique au Québec. Monseigneur Bourget fait la vie dure à l’Institut canadien de Montréal qui résiste à ses ordres. L’évêque ultramontain voit dans l’Institut « une source empoisonnée pour le public » (150) et menace d’excommunier quiconque visite sa bibliothèque ou assiste à ses conférences. L’Institut de Québec, quant à lui, assure sa pérennité en acceptant dès le départ la censure ecclésiastique. Pour faire contrepoids à l’influence protestante et aux valeurs libérales, et ainsi donner à la population francophone accès à des lectures plus édifiantes, des bibliothèques paroissiales voient le jour. Jusqu’à la prise en charge de l’éducation par l’État québécois en 1964, ces bibliothèques se présentent comme un complément aux écoles. Séguin se montre particulièrement critique envers les bibliothèques paroissiales : l’auteur affirme qu’au lieu d’être les précurseures de la bibliothèque publique, elles ont plutôt retardé son développement en raison de l’intervention incessante d’un clergé cherchant à censurer l’émancipation et la pluralité de points de vue. L’esprit d’ouverture généré ensuite par la Révolution tranquille ne s'est pas traduit par un soutien financier immédiat de la part de l’État. Ce dernier appuie en principe les bibliothèques publiques gérées par les municipalités et un réseau d’institutions visant à préserver le patrimoine québécois, mais il est clair que les ressources demeurent insuffisantes. Bien qu’elle soit en arrière-plan, l’histoire de la professionnalisation des bibliothécaires est aussi présente dans ce livre. Jusqu’au 20e siècle, le personnel des bibliothèques n’est pas formé dans le domaine. On peut toutefois observer l’introduction progressive de la classification décimale Dewey, le passage au catalogue sur fiches et l’adoption d’un traitement plus systématique des ressources documentaires. Il s’agit aussi d’une entreprise distinctement masculine; qu’elles soient paroissiales, de souscription ou relevant d’un organisme culturel, les bibliothèques sont soutenues et dirigées par des membres du clergé ou issus des professions libérales, donc presque exclusivement des hommes. Peu abordée dans l’ouvrage, la féminisation des bibliothèques est somme toute récente. La bibliothèque publique, telle que décrite par Séguin, suit un parcours familier en histoire du Québec. Sous l’emprise de l’Église catholique jusqu’au milieu du 20e siècle, la province se distingue par un retard important en ce qui a trait à la création de bibliothèques publiques financées par l’État, contrairement à l’Ontario et aux États- Unis. Elle demeure aussi en marge des initiatives d’Alexandre Vattemare (créateur du système d’échange international) et d’Andrew Carnegie (riche industriel à l’origine de quelque 3 000 bibliothèques publiques un peu partout dans le monde). Mais le récit de

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 2 rattrapage également commun en histoire du Québec reste incomplet. Comme l’auteur le souligne, malgré le succès de la Grande Bibliothèque à Montréal, les bibliothèques publiques au Québec ne bénéficient toujours pas de leur propre loi, mais relèvent plutôt de la Loi sur le ministère de la Culture et des Communications, ce qui « [s’avère] une bien curieuse façon d’affirmer sa distinction » (541). En somme, l’ouvrage de Séguin regorge d’information au point d’en faire un livre de référence plutôt qu’une monographie. Avec autant de détails et de détours, les repères chronologiques à la fin de l’ouvrage s’avèrent fort utiles, bien qu’une représentation visuelle aurait permis d’illustrer plus clairement les chevauchements chronologiques entre les divers types de bibliothèques. Toutefois, un chapitre étant alloué à chaque modèle, les retours sont fréquents et amplifient le sentiment agaçant d’une histoire qui se répète. Une liste d’acronymes aurait aussi été pratique. Cependant, ces quelques critiques ne réduisent en rien l’importance de ce livre qui contribue de façon significative à mieux comprendre l’histoire culturelle et intellectuelle du Québec, ainsi que celle de la lecture et de la bibliothéconomie.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 3 Andrea Baer, Information Literacy and Writing Studies in Conversation: Reenvisioning Library–Writing Program Connections. Sacramento, CA: Library Juice Press, 2016, 191 pp., $28.00.

Carly Diab Emily Carr University of Art + Design

In Information Literacy and Writing Studies in Conversation: Reenvisioning Library–Writing Program Connections, Andrea Baer explores the connections between research and writing processes to explore the benefits and possibilities of collaboration involving information literacy and composition instruction. The book has five chapters addressing empirical studies about students as writers and researchers, frameworks used for writing and information literacy, examples of writing centre–library collaborations, a discussion on the potentials for collaborations, and recommendations for moving forward. Baer uses her experience as a librarian and her knowledge of writing and composition instruction to provide a balanced perspective on the benefits of writing and information literacy collaborations. Baer begins with an examination of empirical studies about students’ research and writing processes. She explores how research and writing instruction has evolved in higher education by moving away from traditional procedural methods towards a more meaningful, connected approach that involves questioning the social contexts of research and writing. She observes that in the past information literacy and writing instruction often focused on skill development using tools that decontextualized the process, and that now such instruction uses a more holistic method where research and writing processes inform one another. She recognizes that research is not linear or mechanical, nor is it isolated from other academic activities. Furthermore, research and writing are both analytical, interpretive, and argumentative—not simply the acts of gathering facts and reporting information. Since scholarly writing is intertwined with the research process, there are pedagogical opportunities for connecting research and composition in instruction sessions. The research discussed in Baer’s book is based on various scholarly concepts, including the concept of “teaching for transfer” and ideas from the report How People Learn (National Research Council 2000). “Teaching for transfer” is the idea that

Diab, Carly. 2018. Review of Information Literacy and Writing Studies in Conversation: Reenvisioning Library –Writing Program Connections, by Andrea Baer. Canadian Journal of Academic Librarianship 3:1–3. © Carly Diab, CC BY-SA-4.0. concepts learned in one context can be applied to another. How People Learn is an evidence-based research project by the National Research Council that describes a full and complex picture of human learning, as well as how the ways that people learn have implications for teaching. Baer draws on these concepts to suggest that an effective pedagogical approach would encourage curiosity and meaningful acts of inquiry in research and writing, rather than finding information for an assigned purpose. Baer continues in the third chapter by providing a detailed comparison of the Writing Program Administrators’ Framework for Success in Postsecondary Writing (2011) and the Association of College & Research Libraries’ Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education (2015). Baer carefully analyzes and finds similarities between the two frameworks to show how seamlessly they can be connected in pedagogical practice. By weaving these frameworks together, information literacy and composition instruction can consider rhetorical and social contexts, and the social and affective dimensions of writing and information literacy, so that students are better able to make connections between their writing and information-gathering practices. In the next chapter, Baer outlines examples of collaborative projects between librarians and writing centre coordinators. She describes the findings from research interviews she conducted to find out how librarians and compositionists in universities came to work together. She describes each partnership in detail, explains the projects that stemmed from their collaborations, and discusses themes she observed in the participants’ collaborations. Among the themes, she found that there were challenges in establishing and sustaining partnerships and multiple benefits to collaborating. Baer continues in the next chapter by describing the interpersonal and social factors that have an impact on collaboration between writing centres and libraries. These include organizational culture, differences in pedagogical approaches and methods, and structural conditions, which can all create barriers for writing centre staff and librarians. For example, misconceptions about information literacy and composition instruction can affect how the work of librarians and writing centre coordinators are valued and implemented by administrators and faculty in the institution. After defining the barriers, Baer reexamines the institutional positions of writing and information literacy and offers some solutions for moving forward. Two examples of ways of moving forward are to look for similarities in the missions for composition and information literacy instruction and gain a better understanding of one another’s roles.

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 2 The author is a librarian but is informed by her research in writing and literature; therefore, she has a balanced approach and gives equal attention to both writing centre and library research frameworks. She also shows a first-hand understanding of the benefits of interdepartmental collaboration for students when they are encouraged to see the connections between information literacy, research, and writing. The intended audience or readership is academic librarians and writing centre staff, particularly those whose work involves instruction or information literacy and those who have an interest in collaborating with scholars outside of their department. Equal attention is given to both professions. The book is well researched with footnotes and an extensive bibliography. It includes research from both library and writing centre perspectives. The sources and evidence are current and relevant to the topic, including work from individual scholars and relevant associations. A thorough index serves as a useful finding aid. The writing style is well articulated and scholarly, and written in way that is easy to comprehend for both writing centre and library workers, who may not be wholly familiar with one another’s professional jargon. Terms or concepts that may be unfamiliar to either profession are explained clearly. The author successfully achieves her purpose of encouraging and justifying collaboration between writing centres and libraries to provide students with a well- rounded introduction to the research and writing process. The book contributes to knowledge of learning commons collaborations, information literacy instruction, and composition instruction. It relates well to current conversations in those fields. This book is recommended for anyone interested in information literacy, composition, or collaboration with writing centres or librarians.

References Association of College & Research Libraries. 2015. Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education. Chicago: American Library Association. ht tp://w w w.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework Council of Writing Program Administrators, National Council of Teachers of English, and National Writing Project. 2011. Framework for Success in Postsecondary Writing. Berkeley, CA: National Writing Project. ht tp://w w w.wpacouncil .org/fr a mework National Research Council. 2000. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School: Expanded Edition. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. ht tps://doi.org/10.17226/9853

canadian journal of academic librarianship revue canadienne de bibliothéconomie universitaire 3 About the Artist / À propos de l’artiste

In the course of more than 30 years of practice, interdisciplinary artist Guy Laramée has created in such varied and numerous disciplines as theater writing and directing, contemporary music composition, musical instrument design and building, singing, video, scenography, sculpture, installation, painting, and literature. He has received more than 30 arts grants and was awarded the Canada Council’s Joseph S. Stauffer award for musical composition. His work has been presented in the United States, Belgium, France, Germany, Switzerland, Japan, and Latin America.

Au cours d’une carrière de plus de 30 ans, l’artiste Guy Laramée a œuvré dans des domaines aussi variés que l’écriture et la direction théâtrales, la composition musicale contemporaine, le design et la création d’instruments de musique, la chanson, la vidéo, la sculpture, la peinture, l’installation et la littérature. Il a reçu plus d’une trentaine de bourses dans le domaine des arts ainsi que le prix Joseph S. Stauffer pour la composition musicale du Conseil des Arts du Canada. Son travail a été exposé aux États-Unis, en Belgique, en France, en Allemagne, en Suisse, au Japon et en Amérique latine.

Site web de l’artiste / Artist’s website : www.guylaramee.com