It's Not Rocket Library Science: Design Epistemology and American Librarianship Rachel Clarke a Dissertation Submitted in Part
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
It’s Not Rocket Library Science: Design Epistemology and American Librarianship Rachel Clarke A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Washington 2016 Reading Committee: Allyson Carlyle, Chair David Hendry Melanie Feinberg James Mazza Program Authorized to Offer Degree: Information School ©Copyright 2016 Rachel Clarke University of Washington Abstract It’s Not Rocket Library Science: Design Epistemology and American Librarianship Rachel Clarke Chair of the Supervisory Committee: Associate Professor Allyson Carlyle Information School Contemporary American librarianship is typically considered a social science. Yet libraries and librarians have a strong history of making tools and services that enable access to and use of information resources. Conceptualizing librarianship from a scientific perspective discounts its design roots, leaving the field to flounder in the face of other successful information tools and technologies. Reconceptualizing librarianship as a design discipline offers opportunities for empowering and supporting the continued relevance of libraries in the 21st century. In this dissertation, I draw on the humanistic technique of critical inquiry to argue for design as an appropriate and useful epistemological framework for librarianship and further explore the nature of design in the field. Following a broader discussion of elements of design epistemology and their relationship to the library profession, the dissertation examines three critical cases in depth, each one representing a significant era of library history: Poole’s Index to Periodical Literature (est. 1848) The Washington County (MD) Free Library book-wagon (est. 1909) The eXtensible Catalog (XC) project (est. 2006) Design artifacts and supporting materials from each case were critically analyzed based on the framework of identified elements of design epistemology. Examination of the three cases shows ample evidence that much of librarianship aligns with fundamental epistemological approaches and tenets of design, including wicked problems, problem finding and framing, iteration, repertoire, service orientation, and evaluative approaches to design like critique, rationale, adoption, and reflection-on-action. Other elements of design epistemology, such as the use of representations, abductive reasoning, and reflection-in-action, were not observed in the cases; however, the absence of evidence of these elements is not equivalent to their actual absence in practice. In addition to the presence or absence of these elements, a critical examination of the ways in which they manifested in these cases demonstrates that design epistemology tends to be implicit and passive in American librarianship. Even when design epistemology is explicitly included in these cases, it is often done so in a context that renders it external to librarianship—as something that other fields and other professions do. Elements of design epistemology present in librarianship also help to concretely support the idea of librarianship’s focus on users. Examining American librarianship from a design-based standpoint reveals three major themes: 1) many forms of library knowledge not considered valid in scientific contexts are valid in design epistemology; 2) considerations of materiality reveal affordances, constraints, and limitations on innovation in library design; and 3) although many core values of librarianship are innately embedded in library artifacts, evidence of other values, notably cooperation and standardization, is clearly present. Finally, critical reflection on the cases in this study reveals that design may be implicit and externalized in librarianship due to both lack of support and character of leadership and that the normative and evangelical agenda of librarianship never really disappeared with the shift to an ostensibly neutral and objective scientific epistemology. Given these findings, the overarching recommendation for the field at large is to incorporate design epistemology explicitly into American librarianship in research, education, and practice. Acknowledgements No dissertation can be completed without the assistance and support of others. I would like to acknowledge and express my gratitude to the following for their support throughout my Ph.D process: my dissertation advisor, Dr. Allyson Carlyle, for her recruitment and ongoing support; Drs. David Hendry and Melanie Feinberg, for their exceptional feedback and for encouraging me to be more radical and manifesto-y; Dr. James Mazza, for stepping out of his familiar area of research to serve as my GSR; the faculty members who previously served on former instantiations of my committee, including Dr. Charlotte Lee, University of Washington department of Human-Centered Design and Engineering; Dr. Marcia Bates, professor emeritus from the University of California, Los Angeles; the faculty of the University of Washington Information School, especially Dr. Jin Ha Lee for her exceptional mentorship; my fellow iSchool Ph.D. students for their collegiality, advice, and tacit knowledge, especially Abi Evans, Jordan Eschler, Kristen Shinohara, Katherine Thornton, Shawn Walker, and J. Elizabeth Mills; all of the support staff at the iSchool, without whom this research would literally not be possible, especially Wendie Phillips, Cris Fowler, Nick Dempsey and Cortney Leach; the dance department at the University of Washington, for helping me keep my sanity levels high and my stress levels low, especially Brenna Monroe-Cook and Paula Peters; The staff and fellows of the Newberry Library, especially the librarians and staff of the Special Collections Reading Room; the special collections staff at the Chicago Public Library and the Regenstein Library at the University of Chicago; the archivists and staff of the Western Maryland Room at the Hagerstown branch of the Washington County Free Library, especially Elizabeth Howe, John Frye, and Jill Craig; the participants of the eXtensible Catalog project, especially Jennifer Bowen, Nancy Fried Foster, and David Lindahl; Karl Nelson, for his assistance with research at the Library of Congress Copyright Office; the members of the Ivory Tower Fiber Freaks, for sharing their collective wisdom about academia; my parents, Judy and Jerry Clarke, for instilling in me the belief that I could do anything I wanted so long as I put my mind to it; and last but most definitely not least, I thank my husband David Talley for putting up with this entire Ph.D. process and getting me into this whole mess of librarianship in the first place. This work was partially funded by a Society of Mayflower Descendants in the State of Illinois Fellowship at the Newberry Library. For librarians everywhere Table of Contents Chapter 1 Introduction and Problem Statement ........................................................................... 1 1.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Problem statement ............................................................................................................ 2 1.3 Research questions ........................................................................................................... 4 1.4 Significance of the work ................................................................................................... 5 Chapter 2 Literature Review and Project Rationale ..................................................................... 7 2.1 Why does librarianship need a design epistemology? ...................................................... 7 2.2 Existing epistemological approaches to librarianship ...................................................... 8 2.3 A different approach: design .......................................................................................... 11 2.3.1 Creation of problem solutions ................................................................................. 14 2.3.1.1 Artifacts ........................................................................................................... 14 2.3.1.2 Wicked problems ............................................................................................. 17 2.3.1.3 Problem finding, framing, and reframing ........................................................ 19 2.3.1.4 Emphasis on service ......................................................................................... 22 2.3.2 Generation of knowledge through making .............................................................. 23 2.3.2.1 Iteration ............................................................................................................ 23 2.3.2.2 Repertoire ......................................................................................................... 25 2.3.2.3 Reflection ......................................................................................................... 26 2.3.2.4 Use of representations ...................................................................................... 28 2.3.2.5 Abductive reasoning ........................................................................................ 29 2.3.3 Design evaluation methods ...................................................................................... 30 2.3.3.1 Rationale .......................................................................................................... 32 2.3.3.2 Critique