Should libraries have this kind of stuff?

[JJM]

Maybe you'd like to read a library selection policy. Warning: 1.72 megs.

It is a long document- can you provide the salient details? In my experience, library documents are long on words and short on concrete.

Maybe this is the exception. Help me out. Does this promote anti-quack material and reject quack stuff? Remember, my concern is mis-information on health care, more than fairy-tales that the Earth revolves around the Sun.

 

[LibraryLady]

I'm off to TAM 5.5 in the morning, so won't be participating anymore today. However, when I do get back, I'll try to pick out some salient points.

 

[LibraryLady]

Rebecca discovered another “rad librarian” at TAM 5.5 and introduced the two of us. We had a great time talking about various subjects, and I shared the gist of this thread with her; she had a great idea—a thought experiment!

You are now a librarian with a $1000 per month or $12,000 per year materials budget. Your funding is based on the following factors:

Number of books checked out per month.
Number of reference questions asked per month.
Number of people who come into the library.

The following are average prices for books with their average circulation. The borrowing period is maximum two weeks.

Science books @ $50 with an average of 1 circulation per month
Humanities books @ $25 with an average of 3 circulations per month
Books on the paranormal @ $20 with an average of 3 circulations per month
Social science books @ $50 with an average of 1 circulation per month
Art books @ $75 with an average of 1 circulation per month.

Bear in mind, if your statistics go down, so does your budget.

How would you spend this money?

 

[rjh01]

I would
1. Query the stats for starters.
2. Does buying more books on the same subject alter the averages? I mean do we have groups of people who borrow the same types and numbers of books regardless of the number of books that exist in the library?
3. How do book purchase decisions impact on the number of people who come into the library and the number of people who make reference questions?

 

[LibraryLady]

I would
1. Query the stats for starters.

You can query them all you want, but they are what the administration hands you. They are what you work with.

2. Does buying more books on the same subject alter the averages? I mean do we have groups of people who borrow the same types and numbers of books regardless of the number of books that exist in the library?

I'm sorry, please clarify. It's probably clear to others, but I'm still recovering from TAM.

3. How do book purchase decisions impact on the number of people who come into the library and the number of people who make reference questions?

It's hard to say, about the first part of this question. I work in a very large (1.5 million volumes) library which is the center of a state network. Do we count online questions as people who come into the library or not? Telephone calls? Do we count the people who do not use the books at all, but for example sit all day at the computers playing games? These are all real questions discussed in the literature.

The number and depth of the reference books do have an impact on how many reference questions we get, as opposed to people who are reading for self-education or enjoyment. My library has a huge reference collection for the reasons cited above.

I hope this helps you in making your collection development decisions.

 

[rjh01]

I'm sorry, please clarify. It's probably clear to others, but I'm still recovering from TAM.

No problems. This is the critical issue. Let me put it another way. Suppose the library purchasing staff went mad and bought $12,000 worth of books in one year all in one of those subjects you listed. What would that do to the figures you quoted? Suggested possible answers
1. They will have no impact. There will however a huge increase in the number of people borrowing books on that subject.
2. The same number of people borrow the same type of books. As the library has now more books on one subject the averages are changed.

I suggest the second answer is close to being right.

 

[JJM]

I'm off to TAM 5.5 in the morning, so won't be participating anymore today. However, when I do get back, I'll try to pick out some salient points.

I thought this was a response to my posts (#16 and 21) observing that the current, reference-librarian model ("I don't stand behind anything, here is what someone wrote") is inadequate for questions about sCAM from people who are considering it for therapy.

The OP asks if libraries should have material promoting sCAM. My response is that the library should, so researchers can see what mis-information is being promoted. When it comes to someone who is ill and wants to use sCAM, the library should convey only the rational publications that are critical of the subject (or send the inquirer to a real, medical professional). That is because the criticism is fact-based, not mere opinions.

On top of that, the librarians who support sCAM should learn the facts, or recuse themselves. That includes many who review the sCAM books.

 

[Oroborus]

Well look at it this way, maybe someone will want it to increase the strength of their anti-woo by knowing the enemy

 

[JJM]

Well look at it this way, maybe someone will want it to increase the strength of their anti-woo by knowing the enemy

I tried to make that point. Someone else did, as well.

 

[LibraryLady]

I thought this was a response to my posts (#16 and 21) observing that the current, reference-librarian model ("I don't stand behind anything, here is what someone wrote") is inadequate for questions about sCAM from people who are considering it for therapy.

The OP asks if libraries should have material promoting sCAM. My response is that the library should, so researchers can see what mis-information is being promoted. When it comes to someone who is ill and wants to use sCAM, the library should convey only the rational publications that are critical of the subject (or send the inquirer to a real, medical professional). That is because the criticism is fact-based, not mere opinions.

On top of that, the librarians who support sCAM should learn the facts, or recuse themselves. That includes many who review the sCAM books.

On target.

 

[dudalb]

I realize that libraries also carry materials about elves, Ents, witches, and Sherlock Holmes, but those are clearly marked "fiction." (Although I once knew someone who insisted that Sherlock Holmes was a historical figure.)

That someone probably saw some of the essays on Sherlock Holmes done by Holmes enthusiasts,where the fiction that Holmes was a historical characters whose adventure were recoreded by John Watson and edited by Arthur Conan Doyle is a standard technique.
It's sort of a big inside joke,and not meant to be taken seriously,but a few simple souls are still taken in by it.

 

[Skullaxide]

At university, I used to be in charge of the college library, I filed Whitley Streiber's "Communion" under humour...

Me and a few friends used to put Bibles in the fiction section. A Christian friend asked why we didn't put any Korans in the fiction section, so we did that too and everyone rejoiced.

 

[arthwollipot]

Me and a few friends used to put Bibles in the fiction section. A Christian friend asked why we didn't put any Korans in the fiction section, so we did that too and everyone rejoiced.

Oh yeah, I think you're going to fit right in here.

 

[Foolmewunz]

I sort of expected some votes for the negative side of the question, but see none. That's fairly impressive (or the rest of the hard-edged skeptics are off trying to read through Plumjam's latest....).

I really think it's a basic question. Libraries provide stacks of material. Chemicals can make you sick or blow up your bedroom. Should the library stop carrying books on chemistry? You can burn down your kitchen in a cooking mishap. Maybe they stop carrying cookbooks? Auto accidents are a major cause of death. No more auto-maintenance books?

In all cases the answer is a resounding "No!", obviously. The librarian, trustees, administrators, et al have to assume that Mrs. McGinty knows something about Chemistry and is looking at the book for more detailed information in a certain area or on a certain topic. Or that Dr. Chin knows not to leave a pot boiling on a gas stove and go for a three hour drive. And that Mr. Rodriguez has a license and knows how to driver properly. Similarly, LL and others have to assume that the person looking into alternative medicine, pyramid power, reincarnation or whatnot are sentient beings and know what they're looking for and have their own reasons.

We often wind up comparing religion to various forms of woo. Let's reverse that. What if someone goes into the local library and says to LL, "Hi, I'm totally devoid of a spiritual core. I'm looking for the bestest religion of 'em all." Is LL going to direct them to the section on Judaism? Or should she direct them to something on Comparative Religions or Philosophy of Religion, and let them decide on their own? To me (and I'm going to take a chance and guess to LL also) the answer's pretty obvious.

I want my library, whether brick and mortar or virtual, to have source materials on non-fiction* items, and scads of criticism of same. I don't want them sub-sorted in terms of someone's subjective favoritism.

*for fiction, I just want them to have lots and lots of it...

 

[Dancing David]

Me and a few friends used to put Bibles in the fiction section. A Christian friend asked why we didn't put any Korans in the fiction section, so we did that too and everyone rejoiced.

They ate Robin's priest and there was much rejoicing...

 

[Dancing David]

Um, the ability to access information is what libraries are about, while some can read on homeopathy and the Chopralites I can read up on history, science and 'satanic' fiction (Harry Potter, Roger Zelazny and the like).

Free speech is uncontrolled.

 

[TheAnachronism]

I work as a page in our county library (meaning I stock all of the circulating books), and the other day I found quite a few books on Sylvia Brown in the juvenile section. I only found them when stocking one of the books, meaning that someone had to have checked it out.

I can't believe parents would let their children read that trash.

 

[Leicontis]

I would think that it's sort of the librarian's perogative to comment on the books, especially when any sort of question is asked.

I want my library, whether brick and mortar or virtual, to have source materials on non-fiction* items, and scads of criticism of same. I don't want them sub-sorted in terms of someone's subjective favoritism.

What about sub-sorted in terms of objective fact? Many of the claims of sCAM have been scientifically proven false. Study after study says that these practices are at best a harmless placebo. For what they are at worst, I would direct you here.

Intelligent Design books belong in the Religion section. IMO, that's also the best place to put much of the sCAM literature - all belief and bad science, no verifiable fact.

 

[JJM]

{snip} Similarly, LL and others have to assume that the person looking into alternative medicine, pyramid power, reincarnation or whatnot are sentient beings and know what they're looking for and have their own reasons. {snip}

I think most of your points have been addressed. We agree that all points of view (opinions) should be available. The "reference interview" can elicit whether the person only wants proponent material, opponent material, or both. When someone seeks information for personal health-care, it is important to point them to factual material.

It is a fact that homeopathy has been disproven http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=35 What other facts could a person looking for health-care need to know?

There are some practical problems in totally neutral presentation of published material. For one thing, patrons look for reliable information from librarians; offering nonsense betrays that trust. In addition, sCAM practice (even within one cult- e.g., chiropracty, acupuncture, homeopathy) has no standards; so proponents promote conflicting ideas.

Another practical problem is that, unlike your Utopian ideal, the public isn't very discriminating. For example, in a large library they may find a dozen books that promote homeopathy and only two that expose it for what it is. So, the figure the consensus favors sCAM. This is a standard imbalance because proponents make more money on their books than do critics.

If you don't buy that argument- consider all the people who dote on astrologers, psychics, chiros, Chopra/Weil, faith healers, etc. If the public were critical thinkers, those woos would starve.

 

[roger]

What I want from my library is access to information. For example, suppose I was writing an article on sCAM, or crystal power, or whatever. It sure would be nice to be able to go to the library to read some of these books.


You don't get to decide what I think about, thank you very much.