What are some highlights of your work in RADS so far? What have you learned that has surprised you? What have you learned that confirms what you previously knew? What are you hoping to learn more about in RADS during the rest of the term?
I’m of the opinion that “Resource Acquisition and Discovery Services” is too utilitarian of a name to capture the amount of non-mechanical labor that goes into growing and maintaining the library’s collections. In my 4 weeks as the Libe intern, it’s been the conversations with the current RADS librarians that have delivered me the most joy and appreciation. These conversations have illuminated the ethical and personal dimensions of librarianship, which had hitherto been obscured by the idea of the library as a system and machine.
And even in times when I am asked to approach things thinking at the systems level (as was the case when analyzing the RADS end of year report or when considering the realm of academic publishing as a whole), there was always an anchor that humanized the process. For the end of year report, that was the description of everyone’s focus and job responsibilities, and for my conversation with Amy about e-resources and academic publishing that was her contrasting working at a smaller academic library with her current position at Carleton.
Another consistent highlight has been the discovery process that guides my weekly Instagram posts. It’s always good fun applying a week’s lessons in librarianship into real practice – whether that’s analyzing our digital collections or presenting historical bookplates.
Given the small limits of my imagination, I have been continuously taken aback by the scale of operations. Starting with the library’s (very healthy) operations budget and down to the minute details of ordering books and other media, there is so much going on that I am often left momentarily stunned as I try to process it all. I’ll point to the usage count of online journals as an example of something I have a hard time putting into context. I’ll say too that it has been a hard adjustment in recognizing just how much unseen labor goes into running a library.
Aside from the logistical pieces, I was also mildly surprised to find that many of the RADS librarians have been at their post for more than a handful of years. I’m unsure still what to make of that, and whether that is representative of the industry in general.
The level of granularity that I have been exposed to confirms my impression that the acquisition and discovery process is filled with intentionality. Even the mechanical steps of processing a book carry explicit directions to standardize the placement of the cataloguing data and when applicable, the exact creation of a book jacket.
Likewise, that impetus of intentionality spills over to everything else to confirm the notion that there is a lot of behind the scenes work to get things to function as seamlessly as they do.
As I enter the second half of my internship in RADS, I am hoping to expand my awareness of the evolution of RADS work. The curriculum I’ve followed has hinted at the transitions that have taken place within the library sciences, but as far as Carleton’s history goes, things have been relatively quiet on what things used to be like. I mean this less in the sense of what equipment was used in the olden days but more what was considered standard practice and “canon.”
In the same vein, I am curious to know what the long term objectives are of the library. The goals and ambitions of the library have been circumscribed by the practices it follows (which I have been made aware of in my time here) but they have not been spoken of in terms of an idealized end. Though I suppose the product we are working towards is forever a developing process.