by Calsidyrose on Flickr

Introduction

There are sections of the bookstore many people don’t want to be seen in. For me, it’s the business section. Every time I’m scanning the spines of new titles on leadership, innovation and management, I feel a little nervous that someone’s going to jump out of the photography section and call me a square.

I don’t think I’m alone in this. There’s a strong anti-corporate feeling in many of the social circles I inhabit. In fact, the bookstore I usually go to is the largest independent bookseller in Texas. In a city whose mantra is “Keep Austin Weird,” it’s not unexpected. Business books represent corporate culture, “the man,” and mumbo-jumbo for suckers in suits.

It’s not just in Austin. Mega-corporation IBM recently released a commercial that featured “buzzword Bingo” in which employees of a large organization are called to a large meeting with the CEO of the company who boasts about the direction of the organization. As he spits out buzzword after buzzword (e.g., “Web 3-dot-0,” “out-of-the-box thinking,” “value-added”), cynical employees mark off squares on the premade bingo cards.

What I get is this: administration, regardless of what kind of organization you’re in, is often functioning within a “Dilbert-like” reality. Managers are wrapped up in their insulated world of mission and vision statements and strategic planning. They have delusional and misguided ideas about what goes on at the frontlines.

I suspect that for many librarians, the words mission and vision and strategic planning conjure up the same kinds of images. Perhaps you haven’t played Buzzword Bingo, but you’ve exchanged knowing glances with coworkers during planning meetings. You’ve experienced enough strategic planning to know that the majority of the time it’s not going to get you anywhere, and it’s going to take a long time to do so.

A recent excerpt from Benjamin Ginsberg’s book The Fall of the Faculty that appeared in the Chronicle of Higher Education provides examples of visions that turned into strategic plans that turned into years-long failed efforts at change. He faults administrators that use the strategic planning process for their own personal gain in the form of resume-building experiences. These career administrators busy themselves with visioning and planning rather than making real change, all the while continuing to seek out more lucrative opportunities for themselves.

In essence, these inauthentic leaders were using the process for personal gain, and others in the organization could sniff it out.

It’s important to note that Ginsberg doesn’t deny the effectiveness of a good vision or a good strategic plan. He highlights the University of Illinois Strategic Plan as one that contains the characteristics of effective corporate or military plan in that it has explicit objectives and ways of measuring success. It’s not the idea of vision and planning that is broken – it’s the way in which it happens and the motives behind the process that make for failed efforts.

Authentic Leadership

Princeton philosophy professor emeritus Harry Frankfurt’s essay On Bullshit was a best seller when it was released as a book in 2005. In it, he writes about authenticity and fakes:

For the essence of bullshit is not that it is false but that it is phony. In order to appreciate this distinction, one must recognize that a fake or phony need not be in any respect (apart from authenticity itself) inferior to the real thing. What is not genuine need not also be defective in some other way. It may be, after all, an exact copy. What is wrong with a counterfeit is not what it is like, but how it was made. (Frankfurt, 2005, p. 47).

This echoes Ginsberg’s stance that the processes used for change are not inherently bad. It also explains why a fiscally sound, conceptually correct plan might reek of bullshit. Together, Frankfurt and Ginsberg highlight the need for competent, authentic leaders.

Authentic leadership isn’t just about leaders who are true to themselves and their organizations, though that is a part of it. Bill George (2003) identifies five dimensions of authentic leadership: purpose, values, relationships, self-discipline, and heart.

Purpose

Authentic leaders know who they are and what they stand for. They know where they are headed and are inspired and intrinsically motivated to achieve their goals. The way this comes out in leadership situations is leaders who have passion.

Values

Authentic leaders understand their own values, and they use those values to know the right thing to do in difficult situations. Instead of compromising their values in difficult times, they use those situations to strengthen their understanding of their own values. People can tell leaders are true to their values through their behavior.

Relationships

Authentic leaders engage in mutual disclosure with others. They build strong bonds between themselves and others based on trust and closeness. They don’t necessarily reveal everything to everyone, but they are considered transparent and open. They will be open about their weaknesses and are willing to listen to others. People describe leaders with these kinds of relationships as well connected to others in the organization.

Self-discipline

Authentic leaders who practice self-discipline are able to maintain focus and stay on track in order to reach their goals. They are accountable to themselves, to others, and they hold others accountable to the organization. Others know what to expect from them and describe these leaders as consistent.

Heart

Perhaps the “softest” of the dimensions of authentic leadership, heart represents the awareness leaders should have about others’ struggles. They seek to help others who need it. They are frequently described as compassionate leaders who put others before themselves.

A Lack of Authentic Leaders

There are few people who can live up to these standards on a daily basis. There are even fewer who have the management skills to use visions, missions and strategic plans to effect the change they want to see. Even fewer occupy management and leadership roles in our workplaces. It’s no wonder there are so many “Buzzword Bingo” sessions in our work lives.

We have seen economic, social, and political leaders create massive amounts of distrust of leadership throughout our society. Even those identified as authentic leaders have turned out to be less authentic than we had hoped. In what is a basic textbook for leadership studies, Leadership: Theory and Practice by Peter Northouse, of the three case studies exemplifying authentic leadership one was about Greg Mortenson. Mortenson, author of Three Cups of Tea, was once known for his selfless, purpose-driven work in creating schools in difficult political and geographical areas. Now, he is more known for lying about the extent of his work.

Authentic Library Leaders

Now more than ever, libraries are in search of authentic leaders because we have pressing problems. Budgets are being slashed around the country. In my own state, Governor Rick Perry has signed off on a budget that will cut 88 percent of the state library’s programs that aide and assist libraries throughout the state.

By  virtue of their transparency, self-discipline, and high ethical standards, authentic leaders enhance employees’ engagement with the organization and inspire behavior that goes beyond what is expected (Walumbwa, Wang, Wang, Schaubroeck, & Avolio, 2010). Frankly, that’s what we need to solve difficult problems.

In a study of 387 employees and their 129 direct supervisors, researchers found that supervisors who demonstrated authentic leadership characteristics led more motivated, empowered teams than those who were not authentic leaders. Because followers can identify with authentic leaders, they feel more empowered to make change as well (Walumbwa et al., 2010). We need employees that don’t just come to work for a paycheck – we need employees that come to work engaged in the profession and concerned about what’s happening around us. We need employees who are willing to go above and beyond to ensure our users are being served in spite of the cuts all around us.

The Vision Thing

Motivated employees who feel empowered are great, but all of that energy needs to be synchronized, and therein lies another role for the leader: vision-setting. Business guru John Kotter found that of the eight reasons why firms fail, three of them had to do with vision. Firms that failed underestimated the power of vision, undercommunicated the vision, or permitted obstacles to block the new vision. The Leadership Challenge places ‘Inspiring a Shared Vision’ in its model of effective leadership. Other studies on leadership have placed vision at the core of the transformational change process (Zaccaro & Banks, 2004), claiming that it is responsible for generating trust in leaders, aligning the beliefs and values of entire organizations, and intellectually stimulating all who work there (Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1996).

Vision can be a powerful motivator if it appeals to major stakeholders in an organization, including staff, customers, and community members. The business world has a variety of examples of successful visions. Kotter’s seminal work, Leading Change, identifies six characteristics good visions have.

Imaginable

The vision is something that is easily pictured. It doesn’t represent the organization as it is now; rather, it is a picture of the organization in the future. This ‘future organization’ provides people with a direction.

Desirable

The vision is something the appeals to a variety of stakeholders, not just a single group of people. Visions that ignore one group of stakeholders in favor of another will eventually demoralize followers and invariably spark resistance.

Feasible

The vision should not be so farfetched that it appears unattainable. In order to develop a vision that will seem feasible, it should be rooted in reality. That said, it should not be an incremental change, as this will not be inspirational. The right vision stretches an organization’s limits, but not to a point of incredulity.

Focused

The vision should provide a clear direction to work towards. Kotter provides the example, “To Be a Great Company,” as a vision that lacks enough focus to answer questions about where the organization is going.

Flexible

Just as a vision should not be too vague, it should also not be too prescriptive, limiting the options an organization has for achieving the vision. A flexible vision allows for the environment to change and the organization to adapt to it while remaining focused on the vision’s goals.

Communicable

The vision is easy to communicate. It shouldn’t take longer than a couple of minutes to explain well. If the vision is too complicated to communicate, it will eventually lose its power as others in the organization try to adopt it as their own.

Library Vision Statements

In looking at library vision statements posted on websites, it is clear that there are not a lot of what Kotter would define as good – and without a good vision statement, it will be difficult to align a whole library to achieving change even with a good leader.

It is clear that that the library world has yet to embrace a single definition of what constitutes a vision.  These statements range from long, multi-page documents that more closely resemble a mission statement (what a library does and its purpose) to one-liners than seem more like a slogan.

Kent State University Libraries

The Libraries provide information resources and services that are essential to research, discovery, and learning at Kent State University. Activities of our information professionals include synthesizing, organizing, evaluating, and providing access to the corpus of human knowledge and experience. We are committed to the broad-based support of our primary users – students, faculty, and staff – while also recognizing our role in ensuring and maintaining the Carnegie Research II status of the University. We also provide leadership in cooperation with other University offices in the visioning and management of new and more effective information resource services to the University community. Our vision embraces this ideal while acknowledging that we are bound by available fiscal resources.

It goes on to list seven statements of belief too long to include here. Obviously, this vision statement is much too complex to be easily communicated. It also speaks of the library as it is now and doesn’t provide an image of the library in the future.

The University of Texas at Arlington Library

The UT Arlington Library … the best choice for navigating the world of ideas.

This one is definitely communicable. However, it does not have enough focus to guide individuals in the organization. When confronted with a choice to create a learning commons or build a special collection, this vision statement wouldn’t lend much support. It’s also hard to imagine what this place will look like in five years with no imagery or description of the future library.

Keene State College in New Hampshire

Mason Library’s vision is to achieve excellence in the following: Mason Library partners with the campus community to prepare citizens ready to engage in the world. The Library is a knowledge center where students learn information literacy skills that empower them to navigate a rapidly changing environment. The Library offers a welcoming space at the heart of the intellectual endeavor integrating materials, technology, place, and teaching in the tradition of a public liberal arts institution.

This vision statement is a good balance between focused and flexible.  It highlights a distinct direction for the library: community partnerships, a knowledge center that adapts to new environments, and a physical space with materials and technology.  Still, it doesn’t specify strategies to achieve this future, nor does it tie the library to specific technologies.  “Materials,” for example, might mean books, journal articles, and other traditional library materials; however, if the institution shifted to a data-centric curriculum and adopted an e-reader program, this vision is still relevant.

The Power of Vision, Authentically Led

New technologies, shrinking budgets, the growth in the demand for ebooks and several other converging forces are changing the landscape for library work.  At the same time, the library’s relevance is being called into question in our communities, our schools, and our colleges and universities by those who would believe “It’s all on Google.”  Our institutions are competing for scarce resources: for public libraries, fire and police get funded as essential services; for school libraries, instructional units[1] get priority funding; and for colleges and universities, other schools and academic units are vying for the same funding libraries seek.

Clearly, libraries operate in a volatile environment that demands strong leaders to unify an organization and set a path for success. Authentic leadership describes how leaders can interact with followers to overcome organizational inertia and inspire action through purpose, values, relationships, self-discipline and heart.  These leaders have integrity and emotional intelligence, and they rally entire organizations around common, heart-felt goals using a clearly articulated vision of the future.

Emergent Leaders with Vision

Leaders are not always the director.  They can be found throughout the library and are identified by the way they are able to influence others to create a new future for the organization. Northouse (2010) identifies those who do not hold formal authority but who exhibit leadership qualities as emergent leaders.  These leaders are identified by the way they motivate others, initiate new ideas, and seek others’ opinions.  They are passionate and involved.

Library visions can (and should) be emergent as well.  All institutional visions were once just the vision of a single individual that were shaped by others in the institution. Kouzes and Posner elaborate:

We all have dreams and aspirations.  We all think about the future; we all want tomorrow to be better than today.  Leaders have to make sure that what they see is also something that others can see.  When visions are shared they attract more people, sustain higher levels of motivation, and withstand more challenges than those that are singular. (2002, p.105)

While you may not have the authority to define the vision of the library and draft it as part of a strategic plan, you certainly can have a vision and share it with others – even if it’s not in the context of formal planning meetings. For example, in developing the St. Edward’s University library website, I had conversations with each staff member at the library to come up with a shared vision for the site.  This vision was partly mine – I built the bones of it on my own – but it was shaped through conversations with people that knew the St. Edward’s community, including faculty and students.  The final vision that guided website development was:

The St. Edward’s University library website is the go-to resource for academic research for our faculty, staff and students.  It provides unfettered access to high-quality library materials and opportunities for website visitors who have never interacted with the library in any other way to expand their research capabilities through intuitive design, rich information literacy content, and ways to communicate with library staff.  The library’s website will be ubiquitous in the research lives of our users and its content and tools will be found throughout the SEU digital infrastructure.

Because each member of the organization contributed to this shared vision, it withstood early criticism and gained buy-in quickly.  Others saw themselves and their input in the website.  Part of my role as an authentic leader in this situation was to listen actively to others and be honest and open about my own intentions for the site.  I was passionate about making an excellent site that would serve the St. Edward’s University community by recognizing the needs and interests of all major stakeholders.  As corny as it sounds, it was an effort both of the mind and the heart, and I believe that is why it has been a success.

I’m not a director, but I certainly have a vision of what the library will be in the future.  I believe it is a vision that I share with several of my colleagues, and that helps guide my actions.  As my library embarks on a strategic planning process that began this month, I am ready to contribute my vision to the conversations that our entire staff will have about the direction our library will take.  If I do that with authenticity and heart and articulate a good vision, I will help steer this library into the future.

What You Can Do

You can be an authentic leader.  Here are some thoughts on becoming an authentic leader at your library, regardless of your position:

• Take leadership seriously.  Just as the library community has come to embrace teaching as a skill that requires passion and knowledge, so does leadership.
• Participate, if possible, in leadership development.  The American Library Association’s Emerging Leader’s Program is one example, but state library associations may offer something as well.  The most valuable learning experience I have had has been the Texas Library Association’s TALL Texans Leadership Institute, led by ALA president-elect Maureen Sullivan and George Washington University Libraries dean Jack Siggins.  If leadership is a phenomenon you’re really interested in understanding, there are graduate programs like Simmons College’s Managerial Leadership in the Information Professions [2] that can engage you in leadership theory and help you explore how leadership happens in libraries.
• Find your own vision and voice.  You cannot authentically lead using someone else’s vision and someone else’s passion (Kouzes & Posner, 1999).  I recommend the Leadership Challenge, which not only is a great read, but provides activities to articulate your authentic self.  This sounds touchy-feely, but it is something many of us do not do in the midst of our busy, hectic days.
• Lead.  Take the five dimensions of authentic leadership and apply them in your work, starting today.

Many thanks to Dr. Anne Marie Casey, director of the Hunt Library at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University and Irene M. H. Herold, dean of Mason Library at Keene State College for their perspectives on this piece.  As always, thanks to all of my fellow Lead Pipe editors, but especially Emily Ford and Ellie Collier who provoked me with insightful comments and questions.

References

George, B. (2003). Authentic leadership: Rediscovering the secrets to creating lasting value. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Ginsberg, B. (2011). The fall of the faculty: The rise of the all-administrative university and why it matters. New York: Oxford University Press.

Frankfurt, H. G. (2005). On bullshit. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Kirkpatrick, S.A. & Locke, E.A. (1996). Direct and indirect effects of three core charismatic leadership components on performance and attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 36-51.

Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1999). Encouraging the heart: A leader’s guide rewarding and recognizing others. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2002). The leadership challenge. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Northouse, P. G. (2010). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Walumbwa, F. O., Wang, P., Wang, H., Schaubroeck, J., & Avolio, B. J. (2010). Psychological processes linking authentic leadership to follower behaviors. Leadership Quarterly, 21(5), 901-914.

Zaccaro, S. J., & Banks, D. (2004). Leader visioning and adaptability: Bridging the gap between research and practice on developing the ability to manage change. Human Resource Management, 43(4), 367-380.

During the last few frenzied weeks of the academic semester last month I came across an article I reviewed quickly and put aside, but which has lingered in the back of my mind despite the fact that I can’t seem to find it again. Essentially, as a I recall, the article addressed the manner in which academic (and school?) libraries are evolving more fully into social spaces for students, along the lines of a second student union or a glorified internet cafe. The article raised the question in my mind of whether libraries, if they continue to progress in this direction, will eventually just merge into the campus student union, which also provides computers, study spaces, and food options. Do we have a greater vision, a plan for where we’re going, or are we just rolling with the times?

I spent a lot of time last fall researching an annotated bibliography on the Learning Commons that caused me to reflect on some of the same questions. In 1985 Pat Molholt published an article in the Journal of Academic Librarianship titled “On Converging Paths” in which she suggested that libraries and computer labs were likely to merge into one. At this point we can say that she was partially correct, as the job description of a librarian now overlaps strongly in many ways with an information technology job description (I am not sure the reverse is true, however). As a reference librarian, I probably spend about the same amount of time helping students with research as I do helping them with technology. At many institutions the relationship between the library and IT department are very close, and they often reside in nearby office spaces, but I am not aware of any place where they have yet been merged.

The idea of combining libraries with information technology departments is scary to many, but also a very natural step. Many libraries have their own IT departments, or rely heavily on an organizational unit to build and update their website, keep online resources correctly linked and current, provide online reference services and technology support for patrons, and host multimedia content, among other things. If librarians were more highly trained in back-end technology, think of how much further we could take many of our instructional and service initiatives! If IT professionals were trained as librarians, the same would be true.

If you’re not familiar with the concept, the Learning Commons is the latest manifestation of the 1990′s Information Commons, which was a later manifestation of the 1980′s library computer lab. First we put computers in libraries and thought that was pretty cool. Later, libraries at some notable institutions such as The University of Iowa and The University of Arizona decided to integrate their computer labs more fully by expanding the labs, providing a greater variety of software and hardware, offering combined research and technology help desks, and building computer classrooms where online research skills could be taught. That was the Information Commons.

More recently, a number of universities are beginning to build on the Information Commons concept with the goal of a “seamless learning environment” in mind. The Learning Commons includes, in addition to the usual computer labs and classrooms, student services resources such as the writing center, career services, and residence life. In some cases these are physical facilities that combine several units, in other cases they are programmatic or service collaborations (If you’re interested in learning more about this, try Learning Commons: Evolution and Collaborative Essentials or any of the other recent books on the topic). Apparently, this is the next step in our evolution: it’s like creating the WalMart of libraries where students can do their one-stop shopping for everything college.

I think this is a really interesting direction, and I’m sure many of the Learning Commons will be (and continue to be) highly successful. The goal of the Learning Commons is to identify the ways students learn today and creative a responsive environment for them. But it makes me wonder what our libraries and our jobs as librarians will look like in the future if we continue to change in the direction of merging our buildings and services with everyone else’s buildings and services. Will we even call libraries “libraries” then, or will we have more elusive names such as “Integrated Services Building”? At the ISB you can grab a cup of coffee, research and write a paper, troubleshoot your registration problems, and sign up for the dorm room lottery. I wonder if it will be the same person who can help students with all those things.

And the most important question of all: do we know where we’re going?

What Makes a Library a Library?

As I wrestle with this question, I have found interesting a conversation taking place among public and school librarians about what makes a library a library.” Sarah Houghton-Jan began the discussion early in December on the subject of King County’s new “Express Library,” an unstaffed self-serve library branch. After 95 percent of local residents said they would prefer it, King County created a “mini-branch” where patrons can pick up holds, and the library system even threw in two computers for catalog searching and a small browsing collection. Can one even call this a library? Houghton-Jan is not sure:

It raises the question–-what makes a library a library? And not just because there aren’t live staff there. There is not a full browsing collection of materials, no internet-enabled computers, no wifi, no rooms to read or study in, no programs, etc.

From her comment we might extrapolate that what makes a library a library are the things she listed: librarians and staff, a large collection, computers and internet access, study space, and programs of some variety.  But a few days later, a set of video interviews published by Buffy Hamilton from Creekview High School in Canton, Georgia, seem to disagree, at least from the teen perspective. These young people generally see the library as a place to both hang out with friends and get their work done. Out of the twelve students she interviewed (she notes eleven, but one video clip has two students), I was surprised to see that nearly half, or five students, cited “atmosphere” as what makes a library a library. What constitutes the library atmosphere was unclear.

I think the commonly cited quality among both groups of students — the library as a place to read, study, work, and/or do research — is informative, and obviously carries over into college students’ views of the library. For students of all ages, the library is a place to get out of the house or dorm room and get work done. For older students, there is some social value to the library as well. I appreciate Scott Bennett’s view of the library’s value in the modern higher educational institution:

The library is the only centralized location where new and emerging information technologies can be combined with traditional knowledge resources in a user-focused, service-rich environment that supports today’s social and educational patterns of learning, teaching, and research. Whereas the Internet has tended to isolate people, the library, as a physical place, has done just the opposite (p.3).

The library as a place that counteracts the isolating nature of the internet is something I can get on board with. And again, it reinforces the idea of the library as an increasingly social venue.

The value of the library as place appears to be alive and well, but what kind of “place” are we talking about? It seems important that we retain the “atmosphere” the interviewed students cite, but first we need to know what that atmosphere is. If our libraries morph into something else by blending with other campus entities, the qualities students enjoy might disappear. On the other hand, perhaps those qualities are so central to the library that they will persist regardless.

Vision: Do We Have It?

Being a librarian these days sometimes feels like being a passenger on a fast-moving train. We sit inside, hoping there is someone in front running the show, or hoping at a minimum that another train won’t run us off the track. But we sit looking out the side windows without having any idea what may be coming along the road in front of us. Whether or not anyone’s in charge, it can be hard to tell. Lots of people have taken stabs at predicting the future of libraries, and I can’t say with any authority (until we get there!) whether they have it right. Will we be cultural centers, wholly special collections, digital repositories, absorbed into Google, or just plain out of business?

Out of curiosity I searched the last six years of the journal Library Administration & Management for articles with “future” in the title, and found only five. Two were a two-part article on the future of libraries by Bonnie A. Osif from 2008 that summarized the variety of perspectives about library futures as represented in the literature. I must admit to being surprised to not see something more visionary in this journal. Perhaps I am looking in the wrong place. But it seems to me, and I don’t mean to criticize any of our great library leaders, that most of the “vision” I see in the library field is just an expansion of what already exists. Building on our strengths is a great thing, but it is a different thing than having a vision towards which to build our future.

Who is our Henry Ford, our Steve Jobs? Who is leading us to a place where libraries will thrive and succeed in an uncertain future? Some may argue that we don’t need visionaries to lead us, but I disagree. Most of us work day to day with our heads down, just trying to get everything done. We need leaders who have the time and space to be constantly looking ahead, watching the clouds, and anticipating the storms and sunshine to come.

Looking Forward

I don’t have the answers — only a lot of questions. It seems to me that the first thing to ask is what we want libraries to be in the future. Or would it be better phrased to ask what our students want libraries to be in the future? Do we serve our students best if we turn libraries into learning centers combined with various other campus units? From my admittedly inexperienced perspective, and considering the state of the economy, I can see this road leading us towards a place of campus mergers. Putting our instinct for self-preservation aside, is an eventual merger of the library, IT department, and (potentially) other offices desirable? Students might love it, as it will avoid their being redirected multiple times to the office that “handles that,” but will it be the best way to serve their information needs?

Of course we must balance what we want for libraries with what is possible, considering the changes in technology and learning that are still happening. We can’t predict where learning theory may take us next, but I learned while at The University of Arizona that sitting around and waiting for the future to take us somewhere is an exercise in failure. Peter Drucker and other great management gurus encourage us to take control of our future by constantly assessing our successes and failures, experimenting with new innovations, and shedding those aspects of our work that don’t measure up.

I like to consider what our libraries would look like if we tore them all down, erased our memories, and rebuilt them from the ground up. No doubt we would focus first on what our patrons need and use. Not books, that’s for sure — forget about print. Computers and software, yes, but everything will have to be wireless so buy up those laptops. Online resources for sure, but reconfigured in simpler ways. We may still buy academic databases, but now that we’re cross-trained as IT specialists we’ll build our own search engines that cross all of our various information platforms seamlessly. Our buildings will be full of flexible social spaces that can be used for teaching, gaming, group work, and just hanging out with friends. We’re not going to design around the needs of computers anymore. We’ll share building space with the writing center, coffee shop, tutoring, business center, and maybe others. Perhaps we’ll be a big educational mall. WalLibrary. LibraryMart.

Overall, our libraries are innovative and ever seeking improvement, but let’s face it: we’re turtles among a race of hares when it comes to moving with the times. We grab onto new technologies eagerly, but don’t know what to do with them or how to use them effectively. We’re just starting to understand that assessment is important. If we’re honest with ourselves, we know that as a whole we move too slowly. And while it may get us somewhere faster, riding along in somebody else’s train may or may not take us where we want to be.

I hear a little shrillness in the voices of many librarians who speak or write about the future. We argue with the world at large, insisting that not everything is available online, that libraries are not going out of business. We are insecure about our future and whether we’ll have jobs in ten or twenty years. I appreciate the optimism of those who are prepared to evolve with what comes, but I think that is missing the point a little bit. We should not just adapt to fit our changing present, but plan ahead and prepare and take the future by the throat saying, “Throw at me what surprises you will, I am ready for you!”

Who are our visionaries, who is leading this charge of libraries into the future? I’m really asking you, ItLwtLP reader, because I don’t know. I would love to hear about your vision and those you think visionary in the comments below. Perhaps if we put our heads together, we’ll start to see a little glimmer of what’s down the road for us.

Thanks to Ellie Collier, Emily Ford, and Tom Hillard for offering feedback on a draft of this post.

Welcome to another guest post at ItLwtLP. This time we bring you thoughts from Carrie Donovan, an instruction librarian at Indiana University Bloomington. Enjoy!

#307: Authenticity by assbach / CC-BY

Once upon a time in libraries, you could call yourself a good teacher if you spent more than 30 minutes planning a lesson, if you wowed students with your search savvy, or if nobody fell asleep during your presentation. With the growth of instructional initiatives and influence across libraries of all kinds, however, expectations for librarians to develop teaching expertise have heightened. Librarians who teach now find themselves faced with the demand to connect with students, to make libraries and information literacy knowledge meaningful, and to create learning opportunities that are memorable and long-lasting. Such a shift in expectations calls for teacher behavior that is purposeful, mindful, and rooted in the self. Transformation of this sort does not come easy, nor does it happen magically. For those in search of a true teacher identity, authenticity will serve as the best guide.

In order to create the dynamic and engaging environments that are becoming the norm among library instruction and information literacy programs, librarians rely on the participation and interest of their audience to co-construct learning. This type of dialogue requires an open and honest classroom environment in which the librarian is a facilitator and guide for learners as they discover the world of information. In asking students to be present and participatory, we must respond by bringing our own professional and personal wealth of knowledge and experience to the conversation. Putting away the “persona” of teacher and disclosing more of the personal will allow for meaningful interactions with students, increased student involvement, and memorable classroom experiences. From Roger Schank (1990), we learn that keeping up our end of this dialogue means introducing our experience and our emotions into teaching opportunities in surprising and story-driven ways. Based in real-world experiences, stories allow us to share with each other, while also making sense of the world around us as we interact with it. The Schankian application of storytelling to create a direct connection to students’ dynamic memory can also be useful for teachers in the quest to become more personable and approachable to students.

The Paradox of Teaching

Talking about bringing your real self into the classroom is one thing, doing it is another thing entirely. Especially when one considers the following paradox: as teachers, we employ many of the techniques of actors, but in order to be most effective, our teaching must not be artificial. For anyone who teaches regularly, it’s easy to recognize the aspects of teaching that are similar to acting: the preparation, the practice, the warming-up of vocals, the nerves, the sweaty palms, and the vulnerability that comes with setting oneself up for approval or disapproval. In addition, teachers, like actors, often summon a charm or dynamism from within, in order to exude a presence and authority over the purpose and direction of the content for their audience.

After library instruction, I’ve had students say to me, amazed, “Gosh, you really *love* the library, don’t you?” Okay, so maybe I’m a much more enthusiastic person when I teach than I am otherwise, but I’m hopeful that my teacherly self, while a slightly more dynamic version of myself, still comes from an authentic place. If I can surprise, intrigue, or engage students because I present the shiny side of myself when teaching, I’ll do it. Becoming the most special and charming version of one’s self takes some preparation, of course, one cannot just go into the classroom cold. You have to warm up, just like actors and athletes. For example, I had a ritual with my former office-mate that entailed jazz hands and dance moves as a precursor to teaching. Nowadays, my graduate assistant and I joke about putting on our “instruction face,” which usually involves eyebrows up and a big smile. The confidence and giddiness that comes with these warm-up activities can help quell the nerves and fears that sometimes haunt teachers.

Most librarians, even those of us who are devoted to teaching, will admit that many of the same challenges that actors face in terms of stage fright also plague teachers from time to time. After ten years of teaching in libraries, I almost always feel anxious and frightened prior to any type of instruction. To overcome my fear of public speaking as a novice teacher, I started using sarcasm as a coping mechanism. Sarcasm, I have discovered, does not translate well to the classroom setting and put me in complete opposition with my authentic self. Letting go of this crutch has not been easy, but it has been necessary to the successful development of my teacher identity. Without that barrier between myself and the students, teaching and learning experiences have become more open and egalitarian, so that now we share in the vulnerability and the anxiety, as well as the benefits and opportunity that come with it.

While I still rely a lot on sarcasm outside the classroom, I no longer use it to appear fearless. In fact, I think fearlessness among teachers is highly overrated. It’s the adrenaline that comes with my stage fright that is almost like a drug to me, it keeps me coming back into the classroom. Having acknowledged that it will most likely always be a part of my teacher identity, I can now use the rush and the motivational force of my fear to become better at my craft. R.W. Hanning (1984) compares the experience of stepping into the classroom (the start of the performance) to stepping over a threshold and in doing so, we must face our fears and meet the challenges that await us.

Although there are many elements of teaching that are similar to acting, that is not to say that we should seek to be entertainers. Neil Postman warns us about this in his book Teaching as a Conserving Activity (1979) as he discusses the use of multimedia and technology in the classroom. While librarians have some of the best technology tools to teach and to aid in our teaching, we can be true to our teacher identities by relying on our primary instrument, ourselves. We should never be phony or rely too much on props or personas, but instead, we should strive to find the authentic place within from which to direct our teaching. That authenticity will evolve and change depending on the topic, audience, and situation of the day. As teachers, we should be willing to accept the risky nature of this activity and embrace the tension that exists between teaching from a place of authority, while also sharing of ourselves in such an authentic way that we become vulnerable.

Becoming Authentic

OK, so, how does one do this? Can authenticity be learned? The answer is both yes and no. We’ve all had great teachers and memorable learning experiences that shape our construct of what good teaching should be and what it looks like. What makes authenticity in teaching so elusive and slippery is that we cannot simply adopt those approaches as our own and expect them to work just as well. Instead, we must know ourselves well enough to identify our own personal qualities and wisdom and allow those to shape a unique approach to teaching that is true and relevant for us, that comes from a place within us that is real.

Teacher personality has been identified by several studies as a powerful component to effective teaching, more important even than intelligence, in some cases. When associated with personality traits, Laursen (2005) measured authenticity by looking at the extent to which teachers view students as fellow human beings, whether or not the teacher hides behind a detached persona, and how often/much teachers view themselves, as well as students, with intentions, emotions, and interests that are uniquely their own.

The difficult truth that must be acknowledged is that some teachers have a charisma and, as Malcolm Gladwell labels it, withitness, that is innate; thereby giving a natural spark to their teaching. For those of us who are accustomed to expecting results from hard work and practice rather than talent or personality, good teaching is also achievable, but it may not come as easily or inherently. But for those who want to try, the rewards are immeasurable. Just watch any film about teaching to understand what I’m talking about.

In his book, The Courage to Teach, Parker Palmer (1998) discusses identity as the evolution of all the forces that come together to form a person, including: background, culture, experience, and anything else that shapes the self. Recognizing that we bring all of these aspects of ourselves to everything we do, including our instructional activities, is key to finding your teaching identity. Librarians have pursued neutrality for a long time in their provision of organized and accessible information and knowledge, but this philosophy does not serve us well in the classroom. As teachers, we must acknowledge that neutrality is unrealistic and unattainable, and by seeking it we are only doing a disservice to our learners. If we define learning as the ability to think for oneself and information literacy as the knowledge and skills to be thoughtful consumers and creators of information, then we should embrace our teaching as an opportunity to help learners recognize, understand, and question perspectives and ideologies that they encounter in information seeking.

Critical theory, as described by Powell, Cantrell, and Adams (2001), provides an excellent framework for integrating one’s teacherly identity into instruction in order to create opportunities for enhanced student learning and empowerment. Letting go of the notion that information is neutral and that we should teach information literacy or library instruction from a neutral position will allow us to provide a context to our teaching based on experience, perception, and meaning. For teaching to be memorable and meaningful, it must come from the true self and from a willingness to share the beliefs, values, and perspectives that shape it. Espousing this type of behavior in ourselves will encourage our learners to examine what shapes their identity, thereby creating opportunities for learning surrounding the questions and curiosities that arise as a result of self-disclosure, self-awareness, and self-examination.

Patricia Cranton, author of Becoming an Authentic Teacher in Higher Education (2001), presents strategies for understanding the “Self” in order to arrive at a personal and professional identity that intersects at teaching. In addition to reminding us of all the attributes that are indicators of great teachers, Cranton offers step-by-step approaches for identifying ways of discovering and disclosing your authentic self in the classroom and how to live with the benefits, as well as the fallout. Some of these steps include: understanding values and experience, merging self and teacher, telling your story, connecting with students, and knowing your critics. I like Cranton’s text as a complement to Palmer’s, as it is less inspirational and more practical. Sometimes librarians need that.

Sounds easy enough, right? To be authentic, just know yourself and be yourself! Right! However, there are many ways that this can go wrong. Students may not be accustomed to having teachers who are forthcoming with the personal aspects of themselves. They may misinterpret a teacher who is approachable as someone who is attempting to “be a friend”. Successful teaching still depends a great deal on relationship-building and students may feel annoyed or alienated by teacher self-disclosure. As with any relationship, teachers and students must seek a balance through trust-building and negotiation that allows for a teacher’s identity and authority to co-exist with students’ learning expectations and goals.

Despite the dangers and difficulties, it has been my experience that most students are open to recognizing teachers as being whole people who possess knowledge, experience, and interests that extend beyond the realm of the academy. I was pleased to see this corroborated in two studies. In 1994, Goldstein and Benassi looked at in-class participation by students and the effect of teachers’ self-disclosure on it. Upon examining students’ participation in class discussion, the number of questions asked, and the willingness to express opinions and feelings in class, the study concluded that teacher self-disclosure was positively correlated with the amount of class participation by students. Similarly, a recent study conducted by Mazer, Murphy, and Simonds (2009) looked at teacher self-disclosure in the social networking site, facebook. These researchers found that instructors who strategically share personal information (e.g. photos, interests, quotes, status, etc.) positively influenced their students’ perceptions of the teacher’s credibility, specifically competence and trustworthiness. Allowing students the opportunity to recognize similarities between themselves and their teachers, in addition to seeing teachers as people, with lives beyond the classroom, could contribute to the creation of the types of open, honest environments that encourage dialogue, participation, sharing, and ultimately – learning.

Beyond Teaching

Knowing and incorporating one’s authentic self into other areas of work can also result in great success. In leadership, librarians who stand for something and communicate their values demonstrate integrity and credibility. Robert Evans, in Educational Leadership (2007), describes the characteristics of authentic leaders as: vision, personal ethics, and belief in others. Just as when you think of great teachers you’ve had, you can probably also think of great leaders you’ve worked with who not only have a strong sense of self and inner direction, but also share it openly with those around them. This awareness and disclosure of self establishes a culture of honesty, trust, and fairness that is central to creating a common vision and shared commitment in any organization.

Down to You

Authenticity. Something that is so central to the success of one’s craft could take an entire career to cultivate, without ever truly reaching the pinnacle of achievement. But, librarians out there, if you’re anything like me, you revel in your teaching escapades because they are the one aspect of the job that is challenging beyond all expectation, shaking both body and soul, and making you all-around better and stronger. If it were easy, everybody would do it. But teaching, like so many things that are worthwhile, will break you down before it charges you up. It offers up the sweetest rewards for those who are willing to take the hardest hits. Nobody could do it really well without the reality and rawness that comes with self-disclosure, which can be at times a breathtaking walk on a tightrope and, at others, a freefalling leap of faith.

Librarians who are bold enough to develop their inner teacher will connect more deeply with learners and participate more fully in the learning process. Our authenticity will extend beyond classroom encounters to influence the teaching practices of our library colleagues and impact the instructional role of our libraries. With the potential to enhance student learning and increase the relevance of libraries to the teaching and learning continuum, authentic teachers have the opportunity to guide and lead our profession to new heights. As we pursue this path to teacherly identity, let’s be truthful, take risks, and follow our hearts. Remembering all the while, of course, that teaching is not about us, it’s about our students and their learning, as well as our libraries and their future.

If you’re a teacher who has sought out or achieved authenticity, please share your experiences, comments, failures, and successes. I look forward to hearing from you.

Recommended/Further Readings:

• Cranton, P. (2001). Becoming an authentic teacher in higher education. Malabar, FL: Krieger Publishing Co.
• Elmborg, J. (2006). Critical information literacy: Implications for instructional practice. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 32(2): 192-199.
• Evans, R. (2007). The authentic leader. In The Jossey-Bass reader on educational leadership (2^nd ed.). (pp. 135-156). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
• Gladwell, M. (2008, December 15). Most likely to succeed: How do we hire when we can’t tell who’s right for the job? The New Yorker, 36.
• Goldstein, G. & Benassi, V. (1994). The relation between teacher self-disclosure and student classroom participation. Teaching of Psychology, 21(4): 212-217.
• Hanning, R.W. (1984). The classroom as theater of self: Some observations for beginning teachers. ADE Bulletin, 077, 33-37.
• Laursen, P. (2005). The authentic teacher. In D. Beijaard, P. Meijer, G. Morine-Dershimer, & H. Tillema. (Eds.). Teacher professional development in changing conditions. (pp. 199-212). New York: Springer.
• Mazer, J., Murphy, R., & Simonds, C. (2009). The effects of teacher self-disclosure via facebook on teacher credibility. Learning, Media and Technology, 34(2): 175-183.
• Palmer, P. (1998). The courage to teach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Postman, N. (1979). Teaching as a conserving activity. New York: Delacorte Press.
• Powell, R., Cantrell, S.C., & Adams, S. (2001). Saving Black Mountain: The promise of critical literacy in a multicultural democracy. The Reading Teacher, 54(8): 772-781.
• Schank, R. (1990). Tell me a story: A new look at real and artificial memory. New York: Scribner.

Recommended Viewing:

• Dead Poets Society
• Emperor’s Club
• Finding Forrester
• The Karate Kid
• Miracle Worker
• School of Rock
• Spellbound

I would like to thank Emily Ford for inviting me to reflect on my teaching identity in order to write this piece and for being an inspiration to radical librarians everywhere. Also, thanks to Randy Hensley, who first challenged me to tap into my authentic self at ACRL’s Immersion program in 2003 and to my friends Jennifer & April who have been my instructional support system (and cynical touchstones) ever since that time.

Special shout-out goes to all the IU-SLIS Instruction Assistants and students in S573, past and present, who make teaching and discussions surrounding teaching a pure joy (especially Rachel Slough for her endless enthusiasm and willingness to serve as my reviewer on this project).

This post is dedicated to my mom, Gloria Donovan, the most authentic teacher I’ve ever known.