ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries


24 / C&RL News ■ January 2003

NEW REALITIES, 
NEW RELATIONSHIPS

New relationships in academe

Opportunities for vitality and relevance

by Donald G. Frank and Elizabeth Howell

T he vitality and relevance of academic librar­ies are increasingly at risk. Faculty and stu­
dents on campuses do not necessarily view librar­
ies and information centers as the place to go to 
obtain information for instructional and scholarly 
needs. In “The Deserted Library,”1 the author notes 
that gate counts and the circulation o f traditional 
materials are falling in academic libraries across 
the nation as students migrate to study spaces in 
apartments or dormitory rooms, coffee shops, or 
nearby bookstores. At the same time, use o f elec­
tronic resources continues to increase dramati­
cally.

Libraries are being used differently. It is not 
necessary to come into libraries to succeed in aca­
deme. Still, the opportunities for academic librar­
ies to b e  dynamic and vital organizational ele­
ments on their campuses are numerous. The abil­
ity to seek new  or innovative relationships on 
campuses underscores success and vitality for aca­
demic librarians and libraries.

This article advocates the use of the proactive 
consulting model and explores the nature o f the 
relationships with a changing professoriate. New 
relationships with “old” partners as well as “new” 
partners are discussed.

Librarians need to progress from the basically 
passive liaison model to the proactive consulting 
model, getting out o f their libraries and becoming

in forma tio n  consultants. Consultants work closely 
with students and scholars in their offices, labora­
tories, and classrooms. Dynamic and vital bridges 
are developed with the community o f scholars, 
facilitating an essential integration into the in­
structional and scholarly fabric. Additionally, in­
formation professionals are working with differ­
ent generations o f scholars whose perspectives 
differ from those o f their predecessors.

The c h an g in g  p ro fe sso ria te : 
O p p o rtu n itie s fo r n e w  re la tio n sh ip s
Higher education is currently exp eriencing a 
dramatic influx o f a new generation o f faculty. 
These professors, generally referred to as Gen­
eration X  scholars, have different skill sets (in­
cluding technical skills), philosophies o f learn­
ing, and p ed agogical ap p roach es. O ngoing 
changes in higher education are moving co l­
leges and universities toward a learning-cen­
tered m odel o f instruction, w ith ou tco m es- 
based assessment at the model’s core. Librarians 
are responding to these system ic changes in 
academe. Changing roles for librarians as col­
laborators, integrators, instructional designers, 
and inform ation consultan ts as w ell as new  
models o f instructional delivery and assessment 
o f student learn in g n e ce ssita te  no t only in­
creased faculty-librarian contact, but also dra­

About th e authors

Donald G. Frank is assistant director for public services, e-maií: frankd@pdx.edu and Elizabeth Howell is business administration 
librarian and coordinator o f  faculty outreach a t Millar Library a t Portand State University, e-mail: howell@pdx.edu

mailto:irankd@pdx.edu
mailto:howell@pdx.edu


C&RL News ■ January 2003 / 25

matic changes in the nature of faculty-librarian 
relationships.

To discuss the changing nature o f faculty-li­
brarian relationships, it is useful to examine the 
classic or traditional model of the modem era. In 
the variations o f this model, the work o f the 
faculty and the work o f the librarian have been 
basically distinct or discrete, but have increasingly 
merged or coalesced in areas of instructional de­
livery, assessment o f student learning, and other 
scholarly activities. Recent emphasis on informa­
tion literacy and the ongoing reexamination of 
the role and responsibilities o f academic librar­
ians in teaching and learning in the academy are 
intensifying the faculty-librarian coalescence. Still, 
the overall faculty-librarian relationship tends to 
b e information- or resources-based, or within the 
constraints of discipline-based expertise, as such 
expertise is usually valued more than broader skill 
sets that are more generalizable.

Postmodern faculty, motivated by differing so­
cial and educational experiences, have different 
approaches to teaching and learning. These schol­
ars tend to be technologically savvy and pedagogi­
cally experimental. Interested in interdisciplinary 
scholarship, they are comfortable crossing tradi­
tional boundaries. They are also media savvy and 
do not limit themselves to traditional modes of 
dissemination o f information or knowledge, us­
ing Web sites or Web pages, e-mail, zines, and 
electronic journals routinely. They tend to be more 
comfortable with varied or multiple perspectives 
as well as ambiguous or chaotic situations. Work 
styles are collaborative and “playful,” and teach­
ing and interactions with students occasionally 
exist outside the limitations o f the time and space 
allowed by the traditional classroom. They are 
reflective, perceiving or sensing value in studying 
and disseminating experiences o f reflection via 
the “scholarship of teaching” movement.

In addition to their technical orientation, they 
have the “ability to bring together seemingly unre­
lated elements from diverse information resources. 
This talent results in creative solutions to prob­
lems and comfort with competition, a reality that 
many traditional librarians are not prepared to 
face.” They tend to be less hierarchical and are 
more open to collaborations with colleagues at all 
levels of the college or university. Their definition 
o f “faculty” expands to include others teaching or 
participating in academe (consultants, instructional 
designers, or other specialists assisting with the 
creation and dissemination o f content).2

In “The Postmodern Library in an Age of As­

sessment,” Kathlin Ray suggests a dichotomy of 
descriptors for faculty and librarians in the mod­
em  and postmodern eras. Modem faculty and li­
brarians tend to be more comfortable with sta­
bility while postmodern professionals generally 
prefer fluidity in interactions, organizations, and 
information seeking. Certainty is preferred by mod­
em  faculty and librarians while postmodern pro­
fessionals feel more comfortable with uncertainty. 
The modem scholar leans toward distance while 
the postmodern scholar seeks participation. De­
sign and totalization are generally preferred by 
modem professionals while postmodern profes­
sionals feel more comfortable with chance and 
deconstruction. Modem faculty and librarians lean 
toward the individual and determinacy while 
postmodern professionals tend to be more com­
fortable with relationships and interdeterminacy. 
In particular, the transition from modern to 
postmodern is underscored by a progression from 
analysis to synthesis and a progression from con­
trol to integration, with learning as the critical 
organizing principle.3

It is important to note that the above descrip­
tors are indicators of patterns and trends in the 
transition from modern to postmodern. It is not 
an attempt to classify or categorize professionals 
or libraries. In particular, the descriptors are in­
dicative of possible differences in cultures or gen­
erations. Professionals may be or leaning toward 
modem, postmodern, or both. In general, librar­
ians are increasingly likely to be working with 
other librarians and with faculty who are more 
comfortable with ambiguity, collaboration, un­
certainty, chaos, and fluid systems. They are inte­
grators, focused on learning, and uncomfortable 
with control. Expertise expands beyond discipline- 
based specialties to include a variety of practical 
and flexible skill sets. Academe’s learning commu­
nities, for example, are dynamic, interactive, some­
what ambiguous, focused on learning, and basi­
cally reflect the ideals and approaches o f these 
scholars.

Librarians as information consultants: 
A key to successful new  relationships
Academic librarians need to be assertive informa­
tion consultants, conferring and collaborating with 
faculty as full partners. Integrating information 
literacy into all relevant curricular options neces­
sitates ongoing faculty-librarian collaborations in 
which courses and programs are planned and de­
signed. Information consulting connotes activity 
as opposed to passive liaison models.



26 / C&RL News ■ January 2003

T h e inform ation co n su ltan t's su cce ss is 
based on several attributes or characteristics. 
Consultants are credible, with appropriate aca­
demic credentials, including graduate degrees. 
A philosophy o f continuous learning is culti­
vated and promoted. Consultants appreciate 
and understand the utility and complexities of 
information and are able to m anage informa­
tion effectively. They focus on content, with 
value-added information tailored or custom ­
ized for scholars. T h e delivery o f co ntent is 
em phasized over the delivery o f documents. 
Consultants are optimistic. Problematic situations 
are viewed as opportunities to move ahead.

Consultants are assertive communicators. They 
listen actively, examine complex variables, and 
use analytical and interpretive skills to make in­
formed decisions. In particular, they are advo­
cates for the information needs of a specific clien­
tele. Consultants are able to promote or market 
information services and are public relations spe­
cialists. Creativity and innovation are valued by 
information consultants. They prefer and seek or­
ganizational cultures in which creative risks are 
supported. Consultants work effectively on cross­
functional teams composed o f students and schol­
ars from various disciplines. They are collegial and 
able to attain mutually formulated goals. Consult­
ants are effective negotiators, possessing the po­
litical skills needed to w ork with differing or 
contradictory requirements of multiple constitu­
encies. They are also aware o f the political reali­
ties in libraries and on campuses. Consultants are 
comfortable with ambiguous or chaotic situations 
and also with uncertainty. Consultants are, in par­
ticular, proactive facilitators. They are not loca­
tion-dependent and are actively involved in the 
community o f scholars. As proactive facilitators, 
consultants do not wait for ideal conditions. They 
assess current conditions, make informed deci­
sions, taking creative risks as needed, and move 
ahead expeditiously. 4

The information consultant also focuses on 
the process of learning, working closely with fac­
ulty to develop and shape student learning experi­
ences at all levels, including the development of 
course or programmatic content, the introduction 
and integration of the key elements o f informa­
tion literacy, and the application o f realistic or 
meaningful problems. Curricula are shaped and 
influenced by these collaborations. Instructional 
designers, distance or distributed education spe­
cialists, and other computer/systems profession­
als also contribute.

N ew  re la tio n sh ip s w it h  o ld  and n e w  
partners
The move to a consulting model affects relation­
ships with existing partners. Librarians work with 
systems specialists in computer centers to facili­
tate the delivery o f information services and in­
structional content to students on and off cam­
puses. Librarians also collaborate with computing 
specialists to develop sophisticated e-reference and 
e-collections, middleware for digital libraries, and 
other information architectures. As roles and re­
sponsibilities of academic libraries and computer 
centers are occasionally blurred and confused, 
ongoing clarifications o f relationships is neces­
sary.’’

New relationships with new partners are par­
ticularly important and reflect ongoing changes in 
academe. The new partners include relatively new 
librarians and faculty, students, assessment spe­
cialists, centers o f academic excellence, instruc­
tional designers, and specialists focusing on dis­
tance education and distributed learning. Rela­
tively new librarians and faculty are likely to view 
academic librarians as information consultants, 
collaborators in the processes o f teaching and 
learning, and full partners in scholarly processes. 
They do not view academic libraries as reposito­
ries and are aware o f and seek information re­
sources not available in libraries or on campuses.

Connections or relationships with students are 
also changing dramatically. Students are particu­
larly comfortable with Web-based information as 
well as virtual reference services and instructional 
content delivered via technologies. Librarians are 
now consulting and “chatting” with students in 
real-time reference services, interactive chatrooms, 
and threaded discussion forums, in addition to 
face-to-face interaction.

As colleges and universities move toward cre­
ating “cultures o f assessment” in which learning 
outcomes become driving forces for curricular and 
programmatic changes, academic librarians have 
opportunities to provide input into what is being 
assessed across the curriculum and how informa­
tion literacy fits into that assessment. Assessment 
is a doorway to a more fully integrated curricu­
lum. As a result, it is essential that on e o f the 
“new” partners be those faculty and administra­
tors involved with campus assessment. Ongoing 
relationships with centers of academic excellence 
also provide opportunities to integrate academic 
libraries into important activities and programs 
associated with excellence in teaching and learn­
ing.



C&RL News ■ January 2003 / 27

As distance education and distributed learning 
have become integral elements of the educational 
process in academe, information professionals are 
collaborating with specialists, including instruc­
tional designers, to provide reference services and 
instructional content to distributed sites. Librar­
ians are communicating with instructional design­
ers, emphasizing the importance and role of aca­
demic libraries in the delivery of relevant content 
in the online environment. Instructional designers 
become advocates for the inclusion o f libraries 
and information resources in distance education 
courses and also provide the necessary expertise 
to integrate information literacy instruction into 
these courses in ways that are meaningful and seam­
less. Pedagogical issues unique to the online envi­
ronment are discussed and refined in these new 
relationships.

Im p lic a tio n s o f th e  N ew  
R e latio n sh ip s
New relationships necessitate ongoing changes in 
attitudes, approaches, and organizational cultures. 
As the professoriate’s information-seeking behav­
iors and practices continue to evolve, academic 
librarians need to continually acknowledge these 
changes, reshaping or restructuring information 
and instructional services. As a result, strategic 
priorities are affected and need to be flexible as 
these changes are indicative of ongoing transi­
tions. Managers and information professionals in 
general need to rethink and redo within a strategic 
context as roles, responsibilities, and methodolo­
gies are continually assessed.

Organizational cultures in academic libraries 
are changing dramatically as well and will con­
tinue to evolve. The behaviors and patterns con­
stituting cultures are being affected by a positive 
fusion of different generations, including attitudes, 
assumptions, and expertise in libraries and on cam­
puses. Librarians as assertive consultants are re­
shaping communications with faculty, permeating

traditional or historical boundaries, collaborating 
and allowing creativity and innovation to develop. 
Librarians have always cultivated relationships on 
campuses, but the nature of these relationships is 
changing to reflect new and dynamic learning en­
vironments, new and different generations of fac­
ulty, and new ways to deliver information services 
and instructional content.

The diversity of cultures, generations, exper­
tise, ideas, and approaches in academic librarianship 
facilitates effective communications with the 
changing professoriate. This positive fusion un­
derscores an effective integration into academe’s 
instructional and scholarly fabric.

R eferences
1. Scott Carlson, “The Deserted Library.” 

Chronicle o f H igher Education (November 16, 2001): 
A35-38.

2. Julie F. Cooper and Eric A. Cooper, “Gen­
erational Dynamics and Librarianship: Managing 
Generation X.” Illin ois L ibraries 80 (Winter 1998): 
18-21. See also Andrew Brownstein, “The Next 
Great Generation?” C hronicle o f  H igherE ducation 
(October 13, 2000): A71-72.

3. Kathlin L. Ray, “The Postmodern Library in 
an Age of Assessment.” Crossing the D ivide: P ro­
ceeding o f  the 10th N ationalC onference o f  theA ssocia­
tion  o f  C ollege a n d  R esearch L ibraries (Chicago: 
American Library Association, 2001).

4. Donald G. Frank, Gregory  Raschke, Julie 
Wood, and Julie Yang, “Information Consulting: 
The Key to Success in Academic Libraries.” Jo u r­
n a l o f  A cad em ic L ibrarian sh ip 27 (March 2001): 
90-96. See also Donald G. Frank and Elizabeth 
Howell, “Information Consulting in Academe.” 
Encyclopedia o f  Library a n d  In form ation  S cien ce 
(New York: Marcel Dekker). Forthcoming in 
2003.

5. Barbara Baruth, “Missing Pieces That Fill 
in the Academic Library Puzzle.” A m erican  Li­
b r a r ie s 3 3 (June/July 2002): 58-63. ■

( “Gettingc ited,”c ontinued f rom page 23) 
colons; that shows the importance o f a work 
which has significant titular colonicity (and 
on e sem icolon ),” S eria ls L ib r a r ia n  26, no. 1 
(1 9 9 5 ): 1 3 -1 5 ; J . A. Perry, “T he Dillon Hy­
pothesis of titular colonicity: An empirical test 
from the ecological scien ces,” J o u r n a l o f  th e 
A m erican Societyf o r  In form ation  S cien ce 36, no. 4 
(1985): 251-8; and Donna Diers and Florence
S. Downs, “Colonizing: A Measurement of the

Developm ent o f a P rofession,” N u rsin g R e­
s e a r c h  43, no. 5 (September/October 1994): 
31 6 -1 8 . Note that a search in Medline using 
Silverplatter failed to find this last article when 
I used the term “colonicity” since the article 
has no abstract and the term is not in the title. 
Searching using truncation, with the term “co ­
lon*” would not be not advisable in a medical 
database, where the word has a very different 
meaning. ■