Another Structuring of Library Science for the Education of Librarians

Abstract

I HAVE NOT here argued that generalists are needed (or will be needed) in libraries, any more than specialists. By implication I have said that our basic courses must, of necessity, in a first year, be general, at least in respect to libraries. As a study of history, or communities, or theory of knowledge, there is specialism, but npt in kinds of libraries. The argument is for an interdisciplinary education. The implication is also there that, by nature, man tends to specialize; thus there are lectures for faculty specialization, and independent study for student specialization. The argument that library education must be for generalists is somehow based on the phenomenon that most librarians move from specialty to specialty from cataloging to administration, from public library to school library. The years that pass between these changes would, I believe, negate most of the specific knowledge gained from any general or special courses taken years before at library school. Constant updating after graduation is a necessity in any field, and re-education for new responsibilities is normal. What we must aim at providing is an introduction to the profession in an intellectually and emotionally satisfying program. To do so we must provide a variety of learning experiences (seminars, large and small, lectures, independent study, research, and