Employers in the field of library and information science seek a range of “soft” or generic skills, such as flexibility and interpersonal skills, along with domain-specific knowledge and skills. Certain skills, including writing skills, time management, conflict resolution and skills associated with job-hunting such as resume-writing and interviewing, are often grouped together as “professional skills.” Studies show that LIS employers value these skills highly (Partridge, Lee & Munroe, 2010; Saunders, 2019) and indicate they have troublefinding job applicants who adequately demonstrate these skills (Saunders & Bajjaly, 2022).
 Recently some critics (Gray, 2019; Race Forward, 2019) have challenged such skills as being encoded in whiteness, in a way that “discriminates against non-Western, and non-white professionalism standards"(Gray, 2019). Describing how whiteness is reflected in standards related to spoken and written language, dress codes, and timeliness, Gray notes that people of color, women, and people with disabilities are more likely to be disadvantaged by such standards and more likely to be denied jobs and promotions and face discrimination and microaggressions because of them. Such skills are often viewed through an individualistic frame, so if individuals do not meet the standards it is seen as failing or a deficit, rather than the result of oppressive systems whereby some communities have less access to the means of developing or meeting professional standards, including access to education, transportation, and social or community support (Race Forward, 2019). 
 This tension between employers’ expectations for professional skills and emerging recognition of the ways in which standards for professionalism might be marginalizing puts LIS faculty in a challenging position. On one hand, we have an obligation to our students and their future employers to adequately prepare them for the workplace, but on the other hand, we do not want to endorse and perpetuate problematic systems. What is our responsibility to students and employers with regard to instruction in professional skills? What are our current understandings of these skills both as workplace standards and as potentially oppressive systems? To what extent can we balance our obligations to prepare students with our obligations to critically reflect on and challenge some of these standards? The purpose of this panel is to raise questions about instruction for professional skills in LIS programs and to initiate a critical conversation about our understanding of these skills and how we might approach instruction in these skills in more empathetic and equitable ways.
 The panel is composed of four full-time faculty teaching a variety of LIS courses in three different programs. The panel will examine professionalism through a lens of equity, diversity, and inclusion, including discussing what is meant by professionalism, and how some conceptualizations might disproportionately disadvantage already marginalized communities. Panelists will then examine the areas of professional writing, flexibility, time management, and communication in more depth, including how they function in the workplace and the critical questions or challenges raised about how these skills might be disadvantaging or inequitable. These areas were chosen both because they emerged in previous research as areas of concern among LIS hiring managers (Saunders & Bajjaly, 2022; Saunders, 2019) and because they are areas to which the panelists have given considerable attention in their own courses. The panelists will discuss how they have approached these skills in the classroom, including questions or concerns they have about teaching to these skills, and ways in which their approaches have changed over time. The panel format allows for each presenter to give in-depth attention to one skill area, including offering detailed reflections on how they have addressed this skill in their classes, and what concerns or questions they have about emphasizing that skill as an area of professionalism. The panel presentation will conclude with a set of reflective questions for an interactive discussion with the audience. Audience members will be asked to reflect on their own experiences with professional standards and teaching to these skills, and to share questions, concerns, and classroom approaches. This interactive panel is meant to model a community of practice approach, with both attendees and panel members sharing expertise and experiences.
 
 References
 Gray, A. (2019). The bias of ‘professionalism’ standards. Stanford Social Innovation Review. https://ssir.org/articles/entry/the_bias_of_professionalism_standards#
 Partridge, H., Lee, J., & Munro, C. (2010). Becoming ‘librarian 2.0’: The skills, knowledge, and attributes required by library and information science professionals in a web 2.0 world (and beyond). Library Trends, 59(1/2), 315-335. Retrieved from https://muse-jhu-edu.ezproxy.simmons.edu/article/407820/pdf
 Race Forward. (2019). Beyond training and the “skills gap”: Research and recommendations for racially equitable communications in workforce development. https://www.raceforward.org/research/reports/research-and-recommendations-racially-equitable-communications-workforce
 Saunders, L. & Bajjaly, S. (2022). The importance of soft skills to LIS education. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science 63(2), 187-215. https://doi.org/10.3138/jelis-2020-0053
 Saunders, L. (2019). Core and more: Examining foundational and specialized content in library and information science. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 60(1), 3-34.
Search from 250 M+ research papersSearch from 250 M+ research papers
Open Access
Just Published
Oct 16, 2024
Stan Trembach 
