As we prepare for a transition in senior leadership, I’ve been trying to carefully and concisely document the current state of the Library, particularly our planning efforts.  Throughout the fall semester, I’ve been in conversation with a variety of faculty and staff about the direction we are headed in the Library. (Garth Green and Vika Zafrin have been particularly helpful conversation partners.) I decided it was time to articulate some of the basic assumptions that are foundational for our planning.

A primary goal of my work as Head Librarian is to guide the Theology Library to develop collections and services appropriate for the 21st century. The Library was a good 20th century library, but the context in which we work has radically changed. The Library needs to change as well. Three assumptions guide our effort to refocus and restructure the Library.

The Library’s primary purposes are pedagogy and the creation of knowledge.  Collection development was our primary pedagogical tool. We collected, cataloged, and shelved those books deemed essential for student learning and scholarly research. Students and scholars read those books in the physical context of a well-focused and intellectually defined collection. We assumed that the physical collection of the Library essentially defined what information was available to students (and faculty).  That assumption is no longer valid. We continue to assume that pedagogy and the creation of knowledge remain the primary reasons the Library exists, though collection development as it has traditionally been understood is no longer the Library’s primary pedagogical tool, nor the best measure of the Library’s contribution to the learning that takes place at STH. We need to develop new means to accomplish and measure the Library’s pedagogical mission.

Knowledge is created in conversation. Traditionally, libraries have been places where people gather to engage ideas through reading and conversation. In the midst of that scholarly dialogue with past and current voices, new knowledge and understanding is developed.  Until recently, the Theology Library could rather passively provide physical space for reading and scholarly conversation, being assured that those conversations would take place. Recent trends in library use indicate that an increasing number of library users never physically come to the library, and a high percentage of those who do, come only to retrieve a book or photocopy and article that will be read outside the physical space of the Library.  We now assume that the Library’s role in facilitating scholarly dialogue requires intentional programmatic effort rather than simply addressing the task with structural solutions like providing physical space.

The environmental changes that impact the Library are largely cultural. To be sure, technology is a significant driver for these changes, but technology is simply a tool. As a culture, we are more mobile, more globally aware, immersed in a wide variety of media that connect us with more immediacy in ways that reshape our definition of community. The 20th century (and before) was a culture of information scarcity. The 21sth century is a culture of information abundance.  Cultural expectations for anytime/anywhere information and service shape the expectations of Theology Library users.  In our digital culture, information discovery and use is not segregated to specified locations or times. The Library must develop ways of providing both information and service in ways that enter the users workflow, regardless of time, location, or technological devices. However, these should not be viewed as simply technological answers. We assume that the Library must recognize and address these issues as much culturally as technologically.  This requires a change in the Library’s culture as well as active engagement in the culture of our users beyond the physical space of the Library.