“Poverty, Democracy and Public Libraries” by Kathleen de la
Peña McCook pages 28-46 in Libraries & Democracy: The Cornerstones
of Liberty. Ed.Nancy Kranich, American Library Association, 2001.
“Poverty, Democracy and
Public Libraries”
by Kathleen de la Peña
McCook
1. Origins and Development of Public Library Service Framed
As Contributory to Democracy
2. Democracy for All Through Libraries: Standards,
Principles, Role Setting and Transformation
3. The Search for Broad Mission
4. Local Communities Include Poor and Working Class People
5. Librarians, Democracy and the Implementation of the Poor
People’s Policy
6. Democracy: The Only Way Out of Poverty
Poverty, Democracy and Public
Libraries
A central feature of public librarianship in the United
States is that librarians have worked to develop a climate of openness by
defining library policies to create an institution where all are welcome. In
1990 the American Library Association adopted the policy, “Library Services for
the Poor,” in which it is stated, “it is crucial that libraries recognize their
role in enabling poor people to participate fully in a democratic society, by
utilizing a wide variety of available resources and strategies.” (ALA Handbook of Organization, 1999-2000,
policy 61). This policy was adopted because there had been a shifting level of
emphasis in the interpretation of “openness” since the establishment of the
public library. Open doors are very different from proactive service. In this
chapter the socio-economic context of poverty is explored to gain an understanding
of the role librarians can play today to provide opportunity for poor people to
participate in democracy. A brief review of key writing and documents that
define public library service is provided to establish the historical
foundation.
The administration and policy-setting of public agencies
supported by taxes are not well understood by most residents.1 Roads, schools, sanitation, police
and fire protection, social services, and libraries are used when needed and
relatively few residents attempt to influence or change their performance
except at times of perceived crisis. For the most part these public services
are supported by taxes, administered by local jurisdictions and overseen by
elected or appointed technical experts.
Changing the mode of operation of any public service by
external means generally only takes place by legislation or administrative
action (desegregation rulings, welfare-to-work regulations, zoning changes), or
when an influx of new monies is available (community policing, funds for new
construction). Although such actions are the result of the political process,
they are not often the result of action initiated at the local level. Efforts
by residents to affect public services they receive locally are almost always
in reaction to specific situations rather than contributory to changes of
broader policy. For instance, a road through a neighborhood to add better
access to a big box store might bring residents to a zoning meeting only to
learn that the zoning had been authorized years before. While local boards and
advisory entities provide some representation that drives the shape of public
service, there is evidence that the actions and advice of these groups are no
more representative of “all the people” than any other form of representative
government.2 This is not to say that
there is not strong sentiment by public agencies for greater civic
participation, but there is a need to foster inclusiveness with more commitment
as Gates and O’Connor point out: “Working our collaborative and citizen-based
efforts into the formal, local political structure will not only create policy
that reflects the values of citizens but will also hasten reform of local
government from that of a purely representative form to a highly participatory
and dynamic decision-making structure.” 3
Agencies that operate in the public service sector must
conduct self-analysis to make improvements that respond to community needs.
Librarianship exemplifies a public service which carries out a sustained effort
to improve services through a complex set of internal actions, association
developmental activities and participation by working members. While trustees
and library board members do provide resident involvement, libraries have not
been able to bring to their planning and policy deliberations a truly
representative community voice.
To understand how librarians have broadened and strengthened
their commitment to serving all people, by working with all people—especially
poor people— to enhance participation in the democratic process is very
complex. A general understanding of the origins of the public library movement
and the work of librarians over the last 150 years to develop mechanisms to
respond to their communities is necessary.
ORIGINS AND DEVELOPMENT OF PUBLIC LIBRARY SERVICE FRAMED AS
CONTRIBUTORY TO DEMOCRACY
“The modern public library in large measure represents the
need of democracy for an enlightened electorate, and its history records its
adaptation to changing social requirements.”
–Jesse H. Shera, Foundations
of the Public Library, 1949. 4
It was over a century from the beginning of the
establishment of a tax-supported public library in the United States to the
first major histories of public library development. In the years following
World War II several major publications and actions established broad
examination of the public library movement with a special focus on the
democratic philosophies that framed it. Any serious considerations of democracy
and libraries must be informed with knowledge of their contents.
In Foundations of the
Public Library Jesse H. Shera provided well-documented analysis of the
factors leading to the public library, as we know it today. Complex as these
factors may be and somewhat open to interpretation, 5 it is Shera’s identification of the democratizing function of the
public library from its very founding that is important for this discussion.
Shera identified four factors linking the movement for universal schooling and
the movement for tax-supported public libraries:
a) A growing awareness of the ordinary man and his
importance to the group,
b) The conviction that universal literacy is essential to an
enlightened people,
c) A belief in the practical value of technical studies,
d) An enthusiasm for education for its own sake.6
Understanding these factors has remained central to the
conceptualization of public library service by the profession’s leaders as it
has been transmitted and reconfigured for each changing era. Exploring the
contributions that the U.S. public library makes to support democracy is not a
new topic. The monograph, Arsenals of a
Democratic Culture by Sidney Ditzion (1947) analyzed the public library’s
role in supporting democracy. Ditzion noted that in the latter decades of the
nineteenth century libraries continued “the educational process where the
schools left off and by conducting a people’s university, a wholesome capable
citizenry would be fully schooled in the conduct of a democratic life.”7
The histories by Shera and Ditzion coincided with
initiatives of the American Library Association to identify the future of the
public library in a time of great change. The
National Plan for Public Library Service (1948) established two main
objectives for public libraries: to promote enlightened citizenship and to
enrich personal life.8 The National Plan was the final part of
the work of the American Library Association’s Committee on Post-War Planning
and formed part of the basis for the Public
Library Inquiry.
In his analysis of the Public
Library Inquiry (carried out and published between 1947-1952) Douglas Raber
characterized the Inquiry as a
professional legitimating project and noted that the discourse of the Inquiry, “constituted an exercise in
identity creation that relied heavily on the role of the public library as a
sustaining contributor to American democracy.”9 The results of the Inquiry
yielded some recommendations, that if followed, played down the role of the
public library among the general public in favor of opinion leaders in the
community.10 This point was made by
Robert D. Leigh, who, as director of the Inquiry,
wrote the general report that is the most frequently consulted overview. Leigh
characterized opinion leaders as those for whom the public library was most
important.11
These four events– the histories by Shera and Ditzion, the
reports of the Committee on Post-War Planning, and the set of volumes issued by
the Public Library Inquiry 12– provided the framework in which
U.S. librarians worked at mid century. To gain an historical framework of the
concepts linking democracy to libraries readers are directed to these books and
primary source documents as well as the examination of the Public Library Inquiry by Raber, Librarianship and Legitimacy. Suffice it to say that in the general
perception—both of the public and the profession in general, as the nation
moved into the second half of the century –the identification of libraries with
the support and promotion of democracy was strong.
Public librarians
also worked diligently to assist immigrants and minorities as a central
part of their mission and librarians have developed expertise in working with
underserved groups. In 1918 the American Library Association established the
Committee on Work with the Foreign Born to address the needs of immigrants for
library services, but also to assist with “Americanization.”
Because the U.S. southern states did not permit
African-Americans to use public libraries segregated facilities were established
in some cities such as Charlotte, North Carolina; Houston, Texas; and Memphis,
Tennessee. But very few libraries surveyed in 1922 employed African Americans
or made special effort to serve this community . Although there were some
notable exceptions such as the Harlem branch of the New York Public Library,
few African-Americans had library services until the New Deal initiatives of
the 1930s under President Franklin Roosevelt. By 1941 only four states had
integrated library services for all. [see:Jones, P.A. Jr. Libraries, Immigrants, and the American Experience: Greenwood
Press: Westport, Connecticut 1999. Josey, E.J. The Black Librarian in America, Scarecrow, Metuchen, NJ, 1970;;
Tucker, J.M. Untold Stories: Civil
Rights, Libraries and Black Librarianship. University of Illinois:
Urbana-Champaign:, 1998; Dawson, A. "Celebrating African- American
Librarians and Librarianship," Library
Trends 49 (summer 2000), 49-87.]
DEMOCRACY FOR ALL THROUGH LIBRARIES: STANDARDS,PRINCIPLES,ROLE SETTING
AND TRANSFORMATION
“Public libraries continue to be of enduring importance to
the maintenance of our free democratic society. There is no comparable
institution in American life.” –Public Library Principles Task Force, 1982. 13
As Leigh pointed out in The
Public Library in the United States (1950) there was political efficacy in
attending to the needs of opinion leaders, for from them would come
support—especially as the nation’s libraries sought broader funding through
federal legislation during the ‘50s. In a study conducted by the System
Development Corporation (SDC) for the U.S. Office of Education, The Public Library and Federal Policy
(1974) the authors noted, “The public library community must determine whether
public libraries should be principally concerned with serving the information
and library needs of the sophisticated information user or whether they should
try to serve the needs of all segments of the population.” 14 Leigh and the SDC study bracket the third-quarter of the 20th
century in terms of library direction. Between the post-World War II histories
and studies and the SDC study U.S. librarians could look back to the years
since World War II with recognition that the profession had endeavored to
expand its service base without coming to consensus on who should receive
priority for service.
The Library Services
Act passed in 1956 aided libraries in small towns and rural areas. Its
successor, the Library Services and
Construction Act passed in 1964 provided the means for brick and mortar and
well as interlibrary cooperation. Libraries also applied for and were awarded
support under programs of the “War on
Poverty”. Participation in these programs was a factor that changed the way
the profession looked at its articulation of service.
While some have looked back at the demonstration projects of
the War on Poverty period and
decided that librarians tried to do too much, these projects nevertheless
helped to foster a grassroots movement within the American Library Association
that fought to expand the meaning of outreach. In 1968 the American Library
Association Council voted to establish a Coordinating Committee on Service to
the Disadvantaged which became the Office for Library Service to the
Disadvantaged in 1970 (and today is the Office for Literacy and Outreach
Services). This is the ALA home for the Subcommittee on Library Services to
Poor and Homeless People. The Social Responsibilities Round Table (SRRT) of the
American Library Association held its first formal meeting in 1969. Today SRRT
includes a Task Force on Hunger, Homelessness and Poverty.
A number of publications during and after the War on Poverty shaped ideals of the
library as an agent for change and contributed to the dialogue about expanded
activist service during this time. These included (inter alia) the 1967 ALA
survey, Library Services to the
Disadvantaged, Margaret E. Monroe’s “Readers’ Services to the Disadvantaged
in Inner Cities,” Kathleen Weibel’s Evolution
of Library Outreach 1960-1975, Helen Lyman’s Literacy and the Nation’s Libraries, and Clara S. Jones’, Public Library and Information Referral
Service.15 The perspective of
serving poor people was passionately described and well-defined by librarians
during this period.
Over this same period (1950-1975) the American Library
Association issued two standards documents (1956 and 1966). 16 The 1966 Standards came out amidst the War on Poverty and were seen as
inadequate to the times. Many librarians felt that national standards could no
longer reflect local community needs. In fact, the 1966 Minimum Standards for
Public Library Systems would be the last effort at national public library
standards issued by the Association.17
The complex process of the Public Library Association moving
from the 1966 standards to a planning process in the seventies is viewed by
Verna L.Pungitore as a major innovation. In her study of the adoption of the
public library planning process Pungitore examined how the set of techniques,
developed and promoted by the Public Library Association allowed public librarians
to engage in user-oriented planning, community-specific role setting, and
self-evaluation.18 This
transformation of planning for public library service replaced nationally
developed standards with locally derived goals. Attempts to track a particular
value or focus—such as the role of democracy– are naturally more complex as the
devolution of mission to the local level makes it inappropriate to identify
generalizations about all public libraries. McCook, reviewing the history of
the activation of the library’s clientele through the filter of standards
observed that the planning process is “an iconoclastic challenge to the
previous statements that tried to define the role and purpose of the public
library…libraries are to develop services which their community needs. There
are no prescriptions offered.” 19
Once the Public Library Association developed the planning
process, each public library had a methodology to use at the local level to
develop its own mission, goals and objectives in collaboration with community
and staff. The 1980 manual, Planning
Process for Public Libraries, and the 1982 Output Measures for Public Libraries provided the tools for
planning and measurement.20 The role
of the public library in serving democracy was no longer a value imbedded in a
formal public library standards document, for no such document existed at the
national level.
There were two documents issued by the Public Library
Association during the launching of the planning process that need examination
in light of this discussion: The Public
Library Mission Statement and Its Imperatives for Service (1979), a product of the PLA Goals,
Guidelines, and Standards Committee intended as a bridge between standards and
the planning process and “The Public Library: Democracy’s Resource, A Statement
of Purpose,” 22 put together by the
Public Library Principles Task Force in 1982.
The Mission Statement was not well received. In fact, as
Pungitore points out, some of the members of the Committee disavowed it after
it was approved.23 However, the
Statement’s idealism reflected a desire by public librarians to have an
over-arching mission statement while recognizing the need to establish a new
methodology for local planning. This Statement is an important reflection of
the profession’s thoughtful reaction to the ideas of the Other America. 24 The classic thesis (old standards),
antithesis (1979 Mission Statement), synthesis (1982“ Statement of Principles”/
new planning process) formulation works here.
The 1982 “Statement of Principles,” “ The Public Library:
Democracy’s Resource,” was issued amidst the adoption of the new Public Library
Association planning process. It incorporated support for the planning model in
its declaration. This one page document (issued suitable for framing)
identified the public library as offering access freely to all members of the
community “without regard to race, citizenship, age, education level, economic
status, or any other qualification or condition.”25 It is a document of synthesis for it provides a strong sense of
mission yet incorporates the new process of local role identification.
By the late eighties the publications and initiatives that
comprised the public library planning process were characterized as the Public
Library Development Program (PLDP). The publications issued under this
designation included the Public Library
Data Service Statistical Report and its ongoing annual successor, the Statistical Report, a 2nd edition of Output Measures for Public Libraries
(1987), Planning and Role Setting for
Public Libraries (1987), a manual for trainers (1988), Output Measures for Public Library Service to Children (1992) and Output Measures and More: Planning and
Evaluating Public Library Services for Young Adults (1995). 26
In 1994 the Public Library Association Committee on Planning
and Evaluation commissioned a study to evaluate the effectiveness and re-define
the direction of the PLDP as public libraries entered the 21st century. The
study, “An Evaluation of the Public Library Development Program” completed in
1995 recommended a revised PDLP.27
The Public Library Association then appointed a ReVision committee in 1996 to
oversee the process in collaboration with consultants. In 1998 Planning for Results: A Public Library
Transformation Process was published as the new PLA planning document
moving from library roles to library responses. Among the changes was a new
planning component highlighting the importance of community and visioning
statements.28 However, as pointed
out in her analysis of the role of libraries in building communities, McCook
identifies this point of connection as most crucial for public library
inclusion in national community initiatives and not treated with sufficient
attention.29
What can be seen by this summary of the move by public
librarians from national standards to a planning and transformation process is
an internal philosophical struggle to create a process that would reflect local
community needs. This was carried out at the same time the nation, the states,
and local jurisdictions were struggling to find ways to enable local
communities to build capacity.
THE SEARCH FOR BROAD MISSION
“Since their inception, libraries have served as pivotal
community institutions upholding, strengthening, and realizing some of the most
fundamental democratic ideals of our society.” –Nancy Kranich, “Libraries: The
Cornerstone of Deomocracy.”30 –2000.
When the Public Library Association began to move to a
planning process and the PLDP program in the place of national standards, the
effort to establish a national mission for public libraries was no longer part
of the PLA agenda although, as noted above the 1979 Mission Statement and 1982
“Democracy’s Resource” statement were surely such efforts.
Ongoing debate on the mission of the public library included
Hafner’s 1994 reaffirmation of the library’s democratic purpose and critique of
the move to popularization.31 While
the PLA pulled back from broad mission definition regarding democracy for all
libraries after 1982, the American Library Association and the National
Commission on Libraries and Information Science continued to provide general
statements of direction. This is not a place for a sidebar on the role of the
American Library Association or other entities versus ALA’s type of library
associations to speak for all libraries, but in the absence of a broad mission
by the Public Library Association, such actions were inevitable.
In 1995 the ALA’s journal, American Libraries, listed “12 Ways Libraries Are Good for the
Country,” and included in the prefatory material the statement, “Libraries
safeguard our freedom and keep democracy healthy.” With a photograph of the
Statue of Liberty in the background the first of the “12 Ways” listed was “to
inform citizens,” because democracy and libraries have a symbiotic
relationship.32
The 1999 ALA Council adopted the statement, “Libraries: An
American Value,” included it as an official public policy statement (Policy
53.8), and printed it on the cover of the Association’s 1999-2000 Handbook. This statement noted, “we
preserve our democratic society by making available the widest possible range
of viewpoints, opinions and ideas.” 33
That same year the ALA sponsored a Congress on Professional Education that
resulted in an effort to develop “A Statement on Core Values,”34 and the National Commission on
Libraries and Information Science passed a resolution adopting the Principles
for Public Library Service based on the UNESCO Public Library Manifesto. These Principles include the key mission
that the public library will be a “gateway to knowledge,” and that “Freedom,
Prosperity and the Development of Society and of individuals are fundamental
human values. They will be attained through the ability of well-informed
citizens to exercise their democratic rights and to play an active role in
society.”35
This summary of the last fifty years of public libraries’
efforts in the United States to establish standards and move to planning at the
start of a new century is a history of a sustained and consistent commitment to
the ideals of democracy. The language and location of this commitment may vary
from document to document, but the idea of democracy emerges again and again.
The expansion of the idea of service in support of democracy became even
broader during the War on Poverty to
delineate the heretofore left behind. This caused consternation among some that
libraries were trying to do too many things. Yet others held fast to a
comprehensive commitment to work with all people. This summary is only intended
to provide a foundation for asserting that public librarians have remained
constant in their hearts. Though much labor has gone into procedures and
techniques, the essence remains a firm commitment to democratic values.
This essence is a temptation to metaphorical rhapsodizing
that might seem too simple in its purity. But it can not be helped. For
librarians democracy is our arsenal, our cornerstone, our beacon, our strongest
value. And a commitment to democracy leads us without a doubt to be committed
to serving poor people.
LOCAL COMMUNITIES INCLUDE POOR AND WORKING CLASS PEOPLE
“Although we profess that we are citizens of a democracy,
and although we may vote once every four years, millions of our people feel
deep down in their heart of hearts that there is no place for them—that they do
not ‘count.’ They have no voice of their own, no organization (which is really
their own instead of absentee) to represent them, no way in which they may lay
their hand and their heart to the shaping of their own destinies.”–Saul Alinsky
“Statement of Purpose of the Industrial Areas Foundation,”36 – 1941
“When we say ‘for the poor,’ we do not take sides with one
social class…what we do is invite all social classes, rich and poor without
distinction, saying to everyone: Let us take seriously the cause of the poor as
though it were our own.”– Oscar Romero, The Violence of Love, 37– 1979
The Public Library Association has developed powerful new
tools that can assist public libraries in developing service configured to the
needs of the local community. The American Library Association at its policy
levels has reaffirmed democracy as a central library value. Citizen input and
the librarian’s connection to the community are crucial. This is where there
lies a potential for misstep. The total community is not easily involved—not
for community visioning, not for library visioning. Yet the ALA’s policy on
services to the poor, specifically objective 10, says that librarians have
decided collectively that we will work to make this so. The policy states,
“promoting direct representation of poor people and anti-poverty advocates
through appointments to local boards…such appointments to include library-paid
transportation and stipends.”
The standards and planning efforts by the Public Library
Association are impressive for their sustained commitment by so many which is
apparent and sincere. The best legacy these documents and processes provide is
great freedom to work with communities and forge a vision. But there are many
levels and layers of communities within any given community. There are
homeowners, business people, professionals and the working poor. The
communities with which the librarians find themselves most often working or the
communities that choose to work with the librarian are most likely not the
communities that include poor people. This is not an act of commission, but an
act of omission. It is hard to get poor people to the many meetings at which
vision statements are formed—not just for the library, but also for the
community as a whole. Poor people are simply working too hard to be able to
exercise their chances to participate in the democratic process in a way that
is sustained enough for their voices to be heard.
Poverty in the United States is defined by a changing income
level calculated since 1969 that is adjusted each year for inflation using the
consumer price indexes.38 In 2000 the poverty threshold was calculated at
$8,350 for a single person and $17, 050 for a family of four. Yet this
threshold is extremely inadequate for a modest standard of living. It is
deceptive. It ignores the costs of childcare, difference in health insurance,
and changes under the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act of 1996.39
In the 2000 report, Does a Rising Tide Lift all Boats? labor
economist Linda Barrington has constructed a series of poverty statistics that
provide four major findings:
1) Poverty has risen in both the number and share of those
employed full-time and year round since 1973. Gains of the 1960s ceased in the
mid-1970s.
2) Long-term economic growth has had little impact on
poverty among full-time workers.
3) There are great differences in the poverty experience of
full-time workers living in different regions of the country and belonging to
different racial/ethnic groups.
4) Ethnic minorities working full-time move in and out of
poverty more often than whites.40
The October, 2000 analysis of census data by the Center on
Budget and Policy Priorities reports that 11.9 percent of all U.S. citizens
still live in poverty and the child poverty rate is 16.9 percent. This means
that 32.3 million people still live below the official poverty threshold of
$17, 050 for a family of four. In fact, those who have remained poor have grown
poorer. The poverty gap—the total amount by which the income of all poor
households falls below the poverty line—has increased as the truly poor have
experienced reductions in means-tested benefits that offset increases in
earnings. The minimum wage still remains substantially below the levels of the
1970s in purchasing power.41
Children are more likely to live in poverty than any other age group with eight
percent of all American children living with incomes 50 percent below the
poverty line. Additionally, it should be noted that many children (40 percent)
are “near” poor and just above the poverty line.42
In the State of
Working America 2000-2001 it is made clear that the typical American family
is working more hours, taking on high levels of household debt and that
increases in income are based on more hours worked. Middle and lower income
workers have increased time at work by 19 weeks since 1969. There is simply
less time for middle and working class families.43 This aspect of degraded family time is also explored by Theda
Skocpol in The Missing Middle: Working
Families and the Future of American Social Policy.44
Without time to participate in community discussions poor
and working class people seldom have their particular needs heard in community
forums. Without the tools of discourse their efforts to be heard, even if they
make them, are not. Librarians striving to develop comprehensive community
involvement in planning must realize that to include poor and working class
people there must be special effort. The involvement of the poor and working
class in community development and the democratic process is critical if their
needs are to be factored into decision-making. What can librarians do?
LIBRARIANS, DEMOCRACY AND THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE POOR PEOPLE’S
POLICY
“The happiness of others is a goal worth pursuing, and the
method for achieving it, democracy, is a risk worth taking.”— Earl Shorris, Riches for the Poor, 45 – 2000
Participation in the democratic process requires a
perception that one is a member of the community and that one can make an
effect on the community. The May, 2000 issue of American Libraries focused on isolating aspects of poverty
including homelessness, imprisonment, rural lack of connectivity and lack of
access to the ideas of the humanities.46
Providing a way to learn the ideas of the humanities as the way for poor people
to break free of poverty has been presented by Earl Shorris in his book, Riches for the Poor, in which he lays
out the argument that in the United States the poor have been excluded from the
circle of power.47 One way to
ameliorate this is to provide an entrance to reflection and the political life
through the humanities.48 Shorris’
case for the humanities as a “radical antidote to long-term poverty rests
finally on the question of who is born human and to what extent a person is
capable of enjoying his or her humanity.”49
Shorris makes the point, like Jonathan Kozol in his book Ordinary Resurrections, that poor people in our society are
seen as people who work to survive but are not given the given the opportunity
for reflection.50
What better service can librarians provide to poor people
than to develop support for them at the beginning of a journey to full
participation in democracy? The first step in this journey is, of course,
literacy. The American Library Association has a long history of support to
literacy initiatives as do state library agencies and libraries at the local
level.51 This support continues with
renewed emphasis today. “Literacy in Libraries Across America” is a current
three-year national initiative in partnership with the Lila Wallace-Reader’s
Digest Fund designed to strengthen library-based adult literacy programs. Its
purpose is to support selected public libraries in their efforts to provide
educational services to adult learners. Public libraries in four states are
receiving a total of $2.7 million to improve the curriculum and instruction
available to adult students. In addition, the libraries are expanding their use
of computer technology and developing better methods to measure and document
the gains made by learners. The Fund has made a related grant of $1.3 million
to the ALA to coordinate technical assistance to participating libraries,
organize a series conferences for participants, develop a telecommunications
network, create a World Wide Web site for library literacy and implement other
strategies to strengthen the field of library-based literacy programs. 52
Individuals make their own journey toward participation in
democracy. The structure librarians can provide for adult literacy is a basic
way to help poor people. Activating opportunities for new readers to have
access to the ideas of the humanities is another way through support of reading
and discussion programs such as National Connections or Prime Time Literacy,
reading and discussion programs for new readers funded by the National
Endowment for the Humanities.53
With the integration of electronic technology in all aspects
of U.S. life and work librarians have made a concerted effort to provide
equitable access to digital resources. This effort has had a national focus in
the successful work to move from the LSCA to the Library Services and
Technology Act (LSTA) achieved in 1996. Administered through the Institute of
Museum and Library Services the LSTA continues to make money available to local
libraries through state agencies. Its priorities include electronic networking
and targeting the unserved.54 There
are specific provisions for developing services to help people whose incomes
are below the poverty threshold. Additional technology support for libraries
serving communities with residents in poverty has come from the Gates Library
Foundation which has partnered with libraries to provide access to the
Internet.
Helping to create an information literate society is also a
strong emphasis for librarians as exemplified by Nancy Kranich’s Committee on
Information Literacy Community Partnerships intended to bring together
librarians and community members/organizations. Through this initiative
librarians will “ help the public learn how to identify and evaluate
information that is essential to making decisions that affect the way they
live, work, learn and govern…. These are the critical-thinking skills so
essential to lifelong learning, so necessary for effective participation in our
democracy.” 55 One pertinent example
of the kind of information literacy analysis that examines the use of
technology for social activism demonstrates the need for information literacy
to teach both paper-based and digital sources to support democratic citizen
action.56
Literacy, reflection on the ideas of the humanities and the
ability to find and evaluate information in an information society are among
the needs of poor people. The involvement of librarians in these initiatives
working with poor people has come about because librarians have a history of
collective action. The fifteen policy objectives of ALA’s poor people’s policy,
as librarians work to achieve them, may all be seen as contributing to building
a greater capacity for poor people to participate in the democratic process.
But we still have much work to do.
DEMOCRACY: THE ONLY WAY OUT OF POVERTY
“To be prevented from participation in the political life of
the community cannot but be a major deprivation.”—Amartya Sen, “Democracy: The
Only Way Out of Poverty,57 – 2000.
In his January 2000 presentation for the Wingspread
Conference on “The New Information Commons,” Harry C. Boyte characterized civic
professionalism as public craft that does not deny the importance of scientific
knowledge, disciplined effort or assiduously learned skills but integrates such
things into far more contextualized and interactive practice—work “with” people
rather than simply “for” them. Professions practiced as public crafts add public
judgment or wisdom to knowledge. Boyte goes on to state that forms of civic
work influenced many professional traditions through most of the 20th century,
including librarians, who saw themselves as citizens first.58 These ideas are explored in a forthcoming book by Ronald B.
McCabe, Civic Librarianship: Renewing the
Social Mission of the Public Library which reaffirms the traditional public
library mission of providing education for a democratic society.59
The social mission of the public library can only be
activated through librarian participation in the life of the various
communities served. For this reason some librarians participated in the Dialogue on Poverty 2000: Leading America to
Community Action, the democracy project of the national network of
community action agencies to re-engage Americans, especially poor people, with
each other and the process of public policy development to address the dilemma
of poverty in the midst of plenty.60
Being with the community as its residents identify the direction they choose is
at the heart of working with the community to build capacity for participating
in democracy and making changes for a better quality of life.61
And the responsibility of librarians extends beyond the
local community to considerations of what can be done by librarians to
ameliorate information inequity in a global context. These are the concerns of
the International Federation of Library Association’s Social Responsibilities
Discussion Group identified in a composite paper edited by Alfred Kagan,”The
Growing Gap between the Information Rich and the Information Poor Both Within
and Between Countries.” 62 As
librarians deliberate their role in supporting democracy among all people in
the United States and among all people in the world the idea of a “pragmatic
solidarity,” as optimistically described by Heena Patel in Dying for Growth.63 can
be supported by libraries. During Jubilee 2000 librarians can work with
international organizations to provide information about relief for highly indebted
poor countries.64 Working with
people librarians will practice their profession as a public craft recognizing
with Amartya Sen, Nobel winner in economics, that democracy is the only way out
of poverty.65
McCook/Poverty
Notes
1 Because many poor
people may be undocumented or working in the United States without legal status
the term “residents” is used throughout this paper rather than “citizens” to be
more inclusive except in the case of quotations.
2 Jane Robbins, Citizen
Participation and Public Library Policy
(Metuchen, NJ: The Scarecrow Press, 1975). This provides a thoughtful analysis
of citizen participation that makes valid points of continuing value.
3 Christopher T.
Gates and Drew O’Connor, “Toward a Healthy Democracy,” National Civic Review 89 (Summer 2000): 167.
4 Jesse H.Shera, Foundations of the Public Library: The
Origins of the Public Library Movement in New England 1629-1855 (1949)
reprint edition (Hamden, CT: Shoestring Press, 1974), p.vi.
5 See for instance,
Michael H. Harris, “State, Class and Cultural Reproduction: Toward a Theory of
Library Service in the United States,” in Advances
in Librarianship, edited by Wesley Simonton (New York: Academic Press,
1986), pp. 211-252.
6 Shera, pp.221-222.
7 Sidney H. Ditzion, Arsenals of a Democratic Culture: A Social
History of the American Public Library Movement in New England and the Middle
States from 1850-1900 (Chicago: American Library Association, 1947), p. 74.
8 Carlton B. Joeckel
and Amy Winslow, A National Plan for
Public Library Service (Chicago: American Library Association, 1948), p.
16.
9 Douglas Raber, Librarianship and Legitimacy: The Ideology
of the Public Library Inquiry (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1997), p.3.
10 Kathleen de la
Peña McCook (Heim), “Stimulation,” in The
Service Imperative for Libraries: Essays in Honor of Margaret E. Monroe
edited by Gail A. Schlachter (Littleton, CO.: Libraries Unlimited, p. 127.
11 Robert D. Leigh, The Public Library in the United States
(New York: Columbia University Press, 1950), p. 19.
12 The Public Library
Inquiry consisted of seven volumes all published by Columbia University Press:
Bernard Berelson, The Library’s Public
(1949); Alice I. Bryan, The Public
Librarian (1952); Oliver Garceau, The
Public Library in the Political Process (1949); Leigh, op.cit.; James L.
McCamy, Government Publications for the
Citizen (1949); William Miller, The
Book Industry (1949); and Gloria Waldren, The Information Film (1949). Supplementary reports were issued on
library finance, public use of the library, effects of the mass media, music
materials, and work measurement. For complete list see Raber, op. cit, p.82.
13 Public Library
Association, Public Library Principles Task Force, “”The Public Library:
Democracy’s Resource, A Statement of Principles,” Public Libraries 21 (1982): 92.
14 Jean B. Wellisch
et al, The Public Library and Federal Policy. Sponsored by the System
Development Corporation Under a Grant from the United States Office of
Education. (Westport, CT,: Greenwood Press, 1974), p. 161.
15 American Library
Association, Committee on Economic Opportunity Programs, Library Service to the Disadvantaged: A Study Based on Responses to
Questionnaires from Public Libraries Serving Populations over 15,000
(Chicago: American Library Association, 1969); Margaret E. Monroe, “Reader
Services to the Disadvantaged in Inner Cities,” in Advances in Librarianship edited by Melvin J. Voight (New York:
Seminar Press, 1971), pp. 253-274; Kathleen Weibel, The Evolution of Library Outreach, 1960-1975 and Its Effects on Reader
Services: Some Considerations (University of Illinois, Occasional Paper,
Number 16. Urbana, IL.: Graduate School of Library and Information Science,
1982). ERIC ED 231376; Helen Lyman, Literacy
and the Nation’s Libraries (Chicago: American Library Association, 1977);
Clara S. Jones, Public Library
Information and Referral Service (Syracuse, NY: Gaylord Professional
Publications, 1978).
16 American Library
Association, Coordinating Committee on Revision of Public Library Standards, Public Library Service: A Guide to
Evaluation, with Minimum Standards (Chicago: ALA, 1956); American Library
Association, Public Library Association, Standards Committee, Minimum Standards for Public Library
Systems, 1966 (Chicago: ALA, 1967).
17 States, however,
did continue to develop standards. It should be noted that actions of the
Public Library Association and the American Library Association which tend to
be the narrative thread that is followed in this discussion, are by no means
the entire story of the development of public library mission and direction.
State library agencies through their own long-range planning, state library
associations, federal entities such as the Department of Education’s Office of
Library Programs, the National Commission on Libraries and Information Science,
(and today the Institute on Museums and Library Services), private foundations,
multi-type library consortia, library systems and local libraries and their
boards are all participants in the constant process of deliberating on the
directions of public library service.
18 Verna L. Pungitore, Innovation and the Library: The Adoption of New Ideas in Public Libraries
(Westport, CT.: Greenwood Press, 1995), p. xi.
19 McCook,
“Stimulation,” p. 134.
20 Vernon E. Palmour
et al. A Planning Process for Public
Libraries (Chicago, American Library Association, 1980); Douglas L. Zweizig
and Eleanor Jo Rodger, Output Measures
for Public Libraries (Chicago: American Library Association, 1982).
21 Public Library
Association, Goals, Guidelines and Standards Committee, The Public Library Mission Statement and Its Imperatives for Service (Chicago:
American Library Association, 1979).
22 Public Library
Association, Public Library Principles Task Force.
23 Pungitore, p.94.
24 Michael
Harrington, The Other America: Poverty in
the United States (New York, Macmillan, 1962). While libraries do not
figure in the works of Harrington, readers might be interested to note that, as
a student at St. Louis University High School, Edward M. Harrington was a
member of the Library Association. See Maurice Isserman, The Other American: The Life of Michael Harrington (New York:
Public Affairs, 2000), photo following page 178.
25 Public Library
Association. Public Library Principles Task Force.
26 Public Library
Association, Public Library Data Service, Statistical
Report (annual, 1992—present) (Chicago: Public Library Association)
continues Public Library Data Service Statistical Report (Chicago: Public
Library Association, 1988-1991); Nancy Van House, et. al Output Measures for Public Libraries: A Manual of Standardized
Procedures (Chicago: American Library Association, 1987); Charles R.
McClure, et. al, Planning and Role
Setting for Public Libraries: A Manual of Options and Procedures (Chicago:
American Library Association, 1987); Peggy O’Donnell, Public Library Development Program: Manual for Trainers (Chicago:
American Library Association, 1988); Virginia A. Walter, Output Measures for Public Library Service to Children: A Manual of
Standardized Procedures (Chicago: Association for Library Services to
Children, Public Library Association, American Library Association, 1992) and
Virginia A. Walter, Output Measures and
More: Planning and Evaluating Public Library Services for Young Adults (Chicago:
Young Adult Library Services Association, Public Library Association, American
Library Association, 1995) The committee, association and consultant
collaboration that resulted in the PLDP projects are explained with clarity by
Pungitore, in “PLDP: The Modified Innovation,” 107-119.
27 Debra Wilcox
Johnson, “An Evaluation of the Public Library Development Program,” for the
Public Library Association, 1995.
28 Ethel Himmel and
William James Wilson with the ReVision Committee of the Public Library Association,
Planning for Results: A Public Library
Transformation Process (Chicago, American Library Association, 1998).
29 Kathleen de la
Peña McCook, A Place at the Table:
Participating in Community Building (Chicago: American Library Association,
2000), p. 29.
30 Nancy Kranich,
“Libraries: The Cornerstone of Democracy,” American
Libraries 31 (August 2000): 5.
31. Arthur W. Hafner and Jennifer Sterling-Folker,
“Democratic Ideals and the American Public Library,” in Democracy and the Public Library (Westport,CT: Greenwood Press,
1994),pp. 9-43.
3212 Ways Libraries are Good for the Country,” American Libraries 26 (December 1995):
1113-1119.
33 American Library Association, ALA Handbook of Organization 1999-2000 (Chicago: American Library
Association, 1999, p. 45.
34 “Librarianship and
Information Service: A Statement on Core Values,”
http://www.ala.org/congress/corevalues/draft5.html <accessed October 24,
2000>. Though these values were not adopted, the dialogue is illustrative of
current discourse on broad mission and principles.
35 ”NCLIS Adopts Principles for Public Library Service,”
http://www.nclis.gov/news/pr99.html <accessed October 24, 2000>.
36 Saul Alinsky, “Statement of Purpose of the Industrial
Areas Foundation,” as quoted in Sanford D. Horwitt, Let Them Call Me Rebel: Saul Alinsky, His Life and Legacy (New
York: Vintage Books, 1992), p. 105.
37 Oscar Romero, The Violence of Love (compiled and
translated by James R. Brockman, S.J.) (Farmington, PA: The Plough Publishing
Co., 1998), p. 162. In 2013 “Francis 'unblocks' Romero beatification” by John L. Allen, Jr. National
Catholic Reporter April 22, 2013. http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/francis-unblocks-romero-beatification-official-says
38 Gordon M. Fisher, “The Development and History of the
Poverty Thresholds,” Social Security
Bulletin 55 (Winter, 1992): 3-14.
39 “Revising the
Poverty Measure,” Focus 19 (Spring,
1998). This is the newsletter of the Institute for Research on Poverty,
University of Wisconsin-Madison. This issue reports on the project,
“Implementing New Measures of American Poverty,” funded by the Annie E. Casey
Foundation.
40 Linda Barrington, Does a Rising Tide Lift All Boats? America’s
Full-Time Working Poor Reap Limited Gains in the New Economy (New York: The
Conference Board, 2000) p. 5.
41 Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, “Poverty Rate
Hits Lowest Level Since 1979 as Unemployment Reaches a 30-Year Low,”—news
release, October 10, 2000. http://www.cbpp.org/9-26-00pov.htm <accessed
October 22, 2000.>
42 National Center for Children in Poverty, “Young Child
Poverty Fact Sheet,”—July, 2000. http://cpmcnet.columbia.edu/dept/nccp/ycpf.html
<accessed October 22, 2000.>
43 Lawrence Mishel, et. al. The State of Working America 2000-2001 (Cornell University Press,
2001).
44 Theda Skocpol, The
Missing Middle: Working Families and the Future of American Social Policy
(New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 2000).
45 Earl Shorris, Riches
for the Poor: The Clemente Course in the Humanities (New York: W.W. Norton,
2000), p.256.
46 Kathleen de la Peña McCook, “Ending the Isolation of Poor
People,” American Libraries 31 (May,
2000): 45.
47 Earl Shorris, Riches
for the Poor: The Clemente Course in the Humanities (New York: W.W. Norton,
2000), p.72.
48 Shorris, p. 100.
49 Shorris, p. 115.
50 Jonathan Kozol, Ordinary
Resurrections: Children in the Years of Hope (New York: Crown Publishers,
2000).
51 Gary O. Rolstad, “Literacy Services in Public Libraries,”
in Adult Services: An Enduring Focus for
Public Libraries edited by K.M.Heim and Danny P. Wallace (Chicago: American
Library Association, 1990), pp. 245-265.
52 American Library Association, Office for Literacy and
Outreach Services, “Literacy in Libraries Across America,”
http://www.ala.org/literacy <accessed October 24, 2000>
53 McCook, Place at
the Table, p.63. (For background on National Connections); Prime Time
Reading Program http://www.ala.org/publicprograms/primetim/guidelines.html
<accessed October 24, 2000.>
54 Gwen Gregory, “ From Construction to Technology: An
Update on Federal Funding American Libraries 30 (June/July, 1999): 22-23. See
also Institute of Museums and Libraries http://www.imls.gov/ <accessed
October 24, 2000.
55 Nancy Kranich, “ Building Partnerships for 21st Century
Literacy,” American Libraries 31
(September, 2000): 7.
56 Dorothy A. Warner and John Buschman, “The Internet and
Social Activism: Savage Inequalities Revisited,” Progressive Librarian 17 (Summer 2000): 44-53.
57 Amartya Sen, “Democracy: The Only Way Out of Poverty” New Perspectives Quarterly 17 (Winter,
2000): 29.
58 Harry C.Boyte,
“Professions as Public Crafts,” prepared for the Wingspread Conference on the
New Information Commons. Center for Democracy and Citizenship.
http://www.publicwork.org/case/nic2000.htm <accessed October 24, 2000>
59 Ronald B. McCabe, Civic
Librarianship: Renewing the Social Mission of the Public Library (Metuchen,
NJ: Scarecrow 2001).
60 Dialogue on Poverty 2000: Leading America to Community
Action. “National Data Report, Preliminary Findings. http://www.nacaa.org/d2.htm
<accessed October 24, 2000>
61 Kathleen de la Peña McCook, “Librarians and Comprehensive
Community Initiatives,” Reference and
User Services Quarterly 40 (Fall 2000): 20-22.
62 Alfred Kagan, ed. “The Growing Gap between the
Information Rich and the Information Poor, Both Within Countries and Between
Countries.” IFLA Social Responsibilities Discussion Group in Alternative Library Literature,1998/1999 ed.
By Sanford Berman and James P. Danky (Jefferson,NC: McFarland &
Company,Inc., 2000),pp. 293-300. See also the IFLA website for revision of
recommendations http://www.ifla.org/VII/dg/srdg/index.html#1
<accessed October 24, 2000>
62 Heena Patel et al, “Pragmatic Solidarity,” in Dying for Growth: Global Inequality and the
Health of the Poor (Monroe, ME: Common Courage Press, 2000), p. 392.
63 Robert W. Edgar, “Jubilee 2000:Paying Our Debts.” The Nation 271 (April 24, 2000):20-21.
63 Amartya Sen, p. 29.
==========
Article from pages: 28-46.
Kathleen de la Peña McCook is distinguished professor of
library and information science at the University of South Florida (USF) in
Tampa. She has chaired the American Library Association, Advisory Committee for
the Office for Literacy and Outreach Services.
