The Information Age versus Gender Equity? Technology and Values in Education for Library and Information Science - study of the alleged trend toward favoring men in in the information technology field of libraries - author abstract

Library Trends, Spring, 1999 by Suzanne Hildenbrand

INTRODUCTION

Librarians and library educators today vociferously proclaim their support for computerization, digitization, and the Information Age; they also claim to support equity for women and people of color(1) both in their constituencies and within the profession. Yet the Information Age, product of the global economy, with its assault on the public sector, the taxes that support it, and government regulations, including Affirmative Action, does not seem to provide a hospitable environment for the emphasis on equity that has characterized library ideology for decades. In addition, library education played a vigorous role in gender stratification (and racial segregation) historically, and current social attitudes continue to identify men with technology, the keystone of the Information Age. All these factors suggest that it is a good time to examine the potential or actual place of gender stratification in library education today. Unfortunately little research is available to illuminate the confrontation between computerization and equity.

Researchers may be discouraged from examining these topics by both the ideological nature of the issue and the lack of data. That is, it is difficult to write about the social and political costs of library automation when its benefits are obvious and are emphasized in professional literature. Any questioning or analysis leaves one vulnerable to the dreaded, and career-destroying, label "technophobe." In addition, data are inadequate for the emerging conditions and are often poorly defined. This article will examine gender issues in the emerging education programs for library and information science (LIS). An overview of both the historic role of library education in gender arrangements and the gender-technology links in society provide context for an analysis of evolving curricular patterns. The article concludes with suggestions for those concerned with gender (and racial and ethnic) equity in the Information Age.

LIBRARY EDUCATION AND GENDER STRATIFICATION

Gender stratification, or the over representation of men in leading positions and in major specialties, has been present in librarianship since its "feminization," or the emergence of a female majority; library education has often encouraged gender stratification. In the early years, from the 1870s through the 1930s, men were widely believed to have managerial talents that women lacked and this belief was used to justify favored placement for men. Many women shared the common stereotypes and felt that men were needed at the top for the good of the profession. Some may have believed, mistakenly, that the large-scale entry of men into the profession would raise the salaries of all (Williams, 1995, pp. 160-63).

Library history reveals both the ideological arguments and structural arrangements that were used to support male domination. The ideological arguments are based on an identification of males with positive qualities like professionalism, leadership, or technical skills. Women are identified with a lack of professionalism, leadership, or technical skills.(2) Melvil Dewey, famous for recruiting "college-bred women" into his training program in the 1880s, warned them that the top library positions would go to men (Vann, 1978, p. 109). Leaders like Herbert Putnam echoed this sentiment (Weibel & Heim, 1979, pp. 57-66). American Library Association (ALA) President Ralph Uveling in 1945 urged returning (male) veterans to use their education benefits to pursue library education and enter the top slots in the field ("Growing Shortage of Librarians Seen, "1945, p. 9).

Structural changes in library education, presented as reforms which would clearly benefit the whole profession, also supported gender stratification. The work of the Carnegie Corporation and Columbia University economist Charles C. Williamson dominate this area. Williamson was appointed by the corporation in 1918 to do a report on library education. In a secret memo, he emphasized that consideration "be given to the need of checking the feminization of library work as a profession" (Brand, 1983, p. 45). The report addressed two aspects of the problem. First, it stimulated the establishment of elite programs at Columbia and the University of Chicago, anticipating that these programs would develop male leaders. Second, the report also attacked practices identified with the Pratt Institute program, which served an almost entirely female student body. Williamson believed that the program was overly influenced by library employers and was essentially clerical in nature. He recommended that the material covered be taught to young women high school graduates in programs run by major public libraries (Brand, 1996, p. 263).

Historian Ellen Condliffe Lagemann observed of Williamson's report that it intended to "foster a bifurcation not different from that which existed between (male) school administrators and (female) teachers, between (male) doctors and (female) nurses. It would be difficult to read the Williamson study without concluding that fostering hierarchical segmentation by gender was one of its goals" (Brand, 1996, p. 263).