A little digression on the subject of jobs.

Although not part of the course reading list, I happened to stumble across Susan Stenkel Rippley's paper The Education and Hiring of Special Collections Librarians: Observations from a Recent Recruit, (http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlpubs/rbm/backissuesvol6no2/stekel06.pdf) which I read with great relish. The paper is chock full of important information regarding the core competencies for special collections librarians (where we left off last night in our review of the ARL Task Force Final Status Report) and the current outlook on the job situation.

Rippley's article deliniates core competencies in two venues, both traditional competencies such as knowledge of descriptive bibliography, reference work with primary sources, preservation, and subject knowledge. I think we can all agree that these skills should certainly be considered required core competencies for any individual wishing to work in special collections.

But Rippley's article extended beyond these traditional views of the skills needed by special collections librarians and addressed competencies of a contemporary nature including such hot topics as a knowledge of copyright and intellectual property issues as well as an understanding of image permissions, and the ability to discuss these issues with lawyers for the protection of collections.

A proficiency in multiple languages could be said to linger on the side of traditional competencies but Rippley ups the ante on this one by saying special collections librarians not only need to have a familiarity with European languages but others as well that may be represented in the collection, as evidenced by a librarian working with documents from the Korean and Viet Nam wars.

Ouch! How do we special collection wannabes do it all? How do we develop the traditional research skills, master a variety of languages, and move beyond to incorporate copyright and property issues? That's where the training of special collections librarians come in and that is the next item on Rippley's agenda.

On this subject the paper relates, as we all know, that most education for special collections is available in the "continuing education mode." UVA's Rare Book School provides an invaluable service to that end. This class will be my third course at RBS. I began with a course in the area I wanted to specialize in, publisher's bindings and the 19th century in general, then moved on to tackle one of the core competency areas with what I refer to as "bibliography bootcap," otherwise known as Introduction to Descriptive Bibliography. The course next week will assist me in the larger arena of my chosen field, Introduction to Special Collections Librarianship. But again, I digress. The point I'm trying to get to and that Rippley conveys so much better than I am, is that more is needed. More courses need to be offered more often in library programs. Simple. More rare book schools have sprung up to help fill this need, but library schools need to address this issue with a strong curriculum in this area.

As we near the end of the article Rippley turns her attention to the dearth of positions and the requirements often given for those few positions available. Yes, my dears, it's a jungle out there. Years of experience, at least three to five, are the minimum requirements. Hopefully my years as a rare book room volunteer will stand me in good stead when I am ready to face the market. If your intent is to work in archives, so much the better. There are more positions in archives than for rare book librarians.

And so it goes. Return tomorrow for more points to ponder from the ARL report.