Severability Part 1: What can you not cut?

Severability; This is the first part of a three part series. Each peace examines a concept in service to an argument I intend to fully illuminate in the 3^rd part of the series. This first part examines the idea of severability as a metaphor that can be used to clarify missions, jobs, tasks in the library.

Severability is defined by marion websters online dictionary as:  capable of being severed; especially : capable of being divided into legally independent rights or obligations. In the context of this post though it’s a technical term that denotes the ability of sections of a law to remain viable if separate parts of the law are struck down upon judicial review. This idea of severability in this realm  originated in contract law.

The concept of severability becomes useful as a metaphor in librarianship when we are faced with budget deficits and institutional cutbacks. Traditionally librarians have faced such periods with a do more with less attitude. The viability of such an approach is currently under threat due to the protracted nature of underfunding.  Some libraries and library systems have been operating under severe budget constraints for nearly a decade.  Questioning what we can sever out of provides the profession and these institutions an opportunity to find and focus on core functions.  When asking the questions evaluating severability, it’s important to remember, that we are not asking, what can we do without, but what can’t we do without?

Practically, severability is reliant on the ability of a separate parts of the statute to have separate mechanisms for enforcement.  What this means is that when evaluating severability, after a core mission has been determined, by determining what our absolute core function is,  we conceptualize our organization. This time by by asking what facilitates that core mission.  In essence, stripping our institutions to the core function allows for us to focus on developing those institutions in an agile framework, where we focus on delivering core services, and then build on those in a series of iterations, while engaging stakeholders. This allows the library to fluidly rebuild itself into its new identity and clarified role.

Different libraries will obviously come up with different answers to this question, a university library, might look a bit more like a traditional book warehouse, while a public library might look a bit more like a community center.  Wiping the board clean and engaging in radical redesigns of libraries missions isn’t just work for radicals; it’s an essential thought exercise for leaders. It is essential not just for moving our institutions into the future, but also for stewarding our past and steering our present.

End of Year 1/Start of year 2

Hello,
I haven't really talked about my experience in library school recently, so I' thought I would take a moment and write a bit about my experience and my plans for the coming year. The last year was a pretty busy one for me. I took some great classes, met a bunch of cool people, and went to/started to plan a conference. I know I wrote a write up about my first term here is what's happened since then.

Spring Semester 2011:

This spring I took 3 classes:

• 768 - Problems in library and information agency administration
• 748 - Business information sources and services
• 707 - Introduction to information organization and retrieval

All of the classes required a fairly substantial time commitment for the assignments and they were all back loaded at the end of the quarter. The result was a stress free start, and a stressful end. By the end of the quarter I was sleeping 12 hours over 4 days. If you've never done this before I recommend not doing it. As a result of stress and lack of sleep I forgot my external hard drive in one of the labs and it vanished. Doing things ahead of time, and not stressing out is worth it intrinsically. But if that's not enough to help you beat your procrastination streak, just imagine how much it sucked to loose 5 years of your intellectual life.

Problems in library administration was definitely a great class. It was worth if for the discussion of budgets alone. We also discussed library advocacy in depth, and how to deal with restructuring as a result of budget cuts. While the Business reference had a really weird vibe the term I took it, it was a great class and gave me a lot of experience looking for and using business information to create reports and analysis. It will definitely be a knowledge base I will use in the future. 707 was a solid intro class. It had its own thing going on, but the course work was really fun. The tests though, were very hard.

Be Afraid, Be Very Afraid

I'll be writing my legislators about this in the morning. According to a New York Times Editorial a proposed piece of legislation will make it illegal for someone to circulate any

"in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States,” any classified information “concerning the human intelligence activities of the United States.”

This law will effect librarians. As Geoffry R. Stone writes further down"it would plainly violate the First Amendment to punish anyone who might publish or otherwise circulate the information after it has been leaked." So, any library which provide information that's already public, or any librarian who directs a patron to find say a Wikileaks cable will effectively have violated federal law. While in all likelihood such a law wouldn't stand a constitutional test given recent supreme court rulings, it could cause a chilling effect.

The information published by organizations like wikileaks all ready enjoys a marginalized and tenuous existence. Yet, that information can be some of the most important information to scholars, policy makers, and the general public. We should be taking steps to protect it. Regardless of our institutional reaction to curating such documents, librarians must protect our rights to disseminate such information. If we falter here its a short road to the letting the government in our stacks to tell us what we can and can't let patrons read.