As you know CLA is looking at making some significant structural changes.
What does this look like? What impact will these changes have for you, CAPL, our only national library association? Does any of this matter to you? If you have questions or have been looking for “space” to share your ideas with others, ask questions and hear what other members are thinking, then use this space for comments.
There isn’t much time as decisions regarding the future of our library association are being made right now.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
17 comments:
has anyone heard anything about what the new structure might look like?
A suggestion that was made to me was for CLA to consider taking on the role of conducting nation-wide research on libraries, library service, and the impact of libraries on communities and Canadians. CLA could also be the avenue for people to apply for funding to conduct research on libraries and their impact/role. The thought was that research of this nature is done in the U.S. but not really done here. See http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/25/library-computers-used-by_n_512681.html.
this kind of information is relatively easy to collect - it might even just be a case of making a request to libraries. I know that our library already knows what percentage of computer is generated through various activities.
I have heard that the H.R. symposium in Ottawa last year was considered a valuable exercise. As a role for a newly structured CLA maybe "conferences" could be more issue specific and include an electronic attendance option. I think to be inclusive and to benefit from the whole diversity of the library community the invitation would need to be open however.
The statements in the CLA Release are positive but vague. Clearly, CLA does not generate enough revenue to continue business as usual, so what gives? The cost of the membership and the Annual Conference is high.
With the dollar virtually at par many of us are opting for ALA membership and conference. Is it time to go this route?
Furthermore, why is the AGM always the last part of the Conference? Why do so few members attend, and even if they intend to attend, are "driven away" by a poor closing speaker as in Montreal?
Perhaps the important nature of these potential changes will in fact, draw a larger-than-usual attendance and therefore some debate about the future of our national, professional organization.
CAPL Executive Committee should provide a framework for this discussion.
Are we talking about the future of CLA, the future of CAPL or both?
As a division of CLA, CAPL will be part of any restructuring. I believe we are talking about both and that a restructured CLA must include divisions in some capacity. As much as we have shared issues of national interest across all the library sectors, public libraries and public librarians also need a strong national voice.
Membership fees are too expensive. We can't retain student members when the fee jumps from $25 to $200. $200 is too much for individual memberships.
I was disappointed to see that the recent statement about the task force, as sent out by the CLA president talked primarily about financial solvency, without addressing the issue of relevance of the association. Do they not realize that they go hand in hand?
Being too new to the profession I don't yet qualify for the NELI yet though I hope to attend it at the next opportunity. I definitely think that it's valuable for CLA to offer learning opportunities about leadership. I also like the idea of CLA stepping in and becoming involved in research. This is definitely needed for advocacy purposes and also for libraries to evaluate services too. I am looking forward to attending the upcoming program offered by CLA on collection development in the 200s. I hope more sessions on collection development will be freely offered to the community through the webinar format. Please keep up the good work. Thank you!
Reducing the membership fee, I believe, would draw more members. The right balance of members to fee, might increase membership, but an increase in membership will definitely increase input from the sector. A high membership fee leads to comments like "what does my $200 get me?"
Who are the people that are willing to pay $200? I pay it, but still wish I got more for it.
What do I want for my $200? Interesting articles in Felicitor that make me want to open it; web content that draws me into the site on a regular basis; a feeling of connection and pride to my profession; a conference with sessions that are fun, interesting, and speak to my professional needs; timely response to critical issues nationally and provincially . . .
I am just re-reading the Writing the Future document. It has been around for quite some time! There are some pretty reasonable recommendations, especially around conferences. Why wouldn't we hold conferences every second year in Ottawa, for example? Why couldn't CLA conferences in the alternate year be held, as issue based conversations, in conjunction with provincial conferences. I thought these seemed like good ideas nearly 10 years ago.
Writing the Future - recommends that the base rate for CLA membership does not include membership in any division. Instead people would be asked to pay an additional $30 for divisional membership and it is this revenue that would fund (or not) division activities.
Some suggestions for improving CLA as an association that serves members:
1. Force divisions to provide services and activities outside of conference. As far as I can tell, only the special libraries group does anything on a regular basis.
2. Stop handing out money to divisions and interest groups without a budget plan. We all have to submit a plan to get our annual budgets, why should CLA groups be any different?
3. Bring back membership fees based on income levels, like OLA does. This would help to reduce the pain of going from $25 to $200 in one-shot.
4. Encourage students and new professionals to participate by ensuring one seat on every committee is reserved for either a student or new professional.
5. Hold more national events outside of conference. The HR Summit was a good example. So was the value of libraries conference.
6. Look past the provincial associations. They aren't are only possible partners (often they are the competition). How many librarians work outside traditional libraries? How can we reach out to them?
7. Bring outside groups into the fold. Why can't a group like Librarians Without Borders be an affiliate of CLA? They get the benefit of stable administrative support, CLA gets some revenue and the name out there.
8. Acknowledge the volunteers. When was the last time CLA actually thanked the people who serve on committees and working groups? Isn't Volunteer Week coming up?
9. Build bridges to the library schools. Why don't more faculty come to conference? Is there a disconnect between the schools and reality? Should CAIS meet at CLA every few years? A research-based conference?
10. Tell the whiners to stop. Instead of carping about what CLA is doing wrong from the outside, how about joining and fixing it from inside?
Am I whining? Maybe. But I'll also be sending my suggestions to the Task Force. I'm a member and it's My Association!
Dividends the value of public libraries in canada - I was just scanning this 1995 report and see that it is in pretty serious need of updating. Is this a role for CLA, working divisions, and institutions?
CAPL decided some years ago not to update the Dividends report. Instead CAPL started the Public Libraries Building Capacity wiki which is available on the CLA/CAPL website. The wiki is updated on a regular basis and library staff across the country can contribute to it. Library staff can find current research and articles that support the public library's role in building capacity.
Post a Comment