ERIC EJ1073522: Broad and Visionary. Commentary on Allen Kent (1977) Information Science. (Journal of Education for Librarianship, 17(3), 131-139)

2015·0.24 MB·English

by  ERIC

Broad and visionary. Commentary on Allen Kent
(1977) Information Science.
Journal of Education for Librarianship, 17(3), 131–139.
Marcia J. Bates
Professor Emerita Graduate School of Education and Information Studies, University of California,
Los Angeles (UCLA) Email: [email protected]
As I write, we are commemorating Al- • “Information Retrieval Experimenta-
len Kent’s long and productive life (1921- tion” by pioneering information science
2014), after his recent death (Williams, researcher Jean Tague-Sutcliffe.
2014). He was a pioneer in many aspects • “Private Presses and Fine Printing” by
of library and information science (LIS), book expert Roderick Cave.
and yet, as I read his 1977 article, there is • “Automation of Library and Informa-
not much in it that has become ancient, ir- tion Services in China to 1990” by
relevant history. The questions he discuss- Sharon Chien Lin—a rare English-
es are still alive in our discipline in 2014, language historical record of Chinese
whether we call it LIS, information sci- information history.
ence, information studies, or an “iSchool • “Library College: A Prototype for a
education.” Universal Higher Education” by Louis
Allen Kent was a manager, professor, Shores. The library college was once a
researcher, teacher, an editor. It was this popular concept in academic librarian-
last function that I know best, because, ship that should not be lost to our cur-
as Editor-in-Chief (with Mary N. Maack rent generation’s understanding.
as Co-Editor), of the Encyclopedia of Li-
brary and Information Sciences, 3rd Ed., In addition, Kent was prescient in iden-
published in 2010, I became very famil- tifying an area of historical and social
iar with his work as Chief Editor of the research in information that is still under-
first edition of that same encyclopedia. I developed: the history and social devel-
reviewed every volume and article of the opment of whole disciplinary literatures,
earlier edition, which, with updates to the with articles titled “Economics Literature:
original 33-volume encyclopedia, num- History,” “Business Literature: History,”
bered a total of 73 volumes by the time the and so on.
last volume was published in 2003, when Other entries drawn from his first edi-
the second edition was initiated under the tion addressed information technologies
Editorship of Miriam Drake. that are little discussed today, but which
His conception of the subject matter had important roles in the development of
of LIS was very broad and visionary; so modern information technology: “Hyper-
much so that we included 37 “ELIS Clas- text and Hypercard: Early Developments,”
sics” in the third edition, that is, entries “CD-ROM in Libraries” (updated to the
written for earlier editions that we felt present in the third edition by the original
should not be lost to current encyclopedia author), and “Word Processing: Early His-
readers. These included articles as varied tory.”
as the following: The primary issue that Kent deals with
J. of Education for Library and Information Science, Vol. 56, No. 1—(Winter) January 2015
ISSN: 0748-5786 © 2014 Association for Library and Information Science Education
JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SCIENCE
in his 1977 article is one that has run kinds of minds and hearts, analogous to
through the discourse of LIS during my C.P. Snow’s classic “two cultures” of hu-
entire experience of the field, continuing to manities and science.
today. This is the conflict/debate between The concerns about the human factors
libraries on the one hand and information in library work and in information system
technology on the other, a humanistic li- interface design require the presence of
brary science vs. a technical information people who understand people and care
science. I have seen librarians spit out the about making their lives work well when
word “information” as though it were re- it comes to information needs and uses.
pellent, and I have seen technical types Nothing excites children about books and
ignore anything coming from the library reading like hearing a story told by a real
world out of the ignorant assumption that human being in a real library. These fac-
nothing librarians know has any relevance tors are often not well understood by peo-
in the digital world of today. The debate ple with primarily technical talents. On the
is embodied in the common questions of other hand, the staggering amounts of in-
his time that Kent raises in his article: “Do formation needing processing today require
I really need to know how to program a technical skills that were inconceivable in
computer?” “Is ‘information science’ 1950. Finding ingenious methods of infor-
content best taught in separate courses, mation processing and selection requires
or related to conventional library science high-level technical talent and sophistica-
courses?” (Kent, 1977, p. 134). tion. We need the best minds of all types.
I am with Kent in feeling that our field People drawn to library and informa-
is inherently a mixed one, drawing on tion work have always tended to be people
technical, scientific, social scientific, and with broad and varied interests. Not ev-
humanistic forms of knowledge. To do our eryone has every talent, but we need col-
jobs well, we draw on skills and cognitive lectively to integrate those talents together
styles in all those modes. This breadth of within our field to do the best job possible
understanding is evident in his choices of with the information, people, and informa-
entry topics in the original encyclopedia, tion technology that is the subject matter
and in his discussion in the JEL article. I of our discipline. Allen Kent was one of
think there will always be this tension in the early, wise contenders in this debate.
the information disciplines, because good He will be missed, and he leaves a mag-
management and good research and theory nificent legacy.
about the topics of interest in our field re-
quire minds of many different types. As I References
look back on a lifetime in the field, having
Williams. J. G. (2014). In memoriam: Al-
heard these issues raised again and again,
len Kent (1921–2014). Journal of the Association
I feel, finally, that the debate is really a
for Information Science and Technology, 65(10):
conflict between fundamentally different 2162–2163.