WHAT DO ART INFORMATION PROFESSIONALS WANT TO LEARN ABOUT INFORMATIONTECHNOLOGY AND HOW DO THEY WANT TO LEARN IT?Author(s): Deirdre C. StamSource: Art Documentation: Journal of the Art Libraries Society of North America, Vol. 12,No. 1 (Spring 1993), pp. 3-5Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of the Art Libraries Society of NorthAmericaStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27948507 .

Accessed: 10/06/2014 17:13

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

The University of Chicago Press and Art Libraries Society of North America are collaborating with JSTOR todigitize, preserve and extend access to Art Documentation: Journal of the Art Libraries Society of NorthAmerica.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 62.122.77.90 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 17:13:44 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Art Documentation, Spring 1993 3

WHAT DO ART INFORMATION

PROFESSIONALS WANT TO LEARN ABOUT INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND

HOW DO THEY WANT TO LEARN IT? by Deirdre C. Stam

Catholic University of America

(This paper was delivered at the ARLISINA Annual Conference in

Chicago, February 1992.)

The evidence of need for continuing education in information

technologies among art librarians and visual arts curators is all

around us. A glance at the electronic discussion group for art

librarians (ARLIS-L) and at the program of ARLIS/NA con ferences, for example, indicates keen interest in local area net

works, online public access catalogs, electronic clip art, and

online cataloging systems, among other computer-related topics. And the full program of ARLIS/NA conference workshops indi cates that instruction in these topics is considered by conference

organizers to be an appropriate offering. Upgrading of skills with information technology, it appears, is greatly desired in this

community. The kind of upgrading needed and wanted by art information

professionals, however, is less obvious. Just what do art librarians

and visual resources curators want to know about information

technology, and how do they want to learn it? The media exam

ined for evidence?the electronic discussion group and the

conference?dictate formats for learning that may not be the

preferred modes for these potential students. The electronic dis cussion group, for example, encourages only brief inquiries and

specific responses, and the ARLIS/NA workshops usually stress hands-on use of specific programs and tools. Similarly, these

media are suited to particular kinds of topics and not to others.

Both work well for teaching specific procedures; neither is par ticularly well suited to teaching theory. A cursory look at these two means of learning leaves the basic questions unanswered:

what do art professionals want to learn and how do they want to

learn it? Art librarians and visual resources curators were consulted to

find answers to these questions. As part of a survey conducted

during December 1991, questionnaires were distributed to 60 art information professionals listed in the most recent ARLIS/NA

Handbook and List of Members. On the 40 useable forms returned, respondents identified themselves predominantly as art libra

rians (27), and in smaller numbers as visual resources curators

(8) and other related professionals (7). Interesting enough, there was very little variation in responses according to the kinds of

responsibilities reported. Before moving to what art information professionals want to

learn, it is useful to know what they know already. Regular use of the following technologies was reported, here listed in the order of popularity beginning with the most commonly mentioned:

Word-processing (34) Online public access catalogs (27) Automated cataloging systems (24) Electronic mail (21) Automated circulation systems (20) Online bibliographic databases from vendors (20) Automated ordering systems (17) In-house databases (or CD-Roms or videodiscs) (17) CD-ROM databases from vendors (12) Serials check-in systems (11) Commercial CD-ROM or videodisc products other than

bibliographic databases (7) Spreadsheets (5) Publishing programs (2) Because of the importance of the major utilities, some detail is

appropriate here. For computerized cataloging systems, use of RLIN and OCLC is about evenly divided, with no other utilities mentioned. The use of either by visual resources curators is

understandably low, with only two curators mentionings RLIN.

Among other RLIN databases used are these files: AVERY (11), SCIPIO (9), AMC (4), VIM (3), SERIALS (2), NAF [Name Au thority File] (2), AREF [Avery Reference File] (1), ESTC (1), and RIPD [Research-in-Progress Database] (1).

Some respondents expanded upon the catchall categories of

technologies. Among in-house databases reportedly used, for ex

ample, art professionals mention slide catalogs, gifts and ex

change software, local union catalogs, exhibition lists, citation

software, periodical lists, friends organization lists, an electronic

periodical, a provenance index, and others. Specific non

bibliographic commercial CD-ROM or videodisc products re

ported are the National Gallery collection videodisc, a similar

product for Louvre collections, the Oxford English Dictionary, an index of German painters, and various hypermedia products. Other computerized resources included the Art and Architec ture Thesaurus and programs for payroll, font generation, labels, menus, gallery catalogues, and DOS management func tions. In brief, art professionals as a group deal with a very wide

range of technologies, but some of these formats are used by only a handful of people in this field.

How have art information professionals developed their tech nological "know-how"? Three methods overwhelm the rest: self

study with manuals (35), help from colleagues (32), and in-house tutorials (25). Vendors' formal instruction was mentioned fre

quently (18), but comments suggested dissatisfaction with these presentations. Workshops sponsored by professional societies

This content downloaded from 62.122.77.90 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 17:13:44 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

4 Art Documentation, Spring 1993

followed (15), with the remaining formats lagging rather far behind: self-study using on-screen tutorials (13), formal course

work (7), short courses in education institutions (7), other kinds of workshops (2), and other means including reading techni cal literature, using telephone help lines, and working with consultants.

But how do art information professionals prefer to learn? This

question is particularly important to a professional society inter ested in serving the continuing education needs of its member

ship. It is really the crux of this inquiry. Learning from colleagues who know the system in question

is clearly the most palatable method, with 27 people reporting this preference. In-house tutorials (23) and workshops sponsored by professional societies (18) follow closely behind. Self-study with manuals is acceptable, with 16 people reporting a prefer ence for this method (in interesting contrast to the 34 who re

ported actually having used this method but presumably without

enjoyment). Vendors' presentations are less popular (12), with

self-study using on-screen tutorials lagging behind (10), followed

by short courses in education institutions (7), "other workshops" (1), and other means such as telephone support and reading the computer literature. No one reported preferring formal course work. The only significant variation between art li

brarians and visual resources curators is the greater proportional

preference expressed by the latter for short courses in educa tional institutions.

What do art information professionals want to learn? Not de tailed skills, it seems. More than half responding to this question (56%) indicated that they are quite comfortable with their pres ent level of technical skills (with 23 reporting "yes" and 18 "no"). Among the less comfortable, the need was expressed to become familiar with word processing, database creation, image tech

nologies, (better) database searching strategies, e-mail, CD-ROM

products, networking techniques, and spreadsheets. More telling than this scattered list of applications, however, were the com

ments on the reasons for dissatisfaction. The opportunity to

practice skills was cited as a need by many. And more significant was the observation that what was needed was an overall view of

entire integrated systems rather than simple instruction in the bits and pieces used in the local unit. "I am learning to do

specific things by the seat of the pants, with little background or

general understanding of how things work?this makes it more difficult and puts me at a disadvantage in explaining to others," remarked one frustrated respondent. "It's very hard to keep up with changes," lamented another. A visual resources person cited the need to know enough to computerize a collection.

A somewhat similar degree of satisfaction (68%) was expressed about the present state of understanding of basic theory such as

indexing and abstracting, thesaurus construction, information

retrieval, et al. Here, however, comments belied the statistic. As to

what people wanted to know, respondents mentioned "every

thing," "all," and the "basics," and "I know nothing so I don't

know." Among specific theoretical concerns cited were: the saurus construction and use (3), telecommunications (3), and

single references were made to subject searching, imaging tech nology, artificial intelligence, accessing external databases, and

interfaces for online catalogs. Can ARLIS/NA help? Despite the 5 naysayers, the response

was encouraging in that 33 art professionals said "yes." How?

Respondents were very forthcoming. Twenty-three people called for workshops, though some qualified their statements with com ments on the need for "vetting" workshops to ensure high quality and sophisticated sessions. Many praised the past work of ARLIS/NA in providing such opportunities. Repeated mention was made of step-by-step articles in ARLIS (ARLIS/NA and re

gional) publications, of substantive demonstrations of new prod ucts at conferences, and of workshops at regional meetings. Scattered mention was made of the need for lectures, electronic connections to share information, summer institutes, sessions of

practitioners and users at conferences, evaluations of products in

ARLIS publications (and advice on evaluation techniques), and task forces to address timely issues. One respondent concluded

with a call for advice on how to ensure that technology was

supporting the library's mission. The greatest barrier to learning about new technologies for

most professionals is not, as one might expect, lack of money but rather lack of time. (For visual resources professionals, however, the two resources are equally scanty.) Other problems cited ranged widely, including lack of access to equipment, lack of opportunity to practice new skills, the rapidity of technological changes, lack of in-house support staff, and just plain lack of interest. Given the variety of responsibilities facing art informa tion professionals, commented one, it is hard to master such a

variety of technologies as now exist. Another felt overwhelmed

by the "deluge" of technological opportunities and uncertain about which to address. In sum, the essential problem in learn

ing new technologies seems to be largely a matter of priorities. Which technologies are important, and which are worth the time to learn?

Additional comments by respondents echoed some opinions expressed elsewhere but are grouped here because they repre sented the summary thoughts of respondents and therefore de serve some degree of emphasis.

Three ideas emerged strongly in these closing remarks. First, education in new technologies is essential for art information professionals in order that they have a sophsticated understand

ing of these tools. In this vein, one person commented that specialists and special training are needed; librarians cannot deal effectively with new technologies "on the fly." Secondly, this edu cation should include an overall view of technologies and their interrelationships as they occur in art library and visual re sources settings. And thirdly, art repository administrators need to be educated, as well as librarians and visual arts curators, so that they will make available the technologies and the support necessary, especially in the many art libraries and visual re

sources centers that are isolated either geographically or

institutionally. In conclusion, the need for the education of art information

professionals in new technologies is as diverse and complex as the technologies themselves. A few patterns emerge from the detail. While individual needs vary, there is a widespread desire to place these new technologies into some kind of integrated framework and to relate that technological framework to the purposes of the profession. Professionals do and prefer to learn the detail to some extent in their home institutions and in work shops. They find one-to-one and small, highly focused instruc tional sessions useful. They can use some publications also in their institutional setting. What they cannot easily learn there, and feel some need for, is the overall picture: how technologies work, how they interrelate, and how they can be used for profes sional purposes.

Looking at these findings from the point of view of ARLIS/ NA as a professional organization, one can see the opportunity for several kinds of service to members. The categories of infor mation sought seem to consist of basic detail (e.g., instruction in particular programs), theoretical foundations (e.g., instruction in

subject indexing), overviews (e.g., explanations of integrated sys tems or

networking concepts), principles of evaluation and selec

tion, and advice on effective applications in the context of art information repositories. These categories are quite distinct, and

programs addressing them should be suitably specialized and identified. The pedagogical modes for addressing these categories of

topics can vary, taking into account the suitability of the mode to the subject and the preferences of members, such as the ex

pressed enthusiasm for workshops. So strong is this particular enthusiasm that ARLIS/NA might even consider supplanting some traditional panel presentations in the main body of its conferences with more

workshop and user-group presentations. A second major instructional format is, of course, the oft-cited

This content downloaded from 62.122.77.90 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 17:13:44 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Art Documentation, Spring 1993 5

publications program, and especially the less formal publications that can accommodate timely information and homely "how to"

advice. As to which mode of instruction is suitable to which

category of information, planners can turn to the growing body of literature on teaching information technology.

Finally, ARLIS/NA cannot do the job of educating its mem bers about new information technology alone. It can, however, extend its present role as communications vehicle to make

known opportunities of high quality for continuing education in new technologies and art information resources that may be

available in its own regional organizations and in allied organi zations. Though not taking on the full responsibility for educa tion in this area, it can reasonably assume the job of functioning as an informal clearinghouse for educational opportunities. The

need is there; the organization is in place. And such activity is

entirely consistent with the ARLIS/NA Strategic Plan. This or

ganization is the obvious agency to take on the task of helping its members get the training they want and need in new informa

tion technologies.

This content downloaded from 62.122.77.90 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 17:13:44 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions