1. Douglas Waples and Social Epistemology Nicole Kam October 15, 2009

2. Who is he? University of Chicago in 1925 Highly influenced research in the graduate library school Investigating Library Problems (1939) became a standard textbook on research methods Interested in reading behavior. What Reading Does to People (1940) with Berelson and Bradshaw.

3. Epistemology What is knowledge? How do you know it is knowledge? What do you know? How do you know what you know?

4. Social Epistemology The study of how a society or group of people interacts with knowledge At what point is there collective knowledge? How does a society know what it knows? According to Jesse Shera, Waples reading behavior studies inspired the idea for social epistemology.

5. Background Waples was at the forefront of a movement in library science toward using quantitative methods to address social problems Before, library science was about technical practices and the study of “library economy” or how libraries are run

6. Libraries and Readers in the State of New York By Douglas Waples and Leon Carnovsky, 1939 To study library practices and then make recommendations to public policy based on the findings

7. Assumptions The state seeks to lead the community toward “better” reading material (2) Literacy is important. Supplying “exciting” or “sensational” publications to inspire young readers (3) “The most accessible publications are the ones most widely read” (3) quoted from Carnovsky Accessibility is not enough to encourage “good” choices when all types of publications are available. People go with the easier choice

8. Hypothesis “To increase the educational values of reading the more useful publications must be easily available”

9. Methods Two towns, Extown and Wytown, were chosen. Both are suburban communities in New York. They spend a lot of public education. Both have a wide range of publications available and a variety of means in which to obtain them. Extown: population 6,000, homogenous, wealthy, educated Wytown: population 16,000, more diverse, less wealthy, less years of schooling

10. Survey Form Appendix A & B Possible problems with self reporting? (Waples and Carnovsky, 139)

11. Survey Form Differences between the student form and the teacher and parent form? (Waples and Carnovsky, 140)

12. Qualitative Classification (Waples and Carnovsky, 146-147)

13. High School Students School library supplies considerably less trivial fiction than the public library and personal libraries/friends. (Waples and Carnovsky, 60)

14. Teachers Teachers do a lot of professional reading. Elementary school teachers read more of it. High school teachers read a wider range of publications. (Waples and Carnovsky, 82)

15. Parents Extown parents read more books on “modern social problems” and biographies. Wytown reads a lot of romance/glamour and religious books. (Waples and Carnovsky, 97)

16. Conclusions Library staffing: number of students should determine number of librarians needed, not their competency Further study to determine minimum book needs of students Better planning of library building space and design Better cooperation between school and public libraries. Combining space, staff and collections

17. Recommendations “The library” should be examined by educational authorities to further evaluate it’s value School districts that are too small for one full time librarian and an adequate collection should be increased to a larger size The State Library Extension Division should establish regional depositories A long term study should be done to better fund libraries from federal money A study to redistrict public library areas

18. Important questions today Cooperation between public school libraries and public libraries. What policies would need to be involved? How do we get kids to read? How to we get them to read “good” publications? Why are people reading what they are?

19. The Other Side His work has certainly led to LIS to become a discipline, not just a practice or a vocation. Students are encouraged to be independent and innovative and find their own answers. He encouraged interdisciplinary work. While the expansion and diversifying of the field is a good thing, Altman describes the problem of the field fragmenting. Multi-disciplinary areas of library and information science mean that funding can come from many different areas and while this may mean more funds, it can also lead to a field lacking unity.

20. The Other Side W. Boyd Rayward looks back on Waples work, arguing that the field has cycled backwards. Library school programs today are not instilling in their students the passion for research, discovery and scholarship that Waples strived for, and that perhaps it is time for a reevaluation of these programs. Charles Terbille points out the flaws of the Waples-Berelson model of library science. For example, Waples’ methods do not call for a literature review before beginning an experiment. Terbille argues for more weight to be place upon Pierce Butler’s work, who wanted librarians to be scientific, yes, but not to the point where they lose touch with the people that they serve.

21. Works Cited Altman, Ellen. "Differences in Ideology” within "Whither LIS Research: Ideology, Funding, and Educational Standards," in Library and Information Science Research, edited by Charles R. McClure and Peter Hernon (New York: Ablex, 1991), pp. 114-117. Rayward, W. Boyd. “Research and Education for Library and Information Science: Waples in Retrospect”, The Library Quarterly, 56, no. 4 (October, 1986), http://www.jstor.org/stable/4308042. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4308042 Terbille, Charles I. "Competing models of library science: Waples- Berelson and Butler." Libraries & Culture 27 (Summer 1992): 296- 319. Waples, Douglas and Leon Carnovsky. Libraries and Readers in the State of New York. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1939.