Quill 106[1], January 2006

EBL recollections

A mini report from the EBL Mini Conference 2005

Cate Absolon met with Brad Jones to ask him about the experience of co-presenting this paper:

Employing evidence: does it have a job in vocational libraries?
Cecily Martin, Southbank TAFE
Brad Jones, Bremer TAFE

The paper was divided into sections:

1. Abstract.
   
   
   • In the past pragmatic matters toward research (integral to their everyday role).
     
     
   • Recent a shift seen a workplace with the most evidence based sector of the educational environment with the advent of training packages which are national transportable prescriptive explicitly defined competency based using 'evidence guides' and outcome driven.
     
     
   • Suggest that a more systematic research model be adopted and that librarians universally become 'evidence literate'.
2. 2. Librarians: generic and specialist evidence skills?
   
   
   • As librarians were not traditionally trained in (generic) research methodology and therefore absorb skill sets and culture from their host employer (specialist) organisation.
     
     
   • Consequently libraries in the health and academic sector emerged as high interest parties in the EBL movement.
     
     
   • VET has a vested economic interest and therefore different medicine.
     
     
   • Variation in type of evidence (more advanced- different methodology) exists between disciplines eg legal concept and an educational perspective.
     
     
   • Variation in evidence exists within different sectors of the same discipline.
     
     
   • Dilemma faced by the library industry was cited as being the trend of paraprofessionals ( trained at TAFE) are generally working on the complex tasks which were previously only done by a librarian.
     
     
   • EBL relies on the argument that librarians have lacked the generic scientific methodology and fosters the development of increasing the number of projects based on the statistical analysis.
3. 3. A Brief history of vocational education in Australia.
   
   
4. 4. The current basis of vocational education.
   
   
5. 5. The VET experience.
   
   
6. 6. Does evidence have a role in vocational libraries.
   
   
7. 7. Postscript : VETing the evidence.
   
   
   • New competency based model for training doctors in their first year of practice in Britain's Department of Health in August 2005.

The interview

1. What was the exact process leading up to presenting 'Employing evidence: does it have a job in vocational libraries?'

One of the managers put an e-mail around work (South bank at that stage) trying to encourage people. Most were already wearied with workloads and the malaise that goes with restructures etc. CEC, however, is a dynamo and really keen to do conferences. I was getting tired of being on the receiving end of PD sessions and felt ready for a new challenge. While dealing with TAFE themes it would take us into a cross sectoral environment. And it is not every day one gets a chance to have a crack at an international conference! So we got the application details, and followed instructions from there.

Author's NB follows the link to http://conferences.alia.or.au/ebl2005/contrbutions.html call for contributions - important dates ( Submission of Abstracts closed May 2005) themes - types of submissions - criteria for selection - awards.

2. Great title... focus question included for sound EBL framework.... who thought of it and where did the inspiration begin?

CEC and I both have multiple degrees, but the talk these days is often of PhD expectation - (e.g. papers from ALIA last year and also this conference) - to get any professional traction and be taken seriously. We feel that breadth is every bit as useful as depth, and at some stage of your life and we aren't getting any younger) you have to actually do something aside from following assumed rules and doing the paper chase treadmill to stay in the same place. The stereotype cataloguer/pedant is one side of the library game, but there is a touch of the non-conformist anarchist in many librarians. So we felt a title was very 'first impression' important to even be in with a chance. It had to have a hook, be pithy and have a vocational theme. I guess a background of Goon Shows and Monty Python always helps - in fact it was a bit like the Monty Python sketch on naming a pop group. It took a while - we tossed a few ideas around, and I think (?) the final efforts were mine with CEC's laughter as the acceptability-o-meter. We were both pleasantly surprised (shocked) to have it accepted!

3. What was your original point of contact with EBL and any significant highlights to recount on the journey to date?

CEC and I were both at South bank at that stage and she was talking about the conference and wondering what this evidence business was all about and if there were any possibilities there. I knew about her earlier study with Elizabeth and got her to talk it through the stages. My first degree was in Psychology, with a fairly heavy emphasis on research methods and stats. As she went through I stopped her at relevant points and told her what methodology she had used and how various stages were 'evidence' - i.e. she had already done it (as many of us do) without realising.

When we were accepted, as I mentioned, we were a bit (?) shocked, excited and daunted. Now we had to put up or shut up in a significant forum. There were numerous highlights - it was a roller coaster ride from start to finish. We thought we might be able to build on existing literature, and built the abstract on that basis. But then we trawled other areas - as we went along it began to dawn on us that we seemed to be in new turf, as previous work was medical, academic and occasionally public or school oriented... but (while evidence methodologies have been used in vocational work) nothing placing EBL in the vocational context. If anyone knows of anything, pals advise...

So the abstract gradually evolved into a paper, and then into a presentation, and at each stage it evolved and we had to continually remind ourselves - with limited success - of what we had originally intended. We learned a lot about what was happening in these other areas, and that was great. I remember an old saying along the lines of 'if you want to learn something, teach it', and it was a bit like that.

4. How was the working relationship with your co writer/presenter Cecily Martina developed?

CEC is a liaison librarian at COTAH (South bank). When she was doing an earlier project she went off-line and I replaced her. We then worked together for a while and developed a mutual respect for each others viewpoints and skills, particularly our ability to exchange good natured insults (a necessity in any healthy workplace, much downplayed in the texts). When this one came up we collaborated in a 'business as usual' way, only I was offered a position at The Bremer and my bank manager dictated that this would make the collaboration a little more difficult. E-mail, a few visits and considerable lack of sleep and we eventually had it done.

5. Briefly, what would be the key point(s) which you would like to be reflected upon by your peers from your work?

• That despite the daily routine you can take on a challenge, and - occasionally, but without wanting to push the positive thinking/achievement thing (there is far too much of that these days) - it comes off.
  
  
• That the library game does need a more scientific basis to it (I said that in my final course project in 1985...), and EBL seems to be the banner that this is happening under. Library literature and discourse should supplement anecdote, news and tech advice with more structured strategies - for a library audience, and we need to think well beyond literature research.
  
  
• That the scientific approach that works for medicine and higher education will not necessarily work for public, school and TAFE libraries. There are many strands to EBL and we haven't properly unravelled them yet. Different scientific approaches are applicable, and they must reflect the parent organisation to have credibility there.
  
  
• That some people are silly enough to put their hands up for more work in their own time, rather than far more sensible options such as tele and a beer.

6. How would you rate the overall experience of getting the paper presented at an international conference?

A buzz. Demanding, but a real buzz.

It was also nice having one of the 'gurus' indicate he was going to pinch one of our presentation ideas for future use.

7. Were there any particularly difficult phases that came to mind?

No, it was a bit like writing an application followed by a mini thesis followed by actual presentation - all a constant sustained background pressure, with deadline moments, but it will be easier next time.

8. Would you recommend the 'gig' to others?
No way. It will only mean future competition for us.