Week 8 Class: Workshops and Ethics

We spent the first part of class discussing how to run a good workshop, starting out with brainstorming what makes a bad workshop. Most of the answers were typical (boring presentation, inappropriate length), but the topic of icebreakers ended up receiving quite a lot of attention. Turns out it can be tricky  business asking groups of strangers to reveal even small bits of personal information, and those activities that elicit no real information from participants merely serve to try the patience. The best bet is to find an activity or tidbit to be shared that is relevant to the workshop topic at hand. Another potentially underthought section of the workshop is the orientation; you need to bring your participants around to roughly the same page on the situation/material, and make sure that you plant means of group management (e.g. cards for forming pairs and groups) at the beginning of the session. Be conscious, as when helping a patron one-on-one, of your participants' capabilities and potential comfort zones and accomodate them accordingly to minimize confusion and derailment.

Once we got through an outline/overview of workshop structure, we participated in a library ethics workshop by addressing two stories about recent developments for the Toronto Public Library. After assessing the ALA code of ethics in class, we read both stories in small groups and voiced how we felt the code could be applied to each in turn in a class discussion. First was the story about the library placing ads on the backs of due date slips; the ads will be managed by an agency, but the library has laid down some stipulations about ads aimed at children, and will receive income from the ads. The second, about linking the catalogue with an online retailer, seemed at first to be simply a convenience. Both instances seemed to be questionable on the sixth principle of the code, but feelings were quite diverse about the degree to which either situation offended or violated the code. Even when prompted to prefer one over the other, different answers were voiced, with varying reasoning for both sides. I felt that many would have been perhaps a bit closer to an agreement if we had known more details about each situation, including the unknowable: how would each play out on a case-by-case basis? Even in hypothetical form, calling ethically charged decisions remains difficult and time-consuming.