Not Business as Usual: Incorporating LIS Student Perspectives in the Apprenticeship Hiring Process

In Brief

While a Master’s in Library and Information Science (MLIS) degree is typically necessary to become an academic librarian, practical experiences such as internships, practicums, and apprenticeships are essential in gaining employment post-graduation. Providing paid opportunities where LIS students participate in and contribute to meaningful mentorship, training, and work experience is critical to improving inclusion in academic libraries. This article reflects on experiences of student employees of the University of Colorado (CU) Boulder University Libraries’ Ask a Librarian Apprenticeship, who collaborated with the apprenticeship supervisor to purposefully reassess the hiring process for incoming apprentices. This article demonstrates how including student employees as active participants in the hiring process is not only a valuable experiential learning opportunity, but also shifts power dynamics from a sole hiring manager to a team including student employees, creating a better hiring process for student applicants. 

By: Estefania Eiquihua, Karen Adjei, Janelle Lyons, and Megan E. Welsh

Introduction

Although the Master of Library and Information Science (MLIS) degree is required (in many cases) in order to be a professional librarian, a degree alone is not sufficient for library school (LIS) graduates when they enter the job market. Hands-on experience through internships, practicums, and apprenticeships allows students to put coursework into practice and prepare for the post-graduation job search by gaining a sense of what librarianship looks like. As these work experiences have historically been unpaid, it is crucial that libraries begin and continue to offer paid opportunities so that LIS students are not forced to pay for credits toward their degree or contribute free labor to an organization in exchange for practical experience. The challenge of receiving worthwhile professional experience, which may or may not be paid, is especially poignant for emerging library professionals who identify with a historically marginalized group that has traditionally been excluded from librarianship. 

Providing paid opportunities for emerging library professionals is one way to promote inclusion. However, libraries can further facilitate an environment of inclusion by actively involving their current student employees in the hiring process of such paid opportunities. When student employees are actively and purposefully involved in the hiring process – through crafting the job ad, developing evaluation criteria, and interviewing candidates – it benefits the library, the current employee, and future applicants. By intentionally including student employee experiences in hiring practices, professional development opportunities aimed to support emerging library professionals become more accessible. At the University of Colorado (CU) Boulder University Libraries, we experienced the power of involving student employees in the hiring process firsthand by embedding current graduate student apprentices throughout all stages of the hiring process as we recruited a new apprentice. Current student employees were able to gain valuable experience in hiring, candidates experienced a more transparent application and interview process, and the hiring supervisor received valuable insights into how best to implement more inclusive student employee hiring practices to benefit future iterations of the apprenticeship program. 

This article demonstrates how including student employees as active participants in the hiring process is not only a meaningful experiential learning opportunity for apprentices, but also shifts power dynamics from a sole hiring manager to a team including student employees. This article contextualizes these experiences by reviewing the literature on meaningful professional development opportunities for LIS students as well as literature about hiring processes in academic libraries. Our overall intention is to highlight how including current apprentices in iterations of the hiring process creates a better experience for applicants. The practices laid out in this article would be of particular interest for any library hiring supervisors interested in challenging the status quo, providing a rewarding professional development opportunity for student employees, and recruiting a more diverse population of student employees through thoughtful hiring practices.

Literature Review 

Much has been published on the value of providing LIS students with practical experiences through mentorship programs, internships, and practicums. Most literature in support of practical experiences for LIS students argue that an LIS curriculum alone does not provide students the on-the-job training that seems to be expected in the field. Lacy & Copeland (2013) cite that while all LIS programs place value on practical experiences, in many cases students are not required to participate in internships or practicums in order to graduate (unless they are concentrating on school librarianship, for example). The authors emphasize the importance of mentorship programs that offer opportunities for LIS students to network, experience day-to-day work life and job expectations, and to enhance job seeking skills. A study by Goodsett & Koziura (2016) questions what can be done to improve LIS education for new librarians. They surveyed over 575 LIS graduates in order to gain insight into the perceived effectiveness of their LIS education. While respondents undoubtedly found value in their LIS education, most reported that their LIS curriculum emphasized theoretical knowledge. An overwhelming number of respondents reported that practical experiences such as work experience, internships, and practicums were essential in gaining employment post-graduation. 

The need of LIS students to supplement their graduate curriculum sheds light on the importance for libraries to provide meaningful practical experiences so that the next generation of information professionals is well prepared to intentionally maintain and improve the field of librarianship. Lewey & Moody-Goo (2018) suggest that the ideal internship is mindfully designed and should be “transformative and empowering” for the LIS student. The authors emphasize that internships which are mindfully designed can “benefit all parties involved—intern, institution, library, librarians, and the LIS field as a whole” (p.238). The authors advocate that “meaningful internships should have four key features: supportive mentorship, purposeful planning and training, simulation of an authentic professional position, and reflection and assessment” (p. 238). Wang et al. (2022) agree that access to meaningful internships is essential for post-graduate success. However, the authors argue that internships should also strive to become more equitable. The authors cite various barriers that hinder LIS students from being able to participate in practical experiences such as: availability of opportunities, location, lack of time, and finances. Another barrier mentioned was the expectation for students to “volunteer” for experiences or to complete credit bearing practicums in which students have to pay tuition. The authors are critical of the “superficial professionalization” of librarianship and recommend that libraries should work toward supporting LIS students and recent graduates by funding internships and practicums. They also recommend offering interns competitive pay and offering remote or hybrid work to help alleviate the financial or geographic burden of trying to gain practical experience. 

Wildenhaus (2019) emphasizes the critical importance to denormalize unpaid positions in LIS. She notes that the message presented to many LIS students and new librarians is “the cost of entry to a career in libraries and archives is a willingness—and ability—to work for free” (p.2). Wildenhaus states,“the prevalence of unpaid internships may negatively impact efforts for diversity and inclusion among information workers while contributing to greater precarity of labor throughout the workforce” (p.1). Unpaid labor is an additional barrier to Black, Indigenous, and persons of color (BIPOC) seeking practical experience, as Galvan (2015) points out, “only students with access to money can afford to take an unpaid internship… insuring [sic] the pool of well-qualified academic librarians skews white and middle class” (para. 31). Holler (2020) furthers this notion by highlighting, “only certain sorts of people can afford to work for free: people who are wealthy; people with spouses or partners who can provide for them; people who have the luxury of living with families or guardians; people who are unburdened by care work and its economies; people without outstanding medical bills or student debt; and, overwhelmingly: people who are white” (para. 40). Holler (2020) rejects the notion that unpaid or underpaid labor should be normalized and advocates for a “equity budgeting model” in which the culture of paying dues is denounced and institutions commit to paying all workers, especially students who are trying to gain practical experiences in community-based cultural work sectors. Holler (2020) explains that the equity budgeting model is rooted in the desire to “[repair] the damage of a fundamentally extractive nonprofit-industrial complex and cultural work sector, which has survived on the systemic underpayment (or non-payment) of community members of color and freelance cultural workers alike — resulting in a cultural work economy in which independently wealthy, white, or salaried practitioners hold unfair and unequal sway” (para. 3).

There is a significant gap in the literature detailing the perspectives of BIPOC LIS students and new librarians’ experiences with unpaid labor. The lack of literature on the topic may be due to the vulnerable position in which BIPOC LIS students and new librarians find themselves–trying to break into their profession while being entrenched in a culture that insists on “paying your dues” in order to gain professional experience. Insight into their experiences would provide essential knowledge to challenge the status quo in hopes to denormalize the prevalence of unpaid labor in LIS. 

Furthermore, we were not able to find literature that specifically discussed the experiences of LIS students being involved in the hiring process, a growing body of literature has emphasized the importance of inclusive hiring practices as a way to reduce barriers that hinder recruitment efforts (Cunningham et al., 2019; Galvan, 2015; Harper, 2020; Houk & Nielsen, 2023; Shah & Fife, 2023). Shah & Fife (2023) further state, “the recruitment/hiring/retention life cycle for BIPOC job candidates for academic and research libraries is fraught with bureaucracy and layers of communication that deter the very DEAI concepts that they aim to practice” (para. 2). The authors emphasize that complex job descriptions and complicated application processes hinder recruitment efforts and instead, libraries should “focus on the humanity of the candidates” (para. 16), and work toward dismantling barriers by providing honest and concise job descriptions. 

Houk & Nielsen (2023) further this argument for person-centered hiring practices by advocating that every aspect of the recruitment process be critically examined. Specifically, the authors critically examine interviews and emphasize “the need for intentionality in creating environments where candidates, particularly candidates from marginalized communities, feel welcome and set up for success during their interviews” (Discussion section, para. 1). In their research, the authors found that the idea of “the interview as a test” was common. This manifested in explicit testing of skills through presentations or interview questions, in hidden testing through observations of a candidate’s behavior, or in perceived “fit.” The idea of hiring based on the “interview as a test” and “fit” is problematic when put into context of a profession that has been historically predominantly white. According to an American Library Association (ALA) 2012 Diversity Counts survey, nearly 88% of professional librarians identified as white. Cunningham et al. (2019) emphasizes that “fit” is often “undefinable, intangible, and thus allows for libraries to stay within their comfort zones and replicate the status quo” (p. 17). 

Furthermore, while interviews are an integral part of determining whether a candidate is a good match for a position, Houk & Nielsen (2023) argue that libraries should reexamine how they are evaluating candidates and ensure they are making intentional efforts to reduce bias in their hiring criteria. They suggest intentional actions such as providing candidates with interview questions and giving candidates accommodations to ensure that candidates are comfortable and more confident during the interview process. Establishing well-defined hiring criteria and qualifications help reduce bias. The work to improve the hiring practices for CU Boulder Libraries’ Ask a Librarian Apprenticeship through the inclusion of student apprentices, directly addresses these suggestions from the literature review and furthers the conversation by contributing a successful model of reducing professional development barriers in the LIS field.

Apprenticeship Context

University of Colorado (CU) Boulder is a large, R1, public university enrolling over 30,000 students. Five libraries on campus comprise the University Libraries system and support undergraduate and graduate students, faculty, staff, and the broader Boulder, Colorado community. The largest library on campus currently has a distinct reference desk (the Ask a Librarian Desk) and the University Libraries maintain a virtual chat service which we call “Ask A Librarian.” On most evenings and weekends during the academic year, our virtual chat service is staffed exclusively by LIS student employees. Since 2018, we have hired ten graduate students in library and information science as Ask A Librarian Apprentices at CU Boulder. The apprenticeship is a paid, practical experience which aims to build library school students’ skills in reference work by staffing evening and weekend chat shifts, while also supporting their interests as they engage in professional development, networking, and special projects ranging from building research guides to collection development to publishing and presenting. Unique from internships and practica, the apprenticeship is an intentionally scaffolded experience which provides LIS students with a holistic view of academic librarian responsibilities. It is an experience that lasts longer than a typical semester-long internship or practicum, and usually for the duration of the apprentice’s LIS education (due to campus funding parameters, LIS students are no longer eligible to be an apprentice after they graduate). 

In 2020, as the COVID-19 pandemic shifted the apprenticeship to a remote work opportunity, CU Boulder Libraries also intentionally viewed the apprenticeship as an opportunity to recruit LIS students of color to academic librarianship. Contextualized by the Black Lives Matter movement, the murders of Breonna Taylor and George Floyd, growing awareness of the historical injustices and predominance of whiteness in academic library settings, and training dedicated to recruiting and retaining librarians of color (see the excellent the Library Juice Academy course “Recruiting and Retaining Librarians from Underrepresented Minoritized Groups”), CU Boulder Libraries accepted a proposal in summer 2021 to continue the remote modality of the apprenticeship and to explicitly welcome BIPOC students to apply. The apprenticeship is a valuable opportunity for students to gain practical skills as they look toward graduation and enter the job market. It has evolved over the years, especially given the pandemic when apprentices transitioned from staffing our physical reference desk in person to staffing our virtual chat service. Apprentice project work over the past four years has included increased participation in the hiring process for incoming apprentices. 

Initially, in 2018 and 2019, the hiring process involved Megan as the apprenticeship supervisor and hiring manager developing and posting a job ad, reviewing applications, scheduling interviews, and making the final hiring decision; sometimes her colleague who managed the reference desk joined the interviews. The hiring process has evolved to be entirely virtual, matching the modality in which the apprenticeship is currently offered, and now includes current apprentices. The extent of apprentice participation in the hiring process has grown over the past four years. In 2020, apprentices began to sit in on interviews. We moved from incorporating a staff colleague as a companion interviewer to involving current apprentices, both because that staff colleague’s responsibilities had changed and that role experienced turnover, and also as a way for graduate student applicants to hear directly from the experience of current apprentices. This opportunity for current apprentices to articulate their unique perspectives and to be transparent about what the job actually looks like is a valuable opportunity for them and for applicants. Apprentices are able to describe everything from the questions they receive over chat, to the project work they engage in, to what it’s like to work with Megan as a mentor and supervisor. These are questions that Megan cannot answer in the same way, or in nearly as meaningful a way, as our current apprentices.

Currently, CU Boulder Ask a Librarian Apprentices participate in the hiring process by:

• Reviewing and revising the job ad in collaboration with Megan. This helps to capture, in real-time, what apprentices have experienced throughout the entire hiring and employment process. They are able to bring their experiences into all stages of the hiring process to ensure that it benefits future apprentices. CU Boulder apprentice involvement in hiring creates continuity of feedback, revision, learning, and application of inclusive practices for everyone throughout the hiring process so that apprentices and the supervisor can learn from each other and improve approaches to hiring and onboarding,
• Helping to recruit by advertising through listservs, library school forums, on social media (e.g., the We Here Facebook group, a space exclusively for BIPOC library school students and library professionals), and through word of mouth with peers at conferences and individually. These recruiting efforts highlight how apprentices create and leverage their networks within the LIS field to positively contribute to the hiring process. Advertising through these networks expands the reach of the job posting and knowledge of CU Boulder as a site that supports LIS student labor. It also represents the various social networks that current LIS students are a part of, especially ones which the hiring manager may not be aware of, have access to, or be welcome to participate in,
• Reviewing, discussing, and suggesting revisions to hiring documentation. This documentation includes a rubric used to rank application materials, a list of interview questions, and a rubric used to rank interviewees,
• Reviewing applications and ranking them to help prioritize who we should invite to the interview stage, 
• Participating in the interview process by asking interview questions and answering candidates’ questions about their experience in the apprenticeship, and  
• Ranking interviewees to help inform a final hiring decision.

Including apprentices in the interview stage of the hiring process can provide clarity for potential apprentices about the day-to-day work of the apprenticeship and tasks listed in the job ad, addressing questions and alleviating confusion that applicants may have. In this way, current apprentices help to reduce barriers for student applicants throughout the hiring process. Yet, beyond including current apprentices as key participants in such a visible aspect of the hiring process as the interview, much of the evolution of our hiring has involved apprentices helping to create and refine hiring documentation. This documentation helps to standardize the hiring process, enhance clarity of the job and applicant requirements, and decrease bias in the application and interview evaluation by ensuring that multiple perspectives are represented throughout. Increasing apprentice engagement in all elements of hiring helps Megan to evaluate applicants with perspectives other than her own, and it gives current apprentices the opportunity to learn about the hiring process more as a hiring authority rather than as the applicant they once were. 

Apprentice perspectives

Job ad development

Estefania and Karen were both excited to participate in reviewing the hiring material and criteria for the incoming apprentice. They were eager to participate because they wanted to gain experience on the other side of the hiring process while also improving the hiring process for the next round of applicants. In order to revise the hiring materials, Megan and the apprentices reviewed the materials that were used when Karen and Estefania were applying to the apprenticeship. Both apprentices relied on memories and past experience as the interviewee to inform how they would like to see changes made to the hiring material. Each considered what could have been perceived as a barrier by incoming applicants with the intention to make the hiring process more inclusive for the next round of applicants. Both also reflected on their prior experiences while originally applying for the apprenticeship and considered what specific wording from the job ad had appealed to them, what made the apprenticeship an attractive opportunity, and what revisions should be made to ensure the hiring materials were concise, transparent, and reduced bias. 

While reflecting on the job ad (see Appendix A), both apprentices had helpful suggestions for tweaking the original language to more accurately reflect the apprenticeship. For example, Karen suggested changing the language in which the apprenticeship was originally described as a “fast-paced” environment. Karen admits that she initially shied away from applying to the CU Boulder apprenticeship due to this description because she had previous work experience in a “fast-paced” environment and had mixed feelings about entering into a similar workplace. She encouraged changing the language because oftentimes “fast-paced” could be code for work environments that require a lot of responsibility with tight deadlines and no support. Karen also recalled that during Atla Annual 2022, she had attended a workshop co-hosted by Megan entitled, “Navigating in the Fog: Shining a Light on the Library Job Search Process” (Welsh & Knievel, 2022). From the hiring workshop, she was able to learn about common wording that deters women of color applicants in particular, which helped her to identify specifically why she did not apply to the apprenticeship position in the first place. The group decided to omit the “fast-paced” language and instead highlighted that the apprenticeship values practical professional experience alongside receiving mentorship from faculty librarians. We specifically changed the verbiage in the job ad to emphasize the exploratory nature of the apprenticeship experience in allowing emerging library professionals to contribute to and build their interests in the field of academic librarianship.

Estefania also reflected on the specific wording that made her excited about the opportunity and considered how the language in the job ad could enhance the transparency of the responsibilities and make the position more appealing, especially for BIPOC LIS students. For example, the original job ad stated, “A core goal of the apprenticeship program is to invite and encourage involvement of MLIS students from traditionally underrepresented groups in academic librarianship.” When Estefania originally applied for the position, she appreciated that this statement was included and recommended that for Fall 2023 the job ad include the addition of “BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) MLIS students are highly encouraged to apply.” While a small gesture, the additional language is important to advertise that this program is intentionally recruiting BIPOC and people from underrepresented groups. Estefania shared that when institutions add this verbiage, she feels more empowered to apply. 

Recruitment strategies

While Megan maintains a list of library schools to share the job ad with and colleagues in CU Boulder Libraries’ HR share the posting to the Libraries’ website, a job board, and a platform called Handshake, apprentice involvement in promoting the apprenticeship was crucial during the recruitment phase. Karen intentionally shared the job ad with as many groups she was a part of and networks she was connected to in order to cast the net far and wide. This strategy ensured that LIS students would be able to see the ad across many platforms and would have a better chance of being exposed to this opportunity. Leveraging and contributing to social networks is especially important in virtual modalities of professional and academic spaces, where in-person connection and subsequent exchange of information needs to be deliberate and intentional in order to be effective at all.

Places where we shared the job ad include the following: 

• University of Maryland (UMD) MLIS Student listserv,
• UMD MLIS Student discord channel, 
• Association of Research Libraries (ARL) Diversity Programs Alumni,
• Asian Pacific American Librarians Association (APALA),
• National Association to Promote Library and Information Services to Latinos and the Spanish Speaking (REFORMA),
• We Here Facebook Group,
• Atla Listserv, a listserv for Theological and Religious Studies librarians,
• Karen shared the job ad with a former supervisor and a mentor so they could forward this opportunity on to others who may be interested or who might have other networks they could spread the word through. Karen also shared with a peer whom she met at the California Library Association (CLA) conference, and
• Estefania shared the job ad with iSchool Students of Color, a group which she was part of at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.

In total, we received over sixty applications in the Fall 2023 hiring cycle, similar to previous hiring cycles since moving the apprenticeship to a remote opportunity in 2020.

Reviewing and ranking candidates’ application materials

The rubric for evaluating applications was another aspect of the hiring materials that we collaboratively decided to change (see Appendix B). We deconstructed the job ad and applied a numbered scale to help us determine which candidates addressed the qualifications highlighted in the ad. The scale ranged  from 0, representing that the criterion was not addressed in the applicant’s CV/résumé or cover letter or indicating ineligibility for the apprenticeship, to 2 representing that the applicant fully addressed the criterion and met eligibility requirements for the apprenticeship. While this numbering system would help us to keep track of who excelled in crafting their application materials, we decided to allow space for evaluator comments in order to balance the quantitative and qualitative in holistically considering which applicants should progress to the final interview stage. In addition, we also decided to change the language of the following criterion: “[Applicant] discussed interest in pursuing a career in academic librarianship.” Instead of using the word pursuing, we decided to use exploring. Karen advocated for this subtle change because she emphasized that LIS students may still be unsure about committing to academic librarianship. Rather, they would benefit from the opportunity to explore what it is like to work in an academic library without the added pressure of being sure about the career path as a qualifier for being chosen to interview for the apprenticeship. 

With over sixty applications to sort through, using the updated application rubric aided in the standardization of reviewing and ranking candidates. The numbered rating system helped us to generate a finalist list to invite for interviews in an efficient manner so that we did not prolong the hiring process. This efficiency and our concern for “closing the communication loop” in a timely manner meant that we could respond to applicants and provide constructive feedback and resources if they were not progressing through the hiring process. We thought that this clear, thoughtful, and quick communication with all applicants, regardless of acceptance or rejection throughout each step, would be another way for us to respect their time, energy, and effort while also providing guidance and resources that would help to further their careers.

Reviewing and updating interview materials

While we had used an application rubric in the past, the Fall 2023 hiring cycle was the first time we used a rubric to help evaluate interviews (see Appendix C). The interview rubric was structured in a similar manner as the application rubric, where each interview question corresponded with an item on our scoring rubric. For each question that an interviewee answered, we ranked responses according to a numbered scale spanning 1 to 5, where 1 meant that the interview questions were not answered and 5 indicated that the interview questions were answered very well. Since the interview rubric focused on how well the interviewee answered the questions, we felt that this newly developed tool helped to mitigate any bias we may have had in this decision making process. Also similar to the application rubric, we decided to keep space for interviewer comments and added a field to record suggested ranking in order to balance the quantitative and qualitative evaluation. This extra space, not tied to specific interview questions, afforded an opportunity to holistically consider the interviewees and help us determine a finalist to offer joining the apprenticeship program.

We also updated the wording for the Fall 2023 hiring cycle interview questions (see Appendix D). For example, in a three-part question, we asked candidates to reflect on how they would describe themselves, how fellow students or classmates would describe them, and how a teacher, professor, or supervisor would describe them. We decided to remove the second part of this question (about how peers would describe the interviewee) because we wanted to minimize any overwhelm the interviewee may feel and we realized that it did not provide additional substantive information compared to the other parts of the question (see Appendix D, Question #4). Self-reflection and the perspective of an evaluative figure were more important to us than how a peer might view the interviewee. In addition, we felt that some students might not have had enough experience in their studies to have received any feedback from their peers. As previous interviewees, we felt this part of the question may subject interviewees to unnecessary added pressure to prove their worth in a superficially professionalized manner. 

Similarly, we changed the following question, “Please share with us what diversity, equity, and inclusion mean to you, and how these values relate to academic librarianship,” to “Please share how you engage with diversity, equity, and inclusion in your current work or studies, and how you hope to bring DEI into this position and academic librarianship” (see Appendix D, Question #5). First, we felt that the initial way the question was worded referred too vaguely to DEI and academic librarianship, and this would limit the opportunity to have a productive conversation with the interviewee. Karen and Estefania felt that it was too impersonal for us to get a sense of who the candidate was and how they could uniquely contribute to and benefit from the apprenticeship. We also felt that it was making the candidate espouse broad and generalized statements about DEI, and we pointed out that this would end up enforcing surface-level commitment to DEI that we have witnessed and experienced at other institutions and in the field. We knew that this was not Megan’s intention nor goal with valuing DEI in the Ask A Librarian Apprenticeship, so we reworded the question in a way that would invite authentic reflections on DEI. 

Additionally, when reviewing the interview questions, Estefania reflected back to her experience of feeling very nervous going into the interview. She shared that she was filled with doubt and anxiety and tried to combat this by endlessly researching CU Boulder Libraries and potential interview questions. While she agreed to some extent that this research was necessary and strengthened her responses to the interview questions overall, when given the opportunity to participate in revising the interview questions, she advocated for sharing the interview questions before the interview. We agreed that this would give candidates an opportunity to ease their interview anxiety and help them prepare their responses in a more constructive way. Megan shared interview questions with each interviewee the day before their interview in the Fall 2023 hiring cycle. 

Engaging in the interview process

Everyone agreed that it would be important to specify that having cameras on during the video interview was optional. We believed this option would minimize barriers people may have to applying to positions, such as nervousness or inability to find an appropriate space due to other commitments, for example. However, we kept in mind that if hired, the full use of technology would be critical in order to engage fully with the apprenticeship. The option to have cameras on or off was communicated in an email to applicants confirming their interview time.

Including a current apprentice in the interview process as an interviewer and as someone crafting documentation was incredibly beneficial. The apprentice reflected on their own experience and improved the interview questions, clarifying and adjusting them when needed to help interviewees further express themselves and showcase their candidacy. This robust and organic apprentice involvement in the interview process allowed us to gain a deeper sense of the person interviewing for the apprenticeship, and not just reduce them to numbers and ranking. In particular, for the updated question “Please share how you engage with diversity, equity, and inclusion in your current work or studies, and how you hope to bring DEI into this position and academic librarianship,” Karen also added a phrase of “You are welcome to share any lived experiences” for the first person we interviewed. Megan really appreciated how that question was phrased, and encouraged Karen to continue to phrase this question in this modified version. Pivoting for the rest of the interviews seemed to have a positive effect, as applicants were keen to share their lived experiences of DEI as well, especially if they did not have a lot of experience working with DEI in the workplace. This change also reinforced our strategy of modifying the initial interview question in order to elicit more authentic reflections on DEI within the apprenticeship. Both Megan and Karen hoped that this change set the stage for a better interview experience overall for this current round of recruitment.

Having a current student apprentice as part of the interview process further provided a mentorship opportunity on how to reduce bias in the interview process. For one candidate in particular, Karen had asked about their potential fit in the organization and apprenticeship. Megan was gracious enough to take the time to respond by giving Karen an institutional resource on the importance of interrogating what someone means by “fit” and to actually have criteria for this in order to mitigate personal bias in the hiring process as much as possible. Megan reinforced the importance of a holistic and equity-informed application rubric that both apprentices worked to improve so that fit bias would not be an issue. She also shared with Karen a resource from CU Boulder’s website on the different types of biases that may appear in the hiring process (e.g., beauty bias, institutional bias, etc.) and how to develop a plan to recognize these (Department of Environmental Studies, n.d.). This example highlights the mentorship opportunities afforded by including apprentices in the hiring process, along with the potential to ultimately create a more supportive and equitable academic librarianship landscape. 

Reviewing and ranking interviewees to choose a finalist

After the interviews, a few candidates were highly ranked by both Karen and Megan, necessitating a need for further discussion and prioritizing who we would extend an offer to. Reviewing both of our numbered rankings and qualitative observations helped in checking our assumptions and reevaluating our assessment of the whole application. Even with the standardization of the application and interview process to efficiently and fairly narrow down the list of candidates to one finalist, we had to review the qualitative measures within our ranking system to make sure we were taking the whole person into full consideration after all interviews had taken place. Specifically, the comments section of both the application and interview rubrics helped us to appropriately and fairly incorporate the human aspects in this decision making process to choose the finalist. 

Given that the apprenticeship seeks to fill gaps in LIS students’ experiences and education, Megan was initially unsure if a particular applicant would truly benefit from the apprenticeship because they already had some experience in an academic library setting. However, Karen noted that, although this candidate had academic library experience, they did not specifically have reference experience and would benefit from filling that gap through this apprenticeship. In making this decision, Karen thought about the pressures students face as they are getting ready to apply to jobs, and thus was keenly aware that specific experiences for a skill or role plays a key role in being considered for and obtaining future employment. As a result, pointing this out influenced Megan’s perspective about the value of the apprenticeship for the candidate, and this candidate was ultimately hired. Including the perspective of a student throughout the hiring process highlights how one fellow student in a position of power can advocate for another and helps to deconstruct any assumptions about student needs, goals, and readiness for a position. Ultimately, by taking into account current student experiences and embracing a whole-person approach, we created a more positive hiring process for all in making an informed decision on the final candidate. 

Reflections from the other side of the hiring process

From the early stages of the application process, Janelle felt optimistic that the values and climate of CU Boulder Libraries would align with what she hoped for in an employer. Janelle heard about the apprenticeship from Estefania, who she knew through a student group at their institution for aspiring librarians of color. Based on Estefania’s comments about her experience, Janelle sensed that the apprenticeship would be a great work environment and an ideal opportunity to learn more about academic librarianship. 

When Janelle went to apply in Summer 2023, she was struck by how approachable the job posting was. Unlike a number of position descriptions she encountered, when reading the Ask a Librarian posting, she thought to herself, “Wow, I definitely meet all of those requirements! I feel very confident about applying.” Particularly for internships and apprenticeships where training and learning is an integral part of a student’s experience, it is helpful when postings are transparent about the skills and mindset required for a position, while framing these requirements in a way that encourages students to apply.

Janelle also remembers the interview process as a positive experience. In her professional career, she recalls only one other interview where she received the questions in advance. In both cases, receiving the questions beforehand allowed her to enter the interview feeling more at ease, having ideas of what she could discuss for each question. She appreciated how welcoming Megan and Karen were, which helped create a supportive environment during the interview. Although she had initial nerves (as with most interviews), as the interview progressed she became more comfortable due to how Megan and Karen facilitated the interview. She was unable to ask all of her questions during the 30-minute interview, and so at Megan and Karen’s encouragement, she emailed her questions to them afterward. She appreciated the depth of their responses, and found it very helpful to be able to ask Karen directly about her experience with the apprenticeship.

During the interview process, it was clear that Karen was an active participant, and not just an observer. Beyond simply asking questions, Karen was very engaged and present in the interview process, which was a role Janelle had not seen a student occupy before. To Janelle’s knowledge, students are not typically embedded in the hiring process to this extent, although as mentioned above, thoughtfully involving students in the hiring process brings benefits to everyone involved. Seeing Karen’s significant involvement in the hiring process indicated to Janelle that her input and perspectives were valued, and showed her the potential that CU Boulder Libraries apprentices have to be active and respected participants in projects and tasks as important as hiring a new student employee.

As an apprentice who was hired through a process that included active involvement from a current apprentice, Janelle experienced firsthand the benefits of this approach to hiring. From learning about the apprenticeship from Estefania, to asking Megan and Karen questions about the apprenticeship, and to actually working in the position, the apprenticeship experience has met her original expectations. Throughout the hiring process, Janelle gained a good sense of the culture at CU Boulder Libraries, which made her feel confident and excited when starting the position. As a current Ask A Librarian apprentice, her opinions and experiences are valued, and she has had opportunities to challenge herself while receiving guidance and support. This speaks to the apprenticeship’s strength in empowering emerging librarians so that they have increased confidence when starting out in full-time positions. 

Recommendations

For professional librarian positions, we often hear the phrase that “interviewing is a two-way street”–the institution is interviewing the applicant and the applicant is interviewing the institution. By interrogating our hiring processes for graduate student positions, we can help foster that “two-way street” mentality at the student employment level as well. Understanding how individual academic institutions can differ, we anticipate that libraries can customize incorporating LIS students in the hiring process based on their needs. Through the course of writing this article, we have also recognized how our hiring process can improve in future hiring cycles. We would like to offer some recommendations for you as we consider how we may continue to iterate upon the hiring processes we outlined above: 

• Introduce students to what you have to offer. Host a drop-in information session for potential applicants to learn about the apprenticeship before applying. At CU Boulder, we envision Megan sharing some information about the apprenticeship during the first part of an information session then leaving so that applicants may openly ask past and current apprentices about their experiences, Megan’s supervisory style and level of support, and how any institutional issues have impacted them. Apprentices can also share what projects they have worked on, specific accomplishments they achieved, and what they learned through the apprenticeship. Such a session is also a great time to introduce potential applicants to the values of the institution and share how the apprenticeship aligns and supports the mission, vision, and values of the library. The goal of this session is transparency and we encourage readers to consider ways that their hiring processes may be more transparent. 
• Offer alternative opportunities as a source of continued support. Include links to similar apprenticeship opportunities or other professional development opportunities in emails to candidates who are not chosen for the position. As artificial intelligence is already changing the ways in which candidates draft their documentation and apply for jobs, this is an important time for the field of library science to consider how such tools may be used effectively by LIS student applicants. An applicant rejection email may include links to AI tools which could support crafting stronger application documentation for future job opportunities. Offer to connect applicants to colleagues you know if their current geographic region or work align with the LIS student’s career goals. Leveraging your networks and making connections to others in the LIS field can be a helpful source of support for LIS student applicants as they pursue other experiences in the field. 
• Be open, invite critique, make changes, and repeat. We regularly reflect on our hiring processes and we suggest that, immediately after hire, the incoming apprentice is invited to consider the hiring process they just experienced, provide feedback on it, and suggest changes. Student applicant perspectives are invaluable and need to be honored in order to improve processes for future applicants. 
• Build community among apprentices and highlight their value to the institution. Host debrief sessions where apprentices can share updates on project work, collectively explore successes and challenges, and socialize. An aspirational improvement to CU Boulder’s apprenticeship is inviting the cohort of apprentices for a site visit to explore the physical library and campus spaces that they will answer questions about through chat reference, and to build community. Administrative support and funding for such a site visit or for other professional development opportunities (e.g., attending conferences, funding book purchases to build a student’s professional library) signal that the library values LIS student labor and sees the apprenticeship as an important component of the professional journey to invest in. While requesting funds to support these opportunities may seem intimidating, we encourage you to ask, even if you think the answer will be “no” or “not yet.” We view such funding requests as acts of advocacy and we believe that advocating for ourselves is inherently advocating for others.
• Think critically and reflect often about the ways the traditional power structures inherent to hiring practices may be disrupted. We appreciate the suggestions of Eamon Tewell, our external reviewer, in considering the possibility of apprentices exclusively leading the hiring process and offering a final hiring recommendation to HR, rather than offering Megan input which leads to her making the final hiring decision as the apprenticeship coordinator. The hiring process could also afford an opportunity for LIS student applicants to interview the highest levels of the library hierarchy before they are even hired. While we provide an opportunity for apprentices to “pick a Dean” to meet with within their first few months of CU Boulder apprenticeship as a way to challenge feelings of intimidation prior to the high stakes meeting with library leadership during their first post-graduate job interview, we can intentionally place a meeting with library leadership prior to the apprenticeship hire so that applicants can learn about leadership’s priorities as they consider if they want to accept an offer to join the institution. 
• Foster student support networks. Many LIS students were encouraged to apply to the CU Boulder apprenticeship based on the encouragement of peers. Such informal, word of mouth networks are crucial supports for students as they navigate library school and the job search process. Building upon these informal networks while also acknowledging the competing priorities faced by many students, we would ideally like to see student-run listservs, job boards, a dedicated group (similar to the “We Here” Facebook group) for students, and a library Green Book for LIS students which provides information on the quality of mentorship, culture, and institutional support at libraries that employ LIS students.  
• Expand networks and community among LIS mentors. We would also like to see the development of a community of practice which focuses on LIS student mentorship. Some support may be found for mentors affiliated with specific programs (e.g., the ARL Kaleidoscope Program), in informal networks, and at related gatherings such as the relatively new Conference on Academic Library Management which is hosting its fourth conference in 2024. However, currently, there is not a distinct source of community and support for mentors of LIS students more broadly. 

Conclusion

We hope that the documented hiring practices of CU Boulder’s Ask a Librarian Apprenticeship can act as a testimony for how to improve practical learning experiences for LIS students. We encourage academic libraries to advocate for and invest in paid employment opportunities such as apprenticeships, and when possible, to invite students to participate in the hiring process to provide a realistic work experience that will be valuable when students enter the job market. The benefits of including apprentices in the hiring process are apparent and abundant. Their input can foster inclusion in the hiring process by providing reflection and reassessment of job ads, recruiting, and the interview process. In turn, current apprentices help to reduce barriers for student applicants throughout the hiring process. Also, when applicants see apprentices deeply embedded in the hiring process, it can reflect positively on the institution’s culture, and help applicants feel at ease, knowing they can speak directly with a fellow student about the position and to see if it would benefit their professional goals. 

One of the most meaningful aspects of CU Boulder’s apprenticeship program is its iterative nature. The evolution of our hiring practices embodies this iterative approach and highlights the value of LIS student perspectives and experiences in academic library settings. We hope the curiosity and growth embodied in our own apprenticeship will be mirrored across the profession as more institutions and librarians think deeply about the opportunities they can provide to LIS students.

---

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the colleagues who helped to make this article into the piece you are reading today, especially our ITLWTLP editor Jess Schomberg, ITLWTLP peer-reviewer Jaena Rae Cabrera, and our external reviewer, Eamon Tewell, whose invaluable feedback challenged us to interrogate our practices more deeply. This work is the culmination of various rounds of hiring and input from past Ask a Librarian Apprentices; we would like to honor their contributions to improving our hiring practices over the years. In an article so strongly focused on the power of mentorship and succeeding in the academic library job search, we also want to thank all of the mentors who have helped to shape our library journeys: Dawn Harris, Lisa Hopkins, Jamie Lin, Victoria Adjei, Nicole Finzer, Laura Alagna, Kana Jenkins, Motoko Lezec, Kirsten Gaffke, Kimberly Go, Ann Ku, Elise Wu, Noriko Asato, Renee Hill, Carisse Berryhill, Craig Chapin, Arianna Alcaraz, Ray Pun, Tsione Wolde-Michael, Steve Adams, Katrina Fenlon, Alison Oswald, Irene Lewis, Noriko Sanefuji, Steve Hoke, Bill and Nancy Stragand, Farah Nageer-Kanthor, Sharon Friedman, Meredith Bowers, Patrice Folke, Sheila and George Madison, Rose Tabbs, Twanna Hodge, Xiaoli Ma, Gama Viesca, Jennifer Knievel, and Karen Sobel.

---

References

American Library Association. (2012). Diversity Counts. http://www.ala.org/aboutala/offices/diversity/diversitycounts/divcounts

Cunningham, S., Guss, S., & Stout, J. (2019). Challenging the ‘good fit’ narrative: Creating inclusive recruitment practices in academic libraries. Recasting the Narrative: The Proceedings of the ACRL 2019 Conference, April 10–13, 2019, Cleveland, Ohio, 12–21. https://scholarship.richmond.edu/university-libraries-publications/42

Department of Environmental Studies. (n.d.) Develop a plan to recognize and mitigate bias. https://www.colorado.edu/envs/develop-plan-recognize-and-mitigate-bias

Galvan, A. (2015). Soliciting performance, hiding bias: Whiteness and librarianship. In the Library with the Lead Pipe. https://www.inthelibrarywiththeleadpipe.org/2015/soliciting-performance-hiding-bias-whiteness-and-librarianship/

Goodsett, M., & Koziura, A. (2016). Are library science programs preparing new librarians? Creating a sustainable and vibrant librarian community. Journal of Library Administration, 56(6), 697–721. https://doi.org/10.1080/01930826.2015.1134246

Harper, L. M. (2020). Recruitment and retention strategies of LIS students and professionals from underrepresented groups in the United States. Library Management, 41(2/3), 67–77. https://doi.org/10.1108/LM-07-2019-0044

Holler, J. L. R. (2020). Equity budgeting: A manifesto. Marion Voices Folklife + Oral History. https://marionvoices.org/equity-budgeting/

Houk, K., & Nielsen, J. (2023). Inclusive hiring in academic libraries: A qualitative analysis of attitudes and reflections of search committee members. College & Research Libraries, 84(4). https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.84.4.568

Lacy, M., & Copeland, A. J. (2013). The role of mentorship programs in LIS education and in professional development. Journal of Education for Library & Information Science, 54(1), 135–146. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43686941

Lewey, T. D., & Moody-Goo, H. (2018). Designing a meaningful reference and instruction internship: The MLIS student perspective. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 57(4), 238–241. https://www.jstor.org/stable/90022642

Shah, M., & Fife, D. (2023). Obstacles and barriers in hiring: Rethinking the process to open doors. College & Research Libraries News, 84(2). https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.84.2.55

Wang, K., Kratcha, K. B., Yin, W., & Tewell, E. (2022). Redesigning an academic library internship program with equity in mind: Reflections and takeaways. College & Research Libraries News, 83(9). https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.83.9.385

Welsh, M. E., & Knievel, J. (2022). Navigating in the fog: Shining a light on the library job search process. Atla Summary of Proceedings, 9–14. https://doi.org/10.31046/proceedings.2022.3178 

Wildenhaus, K. (2019). Wages for intern work: Denormalizing unpaid positions in archives and libraries. Journal of Critical Library and Information Studies, 2(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.24242/jclis.v2i1.88

Appendix A: 

Job Ad Used in the Fall 2023 Hiring Cycle

Apprenticeship Announcement

University of Colorado (CU) Boulder Libraries

Ask A Librarian Apprenticeship (Virtual)

Approximately 12 hrs/week throughout Fall 2023 – Spring 2024 academic year, $19-$20/hr 

Description: 

Gain practical professional experience in a robust academic library. The CU Boulder University Libraries is looking to hire an Ask A Librarian Apprentice who will receive training in research competencies, staff the Ask A Librarian virtual chat service two evenings from 5-8pm MT (Mondays & Wednesdays) and one weekend day from 1-5pm MT each week (Sundays), participate in special projects based on professional interests under the mentorship of a faculty librarian, and explore issues relevant to new academic librarians through professional development opportunities. The successful candidate will provide virtual research assistance in a major academic library that serves a world-class research university. This position is a great opportunity to supplement your graduate studies with experiential learning and explore the field of academic librarianship. 

Responsibilities:

• Provide virtual research assistance through our Ask Us! chat service
• Attend trainings, workshops, and meetings on a virtual meeting platform  
• Participate in special projects based on professional interests and availability, under the mentorship of the Ask A Librarian Apprenticeship supervisor
• Explore other internal and external opportunities for professional development, including research, writing, publishing, and presentations, based on interest and availability

Qualifications:

• Currently enrolled as a library & information science graduate student for the duration of the apprenticeship. 
• Candidates must be eligible to work in the United States at time of hire.
• Maintain a strong customer service orientation and a desire to provide high quality research assistance.
• Demonstrate interest in the principles of diversity, equity, inclusion, accessibility, and social justice, and how these relate to the mission and values of CU Boulder’s University Libraries.
• Interest in exploring a career in academic librarianship.

Additional Information: 

A core goal of the apprenticeship program is to invite and encourage involvement of MLIS students from traditionally underrepresented groups in academic librarianship. BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) MLIS students are highly encouraged to apply. 

This program begins with trainings which can occur around your schedule in August 2023 and staffing virtual reference shifts with experienced colleagues from mid August through mid-September 2023. The Ask a Librarian Apprentice is expected to complete approximately 12 hours of work per week, including virtual reference shifts on nights and weekends (schedule to be finalized at point of hire), project work, and professional development. The Apprentice will be paid $19-$20/hr and will work through the Fall 2023 – Spring 2024 academic year. For full consideration, please apply by Monday, June 26, 2023. A course schedule providing proof of enrollment in a library science graduate program is required at the time of hire.

To apply, please submit the following documents:

1. Cover Letter
2. Resume or CV

Send application materials with “Ask A Librarian Apprenticeship Application” in the subject line to Megan.Welsh@colorado.edu. 

Appendix B: 

Rubric Used to Evaluate Application Materials in the Fall 2023 Hiring Cycle

Apprentice Application Rubric   This rubric will help to quantify the credentials we seek and determine which applicants we should invite to interview.   Evaluator: _____________________________________   Candidate name: _______________________________   The applicant is currently enrolled as a Masters of Library & Information Science graduate student. 0 = not currently enrolled 1 = enrolled for part of the apprenticeship 2 = enrolled for the duration of the apprenticeship   Has the applicant completed at least one semester/quarter? No, they are entering their first semester/quarter They have completed one semester/quarter Yes, they have completed two semesters/quarters or more   Does the applicant have reference or customer service experience, or did they discuss customer service mindset/philosophy? 0 = No customer service/reference experience; didn’t discuss 2 = Discussed reference/customer service experience/philosophy   Does the applicant already have a position similar to the apprenticeship? 0 = Yes, either formerly or currently employed in a role similar to CU’s apprenticeship 2 = No, the applicant has not had nor is currently employed in a role similar to CU’s apprenticeship   Did the applicant demonstrate or discuss interest in the principles of diversity, equity, inclusion, accessibility, and social justice, and how these relate to the mission and values of CU Boulder’s University Libraries? 0 = No discussion or evidence of DEIA principles 2 = Demonstrated interest around DEIA principles   Discussed interest in exploring a career in academic librarianship. 0 = No, didn’t discuss 1 = Yes, did discuss   Does the apprenticeship fill gaps in the applicant’s training and experience (e.g., would the apprenticeship provide reference experience that they desire but currently don’t have?)? No, the applicant has a wealth of academic library experience already Yes, the apprenticeship would fill an important gap   Comments: _______________________________________________________

Appendix C: 

Rubric Used to Evaluate Interviews During the Fall 2023 Hiring Cycle

Apprentice Interview Rubric This rubric will help us think about candidate responses to questions and rank them to determine a finalist. Evaluator: _____________________________________ Candidate name: _______________________________ On a scale of 1 to 5, how well did interviewees address each question?  What motivates you to explore the field of academic librarianship?  1 = Did not answer 5 = Answer far exceeded expectations! Tell us about yourself and any past experiences, such as course work or work experience, that would help you in this position.  1 = Did not answer 5 = Answer far exceeded expectations! What is your approach to reference/research assistance services?  1 = Did not answer 5 = Answer far exceeded expectations! Think of a time where you facilitated a particularly positive customer service interaction. What about that situation went well? What qualities contributed to a positive interaction? 1 = Did not answer 5 = Answer far exceeded expectations! Please share how you engage with diversity, equity, and inclusion in your current work or studies, and how you hope to bring DEI into this position and academic librarianship. 1 = Did not answer 5 = Answer far exceeded expectations! If you were to describe yourself in three adjectives or short descriptive phrases, what would they be? If a past teacher/professor/supervisor were to describe you in three adjectives or short descriptive phrases, what would they be? 1 = Did not answer 5 = Answer far exceeded expectations! What makes the apprenticeship appealing to you? 1 = Did not answer 5 = Answer far exceeded expectations! Through December 2023, this position will require 2 evening shifts from 5-8pm MT, including Monday and Wednesday evenings, and one weekend shift on Sundays, each week. Based on your schedule, does this work for you?  Yes No Other: ___________________ Did the interviewee ask questions? (use “other” to describe if there was no time left to ask questions) Yes No Other: ___________________ Overall reactions/Comments: _______________________________________________________ Suggested ranking: ______

Appendix D: 

Interview Questions Used in Fall 2023 Hiring Cycle

1. What motivates you to explore the field of academic librarianship? 

2. Tell us about yourself and any past experiences, such as course work or work experience, that would help you in this position. 

3. What is your approach to reference/research assistance services? (If they don’t have reference experience: Could you describe any other experience you have providing customer service in a virtual environment, or how your in-person customer service experience might transfer to a virtual environment?) 

4. This question has two parts: Think of a time where you facilitated a particularly positive customer service interaction (If they are struggling: maybe you were the customer, maybe you were the one providing the service).
   • What about that situation went well?
   • What qualities contributed to a positive interaction?

5. Please share how you engage with diversity, equity, and inclusion in your current work or studies, and how you hope to bring DEI into this position and academic librarianship. 

6. This question has two parts:
   • If you were to describe yourself in three adjectives or short descriptive phrases, what would they be?
   • If a past teacher/professor/supervisor were to describe you in three adjectives or short descriptive phrases, what would they be?

7. What makes the apprenticeship appealing to you?

8. Through December 2023, this position will require 2 evening shifts from 5-8pm MT, including Monday and Wednesday evenings, and one weekend shift on Sundays, each week. Based on your schedule, does this work for you?  

9. What questions do you have for us?

---

Comments Policy:

In the Library with the Lead Pipe welcomes substantive discussion about the content of published articles. This includes critical feedback. However, comments that are personal attacks or harassment will not be posted. All comments are moderated before posting to ensure that they comply with the Code of Conduct. The editorial board reviews comments on an infrequent schedule (and sometimes WordPress eats comments), so if you have submitted a comment that abides by the Code of Conduct and it hasn’t been posted within a week, please email us at itlwtlp at gmail dot com!