Kathleen A. Johnson

The English Department of a university and the library seem to go hand-in-hand. Many students’ only introduction to library research happens in their English courses. There is the obvious stereotype of booklovers overlapping both disciplines. However, they are fairly unique. Literature, as with every other field, has its own set of jargon, theories, and heuristics that guide thesis development and investigation. In some universities, there are subject-specialist librarians, generally ones with additional coursework in a given field and ones who work exclusively with that field. This book is directed mostly at these universities, at their Literature librarian and the Literature department. However, many of the subjects covered in this book would be useful to any reference or instruction librarian and any English faculty looking to revamp their literature research paper requirements.

Some of the more useful sections (for me, mostly as a reference for when I need them later):
p.23: The four stages of writing development: Pseudo-academic writing, generalized academic writing, novice discipline writing, expert discipline writing.
p. 29 Emphasizing the thesis statement over the thesis question: "Research often leads to ambiguity and doubt, often precipitated by crucial disagreements among critics." I often take my students through the 7 steps of research; step 4 is frustration. This is one excellent example of why frustration is so common in academic research. Students seek an answer to their thesis statement, when there is rarely ever one answer--in fact, there is often no answer at all.
p. 33 "It us valuable for students to see librarians modeling ... trial and error research process, trying different combinations of keyword or subject searches, rather than immediately explaining some "correct" approach based on generic examples." In this section, the professor involves the librarian in instruction, letting the librarian know weeks in advance what the research topics are. The librarian models her research process to the class, not just showing them best-case scenarios.
p.65 The author uses modernist and postmodernist theory to define the difference between teachers and students, essentially stating that the difference between the two is not generational, but contextual. Students look for broader connections. Professors look for what's right. From reading this, it looks like I'm already fairly postmodernist(as a biology major, this is a foreign concept to me).

The authors give suggestions of some great research projects, including the goals for what their undergraduate English majors will learn. There are also some great explanations for some of the push-back I get from faculty in the English department. According to the authors, many faculty expect the library to collect, organize, store, and retrieve, not to teach and conceptualize. Throughout there are useful suggestions on great collaborations between library and faculty, but I think this push-back isn't properly addressed. The main reason for this, I think, is that most of the authors were subject-specialist librarians in larger universities with substantial English undergraduate and graduate programs, necessitating more intense interactions but also providing more opportunities for them.… (más)