On January 28th, I had the opportunity to speak at the Japan Association of National University Libraries Symposium held at Nagoya University. It was a pleasure to reunite with members from the time we were establishing the Kanazawa University Library Learning Commons and exploring various possibilities, including Section Chief Okabe from the University of Tokyo Library, Department Manager Uchijima from Kobe University Library, and Section Chief Murata, Ms. Morimoto, and Mr. Nakamoto from Kanazawa University Library (Mr. Nakamoto, thank you for the gold-leaf coffee!). I was also guided through the newly built active learning space in the morning by Section Chief Jiromaru from Nagoya University Library, who provided great support during our three-university library collaboration and continues to support me with my library-related KAKEN research. I had visited before, but he showed me the areas that had been updated since then. Thank you very much. I also met Professor Koyama from Nihon University for the first time, whose name I often see in books!

They are also conducting academic writing seminars, similar to those Professor Kinda did when he was at Nagoya University. I was told that these are currently being held for undergraduate students by a foreign faculty member. It has a cafe-like atmosphere, which is catchy and great. It is also very accessible for students.

They are also working hard on their support desk. I heard they are using software to provide support for thesis writing.

Look at this! Nagoya University Library has partnered with Calil to allow users to search for books they want to read using the Calil app on tablets or smartphones, which then shows them the location and directions. When I was at Kanazawa, I proposed something similar focused more on learning support for a KAKEN grant, but it was rejected… However, it is amazing that they have been able to achieve this much in just a few years! It is truly impressive.

Today, I received feedback from the Japan Association of National University Libraries Symposium. I gave a lecture on learning support in university libraries, focusing on formal learning support and domestic and international case studies. The feedback was mostly about how the participants learned a lot and included statements of determination. I am grateful to have increasing opportunities to speak at seminars for librarians, but I do not necessarily view “I learned a lot” as positive feedback. I reflect on the fact that my talk may have ended as just an input-only session. However, what is great about this symposium is that after the lecture, participants split into five breakout sessions to discuss the topics and have representatives present their findings. As I mentioned in my lecture, I want to go beyond that; I want the librarians to take the discussed content back to their workplaces and talk about it. I want them to view it as an issue or challenge within their own workplace, think about it, and try out solutions, even if only at a trial level. I want them to conduct research where they collect data, evaluate it, and make improvements.

Librarians have great strengths in areas like information retrieval, organization, and classification—the input side of things. However, the problem lies beyond that. This is not just a challenge for librarians, but also for the speakers who address them. I realize I must deliver talks that direct their consciousness toward what comes next.

Another challenge I feel, which is the same as with Faculty Development (FD) for university professors, is changing the mindset of librarians who do not attend such symposiums. When I read the feedback, most of it is generally positive. But when you think about it, the people who attend such symposiums are mostly staff members who already have some awareness of the issues and want to do something about them. So, unless I talk about something completely off-base, it is natural for positive opinions to emerge. The real challenge will be what happens when the attending librarians take the content of this seminar back and talk to those who are less inclined to change their mindset. This will remain an issue to address in the future. It is a point that must be considered, including by management.

I think it is fine for there to be librarians who “do not want to do learning support,” and I do not criticize such individuals. There is a right person for every job (though it is up to managers like section chiefs to decide that). However, I believe they should at least understand the direction in which university libraries are heading and maintain an attitude of cooperation, even if only within their own scope of duties. Furthermore, while the direction a university library aims for may change with educational and learning trends or the university’s educational philosophy, it should not change simply because of staff transfers. Creating an organizational culture where librarians can learn new things and drive library changes themselves—this seems to be the goal, and I would like to provide support for such libraries.

Regarding learning support, unfortunately, there are also faculty members whose mindsets are difficult to change. It is possible that the faculty organization itself has become rigid. As I thought during the recent symposium, while it would be ideal if faculty-staff collaboration worked well, if the librarians have a high level of awareness but the faculty group is ineffective, perhaps the library should just become independent and operate as a learning and educational facility? I believe university libraries have that much potential.