A community of practice (CoP) supports professional development by creating a network of like-minded people who can ask questions, brainstorm, and provide mutual support to each other. Librarians seeking to build relationships to support each other’s efforts in the area of substance use, abuse, and recovery within their communities might consider three different communities of practice: local (in the library or library system), statewide, and national. They have different functions for individual growth, but they will all increase the impact the libraries can have in this area, as local and statewide CoPs will be able to help with local and state laws and politics, while a national CoP can help practitioners see the bigger picture – what is going on in other libraries in other states.
At the Local Level:
Within the Library, the purpose of the CoP is to build a supportive micro-community among staff and volunteers. This can be accomplished through:
- Increasing internal awareness and providing training. Host staff learning circles on substance use, trauma-informed service, harm reduction, and bibliotherapy. Invite local public health or recovery professionals to facilitate workshops.
- Creating a shared resource hub. Create a shared binder or digital repository of local service contacts, book lists, program ideas, and flyers.
- Holding regular (monthly or quarterly reflection and support meetings in which staff can share what’s working, current challenges, and new ideas.
- Creating local partnerships, focusing on agencies and nonprofits (e.g., (harm reduction clinics, treatment centers, peer recovery groups) already doing the work and invite them to co-host library events or provide staff training.
Statewide Communities of Practice:
Across the State, the purpose of the CoP is to grow a network of librarians working on these issues so that no library is doing it alone. This can be accomplished through:
- Creating an informal, moderated online statewide listserv, Slack, Teams, Discord (etc.) space where librarians can share resources, ask questions, and celebrate successes.
- Creating an interest group or roundtable within the state library association and use conference sessions to feature successful programming.
- Creating collaborative online programs, like author talks, recovery-themed book discussions, and mental health workshops that all libraries can promote locally
- Creating statewide training by working with the state library, public health department, or substance use coalitions to offer continuing education credits.
National-level Work:
At the national level, the purpose is to contribute to—and benefit from—a professional field-wide conversation. It helps to see what is going on across the country, as it provides new perspectives in both states that are like yours and those that are completely different. Some ideas at the national level include working with or through ALA and Other Professional Bodies (e.g., Medical Library Association, Public Libraries Association, etc.): are there already roundtables that you can join? Task forces? Working Groups? If not, propose one. Taking that a step further: can that group form a partnership with another national group, like SAMHSA or the National Harm Reduction Coalition to provide resources tailored for libraries?
Another option would be to create a national knowledge exchange with bibliographies, program guides, and case studies (you can start with this one!). Use that space to host webinars where libraries share practical models (e.g., needle disposal partnerships, bibliotherapy book clubs, trauma-informed programming) – like a show-and-tell of what works, when, and how they got support.
Increase the visibility and advocacy for the cause by presenting your work at national conferences, publishing in Public Libraries and Library Journal, and seeking grant support for pilot projects.
Readings:
Wenger, E. (1999). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge university press.
Wenger, E. (2009). Communities of practice: The key to knowledge strategy. In Knowledge and communities (pp. 3-20). Routledge.