RE: DISCUSSION GROUPS, SCHEDULING CHANGE: The Short and the Long
THE SHORT
Limiting choice within PARS to facilitate choice beyond PARS does not seem
to produce gain equal to what will be lost.
There must be other means of achieving the desired end.
"If you can't join them, harvest them."
* Investigate our ability to facilitate ALA Preservation Policy and to
communicate preservation information outwardly by:
* Mapping organizational structures of other ALA units to PARS
committees, where possible,
* Monitoring, from within PARS committees, the agendas and minutes of
other ALA units;
* Appointing liaisons from PARS as appropriate;
* Exploring the possibility of a searchable roster of member
specializations for use by other ALA units in their project-based
initiatives, e.g., a roster of PARS members with digitization skills for
access by OITP's (http://www.ala.org/oitp/) new E-Book Task Force (not yet
listed on the OITP web page); and
* Exploring the possibility of a mechanism that would use a robot to
search the ALA web site (agendas, minutes), using keywords, to identify
areas of interest and new information and to subsequently notify PARS
members automatically as appropriate to their self-description in the
searchable roster (cf, above).
* Assess our liaisons to other ALA divisions to build reporting
structures as appropriate to bring external information into the PARS
community by:
* Requesting liaisons from other ALA units;
* Requiring annual written (and web-posted) assessment of external
initiatives facilitating ALA Preservation Policy from PARS committees
(consistent with mapping, above);
* Providing an annual forum for review of external initiatives
facilitating ALA Preservation Policy, inviting chairs of other ALA units as
appropriate; and
* Explore the possibility of an automated bulletin board (consistent
with the searchable roster's areas of specialization, above) that gathers
and groups then emails updates and other information to PARS members
automatically. (I can't seem to remember to explore the ALA web pages
frequently enough. This mechanism would help pertinent information to find
me.)
Per automation, ... I won't commit my programming resources quite yet, but
I'm open to a possible contribution.
N.B. The ALA web site seems to lack common web-database functions
(information collection, searching, scripting, etc.). Small problem. I'm
certain that PARS wouldn't be alone in benefiting from this type of
automation; and, that ALA would not be alone as well. A data harvesting
tool of this kind might be proposed to IMLS, in a first phase to be applied
to ALA and, in a subsequent phase, of the same term-of-grant, to be applied
to AIC, SAA, and other cultural organizations.
If an IMLS proposal would be too cumbersome, ... ALA could ("might should")
contract with Community of Science (http://www.cos.com/) to provide a
similar service.
Erich Kesse
Director, Digital Library Center
P.O. Box 117007 -- George A. Smathers Libraries -- University of Florida
Gainesville, FL 32611-7007
Tel: 352.846.0129 FAX: 352.846.3702
E-Mail: kesse@xxxxxxx
!**********************************************************!
THE LONG
I won't speak to the recent discussion regarding communication in advance of
meeting as a time-saving or efficiency measure.
Discussion Groups have long since ceased to facilitate discussion; so, while
I find the current discussion beneficial, I don't see this discussion about
communication as pertinent to the proposal at hand.
Before speaking to the change, allow me to see if I recall the rationale for
it.
The rationale, as I recall it, was to free up the time of PARS members to
attend meetings, programs, etc., both inside and outside of PARS.
Ironically, just before the conference began, a research study suggested
that people would be much happier if they were offered little choice. (I
regret I can't cite the study, ... its "punch line" merely amused me at the
time I heard it, ... didn't think I'd ever have reason to advance an
argument with it.) In this context the rationale for the proposed change is
reasonable. I'd rather be happy, wouldn't you? But, its also absurd. We
proposed to limit our choices in order to have more choice? Or, to
paraphrase Lorraine Olley, would we rather be educated by others outside
PARS than to educate others outside PARS about preservation?
I can imagine a counter argument, its appeals to outreach noting that we
might spread preservation awareness if we only got out a little. Indeed,
the recently *proposed* joint ARL/CLIR (cf, attachment) study group on "the
state of preservation programs", while cogently argued and well appointed,
is somewhat insular in membership. That's a red salmon, isn't it?
It seems very few non-preservation folks attend PARS meetings. Individuals
in attendance, not firmly within the preservation community, are invited
speakers and library school students investigating preservation. As the
median age of our community increases, I hesitate to agree with the
scheduling change. We would offer those who would be our future little
opportunity to become engaged in preservation.
Audience not withstanding, it appears that PARS discussion groups have full
agendas. Staggering DGs will produce a backlog of "discussion".
I wonder if the benefits of the change will produce the desired effects.
Lacking coordination with other ALA meetings, will we have freed time to
attend meetings outside PARS or, simply, freed time? The proposed change is
beneficial only insofar as it can be demonstrated that a majority would be
free to attend meetings scheduled for the time freed.
By way of advancing the absurd, I note, that a majority of my scheduling
conflicts were between meetings outside PARS and PARS committee meetings,
not to mention conflicts within the PARS all-committee meeting's room. I
sense that I was not alone. Watching Deb McKern move from table to table to
meet her commitments during the all-committee meeting was like witnessing a
sand-piper's day at the beach. Would we advance the notion that committees
should meet on a similarly staggered schedule? Of course, we would not.
(Facilitating a solution to scheduling conflicts within PARS, at the
Midwinter meeting, we learned that section meetings will soon be conducted
in one location. While choice will still present itself, at least, we'll be
able to scamper from one room to the next. The proposed change, assuming
balanced scheduling, should mitigate the angst we will have felt having made
a choice among PARS meetings.)
Isn't the draw-line of every drama/romance something like, "if she's so
important, what are you doing here?"
Medieval christian theologians advanced an argument for the godliness of
humankind: among the beasts of nature, humans alone had choice. As if
believing that we are "made in God's image" were chopped liver, they
postulated a cow. Offered two bales of hay, equi-distant from the cow, they
suggested that the cow, lacking the ability to chose, would starve to death.
(I don't know; cows are like my dog, which looks like a cow, ... unable to
decide she throws herself down, there to discover one dog-biscuit is closer
than the other. She eats that one first. Then, the other.) Of course
scheduling is not dog-biscuits -- its rather difficult to have your cake, to
mix metaphors, and eat another at the *same time* too! -- but we're not dogs
or cows when it comes to dog-and-pony shows. Some of us, no doubt, throw
dice while others simply throw ourselves down, ...no-conflict meetings
placed on our individual schedules first, conflict decided by proximity or
the foot-path between sequential no-conflict meetings. It's not difficult.
The rationale for DG schedule change appears to be ranked by degree of angst
rather than degree of difficulty.
I meander toward this: I don't find the rationale for the change sufficient.
Limiting choice within PARS to facilitate choice beyond PARS: the gain is
not equal to what will be lost.
Our ability to facilitate ALA Preservation Policy and to bring external
information into the PARS community, however, does need further
investigation and our liaisons need to be strengthened if not reaffirmed.
<<CLIR-ARL Joint study-brief.doc>>
Erich Kesse
Director, Digital Library Center
P.O. Box 117007 -- George A. Smathers Libraries -- University of Florida
Gainesville, FL 32611-7007
Tel: 352.846.0129 FAX: 352.846.3702
E-Mail: kesse@xxxxxxx
Attachment:
doc00000.doc
Description: "CLIR-ARL Joint study-brief.doc"