The class is drawing to a close

Tonight marks the second-to-last live session I will have with my students in the graduate library course I’m currently teaching. Time has flown by. As always, I learn things during the course that I can hopefully use in future teaching. One lesson I learned long ago is that an online curriculum is only as good as the technical infrastructure and support that is offered to it by the school. LEEP at the University of Illinois has a fantastic, dedicated, service-oriented support team and I am thankful for their help and responsiveness. There have been a few glitches here and there but they have been quickly addressed.

I’ll miss interacting with this group of students but at the same time — and I think they would agree — there’s something nice about hitting the home stretch. An awful lot of stuff has been compacted into a very short timeframe (eight weeks) during summer session.

I’m also looking forward to a faculty retreat to be hosted by the school at Allerton Park, a fabulous estate owned by the University of Illinois that is located near Monticello. It’s worth a visit just to see the gardens and the grounds, especially the sculpture scattered throughout. The retreat will be held over the course of two days in August and I have been asked to facilitate one of the sessions, a technology “show and tell.” I’m really looking forward to that.

The soundbite phenomenon

I have enjoyed reading about presentations at the recent ALA annual conference. Of particular note for me are Owen Stephens’ extensive notes, available here. The ability for those who aren’t present at conferences to quickly catch up on essentials of what was discussed is, to me, hugely important and beneficial. I’m thankful for the efforts of others to record their impressions for someone like me to read.

The discussions that are written about often raise important issues in my mind and at times I feel strongly enough about an issue to respond to what was written, usually via commenting on a particular blog post. Such is the case with a recent blog post by Roy Tennant, called “Shoot the Dogma.” In this post Roy talks about a presentation in which one of the panelists uttered the statement, “Shoot the dogma,” as part of a larger narrative about why we should question many of our longstanding beliefs and practices. In this case she was referring to cataloging in particular. Roy picked that as the title of his post and said that this was one statement in the discussion that really stood out to him.

After thinking about that statement for a little bit, I decided to respond. See the link above to the post and the following comments for a complete picture of what was said and by whom. I guess what bothered me (and still does) about that statement is that it represents, to me, the latest in what I would call “the soundbite phenomenon.” Someone else who is regularly quoted with provocative or interesting soundbites is Stephen Abram. No personal affront intended, but I get tired of soundbites like this. Why? Well, there are many reasons. One is that many things are easier said than done. Another reason is that in my observation over many years in the profession, there is a tendency for us to grab ahold of a soundbite like this and shake our heads in affirmation, without really exploring its meaning and implications to see if the point made is actually credible or defensible.

In this case, as Karen Schneider pointed out in responding to my comment in Roy’s post, I need to understand and be aware of the larger context of the discussion. I plan to listen to the audio archive linked from that post so that I can be better informed. This is a reminder, as many others have found in the past, that responding to what someone has chosen to filter or write about in a conference session on a blog somewhere, especially if that response is critical, can be tricky.

One final observation. I find it weird that my criticism of something someone said should be met with the response that, basically, questions my criticism because “This is a domain in which [that other person] has a lot of knowledge.” Oh, please. Let’s just set aside the implication that I lack experience in these areas for now. My criticism, or anyone else’s for that matter, should stand or fall on its own merits. Maybe my criticism, such as it is, will turn out to be invalid. If so I will be the first to admit it.

Getting value out of conference attendance

I’ve been to my fair share of conferences, of all stripes and sizes. I have to say — and this may come across as arrogant — that I don’t get a whole lot out of most of them. A well known blog that I have been reading, called Lifehacker, recently posted about the issue of how to make conferences worth the trip and time. It’s worth reading and then thinking about ways in which you can improve your own conference experience.

A large part of my problem with conference attendance is that I am not the most sociable guy out there. Too many activities with complete strangers can leave me physically and mentally exhausted. (Even too many activities with friends has the same effect.) Another problem for me is that in my experience, too many conferences, particularly in the library world, consist of recycled speakers over and over and over again. While I have never attended them, judging by their publicly available conference schedules, two conferences that I think are pretty egregious in this area are Computers in Libraries and Internet Librarian. Every year it seems like they have the same people talk about variations on the same themes. That is a bit of a turn off. But admittedly I haven’t ever been so maybe my criticism isn’t valid in this case. But I have experience with many others that I actually have attended such as ALA, where this is true. A third complaint I have with conferences is that too much of the time speakers tout what they are doing and how innovative and the “latest and greatest” a certain thing is, and it isn’t. Too often, what I hear about at conferences is something that I already have experience with in my own library setting or know quite a bit about.

I want to go to conferences to learn new things, to hear more detail about things that I have only heard or read about, to stimulate my thinking beyond the boundaries of my own particular sphere of knowledge or work experience. I want speakers who challenge me, who are good presenters, who encourage attendee participation. I want the conference location to be accessible for non-conference activities if possible, to have pervasive (and FREE) wireless connectivity, and to provide ample opportunity for me to get away from it all for short periods of time to recharge my batteries.

One of the things I do when planning to go to a particular conference is to look closely at who is giving a particular presentation and not so much at the topic of that presentation. Maybe that seems odd but at this stage in my career, interesting topic + great speaker is the ideal but interesting topic + bad speaker is always trumped by not so interesting topic + great speaker.

I’m tired of the same old, same old at conferences. The thing is, conferences are really, really expensive these days. I think I have a right to have high expectations for something that I (or sometimes, but not always, my employer) am paying a lot of money to attend. We need new and innovative conferences models in the library world. From the conference organizer’s perspective, I fully realize how much work and effort go into making one successful, and how much can be ruined by pure chance (like bad weather). But I will continue to look for ways to get a better return on my investment. As a result of this outlook, for instance, I don’t ever bother going to an ALA event; they aren’t worth the cost at all to me.