If I may interject a few points here in defense of my colleagues, I must state that librarians have already been overrun by an incredible number of novelties over a series of decades. Almost all of these novelties have meant more work for less pay, fewer positions, less funding and finally, less prestige. Now come the biggest changes of all, and this is after all of the pains with keeping up with overwhelming workloads, learning complex new library systems that change constantly, and you hear everywhere that the changes haven't even begun yet. I am not saying that this is the correct way to think, but a relatively hopeless attitude is very understandable if you have lived through some of these changes.
One of the major problems we are facing is that the way forward is very unclear right now. In my own opinion, FRBR is already practically obsolete even though it was published only about 10 years ago and hasn't even been implemented yet. I am very concerned that everyone will go through all of the work of retooling for FRBR, rewriting rules and retraining, and it won't make a bit of difference. Web2.0 technologies may change everything even more, or they may be a flash in the pan. The new computer formats are terribly complex and who knows? It may turn out that in 10 years people will say, °XML is so obsolete and now it's YML.° Librarians have seen similar stories several times.
I believe that it is less important for librarians to be able to build databases from scratch, but they need an underlying knowledge of how people find information--*NOT* how they use library catalogs, which I think is the underlying assumption of FRBR--but how people find information and how that process can be improved. An understanding of the capabilities of the most advanced computerized systems is necessary, but hands-on coding is unimportant. That is, it is unimportant *if* you have a good computer technician who will genuinely listen to what you say and will build the tools you want. Of course, this involves negotiation and listening on both sides.
This is one reason why I am so much in favor of open source products. Open source allows someone to build tools that they want. Also necessary today and in the future will be a sense of imagination so that you can envision new tools that may use the powers of whatever new tools we have, while utilizing the historic strengths of our profession.
Will this happen? I doubt it very seriously.
Jim Weinheimer
> > ... our profession *should* have a sense of direction that informs its
> > members. It is exactly this kind of leadership that ALA has failed to
> > provide. Continuing education ... could have a role of providing
> > inspiration and inspiring enthusiasm. Most importantly, it needs to
> overcome
> > the (probably many) instances where an institution's management does not
> > encourage exploration and learning, thus stifling the possibilities for its
> > employees....
>
> OK, I follow now. Shame on me for forgetting about this aspect since
> it is endemic and it is a major barrier to progress. At my previous
> job, going anywhere out of state was very difficult (even on my own
> dime) so I really felt out of the flow for awhile. The role you
> suggest makes more sense in this light.
>
> > ... I really see a lot of mis-guided individualism here, as I see
> > generally in the techie world. There's nothing wrong with providing
> learning
> > opportunities, and not everyone learns best alone. This is a kind of
> > "sink-or-swim"-ism that I think is overall detrimental to the
> goal of having
> > a more up-to-date profession.
>
> I think that the environment most librarians and systems people work
> in is a major contributing factor to the strong individualism you see.
> Getting resources is dang near impossible, serious proposals are
> killed by analysis paralysis, and once the legal or procurement people
> get involved (which is in just about everything), we are condemned to
> the bureaucratic equivalent of the La Brea Tar Pits.
>
> Sometimes, the only realistic option is to strike off on your own. I
> think this holds us back, because it keeps things uncoordinated and at
> a small scale, but it gets us through the day.
>
> kyle
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Kyle Banerjee
> Digital Services Program Manager
> Orbis Cascade Alliance
> banerjek_at_uoregon.edu / 541.359.9599
Received on Fri Sep 12 2008 - 15:55:39 EDT