A little over a month ago, I said I was going to learn French. Well, I took longer than I expected to prepare, started later than I expected, postponed it more than I should have, and changed my strategy too often.

But that's ok. I have certainly learned more French than I ever have before. I am still slowly working on it but, what with traveling and preparing for interviews and their presentations, plus other work I have to get done, I have reduced my efforts to learn La Belle Langue quite a bit. And the workload will only get worse. What I need is some touch of formal pressure to keep up with it. Maybe a language partner, or a regular tv show or vodcast to understand, something like that. My other issue is my efforts to retain what I have tried to learn each day... with my other responsibilities and projects, I need some easy way to insert repetition of key lessons into the following 24 hours, whether it's a vocab list to carry around or a phrase to go over in my head. Something to drill something into my head until it sticks.

Learning a new language is hard. Or maybe it's just me? Anyone else have issues with this kind of thing? Any tips on making it easier?

Labels: aboutCommunication, aboutEducation, aboutHumanNature, aboutProductivity, aboutWork

 

There was a recent article in the Library Journal about the dismissal of the head of the public library system in Lexington, Kentucky. Without much information, which is kind of the point of this article, it's hard to really take sides but there are two points that jump out at me when discussing something like this.

Firstly, the CEO makes some pretty strongly negative claims about the behaviour of the local newspaper and their role in all this. As I've said before, I've never been too impressed with most "professional" journalists. They seem more interested in selling papers than disseminating information. Honestly, if it comes down to a librarian's word versus a journalist's word, all else being held equal, I'd have to pick the side of the librarian, despite my obvious bias.

Also, one of the criticisms of the article and the CEO is that she was fired with no explanation. What on earth is that? What kind of open and transparent government runs things like that (rhetorical question, thank you)? I've always thought that very few, at least in an official sense and regarding important issues, decisions should be made without a specified and sufficient reason. Voting? You should have to write at least a couple paragraphs as to why you think this party or this candidate is better than the other(s). Government decisions? Whole reports could be provided explaining the reasoning and the consideration of other possibilities and options. Ethical beliefs? Well, its certainly got to include something more than, "it seems like the right thing to do." Without some clarification of our actions that will affect others to a meaningful degree, we're just animals (which is exactly what we are but nonetheless), which is not what we WANT to be. We seem to like to consider ourselves somewhat more advanced, somewhat more conscious, somewhat more enlightened. Setting aside any arguments as to whether we are or not, we should at least act like what we want to appear as.

What do you think? Am I being too hard on journalism? And should we really be held to account for our actions in some "literal" way?

[ From Lexington PL CEO Imhoff Fired; Threatens Suit, Criticizes Newspaper Coverage by Norman Oder at Library Journal ]

Labels: aboutEvents, aboutHumanNature, aboutInformation, aboutLibrarianship, aboutReason, aboutWork

 

I already commented on the potential problems of adding Wikipedia articles to a library's catalog in the Distant Librarian blog entry that brought up the subject for me here, so I won't go over them again. What I want to do here is consider the benefits of doing so and doing it in the best way possible.

One benefit is that since an assumed good number of users see them as valuable and worthy of usage already, we can somewhat "ride the wave" of Wikipedia's success. Having their content linked to in our collection might say to a good portion of our patrons that, "Yes, we are hip and we can help you get to the resources we know you want." That may not sound like the best reason, but survival of an institution that most of us believe is worth saving may also be worth pandering a little to ensure continued appreciation. I'm not sure what the long term results of such pandering might be so this is probably not a sufficient reason but it does have a certain amount of short-term appeal at least.

Another benefit is that actually, many Wikipedia articles are valuable and include content not included in other resources to a sufficiently similar extent if at all. A venue where anyone anytime can add topics and start filling them up with content will always include more same-level topics than one that must pay authors to develop content. This is saying nothing about the quality of such content but if we assume some bare minimum level of quality that is sufficiently higher than neutral, or worse yet, outright falsehoods, then something is better than nothing. There will be somewhat informative articles in Wikipedia on topics that a for-fee or author-restricted resource will be able to provide. The benefit to a library catalog is that it can be filled with some content not available elsewhere.

A third benefit is that it is free, at least in terms of direct cost. Libraries do not typically have infinite budgets for collections and anytime a minimally worthy resource can be added to the collection for not outlay of money, it must be considered. Of course, the disadvantage of online resources such as Wikipedia articles is that they don't come with handy pre-made MARC records, requiring a certain amount of expertise and effort on the part of those who want them added.

Given these three benefits, how can the addition of at least some Wikipedia articles (and perhaps other similar online resources) be made easier particularly for those libraries with little time or smaller staff complements. First of all, they need to be linked to at the specific version level. This solves the issue of quality control that we tend to pride ourselves on in our collection (as mentioned in the comment mentioned above). Also, when a library/librarian has decided that a specific article version is worthy of addition, the metadata created needs to be shared, made available to other libraries considering it in the future. As a profession we tend to share well so let's use our large numbers to solve our general lack-of-local-resources problem. Finally, if we go down this path, we should go all the way down the path: if we're adding Wikipedia articles to the collection, advertise that we're doing so. One of the big problems with the library catalog as a tool is that users don't know what's in there. We need to tell them. It needs to be made clear all the kinds of resources are included in the collection and why. Not all at once though. One at a time.

Still not sure it's a good idea... May get too messy. But it seems to have a few useful positive side effects and is doable at least on a small scale. What do you think?

Labels: aboutClassification, aboutInformation, aboutOnlineTools, aboutWork

 

I've only recently starting thinking about some of my more complicated tasks as "projects" as defined by David Allen's GTD system/book. I think this has helped me immeasurably (that's a lie, I could totally measure it) by at least forcing me to break the process into smaller more manageable bits. My problem is that I'm not prepared to do it the way GTD suggests - recording the first action and then dealing with the next action when that's done (or at least that's my reading of it) - because I know that I would put off each step just a little which would add up to a whole bunch of procrastination. So I determine all the steps, their order, and which ones can be done simultaneously. This front loads the project work which is one of the big barriers but once it's done you'd think it would be easy from then on in. My big problem is that I don't have a tool or system built well enough to easily organize the individual tasks and then, in the midst of completing them, I come up with a better way of organizing them, or I remember a new task that I forgot to insert somewhere... What I need is a good seamless method/tool to help me manage all this and insert it into my work flow I already have (i.e. Remember the Milk). I keep looking but I have yet to reach the finding stage.

Labels: aboutOnlineTools, aboutWork, funny

 

...and confused.

We have all felt frustrated with a large (or small) company before, after an experience with a sales person, a service person, a help desk or even website. Why does this happen? Why do large groups of people (a business) cooperating (somewhat) on a common goal (to provide a service or product for a fee) but then fail so miserably so consistently in achieving that goal? Are they all incompetent? Well, some people plainly are, whether aware of it or not, but I'm not sure that's the reason in most cases. Are they evil? Perhaps we'd like to think so... that we're running into the BOFH every single time, but alas there is only so many and they can't have taken over civilization yet.

I think, for the most part, it's a matter of a lack of respect for one's own work, our preoccupation on money, and, often, simple miscommunication.

Too many people in too many jobs are there because they simply need a job. They may or may not have been well-trained for their position but, however they go there, they're there now and they're not moving. It's almost as if, in today's Western society (at least in the USA and Canada), no one can actually LIKE their job. I enjoy being a librarian but I feel almost guilty telling anyone other than a librarian that. If you don't like your job, or at least keep saying you don't, you will certainly limit your motivation for doing it well. You can only say TGIF so many times before you start calling in sick on Monday.

Along with our lack of preoccupation with our work is our preoccupation with the reason why we're there: Money. We are constantly needing things and therefore needing money. Again, I'm made to feel awkward (which I don't mind, because I'm just weird like that) when I say my family doesn't have cable TV (and therefore any TV at all). We "need" all these standard "trappings" of society. They may be different around the world but we all have them and the West has them in spades. I think it's getting better but it's not reached "good" yet. This preoccupation with money keeps ours eyes on the prize instead of where we're running and the people we trip over on the way.

In the end though, miscommunication is to blame for much of these problems we have with businesses. Face it, we are none of us experts at communication. Even between two people who speak the same language, come from the same culture and have the same expectations can get tripped up on the words we use to collaborate and transfer data. As a librarian, I know full well how difficult people find it to simply explain what they need help with. Many people are too busy trying to convince me that they don't need help to get their question out in a understandable way. We have a hard time seeing things from another persons perspective, especially when those "things" are the words flying out of our mouths.

So the moral of the story is:

1. Find a job you like, or like the one you have (as much as you can);
2. Chill out about money... you don't need as much as you think; and
3. Think about your communication a little more - you may be surprised at the difference between what you're saying and what you think you're saying.

Of course, sometimes, it is their fault. Give 'em hell! lol

[ Inspired by an article from Mon Jul 30 2007 entitled "Dell Tries To Repair $10 Battery, Hoses $150 Video Card" from "The Consumerist" ]

Labels: aboutCommunication, aboutMoney, aboutWork

 

No, I'm not referring to the Chinua Achebe novel (of course, it just made me think about the novel and, realizing how little I remember of it since I read it years ago, I had to go find a quick plot outline to refresh my memory). I'm talking literally: things fall apart.

• Tried to cut the lawn and only managed to finish the backyard since the right front wheel fell off.
• Found a cracked glass in the cupboard. Many of our dishes are being dropped or getting cracks or chips in them.
• Opened a window the other day and some little piece of plastic, plugging a hole in the other pane frame, was jutting out just a little too much and the edged was snapped off.
• And, of course, the "0" button on the laptop I'm writing this on has been waiting in the case for weeks now, for me to get it reattached.
  

Things fall apart. I was thinking about how horribly unfair this is, how this is all I need, what with money being tight and having no luck in finding a new job for after my current contract ends. But of course, things fall apart. Things break. Things die and rot and gather dust and get loose or get rusted or whatever the age-related verb is for any given inanimate object.

Get over it, bub.

Things fall apart. Get new things.

Labels: aboutLife, aboutMoney, aboutWork

 

This was the last work day before flying out to Winnipeg for the CHLA/ABSC 2009 conference. This is an important one for a couple reasons: (1) I'm looking for a new job so it'll be good to do a little networking, chatting with people, asking around, letting myself be seen (I hate shmoozing but it is helpful so I do what has to be done) and (2) I'm helping host next year's conference in Kingston, so I'd like to help out as much as possible promoting it at this year's conference.

I'm the chair of the Publicity Committee for CHLA/ABSC 2010 and also the webmaster so I've been pretty busy already getting things ready as much as possible. I know
we've all done a lot of work and organizing and everything but I always feel as though I could have done something more, something else to make things even better. I know, I'm a bit of a perfectionist (non-clinical diagnosis there) but I'm getting better. lol

Labels: aboutProfessionalService, aboutWork

 

I worked from home today.

My wife and son were sick and I asked if we could rearrange the reference desk shifts so I could do my fair share first thing in the morning and then go home to watch and take care of the kid's sicky needs, and let my wife sleep and get better (and get her things as she needed them - she didn't), and at the same time, get as much done from work as I needed to do at least for tomorrow.

It actually turned out well because, although I was watching my little 4 year old son in the living room, and he has a tendency to get up and raise hell even when he's sick, he was pretty tuckered out and managed to sleep for several hours, during which I got quite a bit done. Excellent.

But the whole affair brought back how much I wish I had a good workspace: office, writing room, home library, inner sanctum, fortress of solitude, Batcave, happy place... whatever you want to call it. And subscribing to Lifehacker doesn't help. They're always writing stuff about how some reader or whoever has created the perfect unique workspace: built their own standing desk, turned a unused corner into a haven for something needing a haven, or whatnot. I don't have anything like that. And I wish I did.

We have a basement... which is actually not as bad as it sounds, despite it being pretty bad. We live in a small backsplit house and so a good third of the house is a half a storey below the ground floor. It's semi-finished (meaning it's got temporary carpeting and fake wood panelling all over it - I think Dennis Leary's dad lived here) but it's not enough and there's no privacy or soundproofing or coolness.

It's got to be cool. You've got to have a space you like to be in, that you're proud of, that you want to spend time in.

Maybe the next house. Hmmm...

Labels: aboutHealth, aboutHousing, aboutWork