Johnny goes to the library . . . .

My love of books began with a box of crayons. OH! how the black on white needed emphasis! I find my powers of research challenged as literature moves through the digital age. Graduate school presents new information for my enjoyment and consumption. READ ON!!!!!

My Photo
Location: mind

thinking about it?

Thursday, March 29, 2007

hcraeseR snoitarepO

It has been so many years since I have been involved with coordinating & reporting. In the early 70s I was a management trainee at Chevrolet Spring & Bumper (gone with OSHA), learning all that could be packed into our heads at GMs Technical Institute’ Cooperative Education program. Hearing about it, learning about it, and using are it are 3 different animals. And now—37 years on—the ghosts of professors longgone come back to haunt me in this chapter.

It was like—yeah, I remember a lot of this from the classroom, the production floor, and the Engineering offices. As I read on, keeping in mind both practical & learning experiences from the last 4 decades, I put together in my mind’ eye, what might be, could be, may be happening, or could be developed, now that computers have, and continue to evolve. The movie “TRON” comes to mind, where “Central Controller” orders around “electron personnel” to do its dirty deeds. Much like goes on today, with all the control, requirements, techniques, standards, blahblahblah, etc, then TOOLS (cost benefit analysis, benchmarking, program evaluation & review techniques, information systems, time & motion studies—I’m about there), and OPERATIONS RESEARCH.

I never caught on to this area—it was too advanced, with several techniques available for study—just never got it. But here on page 433 of text was a pert, concise, up to date definition: “Operations Research is an ‘experimental and applied science devoted to observing, understanding and predicting the behavior of purposeful [worker-machine] systems, and operations researchers are actiavely engaged I applying this knowledge to practical problems.’” (Stueart & Moran. (2002).). Another thing that grabbed me was on p. 434: “. . . this method demands some knowledge of mathematics and statistical concepts, and these are areas where librarians are thought to be at their weakest; we have realied heavily on nonlibrarians to provide this expertise.” Who might these nonlibrarians be that are so interested in how we check out a book. Is there so much to it?

Then I bounce back to the chapter 8 reading list (p. 208) at the beginning of that chapter, and notice a title: “Crawford, Walt, and Michael Gorman. Future Libraries: Dreams, Madness,and Reality. Chicago: American Library Association, 1995.” and everything fell into place—where exactly I don’t know, but I feel much better now. Oh—the book will be back on P-K shelf shortly.

Wednesday, March 28, 2007




Handout#1. LibQual+ charting library service quality. When I saw this article my first thought was man! are they milking these poor people for all they can get or what? Then I figured- why not? All other aspects of our lives are used and abused. But seriously. . . . Having just taken up serious studies in this field one begins to notice that the educators, facilitators, etc, in the field also take the field and themselves seriously, and try to convince others to do the same, for survival, or satisfaction, or monetary support for one thing or t’ other.
To be a commodity, that commodity must be needed, desired, and used. Whatever that field can do to convince people they are necessary is probably necessary, even though they may be buying into a lie. But I suppose at some point one’ ideals are worthless in the real, antagonistic world, so get on with business, and may the best situation win.

It may be library use will decline with the emergence of the digital domain. I for one have stockpiled enough books to keep me busy in reading till the end of my life, along with instruments to create the sounds of a cultured environment. So when I retire before really getting into the field, I wish you all good luck. I am going to enjoy!!!!!

Handout#2. Perspectives on user satisfaction surveys. By the time you get to page 6662 you have just got to stop and wonder, did anybody besides me actually try to read this most boring of articles? On my personal scale of boredom, which is seldom required, it ranks way down there with Mein Kampf- itself the MOST BORING PIECE OF RAMBLING PULP FICTION I EVER ATTEMPTED TO READ. As a harbinger it was a definite struggle to keep awake (didn’t get very far). Oh joy! on page 6682- something about a futuristic study!

Handout#4. The Promise of Appreciative Inquiry in Library Organizations. After two articles and a website on quality this article sounds interesting- a just reward for submission to the punishment. People pay big bucks for that kind of analysis.

I am reminded abut a wise man once thought “One man’ nirvana is another man’ hell”- oh wait- that was me.

One thing leads to another and soon its back to the same old mutual (cant think of a PC term) society. Reminds me of those nature shows where there are entire civilizations of creatures sucking the life blood out of larger creatures by attaching to their epidermal layers.

Dwell on this abstraction from the article:

“. . . . appreciative. . . mystery. . . marvel. . . high futures. . . hopes. . . dreams. . . images. . . peak experiences. . . highest aspiration. . . envisioning. . . placebo. . . physical. . . psychological. . . emotional. . . medicine. . . expectations. . . future. . . reality. . . interpretations. . . multiple realities. . . journey to the future. . . the unknown. . . seductive. . . deep and sustained. . . change. . . discovery. . . dream. . . design. . . destiny. . .variety. . . informally. . . light. . . high performance. . . experiences. . . stories. . . behavior. . . reveal. . . aspirations. . . interact. . . influence. . . creative. . . thinking. . . influence. . . creative. . . thinking. . . feeling. . . peak experience. . . enabled. . . creation. . . the fifth discipline. . . mastery. . . change. . . collaboration. . . dynamic. . . shapes. . . articulations. . . deeper levels. . . varies. . . awareness. . . habit. . . evolution. . . possibilities. . . seeing. . . relevant. . . effort. . . latent. . . life. . . learning. . . growth. . . development. . . groups. . . appreciative. . . shifting patterns. . . devil’ advocate. . . angel’ advocate. . . suggestion. . . scenarios. . . ideas. . . core. . . effect. . . bold actions. . . pressing problems. . . focus. . . administer. . . full range. . . optimism. . . intentions. . . strengths. . . complex. . . transformational. . . inception. . . assure. . . whirl of change. . . option. . . fixed. . . change at the speed of imagination.

But it reads well. And, as a direct confrontation to the interventionist mentality, it probably makes more sense than intervention management. Just try instituting it among the masses. But I don’t know? Have you got a light? Using this for a framework one might talk one into anything under any circumstance. I might be patronized.

Monday, March 12, 2007

number nine, number nine, number nine, number nine, number nine, number nine, number nine, number nine, number nine, number nine, number nine . . . .

This search into personality instruments is beginning to drain my creativity on the subject- I think that may be the point- not a healthy thing- but much wanted in a society where a majority of followers are needed by a minority of leaders to do whatever the leader cant do wont do dont want to do, so the leaders can maintain their high and mighty lifestyles they have become accustomed to. Things havent really changed in 10000 years

IM HAVING A VISION. so you see kiddies the whole point to the new unified personality instrument testing theory is to enjoy- yes it shows enjoy- getting the system' message shoved into your collective existence anyway we know how. In the remaining days i'm going to create a personality tool- make it completely detachable- so all you have to do is screw it on & take it off, or vica versa. So dont get to attached to Jung- them days are long gone. We gonna go with an off the wall, untried, untested design on the hearts & "minds" of the audience. I got the hardware to sell product (meditation mats, t-shirts, sunglasses, pamphlets describing in painful detail all the possible intricacies, multicolored shrinkwrap in a variety of shapes and sizes, miscellaneous paraphanalia- anymore ideas? A partnership may be on order!@#$%^&*()_+=-~`?/><"':;

psycho logicalists on a pair a dice

I been thinking about it. Its not every lifetime (if ever) you up & find something good in the field of personality instruments. So Carl Jung unknowingly created proteges/followers who tickled the fancies of one captive audience.

Its time to move on. What other sideshow attractions await us in the hall of mirrors--the personality game--this fiasco of life???

Right off the top of my head all I can think of is Freud, someone who obviously had a lot of (possibly negative) influence on humanities which had access to translations of his works. Speaking of which--how do you figure a cokehead like Freud convinced the world that things go better with coke? They cleaned up the soda, but dirtied up our "minds." Isnt it amazing how the slightest suggestion of a suggestion sugggesting something is ate up like so much apolacray.

How about Mesmer? Wonder what he did with personality testing, or convincing us that we needed to do something?


All right- I think weave got Carl Jung figured out, and best summed up by the Moody Blues in their 1968 album In search of the lost chord (House of four doors). If youre not lost now you never will be.

So lets move on. Why do people so need these tests. Some theorists have the power and money to have their products introduced to the captive audiences among the masses. Lets scrap the peanut gallery and go to the master.

Franz Anton Mesmer has been dead since March 5, 1815, following his “discovery” of the subconscious……………{go the days of future past—next time}

Friday, March 02, 2007


Ive been working on the assignment #4 for a while now (about 10 minutes- seems like 10 hours), when the Abilene Paradox goes trotting through my head, and wouldn’t leave. Luckily I began thinking. As I thunk, I thunk about maybe other paradoxae? Thank god there are- possibly more interesting paradoxica. I’d hate to be stuck in a Abilene frame of mind.

Defined, a paradox is described in shades ranging from opinion, belief, hard to believe, contrary, absurd, self-contradictory, counter-intuitive, intrinsically unreasonable, logically unacceptable,

Anyways it happens there are logical (self-referential, vagueness), mathematical and statistical (probability, infinity, and geometry and topology), decision theoretic, chemical, physical, philosophical, economic, and miscellaneous (bracketing, buttered cat, ethics, proof that 0.999=1, logical fallacy, puzzle) paradoxas.

It also happens the Abilene paradox is a economic paradox, along with the other common economic paradoxes: Allais, Bertrand, Diamond-water, Edgeworth, Ellsberg, Gibson’s, Giffen, Jevons, Leontief, Thrift, Parrondo’s, Productivity, Solow computer.
The Ellsberg Paradox is named for that pioneer of Nixon years, Daniel Ellsberg, a former American military analyst with the Rand Corporation, who released the Pentagon Papers, the account of activities of Vietnam. Wikipedia states “(t)he Ellsberg paradox is a paradox in decision theory and experimental economics in which people’s choices violate the expected utility hypothesis. It is generally taken to be evidence for ambiguity aversion. The paradox was popularized by Daniel Ellsberg, although a version of it was noted considerably earlier by John Maynard Keynes.” Thank you, Daniel Ellsberg, made the man a underground subculture hero when Bloodrock immortalized him on their 1972 album Passage- that song is also why I just bored you with this otherwise obsolete information.