Author: griffey

In case anyone has missed this, the so-new-it-still-sparkles LITA blog is full of some amazing ALA conference coverage. KGS covers the Obama keynote and makes me wish I were there.

If the blog keeps up this level of use/writing, it’s going to be around for a long time.

As Anna pointed out in a comment to my previous post, perhaps I wasn’t as informative as I could have been in what sorts of lists I’m looking for. Here’s a short summary of my interests/responsibilities:

• Instruction/Reference
• Technology, esp. as it relates to the above
• Digital Reference (the combination of the above)
• Academic Libraries
• Intellectual Property issues in libraries
• Censorship/challenge issues in libraries

There’s a short list of things I feel like a want to keep up with. I’m sure there’s more, but that’s a sample. Thanks for any suggestions!

Ok all you guys out there in Library Land: what listservs do you consider to be A) the best and B) must subscribes? I’m going through my lists, and there seems to be more and more and more out there, so I know I’m missing a few that I could be either entertained by or helpful on.

Leave me comments on your favs (with subscription info if possible).

Thanks!

First day at UT – Chattanooga! (thanks Yeri!)

Just thought everyone should know. 🙂

More thoughts on the library, the job, etc…later. For now, I’m off to a class.

This latest post from Jeff Pomerantz is just briliant. In it, he discusses the oft-repeated falsehood that in order for writing to be of value it must be edited/peer reviewed/go through the “publication” process. In regards to the above claim, he says:

Let me be totally blunt: that argument was crap then & it’s crap now. The medium is irrelevant; the speed is irrelevant; the delivery mechanism is irrelevant. I could conduct peer review by passenger pigeon & still come up with a lousy result. The quality of thinking is what is important, and frankly I’d go so far as to say, the only thing that’s important. The quality of thinking by the author, by the reviewer, and by the reader. If the author is Jayson Blair, for example, the writing isn’t going to be worthwhile no matter how well-edited it is. If the reviewer is lazy, they won’t catch errors or make good suggestions to improve the manuscript.

Bravo! I’ve been saying the same thing for years now…one of the issues that I confronted with my Master’s Paper was just that…what is “publication”? Does self-publication negate the value of academic work? To claim that good writing MUST be edited is simply short sighted and wrong. Too many people in positions of power in academia seem to fall prey to this fallacy, including many, many librarians.

Peer review will not save you, people. Yes, it’s a good thing. Yes, it’s useful. Yes, it improves the quality of materials. But would you really suggest that there’s no writing that’s good without it? In the whole world? No, no reasonable person would say that. Is there lots of crummy writing out there? Yes, of course there is. Is there crummy writing out there that’s been through an editorial process? Yes, of course there is. Is there quality writing out there that has not been through an editorial process? Yes, OF COURSE there is.

Makes me wish that I had gotten to know Dr. Pomerantz better while I was at UNC. There are a great number of things tied up in this line of thought…academic scholarship is about to undergo some radical changes: more self-publication, less formalized peer-review, more “after the fact” review (ie, commentary rather than pre-pub edits), university rather than publishing house level archival, and much much more. I for one can’t wait.