The true irony of a conference on librarianship through mobile devices is that people even show up. If the technology is really that good, why not have a conference over everyone’s phones?

The value of a conference is not necessarily the content of the presentations, anyways. It’s a chance to network face to face with other people in the profession. This article provides some interesting ideas about conferences: http://www.destrickerblog.com/de_stricker/2010/05/investing-in-our-careers-conferences-are-not-a-luxury.html

As established librarians, it may be easy for you to gripe about the graduates that our library schools are producing, but in an uncertain economy, new graduates are also having to explore options beyond traditional librarianship. There is a demand on library schools to produce graduates to fill these non-traditional roles. You can’t please everyone, and if your library is seriously considering helping new librarians to learn the profession more thoroughly, consider offering internships to library students, or advertising for volunteers.

I learned long ago (starting in my first library job) that most librarians CANNOT take any kind of constructive criticism, in any context. I had but one job where the meetings were spirited and people would at least point out the ramifications of someone else’s poorly-thought-out plan, and that sort of criticism was usually accepted fairly well. Unfortunately, the “spirited” discussion usually revolved around mind-numbingly boring cataloging minutae. But, in NOT ONE of my other (several) library jobs has any kind of real discussion been acceptable. As at conferences, in most staff meetings I have attended, some dimwit (and, I am sorry to say that most of my coworkers have been dimwits) can come present some idiotic plan, and you CANNOT question it. Even if you matter-of-factly point out errors or lack of understanding of the greater context, or just question the need for something, you’re “mean.” I’m not kidding. Everything must be accepted at face value, and every plan implemented even if there are obvious problems from the very start. This mentality extends to other forms of communication, too. I actually had a coworker almost in tears, and suddenly copying the boss on our e-mail exchange because I told her (quite nicely) that in the future she could feel free to just contact me directly (with an issue that is my job – and my job alone – to make decisions about but I didn’t say that) rather than going through a chain of two other people to pass the word to me and pass my word back to her. (I was copied on the chain of e-mails, and she didn’t go this inefficient route because of any official hierarchy by which she had to abide, but rather because “this is the way it’s been done for 30 years,” before my position existed, and she can’t wrap her brain around the “new” way of doing things.) When I went to talk to her in person (after suddenly noticing the boss copied on the e-mail) she told me, red, and shaking, that NO ONE had EVER been so rude to her before.

But I digress from the thrust of these comments, and even more so from the AL’s original post. In any case, until librarians can handle any normal kind of disagreement, they are never going to openly debate the validity of research.

I think I’d be annoying at a library conference. I’m not sure I could, say, let sloppy statistics, or no statistics, go without a comment. I hope you’ll voice up. Rigor has to start somewhere.

I notice a real change in people once they get their first blackberry.