This is a very good and useful post of Bob's, in my opinion,
and it largely rings true.  ( The part about Powerpoint reminds
me of a nice little film, "How NOT To Use Powerpoint",
of which some of you may be aware : 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BP2HlNmRJ4 .
As they say, "In der Beschränkung zeigt sich der Meister". )

With respect to Bob's good question : 

> Why should we expect students and perhaps even faculty
> to follow a different principle for our area of concern?

Here's something I've been sort of wanting to ask, and I'm
not being facetious : 

Does any of you know a librarian who has ever actually
come out and said the following, or something comparable,
to a researcher, say an historian or a geologist or a social
psychologist or a classicist or a microbiologist or a
musicologist ? : 

"Prof. A, I have carefully read through your recent article,
X, in The International Journal of Y, and, I want to tell you,
it can clearly be shown that this article would have made a
more significant contribution to the field [ or avoided such-
and-such a shortcoming, etc. ] if you had in the process of
preparing it only consulted with a librarian, or had only
previously followed a course of instruction by library staff
on effective literature searching in the databases which the
library has licensed and made available to the university
community."  Or suchlike.

Follow-up question :  does any of you know of an actual
case in which, though no one may have pointed this out to
the researcher involved, such an assertion by the librarian
could more or less objectively have been demonstrated
to be correct ? 

Last question :  Is anyone here in a position to produce
valid and reliable evidence that, in any academic field of
his/her choice, the state of knowledge at the moment ( in
history or geology or social psychology or classics or
microbiology or musicology or anthropology or whatever
you like ) is less advanced, or the achievements to date
less impressive, than they might have been, namely
because its specialists have made insufficient use of
librarians, librarians' methods, or recommended library
resources ?

OK -- forget maybe about a cause-and-effect relationship,
if you like. What about even statistically valid evidence of
a positive correlation ?

One could put the same questions, mutatis mutandis,
regarding the scholars'/scientists' accomplishments as
educators rather than for the moment as researchers, if
one so desired.

Why am I posing these questions ?  Are they silly ? Am I
being much too overly simplistic ?

*Can* librarians and other "information professionals"
render, empirically, their oft-heard claims and critiques
credible ?  Convincing ?  Irrefutable ?  Have I missed
something, and have they, in practice, accomplished
such a task already ?

I'd really like to be steered toward some clear cases in
point, should they exist.

You can also turn it around :  Any obvious cases of googling
scholars' ultimately screwing it up ?  Of a discipline that's not
as far as it could be, or is deteriorating, because of too much
googling by its researchers ?

Isn't this kind of like where the rubber really hits the road ?

So to repeat Bob's question quoted above :  "Why should we
expect students and perhaps even faculty to follow a different
principle for our area of concern?" Why indeed ?

If the real validity and value of our way of looking at things
can be shown, in black and white as it were, with solid
pragmatic evidence, will the outside world then not *have*
to listen, and then to behave accordingly ( unless they
genuinely *aren't* in their right minds ) ?

If these *can't* be shown, should we then finally give up on
all the lamentations and protestations and preaching to the
choir that we've been doing for as long as I can remember,
and start expending our energy in a more meaningful
( productive, facilitating ) way ?

It was perhaps a fun game, but who needs it anymore ?

Am I talking nonsense ?  [ Don't answer that ! :-) ]


- Laval Hunsucker
  Breukelen, Nederland