« Beyond Copy and Paste: Intelligent Content EveryWare as the Next Wave of Technological Innovation from Wolters Kluwer | Main | The Bluebook: There's an eReader app developer selling that »
August 22, 2012
Three Questions about Programming Future AALL Annual Meeting Sessions
While off in a post-op narco-haze (read painkillers for minor knee surgery) late last week, AALL President Jean Wenger posted a message about AMPC's new procedures to screen programming submissions to the Members Open Forum on August 17th. Read it yesterday. More importantly, yesterday Cheryl identified what many may think are the three most important issues in this controversy in Question, Answer, quoting from Wenger's statement, and her issue-specific "Musing" format:
Question 1: Is it the intention of AALL to bring the currently independent type model of the PLL Summit into the fold of the larger AALL Annual meeting?
Question 2: How will the "blind review" process that is to be used by AMPC for choosing programs for the annual meeting in Seattle work?
Question 3: Is it true that all SISs will also be limited to sponsoring only one independent education program?
I don't know if Cheryl was intentionally trying to minic AMPC's FAQ but her takeaways aka musings from AALL President Wenger's Members Open Forum post are more direct and to the point than anything written by AALL officially. Of course, they are Cheryl's own opinions about the issues but her 3 Geeks post, Rethinking My Musings on Future AALL Annual Meetings and the Fate of the PLL Summit, is recommended for deconstructing the matter. [JH]
August 22, 2012 in Education & Professional Development, Library Associations, Meetings | Permalink
Comments
Unfortunately on Question 3 Cheryl's statement "It is what it is" in response to Jean Wenger's statement that all SIS will be limited to one program doesn't quite satisfy. PLL put on a large number of excellent programs and if we are limited to one program that is problematic for me. I certainly don't intend to make a trip to the West Coast for a very limited number of relevant programs. I await the decision on the PLL Summit and have every confidence in the PLL leadership that they will try their best to work something out with AALL.
Posted by: Caren Biberman | Aug 23, 2012 8:22:46 AM
Thank-you for the recommendation Joe! In actuality the questions were posed by me in about the exact same wording to Kate Hagan who then said she would pass them to Jean to address in an upcoming FAQ re/the issue. Thus perhaps that is how in some fashion Jean drafted her email to the forum!
Posted by: Cheryl | Aug 22, 2012 1:22:30 PM
