Bibframe reactions

I have concerns about whether we are asking the right questions. Yes it is important to ask does bibliographic metadata have value outside of libraries. However, it may be more important to ask, is it important to have our library resources discoverable where our patrons are searching?
At the moment, many librarians have already posited that library resources are not discoverable where patrons are searching, which is increasingly via Google services, and in many cases SciHub. For places like Penn State with $13 million dollar library budget this may not be an issue, but for many scholars at small universities, especially in developing countries, the university nor the scholar may be able to afford the subscription for the journal which published a scholar’s article. In contrast to library resource silos, the discoverability of paid and open access content is incredibly easy to discover in the megadata world. Hence, resisting patron trends in discovery may be a losing battle; especially when we are content in saying that we have the best resource silo.
The best research silo is all about perspective. Researchers don’t need our authority record indexes to discover all of the resources written by a particular author. Yes it is helpful for author disambiguation, but there are numerous controlled environments out there in the “megadata” world that are not library controlled environments. Libraries, I would argue, do not have a monopoly on building fast, efficient, and accurate data retrieval systems. It seems that for many patrons, in a non-library discovery layer, good enough is sufficient.
At any rate, I hope we as a community considering Bibframe, continue to ask the right questions, questions which are patron-centric, rather than data format specific. If the answer to the question, “Should we have out data discoverable where patrons are searching?” is yes, then certainly Bibframe, schema,org, or any variety of linked data triples are tools which we should be exploring. We should be exploring these formats even if we know that it will provide a less than optimal information seeking experience. If we truly want an accurate information seeking experience, perhaps we should all still be using Dialog.

For Paris:

Liberte by Paul Éluard

“On my notebooks from school
On my desk and the trees
On the sand on the snow
I write your name

On every page read
On all the white sheets
Stone blood paper or ash
I write your name

On the golden images
On the soldier’s weapons
On the crowns of kings
I write your name

On the jungle the desert
The nests and the bushes
On the echo of childhood
I write your name

On the wonder of nights
On the white bread of days
On the seasons engaged
I write your name

On all my blue rags
On the pond mildewed sun
On the lake living moon
I write your name

On the fields the horizon
The wings of the birds
On the windmill of shadows
I write your name

On each breath of the dawn
On the ships on the sea
On the mountain demented
I write your name

On the foam of the clouds
On the sweat of the storm
On dark insipid rain
I write your name

On the glittering forms
On the bells of colour
On physical truth
I write your name

On the wakened paths
On the opened ways
On the scattered places
I write your name

On the lamp that gives light
On the lamp that is drowned
On my house reunited
I write your name

On the bisected fruit
Of my mirror and room
On my bed’s empty shell
I write your name

On my dog greedy tender
On his listening ears
On his awkward paws
I write your name

On the sill of my door
On familiar things
On the fire’s sacred stream
I write your name

On all flesh that’s in tune
On the brows of my friends
On each hand that extends
I write your name

On the glass of surprises
On lips that attend
High over the silence
I write your name

On my ravaged refuges
On my fallen lighthouses
On the walls of my boredom
I write your name

On passionless absence
On naked solitude
On the marches of death
I write your name

On health that’s regained
On danger that’s past
On hope without memories
I write your name

By the power of the word
I regain my life
I was born to know you
And to name you


Translated by A. S. Kline

Heifetz: Limits of Balcony Based Leadership

Recently in my educational leadership coursework we stumbled upon some leadership philosophies of the distinguished leadership theorist Ronald Heifetz, specifically his thoughts from Leadership Without Easy Answers. In some of his leadership philosophies Heifetz recommends that leaders in a crisis must view their challenging situation ‘from the balcony.’ Or in other words Heifetz encourages leaders to not be on the dance floor, but instead view their situation from the balcony. On this metaphorical thought balcony Heifetz argues ‘we’ leaders can more easily see the various perspectives of those we lead; or at least those perspectives of individuals who may be affected by our decisions. But what are the limits of the Heifetz Balcony model?

My first gut reaction is an assumption of depth. Or I question the ability of a leader to truly understand the perspective of someone who reports directly to you, just by imaging what that perspective may be like. As a future leader, I don’t think I can imagine all the possible perspectives of those who may be under my organizational responsibility. Perhaps it is more important to undergo empathy training or to frequently be encouraged to perform tasks which are beneath their responsibility, in order to more fully empathize with various perspectives.

Having shared these criticisms above, on at least one point I do agree with Heifetz. In the toxic environments which leaders may often find themselves, it is important to constantly be filtering your experiences through the lens of criticisms which are meant for me as a person, contrasted with leadership criticisms which may not be directed at a specific person. Instead some criticisms may often be directed at a leader’s position or the leader’s organization. These latter criticisms of a leader’s position, should instead be taken seriously, but are more easily digested if digested through a non-personal lens.

Places to play: a guide for small ensembles and solo musicians near Dayton

As an amateur music performer, I am always wondering where in the world I can play guitar. I don’t like bars and loud music, so this takes my opportunities down to fewer than a handful of places. But if you look closely and keep a list of where performers are playing, perhaps I might find more places than I anticipated. If you are a solo music performer or small ensemble in the greater Dayton, OH region and you’ve performed somewhere unusual that isn’t a bar, please feel free to submit your locations in the comments below. As I find more locations I will add them to my list so check back often.

Blanket Concert Series at Smith Gardens in Oakwood, Ohio

Dayton Art Institute Concert Series

Palermo’s Restaurant

Saxby’s in Oakwood


Starbucks on 725 opposite the Dayton Mall

Whole Foods Market Dayton at 1050 Miamisburg Centerville Rd
Dayton, Ohio

Other Possible Sources

  1. Retirements homes
  2. Daycares
  3. Schools
  4. Libraries

Reactions to Chall – Teacher versus Student-centered teaching

Research has been done on the influence of teaching styles on the performance of students. Jeanne Chall (2000) discussed at length two specific approaches to teaching. In her writings she gathered research which presented evidence in support of teacher-centered instruction instead of student-centered instruction. The teacher-centered instruction was particularly vital for students who were low-income or low achievement. High achieving students, on the other hand, appeared to do well with student-centered instruction. The evidence presented in Chall (2000) was and is important to our understanding of classroom instruction methods which may provide the best style of teaching for all students, but what if this is not enough? What are the questions that we are not asking?

What are the other factors which may influence the positive response of some students towards one method of instruction over the other method of instruction? Is there a possibility that low achievement students respond well to teacher-centered instruction not because it is inherently better than student-centered instruction, but instead it is representative of a style or culture of parenting which these students are more likely to have received prior to attending compulsory schooling? And by deduction, what if higher achieving students respond to student-centered instruction better not because student-centered is inherently better, but because higher achieving students are more likely to exist in a culture of parenting which is more child centered? I don’t have the answers to these questions, but they are important to share.


Time is not something we traditionally think of, until we are running late for work…late for the wedding… late for the party.

Time isn’t something we think of as being fluid, until we have all the time in the world to enjoy a great sunset…to enjoy a great book…to enjoy a great embrace.

Time isn’t something we think of as being shaped by our work, until that day that never ends…the month never ends…the project never ends.

What we don’t realize, is how much our day to day work shapes our unconscious understanding of time. Most of my work projects only last a few hours or a few days. To spend a day on a project, would be a long project. But in libraries, we often have a project which might last a few months…a few years.

K-12 student culture

I’m curious to know some of your reactions to the following prompt. If k-12 schooling improved the structure and process of how they teach and assess learning, so as to more accurately represent the purposes of k-12 schooling, would this change the student culture in k-12 schooling?

My initial response is that even if k-12 compulsory schooling improved dramatically, their is still a point at which school may be fun and serve the developmental needs of every student, but in the required nature of school, it may shape negative school attitudes in student culture.

Or in other words, how much does the compulsory nature of school shape the opinions of children and young adults in negative ways? Please don’t misinterpret this question as rhetorical in nature. I am not recommending k-12 not be compulsory.