There is already the SACO discussion list which is at <[log in to unmask]>
that could serve this purpose. There hasn't been a great deal of actual
discussion about proposals on it, but it has the potential to be a great
vehicle for discussion if members use it. The weekly list minutes
(Summary of Decisions) are routinely sent out on it. This is an open
list but must be subscribed to by sending a name and email address to
>>> [log in to unmask] 05/14/03 08:47PM >>>
I like Hugh's idea of having separate NACO and SACO lists for people
ask specific questions and seek support on difficult problem headings.
The PCC list could be used just for general news and announcements, as
Hugh noted that it primarily is currently now used.
I too think that training opportunities should be multipronged.
Utility-offered, offered at conferences, on the Web, printed manuals,
having someone come to your institution if you desire, mentorships,
should all be part of our training arsenal. Perhaps the PCC Standing
Committee on Training needs to have subcommittees or task groups
specifically devoted to training for each of the PCC programs?
documentation and keeping it current is an imperative.
* Adam L. Schiff *
* Principal Cataloger *
* University of Washington Libraries *
* Box 352900 *
* Seattle, WA 98195-2900 *
* (206) 543-8409 *
* (206) 685-8782 fax *
* [log in to unmask] *
On Wed, 14 May 2003, Hugh Taylor wrote:
> I've been to "our" west coast for a meeting, so out of town for a
> days. From here to West Wales is 6 hours by train - not quite so far
> to CA, but far enough.
> Cambridge is an entirely self-taught SACO contributor. By which I
> whilst we relied on long-distance help and support from other
> both here and in the US, as well as from Coop staff at LC, we've
> attended any formal training session. The same goes for some of the
> and Irish participants, but not all (so far as I'm aware).
> Personally, given institutional commitment and a staff that's willing
> down with documentation and to give apply care and attention to
> proposals, I think this is adequate. But it may not suit all needs,
> readily accept that there are those who welcome the "comfort"
> having sat through a formal session. Equally, from the perspective of
> managing such a program, you can at least be sure that people have
> things, if they've attended formal training.
> I'm assuming, if we develop our ideas to involve the utilities, that
> would accept responsibility for training and documentation in the use
> their systems, just as they do already with NACO.
> Are there issues specific to SACO training support, or are they just
> same ones as apply to all PCC programs? I'm inclined myself to think
> latter is true. So there's clearly need to take on board the work
> by the Standing Committee on Training, and that committee's thinking
> training issues. (Previously I was on a NACO Continuing Education TG,
> aware of the risk of reinventing the wheel at every opportunity...)
> Group training at ALA or wherever is all well and good, but
> rules out some contributors. And is the objective of those sessions
> the practitioners, or to train those who will be training staff back
> their home institution? That's never been entirely clear to me.
> I look forward to the development of Web-based training for all PCC
> programs. This is increasingly vital as PCC becomes ever more
> Attending training in North America isn't possible for all of us
> resident in North America). And there are limits to the number of
> tours that Coop staff can undertake.
> Given that we're looking at turning what already exists into a more
> program, for whom would training initially be developed? Potential
> members? Existing members who need refreshers and updates?
> Although I suspect I'm in a minority, I'd still be interested in a
> SACO-specific mailing list in which practitioners can ask each other
> questions. (Ditto for NACO.) Whatever the intention of the main PCC
> it's never developed into a more general forum, being used mostly
> announcements and news. I believe we have more to learn from each
> from training - however that training is delivered. We, the members,
> program's most effective "training support". And if I send an
> answer to someone's question on a "public" mailing list, then at
> others can put me right. If the correspondence takes place privately,
> two institutions with wrong information, and nobody will ever
> I would agree with Jimmie that feedback on proposals from Coop and/or
> is also valuable "on the job" training. That's an avenue that's not
> available with NACO, of course, and only arises because SACO
> (however they're routed) are bound to be reviewed by experienced LC
> But given the pressures on LC, I don't think we should incorporate
> feedback into our "training support" expectations. Nor can we leave
> to Adam, though that's not such a bad idea either ... ;-)
> Regards to all,
> Hugh Taylor
> Head of Cataloguing, Cambridge University Library
> West Road, Cambridge CB3 9DR, England
> email: [log in to unmask] fax: +44 (0)1223 333160
> phone: +44 (0)1223 333069 (with voicemail) or
> phone: +44 (0)1223 333000 (ask for pager 036)