OLAC BIENNIAL CONFERENCE SURVEY RESULTS
Compiled January 21, 2003
by Sheila Smyth
Q1. Have you attended an OLAC Conference?
62 Yes
7 No
If Yes, how many have you attended?
Meetings attended
Number of people
1 19
2 15
3 6
4 9
5 3
6 1
7 1
8 0
9 2
10 2
11 0
5+ 1
4-5 2
5? 1
Comments on the most important thing to the respondent about the conferences attended:
Attendees:
Over 2/3 of the people who attended commented on the excellence of the following: wealth of information, the knowledge of members, as well as networking. Many of them preferred the smallness of the conference, which afforded the opportunity to speak with “the experts”.
Non-attendees: No comments
Q2. Workshops should be varied to match the level of cataloging experience.
Attendee responses:
16 Strongly agree
39 Agree
6 Disagree
1 Strongly disagree
0 No response
Attendee comments:
It was pointed out that there was a mix of attendees and that the conference should hold the attention of both the newer and the more experienced catalogers. Cost was identified as a variable when determining the number and level of workshops. Additionally the various types of librarians (public, special and academic) may affect the structuring of workshops. It was pointed out that workshops provide a learning experience and librarians can learn from the basics even if they are more skilled. Also, more experienced catalogers enrich workshops when they share their experience. Some attend workshops in areas where they do not catalog so that they can learn something new. One member commented that OLAC does not have enough workshops on advanced topics such as subject analysis, and it needs to address this rather than focusing on descriptive cataloging.
Non-attendee responses:
3 Strongly agree
4 Agree
0 Disagree
0 Strongly disagree
0 No response
Non-attendee comments:
Two people pointed out that both introductory and advanced workshops should be available if there is adequate funding. One person pointed out that advanced workshops would discourage newcomers.
Q3. The best format for advanced catalogers is:
Attendee responses:
4 Small discussion groups
3 Panels
11 Focus group on a narrow aspect
4 No response
Attendee comments:
Five people pointed out that small discussion groups draw people out while panels usually draw on the same people. There was a general theme that all formats are valuable but also each has its own pitfall and these kinks must be worked out if the conference uses different formats. Handouts are valuable and there should be ample time for questions.
Non-attendee responses:
5 Small discussion groups
1 Panels
1 Focus group on a narrow aspect
Non-attendee comments: None
Q4. I consider the appropriate size for an OLAC conference to be:
Attendee responses:
10 100-199
28 200-299
8 300-399
7 400-500
9 No response
Attendee comments:
The largest number of respondents agreed that 200-299 is the ideal size. Generally it was felt if we grew too large, we would lose the intimacy and networking atmosphere. It was agreed upon by some that if the conference were over 250, the workshops would become too large for meaningful discussion. Two people pointed out that the size and quality of the workshops are more critical than the size of the conference. Two other people felt that the larger size was best since the conference is the way librarians learn about OLAC.
Non-attendee responses:
1 100-199
3 200-299
0 300-399
0 400-500
3 No response
Non-attendee comments: None
Q5. I prefer to attend the OLAC conference in:
Attendee responses:
44 Fall
2 Winter
10 Spring
3 Summer
3 No response
Attendee comments:
Six people did not have a preference. A couple of people do not want it in the summer. October is a bad time for government employees. A warm climate was important to a few people while two wanted it located in areas that would provide vacation opportunities. A couple of people preferred Fall and mentioned that we should not have conferences in the same seasons as ALA. A voice rose reminding us to be sensitive to the Jewish holidays.
Non-attendee responses:
1 Fall
0 Winter
2 Spring
2 Summer
2 No response
1 Fall or Summer
Non-attendee comments:
One respondent preferred Fall or Summer (after July) since the fiscal year ends in July and late Spring is very hectic. Another pointed out that it is difficult to get Summer release time, and the weather creates difficulties in the Winter, thus Spring or Fall is preferred.
Q6. I would consider attending a conference during intersession (probably summer) periods if it was held on a college/university campus with reduced rates for staying in dorm rooms.
Attendee responses:
8 Strongly agree
27 Agree
20 Disagree
5 Strongly disagree
2 No response
Attendee comments:
Most of the comments favored staying in hotels since the environment usually offered other cultural opportunities, amenities, and better food among other things. Dorms would definitely be less expensive, but come with their own set of problems.
Non-attendee responses:
1 Strongly agree
4 Agree
1 Disagree
0 Strongly disagree
0 No response
Non-attendee comments: Neutral
Q7. I attended a previous OLAC meeting and found the Membership Meeting useful.
Attendee responses:
4 Strongly agree
45 Agree
8 Disagree
2 Strongly disagree
2 No response
Attendee comments:
Eight respondents thought the Membership Meeting is very informative since it was a vehicle to learn about the organization and its officers. Some found the meeting to be boring.
Non-attendee responses:
8 No response
Non-attendee comments: None
Q8. I would attend the Membership meeting it was not held during the luncheon.
Attendee responses:
4 Strongly agree
37 Agree
13 Disagree
5 Strongly disagree
2 No response
Attendee comments:
Approximately 6-8 people wanted it split from lunch with 4 preferring not to divide their attention between "eating and meeting". It does not allow for people to network at lunch. A couple of people would skip it if it were not held during lunch, while a similar number would attend no matter when it was held. Another asked that we not change the meeting time since the schedule is so full already.
Non-attendee responses:
8 No response
Non-attendee comments: None
Q9. OLAC should have joint meetings with other groups similar to what we do with MOUG.
Attendee responses:
4 Strongly agree
41 Agree
11 Disagree
2 Strongly disagree
2 No response
Attendee comments:
Some favored this since it expanded the attendance number especially with MOUG whose charge is similar to ours. Concern was expressed by a few that OLAC’s mission could be compromised. One of the best things about OLAC, one member commented, is it that everyone speaks the same language (MARC, etc.)
Non-attendee responses:
2 Strongly agree
5 Agree
0 Disagree
0 Strongly disagree
1 No response
Non-attendee comments:
Have a joint meeting every second conference. NASIG, WAML, and the regional SSA are possibilities for joint meetings.
Q10. There should be OLAC Mentors for first time Conference attendees.
Attendee responses:
9 Strongly agree
38 Agree
11 Disagree
3 Strongly disagree
0 No response
Attendee comments:
Four commented that the conference is small enough and therefore mentors are not needed. Three people found the idea helpful while another group of three people felt it should be optional. It was pointed out by a couple of people that the mentors need to be trained prior to the conference. Another comment suggested an hour orientation session for newcomers.
Non-attendee responses:
3 Strongly agree
5 Agree
0 Disagree
0 Strongly disagree
0 No response
Non-attendee comments:
First time attendees should have the option but it should not be mandatory.
Additional comments (Summary):
The additional comments were glowing for the most part. Attendees have had positive experiences with the format and content of the conferences. There was an isolated comment that OLAC is floundering and has not kept up with the latest cataloging trends such as FRBR. Suggestions for improvement from different respondents included providing small discussion groups for catalogers who have been to basic workshops in past years, and to provide more than four workshops. One respondent said cost was a factor in attending future workshops.
Return to Table of Contents | Previous Section | Next Section
Last updated: June 5, 2003
http://www.olacinc.org/newsletters/june03/survey.html
neumeist@buffalo.edu