[130] in Public-Access_Computer_Systems_Forum
Computerspeak
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Public-Access Computer Systems For)
Thu Apr 30 10:01:39 1992
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 1992 08:58:49 CDT
Reply-To: Public-Access Computer Systems Forum <PACS-L%UHUPVM1.BITNET@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU>
From: Public-Access Computer Systems Forum <LIBPACS%UHUPVM1.BITNET@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU>
To: Multiple recipients of list PACS-L <PACS-L@UHUPVM1.BITNET>
2 Messages, 69 Lines
*-----
From: "Jim Dwyer" <jim_dwyer@macgate.csuchico.edu>
Subject: RE: Computerspeak
Mary Brandt Jensen's contends that "given time enough people in the world
learned to read..." According to who? Illiteracy is still a major problem
around the world and right here in the United States. Functional illiteracy
contributes to the creation and perpetuation of a socioeconomic underclass.
Look out in the streets: the gap is getting wider, not narrower. This could
also become the case with computer literacy. Think about the teenagers you know
now. If they're anything like the kids around here there's a continuum from
those who are highly computer literate and may have a future designing video
games, creating music videos, etc. to those who seem to have a future of
playing videogames and asking the customers what they'd like to drink with
their burger. (Understandably served with a small side of sneers and special
sauciness.) It seems to me that the educational system, including librarians,
has a responsibility to help students attain not just literacy and numeracy,
but critical and deep thinking skills. The library, whether it be architectural
or virtual, is more than just data. The gathering and provision of data may be
essential in the attainment of knowledge and, dare I even think it, culture and
wisdom, but is no guarantee that these higher level accomplishments will take
place. Most network services today seem to serve primarily business,
professionals, and the educationally elite. Again, look out in the streets and
keep on movin' if you're out there at night: we fail to serve the whole of
society at our own peril. Jonathon Kozol has written and spoken very forcefully
and eloquently on this topic.
Jim Dwyer
Chico State University
Speaking for himself, not Chico
*-----
From: jaffe@ucscm.UCSC.EDU (Lee Jaffe, McHenry Library, UC Santa Cruz,
408/459-3297)
Subject: Re: Computerspeak
As long as the discussion has moved onto this plane -- and I have to say
that I was very grateful for the thoughtfulness of the responses to
my posting about the "Machine That Changed the World" show -- I wanted
to pursue comments about the future of the book. MacWorld (June 1992)
-- no, that's not a typo -- carried an editorial by Jerry Borrell about
electronic journals. In it he uses some of the same images --
"displays weigh too much, have too much glare
and can't be toted to bed like a book" -- used by Mary Jensen in her note.
Only Borrell assumed that those problems would be solved and we would
be curling up in bed with a good CD-ROM reader. I attended the program
at Berkeley on the new Library of France and was most impressed with the
talk by Geoffrey Nunberg, Stanford/Xerox PARC. He basically does not
buy rumors of the demise of the book. I've gotten a copy of his talk
but he asks that it not be quoted and I can't really do justice to the
richness of his perception or scope of knowledge. However, he takes on
both sides of this debate -- pointing out that we don't want to see
most of the information produced in the world on paper (the output of
the Travellers Ins. company would fill the new library in Paris in 6
weeks) and that the novel is irrevocably tied to the book as we know
(illustrated with quotes from Jane Austen, etc.) and basically curses
both houses. On the other hand he passed out a copy of an editorial
from a 19th c. Harper's and told us that it was an example of an e-
journal of the future. He later explained that the original paper had
become brown and brittle and that its image had been scanned and stored
electronically and then reproduced with a high-quality laser printer.
If I can put words in his mouth I think that his point is that the
technologies are complementary and compatible. Electronics may provide
quick, efficient and economical storage, distribution and access to
information but we may still want to use it in paper. And even this
does not preclude other options. Just a thought...
-- Lee Jaffe
