========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Nov 1994 13:06:32 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Cammie Subject: Theory vs. Practicality ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- (*asterisks used for quotes, underlines etc. in the event of character translation problems) I'm sorry that Hazel's experience with theory vs. pragramatics in education has been less than satisfactory, but I am very supportive of including plenty of *theory* in all fields of *professional* education. I have a B.S. in Technical Communication from the Florida Institute of Technology. Coursework in the major was about equally divided, if memory serves, between communication theory & practical topics such as proofreading, speechwriting, manual preparation, mechanical preparation (pre-computer layout:-), etc. In addition, it was required that every major have an internship, much like what future public school teachers are required to go through in their education. My area of technical emphasis was in computer science, in which I also took a mix of theory and practical courses. Were the practical courses useful? Without a doubt! And certainly these courses helped me in my *initial* search for a job. But without a doubt, the theory has been even more important to my advancement to better paying jobs with increased responsibility, visibility, and challenge. What has the theory provided me? - the ability to reason about problems in communication and engineering and make sound decisions in areas where there are no clear-cut answers - the ability to quickly learn new and increasingly complex topics because I have *core knowledge,* if you will, that gives me a solid foundation on which to build - the ability to cope with increasing change in priorities, direction, the market, and technology. I graduated in 82 and every *practical* course I took in college is almost hopelessly out-of-date. But the theory is still the basis of every step I take. I have always thought that the argument of *pragmatics* vs. *theory* in education came primarily from students and others whose focus is on getting that first job or using some tool in their current job, but not from people who have advanced and become leaders in a particular field. Perhaps this is my bias :-) BUT I do know the following from recruiting new hires at my company - we have been *very disappointed* with new grads in computer science who focus only on learning programming languages and specific computer systems. Almost anyone can learn a particular programming language. But to design a language, to implement a compiler for it, to use it wisely - that is a whole other level of knowledge. And computer systems and programming languages are constantly changing! What good is it to invest an expensive university education in a language that might be *out* by the time one graduates. Likewise, I have been disappointed in current Tech Comm majors who are more concerned with learning how to operate a desktop publishing program than with reasoning about how best to communicate the message! How does this apply to indexing? Well, certainly there are practical aspects about indexing that are very important to learn and can be learned by reading appropriate texts & learning how to use CINDEX/MACREX etc. But producing a good index is the result of reasoning about users' needs, knowledge of typical problems in *look-up* communication (such as synonyms, cross-references, cultural/regional communication preferences etc.), and wisdom gained by experience (which can be shared :-). I better end this message before the readers fall asleep! *Theory* in education is obviously a hot button for Hazel & for me. I think a mix of theory & pragmatics is crucial (and I think the primary role of a university is to provide theory.) The person who initiated this conversation by asking about what to include in an indexing course should include BOTH theory & practical aspects. (end of my soapbox :-) =============================== Cammie Donaldson Software Productivity Solutions 122 4th Avenue Indialantic, FL 32903 407-984-3370 cmd@sps.com =============================== ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Nov 1994 15:52:08 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: HairyLarry@aol.com Subject: Re: Theory vs. Practice ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Hazel Blumberg-McKee wrote, in part: "...I guess I've had too many courses in my life in which there was entirely too much theory and not enough practice--and sometimes none at all. I've got a B.A., two master's degrees, and a law degree, so believe me, I've taken a lot of courses. The way that I learn best is by doing. We need more practicality in our system of education...." ------- Cammie Donaldson wrote in part: "...What has the theory provided me? - the ability to reason about problems in communication and engineering and make sound decisions in areas where there are no clear-cut answers - the ability to quickly learn new and increasingly complex topics because I have *core knowledge,* if you will, that gives me a solid foundation on which to build - the ability to cope with increasing change in priorities, direction, the market, and technology. ----- I think *theoretical* and *practical* need defining. Certainly the theory (organizing and predictive principles) underlying an activity must be learned, but the issue I want to bring forward is the teaching methodology: contrast pure textbook/lecture format ("THEORY") with practice in the form of class labs and projects, workshops, experiments, and (yes) even internships. I think Ms. Donaldson's remarks are not in conflict with my point that learning is improved by effective teaching methodology. Even subject matter described as "theoretical" can be taught in a participative, hands-on manner. I strongly agree with Ms. Blumberg-McKee. Dr. Maria Montessori said the same thing about a hundred years ago, and the Montessori movement world-wide tries to put this into practice. She said it about young children, but it applies very well to adults, too. Larry Harrison HairyLarry@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Nov 1994 15:52:48 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Elinor Lindheimer Subject: theory vs. practice ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- It sounds like Cammie had positive experiences with both theoretical and practical instruction in the field of technical communications. But I believe Hazel was writing about library schools. I have no experience there, but I certainly agree with Cammie about the requirements for indexing that might be learned in a theoretical manner, but these are also taught in a practical indexing course, and they also come from experience and what I call the "wisdom that comes with increasing age." And we all keep learning by participating in forums, conferences, ASI activities, etc. Theory without practice is mind exercise, but not very useful. Theory on top of practice, I think, is more nourishing. Elinor Lindheimer ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Nov 1994 15:53:07 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Hilary.Calvert@newcastle.ac.uk Subject: Theory vs Practicality ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- I have to agree *in part* with Cammie Donaldson. I agree that the theory is vital. I'm not sure that the "hands on" stuff has any relevance at all. I earn my living by researching and treating cancer patients. None of the research techniques that we use now existed when I originally qualified, and none of the drugs I prescribe had been discovered. In writing programs I find that the particular language is more-or-less irrelevant - some are just more annoying than others - but getting a logical grip of what is reaaly needed at a particular point in a program is **VERY** difficult. Question: Who thinks in a language? I don't believe I do because I have great difficulty in saying what I think in any language, but many people are willing to support the idea that linguistic conventions dictate thought patterns. I think the ideal index should be independent of the language in which it is written. Hilary Calvert PS I can't spell either - sorry. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Nov 1994 15:59:32 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jonathan Jermey Subject: Re: Technical Communication courses on indexing ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Quoting Hazel Blumberg-McKee: >I guess I don't really understand how theory can make one a better >indexer.... I've been self-employed as an editor, indexer, >proofreader, researcher, and technical writer. I learned all these >things by doing. > >I don't mean to sound contentious, but the American educational system >seems to me to put far too much emphasis on theory. The Australian system also. As an indexer (and self-taught PC trainer) I've learnt much more from doing than from theory. The theory comes in at two points, I think: once at the very beginning, when you don't know what the heck's going on and whether you're going to be able to cope with it, and again much later, when you can do the job well and want to know how you might be able to do it better. The first should be just the briefest possible introduction: this is what indexes are, this is what indexers do. The second relies on a level of understanding that you can only pick up by working in the field. Most courses, however, make the mistake of trying to teach the second along with the first. >Again, I learned to teach by doing and by having some excellent mentors. As a matter of interest, how many indexers have had mentors (excellent or otherwise)? I know that without my mentor it's most unlikely I ever would have got off the ground at all. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Nov 1994 10:37:09 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jonathan Jermey Subject: Obtaining the ASI Proceedings ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Does anyone know where I can obtain a copy of the Proceedings of the 25th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Indexers? (There is apparently only one copy in a library in Australia, and that's in Adelaide!) Also, are the Proceedings of the 26th meeting out yet? Thanks Jonathan. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Nov 1994 10:45:12 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Philip E. Kaveny" ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Serendipity vrs Control On a theoretical basis must attempts to index the entire Internet place these terms in opposition. I am working on an independent study as part of an advanced program post- MLS at The University of Wisconsin Madison and this is one of the charges my advisor has asked me to keep in mind. Philip E. Kaveny Department of Library and Information Science University of Wisconsin Madison. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Nov 1994 10:45:36 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Judith Weigel Subject: ConText by Oracle ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Anyone here seen the ConText by Oracle in action? Although not indexing software as such, there is a belief that this application will make human indexing unnecessary. A brief description: Oracle ConText is an iterative applicatin that applies thousands of rules to the text, with the resulting data accumulating as the document passes from preparsing to parsing and on through the Concept Processing Engine, discourse analysis, and document development. The document is analyzed by the server as it is by a person - it is read and understood at the sentence level, and then reviewed at the paragraph level, and finally seen as a whole document. It has a Content Reduction System, Theme Reduction Levels, Generation of Aabstracts, Summarization, Information Abstraction. I have only an incomplete descriptive document from Oracle which I obtained by accident. It has me curious, and would appreciate comments from this group. Thx! Judy Weigel, Database Construction, Los Angeles Times, Editorial Library ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Nov 1994 16:33:49 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Elinor Lindheimer Subject: contacting ASI for proceedings ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Jonathan (and all), You can contact ASI by e-mail: asi@well.sf.ca.us to find out how to get the proceedings, including those of the 26th annual meeting. Elinor Lindheimer ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Nov 1994 16:34:19 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Ned Bedinger Subject: Re: your mail In-Reply-To: <199411071611.AA04120@isumataq.eskimo.com> ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- On Mon, 7 Nov 1994, Philip E. Kaveny wrote: > ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- > Serendipity vrs Control > On a theoretical basis must attempts to index the entire > Internet place these terms in opposition. I am working on an Now that you mention it, I think serendipity must vary wildly according to the medium of your index and the strategies that are used to assemble the information into the index. What exactly do you have in mind when you pose the 'internet index'? Ned Bedinger qwa@eskimo.com