I would just like to say - I was actually more disappointed with the
apparent lack of support shown to Anne's query by certain 'professionals'.
 If we can't answer a fellow professionals query, then perhaps the outside
world are correct in their assumptions of us as being staid, unhelpful,
old etc.-as previously debated.

I came into this profession because I found it dynamic and interesting. I
had no idea I might have a problem placing queries on a discussion list as
a result of fear of ridicule by certain people on it.

I really do think that we should be embracing queries as a way to raise
our profile, why not within the profession? and ofcourse outside. And
with regards to answering queries from Students on the list, why not ask
us? If you want the truth why not get it straight from the horses mouth?

Best wishes
Joanne

Ps Apologies for carrying this on an extra day - I did not have access to
email yesterday afternoon


"C.Oppenheim" <[log in to unmask]>

We agree to differ. In my view, interviewers are entitled to take into
account everything they know about the candidate. Malcolm believes that
information about a candidate in the public domain but not put on his/her
cv should be ignored.

I have to say that the hear no evil see no evil approach advocated by
Malcolm does not sit well with Nolan Principles of public accountability.

Charles



Professor Charles Oppenheim
Department of Information Science
Loughborough University
Loughborough
Leics LE11 3TU

Tel 01509-223065
Fax 01509-223053
e mail [ mailto:[log in to unmask] ][log in to unmask]


----- Original Message -----
From: [ mailto:[log in to unmask] ]Dobson, Malcolm
To: [ mailto:[log in to unmask] ][log in to unmask]
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 3:18 PM
Subject: Re: the debate on "modern role of libraries"




Charles,
Many things are in the public domain. Some people choose to make some
things public, others don't. The point about an equal opportunities policy
is that it is equal - ie, everyone is assessed on the same information,
not bits and pieces of information gathered at random by some members of
the selection panel. It really is depressing that some people don't seem
to be able to understand that simple point, and even more depressing that
someone in your position doesn't understand it.

Who said Anne was having "so much difficulty"? - she didn't - she simply
asked for ideas on how to approach it. I think asking for the views of
others is legitimate research.

Malcolm Dobson

-----Original Message-----
From: Fraser Janet (NHS Grampian) [[ mailto:[log in to unmask]
]mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 23 May 2005 15:00
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: the debate on "modern role of libraries"




Charles -

Isn't it true that interviewers seldom know how a candidate
prepared their presentation or whether it's even their work
at all?

I think that the enquirer was making a legitimate enquiry and
that the recuriter should ignore the e-mail question in the
assessemnt porcess. Who knows how the other candidate's may
have come by their presentations?

So to be fair they should stick to the same selection process
for all candidates, perhaps developing some behavioural
questions to assess knowledge and challenge all candidates to
provide examples of when they've actually used/come by the
knowledge they draw on.

Perhaps the solution is not to rely too heavily on one
assessment method in the selection process but instead to use
a blend of methods. (Isn't it also possible that the halo
effect of a smoothly polished presentation may obscure
candidate weakness? Isn't it possible that the best candidate
may fail because they weren't so polished...? I'd rather hear
a discussion about ways to develop interviewer skills and
improve selection methods).

Janet






---- Original message ----
>Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 14:38:32 +0100
>From: "C.Oppenheim" <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: the debate on "modern role of libraries"
>To: [log in to unmask]
>
>If a candidate has so much difficulty with the presentation
that were being
>asked to give as part of the interview process that they had
to get help by
>means of a public appeal, this is something that the
interviewers should
>take into account - they need to consider all the evidence
before them, and
>this is a very public piece of evidence. I fail to see that
this affects
>equal ops. The candidate has voluntarily placed in the
public domain
>information about themselves. I am NOT saying the
candidate should be
>rejected without interview, just that the candidate has
taken a risk with
>their application.
>
>I wonder how those who reacted so strongly to my comments
would feel if a
>student wrote to the list (as they sometimes do) saying "I
have to do this
>essay on XYZ for an assignment, please anyone tell me
everything you know
>about it." Would they help? I hope they always do......
>
>Charles
>
>
>Professor Charles Oppenheim
>Department of Information Science
>Loughborough University
>Loughborough
>Leics LE11 3TU
>
>Tel 01509-223065
>Fax 01509-223053
>e mail [log in to unmask]

***************************************************************************

This e-mail is confidential and privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient please accept our apologies; please do not disclose, copy or
distribute information in this e-mail or take any action in reliance on
its
contents: to do so is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Please
inform us that this message has gone astray before deleting it. Thank you
for your co-operation.
***************************************************************************




***********************************************************************************************************************************************
NHS Lanarkshire Confidentiality and Disclaimer Notice
***********************************************************************************************************************************************

The information contained in this email may be subject to public
disclosure under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002.

This email is intended only for the addressee named above and the contents
should not be disclosed to any other person or copies taken. Any views or
opinions presented are solely those of the sender and do not necessarily
represent those of NHS Lanarkshire (NHSL) unless otherwise specifically
stated.
As Internet communications are not secure NHSL do not accept legal
responsibility for the contents of this message or responsibility for any
change made to this message after the original sender sent it.

We advise you to carry out your own virus check before opening any
attachment, as we cannot accept liability for any damage sustained as a
result of any software viruses.

If you have received this email in error, please forward the original
email message for the attention of the system administrator at the
following address: - [log in to unmask]
***********************************************************************************************************************************************




**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

www.mimesweeper.com
**********************************************************************