Comments by Questionnaire Section
The comments below match the statistical tables representing the perceptions of the conference attendees. The comments are best understood if gauged against the questionnaire. The comments are divided according to the sections of the questionnaire.Excellent choices for speakers -- thanks.
I lipread (I am deaf) and the lighting in Chapel Hall was very bad in that the lips were in the shadows. Thus, I didn't get a lot out of these sessions. But what I did get was useful.
All plenary speakers were superb -- good speakers but also content-rich.
Keynotes were lively and thoughtful. Good choices.
-
Cortes:
Spoke in generalities -- not as scholarly as I would have expected.
Was interesting but didn't address the library.
Was a wonderful change from our librarian notables.
I particularly liked his energy and enthusiasm.
Really made me think; I'd like to bring him to my campus!
Too long.
Was wonderful -- would like to have a tape if available -- or detailed transcript.
Crews:
I learned a lot from Crews.
Good to have handouts! Great session!
Would have been good to have his slides on paper during the talk.
Sullivan:
Was good!
Was conventional, and not very interesting!
Was rather insulting to technical services, and had not much new to say.
Was exceptional -- important content an excellent delivery!
No original thought! A rehash of established organizational management theory and full of contradictions.
Was not as dynamic.
Showed a lack of comprehension that Acq, Selection and Cataloging are also there to care about user needs and to help ref. by providing means to help the user.
Gorman:
I could have read his paper more efficiently than his reading it out loud -- dense content always thought-provoking, but delivery didn't offer much more than reading it.
Liked Gorman's ideas and intentions!
The talk was not terribly polished.
Didn't leave enough time for general discussion.
Respondents gave mini-talks.
It would be better if all respondents used the podium because of the lighting problems.
I really wish people who ask questions would use microphones and/or speaker would repeat questions before answering them [deaf lipreader].
In both these, the keynote speaker was very good. However, some of the respondents were too long and thought they were the main speaker.
Introducing the respondents [sic] at the very beginning, instead of after the keynote speaker, might interrupt the flow less.
-
Copyright/Intellectual Property:
Copyright lecture and panel discussion was excellent because specific info was imparted.
Different perspectives, interesting!
"Average" does not equal "bad." It can be a good, solid interesting presentation.
Evolving Structures/Roles:
Would have preferred them to respond to the keynote address than give 2 more papers themselves. Just too much at one time!
The 2 respondents gave keynote addresses. They were pedantic and completely boring. K. Sullivan was OK.
Respondents spoke too long. Each could have been a separate session in its own right. Although very theoretical.
Last person to speak was supposed to respond to Sullivan's address and instead became a keynote speaker -- Don't ask him back!
The respondents were insulting, as they didn't respond, but gave their own presentation. Don't let them speak again.
Ferguson spoke too long. Left little time for questions and Martell.
Respondents to Sullivan were not on point -- they just used the opportunity to give their own talks.
I thought the responders gave their own talk rather than responding to the keynote speaker.
Respondents ... were dry and uninspiring esp. compared toSullivan's talk. I wanted to debate with Ms. Sullivan but there was no time left.
Too few questions for me to rate this discussion! Respondents to Sullivan gave keynote speeches themselves.
Respondents did NOT respond. Very disappointing and boring! Limit time further for respondents.
Chris Ferguson's content was good but his delivery was on the whole lackluster. Ditto for Charles Martell.
Martell was excellent -- next time ask himto present as the main speaker.
Too long! Both who spoke after Sullivan were not very good. Too long and no clear directionand it appeared they were giving their own talk rather than responding to Ms. Sullivan.
Respondents didn't really respond directly to main speaker. They had separate speeches.
The respondents to Sullivan took too long with their own comments; there wasn't enough time to have a panel.
Really enjoyed Chris Ferguson and Ch. Martell.
Might have been nice to have repeat sessions so we could do more.
I was at California Private Academic Libraries (?) and missed them all. Put California Private Academic Libraries in the afternoon.
Topics were good but not well presented.
-
Internet Showcase:
Computer/Internet connection ... all presenters ... did not work ...Would have liked to know time sequence of Internet Showcase.
CDIG -- Shared Digital Collections:
CDL is not the only library. CARL is open to all and should be aware of all CARL's constituencies.
The digital library was too much of "this is how my library does it."
It was very well organized with an appropriate "spread" of speakers, and very impressive.
ABLE -- GIS Services:
Sariya should define GIS before launching into her presentation (I told her this afterwards).
The GIS overview by Johnson should have preceded Clay's presentation. I'm still relatively uninformed about GIS and when Clay asked for a show of hands, I could tell most of the audience felt the same as I.
Clay could have cited more specifics and given examples of her GIS instructional ??onetimes??? Johnson was excellent.
CCIG -- Information Competencies:
IC program was very informative and more importantly applicable to my library -- love stuff I can take home and use!!
The Topsy Smalley and Bonnie Gratch Lindauer presentations were well presented, articulated and relevant.
CCIG suffered from sub-par talks (Gratch and Smalley are excepted). Too bad! Topsy Smally was very good.
Very uneven presentations -- some were very good, others just average. GREAT assessment update from Bonnie!
Rather boring speakers who didn't seem to be introducing much that was new.
CALM/CARLDIG -- Remote Users:
The remote users was not what I expected and was irrelevant to me. It may have been a good program, but I couldn't judge.
Really disappointing! Some speakers much better than others! Would have been better with 3 panelists, more discussion.
CSUL-JACC:
Repeat of ALCTS!
Correct speaker! Evan Reader was excellent.
Media problems!
Very good discussions, especially with now/new! CSU participants included? Other: MBARI tour -- rated a 5!
Most sessions have way too much text! Impossible to scan! Participants should be limited in the amount of text displayed!
I really thought some of the poster session[s] were well done.
Having the food with poster sessions is a real draw for attendance!
Please make posters list NAME and INSTITUTION prominently. Often buried in their material. (ALA Guidelines are helpful here.)
I don't much care for poster sessions but I know lots of people like them. They all seemed very nicely assembled.
Librarians are doing such interesting things. I got a lot of good ideas, even from some I hadn't even intended to visit.
Very well organized. Lots of room to roam or sit and chat; good presentations! Wonderful fruit! Not enough copies [handouts??].
Well organized! Good room. Needed Internet connections.
Have enought handouts at each poster session.
Don't think 2 hours was necessary, although the overlap with breakfast was a good idea.
Good selection of topics -- good networking opportunity!
Always interesting way to see new developments/projects. Good variety! Although I think they should come near the beginning of the conference. I had several interesting discussions and got ideas I would like to have pursued further.
- License agreements -- dominated by 2 participants who kept getting off topic.
Have Private Colleges and Universities again next year.
CARLDIG Roundtable was great.
David Tyckoson is a good speaker.
-
Asilomar:
Let's go here all the time.
Please have it here again!
Like Asilomar-- would come if it was here again.
Very nice! I would be happy to come back to Asilomar.
Asilomar is a confusing place, but beautiful. I have mixed feelings about it.
This was an excellent choice and well run conference -- kudos to the CARL members who worked so hard.
It was my first CARL conference and I plan to return for more and get involved.
Need to have water available at all sessions.
I love the place! Wonderful setting! Loved the casual atmosphere. Met some great people.
Do this at Asilomar again. The location was beautiful.
Have it here again. ... The package cost was excellent.
Very lovely environment! Excellent facilities ... Best facilities ever encountered for this size conference. Centrally located. Casual. Why go elsewhere?
Preferred the weekend conference rather than Monday and Tuesday.
Great setting, nice to be in a setting with natural attractions and for which everything was walkable (food, hotel and programs).
Registration Process:
Needed a sign outside that directed to our (CARL) registration desks first.
My registration check was held way too long -- checks should be depostied once a week.
Any suggestions for improvement?
Everything was fine or great, except for the coffee. Wine instead of cake!
Conference Hotel Cost:
Actually the value of the hotel was a 5 considering the cost ...
Conference Hotel Quality:
Beds were very comfortable; ceilings were so low. he rooms were OK-- but most convenient.
Meals -- Quality:
Too much food! Great!
Too much food that was just OK! More bottled water instead of soda.
Meals were good. Sodas and snacks were nice to have at programs.
Meals felt a bit rushed. Food was not so great but nothing is perfect.
Quality great but didn't do enough for those with special diets.
While food was good more variety would have been appreciated.
Some veggie entrees lacking but mostly food good; service great!
Food was not adequate for special dietary needs.
Cafeteria food became tiresome. Needed more beverages and water at all events.
Too much sugar/starch for snacks -- next time have more fruit and healthy snacks.
Great food for such a low price! Could have done with fewer desserts at breaks and evening receptions. Ask for fruit at breaks rather than cookies!
Something I ate Sunday dinner completely upset my gastrointestinal system.
Great desserts/sweets and receptions!
I would have appreciated more choice sat meals, such as we had Sunday evening.
Above average food!
Meals/refreshments -- have fruit at all breaks.
Procedures for dining here were confusing, but I don't know what else could have been done to prep us. The food itself was very good.
Current Pricing Options:
This was a very good deal for the cost.
This was a very affordable conference.
The price was very reasonable. Early Bird pricing was very reasonable.
Price was a good deal.
Price was right!
Conference Benefits:
It was close to perfect. It was laid back enough ... Its separateness.
Relaxed atmosphere, self-contained environment optimized informal conversation, quality of presentations, good mixture of plenary and smaller groupings.
Great food! Good price.
Poster sessions and plenary sessions!
Ease of registration; nice to have food on site and not have to go out to restaurants.
Surroundings and casual dress made conference more enjoyable and conducive for learning.
Very relaxing and no stress! Loved not having to deal with taxis, parking, restaurants, boring receptions, etc.
All fine! Having meals together!
Spending time reflecting on the big pictures -- issues/trends for field. New projects, esp. VIS poster sessions!
Everything, cost ... location!
-
Networking with colleagues:
The time to talk to colleagues and network.
Attendees, ACRL information, interaction with colleagues and peers.
As always, meeting and communicating with colleagues. Having lodging and meeting at same location gave more opportunity for informal communication.
Seeing colleagues from throughout the state.
Meeting one's colleagues so easily because of the meal seating arrangements --I really enjoyed that.
Networking, talking to people who are new to you or picking up with some you haven't seen in a while.
Informal discussions; meeting my colleagues.
Local arrangements did a great job.
Networking with colleagues.
Networking -- feeling of being aware of what's going on around the state.
Programming/Local Arrangements:
A variety of venues!
Nice job planning -- good variety, good speakers.
Good pacing of programs with breaks and variety of activities.
Well organized. Very enjoyable.
Format was good. Good schedule-- not too intense!
Great programs. Well organized! Good mix of practical nitty-gritty topics and theoretical/inspirational subjects.
Program organization, food, setting, and speakers were excellent. I learned a lot. Locke and Cynthia deserve a round of applause.
Excellent program and local arrangements.
Location/Housing:
Natural setting was very nice. Freedom from TV; beautifully quiet; lovely surroundings.
Location, location, location.
Gorgeous setting! The site! Location! Location, location.
The setting was a refreshing escape from urban/suburban life.
Lovely setting ...Location was nice. Made it less "stressful" of a conference.
The setting -- if one took time to walk and relax.
Excellent location! Pleasant atmosphere and facilities!
Great location! Really enjoyed rustic peacefulness of Asilomar. And the setting was wonderful.
Location--Location was outstanding!
Excellent environment! Let's have all CARL conferences (the Northern ones) here!
Excellent location, time to enjoy beauty of this place!
Loved the casual, relaxed atmosphere. Enjoyed natural surroundingsand easy access to the beach. Location, facilities.
Interest Groups:
Monday afternoon interest groups all sounded good -- hard to choose only two.
Having the interest groups programs incorporated into conference instead of being pre-conferences!
IG programs (MBARI) Interest Group programs!
The place is wonderful!
Quality of the Monday afternoon programs was great! Very useful.
Evening Discussion Group/Roundtables:
Loved the evening discussion group!
I particularly enjoyed the evening roundtables. (I attended one and heard about another one in detail from my roommate.)
Keynote Speakers:
Loved the insightful keynote speakers.
The speakers were better than I'd expected, esp. the one on copyright.
The opportunity to hear Carlos Cortes outshines any other reasons to be here.
Good speakers!
Very good speakers, respondents, and Q-A opportunities.
Excellent speakers, on the whole! Opening speaker (Cortes) was outstanding. Always amazing that great speakers invited as keynote speakers --congratulations and thank you! Dr. Carlos Cortes.
Speakers were excellent.
Conference Improvements?
Extra copies of the evaluation form for those of us who left our original copy in the car.
A time when vendor demos/presentations did not conflict with panel sessions.
Badges -- kept falling out!
A more visible hangout for night owls!
Needed badges for speakers who didn't register for the conference.
Petty, but the name tags kept falling off.
Maybe your evaluation form needs to be changed to other categories, e.g. "interesting" "not worth attending" "glad I attended?"
"Average" depends on whether one is used to being thoughtful, meaty, interesting! Presentations, unless "Average" is to be judged within this one conference, like ranking the speakers!
Well organized! All programs and speeches were excellent.
Roundtables -- move [meetings] closer together [meeting rooms] to [facilitate] moving around. CSU Roundtable was extremely weak.
-
Networking:
Need a little more time for thought/networking.
Useful to have ribbons identifying new CARL members AND first-time CARL conference attendees -- would like to make them feel welcome!
More promotions for CARL to reach new people who attend.
CSU Roundtable was extremely weak.
Would have liked a message board-- didn't know how to find people and communicate with them without phones in the rooms.
Groups formed cliques; it was difficult to penetrate them to initiate conversations.
Programming/Local Arrangements:
Possibly less plenary sessions and more variety in concurrent programs.
I preferred the Friday/Saturday schedule. It is very difficult to schedule 2 days away from the reference desk, especiallyfor community college libraries.
l like the preconference concept, which allows more programming.
Reinstitute Conference Program Planning Committee. Program should be planned by more than one or two people!
What about a Friday evening through Sunday timing? difficult time to get away.
I felt somewhat left out as a technical services librarian.
Start on time.
Need more fun events. [Need] Presessions.
Some of the programs (Internet Showcase) was just an AD [sic].
More time/free time needed:
Too short. Could be a day longer, with a little more breathing space.
A little more free time to walk on the beach would have been nice.
[Free time] in between events? Allow more breaks in late afternoon.
Program a little too full. Needed more free time.
More free time even if it means another day.
Would have liked some "free time" to go exploring or into town.
Little more time between events to take a breather.
Poster Sessions:
Perhaps spread out the poster session over 2 days or at night.
Needed poster session printer ribbons.
[Schedule] poster sessions near beginning of conference.
Internet Connections:
Need Internet connections. Must have Internet access.
Location/Housing:
Hard to get to Pacific Grove!
Sometimes it was hard to find location of rooms (especially at night -- e.g. some buildings are not well marked).
Clearer maps and directions, especially at night.
[Asilomar is] not easy to get to.
Lighting and acoustics for speakers, especially in Chapel Hall. I lipread and the lighting was so bad, I couldn't see the speakers mouths and, therefore, I couldn't hear.
Would have liked to been able to choose which room I got, i.e. I was stuck in Longview -- a bit far from everything -- would have preferred to be better/closer to center.
Keys, TVs, and telephones in rooms.
Asilomar map should have been inserted into conference folders. I asked for a copy when registering with the Asilomar hotel folks. They only gave them to you if you asked!
Meals:
Perhaps too much [sic] calories at breaks -- but everything was delicious.
Too much food! Specially at late reception and SO MUCH left over!
Evening snacks and bonfire a great idea!
This is a small point, but the evening desserts were much too generous with pastries (many leftovers). Some fresh fruit would have been a nice addition.
Less food -- I gained 5 lbs.
Not enough drinking water!
I would have liked the option of a box lunch to take with me on Tuesday.
I found it difficult to converse at the large round tables and noisy dining hall.
Liked the bonfire -- just needed to move food and drink down there (from Chapel Hall).
Interest Groups:
Repeat IG programs then able to attend more!
Next year: not as many simultaneous [IG] sessions so can attend more than two and bring back more info to library colleagues.
The 2 interest group programs I went to were too much of "this is how my library does it". I may have chosen a bad [one] for me, but it was not particularly useful to me.
Interest group some short, some long. Makes it hard to go everywhere -break up long ones or make all long.
Interest Groups for shorter periods -- no 1:30 to 5:15 p.m. -- more short ones.
Interest group presentations -- would have preferred to go to 2 groups rather than one long presentation. (Make programs similar length so can switch at break.)
Afternoon sessions should be 1.5 hrs. and repeat sessions so people can go to two sessions.
Start sessions on time.
Better speakers for afternoon Interest group programs.
Larger rooms needed for some sessions -- CDIG Shared Digital Collection.
Keynote speakers/panelists:
Have respondents who respond, not give their own presentations.
Minus-no respondents!
Only had some good speakers. Content of presentations after plenary and large session.
Keeping speakers on track. Panelists -- some were excellent, others weren't as much on target.
Some of the "response" speakers, while knowledgeable and accomplished, were not good speakers. Focus on inviting good speakers.
Speakers need to be briefer (particularly respondents). Next time, the respondents need to briefly respond, not give their own talk.
I wish the respondents during the Plenary session (Monday a.m.) actually responded to the speakers -- and stayed within the allocated time.
Future conference topics, speakers, locations?
-
Topics:
Mentoring; Collaboration; Distance Education!
Collaboration with other non-library institutions!
For CCs (Community Colleges) TTIP funding -- how are you spending yours?
Integrating library and university strategic planning.
Fundraising stories/successes/strategies/partnerships.
Changes in WASCstandards for libraries.
Libraries as nexus of preservation of human knowledge!
Something of interest to technical processing.
Reference mediated via networking in distance education.
Information literacy at the 4yr-grad level.
Distance mentoring in MLIS programs.
Preserving the future.
Accreditation/library schools -- mentoring programs. "Stewardship" to mentor into the profession.
Distance education.
Knowledge Management!
Distance education for business collaborations between different types of academic libraries such as Community colleges and CSU or UC Digital Libraries.
Coping with RAPID changes and additions.
Setting up and managing small archival collections with few resources (would be helpful for community college librarians I think).
User education.
Speakers:
Gorman addressing the image of the librarian in the future.
Getting kind of tired of Gorman.
Patricia Senn Breivik, CSUSJ.
Paul Saffo.
Walt Crawford.
Brian Hawkins.
Carol Barone.
Clifford Lynch.
John Ober -- CDL/UC.
Roy Tennant, UCB.
Margaret Wheatley.
Author [David Bolt and Ray Crawford] who's written THE DIGITAL DIVIDE -- growing polarity between"have" and "have nots" re: access to Internet/digital environment.
Locations:
Asilomar.
Palm Springs.
Asilomar.
Here! Again, Asilomar!
Asilomar everytime!. If not, at least every Northern California year!
Loved location/Asilomar wonderful: people seemed more relaxed.
Please return us to Asilomar.
I would not mind coming back to Asilomar.
Return to Asilomar in a few years.
Would like to see itat Asilomar again!
What's wrong with having it here again for a northern year?
I'd like to come to Asilomar again! Retreat-like atmosphere is conducive to quality networking.
Asilomar again! BUT have low-techtopics/presentations due to lack of Internet access.
Schedule the conference at Asilomar again. Let's come back HERE!
Returnto Asilomar in 4-6 years.
Hold a northern annual conference at Asilomar!
Tahoe.
Palm Springs.
Santa Barbara.
San Diego.
Similar conference facility especially at a hot springs area to unwind after sessions.
I am a new CARL member and campus liaison. I am very glad I attended and I hope that I can contribute my time and effort to helping CARL grow.
Thought-provoking topics, good company. General excellence.
Getting away from my daily routine and concerns and thinking about more global concerns.
Wished to attend IG programs/meetings. Desire to learn more about CARL.
To get to know CARL and to get involved!
Need to get involved in CARL. Came (and volunteered as a recorder for Newsletter) because I thought I was the only CSUN person interested -- until the Poster Session information was posted!
Learn new things, recharge my batteries. It sounded interesting ...and was at a time I COULD attend. Like to support CARL.
Price was reasonable.
-
CARL Conference reputability/relevancy:
I have always rated CARL conferences as among the best not only for thought-provoking perspectives but also for the practical ideas and suggestions that I can take home to my libraryand utilize. The one 2 years ago in Oakland remains the all-time BEST of the dozens I've attended over the years.
I always come to CARL because CARL always comes through with excellent programs.
I always attend CARL, if possible. CARL conferences are reliable for their content, amiability and ambience.
This was one was close to my library, and close to the best I've attended.
Because I enjoy CARL conferences.
I know that CARL programs are usually good. I look forward to the CARL conf. every year. Also, I enjoyed last year's conference.
CARL is a good size group and their conferences are excellent. Have attended past conferences.
CARL people and program! I go to all the CARL conferences. Liked the '97 Oakland Conference but was the only (I think!) Northridge person there.
Consistently one of the best library conferences I get to --wonderful speakers, timely/relevant topics to my professional responsibilities. CARL is the most relevant prof assn. that I belong to. I always come away better informed from CARL events. It's a MUST!
Conference Invited Participant/ Conference Committee/ Poster Session/Speaker on a Panel:
To stay in touch with colleagues and friends.
To moderate a discussion roundtable.
Invited to present.
Active participation in putting on a program.
Location
Because it was Asilomar and Asilomar was an attractive location.
Love the location! The friends I have who have been to Asilomar recommended it highly, particularly the place.
Convenient location.
Love the Monterey area and wanted to see Asilomar.
Was being held at Asilomar.
Keynote Speakers:
Speakers' topics and their national reputations!
Some of the plenary speakers: Gorman. Program
Good program. JACC and electronic serials.
Desire to hear content. Programs sounded interesting and appropriate.
Interesting program in advance.
Several programs of interest ...
Professional/Personal development.
Continuing education ...
Networking with colleagues
Colleagues statewide are here. I enjoy getting together with other academic librarians.
As always, meeting and communicating with colleagues.
Get together with colleagues.
Good way to see other Calif. colleagues.
Good to meet other Calif. librarians who might not be nationally, active.
Knowledge "transfer." Get ideas for my library.
Newest ideas ..
To hear, share, exchange new ideas, professional travel and to get different perspectives on issues, problems, etc.
Loved the location -- so quiet and calming and restful. I really enjoyed the conference and will definitely plan to come again.
Nice job. Big thanks!
Great conference -- great job!
Thank you for an enlightening, lively, inspiring conference in an awe-inspiring setting. Keep up the good work! Both program and local arrangements were SUPERB! Stimulating speakers, appropriate topics. The place, meals, activities were great!
-
Networking:
Have a newcomer get-together. As a newcomer to CARL and librarianship I felt somewhat like an "outsider" even though I'm fairly outgoing. Everyone seems to be here with colleagues and friends. [CARL leadership was very welcoming however.]
Programming/Local Arrangements:
The dates of this conference were inconvenient -- the very beginningof UC's fall quarter is such a busy time. Sept. or Nov. or spring would be better, IMHO.
Use Different Badge Holders! Provide"guest" badges for husbands, wives, significant others (with names).
Prefer weekend conference ... [can't read the rest]
More Time/Free Time Needed:
In a setting such as Asilomar, it would have been nice to have fewer plenary sessions and a little more free time to enjoy and take advantage of the natural surroundings. If ANY criticism, there was TOO MUCH to do -- need about 2 hours "free time" on the 1st afternoon if any hope of attracting folks to evening activities (we aren't 35 or younger any longer!).
Poster Sessions:
Have badge ribbons for Poster Session presenters.
Facilities:
Better lighting for speakers. Portable mike for questioners after sessions.
Location/Housing:
Asilomar. It would be great to come here every other year. The green, natural setting plus comfortable rooms with great beds and showers contributes to a relaxed, open environment with lots of opportunity to take and exchange ideas and fun. Please consider Asilomar again.
Asilomar is great! I'd love to come back here. Casual dress is a great idea. Saw a deer and a fox -- where else can you be this close to nature?
Here again, please. Beautiful location, great weather.
Let's meet here again. For future of Asilomar use, find out how people traveled here: 1) car 2) plane and car 3) train. Maybe buses next time?
Conference Highlights