Reply to:   RE: Papers and Diskettes
Rich, Thank you for taking the time to let a future program chair know how you feel. I sense that you represent the thinking of many of the members.  Best, Jim Highsmith
Kunkel, Richard G. wrote:
>Dear ALSB Colleagues,
>
> I wonder whether the preceding discussion about papers and diskettes is
>missing the forest for the trees. I think Janine Hiller's comments were
>right on point - the papers are a very useful medium. We may be erring if we
>view the issue of the papers vs. electronic formats as mutually exclusive
>alternatives. Instead we should offer multiple formats as each is useful in
>its own way.
>
> The purpose for our association and for our conference is to enable to
>broadest possible sharing of good ideas and best practices. The presentation
>of papers and demonstrations is designed to share our study, research,
>successes and failures to our colleagues so that teaching and research
>quality improves throughout our academy. The blind reviews for the
>proceedings and the competition for awards encourage ALSB members to put
>their best work forward at the conference for their colleagues' benefit.
>
> I think we should continue and support practices that contribute to this
>goal, and I think distribution of the papers, despite its flaws, is a very
>useful practice in support of this goal. I concur with all that has been
>said about the inefficiencies of the paper distribution methods. No doubt
>plenty of trees get killed, and I like others, have to pay the outrageous
>"business center" copy price at the hotel to produce my papers at the last
>minute due to my procrastination (or lug them around in my briefcase) Even
>so, if 24 copies of my paper get ignored and immediately tossed into the
>recycling, I considered it a success if just ONE colleague at the conference
>finds just ONE paragraph in my 30-page tome that gives them must ONE idea
>that advances their teaching, gives them a new idea for a research topic, or
>changes their thinking. (This might actually happen every third or fourth
>conference in my case!)
>
> I think retaining the distribution of papers as the normal practice at the
>conference supports the goal of sharing best practices in the following
>ways:
>
> 1) I often find myself torn between attending two sessions at the same
>time. When this happens, I can usually scrounge up a copy of the paper I
>missed, even if I can't attend the presentation.
>
> 2) I often will browse the leftover papers that remain in the session
>rooms. I usually find several gems that I have either missed, or overlooked
>in the conference program
>
> 3) Like Janine, I like to browse the paper during the presentation and find
>the key points that interest me, and trigger a question and insight, or the
>one concept I just don't understand. If I am only listening, without the
>paper, there are a few problems, not the least of which are my attention
>span and comprehension abilities. More significant, though, is the fact that
>the presenter may not choose to use their ten minutes to discuss the points
>I find most interesting, helpful or controversial. I won't even discover the
>issues exist until I open my diskette some weeks later ( if ever), and then
>I can't engage them in a discussion. I fear these moments of inspiration and
>insight (both for me and for the presenter) will be lost if we drop the
>paper format. I am very thankful to my ALSB colleagues for all of the
>constructive feedback and criticism I have received during my
> paper presentation.
>
> 4) Speaking only for myself, although this may apply to others, I find the
>conference is a time for me to focus on new ideas and practices when I am
>away from campus and home demands. I wonder how many of us would, after the
>conference, taking the time to pop open these diskettes one by one to browse
>the paper that was the subject of an interesting presentation at the
>conference. I attended a very good educational technology conference last
>October, and saw some great ideas that are preserved in the conference
>proceedings on CD-ROM. Even though I am now in sabbatical, nearly one year
>has gone by and I STILL haven't quite taken the time to browse for the
>paper. The diskette idea sounds good in theory, but I wonder whether it will
>really work in practice.
>
> I suggest that we retain the practice of requiring 25 copies of printed
>papers be handed out at the conference session by each presenter. In
>addition to this, perhaps at each conference a volunteer could be recruited
>to receive electronic versions of the conference papers to be compiled into
>an unofficial "e-proceedings" that could be downloaded from that ALSB
>website. Submission electronically would be  optional, it should be
>encouraged, but not required. Those with significant plagiarism or copyright
>concerns could then opt not to submit to the e-proceedings, or could submit
>in a read-only or copy-protected format of their choosing.
>
> Some of our members will be well-served by the papers, some will be better
>served by the e-proceedings. By retaining the papers while also establishing
>the e-proceedings, I think we and serve both groups and advance the goals of
>the conference and the academy.
>
> Sorry for the length!
>
> Rick Kunkel
> University of St. Thomas
> St. Paul, Minnesota
>
>
>RFC822 header
>-----------------------------------
>
> Received: from shadow.csufresno.edu (shadow [129.8.57.22])
>       by zimmer.csufresno.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA14345;
>       Wed, 18 Oct 2000 20:40:24 -0700 (PDT)
> Received: from listserv.muohio.edu (listserv.muohio.edu [134.53.7.7])
>       by shadow.csufresno.edu (8.10.2/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e9J3eNR09937;
>       Wed, 18 Oct 2000 20:40:23 -0700 (PDT)
> Received: from naswnt01 (134.53.7.7) by listserv.muohio.edu (LSMTP for >Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <[log in to unmask]>; Wed, 18 Oct 2000 >23:40:02 -0400
> Received: from LISTSERV.MUOHIO.EDU by LISTSERV.MUOHIO.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP
>           release 1.8d) with spool id 500020 for [log in to unmask];
>           Wed, 18 Oct 2000 23:40:01 -0400
> Received: from stthomas.edu by listserv.muohio.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a)
>           with SMTP id <[log in to unmask]>; Wed, 18 Oct 2000
>           23:39:47 -0400
> Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.stthomas.edu by stthomas.edu (PMDF V6.0-24
>           #46177) id <[log in to unmask]> for
>           [log in to unmask]; Wed, 18 Oct 2000 22:39:12 -0600 (CST)
> Received: from ust-gateway4.stthomas.edu ([140.209.3.48]) by stthomas.edu (PMDF
>           V6.0-24 #46177) with ESMTP id <[log in to unmask]> for
>           [log in to unmask]; Wed, 18 Oct 2000 22:39:12 -0600 (CST)
> Received: by UST-GATEWAY4 with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id
>           <48ZJ6PVB>; Wed, 18 Oct 2000 22:39:54 -0500
> Content-return: allowed
> MIME-version: 1.0
> X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
> Message-ID:  <[log in to unmask]>
> Date:         Wed, 18 Oct 2000 22:39:54 -0500
> Reply-To: "Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk"
>               <[log in to unmask]>
> Sender: "Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk"
>               <[log in to unmask]>
> From: "Kunkel, Richard G." <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject:      Papers and Diskettes
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
> X-UIDL: X)7!!U"5!!)2&"!:EL"!
>