>(or information specialists, or my personal favorite, knowledge engineers) for
>the most part have been trained to help people find the information they are
>seeking.
 
Although I'm a reactionary conservative who actually prefers the term
"librarian" if I have my druthers, I second what Anita Cohen-Williams says.
There may be undertrained librarians who hold an MLS from not very good
schools, or who simply weren't paying much attention during their various
classes of whatever sort, but a well trained librarian is an expert in
knowledge -- how to organize it, how it all fits together, and how to
retrieve it.
 
We are encouraged to have a second master's degree -- and there are more
than a few PhDs in MLS programmes, let me tell you.  A very well educated
lot, most of the librarians I've come across ... if for no other reason
than that many come to the profession as a second career, often with
training in academia.  I sometimes think many librarians are scholars who
decide not to produce within their own field but to help others produce
within theirs.
 
What amuses me about this thread is that, if you substitute the word
"library" for "museum" etc, mutatis mutandis, you museum professionals are
saying about YOUR profession just about the same sort of things we
librarians are saying about OURS.  Underpaid, overworked, underappreciated,
the problems of "what is a professional" ...
 
I look forward to seeing how y'all have resolved this when I return from
the wars (aka Christmas shopping) on Wednesday.
 
>Anita Cohen-Williams; Reference Services; Hayden Library
 
Mario Rups
[log in to unmask]