In article <[log in to unmask]>, "Robert A. Baron"
<[log in to unmask]> writes:
> I concluded that those who had more experience and whose devotion was
> tested by the passing of time had a greater stake in the welfare of the
> museum as an institution, while those new to the field, who were just
> learning about their job and its responsibilities had a much more narrow
> focus and set of needs.
>
> Robert A. Baron

There is another possible conclusion.  Those who are young were trained
(educated) recently, while most of those who are older were trained/educated
longer ago.  There has been some shift in education policy, which may have
affected their outlooks.

Education has come to emphasize that, since there is more and more information,
students have to be more and more specialized.  As a generalist at heart, I
had a great deal of trouble in grad school, because I was too unfocussed.
There is discrimination against interest in other fields and "the other guy's
job", and I think this is producing people with narrow views about their jobs.
I don't believe there was such strong selection for specialization in the past,
and this may have affected the outlook of today's older museum staff.

Robin Panza                     [log in to unmask]
Section of Birds
Carnegie Museum of Natural History