>(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]