karen do you have access to my surveymonkey account!
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Karen Coyle <li...@kcoyle.net> wrote: > Michele, I think there are two threads going on. One is looking at the > gender make-up of the c4l community. But I was hoping to be able to compare > that to the gender makeup of the library techie community in general. > Because if we find that c4l is -- randomly -- 42% female, we don't know > whether that is representative of the actual workers in libraries. In fact, > by definition, it only represents c4l, and it's not terribly meaningful if > we can't compare it to something. It means something different if 42% of > techie workers in libraries are female, and it means something else if 75% > of techie workers in libraries are female. > > And then, once all of the numbers are in, you have to figure out if it > means anything at all, but we can worry about that later. > > kc > > > On 11/27/12 11:23 AM, Michele R Combs wrote: > >> I'm not sure that would work. We aren't interested in library staff, >> we're interested in the CODE4LIB community, yes? My manager doesn't know >> all the lists I subscribe to, or the communities I consider myself a member >> of, so I don't see any way for a library to report reliably on behalf of >> its staff. Pretty much by definition, if you want to know demographics for >> a community, you have to ask the members directly. >> >> Not to mention the question of including and "other" option for gender -- >> a library isn't likely to be able to determine that for its staff :) >> >> Michele >> >> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Karen Coyle <li...@kcoyle.net> wrote: >> >>> Joe, what I was hoping for was not a survey where individuals report >>> on themselves, but a statistical sample of libraries where the library >>> reports on its staff. That avoid the "self-image" issue, and the >>> selection that individual reporting on self entails. >>> >> > -- > Karen Coyle > kco...@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net > ph: 1-510-540-7596 > m: 1-510-435-8234 > skype: kcoylenet >