As a faithful disciple of the cult of the brightest shiny object in my mind, also know as “what are you reading now” syndrome; the ability to generate an accurate persona of who is the patron sitting at the far table is my current favorite (it’s basically Service Design).
Lots of people come through the front door and mill about. Some even sit down and look like they’re doing work. I wonder who they really are – first years, Div III’s. Who knows? No, I mean who knows. I would suspect no one. It’s something we don’t track, but if we did how would we do it, what would it take and do you think it would be beneficial? Oh, maybe the most important question of all – what would you do with that information now that you know.
We often think we’re doing a good job helping people, but it’s really based more on assumptions than facts. In the labs I can usually judge who’s an advanced worker simply because I recognize them more often from simple repetition of showing up over the years. But not always. The discussions I have with them are fundamentally different than what I talk about with a first year student. Talking with first years is more directed at concrete answers that add to functionality with a little contextualization spread around to rationalize why we do things the way we do with the hope that they can buy into that also and give them a perceptible pathway into how they’ll work in the future (while it may not be exactly a straight path it is usually continuous).
Talking with Division III students is a little more slanted to mental health, the benefits of diligence, a supportive dialogue about their project, family history, track record with their committee, suggestions for project development, techniques for managing work over a long period of time, prospects for the project and a gentle reminder that there is a future beyond graduation and are you sufficiently prepared for that. It’s as much social as technical.
It’s also more about how the added time factor (significant temporal duration versus a typically truncated class assignment) affects all aspects of the work (scope) and how our emotions play out differently over such an extended time period. It’s about how work is done in an immersive world not the artificial ephemeral effects of short assignments. Not only does the time scape of a year add to the quantity of the work it also adds to the quantity of the worry.
But back to the question of who’s sitting over there at that table. We can take it down to the fundamental question of do you think it would make a difference if we knew? I do. Not only is that the fundamental knowledge of who the patron is (or the theoretical persona), but it’s the consequent knowledge of what’s an appropriate interaction – some, none or in-between. While the first floor is a remarkably social space it’s also one in which staff doesn't seem to interact with the patrons unless asked (approached). Is that an appropriate business model? It may be traditional, but what do we care about that at all. Is it effective? As I’ve said before, it’s not interactive unless you interact.
But perhaps I’m completely wrong. Maybe the students who sit at the tables are all doing fine, their work is exemplary, need no help and will flourish in our absence. Oh, but wait – we don’t know that either do we. Say, if that were true wouldn’t we want to know that even more.
gunther 12-1-2013
