Guest guest Posted September 19, 2002 Report Share Posted September 19, 2002 During the same period in Texas, the following air medical helicopter accidents occurred in Texas: 1999 2 accidents, 3 fatalities 1998 2 accidents, 3 fatalities 1997 0 accidents, 0 fatalities It would be nice to compare the incidence per helicopter transport and per ground transport. BEB E. Bledsoe, DO, FACEP Midlothian, Texas All outgoing email scanned by Norton Antivirus and guaranteed " virus free " or your money back. RE: Ambulance accident data > Donn, > The most current motor vehicle traffic accident information I can > furnish to you at this time is through 1999. The following is from our > finalized reports for 3 years involving ambulances: > > Calendar > Year Fatal Injury Non-Injury Total > > 1997 1 134 54 > 189 > > 1998 2 131 50 > 183 > > 1999 3 153 31 > 187 > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2002 Report Share Posted September 19, 2002 Indeed, it would, but it appears that those statistics are not reported or recorded anywhere except by the individual provider services. I can just imagine the resistance we would meet if we asked the providers to start reporting patient transports for statistical tracking purposes, but I would certainly like to give it a try. There is a research position available at TDH. I wonder if the person taking that position could be convinced to undertake such a survey. Might be worth a shot. Job doesn't pay much, but I'm totally out of work right now anyway. Hmmm... Donn Re: FW: Ground ambulance accident data During the same period in Texas, the following air medical helicopter accidents occurred in Texas: 1999 2 accidents, 3 fatalities 1998 2 accidents, 3 fatalities 1997 0 accidents, 0 fatalities It would be nice to compare the incidence per helicopter transport and per ground transport. BEB E. Bledsoe, DO, FACEP Midlothian, Texas All outgoing email scanned by Norton Antivirus and guaranteed " virus free " or your money back. RE: Ambulance accident data > Donn, > The most current motor vehicle traffic accident information I can > furnish to you at this time is through 1999. The following is from our > finalized reports for 3 years involving ambulances: > > Calendar > Year Fatal Injury Non-Injury Total > > 1997 1 134 54 > 189 > > 1998 2 131 50 > 183 > > 1999 3 153 31 > 187 > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 20, 2002 Report Share Posted September 20, 2002 Donn, According to TRAC-IT, all licensed EMS providers were supposed to start reporting data on ALL EMS runs to TDH on January 1, 2002. Of course, the database was not ready to accept calls on that date....but nonetheless, the plan is " in-place " to collect data on ALL EMS runs for Texas....now compliance will be another issue. Dudley PS: This is the 3rd time in 2 states I have been a part of " send us all your data " ....and all three times there has been no data to show because the actual scope of the project and the unfunded mandate collaborated to make an issue that is much larger than any one ever anticipated. All the ambulance runs in the state....anyone even wanna try guessing what that would be??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 20, 2002 Report Share Posted September 20, 2002 In a message dated 9/20/2002 10:41:57 AM Central Standard Time, THEDUDMAN@... writes: > Donn, > > According to TRAC-IT, all licensed EMS providers were supposed to start > reporting data on ALL EMS runs to TDH on January 1, 2002. Of course, the > database was not ready to accept calls on that date....but nonetheless, the > plan is " in-place " to collect data on ALL EMS runs for Texas....now > compliance will be another issue. > > Dudley > > PS: This is the 3rd time in 2 states I have been a part of " send us all > your data " ....and all three times there has been no data to show because > the actual scope of the project and the unfunded mandate collaborated to > make an issue that is much larger than any one ever anticipated. All the > ambulance runs in the state....anyone even wanna try guessing what that > would be??? > I want to know who is going to budget me the money to hire someone to do all of data storing. I bet it isnt TDH. Andy > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 20, 2002 Report Share Posted September 20, 2002 Dudley, Yes, that is supposed to have started the first of this year, and it has apparently started badly. In addition, TRAC-IT obviously applies only to Texas. Historical data for all states seems to be something that has never been recorded. Regards, Donn Re: FW: Ground ambulance accident data Donn, According to TRAC-IT, all licensed EMS providers were supposed to start reporting data on ALL EMS runs to TDH on January 1, 2002. Of course, the database was not ready to accept calls on that date....but nonetheless, the plan is " in-place " to collect data on ALL EMS runs for Texas....now compliance will be another issue. Dudley PS: This is the 3rd time in 2 states I have been a part of " send us all your data " ....and all three times there has been no data to show because the actual scope of the project and the unfunded mandate collaborated to make an issue that is much larger than any one ever anticipated. All the ambulance runs in the state....anyone even wanna try guessing what that would be??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2002 Report Share Posted September 21, 2002 The sad thing that I have been told over and over by other ambulance services that many are having to try and find money in the budget to hire extra staff members to enter the required data because of the VOLUME of data. I talked to our new billing agent the other day, and he implied that he will be forced to raise what he charges to accomodate the MANY extra key strokes that he will now be forced to do - he will be submitting our data. I have always told my students that on any intervention that they perform, they must balance the potential adverse effects versus the benefit. Which is better? The disease or the cure? Can we also apply that to this subject? I realize that epidemiological studies are necessary sometimes to help us improve what we do by identifying problems etc. But when the route to doing that study incurs more expense and problems for an already overburdened and overwhelmed system, I am not sure that the benefit outweighs the adverse effects. Can somebody help me out with this? Jane Hill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2002 Report Share Posted September 21, 2002 If you find a solution, or someone else has one, let us all know. I bill for a small third city service on a part-time basis (all I am contracted for) and I am wondering if I am going to be able to get all the extra information entered without falling further behind on the all-important job of keeping revenue coming in to keep the ambulance running. Jo Bell At 11:05 AM 9/21/2002, you wrote: >The sad thing that I have been told over and over by other ambulance >services >that many are having to try and find money in the budget to hire extra staff >members to enter the required data because of the VOLUME of data. I >talked to >our new billing agent the other day, and he implied that he will be forced to >raise what he charges to accomodate the MANY extra key strokes that he >will now >be forced to do - he will be submitting our data. I have always told my >students that on any intervention that they perform, they must balance the >potential adverse effects versus the benefit. Which is better? The >disease or >the cure? Can we also apply that to this subject? I realize that >epidemiological studies are necessary sometimes to help us improve what we do >by identifying problems etc. But when the route to doing that study incurs >more expense and problems for an already overburdened and overwhelmed >system, I >am not sure that the benefit outweighs the adverse effects. Can somebody >help >me out with this? > >Jane Hill > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2002 Report Share Posted September 21, 2002 Jane, You're exactly right. Many states collect run data, but few provide any meaningful outcomes. In other words, the collection of data becomes the " end " , rather than the " means " to an identified end. What can we expect to change as a result of collecting and reporting these data? What will be the frequency and reliability of the state-wide reports? Will they be statistically valid? What elements are marked for trend analysis? How will these data specifically influence rule making? Can uniform comparisons be made: by population? - by setting? - by outcomes? Is there a provision for dropping this requirement if the data proves unusable, unreliable or invalid? Or will it just go on forever, regardless of utility or practicality? Was the fiscal impact on EMS providers ever considered? These are just a few of my questions. Bob Kellow je.hill@... wrote: > The sad thing that I have been told over and over by other ambulance > services > that many are having to try and find money in the budget to hire extra > staff > members to enter the required data because of the VOLUME of data. I > talked to > our new billing agent the other day, and he implied that he will be > forced to > raise what he charges to accomodate the MANY extra key strokes that he > will now > be forced to do - he will be submitting our data. I have always told > my > students that on any intervention that they perform, they must balance > the > potential adverse effects versus the benefit. Which is better? The > disease or > the cure? Can we also apply that to this subject? I realize that > epidemiological studies are necessary sometimes to help us improve > what we do > by identifying problems etc. But when the route to doing that study > incurs > more expense and problems for an already overburdened and overwhelmed > system, I > am not sure that the benefit outweighs the adverse effects. Can > somebody help > me out with this? > > Jane Hill > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2002 Report Share Posted September 21, 2002 Hopefully whomever has good ideas about how or WHY on this new Trac-It info, they'll post to the list. Jane Hill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2002 Report Share Posted September 21, 2002 Maybe if someone from that section of the department would answer these questions you raised and shed a little light on the " why's " of all this extra information gathering that is mandated, we could palate it a little better. Of course, that STILL wouldn't help us with the expense of having someone enter all this stuff. Jane Hill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2002 Report Share Posted September 21, 2002 Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire. Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`. Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to learn what you do. See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because they're afraid they'll look stupid. Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation. When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed my enthusiasm for being an administrator. I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. " Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it supports meaningless jobs. Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending in for years? I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't. We need more of that. But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats. Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant. Cynically yours, Gene Gandy Gene Gandy, JD, LP 4250 East Aquarius Drive Tucson, AZ 85718 home and fax cell wegandy@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2002 Report Share Posted September 21, 2002 Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire. Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`. Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to learn what you do. See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because they're afraid they'll look stupid. Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation. When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed my enthusiasm for being an administrator. I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. " Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it supports meaningless jobs. Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending in for years? I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't. We need more of that. But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats. Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant. Cynically yours, Gene Gandy Gene Gandy, JD, LP 4250 East Aquarius Drive Tucson, AZ 85718 home and fax cell wegandy@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2002 Report Share Posted September 21, 2002 Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire. Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`. Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to learn what you do. See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because they're afraid they'll look stupid. Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation. When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed my enthusiasm for being an administrator. I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. " Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it supports meaningless jobs. Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending in for years? I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't. We need more of that. But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats. Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant. Cynically yours, Gene Gandy Gene Gandy, JD, LP 4250 East Aquarius Drive Tucson, AZ 85718 home and fax cell wegandy@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2002 Report Share Posted September 21, 2002 Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire. Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`. Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to learn what you do. See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because they're afraid they'll look stupid. Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation. When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed my enthusiasm for being an administrator. I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. " Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it supports meaningless jobs. Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending in for years? I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't. We need more of that. But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats. Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant. Cynically yours, Gene Gandy Gene Gandy, JD, LP 4250 East Aquarius Drive Tucson, AZ 85718 home and fax cell wegandy@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2002 Report Share Posted September 21, 2002 Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire. Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`. Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to learn what you do. See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because they're afraid they'll look stupid. Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation. When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed my enthusiasm for being an administrator. I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. " Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it supports meaningless jobs. Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending in for years? I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't. We need more of that. But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats. Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant. Cynically yours, Gene Gandy Gene Gandy, JD, LP 4250 East Aquarius Drive Tucson, AZ 85718 home and fax cell wegandy@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2002 Report Share Posted September 21, 2002 Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire. Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`. Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to learn what you do. See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because they're afraid they'll look stupid. Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation. When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed my enthusiasm for being an administrator. I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. " Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it supports meaningless jobs. Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending in for years? I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't. We need more of that. But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats. Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant. Cynically yours, Gene Gandy Gene Gandy, JD, LP 4250 East Aquarius Drive Tucson, AZ 85718 home and fax cell wegandy@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2002 Report Share Posted September 21, 2002 Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire. Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`. Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to learn what you do. See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because they're afraid they'll look stupid. Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation. When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed my enthusiasm for being an administrator. I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. " Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it supports meaningless jobs. Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending in for years? I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't. We need more of that. But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats. Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant. Cynically yours, Gene Gandy Gene Gandy, JD, LP 4250 East Aquarius Drive Tucson, AZ 85718 home and fax cell wegandy@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2002 Report Share Posted September 21, 2002 Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire. Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`. Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to learn what you do. See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because they're afraid they'll look stupid. Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation. When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed my enthusiasm for being an administrator. I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. " Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it supports meaningless jobs. Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending in for years? I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't. We need more of that. But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats. Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant. Cynically yours, Gene Gandy Gene Gandy, JD, LP 4250 East Aquarius Drive Tucson, AZ 85718 home and fax cell wegandy@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2002 Report Share Posted September 21, 2002 Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire. Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`. Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to learn what you do. See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because they're afraid they'll look stupid. Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation. When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed my enthusiasm for being an administrator. I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. " Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it supports meaningless jobs. Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending in for years? I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't. We need more of that. But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats. Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant. Cynically yours, Gene Gandy Gene Gandy, JD, LP 4250 East Aquarius Drive Tucson, AZ 85718 home and fax cell wegandy@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2002 Report Share Posted September 21, 2002 Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire. Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`. Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to learn what you do. See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because they're afraid they'll look stupid. Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation. When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed my enthusiasm for being an administrator. I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. " Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it supports meaningless jobs. Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending in for years? I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't. We need more of that. But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats. Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant. Cynically yours, Gene Gandy Gene Gandy, JD, LP 4250 East Aquarius Drive Tucson, AZ 85718 home and fax cell wegandy@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2002 Report Share Posted September 21, 2002 Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire. Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`. Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to learn what you do. See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because they're afraid they'll look stupid. Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation. When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed my enthusiasm for being an administrator. I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. " Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it supports meaningless jobs. Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending in for years? I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't. We need more of that. But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats. Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant. Cynically yours, Gene Gandy Gene Gandy, JD, LP 4250 East Aquarius Drive Tucson, AZ 85718 home and fax cell wegandy@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2002 Report Share Posted September 21, 2002 Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire. Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`. Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to learn what you do. See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because they're afraid they'll look stupid. Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation. When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed my enthusiasm for being an administrator. I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. " Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it supports meaningless jobs. Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending in for years? I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't. We need more of that. But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats. Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant. Cynically yours, Gene Gandy Gene Gandy, JD, LP 4250 East Aquarius Drive Tucson, AZ 85718 home and fax cell wegandy@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2002 Report Share Posted September 21, 2002 Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire. Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`. Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to learn what you do. See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because they're afraid they'll look stupid. Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation. When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed my enthusiasm for being an administrator. I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. " Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it supports meaningless jobs. Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending in for years? I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't. We need more of that. But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats. Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant. Cynically yours, Gene Gandy Gene Gandy, JD, LP 4250 East Aquarius Drive Tucson, AZ 85718 home and fax cell wegandy@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2002 Report Share Posted September 21, 2002 Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire. Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`. Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to learn what you do. See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because they're afraid they'll look stupid. Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation. When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed my enthusiasm for being an administrator. I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. " Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it supports meaningless jobs. Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending in for years? I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't. We need more of that. But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats. Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant. Cynically yours, Gene Gandy Gene Gandy, JD, LP 4250 East Aquarius Drive Tucson, AZ 85718 home and fax cell wegandy@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2002 Report Share Posted September 21, 2002 Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire. Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`. Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to learn what you do. See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because they're afraid they'll look stupid. Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation. When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed my enthusiasm for being an administrator. I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. " Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it supports meaningless jobs. Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending in for years? I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't. We need more of that. But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats. Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant. Cynically yours, Gene Gandy Gene Gandy, JD, LP 4250 East Aquarius Drive Tucson, AZ 85718 home and fax cell wegandy@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.