Posted on

Review – Publisher of the Community: We’re All Doomed

I just watched R. David Lankes’s recent keynote and wanted to post a short review of the material he covered.

Information

“Publisher of the Community: We’re All Doomed” Closing keynote for the NISO Workshop on “Using the Web as an E-Content Distribution Platform: Challenges and Opportunities.” http://quartz.syr.edu/blog/?p=6265

Abstract: We need to build platforms for scholarship and knowledge development, not information and content delivery. These platforms are not about APIs and eContent, but about people and content. We need to strive not for discovery, but epiphanies.

[vimeo id=”109836897″]

Reflection/Response

I really enjoyed this presentation and will take a few new ideas from it. Beyond new ideas, it was refreshing and inspiring and perhaps a bit challenging to hear his thoughts about collections and technology.

Lankes began by talking about the “death of documents” in that the definitions of documents are changing in rapid and new ways. Digital stuff is different at a fundamental level and the editorial process is radically different because digital information resources are living, changing things. There is continuity in this change but, overall, the change has been a massive paradigm shift. The words “ebooks” and “ejournals” are really just metaphors – we are trying to fit new information into old information formats.

This section flooded my mind with thoughts.

  • In my work moving the Covenant Quarterly online, how can I respect both the “old format” while embracing the new opportunities of a digital environment?
  • I asked a very similar question about my work with the Northfield Historical society – how do I work with that community and not just their collection? Great questions that are constantly reframing my approach.

Lankes also argues for a “sea change” in the history of library and library services – we need to stop thinking about content. There have been massive shifts in the last 40 years:

  • Collection focus. Our primary role was collecting and preserving documents. This worked…but only worked with a functional infrastructure of knowledge producers (academics and publishers) and libraries. Technical revolutions changed that – things like cheap paper and ink – and libraries had to change and evolve. The modern conception of a “book palace” – a building full of books – is a product of this period of time. This model is breaking – and totally broken by the digital revolution and the internet. Creating MARC records for webpages is crazy.
  • Service focus. Cataloging is a service – that has both internal and external audiences. Question – are we really applying our services to the external audience? From library orientation to information literacy – that’s a sign of the shift from collections to service focused libraries. This is a big change…but it’s not enough. It’s still operating in the “consumption” model of information. This model creates an artificial line between the knowledge consumption process and the knowledge creation process.
  • Conversation focus. It’s not about putting content online – it’s about making libraries as centers for conversations as mediators and participants. Conversations create revolutions. Move beyond collecting and organizing metadata toward capturing scholarship itself.

A Netflix for education doesn’t work because education isn’t based on consumption – it’s based on learning and learning is based on conversation and participation.

However, I do take issue with some of these claims. First, this presentation created vocational confusion. Lankes argues – persuasively, I might add – that libraries must move beyond a focus on collections to a focus on service and even beyond that to community conversations. However, my library and my position in the library are organized around the first two areas – collections and services – and my job is focused squarely on maintaining access to our collections and a few of our services. So while I’m inspired by the claims that we need to focus beyond those things I wondered what those new services and platforms for community conversations could actually look like and – as importantly – how do we move in that direction without the required skills? Lankes said that “People create restrictions that technology has removed” but that gives me pause for several reasons. First – the technical challenges to what Lankes proposed are not trivial. The technical infrastructure takes time and energy and expertise that many libraries and community groups simply lack. Second, how do we manage this change?

These – of course – are criticisms as much as they are struggling to think through the ramifications of his argument in my local context and in the context of my future.

CC image from Flickr - https://flic.kr/p/hKQMcN
CC image from Flickr – https://flic.kr/p/hKQMcN

Looking forward, I’d like to think more about the following things and perhaps explore them in library school:

  • The history of the book and the history of libraries. It seems like many librarians take this background and context for granted but I think it deserves intentional study.
  • Focus on building conversations. I think this means a focus on reference and instruction but – beyond that – how can I work with the communities I’m a member of?
  • How can I embody that belief – that the real goal of learning isn’t the consumption of knowledge or the production of knowledge but mediating and participating in that conversation? I try and do that here on my blog – but my attempts have been mixed. I will renew that effort!

Okay. I think that’s enough in the way of reflections. That’s plenty to think about and plenty to wrestle with for now.

Posted on

Getting Serious about Omeka Web Development

I’ve been fooling around with Omeka for two years now – and it’s time to get serious. I’ve decided to try and set up a whole test environment on my local machine so that I can try to do more customizations.

  1. Download XAMPP (https://www.apachefriends.org/index.html) and follow the standard installation process for XAMPP.
  2. Download Omeka (http://omeka.org/download/)
  3. Install Omeka (http://omeka.org/codex/Installation)
    1. Create a MySQL database and user.
      1. I went to http://localhost/phpmyadmin
      2. Clicked “Databases” tab and created a new database.
      3. Clicked on that database, then the “Privileges” tab, then created a new user.
      4. Important stuff from this step: database name, user name, user password.
    2. Extract the Omeka Download into the XAMPP htdocs folder (in my case, C:\xampp\htdocs). I renamed this “north” to relate to a project I’m working on now.
    3. Update the db.ini file here (C:\xampp\htdocs\north) with the information from the steps above.
    4. Open a browser and head to http://localhost/north
    5. Complete the installation prompts.

I ran into two problems that I wanted to fix. First, on the main install screen I got the following warning:

Omeka PHP problem 1

To Fix this problem, navigate to C:\xampp\php and edit the php.ini file. Uncomment the following line

extension=php_fileinfo.dll

by removing the “;” from the start of the line. Then restart the Apache server through the XAMPP interface. Problem resolved!

The second problem was getting the image magick extension installed. This proved to be a major problem and one that is still unresolved. However, because I had an active installation, I found a solution by simply copying the SQL database from my live webhost to my local host and then copying files from that server to my local machine. This allows me to do local changes without having that extension installed. Ideal? No! But functional.

 

Posted on

Social Media Policy for the Brandel Library

I’ve been thinking a bit about developing a plan and policy for the Brandel Library’s social media accounts. In the past, I’ve viewed this as an “important but not urgent” issue and I largely feel the same way now. However, I think that both for planning sake and direction I should invest some time and thought in researching other library’s policies and best practices to guide the Brandel Library’s social media in 2014.

Developing a Policy – Why?

By “policy” I mean a set of expectations that set the boundaries for acceptable conduct as well as some lofty goals for social media in the context of an academic library. I’ve started collecting some relevant policies and articles in this Zotero library and hope to keep updated that frequently.

Starting with the question of “Why?” leads me to connect our social media policy to the library’s general mission statement. Our current mission statement (as of 2012) is:

The Brandel Library supports the educational mission of the university by offering resources, services, and an environment to stimulate academic inquiry and intellectual, cultural and social exchange, while reflecting the Christian, urban, and multicultural vision of the university. This is accomplished through the acquisition, organization, and preservation of both physical and digital materials, and by facilitating their use (access) in a complex information environment through course and individual instruction. Creating awareness of and providing access to these collections are essential to our mission.

I’ve taken the liberty of highlighting certain phrases that I find particularly relevant to the library’s social media policy. Having not planned this – I’m actually relatively happy with how well library mission statement mapped to social policy. At the same time, I also see that our mission statement seems focused on our collections (and facilitating their use) and not on our our users (and meeting their needs). Something to consider long term, I guess.

A Simply Policy

Editorial confession – this draft has been pending for months. In that time, I went to the #ILEADUSA meeting and heard an inspiring talk from Beck Tench. The simplicity of her institutions social media policy has inspired me so much that I’m going to steal it directly and offer it as a first draft. Her policy is simply this:

  1. Use common sense.
  2. If it gives you pause, pause.
  3. We’ve got your back on this.

If I recall correctly, this policy was given in a section of her talk focused on trusting people completely. I’m going to move forward with that confidence and revisit this when the need arrives.

Posted on

“This is how I study”

Just wanted to jot down an idea and try to fill out in a semi-public space.

I’ve been thinking a bit about library instruction, social media, and creating a learning culture at North Park. One idea – based deeply on lifehacker posts “How I work” – is for North Park to try and create a “This is how I study” video series. I think it would be awesome for the following reasons:

  • Would allow and encourage peer to peer instruction.
  • Would create content for our social media campaigns.
  • Would allow librarians to do instruction on a personal basis as well as on make that content available to a wider audience.
  • It would be interesting! Do students listen to music? Work in the library or their apartment?
  • I would imagine these stories (videos? webpages?) could be linked from social media as well as embeded in libguides.
  • I wonder if it could fit in existing structures (like the writing center, tutoring program, or capstone classes) or whether it would be separate.

That’s my emerging idea. Will run it by some people here at North Park to see what people think.

Edit: This idea is also very similar to the ACRL’s recurring post “Memeber of the Week”

Posted on

An Archon (and data) manifesto

Last Saturday I was asked to give a short overview of Archon to the Preservation Committee of the Swedish American Historical Society. It was mostly a hands-on demonstration of how to use Archon and not a theoretical exercise about the transformative role of technology in archival metadata. However, the basic question I was trying to answer was “Why does this matter?” or perhaps “Why is this important?” and those seemed like questions worth answering in a compelling way.

Structured Data > Unstructured Data

By this I mean simply that data that is organized into formal structures (whether MARC, Dublin Core, EAD, whatever) has clear and distinct advantages over unorganized and unstructured data. This project began with loosely organized and structured data – paper based finding aids – but migrated that into the more formal structure of Archon. This had several advantages:

  • Ability to standardize language and make the data more uniform.
  • Ability to set clear metadata standards and systematically improve and add metadata.
  • Ability to migrate to new and differnt systems.

The main advantage of this structure vs. unstructured data is so important to me that it deserves it’s own heading

Linked Data > Unlinked Data

Structuring metadata in an online system allows for a paradigm-shifting revolution – that data can be linked to other pieces of data. I’ve been thinking about this for a while – and will likely continue to think about this – but this is the power of the paradigm shift. Data is linked to other data – thereby linking thoughts, ideas, people, etc. Linked data is fundamentally different than unlinked data.

Typing a subject heading onto a card catalog is fundamentally different than typing a subject heading into a linked database. The question when typing a card catalog seemed to be “what will describe this item to our users?” whereas the fundamental question when created linked data is “how can I link this item to similar items in ways that will be helpful and meaningful?” and that is a huge distinction in my mind. Thinks like controlled vocabularies, conforming to national standards, etc. all make infinitely more sense when linked data is viewed from this perspective.

More Access > Less Access

This perhaps seems obvious, but it’s worth mentioning. More access is better than less access. Connecting people to information resources is the most important work of the library and of archives and providing more access seems nearly undeniably better than providing less access.

I will almost certainly add to this later on (as my views on technology and metadata continue to evolve) but I wanted to take a moment to document this particular moment in time,  capture my current thoughts on the subject, and rely a bit of what I wanted to convey to the Preservation Committee of the Swedish American Historical Society.

 

 

 

Posted on

Gamification in Libraries

Presenters:

  • Speaker: Annie Pho, Librarian, University of Illinois at Chicago
  • Speaker: Bohyun Kim, Digital Access Librarian, Florida International University Medical Library
  • Speaker: Breanne Kirsch, Public Services Librarian, USC Upstate University Library
  • Speaker: Carli Spina, Emerging Technologies and Research Librarian, Harvard Law School Library
  • Speaker: David Pattern, University of Huddersfield, UK
  • Speaker: Kyle Felker, Digital Initiatives Librarian, Grand Valley State University Library
  • Speaker: Laurie Golden, Head of Community Relations, Canton Public Library
  • Speaker: Nicole Pagowsky, Instructional Services Librarian, University of Arizona
  • Speaker: Young Lee, Reference/Electronic Resources Librarian, University of La Verne College of Law

Description:

Gamification, the application of game design and mechanics for user engagement, is a society-wide trend, and game-based learning has recently surfaced as a hot topic in higher education. This program will provide (a) an overview of what gamification means in the library context, (b) what the potential benefits and pitfalls of gamification are and (c) a lively discussion by a group of librarians with many examples of pioneering gamifacation projects at academic and public libraries.

Reflection:

This session had nine presenters that each offered reflections on their own experiences applying game principles to different library settings – from public libraries to academic. Here are my reflections and notes (in no particular order)

Benefits

Game principles and habits and technologies are already in place all around us. So it’s not so much creating or recreating something as many already existing knowledge and patterns useful in a library context. A quick and incomplete list: foursquare, wikipedia, code academy, good reads, actual board games, and hundreds other places already use game principles.

One member of the panel expressed gamification as a voluntary, meaningful task that provides the user with some reward. He also talked about adding a “twist” – an arbitrary element that added difficulty to an event. Most of the presentations focused on digital games and/or online communities and in fact I would have appreciated hearing about an example of game principles being applied to an analog setting.

The potential benefits for the users are an improved library experience. One of my many cryptic and hastily written notes was “embarrassment and shame are barriers to flourishing.” I wish I had provided myself with more context, but I can surmise that one of the presenters was talking about how more traditional interactions – like coming to the reference desk – are difficult experiences for patrons and that often game principles would allow alternative paths to human flourishing. And that’s what library’s are about, right?

foursquare

I think about the foursquare model – one of my favorite online and gamified social communities. If foursquare were run by libraries, you’d likely:

  • have to attend a few sessions about how to use the service,
  • have so-called experts tell you about interesting places in the area
  • be forced to head to the reference desk to ask for a new place to visit and/or confess that you got lost along the way.

This, of course, is nothing like what foursquare is. It’s open and intuitive, you are free to search about your area and learn from fellow users (not just from experts), and there is no shame or embarrassment

The dichotomy I’m creating is, of course, totally false. I’m glad that experts and authoritative sources exist (maps, atlases, city guides, trip planners, etc.) but that’s not really the point. The question I will take from this presentation is what can libraries learn from game principles that will improve library services? How can libraries provide meaningful narrative and  structure  incentives to encourage human flourishing?

Questions/Drawbacks

The panel and at least one audience member also addressed some pitfalls of gamification. Some were methodological and, though basic, are worth repeating. Make sure your game is fun and enjoyable! Translation: don’t build a bad game. Secondly, make sure that it is suitable to your intended purpose.

Another question – perhaps on a different scale – is whether or not gamification might detract from the basic reward/enjoyment of an action. For example, if you like to read for fun, would receiving a prize make you more or less likely to read in the future?

I guess my response to these concerns would come in several forms. First, I believe that all the games mentioned are voluntary – users have to “opt in” to play the game and I think that is important. Secondly, I believe that most of these games had a targeted audience – a particular group or demographic in mind. Again, the point is not to reward and/or trivialize everyone’s library experience, but is targeted to a particular group and a particular action.

Lastly, I believe my cryptic note provides an answer. Focus on human flourishing and emotional elements like shame/embarrassment and joy/friendship.

Application

As always, I was thinking about ways I could apply these principles to my own context. At the end of the session, I jotted down a few notes that I thought I could build on.

  • First, I think the Brandel Library’s “Late Night” library orientation session is an example of game theory in library instruction – though on a small scale. There is a theme that tries to unite tasks into a meaningful activity.
  • The Brandel All-Star. Have a recurring spot on the Brandel facebook page for self-nominated Brandel All-Stars – envisioned as a way to reward and recognize those students with a particular love for the library.
  • Brandel Buttons. I’ve been thinking about this for a long time. Create buttons so that after a user completes a task, they can request and get a button for doing so.
    • Checking out a book.
    • Early morning studying.
    • Late night studying.
    • Interlibrary loan.
    • Asking a reference question.
    • Following or liking the library on social media (twitter, facebook, etc.)

Actually, upon further reflection, I don’t know if either one of my ideas reaches the point where it could properly be called a “game” because they seem to lack meaningful narrative. It’s really more of a way to incentive and/or reward positive behavior.

Resources

The presenters have put together a really solid guide to gamification in library contexts complete with their slides, links to other resources, and a full bibliography of other resources. Here is the link: http://guides.library.harvard.edu/gamification

Posted on

Augmented Reality in Libraries

Presenters:

  • Speaker: Alexandra Van Doren, Web Management Librarian, University of Houston-Downtown
  • Speaker: Jovanni Lota, Information Literacy Coordinator Librarian, University of Houston-Downtown
  • Speaker: Lindsey Simard, Online Instruction Librarian, University of Houston-Downtown

Description:

Using a free augmented reality application, University of Houston-Downtown librarians have been working to create an engaging and memorable library orientation activity for students that will launch in Fall 2013. Come join us in this fun session to see how augmented reality is being used “in the wild” and brainstorm with us about ways this emerging technology could be used in libraries.

arrangement-107872_640

Reflection:

I’ve been interested in applications of augmented reality technologies and techniques for a little while now and I thought this presentation was a solid presentation about one school’s attempt to incorporate Augmented Reality into library instruction. As reported in this article, their project had four major goals:

  1. to orient students to library resources and services;
  2. to increase student retention of material;
  3. to reach out to students beyond traditional library instruction sessions; and
  4. to increase librarians’ “approachability” as perceived by students.

Their presentation began with a basic overview of augmented reality applications in other settings (business, publications, museums, etc.) that was helpful for context but was not new for those already familiar with augmented reality technologies but still helpful to encourage library thinking!

The pitfalls and limitations of augmented reality have been chronicled elsewhere, but I’m an optimist and want to focus on the positive and exciting potential for augmented reality in libraries. Here is a short list – inspired by their talk and later dreaming:

  • Library instruction/orientation. This is how the University of Houston was planning on implementing AR technology and it seemed very promising.
  • Bridge gap between print and digital. If a book is available in both print and electronic, use augmented reality to create link into digital. Creating additional access points – might be more symbolic than useful (but certainly more useful than QR codes!)
  • Navigation within the building.
  • Open up special collections – make a rare book or photograph collection more interactive.
  • Campus tours with interactive maps, pictures, media, etc.

Obviously, I think augmented reality technologies are great and have many potential applications in the library environment. I hope to be able to dedicate a bit more time to this in the future and keep learning about this emerging technology!