Librarians are sometimes skeptical of Wikipedia (the mother of all Wikis). I have met teachers that seem to view Wikipedia with the same skepticism as many librarians. They have asked me, "What do you think of Wikipedia?" I love Wikipedia, therefore I could be convinced to be pretty fond of wikis in general. This occurred. A coworker pitched our circulation staff on the idea of using and contributing to a circulation wiki. As a sign of solidarity I made an information wiki. We used pbwiki.
For quite some time I have kept a file in our G: drive (now a V: drive for some reason) called the Information Desk Rolodex. This was an attempt to ween our staff off the practice of keeping EVERYTHING in a printed file at the desk. Having a wiki made this file better. I dumped most of these saved items in the wiki. Now my file is searchable by keyword.
Years ago I suggested that our branch obtain a scanner and software that allowed for scanning documents and tagging them with keywords to create a searchable database. Since our copiers can scan items allowing us to store things digitally we can now keep them in the wiki too. In this case a wiki can replace that database idea.
So yeah, I love wikis.
P.S. I have played in the wiki sandbox.
Monday, December 1, 2008
Thing #14 Library 2.0
How 2.0 are we really?
Web 2.0 begat the concept of Library 2.0 and now I have managed to read a few articles on the topic for L&P (sources roughly cited below). Having seen Stephen Abram speak at OLC a few years ago, I figured his article would be a good place to start. He views Web 2.0 as being “about the more human aspects of interactivity…conversations, interpersonal networking, personalization, and individualism.” Michael Casey states that services must successfully reach users, be evaluated frequently, and make use of customer input to be considered Library 2.0. So if we keep these elements in mind it makes me wonder: How 2.0 are we really?
Right now I’m primarily considering our own webpage. I love how we got away from trying to be a web portal (eliminating weather and news updates which seemed to be an attempt to have the CML page replace yahoo as a one stop page for our customers). Our page is vibrant and pretty focused. Could it be more 2.0-ish? I think it could, while also admitting that I don’t know all of the technical constraints involved in changing our page. To be a little more 2.0-ish it seems like we could go further to foster interactive conversations/input from our customers and evaluate ourselves more frequently. Here are some “What If” thoughts about Library 2.0 and CML.
WHAT IF we increased the profile of our “Power Users?” We privately identity this group behind the scenes at CML. Perhaps we could pull back the curtain and allow them to make their presence public. Allow them to help shape what we are. Maybe they are self-identified. Maybe they earn a power user rating by submitting reviews to our website that are deemed helpful by others. If ebay buyers trust power sellers more, would our CML users trust reviews from our Power Users?
Speaking of reviews, WHAT IF we allowed public review and comment on titles featured on our page rather than just a star rating?
Patrons have long asked for a way to record and keep track of the books they have previously checked out and returned. LibraryThing & Shelfari have beaten us to that task. But WHAT IF we developed a widget that allowed our customers to upload the books from their CML account to their LibraryThing or Shelfari shelf? (Incidentally, I found something called LibraryThing for Libraries, but it seems to work in the opposite direction by populating library catalogs with reviews.)
WHAT IF the book of the day on our front page was actually 3 to 5 books? If the featured book doesn’t look like your cup of tea, click it to cycle through several more.
WHAT IF we had a similar featured book that was up for a whole month rather than one day? And WHAT IF we allowed users to submit potential discussion group questions? And WHAT IF we hosted several discussion groups based on customer input?
Having solid functional database sources are good. Allowing customer reviews of sources could be better. But WHAT IF we allowed customers to share their stories of how they have actually used our sources? For example, Reference USA happens to be pretty boring. One of our customers has used this for the past couple years to find old friends from his military days. After his wife passed away he used it send thank you letters to her friends that had sent flowers of condolence. WHAT IF he chose to share this and turned a boring source into a story about what we have to offer?
WHAT IF we opened up some of our organizational challenges to public suggestion? For example, a few years back a problem was posed to staff. Our online catalog was working too well. Improvements made it easier to use the catalog and place loan requests. We were being overwhelmed with incoming materials on hold. Putting books into the hands of our users was a good thing, but what about the books that were requested and never checked out? This had a negative impact on our transportation costs. The question was posed to staff: How can we encourage the public to reserve what they need but also make sure they aren’t reserving so much that it goes unused without being checked out? Why weren’t we posing this question to the public too? WHAT IF we packaged some of our tactical plan items in an online “think tank” allowing the public to submit ideas? Would we be obligated to use every idea? No. But we might find useful ideas that were overlooked by our staff.
Perhaps not all of these ideas to open up interactivity with our customers will be viable. That’s where Michael Casey’s Library 2.0 element of evaluating frequently would come in. It seems to be even more 2.0 we need to try more ideas, more often, from more sources, and evaluate these ideas often. Throw out the things that don’t work and allow the ones that do to grow.
Web 2.0 begat the concept of Library 2.0 and now I have managed to read a few articles on the topic for L&P (sources roughly cited below). Having seen Stephen Abram speak at OLC a few years ago, I figured his article would be a good place to start. He views Web 2.0 as being “about the more human aspects of interactivity…conversations, interpersonal networking, personalization, and individualism.” Michael Casey states that services must successfully reach users, be evaluated frequently, and make use of customer input to be considered Library 2.0. So if we keep these elements in mind it makes me wonder: How 2.0 are we really?
Right now I’m primarily considering our own webpage. I love how we got away from trying to be a web portal (eliminating weather and news updates which seemed to be an attempt to have the CML page replace yahoo as a one stop page for our customers). Our page is vibrant and pretty focused. Could it be more 2.0-ish? I think it could, while also admitting that I don’t know all of the technical constraints involved in changing our page. To be a little more 2.0-ish it seems like we could go further to foster interactive conversations/input from our customers and evaluate ourselves more frequently. Here are some “What If” thoughts about Library 2.0 and CML.
WHAT IF we increased the profile of our “Power Users?” We privately identity this group behind the scenes at CML. Perhaps we could pull back the curtain and allow them to make their presence public. Allow them to help shape what we are. Maybe they are self-identified. Maybe they earn a power user rating by submitting reviews to our website that are deemed helpful by others. If ebay buyers trust power sellers more, would our CML users trust reviews from our Power Users?
Speaking of reviews, WHAT IF we allowed public review and comment on titles featured on our page rather than just a star rating?
Patrons have long asked for a way to record and keep track of the books they have previously checked out and returned. LibraryThing & Shelfari have beaten us to that task. But WHAT IF we developed a widget that allowed our customers to upload the books from their CML account to their LibraryThing or Shelfari shelf? (Incidentally, I found something called LibraryThing for Libraries, but it seems to work in the opposite direction by populating library catalogs with reviews.)
WHAT IF the book of the day on our front page was actually 3 to 5 books? If the featured book doesn’t look like your cup of tea, click it to cycle through several more.
WHAT IF we had a similar featured book that was up for a whole month rather than one day? And WHAT IF we allowed users to submit potential discussion group questions? And WHAT IF we hosted several discussion groups based on customer input?
Having solid functional database sources are good. Allowing customer reviews of sources could be better. But WHAT IF we allowed customers to share their stories of how they have actually used our sources? For example, Reference USA happens to be pretty boring. One of our customers has used this for the past couple years to find old friends from his military days. After his wife passed away he used it send thank you letters to her friends that had sent flowers of condolence. WHAT IF he chose to share this and turned a boring source into a story about what we have to offer?
WHAT IF we opened up some of our organizational challenges to public suggestion? For example, a few years back a problem was posed to staff. Our online catalog was working too well. Improvements made it easier to use the catalog and place loan requests. We were being overwhelmed with incoming materials on hold. Putting books into the hands of our users was a good thing, but what about the books that were requested and never checked out? This had a negative impact on our transportation costs. The question was posed to staff: How can we encourage the public to reserve what they need but also make sure they aren’t reserving so much that it goes unused without being checked out? Why weren’t we posing this question to the public too? WHAT IF we packaged some of our tactical plan items in an online “think tank” allowing the public to submit ideas? Would we be obligated to use every idea? No. But we might find useful ideas that were overlooked by our staff.
Perhaps not all of these ideas to open up interactivity with our customers will be viable. That’s where Michael Casey’s Library 2.0 element of evaluating frequently would come in. It seems to be even more 2.0 we need to try more ideas, more often, from more sources, and evaluate these ideas often. Throw out the things that don’t work and allow the ones that do to grow.
articles read:
Web 2.0 - Huh?! Library 2.0, Librarian 2.0Stephen Abram, Information Outlook, Dec 2005
Library 2.0
Michael E. Casey & Laura C. Savastinuk, Library Journal, Sept 2006
Library 2.0: The Consumer as Producer
Beth Evans, Information Today, Oct 2008
which then led to reading:
The Long Tail
Chris Anderson, Wired, Oct 2004
The Rise of Crowdsourcing
Jeff Howe, Wired, June 2006
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Thing #13 Tagging & del.icio.us
I set up a del.icio.us account. Now I can keep track of all my bookmarks. The bookmark file in my computer was working fine, but that ability to tag sites and access them remotely, admittedly, is an advantage. Right now I'd rather discuss tagging and how it could be used to our advantage with our own CML catalog.
The other night I was watching PBS and caught the tail end of an interview with Magic Johnson about a new business book he has coming out (1). Since I habitually look up books and music I hear about and since it sounds like a book CML should own, I get on our website.
Doing a quick catalog search for "Magic Johnson" yielded plenty of results. Now I narrow things down to books, then non-fiction, then items from the last 3 years. Result: nothing BY Magic Johnson.
Off to amazon...Since CML seemingly does not own the book, perhaps I should get the info and make a suggestion for purchase. Amazon lists the book as, "32 Ways to Be a Champion In Business." I try the catalog a couple more times. Magic Johnson 32 ways. Nope. Magic Johnson business. Nada. So far I have been searching like most of our customers probably do, using keywords that make the most sense. Finally I try searching like a librarian. Author: Johnson, Earvin. Limit by publication year and sure enough there's the book in our catalog listings.
What is my point in describing this? Simple. The functionality of our catalog could be improved by allowing customers to create tags in our catalog. Here are the keywords that are included with the title: Success in business, Entrepreneurship, Leadership, Work ethic, Social values and Earvin Johnson. Our catalogers did not include the author's nickname "Magic" in the MARC record. Like it or not, customers search our catalog in the same way they search the Internet: with prominent keywords that make the most sense to them. Before AquaBrowser I would find abandoned webpac searches all the time. "Your search did not produce any results." Something to that effect. AquaBrowser is a means of adapting to how people conduct their searches.
Wouldn't it be interesting to go one step further? Let customers add to the effectiveness of our catalog (2). What if I had been a customer at home that eventually found the catalog listing for the new book by Earvin Johnson but had the ability to tag the search record with his nickname Magic? Perhaps the next search by a customer would go smoother.
1) After his career as a basketball player Magic Johnson flirted with a career as a talkshow host. He sucked at this. However, he is a pretty savvy entrepreneur. He has thriving businesses in Los Angeles neighborhoods where others have been hesitant to invest. Movie theaters and coffee houses stand out as some of the things I've read about.
2) This has reminded me of a title I have run across at work: The Wisdom of Crowds by James Surowiecki. Perhaps I'll mark this down as 'plan to read' on Shelfari.
The other night I was watching PBS and caught the tail end of an interview with Magic Johnson about a new business book he has coming out (1). Since I habitually look up books and music I hear about and since it sounds like a book CML should own, I get on our website.
Doing a quick catalog search for "Magic Johnson" yielded plenty of results. Now I narrow things down to books, then non-fiction, then items from the last 3 years. Result: nothing BY Magic Johnson.
Off to amazon...Since CML seemingly does not own the book, perhaps I should get the info and make a suggestion for purchase. Amazon lists the book as, "32 Ways to Be a Champion In Business." I try the catalog a couple more times. Magic Johnson 32 ways. Nope. Magic Johnson business. Nada. So far I have been searching like most of our customers probably do, using keywords that make the most sense. Finally I try searching like a librarian. Author: Johnson, Earvin. Limit by publication year and sure enough there's the book in our catalog listings.
What is my point in describing this? Simple. The functionality of our catalog could be improved by allowing customers to create tags in our catalog. Here are the keywords that are included with the title: Success in business, Entrepreneurship, Leadership, Work ethic, Social values and Earvin Johnson. Our catalogers did not include the author's nickname "Magic" in the MARC record. Like it or not, customers search our catalog in the same way they search the Internet: with prominent keywords that make the most sense to them. Before AquaBrowser I would find abandoned webpac searches all the time. "Your search did not produce any results." Something to that effect. AquaBrowser is a means of adapting to how people conduct their searches.
Wouldn't it be interesting to go one step further? Let customers add to the effectiveness of our catalog (2). What if I had been a customer at home that eventually found the catalog listing for the new book by Earvin Johnson but had the ability to tag the search record with his nickname Magic? Perhaps the next search by a customer would go smoother.
1) After his career as a basketball player Magic Johnson flirted with a career as a talkshow host. He sucked at this. However, he is a pretty savvy entrepreneur. He has thriving businesses in Los Angeles neighborhoods where others have been hesitant to invest. Movie theaters and coffee houses stand out as some of the things I've read about.
2) This has reminded me of a title I have run across at work: The Wisdom of Crowds by James Surowiecki. Perhaps I'll mark this down as 'plan to read' on Shelfari.
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Thing #12 Twitter
My Twitter was briefly useful in documenting the incredibly stylish outfits of a man we will refer to as "Al." Al is an impeccable dresser and has been witnessed in as many as three different outfits in one day (see footnote 1). He is well known among Whetstoners and it is my hope that he will one day achieve the level of minor local celebrity (see footnote 2). Twitter's usefulness was brief due to Al being banished from the land for a total of four months (click on the above cartoon for a dramatized version of this event). The eviction was warranted. His behavior should not be encouraged. His wardrobe should.
1) The only more impressive example of such frequent wardrobe changes I have witnessed would be Prince in concert. Larry Graham & Graham Central Station opened the show and Prince sat in for most of their set which lasted about 1 1/2 hours. Then Prince performed his own headlining set for 2 1/2 hours. During his time on stage he had no less than three different outfits. Could this show have been any better? Only if he challenged me to a pick-up game of basketball and then offered to make pancakes.
2) Like Zach Allan Starkey, but different. Obviously.
Friday, November 14, 2008
Thing #11 LibraryThing/Shelfari
For Thing #11 I explored LibraryThing and Shelfari. When researching these sites I found that both had received investment from online book dealers -- one from an online bookseller that specializes in used, rare and out of print books and the other from an online bookseller that offers books and pretty much everything else (see footnote 1). If you compare the composition and design of both LibraryThing and Shelfari it is easy to guess who initially backed them financially (see footnote 2).
I liked the idea of using LibraryThing, but balked at the idea of paying for the service if I cataloged over 200 books. Some co-workers use Shelfari, now I do too. Shelfari even had an option to customize my "bookshelf" with rosewood, my favorite of all woods (see footnote 3).
1) Amazon's original investment in Shelfari was $1 million and recently purchased them outright. AbeBooks was an investor in LibraryThing. The developer of LibraryThing, Tim Spalding, has been quite critical of Shelfari. (Perhaps rightly so, but to me he comes across as snarky.) Here's where the world of LibraryThing/Shelfari gets interesting. Amazon, in addition to having recently purchased Shefari, has now purchased AbeBooks. Since AbeBooks owns a 40% share of LibraryThing and Amazon just bought AbeBooks it's almost as if Amazon owns both of these competing book networks.
2) LibraryThing is quirky and esoteric. The design isn't too flashy, but they are high on substance. It's not too surprising that they found venture capital from a business specializing in used and rare books. On the other hand Shelfari is visually appealing. The layout and design contributes to its ease of use. Again, not surprising that Amazon (a retailer skilled at making things easy to find) controls Shelfari.
3) Rosewood is useful in the making of musical instruments, especially guitars. My favorite guitars, Fender Stratocasters, feature necks made of solid maple or maple with rosewood fretboards. Maple has a brighter, punchier tone. Rosewood produces a slightly warmer, more mellow tone. Emphasis is added because if you recorded two different guitars and listened back to them you might not be able to tell the difference. Rosewood fretboards feel better to me and perhaps the difference is as much psychological as it is sonic. On a side note, I have noticed that the overall quality of wood from guitars made today differs from those made even ten years ago. There is often a visible difference in the grain and darkness of materials such as rosewood. A quick ProQuest search led me to an interesting article on the topic of timber used for guitars and how manufacturers are trying to reduce their environmental impact. See: "The Future of Tonewood." Acoustic Guitar, February 1, 2008, 80-86.
I liked the idea of using LibraryThing, but balked at the idea of paying for the service if I cataloged over 200 books. Some co-workers use Shelfari, now I do too. Shelfari even had an option to customize my "bookshelf" with rosewood, my favorite of all woods (see footnote 3).
1) Amazon's original investment in Shelfari was $1 million and recently purchased them outright. AbeBooks was an investor in LibraryThing. The developer of LibraryThing, Tim Spalding, has been quite critical of Shelfari. (Perhaps rightly so, but to me he comes across as snarky.) Here's where the world of LibraryThing/Shelfari gets interesting. Amazon, in addition to having recently purchased Shefari, has now purchased AbeBooks. Since AbeBooks owns a 40% share of LibraryThing and Amazon just bought AbeBooks it's almost as if Amazon owns both of these competing book networks.
2) LibraryThing is quirky and esoteric. The design isn't too flashy, but they are high on substance. It's not too surprising that they found venture capital from a business specializing in used and rare books. On the other hand Shelfari is visually appealing. The layout and design contributes to its ease of use. Again, not surprising that Amazon (a retailer skilled at making things easy to find) controls Shelfari.
3) Rosewood is useful in the making of musical instruments, especially guitars. My favorite guitars, Fender Stratocasters, feature necks made of solid maple or maple with rosewood fretboards. Maple has a brighter, punchier tone. Rosewood produces a slightly warmer, more mellow tone. Emphasis is added because if you recorded two different guitars and listened back to them you might not be able to tell the difference. Rosewood fretboards feel better to me and perhaps the difference is as much psychological as it is sonic. On a side note, I have noticed that the overall quality of wood from guitars made today differs from those made even ten years ago. There is often a visible difference in the grain and darkness of materials such as rosewood. A quick ProQuest search led me to an interesting article on the topic of timber used for guitars and how manufacturers are trying to reduce their environmental impact. See: "The Future of Tonewood." Acoustic Guitar, February 1, 2008, 80-86.
Monday, November 3, 2008
Thing #10 Image Generators
This was supposed to be the year for the Cubs. For the most part it was, then it wasn’t. I was at Wrigley late in the season to witness an incredible game where they came from behind in the 9th to tie, then won in the 12th. The post season was another story entirely. Oh well, like the sign says, I’ll be back for more next spring.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Things 8 & 9 RSS feeds
The cartoon pretty much sums it up. After spending a little time with Bloglines it seemed too cumbersome and clunky. After hearing me complain outloud, coworker Sarah suggested Google Reader. It performs the same function as Bloglines and it’s already a part of my Gmail account. (I just hadn’t paid attention before.)
I set up a few RSS feeds on Google Reader. Currently I’m getting updates from the Chicago Cubs and two of my favorite radio programs, MarketPlace and the World Café. A story that popped up in the reader feed alerted me to a new CD out by Buddy Guy, so now I’ve got my request in.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
