Category: Uncategorized

Posted on
by

Birds don’t know shit:

In Roberts et al. (2009), pigeons failed an intuitive information-seeking task. They basically refused, despite multiple fostering experiments, to view a sample image before attempting to find its match. Roberts et al. concluded that pigeons’ lack of an information-seeking capacity reflected their broader lack of metacognition. We report a striking species contrast to pigeons. Eight rhesus macaques and seven capuchin monkeys passed the Roberts et al. test of information seeking–often in their first testing session. Members of both primate species appreciated immediately the lack of information signaled by an occluded sample, and the need for an information-seeking response to manage the situation. In subsequent testing, macaques demonstrated flexible/varied forms of information management. Capuchins did not. The research findings bear on the phylogenetic distribution of metacognition across the vertebrates, and on the underlying psychological requirements for metacognitive and information-seeking performances.

Beram M.J. & Smith, J.D. (2011). Information seeking by Rhesus monkeys (“Macaca mulatta”) and Capuchin monkeys (“Cebus apella”). Cognition, 120(1), 90-105.

Posted on
by

The popularity of embedded librarian programs in academic libraries is no doubt one result of the profession’s need to redefine its service model in a time of dramatic changes in information architecture, production, and access. As Alison Head and Michael Eisenberg’s 2009 report, “Lessons Learned: How College Students Seek Information in the Digital Age” [pdf], shows, students bypass librarians in order to access academic resources the vast majority of the time. We gave up our roles as information gatekeepers in the last century and, not soon after, began to see our roles as information guides slip away as well. Our response: redefine the role of the academic librarian in the research process.

The professional literature provides a number of successful examples of embedded librarianship: Tumbleson & Burke (2010) focused on the relationship between faculty and librarians in Blackboard for distance education students, going beyond simple course integration. Librarians at the Welch Medical Library at Johns Hopkins University and Purdue University Libraries embedded librarians outside the library to become partners in faculty research (Brandt, 2007; Kolowich, 2010). Kesselman & Watstein (2009) provide a number of other successful examples, including one program at Rutgers which brought together librarians, faculty, and students from the Food Science, Nutritional Sciences, the Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics, and the School of Communication, Information, and Library Studies to solve real-world problems in the food industry (the librarians also helped faculty co-write the grant for the program).

All of these projects are examples of meaningful integration. I’ve been ruminating on this phrase for a few weeks now, trying to think of ways in which our services can be meaningful to students and faculty. It isn’t enough to simply be useful, though that is certainly one aspect of it. I started writing down a list of characteristics that, to me, help define “meaningful integration”:

Library services must be transformative.

If we want to make a difference, we have to change the way students perceive information resources, research, and, in turn, our role in the process. We need to elicit change that shakes the foundation and produces visible (preferably measurable, but I’ll take visible) results. Notably, we have to inspire change in individuals and so:

Library services must be personal.

While we make broad sweeps to change what we do, we also need to focus on the relationships we have with individual faculty and students. If social media has taught us anything over the past decade, it’s that the individual has a tremendous impact on local communities and social groups. Dramatically changing one person’s perception of the library (or research, or information, etc.) has the potential to ripple outward to others. To make these personal connections happen, we need to be “close to the metal” of academic life, whether that be faculty research or student coursework, and so:

Library services must be where the action is.

Every connection starts with a shake of the hand, be it face-to-face or virtual, but we need to be there, standing next to our user, to make it happen.

Each of these characteristics work together to bolster the effects of the other. It seems to me (and I haven’t quite worked out the “how” yet) that the three are inseparable and indispensable if our aim is to become meaningfully integrated into the shifting information landscape. I would even go so far to say that they provide a recipe for success regardless of any and all future changes in libraries, the academy, and information architecture.

And there you have it: your strategic plan for the day. =)

Thoughts?

 

References

Brandt, D.S. (2007). Librarians as partners in e-research: Purdue University Libraries promote collaboration. C&RL News 68(6), 365-367, 396.

Kolowich, S. (2010, June 9). Embedded librarians. Inside Higher Ed. Available at http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/06/09/hopkins

Kesselman, M. A. & Watstein, S. B. (2009). Creating opportunities: Embedded librarians. Journal of Library Administration, 49(4), 383-400.

Tumbleson, B.E. &  Burke, J.J. (2010). When life hands you lemons: Overcoming obstacles to expand services in an embedded librarian program. Journal of Library Administration, 50(7-8), 978-988.

Posted on
by

Yesterday, Henry Jenkins posted a follow-up to his Comic-Con discussion of transmedia storytelling (video above), which he defines as: “a process where integral elements of a fiction get dispersed systematically across multiple delivery channels for the purpose of creating a unified and coordinated entertainment experience.” He differentiates this from other transmedia activities like transmedia branding or transmedia activism. “Ideally,” he says, “each medium makes it own unique contribution to the unfolding of the story.”

This immediately reminded me of something we do in libraries, museums and archives (LAM) all the time: the exhibit. The LAM exhibit can exist across multiple platforms (display case, print publication, website) and utilizes a variety of formats (books, artifacts, still and moving images, digital interactive maps). Back in 2003, the Brooklyn Public Library and the Brooklyn Historical Society created a project entitled “Worklore: Brooklyn Voices Speak,” an exploration of the working class in Brooklyn from the 18th to 20th century. The collaboration included a traveling exhibit, public program and lectures, curriculum guides for elementary students, an online exhibit that included narratives and oral histories, and an online game called “Can You Make Ends Meet in Brooklyn” in the Early 1990s?” that allowed players to choose a type of work and see how those consequences played out in terms of personal finances (unfortunately, the website does not appear to be active any longer).

Creating a LAM exhibit that exists across different media is a similar activity to transmedia storytelling, but it comes at the story from a different angle. Rather than creating or extending a story, LAM exhibits attempt to recreate a narrative of cultural experience told through the perspective of people and objects that made up that narrative. The content of these exhibits serve some of the same functions outlined by Jenkins by offering a backstory, mapping a world, providing other character’s perspectives on the action, and by deepening audience engagement.

For librarians and instructors, the discourse surrounding transmedia could not be more relevant to the work we do. We seek to engage students in thinking about the ways in which the nature of information is changed as it moves from one platform to the next, how the choice to present information in one medium to the exclusion of others affects how we interpret it, and how we can convey meaning through these actions.

It doesn’t appear that we’ve fully agreed upon a definition for transmedia, but that shouldn’t stop us from using the term and discussing it. I recommend following Jenkins’s writings if you are interested in such things. His posts never disappoint.

What are your thoughts on transmedia storytelling? How do we do it? Are we doing it right? I’m especially interested in hearing about ways you’ve integrated it into instruction… but it’s the comments so do what you will 😉

Posted on
by

Normally, this blog focuses on issues related to information literacy and instruction at academic libraries, but since this week is Library Day in the Life week, I’m digressing for a few posts to discuss what I do as a cataloger and library supervisor. Today was a fairly normal day: cataloging, meetings, lunch with colleagues. So instead of boring you with details of what I did, I thought I would show you the tools I use to get things done:

 Hardware:

  • Dell Optiplex 755 with Windows 7
  • dual monitors
  • barcode scanner
  • mouse and keyboard (nothing special)

Software:

  • Microsoft Outlook (for email and tasks)
  • Oracle Calendar (for scheduling)
  • SirsiDynix Symphony (for working on local records)
  • OCLC Connexion (for importing records)
  • Notepad++ (for notes, scribbles, quick document production)
  • Firefox
    • Meebo (for chat and virtual reference)
    • Hootsuite (for monitoring social network chatter)
    • USC Libraries OPAC (for cataloging)
    • some music or radio page (varies depending on my mood)

Email:

I don’t spend a lot of time organizing my email. What’s the point? Outlook’s search functionality is strong enough that I can always find what I’m looking for. I have four folders for all my email: Inbox, Sent, Processed, and Saved. Nothing stays in my Inbox for more that 24 hours. Everything is either dealt with and moved to the Saved folder, deleted, or put in the Processed folder if it has additional contingencies. I have a 1-touch policy when it comes to email: once I touch the file, I have to deal with it. Emails that come from listservs are automatically grouped into subfolders so I can quickly browse the threads and are auto-deleted after 1 month.

Tasks:

Most of my job requires responding to issues as they arise, but I do have some ongoing projects that need constant assessment and management. So I use Outlook for task management. All my tasks are grouped into two categories: Next Actions or Waiting. The idea is that I either do the task as soon as the context is right or I wait until a contingency is removed. I also have a list of Projects that I use to remind myself of all my areas of responsibility.

Scheduling:

I wish I could also use Outlook for my Calendar, but the university uses Oracle. And since everyone else uses it, it makes sense for me to use it so that I can coordinate schedules with other staff.

Cataloging:

Sirsi and OCLC are my two constant companions in this regard. I use Sirsi for local catalog work and OCLC for searching other catalogs, name authorities, and importing records. I also constantly refer to Cataloger’s Desktop and ClassWeb for reference.

Notepad++:

The god of all notepad programs. I use it for everything from taking quick notes to writing memos and drafting project reports. I only throw my text into Microsoft Word if I need special formatting.

Firefox:

All the programs above are docked in my left-side monitor. Firefox occupies its own monitor on the right. I keep it open to the USC Libraries OPAC so that I can do quality control on my cataloging work, but I also keep open tabs for Meebo and Hootsuite to keep track of what the internets are buzzing about. I also like to have some music playing (since I don’t work near other people) so I usually have KCRW, KUSC, Twit, 5by5, or some other streaming radio service open. This keeps me sane. =)

 

And there you have it. Those are the tools that help me maintain a constant level of productivity. I don’t know that having dual monitors and a handful of programs all open at the same time is right for everyone, but it works for me. =)

Posted on
by

One way I stay up-to-date with the general discourse  of academic librarianship (and, specifically, information literacy) is by regularly reviewing scholarly publications. While blogs, Twitter, and other online networks let me know what librarians are thinking at this very moment and offer a more organic approach to peer learning, refereed publications clue me in to issues that are significant enough that someone was willing to spend months, possibly years, or their professional life investigating them.

Unfortunately, my life is an out-of-control batting machine right now, I’m the poor schmuck locked in the cage. The four articles below have been sitting on my desk for few weeks now. Hopefully, I’ll have the chance to read them more closely, but in the meantime, I wanted to call your attention to them.

Carlson, J., Fosmire, M., Miller, C.C., & Nelson, M.S. (2011). Determining data information literacy needs: A study of students and research faculty. Portal: Librarias and the Academy, 11(2), 629-657.

From Abstract: “This paper articulates the need for a data information literacy program (DIL) to prepare students to engage in such an “e-research” environment. Assessments of faculty interviews and student performance in a geoinformatics course provide complementary sources of information, which are then filtered through the perspective of ACRL’s information literacy competency standards to produce a draft set of outcomes for a data information literacy program.”

Daugherty, A.L. & Russo, M.F. (2011). An assessment of the lasting effects of a stand-alone information literacy course: The students’ perspective. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 37(4), 319-326.

From Abstract: “The authors wished to measure the degree to which a library information literacy course establishes a foundation for life-long learning.”

Mestre, L.S., Baures L., Niedbala, M., Bishop, C., Cantrell, S., Perez, A., & Silfen, K. (2011). Learning objects as tools for teaching information literacy online: A survey of librarian usage. College & Research Libraries, 72(3), 236-252.

From Abstract: “Based on information gathered from two discussion sessions moderated by members of the Education and Behavioral Sciences Section’s Online Learning Research Committee a survey was conducted to identify how librarians use course/learning management systems and learning objects to deliver instruction. […] A description of a ‘Toolkit for Online Learning’ created by the Online Learning Research Committee is provided.”

Snavely, L. & Dewald, N. (2011). Developing and implementing peer review of academic librarians’ teaching: An overview and case report. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 37(4), 343-351.

From Introduction: “This article is intended to explore peer evaluation of teaching in higher education in general and of library instruction in particular, then propose a methodology for the development of a set of practices of peer review of course-related library instruction for an individual institution […].”

Enjoy!

Posted on
by

“We must look with cold and hard-headed rationality at our current practices and ask ourselves not what value they offer, but rather what value our patrons believe they offer. If what we offer our patrons is not perceived as valuable by them, then we have two choices: change their minds, or redirect our resources. The former is virtually impossible; the latter is enormously painful. But the latter is possible, and if we do not undertake such a redirection ourselves, it will almost certainly be undertaken for us.”

The above quotation comes from an editorial in the July 2011 issue of The Journal of Academic Librarianship. In it, Rick Anderson, Associate Director for Scholarly Resources and Collections at the University of Utah’s Marriott Library, discusses the current plight of academic research libraries: that patrons’ perceptions of libraries, particularly their value and use, have moved beyond our organizational design and there is little we can do about it.

If you enjoy reading “future of libraries” talk with overtones of the apocalypse (see also Taiga), then Anderson’s article offers tasty hors d’oeuvres. He answers the question “Can the research library go out of business?” with a definitive “Yes” and goes on to describe what that might look like.

I recommend reading the article in full, but I want to touch upon one aspect. We’ve suspected for some time that reference transactions were declining (over 60% per FTE since 1995 according to one study Anderson cites), partly because more information is easily found online but also because students’ perceptions of their information searching skills are strengthening. They may indeed still need librarians in certain situations, but they don’t think they do.

Anderson doesn’t believe we can change this perception. I tend to agree. Rather, I think we should be working even harder to integrate our resources seamlessly into our students’ daily lives in ways that encourage [self-initiated] discovery: embedding resources in course pages, using search discovery layers, making ourselves available at the students’ point of need in both physical and virtual spaces (but mostly virtual), and building programs and projects that encourage complex human-information interactions. We can be leaders, but the kind of leaders that stay out of the way.

It isn’t important that students know librarians are behind it. Most probably don’t care if it’s us or our IT department or Google. They only care that it works and that it helps them get things done. Thoughts?

 

Reference:

Anderson, R. (2011). The crisis in research librarianship. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 37(4), 289-290.

Posted on
by

David Brooks wrote an op-ed for today’s New York Times where he talks about how we as an American society have failed the generation of college students about to enter the work force. Read the article at your leisure, but I’m planning to digress a bit from the topic. Brooks makes one comment that struck me as applicable to academic library work:

No one would design a system of extreme supervision to prepare people for a decade of extreme openness. But this is exactly what has emerged in modern America. College students are raised in an environment that demands one set of navigational skills, and they are then cast out into a different environment requiring a different set of skills, which they have to figure out on their own.

Academic librarians talk a lot about developing skills, most notably in the context of information literacy. We spend many waking hours and significant resources teaching students how to effectively research information for their coursework, how to analyze it, use it, and (if we’re lucky) how to develop lifelong learning habits that they can use beyond the classroom. But in the opinion of Brooks, we (as part of the system that builds up young learners) are letting our students down.

Granted, Brooks is speaking in terms of the entire educational system, both institutional and cultural. He isn’t focusing his comments directly at universities but also at K-12 schools, parents, and communities. Yet, I think his conclusion is a helpful reminder of why librarians do what they do: one that provides a broader context.

Yes, we ought to teach students how to choose appropriate databases and developing effective search strings, but, all the while, keeping in mind that this is a skill that may only be applicable to the students’ time at university. What is important is the application of learned skill to other life experiences.

To that end, I would advocate for academic librarians to engage more with students by helping them develop better “ground level” skills: learning to manage personal information, to research job opportunities, to stay politically or socially involved with their communities, to build up communities… activities they will continue to struggle with far beyond graduation. We should talk to our students; find out what they think their needs are (or will be), then develop programming around those needs.

What are your thoughts? Should academic libraries be concerned with non-research-related (but information-related) skills development? Have you been a part of a similar program at your institution? How did it go? Let me know in the comments!

Posted on
by

And it’s at about 6 pages into this paper that I’m suddenly “not feeling it.” There is nothing worse than becoming utterly bored with a topic once you’ve passed the point of no return. I’m going to do my best to bring this to it’s so-predictable conclusion but am afraid the result will be absolute rubbish… sigh. Ok. Let’s do this.

Posted on
by

People conducting research in libraries are less mobile than they once were. Not only do they have their papers, library items, and a coffee carefully positioned, they also often have a laptop, a phone, and a music device on display as well.” Aaron Schmidt, Revaming Reference – The User Experience.

When I read that sentence, I was struck dumb. Holy mother of Xenu! You’re right! When I’m at the reference desk or when I look around the reading room, I see nothing but students on laptops. It’s so normal that I never give it a second thought. So why should I think that these students are going to get up from their seat to spend 5-10 minutes with a librarian while their precious hardware is sitting unattended? NYTimes recently warned of the perils of leaving your tech unattended in public spaces and academic libraries are not immune to theft (as the campus police reports constantly remind me).

Ok. So I’ve finally realized something that is completely obvious. Schmidt goes on to talk about the social awareness needed to understand when a patron can be approached in the spirit of “proactive reference,” how reference desks can be reshaped and roaming models rethought. At one point, he quotes Martha Flotten, a Multnomah County librarian who claims to have “mind-blowing reference transactions weekly.”

Again, I was struck. I want this.

So let’s work this out. Embedded reference. Blended reference. Roaming reference. We’ve all heard these terms before. But what are the strategies that make these concepts work? Here are a few ideas:

  1. The Latte Librarian approach. Do you know where the engineering graduate students go for coffee between labs? Why not set up office hours there? Get in touch with the graduate coordinator for the department and make sure they pass the word along. See also Some Librarian.
  2. The Tablet Librarian approach. Get a tablet and roam the reading rooms,  study halls, and collaborative work spaces where students get things done. If you have to, wear a shirt that says “Free Librarian” (or wear a bow tie). Use your social insight to find students who need a helping hand. Great waiters/waitresses know when you need their help and when to leave you alone. Channel your inner waitress.
  3. The Celebrity Librarian approach. Build a brand around 1 or 2 of your most charismatic reference librarians. Set them up with Foursquare and location-based social programs and get the word out about their movements. Let students follow them. Make it game (I have a Waldo costume on stand-by). Patrons may be more inclined to seek out a librarian if they know one is nearby.
  4. The Student Librarian approach. Work with indiviudal students to create [paid] library ambassadors that extend reference services into particular dorms, schools, buildings, or other campus locales. Build in them strong research skills and train them how to teach these skills to others. MPOW will begin a similar program in the fall.
  5. The Librarian-For-Hire approach. Reach out to student government groups, Greek societies, and professional societies within the university system and offer your services. Go to their meetings and talk with the leaders of those organizations. I’m sure that the local political societies would love to have a seminar on finding resources for their various campaigns. It may require teaching some classes outside the normal hours, but it’s a connection to students who are really passionate about a subject.

The central theme of all these approaches is location. Meet the students where they are and stop expecting them to come to you. You can do this by making small changes. Instead of having office hours in your office, have them in a public space. Instead of standing behind the reference desk, stand/lean/walk-around in front of it. Visibly express your availability and eagerness. Stop being afraid of intruding.

These are just a few ideas for revamping your reference service and getting you out from behind the desk. Maybe they will work for. Maybe not. Maybe they will just be excuses for you to procure special project funding and find an excuse to drink more coffee (or buy an iPad). But the need for human mediation in the information search/evaluation/use process will never disappear, no matter what the deathers claim. We just need to be more proactive in finding gentler ways of making that first contact.

How has your library tried to revamp reference and reach out to students where they are? What has worked for you? What hasn’t worked?