TED Talks about Libraries

Here are four TED Talks about the library and why libraries are still valuable and important in the wired world of the 21st Century.

Lisa Bu: How Books Can Open Your Mind

John Green: The Nerd's Guide to Learning Everything Online

Sir Ken Robinson: Bring on the Learning Revolution

Mac Barnett: Why a Good Book is a Secret Door

Is the Catalog just too hard to use?

Wired posted this article last year, about what Millennials want from their technology.

Dude, where's my Internet?

How Millennials Require Us to Design the Technologies of Tomorrow

I came across it when somebody shared a few articles complaining that the current generation are poorly educated and lazy. Debate that at your leisure, that's not what I'm talking about.

Millennials, Wired says, want technology, especially interactive technology

"to provide the most usable, self-guided, hiccup-free, efficient user experiences in history."

What does this mean for libraries?

"Millennials prefer to be in the driver’s seat, and will generally not seek assistance over live chat, email, or phone to get answers to their questions. They need self-service solutions; if they can’t quickly resolve their own problems, they will give up and go elsewhere, knowing that many alternatives are just a Google search away."

What this may mean is that when library web sites aren't as slick or self-service as they expect such services to be, they will decide not to use it. Their preference for the Now, the immediate, will trump the need for more thorough, more scholarly resources. The "everything is available online" meme will live on.


I have no problem using our library's catalog to find books, e-books, DVDs etc. But then, I've been professionally employed doing this for over a decade. How well does our library catalog compare to finding a book at Amazon.com, I wonder? Probably not so well. I can use either, and do, regularly, but I'm by practice more tolerant of having to 'work' a system to get what I want from it.

How well do library web sites translate to the small screen of mobile devices?  Millennials prefer the mobile interface, although many still use laptop/desktops. I think it is unlikely that libraries will be able to devote as many resources to web site presentation as an online retailer can, but surely work can be done to maintain or improve accessibility from mobile devices. Our systems librarian tells me that our catalog does not work well at all with smartphone-sized screens. A user will have to scroll side-to-side as well as up-and-down to see a record. The library's web site is optimized for small screens, but a big problem is that we link out to a lot of third-party sites.

A frustrating part of this for libraries is that we have no control and possibly no input into how library vendors construct or arrange their content platforms. A user may find our website mobile-friendly, but what will they find when they link out to Factiva or Lexis-Nexis? Again, my systems colleague tells me that many vendors do not have mobile-friendly designs on their sites.

Maybe we librarians could position ourselves as the help desk for wonky vendor platforms.

The Politics of Librarians

This just puts some statistics behind what I already knew - I am a stranger in a strange land. I'm a white male, religiously very conservative registered Republican. Most of my chosen profession is not any of those things. 

But there's no way we're biased or anything, right?

Nope, just strict fidelity to the pursuit of knowledge.

Graphic source:

http://verdantlabs.com/politics_of_professions/index.html

The Skeuomorphic Library

Barbara Fister, of Library Babel Fish at Inside Higher Ed, wrote a piece recently about, well, I'm not entirely sure what she's getting at. But it has a cool-looking obscure word in the title.

For those of you who don't know (like me) the word skeuomorphic refers to an object that has characteristics shared in common with and based upon some other object, usually made of a different material than the original. Ms. Fister uses it to describe aspects of library collections and organizational schema that belong to earlier periods. Why, for example, does our modern online book catalog, still use the big long MARC record format that was intended to streamline the production of physical catalog cards? For that matter, why do we still refer to the database of books & physical media as the "card catalog"?  Even sticking the word "online" or "digital" in front of it conveys no more meaning to current students who have, in all likelihood, never seen an actual card catalog.

Even I barely remember ever using one of these at the public library

Fister is not recommending (I think) that we abandon all of these reminiscent relics of earlier ages of librarianship. Good, I say. Keep the old until something can be shown to do it better. Things that last long enough to get old have something of value to offer, that's why they last.

The latter half of the essay talks about the importance of helping undergraduate students understand the significance of scholarly or academic journal articles, and the utility of citations as "chains of association" that help students conduct this new activity called "Research".

"learning how to read a citation and go from it to a source remains a huge challenge for undergraduates once they realize that fine print is actually good for something other than a kind of plagiarism liability insurance."

So it remains one of the librarian's principal responsibilities to open up the students' eyes to the larger world that they have entered. Help the students understand not just how to do research, but what the research is for. If they will be professionals in the sciences and other fields of intellectual life, they have to understand those fields, how they operate, and particularly, where they came from. The library connects current practice to historical understanding, without which students can't grasp the width and depth of their chosen field.

 

Library Journal reviewed my presentation!

Wow! Earlier this month I attended the Charleston Conference: Issues in Book and Serial Acquisition, which I've attended for years. This year was something new, as on Friday I got to do my first major conference presentation.

I spoke about a big project from last year, the receipt and ingestion of a very large donation of books from the estate of a former faculty, Dr. Homer Blass, who reposed in 2013. May he rest in peace.

The most "-phile" bibliophile I've ever known.

The presentation, which I called "Emptying the Dump Truck" was all about the planning and execution of receiving large donations to your library. I spoke about the critical necessity of planning, most of which can be done before a large donation appears, as often donors don't give much advance notice of a donation being given. 

These were just two of the many, many shelves of books he had.

Well, rather than talk about it all here, I'll share this instead. Library Journal's online edition published a review of my presentation!  You can read about it here.  I'm very grateful to LJ for taking notice of my work, calling it " perhaps the most actionable information of the conference".  Who knew?

What I'm Reading Now - Fundamentals for Liaisons

What I’m reading Right Now:

Fundamentals for the Academic Liaison, part of the ALA’s Fundamentals series. Written by Richard Moniz, Jo Henry, Joe Eshleman

Why I’m reading it:

A big part of my job is to serve as liaison between the library and several academic departments. This academic year liaison work is getting more attention and priority from the library administration.

What I think of it:

It is well written, and each chapter covers a distinct aspect of the liaison librarian’s job. The chapters I’ve read so far all have a lot of useful information and suggestions, and very little fluff.

Will I finish it?

Yes. This is information I can put to use right away. One of the advantages of working for the library is that I can always renew or extend my book borrowing. Which is good, as I get to read this about 1/3 of a chapter a week.

Would I recommend it?

Yes, I would, particularly for new librarians. I don’t recall my MLS program covering liaison work, and if yours hasn’t, this book really is a must.

Gimme a quote:

“As a library liaison, prepare to become a master of communication. Communication is the key to establishing faculty relationships and those relationships lead to success as a liaison.” Chapter 3, p. 35

Educational Technology - Toys or Tools?

Probably it's some of both.

Stephen Bell discusses EduTech in his latest From the Bell Tower post. I'll be here when you get back from reading it.

Engage rant mode. 

Our library has its share of whiz-bang new technology. Our main library classroom, for example, has a  set of large monitors spaced around the room. Students can sit around the table by the monitor, and wirelessly connect their device to the monitor. The point of this is that when working on a group project, they can all be working on the same copy of the video, the document or picture, instead of emailing copies around the group and losing track of who's got the 'official' or 'final' version of the project.

At the front of the classroom are the big projection screens, attached to the monitor at the instructors stand. That computer has the same software as the big monitors, so that any group can pass their screen up to the projected screen and let the whole class see it. Multiple documents can be displayed at one time. 

That's great, but after two years with this stuff, I have yet to hear of any of the librarians using this technology in an Info Literacy or Reference Instruction session. It's not that we haven't been shown how to use the software; what hasn't happened is the opportunities for us as librarians to incorporate it into what we're trying to teach. A lot of us have very limited opportunity for teaching between faculty who don't ask very often, and faculty who ask us to cover only specific things.

Forgive me for sounding like an old Luddite, but I'm going to, a little. Why do we need this group project software in the library?  That's not where most classes meet, and certainly not on a regular basis, so the classes that are doing group projects don't get to use this very clever technology. 

We had a fellow from our campus Information Technology department come in to give us a lecture/presentation about using ed tech. His biggest point, which I could easily appreciate is that whatever level or amount of technology your library has available, the technology is still just a tool for the people doing the educating. People teach, technology assists. Technology does not teach anyone. This, I understand from an article Bell links to, is known as the Law of Amplification.

His second point was that when using ed tech, we should teach the method or process instead of  'how to use this device or software'. When I speak to classes about library research, I talk about the concepts that all database search interfaces share, not how to find articles in EBSCOHost.

"it’s a move away from an “I need the latest bright, shiny ed tech” mentality."

 Exactly.  In perusing the online literature and discussions of higher ed, I see/read a lot of searching for magic bullets, and an unhealthy dose of wanting to sound socially progressive and 'relevant' which often means uncritically embracing every new edu-fad and shiny technology that comes along.

I have listened for years to various higher education types both in and out of the library talk about the 'inevitability' of e-books overtaking and replacing print books. I'm still not convinced it's going to happen, and that it's going to happen within a generation. Perhaps I can point towards a few articles that show the continued viability of print, like this 
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/olmstead/save-the-print-library/

and this
http://www.infodocket.com/2014/10/18/winthrop-university-the-book-vs-e-book-e-book-survey-report/
  Or you can just take my word for it. This is of course far from conclusive, but at least it is clear I'm not alone in thinking that the techno-utopians who sigh for the death of the print book are going to be disappointed for some time to come.

Luddite moment over, everyone can relax.

RIP, Cynthia Hurd

The murderous attack on Charleston, SC churchgoers on June 17th has shocked and saddened the nation, but now I've learned another reason to be dismayed. My faith has lost brothers and sisters, and my profession has lost a longstanding member. According to an article at Inside Higher Ed, Cynthia Hurd was a librarian at a regional public library, and a part-time librarian at The College of Charleston. The IHE article quotes an open letter to the campus from the CoC president.

"She was a protector and lover of books and a fountain of knowledge whose loss will be felt by our entire college community,” he wrote. “Known for her quick wit and sense of humor, Cynthia connected with every person with whom she came in contact. She could relate to anyone, no matter who they were or where they came from. In that sense, she represented the very best of our college and our beloved Charleston."

Rest in Peace, Cynthia. May Light Perpetual shine upon you, and may your Memory be Eternal.

It's the End of the Library as we know it . . . Again

Despite the click-bait title "Do We Need Libraries?", Stephen Denning of Forbes magazine is not predicting the impending obsolescence of libraries as has been done elsewhere. He's saying that libraries might become obsolete.

Doctor Who's "The Library" - why is it so quiet?

The Power of Quiet

"When I tell people I identify as an introvert, they say, “How are you able to give speeches in front of 600 people and still consider yourself an introvert?” Introverts, I say, know how to “bring it,” or at least can learn when we have to. But it has a cost. Learning how to embrace your “inner extrovert” when you need to is necessary."

 Michael Stephens at Library Journal writes about the challenges and opportunities for introverts in the library world (hint: there are lots of us) in The Power of Quiet, on his blog Office Hours.

I am often times grateful for my office, which is tucked away in a staff area, far from the Maddening Crowds of students. An older office that I occupied for several years was directly off of a student casual seating area of the library, so I would often look out my door (it felt too stuffy to keep the door closed) and see a student watching me with curious interest. It was disconcerting to say the least. Among my memorable interactions with students in that office was:

• The student who walked into my office, and then asked if she could use my microwave to reheat her coffee. I was discussing an issue with my supervisor, who was sitting right next to me, at the time. I let the student use the microwave. 
• The student who got all the way into my office before realizing that this was not an available study room. My name plate on the wall and all my stuff posted on the door did not seem to register to him that the room was occupado. 
• The string of students who wandered back and forth outside my door while talking loudly on their cell phones. 

By comparison, my new office is much less subject to interruptions. I do get phone calls from student workers, asking me to tackle a reference question that they're unsure about, and that's fine. Sometimes I cringe when the phone rings, if I feel like I can't handle talking to anyone; but I've got my "inner extrovert", or my professional face to get me through a tiring encounter. 



I don't claim to never need interaction; I really enjoy talking with our student workers, and learning about where they've come from and where they want to go. Maybe that's why they call me with the hard questions. However, I'm usually the one who initiates and ends the conversation, and I prefer to talk with students one on one. At staff meetings, whether student workers are involved or not, I tend to sit quietly and let people come and join me if they choose. If they do, thanks for enduring the meeting with me. If not, I'll be all right just the same.



What's your preference, in the thick of it, or towards the edge?



photo credit: <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/60141638@N06/8512104420">Hello My Name Is Introvert</a> via <a href="http://photopin.com">photopin</a> <a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/2.0/">(license)</a>

Far From the Maddening Crowds

"We live in an age of chattering masses,"  writes librarian Mark Herring of Dacus Library, Winthrop University, in the library journal Against the Grain (Feb 2014 v26,1).  "Everybody talks to everybody else," but nobody is listening, he says. Well, I listened. I also asked his permission to extensively quote his article, and then give my hopefully well reasoned response to it. Here it is. For the remainder of this column, anything in italics are his words.

                In our hyper-connected age, everybody talks to everybody else, with all sorts of entertaining news . . . we 'blow up' the Twitterverse with our claptrap that masquerades as real conversations and human connections. Essentially we are talking to ourselves because no one is really listening.

                Why is no  one listening?  Is it because we're too enamored of our own opinions?  On the 'nets we are free to spout our opinion, often behind a protective layer of anonymity. This gives the added bonus of not having anyone get in our faces about what we've said. There's no consequences to commenting or re-tweeting. It might be, however, that we are instead too insecure in our opinions so that we must shout them louder than everyone else, lest we hear a contrary view that might upset our world. 

                We talk about nothing because to talk about something requires that we stop and think, read, study and consider. If we do that, we might miss something else as it goes zooming by. Our culture, particularly online culture thrives on the new and on things happening fast. This is not in itself new; St Luke notes in the Acts of the Apostles (17:21) that the Athenians spent all their time telling or hearing some new thing. The difference is that today the new thing arrives much more quickly. If we stop to think about any of it, several other things will have passed us by.

                We enjoy Twitter nitwits like Anthony Weiner . . . In many ways people like this deserve what they get, courtesy of the lightning rod we call the Internet.

              Nitwits like Weiner are ubiquitous - it is just that they now have a wider forum in which to display nitwittery. Lack of discretion and foolishness is also a part of the fallen human condition, which is to say it's not new either. The 'nets just make them visible to more people, for a brief period.

             The chattering masses may just want to be heard, to be recognized, to have someone validate their existence. I regretfully note that I check my page counts more than once a week. I am not immune to the lure of Internet fame. It is sad to think that counting 'likes'  or re-tweets may be the new Man's Search for Meaning. Why should we accept this "claptrap that masquerades as real conversations and human connections"? We need conversations and connections, but we simply will not find them on Twitter.  Twitter, by the way, is not the Internet. One can find a form of community online, if one looks for smaller venues that the Twitterverse - forums and blogs and discussion boards that have a common theme, whether hobbies or beliefs or what have you. I have had many informative and sometimes challenging conversations with others online who share my interests. This is still not the same thing as my friends with whom I play games or worship or do my work, but it is not nothing. It cannot however substitute for the real thing.

                It is an unfortunate truth that we often end up with the results that we fear because of something we did – especially when we are afraid or insecure – which is very common for the post-modern chattering masses.  We want to be heard, but don't listen. Listening is the first step to being heard: if you want others to listen to you, start by listening to them. By shouting (or TYPING IN ALL CAPS) we try to force others to listen to us, but it doesn't work. It may even encourage louder shouting on their part, to get you to listen to them.

                Twits, like Weiner and others, try to get our attention by being outrageous, but how long will it be before his stupidity is so commonplace as to no longer be shocking?  Then we will experience a new depth of outrageous stupidity, and another, and another. We deaden our sensibilities by continuing to absorb the barrage of outrageousness and ridiculousness, and eventually nothing is shocking. We can lose our ability to be shocked, and in the process, our ability to feel anything. 

          “This isn’t so much a reading problem – though it certainly is that - as it is a cultural shift to react, not think, to post, never reflect, to chatter and not shut up for even a second . . . for this we are giving up newspapers, personal communications, books, libraries and Lord only knows what else!?”  I don't Tweet, but I do read and write blogs. The ones I read most often are focused on specific activities - like librarianship, or writing, or my other job, sci-fi role-playing. Of the blogs that I read, I can say that I rarely come across a post that, whether short or long, isn't thought out and expressed with clarity. Often I find myself thinking, "now why didn't I write that?" or "I could write something about that myself". 

                I find these things that Mr. Herring says sad, rather than maddening. The Internet is a very large pond indeed, and we are very small fish. This in itself is difficult for most people (even me) to accept. Shout as we might, it's not going to make a lasting impression. With so many people making ripples on the pond, whatever ripples I may make will be swamped and broken up almost immediately.

                Europeans have long thought of Americans as shallow, frivolous and a bit too silly. But are we a bit too superficial for our own good?  Yes, of course we are. The Europeans look at us and think “Been there, done that” as if their jaded decadence is somehow better than the mess we've got. And of course, it is not like the Internet only exists in America. There are plenty of Euro-nitwits out there cluttering the Twitterverse, I'm sure.

                Andy Warhol supposedly promised everyone would be famous for 15 minutes. What are we supposed to do when the fifteen minutes are up and we get washed back into obscurity? Unplug. Get off the 'nets and go have a conversation with someone face to face. Accept our (relative) obscurity. We are not obscure to God. He made us to be in relationship with Him and with each other – in person, not as text on a screen. The 'nets are nice for information, weather reports and funny cat videos. But it is not where we were meant to live. 

                The irony is not lost on me that I have suggested that people unplug and spend less time online – on a social media site. Nor is it lost on me that almost no-one will read this. I must not be shouting loud enough.