Conclusion of the semester

Hopefully the pleasure I took in completing these competencies and exploring the technologies showed through the evaluation: 20 points out of 20 were awarded for the blog work I completed.

It was fun :-)

Competency 8: Exercising an Internet search for relevant web site

The study module for the week is Internet searching, and our competency task is to conduct an Internet search for a web site relevant to this blog's focus.

I was most intrigued with the module's information on social search engines, so I used the home page of Flickr to do a search on the topic of Library 2.0.

As the first graphic illustrates, the simple term "Library 2.0" returned almost 3,000 results for the search. These are personal photos, professional photostreams and visual items that have been tagged or labeled by human hand as being relevant to this topic. The top hit seen on this graphic (click on graphic to see larger image) is from Michael Casey, arguably Mr. Library 2.0 himself, and his Flickr resources offer innumerable views and events.

From these search returns, I found a very interesting photo which lead me to a very interesting website, the Yale University Science Libraries page and its innovative use of Library 2.0 technologies, seen here to the left. Check out the site, and see the intriguing implementation of Library 2.0 features at http://www.library.yale.edu/
science/socialnetworking.html

This site is an intriguing look at the various Web 2.0 ways that the Yale libraries are reaching out to engage involve their patrons in the information sphere.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Competency 7: Multimedia

For Competency 7 we share some form of multimedia (audio, video, graphics, etc) that reflects the twin topics of the blog.

I found a perfect fit, again*, for a multimedia file that focuses on Library 2.0 and the place it has in the academic library. Appropriately enough, this concept map was created by Michael Habib, a grad student in the SILS (School of Information and Library Science) program at UNC-Chapel Hill during the last semester of his graduate work.

I particularly like Michael's visual approach to understanding the various facets of influence in both the virtual and the physical spheres of academic libraries and the innovations of Library 2.0. The URL for his blog and the site of the original posting is given below.

http://mchabib.blogspot.com/2006/08/academic-library-20-concept-models.html

*... which begs the question if we librarian bloggers are merely proliferating our thoughts for our own benefit. Is anyone beyond the bibliosphere in on this discussion?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Competency 6: Successive Fractions search in LibLit

Of the various search models, the success fractions procedure is an interesting one. It starts with a broad concept, typically yielding way too many results, and then strategically narrows the search by applying additional limiting terms: Boolean operators, proximity operators, or non-subject attributes such as language or document type. These non-subject attributes extend the power I have to produce more relevant results.

As with other database competency searches, the query for this search: How do academic libraries implement Library 2.0 in their practices?

1) First search set is the broad (Library 2.0 OR user services) within the Library Literature database (LibLit), with the SmartSearch option, which returned 3,733 returns.

2) The next step to narrow or limit the returns appended a second attribute with the Boolean AND operator: (Library 2.0 OR user services) AND (academic OR university) in the SmartSearch mode. This returned a nicely fewer number of returns, 811, but it's still way too many.

3) My successive limiting descriptor was that of date. The other 3 competency searches had found documents that speak to the history of the Library 2.0 phenomenon; this time I imposed the "Within last 12 months" Date attribute, and this time the search returned only 48 documents. Finally, to tweak the results closer to what I wanted to read, I additionally added a fourth limiter: "Feature Article" in Article Type, and this brought me to a reasonable 28 returns.

The image displayed to the right (clicking on the image itself links to a larger, clearer display) shows these search terms and the final results. One interesting bit of information that I gleaned from the "Last 12 Months" delimiter is evidence that Library 2.0 is spreading to smaller countries around the world. Because my focus is on U.S. academic libraries, I found that Hits #9 and 10 would be most relevant to what I intended with my search.

This search model allows the user to deliberate and consider what s/he is requesting of the database as each successive term or limiter is applied. Indeed it made me aware of the bigger picture of Library 2.0 and academic libraries "out there." I would find this model particularly helpful in cases where I need to feel my way through the various perspectives for the core search concept.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Competency 6: Specific Facet First search model within the LexisNexis database

Continuing with the competency of information-seeking strategies within varying databases, this post discusses using the "Most Specific Facet First" strategy as it might be done within the LexisNexis database.

This search model is described in the text Information representation and retrieval in the digital age (Chu, 2007) as "efficient" because the searcher begins with "the term that should take the least amount of time to be processed" and because "there would be no point to continue the search if the number of results retrieved ... seems unacceptable" (i.e. too small a return). (p. 86)

For this post I continue with the previous search query which follows the theme of this blog: What are some of the things being done in academic libraries to implement Library 2.0?

As identified in the previous post, the concepts within this query could be expressed as:

Library 2.0

academic libraries

("Implementation" for this search purpose is more of a delimiter or a descriptor rather than a search concept.)

Often the searcher can identify the most specific or least prolific concept, the one that will return the fewest hits from a database. Since I'm using LexisNext for this experiment, I am going to assume that the concept "Library 2.0" is the most specific of the concepts. (LexisNexis is described as "a full-text resource for news, business, legal research, medical information and reference," according to the Texas Woman's University database description.)

Just to verify my assumption, I do quick searches within LexisNexis (Major U.S. and World Publications only) on the single concepts by themselves, and I find these numbers for results:

Library 2.0 - returns 595 possibly relevant information sources;
academic libraries - 999 returns (maximum number)
So indeed, the first concept would be my most specific facet.

(Click on the image to view the search and returns more clearly.)

Reflection: The ideal situation for a effective and efficient Specific Facet search would be to begin with a concept that would take little time to be processed and which would return an acceptable number of results. However a return of 595 hits, as in my case with the term "Library 2.0," is still too broad to be an effective search. Thus this particular search model indicates that I would need to continue my search using another model, one which would allow me to narrow my hits with a second or third concept. For the specific query with which I began, this has proven to be an ineffective search model.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Competency 6: Building Block search with WorldCat

When making an information search in an electronic database, one of the friendlier search models is the Building Block format. This involves identifying the core concepts within the search query and developing synonyms and phrasings that will precisely pull all related materials from that database.

For example, a search for relevant information on this blog's focus of Library 2.0 in the academic setting could begin with a search query such as this:
What are some things that academic libraries are doing to implement Library 2.0?
And the core concepts within that query could be:
Library 2.0 . . . academic libraries . . . . implementation

Seeking synonyms for those core concepts, and linking them together with Boolean connectors, could yield something like these 3 search sets:
s1 = library 2.0 OR library technology OR internet technology
s2 = academic librar* OR university librar* OR research librar*
s3 = implementation OR program implementation OR polic*

The * represents truncation or a way to expand the search by telling the database algorithm to look for all words that begin with "libr," as in "library," or "libraries," or "librarian," and so on. The asterisk (*) is what this particular database, WorldCat, uses to indicate truncation.

The graphic I've posted here shows these 3 search sets entered into the WorldCat database search fields and further connected with the Boolean AND connector. (Click on the image to see a larger, clearer view.)

I had not indicated any particular field within the database records, so this would return the largest possible number of results.

However, the search shown returned 1,864 "hits" or results. This is too many returns -- I'll go back and use some of the WorldCat limiters to narrow my search. The first hit is shown here, and it makes me wonder how it is connected to what I'm looking for.

(When I investigate the first return, I find that the keywords are found individually, NOT as phrases as I thought I was indicating [i.e. it finds the word "library" in the bibliographic description of the item, and "2.0" somewhere in the description, but NOT as "library 2.0" together]. As I narrow those results, I'll try to sharpen the focus as well.)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Competency 6: Citation Pearl search in Academic Search Complete

The next four posts will demonstrate competency in database searching using four different search models within four different databases. This first search demonstrates the citation pearl growing search strategy implemented in the Academic Search Complete subscription database.

The strategy begins with a known item and extends the search for like information using the associated index or subject terms that the article reveals. Specific to my blog topic of Library 2.0 in the academic setting is Michael Casey's September 2006 Library Journal article titled "Library 2.0." The terms associated with this article were:

• PUBLIC services (Libraries)
• LIBRARY planning
• LIBRARIES -- Automation
• INFORMATION technology, and
• LIBRARY users.

From these terms (and adding the focus of university libraries) I created the search displayed in this image.

The search yielded 17 hits, all of which were strategically relevant and discussed Library 2.0 concepts within the academic library. Several in particular were keepers; the citation for one such hit:

Checking Out Facebook.com: The Impact of a Digital Trend on Academic Libraries. By: Charnigo, Laurie; Barnett-Ellis, Paula. Information Technology & Libraries, Mar2007, Vol. 26 Issue 1, p23-34, 12p, 2 charts, 4 graphs; (AN 24655398)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Competency 5: Tagging

In our course work we are exploring the use of tagging as an informal means to create metadata for the Worldwide Web.

After searching LibraryThing for a resource that ties in with my blog topic of Library 2.0 and the Academic Library, I found Cathy De Rosa's OCLC report on College Students' Perceptions of Libraries And Information Resources from 2006. The work examines the information-seeking habits and preferences of international college students and serves as a companion piece to the December 2005 OCLC Perceptions of Libraries and Information Resources report.

It was exciting to see tagging in action: I located the resource on LibraryThing because other ordinary people as I am had informally tagged the resource with "library2.0," and I added the tag of "academic" for the level of libraries I'm interested in. Pretty cool.

The "cloud" of tags that have been
been assigned to De Rosa's report is represented by this cut-and-paste graphic to the right. Note that the greater the number of times a term has been assigned to the title, the larger, bolder the tag appears in the cloud. (You can see this cloud for yourself, and updated in real-time, at http://www.librarything.com/work/2722553.)

(I went to Amazon and found no one had tagged this report, so I started the page off with my own two, Library2.0 and academic. It's spreading.)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Competency 4: displaying a pertinent RSS Feed

Competency 4 for the purposes of my course involves selecting an RSS feed relevant to this blog's dual theme of Library 2.0 and the academic library and then displaying that feed on this blog.

One blog I referred to earlier on this site was that of Suzanne Chapman, the interface and user testing specialist for the University of Michigan Library’s Digital Library Production Service. She maintains a blog on a wide range of topics that involve technology, user services, librarianship at the academic level and being a person who loves the library world.

The web site is called Userslib.com, and I think you'll enjoy watching and delving into some of her posts. (Click on the link for the name of her blog to go see what's up.)

I particularly like the relevant information she gives on the U of Michigan's efforts to more fully engage the user population. She's trying some of the most-talked about practices in Library 2.0, and it's interesting to see what she reports in response to the various attempts.

Note: due to the unfortunate layout of this (I think) attractive blog template, the Newsfeed must remain towards the top of the blog, separated from this post about the competency. It's right up there for you to see, and that's good. But this post about the rationale and competency may be less obvious. Good luck.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Competency 3: linking to a podcast

One of the resources I'm examining in my study of Library 2.0 and the academic library setting is the format of podcasts. This format of information representation is one of the brighter lights in the sphere of Web 2.0 innovations that are impacting libraries today. (graphic from http://uk.gizmodo.com/ipod%20poster%20girl.jpg)

For those not familiar with the technology, it can be boiled down to this: audio files out there on the Internet (usually in MP3 format) that are available to download (meaning, "save to your computer or transfer to an MP3 player") or listen to in a streaming format (playing it instantaneously through your computer).

I was surprised by quantity and quality of podcast resources on this topic. I am coming late to this global discussion of Library 2.0, and there is a lot of information out there! For this post I used the Yahoo! Podcasts search engine (http://podcasts.yahoo.com/) with the terms "Library 2.0" and "academic." The combination yielded great links to pertinent material.

At least three pages of the American Library Association's web site (http://www.ala.org/) provide podcasts focusing on different interest areas. The ACRL division (Association of College and Research Libraries, the academic libraries organization) maintains a page of podcasts intended to "provide fresh dimensions on the issues and events in academic librarianship." The most recent offering there, from January 22, 2008, is entitled "Library 2.0 Initiatives in Academic Libraries," and that title mirrors their newly published ACRL book of the same name. Bingo! A perfect tie-in for my study.

In short, my rationale for including this podcast on my blog is its strategic relevance to my blog topic and the currency of its information.

In the podcast College & Research Libraries News Editor-In-Chief David Free discusses Library 2.0 with Dawn Lawson of New York University and Susan Sharpless Smith of Wake Forest University. In the interview, Lawson shares her experience using FaceBook (a social networking web site) to extend her library's outreach to its patrons, and Smith shares how she and her colleagues used L2 technology to make campus Information Literacy courses more relevant and interesting to the students.

The podcast is worth listening to (click on the hyperlinked podcast title above, or go to http://blogs.ala.org/acrlpodcast.php) as it shares the specific experiences of the two librarians as well as additional resources for those interested in L2 and the academic environment.

You may be interested to know that the ALA will maintain a wiki related to the Library 2.0 Initiatives book, http://www.acrl.ala.org/L2Initiatives/index.php?title=Main_Page, which will present updates on the case studies described in the book. A gift that keeps on giving!

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

What is Library 2.0? (continued)

For individuals new to the library and information field, the concept of Library 2.0 may not mean a thing. But if you know about Web 2.0, then you have a good start.

During the last years of the 20th century the WorldWide Web moved from being a one-way,
authority-based environment to a more collaborative and participatory platform. Something like the first release of a software package, version 1.0, and the new, improved version, 2.0.

Things like user-provided content (think Flickr) and collaboration (think Wikipedia) began to be the norm. Web users now frequently contribute to web content (read any reviews on Amazon lately?), and the technology of website design has grown to incorporate user-focused changes in more and more pages.

Image shared from http://www.personalizemedia.com/index.php/2006/08/27/virtual-worlds-web-30-and-portable-profiles/

Growing out of that shift in the WWW and its technology has come a view of library services which focuses on user (or potential user) needs and wants. Granted, part of the impetus for change has been the growing competition with Internet search engines and their often unverified results that has slowly eroded the dependence on the local library as a source for the public's information needs.

Inevitably the print document, the very backbone of libraries, is being impacted by those very same technological changes. I'd like to be reading Friedman's The world is flat on a Kindle but there is still that cost issue.

Many folks knowledgeable about libraries and information trends in this increasingly wired environment believe that libraries --and librarians-- must change with the culture (update to a newer version, if you will) to remain relevant.

In coming posts I'll share specifics and examples of these trends. And I'll consider how these trends and innovations can and do impact the academic library and its place in the Information Age.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Competency 2: sharing a relevant blog

Blogs relevant to considerations of Library 2.0 theory and practice are abundant! And the pleasing characteristic of many blogs is that they are kept up to date and share current thoughts and information.

Using GoogleBlog as a search engine, I found many of the predictable names in the Library 2.0 (L2) conversation: Michael Casey and Laura Savastinuk, Philip Bradley, Meredith Farkas, John Blyberg and Laura Cohen, as well as Kate Sheehan and K.G. Schneider. Paul Pival as "The Distant librarian" working in Canada and Jeff Scott, library manager in Arizon both have blogs with current posts on the topic of L2. One blog referred to another, and one site led me to more and more. So what started with GoogleBlog became a dynamic treasure hunt.

My most profitable find, though, was a blog with the combination of L2 and the academic library setting. Suzanne Chapman serves as "the interface and user testing specialist" for the University of Michigan Library's Digital Library Production Service. Her blog , UsersLib.com, site provides extensive reading in various related topics, and naturally the topic of L2 as it concerns her university library is part of her treasure.

In short, my rationale for choosing to add this blog to mine is that Suzanne is living out the dual focus of my blog: how do we implement Library 2.0 for our academic library users?

So I'm happy to direct my readers to http://userslib.com/category/library-20/ and especially to Suzanne's post from last month entitled "Data: Students + Facebook + Library Outreach." The article is "keepin' it real" by reminding us that technology alone does not an L2 make.

I posted recently about our library web survey but I thought it’d be interesting to talk a little about one particular question: If you could contact a librarian via Facebook or MySpace for help with your research, would you? If not, why?

The main impetus for this question comes from a current trend for libraries to create Facebook apps that allow OPAC searching and other library related functionality from within Facebook. There has also been a lot of discussion and experimentation with using Facebook for reference and outreach. ... Nearly half of the total respondents stated they would not be interested, but for various reasons - the biggest reason being that they feel the current methods (in-person, email, IM) are more than sufficient. 14% said no because they felt it was inappropriate or that Facebook/MySpace is a social tool, not a research tool. Though this latter category does not represent a majority, these responses were the most emphatic.

Suzanne's comments in response to the data make for interesting reading, particularly her comment on what many students have yet to understand about FaceBook and privacy. Check out her full post when you have a moment.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

What is Library 2.0?

"What makes a service Library 2.0? Any service, physical or virtual, that successfully reaches users, is evaluated frequently, and makes use of customer input is a Library 2.0 service."

from Casey, M. E., & Savastinuk, L. C. (2006, September). "Library 2.0." Library Journal,
131(14), 40-42

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -