dansblog

Ah, what a long, strange journey it’s been.

What am I saying?  I can hardly believe the class is over – it’s been GREAT (but yeah, a little strange at times).

I began the semester feeling more than a little curmudgeonly about all this ‘new-fangled’ Library 2.0 stuff, and certainly overwhelmed by the implications of it all.  I am happy to report that – while at times I still find it overwhelming – this class has truly helped me get on board with the possibilities for library service that the tools we’ve learned about open up.

Although I’m probably still more comfortable on the “lurker” side of things, being a part of the conversation has been immensely rewarding.  My comfort level with the technology has grown by leaps and bounds, although there is likely still some leaping and bounding to be done in my future.  But it terms of the philosophies underlying it all – the idea of a user-created experience, of making the HUMAN element a central aspect of library service – consider me firmly and enthusiastically on board.  While every tool may not be appropriate for every situation or every library, the ways in which we’ve discussed (and illustrated) using the various tools can translate to a broader understanding of our role as service-providers.   I suppose it harkens back to the opening readings of the semester, in which we were reminded that any change must be implemented with purpose.  That purpose is our patrons, and their experience with libraries, librarians, and the infosphere.

I have been so impressed with my classmates through all of this.  What a wonderful experience to explore, learn, share and grow with such talented, committed, and impressive people.  And of course, I don’t think anyone would argue with me that the atmosphere of learning created by Michael made it not only possible, but exciting and fun.  Would that all educators were as nurturing as he!

Some of the most important things I’ll take with me from the class:

• the idea of a Personal Learning Network
• a renewed sense of play, where technology is concerned
• a feeling of being part of an exciting network of dedicated library professionals
• the importance of customer-service that is actually focused on the customer
• everything from the group presentations – they were all MOST impressive
• and of course, my FaceBook friendship with Anita Pointer!

Thank you all for a great experience.  I know we’ll be seeing each other in the future, if not in person, then certainly on our Personal Learning Networks.   Congratulations to all the graduates (and I’ll be right behind you next semester!).

My teammates, Leslie Westerberg, Julia Bryan-Diehl, and Mike Hominick, and I all contributed to a “group post,” which I believe can be found in their individual blogs.  Rather than re-create the whole thing yet again, let me share my personal insights into using 2.0 technology for the group project:

“Using a Facebook group for our ‘central meeting place’ accomplished a couple of different things: firstly, it gave us each the flexibility to work and contribute at our convenience (and to check in with what fellow group members were up to). Secondly, it saved us time in our face-to-face meetings. Because we were all on the same page and up-to-speed on what had been done (and what yet needed to be done), our in-person time was used more effectively”

As for my contribution to the project itself, my portion was concerned with examining attitudes toward the concept of privacy on the internet.  We had initially decided to focus on the idea of teaching privacy to college freshmen, but as my research panned out, it was interesting to examine attitudes about privacy across the generations – from children to adults (but mostly focusing on teenagers, as that was closest to our agreed upon focus).  Although much of the information that is out there is anecdotal, it was fascintating to see how the younger generations have less of an expectation of privacy than their older counterparts.  But what was REALLY astonishing was how quickly users of ALL ages forget the realities of the internet.  (I also created the handout).

In thinking about the idea of teaching internet privacy, I would like to leave everyone with this idea (that I don’t think I effectively got out there in the presentation):  the point of mentioning the (very real) dangers of sharing personal information online isn’t to freak students out.  I liken it to driver training:  driving carries risks, but we don’t tell students not to drive, we tell them to wear a seat-belt.  And in the same way the driver’s education teachers show pictures of grizzly accidents to drive the point home (at least they did in my day), it’s (hopefully) effective to drive home the point about internet privacy by sharing some of those “horror stories.”

Finally, a BIG BIG thank you to Mike, Julia, and Leslie for being such outstanding partners.  This was BY FAR the best, most enjoyable, and fruitful group project I’ve had the pleasure to be a part of!

Some of you know that I’ve been having a bit of a rough time lately due to a family crisis (there, now you all know), but I’ve actually got a smile on my face today, because ANITA POINTER ACCEPTED MY FRIEND REQUEST!

Silly, I know, but we’ve got to grab onto whatever gets us through, right?

Ah, the power of 2.0!

First off, my apologies for the tardiness of this post….Life has thrown me curveball, and it took me a while to figure out what to do with it!  But onward I go…

For the Brand Monitoring Assignment, I had originally wanted to follow the conversation about the library I work at: Rolling Meadows Public Library.  But, at least as far as Twitter is concerned, there IS no conversation about my library.  In fact, except for a brief flurry of excitement around the time police were looking for the escaped fugitive-at-large, Rolling Meadows itself isn’t much of a topic of conversation on Twitter.

So, I turned to my hometown of Pasadena, CA to see what was/is being said about its library system.  What I knew about the library/city going in:

The library has a main branch, called the Central Library, and nine branches throughout the city.

My mother is a former Board Member who, after visiting me in Chicago, instituted the “One City One Book” program in Pasadena – which they still do.

Pasadenans have a great deal of civic pride, especially as it relates to the architecture of their civic buildings. The most striking example is the City Hall:

I had used the library growing up, of course, but with no point of comparison, it was simply “the library;”  I had no idea what others thought of it, or even IF others thought of it as anything other than “the library.”

So I began searching for conversations on Twitter.  Over the course of the 2-and-a-half weeks or so (November 2 – 18) that I was monitoring, there were in fact a few (not many) posts about the library.  One or two people mentioned that they were at/going to/leaving the library, without offering any commentary about the library.  There were several posts promoting events at the library (although none of those posts were from the library itself, but rather the sponsors of the events: a Family Trivia Night sponsored by the ??? Family Association [sorry - I can't read my own notes, but I think it was the Christian Family Association].  And a sixth-grader announced that she was having a piano recital at the library.)  Two posters mentioned that they love the library, but weren’t very specific about why.  And that was it for Twitter, at least for that time period.

Now, I was going to say that what was conspicuously absent on Twitter was any presence of the library itself.  But in trying to get caught up with the schoolwork that I missed due to that darn curve-ball, I went back and looked at Twitter over the last two days.  Suddenly, there’s a poster called pasadenapio posting fairly frequently about events happening at the library.  I thought “aha! this must be a library representative!”  Close.  She’s apparently a City Representative – the Public Information Officer- and she posts about events all over the city, not just at the library.  While it’s not directly from the library, it is at least some sort of official presence, which I think is a good thing.

Turning my attention to Yelp, I found quite a few reviews of the library, although of course, they weren’t limited to a specific time-period.  In fact, going back to 2006 (at least!) there are VERY positive reviews of the library.  But the reviews focused almost entirely on the physical structure of the library: the beautiful architecture, the dim lighting (I was actually a bit surprised that so many people like their lighting dim), the many rooms and passageways, the parking.  One person mentioned the friendliness of the staff.

In terms of negative comments, there was one constant: the horrific state of the restrooms.   And one or two posters had comments about fellow patrons: the amorous activities taking place in the stacks, people talking loudly on cell phones, and people downloading porn being the main offenses.

So, what I take away from the assignment is the necessity of those serving The People to listen to The People.  Well, no, I already knew that.  More to the point is listening to The People where The People are talking.  Pasadena Public Library does have on its webpage a link for submitting comments.  But I think PPL would be wise to do some Brand Monitoring of its own (in other words, taking an ACTIVE approach to getting feedback).  It really sounds like, in the mind of Pasadenans (and others – quite a few people mentioned travelling to Pasadena specifically to use the library), that their library would be just about perfect if they paid a little more attention to the cleanliness of their restroom facilities.  And that seems like an easy enough fix, but maybe the staff of PPL isn’t aware that so many people are disgusted by the bathrooms.   If they were paying attention to the conversations, they’d know.

Oh, since so many of the reviews mentioned the physical space, perhaps you’d like to see the library itself:

I’ve decided to look at the relationship between gaming and literacy/learning.   Whenever I’ve been in conversations about gaming in the library, one of the most common arguments FOR games is “Well, they bring people into the library.”  That’s certainly a good thing, but free cookies bring them in, too.  So, do games have a place in libraries that offers more than free cookies ever could?  The little bit I’ve read so far of James Gee’s What Video Games Have to Teach Us About Learning and Literacy leads me to believe that yes, they do.  But, of course, I can’t just take Gee’s word for it!

Here are some of the sources I have been/am/intend to/would like to look at (hope this wasn’t meant to be presented in a formal citation style!)

Alkan, Serkan and Kursat Cagiltay. “Studying Computer Game Learning Experience Through Eye Tracking.”  British Journal of Educational Technology. May 2007.

 Andersen, Neil. At the controls :  questioning video and computer games.

Andrews, Richard and Caroline A. Haythornthwaite. The Sage handbook of e-learning research.

 Annetta, Leonard A. “Video Games in Education: Why They Should Be Used and How They Are Being Used.”  Theory into Practice. Summer 2008.

 Bogost, Ian. Persuasive games :  the expressive power of videogames.

 “Broadening Gaming Services in Libraries.” Library Technology Reports. Apr 2008.

 “Broadening Our Definition of Gaming.” Library Technology Reports. Apr 2008.

 Buckingham, David and Rebekah Willet. Digital generations :  children, young  people, and new media.

 Coiro, Julie. Handbook of research on new literacies.

 Compton-Lilly, Catherine. “What Can Videogames Teach Us About Teaching Reading?”  Reading Teacher. May 2007.

 Crewdson, Ann. “The 7^th Early Literacy Skill.” School Library Journal.  Aug 2009.

 Danforth, Liz. “Games and Literacy.” Library Journal. 6/15/2009.

 Danforth, Liz. “Games and Writing.” Library Journal. 10/15/2009.

 Danforth, Liz. “Why Games?” Library Journal. 5/15/2009.

 Gee, James Paul. Good video games + good learning : collected essays on video games, learning, and literacy.

 Gee, James Paul. What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy.

 Martin, Justine and Robin Ewing. “Power Up! Using Digital Gaming Techniques to Enhance Library Instruction.” Internet Services Reference Quarterly. V. 13, 2008.

 Neiburger, Eli. “Games…in the Library?”   School Library Journal. July 2007.

 Norton-Meier, Lori. “Joining the Videogame Literacy Club: A Reluctant Mother Tries to Join the ‘Flow.’”  Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy. Feb 2005.

Olson, David R. and Nancy Torrance. The Cambridge handbook of literacy.

 Paul, James. “Videogames: A Useful Teaching Model.” Distance Education Report. 9/1/2004.

 Pierce, Jennifer Burek. “It’s Not All Fun and Games.”  American Libraries. Apr 2009.

 Schrader, P. and Michael McCreery. “The Acquisition of Skill and Expertise in Massively Multiplayer Online Games.”  Educational Technology Reasearch and Development. Oct 2008.

 Sefton-Green, Julian. “Changing the Rules? Computer Games, Theory, Learning and Play.”  Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education. Sep2005.

 Selfe, Cynthia L., Gail E. Hawisher and Derek Van Ittersum. Gaming lives in the twenty-first century : literate connections.

Strasburger, Victor C. and Barbara J. Wilson. Children, adolescents, & the media.

 Tucker, Patrick. “The Dawn of the Postliterate Age.” Futurist.  Nov/Dec 2009.

 Ward-Crixell, Kit. “Gaming Advocacy.” School Library Journal. Sep 2007.

Just another fun story to share, this time courtesy of Flickr.

One of my pasttimes (when I have the time) is genealogy.  I’ve had an ancestry.com profile for a while now, and I occaisionally get automated messages that a document match for one or another of my ancestors may have been found.  But in terms of connecting me to people, it hasn’t done much (it’s been really fascinating, though).

At any rate, a couple of years ago, I had the unpleasant task of emptying my parents’ house in preparation for sale.   That process uncovered a treasure trove of old photos that I don’t think anyone knew we had (they were in a sealed box from my grand-aunt — I suspect it went to my father after her death, but apparently no one ever opened the box – it contained an unopened letter of acceptance from UC Berkeley, addressed to my father!  Now there’s a mystery….).   I have a cousin who is also interested in the family tree, so I posted the photos of my ancestors on Flickr, so my cousin could access them.

Fast forward two years or so.  The other day I got an email from a person in New Zealand who just happened across my photos and recognized some of the names from her own family tree!  Turns out my great-great-grandfather and her great-great-grandfather were brothers (making her my 4th-cousin).  I had found evidence that one of the brothers had moved to New Zealand, but I never knew why.  Looks like I have my opportunity to find out!

Even better, maybe I have a relative in NZ to visit?

These are the kinds of connections I like!!

My Boy!

The book I read for my Context Book assignment is Daniel H. Pink’s A Whole New Mind: Moving from the Information Age to the Conceptual Age (New York: Riverhead Books, 2005)*.  It’s a fascinating look at the skills needed for flourshing in a world where much of our “information work” can be done by computers (or outsourced to Asia!).

My gut says “WRITE  a book report,” but my colleagues have encouraged me to let my animoto video stand-alone.   So here it is:

*in subsequent editions, the title was changed to A Whole New Mind: Why Right-Brainers Will Rule the Future.

OK, this is just silly, but since I’ve shared my concerns about “the dark side” of Social Networking, I thought I’d share a story that put a smile on my face.

One of my signature idosyncracies is an undying fandom for the Pointer Sisters. For those who may not know, the Pointer Sisters had a slew of hits in the late 70s-mid 80s like “Jump for My Love,” “I’m So Excited,” “Neutron Dance,” “Fire,” and several others, but they released their first album way back in 1973. For true afficionados it is their earlier stuff that really inspires the passion – they recorded an eclectic mix of jazz/scat/be-bop/R&B/blues/and even country (in fact, they won their first Grammy for a country song).

When I first set up my FaceBook account a couple of years ago, I was poking around, as we all do, looking for interesting groups to join, when I found “The Mutual Pointer Sisters Support Group”, which was a fairly new group at the time, with only half a dozen or so members. Still, I joined the group, found some great old photos and videos that others had posted, shared my Pointer memories….and kind of forgot about it.

This morning, I was doing some housecleaning on FaceBook, and discovered that the group is now up to 132 members, and Ms. Anita Pointer herself is a member!!! I sent her a “friend request” (along with a note thanking her for the joy her music has brought me over the years), but I rather expect it’ll be ignored. Still, ya never know. And I must admit, it would tickle me to no end to see her status updates on my homepage.

The whole experience made me think about people with common interests forming communities, and the concept of the Long Tail. I mean, really, how many Pointer Sisters fanatics could there be? (Answer: at least 132, and three of us live in Chicago!) I’ve long felt like something of an oddball for this particular passion of mine (not that being an oddball is a problem for me), so it’s kind of nice to know that there are in fact others who recognize the brilliance of the Pointer Sisters. Since the Pointer Sisters don’t often come up in conversation, it’s unlikely I would have found this group of fellow ‘Pointheads’ any other way!

Now, here’s a trivia question that seems to come up a lot. See if you can guess the answer: who were the first black women to perform at the Grand Ol’ Opry? (You do remember I mentioned the Pointer Sisters won their first Grammy for a country song, right?) Their country hit, by the way, was called “Fairytale.” It was written by my fellow group-member Anita Pointer (and her sister Bonnie), and was subsequently covered by none other than Elvis Presley. And here’s a vintage clip of the gals performing the tune (that’s Anita singing lead).

I have to admit that this class is proving to be incredibly challenging for me. Not because it’s academically difficult, not because the workload is too much, not even because I’m having difficulty understanding the material. My problem is that given how life-altering 2.0 technologies are, it’s hard for me to stay focused on the Library applications without considering the larger Sociological/Pyschological/Anthropological implications. So, I’ve decided to put my faith in the “Radical Trust” concept, and share some personal background with you all.

My oldest brother, who i shan’t name (but our last name isn’t that common, and I’m sure talented Library students could figure out who he is if they were so inclined) is, quite simply, brilliant. That is, he’s left-brain brilliant. He was a computer-geek before most people had even heard of computers. But he is utterly useless when it comes to right-brain functions (at the risk of oversimplifying, the left half of our brains handle analytical tasks, the right brain holding sway over the more intuitive, emotional aspects of life). For almost 20 years, my brother rarely left his bedroom. When he left his bedroom, he rarely left the house. And he only left the house to smoke (he lived with my parents, who don’t allow smoking in their house). Beyond that, he never strayed more than a block from the house. FOR 20 YEARS.

And yet he knows things about the world. When I went to Japan a few years ago, he was full of suggestions of things I should see, places I should visit, and so forth. But he’s never been to Japan. He was sharing with me information he’d gleaned off the Internet. He often refers to various “friends” of his. In some cases – the few people he did actually have face-to-face interaction with (on his smoking breaks) – I’ve had to field some difficult questions from his “friends”: why haven’t we heard from your brother? Doesn’t your brother want to stay in touch? I THOUGHT WE WERE FRIENDS!!!!!

To be fair, by brother doesn’t seem unhappy with his life. But I can’t help but noticing that his life doesn’t really take place in the physical world, it takes place online. Exclusively. He can tell you, with apparent authority, about various restaurants, bars, and venues in Tokyo, but if you want to hear about actual experiences in those venues, you’ll have to talk to me (or anyone else who’s actually been to Tokyo).

And therein is the heart of my worry. For all of the potential I see in Social Networking (and I do, I really do!), I’m concerned that online Social Networking has a comparable relationship to actual Socializing as Reality Television does to actual Reality. Similar, but not really the same. And ultimately, a poor substitute. Which, to me, means that the goal is not to replace face-to-face interaction with online interaction, but to recognize online interactivity as a tool to ENHANCE or AUGMENT face-to-face reality.

I don’t know how many of you watch “Glee” on Fox (but you all at least should – it’s tremendously entertaining), but there’s a line from the pilot that has stayed with me. The character who spoke the line is Rachel, a HS sophomore who is both pretty and talented, yet feels like an outsider, is a bit of prima-donna, and who tends to alienate people around her. In her voice-over introduction to the audience, this is what she said:

“You might think all the boys in school would totally want to tap this, but my MySpace schedule keeps me too busy to date.”

That’s cutting satire, people!!! The only context in which I’ve heard that line mentioned is in reference to the self-assuredeness with which the actress delivered the first part of the line, “you might think all the boys in school would totally want to tap this,” but to me the satire – and the bittersweet comment on teens today – comes in the second part: “but my MySpace schedule keeps me too busy to date.” Here’s a girl who is desperate to fit in, desperate to be popular, desperate to be recognized by her peers, and yet she turns to the (mostly) anonymous Internet, instead of, you know, actually dating.

Utlimately, I know that “Glee” is fiction. But my brother is real. And even though I know my brother is most likely an aberration, he remains real. And he can’t be the only one like him. And as easy as it is to say “well most people aren’t like that, and most people don’t withdraw from human interaction,” as librarians we don’t serve “most people,” we serve all people (er, as public librarians, I guess, but my brother – along with his “Born Digial” counterparts – are certainly able to matriculate, making them potential patrons of Academic libraries, too. And even my brother was once a child, so all of this shouldn’t be lost on School Librarians, either). I hear anecdotal evidence of the people (mostly teens) waxing rhapsodic about a world where they can conduct all their life-business online, but I’ve also witnessed a real-life example — and it ain’t pretty.

I guess all of this is on my mind due to my Context Book : “A Whole New Mind,” by Daniel Pink. The central argument is that we are on the brink of a New Age, wherein it is the synthesis of left-brain AND right-brain comptrencies that will be at the lead to success (at least economic success; Pink doesn’t spent a lot of time defining ’success’). What worries me is that, as in the case of my brother, some of our 2.0 technologies will foster an illusory sense of importance of the left-brain activities, at the expense of the (for now) distinctly right-brain functions, especially the all-important, if not cliched, “people skills.”

More on the left-brain/right-brain business later. But, in a nod to the overall theme of my Context Book, I’ve decided that an Animoto video makes a lot of sense. I will be writing an actual text-based report on the book as well, but I thought I’d toss out my preliminary attempts at an Animoto video for your perusal (N.B. this is not the final product!) — enjoy!

http://animoto.com/play/XIukImJnxRb7fqAFcXcCrw