for if you have no blog

well into another semester, i’ve got another fledgling Library 2.0-related blog where i’ll occasionally check in, along with other librarians, to collectively share info, thoughts, and stories. we won’t have a lot of time right away, but it will all come together as we finish tying up loose ends like, say, finishing the MLIS program.

meanwhile, you’re welcome to come follow along and to join the collective as we find time to put it together.

our blog and Twitter links are:

http://golibrarians.wordpress.com/

http://twitter.com/theGoLibrarians

using Google presentations was good practice with a web-based application. although they aren’t the prettiest of visual tools, they are highly accessible to librarians and students and can be easily shared and co-edited by collaborators. (and it’s free.)

for my part of the project, i researched hyperlocality, being fairly ignorant of the term and inherent concepts. researching literature related to hyperlocal libraries, one quickly finds that there is not a great wealth of information available. most of the literature of hyperlocality has to this point been focused on hyperlocal business and media. yet we muddled on. i discovered what hyperlocality is and looked at how it is used and how it could be of further use to libraries inching toward a more Library 2.0 culture.

i chose to define hyperlocality and give a very basic overview of some different types of hyperlocal applications and how they are used in various sects of service and business, while letting Dan and Denise really dig into some of the most salient aspects of hyperlocal activities in libraries and media.

most of our correspondance and collaboration was without calamity, aside from a miswritten email address or two. we used Twitter direct messaging and email, and we left brief notes to each other directly on the presentation slides. 

another fine hands-on and interactive learning experience and a suitable way to help wrap up the semester.

not a stunning amount of literature has been produced to this point as to how cloud computing can benefit librarians and library students. by and large, cloud-related articles and blogging seems to have been produced to analyze the benefits and deficiencies of cloud applications where cost and privacy are concerned. articles and blogs also gauge the cloud’s usefulness to people in business or in the media.

however, the modern library naturally borrows certain precepts of business planning and marketing to help ensure its stability and growth. it likewise can relate to certain fundamental concepts of the media and how new technology is used to advance the procurement, processing, and disbursement of information. so, in sifting through the analytical literature on cloud computing of the last few years, one finds that there are some salient points and existing arguments that are readily applicable to the library’s presence in the cloud, as well as that of the LIS department.

not having relied to heavily on one or a few sources, i can list a pair that can give an idea about the type of cloud-related literature that is out there. one interesting piece is called ”Where is the cloud? Geography, economics, environment, and jurisdiction in cloud computing.” published by First Monday (2009), this article tries to answer questions about the cloud where copyright, law, and privacy are concerned. the author, Lin Jaeger, cites a long list of consulted sources. unfortunately, none of them are library-related. http://bit.ly/2uvUY

one of the first pieces if read was also from First Monday. Lorcan Dempsey’s article, “Always On: Libraries in a World of Permanent Connectivity” (2008) is a simple read for anyone interested in cloud computing and web technology in the library. http://bit.ly/JutvF

some other sources i’ve used to gauge different perspectives on what constitutes the cloud and cloud computing:

Jaeger, Lin. “Where is the cloud? Geography, economics, environment, and jurisdiction in cloud computing.” First Monday 14.5 (2009): n. pag. Web. 1 Dec 2009. <http://bit.ly/2uvUY>.

Richardson, Will, “Is My Head (and My Life) in the Clouds?” [Weblog entry.] weblogg-ed. August 2008. (http://bit.ly/2Htd1Q) 6 Dec 2009.

Dempsey, Lorcan. “Always On: Libraries in a world of permanent connectivity.” First Monday 14.1 (2008): n. pag. Web. 1 Dec 2009. <http://bit.ly/JutvF>.

“Cloud Computing in Plain English.” commoncraft.com. Web. 1 Dec 2009. <http://www.commoncraft.com/cloud-computing-video>.

Barnatt, Christopher. “Cloud Computing.” ExplainingComputers.com. Nov 2009. Web. 6 Dec 2009. <http://explainingcomputers.com/cloud.html>.

for several weeks i’ve been monitoring Twitter feeds from Madison, Washington D.C., and Skokie public libraries. i chose to watch three tweeting libraries, rather than one, in order to get a broader view of conversations regarding libraries in different parts of the country. Madison Public Library (@madisonlibrary) is using Twitter to advertise programs, events, and additions to the library’s services. it also gives notices of tech problems, such as wifi outages, and keeps users abreast of branch construction progress via links to the library flickr page. there are only occasional transactions between the librarians and other Twitter users who have reference questions, and the turnover is under 24 hours. i posted a reference question to see what kind of answer i would get. the response was as-expected and posted the same day.

this week, the DC Public Library (@dcpl) was listed as the 12th most popular library on Twitter. this is surprising as librarians there only tweet every 2-3 days. they are using Twitter for the same reasons as MPL. some users mention the library in tweets, making comments and suggestions (i.e., nici browsing @dcpl (new site looks good, btw!) for some new comics to read. wish there were more ex machina titles. but walking dead ftw.). another user wrote the following tweet: cransell I wish being a subscriber got you free access to the Washington Post’s archives, at least I have a @DCPL library card!

more impressive is the activity i found on the Skokie Public Library (@skokielibrary) page. while the other two libraries were themselves responsible for the vast majority of activity on their Twitter pages, SPL and its users are constantly engaged in conversation, be it reference questions, praise for library services, or library updates regarding services and events. in the last week, a number of followers posted links to a letter in the Skokie Pioneer written by a grateful Utahn who recently patronized the library. (see that letter at http://bit.ly/JpOpy.) followers of skokielibrary will occasionally tweet about recent experiences in the library, sharing comments about they particularly enjoy about the library (i.e., staff members, accommodations in the library space, collections, etc.).

it’s clear that these lines of communication can benefit the library and its community in many ways, not the least of which are the means of convenient reference and user access to scheduled events. librarians enjoy, among other perks, a quick, free medium to push events and services while easily monitoring what people are currently saying about the library and its services.

i recently read an article by Anthony Grafton titled “Apocalypse in the stacks? The research library in the age of Google.” (read the whole article here: http://tiny.cc/MlQro.) the article appeared in Daedalus in January 2009. at 12 pages, i thought, “awesome. another long doom and gloom essay warning of the end of the library as we know it.” not that i don’t believe that the library “as we know it” is certain to face change–it has always faced change and has had to adapt to serve its users. but there are just too many hacks writing poorly-conceived articles about the demise of the physical library as a social institution; too many media figures attempting to be thoughtful and hep to grass roots culture, tapping events and concepts better left to those people immediately involved in the institution and its mutations.

Grafton cites multiple “crises” faced by libraries as they move into the “age of Google,” common among current literature on the subject of physical libraries, among them changing reading/study/research habits of graduate students and financial restraints in the current economy. Grafton writes, “It’s not quite apocalypse in the stacks, but it’s certainly a time of shaking, if not of breaking, what had seemed permanent institutions of unquestioned value.” sounds like the same old doom and gloom, i know. and as i read this article i did find Grafton makes some salient points and valid judgements regarding the alleged dichotomy among libraries of yesterday, today, and tomorrow. for instance, there are great differences between LIS graduates of today and those of just five years ago. students in 2004 were just skimming the surface of today’s hot topics, such as  the public library’s place in the community v. that of Borders and the affects of the Internet on public and academic libraries. my wife graduated library school at that time. she wasn’t studying how Google can be useful to librarians or how it is a threat to librarianship. she wasn’t studying the future of cloud computing and its benefits to school librarians. she certainly wasn’t taught stewardship regarding social networking websites and their usage in the library. certainly, there is a divide between us and current librarians as a whole: they are more Library Science, as it has been traditionally viewed, while we are expected (if we want to get ahead of the pack) to be more Information Science, and beyond that. Grafton touches on this concept and gives welcome thought to other points of current consideration.

i recommend not getting too stressed out when reading about how physical libraries are losing their place to technology. these reports are largely unfounded. i also might recommend reading this article by Grafton, being sure to take the gloomy points lightly and taking the rest into real consideration.

the plan right now is to research and report on how cloud computing can be used (and is currently being used) to help librarians do their jobs. i’ve got an RSS feed set up from Twitter so to monitor what people are linking to and saying about #cloudcomputing. i’ve used delicious to search what site users have bookmarked regarding cloud computing in libraries and elsewhere. there is a bit of blogging going on by the Library 2.0 Gang and The Shifted Librarian, to name a pair, that offers some valuable library-specific insights into the usage of cloud sites. OCLC also has published a few relevant pieces that i will explore further as i find time. so too has School Library Journal put out a few interesting articles in the last year and Library Journal in just the last few weeks.

i’ve also done a bit of preliminary web searching, nosing around on blogs, and peeking at sites i’ve heard about around the campus vine (i.e., Zotero, LibraryThing, Knol, etc.). it all adds up to not-so-very-much right now, but i’ll be looking into some bound volumes that explore the cloud as it relates to librarians.

as a jumping-off point, i’ll probably grab a copy of Cloud Computing for Dummies (2009) by Judith Hurwitz, Robin Bloor, and Marcia Kaufman. honestly. i mean, why not? there is also Cloud Computing: Web-Based Applications That Change the Way You Work and Collaborate Online (2008) by Michael Miller.  i’m taking suggestions.

In his book Tribes, Seth Godin observes that the need to belong is an inherent part of human nature. However, many Americans spend their days in work environments where they have no sense of community and operate with the assumption that they have no power. They are willing participants in the static persistence of  what Godin calls “the factory.” The author’s purpose in writing Tribes is to to empower the reader by placing upon him the onus of change and responsibility for making change by embracing a leadership role. The author illustrates how geographical limits have been eliminated by the Internet, creating endless possibilities for people to become leaders and limitless potential for “tribes” (people with common interests or whom are brought together by a specific cause) to connect and make change. Godin asserts that all tribes require a leader. “You can’t have a tribe without a leader–and you can’t be a leader without a tribe.” Library students and staff are charged with applying these concepts to the changing landscape of information science. Where some may feel they have no control or that the library may be losing ground to electronic and web technologies, Godin emphatically challenges us to accept the changes happening around us, assume the role of leader, and begin to do things differently. He cites the ruin of the music industry as a case for breaking from the factory–that the industry had no leaders to foresee and make change or to bring consumers together as a tribe. The industry didn’t care about music; it didn’t care about tribes; and it paid the price for its ignorance.

Godin observes that “people will only follow and believe in and grow a company if it offers something new.” It is this theory that change encourages growth which permeates some LIS classrooms and proactive libraries. People want to follow, and they are most likely to follow a leader who challenges the factory, or the status quo. This Godin calls the “Cult of the Heretic”–the crowd of people in the real or web community who find and follow the person trying to make change. Whereas Godin insists that we are all leaders, I would contest that we are not leaders until we lead. The majority are content with following someone they trust. Librarians and communities will follow the person who is willing to junk the status quo: make changes in staff, space, service, and policy.

Godin also reaffirms what we often hear and read about Library 2.0, that tribes and communities are not so much about technologies as they are about people. Godin illustrates the power of social networks, specifically Twitter, to bring leaders and followers together to form and cultivate tribes, but that the technology is useless without the inherent need of human beings to perceive flaws, seek progress, and find belonging. In fact, there are many concepts packed into this little book–too many to address in this blog–that merit exploration and may be applicable to many areas of life. Some of the concepts are broad or difficult for the “sheepwalking” branch librarian to imagine. Many librarians work with tied hands and may be inspired but unable to make change from the inside–they may have to leave and work from the outside in. Still, I would recommend the book to anyone who senses stagnation in their environment.

http://www.c4lpt.co.uk/recommended/index.html

Below is a link to a blog post by Purdue eTech (Purdue Emerging Technologies), a group at Purdue University that “researches and investigates new technology trends for teaching and learning.” The post includes some key statistics from an interesting poll of students at a number of universities around the country regarding their use of technology both in and outside the classroom.

http://purdueetech.wordpress.com/2009/10/23/ecar-study-of-undergrads-and-it/

The ECAR study in its entirety can be found here: http://www.educause.edu/ers0906

As a person who is guilty of regularly texting during classtime, I was not so surprised as the author about the high number of students who use cell phones in class for “non-class activities” (read: “screwing around”). I do have to wonder whether phones could be used in the classroom for positive educational and instructional reasons. Certainly, there may be apps for smartphones that instructors could use to help share information and resources, but many students don’t have those types of phones and many still have no interest in smartphone technology. The author suggests a smartphone requirement. But I don’t know how many schools/programs/student councils would go for that. Some schools are giving students laptops and iPhones as part of their admission, but these are not always the average state-funded universities at the mercy of ever-tightening budgets.

Furthermore, I was not at all surprised by the preference of (older) students to keep cell phones and mobile devices from the classroom altogether. Some more fastidious and persnickety students are annoyed by students who are always twittering or facebooking or texting during lecture. And then there are the instructors themselves. As the study suggests, many instructors may not be altogether familiar with available technologies or may have no interest in learning. Some old dogs just don’t care to learn new tricks but will be happy to let the younger faculty employ technology as they find it useful. Are we missing an opportunity here? Some would clearly say no. Some others are surely investigating the possibilities.