The best thing about this training that I observed was the collegial aspect. More than one exercise was approached cooperatively at the library I worked at. Even those that didn't often prompted conversations.
Most of what we covered I had encountered before, so there were no complete blow-me-away discoveries. But I am enjoying using an RSS feed again. And I really will try to be good about my del.icio.us account. I'm going on the theory that if I actually use it, the tool will become useful to me.
The biggest personal benefit was to think about all of these tools in the context of library service over an extended period. I still think we tend to want to use things because they are new and cool, and I think we need to be thoughtful about why we are choosing to use some of these tools - ask whether it is the right tool for the job. That said, in many cases we won't know until we try.
My biggest fear is that we will now go back to shelving our thinking and go on with business as usual. In this fast-moving environment we need to be acting quickly if we want to be a player and not be left behind. (See my comments on downlaodable media and podcasting.)
At the very least we have experienced the "Solitaire training". Increasingly the technology tools we use at work and play and in helping people find information will look like these 2.0 tools and be built around the kinds of functionalities they have.
Hopefully it will be more than that as we come up with innovative ways to use these tools, and to incorporate the best aspects of them in some fo the work we do (new ILS web interface anyone?)
Saturday, August 16, 2008
Gaming and gamers
Yes, there are work-force implications. Providing goal-oriented work with rewards and incentives while fostering an environment where risk-taking and innovation is encouraged without undue punishment for failure.
Games are also being developed as training tools. I see the greatest potential here in using games to familiarize people with tools and interfaces. The perfect example of this is the old Solitaire game that was included with all computers. People needed to learn to move a mouse, and this game provided exactly the kind of orientation and practice needed, in a very fun way.
Training "with a spoonful of sugar" in this way would be relevant for both internal trainings and for providing user eduacation to patrons.
There is such an array of games available you really can choose from the easy to the complex, and the time investment. That's what I enjoyed about the quick games featured in this exercise - quick fun without having to devote undue time to the game.
Games are also being developed as training tools. I see the greatest potential here in using games to familiarize people with tools and interfaces. The perfect example of this is the old Solitaire game that was included with all computers. People needed to learn to move a mouse, and this game provided exactly the kind of orientation and practice needed, in a very fun way.
Training "with a spoonful of sugar" in this way would be relevant for both internal trainings and for providing user eduacation to patrons.
There is such an array of games available you really can choose from the easy to the complex, and the time investment. That's what I enjoyed about the quick games featured in this exercise - quick fun without having to devote undue time to the game.
Spot the library!
This was a fun one. Several of us here at the library were looking at it together - looking at the library from way above! Everyone was impressed at the image available. The ability to navigate around the area was also stunning.
It's fun to look up your house, and travel around a neighborhood you know well.
I have yet to use Google Earth for a reference question, and so I hope this exercise will help me think of this tool not just in terms of something that is pretty fun to play with, but also in the ways I can use it to help patrons with information needs.
It's fun to look up your house, and travel around a neighborhood you know well.
I have yet to use Google Earth for a reference question, and so I hope this exercise will help me think of this tool not just in terms of something that is pretty fun to play with, but also in the ways I can use it to help patrons with information needs.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Avatars and Mii
Avatars are a blast. I've created them for work (at left). Nobody is reading these, but there's a chance to match me to my rants.
Creating Miis on the Wii has also sucked more time out of my life than I'd like to admit. The Mii is the character you play with on many Wii games, and the fun is in creating many different characters with many different looks.
I do not live in Second Life. I don't think I would like to. I'd do it for work if that were a part of my duties - librarians should be places where people need help finding information, after all.
The trouble for me is sometimes I barely even feel like I have enough time for a First Life. I'm busy with work and family, and my leisure time is already filled up.
No More Office?
I recently discovered the usefulness of Google Docs because I have a computer at home with no Office suite on it. I honestly don't do alot of document creation, but I've started using this free service instead of purchasing Office.
Working great so far!
I think there is a lot of potential here for libraries, because the uses for someone who does public computing are fantastic. No need to carry around storage devices or worry about compatability with different software on different machines. Educating our users about these tools could be a real service to them.
One negative I have heard that makes some sense is that some people do not want to use these because they do not resemble the software they would be using in a job setting, and they want experience with that kind of software to put on a resume or talk about in an interview. But perhaps this too will change over time?
Working great so far!
I think there is a lot of potential here for libraries, because the uses for someone who does public computing are fantastic. No need to carry around storage devices or worry about compatability with different software on different machines. Educating our users about these tools could be a real service to them.
One negative I have heard that makes some sense is that some people do not want to use these because they do not resemble the software they would be using in a job setting, and they want experience with that kind of software to put on a resume or talk about in an interview. But perhaps this too will change over time?
Searching . . .
Waiting for the next big thing in search engines feels like waiting for the next great revolution in pop music. When something like Google comes along with its concept of using links to and from a site to help rank quality, it feels like everything has changed and the possibilities abound.
But then comes a fallow time. I feel like we have been waiting for the next leap in searching for a while now. Sure, the Big 3 improve a little all the time, but there has been nothing that constitutes a major change in a long time. And they mostly seem to be improving ways to generate ad revenue and be palatable to the Chinese government.
We're still waiting on the next Sex Pistols, the next Nirvana, the next Bob Marley of search engines.
Metasearching sounds good in theory, but in practice I have always found it clumsy. I think one of the challenges of searching the web is getting too much information back - the longer the list of possible sites, the more daunting the work of finding the right one, and the more non-relevant results there will be to sort through. Combining the results of a search from multiple search engines seems to add to the glut rather than refine it.
I also have some specific issues with the way metasearch sites do business. Dogpile, for example, features results from the advertisements on Yahoo and Google not in their advertising section at the top (which is longer than at the Big 3 sites) but in their results. If you read the fine print you can see that a site they are pointing to was taken from "Ads by Yahoo" rather than Yahoo search results.
But then comes a fallow time. I feel like we have been waiting for the next leap in searching for a while now. Sure, the Big 3 improve a little all the time, but there has been nothing that constitutes a major change in a long time. And they mostly seem to be improving ways to generate ad revenue and be palatable to the Chinese government.
We're still waiting on the next Sex Pistols, the next Nirvana, the next Bob Marley of search engines.
Metasearching sounds good in theory, but in practice I have always found it clumsy. I think one of the challenges of searching the web is getting too much information back - the longer the list of possible sites, the more daunting the work of finding the right one, and the more non-relevant results there will be to sort through. Combining the results of a search from multiple search engines seems to add to the glut rather than refine it.
I also have some specific issues with the way metasearch sites do business. Dogpile, for example, features results from the advertisements on Yahoo and Google not in their advertising section at the top (which is longer than at the Big 3 sites) but in their results. If you read the fine print you can see that a site they are pointing to was taken from "Ads by Yahoo" rather than Yahoo search results.
Podcasts
Another 2.0 tool I'm pleased to see libraries experimenting with. I didn't see anything in the libraries listed that knocked my socks off. There seem to be three variations:
These are all good thoughts, but in my opinion keep us inside self-imposed limitations. True, some people might be interested in listening to a really good RA librarian in order to find more good books to read, but we can be more creative than that.
If Sno-Isle gets into podcasting I hope we can be a more creative force. I think that having easily downloadable content, and a lot of it, on our website should be key goal for us, and podcasting is a great way to create this content. (Without having to wait for vendors to create it.) The content should do what our other services do - provide entertainment, information, education and culture.
There have got to be better ideas, but what isn't there a staff member who's a great gardener who could record a regular show with gardening tips, offering both personal experience and information cited from books the library owns? Or someone talking about great music they've discovered in the library collection, maybe even playing some tracks. They wouldn't need to promote specific library items, just, "hey - there's great music at the library!" Or two people debating the merits of selected movies.
And here's the dangerous idea - what about letting the patrons in? Couldn't a public library provide the equipment to create a podcast? The podcast could then be used by the patron who creates it, but would also be placed on the library web site. That might provide for some really exciting content creation.
- Recording of a traditional service or program (speaker, storytime, etc.)
- Book talks or "reviews"
- Someone talking about the library and library services
These are all good thoughts, but in my opinion keep us inside self-imposed limitations. True, some people might be interested in listening to a really good RA librarian in order to find more good books to read, but we can be more creative than that.
If Sno-Isle gets into podcasting I hope we can be a more creative force. I think that having easily downloadable content, and a lot of it, on our website should be key goal for us, and podcasting is a great way to create this content. (Without having to wait for vendors to create it.) The content should do what our other services do - provide entertainment, information, education and culture.
There have got to be better ideas, but what isn't there a staff member who's a great gardener who could record a regular show with gardening tips, offering both personal experience and information cited from books the library owns? Or someone talking about great music they've discovered in the library collection, maybe even playing some tracks. They wouldn't need to promote specific library items, just, "hey - there's great music at the library!" Or two people debating the merits of selected movies.
And here's the dangerous idea - what about letting the patrons in? Couldn't a public library provide the equipment to create a podcast? The podcast could then be used by the patron who creates it, but would also be placed on the library web site. That might provide for some really exciting content creation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)