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.
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
Sno-Isle Downloads
I have been pleased all along that we as an organization are blazing forward with providing downloadable and streaming content. I think this is going to be a major area of content and service provision for libraries in the future - the very near future.
While OverDrive is clunkier and clumsier than many other media experiences our patrons have online, it is an important start. Many things could be improved, starting with the iPod situation. I realize this is starting to change, but I still wonder about the quality of the titles that will be made available, and whether yet one more type of product doesn't just add to the confusion.
There are other things that don't make alot of sense to a user. Holds queues for downloadable content. The inability to return an item early. And the variety and popularity of music and video selections need to improve.
I realize most (all?) of the obstacles in this arena are on the vendor side, and are largely driven by paranoia over digital copyrights. We as libraries need to continue to advocate for products that work for our users and make sense for libraries to provide. We can also explore ways to provide online content that breaks the vendor-purchaser model.
We're headed in the right direction - but if we don't move fast with providing downloadable content we will be left behind as a player in this arena. I can think of few better ways to be where our users are when they need us providing a useful and important service.
While OverDrive is clunkier and clumsier than many other media experiences our patrons have online, it is an important start. Many things could be improved, starting with the iPod situation. I realize this is starting to change, but I still wonder about the quality of the titles that will be made available, and whether yet one more type of product doesn't just add to the confusion.
There are other things that don't make alot of sense to a user. Holds queues for downloadable content. The inability to return an item early. And the variety and popularity of music and video selections need to improve.
I realize most (all?) of the obstacles in this arena are on the vendor side, and are largely driven by paranoia over digital copyrights. We as libraries need to continue to advocate for products that work for our users and make sense for libraries to provide. We can also explore ways to provide online content that breaks the vendor-purchaser model.
We're headed in the right direction - but if we don't move fast with providing downloadable content we will be left behind as a player in this arena. I can think of few better ways to be where our users are when they need us providing a useful and important service.
Tag you're it
Searching del.icio.us: Perhaps I just don't have the patience. I've tried this site before with limited success, and didn't find it any more helpful through this excercise for finding the web site I need. Fun for browsing, especially if you know the people tagging (the social aspect.)
In theory there is great power to the idea of a folksonomy, but as a self-styled "expert searcher" I think I feel the way many librarians do - there is still some work to be done before this will work for pointed, driven research. I did start an account. I'll try to be good about adding to it. The idea of portable favorites is appealing.
Some of the power of a social bookmarking site like this could be harnessed by a group with a similar interest - so I see potential for something like a reference staff, if all were commited to the work, making use of something like this to have portable access to often used web sites.
While del.icio.us has not worked well for me, I am a proponent of folksonomies, or less formally, tagging. I think letting users define search terms has tremendous potential. I'd love to see the day we let library users tag items in our catalog. The potential for increasing access, as well as the added benefits of creating an interactive community of users, make this an option we as libraries have to explore.
My fear is that we will study the issue for so long it will be too late to jump on the boat. The LibraryThing concept, providing a seperate and already built folksonomy to plug into the catalog, is interesting but does not go far enough. We need to allow our users, those searching our catalog and using the items in our libraries, to begin providing terms for searches.
In theory there is great power to the idea of a folksonomy, but as a self-styled "expert searcher" I think I feel the way many librarians do - there is still some work to be done before this will work for pointed, driven research. I did start an account. I'll try to be good about adding to it. The idea of portable favorites is appealing.
Some of the power of a social bookmarking site like this could be harnessed by a group with a similar interest - so I see potential for something like a reference staff, if all were commited to the work, making use of something like this to have portable access to often used web sites.
While del.icio.us has not worked well for me, I am a proponent of folksonomies, or less formally, tagging. I think letting users define search terms has tremendous potential. I'd love to see the day we let library users tag items in our catalog. The potential for increasing access, as well as the added benefits of creating an interactive community of users, make this an option we as libraries have to explore.
My fear is that we will study the issue for so long it will be too late to jump on the boat. The LibraryThing concept, providing a seperate and already built folksonomy to plug into the catalog, is interesting but does not go far enough. We need to allow our users, those searching our catalog and using the items in our libraries, to begin providing terms for searches.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)