WML Tech Updates

If you haven’t heard the news, is now being intergrated in a library’s catalog!

“We’re happy to announce that the Danbury Library in Danbury, Connecticut has become the first library in the world to put LibraryThing for Libraries on its live catalog. The Danbury Library—already breaking ground with an active blog and a MySpace page—continues to innovate and experiment. And we finally have something to show people!”

For more information on this amazing project (and for some nifty screen shots), view the whole article on Thingology, LibraryThing’s Ideas Blog.

I also want to encourage you to go straight to their catalog and play with it yourself! It’s very cool!

Congrats to Tim Spalding and his LibraryThing Team and to Kate Sheehan, Danbury’s Coordinator of Library Automation, for making this happen and being a role model for all the libraries who know their OPAC sucks and are positive that things can only improve.

Jenny Levine had a great post today on communicating with library users, whether in-person, on the phone, IM, texting, or just changing the status of your IM so people can easily tell whether or not you are available.

I talked with my colleague Cynthia just the other day about this, and how we both change our status in Trillian quite regularly. Unfortunately, only a couple other WML library staff use IM, and they use different clients like AIM, Yahoo, or MSN. Heck, even LITS set up an in-house client (Exodus) to test, but it’s never been announced or promoted to all the libraries for use, nor do they intend to advertise it. They say it’s up to the directors of the individual libraries to determine whether or not to implement it. So I guess if I am really adamant about using IM in WML, I need to make a convincing case to our director. We need to be on the same page internally before we even attempt to do IM reference interactions with library users. But wouldn’t it be cool if I could IM with any of my colleagues throughout the Heard Library system, many of whom I need to interact with regularly because of committees and project teams? And do you know anyone not in favor of reducing the amount of email we get?

I personally communicate with my colleagues in a number of ways. Some people only respond to email, but I have several colleagues throughout the Heard Library system that I communicate with via Facebook, IM via Exodus, IM via Trillian, and even SMS texting. And with some people, it’s just easier to call. But one thing Jenny said really hit me.

“…it’s important to do the cliche and “think outside of the box” of how we ourselves might view communication. Even when we do focus groups or informal surveys, it tends to be with library users, who might not be that different from us. Therefore, we might miss patterns like these that show a shift in how the outside world communicates.”

I think it is important that we keep in mind how other people communicate and want to be communicated with. I know some reference librarians that when they get an instant message, or even an email, they insist that the user come into the library because the librarian thinks it’s easier to explain how to find something or use a particular resource. But there are so many tools out there that can help the patron just as much as an in-person interaction. We could be doing screencasts, mini podcasts, creating interactive tutorials, adding the info to a wiki or a research guide. I am sure other people besides myself get tired of answering the same questions over and over again. But I think our users like having options on how they not only find information, but having options in how they interact with us as well.

The person who emailed a reference question to a librarian - she emailed because either it was inconvenient, she didn’t want to come into the library, or she didn’t want to talk to a person. Isn’t customer service about giving people the type of service they want, not what we want? Why do we present to our users so few options of interacting with us when the communications possibilities are almost endless and continually expanding?

I was catching up on reading my feeds tonight and I came across David Lee King’s notes from the opening session at Computers in Libraries (which is a cool conference that I would LOVE to go to - maybe next year). Anyway, the opening session was presented by Lee Rainie from the Pew Internet & American Life Project. I’ve heard him speak before about Pew surveys results, and the results are always so interesting. But this opening session had a library focus, which was nice. Apparently, Rainie talked about six hallmarks of the web 2.0 world that matter to libraries.

1. the internet has become the computer
2. content creation
3. even more internet users are accessing the content created by others
4. many are sharing what they know and feel online and that is building conversations
5. tens of thousands are contributing in online … ???
6. customizing their online experiences thanks to web 2.0 tools

See all the details and explanations on David’s blog, which always has insightful information.

What do the next few years hold for Network Computing Architecture? Matt Hall, Assistant Vice Chancellor, Information Technology Services and Associate Chief Information Architect, Infrastructure at Vanderbilt University, peers into his crystal ball for insight into that topic.

Click to view Hall’s presentation Network Computing Architecture 2007-2010 Vision. Allow approximately 30 minutes to watch the presentation.

In addition to discussing prognostication about network computing in the coming years, Hall outlines how Vanderbilt IT leaders will organize core and shared IT infrastructures to best leverage them.

Not sure you have seen this, but it’s been the talk of a lot of major blogs I read. I shared this with Paul and Flo, and I think it’s important enough to share with everyone in WML.

It’s an essay called Changing Roles of Academic and Research Libraries that derives from a discussion from the Roundtable on Technology and Change in Academic Libraries that took place last November. It discusses transformation, leadership, the risks of undertaking the tenets proposed in the essay, the role of library professionals, and more. I was really impressed with the depth and insight provided in the essay, but in particular, this section that tries to make sense of the “messy future” ahead:

There are three essential actions libraries must take to achieve the necessary transformation and remain vital forces on campus in the years ahead:

• First, libraries must evolve from institutions perceived primarily as the domain of the book to institutions that users clearly perceive as providing pathways to high-quality information in a variety of media and information sources.
• Second, the culture of libraries and their staff must proceed beyond a mindset primarily of ownership and control to one that seeks to provide service and guidance in more useful ways, helping users find and use information that may be available through a range of providers, including libraries themselves, in electronic format.
• Third, libraries must assert their evolving roles in more active ways, both in the context of their institutions and in the increasingly competitive markets for information dissemination and retrieval. Libraries must descend from what many have regarded as an increasingly isolated perch of presumed privilege and enter the contentious race to advance in the market for information services—what one participant in our roundtable termed “taking it to the streets.”

There are several other statements that really caught my eye within this essay. But I still encourage you to read it in its entirety. Here are some examples:

“The changes that are occurring—in technology, in research, teaching and learning—have created a very different context for the missions of academic and research libraries. This evolving context can afford a moment of opportunity if libraries and librarians can respond to change in proactive and visionary ways. There are diverse and unmet needs now arising within the academy—many of which closely align with the traditional self-definitions of academic and research libraries. “

“The transitions occurring in the production, dissemination, and retrieval of information provide important opportunities for academic libraries to lead their institutions in pursuing new modes of academic research and productivity, much as they did in helping their institutions adopt digital technology in its earlier stages. The evolutions that continue to occur—changing paradigms of knowledge production, expanding sources and modes of dissemination, faster and broader accessibility to a growing range of information – all have the ring of opportunity from the standpoint of an entrepreneur. Changes in technology and modes of academic work create new kinds of needs that libraries can help fulfill. In this sense the challenges libraries now face are the same ones that confront any contender in the expanding market for information: there is a continuing need to adapt to rapid change, to keep pace with new developments in technology and new competition in the industry. “

“The challenge for libraries, their leadership and staff, is to recast their identities in relation to the changing modes of knowledge creation and dissemination, and in relation to the academic communities they serve.”

And finally, “Today’s library staff must include people who see themselves as active contenders in a race for relevance, regard, and resources. Some of its members must have strong technical skills and an ability to identify specific areas in which technology can advance the institution in fulfilling its academic mission. Library staff must be capable of working effectively in partnership with faculty members to enhance the strength of teaching and research. To be certain, there are many staff members of this kind in academic libraries today.”