This article “aims to explore the range of free and inexpensive technologies that are available and have been simply implemented with practical and immediate benefits both for library staff and clients.” Kajewski has achieved this by identifying:
• The relevant key technologies (blogs, wikis, RSS, podcasts, vodcasts, web conferencing and instant messaging)
• How/why they can be applied in the library environment
• Examples of libraries (many of them Australian) actually implementing these technologies
It is important to note that Kajewski’s article is an in-depth look at the benefits of these emergent technologies that characterise Web2.0, rather than the technologies themselves. This would help explain the sometimes awkward definitions, for example, Kajewski’s initial description of a blog was “...a particular category of web site where the content is presented in a continuing sequence of dated entries”, her second attempt was better “Blogs are web sites that contain brief entries displayed in reverse chronological order”. Also the author’s discussion on wikis appears a little misleading, by stating that “Anyone with a web browser can insert new, include new content to existing pages, or delete existing information”, Kajewski is neglecting to inform the reader that this not true of all wikis, many wikis can only be edited by registered members. The section on vodcasts seems incomplete due to the absence of any mention of youtube – the largest player in this technology.
Interestingly there is no mention of the term Web 2.0 in her article and therefore no discussion as to ‘why’ these technologies are dominating the Internet.
Despite these shortcomings, Kajewski offers important insight as to how libraries can harness these technologies. Where other authors have simply advocated the use of blogs because they’re ubiquitous, Kajewski has actually identified that “There are four major ways blogs can be use in the library: as an information service, as a library service, as [a] feedback tool, and as a professional awareness service.” Information such as this can be of immense benefit to libraries when drafting management plans/policies prior to adopting emergent technologies.
Kajewski’s article has many examples of her ability to identify Web2.0 applications in libraries, as illustrated by some of the sub-headings used by the author:
• Wikis for librarians
• Wikis for library users
• RSS feeds for library users
• How can public libraries use podcasts
All of the technologies chosen by Kajewski still remain relevant today. It is interesting to note that at the time of writing, the use of instant messaging (IM) in reference work was considered to be controversial, today it is considered a practical and useful tool and is almost common place. It is not unusual to see tools such as Meebo on a library’s web site.
Kajewski’s section on “staff buy-in” identifies one of the keys to success that may be overlooked by libraries. Training will give staff the confidence to work with new technologies and promote them to users. Staff acceptance is essential to successful implementation and ongoing use.
In conclusion, Kajeski has delivered a very useful document for libraries. By identifying key technologies and associated library uses, libraries have here a document that will facilitate policy formulation, selection of appropriate tools and successful implementation.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Using blogs and wikis to communicate with library clients.
This straightforward title is highly indicative of the style of the article. Watson and Harper have successfully stepped up to the challenge of concisely and clearly discussing the relevance of blogs and wikis in the library context. The authors provide a brief, but highly informative, ‘how-to’ style article that is easily read and understood, making it ideal for librarians new to Web 2.0 technologies.
Watson and Harper’s article initially covers the definition of blogs, wikis and Web 2.0. Their observation on the basic difference between blogs and wikis is (that the former is an ‘online journal’ arranged chronologically and, the latter is ‘online collaboration’ not necessarily arranged by date), is a good example of the authors’ ability to convey meaning in a straightforward manner.
The authors go on to make the important point that many library patrons are already active participants in the online environment and that “The question is no longer if we meet our patrons online, but how.”
Another noteworthy point is that social technologies do not look after themselves; they need promotion and consistent attention to maintain currency and, to ensure relevance and appeal. This is something libraries will have to consider seriously when embarking upon the Web 2.0 path – do they have the capacity to effectively implement these technologies?
Blogs and wikis have firmly established their place in the Web 2.0 environment and are more popular now than they have ever been, so the technologies are highly relevant to libraries today ( a quick look at the website Aussie Library Blogs will show this). Since publication of this article, Twitter is perhaps the most significant new player in this category of Web 2.0 technologies. Twitter’s micro-blog style may diminish some use of blogs but could never make them obsolete given the 140 character limit of Twitter posts.
Watson and Harper also suggest the use of RSS feeds as a means of promotion, and this is the only shortcoming of this article. The suggestion itself is perfectly acceptable but the lack of definition of the technology is an oversight, given that the article is aimed at the novice some explanation and discussion of RSS feeds would have been useful.
Overall the article is refreshingly clear and succinct, and is more like a practical introduction than an academic discussion, which can be as equally important.
Watson and Harper’s article initially covers the definition of blogs, wikis and Web 2.0. Their observation on the basic difference between blogs and wikis is (that the former is an ‘online journal’ arranged chronologically and, the latter is ‘online collaboration’ not necessarily arranged by date), is a good example of the authors’ ability to convey meaning in a straightforward manner.
The authors go on to make the important point that many library patrons are already active participants in the online environment and that “The question is no longer if we meet our patrons online, but how.”
Another noteworthy point is that social technologies do not look after themselves; they need promotion and consistent attention to maintain currency and, to ensure relevance and appeal. This is something libraries will have to consider seriously when embarking upon the Web 2.0 path – do they have the capacity to effectively implement these technologies?
Blogs and wikis have firmly established their place in the Web 2.0 environment and are more popular now than they have ever been, so the technologies are highly relevant to libraries today ( a quick look at the website Aussie Library Blogs will show this). Since publication of this article, Twitter is perhaps the most significant new player in this category of Web 2.0 technologies. Twitter’s micro-blog style may diminish some use of blogs but could never make them obsolete given the 140 character limit of Twitter posts.
Watson and Harper also suggest the use of RSS feeds as a means of promotion, and this is the only shortcoming of this article. The suggestion itself is perfectly acceptable but the lack of definition of the technology is an oversight, given that the article is aimed at the novice some explanation and discussion of RSS feeds would have been useful.
Overall the article is refreshingly clear and succinct, and is more like a practical introduction than an academic discussion, which can be as equally important.
Monday, September 7, 2009
Service for the next-generation library.
In this article Casey and Savastinuk examine and advocate the expanded Web 2.0 concept of - Library 2.0. They suggest that the pressures faced by libraries from customer demands and funding bodies could be resolved by adopting a Library 2.0 approach in the delivery of their service. The authors put forward a compelling argument, which is supported by many real life examples of libraries implementing strategies that are “customer-driven”.
Casey and Savastinuk suggest that unlike Web 2.0, Library 2.0 is more than just technology based, although technology can play a significant role in creating a “customer-driven, 2.0 environment”, it is not the only possibility. They state that any service that “successfully reaches users, is frequently evaluated and makes the most out of customer input is a Library 2.0 service.”
Important issues covered by Casey and Savastinuk include:
• Identifying and targeting non-users
Traditional library services have satisfied traditional library users, however in our ubiquitous ICT environment users have different expectations of the delivery of their information and entertainment needs. The authors suggest that libraries can engage a diverse range of new users with the use of technologies such blogs, wikis and “user-crafted social networks” (eg MySpace, Facebook and Wikipedia) and services such as inter-library loans, home delivery of books and electronic texts.
• Customer collaboration
The authors have been able to succinctly capture the essence of the Library 2.0 model by stating that “...it seeks to harness our customers’ knowledge to supplement and improve library services...Ultimately this creates a more informative product for subsequent users.” Once again, technology would be an ideal solution to facilitate this but does not have to be the only one.
• Implementation
Casey and Savastinuk make the practical observation that libraries have varying degrees of capability in implementing a Library 2.0 model but there are viable options for all libraries, the key to success is the willingness of staff to appreciate the need and embrace the change.
• Continuity
Essential to the Library 2.0 model is evaluation and this is also “customer-driven” so that services can be reviewed and updated.
This article seems to be aimed at public libraries as many of the Library 2.0 examples given are from public libraries. These examples also indicate that the choice of technologies, implemented to achieve Library 2.0 goals, is driven by existing popular Web 2.0 technologies. Libraries are aware of what technologies their users prefer and are familiar with, and are harnessing them for their own purposes.
Although the authors stress that technology is not the only vehicle for success in the Library 2.0 model, from their discussion it is obvious it is a major factor and one without which, success is unlikely given the ICT-savvy nature of the modern public library user. Technologies mentioned in the article have mostly retained their popularity for example, blogs and wikis. Specific tools such as flickr, MySpace and Facebook have grown in popularity since publication of this article. Writely is probably better known today as Google docs and the Microsoft equivalent Microsoft Office Live are enjoying continued success.
Any elementary discussion of Library 2.0 should include some analysis of digital libraries and the author’s failure to do so here is perhaps their only serious shortcoming. Investigation of digital applications such as, digitising/uploading documents, reading lists, photographs, e-resources and historical records would have presented a more complete picture of the Library 2.0 model. E-resources (such as, e-books, e-journals) have brought libraries beyond their walls and opening hours – this is a significant milestone and justifies acknowledgement and discussion.
In summary, at its core, the Library 2.0 model is not as new as its name suggests. Library services industriously adopted a user-driven focus first, when economic pressures came to bear upon them in the 1980s and then even more so in the 1990s when the Internet became a readily available tool and the relevance of libraries was being questioned. What is new about Library 2.0 are the technologies used as the vehicles to success, and in this respect the authors have provided plenty of examples illustrating possibilities for libraries, tempered with sensible acknowledgment to the barriers to success.
Casey and Savastinuk suggest that unlike Web 2.0, Library 2.0 is more than just technology based, although technology can play a significant role in creating a “customer-driven, 2.0 environment”, it is not the only possibility. They state that any service that “successfully reaches users, is frequently evaluated and makes the most out of customer input is a Library 2.0 service.”
Important issues covered by Casey and Savastinuk include:
• Identifying and targeting non-users
Traditional library services have satisfied traditional library users, however in our ubiquitous ICT environment users have different expectations of the delivery of their information and entertainment needs. The authors suggest that libraries can engage a diverse range of new users with the use of technologies such blogs, wikis and “user-crafted social networks” (eg MySpace, Facebook and Wikipedia) and services such as inter-library loans, home delivery of books and electronic texts.
• Customer collaboration
The authors have been able to succinctly capture the essence of the Library 2.0 model by stating that “...it seeks to harness our customers’ knowledge to supplement and improve library services...Ultimately this creates a more informative product for subsequent users.” Once again, technology would be an ideal solution to facilitate this but does not have to be the only one.
• Implementation
Casey and Savastinuk make the practical observation that libraries have varying degrees of capability in implementing a Library 2.0 model but there are viable options for all libraries, the key to success is the willingness of staff to appreciate the need and embrace the change.
• Continuity
Essential to the Library 2.0 model is evaluation and this is also “customer-driven” so that services can be reviewed and updated.
This article seems to be aimed at public libraries as many of the Library 2.0 examples given are from public libraries. These examples also indicate that the choice of technologies, implemented to achieve Library 2.0 goals, is driven by existing popular Web 2.0 technologies. Libraries are aware of what technologies their users prefer and are familiar with, and are harnessing them for their own purposes.
Although the authors stress that technology is not the only vehicle for success in the Library 2.0 model, from their discussion it is obvious it is a major factor and one without which, success is unlikely given the ICT-savvy nature of the modern public library user. Technologies mentioned in the article have mostly retained their popularity for example, blogs and wikis. Specific tools such as flickr, MySpace and Facebook have grown in popularity since publication of this article. Writely is probably better known today as Google docs and the Microsoft equivalent Microsoft Office Live are enjoying continued success.
Any elementary discussion of Library 2.0 should include some analysis of digital libraries and the author’s failure to do so here is perhaps their only serious shortcoming. Investigation of digital applications such as, digitising/uploading documents, reading lists, photographs, e-resources and historical records would have presented a more complete picture of the Library 2.0 model. E-resources (such as, e-books, e-journals) have brought libraries beyond their walls and opening hours – this is a significant milestone and justifies acknowledgement and discussion.
In summary, at its core, the Library 2.0 model is not as new as its name suggests. Library services industriously adopted a user-driven focus first, when economic pressures came to bear upon them in the 1980s and then even more so in the 1990s when the Internet became a readily available tool and the relevance of libraries was being questioned. What is new about Library 2.0 are the technologies used as the vehicles to success, and in this respect the authors have provided plenty of examples illustrating possibilities for libraries, tempered with sensible acknowledgment to the barriers to success.
Saturday, September 5, 2009
User collaboration in websites – J. Pearce (2006)
Judith Pearce presented her User collaboration in websites paper at the Framing the Future, ARLIS/ANZ Conference, 21-23 September 2006. In this paper, Pearce discusses what is meant by “Web 2.0 and the Internet as platform”, she then goes on to discuss two current services of the National Library of Australia (NLA) – Picture Australia and Australia Dancing – and the proposed new service People Australia. The purpose of this paper is to provide a brief introduction to the concept of Web 2.0 technologies and how the NLA are using those technologies to promote these services.
Pearce presents a useful introduction to the Web 2.0 phenomenon, albeit with some shortcomings. The discussion on Web 2.0 itself is brief, but it is enhanced and further developed when discussed in context of examples of the NLA’s use of these technologies.
As the pinnacle library in Australia, the NLA (through its actions) steers the direction or focus for all libraries in Australia, especially State libraries and subsequently public libraries. At the time this paper was presented, the Web 2.0 concept was starting to amass a groundswell of support worldwide and its potential was becoming obvious. Given this background, the brevity of Pearce’s discussion of the Web 2.0 phenomenon may have left the audience with more questions than answers. Although this is not necessarily a bad outcome, as it may encourage further personal research, but given the innovative nature of the subject and the influence of the NLA, more in-depth discussion would have been beneficial, especially discussion on how libraries worldwide were harnessing the technologies.
Pearce’s mention of user participation is focused on the user interacting with existing services “thorough tagging, comments, ratings and reviews” and does not consider the vast amount of user generated content (UGC) published on the Internet independently, for example, personal blogs. Despite advances in technology, such as Ajax, sites such as flickr and Wikipedia would not exist without UGC. UGC is the true essence of Web 2.0 technologies.
Complex topics such as Ajax and Application Program Interface (API), are given concise and clear treatment by Pearce that is well suited to a Web 2.0 newcomer. Explanations are supported by excellent references for further information (web addresses to “Ajax (Programming)” on Wikipedia and “Put Google Maps on Your Own Web Site” at Google).
Pearce’s choice in examples demonstrating Web 2.0 technologies are excellent, flickr and Wikipedia embody all the elements that characterise the phenomenon. These choices also support her later discussion on Web 2.0 and the NLA.
The bulk of the paper is devoted to the NLA’s experience with Web 2.0 through its projects Picture Australia, Australia Dancing and the proposed People Australia project. Pearce’s discussion is frank and highlights the important issues such as “quality and consistency of metadata” when tagging and the collection of all forms of annotations (“tags, comments, notes, ratings and reviews”) to improve functions such as ranking and grouping to enhance search results.
The Wikipedia model is put to the test by the NLA in its Australia Dancing project. Pearce provides convincing arguments for steering away from a completely open model when a “scholarly biographical entry” is required. Pearce points out that a completely open model is subject to mythologising and political agendas, and by limiting authors to registered users and subjecting entries to peer review a “more balanced assessment of the subject’s life” can be achieved.
Given the benefit of hindsight, the subject matter of Pearce’s paper and the approach of the NLA demonstrate great insightfulness. Wikipedia has continued to grow and has now reached 5 million entries and has proven itself to be a useful reference tool for definitions and references to further research. Flickr is being used by many libraries now and is proving to be a popular tool for local studies collections and marketing. The problems discussed continue to be problematic and therefore relevant to libraries today.
In conclusion, although the general introductory comments on Web 2.0 were brief, the discussion on applications such as flickr and Wikipedia in the NLA context provide excellent insight into how emergent technologies can be harnessed by libraries and the real problems associated with them, which are still relevant today.
Pearce presents a useful introduction to the Web 2.0 phenomenon, albeit with some shortcomings. The discussion on Web 2.0 itself is brief, but it is enhanced and further developed when discussed in context of examples of the NLA’s use of these technologies.
As the pinnacle library in Australia, the NLA (through its actions) steers the direction or focus for all libraries in Australia, especially State libraries and subsequently public libraries. At the time this paper was presented, the Web 2.0 concept was starting to amass a groundswell of support worldwide and its potential was becoming obvious. Given this background, the brevity of Pearce’s discussion of the Web 2.0 phenomenon may have left the audience with more questions than answers. Although this is not necessarily a bad outcome, as it may encourage further personal research, but given the innovative nature of the subject and the influence of the NLA, more in-depth discussion would have been beneficial, especially discussion on how libraries worldwide were harnessing the technologies.
Pearce’s mention of user participation is focused on the user interacting with existing services “thorough tagging, comments, ratings and reviews” and does not consider the vast amount of user generated content (UGC) published on the Internet independently, for example, personal blogs. Despite advances in technology, such as Ajax, sites such as flickr and Wikipedia would not exist without UGC. UGC is the true essence of Web 2.0 technologies.
Complex topics such as Ajax and Application Program Interface (API), are given concise and clear treatment by Pearce that is well suited to a Web 2.0 newcomer. Explanations are supported by excellent references for further information (web addresses to “Ajax (Programming)” on Wikipedia and “Put Google Maps on Your Own Web Site” at Google).
Pearce’s choice in examples demonstrating Web 2.0 technologies are excellent, flickr and Wikipedia embody all the elements that characterise the phenomenon. These choices also support her later discussion on Web 2.0 and the NLA.
The bulk of the paper is devoted to the NLA’s experience with Web 2.0 through its projects Picture Australia, Australia Dancing and the proposed People Australia project. Pearce’s discussion is frank and highlights the important issues such as “quality and consistency of metadata” when tagging and the collection of all forms of annotations (“tags, comments, notes, ratings and reviews”) to improve functions such as ranking and grouping to enhance search results.
The Wikipedia model is put to the test by the NLA in its Australia Dancing project. Pearce provides convincing arguments for steering away from a completely open model when a “scholarly biographical entry” is required. Pearce points out that a completely open model is subject to mythologising and political agendas, and by limiting authors to registered users and subjecting entries to peer review a “more balanced assessment of the subject’s life” can be achieved.
Given the benefit of hindsight, the subject matter of Pearce’s paper and the approach of the NLA demonstrate great insightfulness. Wikipedia has continued to grow and has now reached 5 million entries and has proven itself to be a useful reference tool for definitions and references to further research. Flickr is being used by many libraries now and is proving to be a popular tool for local studies collections and marketing. The problems discussed continue to be problematic and therefore relevant to libraries today.
In conclusion, although the general introductory comments on Web 2.0 were brief, the discussion on applications such as flickr and Wikipedia in the NLA context provide excellent insight into how emergent technologies can be harnessed by libraries and the real problems associated with them, which are still relevant today.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)