Week 13 Muddiest Point
15 years ago
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Friday, September 26, 2008
Week 6- Reading Response
The Wikipedia articles on Computer and Local Area Networks were clear, concise, and very informative. As usual.
The article arguing for RFID was of particular interest to me, though, because I only knew a little about it, but kind of saw it as the dream-tool of weeding. The article was written in a very objective tone, explained the issues and technology very competently and pretty simply, but managed to make a convincing argument. A couple of things that caught my eye:
- "Libraries use new technologies becuase the conditions in the general environment that led to the development of the technology are also the conditions in which the library operates." Great point, great phrasing. I couldn't agree more.
-"A fully automated library could potentially know exactly where an item is, down to the very book truck or bin." Sorry, but I already do know almost where all of the books and movies are in my library at any given moment, whether they are checked out, and if not, where exactly they are right then. And the few I don't know, someone else does, because they checked it in, or shelved it, or just happened to notice it. Very, very rarely is there something that we can't locate. And we don't need computers to do it. Humans are just as capable as machines sometimes, if not more so.
-"Some libraries intend to become 100% self-check-out...The act of running patron cards and library items through a check-out station for hours at a time is mind-numbingly dull, and probably not the best use of staff time." Pardon me, but as a person who has been doing precisely that for 10 years and counting, let me tell you that dull is not one of the words I would use to describe it, and there are very few librarians that I have met in my time at the Free Library of Philadelphia who are able to handle or ever would take a shift on the front desk.*
To begin with, when you are circulating 12-1400 books in 7 hours, there's not a lot of time for boredom. Which brings me to the next point: have you ever been behind an absolute idiot at the self-check-out in the grocery store? How about if he had 15 books, 5 dvds, and 5 cds? And had to find his library card? In the time it takes the average intelligent person to move through the self-check-out machine, (say with 2 books and 3 movies), I have checked out 4 patrons with the same amount of material (assuming they needed no other services from me).
We do one-hour shifts on the desk (we've found that any longer and the nerves start to frazzle and tempers start to flare, not to mention you get very tired. There are some branches in our system that do two-hours, though). In the average one-hour shift, you will have to help people log on to the computers, find websites, send email, open email, locate government forms,find the travel section, print their jobs, use the copier, and even unlock the bathroom door, all while checking in the returned items, keeping the counter clear by promptly moving them to their shelving carts, and checking out all of the patrons that are leaving. And remember, the patrons leaving will want everything from seeing what they still have out, to renewing everything they still have, to placing 1, 5, 10 books on hold, to can they pay their fine, to "I did not borrow that book and I am not paying that fine! I am borrowing this book right now!" It is the very, very, extremely rare patron who just wants to check out his things, has his card ready, and has no problems with or questions about his account.
If that sounds dull to you, then I am awfully glad I don't have your job. For me, the biggest challenge of front desk work is patience: I am social worker, confidante, counselor, best-friend, government representative, and, most of all, captive audience--I signed up for absolutely none of these roles. I also have a very hard time maintaining a professional, neutral tone with people who are clearly smarter than they act, and may be nicer, better people than they necessarily show in the moment I am dealing with them. Public service is a difficult thing, and every once in a while I just hate all these stupid, annoying, ignorant, rude patrons, but never once have I thought it was dull.
*Special Note: . Although less than a handful of the librarians I have worked with in my system could and/or would take the desk, I am lucky enough to work for two who, while not completely able, are more than willing and just need occasional backup. And, as a result, they are getting better and better at it--my branch head even decided she wants to take a shift on all late nights so that she can get to know more patrons and see what they were reading.
The article arguing for RFID was of particular interest to me, though, because I only knew a little about it, but kind of saw it as the dream-tool of weeding. The article was written in a very objective tone, explained the issues and technology very competently and pretty simply, but managed to make a convincing argument. A couple of things that caught my eye:
- "Libraries use new technologies becuase the conditions in the general environment that led to the development of the technology are also the conditions in which the library operates." Great point, great phrasing. I couldn't agree more.
-"A fully automated library could potentially know exactly where an item is, down to the very book truck or bin." Sorry, but I already do know almost where all of the books and movies are in my library at any given moment, whether they are checked out, and if not, where exactly they are right then. And the few I don't know, someone else does, because they checked it in, or shelved it, or just happened to notice it. Very, very rarely is there something that we can't locate. And we don't need computers to do it. Humans are just as capable as machines sometimes, if not more so.
-"Some libraries intend to become 100% self-check-out...The act of running patron cards and library items through a check-out station for hours at a time is mind-numbingly dull, and probably not the best use of staff time." Pardon me, but as a person who has been doing precisely that for 10 years and counting, let me tell you that dull is not one of the words I would use to describe it, and there are very few librarians that I have met in my time at the Free Library of Philadelphia who are able to handle or ever would take a shift on the front desk.*
To begin with, when you are circulating 12-1400 books in 7 hours, there's not a lot of time for boredom. Which brings me to the next point: have you ever been behind an absolute idiot at the self-check-out in the grocery store? How about if he had 15 books, 5 dvds, and 5 cds? And had to find his library card? In the time it takes the average intelligent person to move through the self-check-out machine, (say with 2 books and 3 movies), I have checked out 4 patrons with the same amount of material (assuming they needed no other services from me).
We do one-hour shifts on the desk (we've found that any longer and the nerves start to frazzle and tempers start to flare, not to mention you get very tired. There are some branches in our system that do two-hours, though). In the average one-hour shift, you will have to help people log on to the computers, find websites, send email, open email, locate government forms,find the travel section, print their jobs, use the copier, and even unlock the bathroom door, all while checking in the returned items, keeping the counter clear by promptly moving them to their shelving carts, and checking out all of the patrons that are leaving. And remember, the patrons leaving will want everything from seeing what they still have out, to renewing everything they still have, to placing 1, 5, 10 books on hold, to can they pay their fine, to "I did not borrow that book and I am not paying that fine! I am borrowing this book right now!" It is the very, very, extremely rare patron who just wants to check out his things, has his card ready, and has no problems with or questions about his account.
If that sounds dull to you, then I am awfully glad I don't have your job. For me, the biggest challenge of front desk work is patience: I am social worker, confidante, counselor, best-friend, government representative, and, most of all, captive audience--I signed up for absolutely none of these roles. I also have a very hard time maintaining a professional, neutral tone with people who are clearly smarter than they act, and may be nicer, better people than they necessarily show in the moment I am dealing with them. Public service is a difficult thing, and every once in a while I just hate all these stupid, annoying, ignorant, rude patrons, but never once have I thought it was dull.
*Special Note: . Although less than a handful of the librarians I have worked with in my system could and/or would take the desk, I am lucky enough to work for two who, while not completely able, are more than willing and just need occasional backup. And, as a result, they are getting better and better at it--my branch head even decided she wants to take a shift on all late nights so that she can get to know more patrons and see what they were reading.
Monday, September 22, 2008
I guess I really *am* a nerd, but...
Hey, I was just wondering if was the only person out here who really wishes she had learned about CiteULike in undergrad? I feel like I did when Napster first started and can hardly wait to start storing the interesting stuff I've read and losing the hard copies I've been saving all these years...(whoa, do I sound like a new-world librarian or what?) I know I am a loser, but how awesome is this site?
I just want to thank Dr. He for introducing us to it...it's pretty great!
I just want to thank Dr. He for introducing us to it...it's pretty great!
Friday, September 19, 2008
Week 5 - Comments
Response to Lauren’s Lovely Links (so very useful): https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=4181925387762663697&postID=2509969814099689784&page=1
Response to Jen’s YouTube article response: https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=1475137707322366107&postID=7852200519071717247&page=1
Response to A librarian’s important tasks: https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5671000685629389967&postID=3390927621638259886&page=1
Response to Liz's Week 5 Muddiest Point
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5418895447708724556&postID=5263853175734116275&page=1
Response to Jen’s YouTube article response: https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=1475137707322366107&postID=7852200519071717247&page=1
Response to A librarian’s important tasks: https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5671000685629389967&postID=3390927621638259886&page=1
Response to Liz's Week 5 Muddiest Point
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5418895447708724556&postID=5263853175734116275&page=1
Week 5- Muddiest Point
If machine learning is similar to data compression, and data compression is used as a benchmark of "general intelligence," and they are both based on prediction.... Does that mean that humans are so limited and predictable in our conversation and thought patterns that we could be fooled in a Turing test by a really powerful compression system running Zipfian distribution patterns on millions of old, recorded conversations?
Week 5- Reading Response
Imaging Pittsburgh
I found this article to be extremely, extremely interesting and will actually be passing it on to my branch’s Historical Society (they are in year two of a projected ten-year digitization project). I really like that there are already collaborative efforts out there to unify similar collections and make access easier for the end-user. Really easier, not just theoretically. I think this report is so clear that even without specific details, it gives a loose guide to the main challenges and requirements of such an effort. That being said, there are a few things that caught my eye.
(page 3) Around figures 2 and 3, the author says “other diverse and competing views of the city include…” and then describes a collection of utilitarian photos (street conditions, paving, curbs, etc) contrasted with a general collection that demonstrates the “artistic nature and value of similar sites.” My question is: competing? Why not complementary? Why not display them side by side and maybe provide a really interesting and fully developed perception of the city? To have pre-demolition photos of that caught Lower Hill in its prime as background up next to photos designed to make Lower Hill look good might really show the neighborhood in a truer/fuller light. At any rate, they are not competing to be the authoritative view, they are complementing each other to provide something more than the individual pieces.
When the author refers to the lack of communication outside group meetings in the Challenges and Accomplishments section on page 4, he says that while he does not know, he believes that it results from a combination of “everyone knowing exactly what to do and doing just that or they are so busy doing other jobs that they don’t have time to communicate.” Unbelievably to me, they don’t communicate despite the fact that when the groups met, “ideas were exchanged that caused each institution to reconsider its method and incorporate new (and often better) ideas” (page 6). I just want to note that while everyone says that email and technology make collaborating and communicating easier, but the fact is that when you have actual work to do, email is nothing but a giant pain in the neck, regardless of what benefit and work-help you might gain from using it. When you have a meeting on a certain day and time, you plan your work schedule around it, but when you just have to email someone, tell me you, too, don’t put it off and spend as little time as possible thinking about it when you write it. I hate meetings, but unless you are constrained by geography, there is nothing better than face to face, or at the very least telephone. It’s actual give-and-take, heat-of-the-moment communication—email is no better than a letter, just faster.
On the same reference, the idea that it is taking so very long for libraries to start aggressively and actively sharing experiences and practices is ridiculous. Many believe that you can’t apply the Kuhnian model of normal science to LIS, but I think this is the one part of our field where it’s necessary. Imagine if we had years of scientific method-ly recorded information about various different service approaches and collections offered? Imagine if libraries published their efforts on a level similar to research scientists? Imagine if the publish or perish mantra held true and head librarians across the country were creatively applying new technologies to traditional goals in order to write papers? I think it could be very good (as long as it wasn’t as extreme as in academia). Yes normal science is derivative and unproductive for scientific progress purposes, but because we are not quite after the same thing, derivative research in library services could be more generally applied.
ACRL article on YouTube and Libraries
I wonder how much YouTube paid Ms. Webb to write this? Actually, it’s quite an effective piece of advertising aimed at the mid-career librarian who does not use the internet or socialize with those who do. The only surprising thing is that it’s in an ALA publication at all, unless you consider it friendly, no-pressure, professional development?
Data Compression from Wikipedia
Astonishingly easy to understand because it’s so very clearly written. I am all about the lossless data—it just offends me to think that anything would be lost. As for the limits of human sensory perception: I can’t feel it when a mosquito bites me (usually), but I have a full blown sensory reaction to the event. I know that’s a bad analogy, but I kind of think that great art operates on a level beyond our total understanding, and if you remove color or sound tones and effects simply because they are not measurably perceived by the human senses, you could wind up removing whatever it was that made the art great.
I found this article to be extremely, extremely interesting and will actually be passing it on to my branch’s Historical Society (they are in year two of a projected ten-year digitization project). I really like that there are already collaborative efforts out there to unify similar collections and make access easier for the end-user. Really easier, not just theoretically. I think this report is so clear that even without specific details, it gives a loose guide to the main challenges and requirements of such an effort. That being said, there are a few things that caught my eye.
(page 3) Around figures 2 and 3, the author says “other diverse and competing views of the city include…” and then describes a collection of utilitarian photos (street conditions, paving, curbs, etc) contrasted with a general collection that demonstrates the “artistic nature and value of similar sites.” My question is: competing? Why not complementary? Why not display them side by side and maybe provide a really interesting and fully developed perception of the city? To have pre-demolition photos of that caught Lower Hill in its prime as background up next to photos designed to make Lower Hill look good might really show the neighborhood in a truer/fuller light. At any rate, they are not competing to be the authoritative view, they are complementing each other to provide something more than the individual pieces.
When the author refers to the lack of communication outside group meetings in the Challenges and Accomplishments section on page 4, he says that while he does not know, he believes that it results from a combination of “everyone knowing exactly what to do and doing just that or they are so busy doing other jobs that they don’t have time to communicate.” Unbelievably to me, they don’t communicate despite the fact that when the groups met, “ideas were exchanged that caused each institution to reconsider its method and incorporate new (and often better) ideas” (page 6). I just want to note that while everyone says that email and technology make collaborating and communicating easier, but the fact is that when you have actual work to do, email is nothing but a giant pain in the neck, regardless of what benefit and work-help you might gain from using it. When you have a meeting on a certain day and time, you plan your work schedule around it, but when you just have to email someone, tell me you, too, don’t put it off and spend as little time as possible thinking about it when you write it. I hate meetings, but unless you are constrained by geography, there is nothing better than face to face, or at the very least telephone. It’s actual give-and-take, heat-of-the-moment communication—email is no better than a letter, just faster.
On the same reference, the idea that it is taking so very long for libraries to start aggressively and actively sharing experiences and practices is ridiculous. Many believe that you can’t apply the Kuhnian model of normal science to LIS, but I think this is the one part of our field where it’s necessary. Imagine if we had years of scientific method-ly recorded information about various different service approaches and collections offered? Imagine if libraries published their efforts on a level similar to research scientists? Imagine if the publish or perish mantra held true and head librarians across the country were creatively applying new technologies to traditional goals in order to write papers? I think it could be very good (as long as it wasn’t as extreme as in academia). Yes normal science is derivative and unproductive for scientific progress purposes, but because we are not quite after the same thing, derivative research in library services could be more generally applied.
ACRL article on YouTube and Libraries
I wonder how much YouTube paid Ms. Webb to write this? Actually, it’s quite an effective piece of advertising aimed at the mid-career librarian who does not use the internet or socialize with those who do. The only surprising thing is that it’s in an ALA publication at all, unless you consider it friendly, no-pressure, professional development?
Data Compression from Wikipedia
Astonishingly easy to understand because it’s so very clearly written. I am all about the lossless data—it just offends me to think that anything would be lost. As for the limits of human sensory perception: I can’t feel it when a mosquito bites me (usually), but I have a full blown sensory reaction to the event. I know that’s a bad analogy, but I kind of think that great art operates on a level beyond our total understanding, and if you remove color or sound tones and effects simply because they are not measurably perceived by the human senses, you could wind up removing whatever it was that made the art great.
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Week 4 - Comments
Reading 4, Databases: https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6411265268178233609&postID=1333806017329354677&page=1
Reading 4, random thoughts about different points made well: https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3413864360557025238&postID=5563099542386863768&page=1
Jeremy’s Flickr Photos : https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3413864360557025238&postID=3527627984950173375
Reading 4, random thoughts about different points made well: https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3413864360557025238&postID=5563099542386863768&page=1
Jeremy’s Flickr Photos : https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3413864360557025238&postID=3527627984950173375
Assignment 1- Flickr Photos
In celebration of the coming 65th anniversary of Batman's appearance in Daily newspapers, I decided to scan the first twenty days worth of panels.
View as a set: http://flickr.com/photos/30457400@N05/sets/72157607279679019/
Easier to see view: http://flickr.com/photos/30457400@N05/
View as a set: http://flickr.com/photos/30457400@N05/sets/72157607279679019/
Easier to see view: http://flickr.com/photos/30457400@N05/
Saturday, September 13, 2008
Comments on Digitization Discussion Board
I know these may be posted late, but I didn't realize we were supposed to post links to our Discussion Board comments, too.
Response to Digital Reliability : https://courseweb.pitt.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_9047_1%26url%3D
Response to Worth of Digitization: https://courseweb.pitt.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_9047_1%26url%3D
New Thread- Some food for thought: https://courseweb.pitt.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_9047_1%26url%3D
Response to Digital Reliability : https://courseweb.pitt.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_9047_1%26url%3D
Response to Worth of Digitization: https://courseweb.pitt.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_9047_1%26url%3D
New Thread- Some food for thought: https://courseweb.pitt.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_9047_1%26url%3D
Friday, September 12, 2008
Week 4- Muddiest Point
I'm doing pretty well so far in understanding the different operating systems and application softwares. Open Source is a little more difficult: If I have an open source software application, do I need to constantly monitor all the adaptations and changes in order to get any future alterations and improvements? Do I need to reload the program in all its new permutations, or can updates be done "automatically"? If I must constantly stay on top, it seems that unless you are a programmer, it might just be easier to go with a package that updates periodically from an online source (the way Adobe and other programs do). Any thoughts?
Week 4- Reading Response
The wikipedia information on databases is extremely informative. I never realized all the different ways of relating information to each other. It seems like by combining a relational database with a networked, hierarchical system we could come up with a really outstanding system for organizing scholarly information. Each "master file" would be a piece of the "core, seminal" literature on the subject, and the respective levels down would be the derivative articles and ideas.
The importance of metadata in this endeavor is paramount. I find it interesting that while metadata is integral to information sorting and retrieval, applying Zipfian data distribution tables to the vocab of metadata leaves us with the core vocab of metadata that makes it simultaneously "opening/enfranchising" and very much an exclusionary tool: if you don't know the right language to use in your search, you may never find anything. In this respect, librarians are still very important to the search process becuase they should know the language with which to best utilize metadata tags in searches. Because I have always been interested in cataloging (and how, for instance, a travel book on Disney World gets put in the 796's instead of the 917.5304's) the Dublin core data model is somewhat fascinating. As opposed to the OCLC tags, the Dublin model seems to be applied with the lay end-user in mind and depends on semantics that the lay end-user actually uses and would feel comfortable with. In addition, the idea that a search engine using this model would be able to take into account things like synonyms and jargon differences means that you wouldn't necessarily be limited to your area of expertise anymore, and would be able to move just as easily through connections with other areas and subjects.
The importance of metadata in this endeavor is paramount. I find it interesting that while metadata is integral to information sorting and retrieval, applying Zipfian data distribution tables to the vocab of metadata leaves us with the core vocab of metadata that makes it simultaneously "opening/enfranchising" and very much an exclusionary tool: if you don't know the right language to use in your search, you may never find anything. In this respect, librarians are still very important to the search process becuase they should know the language with which to best utilize metadata tags in searches. Because I have always been interested in cataloging (and how, for instance, a travel book on Disney World gets put in the 796's instead of the 917.5304's) the Dublin core data model is somewhat fascinating. As opposed to the OCLC tags, the Dublin model seems to be applied with the lay end-user in mind and depends on semantics that the lay end-user actually uses and would feel comfortable with. In addition, the idea that a search engine using this model would be able to take into account things like synonyms and jargon differences means that you wouldn't necessarily be limited to your area of expertise anymore, and would be able to move just as easily through connections with other areas and subjects.
Friday, September 5, 2008
Week 3- Reading Response
Windows Roadmap; Linux; Mac OS X
This weeks' readings are very helpful to me. I will definitely go back and read the rest of the Introduction to Linux. When I was in the early years of grade school, everyone who had a computer had an Apple, and growing up we learned Basic, C programming, and Pascal, but I got off the computers/technology track when I hit Advanced Logic Systems, and have since become totally adapted to the Windows world. I was completely unaware of how pervasive Linux is, or how easily it seems I could use it. Of the three readings, I found the Linux one to be extremely persuasive and suprisingly easy to understand, although I would feel more comfortable knowing more about the author--he's definitely a true believer. One of my larger fears is that his/her enthusiasm has inspired a false confidence in me, so I plan to investigate it more fully, but considering I am going to buy a new computer just for school this weekend (so that I can protect my "real" one), the article has opened up avenues that I had never even considered. I am more swayed by the PC vs Mac commercials than I was by Wikipedia article, however, and cannot help feeling that Macs are pitched to and geared for a younger generation than mine.
With respect to the Windows Roadmap, it was very clearly a corporate pr piece. What caught my attention most was the frequent "acknowledgments" of "user feedback" regarding Vista that never clarified what that feedback was or specifically how they had listened and made changes. Because my mom has Vista, I am willing to bet that it was mostly, if not all, negative. When I am at my mom's house, I do not use her computer because it drives me absolutely crazy: I cannot access many sites or view content on many other sites because of all the security things it has going on (at least that's my ignorant self's theory). On the other hand, the article addressed a lot of issues and as a realatively happy Windows user, I look forward to better things in the future.
While none of these articles was, for me, authoritative, what I appreciate most are the extensive links and resources available for further investigation. I want to go in-depth into the other Mac reading, but only had time to really skim it before today.
This weeks' readings are very helpful to me. I will definitely go back and read the rest of the Introduction to Linux. When I was in the early years of grade school, everyone who had a computer had an Apple, and growing up we learned Basic, C programming, and Pascal, but I got off the computers/technology track when I hit Advanced Logic Systems, and have since become totally adapted to the Windows world. I was completely unaware of how pervasive Linux is, or how easily it seems I could use it. Of the three readings, I found the Linux one to be extremely persuasive and suprisingly easy to understand, although I would feel more comfortable knowing more about the author--he's definitely a true believer. One of my larger fears is that his/her enthusiasm has inspired a false confidence in me, so I plan to investigate it more fully, but considering I am going to buy a new computer just for school this weekend (so that I can protect my "real" one), the article has opened up avenues that I had never even considered. I am more swayed by the PC vs Mac commercials than I was by Wikipedia article, however, and cannot help feeling that Macs are pitched to and geared for a younger generation than mine.
With respect to the Windows Roadmap, it was very clearly a corporate pr piece. What caught my attention most was the frequent "acknowledgments" of "user feedback" regarding Vista that never clarified what that feedback was or specifically how they had listened and made changes. Because my mom has Vista, I am willing to bet that it was mostly, if not all, negative. When I am at my mom's house, I do not use her computer because it drives me absolutely crazy: I cannot access many sites or view content on many other sites because of all the security things it has going on (at least that's my ignorant self's theory). On the other hand, the article addressed a lot of issues and as a realatively happy Windows user, I look forward to better things in the future.
While none of these articles was, for me, authoritative, what I appreciate most are the extensive links and resources available for further investigation. I want to go in-depth into the other Mac reading, but only had time to really skim it before today.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Week 2- Muddiest Point
Are comments on others' blogs a required part of participation? Or are they optional (but strongly encouraged)? Anybody have a strategy for handling 100+ blogs and trying to find someone on whose blog to comment intelligently in the least amount of time?
Also, What about duplicate comments? I am spending hours trying to find a blog on which I can comment intelligently but where someone else hasn't already said the little I can think of--should I just post my similar, often repetitive comment, too? I always feel like the people who do that should read what others have said before they post, but here I am about to just do the same thing. Any advice? Tips? Strategies? (besides getting there first and/or tracking the blogs I have found I am able to respond to)
Also, What about duplicate comments? I am spending hours trying to find a blog on which I can comment intelligently but where someone else hasn't already said the little I can think of--should I just post my similar, often repetitive comment, too? I always feel like the people who do that should read what others have said before they post, but here I am about to just do the same thing. Any advice? Tips? Strategies? (besides getting there first and/or tracking the blogs I have found I am able to respond to)
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
Week 2 - Reading Response
Wikipedia Readings
I think that the first wiki (with all the technical definitions) will be very helpful to me--I'm not so very technically literate, and it was nice to have everything broken down and easily defined.
What I actually think is most interesting about this weeks readings is that they were wikipedia entries. During undergrad, professors were divided (but mostly against) allowing Wikipedia as a "Scholarly" reference source, and even the ones who said it was okay felt that it was only acceptable for certain topics that were without much controversy. This could be one of the areas in which we can see that the "paradigm" dictating library services and standards for information sources is blurry, and Wikipedia itself is interesting in that many users produce one *agreed upon* body of knowledge/definition.
I think that the first wiki (with all the technical definitions) will be very helpful to me--I'm not so very technically literate, and it was nice to have everything broken down and easily defined.
What I actually think is most interesting about this weeks readings is that they were wikipedia entries. During undergrad, professors were divided (but mostly against) allowing Wikipedia as a "Scholarly" reference source, and even the ones who said it was okay felt that it was only acceptable for certain topics that were without much controversy. This could be one of the areas in which we can see that the "paradigm" dictating library services and standards for information sources is blurry, and Wikipedia itself is interesting in that many users produce one *agreed upon* body of knowledge/definition.
Monday, September 1, 2008
Week 1- Muddiest Point
I rewound and watched the section of the class video where Dr. He discusses the week 1 and week 2 assignments a couple times, and it seemed like week 1 and 2 reading responses are due Tuesday, September 2, but that all future readings/assignments are due on the Friday before the class for which they are assigned. Maybe because of class just starting, but also because the "readings" are kind of easy for week 2? Anyone get the same impression or do we have until Friday to respond to the Wikipedia articles and the Online Museum?
Week 1- Reading Response
Information Literacy and information Technology Literacy – Clifford Lynch
I am incomplete agreement with Mr. Lynch’s definition of Information and Information Technology Literacy. I also feel that his definition goes a long way towards making the argument that print is still the most efficient delivery system for information and ideas. Why? With print, basic literacy means you learn how to decipher the symbols which comprise our language. Once you learn, there is no impediment to your reading anything, except availability and personal interest. With computers and other forms of IT, on the other hand, you must constantly learn and adapt to new symbols comprising new languages, as well as new required skills. Concrete example: I don’t pick up a book, magazine or newspaper between the ages of 18 and 50. At age 50, I can pick up any book, magazine, or newspaper I want and jump right in with few problems (maybe my eyes will tire). Conversely, I take a bunch of Computer and IT classes so that I can merge on the info super highway. Then, I just put it on cruise control only to discover a mere two years later that my machine is no longer adequate to function, and that I have no idea what’s going on or how to find what I need. In other words, the effort to maintain IT literacy is perpetual and consuming.
The one element common to both print and digital information is that the most important aspect of literacy is discernment. It is here where I feel that the library can maintain its role as the premier provider of information. Many people lack the experience, confidence and/or knowledge to assess the value of given content. The library can brand itself as the place to go to have accurate info at your fingertips—we vet the sites for you, or we can teach you how to do it yourself. In addition, when you take into account the often prohibitive costs of existing—not to mention emerging—technologies, the library becomes the only point of access to digital information, and for even just the computers themselves, for a great percentage of the population. Given the current state of the economy, this is hardly going to change anytime soon. If the libraries across the country handle the demand well enough, it might never have to. And since I believe that the public library exists to ensure equal access for all segments of society to all types of information; continually providing the ever-changing technologies would be a pretty good thing.
Content not Containers – OCLC Marketing Staff
The part of this essay that I had the strongest reaction to was the example of “WebBrain” contextual searching. To me, it looks just like Aquabrowser, which the Free Library of Philadelphia adopted a little more than a year ago, and which I cannot stand. Perhaps I betray my age, but there is nothing helpful about an apparently random assembly of “suggested topics,” especially because I am rarely, if ever, using the library’s online catalog because I wish to browse.
The other part of the essay which I reacted strongly to is the implied death-knoll of print information because of the rise in ebooks, audiobooks, and other non-print media. I do not contest the statistics, merely their interpretation. It is possible that one day people will be more comfortable reading Dostoevsky on a Blackberry or Smartphone, but, to me, the drop in print sales is more indicative of the fact that people are reading less overall. As an undergrad, I did a group project about the “future of libraries in an ebook world,” and the one thing that stuck with me (although it was not my part of the project) was the growing trend of text-searching, wherein a person searches inside the text for “relevant” parts, and then only reads those parts. And these are students and academics, who you would assume would want to understand an issue fully, not just a narrow area within that issue.
Finally, I am all for the syndication of journals and magazines—JSTOR is one of my all-time favorite resources, but the fact is that I could never afford a personal subscription and without access to a university or public library, I’d never get to use it. It is this syndication that enables a small, rural library in Podunk, Middle America to be the intellectual equal of the NY or Phila. System (if their budget is large enough, that is). Ideally, everything that has ever been or would ever be in print will be digitalized and available for syndication on the internet (I’m thinking the google book project, project Gutenburg, etc). However, having worked in one of the country’s Government Doc depositories and having seen the awful condition of material on microfiche and film, I have to come down strongly in favor of keeping print copies around for when better technologies are developed. If we cannot digitalize something to perfection, it should not be done.
Lied Library @ 4 Years – Jason Vaughan
Because I work in a busy branch in a large city, there is not much new information here for me. About the only thing that caught my attention was the value-judgment Vaughan placed on the “community” patrons’ computer use. Beginning on page 41, the article lays the foundation for devaluing and prioritizing an individual’s use of the computer. According to Vaughan, 90% of the library’s computer use is “faculty, staff, and students,” with the other 10% being lumped as “community.” Vaughan claims that this 10% is responsible for 17% of all time spent on Lied’s computers. In Vaughan’s own words “community users are not in an academic program and come to surf the web, check their email, and play games, as opposed to ‘academic’ work.” I checked into it, and while I was thinking that “community” users meant people like me who lived nearby and paid for library privileges (for example, a UPenn library card costs roughly $500 a year), it turns out that they are actually only teachers, academics and professionals affiliated with Nevada’s System of Higher Education. As a person unaffiliated with either UNLV or NSHE, I am only permitted borrowing privileges and access to databases—no internet browsing whatsoever—as long as I have a valid state id and a credit card (as collateral-- the borrowing/database privileges are actually free).
As such, I find Vaughan’s assertion that “community users” impede and often prevent students with “legitimate needs” from using computers to be not just “disheartening” but offensive and somewhat ludicrous. After I read that the library planned to “limit what internet resources community users can access, to help cut down on networked game playing, e-mail, and generalized web-surfing by this group” (42), and, even more mortifying, that library employees could see who was on what computer, how long they had been on, their affiliation (student or “community”), etc. and kick a “community” user off in favor of a student who may or may not have the assumed “legitimate” needs, I thanked God and all concerned that I worked here in Philadelphia, where a child who wants to go online and play stickdeath is just as important as the adult who wants to go on and update their resume—in some cases, don’t ask, don’t tell is a wonderful policy. We don’t censor what you read or watch, and we don’t place value judgments on your activities, we simply provide equal access on a first-come, first-serve basis. (of course, there are always exceptions and special circumstances, but it seems to me that our egalitarian approach makes those exceptions more palatable to those who aren’t getting one).
I am incomplete agreement with Mr. Lynch’s definition of Information and Information Technology Literacy. I also feel that his definition goes a long way towards making the argument that print is still the most efficient delivery system for information and ideas. Why? With print, basic literacy means you learn how to decipher the symbols which comprise our language. Once you learn, there is no impediment to your reading anything, except availability and personal interest. With computers and other forms of IT, on the other hand, you must constantly learn and adapt to new symbols comprising new languages, as well as new required skills. Concrete example: I don’t pick up a book, magazine or newspaper between the ages of 18 and 50. At age 50, I can pick up any book, magazine, or newspaper I want and jump right in with few problems (maybe my eyes will tire). Conversely, I take a bunch of Computer and IT classes so that I can merge on the info super highway. Then, I just put it on cruise control only to discover a mere two years later that my machine is no longer adequate to function, and that I have no idea what’s going on or how to find what I need. In other words, the effort to maintain IT literacy is perpetual and consuming.
The one element common to both print and digital information is that the most important aspect of literacy is discernment. It is here where I feel that the library can maintain its role as the premier provider of information. Many people lack the experience, confidence and/or knowledge to assess the value of given content. The library can brand itself as the place to go to have accurate info at your fingertips—we vet the sites for you, or we can teach you how to do it yourself. In addition, when you take into account the often prohibitive costs of existing—not to mention emerging—technologies, the library becomes the only point of access to digital information, and for even just the computers themselves, for a great percentage of the population. Given the current state of the economy, this is hardly going to change anytime soon. If the libraries across the country handle the demand well enough, it might never have to. And since I believe that the public library exists to ensure equal access for all segments of society to all types of information; continually providing the ever-changing technologies would be a pretty good thing.
Content not Containers – OCLC Marketing Staff
The part of this essay that I had the strongest reaction to was the example of “WebBrain” contextual searching. To me, it looks just like Aquabrowser, which the Free Library of Philadelphia adopted a little more than a year ago, and which I cannot stand. Perhaps I betray my age, but there is nothing helpful about an apparently random assembly of “suggested topics,” especially because I am rarely, if ever, using the library’s online catalog because I wish to browse.
The other part of the essay which I reacted strongly to is the implied death-knoll of print information because of the rise in ebooks, audiobooks, and other non-print media. I do not contest the statistics, merely their interpretation. It is possible that one day people will be more comfortable reading Dostoevsky on a Blackberry or Smartphone, but, to me, the drop in print sales is more indicative of the fact that people are reading less overall. As an undergrad, I did a group project about the “future of libraries in an ebook world,” and the one thing that stuck with me (although it was not my part of the project) was the growing trend of text-searching, wherein a person searches inside the text for “relevant” parts, and then only reads those parts. And these are students and academics, who you would assume would want to understand an issue fully, not just a narrow area within that issue.
Finally, I am all for the syndication of journals and magazines—JSTOR is one of my all-time favorite resources, but the fact is that I could never afford a personal subscription and without access to a university or public library, I’d never get to use it. It is this syndication that enables a small, rural library in Podunk, Middle America to be the intellectual equal of the NY or Phila. System (if their budget is large enough, that is). Ideally, everything that has ever been or would ever be in print will be digitalized and available for syndication on the internet (I’m thinking the google book project, project Gutenburg, etc). However, having worked in one of the country’s Government Doc depositories and having seen the awful condition of material on microfiche and film, I have to come down strongly in favor of keeping print copies around for when better technologies are developed. If we cannot digitalize something to perfection, it should not be done.
Lied Library @ 4 Years – Jason Vaughan
Because I work in a busy branch in a large city, there is not much new information here for me. About the only thing that caught my attention was the value-judgment Vaughan placed on the “community” patrons’ computer use. Beginning on page 41, the article lays the foundation for devaluing and prioritizing an individual’s use of the computer. According to Vaughan, 90% of the library’s computer use is “faculty, staff, and students,” with the other 10% being lumped as “community.” Vaughan claims that this 10% is responsible for 17% of all time spent on Lied’s computers. In Vaughan’s own words “community users are not in an academic program and come to surf the web, check their email, and play games, as opposed to ‘academic’ work.” I checked into it, and while I was thinking that “community” users meant people like me who lived nearby and paid for library privileges (for example, a UPenn library card costs roughly $500 a year), it turns out that they are actually only teachers, academics and professionals affiliated with Nevada’s System of Higher Education. As a person unaffiliated with either UNLV or NSHE, I am only permitted borrowing privileges and access to databases—no internet browsing whatsoever—as long as I have a valid state id and a credit card (as collateral-- the borrowing/database privileges are actually free).
As such, I find Vaughan’s assertion that “community users” impede and often prevent students with “legitimate needs” from using computers to be not just “disheartening” but offensive and somewhat ludicrous. After I read that the library planned to “limit what internet resources community users can access, to help cut down on networked game playing, e-mail, and generalized web-surfing by this group” (42), and, even more mortifying, that library employees could see who was on what computer, how long they had been on, their affiliation (student or “community”), etc. and kick a “community” user off in favor of a student who may or may not have the assumed “legitimate” needs, I thanked God and all concerned that I worked here in Philadelphia, where a child who wants to go online and play stickdeath is just as important as the adult who wants to go on and update their resume—in some cases, don’t ask, don’t tell is a wonderful policy. We don’t censor what you read or watch, and we don’t place value judgments on your activities, we simply provide equal access on a first-come, first-serve basis. (of course, there are always exceptions and special circumstances, but it seems to me that our egalitarian approach makes those exceptions more palatable to those who aren’t getting one).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
