We don't know until we try

A couple of weeks ago I gave a lecture on library resources to about 20 fourth-year students. Included in the show-and-tell was our new libguide-based subject guide, and my new meebo widget. I took the opportunity to ask, "So you can contact me by phone, email, meebo, or face-to-face. Which do you think you'd be most likely to use?"

The responses were: email or face-to-face. A bit disappointing (after I'd spent some time explaining to colleagues and managers the advantages of the meebo widget) but interesting.

But. That was Friday. On Monday I got a Meebo query, and on Tuesday I got another Meebo query. So even though the class had said they would use some other method to contact me, 10% of them, while browsing the subject guide, saw that I was online and thought they'd contact me that way after all.

I officially approve of asking users what they think about things - but it's not perfect. The only way to be sure whether something's useful or not is to try it out (and market it!)

[Obligatory acknowledgement that we can't try out and market everything. But we were already using a meebo room for online reference, so adding a widget to my libguides took me less than 10 minutes.]

Tweets on libraries

Gerrit van Dyk comments on some tweets about libraries as (respectively) discussion space and quiet space, and I think these raise a couple of issues for libraries:

1. Often libraries do have the discussion areas people want, but people don't know we do! We're not always very good at promoting the resources/services we have. (In a focus group recently, a postgrad student timidly said that it'd be nice if the library could offer a service where if she was stuck on her literature review she could come to us and we'd help her do it. Us reference librarians running the focus group had a hard time not banging our heads on the nearest desk: this is #1 on our job description and she didn't know that's what we're here for!)


2. Sometimes we get so focused on a trend (more people want discussion spaces) that we forget that this doesn't mean that everything's completely changed all at once (ie people haven't suddenly stopped wanting quiet spaces). (Last year I made a video with some of my library's students asking them what they liked about using the library, and a startling percentage said what they liked was that it was a nice quiet place to study.)

---

It's definitely illuminating seeing what people say about libraries online, though it occasionally feels like stalking. I've got an RSS feed of a search on tweets in New Zealand about libraries (due to the NZ ISP system I couldn't narrow it closer to my region). One recent one that is food for thought: "wondering why i'm being told to take a library course when i have been at uni for 3 years and know how to read a book". Hopefully the library course will answer that question...

Getting cheered

So my colleague and I got cheered at the end of a library skills lecture to 280 new engineering students last week. Ruling out, for vanity's sake, the possibility that it was because

• we finished early;
• that corner of the room was watching sports on their iPods;
• the students that way inclined thought I was hot;
• the students the other way inclined thought my colleague was hot...

...It might have been because of a couple of things we tried a bit differently this year.

A bit of background: this lecture was for the first year ("intermediate year") of Engineering students, in their first week ever at university. Latest figure I've heard is that 780 are enrolled; we gave the lecture in three sessions with ~250 students attending each day. The lecture is to support their first assignment, an essay requiring library research which they have a week and a half to write. Anguished quote from the first year this course was offered: "I choose engineering so I wouldn't have to write!" Citing is a completely new concept to 95% of them.

The last two years, we did a powerpoint going through the research process, different kinds of sources, how to evaluate sources including websites, the evils of Wikipedia, etc, and citing.

This year we did three things differently:

1. we restructured the powerpoint to start with *their* research process - ie, Google and Wikipedia. We showed how some bad search results come up, eg tipsforsuccess.org, written by a follower of L Ron Hubbard, and I told the story of how Hubbard made a bet at an sf convention that he could create a religion and make a million dollars. (People laughed, it was great.) I showed the Wikipedia page from that Google search - it had some gorgeous orange warnings on it so we talked about those, then looked at the introductory paragraph which had footnotes. (Subliminal introduction to the concept of citing.) Scrolled to the reference list at the bottom of the page which had dictionary entries, books, journal articles, newspaper articles - and segued from *there* into the scholarly research process and the things we hold in the library. And so forth.
2. Inspired by Beyond active learning: a constructivist approach to learning(1) we got interactive. We were really dubious about this because a) the class size was 250ish and b) these are engineers, and most engineering classes have mutely resisted interaction. So we made sure the powerpoint would work even if they didn't answer questions. The interaction itself was things like: "So you've got an assignment: where do you start?" We expected to elicit "Google" - actually people had various responses and were all talking at once so we couldn't hear them all. Some said the library so we cheerfully called them "greasers" :-) and then when we heard "Google" from others we moved on to the next slide. Google results - "What do you notice about these results?" - they noticed some things, and the rest of what we talked about we just added to what they were saying. Same thing with Wikipedia: "What do you notice? What do these numbers in brackets mean?" And so forth.
3. We rejigged the slides themselves. The old slides were endless bulletpoints. So, inspired by the movement in conference presentations to use images rather than bulletpoints, we did the same thing. This worked particularly well for a photo-tour of the different parts of the library they'd need, eg a photo of where the reference collection was, then a photo zoomed in on some dictionaries. We had a series of photos physically walking upstairs to the main stacks of books for the assignment subject area. It was a bit hokey and people laughed, but... hey, people laughed, so it was cool.
   3a.   We paused in the middle for a couple of minutes to let the students write down links to the library website, the subject guide, and Internet Detective.

So we gave this lecture three times. People seemed engaged for them all, and the first two times we got regular applause and then people coming up for questions afterwards. The third time someone asked a question in the middle of it (during the citation section), and at the end we got applause and cheers from one corner, and people coming up for yet more questions. So, I dunno, maybe the cheering was a fluke; but either way, I think that format worked really well, and I'm going to be trying it with more classes in future. (Even if more advanced engineering students might have learned how to resist interactivity - it seems worth a try.)

(1) Cooperstein, Susan E. and Elizabeth Kocevar-Weidinger (2004). Beyond active learning: a constructivist approach to learning. Reference Services Review 32(2), pp 141-148

PS Of course we're still having to tell half this stuff again and again to people coming to the combo lending/reference desk, and I'm considering how to find physical space for some mini-workshops, but that's par for the course.

RSS feeds on Facebook

I've played with a number of Facebook applications that claim to let you import RSS feeds into Facebook - and then mysteriously fail to update them. RSS feeds that don't update are not overly useful.

I finally concluded that if we wanted to import our library blogs into our (currently in demo) library Facebook page, we'd have to use Friendfeed instead. Only when I actually tried this out, it turns out that the Friendfeed application doesn't work on pages.

So I went trawling through Facebook's RSS applications again and (perhaps because this was a couple of months since I last tried) found one that seems to work: RSS-Connect(*). It looks clean, the display is reasonably customisable, and it works smoothly and intuitively to open/close items when clicked and take you through to the original item on demand. And most importantly, it really does update automatically - you even get to choose how often you want it to check for updates.

(*) There must be a way to get a link that shows you information about the app before forcing you to add it, but Facebook isn't intuitive to me and I haven't found it yet.

ETA 22/5/09 I can't recommend RSS-Connect, aka Social RSS, any more as it frequently loads either very slowly or (more often) not at all. This leaves me without a working RSS application again. Anyone know of anything, or want to create one?

ETA 17/7/09 RSS-Connect aka Social RSS is back in my good books with some caveats; see comments for more.

Non-English blog roundup #11 - the sharing edition

"Non-English" seems to have turned into French, probably mostly because that's the language I read best. Must remedy this. In any case, today I've got a collection of blog posts sharing data:

The Assessment Librarian was thinking about computer posts in his library dedicated to catalogue research only and wondered how much use these got compared to computers available for any purpose. Data collected over two weeks showed:

• Arts and Sciences branch
  • Catalogue-only - 12% usage
  • 'Open' computers - 51% usage
• Law and economy branch
  • Catalogue-only - 7% usage
  • 'Open' computers - 65% usage

He concludes that, while it's not straight-forward to analyse the results, it's worth considering whether there are other possible uses for their catalogue-only computer stations.

Inspired by this post, Des Bibliotheques 2.0:

• shares Google Analytics statistics for off-campus visits to the library catalogue from 1st April 2008 - 1 Jan 2009 (a good handful of pages in pdf);
• compares numbers of visitors to the homepage (site) vs the number of visitors to the catalogue (OPAC) (note the numbers were gathered using different tools;
• shows the impact of a new website - " the number of visitors has increased from 80-100%; the number of visits has increased from 30-50%; the number of pages seen per visit has tripled".

And De Tout Sur Rien has decided "I will no longer participate in projects in which the publication of my contributions in a digital format and under Creative Commons license [...] is not planned from the beginning," and calls for colleagues and/or readers to make the same decision.

More on sharing

Yesterday we presented our conference feedback and I launched my "Let's share everything!" manifesto. By the end of the session we were running late so we eschewed taking questions in favour of adjourning for lunch, but the idea's out there and hopefully percolating. In the meantime I have LibGuides, focus groups, lesson plans, institutional repository verification, liaison, maybe-Facebook, hopefully-podcast, and oh-yes-outreach to set up before first semester starts.

But the other day I was reading (via LibraryTechNZ) a paper on IM a Librarian: Extending Virtual Reference Services through Instant Messaging and Chat Widgets. This linked to an open source tool and I navigated back up the chain to find a page the University of Nevada Las Vegas Libraries has set up a page of open source software projects they've been working on. So there's one more precedent for the list.

And the fact that I came across it by such a chain of links has convinced me that, valuable as it is to get the stuff up onto the web anywhere, the real value will come when we can pool all of it into one place for easy findability.

Libraries and sharing

In December last year Dale Askey wrote a Code4Lib column, We Love Open Source Software. No, You Can’t Have Our Code which raised some discussion for a while.

But of course it's not just software.

Oh, I haven't personally experienced libraries refusing to share information. In fact when I was researching our "Library on Location" project, everyone I contacted was more than happy to give me stories, photos, even survey data. But... I did have to track them down from oblique references in old blogs and newsletters and email them, one by one.

And we put our own Library on Location reports online, which I'm glad we could do. But... we had to ask if we could do it, and only our conference paper is in any kind of official repository sort of space.

Is this consistent with our profession's attempts to convince academics to put their research papers and data into institutional repositories?

And is it an efficient, librarian-like way of organising the accumulated knowledge within the profession?

Statistics.
User surveys.
Projects that work.
Projects that don't work.
Projects that might work but we ran out of funding.
Projects that would work if we could share the workload with another institution.

This might have been why the Library Success wiki was created. It's a great idea, but its contributors are individuals, not libraries, so it just doesn't have the kind of oomph I'm thinking about.

What if...

What if every library in the world brought their anonymised circulation data, their IM reference statistics, their anonymised usability testing and survey results, their project reports, their lesson plans and handouts, and their iPhone applications out from their hard drives and their intranets and made them publically accessible?

What if they all licensed this stuff (and photos and podcasts and vidcasts and...) with a Creative Commons or GPL license?

What if they all created a single website where this stuff could be stored and searched in one place?

What if that website allowed space for libraries and librarians to comment and collaborate on and add to each other's work?

No, seriously, I mean it

At the end of the month my library's delegates to LIANZA2008 are going to report back to the rest of the staff about what we got out of the conference. I got 4 things out of conference, 3 of which were:

1. Leadership - future taking vs future making
2. Innovation - just do it
3. Why are they presenting on this topic when we've gone further in our analogous project and have more experience of how it works in practice? Oh yes: because it never occurred to us to share.

So in my allotted 5 minutes of the reporting back, I plan to pitch the idea that we should move all our (sanitised if need be) project work from the intranet to open webspace.

What about the rest of the world?