Monday, April 13, 2015
Blog Arrangement
Changed the layout of the blog - contributors now listed at the bottom (sorry 'bout that ;)).
Sunday, April 12, 2015
Recommendations
The following is a set of recommendations for Web 2.0 technologies to be added to Warringah Libraries. Links will be provided to the libraries that these ideas are taken from.
Children's
Yarra Plenty Regional Library features various children's games. These are educational in nature. Notably, this includes user-generated content, including the abilities for users to create their own stories. I could see this being a great addition to Warringah Libraries - there's already a dedicated set of activities for children, so the implementation of online games would fit in, and actually distinguish itself by being purely electronic. The ability to create stories is something that the library has already embraced (the writing competition), so again, I could see this having a precedent for implementation.
Note that Yarra has used similar principles in its homework section, namely using games as an educational tool. Hennepin County Library also utilizes similar software.
Adult Fiction
Sutherland Shire Library doesn't provide this service itself, but does link to services that represent Web 2.0 concepts. I'm referring to its what should I read next? section, with links to sites such as NoveList (fiction/non-fiction) and Who Else Writes Like? (a search for similar authors). Note that this also includes works for children, and in some cases (e.g. NoveList), would require the patron's library card number.
I can see these services being provided to good effect at Warringah Libraries. It wouldn't require much work on the library's behalf, it would require them setting up links for web services rather than creating those services themselves. While this may require dealing with some of the host sites (e.g. a means to access NoveList through a Warringah Library member card), I'm sure it's something that patrons could appreciate.
Information
Sutherland Shire Library utilizes a pathfinder...sort of. The pathfinder is inactive, and it isn't really what I'd call a pathfinder in that it's presenting information by itself rather than the links to that information. But this kind of information is something I could easily see fitting in with Warringah - it already has a local studies section, it already has a means of information submission, and it already has a local studies section on its website. The ability to submit links to information is an example of Web 2.0, so I could see this as being a good way to foster community involvement.
Children's
Yarra Plenty Regional Library features various children's games. These are educational in nature. Notably, this includes user-generated content, including the abilities for users to create their own stories. I could see this being a great addition to Warringah Libraries - there's already a dedicated set of activities for children, so the implementation of online games would fit in, and actually distinguish itself by being purely electronic. The ability to create stories is something that the library has already embraced (the writing competition), so again, I could see this having a precedent for implementation.
Note that Yarra has used similar principles in its homework section, namely using games as an educational tool. Hennepin County Library also utilizes similar software.
Adult Fiction
Sutherland Shire Library doesn't provide this service itself, but does link to services that represent Web 2.0 concepts. I'm referring to its what should I read next? section, with links to sites such as NoveList (fiction/non-fiction) and Who Else Writes Like? (a search for similar authors). Note that this also includes works for children, and in some cases (e.g. NoveList), would require the patron's library card number.
I can see these services being provided to good effect at Warringah Libraries. It wouldn't require much work on the library's behalf, it would require them setting up links for web services rather than creating those services themselves. While this may require dealing with some of the host sites (e.g. a means to access NoveList through a Warringah Library member card), I'm sure it's something that patrons could appreciate.
Information
Sutherland Shire Library utilizes a pathfinder...sort of. The pathfinder is inactive, and it isn't really what I'd call a pathfinder in that it's presenting information by itself rather than the links to that information. But this kind of information is something I could easily see fitting in with Warringah - it already has a local studies section, it already has a means of information submission, and it already has a local studies section on its website. The ability to submit links to information is an example of Web 2.0, so I could see this as being a good way to foster community involvement.
Saturday, April 11, 2015
Evaluation
Per exercise 10, I am to look at Web 2.0 aspects of my local library service - in this case, Warringah Libraries.
Children's
There is a children's service on the library website, designated as "kid's space." Of the functions present, there are some that are digital in nature. This includes "homework help" (with links to websites provided, said links focused on particular topics), "find a good read" (includes links to NoveList), and "digital kids" (e-books, and a streaming service for book reading by well-known actors). However, I can't really call any of these examples of a Web 2.0 mentality in that they're not user-created, driven, or anything that involves user-generated content. It's more the library providing a service for users. There are, however, two reasons why I have listed this section as an example of Web 2.0.
The first is that all of these options, and every other option in the kid's space section, has the option to share the information on social media, through sites such as Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, etc. The characteristics of Web 2.0 include the sharing of information and participation in the sharing/creation of that information. So at the least, the opportunity to spread these services through social media does show an awareness of Web 2.0 features on the library's part.
The second feature is actually the young writer's competition, an annual event the library has held since 2011, where children submit a piece of writing, with commended submissions being put on display, with access through the site. I would argue that this is an example of Web 2.0 in action, in that it is user-generated content (the writing) making its way onto the net. While it does not have the same level of reader imput as other sites that allow writing submissions (e.g. Fictionpress), the act of involving people to submit something that will make its way online is, I would argue, something that Web 2.0 has allowed for.
Adult Fiction
Of the library branches that I have worked in/visited, adult fiction has always been categorized in its own section, with genres given by spine stickers. On the library website, there is no such distinction. While an online catalogue exists, it does not include a filter by intended age range. It does include a star rating system (1-5), so that in itself is an example of user-driven content.
Aside from this, the only example of adult fiction that I can say utilizes Web 2.0 is the book club feature. Not that this is necessarily reserved for adults, but with the listed works being adult fiction/non-fiction, with the promotional image depicting adult, and the list of book clubs seeming to veer towards adult content, I would list this as a service focused on adults.
The service itself allows users to register book clubs and/or join them. The library will provide the club with ten copies of the same book, and the club will operate as it sees fit. I would call this as an example of Web 2.0, in that the technology itself allows for people to connect, and is an example of user-driven content (creating of book clubs, and adding to the list of available works).
Local Studies
Having worked in Local Studies (and am still working at this time of writing), I can say that this section is very focused on physical media - physical books, physical objects, physical newspaper cuttings, etc. While it is intended that the newspaper cuttings at least are eventually uploaded, for the most part, they are regulated to archive status.
That said, there is an aspect of Local Studies that represents Web 2.0, in as much that a lot of it comes from members of the public. This includes photos, where uploaded versions can be found here. Again, an example of Web 2.0 in that it is user-generated content appearing in digital form.
Children's
There is a children's service on the library website, designated as "kid's space." Of the functions present, there are some that are digital in nature. This includes "homework help" (with links to websites provided, said links focused on particular topics), "find a good read" (includes links to NoveList), and "digital kids" (e-books, and a streaming service for book reading by well-known actors). However, I can't really call any of these examples of a Web 2.0 mentality in that they're not user-created, driven, or anything that involves user-generated content. It's more the library providing a service for users. There are, however, two reasons why I have listed this section as an example of Web 2.0.
The first is that all of these options, and every other option in the kid's space section, has the option to share the information on social media, through sites such as Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, etc. The characteristics of Web 2.0 include the sharing of information and participation in the sharing/creation of that information. So at the least, the opportunity to spread these services through social media does show an awareness of Web 2.0 features on the library's part.
The second feature is actually the young writer's competition, an annual event the library has held since 2011, where children submit a piece of writing, with commended submissions being put on display, with access through the site. I would argue that this is an example of Web 2.0 in action, in that it is user-generated content (the writing) making its way onto the net. While it does not have the same level of reader imput as other sites that allow writing submissions (e.g. Fictionpress), the act of involving people to submit something that will make its way online is, I would argue, something that Web 2.0 has allowed for.
Adult Fiction
Of the library branches that I have worked in/visited, adult fiction has always been categorized in its own section, with genres given by spine stickers. On the library website, there is no such distinction. While an online catalogue exists, it does not include a filter by intended age range. It does include a star rating system (1-5), so that in itself is an example of user-driven content.
Aside from this, the only example of adult fiction that I can say utilizes Web 2.0 is the book club feature. Not that this is necessarily reserved for adults, but with the listed works being adult fiction/non-fiction, with the promotional image depicting adult, and the list of book clubs seeming to veer towards adult content, I would list this as a service focused on adults.
The service itself allows users to register book clubs and/or join them. The library will provide the club with ten copies of the same book, and the club will operate as it sees fit. I would call this as an example of Web 2.0, in that the technology itself allows for people to connect, and is an example of user-driven content (creating of book clubs, and adding to the list of available works).
Local Studies
Having worked in Local Studies (and am still working at this time of writing), I can say that this section is very focused on physical media - physical books, physical objects, physical newspaper cuttings, etc. While it is intended that the newspaper cuttings at least are eventually uploaded, for the most part, they are regulated to archive status.
That said, there is an aspect of Local Studies that represents Web 2.0, in as much that a lot of it comes from members of the public. This includes photos, where uploaded versions can be found here. Again, an example of Web 2.0 in that it is user-generated content appearing in digital form.
Community Profile
I live in Killarney Heights, an area that falls under the purview of Warringah Council. By extension, my local library service is Warringah Libraries. I have accessed its community profile through the link provided. All things considered, there is nothing out of the ordinary - the service is a public library, with multiple branches, and covers material as you'd expect a public library to - nothing too specialized, and with a variety of material for all ages. The community profile suggests nothing exceptional - English is by far the dominant language (and in most cases, only language spoken), the majority of people in the area were born in Australia, there's no great difference in the number of males and females, and the age profile more or less conforms to the ideal population pyramid (many children, steady decrease as age goes on, though there's a blip in the 60-64 range.
At the end of the day, the library service of this area appears to be serving a standard population.
At the end of the day, the library service of this area appears to be serving a standard population.
Tuesday, April 7, 2015
Podcasts
Podcasts are audio files generally associated with the Internet. The idea is that by downloading/streaming a file, a user will listen to people talking/discussing a subject for a given period of time. Podcasts tend to be focused on a particular topic, and come out on a (semi-)regular basis, such as in the form of "episodes."
An example of a podcast is one conducted by the National Library of Australia. These are sorted by topic, with each topic hub listing episodes. These topics are as follows, and are listed as a hub here.
*Talks & conferences
*Exhibitions
*Collections
*Media
*Events
*Bookshop
*Digital culture
*Innovative ideas forum
*Learning
An example of a podcast is one conducted by the National Library of Australia. These are sorted by topic, with each topic hub listing episodes. These topics are as follows, and are listed as a hub here.
*Talks & conferences
*Exhibitions
*Collections
*Media
*Events
*Bookshop
*Digital culture
*Innovative ideas forum
*Learning
Monday, April 6, 2015
Social Bookmarking
Two sets of reviews are the subject of this post. One at the State Library of Tasmania, concerning the book Born or bred?: Martin Bryant: the making of a mass murderer. The other is a series of reviews at Stonnington Library, Victoria. The question is how effective these reviews are, and how useful reviews are to libraries in general.
The Library of Tasmania reviews are useful. While there's only two, and only one has a rating, both go in-depth, summarizing the contents of the book in question. I notice that neither of them really present a judgement of the work, and just go for summarization, but I think that's useful in of itself. At the least, it can help a browser decide whether this work would interest them.
The series of reviews at Stonnington is a case of quantity over quality, with the reviews given never running more than a few sentences, though granted, this has the addition of constant ratings. These reviews do have some worth to them, but at times, their lack of length is to their detriment. For example, "Ad hoc production - very little (satisfying) analysis or synthesis!" is an example of a negative review, and "The reviews don't lie. Must read book if only to discover when and where the term, "flexible conscience" is used and, in what context" is an example of a positive review. Neither of these tell me anything bar what the reader thinks of the work, and as such, I have no means of gauging the work's quality/lack of it bar taking their word for it (or not).
Concerning the question of whether libraries should be providing these services...well, I feel the Stonnington reviews are an example of what can go wrong with user-generated reviews, and it's by far not the only site that shows what this system can entail. User reviews can vary widely in quality, won't necessarily strive to be objective, and even if made with the best of intentions, won't necessarily be that useful. The Library of Tasmania reviews defy these potential issues, but I feel they're the exception rather than the rule. That said, I think this would be a net positive feature for libraries to have - in a Web 2.0/3.0 age, user participation is expected, and as per the previous blog post, I have already outlined the benefits of a social media presence. That, and I would trust that the average browser would be able to evaluate when a reviews is useful and when it isn't.
My local library (Warringah Libraries) has a rating system, where users can leave a star rating (1-5). A key exists for what each star represents. However, it does not allow users to leave comments. One has to login to leave a rating.
The Library of Tasmania reviews are useful. While there's only two, and only one has a rating, both go in-depth, summarizing the contents of the book in question. I notice that neither of them really present a judgement of the work, and just go for summarization, but I think that's useful in of itself. At the least, it can help a browser decide whether this work would interest them.
The series of reviews at Stonnington is a case of quantity over quality, with the reviews given never running more than a few sentences, though granted, this has the addition of constant ratings. These reviews do have some worth to them, but at times, their lack of length is to their detriment. For example, "Ad hoc production - very little (satisfying) analysis or synthesis!" is an example of a negative review, and "The reviews don't lie. Must read book if only to discover when and where the term, "flexible conscience" is used and, in what context" is an example of a positive review. Neither of these tell me anything bar what the reader thinks of the work, and as such, I have no means of gauging the work's quality/lack of it bar taking their word for it (or not).
Concerning the question of whether libraries should be providing these services...well, I feel the Stonnington reviews are an example of what can go wrong with user-generated reviews, and it's by far not the only site that shows what this system can entail. User reviews can vary widely in quality, won't necessarily strive to be objective, and even if made with the best of intentions, won't necessarily be that useful. The Library of Tasmania reviews defy these potential issues, but I feel they're the exception rather than the rule. That said, I think this would be a net positive feature for libraries to have - in a Web 2.0/3.0 age, user participation is expected, and as per the previous blog post, I have already outlined the benefits of a social media presence. That, and I would trust that the average browser would be able to evaluate when a reviews is useful and when it isn't.
My local library (Warringah Libraries) has a rating system, where users can leave a star rating (1-5). A key exists for what each star represents. However, it does not allow users to leave comments. One has to login to leave a rating.
Sunday, April 5, 2015
Social Networking
I think it's good for libraries to engage in social media because it ultimately serves both the library and its customers. The following benefits come to mind:
1) It allows the library a method of informing customers of events, changes, etc. While there are other methods of this (e.g. email), social media does serve a useful purpose as an update tool.
2) It gives customers an easy method of feedback. Again, other methods for feedback exist, such as survey forms. However, in social media, feedback is far more reactionary, as in, an individual can post feedback, and have it responded to in quick order. This benefits customers in giving them a 'voice,' and benefits the library should it wish to react to consumer demand.
3) Subjective, but a social media presence can foster a sense of community in a userbase. A sense of belonging, sense of customer loyalty, etc. It is for this reason why on many forums community managers exist to help foster this sense, and moderators to target abusive posters. This may not form as readily on a social media site such as Facebook (where topics cannot be categorized as easily as a forum), but I could see this working to a library's benefit if the community is nurtured appropriately.
1) It allows the library a method of informing customers of events, changes, etc. While there are other methods of this (e.g. email), social media does serve a useful purpose as an update tool.
2) It gives customers an easy method of feedback. Again, other methods for feedback exist, such as survey forms. However, in social media, feedback is far more reactionary, as in, an individual can post feedback, and have it responded to in quick order. This benefits customers in giving them a 'voice,' and benefits the library should it wish to react to consumer demand.
3) Subjective, but a social media presence can foster a sense of community in a userbase. A sense of belonging, sense of customer loyalty, etc. It is for this reason why on many forums community managers exist to help foster this sense, and moderators to target abusive posters. This may not form as readily on a social media site such as Facebook (where topics cannot be categorized as easily as a forum), but I could see this working to a library's benefit if the community is nurtured appropriately.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)