This is Carol Burnett portraying a library worker (she doesn't claim to be a librarian in the video, although she does suggest reference work in addition to shelving) on The Lucy Show.

(Found this through an RSS feed entry from one of my favourite library related comic strips, Shelf Check.)

Labels: funny, librarianship

 

Just read "Topeka Library Board Restricts Access to Four Books on Sex" by Norman Oder from the Library Journal on February 20. The article talks about how the library board for Topeka and Shawnee County Public Library has decided to restrict access bye age to four books on the topic of sex, despite the director's recommendation and comments from other groups.

This is not uncommon. And not really surprising. A group of mayor or county appointed concerned citizens claiming that any exposure to sexual information to anyone under 18 (I'm assuming that's what passes for a minor in that area) is painfully traumatizing. Despite the seemingly obvious fact that this kind of reaction is probably the biggest cause of all our adult problems with sex, relationships, intimacy, gender issues and the like... Despite the fact that putting sex education material where you have to ask someone specifically for it will place an insurmountable barrier to the vast majority of the very adults the books are there to help... Despite the seemingly obvious contradiction of censoring these materials in the face of their own country's declarations of freedom and democracy... Despite all our own experience of not being scarred for life on discovering our Dad's Playboys and our continued ignorance even with such a valuable reference on a subject that's central to all our lives by definition... Despite all these issues with this story, I think my biggest problem is with the lack of similar action with materials "harmful to minors" (as well as the rest of us) due to a lack of truthfulness and reason.

We have a bizarre sense of priority. We shut down discussions and educational opportunities on an act and aspect of our society that ensures the continuation of our species (and at least half of us would say a very contented continuation... lol) because we think it's dangerous. And then we embrace and protect or simply ignore whole areas of irrationality, nonsense, bias and unjustified claims. Those who are religious literally place faith or belief without justification above reason. We raise our children on deliberate lies we call fairy tales and tradition. We get so much "information" from journalists, authors, and friends without requiring any amount of proof. Sure Oprah Winfrey gets upset when she finds out a book she's put her brand on turns out to be blatant lies, but then where were the measures taken to ensure that didn't happen in the first place?

I'm not saying that we should all live our lives through pure logic (although Mr. Spock's ears are a conversation starter!) and that no amount of fiction or childhood innocence is allowed or even appropriate or that religion provides nothing helpful or positive. Imagination of what's not possible or falling into a make-believe world is wonderful and valuable and we must all put bounds on the level of certainty we require from all the various sources in our lives. What I'm dismayed at is the relative lack of awareness of THESE issues and the disproportionate preoccupation with what seems to me to be mere insecurities and phobias. These latter are supposed to be managed and surmounted in the name of the former. Not embraced and maintained.

I do think we're getting better though. Fewer cases of censorship seem to bubble to the surface and they are often accompanied by reports of opposition. Sex education IS more available in schools overall and hopefully (because I have no numbers to support anything more than hope) parents are helping their children learn more. And, although so many see it as the downfall of civilization, sex and other untouchable subjects are coming into the mainstream more, which is good if only to allow us to talk about such things and discover what IS harmful and what is not.

So go out and talk. Or just stay where you are and comment here...

Labels: health, librarianship, thoughts

 

One of my biggest beefs with how people search for information is that they don't know (and don't care to know) how the tool that they are using works. Whenever I bring this up, the common response is something like, "You don't have to be an auto mechanic to drive." But I think this is a misunderstanding of what it is to know how something works.

To drive, you certainly don't need to know about everything that's under the hood, how spark plugs ignite fuel causing pistons to move up and all the rest. It may help in some way, in order to push your car to its extreme, or to ensure that you are not causing unnecessary harm to the engine, or even how to interpret subtle reactions the car may have to what you're doing. But you DO need to know what happens when you turn the steering wheel, when you step on the accelerator, when you turn the key... You need to know what the result is in pretty good detail (how much do you turn the steering to cause so much turn in the front wheels or how much gas to give it to accelerate a certain amount). You don't need to know how the car does what it does but you do need to know what it does. That's what "knowing how a car works" in a operational manner means.

Similarly when searching for information, you need to know how your search tool works. You don't need to know Google's proprietary code underneath the "hood" or what programming language PubMed uses on it's servers. You do need to know that when you type in a word in the Google search box, it's looking for entries in its database (i.e. web pages) that has that word in the web page (or rather Google's record of the web page) somewhere. You need to know that PubMed not only finds the article citations that has the word that you typed in somewhere but also maps that word to possible subject labels and includes the articles tagged with those too.

But too often, novice users merely type words and phrases into the box without considering what the box will do with those words and phrases. Some think they are clever and include Boolean terms like AND or OR or short forms of those like the plus (+) sign, but don't think to check whether the tool recognizes those terms or whether it uses them in the way they think. And I've come across a few tools that don't know themselves how they work. (For example, TRIP at http://www.tripdatabase.com claims in the search tips that users can include the connector AND but it "ands" terms by default anyway, making using the word useless.)

So, please, when you're searching, test out the tool a little first. See what changing your search a little will do to see if it does what you think it does. If you think adding more words will get you closer to what you want, see if adding any other word actually reduces your results. If it increases them, it's not doing what you think. So test drive your search engine or article index a little first. Or better yet, ask a librarian.

Labels: internet, librarianship, thoughts

 

A couple events in the past few days have made me feel excited for the future.

As I've probably mentioned before, I'm the chair of my kids' school's Parent Advisory Council. I haven't been chair for very long and this is the first position like this I've had outside of the world of librarianship so I got off to a rather slow start: merely arranging for meetings, creating agendas, piping in with suggestions and questions when appropriate. But not knowing the community or the school or the processes as much as the others, I felt a little cautious about proposing things and directing them in any way. But as I've learned more and listened more, I feel more confident in a leadership role. I love coming up with ideas and ways to see them through. In the past couple meetings, I've started us down the path of improving communication to the parents and just recently started a wiki to act as the school council's web site.

And just today, I got a call from Hamilton Public Library that they would like to interview me for the position of Branch Manager. I just had a phone interview yesterday and apparently they were sufficiently impressed that they want me to continue on down the process. I've loved working as a health sciences librarian in the position I have now, but it's always been a temporary position and it's coming to an end soon so I have to move on. I worked as a public librarian and supervisor before so I know I would do well and have a great time back there so I crossing my fingers on this one. I've applied to a whole bunch of positions in a wide variety of places and fields and levels but this one would be uber leet. LOL

Everything's coming up Milhouse! Good times FTW!

Labels: librarianship, work

 

Just had an interview on Friday for the position of "Reference and Government Information Librarian" at the local public library. Although I've gotten used to being an academic librarian for the past few years, the job description (responsible for the government documents, electronic resources as well as the reference collection) sounds like something that I would do well at and really enjoy as well, as well as being a lot of work (which I don't mind of course). They said that it shouldn't be too long until they make their decision, so I'm waiting on the edge of my seat for them to contact me. I'm still applying for others whatever the case but it would great if I got this one.

How come it's exactly those events that you want to happen inspire in me a reaction that makes it even more difficult for it to come to pass? The more you want the job, the more nervous you are during the interview, and therefore the less "perfect" they see your effort at impressing them. I can speak in front of a class full of total strangers including professors, doctors, whatever, and have no problem, but the second I have to speak to a small group of people about how awesome I am at whatever, I feel the god (or demon rather) of chickening out descend on my little head.

Anyway, I feel good about this one. Wish me luck!

Labels: librarianship, thoughts, work

 

Just finished reading:

Harris R & Wathen N. 2007. "If my mother was alive I'd probably have called her.": women's search for health information in rural Canada. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 47(1):67-79.

which concluded with the following suggestions (some of which are pretty obvious but are important to spell out specifically nonetheless).

1. "...an important, overarching consideration for those designing and delivering health reference services should be the promotion of communitywide awareness of such services."


2. "...women want and need not only health information per se, but to have it presented, and ideally discussed, in the context of a caring, interactive relationship - one that respects the woman as the expert when it comes to her own needs, concerns, and context."


3. "For many, 'health' is incorporated in the concept of 'well-being' or 'quality of life,'" and "Any health reference service, therefore, should be interlinked with other subject areas that patrons may view as part of health and well-being, or, as one of the women in [the] study put it, 'the emotional side of health.'"


4. Health information programs and services should be designed not only to help patrons find high-quality information, but also teach them basic skills for searching, identifying high-quality sources, and knowing what types of information require follow-up action, such as consultation with a healthcare provider."

The basic message was that "It seems naive, if not cynical, to assume that the healthcare needs of women who live in rural communities will be met by simply deepening the supply of Internet-based health information..."

Labels: health, librarianship, reading

 

Notes from Web 2.you workshop (February 15, 2008, at McGill University, Montreal) session called “Web 2.0, Library 2.0, Librarian 2.0” 1.5 hour presentation by Jessamyn West, Library Consultant from rural Vermont & blogger from “librarian.net” [librarian.net] (professional) & “Abada Abada” [jessamyn.com/journal] (personal)

[Her presentation notes can be found at librarian.net/talks/mcgill]

As a contrast with many of her colleagues, she prefers the title “library technologist” for the work that she does now, helping a number of small public libraries in Orange County, Vermont, primarily with their technology needs and issues.

She began her discussion of the whole 2.0 concept with some of the real basics and what really needs to be considered before any mention of 2.0 anything happens:

• Her (and our) frustration with mere dial-up internet access and that, like it or not, many of our users still have and always will have merely dial-up access.
• The usefulness (or not) of school libraries being wonderfully filled with PCs with high speed internet access in small towns with little or no ‘net otherwise.
• Government agencies and companies trying to put everything on the web (and very often ONLY on the web) and the difficulty some people still have with getting access to that.
  

Through all of these barriers and issues, it’s still important for libraries to recognise their role in making technology fun, easy and accessible.

You know those O’Reilly programming books with the black and white animal on the cover? Well, the term “Web 2.0” comes from one in which the author was merely using the phrase like a brand name and not literally meaning any newly formed technology in particular. The web before 2.0 was just a billboard – sites, pages, information, and images posted to the internet, were just that: posted up for users to look at and admire but not interact with in any way. The desire to be able to interact with what was there, to be able to comment on articles, manipulate images, and reconfigure data, was the birth of the Web 2.0 idea. Beyond this rather vague sense of the user being able to take part in the internet somehow, the 2.0 concept is still not completely clear, including the “spin-offs” like our own Library or Librarian 2.0, similar to the US Justice Potter Stewart’s famous definition of obscenity, “I know it when I see it.”

Because it is still a concept in its infancy, there are many things to do before (or while) we jump on the Library 2.0 bandwagon. Consider the elderly or novice computer user. In many ways these patrons are even more difficult to assist than the truly disabled like the blind or deaf. And although parts of Library 2.0 can seem to help, such as the idea that we are to be making our tools and services more user-centered, other assumptions make it more difficult, such as the assumption of a certain level of technology being available or interest on the part of the user. The network is not always up and running and some users create lousy content. But the important thing to remember is that you don’t want to refrain from doing something just because the supports MAY not be there someday. “We can’t get nice furniture… What if the library fills with squirrels?” Librarianship is getting much more open now so we have less and less nay-saying-for-the-sake-of-nay-saying like this, but we still have a hard time letting go.

Library 2.0 is not a “what”, it’s a “how”. It’s a way of thinking about what we’re doing without a specific list of tools and resources to do it. And it’s not always just about the web. For example, in those brochures or PowerPoint slides we create, we have a tendency t o simply use the free clip that comes with Microsoft Office. Not all of that is bad and it’s certainly better to have a graphic than not but we could also be searching through flickr.com for images licensed under Creative Commons to get images that are not only free and legal but also much more interesting and attractive. The idea is that we should be experimenting, and just like so many companies and products coming out today in “perpetual beta”, it’s ok to just try something without being absolutely certain it will be perfect first.

[At this point Jessamyn pointed out that she used the term L2 as a short form for Library 2.0, but was not claiming to be starting any new trend or catchphrase for the topic. I say we should start using this right away! lol]

The book “Cluetrain Manifesto”, by Christopher Locke, Rick Levine, Doc Searls, and David Weinberger [cluetrain.com], talks about how the web, and particularly Web 2.0, is changing business. “Markets are conversations,” and some companies are slowly realizing that they need to get back to a more human level of interaction and offering of service: we need to avoid data silos, for example, and resources need to allow “deeplinking”, the ability to link directly to the page or part of the web site that interests us specifically. Some illustrations of how libraries are following this trend are:

• Pace University Library’s reminder to users that they could get a library card for the local public library system and therefore access to different and more resources if the university’s resources are not sufficient;
• Cook Memorial Library’s use of Scriblio to provide usefully named links with friendly text in their catalogue (as compared with the University of Vermont Library’s catalogue, using the standard interface most academic libraries use now with unintelligible labels, long call numbers, jargon, etc.), the moral of the story being “keep it simple”,
• (A comment at this point from the audience repeated the question in an earlier session about the Amazon “recommender” function and whether this was in any catalogues to Jessamyn’s knowledge. Apparently, there are some big systems that have something like this, but there are privacy issues to be considered when a library provides this service.);
• the McGill Hospital Library’s website includes a photo of the staff which makes the library, and the work seem more personal;
• Plymouth State University Library is using the resource type facet for multimedia types, making it easier for users to find exactly what they are looking for;
• Koha (I believe this is the correct spelling) provides an example of the existence of fun or silly interfaces, the fact that tools can be designed in almost any way so that the users are more comfortable in the “environment” (in this case it was a tool for young children).
  

Another issue that is being worked through using Web 2.0 tools, is the issue of increasing numbers of workers complaining about unmanageable amounts of email being received. Using RSS feeds, blogs, social networking sites like Facebook, etc., communication can be funneled to appropriate channels to get the tools to do some of the work of sorting information flow for us.

But Web 2.0 is also about saving the time of the user, as one of the founders of modern librarianship, Shiyali Ramamrita Ranganathan, defended. And with the right tool or service, this doesn’t always have to translate into more work for the librarian or library staff. For example, there’s a plugin for FireFox called LibX that will allow the user to search a library’s catalogue without having to first navigate to the catalogue’s page. Also, the University of Connecticut Library is using a wiki to create a collaborative FAQ. Wikis have also been used as a platform to more easily create, update, and access the reference manual. The key is to try new things and do your own usability testing – find out what works and who it works for. We keep buying OPACs and other tools that do not work. We need to develop standards and demand compliance.

Finally, Library 2.0 is not a religion and it is not always about technology. It’s about taking the initiative. Go on... Scoot!

Labels: internet, librarianship

 

Notes from Web 2.you workshop (February 15, 2008, at McGill University, Montreal) session called “Blogging for Professional Development” 1.5 hour presentation by John Dupuis, Head, Steacie Science & Engineering Library, York University & blogger from “Confessions of a Science Librarian” [jdupuis.blogspot.com] , February 15, 2008.


[Presentation given here can be found at tinyurl.com/2u24do or here]

The new “digital world” is all about attention and reputation (from Richard Akerman, CISTI). This, among other reasons, is why blogging is so important, valuable and popular. We blog for social (or selfish) reasons: to become popular, to be known, to improve our standing in a certain field or group, but we also use blogs to explore ideas, to act as an external memory, to make a profit, to communication, and to create opportunities.

(Note: The presentation slides include several comics from the series XKCD [xkcd.com]. And a blog of note is "Walt at Random" [walt.lishost.org].)

The term "biblioblogosphere" among others is used to describe the world of librarian and library related weblogs. And there are many different types of "biblioblogs": from the personal to the institutional, from containing commentary on events big or small to sharing news items and new resources, and from the very broad to the very narrowly defined in terms of subject area. To find blogs of interest you can try:

• blogrolls (lists of related blogs) available on a blog you already know;
• search using
• Technorati [technorati.com]; or
• Google Blog Search [blogsearch.google.com];
• check out the list of blogs on:
• LISWiki [liswiki.org/wiki/Blogs#Individual_Weblogs]; or
• OEDb [oedb.org/library/features/top-25-librarian-bloggers-by-the-numbers]; or
• check out a compilation of individual blog posts via
• “The Library Shelf” [thelibraryshelf.com]; or
• the “Carnival of the Infosciences” [infosciences.pbwiki.com].
  

Although there are plenty of library related blogs, it’s also a good idea to read blogs (or any material for that matter) outside of librarianship. For example, as a health science librarian, I could regularly read blogs from health care professionals like “The Physician Executive” [executivephysician.blogspot.com] or “Stories from the hospice nurse” [atrugoddes.livejournal.com] to connect with my users and stay on top of their personal issues to help me serve them better.

Issues to consider when blogging:

• Library 2.0 – as a subject, as a mindset, and in the functionality of your site.
• Privacy – yours and others
• Intellectual property – yours and others
• Politeness – to what degree should you be or can you be
• Anonymity – whether to be so or not
  

Why should someone blog as opposed to publish in the more academic literature?

• Blogs are more immediately available and easily accessible.
• Blogs tend to be much more interactive, allowing readers to contribute with comments and the author to respond to such comments.
• It is much cheaper both for the author and the system as a whole.
• There is no “gatekeeper” when writing a blog post: anyone can create a blog and start posting right away, whereas to get published, you must get past the publishers, editors, and often your own peers.
  

(Note: Check out the book “Balanced Libraries” by Walt Crawford all about Library 2.0 – read more in a brief review from the blog “Slow Reading”.)

Blogs are also an excellent source of information on a variety of very new, controversial, or little known topics. In a comparison of search results on certain current issues, LISZEN (an LIS search engine that includes blogs) [liszen.com] outperformed tools like Web of Science, Inspec, or even LISA, simply because the latter do not include blog literature which is where some of these ideas are being discussed in much more volume. In some subjects, blogs are the only real outlet to get your ideas out. We’re always talking about information overload nowadays but there will always be something new and unique to say and it’s important to make sure your make your voice heard using whatever method you can find.

Audience comment to the presenter remarking how great it would be to have senior university administrators blogging about their work: Check out the French blog from University of Montreal library school director Jean-Michel Salaün “Bloc-notes de Jean-Michel Salaün” [blogues.ebsi.umontreal.ca/jms]

York University has developed a site called Planet York [planetyork.yorku.ca] that compiles blogs posts from blogs written by York U staff and faculty. This not only provides a rich overview of what some of the university’s minds are thinking for the benefit of those outside of the institution, but is a source of pride, inspiration and networking for those within York U as well.

Tips on blogging yourself:

• Find a niche to fill but don’t be afraid to evolve as well.
• Blog your passion. Blog about what you love, otherwise you won’t be able to keep it up.
• Post when you want. We don’t all have to post several times a day or even once every day. The presenter blogs about 3 or 4 times a week. Some blogs are weekly.
• Pause before writing, but don’t obsess about it.
  

Oh and check out the blog “Academic Librarian” [blogs.princeton.edu/librarian]

After-session comments from the audience:

• Consider your impact and reach: If you are job searching you may not want blog posts about how much you hate your boss or about how you steal pens from work regularly.
• Is it possible to delete your entire blog? Many blogging tools allow you to delete your content and account and therefore remove it from the “live” web but search engines by design roam around the internet saving text wherever they can. If you have a relatively new blog, then deleting will probably really delete it. If you’ve been blogging for years, chances are that all your text has been scooped up and archived somewhere.
  

Labels: internet, librarianship

 

Reading "moving from the ivory tower to the community" by Margo Fryer from the October 2007 "Academic Matters"...

This is an interesting article about UBC's "Learning Exchange" - a facility with free computer resources and Internet access for Vancouver's Downtown Eastside. As I was reading their description of it:

The... patrons are a diverse mix - former resource industry workers whose bodies gave out after years of hard labour, Aboriginal youth wanting to upgrade their education, women with babies needing adult company, immigrants who are participating in our ESL program, substance users trying to stay clean, and homeless people looking for refuge. One any given day, there will be people ... who have been coming there almost every day for years and others who have come for the first time.

...I thought, "My god. They've invented the PUBLIC LIBRARY!"

Labels: funny, librarianship, reading

 

Notes from the Web 2.you workshop (February 15, 2008, at McGill University, Montreal) session called "Is Boolean Dead? Research and the New Web" 1 hour presentation by Rajiv Johal and Beth Dunning, Librarians, Howard Ross Library of Management, McGill University.

Having driven from Kingston and not accounting enough for the traffic in Montreal, I was late for this presentation by a few minutes so I missed the opening statements but was flung fully into the meat of the presentation without any preamble.

The question was asked, "What is Search 2.0?" There is no clear definition for this concept but it does include the increasingly popular use of facets and tags, and is emphatically not Boolean. Some examples of public search engines illustrated this 2.0 idea are:

• the child focussed, visually appealing search engine RedZee [redzee.com],
• the guided search engine ChaCha [chacha.com], and
• Rollyo [rollyo.com] which allows you to choose or create a tool that searches only a certain set of sites.
  

The open source ILS movement is also including some very 2.0 concepts:

• Fish4info [fish4info.org] is an example of a user-friendly interface for your OPAC/ILS created with the CMS Drupal; and
• Evergreen [open-ils.org], which is quite popular in the US, is a full OPAC/ILS product with facets, reviews, and no Boolean.
  

In many of these tools, although Boolean operators are not used or not recognized in the default or basic searches, very often there is still the option to be able to use it. It just remains hidden to the user who may be confused or ignorant about Boolean techniques.

Increasingly, vendor solutions are also integrating some of the Search 2.0 preferences, whether as full products or “middleware”, pieces you can simply add to your current system. And example is Aquabrowser’s tag cloud (note: the tag cloud is frequently on the left of the screen because research has shown that that is where average users tend to look first), used at the University of Chicago’s library catalog option “Lens” [lens.lib.uchicago.edu]. When trying to determine whether this technology was a useful addition to their catalog, the U of C found that upwards of 9 out of 10 students (even Masters and PhD students) improve their search results with access to the tag cloud. (I’m not sure that the survey really shows that it is a good tool: it could just be that generally people are really bad searchers and that any tool would improve things. Searching problems are very often a matter of lack of a clear process not always lack of synonyms or proper terms.) U of C is still maintaining their original catalog interface (sans tag cloud) so that all the usual functionality can still be used included Boolean searching.

At this point, an audience member asked about about the existence of tools that enabled virtual browsing of the shelf but the presenters were not aware of any such tools.

Citation and other research databases were also entering into the Search 2.0 ring. For example Factiva Search 2.0 ( a business news database) does not translate “and” or “or” into the Boolean functions but rather includes them as any other keyword in the search because AND or OR could be a company’s ticker code or part of one. When searching using a term that the tool recognizes as a company’s ticker, it breaks this option out to link to the company’s homepage or related news, and it includes a multimedia search in the platform as well.

Another question from the audience concerned the existence of recommender-type tools in use in any of these tools. Apparently McMaster University Library is testing this functionality.

Another vendor jumping on the Search 2.0 bandwagon is EBSCO with their Visual Search. This uses indexing to create a visual interface to explore articles but, just like the other tools, it really only helps with browsing as opposed to performing comprehensive searches.

The important points to take away from this session were summarized as:

• Boolean searching is not dead but rather hidden from the average user; and
  
• Search 2.0 is here to stay, being about what users want. Try implementing some of the ideas in some small way.
  

After-session comments from the audience:

• Consider a search tool used by Walmart called Endeca [endeca.com].
• What would you do first? Remove the necessity to search with Boolean operators and include a spell check feature. The term “fuzzy searching” was used to describe these kinds of functions.
• Consider the tension between teaching users how to search and making it easier for the users to search.
  

Labels: internet, librarianship

 

[From Information isn't reserved for books by Houston Chronicle's Carolyn Feibel.]

Another good example of the "we're not all old spinsters with horn-rimmed glasses and tight hair buns" style of librarian related news piece. In fact, it quotes a past president of ALA as saying:

librarians are subject to outdated stereotypes: "fusty, bookish, sensible shoes, eyeglasses and not particularly friendly. We're really the polar opposite of that right now."

Good point, but it makes me think, "So what is the polar opposite of 'bookish, sensible shoes, [and] eyeglasses'?" Sports-loving, Reebok-wearing, and sans glasses? That's not me. I read. I wear Doc Martens (VERY comfortable and the style I wear looks business-ey). I wear glasses. And trust me, there are still several of the stereotypes walking around. Just like any profession, most of us don't fit the typical image but we're not the furthest thing from it.

And I was always confused about librarians being seen as not friendly. Yeah, the clerks behind the circulation desk are often grouchy... try their job for a day and try not being grouchy. But librarians HAVE to be comfortable with people. That's pretty much all we do: connect people with information. Without people, we'd have nothing to do!

Later in the article, the director of Houston Public Library is quoted as saying, "You can take your coffee around the library, and nobody's going to tell you to be quiet." I don't know about you but it's still possible to be loud enough for you to be disturbing those around you, even the ones working in groups. But she's right in saying that libraries have to stop being just the building with the books. IN-FORM-ATION. That's what we're about. Remember it, kids. Write it down. Then come ask us for it.

Labels: librarianship

 

Registration is now open for the Canadian Health Libraries Association 2008 Conference!

Taking place in sunny Halifax, Nova Scotia, the theme is "Navigating the seas of change"... I've never been to the east coast of Canada before, although I've lived and visited the east coast of the US before. It would obviously be much different and it would be interesting to attend this conference, but I went to last year's CHLA conference in Ottawa, many of my colleagues are going, and, besides, there are other conferences I'm considering, MLA and WILU being the two big ones coming up. I've never been to either Chicago, where MLA is this year, or Vancouver, where WILU is being held (Geez... I haven't been anywhere, have I?) so it would be interesting to see both but I don't know if I have enough professional development funds to cover both, and I certainly can't pay for one completely out of my own pocket so I'll probably have to choose. MLA is more closely linked to my current job but WILU is more generally applicable any job I'll have in the future. Chicago is closer and therefore cheaper, but Vancouver is still in Canada and if I took my wife we could make a little vacation out of it. Both locations sound interesting (although Chicago tips the scales slightly in this category). I don't know. I'll have to ask around for suggestions. Of course, YOU could tell me what you would vote for in a comment below... Hmmm...

Labels: family, health, librarianship, work

 

Here's a link to the 43 page pdf document, "Information searches that solve problems" report from the Pew Internet & American Life Project (Can't we Canadians ever do anything ourselves? Sheesh.), but here's 4 of the 6 major findings from the executive summary (2 about gov docs and e-government... yawn) for those of you who are too lazy to read the whole thing... like me. LOL

• People use something called the Internet to get information! Duh.


• "Searchers usually end up satisfied." Yeah, and people flock to McDonald's... that doesn't mean they're getting what they need!


• "Libraries meet special needs." They say 'special needs' and then they talk about libraries being filled with people in their 20s. (Maybe this deserves some reading of the actual report.) I'm glad they're coming in and all but the people who really need information (doctors, politicians, teachers, parents, etc.) don't all fit in that category.


• Some people have access - others don't. Again, duh.

Not much new. Not much interesting. What really needs to be studied is why people don't want to read or learn or think any more (if they ever did). I think most of the world's problems would disappear if everyone just "chillaxed", became a little more aware of how things actually work and became a little more responsible for their own thoughts and beliefs. What we think and feel affects what we do, and therefore we need to be armed with the best raw material on which to base those thoughts and feelings so that the actions that burst forth make a little more sense and work a little better with everyone else's actions.

Can't we all just get along?!? LOL

Labels: internet, librarianship, thoughts

 

A few days ago, a colleague of mine remarked on how, being Jewish in an environment of mostly non-Jewish people she is usually called on to be the expert on her "people", how it really sets her apart, and how odd and sometimes uncomfortable that is.

Of course (being the completely self-centered person I am) I immediately tried to think about how this concept can be turned around and applied to me! LOL I'm not Jewish so that's out. In fact I'm not religious at all (I'm interested IN religion but am not a believer per se) and most people are if only just a little, but I don't think that really works either. But I am a male in a primarily female field (librarianship, for those of you not paying attention) and to some degree I can see how she feels. I take great care to communicate my non-stereotypically-male characteristics: I don't like sports, I don't drink (beer or otherwise), I'm a total spice-wuss, I'm not totally colur-blind, etc. but I still feel occasionally that I'm slotted into the "oh, he's just a guy" category. It's not vindictive and sometimes I play it up just to get a laugh. But there is slight pressure there to be the example guy in the room (there is one other male in the library out of 20 staff in total, so it's not all on me... lol) and a bit of barrier that I work at keeping down.

Or perhaps I don't know how she feels. I am not often specifically called on to be the expert on the male perspective and perhaps this feeling that I am an example is all of my own making. There are plenty of us guys around to examine and interogate so it's not like I'm a new concept to be explored or an issue to be tip-toed around. I can imagine this is probably how some "minorities" feel - like a specimen or a land mine depending on the level of comfort the people around them have - when all they want to be treated like is a regular Joe... er, Joan.

I don't know how I would feel in that situation. I like to point out and push out my differences (and eccentricities sometimes) but to have your difference(s) defined and thrust upon you might become tiresome and restrictive. We all want to belong somehow and to constantly be held at arms length for some stupid, superficial reason would be difficult to handle.

Labels: librarianship, thoughts, work

 

Here's a good article about a librarian who's a "wiz" at answering questions and all about the telephone reference service that she works in: News - Reference librarian: Where to turn when you need an answer - sacbee.com

Reading this article brings me back to my previous job where I occasionally had to march down to the basement and sit at the telephone reference desk myself. This pics in the article make their space seem a little nicer than ours was but not much different other than that.

I don't know if I'd describe myself in a favourable a light as Ms. Owens in the article but wouldn't it be great if all librarians were seen as such problem solvers, such "know-it-alls" as they say in the article? Especially in public libraries... this is really the reputation that librarians should try to cultivate. But there are too many librarians that don't think that librarianship is really about that, to who I say, "What else do we really do then?!?" And LIS masters programs don't really push this image. Come to think of it, I don't remember having any image pushed at me in library school! That's a shame. Just like any university program, and the professional programs in particular, an important part of the curriculum should be pointing the graduates in the direction of bettering the profession. They don't seem to do this... at least not enough. LIS programs are not typically very long so time is certainly a factor but I would expect some time devoted to what makes a great contributor and example for the profession... what our goals should (or at least could) be.

(Here's another of those librarians-we-all-want-to-be: David Smith from NYPL)

Labels: librarianship, thoughts

 

Let start by saying (again) that I do like Wikipedia. But (and here we go) I don't think people really know how to "use" it. And I don't mean, they don't know how to look up specific articles in it, or modify things in it, etc. I mean, people don't know how to treat it as an information source. The common complaint about it is that it's not "authoritative" like the Encyclopedia Britannica (the usual comparison). And then the retort to that is, "Well the Encyclopedia Britannica makes mistakes too!" I hate that. First of all, let's try to get along people, ok?

Second of all, that dismisses the whole value of both sources, particularly Wikipedia. And it shows a fundamental misunderstanding about what Wikipedia is, or rather, what it does for us. Take as an example, how people usually refer to information they find in Wikipedia. I'm reading along in the 2006-07 Annual Report for the Canadian Cochrane Network and Centre (the Canadian part of the Cochrane Collaboration, an organization successfully high quality, timely, and most importantly as near-certain as possible, health care evidence materials... read the first few pages of the report) and they refer to a description of Cochrane found in Wikipedia by saying "Wikipedia, the popular online community encyclopaedia states..." it. This is the common mistake. Wikipedia did not state it. A user of Wikipedia stated it. You may think, "Well, duh!", but this is an important distinction. Encyclopedia Britannica (the organization) is an entity that has taken on the responsibility for the information put forth in the Encyclopedia Britannica (the information source). Wikipedia has not. They can't. All they've done is provide a forum in which anyone can manipulate text, that happens to be in the form of an encyclopedia. I'm not saying that this makes it less truthly or trustworthy or authoritative, just that when you citing something in Wikipedia, the author isn't Wikipedia. It's "Chrismoore123" or "Thinboy00" or "Noodlenozzle", the user that typed it in. They're responsible. They're the source that you're judging authoritative or not. Individuals created the entries in Encyclopedia Britannica too, but Encyclopedia Britannica (the organization) has taken efforts to make sure those individuals are qualified and us readers trust them on that, or at least hold them responsible for their efforts.

One interesting difference is how time plays into judging the authority of these two sources. In Encyclopedia Britannica, we assume that the newer the information is, the better, the more accurate it is. Although in Wikipedia we do this to some extent too, it should also be seen that in a community where anyone and everyone can change anything and everything, the older the content is, that is the longer it's stayed around without anyone changing it, the better (or at least, most agreed upon) it probably is as well.

Labels: internet, librarianship, reading, thoughts

 

Presentations are over! I talked about library resources that can be used in the classroom last week at EOSET 2007. It was at RMC which was cool. Never been over there before. Nice old buildings. Probably older than some of the older buildings on the Queen's campus. Very impressive talk by Major Workman on teaching, technology, policy, and the future. Very inspiring and refreshing, and of course, candid. It is the military you know!

Also a great description of a new automated assignment/testing system for some professor of math... can't remember his name right now. (Check on the EOSET program, you'll find it.) Anyway, it was about this system that randomizes rather complex math problems so that students can take "quizzes" with as many questions as they'd like, as many times as they'd like. It actually turned out that students were doing like ten times as much work and loving it! Pretty cool.

And in other news, my coworker is having twins. Don't know whether they are boys or girls or what, or identical or not, but that's pretty cool. Actually, it's really old news but I haven't mentioned on here yet so it's news to you! And my sister-in-law is apparently pregnant. Babies everywhere!

Still looking for another job for when this temporary contract runs out. I spent a lot of time today working on my resume and cover letter for the one I'd like the most (gotta apply soon) and I've got to work on applying to a bunch of others as well. Wish me luck. Again. Oh boy.

Labels: family, librarianship, work

 

Today, I attended the second and last day of the Cross-Faculty Teaching Forum conference that I presented at yesterday. (Check out my abstract in the list: A3 on this list) Informative, inspiring and interesting. And it brought me into Goodes Hall, a very nicely reworked building that I've never been in on campus. (I'll put my materials up here somewhere when I get a chance...)

And I may have helped save 400 lives yesterday... Just a regular day in the life of a reference librarian. But seriously, it's possible. When I came to relieve my colleague at the desk, she had just received a request to look up a non-profit foundation based in Ontario, working in Columbia, by the name of "Child & Youth of the Future". I took over and scoured all the foundation-related directories that we have, plus called over to Stauffer (the humanities library) to get them to do the same. Nothing. I also checked the Canada Revenue Agency website which has a searchable database of charities registered with them, which this foundation would probably have to be. Not the easiest search function I've ever used, but nothing there either. Calling back, I told the info-requester that I had found nothing in the main resources that such an institution should be in if it existed, so, it's unlikely that it did. He told me about the offer a group going by this name and description gave to 400 students in Columbia: free university education. Very elaborately set up: recruiting local trusted figures to help pass on the message, tours, t-shirts, some free cellphones, etc. Before they were taken away to a university where they were to stay the night, something interfered, and some sort of police involvement developed. Nothing very clear, I don't know how the person contacting us was involved, or whether any of this ever really happened, but scary nonetheless. But apparently a tragic ending avoided. And I helped. Whew.

Labels: librarianship, work

 

Here's some sites that I found out about through Marylaine Block's "Neat New Stuff I Found This Week":

• LibSite: A Recommendation Service for Library-related Websites
  http://libsite.org/
  Reviews of interesting and important web resources for librarians; feel free to add your own recommendations.
• NPR Podcasts Directory
  http://www.npr.org/rss/podcast/podcast_directory.php
  This 2007 Webby and People's Voice award-winner includes over 450 podcasts from member radio stations on a wide range of topics - Car Talk, Speaking of Pets, The 90-Second Naturalist, Sports with Frank DeFord, GeekSpeak, and more. Browse by topic, title, or provider.
• Reading Stack at Flickr
  http://www.flickr.com/groups/readingstack/
  Here's a fun meme to spread: take a photo of the pile of books you're hoping to get around to reading. Then, once you've finished one from the stack, post a comment on it.
  

Now, of course, I have to get someone to recommend my sites on libsite.org, check out all these podcasts, and build and photograph a pile of books to read. This is "Internet" thing is NOT helping me finish my To Do list. It just adds to it! I can't wait until the fad dies down. LOL

Labels: internet, librarianship, reading

 

Long simple day at work today. I received an email requesting advice/help with a search yesterday that was described as being for a systematic review. Now, in medicine, systematic reviews are the cream of the crop in terms of documentation/publication. They take a lot of research (in the literature), a lot of care, a great deal of analysis, are incredibly practical and focused, and are meant to be regularly and eternally updated. I thought, "Yes! I'm going to really do a good job on this and be part of something really useful!" I worked all day preparing the search, checking definitions, finding subject headings and synonyms to ensure that the search would be comprehensive, and I wrote back to the requester mid-stride to make sure they were aware of what I was doing and what they could expect. Also, for stats purposes I wanted to know whether they were faculty or professional health care staff... Near the end of the day I get a response saying that they are a student actually working on an assignment that they will be handing in (the first part of, anyway) to US!!! All that work for someone I can't do the work for! Gaaahhhh!!! Well, hopefully their supervisor (this person is on a work assignment outside of the school doing this research) is the one doing the systematic review so that I can at least give the work to someone. Maybe. Who knows. At least it was a good experience and the next time a request like that comes in I have learned a few tricks and tips to help me do an even better job!

It's funny though. This really came at an appropriate time. I have been thinking lately about how I (and other librarians) really should do "more work" helping our users. Not that librarians don't already do a lot of work, or that we have loads of extra time on our hands. I just feel as though we could (and should) be doing more impressive work for our users. For example, not many libraries do literature searches for their patrons. Many, if they do, charge for the service. Bracken Library here at Queen's University does this for staff and faculty and health care professionals for free (at least on an individual level). But even though these are time consuming, difficult, and usually much better than the user could have done alone, sometimes I feel as though we're still not doing enough. I discussed this with a colleague of mine and I'm not as confident in this opinion as I was... I'm not quite sure what exactly we could do more, given our time and education restraints, but I feel as though we are not quite as impressive as I know we could be. Or perhaps I'm just feeling as though I could do more and wish I had the opportunity. I don't know.

On a completely unrelated note, I've been playing the free beta version of Lord of the Rings Online (LOTRO) for the past week or so. It's not bad. World of Warcraft (WoW) is still my favourite but I can definitely see how someone could like LOTRO more. The graphics (of the environment) are much more impressive (flowing grass, more realistic animal behavior, etc), the quests and activities, etc. are much more involved, serious and have many more layers than WoW. But there're still some things that are keeping me in WoW: the interface graphics are much nicer and clearer, the world seems much bigger and full of more possibilities, and there are vastly more people using it making the experience a little more varied in terms of interactions and socialization. They both have jerks and morons who cheat, swear, hate, disturb others, or don't play "fair" although I'm surprised at the numbers of these players who have swarmed into LOTRO already. I'll play it until I have to pay, and then move on to another free demo/trial edition: Final Fantasy, Matrix Online, Star Wars Galaxies, Star Trek Online (whenever that comes out), etc.

My daughter is suffering from a bad headache right now. Well, actually she's probably asleep now but she was feeling pretty bad before she went to bed a while ago. Aren't headaches about the worst kind of pain you can imagine? It hurts sometimes just to think, and try not thinking for a while! Go on, try it. LOL Unfortunately, migraines seem to be common on both my side of the family and my wife's.

And I just finished watching my current favourite show on TV now: TVO's "The Agenda with Steve Paikin". Not for the faint of heart, or rather, mind. A political show, but one that deals with issues calmly, rationally, and intelligently. Today's show discussed France's upcoming presidential election, and the recent provincial vote in Quebec. One of the leading candidates in France (in second place no less) is a woman, who, if elected, would be the first female president in France's history. It always dismays and confuses me why, in this day and age why (US, Canadian, European, etc.) political leaders are still always white and male. Are voters the last to be able to see past our prejudices? And an interesting last note in the French election portion of the show was some comments about the animosity France has for the States, talking about how France sees itself as having once what America has now, and that it represents for France both their worst fears and their best dreams for their future. At the end of the discussion about Quebec politics, one of the "panelists" spoke of how Quebecers tend to vote for and respect intellectual candidates more than Ontarians (gawd, what a mouthful). I think this is a trend throughout Western society (and probably the whole world), that we seem to be getting smarter on average and yet we still despise or at least avoid intelligence. Quebec may be able to fend this bad habit off a bit more, thanks to a language barrier between them and us english-speaking troglodytes but we'll bring them over to the dark side yet! LOL Finally, at the end of the show, Steve spoke with one of the producers of the show, which totally cracked me up. Following on the heals of the anti-intellectualism comment, it was brought up that the producer had (and has) spoken to guests on the show about words they cannot use: "narcissism" and "ontological" being two examples of words that "don't travel well". Writing this down now makes me wonder why I totally cracked up at this at the time! LOL

Labels: family, funny, librarianship, thoughts, work

 

So, hello and goodbye to Easter. My family and I spent the weekend at my parents, which is ok (unlike many people I know, I like my parents) but I always prefer staying home. Yes, yes, what a bore I am. But I just like being with all my stuff: I like sleeping in my own bed, I like being able to do the things I need to do (whether I actually do them or not), and besides, my parents only have satellite TV and dial-up internet access! Gawd! LOL

The weather has been horrible lately. It's supposed to be spring now! I mean I like the cold more than anyone else around apparently but even I'm getting a little tired of it. It actually snowed for several days recently. It's all gone now but it's still cold. I've "put away" my winter coat but I might have to get it right back out again... Fortunately it's still hanging on the hook by the door so I won't have to go very far to get it. LOL

I was away (from work) sick back on the 3rd. I don't usually take sick days and I wasn't anywhere as near sick as I usually am when I convince myself to do it but I think it was the best thing I could have done. It usually takes be several days of dragging myself into work sick as a dog before I stay home and then I'm sick for many more days after that. This time I felt 100% better the very next day. I think I may make this "listening to my body" thing more of a habit!

I attended a web/teleconference on the changes in the catalog by K. Calhoun back on the 4th. She wasn't the most engaging speaker but with my growing interest in the perceptions people have about librarianship (see my new blog, Buns & Shushings) and therefore the usability of our resources, I was rather opinionated about it. I was furiously scribbling down notes throughout the presentation and at the end, when she asked for comments/questions, I let her have it! LOL Well, actually, I hung back, not wanting to be the first to talk (nobody else was saying anything, at my location or otherwise), but then I leapt. Of course, when I leapt, several other people leapt too and my "hand up" wasn't recognized until the very end and I had to cut my "tirade" short. I was pretty tame actually, trying to convince the audience of the seemingly obvious point that we need to give people what they want, listen to why they "hate" us so much, and just offer more possibilities. The catalog (and really all information tools) needs to change but it should be in the direction of offering more, rather than replacing what it already does well with different functions. For example, don't replace subject headings with social tagging, use both!

Labels: family, librarianship, work

 

Max continues to get up several time during the night and managed to, for the past two mornings, end up in bed with us without knowing until it was too late. I swear he's now hardwired to get up and stumble over (with incredibly ninja stealthing abilities) to our room.

Listening to Pink Floyd's "Coming Back to Life". I remember listening to this in university, alone in my dorm room. It starts out as a very "pity me", "how could you" kind of song but then turns into "Damn straight, screw you, I'm gonna make it" kind of song.

Did a HUGE literature search for a faculty member/resident/grad student (not sure really... it's very complicated... LOL) yesterday on zinc. Yes zinc. That's pretty much all I had to go on. Rather broad don't you think. Just RCTs and reviews of course, but still. Now you're jealous of my fantabulous job, aren't you?

The fire alarm went off yesterday... Thank GAWD it was a pretty nice day, weather-wise.

Found out that a co-worker of mine is pregnant. Congratulations and good luck and all that, yeah, yeah... go on maternity leave already so I can stay at Bracken a little longer please!!! LOL

Watched a couple webcast/webinars today. One on the databases Expanded Academic ASAP and Academic OneFile (didn't learn much new, already played around with them a few weeks ago), but the other one was about getting new knowledge to clinicians more and faster (see a summary of the session). We thought, "Hey, that sounds like libraries should and would be involved in that. Nope. He didn't really put librarianship in too flattering a light. In fact, he put us in a column of other "ways for doctors to stay current that DON'T work". Thanks, Bri.

But in a way I agree with him. We don't do enough. We do a lot of work, and, what we do, I think we do well. But when it comes to pushing the information out to the users, changing people's minds about the value of good research practices, helping answer the questions that people have and may not even know that they have, we're not pushing hard enough. Most of the time we're not pushing at all. We need to be proactive, to be out there in people's faces, showing them that we exist, that we are valuable, and that we want to help. We can't always wait for them to come to us. That may sound odd from a librarian, but we need to be "loud and proud" and prove out worth. But it will take more work and smarter work for us to do it. But we can. I hope we will.

Labels: family, librarianship, music, thoughts, work