The ALA Emerging Leaders (EL) program is a leadership development program which enables newer library workers from across the country to participate in problem-solving work groups, network with peers, gain an inside look into ALA structure, and have an opportunity to serve the profession in a leadership capacity. It puts participants on the fast track to ALA committee volunteerism as well as other professional library-related organizations.
The EL program kicks off with a daylong session during the ALA Midwinter Meeting. Afterward, it grows and develops in an online learning and networking environment for six months. The program culminates with a poster session presentation to display the results of the project planning work of each group at the ALA Annual Conference.
LITA will sponsor 2 Emerging Leaders this year. LITA will contribute $1000 towards expenses ($500 for each conference). The LITA sponsored EL’s will also be paired with the LITA Vice President and will be appointed to a LITA Committee once they complete the EL program. Those interested in being sponsored by LITA, should check the LITA box on their application.
Sponsorship is not required for participation in the program. Anyone who is selected to participate in the program but not sponsored, will be expected to pay their own expenses.
Apply now for the 2010 class of Emerging Leaders. Deadline for submission of online application and all references is EXTENDED to AUGUST 7, 2009
The Social Software Showcase, presented by LITA’s BIGWIG, is a chance to learn about several different areas of software in a quick, efficient way. The way it works is that the content for the showcase is voted on beforehand, and presentations are created for that content. The presentations are made available online on the Social Software Showcase page. The presenters and their topics are briefly introduced at the beginning of the showcase, then the attendees are given the opportunity to visit each of the presenters to discuss their topic for 10 minutes. After 10 minutes, the attendees rotate and move on to the next topic. This provides the opportunity for attendees to visit each of the presenters or, as in my case, attend as many presentations as fit into their available time. The four which I attended were mobile websites and applications, information mashups with government information, cloud computing, and Google Wave.
Our ever-alert ALA Representative to NISO, Cindy Hepfer, has informed us that ISO/FDIS 15511, International Standard identifier for libraries and related organizations (ISIL) is now available for ballot.
From the ballot text;
“An ISIL identifies an organization, i.e. a library, an archive, a museum or a related organization, or one of its subordinate units, which is responsible for an action or service in an informational environment (e.g. creation of machine-readable information), throughout its life. It can be used to identify the originator or holder of a resource (e.g. library material or collection in an archive). It is intended to have a minimum impact on already existing systems.”
As usual, ALA is not voting on the standard itself but rather is providing feedback to NISO as to whether to approve or disapprove the standard. NISO will review and consider this feedback prior to submitting the US vote. Permission is granted by the American National Standards Institute to reproduce this International Standard for the purpose of review and comment related to the preparation of a US position, PROVIDED THIS NOTICE IS INCLUDED. ALL OTHER RIGHTS ARE RESERVED.
Any ALA member wishing to see a copy of this draft standard for the purpose of offering comments prior to the deadline may contact Cindy directly (HSLcindy@buffalo.edu) — please be sure to let her know you are an ALA member. I’d appreciate it if you’d also copy me on your request, so we know how much interest there is in this standard (email@example.com). Your deadline for comments to Cindy is Monday, Aug. 24, 2009.
All of the panelists touched on some common themes:
Tracking – Electronic data is easier to manage and parse for usage statistics. Even if registration or logging isn’t in the cards, a small database or even spreadsheet is a big help for keeping staff administrative tasks organized. Well-structured data is a great way to glean statistics for LSTA justifications and the like
Apprehension– whether it be staff with doubts about difficulty and usefulness, or a perception that patrons would not buy into an online component as much as hoped. The consensus was that online registration/tracking was easy-to-use and productive, and that staff bought in after a short while
Paper – It is possible to eliminate paper registration and logs altogether with an all-online program; however, the panelists still had varying degrees of paper usage. In this sense, online programs are additive to the traditional SRP. As Irmgarde Brown said:
It’s not about either/or, it’s about ‘and.’
Paper provides access to those without computers or computer skills, and log printouts are a simple way to manage redeeming prizes
Scale – commercial products can be a poor organizational fit for both small and large applications. Small libraries cannot afford the software, while consortia may have needs greater than the scale of some commercial designs. Luckily, homebrew systems proved possible and capable in both scenarios, though with sacrifices of features or support
Altogether, the introduction of online components correlated to increased participation at all four panelists’ libraries/systems. Among the many benefits:
Resource sharing – one or more libraries can invest in an online Summer Reading Program and spread the benefit to other libraries
Less paper and other overhead
Simplicity lends to choice in programming language and DBMS. Choices ranged from ColdFusion to PHP, and from Access to MySQL
Ease and incentive for increased community partnership (ie. Maureen Ambrosino’s example of cooperating with the Boston Bruins to the satisfaction of all)
I will follow up with an Online Summer Reading round-up for those interested in the various software packages available. In the mean time, I’d be happy to track down answers to any questions in the comments. Likewise, if you know of some great free or commercial OSRP software packages, please also make note of them in the comments as well. Thanks!
Title of conference program: The Ultimate Debate: Has Library 2.0 Fulfilled its Promise?
Speakers: Meredith Farkas, Cindi Trainor, David Lee King, Michael Porter; moderated by Roy Tennant.
Monday July 13, 2009; 1:30 – 3 pm; McCormick Place West, W-181
Sponsor: Internet Resources and Services Interest Group (IRSIG)
This program was presented as a debate, with Roy posing questions for the panel.
The room for this presentation was huge, and the room was packed with librarians! We were seated shoulder to shoulder, with nary an open chair in the room.
Roy’s first question was “What does Library 2.0 mean to you?” Here are the panelists’ responses:
it’s not only a set of tools, but also a philosophy
helps create space that welcome participation by users
it’s what libraries do to fulfill our roles as community and information anchors
it’s a plethora of tools that can help libraries become more relevant
it’s about being user-focused
seeing the creation of library services as an iterative process
constantly assessing services to make sure they meet the needs of our customers
not just new tools, but also…
a new philosophy, a new way to do things
let’s not focus on brands (like Twitter or wikis), lets focus on what these tools can do for us
Michael read some of the tweets he received as replies to his tweet http://twitter.com/libraryman/status/2617070771
Second question: what is a Library 2.0 technology?
technology that allows us to build communities and communicate with each other
technology that allows us to form relationships with people who are bits and bytes online
a way to move content from one place to another, like RSS
“made to connect me to you”
“if the technology works, it doesn’t get in the way”
a problem with 2.0 technology is “it’s hard to know what to use”
it’s hard to track the success of your institution’s success with 2.0 tools, in the report formats libraries typically have to submit
Michael is working to put together something to help libraries track the success of their use of 2.0 tools
stated we have stats from blogs, and can see the number of Facebook friends/fans
some of these tools will track stats, show engagement — but these tools cost money; he mentioned Radian6 as one of these for-fee tools
how can you track engagement, how can you track the impact your library has on a person’s life?
it’s important to look at how to do an assessment of 2.0 tool usage at your library
reports to supervisors are primarily numbers; anecdotal evidence and emotional impact is difficult to report
Third question: what are some of the barriers you to see to libraries adopting some of these Library 2.0 tools?
“we’re entrusting our knowledge our hard work to 3rd party sites that might not be there in the future”
companies that exist now, might not in the future
she cited ma.gnolia as an example of a social bookmarking service that’s no longer in existence
libraries aren’t planning for how they can have backup copies of their stuff
they need to ask if the company is stable, and if their info will still be there a couple of years from now
don’t be afraid to experiment, but take a risk-management approach
it’s very easy to set up a free blog, but the bigger barrier is you need to immerse yourself in a tool to learn it
having a person in charge of a 2.0 tool, but when that person leaves, what to do about the orphaned blog or wiki that’s left behind
concerned that libraries are being usurped by commercial companies
libraries don’t have the money to compete with content and delivery suppliers like NetFlix
the relevance of libraries is at risk
as an industry, we need to do something to not get cut out of the market share
time is a challenge — we’re being asked to do new stuff, but none of our other tasks have been taken away
just because they’re free tools doesn’t mean we don’t need to plan for them
“use these tools to show how awesome you are” and share that with your community
admins should be gviing staff time to staff to do these things at work, not on your own personal time
Fourth question: Can we point to some successes of 2.0 technologies and principles?
This session was sponsored by ALCTS Collection Management and Development Section (CMDS), RUSA : RSS Catalog Use Committee and LITA Next Gen Catalog Interest Group.
Program Description: In today’s complex information environment, users have come to expect evaluative information and interactive capabilities when searching for information resources. A panel of experts will address various aspects of providing links to external information in library catalogs, implementing user-contributed functionality, and using computational data to support bibliographic control.
Jonathan Blackburn, Eli Neiburger, Karen Coombs (absent due to illness)
Jonathan Blackburn was formerly employed as the “web guy” at Florida State University (FSU). He currently is the Product Analyst at OCLC. Blackburn explained why a content management system (CMS) would be useful to create library websites: They’re good for collaboration and efficiency, though they can result in an incoherent representation due to collaborative work. CMSs matter to libraries because they can leverage library staff and potentially reduce costs.
Uses and applications of a CMS include a public-facing website, staff intranet, digital library (asset management), and one-off projects (events, programs). If your library wants to try out a CMS for the first time, events or programs are a great excuse to see if a CMS is the right fit for your organization.
CMSs create unique challenges for libraries. They need to allow for different “types” of content (hours, events, databases), to be usable for people at different levels of expertise (different comfort levels in regards to technology), to be interoperable between systems (catalog, course management software, etc.), and to remain consistent for institutional branding or navigation (to follow guidelines set by the parent institution).
Jonathan Blackburn went on to illustrate FSU’s use of dynamic content on their website and their switch to content management systems.
2005: Static HTML and custom PHP/MySQL
2006: Drupal and custom PHP/MySQL
2007: Redesign and MediaWiki subject guides
2008: Staff intranet (Drupal)
2009: Migration to Drupal (unfinished) and LibGuides
He offers 6 lessons from his experience with content management systems at FSU:
Start with a content management plan: who does what, when, and how often (and how are they accountable)
Get staff input: find out what your content creators want
Secure support from administration: if they’re not behind it, it will never happen
Choose right tool(s) for the job: if it doesn’t meet the organization needs, don’t use it, no matter how “cool” it is
Be flexible and embrace workarounds
Outsource when possible
Lastly, Blackburn offers future opportunities for content management systems.
Library “profiles”: CMSs built specifically for libraries and their needs
Hosted solutions: “putting stuff in the cloud”
Interoperability: “glue that can tie stuff together”
The session “Science Fiction and Fantasy: Uncovering the modern world of information through metaphor and imagination” sponsored by Tor and Baen publishers featured Robert Charles Wilson, Ken Scholls, Margaret Weiss, John Brown and Eric Flint.Â All the authors expressed varying degrees of confusion regarding the topic of discussion, but their talks yielded surprisingly similar insights.
Robert Charles Wilson spoke first.Â He used his latest novel, Julian Comstock, A Story of 22nd Century America, to illustrate his belief in the power of knowledge over ignorance and the idea that information “wants to be free.”Â He argues science fiction requires participation in the questions of society, culture and technology.
Ken Scholls analogized science fiction and fantasy as a tent show performed by the likes of Tom Bombadil, Paul Atreides and Dorothy Gale.Â He spoke of the power of science fiction and fantasy to transport and transform.
Margaret Weiss spoke of the author’s place in society.Â An author should tell stories, the people’s stories.Â She believes fantasy especially allows her to tell the stories of real people in extraordinary situations.Â She offered the example of a character in her fantasy world who is an alcoholic in a culture where the tavern is the primary gathering place.Â He lost his family, his home and his livelihood due to his alcoholism.Â In the course of the novel he tries to recover some of what he has lost.Â Weiss hopes this character’s story may help a young person better understand his alcoholic parent.
John Brown followed Margaret Weiss positing that reading is a drug.Â Readers thirst and hunger for reading and that the physical response resulting from reading is not just analogous but the same as the physical response a drug user feels.Â He hopes that his work gives young people a first taste of the reading drug and that they will be hooked for life.
Eric Flint approached the subject differently. He argued Contemporary Literary Fiction has lost its way.Â Modern literary fiction requires extreme realism with “ordinary people in ordinary circumstances that they handle extremely badly.”Â He argues that true literary tradition extends through Homer and Shakespeare who were not bound to realism and engaged in thought experiments with “ordinary people in extraordinary circumstances they handle well.”Â He expressed disdain for the need felt by some to defend science fiction and fantasy and commented that if the definitions of genre fiction were applied to Moby Dick it would be in the science fiction section because “no whale that ever lived would act like that.”
The entire session was engaging.Â The authors gave us some food for thought and plenty of encouragement.Â I thoroughly enjoyed the session.