OLJ - Module 2 - Social Book marking

OJL Activity:
Set up an account on the social bookmarking service Delicious - http://delicious.com/

Write a short evaluation (no more than 350 words) of your use of Delicious as a social bookmarking tool - include a critical evaluation of the effectiveness of different features and/or functions, as well as a brief statement on the different ways an information organisation may be able to utilise Delicious to support information services, learning and/or collaboration of users and/or employees.

Through the Inf506 course, I created a Delicious account from which I immensed in the sicial book marking experience. As a student I have used Delicious to keep track of references to literature I have reviewed. I have also used Delicious as a tool in bookmarking and sharing resources with fellow students. Info506 Lecturer provided Delicious links to very relevant resources.

Delicious social tagging when integrated with the library catalogue allows users to share tags on library titles. While the library catalogue functionality provides ability to bookmark searches, the social element of tagable bookmarks is very important as it is easier for others to find and use what other library users have saved as useful resources. (Evans, 2010, p. 43).  Educause explain that  social bookmarking "opens door to new ways of organizing information and categoring resources and it is a process [that] allows like-minded individuals to find one another and create new communities of users that continue to influence the ongoing evolution of folksonomies and common tags for resources". Tagging: (“Folksonamies”) is also a functionality of the social networking that enables users to collaboratively create and manage tags to annotate and categorize content.

I visited a number of library catalogues and observed the used on social bookmarking on some of the catalogues.

Darien Library - Users can add tags

User can also search on Tags they have added.

OLJ - A reflective statement on my development as a social networker.

Part B: A reflective statement on your development as a social networker as a result of studying INF506, an the implications for your development as an information professional.


At the start of this course I was asked to list which Social networking technologies and sites I had already used.

My answer was “None”!

Up until  taking this course, I had been very sceptical  about using social networking technologies out of a concern for my privacy and security. I had been blinded to the fact that social networking technologies have a dominant presence in the web arena (Jacobson (2011, p.79) and therefore their relevance to information professionals such as myself can not be overlooked. The Inf506 learning has provided me with a greater understanding of this by exploring  the concept, theory and practice of social networking technologies within the context of libraries and information management.

It is through the Inf506 learning that I was able to take close look at the Web 2.0 concept and how its adaptability into Library 2.0 has provided libraries with tools that adds value and usability to the library resources; a tool that has taken the OPAC (Open Access Catalogue) to the next generation of library catalogue. During this learning I have spent significant time studying various library catalogues to see how they have evolved to incorporate the Web 2.0 underlying principles or 4Cs - collaboration, conversation, community and content creation in the past few years - as we studied in Module 3.



This Library 2.0 meme map developed by Bonaria Biancu (2006, http://www.flickr.com/photos/bonaria/113222147/sizes/o/) shows the main elements of the Library 2.0 concept:

Facebook and Twitter:

I have so far used Facebook and Twitter as a learning tool. These networks offered me an interactive, resource sharing, supportive and cohesive learning community. Information posted and shared on Facebook and Twitter was very relevant to the learning objectives.

In developing my skills as a social networker, within the context of library information management and within the library 2.0 ethos, I was especially interested in Facebook’s integration to the library catalogue. “Facebook is currently the largest social network site on the web, ranking fourth most visited of all Internet sites” (Landis 2010, p. 12) yet, according to Jacobson (2011, p.79) its use in libraries is just taking hold. Literature reviewed  show that integration with Facebook enables users to share links to library materials with friends thereby it helps to promote the use of library resources.

Colorado State University Library catalogue - Integration of social networking sites to their catalogue.


On a professional note, as a systems implementation consultant and trainer, I could use the social networking  learning to enhance my training of librarians by encouraging different groups to collaborate in a social networking environment where trainers and consultants could engage with customers in addressing questions from training. Such an environment will encourage all groups to participate and share knowledge and experience of their learning. Currently followup on training is with individual customers through emails and quite often we are having to respond to the same questions in a number of email correspondences.

There are some other possibilities to explore with my employer - an Integrated Library Management Systems (ILS) vendor. An example is the use social networking site like Facebook as a forum for customers and the Clientcare staff to share information on the software tips and fixes. I think this will help to reduce the number calls that are logged.

On a personal level, Social networking sites provides me a free space to connect with nearby and far away friends and acquaintances, a space where I can promote myself professionally and academically.

A place where I can share in a learning community environment.

I now have an open mind to using social networking sites and online publishing. I am aware of Internet privacy and security issues, and the need to be careful with its use.

My most continuing fear with use of social networking sites are that:

• It can put ones personal safety at risk and as Who's watching puts it "Once you publish something online, it is available to other people and to search engines. You can’t retract it".

As a library and information professional, I need to emerge into the social networking usage. It is only then that I can experience the nature of the needs and expectations of customers. To keep abreast of the changing social networking tools and be prepared to jump to the next new tools and to contribute to making new tools in the social web arena relevant to the information seeking community.

OLJ - An evaluation statement with a focus on FaceBook, Tagging and RSS feeds

Part A - An evaluation statement using 3 experiences documented in your OLJ as evidence of meeting the learning objectives of the subject.

Web2.0/Library2.0: I explored social networking technologies within the context of libraries especially with regards to OLJ learning in areas relevant to Library 2.0. Library 2.0 as coined by Michael Casey (Sodt & Summey 2009, p.98) is built on Web2.0 concept. Tom O’Reilly (Evans 2010, p.4) suggests that the underlying principles or 4Cs of Web2.0 are collaboration, conversation, community and content creation.


My review of recent literature confirmed although a recent development Library 2.0 is taking hold in the library community. (Evans 2010, p 3). Library 2.0 development by proprietary Integrated Library Systems (ILS) vendors, open source community, and commercial vendors affect the library 2.0 tools available for next generation catalogue. Yang (2010, p 690) suggests that Open source tools seem to be bolder and more innovative than proprietary tools in embracing library 2.0. I observed this when I visited a number of library catalogues; and it was clear that libraries with limited technical resources are limited in implementing the Library 2.0 tools offered by the Open source technology and tend to rely on what their proprietary systems provides them.

In line with Web2.0 4Cs of social media studied social networking sites like Facebook, and other Web 2.0 tools like Tagging (Folksonamies), and RSS feeds “creates opportunities for users of online services to add value to the service through feedback and interaction". I examined the use of these tools to see their integration to the library catalogue (next generation catalogue) in support of the Web2.0 4Cs.

Facebook: Despite being a dominant social networking site on the web arena; (Landis, 2010, p. 12) its use in libraries is just taking hold (Jacobson 2011, p.79).

I visited a number of library catalogues to review the collaboration of Facebook and Twitter to the next generation library catalogue. A significant number of library catalogue I visited had some presence of social networking integration with a link to Facebook.com. Although the percentage of library catalogues without social networking integrations were higher, those with integration with Facebook enable users to share links to library materials with friends, and this helps to promote the use of library resources. Although I also observed that Library catalogues are yet to align Facebook integration to the full contentment of the Web2.0 4Cs. With the current integration, users are not fully engaged in collaboration, conversation and content creation. As illustrated below, a link to Facebook from an item search allows users to share a library material with their Facebook fans. One could say that this provides some collaboration.

The future the Library catalogue/Facebook integration aims to enable Facebook to “embrace” the library catalogue. Such a love affair means that the library catalogue becomes fully accessible/searchable from a person’s Facebook account. This concept keeps users into their Facebook environment and pushes the library catalogue to the Facebook environment where most users would spend most of their time. This concept allows users to immerse in collaboration, conversation, community and content creation.


Such an environment will allow the Facebook users to easily add content by adding resources of interest to their virtual book shelf, and then sharing those with fans. Additionally “My Account” function of the library catalogue could be accessible from the Facebook account authentication. A Paypal feature that allows users to conveniently pay their library fines and fees could be incorporated.

A Facebook plugin widget “Like this book” could be integrated to library catalogue enabling users to rate popular materials.

RSS feed: (Really Simple Syndication) allows users to connect themselves to content that is often updated. Next generation library catalogue interface includes RSS feeds. With this feature users can have new books lists, top-circulating book lists, canned searches and “watch the topic” connections to the catalogue on their own blogs or feed reader page. Users could also use RSS feed to keep a history of what they are reading, and are able to share these with friends.

Web 2.0 ‘technologies’ is about creating a magnet to which people can be pulled to information content on library website. It is also about pushing out content to people.

The collaboration of RSS feeds to the "Next generation library catalogue" has potential to greatly enhance the way that libraries deliver their resources. (Aery 2008, p. 1)

Tagging: (“Folksonamies”) is also a functionality of the social networking that enables users to collaboratively create and manage tags to annotate and categorize content. Thomas et al (2009, p.412) argue that though library provides controlled vocabulary, users quite often are not familiar with the terms in the vocabulary and therefore not able to make the right searching decisions. Tags are therefore used to provide the ability for users to highlight different aspect of resources. Thomas et al (2009, p.431) conclude that, “social tagging does indeed augment the LCSH [Library of Congress Subject Heading] providing additional access to resources”. The collaborative aspect of the tagging system is also an important function. Golder and Huberman (2006) in Thomas et al (2009, p.413) say that “Users tag primarily for themselves but software makes it possible to see all the tags so a users can borrow tags from other users.

In addition, Delicious social tagging when integrated with NGC allows users to share tags from the library catalogues. While the library catalogue functionality provides ability to bookmark searches, the social element of tagable bookmarks is very important as it is easier for others to find and use what other library users have saved as useful resources. (Evans, 2010, p. 43).

OLJ - Module 3 - Library 2.0 ethos - A-Z social networking for libraries

OLJ Activity:
READ the post A to Z of Social Networking for Libraries (22 January, 2010) on the Social Networking for Libraries blog.


Consider this advice in terms of a library and information agency that you know (as an employee or user). Select advice from five (5) letters of this A-Z list and consider how these may be applied to this library to help it embrace a Library 2.0 ethos. Write up your findings as a post (of no more than 350 words in your OLJ).

A classic or digital migrant library user, and or a conservative library management might be contented with an ‘out of the box’ Library catalogues typically known as the OPAC (online access catalogue) as delivered by an ILS. After all the OPAC could be seen as an effective tool that point users to information sources located in the library. They may also be limited by resources available for developing library catalogue to the standard of the next generation catalogue. "If it ain't broke, why fix it". However is this enough in the Web2.0/Library 2.0 current environment? Could Library 2.0 “revitalize” the way libraries serves and interact with customers as claimed in Casey & Savastinuk? Library 2.0 invites users’ participation, enhanced librarian’s skills and service improvement, and offers “customer driven service opportunities” where customers can tailor library services to suit their own needs.

The A to Z of Social Networking for Libraries provides a list of social networking technologies that add value to library services in the current Web2.0 environment. Understandably there is pressure for libraries to respond positively to the fast changing world of information technology; to provide Internet related resources and services that users need and want. Libraries therefore look realistically at what is achievable within the library available resources.

Of the A-to Z, I am considering specifically how L-Librarything and M-Mobile technologies maybe applied to the Charles Stuart University (CSU) Library catalogue to embrace Library 2.0 ethos.

LibraryThing’s Tag browsing for example will enhance CSU catalogue with "powerful and flexibility searching and browsing books by tags. CSU could also "FRBR"ize their catalogue by linking related editions and translation of the same work. Book reviews is another useful feature of the Library2.0 ethos.

As an example of the technology being offered, SirsiDynix an Integrated Library System (ILS) offers the BookMyne product which is built on the Web services technology. BookMyne brings conveniently, social-savvy library functionality to the Library customers. The ability for the CSU library to make their information sources, and social networking services accessible via mobile devices will enable CDU to reach their clients where ever they are.

OLJ - Module 3 -the 4Cs of social media

OLJ TASK - Visit ASU’s collection of The Library Minute videos and view five (5) of these one minute videos, then visit two (2) of the other Web 2.0 tools used as part of the ASU Library Channel suite at http://lib.asu.edu/librarychannel/.


Write a critical evaluation on ASU Libraries’ use of these platforms to achieve the 4Cs of social media (in no more than 350 words).

Arizonal State University (ASU) libraries 'the library minute' video title "the social connection"  encourages their customers to "connect with us and join our conversation". ASU claims that communication goes both ways. ASU has promoted their services and resources on Twitter and  Facebook websites.  As an academic environment, I can see that it is important for ASU to engage their student in the social space where students hangout. These social networking technologies fits in well with the Web2.0 4C - thus collaboration, conversation, community and content creation. ASU provides a collaboration between their website and the Facebook and Twitter site and uses this media to provide information for their customers. Customer are able to rank information provided as "liked". Customers are also able to tweet the "ask a librarian" service. This could be seen as some form of a conversation and content creation. However, I can see that ASU does not fully engage their customers in a conversation where customers could post comments to the ASU Facebook posts.  Where 4Cs of Web2.0 is adhered to, customers should be able to add content, share in a conversation with the library community, and with  the face book community.  
  

I expected to see  the ASU library integrate the social networking sites to their Library catalogue as I have seen on Hennepin County Library. The  integration/collaboration of  Twitter and Face book to library catalogue allow library users to exchange information about the library materials they are reading; and according to Breeding (2010, p. 29) social networking sites "provide important opportunities to promote the library relevant content [library catalogue], services, and activities". This is illustrated on Hennepin County Library (HCP) as illustrated in figures1 - 3. However, this collaboration with library catalogue does not truly fit in with the Web2.0 principles. The Library catalogue should be accessed directly from the Facebook account, where customers could comment on books they are reading within their Facebook account. Customer should create and add to their virtual bookshelves and then share bookmarks with fans.

Figure 1 demonstrates the integration of Facebook and Twitter to the HCP library catalogue.

Figure 1


















Figure 2 shows an illustration of a search  result that links with Facebook to allow the item information shared and discussed among the Facebook community.

Figure2

Similarly, figure 3 shows an example of library catalogue item link through Twitter; this could be shared and discussed as a tweet.

Figure 3

OLJ - Module 4 : Making Web2.0 work in Libraries

OLJ Activity:
Select three (3) libraries of your choice that use social networking to meet their goals.

Develop a comparative table which documents how each of the libraries use social networking tools to support information service provision, educational programs, conduct business etc.

Based on this comparison (and in no more than 350 words) develop your own list of “Reasons why libraries should be on social media”, and draw upon aspects of these three libraries to illustrate each point.

A comparison of Web2.0 tools as used in a select university libraries. Ohio University Library(Ohio) has a focus on interaction, and on engaging customers in instant communication. Facebook and Twitter is used intensively on Ohio to promote library services and  to track feedback from customers.  Ohio has not used Blogs where as Charles Sturt Library uses Twitter and Blogs and has a focus on instant live chats with their customers. It appears the University of Auckland Library has not invested much in Web2.0 with just Tags, RSS feed and Email available. Auckland University has the Mobile applications provided for their customers to access and use their Library on the go.

I am surprised that Charles Sturt Library and the University of Auckland Library have used less social networking sites and social media. It is becoming essential for libraries to to take the idea of  Web2.0  and apply its tools to engage, interact and empower library patrons. According to Breeding (2010, p 28), "social media provides opportunities for exposure to the library and funnel users into the service it offers".

Facebook use in libraries is summarised as follows:

• Live reference chats
• Engage with customers by allowing customers to add comments to posting or to "like posting"
• Collaborated to library catalogue to able customers to share information on books they are reading.
• Promote the library services and encourage participation
• Book clubs and study groups

http://old.diglib.org/forums/spring2009/presentations/Boyer.pdf

Twitter can be used to pull customers to the library and track what the library patrons think of the services offered.

• Reference services: tweet information on current events
• It helps in the identification of user needs
• Promote library services.
•  Attract  followers to the library
• Collaborate Twitter to the Library catalogue to enable users to share information on library material
• Bulletin board: Some libraries use Twitter as an online bulletin board for which they post programme announcement (Krabill, 2009, p. 15)

 RSS feed is great for pushing out information to people. RSS enhances the traditional library's  current awareness service "Selected Dissemination of Information (SDI) function. 

YouTube videos can be used as a social tool to promote the use of library resources. For example, Ohio University Library has promoted their library services with a series of Video help.   I find video tutorials facilitates learning a subject quickly and it could be used also as a learning tool in a University learning environment..

OLJ - Module 2 - RSS feeds.

OLJ - Activity

Now that you have explored some examples of how libraries and the media make use of RSS to deliver updated information and the applications that can tailor and aggregate feeds for specific users, find two (2) additional examples of 'RSS in action', and develop a 350 word post to your OLJ on how RSS can enhance a library or information service’s ability to meet the information needs of its users.

RSS in Web2.0 environment means that the web browser is no longer the only means of viewing a web page" O'Reilly (2007, P 25). Users have the power to pull information updates to any devices and share those with their friends.   "It provides users a way to syndicate and republish content on the Web" (Arora, 2009, p.53).   RSS empowers information sharing as since its delivery in 1997 by Dave Winer, it has turned "webblogs from an ease-of publishing phenomenon into a conversational mess of overlapping communities" (O'Reilly 2007, P 25). RSS enables organisation to create a magnet from which people can be pulled to information content on their website.   

So...
Create         Publish          Distribute

Source: Feedburner.google.com

RSS stands for "Really Simple Syndication" but also referred to as "Rich Site Summary". RSS is technology used to distribute information from websites. With RSS, readers can subscribe to timely updates from their favourite websites or to aggregate feeds from many sites into one place. RSS feeds can be read using software called an "RSS reader", "feed reader", or "aggregator", which can be web based, desktop based or mobile based.

Organisations such as Libraries need their customers to stay informed of new information resources and services acquired or offerred by the library.

The collaboration of RSS feeds to the "Next generation library catalogue" has greatly enhanced the way that libraries now delivered their services  (Arora, 2009, p.53). With RSS, users have ability to subscribe to an alert that gives them a list of new titles acquired by the library. Right  from their own space, they can then  request the new book delivered to them.

The screen shot below illustrates the ability to subscribe to titles of interest from the library catalogue.

Source: Auckland City Libraries

See the amazing things Dekalb county public library is doing with RSS feed. With RSS feeds, their users can  keep up to date on the latest additions to the library catalog. This library also offers Calendar of Events RSS feeds for every event type, age group, and library branch.

In fact, RSS feed has become a standard feature of the new generation library catalogue.  RSS “feeds” free library customers  from having to constantly search the library catalogue to see if anything new and interesting has been acquired. The required  information is delivered to customers as soon as it is available.

Here is the highlight of how libraries are using RSS feed:

• New additions that match a users particular interest
• Newly published articles
• Newly added items by Media type.
• Newly added items by Subject
• Newly added items by Author
• Newly added items by Time period
• Library notices
• Library calendar/events
• News and current affairs
• Community events
• Use of RSS for checked-out history. User can always keep track of all items they have checked out.