Some of my favorite things from this course were the Library 2.0 week and the Online Apps/Tools week. For Library 2.0, this was a term I'd heard but never really felt comfortable with. Now I do, and although I still don't think the term is a good representation of the concept, I do like what it stands for. For the Online Apps/Tools week, I had used Google Docs previously and am comfortable with it. But since I had to use a second tool for the exercise, I also looked at Zoho. I discovered I really liked it. I'm sure I'll keep using Google Docs but I did enjoy learning about Zoho and seeing how it worked too. I didn't think that I would like Zoho, so I was pleasantly surprised. Additionally, I was reminded that week how useful these online collaboration tools are when working on documents with others.
This course did help me feel more comfortable with technology. I've taken other courses like this, for Web 2.0 tools. But every time I take new course there is always something new and different that I learn. Sometimes the tools have been improved since I last used them, so taking these kinds of discovery courses helps me keep up to date. One area I definitely feel more comfortable with is blogging. We had to use our blog for a number of different tasks throughout the course and so I definitely feel more comfortable using blog software and leaving comments on other people's blogs.
My unexpected outcome was that I enjoyed following the blogs of some of my friends. I started following them and in Blogger would see their updates when I logged in to Blogger. Since we were often working on the same week's tasks, I would read their posts and add comments. This was something I have rarely done before.
I don't have any suggestions on improving the format, or things that were left out. As usual, time is always an issue so I was very happy that you are giving us until Jan 2 to complete the course and evaluation. My only minor suggestion would be to offer a course that lasted a shorter time. That would give me less of a chance to fall behind. ;-)
I would definitely participate in future discovery projects that the RML might offer! Thank you!
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Thing 12 - Library 2.0
I read a couple of the references that discussed Library 2.0. I've heard that term a a number of times, but never really knew who or how it was different from Web 2.0. The few references I read for this assignment all basically said the same thing, so now I feel like I know what the difference is.
Library 2.0 is about making your library's space (both physical and virtual) more attractive & relevant to your users. It doesn't have to involve technology, and that was where I was getting confused. I was thinking that Library 2.0 was just applying Web 2.0 principles to libraries. But its actually much more than that. It is also includes making your physical building more attractive, changing policies, holding events that draw people into your facility, etc.
One of the items I read talked about how they don't like the term Library 2.0 and I would agree with that. I think the term puts too much emphasis on the technology aspect.
But the idea of trying to reach all of your users, even your non-users, is a great one. The idea of continuously evaluating your services is great. The idea of constantly asking your users for feedback is great too. None of these ideas are new, but there is definitely a higher emphasis on these thoughts in Library 2.0.
In the past I was turned off by the term Library 2.0 because I thought it was only focusing on technology and that that was too narrow of a focus. Now I'm more comfortable with the term and so it doesn't annoy me like it used to.
In terms of my library, I think we are already doing a lot of Library 2.0 stuff and don't even know it. We recently moved into a new building and we used user input to design the space. All of our users love the building. We also regularly offer speakers and programming, including exhibits, in the building. We posted our draft strategic plan online and asked for user feedback. And we are getting ready to create an online suggestion board. All of these things fit into the Library 2.0 thinking.
Library 2.0 is about making your library's space (both physical and virtual) more attractive & relevant to your users. It doesn't have to involve technology, and that was where I was getting confused. I was thinking that Library 2.0 was just applying Web 2.0 principles to libraries. But its actually much more than that. It is also includes making your physical building more attractive, changing policies, holding events that draw people into your facility, etc.
One of the items I read talked about how they don't like the term Library 2.0 and I would agree with that. I think the term puts too much emphasis on the technology aspect.
But the idea of trying to reach all of your users, even your non-users, is a great one. The idea of continuously evaluating your services is great. The idea of constantly asking your users for feedback is great too. None of these ideas are new, but there is definitely a higher emphasis on these thoughts in Library 2.0.
In the past I was turned off by the term Library 2.0 because I thought it was only focusing on technology and that that was too narrow of a focus. Now I'm more comfortable with the term and so it doesn't annoy me like it used to.
In terms of my library, I think we are already doing a lot of Library 2.0 stuff and don't even know it. We recently moved into a new building and we used user input to design the space. All of our users love the building. We also regularly offer speakers and programming, including exhibits, in the building. We posted our draft strategic plan online and asked for user feedback. And we are getting ready to create an online suggestion board. All of these things fit into the Library 2.0 thinking.
Thing 11 - Podcasting
I checked out a few of the podcast directories. In general, they were pretty hard to use to find anything good, unless you already knew what you were looking for.
Podcast Alley - I had the best luck with this directory. Although it was pretty difficult to browse a list of titles. Searching by keyword was your only option. I noticed there seemed to be a lot of alternative medicine titles. I did find a podcast to subscribe to - MedPod101. It teaches a different topic from Internal Medicine in each podcast.
Podfeed.net - This directory seemed better, in terms of finding things. And I liked the tag feature too. However, after browsing for awhile it looks like all of the podcasts in this directory are made by individuals. I didn't see anything from an "authority", like the CDC, or an association, or a society. I again saw lots of podcasts on alternative medicine, as wells a dieting and sex. I also noticed a feature where you could pay to have your podcast moved to the top of the list.
Yahoo Podcasts - I looked at this only briefly because when I was doing searches, everything that was coming back was music. So I got tired of trying to get past the music results and I just gave up.
Podcast Alley - I had the best luck with this directory. Although it was pretty difficult to browse a list of titles. Searching by keyword was your only option. I noticed there seemed to be a lot of alternative medicine titles. I did find a podcast to subscribe to - MedPod101. It teaches a different topic from Internal Medicine in each podcast.
Podfeed.net - This directory seemed better, in terms of finding things. And I liked the tag feature too. However, after browsing for awhile it looks like all of the podcasts in this directory are made by individuals. I didn't see anything from an "authority", like the CDC, or an association, or a society. I again saw lots of podcasts on alternative medicine, as wells a dieting and sex. I also noticed a feature where you could pay to have your podcast moved to the top of the list.
Yahoo Podcasts - I looked at this only briefly because when I was doing searches, everything that was coming back was music. So I got tired of trying to get past the music results and I just gave up.
Sunday, November 30, 2008
Thing 10 - Online video
This week our assignment was to play around with YouTube. I've used YouTube before, but usually someone will send me a link directly to a video to watch. What I find annoying about YouTube is searching for videos. If you know the exact name of a video, you are likely to find it. But if you don't, or you just want to browse videos on a topic, there isn't a great way to do that.
I tried searching for "library", "medical library" and "health sciences library". I got a few things, but mostly I got a lot of junk back. I did find two videos that were professional and interesting:
Building Academic Library 2.0
This was from an event at UC Berkeley. It was interesting because apparently Berkeley posts a lot of their events on YouTube, which I thought was very cool. You could even subscribe to Berkeley Events and be notified when there are new videos available.
EBLIP4 Keynote 5-9-07 Booth Plutchak Debate
This was also recorded from a session that took place at the EBLIP (Evidence Based Library and Information Practice) Conference in 2007. It was great to be able to watch something like this for those of us that could not attend the meeting. However, I did just stumble across this, I found it purely by luck.
In terms of what features would be nice in a library website, it would be nice to have videos available on our website from guest speakers we have in the library. Currently we can record these sessions, but then we have to pay to have them streamed from the campus streaming videoserver, and it is a monthly charge. Maybe we could look into putting the videos on YouTube instead. Also, maybe posting a video on the library website that is a tour of the library would be nice.
Finally, here is my attempt to embed a video from YouTube into my post:
I tried searching for "library", "medical library" and "health sciences library". I got a few things, but mostly I got a lot of junk back. I did find two videos that were professional and interesting:
Building Academic Library 2.0
This was from an event at UC Berkeley. It was interesting because apparently Berkeley posts a lot of their events on YouTube, which I thought was very cool. You could even subscribe to Berkeley Events and be notified when there are new videos available.
EBLIP4 Keynote 5-9-07 Booth Plutchak Debate
This was also recorded from a session that took place at the EBLIP (Evidence Based Library and Information Practice) Conference in 2007. It was great to be able to watch something like this for those of us that could not attend the meeting. However, I did just stumble across this, I found it purely by luck.
In terms of what features would be nice in a library website, it would be nice to have videos available on our website from guest speakers we have in the library. Currently we can record these sessions, but then we have to pay to have them streamed from the campus streaming videoserver, and it is a monthly charge. Maybe we could look into putting the videos on YouTube instead. Also, maybe posting a video on the library website that is a tour of the library would be nice.
Finally, here is my attempt to embed a video from YouTube into my post:
Thing 9 - Online Applications and Tools
I choose to look at Google Docs and Zoho Writer. I choose those because I have used Google Docs before, but never Zoho Writer.
All and all I thought they were pretty similar. Both actually were part of a suite of tools although I only looked at the word processing tools.
I think that Zoho had a much cleaner and user-friendly interface. I thought it looked most similar to Microsoft Word which is what I'm used to using. Although there were a lot of buttons on the Zoho toolbar, and it was difficult for me to find the one that I needed.
In my work that involves people from outside of my library I have used Google Docs, and will likely continue too. It works really well for things like committee work. When I work with people in my library though, we usually just exchange documents via e-mail and use the Review tool in Word. I've thought sometimes that using Google Docs might be easier, but I don't know who is and isn't familiar with Google Docs. I do know that everyone has MS Word and is familiar with that.
The security/privacy issue would be a problem for some of the work I'd want to share. I'd want to know more about how "secure" my documents were that are saved on the Google or Zoho servers. I didn't see that information readily available...
I also looked at the Snipshot. I don't have an image editing program on my computer, so I was interested in it. It looked pretty neat, and had a number of common features. I liked that I could save my files in various formats, including PDF. I have bookmarked this application in Delicious so I can use it in the future.
All and all I thought they were pretty similar. Both actually were part of a suite of tools although I only looked at the word processing tools.
I think that Zoho had a much cleaner and user-friendly interface. I thought it looked most similar to Microsoft Word which is what I'm used to using. Although there were a lot of buttons on the Zoho toolbar, and it was difficult for me to find the one that I needed.
In my work that involves people from outside of my library I have used Google Docs, and will likely continue too. It works really well for things like committee work. When I work with people in my library though, we usually just exchange documents via e-mail and use the Review tool in Word. I've thought sometimes that using Google Docs might be easier, but I don't know who is and isn't familiar with Google Docs. I do know that everyone has MS Word and is familiar with that.
The security/privacy issue would be a problem for some of the work I'd want to share. I'd want to know more about how "secure" my documents were that are saved on the Google or Zoho servers. I didn't see that information readily available...
I also looked at the Snipshot. I don't have an image editing program on my computer, so I was interested in it. It looked pretty neat, and had a number of common features. I liked that I could save my files in various formats, including PDF. I have bookmarked this application in Delicious so I can use it in the future.
Thing 8 - Creating a wiki
I created this wiki:
http://exhibitscomm.wetpaint.com/
The wiki is for a library committee that I am on that is responsible for the exhibit spaces within our library. Our committee members are not all from the library, so having a wiki would be an easy way for us to share information besides e-mail.
I have used WetPaint before, but it was a little while ago. I think the interface is pretty user friendly. The ads are annoying, but it is nice to see that educational groups can get an ad-free wiki (although the wiki I created would likely not qualify).
The first thing that struck me when I got the Wet Paint site was that they don't call their software a wiki, they call it a website. They say "to create your own website, click here". I know you can use a wiki to create a website, but it was interesting that even Wet Paint is no longer called itself wiki software.
We do currently use wikis at my library. We use them on the staff side, primarily for information that used to be found in "desk binders" at our service points. Having all of the information online makes it much easier to access and to search. We are also using it for a project we are working on for a library service we call "roving".
For information that is updated frequently, I think a wiki is nice because it makes it very easy for any library staff member to edit the information. I think that is why the wiki format is working so well for for things like desk manuals.
http://exhibitscomm.wetpaint.com/
The wiki is for a library committee that I am on that is responsible for the exhibit spaces within our library. Our committee members are not all from the library, so having a wiki would be an easy way for us to share information besides e-mail.
I have used WetPaint before, but it was a little while ago. I think the interface is pretty user friendly. The ads are annoying, but it is nice to see that educational groups can get an ad-free wiki (although the wiki I created would likely not qualify).
The first thing that struck me when I got the Wet Paint site was that they don't call their software a wiki, they call it a website. They say "to create your own website, click here". I know you can use a wiki to create a website, but it was interesting that even Wet Paint is no longer called itself wiki software.
We do currently use wikis at my library. We use them on the staff side, primarily for information that used to be found in "desk binders" at our service points. Having all of the information online makes it much easier to access and to search. We are also using it for a project we are working on for a library service we call "roving".
For information that is updated frequently, I think a wiki is nice because it makes it very easy for any library staff member to edit the information. I think that is why the wiki format is working so well for for things like desk manuals.
Thing 7 - Wikis
For this week's assignment I'm supposed to post my thoughts about wikis. I did look at a number of the wikis that were suggested to us. I was actually surprised by the number of wikis that were aimed at the healthcare professionals, including students. There were a number in the radiology and cardiology areas. What struck me about a number of the wikis though was that they seemed like someone started them, but then no one else joined in to edit the wiki and the original author lost interest. There were many of them that said "we need your input in these areas" and it seemed like it was 75% or more of the content that was blank. A little disappointing, and it also shows how difficult it is to keep anything, even a wiki, maintained. It made me wonder how current some of the information was on these wikis, and if it could be trusted.
In terms of library wikis, I did think the Library Success wiki was a great idea. Although it also suffered from the same problem of being pretty thin on content. Some areas had more information (marketing, technology) while other areas had very little (reference). Biz Wiki is one I have heard of previously, and I think it is very good. But I believe it is completely maintained by a librarian in Ohio. I don't believe that it can be edited by anyone besides that librarian.
I thought I'd find a number of wikis that were aimed at patients - sort of like support groups. I didn't see too many. Wiki Cancer was likely the closest one I saw, but again, it seems like there is a main group doing the editing and that others are just posting comments.
I know in my library we are using wikis that are accessible only to our staff. These wikis contain policies, procedures, tidbits of information, etc. Since we are a small audience and we all have a vested interest in the information, the wiki is updated frequently by a number of library staff. The format seems to be working really well, and we have been happy with it. My impression is that it is easier to create a wiki for a smaller group, in which everyone can have access, rather than trying to create a wiki for everyone in the world to use.
In terms of library wikis, I did think the Library Success wiki was a great idea. Although it also suffered from the same problem of being pretty thin on content. Some areas had more information (marketing, technology) while other areas had very little (reference). Biz Wiki is one I have heard of previously, and I think it is very good. But I believe it is completely maintained by a librarian in Ohio. I don't believe that it can be edited by anyone besides that librarian.
I thought I'd find a number of wikis that were aimed at patients - sort of like support groups. I didn't see too many. Wiki Cancer was likely the closest one I saw, but again, it seems like there is a main group doing the editing and that others are just posting comments.
I know in my library we are using wikis that are accessible only to our staff. These wikis contain policies, procedures, tidbits of information, etc. Since we are a small audience and we all have a vested interest in the information, the wiki is updated frequently by a number of library staff. The format seems to be working really well, and we have been happy with it. My impression is that it is easier to create a wiki for a smaller group, in which everyone can have access, rather than trying to create a wiki for everyone in the world to use.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
