RUSA MARS User Access to Services Committee Discussion Forum How Libraries are Using Web 2.0
Hyatt Regency Denver Centennial B Saturday, January 24, 2009 5:00 pm ‐ 6:30 pm
This discussion forum, sponsored by the User Access to Services Committee, reviewed the findings of the committee's recent 10‐question survey on Web 2.0 uses in libraries. Attendees, seated at various break‐out tables, also discussed how their libraries are using Web 2.0.
The discussion started with co‐chair Dianna McKellar reviewing the survey, stating the strategy for the discussion, and directing participants to paper versions of the survey analysis, the Web 2.0 Bibliography and a list of Web 2.0 Tutorials (all materials will be posted to the MARS UASC Website).
There were four tables, and committee members served as facilitators at each table. In the interest of time, only question 5 and question 7 from the survey were discussed. Below is a summary of the discussion pertaining to question 5 from the survey. Question 5 asked the following: Do you use or interact with learning management systems (such as BlackBoard, WebCT, or Sakai) for library‐related purposes? If so, which system do you use, and what would you like to see further connected/improved between the library and these systems? 4 systems were mentioned: WebCT by 4, Sakai by 2, Blackboard by 2, desire2learn by 1. List of Integrated Features: · E‐Reserves (most popular) · Direct links to reading lists · Integration with RefWorks · LibGuides · Class specific LibGuides and Web pages · Library tab
One participant's institution has developed a learning objects repository, which includes podcasts, videocasts, Web pages and PDFs, where faculty can pick and choose what modules they want to include on their course site. Barriers: · Time · Training (see below) · Getting faculty to use blackboard · Need to educate faculty on what to bring in · Emphasize that this means NO MORE WORK for faculty and in many cases, less work · Links: Changed/dead links, authentication, one solution: open URL links · Accessibility · Whether a librarian has faculty status can make a big difference in how they are able to use a LMS · One participant was listed as an instructor on the course page but was not able to build any lasting relationships
· Layers: A LMS can reduce layers and make access more convenient, or it can be an additional layer that leads to frustration and overload · Finding our place. What is our role? Students find it weird that people they don't know or have only met once have access to their course related conversations/documents Communication: · Wimba · Chat function (office hours?) · Videoconferencing: students find the system burdensome Uses for Clickers: · Discussion of plagiarism, have students vote on gray areas; Prove to students that they don't know as much as they think they know · Polling · Quizzes, Diligence quizzes · Group assignments
Training Issues: · Training staff on blackboard · Training students on blackboard · Overload is a barrier to faculty buy‐in. · Problems with frequent changes and upgrades · When an institution changes vendors this is a HUGE barrier to faculty Below is a summary of the discussion that ensued at various tables pertaining to question 7 from the survey. Question 1 (This was actually question 7 from the survey.) What other programs or tools would you like to explore to help extend or simplify your work? We had many public librarians who said they were using almost all the Web 2.0 technologies mentioned in the survey (blogs, wikis, Facebook, MySpace, and learning management systems such as BlackBoard, WebCT, and Sakai) or they were at least trying them. Some were very successful with Facebook for PR for gaming, events, etc. In academia there was the question of whether or not students "want us in their space," if administration has policies or concerns about privacy of students and a general wondering, "Why would anybody use Facebook?" Blogs are being used for a number of purposes (new books, events...) It was mentioned blogs are only really successful if they get "tangled" up with other outlets (delicious, RSS in a newsreader on the homepage...). Some felt lots of work went into blogs that are not read. Twitter and YouTube both were being successfully used....
One academic librarian said she wrote a widget to get the "ask a librarian" chat service on every page in the catalog and use climbed exponentially. LibGuides and "open source "Library ala carte" were popular. There was discussion about second life not really being "appropriate" for the public library audience. The question was asked, "Why would patrons go online to get to a resource in another interface that they are interacting with directly online?" It isn't that patrons don't use second life, it just isn't where they go for library resources...
There are some 2.0 technologies that people have access to but they never quite fly‐ like Basecamp (project management software for internal use..)
Sharing details of how Facebook is used were illuminating‐ how a fan is different from a friend, how viral PR works, how libraries are using twitter or tagging, what LibraryThing is..
Question 2
Have any of you had experience with these resources, and if so, do you have any feedback to share concerning successes, tips, or things you'd do differently?"
One person said the success of using a Web 2.0 technology is dependent on the nature of the project‐ (Google docs for example, can be perfect for document creation‐ but it isn't a good "long term storage solution" for documents.
Question 3
For those of you who have resources that you have not yet tried, but are interested in, what are the barriers that are preventing you from having explored these resources? Staff members can become fatigued from trying yet another new technology ‐ small scale pilots make sense before you ask everyone to try a new tool. Expectations are important (“How high or low…how much frustration can you tolerate?”) Question 4 Can we come up with potential work‐arounds to these barriers? There is value in trying things and failing‐‐we do learn from mistakes, and it keeps us informed and open.
Before launching full scale, try pilots. Question 5
How do you discover what Web 2.0 tools your users already use?
Check their academic and personal sites, etc. for Twitter “follow my tweets” links, Blogger or Flickr links. This is particularly helpful when you are working with specialized users, e.g. science faculty. Consider holding small focus groups with students; they will come if you feed them.
Question 6 Optimizing virtual reference service is a problem. Any suggestions? · Chat reference statistics help you understand how and when users use IM. · Co‐browsing software still crashes often, and users may have incompatible systems. · Some libraries have had success using Skype (http://www.skype.com/) for reference. Other recommendations include: · LibraryH3lp (http://journal.code4lib.org/articles/107and https://libraryh3lp.com/docs/h3lp) · Hab.la (http://www.hab.la/) · Meebo (http://www.meebo.com/) · Pidgin (http://www.pidgin.im/) Question 7
How can distance librarians be educated about Web 2.0? Give them online Webinars, podcasts, tutorials etc. Question 8
How can Facebook be effectively used as a library service?
Use it to support in‐person programs at your library. Create a page rather than starting a group; users can opt‐in to email broadcasts from pages.
Question 9
What are some tips for creating tutorials?
Facebook has a <10 MB size limit, and YouTube has a 100 MB upload limit – too small to accommodate a lengthy library tutorial. Try saving in Flash (FLV) format and offer a low resolution version for off campus students using dialup. Recommendations for VoiceThread (http://voicethread.com/) – allows you to record audio and attach a stream of photos, images, doodles, etc. to tell a story. CiteULike (http://www.citeulike.org/) a social tagging service for scholars allowing them to easily share citations
Highlights of Other Discussions
How Libraries are Using Web 2.0 – Web 2.0 tools are for connecting with users, and won’t necessarily simplify your work. Before implementing a new tool, it’s essential to plan for training and support. One librarian wanting 2.0 services will not be enough to make it happen. Learning Management Systems – Faculty get frustrated when they are asked to switch from one LMS to another (e.g. when a university tries to migrate all departments to the same LMS). LMS do make life easier for faculty in the long run. Most institutions use them for quizzes and to create a repository of assignments and readings; there’s room for more creativity here.
Wishlist of Future Topics
· Streaming video resources
· Collaboration and virtual meeting software for librarians and staff
· More information about public libraries (focus was mostly on academic libraries) · Nuts and bolts of marketing your Web 2.0 service to motivate people to
subscribe and make substantive contributions (rather than just receiving others’ content)
