Of the two highlighted podcast directories, Podcast Alley was my favorite. I had to play with it a little to figure it out, but I generally liked the results. I also liked DigitalPodcast, a directory I found through Google's directory of podcast directories, although I wouldn't probably use it before Podcast Alley.
I generally think of podcasts as a nice extra from blogs I like rather than as a primary source of information. So I listen to podcasts from websites I visit regularly, but am surprised to learn that there are actually directories of them. I wonder how many of the podcasts in the directories are meant to be stand-alone rather than supplemental to other websites.
For the library, audio podcasts could be used to highlight some new or under-utilized services, webcast interviews with visitors and employees of interest, or provide commonly requested information or book reviews. Having said that, YouTube video podcasts strike me as being more useful to the library. They could be used to do all the things audio podcasts do, plus provide information that really needs visual aids, like help customers with common problems on the PCs and catalog computers.
Friday, November 28, 2008
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Thing 20: You Tube
You Tube is great fun. I know I've killed lots of time this afternoon just hopping from video to video. You say learn...
One way I've already made use of YT at the library is in the Homework Help Center. Yourteacher.com has posted a number of their math lessons on You Tube. They are short (less than 5 minutes) instructional videos on specific topics in math. The video I've embedded here is about solving square roots, but there are hundreds of others. It's easy to direct a student to the appropriate page, kids like using the computer...magic! Warning: this may cause drowsiness.
I think I will start sending customers to CreativeCommons for computer instructions too. Good stuff.
As for official library usage, I think it would be a lovely thing to arrange a CML channel with instructional videos to answer common customer questions like how to use aquabrowser, how to print, how to save. It might also be a cheap and savvy way to do some marketing.
One way I've already made use of YT at the library is in the Homework Help Center. Yourteacher.com has posted a number of their math lessons on You Tube. They are short (less than 5 minutes) instructional videos on specific topics in math. The video I've embedded here is about solving square roots, but there are hundreds of others. It's easy to direct a student to the appropriate page, kids like using the computer...magic! Warning: this may cause drowsiness.
I think I will start sending customers to CreativeCommons for computer instructions too. Good stuff.
As for official library usage, I think it would be a lovely thing to arrange a CML channel with instructional videos to answer common customer questions like how to use aquabrowser, how to print, how to save. It might also be a cheap and savvy way to do some marketing.
Thing 19: CML Power Tools
I've had the toolbar on my computer at home since it came out a while ago, but haven't really played with it much since then. I do use it on a regular basis, but usually just to go to the CML front page. In learning more about it, I found that I really like the search bar's catalog, dictionary and encyclopedia options. I can see the My Account button as a useful tool. Someone who uses MOLDI would love the eMedia links. The buttons to the Events, Kids and Teens pages might be useful to people who use them.
My Dream CML Toolbar would look something like this: a search bar like the one already available, with additional searches for events and web search capabilities like Google, Ask, etc. Configurable RSS feeds. A My Account button. eMedia, Events, Kids and Teens buttons with pull-down lists to narrow the options. And a Reference button with a pulldown list of popular topics, like legal, medical, jounrals, etc.
My Dream CML Toolbar would look something like this: a search bar like the one already available, with additional searches for events and web search capabilities like Google, Ask, etc. Configurable RSS feeds. A My Account button. eMedia, Events, Kids and Teens buttons with pull-down lists to narrow the options. And a Reference button with a pulldown list of popular topics, like legal, medical, jounrals, etc.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Thing 18: Web 2.0 Awards
I've played around with Pandora before, but never thought to compare it to other sites like it. The Web 2.0 Awards has Pandora ranked #2 in the music category, with lower ratings than winner Last FM in most categories.
Both sites start with the user declaring a favorite band or song, then branching out with recommendations. In Pandora, recommendations are based on the Music Genome Project, an analysis of more-or-less identifiable qualities of music (like major chord structures, tight harmonies, or repetitive rhythms). As the site plays a new song, you can indicate that you enjoy it or that it's not to your taste. The site adds that information to it's data, makes an adjustment, and suggests another song. You can create multiple "stations" based on artists or songs and can combine playlists so you don't end up listening to the same stuff over and over (and over and over).
Last FM, as I understand it, uses a different methodology. Rather than try to isolate what you like, they assume you'll like what other people who also like your picks like. You can still tell them you don't like a song, so you aren't chained to their playlist. Last FM is more keyed in to the Web 2.0 ethic, with space for comments and other feedback, links to concert calendars, videos... Last FM has a more robust website than Pandora, but I still like Pandora better.
Both sites promise to turn you on to music you might not have thought to try before, but Last FM assumes that you are - more or less - like everybody else. They pigeonhole you. Naturally, it works most of the time. Most people are like most people. But if it works as a way of identifying which group you belong to, it isn't likely to work as a means to introduce you to new music. If I actually fit in the group that predictably, the group isn't likely to have many musical interests I don't already have myself. Pandora's method actually makes more sense. If you like a sound, find out what it is about the sound that you like, then find other pieces of music with that quality in common. You aren't being stereotyped. You're being shown other ways of looking at the universe of music.
It's like Readers' Advisory. If someone said they love mystery books, I could run through a list of the most popular mysteries and probably give them something to read. But if I really wanted to give them a book that suits them, I would need to ask some questions: which are your favorites? What stand out to you about them? Do you prefer hard-boiled crime mysteries or cozies? Does the gender of the protagonist matter to you? and so on. The why is more important than the what in readers' advisory; and in listeners' advisory.
Both sites start with the user declaring a favorite band or song, then branching out with recommendations. In Pandora, recommendations are based on the Music Genome Project, an analysis of more-or-less identifiable qualities of music (like major chord structures, tight harmonies, or repetitive rhythms). As the site plays a new song, you can indicate that you enjoy it or that it's not to your taste. The site adds that information to it's data, makes an adjustment, and suggests another song. You can create multiple "stations" based on artists or songs and can combine playlists so you don't end up listening to the same stuff over and over (and over and over).
Last FM, as I understand it, uses a different methodology. Rather than try to isolate what you like, they assume you'll like what other people who also like your picks like. You can still tell them you don't like a song, so you aren't chained to their playlist. Last FM is more keyed in to the Web 2.0 ethic, with space for comments and other feedback, links to concert calendars, videos... Last FM has a more robust website than Pandora, but I still like Pandora better.
Both sites promise to turn you on to music you might not have thought to try before, but Last FM assumes that you are - more or less - like everybody else. They pigeonhole you. Naturally, it works most of the time. Most people are like most people. But if it works as a way of identifying which group you belong to, it isn't likely to work as a means to introduce you to new music. If I actually fit in the group that predictably, the group isn't likely to have many musical interests I don't already have myself. Pandora's method actually makes more sense. If you like a sound, find out what it is about the sound that you like, then find other pieces of music with that quality in common. You aren't being stereotyped. You're being shown other ways of looking at the universe of music.
It's like Readers' Advisory. If someone said they love mystery books, I could run through a list of the most popular mysteries and probably give them something to read. But if I really wanted to give them a book that suits them, I would need to ask some questions: which are your favorites? What stand out to you about them? Do you prefer hard-boiled crime mysteries or cozies? Does the gender of the protagonist matter to you? and so on. The why is more important than the what in readers' advisory; and in listeners' advisory.
Friday, November 21, 2008
Thing 16: Wiki Sandbox
In addition to playing with the internet and ideas, I like to play with number order too. I bet you didn't know 16 could come after 17!
Editing the wiki was easy, and it was was fun to look at what other people have included. For instance, I enjoyed scrolling through the Favorite Books page. Library people have good taste in all kinds of books.
Editing the wiki was easy, and it was was fun to look at what other people have included. For instance, I enjoyed scrolling through the Favorite Books page. Library people have good taste in all kinds of books.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Thing 17: Google Docs
Google Docs : wikis :: office software : web editing software
I can certainly see how having an online document could be more efficient for people who are working together on a project. It would be useful for committee work, preparing group presentations for conference and meetings or tracking budget information in a branch. I haven't been able to imagine useful applications for the general public in a library setting, unless we decided not to renew MS office and instead offered instructions for using cloud storage. There are better options there though: Open Office, for one, is more robust than Google Docs, and just as costly.
Cloud storage is a useful backup method for personal documents. I use it to back things up at home. I wouldn't want to have it me my primary method though (and I wouldn't be comfortable recommending it to others) because I would rather have control of my documents. I don't suppose Google's system is less reliable than my laptop or a flash drive, but if I were giving a presentation somewhere and the network or Google were down (it happens), that would be the end of the presentation (or at least the visual aids). If I'm simply using it for backup, the odds of something going wrong with my own device AND the cloud storage system are much lower.
I can certainly see how having an online document could be more efficient for people who are working together on a project. It would be useful for committee work, preparing group presentations for conference and meetings or tracking budget information in a branch. I haven't been able to imagine useful applications for the general public in a library setting, unless we decided not to renew MS office and instead offered instructions for using cloud storage. There are better options there though: Open Office, for one, is more robust than Google Docs, and just as costly.
Cloud storage is a useful backup method for personal documents. I use it to back things up at home. I wouldn't want to have it me my primary method though (and I wouldn't be comfortable recommending it to others) because I would rather have control of my documents. I don't suppose Google's system is less reliable than my laptop or a flash drive, but if I were giving a presentation somewhere and the network or Google were down (it happens), that would be the end of the presentation (or at least the visual aids). If I'm simply using it for backup, the odds of something going wrong with my own device AND the cloud storage system are much lower.
Thing 15: Wikis
In exploring a few library wikis, the thing I found most interesting was the degree to which different libraries allow their customers to edit the wikis. The St. Joseph County Public Library, for instance, seems to allow only library staff to edit the wiki. [full disclosure: the library I used as a child] Customers can call or email suggestions, but really it seems to be the SJCPL's reference site.
The Library of Stevens Co. (WA), on the other hand, looks to have an open wiki policy. Thier intent seems to be to have a community resource hosted (and perhaps monitored) by the public library, but with content provided by their customers.
SJCPL's approach has its benefits: I imagine any staff member could add or update the site, which would make the staff more invested in the library's web site. With more strict oversight, the possibility of malicious or even just careless activity is reduced too. But this restricted way of wikiing flies in the face of the idea of a wiki as I understand it. If the idea is to democratize the information on a website, I would think the LSC wiki is the way to go. Yes, there is a lack of control. But simply looking at the two sites makes the benifits of the wiki way apparent.
The LSC site is robust, with great reading lists and local information. I imagine that both library employees and customers enjoy being involved in a project together. The community is invested in the success of the library in a new way. The library's catalog is linked to book mentions, so it's easy to move from something useful on the wiki to something useful at the library. Wikis are social internet at its best.
The Library of Stevens Co. (WA), on the other hand, looks to have an open wiki policy. Thier intent seems to be to have a community resource hosted (and perhaps monitored) by the public library, but with content provided by their customers.
SJCPL's approach has its benefits: I imagine any staff member could add or update the site, which would make the staff more invested in the library's web site. With more strict oversight, the possibility of malicious or even just careless activity is reduced too. But this restricted way of wikiing flies in the face of the idea of a wiki as I understand it. If the idea is to democratize the information on a website, I would think the LSC wiki is the way to go. Yes, there is a lack of control. But simply looking at the two sites makes the benifits of the wiki way apparent.
The LSC site is robust, with great reading lists and local information. I imagine that both library employees and customers enjoy being involved in a project together. The community is invested in the success of the library in a new way. The library's catalog is linked to book mentions, so it's easy to move from something useful on the wiki to something useful at the library. Wikis are social internet at its best.
Friday, November 7, 2008
Thing 14: Library 2.0 (beta)
I enjoyed reading all of the perspectives presented in the OCLC Nextspace Newsletter. One of the really astute things that most, if not all of the authors observed was that Library 2.0 is really about providing good customer service. Rick Anderson's piece, "Away From the Icebergs" pointed out the importance of recognizing ways of doing things that have become obsolete. In the case of libraries, we have to recognize that the flow of information has changed pretty radically over the past 15 years.
Libraries, which used to be a depository for knowledge and information, have quickly become an access point, one of many resources. Customers have made corresponding changes in their expectations of libraries. We need to be willing to make similar changes, and be insightful about everything those changes will entail. We need to regularly revisit our assumptions about how our resources -- financial, human, physical, and electronic -- can best be used, keeping in mind that they are all means to the end of customer service, not ends in themselves.
Michael Stephens' article, Into a New World of Librarianship, outlines what these changes can mean for the people who work at the Library 2.0, where content is user-driven and change happens quickly. Successfully operating a library like this will require transparency and flexibility, among other things.
Since flexibility will be at a premium, I'd like to think of us as a Library 2.0 (beta) -- constantly testing, improving, trying new things. Think Google, if Google were a brick-and-mortar library. [I'd like to take credit for the coinage, but I see that it was in use as long ago as 2005. Oh well, I still like it]
Libraries, which used to be a depository for knowledge and information, have quickly become an access point, one of many resources. Customers have made corresponding changes in their expectations of libraries. We need to be willing to make similar changes, and be insightful about everything those changes will entail. We need to regularly revisit our assumptions about how our resources -- financial, human, physical, and electronic -- can best be used, keeping in mind that they are all means to the end of customer service, not ends in themselves.
Michael Stephens' article, Into a New World of Librarianship, outlines what these changes can mean for the people who work at the Library 2.0, where content is user-driven and change happens quickly. Successfully operating a library like this will require transparency and flexibility, among other things.
Since flexibility will be at a premium, I'd like to think of us as a Library 2.0 (beta) -- constantly testing, improving, trying new things. Think Google, if Google were a brick-and-mortar library. [I'd like to take credit for the coinage, but I see that it was in use as long ago as 2005. Oh well, I still like it]
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Thing 13: Delicious
This is seriously cool. I love having access to my bookmarks no matter where I am or what computer I'm on. I love being able to tag bookmarks. I love being able to see who else uses the same sites, and seeing how they catalog them. Great!
I'm looking forward to playing with clouds and tags some more.
I would love to be able to install the toolbar here at work (and have it stick). I think it would be incredibly useful.
I'm looking forward to playing with clouds and tags some more.
I would love to be able to install the toolbar here at work (and have it stick). I think it would be incredibly useful.
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
Thing 12: Twitter
I might actually start using Twitter for library business. It would be a good way to let students know about availability at the HHC, to remind about upcoming gaming...just off the top of my head.
On a personal level though, I'm not sure I get it. I can imagine ways to use the service. It's a very efficient way to make announcements. But this seems like a prime example of finding ways to use a technology that nobody needs instead of developing a technology to meet an existing need. I've read blogs from a number of people who are very positive about Twitter. It seems like an acquired taste: about a month to really get into it and see the value. I don't think it's worth that much personal investment, outside of the social pressure to be that connected. My feeling is this: if I want to talk to friends, I'll call them and have a conversation. If I want to have a conversation with lots of friends, I'll have a party. I don't know the last time I thought to myself: I wish I could tell something to everyone I know right now.
On a personal level though, I'm not sure I get it. I can imagine ways to use the service. It's a very efficient way to make announcements. But this seems like a prime example of finding ways to use a technology that nobody needs instead of developing a technology to meet an existing need. I've read blogs from a number of people who are very positive about Twitter. It seems like an acquired taste: about a month to really get into it and see the value. I don't think it's worth that much personal investment, outside of the social pressure to be that connected. My feeling is this: if I want to talk to friends, I'll call them and have a conversation. If I want to have a conversation with lots of friends, I'll have a party. I don't know the last time I thought to myself: I wish I could tell something to everyone I know right now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
