Both entertaining and enlightening, the Library 101 project has just been launched by David Lee King and Michael Porter.  Aimed at inspiring us to integrate past, present and future librarian skills in order to continue thriving in a changing environment, the project is collaborative and ongoing.  Check out their ‘music video’ below for a fun introduction to their idea:

Library 101 by David Lee King and Michael Porter

Do be sure to check out their list for 100+ past, present and future skills for the profession, many of which could easily apply to librarian 2.0.  A very thorough and thought-provoking list!

You can check out an interesting assortment of essays from library professionals on the website as well.  Happy reading!

If you find something that you feel is important (or lacking) for librarian 2.0 skills and knowledge then we would love to know about it – we’ve been discussing similar ideas on our “Librarian 2.0?” page.

“A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.”
~Ralph Waldo Emerson~

The October 2009 issue of School Library Journal features the article, “Things That Keep Us Up at Night” by Doug Johnson and Joyce Valenza, two library professionals who are considered by many to be among our profession’s most thoughtful and forward thinking leaders. Some readers interpreted this article as a call to action and for us as school library professionals to step up our efforts to be cognizant of the shifts in the information landscape occurring in our profession.  Johnson and Valenza feel these approaches would create a proactive approach for providing students the information literacy skills they need to fully participate in today’s world.

However, others took offense to the article, particularly the sections, “The Challenge of Keeping Ahead” and “Failing to Embrace Networked Media.” For the last two weeks,  several librarians, including me, engaged in two lengthy conversations about this question with Beth Friese, a colleague,  via Twitter over Friese’s question and subsequent discussion, “Where Are the Others?” in her response to this article over at Johnson’s Blue Skunk blog.

These ideas and concerns shared in the SLJ article are not new—they were voiced as early as  September 2007 by Valenza and by Johnson in February 2008. Both Valenza and Johnson have blogged diligently to provide strategies and solutions to these challenges, yet it seems those efforts have fallen on many a deaf ear.  It is frankly a bit stunning and disturbing to me that so many in our profession are in a real state of denial the perilous state of school librarianship in the United States.

While I feel Friese presents an articulate response, I disagree with her and some of the individuals who responded on Doug’s blog  as well as Joyce’s blog on several points, so I would like to summarize Friese’s concerns and then share my responses to those statements.

Criticism: Finger Pointing and Exclusion

Beth addresses the authors, stating, “You point your finger right at them in this piece and tell them they are dragging us down. However, they never seem to enter the conversation. Many of us think we know some of these librarians. But they are absent from the debate.” Beth also shared she felt library leaders should be encouraging those who are “behind” rather than admonishing them.

I did not read the article as reflecting a “finger wagging” attitude, but instead, as an honest and constructive assessment of the state of our profession. If you asked any school librarian if he/she knows a colleague who is stagnant and taking no initiative to be a lifelong learner, they could identify not just one, but probably several, which I find disturbing.  For every principal who may not be savvy as to what he/she should expect from his/her school library media specialist, there is one who yearns for a school library media specialist who will be a catalyst for learning and change in the building.

In addition, leaders like Johnson, Valenza, and many others have done nothing but provide ongoing encouragement and idea sharing through both social media and print journal articles to the library community.  For those who are not in school districts that are adequately resourced, a personal learning network can accomplish the same goal, and in many ways, more effectively.   There are ample opportunities for school librarians to access and apply information about the latest tools, trends, and questions for debate, but they must be sought out.

Friese also takes issue over the statement that those who are failing to change are “dragging our profession down.”  In the section, “Failure to Embrace Networked Media”, Johnson and Valenza write:

“Librarians who don’t have PLNs, don’t attend conferences, don’t read cutting-edge professional literature—from both the library and the education worlds—are dragging our profession down. And good people are going with them. Professionals who lack an understanding of the power of professional networking disturb our slumbers.”

However, Chip R.  Bell and John R. Patterson remind us in The Hazards of Culture Change that “…without needed change the organization risks losing its competitive advantage. Losing its edge makes it harder to attract and retain the best talent and resources, and in today’s economy, the death knell begins.”  In his keynote speech, “Future Proofing Your Library” at the Georgia Council of Media Organizations (COMO) on October 8, 2009 , Steven J. Bell reminded us that our accomplishments of the past will not carry us into the future.  Look at the world we live in—I do not think it is possible or feasible to try and make a convincing argument that a school librarian should not be making an effort to be technologically savvy.

Before the advent of the read/write web, most educators engaged in professional growth through college coursework, local staff development, traditional conferences, or print professional publications; as email became more commonplace, many engaged with others through list servs. While those means still exist, there are now many exciting, dynamic, and FREE means for extending your professional learning and networking with others. While many may choose to enter these conversations about school librarianship through traditional mediums, more options than ever exist to do so at a time that is just right for you and your schedule: social media/networks such as Twitter or Facebook, blogs freely available to anyone for reading at a time that works for your schedule, print publications now available through your state/public virtual library or better yet, for free on the web, Google groups, virtual conferences (many of which are archived for viewing at a time that works for you), the social bookmarking networks of others as well as groups in social bookmarking services like Diigo and free webinars that are open to anyone who chooses to participate. No where did it state in the article you have to participate in all forms of communication; instead, find an entry point and grow your means of connecting with others at a pace and with the tools that are comfortable for you.

Friese feels those in disagreement with the ideas of the Johnson and Valenza’s article are absent from the debate, but I don’t see exclusion as a reason as to why the others aren’t “here.”  Unfortunately, many have adopted the mindset that learning stops once we complete graduate school and feel they do not need additional professional growth after graduation.   Beth calls for a “culture of curiosity”, but should that culture not already been well established in school librarianship?  We must leave behind the thinking that one’s MLS or SLM program can prepare you for everything you may encounter.   While it certainly should provide a solid foundation, graduate preparation is only the beginning of your journey as a library professional.   I see ongoing growth and learning as fun and challenging, not as a dreary chore that evokes a sense of being overwhelmed or overworked.

We also cannot limit our exploration of ideas to our comfort areas of interest—we must be willing to learn more about emerging trends and ideas that may not be our first love but may be the very thing that draws in our students. I cannot stress how much my PLN has influenced my practice; for nearly two years now, I have cultivated and continue to grow my personal learning network to include experts and knowledgeable others both within the field as well as those outside of it who have so many insights to offer that help me improve my practice .  If you aren’t willing to be organic, you exclude yourself from having a place at the table of school librarianship. How can you be effective if you are not making some effort to hone your talents and knowledge?

Can we really justify inaction and a failure to model lifelong learning, particularly when we know we have a significant perception problem about what we do and how we impact a school environment? Is there really any reason for not making an effort to keep your finger on the pulse of your profession and being proactive in your practice? Is there honestly any legitimate reason for any school librarian to NOT engage in ongoing reflection through some means?

I now ask you to look at our AASL Standards for the 21st Century Learners. The sampling of skills, dispositions, and responsibilities below reflect an emphasis on networked learning and social media:

• 2.1.4 Use technology and other information tools to analyze and organize information.
• 2.1.5 Collaborate with others to exchange ideas, develop new understandings, make decisions, and solve problems.
• 3.1.2: Participate and collaborate as members of a social and intellectual network of learners.
• 3.1.4: Use technology and other information tools to organize and display knowledge and understanding in ways that others can view, use, and assess.
• 3.1.5 Connect learning to community issues.
• 3.3.1 Solicit and respect diverse perspectives while searching for information, collaborating with others, and participating as a member of the community.
• 3.3.3 Use knowledge and information skills and dispositions to engage in public conversation and debate around issues of common concern.
• 3.3.4 Create products that apply to authentic, real-world contexts.
• 3.3.5 Contribute to the exchange of ideas within and beyond the learning community.
• 4.1.2: Read widely and fluently to make connections with self, the world, and previous reading.
• 4.1.4: Seek information for personal learning in a variety of formats and genres.
• 4.1.6: Organize personal knowledge in a way that can be called upon easily.
• 4.1.7: Use social networks and information tools to gather and share information.
• 4.2.1: Display curiosity by pursuing interests through multiple resources.
• 4.3.1: Participate in the social exchange of ideas, both electronically and in person.
• 4.3.3: Seek opportunities for pursuing personal and aesthetic growth.

Look at the ideas and concepts in these standards related to networked and connected learning.   It sounds an awful lot like inquiry and using social media to accomplish these tasks to me.  How can you teach what you do not practice?

Last but not least, numerous groups continue to sound the warning bell for the importance of positing transliteracy as an essential literacy. You can read more about my thoughts and reactions to the Knight Commission on the Information Needs of Communities in a Democracy at my blog post here, but in a nutshell, transliteracy is becoming the new cultural capital. While no one is saying to throw out the practices that work, the report does concur with Johnson and Valenza’s assertion that we must put the needs of today’s learners first. Recommendation 6 warns:

“It may be tempting for teachers and administrators who are themselves uncomfortable with new media to view digital and media competencies as “add-ons” to basic learning in “reading, writing and, arithmetic.” These competencies are, however, new forms of foundational learning. The consequences of neglecting this challenge can be dire. Students who are deeply immersed in the world of online communication outside of school may find classrooms [and hence, school libraries] that marginalize new technologies both tedious and irrelevant.”

Too many school librarians dismiss these kinds of literacies as fleeting and see them as irrelevant. They scoff at the conversations we attempt to have about networked learning, the emergence of social scholarship, and the need to teach our students ways to harness the power of social media. Are our schools providing our students the advantage through well-rounded information literacy instruction and learning activities that value digital and media literacy? Or do we privilege traditional literacies at the expense of this cultural capital our students need? As leaders in our school communities, a role we should be embracing, let us blaze the trail to create a culture of inquiry that encourages students to use these literacies as a lens for understanding more deeply how multiple kinds of texts function within our society. Who better to wave the banner for transliteracy than school librarians?

Criticism: Barriers

Beth identifies what she perceives to be a list of obstacles and roadblocks to change that she feels may explain why school librarians may not cultivate a personal learning network.

• basic internet access

• aging collections

• fixed scheduling

• no paraprofessional support

• outrageous student to library staff ratio

• test scores dictate instruction

• money to travel to conferences no longer exists

• filtering reigns

• they may face administrators who don’t support them

• teachers with no time to collaborate

• few obvious opportunities to develop whatever a PLN is

Some feel that these concerns are not shared by what Jim Randolph (Teacher Ninja) identifies as “first wave adopters”.   Are more progressive librarians immune from these challenges?  It is naïve to think that librarians who are considered ahead of the curve don’t worry about these challenges and/or face them in their library environment; the difference is that some of us choosing to not let these circumstances or barriers define who are or what we do as librarians.   We instead try to see these challenging situations and times as an opportunity to innovate,  not to dwell on the things we cannot do.

These are topics that should be of concern to every school library media specialist in the test driven culture and economically challenged times we work in.  They are not reasons, though, to fail to innovate and keep up.  I try to be very transparent about the challenges I face through my blog (many of which are on this list above); however, I also endeavor to demonstrate that there are obstacles and may also get discouraged at times, If I throw up my hands and give up, how can I hope to achieve the goals and vision I have for the library program if I don’t chip away at the problem?  I do believe that with continued and consistent efforts to educate and nurture decision and policy makers, I can slowly but surely eliminate barriers to change.  I also must be willing to challenge my thinking, seek out others who can help me analyze the obstacles from multiple perspectives, and also be willing to take risks to try and effect authentic change.  Our times call for “true grit” and our willingness to keep getting up even if we get knocked down more than once.

These concerns lead to the ideas of advocacy and leadership, which are addressed by Johnson and Valenza in the article. We have to remember that our efforts to tear down these barriers are about what is best for our students. At the end of the day, it’s really not about you, the school librarian.  Instead, we must keep our focus on what is best for students.  We cannot sit around and indulge in self-pity and endless complaining about the challenges we face.  Instead, we can choose to identify the problems and campaign for effective solutions that will provide the best possible learning environment for our students. We cannot sit and wait for someone to save us; we must save ourselves through grass-roots advocacy and effective marketing of our library programs.

School library advocate and “Washington Mom” Lisa Layera Brunkan reminded us at the School Library Journal Summit in October 2009 that our advocacy efforts should be focused on how these obstacles and cuts affect students; if we do not collect the appropriate data, demonstrate how we make a difference through transparent means (i.e. social media), cultivate our presence as one that is “indispensable” in our building, then we will continue to see the erosion and marginalization of our roles. Sara Kelley Johns, former AASL president and 2010 ALA presidential candidate outlined our roles as leaders at the SLJ Summit, asserting that “We have to be the leaders in the building whether they acknowledge us or not!”

Rather than seeing ourselves as victims who are helpless, we must work together to find creative solutions to the obstacles Beth has identified in her response. For those who feel powerless, engaging in creating a personal learning network can connect them others around the world who have faced similar challenges and found ways to overcome these seemingly insurmountable odds. Johns also reminds us that,

“Advocacy rests on solid programs—we may have good programs now, but we have to be learners ourselves. All of us need to be learners—whatever we can do to foster the most effective learning to students among our fellow librarians is one librarian’s mantra.”

The marvelous and brutally honest blog post, “Embracing Obstacles” from the Brand Builder Blog, offers many pearls of wisdom for dealing with barriers. I encourage you to read the blog post in its entirety, but Oliver Blanchard offers this perspective on how we should view and deal with obstacles:

Great project managers aren’t just natural multi-taskers. They’re also natural strategic masterminds. Improvisation kings (and queens). Crisis jugglers. Fearless creative acrobats. Their job (their nature) is to constantly find and implement solutions to problems, foreseen and not. Their job is to embrace hurdles and obstacles, because each one brings them one step closer to their goal. They thrive on making things happen. The more untraveled the road, the better. The more complex the gameboard, the better.
It takes a special kind of person to be able to a) do that kind of work well, and b) love every minute of it.  It isn’t for everybody. Excuses and blame don’t exist in this little world. There’s only what you did and what you didn’t do.  Sometimes, even the best laid plans just go awry.  For most people, that’s not a good thing…and for some of us, that’s when the real fun begins.

Are we not project managers? The AASL Empowering Learners: Guidelines for School Library Media Programs has added leader to our list of roles we play in our learning communities. How can you lead if you are not making an active effort to keep up with what is happening in the field and taking proactive measures to adapt? I am a firm believer in leading by example, and we cannot lead for our students, teachers, administrators, or parents if we are allowing perceived obstacles to impede us from our mission. Are you that special kind of person who leads and advocates for your library program in the face of these challenges? Are you what Stephen Walker defines as an “A” librarian who innovates in spite of adversity?  Chip R. Bell and John R. Patterson remind us in The Hazards of Leading Culture Change that “Planned change takes courage and tenacity.”

Criticism:  2.0 Is Not Our Brand

Friese writes, “ Our brand really can’t be social media. It can’t be databases. It can’t be 2.0. Not only will these things fade away, they exclude large parts of our profession from participation. I’d rather adopt our brand as “cultivating curiosity.” That will stand the test of time. And it’s something we can all gather around the table and talk about pushing toward.”

Based on our AASL Standards for 21st Century Learners, it seems to me that we should have already adopted and been cultivating a brand of inquiry and curiosity.   Are our library school programs instilling this value and mindset in students? Are there any legitimate reasons as to why every librarian would not already have this stance to some degree?

Secondly, I don’t think Joyce identifies any one of these “things” as our brand although I feel there is really no argument that they are indeed elements of our brand for now.   Go look at the manifesto linked in the article (and please note that every reader was invited to contribute) —does it look as though it is focused on single item to you? To me, that answer is no. Instead, the manifesto identifies critical issues that we must address and include as part of our library programs. And if you don’t agree with the brand, what would you add? Again, the invitation to engage and contribute is there, but if you aren’t participating, can you really complain?

You can be excluded only if you allow yourself to be by choice. If you choose to not join the conversations that are taking place in many spaces, then yes, you will be excluded.

Final Thoughts

Many of us interact with media specialists who are just in the process of cultivating their personal learning networks. I think we all make an effort to welcome the new voices and provide encouragement to those who want and ask for help—I won’t identify names for fear of omitting anyone, but I can identify several school librarians that I have helped through f2f interaction, Twitter, Gmail chat, and emails. The encouragement Beth prefers has been in place and continues to be there, but school librarians have to be willing to take those first steps to get started on the journey.  You cannot be helped if you are not willing to help yourself.

Jim Randolph mentioned my visit to his class (my alma mater, I might add, the University of Georgia) and stated that while he enjoyed the visit, some were overwhelmed by the information I was asked to deliver. While some may have reacted to the presentation in that manner, I can attest there were those who listened to my advice to start with one piece of the puzzle at the time and who have started sowing seeds of advocacy and leadership in their practice; never did I say that my practice was ideal or something that happened overnight. I can assure you any good I have done in my school is the result of hard work, persistence, and an unwavering belief that my library program does have relevance.   No one else is going to believe you and your work are relevant if you don’t believe yourself.

I don’t consider myself an exceptional librarian by any stretch of the imagination, but I do consider myself a learning and information professional who tries to embody the qualities of Librarian 2.0. I also try to convey I have miles to go in my growth and practice, but through ongoing reflection and assessment, I can feel confident that I am taking the right steps to be a lifelong learner. I think if we approach our “work” as play and joyful learning, then perhaps we might be better able to follow Seth Godin’s directive to “Stop trying to be perfect and start being remarkable!”

Doug Johnson concludes the blog post by asking these questions, “Do we owe an apology to those who struggle in silence? How can we give a voice to those who choose not to network?”

If you believe that constructive criticism is part of ongoing self-assessment and a key to growth, then the answer is no. If anyone is owed an apology, it is the students who are not getting the instruction and library program they deserve because they happen to be in a school in which their school librarian who chooses, for whatever reasons, to not at least make the effort to implement a library program that is responsive and proactive.  No one disagrees that each person will adopt these practices in different ways—we can celebrate that, but there is nothing to celebrate about those who won’t even make the effort to move forward.

As for the question about giving a voice to those who choose not to network, only they can give themselves a voice by choosing to participate in the community discussion rather than standing on the sidelines.  In conclusion, it is my firm belief that no one can “give” you your voice. You must find it yourself and then be willing to share it with others so that we may all learn and work toward moving our profession forward.

“Where Are the Others” is not really a question I think is most important.   Instead, I think this question is what we each need to ask ourselves as school librarians:

What will you do with your voice?

Hi everyone,

Discussion Papers I and II are now available to download on our Resources page.  These give a good overview of the project and preliminary findings so far, so be sure to check them out!  Comments, thoughts, and opinions are all very welcome and encouraged, so please do let us know what you think.

CNN has an interesting article looking at the ways in which libraries and librarians are continuing to evolve in response to increased digitisation of information and use of social technologies.  Highlights include:

Library 2.0…

People used to go online for the same information they could get from newspapers. Now they go to Facebook, Digg and Twitter to discuss their lives and the news of the day. Forward-looking librarians are trying to create that same conversational loop in public libraries. The one-way flow of information from book to patron isn’t good enough anymore…

Community Centers…

Jason M. Schultz, director of the Samuelson Law, Technology and Public Policy Clinic at the University of California at Berkeley Law School, said libraries always have served two roles in society: They’re places where people can get free information; and they’re community centers for civic debate.
As books become more available online, that community-center role will become increasingly important for libraries, he said…

Librarians…

This shift means the role of the librarian — and their look — is also changing.
In a world where information is more social and more online, librarians are becoming debate moderators, givers of technical support and community outreach coordinators…

And finally…

“I came into libraries and it wasn’t about books,” said Peter Norman, a graduate student in library and information science at Simmons College in Boston who says he’s most interested in music and technology. “Sure I love to read. I read all the time. I read physical books. But I don’t have the strange emotional attachment that some people possess.”
“If the library is going to turn into a place without books, I’m going to evolve with that too,” he said.

Click here to read the full article: “The future of libraries, with or without books”.

What do you think?  Are you seeing the same kinds of changes in your own libraries?  You might like to post a comment on our “Librarian 2.0?” page if you haven’t already done so!

Certains biblio-geeks ont créé des widgets d’interrogation de leur catalogue.

On peut en trouver chez Netvibes :

chercher : library+catalog :

• 28 réponses dont :
• University of Liverpool Library Catalogue : 12.232 installations (*)
  
• Bibliotheque de Tlse : 145 install
• Puis : moins de 100 install par widget

chercher : bibliotheque+catalogue :

• 6 réponses dont :
• universté Laval (quebec) : 345 install
• Bib Tlse : 145
• Puis : moins de 100 install par widget

On peut en trouver chez Widgetbox :

Chercher : library+catalog :

• 106 widgets dont :
• PPLD : 849 install
• 10 widgets a plus de 100 install
• en francais, saluons : BU Grenoble (251) ; BU angers (153) ; BM Tlse (101)

On peut en trouver chez Google :

chercher :library+catalog

• 149 résultats
• aucune stat d’install !!!

chercher : bibliotheque+catalogue

• 11 résultats
• aucune stat d’install !!!

Coda :

• C’est maigre
• C’est très maigre
• D’autant que 80% de ces install l’ont été par d’autres biblio-geeks

Mais :

• On verra dans 6 mois, le dynamisme de ces install (je ne suis pas optimiste du tout)
• Les gens vont voir à l’opac les pages dédiées aux “outils2.0″ : ils regardent, mais ils n’en font rien
• Hypo : Peut-etre est-il important de se positionner dessus pour dire à ces usagers : “on n’est pas des caves ; donc vous pouvez avoir confiance en nous, comme professionnels”. Si je sais faire B ; alors je suis bon ; alors ca vous rassure et vous croirez que je sais faire A aussi…

***

(*) : inexplicable….

Bloggers from Follow the Reader have posted a recent interview with two library professionals about how they are perceiving some of the challenges of the digital age for libraries.  From the blog post:

As digital publishing options become more and more prevalent, libraries of all kinds are working to incorporate digital into their collections and service offerings. This is no easy task, and libraries face plenty of obstacles as they gear up for the digital age. To get a bit of insight about how some libraries and librarians seem to be dealing with the changes of “Library 2.0,” we spoke with Kathy Ishizuka, the technology editor of School Library Journal, and Shayera Tangri, a branch manager for the Los Angeles Public Library…

Click here to read the rest of the post and the interview: “Libraries (and Librarians): Braving the Digital Age”.

An article has just been published in the newest issue of the Journal of Documentation that attempts to answer the question “What is library 2.0?” from the perspective of library professionals.  (For those without access to the journal you can check out a related presentation here.)

Researchers from Åbo Akademi University in Finland used a technique that identifies trends based on the co-occurrence of words, as library professionals attempted to explain what ‘library 2.0′ means to them.

The researchers were able to map out seven core concepts or “building blocks” that they believe define library 2.0 from a professional perspective.  These seven identified components of library 2.0 are represented in the image below:

The Building Blocks of Library 2.0 [image taken from http://library2pointoh.fi/]

The researchers could then use these core building blocks to provide their own empirically-based definition of library 2.0:

“Library 2.0 is a change in interaction between users and libraries in a new culture of participation catalysed by social web technologies.”

As you can see, this definition coincides with many previous ideas about library 2.0 and the notion that it is about more than just the technology – rather it is about what the technology is allowing us to do.  Some would even say that technology is not essential to a definition of library 2.0 at all.  What do you think?

Of course this would also mean that ‘librarian 2.0′ will be about more than just the technological skills as well.  Is technology necessary to define your idea of librarian 2.0?  Opinions are very welcome on our “Librarian 2.0?” page as always, so if you haven’t yet visited you might like to do so!

You can find out more about the work of the Finnish researchers above by checking out their blog (in English): Library 2.0: A new participatory context.

Some upcoming presentations have now been added to the blog (see the Resources page for a complete list of presentations):

• Partridge, H. (2009) Becoming librarian 2.0. Paper to be presented at the CAVAL People in the Information Profession Conference, Victoria University, Melbourne, Australia, 15-16 October 2009.
• Partridge, H. (2009) Librarian 2.0: The most adaptable to change!? Australian Law Librarians’ Association Evolution Conference 2009, Darwin, Australia, 2-4 September 2009.
• Partridge, H. (2009) May we work in interesting times: Librarian 2.0 and beyond. CAVAL Reference Interest Group, Information Literacy in Interesting Times Seminar, Melbourne, 25 November 2009.

For anybody wanting to become more familiar with the ways that microblogging service Twitter is being used by libraries and librarians, an article in the May edition of Computers in Libraries by Sarah Milstein gives a brief overview:

For many people, the word “twitter” brings to mind birds rather than humans. But information professionals know that Twitter (www.twitter.com) is a fast-growing, free messaging service for people, and it’s one that libraries (and librarians) can make good use of—without spending much time or effort…

You can read the free full-text version of the article, “Twitter for Libraries (and Librarians)” here.

You can also read about some of the ways that Twitter is being incorporated into real-life educational settings (albeit in this case not for LIS education), for example by reading about the respective classroom experiences of Monica Rankin and David Parry, both from the University of Texas at Dallas.

Recently another conference paper discussing ‘librarian 2.0′ competencies has been made available online via the E-prints in Library and Information Science archive (E-LIS).  The paper, “Social Networking Literacy Competencies for Librarians: Exploring Considerations and Engaging Participation” by Joe Murphy and Heather Moulaison, was presented earlier this year at the 14th National ACRL Conference, and discusses some suggested competencies for librarians engaging with online social networking tools.

The authors list the following competencies as necessary for social networking literate librarians:

1. Understanding and articulating social networking sites and their goals
2. Creating content
3. Evaluating information
4. Applying information ethically and legally
5. Searching and navigating
6. Interacting
7. Teaching
8. Providing services
9. Flexibility

From the paper:

…Librarians need a new branch of skill sets specific to utilizing and leveraging social networking sites to provide quality services and maintain their role as information experts in a Web 2.0 world.

The following competencies are a suggested set of skills that librarians should possess as social networking literate information professionals capable of implementing library services and utilizing information within social networking sites…

The entire paper is available to download via E-LIS.

You might like to think about how these skills compare to ideas of librarian competencies before the explosion of web 2.0 technologies. 

Remember that you are always welcome to share your thoughts on our “Librarian 2.0?” page as well.

A recent article in Campus Review talks about some of the ways that academic libraries (and consequently librarians) are changing in response to increased digitisation of resources.  From the article:

The next generation of professional librarians are enrolled in information management degrees. They need to be given the explosion in digital information, reports Jeremy Gilling.

The information revolution has transformed the world of libraries. Books are still borrowed, though in decreasing numbers, while information is increasingly held in electronic form. Librarians’ role now is to guide students and staff through an increasingly self-service environment, and spaces are being redesigned to facilitate this process…

Click here to read the full Campus Review article “It’s bigger than just libraries”.

Recently EDUCAUSE Australasia 2009 took place from 3-6 May in Perth, Western Australia.  One of the presenters there was Kathryn Greenhill, a librarian working at Murdoch University Library who also maintains her own blog.  She presented a paper titled “Why Learning about Emerging Technologies is Part of Every Librarian’s Job”, which you can read by clicking on the link.  You can view the accompanying slideshow for the presentation at Kathryn’s blog, or by clicking to play the embedded version below:

Slideshow by Kathryn Greenhill: “Why Learning about New Technologies is Part of Every Librarian’s Job” Source

Kathryn’s paper talks about workplace learning programmes for staff learning about web 2.0 technologies, as well as techniques for finding the time to learn about these technologies.  A few of the comments on our “Librarian 2.0?” page lately have been related to the fact that it is hard for some LIS professionals to find time within their job to focus on the issue of web/library 2.0.  Twenty-one reasons are listed in the paper as to why it is important for librarians to learn about new technologies, including as a way of increasing our skills.  Kathryn was also awarded a Jean Arnot Memorial Fellowship for the paper. 

You might find it interesting to have a look at the paper and the presentation, and to think about the extent to which you see learning about web 2.0 technologies as forming part of your own job as an LIS professional.  As always comments can be directed to the discussion on our “Librarian 2.0?” page.

Les Médiathèques de l’agglomération troyenne sont très actives en ligne.

J’ai un peu surfé sur leur site, j’y ai trouvé :

• Une vidéo de présentation de la bibliothèque en anglais :
  • A noter :
  • c’est 7 min, ca me parait trop long, notamment à charger
  • C’est hyper débile (bonne ambiance)!!! Des bib’ qui ne se sont pas pris la tête pour parler d’eux…
• Une expo virtuelle avec un peu d’anim assez simple sans doute.
• Un sous-site sur Facebook annoncé dès la home page
• Une visite virtuelle des locaux, sans doute sous-traitée, mais vous pouvez faire la même tout seul avec un peu de flash.
• Une bibliothèque numérique unique et bien faite
• Des services en ligne à la pelle. Notamment en VoD et en Musique (Eh les gars, comment ca marche tous ces services ???)
• Des audioblogs en partenariat avec arte.
• Des visites des locaux dans un cadre de “visite touristique“
• De nombreux travaux pédagogiques à destination des enfants
• Des prêts d’exposition
• Des tas de service entre usagers et bibliothèques (dont 3 blogs!!)
• Des bibliographies à la demande !!!
• Deux projets qui s’affichent comme tel
• Bibliosésame

****

Bon, je crois qu’on a tous à en prendre de la graine.

Bravo à eux !

Après des années passées à se morfondre parce que nos usagers d’OPAC ne pouvaient profiter ou écrire des commentaires sur les documents, voilà 3 web-services qui vous proposent de vous lancer  !

Qui sont les joueurs ?

• Librarything : boite US dont on a déjà bcp parlé… racheté par bowker (équivalent d’Electre en plus balaise, a racheté aquabrowser y’a un an). Enfin, c’est LTFL qu’a été racheté par bowker
• Libfly, vu via le BBF mais présent à Dole ou à Troyes depuis plusieurs mois : émanation de la société Archimed
• Babelthèque : émanation de Babélio

A quoi on joue ?

Le but est d’enrichir nos OPAC avec du contenu déposé sur d’autres plateformes web. En gros, il existe des endroits où tout un chacun rentre ses livres, les commente, les note, les taggue, etc… Et c’est ces informations là, détenues par des institutions tiers, qui viendront enrichir nos OPAC

2e effet kiss cool : nos usagers à l’OPAC doivent avoir la possibilité eux aussi, d’ajouter du contenu qui sera reversé à la plateforme initiale.

L’intéret étant de n’avoir qu’une plateforme francophone, la plus interopérable possible – et de mutualiser, à l’échelle de la francophonie toute entière ce type d’enrichissements..

Quels sont leurs pouvoirs ?

Etat au 05/03/09

NB : Vous pouvez voir certaines valeurs il y a 10 mois dans ce vieux post.

Quels sont leurs armes ?

Les webservices offerts :

Qui gagne ?

D’abord, vous pouvez tester ici. (attention, c’est brut de décoffrage en terme d’ergonomie)

Essayez avec : Nothomb, Serres, Anna Gavalda, Onfray, Marc levy, guillaume musso, tintin…

Je conseille une notice d’entrée où les 3 acteurs sont présents :

Je te retrouverai / John Irving

Vous pouvez essayer aussi :

Les bienveillantes / Litell

Librarything

Les + :

• pérénnité/longévité ;
• communauté de développeurs ;
• nombre d’API et de développements déjà faits
• l’esprit open source revendiqué (du moins initialement)
• grande autonomie de personnalisation pour la bibliothèque

Les  – :

• La communauté française n’est pas à la hauteur de l’US
• Tous les tags sont en anglais
• Le temps long d’apparition des webservices sur votre OPAC
• NB : les problèmes de diacritiques sont corrigeables comme l’a montré la BU d’Angers…

Libfly

Les + :

• Une offre qui permet de s’interfacer avec les SIGB pour avoir la disponibilité de votre document
• La fonction “emprunter” du réseau social
• L’expertise d’Archimed dans le monde du web en bibliothèque
• La très belle fenêtre d’ouverture en cliquant sur les tags.

Les – :

• Une plateforme jeune donc avec un nombre limité de participations à ce jour.
• La plateforme de configuration autonome pour les bibliothèques n’est pas encore là (et peut-etre ne correspond pas à leur stratégie de dév’?)

Babelthèque

Les + :

• Un réseau social, “babélio”, très fourni en commentaires/critiques des utilisateurs
• La possibilité d’écrire des critiques dans l’OPAC sans avoir à se logger
• autonomie de personnalisation pour la bibliothèque

Les – :

• La structure babélio, jeune et non assurée

Comment on fait ?

1. Ca coute – au plus – une poignée de kE (moins que l’ancien seuil des marchés publics) pour un an.

2. On leur écrit :

• Ils vous expliquent en gros
• Ils vous donnent trois lignes de code à coller dans votre OPAC sur le fichier général de vos notices
• On fait un peu de configuration et de customisation
• Le tour est globalement joué

Pourquoi la BM de Toulouse a choisi Babelthèque ?

Parce qu’on a commencé à se draguer il y a 9 mois – et qu’on bosse avec eux là-dessus depuis 6 mois. Je vous passe les ratés, les changements, et les sueurs froides – ils ont sorti un produit qui répond très bien à l’expression initiale de nos besoins.

Qu’on peut voir ici dans sa version customisée.

Remarque sur le taux de recouvrement :

Difficile à jauger.

Du catalogue de la bib’ de Toulouse,   50.000 notices sont présentes chez Babélio. Je ne sais combien contiennent des données 2.0 (note et/ou commentaires et/ou citations et/ou tags)

Le nombre d’isbn uploadés était de 330.000 ! Donc le taux de recouvrement est faible (15%), ce qui traduit sans doute la richesse du fonds d’une grosse structure.

Il est fort à parier qu’une structure moyenne avec disons 50 à 100.000 isbn uploadés, aurait des taux de recouvrement très supérieurs (avec autour de 40.000 isbn reconnus chez babélio).

Y’a t il d’autres joueurs ?

Zazieweb devrait se lancer si j’ai bien tout suivi.

Et que fait Electre ?? ((je ne sais pas!!))

Y’a t il d’autres protagonistes?

Bien sûr!

On va vers une collaboration très intriquée de toute la chaine du livre, a priori grâce à la techno des web services.

L’idée sera alors d’aller agréger du contenu enrichi de différentes sources :

• public
• éditeurs
• libraires
• bibliothécaires
• etc

 Monter un marché, c’est pas un cadeau !

Monter un marché de numérisation pour plusieurs projets de votre institution – ca relève de l’acrobatie !!

Mais monter un marche de numérisation pour l’ensmeble des services culturels de la ville – ca relève de la haute voltige !!!

Comme ils ont peur de rien par chez nous, c’est quand même ce que le service des ”Marchés publics” nous a enjoint de faire !

Alors, une fois de plus, non comme modèle, mais comme exemple, je vais vous dire comment on a fait. Je vous passe le flou et les repentirs pour exposer une méthode propre.

Méthodo

1. On a réunit l’ensemble des services demandeurs.
2. On déduit de leurs besoins 5 grands types de lot en regroupant les projets concernant des supports proches, ie nécessitant des technologies, des outils et des acteurs identiques.
3. On fait remplir à chaque service demandeur une fiche descriptive de leurs besoins pour chacun de leur projet.
4. On leur demande de budgéter chacun de leur projet
5. On rassemble tout ca et on en déduit le type d’appel d’offre à lancer

Obstacles

La profusion des besoins est énorme :

• Avec ou sans MRT ?
• Avec ou sans OCR ?
• Recto ou recto-verso ?
• Relié ou pas ?
• Quel format ?
• Couleur ou pas ?
• Avec ou sans meta-données ?
• Compatible avec tel logiciel ou pas ?
• a intégrer à la base joconde ou pas ?
• Avec outil de diffusion ?

Et je vous parle pas des musées dont je suis pas expert !!

Résultat

Nous on a fait 5 lots avec des sous-lots dedans. Chaque projet identifié correspond à un sous-lot. Les prestataires répondent par lot. On demande au prestataire un prix forfaitaire global par lot avec une décomposition globale au niveau de chaque sous-lot.

On peut demander une visite obligatoire sur site pour qu’ils voient l’état du chantier. 

LOT 1 : PERIODIQUES AVEC OUTILS DE DIFFUSION

LOT 2 : DOCUMENTS ECRITS NORMAUX

LOT 3 : DOCUMENTS ECRITS PRECIEUX

LOT 4 : ICONOGRAPHIE NORMALE

LOT 5 : ICONOGRAPHIE PRECIEUX

——————————————————–

Fiche à remplir par les services demandeurs

Lot :

Service demandeur :

COLLECTION FOURNIE PAR LE CLIENT :

Titre :

Description :

Type du document :

Quantité totale :

Format du document (avec estimation quantitative afférente) :

Qualité du document (avec estimation quantitative afférente) : (1)

Quantité (%) de documents reliés :

Quantité (%) d’imprimés s’ouvrant à 120° :

Quantité (%) d’imprimés s’ouvrant à 180° :

Fournitures des métadonnées par le client (oui/non) :

Remarques sur la collection :

Je rebondis sur transnets et modern art notes

Après les bibliothèques, les musées :

***

Que font les gros américains ?

modern art notes le dit mieux que moi, mais quand meme :

• Ils peuvent twitter plusieurs fois par jourDepuis différentes plateformes
• Ils répondent à des personnes en particulier (@…)
• Ils font bcp de fonction phatique
• Ils se parlent entre eux

=> ils font du pur réseau : tchatche vide et creuse

———-

NB : la recherche d’usagers sur twitter étant très limitée, je précise qu’il y a bien plus que 7 musées en France sur twitter; mais ils ne sont pas apparus vu le protocole de la recherche. Notamment : centre pompidou; les abattoirs; etc.