Thursday, August 5, 2010
Sunday, June 13, 2010
Final Project
Nancy Van Wert
Erin Kirkbride
MLIS 7505
June 13, 2010
LIBRARY 2.0: A COMPARISON OF ANN ARBOR DISTRICT LIBRARY AND GWINNETT COUNTY LIBRARY SYSTEM
Library 2.0 was first defined by Michael Casey in his blog Library Crunch in 2005 (Casey, 2010). Based on the concept of Web 2.0 and using its tools, Casey asserts it is "a model for service that encourages constant and purposeful change, inviting user participation in the creation of both the physical and virtual services they want, supported by consistently evaluating services. It also attempts to reach new users and better serve current ones through improved customer-driven offerings." (Casey, 2010)
For the purpose of this report, the authors will compare the successes of two exemplary libraries that use Library 2.0, the Ann Arbor District Library in Ann Arbor, Michigan and the Gwinnett County Libraries in Gwinnett County, Georgia. Library 2.0 focuses on how to build a virtual community that supports the library as a physical place and upholds the mission and vision of the library.
In 2007, Ryan Deschamps posted on his blog, The Other Librarian, ten things a library can do to satisfy the qualifications for being called Library 2.0. Through simple steps, a library can build a community of user involvement, reaching out into the online community there by fostering the library as a source of quality information to navigate the problems of life, encourage learning, citizen engagement and seeking opportunities to serve the public in new and innovative ways. Deschamps’ steps are:
1. Use Mozilla Firefox on all your public computers—Firefox is an open-source browser.
2. Add Deli.cio.us to your browser—Deli.cio.us allows patrons to save and access social bookmarking from anywhere.
3. Use RSS feeds for library news—RSS feeds deliver news directly to the user.
4. Develop blogging guidelines—Blogging encourages staff to get involved and become “evangelists for the library cause”; it also shows community awareness.
5. Provide a content management system (e.g. a wiki) for staff to share information; this can be internal and also used externally.
6. Have a public blog to encourage user engagement; this can be used to answers questions, and user input elevates the perception that the community is involved in the running of the library.
7. Use collaborative platforms as Google Docs or Zoho.
8. Keep a Flickr page with photos of the library; visual images are worth a thousand words.
9. Access to Instant Messaging, Gaming, and YouTube are not required but strongly recommended as they are hot buttons for many.
10. Engage teens in technology. (Deschamps, 2010)
Ann Arbor District Library
An overview of the Ann Arbor District Library in Ann Arbor, Michigan shows that as of 2008 the library system serves a population of approximately 115,000. The operating budget for 2010 is $12.3 million. The library system holds over 500,000 materials.
The AADL is committed to sustaining the value of public library services for the greater Ann Arbor community through the use of traditional and innovative technologies. AADL values include: excellence in customer service; providing, supporting, and advocating access for all; acting with initiative, creativity, and flexibility; working together, with enthusiasm and optimism, to reach goals; and responsible stewardship of resources.
Gwinnett County Public Library
Gwinnett County Public Library (GCPL) serves a total population of over 769,000 residents, and had 340,055 registered borrowers as of 2009. The system consists of 15 branches, houses over 1,000,000 print and media items, and maintains subscriptions to over 150 databases. In 2009 the GCPL counted over 4.1 million visitors to branches, and over 4.2 million website visits; over 7.5 million items were circulated, and over 139,000 community members attended library sponsored programs. The mission of GCPL is as follows: Supporting your informational, educational, and recreational interests with convenient, creative, customer-friendly access to materials and services.
Interview Responses
Two email interviews were conducted on Tuesday, June 8th, 2010; one was with Eli Neiburger, Associate Director for IT and Production, Ann Arbor District Library, and the other was with Michael Casey, Information Technology Director for Gwinnett County Public Library (responses in italics).
What were your technology adaption processes, including motivations, decision-making criteria and staff's responses?
Neiburger: AADL apparently is not big on process or criteria. Engaging Library 2.0 did not happen overnight, but now the IT and Productions Department is responsible for the technology. They work closely with the rest of the staff and even have some IT staff who do desk shifts so that they know what's going on and what's needed. Most of our new technologies are either initiated by the Development or Productions teams, or are a request from another department. If it makes sense, has a payoff, and is a sustainable use of resources, they find a way to make it happen.
Casey: Well, I’d say there are three main sources of new technology ideas: staff, teams, and vendors. Staff bring us some ideas, especially when they read professional journals or attend conferences. Teams, like the Emerging Tech team, will often find and/or investigate new technologies for adoption by the library. And finally, vendors often bring new tech to our attention – a good example of this being the coin and bill accepting self-check at the Hamilton Mill Branch.
Technology then gets adopted in one of two ways: either someone in admin champions the new technology and sees that it gets implemented or the new technology is written into the strategic and/or technology plan so that it gets implemented on a schedule.
What decisions are involved? I’d like to say that the sole decision is always customer service impact (both internal and external customers, in this case). But of course there is a return on investment (ROI) to consider (although many organizations, ours included, sometimes fail to really take a good look at the expected and then actual ROI). Sometimes new technology gets adopted because someone in admin really likes it – that’s just reality.
Measuring staff response and technology ROI is very difficult. I’d say that we typically use a combination of statistics (throughput, such as check-in or check-out, books processed, customers served, etc.) and feedback through formal (surveys) and informal (word-of-mouth) channels.
What functional and service areas are these technologies used in?
Neiburger: Libraries are technology businesses. They always have been. Books were such a powerful transformative technology they kept the world changing for almost 500 hundred years. Now that we're in the early stages of the information revolution, there is no part of any organization that is not touched by internet technology. So, the answer to the question is: they are used in all functional and service areas.
Casey: I believe we use these new techs in all areas.
What kind of Web 2.0/Library 2.0 technologies are used? (For example: cloud computing, RFIDs, automated check-out, personalized catalog views, blogging, social networking, etc.)
Neiburger: The cloud is a bit dangerous for libraries. It is a critical part of a library's value to their communities in this century to be in complete control of the data they keep on their patrons, and that cannot be done in the cloud. RFIDs and self check-out are not what I would consider 2.0 technology. Some libraries in the 80s were using self checkout. Web 2.0 is merely recognizing that the library exists for the patrons, and not the staff. While that seems obvious, many, many libraries still make decisions based on what the staff wants, and that simply isn't sustainable. Our entire web presence is powered by Drupal, which allows for extensive commenting, tagging, user-customized views, sharing, etc. AADL does not develop new products without considering how our users will add to them. This is the essence of the 2.0 mindset.
Casey: Over the past three years we (the IT department and the library) have made a concerted effort to integrate second-generation technologies into our system. Several examples are: LibraryThing for Libraries (cloud based ILS enhancement which allows reviews), Rackspace Cloud (cloud based server hosting for next gen website due this fall), BigWebApps (cloud based help desk ticketing), enhanced RFID self-check hardware (new equipment reads cards without need for moving parts, changed in 2007/8), enhanced self-check software (now server based and far more customizable), creation of social networking presence on Flickr, FaceBook, and Twitter, several internal blogs, including the ILS blog, Survey Monkey (used several times on very large scale for system changes such as facilities, hours, customer feedback, etc. – many responses exceeded 2000+), formalized Technology Team reviews of the tech plan (building in regular review processes which includes staff and customer feedback, etc.
This July we hope to launch LibraryAnywhere, a mobile phone compatible library catalog.
Going forward, we will be utilizing open source software for our website which will launch this fall, which will result in a significant money savings. In addition, we will be transitioning our IM reference service to SMS/text and website widget chat – this should be done in spring 2011. Also in spring 2011 we hope to launch a website knowledge base based upon a product called LibraryAnswers (a cloud based service).
Do you follow a best practices model?
Neiburger: AADL does not follow a best practices model. Best practices are just shorthand for a lack of vision. Every community is different; best practices in one community can easily be the worst idea in another community. That said, we're always listening for cool ideas that other libraries are trying.
Casey: Yes. Individual projects, such as the website, are constantly measured against various best practices models. In addition, the technology plan is being measured against some very new best practices which require regular review and re-evaluation.
How does the library follow trends in library technologies?
Neiburger: Twitter.
Casey: I’m not sure we’re following other libraries so much as we’re trying to stay abreast of the technologies that our customers and other industries are using. Internally, this means we’re always looking for more efficient systems so that we can do more with reduced budgets. Other libraries are looking at these things, too, as are other service organizations. Externally, this means we are trying to adopt more 2.0 tools and services, including customer feedback and communications. The library has a presence on the major social networking sites, and the next generation website is being built on an open platform that will easily permit two-way communications (Drupal).
How are the usage statistics for your blogs?
Neiburger: Well, our entire site is blog-style, so it's difficult to attribute traffic to blogs. We did serve over 10 million page views just in March of 2010, and an average of 34 page views per visit, which is very high for the web. This indicates that people who come to aadl.org are staying a long time, reading many different posts and searches, and coming back frequently.
Casey: We measure use in several ways. The website uses Google Analytics (a powerful and free website stats manager). FaceBook and Flickr have their own rather good built-in stats. Our internal blogs are measured primarily through use, and the ILS blog is definitely the most heavily used internal blog.
How do you justify allocation of resources for virtual presence (Second Life, FaceBook, virtual reference services, etc.) if you have any?
Neiburger: Second Life is a joke and any resources a library invested there would be a very poor use of public funds. FaceBook is just a part of one of our marketing clerks' job and takes just minutes per week. We once used a subscription virtual reference service, but we discontinued it due to lack of demand. We just do reference by email when it comes up. Part of the advantage of modern web technologies is that the good ones are freely available. For AADL, we made an early investment in technology expertise (there are 10 full-time employees in our IT Department and it pays off every day by our being able to do new things with no new costs).
Casey: Our only virtual presence is on FaceBook, Twitter and Flickr. We do have IM reference but that is going to transition to SMS/IM/Chat in the next year or so.
Has the library been able to evaluate the response of patrons to Web 2.0/Library 2.0? If so how?
Neiburger: The proof is in the pudding: AADL has over 80,000 registered users and almost 80,000 tags; 2,000 reviews and 8,000 ratings. There have been 17,000 comments on blogs, all since 2005. For a small town, AADL is very pleased with the response. In addition, we hear from the public constantly about how much they love and use aadl.org. It's not very common for libraries to get praise about their websites from their patrons. The fact that they take the time to tell us that they love it and how it could be better is all the response we could wish for.
Casey: So far as feedback and evaluation go, at this point we are simply looking very closely at usage stats on the website and through the various services. We have not yet done any real public surveying regarding any two-dot-zero services.
Is there any other information or insight that you can share regarding your experiences with Library 2.0 and/or Web 2.0 technologies?
Casey: I will simply say that getting local political support (admin and board) is crucial. Any success in these areas is contingent upon support and a belief in the services. Everyone must buy-in, or at least be willing to try.
Analysis
Looking back at Ryan Deschamps’ ten steps to Library 2.0, Ann Arbor District Library meets all but two of the requirements, the use of Delicious and /Flick. Along with Drupal, the staff uses a wiki and Google applications to communicate amongst themselves. Firefox is used as the computer browser. The success of this library is driven by their blogging website, the users shape AADL by their comments and the library listens. The community of Ann Arbor is the driving force in directing the vision of the library, "open and equal access" to all.
Gwinnett County Public Library has implemented several of Deschamps’ ten suggestions for becoming Library 2.0. GCPL uses Mozilla Firefox, has blogging guidelines and maintains blogs, provides an internal content management system and uses collaborative platforms, keeps a Flickr page and a FaceBook page, and engages teens in technology. They are also taking definitive steps toward becoming more Library 2.0 in the near futures.
The two library systems share viewpoints on some topics, but have very differing points of view in regards to others (particularly in regards to best practices and cloud computing). It seems clear that Library 2.0 means different things to different people, and that the culture and administration of an organization can have a drastic effect on the direction that a library takes in terms of technology and progress.
WORKS CITED
Casey, Micheal (2010). Library Crunch. Retrieved from http://www.librarycrunch.com
Deschamps, Ryan (2010). The Other Librarian. Retrieved from http://www.otherlibrarian.wordpress.com/2007/01/19/my-top-ten-library-20-no-brainers-for-public-libraries
Ann Arbor District Library (2010). Retrieved from http://www.aadl.org
Gwinnett County Public Library (2010). Retrieved from http://www.gwinnettpl.org
U.S. Census Bureau (2010). Ann Arbor city, Michigan. Retrieved from http://www.factfinder.census.gov
U.S. Census Bureau (2010). Gwinnett County, Georgia. Retrieved from http://www.factfinder.census.gov
Erin Kirkbride
MLIS 7505
June 13, 2010
LIBRARY 2.0: A COMPARISON OF ANN ARBOR DISTRICT LIBRARY AND GWINNETT COUNTY LIBRARY SYSTEM
Library 2.0 was first defined by Michael Casey in his blog Library Crunch in 2005 (Casey, 2010). Based on the concept of Web 2.0 and using its tools, Casey asserts it is "a model for service that encourages constant and purposeful change, inviting user participation in the creation of both the physical and virtual services they want, supported by consistently evaluating services. It also attempts to reach new users and better serve current ones through improved customer-driven offerings." (Casey, 2010)
For the purpose of this report, the authors will compare the successes of two exemplary libraries that use Library 2.0, the Ann Arbor District Library in Ann Arbor, Michigan and the Gwinnett County Libraries in Gwinnett County, Georgia. Library 2.0 focuses on how to build a virtual community that supports the library as a physical place and upholds the mission and vision of the library.
In 2007, Ryan Deschamps posted on his blog, The Other Librarian, ten things a library can do to satisfy the qualifications for being called Library 2.0. Through simple steps, a library can build a community of user involvement, reaching out into the online community there by fostering the library as a source of quality information to navigate the problems of life, encourage learning, citizen engagement and seeking opportunities to serve the public in new and innovative ways. Deschamps’ steps are:
1. Use Mozilla Firefox on all your public computers—Firefox is an open-source browser.
2. Add Deli.cio.us to your browser—Deli.cio.us allows patrons to save and access social bookmarking from anywhere.
3. Use RSS feeds for library news—RSS feeds deliver news directly to the user.
4. Develop blogging guidelines—Blogging encourages staff to get involved and become “evangelists for the library cause”; it also shows community awareness.
5. Provide a content management system (e.g. a wiki) for staff to share information; this can be internal and also used externally.
6. Have a public blog to encourage user engagement; this can be used to answers questions, and user input elevates the perception that the community is involved in the running of the library.
7. Use collaborative platforms as Google Docs or Zoho.
8. Keep a Flickr page with photos of the library; visual images are worth a thousand words.
9. Access to Instant Messaging, Gaming, and YouTube are not required but strongly recommended as they are hot buttons for many.
10. Engage teens in technology. (Deschamps, 2010)
Ann Arbor District Library
An overview of the Ann Arbor District Library in Ann Arbor, Michigan shows that as of 2008 the library system serves a population of approximately 115,000. The operating budget for 2010 is $12.3 million. The library system holds over 500,000 materials.
The AADL is committed to sustaining the value of public library services for the greater Ann Arbor community through the use of traditional and innovative technologies. AADL values include: excellence in customer service; providing, supporting, and advocating access for all; acting with initiative, creativity, and flexibility; working together, with enthusiasm and optimism, to reach goals; and responsible stewardship of resources.
Gwinnett County Public Library
Gwinnett County Public Library (GCPL) serves a total population of over 769,000 residents, and had 340,055 registered borrowers as of 2009. The system consists of 15 branches, houses over 1,000,000 print and media items, and maintains subscriptions to over 150 databases. In 2009 the GCPL counted over 4.1 million visitors to branches, and over 4.2 million website visits; over 7.5 million items were circulated, and over 139,000 community members attended library sponsored programs. The mission of GCPL is as follows: Supporting your informational, educational, and recreational interests with convenient, creative, customer-friendly access to materials and services.
Interview Responses
Two email interviews were conducted on Tuesday, June 8th, 2010; one was with Eli Neiburger, Associate Director for IT and Production, Ann Arbor District Library, and the other was with Michael Casey, Information Technology Director for Gwinnett County Public Library (responses in italics).
What were your technology adaption processes, including motivations, decision-making criteria and staff's responses?
Neiburger: AADL apparently is not big on process or criteria. Engaging Library 2.0 did not happen overnight, but now the IT and Productions Department is responsible for the technology. They work closely with the rest of the staff and even have some IT staff who do desk shifts so that they know what's going on and what's needed. Most of our new technologies are either initiated by the Development or Productions teams, or are a request from another department. If it makes sense, has a payoff, and is a sustainable use of resources, they find a way to make it happen.
Casey: Well, I’d say there are three main sources of new technology ideas: staff, teams, and vendors. Staff bring us some ideas, especially when they read professional journals or attend conferences. Teams, like the Emerging Tech team, will often find and/or investigate new technologies for adoption by the library. And finally, vendors often bring new tech to our attention – a good example of this being the coin and bill accepting self-check at the Hamilton Mill Branch.
Technology then gets adopted in one of two ways: either someone in admin champions the new technology and sees that it gets implemented or the new technology is written into the strategic and/or technology plan so that it gets implemented on a schedule.
What decisions are involved? I’d like to say that the sole decision is always customer service impact (both internal and external customers, in this case). But of course there is a return on investment (ROI) to consider (although many organizations, ours included, sometimes fail to really take a good look at the expected and then actual ROI). Sometimes new technology gets adopted because someone in admin really likes it – that’s just reality.
Measuring staff response and technology ROI is very difficult. I’d say that we typically use a combination of statistics (throughput, such as check-in or check-out, books processed, customers served, etc.) and feedback through formal (surveys) and informal (word-of-mouth) channels.
What functional and service areas are these technologies used in?
Neiburger: Libraries are technology businesses. They always have been. Books were such a powerful transformative technology they kept the world changing for almost 500 hundred years. Now that we're in the early stages of the information revolution, there is no part of any organization that is not touched by internet technology. So, the answer to the question is: they are used in all functional and service areas.
Casey: I believe we use these new techs in all areas.
What kind of Web 2.0/Library 2.0 technologies are used? (For example: cloud computing, RFIDs, automated check-out, personalized catalog views, blogging, social networking, etc.)
Neiburger: The cloud is a bit dangerous for libraries. It is a critical part of a library's value to their communities in this century to be in complete control of the data they keep on their patrons, and that cannot be done in the cloud. RFIDs and self check-out are not what I would consider 2.0 technology. Some libraries in the 80s were using self checkout. Web 2.0 is merely recognizing that the library exists for the patrons, and not the staff. While that seems obvious, many, many libraries still make decisions based on what the staff wants, and that simply isn't sustainable. Our entire web presence is powered by Drupal, which allows for extensive commenting, tagging, user-customized views, sharing, etc. AADL does not develop new products without considering how our users will add to them. This is the essence of the 2.0 mindset.
Casey: Over the past three years we (the IT department and the library) have made a concerted effort to integrate second-generation technologies into our system. Several examples are: LibraryThing for Libraries (cloud based ILS enhancement which allows reviews), Rackspace Cloud (cloud based server hosting for next gen website due this fall), BigWebApps (cloud based help desk ticketing), enhanced RFID self-check hardware (new equipment reads cards without need for moving parts, changed in 2007/8), enhanced self-check software (now server based and far more customizable), creation of social networking presence on Flickr, FaceBook, and Twitter, several internal blogs, including the ILS blog, Survey Monkey (used several times on very large scale for system changes such as facilities, hours, customer feedback, etc. – many responses exceeded 2000+), formalized Technology Team reviews of the tech plan (building in regular review processes which includes staff and customer feedback, etc.
This July we hope to launch LibraryAnywhere, a mobile phone compatible library catalog.
Going forward, we will be utilizing open source software for our website which will launch this fall, which will result in a significant money savings. In addition, we will be transitioning our IM reference service to SMS/text and website widget chat – this should be done in spring 2011. Also in spring 2011 we hope to launch a website knowledge base based upon a product called LibraryAnswers (a cloud based service).
Do you follow a best practices model?
Neiburger: AADL does not follow a best practices model. Best practices are just shorthand for a lack of vision. Every community is different; best practices in one community can easily be the worst idea in another community. That said, we're always listening for cool ideas that other libraries are trying.
Casey: Yes. Individual projects, such as the website, are constantly measured against various best practices models. In addition, the technology plan is being measured against some very new best practices which require regular review and re-evaluation.
How does the library follow trends in library technologies?
Neiburger: Twitter.
Casey: I’m not sure we’re following other libraries so much as we’re trying to stay abreast of the technologies that our customers and other industries are using. Internally, this means we’re always looking for more efficient systems so that we can do more with reduced budgets. Other libraries are looking at these things, too, as are other service organizations. Externally, this means we are trying to adopt more 2.0 tools and services, including customer feedback and communications. The library has a presence on the major social networking sites, and the next generation website is being built on an open platform that will easily permit two-way communications (Drupal).
How are the usage statistics for your blogs?
Neiburger: Well, our entire site is blog-style, so it's difficult to attribute traffic to blogs. We did serve over 10 million page views just in March of 2010, and an average of 34 page views per visit, which is very high for the web. This indicates that people who come to aadl.org are staying a long time, reading many different posts and searches, and coming back frequently.
Casey: We measure use in several ways. The website uses Google Analytics (a powerful and free website stats manager). FaceBook and Flickr have their own rather good built-in stats. Our internal blogs are measured primarily through use, and the ILS blog is definitely the most heavily used internal blog.
How do you justify allocation of resources for virtual presence (Second Life, FaceBook, virtual reference services, etc.) if you have any?
Neiburger: Second Life is a joke and any resources a library invested there would be a very poor use of public funds. FaceBook is just a part of one of our marketing clerks' job and takes just minutes per week. We once used a subscription virtual reference service, but we discontinued it due to lack of demand. We just do reference by email when it comes up. Part of the advantage of modern web technologies is that the good ones are freely available. For AADL, we made an early investment in technology expertise (there are 10 full-time employees in our IT Department and it pays off every day by our being able to do new things with no new costs).
Casey: Our only virtual presence is on FaceBook, Twitter and Flickr. We do have IM reference but that is going to transition to SMS/IM/Chat in the next year or so.
Has the library been able to evaluate the response of patrons to Web 2.0/Library 2.0? If so how?
Neiburger: The proof is in the pudding: AADL has over 80,000 registered users and almost 80,000 tags; 2,000 reviews and 8,000 ratings. There have been 17,000 comments on blogs, all since 2005. For a small town, AADL is very pleased with the response. In addition, we hear from the public constantly about how much they love and use aadl.org. It's not very common for libraries to get praise about their websites from their patrons. The fact that they take the time to tell us that they love it and how it could be better is all the response we could wish for.
Casey: So far as feedback and evaluation go, at this point we are simply looking very closely at usage stats on the website and through the various services. We have not yet done any real public surveying regarding any two-dot-zero services.
Is there any other information or insight that you can share regarding your experiences with Library 2.0 and/or Web 2.0 technologies?
Casey: I will simply say that getting local political support (admin and board) is crucial. Any success in these areas is contingent upon support and a belief in the services. Everyone must buy-in, or at least be willing to try.
Analysis
Looking back at Ryan Deschamps’ ten steps to Library 2.0, Ann Arbor District Library meets all but two of the requirements, the use of Delicious and /Flick. Along with Drupal, the staff uses a wiki and Google applications to communicate amongst themselves. Firefox is used as the computer browser. The success of this library is driven by their blogging website, the users shape AADL by their comments and the library listens. The community of Ann Arbor is the driving force in directing the vision of the library, "open and equal access" to all.
Gwinnett County Public Library has implemented several of Deschamps’ ten suggestions for becoming Library 2.0. GCPL uses Mozilla Firefox, has blogging guidelines and maintains blogs, provides an internal content management system and uses collaborative platforms, keeps a Flickr page and a FaceBook page, and engages teens in technology. They are also taking definitive steps toward becoming more Library 2.0 in the near futures.
The two library systems share viewpoints on some topics, but have very differing points of view in regards to others (particularly in regards to best practices and cloud computing). It seems clear that Library 2.0 means different things to different people, and that the culture and administration of an organization can have a drastic effect on the direction that a library takes in terms of technology and progress.
WORKS CITED
Casey, Micheal (2010). Library Crunch. Retrieved from http://www.librarycrunch.com
Deschamps, Ryan (2010). The Other Librarian. Retrieved from http://www.otherlibrarian.wordpress.com/2007/01/19/my-top-ten-library-20-no-brainers-for-public-libraries
Ann Arbor District Library (2010). Retrieved from http://www.aadl.org
Gwinnett County Public Library (2010). Retrieved from http://www.gwinnettpl.org
U.S. Census Bureau (2010). Ann Arbor city, Michigan. Retrieved from http://www.factfinder.census.gov
U.S. Census Bureau (2010). Gwinnett County, Georgia. Retrieved from http://www.factfinder.census.gov
Friday, June 4, 2010
I've Got the 2.0 Buzz!
After numerous attempts at finding a 2.0 library, SUCCESS! I am interviewing the associate director of the Ann Arbor Disrict Library! Questions are off!!! The final push is on to get everything done. I have been at it all day with a small Raleigh break to the park....
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Assignment 3/CMS
I conducted this interview with Keith Belton, Webmaster for the Lee County Public Library System in Ft. Myers, Florida. The LCPL system has 12 branches, and a yearly budget of approximately 28 million.
I had been monitoring the LCPL website for the past 9 months. Within the last month a new website was introduced, providing more up to date, user friendly information, showcasing all the programs the library offers, links to use the latest technology and with a great “splash,” reflecting Library 2.0 (See: http://www.library.lee-county.com).
Mr. Belton relayed this information during the week by way of email/phone correspondence. This is what the correspondence revealed. There were two IT departments, one belonging to the county, one belonging to the library. To make the distinction, County-IT and Library-IT will be used. Lee County as a whole was looking for a new CMS for their intranet. The library was instrumental in selecting what they finally used and in testing it, they were the guinea pigs.
Mr. Belton noted the library needed to find a way to broaden staff contribution to their intranet and website. They also needed a platform that their outsourced/ contracted County-IT department could support. Apparently the County-IT people were very Microsoft oriented. They ended up using Microsoft Sharepoint (not open source). It could be used for both intranet and website (one learning curve), and would be supported by the County-IT. The old intranet system (Revise) was very limited and not very amenable to distributing content generation. The old website was a static website that had no CMS, and was a bottleneck for getting information updated in a timely way. The library beta tested about six months on the intranet and then another four months on the external website.
The learning curve was very steep, Sharepoint was not for the faint of heart or for those without a lot of MS server setup knowledge (provided by their County-IT department). Keith also looked at Drupal and Joomla, and sometimes wished they had gone that way, since the administration was much simpler. (That was his opinion of Drupal!) He has always been an open source advocate, stating if they had been a stand-alone library looking for a CMS, he would have gone with Drupal. At one point during the months-long process of setting up Sharepoint, he went home and setup a Drupal server in 3 hours! (That amazed me after the information that our class has learned about Drupal!)
The advantages of integrating with the county-wide system, and of having one platform for county and internal library use were just too great to pass up. He continued to say that their case was special, but they have been able to utilize it well. “There have been times we felt like we were wrestling with a (Microsoft) bear, but the benefits have been worth it.” The situation where the county was adopting this platform as a whole and providing setup support made the decision a good one.
Keith did not feel this had been a top down decision. County- IT built a test intranet server just to evaluate the technology and invited the library to try it. It worked very well for them as an intranet. The county was looking for a more robust platform that could integrate with office and county HR workflows, etc. They really liked Sharepoint as an intranet platform. The county-wide platform was becoming obsolete as well, and so they all saw the advantages of using the same platform.
I asked him if they steered away from Open Source due to security reasons since the county was involved. Keith thought it wasn’t so much of steering away as focusing on what they knew and could support well. LCPL has a good deal of autonomy, and if they had really decided that Drupal or something like that was what they wanted, they would have been able to argue strongly for that and gotten it. If that had happened more of the support would have been on the shoulders of the 5 person automation department of the library.
As a county agency it probably was more cost effective to go with Sharepoint over Open Source, as the library had no direct costs for the system. The cost to the county was around $100K, so an Open Source would have been much cheaper upfront. Integration with the existing system and utilizing the existing expertise of the County- IT folks were also big benefits.
I learned that technology needs can be satisfied in ways that benefit more than one organization. In this case, what worked for the county could also work for the library, saving money and man hours. Though Open Source may have been the first choice of the library IT staff, working with the county relieved them of any cost associated with Sharepoint,and the library gained extra support form the County-IT department. If they had gone with Open Source, the five person Library-IT staff would have also had the responsibility of the supporting the county, which Keith says would have put a strain on them. For LCPL it was a win-win situation.
Keith Belton kindly gave me permission to use his name and the name of the Lee County Public Library System, Ft. Myers, Florida.
I had been monitoring the LCPL website for the past 9 months. Within the last month a new website was introduced, providing more up to date, user friendly information, showcasing all the programs the library offers, links to use the latest technology and with a great “splash,” reflecting Library 2.0 (See: http://www.library.lee-county.com).
Mr. Belton relayed this information during the week by way of email/phone correspondence. This is what the correspondence revealed. There were two IT departments, one belonging to the county, one belonging to the library. To make the distinction, County-IT and Library-IT will be used. Lee County as a whole was looking for a new CMS for their intranet. The library was instrumental in selecting what they finally used and in testing it, they were the guinea pigs.
Mr. Belton noted the library needed to find a way to broaden staff contribution to their intranet and website. They also needed a platform that their outsourced/ contracted County-IT department could support. Apparently the County-IT people were very Microsoft oriented. They ended up using Microsoft Sharepoint (not open source). It could be used for both intranet and website (one learning curve), and would be supported by the County-IT. The old intranet system (Revise) was very limited and not very amenable to distributing content generation. The old website was a static website that had no CMS, and was a bottleneck for getting information updated in a timely way. The library beta tested about six months on the intranet and then another four months on the external website.
The learning curve was very steep, Sharepoint was not for the faint of heart or for those without a lot of MS server setup knowledge (provided by their County-IT department). Keith also looked at Drupal and Joomla, and sometimes wished they had gone that way, since the administration was much simpler. (That was his opinion of Drupal!) He has always been an open source advocate, stating if they had been a stand-alone library looking for a CMS, he would have gone with Drupal. At one point during the months-long process of setting up Sharepoint, he went home and setup a Drupal server in 3 hours! (That amazed me after the information that our class has learned about Drupal!)
The advantages of integrating with the county-wide system, and of having one platform for county and internal library use were just too great to pass up. He continued to say that their case was special, but they have been able to utilize it well. “There have been times we felt like we were wrestling with a (Microsoft) bear, but the benefits have been worth it.” The situation where the county was adopting this platform as a whole and providing setup support made the decision a good one.
Keith did not feel this had been a top down decision. County- IT built a test intranet server just to evaluate the technology and invited the library to try it. It worked very well for them as an intranet. The county was looking for a more robust platform that could integrate with office and county HR workflows, etc. They really liked Sharepoint as an intranet platform. The county-wide platform was becoming obsolete as well, and so they all saw the advantages of using the same platform.
I asked him if they steered away from Open Source due to security reasons since the county was involved. Keith thought it wasn’t so much of steering away as focusing on what they knew and could support well. LCPL has a good deal of autonomy, and if they had really decided that Drupal or something like that was what they wanted, they would have been able to argue strongly for that and gotten it. If that had happened more of the support would have been on the shoulders of the 5 person automation department of the library.
As a county agency it probably was more cost effective to go with Sharepoint over Open Source, as the library had no direct costs for the system. The cost to the county was around $100K, so an Open Source would have been much cheaper upfront. Integration with the existing system and utilizing the existing expertise of the County- IT folks were also big benefits.
I learned that technology needs can be satisfied in ways that benefit more than one organization. In this case, what worked for the county could also work for the library, saving money and man hours. Though Open Source may have been the first choice of the library IT staff, working with the county relieved them of any cost associated with Sharepoint,and the library gained extra support form the County-IT department. If they had gone with Open Source, the five person Library-IT staff would have also had the responsibility of the supporting the county, which Keith says would have put a strain on them. For LCPL it was a win-win situation.
Keith Belton kindly gave me permission to use his name and the name of the Lee County Public Library System, Ft. Myers, Florida.
Thursday, May 27, 2010
A Relationship with Word Press/ Assignment #2, MLIS 7505
Coming to the end of a long week that began with a group meeting. At the time my group was all Valdosta based so we meet with our laptops and played with WP. We created our own blog not knowing that we were suppose to use the one that Dr. Oguz set up for us. But that was ok, because we were using the same platform, so it was good practice. By Monday we were up and running, experimenting with the right one! Word Press is one of the most popular blogging platforms, so I think this exercise experimenting with it to be invaluable. I feel more confident in trying to use WP in the future. For the inexperienced person, like myself, you just have to jump in and get your feet wet, through mistakes and questions comes learning. My team is probably tired of hearing from me, and I applaud their patience with answering my questions.
Group 1 continued to experiment, we had two more group meetings which were a tremendous help to me. Dr.Oguz added another team member mid week and we tried to bring her up to date on our progress. I ran into difficulties on Tuesday with the site. When I brought it up on my computer, I could not get into the administration to make changes or play. I could not find the dashboard in my browser history and I experienced this on both by big laptop and my mini.So, I wasnt sure what happened, but something did! Celia provided me with the URL for the dashboard and this was the only way to enter. She had to add the admin back from hers and I was set to go again!
We initially set up a couple of categories, and then everyone was to play with the themes, tags, categories,plugins etc. We created our onw bios. I added a page and heading on therapy dogs in the library with a URL to Therapy Dogs International and uploaded a couple of pictures. My first attempt did not work and my team came to the rescue with directions again but it was exactly what I had been doing (at least I knew I was on the right track!) My third attempt was successful.
I also changed the time, changed the theme, tagged, categoritized and added the Askimet plugin. I am slow, so it would have been fun to have had more time to explore and experiment, but I felt it was a good first attempt!
I enjoyed monitoring the successes and frustrations of other teams. We all seemed to be struggling with the same issues, which made me feel better! I believe Team 7 had the winner theme! It was a little scary but certainly got your attention. I would have liked to have experimented more with the themes, but I am a little hestitant that I might mess the site as we are running out of time! I am a visual being and I like splash!
I checked out other websites that have been made through WP and I was amazed; the Wall Street Journal, celebraties, universities, along list of beautiful sites. I wonder what depth of knowledge it takes to create one of these and how long it would take?!
In conclusion and considering the usual group constraints of scheduling, and the time constaits of the class,I feel the project was successful. Team 1 helped each other, we brainstormed and learned about WP together. Those who knew more, helped the ones that didnt (me!)to understand how to make WP work so I could apply it to the our site.
Group 1 continued to experiment, we had two more group meetings which were a tremendous help to me. Dr.Oguz added another team member mid week and we tried to bring her up to date on our progress. I ran into difficulties on Tuesday with the site. When I brought it up on my computer, I could not get into the administration to make changes or play. I could not find the dashboard in my browser history and I experienced this on both by big laptop and my mini.So, I wasnt sure what happened, but something did! Celia provided me with the URL for the dashboard and this was the only way to enter. She had to add the admin back from hers and I was set to go again!
We initially set up a couple of categories, and then everyone was to play with the themes, tags, categories,plugins etc. We created our onw bios. I added a page and heading on therapy dogs in the library with a URL to Therapy Dogs International and uploaded a couple of pictures. My first attempt did not work and my team came to the rescue with directions again but it was exactly what I had been doing (at least I knew I was on the right track!) My third attempt was successful.
I also changed the time, changed the theme, tagged, categoritized and added the Askimet plugin. I am slow, so it would have been fun to have had more time to explore and experiment, but I felt it was a good first attempt!
I enjoyed monitoring the successes and frustrations of other teams. We all seemed to be struggling with the same issues, which made me feel better! I believe Team 7 had the winner theme! It was a little scary but certainly got your attention. I would have liked to have experimented more with the themes, but I am a little hestitant that I might mess the site as we are running out of time! I am a visual being and I like splash!
I checked out other websites that have been made through WP and I was amazed; the Wall Street Journal, celebraties, universities, along list of beautiful sites. I wonder what depth of knowledge it takes to create one of these and how long it would take?!
In conclusion and considering the usual group constraints of scheduling, and the time constaits of the class,I feel the project was successful. Team 1 helped each other, we brainstormed and learned about WP together. Those who knew more, helped the ones that didnt (me!)to understand how to make WP work so I could apply it to the our site.
Saturday, May 22, 2010
Friday, May 21, 2010
GUGM
Yesterday I atended the afternoon GUGM online conference at Odum. That would be the Gil Users Group Meeting that was held in Wimba, but they had big screens up for viewing. I listened to the talk on from three people at Georgia Tech on their system. Most of it was over my head but thanks to this class I recognized a few things! Them I listened to Debra Davis and Mike Holt present the developement of Archon which was enlightening, like why they chose Archon and how it works.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Human or Dog?
A wiki is a great example of Library 2.0. One of the things that stood out to me in the reading was Web 2.0 and Library 2.0 is about being human and connecting and seeing what happens from there. That is why Sir Raleigh has become a catalyst in connecting the humanism and the technological, reaching out to library users and engaging them into the library with a loving cuddly teddy-dog.
An On Going Story of Tails and Wikis
Sir Raleigh and I have developed a scanario to let you know more about the wiki we have chosen for our library which is the Lee County Public Library system in Ft Myers,FL.Raleigh loves running the beach at dog park at Estero. It is rather lengthy and I apologize but I felt it was needed. Raleigh is use to that part...one of the reasons he is such a great listener. Good qualifications for his therapy work in the library. I also cited from Wikipedia, which I thought appropriate in this context, and their source was the US Census! Hope nobody messed with it. Since this is a blog and kind of casual, no APA!
Finding a Wiki and a Job for Raleigh
1. The library that I have chosen to develop a wiki for is in actuality a library that I would like to work for, the Lee County Public Libraries in Ft Myers, Florida. First, a look at the demographics of Lee County. According to Wikipedia, as of 2005 the population was approximately 589,000 of which approximately seventy seven percent were Caucasian, fifteen percent Latino, eight percent Afro-American, and one percent Asian. Eighty percent ranged in age from 45 to 64, twenty two percent were over 64. Twenty two percent had children under age 18. This reflects a large professional group, and an equal division of children still living at home and seniors.
2. The Lee County Library system is made up of twelve branches, one which is devoted solely to audio collections. The combined libraries offer 340 public computers, 21 self checkouts, 5 download stations and a PC reservation and print management system. They have one book mobile. Their budget for the years 2007 to 2008 was approaching $28,000,000. They offer a wealth of programs to meet the needs of the community. I have been monitoring their website for the past year, and it has been recently revised. It is a fine example of showing the depth of the programs they offer, is visually appealing, and easy to move around in. They have now added a Download Depot to access books, music, videos, for Macs and OMC on the go. One can access from Ipods, android phones, and Blackberry Windows Mobile. LCPL appears to be embracing Library 2.0, and they look for marketing venues that are unique. Well....
2. The Lee County Library system is made up of twelve branches, one which is devoted solely to audio collections. The combined libraries offer 340 public computers, 21 self checkouts, 5 download stations and a PC reservation and print management system. They have one book mobile. Their budget for the years 2007 to 2008 was approaching $28,000,000. They offer a wealth of programs to meet the needs of the community. I have been monitoring their website for the past year, and it has been recently revised. It is a fine example of showing the depth of the programs they offer, is visually appealing, and easy to move around in. They have now added a Download Depot to access books, music, videos, for Macs and OMC on the go. One can access from Ipods, android phones, and Blackberry Windows Mobile. LCPL appears to be embracing Library 2.0, and they look for marketing venues that are unique. Well....
continued Wiki......
3. This library has a large community presence and is not afraid to be on the cutting edge of marketing to their community. They have asked me to select a wiki that would be easy to get up and running and would be compatible with the quality of their website (http://www.library.lee-county.com ). They would like to introduce to the community a special therapy dog, Sir Walter Raleigh, who would be used in their children’s literacy program. Sir Raleigh, the gentle teddy bear standard poodle will visit the library on a regular basis and the children will read to him. Because Sir Raleigh has such great skills, he will also be used with the book mobile to deliver books with a warm loving woof to the homebound. So, the wiki needs to get detailed information to users about therapy dogs, be fun and appealing for kids, easy to design and update, and fit in with the quality of the rest of the LCPL web page. Because this is an experimental program, cost, at least for now was a concern. They wanted information to be shared between the children’s programs and outreach/bookmobile, and the community at large with the interaction with Sir Raleigh and using therapy dogs in the library. Reflecting shared library and community experiences with a therapy dog would give credibility for using them in the library. Other libraries that have used therapy dogs can also contribute their experiences, and links can be added to www.librarydogs.com and www.therapydogs.com . What better way to pull the community into the library than with a warm furry friend helping the young and old. The wiki could be expanded to include books relating to dogs for children and adults, events involving pets, caring and training of pets, and tied into Florida’s hurricane readiness for pets.
4. After exploring the different types of wikis on www.WikiMatrix.com , I decided the best route would be an open wiki. These use open source software and are free. They are Web-based, simple and can be used on any browser and any computer. Users can contribute to this wiki by simple using their library card number. This would help keep out unwanted editing of the wiki. The free wiki to be used is www.doowikis.com . This wiki is simple, quick, and has lots of fun applications. There is an excellent example at www.doowikis.com/?gclid=CPjTwrj23gECFRuenAodSWRTIA.com. When you get there go to Real-World Example and then to "this independent web" to see a great example of what the LCPL wiki could look like, with a little twiking of fur, tails, and woofs!
4. After exploring the different types of wikis on www.WikiMatrix.com , I decided the best route would be an open wiki. These use open source software and are free. They are Web-based, simple and can be used on any browser and any computer. Users can contribute to this wiki by simple using their library card number. This would help keep out unwanted editing of the wiki. The free wiki to be used is www.doowikis.com . This wiki is simple, quick, and has lots of fun applications. There is an excellent example at www.doowikis.com/?gclid=CPjTwrj23gECFRuenAodSWRTIA.com. When you get there go to Real-World Example and then to "this independent web" to see a great example of what the LCPL wiki could look like, with a little twiking of fur, tails, and woofs!
HiHO it's off to work I go....
Well, I feel like red riding hood being chased by RSS the wolf! I am off to Odum and then back here to tackle the rest of the project and get that in tonight!!! Hopefully Sir R will not be needy or we will have to sneak in a trip to Freedom Park, or a romp with the hose in the backyard. He jumps HIGH to eat the stream of water and takes great joy in getting soaking wet, but what pure pleasure he gets (and I get a good laugh as long as he stays out of my flowers!)
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
I could Spend Hours
I could spend hours playing with this stuff. I sit down to do wikis and an hour later I am still playing with blogs and rss feeds. I'm done and sir wants out!
Monday, May 17, 2010
Furry Tails!
This RSS thing is getting to be very confusing. Raleigh is chasing his tail in frustration! I think I will stop by to see Dr. Oguz when I go into the library today. He did say to check with instructor, right? I can update that later!
Sir R had an exhausting experience at the dog park. We meet 2 Westies, one of which also is interesed in therapy work. Also the President of PETS, which is a nonprofit tha stresses pet education and particularly teaching children how to act around pets....important thing for Sir R and I to know as we prepare for children in the library.
On to WIKIS!
Sir R had an exhausting experience at the dog park. We meet 2 Westies, one of which also is interesed in therapy work. Also the President of PETS, which is a nonprofit tha stresses pet education and particularly teaching children how to act around pets....important thing for Sir R and I to know as we prepare for children in the library.
On to WIKIS!
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Testing
I am testing to see if this posting will appear on the RSS feed......What a maze! A source of frustration when you dont know what you are doing! Sir Raleigh wants to go back to the dog park!
Saturday, May 15, 2010
Evan Needs a Dog
Well, I have watched the Wikipedia podcast, the Second Life and the Farkas one that was very lonnnng. Great info in all of them, all new to me!
Saturday with Raleigh
Sir Walter and I are having coffee and ready to watch our first podcast for class. Yesterday we read two of the required articles in our reading. We thought the one by Kawjewski was an easy read and had lots of good information.I have a question. Is the difference between a podcast and vodcast just the video element? That brings up the RSS feed.....do we have to change anything in this blog on the feed site? I was kind of clueless to some of the steps so I left the selections to the ones that were already checked.
Hope you all can post now, I turned that feature on!
The other article I "looked over was Essential Resources.....which seemed to me a lot of Greek about cataloging software. Is that what you all found too?
Now for the entertainment! Then Raleigh and I are off to Valdosta's Bark in the Park! Sir R says WOOF!
Hope you all can post now, I turned that feature on!
The other article I "looked over was Essential Resources.....which seemed to me a lot of Greek about cataloging software. Is that what you all found too?
Now for the entertainment! Then Raleigh and I are off to Valdosta's Bark in the Park! Sir R says WOOF!
Friday, May 14, 2010
Beginnings
Hi, everyone and welcome to my blog! I guess I need to post a little something about myself. I have worn many hats in my professional career from interior design, travel and massage therapy. Somewhere along the line, due mainly to raising two children, I started working in dentistry, a great part time profession while raising a family. With all that behind me, I am now reinventing myself, and along for the ride is my trusty canine companion, Sir Walter Raleigh. You will probably be hearing about him alot, we are waiting to begin therapy dog certification training as Raleigh wants to be a library dog. So, we both are in school together and will have rewarding library careers ahead!If you would are interested in dogs in the library check out http://www.librarydogs.com.
My background in technology is close to "0". A year ago, I knew how to send emails and surf around the internet, I always had my son as my go to man. And I still do, thanks to Skype! Now I find myself deep in a language that is competely foreign to me! I feel like I'm on a bike going up a mountain! That's why I'm in this class. I was a bit overwhelmed when I looked at the class syllabus, and I will be asking alot of questions, so I hope all of you dont mind! I try to remember to focus on one thing at a time and build on that! Everyday I learn something new, so its a good day!
My background in technology is close to "0". A year ago, I knew how to send emails and surf around the internet, I always had my son as my go to man. And I still do, thanks to Skype! Now I find myself deep in a language that is competely foreign to me! I feel like I'm on a bike going up a mountain! That's why I'm in this class. I was a bit overwhelmed when I looked at the class syllabus, and I will be asking alot of questions, so I hope all of you dont mind! I try to remember to focus on one thing at a time and build on that! Everyday I learn something new, so its a good day!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
