LARK meeting on 7 November 2013, 5-7 in Sydney

Making a way to the place in future

By Suzana Sukovic

Photos http://www.flickr.com/photos/worldbycycle/

Thanks to Kristina Stoney for her generous permission to reproduce her and Nicolas Arney's beautiful photos.
 

In transition (Turkey)

This week I learnt at some majestic places – NSW Art Gallery, State Library and sandstone buildings of a private college. However, the main part is happening right now as I am trying to make sense of it, writing this blog at my desk – a very modest place of learning.

The week started with the ALIA Future of the Profession summit at the State Library when we tried to work out what the future holds for us, librarians and other information professionals (see #alliafutures on Twitter). On Tuesday, it was the AIS ICT Integrators Conference where we talked about using wonderful digital tools in a meaningful way in education, which refuses to change fast enough (#aisitic). Anne Cutler, Director of Learning at Tate, topped the week with a guest lecture at the NSW Art Gallery.

 

In all these events, we talked about knowledge industries and repeated the same questions: Will we be needed in the future? Where is our place? What do we need to do and how? Professionals in ‘easy target’ industries worry about copping another round of cuts, but it isn’t the only problem. Even doctors wonder whether they’ll treat sick patients in the future, I’d read just before the summit. Democratisation of knowledge enabled by fast developments of ICT has quickly shifted our sacred grounds leaving us slightly insecure on our feet.

 

People working in the knowledge sector have lots of questions and doubts but, fortunately, they also have some (tentative) answers.  Librarians, teachers and curators believe that future knowledge will be shared, collaborative and learner/client-centered. But, where will we be with our professional knowledge, authority, special buildings and artefacts in the culture of Google, Facebook and Wikipedia? There, with people, working as facilitators, we say.

 A key to that shared vision can be described in four points.
 

Checking it out (Casablanca)

1. People, our students and clients, should be trusted to set their own learning agenda. Kristina Stoney (http://ride2learn.org/) travels around the world on her bike and engages students in challenge-based learning. Students choose their challenge and find their answers thriving in the experience, explain their teachers. 

Some community libraries have started people records describing their unique knowledge. Community members can ‘borrow’ a person to talk with them in the library.

‘We are misunderstanding what our public wants from us,’ says Anna Cutler. She wants visitors at Tate to set up their own gallery programs. Young people organised a festival at Tate gathering 20,000 participants who spent hours at the gallery.

People want to learn, to participate and share. We have to allow them to tell us how.
 

Bread tools

2. Our tools and resources are valuable and, often, unique. We need to use them in partnership with other players.

Google doesn’t know everything, but makes an information professional’s job easier, says Mark Pesce. Is this question Googleable? may be the question to filter reference enquiries. Today, a meme has come my way. The joke is about the infamous question Do you have that green book by that famous guy? But, the whole joke is a misunderstanding. The question is legitimate. Librarians have reference interview, knowledge of literature and search tools to answer questions that can’t be searched online, though Google may come handy. Students need teachers to guide them, although YouTube is often better for specifics.

 

Our greatest tools are our mind and professional knowledge.

 

3. Values. What are our values? What do we mean by them? How do implement them? - are questions at the core of a learning transformation at Tate. How do we recognise our values in practice? asks Cutler’s team.

 

Tyre inspection

4. Evidence is crucial for change. In order to answer the questions about values, the Tate team constantly gathers, analyses and shares data looking for evidence that they are on the right track and finding areas for improvement. The title of Cutler’s talk, Changing the refrain: creativity and the idea of learning, suggests a creative change of the learning refrain. But, even a creative change, needs a systematic, evidence-based practice.

 

Schools and libraries don’t talk often about evidence-based change. They tend to be more focused on assessment of what they have always done – How much has the reading improved? Are we getting good HSC scores? How many visitors do we have in library spaces and online? In schools and libraries, we rarely gather evidence to inform change. Perhaps, a lesson is in this point of difference. We should stop waiting for our institutions for instructions and start gathering evidence of a change we want to see and lead. That way, we’ll be a step closer to that future we envisage for our profession.

A good place to start is at our desk.

Library users & design

Edward Kostraby

UNSW main library tower lahznimmo.com

Getting the right fit between a library, and users is an ever evolving environment. Libraries, are no longer archetypal, but with constant refurbishment and build of new spaces and constructs, design, plays an ever increasing central role in the right fit for all who use a library. The right fit is not a “now thing” but has been evolving for a number of years. It is perhaps now that library design is actually considering users within this concept. Both of the Australian articles presented provide welcome content for the use of library spaces, while the third article discusses this from a school perspective. 

Nimmo, an architect, explores, the process of innovation in spatial design and the process of design, “…an interactive design…between architects, librarians and stakeholders”. This is a welcome statement. The process as outlined, seems to provide a worthy consensus outcome. Nimmo looks at two projects he has been involved in, refurbishing the UNSW Menzies Library, a ten year venture and a green fields build for the Gold Coast City Council, a somewhat quicker outcome. Critical is expounding ones first principle, what are we actually going to do?  A three stage workshop process is explored, from basic concepts to the final master design.

Further, “…new libraries are often an eclectic assembly of design components…without a coherent framework for strategic intent” To overcome this, a qualitative “workshop process” was used and described in some detail, to include all stakeholders. Through this process all gain insight on issues outside their own areas of concern and likewise, all gain insight of others concerns. The stakeholders become part of the process and not just onlookers accepting a fait accompli, the final product, a concensus model of design. A pararell process is separate consultative meetings being the kernel of the working design is also essential as this is where the first principles are made into practicalities. Data such as visits, loans and various uses are important as this quantitative area then supports and fuses with the qualitative, supporting the initial move to refurbish or build. 

What are we looking for when it comes to design for use? This has to be the basis of any move to redesign libraries and their spaces, flexible spaces, fewer books, more digital access, a communal/social centre. One gets a sense that the process is lengthy, requires commitment from all for the betterment of the communal environment. The formal process has solid merit, particularly as there are varying inputs for a costly building.

Norman’s views (a Sydney based librarian) are broad, challenging and in the public domain, in that public libraries to survive, must be and are regenerating their roles, constantly repositioning themselves to take advantage and align themselves with their paying communities. The community (users) must be at the table, they cannot be ignored. The issues raised can be articulated for both tertiary and many school libraries, all finding themselves in a similar position. The many topics briefly discussed are realistic and intertwining throughout the article is the user. What does the user want from the design of spaces? How libraries are reimagining services and their place in society in general and in particular instances?

Perrault and Levesque’s small article begins with a quote from To kill a mockingbird, a text well known to most from secondary school. It is this connection that they use to look at library design from the point of view of the student. The term “empathic design” offers a means of empathy, putting oneself in place of another, such as organisations to better understand users’ needs.  The concept is taken from an earlier article and used in their article as a ”relatively low cost, low risk way to identify potentially critical customer needs”, one would think this applied in terms of time and finance. Again quantitative data is useful to add weight to change. Complementing this is the qualitative aspect, that is observing the user in the environment and how the user engages, what they do or don’t do.

They discuss a relatively easy five step process, in contrast to Nimmo’s detailed design process. “The empathic process offers a proactive and purposeful strategy to offer fully inclusive programs and services”. It is not articulated in any detail, but others a snap shot of its characteristic and if interested the reader is lead to investigate the original article.
Empathic design addresses unarticulated user needs – its strongest feature. This user centered approach becomes an intimate model as distinct from a more structured model. 

One gets the sense that library design of today is about legitimising the users, their use of the space, the services they require  and not so much of a collection. It is the users who are driving library use. This is a critical factor to remember at all stages of design and ultimately the practicalities of daily use. To be flexible enough in 10 or 20 years – like a built in wardrobe, so a library too must have built in flexibility. 

What are user needs, their experiences, how are they articulated, establishing a broad consensus for the final design is paramount and one can only wish that such detailed processes really infiltrate the design process so that users and libraries are one fit. 

These offerings provide solid insight and practical directions for all stakeholders to contribute and make the library experience an ever evolving and collaborative environment. Proactive connections, is the future for libraries and users.

References

Nimmo, Andrew. “An architect’s perspective – how to encourage genuine innovation in library design”. Australian Library Journal 61:3, (2012): 200-6.

Norman, Mark. “Frail, fatal, fundamental: the future of public libraries”. Australasian Public Libraries and Information Services 25:2, (2012): 94-100.

Perrault, Anne Marie & Levesque, Aimee M. “Caring for all students”. 7Knowledge Quest 40:4, (2012):16-7.

This article first appeared in Incite June/July 2013.

Edward Kostraby is a member of ALIA Research Committee and Head of Library, St Michael’s Grammar School, St Kilda, Victoria.

Collection development: An update for the digital world

Mary Anne Kennan

This article first appeared in InCite, August 2013

The theme of this issue is collection development. In volunteering for this column (LIS: Investigations) I thought a lot has probably happened in this space since I last actively thought about collection development in 2004 and it would be good to update. I was interested to see how much the increasing use of digital technologies may have changed the work of collection development, so I searched the ALIA /ProQuest member’s database under the terms “collection development” and digital. One of the many interesting findings was a review of a book by Maggie Fieldhouse and Audrey Marshall titled Collection development in the digital age (Holley 2013) that looks well worth a read. Holley’s review talks about the value of the book for those involved in collection development. For those such as me needing either an introduction or overview, Holley recommends the opening chapter “The concept of collection development in the digital world” (Corrall 2011). The chapter builds on research and case studies about collection development and the rest of this short article will focus on summarising some of the issues raised in that chapter which is available open access.

Corrall begins by emphasising the relatedness of the terms “library” and “collection” and teases out how our understanding of the term “collection development” has changed over time. While the term “collection development” has always included a planning component; and selection, acquisition and maintenance were key concepts; as resources sharing and the providing of access to resources beyond the library in the networked environment became increasingly common, some have argued for replacing the term collection development, with collection management – although as Corrall points out, there are some differences still between what we see as “development” and “management”. 

The chapter provides an excellent summary of how the increasing development and utilisation of digital technologies have played out in libraries from the late 60s to early 70s when libraries “introduced computers to improve the efficiency of day-to-day operations, particularly cataloguing and circulation” (p. 9); through to more innovative and “transformative” computer based services and with them, the associated shift from the concept of “ownership” to that of “access” and the need to find a balance between access and collection. 

Corrall then builds on Lynch’s (2000 in Corrall 2011) framework to illustrate how the shift over the last 50 years from local collections of predominantly print based materials to networked electronically delivered content. More recently Web or Library 2.0 content associated with social media and user-generated content, has seen libraries utilise collections not just for supporting current and future user information needs, but also for building communities. 

At the same time, libraries and publishers were developing collections by digitising their own content; commercial aggregators were emerging; and scholarly organisations began capturing and preserving their own research output (and increasingly other assets) in institutional repositories. However, the resources which may form a part of collections were, and are, continuing to change and include web pages, listervs, chat, blogs and wikis, where not only is there no print equivalent, but where the content may be user-generated and is being continually revised and edited – changed. 

As collections became more complex, library management systems, digital asset (or object) management systems, institutional repositories and hybrids of all of these, became more complex to manage hybrid and digital collections. As we consider how collection development will continue to evolve, we then ask the question: what do libraries via these systems try to achieve through their collections? Building on Buckland (1989; 1995 in Corrall 2011) and others, Corrall discusses the role of collections as archival (retention and preservation), dispensing (availability and access), bibliographic (organisation and identification),  and symbolic (based on value) resources. Corrall suggests that while format and location of material continues to change, the principle of developing and managing collections for current and future users needs remains relevant.
Whatever we think of the changes in library collection development and management as discussed in this chapter,  it is clear that the components of library collections, the ways we develop and manage them and how we think about them are evolving and continuing to evolve. Thus those of us responsible for collections need to be alert to technological changes and the needs of current and future users so we can prepare for “dealing with the collections of tomorrow” (Corrall 2011, p. 3).

References
Corrall, S. (2011) “The concept of collection development in the digital world” in Fieldhouse, M. & Marshall, A. (2011) Collection Development in the Digital Age London: Facet. (Distributed in the United States by Neal-Schuman, 2012). http://www.facetpublishing.co.uk/downloads/file/fieldhouse-ch1.pdf

Fieldhouse, M. & Marshall, A. (2011) Collection Development in the Digital Age London: Facet. (Distributed in the United States by Neal-Schuman, 2012). 

Holley, R. (2013) Review: Collection development in the Digital Age Library Resources & Technical Services 57 (1): 68-69.

Mary Anne Kennan is Senior Lecturer in the School of Information Studies at Charles Sturt University (CSU) and a Visiting Fellow in the School of Information Systems, Technology and Management at the University of New South Wales (UNSW). Her research interests include scholarly communication and research data management, open access and institutional repositories. Her personal web page is at http://maryannekennan.com

Is research one more thing to do?

Suzana Sukovic
 
These two pictures have been recently posted on the LARK Facebook page. They reflect how I often feel about research. There are times when research is on top of my ‘to do list’, but it doesn’t get done -- and times when I give up even putting it on the list. There are times when I ask people how they do it and times when I am completely with Willy Wonka. Despite a popular belief that librarians sit in peace and quiet reading novels, we are busy all the time. If we have to do one more thing, it has to be something involving our clients or projects with pressing schedules. 

But, research isn’t one more thing. Research is THE thing. Reminders come in flashes by doing research.

Data are beautiful

Like many students who get the job done just before the assignment is due, I have recently revisited my neglected research data in order to meet fast approaching presentation deadlines. I still had enough time to stop and give data a proper look...And then there was a flash moment. I remembered how beautiful and meaningful data are, especially emerging  from the dark recesses of drawers. My ethnographic notes reminded me how easy it is to forget key details and how important it is to keep track of reasons why you think your project was successful (or otherwise). There is a good reason why we should stick with methodology and go beyond our impression that something worked or didn’t work. 

 

That quiet space

Staying with data for a while opens a quiet space for analysis and reflection. (As it happens, working to presentation deadlines is a pretty good way to keep other emergencies at bay). Listening to recorded voices of your study participants, school girls or seasoned academics, always brings a point when you appreciate that doing an interview means opening a space for participants’ own reflection. Research is a reflective practice. In that quiet space, connections start opening. It is hardly surprising that solutions to problems in other projects come much easier after some time in the research space.

http://www.cameronius.com/graphics/spiral-packing-figures/

 

Voice

Evidence-based practice and reflection help enormously in finding own voice. The metaphor, actually, comes from my study of digital storytelling where students talked about finding their voice. Like students intimidated by a recorder and sound of their voice, I have recently stood in a room full of teachers getting ready to tell them about a library teaching project – in their school. As a librarian among teachers, I need to find a pitch for this audience. Luckily, data have their own way of speaking. It isn’t (only) a security blanket. The reality is that interesting professional experiences are rarely heard beyond the immediate circle of colleagues unless there is some substantial (i.e. research-based) evidence and connection with a larger body of knowledge. Research takes your voice further. 

 

Community of practice

A day after my presentation, a teacher who has just finished her master’s told me how much she enjoyed hearing about a research project. ‘I don’t talk about these ideas with anyone outside uni. I don’t talk about research with my husband. Now that I don’t go to university any more, I don’t have anyone to talk about these things,’ she said. We talk about starting an informal research group. Time will be an issue. It always is. But, right now, we both remember that research isn’t one more thing to do. Research is THE thing.

 

Suzana Sukovic is Head of Learning Resource Centre, St. Vincent's College and Research Associate, the University of Sydney

Accidental information professionals: Pathways to selecting our courses

http://www.alia.org.au/ausfavlibrarian/

Gaby Haddow

 Why do people choose to become information professionals? This question is important to educators and to the profession more widely. For educators, it relates to how we attract students and, for the profession, it is associated with perceptions of information professionals and the value afforded to our role by parent organisations and the community. 

One of the biggest information studies schools in the United Kingdom set out to discover the career history and motivations behind their students’ enrolment in undergraduate and postgraduate courses. They found that many students described the pathway to information studies as circuitous and often related to prior experience. A love of books is still important as is the desire to work in a ‘helping’ profession. 

Using focus groups to gather their information, Simon and Taylor (2011) used qualitative methods to report their results. According to the researchers, many students had ended up enrolled in information studies ‘accidentally’.  Returning to the workforce after having a family or finding previous jobs unfulfilling were cited as reasons for turning to information studies. But importantly, this decision was influenced strongly by their experience working in an information service; a feature common to students at both the undergraduate and postgraduate levels.  Some students felt they were “born librarians”. Although the surveyed students recognised that they needed to be “multi-functioning” in an information environment steeped in ICT, many still reported a love of books led them to information work. This motivation was connected to a more general notion about the profession: that the work involves helping others to research and learn.
 
When the students were asked why they had decided to enrol in their degree, the students (particularly those who had been working in an information service for some time) described a feeling that their studies contributed to gaining confidence and enhancing their self-worth. For example, one student is quoted as saying “I want to do it for myself … I feel I’m capable of more than I’m currently doing”. In addition and connected, was the belief that they would advance their careers on completion of the degree and that the perceptions of their role in the workplace would improve with the professional status gained by a degree.
 
Some of the conclusions from the Aberystwyth study are supported by a recent Australian report Re-conceptualising and Re-positioning Australian Library and Information Science Education for the Twenty-first Century. Combes and others discussed the report’s findings for information studies students and new graduates in their paper at the 2011 International Association of School Libraries conference. They note that 50% of current students are already working in the library and information sector and one of their reasons for enrolling in a degree was to get the piece of paper that would qualify them for a library job. Encouragingly, there was a sense of optimism about the future of the profession.
 
How can the profession and educators use these research findings to attract students to information studies courses? ‘Accidentally’ arriving at a decision to become an information professional doesn’t suggest many strategies for marketing and ‘working with e-books’ doesn’t have quite the same ring to it (if we were to be honest about the nature of materials that our profession now manages). However, motivations relating to helping people could provide a direction for promotion and the fact that many students had previous experience in information services indicates that publicity about degree courses may be useful in those workplaces.


Simon, Anoush and Marianne Taylor. 2011. “Career History and Motivations for Choosing LIS: A Case Study at Aberystwyth University.” Library Review 60: 803-815.

Combes, Barbara, Jo Hanisch, Mary Carroll, Hilary Hughes and Aliese Millington. 2011. “Are We There Yet? Students Have Their Say about Library and Information Science Education in Australia and Twenty-first Century Learning.” Paper presented at the International Association of School Libraries 40th Annual Conference, Kingston, Jamaica, August 7-11. [This paper is drawn from the findings of the Re-conceptualising and Re-positioning Australian Library and Information Science Education for the Twenty-first Century report]

This article first appeared in the InCite, April 2013

Gaby Haddow is Chair of the ALIA Research Committee, Dept. of Information Studies, Curtin University

Persuasive Technology

Suzana Sukovic

Earlier this week Sydney was a gathering place for participants in the 8th International Conference on Persuasive Technology. I saw their announcement on a mailing list and decided to send a last minute one day registration. Since the organisers were CSIRO and NICTA, I expected highly technological talk, but hoped that the focus on behaviour and persuasion, in combination with announced multidisciplinarity, would make the proceedings less opaque to the unitiated. What did I know? As promised in announcements, the conference was truly multidisciplinary with lots of attention given to human behaviour, choice-making and the meaning of the word “persuasion”. Unlike other similar gatherings, no one even whispered the F word (“fluff”).  Papers presented a rich tapestry of ideas and perspectives from discussions about ethics of persuasion, possibilities to use lingering feelings after confronting computer games to promote reflection to considerations of factors influencing health-related decisions, to name some. The official part of the program on the day finished with a panel discussion about games and gamification. Proceedings of this interesting conference are available from Springer. Workshop proceedings are also online.

Attending events in other disciplines or areas outside one’s immediate professional circle is always invigorating, not only as a source of new ideas and perspectives, but also as an opportunity to gather some observations about group behaviours and topics of interest. I left the Persuasive Technology conference with two observations I’d like to share.

The first is that new fields arising from creative applications of technology inevitably deal with issues of naming. How do we call what we are doing? What is the implication of words we are using? How do we define our area in relation to neighbouring disciplines? These are the persuasive questions for those who work in the field of persuasive technology – exactly the same questions we hear at other gatherings where people define a new area of interest arising from application of computers in existing fields such as the digital humanities, computer art, and library and information studies.

The second observation is more a reminder how refreshing it is to step out of the confines of own discipline and culture. After attending a number of discipline-specific, predominantly monocultural conferences with a clear academia-profession divide, it was a breath of fresh air to be at a small gathering representing a variety of professional and academic backgrounds where people spoke English in different accents and occasionally chatted in other languages. Diversity not only makes it more interesting but, in my mind, also adds considerably to the credibility. When a topic is discussed by people representing a variety of perspectives, there is a better chance that relevant issues are covered and major biases avoided. I am not aware of anyone at the conference representing a LIS point of view, but I am sure that with our knowledge of how to present information and design electronic environments, we would have something to say about persuasive technology.

Dr Suzana Sukovic has positions in a high school and university. She usually enjoys when birds of different feathers flock together.