Academic Collection mobility?

Is the content of academic libraries accessible by mobile device?

I fear this is barely (or maybe not) related to the report I ought to be preparing for my INF210 class. My library-twitter-verse keeps mentioning that the mobile trend is important - and as the INF210 task is focussed on collections, I wonder what implication the mobile trend has, if any, on future developments of an academic library collection. 

Without trying to answer that question just yet, I am going to try to gather some of the material I've been scanning:

First, for chronological location 'twas this John Dupuis' retweet of Sarah Houghton-Jan's mention of Aaron Tay's musings about mobile options for libraries and thoughts on usability which provided the last straw.  My desire for a tablet (sons don't want me to get an ipad) that could somehow ease my research efforts is pricked with every tweet about ereaders, ipads, ebook lending - so while I'm feeling the pressure to get started shifting my research into writing a report, my procrastinators asks whether this mobile device thing is something worth exploring for my collection report.

I know libraries are optimising their websites and catalogues for mobiles, but the important question (for whether this distraction is useful to INF210) is whether this makes a difference to the Collection. So I ask (doubting it is the question I should be asking) whether mobiles can access full-text content - not just records of the content.  Had I a mobile could I easily read full text articles, books, repository contents?

Okay, I've begun finding answers to my own question, with help from University of Sydney's list of library resources for mobile devices, Dartmouth College Library's description of mobile access to digital resources, and Richard Bernier's slideshow:

Research on the Go: Accessing Library Databases via Mobile Devices

Presentation by Richard Bernier

So some database content (eg EBSCOhost) can apparently be found and read by mobile - can anyone tell me how well? / how much?

Michelle McLean shared notes she took at CIL 2007 that mentioned Overdrive and Netlibrary had mobile accessible ebooks - but Josh Hadro says it is still too complicated to actually get those ebooks onto mobile devices.  Oh of course Meredith Farkas listed some vendors who have mobile interfaces (slide 60) and I see EBL Ebook Library in there - that's one of UB's suppliers (I want to see how well mobile access works :-S).

The Library in Your Pocket: Mobile Trends for Libraries

Presentation by Meredith Farkas

Oh and slide 61 Meredith mentions the Duke Mobile Digital collections, I remember viewing that Youtube video in 2009: excellent.  In Slide 62 Meredith shows how Flickr can make photo collections mobile accessible - although how reliable this strategy would be in the long term is questionable unless I missed a change in attitude from Yahoo over Flickr. Hmm and NCSU have mobile devices in their collection to loan (slide 63).



So, considering a growing academic collection area: repositories? Apparently Adewumi and Omoregbe (2011) found that only Greenstone supports access via mobile devices (p.31 [p.4 in Scribd]) although they did not identify which versions of the platforms they were reviewing. Without a device I'm left wondering what level of access that is - oooh if only I had a device I could use to check all the repositories I've been looking at lately.

Interestingly, the Journal of Computing in which I found Adewumi and Omoregbe's article is available via Scribd -

Institutional Repositories: Features, Architecture, Design and Implementation Technologies

I'm going to want to read that article in more detail: how does Scribd compare to IR platforms? One advantage: from how many IR's can one EMBED items? One limitation in Scribd (which doesn't differ greatly from many of the repositories I've viewed) is that it did not give Zotero suitable metadata beyond title for citation.

Oh my, another distraction (Scribd as repository?) - but I've set that path aside to consider later. What is relevant is that Scribd viewer is mobile (with HTML5).

Leads to explore:

A 2009 annual report from an IFLA committee in acquisitions and collection development mentioned plans to convene a programme at Gothenburg in 2010 entitled "Opening Doors to Spectacular Collections: Access to Multi-sensory, Multimedia, and Mobile Materials" ... okay, one of the sessions was:

"A collaborative study: on the demands of mobile technology on virtual collection development" by Mari Aaltonen, Petri Mannonen, Saija Nieminen and Marja Hjelt. Quite irritatingly the pdf appeared to lack metadata for Zotero to grab, however the content is worth the bother.

Among the researchers' conclusions: "readers are not good enough in functionality to warrant materials being chosen purely on the basis of compatibility with these devices"; functionalities they mention as necessary (and lacking) for academic reading in readers (and I would guess in mobiles) are: easy browsing, navigating, searching and zooming, handling of colour graphics, tables, pictures and equations, ability to jump easily between multiple documents and to annotate.

Oh my oh my oh my: just when I thought I might be able to stop and go to bed echofon tells me that Dan Cohen thinks this worth mentioning:

neat right? but that's not all. While I sniff out the second article (Reinventing research? Information practices in the humanities), RIN go ahead and show me their recent tweets

Reinventing research? Information practices in the humanities | Research Information Network via kwout

Did you see? "Mobile use of repositories". MMhm, so Leslie Carr tells me that access of output at University of Southampton ECS repository is "less than 1/4 of the general use of mobile Internet" and he believes this is because pdf doesn't suit small devices. But he mentions "Mekentoshj's Papers and Mendeley for iPhone seem to indicate that an attractive mobile experience should be possible." Ack, and then Richard M Davis replies mentioning his "Download to my Kindle" idea for repositories, and a comment about pre/post publication versions being in "less intricately formatted PDFs" - which makes me wonder, but only a little as I'm more curious about his reference to "Scholarly HTML" which I think might be related to TEI? (Text Encoding Initiative?) but not directly, if I read petermr's hopes for Scholarly HTML correctly.

A question librarians, archivists, repository builders are concerned with is format durability.

That's all very interesting, but I'm guessing it is not one of the biggest issues to anticipate in the near future of collection development at a regional university library?

thinking about patron-driven acquisition

Line of duty | by Patrik Jones

Course material points to Barbara Fister's "Puzzled by patron-driven acquisition" and then asks what we think.

I think Barbara was having a vent in good blogger style.  Being a vent, some of her points get a bit mingled.

The clearest and most important point she made was

Used as a supplement to traditional collection development (which is already patron-driven, in that we have always tried to match choices to expressed or even inarticulate needs) it makes a certain amount of sense--provided your patrons will use e-books

[my italics]
In fact, what else is there to say?  I'd say that sums up a reasonable point-of-view.

Barbara was concerned about some speakers' enthusiasm for the method of acquisition, although she didn't identify anyone who is using it as their *sole* method of collection building. I can see how people can get enthusiastic - being able to put titles before our patrons before we buy them, being able to offer a loan (at a loan price) and only choose to buy if an item is borrowed a few times and we think it might have continuing value - this sounds wonderful.  Of course how wonderful depends how much it costs us simply for access to the database of ebooks (which I'm not in postion to know), and how well suited the database is to our likely needs (which I'm guessing is tailored to the library's profile) - but the principle is promising.

Books and friends should be few and well chosen. by studioapril. 1982

More frustrating in my course is that the next question presents false dichotomy and does not even follow from the above reading or any prior in the unit: "should librarians choose what they think people should be reading (or viewing or listening to) rather than what they want" as if the answer is not obviously NO in response to the "should" in most cases but also "it depends" because of course it is possible that there is a library somewhere whose collection development is based solely upon a specific curriculum of readings for a specified purpose in a narrowly focussed organisation, and in that unlikely library "what they want" simply wouldn't arise. 

Seriously?
"should"? - is this deception, obfuscation or muddy communication? does the question mean obliged, duty-bound, propriety-bound, expected, could, would or something else?
"rather than"? is such an either/or likely to arise?
"what they want"? a want articulated? like a request?

It is not a real question.  When, if the budget has not run out and the "want" is within the parameters of collection development for the library and patrons are permitted to make a request, would a librarian ever be forced to choose between a valid request and some other collection appropriate item?

EBLIP online journal... sigh

Loving the online journal Evidence Based Library and Information Practice because: Interesting, Chock-full of interesting; Free. Makes me want an e-reader of some sort so I can more easily take it somewhere more comfortable for reading.

Really annoyed by the journal because: For *&^%$#@! - it is freely available online - why on earth is it being published with those -------! columns?  In fact, wouldn't those columns be even more of a nuisance on an e-reader?

I guess I'd understand if the journal was being issued principally as a print journal and the online version is merely for accessibility - is it?  This journal is so interesting I'd consider paying a fair amount for a print subscription just so I can read it somewhere comfortable, but I can't find any information pointing to that as an option.

About judging ideas & opinions

Scott Adams riffed on the notion that it is absurd to have an opinion on whether it was a good idea to create a certain movie (or other things for that matter).

Scott Adams Blog: The Value of Ideas 06/04/2010 via kwout

I wonder whether opinions say more about the opinionator than the content of the expressed opinion? e.g., one who says "that's a bad idea" is revealing that they simply cannot imagine an expression / execution of the idea that they would enjoy. Which might lead their listener to wonder about the quality of the opinionator's imagination, or preferences.

Which reminds me about another opinion on opinion:

That, in many situations, while everyone is entitled to their own opinion (supported by Article 19 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

)... "not all opinions are equal". While I'm sure she's not the only one to express that truth, 'tis Sandra Dodd of unschooling fame, whose expression of it I always remember... vaguely....

Image by moonflowerdragon via Flickr

Of course, one of the reasons this comes up in relation to Sandra is in the matter of freedom of expression of opinion. If I recall correctly, and I hope someone will point out if I misrepresent it, Sandra expresses the opinion that place may limit freedom of expression. For example, in a Yahoogroup or mailing list, made or owned by an individual - the rules for expression in that place may be declared by the owner and maintained through eviction from the group if necessary. Similarly for private homes, or other privately-owned buildings. I have not investigated whether the law supports private-space-right-to-suppress-speech.

OOOh, but that reminds me of a recent post by Kathryn Greenhill, about the library's role (as a public institution) in the provision of information when there are many opinions on a topic: that of not censoring, no matter whether the available information is, in the librarian's opinion, bad in some way.

I think the following of Kathryn's comments sum her overall view, though I recommend the lively presentation in her whole article:

A library’s role is not to supress ideas – not matter how dangerous or loony I may believe those ideas to be, nor how wrong I think they are. ... A library’s role is to provide access to information and connect people to that information. We seek to provide a balanced and varied collection, but not to judge the information we are providing, nor the people who are seeking it. ... I am not arguing that ideas should be heard without rebuttal, argument, critical thought or judgment. I am arguing that they should be heard and that libraries exist as a vital institution to protect the right for that to happen...

I think an important point to remember is the breadth of material that comes under the label "information". "Information" is not only facts, but also theories with or without reasonable support, opinions of varying quality and fictional representations.

Something students in CULLB602C@UB will be exploring is the library's role in teaching Informacy, ie: educating its patrons in evaluating the sources of information they peruse.

Related articles by Zemanta

• There is no such thing as public opinion (clubtroppo.com.au)
• A Vision for a School Library (123elearning.blogspot.com)
• Court Says Internet Filtering in Public Libraries Not Censorship (readwriteweb.com)

Just a quick mention in relation to Zemanta: I chose (as somewhat related in area of interest) the above articles from those suggested by Zemanta. As I scrolled through the list of suggestions again after my second selection I was disturbed to note that an article was marked "Clicked" (ie selected) that I had *not* chosen. It is possible that I may have mis-moused or mis-clicked in making my selection; and I have no way to be sure - but as the "clicked" item I did not choose was a PROMOTED article, I intend to carefully double-check my selections in future.

Revisiting SomeThings with CULLB602C@UB

Although, technically, I guess I'm not really IN the cohort, because I was granted RPL (see my echo still clapping)... I'll be cheering on the 2010 batch of CULLB602C@UB students with their remarkable and daring new unit structure.  Kudos to Loretta Kelly for braving the waters and plotting an interesting course.

Course... of course - when I first began imagining a melding of web2.0 with LearningLibrarianship (even before it received a boost of inspiration from 23 Things) I knew it would be most effective beyond one unit.  Our course coordinators have made efforts here and there: this unit or that used a wiki or an eportfolio or the CMS discussion board or online documents. But I felt many students who didn't have a big picture of how libraries are developing an interactive online presence missed appreciating the opportunity they had in those tools, AND that there were so many tools of which they were unaware that could enhance their research, their informational input, and their sharing - throughout the course.

So I envisaged a unit that would be a first unit. But with such a huge learning curve - and a goal of it making sense and fitting together with a wide range of web2.0 tools and aspects of librarianship - it really needs to span the whole course (at least 2.5 years full time).  How can that be done?  TAFE courses are usually run in discrete, short-time-frame units.  How might it be possible for this kind of activity to span the whole course, not just as a side issue, but for engagement in the activity to contribute to assessment for other units?  Am I dreaming too wildly?

Literacy & Informacy: Problems with the term "information literacy skills"

Previously, I explained why I applied for RPL in
CULLB602C Use, evaluate and extend
own information literacy skills.

YAY I have been granted recognition of prior learning :D

I never did get around to publishing the progress of my thoughts while examining conceptions of “information literacy” - probably because I never really resolved the issues to my own satisfaction.

Perhaps instead I will just post a scattering of thoughts without aiming for a conclusion.

First I needed to understand my base point. So I looked at definitions:

From memory: A skill is an ability; but then so is literacy. So "literacy skills" is tautological (ability to read and write abilities).

I checked a dictionary:

From the Concise Oxford Dictionary (Sykes, 1976):

information n. Informing, telling; thing told, knowledge, (desired items of knowledge, news.

literacy n. Ability to read and write.

skill1 n Expertness, practiced ability, facility in an action or in doing or to do something; dexterity, tact.

However: I have observed over the years that the term ‘literacy’ has been used to express a variety of notions beyond that simplest definition, to include whole spans of thinking and communication skills (Callison & Lamb, 2005-2009). Sometimes to the point where reading and writing may be completely irrelevant: “making meaning in a two way flow of communications” (Boyce, 1999, p. 57). In fact Callison & Lamb (2005-2009), among many, declare that “the definition of literacy has evolved” (¶1).

Oh I'd agree that the term has been malleably defined to suit the goals of its users, but considering the breadth encapsulated in its Latin root, evolution is not what has happened.

Online Etymology Dictionary via kwout

I guess I struggle with phrases compounded as "xxxx literacy" because of the way "literacy" itself is loaded.

Comprehension and communication skills seem to me to be independent of the ability to read and write; and need to have been present in order for a person to learn to read and write. Refinement of comprehension (higher order thinking skills) and communication also develop outside a text environment, although most of us don't get to see that as we live and learn within one.

It is easy to see how, in a society in which text is a dominant communication device; people can conflate natural development of human capacity to comprehend and communicate with increasing competence and fluency with text. Could such conflation create an assumption that to learn and function depend particularly on the ability to read and write; then explaining why quite beside the overall education system, literacy programs particularly attract funding? Might this factor into a willingness to wrap up anything at all as literacy?

Back to "xxxx literacy": These days one can find “literacy” being appended to almost any other word to convey something about skills which are required to make sense within context of the first word. Often, these skills do not require literacy at all except when they are to be applied in a text environment. For example:

“Scientific Literacy, Economic Literacy, Technological Literacy, Visual Literacy, Information Literacy, Multicultural Literacy.... communication literacy, productivity literacy, content literacy, critical literacy” (Callison & Lamb, 2005-2009, ¶4,5).

Even the competence to pursue, evaluate and use information does not require literacy (the ability to read and write). Campbell (2008 p. 19, citing Aporta, 2002) describes how the Inuit people in Canada’s High Arctic, when planning a journey across the sea ice which reforms over time with ocean currents and underwater landforms:

• know they need information on the current “ice marks” by which to navigate,
• know whom to approach to get information (the experts with the traditional, oral knowledge on the codes that make such marks predictable),
• evaluate who has the most experience or is the best navigator, and
• use that information to travel through the sea ice territory safely

Campbell (2008) declares this pattern of information seeking, evaluating and using is consistent with the American Library Association (1989, ¶3) definition of being information literate: to recognise when information is needed, to locate, evaluate and use appropriate information effectively.

Such an example demonstrates that the capacity humans have for acquiring and using information does not require literacy (ability to read and write). So to label such capability as "information literacy" perpetuates confusion where there should be distinction between literacy and thinking or whatever skills are of practical interest.

• Precise skills which fall under the label ‘information literacy’ are remarkably diverse depending on the educator and his/her program, and can include:
• Basic computer and internet access skills (Millen & Roberts, 2007) through to information technology fluency (Bundy, 2004 as cited in Andretta 2005, p. 44; Shapiro & Hughes, 1996),
• Library orientation (Slusarczyk, 1996; Gavin, 2008),
• Search engine savvy, or searching the web (Boyce, 1999, ¶2; Gavin, 2008) ,
• Searching OPACs, databases (Gavin, 2008; Andretta, 2005),
• Selecting a research/essay topic and developing a thesis statement (Gavin, 2008),
• Writing skills (Andretta, 2005, p. 176),
• Referencing skills (Andretta, 2005, p. 175; Slusarczyk, 1996 p. 62),
• Evaluating web sources (Gavin, 2008; Andretta, 2005, p. 174),
• Standards and formulae for cognitive skills and metacognitive processes including problem solving and critical thinking (Boyce, 1999, ¶2; Eisenberg & Berkowitz, 2009; Shapiro & Hughes, 1996, Bundy (2004) and Hepworth (2000) as cited in Andretta, 2005, p. 44 and p. 16)
• “Social-structural literacy, or knowing that and how information is socially situated and produced” (Shapiro & Hughes, 1996),
• The ability to self-publish electronically in text or multimedia (Shapiro & Hughes, 1996),
• Values and beliefs about wise, ethical and socially responsible use of information (Bundy (2004) as cited in Andretta, 2005)
• “right through to philosophy of learning how to learn, personal mastery and leadership” (Boyce, 1999, ¶2)

Once again one wonders whether the umbrella use of a term like “information literacy” is motivated by the appeal of the words to garner financial support. Boyce (1999) opines:

“The social and cultural values we associate with each word mediate their connection so that coupled together in a special communications context, at a time of educational and curriculum reform, they are endowed with urgency and extra significance”

I'm tempted, if an umbrella term is needed (for the capabilities to identify a need for, seek, find, evaluate and ethically use information) to use Informacy. Although I imagined the term for myself following the pattern set by literacy and numeracy, I have discovered I am not the first:

Informacy term first used - Google Search via kwout

Not having access to Emerald's holding of Aslib Proceedings from 1984, I cannot check who (if anyone) R Lester appears to have been citing in that article. Nor could I check whether the term was defined as I would use it. (Update 11 April 2011, I've somehow gained access and it appears Lester was citing a "LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SERVICES COUNCIL. Working Party on Manpower Education and Training. Discussion Paper on User Education. June 1983" and from his quotes (because I can't find the original) believe they did use the term as I would.  Interestingly, Mr Lester argued against public funding of "user education" programs, and felt the appropriate place for informacy education was in primary schools.)

In one case:

eInclusion@EU : Section 2.2 via kwout

Is there any way of easily discovering whether the term was ever proposed outside of the context of modern technology? In some cases Informacy appears to be used as a compound of information handling and technolacy (another term I'm not the first to conceive):

The Digitisation of Our World - The Digitisation of Our World via kwout

Rise of the knowledge worker - Google Books via kwout

Media access: social and ... - Google Books via kwout

Considering that information is available both outside text and technology, I'd prefer that the term Informacy not automatically incorporate Technolacy:

reinventing-IT: Literacy, Numeracy, and Technolacy? via kwout

But that's enough for today.

References (only those which could not be hyperlinked):

Andretta, S. (2005). Information literacy: a practitioner's guide. Oxford, UK: Chandos.
Boyce, S. (1999). Second thoughts about information literacy. Concept, challenge, conundrum: from library skills to information literacy (pp. 57-65). Adelaide, SA: University of South Australia Library.
Gavin, C. (2008). Teaching information literacy: a conceptual approach. Plymouth, UK: The Scarecrow Press.
Millen, D., & Roberts, H. (2007). Healthy mind, healthy body: digital literacy in the NHS. In J. Secker, D. Boden, & G. Price, The information literacy cookbook: ingredients, recipes and tips for success (pp. 27-43). Oxford, England: Chandos.
Slusarczyk, L. (1996). Finding business information in Curtin University Library: information literacy skills for life-long learning. [Bentley], Western Australia: Glenn Pass.
Sykes, J. B. (Ed.). (1976). The concise Oxford dictionary of current English (6^th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

RPL for CULLB602C & Library2.0

Have you ever applied for RPL (Recognition of Prior Learning)... would you describe it as Fun Fun Fun? Hm, not sure I would either :D

Still, that's what I've been doing for the past few months...and much of the process has been Fun.

Since I began studying for an Advanced Diploma in Library and Information Services I have been avoiding one particular subject: "CULLB602C Use, evaluate and extend own information literacy skills". Why?

Because the major assessment task for the unit appeared to be even worse than the nature of assessment I detested in undergraduate degree courses: not just a trivial essay but a completely irrelevant (to the industry) trivial essay. To be produced just for the sake of demonstrating "conducting research", "communication skill" and "appropriate referencing" - as if none of these attributes have been demonstrated in any of our other unit assessments. Only this was the longest individual piece of writing required in the course. (Other units' assessment tasks often had no number-of-words constraints and depending on the student's extent of research may (in fact for me did) produce longer pieces of writing.)

All this time I have wondered in what way that kind of assessment related to the title & purpose of the unit. So in 2009, facing the prospect of having to do the unit in 2010, I asked a current student of the unit for the elements of competence. The elements and criteria of competence (pdf) of this unit are interesting - they are relevant to the industry and competence in them is I believe important for performance as librarians. (By librarian I mean the Cambridge and Oxford definition not the more recent and questionably-motivated redefinition). Unfortunately I did not and do not believe that the assessment tasks used in recent years appropriately challenged students or allowed them to develop and substantiate even half of the criteria of competence that the unit appeared designed to achieve and which would be valuable for their careers.

Also while I read it occurred to me that as a result of my work and play I could already demonstrate competence in all of those elements and their criteria: I would apply for RPL.

Along the way I would wrestle with a term I have long detested: "information literacy" - I refuse to append the third word often thrown on the end as it is in the name of the unit, because the effect makes me shudder. Naturally it is a fight I am in no position to win, but the attempt involved research, reflection and writing. All of which I felt would be constructive: personally, professionally, and for my application for RPL.

Do you think a series of posts could be good evidence? I wasn't brave enough. Not that I have an audience of whom to be shy, after all I write randomly, and for myself mainly. I did not know who would assess my application so I could not check whether they would be comfortable with that sort of evidence, although I did eventually refer to some of my posts (particularly those on citing online sources). Although it wasn't just the assessor's comfort... the thought of having what I hoped would demonstrate my competence available for anyone to view (and potentially question) was a little too scarey. Now I wish I had tried it because I have come to feel that blogging would be an excellent medium through which students could explore, develop and demonstrate the competencies of the unit.

I'd still like to post some of the thoughts I had during my application, and the assessor has since given approval, but I'm not sure how to or even whether it is worth doing so retrospectively.

Amongst other evidence, I referred to my explorations and subsequent use of web2.0 tools. I kept fantasising how a program somewhat like 23 Things could might help library students to "use, evaluate and extend" their "information literacy".

Excitingly, during my interview, the assessor indicated that my application for RPL and its reasons (ie the poor relevance of the assessment task) had contributed to a review of how the unit is presented at UB. Apparently it will now be restructured and among other changes will involve aspects of ... oh let's call it "Library 2.0 stuff" for want of a better phrase. I hope I get to see how it changes.

LSJ Editors' Blog

My thanks to Sharon and [aliaSTUDENTS] for informing me about the first issue of Library Student Journal.

I enjoyed thinking about how instant messaging might or might not serve patrons, stimulated by Licia Slimon's IM reference service for teens case study. And I particularly enjoyed the editor's explanation of why the journal is produced for open access.

Who wouldn't be curious what happens at the LSJ Editors' Blog? I'm glad I was
... Google jockeys? ... so I'm curious, doubtful (how distracting), critical (for effective teaching wouldn't planning an engaging presentation be more valuable?), and back to curious (if anyone has found such an activity valuable for the subject of the 'lecture' how and why?)

and

At some stage in my course will be a subject on library space design, and when I saw Jessamyn's post about SPL's signage woes, felt I must make a note.

"the weird juxtaposition of amazing architecture with crummy laser-printed signage or post-it signage."

Updated 29 May 2010: Links, as Library Student Journal and the editor's blog have moved at least once.