Blog for 4/21

Web Accessibility

As someone who hopes to be a school librarian, I feel that one of the scariest elements in my future profession is that I will very likely be alone in what I do at my particular facility. Over the years, I have seen and worked at schools that were simply unprepared to deal with student disabilities. Many still do not offer any form of an elevator or lift service between floors. Others are unprepared to assist students who need any assistive technology more complex than a mouse. In public schools, student aides are often provided who can help with these matters. But what should a librarian who works at a nonpublic facility do?

Brophy and Craven make the assertion that “the people who would most benefit from good Web design are generally people who are blind, partially sighted, or dyslexic, and in particular those who use screen reading technology” (2007). I find that to be really quite an interesting statement. I can’t say I’ve ever really thought much about sight-challenged individuals actually using the internet. Obviously, Braille keyboards would be a necessity, as would some form of interpreting the information. Text-reading programs can assist with text-to-audio conversion, but how would someone go about reading a .jpg? I supposed that would be where an “ALT” attribute would come in. Consequently, ALT attributes are only one of ten tips suggested by the World Accessibility Initiative. Others include multimedia captions and transcripts, alternative content for unsupported features, and consistent and sensible page and content structures.

The end goal of web accessibility is one of future proofing. Standardization, understandability, and a robust level of continual currency must all be offered at cost effective prices. Obviously, this is a challenge, and an increasing amount of legislation only serves to make it more of one. This trend will most likely continue to spread outside of the US and UK as more countries adopt policies encouraging web accessibility for all users.

Resource

Brophy, P., & Craven J. (2007). Web Accessibility. Library Trends, 55(4), 950-972. (Available through the CUA libraries website)

The Web 2.0 Challenge to Libraries

I will admit that I had no actual understanding of the meaning of Web 2.0 before this semester. The name alone has always made it seem like something of an empty concept. To be honest, I would be hard pressed to coin a term more “buzzwordy” than Web 2.0. Now that I understand the meaning of it, I can’t truthfully determine if my initial thoughts were that far from the mark. As Tim Berners-Lee put it, “Web 2.0 is, of course, a piece of jargon, nobody even knows what it means” (Joint, 2009).

Web 2.0 is social networking. Though the name was coined as a joke, many feel that there was more truth in it than one might initially believe. Libraries, by definition and purpose, are somewhat dated. Integrating user-produced and shared media into the mix can be seen as a way of spicing things up and adding a bit of currency. The extreme popularity of internet message boards shows us that user involvement is a powerful motivator. Services like Youtube and Yelp that allow individuals to post thoughts, reviews, and criticisms are extremely lucrative.

Drawbacks to this system exist, though I would not have expected them to appear in quite the form they do. There’s the matter of who controls the produced content, for example. Additionally, there’s that element of vulnerability an institution brings in when allowing outside forces, be they users or social networking services, to access their systems. There’s also the question of uniformity versus innovation and flexibility. I think it would be safe to say that no one ever accused a library of being on the cutting edge of cultural trending, after all.  

Ultimately, I fear that social networking in the workplace will mostly be another hot button issue. Very few people are looking to post to their MySpaces these days, and this may prove to be the case as well in a few years when looking back at Facebook. But, like Joint says, you just can’t ignore a major trend because you don’t agree with it. Libraries already face the possibility of cultural extinction, and relevancy is a major asset in the digital world. If Web 2.0 can help in that area, it’d be foolish not to embrace it.

Resource

Joint, N. (2009). The Web 2.0 challenge to libraries. Library Review, 58(3), 167-175.

Blog Entry for 4/7/2013

Part 1: Database Basics

Given the somewhat unusual format of this particular resource (i.e.: an interactive webpage), I have chosen to narrate my experiences and reactions as I proceed.

To begin, a database is a collection of information, regardless of media format. Like organs are to tissues are to cells, databases are to records are to fields. Library catalogues are databases about library ownings. Its records are books whose fields are authors, titles, call numbers, etc. Article indexes are databases of journals and other periodicals.

The keyword portion presented a primer on Boolean terms, wildcards, and other similar concepts.  Not much to be said for these, as they’re already a staple of most LIS courses from my experience.

Most of the remaining bullets on the webpage were devoted to additional content that bolstered the first two, such as a Help screen and a Glossary. It’s surprising that so little of the website would be devoted to the actual “lesson.” As for the layout of the website itself, the interactive features were welcome when they served to enhance the lesson, such as the quizzes provided after each of the main two sections.

I feel that the interactive rhetorical questions were a bit self indulgent, as was the mini-running joke “you know the drill” comment under the records portion. Maybe I’m just losing my sense of humor as I get older, but I find unnecessary add-ons such as these and animated gifs of cartoon cats to be somewhat unprofessional. On the whole, though, I think this was a fine resource that would be a welcome tool for an individual who was not interested in deeper studies in this field and simply needed a crash course in the subject. It was easy to understand and refreshingly free of jargon.

Database Tutorial. dot@mac. http://dotatmac.mcmaster.ca/db_basics/db_01_home.htm

Part 2: How Does XML Help Libraries?

This article presents a straightforward, no-nonsense approach to the topic at hand that I appreciate. It begins by asking a question: “why is XML important for libraries?” The answer is, quite simply, that the internet changed everything. This fact is readily apparent in libraries, as resources that were once upon a time largely physical have been replaced with a need for electronic information. As these sorts of items are difficult to place in a catalog, a new technique is called for.

Why XML? As author Banerjee phrases it, “it is impossible to search or display information unless it is structured in a meaningful way.” XML provides a structure for storing information that can be shared in a uniform manner and even combined with other data. Consider ALADIN, for instance, which is used by academic research libraries such as Catholic.

Libraries are able to use XML to store books, send queries, search databases, and authenticate patrons (a feature of which, as someone perpetually incapable of remembering his student ID number, I am painfully aware). Libraries can develop their own XML applications, or take advantage of those designed by others. XML can also be used to represent and work with MARC data, in which large amounts of information have been previously stored.

Banerjee, a library systems analyst himself, believed strongly that XML is to have a strong impact on libraries at the time of this article’s writing in 2002. Now, over ten years later, it would be of worth to hear how his views have changed since then and to see what advancements have developed in line with his speculations. A quick Google search reveals that he now oversees digital services for a library consortium and is co-owner of a library technology consulting firm. It would be safe to assume that he probably knew what he was talking about when he wrote this article.

Banerjee, K. (2002). How does XML help libraries? Computers in Libraries,22(2). Retrieved from http://www.infotoday.com/cilmag/sep02/Banerjee.htm

Weeks 5&6 Blog Post

Week Five – Blog Article

Rachit Gupta defines Human Computer Interaction as “a discipline which aims at an established understanding and designing of different interfaces between humans and computers in a way that it defines systems that are enjoyable to use, are engaging and are accessible” (2012). The most important part of the Human Computer Interaction, or HCI, is the human, and the goal of the experience should be usability and functionality so as to maximize the enjoyment of the experience.

“The involvement of user,” Gupta posits, “is classified under three

categories: physical, cognitive and affective” (2012). These are, in other words, concerns of mechanic, interpretation, and impact, respectively. Of these three, the most recent and most interesting to me, personally, is the affective criterion. How does one create a lasting experience that stays in the mind after is complete? Do we resort to novelty or are there more concrete techniques to be applied? For instance, Gupta brings up the concept of emotion analysis, wherein computers are able to evaluate human noises, such as gasps, sighs, and the like. When combined with such tools as eye and body movement tracking, a computer program could be made to seem almost downright psychic when adapting itself to a user’s needs. But will such adaptations prove cost effective and have actual lasting staying power?

            Gupta concludes the article with thoughts on the future of HCI. “… the relationship of the society with the technology will not just be a user based experience. Unlike today, computers will be flowing everywhere and most of our lives will be directed by computers” (2012). There are ethical considerations, such as privacy and human desires, which must go into the shaping of HCI of tomorrow. We are, as Gupta puts it, dependent on technology. That is a scary thought to me, as I hear stories of people who show physical signs of withdraw from not having access to the internet for as little as several days’ time. How much will technology come to control our lives and will there be room in the world for both people and progress to share it equally?

Citation

Gupta, R. (2012). Human computer interaction: A modern overview. International Journal of Computer Technology and Applications, 3(5), 1736-1740.

Week Six – Blog Article

            Jakob Nielsen, published author and authority on homepage usability, discusses “The Ten Most Violated Homepage Design Guidelines” in his article of the same name. “There are ten usability mistakes that about two-thirds of corporate websites make,” Nielsen claims. “The prevalence of these errors alone warrants attention, especially since they appear on sites with significant investment in usable design” (2003). His list, numbered in order from most frequent to least, is an amusing and entertaining guide to the “do nots” of the technology world. I will be discussing a few of the standout highlights as I see them.

            “Emphasize what your site offers that's of value to users and how your services differ from those of key competitors” (Nielsen, 2003). I have to think this one is intentional on the part of many web designers, which is why it is so frequently ignored. Many companies are afraid of putting themselves out there and outright claiming that what they do is better than the rest without the facts to back it up.

            “Use a liquid layout that lets users adjust the homepage size” (Nielsen, 2003). As an individual with poor eyesight, this one is particularly beneficial to me as I like to adjust the font sizes on my web browsers. This also matters to individuals with larger monitors – a subcategory I also fall into. Likewise, I agree with him that graphics should only be used for actual content and not clutter and hyperlinks should distinguish between used and unused.

            “Don't include an active link to the homepage on the homepage” (Nielsen, 2003). This one actually feels a bit pedantic to me. Uniformity in web page design over the body of a site can lead to easier link checking even if it is redundant. Of similarly minor detail is his request that search buttons not be labeled with additional search text.

            Ultimately, I feel that Nielsen makes many good points regarding the streamlining of websites and usability in general. Reading his treatise brings back a mental image of those Angelfire and Geocities sites of yesteryear and all their clutter and fuss. And, while I support anyone’s right to make a fan page for their favorite sitcom character, the world does not need any more rotating gif images of traffic cones declaring one’s site to be “Under Construction.”

Citation

Nielsen, J. (2005). Ten Usability Heuristics. http://www.useit.com/papers/heuristic/heuristic_list.html

Blog 2B

Week 4

Kinner and Rigda trace the transition of Automated Library System to Integrated Library System in their article, “The Integrated Library System….” I find this article to be of interested because the path it follows, from ‘80s to today, is, in a way, the path of my life. A child of the ‘80s, one of Gen Y as it is called, I have observed and followed this library evolution without even realizing it.

“In libraries and the library automation industry, modernization, the first phase, occurred during the 1970s and 1980s. These library systems were “purpose built, stand-alone systems that solved a single problem using what we now consider primitive hardware, operating systems and software” (Andrews, 2007, p. 572). These ALSs were not designed to be interactive or even user friendly. They ran on main frames accessed via “dumb” terminals and were, for the most part, managed by information technology staff rather than library staff. These systems covered the core modules used by library staff: acquisitions, cataloging, circulation, and serials. They were more efficient than the paper systems libraries had been using for generations” (Kinner and Ridga, 2009).

When I was young, I browsed library shelves. I remember the few attempts that educators made at instructing me in the ways of the card catalog, a physical thing at the time (at least in the small West Virginia town where I grew up). It did not go very well. If there were computers in the library for public usage, I never saw any.

“The OPAC of the late 1980s became the face of the library, albeit in a nongraphical user interface; yet it was quite functional and a huge leap beyond the paper card catalog. The advent of the OPAC led libraries into the next phase of West and Lyman's procession, innovation. This phase witnessed significant experimentation, which involved the integration of the core library modules and the OPAC. This heralded the emergence of the ILS” (Kinner at al., 2009).

In the last ‘80s, my family relocated to VA Beach, VA. Their Central Public Library, a library whose size and scope I almost haven’t seen since, blew my mind. I remember using the computers at that library, hilariously dated by today’s standards, to locate what I was looking for. The user interfaces were text only, all of it a sickly shade of green with ASCII style borders comprised of repeating symbols. It was functional, but hardly more about it could be said. Most often, it existed only to show me that a particular book had not been returned in a span of time best measured in months. If it had any other features, I never found them.

“By the late 1990s, “the ILS was functionally complete with good MARC support but with varied network support” (Andrews, 2007, p. 573). The ILS of this time had a Web-based catalog, WebOpac, which was done quickly and was not very sophisticated. In essence, libraries were still dealing with an ILS as a “silo.” That means they were basically stand-alone units, yet with information being shared across library units. These systems were managed by library staffs, accessed over a network, and operated with a Web- or character-based interface, which ran on a single server” (Kinner et al., 2009).

A college student by this time, my experiences in the library were exclusively online. In fact, I rarely left my college library’s computer lab during crunch times except to grab the occasional physical text. Instead, services like JSTOR comprised the majority of my resource selections, as did web-based articles and research. The college library’s interface appeared as a web search engine – something I could open in the background as I typed in Microsoft Word or browsed in Internet Explorer.

Work Cited

Kinner, L. and Rigda, C. (2009). The Integrated Library System: From Daring to Dinosaur? Journal of Library Administration, 49(4), 401-417.

Blog 2A

Week 3

In their article, “What qualifications…,” Choi and Rasmussen really caught my attention. For the last six months, I have been looking for a way into the world of library science professions. An English teacher previously by trade, the transition to becoming a children’s librarian felt as natural as falling off a log at first. “Sure,” I thought, “I’ll have no problems finding work in this field.” Now, six month later, I have only just accomplished my goal and acquired work as a school library aide. Permit me to respond to some of what they say in their article.

“Several content analysis studies have revealed the impact of computer-related technology on library positions and their requirements. Those studies found that required computer-related skills changed and increased over time with new developments in technology” (Choi and Rasmussen, 2009).

This is most certainly the case. As a frequent visitor of the federal government’s jobsite, USAjobs.gov, I can attest that their library-related technology demands are extensive. The questions they ask are specific, in depth, and uncompromising. These job searchers phrase their questions in such a way that nothing less than an exact answer will suffice.

“Two studies by Smith and Lynch found that most jobs in their data set listed general, rather than specific, computer skills, and behavioral characteristics of candidates became increasingly visible in the job advertisements. The researchers discovered that “combination” jobs that shift from traditional specialist to more complex functionalist positions were on the increase in their sample. Likewise, Beile and Adams identified a significant number of positions relating to electronic services that fit into neither public nor technical service areas” (Choi et al., 2009).

I disagree with this point. I blame the unusually diverse nature of DC in that job seekers here can request any number of exact requirements when searching for a librarian. Not long ago, for instance, I found myself lacking qualifications for a particular library job because I was unfamiliar with Urdru. In this area, in this job market, specialization is the name of the game.

“Technology-related experience appeared most frequently (123 out of 217 instances (56.68%) as required qualifications and 63 out of 143 instances (44.06%) as preferred qualifications). Similarly, technology-related competencies were the most frequently mentioned knowledge/skills in both the required and preferred categories. Knowledge of and experience in resource building appeared next most frequently, followed by qualifications on knowledge organization” (Choi et al., 2009).

This I find to be of particular interest in education. In my experience, teachers fixate on their one area of expertise and need a strong support system. Requiring a teacher to also understand the software systems at play in his/her environment could lead to disastrous results.

“Among qualifications stated in the ads, a qualification of communication and interpersonal skills (57.47% in Table 9) appeared most frequently, followed by expertise on current trends in the digital library environment (26.44% in Table 7), and experience in digital library development and digital information systems (25.29% in Table 8). Knowledge of and experience with metadata, and the creation and management of digital information were also required frequently in the ads” (Choi et al., 2009).

It has surprised me, more so than any other part of library schooling to date, how much customer service goes into this field. Similarly unexpected is the emphasis on cutting edge system knowledge. The cultural stigma on libraries, even today, is one of an almost dinosaur-like tendency to plod.

Works Cited

Choi, Y., & Rasmussen, E. (2009). What qualifications and skills are important for digital librarian positions in academic libraries? A job advertisement analysis. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 25(5), 457-467.

Blog Posting #1

In their article, "Integrating Human-Computer Interaction Development Into the Systems Development Life Cycle: a Methodology," Zang et al. present a versatile and flexible system of evaluation. Their goal is to create a template capable of addressing the physical, mental, and aesthetic concerns inherent in human- computer interactions. They discuss the problems inherent in creating an electronic system capable of meeting the needs of users and present several examples of processes mapped to this structure (eg: ordering international cuisine).

As time passes and human-computer interactions continue to increase in complexity and frequency, I imagine the need for system optimization will only increase. Ten years ago, the concept of ordering a meal from a local establishment online for delivery was a novelty and, perhaps, even a gross abuse of technology. Today, it has become incredibly common. In areas such as DC, where public transportation is a necessity, more and more consumers are purchasing the day-to-day essentials of life (ie: paper products, groceries, cleaning supplies, etc.) online rather than seeking them out in person. Take Amazon.com,  for instance. Once, it existed solely as a purveyor of books. Today, however, you can purchase almost anything through it. Today, you can purchase tax help, education, even advice through the Internet. Imagine what well be buying online tomorrow.

--

Out of all the articles I have read so far for this class, I would say that Kochtanel and Matthews did the best job of writing to the common reader in their "The Evolution of LIS and Enabling Technologies." The authors take the reader through the history of computing operations in libraries, spanning from the days of punch cards and the origination of library automation as a concept. They go on to discuss such concepts as library technology integration, globalization, and the importance of the World Wide Web.

I find the discussion of eTexts to be of most personal interest. I, myself, was one of those readers who first viewed Stephen King's "Riding the Bullet" as it was published - an eBook exclusive  At the time, I did not realize that I was witnessing history, instead seeing it as some sort of a publicity grab. Still, I was a fan of King's and took the plunge as many others have since. Today, devices like the Nook and Kindle have all but put local bookstores out of business. We've seen the decline of Borders, Waldenbooks, and countless "mom and pop" bookstores. Indeed, only Barnes and Nobles and a few others have managed to survive against the online book market.

It occurs to me that, ever since the mid to late '90s, librarianism as a profession has experienced a painful and sometimes unwanted bout of pubescence. It has been forced to grow exponentially to meet with the modern demands put fort by technology where once, for a period spanning millenia, its only real concerns had been physical print. This process has continued to this day, as computers have fundamentally altered the entire industry.

---

Resources

Kochtanel, T. R., & Matthews, J. R. (2002). Ch.1. The Evolution of LIS and Enabling Technologies. In Library Information Systems, pp. 3- 12. chapter1.pdf

Zhang et al. (2005). Intregrating Human Computer Interaction Development into the Systems Development Life Cycle: A methodology. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 15, 512-543.