We looked back on 2009, looked forward to 2010, and looked *way* forward to the future of technology and how it’s going to impact libraries.  There was, of course, lots of talk about training, instruction, classes, and the perils of the audience’s eye-roll.

Having never listened to audio interviews of myself before, I discovered that I apparently really enjoy the word “really”.  I hope you enjoy the podcast.  Really.

She joined one of our library’s catalogers and I for lunch to discuss her internship at my library, where she will be learning cataloging under his direction.  While we were in the middle of disucssing  the challenges of cramming the whole scope of cataloging into five months, I brought up RDA.

She had never heard of it.  I asked about her understanding of FRBR.  “What’s that?”

I knew for a fact that she had taken an introductory class on the organization of information, as well as a class on indexing and abstracting.  So I guess somewhere in there, I expected her to learn about these emerging standards.

Imagine the look of horror that spread across her face when we explained what they were.  “But what if I had gone into a job interview and someone had asked about RDA or FRBR?”  Exactly.

MLIS programs should be at the leading edge of exploring emerging trends in our field.  They should be preparing their students for the rapid change that we experience in libraries, and equipping them to evaluate and make tough decisions regarding formats, standards, and techniques of description

I’m not picking on FSU alone here.  In my time at VSU, I’ve served on and/or chaired several search committees.  The number one reason that candidates aren’t selected is that they lack experience, or reveal their ignorance in an interview.  It is my opinion that since librarianship is a practical science, it should be practiced by its students, at least in the form of a mandatory internship.

And no, I’m not talking about folksonomies and tagging here.  Although they are fun and very useful, they are no replacement for standards-based high-quality metadata.  I would never want my library’s catalog to look like my personal photo collection–with spotty tagging and organization at best!  Reference librarians, library staff, other catalogers and users all make use of high-quality cataloging metadata for locating the specific items that they need.  All it takes is a single mistake in a cataloging record to ensure that an item is lost to its user forever.  Catalogers:  take it from a Reference Librarian–what you do is important.

So, my plea is this:

If you teach in an MLIS program, stay in touch with librarians to know what your students should be learning to be prepared for the real world.  Look at the entry-level job ads that are being posted, and ask if the average graduate of your program will leave with the skills necessary to do that job.  Look at the advanced-level job ads that are being posted, and ask if your students are being instilled with the intellectual curiosity and passion that will lead them in that direction.  Make internships required for all your students, so they can at least get a taste of what librarianship is really like.

If you are a cataloger, constantly strive to improve what you do, and stay in touch with the cataloging community.  Think about the long-term effects of your description choices–after we’re long gone, our bib records will remain, either informing or misleading the next generation.  And please pass along your skills and passion to the next generation by offering mentorships and internships.

If you do it for no one else, then do it for our users.  After all, they are the ones who truly suffer if tomorrow’s catalogers are unskilled, and that perfect resource can’t be found.

1. Figure out what you want to measure. We polled the reference librarians to see what they thought were the most important skills for students to walk out of the session with.  Those are the things we test.  Thanks to Emily for doing this!
2. Create a form for the pre- and post-test. Ours is here.
   1. We ask them for their ID numbers so that we can match pre- and post-test scores.  Since the librarians do not have access to the students’ ID numbers–and since the professors never see our assessment results– there is no fear of retribution for “bad scores.”  After all, bad scores just mean we’re doing a bad job of imparting the information!
   2. The form (invisibly) timestamps each submission, so you can tell the pre-tests from the post-tests by the time that each entry was submitted.
3. Have the results dump into a web-based text file. We use the ProcessForm script by MindPalette, which is free.  A big thank-you to Andy in Web Services, and Sherrida and Keith in Automation for making this happen.
4. Create a spreadsheet for analyzing the data. Ours is here.
   1. The spreadsheet’s calculations are based on the number of students taking the pre- and post-tests.  So if you had 17 students take the pre-test and 19 students take the post-test, you can plug those numbers in to see the percentage correct for the number of students taking each test.  This way, if you have stragglers, you’ll still get appropriate percentages.
5. Plug the data from the web-based text file into the spreadsheet, and voila!

My class of 19 "Intro to Communications" students.

Lessons Learned:

• We’re definitely getting more assessment done in less time, and with less fuss.  So that part is a complete success.
• Students will not remember your name (or even their professor’s name, or what class it is).  Write it on the board.
• We’ll be adding more options for unique (non-identifiable) numbers, since many students do not know their VSU ID numbers.
• The results get skewed if you have more people take the post-test than the pre-test.  Students who take the pre-test will naturally do better on the post-test because they will know what questions will be asked.  Since stragglers will do more poorly in the post-test, you can actually see a decrease in correct answers.  So if you have stragglers, they need not take the post-test (esp. considering they did not get the same instruction experience as those who are on-time and took the pre-test).
• Be aware of the language that you use in the instruction session, and how that will affect the results.  For example, the truncation question asks if truncating a term will search for words with the same 1) beginning, 2) middle or 3) end.  If you say in the session that truncation will search for words with the same root, you will get poorer results.

Please feel free to use this method, or tell me your own way of measuring your library instruction sessions!

Social Media in Plain English from leelefever on Vimeo.

So as part of our annual goals here at MPOW, we’ve created an online form for students to fill out as a pre- and post-test.   The results write to a tab-delimited text file using ProcessForm 3.0.

By including a hidden date and timestamp, we’re able to separate classes as they are added to the text file, and then import them into a spreadsheet for analysis.  Couple this with the students’ institutional ID number, and we can compare pre- and post-test scores while keeping the students’ anonymity intact.

With a little help (read: enforcement) from friendly professors, this test could be self-administered before and after the library instruction session to prevent eating into precious library instruction time.  Additionally, the test could be performed pre- and post-library instruction, and then again at the end of the semester.  Let’s see how much they really retain!

I welcome comments, criticism and suggestions! A big “thank you” to Andy and Sherrida for making this happen, and feel free to steal the code from the assessment form.

First, I’m going to be teaching Sunday School tomorrow.  I’ll be staying in DC with my friend Sarah.  The Sunday School class that she teaches (with her masterful M.Div. degree) is doing a series on world religions.  When she first asked me if I’d be willing to teach about Paganism, I had that knee-jerk reaction:

“Are you guys learning how to convert Pagans?”

“C’mon Cliff, it’s me.  Hello.”

“I know, I know, just checking…”

Given Sarah’s strongly liberal religious leanings (she and I agree on most metaphysical concepts), I know that I have nothing to fear.  So I plan on going in and sharing some of the basics of Paganism, the major branches, and the few unifying themes of the Pagan religions (taken from a well-timed episode of the Deo’s Shadow podcast).  From Sarah’s description, I have nothing to fear and lots to look forward to.  I’ll promise not to hex them if they promise not to stone me.

After that I’ll be spending Monday – Wednesday at CIL2008!  I’m looking forward to seeing some old friends, meeting some new friends for the first time, and meeting in person folks that I’ve been trading blog posts with for a while (here’s hoping I don’t go all geeky fanboy on that last group!).  Thursday through Sunday will be time spent with Sarah, Jason and their St. Bernard dog Bruno, as well as visits with friends who live in the DC area.

No one showed.  For either of the presentations. There could be several causes (foremost in my mind is timing), but it was not for a lack of marketing.  We’ll probably just set up to do it again later in the semester.

I note in my presentations that I’ve embraced failure as part of the creative process.  And after all, if I have to fail, I want to do it spectacularly.  I want to fall on my face in front of a crowd of people who point and laugh at me–just so that I can remember to laugh at myself.

So in that spirit, feel free to have a look at my cheezy-humored presentation (with a few facts thrown in for good measure), and laugh with me.  I’m sure that next time the room will be packed.  :)

I’m actually finding this more challenging than speaking to librarians about social networking. Most of the time when I give Library 2.0 talks, the majority of the crowd is being introduced to it for the first time (beyond what they hear in the media). So after I do a little damage control regarding predators (with the data to back it up, of course), I explain how these tools can be useful for libraries. That’s the other defining characteristic–I’m telling librarians how to use these tools for work, not fun (although I personally find them a lot of fun). So I start from the basics and then talk about libraries. Piece o’ cake.

Not so with talking to freshmen. How many of them are already embedded in SNSes? I’m sure that many of them have been using MySpace (and perhaps Facebook) for some time. And yet some may have not. And for those who have, their various degrees of experience will mean that for some I will be teaching a lot of new material, and for others I’ll be rehashing stuff they’ve known for years. The solution? Tap-dance. If you have to rehash stuff, do it in a way that’s entertaining and innovative. I’ll try to throw in as many jokes, comics, pictures, etc. as I can to keep it light and entertaining.

Second, I’ll be speaking about how freshmen can manage their online identities (i.e. privacy). Not the sexiest of topics. I’m sure some of them have had their authority figures try to scare the crap out of them in the wake of the MySpace Predator scare (since fear is an easier deterrent than education). So I’ll be informing them about the instances of true predation, the statistical likelihood of predation and stalking behavior, and how to protect themselves (so that they don’t become that one-in-a-million). I’ll also need to educate them about the long-term effects of having an online presence (insert WayBack Machine here). I can’t wait to show them my web pages from college!

If you have any great ideas of what college freshmen should know about SNSes (or more ways to make it entertaining) let me know!

edit:  I changed the title because it was non-descriptive (in an attempt to be poetic).  Bad, librarian, bad!

1. Buy two copies of this report–one to read/mark up, and one to share.
2. Grab a pencil–you’ll want it.

In Technology Competencies and Training for Libraries, Sarah Houghton-Jan has created a concise, humorous, and illuminating step-by-step guide for planning, writing, implementing, training for, and reviewing technology competencies in libraries. This report continues the sensible organization and writing style that I have come to love about the Library Technology Reports series. In addition, Houghton-Jan has included practical advice for each step, gleaned from personal experience and thorough research. As she says in the introduction:

A few years ago, I found myself wanting a work like this to exist. Because it did not, I figured that I might as well consolidate all the information about library technology competencies in one place so that others could benefit from my hunting and gathering.

She has truly succeeded in this, because her writing style fluidly combines personal narrative with an abundance of research. I found myself scribbling notes in the margins, drawing big arrows, and underlining entire passages. It is impossible to read this report without thinking about the ways that you can implement the information in your own library. Be prepared–reading this report will induce a brainstorming session!

The step-by-step format of the report makes it accessible and practical. I could see this becoming the standard work for technology competenies taskforces, with each chapter serving as a practical guide in the process of developing and implementing technology competencies. The author’s advice is useful and down-to-earth; she skillfully addresses dealing with the possible fears and reluctance of staff, librarians and administration. Problems with funding, skilled trainers, learning styles and lack of time are all addressed in full. Each time that I thought of a potential question to write in and ask, I found the answer a few sentences away (the mark of a great trainer!).

Even if you don’t plan on implementing technology competencies in your library, this report will prove valuable. Instruction librarians in particular should read the chapter “Conducting Technology Training,” since the library skills that we now teach to our users are inseperable from technology. I will be passing along Houghton-Jan’s list of twenty technology training tips to our Library Instruction committee, and will be reviewing them for my own benefit for years to come.

On a personal note, huge thanks to Sarah, Jenny, and Mary Mackay for providing me with a review copy (so I didn’t have to mark up the library’s copy!). And to answer your question on p. 54, Sarah, I use Google Calendar. ;)

And I have 883 spam comments on my blog to sort through.  joy.