I’m very proud to be a part of this series, as it aims to provide librarians with a ground-up approach to a variety of topics.  It brings together big names in the library technology field (which I’m positively blushing to see my name included alongside!), and provides material both for beginning library workers all the way through experienced practitioners:

So order a copy for your library (or yourself!), listen to the companion podcasts and add your notes to the companion wiki!  I’m looking forward to interacting with readers on the wiki and right here on my blog!  So go check it out!

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.

Robin Hastings has joined the long list of illustrious writers for this series with her report Collaboration 2.0. She is the Information Technology Manager for the Missouri River Regional Library in Jefferson City, Missouri, and she has a long list of presentations and publications that further validate her expertise in the realms of cloud computing for libraries. In this report, Hastings walks readers through the basics of online collaboration and cloud computing, followed by a description of the Library Society of the World, to show an example of cloud computing in action. Next, she provides explanations of the different styles of technology-aided collaboration, as well as a host of Web 2.0 tools that can be used to foster collaboration. Last, examples of groupware (collaborative software suites), examples of collaborations, and further resources are given.

As with other LTRs I have reviewed, Collaboration 2.0 is a clear, concise, and easy-to-read introduction to the concepts presented.  Hastings looks at Web 2.0 tools from the perspective of someone looking to foster ease of communication and project-based work in libraries.  Tools such as Facebook and Delicious, traditionally used for social purposes or personal productivity, take on a new light when viewed through this lens.  I don’t want to give away all of the richness of the report, but a couple of features are worth pointing out.

When introducing the collaborative tools, Hastings provides information about (and links to) the Terms of Service for each. This is valuable information to provide in a report such as this, especially for busy librarians.  There are those of us (myself included!) who may not pause to realize that the wiki tool WetPaint claims a Creative Commons license for all displayed content–including your content! The ToS summaries provided in the report enough to warrant taking a look at the work! Hasting’s summaries can be further complemented by subscribing to the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s recently released Terms of Service Tracker.

The report has few omissions, and those that exist are clearly explained. Hastings only provides a short introduction to the social/psychological concepts behind collaboration; readers expecting to find pointers on encouraging buy-in from team members, managing conflict in collaborative groups, or best practices for getting administrative approval should look to the report’s resource lists for more on these topics. Also, since the writing of this report, several tools have emerged or evolved that should be added to the list of available tools. Dropbox has emerged as a synchronizing and sharing tool that can prevent team members from having to mail documents back and forth, while still keeping documents on their hard drives and maintaining a cloud copy at the same time. Zotero has recently added group libraries, making it a great addition to the report’s list of bookmarking tools.

Hastings had a unique challenge in selecting from the innumerable Web 2.0 tools available, and choosing only those that met the needs of librarians working in a collaborative environment. Yet she did so well, provided concrete examples of these tools in use, and clearly explained the benefits and problems associated with each tool. I recommend this report to any libraries looking to streamline their internal and external collaborations. As these tools for collaboration continue to grow and change, I honestly hope that we see another report from Hastings, following up on the success of this one.

(FULL DISCLOSURE:  I am mentioned in the report, since Ms. Hastings put out a call for collaborative usage of Web 2.0 tools, and I supplied a story that was included.)

Thankfully, there’s an easy way around all of this using Dropbox, everyone’s favorite automatically syncing backup storage service.

1. Install Dropbox on the computers you will be using regularly.
2. Install FireFox Portable into your Dropbox folder.
3. Install Zotero on Firefox Portable.

That’s it!

Now when Dropbox syncs, it will automatically syncronize your Zotero library (including all the attachments) to the web and all your computers.  When you get up from work, close down Firefox Portable, but leave your computer on so it can finish backing up to the web.  By the time you get home, your home computer will be all synced up and ready to pick up where you left off.  Just open up Firefox Portable at home, and your Zotero library will be there!

Caveat:  Because Zotero stores files in a directory and file structre that is unreadable to humans, you won’t be able to access your Zotero files or attachments directly from Dropbox’s web interface.  So if you go on the road, make sure that you either have your laptop with you (with Dropbox installed), or else transport important files seperately from Zotero.

Let me know how this works for you!

My FirefoxPortable, ThunderbirdPortable, and PidginPortable program folders all fit easily into my Dropbox.  I have the Dropbox client installed on my home desktop, home laptop, and office desktop.  When I stop using one computer to move to another (like when I come home from work), I make sure to close these programs.  By the time I get home, all of the files have synced, so I can now see all the Firefox windows I had left open, all the Thunderbird emails I saved at work are available, and my Pidgin chat logs are there to be searched.  This has allowed me to ditch my jump drive altogether!

Caveats:  I don’t have the client installed on the Reference Desk computer, since it is a shared computer and that would give everyone access to my files.  I also have to remember to close the programs as I change computers, as it will create “conflict” files in Dropbox otherwise.  I can tell you from experience, it’s a lot easier to remember to close programs than it is to keep up with a thumb drive!

Give it a try, and let me know if you encounter any other tech tips I might find helpful!

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!

Why am I digging this up again?  Because our brilliant newly hired Electronic Resources librarian is encountering the same problems I did in my short interim–only many times over.  Our institutional online subscriptions are being paid for, but they are not able to be used because of the need for a login/password.  There are dozens, if not hundreds of these subscriptions floating out there.

1) Publishers, vendors, IT folks, administrators, lawyers, whomever.  I’M BEGGING YOU.  Please let our users access the resources that they are paying for with their tutition and tax dollars.  Just grant us IP access.  Yes, I know you’re “working on it.”  Yes, I know it will “take some time.”  But in the mean time, our users are being cheated.  And they’re angry at you and me because of it–but I’m the only one who hears it.

2)  If anyone out there in library- or technology-land knows of a way to elegantly bypass this from a user’s perspective, I’d be grateful to hear it.  I want my users to click on a link for the PDF of an item and have them actually be able to use that item.  I don’t want them to see a username/password prompt.

They’re coming.  Save me, please!

Social Media in Plain English from leelefever on Vimeo.