157 Matching Annotations
  1. Jun 2017
  2. Apr 2017
  3. theolib.atla.com theolib.atla.com
    1. ownership of learning from the educators to the students

      sounds neo-liberal

    2. the visual culture both students and teachers inhabit

      Context of "visual culture" plz.

    3. conceptual and application-oriented instruction are provided through brief online videos prior to the class sessio

      Immediate Q: how many students actually watch them?

    4. Flip Over Research Instruction: Delivery, Assessment, and Feedback Strategies for “Flipped” Library

      This is our April 2017 #lisjc article!

  4. Mar 2017
    1. 55.00(31.09)65.00(17.12)78.57(20.73)

      If I multiply these out, the average of all 34 participants is 69. 69/100 CORRECT, not 69 incorrect. So, if this study is based on a math error (correct to incorrect), then actually scores got better with confidence. Otherwise, the actual average of the results was 30/100. An actual dismal score, not a D. I really need to see the data, dammit.

    2. Given this difference between male and female undergraduates on an economics assessment it would be interesting to more thoroughly explore library skills through the lens of gender.

      OMG yes please.

    3. Out of 34 participants only three identified as men,

      WHAT

    4. minimal relationship

      You didn't want a "minimal" relationship, you wanted a strong inverse relationship.

    5. There were more total incorrect answers in all three confidence levels on the general test than on the library test

      This doesn't really seem notable because there's almost no way to evaluate the comparative "levels" of the two tests relative to each other.

    6. .

      YOU DIDN'T PRESENT A CROSS-SECTION OF FINDINGS BY ACADEMIC YEAR WHY DIDN'T YOU DO THAT

    7. “in-course evidence of skill deficiencies in theseareas, suchas weakcitation practices, sloppy search techniques,and problems constructing research questionsand theses”

      As noted where? By instructors marking assignments? Or in your own third-party analysis?

    8. least competent students were most vulnerable to failing to properly calibrate self-views and research skills

      I just want someone, somewhere, to say "This is a fundamental fact about information literacy." Just once.

    9. 198

      Now what are these numbers?! Total wrong answers, across 34 tests? WHY?! 198 / 34 = 5.8, and students did NOT get an average of 5.8 questions wrong if the mean was 69. I am so confused.

    10. 69 (D)

      OH NO so mean scores WERE 60 & 69, which means that it's totally impossible for the means by group to be 45, 35, and 20. So I want a look at the data.

      (Also, 69 is a C+ in Canada. So this gave me heart palpitations for a second. This is a Canadian journal, dammit!)

    11. there were fewer incorrect responses in the low confident category (M = 55.00) than in the high confident category (M = 78.57)

      I'm really confused by this. How can mean scores for the GK test be ~70 if the three group means were 45, 35, and 20? Unless you mean that the mean INCORRECT scores for the tests were 60 and 69.71. Which is not what the Results section starts with.

    12. each participant was categorized as low, medium, and high confidence.

      Curious as to why you would do this on a participant scale instead of on individual questions.

    13. Fifteen participants reported that they had visited the library at least once with a class for formal library instruction.

      Confused as to why "visiting the library" is part of this - do not formal library instruction sessions happen outside the library? That should be made clear.

    14. highest levels of confidence would be found in participants with the most

      AUGH no. There has to be a third influence here: not all confident students are right, not all confident students are wrong; sometimes confidence is overconfidence, and THAT is predicted by ___.

    15. First year students

      I feel like you would need a control group at a higher level, who had been exposed to academic research methods for longer, or something.

    16. authentic

      weird choice of word

    17. wo causes of overconfidence within library research were proposed: a lack of personal interest in research methods, and anxiety surrounding the research process

      Anxiety + disinterest? Sounds like two symptoms of an underlying cause: some kind of misapprehension of the scholarly endeavour as a whole. Feels like the study can't stop here ....

    18. the important topic of overconfidence inacademic library patrons

      what about non-academic

    19. Given the high percentage of undergraduate students that visit the library for research instruction, there should be more examinations of the effects of overconfidence within the library environment

      What high percentage? This needs a citation.

    20. Rather than confront and resolve this lack, a person runs the risk of displacing their low grades upon external factors, such as difficult examinations or academically rigorous professors

      This is definitely something paralleled in similar studies about internal and external locuses on control, etc., things like happiness and satisfaction studies rather than academic success.

    21. studies investigating overconfidence demonstrate that low performing students are more disposed to overestimate their academic achievement than high performing students.

      I feel like this is backwards. I need to think of this as: overconfident students are more likely to be low performers; students who had a better grasp of their own skill level were higher performers.

    22. both groups benefited from confidence judgment training, and the need to justify answer selection on the testing instrument decreased overconfidence for low achievers.

      Decreased overconfidence but didn't improve achievement?

    23. within an academic library setting (G

      I don't understand what this "setting" specifically is. If you're measuring overconfidence in academic subjects, aren't you measuring it with research and use of library materials de facto? Whether it's measured by/on a test or earlier in the research process?

    24. very little research on overconfidence has been conducted in library and information science

      I would argue a significant portion of information-seeking research is about overconfidence in some way or another.

  5. Feb 2017
    1. (active manipulation). Hand/object manipulation may involve lifting, pulling, closing, rotating,or turning. Within the digital space, this is identified as scrolling orzooming.

      Glad to see this makes some inroads into "manipulative aesthetics" but I'm not sure we can account for the wide diversity of manipulative access in archives/museums/etc.

    2. In a study to determine the connection between users and found objects, researchers discovered that humans seek to create an emotional or personal experience by adding context or framework to give personal meaning to the object

      Seek to? As in, the natural inclination is to make an aura where none may exist? This concerns me.

    3. Media theorist Lev Manovich believes that aesthetics and information visualization areimportant aspects of digital collections

      AMEN

    4. A Comparative Study of User Experience betweenPhysical Objects and Their Digital Surrogates

      Hey, we're collaboratively annotating this article as part of #lisjc!

    1. insufficient staff time (67.4%) and insufficient ongoing funds outside of grants (61.9%) as major barrier

      k

    2. However, 51.2%do solicit locally significant materials from other state agencies or local institutions to be digitized. And while most states (57.1%) don’t engage community members in digitization activities, some engage the community in describing materials (35.7%) and transcribing materials (26.2%)

      k

    3. Mirroring the response from public libraries, the criteria state libraries most commonly used to determine contentto digitize are “historical significance” (97.6%), “preservation purposes” (73.8%) and “patron demand” (76.2%).

      k

    4. States were also asked to report if their collections include unique and locally significant materials that focus on historically underrepresented populations. The most commonly held items represented the African American/Black population (43.5%) or the American Indian/Native population (40.0%)

      k

    5. 78.7% of state libraries reported having born-digital materials in their collections, versus 12.2% of public lib

      k

    6. However, of the public libraries that are digitizing, 63 (19.2%) reported not publicizing the availability of their digital collections in any way

      k

    7. Among libraries whose digitization activities ended more than three years ago (9.6%), the most commonly reported reason for stopping is that it was supported by “a one-time funding opportunity.

      k

    8. Of the 381 libraries that reported on funding sources for their digitization projects, 90.0% receive more than half of their digitization funding from a single stream (the library’s budget, federal funds, state funds, etc.) and 75.0% of libraries receive at least 90.0% of their digitization funding from a single stream.

      k

    9. OCLC’s CONTENTdm® software(15.8%). Other platforms reflected in the responses include Omeka (4.3%) and PastPerfect (4.8%)

      k

  6. Jan 2017
    1. all people, no matter what their position, would have to articulate and defend the values and assumptions on which their claims are made.

      Or, you can take the shortcut: produce 'alternative facts.'

    2. Neutrality is indeed a myth, and this is something that LIS professionals should acknowledge as well as embrace. This discovery means that it is both appropriate and necessary for LIS professionals to have a political position. Whether it be in collections and services or scholarly communication, it is crucial to have a position and to be able to articulate it, both for the sake of transparency and for the sake of social responsibility. Progress is possible only when one is willing to take a position that goes against the status quo and when those judging that position are similarly willing and able to stand for its merit

      Was definitely hoping for some more work in imagining how these things play out in practice. This conclusion seems a bit redundant at this point.

    3. Armstrong advocates for changing publishers’ decisions from whether to publish papers to how to publish them, to encourage the publication of innovative findings (1

      Well here's what I'm talking about.

    4. duplicity at worst;

      +1

    5. The literature reviewed, and the arguments contained here, suggest that there is an opposition between neutrality and social justice.

      Purely in the realm of collection development and procurement, these arguments fall far short of what I'd have hoped to read: about the act of presentation of materials to users, the context that a library creates (authority? popularity? wholesomeness?) and whether libraries can temper those associations through other means. Maybe a selection process can never be neutral, but more important is how users perceive those selections - how much they understand about how their library sausage gets made.

    6. hile I will not delve into the finer points of the distinction between censorship and selection

      too bad.

    7. Blanke’s argument is that librarians must have clearly articulated political and philosophical ideals or positions or else they will end up supporting power and privilege without purpose or direction.

      +1

    8. Berninghausen (1972) argued in favour of the principle of neutrality in librarianship and opposed the alternative, partisanship. He argued that interest in social and political issues would weaken the American Library Association and lead to librarians making decisions about “approved” library materials based on their own opinions concerning social and political issues

      Okay, here's the partisanship stuff.Does Berninghausen give examples of how this looks in practice, or get to the point of discussing how decisions get made based on opinions anyways?

    9. forbidding censorship

      SO LOADED

    10. This suggests that neutrality is never completely possible. Then I introduce the LIS debate about neutrality, which presents an opposition between neutrality and social justice in library services.

      It concerns me that "social justice" is opposite "neutrality" and not "social conservatism" - or that "neutrality" isn't opposite "partisanship" or "advocacy" or some other word that could indicate either side.

    11. Foucault, the “Facts,” and the Fiction of Neutrality: Neutrality in Librarianship and Peer Review

      Hey, we're annotating this article collaboratively as part of the #lisjc project!

  7. Nov 2016
    1. They found that respondents reported a limited knowledge of copyright and admitted gaps in their understanding, but that they did not want a required copyright course due to time constraints (Smi

      This is an important discussion point: do people really think that copyright "doesn't affect them" such that they shouldn't prepare themselves? Is it always a thing you have learn by screwing up (or by being screwed over)? Don't you waste more time that way? Wouldn't you think academics would know better?

    2. Even media directors, who one would imagine would have a more developed knowledge of copyright law than their colleagues in other subjects, were found to demonstrate limited competency in their understanding (C

      A bit concerned about the use of 20-year-old studies here.

  8. Oct 2016
    1. Awareness and Perception of Copyright Among Teaching Faculty at Canadian Universities

      Hey, we're annotating this article as part of #lisjc for November 2016!

    1. There are currently no provisions in the Documenting Ferguson Terms & Conditions describing research use ofcontributor information. There is language included that covers the use of a contributed object that permits it to be used “for educational, research, and promotional purposes outside of the Project, in perpetuity and in all media formats,” (Washington University Libraries, 2014) but nothing that explicitly addresses what information about contributors Washington University Libraries would share for educational and research purposes. As this is a collection intended for scholarly use, clear statements about usage of materials and contributor metadata are required

      Well this is important.

    2. The current promotional flier for Documenting Ferguson features a call to action of “Don’t let these images be lost to history,” encouraging people to contribute materials for archival and preservation purposes. While an important message that certainly resonates with those working in preservation communities like libraries and archives thatappeal does not directly translate to the motivating factors present in the site. Instead, appeals and calls to action should amplify the motivations of altruism, humanitarian response, and sharing and gaining knowledge that are present through messages such as, “Share Your Photos, Share Your Story,” “Call for Assistance: Your Photos Needed,” “Contribute to the Conversation” or similar.

      Hard to really draw any conclusions specifically from your own data, but I'm also not sure this follows the lit-review.....

    3. Participants of the usability study questioned what percentage of the contributions were from Ferguson residents, and wondered how a site meant to archive the activities of a social movement based around a community of people could have true impact iffew of those contributions were from residents.

      Does it say somewhere that contributors aren't Ferguson residents?

    4. None of the five usability study participants were aware of the Documenting Ferguson web site before beginning the study. This suggests that while the events in Ferguson have received national attention, the Documenting Ferguson site is still largely unknown outside of the library and archive community.

      tough to say ... just because your university hosts the project doesn't mean university students have a vested interest in it. different audience selection would've yielded very different results.

    5. the questionnaire statement that received the lowest mean score (1.82) across the board was, “Participating in Documenting Ferguson is a good escape from my own troubles.” This anhedonic response differs from findings from Hertel et al. (2003), where a main motivating factor for open source software developers is “fun.”

      I mean.... sure.

    6. n this task, participants were asked to locate the first image added to the archive. Successful completion of this task could be completed in 3 steps, by first clicking on “View Collection,” then “Browse by Date Added (Ascending),” and then the thumbnail for the first image in the list,http://omeka.wustl.edu/omeka/items/show/8262. However, this was another task that none (0%) were able to accomplish. Most participants clicked on “View the Collection,” and werethen unsure why they were seeing items starting from November 29, 2014. While users noted the ability to browse by date, tag or map, none took the appropriate action to complete the task

      Again, this seems like it speaks to a more general "how do you internet" kind of problem you could've escaped with a different demographic for the usability study.

    7. Participants were asked to determine if there were any protests at a Cardinals baseball game. Participants could have completed this task within one search for the term “cardinals,” which would have returned the image athttp://omeka.wustl.edu/omeka/items/show/8558, describing a contributor’s experience holding a protest sign at the Cardinals’ home game on Sunday, September 21, 2014. However, none (0%) of the participants were able to successfully complete this task. All used the search box on the home page to perform this task, but used different search terms, including “baseball, “ which appeared to return a number of results unrelated to the protest at the game; however, those results were tagged with the term “baseball” and did in fact discuss baseball protests. Although participants indicated that completing this task was difficult and not straightforward, and none were able to return the successful result, all were ableto locate and use the search box on multiple attempts, suggesting either an issue with the site’s search indexing or user error in information retrieval

      This is crazy. Also good proof that the usability study should've moved past undergrads and on to, perhaps, more adult members of the community [who were part of the protests]. Wondering if a control-group of some kind would have been appropriate here.

    8. a lack of consistency in the state of the web site and inconsistent use of the browser’s Back button. Clicking the “Contribute Media” button opens up a new browser window to add the content, which does not have a link back to the Documenting Ferguson home page, and the browser’s Back button is non-functional. Clicking the “contribute” link within the homepage text does not open a new window; instead it simply advances to the same contribution page, but within the same browser window, so the browser’s Back button functions as expected.

      Is this general to Omeka, or specific to your implementation?

    9. organization of content on the homepage. Participants indicated that the page was overly wordy andtext-heavy,lacking a clear statement of purpose and intentio

      Fair.

    10. aesthetic concerns with the home page; specifically, they indicated the large amount of whitespace (shown as gray in the site design) on either side of the center content block.

      OMEKA shakes fist

    11. participants trust that the materials in Documenting Ferguson will persist over time (mean 5.67) and will be responsibly used and cited (5.47), that no harm will come to them as a result of participating in the site (5.27), and that the organizations behind Documenting Ferguson are working in the community’s best interest (5.2). However, the site does not help participants trust others (3.4).

      Could really use some context for these. No legal harm will come to them? No harassment? Why? Because of anonymous contribution, or because of the nature of the project, or something else?

    12. Comments made during thethink-aloudusability study indicate a main social barrier as being a lack of awareness of the site.

      not surprising.

    13. 75

      75% of contributors were white.

    14. ProtectiveProtecting ego from negative features of the self.“Participating in documenting Ferguson helps me work through my own personal problems

      still at "lol whut"

    15. people with little social capital, such as those in economically depressed communities, are challenged in building expansive social networks, and that site owners should “pursue opportunities to create technologies that better connect groups and individuals to those in authority.”

      SO IMPORTANT. Disappointing that we can measure participation/non-participation but we don't articulate that "fun/ideology" and "social capital" are actually both dependent on some other causal factor, i.e. socioeconomic standing due to oppression.

    16. ideology associating editing Wikipedia toopen-sourcedevelopment.

      Interesting!

    17. negative features of the self

      lol whut

    18. "other-oriented"motives (social affiliation, altruism, and reciprocity) and"self-oriented"motives (self-expression, personal development, and enjoymen

      This list seems to be only articulated motives, not subconscious/socially-reprehensible ones, such as self-aggrandizement, promoting a certain worldview, media control (e.g. men destroying the ratings of women-oriented TV http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/men-are-sabotaging-the-online-reviews-of-tv-shows-aimed-at-women/ ), etc.

    19. a lack of awareness of the resource, lack of trust in the sponsoring organization, avoidance in participating due to personal beliefs, and lack of intrinsic motivating factors for contributing to and participating in the archive.

      feels like this doesn't sufficiently lay out the conditions FOR participating: one, having something to share (which necessitates having BEEN there and having recorded and/or seen something worth relaying); two, an understanding of personal privacy and/or copyright in the materials that could be shared (e.g. ongoing litigation? threats and harassment online?). If this is subsumed under "intrinsic motivating factors" it should be explicated a bit better.

    20. gaps in functionality

      Would be interesting to know if people really did have material that couldn't be shared due to format.

    21. practitioners in the digital library community have begun to establish participatory archives

      this sounds bad, like participatory archives aren't being made by archivists

  9. Aug 2016
    1. On Dark Continents and Digital Divides:Information Inequalityand the Reproduction of Racial Otherness in Library and Information Studies

      Hey, we'll be annotating this article for the September 2016 iteration of LIS Journal Club!

  10. Jul 2016
  11. www.comminfolit.org www.comminfolit.org
    1. expert practitioners

      but ... not practitioners

    2. “...all models are wrong; the practical question is how wrong do they have to be to not be useful”

      I wish you had opened with this!

    3. the novice’s view of information as a flat, undifferentiated landscape served up in a browser window

      this could be a tiny bit less insulting

    4. In this way, influence relating to professional reputation and personal demeanor is precluded.

      .... is that actually true though

    5. person

      I rankle every time I see "people" and not "students," because I think TCs work a lot better for the traditional (young, freshly-high-school-graduated) university student than they do for learners at other stages in their lives or outside formal spheres. I've seen little discussion on how TCs work in independent or self-guided learning, so I'm not sure that I can get behind this language.

    6. hypothesis about the emotional state of a student acquiring a threshold concept made their results too limited.

      Wow.

    7. hreshold concepts may be understood as a shortcut through the theories for disciplinary faculty who do not hold advanced degrees in education (Meyer & Land, 2007)

      I would be hard-pressed to market this as a good thing.

    8. Irreversible: once grasped, cannot be un-grasped

      ... which is something I've always found a bit questionable in this premise.

    9. prominent voices in our field

      I already find this premise questionable.

    10. IDENTIFYINGTHRESHOLDCONCEPTSFORINFORMATIONLITERACY

      Hey, we're annotating this article collaboratively as part of the #lisjc group!

    1. Until the 1920s, students at the Library School of the Carnegie Library of Atlanta were “treasured if they could muster the ability to tell Uncle Remus stories in authentic ‘darky’ dialect at storybook hour” (Carmichael, 1992, p. 177)

      This is extremely confusing to me. Would've loved some explication.

    2. functioned to sanction capitalism, enforce traditional gender roles, and encourage deference to authority

      going to ask again what the actual complicity level was here

    3. In addition, “boys were to be denied fiction that led them to feel discontent with meager salaries or a soberly traditional life-style, [and] girls [were] forbidden books that encouraged them to break away from domesticity”

      oic

    4. Though some were wary of the detrimental effects that too much feminine influ-ence on (male) children might have,

      bahahahahahaha

    5. This included the creation of distinctly children’s spaces in public libraries and the pro-vision of hands-on activities, poetry readings, and celebrations

      WHEN

    6. Those for whom citizenship was denied—including the colonized indigenous, “the enslaved of African descent, and...Asian immigrant labor” (Honma, 2005, p. 7)—were thus also denied incorpora-tion into the United States citizenry and access to its accompanying rights and privileges.

      wait - so are we denying these people library access, or colonizing them, at this point

    7. The white woman, when allowed into the nineteenth-century public li-brary, not only gained entry into a white male space, but she was also able to retain “claims to typically female space within genteel middle-class so-ciety”

      seems legit

    8. “The emphasis upon ‘personality’ as a test for library fitness, not only in the library schools but in the profession at large, is reflected in the fact that by 1900 librarians ranked second only to government clerks as the occupation in which native white women of native parentage had attained the greatest prominence”

      not really sure how the causation works on this one, tbh

    9. Indeed, an early criterion for admittance to professional library schooling included an evaluation of “personality.” Here, personality as a trait included “breeding and background” as well as “the missionary spirit, cultural strength...gentleness, and sense of literary values”

      ah, there's the rub

    10. “the librarian stressed the nonrevolutionary nature of their emergence into public life, reassuring their male leadership that feminization posed no real threat to male prerogatives or traditional sex-roles”

      that was crafty of us.

    11. infiltrate and soil the profession

      yeah that's how that worked

    12. serves as an example of the benevolent teacher, co-constituted by her race and gender, who by the end of the film effectively “saves” rough-and-tumble students of color

      effectively

    13. a redemptive narrative

      It's weird because we have a hard enough time convincing people that our work is political and contains social-justice aspects, but I'm reading this as indicating that any helpful social service provided is going to be read as "redemptive" instead of just good librarianship.

    14. but the effect is nonetheless similar

      okay so what is an educational endeavour that functions without a colonizing influence?

    15. a “spinster headmistress, intelligent but thwarted in her academic pursuits by her gender and possibly her social class, whose maternal instincts and academic interests have been directed towards her ‘Native’ charges”

      "Spinster" indicates unmarried, so, we're conflating the philanthropic work of the rich wives of businessmen with the "leftover" ladies of society who either need to support themselves or who still live with their parents.

    16. “independent action and [to practice] unfettered power over the lives of others”

      oh yeah, that's the good stuff

    17. In a discussion of Lady Bountiful’s motives, Gerard notes that most of these women were socially conservative and thus supported traditional social hierarchies.

      It would be very interesting to find a Lady Bountiful's justification of her charity work in her own words, and whether or not this indicates a social conservatism (e.g. a belief that helping the poor is important, but only through individuated giving, never societal restructuring). I'd hypothesize that structural change never occurred to them as an option. So I'd want to look for other writings that indicated a social conservatism and then have to extrapolate from there about their charity work.

    18. A useful too

      Oh good.

    19. insistence on not

      insistence? inability? habituated blindness to the possibility of naming itself?

    20. I propose that her legacy continues to influence the field

      It's one thing to say "This is a helpful framework for understanding the field" but quite another to suggest that an previously-unidentified archetype "influences" it. You are overlaying an existing phenomenon with a new meaning, so this sentence construction is flawed. (Especially since you haven't even defined her at this time in the article.)

  12. Jun 2016
    1. We hope that the application of the J.O.I Factor in this article serves merely as a proof of concept

      Has anyone seen further uses of this?

    2. Also, the spectrum lumps open access publishing options, another of our data points, in with Reader Rights as “immediate access to some, but not all, articles (including the ‘hybrid’ model” — “hybrid” meaning the business model where articles can be made open access on a one-by-one basis for a fee. We decided to add a “-” for journals that offer open access publishing for a fee, illustrating the negative connotation that might have for authors.

      Interesting that the spectrum doesn't differentiate very well here.

    3. All details were inputted to the spreadsheet and coded for consistency.

      Were any journals excluded for failing to provide these details?

    4. Our journal list includes an extraordinarily broad range of journals including research focused journals and those in subfields of librarianship like archives and technical services. This decision was made so as to gather data from the broadest possible representation of LIS scholarship

      I could really use a few contextual pieces of information: for one, what's the estimate of total LIS journals that you could potentially have drawn from? Two, might you have controlled in some way for the types and subfields represented here?

    5. The journals that we began with came from an internal list compiled as part of a professional development initiative at Florida State University Libraries. A student worker in the Assessment department compiled the original list of 74 journals, and then the co-authors of this piece expanded that list to 111 after consulting the LIS Publications Wiki.

      So, not really a "method" then.

    6. Top LIS journals can be identified and ranked into tiers by compiling journals that are peer-reviewed and highly rated by the experts, have low acceptance rates and high circulation rates, are journals that local faculty publish in, and have strong citation ratings as indicated by an ISI impact factor and a high h-index using Google Scholar data.

      I'm so interested in knowing precisely what constitutes a (relatively) high circulation, (relatively) low acceptance, (relatively) strong citation rate, etc. in LIS work. Do we have a journal that sets a standard?

    7. academic librarians often consider open access journals as a means of sharing their research but hold the same reservations about them as many other disciplines, i.e. concerns about peer review and valuation by administration in terms of promotion and tenure

      An issue I rarely see tackled head-on.

  13. May 2016
    1. Librarian, Heal Thyself: A Scholarly Communication Analysis of LIS Journals

      Hi! We're annotating this article as a group as part of #lisjc!

    1. proposing to hireno more librarians by the head of a Canadian university library, the TED Talk ethos was further delineated:“We just want to get it done. We didn’t want to over-analyze it. We want to just pick a direction and go for it. We felt that the survival of the academic library was dependent upon our abilityto start acting upon something.... We spend a lot of our time and effort in integrating technologies throughout the library, whatever that might be”

      double burn

    2. The Director of Web & New Media Strategies at the Smithsonian Institutions recently gave the keynote at a yearly LIS symposium in Washington, D.C.(Edson 2014). He isvery charismatic, well-spoken and transparently sincere in wishing to extend the reach of GLAMS (galleries, libraries, archives, and museums), but he does so byspeaking in strikingly neoliberal terms, with the emphasis on scale:the “world has changed in scope scale and speed,” but libraries haven’t; we don’t dream big enough like astrophysicists, computer scientists (e.g.,the algorithmic growth of Moore’s Law), or the audience reach of Wikipedia or Gangnam Style videos.The results were much like a slickly-produced TED Talk, with little “room for debate or questions.... ‘[I]deas’ [are] modular, fungible and easily transmitted in convenient formats ... commodify[ing] thought, making ideas interchangeable, and adapted for consumption ... [without] the critical delineation of problems, or the formulation of better questions”

      burn

    3. tradition of crisis

      Thank you for this.

    4. Examples were not difficult to find.

      /cackling

    5. professional insecurity;

      THIS IS A THESIS IN THE MAKING

    6. Carnegie

      is Google the new Carnegie

    1. the art (or is it a science?) of selection remains their most important, and closely guarded, skill.

      I don't know any of these people.

    2. whatever that means

      This is insultingly disingenuous. You can make an argument for some materials blurring that line, but the vast majority fit neatly into the two.

    3. Many libraries display only the Dewey decimal numbers at the end of the Non-Fiction shelves. These numbers make perfect sense to cataloguers and librarians but to ordinary folk they may as well be Egyptian hieroglyphs

      Absolutely true. There is no reason why signage can't be more descriptive - you don't even need to label every single shelf, just the more popular sections. Even seasonal/exhibitional displays could help with wayfinding. Dewey labels are (IMO) ridiculous, and many places still use them. That said, you would have to cite studies showing that patrons helping themselves to stacks materials is more functional (i.e. serves research needs) than having a librarian as an intermediary, who can suggest other (non-book and other-location) holdings.

    4. denied access

      Not in my experience.

    5. The vast majority

      Demonstrably untrue. Between e-lending (Overdrive, Hoopla, Zinio, academic databases, etc.), and online account management (putting holds on materials from home), this statement is flagrantly hyperbolic.

      You might also mention bookmobiles here, or visiting library services.

    6. a building full of books

      I think you mean a building full of computer terminals? Also children's toys. And space for programming and events.

    7. These are often located on the upper floor to demonstrate the higher place which reference services continue to occupy in the public library hierarchy. The Children’s Library is in the basement, of course.

      WHEREEEEEEEEEEEE

    8. democratic public space

      Most places are doing this already.

      I think perhaps the most interesting argument to be made here is how you opened this article: social control. How are libraries now participating in social control, other than offering services that are unfortunately depleted by weak budgets? Can you offer proof of this?

    9. The public library continues to be judged on the quantity of its collections.

      Where? Where are the citations here? Who, in public-library-land, brags about the size of their holdings? I've seen places brag about the size of their digitized license-free archival offerings, and about their circulation stats per capita. Who brags about holdings, period?

    10. For many non library users these gates are just one of a range of physical and perceptual barriers

      I am dying for some actual quotes and examples here.

    1. hemes

      I have several questions about this method: 1) Is it, in fact, valuable to compare multiple participants' views of their organization's values? (When they are all from 1 organization.) 2) I feel like the variance in participants' values would affect how they saw their organizations, i.e. things Ps feels strongly about would be more noticeable to them if they thought O lacked those interests. High inter-participant correlations in ratings of O-values would be interesting. 3) There would be way less chance of any correlation between Ps of differing Os as to organizational values, except in the general thesis that organizations are generally conservative and/or ROI-focused, which we could debate all day, I guess ... 4) I feel like #1 would only be valuable as compared to #3, where 3 is your control (how all Ps feel about their Os) and 1 is your experimental (how these Ps feel about this one O). Controlling for 2 (how some Ps feel strongly about certain values and misperceive their Os in corresponding ways).

      ... does that make sense? Maybe I'm misreading but I don't feel like the PQMethod software is described as offering these analyses.

    2. it would be useful tomodifythe concourse to remove statements that did not differentiate between perspectives and to add statements that provide more granularity in terms of how values are expressed through actions

      !!!!! I'm SO interested in this. How could you test people on their interest in actions, laid out specifically, and the relation of those actions to their stated values?

    3. practices.

      It would be really interesting to speculate more on how we might typify cataloging quality - I feel like I could list a half-dozen as a non-cataloguer, but I would be interested to see how others see those things. (Completeness in # of fields + relevance of fields; vocabulary control as % of applicable fields; format + readability of long-form fields; typos + factual errors; relevance of subject headings based on available SHs and # of SHs used; ........)

    4. It was also part of the Innovation Focus themein a way that indicates that participants had strong perceptions of the institutional importance of usability, but placed the usability card at different ends of the distribution

      I find this very interesting. Something to follow up on with a larger study perhaps.

    5. eight participantsin total

      My natural tendency is to question the validity of the sample size, right off the bat. Is one participant per library going to be able to reflect meaningfully on the values of said library?

    6. For this study, the aboveliterature review was conducted to select the concourse

      See, this is where I wonder whether a different format would be better. For a research project where the lit review is part of the methodology, wouldn't you put methodology first and lit review second? Is it just me?

    7. enaud, Steinhagen,and Moynahan

      I totally want to read this study now; what a tantalizing summary.

    8. discovery of an electronic resource leans almost exclusively on metadata

      ++++++ A thousand times yes

    9. The participants are selected because they provide a broad representation of viewpoints within the overall subject population

      This sounds a bit backwards; how does one "select" participants? How do you pre-select participants with a "broad representation of viewpoints"? Sounds laborious.

    10. when asking about the actual outcomes of assessment activities, reallocating staff was the most common result, followed by streamlining processes and making collection development decisions.

      Does that mean that, even when the desired outcome of assessment was "improve services," for example, the results of activities were more often expressed in terms of listed changes such as staff reallocation, rather than in "Yes, we improved services! By [this much]!" ??? That's weird.

    11. necdotal data

      Red flag!

    12. Q methodology.

      I feel like this intro kind of washed over me - without a practical example or two, I wasn't really sure what was being discussed. I would have liked to have a short "intro" to the methodology here, and then have that expanded later in the methodology section (since that's where you describe your approach, not the theory you're working from).

  14. Apr 2016
    1. Examination

      Hey team, we're tackling this article as part of the #lisjc research methods reading club!

    1. Examination of Cataloging Assessment Values Using the Q Sort Method

      This article is being annotated and critiqued as part of the #LISjc project!

  15. Mar 2016
    1. Signage

      I wonder if they consulted existing signage and wayfinding research to improve this in line with best practices. (That's a whole other article, isn't it?)

    2. Improving Reference Service with Evidence

      Hey folks! This article is being annotated as part of #LISjc, a methodological-critique reading group for librar*s. Please tag your public annotations with #lisjc!

    3. Added four chat hours per week, from 5:00p.m. to 6:00p.m. Monday-Thursday

      Guessing these hours were chosen because of staffing availability, not through other measures of measured virtual-ref needs.

    4. number of students entering the library

      Gate counts didn't show a corresponding decrease along with the decrease in FTE students, so ref Q #s and students in the library don't seem to be related ... right?

    5. the number of classes we teach (since those students tend to be heavy library users)

      Odd that you would identify a potential audience for improvement ("students who are not in our classes") but not target that audience for outreach.

    6. We were able to provide the new service during peak hours of reference desk use, from Monday-Thursday, 11:00a.m. – 5:00p.m.

      Does this mean they ONLY offered chat reference during 11-5 M-Th? I would love a bit of elaboration here - was this because on-desk staff were doing both in-person and chat work simultaneously? Or was this intentional, because they thought in-person reference patterns would replicate in virtual?

    7. a “typical week” mode of counting reference questions, in August 2013 we had switched to a locally-developed, simple means of counting every reference transaction.

      I'm not familiar with this; are these commonly-accepted methods? What do they entail? I've seen what are basically daily sheets with spaces for checkmarks for different types of interactions. Can someone who does reference fill me in? Or is this something the author would need to elaborate on?

    8. .

      Just to conclude my impressions of this whole section: the problem presented was "Reference service usage is declining" - which isn't necessarily a problem because reference usage isn't an innate good (both in itself and when you consider competing mandates in other library services, given that libraries have finite resources to offer). The key motivation here, that "students frequently needed the help of a librarian even when they didn't ask," is not backed up by any concrete evidence. So already we've got a weak hypothesis, limited data-collection utility, and no empirical implications.

    9. increase the number of reference questions answered

      If I were being really picky I'd say that's not really a goal, that's a key performance indicator, ideally used in conjunction with assessment on grade outcomes to judge the quality of the references questions and answers asked and given, in order to asses the overall VALUE OF REFERENCE SERVICES.

    10. these numbers made us question the wisdom of staff hours devoted to reference service

      Seems like this kind of decline is mostly correlated to the rise of Google, more than anything else. Without information as to the nature / type of questions asked then and now, I guess we can't really conclude anything, though.

    11. xperienced reference librarians pointed out that although the questions were fewer in number, they tended to be complicated and required more time to sort through the students’ needs.

      Feel like there are pedagogical implications here that need to be explored.