Monday, January 31, 2011

Read in Jan 2011

Start of 2011 and I read:

Between Water and Song: New Poets for the Twenty-First Century
[RoughNotes | NLBsearchplus]

Brevity 2: Another Collection of Comics by Guy and Rodd
[RoughNotes | NLBsearchplus]

fundsupermart
[RoughNotes | NLBsearchplus]

Futurama: The Time Bender Trilogy
[RoughNotes | NLBsearchplus]

Lost Squad
[RoughNotes | NLBsearchplus]

StarCraft: Frontline Volume 1 (Starcaft) (v. 1)
[RoughNotes | NLBsearchplus]

Story Structure Architect: A Writer's Guide to Building Dramatic Situations and Compelling Characters
[RoughNotes | NLBsearchplus]

The Crown and Other Stories
[RoughNotes | NLBsearchplus]

The Question: Five Books of Blood
[RoughNotes | NLBsearchplus]

The Unwritten Vol. 2: Inside Man
[RoughNotes | NLBsearchplus]

Sunday, January 30, 2011

Rambling with Silver: 30 Jan/ 29 Jan 2011

[Explanation: An archive for my own personal reference and reflection, of memorable bits from my Skype conversation with David Silver, Associate Professor of Media Studies at the University of San Francisco. Feel free to join the conversation.]

Previous ramble - 30 Sept/ 1 Oct 2010

David's Dream Exhibit:
  • In the library; Circle/ panels; 360-degree view
  • Displaying foods by seasons; "Fill in the exhibit as we go along the seasons"; Showcase seasonal recipes; Feature cookbooks, poetry books (winter, spring etc.)
  • "get viewers mindful of seasons"
  • What about Singapore, which has no seasons? David suggests holiday food traditions, which tends to be seasonal (true!)
  • Information could be based both librarians and patrons own research
  • "nowadays we don't care about the seasons: chickens are available year-round in the grocery stores"
  • "imagine a huge world map; figure out where our food come from".
  • Perhaps extend the idea to a cross-country chat (among teens?)

Future of libraries
  • "Libraries are beholden to books", and notion of literacy is significantly "print-based literacy"
  • David observes that (in the US) librarians used to complain that users come in to use computers only and leave without borrowing. Now some librarians are glad libraries have computers, so that people are visiting libraries.
  • We talked about fearing the Internet in the 90s, and whether there are similarities with the fears of digitisation and rise of eBooks today.
  • David suggests a possible research area about "librarians' fears from 1994 - 2010"; suggests this could go back to the '80s with the onset of computer databases.
  • Possible source of research: editorials of library journals of last 15 years; library magazines; forecast articles; "fears"; initial reactions to microfiche
  • Suggested reading: Joseph Corn's "Imagining Tomorrow"; popular stories/ narratives on what the future is going to look like.
Imagining Tomorrow: History, Technology, and the American Future

The September Project (TSP)
  • Problems of being bogged down with immediate needs of posting updates (not hard to do in itself but the volume overwhelms)
  • Suggestion that TSP could develop the following framework: 
    • David & Sarah (funding, figurehead roles, interview students)
    • Gleeson Library (learning & training partner)
    • Student Volunteers (content work)
  • Value to the library - a way to position the library as a focal point; to engage students in a global volunteer activity
  • Value to students - learn a skill (blogging, google maps), apply the learning, learn about libraries both nationally and globally; count as academic work
  • Once this "operational" foundation is established, then there's more time to work on innovative aspects to TSP

BTW, check out Librarians and Social Change, a research project by Teresa Garcia, with a case study on TSP.

Sunday, January 23, 2011

Engagement: More than just Feedback (Part 1)

This FastCoDesign.com article led me to explore the Give A Minute website:
Give a Minute is a new kind of public dialogue. It only takes a minute to think about improving your city, but your ideas can make a world of difference. "Give a Minute" is an opportunity for you to think out loud; address old problems with fresh thinking; and to enter into dialogue with change-making community leaders. Soon, you’ll also be able to link up with others who have similar ideas and work on making your city an even better place.
Give a Minute!

Very cool site, in terms of design and presentation. The submissions appear as Post-It notes. To view them, you use the Zoom-in feature (at the top left of the website). The individual notes can be shared via Facebook.

Give a Minute! Give a Minute!

I didn't try to submit a suggestion, so I'm not sure if there's any filtering or authentication (by IP address) on what appears on the page.

Give a Minute!

Like any feedback site, the suggestions are of varying "quality". What is "quality" is subjective but you can tell that some are better conceived than others. And some posts are self-promotional than genuine submission of ideas:
Give a Minute!


BUT IS IT REALLY CROWDSOURCING?
For all its coolness, the Give A Minute site functions more like a feedback portal rather than a real crowdsourcing site as suggested by the Co.Design article headline. Though in fairness, the Give A Minute site itself didn't suggest that it was crowdsourcing in any way.

I understand Crowdsourcing to be more than just "ideas from the crowd". There has to be some activity or actions from participants too. Merely soliciting ideas and views doesn't seem like crowdsourcing to me.


SINGAPORE'S CONTEXT
The Singapore government's equivalent of Give A Minute would be the REACH portal, and probably the eCitizen portal (i.e. the Feedback page, where submitters don't have to worry about which government agency to direct their views).

As both a library employee (we receive loads of suggestions) and also a private citizen who has submitted feedback to private companies and government-related organisations, I think ideas are cheap.

The devil is in the implementation.

I'm not demeaning the ideas from customers (or myself). It's good when the citizenry/ public is increasingly forthcoming with views and suggestions, for the opposite would be apathy.

Social media is increasingly the tool of choice for engaging the citizenry. But it's become so easy to give ideas and suggestions that the concept of engagement has to be more than that.

The article made me wonder how government agencies could adopt crowdsourcing as a means of engagement. Or more important, what would make it work?

I'll have to think about it.

Meantime, if you happen to stumble onto this post, feel free to leave your comments.

[Next: Part 2]

Wednesday, January 19, 2011

Writing as an individual, rather than "For the Institution"

It's the reminder remainder of my lunch time as I write this. Taking a break before the workshop resumes.

I'm conducting a "Writing for Social Media"* workshop today. Have been conducting this for maybe three years or so. About eight runs so far.

The course covers aspects of writing for the Internet and social media -- blogs, a little bit of Facebook/ Twitter, an overview of planning vodcasts and podcasts. There's some technical information and techniques (e.g. what does it mean to "write concisely", "in a personal tone", "passive Vs active voice", differences in writing instructional posts Vs feature articles).

Participants go through writing activities, group discussions and class critiques (I always warn them to leave their egos at the door -- but it's not as hard horrible as it sounds).
NLBA Writing for Social Media workshop

I also try to get the class to discuss and think about what it means to be "social", as opposed to only "writing".

The hardest bit, from my perspective as a trainer, is in explaining what it means to "write from the heart". Or rather, convince the participants why it's important to do do.

In explaining about "writing from the heart", I still quote Shel's book: write with "Passion" and "Authority".

Participants also shared that it's about giving readers a glimpse into our personal viewpoints or work. E.g. how did we plan for this programme? What did participants tell us?

And about our feelings, e.g. what's my personal thoughts after facilitating a book discussion session? What new insights did I learn?

Technical skills are easier to master. But the ability to evoke emotions from the reader -- that's an art in itself.

Also, what one reader feels is emotive writing may come across as bland to another.

And I think in a work setting, few jobs require the employee to write with emotions. Couple that with the culture of librarianship being more of "behind the scenes" rather than being "front and centre", it's harder to get a library institution to share it's institutional knowledge, through its people-assets.

* The workshop details are not posted at the NLB Academy site, but you can email them to enquire.

Thursday, January 13, 2011

Read in 2010

If you're interested in what I read in 2010, here's the link.

Total of 93 items listed there. About 42 items (or 45%) were graphic novels. Which meant 51 items were books.

About 4 books a month. Almost all were items borrowed from the public libraries.

Was a bit surprised at that, 'cos I expected to have read even less books in 2010. Apparently I reversed my own decline in reading books and graphic novels. I definitely blogged a lot less in 2010 compared to 2009 (and even less than 2008). It all has to do with how I used my discretionary time.

I was able to keep up my reading because I commute to work on the MRT. I tend to have a book on hand when I travel by train.

Don't have an iPad or Kindle, so it's still largely books for me. A related point was made here.

My choice of graphic novels arose from a need to just chill and read something less heavy-going.

My rate of reading/ borrowing was maintained because I visit a public library almost every day, as part of my work.

Yet another reminder that for libraries, whose main products offered as still in physical formats, if we're out of reach, then we'll soon be out of touch.

Singaporeans working adults are just so pressed for time today, and offered so many other reading alternatives. It's no surprise that they won't use public libraries if we don't offer them something that they can't obtain elsewhere (or would find it too expensive to do so, on a regular basis).

Friday, December 31, 2010

Read in Dec 2010

The memorable ones in Dec:

Garageband Tips and Tricks
[RoughNotes | NLBsearchplus]

Concrete Volume 1: Depths
[RoughNotes | NLBsearchplus]

A Practical Guide to Mentoring: How to Help Others Achieve Their Goals
[RoughNotes | NLBsearchplus]

Batman/Deathblow: After the Fire
[RoughNotes | NLBsearchplus]

Saga of Seven Suns, The: Veiled Alliances (The Saga of Seven Suns)
[RoughNotes | NLBsearchplus]

The New Social Learning: A Guide to Transforming Organizations Through Social Media
[RoughNotes | NLBsearchplus]

The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly Volume 1 SC
[RoughNotes | NLBsearchplus]

The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid, Revised and Updated 5th Anniversary Edition: Eradicating Poverty Through Profits
[RoughNotes | NLBsearchplus]

The Act of Roger Murgatroyd
[RoughNotes | NLBsearchplus]

Starman: To Reach the Stars (Book 6)
[RoughNotes | NLBsearchplus]

Robotika Volume 2: For a Few Rubles More
[RoughNotes | NLBsearchplus]

Looking for Jake: Stories
[RoughNotes | NLBsearchplus]

Hungry Stones and Other Stories
[RoughNotes | NLBsearchplus | eBook available from NLB]

Lobster Johnson Volume 1: Iron Prometheus (v. 1)
[RoughNotes | NLBsearchplus]

Thursday, December 23, 2010

"Virtual Worlds for Kids" research

Bernadette, aka hvxsilverstar, alerted the Librarians-In-Singapore list members to a special "Virtual Worlds for Kids" issue of the Journal of Virtual Worlds Research on "Virtual Worlds for Kids".

The accompanying note from the Editor-In-Chief:
"... We hope this volume of scholarship will provide much needed insight into the ever increasing use of virtual worlds by kids (3-14 years old), which represents a significantly larger market share than virtual worlds use by adults."

Volume 3, Number 2: Virtual Worlds for Kids
Incidentally, the journal is licensed under a CC-BY-NC-ND license.

The issue's guest editors were Dr. Sun Sun Lim (National University of Singapore) and Dr. Lynn Schofield Clark (University of Denver).

THINK-ALOUD
I thought the journal articles was timely, in light of recent articles I read about kids and teens not taking to twitter and blogs. The peer-reviewed articles contains lots of thinking points in the context of libraries.

For instance, in Diana Burley's "Penguin Life: A Case Study of One Tween’s Experiences inside Club Penguin", this para on page 12 caught my eye:
"Penguin life has been interesting. It has presented a dynamic backdrop for the exploration of how personal, behavioral and environmental factors have influenced the development of my tween daughter’s social identity, and of how the platform of Club Penguin makes it easy to experiment with identification, and more challenging to read social cues that relate to those identifications."

And also, page 11:
"Racial identification similarly changes, so that young people are challenged to see that race may not be solely related to appearance but may also be related to one’s choices and particularly to the affiliations one chooses. In Club Penguin, race as manifested through the penguin body color is a seen as a legitimate reason for gathering and for exclusion."

Those might be reasons to be put into proposal papers, if any library were to put up funding papers for setting up VR environments for kids.

On the flip side though, I think the difficulty is in trying to prove those outcomes empirically, on a representative scale. Or in a way that convinces people that if the library were to set up a VR environment for kids, the kids participation will result in those intended outcomes -- and not merely an intellectual observation made in the research context.

I can imagine critics asking if kids really go into VR environments to learn about social identity. If they don't, then how would that sort of specific learning outcome be achieved, rather than through chance.

Also, a criticism may be that there are other "tried and tested" ways for inculcating the same values. E.g. face-to-face workshops.

Those were some "issues" that came to mind, i.e. I could hear the funding panel ask those tough questions.

Perhaps the response could be in research like "A Framework for Children’s Participatory Practices in Virtual Worlds" (Terhi Tuukkanen, Ahmer Iqbal, Marja Kankaanranta). From their abstract:
The aim of this paper is to establish a framework for participation in virtual worlds and to test the framework by looking at current participatory practices in virtual worlds. In this paper we present a framework for children’s participation in virtual worlds which is based on research review. Our framework sees children in virtual worlds as social actors, learners of civic participation and as citizens. Results of a survey conducted to find the participatory practices of children in virtual worlds are also presented. The results indicate that children are highly interested in socializing with friends and engaging in avatar related activities. It was also found that traditional forms of civic participation are not very common in virtual worlds. Thus, there is a need to promote traditional forms of civic participation and at the same time look at new opportunities presented by virtual worlds for civic participation.

I was intrigued and encouraged in the potential application of this framework (page 7 illustrates the four levels in the framework). But reading the conclusion, it's clear the outcomes are inconclusive. Like this para on P.21:
"... Instead, children seem to be more interested in expressing themselves in chatting and other social activities. On the other hand, it has to be remembered that there are always differences between children as well. There were children in our study who reported being interested in expressing opinions and taking part in voting and demonstrations often in virtual worlds. We also have to accept that all children are not interested in virtual worlds at the moment..."

And continues:
In this article, we have presented one way to look at children’s virtual participation and our study still continues. Based on this first phase of our study, we may argue that children are socially active in virtual worlds, which creates many opportunities to educate children about civic participation and to prepare them as citizens of real world by enhancing citizenship in virtual worlds. However, these opportunities can only be realized when the activities and features for civic participation and education are social in nature and have a fun element to it. Thus, there is a need to carry out further research in order to enhance civic education and participation in virtual worlds.

The search for empirical proof continues.

Until then, I'd imagine that few libraries would venture into VR environment initiatives for kids as yet. The costs seems to be high. Arguable, perhaps. But costs can be in terms of investment of time and resources.

Especially in an economic climate that seems unfavourable for experimentation, I suppose libraries will generally plod along when it comes to straying outside the "tried and tested".

The PDF issue can be downloaded via this direct link. The journal website is at jvwresearch.org.

Journal of Virtual Worlds Research
Volume 3, Number 2: Virtual Worlds for Kids

Virtual worlds as a site of convergence for children’s play
Sun Sun Lim, Lynn Schofield Clark

Beyond Being There: A Grounded Investigation of the Value of Virtual Worlds for Remote Family Interaction
Lizzy Bleumers, An Jacobs

Virtual Epidemics as Learning Laboratories in Virtual Worlds
Yasmin B. Kafai, Nina H. Fefferman

Who’s Watching Your Kids? Safety and Surveillance in Virtual Worlds for Children
Eric M. Meyers, Lisa P. Nathan, Kristene Unsworth

Making Sense of the Virtual World for Young Children: Estonian Pre-School Teachers’ Experiences and Perceptions
Andra Siibak, Kristi Vinter

A Framework for Children’s Participatory Practices in Virtual Worlds
Terhi Tuukkanen, Ahmer Iqbal, Marja Kankaanranta

Penguin Life: A Case Study of One Tween’s Experiences inside Club Penguin
Diana Burley

Virtual Junk Food Playgrounds in Europe: Advergames in the UK and Hungary
Arhlene A. Flowers, Katalin Lustyik, Emese Gulyás

Growing Up with Neopets: A Personal Case-Study
Stephanie Louise Lu

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Principles and strategies for institutions adopting Creative Commons/ Open Access initiatives

The Creative Commons Australia just published this document, "Opening Australia’s Archives: Open Access Principles for Australian Collecting Institutions" (version 1, Dec 2010), for Australian Collecting Institutions (e.g. galleries, libraries, archives and museums).

I felt the guidelines would be useful if your institution is exploring a Creative Commons (CC) or Open Access policy, and would like to know where/ how to start.

Or simply to go through all critical considerations, in order for the institution to make an informed decision whether to adopt a CC/ Open Access policy, or not.

The document also describes examples of institutions that have adopted CC/ Open Access (see the Case Studies section).

The 38-page* document is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia licence.
Opening Australia’s Archives Opening Australia's Archives Open Access Guidelines Version 1 – Creative Commons Australia
*It's 38 pages when I opened with Open Office, which seem to have different pagination.

From its Introduction:
The Opening Australia's Archives project aims to address this problem by working with Australia’s collecting institutions to increase the public’s ability to access and reuse our national collections. Run by the Innovation Law program of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Creative Industries and Innovation at Queensland University of Technology the project encourages the adoption of open access approaches through coordinated policy, implementation and advocacy initiatives across the collecting sector.

Opening Australia’s Archives: Open Access Principles for Australian Collecting Institutions were prepared in consultation with representatives of the Australian collecting sector commencing with a series of meetings held nationally during 2009. For more information on the meetings, principles and project see the Opening Australia's Archives website.

The document explicitly states that it is not meant to be prescriptive:
They are suggestions only, drawing on approaches already being used by collecting institutions in Australia and internationally, and may not be appropriate for all situations. (p10/ 11)

I found the document very readable.

Practical too.

The coverage seems comprehensive. Enough to anticipate pertinent operational issues in the institutional adoption of CC/ Open Access. That's what struck me, as I think back on how some of my colleagues and I attempted a similar assessment recently. This set of guidelines would have helped a lot (as for the said 'assessment' in question, it shall be revealed in due time).

For instance, the section on "Easy first steps" suggests:
  • "Start with low-risk steps, such as marking public domain material on your website as free for reuse"
  • "Identify materials that the institution owns the copyright of and release them under broad terms of use (such as a Creative Commons licence)"
  • "Identify materials within your collection that have a single, easily locatable copyright owner..."
  • "Incorporate an optional public access licence into your collection agreement"

The 'practical' part comes across like these two examples (from the "writing institutional policy" section):
  • Establish ‘notice and takedown’ procedures for dealing with requests to remove material from an institutional website. This should include clear guidelines on the circumstances in which it is appropriate for material to be removed (eg copyright infringement, cultural sensitivity etc) and the circumstances in which it is not. 
  • ... Having some material available for open access – even if it is not complete or of the highest quality – is better than none.

Other subsequent sections spell out principles for practical and operational matters. Like these section headers:
  • When developing terms of use for online material
  • When responding to permission inquiries (btw, it mentions about how to save administrative time for public enquiries on permissions for re-use(
  • When collecting material
  • When providing access to material
  • When dealing with orphaned works
  • When writing institutional policies
  • When considering business models (i.e. how to sustain the open access service)
  • For sector-wide collaboration

The document continues with case studies of "successful and best practice open access projects, or projects relevant to open access around Australia and internationally".

The cases include those from Australian local/ state and national institutions. International case studies include Flickr Commons, The Brooklyn Museum, Massachusetts Institute of Technology OpenCourseWare, Bundesarchiv (German Federal Digital Picture Archives), the Dutch Tropenmuseum, Project Guttenberg, The Smithsonian (also links to the Smithsonian Institution Web and New Media Strategy wiki.

It occurred to me that it's not just public or government institutions that might find this set of guidelines useful.

Maybe in the near future, we'll see a private/ commercial enterprise start a CC/ Open Access project, as part of their Corporate Social Responsibility.