UPDATE: Derik gave me permission to use a sketch!

Sick of going through people’s line-by-line accounts of conference sessions? Check out these sketches!

I got an email this morning from Derik A. Badman telling me about the sketches he make during Computers in Libraries 2006. Here are 45 sketches, including one of me. Another personal favorite is this one of Michael, me, and Amanda and our computers.

It’s bad when schools ban the use of or access to wikipedia, blogs, MySpace and other websites, right? Doing this is kind of like burying your head in the sand. I heard a story this morning that can one up this non-technique. In the workshop’s discussion of wikipedia and social software’s preference of consensus rather than expertise, a school librarian told a sad story. Turns out that the librarian of a rival school was holding an instructional session on wikipedia. Instead of encouraging good habits, this librarian had students vandalize rival school’s wikipedia entry.

That’s quite a way to prove that anyone can make edits. Yowza.

Everyone else did a fab job taking copious transcripts of the Gaming in Libraries 2005 Symposium . I didn’t have all that typing in my fingers, so I sat back, listened, and jotted down some thoughts when the spirit moved me.

There were many great things about the conference, but there was one thing I liked in particular. And no, it wasn’t the fact that I got to play Mario Kart during the breaks. I was really pleased to hear that the same language I’ve (used and) seen being used to motivate people to get libraries involved with weblogs, RSS, and other social software was the same language being used at the symposium. Both the act of blogging and playing certain games can be seen as learning through gaining membership in a community of practice. Participation is the key. Constance Steinkuehler told the crowd just how much effort is spent by participating in a MMOG (Massively Multiplayer Online Game) community. Weeks, months even, are spent in meetings, collecting data, analyzing data and determining a plan of action. To me, this really sounds like writing a research paper. Players are learning how to learn even if they aren’t aware.

And if libraries participate in the social networks of their users, “going to the library” will be less like it has been (often times a last resort), and more like consulting a friend. This similarity was encouraging because it indicates that Libraries are working on the same issues, for similar reasons, though different tactics. When we’re all getting our heads in the same place, joining together to accomplish similar goals…well folks, I dare say we’re part of a movement.

One idea that will likely come through in everyone’s reports is the notion of video games in libraries for their own sake, not as a loss leader for books. In our gaming grant, we stressed that for many people, getting involved with a game is like other people getting involved with a book. Les Gasser went so far as to say that games are now part of kids’ cultural mythology. The idea that games’ storylines have such an impact resonated with me. Just the other day I was talking with a colleague’s daughter and she told me the cut scenes (elaborate animated portions used to forward a game’s plot) in her favorite game are so moving that they made her cry. Games really are a form of storytelling. Try out some games if you need proof.

Another thing I hope everyone took away from the Symposium is a historical perspective on new media in libraries. Many of the speakers stressed that resistance to video games as part of library service is the same force that resisted DVDs, VHS tapes, Magazines, and even Fiction in libraries. The high/low culture debate in libraries is bound to continue.

The Symposium ended with some really great and super practical tips for librarians’ interactions with young people. Beth Galway did a great job illustrating how librarians can take prompts from games to pitch and tailor their services. Her points included:

• Be a strategy guide don’t be a level boss. In other words, don’t mimic the powerful and intimidating creatures that players defeat at the end of a level. Instead, be a collaborator in their journey.
• Show, don’t tell. Many kids like learning experientially.
• Get them started. Let them do. Then see if they need some guidance after a bit.
• Ask for a demo of expertise. Not only do thing kids like “doing,” they love to shine when they do well.
• Change the space often. Even if it is simple rearrangement, alter the space that teenagers use every week. This will keep their interest.

Here are the rest of the posts tagged gaminginlibraries2005 on technorati, and here are 154 pictures tagged gaminginlibraries2005 from flickr.

One of the best moments at Computers in Libraries 2005 for me was when I was completely stumped by a question from the audience during our IM presentation. I was talking about the shortened version of English that can make up the majority of an IM conversation. I had the image of a (staged) conversation with Jenny displayed, chock full of abbreviations. Someone in the audience asked what a particular group of letters meant (aaf) and I hadn’t the faintest clue.

Not wanting my point (that communication via IM is very viable) to be washed away, I mentioned to the audience that even though we didn’t know what the letters exactly meant, we still could understand through the context of the message, what Jenny was trying to say.

Anywho, experts agree that `Netspeak’ [is] doing more good than harm to English language and there might not be as many misspellings and abbreviations as we think.

After dinner the other night*, Michael, David, Greg and I visited a nice cafe called Tryst. Our time there and the “Delighting the User” keynote of 3/18 make for some interesting thinking. As we enjoyed our beverages we noted all of the people using the (free) wireless network and how different their preferred information gathering techniques are from what libraries are providing. Many of the customers were multi-tasking, balancing surfing on the web, IMing, reading books/magazines, and talking with their friends in the cafe. As if this isn’t different enough from our libraries, there was moderately loud music playing as well. The reading and information gathering that the people were doing certainly wasn’t traditional, but rather can be described by a term I heard in the keynote: “PC Literature Behavior” in which snippets of info are gathered and processed repeatedly, often, and perhaps not entirely randomly.

I mention this last bit because of an observation made the other day by a friend of mine. A number of us were hanging out and talking when a topic that needed some augmentation arose. There was a computer nearby, so we gathered ‘round. I found a relevant page, clicked, and found the info we needed. I highlighted the segment of the page we were interested and my friend remarked, “You’re good at looking at webpages.” He hadn’t yet found the needed information on the page while I somehow saw it straightaway. For someone observing us (like we were observing the people in the cafe) this info gathering session might have seemed random because of the speed with which it took place. Certainly there can be nondirected browsing, but there is tons of “specific gathering and leaving” behavior going on. The transmission of information clearly is no longer a unidirectional process. It seems to be more of a multidirectional, multifaceted, swirling process of gathering, processing, sharing, and responding that is all about people.

So. What does this mean for libraries? I don’t have many specific answers yet, but I do think all of this illustrates the framework with which libraries need to be thinking about their users. So far we’ve been trying to figure out what they need, giving them what we have (and trying to trick them to believe we’re giving them what we want. What we need to do is stop “trying to turn our patrons into little librarians” but rather really embrace them for what they are and giving them what they want. Abram suggested doing this by looking at users preferences, desires, goals, aspirations, and values. That’s an entirely new level of being user-centered.

*best meal of the conference, by the way, the Ethiopian place Fasikas in Adams Morgan.

I was pleased to see some more presentations about IM at CIL2005. In addition to my presentation with Michael, there was a 15 minute cybertour and another 45 minute session. The other session, “IM: Providing Services and Enhancing Communication” (given by two librarians from the business school at University of Michigan was great for a number of reasons. It was neat to see not only a library director at CIL, but one that was talking about the value of IM. She shared a personal story to begin. Her daughter was being aggressively recruited by a number of colleges, all of which took different tactics to get in touch with her. She ignored the mail, email, and telephone calls, but responded to the soccer coaches savvy enough to send her IMs. Wow. Another great thing about their presentation was how seriously they took their IM project. When the director, Tomalee Don, realized it was going to be an issue, she restructured her department to make room for IM. Not only did she switch around parts of her staff, she hired new staff. To cover evening hours, she hired students from the school of Information, trained them to use business reference materials, and had them work as Circulation supervisors/IM librarians. This restructuring and IM brought her better qualified Circ clerks!

The questions asked at the IM presentations were different from others I have received: they were informed. Being more advanced, they indicated that more people are experimenting with IM and spending time thinking about it. This is good. Since others out there might have similar questions, I’ve recorded them and will post them here, the first one perhaps being the most frequently asked question:

Q: What do you do if you’re doing an IM question and a patron walks up to you?
A: I’m going to summarize Tomalee Don’s response for this. She stated that she treats students entering the library virtually just as she treats those who enter physically. “Virtual patrons are as important as in-house ones,” she said. This was amazing to hear, and a very good answer.

Q: How do I promote an IM service if I start one?
A: I think IM services promote themselves. As soon as a few people start using the service, they’ll think it is so cool that they’ll share your screen name with their friends. In the presentation I mentioned Brian Smith’s strategy that worked all too well; sending flyers around to the local schools. Other things to consider are putting a page on your website with details of the program, and handing out flyers/bookmarks/business cards at your library.

Q: How many people can be signed onto an IM account at the same time?
A: Probably a near unlimited amount, but it is my experience that only the first person to have signed on will receive the initial questions when a patron IMs. Therefore, using IM for a statewide VR project only makes sense if one library/person is signed on at a time. This being said, any statewide collaborative project negates the community building aspect of IM.

Q: How many screen names should my library sign up for?
A: Chances are that having one central IM contact might be the simplest thing for your users. However, if you’re at a large library, consider having a screen name for Reference, and one for, say, the Audio-Visual department like Michael’s library is doing.

Lastly, a woman in the audience for our presentation shared an interesting use for IM in her library. They use it to communicate from floor to floor to track patrons trying to get more time on their web terminals. I never would have thought to use IM as a security type tool.

yes, i’m blogging on my treo while sitting on the dead tech panel. abram keeps poking me in the ribs.

There are a number of things I’m slightly busting at the seams to post about. I must say that it has been an inspirational day.

David King talked to a room packed with people about an excellent way to frame a library’s website: a user targeted design. It was a full and rich presentation, but I’ll try my best to sum it up in one sentence. A user targeted design has updated content (generated in house and other), directed to a specific user groups.
To make it clear, user targeted design is niche marketing, making web pages for specific audiences. The reason I like this idea so much (and plan to make my library’s site more than half-way user centered) is because a user targeted approach also seems to be user centered. A really good tidbit from his talk was about promoting user targeted websites. King’s approach is to match other (targeted) materials with URLs of the targeted page. For instance, on a ‘Romantic Reads’ bookmark, he puts the URL of the matching content on the KCPL website. He also mentioned telling local community organizations about content on your site that is relevant to them.

Earlier in the day, Clifford Lynch gave an interesting overview of the past twenty years of libraries and computers. He didn’t spend much time talking about the technical innovations, but rather what these innovations had on data.

I spent some time reflecting on how much data there is today, how long it may or may not last, and what a huge change this is from the past. We’ve moved from a “scarcity of information” in the 80s to an abundance now. As the amount of data continues to grow, so will our methods for finding it.

Then in a session this afternoon, Stephen Abram brought up his “Internet as acorn” simile and mentioned that so far we’ve been in a period of slow growth. The oak tree will be much larger, and it will shoot up much faster than the germination period of the acorn. As is the trend, the changes that Lynch spoke about, impressive in their own right, are going to pale in comparison to what we see in the next twenty years.

Another topic that both speakers covered was images on the web. Lynch noted how images are quite standard now, freeing physical objects in a way. Pictures are now a part of discourse. These visual surrogates are important for all of the visual learners in the world (i.e. the people that learn in ways different than the 20% of us that are text-based librarian-type learners). The underlying implication is that libraries should be involved with this trend and involve visualization in their repertoire. Perhaps part of virtual reference systems of the future will be a full replication of your library’s physical space and your own avatar to use to interact, communicate, and collaborate with your patrons.

Now I’m going to run through my ‘Dead Technology’ presentation. A bit of jocularity tonight is going to be a relief for everyone I’m sure!

I enjoy this font. I like seeing it in use.

Yes, we’re all busy running around, listening, learning. Yay.