Bill Keller. "Let's ban books, or at least stop writing them" NYT, July 13, 2011.
James Gleick. "Books and other fetish objects." NYT, July 16, 2011.
Annie Lowrey. "Readers without Borders." Slate, July 20, 2011.
These days I’m navigating a sea of p-books, e-books, and digital collections. With regard to print I identify with Keller's description of a "teetering stack of … books that [he] means to read someday." What with book group titles, library conference give-aways, and promotional copies, I must decide what to read and then quickly hand the freebies to friends and family. Otherwise the teetering stack quickly becomes a fire marshal’s nightmare in my attic. To my family’s distress I’m not ruthless about weeding.
I’m now acquiring book group titles on my e-reader. While browsing the online shop I often download additional non-book group titles. Oddly, I also peruse the physical bookstore shelves, and then download e-versions while sipping coffee in the café. I now have an e-teetering e-pile of e-books-to-be-read on my e-reader. I feel less guilty about acquiring e-books. I don't have to dust, move, or weed them. I also like that my e-reader is more portable than a pile of print.
Annie Lowry talks about book-sellers adapting to the e-world. On the PBS NewsHour last week Lowrey predicted we would still be reading print 50 years from now, even as we see a migration to digital. I certainly own enough volumes in my attic to keep myself entertained for decades. There’ll also be the competing e-pile. Might there come a time when I replace the print backlog with e-versions? Maybe, but not yet. I need to be able to get foreign e-titles. I look forward to the time when my e-ink reader will double as a back lit tablet computer.
In addition to my personal collections I’m enjoying digitized rare book and manuscripts collections on the Internet, although I also identify with James Gleick's “thrill” of handling the actual documents. Seeing the physical items in an unmediated environment is definitely an amazing experience. But with the digitized collections I have access to more knowledge, and I’m discovering treasures I might never have known about otherwise. And what about the born-digital geniuses who will be composing and promulgating their influential, world-changing work in the digital environment? Gleick warns that when we place high value on rare book and manuscript objects we treat them as if they were “talismans”, rather than instruments of knowledge and documentation. Will later scholars get the same thrill when viewing born digital documents? I feel energized by the increasing number of digitized works, even as I realize this new e-world seems to be changing scholarly research. Gleick points out that we will see "a profound transformation ... for the practice of history". With digitized special collections we have new research opportunities.
My “to read” p- and e-piles are growing exponentially. I love learning about humankind’s accomplishments and stories. As an information professional I greatly enjoy participating in the process of discovering, accessing and using knowledge and information in this dynamic environment.
Friday, July 29, 2011
Wednesday, July 13, 2011
Reiteration: Skills for our digital world
In our digital world, e-resource publishing is increasingly the norm in the Sciences, Social Sciences, and Humanities. Print-based technical service activities for mainstream print publications (not special collections materials) are already decreasing. Digital publications have been increasing and will continue to increase. An increasing number of new reference sources will be available in electronic format only. Cross-vendor tools for the organization and management of e-resources are emerging (e.g. Elsevier, Ebscohost Discovery Service, Summon, Google Scholar, etc). Vendors are supplying catalog records (brief records for acquisitions; full records for e-resources via services like MARCit! and Serials Solutions)
Libraries will increasingly seek to enter partnerships with other libraries and organizations, creating collaborative collection agreements. Archival material will increasingly come to us in digital format because that is how it is being created, stored and managed. Our special collections will continue to acquire unique material, much of which (but not all) will likely continue to be non-electronic.
Within a generation we will have born digital scholars. They’ll have grown up with, and done their research in a digital environment.
The library will have fewer staff. This staff will need a different mix of skills than our current staff has. Cataloging staff will use traditional cataloging skills less than the new skills needed in the digital dominant environment. We need people with an understanding of digital structure, different metadata schema, various digital formats, and the underlying architecture of various databases. We need people who understand the basic languages and structures of digital systems (RDF, XML, PHP, JAVA, etc.), and the possibilities and opportunities they present. We need managers who are able to conceptualize, plan, and carry out Collection Services projects.
We also need more people with foreign language skills to work with the growing number of multi-lingual e-resources. Knowledge of more than one language has become more critical than ever for discovery of and access to information in this new environment.
While it is true that we will need to continue managing our mainstream print collections (cataloging new material from not-yet-digital areas, clearing backlogs, record cleanup, preservation, storage), these tasks will eventually stabilize and decrease over time. Eventually we could even see shared depositories with staff who would take over the management of these materials and metadata from the originating libraries.
Libraries will increasingly seek to enter partnerships with other libraries and organizations, creating collaborative collection agreements. Archival material will increasingly come to us in digital format because that is how it is being created, stored and managed. Our special collections will continue to acquire unique material, much of which (but not all) will likely continue to be non-electronic.
Within a generation we will have born digital scholars. They’ll have grown up with, and done their research in a digital environment.
The library will have fewer staff. This staff will need a different mix of skills than our current staff has. Cataloging staff will use traditional cataloging skills less than the new skills needed in the digital dominant environment. We need people with an understanding of digital structure, different metadata schema, various digital formats, and the underlying architecture of various databases. We need people who understand the basic languages and structures of digital systems (RDF, XML, PHP, JAVA, etc.), and the possibilities and opportunities they present. We need managers who are able to conceptualize, plan, and carry out Collection Services projects.
We also need more people with foreign language skills to work with the growing number of multi-lingual e-resources. Knowledge of more than one language has become more critical than ever for discovery of and access to information in this new environment.
While it is true that we will need to continue managing our mainstream print collections (cataloging new material from not-yet-digital areas, clearing backlogs, record cleanup, preservation, storage), these tasks will eventually stabilize and decrease over time. Eventually we could even see shared depositories with staff who would take over the management of these materials and metadata from the originating libraries.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Ready for Change?
The Getty Research Institute. Introduction to Metadata, 2nd ed. Edited by Murtha Baca. J. Paul Getty Trust, 2008.
http://www.getty.edu/research/conducting_research/standards/intrometadata/
I loved this textbook. It does a great job giving a general history of metadata, and describing various types of metadata standards and their development for use with particular formats, in specific contexts.
In the final section, “Practical Principles for Metadata Creation and Maintenance” the editor confirms that metadata creation continues to be a core activity. Metadata creation is increasingly shared among many units and departments in an institution, and a metadata record can be enriched throughout its lifespan. User-created metadata has its place, especially when created by subject specialists, and can enhance discovery and access. The Catalog Department no longer has sole dominion over bibliographic control. For catalog librarians working with mainstream trade publishing resources for general collections, the traditional 20th century format MARC21 cataloging tasks are increasingly performed by others. For all formats in the mainstream publishing industry, metadata for 20th and 21st century formats are increasingly provided by book publishers and vendors, even for humanities topics in the area studies. As a greater percentage of material becomes available in digital format, our database providers and library systems developers are refining database structures and interfaces to make their products easier for library users to search and access information resources. Digital publications are already part of the mainstream publishing industry. As the library becomes an increasingly disintermediated environment, we refine and develop our metadata standards and best practices. Everyone’s looking for other ways to catalog their resources. Everyone’s looking for more convenient ways to find and access information. Modern libraries have more than a century of experience organizing information and providing access to knowledge. We need to be active participants in the development and use of a wide array of metadata standards and database infrastructures, by being actively supportive of work in other industries, and ready for change.
http://www.getty.edu/research/conducting_research/standards/intrometadata/
I loved this textbook. It does a great job giving a general history of metadata, and describing various types of metadata standards and their development for use with particular formats, in specific contexts.
In the final section, “Practical Principles for Metadata Creation and Maintenance” the editor confirms that metadata creation continues to be a core activity. Metadata creation is increasingly shared among many units and departments in an institution, and a metadata record can be enriched throughout its lifespan. User-created metadata has its place, especially when created by subject specialists, and can enhance discovery and access. The Catalog Department no longer has sole dominion over bibliographic control. For catalog librarians working with mainstream trade publishing resources for general collections, the traditional 20th century format MARC21 cataloging tasks are increasingly performed by others. For all formats in the mainstream publishing industry, metadata for 20th and 21st century formats are increasingly provided by book publishers and vendors, even for humanities topics in the area studies. As a greater percentage of material becomes available in digital format, our database providers and library systems developers are refining database structures and interfaces to make their products easier for library users to search and access information resources. Digital publications are already part of the mainstream publishing industry. As the library becomes an increasingly disintermediated environment, we refine and develop our metadata standards and best practices. Everyone’s looking for other ways to catalog their resources. Everyone’s looking for more convenient ways to find and access information. Modern libraries have more than a century of experience organizing information and providing access to knowledge. We need to be active participants in the development and use of a wide array of metadata standards and database infrastructures, by being actively supportive of work in other industries, and ready for change.
Friday, August 6, 2010
Future of Catalog Librarians and Cooperative Cataloging
Schuitema, Joan E. “The Future of Cooperative Cataloging: Curve, Fork, or Impasse?” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 48:2, 258-270.
In summary: I thoroughly enjoyed the description of historical patterns in cooperative cataloging, and the reasons we’re having difficulty determining what the future might hold for professional catalogers, as well as cooperative cataloging.
The same issues seem to have arisen with each generation of catalog librarians: complex, yet time-consuming and costly rule structure vs. need for standardization; increased publisher output outstrips the pace of cataloging; cataloging copy provided at point of distribution creates fear of job loss among catalog librarians; changing technology forces catalogers to work in new ways. I found it helpful to see a description of the differences between past challenges and today’s situation.
Ongoing economic constraints mean libraries will continue to streamlining local processes. Our integrated library systems allow us to more easily combine acquisitions and cataloging tasks. Our day-to-day bibliographic description is increasingly being done by vendors, who have recognized the economic and practical benefits of their services in a world where the production of electronic information will forever outpace a library’s ability to keep up with the bibliographic description.
Because of the Internet’s content and interface options, users no longer go to the library catalog first. In the hard and social sciences users want access to information in digital format. The humanities are also increasingly favoring digital over print. Along with endless variety of digital content comes an increase in metadata creation by everyone from catalog librarians, to skilled library vendors, to folks sitting at home in their slippers. Metadata creation and distribution is increasingly beyond the control and sole domain of the highly-trained cataloger. At the same time, good metadata is more important than ever for discovery and access in today’s complex information environment.
What is the impact of these changes on career catalog librarians assigned to work exclusively in the traditional MARC-based/AACR2 cataloging environment? We have lost our identity as the primary experts for organizing knowledge. Schuitema makes a good point when she says, “Indications are that the products we have been producing while still scalable in terms of providing access to print materials if significant changes were made, will no longer meet the discovery needs of our clientele seeking information in today’s expanding digital environment.” I’m thinking that in our world, where libraries will likely continue to suffer funding constraints, where the demand for digital resources will continue to increase, where new infrastructures are evolving to store digital information, we catalog librarians must learn new metadata schema for a wide range of digital information types, must develop new ways to adapt our current skills and experience to the dynamic environment where production of digital resources will always be vastly larger than print, and must define who we are professionally through active participation in these changes.
In summary: I thoroughly enjoyed the description of historical patterns in cooperative cataloging, and the reasons we’re having difficulty determining what the future might hold for professional catalogers, as well as cooperative cataloging.
The same issues seem to have arisen with each generation of catalog librarians: complex, yet time-consuming and costly rule structure vs. need for standardization; increased publisher output outstrips the pace of cataloging; cataloging copy provided at point of distribution creates fear of job loss among catalog librarians; changing technology forces catalogers to work in new ways. I found it helpful to see a description of the differences between past challenges and today’s situation.
Ongoing economic constraints mean libraries will continue to streamlining local processes. Our integrated library systems allow us to more easily combine acquisitions and cataloging tasks. Our day-to-day bibliographic description is increasingly being done by vendors, who have recognized the economic and practical benefits of their services in a world where the production of electronic information will forever outpace a library’s ability to keep up with the bibliographic description.
Because of the Internet’s content and interface options, users no longer go to the library catalog first. In the hard and social sciences users want access to information in digital format. The humanities are also increasingly favoring digital over print. Along with endless variety of digital content comes an increase in metadata creation by everyone from catalog librarians, to skilled library vendors, to folks sitting at home in their slippers. Metadata creation and distribution is increasingly beyond the control and sole domain of the highly-trained cataloger. At the same time, good metadata is more important than ever for discovery and access in today’s complex information environment.
What is the impact of these changes on career catalog librarians assigned to work exclusively in the traditional MARC-based/AACR2 cataloging environment? We have lost our identity as the primary experts for organizing knowledge. Schuitema makes a good point when she says, “Indications are that the products we have been producing while still scalable in terms of providing access to print materials if significant changes were made, will no longer meet the discovery needs of our clientele seeking information in today’s expanding digital environment.” I’m thinking that in our world, where libraries will likely continue to suffer funding constraints, where the demand for digital resources will continue to increase, where new infrastructures are evolving to store digital information, we catalog librarians must learn new metadata schema for a wide range of digital information types, must develop new ways to adapt our current skills and experience to the dynamic environment where production of digital resources will always be vastly larger than print, and must define who we are professionally through active participation in these changes.
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Horizon Report 2010
The Horizon Report: 2010 edition. A collaboration between the New Media Consortium and the EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative.
http://wp.nmc.org/horizon2010/
Open Content. 1 yr or less to adoption. The report discusses large-scale initiatives. What about the vast number of smaller digital imaging projects? While having online visual access preserves this material and helps researchers decide whether to make a special trip to a distant collection, the multitude of metadata schema, and our current inability to easily search across the various schema and platforms (not to mention all the copyright issues) make discovery and use somewhat serendipitous in our massively diffuse content environment. It seems that many of us who are metadata specialists become familiar with one, or maybe a couple of metadata schema at any given time. Should more of us learn about a wider range of schema types and their application?
Visual Data Analysis. 4-5 yr horizon to adoption. These tools blend statistics, data mining and visualization, allowing us to better understand complex relationships and social processes. The report discusses how these tools have been used nearly exclusively in the hard sciences, but are now being applied to the social sciences and humanities. Fascinating examples: http://www.gapminder.org/
http://wp.nmc.org/horizon2010/
Open Content. 1 yr or less to adoption. The report discusses large-scale initiatives. What about the vast number of smaller digital imaging projects? While having online visual access preserves this material and helps researchers decide whether to make a special trip to a distant collection, the multitude of metadata schema, and our current inability to easily search across the various schema and platforms (not to mention all the copyright issues) make discovery and use somewhat serendipitous in our massively diffuse content environment. It seems that many of us who are metadata specialists become familiar with one, or maybe a couple of metadata schema at any given time. Should more of us learn about a wider range of schema types and their application?
Visual Data Analysis. 4-5 yr horizon to adoption. These tools blend statistics, data mining and visualization, allowing us to better understand complex relationships and social processes. The report discusses how these tools have been used nearly exclusively in the hard sciences, but are now being applied to the social sciences and humanities. Fascinating examples: http://www.gapminder.org/
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
ITHAKA S+R. “Faculty Survey 2009: Key Strategic Insights for Libraries, Publishers, and Societies.” 2010.
http://www.ithaka.org/
Given that dependence on digital information has led to a decline in scholarly reliance on locally-provided library resources, and also direct consultation with librarians, what do these changes mean for technical services? It seems an increase of vendor-supplied metadata for all types of resources, remote server access to digital resources and exciting new digitization initiatives create opportunities for managing very interesting projects and processes. According to the survey, certain faculty feel the library has an important role in teaching support. Trained subject specialists in technical services work directly with the data in this increasingly complex, increasingly mainstream digitized research environment where print also continues to play a role. We can improve access to all resources for all scholars, by improving information infrastructure (behind the scenes) and via bibliographic instruction classes.
http://www.ithaka.org/
Given that dependence on digital information has led to a decline in scholarly reliance on locally-provided library resources, and also direct consultation with librarians, what do these changes mean for technical services? It seems an increase of vendor-supplied metadata for all types of resources, remote server access to digital resources and exciting new digitization initiatives create opportunities for managing very interesting projects and processes. According to the survey, certain faculty feel the library has an important role in teaching support. Trained subject specialists in technical services work directly with the data in this increasingly complex, increasingly mainstream digitized research environment where print also continues to play a role. We can improve access to all resources for all scholars, by improving information infrastructure (behind the scenes) and via bibliographic instruction classes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)