I had a dream last night that I failed the comprehensive exam. The test was unlike the one I am preparing to take because it was all fill in the blank (the type of test I loathe!) and essay. It asked me math questions, old locker combinations, and things in a strange foreign language that I'm not familiar with. Needless to say, in the dream I failed miserably. Then some person I remember not liking in high school came up to me and rubbed it in that I failed. WHAT A NIGHTMARE!!!
I chalk it all up to over worrying...
So I've been reading up on the importance of metadata during my studies. While most people treat metadata like a dirty word (it wasn't too long ago I was part of this group), I've come to appreciate the concept. Working in a library setting, I come to use metadata everyday to find my information. However, an article by Karen Markey about the changes that need to be made to the classic catalog, along with some reading I've been doing about the Google Book Settlement have got me thinking. Maybe a change is in order.
Currently, the way we search a library catalog is the standard surrogates: Title-Author-Keyword search. Sure we may throw in an ISBN every now and then, but the catalog tends to make us work for the answer. Same goes for databases. What would be a simple search on EBSCO, takes plenty of "tweaking" in order to find the magic set of terms to get the number of correct hits you are wanting. As information professionals, this is not really a problem, cause let's face it... we live for the search! But let's take a minute to think about our customers. Most of them work on a NOW schedule. They don't have the time it really takes to complete a successful information search. Most would say this is where information professionals come in, but our society has shifted from an "ask a professional" mentality to the ever popular "self-serve" way of life.
Most people, excluding those stuck in the digital divide, are familiar with Google searching by now. It's obviously a successful everyman approach to information searches. Why shouldn't our catalogs and databases search like Google does. If they did have similar search capabilites, I'm certain more customers (and potential customers) would use it and feel more welcome in the library. Also, searches from a library catalog or database would yield a higher quality of sources than a simple Google search.
This small rant has led me to the Library 2.0 information that is required as the "2nd thing" of my 23 Things. From what I'm understanding, Library 2.0 is the movement that's trying to bring these people who need Google-like search capabilities back to the library. Through blogs, social networking, game nights, etc. people will begin to feel welcome again in the library. They won't be scared off because they don't know how to use the catalog or find what they need. Instead, they will see what their library has to offer which is FREE SERVICES AND INTERNET!!!
Well, at least that's my take on it, in a general sense! Back to studying, and trying to finish Catching Fire by the end of the weekend!
The Markey article can be found here:
Markey, Karen. 2007. The online library catalog: Paradise lost and Paradise regained? D-Lib Magazine 13(1/2). Available at http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january07/markey/01markey.html
And for more on Library 2.0, check out this blog post my friend Jen found:
http://www.blyberg.net/2006/01/09/11-reasons-why-library-20-exists-and-matters/
I found it incredibly helpful in my understanding of Library 2.0 madness!!!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment