No one, including myself has made an entry on this blog since September. We tend to rely on group e-mail–libs1; libs2; circlist, etc.–to get out what information that needs to get out there. This of course, is fine. I’m a huge e-mail user; can’t imagine my life without actually. I thought initially that using a blog would eventually catch on, but alas…it just hasn’t worked out that way.
So, what do you think? Should we just archive this puppy? Should we just use the blog for special group sharing projects like we have in the past? Should we all have individual blogs on which we can wax eloquent on all matters library and otherwise? Although I realize that everyone is busy and into their own groove and manner of communication, personally, I’m not particularly interested in keeping this one going if no one is going to contribute to or read it.
My 2 cents; how about yours! Of course I’ll send everyone an e-mail to alert them to read this entry–lol!
Deb
I ran across this from the ILI-list:
http://www.lakeland.cc.il.us/library/tenreasons.htm
Also this from Lewis & Clark College’s, Watzek Library:
Top Ten Reasons To Ask a Librarian
Because….
10. Wikipedia is not a cite-able source
9. Librarians can get you that article you need for free (don’t be fooled by web sites offering to sell you articles for a hefty price).
8. Google only goes so far.
7. “In the nonstop tsunami of global information, librarians provide us with floaties and teach us how to swim.” –Linton Weeks (Washington Post article, 13 January 2001, p. C01) Quote retrieved from http://www.laughinglibrarian.com/siglibn.htm
6. You can ask us by phone, email, or in person.
5. There is no such thing as a stupid question.
4. Watzek librarians are available for personalized research consultations.
3. Librarians can show you how to search.2. Web 2.0? But of course, dahling.
1. It’s time to start asking someone other than mom and dad!
Deb
The “Eyes” Have it: Experiment Finds Students Biased Toward Google
That students often blindly trust search results returned by Google is a common lament among librarians. But an eye-opening study published in the Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication suggests that trust isn’t so blind after all. According to “an eye-tracking experiment” involving 22 undergraduate students from Cornell University, Cornell researchers found that “when participants selected a link to follow from Google’s result pages, their decisions were strongly biased towards links higher in position even if the abstracts themselves were less relevant.” The authors said the results demonstrate the “implications for the search engine’s tremendous potential influence on culture, society, and user traffic on the Web.”
The authors sought to shed light on “whether a user’s choice of a particular abstract was based on the position of that abstract, the user’s evaluation of the relevance of that abstract, or a combination of the two.” To determine this, researchers employed devices capable of recording eye movements. “Eye tracking adds meaning to the more traditional log file or click behavior analysis,” the authors noted. “It allows for a more complete assessment of the information-seeking process by revealing which query result abstracts users looked at, or were aware of, before selecting a query result or refining their query.”
The results revealed students are conflicted about “trust” versus “evaluation,” as the data showed that even where there was an “implicit awareness of the conflict between the displayed position and their own evaluation of the abstracts,” that awareness was “not strong enough to override the effects of displayed position.”
What does this all mean for searchers? “The imbalance between trust and evaluation may simply mean greater or lesser search costs, in terms of, say, time and/or effort,” the authors noted. “More insidious, however, is the potential for misguided trust to exacerbate what others already fear regarding the non-egalitarian distribution of information.” In other words, the combination of “users’ proclivity to trust ranked results with Google’s algorithm increases the chances that those ‘already rich’ by virtue of nepotism get ‘filthy rich’ by virtue of robotic searchers,” while “smaller, less affluent, alternative sites are doubly punished by ranking algorithms and lethargic searchers.”
Deb
Article on CEO’s personal collections.
http://tinyurl.com/yrvqqb
-BK
Volume 34, Issue 1 of the LOEX Quarterly is now posted at:
http://www.emich.edu/public/loex/currents.php
Password: loex994
I encourage you to read the article on Google Custom Search & Library Instruction on page 6 and of course Ross LaBaugh’s column, Ross’ Rave, on page 11 which is always insightful and in my opinion the best thing going for this publication!
Deb
Here’s an article of interest from the June 26, 2007 issue of The Chronicle: Wired Campus Blog.
Deb
An online supply order form is now available and can be sent directly to Laura.
Deb
Here is a listing of new addtions to the Bailey Library’s Helpful Websites page. These are a result of our recent conversation on eliminating some reference standing orders in favor of the free, Internet version.
New under College Teaching:
Digest of Education Statistics
Accredited Institutions for Postsecondary Education
New under Careers:
Dictionary of Occupational Titles (O*Net)
New under Statistics on the Web:
Handbook of U.S. Labor Statistics
International Database
NCDC - National Climatic Data Center
Population Reports
New under Federal Government:
Budget of the U.S. Government
Congressional Staff Directory
Federal Reserve Bulletin
U.S. Code
Deb
For future reference:
“The ACRL Research Committee developed the top ten assumptions after surveying member leaders and conducting a literature review. A panel representing community and liberal arts colleges, research university libraries, as well as an observer of the higher education environment reacted and commented upon the assumptions at the ACRL National
Conference.These assumptions underscore the dominant roles that technology and consumer expectations are increasingly playing in libraries,” said Pamela Snelson, president, ACRL and college librarian at Franklin and Marshall College. “The underlying trends offer new opportunities for academic
libraries and librarians to embrace the future.”
1. There will be an increased emphasis on digitizing collections, preserving digital archives, and improving methods of data storage and retrieval.
2. The skill set for librarians will continue to evolve in response to the needs and expectations of the changing populations (student and faculty) that they serve.
3. Students and faculty will increasingly demand faster and greater access to services.
4. Debates about intellectual property will become increasingly common in higher education.
5. The demand for technology related services will grow and require additional funding.
6. Higher education will increasingly view the institution as a business.
7. Students will increasingly view themselves as customers and consumers, expecting high quality facilities and services.
8. Distance learning will be an increasingly common option in higher education and will co-exist but not threaten the traditional bricks-and-mortar model.
9. Free, public access to information stemming from publicly funded research will continue to grow.
10. Privacy will continue to be an important issue in librarianship.
For more information you can read an article in the April 2007 issue of C&RL News on the “Ten Assumptions“.
Deb
Check this one out:
Finding Time Magazine at Penn State Libraries
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKvR0OC4nYc
Deb