Photo of Katie Fraser with CILIP Blogger Button

www.chuukaku.com

Katie Fraser's blog and website

I'm an academic librarian, working in the UK Higher Educational sector, supporting academics and students. Prior to this, I was a researcher, working with social and learning technologies.

My interests include the application of all kinds of technology, research support in libraries, learning spaces (my Librarianship dissertation studied an Information Commons project), evidence-based practice and the professional development of library and information workers.

You can find out more about more about me from the links to the left.



Mashed Library: Unconference Thoughts

July 10th, 2009

As well as commenting on the more formal learning I took from Mash Oop North, explored in my blog posts on the opening sessions I also wanted to take time to comment more generally on the unconference.

I was funded to attend Mashed Library by CILIP Yorkshire and Humberside – I’m writing a report for their newsletter in ‘payment’ and because I was travelling from Nottingham rather than Sheffield, where I study, they generously offered to put me up in a hotel before the event to allow me to avoid a super-early start.

I’m really glad I got to go to the event early as the Monday night getting-to-know-you meal and drinks were invaluable in finding my feet and getting to know some delegates beforehand. I commented on my previous posts that Twitter was useful in following ideas being generated and discussed elsewhere in the event itself, but the pre-show was great in that I got to meet up with people who I knew from Twitter beforehand. It was great to put people to IDs / pictures of faces, and I found a few more interesting people to follow as well. I’ve always tended to arrive at events like this on the day, and I think I might actually arrive early wherever possible in the future, as it really helped me settle in.

The conference was brilliantly organised: not only were we asked to indicate our own experience and interests beforehand, but we also got to vote on pizza toppings for the lunch, and influence which of the opening sessions ran parallel to each other. I missed the Yahoo! Pipes session, as it ran opposite one my choices, but fellow-Twitterer @spiky7 and I had a play with it in the afternoon and created an exciting tool for stalking conference organiser Dave Pattern. Unfortunately we had to edit out his #mashlib09 tweets as they overwhelmed the timeline!

If you’re interested in learning more about Mashed Library then it’s well worth visiting the Mash Oop North blog, where there should be further updates on the event. Next year’s event will take place in Birmingham, entitled Middle Mash, and I’d recommend attending if you can find a place – this year’s sold out with speed!

Note: the picture shows the Ikea rat on display at the Rat and Ratchet, which we called into on Monday night. I have the exact same toy rat, so he made me feel right at home.


Mashed Library: Opening Sessions II

July 10th, 2009

The second session I attended at Mash Oop North was by Brendan Dawes who “does things with data” as he described it, creating playful and interactive visualisations. The major message, for me, in his talk, was how much more creative we could be with the way we represent data in libraries. The OPAC tends to be quite serious and workmanlike, and, sure, usability is important. But what about encouraging playful and creative exploration of information? Maybe libraries need to learn a lesson from Donald Norman’s Emotional Design where he realised that his focus on usability in his earlier works could divert attention from the kind of design which we fall in love with. There’s a more obvious place for playfulness in public than academic libraries, but a more ludic approach might be a good way to engage students and encourage them to explore library services in the early stages of their university careers.

The final formal session of the day was perhaps the most practically useful for me, a whistlestop tour through applications by Mike Ellis. He particularly focused on applications which could be used to ‘scrape’ data from webpages which aren’t formally set up for data sharing through RSS feeds or APIs. I must admit to getting a little lost in this session, joined by a few others in the Twitter chat, but Mike came to the rescue by putting all the information down in a blog post on scraping, scripting and hacking which I’ll definitely be revisiting.

The nice thing about being at a techie conference was that lots of people were using Twitter, and so I got to experience bits and pieces of the other talks by following along on the #mashlib09 hashtag on my borrowed-for-the-day iPod Touch. More on Twitter to follow in my other thoughts on the conference.

Note: photo features obligatory white-blood-cell-in-transit-to-conference shot. The white blood cell team did quite well at fending off conference lurgy.


Mashed Library: Opening Sessions I

July 10th, 2009

This week I attended the Mashed Libraries event Mash Oop North. This is an unconference (informal conference) event looking at the use of mash-ups in libraries. I’ve put together a few posts on the day, and in the first two I’m concentrating on the opening sessions, as these were the most information-rich parts of the event.

My first opening session was Dave Pattern and Iman Moradi talking about “Making data work harder”. The simplest way to sum Dave’s section up was that it was about libraries doing an Amazon – harnessing library usage data to enhance the user experience. There were lots of great examples of how this could enhance user activities. I was also provoked to wonder whether there were opportunities for libraries to go beyond some of these more commercial models of data to create more library-specific data usage. Free provision of resources which adds a whole new angle to features like book suggestion, and there’s some aspects of library usage – such as renewals and repeat borrowing of books – which don’t feature in the commercial sphere.

Dave’s thoughts were followed by a section from Iman about design in libraries. I had a brief chat with Iman later in the day about ethnography in libraries, and his comments about how libraries might capture information about using the library from students before they leave – almost a form of student-focused knowledge management – were thought-provoking. It resonated with some of the intentions of my dissertation, although my work is focused on harnessing that knowledge for institutional rather than community learning.

Note: Picture shows the deluge Mashed Library was treated to at lunchtime. The misty effect in the background is genuinely caused by sheer weight of water.


UKeiG prize highlights inconsistencies in conference places for students

April 25th, 2009

I was initially pleased to see that UKeiG were offering a student place at their annual conference, and then disappointed to see that I wasn’t eligible as the place is only available to those who are “not in receipt of another award, bursary or scholarship”. As my MA is AHRC funded this puts me out of the picture. My funding (unlike AHRC research degree awards) has no provision for career development within it, so I don’t think it is arguable that it should include conference attendance. I therefore assume that the UKeiG just feels that all opportunities should be spread evenly between Information Studies students. I don’t think this is an untenable position; however, I do think it highlights inconsistencies in the way student places on conferences are distributed.

Aside from my funding I’ve attended both the Research Libraries UK and LILAC conferences on student places this year, and I’ve applied for and failed to get other opportunities. I certainly intend to be proactive and enthusiastic, although the wording of the UKeiG email did, I’ll admit, make me wonder whether applying for all these opportunities looks greedy. I’d understand if UKeiG’s criteria were shared across the sector. However, there are noticeable differences between the conferences to which I’ve applied: LILAC, for example, allows any student registered for any library qualification to apply. I know that these are separate organisations, and standards don’t really apply, but I wondered what people thought was the ‘fair’ way to do things. Should students be restricted to only one set of funding over a year? Should opportunities be determined by merit alone? Please do comment and let me know what you think.


LILAC Conference

April 6th, 2009

Toy dragon reading the LILAC 2009 Conference PackAt the start of last week I went to LILAC, the Librarian’s Information Literacy Conference, for which I was lucky enough to win a student award. The growth of information literacy in academic libraries particularly drew me in, plus two of the key themes of the conference were emerging technologies and supporting research, which reflect my interests quite well. Overall, LILAC was a great mix of research and practitioner accounts, particularly in the HE sector, so was ideal for me to get a good understanding of best practice.

One of the most interesting themes of the conference for me was the idea of doing information literacy without saying information literacy. I think that generally people outside the information professions don’t really know what the ‘information’ in ‘information professions’ means. Whether we within the information professions agree with what it means is another blogpost entirely! More than one speaker (such as Jonathan Westaway and Moira Bent) mentioned needing students to acquire habits rather than skills, expressing that it’s not really the ability to spot the seven pillars that counts, but making effective use of information so automatic that it might not even be articulated. Keynote Melissa Highton suggested that maybe digital literacy might be a more inspirational phrase for non-librarians, and in the final session of the conference Claire Packham from the British Library mentioned that the major factor in increasing attendance at the Information Literacy sessions in their new reader education programmes was stopping calling it information literacy.

On the other hand, if we’re not saying information literacy we hide the message that certain key skills transfer across contexts. Perhaps the solution is to make the information professions synonymous with information literacy practices in the minds of the public so they automatically see new contexts of information use as under our remit. I think librarianship suffers from the idea that librarians are experts on the resources under the library’s roof (physical or digital). An awareness that we are experts on doing information literacy even if we aren’t saying information literacy requires us to focus on our practices rather than our products. Therefore the importance of the information professions acting as advocates and implementers of information literacy practices is what I’ll be taking away from LILAC.

Photograph of the Cardiff University dragon reading the LILAC 2009 Conference Pack taken by Katie Fraser.


LILAC Conference place and Semester 2

February 18th, 2009

I’ve just heard that I’ve received a sponsored student place at the LILAC Conference 2009. LILAC is the Librarian’s Information Literacy Annual Conference, and this year it’s looking at emerging technologies and supporting research, which is right up my street. I enjoyed the first semester module on information literacy but didn’t feel the second semester one reflected my particular interests in the area, so I’m glad to have the opportunity to round out my understanding of the topic. Definitely looking forward to it.

On the course, I’m one week into the second semester and starting to find my bearings after a busy week working out my new schedule. This semester we get to pick and choose our own modules, and I’m taking Academic, Research and Special libraries (which pretty much fits perfectly the range of libraries I’m hoping to work in), Electronic Publishing and Educational Informatics.

Although some of the Electronic Publishing and Educational Informatics work overlaps with what I’ve studied in my PhD (or self-taught skills, such as the creation of xhtml / css websites) I think I can learn a lot from information scientists’ perspectives on these areas. For example, Electronic Publishing concentrates on standards and legislation, and the Educational Informatics modules focuses on the use of established technologies for formal education, whereas my own research covered more informal uses of emerging technologies.

Finally, I’m currently discussing working with Sheffield’s Information Commons for my dissertation, which promises to be an exciting exploration of evaluating new learning spaces. More on this soon as the details get worked out – I submit a proposal at the start of March.

Note: The picture accompanying this post was taken at the Apple Store in London. It’s my website on the largest computer screen I think I’ve ever seen, which for some reason I found incredibly amusing.


Feature on RLUK Conference in CILIP Update

January 30th, 2009

As a second step in my campaign for media dominance, I’m mentioned in an article in this month’s (the January / February issue) of CILIP’s Library and Information Update. Hello to anyone who’s found their way here from the article – it’s on the RLUK (Research Libraries UK) Conference I attended back in October 2008 and here are the posts from the conference mentioned in the article.

Just to avoid / add to the confusion, the article’s got a teensy error in it: I’m actually a student with a PhD, rather than a PhD student – I’m currently studying for the MA in Librarianship at Sheffield, and my PhD was in Learning Sciences at Nottingham University. Still, nice that Update were so interested in our experiences as student attendees at the conference, and I hope this is a positive sign for RLUK continuing to offer student places at their future events.


RLUK Conference: Part four – Future of Librarianship

November 8th, 2008

The final theme was the future of librarianship, and this covered two main aspects – the need for leaders of the future, and the research library-specific consideration of how librarians’ roles might change.

There were two talks on leadership. The first came from Alistair Work, and mainly focused on how individuals react when the moment to show leadership arises. He also asked an interesting question – given that long-term professionals tend to develop certain styles of thinking, with associated neural changes, what does a librarian’s brain look like? For me, an equally interesting question was whether a newly qualified librarian is going to end up with a similar brain to the librarians in charge today, and what, if any, differences there are between the current cohort of library school students and those of a few decades ago. In addition, Sheila Corrall, my Head of Department presented an evaluation of the Leading Modern Public Libraries programme – it seems well worth a look for those interested in library leadership across the sectors.

The other main theme was the emergence of new types of librarian role in research libraries. Often when speakers talk about the changing role of librarians it is simply a matter of integrating new technologies into old posts; this was about how changes from technologies might create entirely new posts. For example, with the advent of open access, researchers will need librarians to manage internally produced repositories of publications, and even data. In research libraries it seemed like librarians were being encouraged to move away from liaison roles to the support of researchers’ information needs, and with my background in research this certainly sounds like an exciting opportunity!

So, that’s the end of my thoughts on the RLUK conference. There’s a bunch of stuff about the course and visits backed up to talk about, but that will have to wait until my next update!


RLUK Conference: Part three – Digitisation

November 6th, 2008

Another theme of the conference was digitisation, and as one of my main interests is in the use of technology in libraries both of the parallel sessions I attended focused on this theme. Alice Prochaska from Yale University spoke to the whole conference about the opportunity for libraries to exploit their special collections as a “unique and distinctive” resource in the information age. The major question to be asked in doing this, however, was “how do we prioritise our digitisation programmes?” and several speakers over the course of the conference gave their opinions.

A session themed around OCLC’s Shifting Gears paper, led by John MacColl, argued for mass digitisation – getting as much ‘out there’ as possible so that collections could be sifted through by researchers rather than librarians. A number of strategies were put forward for this – from ‘scan on demand’ to simple ‘scan the first one and keep going’ strategies. However, researchers still have to find the digitised information. One issue identified in the following JISC / RLUK session was that collections tend to be available through individual portals, and designing usability and interoperability into these has not been a priority. The other, recurring throughout the conference was whether to add metadata at the collection level, at the level of items, and whether user tagging could substitute for / add to metadata added by librarians – I’m a fan of the tagging route, but it was interesting to see the range of (passionate) opinions on whether it was a good idea!

Again collaboration rose as a core theme, with the collaboration between JISC, JSTOR and the pamphlet owners on the 19th century pamphlet collection an interesting example – JSTOR provide the infrastructure for storing / accessing the collection. The difficulties (and opportunities!) of working with commercial partners were something I hadn’t seen spelled out in concrete terms before, and again the OCLC Good Terms report on such collaborations seems like a useful resource.

Finally, and particularly up my street, the difficulty of storing born digital information was considered. At RLUK the focus was very much on how to store websites / pages, and whether regulatory backing could be achieved to allow this to happen. This discussion came up again recently for me in the context of Game City where the National Videogame Archive was launched. Videogames can be ‘born digital’ but they are associated with physical media, such as cartridges, and other physical materials such as instruction booklet and inserts. Digitisation of materials sounded like such a simple concept before I started digging!


RLUK Conference: Part two – Funding

November 1st, 2008

It seemed inevitable that the credit crunch would crop up at some point during the conference – it seems to be everywhere at the moment – and Sir Drummond Bone launched straight in. He predicted less funding in the pot, and the responses research libraries would have to make to this, such as finding funding elsewhere. In what might have been good news for the majority he predicted that major financial changes wouldn’t hit until 2010, although as I’ll be launching myself at the job market in late 2009 it could have been better news for me!

What hadn’t really entered my radar is what a big effect small changes in government have on funding research. Apparently Gordon Brown was a big supporter of research funding as chancellor, and his move to PM may not be great news for funding. Less surprisingly, a complete government change is likely to make waves. The Conservatives are apparently enthusiastic about evidence-based practice, but whether this would translate to cash flow is debatable. I won’t be voting based upon these considerations, but it was interesting to think about the impact of the political climate on funding priorities at a range of different levels.

The big issue for RLUK and funding was, however, the move from the RAE (Research Assessment Exercise) to the REF (Research Excellence Framework). As a PhD student I was highly aware of the effect of the RAE on departments. This was notable among my graduating peers looking for employment in university departments, and the emphasis placed on publications in staff recruitment as the 2008 RAE approached. The REF is planned to have a major bibliometric component to it: using staff publication citations to assess quality. On the one hand removing the administrative burden of the RAE on higher education sounds promising. On the other, part of me baulks at the idea of assessing departments in this way, particularly as it has not yet been decided whether staff can take their publications with them when they move jobs, which would preserve the same job market issues.

Stephen Pinfield’s comments about the REF, and its trial at the University of Nottingham were particularly relevant to me, as I was both PhD student and library assistant at Nottingham, and know the organisation well. In addition, Alison Weightman’s presentation on internal peer review for developing research quality at Cardiff University was also intriguing. While I was a PhD student informal peer review – commenting on work and reading through papers – was a common process among students and some staff. However, it would certainly be beneficial to officially recognise these efforts. The idea of the library / information service acting as a facilitator or this process also appealed to me: the potential for a well thought-out and centrally coordinated peer review process to encourage interdisciplinary research seemed high. As Alison Weightman pointed out, better publications are possible with internal peer review, better publications lead to more funding in a bibliometric model, and this is a great example of how the library can work together with researchers for the good of the institution as a whole.

As well as collaborating with researchers, however, the library might also need to procure more funding for their own work. One particular need for funding for libraries explored during the conference was for the digitisation of special collections. Presenters discussed ways in which the library could partner with institutions like JISC or corporate partners such as Google to support digitisation projects, as I will discuss on the next entry, on digitisation.