Karen Munro, Learning Librarian

I’m part of a group using Meebo for chat reference, and while it’s been fine so far, it lacks a couple of features we’d like to have. One: the ability for the user to leave the chat page without ending the session. Two: the ability for the user to leave us a message if s/he arrives when we’re not on.

I’m poking around in other web-chased chat options, and so far I’m turning up a couple of options.

• Meebo: No limit on concurrent users, as far as I know. Requires the librarian to keep the Meebo.com page open in a browser in order to stay on the service. (Although they now also offer a sidebar widget that may remove that requirement.)
• Plugoo: Only five concurrent users. Doesn’t require the librarian to keep a web page open, because it doesn’t offer a proprietary chat client–instead, it works through an existing chat account such as Meebo, AIM, YM, etc. Users can leave a message if they access the service when the librarian isn’t on.
• Hab.la: Allows user to navigate away from the web page without ending the session. (See this post on infodoodad.) Has a dedicated page for library services. Only allows 5 concurrent users. Only allows one librarian at a time (but they’re working on more.) Hab.la also seems like an interesting new delivery model, in that the chat bar sits unobtrusively in the bottom corner of any page you want; to chat, users click on it to open a window. So instead of devoting a single library web page to chat, you could put chat bars on every web page and not worry about whether people could find their way to the single service point. Sort of like having librarians roaming all over the library. (Of course, that limit on concurrent users could get sticky.)

None of these tools archives chat transcripts, which is a drawback. On the other hand, they all offer anonymity to both participants in the conversation, which is a plus.

So, to sum up (click through for full-size version):

If I got anything wrong, or have outdated information here, please let me know.

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about whether screencast tutorials are accessible. Or, more accurately, about how accessible they can be made to be.

I use Adobe Captivate to create tutorials for the library, and I include interactive features like click buttons, links, mouse-overs, etc. From a pedagogical and usability standpoint (if it’s done right), all this is a bonus–it encourages active learning, engagement, and time on task. A major benefit of screencasting is that it can reach visual learners, who’d rather watch a process than read a description of it. Audio narration can reach learners who like to hear material rather than read it. Students with learning disabilities (or anyone, for that matter) can review the material repeatedly, at their own pace, whenever and wherever they want. All good.

However.

Captivate includes a number of accessibility features, including output for screen readers and closed captioning. I’ve used those features, and I’ve seen my tutorials used via a screen reader. (Thanks to the campus web access group for this.) The result was far from pretty, and also pretty far from meaningful compliance with Section 508. (The subpart to pay attention to in this case is C: Functional Performance Criteria.) An experienced screen reader user couldn’t navigate through the interactive features without difficulty, and in some cases we hit brick walls.

It all makes me wonder–how often do we really take accessibility into account when we develop screencast tutorials, or for that matter, any new library services? If we can’t make all delivery methods equally accessible, do we try to ensure that we provide alternative means or support for users? According to Section 508, that’s what we should be doing (assuming we receive Federal funds.)

I’d be interested to hear from anyone who’s worked on making their screencast tutorials accessible, or who’s thinking about ways to supplement screencasts with more accessible types of online instruction. I’d also be interested to hear about how other libraries have tackled this, from a policy perspective. It seems to me that having a clear policy and shared understanding about how to balance innovation and accessibility is a baseline requirement for libraries doing online instruction.

Well, it’s probably too soon to say “vs.,” but if I were a faculty member who wanted to make a quick, easy, low-risk, low-maintenance site for my class, I’d definitely be interested in Google Sites. Here’s what I’d find most intriguing:

• I don’t have to know HTML.
• I can limit membership to just the people I choose–the whole world doesn’t get to see my Google Site. (Unless I want them to.)
• I can collaborate with other instructors at my institution (Google Sites lets me invite others with the same email domain.)
• I get some very groovy Google Site themes, without having to wrangle a single graphic.
• I can create and insert spreadsheets, documents, slideshows, images, presentations, and YouTube or Google Video videos into my page with a click.
• I can insert Google Gadgets (like Google calendar, a mini web search, a stock ticker, RSS feeds, or Pac Man) into my page with a click.
• Users can comment on my pages automatically, the way they can on a wiki or a blog.
• I can change the look and feel or layout of the site (where the navigation sidebar appears, for example) with a click, or a drag-and-drop.

What can’t I do? Well, I can’t associate my students’ IDs and grades with the site, so the online gradebook would have to be a separate tool. That might be a killer. But for a lightweight, free, easy-to-administer course site, Google Sites gets a lot right.

Want to see what a Google Site might look like? Here’s an example of a K-12 classroom site (mentally modify for higher ed), and here’s a sample team project site.

Just for my own future reference (because my own del.icio.us account isn’t as well-organized as I’d like, and I sometimes lose things–oh, for a free hour to do some quick-and-dirty cataloging!), I’m posting the link to this great list of libraries using del.icio.us.  Current as of Feb 7, 2008.  Not sure whether it will be updated.

Leigh Blackall’s Flickr photostream on networked learning is really cool–thought-provoking, visually sophisticated, and an interesting use of Flickr as a teaching tool.  I recommend taking a look.  (And yay, he’s using Creative Commons for the images!)

Just a heads-up that Apple has released the new MacBooks today.  The main difference seems (to me) to be a faster processor.  And is it just me, or are these a little cheaper than the last go-round?

The latest crop of reference questions from my shifts at the UC Berkeley libraries are up here.  Glory in the intellectual diversity of the campus!

I was saddened to see, in a publishing industry news email this morning, that the wonderful independent bookstore Cody’s is closing its last store in the East Bay. They’ll be opening a smaller, more focused location near the Berkeley BART. Cody’s is an East Bay institution, and one of the premier independent bookstores in the country. This is not good news for the life of our minds.

And so, in self-defense, I hereby promote the wonderful Tournament of Books, sponsored by the equally wonderful Powell’s Bookstore in Portland, OR. Powell’s is another legend in the independent bookselling world, and the Tournament of Books (aka ToB) is a battle-of-the-bands type event, with a list of recent novels pitted against each other in brackets that are then pitted against each other, and so on and so on, until only one book is left. All judges are named, all biases are proclaimed. And Powell’s is giving 30% off all the books on the list, so you can follow along and place your bets.

E-books are wonderful, online document sharing is great, but in the interests of cultivating a diverse, lively, healthy, even thriving world of independent booksellers and publishers, go buy a book from your local bookstore today.

Speaking of the IS Research & Scholarship Committee, one of our recent projects was a discussion forum at Midwinter 2008, titled “Research Into Action: Leveraging Research Into IL Instruction.”

Our esteemed panelists Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe, Scott Walter, and Michelle Zafron led a great discussion, and the place was packed with interested, idea-producing librarians.

You can stream or download an audio-recording of the session, and/or take a look at the Recommended Reading list (PDF), all here.

I’m chairing the ACRL Instruction Section Research & Scholarship Committee, which is working on a new ongoing publication for instruction librarians titled “Five Things You Need to Read About…[fill in the blank]” (You may notice a resemblance.)

Our first topic for this new publication is going to be copyright and instructional materials, but our runner-up was LibGuides. And because I’m also interested in LibGuides, I’m going to do a quick focus post on ‘em.

If you don’t know about LibGuides, they’re a proprietary turnkey system for creating web-based research guides, created by a company called Springshare. They allow librarians to quickly and easily add Facebook applications, YouTube videos, meebo (web-based chat) widgets, polls, a rating system for suggested resources, and other neat things to their web pages. Overall, the idea is to make library web pages more interactive and user-friendly, while removing the technological burden from non-techy librarians. This is not a free service (annual licenses run from $899 to $2499), and the pages are hosted by LibGuides, not the library. (Although they say they’re willing to talk if you really want to do your own hosting.)

You can see some examples of library research guides created using LibGuides here.

A selective list of readings includes…

• The Librarian in Black blog post
  Sarah bullet-points a lot of the key functions of the tool, and nutshells it as a “swanky-looking wiki with a lot of open source features pulled all together in one place.” A good starter post for anyone considering the LibGuides option.
• Library Support Staff blog post
  More critical of the pricing model for the tool. “This, to me, is packaging Library 2.0 like a database subscription.” Which, good point. However, I’m pretty sure there are libraries who are willing to pay for the convenience that LibGuides offers, or who don’t have Systems departments that can host and support all the features that LibGuides offers. Those libraries might accept the cost. (Though I hope they’d also put some money into training their staff to do these things for free in future.) Also critical of some of the fine print in the license agreements (with a link.) To their credit, Springshare addresses some of these points in the comments.
• BiblioTechWeb blog post
  Much more enthusiastic review of the tool. Scott is very happy with the way LibGuides interfaces with Facebook tools, which is sort of a mixed bag for me. (My last “Focus on…” post was about Facebook, and included some research showing that students don’t want to use FB for research, they want to use it for gossip. Also, I keep seeing articles saying that FB is already getting old, so I’m not sure it’s the technology I’d want to tie to.) Scott works at a library that has actually used LibGuides, so he has hands-on experience.
• “Beyond HTML: Developing and re-imagining library web guides in a content management system” in Library Hi Tech, 24(1), 2006
  I skimmed, I admit! A case study of using a CMS to create web guides at Georgia State University Library, and a good overview of why libraries should move toward using a CMS (or similar tool) for publishing their subject guides. Essentially: consistent look & feel, clearer information architecture, no skill barrier for publishers, reusability of content, and usually version control and good customization. Georgia State moved from the Wild West of Front Page to the more civilized climate of a homegrown CMS after doing a comparison of several licensed and open source CMS providers. I don’t want to stray too far into CMS territory here, but for any librarian who wants to understand a bit more about why CMS = good (or what CMS = at all), this is good background reading to compare with what Springshare is offering.
• Oregon State University’s open-source alternative (ICAP)
  Look at that, someone’s gone ahead and made a free, open-source LibGuides tool! I have no idea why I haven’t heard more about this project. ICAP stands for Interactive Course Assignment Pages. My one nitpick (and it’s minor!) is that while the ICAP site looks great, it’s maybe pitched a little toward tech-savvy Systems librarians who know why “Uses the MVC pattern” is a benefit (?), when in reality it’s non-tech-savvy subject librarians who are going to be the real drivers on using the tool. Be sure to check out their Publications page, too, for more about the project.
• Creating a Library Database Page with Drupal
  Okay, this one’s a little more tech-y, but again, it’s an interesting alternative to the LibGuides model. Leo Klein screencasts the process of setting up a resource page (he calls it a “library database page,” which is confusing to me–he means a page that lists licensed databases, so basically a research guide) in Drupal, an open-source CMS. Too much detail for most viewers who aren’t actively pursuing Drupal solutions right now, but still interesting as a way of getting the under-the-hood view of managing sites with Drupal.