Competency H

Demonstrate proficiency in identifying, using, and evaluating current and emerging information and communication technologies.

The relentless waves of technological change which seem to demand the continual remaking of the strategies and practices of librarianship can feel, according to several librarians I’ve spoken with, overwhelming, or like a diversion from fulfilling other more important responsibilities, or like chasing the latest trend in consumer fancy. There is a frustration that there is hardly enough time to catch one’s breath between revolutionary developments in some critical area of technology impacting libraries, or in patrons’ latest expectations about what kinds of things their library should offer. The need for “skilling up” – for ongoing continuing education / literacy instruction – is a source of both stress and professional satisfaction. Successfully meeting users’ technology-mediated information needs, and the continual challenge of keeping up with new technology landscapes both rightly foster professional pride and sense of purpose. The growth of technology resources available in libraries is annexing space previously relegated to the stacks. Remaking library floor plans to accommodate new creative spaces, learning hubs and  economic incubators which promote research, study, media / maker space and classrooms  

Libraries have of course long been subject to technological transformations. It certainly appears as if the cycles of technological innovation and revolution have accelerated in the digital era, but where to mark the approximate date is a source of debate. An argument could be made that it began in the late 1960s with the development of the MARC record format, and the concomitant death of card catalogs, but others have made a strong case that the more consequential watershed for information professionals occurred with the advent of the world wide web in the mid-1990s. This competency does not urge reflecting on the past, despite the fact that it surely influences the present, but instead to explore the current and emerging state of information and communication technologies.

Technology saturates the everyday functioning of libraries of all types, enabling and providing access to fundamental services, programming, and resources. A few recent examples of digital era manifestations of these are internet access, services for the differently abled, eBook downloads, laptop borrowing, databases of electronic journals, PDA /DDA, Interlibrary Loan Systems, workshops on computer software and hardware, mobile services, streaming media, maker spaces, media centers and more. These are more or less visible to the public, but “behind the curtain” there are myriad other examples of digital tools and technology-driven activity carried out by technical services and IT departments, front-end staff, catalogers, etc. A superficial sketch of digital-era library tools and processes should include using ILS software to manage circulation and acquisitions, applying metadata and controlled vocabularies to grow and manage online catalogs, implementing “discovery tools” that enable searching across multiple collections and databases including those outside of the local catalog, using virtual reference tools, building complex portal websites, configuring and maintaining highly sophisticated digital curation systems to support scholarly research, using project and event management tools, creating graphics with photo editing software for marketing and outreach, creating libguides, using participatory media and courseware and related software to deliver digital literacy training, deploying more sophisticated environmental control systems in special collections and archives, and archivists using digitization tools to make surrogates and reformat files at risk of technological obsolescence, to name a few. Many of these topics are so complex and deep that professionals only specialize in one or two of them: discovery tools, for example, or digital curation.

A broad, not particularly new, and still unfolding trend is Library 2.0., a new model for collaborative user services which continues to impact a wide variety of tools, resources and programs. Strongly influenced by Web 2.0, the basic idea of Library 2.0 is to empower users by soliciting and foregrounding their input in the design of library services; online, that includes building mechanisms that allow users to contribute to the creation of content and community (Casey & Savastinuk, 2006). Under the Library 2.0 model, interactive and two-way conversations between librarians and users enables services to be evaluated and improved more frequently. A more modest example is the addition of fields for user participation like ranking, comments and tagging in “next-generation search” tools like WorldCat (which are of course, no longer “next”). In theory – and depending on who you talk to, also in practice – more user contributions can lead to more incremental improvements in tools in, for instance, an OPAC 2.0. For better or worse, Library 2.0 could also lead to the presentation of customized content for individual users. A potential unintended consequence of a technology feature like this could be the filtering, marginalization or lower ranking of certain content based on user profiles. There is strong evidence that people do not like the fact that websites constantly harvest information about your browsing history and use to display “personalized” ads and content. It seems likely that many library users would not want to interact with library resources running a recommendation engine algorithm. This a perhaps minor example of many of technology as a double-edged sword in a library context, a set of tradeoffs in terms of privacy, intellectual freedom, creativity and participation that can provoke ambivalence from users and librarians as well.

Some of the inventions and applications of technology described above have rapidly shifted conceptual paradigms and ways of doing things in libraries, while others have more gradually remade particular niches, shaping their future forms over time through small evolutionary steps. The latter is the far more common case, but that does not mean they are low velocity or only marginally impactful. The lists above are fairly superficial overviews of non-technical, end-user examples; they are technology-based but for the most part don’t require an engineer-level understanding of all the parts and the mechanics of how they fit together. While there is likely ongoing change in all these areas of tools and practices, I can’t quite imagine any of them ending up on a list of emerging library technologies. Marcotte enumerates a host of other  trends – not all nascent, but certainly still developing – including “virtual reality, online calendar systems, online classes, digital citizenship education, and open education resources” (2019). Some of these are very broad open-ended areas of theory and practice that are supported by a bedrock of scholarly literature, like online classes and virtual reality. Others are more specialist and finite.

There are many sources, academic and popular, that can be consulted for news and analysis of technologies recently introduced into the world of librarianship. The ALA’s Core division (previously known as LITA) has a Technology Section that lists 10 “interest groups” focused on topics that strike me as more plausibly “emergent” (their Emerging Trends and Top Technology Trends committees are, unfortunately, still too emergent to exist online yet!). Their list is worth perusing:

• Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Libraries
• Collaborative Digitization
• Digital Conversion
• Imagineering
• Instructional Technologies
• Linked Data
• Maker Technology
• Open Source Systems
• WebServices4Lib
• Women, Non-Binary, and Trans Workers in Library Technology

Most of these items link to pages on the ALA’s new “Core: Leadership, Infrastructure, Futures” site that have yet to be populated with discussion threads, member information and topical content. Several of the topics listed above are not new, though they are presumably in a state of active development. Because the site mostly remains to be built out, it’s not possible to gauge the degree of expertise required to understand and engage in these topics. The ALA Core publishes an open-access, peer-reviewed journal named “Information Technology and Libraries (ITAL)” which offers broad coverage of technologies used by librarians that with both scholarly and pragmatic value. The ALA also publishes the subscription-only journals “Library Technology Reports” and “Smart Libraries Newsletter” through its division “ALA Tech Source.” Other authoritative websites devoted to library technology which are actively publishing new work include the prosaic but content rich and very up-to-date (via RSS feed) Library Technology Guides, the open access code{4}lib journal (“fostering community and sharing information among those interested in the intersection of libraries, technology, and the future”), and the Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship, a quarterly open access journal dedicated to a range of scholarly content of interest to science and technology librarians.

There are a vast number of books concerned with information technologies in the library (physical and virtual), and a proper literature review of these would be a formidable if not impossible project. To focus only on emerging technology, “Emerging Library Technologies: It’s Not Just for Geeks” by Ida Joiner and “Emerging technologies for librarians: a practical approach to innovation” by Sharon Yang are promising summaries from the reputable academic publisher Elsevier / Science Direct / Chandos Publishing. One problem with print books dealing with these topics, however, is their relatively short expiration dates. In response, many publishers, especially in the academic market, sell electronic editions of books which can be continually revised at no cost to the buyer. The problem is not finding news or in-depth treatments of topics related to technologies in libraries, but rather narrowing down the number of resources and experts to consult in order to become broadly literate in the subject. Social media and online communities like the ALA Core site offer another approach, one that may be more effective than a mere reading list.

In my investigation of the roles that social media is playing in libraries I was unsurprised to learn that many libraries use various social media channels for marketing and outreach campaigns and advocacy purposes, with the expected emphasis on garnering likes, shares and comments. Library patrons are heavy users of social media, so inevitably there will be patron questions for librarians to answer. However, what I was most interested in finding were groups and accounts on Facebook and Twitter dedicated to (emerging) library technology. I didn’t find much on Facebook, but I’m unsure if that’s related to their rudimentary search capabilities compared to other platforms like Twitter. The Association of Research Libraries has a Twitter account, and I was able to explore their tweeted links, retweets, followers. Twitter’s own recommendations on the ARL feed which led me to the accounts of ACRL, RUSA and others. I also found an excellent blog named “Emerging Technologies Librarian” authored by medical librarian PF Anderson, a prolific poster of relevant, thoughtful, well-researched content who offered this list of helpful links and hashtags for librarians on Twitter.

As far as my own interests in technology, I am currently most interested in archival and special collections related tools and practices. More specifically, I hope to have a professional opportunity to create an exhibition from archival materials, staged in both physical gallery and online. I will be working as an intern at the Golden Gate Recreation Area’s Park Archives and Records Center this summer. While I don’t yet know exactly what the Archives most pressing needs are and what I will be called upon to do, but I’ve expressed my interests in this particular area of archivist know-how. I would especially like opportunities to get hands-on experience with Digital Asset Management applications and tools like Omeka and DSpace (unlikely), though I’ve been advised that the archive’s parent institution – the National Park Service – is slow to embrace new technologies. Regardless, I look forward to gaining practical experience in an archival environment, and more broadly in the realm of cultural memory institutions. My longer-term goal is to secure a job as a librarian at a contemporary art museum and learn the specific tools used to support research by curators, artists, and others.

References

Anderson, P.F. (2018). Library Twitter Chats Collection. In Emerging Technologies Librarian. Retrieved April 10, 2021 from etechlib.wordpress.com/2018/08/09/library-twitter-chats-collection

Casey.M & Savastinuk, L. (2006). “Library 2.0: service for the next generation library”. Library Journal. Retrieved April 5, 2021 from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234619983_Library_20_Service_for_the_Next-Generation_Library

Joiner, I. (2018). Emerging Library Technologies (Chandos information professional series). San Diego: Elsevier Science & Technology.

Marcotte, A. (2019, March 1). Tech Trends. Retrieved from https://americanlibrariesmagazine.org/2019/03/01/tech-trends-libraries/

Technology Section (n.d.) In Core: A Division of the American Library Association. Retrieved April 10, 2021 from http://www.ala.org/core/member-center/sections/technology

Yang, S. Q. (2016). Emerging technologies for librarians: a practical approach to innovation (First edition.). Elsevier : Chandos Publishing.

Evidence for Competency H

Evidence 1

https://ischoolsjsu.libguides.com/pandemics

For INFO 210-01, Reference and Information Services, I created a libguide on “Pandemics through History.” In and of itself, I’m sure it failed to live up to its overly broad, encyclopedic ambitions, but I hope that it did succeed in providing a useful and diverse array of links to much more comprehensive and detailed content. The scope of the libguide was tilted towards the history of pandemics in Europe to a degree that excludes culturally and scientifically valuable information from other parts of the world. We used Springshare’s libguide creation tool to create the site. It was satisfying to pull together the layout and graphics into the finished libguide design, but the bulk of the work was exploring and locating various kinds of resources to share and organizing them under different menus. The “Journal Databases” and “Articles” menus contain links from an abbreviated literature review I performed on historic pandemics (1^st category) and coronavirus (2^nd category). Of course there was a strong focus on reference and bibliographic materials as well, content I was able to cull through intensive use of the SJSU King Library’s One Search Tool and Research Guides: mainly the “A-Z Databases” page but some of the libguides on researching scholarly sources. The project combined a dash of User Experience design with a good deal of information research and organization. I’m happy with the end result – at least, as “happy” as one can be about such a morbid though often fascinating topic.

INFO-210-Research-Library-Guide-Josh-Simpson

Evidence 2

I wrote a white paper entitled “DDA: Limitations and Adaptations” for course 230-10 (Issues in Academic Libraries) about trends in DDA / PDA (Demand Driven / Patron Driven Acquisition). Offering an alternative to the “just-in-case” collections development model which strives to correctly anticipate future patron interest and acquire books so they will be waiting on a shelf for check out, DDA operates on a “just-in-time” paradigm in which patrons can instantly download and access titles that are not currently owned by the library. As a panacea for the typical tradeoffs and limitations that make collection-building financially challenging, DDA hasn’t exactly lived up to its initial hype. That said, it does enable more efficient spending of collection budgets, and its flexibility minimizing duplications with approval plans and firm orders, complementing rather than replacing print acquisitions. Academic libraries have experienced significant pain in recent years as the amount and cost of subscription scholarly journal content have soared, and at this point DDA / PDA is not available for academic journal market. For this reason many librarians and researchers have concluded that DDA on its own is not capable of delivering all the source materials scholars might need or creating broadly inclusive disciplinary / cross-disciplinary collections. Rising Short Term Lending (STL) costs for libraries, the withdrawal of “front list” titles from DDA pools, and abandonment of STL altogether are all adding to financial pressures on both publishers and libraries. This paper attempts to explore the advantages, tradeoffs and new trends in DDA / PDA.

INFO-230-Josh-Simpson-White-Paper-2-1