According to the NYT, the Google Android phone, also known as the HTC Dream, will be here before the end of the year.  Here's a video that purports to show the phone (warning: creepy breathing)

What sets the Android apart?  Like the iPhone, it runs on an open platform.  Unlike the iPhone, it has (allegedly) a touch screen and a full keyboard.  It integrates tightly with Google apps (of course).  Nice.

Oh, the timing.  I just got an iPhone and now this.  How long before it's commonplace to own a string of mobile devices?  I want to collect phones like some people collect shoes.

And with that, friends, I'm off for a week.  The Blogust challenge is fun and has helped me be a little more flexible in creating blog content.  That said, I think I can only reasonably do it when I'm at work.  I need to rest and build energy for the start of classes and the Open House!  See you in about a week.

Article numbah two in my Blogust series of favorite readings: "Information Literacy Makes All the Wrong Assumptions" by Stanley Wilder.

When this article was published in 2005, it raised a big stink in the library world.  You see, we don't criticize the sacred cows in our profession often.  And information literacy is one of the biggest sacred cows of them all.  As long as it's smart people fighting, I love a good fight, and this article is all about the fighting.  How can you not love statements like this:

"Information literacy does nothing to help libraries compete with the Internet, and it should be discarded."

Inflammatory statements aside, Wilder makes some astute observations in this article, including the idea that librarians should focus on reducing the complexity of information retrieval, rather than teaching the complexity itself.

Wilder's central tenet is that librarians should create interfaces that reduce (if not eliminate entirely) the need for instruction.  Here's my favorite quote from the article:

"Librarians need to use their expertise to make the library's online presence approach the simplicity and power of the Internet."

Amen to that.  I have yet to find another article that states this objective as clearly.  An article that angered so many provided a career eye-opener for me: An instruction librarian can reach and teach more students through effective interface design than through face to face instruction. 

Enjoy the article!  And please feel free to fight about it.  Nothing could make me happier.

Today was the second (and final) day of Learning Design Summer Camp.  I was sad to see it end. 

The Camp helped me realize how much I depend on the flow of our local online community for personal development.  I blog to connect with and learn from our local campus community--the Learning Camp community essentially---not necessarily the larger, national community of librarians out there.  The majority of blogs that I read regularly are local--the commenters on this blog are by and large local.  Realizing this was a sweet moment.  How many academics can say that they receive so much inspiration from their local community?

I took away lots of new ideas, made some great new friends, and perhaps even learned how to better appreciate the power of Twitter.  Tomorrow, I'll share more on a discussion we had on campus learning spaces.  But for now, Robin and Shannon both summed it up the whole experience beautifully.

Learning Design Summer Camp started today.  I have never seen a conference with so much backchannel--pretty amazing!  It was fascinating to see the PSU Twitter community burst into real life--some people referred to each other by their Twitter handles.

There were some terrific presentations today, and it was wonderful to talk with people I don't get to see on a regular basis.  We had a great lunch discussion on digital literacy (see Dana's blog post for more of the details).  I also learned how to eat a cupcake and bite a toddler.  I discovered what Twoosh-ing is.  I had no idea.

I presented a 10 minute lightning talk on Zotero. (Anne posted a recap of all the Lightning Talks)  On to Day Two!

Below is a (very, very preliminary) draft of a research problem that I might submit as part of a sabbatical proposal for 2009-10.  If you have any ideas or feedback on this, I'd love to hear it!

Online content creation by college students continues to grow each year. (Pew, 2007)  Student content creation can take the form of a blog or web page, original online creative content (including audio/video content), or remixed, original online content fashioned into an entirely new creation.  According to the Pew Internet & American Life Project (2007), nearly two-thirds of all teenagers are content creators, up from 57% of online teens in 2004.  Locally, 42% of Penn State students report that their instructors required a multimedia project as a class assignment during the 2007-08 academic year. (FACAC, 2008) 

The focus of this project is timely, as the Libraries begin collaborating with Penn State's Digital Commons and building a new Knowledge Commons at University Park, integrating multimedia content creation within Libraries facilities and services.  Digital media creation will be at the center of the Libraries’ new Commons, physically and pedagogically.  Yet where does information literacy embed within the content creation process?  This project will explore student online content creation, analyzing how students acquire digital literacies, including information literacy, and how librarians can play an active role in educating and enabling students as they create new online content.

The role of librarians and information literacy in the content creation process is critical.  How is the definition of information literacy changing and meshing with other integral digital literacies?  In our online world, it is challenging for students to understand the central importance of effective library research and citing sources.  When students create online media projects culled from (and often remixed with) a variety of electronic sources, the issue becomes even more blurred and imperative. 

In “Student Content Creators: Convergence of Literacies”, Joan Lippincott (2007) discusses higher education’s need to prepare students to be effective content creators within their major or area of study.  Lippincott notes, “faculty and professionals from a variety of areas could collaborate to develop experiences that can be embedded in the curriculum to assist graduates in becoming sophisticated digital-content producers in their professional lives. This is most certainly a twenty-first-century challenge for higher education.”

It's Friday, friends!  :)  In honor of Friday (and one week down for Blogust), I'm posting something fun.








image from Garfield Minus Garfield


Have you seen Garfield Minus Garfield? This is really something.  As the site describes it, Garfield Minus Garfield is "a journey deep into the mind of an isolated young everyman as he fights a losing battle against loneliness in a quiet American suburb."  It's the story of Jon, with Garfield removed from each panel.  Now, why didn't you and I think of this?  (Of course, there's also Arbuckle, where Garfield strips are redrawn entirely.  Comics fans are an often critical and highly industrious lot.)

Perhaps the best part (aside from the truly bizarre and really funny strips that result from this experiment) is that Jim Davis is completely on board with it.  So much so that (as this post from ReadWriteWeb explains), Ballantine Books is publishing a collection of 'Garfield Minus Garfield', with Davis's blessing, and timed to coincide with the publication of a Garfield 30th anniversary book.  It's sort of like the Grey Album with a much more positive outcome.

As the RWW post points out, this is a great example of open content creation.  By allowing 'Garfield Minus Garfield' to exist and even continue, Jim Davis allowed an entirely new cartoon creation to coexist with his strip.  This is rare.  And wonderful.  And, quite possibly, the only collection of Garfield strips that I've ever completely enjoyed.

Happy Friday!

While I am trying this Blogust experiment (thank you, Wendy Girven!) I think I'll devote one post each week to sharing a favorite article.

This week, it's The Expert User is Dead by Leo Robert Klein. I love this article if only for the title.  It is a phrase that I know I've wanted to scream before in many an interface design meeting (or really, just any meeting.  Why not?)  "People!  The Expert user is dead!!" 

That would get a reaction. Just a few weeks ago someone mentioned to me that the next version of the CAT had better have the advanced search screen front and center, and I almost tore my hair out right then and there.  Ugh.

I'm hoping to have more time over the coming year to explore interface design and how public services librarians, who are front and center experiencing patrons' needs and wants, are central to the design process.  Klein's article goes a long way in explaining why we need to advocate for the vast majority of our patrons--users who want to access information for their needs quickly, easily, and in the simplest manner possible.

As The Social Times noted, it's been a slow summer.  Remember last summer?  The Facebook platform launched and there was lots to talk about.  This year, not so much.

That said, there are some new developments, including Google Knol.  I posted about this last December, back when there was a big kerfuffle over what Knol could and would be.  Was it a worthy competitor for Wikipedia?

Now, Knol is here.  My new, favorite blog, The Medium is the Message, has a great post on Knol and its implications for scholarly communications.  I can't argue with the author--he even wrote a Knol on Service Oriented Architecture to help prove his point.  That's dedication.  It's also smart--he repurposed some of his blog content to create the Knol.  Maybe that's what I should be doing throughout August instead of writing new content each day.

A commenter on The Medium is the Message asked, "How is a Knol different than a Wikipedia article?" 

There's one big difference (in my mind, at least):  as an author, you have the option of open, moderated or closed collaboration.  Open collaboration is essentially the same as Wikipedia--open, immediate editing by all signed in users.  Moderated edits and revisions are sent to the original Knol author for consideration, unlike Wikipedia, where the edits are immediate.  And closed collaboration articles, are, well, closed to everyone but the author(s).  In that respect, Knol is much more like Scholarpedia .  And considering that, Knol may be, as The Medium is the Message pointed out, much more relevant and useful to scholarly communication.  If I write a Wikipedia article on information literacy, can I claim it as a publication?  Of course not--the only way to track my actual contributions to that article would be to go back through the edit history.  A Knol, however, can grant primary ownership to me, and (if I so choose) provide an arena for feedback from other stakeholders and researchers in my area.

My other concern is how the primary author structure in Knol affects the responsiveness and accuracy of articles.  If I create a Knol, and then I drop off the end of the earth, how does the Knol continue to be updated?  If it becomes outdated, does its relevance (and that of Google Knol as a whole) also drop?  How will Knol control this?

Hello everyone!  I am in Chicago today for the CIC Google Book project.  Some interesting articles to read on the Project:
(Edited to add:  This is what happens when you bank blog content!  I unfortunately never made it there---big travel snafu at O'Hare.  A hugely interesting project nevertheless....)

• Toobin, Jeffrey.  Google's Moon Shot.  New Yorker (February 5, 2007).

• Smith, Charles Edward.  A Few Thoughts on the Google Books Library Project. EDUCAUSE Quarterly (No. 1) 2008.
  
  
• Some news on the entirety of Google Books being made accessible to students with visual disabilities.
   
• And finally, a view of how the Google Books API looks in a library catalog record. (note the "preview in Google link)  (via if:book)
  

For the last few weeks, I've had the fun of working with Allan Gyorke and others on planning the Learning Design Summer Camp.  Are you coming?  I hope so.  At the Camp, I'll help moderate a lunchtime discussion on Digital Literacy.  I think about one portion of this topic often--information literacy.  This is a nice opportunity to broaden my perspective a bit and think about how information, technology and other critical literacies co-exist and complement one another.

One paper that I've selected for the discussion cuts to the heart of the matter:  Student Content Creators:  Convergence of Literacies by Joan K. Lippincott.  Lippincott details how student content creation mandates the inclusion of information, technology, media and visual literacies in the higher ed curriculum.  She writes:

"...few academic programs have identified the preparation of students, whether undergraduate or graduate, to be digital authors of all types of content as a desired outcome of their studies. Can universities and colleges do a better job in readying students to become content creators within their professions?"

Lippincott also identifies the importance of media literacy, suggesting that in the future, this may be even more important than written literacy.  I think looking at a host of literacies, how they fit into and enable the curriculum, how they are tied to University learning outcomes, is an essential exercise.  Penn State is currently in the process of implementing a University-wide assessment program.  Thinking broader than simply identifying isolated examples of information literacy or techonology literacy is a wise example that may enable students to develop the range of skills they need to be inventive, responsible content creators.