The Death of Imagination?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

In the second and tenth of Time’s 10 Ideas That Are Changing Your Life, Joe, Mika and the crew talk about cloud computing and stress. Joe’s comments about the value of serendipity when doing research in law school vs. Google’s giving you the exact answer, and Mika’s about stress and always being on really struck home with me.

Over 10 years ago I remember a conversation with some techies who were bemoaning the growth of Lego kits that were “something” (car, house, rocket, etc.) and the paucity of those that were just “make it yourself”. One person said that he’d seen children upset because they couldn’t exactly replicate the image on the box: somehow they’d failed. I remember buying one Barbie and then adding outfits, today it’s many Barbies with one outfit each. Where’s the imagination or sense of play?

Many people declare a “cyber Sabbath” or vow to turn off during their vacations. Then I see them still “on”, or hear that they read/saw/blogged something during this downtime. While I understand the addiction and the fear that by being “off” you’ll miss something big, I’m less and less worried about that. As educators, one of the things we must teach students is the value of quiet, reflection, concentration and the ability to be alone with an idea. Modeling that is critical – yet I fear many of us are failing to do this. How can we shift our culture and practice?

Even more important, what harm are we doing our children by not highlighting the importance of these things?

Membership Has Its Privileges

A recent kerfluffle about YALSA’s new policy regarding access to the awards list has broken out – LizB, as always, has the best round-up and analysis.

My thoughts?

I understand YALSA’s wanting to reach out to people who are not currently members, and I understand that they want to increase membership. The question of how expensive ALA (and YALSA) is might be part of the issue about falling membership, it may also be due to librarians losing their jobs and finding work in other fields. That’s food for another post, though.

The problem is that this decision presumes that the people who are looking at YALSA lists are all YA librarians, and that reaching out to them about the value of membership and events is a good thing (the goal, apparently, is to create an e-mail list of all these non-members who look at the website for list information). But what about students who are looking to nominate a favorite book for BFYA or the Excellence in Non-Fiction Award (as committee member on the latter, I’m particularly interested in that!)? Or parents (or grandparents, aunts, etc.) who aren’t blessed enough to have a librarian to guide them to the best new books for them to give as gifts?

Sarah Flowers, on the YALSA blog, says:

The purpose of this change, which is not expected to be temporary, is three-fold. On the one hand, one of YALSA’s Strategic Plan goals is member recruitment. Obviously people who are already coming to our website are candidates to become members. By collecting their email addresses, we can send them information targeted to their areas of interest, and perhaps gain some new YALSA members in the process. The second purpose is to find out more about who is using the website and how, so that we can do an even better job of serving both members and non-members. The third purpose is to identify and cultivate a list of advocates for teen services. Now more than ever we need to reach beyond the library community to engage people in advocating on behalf of libraries. Advocacy and activism is another goal in YALSA’s strategic plan, and organizations such as NTEN (The Nonprofit Technology Network) identify what YALSA is doing—collecting email addresses of those who support our cause—as a best practice for not-for-profits.

In less than two weeks, we have already collected over 1,100 names and email addresses, so clearly a lot of people think that providing this information is a fair trade for what they get from YALSA’s lists. Moreover, these teachers, parents, teens and others can be tapped by YALSA to support the great work that you do. We are proud of the work that you, the members, do for YALSA in creating these lists and awards, and we want to make sure that we’re promoting them—and YALSA—effectively beyond our own membership. YALSA depends on donations, sales from products and fees from CE to support the majority of the services that we provide and the work we do. Without avenues to promote these products and services, YALSA would not have enough funding to continue the same level of service it has been providing.

Let’s go back to one of my examples: someone wanting to nominate a book, or just get an idea as to what’s new and really outstanding for teens now has to give YALSA their e-mail (and it’s going to be every time they look at the lists, not just once) and can be “tapped for potential membership and advocacy”. If this were my parents, they’d go elsewhere for their information and think far less of YALSA. Why? Because they don’t want to be members (why should they join? they’re not in the library world or in the book world, they’re simply trying to get information for their next book purchase). And advocacy or donating? Unlikely that they’d do it, however much they like books or approve of teen services.

Over on the AASL website, they’ve locked down a lot of content on the theory that “membership has its privileges” – mostly this applies to Knowledge Quest magazine. Doug Johnson discusses that here. I do understand that there are reasons for organizations to block (or, more accurately, control access to) content, in part to encourage people to join. But is this the best way? Isn’t it better to have complete access to this stuff so that people see that there’s a value to joining? Creating a barrier for non-members to get information that passively leads to advocacy (as in “if you’re looking for great new books to buy your daughter, there’s this award/list that’s really helpful”) sends people away, not brings them in.

And making this move without telling people or allowing for discussion? For an organization dedicated to open access and freedom of information and sharing of information, that just seems wrong.

Getting over myself

One of the biggest blows to one’s ego is watching the work one has done be supplanted by another’s vision. This always happens when you leave one job, and I’ve often felt a little guilty over the “blame the predecessor” game that goes on when jobs change hands. Watching (via twitter and personal blog posts) and hearing friend’s reactions to what’s happened in their schools – to the collection, to the website, to the program – after they left their posts has been instructive.

This is the second time I’ve left a position where I worked hard to create a collection and program that were creative, collaborative and met the school’s needs. My vision wasn’t completely fulfilled when I walked out the door for the last time (thanks to lack of money or administrative/colleague support, and even my own ability to do what I’d thought was possible), and it rankled that someone else would reap the benefits of my work – or dismantle it completely. The most difficult piece is getting over myself, recognizing that others have a vision, too.

Having had a few months to reflect and revisit triumphs and failures, I’m definitely “over” myself. In a recent conversation with a good friend about one library I worked in, the good and bad of both my and my successor’s regimes were discussed – a great reality check. And what a pity we couldn’t work together, blending our strengths and balancing our weaknesses to provide a great program. Being able to learn from peers is a blessing, but a bigger blessing is having the opportunity to learn from your own past performance long enough after the fact to not have ego about it.

And what a great way to move forward, with a clear idea about the good and bad and the ability to capitalize on the former while minimizing the latter. Here’s to a 2012 that provides more such opportunities.

The Role of Reading

The recent twitter effort to get our senators to remember school libraries/librarians during their ESEA discussions made me think about the role of librarians – or, to be accurate, it was one of the things that made me think about our role. 

#AASL11 Reflections: overall impressions

Having the opportunity to spend time taking with peers, learning from them during formal presentations as well as in informal conversations is always wonderful, and the AASL conference certainly provides that opportunity. The focus on school libraries is something of a dual-edged sword, however. Why? Because when you’re in a walled garden you don’t get to see what your non-school-librarian peers are doing. I’ve learned so much from my public and academic library peers that could – and should – be shared with school librarians, but even at “Big ALA” that tends not to happen. Just my thought, obviously, but one we might want to consider going forward.

The Learning Commons had a great unconference focus, but maybe next time we include a tech playground (vendor free) and focus more on those not already presenting? I wish more newbies had the opportunity to go to the LC sessions as they were happening, to increase the conversation and the learning there.

Why weren’t they there? Because for the first time I can remember, each session I attended was full. People sitting on the floor, trailing out the doors full. And from what I’ve heard, this was the rule. So many congratulations to the committee for good session choices!

Minneapolis was also a wonderful venue: very walkable, friendly and warmer than my hometown! I don’t know how walkable Hartford CT will be, but after Charlotte (2009), Minneapolis was a great decision. The lack of need for the buses to and from the Convention Center was so nice and “green” (if only we could get rid of the program books, or make them an “opt in” feature!). And – gasp! – Starbucks wasn’t on every corner. Instead I got to have Caribou Coffee and Dunn Brothers. YAY for local chains!!

Finally, Dorcas sums it up better than I ever could:

AASL—Streaming and Teaming for Strong School Libraries | American Libraries Magazine via kwout

Let’s talk about PDA (part two)

(see Part One)

In addition to the questions of findability and privacy and information overload, the question of who actually owns the materials you’re acquiring arises. Let’s say a student is studying Portugal’s involvement (some might argue creation of) the Atlantic Slave Trade. I could purchase a physical copy of Hugh Thomas’ The Atlantic Slave Trade: 1440-1870 knowing that it would be on the shelves for students to use for many years to come. If it was available in e-book format, I could purchase a digital copy. However, I’d have to think about whether I wanted to be locked into a device (Kindle, Nook, Kobo or ???) or if I were going to support a BYOD program that allows patrons to download or read the book on their own device. What if we change devices, from Kindle to something soon-to-be-invented – how do we take that copy with us? The same holds for “purchase” via a consortium or content provider (say, Follett Shelf or OverDrive): if we don’t re-up our fees every year, how can I provide that content to my students year after year (the same question holds if the provider goes out of business)?

This might be a good idea if the books “purchased” are multiple copies of current popular fiction. When the demand for yet another copy of Twilight or the newest Sarah Dessen goes down, just stop renewing that title. But for research, it seems to me that this might not be the best model from a fiscal or a rights perspective.

Finally, there’s the question of note-taking. How easy would it be to take notes on digital content? The Kindle does allow for bookmarking and note taking, but not in quite the same way I see students currently taking notes and marking pages (using post-its or making copies/scans of relevant pages, of course). How easy is it to flip from e-book to e-book, comparing one fact or explanation or discussion to another? Again, this is one of the areas that a strong PDA program needs to address. And if we’re opening up the notes to the public, what are the odds that plagiarism will flourish?

So many questions to consider, and so many conversations still to be had. Let’s start them at AASL11.

Let’s talk about PDA (part one)

I’m not talking about allowing Public Displays of Affection in one’s library. Nor am I talking about a Personal Digital Assistant. This post is about Patron Driven Acquisition, a topic that I’m hearing more and more about given the rise of e-readers and e-books in our collections. How do we adjust our existing policies to include PDA? Do we adjust our existing policies? What limitations, if any, do we put on PDA within our institutions? What about findability: do these items go into our catalogs, or not? How do we measure the success of a PDA program?

Some schools are allowing students to recommend (or purchase) books via their Kindle/Nook programs but this isn’t quite what PDA means. Barbara Fister has a good description of PDA in her Inside Higher Ed column:

This new way of building collections emphasizes speed and choice, things that are popular these days. No need to wait for interlibrary loan; just click on the title in a large shopping mall of e-books and you can have what you want right away. One model that’s popular is to enter the e-book options into the library’s catalog. Browsing for a short period of time is free; browsing for a longer period is treated as a rental and the library pays a fee; and if a book is “rented” four times, the library automatically purchases the book.

During the recent LJ/SLJ E-Book Summit, I “attended” the academic library thread to see how I could better prepare my K-12 students for their next academic experience and was surprised by the conversation that was had about PDA.

The librarians were all very much in the Pro-PDA camp, with findability being the major issue they faced. One university was actually creating its own app to assist students! What about privacy? Well, as danah boyd often points out, teens think of privacy differently than adults do and in the academic realm, it could be very helpful to know that when you’re researching the Boxer Rebellion or the environmental changes brought about by El Nino that previous researchers found certain books and articles to be helpful. On the other hand, it could also be argued that part of doing research is to do the search part on your own, to see what information you can find on the topic (and if you miss something critical because you didn’t search well, or hard enough, that’s part of the learning process). That conversation, of course, leads to questions of academic integrity and what role research should play in the educational process.

But back to PDA. Shortly after the Summit, Barbara Fister posted The Revolution Will Not Be Subscription-Based, in which she discusses the financial implications of this mode of acquisition. Having recently had the experience of spending over $500,000 in six months to replenish a K-12 print collection, I’m painfully aware of the financial discussions. There are a great number of books that were purchased that haven’t circulated, books that should have been purchased in digital format, and books that have (already) outlived their usefulness. While we have added books requested by patrons (teachers and students) as soon as we can, the immediacy of acquisition in the PDA programs at the panelist’s colleges hasn’t been there.

Would joining a consortium that offers hundreds of titles for potential immediate purchase be a good thing? What about the financial side and the DRM issues (see my upcoming part two)?

As AASL11 approaches, I look forward to having these conversations with my peers and colleagues.

Be careful: there’s a baby in that bathwater

The other day I realized my iPod had decided that its time had come, so I made plans to go to the nearby Apple Store in Danbury. I also checked the online store to see what the possibilities are and learned that there was nothing that really met my needs: the Nano was only 16gig and the iPod was 160 – I needed “only” 30-40. Sigh. One friend asked why I wasn’t using my iPhone to hold all my music and my response was that I like having different machines for different functions. There’s less to go wrong, and if one part dies/malfunctions, I don’t lose everything (this hearkens back to my decision not to get an all-in-one tv/vcr).

That led me to reflect on some recent trends, particularly this idea that New!Improved!Shiny! technology tools are better than what we have already.

Making a hash of tags

Yesterday I had the opportunity to attend Senator Gillbrand’s first Women’s Economic Empowerment Summit, but this isn’t a post about the content of that summit. Instead, it’s about the social media aspect. When I got there, I asked about an official hashtag – one of the Senator’s legislative aides (she had her NY and DC office staff there, as well as several staffers from around the state) told me that “[she] really knew nothing about this twitter stuff” and, apparently, she was not the only 20-something there that was ignorant. The older aides kept reminding us to turn off our mobile devices, as though live-tweeting or otherwise capturing the sessions as they were going on was inconceivable (although NY1 and several news people were there).

After two panel discussions we had two breakout sessions, and in one the hashtag #runwomenrun was displayed. Was this the official summit hashtag? Apparently not – I learned in the second session that it was #nyuwomensforum. Nowhere, in any of the literature I was handed, was this mentioned.

I contrast that to the work being done on the upcoming American Association of School Librarians conference. At virtually every turn I’m told that the hashtag is #AASL11. Now, things haven’t always been that clear – at the previous conference, in Charlotte, there was some confusion as to whether it was #AASL09 or #AASL2009. And at a couple of other conferences there have also been confusion (full date vs. last two digits, usually, but sometimes the acronym to be used was in question). But there was never a question that there would be tweeting, and that a hashtag would be needed, and that some sort of consensus needed to form.

After the summit I had lunch with a friend, someone who is not on Twitter (she’s an arts therapist, so probably doesn’t need to be) and I gave her a quick primer on what different social media things she might want to get involved with. Then she asked about the hashtag and I told her that they could be confusing… and brought up the example I gave during my YALSA webinar. #bbw to librarians means “Banned Books Week”, but to the tv audience it means “Basketball Wives” and to a certain population of men it means “Big Beautiful Women”. That’s the beauty of, and problem with, folksonomies.

One place too many? or, I don’t communicate that way

As I was preparing for my upcoming YALSA Webinar on teens, social media and information literacy (what, you haven’t signed up yet?  I’ll wait while you do so) I thought about the places teens will go to get information for research.  I even asked a few teens about their experiences, and the “usual suspects” popped up – Twitter, FaceBook and blogs found through Google’s search.  What about Nings or Google+, I asked.  Their response was the equivalent of a blank face.

One had heard of a Ning, but didn’t see it as a place to gather information for school work.  It seems that Google+ hasn’t even crossed their radar.  As someone who has joined two or three Nings, I have to agree that it’s not my first stop for anything.   Even on the Ning I created, I feel that sometimes it’s difficult to find the time to go there to comment and participate.

I was also thinking about how we use social media, and how several of my friends won’t use it at all.  These are intelligent women, with accomplished careers, and they just don’t see the point of using Facebook or Twitter (much less the closed Ning I created for the class, or the web forum set up five years ago, or the Yahoo group discussion list…) One, a copyright lawyer (her motto is “making the world safe for logos”) even refused to participate in a special, one-time online-only edition of the alumnae newsletter.   Contrast that to a college friend who, I believe, has accounts on virtually every social media site out there, including a slew of them he never uses or goes to.  They’re there “just in case”.  One interesting trend I’ve seen among my students is that once they’ve left high school, their use of Facebook and other social tools dies down (until vacation, of course).  They seem to be busy living their lives, establishing themselves in their careers or growing their families.

It’s clear that younger generations are comfortable with being online, far more comfortable than my generation or those above mine.  And given my profession, I’ve had to become comfortable with it – but I’ve reached my limits I think.  Unless I can see a real value to joining a site, or learning a new online tool, I’m going to take a “wait and see” approach.  Yes, I have Google+ invitations, but thus far I haven’t responded: prove to me that the time spent there will be of more value than the time I spend elsewhere.  Nings?  Ditto.

Anyone else staring to have that “one place/tool too many” feeling?