Conul Annual Conference 2016 - Call for Papers

Guest post by John McManus on behalf of the Conul Conference '16 Committee

Going Further Together: Collaboration in Irish Academic and Research Libraries

CALL FOR SUBMISSIONS

The second annual Conference of the Consortium of National and University Libraries will take place on Wednesday 1st and Thursday 2nd June 2016 at the Sheraton Athlone hotel.

The overall aim of the conference is to consider the broad challenges facing academic and research libraries in Ireland. The conference will identify and debate these challenges and provide an opportunity for staff to network, learn, discuss and share their expertise and best practice.

CONFERENCE TOPICS

CONUL invites papers and posters which address the following areas:

Teaching and learning collaboration
Suggested Areas: Partnerships with students, Faculty partnerships, Digital literacies

International collaboration
Suggested Areas: Twinning, Exchanges, Other

Research collaboration
Suggested Areas: Research data management, Open access initiatives, Digital libraries, Collaborative publishing

Collaborating in the community
Suggested Areas: Schools, Public libraries, Archives (e.g. local authorities), Community groups

Collaborative collection development and management
Suggested Areas: Conservation and preservation, Collaborative storage, National approach to digitising unique and distinct collections, Collection development and management, Resource description, union catalogues

User experience (UX) collaboration
Suggested Areas: Partnerships with academics, support services or students

Technology collaboration
Suggested Areas: Shared library management systems, Collaborative digital storage, Collaborations on devices and equipment

Staff development collaboration
Suggested Areas: Job swaps, Collaborative academic publishing, Mentoring

Other Strategic Collaboration
Suggested Areas: Other areas of strategic collaboration

SESSION TYPES

Presentations (20 minutes with 10 minutes for Q&A)

Lightning Talks (10 minute presentations)

Poster (A1 size)

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

Complete the online submission form here before 5.00pm on Monday 15th February, 2016 and include:

Title of the Presentation or poster
Name, affiliation, job title and short biography of lead and corresponding author
Name, affiliation, job title and short biography of co-author(s)
Abstract (300 words for all talks, 100 words for posters)
Session type (presentation, lightning talk or poster)
Conference topic addressed (see above)
Contact email address

KEY DATES

Monday 15th February, 2016 Call for submissions closes at 5pm
Tuesday 15th March, 2016 Notifications issued
Tuesday 22nd March, 2016 Final confirmation date for successful applicants

SPEAKER INFORMATION
Please note that conference speakers will be required to register for the full residential conference and presenters may be recorded for live streaming. A recording of the presentation and a copy of the slides may be published online after the conference. Posters may be published online after the conference.

BURSARY
CONUL is also delighted to announce a bursary which will fund the recipient’s attendance (registration and accommodation) at the 2016 CONUL Conference. The bursary will be awarded based on a poster presentation which will be exhibited by the successful applicant at the 2016 conference. The poster should address an aspect of the conference theme Going Further Together: Collaboration in Irish Academic and Research Libraries.

Application is open to staff of CONUL member institutions who have not previously presented at conferences. The closing date for application is 15th February 2016.

WEBSITE
The conference website, with all latest updates including profiles of our keynote speakers, is live and can be viewed here:


Last but not least, feel free to chat about us on twitter using hashtag #conulac16.

Read More

Project Gutenberg: collection development and economics

This post discusses Project Gutenberg’s collection development trajectory. It also considers and applies to PG selected aspects of the evolutionary stages of the digital library life-cycle model as proposed by Calhoun (2014, pp. 159 – 177).

Candela et al. (2007) note that an online digital library is any virtual organisation that comprehensively collects, manages and preserves digital content, as well as offering it to respective user communities according to codified policies. This particular description of an online digital library is fitting for the purpose of this post since a well-defined collection development policy (CDP) determines, arguably, the level of success of a digital library. A CDP can be characterised as "a formal written statement of the principles guiding a library’s selection of materials, including the criteria used in making selection and deselection decisions (Reitz, 2004).

The process of developing a collection over time is guided by a library’s mission statement. Another important function of collection development includes resource sharing, which specifically involves the sharing of collections, data and facilities. For an in-depth discussion on collection development within the digital library context consider Jones (1999) and Joint (2006). Fundamentally, collection development frameworks apply to any library type, whether analogue, hybrid, or digital as is the case with Project Gutenberg (Jones, 1999, p. 28).

Project Gutenberg owes its growing collection to a vibrant online community of content providers. But what does the construct of community in an online environment mean? Lee, Vogel, and Limayem (2003) explain that such communities are “cyberspace(s) supported by computer-based information technology, centred upon communication and interaction of participants to generate member-driven content, resulting in a relationship being built” (p. 51). There are other definitions of virtual communities (see for example Craig and Zimring (2000); Ho, Schraefel, and Chignell (2000)), including one that describes them as computer-mediated spaces where there is potential for an integration of content and communication with an emphasis on member-generated content (Hagel, 1999).

One way of tracing the evolution of Project Gutenberg’s electronic library collection up till now can be achieved through the application of the theoretical life-cycle model of success factors for digital libraries in social environments (Calhoun, 2014, pp. 160-176). The model was specifically developed for the digital library context and adapted from Iriberi’s and Leroy’s (2009) original life-cycle model for online communities which represents an in-depth theoretical and practical treatment on the diverse activities of online communities. Calhoun’s (2014) adaptation contains four cyclical stages: 1) inception, 2) creation, 3) growth, 4) maturity. Each stage holds distinct sub-components, also called success factors, of which a limited (targeted) selection will be discussed below in relation to Project Gutenberg.

Inception
Purpose and focus
From the outset, Project Gutenberg’s collection acquisition strategy was built around the idea of
creating a vibrant user and contributor orientated online social environment. Calhoun (2014) notes
that digital libraries tend to succeed if they are “backed by passionate, committed builders on the
one hand and enthusiastic, vested community participants on the other” (p. 162). The committed
initiator and start-up builder was Michael S. Hart (2015), whose public e-text library strategy is based
upon two clearly communicated premises: 1) straightforward open access to and use of e-texts (i.e.
low legal and technological entry barriers), 2) digital artefact inclusion on the basis of the “bang for a
buck” philosophy to appeal to and capture 99% of the general reading (online) public Michael Hart(1992).

(Virtual) community orientation
One way of effectively encouraging existing as well as recruiting new PG contributor volunteers is
through the characterisation of practical experiences and motivations via its “Volunteers’ Voices”
feature at http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Gutenberg:Volunteers'_Voices. These tend to be framed around the “love of good literature”, “free availability” and the belief that “people could be influenced for good by what they read”, among other reasons. Fundamentally, Project Gutenberg’s social structure can be described as a “virtual volunteer organisation” (Jones and Rafaeli, 2000), which excels at sustaining mutual-interest individuals that keep on contributing to the communal material acquisition effort. Towards the end of 2003, already about 2,000 people were doing some form of constructive work for PG (Project Gutenberg, 2014).

Volunteers are facilitated through comprehensive support documentation provided for on the Project Gutenberg homepage (Project Gutenberg, 2007). Different levels of user involvement are possible: proofreading of an e-text, procuring of source material, donating money or promoting Project Gutenberg on one’s website through a PG widget (Project Gutenberg, 2011). This idea of encouraging pro-active user involvement is also emphasised by Witten, Bainbridge andNichols (2009), who note that “libraries can evolve from exclusive suppliers of information that users consume into a partnership where both the library and its users supply material (p. 67). Project Gutenberg represents a radically reversed content acquisition model, whereby the user/contributor fully absorbs the role of the acquisition librarian. Essentially, this approach goes against the traditional library mediated digital library eco-system where librarian oversight is absolute despite the obvious downsides: “most digital libraries do not allow users to contribute in this manner, missing out on potentially valuable sources of quality improvement” (Witten, Bainbridge and Nichols, 2009, p. 68).

Creation
Needs-based
Project Gutenberg’s collection development policy enables the success of an ever-growing collection
since “individual volunteers choose and produce books according to their own tastes and values, and
the availability … of the book” (Project Gutenberg, 2014). This broad policy enables the project to
organically adjust to the varying needs and expectations of its user audience over time. Other digital
libraries, e.g. in the academic user domain (e.g. the university context), are considerably more
restricted by stringent material selection criteria that need to satisfy the particularities of teaching
and learning programmes, cost control and licensing requirements among other variables (Jones,
1999, p. 29).

Growth
Interaction Support
Since 2000, Distributed Proofreaders (DP) supports the development of e-texts for Project Gutenberg (Lebert, 2008). DP enables the web-based process and assists in the conversion of analogue public domain books into e-texts. Volunteers contribute to the workflow and share the workload by, for example, splitting book conversion projects into individual pages, which significantly speeds up the process. (Distributed Proofreaders, n.d.).

Individuals register with the site first before they can contribute to Project Gutenberg. Distributed Proofreaders aims to act as a one-stop shop for this purpose and offers a detailed help section, called FAQ Central, to support its volunteers on various subjects including proofreading, formatting, creating and managing projects, as well as mentoring and a dedicated public mailing list, among other topics (Distributed Proofreaders, n.d.).

The existence of DP reinforces the assertion by the Center for History and New Media (2010), the providers of Omeka, that “Web 2.0 technologies and approaches to academic and cultural websites … foster user interaction and participation” (para. 3). Essentially, gutenberg.org and pgdp.net/c/ (DP) form a symbiotic relationship that actuates virtual community participation.

At the same time, Web 2.0 technologies need to be designed in such a way that they can keep on attracting, growing and, most importantly, maintaining a vibrant community of dynamic content contributors. Lampert and Chung (2011) rightly point out that community requirements must be consistently met during the planning process of new digital library projects in the sense that key decision points are clearly defined, and processes are well created and documented (p. 83-90).

Quality content
Calhoun (2014) notes that a digital library can be considered a candidate for lasting success if it is perceived by its users “as a hub for a certain type of content that is essential to their shared interests”, including the ability of building up a critical mass of material content (p. 171).

Evidently, Project Gutenberg is very good at doing both if one considers its collection development trajectory over time: “to this day, nobody has done a better job of putting the world's literature at everyone's disposal … and to create a vast network of volunteers all over the world, without wasting people's skills or energy.” (Lebert, 2008). Until the mid-nineties, when the Internet started to become more ubiquitous, Michael Hart was more or less the sole contributor to the project. It then started to expand rapidly through the involvement of a growing number of enthusiastic volunteers in many countries: 1000 books by August 1997; 2,000 in May 1999; 3,000 in December 2000; 4,000 in October 2001; 10,000 in October 2003 and 25,000 books in April 2008 (Lebert, 2008). Presently, the project offers over 50,000 e-texts completely free of charge (Project Gutenberg News, 2015).

Maturity
Ongoing funding
Baker and Evans (2008, pp. 46-47) identified eight classic economic models for digital libraries including the free model, which is somewhat applicable to Project Gutenberg. Here, the “costs of set-up and maintenance are absorbed by the owner rather than passed on to the user” (Baker and Evans, 2008, p. 46). The reality is that the free model in the Gutenberg context is conditional in the sense that it operates as a public digital library relying on the financial support and e-text contributions of the wider public.

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation operates as a tax-exempt registered charity drawing on individual peoples’ financial donations (Project Gutenberg, 2014). As a result, its organisational structure is lean and low-cost by definition; only two paid part-time individuals are presently employed. The project is flexible and adaptive in its approach to generating donations. PG also generates funding streams through the services offered by micro-crowdfunding platforms. Since 2012, Project Gutenberg uses flattr.com (n.d.), which enables individuals to contribute to PG (and other projects) on an ongoing basis at flattr.com/thing/509045/Project-Gutenberg (Teller, 2012).

Arms, Calimlim, and Walle (2009) observed that “financial sustainability is the Achilles' heel of digital libraries”. PG’s very business model is rooted in the idea of collection building through an army of volunteers, lean operations management, and a highly optimised operational cost-base. The project’s continued success depends on the fusion of two distinct roles: e-text contributions and financial support through a committed volunteer base.

Arguably, the risk of failure is mitigated by the fact that the individual volunteer feels very much empowered. (S)he is encouraged to influence every aspect of Gutenberg Project. Contributors are given the opportunity to shape the project’s daily operation, as well as its strategic projection into the future (see an example list of volunteering opportunities listed at gutenbergnews.org/category/volunteers/).

The road ahead
It is challenging to speculate on what further developments could take place within the Project Gutenberg universe. Maron, Smith and Loy (2009) identified various factors for ongoing success and stability in digital library projects: 1) dedicated and entrepreneurial leadership, 2) a clear value proposition, 3) minimising direct costs, 4) developing diverse revenue sources, 5) clear accountability and metrics for success (p. 13-27).

Project Gutenberg delivers on all of the above as previously outlined. The project is pro-active and embraces opportunities to expand its appeal. It links up with a variety of like-minded partners and affiliates, including, for example, Wattpad (Wattpad, n.d.), which lists thousands of titles accessible for computer or mobile devices at m.wattpad.com (Project Gutenberg, 2014). Wattpad, just like ManyBooks.net, delivers PG titles to the mobile reader, which expands its potential user base significantly. For a full list of affiliates and partner see Partner, Affiliates and Resources (Project Gutenberg, 2014).

An interesting link-up is also OCLC’s WorldCat indexing of targeted Project Gutenberg books, which currently includes over 1,400 titles: https://www.worldcat.org/search?q=au%3AProject+Gutenberg.&qt=hot_author.

As a strategy to expand revenue resources, Maron, Smith and Loy (2009) consider the approach of licensing content to users or commercial publishers (p. 23). In principle, this idea could be considered by PG, whereby copyright owning authors and smaller-scale publishers could be invited to contribute to the project to get access to an expanding user base. However, there are significant cost imperatives involved.

Though the professional licensing business can be lucrative – professional clients, in particular, have the ability and     motivation to pay for this content – there are significant costs associated with meeting the unique needs of these demanding customers in a competitive environment. Professional clients require custom tools, functionality and metadata to address their specific needs, and labour-intensive customer support must be available. Maron, Smith and Loy (2009, p. 24)

Realistically, these expectations cannot be met as PG’s legal status and operational model revolve around the volunteer principle. Commerciality, by definition, is outside of the equation.

Read More

Merry Christmas...

via Wikipedia Commons

On behalf of the Libfocus Team I would like to wish you all a very Happy Christmas and a wonderful 2016.

Thanks to all of you who support us, who write guest blogs for us, who comment on our blogs, who share our blogs. Thanks to everyone of you for every bit of support.

2015  was a good year for Libfocus and I hope that 2016 will be even better. Reminder again that we LOVE guest posts - so if you have an idea that you think would make a good blog post - do get in touch, we would love to hear from you.

My library hope for 2016 is that you recent graduates seeking work find it. The end of 2015 saw a number of library posts being advertised - hopefully this continues apace and you passionate recent grads can enter our workforce

I also hope that the austerity drive that has shut down so many libraries, or reduced services significantly, particularly in the UK, does not continue in 2016. Here's hoping that the #saveourlibrary campaign(s) meet with more success in 2016.

And finally, to repeat, here's hoping you all have a lovely christmas and a wonderful new year...

Read More

How to Become a Library Director

When I was just starting out in libraries, I took advantage of resume review workshops, attended career fairs at my library school, asked my professors to talk about the job market, and reached out to working librarians for career advice. A few years later, I've reviewed resumes at workshops, spoken at career fairs, devoted class time to job search strategies as a library school instructor, and been approached by young librarians looking for career advice.

Having now been on both sides of the job search education issue, I have realized that what would have been most useful to me when I was just starting out is if librarians were willing to spend time considering what job search strategies worked for them and then shared those strategies.

I'll start. Here's how I landed my dream job, broken down into five broad steps.

1. Read lots of job ads.

Job ads don't just tell you what positions are available, they also tell you what skills, experiences, and traits are needed in order to get the job. As soon as I realized I wanted to be a library director, but long before I was qualified to become one, I began spending time each week reading job ads, and I made of list of the qualifications I saw most often.

2. Build your resume.

Once I had a list of qualifications, I went about earning them. I could earn some items on my own outside of work – technology skills, for example. Other items could be practiced constantly, like being cool under pressure or being an excellent communicator. But the process to earn the biggest items – like facilities, budget, and staff management – was more prescribed: I had to start with tiny projects in order to earn small projects in order to earn medium projects in order to earn large projects. For example, a minor facilities project at one library – having a built-in bookshelf removed and the plaster behind it repaired – led to a larger facilities project at another: planning and overseeing the installation of new electrical and data ports in order to update an older building without a major renovation. This larger project helped convince my supervisors at that same library to let me take point when the roof sprung a leak.

This was a time-consuming and somewhat daunting process – the list of qualifications I had put together was long – but it was also a fun, or at least a satisfying, process. My enjoyment of the work and the time it took to earn these qualifications made me more confident that I wanted to be a library director, and that I would be a good one.

3. Have a specialty.

While gathering the qualifications I identified by looking at job ads, I also established a specialty that would both set me apart as a candidate and help me succeed as a director. I worked to become skilled at library assessment – gathering and interpreting data, both qualitative and quantitative, to identify where a library is doing well and where it has room to improve. I paired my assessment skills with my experience teaching to become someone who can not only gather and interpret data, but also explain it in a compelling way to a non-expert audience.

I enjoy assessment and I enjoy teaching, so it made sense for me to concentrate on these areas. To identify a specialty that might work for you, I recommend staying on top of our field: Read LibFocus, LibraryJournal, In the Library with the Lead Pipe, and INALJ. Follow librarians on Twitter. Join ALA Think Tank on Facebook. Subscribe to /r/libraries on Reddit. Identify libraries and librarians doing exciting things and keep an eye on them for inspiration. Go to conferences. Find something in libraries that you're interested in and become an expert.

4. Apply.

Don't wait until you've gathered all your qualifications and have become the perfect candidate before applying for your dream job. We're never finished building our resumes (how boring would that be?) and no candidate is perfect. So when you find a job you're interested in, apply for it. You might get it. But even if you don't get it, the application process is enormously helpful. Like anything else, applying takes practice. Tailoring your resume and cover letter to specific jobs, knowing what to wear, becoming confident in your skills, listening and speaking well during your interview – all of these are skills that you need in order to become a library director, just like facilities, budget, and staff management.

5. Ask for advice.

The most useful thing I did when I was about to apply for my first directorship was ask a director at another library to look over my resume and cover letter and give me feedback. I had met this director only once before – we traded cards at a conference – and I was a little nervous to ask her for help; we were essentially strangers. But librarians are a generous and helpful group, used to answering questions and giving advice. And the advice I received from my now-colleague was invaluable. When you are applying for your dream job, ask a librarian for help. And, when you are in a position to help someone else, do so.

If you'd like me to take a look at your resume or cover letter, connect with me on Twitter.

Read More

Library Ireland Week: Job Swop to Newbridge Public Library

Guest post by Ciarán Quinn, Maynooth University Library

On Wednesday the 25th of November instead of my usual dash to work through the back roads of Kildare from Newbridge to Maynooth University Library, I had the pleasure of starting my working day with a stroll of a mile or so to Newbridge Public Library (and County Library) on the Athgarvan Road. The reason for my visit you ask? It was part of the Job Swop Scheme for Library Ireland Week.

To my shame (and also the cut backs in opening hours in these recessionary times) I'd never actually been inside the building so I was looking forward to having my curiosity satisfied. It is a landmark Art Deco building in the town and was built in 1936. This building now houses the "History and Family Research Centre" with the Library itself in a more modern adjoining building. The Library administration is housed in the Rivebank Arts Centre which is adjacent.

I was met by Suzanne Brosnan (my Swop partner) who had already spent one day on the job swop with me in Maynooth University and she gave me a tour of the Library. Later in the morning she continued my tour with an opportunity to see how the administrative side of things worked and to meet some of the Library staff. I was really impressed with the many services they provide. Earlier in the morning I also had a chance to see one of their excellent services in progress with the arrival of the local National School Children to return, renew and borrow books. I was really impressed by their enthusiasm and thought what a great job they are doing in passing on the pleasure of Libraries to a future generation. Thanks to the other Suzanne for looking after me.

After a nice lunch in the Riverbank Arts Centre I spent the afternoon with James Durney (Historical Researcher with the Kildare Heritage Company and Author) who works in the Kildare Local Studies Dept. and Karel Kiely Genealogist. She was closely involved in the development of the Kildare Online Database of Genealogical Records. Both were very generous with their time. I received a fascinating insight into the Archives in Kildare with James and the processes involved in developing a genealogical database and how to search for your family history in the most effective way with Karel. So overall a day well spent and an introduction to a great Library Service on my doorstep, I'll be back! Thanks Newbridge Library and thanks to the Library Ireland Week Jobs Swop scheme - a great initiative.

Read More

IATUL – Hannover, Germany: July 2015

Guest post by Niamh Walker-Headon, Systems Librarian ITT Tallaght

This report details the IATUL Conference in Hannover, Germany in July, hosted by the TIB library. Any errors are my own.

The conference theme was: Strategic Partnerships for Access and Discovery

There was a very full programme, and presentation delivery was at times so fast that I could barely take photos of slides fast enough! 5 ½ days of events were provided for delegates, with amply time for social networking, and visiting exhibitor built into the programme. The first ½ day was for registration and welcome reception, where I succeeded in meeting the only other Irish delegate.
The 1st and 2nd day were structured with a general session addressed with keynote speakers and then subsequently parallel topic steams.

Day 1
Day 1’s keynote speakers both brought to the attention of the general assembly that there is a need for significant re-consideration and change to copyright and it’s associated laws, for several reasons. From the opportunity to allow for greater specificity in search results, to the needs of the planned single digital market in the EU, the argument was made for change. In parallel to this many speakers called for the mandating of open access publishing for research being undertaken using public funding / grants, or in publicly funded institutions. Issues around peer review and the green / gold open access publishing model were outlined and discussed.

The parallel session I attended dealt with managing change, covered diverse topics: from the implementation of beta ILS platforms to gathering consensus when selecting key performance indicators, and from transatlantic research into library staff’s expectations from their managers as leaders, to the proposing of the PRUB theoretical model to validate library strategy.

Day 2
Day 2’s keynote speakers spoke of open access publishing and the potential crisis facing library regarding the management an implications of big data.  Ms. Van Wezenbeek focused on the how and why of open access publishing, making the argument that everyone should have easy access to research, as science grows when you spread and use results. She called for the FAIR system for academic publications. Mr. Balke argued that libraries have a big data problem, and need to care more about the semantics in the metadata that they index, as the aim is to provide access to knowledge. The proposal was made that index retrieval interfaces are needed for every discipline, type of use and type of person… which differentiate at the level of detail provided in the result. For example: the results to match the question ‘What is the Higgs Boson particle?’ need to be different for users at the primary, secondary and tertiary levels of education. He also discussed the reliability of Science 2.0 and automatic data mining.

Ten posters about a variety of topics were presented in lightening talks.

The parallel session that I attended focused on library environments and included several sessions outlining library refurbishment projects, from financing, to the installation of green technologies, from architect’s involvement to the need to develop flexible spaces for both users and staff.  A very useful overview of trends on e-journal subscription models and discussion of ‘big deals’ was presented. This session closed with a presentation focusing on the integration of Research Information Management Systems and Institutional Repositories into academic libraries, as the library has the data management skills to make these projects successful.

Day 3
Day 3 was a study tour to the Herzog August Bibliothek in Wolfenbuttel, where the German national output for the 17th century is housed in 11 buildings around the centre of the town, and the Volkswagen visitor centre [Autostadt] where some fantastic displays were available for perusal.

Day 4
Day 4 saw a series of shorter talks many of which highlighted services provided by or being developed by libraries of the T9 Universities in Germany [The 9 Technological Universities]. These included:
• the EZB open URL linking service, which includes the Library of Congress amongst it’s customers
• a session on automatic harvesting, indexing and provision of multimedia open access objects using the infrastructure of wikimedia commons and wikidata
• detail about how the TIB AV Portal leveraged semantic technologies to deliver academic video content
• information about the introduction of video abstracting in the sciences
• An outline of the VIVO open source research management information system
• Blog provision / hosting as a service to academic communities
• App development for the exposure of visual collections
• 3d printing at the Radcliffe Library.

Day 5
Day 5 entailed a visit to the TIB library at the University of Leibnitz in Hannover. Attendees were treated to a presentation on the library, including details of its holdings, services, and co-operative projects, such as document delivery with Subito. This was followed by a tour of the physical library itself, which only has the last 5 years of materials and the prescribed course readings available on the open stacks, and uses off-site storage for other materials, which can be requested for consultation.

Full report is available at http://anleabharlannai.blogspot.ie
Photographs from the conference are available at: https://photos.google.com/album/AF1QipNwgfDYYiEtV4UskBXoGehJXeAAm5d2vkfA7OPx
Conference presentations are available at: http://www.iatulconference2015.org/programme

Read More