Bill Mayer, the University Librarian at American University, has been implementing some fairly radical (for libraries) changes in how the library exists on campus and interacts with the university community:

Next Steps : Change at American University

I really don’t have much of an opinion on any particular changes, mainly because I think that any library needs to seek out the ways to best serve their community.  This means hanging on to traditional ways of service, while at the same time implementing out new tools and ways to connect people with what they seek.  The best results for this process will be different for different libraries and communities.

I was, however, impressed with his approach:

…one word kept coming up over and over again: trust. “Trust is the most important aspect of the work we do—without it, there can be no change, no movement, no growth,” he said. I asked him how one goes about building trust and his response was simple: listening. “You ask questions and then you listen to what others say and suggest, and then you build up together from there. That’s a key part. If an administrator doesn’t ask, or even worse, asks but doesn’t include aspects that staff suggest, then you lose trust.”

If he walks that talk, then I think he has a good chance of finding the right balance for American University.

As the economy continues to remain weak and budgets tighten for public libraries, here is a study that should encourage any community of the value of high speed internet access via their libraries:

Internet Use and Job Search (pdf)

In a nutshell, the rate of “discouragement” (giving up hope for finding work) is reduced by 50% when job seekers have high speed internet access, and is reduced by 30% when job seekers have access to dial-up internet.

This provides a justification for providing high speed access to the community, in that it will encourage not only a higher rate of employment, but also less desperation in those still seeking employment.

To take this one step further, I would suggest that providing training and support (perhaps through volunteers among job seekers) might improve a community’s results beyond the scope of the study.

found via LISNews, who found it via NPR

The American Library Association has announced the winners for their many youth categories:

Literary Award Winners

There are more categ0ries than I remember… scanning through the lists reveals many interesting titles.

2010 : The Only Year of the E-Reader is a post on Kit Eaton’s blog at Fast Company.  He argues that the days (well, years) of the e-reader are nearly through, because the multi-function tablet seems to be coming into its own.

I agree, but will take it a step further:  we are in a period of technological convergence.  Our cell phones are cameras, organizers, and many things once reserved for the realm of computers (such as web browsers and e-mail software).  Products like the iPhone, Droid, and Nexus have shown what can be done in a small form factor.

Take things a few steps further, and there is no reason that future devices won’t have larger screens (folding? flexible?) that will serve well as e-readers.  In fact, one can keep adding software functionality and see that these will be primarily limited by our ability to interact with them.  The best smartphone keyboards only approximate what we can do with a standard keyboard, and I suspect that fixing that problem will be a quantum leap for users.

I expect this convergence to continue, until we will be carrying our computers on our hips and simply connecting to whatever networks and user devices we need at a particular location.  This is a common thing for web browsing and e-mail, watch for it with other functionality.  And yes, the “cloud” will play a big part (even though we are currently seeing a backlash against it).

When this day (year) arrives, will libraries be ready to integrate these new behaviors into our routines?  Will we see “reference as a service” or location based offerings become part of our forte?  I suspect that it will be like many current library technologies… we will get there eventually, with some leading the way.

found via Bobbi L. Newman at Library by Day

This is a fantastic opportunity for the right organizations with the right ideas:

Ben & Jerry’s Foundation

Note that in their Funding Priorities, they limit grants to “grassroots, constituent-led organizations that are organizing for systemic social change”, so this would be something that might be useful to some Friend’s groups, or beneficial as something that a library could offer support to a community group (i.e. helping to provide books, tools, and access to underserved populations such as the homeless).

Think about how this could benefit your community, and who could effectively organize it.  Then think about how your library might be able to add value to the end result.

discovered via an OhioLink e-mail

If you spend any amount of time perusing Wikipedia, you will encounter articles on topics that are either exceedingly trivial, offbeat, or hard to classify.  For those who seek these articles, they have a page for it:

Wikipedia: Unusual Articles

This could be considered a place to check for offbeat reference questions (although the Wikipedia search function should offer better results).  Note that you would not want to assume that an article listed on this page would remain, as “all such lists have a risk of being deleted because of lack of neutral definition of what really is ‘unusual’.”

A few articles of note:

• The Magic Roundabout
• Buffalo buffalo buffalo…
• Beatosu and Goblu, Ohio
• George P. Burdell
• ISO 3103

found via ResourceShelf

The American Antiquary Society has a great visual reference on the Anatomy of a Catalog Record:

found via Catalogablog

While clearing out old lists of post inspirations, I ran across a post on Commonplace.net that still gets my brain going:

At my place of work, my desk is in close proximity to our two catalogers.  The conversations that ensue about cataloging standards, MARC, and such are often interesting, and occasionally stray into realms so esoteric that it becomes a challenge to keep up with the thread of conversation.

My rare contribution usually boils down to “I am an agnostic as to what standards are used, but the basic storage and retrieval of cataloging information should be as granular and relational as can be achieved.”

By granular, I mean that information should be divided into small, well-defined chunks.  When an author is listed as “Smith, John, 1947-” I cringe a little.  Dividing the author’s first and last (and middle) names into separate fields makes a world of sense, especially when you encounter authors with multiple middle or last names (or both).  Instead, MARC relegates the name into one string.  This also creates problems with cultural differences in how given and family names are presented.

Another problem is that this information exists separately in each bibliographic record.  If our data storage systems were to store author/creator information in a relational manner, we could have one record for “Smith, John, 1947-”.  This would make it much easier in the unfortunate circumstance that the author becomes “Smith, John, 1947-2010″.

Most library software uses granular and relational database methods for the storage of circulation and acquisitions information.  It is our bibliographic information that is stuck in an inefficient rut.

The strongest argument I can think of for changing this is that is is very easy to create scripts and use software to put together small pieces of information to create an easy-to-understand string; it is much, much harder to take that string and break it into well-defined and usable chunks in order to use the information in new ways.

The future of data is not so much everyone using the same specific standards, but using standards that can be compared and used in ways that are compatible.  We can easily build MARC records from a granular relational database; cataloging need not change how it views and edits records (not much, at least), but the current methods are holding libraries back.

Eric Leese Morgan demonstrates how to quickly make a 12-page book by making a few cuts in the pages and fitting them together:



About ten years ago I created about 20 handmade books of about 25 pages each.  I don’t thing this method would have been effective for that particular effort, but it is certainly something to keep in mind when one wants to put something together that looks decent and works well.