Here is a PDF version of a powerpoint presentation of my capstone research topic:
Kastellec – The Way Forward – Contemporary Issues in Digital Preservation
|
|||
|
This study explores users’ opinions on different models of reference service at one academic library. In recent years, some libraries have embraced alternative models of reference service, such as virtual reference, “embedded librarians,” and the “Brandeis-model.” In anticipation of a move to a new library, administrators of a large research university, appointed a team to select or develop a model that will serve users of the new library most effectively. A professional moderator will conduct nine focus groups, consisting of undergraduates, graduate students, and faculty members who are both users and non-users of the library. The aim is to gather qualitative data on users’ research needs and processes, and their opinions each service model. In order to solicit informed opinions of multiple reference models, the groups will be asked for their reactions to computer-generated simulations that demonstrate each model of service. The reactions will be audiotaped, transcribed, coded and classified, and then analyzed to determine preferences of service from the participants. Although the preferences identified through this simulated approach may not be generalizable to all reference environments, the results may be of application to other academic libraries considering various reference models but lacking funds for their own user studies. The Oconee County Libraries (OCL) has to keep track of information on over 100 pieces of electronics (computers, monitors, printers, etc.) Currently, a combination of Excel spreadsheets and an online tool from webjunction.org are used to record inventory information. The result is an unwieldy system that is time consuming to keep updated. The goal of this project is to create a database to record essential inventory data for both branches. It is hoped that, if the system performs well, it may one day be expanded to cover the other libraries in the Athens Regional Library System (ARLS). Most frequently, the system will be used to record or update the location and relation (e.g., which monitor is hooked up to which computer) of pieces of equipment. In its current incarnation, the database will only be accessed by the author (OCL’s sole IT staffer), but in part that will entail translating requests from the Library’s Manager and Regional Business Office staff into database queries.
The central premise of Calhoun’s report is that technology has “created an era of discontinuous change in research libraries—a time when the cumulated assets of the past do not guarantee future success” (2006, p. 5). Calhoun’s perspective is that this notion applies directly to traditional library cataloging. Yee argues that traditional cataloging is fundamental to the value of libraries (2007). Mann makes the case that research libraries’ primary mission is to serve the specific needs of serious scholarship (2006). Each is right in their own way. Mann and Yee, though, fail to recognize the changes that the coming of the Information Age has wrought on the world outside libraries. Far too much valuable information is outside the reach of traditional catalogs. Libraries must embrace technology to extend the grasp of catalogs beyond local holdings.
Access DefinedAccess is defined in libraries by the American Library Association (ALA) Code of Ethics, the ALA Library Bill of Rights, and a number of interpretations of the Bill of Rights issued by the ALA. Access inhabits the region where intellectual freedom and service intersect, in that it concerns applying intellectual freedom principles to the deployment of libraries’ resources and to shaping service to enable maximal use of those resources. Aspects of access are often defined in opposition to barriers to access; librarians are charged with overcoming, eliminating, or reducing physical, societal, procedural, and economic elements that hinder users’ information seeking (Rubin, 2004, pp. 45-47). Conceptually, access can be broken down into two categories: equity of access and access to information. “Equity of access means that all people have the information they need-regardless of age, education, ethnicity, language, income, physical limitations or geographic barriers” (American Library Association, 2010). The other half of the equation is access to information—what information does the library make available to users?
Intellectual Freedom is “[t]he right under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution of any person to read or express views that may be unpopular or offensive to some people, within certain limitations (libel, slander, etc.)” (Reitz, 2010). The other notable legal limit on free speech is obscenity, defined as a work that, taken as a whole, includes offensive sexual content (according to community standards) and lacks serious literary or other merit (Preer, 2008). A few seminal American Library Association (ALA) and Canadian Library Association (CLA) documents define intellectual freedom in libraries. The application of intellectual freedom in libraries has been, and continues to be, a source of tension.
|
|||
Site Index | Admin Mike Kastellec: Potfolio by Mike Kastellec is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. Powered by WordPress & Atahualpa |
|||