Notes on LJ & SLJ 2012 Library Ebook Usage Reports

I am glad to read LJ & SLJ 2012 Library Ebook Usage Reports. I wrote down some facts that especially impressed me when I read the "Academic Library" and "Public Library" parts. (see below)

An impression I had about the general US library eBook market is that eBook is a much more urgent reality for public libraries than for academic libraries. I am really surprised to see the collection and circulation numbers in public libraries this year, which are increasing in a much faster speed than I expected. (Circulation number from 11,000 last year to 44,000 this year, WOW!) Another difference here is public awareness, low level of awareness is a bigger problem for academic libraries.

But on the other hand, it's interesting to see that eBooks represent a higher percentage of acquisition budgets in academic libraries than public libraries. I am not sure how much of the difference can be explained by the limited budgets of public libraries. But clearly, budget is a huge issue in a broader term.

For library eBooks, I cannot agree more with a comment by Professor Dave Lankes, that publishers will not sell eBooks to us just because we complain. We should actually do something more constructive.

Like my previous post mentioned, OA is definitely something all libraries must participate in unity as soon as possible. Some libraries are adopting the eBook model developed by Douglas County Public Library, but more libraries should join, because it ensures that libraries own the eBooks rather than just subscribing them. Moreover, libraries should participate the campaigns on Unglue.It to unglue eBooks to public domain. It doesn't take each participants a lot of money; but if more people/libraries can join, we will definitely have more free resources in the future.

My note:

Academic Library:

• There are no dramatic changes in this field after 2010. And the relationship between vendors and libraries are not more contentious. 
• EBooks represent 9.6% of academic libraries acquisition budgets; and participants predict that the number will increase to 19.5% by 2017.
• 83% of the institutions say they purchase eBooks of "perpetual access" (which may or may not mean that the library own the eBook); 71% choose "subscription".
• The percentage of institutions which are using PDA increase from 16% two years ago to 31% in this survey.
• 52% of the participants identify low perception as the barrier to user eBook access, which has been lower since 2010. But 50% of the participants say that users prefer print, which has been increasing after 2010.

Public Library:

• The mean number of eBooks offered by libraries increase from 4,350 last year to 10,000 this year, while circulation increase from 11,000 last year to 44,000 this year. 
• EBook reader (90%) is the dominating device used by library members to read eBooks borrowed from public libraries; tablet (66%) is the second most used device. 24% of the public libraries lend eBook reader for home use.
• Physical barriers are the most important barriers to eBook access, like the long time to wait and limited number of eBooks available.

"What if they don't care about the library?"

"What if they don't care about library?" For me, this is one of the biggest questions of Participatory Librarianship/New Librarianship.

Based on my old America/China dichotomy, American libraries shouldn't have this problem, because libraries here have a much bigger user base. But after I came here, I realized that this was actually a problem here. I even heard this question in IST511 given by Professor Lankes.

But even so, this is a larger problem in China.

I heard a lot about how Chinese people don't care about libraries, public or academic ones. For example, some people just complain about why the libraries cannot offer some very specific resources, which, in fact, are offered by these libraries. This case is far from the worst. What's worse is that a huge number of people have no idea what a library is; they come to the libraries to buy books. Or worse, they don't know anything about a library.

Chinese libraries are doing marketing, in various ways. But even the best examples may not work effectively, because, guess what, people don't care. That's what I heard from some librarians from Tsinghua University Library, which is one of the best libraries in China and just won the 10th IFLA International Marketing Award earlier this year. Moreover, a large number of Chinese libraries are using Sina Weibo as a way to promote the libraries. Except for few ones, most of these libraries are suffering from either "echo chamber effect" or meaninglessly few followers. In this term, I definitely agree with Dave that marketing itself cannot make a difference.

Back to 511. In class, when one of my classmates asked Dave what if library members don't care about the library. I think Dave made a good point that we should try to find a way to make them care, either by working harder, or by finding what they need or care about, beyond libraries. So here comes the boundary of 511, since it's only about the worldview rather than any real world skills needed by a librarian, I still don't know how to actually make members care, but at least I know there is a direction that may work. That's why I look forward to the "Library Planning, Marketing, and Assessment" class next semester.

"Death of Library", a Revisit

(Picture from: http://www.agrav.net/gallery/v/travel/Melbourne/Sculpture+out+the+front+of+State+Library.jpg.html)

I love this sculpture outside the State Library of Victoria, Australia. It always reminds me that the threats faced by each libraries are real and potentially vital.

Even after I bought the theory of Dave that we should not talk about "save the library" any more, I still think these two points are not totally contradictory. We can be positive and awesome, yet we must know all the real problems our libraries are having and try to solve them. It's my "optimist pessimism" (or "pessimist optimism" if you like).

Good weekend, everyone!

Kevin Dames on Library Pirate Paradigm

As the last session of the "Lawyers, Librarians, and Pirates" conference (hashtag:  #unysla) organized by Upstate New York Chapter of SLA, K. Matthew Dames, who is currently the Copyright & Information Policy Adviser in Syracuse University, gave an insightful yet informative presentation about copyright, the construct of policy, the shift of paradigms as well as how libraries can survive in such an environment. 

By tracing the US history since 1970s, Mr. Dames stated that after intellectual property replaced manufacturing as the foundation of the US economy, intellectual actually took the form of traditional property, namely, intellectual property became something that can be owned and controlled exclusively, which is still the case nowadays. In order to gain a bigger market share across the world, American businesses and government constructed the idea of pirate and push the concept to other countries, which resulted the effect that is called "normalization of copyright laws" by the presenter.

On the other hand, the culture in the library is characterized as free and as transparent as possible. So the presenter identifies the conflicts between the piracy model as well as the free model in the libraries. Even though the side of libraries seems to win in recent events like Cambridge University Press v. Georgia State University, Authors Guild v. HathiTrust as well as Random House's recent claim that libraries own their eBooks, it is clear that the distribution chain of digital contents doesn't necessarily include any middleman, libraries being one of them; and what's more, middlemen are actually being killed in the market. 

For Mr. Dames, since the reformation of copyright law is almost impossible based on his observation, the only way library can survive in the market, or even reverse the market, is to adopt the Open Access model. But since the future of Open Access is totally open, and it's almost certain to come in the future, recently, Copyright Clearance Center are helping publishers to transform from traditional publishing models to Open Access model, because publishers understand that, the only way to predict the future is to create it, which is exactly what libraries should do in order to play a bigger role in tomorrow's world of digital content. 

Another point Mr. Dames made is that libraries have the furthest distance away from publishers, however, they are also the nearest to library members in the chain. As a result, libraries should figure out how to better serve the members. And moreover, libraries should become publishers themselves, not only in order to take control of the contents, but also to become more familiar with the general process of publishing. 

QR code: a short pathfinder for #605thurs

LibSuccess Wiki's "QR Code" page: http://www.libsuccess.org/index.php?title=QR_Codes

I always think I am a fan of new technologies (I am becoming less so, btw), so after hearing about the fact that QR codes were being used by some libraries in 2010, the "QR Code" entry in LibSuccess Wiki was the first place where I got a lot of information about how QR codes are actually used in libraries.

Meredith Farkas. (2011, October 28). QR Codes Rock the Library on Your Phone. Sports. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/librarianmer/qr-codes-rock-the-library-on-your-phone

Meredith is also the creator of the aforementioned LibSuccess Wiki. (Her blog is really awesome, BTW.) This presentation offers how libraries are using QR codes in a systematical way.

Michael J. Whitchurch. (2011). QR Codes and Library Engagement. Retrieved October 24, 2012, from http://www.asis.org/Bulletin/Oct-11/OctNov11_Whitchurch.html

Power to the Patron Q&A: BYU’s Michael Whitchurch on Mobile Trends in Libraries - The Digital Shift. (2011, November 10).The Digital Shift. Retrieved October 24, 2012, from http://www.thedigitalshift.com/2011/11/mobile/power-to-the-patron-qa-byus-michael-whitchurch-on-mobile-trends-in-libraries/

Brigham Young University's Harold B. Lee Library did a great job to implement QR codes in the library and share their experiences of these projects.

They used QR codes to conduct a library audio tour and to reserve learning rooms. The results indicated that the second function was used much more than the first. Visibility as well as user needs are the major reasons of the differences. 

Because when the library conducted the QR codes projects, the penetration of cellphones on the campus was only 14%, it's inevitable that QR codes could not be very popular (maybe it is still the case today). What impressed me was that the library learnt a lot from the "failure", for example, using a LibGuides page to offer QR codes instructions (this page cannot be found anymore), making QR codes more beautiful to attract students and other suggestions are mentioned in the resources. Also, it is important to think how to use technologies to add value to the library members as well as tracking the usage of these technologies. 

Failure itself is not bad at all. It's a true failure if we cannot learn anything from the past. Also, since using QR codes in the library is basically for free, the library won't lose a lot anyway.

There are also some practical guidelines for libraries to consider when they are using QR codes. David Fiander's blog post is a short but useful one. Using mobile friendly website, offering wifi in the spots where the library offers QR codes, using short URLs to make QR codes more user- and machine-readable are the most heavily discussed topics.

14 Million Americans Scanned QR or Bar Codes on their Mobile Phones in June 2011. (2011, August 12).comScore, Inc. Retrieved October 24, 2012, from http://www.comscore.com/Insights/Press_Releases/2011/8/14_Million_Americans_Scanned_QR_or_Bar_Codes_on_their_Mobile_Phones_in_June_2011

Report: QR code use rising in unexpected ways | Articles | Home. (2012, August 17). Retrieved October 24, 2012, from http://www.prdaily.com/Main/Articles/Report_QR_code_use_rising_in_unexpected_ways_12422.aspx

These are only two of the reports about usage of QR codes outside the library world. However, the decision made by the library about a specific technology is sometimes totally dependent on the bigger-world scenario. 

According to these reports, the usage of QR codes has been increasing since 2011. However, the increase of number sometimes doesn't mean too much. In the first report, .comScore reported that, in 2011, even after a huge increase, the total number of the people who scanned QR codes in their cellphones in June 2011 only represented 6.2% of all American mobile users. Is it worthy using a technology only used by such a small fraction of people? 

It's good to know that the number of people who know about or use QR codes is still increasing in 2012. But I am not sure whether the number can ever reach the critical mass or not. I don't want to predict the future -- librarians should be open to the future though. But I totally understand why some technologists don't think QR code has a bright future, for example, this "implementingqrcodesinlibraries.org" made by Aaron Schmidt is a perfect example. In principle, I don't think any technology requiring people to install an extra app can be very popular, not to mention that it can only be used on smart phones.

One more point is that, how many of you feel it embarrassing to stop and scan a QR codes on the street? I sometimes do.

Any ideas about using QR codes in libraries? Please share with me!

Some ramdom thoughts after this week's #ist616 class

Notes: below are some of my notes in today's IST616 class (Resources Organization and Management) and a little bit of explanations of these pieces of notes: 

1. shelving can be improved anyway -- to be not so intimidating or even win the members to use the resources.

As proved by a lot of cases, by offering graphic category signs, rather than the numbers or character-number combinations, library classification can be better understood by library members. "To win the members to use the resources" as mentioned by someone in the class is a beautiful vision.

2. how classification can be beneficial to the community -- by user behavior assessment?

As mentioned in Twitter, my central interest/concern toward cataloging (and classification) is how library cataloging can be more relevant to the library members. In terms of this, you can say that graphic display of categories is a way to make cataloging more relevant; but I feel it's not "good enough". I love the idea of some school librarians to design a classification which is more consistent with the curriculum in the school. This is a perfect example that cataloging can be relevant with the local community. It may not be easy, but it's definitely worthy trying.

Someone in the class said that DDC numbers, by large, were to be used to locate resources rather than to be understood. For me, it's an assumption, and a very dubious one. "Objective users needs assessment" (as put by Marie) is important in this term. But I still doubt how people can perceive their own needs toward library catalog. When I was a cataloger in China, I used to conduct a user needs survey about the OPAC of the library. The most surprising finding was not how awful our OPAC was. It was the fact that a lot of library members did not even use our OPAC! Since we haven't offered print catalog for many years, I wonder how people can find resources (at least effectively). Sure, the library changed a much better OPAC recently, but it's extremely hard to change people's behaviors.

3. what about having the idea that library classification is just to spot the resources

Library classification are still mainly used for physical resources. And since physical resources are becoming less important in all kinds of libraries (academic much more than public though), is it OK to maintain the current usage of classification in physical libraries, and wait for its death? (Sure, classification has a bright future to be used by Internet.)

4. How people find resources in different locations, say, in google and bookstores

Library member cannot find resourced effectively in libraries, which may or may not be because of the current cataloging and classification system. However, as someone said, people cannot find information effectively in bookstores and on the Internet! So what does it need to be a good library discovery mechanism in this term?

5. There should be a way to incorporate user's classification, but is it possible? 

One random idea I have is that, library organizes a tag day (or week) in which library encourages members to make tags to library collections they think are relevant to a certain topic (for example, Halloween in this month). And libraries display all the tagged resources in a place to increase the exposure of the collections. 

Tag is a dilemma for libraries. Most of the libraries are lack of a big enough member base. However, without this member base, it's hard to form a real online community, since the rate of active members is basically the same in nearly all kinds of websites.

A conversation about LIS education and library practices

The relationship between LIS education and library practices (what the relationship is, what the relationship should be, et al.) is one of the most heavily discussed topics in this field.

Andy Woodworth's blog post "Ten Things You Won’t Find On Your LIS Class Syllabus" is the last article I have ever read and made me think a lot about this topic. You can say that I have been thinking about the gaps between LIS education and the every day practices until now. And this blog post is kind of a brief reflection on this topic. In his post, Andy offered a lot of his suggestions to LIS students about the aspects that LIS education fails to cover, for example, the "new vs. old librarians" meme, many of which are very interesting in the light of New Librarianship.

Several days ago, I posted this question on Facebook. My question was:

There is definitely a gap between library science education and every day practices. But what's that?

A number of replies were received, including:

• Business/financial training
• Management
• Actual hands on practice
• Conversations/collaboration with practitioners and marketing
• There is a disconnection with what the field actually needs right now
• Community engagement/public affairs

From this list, you can see the inputs from both library students and library practitioners. You can say that all these ideas are very important. I interviewed a manager in Bird Library several weeks ago. The lack of management training is one of the topics he mentioned during the interview. And I have been wondering about the business model (economics) of libraries, behind the huge dispute around eBooks and other topics. However,\ the most interesting reply I got was from Aaron Tay, a senior librarian from Singapore. He asked, was there really a gap?

I don't think there is a standard answer to this question. People from different backgrounds definitely have different opinions. His answer kind of reminded me of the blog post written by Prof. Lankes about how librarians should be positive about our expertise and future. In this sense, I feel so lucky that I am in SU. I can see people around me are trying the best to engage with libraries and library practitioners in the real world. Prof. Lankes himself has a close relationship with the practitioners. Moreover, 511, which is like the most realist class I have ever taken (or a "worldview" class as what Prof. Lankes calls it),  is also a very practical one, in which we need to finish all kind of tasks in groups, some of which are tied closely with the real world, like MOOC.

But I do think that, even in here, there may still be a gap between what we are doing as a student and what we are going to do as a librarian. Last week's 605 was one of the few cases where I have sensed the gap. Mallory and I gave this presentation about database for the reference class. I think this class is very practice-based; however, when I read the textbook, I cannot stop doubting that some of the information is out-of-date or maybe too idealist. So we tried to make this presentation practice-based rather than textbook-based. There were some differences we can observe, which I hope I can talk about in the future.

I have been a librarian. However, sadly, my past experiences cannot help me a lot in this issue. First, I worked in China. Second, the librarianship in China is not as professional as in the US.

I think this question will be one of the questions that will haunt me a lot in the future. However, hopefully, I can become a better librarian in the future after I try all the means to answer it.

Library personas

I have always been saying that I am a fan of eBooks. I mean, I AM, except for few cases. For example, I subscribed to the print version of Library Journal. After making the decision, I thought it may not be the best idea I have ever made, because, first of all, I assumed that all the articles you can read in the print version of the journal can be found on the website; moreover, after getting the first two issues, I found that most of the contents were book reviews. (I cannot stop wondering, is acquisition still that important nowadays?)

But on the other hand, I did read an article that was not published on Library Journal's website from the October 1st issue. This is Aaron Schmidt's Persona Guidance, which is a very interesting article, and  I failed to find it in his column on the website

I read about Europeana's seven personas years ago. I was really excited about it. Clearly, it's a useful way to design and assess your library's services. After a second thought, compared with general user interviews, I think designing library personas can be a more systematic approach to research your members. (But I do think massive user interviews are one of the sources to design library personas.)

In the article, Aaron mentioned a number of the components of a library persona profile, namely, members' names, photographs (even though all the personas are fictional depictions), goals, quotes as well as the ages.

In the real world, Europeana's personas include each user's personal information, interest, media use, searching strategy as well as his/her relationship with Europeana. HathiTrust's personas are very similar with the one of Europeana, maybe because that both of them are digital library projects. Certainly, they are different compared with a "general library". So I felt it interesting to find the library personas designed by Cornell University Library. The library identified three group of library members: faculties, graduate students and undergraduate students, compared with the more general user groups of Europeana and HathiTrust. And for each of the users, there are personal background, library interactions and transactions, key experiences as well as luxuries, comforts and necessities.

However, all these examples seem to fail to consider the goals of the library members, which was mentioned in Aaron's article. It's understandable that it's hard to summarize members' goals into patterns, but as Aaron stated in the article:"A persona's goals are probably the most important piece of the puzzle ... because user motivations and goals should be a focal point, so you need to ensure that the goals of each persona are realistic."

It reminds me of OCLC's “Geek the Library” project, whose focus is actually on library funding, but the value the libraries transfer to the community is "What's your hobby/geek? And no matter what it is, the local library can support it." The whole project is a collection of the personal narratives of library members, which is not a portfolio of personas per se, but is similar with that (in terms of its focus on individuals), and has a stronger focus on members' passionate.

Library persona sounds like an interesting way to think about the library members to me. So, I am curious about what other libraries are using this method besides the above examples.