There are many different library management systems (LMS) that a library can choose to adopt (although according to Fisher (2000) a library manager will only be required to make the big decision once or twice in their entire career). Consequently librarians often have little experience in selecting a system and find it difficult to make a wise choice.
Another factor that contributes to making the librarian’s choice hard is that each system is created and promoted by different organisations, and therefore comparing features can be quite complicated.
A comparison of two systems
Two recently developed systems include Koha and Vubis Smart. Koha is an open-source LMS which has been in use in libraries since 2000. As an open-source product it is constantly being enhanced by programmers and library technology staff. Vubis Smart is the latest creation from Geac, a well known provider of library management systems. Vubis Smart’s most recent version was released in May 2007.
A study of the websites for these information systems (The Koha Development Team & Katipo Communications 2005; Extensity 2006) revealed certain similarities between the systems and, as expected, some differences.
Main features unique to Koha
• Open source (which means no fees, regular maintenance and updates, improvements based on the library communities needs and no lock in to a vendor, but also less support).
• Add ons (called Koha Extensions, these are new coding written to add to the products original features).
• Useable on any platform (Windows, Mac, Unix or Linux. Vubis Smart cannot be used on Mac platforms).
Main features unique to Vubis Smart
• User education services (to train staff in the use of this new system).
• Project management services (to assist in implementing the new system).
Common features
The most common features are clearly the core functions: catalogue, circulation, acquisitions and serials management. Both systems also feature a web based, searchable OPAC. The Vubis Smart OPAC also provides auto spelling correction and fuzzy logic capabilities.
Another similarity is their compliance with library standards, including MARC21, UniMARC, and Z39.50.
As most LMS provide these basic utilities, a decision to choose one over the other must be made based on characteristics such as user-friendliness and attractive interfaces (Parab 2004). Both Koha and Vubis Smart claim to offer clear search interfaces. In fact Vubis Smart’s search interface can be tailored to specific libraries needs.
A trial of both products would reveal more differences and similarities. Obviously Koha has an advantage in that the trial (and adoption if chosen) would be free, however the support provided by Geac for Vubis Smart may be more important, depending on the library’s needs.
REFERENCES
Extensity 2006, ‘Vubis Smart – a new approach’, viewed 14 September 2007,
http://www.library.geac.com/page/vubiseng_LIB.html.
Fisher, S 2000, ‘On the quality and usefulness of the specification in determining a customer’s requirements: A survey of UK library system suppliers’, OCLC Systems and Services, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 168-174.
Koha Development Team & Katipo Communications 2005, ‘Koha’, viewed 14 September 2007, http://www.koha.org/.
Parab, N 2004, ‘A strategic analysis of Eloquent systems’, Simon Fraser University, viewed 14 September 2007, http://ir.lib.sfu.ca/retrieve/3996/etd0443.pdf.
Friday, September 14, 2007
Sunday, September 9, 2007
Developments in (online) library services: Improving service delivery
It is a well known fact that technology is advancing at a great rate. Libraries have not been slow to follow this trend and incorporate new technologies into their services. Virtually every library in Australia provides access to the internet and hosts a library web page with library information and an online catalogue.
Margaret Hyland’s article details some of the new developments the ACT Public Library is undertaking regarding online library services (Hyland 2006). Using the library web page as the foundation which provides library locations and program details, online searchable catalogue, account management facilities (including loan requests and renewals, personal details update facilities and interlibrary loan request options), the ACT public library is providing further developments.
Learning pathways
Learning pathways direct you to resources that will help you to learn in a particular area. The ACT Public Library have learning pathways for school students, young children, people learning computer skills and job seekers (ACT Library and Information Services 2007).
They employ this service to encourage lifelong learning and literacy. These goals support the local community aims of social inclusion.
Live homework help
This is a service where school students can speak to tutors over the internet and get help with their core subjects. It involves simultaneous exchange of information imitating a real conversation.
This service is important in encouraging literacy in young children and also in teaching them that the library (physical or virtual) is a good place to go to satisfy their information needs.
Digital literacy training
The ACT Public Library understand the significance of computers and the internet in today’s information society. They are committed to reducing the digital divide in their local area and because of this commitment they provide digital literacy training online using free web-based tutorials, and in person at library branches.
What online services are other libraries offering?
Many libraries are using online services such as ‘remote access to online databases, virtual reference services, online tutorials, e-reserves, document delivery, and the development of web-based portals and gateways’ (Nicholas & Tomeo 2005). Others are using blogs, social networking sites, RSS feeds, almost every emerging technology, to improve service delivery for their clients (both traditional and non-traditional).
With all these exciting new advancements in service delivery, it is easy to neglect traditional services. Hyland notes ‘the ACT Public Library has not discontinued other services and programs to resource expanding delivery of online services’ (Hyland 2006). This is the key to providing enhanced service delivery, rather than simply providing the same old service in new formats.
REFERENCES
ACT Library and Information Services 2007, ‘Lifelong learning at your public library’, viewed 9 September, last updated 6 March, http://www.library.act.gov.au/learn/summary.
Hyland, M 2006, ‘ACT Public Library online information services’, inCite, viewed 9 September, http://alia.org.au/publishing/incite/2006/03/print.html?ID=25.
Nicholas, M & Tomeo, M 2005, ‘Can you hear me now? Communicating library services to distance education students and faculty’, Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, vol. 8, no. 2, State University of West Georgia.
Margaret Hyland’s article details some of the new developments the ACT Public Library is undertaking regarding online library services (Hyland 2006). Using the library web page as the foundation which provides library locations and program details, online searchable catalogue, account management facilities (including loan requests and renewals, personal details update facilities and interlibrary loan request options), the ACT public library is providing further developments.
Learning pathways
Learning pathways direct you to resources that will help you to learn in a particular area. The ACT Public Library have learning pathways for school students, young children, people learning computer skills and job seekers (ACT Library and Information Services 2007).
They employ this service to encourage lifelong learning and literacy. These goals support the local community aims of social inclusion.
Live homework help
This is a service where school students can speak to tutors over the internet and get help with their core subjects. It involves simultaneous exchange of information imitating a real conversation.
This service is important in encouraging literacy in young children and also in teaching them that the library (physical or virtual) is a good place to go to satisfy their information needs.
Digital literacy training
The ACT Public Library understand the significance of computers and the internet in today’s information society. They are committed to reducing the digital divide in their local area and because of this commitment they provide digital literacy training online using free web-based tutorials, and in person at library branches.
What online services are other libraries offering?
Many libraries are using online services such as ‘remote access to online databases, virtual reference services, online tutorials, e-reserves, document delivery, and the development of web-based portals and gateways’ (Nicholas & Tomeo 2005). Others are using blogs, social networking sites, RSS feeds, almost every emerging technology, to improve service delivery for their clients (both traditional and non-traditional).
With all these exciting new advancements in service delivery, it is easy to neglect traditional services. Hyland notes ‘the ACT Public Library has not discontinued other services and programs to resource expanding delivery of online services’ (Hyland 2006). This is the key to providing enhanced service delivery, rather than simply providing the same old service in new formats.
REFERENCES
ACT Library and Information Services 2007, ‘Lifelong learning at your public library’, viewed 9 September, last updated 6 March, http://www.library.act.gov.au/learn/summary.
Hyland, M 2006, ‘ACT Public Library online information services’, inCite, viewed 9 September, http://alia.org.au/publishing/incite/2006/03/print.html?ID=25.
Nicholas, M & Tomeo, M 2005, ‘Can you hear me now? Communicating library services to distance education students and faculty’, Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, vol. 8, no. 2, State University of West Georgia.
Friday, August 31, 2007
What is a community of practice and how can an intranet support its activity?
Community of practice
‘Community of practice’ is a recently developed term, established (according to Robertson 2004) in 1998 by Etienne Wenger. Robertson (2004) describes communities of practice as the sharing of information between colleagues in an informal manner.
Communities of practice can exist anywhere. Wenger and Lave created the term whilst studying apprenticeships (Wenger nd), but Wenger explains that the application of communities of practice reaches governments, the education sector, the social sector and more. Most significantly the theory of communities of practice has been applied to business organisations. In particular, Robertson (2004) discusses how it is used within knowledge management organisations.
Wenger (nd) suggests communities of practice can be used to collaboratively solve problems, request information, share experiences that might be of value to others, share intellectual innovations, and coordinate activities, just to name a few!
Intranet
It is important at this point to clarify what an intranet is, before we consider how it can be used to promote the activities of a community of practice. The ODLIS definition of an intranet as a ‘web site designed to be used only by the staff or employees of an organization [sic]’ (Reitz 2006) provides a simple understanding.
Robertson (2004) elaborates, explaining that the intranet is an information resource for an organisation allowing publications to be shared across the intended community. Furthermore, Robertson argues that the use of the intranet can be expanded to advance the purposes of the knowledge-based organisation.
Using the intranet to support a community of practice
The first suggestion Robertson makes is to use the intranet to build a ‘home page’ for the community of practice. Although simple enough, this is a solid basis on which to build other, more creative features. It allows members of the community of practice to come together intellectually to share ideas, experiences and knowledge (whether members are physically connected or not).
Another feature of the intranet which Robertson mentions is that it allows a forum for publication of information contributed by the community of practice. Not only does this allow the members of the community to share and access their information, but it also provides an access point for others within the organisation. In this way it acts as what Robertson refers to as a ‘content repository’.
Within this repository, intranets can facilitate the use of weblogs, wikis, content management systems and other dedicated tools to promote the activities of the community of practice.
Obviously a community of practice cannot exist without the interconnection of people who share relevant knowledge. What Robertson suggests is that the intranet can be used to make this connection possible, and along the way can enhance the community’s capabilities.
REFERENCES
Reitz, J.M. 2006, ODLIS- Online Dictionary for Library and Information Science, Libraries Unlimited, viewed 30 August 2007, http://www.lu.odlis/.
Robertson, J 2004 ‘Intranets and knowledge sharing’, KM Column, Step Two Designs, last updated 1 May 2005, viewed 30 August 2007, http://www.steptwo.com.au/papers/kmc_intranetsknowledge/index.html.
Wenger, E (nd) ‘Etienne Wenger home page’, viewed 30 August 2007, http://www.ewenger.com/index.htm.
‘Community of practice’ is a recently developed term, established (according to Robertson 2004) in 1998 by Etienne Wenger. Robertson (2004) describes communities of practice as the sharing of information between colleagues in an informal manner.
Communities of practice can exist anywhere. Wenger and Lave created the term whilst studying apprenticeships (Wenger nd), but Wenger explains that the application of communities of practice reaches governments, the education sector, the social sector and more. Most significantly the theory of communities of practice has been applied to business organisations. In particular, Robertson (2004) discusses how it is used within knowledge management organisations.
Wenger (nd) suggests communities of practice can be used to collaboratively solve problems, request information, share experiences that might be of value to others, share intellectual innovations, and coordinate activities, just to name a few!
Intranet
It is important at this point to clarify what an intranet is, before we consider how it can be used to promote the activities of a community of practice. The ODLIS definition of an intranet as a ‘web site designed to be used only by the staff or employees of an organization [sic]’ (Reitz 2006) provides a simple understanding.
Robertson (2004) elaborates, explaining that the intranet is an information resource for an organisation allowing publications to be shared across the intended community. Furthermore, Robertson argues that the use of the intranet can be expanded to advance the purposes of the knowledge-based organisation.
Using the intranet to support a community of practice
The first suggestion Robertson makes is to use the intranet to build a ‘home page’ for the community of practice. Although simple enough, this is a solid basis on which to build other, more creative features. It allows members of the community of practice to come together intellectually to share ideas, experiences and knowledge (whether members are physically connected or not).
Another feature of the intranet which Robertson mentions is that it allows a forum for publication of information contributed by the community of practice. Not only does this allow the members of the community to share and access their information, but it also provides an access point for others within the organisation. In this way it acts as what Robertson refers to as a ‘content repository’.
Within this repository, intranets can facilitate the use of weblogs, wikis, content management systems and other dedicated tools to promote the activities of the community of practice.
Obviously a community of practice cannot exist without the interconnection of people who share relevant knowledge. What Robertson suggests is that the intranet can be used to make this connection possible, and along the way can enhance the community’s capabilities.
REFERENCES
Reitz, J.M. 2006, ODLIS- Online Dictionary for Library and Information Science, Libraries Unlimited, viewed 30 August 2007, http://www.lu.odlis/.
Robertson, J 2004 ‘Intranets and knowledge sharing’, KM Column, Step Two Designs, last updated 1 May 2005, viewed 30 August 2007, http://www.steptwo.com.au/papers/kmc_intranetsknowledge/index.html.
Wenger, E (nd) ‘Etienne Wenger home page’, viewed 30 August 2007, http://www.ewenger.com/index.htm.
Friday, August 24, 2007
Library 2.0
In his article on Web and Library 2.0, Maness (2006) calls for a standard definition for the term Library 2.0 to be used in the library science field. The definition he proposes is
‘the application of interactive, collaborative, and multi-media web-based technologies to web-based library services and collections’.
His definition rests heavily on an understanding of what Web 2.0 is and how it can be used to enhance library services.
So what is Web 2.0?
Maness describes Web 2.0 as developments that are ‘collaborative in nature, interactive, dynamic, and the line between the creation and consumption of content in these environments [is] blurred’. Essentially he is talking about the development of the static web into a community-based environment where everyone has the chance to direct the shape.
Leung (2007) considers Web 2.0 technologies all to be social networking technologies. In a sense she is right, since all Web 2.0 technologies are about interaction and user collaboration which is part of networking. Yet Abram (2006) explains that Web 2.0 is not only about community interaction but is also about ‘personalization [sic] and individualism’.
From Web 2.0 to Library 2.0
If Library 2.0 is the application of Web 2.0 technologies to library services, what does this mean for library services? Library 2.0 is about working with users to create user-focused products (Bolan, Canada & Cullin 2007). Librarians in Library 2.0 are no longer the gatekeepers to information, library users are becoming creators of content as well as users of content, traditional roles are becoming blurred. Librarians can use Web 2.0 technologies to promote this interactivity and to enhance traditional library services. It is important to note that traditional library services are not rejected, but are thrust forward to a whole new level (Huwe 2007).
What are the key elements of Library 2.0?
According to Maness (2006), the key elements of Library 2.0 are ‘synchronous messaging and streaming media, blogs, wikis, social networks, tagging, RSS feeds and mashups’. Leung (2007) adds to this list podcasts. Bolan, Canada and Cullin (2007) also include user added ratings or recommendations and, perhaps surprisingly, gaming.
Interestingly they consider Library 2.0 to entail not only technological innovations but also physical considerations. They point out that user collaboration in modifying physical library spaces will create a more inviting environment and is part of the overall of Library 2.0.
In a sense, all Web 2.0 technologies are mashups as they combine technologies to create new services (Maness 2006). The possible mashup creations are limited only by imagination. As Web 2.0 continues to develop, so too Library 2.0 will evolve as it is manipulated by the community it serves.
REFERENCES
Abram, S 2006 'Web 2.0, Library 2.0, and Librarian 2.0: Preparing for the 2.0 World', SirsiDynix OneSource, vol. 2, no. 1.
Bolan, K, Canada, M & Cullin, R 2007 'Web, library and teen services 2.0', Young Adult Library Services, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 40-43.
Huwe, T.K. 2007 'Surfing the Library 2.0 waves', Computers in Libraries, vol. 27, no.1, pp. 36-38.
Leung, D 2007 'What the bloody hell is Library 2.0?', Vic Specials, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 6-7.
Maness, J.M. 2006 'Library 2.0 theory: Web 2.0 and its implications for libraries', Webology, vol. 3, no. 2, article 25.
This is a basic overview of Library 2.0 and its applications. To take a look at Maness’ article, click on the link in my Library 2.0 Links to ‘Library 2.0 theory: Web 2.0 and its implications for libraries’. You can also check out the other Library 2.0 links to get more information on the subject.
‘the application of interactive, collaborative, and multi-media web-based technologies to web-based library services and collections’.
His definition rests heavily on an understanding of what Web 2.0 is and how it can be used to enhance library services.
So what is Web 2.0?
Maness describes Web 2.0 as developments that are ‘collaborative in nature, interactive, dynamic, and the line between the creation and consumption of content in these environments [is] blurred’. Essentially he is talking about the development of the static web into a community-based environment where everyone has the chance to direct the shape.
Leung (2007) considers Web 2.0 technologies all to be social networking technologies. In a sense she is right, since all Web 2.0 technologies are about interaction and user collaboration which is part of networking. Yet Abram (2006) explains that Web 2.0 is not only about community interaction but is also about ‘personalization [sic] and individualism’.
From Web 2.0 to Library 2.0
If Library 2.0 is the application of Web 2.0 technologies to library services, what does this mean for library services? Library 2.0 is about working with users to create user-focused products (Bolan, Canada & Cullin 2007). Librarians in Library 2.0 are no longer the gatekeepers to information, library users are becoming creators of content as well as users of content, traditional roles are becoming blurred. Librarians can use Web 2.0 technologies to promote this interactivity and to enhance traditional library services. It is important to note that traditional library services are not rejected, but are thrust forward to a whole new level (Huwe 2007).
What are the key elements of Library 2.0?
According to Maness (2006), the key elements of Library 2.0 are ‘synchronous messaging and streaming media, blogs, wikis, social networks, tagging, RSS feeds and mashups’. Leung (2007) adds to this list podcasts. Bolan, Canada and Cullin (2007) also include user added ratings or recommendations and, perhaps surprisingly, gaming.
Interestingly they consider Library 2.0 to entail not only technological innovations but also physical considerations. They point out that user collaboration in modifying physical library spaces will create a more inviting environment and is part of the overall of Library 2.0.
In a sense, all Web 2.0 technologies are mashups as they combine technologies to create new services (Maness 2006). The possible mashup creations are limited only by imagination. As Web 2.0 continues to develop, so too Library 2.0 will evolve as it is manipulated by the community it serves.
REFERENCES
Abram, S 2006 'Web 2.0, Library 2.0, and Librarian 2.0: Preparing for the 2.0 World', SirsiDynix OneSource, vol. 2, no. 1.
Huwe, T.K. 2007 'Surfing the Library 2.0 waves', Computers in Libraries, vol. 27, no.1, pp. 36-38.
Leung, D 2007 'What the bloody hell is Library 2.0?', Vic Specials, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 6-7.
Maness, J.M. 2006 'Library 2.0 theory: Web 2.0 and its implications for libraries', Webology, vol. 3, no. 2, article 25.
This is a basic overview of Library 2.0 and its applications. To take a look at Maness’ article, click on the link in my Library 2.0 Links to ‘Library 2.0 theory: Web 2.0 and its implications for libraries’. You can also check out the other Library 2.0 links to get more information on the subject.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
