This post, as my
final assignment for INF506, comprises of two parts. The first one is my
evaluative statement based on the three of my blog posts. The second part is my
reflective statement on my development as a social networker and the
implication of my new skills and knowledge on my work as information
professional.
1) Evaluative
statement
Firstly, my post on Delicious
describes my experience in using the social bookmarking tools. I posted that
when I first used Delicious and my experience with it was not easy. After
following Help-Delicious, I can manage
it much better. Delicious, like other social bookmarking sites, allows you to
share your internet bookmarks e.g. websites, blogs, and articles through a
website. Delicious is a good example of Web 2.0 tools that uses tags, social
networking and user-generated content. It allows users to add comments and tags
to describe the site as Help-Delicious suggests “comment and tags to better
categorize and contextualize why you’re adding the page to your collection”.
Delicious makes it easier for users to do explore what other users bookmarked
and in this way users with similar interests work together and share their
bookmarks.
 |
|
Source:
Social bookmarking web service: Delicious.com
|
Delicious also
provides RSS feed on most Profile pages to help users keep track of links from
other users (Help-Delicious). However, I find it not easy to get the RSS feeds
from the users I followed. Finally I successfully added RSS feeds by following
the “Developing for Delicious”.
Deitel (clause
3.10 Social Bookingmarking) explains that “Third parties can use the
del.ocio.us web services API
to build tools and incorporate social bookmarking functionality into their
applications” and shows Adobe Illustrator as an example. However, this issue
seems quite technical, and I don’t intend to follow it for now.
As a librarian, I can make
use of Delicious for sharing the tagged content to our school communities.
There is a good example from CSU School of Information Studies tags at
https://delicious.com/sissocialmedia/tags
(INF506 Module 2, p.3). Users may access those bookmarks from any computers and
discover new sites by searching tags, as well as subscribe to RSS feeds from
other users who may have common interest.
Secondly, the post on RSS
discusses how two organizations (Library
of Congress and CityU Library)
offer RSS to their users for enhancing their web-based services. RSS is one of
the Web 2.0 applications that allows libraries to offer high quality online
exposure and to promote web-based library services, and in this way expand the
scope of library facilities to their users (De Sarkar, 2012). Users may
subscribe to RSS feeds that cater to their needs. The use of RSS for tracking
due dates of library materials is a great service to users. The
Seattle Public Library allows users to sign up for notices not only by
email, phone, Library Elf but also by RSS to get help tracking due dates.
 |
 |
 |
I consider RSS to
be a good service for our library. To facilitate the use of RSS, adequate
training is necessary. CityU Library
does it very well. De Sarkar’s paper also demonstrates the feasibility of RSS
in different libraries. RSS not only serves the purpose for managing
information but also reducing information overload (Harinarayana & Raju, 2010). RSS is the most widely applied technology
and keeps users regularly updated about any library news. This tool is great
also for marketing the libraries and for enhancing the interactive behavior in
user communities.
Final post that I will discuss here is under the
title Web
2.0, Library 2.0, Librarian 2.0 .
 |
|
Source: Integrating Technology with Web 2.0 Resources
From: http://integratingnewweb.blogspot.hk/ |
In Library 2.0, we
emphasize the collaborative and interactive sharing among the user community in
a networked environment. Librarian 2.0 is the one who is willing to apply Web
2.0 technologies and tools to reach their user communities, to better serve
their needs, and to improve communication. Harvey (2009) also mentions that
librarian 2.0 is also willing to take risk in employing new resources and
tools, and is creative in developing various new service in the library.
Libraries need to incorporate new features to attract their users. According to
Bradley (2007) as cited in Harinarayana
& Raju (2010), libraries should
explore novel ways of communicating and attracting users through the use of Web
2.0.
Conclusion
Due to the
changing of users’ expectations, libraries are expending their services by
providing user-centered services via Web 2.0 features like blog, wiki, RSS,
social bookmarking/user tagging like Delicious, as well as social networking
sites like YouTube for video sharing, Facebook,/Twitter for sharing information
among users, Flickr/Instagram for photo sharing etc. Librarians engage with
various Web 2.0 tools to enhance their services and engage their users. Harinarayana & Raju (2010) state that collaboration and participation are the most
attractive features of Web 2.0, and that librarian must adapt these changes
judiciously and quickly.
References:
Developing for
Delicious. Retrieved from: http://delicious.com/developers
Harinarayana, N. S., & Raju, N. V. (2010). Web 2.0
features in university library web sites. Electronic Library, The, 28(1),
69-88. DOI: 10.1108/02640471011023388
Harvey,
M. (2009). What does it mean to be a Science Librarian
2.0? Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship, (Summer). DOI:10.5062/F4M906KW
Help-Delicious.
Retrieved from: http://delicious.com/help
Social
bookmarking, Deitel. Retrieved from:
Module].
Retrieved from Charles Sturt University Website:
No comments:
Post a Comment