Brian Rosenblum in Czech Republic

For those of you that attended Brian Rosenblum’s presentation on Libraries as Publishers at last week’s CALC Summit, you might be interested to know that your colleagues in Europe got to enjoy his presentation as well!

Patrick Danowski, a librarian from Berlin, posted a comment to his blog, Bibliothek 2.0 und mehr (Library 2.0 and more) earlier this week about a Library 2.0 conference he had attended in the Czech Replublic. In it, he blogged on Brian’s presentation. Congratulations Brian!

What a small world!

CASLIN: Libraries as publishers « Bibliothek 2.0 und mehr …
CASLIN: Libraries as publishers
Abgelegt unter: CASLIN2007, Open Access — patrickd @ 10:32

Der erste Vortragende ist Brian Rosenblum von der University of Kansas. Der Hauptfokus des Vortrags liegt auf “Electronic Publishing Services”. Er starte mit der Motivation wieso Bibliotheken Verlage werden sollen:

Incidentally, I ran across PatrickD’s blog at Library20.ning.com. If you haven’t visited this site, you definitely should. It’s like MySpace for academic librarians. Very nice venue for communicating and networking with other librarians around the world who share your interests!

Advertisements

Educause Gets Net Savvy

Here’s a new white paper published by Educause that is right on the money in describing students’ habits and attitudes and the need for information literacy. I haven’t had time to read the entire paper yet, but just the quote below looks highly promising. Thanks Diana Oblinger! Sorry you couldn’t make it to our CALC Summit in May!

EDUCAUSE Quarterly | Volume 30 Number 1 2007
Constantly connected to information and each other, students don’t just consume information. They create—and re-create—it. With a do-it-yourself, open source approach to material, students often take existing material, add their own touches, and republish it. Bypassing traditional authority channels, self-publishing—in print, image, video, or audio—is common. Access and exchange of information is nearly instantaneous.

Strategies and Frameworks for Institutional Repositories and the New Support Infrastructure for Scholarly Communications

This article by Tyler O. Walters of Georgia Institute of Technology appears in the October D-Lib Magazine (http://www.dlib.org/). I wanted to share it with our faculty and staff because it discusses an important shift in scholarly communication. Scholarly dialogue no longer takes place only in formal publications; the academy is beginning to recognize that important communication also occurs in informal ways. We are poised to be able to harness that intellectual capital and manage it ourselves in ways that adds to its legitimacy. The time has finally come when the balance of power is tipping away from publishers and towards owners of intellectual property. For those of us in small academic institutions, this represents a very positive trend that will eventually allow us to be able to provide our communities with access to information that was previously only available to the elite.

Strategies and Frameworks for Institutional Repositories and the New Support Infrastructure for Scholarly Communications
The definition identifies two broad categories of scholarly communication, formal and informal. Historically, librarians have been most concerned with the formal (i.e., journals, technical papers, conference proceedings, white papers, research reports). However, a growing body of informal modes, such as blogs, wikis, listservs, and other social software content, are being utilized by scholars and their students. Increasingly, new knowledge is exchanged through both formal and informal means.

Google Books

People are talking about an article that appeared in the Washington Post yesterday in defence of Google Books. One of our librarians, Karen Pardue, sent it to me today. You can read the article on Washington Post Web site.(You may be asked to create a free account before you can access the article.)

The author Richard Ekman, president of the Council of Independent Colleges, makes the case that many books published today are only printed in limited runs and that, in the future, many fairly mainstream resources may be hard to access. Because Google Books only provides keyword searching of and limited access to the content of these copyrighted materials, he argues that it should be viewed as a valuable access tool which will ultimately increase the public’s demand for printed resources.

Another way of thinking about this might be the trailers that film companies make available to increase the public’s desire to see the whole movie. In my opinion, the most important component to Google’s new service is the link they provide to “find this book in a library”. In my experience this option is not always as useful as one would hope. Case in point being a search I just ran as a test. I searched Google Books for “San Luis Valley”. I found a book called Minot, North Dakota; Oroville-Tonasket, Washington; and San Luis Valley Project, Colorado–water resource legislation : hearing before the Subcommittee on Water and Power of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, One Hundredth Congress, first session, on S. 641 … S. 649 … S. 1549 … August 5, 1987. When I clicked on “Find in a Library” I was taken to OCLC’s Worldcat database, which is great. But upon entering my zip code I was given only one holding for this book in Colorado. If I weren’t a librarian, I might not realize that this is a Government Document and that many regional and selective depositories (of which my library is one) probably also have this document, but haven’t cataloged it separately.

My point is that I think there is a lot of potential for access to previously inaccessible materials via Google Book. However, I would encourage Google to continue to develop ties with local libraries that lead readers from the Google search page to the more specific sources of information.

Google Away!