Tag Archives: technology

A Joy of Organising

Posted on by acrystelle
1

I love to organise. Depending on what needs to be organised, I’ll organise to the very last detail. I enjoy planning, seeing a project take shape, understand what I need to do to achieve or complete a task. I guess you could say that planning and organising, at least for me, is a way of getting the process of organising and using planning tools, out of my head so I don’t have to stress so much about completing things. I’m also a visual person, and have a need to see progress is being made.

 

This year – oops, allow me to correct that – last year I did away with my usual diary and went completely electronic, with a task manager and iCal on my iPhone to manage every day. Guess what? It took the joy I had out of organising and being organised. Electronic formats did not get me excited about an upcoming event or project completion. My commitments and appointments didn’t seem as real. I side-stepped a lot of my Pilates time and replaced it with work, even though I had blocked out time in my ‘diary’.

 

Towards the end of last year, I bought myself I diary. Yes, I’m going back to a good ‘ol paper diary. I’m bringing back the joy I have in organising. Already I’m loving it.

 

In my new diary I record my exercise, appointments, due dates and, inspired by the Bun-Toting Librarian, I’ve started to write down my mood, succinctly of course. At the beginning of each month I have room to make a list of focus areas and projects, as well as goals and what I’m grateful for. I’ll still use a task manager to manage the finer tasks for projects, but my diary is a small private space for me, away from my work and other commitments on the iPhone.

 

Over the last year however, I have developed a habit of entering appointments into iCal. I have my iPhone with me wherever I go. Like the shift to electronic organising, returning to a paper format will take some adjustment. Say or think what you will. So what if I appear to be going backwards? There are a number of great looking apps in the App Store right now I could download and use. Perhaps my position will change once I have a tablet; maybe I perceive the iPhone as not big enough to comfortably record what I need to. I like trying out new tools to facilitate organising and planning, but nothing beats a paper diary……at least for now.

Information Architecture and Digital Libraries (Part 3)

Posted on by acrystelle
Reply

“Information Architecture and Digital Libraries Part 2” discussed the importance of understanding the information environment when delivering an information service in a digital space. Information needs inform the three focus areas – context, content and users – of defining an approach to information architecture design for a digital library.

Information architecture is most concerned with increasing ‘findability’ of content within a shared, information space. (Batley, 2007, p. 3)…….What is findability?

You know what? I can’t define ‘findability’. In fact, I don’t think I’ve seen a definition. Where ‘findability’ is discussed in the literature, I’ve found only descriptions and discussions about what may make up or determine it. How can I discuss something I cannot define (yet)?

Okay, I’ll take a slight side step and let you in on some feedback I’ve received for my paper. Attempting to identify relationships between key concepts of information architecture into an over arching framework was, in the marker’s words, brave. Certainly brave to do so in under 3000 words. If my framework is it be solid, for lack of a better word, or well developed, I need definitions of key concepts. With this said, I don’t think my thinking around key information architecture concepts are completely lost or illogical. What I’m trying to achieve is to separate the key concepts in a way which defines each of their roles as they contribute to information architecture practice and design. To discuss key concepts separately is definitely a challenge…..and I do love challenges.

So here goes….

Findability

Findability. If I break down the term I would think it to mean that content is able to be found within a system. The focus here then is to provide or enable this ability. An understanding of the information environment will ultimately determine what makes content findable. Measuring or evaluating how findable content is, will be different in each scenario. A definition for findabiity will be dependent on the context in which the library is situated – expectations of the system, technology used and available in the organisation, (in the case of an engineering technical library) operational and regulatory requirements and business objectives – as well as the content the library holds in the collection and how it is managed and maintained (Morville & Rosenfeld, 2007, p. 25). Findability is then firstly achieved with an appropriate response to the library’s information environment. Secondly, findability is achieved with organising, classifying and describing content – effectively, content management practices.

Content management involved in library management and information architecture practices, underpin the entire library system architecture (Batley, 2007, p. 145). Core concepts involved in content management, more like content maintenance, are: -

  • Indexes and indexing
  • Classification
  • Cataloguing
  • User-centred design

(Batley, 2007, p. 4-9).

The diagram below depicts the relationship between understanding the information environment (which informs the focus and approach) and content management practices to achieve findability.

Metadata

Establishing findability requires identifying how each item or document type can be distinguished from another. Findability lies in the ‘groundwork’ of library processes and practices. That is, the library content’s metadata. For an engineering technical (digital) library, appropriate and consistent selection of metadata used to catalogue each technical document increases control and improves management of the collection (Batley, 2007, p. 143). As metadata is usually associated with resource discovery and retrieval, there is no doubt of the direct influence metadata selected for resource description has on the possible ways in which the resource can be searched within the digital library system (Batley, 2007, p. 144).

I can now start to see the concept of findability take some shape….

Focus: resource discovery and retrieval.

Orientation: context and content.

Achieved by: library’s understanding of and response to the information environment, in the form of appropriate content management processes and practices.

Morville, P. & Rosenfeld, L. (2007). Information Architecture for the World Wide Web (3rd ed.). CA, USA: O’Reilly Media, Inc.

Batley, S. (2007). The I in information architecture: the challenge of content management. Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives, 59(2), 139-151.

Audit Your Personal Learning Environment

Posted on by acrystelle
2

No doubt there are others like me who have signed up for, downloaded or acquired tools, applications and devices which make up our Personal Learning Environment. There is every intention to integrate these into our daily or weekly routines. Perhaps we just wanted to try them out, used them for a specific task or project or have used them only on an ad-hoc basis at most. It’s time to clean up!

In an earlier post, where I distinguished a PLN from a PLE, I hinted at my own definition of a Personal Learning Environment. There appears to be variations of a definition, yet two components stick out – tools and learning. Here’s my definition: -

A PLE consists of an individual, learner-oriented collection of tools, resources, services, and connections organised and used to gather and engage with information, reflect, and communicate and collaborate with others, in pursuit of continual learning and achievement of goals and objectives. 

The goal of a PLE audit (or mine) is to re-organise and co ordinate components to increase efficiency by minimising effort required to access and use each component. The outcome of this process is a more effective PLE, better suited to the achievement of learning goals and objectives.

I’ve taken three steps to audit and tidy up my Personal Learning Environment – stocktake, assess and organise.

Stocktake

  1. Gather all log in details for each tool, resource or service. I found this was the easiest way to identify what I’ve signed up to, tried, or use.
  2. Create a list of email subscriptions, web applications, wikis, software of your computer and devices. My list consisted of over 20 tools (!) including Gmail, Mindnode Pro (on my Mac), Dropbox, Twitter, Slideshare, Evernote and Skype.
  3. Divide a page into three columns – Tools/Devices/Resources, Use it?, What for?.
  4. Fill in the table as much as possible.

Assess

Go through each component and assess its role and contribution to your PLE. I created the diagram below to provide consistency and assist with the process.

(I understand the diagram can be hard to read. Click on the image to view a larger version)

Organise

Once you have identified the next steps required to re-organise your PLE components, ensure that you action them! If it will help, create a diagram or edit your list (created during ‘stocktake’) to show your newly designed PLE.  A visual reminds and assists me to see the ‘big picture’. I’m that sort of person, I guess.

Other Tips

  • Take stock of your PLE on a regular basis.
  • Include your online presence in this process. Which ‘presence’ (eg. LinkedIn, blog) is lagging, not being properly maintained that it’s potentially damaging your brand and identity?
  • Identify the role of each component by their function. For example, my Google Reader performs a collecting function and my blog is a thinking and contributing space.
  • Create (and stick with) consistent use of tags, vocabulary and folder structures across similar applications. For example, a project folder on my mac will resemble an arrangement of notebooks in Evernote.
  • If you use Instapaper, create an RSS feed for your “Unread” folder and add it to Google Reader. You’ll only need to look in one place for reading material and resources, not two.

The aim here was to prompt thinking about the effectiveness of a PLE and its components’ efficiency of use. The suggested audit process is intended to be a guide and is by no means exhaustive or absolute. I’m sure there are other ways to evaluate tools and ‘tweaking’ a PLE. This was just my approach. I hope it can be of use to others.

Resources for PLE definition: -

Attwell, G 2010, ‘Supporting Personal Learning in the Workplace’, The PLE Conference, ISSN 2077-9119.

McElvaney, J & Berge, Z 2009, ‘Weaving a Personal Web: Using online technologies to create customised, connected and dynamic learning environments‘, Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 35(2).

Educause 2009, ‘7 Things you should know about Personal Learning Environments‘.

A Pending Purchase

Posted on by acrystelle
4

It’s about this time of year when I ponder and plan what I will do with my tax return. I’m expecting a decent one, as I have a lot of expenses to claim and I also have a feeling I’ve paid too much tax this financial year.

I’ve made a deal with myself that if I receive a return over X amount, I’d like to purchase an iPad. I’m a careful buyer of such purchases. I always try to make sure I receive the best value for my money. I make it my mission to squeeze out the most possible benefit and use from an item. I’m not saying I’m ‘tight’ by any means, just don’t like my hard-earned money go to waste.

Main reasons for using an iPad are: -

  • Take notes at conferences and similar events such as professional development workshops
  • Read articles, blogs and other items delivered to my Google Reader
  • Traveling – use Skype, Evernote and internet for notes, writing and contacting home while away (business or pleasure)
  • Hook it up to the network at work – if allowed to, ‘sweet talking’ required
  • Take notes in work meetings
  • Casual mind mapping
  • General internet browsing

 

Benefits include: -

  • Notes are input straight to Evernote. No need to transfer hand written notes after the event and can email notes to my work inbox if required
  • Minimise need to take my laptop from the study to the couch to only read items from Google Reader (Is that just lazy? I find it annoying to move a 15 inch laptop)
  • Make traveling luggage lighter by having little need to take my laptop
  • At work – I can become more ‘mobile’ if I’m able to answer library questions from anywhere in the hangar office. I have people ‘grab me for a minute’ when I walk around and I often need to either go to their desk or have them walk to mine.

 

Now, the all important question – to 3G or not to 3G?

I’m leaning towards doing without 3G, mostly because of the extra cost for a data plan. If the majority of my use will be while connected to wifi, I shouldn’t need it. My thinking is that if I urgently need to look for something using the internet while ‘on the go’, I can use my iPhone. I have home internet, plus my iPhone which has a data plan included. So to add another data cost will take my total bill over $100 a month. That’s a lot of data! And money

Another question – how big?

I’m undecided between the 16G and 32G. When I think about it, the iPad will be mostly a work and study device. My notes are in Evernote so the data is not stored on the iPad. I won’t be storing books for leisure reading as I (still) prefer hard copy. Music is stored on my iPhone and Macbook.

 

So over to you. I need some advice.

What do you use your iPad for? Why did you buy one?

Am I missing any possible uses?

Did you opt for 3G? Why? Why not?

How big did you go? Why? Why not?

Information Architecture and Digital Libraries (Part 2)

Posted on by acrystelle
1

For a library that delivers an information service in a digital space firstly requires a comprehensive understanding of the information environment in which it’s situated. It is important to identify information needs from both the user and organisational perspectives. In the case of an engineering technical library, there are also operational requirements to meet and industry regulations to satisfy, with regards to the library’s content – its use, maintenance and access to the collection.

An approach from the ‘bottom up’ looks at the tasks library users are required to complete as part of their job, as well as the series and patterns of activities undertaken to meet information needs. Morville and Rosenfeld (2007, p. 35) identify four common information needs: -

  • “known item” seeking – the user knows exactly what they’re looking for
  • “exploratory seeking – the user knows a few attributes of what they need, so a few search results will suffice
  • exhaustive search – the user requires a complete listing on a particular attribute or combination of attributes
  • “re-finding” – placing the search result aside, like a “saved search”, so the user may quickly return to the document

I, myself, have found definition of these information needs useful as I work to re-design an intranet site for my engineering technical library. Any ideal functionality will not happen all at once. I’ve had to break up the improvements into a series of “phases”, focusing on what is critically important to deliver first.

A ‘top-down’ approach to identifying information needs looks at organisational objectives and operational requirements, as they too, impact on what the digital library (engineering technical library, for example) holds in its collection, who will use the information and how the information should be managed and maintained.

Understanding the information environment then informs the approach taken to the information architecture design process, and develops the focus through which the digital library must take in order to effectively integrate information architecture practices into ‘every day’ processes and service orientation. According to Morville and Rosenfeld (2007), there are three areas of focus for information architecture methodology (p. 24-25).

  • Context – organisational objectives, operational requirements, resources, technology, politics, culture, industry regulations
  • Content – existing structure, document and data types, content diversity, volume
  • Users – audience, tasks, needs, information seeking behaviours, experience with technology and existing system

One may argue that the “context” is the information environment. However I would argue that an information environment cannot be without the content it requires, nor the users who need to interact with the system to search and retrieve information. An approach (or focus) is largely driven by context, yes, but I see all three impacting on each other. Aviation industry regulations (context) wouldn’t be be without the information needs of users and organisations, and there would be no focus or objective of a digital (engineering technical) library’s collection without the governing industry regulations or the users who require access to the collection. In order to satisfy the demands and expectations with the context, an information architecture need evolve around user (and organisation) situation, be task-based and ‘searching behaviour’ (user) focused (Kirby, 2006, p. 11).

I shall leave you with a diagram which depicts how I see the information environment. I’ve attempted to identify the relationship between information needs and the focus areas required to proceed with an information architecture approach to delivering a digital library service.

As always I welcome any feedback, thoughts, further ideas. The paper I’ve written (for assessment in my Masters course) is but my first attempt at understanding information architecture key concepts and principles. Please let me know if you think I’ve missed anything. I’ve developed an interest in information architecture and only wish to further my understanding.

Kirby, E. (2006). Improving intranet usability at AXA. Knowledge Management Review, 9(4), 10-11.

Morville, P. & Rosenfeld, L. (2007). Information Architecture for the World Wide Web (3rd ed.). CA, USA: O’Reilly Media, Inc.