Caval Research Overview

Tame the Web | Michael Stephens | Dominican University GSLIS | Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0

Measuring the Value and Effect of Learning 2.0 Programs in Libraries

Michael Stephens, PhDDominican GSLIS | CAVAL Visiting Scholar

www.tametheweb.com | www.dom.edu/gslis

Image: http://www.flickr.com/photos/aaronschmidt/281619803


Agenda

• Web 2.0 & Learning 2.0

• Free open across the Web

• Institutional Impact

• Research Questions

• Methodology

• Preliminary Look at the Data


http://www.flickr.com/photos/josefstuefer/55109059

Web 2.0


http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html

The Web as platform. Harnessing collective

intelligence.Data is the next Intel inside.

End of the software release cycle.Lightweight programming

models.

Software above the level of a single device.

Rich user experiences.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/josefstuefer/55109059


This Web harnesses collective intelligence.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/max_westby/4045923


This Web provides rich user experiences.



This is where we live.


http://flickr.com/photos/stabilo-boss/93136022/


Open

Participatory

Comments

Feeds

FavoritesAcess/API

Profiles

Radical TrustMemes

Harnessing Collective Intelligence

Rich User Experience


Open

ParticipatoryComments

Feeds

FavoritesAcess/API

Profiles

Radical TrustMemes

Harnessing Collective Intelligence

Rich User Experience

Learning 2.0






http://plcmclearning.blogspot.com/



Blowers recognized “that librarians need to know how to participate in the new media mix if libraries are to remain relevant.”

Blowers challenged her 550 staffers to become more web savvy. Using free web tools, she designed the program and gave staff members three months to do 23 things.

Hanly, B. (2007) Public Library Geeks Take Web 2.0 to the Stacks. Retrieved February 12, 2009 from http://www.wired.com/culture/education/news/2007/03/learning2_0

Hastings, R. (2007). “Journey to Library 2.0.” Library Journal. Retrieved February 15, 2009 from http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6431957.html


• Learning delivered online via blog/media

• “23 Things” to learn & explore

• Staff blogs to chart reflection & progress

• Incentives: MP3 Player/Laptop

• Touted as transformational

Program Components


Free open across the Web.




Learning 2.0 Across the Globe


Don't ask me the number of libraries or organizations? With programs having been run by the National Library of Norway, the State Library of Victoria, Maryland public libraries statewide, 23 Things on a Stick for multiple libraries and organizations, I really have no way of knowing the total impact or number of organizations that have adopted the program. But from my delicious links and growing communications folder I can tell you this... the number is definitively over 700 and more then likely hovers somewhere just under 1000 organizations worldwide.

Blowers, H. (2009). WJ hosts 23 Things summit. LibraryBytes. Retrieved March 5, 2009 from http://www.librarybytes.com/2009/02/wj-hosts-23-things-summit.html


http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&msa=0&hl=en&msid=101962518196533878534.000001122a2490d657a64


http://www.yarraplentyonlinelearning.blogspot.com/




http://www.flickr.com/photos/theskokieten/2093430767/


http://community.ahml.info/bakersdozen/


Institutional Impact


“I believe that this has been one of the most transformational and viral activities to happen globally to libraries in decades.”

Stephen Abram


“To our knowledge, no formal evaluation of Learning 2.0 has been conducted. However, the take-up rate among libraries worldwide has been impressive and stands as an endorsement of the program.”

Gross, J. & Leslie, L (2008). “Twenty-three steps to learning Web 2.0 technologies in an academic library.” The Electronic Library, 26:6 p790 - 802


Transparency

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mdumlao98/237755557/


http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/15.04/


• Multiple avenues for open communication

• Visit the front lines regularly

• Cross train

• Provide Learning for all staff

• Involve staff in governance

• Open planning, cross-functional

A Road Map to Transparency

http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6510682.html


Say “Yes”

http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6510682.html


PLAY


Play— the capacity to experiment with one’s surroundings as a form

of problem-solving.

Jenkins

Jenkins: Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: http://www.projectnml.org/node/540


The library satisfies curiosity.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/broterham/37039048



Research Questions


What does it mean to say that the program “has fundamentally changed the staff's way of thinking and working in the 21st century?”

Titangos, H.-L. H. and Mason, G. L. (2009). Learning library 2.0: 23 things @scpl. Library Management, 30(1/2):44-56.


To what extent has Learning 2.0 impacted institutional culture, staff confidence, staff promotability, institutional morale, and institutional openness?

To what extent have Learning 2.0 programs improved library staff ’s ability to utilize emerging technologies?


What factors create the most useful and successful L2.0 programme?


Methodology


Three Areas

• International literature review of studies and articles about L2.0 & Web survey of programme administrators in Australia.

• National survey of L2.0 participants concerning experience and impact of L2.0.

• Case study location: pre and post L2.0 - Townsville City Libraries.


Procedures

• Literature searches, blog searches

• Web surveys

• Focus groups


Blowers’ Ten Tips

• 1. Encourage networking and the learning will follow.

• 2. Allow participants to blog anonymously.

• 3. Use 1.0 methods to communicate.

• 4. Encourage group discovery.

• 5. Design the program for late bloomers.

Blowers, H. (2008b). “Ten tips about 23 things.” School Library Journal. Retrieved February 14, 2009 from http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/article/CA6600689.html


Blowers’ Ten Tips

• 6. Focus on discovery, not skill building.

• 7. Reward staff for learning.

• 8. Online means hands-on, not hands-off.

• 9. Enable transparency and practice radical trust.

• 10. Continually encourage staff to play.

Blowers, H. (2008b). “Ten tips about 23 things.” School Library Journal. Retrieved February 14, 2009 from http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/article/CA6600689.html



Data Analysis

• Quantitative analysis

• Qualitative analysis

• Coding responses:

• Codebook

• Multiple coders


A Sample to CodeVery little direct impact could be measured, however the Library has gone on to explore the use of various online tools (e.g instant messaging, Facebook, twitter, you tube) to delivery or promote services, and the 23 Things program was probably and important part of preparing staff and positioning the Library as innovative and active in the online environment.”


Preliminary Look at the Data


Admin Survey


Admin Survey Details

• Survey announced on various lists & blogs

• Survey link emailed to those identified as administrators

• 41 respondents


Findings

• Encouraged staff to work together 94%

• Staff given work time for programme 97%

• Offered incentives 65%


0

1

2

3

4

5 7 8 9 1011

12 1314

1516

2024

32Number of Weeks

Time Frame for L2.0 Programmes


0

2.25

4.50

6.75

9.00

1 2 46

OPENNone

Catch Up Time at End of Program


“Staff initially had about 10 weeks to complete the program of 9 tasks. this was extended by a month when the IT dept cut off access to the Learning 2.0 program blog about 6 weeks in to the program.”


“We allowed 12 weeks for staff to complete - after the 12 weeks we offered staff to keep going at their own pace.”



Responses• The library is now using web 2.0 tools to varying

degrees

• Staff are more comfortable and knowledgeable about the tools

• No perceived impact/difficult to tell/too soon.

• The programme has allowed some staff to excel with the tools while others have not, creating a perceived divide in the library.

• Need a more practical application of the tools to actually see impact.


Preliminary Implications

• Management and administration must back the program

• IT must be involved / no blocks to access


National Survey


National Survey Details

• 384 Respondents

• 86% Female & 14% Male

• 29% 45-54 age range 28% 35-44 age range

• 18% Academic Libraries 15% Public Libraries


85%

15%

YES NO

Did you complete the programme?

N=291

N=53


If you didn’t complete the program, why not?

• No Time/Too busy 74%

• Too hard/didn’t like it/not comfortable 25%

• Already knew about the tools <1%

• Blocked sites <1%



Lasting Impact of Learning 2.0

• Better/Increased awareness of 2.0 Tools/ inclusive feeling for staff 30%

• Increased use of tools in Library 21%

• No impact 20%

• New ways of working/service 18%


Lasting Impact of Learning 2.0

• Confidence/Helping Library Users 16%

• Improvements to staff communication 8%

• Increased use of tools in personal life 4%


Focus Groups


Focus Groups

• Ramdomly selected participants meeting criteria that they at least started the program in their libraries.

• Series of questions similar to national survey

• Sessions recorded via field notes and laptop


Preliminary Thoughts

• Programme promoted a more personal awareness of tools for professional development

• Staff more comfortable talking about or using tools

• Insights into what made the program work well and what did not


Next Steps

• More focus groups in Townsville

• Completeion of data coding

• Statistical manipulation of data


Next Steps

• VALA Presentation February 2010

• New Review of Academic Librarianship article 2010

• PLA (US) Presentation March 2010

Michael Stephens

[email protected]

[email protected]

AIM: mstephens7mac

gslis.dom.edu

www.tametheweb.com

Technology

Caval Research Overview