Reading and Activity #5

I am a private person in general. Whether good or bad, I do not share my activities or issues with other people. I am not vocal about my private life unless someone asks, and even then, I do not fully divulge all information. To me, privacy is an important concern especially with technology. On Facebook, people are always sharing their day step-by-step. I often wonder why Facebook users do this, because first of all, no one cares that you woke up at 8am to clean the kitchen and secondly it is dangerous to give anybody any information about yourself. For example, like Facebook article states it can let burglars know when to break into your home. For me, privacy is one of my main concerns, and I will continue to be cautious about revealing too much about my life to acquaintances as well as the general public.

The article, “Facebook & Your Privacy,” presents positive and negative aspects to Facebook. The consumer report mentions that while “Facebook makes it so easy to keep up with friends, family, and colleagues, discover great content, connect to causes, share photos, drum up business, and learn about fun events,” the social networking site gathers and distributes personal information to advertisers and other third party companies. Facebook is able to collect personal data due to many factors in and out of user control. One way Facebook is able to gather information easily is because many Facebook users share their daily plans on the site. Too much sharing can cause other problems as well because employers, insurance companies, and other groups are constantly examining Facebook pages. Another way privacy is threatened occurs when people “like” Facebook pages dealing with medical issues, world causes, etc. and other websites. Facebook is able to immediately track users’ likes. Additional reasons for privacy loss occur because many users do not set their privacy controls and some do not know privacy settings exist.  The article also explains that even if you set privacy controls, friends using Facbook apps unknowingly release your information to third party companies. Interestingly, compared to Europe, U.S. privacy laws are not effective and they do not protect users’ privacy. Because the laws are weak, users are granted minimal federal rights to have any sort of control over personal information being collected. The article discusses another controversy of Facebook: Tag Suggest. Tag Suggest applies facial recognition to tag people automatically in photos. Evidently, the program is opt-out, meaning that users who do not want to be involved must go into settings and opt-out of the program.       Many organizations like the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) are trying to hold Facebook more accountable in sharing information the company has on users.

News Report #5

“Survey Says: Library Borrowers Also Buyers”
Michael Lovett

November 15, 2012
http://overdriveblogs.com/library/2012/11/15/survey-says-library-borrowers-also-buyers/

In “Survey Says: Library Borrowers Also Buyers,” Michel Lovett breaks down findings of a survey conducted by OverDrive—a global digital book distributor—and ALA’s Office for Information Technology Policy (OITP).The survey was available between June and July of 2012. This survey was taken at “thousands of OverDrive-powered public library websites in the United Sates.” Because 75,000 people took the survey, it is considered to be the “largest study of library eBook usage to date.” The survey found that overall reader’s base most of their book-buying choices around libraries. Of the people surveyed, 35 percent have bought the books that they first borrowed from the library. Based on the survey, library patrons buy on average 3.2 books per month. This includes print and e-books. Those patrons also note that they would be more inclined to buy books that are advertised through the library and/or its website. Also, according to the survey, 57 percent claimed they use the library as a basis forfinding books. Lovett also includes the survey’s discovery that there has been an increase of 44 percent in digital book buying in recent months. In relation to being able to afford books, the survey found that 48 percent claimed their household income was at least $75 thousand.

From glancing at the survey and reading through Michael Lovett’s write-up, I learned how important libraries are to patrons and their book buying decisions. I would be interested in the ages of these library patrons. Based on people of my generation, I assume that these library patrons are mature in age. Also, considering almost half had substantial amounts of income, they can afford to buy numerous books. I find it interesting that digital books have recently increased. I wonder if younger buyers are responsible for the increase, or if older buyers are jumping on the bandwagon. Overall, I find the survey to be accurate because of the mass number of respondents.

News Report 4

“Visualization Wall the Centerpiece of Brown Digital Scholarship Lab”

Matt Enis

October 29, 2012

http://www.thedigitalshift.com/2012/10/hardware-2/visualization-wall-the-centerpiece-of-brown-digital-scholarship-lab/

The article “Visualization Wall the Centerpiece of Brown Digital Scholarship Lab” by Matt Enis describes the Brown University Library’s newest addition: Patrick Ma Digital Scholarship Lab. This lab offers students the ability to use software that is designed for many subject areas. The labs main attraction is a “video visualization wall made from twelve 55-inch LED screens.” The wall can “show a single seven foot by 16 foot image.” It can also display “video at 24 megapixel resolution.” Another feature—which allows for collaborative projects—is the option to connect the wall to “individual touch-screen monitors.” This wall also enables videoconferencing. Because the visualization wall provides both size and resolution, images can be seen in detail unlike with a projector. Enis quotes Patrick Rashleigh—the library’s data visualization coordinator—explaining the various types of collaboration, “You can have a large group of people looking at the same visual artifact on screen, or you can have multiple people displaying their own artifact, and everyone being able to see others’ works. And then variations in between those two extremes.” According to Enis, the idea for the visualization wall is based off of a “19^th century watercolor panorama chronicling the achievements of Italian general Giuseppe Garibaldi.” This work of art was first digitalized so that Brown’s Department of Italian Studies could have viewing access. Next, the library implemented an interactive touch screen—PixelSense—for interacting with the digitalized panorama. This worked well for one or two people but was unable to accommodate a larger number of people simultaneously. To fix this, they first connected a computer to a large screen that would allow for more viewers. Then they realized that students needed an environment that could be used individually or for groups. And the idea for the digital lab was born.

I found this article to be fascinating. I believe Brown University students will greatly benefit from this digital lab. I wish UNCW had this interactive learning facility, because it opens doors to creativity and collaboration that is otherwise restricted due to the lack of technical equipment. I would be interested in finding out if student achievement excels due to the use of the new lab and how many students actually take advantage of the facility. From reading about the progression of ideas and implementations that ultimately resulted in the digital lab’s creation, shows how vast technical/educational improvements can be made to a University—provided that sufficient funds can be obtained—which would normally not have been envisioned. Overall, the article opened my eyes to the possibilities of advancements that Universities could implement to better student learning in this highly technical age.        

Reading and Activity #4

Normally, when I am searching for information for an assigned research paper, I automatically begin my searching with Google. I usually attempt to use library resources, like databases, but for the most part, I have trouble finding the full text articles. I should ask for help, but usually I do not see anyone around to help. Also, I feel like finding help will put me behind because I usually procrastinate with research papers. Being a student, both readings related to me. I found them to be very true and I felt like they were writing about me. Also, the report was very on track with what students are thinking, feeling, and struggling with when it comes to the research process.  

Steven Bell’s article “The Infodiet: How Libraries Can Offer an Appetizing Alternative to Google” discusses the overwhelming use of Google over academic libraries. Students are choosing to use Google to find information for research papers rather than taking the time to find information from academic libraries. Bell compares the quality of academic library information to the quality of Google information by relating academic libraries to food “carving stations” and Google to “greasy burgers and fries”. Then stating, “Too many students are bringing a ‘supersize it’ mentality to research, in effect asking librarians, ‘Can you Google-ize that for me?’” Bell’s point is that students prefer Google because it produces fast and easily accessible information with little thinking involved. The article then introduces James Morris, dean of the School of Computer Science at Carnegie Mellon University, who has named this problem “infobesity.” Bell goes on to argue that the information on Google is like a “junk-food diet” and leads to low- quality research papers. Hopefully solving this problem will be aggregators that offer Boolean searching and more advanced features that will find more precise, “nutritious” information as long as students are willing to take to the time to understand a more complex search process. The obstacle will be to get students to choose the “healthier” option over the “unhealthy” one: Google. Bell is noticing that database producers and librarians are beginning to morph to be more like Google in offering easily accessible, full text works. The problem seems to be that these databases are filling up with journals that are full text—convenient—, but do not contain the highest quality of information that conducting a more in depth search would have uncovered.  Although this is occurring, ProQuest and RedLightGreen are attempting to make their databases easier to use but still maintaining high quality information. Bell explains that professors can help direct students to use databases by requiring certain sources for papers; however, he claims that some professors do not understand the databases themselves consequently not requiring students to use them. All in all, Bell urges the importance of evaluating research.  

“Truth Be Told: How College Students Evaluate and Use Information in the Digital Age,” by Alison Head and Michael Eisenberg, is a fascinating information literacy progress report. The report uses a sample of students from different Universities around the country. The sample students were surveyed about how they find, use, and evaluate information from the web as well as library resources, like information from journals, books, and information from databases. Not surprisingly, the report found that students take more time to evaluate information from the web and spend less time evaluating information from the library. The main reason for this is because web information can be very unpredictable in its authority and content while students assume that library resources have already gone through an evaluation process by the librarians. The charts showed that a good amount of students asked their professors for help with evaluating sources; however, not many students asked librarians for help. It was discovered that students will use the library services but not the librarian services. The report also found that when searching for materials, students first use course related material then proceed to the web for information. The charts that were provided showed interesting findings that might surprise some professors. For example, professors may assume that students rely on Wikipedia for information, when in fact students who use Wikipedia are using the sources that it provides. Students were also surveyed about how they evaluate personal research. Again, not surprisingly students evaluated the information less critically but asked friends, family, and professionals for help with the evaluation, rather than asking professors. One of the main points of the report is that students have the most trouble in the beginning stages of finding information for a research paper. Pinning down a topic was difficult for many students so difficult that they wanted their professors to choose one for them. Also, students feel overwhelmed by the vastness of information and then find it somewhat difficult to go through and filter relevant information from the irrelevant. Like Bell’s article, the importance of librarians and professors coming together to encourage students to critically evaluate information is stressed.  

Activity #3

If I were to renovate UNCW's Randall Library, I would change the first floor by adding more computers and seating. To accommodate for more space, all books (including periodicals), media, and newspapers would be moved to the second floor. Also, the new space on the first floor would enable TAC to expand in order to help more students in a timely manner. The second floor would hold all written material and media as well as the circulation desk. An addition of a third floor would be constructed. The third floor would have multiple graduate study rooms and an all-around quiet study atmosphere. On all floors, restrooms would consist of at least five stalls in each. In regards to the entrance of Randall Library, I would make more entrances accessible to students so they do not have to walk the entire way around the building.   

Jennifer Howard’s article “Tomorrow’s Academic Libraries: Maybe Even Some books” explains two different approaches that Drexel and Johns Hopkins Universities are using to incorporate the needs of students in regards to libraries. Drexel University is planning to build a “bookless learning center” outside a dorm building. Students will have “around the clock” access to the center where they can use the library’s digital resources or just have a place to hang out and study. Also, students can meet with librarians and professors at the center. The entire cost of the new center will run Drexel almost a million dollars. At Johns Hopkins University, “informationists” come to “students and faculty members in the schools of medicine, nursing, and public health.” This way there is no need for them to access the actual library. These “informationists” are librarians who work externally from the library: classrooms, labs, and other college settings. The informationists conduct arduous systematic literature reviews for medical literature. Their main goal is to help people locate and use information.

“Information Navigation 101” written by Andrea L. Foster, first discusses the abundance of information—good and bad—that students have access to via the internet. Students at Cal State’s Fullerton campus are highly encouraged to find scholarly information from the library’s online databases with help from librarians. This practice of “information literacy” is happening at colleges across the U.S. According to the article, “Accrediting agencies are now considering information-literacy programs as measure of an institution’s performance.” The article then explains the history of information literacy leading up to current times. Urban colleges are stressing the importance of information literacy because most of their students are the first in their families to attend college. Another point the article brings to light is that some librarians treat information literacy as a new trend. When in actuality, the same practice has been done for a long time but now has a name. Along with teaching information literacy, standardized information literacy tests have been distributed to many students at different campuses. The majority of librarians claim that the tests only measure a student’s “information-literacy proficiency” and that the tests may soon disappear. In place of the tests, students would have to successfully complete hands-on research projects to showcase their skills.

News Report #3

News Report #3

“Barnes & Noble unveils its first hi-definition tablets”

Phil Wahba

9/26/2012

http://news.yahoo.com/barnes-noble-takes-aims-amazon-apple-hd-nook-050306151.html

Barnes & Nobel has released its first hi-definition tablets. According to analysts, these new tablets will keep Barnes & Nobel “in the fight with Amazon.com Inc., Apple Inc. and Google Inc.-for now.” Microsoft has agreed to invest $605 million in the Nook e-reader over the next five years.  While this new e-reader is an improvement from past e-readers, it will be difficult for Barnes & Nobel to continue to unleash new products because the corporation is financially smaller than others (even with the help from Microsoft).This new tablet is lighter and thinner for easy readability compared to its rivals, like the I-Pad. Barnes & Nobel is in constant competition with Amazon’s e-reader devices. And currently, Amazon holds 60% of the U.S e-book market. According to Forrester’s Epps, Barnes & Nobel is trying to transition its established clientele “onto the digital platform.” These new hi-definition tablets allow each member of a family to create their own home page and tailor preferences. The tablet also possesses controls to block children from inappropriate content. Because the majority of Barnes & Nobel’s customer base read books and magazines, the tablet features new page-turning technologies and increased image resolution.

I have never owned an e-reading device, but my mother loves the Kindle e-readers. She would be interested in these new features that the Kindle lacks. Barnes & Nobel created a smart and sensible e-reader for families. As opposed to everyone having their own e-reader, it can be shared by family members, while still keeping each person’s settings intact. I think that Barnes & Nobel is going in the right direction, realizing that people are moving to digital reading, with its ideas of how to keep its customers and gain new ones. Even though the company is pursuing new and improved ideas and technologies with its e-readers, the fact that their financial means are not limitless, Barnes & Nobel will still be competing with companies that have infinite means. It is hard to predict what will eventually become of Barnes & Nobel, but unless they can dramatically increase their profits while maintaining their customer base, I predict they will share the same end as Borders: bankruptcy.    

Activity/Reading #2

My evaluation of Criteria:

When finding information via the internet, I first examine the website where the information is located. If the website is built improperly or makeshift in appearance, I automatically decrease the credibility of the information. The URL can also help determine the credibility of information. For example, .gov websites tend to provide more credibility than a .com website. Next, I read the content. If there are grammar or spelling mistakes, I usually stop reading and move onto another source. Honestly, I do not thoroughly check the information. I am usually in a hurry when researching, and I take information that “looks” credible.

Readings:

Mark Bauerlein’s article, “Authority Figures,” discusses the ranking and popularity process of information that is displayed from search engines. Bauerlein mentions Michael Petrilli’s experiment that dealt with search engines and what criteria is used when displaying search results from a search engine i.e Google. Petrilli’s experiment found that Wikipedia was almost always the number one search result for all of his searches. Intelligent Positioning discovered that Wikipedia is the top position on 56 percent of all Google searches (wow!). Bauerlein implies how he feels about Wikipedia when he states, “…Wikipedia has only broadened its leviathan reach.” Leviathan refers to a demonic creature or monster (dictionary.com). Bauerlein also addresses the irony between the founder of Wikipedia to the principals behind Wikipedia. Bauerlein claims that Wikipedia is the opposite of what the founder stands for. The subjects of print encyclopedias (Britannica) were questioned. Britannica costs almost 14 grand while using a Wikipedia is free. Some people may feel more secure having a bound encyclopedia but those people also must have the money to afford it.

The article, “Information Navigation 101,” by Andrea Foster addresses the importance of “information literacy.” While search engines provide endless amounts of information, students are having trouble being able to decipher which information is credible and which is not. Librarians have taken it upon themselves to try and aid students in this process by teaching them research skills (our library 103 class applies). These research skills are tools to help find reliable sources for information. Foster notes that, in the past, some colleges had these types of programs, but now almost every college has information literacy classes.  Along with taking information literacy classes, schools are having students take standardized tests to show they are information literate.  The article also mentions how some professors are against any information that is not from a printed source.