Category: Articles

Help! ––I’m at a symposium and I’m trying to learn!

By Meghan Lyon

Last Friday, October 19th, I had the pleasure of observing two symposiums. I attended the first half of The Uncomfortable Archive: New York 2018 Archives Week Symposium, and the the second half of the first day of theWhitney Independent Study Program 1968-2018 50th Anniversary Symposium. These events marked my first encounter with the conference-style symposium. I have attended numerous lectures, but a presentation in the symposium format has a quality that diverges from a unique lecture; each speaker addresses their own content or area of expertise  as well as the overarching concept of the day.

According to Merriam-Webster, the definition of symposium includes: “a social gathering at which there is a free interchange of ideas”; “a formal meeting at which several specialists deliver short addresses on a topic”; “a collection of opinions on a subject”; and “discussion.” Additionally, it defines a panel as “a group of persons who discuss before an audience a topic of public interest.” The panel would be the object of attention, the body expected to enlighten the audience; it could also be the platform from which information is distributed. From my observation of the symposium as an information environment, I would define it as a learning-based information environment, where the audience is an information-seeking group whose attendance is predicated on the expectation of a conference of knowledge from the panelists. 

The Uncomfortable Archive Symposium, which I observed from 9:30 am through the lunch break at 1:15 pm, was devised to motivate the audience by revealing uncomfortable histories and truths about archives or loosely-defined archival materials. This goal manifested in multiple presentations about obstacles to record keeping and maintenance from autocrats, fascists, and capitalists. The Keynote Address was given by Anthony Clark, who played up the “uncomfortable” concept. Clark is an expert on presidential libraries and archives and discussed the more insidious aspects of presidential libraries—not just as propaganda machines but as active forces in politics, conservatively oriented towards maintaining the status quo of private interest groups. His address examined the unfortunate history and present mismanagement of the National Archives and Records Administration by the former director of NYPL, David Ferriero.

Clark addressed a room full of concerned professionals who were mostly cis-female, mostly white. The audience lights and stage lights were both on and remained on throughout the day; the AC was on, there was carpeting and plush chairs, there were no outlets throughout the seating area, and  there was no wifi and no data service in the hall at the Center for Jewish History. There was a podium for speakers and a table for panelists; I found that every panelist was an individual speaker and the “panel” discussion was, unfortunately, just an audience Q&A directed at the group of “panelists.”

The Uncomfortable Archives Symposium was crafted as a learning environment for archivists and professionals within the field of information. Most audience members were taking notes; actively engaged and trying to learn. However, several days after the Uncomfortable Archives, a peer who was also in attendance bemoaned that there was too little discussion of problems or troubleshooting thereof from within archives; in other words, she gained no knowledge that was useful to her as a professional.  Also, most talks were initiated after a precarious disclaimer: “My comments are my own and not my employers,” a common social media and web-based, personal disclaimer which has migrated towards any format that has the potential to wind up on the internet. This attempt by speakers to protect their professional status could relate to Robert Jensen’s paper, The Myth of the Neutral Professional. In order to keep their jobs, librarians and archivists are pressured to appear politically neutral. At the very least, they must attempt to be sure that they cannot be held accountable as a representative of their employer when speaking publicly. I find the disclaimers’ presence to be unsettling, and feel sorry that the speakers need to present defensively on stage.

Midday I walked over to the Whitney Museum of American Art for the ISP 50 Year Anniversary Symposium; This second observation lasted from 2:30pm – 8pm.

The Whitney Independent Study Program 50 year anniversary Symposium was a very different kind of event from the Uncomfortable Archive; It was not technically a professional event. The intended audience was ISP alumni, but the ISP program is so popular that many others were also in the audience. The 2-day event was both open to the public and free, so it drew contemporary art enthusiasts, fans of panelists, social climbers, artists, museum workers, art historians, current university students, and people in some way involved in the art world who are hungry for continued education. Because of the various points of entry, there was also a more diverse demographic. It was so packed in the lecture hall that overflow seating was made available in the Tom and Diane Tuft Trustee Room on the 8th floor, which is where I wound up for the first panel that I witnessed.

Whitney ISP Symposium from the 8th floor Trustee Room

In the trustee room, there was a monitor playing a livestream of the symposium as it occurred downstairs. This room quickly filled up, although it wasn’t totally full and people wandered in and out. There was an odd phenomenon of 8th floor of attendees clapping when speakers concluded, even though the presenters were on tv.

Another unexpected occurrence (unexpected to the Whitney staff, at least) was that people who showed up at the beginning of the symposium did not leave. This created a major occupancy problem, because people who registered beforehand, or who were ISP alum, could not enter. I believe that the organizers thought that people would come for a panel, or a particular speaker, and then leave—grossly underestimating the major interest in this kind of educational experience. After witnessing this symposium, I would conclude that multitudes of people are craving high quality, free, educational experiences. The panelists in this case were key figures in art theory, writing, criticism, contemporary studio practice, and pedagogy, and it is too often an exclusive few who are able to interact with the brilliance associated with the ISP milieu.

Like the Uncomfortable Archives’ attendees, nearly every audience member had a notebook out, although I would say the note-taking at the Whitney was a little more feverish, on both the 8th and 3rd floors. Eventually, a few people from the 8th floor went down in between panels to try and claim a few abandoned seats.

A panel in the lecture hall at the Whitney ISP Symposium

I made it into the lecture hall for the Pedagogy and Critical Practice panel. The structure of the panels were similar to those of the earlier symposium; each member of the panel gave a short presentation with slides, however, instead of a Q&A afterwards, there was a moderated discussion on the overarching theme of the panel, with a short time for  audience questions. The time-ratio weighed heavily on the lectures, clocking in at almost 2 hours of serial lectures per 20 minutes of panel discussion.

A little earlier in the evening, curator Johanna Burton had referenced  “embodied learning”—which she described as something along the lines of “trying out learning through new experiences.”  I thought this would be a good opportunity to explore  Marcia J. Bates’ paper Fundamental Forms of Information.  I could see note-taking as an interaction with recorded information, “communicatory or memorial information preserved in a durable medium,” (Bates 14)  as well as an enactment of student/teacher paradigm, and an attempt to fill a knowledge-seeking need. The symposium could be examined as a place for the expression of recorded information (lectures) to be

Single-Circle Diagram that says "Information Environment / Learners / I feel grateful to be here ----->"
“Information Environment / Learners / I feel grateful to be here ——–>”

embodied by an audience through listening and interpretation, and then enacted by their future selves as more knowledgable beings.  

Nearing the end of the ISP Symposium, Mary Kelly took the stage. Kelly was the only speaker who did not use a slide-show presentation, and she was so soft spoken yet captivating, you could feel the entire audience leaning in and opening up. I drew a small diagram of the environment and how I felt.

Sources:

Bates, M. (2006). Fundamental Forms of Information. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(8) (2006): 1033-1045

Jensen, R. (2006). The Myth of the Neutral Professional. Lewis, A. (Ed.), Questioning Library Neutrality: Essays from Progressive Librarian. (pp. 89-96). Duluth, MN: Library Juice Press.

 

Posted on by Meghan Lyon 0

Effective Engagement @ Cooper-Hewitt

Effective Engagement @ Cooper-Hewitt

by Elizabeth Phyle

To observe an information environment I spent time at the Cooper-Hewitt Museum watching audiences interact with their exhibit. The Cooper-Hewitt is at the forefront of incorporating technology into their visitor experiences. In addition, they have “Senses: Design Beyond Vision” on view until the end of the month. I am very interested in how museums incorporate tactile activities to facilitate visitor engagement with the material. The “Senses” exhibit and their other hands-on exhibits gave me a chance to observe how these features provide deeper engagement as well as how they potentially divert attention from more substantial information.

Perspective taking

I believe that sense are an under-utilized tool in museums. We ask visitors to look, listen, and read a lot while they walk through a quiet gallery. It was shocking the difference in atmosphere between the more traditional exhibits and the “Senses” exhibit. The energy was palpable while people were engaged in touching and smelling as well as looking and listening. Some of the most interesting installments were the ones that took a risk; using the senses to convey something beyond words. For example there were translucent white boxes with phrases on top of them describing a moment or feeling that is specific enough to conjure an image in your mind. Then you press a button, lean in close, and the artist’s interpretation of that scent whiffs over you. Watching people interact with the exhibit was fascinating. People had strong, immediate reactions; often in the form of interjections, not words. The scent named “the feeling for someone once loved, but no longer” elicited pained “oohs.” The one named “being perfectly entangled with another” caused many visitors to smile and “awwhh”. Not everyone thought that every scent was a perfect representation of the emotion described, but it served as a fantastic conversation starter either way. Any good exhibit asks visitors to shift their perspective. By asking them to uses their senses in unfamiliar ways the exhibit forces perspective shift. Context shifting is an important skill in a multi media and medium world. Other museums could incorporate sound, touch and smell into their exhibit in similar ways to help visitors realize their own perspective and take on the perspective of others.

One installment that compelled the visitor to enter the life of another was called “Portal_Soundscapes” Here visitors listened to sounds from cities around the world including voices from refugee camps. I found it very powerful, but unfortunately not many people visited it while I was in that area. This may be partly because it was slightly off the main path, or it may be that visitors did not want to engage in more serious topics while they were playing. Things like this that offer a wide snapshot of human experience could be useful in history museums. Oral histories are powerful, but visitors can also benefit from abstract views of the human experience like asking “what do humans sound like?”

The nagging questions that I had all the while was, how much are people actually taking away as they flit from one thing to the next? It is a tall order to expect visitors to be able to go from scratching and sniffing a wall to reading the placard text about accessible design. I saw that some visitors would skip any exhibit here that didn’t have some of sensory activity associated with it. Like bee’s between flowers, many people would walk up to the installment, do a quick skim for any feature that they could do something with, but if all there was was something to read or information to listen to they would flutter to the next spot and repeat. This certainly telling about how we prefer to interact with our surroundings, but to what extent should museums cater to these impulses? This reminds me of the discussion of user-centered versus system-centered design that we encountered in Talja and Hartel as well as the class discussion we had surrounding it. They discuss the traps in images about user-centeredness being warm and compassionate opposed to a cold and quantitative system centered design (Talja and Hartel 2007). Compared to traditional museum experiences where the visitor is expected to conform to the museum, we can see with the rise of sensory exhibits and pop-up museums how museums are being pressured to cater to the visitor. However, museums should not lose sight of their mission and institutional strengths. The Cooper-Hewitt overall did a fantastic job of balancing education, collection presentation, and interaction.

Conscious Consuming of Information

At a small out-of-the-way alcove there was a headset with two short hospital soundscapes. One was of a traditional hospital setting with high frequency beepings, rushing of gurneys, panicked footsteps, and doctors yelling out stats. The other one was what a “humane patient experience” could sound like. It explains how information could be communicated between nurses and doctors while preserving a environment that is beneficial to the patient. This reminds me of the way they Sengers ended the article on Practices for a Machine Culture, she argues for “technical artefacts that enrich human experience, rather than reducing it to a quantified, formalized, efficient, and lifeless existence (Sengers 2000).” Hospitals are a great example of a systems-centered environment. Since their work is so technical, fast pace, and high pressure, it is unsurprising that the externalities of their system is not something that has traditionally been at the forefront. This exhibit allows visitors to think critically about these externalities as well as examine the role that sound plays in decoding our environment and on our stress levels.

Cooper-Hewitt is a unique case for consumerism in museums because at its core it is a product design museum. The question then become are they feeding consumer culture or educating on it? There was only one stark example that I found of product promotion in the museum. There was a wall of chocolate bars in different flavors and enticing packaging, which you could conveniently find for sale in the gift shop. I could find no educational value in this installment. The purpose it served was only to generate excitement about a product. Again this brings us back to the user-centered discussion. The designers tell the user what they need and proceed to embed their product into the grooves of our lives. This is not the same as responding to a demand.

On the other hand, working through this exhibit may be an effective way for visitors to learn about the ways we react in accordance with our senses and ways we are likely to be deceived. The disability and sensory design area showed how certain scents can spark appetite and memory for dementia patients, and how color coded design can help our brains understand the functionality of items. Examples like these shows how the exhibit is educating visitors to what product design has the potential to be. In “Saturated: The Allure of Science and Color” there was a old Mac computed on display with this quote from Steve Jobs, “For most consumers, color is more important than megahertz, gigabytes, and other gibberish associated with buying a typical PC.” This placed in an exhibit about color allows visitors to reflect on their own consumer decision and how they are affected by design. This fits in to the discussion about design justice introduced to us by Constanza. The products we buy are all encoded with values, and along with the values are the frameworks of our society and all the power structures that entails (Constanza 2018). Museum experiences that let the visitor “behind the scenes” on how and why things are designed allow them to decode their consumer environment.

 

Talja, S., Hartel, J, (2007). Revisiting the user-centred turn in information science research: an intellectual history perspective. Information Research, 12(14).

Constanza-Chock, S. (2018). Design  Justice: towards an intersectional feminist framework for design theory and practice. Design Research Society. University of Limerick. 25th-28th June 2018.

Sengers, P. (2000). Practices for a Machine Culture: A case study of integrating cultural theory and artificial intelligence. Surfaces. Presses de l’Universite de Montreal.

Posted on by Elizabeth Phyle 0

I Just Learnt the Greatest Part of American History

Observation of Frances Tavern Museum

 Oct 23. 13:14-16:14

 

Introduction & Inspiration

I am always a museum fan but I was too shy to be there alone. I guess it might feel different when I visit sites of culture with friends when we exchange views. I have visited museums in locations with history of 2000 years as well as galleries of world famous art collections. This time, I was going to a place with longer history, than the country I am staying. I chose this site, mainly because I know just a little about American history and I want to experience, hoping that my pieces of knowledge could revive and connect with each other.

I visited the Fraunces Tavern Museum in Oct. 23, in a different manner. I observed with my eyes big and round. Usually I visited museums casually and I believe that I can come back another time with a fresh new mood and look. I tried to grow with the communication I had with friends whom I talked with during the visit. Sometimes, it is also valuable to try to talk with yourself, when you emerge yourself in front of historical occasions and sites.

I knew I love museums, but now I understand more of why, with some knowledge from Course 601: Foundation of information.

 

I See Different Types of Information Interaction

Come to the Real Site of Historical Places

Read and Touch Tallmadge Memorial erected Dec.4, 1907

Read Event Calendar Brochure

 

Play Scavenger Hunt

Watch Orientation Video

Touch Art and History

Take a Selfie with Mascot

Smell the Merchandise-Tea

Decode Confidential

I Learnt Big Names and Great Events on Site|

Museum Collections

Fraunces Tavern Museum’s mission is to “preserve and interpret the history of the American Revolutionary era through public education”. On the history page of the museum online, we can find longer lines of history of Manhattan, than United States. If there is one collection to be the greatest moment, the next one would be the one: Signing of the Constitution of the United States.

It was in this room that President Washington took leave in Dec. 4, 1783, and the most emotional Memoirs of Colonel Benjamin Tallmadge, written in 1830 and now in the collection of Fraunces Tavern Museum.

“After the officers had taken a glass of wine General Washington said ‘I cannot come to each of you but shall feel obliged if each of you will come and take me by the hand.’ General Knox being nearest to him turned to the Commander-in-chief who, suffused in tears, was incapable of utterance but grasped his hand when they embraced each other in silence. In the same affectionate manner every officer in the room marched up and parted with his general in chief. Such a scene of sorrow and weeping I had never before witnessed and fondly hope I may never be called to witness again.”

The Long Room is preserved and no photo is allowed in this room. The best picture of that moment can be found in the engraving with hand coloring below.

Samuel Fraunces, as the “inn holder” of Frances Tavern, centered in the middle of commercial district, who owns business but also brings him politics connections.”On December 4, 1783, nine days after the last British soldiers left American soil, George Washington invited the officers of the Continental Army to join him in the Long Room of Fraunces Tavern so he could say farewell.” Later from May 1789 to Feburary 1790, Fraunces was hired, by Washington, as  the newly elected President, chief steward in New York. “He was responsible for overseeing the operation of the house and a staff of twelve. ”

The “inn” is more than a living space, in 1768, chamber of commerce was founded here. It became actually the “center of politics”

 

Thoughts & Reflection

Museums to me,  is another form of reading, in an interactive way, from multimedia sources. Compared to watching movie or documentaries, I love more of reading text and paragraph on a piece of paper material, such as a book. In this way, the reader has more rights to break and think twice at any pace. You can also take note, ask question or scan or search back and forth. A book after a reading process is never the same book it used to be, it became a product of both the writer and the reader.

My favorite categories of reading was biography and travel notes. These are based on true stories, it is supposed to. Publishing books is a way of telling a story in author’s tone. However, it is never the same, with a realtime and real space experience. Museums, are devoted to preserving the history and culture, in a different time, but real place.

Through the real touch of the original site, I feel the strong sense of politic hand in hand with finance. This museum was established in 1907. I wondered, will there be a museum of people in general, instead of politics. In Jensen’s words, there should be a shift from capitalism to liberal and pluralist, as well as democracy rather than corporate.

In Jenson’s article, 2008, “Library-Neutrality”, with open-minded applied to sciences, innovation increases; while with progressive applied to humanities, sometimes it is dangerous, well, “American revolutionary war arose from growing tensions between residents of Great Britain’s 13 North American colonies and the colonial government, which represented the British crown”. I feel that it maybe dangerous to British government at that time, but for American at this time, it is the opposite.

 

 

Reference

https://www.history.com/topics/american-revolution/american-revolution-history

http://www.frauncestavernmuseum.org/history/

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted on by De Han 0

NYPL: Constraints Outside Bars by Amber Pasiak

NYPL: Constraints Outside Bars

Nestled in an unassuming building on 39thstreet in Manhattan, lies the backbone to many of the programs offered through New York Public Library. One of these outreach programs is the Correctional Services. This program is a small staffed group of librarians and volunteers who help provide reference information, circulating book service, video visitation and recorded readings for children to people in jail. These are primarily New York state jails; however, the reach and depth of this program is rapidly expanding. It is here that I got a firsthand look at what it entails to run a program of this kind. I had the pleasure of meeting and spending the morning with Emily Jacobson, aCorrectional Services Librarian.

Before I went to do this observation, I read The International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions guideline for library services to prisoners which details practices that “reflect an acceptable level of library service, which could be achieved in most countries where national and local government policies support the existence of prison libraries.” This guideline stresses the shift from punishment to education and rehabilitation, wherein the role of the library is paramount. These guidelines offer hopeful, democratic and, which I was soon to discover, slightly unrealistic in practice, suggestions. This is not to say that the staff at NYPL has disregarded the suggestions, quite the opposite actually. I felt that they were doing their best to emulate them with what they were allotted. I also want to stress that I do recognize that a large general guidebook is going to have different uses across different institutions, whether it is a federal vs state jail or prison or a different type of correctional facility.

The Day:

Emily and I started the morning with a general overrun of all the services that are provided and how. The first task of the day was to sort through the many reference letters that have been mailed in. A great many of these letters requested a copy of NYPL’s “Connections” guide. This is a reentry guide that is free to people who are in jail or prison and offers information on housing and finding a job. Most of the other letters addressed issues about self-help resources, general reference questions and legal information.

The second part of the day was the selection and shelving of books that have been donated to the program. The correctional services is a donation based service. This means that a lot of the books that are donated cannot be used for certain reasons. Although there is a very limited “banned” book list, a great many others were in too poor condition, repeats or, to my surprise, very out of date magazines.

I was also surprised to learn that the program is all analog. Emily explained that there were several reasons for this. The first was that many of the jails do not have internet access, hence why this program’s reference letters were so popular, and there are many safety procedures in place that would make carrying out a regular library check out difficult. Another reason is that there are very few library locations inside jails, and thus the library will either be a popup that happens roughly twice a month or a book cart service. Some of the jails do offer some storage space, but when everything is in constant transit it makes hard to keep track of most of the books, as checking out a book is a hand-written paper process, with just a title and a patron name.

Keeping track of the books while working in a jail is the sort of dilemma that a regular library doesn’t normally see. As Emily explained to me, a jail is where someone is either awaiting trial, or has been sentenced for less than a year. This means that the patrons to a library jail are very often in flux and books tend to go missing or get lost, making it nearly impossible to have a traditional check out system.

The Days Reflections:

Although I spent most of the morning doing physical aspects of the job, it wasn’t hard to see how the theoretical frameworks that have been discussed in class were in play. The first that struck out to me was the curating choices of the librarians. As this is donation based, the variety of books coming in was already limited, and then the books about bomb making, etc. (if any) had to be removed, any damaged or watermarked books could not be used, and any hard cover books were deemed physically dangerous. So, what does this leave you with? Well, it looked to me that it was a million copies of the same Jo Nesbo and Nikki Turner books.

How does a librarian deal with trying to offer a balanced selection with limited resources and restrictions? How does a librarian take hold of their accountability, responsibility and recognize their “power” in a much stricter and limiting politized institution? Reference letters and book requests do show how a librarian might try to build a certain collection, however, this is not always possible to do, due to funding, donations and general stigmatization of the rights owed to a person in jail. When do these critical questions about a library space overlap or go against the critical questions about the roles jails and prisons play in society? William Birdsall articulates in his article “A political economy of librarianship” that: “librarians need to devote more effort researching the political and economic dynamics that define the past and current environment of libraries. Libraries are the creation and instrument of public policy derived from political processes.” Could this also not be said about jails and prisons?

In the article, “Information needs in prisons and jails: A discourse analytic approach”, the authors Debbie Rabina, Emily Drabinski and Laurin Paradise state that the information needs of people in prison and jail are actually constructed and created by those institutions. This article was written using data from the actual reference letters that NYPL correctional services have received. The article goes on to talk about the term digital divide. This term, otherwise referred to as information poverty, has been contested due to the binaries that it creates and simplification and stigmatization that it reinforces. They state that creating binaries related to the digital divide can be dangerous by placing librarians in a higher viewed position of power. They argue that the problem of information access is not solely the result of a lack of internet.

I found this point interesting due to the already existing idea that people in jail or prison are coming from a place of poverty and that by placing them in a binary of digital divide, scholars are reinforcing that separation, while also adding another level of authoritative power above them.

Conclusion:

Although I do not have an answer to many of the questions I have raised here, I did find it enlightening to have seen how some of the critical questions and theoretical frameworks we have been introduced to as students fit into real world situations. My day spent at the NYPL correctional services has made me think about these questions in a different manner. There has already been much discussion on how some of these issues of power play out differently between public and academic libraries, however when dealing with a public library situated in a very specific authoritative politized institution they take on another new role.

 

“Future research should address the information that incarcerated users have, not what those of us on the outside imagine they do not.”(Rabina, 2016.)

 

Resources:

American Library Association. (2017) “Prison Libraries”. Retrieved from http://libguides.ala.org/PrisonLibraries/Home

Birdsall, W. (2001) “A political economy of librarianship?” Progressive Librarian, 18, Summer 2001. Retrieved from https://lms.pratt.edu/pluginfile.php/828932/mod_resource/content/0/02_Birdsall_2001.pdf

Lehmann, V., Locke, J., & International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions, T. H. (Netherlands). (2005). Guidelines for Library Services to Prisoners. 3rd Edition. IFLA Professional Reports, No. 92. International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions. Retrieved fromhttps://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED497652.pdf

Rabina, D., Drabinski, E., & Paradise, L. (2016) “Information needs in prisons and jails: A discourse analytic approach.” De Gruyter. Retrieved from https://lms.pratt.edu/pluginfile.php/829457/mod_resource/content/0/2016_Libri.pdf

Posted on by Amber Pasiak 0

Pop Up Museums: User Centered-Research at it’s Full Potential by Sloan Strader

The phenomena of “Pop Up Museums” has taken the art world by storm. Known for their trendy themes, and picture perfect exhibitions these sites present a real challenge to traditional museums and cultural institutions. Some disagree with the use of the word “museum” to describe these sites as they appear to fall short of particular requirements like, a permanent collection or a physical permanent location. According  to the International Council on Museums (ICOM):

“A museum is a non-profit, permanent institution in the service of society and its development, open to the public, which acquires, conserves, researches, communicates and exhibits the tangible and intangible heritage of humanity and its environment for the purposes of education, study and enjoyment” (ICOM 2016).

Pop Up Museums are more fluid, they move from place to place depending on interest. Unlike traveling exhibitions, Pop Up Museums do not need the support of a museum as a host. Instead any space can be rented out to host the exhibition.  They are less of an institution and more of an experience, one of the many reasons for their rise in popularity. I chose to attend a Pop Up Museum as opposed to a traditional museum because I was curious to observe patrons in a completely user-centered information environment marketed towards contemporary interests like taking selfies.

For my observation assignment I visited The Museum of Illusions, which arrived in New York a few months ago. I would describe the museum as a “hyper interactive space”, where the focus was not on art, historical objects, or other things we’d typically find in museums but instead was focused almost entirely on games. According to their website, the museum’s purpose is to “offer you an intriguing visual, sensory and educational experience with a handful of new, unexplored illusions” (Museum of Illusions 2018). I went to the exhibition alone so I was unable to participate in some of the activities. I spent a majority of my time watching several families and made the following observations during my visit:

1. Instagram Focus

While walking around the exhibition I noticed the following image at each stop posted on the floor. A graphic of a camera encouraging the patron to stand in that precise spot to take a photo, suggestively for Instagram, Twitter, or some other form of social media as the graphic was followed by “#museumofillusions”. This idea of “Insta-worthy” museum spaces is what makes Pop Up Museums a competitor to traditional museums and cultural institutions. 

During my visit every patron had their phone out to take pictures, which is not odd behavior in a museum per say, but I was surprised by how much phones were being used. It felt as if I did not have my cell phone I would be missing out on part of the experience. This makes me wonder if there is a shift away from museum objects and their collections, or their information value, towards their entertainment value. Are pop-up museums perhaps an over-correction of traditional museums historical difficulty of engaging with their audiences? Especially in thinking about younger generations who may not be as interested in visiting a history or art museum, the Museum of Illusions is approachable and fun. I saw a lot of families with children ranging from toddlers, to teenagers, to grandparents running around the exhibition, taking pictures, and playing with the installations.

2. Multi-User Interactive Activities

As I mentioned I wish I would have attended the exhibition with a friend. As most of the pieces were intended for use by two or more people! The interactive component of the museum not only makes it more fun for patrons, but also speaks to the intentions of curators or exhibition designers. In our readings about user-centered research, focus has either been placed on the user as an individual or on the community. I would love to learn more about the relationships between users in an information environment. Seeing families and friends interact with one another at the museum was one of my biggest takeaways. One of the more simple illusions was a kaleidoscope with openings at both ends for people to look at one another through. I imagine the effect was much cooler when doing this activity with another person, as when I did it on my own the kaleidoscope did not produce the same effect. The most popular piece on view combines my early point about Instagram potential with social elements. Upstairs there is a room with furniture set up on its side, when people stand in this room they can take photos that create the illusion they are suspended.

I observed a family who spent about fifteen minutes planning how they were going to stage this photo. What I witnessed was more than the typical Instagram posing, instead the daughters were problem solving with their parents, engaging with the illusion part of the piece by trying to figure out how to take the photo. My observations of the relationships and interactions I saw at the Museum of Illusions makes me consider the importance of social interaction in information environments, and how this may be one of the reasons for Pop Up Museums popularity and success.

3. Size of Exhibition + Cost

My two biggest criticisms of the Museum of Illusion would be size and cost. A student ticket was $18 and family tickets are $53. I understand why museums charge admission fees, but am baffled as to why the Museum of Illusions cost so much. The exhibition itself has no more 20 pieces. It took me about 45 minutes to go through the museum and I spent the rest of my time watching patrons interact with the exhibition. This made me think about incentive and how museums can successfully entice users into visiting their spaces. As someone who worked in visitor services at an art museum I have overheard a lot of griping and complaining about whether or not museums are worth their admission fee, but surprisingly enough the patrons at the Museum of Illusions seemed to be happy costumers. The museum seemed to know its market very well, and shaped the exhibitions to the wants and needs of the people.

All in all my observation of the Museum of Illusions as an information environment was eye opening. As a critic of the Pop Up Museum phenomenon, I was wary of what these temporary exhibitions with seemingly arbitrary themes had to offer patrons. Yet in thinking about my observation in conversation with Sanna Talja and Jenna Hartel’s arguements in their essay Revisting the user-centred turn in information science research: an intellectual history perspective, Pop Up Museums appear to be a natural progression in the over arching trend of information studies and user interaction. Talja and Hartel argue:

“The conceptualization of ‘users’ in the dual role of producer and consumer of information yields a broad and active role to the user. Garvey and Gottfredson (1979: 320) not only assumed that users should be placed at the center of systems designed and planned by someone else, they stressed that innovations and interventions in communication systems must ultimately be designed in collaboration with, or within, scholarly communities themselves or they will not become efficient and effective” (Talja Hartel 6).

Although the systems referred to in this passage are academic, the framework presented can be useful in helping us understand the success and overall importance of Pop Up Museums as information environments in the digital age. The Museum of Illusions is a direct response to the entertainment needs of its patrons, an observation that’s visible in the way the exhibition is constructed. The entertainment value of the space seems to take precedent over the content, but does not inhibit the exhibition’s success. The museum’s focus on fun as opposed to prestige or namesake makes this information environment approachable and in turn, accessible.

 

  

Works Cited:

  1. Hartel, Jenna & Talja, Sanna. (2007). Revisting the user-centred turn in information science research: an intellectual history perspective
  2. ICOM. (2017). ICOM Definition of a Museum. http://archives.icom.museum/definition.html
  3. Museum of Illusions New York. About Us. https://newyork.museumofillusions.us/about-us/
Posted on by Sloan Strader 0

Meetup: Designing Technology for Older Adults

In September, I attended my first Meetup – ‘Designing Technology for Older Adults.’ The speaker was Yasmin Felberbaum, a Ph.D. student at the University of Haifa. The focus of the talk was threefold: (1) the challenges of designing for older adults; (2) the design decisions that could improve products for these users; and (3) examples of well and poorly-designed products aimed at older adults. For this article, I will use Felberbaum’s research to show how these design considerations tie into our readings about user-centered design, design justice and the political economy of information. First, I will highlight the design challenges associated with older adults, and how these are undergoing a transformation. Next, I will discuss what inclusive design means in the context of Chock’s ‘Design Justice.’ Finally, I will use Felberbaum’s research to show how we can best design for an elderly population, reflecting principles championed by the Design Justice movement.

Design challenges for older adults 

The event began by defining an ‘older adult’ as anyone over the age of 65 and highlighting the challenges associated with designing for this segment of the population. These fall into three main categories:

  • Physical – motor changes, e.g., inability to hold a device for an extended time;
  • Mental – cognitive and emotional changes, e.g., loss of loved ones may cause depression or decreased motivation;
  • Educational – low levels of technology training and skills are still prevalent.

Due to population increases and improved life expectancy, estimates currently put the number of adults aged 65+ at roughly 2 billion by 2050, according to Felberbaum. However, the older adults of today are vastly different from those of the future, a point which Norman references in his ‘Being Analog’ article. As our everyday lives are becoming increasingly complex, ‘the slow evolutionary pace of life is no longer up to the scale and pace of technological change’; meaning that humans must now try to keep up with ever-increasing and oppressive amounts of knowledge. As a result, the current generation of young, digital native adults, are being shaped by different experiences with technology. They have higher expectations for technology to help them cope with so much information. The way that young adults today interact with technology is also fundamentally different. According to Benkler’s ‘The Wealth of Networks,’ our interaction with technology today is much more pervasive than it was 50 years ago. The conclusion we can draw from this is that to disregard older adults as an insignificant portion of technology consumers is seriously misguided. Not only will they become increasingly significant in size and purchasing power, but they will also be more demanding in the quality of that technology and how it serves their lives. They will be healthier and better technically educated and will fully expect to be included and designed for, much as they would have been when younger.

‘Design Justice’ as a way to overcome exclusive design processes

One of the main arguments presented by Felberbaum was that stereotypes about technology products for older adults, e.g., low adoption rates, are often a result of the exclusion of the user group from the design process. This omittance is just one example of designers overlooking users who do not conform to the stereotypical ‘imagined user […]. In the U.S., this means straight white middle-class, cisgender men, with educational privilege and high technological literacy, citizenship, native English speakers’ and, I would also add, young age. Constanza-Chock discusses recent attempts to overcome this in her Design Justice article. Design Justice champions a set of principles that, when included in the design process, should fairly and accurately represent marginalized users. It recognizes that the participation of these end users in the design process is crucial to creating products that are valuable for them. This is relevant to Felberbaum’s presentation, as she gathered her insights through the direct participation of older adults in her research process. She conducted in-depth interviews with her users, who were questioned and observed while using technology products with both inclusive and universal designs. The feedback gathered included which products users were more likely to adopt and why, what product issues they could not overlook and what they found attractive or helpful. Here is a clear example of Design Justice at work: the inclusion of the participants and recipients of the design as key contributors.

Constanza-Chock also presents the idea that designers with diverse backgrounds and experiences, especially those from marginalized communities, could help broaden perceptions of the ‘imagined user,’ resulting in fewer overlooked groups. While this is a worthy goal that should be encouraged, it may prove difficult when considering an elderly population. One of the very reasons that old adult marginalization occurs in design is because they are physically or mentally unable to participate in the process, or are retired from the workforce. Therefore, advocating that adults over 65 become designers to mitigate their exclusion may not be feasible. In these cases, applying concepts of user-centered and empathy-driven design become even more critical. These can help to supplement knowledge and experience gaps when designing for users that cannot fully participate in a process that was created precisely for their inclusion.

Best practice design for older adults

The final part of the event focused on the insights Felberbaum gathered from her research with older adults. These can be summed up as:

  • The social or gamification component of a product was vital to secure adoption and continued use;
  • Adoption only happens where there is a clear added value, e.g., what am I gaining by using this, that justifies introducing a new habit at a late stage of life;
  • The design should be universal and not inclusive – older adults did not want to use products aimed specifically at them due to stigma or emotions in acknowledging a perceived diminished place in society;
  • The lower the interaction and learnability requirement to use the product or device, the higher the adoption rate;
  • Where new information is necessary to use the product, this must build on existing or prior knowledge to secure adoption;

These insights provide good examples of best practice when designing for adults over 65, and they were all elicited by communicating with the target user group. These insights also touch on one of the action’s outlined in Gehner’s article, specifically: ‘understand that charity is not dignity; dignity is inclusion.’ I think this is particularly poignant and applicable to the outcomes of Felberbaum’s research as the products that had the most success were those that did not treat older adults as a separate segment of the population that needed unique designs. The older adults interviewed wanted to feel included, empowered and just like everyone else by being able to use the same products as their children and grandchildren – universal design was overwhelmingly the preferred choice.

Conclusion

The event made me think critically about my relationship with technology as a future older adult. It was also significant, as an aspiring UX designer, to see an example of design justice at work providing higher quality insights. Often, as Norman points out, what we attribute as issues with users, are a result of poorly designed products. Stereotypes, such as low adoption rates among older adults, are dangerous because they similarly focus the problem on the user and not the product, making designers less inclined to change their design process. The key takeaway for me was that it doesn’t matter what user segment you are designing for – if a user-centered approach is used, adoption will occur.

Works cited:

  • Costanza-Chock, S (2018). Design Justice: towards an intersectional feminist framework for design theory and practice, Design Research Society 2018.
  • Norman, D. A. (1998). The Invisible Computer: Why Good Products Can Fail, the Personal Computer is So Complex, and Information Appliances are the Solution. MIT Press. Chapter 7: Being Analog.
  • Benkler, Y. (2006). “Introduction: a moment of opportunity and challenge” in The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. Yale University Press, 1–18.
  • Gehner, J. (2010). Libraries, Low-Income People, and Social Exclusion, Public Library Quarterly, 29:1, 39-47.
Posted on by afelberg 0

Event Reflection-WLA Immigration and Library Service in 2018

This event, held at the Westchester Library System Headquarters in Elmsford, NY, consisted of a panel discussion with Carola Bracco, executive director of an organization assisting immigrants in Westchester County called Neighbors Link; Karin Ponzer, the organization’s legal counsel; and Karen LaRocca-Fels, Director of the Ossining Public Library.

For an event of only 90 minutes, a lot of ground was covered. Much attention was given to challenges facing the library system in connection to the increase of immigrants, both documented and undocumented, in Westchester County. Aside from the language barrier, immigrants were reported to be hesitant to use the library services because they perceive the library as a government institution which might turn them in to ICE . Another source of worry is the few examples of hostility from the residents toward immigrants. As an example, prior to an event the WLA held in conjunction with the Ecuadorean Consulate, an anonymous phone call was made threatening to call ICE.

Before addressing more local issues, Karin Ponzer, the legal counsel for Neighbors Link, began with a overview of recent developments in national policy affecting immigrant communities. She noted that there is no constitutional right to stay in the United States unless one is a U.S citizen. This is as true with asylum seekers as it is with economic migrants. Supposedly in the interest of national security, benefits have become increasingly denied to immigrants. Ms. Pozner lamented that the Attorney General has been interfering with the judicial branch to rewrite law so as to extend the authority of the Federal Government. She concluded with remarking that current restrictions on immigrants are worse than they were after 9/11.

One of the primary issues discussed was the challenges surrounding immigrants obtaining library cards. Currently, one is required to provide a picture I.D, however many immigrants are not carrying photo IDs with them for fear of being stopped by ICE. One of the solutions offered was that immigrants could get Westchester County IDs for $18.00. This would necessitate going to the county clerk’s office, which some immigrants may be wary of doing. If was further suggested that libraries may be able to become qualified to give these IDs themselves. This would require a change in legislation at the local level, but it was indicated that this would not be exceedingly hard to do. The panelists emphasized how important it is for immigrants, irrespective of their status, to be able to use the library services. Libraries have been a reliable place for immigrants to gain information on the Immigration Protection Act and education in technology.

The panelists also suggested that  a policy be introduced in the unlikely event ICE entered the library to apprehend anyone suspected of being undocumented. Ms. Ponzer reviewed some of the  current ICE policies. At the moment, though it may change, ICE’s current policy is that it would not enter educational facilities (including libraries), funerals and weddings, and places of worship. Ms.Ponzer noted that the library is required to comply with the police because that is a matter of criminal law, however, because ICE operates under civil law, libraries have fewer obligations. ICE would need a judicial warrant before the library is legally bound to cooperate fully. In contrast, an administrative warrant, which is easily distinguishable by how it looks, is not legally binding.

This discussion reflects an issue of paramount importance for the information profession in general. David Bawden and  Lyn Robinson, in their book Introduction to Information Science, state that  the “main areas of concern within information ethics include…universal access, information poverty and the digital divide” (237). Ensuring that immigrants have access to the library is essential for addressing the issue of information poverty and providing universal access.

http://www.westchesterlibraryassociation.org/

 

Posted on by Benjamin Ottenstein 0

Understanding media and technology | NYCML’18

NYCML Banner

What is NYC Media Lab’18

Every year, NYC Media Lab hosts a summit where investors, professionals and students come together to present projects and ideas. This year’s NYC Media Lab Annual Summit was held at The New School on September 20th. There were thought-provoking debates, hands-on workshops and 100 demos. Attendees appeared thrilled to explore the future of digital media innovation.

Keynote speakers

Keynote speakers were Thomas Reardon, CEO and CO-Founder of CTRL-Labs, and Maya Wiley, Senior Vice President for Social Justice and Co-director, Digital Equity Lab The New School.

Thomas Reardon in conversation with Satish Rao at NYCML’18

Reardon’s talk was the highlight of the event. It was very engaging and insightful. Reardon has received his PhD in Neuroscience from Columbia University. The core idea of his discussion was very similar to what Don Norman said in his book “The Invisible Computer”. Norman discusses what computers are good at and what humans are good at. He then suggests that technology is designed and people are being asked to conform to the needs of the computer. Although it is useful to take advantage of the strengths of the computer, this only works if the machine adapts itself to human requirements. Reardon presented a technological solution to issue Norman discussed in his book. He discussed the huge gap between human input and human output. How neural interfaces can solve the output delay problems. He explained that muscles are causing delays in the output, and if we manage to read the mind, we can eliminate muscles from the process. He argued that capturing intention, not just motion and making it work, is the future. He also mentioned that this technology will help people with motor neuron diseases. After hearing his ideas, I am very excited to learn more about neural control and robotics.

Maya Wiley in conversation with Kai Falkenberg at NYCML’18

Wiley is a nationally renowned expert on racial justice and equality. She discussed that technology is driving policies and urged entrepreneurs to model their business to help low-income households. She highlighted the difficulties that low income, coloured neighbourhoods face. Her talk was insightful and made me think about the effects of technology on underprivileged populations.  As suggested by Jentery Sayers that blending together collaboration, experimental media, and social justice research can bring a new trajectory for American and cultural studies.

Project Showcase

Project Showcase NYCML’18

Seven innovative startups presented their ideas and prototypes. Some notable projects that inspired me were:

Ovee

Jane Mitchell and Courtney Snavely presented Ovee

Ovee is a project by Jane Mitchell and Courtney Snavely. It is a platform that creates a community that supports women as they navigate reproductive health issues. Ovee is my favourite project because I can relate to the problems it is addressing.

Let’s Make History

Ilana Bonder and Hadar Ben-Tzur presenting Let’s Make History

Lead team members of the project are Ilana Bonder and Hadar Ben-Tzur. In the mobile application of Let’s Make History, a user can travel back in time to Washington Square Park through augmented reality. Users can also join Wallace and June- two young activists on a 1968 spring day, in a cinematic experience.

The Secret Club
A system developed by Rongxin Zhang, Kirollos Morkos and Yijia Wang, The Secret Club monitors sensitive news websites and stores backups of articles in a censorship-resistant network. The project can have significant value in authoritarian regimes where the public wants free access to information. This project is a very good example of Libration technology. Larry Diamond explains libration technology as a medium which enables citizens to report news, expose wrongdoing, express opinions, mobilize protest, monitor elections, scrutinize government, deepen participation, and expand the horizons of freedom.
The great synthetic media debate

NYCML hosted an interesting discussion on the future of synthetic media. For some, computer-generated images, videos, text and voices can be a source of entertainment and yet, the potential for danger is extraordinary. This debate was set to address the proposition, “synthetic media will do more good than harm,”. Ken Perlin, a professor in the Department of Computer Science at New York University and Eli Pariser, an Omidyar Fellow at New America Foundation were for the proposition, arguing that synthetic media will do more good than harm. Ambassador Karen Kornbluh, Senior Fellow for Digital Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations and serves as a Governor on the U.S. Broadcasting Board of Governors and Matt Hartman, a partner at betaworks ventures were against the proposition, arguing that synthetic media will do more harm than good.

Both teams started with the definition of synthetic media. Eli Pariser explained that how simple images and videos can deceit humans by showing the audience some examples. He made a point that every source of technology can be used to harm people. His team member, Ken Pariser added to his argument, explained how synthetic media changes with time and it has been there for some time. According to him, at some point radio was a medium of manipulation. The highlight of Ken Pariser’s argument was that we need to trust the goodwill of humans. He explained entertainment usage of synthetic media.

Karen Kornbluh shared her personal experience as a policymaker and explained that how technology has been challenging democracy. Policies have been made to counter those challenges and to ensure a people’s right to information. Part of her argument was that people are evil and they are going to use synthetic media for their benefits. Her argument was very similar to one in the paper Digital Life in 2025″ Abuses and abusers will ‘evolve and scale.’ Human nature isn’t changing; there’s laziness, bullying, stalking, stupidity, pornography, dirty tricks, crime, and those who practice them have new capacity to make life miserable for others.” She further added that we need to understand the harm so that we can make policies accordingly.  Matt Hartman claimed that most of the examples of synthetic media are harmful. He acknowledged the entertainment aspects of synthetic media. Referring to the current situation in USA’s Politics he added that we are witnessing the threat posed to our democracy by synthetic media.

This debate was moderated by Manoush Zomorodi, co-founder of Stable Genius Productions. Both teams presented solid arguments. In the end, I agreed with Karen Kornbluh and Matt Hartman that synthetic media has the potential to do more harm and it is important that we create policies accordingly.

Demo Expo

Some interesting projects from Demo Expo

At the expo, students displayed emerging media and technology prototypes. It was an amazing experience for me. The astounding ideas presented by the students were motivational for me. It will be interesting to see how augmented and virtual reality are going to impact the world.

That’s me

Summit’s like NYCML’18 can bring people from the tech industry and academia together, to work towards a better future for humanity in this advanced technological world.

Cited Work

Anderson and University’s – NUMBERS, FACTS AND TRENDS SHAPING THE WORLD.Pdf. https://lms.pratt.edu/pluginfile.php/831785/mod_resource/content/0/PIP_Report_Future_of_the_Internet_Predictions_031114.pdf. Accessed 10 Dec. 2018.

Anderson, Janna, and Elon University’s. NUMBERS, FACTS AND TRENDS SHAPING THE WORLD. p. 61.

Larry Diamond. “Liberation Technology.” Journal of Democracy, vol. 21, no. 3, 2010, pp. 69–83. Crossref, doi:10.1353/jod.0.0190.

Larry Diamond – 2010 – Liberation Technology.Pdf. https://lms.pratt.edu/pluginfile.php/831842/mod_resource/content/1/21.3.diamond.pdf. Accessed 10 Dec. 2018.

Press, The MIT. “The Invisible Computer.” The MIT Press, https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/invisible-computer. Accessed 10 Dec. 2018.

Sayers, Jentery. Technology | Keywords for American Cultural Studies. https://keywords.nyupress.org/american-cultural-studies/essay/technology/. Accessed 10 Dec. 2018.

 

Helpful Links

https://nycmedialab.org/
https://nycmedialab.org/prototyping-projects/
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEV0ObzNb_nFzrGS841niIA

 

Posted on by Aimen Awan 0

ASIS&T Webinar: “Information Practice in International, Collaborative, Publicly Funded, Data Driven, Digital Humanities Projects”

I attended the ASIS&T webinar, “Information Practice in International, Collaborative, Publicly Funded, Data Driven, Digital Humanities Projects”  presented by, Alex H. Poole (PhD), and Deborah A. Garwood (MSLIS, PhD student) from the Drexel University Department of Information Science. Within the contents of this 50 minute long presentation observations and recommendations were issued about 5 key categories of analysis relating to the grant based program Digging Into Data Challenge. 

Those areas include:

  • Collaborative and Interdisciplinary work
  • Pedagogy and Researcher Skills
  • Librarians and Archivists
  • Project Management
  • Data Management

Before we delve into specifics lets establish an understanding of what the Digging Into Data Challenge is.

According to their own website the goal of DID is

“–to address how “big data” changes the research landscape for the humanities and social sciences. Now that we have massive databases of materials available for research…what new, computationally-based research methods might we apply? Digging into Data challenges the research community to help create the new research infrastructure for 21st-century scholarship” (About).

Along with this mission are grants which are “sponsored by several leading research funders from around the world” (About).

The participants that are awarded these grants come from varied disciplines, and areas of research like languages, linguistics, biodiversity, law, history, political science, and media/imagery studies. Poole, and Garwood decided to analyze the third round of funded projects in practice from 2013-2016 which they call DID3.  This round included 14  projects from 10 funding agencies, and 4 nations. A grand total  of 5.1 million dollars were awarded to the DID3 participants.

Qualitatively they assessed 11 of these projects utilizing  semi-structured interviews, documentary evidence, and scholarly output on the 5 key areas listed above.  The outcome was a clearer picture of the extent of information practice, adherence to mandates, and cross-discipline challenges unique to the DID3 cohort. All 5 categories exhibited fluctuations in weaknesses and strengths among participants. For the sake of this article I will focus on 2 points I found most provoking from Poole and Garwood’s analysis and what it could suggest for evolving information practices in interdisciplinary research.

Point 1:
“Pedagogy has an important yet under exploited role in publicly funded research, particularly in digital humanities”

According to Poole, and Garwood’s study participants placed strong emphasis on domain knowledge as fundamental to their research outcomes but coincidentally experienced “steep learning curves”  during the life span of their research. In fact, 21 new skills  (most of them technology related) were learned by the members of the DID3 group.

This is compelling because it points toward larger possibilities for pedological advancement along interdisciplinary lines. It also affirms strengths in fields like digital humanities where collaboration between human centered questions and technology are championed and heavily experimented with. As evidenced by this study we are still negotiating ” the implications of the multilayered literacy associated with computers” (Selfe). A literacy that may be fettered by exclusionary domain practices and inflexibility within specializations.

Pedagogy must respond to the swelling need for variable research. The future is presenting, and often demanding more opportunities for blended knowledge between technological and traditional modes of study. Departments that seek “collaboration across disciplines and institutions, working with primary sources and archives, strategically selecting technologies under financial constraints, and working within networks and connecting with local communities…will ultimately rise to an ethical level of civic engagement”(Alexander and Frostdavis). 

As Poole and Garwood suggest,

“We must imbricate domain types and computational expertise in data, as well as coordinate curricula among all stakeholders.”

If this cohort reveals anything  it is that by expanding our pedagogy in open and “multilayered” methods, especially those with computational focuses, future research will be more representative and more prepared for our society and its digital iterations.

Point 2:
“Apparent non-involvement of information professionals (librarians and archivists)  in these projects is quite deceptive as it was so foundational as to escape notice”

According to Poole and Garwood’s case study, only 5 of 53 participants in the DID3 are active librarians and archivists. What is glaringly obvious is their limited number of official contributions seem to be essential to the missions of  DID3  funded research. Those contributions are:

  1. Physical Hosting
  2. Virtual Hosting
  3. Visualizations
  4. fair use and copyright
  5. liaison work
  6. User Testing
  7. Translation Work
  8. Curation

Unfortunately it seems the tenants of librarianship are being  utilized regardless of their official inclusion in research.  According to Poole and Garwood most researchers admitted using core competencies rooted in LIS, but never consulted a professional. Particularly worrisome is that the  DID3 cohort rather inconsistently fulfilled their open data missions and opted for traditional publications which paywalled users from access, or developed websites which stopped being updated after research was finished.

One participant claimed he utilized information professionals as unofficial supporters and was simply unaware of their knowledge due to “miscommunication”.  Another participant with an MLIS degree said that researchers don’t ask about her prowess due to the stereotypes that fall around “librarianship” and its competencies.

Largely these assumptions of what librarians/archivist can and can not do are a part of a cyclical historical trend where the “quest for professional status has been an area of insecurity since the beginnings of the modern profession, particularly for those relying on local authorities or remuneration”(Luthmann). Some reports suggest the “stereotype still exists within the public perception and may act as a powerful deterrent to library use“(Luthmann).

It is urgent that researchers not be admonished, but rather provided with accurate representations of the librarians at their institutions, services they provide, and comprehensive explanations of their expertise. After all, how does one gain status and respect if the credit is rarely given, or opportunities scarcely offered?

Attaining professionals versed in curation, fair use, and liaison work in a research capacity will only help with open access, and longevity. One researcher in the study  admitted their librarian  “could do things with data visualizations that we couldn’t” and  functions like curation are “a really significant issue, otherwise your not going to be able to use this data yourself let alone make it available to anyone else.”

‘Miscommunication’ and negative tropes about librarianship will only be abolished by giving credit where it is due.  Seeking librarians, and archivists early on to be included in decisions in data’s retrievability and life cycle will have long lasting effects for accessibility. Developing  channels between information professionals and researchers will inevitably widen the currents of expertise, and result in a long overdue partnership of accountability and respect.

Conclusion:

Poole and Garwood’s study is crucial in how we develop effective strategies for the humanities and its scientific infrastructure.

As they point out,

“We must engage funders and researchers in a process that facilitates ongoing liaison, tracking outcomes and supporting researchers subsequent endeavors”

Presumably we must also reach across disciplinary, and professional boundaries. The byproduct of this action could be one of inclusivity and expansion on topics that could shape how we understand humanity and its residues going forward.

 

 

Works Cited

“About .” Digging Into Data, Trans-Atlantic Platform, diggingintodata.org/about.

Alexander, Bryan, and Rebecca Frostdavis. “Should Liberal Arts Campuses Do Digital Humanities? Process and Products in the Small College World.” Debates in the Digital Humanities, 2012, pp. 368–389., doi:10.5749/minnesota/9780816677948.003.0037.

Luthmann, Abigail. “Librarians, Professionalism and Image: Stereotype and Reality.” Library Review, vol. 56, no. 9, 2007, pp. 773–780., doi:10.1108/00242530710831211.

Selfe, Cynthia. “Computers in English Departments: The Rhetoric of Technopower.” ADE Bulletin, 1988, pp. 63–67., doi:10.1632/ade.90.63.

 

 

Posted on by Seth Crider 0

ALSC Webinar: “Advocacy for Everyone”

The Association for Library Service to Children hosted a webinar, “Advocacy for Everyone,” on Wednesday, October 3, 2018. Four panelists, moderated by librarian Africa Hands, discussed Advocacy in relation to children and youth librarianship.

The first question Hands asked was about how advocacy related to children and youth librarianship. The first speaker was Brian Hart, board member of Greensboro Public Library in North Carolina. He believed in the importance of intentionality in interacting with the public. When a librarian is deliberate in telling parents the value of bringing their children to libraries, it  that e and child to be advocates for the library. He emphasized that libraries help create a civil, confident, educated society through providing to children. By giving this perspective and language to parents, parents can then go out into their own network and spread the message about the positive effects of utilizing the library. This brings in the community and provides unity, which fosters advocacy. Confidence is a large part of the work.

John Gehner’s article, “Libraries, Low-Income People, and Social Exclusion,” discussed how social exclusion can minimized by the efforts of libraries. Hart’s point about deliberate action to speaking with patrons, therefore empowering them utilize the library and be advocates, is aligned with Gehner’s idea that librarians can remove barriers that cause exclusion by doing one-on-one interactions, offering welcoming orientations, and accommodating visitors. Once libraries welcome patrons, and will patrons demonstrate the value of libraries, which then allows libraries to advocate for resources to provide even more service to the community.

A second answer for the question about advocacy was answered by Gretchen Caserotti, Library Director of Meridian Library District in Idaho. She emphasized that the work of advocacy is not insular. She pointed out the potentially strong relationship betweens libraries, schools, and other youth-related programs. With this, public speaking becomes a valuable skill for libraries because advocacy requires communication. She described it as an asset in advocacy.

Gehner’s fourth action, “Get out of the library and get to know people,” discussed this point. The article listed three points that library staff must do, the third one being  “build and rebuild relationships between and among local residents, local associations, and local institutions.” As Caserotti explained in the webinar, physically going out to meet people is essential to connecting and advocating.

The next question Hands asked was about whose role it was to lobby for advocacy. Constance Moore, Vice President of Bucks County Free Library in Pennsylvania, believed it was broadly everyone’s job. Hart and Caserotti specified that different levels of government, and different groups in general, have varying roles. Hart, being a board member himself, believed that smaller organizations have more information about a local landscape, and therefore are equipped to position the library for advocacy success. Caserotti emphasized that each level of the government affects libraries, and the communities libraries serve, in multiple ways. She wanted to note the importance of considering each level, and having the “right” people for each issue. For example, a library board makes sense on a state level, where as a city council make sense on a city level.

The job of advocating by the general public is also easier with the internet. In Pew Research Center’s article, “Digital Life in 2025”, Janna Anderson noted, “political awareness and action will be facilitated and more peaceful change and public uprisings like the Arab Spring will emerge.“ Because social media allows for the general public to advocate for a mission, Moore’s push to having everyone lobby is much easier. It also allows different levels of authority to advocate simultaneously and tackle the same issue from different angles.

At the same time, there are dangers to using the internet for advocacy. There may be mixed messages or over-saturation of information. While a violent uprising is unlikely in an American library in 2018, it is possible that miscommunication can hinder advocacy rather than promoting it.

Hands’ next question asked about the process of lobbying and advocacy. Kristen Figliulo, Program Officer for Continuing Education at ALSC, believed that everything from phone calls to physically being in a room and testifying, is valuable, since legislation is a long process. She also believed in the value of building relationships before issues appear, so by the time they do, libraries feel comfortable reaching out. A way to develop a relationship includes inviting legislators for tours, sending them information about events, and overall keeping them up to date about events happening or involving the library. Figliulo also emphasized the value of building a relationship with the media. As mentioned earlier in the Pew Research article, the internet, where most of the media lives, allows for facilitation of change.

One issue Hands brought up was the issue of the boundaries of advocacy. Caserotti believed that context is important. For example, public agencies may not always allow public funds to be used for advocacy. Therefore, advocacy may have to come from different positions. Being “on the clock” versus “off the clock” affects how a message may be interpreted. Returning to Gehner’s article, the fifth action was, “understand that charity is not dignity; dignity is inclusion.” Advocacy allows for inclusion, but aggressive, blind, thoughtless advocacy may create what Gehner described as a “disconnect between saying we serve everyone and actually doing so.” In advocacy, the position of not only the community, but the librarians, must also be considered.

The final question asked the panelists, what is one small act of advocacy that you can do every day as a library employee? Hart, coming full circle, believed that confidence and openness to speaking about the positive effects of the library on the community. Caserotti emphasized the value of statistics. Reference clicking and program attendance are few of the ways to quantify the value of a library. She also described the “share up” idea. Librarians may hear about stories every day in the stacks, but directors such as herself don’t hear the stories. She believed that if librarians trained themselves to share the stories of the library doing good for the community, it empowers her, as a leader, to do more.

The webinar addressed many issues in the context of children and youth librarianship. However, many points about advocacy are applicable to the wider reach of librarianship, and information science as a whole. From finding the “right person” for the right level of government, to the data tracking and face-to-face communication of a larger public, actions for advocacy can be applied across a range of institutions, organizations, and missions.

Alvina Lai

Fall 2018

Posted on by Alvina Lai 0