LIS 9763

1. Has your view of social software changed since starting this course? If so, how?

When I started this course, I initially thought that I knew nothing about social software. Later, I realized that I had either looked into or tried many of them early on, did not find them particularly useful, and forgot that I even knew about them. Web 2.0 stuff have become popular and more user friendly as time went on, so it was good to rediscover some of them and learn about the newer ones I’ve missed.

Also, I was surprised to find how text-heavy many of the web 2.0 applications are. Twitter, facebook, wikis, blogs, delicious, RSS, … with the exception of Second Life, youtube and flickr, many of the web 2.0 software leave you with a constant barrage of text.  I used to think that web 2.0 was more along the lines of media sharing, so I was expecting more high-tech, visual and immersive technologies. 

 
2. What would you consider to be the low-hanging fruit, i.e. the tools that could be implemented easily and with the greatest impact?

I would say none are low-hanging fruit. With the exception of something like Second Life, all the web 2.0 applications can be implemented easily. But none are guaranteed to have the greatest or any impact at all. RSS is really easy to implement, but from my observations, it's not well known. It seems to be something that people don't even notice unless someone else tell them about it. I was talking to my supervisor, and she was saying that RSS is very useful, but it never really took off the way everyone imagined it would.  

Blogs are another really easy tool, although its impact is, again, dubious. The problem for blogs is content creation. If you aren't able to generate good content continously, upkeep becomes difficult. It reminds me of a saying I heard before that went something like this, “Anyone can write one good book. Only a true writer can do so continuously.” If libraries can figure out a way to have their users be the ones who submit relevant blog content (or at least request what content they would like to be written), they’ve pretty much succeeded in implementing true web 2.0.  

 
3. What social software tools (if any) do you consider to have the least potential for library service and why?
 
From a user’s perspective, I don't think I found any of the web 2.0 technologies in the manner that they were implemented so far as being particularly appealing or geared towards my interests. Most implementations has struck me as being library-centric.  

The best practices I’ve seen so far were focused on collaboration among employees of the library or used for networking among librarians. I'm not sure that any of these technologies in their current state are optimally geared towards providing library service to patrons, although with some tweaking, they might work. While I wouldn’t recommend bandwagoning on any of these technologies without just cause, I wouldn’t count any of them out yet.

I suspect when the dust settles, the usage of web 2.0 technologies in libraries will be vastly different from what we are seeing in the case studies.

 
4. Tell us about your personal experiences with the social software tools we’ve used & looked at this term. Which tools have worked for you, which haven’t?

I would say that wikis were a surprise and I didn’t realize how flexible and useful they can be, especially the concept of creating private wikis or easy webpages. Delicious is great for storing my low-use links. RSS has made receiving information faster and is a great gateway to other web 2.0 content. I normally can’t be bothered to check out youtube. But I’ve been getting RSS feeds that have included youtube videos, so I’ve started watching a lot more. Ditto for blogs thanks to my Google Reader.

I can’t imagine being bored enough to want to follow someone on Twitter. Or logging on to Second Life to socialize with people I don’t know.

 
5. How has the distance ed. experience been for you?

I’m not a fan of distance education in general and prefer the in-class whenever possible. However, since web 2.0 technologies are so easy to use, the learning-on-your-own part wasn’t too difficult. The course was more about reflecting on our experiences using the software, the readings, and case studies, so I think the blog format and commenting was suited to that.
 

6. Do you have any suggestions for improving the learning experience of this course? (e.g. readings, weekly activities, assignments, etc.)

On the plus side: I think that the mid-term feedback for participation was a great idea. It was the first class where I had it and I would actually like to see the practice spread to the rest of the program. I have been speaking with other students in the program and found that many have complaints about how participation marks are allocated and several feel blind-sighted about their end-of-term participation marks.

One suggestion for improvement would be to include more Canadian content in the case studies. Web 2.0 is being adopted by many Canadian schools and businesses, and examining some of their examples (good and bad), might be a way to bring a reality check aspect to the case studies.