Download - Learning about learning 2.0: evaluating the New South Wales public library Learning 2.0 program

8/14/2019 Learning about learning 2.0: evaluating the New South Wales public library Learning 2.0 program

1/23

LEARNING ABOUT LEARNING 2.0: EVALUATING THE NEW SOUTHWALES PUBLIC LIBRARY LEARNING 2.0PROGRAM

Ellen Forsyth, Mylee Joseph and Leanne Perry

Ellen Forsyth, State Library of New South Wales, Sydney 2000. E-mail:[email protected]. Mylee Joseph, State Library of New South Wales, Sydney2000. E-mail: [email protected]. Leanne Perry, State Library of New SouthWales, Sydney 2000. E-mail: [email protected].

Presented at Research Applications in Information and Library StudiesConference 5 (RAILS5) University of Technology, Sydney 23 January, 2009.

AbstractThe New South Wales Learning 2.0 training program was made available to

the entire public library work force of over 2300 people in 2008 - 2009. Thispaper is a snapshot of the impact the Learning 2.0 course at September 2008,five months after the course was launched. The paper explores how thetraining has impacted on the level of skill, knowledge, and confidence relatingto web 2.0 tools.

Aim

The aim of this evaluation of the New South Wales public library Learning 2.0program is to measure the impact of self paced web 2.0 training on individualsworking in New South Wales (NSW) public libraries. In this paper the focus is

on how the training has impacted on the level of skill, knowledge, andconfidence relating to web 2.0 tools.

Background to the Learning 2.0 Program

2,344 staff are employed in 363 local government public libraries and onboard 22 mobile libraries throughout New South Wales1. From discussionsand anecdotal evidence, it became apparent to Public Library Services staff atthe State Library that a significant proportion of public library staff did notpossess the knowledge or technical skills required to fully participate in therapidly changing library service environment, including engagement with web2.0 technologies, which is emerging to meet changing client expectations inan increasingly interactive online environment.

The New South Wales public library Learning 2.0program (Learning 2.0)2 isan online self-paced training program to allow public library staff across NewSouth Wales to learn more about emerging technologies on the web. Theprogram was written by Ellen Forsyth and Mylee Joseph. They work in thePublic Library Services branch at the State Library of New South Wales. Thisteam is responsible for promotion and development of public library servicesin New South Wales. The course was based on Learning 2.0 programs from

Orange County Library System in Florida

3

and King County Library System inWashington4. Learning 2.0 is a twelve week online self-discovery training
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/23

program designed to encourage library staff to explore new web-basedtechnologies like blogs, wikis and podcasts. Each week there is a module towork through which introduces participants to new web 2.0 tools. There willoften be a video to explain the tool, participants will see examples of goodpractice library and museum implementations, and there will be an exercise to

try tools for themselves. The course included setting up a blog, exploringFlickr, tagging and Creative Commons; RSS and RSS aggregators, Wikipediaand other wikis; online video including Youtube and Google video,folksonomies, delicious and LibraryThing, answer boards, social searching,podcasts and audio, mashups, online applications and social networks.

Each participant maintains a learning blog where they write about what theyhave discovered each week. Participants are encouraged to comment oneach others blogs. The original program was designed by Helene Blowers forthe Public Library of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County5. It has a creativecommons licence which has allowed other programs to be developed,

including the programs at Orange County Library System in Florida6 and KingCounty Library System in Washington and the State Library of New SouthWales. The training program is completely built on web 2.0 technologies thatare freely available on the Internet. These sites include: Blogger, Flickr,YouTube, PBWiki & Bloglines.

The New South Wales public library Learning 2.0 program was publicisedextensively through e-mail and meetings. All public library staff wereencouraged to participate. It was presented as a course in which everyonecould participate. There were no barriers to participation from the StateLibrary. Barriers to participation occurred due to local council policies onaccess to some sites (particularly YouTube and online e-mail), speed ofconnections (broadband is not everywhere) and the level of interest ofparticipants.Course material is accessed via the internet allowing staff in rural and regionalcentres equal access to the program. As there is no prior knowledgerequired, staff with any skill level can participate. The program is self paced,allowing flexibility as to when and where it is undertaken, and how long aperson takes to complete the course. The program is built using the sameweb 2.0 tools included in the course. It is published by the State Library of

New South Wales with a Creative Commons licence allowing it to be easilyshared with other agencies.

Background on the learning 2.0 evaluation what is happeningelsewhereWhile there are more than 250 individual 23 things or Learning 2.0programs7 either completed or currently underway in almost 500 participatinglibraries worldwide, there is limited information available around the evaluationand outcomes of these programs. Where information is available it is clearthat the evaluation of the success of programs has been largely measured vianumbers of completions and feedback received via participants through blog

entries.


3/23

Some programs have actively sought feedback via surveys at the end of theprogram, typically an online evaluation in the last week of the program forexample the Minnesota Multitypes 23 Things on a Stick program.8Generallysurveys have focussed on the participant assessment of the program,including reactions to the program, both initially and at the end of the program,

favourite and least favourite parts of the program, what was most challengingabout the program, possible improvements for the program and ways web 2.0applications could be used in the participants library service.

Recently there has been a move to establish clear evidence of the impact ofthe Learning 2.0 programs on library services. Helene Blowers, the designerof the original Learning 2.0 program, 23 things9 has initiated a survey forLearning 2.0 program co-ordinators. The survey seeks to evaluate howsuccessful the program has been on a global level and what are the keyfactors for success including issues such as organisational support andincentives. The survey also attempts to measure some of the broad impacts

of the program rather than just the program itself, by including questions onthe outcomes for staff and the development of new services as a result of theprogram. Blowers survey of more than 700 course coordinators around theworld was released in August 200810 and the survey results were released inJuly 2009.11 This was a very high level survey which mainly asked aboutmotivation for participation, openness of participation, use of incentives andmanagement support

The NSW Public Library Services Learning 2.0evaluation included a range ofstrategies which sought to measure both satisfaction of participants with theprogram and the impact of the program on knowledge and use of web 2.0tools at an individual and library service level. As with other Learning 2.0evaluations feedback received via program and participant blogs were a keysource of information for evaluating the success of the program. However,unlike most other evaluations we undertook to measure the change in skilllevel of participants in web 2.0 technologies over the course of the programand at nine month post program completion. Although Mayo Clinic LibrariesLearning 2.0 program have also undertaken some evaluation of the impact oftheir program on individual participants skill levels there is little evidence thatthis level of evaluation has been undertaken in a public library Learning 2.0program context.12

Research methodologyThere are six components to the research methodologyCompletion ratesProgress of participants through the program was monitored and recorded bythe project team leaders. This information included the number of peoplestarting, the number who reached mid point and the number who completed.

Self assessment of skills and knowledgeEach participant completed an anonymous self assessment survey at thebeginning of the training program. These were deliberately anonymous as it

was important for people to be able to answer honestly. The survey wasdesigned to give a realistic snapshot of participant skills and understanding. It


4/23

was considered more important to have a state wide overview rather thantracking changes to individuals.

Mid point surveyThe mid point survey was included in the activities for week six to check how

participants were managing online learning. The survey was designed toidentify issues with the program and online learning, what was working andwhat wasnt. It was also designed to find if the current level of support beingprovided was effective.

Completion surveyThe survey, at the end of the program, repeated the questions from the midpoint survey and the self assessment. The purpose of this survey was toidentify the changes in participants perceptions of their skills and knowledgeof web 2.0 tools, and to comment on the content of, and support for, theprogram. This survey may be skewed by the high achievers completing and

others falling by the wayside and not completing the survey.

Nine month post completion surveyA nine month completion survey will be undertaken with all participants whocomplete the program. This survey will explore the longer impact of theLearning 2.0 program on library services. The survey will include looking atthe tools people are using in their libraries, what policies have changed andhow skill levels have been maintained or enhanced. This survey wasundertaken in March and the results are being analysed.

Feedback on blogsThe program was designed to elicit comments and feedback on both theprocess and progress of learning about web 2.0 tools. All participants wererequired to establish a learning diary blog which was publicly visible, linked tothe course blog roll but did not disclose their identity or library. The progressof individuals was monitored by comments and feedback posted on theirlearning blogs, and comments posted on the administrators blog.

Evaluation results

1. Program participants, progress and completion rates

More than 10% of the public library workforce in New South Wales havesuccessfully completed the program to date. While this is reasonable, initialexpectations of completion rates were much higher. Over one third of theNew South Wales public library workforce started this program. This was thelargest number of people to ever to participate in training provided by theState Library. A snapshot of the variety of roles is useful in assessingparticipation across the profile of the NSW public library workforce.

Table 1 Role of people undertaking the program

Roles No. enrolled

Library Manager 52Team leader / coordinator 91


5/23

Branch librarian / Branchlibrary officer

96

Specialist [eg. children's,reference, local studiesetc.]

176

Customer service officer 17Mobile library driver 4

Library officer / technician 165

Library assistant 240

Other 76

Total 917

The following table shows the numbers of people undertaking the program, bytype of public library at the start, midpoint and completion of the program.

Table 2 Completion rates

Start Mid point Completion

Branch Library 331 107 87

Central Library 446 149 110

Regional headquarters 67 29 18

Mobile library 6 4 2

Joint use library 7 1 3

Other 36 6 6

Total 893 296 226

Note the different totals in the tables are because not everyone chose to

provide information about the kind of library they work in.

The mix of library workplaces was useful in assessing the accessibility of thecourse and any barriers to participation and completion. The results indicatedthat staff working at a branch library were just as likely to complete the courseas those working in central and headquarters locations, ie. there were norelevant geographical barriers and staff at branch locations were equally selfmotivated to complete the course. This is useful information for planningfuture professional development activities for the NSW public library network.

2. Self assessment of skills and knowledge

The self assessment undertaken by participants at the mid point andcompletion of the program provides a clear indication of an increase inparticipant skill and knowledge level of the web 2.0 tools. As illustrated inTables 3 and 4, a clear shift in skill level was indicated in all web 2.0 tools.The shift followed a consistent pattern of moving up one stage in terms of themajority of participants skill levels. In all cases where the majority ofparticipants indicated that they were unfamiliarwith a web 2.0 tool prior to thecommencement of the course the majority of participants moved to the newuser skill and knowledge levels. Similarly where the majority of participants

indicated that they were new users prior to the commencement of the courseat the completion of the course the majority of these participants had moved


6/23

up one level to userskill and knowledge levels. By the completion of thecourse at least 82% of participants indicated they were at new user level orabove for all web 2.0 tools.

Table 3.Self assessment prior to commencing the Learning 2.0 program

0%

10%

20%

30%40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Blogs

ollaboration

oftware[eg.

agging[eg.

el.icio.us,

Online

project

Graphic

organizer

RSS

Podcasts

and

Wikisand

Wikipedia

Social

networking

Instant

messaging

nlinevideo

[eg.

igitalonline

usic[eg.

Digital

ictures[eg.

Mashups

Answer

boards[eg.

Internet

safety

Power U

User

New Use

Unfamilia

Table 4. Self assessment at completion of the Library 2.0 program

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Blogs

ollaboration

oftware[eg.

agging[eg.

del.icio.us,

Online

project

Graphic

organizer

RSS

Podcasts

and

Wikisand

Wikipedia

Social

networking

Instant

messaging

nlinevideo

[eg.

igitalonline

music[eg.

Digital

ictures[eg.

Mashups

Answer

boards[eg.

Internet

safety

Power U

User

New Us

Unfamili

3. Midpoint survey and completion survey comparisons


7/23

a. Program experience and satisfactionThe midpoint and completion surveys were designed to identify issues andoutcomes with the program and online learning more generally; what wasworking and what wasnt. Overall, issues and motivation appeared to be

similar at the midpoint and completion of the program. At both stagesparticipants identified a high level of agreement that the format of theprogram, a mix of video and text and the capacity to schedule their ownlearningwere important motivators to their learning.

The midpoint and completion survey also highlighted the importance ofinteractivity in the program, including the critical importance of State Librarystaff commenting on the public participants blogs. People wanted to knowthey were writing for a reader rather than writing on a blog that no one wasreading; this remained constant throughout the program

There was one significant difference identified at the midpoint of the programand at the end of the program. At the midpoint of the program the areas ofmost concern for participants was finding the time to complete the program.More than 54% of participants agreeing or strongly agreeing that finding 15minutes a day was their biggest challenge. Interestingly only 38% ofparticipants who completed the program indicated that they agreed or stronglyagreed that finding 15 minutes a day was the biggest challenge. Thisapparent decrease is not surprising considering that participants whocompleted the final survey were generally earlier finishers of the program anddid not appear to have significant issues with the time required to participatein the program.

b. Levels of support for the program participantsThe level of satisfaction with support provided throughout the programremained constant. Participants particularly valued the support from theState Library both in terms of responding to inquiries and providing updates. Itappeared that the preferred context for learning was a local issue. There wasno clear evidence to support the idea of learning in groups or pairs or asindividuals was the most appropriate context for learning with participantsfairly evenly split between agreeing and not agreeing that it would be easier to

work with others. However there was a strong indication that colleaguesupport was important with more than 60% agreeing or strongly agreeing thatwork colleagues were their main source of support.


8/23

Table 5. Midpoint survey: program support

Midpoint survey: program sup

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

IamawarethatIcan

contacttheStateLibraryifI

ne

edhelporsupportwith

thePublicLibraries

Learning2.0course

IhavecontactedtheState

Libraryforsupportand

helpwiththeprogram

T

heStateLibrarysupport

forthecourseis

responsiveandtimely.

ThePublicLibrary

Learning2.0weekly

updatesareauseful

sou

rceofinformationwhile

doingthecourse.

My

workcolleaguesaremy

ma

insourceofsupportfor

thecourse

Itwouldbeeasiertowork

withsomeoneelseorina

groupwhendoingthe

course

Type of suppo

LevelofAgreement

Strongly agAgree

Disagree

Strongly di

Table 6. Completion survey: program support

Com pletion s urvey-program sup

0%10%20%30%

40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

IwasawarethatIcould

contacttheStateLibraryifI

neededhelporsupportwith

thePublicLibrariesLearning

2.0course

IhavecontactedtheState

Libraryforhelporsupport

withthecourse

TheStateLibrarysupportfor

thecoursewasresponsive

andtimely.

ThePublicLibraryLearning

2.0weeklyupdateswerea

usefulsourceofinformation

whiledoingthecourse.

Myworkcolleaguesweremy

mainsourceofsupportfor

thecourse

Itwouldhavebeeneasierto

workwithsomeoneelseorin

agroupwhendoingthe

course

Type of suppo

Levelo

fagreement

Strongly a

Agree

Disagree

Strongly di

c. Application of Web 2.0 toolsThe midpoint and completion surveys also explored how participants thoughtthey may use the knowledge and skills they had gained through participationin the program. This data will be used as a basis for comparison with the datacollected in the 9 month post completion survey to explore how intentionsfollowing the course are translated into real library services and programs.This analysis will be published at a later date.

Again responses were fairly consistent across the midpoint and completionssurvey with almost 90% of participants indicating they could see applications

for web 2.0 tools in their work area. As participants progressed from themidpoint of the program there was an increase in the percentage of


9/23

participants who had actually implemented web 2.0 tools. There was also ahigh level of agreement that participants would continue to use web 2.0 toolswithin their work at both the mid and completion point of the program.

Table 5. Midpoint survey web 2.0 applications

Midpoint survey-web 2.0 ap plic

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Icansee

applications

forWeb2.0

toolsinmy

workarea

Ihavealready

implemented

web2.0tools

inmywork

areaasa

resultofthis

course

Iamlikelyto

continueto

useWeb2.0

toolsinmy

workoncethe

programis

complete

Applicatio

Levelofa

greement

Strongly agr

Agree

DisagreeStrongly dis

Table 6. Completion survey web 2.0 applications

Completion survey: web 2.0 applications

0%10%20%30%

40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Icanseeapplicationsfor

Web2.0

toolsinmywork

area

Ihavealreadyimplemented

web2.0

toolsinmywork

areaasaresultofthis

course

Iamlikelytocontinuetouse

Web2.0

toolsinmywork

Iwouldliketohavemore

onlinetrainingopportunitiesin

thefuture

Web 2.0 applications

Level

ofagreement

Strongly agre

Agree

Disgaree

Strongly disga


10/23

Qualitative comments from the mid point and completion surveysComments from both the mid point and final surveys for the course indicatethat there was a broad range of experiences for participants. Some reallyenjoyed the online learning and being able to work at their own pace, some

wanted learning communities structured for them while others structured theirown online learning community. For some the course was clear and easy tofollow, while others wanted more step by step instructions. There was littleconsistent pattern about what would help people with their learningexperience.

In the mid point survey 42.6% of the comments were positive or very positiveabout the course and about what people were learning.

Examples of these comments are:The course is excellent as it is available 24/7 online

I am really enjoying the Learning 2.0

57.4% of the comments were about problems experienced while working onthe course. The problems mentioned focused on technology infrastructureand policies as well as the time available to do the course. Comments include

Its just hard to find the time to do it, working part time, plus finding a pcthat hasnt blocked YouTube and other sites!

Unfortunately my branch computer isnt fast enough to run theapplications.

In the end point survey 17% of the comments were negative or neutral, whichwas a significant decrease from the mid point survey. The comments weremostly about the time required to do the course, technology infrastructure andpolicies and support within the work place. Comments from this sectionincluded:

I think the target 15 minutes a day was too ambitious for most librarystaff members, especially when one has so many other duties toperform. This is especially so for part-time staff and casuals.

The training explained concepts well but was lacking when it came toproviding examples of how to.

75.4% of the comments were very positive. The other 7.6 comments werepostive, These included

this is a life changing course. Im so glad I did it.

Your support and response made me complete the course in the timeframe successfully.

Thank you for this great opportunity


11/23

In the completion survey there was an additional question asking for anyother comments or suggestions about the Public Library Leaning 2.0 course.Of these comments 27.2% would have liked more help from the State Library,more detailed instructions or more support (or help) within their workplace.

It would have been more fun and less stressful to have been able to

work in groups.

At times I think some of the content was a little confusing and it neededto be explained more clearly.

72.8% were very positive with people writing about their enjoyment of thecourse and about what they had learned. These comments sometimesshowed a low level of support in the work place, but that these individualswere focused on completing the course regardless of this.

A thrilling experience. Looking forward to more courses in future

It was an excellent program; please offer more online training like this!

This was a brilliant way to learn to so that all people could be involved.I enjoyed being able to do my course from home as I am only a parttime worker. It is great to be able to work at your own pace yet havethe support of your fellow staff and the State Library if you need help.

Feedback on blogsComments on blogsComments on the course blog were moderated as a way of protecting againstnuisance or offensive comments. All the comments were published as therewas no spam, no offensive language and no one being overtly critical of theirorganisation or their peers. The comments were made using the names underwhich people were blogging.

The online learning community developed with active participation from staffat the State Library. This was mainly through comments on blogs, replies toe-mails and telephone assistance. The participants were also helping eachother, some being very active in providing help even when they had finishedthe program themselves.

Comments and feedback within blog postings provided insight intoparticipants experiences, issues and skill level. A comparison of twoparticipant blog entries is an example of this (see Appendix 1). The level ofskill and confidence of participants commencing the course varied widely.Many participants used their learning diary blogs to express their lack ofconfidence and excitement about commencing the course and theirfrustrations when exercises proved more challenging or time was short.

References to learning new skills at the mid or late points in their career werecommon amongst participants, many of whom worked in isolation and may

not have any formal library qualifications. In other cases, participants had ahigh level of skill and confidence using the technology and expressed interest


12/23

in the course and library applications of tools to which they had already beenexposed. The structure of the course guided these individuals throughexamples of best practice and the learning diary provided a forum to expresstheir own preferences, opinions and additional discoveries.

The use of learning diary blogs was designed to encourage participants todemonstrate their learning and experiment with the web 2.0 tools. However,an unexpected outcome was the level that participants reflected and analysedthe way they were learning. This course was the first time, in a programoffered to the public library network, that a learning diary has been used byparticipants to reflect on their learning in a structured and public way. This isuseful information in planning future self paced professional developmentprograms for the public library network.

There were a few instances during the course where other participantsreceived comments on their postings from other agencies, for example staff

from Zoho Docs, an online applications site, commented on a posting aboutdifficulties using Zoho products13 and a staff member from the PowerhouseMuseum provided helpful information via a blog comment when a courseparticipant had written about difficulties they were having viewing aPowerhouse Museum blog14. This startled participants as the public natureand interactive communication possible with blogs was new for many. Someparticipants had not realised how easily the information they were writing ontheir blogs was to track.

Lessons learnedThe most significant lesson that was learned is that tracking individualprogress rather than simply tracking group progress would have providedclearer insights into the issues and motivators within the program. It wouldhave been helpful to know how the completion rates for different types ofpositions compared and contrasted. We can do this kind of analysis by typeof library being worked in (central library, branch library and so on) but not bylibrary assistant, librarian or other position type. It would have also beenhelpful to know the ages of the people starting and completing the program, toidentify any correlation between age and progress through the program. Itwould have informed us about completion rates based on age and whether or

not this has an impact (which is what the authors would assume) or not.

Longer term evaluation of the impact on library servicesA nine and eighteen month post completion survey are planned to gain anunderstanding of the longer term impacts of the learning 2.0 program. Thepost completion surveys will explore how or if, skills with web 2.0 tools havebeen maintained; what web 2.0 tools are now being used or are planned foruse in public libraries and how the effectiveness of the tools are beingevaluated. The surveys will also explore how public libraries are deliveringservices to their clients using the tools, as well as how processes within thelibrary may have changed because of these tools. The post completion

surveys will identify outcomes from a library managers and courseparticipants perspective.


13/23

Some early outcomesIt is anticipated that a similar online format can be used by the State Library ofNSW to extend existing consultation, specialist support and other professional

development opportunities across the public library network in NSW.

Since the training has been implemented there have been a number of jobadvertisements requiring the skill set or specifically completion of the Learning2.0 course. Some library staff are editing their communities entries onWikipedia, and one course participant used LiveJournal (a blogging tool) toreport on an international conference they attended. Various other web 2.0tools have been used by New South Wales public library staff. A number oflibrary working groups have established wikis to share and publish informationabout their specialist area. Google docs is being used widely and frequentlyby members of the public library network to develop collaborative documents,

resolve network wide strategic issues and undertake planning across ageographically dispersed group of libraries.

At the time of writing it was too early in the research identify long termoutcomes and trends. The post completion survey will provide more detail oninitiatives and ongoing development of skill levels following the completion ofthe program.

Conclusions and implications for the profession

The evaluation of the Learning 2.0 program highlighted the need for publiclibrary staff to continue to develop and maintain a skill set which is relevantand useful in a continually changing context.

In many ways the basic skill set for libraries and the library profession remainsthe same; however the range of tools used continues to expand. Public librarystaff need to keep informed and active in areas of new developments so thatthey know when they need to develop a new skill and when they need to learna new tool but use existing skills.

The self assessment surveys at the beginning and the end of the course

demonstrated that there was generally a lack of awareness andunderstanding of web 2.0 tools in NSW public libraries. The need to be alertand aware of developments15 with implications for libraries was highlighted asmany library staff were introduced to tools that their clients had been using fora while.

During the program, issues related to continuous learning and learning tolearn were also raised as some people struggled with the online trainingformat while others enjoyed this style. This highlighted learning style issuesfor online, self directed training. Web 2.0 technologies provide an opportunityto present training in an online environment which caters to a variety of

learning styles and preferences. Tools such as Flickr, Slideshare.net andYouTube mean that increasingly we are able to create learning programs


14/23

online that are closer to those available in a face to face context. Furtheranalysis would be required to gain a better understanding of the barriersrelating to online learning and completion.

Twelve months on from the original completion date of the course,

participants continue to work through activities, many continue to completethe course and new participants enrol in the course weekly. While this hasimplications for maintaining the course and supporting participants it is strongevidence that the self-paced nature of the course continues to be relevant forthe target audience. It is acknowledged that a significant proportion ofparticipants do not complete every activity. However, anecdotally, theawareness of web 2.0 tools across the network appears to be heightened. Itis anticipated that the later follow up surveys will provide more data to supportthis finding.

The focus of this evaluation was to elicit data on what was useful within the

course and what outcomes were achieved by individuals who completed thecourse. Participants who did not complete the course have not beeninterrogated to discover the reasons they dropped out of the program.However it is likely that the key issues for public libraries include learningstyles and preferences with issues such as individual motivation, time,organisational support for training and development, capacity for theorganisation to adapt to an online training environment and commitment to lifelong learning needing resolution before successful online training can beimplemented. The Learning 2.0 course demonstrated that public library staffin remote and regional areas could participate as easily in professionaltraining programs as libraries in metropolitan areas as geography is a lessrelevant factor in terms of access to online training programs.

Factors such as bandwidth, filtering software and firewalls replacedgeographic isolation as key factors influencing the capacity of library staff toparticipate in training and skills development. Although most public librarieshave broadband access there were issues of connectivity speed for courseparticipants. Some people were unable to complete the course at homebecause broadband access is not available in all rural communities. Somecouncils blocked many of the sites used for the course, often including blanketbans on Youtube access. Other councils blocked access to web based e-mail

and other sites including those for blogging software and online productivitytools such as Google docs. These issues made it very hard for some peopleto participate as they did not have access to key tools required or theirconnectivity was frustratingly slow. Some people were able to developsolutions for these barriers, but for others it was too hard.

Information gained through the evaluation of the Learning 2.0 coursehighlighted the need for libraries and library staff to be flexible if they are toremain relevant. The popularity and usage of web 2.0 tools explored in theLearning 2.0 program will change in relatively short timeframes. The Learning2.0 program was designed to provide libraries with a framework for continuing

to develop knowledge and awareness of changing trends in the way ourclients access information rather than be the definitive tool for libraries in web


15/23

2.0 technologies. To remain relevant, libraries and library staff will have tokeep learning, adapting and changing as services, policies and proceduresneed to keep pace with the new technologies. Organisations will need toengage proactively with change rather than ignoring it. The Learning 2.0training highlighted these issues for participants and hasimplications for their

councils who will need to be similarly prepared with social media policies andchanges to ICT policies.

The importance of a global perspective in learning was also highlighted duringthe course. It was possible for people in New South Wales to see goodpractice in the use of web 2.0 tools across NSW and around the world. Someparticipants received comments and feedback on their blogs from peopleoutside the New South Wales public library network which enhanced theirlearning experience and emphasised the capacity of web 2.0 tools to providea global learning context.

The New South Wales public library Learning 2.0 program facilitated publiclibrary staff acquiring new skills in using blogs, wikis, online file sharing,podcasting and rss feeds. It is also clear that online training is an effectivemechanism for more general state wide professional development.

There are examples of new services and activities implemented in NSWpublic libraries as a direct result of learning these new skills including libraryuse of Flickr, blogs, social networking tools and twitter. Library staff canprovide direct assistance to library clients using these tools with these newskills. Further research and evaluation is required to ascertain how theseskills and knowledge have been translated into ongoing services for, andcollaborations with, public library clients. Future evaluation should alsoexplore how people are maintaining and developing their web 2.0 skills asthese tools evolve and develop. These points will be addressed in the nextphase of evaluation of the Learning 2.0 program which will seek to find outhow people are using and maintaining their skills nine months after theycompleted the course.


16/23

Web 2.0 tool Participant A librarian, solo operator, countrylibrary, nearing retirement

Participant B librarian, experienced senior teammember, metropolitan library, mid career

blogs

I feel that this is an historic moment - the very first blogposting of an IT nitwit. I'm not sure whether to thank the StateLibrary's Web.2 training programme or not .... No, seriously,thank you (or should that be thanx?) for clear instructions thateven I could follow. ... I suspect first and foremost doing(attempting?) the course involves for me satisfying personalcuriosity and confronting a challenge - after all I'm someonewho doesn't own a mobile phone and has never played aCD!!!... Without ever having actually seen a blog before I hada preconceived attitude based on the personal blog conceptwhich to me is narcissism gone mad. But now I recognizethat a blog as an online forum or discussion zone like theAlternative Teen Services example or regular informationservice like the Southern Tablelands History Matters site hasconsiderable professional potential.

Like the format of the course. Simple, easy to follow,interesting. I thought the blog examples provided were veryuseful. Loved the blog for the WW1 soldier with postsmatching the dates of his letters from the front. What a greatidea! Blogs could be huuuuuge for local studies....

flickr

Good luck to anyone else who is finding this exercise 'sticky' -the local CTC manager had never uploaded from Flickr sothere wasn't much help available!

I'm a bit concerned about the privacy issue. I am nowchecking all the permissions pages on these accounts thatI'm setting up, i.e. Google (for Blogger), Yahoo (for Flickr).Caveat emptor I suppose. The ramifications of the privacyissue on these types of websites and its relation to identitytheft is covered in an article in MASHUP, With online friendslike these and In your Facebook

rss

I must confess that when I read of some of the problemspeople had with RSS feeds I put Week 4 in the 'too hard'basket and moved on to Week 5 and wikis. I hope to comeback to Week 4 later ...(Returned to the rss feeds activities weeks later andsuccessfully completed them.)

Tried bloglines. OK site. I've been using IE7 for my feeds buthaving them available anywhere thru a web based account isbetter than only having them available at one desktop orhaving to set them up on every desktop or laptop that I use.

16
http://blogs.smh.com.au/mashup/archives/random_access/017340.htmlhttp://blogs.smh.com.au/mashup/archives/random_access/017340.htmlhttp://www.smh.com.au/news/web/in-your-facebook/2008/02/23/1203467445965.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap2http://blogs.smh.com.au/mashup/archives/random_access/017340.htmlhttp://blogs.smh.com.au/mashup/archives/random_access/017340.htmlhttp://www.smh.com.au/news/web/in-your-facebook/2008/02/23/1203467445965.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap2


17/23

wikis

I can see that wikis are a very democratic form of informationsharing and in line with current social attitudes of equality ofrights, freedom of expression, etc, etc. And I must confessthat despite my reservations as to the quality of theinformation I do use Wikipedia as an information source toanswer client enquiries.... I commend the two video tutorialstoo - particularly the Wikis in Plain English may be very basicbut that is just what an IT Nitwit needs!

If you want to collaborate (with the public or colleagues orboth), then a wiki looks like the way to go. If you want to do itcheaply, then a wiki is also the way to go. Websitemanagement software is not cheap. If you want to do it andbypass your Council IT people, then a wikispace could alsobe the way to go.

YoutubeMy, my, an IT Nitwit pasting a YouTube video in a blog!!!!!!!!Thank goodness for a helpful CTC assistant who said Don'tclick on Insert Video but Do click on Edit HTML. Whichseems Irish to me but it worked! (example embeddedsuccessfully)Putting in "Mosman Library" brought up nothing on YouTubeand a series of "{Media personality or author} at MosmanLibrary" videos of 40 mins to 1 hour duration on Google. (Toolong for YouTube.) In theory these videos would be a veryattractve addition to a blogged Library Newsletter.

I must admit, I do love YouTube.

(several examples embedded successfully)

Taggingdelicious

I think that social bookmarking such as del.icio.us offerscould be a great resource for libraries and their clients. As the"Social Bookmarking in Plain English" video says adding to aFavourites list soon makes that so large as to be unusable

whereas the grouping/bundling of the tags is a logical andeasy way of managing links to multiple sites. The fact that thebookmarks are public means that a del.icio.us accountbecomes an online virtual-world equivalent to the old subjectcard catalogue. Library members can access a range of siteswhich come with the library's implicit recommendation as areliable site sorted according to broad subject labels.

I love del.icio.us.

All the bookmarks that I want to use everywhere are now inone place categorized in the way that I think. Simple andeasy to use.

17


18/23

Librarything

My reaction to LibraryThing is that it is amazing, a crossbetween Libraries Australia and an infinitely large readingclub. But I get this picture of people sitting in front of acomputer screen typing away instead of actually readingbooks -surely you would need a lot of time to do both .... Onthe other hand, the reader assistance potential is huge. Ithink I will alert library patrons to its existence through theLibrary Lines column and leave them to to pursue it if theywish.... I also wrote up LibraryThing in last week's Library

Lines column in the local newspaper.

Checked out the Kingston Library site (ThanksBambino forthe tip). Integrated LibraryThing into the catalogue. Neat. Tagclouds, lists of similar works from LibraryThing, etc. can't waitto get it into our catalogue.

Even created my own LibraryThing account. I'm getting a bitattached to it, adding a few items each day. It's strangelooking at the things that I read grouped on a computerscreen. On the bookshelves at home they are part of the

furniture and I tend to take them for granted. Now that I'madding them to my LibraryThing account, I'm going over themand starting to reread some.

Answerboards

"Slamming the boards" certainly showcases the quality oflibrary reference services - the quality of the answers stoodout like a beacon and no wonder they regularly received 'bestanswer' accolades - much more detailed, referenced, withreferrals to further information sources whereas many of theother answers were only a sentence based on therespondent's 'knowledge'. The little asides like "your library isa great resource for all" and (my favourite) "we {i.e. librarians}eat questions for breakfast" are a good marketing ploy inreminding viewers of the existence and relevance to them oflibraries.However I won't be out 'slamming the boards' because Isimply don't have time - need to answer local referencequestions first.

Gee, I don't know about "slammin the boards". Sounds a bittoo try hard to me. A touch of the "let's sound like cool andgroovy librarians". Is it just me or do librarians trying to soundcool always sound lame? I think I'd ratherwatch paint dry.

Could be OK for training I suppose, or if you haven't got alife. Could be good if set up locally, or cooperatively. Ask aLibrarian type thing. I can't see my Council wanting me tospend work time on Yahoo answers, as rivetting as that maybe.

Podcasts

It seemed to me that apart from a general resource inreference work (equal in value to any other informationsource) and library news/marketing contexts, podcasts havetwo main uses:

I realise now that all the people with wires hanging out oftheir heads are part of the advance force of the pod people.The ABC and Library Success Wiki are merely instruments oftheir grand design....... What? Oh. Sorry, I've been listening

18
http://nswpubliclibrarieslearning21.blogspot.com/2008/03/week-7-tagging-folksonomies-delicious.htmlhttp://nswpubliclibrarieslearning21.blogspot.com/2008/03/week-7-tagging-folksonomies-delicious.htmlhttp://www.watching-paint-dry.com/http://www.watching-paint-dry.com/http://nswpubliclibrarieslearning21.blogspot.com/2008/03/week-7-tagging-folksonomies-delicious.htmlhttp://www.watching-paint-dry.com/


19/23

Podcastscont...

- summary information on resources (inhouse andother)produced for single/narrow-interest users by aspecialist library on a regular basis - weekly? monthly?. Thepodcasts provided by the National Library of Medicine in theU.S. are akin to this - a weekly update by the Directorhighlighting health issues and accompanying informationfrom Medline Plus, lasting c.5 minutes.- book reviews and reader assistance. The example I likedbest was "Bookstacks Quick and Simple" from the Library

Success Wiki. Very colourful site, well set-out with short bookreviews (c.3 minutes), a new one posted each day but allindexed and accessible by genre. There are also book talkswritten by students which should appeal to the youngerbrigade. It would not take too much time to podcast such areview regularly within a library website, say three times aweek, and although not being able to see the book cover is adisadvantage, it would require less input than a video (andonce you've seen the cover what else is there to show on avideoed book review anyway!).

to too many sci fi podcasts, I think.

Podcasts on the ABC are great. Love going back to them forstuff that I've missed or just to find something interesting tolisten to.... Obvious application for podcasts and vodcasts islocal studies oral history projects and library eventsgenerally, e.g. author visits etc.

I think we will need to get some training on using the video

and audio equipment for them to look and soundprofessional. Unless we get a grant to do it.......

Mashups

Mashups are fun! Being more creatorati than technoratidownloading the photo was an issue but using theBighugelabs to create a poster was easy. A little moreflexibility in positioning the lettering would be nice .... Now,will I be able to download it to the blog .... For the techno-savvy librarian running small-group courses in something like

using mash-ups would be a very popular initiative, particularlyin school vacations -a useful service and also an effectivemarketing strategy, demonstrating the library as relevant, up-to-date and generally 'cool'. Even the CTC manager here hadnever heard of mashups.

Checked out the big huge labs stuff. It's OK. Reminds me abit of Publisher style stuff. Created the billboard there. Gotthe photo from Flickr. Has possibilities for promotional stuffand fooling around with staff photos on the intranet. Free isfree, I suppose, but I still prefer some good software on mydesktop rather than the web based stuff. And I don't mind

paying for it if its good and it does what I want, especially if Ican get it cheap on a computer magazine disc.

19
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kt/103941053/http://www.flickr.com/photos/kt/103941053/


20/23

Onlineproductivitysoftware (eg.Google docs)

This sort of document preparation or at least documentdrafting would be effective meeting preparation, requiringparticipants to really think about the issues involved andcome with thoughtful reactions to share. I would seeconcurrent document editing and associated communicationexplaining why changes were made.

Overall, I'm experimenting with these free productivity tools,but they still have some way to go before they are reallycompelling to use. Having said that, they certainly have somepotential to become compelling. In the workplace, I think thesecurity factor may work against them. Setting up similar filesharing on an intranet using something like MS Sharepointmay appeal more to the Council IT dept. For sharing nonsensitive and non confidential stuff, especially over manysites using virtual teams, these tools will be fine.

Socialnetworking

I have looked at each of the examples of social networking inaction and I can see that these institutions are usingMySpace etc to great effect. Their sites are eye-catching,informative and provide lots of opportunities for members tointeract with the site which is so much the expectation ofcontemporary culture, or at least youth culture.I was particularly interested with the local GovernmentCommunities of Practice example which is much 'bigger' thanlibraries but could offer great potential for enhancing thesocial fabric. The East Renfrewshire Council example wasalso interesting because it was simpler and therefore moreaccessible to me than some of the others, impressive thoughthey are. I could see something like it as being only just out ofreach of this library.It could be just that I have been toiling over this course forfive hours today but the different applications - blogs, wikis,social networks - are starting to merge together in my mind.They all seem to involve networking in the sense of sharingideas and inviting interaction and where does one out-perform another?

Social networking sites can certainly be useful for promotionand any sort of communication, feedback, interaction,engagement with customers. As long as, like any otherstrategy, you're sure about the objective that you want toachieve by using it and you commit enough resources to do itwell rather than doing it half arsed. Certainly myspace hasbeen used by libraries, especially US ones, to reach youthsegments.

20


21/23

In conclusion

I tried very hard to set up a news feed to this post. There areitems showing up but I don't know whether it willautomatically update as I would have thought it should ..Anyway I tried!! (the story of my involvement in thiscourse ..!!!)

Well, finished the course. Had a great time exploring thisstuff. Now participating in some LibraryThing discussions,setting up another blog, fiddling with code in blog templates,and other neat things.

(Added a wide variety of widgets to the learning diary blog,continues to use the blog after the course was completed.)

Sources: Petes Learning 2.0 Blog and Confessions of an IT nitwit

21


22/23

22


23/23

1 New South Wales Public Library Statistics 2007/08 from Bibliostat2 NSW Public Libraries Learning 2.0 http://nswpubliclibrarieslearning2.blogspot.com/ [Accessed 17 September 2008]3Orange County Library System, OCLS learn 2.0 http://oclsl20home.blogspot.com/ [Accessed 23 April 2009]4 King County Library System, KCLS learning 2.0 http://kcls27things-list.blogspot.com/[Accessed 23 April 2009]5 Public Library of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County,, Learning 2.0http://plcmcl2-about.blogspot.com/ [accessed 23April 2009]6Orange County Library System, OCLS learn 2.0 http://oclsl20home.blogspot.com/ [Accessed 23 April 2009]7Blowers, Helene, Learning 2.0 Survey: Calling all program coodinators ..http://www.librarybytes.com/2008/08/learning-

20-survey-calling-all-program.html[Accessed 17 September 20088Minnesotas seven multicounty multitype library systems 23 Things on a stick

http://23thingsonastick.blogspot.com/2007/11/thing-23-final-thoughts_09.html9 Public Library of Charlotte and Mecklenberg County Learning 2.0 23 things program http://plcmcl2-

about.blogspot.com/[Accessed 17 September 2008]10 Blowers, H. Learning 2.0 Survey: Calling all program coodinators ... inLibrarybytes blog 5 August 2008

http://www.librarybytes.com/2008/08/learning-20-survey-calling-all-program.html[Accessed 26 May 2009]11Blowers, Helene Learning 2.0: 23 Things Survey Findingshttp://www.slideshare.net/hblowers/learning-20-23-things-

survey-findings[accessed 9 July 2009]12 Reflethsen, M. and Farrell A.Cross-Country Connections: Implementing Learning 2.0 in a Multistate Medical LibrarySystem in Medical Library Association Annual Meeting and Exhibition 2008

http://www.mlanet.org/am/am2008/index.html [Accessed 26 May 2009]13 Zohohttp://www.zoho.com/[Accessed 17 September 2008]

14 Powerhouse Museum Fresh + New(er)http://www.powerhousemuseum.com/dmsblog/[Accessed 17 September 2008]15 Schonfield, Erick Where are we in the hype cycle? Tech crunch 18 August 2008

http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/08/18/where-are-we-in-the-hype-cycle/ [Accessed 3 April 2009]
http://nswpubliclibrarieslearning2.blogspot.com/http://kcls27things-list.blogspot.com/http://kcls27things-list.blogspot.com/http://plcmcl2-about.blogspot.com/http://plcmcl2-about.blogspot.com/http://www.librarybytes.com/2008/08/learning-20-survey-calling-all-program.htmlhttp://www.librarybytes.com/2008/08/learning-20-survey-calling-all-program.htmlhttp://www.librarybytes.com/2008/08/learning-20-survey-calling-all-program.htmlhttp://www.librarybytes.com/2008/08/learning-20-survey-calling-all-program.htmlhttp://23thingsonastick.blogspot.com/2007/11/thing-23-final-thoughts_09.htmlhttp://plcmcl2-about.blogspot.com/http://plcmcl2-about.blogspot.com/http://plcmcl2-about.blogspot.com/http://www.librarybytes.com/2008/08/learning-20-survey-calling-all-program.htmlhttp://www.librarybytes.com/2008/08/learning-20-survey-calling-all-program.htmlhttp://www.slideshare.net/hblowers/learning-20-23-things-survey-findingshttp://www.slideshare.net/hblowers/learning-20-23-things-survey-findingshttp://www.slideshare.net/hblowers/learning-20-23-things-survey-findingshttp://www.slideshare.net/hblowers/learning-20-23-things-survey-findingshttp://www.mlanet.org/am/am2008/index.htmlhttp://www.mlanet.org/am/am2008/index.htmlhttp://www.zoho.com/http://www.zoho.com/http://www.zoho.com/http://www.powerhousemuseum.com/dmsblog/http://www.powerhousemuseum.com/dmsblog/http://www.powerhousemuseum.com/dmsblog/http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/08/18/where-are-we-in-the-hype-cycle/http://nswpubliclibrarieslearning2.blogspot.com/http://kcls27things-list.blogspot.com/http://plcmcl2-about.blogspot.com/http://www.librarybytes.com/2008/08/learning-20-survey-calling-all-program.htmlhttp://www.librarybytes.com/2008/08/learning-20-survey-calling-all-program.htmlhttp://23thingsonastick.blogspot.com/2007/11/thing-23-final-thoughts_09.htmlhttp://plcmcl2-about.blogspot.com/http://plcmcl2-about.blogspot.com/http://www.librarybytes.com/2008/08/learning-20-survey-calling-all-program.htmlhttp://www.slideshare.net/hblowers/learning-20-23-things-survey-findingshttp://www.slideshare.net/hblowers/learning-20-23-things-survey-findingshttp://www.mlanet.org/am/am2008/index.htmlhttp://www.zoho.com/http://www.powerhousemuseum.com/dmsblog/http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/08/18/where-are-we-in-the-hype-cycle/

Download - Learning about learning 2.0: evaluating the New South Wales public library Learning 2.0 program

Top Related