Interest Group and Committee Chairs (LITA) Community

Closed group
In: LITA Interest Groups (Library & Information Technology Association), Leadership
86 members  |  About this group  |   Syndicate content

Midwinter Meeting & Annual Conference 2014

Annual Programs:
It is time once again to start thinking of presentation and program topics for next year. The Program Proposal Form will be posted on Connect and the LITAblog following Annual Conference.

Proposal Deadline TBD (likely August, 2013)

 Midwinter Meetings:

Submit your Midwinter meeting space requests and AV needs to Valerie Edmonds vedmonds@ala.org no later than September 15, 2013

1
View:   Faces | List

Discussion Imagineering Interest Group Meeting, ALA Midwinter 2014

by Breanne Kirsch on Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 01:49 pm

Imagineering Interest Group Meeting, ALA Midwinter 2014

  • There were 8 attendees.
  • The Chair, Breanne Kirsch gave a short introduction on the Imagineering IG.
  • We discussed possible topics for the upcoming program at Annual and decided on the following topic: Redefining Humans from the Past to the Future.
  • Future endeavors of the group were also discussed including a group blog that will be headed by Frank Skornia.

Discussion Game Making IG Meeting, ALA Midwinter 2014

by Breanne Kirsch on Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 07:34 am

Game Making Interest Group Meeting, ALA Midwinter 2014

Game Making Interest Group Meeting, ALA Midwinter 2014

  • There were 12 attendees.
  • The Chair, Breanne Kirsch gave a short presentation on how to create a game for use in the library without a lot of technology expertise.
  • Games in Libraries: Essays on Using Play to Connect and Instruct is a new book, edited by Breanne Kirsch, recently published by McFarland and was discussed during the meeting.
  • Then attendees discussed what game related projects they are working on at their institutions.
  • Future endeavors of the group were also discussed. 
More...

Discussion Presentation Facilitated Discussion

by Michelle Frisque on Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 11:42 am

Short presentations are used to spark small group discussion.

Procedure

1. Topics and presenters are identified before the meeting. Questions the facilitator can use for discussion should also be identified and documented before the session.

2. The room should include multiple tables (preferably round). Discussions are best when the table has 4-8 people at each table. You can assign a facilitator for each table ahead of time or ask each table to select their own.

Short presentations are used to spark small group discussion.

Procedure

1. Topics and presenters are identified before the meeting. Questions the facilitator can use for discussion should also be identified and documented before the session.

2. The room should include multiple tables (preferably round). Discussions are best when the table has 4-8 people at each table. You can assign a facilitator for each table ahead of time or ask each table to select their own.

3. First group of speaker(s) present their presentation(s) on a similar topic to the larger group. It is best of the presentations last no longer than 20 minutes.

4. It is then time for group discussion. Discussion should be at least as long as the presentations that are being discussed. Questions for discussion should be distributed to each table. Each table can deviate from the questions but are available if initial conversation lags. Each table should identify a facilitator (facilitator can also be predetermined before the session), recorder and a time-keeper. The group then discusses the topic for a specific amount of time. Ideas should be captured on paper, sticky notes, online, etc. The recorder can either be the facilitator, another person identified in the group or each person can be responsible for documenting their own idea.

5. Debrief. Someone from each table summarizes what was discussed at their topic during all of the rounds to the everyone in the room. Each table should be given 3-4 minutes.

6. Repeat

 

More...

Discussion Facilitated Discussion

by Michelle Frisque on Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 11:41 am

Small group discussion focused on shared topic area.

Procedure

1. Topics can either be identified before the session or the first part of the Discussion Group can be spent identifying the topics for discussion. All tables can discuss the same topic or have one or some of the tables discuss one topic while other tables discuss other topics. If topics are identified before the date, create questions that can be used at each table to facilitate the discussion.

Small group discussion focused on shared topic area.

Procedure

1. Topics can either be identified before the session or the first part of the Discussion Group can be spent identifying the topics for discussion. All tables can discuss the same topic or have one or some of the tables discuss one topic while other tables discuss other topics. If topics are identified before the date, create questions that can be used at each table to facilitate the discussion.

2. The room should include multiple tables (preferably round). Discussions are best when the table has 4-8 people at each table. This format also can easily support virtual attendees. Create a “table” or “tables” online for group discussion. Have someone on site to follow the discussion so they can report out.

3. If multiple topics will be discussed, assign topics to each table. You may want to allow attendees to move to the table that discusses topics of interest to the. If questions for discussion were identified ahead of time distribute them at this time.

4. Each table should identify a facilitator (facilitator can also be predetermined before the session), recorder and a time-keeper. The group then discusses the topic for a specific amount of time. Ideas should be captured on paper, sticky notes, online, etc. The recorder can either be the facilitator, another person identified in the group or each person can be responsible for documenting their own idea.

5. Debrief. Someone from each table summarizes what was discussed at their topic during all of the rounds to the everyone in the room. Each table should be given 3-4 minutes. Someone onsite should summarize the results online for the virtual attendees.

6. Repeat

 

More...

Discussion Around the World Discussions

by Michelle Frisque on Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 11:41 am

Participants move around the room participating in loosely structured discussions that are of interest to them.

Procedure

1. Topics can either be identified before the session or the first part of the Discussion Group can be spent identifying the topics for discussion.

Participants move around the room participating in loosely structured discussions that are of interest to them.

Procedure

1. Topics can either be identified before the session or the first part of the Discussion Group can be spent identifying the topics for discussion.

2. Topics are then distributed around the room. One topic per area and the topic should be displayed so that it is easy for participants to identify the topic being discussed in that area. Areas can be tables, flip charts, sections of a wall, etc. Paper with markers, or post-it notes with pens should be placed in each area so that ideas discussed can be documented. The ideas discussed can be documented using words or pictures.

  • Facilitator: a facilitator should be assigned for each topic. Facilitators can be chosen in in 3 ways:
    1. The facilitator can be assigned before the Discussion Group begins.
    2. The facilitator can be selected by the first group that discusses the topic. In this model the facilitator stays with the same topic during each round.
    3. The facilitator can rotate each round. The facilitator in the first round can either be assigned ahead of time or selected by the first group who discusses the topic. The facilitator then stays with the topic for the next round. Before the next round is over the facilitator can ask for a volunteer to become the facilitator for the next round. If there is a volunteer the first facilitator can move to another topic. If no one volunteers they remain at the station for the next round.

3. Round 1. Participants select which topic they want to discuss and go to the area of the their preferred topic. The group then discusses the topic for a specific amount of time (to be determined before the first round begins). Ideas should be captured on paper, sticky notes, online, etc. The recorder can either be the facilitator, another person identified in the group or each person is responsible for documenting their own idea. It is best of each area has between 4-8 participants.

4. The first round should last no more than 20 minutes but can be as short as 5 minutes.

5. Round 2. After the first round is completed, participants select another topic they want to discuss and go to the topic area. At least one person from Round 1 needs to remain with the original topic, they will be the facilitator for Round 2. The facilitator gives a brief synopsis of what was discussed in Round 1 and then opens the floor for discussion. Ideas should be captured on paper. The recorder can either be the facilitator, another person identified in the group or each person is responsible for documenting their own idea.

5. Round 3. After the second round is completed, participants select another topic they want to discuss and go to the topic area. At least one person from Round 2 needs to remain with the original topic, they will be the facilitator for Round 3. The facilitator gives a brief synopsis of what was discussed in Round 1 and Round 2 and then opens the floor for discussion. Ideas should be captured on paper. The recorder can either be the facilitator, another person identified in the group or each person is responsible for documenting their own idea.

6. If time remains, conduct additional rounds.

7. Debrief. After the last round is completed it is time to debrief. The facilitator from the last round summarizes what was discussed at their topic during all of the rounds. Each topic should be given 3-4 minutes.

 

More...

Discussion INVITATION to Responsive Design in Libraries - LITA Mobile Interest Group Virtual Meeting for ALA Midwinter

by Laurie Bridges on Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 02:30 pm

RESPONSIVE DESIGN IN LIBRARIES

Sponsored by the LITA Mobile Interest Group

ALA Midwinter Virtual Meeting

When: Wednesday, January 15.

9 am Hawaii - 10 am Alaska - 11 am Pacific -12 pm Mountain - 1 pm Central - 2 pm Eastern

 Where: Virtually. Register at https://oregonconnect.ilinc.com/register/kbtvmbh

RESPONSIVE DESIGN IN LIBRARIES

Sponsored by the LITA Mobile Interest Group

ALA Midwinter Virtual Meeting

When: Wednesday, January 15.

9 am Hawaii - 10 am Alaska - 11 am Pacific -12 pm Mountain - 1 pm Central - 2 pm Eastern

 Where: Virtually. Register at https://oregonconnect.ilinc.com/register/kbtvmbh

Description: The LITA – Mobile Computing IG is pleased to host the following presentations at its upcoming virtual meeting:

 1. Responsive Introduction/Overview

Presenter: Brad Czerniak

Web design has been a tumultuous 20-year journey. Along the way, it has seen battles for standards, competing platforms, and exciting innovations — all in the name of delivering the best possible sites to users. In this presentation, Brad (the developer of possibly the first responsive library website) will give historical background that puts the shift toward responsive design in context. He will also layout some forward-thinking concepts for where web design and development are heading in the near future.

Responsive sites:

  http://www.cantonpl.org

  http://www.commercialprogression.com

  http://www.codemichigan.com

2. Your Library, Anywhere: A Modern, Responsive Library Catalogue at University of Toronto Libraries

Presenters: Bilal Khalid, Gordon Belray, Lisa Gayhart

 With the recent surge in the mobile device market and an ever-expanding patron base with increasingly divergent levels of technical ability, the University of Toronto Libraries embarked on the development of a new catalogue discovery layer to fit the needs of its diverse users.

The result: (http://search.library.utoronto.ca) a mobile-friendly, flexible and intuitive web application that brings the full power of a faceted library catalogue to users without compromising quality or performance, employing Responsive Web Design principles. In this talk we will discuss: application development; interface design; and project communications.

3. Maintaining multiple responsive designs with a small staff

Presenter: Steve Cherry

 The Catholic University of America libraries decided to adopt responsive design due to increasing mobile traffic. However, maintaining a unique theme for each site that needed one placed a huge burden on the small team. Steve will discuss some of the tools and techniques used to lessen that burden, allowing CUA Libraries to reuse the majority of code across systems.

Responsive sites:

http://cuomeka.wrlc.org/

http://cuexhibits.wrlc.org/

http://www.lib.cua.edu/music/

http://www.lib.cua.edu/rarebook/

https://github.com/sccherry/middleman-styleguide

4. Re-coding for Responsive Design: Tips, Tricks and Traps

Presenter: Alicia Virtue

 This presentation is an overview of the strategies used to adapt and implement responsive design for the Santa Rosa Junior College library website (http://www.santarosa.edu/library). The SRJC library website serves as the main interface for student research and as the primary instructional tool for approximately 40 information literacy classes a semester. A discussion of the challenges faced in introducing multi-browser, multi-screen size performance  while adhering to the College's visual design requirements will include strategies taken to implement consistent  navigation across mobile phones, tablets and desktop interfaces  as well use of media queries for presentation of text and graphics. Highlights of some of the tools used to showcase and feature library resources across multiple device and display sizes will be addressed, including use of adaptive slide shows, carousels, lightboxes and other jquery-based tools.

 

 

More...

Discussion Top Technology Trends Committee (Library and Information Technology Association) 2013, annual report

by Michelle Frisque on Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 08:14 pm

Top Technology Trends Committee (Library and Information Technology Association)
2013, annual report

DATE: 9/29/13
CHAIR: Nadaleen Tempelman-Kluit

Top Technology Trends Committee (Library and Information Technology Association)
2013, annual report

DATE: 9/29/13
CHAIR: Nadaleen Tempelman-Kluit

In effort to both enliven, and test the durability of the brand, in 2013 the Top Technology Trends (TTT) Committee focused on experimented with format, structure, and tone. We did this by soliciting feedback from LITA, and encouraging it from the audience at ALA midwinter. Much of the feedback focused around the lack of diversity of the panelists-both gender and genre wise. Several people mentioned that there were rarely public librarians on the panel, and many others mentioned that, historically, there was a dearth of women on the panel.

Fortunately, we’d already addressed the gender inequality issue for the Midwinter TTT event, including several women panelists:

Moderator: Carl Grant

Speaker: Bess Sadler

Speaker: John Law

Speaker: Julie Speer

Speaker: MacKenzie Smith

Speaker: Roy Tennant

Speaker: Todd Carpenter

 

For midwinter, Carl Grant moderated, and the conversation centered around the topic: “If Data I Created Resides in a Cloud Environment, Is it Still Mine?"

Feedback from this event was mixed, with many people requesting we go back to many trends identified by panelists, rather than those centered around a specific topic.

Responding to this feedback, for ALA Annual, we went back to the format of panelists talking about a number of topics. We had several conference calls, one with the panelists, to discuss their trends and how they’d complement the others, and not overlap. We were also fortunate that Lorcan Dempsey agreed to moderate the whole conversation.  Our panel consisted of an equal number of men and women, and panelists were drawn from academic, public, and corporate environments:

Moderator: Lorcan Dempsey

Speaker: Char Booth

Speaker: Aimee Fifarek

Speaker: Sarah Houghton

Speaker: Brewster Kahle,

Speaker: Clifford Lynch

Speaker: Gary Price 

 

The annual event was well received, and twitter feedback included:

  • ·      "also a good sign! such good content coming so fast that it's hard to get it all! :) indication of an excellent #ala2013ttt
  • “good discussion on national security letters, prism, etc at #ala2013ttt "we're privileged. anonymous privacy is baked into who we[lib] are." 

There was a nice blog post summarizing the event as well, at:

Following Annual the committee debriefed and came up with the following best practices:

  • Diverse panelists both in terms of profession and gender
  • Invite a previous panelist to moderate a panel
  • Have a conference call with the panelists to discuss trends in advance and do some planning
  • Have one committee member be the liaison to a panelist, answering questions, etc.
  • Tweet about events, provide a hashtag, and encourage feedback for future events
  • Provide a less formal “panel” environment, with chairs in a semi-circle, and no tables, if possible

The committee also noted that it needs more support from LITA, in the form of:

  • A budget for handouts
  • Technology support for videotaping events
  • More support generally from LITA, in the form of more information sharing, deadline reminders, etc.

 

More...

Discussion ALCTS/LITA MARC Formats Transition Interest Group

by Stacie Traill on Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 11:04 am

The ALCTS/LITA MARC Formats Transition Interest Group met on Saturday, June 29, from 3-4 PM. The Interest Group hosted presentations addressing potential future transformations of MARC data from two different perspectives. About 80 people were in attendance.

The ALCTS/LITA MARC Formats Transition Interest Group met on Saturday, June 29, from 3-4 PM. The Interest Group hosted presentations addressing potential future transformations of MARC data from two different perspectives. About 80 people were in attendance.

Kevin Ford of the Network Development and MARC Standards Office at the Library of Congress presented “On BIBFRAME Instance.” Ford began with a discussion of the principles behind BIBFRAME development and its linked data model: reliance on identifiers rather than strings, reduced ambiguity, decentralization of data, the ability to annotate or otherwise augment data, and flexibility for both cataloging and other uses. Ford then described efforts to identify BIBFRAME instances, which are individual resources that embody a work, based on the Library of Congress’s existing MARC bibliographic records. Instances are generated from MARC data based on varying combinations of ISBN and data in MARC 260 and 300 fields. Instances do not necessarily have a one-to-one correspondence with MARC records. Although there is some ambiguity, analysis shows that a relatively small number of LC’s MARC records are likely to represent multiple instances. Ford continued with a discussion of use cases for the level of atomicity provided by BIBFRAME instances, noting that it is better aligned with contemporary practice outside libraries and allows for improved linking, where instances can be easily combined under the work.

Brian Geiger, Co-Director of the English Short Title Catalog for North America, and Carl Stahmer, Associate Director of the English Broadside Ballad Archive, gave a presentation titled “Redesigning the English Short Title Catalog.” As part of a grant-funded project, ESTC is currently engaged in a process to convert their catalog from MARC to data-agnostic triplets. The ESTC’s existing MARC catalog does not allow the flexibility that scholars need to harvest and analyze the data, or to annotate it. Geiger and Stahmer emphasized that ESTC’s new approach is intended to be “agnostic” in order maximize flexibility, extensibility, and longevity. To this end, they are moving toward converting ESTC data to an event-driven RDF triplets model (which resembles BIBFRAME in some aspects). The outcome is that the data can be used to generate as many views as are desired; all that is necessary is the coding for machines to properly present each view of the underlying data.

Though specific approaches differ, the two presentations both highlighted the challenges of moving to a linked data model, as well as the great potential of linked data models to improve access and discovery.

 

More...

Discussion LITA Distance Learning IG

by Erica Defrain on Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 01:46 pm

From Cheryl Blevens, Distance Learning IG Co-Chair

From Cheryl Blevens, Distance Learning IG Co-Chair

At the 2013 ALA Annual Conference, the topic of LITA’s Distance Learning Interest Group’s discussion session was “Embedded Librarians in Course Management Systems: Transforming Ourselves.” As a prelude to the session, co-chairs Cheryl Blevens and Erica DeFrain created an annotated bibliography for supplemental reading.  This bibliography was posted on the LITA website. Additionally, business cards listing the URL (http://bit.ly/DLIG_Bib) were distributed at several LITA sessions. Discussion session participants were asked if they were embedded in a Course Management System (“CMS”). They were asked to share challenges, opportunities, and best practice methods they used to collaborate with faculty and strengthen communication.

In a casual discussion environment, participants shared their challenges, opportunities, and best practice methods for collaborating with faculty and working with students. All of the participants’ universities had separate departments or divisions dedicated to distance learning, also known variously as “continual learning” and “online learning.” These departments afforded the embedded librarians additional sources of support and collaboration to bring the library and its resources to the attention of the online teaching faculty and distance learners.

Librarians have created LibGuides that in addition to informing distance learners of the services the library offers, provide access links to those services. They maintain virtual office hours and make themselves available for threaded discussions. They continually monitor tutorials that show how to navigate software, assuring that online learners are kept as up to date as students who are physically on campus.

An example of an idea of a resource that one of the participants makes available to their university faculty and student population, can be adopted by others who may not have already thought of it. UNCG’s instructional tech “toolkit” Libguide (http://uncg.libguides.com/toolkit) contains six tabs with defined sets of educational tools: access, collaborate, feedback, organize, present, schedule. Each tool has small descriptions, functionality, usefulness and a link to the tool's website. There is a clear disclaimer that says that many tools may not be supported by UNCS, but that the information about the tool (basics, ideas for use, how-to guides, tutorials, or additional resources on potential uses) is being shared by the librarian who has vetted the product. The intent is to share these potential resources that the student might find useful. 

As the session drew to a close, participants expressed appreciation to each other for the shared ideas, the networking opportunities, and recommendations of sessions that might be particularly helpful in their jobs as Distance Education librarians. 

More...

Online Doc LITA Open Source Interest Group

by Victoria Teal Lovely on Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 10:43 pm

Chair for 2012/2013: Galen Charlton

The LITA Open Source Interest Group met at ALA Midwinter on Saturday, January 26. Approximately 10 people were in attendance.  Members present shared their experiences with open source in libraries, including open source integrated library systems and digitization software.

Chair for 2012/2013: Galen Charlton

The LITA Open Source Interest Group met at ALA Midwinter on Saturday, January 26. Approximately 10 people were in attendance.  Members present shared their experiences with open source in libraries, including open source integrated library systems and digitization software.

The Open Source Interest Group met at ALA in Chicago on June 29.  Again, approximately 10 people were in attendance.  The discussion revolved around the focus of this group. Should it be focused on open source integrated library systems, library-specific open source software or any open source product that might be used in libraries? The consensus was that it should not be limited at this time. The group also discussed possible ALA presentations.  Of interest is the experience of sponsoring development in the open source environment.  Sponsoring webinars is also desirable.  One suggested topic was what are the skills needed to evaluate and manage open source products? 

Respectfully submitted by Vicki Teal Lovely, incoming chair.

More...

Pages

Community space for current Chairs of LITA Interest Groups and Committees

Subscribe to Interest Group and Committee Chairs (LITA)