Universities are not Corporations (yet!), but do share aspects, in part because they are large organizations.  This is an interview tidbit on why it’s important for corporations to be aware of the importance of culture>  I would argue that the same is largely true for Universities.

McCracken Interview

Well the latest news about Google is that it’s trying to predict what you are searching for instantly.  The results come up as you are still typing what you are looking for.  The early verdict is “clever, not psychic.”  I wonder if it will turn into a kind of game–what is Google thinking I’m searching for?–very like when people allow their phones to complete the words they are typing, even (and especially) when it’s the wrong words.

The impulse to know more than users do about what users are searching for can get us into trouble.  I’m not saying that users of library resources always know what is possible, when conducting a search.  But it is possible for  information specialists to go too far in assuming they think they know what people are looking for–or how they should be looking for it.  Information scientists are trained to organize information, and to retrieve it from information systems, but are not always working with systems that are intuitive to users.  Thinking that information science provides the best way to organize information can get in the way of library users finding the information they need–or even, perceiving the library as a good place they can go for resources.  If the organizing structures of the information resources are too challenging, people can give up. 

I wonder about Google Instant.  Will people respond well to Google presuming that it can know so much from so little initial data?  Will Google build in the right kind of flexibility. so that people can find what they are actually looking for, not just what Google thinks they are looking for?

This article in the Chronicle of Higher Education takes Google to elaborate task for its inadequate metadata.

What is metadata?  It’s a word that I was utterly unfamiliar with up until about 6 months ago.  And my grasp of its meaning is still that of a non-expert.  My definition of “metadata” is:  the descriptive data attached to the electronic records of library materials, be they books, articles, or other documents/items, that allow for search engines to find those materials.  (I am sure my colleagues here will correct me when I am wrong–or elaborate on that definition if they find it inadequate).  In short, if there is bad or incomplete metadata, the best materials for the searching patron may never turn up, when they type in subject categories, author names, book titles, or publication dates.

Google’s massive book-scanning project inspires a great many alarmist conversations among academics, and I have my own reservations about the Google-ization of academic publishing.  But it seems clear to me that, if Google is going to do this, with the purpose of making nearly all of academic publications accessible and searchable, they should at least do it correctly.  This article points to the errors already embedded in Google’s metadata, and highlights the potential trouble for scholars if those errors are allowed to persist.

Do you expect to be able to find useful information when you Google things?  How can you expect it, if there are such serious flaws in their methods?  Perhaps this is a hint that Google is not actually the be-all end-all of academic search, but remains just a starting point.

Among the messages I take from the article today is the one that states: Google should be employing actual metadata experts in their books project.  And also that, for now, the need for librarians and their expertise is not going away anytime soon.

I’ve been an academic for my entire adult life, and so New Year’s for me falls in late August.  It was fitting that the weather changed just enough today to make it feel like Fall was really just about here.

Today was the Atkins Library’s Week of Welcome day, and we were out in force, giving students “smart pills” with our latest brochure, and connecting students to the resources they need to do their work here on campus.  We also had up the ever-present easels, and people wrote on them. 

We asked four questions.  I’ll post the first one now, and update as we get the pictures ready.

Where do you like to Read and Write ?

Question 2:
What do you think  Librarians DO?

Question 3:
Who do you talk to about assignments?

Question 4:  What do you need from the library?  We got two sets of responses, because we erased the full board and started over about halfway through our WoW session.

What are your answers to these questions?  Are they different than the ones above?  Answer in the comments!

This video was created by an Intro to Anthro class at UC Riverside this past Spring.