Social media adoption, policy and development: exploring the way forward for academic libraries

Social media adoption, policy and development: Exploring the way forward for academic libraries Daniel Hooker, MLIS Student Supervised by Dean Giustini, UBC Biomedical Branch Librarian Submitted to Dr. Mary Sue Stephenson In completion of the requirements for LIBR 594: Directed Study School of Library, Archival and Information Studies (SLAIS) University of British Columbia 1 December 2009

Table of Contents Introduction .....................................................................................3 Literature review..............................................................................7 Background...................................................................................................................7 Social media in higher learning .............................................................................9 Academic library 2.0 ...............................................................................................14 Strategic planning....................................................................................................19 Social media library policy............................................................ 22 Policy recommendations......................................................................................24 Conclusion and recommendations.............................................. 26 References..................................................................................... 28 Appendices.................................................................................... 33 Appendix A: Directed Study Schedule, Fall 2009 ......................................33 Appendix B: Selected Search Concepts and Sources ................................35 Appendix C: Works Consulted .........................................................................37 Appendix D: Selected CARL Strategic Plans ...............................................42 Appendix E: Example Social Media Policy....................................................44

Hooker -‐ 3 Introduction In this paper, I outline activities undertaken during my 2009 directed study project with Dean Giustini, a SLAIS adjunct faculty and a reference librarian at the UBC Biomedical Branch Library. The purpose of this investigation into social media was to examine the role of institutional strategies, policies and guidelines that support social media and lead its use in academic libraries. To orient myself to this research topic, I began by locating freely available primary materials on academic library websites and by retrieving presentation slides and relevant grey literature from search engines, social media of various types and online abstracting and indexing services and databases. In an effort to examine as many papers and ideas as possible, I searched for topics using a combination of keywords and thesaurus descriptors such as blogs, wikis, RSS feeds, Twitter, social software, web 2.0, library 2.0, university 2.0, post-‐secondary education, strategic planning, policy development, and social media in higher education. Some of my primary search concepts are detailed in Appendix B. During the fall 2009 term1, I completed the following activities: 1) literature reviews in multiple academic databases such as Academic Search Complete, ERIC, Google Scholar, LISA, LISTA; OAIster, Web of Science, to name a few; 2) environmental scans of web documents on academic library websites and blogs in Canada (and select examples in the United States) and 3) reviews of social media guidelines, ‘appropriate use’ policies and strategic planning documents that mention web 2.0 or social media specifically (see Appendix B). In addition, I For a complete fall 2009 schedule of activities for my directed study, see appendix A. 1

Hooker -‐ 4 enrolled as an auditor in a new online course about social media offered through SLAIS entitled LIBR559M “Social media for information professionals”. As a student librarian immersed in evaluating social media, I worked closely this term with the instructor and my peers in exploring and interrogating a range of topics and modules in the course. Dean demanded high quality work and sustained effort from all of us in the course, and my role as an auditing student was no exception. Additionally, in October, I was also able to co-‐author a paper on social cataloguing with Allan Cho and Giustini which was subsequently accepted for publication by the Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association2. The most important activity this term was accumulating and reading the literature of social media in the academic environment, and taking time to reflect on its history and recent developments. Overall, the scholarly literature of social media in library and information science (LIS) reveals an impressive range of applications that are regularly used in the teaching and learning activities of academic librarians. Beyond the isolated use of blogs, wikis, synchronous chat tools and social bookmarking, a number of successful social media projects and initiatives in the United States, Australia and the United Kingdom can be examined where they are adequately publicized (and, to a lesser extent, projects originating in Canadian academic libraries). Individualized reports of success and scattered reports originating in Canadian academic libraries prompted further investigation about the circumstances that led to those programs best practices. Some evidence was found to support the assertion that ‘library 2.0’ projects in Canadian academic libraries are undertaken in ‘hot spots’ of innovation and in environments where there are varying levels The accepted paper is entitled “Social cataloguing: an introduction for health librarians” and will be published in early 2010. 2

Hooker -‐ 5 of interest and support. Often, it seems that in addition to an academic librarian’s regular duties, social media experimentation was undertaken due to personal initiative or skills set, and often they enjoy little in the way of institutional support. The perceived lack of administrative resources provided to academic librarians seems to be exacerbated by common barriers such as the inordinate amount of time needed to learn social media or the inherent cultural resistance to social media (some tools are blocked at OPACs and on library staff computer builds, for example)3. In addition, due to my experience this semester with Giustini (personal communication, October 2009) it has become clearer to me that direct conflicts between an academic librarian’s desire to use new services and the inevitable clash that occurs with a library’s information technology (IT) department are quite common and that this invariably results in initiatives being abandoned – or shelved for a period of time. In the past few years, social media’s rise in academic communities has been steady, but this year has proven to be unique so far for a number of reasons (Armstrong, 2008; Weller, 2009). For example, bloggers are beginning to consider what kinds of policies are needed to support the use of social media in library organizations (Kroski, 2009). Not surprisingly, academic libraries are still very much in an experimental phase in their use of social tools particularly folksonomies, social cataloguing sites and microblogging tools like Twitter. Universities, too, are in an exploratory period in applying social media to their recruitment, teaching and development efforts. Throughout the academic world, though, 3 The social media drivers and barriers that exist in Canadian academic libraries will be part of Giustini’s CARL/ABRC survey research that he plans to conduct in 2010.

Hooker -‐ 6 social media is beginning to make a considerable impact on higher education and, as a result, on the delivery of information services in academic libraries. As social media is used to reach out to academic constituencies, and to build cross-‐ disciplinary collaborative relationships, the lack of social media policies and usage guidelines is set to emerge as a critical problem (Armstrong, 2008). Given Dean’s experience within a large institutional academic library, it became clear from our discussions about these issues (personal communication, October 2009) that there are driving forces in the external environment that compete with the seemingly insurmountable barriers within organizations when social media is used creatively. Occasionally, it must be said, the rigid administrative hierarchies and conservative library cultures do little but compound the problem of using social media innovatively. While individual ‘social’ librarians are forging new paths in their deliver of library services, many do so at the expense of their own personal time and talent. Whereas some academic librarians are successfully creating programs for their users, others have to wait for institutional cultures to change before social media’s affordances can be fully identified. As new social media emerge as potential catalysts for innovation, academic librarians face a number of pressures about how to respond to new tools in new ways. In this directed study, I had the increasing sense that the acceptance of social media in academic libraries has now reached a critical point where it is difficult to ignore. Social media has built enough popular awareness and worked its way into academic activities such that it cannot be ignored as a passing fad. The effective evaluation and management of social media should be a key consideration in all academic libraries given the prominence and

Hooker -‐ 7 potential of the tools in managing our users’ information behaviours, and our own. What seems clear is that most academic librarians are increasingly required to interpret the values of web 2.0 or ‘academic library 2.0’ within their own libraries’ cultural context. How can we engage users in a dialogue? How can we meet them in digital spaces such as Facebook, Twitter and Google? Many academic librarians feel that they should be responding to these needs but find it hard to do so when institutions remain unconvinced of social media’s place in the academy (Thomson, 2007) and in key documents such as strategic planning and library policy. Literature review Background In 2009, the LIS literature is replete with discussions of web 2.0 and library 2.0 (Weller, 2009). Between the advocates and critics of social media, the bibliography is characterized by the emphasis on the attributes of specific social tools or programs; more often than not, their accompanying affordances for teaching and learning are typically outlined. However, a less obvious theme is how academic librarians can assess these tools properly within their own libraries and how they might meet the specific needs of their local users. Given the demands of assessment on any innovative library program, and the extent to which faculty and students drive change within the academic library, a number of formidable challenges lie ahead for academic librarians. Both Giustini and I believe that, because of the rapid expansion of the social media sector, academic librarians may have no alternative in the near future but to concede the value of some specific tools. In the past decade, numerous

Hooker -‐ 8 articles have shown that librarians, while inclined to try out new technologies to deliver library services, are uncertain or even anxious about what they might need to know or how to use new technologies within the existing framework of legacy library systems (if they can at all). Therefore, academic librarians are often expected to seek evidence or proof that technologies are “useful” before implementing social media in their programming. However, what many academic librarians discover is that the empirical research on social media is still in nascent and that more investigation is needed before direction can be found from the LIS literature. We fear that academic library users will move on to other ways of interacting while at the university or begin to see the Library as ‘out of touch’. An additional challenge faced by academic librarians is measuring the impact of digital tools on the development of information behaviours (e.g. Gordhamer, 2009). Can social tools actually promote desirable behaviours or do they in fact set back librarians’ media and information literacy efforts? Academic research is not simply a matter of searching on the Internet or networking with scholars on Twitter and Facebook. Some researchers, in fact, suggest that social media has considerable potential to impact how users communicate and find information (e.g. Zhao & Rosson, 2009) not to mention how they collaborate and solve problems. Likewise, the web also may have a tendency to fragment readers’ attention and willingness to engage in thorough or extended reading (Carr, 2008) – surely this point alone is why social software is seen to be disruptive by most university faculty. Building on these observations, the notion of using social media in higher education has nonetheless been breached and a variety of inroads have been made (Weller, 2009). But the question about

Hooker -‐ 9 whether social media can be deployed to promote desirable research skills is a salient (and likely to be a recurring) one. The adoption of popular search engines such as Google, Google scholar and Yahoo is, to some extent, illustrative; these tools followed similar trajectories in terms of their use by and eventual acceptance in academic libraries (Ford & O’Hara, 2008; Walters, 2009). However, finding a rightful place for social media and its acceptance in academia is one of main reasons for this directed study. Given a continued lack of usage guidelines or strategies, social media has the potential to disrupt academic libraries and their services. As social media is used for learning more generally, academic librarians need to be aware of the challenges that they introduce and work to meet the emerging needs of post-‐secondary students (many of whom are accustomed to social tools). At the very least, academic librarians should be devoting some of their time each week to explore the emerging digital landscape to see what students themselves are doing. Social media in higher learning The debate about Web 2.0 and its role in higher education (Grosseck, 2009) has been around since Tim O’Reilly initially defined it (O'Reilly, 2005). Since then, of course, much has happened on the web; the rise of “digital natives” (McHale, 2005), “millennials” (Raines, 2002) and even the “net generation” (Bullen, 2009; Oblinger & Oblinger, 2005) has been extensively discussed. These students were born in the post-‐Web era and are increasingly familiar with online environments that involve two-‐way interaction. The literature that discusses these learners and their unique expectations has also emerged as a topic of

Hooker -‐ 10 research for educators and librarians alike; and, how to target them directly in the delivery of programs and services is a perennial subject in the literature. Although generalizing too broadly about these learners is problematic (Bennett et al., 2008; Wesch, 2008), it can be said that the expectations of web-‐based learning and online access to educational resources have deeply changed what students want from their university experiences. This is a result of the growing relevance of the Web in learners’ digital lives and because of the fact that many learners arrive for their undergraduate education with considerable awareness of the Internet and its potential for social collaboration and networking (Tapscott, 2008). Because of the growing awareness of digital learners, a theoretical discussion has developed slowly among educational technologists. One topic that is debated fiercely by educators is how to use the Web as a supplementary learning space and, more specifically, how to use it to promote collaborative, social learning. For example, Eijkman (2008) envisions a “non-‐foundational network-‐centric learning space” realized through social media tools. Williams and Chinn (2009) discuss an active learning theory model for increasing engagement of “net generation” students through the use of social media, and Huang & Behara (2007) note the potential for experiential learning for students using social media in MBA courses. Additionally, Beard & Dale (2008) describe the development of information literacy skills through the academic library that incorporate social media and web-‐based collaborative appliances. Practically speaking, Maloney (2007) writes that “what we can see in the Web's evolution is a renewed focus on innovation, creation, and collaboration, and an emphasis on collective knowledge over static information delivery, knowledge management over content management, and social interaction over isolated surfing.” Outlining the

Hooker -‐ 11 collaborative and social benefits of these technologies for academic librarians is a first step to promote the untapped potential of social media in library programs and services, and it seems as though there is a leadership opportunity for academic librarians to make the connection between changes in pedagogies and the use of social media to promote more active forms of learning. Recently, at the highest levels of higher education, there has been discussion about social media and its impact on research practices and academic collaboration (Weller, 2009) which is a further way to embed social media into to the mission of academic libraries. For example, Greenhow et al. (2009) state “Web 2.0 has… expanded the academic’s ability to cultivate social and professional connections and to potentially build and maintain larger networks for catalyzing interdisciplinary collaborations, multisite research, and inter-‐ institutional partnerships.” Academic inquiry is grounded in a culture of experimentation and collaboration and social media provides unparalleled opportunities to engage with other scholars and researchers worldwide. Further, the authors suggest that “academics can choose to ignore the current culture or attempt to build an online network of resources, colleagues, and authorship. Only by doing the latter is it possible to distinguish authoritatively between the hype and the potential of Web 2.0 technologies.” Separating out the facts from fiction will be crucial to the successful application of social media to scholarly information practices. As web 2.0 is introduced more generally into academic life, social media will become increasingly ubiquitous, especially with the recent rise of web-‐ enabled mobile devices. At the very least, academics who seek engagement with others in

Hooker -‐ 12 these digital spaces will appreciate the affordances of the tools and be able to discern potential applications for their work. The introduction of information technologies introduces many challenges, not only for academic librarians but for faculty and students university-‐wide. Freire (2008), for example, takes a practical look at the challenges of adoption of Web 2.0 in university settings. He advocates for the adoption of new technologies at the university and notes that “applying methods for collaborative and active learning are essential approaches to attain these objectives, and the web 2.0 could be an instrumental and strategic tool in their development” (Anderson, 2007 cited in Freire, 2008). Freire states that adopting these social technologies presents some political problems in addition to the purely technological, notably that as the university confronts “important technological, managerial and human barriers …an adaptive strategy is needed that could be designed from previous experiences of educational, research and business organizations.” Though the affordances of social media can be shown easily in theory, bureaucratic obstacles and poor institutional awareness will continue to be constraints for academic librarians. To date, the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) has produced some of the most important foundational documents about social media in academic contexts. An important and perhaps seminal review of eleven UK universities (Franklin & van Harmelen, 2007) illustrates some trends that should be of interest to academic communities in North America. For example, the authors found that only one academic institution in the UK had a set of guidelines in place to guide the use of social media and blogging tools. They argue that

Hooker -‐ 13 institutions should respond to web 2.0 at a broader strategic level as well as through the use of specific policies. Another JISC study published in 2009 (Committee of Inquiry into the Changing Learner Experience) showed a close integration between social media and today's learners in institutions of higher learning. Increasingly, the tools that form part of web 2.0 are used in conjunction with teaching students and faculty. They argue that more research is needed to support changes in technology and to promote correct behaviours that are needed to use social media responsibly. The authors say that “higher education has a key role in helping students refine, extend and articulate the diverse range of skills they have developed through their experience of Web 2.0 technologies. It not only can, but should, fulfill this role, and it should do so through a partnership with students to develop approaches to learning and teaching.” This statement is a clear call to seek a practical way forward and as universities worldwide undertake initiatives to meet the information literacy needs of learners, it will be increasingly important for academic libraries to devise strategies to promote social media and to ensure its effective use by the academy. As academic libraries continue to cultivate scholarly information practices and the values inherent in web 2.0, they should be ready to apply social tools to their service delivery models. This means that librarians must learn how to educate users in a media-‐saturated age and how to assess media in the 21st century. (This is one of the reasons, I understand, SLAIS approached Giustini (2009) about creating a course on social media because of its importance for information professionals.) In the following section, I highlight a number of other trends that are germane to the academic library and those in higher education as a

Hooker -‐ 14 way to examine newer ways to access information in the digital age – which, of course, is a central role of academic libraries around the world. Academic library 2.0 Given the enthusiasm for Library 2.0 (Chad & Miller, 2005), it is surprising that academic libraries fall behind their public library counterparts in dealing with the governance of social media. Governments and businesses have begun their planning in an effort to establish rules of social media usage because they so often seem to blur personal and professional boundaries. Conversely, academic libraries are somewhat reluctant, it would seem, in their overall approach to navigating these boundaries. Despite pockets of innovation they do not exhibit any where near the same level of interest or curiosity in dealing with issues relating to digital identity or online reputation management. In fact, despite some very well-‐documented surveys of academic libraries’ use of social media, some initiatives are undertaken with little or no awareness of how social tools are implicated in public relations and risk management. Social media usage brings risk for businesses and organizations in both the private and public sectors. Compounding this problem is the lack of quantifiable evaluation and assessment methods for social media programs. However, the issues surrounding information behaviour and practice in the university have now reached a point where academic libraries must take a more proactive role to ensure the ongoing integrity of their university’s web presence. Though the concept of “Library 2.0” has been well-‐debated in the blogosphere, there has been significantly less debate around its academic counterpart -‐ “Academic Library 2.0”.

Hooker -‐ 15 Academic libraries are united in their desire to use technology wisely but seem less inclined to mention the need to master social media as part of an emerging set of technical competencies. This reflects a number of difficulties such as the integration of new tools into library information technology infrastructure; a general lack of IT support for tools ‘in the cloud’; and, despite the ubiquity of social media usage in society as a whole, the lack of an articulated model that would account for the resources academic librarians need to implement to be effective or innovative. Somehow, the academic discourse has remained muted and out of touch by comparison with what is happening in public libraries, business and government – but it must be said that this is slowly changing Back in 2006, for example, Michael Habib devised a conceptual model for Web 2.0 in the academic library for his Master’s thesis in library and information science. In fact, he used the Library 2.0 framework to define a specific niche for academic libraries that would see the blending of traditional functions with a renewed emphasis on social tools (based on the rise of digitally literate learners and faculty in the 21st century). Habib stakes out a position for the academic library that would blend together physical and digital spaces as well as merge library data with collective intelligence, cloud computing and Web 2.0 tools. Habib's work provides the basis for a new model that outlines the requirements of academic libraries but is now several years out of date. Indeed many of Habib’s arguments cannot account for technologies that have emerged since their writing. For example, Twitter (http://twitter.com/) was just being released at the time of Habib’s research (Malik, 2006). LibraryThing (http://www.librarything.com/) is another example of a social networking tool

Hooker -‐ 16 that has gained considerable momentum and academic library attention since 2006 (LibraryThing, n.d.). Building on concepts of Academic Library 2.0, Liu (2008) more recently examined many Association of Research Libraries (ARL) homepages to explore integration of social media. She found that most information on “academic library homepages still focuses on library functions, requires numerous pathways for access… [and] few current academic library Web sites offer opportunities for users to create and share user-‐generated content.” User interaction and participation should be a core value of social media for academic librarians. Liu, in fact, recommends a series of conceptual designs for increasing user-‐inclusion and engagement but cautions that her recommendations are merely “what users might want”. Liu successfully incorporates Library 2.0 concepts into an academic library context but her paper is limited to library home pages. Xu et al. (2009) conducted a similar review of New York state universities’ use of social media but do not use their findings to create a new conceptual model for academic libraries beyond a rearranging of familiar concepts. Social networking sites (SNS) were among the first social media to be recontextualized for academic libraries. For example, Charnigo & Barnett-‐Ellis (2007) conducted a survey to gauge academic librarians' awareness of Facebook because at that time it was only available for university students. Since that time, Facebook has been opened to the public, and a rapid growth of older users has become noticeable (Kirkpatrick, 2009). A repetition of this study would be useful today in order to account for Facebook’s increased publicity in the past year and their shifting demographics.

Hooker -‐ 17 Chu & Meulemans (2008) also examine SNS and describe the challenges and potential benefits of establishing a library presence on two services, MySpace and Facebook. The authors examine the two different networks but repeatedly conflate the two services as a kind of hybrid entity “MySpace/Facebook.” This method does not account for research that reveals two very distinct networks in Myspace and Facebook (e.g. boyd, 2007), and makes it difficult to draw usable conclusions from their results. In terms of raising awareness of social media in an academic library, Gross & Leslie (2008) describe the process of familiarizing academic library staff with social media following their implementation of a “Learning 2.0” program based on Blowers (2006). Gross & Leslie describe their program and report that staff liked the concept; however, their article does not attempt to conceptualize a broader model or argue for implementing guidelines for the use of social media in libraries more generally. It must be said that raising awareness of social media is only the first step in encouraging its implementation and assessment in the academic library. The difficulties of articulating a generic Library 2.0 model are most convincingly demonstrated by a study conducted at Kent State University undergraduates and their familiarity with web 2.0 tools (Burhanna, Seeholzer & Salem Jr., 2009). In the study, students shared their perceptions about how the university library could use social media to meet their informational needs. Interestingly, the authors started with the erroneous assumption that digital natives possess heightened awareness of social media. However, they found surprising differences between their users and those paragons of technology discussed in

Hooker -‐ 18 the literature. Bullen et al. (2009) found similar results about college students at the British Columbia Institute for Technology. It may in fact be possible that these two studies are merely exceptions to the rule but it serves as a useful reminder that technological initiatives should always be undertaken first by doing a proper analysis of local users. In a general sense, measuring technological skills in users is a big challenge in developing effective library programs. Adapting to changes in the delivery of content is another challenge with respect to social media within institutional culture. Joint (2009) describes a range of difficulties of successfully implementing web 2.0 initiatives in academic libraries in terms of copyright concerns and inadequate computing skills. However, moving from more traditional methods of user engagement to participatory web 2.0 models has measurable benefits for information professionals. Kalfatovic et al. (2009) describes the Smithsonian Institution’s decision to provide photographs from their digital collections via a collaborative Flickr space they call ‘The Commons’. Initially, they thought that providing photographs on Flickr would create an increase of use of the Smithsonian’s website but little traffic was ultimately seen in that direction. The collaborative space on Flickr, however, provided the Smithsonian with a space outside its homepage in which to connect with users and to discover that “each additional consumer of the products of the Commons adds to the commensurable experience of each and all users.” The communal interaction and collaboration among Flickr users and the institutions in the Commons project increased value and engagement for all but required a major shift in the Smithsonian’s self-‐concept and comfort in using alternative social spaces.

Hooker -‐ 19 The continual shifts in the digital landscape in the past few years have created disruptions of various kinds for academic libraries. One disruption is the changing sense of place that inevitably occurs when academic libraries use social spaces to deliver services to their users. Many library programs using social media are reported in the literature but, for example, it is not always clear to users what the benefits of searching a catalogue by ‘tag cloud’ or other social cataloguing feature could be. Due to the deviations in how information is presented in these new spaces, which also typically occur outside traditional library sites, users and librarians alike may feel a sense of dislocation from their usual library experience. Clearly, this is where institutional branding is important; services need to be provided to entice users in social media spaces but balanced against the need to make users aware of the digital assets of the library. Innovative services delivery using social media in academic libraries should still mean that users feel connected to their libraries when they find themselves in external digital locations. To bring program planning and institutional guidance closer together, I examined a growing body of strategic planning documents to understand how the needs of users, libraries and institutions can be aligned with the objectives of the university as a whole. Strategic planning The use of social media in higher education is now well-‐established in the professional literature. What is still up for debate is whether academic librarians and their institutions will accept the shifts in attitudes brought on by social media or whether the associated tools will be viewed as inconsistent with institutional goals. Institutional and professional cultures are

Hooker -‐ 20 difficult to change, and my intention with this directed study is not to require a shift in institutional approaches towards social media. McNichol (2005), however, says that the lack of a culture of “outcomes assessment” in UK academic libraries is creating a number of difficulties. For example, academic librarians make the assumption that university libraries are central to higher education but do not work to justify their relevance in the event of shifting institutional needs. Without a more concerted effort to move the academic library model toward emerging web technologies and practices, academic librarians risk losing their central place within the modern university. Some planning literature has identified additional concerns with organizational resistance to change. O'Connor and Au (2009) argue “for the future library to survive and prosper, the continuous alignment of its strategic direction with the demands of the environment is vital, especially when the speed of changes is rapid, and the scope, extensive.” The popularity and pervasiveness of social media qualifies as rapid and extensive change. Korte and Chermack (2007) state that “recognizing the power of underlying assumptions and systematically challenging these assumptions is critical to foster an adaptive, vital organization” and, moreover, developing detailed plans to prove or disprove the effectiveness traditional institutional views is one effective way of doing so. In some of the most recent literature, the emergence of social media on the web is indeed driving a change in strategic planning efforts. Allard (2009) drafts a model of “World 2.0” that advocates for library managers to understand the implications of social media for strategic planning. Close to home, a librarian at the Vancouver Public Library, Cahill (2009)

Hooker -‐ 21 discusses the development of a digital branch at VPL and explains in detail how strategic plans is driving their support for web 2.0 activities. Foundations for social media policies have been written into the job descriptions for two web librarian positions, for example, which were created as a result of their strategic initiatives. In the United States, other specific strategic planning initiatives in libraries include the creation of a working group called SPLAT (Special Projects Library Action Team) to support collaborative online initiatives in Idaho libraries (Cordova et al., 2009). This model, similar to the approach discussed by Gross and Leslie (2008) above, encourages staff experimentation which is then followed by written reflection. Reed and Signorelli (2008) recognize the importance of staff training in their study where “library staff and library users find themselves immersed in a Web 2.0 world and need assistance in learning, using, and coping with new technology”. Unfortunately, they do not mention the importance of establishing manuals and documentation that will help libraries cope with how to use these technologies. In Canada, one of the more successful strategic planning efforts regarding social media and technological literacy originated at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario4. The University Librarian at McMaster, Jeffrey Trzeciak (2008), describes the “transformation” of McMaster University Library from “a very traditional academic library to innovative, user-‐ centred partner in teaching, learning and research.” He notes that “we moved from a model based on transaction-‐based services to one based on pedagogy and learning services.” The re-‐positioning of the academic library within the learning community as a place that values For a list of other Canadian Association of Research Library planning documents, see Appendix D. 4

Hooker -‐ 22 the educational experience embodies the collaborative spirit of Web 2.0. Its focus on innovative practice and technological developments has made McMaster Library a leader in technologies and raised its profile within the academic library community in Canada. Unfortunately, institutions must always prioritize and evaluate new and existing programs. In the face of shrinking budgets, librarians do not always have the support necessary to balance their existing job duties with the rapidly proliferating technologies on the web. However, as digital information spaces and behaviours shift as a result of online interaction, academic library strategies must also shift and adapt. Social media library policy The urgent need for establishing social media guidelines and policy stems from stories of misuse and perceived problems associated with so-‐called illegal and even nefarious online activities. For example, in late 2009, a Prince Edward Island teen threatened on Facebook to shoot his classmates (Canadian Press, 2009). Also, in 2008, a chemistry student at Ryerson University was expelled for establishing a Facebook study group (Morrow, 2008). This caused a public relations problem for Ryerson and seemed to be characterized in the media as an older generation being in direct conflict with a savvy digital and younger one. In a broader societal sense, there have been a series of public relations nightmares for organizations both public and private; for example, what happens when an American Domino's Pizza employee posts a video to YouTube of himself tainting a pizza ready for delivery (Kiley, 2009)? Twitter has seen its own backlash, notably from a FedEx email confronting a consultant about an unflattering tweet (Shankman, 2009). The list goes on.

Hooker -‐ 23 Despite the risks, businesses and libraries alike are beginning to see the benefits of promoting their brands through interactive and user-‐focused media. However, a lack of awareness and even confusion persists around what information is private and public in social media and even what it means to be “social” in digital spaces. The academic library is one of the few institutions that can teach media skills at reference desks and in information workshops. As the risks to our users and their online identities grow in the social media age, detailed guidelines and practices will be needed to steer students toward trouble-‐free web and digital interactions during their education and into their professional careers. Moving beyond the strategic plan and into a discussion of local policy development is a difficult transition for most organizations to make. Policy development is dependent on institutional priorities and whether a culture exists that promotes certain desirable attitudes and behaviours. Without the support of the institution at large, it is difficult to imagine responsible use of social media among students, let alone faculty or staff. It is also difficult to establish the appropriate level of experimentation online versus strict rules-‐based guidance. Given the potential for confusion, misunderstanding or lack of awareness, it is critical that academic libraries review their computer policies and guidelines accordingly to accommodate social media. Although not specifically geared to academic libraries, Kroski (2009) is one of the few librarians to mention the necessity of writing coherent policies to support social media usage in libraries. The article she published in School Library Journal focuses on the school library community, which seems to have its own peculiar challenges that relate to an academic

Hooker -‐ 24 model. School libraries have their own online presence to create but young learners -‐-‐ their primary patrons – also have to be instructed about how to present themselves in digital spaces if they wish to do so. Concern for learners is an emerging issue for academic libraries as well because university students of all ages engage in online activities which may have an impact at some point later in their professional lives if they are not careful (e.g. Careerbuilder.com, 2009). Despite the impact that social media participation has on users and institutions, Kroski (2009) was unable to find many existing policies for school, college or public libraries. Many existing social media policies focus on blogging alone, likely because it is the most common tool used by libraries, and surely one of the most accepted. Some libraries Kroski identifies establish rules for patrons, without mentioning any guidelines for the publication of content by staff. Social media policies in the corporate realm, however, are more specific and detailed. Corporate policy seems to stem from confusion about appropriate use (e.g. van Grove, 2009) or due to greater adoption rates of social media in businesses such IBM, Intel or HP. Regardless, their institutional guidelines outline social media practice and encourage positive and constructive social media use as much as possible. Policy recommendations One seminal example for social media policy is IBM's Social Computing Guidelines, which was originally drafted on a wiki in 2005 (IBM, n.d. cited in Kroski, 2009). IBM's guidelines include a general outline of conduct and a detailed discussion of why these

Hooker -‐ 25 policies are in place. The most salient point comes early: IBM encourages its users to participate online to learn. “As an innovation-‐based company, we believe in the importance of open exchange and learning―between IBM and its clients, and among the many constituents of our emerging business and societal ecosystem. The rapidly growing phenomenon of user-‐generated web content―blogging, social web-‐applications and networking―are emerging important arenas for that kind of engagement and learning” (IBM, n.d.). Kroski (2009) takes this IBM document to heart in her proposal for library policies. She says that “a social media policy doesn’t have to be long or read like a tyrannical list of rules. But a few guidelines can go a long way toward helping people use social media wisely.” As more and more libraries venture into social media, or continue with their existing programming, it is critical that they consider their in-‐house practices at a time where library budgets and programs are under increased scrutiny. The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) has a detailed social media policy that helps to highlight the concerns about presenting unbiased and newsworthy content by employees while encouraging exploration. While academics may not be accountable to taxpayers in the same way, many of the concerns at the Crown’s broadcaster, such as bias and organizational identity, are similar in nature to a public university. The BBC lists guidelines and scenarios of responsible usage of social media without being overly restrictive and without discouraging innovation and experimentation. They also provide separate guidelines for personal use (BBC, 2008b) as well as professional (BBC, 2008a). A helpful, detailed approach one that is not needlessly restrictive should be the overall approach for academic libraries writing their own social media guidelines. For more specific examples in

Hooker -‐ 26 the corporate realm, there is a large database of social media policies publically available on the web (Boudreaux, n.d.). Conclusion and recommendations This directed study has given me an opportunity to examine social media usage in academic libraries and within the larger context of trends in information technologies, higher education and lifelong learning. The timely aspect of this study is what mechanisms can be developed to encourage academic librarians to develop a shared understanding of a way forward while adapting to the inevitable cultural changes that have been brought about by social media. In evaluating the literature on social media in Canadian and American academic libraries and the programs developed within those organizations, it seems obvious that academic librarians are at a critical juncture. Guidelines for using and integrating social media need to written before the tools can find acceptance in academic libraries. By taking a proactive approach to justify and codify social media practices through better planning and policy development, the academic library can begin the process of bridging a gap between experimental projects taken on by personally-‐motivated librarians and clearly outlined web media strategies. Current literature does not fully capture the strategic potential for social media in academic libraries, and it may now be necessary to establish best practice frameworks and model planning documents in order to provide more innovative and effective supports for this critical, emerging area. As a result of undertaking this investigation, I have been able to identify a number of projects or logical next steps (recommendations) that can be taken in conjunction with other

Hooker -‐ 27 ideas as part of a graduated approach to responding to social media. Academic libraries should consider the following in responding to the advent of social media within their organizations, namely: 1) Consider an in-‐house training program for library staff, perhaps in partnership with academic information technology (IT) units, about social media and how to recognize the impact of web 2.0 in scholarly communication; 2) Consider hiring an emerging technology librarian, or seconding an available academic librarian to a project, whose main responsibility would be to monitor social media, disseminate its benefits and keep academic librarians apprised of key developments; 3) Consider a committee of ‘early adopter’ academic librarians who serve as leaders in their institutions and share best practices with faculty and students accordingly. The challenge of adopting social media in the academic library is not new, but only now are librarians and scholars beginning to tackle the advanced management of social medial programming head on. Further research on new learners and information literacy will bolster the evidence needed for librarians to begin shifting institutional culture. Additionally, the sharing of professional practice is always recommended, no matter the channel. However, the onus is now on the librarians, managers and institutions to prepare the way forward for social media in the academic library. Our users are changing along with their information practices, and the time has come to bridge the information gap between library experimentation and established service. We can either meet our users out there to collaborate, or wait endlessly for their return.

Hooker -‐ 28 References Allard, S. (2009). Library managers and information in World 2.0. Library Management, 30(1/2), 57 -‐ 68. doi: 10.1108/01435120910927529 Anderson, P. (2007). What is Web 2.0? Ideas, technologies and implications for education. JISC Technology and Standards Watch. Bristol, England: JISC. Retrieved November 21, 2009, from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/techwatch/tsw0701b.pdf Armstrong, J., Franklin, T. (2008). A Review of Current and Developing International Practice in the Use of Social Networking (Web 2.0) in Higher Education. September 2008. Report for the Committee of Inquiry into the Changing Learner Experience. BBC. (2008a). BBC use of social networking and other third party websites. BBC: Editorial Guidelines. Retrieved November 29, 2009, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/editorialguidelines/advice/bbcweb/index.shtml BBC. (2008b). Personal use of social networking and other third party websites. BBC: Editorial Guidelines. Retrieved November 29, 2009, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/editorialguidelines/advice/personalweb/index.shtml Beard, J., & Dale, P. (2008). Redesigning Services for the Net-‐Gen and Beyond: A Holistic Review of Pedagogy, Resource, and Learning Space. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 14(1/2), 99-‐114. Bennett, S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 775-‐786. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-‐ 8535.2007.00793.x Blowers, H. (2006). Learning 2.0 : 23 things you can do to become web 2.0 savvy. Retrieved October 15, 2009, from http://plcmclearning.blogspot.com/ Boudreaux, C. (n.d.). Online Database of Social Media Policies. Social Media Governance: Empowerment with Accountability. Retrieved November 1, 2009, from http://socialmediagovernance.com/policies.php boyd, d. (2007, June 24). Viewing American class divisions through Facebook and MySpace [Web log message]. Retrieved November 27, 2009, from http://www.danah.org/papers/essays/ClassDivisions.html Bullen, M., Morgan, T., Qayyum, A., & Belfer, K. (2009). The Net Generation in Higher Education: Rhetoric and Reality. International Journal of Excellence in eLearning, 2(1), 1-‐13. Burhanna, K. J., Seeholzer, J., & Salem Jr., J. (2009). No Natives Here: A Focus Group Study of Student Perceptions of Web 2.0 and the Academic Library. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, In Press, Corrected Proof. doi: 10.1016/j.acalib.2009.08.003

Hooker -‐ 29 Cahill, K. (2009). Building a virtual branch at Vancouver Public Library using Web 2.0 tools. Program: electronic library and information systems, 43(2), 140 -‐ 155. doi: 10.1108/00330330910954361 Canadian Press. (2009, October 17). PEI teen in hot water over Facebook threats. The Globe and Mail. Retrieved October 18, 2009, from http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/pei-‐teen-‐in-‐hot-‐water-‐over-‐facebook-‐ threats/article1327998/ Charnigo, L. E. A., & Barnett-‐Ellis, P. E. A. (2007). Checking Out Facebook.com: The Impact of a Digital Trend on Academic Libraries. Information Technology & Libraries, 26(1), 23-‐34. Chu, M., & Meulemans, Y. N. (2008). The Problems and Potential of MySpace and Facebook Usage in Academic Libraries. Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 13(1), 69-‐85. doi: 10.1300/J136v13n01_04 Committee of Inquiry into the Changing Learner Experience. (2009). Higher Education in a Web 2.0 World. Retrieved November 29, 2009, from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/documents/heweb2.aspx Cordova, M., Funabiki, R., &Vecchione, A. (2009). SPLAT 101: Web 2.0 in Idaho's Libraries. The Idaho Librarian, 59(1). Retrieved October 17, 2009, from http://www.idaholibraries.org/idlibrarian/index.php/idaho-‐librarian/article/view/4/51 Draper, L., & Turnage, M. (2008). Blogmania: Blog Use in Academic Libraries. Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 13(1), 15-‐55. Eijkman, H. (2008). Web 2.0 as a Non-‐Foundational Network-‐Centric Learning Space. Campus -‐ Wide Information Systems, 25(2), 93-‐104. Ford L., & O'Hara L. H. (2008). It's all academic: Google Scholar, Scirus and Windows Live Academic Search. Journal of Library Administration, 46(3/4): 43-‐52. Franklin, T., & van Harmelen, M. (2007). Web 2.0 for content for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education. Bristol, England: JISC. Retrieved October 18, 2009, from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/documents/web2andpolicyreport.aspx Freire, J. (2008). Universities and Web 2.0: Institutional Challenges. eLearning Papers, 8. Retrieved from http://www.elearningeuropa.info/files/media/media15530.pdf Gordhamer, S. (2009). 5 Ways Social Media is Changing Our Daily Lives [Web log message]. Retrieved October 18, 2009, from http://mashable.com/2009/10/16/social-‐media-‐ changing-‐lives/ Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., & Hughes, J. E. (2009). Learning, Teaching, and Scholarship in a Digital Age: Web 2.0 and Classroom Research: What Path Should We Take Now? Educational Researcher, 38(4), 246-‐259. doi: 10.3102/0013189X09336671

Hooker -‐ 30 Gross, J. E. A., & Leslie, L. (2008). Twenty-‐three steps to learning Web 2.0 technologies in an academic library. Electronic Library, 26(6), 790-‐802. Grosseck, G. (2009). To use or not to use web 2.0 in higher education? Procedia -‐ Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 478-‐482. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.087 Habib, M. C. (2006). Toward academic library 2.0: Development and application of a library 2.0 methodology (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/1901/356 Huang, C. D., & Behara, R. S. (2007). Outcome-‐Driven Experiential Learning with Web 2.0. Journal of Information Systems Education, 18(3), 329-‐336. IBM. (n.d.). IBM Social Computing Guidelines. Retrieved November 29, 2009, from http://www.ibm.com/blogs/zz/en/guidelines.html Joint, N. (2009). The Web 2.0 challenge to libraries. Library Review, 58(3), 167-‐175. doi: 10.1108/00242530910942027 Kalfatovic, M. R., Kapsalis, E., Spiess, K. P., Camp, A., & Edson, M. (2009). Smithsonian Team Flickr: a library, archives, and museums collaboration in web 2.0 space. Archival Science, 8(4), 267-‐277. doi: 10.1007/s10502-‐009-‐9089-‐y Kiley, D. (2009, April 15). Domino's Pizza Youtube Video Lesson: Focus on Standards, and Pack Your own Lunch [Web log message]. Retrieved October 18, 2009, from http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/brandnewday/archives/2009/04/dominos_pizz a_y.html Kirkpatrick, M. (2009). Facebook's Own Estimates Show Declining Student Numbers; Now More Grandparents Than High School Users [Web log message]. Retrieved October 15, 2009, from http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/facebooks_own_estimates_show_youth_flight_fr om_sit.php Korte, R. F., & Chermack, T. J. (2007). Changing organizational culture with scenario planning. Futures, 39(6), 645-‐656. doi: 10.1016/j.futures.2006.11.001 Kroski, E. (2009). Should Your Library Have a Social Media Policy? School Library Journal, 55(10), 44-‐46. LibraryThing. (n.d.). LTFL: Libraries using LibraryThing for Libraries. Retrieved November 29, 2009, from http://www.librarything.com/wiki/index.php/LTFL:Libraries_using_LibraryThing_for_Librari es Malik, Om. (2006, July 17). Silicon Valley’s all Twttr [Web log message]. Retrieved November 29, 2009, from http://gigaom.com/2006/07/15/valleys-‐all-‐twttr/ Maloney, E. J. (2007). What Web 2.0 Can Teach Us about Learning. Chronicle of Higher Education, 53(18), B26-‐B27.

Hooker -‐ 31 McHale, T. (2005). Portrait of a Digital Native. Tech & Learning. Retrieved October 15, 2009, from http://www.techlearning.com/article/4572 McNicol, S. (2005). The challenges of strategic planning in academic libraries. New Library World, 106(11/12), 496-‐509. doi: 10.1108/03074800510634982 Meijer, A., Thaens, M. Alignment 2.0: Strategic Use of New Internet Technologies in Government Morrow, A. (2008, March 5). School moves to police students online. The Eyeopener. Retrieved October 18, 2009, from http://theeyeopener.com/article/3816 O'Connor, S., & Au, L. (2009). Steering a Future Through Scenarios: Into the Academic Library of the Future. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 35(1), 57-‐64. doi: 10.1016/j.acalib.2008.11.001 O'Reilly, T. (2005, September 30). What Is Web 2.0. Retrieved O’Reilly Media website, October 19, 2009: http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-‐is-‐web-‐20.html Oblinger, D., & Oblinger, J. (2005). Is It Age or IT: First Steps Toward Understanding the Net Generation. In Educating the Net Generation. Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE. Retrieved October 15, 2009, from http://www.educause.edu/Resources/EducatingtheNetGeneration/IsItAgeorITFirstStepsTo wardUnd/6058 Raines, C. (2002). Managing Millennials. In Connecting Generations: The Sourcebook. Menlo Park, CA: Crisp Publications. Retrieved October 15, 2009, from http://www.generationsatwork.com/articles_millenials.php Reed, L., & Signorelli, P. (2008). Are You Following Me? American Libraries, 39(10), 42-‐45. Shankman, P. (2009, January 15). Be Careful What You Post [Web log message]. Retrieved October 18, 2009, from http://shankman.com/be-‐careful-‐what-‐you-‐post/ Shu, L. (2008). Engaging Users: The Future of Academic Library Web Sites. College & Research Libraries, 69(1), 6-‐27. Tapscott, D. (2008). Grown up digital: how the net generation is changing your world. New York: McGraw-‐Hill. Thomson, J. (2007). Web 2.0 takes on colleges and universities: The Dawn of Education 2.0. http://www.master¬new¬me¬dia.org/¬news/2007/04/20/web_20_takes_on_colleges.htm (First published in Innovate. Journal of Online Education. Vol. 3, Issue 4, 2007, under the title: Is Education 1.0 Ready for Web 2.0 Students?).

Hooker -‐ 32 Trzeciak, J. G. (2008). McMaster University Libraries 2.0: transforming traditional organisations. SCONUL Focus, 44, 4-‐10. Retrieved November 1, 2009, from http://www.sconul.ac.uk/publications/newsletter/44/ Ure, L., Atkey, S., & Miller, K. (2009). Exploring Social Software at UBC Library: The TOTS Series. Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library & Information Practice & Research, 4(1), 1-‐5. van Grove, J. (2009, August 4). ESPN Responds to Criticism and Publishes Social Media Policy [Web log message]. Retrieved October 18, 2009, from http://mashable.com/2009/08/04/espn-‐social-‐media/ Weller, Martin and Dalziel, James (2009). Bridging the gap between Web 2.0 and higher education. In: Hatzipanagos, Stylianos and Warburton, Steven eds. Handbook of Research on Social Software and Developing Community Ontologies. PA, USA: IGI, pp. 1659–1671. Wesch, M. (2008, June 17). A portal to media literacy [Video file]. Retrieved from the University of Manitoba web site, November 27, 2009: http://umanitoba.ca/ist/production/streaming/podcast_wesch.html Williams, J., & Chinn, S. J. (2009). Using Web 2.0 to Support the Active Learning Experience. Journal of Information Systems Education, 20(2), 165-‐174. Xu, C., Ouyang, F., & Chu, H. (2009). The Academic Library Meets Web 2.0: Applications and Implications. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 35(4), 324-‐331. Zhao, D., & Rosson, M. B. (2009). How and why people Twitter: the role that micro-‐blogging plays in informal communication at work. In Proceedings of the ACM 2009 international conference on supporting group work (pp. 243-‐252). Sanibel Island, FL: ACM. doi: 10.1145/1531674.1531710

Hooker -‐ 33 Appendices Appendix A: Directed Study Schedule, Fall 2009 Sep 08 – Sep 12 (1 week) • Project outlining and discussions • LIBR 559M: Module 1 Sep 13 – Sep 26 (2 week) • Literature review: social media in higher education • LIBR 559M: Modules 1/2 Sep 27 – Oct 03 (1 week) • Literature review: Social media as learning tools • Planning meeting held with Dean • LIBR 559M: Module 2 Oct 04 – Oct 10 (1 week) • Literature review: Social media in academic libraries • LIBR 559M: Module 3 Oct 11 – Oct 24 (2 weeks) • Threading research, reviewing articles for narrative description • Planning meeting held with Dean • Writing of Directed Study draft begins • LIBR 559M: Modules 3/4 Oct 25 – Oct 31 (1 week) • Environmental scan: Social media policy • 1st Directed Study draft submitted for review • LIBR 559M: Module 4 • “Social Cataloguing” wiki entry (LIBR 559M) and article (JCHLA) completed Nov 01 – Nov 07 (1 week) • Environmental scan: CARL Strategic Plans • Addition of Strategic planning literature to draft • Weekly planning meetings begin • LIBR 559M: Module 5 Nov 08 – Nov 14 (1 week) • 2nd draft of directed study completed • Weekly planning meeting • LIBR 559M: Module 5 Nov 15 – Nov 21 (1 week) • 3rd draft of whole essay completed • Weekly planning meeting • LIBR 559M: Module 6

Hooker -‐ 34 Nov 22 – Nov 28 (1 week) • Final draft of paper for review by Dean • Weekly planning meeting • LIBR 559M: Module 6 Nov 30 – Dec 2 • Final paper sent to Dr. Mary Sue Stephenson • LIBR 559M: Final presentations: Directed study, and TOTS session slides • Project Completed

Hooker -‐ 35 Appendix B: Selected Search Concepts and Sources Social media concept mapping (Academic Search Complete) • DE “SOCIAL computing” • DE “SOCIAL media” • DE “SOCIAL bookmarks” • DE “SOCIAL networks” • DE “SOCIAL network theory (Communication)” • DE “WEB 2.0” • DE “BLOGS” • DE “WEB publishing” • DE “WIKIS (Computer science)” • DE “WEB analytics” • DE “WEB sites” • DE “BOOKMARKS (Web sites)” • DE “ONLINE chat groups” • DE “SCHOLARLY Web sites” • DE “WEB portals” • DE “LIBRARY 2.0” • DE “INTERNET users” Social media concept mapping (ERIC) • DE “Electronic Publishing” • DE “Web Sites” • DE “Web Based Learning” • DE “Web Based Instruction” • DE “Computer Mediated Communication” • DE “Online Courses” • TX “social media” • TX “web 2.0” Social media concept mapping (LISTA) • DE “WORLD Wide Web” • DE “WEB 2.0” • DE “BLOGS” • DE “Web Publishing” • DE “WEB-‐Based Instruction”

Hooker -‐ 36 • DE “WIKIS (Computer Science) • DE “LIBRARY Web Sites” • DE “SOCIAL Bookmarks” • DE “SOCIAL Computing” • DE “SOCIAL Informatics” • DE “Library 2.0” • DE “ACADEMIC libraries -‐-‐ Effect of technological innovations on” Academic Library concept mapping (Academic Search Complete/LISTA) • DE “ACADEMIC libraries” • DE “ACADEMIC libraries – Departmental libraries” • DE “AFRICAN American academic libraries” • DE “BIBLE college libraries” • DE “COMMUNITY college libraries” • DE “FRATERNITY libraries” • DE “JUNIOR college libraries” • DE “NURSING school libraries” • DE “PHARMACY school libraries” • DE “PRIVATE school libraries” • DE “TEACHERS college libraries” • DE “TECHNICAL college libraries” • DE “THEOLOGICAL seminary libraries” • DE “UNDERGRADUATE libraries” Professional Development concept mapping (ERIC) • DE “Professional Development” • DE “Professional Training” • DE “Staff Development” • DE “Faculty Development” • DE “Teacher Improvement” • DE “Professional Continuing Education” • DE “Professional Education”

Hooker -‐ 37 Appendix C: Works Consulted Alexander, B. (2008). Web 2.0 and emergent multiliteracies. Theory into Practice, 47(2), 150-‐160. Angus, E., Thelwall, M., & Stuart, D. (2008). General patterns of tag usage among university groups in Flickr. Online Information Review, 32(1), 89-‐101. Bell, S. J. (2007). Building better academic libraries with web 2.0 technology tools. Library Issues, 28(2), 1-‐4. Berkeley, L. (2009). Media education and new technology: A case study of major curriculum change within a university media degree. Journal of Media Practice, 10(2/3), 185-‐197. Booth, C. (2008). Developing Skype-‐based reference services. Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 13(2/3), 147-‐165. Bordeaux, A., & Boyd, M. (2007). Blogs, wikis and podcasts: Social software in the library. Serials Librarian, 52(3/4), 263-‐269. Braender, L. M., Kapp, C. M., & Yeras, J. (2009). Using web technology to teach students about their digital world. Journal of Information Systems Education, 20(2), 145-‐153. Camihort, K. M. (2009). Students as creators of knowledge: When Wikipedia is the assignment. Athletic Therapy Today, 14(2), 30-‐34. Caverly, D. C., & Ward, A. (2008). Techtalk: Wikis and collaborative knowledge construction. Journal of Developmental Education, 32(2), 36-‐37. Chew, I. (2009). Librarians 2.0: Sowing padi in (the) SEA. Program: Electronic Library & Information Systems, 43(3), 275-‐287. Chretien, K., Goldman, E., & Faselis, C. (2008). The reflective writing class blog: Using technology to promote reflection and professional development. JGIM: Journal of General Internal Medicine, 23(12), 2066-‐2070. Chu, S. K. E. A. (2009). Using wikis in academic libraries. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 35(2), 170-‐176. Churchill, D. (2009). Educational applications of web 2.0: Using blogs to support teaching and learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(1), 179-‐183. City uni turns the twitter generation professional. (2009). Information World Review, (257), 03-‐03. Collis, B., & Moonen, J. (2008). Web 2.0 tools and processes in higher education: Quality perspectives. Educational Media International, 45(2), 93-‐106.

Hooker -‐ 38 Cooke, N. A. E. A. (2009). Library instruction 2.0. Public Services Quarterly, 5(2), 114-‐124. Cooper, J. D., & May, A. (2009). Library 2.0 at a small campus library. Technical Services Quarterly, 26(2), 89-‐95. Costa, C. (2007). A professional development weblog: Supporting work-‐based learning in a TAFE library. Australian Library Journal, 56(1), 36-‐55. George, A. S. (2007). Imagining Tomorrow's Future Today. EDUCAUSE Review, 42(6), 106-‐ 126. Glazer, H. (2009). Clever outreach or costly diversion? College & Research Libraries News, 70(1), 11-‐19. Godwin, P. (2009). Library 2.0 and information literacy: An overview. Refer, 25(1), 8-‐10. Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., & Hughes, J. E. (2009). Response to Comments: Research on Learning and Teaching With Web 2.0: Bridging Conversations. Educational Researcher, 38(4), 280-‐283. doi: 10.3102/0013189X09336675 Haupt, J. E. A. (2007). From zero to wiki: Proposing and implementing a library wiki. Journal of Web Librarianship, 1(1), 77. Hazari, S., North, A., & Moreland, D. (2009). Investigating pedagogical value of wiki technology. Journal of Information Systems Education, 20(2), 187-‐198. Hedreen, R. C., Johnson, J. L., Lundy, M. A., Burnette, P., Perryman, C., Van Den Brekel, G., et al. (2008). Exploring virtual librarianship: Second life library 2.0. Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 13(2/3), 167-‐195. Higdon, J., & Topaz, C. (2009). Blogs and wikis as instructional tools: a social software adaptation of Just-‐in-‐Time teaching. College Teaching, 57(2), 105-‐110. Hinton, M. J. (2008). Reading the academic library blog through the lens of genre theory: A preliminary discussion. Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 13(4), 347-‐361. Holmes, K., & Dubinsky, E. (2009). Integration of Web 2.0 Technologies in the Translational Research Environment. Medical Reference Services Quarterly, 28(4), 309-‐335. doi:10.1080/02763860903249027. Horwath, J. (2007). Social tools: More than just a good time? Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library & Information Practice & Research, 2(1), 1-‐7. James, D. E. A., Garrett, M., & Krevit, L. (2009). Discovering discovery tools evaluating vendors and implementing web 2.0 environments. Library Hi Tech, 27(2), 268-‐276. Knobel, M., & Lankshear, C. (2009). Wikis, digital literacies, and professional growth. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52(7), 631-‐634.

Hooker -‐ 39 Kroski, E. E. A. (2007). The social tools of web 2.0: Opportunities for academic libraries. Choice: Current Reviews for Academic Libraries, 44(12), 2011-‐2021. Law, D. (2009). Academic digital libraries of the future: An environment scan. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 15(1), 53-‐67. Lee, M. J. W., Miller, C., & Newnham, L. (2008). RSS and content syndication in higher education: Subscribing to a new model of teaching and learning. Educational Media International, 45(4), 311-‐322. Lehavot, K. (2009). “MySpace” or yours? the ethical dilemma of graduate students' personal lives on the internet. Ethics & Behavior, 19(2), 129-‐141. Linh, N. C. E. A. (2008). A survey of the application of web 2.0 in Australasian university libraries. Library Hi Tech, 26(4), 630-‐653. Magolda, P. M., & Platt, G. J. (2009). Untangling web 2.0's influences on student learning. About Campus, 14(3), 10-‐16. Maloney, E. J. (2007). What web 2.0 can teach us about learning. Chronicle of Higher Education, 53(18), B26. McGrail, J. P., & McGrail, E. (2009). What's wrong with copyright: Educator strategies for dealing with analog copyright law in a digital world. Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 5(3), 6-‐11. Minocha, S. (2009). A study on the effective use of social software by further and higher education in the UK to support student learning and engagement. Bristol, England: JISC. Retrieved from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/projects/effective-‐use-‐of-‐ social-‐software-‐in-‐education-‐finalreport.pdf Myhill, M. E. A., Shoebridge, M. E. A., & Snook, L. E. A. (2009). Virtual research environments -‐ a web 2.0 cookbook? Library Hi Tech, 27(2), 228-‐238. Nackerud, S., & Scaletta, K. (2008). Blogging in the academy. New Directions for Student Services, (124), 71-‐87. Neal, J. G. (2009). What do users want? What do users need? W(h)ither the academic research library? Journal of Library Administration, 49(5), 463-‐468. Neuhaus, C., Neuhaus, E., & Asher, A. (2008). Google Scholar goes to school: The presence of Google Scholar on college and university web sites. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 34(1), 39-‐51. Norton, P., & Hathaway, D. (2008). On its way to K-‐12 classrooms, web 2.0 goes to graduate school. Computers in the Schools, 25(3/4), 163-‐180.

Hooker -‐ 40 Olson, W. (2009). Where did you get that keychain? City Journal. Retrieved October 17, 2009, from http://www.city-‐journal.org/2009/eon1016wo.html Oxford, S. (2009). Being creative with web 2.0 in academic liaison. Library & Information Update, 8(5), 40-‐41. Reichardt, R. (2008). How may I help thee? Let me count the 2.0 ways. Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 13(2/3), 271-‐280. Reinhardt, W., Ebner, M., Beham, G., & Costa, C. (2009). How People are using Twitter during Conferences. In V. Hornung-‐Prahauser & M. Luckmann (Eds.), Creativity and Innovation Competencies on the Web (pp. 145-‐156). Presented at the 5th EduMedia conference, Salzburg, Austria. Retrieved from http://lamp.tu-‐ graz.ac.at/~i203/ebner/publication/09_edumedia.pdf Rhoades, E. B., Friedel, C. R., & Morgan, A. C. (2009). Can web 2.0 improve our collaboration? Techniques: Connecting Education and Careers, 84(1), 24-‐27. Robertson, M. J., & Jones, J. G. (2009). Exploring academic library users' preferences of delivery methods for library instruction. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 48(3), 259-‐ 269. Ronan, J., Reakes, P., & Ochoa, M. (2006). Application of reference guidelines in chat reference interactions: A study of online reference skills. College & Undergraduate Libraries, 13(4), 3-‐23. Sennyey, P., Ross, L., & Mills, C. (2009). Exploring the future of academic libraries: A definitional approach. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 35(3), 252-‐259. Smith, L. (2007). Elsevier dips toe in web 2.0 water. Information World Review, (240), 2-‐02. So, H., Lossman, H., Lim, W., & Jacobson, M. J. (2009). Designing an online video based platform for teacher learning in Singapore. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(3), 440-‐457. Sperring, D. (2008). Libraries, the Internet, web 2.0 and library 2.0. One-‐Person Library, 25(2), 5-‐6. Stephens, M., & Collins, M. (2007). Web 2.0, library 2.0, and the hyperlinked library. Serials Review, 33(4), 253-‐256. Väljataga, T., & Fiedler, S. (2009). Supporting students to self-‐direct intentional learning projects with social. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12(3), 58-‐69. Villano, M. (2008). Taking the "A" out of asynchronous. Campus Technology, 21(11), 38-‐40.

Hooker -‐ 41 West, R., Wright, G., Gabbitas, B., & Graham, C. (2006). Reflections from the introduction of blogs and RSS feeds into a preservice instructional technology course. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 50(4), 54-‐60. Wright, G., van der Heijden, K., Burt, G., Bradfield, R., & Cairns, G. (2008). Scenario planning interventions in organizations: An analysis of the causes of success and failure. Futures, 40(3), 218-‐236. doi: 10.1016/j.futures.2007.08.019

Hooker -‐ 42 Appendix D: Selected Canadian Association of Research Libraries (CARL) Strategic Plans Dalhousie University Libraries • http://www.library.dal.ca/About/Documents McGill University Library and Collections • http://www.mcgill.ca/library/library-‐about/general/ McMaster University Library • http://library.mcmaster.ca/mission University of Alberta Libraries • http://www.library.ualberta.ca/aboutus/strategicplan/ University of British Columbia Library • http://www.library.ubc.ca/home/planning/ University of Calgary Libraries and Cultural Resources • http://lcr.ucalgary.ca/publications University of Manitoba Libraries • http://www.umanitoba.ca/libraries/publications/ University of Ottawa Library • http://www.biblio.uottawa.ca/content-‐page.php?g=en&s=biblio&c=abt-‐ strategiq University of Regina Library • http://www.uregina.ca/library/about/mission.shtml University of Saskatchewan Library • http://library.usask.ca/aboutLibrary University of Toronto Libraries

Hooker -‐ 43 • http://discover.library.utoronto.ca/general-‐information/about-‐the-‐ library/mission-‐statement University of Victoria Libraries • http://library.uvic.ca/site/about/ulo.html

Hooker -‐ 44 Appendix E: Example Social Media Policy Blogging Blogging is a very public way of sharing your ideas. Remember that you are representing the institution, especially if you are using the institutional blogging platform. If it is a personal blog, make a clear statement that the views expressed on your blog are your own and are not associated with your employer. Blog posts are generally best if kept somewhere between 400-‐600 words, and contain links to appropriate content to heighten interactivity with readers. Make sure when configuring your blog to make the RSS feed easily available, and to provide clear links back to the library home page. Twitter Twitter is one of the most popular, rising social media tools in 2009. However, it has its own challenges. For example, if your tweets are public remember that they are “broadcast” when composing tweets. Remember that much of Twitter's value lies in your ability to share information and to be publicly findable. Twitter's value comes from a good balance of professional resource sharing and a reasonable dose of personality. Avoid mechanical linking with only titles, and always strive to add value to your network. Express opinions politely, and participate in constructive conversation. If you have a personal Twitter account, it is OK to advocate and share library resources with your network, but ensure that you have stated that this account represents your views, and not the library's. If you manage a library Twitter account, use your best judgment to

Hooker -‐ 45 ensure that you are sharing library specific resources on the feed, and to keep things relevant or connected to your department when possible. Facebook With the ability to use Facebook as a library's homepage, it is easy to establish a non-‐ invasive presence on this service. Pages can be created to represent different library departments but ensure that a page you create does not overlap with another pages. Seek a fan base, and provide regular new links and wall posts, but avoid sending too many updates that will be broadcast to everyone's News Feed. Again, use your best judgment, and think about how much you would like to see coming from your library on Facebook. Other services Experiment with other services that you deem necessary or are interested in gauging value for your department. If the service turns out to be useful, seek to establish a best use case for your team, draft use guidelines for other staff, and involve other team members and supervisors as appropriate. If the service is deemed to be not useful for you or your library's purpose, seek to delete your account. Remember that an unused or outdated profile sends a negative message to our users. General social media etiquette: When establishing a library service within a service's community, seek out other librarians that use the service to connect with, and glean best practices from. Critically evaluate the service, and seek to formulate a list of the service's

Hooker -‐ 46 benefits. This need not be a formal list, but be prepared to share reasons that you think a particular social media tool is worth your time. Monitoring If you are participating in social media, be sure to periodically search popular search engines and social media sites (e.g. Google, Twitter Search, Delicious) for mentions of your library's name or services. Respond to posts as necessary. Remember social media are about being social! Don't be afraid to comment or participate in discussions, but do keep in mind who you are speaking for or about when online. Use your conversational instincts. Don't say anything online you wouldn't say out loud to a group of your peers and supervisors.

Social media adoption, policy and development: exploring the way forward for academic libraries

by Daniel Hooker on Nov 29, 2009

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

2 Embeds 35

Statistics

Social media adoption, policy and development: exploring the way forward for academic libraries — Document Transcript

http://blog.danielhooker.com	34
http://www.yatedo.com	1