Tagging the academic library

Tagging the Academic LibraryExploring student awareness use and perceptions at Anglia Ruskin University
Jo Harcus
jo.harcus@anglia.ac.uk

What is social tagging?
Social bookmarking: online version of favourites
Social tagging: multiple keywords instead of single hierarchical folders to organise bookmarks
Social benefits are a byproduct of personal information management

http://tags.library.upenn.edu/

http://www.franklin.library.upenn.edu/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?bbid=221634

http://www2.lse.ac.uk/library/eresources/ecollections/freeresources.aspx

http://www.delicious.com/LSELibrary/newspapers

Methods
Online student survey
to generate indicative profile of current users and non-users of social tagging sites
to determine current familiarity with social tagging sites and how and why they are / are not used
Student focus groups
to assess benefits and barriers of existing tagging applications at other academic libraries (University of Pennsylvania and LSE)

Key findings
User profile
Just under half of survey respondents use social tagging sites
No users aged over 40 or amongst research postgraduates
Highest percentage within Faculty of Arts, Law and Social Sciences

Key findings
Familiarity and use
Usage largely confined to popular websites Facebook, Twitter and YouTube
Used daily for personal rather than work or study purposes
Used to manage own resources, communicate and share links with known others rather than to actively collaborate and network with other users
Lack of familiarity biggest barrier to uptake rather than concerns too difficult or time consuming to use

Key findings
LSE Subject Guide
Favoured for facilitating access to authoritative, subject-specific resources thereby saving users time and effort
Preferred to Google: ‘It’s like finding the handsome prince without having to kiss all the toads’
Signposting or spoon feeding?

Key findings
PennTags and the Franklin Catalog
Unhelpful and unreliable, like Amazon, Google and Wikipedia
Barriers to contribution:
time and effort
fear of criticism/ridicule from other users
others gaining from contributions without contributing themselves
fear of accusations of collusion and plagiarism
Resistant to mixing subjective user contributions with authoritative content in the library catalogue

Conclusions
Concentrate on developing applications which focus on facilitating access to quality online resources rather than user participation and collaboration
User education to promote benefits, rationalise concerns and manage expectations
Findings are not generalisable to all student populations

Thank you for listening!

Tagging the academic library

by librarian37 on Apr 06, 2011

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

Statistics

Tagging the academic library — Presentation Transcript