Change in IT Fluency

I have really enjoyed learning more HTML through this class. It gave me the motivation to learn further and use google and other websites to figure out the codes for ideas I had for my website. I actually told my manager how much I liked doing coding web design kind of stuff and she told me "Great! You can make a blog for us!" So I did that and it's pretty basic right now... just on Blogger, but I plan on making my own theme with HTML and using Photoshop for custom graphics. This class has renewed my love of HTML from the MySpace days. :) I also liked learning UNIX, as I had never done anything that "back-end" before and it was cool to feel lie I had do much power over this little command box. I think I would prefer to use the FTP program because I feel it is more user-friendly and I don't have to remember commands or try too hard to navigate through folders and whatnot without them being laid out in front of me, but Unix was definitely fun to learn.

IT Fluency

I have always been pretty fluent in technology. I am a very curious person and have been known to teach myself how do to many things such as learning how to use a DVD player and set up video game consoles as a kid. As mentioned in the last post, I also have experience in writing HTML for myspace layouts which was self-taught as well. I'm trying to keep up with new technology, but I'm only 25 and I feel like it isn't coming as easy to me as it used to.

I don't consider myself an expert in any "behind-the-scenes" tech stuff like coding and processing and computer specs, but I am not totally unfamiliar. Working on these modules, I have found that I already know the basic HTML commands and am excited to learn more in depth coding to write HTML from scratch.

The newest thing I have learned IT-wise would probably be learning all of the different types of AV cords like HDMI, VGA, RCA, etc... and what devices typically use which cables and how to set up mutiple monitors for a PC. Over the summer, we had a really bad storm and it knocked out power out. Everything seemed to be working when it came back on, but we noticed that the HDMI port on the TV in the living room was no longer working so I figured out that I could use RCA cables instead and recently bought an HDMI to RCA converter so that we could use an Amazon Fire Stick on that TV. When it comes to tech stuff that I can't easily figure out on my own, I turn to Google and get a second opinion from my boyfriend who works in IT.

LIS 560 Introduction

My name is Stephanie. I live in Homewood, IL, which is a suburb on the south side of Chicago. I currently work at the Harvey Public Library District as the Young Adult Library Assistant. I've been here for about 6 months and before that I worked in Circulation at another library for 5 years. As far as this class goes, I'm very comfortable with computers and technology. I'm almost 25 and have grown up with advancing technology throughout my life. Back in the Myspace days, I was big into writing HTML for layouts, but I used a template so it wasn't too difficult. I'm very familiar with Adobe Photoshop and have dabbled in other programs of the Create Suite. My boyfriend works in IT for a film post-production house and has taught me a lot of "behind the scenes" aspects of computers, but I'm definitely not fluent. I really enjoyed the article about how IT employees are also like therapists because people have meltdowns when their technology isn't working because that is just like me and my boyfriend. He fixes all of my tech problems and saves the day, but also teaches me what he's doing so I know in the future. I'm a quick learner and have always been able to figure new technology out through trial and error so I'm looking forward to this class to learn even more in-depth information about computers.

Article Summary for Lecture #14- Anhalt & Stewart

RDA Simplified

esource Description and Access, better known as RDA, was introduced to the cataloging world in 2005 as a simpler version of what was initially supposed to be AACR3 (Anglo-American Cataloging Rules 3). RDA was designed to help catalogers conquer the digital world and give a guideline for all cataloging all types of content and material. The reason RDA was made its very own set of rules is because the outcome of an RDA record ends up being so different from an AACR record.

The differences between AACR2 and RDA are quite clear. While AACR2 was introduced in 1978, during the era of card catalogs, it does not provide rules for cataloging newer digital content and emerging technologies. Also, AACR2 is a set of rules that dictates not only the content needed in a record, but how these records should be displayed and arranged. RDA is much more simple in that it only covers what content needs to be in the record. It is a lot less standardized that the AACR series and allows for greater freedom at individual institutions to best fit their needs. Another difference between AACR2 and RDA is that RDA encompasses FRBR (Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records) technology to make searching for materials through an online database much more inclusive. FRBR allows databases to link related works, expressions, manifestations, and items so that users can find the exact copy and version of what they are looking for.

RDA instructs that information in the description may be taken from anywhere in the original source, information is to be input exactly as it is worded in the source, and all names that appear in the statements from responsibility are to be transcribed as well. Traditionally, information from title pages was the only information used when creating bibliographic records, but as time has gone on and publishers have taken style and creative liberties, information found on title pages are not a reliable source to get all of the information needed when creating surrogate records anymore. RDA dictates that catalogers are no longer limited to the title page and any information found throughout the source is fair game. Another difference found is RDA is that originally, bibliographic records were contained corrected typos and fixed mistakes that may appear in the source with a denotation that the entry has been revised from the original work, but with RDA, we are to record everything as it appears in the source, mistakes and all.

Reference

Anhalt, J. & Stewart, R.A. (2012). RDA simplified. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 50(1):33-42.

Article Summary for Lecure #11- Barite

The Notion of “Category:” Its Implications in Subject Analysis and in the Construction and Evaluation of Indexing Language

Simply put, categories are defined as a broad term given to a group to describe what all of the elements in that group have in common or what makes them go together. Philosophers have been redefining “categories” since the times of Aristotle. Most people are able to tell you what a category is or seem to understand the concept of categories, but it turns out that they are much more complex and abstract than one might think. Categories are patterns and groups found by our brains to make better sense of the world around us. Our brains automatically put information into boxes or categories to better understand new things. For example, this summer I was at a doctor’s office telling him my symptoms and as I was listing my symptoms, he told me that he was trying to see if they fit into the “boxes” in his head of all the different ailments I could be dealing with. My symptoms were put into categories to try to make sense of what was happening with me. If my doctor wasn’t thinking of my symptoms in this manner and just took each one individually instead of grouping them, he may have never figured out what was really wrong with me and instead would have treated each symptom individually, like my previous doctor, and I would still be suffering today. Categories make is easier for us to both process and recall information. Thinking of this in the world of libraries… a patron tells you they want a book on pigs, horses, and cows. You would probably search for the category all of those terms fall under, which would be “farm animals” rather than searching for each animal individually. Categories can also be used to organize information and objects outside of our brains as well. We group non-fiction with non-fiction and fiction with fiction. We may even group all of the books that fall under the “romance” category together or “mysteries” or “sci-fi”. This makes it easier for users to find other works that they may like base on their interest in a particular category, or in this case, genre. Catalogers use categories as tools when planning and designing indexing languages.

Categories give catalogers a way to organize subject headings and keep everything in order. Categories also need to have elements that fall within that category. Categories cannot exist without a group of entities that the term holds together. Categories can therefore be analyzed and analyzed in many different ways. The article uses the French Revolution as an example. If you put a string of facts under “French Revolution”, you can study this facts as chronological events, you can look at how these facts influenced other countries or how they affected the population of France. You can use the information under this category to answer many different questions that you may be looking for during your study.

Reference

Barite, M. (2000). The notion of "category:" Its implications in subject analysis and in the

construction and evaluation of indexing languages. Knowledge Organization 27:4-10.

Article Summary for Lecture #10- Northedge

Google and beyond: information retrieval on the World Wide Web

                        The invention of the World Wide Web has brought new challenges, but also many great improvements for information retrieval. The growth of available information has made it impossible for humans to maintain and catalog all of the vast number of resources out there. The limitation of controlled vocabularies and human indexing does not exist with search engines. They are also available 24/7 online so we do not deal with the limitation of a library’s open hours either.

                        Search engines function by having a software agent, or computer program, scan and analyze web pages to index them. The software agents do this continually to add more and more pages to the search engine’s index. When someone submits a search query in the search engine, the engine uses these indexes to quickly retrieve web pages that fit what the user is searching for. Google is known for their gigantic index as well as what they call “PageRank”, which is a algorithm system that Google founders have developed to weed out unimportant web pages that would clog up a user’s search with “bad” sources at the top of their list. For example, if you Google “Facebook”, Facebook.com would be the first result with the most relevant and popular pages just below it. As you went through page after page and page of results for Facebook, because there would be a lot, you would come across pages that may just mention “Facebook” on it, but is not a site you would ever be looking for like a blog or a random organization’s website.

                        A problem with search engines and how they accumulate keywords or tags to be used when finding results is that website creators can insert metatags that are irrelevant to their site just to be included on more search results and bring traffic to their page. A website for a dog breeder in Colorado should not have the metatag “Chicago Cubs” just because they want to gain attention from the world series hype. A breast cancer awareness site should not use the tag “election 2016” to put themselves on search engine results list just because that is a popular search term right now. Search engines are far more beneficial than harmful though and they will only get better from here. They make finding information faster and easier than ever and are here to stay.

Reference

Northedge, R. (2007). Google and beyond: Information retrieval on the World Wide Web. The

Indexer 25:192-195.

Article Summary for Lecture #9- Shiri, Revie, & Chowdhury

Thesaurus-Enhanced Search Interfaces

An important issue search engines face is user inquiries matching the vocabulary in surrogate records. If a term doesn't exactly match, that source will not come up as a search result even if it is exactly what the searcher is looking for. If I am looking for a book on prehistoric reptiles, if I put that in, I may have gotten better results if I had searched for "dinosaurs" instead. This is a problem catalogers have faced and with emerging technologies, they have been able to fix this for the most part. Early versions of thesaurus enhanced search interfaces were introduced in the 1970’s to largely help with filling the gap between what the user thinks they are looking for and what they are really looking for in a catalog. Catalogers realized it would be much easier to provide this tool within the system instead of hoping that one day users will just be able to figure out what to put in and what will give good results and what will not. Without having to exactly match terms in a catalog system, users are able to get much better search results. The 1980’s brought artificial intelligence and expanded thesauri use within information systems. Thesaurus-enhanced systems use a mapping technique in which the user’s term is linked with terms found in the system’s thesaurus and the results are arranged with the user’s term first and then the other located terms after that. Some systems even recommend different terms while typing your inquiry or after the search has been submitted with the number of results that you would get based on those terms. While integrating thesauri into search interfaces has greatly improved how users are able to search using these systems, they are far from perfect. Going back to the prehistoric reptiles example, after looking up “reptile” in a thesaurus, the definition the thesaurus comes up with is “a person who is very dishonest” and offers terms such as weasel, cheater, snake, and rascal. The only one that is maybe going to get me results I am looking for is snake, as in “prehistoric snake”, but still not exactly the dinosaurs I am really looking for. The problem with using a thesaurus in a search interface can be that the term you are searching more may not be used in the way the thesaurus thinks you are using it. Of course that would be an example of a very ineffective search system and while thesauri systems may not be flawless, they are helping users and are being improved all the time.

References

Shiri, A.A., Revie, C., & Chowdhury, G. (2002). Thesaurus-enhanced search interfaces. Journal

of Information Science 28:111-122.