Week 13

Social issues in IT cover vast territory. There are issues of personal information, privacy, security, tracking, and more. I'm intrigued by the delicate balance of convenience and privacy. "Current technologies enable data collection and integration on a scale previously unimagined with both benefits and unintended consequences (Kontzer & Greenemeier, 2006). One unintended consequence is that daily, we read of some new loss of individuals’ organisation-held, personal information. As data losses amass, the realisation that personal information privacy (PIP) is no longer manageable by individuals becomes clearer" (Konger, Pratt, & Loch, 2013. P. 401).

I'm all for convenience--prepackaged salads make eating healthy a lot easier, and having websites store your passwords means one less thing to remember--but as Konger, Pratt, and Loch point out, we pay for convenience with the risk of PIP loss.

How do we solve this? Is it even possible?


Works Cited:
Conger, S., Pratt, J. H., & Loch, K. D. (2013). Personal information privacy and emerging technologies. Information Systems Journal, 23(5), 401-417.

Week 12

I'm intrigued by XML. As I understand it, it is something like a partner to HTML; XML carries (stores and transports) the data, focusing on "what data is", whereas HTML displays the data, focusin on how it looks (http://www.w3schools.com/xml/xml_whatis.asp). "XML is information wrapped in tags" (http://www.w3schools.com/xml/xml_whatis.asp). XML allows for back-adding data (going back and adding new/deleting old information). Since XML stores data in plain text, it makes it possible to merge information from incompatible systems. This, of course, simplifies creating and maintaining information systems, as developers can't predict every element the system will need at the beginning of a project; new needs will develop over time, and will need to be incorporated into the system. XML makes this possible.





Works cited:
www.W3schools.com. "Introduction to XML." Accessed 11/2712016.

Week 7

System usability is vital to any information system. I believe that it is the first step toward accessibility, as it allows developers to know if the system they’re working on is useful enough to be worth using. While there is definitely more to system accessibility, it’s a very important step. I think that a helpful addition to heuristic studies would be an initial accessibility evaluation. Since heuristics include elements like user control and freedom, matching the system & real world, and flexibility (Nielsen, 1995. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/ten-usability-heuristics/), including tests for accessibility and ensuring that websites and other facets of info systems are usable by all seems like a sensible addition.

While week 7 focused on usability, not accessibility, I believe that the two are inseparably connected; after all, for a system to be usable, it needs to be accessible to all, including those with disabilities. 

Nielsen, J. (1995). Ten Usability Heuristics for User Interface Design. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/ten-usability-heuristics/ Retrieved October 22, 2016.

Week 9

Week 9 notes:

Physical accessibility to library buildings has always been on my radar. If it’s difficult to get into the building or navigate the stacks, a library is useless to someone with a restrictive physical disability. What hadn’t occurred to me was web accessibility and less visible disabilities like color blindness and seizure disorders. It just never occurred to me that it’s as important for a library’s website to be accessible as the building itself. If a user can’t access the information s/he needs, the library is useless. “nearly 24.5 million people in the United States are unable to retrieve information from library websites unless web authors make accessibility and usability their goal” (Fulton, C, 2011, p. 38)

The thing is, it’s not that hard to make a website accessible—and it’s the library’s duty to do so in 

order to serve the community. “The most important thing a library can do to make informed decisions about adaptive technology is understand the needs of the community it serves. Only after a library 

builds insight into disability types and technology preferences of its users can it select appropriate 

products and services that will adequately meet their needs” (Gruder, 2012, p. 21). If a web developer keeps the needs of all patrons in mind and uses common-sense web building techniques in mind (like 

using CSS instead of HTML), websites that are accessible to most—if not all—patrons are possible.

Fulton, C. Information Technology and Libraries. “Web Accessibility, Libraries, and the Law.” March 2011 34-43.

Gruder, C.S. Library Technology Reports. “Making Libraries Accessible: Adaptive Design and Assistive Technology. October 2012.

Week 4/6: ILS and HCI

Integrated Library Systems, or ILSes, are, in its essence, tracking software. ILSes allow libraries to automate tracking items in the catalog, including acquisition, check-outs, patrons who have borrowed, bills paid, etc (Integrated Library System, 2016). It started in the 1990s for tracking printed materials (Yang, 2013. P. 1). As it has evolved, ILSes have developed functions to track electronic materials as well as print. A major benefit of ILSes is that they are shareable. Since most ILSes are available online, libraries can share their collections with each other. This is especially beneficial for small libraries without the staff to do large amounts of cataloging and tracking. While ILSes are useful and are an important element of library management, they do have limitations. For example, "managing electronic resources is difficult in the current ILS" (Yang, 2013. p. 1). Additionally, "Some of the other challenges come from Resource Description and Access (RDA) and the inadequate OPAC of an ILS...adding a discovery tool alongside the library’s OPAC can be confusing when added to already fragmented library collections and resources" (Yang, 2013. p. 1). The hope for the next generation of ILSes is that they eliminate these difficulties.

I feel that ILSes are integral to library services, but agree that the difficulties of creating fragmented & difficult to search collections. Ideally (in my mind) A library would be able to catalog/display/use all items in the collection--including online resources--from one location. A simple interface that allows patrons & staff to search and manage any form material from one page. I realize that might be unrealistic (and possibly unwieldy. I don't know what it would look like), though.

HCI is how we use the technology we use, from computers and smart phones to printers.  “The International Standards Organization defines usability as “the extent to which a product can be used by specified users to achieve specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction in a specified context of use.” From a software development perspective, usability is a quality attribute and therefore must be balanced with other quality attributes in each software product” (Moreno, et al. 2013. P. 100).

Good HCI design is important because, if the HCI doesn't work, it won't be used. “The aim of HCI research is to improve the interaction between users and computing devices in the sense that this interaction should become more user-friendly and better adapted to the needs and capabilities of the users and the capabilities of the device.” (Ebert, et al, 2012. P. 121) And if it can't be used, then the user can't be satisfied. The user is “the most important part of the machine interaction process.” (Gupta, 2012. p. 1736)


I think that most sites/programs, etc. have both positives and negatives when it comes to HCI, and the balance of the good and bad depends on the user. For example, Pinterest is a social bookmarking site that’s popular with millions. It is entirely graphic: users share pictures that link to pages they want to share/save. To view others’ pins, users either browse the pictures on their feed or search by keyword to browse pins related to a specific subject. Either way, users scroll through pages of pictures to find what they need. While this is functional and, for most people, highly usable, I find it difficult to navigate because the pictures don’t line up in even rows and columns. 
 

I need linear!

For most people, that’s probably not an issue (and it is visually attractive), but I find it frustrating not to have it organized linearly. So, for most of Pinterest’s users, the UI is perfect; for someone like me, on the other hand, having a way to customize the page layout would make it more useful. 

Another site with both pluses and minuses is Amazon.com. The search is functional, and you can find what you're looking for--especially if you know what department to select--but I find the front page to be cluttered and overwhelming. Although the page has useful features like recommendations and "similar items," I would have an easier time if the graphics were less prominent (do you notice a theme with me and graphics?). It also has too many ads, and many are for things I'm just not interested in.

Books? Yes! Dash buttons? Meh. 

 

Men's shirts? More dash buttons? Ugh. Music is good, though.

Ebert, A, Gershon, N. D., & van der Veer, G. C. (2012). Human-computer interaction_Introduction and overview. Kunstliche Intelligenz, 26(2), 121-126.


Gupta, R. (2012). Human computer interaction: A modern overview. International Journal of Computer Technology and Applications, 3(5), 1736-1740.

 Integrated library system. (2016, August 4). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved October 17, 2016, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Integrated_library_system&oldid=732993655

Moreno, A. M., Seffah, A., Capilla, R., & Sanchez-Segura, M.-I. (2013). HCI practices for building usable software. Computer, 46(4)

Yang, S. (2013). From integrated library systems to library management services: Time for change? Library Hi Tech News, 30(2), 1-8.

Readings for Weeks 2 & 3

In week 2, we read about the system development life cycle and system analysis. I found the readings on SDLC to be the most informative, as I had never looked at this concept before. "A Software System Development Life Cycle Model for Improved Stakeholders’ Communication and Collaboration" (Cohen, Dori, & Haan, 2010) addressed two on-going changes in the software development world. The first change is a shift from companies developing their own software in-house to buying it; the second is a shift from purchasing custom-developed software to off-the-shelf (OTS) packages. Cohen, Dori, & Haan also discussed the life-cycle of software development, from deciding on a need all the way to retirement. (p. 21)

I found this enlightening as I had never considered all the steps involved in developing (or simply purchasing!) software. Also interesting to me was the difference between the traditional system development life cycle and the one adapted for information services purposes. They're basically the same, but some of the steps have been modified or renamed (Cohen, Dori, & Haan, 2010, p. 21). The traditional model is thus:

(P. 21) My interpretation of this is that an entity (in this case, a company, but it could be an individual or other stakeholder) decides that they need something, figures out what that its, plans it, creates it, tests it, installs it, and finally uses it. The model adapted for IS is similar:

(P. 21) As far as I can tell, this boils down to the same steps, with a few differences; instead of design & construction, the new model has steps for finding a vendor (RFP, Vendor Evaluation and Choosing, & Contract negotiations).

The passage notes that "no significant attempt has been made to extend the SDLC model to other situations encountered by many software vendors and software developing entrepreneurs." (P. 21) I would think that this process applies to any purchasing situation: the person/entity decides that they need something, figures out the specifics, gets it, and uses it.

Cohen, et al further describe a proposed system called Lead Driven Development (LDD), which seems to me to be the same concept as the SDLC model, but from the vendor's point of view instead of the end-user's. Instead of a company deciding that they have a need & fulfilling it, a vendor develops a product to fill a need (that they hope exists or that they have been approached for) and gets it to the user. This is the mirror of the SDLC model; the vendor seeks out users rather than vice versa. The biggest difference, as far as I can see, is that the cycle is longer; instead of 7-8 steps, there are 12.

(Cohen, Haan, & Dori, 2010. P. 34)

They finish by explaining that the LDD model "accounts for market and organizational factors and
the way they are woven into the traditional phases of software development. It offers the basis for
the unified, comprehensive multi-tier SDLC framework and methodology that contributes to improved stakeholders’ communication and collaboration through the use of a common reference model for all stakeholders." (Cohen, Haan & Dori, 2010. P. 37) As I mentioned above, I think that this applies to any selling-purchasing interaction, not just software.

 Week 3's focus is on Information Retrieval Systems (IR) and System/Digital Librarianship. I'm quite interested in digital librarianship not only because it is the trend of future info services professions, but also because I'm fascinated by the possibilities presented by DL. In "Technical Skills for New Digital Librarians (Tzoc and Millard, 2011), we learned about the skills that librarian positions (specifically digital librarian positions, but I feel that these may eventually apply to other facets of LIS) require, how library schools address those skills (if, in fact, they do), and how to bridge the gap where school doesn't prepare us. What the article highlights is that most librarian job announcements require digital skills such as database management, digital collection management, digital conversion, digital preservation, network administration, web design, and more. I hadn't realized how broad a range of digital skills libraries are looking for; this helped prepare me for the breadth and depth of knowledge I'm missing & therefore need to learn.

Also interesting was that "generally, skills taught in LIS courses closely matched those being
sought in position announcements with some notable exceptions" (Tzoc and Millard, 2011. P. 13). However, "A certain amount of disparity in results can be expected due to the differing missions between hirin institutions and LIS programs" (P. 13). CUA's program appears (to me, at least) to be comprehensive in the digital library courses offered. The Digital Libraries course of studies offers 10 courses (including one core course required for all courses of study). In my opinion, this will prepare students in this concentration quite well for a career in DL.

I was glad that the conclusion offered resources for furthering our knowledge and skills in the digital arena; many of us don't have the resources (money, time, or both) to take extra classes once we're on the job. Of particular interest to me are W3schools and Lynda.com, both of which I have used (albeit non-extensively) to learn some basic software and web design skills. I would add Youtube tutorials and how-to sites like wisegeek.com, udemy.com, and wikihow.com for basic free skill-building. I was also happy to learn about a resource I had never heard of in Code4Lib.

Jane Monson's "What to Expect When You're Digitizing" (2011) was a good reality check for me. I tend to over-estimate how much I can take on, and Monson reminded me that, especially if I'm solo, I just can't do everything or learn everything I want to. Time, money, and other resources will restrict how much I'll be able to accomplish. I need to keep this in mind as I go forward so I don't set my expectations to high and end up being disappointed in myself!