OLA-2006-IM
Thursday July 03rd, 2008From Library Instruction Wiki
| Table of contents |
logistics
do we want to use presentation software?
who does what?
timing?
rehearsals?
program
introduction
hi, everybody!
what is virtual reference
[ctr? who?]
- humans interacting with humans over a computer to do library reference
- e-mail counts
- live chat counts
- video reference counts
- instant messaging counts
- SMS counts
- whatever is next might count
"Reference" is a misnomer
- lots of circulation questions
- lots of getting-to-databases for off-campus academics
?VR seeks to position the library as a key information provider online?
some specifics about IM
[rb and sw]
- what is a screen name
- what are major services
- why is IM free?
- sell you ads
- the market for IM is growing and growing - you have to make it free to compete
- keeps you using a certain product (AOL, Microsoft-> coming soon?, Myspace)
- one internet business strategy is to open your service up to new developers (Amazon, AIM) - people find new uses for your product, which attracts more users, without you having to do anything.
who uses l-net
[ctr]
- library users
- middle school kids
- adult public library 'power users'
who doesn't use l-net
[ctr]
- undergraduates (not very much)
- high school students
- non-library users
who uses IM
[sr, sw?, rb?]
teen use of IM
[sr]
- 75% of online teens use IM, compared to 42% of online adults
- 32% of ALL TEENS IM every day
- not just chat -- links to articles, websites
- they send documents, sound files, video files
- it's NOT "technology" to them
who would bother to IM the library?
sw?
- people who are using IM anyway - who prefer IM to other forms of communication
- people who are not able to use the phone and their internet connection at the same time
- people who PREFER not to use their phone and internet connection at the same time - anyone who wants to have a live conversation with a librarian without stopping what they're doing or getting up from where they are sitting
wbc compared with im
Houghton, S. and Schmidt, A. (Jul/Aug, 2005) Web-based chat vs. Instant Messaging: Who wins? Online, v29 i4. p26, 5pgs. Accessed through ProQuest 3/21/2006.
The authors compare the way WBC and IM work for reference librarians, using a checklist of 10 major factors, and determining a 'winner' in each category. The 10 categories, with the author's winners, were:
- Speed of interaction: IM
- Cost: IM
- Time/availability: WBC
- Training: IM
- Target market: DRAW
- Software: DRAW
- Features: WBC
- Computer requirements: IM
- Privacy: DRAW
- Community: IM
Two points which I've seen debated elsewhere are Cost and Availability - IM wins initially on cost because the the program is free. However, typically individual libraries are responsible for staffing their own IM service, which means staff time, training time, etc. WBC is an expensive program for libraries to purchase, even if they are part of a cooperative, however, staff time and training might end up costing less - within the shelter of the cooperative, individual libraries can dedicate a smaller number of staff hours to the service. Consider this with the Availability factor - when will the service be available to patrons? Offering IM 24 hours a day would be impractical for most individual libraries. WBC, with librarians staffing it across the country, can be offered 24 hours. I think that these two points, by themselves, make for a hefty debate for a library considering offering either service. Though in the above list, IM wins by numbers, the ten factors don't weigh equally with librarians, patrons, and administrators. One area where IM wins, which adds weight to its use in libraries, is the final factor - community. Because IM is usually staffed by librarians and staff within a single library or library system, patrons will be getting local responses to their local questions.
Another factor i've been noticing is Evolution - IM programs are evolving rapidly, and new add-ons are being built constantly, allowing for greater ease of use and mobility of IM. IM programs adapt to and perhaps even drive technological advances. For example, AIM Express and Meebo - people wanted to be able to IM from computers that didn't allow new programs to be downloaded onto them, such as computers in labs, or at work. AIM Express and Meebo are web based, and don't require a download.
wbc
- only need a web browser
- successful collaborative models have allowed services to grow 1,500 questions per month in oregon, 10,000 questions in ohio
- co-browsing is fancy
- many libraries report that co-browsing doesn't function consistently
- may not work equally well on all computers/browsers
- products keep statistics
- products cost money
- successful services require staff to manage
- complicated software takes time to learn
- users have to wait a few seconds for librarian to pick up
im
- only need a web browser ... or just a computer ... or a cell phone
- kajillions of people already using it.
- free in dollars (not free in other aspects)
- blocked from school networks
- software can be easy to learn under the right circumstances (gaim better than regular aim client)
- typically, user knows "instantly" if there is someone on the other end
- a small library can implement and integrate into daily workflow with little overhead
- privacy concerns and other issues to be discussed later
- advertising
- users can add you to a "buddy list", instant librarian presence, convenient for patron
in common
- chat techniques take time to learn
- does either "scale" well?
demo
[everyone]
needs:
two computers/projectors?
two computers and one projector?
one computer, one projector, and one off-site accomplice?
Do we want to show both a demo of WBC and of IM? I can easily bring my laptop so that we'll have two computers. Or we could do it with an off-site accomplice. Or both. To show what happens when you've got more than one question going.
how im is being used/models
An informal examination of the web sites of 27 libraries that offer Instant message Reference service revealed some interesting information. Though the list of libraries is not comprehensive, it does serve as a starting point for the formulation of some theories regarding the treatment of Instant Message Reference at public and academic libraries in the United States. For example, 26 of 27 (96%) libraries use AOL Instant Messenger (AIM) as one of their IM services. 11 of 27 (42%) libraries use only AIM, making it the most popular choice of IM services for libraries by far. Both academic and public libraries had the same likelihood of offering only one choice of IM service, with 9 of 27 (33.3%) offering only one service. All but one library that offers only one service offers AIM. One library offers only Yahoo!
In academic libraries, if the library offered more than one IM service, then that library offered both Yahoo! And MSN Messenger in addition to AOL. Only four libraries offered more than three services, offering GoogleTalk or ICQ (but not both) as IM services as well.
Curiously, despite the prevalence of AOL’s Instant Messenger (AIM) at nearly all libraries, AOL’s service AIM Express – a web based program that does not require users to download anything onto their computer, but allows them to IM using a temporary ID – was only suggested at 9 of the 26 (34%)libraries that offered AOL.
14 out of 19 (73%) of Academic libraries had at least some instruction on their web site to help patrons set up an account and give them a sense of the way IM works. Conversely, only 2 of 9 (22.2%) public libraries offered even minimal instruction on how to set up and operate IM.
14 of 19 (73%) of academic libraries posted hours of operation. 3 of 9 (33%) public libraries offered hours of operation.
After examining these 27 web sites, it would appear that with this new service, libraries are of generally mixed feelings about how to promote and support this service. Academic libraries seem more likely to fully support the enterprise, offering instructions and posting hours. Public libraries seemed less confident in IM as a tool, but are starting to offer it as an experiment, without committing too much energy to the task.
In building an IM service, certain elements need to be in place. One thing to consider is that IM Reference is fully online, and will likely be seen as an extension of your library’s online presence. How accessible IM Reference information is on your web site, how it’s promoted, what it looks like, what tone you strike with instructions and suggestions, will all serve to inform your patron base as to the way your library feels about the new IM service. A lack of instruction or suggestions, not providing links to set up an IM service, a lack of variety in IM choices, will tell your patrons that you don’t fully support the IM service, and that you hope it doesn’t get used very often, or at all.
What about hours? That’s one I’ve been struggling with – hours of operation. Libraries seem to be deeply committed to the idea of offering specific hours of operation for every service. When the library is open, when telephone information will be available, etc. E-mail is often promoted as “24-hour” service, though with the stipulation that you can ask your question any time, you just might have to wait “24 hours” to hear back from the library about it.
Instant Messaging might be different, in that once your library is on someone’s “Buddy List” then they can tell if you’re online or not. If you’re not online, then they can choose another method of reaching the library, either by e-mail, phone, or walking down to the building. What do patrons expect of an IM service at this point? IM, in general, seems to be based on a certain level of fortuitousness - if someone you want to chat with is online at the same time as you are, you feel 'lucky.' However, if they are not online at the same time as you, you don't neccessarily feel 'unlucky,' just perhaps a little disappointed. Offering set hours of IM service might help some patrons focus on using the service during those hours, but won't help those patrons who need help outside the range of hours.
I guess the central question about hours is this: Does posting hours limit our ability to exceed patron expectations of service?
models for collaborative IM
[ctr] [caleb - if you're feeling like you've got way too much I could easily share this section with you - rb] Share a login
- two or more libraries share a common logon and take turns "staffing the desk".
- typically, each also has their own IM logons so can communicate before trading off.
- cons: works best if neither service is busy
Campus/network model
- librairans on the same network may be able to share a login and save transcripts to a network drive.
Bot model
- IM dealers have always made APIs open to allow products like gAIM and trillian to exist. also "bots"
- bots do :
- automatic tasks - get the weather forecast, get price from amazon, renew your library books
- artificial intelligence
- library bots could:
- route questions to multiple librarians
- keep statistics
- etc
- cons : software hasn't actually been written yet
buddy list and away message model
- make a whole list of available librarians public and easy to find for IM users
- IM clients allow users to set an "away message" so that they can stay logged on to IM but let people know they are not available.
- a sample away message that refers the patron to a collaborative partner: "Multnomah County Library is not on IM right now, but you can get research help from WSU-Vancouver by sending a message to ...."
- cons: works best if you aren't busy
the wsu-v experience
[rb,sw]
- planning
In the planning stage, we examined the available literature on the subject - articles and postings from librarians already using the service, and scholars who have begun to examine IM in relation to other services offered by libraries. What we discovered was that in general, IM is considered easier and cheaper to set up than a Web-based Chat service, and that an IM service was likely to be popular with students at an undergraduate university. Because WSU Vancouver is adding Freshmen and Sophomore classes for the first time in Fall of 2006, we wanted to be ready to serve that new population with services they would be comfortable with.
- preparation
Our early preparation involved setting up the IM services, which had some trial and error - we set up both Gaim and Trillian first, then realized we needed to set up AOL, Yahoo! and MSN accounts before Gaim or Trillian would do anything useful for us. Once we had our accounts set up, we examined how IM worked using Gaim and Trillian. For the most part, the two services were the same - Gaim is an open source program, and Trillian is proprietary, but both are free. We were worried that with Gaim we would have to be more active with checking to see if updates were needed. We initially found Trillian to be a bit more user-friendly but after the initial set-up we prefered Gaim. Ultimately, after using them both, we decided to use Gaim. Supporting open source is important to us and we couldn't find any real downside to it in this case.
- training
Rachel and I experimented with IM-ing each other, asking questions and sending links to web sites, to get a sense of what a normal interaction might be like, and how much time it would take. We discovered various tools available, such as the ability to send patrons a short 'hyperlink' to a web site, rather than posting what might be a very long URL. Once we were familiar with the basic use of the service, as well as how to turn it on and off, we set it up on the reference desk computers, and periodically IM'd the person staffing the reference desk, to help them get familiar with the way the service acted. Rachel sat down with each of the reference desk staff and demonstrated the use of IM and talked with them about their concerns. Ultimately, the software is so easy to use, no one really required much in the way of training.
- launch
We did a soft launch - no bells and whistles, just posting information about the service on our web site. Every week or so, we would do a little something to promote the service, posting articles in the library newsletter and blog, designing and printing out cards and bookmarks to hand out at circulation with checked out books, or at the reference desk. As spring semester got under way, we made sure to promote the IM service at ILI sessions.
- experience so far
Our very first IM reference question was perhaps one of the most exciting - a high school senior in Texas IM'd us to ask questions about our school. Over the next few months, the service has had some use - most IM reference questions are coming from the same students, who, having discovered the service, now use it fairly often.
We get a range of questions from basic circulation and hours questions to "real" reference questions.
[Rachel] Talk about how doing IM reference is different from other kinds of reference -- the pace, etc.
- looking to the future
We are anticipating heavier use beginning in the Fall of 2006, with the incoming Freshmen and Sophomores.
issues
[???]
spim
- spim is spam for IM. it can be annoying, or it can be dangerous. examples?
privacy and safety
On the role of government and using IM:
- NASCIO Research Brief "TLK2UL8R: The Privacy Implications of Instant and Text Messaging Technologies in State Government". https://www.nascio.org/nascioCommittees/privacy/instantMessagingBrief.pdf
Summary: don't take library barcode numbers over IM
- how do we deal with online safety?
- use fake names
- don't trust anyone over 30, etc.
- users change screen names often - keep safe and secure that way. I'm sure you've all had friends that have recently switched to a new e-mail account.
- can the library afford to do that?
- major providers use what you type to sell you ads
- Google Talk lets each user decide if hte transaction is "off the record" - will it be saved *both* parties.
- are there opportunities to use IM to start conversations (with specific users, in communities, on campus) about privacy and safety?
security
- it departments at your library may block IM for "security reasons".
- hackers target "stupid users" and often define these as users of AOL and microsoft products - ie AIM, MSN, Outlook
- IM viruses can be spread in the same way e-mail viruses can be spread: by clicking on something that you don't know what it is
- IM viruses can pretend to come from your friends, the way e-mail viruses do.
summary: security is a real issue, but if you're smart, don't worry
licensing
"you may not use this to conduct busines...."
other issues?
focus group results
[sr, ctr]
future directions
[???]
- L-net im team
- If you're at all considering offering IM or VR service, let your patrons use these services from inside your library and set your internet filters to allow access to sites like Meebo (meebo.com).
discussion
bibliography
[???]
