Library Tools, Tips, & Technologies

I came across this blog post while googling myself (which I do periodically to see what's up with me-not much apparently). An article I wrote a few years ago on Cognitive load theory and online instruction was mentioned (Multimedia Learning Theories and Online Instruction.” College & Research Libraries 67.4 (2006): 364-369.) , which is how I ended up coming across the "In the Library with the Lead Pipe" blog.

Most library related writings regarding the making of tutorials and online instruction focus on the process and software needed to create. Few focus on the pedagogy and instructional design models and processes behind their creation-which is why this post was so great to read.

The post mentioned Common Craft videos as good examples of simplicity in video instruction. The mention of Common Craft reminded me that a few years ago I experimented with creating library videos a la Common Craft. They looked pretty awful

Lessons learned, coming soon..........

MERLOT has announced several new iniatives-see below. Seems all the tools they're providing need to be hosted on their server, and seem to include a fee. Would be interesting to look at them further and see if they would provide more than free or fee based tools we're already using for web instruction (camtasia, etc).

"MERLOT Content Builder –a set of free, web-based tools that can be used by any registered MERLOT member to quickly create compact and engaging, MERLOT-hosted, Web-based learning materials. The Content Builder has been adapted by MERLOT, from the Carnegie Foundation’s KEEP Toolkit, and integrated with www.merlot.org in a fashion that allows instructors to create learning materials, make them publicly available if desired, and directly and easily define and contribute their metadata to the MERLOT repository. More information about the MERLOT Content Builder is available at
http://taste.merlot.org/Programs_and_Projects/ContentBuilder.html "

"SoftChalk Lesson Builder – a commercially available PC-based authoring tool for easy content creation that can be used by any level of developer to create online learning materials. Developers can produce a learning material in SoftChalk via an integrated SoftChalk/MERLOT interface, submit its metadata directly to the MERLOT repository. SoftChalk provides special pricing programs for MERLOT Academic Partners, and unit discounts for registered MERLOT members. More information about these programs can be found at http://taste.merlot.org/Programs_and_Projects/softchalk.html.

Pachyderm - an open source, server-based development system that grew from a partnership led by The New Media Consortium(NMC) and the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art (SFMOMA), and funded by the Institute for Museum and Library Services (IMLS). More information about Pachyderm can be found at http://pachyderm.nmc.org/. Pachyderm is the authoring tool used to create video stories for the MERLOT ELXIR project (http://elixr.merlot.org/creatingstories/) . Pachyderm-developed learning materials can be catalogued in the MERLOT repository by registered members who make use of MERLOT ‘s Contribute a Material function that registered and logged-in MERLOT members can access at www.merlot.org."

It's getting pretty common to see a link below a database citation indicated how many authors have cited the article. It's a beneficial addition, as it can allow people to follow the article trail and discover other relevant articles, and it's also good for those who need to prove that their work is well respected and read by others.

Many of the large databases-Web of Science, JSTOR, Project Muse, ProQuest, MedLine, etc.- provide citation tracking information. However, in many cases, databases only track citation information from the journals they index. Even with databases that include a larger pool of refereed journals in which they're tracking citations-like Web of Science-the journals are specific to the database subject area. To feel that you've cast a wide enough net in your search for citations of a specific article (especially if they are not science or medicine related), you need to look through several databases for citation tracking information. This is a cumbersome and time consuming process, as is evidenced by the PDF "Finding Cited Authors in the Humanities & Social Sciences" linked from this excellent tutorial on citation tracking: http://www.library.uow.edu.au/resourcesbytopic/UOW026626.

Google Scholar casts a wider net in its citation tracking abilities, because it searches across disciplines and includes more than refereed journals. In a Google Scholar search one might find blog posts referencing the article, white papers, technical papers, and mentions on websites. While the information is not limited to refereed journal citations only, it can still be very useful to discover who is looking at a certain work.

While Google Scholar moves things in the right direction, wouldn't it be great to have a a tool that automatically updates citation tracking information, and crawls several meta websites that might provide more than Google Scholar? Enter Citation Tracker. This tool was developed by Panos Ipeirotis of NYU and he developed it to solve the chore of updating his own vita. Users can import their bibliographies, and the software monitors open-web sources to search for citations of those works; it also updates as new cites appear.

The list of citations can then be curated/edited by the user to eliminate redundancies and less-valuable references. It also locates uses of papers in syllabi that appear online (which can be valuable for demonstrating impact of scholarship). The tool can also be used as an alert service, to find papers of interest to the individual scholar. For more information, read his blog post

I put the above tools to the test using one of my articles--Multimedia Learning Theories and Online Instruction Nadaleen Tempelman-Kluit. College & Research Libraries. Chicago: Jul 2006. Vol. 67, Iss. 4; p. 364

Results:
1.ProQuest: Cited by four -one recent (2009, scholarly) the others white papers from Universities

2.Google Scholar: Cited by fourteen- a mix of scholarly journals and blog-type posts, including articles accessed via csa.com and institutional repositories.

3.Citation Tracker: Cited by one hundred and sixty five: http://citation-tracker.com/publications/5d995819-2f0e-4cff-9c40-1e27aaaccc60/citations/. Not all of them are peer reviewed publications, but there are many more publications listed than the above tools provided, and then a plethora of other mentions from across the web.

Seems like a valuable tool.