Do you folksonomy? Why, yes, you do, but you just might not realize that it is what you are doing. Folksonomy in simple terms is the tagging by users. Think Pinterest, Twitter hashtags, Instagram, Amazon, etc. See? I told you! Folksonomy is a user-generated classification of online information, generally separated into categories via tags.
I had my interest pique in reading for this class when
I first encountered the word FOLKSONOMY. First of all, I couldn’t believe that
it has been around for so long (over 10 years), and that I seriously only now,
in this class, have read about it. Though I have personally used folksonomy and
have also viewed it in action on several occasions, but I just didn’t know its
name.
For this final project, I have researched folksonomy
and its practical usage in the library world. There has been some resistance to
the application of folksonomy by librarians, but it definitely shifts some
ownership of the catalog to library users.
My project did not focus on folksonomy at the
elementary level for several reasons, mostly because I think the implementation
of folksonomy would be easier with MS/HS students, as they would have the
ability and independence to do it. I have used public library and college data
regarding the impact of using folksonomy, as there is not much out there about
the use of folksonomy in schools yet, as that’s where we are right now, the
threshold.
My final conclusion related to this topic is that in
the end the most efficient way to use folksonomy in a school library will be
using a system that is already in place, like how the Spokane County Library
pays for add-on that connects to Library Thing, which then provides the tags
and reviews. I did have a great conversation with our current librarian, and
prior to this, she did not have Destiny Quest as an option for our students.
She had it available, but chose to not actually enable the students to have
access to it. In the end, she has turned it on, and our ELA departments plan to
work with Destiny Quest next year, and even have at least one assignment
related to writing a review (which all must be approved) that would be included
on our Destiny Quest school website! As for tagging, that will take more
research to determine how to make it happen for students. I do believe
folksonomy will complement the LCSH, though it more than likely will have to be
provided by a secondary source like having students sign-up for Library Thing.
Note: These are in MLA format, which means alphabetical order, too, but if you read the annotations, you will see that I definitely had some favorites :)
Arch,
Xan. “Creating the Academic Library Folksonomy: Put Social Tagging to Work at
Your Institution.” College and Research
Library News 68.2 (2007): 80-81. Web. 25 April 2016. <http://crln.acrl.org/content/68/2/80.full.pdf+html>.
Two things came out of this article that I had not
read before. First, I found the idea of the “gray literature” an important one
for bolstering the use of folksonomy in the library. There is so much that
doesn’t fall into the black and white controlled vocabulary. Second, I found
out about Penn Tags—from the Pennsylvania State University. Ironically, they
are no longer using this site as of June of this year, as they have come to the
conclusion that having their own tagging system was doubling (or tripling or
quadrupling, etc.) up on what was already out there, and not a valuable or
necessary asset anymore. So, this again lends to my conclusion of how I shall
use folksonomy in the library. As well, this Penn Tags was discussed in the Rethlefsen
source below.
Avery, J.M. “The Democratization of Metadata: Collective
Tagging, Folksonomies and Web 2.0. Library Student Journal, 5 (2010).
Web. 24 April 2016. <https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Joshua_Avery/publication/283514556_The_Democratization_of_Metadata_Collective_Tagging_Folksonomies_and_Web_2.0/links/563ccb8a08ae45b5d2898c6d.pdf>.
This source provides
a background and history of folksonomies, as well as the problems with them.
What I especially appreciated in this article is the explanation of resistance
towards librarians using folksonomy in their work. Avery does a fine job of
showing how the sky really isn’t falling as was expected! I also found the
references to be outstanding and helpful in finding more information about this
subject.
Chen, Irene, and Terry T. Kidd. Wired
For Learning : An Educator's Guide To Web 2.0. Charlotte, N.C.: Information
Age Publishing, 2009. eBook Collection (EBSCOhost). Web. 10 May 2016. <http://moe.highline.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=470411&site=ehost-live&scope=site>.
This source
focuses on how our students learn, how they have grown up, how they are wired.
It delineates into five sections, and the two that were most helpful for me
were Part Two: Social Learning, Networking
and Web 2.0 and Part Five: Web 2.0
Case Studies and Ideas for Educators. This is, again, the WHY and HOW
behind the use of folksonomies with our students. Our kids are social learners,
even if they are doing so independently. This would be a source to use when
presenting the need to make changes for our students and connect them via
networking, such as folksonomy allows.
Dempsey,
Lorcan. “The User Interface That Isn’t.” Lorcan
Dempsey’s Weblog: On Libraries, Services, and Networks May 15, 2005. Web.
25 April 2016. < http://orweblog.oclc.org/the-user-interface-that-isnt/>.
This was actually a web post, and the reason it is
included in this project is because it offers the why behind the question of
changing the way we do things, especially related to our library catalogs and
websites. For me personally, it provides a structure as to how to make changes
in my current situation. I would pull from this web post to present to my
administration about the new direction I want to take our library catalog and
website.
Hoffman,
Carlie. Personal interview. 8 June 2016.
Ms. Hoffman’s position is
Library Service Manager for Virtual Services for the Spokane County Library. By
far and away this was the most helpful resource for me because it was how
folksonomy practically works in a library. Ms. Hoffman actually had statistics
as related to how often tagging was used to find books, how many tags were
collected, and which specific tags, etc. She did share with me a variety of
resources which offer tagging and user reviews which can be added to catalogs depending
upon which catalog a library has.
Rethlefsen,
Melissa. “Chief Thingamabrarian.” Library
Journal. January 15, 2007. Web. 8
June 2016. <http://lj.libraryjournal.com/2007/01/technology/chief-thingamabrarian/>.
I loved this article! I wish I would have found it
first in this entire process!! It is an interview with Tim Spaulding the brain
behind Library Thing! I found out about a cool tool called the Unsuggester on Library
Thing. As well, it is discussed how Library Thing uses EVERYTHING from the
Library of Congress to Amazon to other library catalogs and, of course,
folksonomy. This article also helps to show why it’s next to impossible for a
library to have a tagging system on its own. It is all about volume of tagging
to make it work and also to weed out any of the offensive or inappropriate
tagging.
Rolla,
Peter J. “User Tags versus Subject Heading.” Library Resources and Technical Services 53.3 (2009): 174-183. Web.
25 April 2016. <https://journals.ala.org/lrts/article/view/5281/6428>.
Peter Rolla focuses on the need for both user tags and
subject heading. He shows in this article how they both complement one another,
and that they are tackling the same purpose but with different audiences. This
is a source that made me really think how important user tags can be for my
audience of young adult teens to access information in the library. The user
tags from Library Thing are much more focused for their purposes. But, I really
appreciate Rolla’s point that we have to keep the controlled vocabularies, too,
or we will lose valuable organization that reaches far outside of our realm and
into the rest of the world. Ultimately, I want my students to easily access information in my library, but also
know how to survive and thrive at libraries out in the world that won’t have
folksonomy available to them.
Spiteri,
Louise F. “The Use of Folksonomies in Public Library Catalogues. The Serials Librarian: From the Printed Page
to the Digital Age 51.2 (2006): 75-89. Web. 25 April 2016. < http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J123v51n02_06>.
With all the research surrounding folksonomies, Louise
Spiteri is the researcher who has compiled the most information and provided
the most papers and articles available on the topic. In this paper, she
provides how folksonomies can be used to organize information, and be an
addition to the controlled LCSH vocabularies, and create a community among
library users. She uses both quantitative and qualitative data in her research,
and truly delves into the practicality of folksonomy use.
Spiteri,
Louise F. “The Structure and Form of Folksonomy Tags: The Road to the Public
Library Catalog.” Information Technology
and Libraries 26.3 (2007): 13-23.
Web. 25 April 2016. < https://ejournals.bc.edu/ojs/index.php/ital/article/viewFile/3272/2885>.
Another Spiteri resource,
but in this article she describes a definition of folksonomy and its strengths
and weaknesses. She then works with the language and tags to show how it all
works on a word level. She even focuses on the grammatical forms of words and
how that affects the use of a folksonomy, and includes the research related to
spelling and abbreviation. This article was a foundation of information: A
brass tacks of folksonomy. How it really works.
Tokar, Alexander. Metaphors Of The Web
2.0: With Special Emphasis On Social Networks And Folksonomies. Frankfurt
am Main: Peter Lang AG, 2009. eBook Collection (EBSCOhost). Web. 11 May
2016. <http://moe.highline.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=488409&site=ehost-live&scope=site>.
Alexander
Tokar studies the effect of language used on social networks as well as folksonomies
and the debate of using them or not. His research is broken down into three
parts. The biggest golden nugget was found in part three of this study which
focused on encyclopedic knowledge versus linguistic knowledge. This is hear of the
debate of using folksonomies in the library. Sometimes the encyclopedic
knowledge will not allow users access to what they need. Tokar gives an example
of salt that demonstrates this issue. 
No comments:
Post a Comment