User-centered research for developing programs & articulating value.

Editor's Notes

1. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/darioalba/5327305159 by Kellerio2007 / CC BY-NC 2.0 Cox, A. M. and Pinfield, S. (2014) Research data management and libraries: Current activities and future priorities. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 46(4), 300. doi:10.1177/0961000613492542. Pinfield, Cox, and colleagues went on to develop a library focused institutional RDM model based on a qualitative study of librarians in the UK. The model describes 4 key components of an RDM program - drivers, program elements, influencing factors, and stakeholders. See Stephen Pinfield, Andrew M. Cox, Jen Smith, and Pascal Launois, “Research Data Management and Libraries: Relationships, Activities, Drivers and Influences,” PLoS ONE 9, no. 12 (2014): e114734, accessed September 12, 2016, http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0114734.
2. Of particular interest for this current study were the factors that influence (facilitate/constrain) librarians’ ability to support researchers’ RDM needs. It focuses on librarians’ experiences with RDM in the United States and it is also qualitative. Faniel, I. M., & Connaway, L. S. (2018). Librarians’ perspectives on the factors influencing research data management programs. College & Research Libraries, 79(1),100-119. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.79.1.100.
3. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/pagedooley/7427165626 by Kevin Dooley / CC BY 2.0 Data were collected through individual interviews and three focus groups. In the individual interviews, 10 library professionals were asked about current and planned RDM services, advantages and challenges associated with helping researchers with RDM, what made it difficult and easy to spend time helping researchers, supporters versus detractors of RDM efforts, and perceived competence and confidence that they were helping researchers and meeting needs. Next, 26 library professionals participated in one of three focus groups. Modeled after the individual interviews, the focus group interview questions had similar topics of inquiry. During data analysis, an initial set of codes were developed based on the interview protocols and the set was expanded as new codes emerged from analysis of the transcripts. The results are based on a second cycle of thematic and numerical analysis of the influencing factors. Faniel, I. M., & Connaway, L. S. (2018). Librarians’ perspectives on the factors influencing research data management programs. College & Research Libraries, 79(1),100-119. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.79.1.100.
4. A snapshot of study participants: 66% had some or a lot of RDM experience - 47% some and 19% a lot. 69% were early in their careers with 10 years of library experience or less. 56% worked at institutions with less than 20 thousand full-time student enrollment 20,001-40,000: 25% 40,001 and More: 19% The majority of the participants were female (86%), and less than 45 years old (53%). They represented a variety of roles including – subject specialist, liaison librarian, scholarly communication librarian, reference librarian, data management specialist, digital initiatives librarian, and head of library systems. Faniel, I. M., & Connaway, L. S. (2018). Librarians’ perspectives on the factors influencing research data management programs. College & Research Libraries, 79(1),100-119. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.79.1.100.
5. Here you see, the top 3 RDM services, by the percentage of librarians who mentioned providing or planning to provide them. A wide range of activities comprised the data deposit services. The activities ranged from reaching out to researchers to identify data for deposit, to helping them curate and document their data, to ensuring researchers’ needs were being met at disciplinary repositories. As the service levels varied, so did the time commitments depending on the work involved. One librarian envisioned data management planning as “subject librarians meeting with grad students and faculty, and going over the guidelines for grant funding for data management, and helping them kind of understand what kind of information they're going to need to provide, in order to have a good grant proposal” (Librarian 13). This was pretty typical. Librarians envisioned data management as a focus “on day-to-day data management…file protection, file organization, documentation as you’re collecting the data” (Librarian 22). Faniel, I. M., & Connaway, L. S. (2018). Librarians’ perspectives on the factors influencing research data management programs. College & Research Libraries, 79(1),100-119. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.79.1.100.
6. Findings showed five factors influenced RDM programs: Human resources (78%) Communication, coordination, and collaboration (67%) Technical resources (53%) Leadership support (31%) Researchers’ perceptions of the library (25%). In each of these instances, librarians described situations where different aspects of the factors were perceived to facilitate and/or constrain their ability to support researchers RDM needs. Faniel, I. M., & Connaway, L. S. (2018). Librarians’ perspectives on the factors influencing research data management programs. College & Research Libraries, 79(1),100-119. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.79.1.100.
7. Image: RTC from U.S. Army Red River Arsenal [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons A little over a third of librarians (36%) mentioned challenges with data storage and preservation as a constraint on RDM services. Sustaining institutional repositories over the long term came with challenges which included significant financial commitment. It was expected to stretch most libraries’ infrastructures beyond capacity, given shrinking budgets and uncertain pricing structures. Long term management of the variety of file formats and whether front end functionality of current institutional repositories would support data discovery also were mentioned as challenges. Librarians were unsure of repositories’ ability to help researchers retrieve and reuse data. Faniel, I. M., & Connaway, L. S. (2018). Librarians’ perspectives on the factors influencing research data management programs. College & Research Libraries, 79(1),100-119. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.79.1.100.
8. Image: Public Domain via pixabay.com Almost a third of librarians (31%) expressed concern over the competing demands on time that RDM services would create. Even in the early stages, several librarians were concerned about scaling RDM with too few dedicated staff members. Librarian 01 explained the trouble with success in terms of time and scalability. Yet hiring a team of dedicated experts was not an option for most. As Librarian 05 explained, the common model was to have librarians do a little bit of everything. Lack of skilled staff also was a concern; 22% of the librarians mentioned it. As Librarian 22 explained, their expertise was at the end of the research lifecycle. They were not used to providing support at the beginning and middle of the research cycle as data were being collected and managed. Faniel, I. M., & Connaway, L. S. (2018). Librarians’ perspectives on the factors influencing research data management programs. College & Research Libraries, 79(1),100-119. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.79.1.100.
9. Image: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_University_of_Adelaide_and_Barr_Smith_Library.jpg by Mike Sayfang / CC BY 2.0 (University of Adelaide Barr Smith Library) Researchers’ perceptions about the library also constrained librarians’ ability to support researchers, according to 25% of the librarians. The key issue was that researchers did not recognize the librarians’ areas of expertise or the services that libraries could offer. Librarian 06 captured this well, many researchers’ perceptions of the libraries and librarians were tied to books. Some librarians also acknowledged their late entry into RDM as cause for researchers’ perceptions. In some cases, researchers or their departments/schools on campus had begun to developed their own solutions. As one librarian noted it’s difficult to introduce and embed new library services into researchers’ workflows, once the researchers had established their own practices. Faniel, I. M., & Connaway, L. S. (2018). Librarians’ perspectives on the factors influencing research data management programs. College & Research Libraries, 79(1),100-119. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.79.1.100.
10. Librarians described communication, coordination, and collaboration as a facilitator of RDM services. 50% mentioned communication, coordination, and collaboration with other units on campus (e.g. research office, information technology services, academic affairs, Provost’s office, etc.) 25% with colleagues in the library 22% with researchers 8% with other institutions Faniel, I. M., & Connaway, L. S. (2018). Librarians’ perspectives on the factors influencing research data management programs. College & Research Libraries, 79(1),100-119. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.79.1.100.
11. Image: Volta Laboratory, 1884, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons A quarter (25%) mentioned partnering with colleagues in their library. As Librarian 18 explained library colleagues helped to define, develop, and deliver RDM. Others described pooling different areas of expertise within the library to better support researchers and spread the workload. For instance, a data manager talked about plans to work with liaison librarians to improve their data management skills so they could lead the more discipline specific questions when needed. Almost a quarter (22%) mentioned partnering with researchers. The goal was to develop and deliver more effective RDM that matched researcher needs, or as Librarian 05 described, “getting to our communities and perceiving what the need is.” For some librarians these exchanges led to new services – such as a data management workshop for first year graduate students. For others, it allowed for learning which departments were already supporting themselves vs. which departments needed support and for considering how to capitalize on existing activities. Faniel, I. M., & Connaway, L. S. (2018). Librarians’ perspectives on the factors influencing research data management programs. College & Research Libraries, 79(1),100-119. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.79.1.100.
12. Image: Cogs Illustration, Public domain, via publicdomainpictures.net Similar to partnerships with colleagues in the library, partnerships with other campus units was a way for librarians to further define, develop, and deliver RDM services and pool expertise. Interestingly, twice as many (50%) saw a real need to collaborate with other campus units such as the research office, information technology services, academic affairs, and the Provost’s office. Far fewer mentioned partnering with other institutions off campus - only 8%. And only one really considered the idea of connecting with other institutions to see what they were doing and consider joint activities. Faniel, I. M., & Connaway, L. S. (2018). Librarians’ perspectives on the factors influencing research data management programs. College & Research Libraries, 79(1),100-119. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.79.1.100.
13. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/jensvermeersch/7599314862 by Jens Vermeersch / CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 Half of the librarians (50%) discussed having a full-time expert dedicated to RDM as an ideal solution. Others found that they were able to leverage special areas of expertise to support researchers changing needs. For example: One librarian used prior experience practicing law to develop terms of service agreements for data sharing and reuse. Another drew on archival experiences in engineering and research and development organizations, others drew on prior experiences conducting research. Just over half of the librarians (56%) described continuing education and on-the-job training as a facilitator of RDM services, regardless of their existing skills or expertise. Continuing education tended to be acquired via conferences, webinars, classes, workshops, email groups, self-study, and peer instruction. On-the-job experiences varied across institutions, ranging from immersive experiences with data experts to collaborative summer projects. Faniel, I. M., & Connaway, L. S. (2018). Librarians’ perspectives on the factors influencing research data management programs. College & Research Libraries, 79(1),100-119. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.79.1.100.
14. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/psulibscollections/5755107896 by Penn State University Libraries Architecture and Landscape Architecture Library / CC BY-NC 2.0 Almost one-third of librarians (31%) saw leadership support, both inside the library and within the broader campus community, as a facilitator of RDM. Librarians who had leadership support mentioned specific administrative leaders within and outside of the library and explained the number of ways they helped, including changing library culture and facilitating relationship building. Librarians described leaders taking charge as champions and advocates who created new jobs, provided rationale for RDM investments and plans, gained support from other areas of the institution, and highlighted the library’s RDM expertise and services. Those who expressed a need for leadership support wanted assurances that RDM support was moving forward and seen as key part of what the library was doing. Faniel, I. M., & Connaway, L. S. (2018). Librarians’ perspectives on the factors influencing research data management programs. College & Research Libraries, 79(1),100-119. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.79.1.100.
15. Image: https://duraspace.org/wp-content/uploads/dspace-files/DSpace_Diagram.pdf by DSpace / CC 4.0 Almost 17% the librarians mentioned digital repositories as part of an envisioned RDM program that would make it easier for them to support researchers’ needs. Similar to Librarian 17, several librarians described the need for an institutional repository. Librarian 17 saw a library supported institutional repository lowering researchers’ barriers to participation by providing a system that was easy to use and more robust. Faniel, I. M., & Connaway, L. S. (2018). Librarians’ perspectives on the factors influencing research data management programs. College & Research Libraries, 79(1),100-119. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.79.1.100.
16. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/perugiabella/4238613768 by Perugiacity.com / CC BY 2.0 The influence of human and technical resources and communication, coordination, and communication on RDM suggest the need for institution-wide, rather than library-centric conversations about researchers’ needs versus institutional resources to determine what solutions are possible. For instance, institutional repositories were seen as a means to support researchers. Yet, unresolved questions about associated factors were getting in the way, such as costs, data storage and preservation, and repository functionality. More often than not, libraries do not have the capacity to support RDM throughout the data lifecycle. Findings also suggest they pursue partnerships beyond their campus community to support the range of services needed. By looking to pool expertise more broadly, librarians can draw upon a wider range of expertise and capacity to address specific aspects of researchers’ needs they cannot support themselves. Outreach is important, but consider employing approaches that extend the liaison librarian model and engage researchers earlier in the research lifecycle. Findings also suggest a library administrator-led approach to outreach. Findings suggest creating a coalition of administrators as stakeholders that can champion and support the RDM program across the full set of service organizations on campus is critical. Faniel, I. M., & Connaway, L. S. (2018). Librarians’ perspectives on the factors influencing research data management programs. College & Research Libraries, 79(1),100-119. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.79.1.100.
17. 24
18. 25
19. 26
20. 27
21. 28
22. 29
23. In the recently published research report, “Practices and Patterns in Research Information Management,” we worked with euroCRIS to survey nearly 400 research institutions worldwide. This report provides the most comprehensive review of RIM practices to date, and provides institutions considering or implementing RIM systems with valuable information about existing practices, including standards, persistent identifiers, products, staffing, and interoperability challenges.
24. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/atoach/4790990884 by Tim Green / CC BY 2.0
25. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/zoghal/372832109 by zoghal / CC BY-SA 2.0 Connaway, L. S., & Radford, M. L. (2017). Research Methods for Library and Information Science, 6th ed. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
26. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/string_bass_dave/30814410317 by David Brossard / CC BY-SA 2.0 “Mixed methods research is often thought of as quantitative/qualitative, but other approaches are important to consider: participatory, action, design, etc. Don't think of mixed methods as "survey plus interview" (or worse, "survey with open-ended questions tacked onto the end"). Mixed methods should be deeply integrated, and not parallel tracks that don't intersect. Mixing methods effectively means equal attention to all stages of the research process, from problem statement or hypothesis through analysis; don't focus on the data collection methods to the detriment of the other phases. And rather than quantitative findings followed by a few attractive quotes from the qualitative data organized according to "themes," the findings from mixed methods should be iterative and mutually-informing. Very few people can do mixed methods research alone, so embrace cooperative research. Each person needs to understand all the methods being used, but it's natural that each person will have more expertise in one area. Find research partners who have a deep and true appreciation for your contributions; mixed methods research just to satisfy a funding agency is never as fulfilling or productive as it could be. Work closely together so that the overall research design doesn't privilege one method over another just for the sake of method, but so that the combined approach will answer the research questions and allow you to effect change in the world.” Kazmer, M. (2017). “Mixed Methods.” In Research Methods for Library and Information Science, 6th ed., edited by L. S. Connaway and M. L. Radford, 232-233. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
27. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/nikkijwragg/34670471730 by nikkijw / CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 Adapted from slides by Ellen Olshansky Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications. Webb, E. J., Campbell, D. T., Schwartz, R. D., & Sechrest, L. (1966). Unobtrusive Measures: Nonreactive Research in the Social Sciences, Vol. 111. Chicago: Rand McNally.
28. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/pixel_addict/1842285901 by Pixel Addict / CC BY 2.0 Connaway, L. S. & Radford, M. L. (2017). Research Methods for Library and Information Science, 6th ed. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
29. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/malbooth/8010750594 by Mal Booth / CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 (University of Adelaide Barr Smith Library Reading Room)
30. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/82134796@N03/10374907696 by denisbin / CC BY-ND 2.0 (South Australian Museum and State Library) Connaway, L. S., & Radford, M. L. (2017). Research Methods for Library and Information Science, 6th ed. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
31. Image: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:UofAdelaide-BarrSmithLibrary-Aug08.jpg by Pdfpdf / Public Domain (University of Adelaide Barr Smith Library) Connaway, L. S., & Radford, M. L. (2017). Research Methods for Library and Information Science, 6th ed. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
32. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/edomingo/34756113223 by Enrique Domingo / CC BY-NC-ND 2.0
33. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/wkc1/8338156838 by wkc Chen / CC BY 2.0 1. Describe the things you enjoy doing with technology and the web each week. 2. Think of the ways you have used technology and the web for your studies. Describe a typical week. 3. Think about the next stage of your education. Tell me what you think this will be like. 4. Think of a time when you had a situation where you needed answers or solutions and you did a quick search and made do with it. You knew there were other sources but you decided not to use them. Please include sources such as friends, family, teachers, coaches, etc. 5. Have there been times when you were told to use a library or virtual learning environment (or learning platform), and used other source(s) instead? 6. If you had a magic wand, what would your ideal way of getting information be? How would you go about using the systems and services? When? Where? How? White, D. S., & Connaway, L. S. (2011-2014). Visitors & Residents: What Motivates Engagement with the Digital Information Environment. Funded by JISC, OCLC, and Oxford University. http://www.oclc.org/research/activities/vandr/.
34. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/astrid/5407227138 by astrid westvang / CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 “Suggested guidelines include the following: This is an open, safe, and secure forum. Confidentiality of others should be respected. All suggestions are acceptable. Be patient with fellow group members (speak one at a time, no interruptions). Be an active listener and participant. Ask questions if necessary.” (Connaway and Radford 2017, 252-253) Asher, A. & Miller, S. (2011). So You Want to Do Anthropology in Your Library? Or a Practical Guide to Ethnographic Research in Academic Libraries. Chicago: The ERIAL Project. Connaway, L. S., & Radford, M. L. (2017). Research Methods for Library and Information Science, 6th ed. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
35. Connaway, L. S., & Wakeling, S. (2012). To use or not to use Worldcat.org: An international perspective from different user groups. OCLC Internal Report.
36. Connaway, L. S., & Powell, R. R. (2010). Basic research methods for librarians. Santa Barbara: Libraries Unlimited. Connaway, L. S., & Wakeling, S. (2012). To use or not to use Worldcat.org: An international perspective from different user groups. OCLC Internal Report. 1. Tell us about your experiences with WorldCat.org A broad introductory question intended to reveal the extent to which users have engaged with WorldCat.org, and the information-seeking contexts within which they use the system. 2. Describe a time when you used WorldCat.org that you considered a success. Explores the features and functions of WorldCat.org that participants view positively. Requiring participants to discuss a particular instance provides richer data about the range of uses of the system. 3. Describe a time when using WorldCat.org was unsuccessful – i.e., you did not get what you wanted. Explores the features and functions (or lack thereof) of WorldCat.org that participants view negatively. 4. Think of a time when you did not find what you were looking for, but did find something else of interest or useful to your work? Intended to encourage discussion about the role of serendipity in information seeking, and the extent to which WorldCat.org facilitates resource discovery . 5. If you had a magic wand, what would your ideal WorldCat.org provide? Encourages participants to discuss potential improvements to WorldCat.org. The use of the phrase “magic wand” ensures that participants are not restricted by what they believe to be practical or realistic.
37. Connaway, L. S., & Powell, R. R. (2010). Basic research methods for librarians. Santa Barbara: Libraries Unlimited. Connaway, L. S., & Wakeling, S. (2012). To use or not to use Worldcat.org: An international perspective from different user groups. OCLC Internal Report. The use of the phrase “magic wand” ensures that participants are not restricted by what they believe to be practical or realistic.
38. Librarians’ current processes for resource sharing and ILL How graduate students and faculty get access to resources and why they choose particular types of access
39. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/froderik/9355090806 by Fredrik Rubensson / CC BY-SA 2.0 Connaway, L. S., & Radford, M. L. (2017). Research Methods for Library and Information Science, 6th ed. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
40. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/yilkeephotography/6868983791 by Yilkee Lam / CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 Explain a time in the past month when you were SUCCESSFUL in completing an ACADEMIC assignment. What steps did you take? Think of a time fairly recently when you struggled to find appropriate resources to help you complete an ACADEMIC assignment. What happened? Explain a time in the past month when you were successful in getting what you needed in a PERSONAL situation. What steps did you take? Explain a time in the past month when you were NOT successful in getting what you needed in a PERSONAL situation. What steps did you take? Tell me something interesting that has happened in the past month in the social media that you used for ACADEMIC purposes. Tell me something interesting that has happened in the past month in the social media that you used for PERSONAL situations. What do you have to add to our discussion today about how you got information in the past month for both PERSONAL and ACADEMIC situations? White, D. S., & Connaway, L. S. (2011-2014). Visitors & Residents: What Motivates Engagement with the Digital Information Environment. Funded by JISC, OCLC, and Oxford University. http://www.oclc.org/research/activities/vandr/.
41. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/davies/6612588915 by David Davies / CC BY-SA 2.0 Screenshot: USU7 Emg Dry1 Ph1 (Digital Visitors and Residents, USU7, Female, Age 19) “March was a little more serious. We’re nearing election time and all that jazz, and this is the first election I’ll be able to vote in, so I’ve been doing a bit of reading on a few of the candidates (not much, mind you). As a side note, I’m kind of debating whether or not I should actually vote in this election since I have such little knowledge on the candidates.” (Digital Visitors and Residents, USU12, Male, Age 19) USU12 Est Dry2 Ph2 “Um they do have a search box but I didn’t—I didn’t use that. Um I pretty much just, I pretty much just clicked links.” (Digital Visitors and Residents, USU12, Male, Age 19, 30:37) USU12 Est Follup Int1 Ph3 White, D. S., & Connaway, L. S. (2011-2014). Visitors & Residents: What Motivates Engagement with the Digital Information Environment. Funded by JISC, OCLC, and Oxford University. http://www.oclc.org/research/activities/vandr/.
42. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/jafsegal/5438336871 by Juan Antonio Segal / CC BY 2.0 Connaway, L. S., & Radford, M. L. (2017). Research Methods for Library and Information Science, 6th ed. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
43. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/rojsr/43791740772 by Rojs Rozentals / CC BY-SA 2.0 Ranganathan, S. R. (1931). The five laws of library science. London: Edward Goldston, Ltd.
44. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/165518082@N02/45188906785 by AKT.UZ / Public domain Task 1 Usability Questions: From WebJunction.org, is the user able to easily: Navigate to learn.wenjunction.org in order to access the course catalog? Find the link to the catalog? Task 1 Quantitative Measures: User completes task correctly by (A1) Opening the “Find Training” menu (Y or N) (A2) Clicking the link “Go to Courses” to get to the course catalog option (Y or N) OR (B1) Entering search terms to get to the course catalog option (Y or N) Connaway, L. S., & Radford, M. L. (2017). Research Methods for Library and Information Science, 6th ed. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
45. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/deanhochman/14481958642 by Dean Hochman / CC BY-NC 2.0 Dumas, J. S., & Redish, J. C. (1993). A Practical Guide to Usability Testing. Portland, OR: Intellect Books.
46. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/jooon/4667065908 by Jon Aslund / CC BY 2.0 White, D. S., & Connaway, L. S. (2011-2014). Visitors & Residents: What Motivates Engagement with the Digital Information Environment. Funded by JISC, OCLC, and Oxford University. http://www.oclc.org/research/activities/vandr/.
47. Image: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mortlock_Wing,_State_Library_of_South_Australia.jpg by jonwestra / CC BY 2.0 (State Library of South Australia, Mortlock Wing)
48. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/felipe_gabaldon/3290155994 by Felipe Gabaldon / CC BY 2.0
49. Quadrant 1: HKU, 1st year undergrad Realized I am not that hard working In desperation when I have to directly go to library website Google search: usually don’t login, just search, more on visitor side Snapchat …Hotmail : Not too often do sharing A way to release my burden FB try not to post/share, look at what my friends share Quadrant 2: HKU, upper undergrad Library- Borrow book for personal Google drive – only for group project (visitor) Social media apps make us anti – social Quadrant 3: HKU, faculty researcher and/or scholar Research assistant Least Digital footprint as possible, substantial, good thing to live (the left side of the map) Middle – use a lot in work, create contacts Use HKU specific apps for work, wordpress, create webpage Learn about yourself: need to learn more & contribute more in digital footprint (at work and in personal) White, D. S., & Connaway, L. S. (2011-2014). Visitors & Residents: What Motivates Engagement with the Digital Information Environment. Funded by JISC, OCLC, and Oxford University. http://www.oclc.org/research/activities/vandr/.
50. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/dutchsimba/15704925354 by Dutch Simba / CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 Asher, A. & Miller, S. (2011). So You Want to Do Anthropology in Your Library? Or a Practical Guide to Ethnographic Research in Academic Libraries. Chicago: The ERIAL Project.
51. Clark, K. (2007). Mapping Diaries, or Where Do They Go All Day? In N. Foster & S. Gibbons (Eds.), Studying Students: The Undergraduate Research Project at the University of Rochester. Chicago: Association College and Research Libraries.
52. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/frted/35534085852 by Ted / CC BY-NC 2.0