I had initially planned to publish my talk from the Library History Round Table symposium at the American Library Association’s Annual Conference in a peer-reviewed journal, but it occurred to me that my other talk (from Library History Seminar XII) is going to be on the same research, and most likely in the same journal. So, I added my conference talk to my Scribd account to share with everyone! While you’re there, you can follow me with your account too. Sometimes they get picky about downloading things if you haven’t uploaded your own work, so I can also e-mail the PDF of the talk to anyone who is interested. Otherwise, go here to read the document in full online.
The talk discusses three of the six libraries I researched (Burlington, Davenport, and Mt. Pleasant) more in-depth, whereas my talk from September discussed al 6 libraries, but with somewhat less detailed attention paid to each in order to keep within time constraints. The published version of that talk will be about 25 pages, so that will give me a chance to pay a little more attention to each of them.
If you have any questions or comments, let me know!
March 2011 update: Scribd accidentally deleted my account, meaning that you cannot read this paper on their site. Sorry folks!
>I am about to make the most obvious statement ever: there is a lot of cool stuff happening on the internet.
Not a groundbreaking observation by any means, but I am ceaselessly amazed by the sheer number of new ways to participate in the world as a reader of texts. I mean this both in the literal sense (e-texts versus paper texts), and also in how we interpret those texts (and how technology influences that).
Take, for example, this article on ‘circular reading.’ This author has found a way to exploit the e-reader technology in a way that gives us stories with a circular narrative (no beginning or end). As readers of these stories, how does this sort of narrative change our interpretation of the text, and how does it change our interaction with that text? There are many books that challenge us to think of narrative form differently than a ‘beginning-to-end’ reading experience (I was fond of the ‘choose your own adventure’ book when I was a kid), and this book takes that to a new level by using a technology that isn’t bounded by a structure with a clear beginning and end.
Continue reading “>What New Media Means for Me as a Reader”
>For my regular blog readers, I apologize in advance as this post is a bit off topic in that it isn’t directly related to LIS education or to my own (current) research. However, it is related to my previous life as a researcher in loss and trauma, and my work at a rape crisis team. It is also, of course, related to my dislike of censorship. I encourage constructive comments at the end, and I also encourage you to check out the other blogs below as many folks are saying a lot of very powerful stuff in response to this week’s book challenge.
Continue reading “>Speak Loudly”
>While procrastinating and staring blankly at my Twitter feed a moment ago, I noticed this post by ACRL (ALA’s Association of College and Research Libraries):
@ALA_ACRL: RT @: Open, crowd-sourced peer review works for one humanities journal:http://bit.ly/9HIDJC
As an OA journal editor, I was intrigued. When you click the link above, you’re lead to a Chronicle article about Shakespeare Quarterly‘s new approach to the review process. Basically, a draft of the publication is placed online, and is open for comment by a pool of reviewers with varying specialties. The process is not an anonymous review, so those comments that are made about a submission are attached to the reviewer’s name.