Skip to content
techKNOWtools

techKNOWtools

Laura Pasquini explores how knowledge, technology, and community influence learning and performance.

  • My Twitter Profile
  • My LinkedIn Profile
  • My Instagram
  • Google Scholar Citations
  • About
  • Blog
  • Learning
    • Open HELD Library
    • Twitter Chats
    • How To Podcast
  • Coaching
    • Coaching FAQs
    • Testimonials
  • Consulting
    • Invited Talks
    • Learning & Performance
    • Design
      • Explainer Videos
      • Visual Thinking
    • Evaluation
  • Podcasts
    • #InVinoFab
    • @CoachingThruIt
    • Learn/Perform Mixtape
    • BreakDrink
  • Teaching
    • Teaching Philosophy
    • Courses
    • Public Outreach
  • Research
    • Publications
    • Conferences
    • Mentoring
    • Networked Practices & Community
    • The Higher Ed Podcast Project
  • CV

Tag: metadata

Library, Library Science

Metadata Is More Than “Data About Data”

July 31, 2019July 31, 2019 Laura Pasquini

For my Introduction to Digital Libraries course I enrolled in this summer, our final project was to create a digital library with at least one collection containing at least ten cataloged items. The secret librarian in me was excited to put together a comprehensive repository of the higher education learning & development items I have been studying in my research. Both the project and course have concluded, but I am still working on editing and updating this digital library. There are a few more things I want to organize and catalog before I share it; however you can get an idea of what I’m compiling from this call for resources tweeted below. (p.s. I promise to blog about this digital library for higher education colleagues soon, so others can add and contribute to it.)

Are you #highered pro (staff/faculty/grad. student) with a blog, video channel, webinar collection, photo album, Twitter chat, etc. with a @CreativeCommons license on it? Let me know…I want to include it in a digital library I’m building. https://t.co/isbD4ZP8Yx pic.twitter.com/WM8ltDKsFq

— Laura Pasquini (@laurapasquini) June 24, 2019

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

What has me STILL working on this digital library project are two things:

  1. Rights – This requires me to identify what is the copyright or rights OR to get permission. A number of items I found are accessible online; however few have explicitly listed it’s copyright (e.g. Creative Commons, Public Domain, or other) to designate the “rights” and permission to use for library cataloging standards; and
  2. Metadata – adding the required and recommended descriptive, administrative, and structural information for each digital object/resource I’m adding to the collections in this digital library.

There are no shortage of standards, acronyms for these standards, and protocols required to guide the shared use of these metadata standards. I’m not planning to launch a full lesson on ALL of these metadata standards, but rather share what I am working with and learning about for my digital library “in progress.” If you’re interested in checking out this full glossary and visuals about metadata, have at it with these brilliant Creative Common metadata maps/visuals created by Jenn Riley & Devin Becker:

Seeing Standards: A Visualization of the Metadata Universe

First, let’s define the term, metadata. It’s all around us! Some say it’s “data about data,” however this simplistic definition does not explain the complexity of what metadata does and how it operates in the world today. Monson (2017, pp. 88-89) better defines metadata as

“structured data that is associated with an information resource. It may be either created by hand or captured by a computer system… [and] can be described in terms of its functionality, which includes finding, identifying, sorting, selecting, gathering obtaining, and navigating items within collections of resources because it is structured according to certain sets of rule – purpose for search, discovery, browsing ,and collocation, identification and access.”

With ubiquitous technologies and connected systems of information metadata is all around us. Metadata helps us to buy books, find photos, and search for ALL THE THINGS! Formally known as “information in the library catalog” we now see metadata on a number of digital objects and things we use every day – music, podcasts, videos, books, phone calls, text messages, articles, websites, magazines, files, documents, and more. That being said, I don’t even want to think about the amount of data and metadata even being produced at this given moment — it IS exhausting (Pomerantz, 2019):

From cataloging digital objects, I have learned that metadata work should NOT be a solo project. Metadata creation should be a collaborative effort of people working together — just like we work today (Baca, 2016). This metadata creation process not only contributes to identifying items for a collection or to provide information for individual resources, but it also provides other perspectives and input as to how items will be found and shared. Monson (2017, pp. 89-90) shares the types of metadata required for each resource or object I have be cataloging:

Descriptive metadata: data that describes and objective. This is closely associated with the functionalities of searching and browsing to find the item, e.g. creator or author, title, data of creation, type of object, and subject or keyword associated with the object.

Administrative metadata: data that contributes to the management and administration of objects within a collection; this includes data such as data of digitization, type of equipment used to digitize, file name, and name of the organization that created the digital object e.g. pdf, mp4, mp3, jpeg, png

Structural metadata: how the items within a collection re logically grouped and presented on the screen; it provides information about the internal or “physical” structure of a digital resources, tied to components to form a whole. e.g. text, image, internet media type, StillImage, MovingImage

Metadata provides meaning as it offers explicit information about indexing, accessing, preserving, sharing [rights], and discovering digital resources. As we accrue a growing volume of digital information and objects, both online and offline, it is critical to have standards that offer ways for users to find, retrieve, and manage within our digital networks and overwhelmingly, complex information in our own evolving world. This might be from how things are classified to how the end user will find, navigate, and utilize this resource. I am using the Consortium Academic and Research Libraries in Illinois (CARLI), specifically this best practice for descriptive metadata in these CARLI Guidelines for the Creation of Digital Collections [PDF]. These were the suggested metadata standards recommended to guide our work from the original project, so I’m continuing to follow these protocols. This guide also follows a commonly used standard in many academic libraries, that is, the Dublin Core metadata scheme: https://www.dublincore.org/ which is similar to what is currently utilized at my own institution => UNT Libraries Quick-Start Metadata Guide. For each element that is “required” and “recommended” by CARLI (2017) that I am searching, imputing, and cataloging for EACH resource for my digital library, and a few of the “optional” elements that are available for each object:

Element

Definition

Example

Title

(required)

A name given to the resource; this would describe or identify the file name or object The OER Starter Kit

TOPcast: Teaching Online Podcast

Research Shorts

Creator

(recommended)

An entity primarily responsible for making the resource; this can be an individual, group of people, or organization/institution Pasquini, Laura

TechKNOWtools, LLC

University of North Texas

Contributor

(optional)

An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource; good if there is a team or group(s) making this item Austin, Jane

Pixar Productions

US Department of Education

Description

(recommended)

An account of the resource; this might be the table of contents, abstract, overview, or “about” page/section of the object detailing what this resources is about The Academic Advising (#AcAdv) Twitter Chat discussing advising and student support issues on Twitter every other Tuesday from 12-1 pm CST. We tweet with the hashtag: #AcAdv

YouTube Channel to disseminate and share scholarly work using whiteboard animations.

Publisher

(optional)

An entity responsible for making the resource available; could be a publisher, platform, group, or individual. WordPress

Journal of Comics and Graphic Novels

MIT Press

University of Guelph

Date

(recommended)

A point or period of time associated with an event in the life cycle of the resource; created, valid, available or issued, copyright date, or date accepted/submitted 2001-11-24

2018-05

1999

Subject

(recommended)

The topic of the resource; general information about the item, object, or resource Indie band posters

Sustainable eating practices

The Global Community for Academic Advising (NACADA) — History

Language

(required)

A language of the resource (if applicable) eng

spa

fre

Type

(required)

 

The nature or genre of the resource; this would identify the DCMI type of vocabulary from the Dublin Core Image, SillImage, MovingImage

InteractiveResource, Sound

Dataset, Event, Physical Object

Format

(recommended)

The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource; extent wav, mp4, mp3, jpeg, png

csv, doc, pdf

Coverage

(optional)

The spatial or temporal topic of the resources, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resources is relevant Texas (state)

Niagara Falls (waterfall)

1999-01-31

Source

(optional)

A related resource from which the described resource is derived, e.g. IBSN for books, or URL for websites https://techknowtools.com/

9780349108391

https://flic.kr/p/XrroZS
Identifier

(recommended)

An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context; might be part of a bibliographic citation with a unique number scheme or code to the file. doi: 10.9776/13527

978-0-9952692-1-7

http://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.7228223.v1

 

Relation

(required)

A related resource; it has version, is replaced by, replaces, is required by, requires, is part of; OR has part, is referenced by, references, format of, has format, etc. Public Domain Picks (The New York Public Library)

Community Media (The Internet Archive)

Miniature Book Collection (University of North Texas)

Rights

(required)

Information about rights held in and over the resource; access rights; license pertaining to copyright and permission; open education resources will typically share with a Creative Commons license. Permission is granted under a Creative Commons Attribution License to replicate, copy, distribute, transmit, or adapt this report freely provided that attribution is provided as illustrated in the citation below. View this license: http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.

Public domain

We interact and create digital objects every day and with increased digital/information structures, we need to think about how we are naming, storing, and cataloging resources, especially in the digital. That being said, metadata also carries some consequences for that create a digital shadow to follow and track. With increased privacy and personal data concerns, it’s not just what the metadata information says, but also what and who is attached to this information.

It’s critical to consider what the metadata says about a particular collection. To make digital resources shareable, metadata gives these objects meaning in terms of the proper context, content coherence, standard vocabularies, and consistency (CARLI, 2017). Digitization and digital content does not necessarily mean equal access for all. Digital copies or making materials digital does not make these objects “findable, understandable, or utilizable to our ever-expanding audience of online users. But digitization combined with the creation of carefully crafted metadata can significantly enhance end-user access” (Baca, 2016). It is essential for metadata creators to consider how these classifications within the descriptive metadata is formed. We need to think about who is saying what about particular resources with the metadata schemes we use (Pomerantz, 2015):

This side project of mine is making me think more about metadata and how we classify information, data, resources, and objects in the digital age (or even how many of us do not). Don’t be surprised if you get a DM, email, or e-nudge from me asking you about permission/rights AND to give me some feedback on what I am creating. Knowing that the best digital libraries require collaboration, I will be reaching out soon to get your input, feedback, advice, suggestions, and contributions for this digital library. Back to my metadata descriptives and digital library cataloging for now, as I continue to learn and absorb these concepts.

References:

Baca, M. (2016). Introduction to Metadata, 3rd Ed. Getty Publications. Los Angeles, CA: Retrieved from http://www.getty.edu/publications/intrometadata/

Consortium of Academic and Research Libraries in Illinois (CARLI). (2017, January 9). Guidelines for the creation of digital collections: Best practices for descriptive metadata. CARLI Created Content Committee. Retrieved from https://www.carli.illinois.edu/sites/files/digital_collections/documentation/guidelines_for_metadata.pdf

Monson, J. D. (2017). Getting started with digital collections: Scaling to fit your organization. Chicago, IL: American Library Association.

Pomerantz, J. (2015). Metadata. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Tagged catalog, copyright, creative commons, data, data exhaust, digital libraries, information, library cataloging, Library Science, metadata, organization, sharing rights1 Comment
Podcast, Reflections, SocioTech

What’s Your Terms of Service? #PrivacyParadox

February 13, 2017May 18, 2019 Laura Pasquini

Did you know that Digital Privacy Day (#PrivacyAware) on January 28th and had a number of conversations related to personal privacy? In thinking about the benefits of being an open scholar (e.g. #OpenEd, #OER, #OA), I should not skirt over the challenges/issues of these networked practices. Connected educators often leave traces of metadata or personal information behind as we share documents and resources. Having an online “presence” increases this data traces (which is something I’ve been pondering since I first read, Blown To Bits), and what we share digitally does have the potential to live on — even if you hit the delete button.

With the advent of social technologies, this data trail increases even further. Although my current geographic location does not give me “right to be forgotten” online (just yet,), it is important to consider what this means for our digital identity and personal information. Jon Ronson discusses the challenges of reputation management in these digital times in his book,  So You’ve Been Publically Shamed. Ronson details a few cases where the Internet, or rather people online, seem to embrace the digital shaming (trolling, abuse, etc.) culture to ultimately destroy others. These online actions have real implications outside of our networks and beyond the screen. What we do online does impact our offline selves.

Most importantly, as we live (as our self or as a fabricated self) online, we are at risk for sharing our personal data and information. Most of my higher learning colleagues are moderately versed in privacy/compliance at their local institutions; however, more are increasingly concerned as to how to navigate these digital and social spaces where our personal data is shared and not as regulated. How often do we really think about maintaining our digital self and where our personal information flows?

Perhaps it is time for a digital self-assessment and reflection on the topic of privacy/data sharing. Individual security and user rights are often set aside when we sign up for a platform and/or app. Have you ever stopped to think about who has access to your data? How deep do you read the terms of service before you click “Agree”? What does any given platform/application know about you? What 3rd party has access to your data stored in your app/platform/device? And, how private is your “privacy settings” when the organizations have the rights to share/sell/use your data elsewhere?

Why not assess and review your digital privacy using the Note To Self podcast 5-day challenge on this very topic, the Privacy Paradox: http://privacyparadox.org

privacy-paradox-banner

Image c/o WNYC Note To Self Podcast

  • Day 1: What Your Phone Knows; Let’s get metadata…what your smartphone is tracking and why it matters.
  • Day 2: The Search for Your Identity; How algorithms see us, sell us, and then sell TO us.
  • Day 3: Something to Hide Reclaiming your private parts…and why Google needed an in-house philosopher.
  • Day 4: Fifteen Minutes of Anonymity; The digital gaze, our psyche, and what happens when we know we’re being watched.
  • Day 5: Your Personal Terms of Service; Defining your acceptable conditions for living the good life online.

I continually think about personal privacy and data; however, last week prompted me to think a bit more about my networked self. Have you thought about what you give up when you log on, share, post, or like on any social platforms?  What are your ultimate Terms of Service for sharing data, updating your information, and putting yourself online? Here’s what I proposed for myself, based on the mad libs template via #NoteToSelf:

my-personal-tos

Listen to this short @NoteToSelf series (11-12 minutes per podcast) and consider challenging yourself to stake a claim for your boundaries of how you will share or give up your rights when it comes to your personal information and digital data. Or check out their Privacy Paradox Tip Sheet. #TheMoreYouKnow

References:

Abelson, H., Ledeen, K., & Lewis, H. (2008). Blown to bits: your life, liberty, and happiness after the digital explosion. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Addison-Wesley Professional.

Ronson, J. (2016). So you’ve been publicly shamed. New York, NY: Riverhead Books.

Tagged #AcDigID, #EdDigID, #NoteToSelf, #PrivacyParadox, digital, identity, metadata, note to self, online, privacy3 Comments

Twitter Updates

  • Finding Purpose as Praxis techknowtools.com/2023/01/27/fin… 1 day ago
  • What ways are you prioritizing the "do" on the "to do list? How do you know what's important & urgent? => The Eisen… twitter.com/i/web/status/1… 2 days ago
  • @Sharla_Berry Have you seen this list? edtechjournals.org Might be helpful for what you’re looking for — good luck! 1 week ago
  • What are you letting go of in 2023? https://t.co/hZlinViPT1 1 week ago
  • RT @rockinruksi: "Removing the layers of my identity." Sometimes you need to peel away the extra personas in order to get to the essence. #… 1 week ago

Goodreads

  • My Twitter Profile
  • My LinkedIn Profile
  • My Instagram
  • Google Scholar Citations
Create a website or blog at WordPress.com
  • Follow Following
    • techKNOWtools
    • Join 186,927 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • techKNOWtools
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

You must be logged in to post a comment.