I started my scan of UW Madison Web 2.0 activities by browsing several library websites. Here is a summary of the tools I found in common use:

College Library: IM/Chat (Velaro and Trillian services), Flickr, delicious, Facebook, widgets*

Wendt Library: Blog, RSS feed, Flickr, delicious, Facebook

Steenbock Library: Chat (Plugoo service), RSS feed, Blog

Business Library: RSS feed

Law Library: Chat (Plugoo), Blog, Facebook, Google maps

*Each of these 5 example libraries has a widget created by a programmer at College Library that shows a real time inventory of how many laptops are available for students to check out.

Here at the UWDCC we are using: RSS feed, Google Earth, bookmark tools, Flickr

I also browsed the websites of several smaller member libraries (such as Art, Physics, Chemistry, etc), but did not find that they are actively marketing Web 2.0 tools or services on their websites. (This does not necessarily mean that no Web 2.0 tools are being considered, tested, or used.)

Next, I met with Kelli Keclik of College Library, Karen Dunn of Steenbock Library, and Steve Meyer of the Library Technology Group to find out more details about time and planning, successful implementations of Web 2.0 tools, and plans for the future.

In addition to the tools listed above, I talked to Kelli about some additional interactive features on the College Library website. One of their most popular links is a polling tool. Users can submit a poll question, or the librarians can create one themselves. It is used both for fun (spring break plans, NCAA basketball tournament picks), and as a collection development tool. Kelli said it was particularly valuable when she was planning a new video game collection that was added to the leisure section of College Library this semester. She used the poll tool to find out what game systems people are most interested in, what kinds of games they like, etc. Users can also submit photographs of College Library to be included on the front page of the website.

Several individual librarians around the UW Madison campus have Facebook pages, and College is one of a few libraries to have a page for the institution. A few of the features on their Facebook page that Kelli pointed out are the WorldCat search tool, and a Meebo chat link that redirects users to the Velaro chat service that is staffed at the reference desk. Kelli acknowledged that most students tend to use Facebook as a social site rather than a research site, but she sees no harm in creating a page as it is very easy to maintain (minimal to no time/effort is required once the page is created) and might prove to be useful to students who are already logged in to this popular site.

In the future, Kelli hopes to implement mobile technologies in the College Library Web 2.0 toolbox. She is interested in testing out text message reference services, and possible ways to make library content and services useful in a portable device such as an iPhone or Blackberry.

At Steenbock, Karen uses the library blog as a newsletter/breaking news hybrid. She uses Blogger as the host, and has the two most current posts fed directly to the library's main website in the "News" section of their front page. She mixes up the content to include dates and times for workshops, special hours or events in the library, information about new materials in the collection, as well as "lighter" content such as book reviews, odd facts gleaned from the library's collections, or news from other sources that relates to the Steenbock Library user group (agriculture, life sciences, veterinary medicine). Karen uses Google Analytics to track the "value" in her content. Information such as number of hits, time on the site, navigation (how a user finds the site), access speed, and geographic information about the user. This is a free service, that Karen praised as being very robust and easy to use.

The UW Madison General Library System has a general "Ask a librarian" chat/IM service, but several of the specialized libraries (such as Steenbock) also have a chat service that is specific to their library. Steenbock uses Plugoo, a free service. The service is staffed by whoever is at the reference desk at a given time. This arrangement has been cause for conversation at Steenbock, as the reference librarians strive to maintain quality service in all of their transactions. There was some concern about answering chat and face-to-face questions at the same time, and ending up giving lower quality service to both patrons in the process. Karen brought up the point that "good service" is defined by user expectations, and it seems that chat patrons are not put off or discouraged if the librarian they are chatting with has to step away for a minute, or needs to pause mid chat to do another task. It seems to be an accepted part of using chat as a medium for communication that there will be pauses and breaks during a conversation.

Looking forward, Karen wants to continue investigating free tools that are available online to enhance the services that Steenbock offers. Mobile content and podcasts are one area that Steenbock hopes to expand into.

Steve Meyer, of the Library Technology Group, defined Web 2.0 as more of a personalization movement than as a set of tricks or tools to be implemented. As a member of the library website redesign team, he pointed out that personalized features such as online subject guides created by librarians in the smaller subject based libraries on campus are a way of making web content more personal to various user groups. Regardless of the tool used to create personalized content, the fact that content is customizable and can be repackaged or repurposed by users according to their needs is the most important idea behind Web 2.0 according to Steve. He recommended an interesting article which basically points out that technology is constantly evolving and that Web 2.0 is a bit of a misnomer. It's not an end point, but the current state of technology and development.