Docs Video: Proof of Concept
After taking some snapshots, screen shots and a midi file, I've created a semi-rough cut YouTube docs video. Play it and I'll see you on the other side of the fold. The video is 49 seconds and I estimate it took me a total of three hours to put together - taking the still shots, thinking up web sites to use, finding a short midi file for music. I used a program called ShowBiz that came with my home computer, since I really couldn't justify it as a work project. Could it better? Absolutely! There could be better cover art, perhaps a podsafe vocal, perhaps a better focused theme than just crime, etc. So go out and do it! And if you post to YouTube, please tag the video with "fdlp" so it'll be easier for the rest of us to find. Continue reading
Need Document Cover Art?
If you've thought about using document cover art / gov web site shots in promotional or presentation materials, please check out the new Flickr Govdoc Covers group. I admit there isn't much there now, but if a few people join and add materials, it could be a good community pool for documents graphics. It would also be a good advertisement for what is available through America's Federal Depository Libraries. If you'd like to join the group, please message AlaskanLibrarian on Flickr. And if you'd like govdoc cover art of a sillier sort, there's always the Best Titles Ever! Continue reading
Jan 2007: DRM TECHNOLOGIES & Higher Education: an online workshop
My inbox came up with this online seminar on Digital Rights Management (DRM) that people here might be interested in:
DRM TECHNOLOGIES & Higher Education: an online workshop Are you interested in learning more about digital rights management (DRM) technologies? Would you like to learn more about the current state-of-the-art in DRM and its applicability to your campus? Do you have concerns and questions about personal media, your students and your liability? What is the future of DRM? What about open standards? Do they offer a future for the marketplace? These and other questions will be reviewed, discussed and considered in the upcoming workshop: DIGITIAL RIGHTS MANAGEMENT (DRM) TECHNOLOGIES January 22 - February 2, 2007 http://www.umuc.edu/cip/ipa/ Moderators: Bill Rosenblatt, M.S., Founder, GiantSteps Media Technology Strategies Kimberly Kelley, M.L.S, Ph.D., Vice Provost and Dean, Academic Resources and Services, University of Maryland University College; This workshop is part II of the first DRM workshop held in February, 2006. At the same time, this workshop is standalone; the previous workshop is not a pre-requisite. Join the Center for Intellectual Property as we continue the discussion of DRM technologies and how they impact higher education. Workshop participants will: * Review DRM technologies. - definitions, how it works, and the technology components * Examine the use of specific DRM technologies by institutions as well as by the owners, publishers, and providers of digital content-and some of the current technologies deployed (e.g., Apple FairPlay; Microsoft Windows Media DRM); * Examine DRM and copyright law including the special case of libraries (Section 108 of the Copyright Act); * Gain clarity on fact versus fiction in the realm of personal media and campus life, including P2P file sharing and the TEACH Act for distance learning; * Examine the future of DRM including law, policy, open standards and cross-industry collaboration * Share experiences with DRM! Please see the web site for detailed course objectives: http://www.umuc.edu/cip/ipa/workshops.html#copyright_education SIGN UP TODAY! Early Bird Rates $125 !!!Early Registration Ends January 6, 2007!!! Regular Rate: $150 https://nighthawk.umuc.edu/CIPReg.nsf/Application?OpenFormAlthough the Government Printing Office's (GPO) current policy is one of not using DRM in published electronic government documents, there is nothing other than good will to keep them from using such technologies in the future. Therefore it is important to learn what we can. Then educate our Members of Congress so they can keep DRM out of our no-fee fully functional government information. Continue reading
PART and Expectmore.gov
One of the documents included in the president’s FY 2004 budget declared “…we are no closer to measurable accountability than in President Johnson’s dayâ€(48). In the budget for that year, the OMB (Office of Management and Budget) showed how they were addressing this problem with something called the Program Assessment Rating Tool, or PART. PART was initially developed in 2002 (from what I’ve been able to determine). By 2004, its performance rating assessments were growing in numbers of programs assessed and in influencing budgeting decisions.It is a questionnaire executed by the OMB and the agency whose program is being assessed. The questions are in weighted into four categories: Program Purpose & Design (20%), Planning (10%), Management (20%), Results (50%). PART questions are designed for short answers and are to be accompanied with supporting evidence (or other details when applicable). Lack of supporting detail for an answer may result in a disfavorable score for a particular question. PART answers determine a program’s overall rating. An important objective of the PART assessment process is to help an agency develop an improvement plan for a program –which is then used to evaluate performance in subsequent evaluations. A PART assessment should help clarify a program’s purpose, design, planning, management, results, and accountability and help decision makers (and citizens) determine its overall effectiveness. There are seven types of programs eligible for PART, including Direct Federal, Competitive Grant, Block/Formula Grant, and Capital Assets and Service Acquisition (like big-budget defense acquisitions). Programs were initially to be assessed every five years. The FAQ on the OMB page has more detail. Citizens can get PART assessments from Expectmore.gov. The site was launched formally by the OMB in April of this year(the site was initially launched in February). By making assessments of Federal programs based on PART results available to the public, it is believed such public accountability for performance increases transparency and help us judge whether a program is using resources effectively. Programs have two categories of ratings, “Performing†(broken down into three sub-categories of “Effectiveâ€, “Moderately Effectiveâ€, or “Adequateâ€) and “Not Performing†(as either “Ineffective†or “Results Not Demonstratedâ€). Currently, according to PART assessment results of about 800 programs,
- 72% of Federal programs are “Performingâ€:
- 15% of Federal programs are Effective (meaning these programs set “ambitious goals, achieve results, are well-managed and improve efficiencyâ€).
- 29% of Federal programs are Moderately Effective.
- 28% of Federal programs are Adequate.
- 28% of Federal programs are “Not Performingâ€:
- 4% of Federal programs are Ineffective (meaning these programs have been judged to be “unable to achieve results due to a lack of clarity regarding the program's purpose or goals, poor management, or some other significant weaknessâ€). Some examples of “Ineffective†programs are the “EPA Ecological Research†and Amtrak .
- 24% of Federal programs are Results Not Demonstrated. Includes those programs which were not able to collect adequate data.
Why can’t depositories do this?
Below is an ad made for the Fulton County Public Library. Watch this 39 second clip and then read on. This video actually made me want to play it over and over again because the music had a good beat and because I wanted to see all the book covers and service types flash by again. It's kinetic yet informative. So far it's been viewed 1,737 times and I don't think it's been all by librarians. My only criticism of the video is that it should have faded to both the name of the library AND its URL so people could immediately check out their site. But that is a petty criticism of something very engaging. What's stopping us government information specialists from putting something like this together? Other than time and a fear of movie making software that comes with nearly every computer. What say you to changing that? If you're intrigued by the video above and either have video experience or want to see this as a learning opportunity, please get in touch with me. Either in comments below or by e-mailing dnlcornwall AT alaska.net. I've got a few storyboard ideas and a digital camera that I could use to take pictures of good looking documents. And almost anyone can take screenshots of good gov't web sites. Once it's on YouTube or some other video site, we could start trying to push onto local media as a PSA or maybe beg the Ad Council or someone for air time. You don't have to be a docs librarian to work on this project idea, just someone interested in web/library 2.0 ideas and software. Of course, if someone else has already made a youth oriented govdocs ad, would you send us a link to the video? And why the marketing entries lately? Because one tactic in getting perpetual no-fee access to fully functional government information is making our citizens know that the information is out there and is worth having and fighting for. A tip of the FGI hat to Stephen Abram and SJRLC Connections for flagging this video. Continue reading