Don't get me wrong, its not that I think libraries should shun their users and create content only for themselves. Quite the opposite, in fact! I think libraries have been doing this for years! And all Library 2.0 is is a buzz-word created by library administrations around the world to use at the latest ALA conference.
Today's assignment was to read 3 to 5 of the mini-essays on Library 2.0 published on the OCLC website. And while I haven't quite finished reading through them, I already feel the need to react to them. I start, quite illogically, with essay #2 by Michael Stephens: Into a new world of Librarianship. With his trendy Macbook Pro, pulled-back long hair, and a panchant for buzz-words, Michael Stephens comes across more as a Blogger that happens to be a librarian, rather than a Librarian that blogs. He starts by telling us, in essence, that Library 2.0 libraries should cater to their users. Providing resources for patrons. Next, he'll be suggesting we should be open on occasion! Seriously, did we need an essay telling us libraries should cater to patrons? Isn't that kind of a "no duh" statement?
I did find part of his essay particularly amusing, however.
This librarian does not buy technology for the sake of technology. “Techno-worship” does not exist here. Without a firm foundation in the mission and goals of the institution, new technologies are not implemented for the sake of coolness and status. Technology is put to the test: Does it meet the users need in a new or improved way? Does it create a useful service for putting users together with the information and experience they seek? These are some of the questions this librarian asks when planning for technology. This librarian creates and nurtures a living, breathing technology plan.
Notice to our Director: Technolust is bad! Even the stupid blogger knows!
But enough about the long-haired hippy. Essay #1 is by Rick Anderson, Director of Resource Acquisitions for the University of Nevada, Reno libraries. His essay is something of a warning to the libraries still living in a 1.0 world, and actually I found his ideas pretty spot-on! He describes 3 "icebergs" that libraries need to begin watching out for, to help keep them relevant and afloat. The first iceberg is the idea of "just in case" collections. And actually, the Bellevue library is a perfect example of this! Spread across 3 floors, the Bellevue library has thousands of books, on any and every subject you could think of. The problem is, a good number of those books never circulate! Even before the Internet became a big deal, a large percentage of our books were there "just in case" someone needed a book from the 60s on space travel in the future. But nowadays, that kind of hokey future-telling history can be found on any number of websites. The same is true with exercise and dieting books. What was relevant then may be pretty useless now, and all that information can be found quickly on the web anyways! So why do we have them? Libraries spend tons of money maintaining "just in case" collections and the buildings and real estate to house them, when perhaps they should be looking at how to better use available resources on more important and relevant materials.
He also goes on to discuss ease of use and ease of access to materials and resources. Two icebergs that probably would be better described as one iceberg linked beneath the water, where we can't see. Thats because these two topics go hand-in-hand. Ease of use is pretty pointless when there's nothing to use! And easy of access is equally unimportant when the available information can only be retrieved by a decryption specialist! As technology advances at an ever-increasing rate, libraries must begin to away from the idea that a library is a building that patrons come to, and instead that its a location patrons visit both physically, and electronicly. Free and equal access should include the ability to freely and equally access materials from home, from across the country, or even around the world. KCLS has done a great job at adopting Electronic Resources and Databases to help move towards that goal, that our patrons can access information from home as easily as they can here in one of our libraries.
The next two articles, written by Chip Nilges and John Riemer respectively, speak of interoperation between library systems and institutions. Or, in relation to Web 2.0, how libraries can become a part of Library 2.0 on a broad scale. Library 2.0 isn't just about giving your local patrons their own version of YouTube or LibraryThing, its also about sharing content with other systems to help refine shared information. By integrating shared data like tags and related resources, we give patrons more access to the materials and information they're looking for. One idea mentioned is to integrate many of the ways sites like Amazon.com function, by providing feedback opportunities and purchasing options, and linking or providing professional reviews from things like the New York Times Review of Books, or Publishers Weekly. Chip Nilges, VP for OCLC, speaks of many of the technologies that the OCLC have been working on. Almost all of these ideas help promote Library 2.0 by providing ways for individual systems and institutions to consistantly offer the same results as another location has. Open WorldCat is becoming something like a central catalog for the worlds libraries. This is perhaps Library 2.0 on as large a scale as possible, and I think it sounds like an amazing achievement.
Finally, futurist Wendy Schultz's essay discusses where libraries will go after Library 2.0. She takes ideas discussed in the previous essays and extends them out well into the future. Much of it sounds like its straight out of Peter F. Hamilton's Commonwealth saga, with Virtual and Augmented reality enhancing how libraries already function. Where resources stop being something you simply read, but instead become something to interact with. Not just information presented to you however the author intended, but information that acts as its own guide through the facts and opinions presented. Even the definition of libraries change, as user-created content expands beyond blogs and video sites, and into browsable experiences! Its all a long way off, but I for one certainly look forward to it all!
No comments:
Post a Comment