Library 2.0 and the Academic Library

I didn’t want my official last post on the subject to be a critical one when in reality, I think much of what is packaged in Library 2.0 has the potential to be beneficial to libraries and their users. Quite simply, it’s the lack of context in the movement that gives me pause, not the theories or applications. “Library 2.0” is a way to market a fresh wave or reawakening of user focused change. Energetic inspiration, which many advocates bring to the table, isn’t negative as long as it sparks conversation. Library 2.0 is a conversation and in deference to the course, I will take a brief look at it in terms of what it could mean to academic libraries.

I was surprised to learn that much of the talk of Library 2.0 originated with public libraries and librarians. (Crawford, 2006.) From my very brief observations of the computer area in a public library, most of the patrons would ask how to print from their workstations or how to create bullet points in a Word document. The variety in age, socio-economic status and race of public library users would lead me to believe that public libraries would be concerned with attempting to provide electronic equality more than seeking to be on the cutting edge. Like Crawford, I would have thought that academic libraries would be at the forefront of this movement. A 2005 Pew Internet study found that 88% of adults 18-29 use the Internet and at least 84% of adults of all ages who have had at least some college use the Internet. ( 2006) Academic libraries' users are a technologically savvy generation and Library 2.0 applications could be vital in serving the university’s educational mission, especially with the rise in alternative students and distance education. (Coombs, 2006)

Briefly, here is how some of the Library 2.0 applications can serve universities in positive and even revolutionary ways.

Podcasts: These could be especially positive in non-traditional educational settings. Considering most distance students will be accessing the academic library from their own homes, their interaction with librarians will be limited to the telephone, e-mail or Instant Messaging. Podcasting is a way for librarians to market themselves in a more personal manner. Podcasting can enhance library instruction. Learning styles vary. There may be students who respond better to being shown how to actually use the library website and perform database searches. Online library instruction would no longer be relegated to the written word.

Wikis: Wikis allow students to interact with teachers and other classmates outside of the classroom in one place without the wait time of e-mail. (Cochenour, 2006) Colleagues can develop a scholarly paper together and students can work on group projects without the need for everyone to be available in the same place at the same time. Although any academic setting can benefit from the technology, wikis provide a virtual opportunity for distance education programs to mimic similar projects done on physical campuses.

Social Tagging: Social tagging allows users to become more proactive in describing the information resources available to them. While cataloguers attempt to be as descriptive as possible, the time and resources might not be provided to do it well. Social tagging means students can enhance the bibliographic records to include key words that might not occur to catalogers or appear in the LCSH. Allowing social tagging could lead to spagging (spam tagging) so there are risks. (Arch, 2007) Still, the advantages of increased access for students could outweigh the cons, especially if librarians pay attention to what terms students use for certain subjects in order to improve the “official” cataloging.

Those were three of the ideas I really liked. As I said in my last post, I do believe libraries can incorporate technology, even Web 2.0 technology into their libraries as long it’s to serve the mission of the library and not completely adjusting our focus just because the new gadgets are cool.

Work Cited:

Arch, Xan. (2007). Creating the academic library folksonomy: Put social tagging to work at your institution. College Research & Library News, 68(2), F. Retrieved from Library Literature on April 10, 2007.

Cochenour, Donnice. (2006). Is there a wiki in your (library) future? Colorado Libraries, 32(1), p. 34-36. Retrieved on April 10, 2007 from Library Literature.

Coombs, Karen. (2006). Planning for now and then. Library Journal Net Connect, 2(3). Retrieved from Library Literature on April 5, 2007.

Crawford, Walt. (2006) Library 2.0 and “library 2.0” Cities & Insight. 6(2) Retrieved on May 1, 2007 from http://citesandinsights.info/civ6i2.pdf [Updated link.]

Pew Internet & American Life Project. (2006). Demographics of internet users. Retrieved on April 29, 2007 from http://www.pewinternet.org/trends/User_Demo_4.26.06.htm