Embed Doc
Copy Link
Readcast
Collections

CommentGo Back

Download

Library 2.0: taking it to users’ door step

ABSTRACT

This paper defines “Library 2.0” as “user-centered change”. It is a model for libraryservice that encourages constant and purposeful change, inviting user participation in thecreation of both the physical and the virtual services they want, supported by consistentlyevaluating services. It also attempts to reach new users and better serve current onesthrough improved customer-driven offerings. The paper applies the theory and definitionto the practice of librarianship, specifically addressing how Web 2.0 technologies such assynchronous messaging and streaming media, blogs, wikis, social networks, tagging, RSSfeeds, and mashups might intimate changes in how libraries provide access to their collections and user support for that access.

Keywords

Web 2.0, Library 2.0, Blog, Wiki, Streaming media, Social network, Tagging, RSS,Mashup

Introduction

Library 2.0 (L2) is a transformation in the way library services are delivered to libraryusers. It provides new tools to make the library space (both virtual and physical) moreinteractive, collaborative and driven by community needs. It encourages collaborativetwo-way social interactions between library staff and library customers. L2 requires user participation and feedback in the development and maintenance of library services. The phrase was coined by Michael Casey in his blog, LibraryCrunch, in 2005, although theconcepts that collectively make up "Library 2.0" existed well before then. The term was aspin off of "Web 2.0" which had been coined by O'Reilly Media.Michael Casey described his concept of Library 2.0 as:

“The heart of Library 2.0 is user-centred change. It is a model for library service that encourages constant and purposeful change, inviting user participation in the creation of both the physical and the virtual services they want, supported by consistently evaluating services. It also attempts to reach new users and better serve current ones throughimproved customer-driven offerings.”

(Casey and Savastinuk, 2006)Helene Blowers elaborated on this theory more recently in a presentation at the Statelibrary of Victoria which she called “Library 2.0: transforming the Library through theweb” (Blowers, 2007). She described the importance of Library 2.0 in the library in thefollowing ways:



It’s about cultivating communities



It’s about encouraging participation



It’s about human conversations



It’s about collaboration



It’s about being in their space



It’s about small pieces loosely joined



It’s about shifting the focus



It’s about letting go

Web 2.0– what’s it all about?

The media is currently filled with information about Web 2.0, but what does this conceptmean? Tim O’Reilly (O’Reilly, 2005) describes Web 2.0 in the following way:

“...refers to a perceived or proposed second generation of Web-based services—such as social networking sites, wikis, communication tools, and folksonomies—that emphasizeonline collaboration and sharing among users.”

Tim O'Reilly attempted to define the concepts behind Web 2.0, and offered a usefuldiagram to illustrate some of the related ideas. People and organisations are now usingWeb 2.0 applications every day, and many of them access these programs in the library,on public computers.

Web 2.0 + Library = Library 2.0?

Leveraging the approaches typified by Web 2.0's principles and technology offerslibraries many opportunities to serve their existing audiences

better

, and to reach out beyond the walls and Web sites of the institution to reach potential beneficiaries wherethey happen to be, and in association with the task that they happen to be undertaking.

Libraries were once the guardians of knowledge, and the point at which those seekingexisting knowledge would engage with it. With the rise of Google, Amazon, Wikipediaand more, there is an oft-stated fear that many users, much of the time, will bypass processes and institutions that they perceive to be slow, unresponsive, unappealing andirrelevant in favour of a more direct approach to services offered by others that just might be 'good enough' for what they need to do.Libraries should be seizing every opportunity to challenge these perceptions, and to pushtheir genuinely valuable content, services and expertise out to places where people mightstand to benefit from them; places where a user would rarely consider drawing upon alibrary for support.A theory for Library 2.0 could be understood to have these four essential elements:

•

It is user-centered

. Users participate in the creation of the content and servicesthey view within the library's web-presence, OPAC, etc. The consumption andcreation of content is dynamic, and thus the roles of librarian and user are notalways clear.

•

It provides a multi-media experience.

Both the collections and services of Library 2.0 contain video and audio components. While this is not often cited as afunction of Library 2.0, it is here suggested that it should be.

•

It is socially rich.

The library's web-presence includes users' presences. There are both synchronous (e.g. IM) and asynchronous (e.g. wikis) ways for users tocommunicate with one another and with librarians.

•

It is communally innovative

. This is perhaps the single most important aspect of Library 2.0. It rests on the foundation of libraries as a community service, butunderstands that as communities change, libraries must not only change withthem, and they must allow users to change the library. It seeks to continuallychange its services, to find new ways to allow communities, not just individuals toseek, find, and utilize information.Library 2.0 is a user-centered virtual community. It is a socially rich, often egalitarianelectronic space. While Librarian 2.0 might act as a facilitator and provide support, he or she is not necessarily primarily responsible for the creation of the content. Users interactwith and create resources with one another and with librarians. In some ways, it is avirtual reality for libraries, a Web manifestation of the library as place. A library's presence on the Web in Library 2.0 includes the presence of that library's constituencyand utilizes the same applications and technologies as its community, a conceptHabib (2006) recognizes in a very useful model for Library 2.0 in regards to academic libraries.While these conceptual tenets of Library 2.0 might be rather dependable, envisioning thetechnological specifics of the next generation of electronic library services is at once bothfraught with inevitable error and absolutely necessary. The following prognosticationsare, then, more speculative than predictive. They are meant to conceptually explore and provide context to the relationship between the evolving Web and the evolving library, as