From my standpoint, pretty much all the major Web 2.0 applications could have positive roles in libraries. Blogs, wikis, podcasts, online videos et. al can all enable more informal contact with patrons, and could become the hubs of research communities at campuses and health centers.
There are many practical barriers to this vision, especially in hospital libraries that face tough IT restrictions. But conceptually, Web 2 tools can be very good things in libraries.
YouTube, for example, is a very natural repository for online instructional videos. Even if the quality of the video is not production broadcast level, the likely viewers of a library YouTube video would understand this limitation from their other experiences with YouTube. If a tool with better production values comes along we should use it, but in the meantime there's no reason not to experiment with YouTube.
There's an interesting double standard with Web 2 vs. more traditional tools. If someone has a bad in-person class session they would regroup and do better next time; there would be no expectation of perfection because, after all, everyone is human. But sometimes the objections raised to Web 2 tools imply that they must be absolutely perfect to be useful at all.
After all this Web 2 cheerleading, let me close by acknowledging that some pacing is in order. For example, it might be too much for a library to start a blog service, wiki portal, and online video site in the same week. People need time to adjust and learn new ways of working. On the other hand, though, we also need to "just do it" and enjoy learning how to use all these new tools. That balance--between discretion and enthusiasm--will always be hard to find.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment