There are two library-related articles in the most recent issue of Educause Quarterly that you might want to read:
Disconnects Between Library Culture and Millennial Generation Values, by Robert H. McDonald and Chuck Thomas (PDF 122KB | HTML Format), and
The Embedded Librarian Program, by Victoria Matthew and Ann Schroeder
(PDF 190KB | HTML Format).
The Disconnects article takes a look at some of the issues we’ve discussed here before, namely "fundamental disconnects between the values of today’s library users and the historical, core values of libraries that shaped the first generation of online information landscapes." The authors classify these disconnects into the following areas: Library Culture, Technology Disconnects, Policy Disconnects, and Opportunity Disconnects. A couple of relevant quotes: "Emerging communities of research library users have demonstrated strong preferences for exactly the kinds of networked trust-building, collaboration, resource sharing, and creativity that library technologies and policies discourage." and a reminder that "Today, Ranganathan’s ‘books’ are a metaphor for all information accessible through libraries." Not a ton of new stuff in here if you’ve been thinking about these issues for a while, but lots of good stuff if you need to introduce someone to the idea.
The second article on the Embedded Librarian Program at the Community College of Vermont (CCV) spoke to me more on a practical level. The authors describe how they got themselves involved in the BlackBoard course shells for off campus courses. They reiterate how important it is that any librarian involvement be directly tied to an assignment, and offer a couple of interesting variations on the traditional threaded discussion theme. They note that the program has been successful to the point that they now have to turn away faculty requests to embed a librarian in their course. I appreciate this acknowledgment, as too few staff is the big reason I’m not able to be embedded in many courses here at the U of C. A great way to go if you’ve only got a few courses to support.
But then the authors went on to describe their experiments with Microsoft NetMeeting, which was a great blast from the past for me, as I wrote with a colleague about trials we did at Nova Southeastern University back in the late ’90’s:
Innovative Methods for Providing Instruction to Distance Students Using Technology. By: Pival, Paul R.; Tunon, Johanna. Journal of Library Administration, 2001, Vol. 32 Issue 1/2, p347, 14p.
NetMeeting. By: Pival, Paul R.; Tunon, Johanna. College & Research Libraries News, Nov98, Vol. 59 Issue 10, p758, 3p.
Ahh, the good old days. We pretty much reached the same conclusion even back then: it works, and it can work well, but it’s got some quirks and hurdles to overcome.
Comments
4 Responses to “Educause Quarterly – Embedded Librarian and Millennial Generational Values”
RE: the McDonald and Thomas article:
1. The authors dismiss copyright concerns as a library “obsession” rather than a very real legal issue that requires careful attention – they seem to be ignorant of how seriously vendors take licensing agreements.
2. They claim that library technologies and policies discourage networked collaboration via Web 2.0 applications, but offer no practical examples, and ignore the emergence of PURLS and other tools in databases, etc. that do facilitate sharing.
3. They jump on the “making libraries look and behave like online entertainment venues” bandwagon, which I find infuriatingly anti-intellectual: employers are looking for individuals with the ability to focus on detail, think and read critically, write well, and occasionally to involve themselves in tasks that don’t immediately appeal to them. Pandering to less gifted students in order to bribe them into briefly finding academic work appealing does the entire student body a disservice, and certainly isn’t going to prepare them for the very real competition they’ll face professionally.
I am *really* looking forward to the last idea going the way of the “paperless office” hoo-ha – reading and careful reflection are IMHO the non-negotiable bedrock of academia and of being an educated person, and no amount of Playstation marketing is going to change that.
Hi Ryan, some good points there – I’d encourage you to leave them on the Educause site as well to be sure the authors see them. Wonder what you think of Steven Downes’ thoughts on the impending demise of libraries?
I work in a library that’s primarily digital, but nonetheless struggles to fill the ever-increasing demand by our patrons for print media via ILL and emailed scans. Anyone who’s done graduate-level research realizes that a lot of important material was not born digital, and is unlikely to be available digitally anytime soon (hell, this article was a good recent reminder that there is a durable demand for certain non-scholarly materials that aren’t available digitally). Although most of our patrons have no sentimental attachment to print media, publishing history and funding realities dictate that we’ll have to deal with it for some time to come to serve them well.
A quick read also suggests that Downes doesn’t fully appreciate Google Scholar’s failings as an scholarly research tool, the time and financial burden placed on students by requiring them to deal one-on-one w/content providers (most of whom have no interest in doing so, at least at present) for access to articles, etc., etc. His post is a glib treatment of a complex subject (e.g. “librarians haven’t thought out the implications of online content” – both incorrect and woefully ignorant), and doesn’t leave me concerned about my job security 😉
Yeah, I also thought Stephen was a little too flip – I think maybe he was just having a grumpy day.