Week one readings complete! I always feel better when I get something accomplished :o)
The first reading (Library 2.0 Webology) was a little torturous to read. I was not fond of the tone of the study and just did not care for the style it was written in at all. After slogging through, I got the gist that the author is quite skeptical of the 2.0 phenomenon and seemed a little uppity in his (?) descriptions. I am not sure if there is a translation problem, since the article came from Hungary, or if I am just being overly critical myself.
Anyway, he goes on to discuss his opinion (with some back up articles cited) that there is an important difference in the use of 2.0 tools for professional and amateur level applications, primarily cited between public (amateur) and academic (professional) libraries. He believes libraries should be very critical of 2.0 applications, which I agree with, but I think they should be critical of which ones are used, not if they are used at all (unless your audience does not utilize digital systems, then it obviously does not make any sense to use them). The article also states that they do not know the long term effects of 2.0 on libraries (2007). I think we can now agree that they are here to stay - the forum may change, but the idea isn't going anywhere.
I did appreciate the attempt to distinguish between information literacy and digital literacy, and that statement that all sorts of librarians should be responsible for instruction of both.
The second reading (Blogging & Uses in Libraries) was far more helpful, especially for those that are new to blogging and social media. It clearly explained what blogs are, where they started, and their best uses. Blogs in libraries were discussed in detail, and especially how they can best be utilized. There is also a great link included (http://blogsearch.google.com) that helps people to search for blogs like they would search for a webpage!
This is my first attempt at blogging, so even writing this post seemed fairly difficult. I'm not confident about the length of the post and how long it is before someone gets bored reading! It is also very easy to ramble and not gather all my thoughts before I start!
Your first post was great! I found blogging difficult at first as well, but once you get going and start receiving comments it can be a lot of fun.
ReplyDeleteThanks Jess - I was just excited to receive an email saying you left a comment! lol, oh the little things in life! Now if I could just get some better design details going!
ReplyDeleteI agree about the tortuous nature of Koltay's paper. I put it down to commas!
DeleteI don't know if anyone has explored the Webology website, but there are some pretty interesting articles. I found some referenced articles I want to explore more thoroughly, too.
Now, if we only had more time...
It's funny how when we read an article and get one impression, but when others read it, they get the exact opposite. This is what happened to me. I actually enjoyed Koltay's article, in that he cautions librarians when employing various technologies. Additionally, he stresses the difference between information literacy and digital literacy. I took that section to mean that he suggests that librarians stay aware of the difference, as patrons will not always be. Moreover, when I read the Blogging article, I felt like the authors were stating the obvious sometimes and also creating a rosy picture of what blogging can do for a library. Nonetheless, I'm glad to see another take on both articles, and I'll reread them to see if I am swayed your way!
ReplyDeleteI have to totally agree with you Colleen about the Koltay article. It was a really tedious read and I also really did not care for the style in which it was written. All this just made it so had to actually absorb anything from the article the first time around.
ReplyDelete