SPAM-LOW: Re: [Web4lib] Re: Future of libraries

Tue Jul 8 14:50:55 EDT 2008

We use the same 24/7 virtual reference program mentioned before by Norm
Reeder. It doesn't seem to be used much however, and staff are very
disinterested in participating. It's rather disappointing, but the
enthusiasm just isn't there. 

---
David Cloutman <dcloutman at co.marin.ca.us>
Electronic Services Librarian
Marin County Free Library 

-----Original Message-----
From: web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org
[mailto:web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org] On Behalf Of Andrea Berstler -
Director
Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 11:35 AM
To: web4lib at webjunction.org
Subject: RE: SPAM-LOW: Re: [Web4lib] Re: Future of libraries

Pennsylvania has such a program state wide - Ask PA.
http://www.askherepa.org/

I do not have the numbers here as to their success or "non-success" but
it
is a nice service to offer our rural population, where most things are
not
open 24/7. 

Andrea Berstler - Director 
The Village Library of Morgantown 

-----Original Message-----
From: web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org
[mailto:web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org] On Behalf Of Christopher Kiess
Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 2:03 PM
To: Reeder, Norm
Cc: web4lib at webjunction.org
Subject: SPAM-LOW: Re: [Web4lib] Re: Future of libraries

Norm,

I meant to send this to the list. Dave Clout also brought up some good
points concerning this.

Excellent points and you expose a fatal flaw in one of my arguments.
Some of
the best inventions have been reinventions of another technology and, in
many ways, I think librarians have been adept at this.

As for the virtual reference service, I think it can work. It just has
to be
marketed in the right way. Maybe if it were less associated with a
single
library and part of a larger "web experience." What if there was a
consortium of libraries participating via a single interface for live
interaction.

See this article from Wired:

http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/16-04/bz_curator

chris

On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 1:11 PM, Reeder, Norm <nreeder at torrnet.com>
wrote:

> I guess I'd phrase things a little differently.  Most of the new 
> technologies that have come about didn't originate uniquely for
libraries.
>  We are just too small a market.  For instance we didn't invent the 
> barcode idea; it was adapted from the larger marketplace.
>
> Joan Frye Williams often remarks that when she looks for new 
> technologies or what is "coming", she doesn't look in our libraries.  
> She looks at the supermarket or the wider Internet to see what is 
> developing and then thinks "how could we use that".  Stephen Abrams 
> makes similar remarks.  Microsoft is infamous for its "embrace and 
> extend" philosophy (and look how much money they make because of it!).
>
> So I would think that adapting to, and extending the use of new ideas 
> and things is the way to go.  It does take some looking around (and 
> this listserv is one good way to keep abreast of what's going on too).

> But just because we didn't invent it, or it wasn't taught in library 
> school doesn't mean it can't be significant or we can't play with it.
>
> I think a lot of libraries are playing with Web 2.0 technologies, but 
> there certainly at this point isn't a "default" or "standard" way to 
> implement the variety of things currently out there.  It's going to 
> take some time and trial balloons to see what is effective or not.
>
> One of the things to watch out for though here is the "greatest thing 
> since sliced bread" thingie that initially gets talked about in all of

> the magazines; websites etc., that then doesn't meet the unattainable 
> expectations and is suddenly condemned for not doing so.  Many new 
> technologies take some time to find their true niche.  (Does anyone 
> remember "Java everywhere--Microsoft is toast!).  Didn't quite happen,

> but Java is still a significant technology all the same.  I'd say the 
> same thing about
> 24/7 live/Internet reference.  It was touted as the be all and end all

> and all of our Reference sections were toast.  It didn't turn out to 
> be "all", and there's room for both the new way and old way.  I'm 
> seeing some info to indicate that it isn't all that successful and 
> some libraries are dropping it because of lack of patron input.  But
at
least they tried.
>
> Thanks
> Norm Reeder
> Torrance Public Library
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org [mailto:
> web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org] On Behalf Of Cloutman, David
> Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 9:28 AM
> To: Christopher Kiess; Bill Drew
> Cc: web4lib at webjunction.org
> Subject: RE: [Web4lib] Re: Future of libraries
>
> > All right everyone. I'm going to play the Devil's advocate since I 
> > am
> one of
>
> I sure hope, because this statement is crazy:
>
> > Librarians have not changed and they have simply reacted with the 
> > changing times; that is not true change
>
> Actually, I would consider that to be adaptation, the best kind of 
> change. Adaptation means that change is done is the context of 
> situational awareness. There are so many posts to this list about 
> Second Life, and IM chat, etc., and so little of it relates to the 
> actual demands of patrons and abilities of library staff. I cannot 
> project in measurable benefit of providing these technological
solutions.
>
> As sad as it may sound, in some libraries (I'm not naming names, 
> here), getting the bulk of the reference staff to answer reference 
> questions by email can be a significant change for an organization. 
> Yes, the reference staff knows how to answer references questions. 
> Yes, they can write email. But for some reason, the bulk of them can 
> be resistant to doing both. If reference staff were more accessible by

> email, it would certainly benefit the patrons, and it would be a 
> significant adaptation to the current situation. But it doesn't 
> happen, because the librarians are resistant to change.
>
> I'm sure the situation may different in an academic settings, but I 
> think for public libraries, and my library in particular, we needn't 
> be straining to implement bleeding edge technology. Simply 
> implementing well tested technology that many, if not most, of our 
> patrons already use, can provide significant return on investment. 
> And, yes, that is real change, even if it is only reactive.
>
> ---
> David Cloutman <dcloutman at co.marin.ca.us> Electronic Services 
> Librarian Marin County Free Library
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org
> [mailto:web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org] On Behalf Of Christopher 
> Kiess
> Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 2:49 PM
> To: Bill Drew
> Cc: web4lib at webjunction.org
> Subject: Re: [Web4lib] Re: Future of libraries
>
>
>
> Email Disclaimer: 
> http://www.co.marin.ca.us/nav/misc/EmailDisclaimer.cfm
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>
>

--
C.L. Kiess, B.A., M.L.S.
Information & Knowledge Specialist
Columbus Regional Hospital
Library & Knowledge Services
_______________________________________________
Web4lib mailing list
Web4lib at webjunction.org
http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/

_______________________________________________
Web4lib mailing list
Web4lib at webjunction.org
http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/